A friend in China mentioned today there's growing curiosity about BTC there after it was featured this weekend on CCTV. It's made it to the daily hot topic on sina weibo. Anyone want to speculate on whether/when this might be reflected in the exchanges?
We've discussed this quite a bit since the first CCTV news. Word is that the latest news was neutral to somewhat positive. I think we are going to see adoption in China, both as a speculative investment but also because of the world economic situation. Something we have to consider also, is that people may start to get behind it as a big FU to the USD. That is probably why the government has been pretty open to it. I imagine that over the next 6 months to a year that China will be the biggest holders of BTC. Just on population alone, it only takes a few thousand wealthy people to make that happen. Just a feeling of a guess. As the price of BTC goes up, we either need to go to another term e.g. mBTC or do a split (if that is possible). With the latter no one loses holding power as with creating new shares. I just don't see people being as game to buy when the price is high. But, if it truly starts to grow and is seen as valuable, then mBTC will be the new term. IAS I agree. It's psychological as much as anything. When we start using mBTC as the standard, I would be surprised if the price didn't increase almost immediately. If you're a nobody investor without much money, would you feel more comfortable bragging to your friends that that you bought into the BTC market for .1 BTC or would you rather say I bought 10,000 m BTC? Yeah, that psychological barrier is the biggest. But once we cross it, it is behind us. So, at first you are right, people are going to be like "I don't want no .1 BTC for $111!" But when the price keeps going up and then people are talking in mBTC, it won't be a problem. Also, even a noob can understand that a float of 11 million is NOTHING. We have to move those decimal places over. |
|
|
|
A friend in China mentioned today there's growing curiosity about BTC there after it was featured this weekend on CCTV. It's made it to the daily hot topic on sina weibo. Anyone want to speculate on whether/when this might be reflected in the exchanges?
Sure : It will make no difference whatsoever. That is about as extreme as saying it will cause the price to explode to $10,000. I just don't see how advertising to millions or potentially billions of people will have no effect??? It had pretty much no difference the first time hit hit the TV in China. There was a little price action based on the hype with money already on the exchanges but that soon died out. That is a very arguable point. Do you not remember the downloads of the QT client exploding? Do you not remember the price climbing coincidentally after that? What about the nodes showing up all over China? Anyway, in an emerging and explosive market like BTC, I would not really pay much attention to one past event as being a predictor of future actions. That said, something clearly happened. |
|
|
|
A friend in China mentioned today there's growing curiosity about BTC there after it was featured this weekend on CCTV. It's made it to the daily hot topic on sina weibo. Anyone want to speculate on whether/when this might be reflected in the exchanges?
Sure : It will make no difference whatsoever. That is about as extreme as saying it will cause the price to explode to $10,000. I just don't see how advertising to millions or potentially billions of people will have no effect??? |
|
|
|
A friend in China mentioned today there's growing curiosity about BTC there after it was featured this weekend on CCTV. It's made it to the daily hot topic on sina weibo. Anyone want to speculate on whether/when this might be reflected in the exchanges?
We've discussed this quite a bit since the first CCTV news. Word is that the latest news was neutral to somewhat positive. I think we are going to see adoption in China, both as a speculative investment but also because of the world economic situation. Something we have to consider also, is that people may start to get behind it as a big FU to the USD. That is probably why the government has been pretty open to it. I imagine that over the next 6 months to a year that China will be the biggest holders of BTC. Just on population alone, it only takes a few thousand wealthy people to make that happen. Just a feeling of a guess. As the price of BTC goes up, we either need to go to another term e.g. mBTC or do a split (if that is possible). With the latter no one loses holding power as with creating new shares. I just don't see people being as game to buy when the price is high. But, if it truly starts to grow and is seen as valuable, then mBTC will be the new term. IAS |
|
|
|
Tradeforest is a fraud who in all his insecurities is completely afraid of Ripple. He knows the flaws of Bitcoin, as do many of you, and it frightens him and many of you, that Ripple has aimed to fix them.
