Litecoin now trading for $5.78(btc-e.com)
btc-e.com
Litecoin now trading for $5.78
https://btc-e.com/exchange/ltc_usd
13 comments
You are entitled to voice your opinion, but…
10K BTC would be worth ~$1.4M and the pizza will still be worth relatively the same as it was before. Unless $GS and friends are actively long pizza futures (since it is a vegetable now), then it might be a little more expensive than it was before.
People seem to be focusing too much on market cap and not on the ever increasing companies and people using it to transact for services.
Dont hear much talk on here about EURUSD, USDJPY, USDCNH ctrl+P operations, i wonder how healthy that is?
10K BTC would be worth ~$1.4M and the pizza will still be worth relatively the same as it was before. Unless $GS and friends are actively long pizza futures (since it is a vegetable now), then it might be a little more expensive than it was before.
People seem to be focusing too much on market cap and not on the ever increasing companies and people using it to transact for services.
Dont hear much talk on here about EURUSD, USDJPY, USDCNH ctrl+P operations, i wonder how healthy that is?
Accepting BTC is not the same thing as fixing prices in BTC. Who is fixing prices in Bitcoin?
And if eg the Eur/USD conversion rate had changed +/- X00% in 3 months you could be sure that you would hear much talk about that here (and everywhere).
And if eg the Eur/USD conversion rate had changed +/- X00% in 3 months you could be sure that you would hear much talk about that here (and everywhere).
>10K BTC would be worth ~$1.4M and the pizza will still be worth relatively the same as it was before
I can't see how you arrive at this. No-one is going to buy a pizza for 10K BTC anymore, so clearly the worth has changed.
I can't see how you arrive at this. No-one is going to buy a pizza for 10K BTC anymore, so clearly the worth has changed.
For some perspective: in the mid 90's, i could buy a gallon of gas for about $1. Now it will cost about 4x that. Do i expect to show up at a gas station now with 4 dollars and get 4 gallons worth? No.
Is it that hard for one to think: "Oh i have 1BTC now and it is worth $10000. It used to be worth $.001 when i bought a pizza. The pizza is still valued at $10, now I will spend ~.001BTC since that is what it is worth now. quel chance!"
The worth of the pizza has stayed the same, the worth of the BTC has gone up.
Come back next week and we'll practice paying for pizza in Euros! (unless you live in cyprus of course :P)
Is it that hard for one to think: "Oh i have 1BTC now and it is worth $10000. It used to be worth $.001 when i bought a pizza. The pizza is still valued at $10, now I will spend ~.001BTC since that is what it is worth now. quel chance!"
The worth of the pizza has stayed the same, the worth of the BTC has gone up.
Come back next week and we'll practice paying for pizza in Euros! (unless you live in cyprus of course :P)
>Oh i have 1BTC now and it is worth $10000. It used to be worth $.001 when i bought a pizza
Most likely the guy who got the pizza now thinks "gee, that other guy is now sitting on a BTC treasure that could buy him a house, a car and a lot of nice holidays. I got a pizza".
BTC and $ (or €) are competing for value - and as long as the BTC story is intact, it makes more sense to hoard BTC and spend $$. When there is inflation, it makes sense to invest or consume your money, with BTC this does not make sense if you can hold off your purchase for a while.
I therefore would not be surprised to see a tremendous spike in the BTC valuation but I have no idea what the distant future would be - it can only be a hard crash or the stifling of the BTC economy.
Edit: see also: https://medium.com/money-banking/2b5ef79482cb This is actually a serious problem, if you’re trying to put together a currency, rather than a vehicle for financial speculation. If the currency of a country ever fluctuated as much as bitcoins did, it would never be taken seriously as a medium of exchange: how are you meant to do business in a place where an item costing one unit of currency is worth $10 one day and $20 the next? [...] If millions of people started using bitcoins on a regular basis, the soaring value of bitcoins would actually be disastrous. You’ve heard of hyperinflation: this would be hyperdeflation
Most likely the guy who got the pizza now thinks "gee, that other guy is now sitting on a BTC treasure that could buy him a house, a car and a lot of nice holidays. I got a pizza".
BTC and $ (or €) are competing for value - and as long as the BTC story is intact, it makes more sense to hoard BTC and spend $$. When there is inflation, it makes sense to invest or consume your money, with BTC this does not make sense if you can hold off your purchase for a while.
I therefore would not be surprised to see a tremendous spike in the BTC valuation but I have no idea what the distant future would be - it can only be a hard crash or the stifling of the BTC economy.
