The thread indeed is gold. +1 to so many of the previous posts

While I am sure many of you understand it already, just want to repeat:

Monero is currently so small that it makes more sense to speculate on if the technology is going to make it, or if the devteam is going to stay. These things do actually matter concerning the long term.

The price is so low that whatever happens to it now, in the bounds of [0, 0.004] does not really matter. If you believe that the coin has a +EV better that Bitcoin (which also has a good one), and want to invest 1%...25% of your cryptostash to XMR, now is a good time to do it. When something happens, the availability of cheap coins dries up faster than you can hit "buy".

We are reaping what we sowed by not cutting down the emission. We are trading the current low price and unusability for the hopefully better perception of XMR as a fair coin in the future.

The Joker in the game is CryptoKingdom, soon to go online.

I am sure you realized he is from 2011, you're not. So shut up, willya?

Well I know I'm followed by a host of people and anything I say can at any time be used against me, regardless of my intention (or that free speech is mandated by the UN and ratified in most countries).

The funny part is not the above, but that the other guys seem to be able to talk shit without punishment all the time. Just look at this forum 

(In case I'm overreacting, and you just need an explanation to any single statement, I am here to help you   )

I am afraid 8 million could be up to 25% tbh 

You give me 100:1 odds, I am willing to bet you BTC1 that it is worth $1,000,000 USD before 10 years have passed. 

Or maybe a 1:100 minority is enough to qualify as "mentally ill"... I heard that the U.S. incarceration plan has 8 million names in it. That has to be about 10% of the literate adult self-supporting males in the U.S.

I struggled a little concerning how to reply. Does anyone of the readers see the irony, or am I wasting my time here?

In my understanding, 300-350 is the (mental) stop-loss / short cover zone for many. Let's see

People can accurately grade others who are less knowledgeable in the field than them. They cannot accurately grade themselves, nor anyone who knows more than them.

i) This is a strong argument against the system of popular vote, because it makes it impossible to get a meaningful percentage of good candidates elected and therefore assures a groupthink outcome suspect to external influence.

ii) It is also a strong argument for voluntarism, because from i) it is obvious that the ones who are oppressing you are not actually capable to do so, thus even if you did not theoretically object, the practice of giving people the power over their superiors, is not yielding good results.

Yes, and if they can't find you publishing the bad joke, they will make it up. Follow you for 4 days with a camera crew to cut and paste individual sentences, if needed. You may be flattered of such intimate interest, but the wife and business associates are typically not.

I'm not going to do AMA again. The first time I tried, got this kind of question that I must answer in 140 characters relatively quickly, and I don't even understand what the guy's after 

Mental illness is defined by the government/death(pharma) industry these days.

I would not say it is anything too far-fetched to call your enemies (bitcoiners) "mentally ill".

I also called other guys "homo" in junior high - not because they were homosexuals but because I did not like them and homosexuals were not in fashion at the time like they are now.

So once mental illness becomes chic, the bitcoiners will be called terrorists, money launderers, etc. instead. It's the normal ignore-laugh-fight-win cycle, perhaps moving from the second to the third stage.

Of course I did. The whole thread is because of that!

The price is more behind the best-fitting trend than at any time in history, so either Bitcoin is going to die, or revert to the trend (or something in between ofc). The EV calc strongly favors investing now.

Another thing that strengthened my conviction was that some of the guys there were actually short. You know, when guys of that caliber are short, and they cover, it's going to have an effect on the price. They are not fools, they had better information and balls than I did a year ago, to actually go short instead of just lightening up, but also they are not fools to destroy themselves when the price goes back up. 300-350 was mentioned as the mental stop loss zone that marks the end of the downtrend and triggers short covering.

Anyone who has the skills to leave no trace of his crypto usage, can either:

a) not accomplish anything since no trace may be left;
b) not stay under the radar due to he is so skilled that he's certainly on the list already.

