Cryptocurrency: 2019 Update

Published on
January 2nd, 2019
27 minutes

Cryptocurrency: 2019 Update

The Expert View ·
Featuring Tuur Demeester

Published on: January 2nd, 2019 • Duration: 27 minutes

Tuur Demeester, founder of Adamant Capital, provides a broad update on cryptocurrency markets. He shares his analysis of the 2018 crypto selloff as well as his future market outlook. Additionally, Demeester discusses his view of the future of blockchain based smart contracts, payment processing, and asset tokenization. Filmed on December 13, 2018 in Austin, Texas.



  • CA
    Craig A.
    8 January 2019 @ 07:04
    By bitcoin hope he means BSV and not BTC. BTC proved it cant scale. 2k transaction every 10 minutes is useless. Its also fundamentally changed from the whitepaper by adding segwit which has security and network flaws. BSV has reinstated the original OP_codes that bitcoin used to have, and can scale. Lastest block size was 103 MB. Bitcoin is designed to be cash and not this phoney store of value nonsense. Currency needs to flow and BTC cant achieve that. Ethereum is also unscalable and proof of stake is completely flawed. It doesn't work, is too expensive and slow. Theyve already reverted their 'ice age' phase which was supposed to make mining impossible to force a solution. That solution never materialised. Real education needs to come to this space, and the get rich quick people of 2017 need to die off before the real industry comes.
    • CH
      Crag H.
      8 January 2019 @ 19:05
      BSV was forked from a fork of Bitcoin by a guy who claims he is Satoshi Nakamoto but have failed to prove it. Many in the space refuse to even be on the same stage as him. Oh, and he also like to patent things which is 100% contrary to the spirit of open source software (such as Bitcoin). Think whatever you want about Bitcoin, but please don't promote stuff like BSV. Search for "faketoshi" on youtube and you'll see what I mean.
    • DW
      Daniel W.
      9 January 2019 @ 04:39
      this guy is too deep into it, his financial livelihood depends onBTC to go up. No objectivity, He did not explain where the value in BTC is and how it is calculated. It is all speculation and the only value BTC has is as speculative asset like which ran its course in '17. after listening to him, I have wasted 1/2 hr.
    • JP
      John P.
      10 January 2019 @ 20:34
      Are you the same Craig A? Your later post sounds really salty like you lost money on bch. This comment about SV just confirmed it. It’s not to late to back out from getting fleeced man, really. There’s a lot of exciting development on BTC, you don’t want to miss out. But more importantly, you don’t want to miss the opportunity to sell SV before you really lose it all.
    • CA
      Craig A.
      14 January 2019 @ 06:46
      I dont have money in any crypto right now. I used to when I got in 2012. BTC isnt bitcoin and the whole crypto space got fucked in 2017. Im salty because idiots like Tur are fucking up the space with their cluelessness and their hubris that they think they are bringing actual value when in reality they are making the world a much worse place.
    • DS
      Dumitru S.
      30 March 2020 @ 03:15
      :)) you do not deserve even a contra argument ...pathetic
  • CT
    Crispim T.
    13 February 2020 @ 19:25
    Great video. Tuur Demeester is one of the greatest minds in this field. BTC is unstoppable.
  • CA
    Craig A.
    8 January 2019 @ 07:34
    Honestly these interviews just make me angry. When I watch a video I don't want to be confronted with complete mistruths. "Bitcoin is liquid". Total nonsense. The spot exchanges for usd are Gemini, Coinbase, Bittrex and Bitstamp. Combined they do less $300m a day. Most exchanges are tether exchanges. Tether is practically a scam whereby every dollar in the tether account = 1 tether on the bitcoin blockchain. Tether have never done an audit and its suspected they are printing tether out of thin air. Its also confirmed that tether exchanges have up to 95% of the volume as wash trading (aka faking trading to increase volume). CME futures are doing a lot of volume but they are cash settled and lag spot. "Network effect is getting bigger". Stated this before. Until you increase the capacity you cant increase the network. Decentralisation is a bullshit term. Litreally means nothing, isn't measurably and just a buzzword to pan to the crypto audience. Bitcoin is an asset with no counterparty risk. Thats its beauty. In order to get people into the game you need Sidechains aren't the future. Lightning network has already failed. Its getting less adoption over time. Just check the stats, nodes with connections are going down. Liquid sidechain isn't getting adoption either. If you want to use these sidechain you need to enter by first having BTC then sending a transaction to onboard yourself. Theres just way too many steps that no normal human will do it. I've tried it - its convulted, difficult and time consuming and at the end you can only send out micro transaction (nearly impossible to send $10+ on these sidechains as the payments doesn't get routed). Theres also legal aspects to it as each node is effectively holding someone else money which means if you want to have a node you are going to need an MSB license. This whole interview was a joke, and a great demonstration of how dumb the crypto space is. Full of clueles fools that think they are changing the world for the better when all they are producing is complicated garbage tech.