Edit: see also: https://medium.com/money-banking/2b5ef79482cb This is actually a serious problem, if you’re trying to put together a currency, rather than a vehicle for financial speculation. If the currency of a country ever fluctuated as much as bitcoins did, it would never be taken seriously as a medium of exchange: how are you meant to do business in a place where an item costing one unit of currency is worth $10 one day and $20 the next? [...] If millions of people started using bitcoins on a regular basis, the soaring value of bitcoins would actually be disastrous. You’ve heard of hyperinflation: this would be hyperdeflation
only if it were possible to spend dollars on the silk road…
been using btc for the past 2 years, and will continue to do so because no(or very very small) processing fees :D
those who want to get caught up on speculation/hoarding will do so. those who appreciate and value the utility btc offers over cash/credit/debit will continue to use them.
been using btc for the past 2 years, and will continue to do so because no(or very very small) processing fees :D
those who want to get caught up on speculation/hoarding will do so. those who appreciate and value the utility btc offers over cash/credit/debit will continue to use them.
"Once again, the conservative, sandwich-heavy portfolio pays off for the hungry investor!"
(Sorry, you saying the pizza will still be worth relatively the same as it was before reminded me of this)
(Sorry, you saying the pizza will still be worth relatively the same as it was before reminded me of this)
I cannot be the only one thinking "WTF is Litecoin?"
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Litecoin
I wonder if there is any value in seeding another XXXXXcoin based on one of these algorithms. Have 2+ instances of the same network...
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Litecoin
I wonder if there is any value in seeding another XXXXXcoin based on one of these algorithms. Have 2+ instances of the same network...
I don't think there's any value and the differences between BTC and LTC are not substantial (IMO).
But my guess is that being the second immediate P2P currency will give traction to LTC and some people who came late to the BTC party will jump in rising the value for a while.
But my guess is that being the second immediate P2P currency will give traction to LTC and some people who came late to the BTC party will jump in rising the value for a while.
It is just different enough to be separately viable at the same time; the blockchains are incompatible down to the hash level. Second it rewards people with lots of hardware and not specialized hardware, which is where Bitcoin is going crazy right now, because a few players have got their hands on something that the rest of the network won't have for some weeks or months to come (ASIC).
ASIC miners for bitcoin are not viable for litecoin because the litecoin scrypt hashing process is memory dependent, not CPU-bound like bitcoin / SHA256. My information comes not from any technical expertise but from interpreting what I'm told by people who have done more research than me.
Maybe someone could explain better?
ASIC miners for bitcoin are not viable for litecoin because the litecoin scrypt hashing process is memory dependent, not CPU-bound like bitcoin / SHA256. My information comes not from any technical expertise but from interpreting what I'm told by people who have done more research than me.
Maybe someone could explain better?
The central premise for Litecoin using scrypt was that it was not able to be mined on GPUs, this was quickly proved wrong and the statement retracted. There's no technical advancement in LTC, it's just a weaker bitcoin clone.
GPUs these days have alongside their massive collections of ALUs, large tracts of fast local memory. That's why they are viable for LiteCoin mining.
ASIC implementations for Bitcoin will be based on SHA256, built with not a lot of internal memory that can be accessed without traveling across another bus. Those implementations will not work with LiteCoin or scrypt, which is memory bound. GPUs have lots of memory.
It's no technical advancement over Bitcoin, I agree, but it is gaining acceptance (the prices have maintained parity with Bitcoin growth) and it seems that your current investment in LiteCoin mining will remain relevant for longer than old Bitcoin hardware, just because ASIC developers working on Bitcoin problem all see LiteCoin as just a weaker Bitcoin clone.
That's not an argument against LiteCoin.
ASIC implementations for Bitcoin will be based on SHA256, built with not a lot of internal memory that can be accessed without traveling across another bus. Those implementations will not work with LiteCoin or scrypt, which is memory bound. GPUs have lots of memory.
It's no technical advancement over Bitcoin, I agree, but it is gaining acceptance (the prices have maintained parity with Bitcoin growth) and it seems that your current investment in LiteCoin mining will remain relevant for longer than old Bitcoin hardware, just because ASIC developers working on Bitcoin problem all see LiteCoin as just a weaker Bitcoin clone.
That's not an argument against LiteCoin.
But I guess that when the BTC bubble will bust, LTC will do the same...
I think an interesting experiment would be to create a coin that can't be converted to USD or other currencies. Just to see what happens. (But I can't think of a technical way to make such a coin.)
