Dow down again.  for sure we'll get a weekly sell signal by the end of tomorrow unless something gets done quick.

VIX on the rise yet again and looking to break out.  fear is on the rise.

sounds simple enough, but diversify out of some risk assets and into something non-correlated:

Silver moves with gold. Short term up but beyond that, down.

we're gonna get a long awaited gold bounce for the gold bugs, maybe up to the resistance level as drawn:



the mirror image of this should be a drop in $DXY down to its support level:

yep.  i won't ever forget that facepalm pic! 

since we spent some time talking about the blockchain today, it occurred to me that it would be interesting to compare the costs of global accounting with the Bitcoin market cap, given that the blockchain is just one big ledger.  i didn't do much other than google the top 100 accounting firms in the world and eyeball add what appears to be their networth.  the top 10 total approx. $6 billion in value which is more than Bitcoin's $5 billion at this point.  and that's not counting all the other global firms and types of accounting at corporate and small business levels.  if someone wanted to do a more in depth analysis, it would make for a great study:

http://www.brw.com.au/lists/top-100-accounting-firms/2013/

this made me laugh.  but it's true and quite clever.  Daniel is the only guy with any substance at the Nakamoto Institute:

Every government agent has the opportunity and incentive to be an early adopter today, and the greater the incentive, the more likely is it that any government attack will be sabotaged by an early adopter among the agents carrying out the attack.

http://bitcoinist.net/bitcoins-obscene-wealth-disparity-is-a-feature/

i think it is amusing when thinking about a gvt led 51% attack in mining.

you beat me to it, altho it doesn't need to get to the ATH.

all that is needed is for the price to start rising again.

another potential support breaker; oil

i love the smell of fear in the morning:

i've heard this a few times already.

can u give a simple layman's description to why this is?

Dow -255

i think we're making the same argument only in slightly different ways.  i've already expounded on the details as to why i believe this in past posts.

also, i think your statement is only stronger b/c you left out the word "may", whereas i intentionally include it as i can't be totally sure.

Dow -222

imo, the money function is paramount and foremost, which is why i often say "The Blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money".

good sign.  some idiot tried to trigger a sell off with a 1400 BTC sell/short but has failed:

extrapolating forward to the end of week, it looks like we're going to get a weekly (intermediate term) sell signal on the Dow.  that's a significant development as it has been the only holdout from the above indices.  given where we are in the cycles, there is a chance this could be a long term top in the stock mkt.  mind you as i've said before, i don't have the structural evidence yet that this is the case.  former subs will know what i'm talking about.  but i am on high alert.

like i also said, this would be good for Bitcoin, as it would cause a RunToSafety and could also highlight the benefits of non-correlated assets from the general financial world of which there is only one, imo.

trying to make Bitcoin consistent with the RT is like trying to jam a square peg into a round hole.

it'll go in eventually if you hammer it hard enough.

must listen podcast of Robert Murphy by Tom Woods on Bitcoin and the Regression Theorum.  it's a little past halfway in the podcast:

http://www.schiffradio.com/pg/jsp/verticals/archive.jsp

Murphy's Conclusions:

1.  Bitcoin is unique in that it was developed from the start to be a form of money and did not evolve as a commodity.
2.  Bitcoin leapfrogged the barter phase whereby it would have established it's own relative value (intrinsic value) as a commodity in the market place against other items prior to becoming a medium of exchange.
3.  the Regression Theorum is too restrictive as it could not have predicted something as innovative as Bitcoin.

i extend his conclusions to say the Jeffrey Tucker's theory that Bitcoin only has value primarily b/c of it's payment network to be wrong.  Woods alludes to Tucker's theory in the interview but clearly disagrees with it.  Woods makes the correct argument that the reason ppl value the payment network is b/c the Bitcoin currency has value to begin with.  IOW, the payment network would be worthless if Bitcoin the currency was worthless.  this is where Andreas is also wrong when he says Bitcoin the currency is merely the 1st app existing on what is the real value, the blockchain and that they can be separated.  same argument as Tucker's, same wrong conclusion.

also by extension, Konrad Graf's theory that the RT is consistent with Bitcoin's origin is also tenuous, if not wrong, altho not quite as aggregious in its conclusions as Tucker and Andreas.  as far as i'm concerned, Mises is a great economist who was right on just about all things except for the fact that his RT did not, and could not, have been expected to have predicted something like Bitcoin which depends on the Internet and a scale of global communication never before seen in human history.

my final conclusion is the same one i've had since i started with Bitcoin back in 2011, and that is that Bitcoin the currency is inextricably linked to Bitcoin the blockchain and Bitcoin the payment network.