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? I'd rather have the 10,000m BTC == 10 BTC  |
|
|
|
Thank you BitcoinAshley, my goal is to get to the point, like you and cypher, where I can impart these things to others that don't know  I guess the better question is, how can I decipher the BS on zerohedge and the many true things they tout hahaha. My only concern is that they know that the doomsday-insider persona they put out gets readership and considering their audience, that they too can be easily manipulated for some ulterior motive. Yes, they tend to exaggerate a lot. And remember, their goal is to make you think the financial apocalypse is right around the corner so you keep reading. IMO, they are correct about what's going to happen, but they have no idea WHEN it's going to happen, so in the meantime they are just exaggerating. The bit about physical demand is interesting. ZeroHedge, Max Keiser, and every website/blog like it are screaming about chinese housewives loading up on gold, traffic jams on the streets in front of coin dealers in Asia, dealers out of stock and unable to find anything, etc, etc. Here's what I've noticed: My dealer went from having most of its coins available for same-week shipping about a month or so ago, to now having 90% of its coins with a 14-21 day delay time. Similar dealers have same issue. However, there are still places you can get metals, there are even still coins at my dealer that will be shipped same week, and I doubt there's traffic jams in front of coin shops in India. It's just that prices are getting to the point where miners and wholesalers are really feeling the squeeze. They're taking a gamble - sell now and risk the market returning to where it was a month ago, or hold a lot of their inventory only to have prices fall further. I think the effect on the market of the naked paper shorts is not to be underestimated and that is why I personally hold PMs. I don't think, as many "BTC bugs" do, that we are going to instantly transition to a world where BTC is used for every single transaction, fiat completely disappears, and PMs instantly drop in value. Oakpacific, I've heard the "guns and ammo are the only thing that will be important in that SHTF scenario" argument many times and I don't believe it one bit. Sure, there are situations like all-out wars and massive civil unrest where you won't even have a chance to make a transaction. But that is not the only possible iteration of such a scenario, and I'd rather have a chance to buy something off my neighbour than shoot him for it and steal it, does that make sense? In the same way that we tell even the most butthurt bears to keep just one bitcoin in cold storage "Just in case," I think even the most anti-PM "BTC bugs" should keep at least a little physical around in case it's the best way to buy a train ticket to "get out of dodge" during the economopocalypse or whatever it is the blogsters are preaching these days. And in that "manufactured single-iteration of SHTF scenario where only guns and ammo matter," how are you going to buy more ammo from the redneck in the trailer park after you run out from defending your family against the an-cap looter gang? Oh right, shoulda brought some gold  Even that scenario used as an argument in the "that will never happen" category ends up defeating itself. I should mention that I was comparing the fungibility of silver to gold, not to other currencies. I think it's safe to assume that most people realize PMs aren't too gifted in the fungibility department when compared to other currencies. I guess the biggest thing is that, gold and silver aren't what they used to be. Gold's utility has definitely decreased after the decoupling of gold-pegged fiat, but even more so compared to before we had fiat at all. Back then, it was common would trade a grain or three of gold for a cow or whatever. Who does that now? It truly does look like Bitcoin and gold are reversing.
Yes, there is no doubt in my mind that if we see any massive shift in the dominant world currencies, PMs will take a backseat to cryptocurrencies. In fact it is more likely they'll be stuffed into the trunk or the roof rack. I've no problem with that. So long as fiat gets run over, hit reverse, run over again, etc, then dragged from the back bumper by a chain on the pavement for 5 miles and thrown into an abandoned coal mine - I'll be a rich motherfucker and the world will be a better place  BitcoinAshley, your posts consistently prove to be well-thought out, framing a broad issue, then presenting it in an easily digestible way to the masses. This is one of the most sensible posts I've read exploring the PM/SHTF scenario. Kudos. It is pretty good, although I think she misunderstands why people want guns and ammo. Maybe for some they are thinking about robbing their neighbor, but for me, I'm thinking about hunting my land for meat. It's sad to me how many people only think of guns in terms of human on human violence. They are wonderful tools that are life sustaining when used properly. The first thing one should learn about guns is to always be sure there are no humans at the end of your barrel at any time. |
|
|
|
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.
Thank you RMS.  Don't forget all the embedded systems that have long ago abandoned the bloated GNU libraries for lighter replacements . We're talking about generic Linux here, go spread your GNU elitism elsewhere. Sure, it is a big factor on the desktop, but GNU can't claim dominion over all Linux systems, and even on the desktop, 98% of the functionality is available from other non-GNU libraries. Yes, GNU played a large roll in getting the Open Source movement rolling, but now they have an egotism problem and will become irrelevant if they continue to rest on their laurels. |
|
|
|
But, deflation is accompanied by a very tough labor market. [citation needed] especially given my (admittedly anecdotal) experience in an inflationary economy that the job market sucks. Chapter 1, beginning with "Of the Wages of Labour" Admittedly rooted in sound money economics, which may not directly apply to modern reality. Could you point out where it states that "In an economy where the value of money is increasing, labor is in small demand"? 'Cause I don't see it. I'm not sure about those summaries, I would read the source material. Anyway, it is not always correlated because deflation doesn't cause a tough labor market. Thank you. Automation can sometimes cause a tough labor market (in the industry undergoing automation), but that's not the same as deflation causing a tough labor market. Correct. I never made that claim. The quote above is taken out of the specific context of automation-induced inflation that I framed it in originally. |
|
|
|
But, deflation is accompanied by a very tough labor market. [citation needed] especially given my (admittedly anecdotal) experience in an inflationary economy that the job market sucks. Chapter 1, beginning with "Of the Wages of Labour" Admittedly rooted in sound money economics, which may not directly apply to modern reality. Could you point out where it states that "In an economy where the value of money is increasing, labor is in small demand"? 'Cause I don't see it. I'm not sure about those summaries, I would read the source material. Anyway, it is not always correlated because deflation doesn't cause a tough labor market. However, both can be triggered by increasing productive capacity caused by automation replacing human labor. And it used to be that this was the primary cause of deflation |
|
|
|
But, deflation is accompanied by a very tough labor market. [citation needed] especially given my (admittedly anecdotal) experience in an inflationary economy that the job market sucks. Chapter 1, beginning with "Of the Wages of Labour" Admittedly rooted in sound money economics, which may not directly apply to modern reality. |
|
|
|
The problem with that argument is the long periods of deflation in the 1800s when the currency was gold.