Also, if you're going to explain Ripple, at least do it with integrity. Ripple is still in beta and will be decentralized upon release of the server source code. Sure, they render your mining efforts useless and for good reason but to flat out lie about Ripple either shows you don't know what you're talking about or you too are afraid of Ripple because of the deep seeded insecurities, that lie with the flaws of Bitcoin. That which the Bitcoin community refuses to address. As they say, you snooze you loose and never is this more true than in the world of technology.
I'm quite sure you are into Bitcoin only because you are into get-rich-quick schemes, and that's why I'm sure you are also holding Ripples. But you do not understand Bitcoin is a revolution - a movement. It is about being debt-free, about saying fuck off to fractional reserve. Is about holding a real asset and not debt-backed valueless paper. Ripple is just taking the old banking system (which is just accounting and debt transfers) to a distributed level, while introduces its very own premined currency. From one side, in Ripple you have "the old banking system" in his distributed version: which is a debt-based scam that allows anybody to create money from thin air, while the weakest links are left holding the bag. Nothing new under the sun. From the other side, you have the "cryptocurrency" inside Ripple, the XRP: which is just a premined scam, where ALL the coins have been created by a private entity for its own profit. OpenCoin will distribute their crypto as they wish, hoping that it will increase in value because everything else in Ripple is just "paper scams". It's the third time I tell you, Coinseeker: you do not understand Bitcoin. You do not understand its deep revolutionary implications. Bitcoin is meant to set you free, while Ripple is meant for their creators to be rich. Bitcoin solves a huge problem in money transfer: TRUST. You only need to trust maths in Bitcoin. With Ripple, is the opposite - you have to blindly trust a lot of things. +1 & Well Said. |
|
|
|
And when you hear them talk it is clear they are just in it for the money. There is no passion in their speech (if you can even call it that). I would be VERY VERY careful of these guys. They have millions and millions tide up. They are looking out for themselves first.
Not saying to get them out (to early for that), but they need to be kept a close eye on, very close.
Was that annoyingly nested quote-block from hell necessary? Also, would it be surprising that someone who invested a million dollars was in it for profit? Do you understand how investment works? As for their fundamental basis for investing - who knows, that requires a level of personal information that probably isn't available to anyone except their closest friends. It remains to be seen whether they're a benefit or a hazard. Your question is relative. Do I know how investments work? I think for most people (sheeple) yes, And I also know how it works for visionaries. I'm worried the Winklevoss twins are mostly the former. Further, I'm afraid the Winklvoss twins would do whatever it takes to become billionairs and I'm not sure they actually care about BTC. That should be our fear. They could be like a twin Trojan Horse... |
|
|
|
|
Question for you wall watchers:
I noticed this Friday that the amount of Asks (sells) at 100k volume jumped from the range of $170-$180 in May to $330 3 days ago and $245 the last two days?
Any ideas here?
|
|
|
|
What if it drops $1000 in a day? - oh but wait, it can't!, and though I really do get what crumbcake was getting at invoking Pascal's Wager it is a fact only one side has a limit to its movement in a day.
But the price doesn't have to fall $1000 in a day. The price can half as often as it can double. Here's a neat puzzle for you: 1. You're given a sealed envelope, and are told (truthfully) that it contains $100. 2. The man who gave you the envelope presents two other, identical looking envelopes. He informs you that one of the envelopes contains exactly $50 (half of the money you hold), and the other $200 (double the money you hold). 3 He offers you a chance to swap your envelope for one of the two presented envelopes. 4. Seems like it's in your best interest to swap, since if you choose badly (the $50 envelope), you only lose $50 (you had $100 before the swap). If you choose well (the $200 envelope), you win $100. Odds of you choosing the $200 envelope are 50/50, while you could win double of what you could lose.  See the problem? Or did i misinterpret what you were trying to say? Your complicating something quite simple by talking in analogies, which in this case is really missing the point. Do you believe in BTC? If not then don't partake. Is it an investment? Then find your entry point. Really quite simple. As I said above, I believe in what it means and what it stands for. Nothing complicated, no TA needed, just looking at the world and what bankers are doing to it is enough for me to make my "donation" to a better cause. We will be in this together anyway. It's about sharing I'm not sure how ideology manages to creep into a speculation forum  In particular, the Wall Movement thread As i understand it, I don't have to buy into an ideology to trade in Bitcoin. If you feel that trading Bitcoin must be propped up with calls to "donate to a cause," that sort-a spooks me from buyin'. Edit: Why should it matter if I believe in BTC as long as i think there's money to be made? If i buy in -- good for you & Bitcoin. If I stay out -- more Bitcoinz left for you? Seems like a win/win? Fair enough with the idealogies, but the point remains - If you wait for it to drop and it doesn't and instead shoots up $100 or $200 in a day, you will be there with cash and no BTC. I think that is a much much bigger gamble than buying some BTC now, especially since we retraced and are getting stable (and the whole China, Rushia pay pal, VC money, etc. news) |
|
|
|
Now, if it jumps up $100 or $200 in a day, your going to be there sitting in cash. Moral...
