Try to Predict Where Crypto Will Go in the Next Few Years - Please don't just say dead and gone (without your reasoning).

[underscoredash]

The Ethereum blockchain will be used as an anchor of trust for the Kaleido enterprise blockchain. This means that the sensitive data required for a smart contract to function will be kept inside of a private, permissioned blockchain that executes them to perform the exchange of tokenized assets (realty, automobiles, commodities, etc...), but a record of the exchange that does not contain any sensitive information will also be recorded on a public blockchain in a way that's cryptographically verifiable to have occurred due to its execution on the private one. Stellar's blockchain will be used in place of Ethereum for Hyperledger DApps.

Chainlink will be one of the - if not the most - popular DApps on the Ethereum blockchain once it becomes common knowledge that its decentralized data integrity verification can be configured to gather inputs from anything and output to anything (not just blockchains) via external adapters in the industries that would benefit from that.

Stellar and Ripple will continue to capture more of the market share for cross-border monetary transactions, increasing their prices. This is due to them removing previously required intermediaries for said exchanges, resulting in less transactional friction, in turn making the process cheaper. This will be done via xCurrent and Hyperledger DApps utilizing XLM as well.

Due to these cryptocurrencies gaining market share in their respective applicable industries, they will have a backing for their prices that's something other than pure speculation. Instead, a majority of the the price for them will come from the value of the networks that require their usage to utilize them.

 

[Rei is shit]

to the moon duh

 

[The Shadow]

Into the crypt.

But for realsies I have no fucking clue, I don't know these things.

 

[underscoredash]

Into the crypt.

But for realsies I have no fucking clue, I don't know these things.

I'm just learning writing smart contracts to get ahead of the curb when it comes to getting a job in what I think will be a high paying future industry.
Can already do it on the ETH blockchain, now I'm learning stuff like Docker, Kubernetes, and Golang for Hyperledger's. This whole thing is such a pain in the dick though.

 

[chunkygoth]

It's not going to do anything if normies can't get into it, and right now there's no normie use case. There's buying drugs and there's speculation. You can't really buy anything with it. Normies aren't going to try to get into it for speculative reasons when the price is so low right now. They're only going to try to get into it when the price goes back up.

 

[CrunkLord420]

Consolidation and then enter a new cycle.

 

[oldTireWater]

If it can't stabilize, then it's useless as a currency.

 

[Cinderblock]

Coming from a total noob. All I can say is that I'm seeing A LOT of news articles claiming it has reached a new, total low. My theory is that they are trying to bait more people into buying since they know that everyone knows "buy low, sell high".

 

[garakfan69]

1. The later cryptocurrencies will become centralized just like bitcoin.
2. New ones spring up that "will fix everything".
3. Go to 1

 

[whatever I feel like]

And as for reasoning? You can't buy anything with the ones that aren't bitcoin and whenever bitcoin itself starts to gain steam mining itself will devalue it, despite what its defenders might claim.

 

[Jeb-sama]

I can't really see it going anywhere in the next few years. It will likely just continue on its current path (of being an engine for pump and dumps) for the foreseeable future.

I want it to succeed, but I also want the community to stop being so insanely mindless.

 

[Skeletor]

It’s done, the bubble popped and there’s no reason to expect another round of cryptohysteria. It’ll continue to be a nerd toy and there will be some hardcore HODLers out there, but there’s going to be zero mainstream use.

 

[CrunkLord420]

The price of BTC is irrelevant to it's function (even in eCommerce where services like BitPay immediately cash you out). The function of regulatory arbitrage is still active. The asset is extremely tradable at the moment. It's 5x up from less than 2 years ago.

I wouldn't be buying BTC to hold. But the idea that BTC is somehow "dead" is perpetuated by people trying to buy the run up and then getting fucked in the correction. To those people BTC may as well just be a stock in their portfolio, and BTC may as well be dead, along with video game stocks like Activision-Blizzard or EA.

For an active trader, BTC is better than it was when it was stuck in a $30 range at $6k. It was so bad I had to go trade ForEx and US securities (all while using BTC as collateral).

 

[BillionBisonBucks]

EVE (or another game like them) is gonna set their in-game money against their own cryptocurrency. Mining asteroids will be more literal then ever before, and real-money trading will never be the same.

