Or are there a lot of people still following technical indicators and such.
Of the people who still choose to follow technical analysis, what's popular in bitcoin? What are people using?
Im still following some technical analysis, for day trade i think is still good you can predict some trend when it just jumped . for example price: 650 - 630 - 620 -500 -640 - 630.. it has been like a roller coaster for days. I can't comment on the validity of your specific idea but I think that's a little different than what I consider standard 'TA'. I would say you're more trying to trade off of market psychology and specific anchor prices. Some people try to claim that the popular TA indicators are representative of underlying market psychology but without being able to explain the logic behind them, I don't consider them on the same level. What you're trying to do falls closer to behavioral economics. Since you're basing your idea on predicting people's(the market) reactions to different price points. |
|
|
|
Litecoin too big to fail - just like automobile manufacturers and the banks. Some rich person will come in last minute, buy up the sell walls and send LTC to $30.
I think like you, ltc community is big What incentive is there for someone to do this? |
|
|
|
And see this is what I'm talking about when I post about the insanity of the Litecoin community letting their coin just die like this while you have legends like this reaching out with good ideas. But nothing ever seems to happen in Litecoin but complacency and arrogance. Blows my mind to see 300 mil market cap coin go to waste like this. Litecoin with it's market cap had such a huge advantage over other alts which it could have used to cement itself as the alternative to bitcoin if there was enough will in the community to push some boundaries and innovate. The only positive thing I'm getting from this is some faith restored in free markets. The market is adapting and responding to Litecoins lack of initiative. And in the future other coins will learn not to get complacent, as Litecoin will live to be a cautionary tale. |
|
|
|
|
Why did the Coblee decide to keep the vanilla scrypt algo and let Litecoin go to the ASICs anyway? I read his post with his supposed explanation, but the logic was so weak that it almost seems like he would have more to gain by letting this happen. The justification was just odd and went against the one of the primary, if not the primary goal of Litecoin.
|
|
|
|
Well innovation, you don't see much innovation with Bitcoin either.
Lots of people use this as an excuse for altcoins but it's a really poor comparison in my opinion. Bitcoin was the innovator. Bitcoin doesn't have to compete with alts(yet anyway). |
|
|
|
Bitmark deserves better company  Bitmark has lots of potential. Hopefully some more people can support the project soon and it can launch. These local coins are a bit useless I think when we're dealing with worldwide digital currency. |
|
|
|
It is surprising at just how many poorly named coins there are. My vote would go to Boolberry, a coin that sounds like a weird brand of cereal. They chose that name after two naming contests, and that's what they came up with.
At first I thought Boolberry was a bit silly but it's grown on me a bit. I assume it's a play on 'Boolean'. Hodorcoin is pretty good. Dogecoin is an obvious choice. But I think the worst name was Kittahcoin. An obvious rip off of Doge while not being creative or funny. |
|
|
|
|
But in that case couldn't they lose money if the market adjusts the price upwards before they finish buying all the btc they need? If COIN is trading at 20% above spot you can almost guarantee that Bitstamp et al are sure to follow soon.
|
|
|
|
I assume everybody now understands that money printing effectively is the money printers skimming value from all holders of money.
People are contempt with a small yearly rise in prices. We adjust for it almost without thinking. When you negotiate your salary, you just assume that an inflation adjustment is accepted, the question is what more. The same with prices. The traders offering prices, more or less automatically adjust for inflation first, then he thinks about should he go more or less whatever he thinks the market can take.
The inflation is internalized.
Measuring inflation is fundamentally impossible. Since the goal of all activity is consumption, only consumer goods and services are included. Traditionally a basket of goods were bought, and then prices compared year on year. But as the world changes, some of the wares in that basket will be irrelevant, and important new goods has to be included. So after a number of years, the basket has to be changed. Then there is the individual preferences, each person sees the the price changes of the goods he tends to buy.
The inflation is thus not really measurable.
The public does not understand what is the input parameters to the value of money. They think it has something to do with the strong innovation, a great country, a strong military, hard working people, or whatever. In reality it is the supply of money, and the demand to hold money that decides the value.
The public will always underestimate future inflation.
Since inflation is internalized, it stops working. There is therefore room to accelerate it. And since it is unmeasurable, there is the possibility to hide it in fake indexes. Eventually they see that they personally can buy less. They do not understand why, and therefore they might think that prices may go down. Therefore, the inflation will always increase, and the public will always be surprised.
This is the psychology of inflation. This is seen in historical hyperinflation episodes.
Refer to "When money dies" by Adam Ferguson. I was pointed at the book somewher on this forum (have not finished reading it).
