Q: Given an unending supply of inflationary medium, how long can a balloon keep expanding?
The universe has been expanding for some time now. Based on the historic trend line, it is likely to keep expanding. It might even accelerate. You may be waiting a wee while longer for universal Armageddon. What the hell does the universe have to do with a balloon? Nothing. |
|
|
|
You seem to be describing Armageddon-like scenarios in which gold might prosper in such a way that is appreciating 10x or more from current value, ... unlikely scenarios, but we might chose to make 1% to 10% of our investment choices based on such scenarios, especially if we assign them a high probability (such as 10%, which seems a bit high to me, but might seem reasonable to some of the Armageddon nutjobs out there)
Q: Given an unending supply of inflationary medium, how long can a balloon keep expanding? A: Exactly until the internal inflationary forces overcome structural integrity, causing balloon to burst. - jbreher, proud monetary armageddonist nutjob since long before the turn of the millennia |
|
|
|
That's cool, I guess. This bit puzzled me however: The support, however, is limited to six devices - Galaxy S10e, S10, S10+, S10 5G, Note10, and the Note10+, and is restricted to seven countries - Canada, Germany, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, the U.S., and the U.K. What - if you replace your phone or move elsewhere, All Your Corn Are Belong To Samsung? |
|
|
|
Has nothing to do with a "blockalypse" because the blockalyse never happened. Blocks became full, Dominance plummeted. If you don't like the name Blockalypse I for this sorry state of affairs, then good for you. Stick your metaphorical fingers in your ears or bury your metaphorical head in the ground - your choice. For my part, I find it an apt and fitting description. It simply means blocks are becoming increasingly full.
Exactly. And when they become persistently full once again? Blockalypse II. Where the masses again abandon BTC for some other chain that actually allows one to quickly and inexpensively transfer value. |
|
|
|
I already responded both that your facts are not correct and also,
So you're asserting that the charts I posted links to contain fraudulent figures? Interesting. I don't believe your assertion is correct, so I will tentatively conclude that you are delusional on these additional matters of fact. I'll be happy to rescind my conclusion of delusional, just as soon as you post links to credible evidence of corrected data. ... and even if you might be using some actual facts ... emphasizing facts (if true) in your favor I know that at one time, in about late 2017, you and your buddy, PeterR were advocating 50/50 or some baloney like that Nope. You misrememberate. I think Peter suggested just not divesting your other Bitcoins. For my part, I have divulged several times that I have several times the number of BCH, and of BSV, than I do of BTC, though the dollar value of my BTC exceeds the rest of my holdings. And no, I do not feel stupid about it. I fully expect total vindication upon the onset of Blockalypse II. Even if not, I am doing just fine, thankyouverymuch. <<... deflection continues ...>> Lest we forget which facts JJG asserted are incorrect: OK, actually only the first two were facts. The last paragraph was merely a rational conclusion based upon those preceding facts. Who gives any shits about your attempts to describe bitcoin as broken with a bunch of made up bullshit, See, this is the salient point, JuniorJiggly: I am posting facts with links to supporting evidence, and you keep characterizing them as 'a bunch of made up bullshit'. You are being Deceitful, Dishonest, and Dissembling. |
|
|
|
I already responded both that your facts are not correct and also,
So you're asserting that the charts I posted links to contain fraudulent figures? Interesting. I don't believe your assertion is correct, so I will tentatively conclude that you are delusional on these additional matters of fact. I'll be happy to rescind my conclusion of delusional, just as soon as you post links to credible evidence of corrected data. ... and even if you might be using some actual facts ... emphasizing facts (if true) in your favor I know that at one time, in about late 2017, you and your buddy, PeterR were advocating 50/50 or some baloney like that Nope. You misrememberate. I think Peter suggested just not divesting your other Bitcoins. For my part, I have divulged several times that I have several times the number of BCH, and of BSV, than I do of BTC, though the dollar value of my BTC exceeds the rest of my holdings. And no, I do not feel stupid about it. I fully expect total vindication upon the onset of Blockalypse II. Even if not, I am doing just fine, thankyouverymuch. <<... deflection continues ...>> Lest we forget which facts JJG asserted are incorrect: OK, actually only the first two were facts. The last paragraph was merely a rational conclusion based upon those preceding facts. My dear bear, correlation does not equal causation No argument there. However, correlation does form the basis of a rational causation hypothesis. OTOH, your example was noncorrelation. Which is quite a bit further from equaling causation (i.e., in direct opposition from) than is correlation. A crypto bull market will shrink Bitcoin market dominance
