this can only happen in altcoins markets because they are pretty small and a "large player" there can mean a very smaller amount of money to change things to your advantage.
but with bitcoin you will need a very large amount of money which then would not exist in one place and even if it is possible then it would be stupid to buy bitcoin with all of it just to control things. It wouldn't be "just to control things"; it would be to "not lose control over things". |
|
|
|
Say an interested party has 10 times Bitcoin's market cap to spend. He buys up the entire order book on the largest exchanges. Once he holds a significant percentage of all bitcoins, he waits for some kind of negative news, then dumps, causing panic sells, which he buys up at the bottom. He repeats this pattern until he owns as many bitcoins as HODLers allow.
How would this affect adoption and confidence in the market? Is there anything that would or could prevent this from happening, aside from the amount of fiat money required?
Pretty sure this is exactly what is happening... What makes you believe that? |
|
|
|
Seems a stupid scenario, how realistic is it to discuss 'one large player buying up most coins'. It'd have to be a sovereign wealth Sheikh or something to afford that.
Seems dumb to even think of it as a possibility, will never happen. You'd have to have the surname Rothschild. Pretty sure the exact scenario described by the Op has happened, drove BTC all the way to the $780 top, then dumped big time to $555. But then didn't buy up again. After enough such cycles, he would've left the price skyrocketed and liquidity low after panic sells. The point would obviously not be to profit numerically, but rather systemically, i.e. to destroy what is perceived as the largest threat. |
|
|
|
|
So even if he could get 50% of all coins, or even 80%, he wouldn't be able to influence the price to the point of causing permanent/long-term market confidence loss?
|
|
|
|
|
You really think that would be a problem for someone will $100 billion to spend?
Assume such limitations of the legacy banking system are not an obstacle.
And yes, it would be a slow process, say over several months, so that it can go quite unnoticed.
|
|
|
|
As you know Im no longer project developer, but Im still an investor. Trump is struggling to secure donations because of the rats in the GOP - NOW is the time to strike with the CRYPTO SUPERPAC.May I suggest MEMES tweeted directly to Trump and people around him, such as Ivanka, his sons, Roger Stone, also people like Milo, Briebart, campiagn manger, his official media spokeswoman etc - anyone or anything that can get the word back to Trump. Memes can be tailored for a specific person to get their attention. For example I would make one directly for Milo. He then sees this as a good thing, he talks to someone who talks to Trump who then looks at it, contacts us, asks some questions get written agreement - Bingo! If there is a lot of this Trump wont be able to ignore it and beleive me 1 mil donation will definitely peak his interest. Trump values even $1. Hes never lost that sense of value of money through his life. Ive read his books I know how he thinks. Also be aware Im being intentionally conservative with that figure. Who knows how high the price could go? MEMES MEMES MEMESHere is a quick one ive made up just for this post. Anyone can make them and post them here and we can all Tweet them on our accounts, add them to the official Facebook account etc. Change the wording as you see fit, but has to stay on point - Mr Trump Endorse this project and we can donate BIGLYAny ideas for text changes on memes most welcome. If you cant make memes, suggest some catch phrases. Ill make a few different ones, but so can you.. We have to ask Trump for his endorsement which will obviously increase the value of the coin and the value of the donation toward his campaign.  I think it's unreasonable/unrealistic to expect an ENDORSEMENT, at least at first; but an acknowledgment or nod of approval is quite likely. We have to admit that altcoins, and even crypto in general, are risky/uncertain instruments, and thus not something Trump will be willing to outright endorse. But maybe I'm wrong -- maybe he's that awesome!  I think we want to see Trump become far better, do far more for the good of America and the world, than any president before him. The way I see it, Trump is a catalyst for major, unprecedented changes, which may extend even into the idea of space travel. We're gonna make things change. We have to. And we're gonna get the best people, to make the best change. Nobody makes things change like me. I am the best at change. So we're gonna make things change. And we're gonna make them change so much, you're gonna get sick of it. You're gonna say, please, Mr. Trump, stop making things change. But we're going to do it. Also, from Trump's current perspective, Reagan and Washington were the best presidents, not Lincoln. Simply brilliant. |
|
|
|
|
Say an interested party has 10 times Bitcoin's market cap to spend. He buys up the entire order book on the largest exchanges. Once he holds a significant percentage of all bitcoins, he waits for some kind of negative news, then dumps, causing panic sells, which he buys up at the bottom. He repeats this pattern until he owns as many bitcoins as HODLers allow.