    • CH
      Crag H.
      8 January 2019 @ 19:21
      Say what? Decentralisiation is one of the key aspects of Bitcoin. It means there is no way to shut it down because it's run by thousands of users, parties and companies around the world in different juristictions. It's the reason it keep surviving. Get a clue before puking out stuff like this.
    • CT
      Crispim T.
      13 February 2020 @ 19:23
      This comment is off in many ways. Tuur is a great mind in this field. I love how these naysayers keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again even after 11 years .Proven wrong year after year, always hoping everything will suddenly turn different. BTC is the biggest, most impacting thing since the Internet. But it will be much bigger, as information was fairly optional but money affects every single person.
  • KJ
    Keith J.
    3 January 2019 @ 08:11
    Tuur - would be interested if you have any views on grin?
    • TD
      Tuur D. | Contributor
      20 June 2019 @ 02:45
      I like it for circumstantial reasons: anonymous creator, some brilliant contributors/reviewers, apparently genuine privacy & scalability innovation. It has a terrible inflation schedule, but I doubt the market will care much if it gets traction.
  • DY
    Dmytro Y.
    12 January 2019 @ 03:02
    1) what is the intrinsic value and reason for ordinary person to hold BTC and crypto except for speculation purpose? Or except Ultra rich who need to move hundred million dollars online. Though tax implications are questionable. 2) who are these institutions “building on BTC”? Why to keep opaque language and not name the heroes 3) “markets in 2017” were just speculation. 99 percent of people don’t care about crypto as such. We all just wanted to make easy money let’s admit it. Looks like a very polished speech about what essentially was a bubble. (For disclosure I hold BTC and other crypto but let’s face the truth).
  • TR
    Travis R.
    3 January 2019 @ 04:41
    This is what I don't understand about crypto and bitcoin specifically: Why cant somebody build a better crypto and have that take over the market? Hashgraph for example. Why is bitcoin the end-all-be-all to the crypto HODL crowd?
    • CH
      Crag H.
      3 January 2019 @ 08:50
      Because it's like saying: Why can't someone just build a better version of the IP protocol and have that take over the internet? Even the upgrade of the IP protocol (IPv6) have failed to gain dominance due to the extreme network effects of IPv4.
    • cl
      connor l.
      9 January 2019 @ 22:10
      Proof of Work. There hasn't been a better one built. Hashgraph is centralized.
    • JP
      John P.
      10 January 2019 @ 20:40
      Because it’s very hard to create a network with no clear leadership and decentralization. Any improvements developed either have tradeoffs or could be implemented on bitcoin.
  • EG
    Eduardo G.
    2 January 2019 @ 12:41
    All well and good, but I haven't been able to find a convincing answer to the question of why on earth the FED, the BCE and any other powerful central bank would ever give away their seignoriage and control over monetary policy??? I appreciate all of the qualities he mentions about bitcoin, but to become THE reserve asset? I highly doubt it.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      2 January 2019 @ 23:09
      You sound like a horse breeder scoffing at cars being a "fad". Here's the point -- Bitcoin has already wrested away that control. The only remaining bit to see is whether the central banks understand how badly they've fumbled. When MP3's were new and Napster hit the scene, there was no stopping the clones and copycats that were not as centralized as Napster was. You might as well argue for Digital Rights Management -- which has been a colossal failure in any sense of the word. The RIAA/MPAA spend millions to stop proliferation of sharing, and they can't stop it. The governments of the world can't stop it. Did you realize there's a satellite in space, broadcasting the Bitcoin ledger? And there will soon be more? There's nothing to stop, because unlike central banks and your usual financial institutions, it isn't a centralized hub-and-spoke with one control center to shut down.
    • Kv
      Kristian v.
      10 January 2019 @ 04:54
      I’m a bitcoin investor but I struggle anytime the comparison is made to MP3’s. In the end, the distributed file sharing platforms didn’t win. Apple Music and Spotify did. Ease of use is critical and the established music industry hampered that enough that the very usable subscription services flourished.
  • ap
    alexandre p.
