MatTheCat does come up with some weird ass trading theories to attempt to bet against the trend, to leverage trade and seeming to even overly rely on luck and fluke whale manipulations in order to profit from the opposite trend direction...

Seems like a losing strategy, and I would rather not gamble with my bitcoin investment...

Nah... Let's not play the everybody is right baloney... .

Only one side came into this situation with guns blazing, and attempted to mislead by asserting a technical problem (that really did not exist), and through that were attempting to change governance. 

That change in governance would have probably destroyed bitcoin to make it like paypal or some other system that is controlled and manipulated by a small group.

O.k... I understand the definition of trolling... it tends to be the opposite of the truth...


And, maybe it is just wearing on me a little bit, when core is made out as some kind of unified force that is the bad guy, when in fact it seems that a lot of the recent mess was  brought on by XT and classic proponents who may have been unwittingly attempting to undermine bitcoin in a variety of ways, including attempting to cause it to be easier to change fundamental aspects of bitcoin and through confusion and disinformation to cause unnecessary divisiveness in the bitcoin community

I made various responses in bold, above.

It is hardly the case that people are brainwashed around this forum, and you should know better than to assert such nonsense..


You are beginning to come off as butt hurt (and maybe that has been the case for a couple months now)...

You seem to be so delirious that you don't even recognize the preposterous nature of your own postings.... why should the forum allow you to make posts in which you attempt to steal members and attempt to promote another forum while at the same time denigrating the forum in which you are posting...   Are you sure that someone has not taken over your account.. because not only are you coming off as butt hurt, you are also coming off as a bit deranged.
 

That makes little to no sense.

Initially, a bunch of folks are pissed off at Theymos and administrators of this forum because they suggest that they are being censored and not able to propagate ideas regarding XT and classic and related ideas to make a hard change to the blocksize limit..

In essence, it has been discovered that the real agendas of XT and classic supporters has not been about hard changes to the blocksize limit, but instead concerns about bitcoin's governance, and they want to make it easier to make changes to bitcoin.  That would be a banker's wet dream to be able to undermine bitcoin like that.

So, really contrary to your assertion, it really is not the case that persons opposed to XT and classic happen to be supporters of banks and corporations because the exact opposite seems to be true in regards to the effects of either the implementation of XT or classic in their aims to make it easier to make changes to fundamental bitcoin protocols and consensus systems.

This one is not controlled by corporations and/or banks... .. hahahahahaha...

Get real!!!

According to the insightful predictions of Aztecminer.dummy, we are not going to get prices outside of the $350 to $500 range, because bitcoin is stuck...

hahahahahha...   He's already moved off of that statement a little bit, in preparation for having to change his dumbass and simplified narrative.  If we get any kind of downward correction, surely we are likely to get a few of the "bitcoin doesn't scale" propagandists coming in here in order to attempt to save a little face... with their FUCD spreading efforts.

Naw...

I'm not going to play this stupid-ass game, in which you continue to fail/refuse to clarify the meaning of your simple sentence, i.e.:  "It's not about the money, it's about sending a message "

hahahahaha


He will post about martians, his dreams and various other at the moment off topics in order to bring us "quality TA"  or maybe, Monero, as an alternative "quality" topic?

 

The below article gives a pretty decent overview of segregated witness and the anticipated timeline

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4ftqug/the_segregated_witness_timeline_from_idea_to/

Some credit may go to segregated witness's status in terms of this latest price optimism, no?

I don't know whether I should feed any trolls, yet if you could explain your amorphous response causing it to become less amorphous, that would be great.   

I had the same thing happen on Venmo... those fuckers.   

You have a real bad sense of market dynamics if you believe that prices stop/reverse at $490... sure it could stop before that time, but if prices make it it $490, we have pure momentum and psychology that easily brings us into the mid-$500s and more likely into the mid $600s... though, surely such momentum can stop at any time, it just takes a lot more effort to go against a trend, and when we hit certain price points, there becomes a strong trend and $490 is one of those price points that is likely upwards rather than a reversing point...

of course you can price it in, and a whole hell-of-a lot of other people can price it in too; however, all of those people still do not make the whole market or the market behavior from those known events there continue to remain a lot of unknowns, including a number of market actors who do not realize the impact and whose actions cannot be predicted ahead of time. 

