I am not sure if I understand what you are saying is going on with the e-mails of your gf's dad.

I do believe that this coinbase patenting thing is a BIG deal moreso because of the idea of patenting in practices in a space like bitcoin seems to be somewhat out of the spirit of bitcoin's open source developments - and I recall that Circle and even some other businesses had some past practices of sending bitcoins to nocoiners or precoiners that would allow those recipients to easily get into bitcoin by receiving the e-mail and then being able to claim them through the Circle account, if they chose to do so... I recall also that with Circle's system, the "sent bitcoins" were not truely considered to be sent unless the recipient on the other end opened the e-mail.  Once they opened the e-mail then Circle would not be able to reverse the transaction.. but if they did not open the e-mail the transaction could be reversed.

In any event, I am not really sure what differences, if any, the coinbase e-mailing patent ideas (technologies/practices) materially differ from what some of the others might have done in this regard, including Circle.

So, I guess what I am saying is that I am getting a bit of a different point out of this whole e-mail patenting announcement, which is more of a concerned about the possible privatization of aspects of bitcoin or even some litigation that could be presented.  I don't consider this kind of e-mailing of bitcoins to be any kind of BIG and meaningful deception deal in terms of all of the kinds of Dumb that exist in the world in terms of various mainstreamers or newbies figuring out the various different ways to hold or to manage their coins.. and surely if the amounts are small it is a less BIG deal, but surely if the amounts become large, then sometimes some of the dumb will be parted from their money, in part because of their level of dumb... survival of the fittest in that regard.    

I am not saying that I don't have any sympathy for dumb, but I am saying that sympathy should ONLY go so far when some people seem like they are looking to get scammed.... they are an accident waiting to happen.   look at one of our favorite "accidents waiting to happen", aka Roach - not that I am trying to give him more attention than he deserves, but he does frequently show us real world instances of what NOT to do.  Some people are able to learn from that, and others are not able to, so frequently with those "accident waiting to happen" kinds of folks, they are not likely to learn until they either experience the accident or something damned close... some of the dumb are really stubbornly dumb... and it seems like it should be difficult to feel sorry for that, even if we might not really get a lot of joy from the sufferings of others, but it seems a lot more tolerable to see such suffering when they are stubbornly dumb.

I think that there is always some needs to be flexible..... but yeah, of course, getting moar "richie" sooner rather than later would be the preferred way forward.. even if it is difficult to rush these kinds of known unknowns that could get fucked up by the unknown unknowns.

Bargain Boyz can go get fucked, as far as I am concerned.. ..  maybe while on "sabbatical"?....  nice twist, hairy.  I mean infofront..... hahahahaha

Overall, I agree with a lot of your points, Lucius; however, I would quibble a bit with your framing the beginning of a cycle (or the next cycle) in such strict terms. 

Of course, the halvening has a very strong material and real world impact because it immediately, precisely and suddenly cuts the newly issued rewards in half, and this surely is a known event and it is even timed in very precise terms (meaning the block number that it is going to happen).

But even with all that there has already historically proven to be a bit of market action that comes in anticipation to the halvening, and sure a bit of ceremony around the halvening and even some pressures that build and build and build after the halvening.  I would assert that the halvening is largely a ceremonial event rather than an empirical one concerning when the next cycle starts exactly.. because when the cycle actually ended up happening, ends up being one that we can look back historically and proclaim whether or the extent to which the models ended up playing out as anticipated or concluding that we might need to tweak the model somewhat in order to account for how history ended up playing out.

What I am suggesting is that you might end up being correct in terms of how the cycle model ends up playing out; however, there exist a decent amount of real world players who want to attempt to prove the various models wrong and thereby be able to personally (or institutionally) be able to profit from proving the models wrong (even if they only end up being correct on a short term, rather than a longer term basis), which involves BTC price manipulation beyond expectations whether that is manipulating in the downwards direction or manipulating in the upwards direction to the extent that they are able to achieve such manipulation with the tools that are available to them.

