You could have stuck a fork in BofA years ago, if it weren't for the bailouts they've received.  I doubt bitcoin will get such tender loving care.

I was referring to your comment August 18, here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1493.msg464673#msg464673

(I cited it in my earlier comment, as a hypertext link.)

No one actually knows how money originated, and that essay doesn't do anything to illuminate the question.  It is rife with glib assumptions.   I like David Graeber's theory on the origin and original purpose of money, as it is at least based on observations of actual human cultures, as opposed to the bold evidence-free theorizing Szabo indulges in.  But even it is highly speculative on this question.

  And that's fine, but has anyone established that this is actually a better predictor than other methods?  I mean, human judgement was (maybe still is, haven't been following), the most accurate method for protein structure prediction, but that didn't stop people from testing the accuracy of those predictions in competitions with machine prediction methods...

Do you know what went wrong with your August prediction?

Bwahahaha.  With the way it's inflating, that's a LOT of bitcoins...

Then what's it good for?  Are there any objective, systematic analyses of the predictive powers of these indicators that I could read?

Thanks, netrin.  If I understand correctly, in mid to late August there was an even stronger "bullish indication" by this reasoning, because the MAC(26,12) was above its 9-day EMA, and the price steadily dropped.  It appears that S3052 did indeed read a bullish signal at that time, which must have been somewhat painful. 

All the MACD framework seems to indicate is that there was a recent reversal in a short-term trend (in this case, the bounce from ~$4.8 around Sep 17.)  This does not seem very convincing to me.

I haven't read the RSI wiki page, yet, but appreciate the pointer.  I will look at it later.

This is interesting.  Where can I read about how this principle was established?

S3052, just repeating because my questions might have been obscured by the fact that they are at the bottom of the last page, below some images:

What do "MACD (26,122): -0.753", "EXP(9): -0.851", "Divergence: 0.098", "RSI(14): 34.72" mean?  What is bullish about this divergence measurement?

I'm afraid this petition was fairly unwise.  Public legitimacy is probably the most fundamental source of government power, but control of the coin of the realm plays an absolutely critical role, too.  Explicitly presenting bitcoin as competition for the coin of the realm while it is still small enough to squash like a bug is really asking for trouble.

People have tried circulating alternative currencies, sometimes with great success for their participants (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C3%B6rgl#The_W.C3.B6rgl_Experiment), but governments will always shut them down as a threat to their power.  If bitcoin gets serious traction, it will face this problem, too, but there is no need to invite the trouble in early.

  The USG's secret plan to destroy the bitcoin economy isn't.  Duh.

I get a breakeven time (at current BTCUSD exchange rate, 0.09c/KWh, and current ebay auction price of $550) of 2 years, 266 days, assuming 50% profitability decline per year.

dunand is pointing you in the right direction.  Bring the system back up and immediately check the messages in the files in /var/log (you can see the most recently modified files with "ls -lt | head -50".  The time it reports next to each file is the time the file was last modified.  You can read a file with "less <filename>."  Do ">" to go to the end of the file.)  Report back anything interesting you find there.

A plausible argument can be made for "support" at this level, based on the fact that it has bounced from here twice now.  Pretty thin evidence, though, and completely retrospective.  I have no idea what the basis for those bounces was, and whether it still applies now.

  Making a better bitcoin is precisely why I think it would be good.  Fresh start, do something more innovative next time.  Innovation would be easier from a small user-base (less concern for backwards-compatibility, etc.)

So basically, on the basis of no evidence that you've deigned to share with us whatsoever, you're dismissing my opinion as motivated by pecuniary and deceitful purposes?

Yeah.  Your bitcoinz.  I can haz them?

The Chinese stock market is just as much a crook's game as stock markets everywhere else, though.  Not where you want to be putting the majority of your savings.

That NSA computer is oooold, though.

I believe you.  Just pointing out my reactions to your marketing as a potential (very unlikely) buyer, in the hope it might be useful to you.

  I think it would be great if the exchange rate of bitcoin crashed to zero, and only the true believers were left.  If that happens, it means that bitcoin as it is today (basically a simple replacement for conventional currency, conceived of and used as a medium of exchange in essentialy the same way) was a failed experment, but there are many modifications to it which would be very exciting, and much easier to establish with a small user base.