Its like a GHOST town in China right now!!! </sarcasm>   |
|
|
|
I documented in the thread from which those quotes originate. You can click the link on a quote to go to thread (and post) where it comes from.
Specifically a recent Oxford study predicts 45% of all existing jobs will be lost to automation by 2033. This confirms we are in a period of radical technological unemployment. This appears to happen every 78 years. The difference is this time we are all tied together in socialism by central banks. You can re-read my quotes from the prior post to weigh the gravity of this thud of a realization.
If you are arguing that automation will lead to long-term unemployment, I think you are wrong. Authors have written extensively on this subject since the 1900s (and perhaps earlier). Many were worried that machines would replace men. What we have seen is that automation simply results in higher efficiency and unforseen job opportunities on the automation side. This seems obvious to me, so you must be arguing something else despite what I'm reading here. He is arguing something else. He is arguing that collectivism is nearing the point where it causes general economic collapse. Furthermore he is arguing that when such a collapse occurs the populace will demand yet more collectivism in tragic feedback loop. Hmm... I skimmed because I agree with a lot of the beginning so I am clearly missing something at the end. I look at the emerging knowledge economy and see amazing individualism. And by that I mean a few individuals are capable of projecting their knowledge across the entire globe easily, and thereby reap the benefits of a global market. The effects of this are the newly minted Google, Facebook, twitter, etc billionaires... and likely a lot of others that are lower profile. This is pretty obvious for knowledge based services. Automatic scaling of AWS nodes or Google apps lets IT services focus solely on delivering the information service, not all the manual details of deploying server farms, etc. Outside of IT, production has become a commodity service -- easily obtained for relatively little $. So the effort to create/store/ship a physical embodiment is no longer a limitation for a company. You can shop for factories to do turnkey production of electronics and plastic/metal casing, foam packaging, etc that you specify via common electronic and 3d design file formats. And then you can have those products warehoused at Amazon or another drop-shipment company. No need to see them yourself. For example, I forget whether it was Sirius or XM, but at one point the company had 100 employees and was delivering satellite radio service worldwide (or at least that is what I remember... not going to verify it now...) |
|
|
|
CoinCidental: I know there is a lot of buying pressure. I only wanted to post this at a public place because I've seen this pattern in many different tradable instruments, from S&P futures on 1 minute candlesticks to Single stocks on weekly candlesticks!
adamstgBit: It might not behave "right" as it is in an early growth phase, I agree with you. But technical analysis can work in this situation too. We'll see how this evolves pretty soon.
If the $1200 level is broken at a heavy volume, consider this analysis as failed. I only used a small part of my holdings for this.
I have noticed strange happenings WRT bitcoin and volume. In particular, bitcoin has high volume corrections and then low volume returns, even in a bull market. I've seen this pattern so many times that I think that volume based analysis derived from stocks may be faulty. This is often followed by oscillations (a triangle for you TA people) and then upwards breakout. One explanation may be that on every down tick some coins go into long-term wallets. This creates a lower supply at these previous price points. Without that supply the return must necessarily be low volume. |
|
|
|
Wow. Bitcoinity.org switched to mBTC as default!  bullish as fuck!!!!!!!!!!!!! I switched to BitcoinWisdom a couple months back. Last week I was requesting this same thing, and the owner over there simply said: "The unit has to be the same as in the exchange" (paraphrasing, can't find the actual post) It struck me then, he is 100% right. Having BTC at one place and m BTC at others is kind of (super) messy, and prone to provoke mistakes. We need the exchanges to adopt this change, or we need a Bitcoinity and everyone else to have just a little bit more patience, won't be long now. I agree 100% though, this is uber bull for marketing and spreading Bitcoin, we need it ASAP. I just wished the community could pull it off in a more coordinated consensual fashion. I disagree. This is a not a top-down organization but a peer-to-peer. Everybody can switch when they want to, hopefully soon. Its not very hard to see the m in front of the BTC. Kudos to bitcoinity for being the first! |
|
|
|
Only 1000 persons with 1000 coins or more? I think that in the 1k range we have more than that, I'd say at least 2000 persons. Just remember that 1000 coins just costed $12.000 in January 2013.
