I remain surprised regarding how long ETH has remained "Up"


Really, ETH probably does not deserve a value of much more than $1.50 per ETH, yet I suspect that it is going to remain above $3 , and possibly even $5 for some time, and furthermore, I would not be surprised if ETH gets pumped again to some outlandish and unsustainable value of $25.. hahahahaha..

Kind of crazy seeing how speculation works in the quasi-centralized coins (surely ETH is not as centralized as Ripple, during the Ripple pump from a couple years ago.. and look Ripple seems to remain considerably overvalued, too)

It is kind of funny, if it were not so sad, to have one lambie account (blunderer) defending another lambie account (bargainbin)...

It's is like you, with the two stupid ass trolling accounts, are talking to yourself (of course with a few of us die-hards as your remaining audience) and interbreeding within yourself, like a bullcow would possibly do, if such a fictitious self-sufficient animal were to exist...    


Regarding the wall?  Break through $430 over the weekend?   Maybe I would put the odds of breakthrough over the weekend at slightly less than 50/50 at 46 for breakthrough and 54 for not?    kind of a random guess on my end.. because breaking through $430 seems to be a bit more bullish than the market may ready to accept.... .. within a couple weeks, though the odds seem quite a bit more likely that we will break through... maybe 50/50?

BB (aka lambie, et al) is not too smart when it comes to understanding the difference between a cow and a bull.  

She he it seem to believe that a cow is just a smaller bull... hahahaha... dumb

hopefully, she he it knows more about bitcoin and it's various price directions, but after reviewing some of her posts and the various previous banned accounts, it seems fairly apparent, even though ironically she is getting paid in bitcoin, she does not seem to know too much about bitcoin either, and is merely in this thread to attempt to distract from the topic of bitcoin and to denigrate the concept.

I doubt that it really matters too much regarding how much BTC posters in these speculation threads are holding.  Surely claims seem a bit more realistic when they are working with more than 5 or 10 coins, and surely it helps to make profits a bit greater when working with a larger stash of coins.  Sometimes when the reference is to a stash of less than 1 coin, then it becomes more difficult to take the person seriously (especially if making claims about trading BTC)

Between late 2013 and mid-2014, my goal was to build up a personal holdings of about 30 coins, yet when BTC prices dropped from $1,000 to $600 then to $400 and finally to $200 and below, 30 coins became a lot more attainable, well within my budget, and I ended up exceeding that initial goal. 

Frequently, after I had attained my initial 30 coins, I would begin to talk more in hypotheticals, and not discuss too many specifics regarding my exact quantity of holdings; however, I frequently like to use 100 coins as easy reference point when discussing BTC accumulation and trading strategies and techniques..

Whether I personally hold 100 coins, 100 coins seems like a good round number that could be easy to digest and fairly within grasp of a lot of people who have been at this accumulation and trading of BTC for a while.

On the other hand, it seems that in the coming years, and once BTC prices may likely 10x in the coming years (possibly even this year), it may become more practical to talk about accumulating and/or trading 10 coins, for illustrative purposes.   

I agree with a lot of what you are saying, rOach; however, when attempting to predict price direction and market behaviors of various mixed motive actors, we cannot assume that everyone who has accumulated a bunch of bitcoins owns those coins for the purpose of profiting off of those bitcoins directly.  

It seems to me that there are some actors (including finance institutions, payment processors and governments) who likely own a significant quantity of bitcoins, but they are invested in bitcoin not being successful and they perceive it to be in their best interest if bitcoin is not successful (and bitcoin's price is suppressed) ... therefore, these kind of persons (entities) may still own some bitcoins and are willing to lose money on their bitcoin investment/holdings in order to gamble that they are going to be able to profit in other ways (so long as bitcoin's price does not go up).

I've bolded your last two sentences, above.

You are likely engaged in a bit of fiction thinking if you believe that miners buying/selling to themselves would have any meaningful impact on price or that it is any kind of widespread factor that affects price in any significant way.  Further, in recent years, most legitimate exchanges (that affect prices) have various kinds of fees that would cause disincentives to trade with self.  The extent to which some of the Chinese exchanges have no fees also cause a dramatic increase in volume, and they tend to not be much if anything of price leaders in recent years (and yes those exchanges are likely heavily employing bots that trade on very tiny spreads).