Don't try to time a Black Swan.
 And if it drops 100$ in a day? Even if you have a world changing invention, markets can remain blind to it for years. Worse: the invention could simply be discarded and forgotten. For example, the Greeks invented the steam engine, but we had to wait for thousands of years before any of its potential was really used. "Guys! Hold to it! It's world changing invention!" - A guy, 2000 years too soon. I really wish Bitcoin will go up, but you guys remember me too much of how I was in 2009. "How can it go down? It's the most important invention since fire!" The market didn't care. The more I see scareless permabulls like you, the more I fear for Bitcoin.  What if it drops $1000 in a day? - oh but wait, it can't!, and though I really do get what crumbcake was getting at invoking Pascal's Wager it is a fact only one side has a limit to its movement in a day. Again, in principle I see your parallel with inventions lying un-built and unused for millennia yet it takes some stretch of the imagination to put Bitcoin in this category. I see it as closer to the steam train having been built and refined and tested and is now pulling a long mixed consist of goods and savers and speculators. We may well have hit a bit of a hill that is a struggle for the engine at this stage of its development but there's a lot of momentum behind it and I doubt this will be its nemesis. But even if it did fail to make the crest of the hill (or the next) its unmaking is by now impossible. Whether it's Bitcoin or something else the cat is well and truly out of the bag. There'll be no languishing for millenia for the idea and technology of stateless decentralised money. And my last query is regarding fear of permabulls. OK, I get it was at least partially in jest but my question is how can someone who, based on a decent understanding of the concept and its implications, is as convinced as Its About Sharing is be a threat to Bitcoin? There's a hard core of believers in this technology who would ride the price down to one cent if that's what happened - providing the technology still does as it ought our net worth loss might smart but the hope in the idea would not be smothered. Holders like that are surely very healthy for Bitcoin. There is a danger that those looking for an excuse to believe Bitcoin is a get-rich-quick scheme will feed from such positive writings and we probably should be wary of their affect on the market as they alternate between buying without understanding what they're getting into and disillusioned selling when in disbelief they see price can go down too! But that's not the fault of the permabulls. For bitcoin to really go up it needs normal people to regularly see things offered for sale in BTC, such as when they're shopping on Amazon or their local supermarket website, or even in the supermarket itself. It also needs to be as easy to buy things with as normal money, or at least as easy as paying with a debit card. Bitcoin conferences may be a good thing but the existence of bitcoins isn't news to those who attend them, even now if you stop people in the street and ask what they know of bitcoins most will say they've never heard of them. If the average Joe had £20 worth of bitcoins that'd be a huge increase in the amount of fiat invested in BTC. I'm not even thinking so large. I just see it in the short term as a competitor to pay pal, western union and credit cards. But that alone is a huge industry. If you are a store and can increase your monthly profits by 3% or so, you do and don't think twice (barring security and other valid concerns). Pay Bal is huge and it's not in the supermarket. That is years and years away for BTC imo, but who knows. I think it is so early in BTC's history that we really don't know what we are dealing with here. |
|
|
|
What if it drops $1000 in a day? - oh but wait, it can't!, and though I really do get what crumbcake was getting at invoking Pascal's Wager it is a fact only one side has a limit to its movement in a day.