Why does changing the basket of goods to keep it updated mean that inflation is unmeasurable? Isn't that logical? you compare different things. Was your granddad richer than you? Maybe he had horses. How do yo compare his horses to your car? But it's gradual and you can compare lots of different things. Plus there's things like gold which are always going to be the same. Do you think the inflation rate of the US dollar in the last hundred years that is commonly quoted is wildly inaccurate? You can only make an estimate. Yeah, but at least you have a good general idea of what the rate of inflation has been. Plus you can see with your own eyes how things are getting expensive in your day to day life. So it's nice to have a good estimate to go with what you're already seeing anyway. |
|
|
|
How does quantum computing change the game at all? I know Satoshi was aware of the potential of quantum computing and had mentioned it once or twice. Anyone know much about how it will affect bitcoin?
Quantum computers are decades away from making any impact. Bitcoin could be upgraded to post-quantum cryptography in the future if necessary. Are there any articles or anything about the topic? It sounds interesting. I don't really know what the theories are regarding how they could potentially break SHA256. It sounds interesting though. And also are there already people theorizing on a post-quantum cryptography? wikipedia is your friend (sometimes) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computerYeah, but I was more looking for some articles written about it with regards to bitcoin. But thank you. |
|
|
|
Isnt there also a crazy part where 3d printers are used to make houses?
Why "crazy part" it's great that this technology also helps those in need  Crazy awesome I guess.  |
|
|
|
There are altcoins that are Proof of Stake which give interest on held coins that is similar to inflation. 2-3% per year given in stake forging rewards. That seems to be a big trend in the altcoin market.
Trend =/= value and success in any way. It's just an popular experiment. Some of them seem pretty valuable and successful so far. Just from looking at their market caps anyway. I don't own any altcoins at the moment. By my opinion 98% of their value is fake as they have no real value or purpose sadly, developers are only trying get-rich-fast scheme or some scam ones. Sure there are tons and tons of bad coins and scam coins, but the ones that have worth a lot are worth a lot precisely because the devs aren't just trying to get rich fast and dump them. I agree that few of them really look promising, but you never know what may happen and after reaching nice price dev gets his hidden wallet out and dumps milions worth of coins...and ta-daaa game over. I think these days people are pretty meticulous when their analysing the code base to find any little surprises like that the dev might have left in. Although it definitely happens. Even the exchanges themselves are looking over the codebase before listing coins these days. |
|
|
|
Thanks for you input! Very enlightening. I will stop using TA now, it clearly is the devil!
TA is stupid all the way when you just can buy and buy and buy and hold and buy and buy and hold!
Who needs TA for that!
Oh! Finally the redeemer came to us.
This board offers as much geniuses as completely non-trolling-retards.
I'm not trying to troll people. But I've seen online communities and people go through infatuations with TA and then slowly come to realise that all of this information that's being analyzed is just descriptive rather than predictive. I'm just wondering what the status of TA is in the bitcoin community. The supply and demand of bitcoin is of course what determines the price. I'm not here to 'redeem' anyone or convince anyone. I don't mean to come off in an offensive way either, humans are naturally drawn to see patterns in data. |
|
|
|
There are altcoins that are Proof of Stake which give interest on held coins that is similar to inflation. 2-3% per year given in stake forging rewards. That seems to be a big trend in the altcoin market.
Trend =/= value and success in any way. It's just an popular experiment. Some of them seem pretty valuable and successful so far. Just from looking at their market caps anyway. I don't own any altcoins at the moment. By my opinion 98% of their value is fake as they have no real value or purpose sadly, developers are only trying get-rich-fast scheme or some scam ones. Sure there are tons and tons of bad coins and scam coins, but the ones that have worth a lot are worth a lot precisely because the devs aren't just trying to get rich fast and dump them. |
|
|
|
Craig Venter (the inventor) wants to use them to terraform Mars, but if we can terraform mars, we can fix Earth right?
Not sure, but I would think growing and creating an environment from scratch would be easier than fixing one that's already ruined without destroying everything in the process just to get a clean start. If we can make an organism that can breath Mars air, eat Mars dirt, and spit out Oxygen and water... We can definitely make something that can eat garbage and shit out water or something. Well we do that kind of with our bodies already too. You can separate garbage from water but you can't change carbon into water, which is the main problem. |
|
|
|
I assume everybody now understands that money printing effectively is the money printers skimming value from all holders of money.
People are contempt with a small yearly rise in prices. We adjust for it almost without thinking. When you negotiate your salary, you just assume that an inflation adjustment is accepted, the question is what more. The same with prices. The traders offering prices, more or less automatically adjust for inflation first, then he thinks about should he go more or less whatever he thinks the market can take.
The inflation is internalized.
Measuring inflation is fundamentally impossible. Since the goal of all activity is consumption, only consumer goods and services are included. Traditionally a basket of goods were bought, and then prices compared year on year. But as the world changes, some of the wares in that basket will be irrelevant, and important new goods has to be included. So after a number of years, the basket has to be changed. Then there is the individual preferences, each person sees the the price changes of the goods he tends to buy.
The inflation is thus not really measurable.
The public does not understand what is the input parameters to the value of money. They think it has something to do with the strong innovation, a great country, a strong military, hard working people, or whatever. In reality it is the supply of money, and the demand to hold money that decides the value.
