Bitcoin Forum
May 29, 2024, 11:17:08 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 [68] 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 ... 248 »
1341  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 08:25:43 AM
Did you read the article or not?
yes I did read the article. he said it will form a base in the next quarter, not crash. as for the range he describes, why would you believe he has the formula to predict $350 bottom?  436 bottom has given us all the signals we need.
all the past bubbles have consolidated in a wedge. thats a sequence of 5. if the price dropped to 350, this one would break that rule. wedges have significant meaning in consolidation.

Did you read his points about why there is now more structural selling? Specifically that there are too many retailers and retailers convert immediately to fiat. And consumers are not growing as fast. Because Bitcoin is wonderful for merchants (no chargebacks) but sucks for consumers .

dont forget that the mother of all uses of bitcoin will be money transfer. That could be organised in months. anything to do with retailers and consumers have never had an impact on the market. the market cap is speculative.

Marginal flows.
1342  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 08:20:14 AM
Did you read the article or not?
yes I did read the article. he said it will form a base in the next quarter, not crash. as for the range he describes, why would you believe he has the formula to predict $350 bottom?  436 bottom has given us all the signals we need.
all the past bubbles have consolidated in a wedge. thats a sequence of 5. if the price dropped to 350, this one would break that rule. wedges have significant meaning in consolidation.

Did you read his points about why there is now more structural selling? Specifically that there are too many retailers and retailers convert immediately to fiat. And consumers are not growing as fast. Because Bitcoin is wonderful for merchants (no chargebacks) but sucks for consumers .
1343  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 08:18:10 AM
http://www.wired.com/2014/03/bitcoin-currency_martin/

Bitcoin Is Pointless as a Currency, But It Could Change the World Anyway

Quote
Why Bitcoin May Be Different

If history is a guide, it is here that bitcoin’s real potential lies: in its hybrid payments technology. As Europe’s medieval merchant-bankers proved, a brilliant new means of recording and verifying money transfers can indeed be a revolutionary event — not just in economic, but in political terms.

The existing, bank-based payments system is expensive and antediluvian — but also profitable and therefore jealously guarded by its powerful owners. Other technologies co-exist — such as cash payment face-to-face, or the developing world staple of hawala for international transfers — but they cannot seriously compete with banks. If Bitcoin’s technology is as cheap, as scalable, and as secure as its advocates claim, it may be different.

That last point, of course, is crucial. One reason that cash, that most archaic of payments technologies, still exists, is because it really is anonymous. Anonymity in transactions can be abused, of course. But it remains a basic civil liberty. Payments systems that use ledgers rarely offer the same assurance. Efficiency and economy are nice to have: but not at the cost of our right to privacy.
If history is a guide, it is here that bitcoin’s real potential lies: in its hybrid payments technology.

It was thirty-five years ago — long before bitcoin, the internet, or even the Macintosh — that the French philosopher Jean-Francois Lyotard warned that “the computerization of society…could become the ‘dream’ instrument for controlling and regulating the market system, extended to include knowledge itself and governed exclusively by the performativity principle.” An unreasonably dystopian vision, perhaps, given the enormous increases in prosperity and individual freedom that the web has brought. But it is only now that computerization is transforming money — the most basic institution of all in our market societies. So it is a dystopia we must make all the more certain does not become reality.
1344  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 08:12:25 AM
Did you read the article or not?
1345  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: "Failure to Understand Bitcoin Could Cost Investors Billions" (Bitcoin's flaws) on: April 01, 2014, 08:09:28 AM
BTC is likely headed below $400 (possibly with a dip below $300) and the recovery will not likely be swift rather a U bottom.


https://medium.com/p/ba5f3fcce103

Finding Equilibrium : Searching for the true value of a Bitcoin

Vinny Lingham, CEO of Gyft, discusses some of the current forces affecting the price of bitcoin. A very worthwhile read imho.

Excellent article. I agree with everything he wrote.

I also have made the point that Bitcoin asymmetrically favors merchants at this stage. And he points that out well.

Risto you should read that article above. Then you will understand where the selling pressure is coming from and what has changed.



Did you read the article or not?
yes I did read the article. he said it will form a base in the next quarter, not crash. as for the range he describes, why would you believe he has the formula to predict $350 bottom?  436 bottom has given us all the signals we need.
all the past bubbles have consolidated in a wedge. thats a sequence of 5. if the price dropped to 350, this one would break that rule. wedges have significant meaning in consolidation.

Did you read his points about why there is now more structural selling? Specifically that there are too many retailers and retailers convert immediately to fiat. And consumers are not growing as fast. Because Bitcoin is wonderful for merchants (no chargebacks) but sucks for consumers .




