Why make it so complicated?  If you do NOT like the $500 issue, then leave that out.. who cares about that.

The main question is whether or NOT you are willing to bet that BTC will NOT hit $435 in the next 30 days.  You can pick any amount that you want to bet.  Who fucking cares about odds.  You only going to take a bet if you get odds, then change the amount to $430 or something that you are willing to live with with 1:1 odds.  Maybe Windjc is willing to give odds, but the odds are NOT necessary, if you can agree to an amount and just keep it 1:1 - either BTC breaches that level in 30 days or it does NOT.

90 days is NOT needed - unless you are betting on something else, besides your original statement that BTC will never breach $435.  If you go with 90 days, then you just have more time to lose the bet.


Personally, I agree with you Rptiela about the bullishness of bitcoin, but I am NOT very confident to make any bet that BTC will NOT breach a certain amount.. Maybe I would bet that it will NOT breach $300, but personally, I am NOT even sure about that.... But, who cares about me?  I did NOT make the statement.  You, Rptiela, made the statement that BTC would NOT breach $435, and said that you would put some money on it.. .. so go ahead and do it.  Even though I do NOT agree with Windjc's conclusion about the direction of BTC prices, he seems reasonable in the framing of bets.  It may be the case that the two of you cannot see eye to eye on the terms of the bet, but the subject does NOT necessarily need to be complicated with odds and a whole lot of various ambiguous terms.

If you do NOT like the current state of the bet, then you should propose counter-terms that you are willing to accept.. rather than complaining about Windjc's counter-terms.   

If you really are serious about taking a bet then you have to work with possible options and it seems that Windjc's terms were within the bounds of reason... and probably tweakable.

The odds are NOT established at the time that you place the bet?  That would suck, if the odds keep changing forever... the odds have to lock in at some point when the betting is closed?  like horse racing.. but this is a little different b/c the horses are running while the bets are coming in.. and they close the bets on the last lap or some silly shit like that?

In my eyes, it would be more fun, if the odds were locked in at the time that I were to place my bet.... if i were to bet... otherwise, the whole thing seems to be fucked to be betting on horses while the horses are running.

So, if you were a betting man, you would be siding with Windjc about the $435 in the next 30 days?  or do you believe the downfall and FUD spreading of china is gonna last longer than 30 days?

I agree with you that China remains a relevant factor.. and will continue to be a relevant factor, until some other more relevant factor drowns it out.. such as major investment entering into the market (pie in the sky?  does NOT seem to be a long shot)...The existence of these three Fud-spreading China exchanges does seem rife for some kind of a GOX-like scandal, though.

My point is still valid, and I could give a shit whether a guy has $10 million in liquid assets or $10,000 in liquid assets.

The point of the bet seems to be to put some money where your mouth is, and you do NOT need to prove yourself with a $50K bet, especially when it seems that the $50k aspect of the bet may be getting in the way of making the bet.  $5k remains a meaningful amount b/c it is meaningful to others, and some people could live for a year off of $5k.

Let's take the guy with $10,000 in liquid assets, he could still prove his point by betting $5 (0.05%) rather than by betting $50 (0.5%).  And, don't tell me that the guys with $10 million are treating $50K the same as a guy with $10k is treating $50.  That may be the same percentage (0.5%), but even well to do people are going to begin to put up some barriers when they are throwing around $50k here and there for quasi-random bets on an internet forum.

Part of my point is that the proposed $50k amount of the bet may be getting in the way of finalizing the terms of the bet, and that $50k amount really is NOT necessary, unless the guys are merely wanting to impress people with pompous big balls numbers, that distract from the main point.... which is to put "some" money where you mouth is... with clear terms that everyone can understand.

I believe 30 days is more than enough time to call Rpietila on his request for a bet.  Initially Rpietila's bet request was somewhat general concerning the conditions and the timeline, which Windjc, narrowed some of those terms. 

I like the idea of charity contribution - and maybe it shoudl be better that the charity goes towards some knid of BTC infrastructure or something BTC related (besides a BTC mansion); however, I doubt that the bet needs to be so large as $50K in order to prove the point. 

If someone, such as Rpietila, is asserting that we will "never" see $435 again, then he certainly should feel confident that will NOT occur in the next 30 days.  If the bet is for a smaller amount, let's say $5k or less, then there should be considerable less incentive to manipulate the market (and on honor both parties are already asserting that they will NOT engage in BTC manipulation tactics - which could be included and defined in the bet terms - eg no buying or selling within a certain amount during the time parameters of the bet).

It seems tome that you guys are very close - and really, you should NOT see a lack of balls, to bring down the amount of the bet - b/c the point seems to be putting some stake (not steak) and commitment into the short-term prediction - which does NOT need to be $50K, in order to be meaningful.

I doubt that you would need to convert... b/c once the terms of the bet are agreed to and hopefully understood by everyone, then each party would transfer to you the equivalent of BTC, as if that party were to lose the bet, and then you would hold those amounts until the terms of the bet runs. Should be able to do all of that with BTC, even though the BTC amount(s) could be measured in the equivalent of fiat.

