From an economics standpoint and a personal opinion, I don't think there is any future value for Bitcoin (or any digital or virtual currency).
From what I've been told, there is a finite amount in Bitcoin which means there is a limit on how much one can theoretically amass.
However, that's not to say that people will not trade money for it. If it is worth a lot to someone (and I suppose not everyone), then the value of Bitcoin will be high. But not everyone wants a Bitcoin. Not everyone can do much with a Bitcoin compared to other currencies. It will only be worth a lot to those who know what to do with it.
It's not knocking on Bitcoin alone - currencies and gold work the same way. The only reason gold has such a high value is because of its perceived value and it's theoretically accepted everywhere in the world. If everyone said they will not accept gold but silver instead, then the value of gold will certainly drop.
That said, if you do want to data mine, make sure you do it when the times are hot. :) (which could well be right now)
I think it's a bootstrapping problem. Gold was bootstrapped eons ago because it was shiny and rare (and survives because it remains rare to this day). Fiat currencies are bootstrapped by governments (you can pay your taxes in them and governments pay their workers and contractors in them).
I'm not sure how Bitcoin is going to be bootstrapped, how one might conclude if/when it becomes a stable currency or if it is even possible. I think a significant proportion of the market might need to receive some benefit to switching before they will buy in, much like any new product in a traditional economy.
Bootstrapping is growing daily: http://bit.ly/bitcoinnodes though there are too many areas where Bitcoin does not yet exist.
Hmm ... a benefit? How about "no payment network fees"? When you send $20 to a friend, your friend gets all $20. Not $19.12 like if you paid your friend with PayPal, ... Not $19.50 like if you paid your friend with SquareUp. No, .. the transaction settles at par value (all $20 goes to the recipient). Do you buy gas from the fueling station that charges $0.10 less per gallon because they only accept cash? Not everyone does, but enough do such that it continues to stay in business.
Does Bitcoin need "a significant portion of the market" to succeed, or can it succeed simply by growing just in the niches that it already excels at today (transactions that benefit from anonymity, transactions that benefit from having no fees whatsover, transactions that are too small to be cost effective on other payment networks, etc.)?
Bootstrapping is growing daily: http://bit.ly/bitcoinnodes though there are too many areas where Bitcoin does not yet exist.
Are these places that are generating bitcoin, or are they places where I could spend bitcoin if I had it? If it's just people producing bitcoin, the fundamental problem is still that it can't generally be exchanged for anything. Unless bitcoin is accepted a lot more widely than I thought, you'll have an easier time convincing me to take payment in the form of gift cards for the local grocery store.
You can buy tea, socks, domain names, t-shirts, nightlights, video games, books, pen testing, and more using bitcoins: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade
In short, not all that is rare and limited is valuable.
I have a few additional concerns with the adoption of bitcoin. One being that it displaces those currently in control and will therefore be made illegal. It would not be too hard to portray bitcoin as the tool of illegal traffickers to the general public.
Then again, just because there is some risk, does not mean it is not worth it.
>From what I've been told, there is a finite amount in Bitcoin which means there is a limit on how much one can theoretically amass.
You are not going to eat bitcoins. So while nobody will ever get more than x bitcoin, the exchange rate between bitcoins and bread can easily change, and likely will (this will also make the hidden cost of inflation public, which is likely where the biggest threat to bitcoins are).
The relative durability of bitcoin plus the fact that it becomes scarcer through time means that bitcoins have far too high a potential to appreciate in value.
From an economic standpoint, it will encourage hoarding.
One of the problems with hoarding is that people simply stop producing because there are not enough money in circulation. This is more or less like the old money days when moneyed people didn't have to work, and people who have no money could not find work.
Bitcoins also doesn't solve the problem of derivative bitcoins, e.g. futures and debts. For instance, you can "create" more money in the system if bitcoin deposit taking institutions are permitted to do "fractional" banking.
Remember, that gold itself is a finite resource. As time passes, currencies become backed by gold instead of gold, and eventually it untethers from gold.
On the good side, Bitcoins is the environmentally friendly equivalent of gold. It would make Warrent Buffett proud, since he famously remarked "People dig up gold from somewhere out of the ground, melt and forge it into shapes, dig another hole, bury it again and employ people to guard it."
>From an economic standpoint, it will encourage hoarding.
You cannot eat bitcoins, nor do they cure illness, provide you with electricity or any of the other things you want (you in the abstract).
It is true that deflation encourage people to hoard more so than does inflation but you are ignoring things like the future value of money (a dollar today is better than a dollar a week from now) as well as peoples tendency to value the things they buy more than the money they give for them (otherwise, why buy it in the first place).
Finally deflation would enable investors to wait out bad times, hopefully killing the bubbles that crop up whenever the market can't sustain the required investments.
If you still don't believe me, consider this: in the middle to late 1990ies people new that computers would get obsolete very fast and that the expensive computer today could be had for less not long in the future, but the value of having a computer today was better than paying less for a new one tomorrow.
4. Encourage the "right" economic behaviors - debatable - since we do not all share the same definition.
For instance, oil as a currency would be interesting, because much economic activity is tied to harnessing energy. Relative decline in oil reserves point to declining wealth.
The problem with a guaranteed deflation scenario is that it leads to long term economic stagnation and lack of investment activity. There will be no good times to wait for.
From what I've been told, there is a finite amount in Bitcoin which means there is a limit on how much one can theoretically amass.
However, that's not to say that people will not trade money for it. If it is worth a lot to someone (and I suppose not everyone), then the value of Bitcoin will be high. But not everyone wants a Bitcoin. Not everyone can do much with a Bitcoin compared to other currencies. It will only be worth a lot to those who know what to do with it.
It's not knocking on Bitcoin alone - currencies and gold work the same way. The only reason gold has such a high value is because of its perceived value and it's theoretically accepted everywhere in the world. If everyone said they will not accept gold but silver instead, then the value of gold will certainly drop.
That said, if you do want to data mine, make sure you do it when the times are hot. :) (which could well be right now)