 

[>DrunkenDevil555<]

I will figure out how to go to the moon, mine cheese and make million year old aged cheese worth $110k and use it when all the world is under one New World Order and all economies have tumbled, leaving us only with the cheese to bargain with.

To be real... I feel that there will be no interruption to bitcoin if an economic crisis happened. The debt would consolidate some how and something in it's place like solar energy, petroleum, or other sources of trade would be used to back the value of currency. There always has to be something to keep the value of currency alive. Since we have the internet, I believe banking will eventually be completely cyber and eventually have AI interactions to replace bankers. The freak part is that when you make a transaction, Big Brother will also take a video of you make such transaction or committing theft during a transaction and you will be reported to authorities to be detained for criminal action. Or if you try to protest that you have not made certain transactions, the computer will search for several verifiable method including the video of you completing the transaction and will deny your claims of lose. (phew)...

 

[underscoredash]

It's not going to do anything if normies can't get into it, and right now there's no normie use case. There's buying drugs and there's speculation. You can't really buy anything with it. Normies aren't going to try to get into it for speculative reasons when the price is so low right now. They're only going to try to get into it when the price goes back up.

Normies use Linux and Cisco everyday, in the form of using the internet and accessing websites hosted on Linux servers. Just because normies don't directly use it, the things I've mentioned and their use cases will most likely still be "used" by normies.

 

[melty]

I unironically think bitcoin will go past $100k at some point in the next five years. Where it goes after 5 years I have no idea. I think there's a much bigger crypto bubble coming, with another round of hysteria for various ICOs that don't really provide value, and a dotcom-esque burst, etc.
Blockchain in general is here to stay, and perhaps most of the blockchain applications that will actually stick around haven't been created yet. I believe industries are going to invest more in blockchain in the next few years. Facebook is hiring tons of blockchain developers. People in my industry are extremely interested in blockchain. Walmart partnered with IBM to develop blockchain for food safety, I don't know how blockchain created by Walmart and IBM is secure and decentralized (I don't think it is) but I can certainly see more companies doing stuff like this in the future.

Everything is becoming more censored and less trustworthy; at least, it's becoming more obvious. Not just the internet, but the government, the media, everything... I see no indication this is going to change anywhere in the near future, so I think people are naturally going to turn to blockchain technologies and cryptocurrencies because you do not need to trust anyone. I just see more and more bullshit happening with deplatforming and trying to remove peoples income source eg Patreon.

I think SOME cryptocurrency will be widely adapted in the future to the point randos use it to pay for stuff, but I don't have any opinion if it will be bitcoin, XRP, or something else.

 

[Sexy Potoo]

If it is going to get any serious use, crypto is going to need something to back it, otherwise, it will forever be a sideshow attraction in the realm of finance and you will never be able to spend it a store or restaurant outside of rare edge cases.

I know that is more or less the opposite to the idea of cryptocurrency, but every other successful currency has been backed by a strong nation that people know isn't going to implode overnight. The nations enforce, under the penalty of law, that their currencies are to accepted as financial payment. The government also enforces that an employer has to pay an employee the minimum amount of the official currency or break the law.

If Bill Gates said that he would exchange a dollar of monopoly money for US dollars, monopoly money would become a serious currency because it is being backed by something.

Nobody would agree to work an hourly job for a company and be paid in American dollars if the dollar could lose half of its value in a matter of days.

The fact that mining cryptocurrency does no actual work besides printing the digital version of monopoly dollars is a huge hurdle in having crypto be backed by anything. Golem Network Tokens are interesting because when you mine the currency, your computer is actually working to render somebody else's animation file and that somebody else paid for that service. This, in theory, could make a crypto that is stable like a fiat currency, and something like could, in the future, be accepted at McDonalds.

Until then though, the only time the normie will hear about crypto is when /biz/ posts the pink wojacks.

 

[Kaiser Wilhelm's Ghost]

Apologies the old Kaiser has been drinking so there might be some word salad going on.

