Sweet mother....  We're retracing through this dip at a remarkable speed.  Hmm, not quite a 540 retest then. Thoughts on revisiting? |
|
|
|
Congratulations to everybody for taking #4 once again at http://coinmarketcap.com/Hypes which don't offer anything new or special will go below NXT. I'm looking at you LTC.  Does anyone know the current situation with DRK? Is it likely to recover from its multiple forking? Can't quite make out what the deal is there. |
|
|
|
|
Back to where we started the day. I'm calling that 'consolidation'.
Or something.
|
|
|
|
Jorge, this is another example of you discarding information that doesn't meet your starting criterion of bitcoin = scam.
Confirmation bias doesn't do you any favours.
I have no reason to believe that Bitstamp is insolvent, but, if it were, it could and would easily fake that test. That the test is accepted without criticisms only confirms how gullible bitcoiners are. Bitcoin is not itself a scam, but I have never in my life seen an economic sector so chock full of scammers. Every crook in the world who learns a little about bitcoin would want to "adopt" it. It is a much more lucrative and "safe" vehicle for scams than the classical ones -- stolen credit cards, counterfeit cash, phony viagra, nigerian heirlooms, penny stocks, ponzi funds, ... I remember people saying something similar when something called 'the Internet' started to gain momentary popularity in the late 90s. Thank goodness that didn't work out. Bitcoin is a protocol. The rest will get worked out along the way, just as it was/is with the Internet. |
|
|
|
From bitstamp FB: Bitstamp BTC Proof of Reserves, May 2014 Dear Bitstamp clients, To reassure clients, Bitstamp regularly performs a procedure to prove its BTC reserves. On May 24th, 2014, Mike Hearn of Vinumeris GmbH, bitcoin core developer and prominent member of bitcoin community observed Bitstamps proof of reserves procedure. Reserves were proven by conducting a Bitcoin send-to-self transfer. Details of the procedure are provided in the PDF linked here: https://www.bitstamp.net/s/documents/Bitstamp_proof_of_reserves_statement.pdfIn summary, Bitstamp held 183,497 BTC its cold wallet fully covering both the clients funds held at Bitstamp and the clients funds on the Ripple network. Additionally, a financial statement audit is in progress. Best regards, Bitstamp team Cool  Yawn. Another "audit" that proves nothing, but reassures those who want to believe. At least we know the sum of the balances of all Bitstamp client accounts (if we trust Bitstamp, that is). A useful datum, although useful to what I can't say at the moment. Jorge, this is another example of you discarding information that doesn't meet your starting criterion of bitcoin = scam. Confirmation bias doesn't do you any favours. |
|
|
|
I don't think we're going lower then this tbh
headed to 630 in a couple days
540 retest was question for discussion. Thoughts for/against? |
|
|
|
540 retest required?
Required for what? Going up. Conventional TA I think. |
|
|
|
Do you know what the ROI is so far? |
|
|
|
Interesting discussion as I really should sell some bitcoin right now as my only source of income is the consulting work I do for which I get paid in bitcoin.
Should I hold-off selling even if I really could do with more fiat?
I'm in the same boat getting paid some btc for copywriting. When we were in a downtrend it made sense to save a little and send the rest straight through to Stamp to cash out. Now, it grates to sell in an uptrend. I guess it's simple: hold on for as long as possible, sell what you need to and save the appreciating difference. That's my plan, anyway. |
|
|
|
Apparently.... Another painful news; Mintpal: The DRK/BTC market is currently frozen because of fork issues, we will bring the market back when the issues have been fully resolved. Poleniex too. Suspicion is they are trying to stop the dumping... all cloaks and daggers stuff right now  Apparently there was one intended fork and multiple unplanned ones. |
|
|
|
DRK having a bad day.
NXT #4.
Nice.
Holy Sh*t! Nice! We're getting closer and closer to the top! Yup. #3 is not a stretch. Litecoin will take some unseating. And it's cryptoland, so anything can happen at any point. But that move was a triumph of fundamentals over hype, so I hope the same will keep happening. |
|
|
|
|
DRK having a bad day.
NXT #4.
