You have to be very naive or worse to think that pharmaceuticals want to kill their customers. What they want is for them to live long so they can sell them lots of drugs.

We could take you seriously if you paid attention to reality when it does not coincide with what you predict, as always happens, but since you insist on making a fool of yourself, we can only laugh.

I still think we will pass $100k this year, provided we don't have too much more catastrophic news like the miners in China.

I have commented in other threads, although Saylor's idea doesn't seem like a bad idea in principle, I think that popularizing it can lead to disastrous results.

I don't think the masses are going to borrow as Saylor says. What he says is what a lot billionaires do: they create or acquire first-class pristine assets, never or almost never sell them and borrow against them. What he also says, and I don't see as much emphasis on it, is that they do it with a low debt to equity ratio, which allows them to ride out downturns and bear markets.

I believe that if this becomes popular, the masses will borrow at a dangerous debt to equity ratio, which could lead us to fall into the very problems that Bitcoin was created to solve.

I was simply ironizing because the defenders of communism claim that what Stalin did was not true communism, and we could apply the same to others. But when they all end up the same, I think there is something wrong with the system itself, not that it is a good idea misapplied (repeatedly), but that it is a bad idea.


Actually, what I believe is that humans tend to commit excesses, regardless of the political system in place, so it is better to counteract excesses. If extreme capitalism is implemented with hardly any rules, society ends up being like a jungle and I believe that precisely what characterizes us humans is that through intelligence we have been able to go far beyond our natural instincts.

As to whether it is better for them to be left-wing or not, I think we might not agree on the basis. Do you call economies where public spending accounts for 50% of GDP or more capitalist? In many European countries that is what happens, and I would not call them very capitalist. More capitalist than North Korea, that's for sure, but I see them as quite intervened. So I would say that maybe we don't share the basic vision, because I understand that you in general see developed nations as quite capitalist, and that's why you think they have to moderate it with regulations, etc., and I see them as a little bit too intervened and with too much state weight in the economy.

I was thinking something like this when I was reading the OP. Anyway, I don't think bitcoin has to follow a deterministic price pattern that behaves as you say either. What we know is that so far, it has behaved that way, but in the future it may change. Mind you, I see it as more logical and with more basis than what the OP says.

The news is good, as is all news of this style. Although in my case I would not deposit Bitcoin in a bank, you know, not your keys...

I wonder if banks accepting Bitcoin deposits are going to give any advantage, interest or anything. Banks that allow you to leave gold in a safe deposit box charge you for it but in return they give you more security than if you keep it at home. As for depositing Bitcoin, I don't see any advantage.

You are lying. There are no future profits. Anyone who understands basic calculations knows that in the long term there are only losses, even if in the short term you can have positive results.

There would be much to discuss here. Hitler was not a faithful believer in economic liberalism either. What you express is a debatable political belief:

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian


Sure, sure, neither Pol Pot, Mao etc. were not true communists either.


I agree.


I agree 100%

Just because I have a long-term vision. I don't care about short-term fluctuations in price. I care about what Bitcoin is and how important it will be in the world in the years to come.

Yes there is. Fasting works for everybody.


You and suchmoon agree on the same idea, as do others who have commented in the thread, but you are not right. Your model does not explain why insulin makes you fat even if you consume the same calories.


Dr. Fung's latest video is precisely about that idea.

How To Lose Weight (Controlling Body Set Weight) | Jason Fung



Your model can't explain this:



Or this:




Apart from individual variability, I understand that the older you get, when you have been eating a carbohydrate-based diet 5-6 times a day for many years, the worse and worse the machine works.

Yes, I've said that many times. Current guidelines prescribe a maximum of 800 IU. It gives me food for thought. There can always be calculation errors, but this one, which has been known for a long time, leads to underdosing. As I commented in the thread on vitamin D, this leads to higher sales of medicines and more profits for the pharmaceutical industry.

Btw, does anyone know why I can't open pubmed articles? I've tried with different browsers, I've also googled about the subject and I can't solve it.

I have just seen a video and I don't know if you are referring to this:

Will Cain: Democrats are hiding from their own racist creation


Actually many people do not know that there was not so much difference between Hitler and Stalin.

If we were talking about a moderate European-style socio-democrat, there would be.

In the case of Coinbase and Binance I see it as much more improbable, but the phrase "not your keys..." does not only apply to the fact that you can be scammed. Coinbase may decide to freeze your account for legal reasons, for example. If you have your keys, you can go abroad with your coins and nobody can freeze them.

I'll tell you what I think: I have looked at your post history and I see that you write very little. From May 25th to June 10th you didn't write anything, and the post you wrote that day was to apply for this campaign. The next post was 4 days later to re-apply.

I don't know what Brainboss will think, as he is the manager and has the last word but in general a campaign manager will not like your post history. They usually want it to show that you regularly write decent posts.

Then I saw that you wrote a few posts yesterday. In my opinion if you continue like this, writing decent posts regularly, even 2 or 3 a day on average, you will increase your chances of being accepted in campaigns.

It is a pity that on the one hand this kind of news gives cryptocurrencies a bad name and on the other hand how some poor people have been scammed. What we should take away from this is the "not your keys...".

Although Bitcoin is the most profitable asset of the last 10 years, there are many people who have lost money with it. They are the ones who bought at $60K and are selling now. Or those who years ago bought at $100 and then sold at $40. A lot of people don't see the big picture and get caught up in emotions.

If I'm reading the chart correctly, the answer would be no. As of today, there is a divergence between what the model predicts and the price on the downside, but in the past there was on the upside and the price returned to the median.

Another thing is whether we doubt that the model is correct or not, but as a model that explains quite reliably the behavior of the price as a function of supply, I do not think that the price today falsifies it.

No man, no. You seem to refuse to understand. It's a hormone problem, it's not an algorithm. That's what this thread is about.

The garbage communist discourse you express does not take into account that everyone had the same opportunities to buy when it was very cheap. When it was worth $1 or $.0.10.

Believing that garbage speech leads to believe that we can not do anything against our destiny because if we are not rich we are going to be poorer and poorer, when the truth is that there are people of modest economies that have made real fortunes with the Bitcoin.

Then you also fail to take into account that most of these addresses do not belong to individuals but to exchanges:

The richest Bitcoin addresses are owned by cryptocurrency exchanges. Collectively, these addresses hold less than 3.5 percent of all bitcoins.

Since I don't buy what you say, I will continue to buy Bitcoin.

Me neither.


No, no strawman arg. I thought you were smart enough to understand hyperbole. I see I was wrong.