Some enterprising person will provide that service (for a fee, of course)
Unless you add a license of some sorts stating that it is illegal to exchange it for real currencies.
Then someone will do it regardless, but at least they will be prosecutable.
Then someone will do it regardless, but at least they will be prosecutable.
"they will be prosecutable"
Will they now?
Will they now?
Comparison between Bitcoin and Litecoin: https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/wiki/Comparison...
> Have 2+ instances of the same network
It's different network where mining is done with different algorithms. As far as I know hardware for bitcoins is useless for litecoin (and vice versa).
It's different network where mining is done with different algorithms. As far as I know hardware for bitcoins is useless for litecoin (and vice versa).
Litecoin makes use of Colin Percival's (cperciva) excellent scrypt hashing library to make mining on commodity CPU/GPU's feasible and therefore non-competitive with BitCoin mining (you can mine both at the same time).
That's its primary plus; other plusses are quicker confirmation times and a larger number of coins to be generated (the reward is halved every 840,000 blocks).
That's its primary plus; other plusses are quicker confirmation times and a larger number of coins to be generated (the reward is halved every 840,000 blocks).
What I want to see is a bitcoin-like currency with a fairer generation curve, one that would follow traditional inflation and not disproportionately reward early adopters. E.g. mining could have constant difficulty, so that the cost of a million CPU cycles in this currency would be more-or-less constant. Are there any efforts in this direction?
You don't care who owns all the gold by which was all the currency once backed.. why would you care who generated bitcoins? This might be a very sloppy comparison since I have no idea how gold-currency worked, but my point stands. Bitcoin shouldn't be about mining, it's about exchange (for goods and services, not dollars). It really doesn't matter from your perspective how the coins were once mined. You just acquire them (as you acquire money now) and spend them. That's all. Yes, there are and will be people who made fortunes out of this scheme. But that should not affect you.
>You don't care who owns all the gold by which was all the currency once backed.. why would you care who generated bitcoins? This might be a very sloppy comparison since I have no idea how gold-currency worked, but my point stands
Actually, the need for an alternative currency to silver was a significant driving force in my country's history (it resulted in us creating a modern banking system ahead of many of our contemporaries, the effects of which are still visible today) - and this need existed primarily because so much silver was controlled by Spain, our enemy.
>Yes, there are and will be people who made fortunes out of this scheme. But that should not affect you.
Maybe it shouldn't. But as a human with a sense of fairness, I object to creating immense fortunes for those who did a relatively small amount of programming, or simply got lucky.
Actually, the need for an alternative currency to silver was a significant driving force in my country's history (it resulted in us creating a modern banking system ahead of many of our contemporaries, the effects of which are still visible today) - and this need existed primarily because so much silver was controlled by Spain, our enemy.
>Yes, there are and will be people who made fortunes out of this scheme. But that should not affect you.
Maybe it shouldn't. But as a human with a sense of fairness, I object to creating immense fortunes for those who did a relatively small amount of programming, or simply got lucky.
Depends really. If they're getting fat off my economic output then that bothers me. If, by my participation in the BTC economy, my economic activity fuels a rise in the price of the coin, then the early adopters are effectively profiting from my actions. This bothers me.
> mining could have constant difficulty, so that the cost of a million CPU cycles in this currency would be more-or-less constant
As I understand it, in Bitcoin the difficulty goes up so that the rate at which new coins are mined stays pretty much the same. The issue though is that each of the different mining architectures (CPU, GPU, FPGA, ASIC) can do a magnitude more amount of work than the previous could. As such the difficulty goes up, so now there is the problem that unless you've got the fastest hardware you probably aren't going to get anything (as a solo miner anyway). If the rate at which they were mined was kept constant I'd guess all Bitcoins would have already been mined - in that case you'd still have the early adopter problem, but magnified even more.
As I understand it, in Bitcoin the difficulty goes up so that the rate at which new coins are mined stays pretty much the same. The issue though is that each of the different mining architectures (CPU, GPU, FPGA, ASIC) can do a magnitude more amount of work than the previous could. As such the difficulty goes up, so now there is the problem that unless you've got the fastest hardware you probably aren't going to get anything (as a solo miner anyway). If the rate at which they were mined was kept constant I'd guess all Bitcoins would have already been mined - in that case you'd still have the early adopter problem, but magnified even more.
> As I understand it, in Bitcoin the difficulty goes up so that the rate at which new coins are mined stays pretty much the same.
The rate halves every so often, the creation of new bitcoins slows over time, to the limit of 21 million.
