I trade Bitcoin, Robert. I don't touch gold.
Depending on the country you live in I would reconsider that. If not gold checkout silver, copper, or nearly anything that would have actual use in production. There are a lot of "what if" situations where all-in bag holding of bitcoin could seriously leave you in a bad spot but far fewer of those potential situations when talking about precious or industrial metals. I trade Bitcoin, I don't hoard it. Sure, gold has intrinsic value, but that's an insignificant fraction of its price. I don't follow the gold market. Just not my thing. |
|
|
|
^ What's bothering you, stereotype? You feel I'm giving folks here too much credit? Say it in words  What are your thoughts on exchanges using other peoples BTC to short the market? Unregulated and transparent are different things. One is honest. My thoughts are pretty bland: If they can do it without any repercussions, they probably do. That's why regulations exist. Well this may be insightful to others FYI so why cynical about the potential enlightenment of others and beating down on these suggestions. You're only encouraging people not to ask questions and if so, direct them somewhere better. Though I don't see the issue with challenging the ethics of our assumptions I think that others already understand this. To trade Bitcoin, you have to estimate and accept third-party risks. |
|
|
|
...
just keep on walking with the rest of the sheep to your financial slaughtering.
Robert Paulson, straying from the heard doesn't make you a lion. You're still a sheep, albeit a maladjusted one. With a substantially lower life expectancy  you are dead wrong. if you exit paper assets right now and buy into gold/bitcoin when all the other fools still believe the papers are going to make it you are the father of all lions. I trade Bitcoin, Robert. I don't touch gold. You are a wayward sheep, not a lion. Now get back to the heard before you get run over by some passing 18-wheeler. And thank your lucky stars that our Beneficent Reptilian Overlords like lamb chops |
|
|
|
^ What's bothering you, stereotype? You feel I'm giving folks here too much credit? Say it in words What are your thoughts on exchanges using other peoples BTC to short the market? Unregulated and transparent are different things. One is honest. My thoughts are pretty bland: If they can do it without any repercussions, they probably do. That's why regulations exist.  |
|
|
|
...
just keep on walking with the rest of the sheep to your financial slaughtering.
Robert Paulson, straying from the heard doesn't make you a lion. You're still a sheep, albeit a maladjusted one. With a substantially lower life expectancy |
|
|
|
Round 2  Oh yeah.  |
|
|
|
^ What's bothering you, stereotype? You feel I'm giving folks here too much credit? Say it in words |
|
|
|
^  |
|
|
|
mr manipulator played it brilliantly, he held Huobi down and just edged it low enough for his bids on Stamp/Finex to be sold into. Then as soon as they were the price started moving back up and here we are now breaking upwards. Well played and sorry to all the suckers who sold into it lol.
Quoted for future lel. |
|
|
|
Looking forward to seeing how bitcoin market does on a stock market crash.
The debt ceiling drama is coming this March, after they postponed it last year. So there should be some good ingredients for a nice panic stew.
Lol, why wait? Enjoy the hysteria in the Bitcoin market nao |
|
|
|
Lol, another brainiac beat you to it, with a slightly different twist: |
|
|
|
Assuming you're talking to me: I think people in this thread are a bit more realistic in their expectations. Like myself, they understand that players in unregulated markets use every tool at their disposal to their advantage. Why draw attention to something so obvious? |
|
|
|
Lol,  Keep trolling  |
|
|
|
TL;DR:  |
|
|
|
What do you suppose will happen to all this hashpower once block rewards vanish?
*edited.
when block rewards vanish it will be year 2140. ... Until that happy day, let's stop it with "Bitcoin is deflationary" bullshit. At the current rate of ~10%, it's quite the opposite @romerun: You've been safe all the way down from 1k. |
|
|
|
where are the dumpers now? Its your chance for no slippage
Not enjoying the show?  |
|
|
|
...
I asked on IRC if I own every share of RENT on Havelock, if I effectively own all 8 houses and he said yes.