There are a lot of issues with crypto currencies markets. I tend to think that it's a great thing to use in terms of speculative markets and fun to dick around with in the small sense, but the fact of it is is that at the moment the speculative market exchange is all that crypto really has to offer. That is fine, it's essentially the tulip markets in Holland before the great crash where the prices rise and fall on bits of provided information provided. In terms of long term longevity it has these issues.

a) The crypto market for the majority of it's life has been speculative. People buy in, to have people plump up the numbers and cash out, and it waves and ebbs in turn with a purely speculative market. Ironically the only time that Bitcoin at least, (alt coins weren't well established yet) was fairly stable was with the rise of the Silk Road when the value of the bitcoins and the transactions generated from the Silk Road Market place kept the early prices of bitcoins stable, even though it did also experience some serious jumps and adjustments, the majority of the investment in the crypto currency markets has always been speculative and not for mainly practical use, which is why stability in value always has been an issue.

b) So many of the new alt coins have yet to actually show any real world value in terms of delivering on proof of concept that the market will constantly stay in a state of flux, until one of the companies is actually able to unveil the best of the crypto market competitors there will always be some company or ICO that basically paints a picture which speculators will think they can make a quick buck on. Some of these companies have even gone as far as to falsify information or progress in order to get speculative market capital in order to fund projects, and some have even taken the excess money for ICO's and invested it in traditional investments, which shows to me that their is not the level of stability yet that would require any serious long term investment in the sector. In terms of the newer kids on the block, they've yet to prove value, and with older more established systems such as bitcoin is has to be able to compete with new technologies.

c) Another major downside is the lack of actual real world tangible collateral to act as the basis of value outside of the crypto markets, as a result the value of the markets will always be unstable due to the fact that it is not tied into any real world item of value that controls the absolute bottom of the pricing market, and also allows for some level of value cap at the top end of the market. It's like a perpetual money printing machine in many cases, and while a lot of the coins have an upper limit that will top out eventually it has yet to have happened in our lifetime. Even the longest running crypto currency, bitcoin has yet to reach it's actual market cap, and even then it's value has never been realistically tied to anything outside of it's usage or saleability to other investors.

d) Market adoption is another large stumbling block for most crypto currencies. While some online retailers have taken the steps to include it as a modicum of exchange, the market still relies heavily on traditional means of currency exchange, which ultimately hampers the adoption of any crypto currency. Sure you can have a million of something, but if you are unable to exchange it with convenience then it falls flat on it's face. The same reason that early civilizations adapted coinage, and then notes currency was to make the exchange of currency easier versus actual exchange of goods. Crypto so far hasn't really been able to provide something that is quicker, easier and generally more cost effective over all for the average user, and so it's avoided adoption of any singular unit of currency as a means of exchange.

e) Another stumbling block is adaptive technology. The literal explosion of alt coins on the markets shows that the technology or theoritical technology has been able to far out pace the existing coins in the sense of utility. If there is to be one coin that is actually adopted for wide spread usage it must be able to adapt to the technological changes of the market in order to actually compete with any new coins that might be magicked up by a company looking to cash in on the market.

f) This ties in with the previous point, over saturation of the market. How does one singular or a small multitude of crypto currencies actually rise to the prominent position where they are generally adopted by all, when there are so many different competing crypto currencies vying for market share. It would be like having sixty versions of the US dollar, all of which would not actually be universally useful to the consumer, and as such you'd have to be rely on exchanges constantly to get any form of value out of your particular crypto coin. I know the majority of people would probably hold multiple coin, but we are talking about adoption by regular people, who probably do not have the time or the mental capabilities of juggling three or five forms of exchange at the same period of time because their crypto is only accessible with certain business groups, banks, etc. It creates a problem in terms of real world practical application.

As long as the crypto market continues to act as a speculative stock market and not a currency market, then it will never cease to be highly speculative. As a result it will be a place where you can make easy money, but it won't without some sort of winnowing or outside interference stabilize into an actual currency market.

I have the feeling it will continue to grow as time goes one, but will always be highly speculative as people look for the next potential moon.

 

[underscoredash]

I came back to respond to this thread because events have shown that the industry is more intent on investing in blockchain technology than before. Recently Amazon announced a partnership with Kaleido, ConsenSys's enterprise blockchain platform - based off of the Ethereum blockchain; they announced the launch of their own enterprise blockchain, the Quantum Ledger Database (QLDB) as well. Due to a recent patent filing by them, it would also seem that their QLDB will support sharding (the process of splitting a blockchain into smaller, less resource-intensive blockchains that are authenticated against each other with the use of merkel trees). It would seem that their approach is to have Kaleido be used for smaller enterprises that don't have the resources to implement their own larger industrial blockchains, while their QLDB offering would be used for those that do. This is because the intent of Kaleido is to eliminate the need to write as much custom code as possible, whereas QLDB, while offering much higher throughput, would be much more difficult to implement. This is in direct competition with IBM's Hyperledger platform, which is also a high-throughput, difficult to implement blockchain solution intended for large enterprises.