I am a little confused about the historical reference for this statement.  We saw a 42% BTC price rise on about October 25, and then we have seen a trickle down and flat and various ongoing pushes in the downward direction since October 25th until present.  Maybe we have a double bottom in the mid $6ks, but the ongoing BTC price seems way too much hovering in the lower $7ks in order to have any kind of rest assurance that the potential double bottom in the mid-$6ks is going to be the end to the correction... maybe 50/50.. as far as I can speculate regarding whether there is going to be any further correction that might take us below the current and so far $6,425 local low of this correction that happened a couple of days ago.

And, by the way, fuck China as being any kind of meaningfully important causal factor in regards to BTC price dynamics.  You cannot really believe in any of these kinds of one-causal factors in regards to bitcoin price movements, which more likely a product of several factors - even if there could be some marginal effects that dominant factors, including "china" can have to influence BTC's price momentum from time to time.



O.k... you do seem to be talking about the same things as me, which was a late price rise to $10,300 and then a somewhat drug out price drop over two months thereafter.


O.k. I largely accept your definition of falling out of a bull trend, that would largely cause the odds of the BTC price going down or staying flat greater than the odds for up, but I remain quite reluctant to concede that it is fair to assert that bull or bearish trends flip so quickly.  I think that with bitcoin we have to zoom out a bit and think about BIGGER trends, and sure, even though we might be in the midst of a pretty seemingly deep and drawn out correction time, I doubt that it is enough of a break down or even a time period in which we can really assert that the transition into the bull trend has been broken.

Of course, assessments can differ on these kinds of assessments and those are the kinds of thinking differences that contribute to the assigning of probabilities regarding which way people are going to differ in terms of where they believe that the BTC price is going to go from here.. whether short term, medium term or longer term.




"we"?  hahahahahaha Are these really your words?  Even though there have been very difficult to substantiate speculations that you might have a team, your style has not usually been to employ the royal "we"  that is what wannabe sorcerers tend to do.. or even troll/shills, and maybe you just slipped up here?

Regarding your substantive claim, sure... if "we" (meaning the BTC price) is kind of caught in a price range that is in the lower end of a consolidation range, then it can take a while to play out... consolidation tends to signify that neither side is really getting their way and the price is continuing to stay in an area until maybe one side or another achieves a lucky break in their preferred direction.... and if we are in a bull market then the odds for up are greater than the odds for down and if we are in a bear market the odds for down are greater than the odds for up, but no matter which market we are in, the price could end up breaking in the direction that is opposite of what the odds would predict.. which could even end up changing what kind of market we are in after the break versus before the break had occurred.



These really your words?  Sounds more bearish than your usual unfettered and frequently overly unrealistic bullish optimism.  



You taking notes from TOAA?  or lambie?  Really, "our"?

Substantively... you are saying "down before up"    hahahahaha... I have heard that before.  Maybe it will happen?  Maybe not.



As an investor, I don't think that the trend has to move up, except over the longer term or at the time that the investor is going to need his/her (their... to use the plural) money.. Maybe that is what you are asserting... and further investors surely prefer that their investments are profitable, but some kinds of investments are risky and/or a hedge, so profits are not necessarily guaranteed in a kind of needing way, but it is important in a kind of assessment regarding the extent to which an investment might have been either profitable or otherwise served its hedging purposes (which might not have been profitable, but were still serving insurance purposes).


These are agreeable and true... historically bitcoin has always been profitable for anyone who hung onto it for at least 3.5 years (which would be the employment of various variants of buying, accumulating, holding), but of course, history does not provide any kind of guarantee of future profitability or the timeline that will be necessary in future in order for the investment to play out.  Furthermore, if investors attempt to play around with their BTC investment too much, by getting in and out and some other strategizing things like that, they might have ended up losing in what should have been a profitable market, overall.


Fair enough rendition of history, and again, history does not guarantee future results even though there seem to be a lot of very convincing and solid price modeling that accounts for the history and puts pretty damned good odds on continued future upwards BTC price movements.



fair enough.



1) royal "we" again?  