The limit is imposed by choice, if you kept creation proportional to some factor of the network rather than ever-decreasing and with a solid cap, you could change the game.
I agree that processing power is not necessarily the best factor to relate it to.
The rate halves every so often, the creation of new bitcoins slows over time, to the limit of 21 million.
The limit is imposed by choice, if you kept creation proportional to some factor of the network rather than ever-decreasing and with a solid cap, you could change the game.
I agree that processing power is not necessarily the best factor to relate it to.
What if you'd limit coins by time instead of cycles? You'd still need some crypto magic to keep people from playing with time, but in general, most people agree what the time is.
The rate of Bitcoin production drops in half every few years. It's a jagged curve designed to end-up producing a fixed number of bit-coins.
As someone who just started mining litecoin on a mid range CPU about 10 days ago and has scene my payout per day decrease as the price has spiked I agree.
>>follow traditional inflation and not disproportionately reward early adopters
Otherwise it will, too, reduce to a currency of the geeks, by the geeks and for the geeks.
Otherwise it will, too, reduce to a currency of the geeks, by the geeks and for the geeks.
[deleted]
Is there a crypto coin that doesn't need to be mined ? Say, one coin = $1 USD and would still benefit from anonymity those coins provide ?
edit: for those who reply with 'the 1 dollar coin is worth 1 dollar', well, actually you can't buy online anonymously with it, like on the silkroad. You don't benefit from internet payements like you do have with bitcoins.
The question would be : is that possible to have a virtual currency indexed on a fiat currency that would have the same benefits of the cryto ones we are using ?
edit: for those who reply with 'the 1 dollar coin is worth 1 dollar', well, actually you can't buy online anonymously with it, like on the silkroad. You don't benefit from internet payements like you do have with bitcoins.
The question would be : is that possible to have a virtual currency indexed on a fiat currency that would have the same benefits of the cryto ones we are using ?
There is a coin worth $1 USD that doesn't require mining and can be exchanged anonymously. Is the cryptographic aspect a hard requirement?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_coin_(United_States)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_coin_(United_States)
I think it is a hard requirement; nobody keeps tight track of $1 coins because it's hard to trade a few million dollars using just that. A cryptographic currency wouldn't have this issue.
Is there a crypto coin where the mining work isn't a useless waste of energy?
Bitcoin mining (and maybe litecoin, dunno) doesn't do anything useful in the process of using all those hardware and electrical resources. No protein folding, no SETI, no looking for mersenne primes - just a bunch of crypto work that gets you bitcoins. It'd be nice if you actually had to produce some knowledge to get the coins.
Bitcoin mining (and maybe litecoin, dunno) doesn't do anything useful in the process of using all those hardware and electrical resources. No protein folding, no SETI, no looking for mersenne primes - just a bunch of crypto work that gets you bitcoins. It'd be nice if you actually had to produce some knowledge to get the coins.
This the common mistake. Mining does useful work: validating transactions.
How is finding the digits of 2^57,885,161 - 1 useful?
Many of the proponents of these currencies believe that a currency governed by mathematics is better than a currency governed by fiat. Since the government can print as many USD as it wants there's no way to fix an exchange range unless the cryptocurrency allows unlimited money supply increase, which clearly has to be controlled by some central authority.
To index to a fiat currency it requires a market maker. Some person or group that will guarantee that if you have $1 they'll give you a unit of currency and if you have a unit of currency they'll give you $1. To meet the demand for this currency it would require the market maker would need to be able to print money, otherwise the price could naturally increase without a way to stop it. Also, to be able to survive a run on the bank, for every unit of currency they issue and take in $1 they would have to keep that $1 in reserve in case everyone tries to cash out at once.
Letting a central authority print money that had no obligations to the general public is dangerous. Also the market maker would likely spend some of the money they take in. If there was ever a run on the bank they would just shut down the currency and keep the money that was paid in, which would make a run on the bank more likely.
This is very similar to online casinos that let you buy chips, but instead of offering gambling services, they would offer annonomous transaction services. Some casinos have just shut down and kept all the money or if it becomes a legal problem (as any solid fully annonomous currency would) could be shut down by their local government.
There is just no good reason to trust a currency that requires a central authority that can print money and that you don't trust and there is no reason to trust that they'll use the printing power responsibly.
Letting a central authority print money that had no obligations to the general public is dangerous. Also the market maker would likely spend some of the money they take in. If there was ever a run on the bank they would just shut down the currency and keep the money that was paid in, which would make a run on the bank more likely.