I unironically think bitcoin will go past $100k at some point in the next five years. Where it goes after 5 years I have no idea. I think there's a much bigger crypto bubble coming, with another round of hysteria for various ICOs that don't really provide value, and a dotcom-esque burst, etc.
Blockchain in general is here to stay, and perhaps most of the blockchain applications that will actually stick around haven't been created yet. I believe industries are going to invest more in blockchain in the next few years. Facebook is hiring tons of blockchain developers. People in my industry are extremely interested in blockchain. Walmart partnered with IBM to develop blockchain for food safety, I don't know how blockchain created by Walmart and IBM is secure and decentralized (I don't think it is) but I can certainly see more companies doing stuff like this in the future.

Everything is becoming more censored and less trustworthy; at least, it's becoming more obvious. Not just the internet, but the government, the media, everything... I see no indication this is going to change anywhere in the near future, so I think people are naturally going to turn to blockchain technologies and cryptocurrencies because you do not need to trust anyone. I just see more and more bullshit happening with deplatforming and trying to remove peoples income source eg Patreon.

I think SOME cryptocurrency will be widely adapted in the future to the point randos use it to pay for stuff, but I don't have any opinion if it will be bitcoin, XRP, or something else.

The reason IBM and Walmart's blockchain implementation is decentralized and secure, is that (in theory), it would require every participating party to validate a transaction e.g. Walmart cannot confirm the safety of a crop of lettuce from being salmonella free unless the farmers and regulatory agencies do as well, and vice versa. It also introduces supply chain transparency, whereas before, even Walmart had difficulty tracking the origin of their produce. This is because all participating entities have to verify where it came from and how it got to their stores as it is was delivered to them. The way it ensures the validity of every participating entity that has signed off on the safety of the crops before their confirmation is committed to the blockchain, is cryptographic certificates issued by a Certificate Authority (IBM in this case). This shifts the legal blame for any fraudulent claims about crop safety to whichever entity has provided inaccurate results, incentivizing them all to provide accurate information. I'll post more replies as I read through the rest of your posts I'm kinda drunk now lol.

I came back to respond to this thread because events have shown that the industry is more intent on investing in blockchain technology than before. Recently Amazon announced a partnership with Kaleido, ConsenSys's enterprise blockchain platform - based off of the Ethereum blockchain; they announced the launch of their own enterprise blockchain, the Quantum Ledger Database (QLDB) as well. Due to a recent patent filing by them, it would also seem that their QLDB will support sharding (the process of splitting a blockchain into smaller, less resource-intensive blockchains that are authenticated against each other with the use of merkel trees). It would seem that their approach is to have Kaleido be used for smaller enterprises that don't have the resources to implement their own larger industrial blockchains, while their QLDB offering would be used for those that do. This is because the intent of Kaleido is to eliminate the need to write as much custom code as possible, whereas QLDB, while offering much higher throughput, would be much more difficult to implement. This is in direct competition with IBM's Hyperledger platform, which is also a high-throughput, difficult to implement blockchain solution intended for large enterprises.

The reason IBM and Walmart's blockchain implementation is decentralized and secure, is that (in theory), it would require every participating party to validate a transaction e.g. Walmart cannot confirm the safety of a crop of lettuce from being salmonella free unless the farmers and regulatory agencies do as well, and vice versa. It also introduces supply chain transparency, whereas before, even Walmart had difficulty tracking the origin of their produce. This is because all participating entities have to verify where it came from and how it got to their stores as it is was delivered to them. The way it ensures the validity of every participating entity that has signed off on the safety of the crops before their confirmation is committed to the blockchain, is cryptographic certificates issued by a Certificate Authority (IBM in this case). This shifts the legal blame for any fraudulent claims about crop safety to whichever entity has provided inaccurate results, incentivizing them all to provide accurate information. I'll post more replies as I read through the rest of your posts I'm kinda drunk now lol.

Look into stablecoins, even Facebook is looking to make one apparently.