I think it's probably a pretty accurate estimation, it's almost certainly less than 2000, based on what we know of distribution patterns. It is statistics like this that highlight just how small the bitcoin community/economy really are. Even with all the press and attention we have had this year, and stories of people "striking it rich", we have still only created about 1000 new millionaires. I truly doubt Bitcoin has created 1000 new millionaires if you know what I mean... |
|
|
|
|
I think that there could be a bunch of people who have wisely diversified into multiple addresses. So I think your data may be inaccurate -- you can't really tell if there are 500 or 2500 1k BTC holders. Could be a constant factor or more likely the normal distribution is thinner on the blockchain than it is in reality.
But I think the essence of your argument and analysis holds...
|
|
|
|
Recently, Bitcoin market cap (i.e. total value of all Bitcoins issued) reached the $2 billion mark, surpassing small countries like Liberia and Guinea.
This should have been obvious.
isn't it $20 billion? The authority for this is http://www.coinometrics.com/bitcoin/bmixGo to the bottom of the page and select Full Data Table Bitcoin is currently 71 in the world (out of 191 countries) between azerbijan and lithuania burma at 12 million? okay, who wants to go in with me and buy burma? Hmm, you know what, that's actually an interesting proposition. It's probably hard to buy a country using national fiat currencies, no matter how rich you are, but with bitcoins... you just might be able to do it (i.e., pay out the government + military to leave the country / hand over control). Maybe we will see a brave new world of corporations taking over nations now that they have a financial vehicle with which to do it. I know these comparisons are tongue-in-cheek, but just for those who are confused as far as I can figure you couldn't buy a country for its GDP. I mean, even if you COULD buy a country... you couldn't buy it for its GDP. It wouldn't cost that little. That would be like buying a company for its earnings. But as we all know stocks trade for a PE multiple. Makes sense because you are buying ALL future earnings output, not just one year. So I think a PE of 10 would be ok esp. for these underperforming countries... So Burma could go for 120million... that's way too... well... hmm... |
|
|
|
When it breaks the gold price it will be like a knife cutting through hot butter.
Or a hot knife through butter. Whichever I guess  Lol.... A cannon ball can easily move through hot butter. What about a knife made of butter cutting through a block of butter?  It WAS "like a knife cutting through hot butter"... when the knife was removed the fluid reformed unchanged. Oh well... there's always this week. |
|
|
|
That's one problem with mathematical models; they are very bad at predicting events that exceed their initial structure -- like predicting the sudden adoption in the world's 2nd largest economy. But the human brain is amazing at imagining the world and projecting a future. A combination of both techniques works best... China is coming...
The engine is firing on more cylinders -- USA, Europe, Asia. I feel that the last "bubble" was mostly driven by USA. Of course Europe was a major player but rallies occurred during USA day time (mostly). In contrast this 65+ rally seemed to be USA, 130+ rally was pulled by Asia, but now the Second Market fund, Canada ATM news, etc is also driving the exchanges up 24 hrs a day. Note how major psychological barriers are just blown through -- for every barrier 1500, 2000 CNY, 200,250,300USD, 200EU, there are 2 other currencies where that level is irrelevant.
Africa, India, and much of South America are still missing. They will be instrumental for the next one...
The question is, "will this difference translate into a sustainable rally at these rates?" I think the answer is that it will be sustainable at higher rates, but of course in the end there will be a blow-off. There always is. Personally, I'm hoping for a daily-pullback today, I think we need one...