This is why it is going lower, much, much lower:

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20131211005909/en/BitPay-Exceeds-100000000-Bitcoin-Transactions-Processed#.Uzp95qIryho

Quote
processed over $100 million in transactions this year, and has increased its merchant base to over 15,500 approved merchants in 200 countries

http://seekingalpha.com/news/1465461-bitcoin-bitpay-volume-triples-m-m-european-regulators-weigh-in

Quote
BitPay volume triples M/M in November after the roll-out of a new pricing plan and integration with Shopify. Transaction volume tripled during the same period

Thus using an geometric series, I can estimate their December sales were $40 million, January, $120 million, February $360 million, March over a $1 billion. Now surely their Xmas surge was greater than normal M/M growth, but you can clearly see this is much larger now and very significant.

The more success Bitpay has, the worse for Bitcoin. Because Bitpay is all about liquidating BTC from investors (not bringing in proportionally new customers to the ecosystem).

How could we have missed that! (Slams forehead into the wall)

I saw the silver chart pattern indicating a long grind lower ahead, and I saw the asymmetry in appeal for merchants vs. customers, but I didn't put 2+2 together.

The Gyft owner has a bullish bias so that is why he is saying $350. In fact, markets don't work that way. They have momentum and overshoot either upwards or downwards.

Bitcoin is pointed down now and it will be a vicious cycle that feeds on itself. It is structural and we have to go down and restart from a low equilibrium.




This is why it is going lower, much, much lower:

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20131211005909/en/BitPay-Exceeds-100000000-Bitcoin-Transactions-Processed#.Uzp95qIryho

Quote
processed over $100 million in transactions this year, and has increased its merchant base to over 15,500 approved merchants in 200 countries

http://seekingalpha.com/news/1465461-bitcoin-bitpay-volume-triples-m-m-european-regulators-weigh-in

Quote
BitPay volume triples M/M in November after the roll-out of a new pricing plan and integration with Shopify. Transaction volume tripled during the same period

Thus using an geometric series, I can estimate their December sales were $40 million, January, $120 million, February $360 million, March over a $1 billion. Now surely their Xmas surge was greater than normal M/M growth, but you can clearly see this is much larger now and very significant.


Oh fuck look what just happened under our nose while we were not paying attention!

https://www.goldsilverbitcoin.com/bitpay-worlds-first-zero-transaction-fee-payment-processing/

Quote
BitPay’s new model, however, asks for $30 per month per merchant, with zero additional fees. This is unprecedented in payment processing space, and will certainly send shockwaves through various payment processing spaces.

Both BitPay and Coinbase represent the world’s first zero-fee payment processors, driving home how revolutionary modern payment methods are.

Quote
Visionaries who invested in BitPay include Trace Mayer, Peter Thiel and Max Keiser.


So who is paying those high fees? We the customers in the exchange rate!!! And liquidating our investment!

Fuck we've been sucked into a fiat vortex by that same bastard Peter Thiel who angel funded Facebook and Paypal.

This is war. I'm livid. It is time to get serious.




I believe you are too preoccupied with USD. The feedback loop of (lower USD price -> less users -> even lower price) has never before held true with Bitcoin, and I have no reason to believe it would now.

What about 2011?

In between 7-11/2011, the number of non-dust addresses grew by 30%.

Even if we assume that there is such a negative feedback loop, 2011 was a proof that it was reversed and did not self-immolate.

So far we have one vicious bear market that was reversed, and 5 years of gains. My theory is that Bitcoin has a self-reinforcing positive loop which will eventually consume fiat totally, and all the bear markets are temporary. If you say otherwise, the burden of proof is on you because such an assertion is not supported by neither history nor reason.

Strawmen avoid the points made.

1. Why can't a "vicious bear market" repeat? You admitted before that the 2011 bear market was caused by tech geeks early adopters who overextended because they are poor at speculation. Recently we've had a huge influx of n00bs into Bitcoin investing.

2. Who is arguing that Bitcoin won't continue to go up (i.e. "self-immolate") after the bottom? Not me.

3. What proof do you have that Bitcoin is different from every investment in the history of mankind, in that all investments are limited to a market segment and eventually peaked without reaching every man and woman on earth? You do no market demographics analysis. You just assume that Bitcoin will jump the chasm even though it currently lacks a compelling feature set to do so.




An anonymous coin would be great. Be sure to note it here when you find someone(s) to launch it.  A well thought out alt could grow very quickly compared to bitcoin. The market is ready established, and crypto-funded.

Note that the developer of Darkcoin admitted to me yesterday that I was correct and Darkcoin breaks anonymity by trusting the master node with your identity.

I provided him a suggestion, but it is not my best idea of how to do anonymity (which requires a different design than Darkcoin has).




Even if you are correct the US isn't the only country in the world.

I don't know to what extent tax issues (if at all) will affect European masses in adopting Bitcoin. I lack domain knowledge of those jurisdictions.

Capital gains tax is a non-issue in the developing world (masses here don't files tax returns). Yet they also are not currently the target demographic of Bitcoin.

The other issues I enumerated (look 2 posts up) should prevent Bitcoin from adoption of the masses for use as a daily currency every where on earth. Whether those issues will be fixed and whether they will be fixed in Bitcoin, offchain services, and/or an altcoin, is something that remains to be seen.

Right now Bitcoin is mainly adopted as a self-reinforcing (i.e. those who invest are supporting the rise in price, i.e. a sort of pyramid scheme of sorts but not entirely) speculative investment and some genuine use as a means to transfer value over distance. Also there are cases where one needs to use Bitcoin, e.g. buying drugs over the internet, registering domains anonymously (if you are very careful), etc.. Mostly Bitcoin is used to speculate in Bitcoin and altcoins. It is an investment unit-of-exchange. But none of that is really widespread mainstream use. I am still searching for that compelling need for the broader population.

One of the big needs I expect is when the confiscations begin, there will be a rush into crypto-currencies. Yet I expect an anonymous coin will get most of that, if that anonymous coin is respected and well established and is competing very strongly with Bitcoin (i.e. perhaps 1/10 or more of Bitcoin's market cap). Otherwise Bitcoin will get most of it.




This is an interesting point.  In the long run, this IRS opinion that miners need to report income when they mine, is frankly absurd, and will definitely be reversed in a tax court, if they don't revise it before then.

How do you figure? The network is paying them for their services of mining. Seems correct to me and it is the ruling I expected and predicted since long-time ago.

I can freely produce a work with a market value, and the act of production does not result in a taxable event, in every precedent case.  Selling the work produces a taxable event.

Mining isn't producing a unique work. It is providing a repetitive service that is scripted by the network. The litmus test is that the network is the manager, not the miner. The network sets the difficulty, the protocol, etc..

A network cannot manage anyone.  Management flows in the opposite direction.  Mining a block produces a novel work.

The network dictates which hash to solve. Which is what the miner is paid for doing. Everything else the miners do is optional in the protocol and thus incidental.



there are 12 million millionaires in the world, and 1500 billionaires. there are only 21 million bitcoins, and I imagine most of those people dont have any.

That 21 million will never stand as the asymptotic limit (actually it isn't asymptotic because the finite limit of divisibility is 1 Satoshi), because there is no way the world's billionaires will hand power to Risto et al (of course not!). That is pure fantasy like slumber party of overgrown, naive children playing a board game. There are multiple ways it can be increased.

  • Off chain is the only way Bitcoin will go mainstream. Coins will be created just as the private banks did with gold certificates in the 1800s with gold on deposit.
  • It is impossible that altcoins won't proliferate because Bitcoin can't offer every feature.
  • One pool controls 50+% of the hash power, even one ASIC miner controls 10%. Government control of that pool (and a few miners) can force more coins to be created. This won't be done now, instead later when the lockdown is more ubiquitous and you have no way to avoid this control.



OK, no-one has still bothered to state what 'n' stands for (I'm assuming p = price) but it all sounds highly plausible.

I wrote that upthread. Here it is again.

It is the number of unique addresses from the blockchain.info chart. And Peter R showed that n^2 correlates with price p. This is Metcalf's Law and Reed's Law.

I had explained in an upthread post that if we use a ruler on the n chart along the bottoms since 2012, then should currently be at 100,000 yet it is currently at 150,000.

Also there was a divergence since February where p declined but n rose. That divergence must be resolved. Will p rise or n decline?

If n must drop by 33%, then p price could drop to 0.67 x 0.67 = 45% of recent p (inconclusive to determine which recent p to multiply by .045, perhaps $450 - $600).

I also projected the bottom from July 2012 using compounding and I also get a $300 to $350 target for the bottom within next 2 weeks.

$450 is a lot closer to the bottom than $600 was. Risto is correct about that.




AnonyMint is concerned about mass adoption, because he wants to save the world.  More power to him.  Being in the world, I think it could use some saving.  But his particular form of mass adoption is not necessary or to be expected during the time between now and the next two or three hype cycles.  IRS treatment of bitcoin can be harmful to mass adoption in the medium term, but good for institutional adoption in the near term.

Medium-term I'm concerned about those who are adopting Bitcoin now, and that they have no anonymity and they can't spontaneously mine it any more (without a serious investment in mining). And I am concerned that the mass adoption of Bitcoin will come in the form of off chain  (to fix the slow transaction speed and other issues which INTENTIONALLY won't be fixed on chain) and government control over mining and off chain coin supply, and that we Bitcoin adopters won't have any other option. We will be trapped in the new digital slavery NWO. My perspective is viewed by many as extreme and paranoid.

For next week or two, I think the tax ruling can deflate the confidence of some of the n00b investors who bought at $600 - $1000 if the price breaks down through $400. Capitulation would then come when they lose resolve to hodl. I could be wrong about this bottom call. I have presented some ways of looking at the chart of adoption to support my short-term perspective.

I also presented a new theory of the adoption curve being log-logistic instead of logistic. They key distinction is the rate of adoption would be declining since the launch of Bitcoin and not after 50% have adopted. The chart of n seems to support my view, but (from eyeballing it only) there are not enough data points yet to reliably conclude.

Because of my negative view on the potential outcome of Bitcoin on us, I have a very bad taste in my mouth if I buy BTC as an investment. I feel like I am a traitor to humanity and I would be better served to invest my time in an alternative instead. So it would take a very low bottom price to maybe cause me to potentially incriminate myself (assuming totalitarian effects of debt crisis subsequently emerge). I realize I am being somewhat irrational if my goal is to maximize return on capital. Also no man is an island.

I suppose I am not appreciating Risto as much as I used to because he preaches what I believe to be the NWO coin, and he uses hyperbole such as claiming it is at a fraction of adoption of world's population as if he can be sure how Bitcoin can morph to be compelling to masses. The only way I see it doing that is with government blessing. And this outcome is not the way investments usually work. Yeah it is always "different this time". Yet I am trying to not let this affect my feelings about any person. Frankly I need to do less talking and more working. (Mea Culpa)^1000000.

Correction: Note if I remember correctly Risto wrote 99.5% of adoption remaining, which would mean 200 x 2 million = 400 million target. Actually that is not too far from my expection of the current white male demographic target market. That is qualitatively not mass adoption by the entire world. That is 1 in 17 people in world. So I am not clear if Risto is arguing for mass adoption as a currency or for white male adoption as an investment bubble? His numbers are straddling the two. My expectation is either Bitcoin will top out as an investment bubble at up to one or two hundred million, or it will be prodded by the government to become the digital fiat. I don't see another outcome for Bitcoin, because I see no relevant development at all on the block chain protocol.

Certain developers who you know their name spend more time meeting with the CIA and the Council on Foreign Relations than developing the protocol improvements.

Since when should a programmer be a political liaison  Huh

Fishy smell.




Please don't ignore the question.

...

Do you really think the government is going to give up its control over money?

I think this is a very good question, and I think the answer is no, they will not give up control over money. At least, not on purpose. So in my mind the question becomes: does the government regard cryptocurrencies as a threat to their control over money? A few years ago I might have predicted yes, but recently I have been leaning more towards no, based on less-than-hostile comments from various people like Ben Bernanke, Janet Yellen, Alan Greenspan.

Propaganda. Have you followed what Larry Summers said? They want digital currency so they can easily confiscate. The establishment is supporting Bitcoin because they can more easily track where all the money is.

....but bitcoin is not as high on that list as early enthusiasts (like me) used to think. In an ideal world, bitcoin will not topple the central banking system, something else will; and when that happens, bitcoin will save us all from chaos. I am sure my thinking on this question will continue to evolve.

It is very high on their list if it can grow.

They are trial ballooning different ways to bring the world onto a digital ledger so they can confiscate by pressing a button. Off chain on Bitcoin will be the mechanism to achieve this control.

They have nothing to fear from Bitcoin, because one pool already controls 50% of the mining. They could easily blacklist coins tomorrow if they needed to.

Now they just to manage their baby well to keep you all supporting their desired outcome of slavery.

Proof is in the facts. Bitcoin is not decentralized. You all are controlled by propaganda. The mining is already controllable by the government.

The key now is to manage it so you all don't wake up and move to an anonymous coin. To keep you all locked in by your greed and the thought the largest market size is best.




The less totalitarian governments (I include the US here) have no immediate plans to do any crazy-ass confiscations. But, if and when they decide to borrow a page from FDR ... it will be too late. Bitcoin will be entrenched.

The head of the USA Treasury department that oversees FinCEN has said in recent interview (have a link to it on my thread) they are monitoring adoption very closely. He specifically said that government oversight will increase if it becomes possible to move large amounts of money with Bitcoin and/or you can live by spending only Bitcoin. And that was only the financial crimes division. He said other departments were watching it with other mandates. This will not fly past their radar. He specifically mentioned anonymity as a threat many times. He also said they have people tracking the block chain.




The other near-term implication of the tax ruling is the margin call on miners who have to get cash before April 15.

Ditto in China apparently with April 15 deadline to sell and get out before exchanges close.

So we have perhaps persistent selling for next 2 weeks.

About the tax planning+timing issue. You just don't get it. Normal people already have no incentive to use Bitcoin and now they will really stay away from it. Why fuck with the hassle? Most people don't even know what a Schedule D is.

New software? Have you tried using H&R Block? I do every year, and they are the experts on simplification. My ex can't figure it out. I have to do her taxes this week.

Do you realize how stupid Americans are? They voted for Obama.  Cheesy

None of that affects the fundamental adoption by fanatical white males, but it is enough to bust the bubble run we've had and cause capitulation among all the weak hands.

