What will be interesting to see is how they keep this going.

Does it generate its own momentum (it hasn't done since early 2013) or does it float like a lead balloon ?

(Put it this way, I for one won't won't be spending any money on finding out   )

Could be. Hadn't thought of that (probably cos it's the most obvious theory !)

If we pick one of the recent litecoin pumps for analysis and go down to the 1-minute chart, check the volume bars. You'll see that the pump happened over a period of 4 minutes.

However, notice something interesting about the first minute: The volume bar is humungous - 220 odd BTC's worth in what must have been 2 or 3 trades at most, possibly even a single trade.

Notice the corresponding minute-1 candle, however. It doesn't even budge. The price doesn't move until the second minute by which time $50,000 worth of litecoin has already been bought going into minute 2.

So somebody was trying to break a massive resistance wall and turn the trend around by sheer brute force. I'll leave it to the politicians and 'industry insiders' in this thread to speculate over who was doing that and why, but it seems like a major piece of market engineering to me. Maybe the Chinese exchanges are giving the market a "stir" to get it moving again.

You can see why they might want to do that from the 1-week chart which kind of puts this pump into perspective. I suppose 100 grand is small beans to them if it can keep your business model alive. (Emphasis: only my speculation. Could be anything).

P.S.

I come from a generally left wing background in terms of family influences and my own political outlook. At the same time I'm not blind and am an enthusiastic logician.  (   Did I invent a new word there ? )

I always think it's hilarious chatting to family members or friends who rage at the "speculative fraud" of the capitalist system, while creaming off their pensions which are only there because of years of traders sweating and working markets to get them the maximum ROI on their salary investments. ok - the traders are only doing it for the bonuses dangled in front of their noses and there is rife systemic financial fraud, but it doesn't change the fact that people lump everything into the one big pot and call it "bad capitalism" when in fact they're happy to take the gains where it suits them.

Thats because in a democracy, you have a personal stake in society simply by existing. You *are* a masternode.

In an monetary or corporate asset, however, you don't have any personal stake in it unless you own it, and even at that your stake is still proportional. If I buy 1 share in Apple for $126, 92 cents, I won't have as much voting power as Mr Icahn who bought $3 billion worth of shares.

If I invest 200 hours in building myself a custom guitar, I'll reasonably have more influence its development than you if you invested 5 minutes putting the strings on.

Is anyone seriously arguing that that's a problematic or even unhealthy state of affairs ? In that case I'd be taking decisions with almost nothing to loose ergo = wreckless meanwhile a big investor (by conventional logic) agonizes over every tiny policy but both our votes count the same ?

It isn't capitalism or any other "ism". It's just plain fairness and commercial logic.

The project goes in whatever direction those who are most interested (and therefore most invested) want it to. Minority investors do get something in return for their minority investment - minority risk. Thats what represents the balance of their holding and the large investor's.

I look at it in terms of inherent "equality": anyone who buys more, gets more.

I don't see what your problem with this is - in fact thats the whole idea of any ROI instrument.

At a technical level, the network doesn't care who owns what. The concept of ownership doesn't exist in crypto - it's just a 1000 nodes doing work for the network and as far as it's concerned they are 1000 distinct nodes.

As far as the 'investing' aspect of it goes, if you invest in mining hardware and then invest all your returns of subsequent years in mining hardware, you'll experience a similar non-linear growth in your returns, as you would with any investment instrument which delivered an ROI.

The other side of the 'coin' is that if you keep investing all your returns in masternodes, you'll never be going ski-ing, relaxing in the bahamas, or taking a trip on Richard Branson's space plane. All your returns are going into doing service for the network which - again - is according to the design objective of this policy.

Once stamp clears its 15 minute chart correction we might see that wall get attacked again.

Then you might get your 249.22 if it gets through the 240 resistance.

It's a brown whotsit. Get your terminology right  

Whoosh....93 BTC on BTCe - munched.

Either there's something wrong with Bitcoinwisdom or the BTCe order book looks strangely empty.

There's no supply above 242 and only about 1400 bitcoins left on the whole order book.

63 BTC there - munched.

Is that where the blue thingmy crosses the brown whotsit going up the way on your chart ?

