为什么说比特币会失败？

    每隔几年，技术世界就会爆发一场革命，迎来下一个有望改变人类生活方式、催生一个高利润新产业的大事物。继个人电脑爆炸式发展之后，互联网、智能手机、平板电脑、云计算，以及其他大大小小的颠覆性技术接踵而至。最新一个粉墨登场的变革者似乎是虚拟货币，而在这一领域，最大的玩家当然非比特币莫属。

    从表面上看，比特币似乎是一个伟大的创意，或许也是一种必然产物。比特币（这个虚拟货币的实际单位）是一种可以由买卖双方直接交易的电子货币，它不需要黄金、美元或其他传统的价值储存手段提供实体支持，价格完全基于一个点对点式网络自发形成的需求。比特币与主流货币的差异并不大——自国际货币体系于20世纪70年代废除金本位制、创建浮动汇率以来，就连美元基本上也遵循着同样的运作原则。

    最大的区别在于监管。不同于现金，比特币不受中央银行支持，而传统货币的实际价值其实是由中央银行确定的。

    为了理解这一点，试想一位店主按照一个固定价格向顾客出售方糖块的情形。走进店铺前，这位顾客知道他兜里的美元将产生一定量的价值。尽管这种价值（即美元的价格）在外汇市场上或许会波动，但只会在一个狭窄的区间内变化，不会影响这位顾客实时购买方糖块的能力。如果美元价值的波动远远超出一个可接受的范围，央行通常会采用货币交易的方式对它进行矫正，让它回到正常的区间内。这正是一种不与黄金挂钩的法定货币依然可以有效运转、不会因货币投机者作祟而遭到破坏的原因所在。

    相比之下，比特币的波动性使得这一切毫无确定性可言。店主和顾客都不知道如何在任何特定时间内给方糖块正确定价，因为这种虚拟货币的价值往往呈现大起大落之势。过去一年，一个比特币的价格曾经从14美元暴涨至1,100美元，2013年年末又回落到了500美元左右。如此大幅度的波动不仅使得交易双方根本无法预测比特币的价值，而且也让它变得几乎一钱不值。剧烈波动的原因是，由于缺乏任何官方的货币之锚，比特币只存在于物物交换或投机的背景之下，但当交易和炒作终止时，一切围绕比特币的喧嚣也将偃旗息鼓。换句话说，比特币的成功完全基于一个自我实现的预言，这种状况就像听起来那样危险，比特币甚至无法通过一种真实货币理应经受的考验。

    此外，比特币的不可替代性也是一个小问题。举一个很有说服力的例子：有个人因扔掉了一个硬盘驱动器而损失了价值约750万美元的比特币。当然，我们也可能一时记不起把现金放在什么地方，但几乎不会如此轻易地丢失如此巨额的现钞。这项因素，再加上上文提及的种种问题，使得比特币成为一种极其不可靠的交易媒介，进而贬损其价值主张，也就是它的匿名性、交易免税、比信用卡更低的交易成本等。

    最后不得不提一下丝绸之路(Silk Road)，这家以比特币作为交易媒介的在线黑市最近被美国监管当局关闭。由于匿名性和点对点体系，比特币备受非法货物交易者的青睐。对于比特币的投资者来说，这或许是个好兆头，但这种使用方式几乎肯定会受到执法者的注意，迟早会被取缔（丝绸之路就是一个例子），而且有可能导致监管部门对它的使用方式施加重重限制。本周举行的达沃斯世界经济论坛(World Economic Forum)上，美国金融界大佬对比特币的前景表达了类似的看法。“问题不在于我们是否接受，”摩根大通(JPMorgan)首席执行官吉米•戴蒙接受美国全国广播公司财经频道(CNBC)采访时说。“我们现在连能否为比特币交易提供方便都成问题。说到底，对比特币不放心的人是政府。”

    Every few years the world of technology witnesses a revolution, the next big development with the potential to change how we function and to spawn a highly profitable new industry. There's been the explosion of personal computers, followed by the Internet, smartphones, tablets, cloud computing, and other large and small disruptive technologies. The latest such game-changer seems to be the arrival of virtual currencies, personified by the biggest player in that arena: bitcoin.

    On the surface, bitcoin seems like a great idea and maybe an inevitable one. Bitcoins (the actual units of this virtual currency) are a form of electronic money that can be traded directly between parties; do not require the physical backing of gold, dollars, or any other traditional store of value; and whose price is based on demand over a peer-to-peer network. That isn't that different from mainstream currencies -- since the abolition of the gold standard in the 1970s and the creation of floating exchange rates, even the U.S. Dollar functions mostly on the same principles.

    The big difference? Regulation. Unlike cash, bitcoin isn't backed by a central bank, which essentially gives conventional currencies their real value.

    To understand this, consider that a shopkeeper sells a candy bar to a customer for a fixed price. The customer knows before he walks in that the dollars in his pocket will yield a certain amount of value. That value (the price of the dollar) might fluctuate in foreign exchange markets but only within a narrow band and will not affect the ability of the customer to buy the candy bar in real time. If the value of the dollar fluctuates too far out of an acceptable range, it will usually be brought back in line through currency transactions by central banks. That's precisely why a fiat currency system (not pegged to gold) can still work and not be disrupted because of currency speculators.

    By contrast, the volatility of bitcoin makes everything a lot less certain. Neither the shopkeeper nor the customer would know how to correctly price the candy bar at any given time, since the value of the virtual currency undergoes such extreme highs and lows. Over the past year, the price of a bitcoin has gone from $14 to more than $1,100, settling back down around $500 at the end of 2013. The fluctuations not only make predictability of value impossible but also render bitcoins almost worthless. The reason for this is that bitcoins, due to their lack of any official anchor, exist only in the context of barter or speculation, and when the transactions and hype stop, so does the music. In other words, the success of bitcoin is based on a self-fulfilling prophecy, which is just as dangerous as it sounds and does not even pass the test for a real currency.

    There is also the small problem of bitcoins being irreplaceable, a case in point being a man who lost some $7.5 million worth of bitcoins because he threw away a hard drive. Cash can be misplaced too, of course, but hardly in such quantities and so easily. This factor, combined with the issues mentioned above, makes bitcoin an extremely unreliable medium of exchange, which detracts from its value proposition: anonymity, tax free transactions, and low transaction costs compared to credit cards.

    Finally, there is Silk Road, the online marketplace for illegal goods shut down by U.S. authorities and facilitated by bitcoin. The popularity of bitcoin for conducting illegal trade due to its anonymous nature and peer-to-peer system might bode well for bitcoin investors but is almost sure to attract fire from law enforcement sooner or later (Silk Road being one example) and could result in heavy restrictions being placed on its usage. This week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, U.S. financial leaders shared a similar outlook on bitcoin: "The question isn't whether we accept it," JPMorgan (JPM) CEO Jamie Dimon told CNBC. "The question is do we even participate [with] people who facilitate bitcoin? The people who are going to eventually really get upset with it will be governments."