And I think there are a lot of newbies that bought at $600 - $1000 who are sweating it right now.

Then there are those who are sure it can't go lower than $400. Some of them might capitulate as it breaks down from there.

We don't have the system of Sweden. IN the USA, everyone is afraid of the IRS. Or at least they don't want to add hassle with IRS just to use some stupid technobabble money that they don't need any way.




http://www.wired.com/2014/03/bitcoin-currency_martin/

Bitcoin Is Pointless as a Currency, But It Could Change the World Anyway

Quote
Why Bitcoin May Be Different

If history is a guide, it is here that bitcoin’s real potential lies: in its hybrid payments technology. As Europe’s medieval merchant-bankers proved, a brilliant new means of recording and verifying money transfers can indeed be a revolutionary event — not just in economic, but in political terms.

The existing, bank-based payments system is expensive and antediluvian — but also profitable and therefore jealously guarded by its powerful owners. Other technologies co-exist — such as cash payment face-to-face, or the developing world staple of hawala for international transfers — but they cannot seriously compete with banks. If Bitcoin’s technology is as cheap, as scalable, and as secure as its advocates claim, it may be different.

That last point, of course, is crucial. One reason that cash, that most archaic of payments technologies, still exists, is because it really is anonymous. Anonymity in transactions can be abused, of course. But it remains a basic civil liberty. Payments systems that use ledgers rarely offer the same assurance. Efficiency and economy are nice to have: but not at the cost of our right to privacy.
If history is a guide, it is here that bitcoin’s real potential lies: in its hybrid payments technology.

It was thirty-five years ago — long before bitcoin, the internet, or even the Macintosh — that the French philosopher Jean-Francois Lyotard warned that “the computerization of society…could become the ‘dream’ instrument for controlling and regulating the market system, extended to include knowledge itself and governed exclusively by the performativity principle.” An unreasonably dystopian vision, perhaps, given the enormous increases in prosperity and individual freedom that the web has brought. But it is only now that computerization is transforming money — the most basic institution of all in our market societies. So it is a dystopia we must make all the more certain does not become reality.
1346  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 08:03:22 AM
sorry, but selling pressure has not increased, it has decreased.

yesterday everyones fear was confirmed, and it had no fundamental or speculative follow through. The down trend is over.

You are fooled by looking only at short-term day trading data.

The selling pressure is now structural and will not abate for months. See the article from the Gyft founder, which I quoted a few posts upthread.
1347  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 07:43:42 AM


Risto's posts are amongst those that I generally read through well. Most of the rest on here (unless post is short and happens to catch my eye), I don't bother even reading cos I know exactly the drivel to expect and don't want to waste mental energy trying to make sense of it. .

Ah.  Wise.  It is often best to conserve when resources are scarce.

And Risto has apparently entirely missed the reasons that the selling pressure has increased. See my prior post. So that is what you deserve for idoling one man.
1348  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 07:31:34 AM
https://medium.com/p/ba5f3fcce103

Finding Equilibrium : Searching for the true value of a Bitcoin

Vinny Lingham, CEO of Gyft, discusses some of the current forces affecting the price of bitcoin. A very worthwhile read imho.

Excellent article. I agree with everything he wrote.

I also have made the point that Bitcoin asymmetrically favors merchants at this stage. And he points that out well.

Risto you should read that article above. Then you will understand where the selling pressure is coming from and what has changed.


If it turns around I would start worrying after it passes 550

I have a question to the bears. If the price does in fact go the other way at what level will you start buying back? At what level will you panik buy?

so everything lower 550 would be just a bulltrap for you?
i think that will be the problem for the bears, as soon as the green volume bars start to be larger than the red volume bars, it could be the reversal or only a bull trap.  Cool

I don't expect a V reversal. I am waiting for it to get errie quiet after everyone has capitulated and exhausted their fiat capital.

I expect a long U reversal.

However working against my scenario is the bottom price rises about $10-15 per week that this drags out.


What is to be gained by denying the current issues we are presented with.  (and I'm talking as a 'community' rather than personal or individual gain.)

I repeat: there are no new issues. It is a common scare-tactic to raise some evergreen issues when it is important to fool the newcomers.

Therefore "presented with" reveals you agenda pretty well  Cheesy
1349  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 07:20:10 AM
I give credit to Risto for taking all the abuse from people that he does and doing so in a mature manner. He works hard on his TA and shares it for free with the crum bums on this board and all they do is challenge him. Imo he's one of the 5-10 people on this board who are actually worth reading.

Risto's posts are amongst those that I generally read through well. Most of the rest on here (unless post is short and happens to catch my eye), I don't bother even reading cos I know exactly the drivel to expect and don't want to waste mental energy trying to make sense of it. Worst of all are the drivel merchants who aggrandise their drivel with fancy jargon and complex concepts. There has been one in particular who has been at large (aminorex) recently in this thread that has resulted in the past few pages here being a total skim read for me....unless I see a poster with a reliable track record of good posts.