    8 January 2019 @ 12:31
    i was expecting more. RV you should do your due diligence when you invite a bictoin maximalist to discuss the crypto space. His view isn't going to be neutral. He is managing a bitcoin only fund but i haven't seen any disclaimer in the video. No disclosing of his position either.... it is a shame. And pay attention to Craig A. comment below. He is correct.
    • CH
      Crag H.
      8 January 2019 @ 18:31
      Craig is absolutely *not* correct and neither are you.
  • ls
    lucas s.
    5 January 2019 @ 13:38
    if BTC is going to be a currency, the most important aspect is its use as a medium of exchange. The other 2 aspects of a currency, store of value and unit of account, are peripheral without. All the discussion about protocols and other shitcoins, etc are moot. if BTC is going to be a global decentralized currency, it has to be used to exchange goods and services, full stop. I would love for anyone (and I have asked Tuur on twitter many times without a convincing reply) to produce data showing BTC use as a medium of exchange.
    • TD
      Tuur D. | Contributor
      6 January 2019 @ 17:19
      As Jevons said: "Historically speaking … gold seems to have served, firstly, as a commodity valuable for ornamental purposes; secondly, as stored wealth; thirdly, as a medium of exchange; and, lastly, as a measure of value." => in that order. It doesn't make sense for an asset to become a medium of exchange, before the market has validated it as a store of value.
    • ls
      lucas s.
      7 January 2019 @ 01:07
      Tuur, thanks for the reply. I am not attempting to be negative here, I am simply stating my view on what will bring BTC to currency status. Whether you agree w my point or not is fine, but, the question remains, is there a statistic or data set that shows how much of BTC transaction is used for exchanging goods and services?
    • CA
      Craig A.
      8 January 2019 @ 07:06
      Someone with brains! Finally someone actually speaking logic. Yes this is exactly what the space was supposed to be about. BTC cant be a medium of exchange and to be frank calling BTC - bitcoin is just an outright lie at this point. So many fundamental things have changed with BTC thats it not even bitcoin anymore.
  • OC
    Otto C.
    8 January 2019 @ 04:14
    Great presentation Tuur!!! It would great to hear your opinon about HashGraph vs. Blockchain technology. It seems that a solution using HashGraph infrastructure would be easier to build, manage and grow. Thank you for your insight
  • PS
    Paul S.
    2 January 2019 @ 10:05
    Tuur is a nice guy But this is pure turd polishing
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      2 January 2019 @ 23:13
      Your comment, it all its brevity and lack of exposition tells me one thing -- you haven't devoted a single hour to thinking about the implications of an emerging asset class like Bitcoin. Sad, the opportunities are numerous.
    • PS
      Paul S.
      7 January 2019 @ 10:52
      I was 'transacting' using BTC when it was $10... the fact people are taking it seriously still after all we have seen and the hundred billion valuations amuse me no end. If I was a younger chap like I was then - I would likely be making my purchases using Monero - better than Bitcoin for the purpose.... What price target you got on Dogecoin?
  • PG
    Philippe G.
    5 January 2019 @ 13:56
    Interesting take on Ethereum....Like bitcoin, it's not perfect and in, we'll see. Always appreciate different opinions and frameworks in this space!! Bring this gentleman back in a year or so please!
  • bs
    bob s.
    5 January 2019 @ 12:19
  • RK
    Roger K.
    4 January 2019 @ 18:38
    The only true decentralized coin - Which serves the purpose of digital gold for the future. That's the only use case right now. Rest of the block-chain technology is a cumbersome and expensive database, most of the time unnecessary burden. Most of the industries are better served with centralization and some industries are better served with decentralization ,which is yet to be innovated in the future.
  • PF
    Patrick F.
    4 January 2019 @ 15:19
    Great Interview.
  • gb
    gabriel b.
    3 January 2019 @ 06:23
    As someone who has subscribed to Real Vision long enough to see all Tuur's appearances and also remember when Raoul was a BTC bull I want to say bring Tuur on RV as often as possible. He has been very consistent and clear on his views for a long time, he warned tons of people about the shitcoin bubble, and was unbiased enough to do a pretty good job calling the top in his beloved bitcoin. He has a strong understanding of the underlying technology of BTC and has helped educate me and other RV viewers early on. He is also a great follow on twitter for this reason as he gets into plenty of substantive debates and deep dives. Much of his prior content was more educational but if you have watched his RV appearances and follow him on twitter it's pretty clear he has one of the best track records in his space over the past few years as anyone who appears on here has in theirs . This is the type of guest we should always be clamoring for more of!
    • KP
      Krishna P.
      3 January 2019 @ 23:18
      thanks Gabriel your comment is very helpful, I will watch other videos and educate myself
  • PC
    Philip C.