But the price doesn't have to fall $1000 in a day. The price can half as often as it can double. Here's a neat puzzle for you: 1. You're given a sealed envelope, and are told (truthfully) that it contains $100. 2. The man who gave you the envelope presents two other, identical looking envelopes. He informs you that one of the envelopes contains exactly $50 (half of the money you hold), and the other $200 (double the money you hold). 3 He offers you a chance to swap your envelope for one of the two presented envelopes. 4. Seems like it's in your best interest to swap, since if you choose badly (the $50 envelope), you only lose $50 (you had $100 before the swap). If you choose well (the $200 envelope), you win $100. Odds of you choosing the $200 envelope are 50/50, while you could win double of what you could lose. See the problem? Or did i misinterpret what you were trying to say? Your complicating something quite simple by talking in analogies, which in this case is really missing the point. Do you believe in BTC? If not then don't partake. Is it an investment? Then find your entry point. Really quite simple. As I said above, I believe in what it means and what it stands for. Nothing complicated, no TA needed, just looking at the world and what bankers are doing to it is enough for me to make my "donation" to a better cause. We will be in this together anyway. It's about sharing |
|
|
|
Now, if it jumps up $100 or $200 in a day, your going to be there sitting in cash. Moral...
Don't try to time a Black Swan.
And if it drops 100$ in a day? Even if you have a world changing invention, markets can remain blind to it for years. Worse: the invention could simply be discarded and forgotten. For example, the Greeks invented the steam engine, but we had to wait for thousands of years before any of its potential was really used. "Guys! Hold to it! It's world changing invention!" - A guy, 2000 years too soon. I really wish Bitcoin will go up, but you guys remember me too much of how I was in 2009. "How can it go down? It's the most important invention since fire!" The market didn't care. The more I see scareless permabulls like you, the more I fear for Bitcoin. If it drops $100 in a day then you should buy some more, no? It depends on the reason. But complications aside... My point, and I think it was made clear, but I'll type slower for you: If you are going to wait on the sidelines for it to drop and it doesn't but instead goes up $100 in a day, you will be holding cash. Your choice. That is my simple point. But, my bigger point is that this isn't an investment. It is a statement. I am making my statement now. I am not an investor, this is about trying to create a better place, getting us away from central banking. If you want to see it purely as money making, well, you create your own reality. We all need to be careful in that regards to be honest. IAS |
|
|
|
$120 isn't cheap? 11 million shares and a global economy that we are only hoping to get a small fraction of a percentage of ? $120 is VERY cheap when you factor in the market, incoming VC money, low float, affect on currency/monetary policy, etc. We are talking about a revolutionary game changing technology. Can you come up with something better?  True, compared to world economy $120 is still cheap. But world domination takes time. Historical growth rate of bitcoin is somewhere around a tenfolding every 1-2 years. That just happened, so chances are low it will happen again anytime soon. A black swan event can ofcourse always occur, a single ambitious billionaire jumping into bitcoin can do the trick, so always be exposed to bitcoin with a decent percentage of your capital. That being said, chances are higher for it to correct after a bubble than for it to launch into a new one shortly thereafter. So a good portion of your bitcoin capital on the sidelines is rational in my opinion. I guess it is safe to say that none of us know. But in danger of missing a Black Swan go by I would rather sacrifice some future "profit" or holdings of BTC by trying to buy in later at lower prices, with just holding at what I see to be a great price - now. But I can say, it is wise to have capital available to buy more in later should that occur. But it sounds like you are trying to rationalize the greatest social experiment in the history of our civilization. Think about that. Now, if it jumps up $100 or $200 in a day, your going to be there sitting in cash. Moral... Don't try to time a Black Swan. Black Swan is only a Black Swan in hindsight. 'Til then, it's a Red Herring or an Ugly Duckling That is not true about only a Black Swan in hindsight, it is merely hard to predict. So, for the masses it is near impossible to predict. A few (including me) called the internet as a Black Swan. Now I'm saying cryptocurrencies (maybe BTC) are the next big Black Swan. And they are Anti-fragile to boot. Very very powerful (see Sig).   |
|
|
|
Volume at Gox is so small it is almost scary
Yeah, but it is a bank holiday here in Germany and I think in other places as well. When the general volume on MtGox falls below that of other exchanges then you will know something took place. That probably doesn't happen as the recent DHS news isn't really much, but who knows how it affects people. |
|
|
|
I guess it is safe to say that none of us know. But in danger of missing a Black Swan go by I would rather sacrifice some future "profit" or holdings of BTC by trying to buy in later at lower prices, with just holding at what I see to be a great price - now. But I can say, it is wise to have capital available to buy more in later should that occur. But it sounds like you are trying to rationalize the greatest social experiment in the history of our civilization. Think about that.