Therefore, halfing is only partially priced in because market information is imperfect (even with known factors) and humans are not completely rational... and accordingly, the behaviors of some irrational people are going to affect the rational and irrational behaviors of others, creating even more unknowns.

I don't like leverage either, because it is too much like gambling with something that is very highly capable of being manipulated... and manipulations can take place to truly screw us over (especially with leverage).

Maybe without leverage, we are not going to get rich from BTC market movements; however, we now know that bitcoin is capable of 10x(s)... and we should be able to do very well with BTC with anything approaching a 10x... even a 2x or a 5x...   Anyhow, since there have been several 10x(s) in the past, and there remains considerable potential for at least a couple more 10x(s), we should put ourselves in such a position to profit from such, if considerable upwards movement(s) were to occur...

Probably, we have to play to preserve our capital sufficiently in case there is not any additional 10x(s); however, since we know that 10x(s) are reasonably possible, we still need to sufficiently prepare our BTC investment portfolio(s) for those kinds of possibilities. 

In other words, like you describe, try to take measured and small profits along the way, and do not sell all or a large portion of BTC merely based on a 2x or a 5x price movement, unless there is fairly convincing information that a 10% or so correction is occurring.. even though it may be a good idea to sell some of them, maybe up to 50% at various stages. and maybe allocate some of the sales proceeds for taking off the table completely and some for buying back.   

There's nothing wrong with having a BTC trade strategy that works for you; however, having such a strategy does not imply that strategy to be good for others.

I would not waste my time looking into any of your writings, but at this point, I am not going to attempt to stop others who may be inclined in such ways.

Don't consider my lack of not recommending your "supposed works" to be an endorsement.   

I don't know why you would conclude that my feelings are involved in this at any higher level than necessary. 


\I am just making various points on the internet.  You made your points and I made mine... 

U don't really know that he actually sold his account.

Even though we are allowed to speculate here, we should attempt to stay within reality regarding some of our known facts, and you seem to be going on quite a tangent with your assumption that seg wit allows more opportunities for bitcoin-related fractional reserve banking. 

Let's consider that under our current bitcoin practice, we have quite a few bitcoin merchant entities and bitcoin exchanges that are holding private keys and therefore holding bitcoin's and conducting transactions off of the blockchain... in essence we have to trust that they are not trading more bitcoin's than they actually hold (through their off chain transactions).  The weight of the credible evidence seems to suggest that Lightning Network creates structures and incentives to have more and more of these historical transactions to be connected with the blockchain.  Even though they may not be immediately settled, they are connected with the blockchain, and entities using LN will not be able to transact with coins that they do not have. 

You seem to be suggesting the opposite, as if LN transactions will not be tied to the blockchain and entities utilizing LN can somehow create or use coins on the LN that they do not have... which makes little sense... based on the actual factual descriptions regarding what LN provides.









We gotta see how it plays out... It is way too early to be attempting to predict fees based on potential services that are going to be offered and the extent that there may be competition.



Makes little sense.  There are going to be both regulated and non regulated conduct within this space for some time to come.


yeah... you do seem to be exaggerating fees because we really do not know, yet.... because there are forces in both directions (bringing fees up and bringing fees down)





It's possible that there will not be a need to increase the blockchain limit.  Why raise it if it does not need to be raised?



I doubt that anytime soon we are going from free and penny transactions to $10 to $100 transactions.. makes little sense, in our life times.



If fees are that high, then I'm sure people will search for and find alternative and less expensive means to transact value.

Actually, your narrow focus on one word does not make you smart, but instead makes you patronizing and deviating from the actual point(s) that I made.

I've read several of your posts, and frequently, you make decent sense, except when you get on some of these dumb-ass tangents...


Yes, we all know rule and ruler are two words and two related concepts; however, for the purposes and points that I was making, it doesn't fucking matter... thus.... this part of the discussion has become a considerable and irrelevant tangent... that possibly makes you feel good because you want to instruct regarding some irrelevant point that you are acting as if you know and others do not know?