Speculation based upon facts not yet entered into evidence. |
|
|
|
I already responded both that your facts are not correct and also,
So you're asserting that the charts I posted links to contain fraudulent figures? Interesting. I don't believe your assertion is correct, so I will tentatively conclude that you are delusional on these additional matters of fact. I'll be happy to rescind my conclusion of delusional, just as soon as you post links to credible evidence of corrected data. ... and even if you might be using some actual facts ... emphasizing facts (if true) in your favor I know that at one time, in about late 2017, you and your buddy, PeterR were advocating 50/50 or some baloney like that Nope. You misrememberate. I think Peter suggested just not divesting your other Bitcoins. For my part, I have divulged several times that I have several times the number of BCH, and of BSV, than I do of BTC, though the dollar value of my BTC exceeds the rest of my holdings. And no, I do not feel stupid about it. I fully expect total vindication upon the onset of Blockalypse II. Even if not, I am doing just fine, thankyouverymuch. <<... deflection continues ...>> Lest we forget which facts JJG asserted are incorrect: OK, actually only the first two were facts. The last paragraph was merely a rational conclusion based upon those preceding facts. |
|
|
|
While most alts have been dumped, XMR and LTC have not been. I wonder why they left them. I don't think these two coins are going to perform well.
Litecoin acolytes hold heartfulls of halvening hopium. As for Ripple, it is arguably not a cryptocurrency. You must be navigating on autopilot in terms of NOT knowing your shitcoins. Not that it is a plus to know shitcoins. As long as you know the various forms of bcash and BIG blocker talk, what else do you need to know? In other words, no one mentioned Ripple. XMR = Monero Ripple = XRP Haha. Yep, you got me. And I even have holdings of each of the above. Imagine my chagrin. |
|
|
|
I already responded both that your facts are not correct and also,
So you're asserting that the charts I posted links to contain fraudulent figures? Interesting. I don't believe your assertion is correct, so I will tentatively conclude that you are delusional on these additional matters of fact. I'll be happy to rescind my conclusion of delusional, just as soon as you post links to credible evidence of corrected data. ... and even if you might be using some actual facts ... emphasizing facts (if true) in your favor I know that at one time, in about late 2017, you and your buddy, PeterR were advocating 50/50 or some baloney like that Nope. You misrememberate. I think Peter suggested just not divesting your other Bitcoins. For my part, I have divulged several times that I have several times the number of BCH, and of BSV, than I do of BTC, though the dollar value of my BTC exceeds the rest of my holdings. And no, I do not feel stupid about it. I fully expect total vindication upon the onset of Blockalypse II. Even if not, I am doing just fine, thankyouverymuch. |
|
|
|
(or more likely govt. agent).
Go fuck yourself, Junior G-person. |
|
|
|
I ain't shilling anything. I am pointing out the negative consequences -- quite reversible ones, if the community would get off it's collective delusional metaphorical fat ass -- of implementing a centrally planned production quota upon transactional capacity.
You can keep pushing that narrative but no one wants to use a fork owned and run by Calvin Ayre and Craig Wright. Or Roger Ver for that matter. I don’t know how you can stand associating yourself with those characters. Funny how I'm clearly talking about BTC, and you yammer on about personalities associated with other Bitcoins. |
|
|
|
You know that jbreher got pretty worked up when some of us (well partly emphasized by me) continued to refer to him as a govt agent...
Go Fuck Yourself, JuniorGee. How are we supposed to really know peeps on the interwebs?
Didn't you know? I am mindrust's alter ego. I thought everyone already knew that. |
|
|
|
Of course, there are several rebels including your buddy jbreher who just wuvs himselfie some coinbase....