Now, if it jumps up $100 or $200 in a day, your going to be there sitting in cash. Moral...
Don't try to time a Black Swan.
People should really try to comprehend this. The small value you are likely to gain by waiting (which is relatively probable) does not beat the enormous gain you lose by being out when the price suddenly spikes (even though this is a far less likely event to happen in the time-frame you are out of BTC). The opportunity cost of choosing fiat over BTC short term can be extremely high. Exactly. If you get super lucky and call it right you might get another 20% or so, but if you call it wrong you are holding ZERO and buying in at much higher levels. Look at the world - Banks are printing money (Japan, US, Euro) at record levels, Gold/Silver is being naked short sold in the paper markets suppressing the price and all the while Central banks are buying gold up, Unemployment is up, Financial numbers are being fudged, new wars are being talked about or close (Syria, Iran, etc.), etc. and etc. When the weasel goes pop you won't have time to get back in and you won't believe where the price is... IAS |
|
|
|
that was at best a below average talk. wow, harvard education and this is what public speaking sounds like? ouch.
Not everyone can give a Steve Job-like presentation. These guys are just VC's, rich kids with money to burn. But at least they speak in a honest and frank manner, from the bottom of their hearts. They don't give a shit about Bitcoin. They mock bankers, and their father is an actuary -- they got their money from the financial sector. What have they done or said that indicates they don't give a shit about Bitcoin? They want it regulated. They're shills for the financial industry. Maybe they see that regulation is unavoidable if Bitcoin is to gain mainstream adoption. It might not be a bad thing for services for Bitcoin to be regulated. But Bitcoin itself is difficult to regulate. So bitcoins can be, seized, restricted from crossing boarders, taxed, tracked, limited in the amount individuals can hold, and the exchanges run by the same people who screw everyone over now. They're bad things, IMO. I wouldn't go as far as equating regulation to all those scenario you've listed. Regulation does not necessarily mean seizing or tracking or restriction. It might be just regulation of exchanges, or maybe of merchants, but nothing too intrusive. FinCEN want to regulate virtual currency under the Bank Secrecy Act (1970): "Designed to help identify the source, volume, and movement of currency and other monetary instruments transported or transmitted into or out of the United States or deposited in financial institutions" "Required banks to (1) report cash transactions over $10,000 using the Currency Transaction Report; (2) properly identify persons conducting transactions; and (3) maintain a paper trail by keeping appropriate records of financial transactions" http://www.fincen.gov/news_room/aml_history.htmlRestriction and tracking! And the DHS have already seized money in Mt. Gox's Dwolla account. If we're going to fight back against that kind of regulation, Bitcoin needs connections and influence of exactly the type the Twinkievoss twins can provide. They've already talked about getting a Washington lobbyist. We know they've got powerful buddies - that was the point of Harvard, right? The regulation is coming one way or another. Whether we are ready is up to us. The Bitcoin Foundation are going to hire a lobbyist. http://www.itworld.com/357078/bitcoiners-rally-enlighten-washington?page=0,1The Winklevoss's want Bitcoin to be regulated. They are the current system. And that's why they don't give a shit about Bitcoin. They care about adding 0s to their bankaccount, not about the freedom Bitcoin offers to everyone else. And when you hear them talk it is clear they are just in it for the money. There is no passion in their speech (if you can even call it that). I would be VERY VERY careful of these guys. They have millions and millions tide up. They are looking out for themselves first. Not saying to get them out (to early for that), but they need to be kept a close eye on, very close. |
|
|
|
|
MtGox USD Price - $ 122.65, Euro Price - 94
Bitcoin.de (Germany, Europe) Euro Price - 89
The difference has been like this for weeks. I've seen it even higher.