2) I agree that the odds for overall up in 2020 seem to be greater than the odds for flat or for down, which kind of suggests that we are still in a bull market... even if the price rise might be gradual or it might end up exploding .. hard to know for sure regarding degree, but the odds for up during 2020, or by the end of 2020, seem decent, at least, maybe even better than 50%


Strange way of saying that, which does not really seem to be your writing style.. but whatever... we have had stranger things happening around these parts, sometimes.  

For a lot of people it is not very clear, but when the train starts going, they are trying to catch up, even if it is still not clear to them why the train is going.. and it becomes a kind of panic chaos.. .that is still not clear, even though it would have been better to have been at least partly on the train rather than chasing it. 



You have your own choices, regarding your level of preparedness attempts, or not... or just to continue to be "not so clear"

 
More bad news.

Since you seemed to have cornered a lot of the bitcoin addresses market, I am considering changing my interwebs nick to a longer one... something like, HopeLess8jFESKwMRnz, and take my chances in starting my interwebs' life over again.      (gonna take me a while to build up my post count again, but I am going to post shorter ideas... like maybe just a sentence or two per post, and that way I can reach my current post count a lot more quickly under my new interwebs identity).


I have been in bitcoin for 6 years, and a lot of use of various kinds of bitcoin address management tools remains gobbeldy-gook to me.  Maybe I should play around more just to get more comforts?  

I do sometimes generate addresses from various wallets that I use, and I thought that I had learned quite a few basic moving around bitcoin things including manage addresses when claiming some of my then sprung into existence bcash in August/September 2017... at least some of my comforts had gone up in terms of using back ups and moving bitcoins around in order to claim the bcash, which ultimately resulted in some more technological comforts that I did not lose any coins... or so it seems, but then I saw some other mistakes I made in that process, too.  

Anyhow, some of the customization abilities of some wallets, or even using more advance tools that are available seems out of my area of comfort and practices.

Are you actually stealing some of my future bitcoin addresses (and Bitserve's too?), for when-ever I might happen to get smart enough to be able to generate such a thing for myself?  

or do those bitcoin addresses go back into circulation if you don't actually end up using them?  

I understand that there are quadrillions and quadrillions of bitcoin address possibilities, but still.. there has gotta be some inability to reuse them too once you generate the addresses, right?  

In other words, XhomerX10, I am getting really mad for you destroying bitcoin and you are going to use up all of the addresses...    

You are using up all of the available bitcoin addresses before we even have a chance to get MOAR richie from it makes me even more mad than the definitional semantical differences between costs and costs.

Hasn't been a good day for me, so far.  Sucks to be me, today.  

Of course, the SV propaganda diptwat is making that thread self-moderated so that he can totally spin bullshit and perhaps mislead innocent people into believing that there is some merit in the snake oil salesman claims  while making it appear as if the thread is a kind of open discussion of the merits of the coin, yet surely not all members are going to realize that there is a difference between a self-moderated thread and an open thread, and they might not realize the whole damned self-moderated thread is a deceptive propaganda piece.  It is too bad, but the forum does seem to allow those kinds of threads that are likely going to facilitate the hurting of some truly innocent people.

By the way, I do believe that it can serve some purposes to make fun of the SV diptwats in various kinds of ways, so even if nutildah might have some abilities to really hone in on their bullshit, sometimes even the more superficial criticisms can have purpose and resonate with people too, in terms of raising red flags about the phony baloney nonsense that gets posted in that thread.

You had tended to make a lot of decent points arguing with those dweebs in that self-moderated thread, but all of these deleted posts seems to support that a lot of that wonderful posting ends up being a BIG ass waste of time - we are just kind of getting the deleted posts out of context when we see them here.. even though sometime the context might be understood, even if posted here quite later (your sample post is 2.5 months later... so I guess that it stayed posted for 2.5 months before it was deleted.. so maybe there is some value in that?  perhaps?).

Exactly!!!! We agree on something.


Actually, such statement is a maxim to live by, and no need for proof is required.  In other words, proof is optional.

Here is a snapshot of my crystal ball, and i am just going to forsake Opsec on this one occasion.  This one is for you, mic.  




Stop rubbing your eyes, mic.  You are going to end up looking like the below-attached guy.  As you see: I already tried to warn Hueristic about playing around with his eyes.