You are unable to comprehend what aminorex is writing. His posts are not drivel, and apparently it is just way over your IQ range or perhaps your area of mental interest and attention span.

Risto's posts often lack depth, which is why simpletons like them. He is correct on the main point which is BTC will bottom then continue up. That is probably all you need to know.
1350  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 07:12:45 AM
P.S. Isn't there a  $600 exclusion for reporting on bartering? I need to look into that.

Clarification on the tax issue from a US tax attorney.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/21una0/i_am_a_tax_attorney_here_is_the_truth_about_1099s/

Thought it could be valuable since some of the posters here seem to have it slightly wrong.

Thanks that reminded me the $600 exclusion is on reporting payments, not on reporting gains.
1351  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 07:10:31 AM

Buy back in soon. Bitcoin isn't over. No chance.
1352  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 06:57:47 AM
there are 12 million millionaires in the world, and 1500 billionaires. there are only 21 million bitcoins, and I imagine most of those people dont have any.

That 21 million will never stand as the asymptotic limit (actually it isn't asymptotic because the finite limit of divisibility is 1 Satoshi), because there is no way the world's billionaires will hand power to Risto et al (of course not!). That is pure fantasy like slumber party of overgrown, naive children playing a board game. There are multiple ways it can be increased.

  • Off chain is the only way Bitcoin will go mainstream. Coins will be created just as the private banks did with gold certificates in the 1800s with gold on deposit.
  • It is impossible that altcoins won't proliferate because Bitcoin can't offer every feature.
  • One pool controls 50+% of the hash power, even one ASIC miner controls 10%. Government control of that pool (and a few miners) can force more coins to be created. This won't be done now, instead later when the lockdown is more ubiquitous and you have no way to avoid this control.
1353  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 06:51:34 AM
Mining isn't producing a unique work. It is providing a repetitive service that is scripted by the network. The litmus test is that the network is the manager, not the miner. The network sets the difficulty, the protocol, etc..

A network cannot manage anyone.  Management flows in the opposite direction.  Mining a block produces a novel work.

The network dictates which hash to solve. Which is what the miner is paid for doing. Everything else the miners do is optional in the protocol and thus incidental.
1354  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 06:28:08 AM

How can this be a threadjack when Risto often uses adoption to support his bottom calls in this thread?

The Iron Law of political economics is perhaps the strongest of arguments in favor of decentralized governance. There is now way to eliminate the incentive to concentrate benefits and distribute costs without eliminating the taxing/regulatory mechanism of the monopoly State.

God bless you! And you are not my sock puppet, but I couldn't have said it better. And that is a good post for me to exit on. Thanks.
1355  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 06:09:55 AM
I am going to try to stop posting and get some real work done. I have said that in the past and failed to sustain. Hopefully I can discipline myself.

I appreciate that some here have been cordial (even amicable) and participated in an open discussion, including Risto for allowing the discussion.

This issue is highly charged. Most of you are very sure that you've already found the Holy Grail, whereas I think you've found the cloak of the Grim Reaper. (Drama much don't I, eh ... Primadonna display feels revolting ... those who talk don't build) Again I note the importance of Bitcoin as a backbone for any other effort to improve matters.



Propaganda. Have you followed what Larry Summers said? They want digital currency so they can easily confiscate. The establishment is supporting Bitcoin because they can more easily track where all the money is.

I have not, but will look for it when I have time.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/17/negative-interest-rates-eliminating-cash-the-summers-solution/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/01/24/electronic-money-coming-everywhere-sooner-than-you-think/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/01/25/electric-money-will-eliminate-bank-runs/

I think the overall reaction of the government towards cryptos is going to turn out to be very complex. And fascinating. And one thing to keep in mind, is that there will be no unified reaction, because "the government" is run by lots of people with conflicting agendas. With campaigns funded by more people with different agendas. And varying degrees of technical sophistication.

It looks like many heads, but there is a unified body behind the curtain when it comes to threatening their control over money (that is fundamental to the existence of society as it has been formulated lately). I believe there will be only more centralization.

Unless... somebody fucks with them with anonymity and other shit they aren't able to deal with... in that respect I agree that real complexity might arise...

They are trial ballooning different ways to bring the world onto a digital ledger so they can confiscate by pressing a button. Off chain on Bitcoin will be the mechanism to achieve this control.

They have nothing to fear from Bitcoin, because one pool already controls 50% of the mining. They could easily blacklist coins tomorrow if they needed to.

Now they just to manage their baby well to keep you all supporting their desired outcome of slavery.

Proof is in the facts. Bitcoin is not decentralized. You all are controlled by propaganda. The mining is already controllable by the government.

The key now is to manage it so you all don't wake up and move to an anonymous coin. To keep you all locked in by your greed and the thought the largest market size is best.

