Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
Ez a téma zárolásra került 
Hozzászólási szabályok és irányelvek
Hozzászólás jelentése
Keyword is on past time. They saw potential but currently they dont.
Its not about whether or its a big deal but rather how OP doesnt get that IF Valve would see potential in bitcoin as a payment on steam, they likely would have kept it but didnt. Your guess is just as good as mine on that.
Gold reserves/ trust?
Bitcoin as of right now at best is backed by demand and trust
The reason they discontinued bitcoin was because of the high fees and slow confirmation times which exposed purchases to extra volatility. Volatility is still an issue but the fees are pretty much gone now and confirmation times are better. Both will continually improve. I wouldn't be surprised if Steam reactivated support eventually. They should.
Anyway this thread is about Litecoin, not bitcoin. Litecoin does not currently have the same issues as bitcoin. It is designed to be fast with low fees. Making it ideal as a currency for transactions on a service like steam. So i really hope steam reconsiders trying crypto again and they do that in the form of Litecoin at the very least.
Just a comment to the naysayers in this thread. Please do proper research about cryptocurrency before you spew rubbish about it being a bubble etc etc. It just makes you look ignorant and we cant have proper discussions when one side is ill informed. And i dont really get the whole "No! You cant have this feature because I dont like it and wont use it!" stance.
Most ppl saw what happened too many times with the new best things blowing up so i hope you understand that ppl are sceptistic,
As an old saye goes: no wonder lasts forever
Imagine the technology remains exactly the same, except the last step of the mining changes a bit - instead of being awarded an electronic token, your printer spits out a banknote.
How is that not literally "printing money"? And don't say anything about banks. You don't solve a perceived problem by adopting the same kind of behavior you criticize in others.
I get it. You have a whole bunch of these tokens and are trying to get people to give you stuff for them rather than asking money for their stuff. As the old saying goes, I'd love to pay my taxes with a smile, too, but that isn't legal tender.
Also it being a bubble has little to do with technology, and a great deal to do with psychology.
It's funny to see how you assume that the only reason for people to be opposed to your idea is that "they just don't get it".
Newsflash: that's not how it works. I know you feel like you're smarter than us "naysayers" but you really aren't. You're just another person.
Currency has one thing, because it is mandated by at least one government as a form of payment with an accepted universal value. Cryptos have no government backing, or regulation and infact agressively try to avoid such which means it will never gain the confidence of a bank note since a business does not have to accept it meaning it cannot reliably be used to pay for goods and services.
THe fluctuations in value don't help either.
Funnily enough you can use cryptos to pay taxes in certain States.
I know you feel like you're smarter than folks that are interested in the technology but you really aren't. You're just another person.
It remains to be seen if Bitcoin (and other cryptos) enter a 3rd massive bubble in the future. I personally doubt it but I also don't think it's going away any time soon.
All of that is quite a ways from whether or not Steam would have a desire to allow people to use cryptos to buy games...
You mean "certain states" as in "Arizona"? And you mean "you can" as in "you might be able to by by 2020"?
Wait, when did they change the word "technology" to mean "getting stuff for free"?
Of course it's not going away. The concept has been present throughout history, only the form changes every now and then.
And the answer there is really simple - it doesn't and it wouldn't, for the time being.
There are a few other states that have prepared or are preparing proposals for the same, but yes I stand corrected. Clearly some people in the government do view it as legal tender (certainly moreso than your smiles).
It's not really free though is it? I can't speak to some useless ICOs that have been floating around but you actually have to provide a useful service to the network in order to be rewarded with Bitcoin (or Litecoin or Ethereum).
So what are some examples of similar concepts as Bitcoin/cryptos? You keep repeating this so there must be many such examples.
It seems they did (for Bitcoin) until network congestion made it infeasible. Is it really so unbelievable that they could in the future?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6iDZspbRMg
Look upn the SOuth Seatrading company and its storied history. See if it sounds familiar.
The fact is if you study the history of currency and banking you'll come across a laundry list of failed attempts of decentralization.
Well, did until people started asking questions and the pyramid's downward expansion started slowing.
A bitcoin conference stopped accepting Bitcoins....
Sure, I never argued that people in the government are smart, just that they make the laws and they decide what is legal tender.
The South Sea Trading Company seems more similar to the ICO craze that plagues cryptos. But yes there are some similarities, there are also many more differences I'd argue.
Steams own reasoning in their post about it mentions the network fees specifically (as well as the volatility). The combination of those meant that by the time a transaction was accepted into the blockchain the value of the Bitcoins that were sent may no longer be enough for the game. The network fees made refunds difficult as well and the same issue may occur if they asked for the rest of the payment via Bitcoin.
Indeed, at one of the high points of the network congestion they decided to stop accepting Bitcoin as payment, for a very similar reason as Steam did I presume.
the currency will not last..
this is something some group or another tried every few decades, the ONLY difference here is that its digital