7:1 odds are a bargain, very reasonable indeed to even the slightest bear. you should have taken the bet.
He never offered him 7:1 odds, for one thing. He only mentioned that is what he would be willing to accept after the fact. If you're talking shit that it's NEVER going to break 435 again, putting your money where your mouth is would be taking pretty much any bet for any odds that came your way, assuming you weren't bullshitting, which he obviously was. Not taking an even money bet on something you perceive to be a lock is ridiculous, so his mouth said "never below 435" but his money said "eh, like 20% chance of not under 435." See the difference? Which part of the Call to Bet was difficult to understand?  Based on my research, I don't believe we will see 435 ever again (Bitstamp). If someone is willing to bet (I naturally expect much better than 1:1 for me), PM please. Chart1 & Chart2. This is just the 2013-7-18 again. No looking back (when you least expect it). Perhaps you fit in the description in my Lamentation...  EPILOGUE
It is difficult to read the thread because of so many posts, especially if you are of the type that never checks the sources and relies on people. But then you will also get the objectively wrong idea of what is happening. Here I wanted to have a nice private bet with anyone who thinks that breaking 435 is imminent and is willing to give me great odds for defending it.
Have you noticed that not a single person with high standing has criticized me? It is the same trolls over and over, twisting simple and clear words, or teens with fingers hard-wired to bypass the brain. |
|
|
|
Looks good. Take my money!!!
I am currently making the excel with all the player aids, showing the points for each slot (should it win) automatically etc. Perhaps I get it ready even today! Mind sending your email address as a PM so you could betatest it?  |
|
|
|
many readers don't understand the whole concept and go out screaming "rpietila was wrong" every time I say anything, no matter what probability is attached.
The vultures love having someone to blame. they crave it. they also crave promises. and free lunch. A logical proposition of "something is true with 100% certainty" does not have any practical meaning in the realm of probabilities, because to say it would entail attaching infinitely long bounds or infinitesimally short timeframe to it. - I can say with 100% certainty that Bitcoin price in USD is between 0 and infinity at any point forward. - I can say with 100% certainty that at the moment of observing, it is between 400 and 500. - I can say with 99% certainty, that it will not crash to 100 or rise to 1000 in the following 24 hours (average price of that time), and anyone can call me by offering better odds than the prediction, eg. 50:1. Still there would be practical reasons not to take the bet, eg. overhead, taxes or regulations. That's why I'd like to bet such that I win a lot with small P and lose a little with high P |
|
|
|
rpietila, when you say you expect the price to multiply 10 fold this year, which price do you start from? - do you mean the lowest price of the year, circa 350 I think it was.
The exponential trend at the close of the year points to about $3-$12 per m BTC. We're pretty running out of time. As months pass we get less and less chances to go higher. For me, it seem price makes lower highs, and lower lows... Bearish for the next 6 months at least (which goes to end of 2014) 2010, 2013 were stellar years. 2011 quite good 2012 decent 2009 price did not go up, but if you mined coins, you were hardly disappointed. The years are different. After closing 2013 above the trend, we might close 2014 below the trend. But even then I'd suggest $3000 and a new ATH. On the other hand, after 2010-11 megabubble (6400x increase in price), the hangover lasted for 20 months, so it is not entirely ruled out, because some claim that Bitcoin's growth is slowing. That is why it is so interesting. I refrain from making any percentage predictions for now, because many readers don't understand the whole concept and go out screaming "rpietila was wrong" every time I say anything, no matter what probability is attached. And here is the UPDATED 2014 prediction contest, which REALLY determines who can predict and who is just breathing hot air. |
|
|
|
rpietila, when you say you expect the price to multiply 10 fold this year, which price do you start from? - do you mean the lowest price of the year, circa 350 I think it was.
The exponential trend at the close of the year points to about $3-$12 per m BTC. |
|
|
|
Nobody compelled me to compose memoirs, so they are there for a purpose. Perhaps I will tell, perhaps not. |
|
|
|
Rpietila
Water under the bridge. You are a smart guy and have been right alot before. Given current conditions, including 1 day macd turning down, china falling apart, breach of major supports - i woulld be very intersted in hearing from both of you thoughts on the next 72 hours.