I think that you guys have NOT agreed to several of the terms, yet, and there cannot be NO bet without clarification of the terms, and escrow is one of the terms.  You have not even agreed whether 30 or 90 days, and 30 days seems more than enough time to allow the bet to run - however, it does NOT matter what I think if you two are willing to agree to 90 days, then so be it.


I do NOT understand why 2 days is necessary to solidify, but it may just be that you are hedging your bet which is fine if a person can recognize ways to hedge.

Of course, the bet could be completely in BTC.. with a dollar value so for example the equivalent of $50k valued on x date in BTC either way... but it sounds as if you are talking about much greater amounts.  I am NOT clear about whether it was 50BTC or 100BTC.. which would or $250k or $500k depending on the value of the BTC.

Why would this NOT create a private courier system?  would that work? Send the fiat to the courier, and the courier delivers the fiat to the exchange.  Does seem a bit inconvenient way to convert back and forth to/from Fiat and BTC.

There seems to be a bit of a contradiction, but we will see how it plays out, and surely, I am NOT completely surprised by contradiction(s) that may exist.

Your rendition of what is going on in China does NOT make very much sense- especially considering the extent to which bitcoin mining businesses are operating out of china, as well. 

China is going to be o.k. with the various bitcoin mining operations - whther related to the manufacturing of equipment and the actual mining itself?    Just seems contradictory and illogical.

Also, isn't there a little irony in the supposed May 10 date, which happens to coincide with the Global Bitcoin summit in Shanghai.... All seems kind of weird.

I suspect he is NOT buying at any point above $370 - just speculation on my part. 

But Risto is NOT going to disclose, exactly what is his buy point... which is fine.  NO problem with that.

Certainly, it is going to affect some people's decisions about whether to buy or sell and how much and when... but really, posters sometimes seem to give too much weight to the significance of their posts here.

I doubt that the real movers and/or shakers of the market and/or overall sentiment is affected greatly by this thread - even though this thread is one of the data points that may be used by some to measure market sentiments.

Yeah... right.  You really believe that this thread has any meaningful effect on BTC exchange prices?

I agree with the portion of your statement that savegox would probably have been better for bitcoin and crypto currencies than court managed liquidation of GOX; however,  I do NOT agree with your cataclysmic prediction of some major price reduction in bitcoin b/c of that liquidation decision (and potential problem of NOT resolving other major issues regarding what happended to the other 600K coins).. You are talking crazy when you reach those kinds of outrageous  / double digits types of conclusions.

My understanding is that there are a variety of possibilities but one is form of marking transactions and using bitcoins as collateral.. anyhow, there would be no need to change in and out of actual fiat once you have bitcoin (except at the very beginning or the end end if you were to want to cash out for fiat or buy more BTC with Fiat - but you would use your regular channels for that.   I'm sure that there will be varying competitive models, in the beginning.

I agree that will happen, so long as NO real major investor does NOT come into the bitcoin space.  On the other hand, if we get some news regarding some major investor into the bitcoin space... then the Chinese news will NOT affect bitcoin prices so much. 

I doubt that BTC prices are going to completely detach from Chinese involvement, b/c the Chinese are going to remain in bitcoin.  They just may become a lesser factor over time.  Hopefully.. b/c they do seem to have a tendency to manipulate through their ambiguities Whether purposefully or NOT)

Yep... I read some of your old posts (mostly in the SSS thread but also several in your diary thread) , and certainly, I could see from where you were coming in some of your contemporary prediction posts, and one of the risks of making timely prediction  posts will be that there are  going to be uncertainties as to when or how much to buy/sell exactly... or determining how far above or below the trendline you believe that BTC prices are and the extent to which such BTC prices may or may NOT be sustainable.

And, sometimes, there is also going to be some reassessment or maybe even shifting of the price prediction model.  We are all working with incomplete information; however, some posters have different analysis tools in their background and some plans work better than others to achieve the various goals of the person affected by his/her investment choices.

I am am looking forward to some of these decentralized type exchanges, too; however, I think that it will take a little while to get the bugs out of them.  Nonetheless, I look forward to thse kinds of developments that may resolve some of the stealing and  the manipulation and whatever else they are meant to solve.

It's whatever you make of it... There is a lot of goofing off in this thread, and no big deal, if posters are on a similar wave of mutual respect or whatever then it will be easier to work the humor into the back and forth dialogue. 

On the other hand, if posters are competing with each other or throwing out insults, then those kinds of communications can easily devolve to be fun for neither... or maybe just fun for one of the two?







Possibly, it is the way the message is communicated, rather than the message. 

If you are coming out making assertions like fair value is $x, then that could seem pretty ridiculous to others, if you do NOT explain some of the recent history and various developments.  $300 seems pretty extreme on the low-side in my thinking, and I would probably put fair current valuation in the $750-$850 arena... Though I am NOT stuck with that opinion, if we were to discuss how we arrive at our calculations with a fair understanding of the history and the various developments and investments into BTC and also the fact that the market may price BTC based on future expectations including likely regulation(s) and BTC's ability to take over certain payment system functions or storage of value functions or even public ledger functions. 

If you spurt out claims of $300 without providing what would seem plausible accounting of the facts, then other posters are going to get frustrated and call you names or ignore you may be easier.  I am fairly doubtful that you are wanting to engage in a meaningful dialogue, but NEVER say NEVER... eh he hehehe...