    3 January 2019 @ 10:19
    The significance of first mover advantage is overstated. The history of the IT industry is replete with examples of products and services that were first to market and later (sometimes many years later) got stomped on. The IBM PC was not the first microcomputer, Microsoft Excel was not the first spreadsheet, The Mac was not the first computer with a graphical user interface, Google was not the first search engine, Facebook was not the first social networking site, etc., etc. All of these destroyed their competition despite being late to the party.
    • CH
      Crag H.
      3 January 2019 @ 15:56
      I would argue that there's a big difference between products/services and protocols. I work in the medical IT space which is very conservative. Hospitals rarely switch IT vendors, but when they do they only switch to a vendor that support the exact same protocols as they are currently using (because otherwise all integrations would stop working). And changing the protocols themselves are even harder and takes even more time since all parties first need to develop new versions of their products and then they also need to to get them into production (at the same time). Given that the financial industry is even more conservative than the medical industry I think that the first mover advantage is extremely important in this case.
  • MC
    Michael C.
    3 January 2019 @ 15:27
    Great interview. Please keep bitcoin ones coming!
  • BM
    Beat M.
    3 January 2019 @ 11:25
    Who cares about the price? Its the worst thing that happend to Bitcoin, tulip mania and a zillion other coins. The technology (the good part) will be taken away and used to brake the camels back ($), controlled by those who have the most powerfull Mainframe (China)
    • OT
      O T.
      3 January 2019 @ 15:18
      China has the mainframe, true. But would you like the China Communist Party to control the mainframe that controls your money?
  • JF
    Joseph F.
    3 January 2019 @ 04:36
    Here is my experience with bitcoin. I live in Canada so it is difficult to even find a legit exchange to buy the coin. I found one in Vancouver BC , Quadrega Fx. It took weeks to set up an account, then it took another week for my "fiat currency" to be deposited into my account. I bought my first coin for $4000.00 in August 2018. Liquidity was almost non existent so I sold the coin for $4500.00 when a bid finally showed up. 1. There was a financial charge for the inital deposit $50.00 2. There was a financial charge for buying the coin, plus a portion of the coin was taken for the buy. 3 .There was a financial charge for selling the coin. 4. There was another financial charge for withdrawing the "fiat currency" back into my bank account. If normal brokers did this they would not be in business very long. Never again, and I was lucky to make a small profit.
    • CH
      Crag H.
      3 January 2019 @ 08:55
      Valid arguments. But none of them have anything to do with Bitcoin itself. As a EU citizen I use the Kraken exchange and it works great.
    • JL
      James L.
      3 January 2019 @ 09:51
      Check out the Canadian Shakepay app...I am a fellow Canadian and had the same issues you did with adding trading capital to the cryptoverse as well as finding it way too costly and inefficient, but I have to admit I found Shakepay a few weeks ago and was really impressed. That being said I still think there are other better markets to trade than crypto.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      3 January 2019 @ 14:20
      All I'm seeing here is a great example of how legacy financial systems fail their customers. As a Canadian, you have access to other exchanges that aren't based in Canada. As for there not being few Canadian exchanges, you can thank your local regulators and red tape for that. Makes any competition to the money-laundering HSBC's of the world hard to come by. The barriers are coming down and crypto-to-crypto decentralized exchanges are on the rise. Legacy financial services will have to change, or they'll be left in the dust. Middle-man fees and outrageous demands for KYC/AML will be on the way out too.
  • TH
    Timo H.
    2 January 2019 @ 18:53
    General narrative a year ago: "You need to have a diversified selection of cryptocurrencies in your portfolio for various payment and store of value purposes. Ethereum will be the biggest thing since sliced bread." Narrative today: "Bitcoin is the one and only crypto asset you need to have. Its primary purpose is store of value. Ethereum has some serious design flaws and will probably fail." Interpretation: Just like the value of crypto assets, the amount of crypto BS has been reduced by 90% in a year, but there's still 10% to go, unless someone comes up with a real and compelling use case for Bitcoin. It does not exist today. If you need a store of value, that actually is universally accepted and whose scarcity is guaranteed, buy gold. Decentralized, crypto based data and transaction management techniques are extremely useful and valuable, but none of the truly valuable use cases require a cryptocurrency of any kind.
    • PU
      Peter U.
      2 January 2019 @ 21:11
      superb comment
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      2 January 2019 @ 23:00
      Gold's supply doubles every generation. Gold, due to its density is hard to transport and even harder to secure. Some nations, like Canada, don't even bother having gold reserves. Due to rehypothecation, tungsten-wrapped bars being found at major dealers and vaults, the sanctity of Gold is not absolute. The use of cryptocurrency is obvious, and the multitude of hourly transactions on a global scale is easy to verify and confirm. Try moving 1 Million notional in under a day with Gold to another point on the planet. The advantages to computational money is obvious, even if you fail to see it.