Recently, by correlating hacks, DDOS, etc. with dumps you can get an idea of how well the manipulators are doing. Not that well, it seems. People seem to be looking at the other (still up) exchanges and not panicking. This decreases volatility dramatically. Actually, no. The human brain does a decent job with linear models, but is horrid at exponential projection. I am quite optimistic about the computer models' ability to compete, particularly with multiple data streams. I never said anything about the human brain and exponential projection. "A combination of both techniques works best..." is what I said. I predicted China in May, and the macro-economic ramifications a month ago. These predictions were given at a time when they were economically valuable. I thought "uncle..." meant you were open to a reassessment of your prediction methodology so I just thought I'd opine... |
|
|
|
It's the holidays, nobody cares about Bitcoin. This wasn't just a "weekend" crash, this was/is a crash on the largest consumer spending days of the year. Clearly proves (as if there was any doubt for the non-delusional) that Bitcoin prices are pure speculation and have nothing to do with consumers spending Bitcoin. In fact, one could make the argument, many people cashed out to go shopping with government fiat.
There are mega whales with eyes on Bitcoin speculation, so it's always possible one or more of them dumps 10-20 million on Bitcoin but assuming we're basing Tuesday on regular people, I'd say we're in for a good dose of capitulation. I pick #2.
Not sure what you are arguing here. Let me try: Last weekend was one of the largest consumer spending weekends of the year. BitPay reported record Bitcoin spending and much of this is probably converted to fiat. We had a 4-day "weekend", severely depleting the incoming funds. With all this going on, market manipulators attempted to crash the market as evidenced by simultaneous hacks on bitcointalk and DDOS on campbx and bitstamp. However, this crash attempt was only able to bring the market back to where it was a week ago and we have subsequently risen back to > 1000 USD per coin. I think we may rise quite a bit more before the blow off... |
|
|
|
That's one problem with mathematical models; they are very bad at predicting events that exceed their initial structure -- like predicting the sudden adoption in the world's 2nd largest economy. But the human brain is amazing at imagining the world and projecting a future. A combination of both techniques works best... China is coming...
The engine is firing on more cylinders -- USA, Europe, Asia. I feel that the last "bubble" was mostly driven by USA. Of course Europe was a major player but rallies occurred during USA day time (mostly). In contrast this 65+ rally seemed to be USA, 130+ rally was pulled by Asia, but now the Second Market fund, Canada ATM news, etc is also driving the exchanges up 24 hrs a day. Note how major psychological barriers are just blown through -- for every barrier 1500, 2000 CNY, 200,250,300USD, 200EU, there are 2 other currencies where that level is irrelevant.
Africa, India, and much of South America are still missing. They will be instrumental for the next one...
The question is, "will this difference translate into a sustainable rally at these rates?" I think the answer is that it will be sustainable at higher rates, but of course in the end there will be a blow-off. There always is. Personally, I'm hoping for a daily-pullback today, I think we need one...
Recently, by correlating hacks, DDOS, etc. with dumps you can get an idea of how well the manipulators are doing. Not that well, it seems. People seem to be looking at the other (still up) exchanges and not panicking. This decreases volatility dramatically. |
|
|
|
You may know this, but, "salting" a password is the technique of putting a completely obvious but mostly unique phrase into the password so that an attacker must specifically attack each individual rather than allowing him to attack everyone at the same time by creating a brute-force dictionary for all combinations. At the same time this additional data is chosen to be very easy to remember. For example, the passphrase "thezerg hello world" is much harder than just "hello world". I think NoBrainr could benefit from salting. def main(salt=None): if salt: salt = salt + " " else: salt = "" f = open('DICT') if len(sys.argv)>1: wd = dict(x.split() for x in f) pp = salt + ' '.join([wd - for x in sys.argv[1:16]])
else: wd = [x.strip('\n') for x in f] pp = salt + ' '.join([wd[random.SystemRandom().randrange(0,len(wd))][6:] for _ in range(7)]) pr = S(pp).hexdigest() print addr(int(pr,16)),'==',pp |
|
|
|
A certain regular contributor to here has two 'attack threads' about him set up - WTF?!