|
|
|
|
$120 isn't cheap? 11 million shares and a global economy that we are only hoping to get a small fraction of a percentage of ? $120 is VERY cheap when you factor in the market, incoming VC money, low float, affect on currency/monetary policy, etc. We are talking about a revolutionary game changing technology. Can you come up with something better? True, compared to world economy $120 is still cheap. But world domination takes time. Historical growth rate of bitcoin is somewhere around a tenfolding every 1-2 years. That just happened, so chances are low it will happen again anytime soon. A black swan event can ofcourse always occur, a single ambitious billionaire jumping into bitcoin can do the trick, so always be exposed to bitcoin with a decent percentage of your capital. That being said, chances are higher for it to correct after a bubble than for it to launch into a new one shortly thereafter. So a good portion of your bitcoin capital on the sidelines is rational in my opinion. I guess it is safe to say that none of us know. But in danger of missing a Black Swan go by I would rather sacrifice some future "profit" or holdings of BTC by trying to buy in later at lower prices, with just holding at what I see to be a great price - now. But I can say, it is wise to have capital available to buy more in later should that occur. But it sounds like you are trying to rationalize the greatest social experiment in the history of our civilization. Think about that. Now, if it jumps up $100 or $200 in a day, your going to be there sitting in cash. Moral... Don't try to time a Black Swan. |
|
|
|
It should not be about hoarding.
That's my point also , but I bet 99% think (and do) otherwise. Early one people seem to be doing two things: 1 - Have a BTC savings account (e.g. paper wallet, etc.) 2 - Have a spending account (e.g. - client, e-wallet, android apps, etc.) At this point in time it seems the users are also trying to spend their BTC's with #2 but they are also holding (hoarding?) for the future. But I don't see that as a long term problem. As the price goes up people will start selling. That has already begin. It is a sort of distribution system. We don't want "wall street" buying things up at these low levels. |
|
|
|
$120 isn't cheap? 11 million shares and a global economy that we are only hoping to get a small fraction of a percentage of ? $120 is VERY cheap when you factor in the market, incoming VC money, low float, affect on currency/monetary policy, etc. We are talking about a revolutionary game changing technology. Can you come up with something better? You know the problem? That the number of actual bitcoins transactions is going down, volume is doing the same and the number of users paying/buying in bitcoins is becoming quickly the same as oct-dec 2012. The way I see things we're gonna end with a highly valuable bitcoin that nobody uses but it is worth millions because of the things it CAN do. A currency not used is essentially a useless currency - at least when one considers what BTC is about. Anyway, with the (current) 100,000,000 bits per BTC, it doesn't require many to be in circulation for it to be effective. We have near infinite divisibility (can increase) of each of the 11 million BTC units (not infinitely printable like current central banks and Quantitative easing - yuck! Think about that... Use it or lose it I would say though. It should not be about hoarding. We are early on in the movement though so things will change here as we go forward. Further the mentality of the average BTC user is not about power and fame. This is a morally found movement about change. Don't cheapen the argument here. We are taking part in the largest social experiment in our history. And you know the answer? eheeh, come on... We are all sitting in the front row and watching with our eyes wide open... |
|
|
|
Ah, that old chestnut. It is not any school. It is the common sense. It is old as the world! Deflation is the natural cure for inflation. Deflation is caused by bursting of bubbles. Bubbles are caused by money printing. So if you don't want deflation stop printing money and stop encouraging speculative behavior of large masses of people. Ordinary people are penalized if they save their money in a bank so they go elsewhere creating bubbles in housing and stock market. Without savings there is no capital. Without capital there is no capitalism. Simple as that.  eeheh, Love the pic. But are you sure we shouldn't just give the Quantitative Easing a couple of more years to see how it works out? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