The public will always underestimate future inflation.
Since inflation is internalized, it stops working. There is therefore room to accelerate it. And since it is unmeasurable, there is the possibility to hide it in fake indexes. Eventually they see that they personally can buy less. They do not understand why, and therefore they might think that prices may go down. Therefore, the inflation will always increase, and the public will always be surprised.
This is the psychology of inflation. This is seen in historical hyperinflation episodes.
Refer to "When money dies" by Adam Ferguson. I was pointed at the book somewher on this forum (have not finished reading it).
Why does changing the basket of goods to keep it updated mean that inflation is unmeasurable? Isn't that logical? you compare different things. Was your granddad richer than you? Maybe he had horses. How do yo compare his horses to your car? But it's gradual and you can compare lots of different things. Plus there's things like gold which are always going to be the same. Do you think the inflation rate of the US dollar in the last hundred years that is commonly quoted is wildly inaccurate? |
|
|
|
LogoInitial Base: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=660544.msg7665000#msg7665000Requirements: - "BM"
- purple (#330066 - or variation of)
- circular background
- white symbol
- the single currency line on left and double on the right
Since then mymenace has kindly provided three variations: I am very happy with all three, and feel each has a use. mymenace: perhaps it would be nice to have a mono (black and white) version of 1 and 2. Regarding three I feel like the outer "bitmark" text should be aligned with the central logo, do you agree? allow: it would be nice to spread the work load you obviously have good design skills, we need the equivalent of this logo for the website, document headers, and so forth. Would it be okay if I asked you put any efforts you are willing to contribute in this direction, using 1 or 2 above with some nice "Bitmark" or "Project Bitmark" text to the right of it. For the testnet logo we need an alternative color, I very quickly autobalanced the original logo to create this, perhaps an alternative color would be more suitable, what do you both think? Soon, we will also need to consider a design for the website, and also a domain for the project. Thank you very much for your valuable contributions, they are very appreciated. Branding UpdateOver the next 24 hours we will be creating a new repo on github for branding and artwork. Mymenace has kindly offered to make the aforementioned changes and commit low and hi res art work to the new repo for other contributors to use and adapt as needed. I think logo number 2 is the best one out of the three. Are you going to be choosing one as an official logo or something, and keep the others for side uses? |
|
|
|
So you expect people just borrowing you coins worth of millions if you promise to pay back?
With a legally binding and notarized contract, of course. This funny thing happened to me two years ago. I wanted to buy something non-virtual. It was pretty expensive. It has four walls and a roof, and all sorts of nice things like heating and cooling and electricity. It's often referred to as a "house." I didn't have enough cash to buy it. So I went to some people and I asked to borrow hundreds of thousands of fiat dollars. I offered them a 3.5% annual rate of return -- something comparable to what I discussed above -- and proved to them that I was a pretty good risk and was likely to pay back anything I borrowed. And you know, the funniest thing happened: they said yes. Who'd have thought? Hundreds of thousands of fiat dollars is not very close to 51% of all dollars that exist, or am I mistaken? And at least where I live, banks don't give the money to you, they transfer it to the seller's account in exchange for a document that the bank will hold which basically means that the bank owns the apartment/house until the loan has been paid back (sorry I don't know the English terms but you get the idea). This guarantees that the money has been spent on the house, and that the value of the house "backs up" the loan. This is why I provided the example of Soros and the bank of England. If you adjust for inflation and the GBP/USD exchange rate at the time, he borrowed substantially more than the entire current market capitalization of Bitcoin (which is only about $8b USD now). Soros borrowed the 2014 equivalent of about $20b USD. It's very easy to borrow money if you already have a lot of it, particularly for short terms. And remember, in this case, you don't even need to borrow the money - you're just borrowing one of its capabilities (that of staking and verifying transactions). And, as AlexGR pointed out, many of the coins in the network are not actively staking. If the profit margin was 50% and the volume was right, it's naive to believe nobody could borrow a billion or ten to exploit it. They would. But if that's a possibility it's easily prevented by people knowing that it's possible and not lending out 51% of the coins to a single entity. |
|
|
|
Will this to trade soon, will this trust forced to buy more bitcoin if there are great interest?
Hopefully yeah. I hope it's so popular that they are rushing out to purchase more. i guess their "little" bitcoin stack will be enough for the first 4-6 months but they have to get more  4-6 months?? even if shares start at $130 a piece (equivlent to $650 bitcoin value)... its only $130mill cap... did you see how fast the caps of other IPO's reached over $130m.. i can see them shares being bought up in days. especially if offered cheaper than 20% of bitcoin true value Yup I would not be surprised if they are already pre-sold. This has been coming for over a year now What would happen if they sold out or something quicker than expected? Would they have to freeze the ticker symbol on the market until they went out and acquired more bitcoin? I wonder if they have a plan for this(would be a good problem to have I guess ) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