This is very similar to online casinos that let you buy chips, but instead of offering gambling services, they would offer annonomous transaction services. Some casinos have just shut down and kept all the money or if it becomes a legal problem (as any solid fully annonomous currency would) could be shut down by their local government.
There is just no good reason to trust a currency that requires a central authority that can print money and that you don't trust and there is no reason to trust that they'll use the printing power responsibly.
April 1st, Time: 00:00 - Price 0.82 USD
April 3rd, Now - Price 5.45 USD
http://www.litecoinpool.org/charts
yup, looks legit :) I believe this one we actually will see pop
April 3rd, Now - Price 5.45 USD
http://www.litecoinpool.org/charts
yup, looks legit :) I believe this one we actually will see pop
I've particiapted in the litecoin trading for about 3 days now and the price development so far has been unreal. what's notable is that whenever I take a look at the orders book buyers outweigh sellers by a ratio of at least 2:1. Currently there are open buy orders for 154724 LTC (that is >850'982$, as of 3/4/13 - 15:41 CET). I'm currently gambling on mtgox supporting litecoin on its exchange.
Where did you buy the litecoin? And also, how did you transfer money into that exchange?
I'm currently looking at BTC-e.com for the exchange, and OKPay for money transfer, but... OKPay just feels wrong. They are asking for photos of my drivers licence and utility bills - seems weird.
I'm currently looking at BTC-e.com for the exchange, and OKPay for money transfer, but... OKPay just feels wrong. They are asking for photos of my drivers licence and utility bills - seems weird.
I've used OKPay. The verification via photocopy is actually pretty common among those exchanges. MtGox has the same requirements. However the trip MtGox -> OKPay -> Btc-e is quite costly and there might be cheaper alternatives.
I'm interested to see if a flurry of crypto-currencies develops into a bubble with all the craziness that could mean. I'm not sure on the defenseability of BitCoin to filtering by ISPs as could perhaps be mandated by the government. If driven underground what would the reaction be?
My main thought is that it doesn't really matter if its filtered by ISPs, or if it's impossible to shut it down because they can't stop the hackers, man...
If the government of the US decides it's illegal and declares businesses and individuals accepting BTC to be trading illegally, then the value will undergo a significant collapse as it's now no longer the way of the future but just a secret internet thing (in the US). If a few other countries follow along then all dreams of BTC as the new global internet currency and transfer medium fail.
Bitcoin may not be the easiest thing to shut down due to its P2P nature, but that doesn't mean it can't be effectively destroyed by people in power.
If the government of the US decides it's illegal and declares businesses and individuals accepting BTC to be trading illegally, then the value will undergo a significant collapse as it's now no longer the way of the future but just a secret internet thing (in the US). If a few other countries follow along then all dreams of BTC as the new global internet currency and transfer medium fail.
Bitcoin may not be the easiest thing to shut down due to its P2P nature, but that doesn't mean it can't be effectively destroyed by people in power.
Any currency as volatile as Bitcoin or Litecoin is right now is worthless, because it's too unstable to do meaningful business transactions with.
Is it just me or is BTC-E (Cloudflare error) and MTGOX (was not able to login) currently under heavy load?
Not just you ...
"Website currently unavailable
The website you are trying to access is currently unavailable. Please try again at a later time. If you are the site owner, here is a help resource to help resolve the issue."
"Website currently unavailable
The website you are trying to access is currently unavailable. Please try again at a later time. If you are the site owner, here is a help resource to help resolve the issue."
Ok, now the question is...
... how I can make my own crypto-currency?
... how I can make my own crypto-currency?
If you'd like to mine Bitcoin, this is a pretty good guide:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Gw7YPYgMgNNU42skibULbJJU...
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Gw7YPYgMgNNU42skibULbJJU...
No, I've asked how make my own crypto-currency, not how make bitcoin
Oh, well here's the original paper that describes the system in detail:
http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
Ask the litecoin guys in litecoin forum, they forked bitcoin, they can explain things to you.
So this is getting flagged (20 minutes ago it was in the top 30 now it's in the middle of the 70), I have a theory that's mainly by avid bitcoin users.
Anyway after the Bitcoin boom I did my research about cryptocurrencies (and after discovering I bought 3000 BTC in 2009 for US$ 1, I still have them) and my opinion is that:
1) Some miners are moving away from BTC mining since it's mainly dominated by ASICs these days, litecoin is theory ASIC proof (did not read why, only what I read).
2) Users had build an identity around Bitcoin which involves political and economical beliefs (/r/bitcoin has links to /r/Libertarian /r/Austrian /Anarcho_Capitalism).