I have contemplated what sort of technical battle would ensue if the government decided to take explicit control of the blockchain.

For the sake of argument, suppose the government announced that all miners had to be "licensed" or "approved" or some such thing. How could the crypto community fight this? I suppose the community could fork the blockchain to make a branch run only by miners that were not government sponsored. Perhaps, there could be some underground network of anarcho-miners who are required to pledge their allegiance to the Ghost of Satoshi to become part of the network.

We better have that in place already tested and growing, not waiting until the gauntlet comes and everybody stands around looking at each other with mouths agape like deer in the headlights. Gun confiscation post-Katrina is an example.

There would ALWAYS be people willing to risk their lives to run this network. So I don't think the government could kill the network.

It is almost already too late. They can give their lives in futility yes.


What they could do, is prosecute people who are caught using the "unapproved" bitcoin blockchain. They'd probably have to crack down pretty hard. And whether they would be successful, I dunno.

Of course they would succeed for the same reason totalitarianism always does, the masses have no option if they stop depending on the government. We haven't built anything yet.


Another question: what if two (or more) governments battle for control of the blockchain, so no one gets 51%? Does that mean Satoshi wins?

Do I need to cite for you the news on the coordination between the G20 and NSA to track down all tax evaders and financial crimes?
1356  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 05:24:48 AM
P.S. one of the reasons to hide this discussion in a TA thread is I think the (powers) have (that be) workers who read this forum. Also because the core of the adoption is here. You all are the leaders.

Mass adoption vs. nation fiat question, some quick thoughts:

The characteristics required for adoption vary with the scenario.  A global fiat failure scenario, a national fiat failure scenario - which varies dramatically between cultures and jurisdictions, or an incremental adoption within the nominal status quo scenario.  

A challenge to refutation is an unfair gauntlet to throw down, in part because it would be an interminable debate, deciding which specific characteristics of a national fiat were necessary and sufficient under each of a wide range of scenarios.

The point is made, and taken, that for some set of characteristics, the result is that the crypto has become no better than, or even worse than, the fiat which its adoption might displace.  Whether that set of characteristics is a proper subset of the characteristics required for such a displacement under *all* scenarios seems naively unlikely.  Whether it is a proper subset under the eventual scenarios which actually unfold will then depend on unfolding events.

But now I feel like I'm contributing to a thread hijack.  Unless Risto addresses the topic, it should probably be moved to one of AnonyMint's threads.

How can this be a threadjack when Risto often uses adoption to support his bottom calls in this thread?

It seems it is difficult to separate FA and TA when discussing Bitcoin. A relationship between a proxy for adoption n and price p was shown in this thread.

The only characteristic of fiat that we need to look at is centralization as it subjugates all (relevant) structure w.r.t. to the masses. The Iron Law of Political Economics guarantees that. And it is nearly impossible for the participants to see that. That is why it is so scary of a beast.

Quote
So the implosion of the friction and thus the order only occurs when they perish, because they will continue to repeat the mechanism which they do not understand to be a cause of their suffering. This can be verified in a petri dish, as an organism will reproduce until it consumes all of its food or oxygen. Due to the lack of a pre-frontal cortex, it is unable to comprehend the connection of reproduction to unsustainability. Unfortunately, even though humans have a pre-frontal cortex, they do not comprehend that debt, insurance, bonds, fractional reserve money, and centralized governance, cause the demand (and thus production) of resources to be overconcentrated in sectors of the ecosystem that create a less productive future.

    “It amazes that otherwise bright people can’t understand the simple concept that economic collapse doesn’t convert collectivists into anarchists.”

Thus the people are blind to the mechanism which is enslaving them and reducing their prosperity. Thus, since they will not change the mechanism, centralization of governance will grow stronger from the current financial crisis, and will diminish only when the involved organisms perish. Entropy is continuously culling the center of the bell curve so that knowledge can advance.

You are very astute at "multivariate abstraction" (apparently superior to me, as you already corrected me on n^2 has more structure than p, kudos), but you may not be as insightful at boiling it back down to external relevance. And you've noted this is an area you need to be careful on not deluding yourself.
1357  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 04:24:02 AM
AnonyMint is concerned about mass adoption, because he wants to save the world.  More power to him.  Being in the world, I think it could use some saving.  But his particular form of mass adoption is not necessary or to be expected during the time between now and the next two or three hype cycles.  IRS treatment of bitcoin can be harmful to mass adoption in the medium term, but good for institutional adoption in the near term.

Medium-term I'm concerned about those who are adopting Bitcoin now, and that they have no anonymity and they can't spontaneously mine it any more (without a serious investment in mining). And I am concerned that the mass adoption of Bitcoin will come in the form of off chain  (to fix the slow transaction speed and other issues which INTENTIONALLY won't be fixed on chain) and government control over mining and off chain coin supply, and that we Bitcoin adopters won't have any other option. We will be trapped in the new digital slavery NWO. My perspective is viewed by many as extreme and paranoid.