    • TD
      Tuur D. | Contributor
      3 January 2019 @ 01:39
      To challenge the supposed lack of value of BTC versus gold (and I am a goldbug): try sending $100M worth of physical gold to another country, let alone another continent. Bitcoin's multi-signature wallets even allow custodians to spread the necessary access keys to the BTC over multiple continents, making it nigh impossible for authorities to confiscate. Also consider that Bitcoin is highly auditable, which is not the case of gold - I believe the last partial audit of the Fed's gold reserves was in 1953.
    • CH
      Crag H.
      3 January 2019 @ 09:38
      Agree with Timothy and Tuur. And also, if you feel like the narratives have changed it's probably because you don't follow this space close enough. If you were to follow guys like Tuur you would see that the Bitcoin narrative have been the same for a long long time.
    • TH
      Timo H.
      3 January 2019 @ 13:04
      @Tuur: I get the "digital gold" story and acknowledge, that there's potential use for it as a means to break the laws of an oppressing country. It is however very unfortunate, if that remains its only real use. @Petter, it is correct, that I don't follow Bitcoin close enough. I've passed it years ago and working on stuff, that's couple of generations ahead and actually useful in real life. Bitcoin is a huge innovation, but it lacks compelling commercial use cases. That's surprisingly common with big innovations. Their first applications are not always the most valuable ones.
  • CM
    C M.
    3 January 2019 @ 03:46
    Beginning 2018, projects a shake-out. Follow-up in August predicting that prices would go sideways or down. Year ends with 75% loss - guess he was right about that shake-out. Says it may have not reached bottom. Bear market may last longer than expected, but bitcoin is trading at fair value (no idea how this is calculated). Hope breeds eternal misery.
    • JA
      John A.
      3 January 2019 @ 11:53
      My beef is the same. Tour continually talks about the current “value” without describing how value in BTC is calculated. It has no intrinsic value. Cryptocurrencies have a lot of benefits, and I am sure the technology will spread far and wide. My guess is that the technology survives, and becomes a better version of fiat money, but controlled by governments. I, for one, stick with gold as a long-term store of value, and real money. (Talk about anonymous...)
  • TS
    Tor S.
    3 January 2019 @ 00:54
    I'd like if someone for once spent two minutes explaining what - to me anyway - is the most important driver for this tech. Sure, smart contracts, oracles aso are important and cool stuff, but we tend to think of them as something we humans would use, and typically an insurance company wold benefit from utilizing, sure we would benefit but the elephant in the room here is IoT and the data marketplace that will erupt from it. It is going to be enormous. You all know something about robot trading on the exchanges, the volume, frequency aso. Apply that to everything else you know, health care, entertainment, smart homes, smart cities, military, environmental, transportation, supply-chain, agriculture aso, aso. and add some services you cant even think of today. When you fart in your car seat 25 years from now, the car might try to sell that information. Its hard to imagine today that it could have commercial value, but who knows, your health insurer might wanna buy it for a 1/100000 of a $. Permission-less, fee-less DLT is the only thing that scales. I have not even started on the AI or ML side of things, We have probably not seen anything yet, ML needs to come out of the server room, and enter the internett / IoT to do any meaningful modelling of society. Same issue. Data marketplace. It needs the same secure permission-less, tamper proof protocol to communicate. This is where i see this tech, and its value. I find it hard to imagine meaningful IoT, or AI/ML of scale, without it. The visions of 1999 .Com are here now, almost 20 years later, this will also take time. My two cents :)
    • TS
      Tor S.
      3 January 2019 @ 01:14
      Let me just add that i liked Tuur's view. Thumbs up. I just think the "first mover" "store of value" story, even if it might be true, could be juced up a litle. I also tend to think there will be different technologies for different purposes. There might also be different tech following political, and cultural centers.
    • TD
      Tuur D. | Contributor
      3 January 2019 @ 01:34
      Hi Tor, valid question. Imo the driver for Bitcoin is that there is massive latent demand for a digital censorship resistant reserve asset, or, if you will, for a politically neutral digital currency. Imo the value proposition for "Distributed Ledger Technology" or "Blockchain tech" in general is a lot less clear. In my mind, Bitcoin is the first layer of the open financial internet, just like how the WWW (with HTML) in the early nineties formed the base layer for the internet. Also back then there was a lot of buzz about corporate networks (remember Bill Gates' "information superhighway"), but ultimately it was the bottom up network that was the most disruptive.