The low is reached when everybody thinks it will go lower. The explosive uptrend will start when everybody are sure that the low has been reached (typically months before). Most of us await a new low or at least retest of 340. So it will not go to the moon yet, but perhaps it means that the low is in place. I have no idea what will happen this weekend. |
|
|
|
Without any prior introduction, I posted the following. Because no prior info was given, this must be treated as the sole expression of my wish: Based on my research, I don't believe we will see 435 ever again (Bitstamp). If someone is willing to bet (I naturally expect much better than 1:1 for me), PM please. Chart1 & Chart2. This is just the 2013-7-18 again. No looking back (when you least expect it). Keywords: - (implicit) in BTC - (implicit) long duration at least 3 months (to adequately model "ever") - trigger condition breaching 435 - someone (anyone can take it!) - send me PM- much better than 1:1 odds for meWindjc's proposal: In 2014-3-30, the exponential trendline model gave a buy signal at $460 and the price has been unable to go below it for any extended time even after 4 weeks.
In 2013-11-23 it gave a sell signal at $872 (SlipperySlope's 0.40 confidence) or 2013-11-28 at $1,056 (my 0.45 confidence). It was also unable to stay above it for any extended time.
What odds do you want? As I would be betting to win less valuable coin, you shouldn't get much better than 50%. I think you will offer an unreasonable bet so that you don't have to make one at all. But let me know. Unreasonable? It's $30 to the trigger line (was $20 when I first called it). Are you willing to give 1:1 odds to me that price will hit $495 some point in the future? Of course not, you would not take that even at 10:1. So don't expect the same of me. Lol. You didn't even make an offer. Why am I not surprised? Since you are too chicken s***  to make a bet, here's one for you. Bet $50k with of btc Duration 30 days If we hit 435 on Stamp and don't hit 500 I win. If we hit 500 and not 435 you win If we hit both or neither its a draw. And we both donate $1000 worth of btc each to charity. Keywords: - in USD - short duration 30 days - trigger condition breaching 435 and breaching 500, with both/neither considered a tie (windjc's estimation 90% this will end in a tie) - aimed for me only, with insult - public- 1:1 odds, with charity clause* * EPILOGUE It is difficult to read the thread because of so many posts, especially if you are of the type that never checks the sources and relies on people. But then you will also get the objectively wrong idea of what is happening. Here I wanted to have a nice private bet with anyone who thinks that breaking 435 is imminent and is willing to give me great odds for defending it. This windjc turned into a public challenge directed against me, with different terms in every 6 parameters that are important in a bet. The bet itself seemed +EV for me so I decided to go on with it, but in the end there was not enough mutual agreement. As was perhaps the intention, windjc collected "fame" because I did not took his bet (why? do I also get points every time I propose things to people when it is not in their interest to comply?  ). In the meanwhile nobody took my bet (the one which i would have unequivocally lost last night). Nobody was even interested. I had estimated that probability for 435 holding should be 10% in general public's eyes, but I thought it was 20%. So I would have taken 7:1 odds for me, and lost almost straight away. |
|
|
|
Dat wall at 435 has scared everybody for like 3 hours already  |
|
|
|
Here is a thought experiment: imagine that tomorrow everybody somehow "knows" that the price of bitcoin would never increase, but that the price of bitcoin would never decrease either. It is simply a fact that 1 BTC will forever buy the same basket of goods. Would you expect world-wide demand to hold bitcoin to increase or decrease?
Increase, by a large multiple! Bitcoin is more useful than fiat currency, and as its value would forever be stable against goods (like gold's value is, even though gold cannot be transacted), there would be no risk in holding bitcoins. I would imagine that perhaps 10,000x today's number of bitcoin would be demanded by the market. |
|
|
|
I don't know what you are talking about. I propose to do an IPO for initial distribution and you tell me that i don't know the difference between shares and currency, are you drunk?