How would this affect adoption and confidence in the market? Is there anything that would or could prevent this from happening, aside from the amount of fiat money required?
|
|
|
|
BOT ON YOBIT Whoever has that bot running on yobit please remove it. Better still everyone stop using that exchange.
What was the bot doing? |
|
|
|
|
^ I would mock too, but I suspect you are here for that. I do laugh at your ridiculous insistence on remaining ignorant.
|
|
|
|
I have a hard time choking back the assertion Bitcoin was designed to fail at a certain point.
I just can't wrap my head around that concept..
Define "fail"? If you define fail as the coin stops functioning or double-spending is so pervasive via 51% attack that no one will accept it, then I agree it is a ludicrous proposition that isn't very likely to happen. Rather the designed failure of Bitcoin is to become centralized so that the elite are able to control who can transact (which is another symptom of a 51% attack) so they can implement capital controls, expropriation, and taxation, while also tracking every transaction we make so we are 666 slaves. Yes, right, and let's make it open source so that it can be cloned and potentially improved upon to the point where our original plan fails. Bitcoin is not failing but it is failing to scale to mass adoption, and BitCON (the Trojan Horse) is failing in that it will be more oppressive+totalitarian than cash and fiat were. Why do you people have such a difficult time to understand this distinction, even I have repeated it so many times. Cash and fiat is not intrinsically oppressive+totalitarian, it depends on who/what controls the issuance. What would stop us from simply decentralizing away from "BitCON" if it becomes centralized and controllable like you are saying was the plan all along? |
|
|
|
Yep, and thanks to the level of FUD that has been employed by blockstream now every idiot on r/bitcoin thinks hard forks are somehow "dangerous" and "contentious", despite having no real understanding of the subject.
What a laughable state of affairs.
We have a bunch of greedy idiots who just want to maintain their control over the bitcoin protocol at all costs, who have now taken over bitcoin development.
Core has employed massive amounts of FUD, disinformation campaigns, smear campaigns, paid hundreds of thousands to DDoS nodes of competing implementations, censored all the main communication hubs and filled them with their trolls... and the list goes on.
You'd really have to be an idiot not to see what's happening here. It's incredible how skewed your perspective is. You got it all reversed. The maxblocksize hardforking efforts originate from a deliberate covert campaign of creating disinformation that people like you spread as misinformation. You are helping the real "bad guys" while fully believing the lies they have sold you... If you're not an idiot you will do far more research and come back with a much broader perspective. |
|
|
|
I don't actualy understand why to make a coin with the name of one of the biggest Tirants in the USA... It is kinf of like making a coin with the name of Hitler IMO Trump coin = Hitler coin
HAHAHAHAHA!!! Trump is LITERALLY Hitler huh? Unless you're trolling or being sarcastic then good one. Yes their just trolls or hater or just ill-informed best to just feel sorry for theses types of people. They are haters who believe they are anti-haters. It's truly at once hilarious and sad. |
|
|
|
I can't believe I'm the only one seeing this: This user is currently ignored. |
|
|
|
This week we can do a bit of a giveaway. I dont know when they cant be tradeable but hopefully soon.