    • TS
      Tor S.
      3 January 2019 @ 10:21
      Hi Tuur. I agree. It was late last night, your views inspired me and my brain spun away. :) My futuristic view is probably far-fetched. For the oversee-able future, i think your points are relevant. I also like your comparison to birth of WWW. For instance, the SMTP protocol was written back in 1982. Today about 280 billion e-mails are sent on a daily basis. IPv4 is from 1971. Today more or less all leaf devices on the Internet uses it as a transport layer. They both lack many features one would add to such protocols of scale, if made today. Still they both seem impossible to kill off. First mover advantage. I still believe the “monetizing of data in the M2M economy” is an important issue discussing crypto and valuation. First mover to enable IoT/AI/ML of scale will hold value, at least as a fixed amount utility or a commodity. Some say data is the new oil. At least I feel it is a valid argument to those who say it hold no value.
  • BM
    Beat M.
    2 January 2019 @ 13:40
    2 years ago I was so curious about Bitcoin, now it is like a leftover thanksgiving turkey.
    • CH
      Crag H.
      3 January 2019 @ 09:42
      Do you follow Bitcoin or the Bitcoin price?
  • VS
    Vikram S.
    2 January 2019 @ 19:39
    Tuur gives a balanced view of what is happening in the space. Bitcoin is the number one digital asset with the most dominant network effect by far and will remain so in the future
    • TH
      Timo H.
      2 January 2019 @ 19:48
      I fail to see, where the network effect is.
    • IO
      Igor O.
      2 January 2019 @ 20:15
      Nothing balanced about it. Very bitcoin sided.
    • CH
      Crag H.
      3 January 2019 @ 09:32
      @Timo: There are more than 100 forks of Bitcoin. None of them have managed displace Bitcoin. @Igor: I disagree. What wasn't balanced though were the "blockchain, not Bitcoin" and "Bitcoin is the MySpace of crypto" narratives driven by the Ethereum/ICO crowd in 2016-2017. It took Bitcoin 10 years to get the recognition it has today. Being sceptical about a lot younger untested/centralized/proof-of-concept projects is not being "bitcoin sided". It's common sense.
  • DS
    David S.
    2 January 2019 @ 20:30
    How many forks in the drawer? DLS
    • CH
      Crag H.
      3 January 2019 @ 09:11
      Have all Rolex watches dropped in value just because there are thousands of fakes out there? If anything, it's a sign of accomplishment.
  • JQ
    Joseph Q.
    2 January 2019 @ 20:39
    Real vision this guy is great on Bitcoin BUT F ing Clueless on Ethereum. He told you on Realvision to sell Ether at 10 bucks in 2016. Look at the current development/Git hub repos/ truffle downloads all growing exponentially. Look at Makerdao which was talked about on here a couple weeks ago. Get Joe Lubin or Andrew Keys on here to talk ether.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      2 January 2019 @ 22:51
      He's not clueless about Ethereum. Here's a detailed run-down with citations on why ETH is essentially a big science experiment on the verge of failure -- Even independent peer review of ETH's "Casper" scaling solution has shown they don't have what it takes to make it work. ETH forks on January 16th to "upgrade" to this solution, I'd be very wary about what happens next.
    • CH
      Crag H.
      3 January 2019 @ 09:06
      Joe Lubin still haven't taken on Jimmy Song's bet. That tells you something.
  • SF
    Simon F.
    3 January 2019 @ 08:49
    I think too many comments are focused on the trees, when it is the wood that really needs to be understood. I consider the balance of probabilities are in favour of the tech eventually meeting the need, but fundamentally the outcome for crypto will come down to the trajectory of politics - centralised government or distributed? If one was to bet ones total net worth today on that outcome, the outcome that best reflects the reality of human behaviour over time would suggest centralised. If we continue to have centralised government, then crypto will just produce increasingly better plumbing to a fiat and centralised system where value will be what governments say it is.
  • ML
    Mathieu L.
    3 January 2019 @ 05:45
    Never to trust a maximalist narrative... Bitcoin is closer to a company's proposition than a search engine proposition. Polymath, WAX, Iota, Golem, Sia!
  • dd
    david d.
    2 January 2019 @ 11:31
    capitulation only works where theres intrinsic value, bitcoin is going to almost zero
    • cl
      connor l.
      2 January 2019 @ 12:17
      How is gold's intrinsic value different?
    • DS
      David S.