3) Because of that you'll see in bitcointalk.org or /r/bitcoin talk about government and fears of it and some belief that bitcoin can present an alternative reality to current state of fiat money[1].
4) In /r/bitcoin any citation to litecoin get people either heavily questioned or downvoted, it shows that although the users are libertarians/austrians (there probably someone there who is one but not the other, or is neither) they do not see as good the idea of multiple cryptocurrencies fighting each other, which was Hayek's free currency system all about.
5) In the end I believe more cryptocurrencies will appear with different mining algorithms, some will try to be more fair in their mining mechanisms and others just like Bitcoin
6) I believe Bitcoin has only two possible futures, one it will be the cryptocurrency, if that's what's happen and people began to accept it instead of using it as an investment medium then each coin is now undervalued by hundreds of dollars, however if people use more than one cryptocurrency (or none at all) price and demand will set the dynamics, but in this case I believe the current bitcoin price will go down.
[1]: I doubt that, if Bitcoin do substitute current money it would not be different than what we have with the exception that I believe governments from large countries would fork Bitcoin and put large ASIC farms to apply the 51% attack to control their own cryptocurrencies, just like what happens with current fiat money, these govenments will probably only allow taxes to be paid in their own currencies. Also like current money BTC would be anonymous with the exception that the transactions chain permit governments to see all transactions that happened (since this is necessary by the currency), coupled with double book accounting for businesses this would for me create a very different world than what people believe bitcoin will lead.
EDIT: I do not see how political beliefs are at all important if you use/mine a cryptocurrency or not, really the political aspect of bitcoin users gets me baffled, although I see how it developed the impetus for the currency initial diffusion.
Anyway after the Bitcoin boom I did my research about cryptocurrencies (and after discovering I bought 3000 BTC in 2009 for US$ 1, I still have them) and my opinion is that:
1) Some miners are moving away from BTC mining since it's mainly dominated by ASICs these days, litecoin is theory ASIC proof (did not read why, only what I read).
2) Users had build an identity around Bitcoin which involves political and economical beliefs (/r/bitcoin has links to /r/Libertarian /r/Austrian /Anarcho_Capitalism).
3) Because of that you'll see in bitcointalk.org or /r/bitcoin talk about government and fears of it and some belief that bitcoin can present an alternative reality to current state of fiat money[1].
4) In /r/bitcoin any citation to litecoin get people either heavily questioned or downvoted, it shows that although the users are libertarians/austrians (there probably someone there who is one but not the other, or is neither) they do not see as good the idea of multiple cryptocurrencies fighting each other, which was Hayek's free currency system all about.
5) In the end I believe more cryptocurrencies will appear with different mining algorithms, some will try to be more fair in their mining mechanisms and others just like Bitcoin
6) I believe Bitcoin has only two possible futures, one it will be the cryptocurrency, if that's what's happen and people began to accept it instead of using it as an investment medium then each coin is now undervalued by hundreds of dollars, however if people use more than one cryptocurrency (or none at all) price and demand will set the dynamics, but in this case I believe the current bitcoin price will go down.
[1]: I doubt that, if Bitcoin do substitute current money it would not be different than what we have with the exception that I believe governments from large countries would fork Bitcoin and put large ASIC farms to apply the 51% attack to control their own cryptocurrencies, just like what happens with current fiat money, these govenments will probably only allow taxes to be paid in their own currencies. Also like current money BTC would be anonymous with the exception that the transactions chain permit governments to see all transactions that happened (since this is necessary by the currency), coupled with double book accounting for businesses this would for me create a very different world than what people believe bitcoin will lead.
EDIT: I do not see how political beliefs are at all important if you use/mine a cryptocurrency or not, really the political aspect of bitcoin users gets me baffled, although I see how it developed the impetus for the currency initial diffusion.
1) There are some people out there sitting on fortunes in *coin. If and when they sell, the boom goes bust
2) If that does not happen, or even if it happens for some time, the future of a currency with no inflation seems to be limited - as long as there is any interest by merchants, it will always gain against fiat money. This upward pressure makes those currencies fight with gold for the role of a long-term asset but makes them impractical as a day-to-day trading vehicle.
Remember the 10,000 BTC pizza? That pizza would now be worth $1.4M - this is absurd and even if we switch to micro-BTC, such a trend leads to hoarding, not spending.
A P2P-currency with a built-in Tobin tax or demurrage would be more interesting.
edited out the factor of 100 in the pizza.