Try another frontier. Such as questioning the legitimacy of the whole charade. Bruce Fenton said he went on offensive when a cop was trying to fill his ticket quota with him, making the cop admit that he's on the morally losing side, but needs to get his family fed. In this case, at the expense of another family of 6.

I realize many more things now than as little as a year or two ago.

It's called "experience". 

We do. See OP. Just adjust the scenarios or the probabilities thereof.

This is a very simple case really, there is a timeframe, and the assumption that BTC will have a price in USD. It always holds true, because "no price" == 0 USD, and "USD fails" == inf USD, in which case the calc reverts to the purchasing power instead.

Estimating the probability is difficult, of course. Few actually placed their bets in 2011 based on the conviction that the price would go up 500x in 2 years. If I had needed to think about it in detail, I would have given "$2->$1200+ in two years" a probability of ~1%.

Of course we cannot know in retrospect what the probability was, but we know the outcome was 500x. And we can consider that perhaps the probability was higher than my estimate, and certainly higher than the majority's estimate.


This is the beauty of EV. If there is a positive case good and probable enough, it makes it all worth it.

Consider 2 cases of extreme gambling with a very slim chance of winning, and very negative EV.

- Lottery
- Insurance.

In both, you can expect (EV) to get a 30-40% payout over a period of 5 years (so -60..-70% EV), with a microscopic chance of hitting it big. With insurance, the condition even is that you cannot really end up better off than in the beginning so that's even worse than lottery.

I'd much rather invest in something like Bitcoin. Anyone who knows about Bitcoin and continues to gamble off his fortune with insurance payments clearly does not have a clue what he is doing.

+1. You never know. So leaving out any of the datapoints because of alleged bullshit is not good.

Many astute guys have a theory that TPTB are bullshitting us the final last time with a move that goes to high-5 digits, sucking their money in the game, crashing the price, and gaining a public record of all the people who are thinking independently enough to buy in, but are not paranoid enough to realize that it was a bankster/government con all the way from Satoshi to the FEMA camp.

Do I believe that? It's certainly a possibility. Instead of burdening my mind too much about the probabilities of the scenarios, I have found it much more helpful to group them under "harassment" and develop my skills to cope in the odd chance that 8 government guys want to raid your house and confiscate everything, or lock you in an institution, deny your lawyer and force-feed psychiatric drugs, or sue you over Kafkan made-up victimless crime allegations, or make up a national televised sex scandal over your employee you never even kissed.

After going through those, my interest in nitpicking about how likely it is for Bitcoin to reach the ATH exactly, is pretty pointless. It is more important for a person, whether he is denied Internet access or not, than whether he has a few million more or not. In western countries you may be denied Internet and lawyer without fair trial, and that is a human rights issue.

I am always ready to bet, though, if the odds are good enough. To get to $1,000/BTC from here, we need it to go up 4x. So if I have $1,000, I'd be at $4,000 when the price is $1,000. I also get to benefit from the close cases, for example $500 means a double. So, in USD terms, I'd probably not bet $1,000 unless I got $15-20k in the event of Bitcoin hitting $1,000. Actually it's more likely that you find the other side of the bet more interesting! Anything goes for me. I don't hope, I do the maths.

My Simple and Sane Savings plan (link in sig) actually promotes unemotional profit taking every time the price rises to the new ATH, and setting the profits aside. I believe taking a calculated risk early on (now) and starting to cash out little by little after a certain target price is hit, be it $1k or $10k, the experience is the best for most people. No trading. No agony.

In 2011,  $1->$32 (32x)
3-4/2013,  $15->$266 (17x)
10-11/2013,  $130->$1242 (10x).

So it would appear likely to me that the blowoff phase would come, but would top out in less than 10x the price of the "stable" period before the bubble. Then again, we are more below the trendline now than ever, and I could be completely wrong and we develop a superbubble, only to pop in the $100k or so.

During the advanced stage of the bubble, the marketcap can in a low liquidity environment rise 100:1 (by $100 for every $1 invested), therefore the last double from let's say $50k to $100k would be achieved by a mere 7.5 billion investment.