Still seeing deflation as a necessarily bad thing, huh? No - replying to the post saying that deflation is a result of money printing. In a gold - or other stable monetary system - economy, deflation is an indication of economic growth. Specifically, that the economy is growing faster than the money supply, and therefore the individual monetary unit is growing more valuable as it represents more real wealth. Still think Japan's deflation was a problem? The confusion comes in because "the economy growing faster" is usually due to automation driving down labor demand. If you keep your job or have lots of cash, deflation is great. But, deflation is accompanied by a very tough labor market. However, if it is a reliable feature in the economy, people learn to use it to their advantage by saving. |
|
|
|
The Japanese are able to borrow money for less than their inflation rate.
This is the root of your difference in opinion. You believe there is infinite demand for government debt. Remember, the bond markets are still markets. If demand dries up, interest rates will rise. Unless the central banks can increase demand for bonds without paying more interest, they will be in trouble. Watch Japan... the 5 year interest rate jumped up 38.9% this month, most of it in the past week. This is after then yen fell roughly 30% in the past 6 months. Demand is leaving bonds, and unless they tighten and strengthen the yen in the near term the long term result will be higher interest and thus deflationary pressure as more profits are needed to service the debt. That is a good thing! The Japanese state will be forced by the markets to borrow less and the Japanese consumers will be encouraged to spend more. That's exactly what you would hope to see happen. Obviously if capital leaves the bond market it will be invested elsewhere, but this does not necessarily mean consumer spending. |
|
|
|
My problem with ChartBuddy:  Absolutely illegible as soon as there's any movement at all That's a fair point. It shows a better view of asks than bids. I'm not sure how to solve this. A color gradation on a 2d plane may work okay, although a grey scale would work better for people with color vision problems. |
|
|
|
I don't like the idea of bots posting like this, it is just spam. The charts themselves are 99% unintelligible in my opinion.
Ban it I say, if the owner has something worth sharing, he can share it himself
I don't understand it. Kill it! It only posts in this one thread. If you don't like it you can ignore it. Maybe if you learned to read it you might find it useful as well. |
|
|
|
|
I suspect that currencies should not be stable and that stabilizing currencies leads to price fluctuations in all other goods.
|
|
|
|
The Japanese are able to borrow money for less than their inflation rate.
This is the root of your difference in opinion. You believe there is infinite demand for government debt. Remember, the bond markets are still markets. If demand dries up, interest rates will rise. Unless the central banks can increase demand for bonds without paying more interest, they will be in trouble. Watch Japan... the 5 year interest rate jumped up 38.9% this month, most of it in the past week. This is after then yen fell roughly 30% in the past 6 months. Demand is leaving bonds, and unless they tighten and strengthen the yen in the near term the long term result will be higher interest and thus deflationary pressure as more profits are needed to service the debt. |
|
|
|
And what about the US based exchanges with the proper licenses?
As long as the exchanges are complying with all of the laws and regulations in all of the countries they do business in, and are paying all of the appropriate taxes, there is no problem. Of course, this is easier said than done, and will require things like full and proper identification of all of their clients, and reporting of any suspicious activity to the proper authorities. You make it sound like regulations are purposefully difficult to comply with. |
|
|
|
|
Watch the Japanese Bond yields. They are up 40% in the past week... if they continue to rise the extra interest due will suck up any extra capital that might lead to inflation.
|
|
|
|
Look deeply into it. It is nothing.
Looking deeply into nothingness is not advisable. |
|
|
|
Make light of it if you wish. A lot of you wont be laughing when the exchanges serving the US (and Europe for that matter) get shut down one by one for non-compliance.
And what about the US based exchanges with the proper licenses? Which US exchanges have the proper licenses? I've been trying to figure this out, no luck so far. Coinbase, for one. They are not a full service exchange like Gox, but you can link it to your bank account and then do buys and sells. |
|
|
|
Make light of it if you wish. A lot of you wont be laughing when the exchanges serving the US (and Europe for that matter) get shut down one by one for non-compliance.
And what about the US based exchanges with the proper licenses? |
|
|
|
Soon enough BitPay will introduce online wallets for customers
Good news for bitcoin adoption for commoners, many who wouldn't want to bother with a regular wallet. Bitpay could really take off. bitpay opening online wallets for customers means they become a bitcoin bank it would be like banks are to hard cash: 1. fractional reserve 2. credit if you understand that bitcoin's nemesis are banks, then you see that that bitcoin's survival requires that there will not be bitcoin banks bitcoin banks becomes more popular than bitcoin itself -> bye bitcoin If you understand wallets are not the same as bank accounts, then you see that you are jumping to conclusions that will likely not play out in reality. Do some research on the blockchain.info wallet model. It doesn't support fractional reserve, credit, nor does it even give the operators access to any funds. That said, fractional reserve bitcoin accounts will probably happen eventually, but when a bank run happens those who gave up control of their money will learn their lesson instead of being baled out. We will always have the choice to avoid such institutions. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