Employing bots on fee bearing exchanges does not delegitimize the trades, and the exchanges that maintain fees tend to be the most likely to be the price leaders... and even when exchanges allow for a large amount of leverage trading, those kinds of practices can take away (or at least discount) their ability to be price leaders.  Yet, in the end, the price is driven by the combination of the actions on the exchanges, which supply of "actual" coins will factor into how much the price changes in one direction or another.

Actually, this is a real decent point that seems to relate to momentum, and what causes the momentum is not so important as the fact that momentum is created.

Accordingly, the flat price performance periods seem to serve as back and forth and uncertainties about which direction is the price going to go.  Attempts at spreading FUCD, and also attempts to hype, too.  Yet during the more or less flat periods, there is an inability to push prices either above a certain price point or below another price point. 

Likely in the past 3 months or so, we've had prices largely between $360 and $460... and some unsuccessful attempting to push beyond those price points.  Further, during this past three month period, there was a certain amount of the bitcoin community buying into various disinformation regarding technical problems with bitcoin blocksize limits and mixing up the topic of "technical problems" with overly exaggerated concerns about governance issues and seemingly purposeful creation of a variety of loudly vocalized discontent. 

Yet, as time passes and maybe as some of the quasi-related technical implementations (such as segwit) roll out (and the sky doesn't fall), momentum is going to pick up in the upward price direction and a large number of people following bitcoin and also newbies to bitcoin are going to jump on the bitcoin train for the upward momentum that will likely be difficult to hold back (at least for a certain period) that may well take us to the $3,000 to $5,000 price territory.. this may not specifically be halvening that causes it, but a variety of factors coming together (which no doubt will include some of the dynamics of supply and demand - which involves materially that half of the amount of coins are being mined on a daily basis).

You seem to be onto something.   

seems to be a fairly minor problem (and likely premature) in the whole scheme of things....

at this time, transferring value around seems to work pretty good to have $10k or even $30k moved around for less than $.10.. even if it is not clear whether in the future it will cost $.04, $.05 or $.06 .. .and whether such transferring could be done for free or if it could possibly cost $1 under some circumstances in 5 years. 

There is a lot of unknowns in the worlds, and it is not the end of the world to have various unknowns that will likely be known (or at least better known) at a later and more relevant date.

"we were told"


Yeah, right do you have a rock in your pocket?  Who is "we"?  The royal "we"?


Pretty much you are assuming a problem where little to no problem exists, and there are various sufficient fixes in the making and under consideration.  There is not an emergency at the moment... seg wit is on the way, and there may actually be some additional hard increases (even though it may or may not be necessary in the short term.. we will see?) 

The only "fix" that does not seem to be sufficiently in the making is to figure out ways to get the whiners to let up on their whining so much, but maybe after a 3x price bubble, some of them may let up on the whining a little bit, but others may need a 10x bubble?  Hm?  There may be few ways to completely quell some of the more disingenuous ones?

That's ridiculous to cite over 6000 posts in a blanket format as your supposed proof.  Non-specific, and therefore ridiculous.


On a related note.  Based on your posts, I am fairly certain that you are skilled at art, distraction and denigration of bitcoin.  Congratulations.

Hopefully you get paid adequately, yet I'm fairly certain that you have more than double the posts as me, and even your notlambchop account had more posts than me (more than 7000 in a little more than a year of activity)... and probably, you have had nearly 100 other accounts, some of those accounts more successful in the longevity department than others.  Accordingly, a combination of art, distraction, denigration of bitcoin and technical skills.  So, even if you may not be an idiot, you are surely ridiculous, and probably undercompensated.. hahahaha... complain to your employer, who is likely paying you in bitcoin... 

Nothing wrong with calling an idiot an idiot based on evidence, yet you seem to be employed in distraction rather than substance... and frequently you are not talking about substance, and instead getting caught up on personalities in order to refuse or avoid to address substance.

Sure, I understand that a paid troll is likely getting paid to distract, so you seem to be fairly skilled at providing your purposefully trolling services.






You could be correct about the service being a scam, but really you appear to be just throwing that out there and assuming rather than providing any details or knowledge about the actual terms of service.. ..

maybe after you had already thrown out a bunch of shit, you are retroactively attempting to provide evidence for your earlier vague conclusory accusations?







hahahahahaha

touche


you could be correct if it is really true that nearly all (you seem to be asserting all) bitcoin lending services have scammed their user base.  You seem to have more evidence on that point than me, and I don't really feel that it is worth my time to research into that particular point.  Accordingly, I will let you rest with that particular (and seemingly incredible) assertion that all bitcoin lending companies have been engaging in schemes to screw over their customers.  






hahahahahaha

"clueless" is a pretty low standard, and even I should have enough confidence to assert that I am not "clueless"....  