Nice.
|
|
|
|
Very unexpected turn of events @DRK coin
Literally no one saw that coming. |
|
|
|
Litecoin seems to be firmly uncoupled from bitcoin now (if that's not an oxymoron). Doge also falling. Dark days ahead for both?
It was the same in the last BTC runup. First, LTC was falling and falling, LTC doomsday prophecies were filling the air. "LTC is dead!!!" and so on. Then, the LTC/BTC ratio suddenly jumped from 0.0075 to 0.05 in a matter of 1 week !!! Same with many of the other alts. I would never call the end of some alt too early, those little suckers are full of nasty surprises! Once upon a time, the majority of crypto investors had not experienced the burning side of a p&d. Not true now. Today, to have staying power, at a leading tier marketcap, a coin has to have compelling features. LTC does not. I expect DRK to fail on its snake-oil promises, eventually, but I expect it to outperform LTC by a nautical mile for a long while, perhaps forever. Yes, LTC has historically lagged BTC and overshot its spikes. I expect most of that positive beta will be embodied by other alts with better distinctives this time. NXT and MRO are obvious candidates (leaving DRK aside for the moment). A couple of weeks back you were more skeptical about NXT. What changed your mind, if indeed it has changed? |
|
|
|
I remember why I ignorred you. This was discussed a while back on this thread. The consensus was, 'Meh'. |
|
|
|
And in the interests of making it a fair experiment, do you ever worry that your posts/articles might prevent that limited adoption happening (which would seem very unscientific)? And if not, what is the purpose of making them?
I doubt that this thread has more than 1000 readers. If having one skeptical poster here can prevent the success of bitcoin, then you should all dump your coins and get out of this losing game, as fast as you can. Independently of its probability of success as defined above, bitcoin may be a fun gambling game, but is a terrible investment, because there is no reliable way to estimate its future value. Unfortunately some sleazy salesmen are touting bitcoin to unwary people as a good investment, even as a hedge against the 1%/yr inflation of the dollar or the 6-7%/yr inflation of Brazil. (Even with the recent spurt, Bitcoin's annualized inflation rate since january has been ~100%/yr.) We see plenty of examples right here. (Sure, if one had a time machine and could invest in September 2013, the return would be fantastic; but, with that tool, playing the roulette at Las Vegas would be even better.) Thus if you want to help someone, tell him/her NOT to invest in bitcoin. You're not just posting in this thread. You've written articles about bitcoin and you're advising your students not to go near it. I don't think that's going to have a serious effect on bitcoin's long-term adoption prospects, either. It may even be beneficial. I'm just not entirely sure you know why you spend so much time here. |
|
|
|
Define "large number of people".
If it is clearly stable and long term, even a few tens of thousands of legitimate users can be counted as success, I guess. But note that there must be enough payment volume to support the miners through fees, once block reward dwindles. And in the interests of making it a fair experiment, do you ever worry that your posts/articles might prevent that limited adoption happening (which would seem very unscientific)? And if not, what is the purpose of making them? Finally, do you have a hat that you would be prepared to eat in the event that your threshold for adoption is met? |
|
|
|
@Jorge
I'm curious. You're an academic, and a scientist, I believe. So any theory you hold must be falsifiable in order to be viewed as credible.
Under what criteria would you entertain the idea that you might be wrong about bitcoin, or cryptocurrency in general?
I answered this some 6,223,678,221 pages ago on this thread. "Success" will be when bitcoin (or crypto) gets used by a large number of people because it is cheaper/faster/safer/easier/whatever than the alternatives. Not because one has a BTC stash to burn, not to support the cause, not to evade taxes or make illegal payments, not because it is hip, not to speculate with, not out of curiosity, etc. Offline key/address generation and asymmetric crypto-signing of "digital checks" are undeniable wins that I am sure will be widely adopted eventually. As for the rest of the bitcoin protocol, and the Satoshi blockchain in particular, I am more skeptical than ever. I must have missed that. I was probably distracted by a picture of a train at the time. Define "large number of people". |
|
|
|
|
@Jorge
I'm curious. You're an academic, and a scientist, I believe. So any theory you hold must be falsifiable in order to be viewed as credible.
Under what criteria would you entertain the idea that you might be wrong about bitcoin, or cryptocurrency in general?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
