...
Also, this year, a lot more trained traders are on the market, bigger money is circulating, and financial derivatives are being put in place. ... One thing most here overlook is it was very difficult to short Bitcoin until about a year ago. Now it's a thing. Shorting and penny stock together = Bitcoin market  |
|
|
|
...I met an old friend recently, working in IT, he heard about Bitcoin, but didn't think it was money. He also had no idea what was wrong with the current system. ...
You used to have reasonable, well-informed friends. Maybe. He complained that a few companies he worked for went bankrupt during recent economic woes and the one he is currently at doesn't look very stable either. He had no idea that the debt-spiral model of today's fiat system was the cause though. He has now. ... Try to understand that repeating hollow, meaningless nonsense, no matter how convincing it seems to you, is still nothing but repeating hollow, meaningless nonsense. You'll get a "+1!!!!1!" from other loons, but sane folks will just point fingers and laugh  |
|
|
|
...I met an old friend recently, working in IT, he heard about Bitcoin, but didn't think it was money. He also had no idea what was wrong with the current system. ...
You used to have reasonable, well-informed friends. |
|
|
|
>artificially pumped If pumping means "artificially inflating the price," does "artificially pumped" mean doing it naturally? |
|
|
|
...
Why would you make more than one transaction for a purchase? The values might come from different addresses, which resembles you metaphor of 10 10$ bills.
Because I control more than one address? Because tx fees are ridiculously small? Because it costs nothing to create an addy? Why wouldn't I, considering that folks like you equate # of transactions with influx of users? Profit. If you want to make fake data, you can also just send the same amount forward and back between two addresses to increase USD volume. That doesn't make that metric better in any way. Sure. Are you suggesting that the USD volume data could also be manipulated and likely is? I'm with you on that one, brah @inca: Your prognosticatin' skillz in this thread are on par with your ability to read the market. I don't think, anybody does this in a large enough scale to really have a significant impact on the statistics. People often tell me that all statistics/studies are fake, when a statistic/study doesn't fit their gut instinct, but sorry, the statistic/case study is still better than your gut instinct. When all media, all statistic, all studies are fake, on what do you base your opinion/knowledge? Conspiracy theory sites on the internet? You asked me why I would do X, I have answered you. Without thanking me, you went on to offer other means of manipulating data. I have agreed with you. Now you're suggesting I'm a conspiracy theorist  I'm not saying the statistics are fake, only that they don't mean what you think they mean. |
|
|
|
Never gets old...   |
|
|
|
...
Why would you make more than one transaction for a purchase? The values might come from different addresses, which resembles you metaphor of 10 10$ bills.
Because I control more than one address? Because tx fees are ridiculously small? Because it costs nothing to create an addy? Why wouldn't I, considering that folks like you equate # of transactions with influx of users? Profit. If you want to make fake data, you can also just send the same amount forward and back between two addresses to increase USD volume. That doesn't make that metric better in any way. Sure. Are you suggesting that the USD volume data could also be manipulated and likely is? I'm with you on that one, brah @inca: Your prognosticatin' skillz in this thread are on par with your ability to read the market. |
|
|
|
...
Why would you make more than one transaction for a purchase? The values might come from different addresses, which resembles you metaphor of 10 10$ bills.
Because I control more than one address? Because tx fees are ridiculously small? Because it costs nothing to create an addy? Why wouldn't I, considering that folks like you equate # of transactions with influx of users? Profit. |
|
|
|
Just bought a few more coins on circle. Lots of 'this user is currently ignored' trolling the threads this morning. I guess that means we are to be moving up shortly!
To be that clever  |
|
|
|
Get on my level   Stay tasty, humans!  ~Your Beneficent Reptilian Overlords. |
|
|
|
... But bitcoin is looking very bullish imho.
Yeah, all the way from $1200. No wonder you're h.  |
|
|
|
 waiting for bitcoin to join teh party. Internet? Stay on topic pl0x! Hang tough, Warriors!
FU! im not the one talking poneys and reptilians. On the contrary,  |
|
|
|
The cool thing about building power lines vs. building ASICs is power lines don't become obsolete in 5 months  And you can get the taxpayer to fund them, because they have a NIMBY attitude towards power plants. Lol @ trotting out ur tax hobby horse when you got nothing. GG, bro! |
|
|
|
Thinking this very much too - and considering just how much positive the growth of fundamentals has seemed over the past year, I'm very much looking forward to the adjustment.
In the last half year, the use of Bitcoin hasn't changed much. See Estimated transaction volume in USD, which has been flat for six months now. There's been a lot of talk about growth in usage, but it's not happening. If you want to know the usage, why do you see the volume in USD? That chart shows how many wealth in moving. The number of transactions should be a better meassure of dinamism. https://blockchain.info/es/charts/n-transactionsUSD volume represents the value of the transactions. The number of transactions means little--if you buy something from me for $100, I don't care if you hand me a $100 bill once, or hand me $10 bill ten times. |
|
|
|
waiting for bitcoin to join teh party. Internet? Stay on topic pl0x! Hang tough, Warriors!   |
|
|
|
Incidentally, yes wealth inequality is a problem, in that 99% of the people on the planet do 100% of the producing but only get to keep 40% of what they produce, while the other 1% that produce nothing, get to keep 60% based entirely on the luck of what family they were born into.
So am I right in discerning that the problem for you is not in wealth disparity per se, but specifically in wealth disparity at birth? If two people are born with equal wealth and opportunity but one works hard while the other squanders their resources then is it ok for the more productive person to become wealthier? Is it ok for him to then afford his children a comparative advantage in wealth and opportunity? Might it be that the root problem behind wealth inequality is in the love of one's children? If this justifies anything, it justifies everything. Those in power today--bankers, politicians, etc.--all either worked for their position, inherited them, or both. This really is the best of all possible worlds |
|
|
|
^ The cool thing about building power lines vs. building ASICs is power lines don't become obsolete in 5 months |
|
|
|
...Bitcoin has far further to run from here. Newbies.
Keep running, filthy Bitcoiners. There's no place to hide!
 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