You should realize that when you exaggerate, you lose some of your credibility (that is if you had any credibility to start with)... no?

 



 

My response here will largely focus on your last two sentences, because your earlier responses appear to be technical avoidances  in the form of quasi-non-sensical ad hominem attacks.


I would like to inform you that legacy CC is not free.  Surely, costs are spread out in various kinds of ways, but in essence cause costs upon merchants that are inevitably going to get built into consumer prices.  





This statement goes to show that you are guessing, and you do not know any details.  You throw out the term "usurious" in order to stir shit, and you do not know any details.  And, in the event that you get called on it, then at that time, you may or may not choose to respond - to the extent that you are not successful into further distracting the conversation into nearly pure irrelevant nonsense.






Yes, Lambie.  

Your way of attempting to belittle me by asking an inflammatory question, while you failed and/or refused to respond to my question(s) regarding how the referred to service is "usurious"  and seemingly successfully engaged in various "fun" irrelevant attempts at distracting anecdotes.

O.k. "usurious middlemen."  I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion.  It seems to me that Western Union can be a bit usurious, but even some of these mainstream institutions have been offering some more competitive rates based on some of the low to no fees of bitcoin remittances, surely bitcoin has barely made a dent in the payment remittance market.  Furthermore, sometimes, the first innovations may be more usurious than others until more and more competition evolves.  If people have bitcoin options, they can compare those to their other options and decide whether or not to use the service.  If it is the best rate that they can get, then it could potentially be usurious, no?  Is that what you are saying?

If you were able to support your own lame conclusions, you should be able to make simple calculations in order to show that you know what the fuck you are talking about.

It's similar to your failure and refusal to provide sufficient information regarding your coinbase limit problem.. you fail and refuse to engage in basic research and/or knowledge and selectively pick your facts.

By the way, at this time, $.05 is about a tiny bit above .0001 BTC... look at bitcoin's exchange rate.. it is about $421, and therefore, .1BTC would be $42.10, and .01 BTC would be $4.21, and .001 BTC would be $.421 and .0001 BTC would be $.0421  etc etc etc

Yeah... You seem to be ignoring most, if not all facts in order to repeat your assertion that in your view bitcoin sucks.


As I already asserted, and should be sufficiently clear, bitcoin is not yet at the starbucks stage...  it is just not close to being mass or merchant adopted or even sufficiently user friendly for such level of micro transactions at the current time.

Surely, in the next couple of years, it seems very likely that bitcoin is going to have the potential to become incorporated into a lot of the fast transaction confirmation market... we just aren't there, yet, and therefore, describing expectations that are not there seems to be in the fantasyland self-serving territory to talk bitcoin down and to focus on deficiencies without acknowledging a large number of development attributes that are either in the wings or likely to be developed in the coming years.

Thanks for your smartass contribution, Bargainbin.

Would we label this post as a forum of desperate trolling, when you attempt to describe the beneficial (and likely even the bullish) offerings of one small company as a kind of negative? 

I would categorize this proposed BitPagos service as innovative, and we will witness the extent to which some companies are going to make money off of these kinds of services and potentially reaching segments of the currently underserved populations who may not be able to easily get small loans from traditional institutions. 

Interesting times ahead.

I doubt that there is any meaningful direct correlation exactly between various alts and bitcoin, even though maybe from time to time, the performance of some alts can be compared and contrasted with the performance of bitcoin - and the investment and disinvestment trade-offs.

You may be correct, but frequently I am skeptical when price predictions are too specific and lacking in qualifiers.  That's a decent number, though... I frequently am hypothesizing that once prices go past $502 (which really seems to become inevitable after $480, then prices are going to shoot into the $600 to $650 territories... and certainly overshooting towards $680 is not outside of normal irrational bitcoin history, which seems quite likely to continue.

Even in the best-case scenarios, $700 is going to be a while... Maybe 4 months or longer....?


I would think that if we get into the $480s (and possibly into the $470s would be sufficient), then it is very likely that we would be able to experience the $600s within that same price run... and the $700s seem to be quite a longer shot, especially without some correction (profit-taking) period, first.. which could cause several months of delay... but really, I would like to be wrong, and it does seem difficult to deny that bitcoin is due for some kind of upwards price explosion... I just fear that getting into the $800s would likely require movement to a new ATH (and we may not be quite ready for that, yet?).