Euro group drawing up pre-Grexit plans including capital controls to be triggered at the weekend.

Bitcoin adopting full Cyprus configuration.

Gold maneuvering.

Central banks frantically throwing naked shorts at metal markets and finding traders happy to swap their worthless overlevered guvpaper for equally worthless gold paper where another 98 people bought the same bar as you.

Central banks throwing in the towel.

World markets in a bit of a tizz.

$400m pulled from Greek banks today. (I don't think Greece is too worried about that as the Euro banks will pick up the tab if they go bust + exit).

LoL !

You asked for that olcaytu2005  

• because we're at the bottom of a 4 hour correction

• because some people always get bored of waiting on news to get their holdings pumped.

• because whenever there's some other pump going on it pulls capital out of the coins round about it

     


Do you mean "sold" at peak ?


Do you mean the "dump" is over now ?

You mean like this one ?  

Very interesting and thoughtful post b.t.w.


Amazing listening to that guy. The depth of analysis he goes to blows any mainstream commentator I've ever seen OUT....OF.....THE....WATER. He's also pretty consistent through the years.

Good theory !

I hadn't thought of that one. Maybe that is the plan - sh*t.


LoL !  +1

It takes 3-4 days for a main-side chain transaction to complete - i.e. for enough proof of work etc to be done on both sides to secure the transfer.

However, once the sidechain has developed sufficient liquidity, another transaction called "Atomic swaps" can be supported where basically the system facilitates an exchange between 2 parties who park their equivalent holdings and have them swapped by the system. That's probably how most of the exchange would be done and possibly only takes a few minutes.

This isn't micro transaction stuff. This kind of plumbing infrastructure is intended for heavyweight movements I imagine. Lets say you want to move $2 billion dollars anonymously. Your not worried about a few minutes - or even a few days - here or there. You're worried about security.


Bitcoin will solve the scaling problem with payment channels. There comes a point where something gets big enough for economies of scale to justify entirely independent infrastructures layered on top of the blockchain. You would not want to use blockchains for day to day transactions anyway - in a mature financial infrastructure it isn't required for anything other than to record permanence.

It's becoming clearer that bitcoin is establishing itself and will become unassailable (at least, it looks like that to me). There's just far too much adoption, network effect, engineering effort and venture capital being poured into it for it to be knocked off the pedestal now. A bit like Microsoft in the 1980s when they took over DOS. It didn't matter what competitive innovation appeared, they always managed to do just enough to fend it off - even if it was just a boiler plated Windows 3.0 against the Mac's infinitely superior System 7.

At the same time, the advent of new technologies like sidechains is finally an admission that the bitcoin technology (as opposed to the bitcoin store of value) can't support all thats required of a future financial system based on cryptocurrency.

The real question for us therefore is what's the role of altcoins going to be ? Will the crypto-economy want genuinely independent blockchains which interface with bitcoin-reserve through freely floating, unpegged markets or will it consolidate only around alts which are in some way pegged - either mechanically or otherwise.

Right now, Dash is at one third of one percent of Bitcoin's marketcap - peanuts. If the former is the case, then that can surely only grow. If the latter is the case then there may not be much hope for any altcoin of any type other than a pure hedge.

My own view is that if bitcoin explodes, the top 10 alts (at least) will receive a massive boost - even if only as a hedge against catastrophic  issues appearing in Bitcoin / sidechain / treechain networks. Dash is superbly placed in this respect because not only does it have a unique approach to anonymity, it also has an absolutely distinct and powerful technology that continues to deliver new solutions to core cryptocurrency issues in the form of the masternode network. Whatever anyone says, it is delivering on all the original design goals.

Adoption is everything. If you can get a bit of adoption, you're less exposed to speculative volatility. Speculative value can only last so long anyway - can't it. Again, Dash has a big potential advantage here because it has more adoptability "out of the box" than bitcoin does, with its native anonymity and fast confirmation properties. This needs to be levered as much as possible to get some market penetration IMO.

Fun-tastic Peter Todd insights on the politics of diversifying the bitcoin network: (Talks about anonymity issues as well - see from 4:00)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfovKFvnqXk