It is too bad you had to ruin a perfectly good post with slander. That is definitely the effect people get after reading a lot of r/bitcoin or r/btc subreddits.

There is strong doubt. I expressed it above. The sales did not "invariably crash the price", and the sales have been suspended for more than a month and yet prices are now dropping again.

So, how much did you get paid for your work? Was it worth the time you spent?

The belief that the drop in price has something to do with the Mt. Gox selling is just a fantasy.

There is no evidence that the selling caused the price to fall. The price rose on each of the days that the coins were sold, and now the price falls even though the selling has stopped.

Read this for more information: https://cointelegraph.com/news/effects-of-mt-gox-trustees-400-mln-sale-on-bitcoin-market

If that is really your attitude, then I think your life might be better if you treat people with more respect.

Why would it reduce Bitcoin? If anything it will increase the use of Bitcoin.

However, there is a problem because the amount credited depends on the conversion to dollars. It means that the amount you pay will not be exactly the amount they receive because of fluctuations in the exchange rate.

Becoming a millionaire makes it a "crock"? I don't think those wives would agree with him.


That's a typical lawmaker response -- make unnecessary laws.

If you want a regulated currency, then why not just use dollars? The whole point of of public decentralized cryptocurrencies is that they do not need to be regulated. Why create a new currency when you already have what you want?

You neglected the most important factors:

1. Adoption
2. Speculation
3. Utility


BTW, I prefer distilled spirits to animal spirits.

• Do your own research. Don't invest in something because somebody told you to.
• Research the offering thoroughly.
• Most ICOs are going to fail. If the information doesn't explain in detail how the business works and how it plans to succeed, then it probably won't.
• There are a lot of scams. If the promoters focus more on the returns than the business, then it is probably a scam.
• Not every idea is a good idea or can become a sustainable business.
• Evaluate the risk. 99% of these ICOs are going to fail. Make sure the reward is great enough to justify the risk.
• Don't be afraid of missing out. There are plenty of opportunities, even after rejecting 90% of them.
• Invest like a professional.

For example:


Don't invest in DeepOnion just because this newbie said to. In fact, I would stay away from DeepOnion simply because it is promoted by newbies.

I'm the Dan at my work, but nobody minds because I gave out 1 BTC Casascius coins for Christmas when they were worth about $5.

Your cons are trivial and not the real cons. Your pros are basically guesses. My feedback is this: you could do more research before coming to any conclusion.

The author missed the point. The Beanie Baby comparison is very appropriate. People went crazy over Beanie Babies, not because they adored Beanie Babies, but because they thought they could make a fortune. It is the same with Bitcoin. People are buying bitcoins, not because they can use them or take advantage of the technology. but because they think they can make a fortune.

Just look at the posts in the Beginners and Help forums. The majority ask, "How can I make money?" Very few newbies here even care about the technology.

There is a lot of information there, but I disagree with much of it.

1. MV=PQ is an equation of 4 variables, and that makes it very complex and difficult to determine anything concrete. There are six ways of writing MV=PQ as an equation of two variables keeping the other two constant. You can come up will all sorts of misconceptions by picking some and ignoring the others.
2. MV=PQ is not a causal relationship. The author claims that PQ can only increase by increasing MV, ignoring that MV can only increase by increasing PQ.
3. MV=PQ does not account for changes in the value of the money supply. That is, if MV is fixed, then the value of PQ can still change -- a $100 phone today is much better than a $100 phone was 10 years ago.
4. The author shows how another paper misuses MV=PQ in order to convince the reader that his own use of MV=PQ is valid. It's a logical fallacy -- his is invalid, therefore mine must be valid. The reality is that both are invalid.

This is a very interesting development. It could be the death of cloud mining if other states and countries follow.

If it is not functional as a "real" currency, then there there is no point.




1. In the U.S., a bank transfer takes a week.
2. A credit card transaction is done quickly, but the merchant doesn't know for months if the transaction will be reversed. A Bitcoin transaction is also done quickly, but it is final in 10-20 minutes.
3. Bitcoin is great for online purchases because the merchant can safely ship on the same day.

Now you are just spamming...

Thanks for correcting me. I think I understand now. The peg is done by only allowing havvens to be traded for $1 in a trustless market, whereas the nomins, which are backed by havvens, can be traded anywhere for anything. It's a clever idea.

I think it depends on your goals and your resources. Is diversification sufficient or do you want to select and manage individual investments, or something in between? Are you investing for the long term or the short term? How much time do you have to spend on your investments?
 
In terms of diversification, there is no "too many". If you are going for diversification, then more is always better. However, most cryptocurrencies are highly correlated, so the benefit of diversification is limited after some number of coins.

In terms of managing individual investments, I don't think anyone has the time to follow 56 coins, unless you do it professionally, perhaps. If you invest in 56 coins, you are effectively investing in random coins. In my case, I don't think I have the time and patience to follow more than 2 or 3.

As for looking for something in between, I believe that in the long run there will only be a few big winners, but many big losers. By weeding out the big losers (many of which are obvious), you can get better returns with only a small impact to risk.

In my case, I feel that investing in the 5 (or less) highest quality and least correlated coins is better than investing in 56 (or more) random coins.

1. As a Legendary, the only benefit of merits for me is that I have more to give to others. I wish the merit system would reduce the number worthless posts, but it hasn't so far, though I suppose that the situation would be worse now without it.
2. N/A
3 I'm surprised by the number of merits I have received, but I'm glad people like my posts. I don't think people should get merits because they need them. Nobody really needs merits or ranks in order to read and post.
4. As the initial allocation of smerits gets used up, merited posts will become more rare.
5. I think everybody benefits the most, but members trying to make money by posting will be hurt.