Quoted for lulz. I think I need to put this to my sig |
|
|
|
|
Is there a thread where we could talk about the interesting concepts of distributing the currency (assuming that the network security is a non-issue)? For example:
Satoshi gets 100,000 units of the new currency. Everybody that applies for his share after him gets an ever-declining amount. No new currency creation, only way to amass it is to buy in open market.
The idea of IPO or one-week premine just does not fly, because nobody would have the incentive to join the system where random blokes own all the money and others have to buy it from them. Bitcoin's mining schedule is pretty much perfect in this sense.
|
|
|
|
Yes. I see. So this brings us to the problem of how to create the monetary base then?
- Loan it into existence (current fiat banking system). Most evil and insidious way that indebts and consequently enslaves most everyone.
- Create it out of thin air and give to the early adopters/whoever (premine). Unfair, uneconomical and does not work in practice.
- Mine it, with each unit of currency created against an equal value of real resources wasted (Bitcoin).
Creating a bitcoin spin-off is unethical because you are giving away most of the value to the already rich bitcoin early adopters. Creating entire money supply out of thin air and give to the early adopters is ok but i think the best solution would be to launch an Etherum style IPO to raise money for developing and promoting the project. Shares are not currency. (Oh my. In the "ancient times" 100 years ago a banker would need to know the difference between a mortgage and a real bill, since the former was not currency but the latter was. Now people are in all seriousness propagating shares as currency   ) |
|
|
|
Yes. I see. So this brings us to the problem of how to create the monetary base then?
- Loan it into existence (current fiat banking system). Most evil and insidious way that indebts and consequently enslaves most everyone.
- Create it out of thin air and give to the early adopters/whoever (premine). Unfair, uneconomical and does not work in practice.
- Mine it, with each unit of currency created against an equal value of real resources wasted (Bitcoin).
-Airdrop it to current BTC holders (Peter R's spinoff proposition, which is awesome imho). Yes, I also think it is very nice. The debate whether to steal somebody's share in the process is also very interesting and reveals much of the designers. (Not taking sides though). |
|
|
|
|
Yes. I see. So this brings us to the problem of how to create the monetary base then?
- Loan it into existence (current fiat banking system). Most evil and insidious way that indebts and consequently enslaves most everyone.
- Create it out of thin air and give to the early adopters/whoever (premine). Unfair, uneconomical and does not work in practice.
- Mine it, with each unit of currency created against an equal value of real resources wasted (Bitcoin).
|
|
|
|
|
According to the TOS in reddit (last page) it is really so.
|
|
|
|
|
The main argument you've been proposing and I've been attacking is the blessing of new coins given to existing holders.
If there is something more to it, please bring it to the table.
|
|
|
|
Eg.with Auroracoin the slope is already negative. Linear regression could not prevent it. Hm, that points out a problem with using linear regression on all the monthly points. Suppose two items A, B that start out both at the same price 1$. Item A then grows steadily to 1000$ over 2 years. Item B shoots up to 2000$ on the first month and then decays steadily to 1000$ in the next 23 months. Linear regression will give a positive slope for item A and a negative slope for item B, even though both increased by a factor of 1000 over that time span. On the other hand, consider item C that starts out at 1000$, drops to 1$ on the first month and recovers steadily to 1000$ over the next 23 months. Linear regression would give positive slope. These examples do not prove that linear regression is "wrong", but should make one aware that its meaning is not what one may think. " Your results are not right. They are not even wrong." --some famous scientist reviewing the work of some colleague Do you happen to like it in the academia when somebody who has no experience on the subject that you have been researching for months, uses childish non-real world examples to prove that in some cases the model you have been researching and using with incredible precision, would give strange results? I consider such a person a menace, but luckily Bitcoin will teach him. |
|
|
|
|
You are not making any sense. In your model, there is no work that the "PoS" does. So all coin creation serves only to inflate the value of all coins. Is there anyone in the thread who knows what he is talking or do I have to conclude that all "PoS" is smoke and mirrors?
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, everybody will get an advance notice of 3 days.
OP updated to show the current, perhaps final, rules!!
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