      2 January 2019 @ 20:38
      Bitcoin can be forked and hacked. Gold can also go to zero if a large meteorite of pure gold falls to the earth. Which is more probable? DLS
    • cl
      connor l.
      2 January 2019 @ 21:03
      Gold can be stolen. The possibility of individuals in control of their private keys having their bitcoin forked or hacked is, in my opinion, smaller than somebody taking possession of my gold. Do you know the probabilities behind "can"?
    • RE
      Renato E.
      2 January 2019 @ 22:37
      @connor l.: Gold has been used as money for thousands of years. Crypto? Not so much. Don't know about you, but I work in the cyber security area for more than 18 years. There exists a market for undisclosed vulnerabilities in any operating system. If I don't want to pay for such a vulnerability, I just wait until a zero day exploit becomes public (e.g. the latest adobe flash player bug). It is way easier to steal your secret keys from your macOS, Windows or Linux System than stealing your physical gold. Why? The attacker doesn't have to risk getting caught by you, the police or some of your neighbors.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      2 January 2019 @ 23:11
      Please tell me the intrinsic value of the electrons whirling on the hard drive platters in your financial institustion's datacenter. Money is what we agree it is worth, nothing more. There is no Gold standard. Nixon took the US off the gold standard in the 70's as a "temporary measure". The spending power of all fiat currencies trends to zero, and yet you think Bitcoin is the problem? What a tragic mistake.
    • SB
      Salvatore B.
      3 January 2019 @ 02:31
      I always find it humorous that the people who know the least about something tend to be the loudest.
  • TD
    Tuur D. | Contributor
    2 January 2019 @ 23:07
    Hi all, I thought I'd share the Bitcoin market outlook piece I mentioned in the video from last August (in it you'll also find a link to our January piece):
    • AR
      Alex R.
      3 January 2019 @ 00:27
      Tuur, Any thoughts on Hedera/Hashgraph? Some believe it will supplant BTC. Thank you!
  • SS
    Scuba S.
    2 January 2019 @ 23:39
    Glad to see Tuur back! RV needed some balance to the multicoin, token, blockchain™, DLT®, etc. vaporware pumping.
  • TP
    Timothy P.
    2 January 2019 @ 23:21
    Turr Demeester is absolutely right. Bitcoin has the Amazon-esque first mover advantage that puts it way beyond its competition. It also has the most activity on its code base, a large raft of capable and experienced developers -- who even take their time to point out flaws in other crypto currency implementations -- including a second-layer solution that is growing massively. Its worth reading Turr's critique of Ethereum, often compared as a close second to Bitcoin -- (Thread formatted tweetstorm) No other coins come close to Bitcoin's metrics. The real infrastructure work is happening now which will only increase Bitcoin's technical lead. This is another facet that most in the space don't recognize, any good idea that happens out there can be incorporated into Bitcoin -- so there's no need for secondary ecosystems like alt-coins. When sidechains become fully operational (there are only two currently active - like Liquid from Blockstream) that will obviate the need for distinct tokens each running their own network security (mining). As for XRP/Ripple, it isn't a cryptocurrency -- it isn't mined -- all of its supply has been pre-allocated, with the founders holding over 60% of the outstanding float. Its basically BankCoin trying to grab the institutional space, but they've failed to have any real usage. Its also worth mentioning they have five servers, Ripple 1, 2, 3, 4, etc, that you connect to -- if that isn't centralized, I don't know what is. Great interview!
  • SU
    Shakeel U.
    2 January 2019 @ 14:13
    27 minutes of pure bullshit
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      2 January 2019 @ 23:05
      You're so laughably wrong I can't even begin to point out why. And you bothered to post this pithy comment -- why are you wasting our time?
  • AM
    Alonso M.
    2 January 2019 @ 16:44
    I gave this a thumbs up. Maybe a first for me when it comes to crypto videos. I think there is useful information here for skeptics. Where I strongly disagree with the interviewee is with comments that suggest there is value in bitcoin. For sure the bloom is off the rose and sentiment is not good, and maybe this will result in a price move. But it definitely doesn't mean there is value in bitcoin at current prices. Probably safer to assume bitcoin was a financial bubble that has burst and will see price declines in the range of 95%-99% from the peak, and this is likely more or less detached from whatever real value develops in the next few years. For as long as technical analysts are speculating over bitcoin's "price", I highly doubt bitcoin will be well suited for the many functions it is expected to perform as a cog in the wheel of global commerce. Time is needed. A lot of time is needed.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      2 January 2019 @ 23:04
      I'd say Bitcoin weathering 10 years of continuous attacks does mean its making progress. This is the 12th time Bitcoin has gone through this cycle, and it won't be the last. I've been continuously charting and trading this asset since early 2011. It needs more time to have end-user slickness in presentation, but the core technology is solid. Most people will end up using Bitcoin in one form or another without even realizing it.