::shrugs:: I get my charts where I do my bidnez. I see no point in trawling over to schtamp just to get your panties outta your crack. |
|
|
|
While most alts have been dumped, XMR and LTC have not been. I wonder why they left them. I don't think these two coins are going to perform well.
Litecoin acolytes hold heartfulls of halvening hopium. As for Ripple, it is arguably not a cryptocurrency. |
|
|
|
No, I didn't, for the most part I don't want to hear what others are saying about me, but this time its an exception! Thanks for the heads up. I also want to thank my mom, Jesus Christ, of course the big man upstairs, oh and micgoossens, jbreher and who could forget JJG, for helping to push me well past the 1,000 mark, I love you all and I hope to win this award again next year! Never stop believing in yourself!! You can do anything!!! Lovely acceptance speech. As one of the little people, it makes me proud by reflection. |
|
|
|
Why did you not join the vote?
Poll is meaningless. I don't begrudge you having a bit of fun, but WTF is the point? |
|
|
|
I already responded both that your facts are not correct and also,
So you're asserting that the charts I posted links to contain fraudulent figures? Interesting. I don't believe your assertion is correct, so I will tentatively conclude that you are delusional on these additional matters of fact. I'll be happy to rescind my conclusion of delusional, just as soon as you post links to credible evidence of corrected data. |
|
|
|
reaching 70% dominance. on cmc, which was always rigged in favour of alts.
BTC dominance was always over 80% until the BCH split happened. From that moment on. Or better to say a bit before that, was always uncertainty. Not just BCH steal dominance but also ETH, which many considered as BTC version two. But it ended just as a platform to crowdfund founds with illegal securities. And it seems it lasted for two whole years. There was an explosion of ICOs at that time. The BCH fork wasn’t a driver. From end of 2017 Feb to mid 2017 Jun, BTC dominance plunged from over 85% to below 40%. https://coinmarketcap.com/charts/#dominance-percentageThe beginning of 2017 is when blocks started becoming persistently full. https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-size.htmlThe loss of dominance was due neither to BCH nor ICOs. 'Twas the Blockalypse. Or more precisely, Blockalypse I. Nice try. It was the ICO boom of 2017 driving up the price of ETH to 35% market dominance. ICOs and token sales became popular in 2017. There were at least 18 websites tracking ICOs before mid-year.[12] In May, the ICO for a new web browser called Brave generated about $35 million in under 30 seconds.[citation needed] Messaging app developer Kik's September 2017 ICO raised nearly $100 million. At the start of October 2017, ICO coin sales worth $2.3 billion had been conducted during the year, more than ten times as much as in all of 2016.[13][14] As of November 2017, there were around 50 offerings a month,[15] with the highest-grossing ICO as of January 2018, being Filecoin raising $257 million (and $200 million of that within the first hour of their token sale).[16] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initial_coin_offeringNice try, indeed. Your timeline does not match up. Your wiki 'evidence' says nothing about pre-May. By 2017 May 1, BTC's dominance had already been slashed from more that 85% in end of Feb to below 60%. Indeed, a look at a chart of cumulative ICO value per month counters your assertion: https://cointelegraph.com/news/from-2-9-billion-in-a-month-to-hundreds-dead-trends-of-the-rollercoaster-ico-market-in-18-monthsOne can quite clearly see that there was comparatively very little taken in by ICO's by the time 2017 Jun rolled around - and that BTC dominance had already nosedived to below 40%. You know what timeline does match up with the plunge in market dominance? Blockalypse I. You can try to bend history around - but we were all there and lived it. Funny how you remember it in a manner other than which the hard numerical evidence indicates. You need to give up shilling your shitcoin
I ain't shilling anything. I am pointing out the negative consequences -- quite reversible ones, if the community would get off it's collective delusional metaphorical fat ass -- of implementing a centrally planned production quota upon transactional capacity. |
|
|
|
Kyle Torpey at least knows how to edit. Yeah, I dunno. What do the last three paragraphs have to do with Blockstream having large mining power? Dude. I am reduced to handing out credit for the simple lack of glaring errors in spelling or syntax. I don't like it any better than you do. Whatta world we live in, eh? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