You are jumping in, too, Globb0?

I am just going to say:  "ditto" if anyone further attempts to interrogate me on this topic.  Otherwise, I agree with the working twice as hard part.  

Edit 1:  Look at ur lil selfie, Globb0....    Can't even properly attach a batman pic.       And, trying to lecture me on economical definitions.  

Edit 2:  Looks like you fixed your pic attachment issue.  So I take back my comments in Edit 1.  Bitserve (or maybe Mic?) probably sent you a PM to explain... hahahahahhaha

I am sticking to my guns.  

@ hairy.  Ditto my above statement.  

Now.  Let's move to a topic that we can agree on.

 


We are all fucked if relying upon me for economic's clarity.   YMMV.   DYOR.  BTFD. 

I would not characterize the end sum of the amount of reward as "cost," but instead profits per BTC that is reduced by half because of costs that remain the same and reward that is half.  Otherwise, I have already made my points regarding the matter.     Semantics, perhaps?

Here's mine from a little bit ago.



Here's couple more from a few weeks ago:

Bitcoin SV is a bot.  He does not really understand anything, but he could be a sucker bot that is dumb enough to make a BSV loan. 

I mean, anyone who actually has 100BSV could not be too smart, could they?   

Well, I am glad that you asked, Globb0.*

Roger, Richard (RR) and me, soon to be known as JRR or RJR or RRJ("we" have not yet decided on our updated acronym), will be making an announcement soon.^tm - perhaps in two weeks.^tm  

We are considering a conference, too, and might even include roach for our PMs angle (roach is a much cheaper option than Peter Schiff).... to add another "R" into our acronym mixenings that will go along with edumacating peeps in respect to pumpementals that will also be debuting soon.^tm  As many of you know, Roach knows a lot about how to make a good solid investment that "holds its value," especially relative to the dollar, and you don't even need a small truck to carry the value around.  A regular car with tinted windows or a trunk will do just fine.  

Stay tuned!!!!

*Disclaimer: Everyone is a scammer.. even your good ole used-to-be buddies in the Wall Observer thread from wwwwwaaaaaayyyyy back.  #nohomo      

I am going to make it all shorter this time, and you might not like the lack of explanations to substantiate my brevity.

 Still the leading cause of death (excluding accidental).

 
Doesn't hurt that individuals are going to significantly vary in terms of what they are preparing for in their "bug out" bags, including NOT being adequately prepared for more realistic scenarios and including the crazies.

Yes I can.



 
Sorry for your loss.  You are going to need to reduce that amount of time from your total expected longevity, which is going to screw up your previous calculations.  

I am thinking that the cost are the same after the halvening.

Only the new supply that comes out of that is reduced in half.

The costs only go up when the hash rate goes up, but moore's law tells us that cost of hashrate goes down with the passage of time.

Of course, nothing is static, so even though bitcoin provides incentives for the front loading of hashing before the halvening (get more coins before the reward goes down) and the cutting off of hash rate after the halvening (because not as much profits from fewer coins).

Ultimately, empirical evidence has been showing that so far BTC prices have been going up way more than double upon each halvening, which causes incentive to mine and to cause the hashrate to go up. 

I think that our best model is to just scramble all the factors together and to say that it is NOT just one variable that can be changed, because a whole bunch of folks are incentivized in an number of ways that end up causing the stock to flow model, the four year fractal model and the s-curve exponential adoption model to all end up playing out in a kind of true way that causes HODLers to become "richie."  There is no such number for "richie" even though peaks of 100x have historically been nice - yet the higher that BTC prices get, the more likely that each four year cycle is going to result in somewhat smaller peaks, including causing "richie" to become less exponential - except for us earlier adopters who are laughing our way to the bank while being accused of being part of a ponzi scheme... thank you very much later adopters, even the reluctant ones that are going to be forced to come on board much later, looking at you roach..**

(**a tiny bit sorry that I devolved in the end of that above paragraph into non-mathematical levels of uncontrolled excited / irrational exuberances, and even a jaded personal attack at roach's expense, as a model of what NOT to do...  )

Snap out of it JSRAW....


Me and you be like this.




#nohomo