  • MS
    Matt S.
    2 January 2019 @ 21:44
    No mention of Proof of Keys and how that could affect the institutional adoption of Bitcoin which Tuur seems to see as a good and necessary evil to make Bitcoin "big and boring".
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      2 January 2019 @ 22:55
      Gemini, a fully licensed and regulated exchange in New York offers custody solutions -- and others are working on providing the same. Just because Tuur didn't mention it, doesn't mean they don't exist.
  • GF
    Gordon F.
    2 January 2019 @ 20:21
    Unlike most of the posters here, I have no strong opinions regarding the future of bitcoin. However, it seems to me to be a good moment to finally buy a little bit, probably $200-500 worth, so as to have a little skin in the game. If it goes to zero, that's not enough to hurt me, but if it goes up 100-fold or more, it will be enough to make a difference. If it does eventually head back up, buying after an 80% drop eliminates much of the risk. This will be a position I will just plan to hold. If it goes to zero, I write it off to experience.
    • IO
      Igor O.
      2 January 2019 @ 21:41
      Gordon just pull up Cisco chart. The point being there is never only one right way.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      2 January 2019 @ 22:53
      Its worth knowing what has happened before, here's a quick rundown of the last 11 times Bitcoin has been through this cycle, with the current episode being the 12th --
  • SA
    Stephen A.
    2 January 2019 @ 15:00
    Real Vision, please schedule a conversation between Erik Townsend, of MacroVoices, and Tuur to discuss their viewpoints on future of cryptocurrencies! Both gentlemen are extremely smart on the topic and have widely different views. Erik seems to have a stronger argument that unfortunately governments will hijack the libertarian efforts of the creators and use cryptocurrency as another population control, ala China's social rating system. If you want true financial anonymity then you will want to keep a paper cash Fiat system, despite all it's flaws.
    • MS
      Matt S.
      2 January 2019 @ 21:38
      Agreed - cash and only cash provide true anonymity
    • TD
      Tuur D. | Contributor
      2 January 2019 @ 22:29
      In case you hadn't seen it, I did a two part debate with Erik Townsend on Bitcoin a few months ago on The Investor Podcast. Here are the links: 1. 2.
  • RW
    Richard W.
    2 January 2019 @ 15:23
    Prognosticating in comments here, about where bitcoin will go in value, is foolish and detracts from sensible observations. I found this interview really informative
  • PJ
    Peter J.
    2 January 2019 @ 14:50
    An interesting interview. Personally, I'll admit I'm a sceptic re whether Bitcoin will ever attain the objectives as laid out here by Tuur. That said I'm sure there were equally sceptical views of Google in the nineties, so I won't say it won't achieve some of the goals stated. However, at this point in time I'm definitely sitting on the sidelines watching and can't see myself participating for some time if ever. To my mind there is a some level of naivety in stating that Bitcoin is non politicised, as at this point in time Bitcoin is not a threat to anyone or any government institution.IF it ever becomes a political threat then political interference and / or control is surely a certainty.
  • SP
    Stephen P.
    2 January 2019 @ 14:22
    Tuur is one of the best in this space. And one of the few who correctly called the 2018 bear in cryptos. His recent Ethereum tweetstorm and comments here on its architectural weaknesses are worth paying attention to (it overloads the main chain). Proof of work wins out, stick to mined currencies, avoid premined ones, or non POW. Bitcoin continuously lowers supply inflation, unlike fiat or even gold. Good interview.
  • CW
    C W.
    2 January 2019 @ 13:45
    An interesting, and perhaps to some slightly frustrating, detail: This was filmed on 13 Dec, two days before BTC made the 2018-low. It's up 20% since.
  • HC
    Howard C.
    2 January 2019 @ 13:09
    Excellent interview. There were too many ICOs, diluted the crypto space .... looks like BTC will be the base. I just learned about the Lightning protocol from Tuur and it looks promising, no longer does one have to wait for confirmations, it is lightning fast. I see Lightning's roadmap has smart contracts so those interested will have to keep an eye on this protocol. Mass adoption, a tipping point, is so close if security and ease of use can be solved.
  • SC
    Sejong C.
    2 January 2019 @ 10:36
    I respect Realvision for uploading such interviews like this. This balances out the negative view on bitcoin. That being said, bitcoin itself might have some value, but other crypto-currencies, not so much.