Bitcoin Forum

Bitcoin => Press => Topic started by: Gordonium on April 02, 2013, 03:23:58 PM



Title: 2013-04-02 Business Insider "Wall Street analyst on Bitcoin"
Post by: Gordonium on April 02, 2013, 03:23:58 PM
WALL STREET CURRENCY ANALYST: One Hour Ago, I Had My First Client Ask About Bitcoin

http://www.businessinsider.com/wall-street-analyst-on-bitcoin-2013-4#ixzz2PJtPtIFn (http://www.businessinsider.com/wall-street-analyst-on-bitcoin-2013-4#ixzz2PJtPtIFn)

Big money is about to pour in...


Title: Re: 2013-04-02 Business Insider "Wall street analyst on Bitcoin"
Post by: cypherdoc on April 02, 2013, 05:13:01 PM
you're right.


Title: Re: 2013-04-02 Business Insider "Wall street analyst on Bitcoin"
Post by: Piper67 on April 02, 2013, 05:14:18 PM
Yup. Those who thought this price rise was due to big money already pouring in are in for a rude awakening.  :D


Title: Re: 2013-04-02 Business Insider "Wall street analyst on Bitcoin"
Post by: grondilu on April 02, 2013, 05:27:01 PM
Quote
With far more rapid advances in the technology of processing than mining, the rules have already been changed to stop some form of mining. This is effectively a form of revaluation of the currency.

What is he talking about?


Title: Re: 2013-04-02 Business Insider "Wall Street analyst on Bitcoin"
Post by: kiko on April 02, 2013, 05:35:24 PM
Quote
This is a supply approach and easily insolvable.
*Raises eyebrow


Title: Re: 2013-04-02 Business Insider "Wall street analyst on Bitcoin"
Post by: Piper67 on April 02, 2013, 05:43:27 PM
Quote
With far more rapid advances in the technology of processing than mining, the rules have already been changed to stop some form of mining. This is effectively a form of revaluation of the currency.

What is he talking about?

Maybe a somewhat obscure reference to the transition from CPU to GPU to Asics


Title: Re: 2013-04-02 Business Insider "Wall Street analyst on Bitcoin"
Post by: Zomdifros on April 02, 2013, 06:52:47 PM
I can't even tell whether or not this guy is actually talking about Bitcoin.


Title: Re: 2013-04-02 Business Insider "Wall Street analyst on Bitcoin"
Post by: Rygon on April 02, 2013, 07:01:33 PM
WALL STREET CURRENCY ANALYST: One Hour Ago, I Had My First Client Ask About Bitcoin

http://www.businessinsider.com/wall-street-analyst-on-bitcoin-2013-4#ixzz2PJtPtIFn (http://www.businessinsider.com/wall-street-analyst-on-bitcoin-2013-4#ixzz2PJtPtIFn)

Big Dumb money is about to pour in...

Fixed it for you


Title: Re: 2013-04-02 Business Insider "Wall Street analyst on Bitcoin"
Post by: solex on April 02, 2013, 10:42:20 PM
I can't even tell whether or not this guy is actually talking about Bitcoin.

+1

If his incoherent rambling passes muster as "currency analysis" then god help his fx investing clients.


Title: Re: 2013-04-02 Business Insider "Wall Street analyst on Bitcoin"
Post by: bb113 on April 02, 2013, 11:24:14 PM
Quote
With far more rapid advances in the technology of processing than mining, the rules have already been changed to stop some form of mining. This is effectively a form of revaluation of the currency.

Quote
sebastien galy
on Apr 2, 4:33 PM said:
@Eero Tulppala:
Thank you for your comments, they are most informative. The information comes directly from wikipedia entries on bitcoins. It does specifically state that the rules were modified to forbid some form of mining (i dont talk about timing as some say). My little bit is just to add a standard fx valuation framework (valuation via relative money supplies and prices) and passing the word around in my space.


Lets try to figure it out, if that comment is really by him then he seems interested. I think the "rule change" may be referring to a combination of the increase in difficulty and block reward size. The currency is revalued because to some degree it is worth more if the network is more secure, and also if the rate of generation has decreased. The forms of mining refers to, as Piper said, "CPU to GPU to Asics".


As for this:
Quote
“Monetary Approach” - One way to value bitcoins would be to compare the money supply of the US vs bitcoins. That simplistic approach would make bitcoins very valuable if they end up being able to buy the same USD asset. This is a supply approach and easily insolvable.


The last part doesn't make much sense to me but he seems to be saying that just looking at the number of dollars and comparing that to the number of bitcoins is not a good way to assess the value. Perhaps there is a language barrier?