For next week or two, I think the tax ruling can deflate the confidence of some of the n00b investors who bought at $600 - $1000 if the price breaks down through $400. Capitulation would then come when they lose resolve to hodl. I could be wrong about this bottom call. I have presented some ways of looking at the chart of adoption to support my short-term perspective.

I also presented a new theory of the adoption curve being log-logistic instead of logistic. They key distinction is the rate of adoption would be declining since the launch of Bitcoin and not after 50% have adopted. The chart of n seems to support my view, but (from eyeballing it only) there are not enough data points yet to reliably conclude.

Because of my negative view on the potential outcome of Bitcoin on us, I have a very bad taste in my mouth if I buy BTC as an investment. I feel like I am a traitor to humanity and I would be better served to invest my time in an alternative instead. So it would take a very low bottom price to maybe cause me to potentially incriminate myself (assuming totalitarian effects of debt crisis subsequently emerge). I realize I am being somewhat irrational if my goal is to maximize return on capital. Also no man is an island.

I suppose I am not appreciating Risto as much as I used to because he preaches what I believe to be the NWO coin, and he uses hyperbole such as claiming it is at a fraction of adoption of world's population as if he can be sure how Bitcoin can morph to be compelling to masses. The only way I see it doing that is with government blessing. And this outcome is not the way investments usually work. Yeah it is always "different this time". Yet I am trying to not let this affect my feelings about any person. Frankly I need to do less talking and more working. (Mea Culpa)^1000000.

Correction: Note if I remember correctly Risto wrote 99.5% of adoption remaining, which would mean 200 x 2 million = 400 million target. Actually that is not too far from my expection of the current white male demographic target market. That is qualitatively not mass adoption by the entire world. That is 1 in 17 people in world. So I am not clear if Risto is arguing for mass adoption as a currency or for white male adoption as an investment bubble? His numbers are straddling the two. My expectation is either Bitcoin will top out as an investment bubble at up to one or two hundred million, or it will be prodded by the government to become the digital fiat. I don't see another outcome for Bitcoin, because I see no relevant development at all on the block chain protocol.

Certain developers who you know their name spend more time meeting with the CIA and the Council on Foreign Relations than developing the protocol improvements.

Since when should a programmer be a political liaison  Huh

Fishy smell.
1358  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 04:06:26 AM
When I have to report capital gains, do you think I record all that stuff myself?  No.  I go to turbotax.com, type in the name of my brokerage and credentials and it imports it all for me.  Software.  There's nothing fundamentally different about bitcoin that it can't be reported the same way.

I have never been able to get my brokerage to interopt with H&R Block and never was worth the time to figure out. That you figured out how to get interoption is great for you, but fact is there is a huge amount of Murphy's Law involved and this won't scale.

One of Steve Jobs favorite analysis and putdowns to very smart people was, "that won't scale". I know because my former genius boss says Steve did it to him.

Interoperation friction destroys scaling.

You aren't using your broker to do that for Bitcoin now, so you must be doing it manually. Or you are not reporting your small Bitcoin transactions.

I have often wondered if many are setting themselves up to be destroyed by the IRS by not reporting small BTC transactions.

I believe the dying socialism will use every little violation to rip us apart.

My perspective is viewed as too extreme and paranoid.
1359  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 03:40:28 AM
OK, no-one has still bothered to state what 'n' stands for (I'm assuming p = price) but it all sounds highly plausible.

I wrote that upthread. Here it is again.

It is the number of unique addresses from the blockchain.info chart. And Peter R showed that n^2 correlates with price p. This is Metcalf's Law and Reed's Law.

I had explained in an upthread post that if we use a ruler on the n chart along the bottoms since 2012, then should currently be at 100,000 yet it is currently at 150,000.

Also there was a divergence since February where p declined but n rose. That divergence must be resolved. Will p rise or n decline?

If n must drop by 33%, then p price could drop to 0.67 x 0.67 = 45% of recent p (inconclusive to determine which recent p to multiply by .045, perhaps $450 - $600).

I also projected the bottom from July 2012 using compounding and I also get a $300 to $350 target for the bottom within next 2 weeks.

$450 is a lot closer to the bottom than $600 was. Risto is correct about that.
1360  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 01, 2014, 03:39:01 AM
- After about 2-3 months, we are near 1000 and there is a hurdle to get over it. It succeeds and the rally is ignited, catapulting us to a new ATH of 3000-7000 in July-August. From taking the old ATH of 1163 to making the new, it is only 20-40 days.

I wonder what the next catalyst will be to get the next wave of investors to rush in?

I am thinking the confiscations begin in Europe, but I think not that soon.

Any ideas? Just curious.
Pages: « 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 [68] 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 ... 248 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!