I think it's the last phase before: "...then you win". Oh well  hang in there man and ignore that ad hominem garbage. Your advice is sound. Although I remain a short, medium and long term bull, anyone who has done well with bitcoin would be foolish not to let a few coins go just for diversification, risk reduction and a small celebration! On topic... I think its surprising how well the price has held up given bank holidays, bitcoin friday, and general holiday spending. Its an advantage of a worldwide market, local variances get smoothed out. We also saw this in a big way a few weeks ago when US and Europe "caught" the Chinese bubble pop. |
|
|
|
|
Real Bitcoin believers spend coin, they just don't SELL it.
|
|
|
|
(to the tune of: Passenger let her go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufEejvMEP64) Well you only sold when it was trading low And missed one thousand when it started to go (  better ending?) Only know you loved them when you let them go Only know it is high cause you sold them low Only hate the rise cause you spent 'em on blo' Only know you loved them when you let them go And you let them go Staring at the bottom of a crash Hoping one day you'll make a buck last ( better something about selling at top) But coins start low and they rise so fast You see them when you close your eyes Maybe one day you'll understand why Everytime you trade you surely cry But you only sell bitcoins when they are trading low You're only in cash when they start to float Only know you loved them when you let them go Only know they were high cause you sold them low Only hate the rise when you spent 'em on blo' Only know you loved them when you let them go Staring at the screen in the dark Same old empty feeling in your wallet 'Cause pages refresh slow and it goes so fast Well you see them when you fall asleep But never to touch and never to keep 'Cause you bought too much And it dived too deep But you only sell bitcoins when they are trading low You're only in cash when they start to float Only know you loved them when you let them go Only know they were high cause you sold them low Only hate the rise when you spent 'em on blo' Only know you loved them when you let them go And you let them go (oh, oh, ooh, oh no) And you let them go (oh, oh, ooh, oh no) Will you let bitcoins go? But you only sell bitcoins when they are trading low You're only in cash when they start to float Only know you loved them when you let them go Only know they were high cause you sold them low Only hate the rise when you spent 'em on blo' Only know you loved them when you let them go And you let the coins go |
|
|
|
|
the silverbox update (comparison from the beginning of this thread, March 13th, 2012, gold=1690, nasdaq=3055, Bitcoin=5.4):
Bitcoin is 1030.00 (5792.00 btcChina in USD). Gold is 1269.00. Nasdaq is 3983.00
Bitcoin: 18974.07% (107159.26%)
Gold: -24.91%
Nasdaq: 30.38%
Gold Diff: 25302% advantage Bitcoin
Nasdaq Diff: 14530% advantage Bitcoin
|
|
|
|
LTC is heating up as well. Don't see a reason why it wouldn't reach 10-20% of BTC value soon.
The question is: why would it? Feels kind of weird saying this (usually normal people tell bitcoin people this), but there is basically no acceptance for litecoin at the moment, it's 100% speculation. only reason I've heard of is that it can be used to anonymize your bitcoins. Sell btc for litecoin, buy back later. While bitcoin provides compelling reasons (beyond paypal and CC) for vendor adoption, litecoin does not (beyond bitcoin). All the same, I've been mining CPU LTC when my computers are on :-) |
|
|
|
so explain to all of us why they let gold rise from $250 to $1921 from 2000 to 2011.
don't say they manipulated it up as that wouldn't explain why Gordon Brown sold the UK's gold reserves at the bottom of 2000.
They thought that because of their successful manipulation, gold was cheap in 2000, so they would like to buy some from UK and other signatories. It was not needed to actively manipulate it up, it would rise quite naturally after so long suppression. Gold's market cap had become minuscule compared to their derivative machinations so buying up more and more gold was not a sacrifice for them. In 2000 they thought that gold would be useful. but they, in this context, implicates central banksters/bullion dealers and thus the Dark Side. Gordon Brown and the Chancellor of the Exchequer are part of them. there's an inconsistency in your logic. Even if you tin-foil-hatters imagine that there is a "they", a new world order, a conspiracy of some kind to do something, it would be foolish to consider that "they" are some kind of autocratic Dr. Evil top-down organization. It would instead be a loose confederation of competing individuals who have some agreements that benefit themselves to the detriment of the rest of the world. Think of a "survivor" alliance or one made while playing "risk" -- all know that in the end there can be only one. Should one member choose or be induced to sell gold at the bottom, the others would simply take advantage. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