D00d, send me your money and I'll tell you you own the Brooklyn bridge. How old are you? Do you even understand what "no legal recourse" means? Do you understand that Brandon, the owner of this website ...might not be totally honest? Why is it things like this need to be explained? I warned people that his brother Benny's IPO [ticker:HASH] was nothing but fail and AIDS. Many didn't listen, some going as far as to ridicule me. That cost them exactly 95% of their "investment." ~Happy Investing! |
|
|
|
@Melbustus: You're talking about an improvement on gold, not fiat. Controlling the money supply is a useful property of fiat, a tool not available with Bitcoin. TL;DR: Deflation is not "a good thing." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeflationI'm talking about an improvement on both. I understand full well that the branch of monetary economics most popular with governments over the past 100yrs or so has considered an elastic money supply to be beneficial. I also understand why in some depth (econ degree (which should make me naturally hate bitcoin, right?)). The math is indeed enticing, and does work in constrained environments. If central banks (ie, the handful of people running them) always operated with absolute perfection, in near-ideal academic circumstances, there'd be a strong argument for that being the better path (and there would still be strong counterarguments). But there are baser problems. CBs don't react fast enough, don't have perfect information, are influenced by politics whether they're officially "independent" or not, often have multiple competing mandates, and operate in a literally chaotic mathematical system *as if* the system they're actually manipulating is fully describable by a simple linear relationship. So, arguably, the effect is that while they may smooth medium-term business cycles in non-outlier cases, they create far bigger instability, which, while appearing less often than the natural ups and downs of the business cycle (also debatable), have potentially high-impact outcomes that could lead to longer-term systemic problems, and in the worst case, geopolitical issues; ie, war. The knee-jerk "deflation is bad crowd" (thanks for the wikipedia link, how helpful) often doesn't realize that their arguments often hinge on an underlying assumption that the *overall* *longrun* money supply dynamics have an inflationary bias, and are not known to, or predictable by, all economic participants. Thus, when some shock *does* create a deflationary moment, it gets exacerbated by economic actors who freak out because they (correctly) realize that they should take this brief opportunity to hoard. IFF the money supply dynamics were *perfectly* known to all economic participants, inflationary, deflationary, whatever - just known - everyone would be able to allocate against that backdrop, and the "what if" feedback loop wouldn't form with such ferocity. It's the same equation, where you put the elasticity doesn't matter in the long-run. Thus, the other considerations above should be given more weight. Sure, this argument has been presented, on this very forum, many times. Mostly without the "I haz a degree" tacked on for emphasis. The onus of proof is usually on the one cutting against the grain, breaking with the conventional wisdom. No proof was ever offered. At this point, Bitcoin's inflation rate is way higher than USD--that's what mined coin is. Bitcoin supply will continue to inflate throughout our lifetime.
As was pointed out by Satoshi, the price of Bitcoin tends to the cost of mining it (and vice versa).
Mostly the vice-versa part, but moving on... In other words, the price of producing one bitcoin tends to the cost of producing it. This means that if Bitcoin ever becomes substantially more valuable, the value dumped into mining it will proportionally increase.
Do you think that ~10% of the world's wealth is going into maintaining today's fiat "ledger" every year?
The amount spent on mining will ultimately be slightly less than the amount of transaction fees generated by the network. If bitcoin becomes a high-volume system (see Gavin's latest scalability roadmap), transaction fees can stay low relative to transaction size and still keep the network secure. The cost spent on mining would be completely acceptable and rational. I'm not talking about what will happen "ultimately." Ultimately the universe will die, I'm interested with what happens in the interim. What would happen if Bitcoin did become a world currency in our lifetime? Right now, we're generating around 10% of all BTC every year. Forgetting for a moment that this makes Bitcoin the most inflationary of currencies, imagine 10% of the world's total wealth being dumped into BTC mining! Literally, willingly destroyed. Just to keep, as you put it, "a ledger." And no, you can not keep the network secure with "relatively low transaction fees." What does "relatively small" even mean? The threat to the network doesn't diminish once the block rewards are smaller. On the contrary, the threat will grow with BTC market cap. Mining today is done for rewards, not tx fees. The hashrate is still growing. What do you suppose will happen to all this hashpower once block rewards vanish? *edited. |
|
|
|
@Melbustus: You're talking about an improvement on gold, not fiat. Controlling the money supply is a useful property of fiat, a tool not available with Bitcoin. TL;DR: Deflation is not "a good thing." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeflationAt this point, Bitcoin's inflation rate is way higher than USD--that's what mined coin is. Bitcoin supply will continue to inflate throughout our lifetime. As was pointed out by Satoshi, the price of Bitcoin tends to the cost of mining it (and vice versa). In other words, the price of producing one bitcoin tends to the cost of producing it. This means that if Bitcoin ever becomes substantially more valuable, the value dumped into mining it will proportionally increase. Do you think that ~10% of the world's wealth is going into maintaining today's fiat "ledger" every year? this myth again Huffed Mop & Glo instead of getting brainwashed in school, huh? Ain't no foolin' a bright feller like you!  please please, entertain me with your deflation is bad theory and how it applies to Bitcoin It is not my theory, it is a theory agreed upon by the majority of grownups. As much as the egalitarian in me wishes to provide you with the education you so clearly lack, the Good Book warns me about casting my pearls before swine. I'll compromise with a quote from wikip: "Economists generally believe that deflation is a problem in a modern economy because it increases the real value of debt, and may aggravate recessions and lead to a deflationary spiral." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeflationNow go and play. Wrong, it is the theory agreed upon by neo-Keynesians working hand in hand with central banks. ... Impressionable children watching "Money As Debt" on YouTube and suddenly their latent daddy issues galvanize into this wacky sillyness |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
...