Indeed, download the Etherium wlalet as it takes a few days to sync
How to use apostrophes infochartTrumpCoin promo materials would look even better with apostrophes! |
|
|
|
At about this time I gave up on the community and sold my coins. If the people driving the decision were functional and worked together, or even if they had been discussing the problem in good faith, I would still be a believer even if block size didn't immediately increase. You are not taking into consideration the idea that there are actors who actually are trying to destroy Bitcoin. Consider that possibility, and then reevaluate everything, is what I would suggest you do. Well these actors have left the project. (Mike Hearn & Co) Yes, they all just gave up, and now Bitcoin is free to progress unimpeded towards undoing thousands of years of central control over money. |
|
|
|
At about this time I gave up on the community and sold my coins. If the people driving the decision were functional and worked together, or even if they had been discussing the problem in good faith, I would still be a believer even if block size didn't immediately increase. You are not taking into consideration the idea that there are actors who actually are trying to destroy Bitcoin. Consider that possibility, and then reevaluate everything, is what I would suggest you do. |
|
|
|
Brilliant logo (for TETH), great "no compromise" look, except that it kinda looks more like it says "FRUMP". What about using this logo? It took me some time to make this, but some members here were asking to be done, so here it is I will definitely consider it. In all honesty I find it a little cheesy, but a little cheese might just be whats needed for the new direction. It looks great but far too "official", as if it were created by and endorsed by Mr. Trump. A little subtlety (not too much) goes a long way in conveying/impressing the idea of an independent project not originating from Trump but rather from supporters. |
|
|
|
Tl;dr: I'm glad that the Classic chapter is over and that we can focus on more important matters and prepare for the next controversial HF (maybe Bitcoin Reloaded?). My bet would be Bitcoin Retried. But seriously, what i`m saying is not because there is some secret conspiracy that has alien or very advanced technology. I just simply stated that technology has a limit, and humans are not omnipotent and never will be. Too much holywood movies make people's imaginations take over their rational brain, and think that humanity is capable of everything if it puts it's mind to. This is false, humans are very limited, stupid creatures, with irrational beliefs, even the high IQ people. Those are some interesting disempowering belief systems you have chosen to buy into... but they are just that, belief systems you choose to impose upon yourself to experience yourself as a limited being.  There isn't and never will be free energy. The entropy of the universe is growing as it is expanding, it is very unlikely that these concepts are physically possible. Mark my words: we will have free energy by 2050. Probably earlier. Many humans already figured out ways to do it, but it's been ruthlessly suppressed. what do you get when you put 10 blockstream lovers into a forum topic.
.. 92 pages of circle jerking each other pretending they are convincing the world that blockstream is the only bitcoin religion people should believe in..
one day they will realise they are preaching only to each other and just uselessly circle jerking inside their small little cult, which doesnt affect the rest of the world.
one day they will realise cult blockstream has the same negative aspects as cult classic and they wake up and see they have all been following the same corporate company that they are trying to insult.
it makes me laugh that they want to defend blockstream. knowing that its backed by banks. yet every single argument against anything not blockstream, also applies to blockstream.
but i expect this message to get deleted because cult leaders don't want their sheep to wake up.
so enjoy your dreams
Just change "blockstream" to "XT/Classic" and you will begin to approach a semblance of accuracy. (BTW, did you know that sentences are begun with capital letters?) |
|
|
|
You do realize that it is most likely that you would have lost your coins in either case since this is about weakened encryption? There's just a difference between the community drawing out to a consensus in which coins get "destroyed" or a hacker exploiting the weakened encryption only to take away your coins. You'd have to choose the lesser of two evils.
What an idiotic thing to say. You're still ranting about how your bitcoind 0.7 won't sync?
This is a completely separate issue from Theymos' call to preemptively destroy old coins sent to pub key before dastardly haxors grab them with their quantum computers.
I`m not talking about the theymos paper, but about the bitcoin classic people that want a more invasive approach.
BTW Wtf is all with this quantum computer bullshit scaremongering? Do you guys realize that there wont be a quantum computer for the foreseeable future. And in my opinion there wont be any ever. The best there is is a 5 qubit setup (which can barely do basic calculations), at near 0 Kelvin degree, and the quantum interference scales up exponentially with the heat. Therefore the difficulty of putting together a more qubit setup scales exponentially, since the heat entropy will just make the setup crash as any small heat fluctuation will just make the quantum state decohere. How are you cooling the atoms down to 0 Kelvin? Its literally impossible, and if nothing else, then the background radiation of the universe will just destroy any entangled state eventually. It will be impossoble to built complex qubit setups. Not even the intergalactic vaacum of the universe is 0 Kelvin, or close to it, so how do you reach that on Earth with all the radiation that is going on here? In my opinion there wont be ever a quantum computer, but even if it will be, its not in the near future, so folks really need to stup this quantum scaremongering. You are operating under a number of assumptions, first and foremost the idea that that which is released publically ("the best there is") is where the technology really is at. The way I perceive it, quantum coherence and quantum computers will lead to free energy, and may already have under the dark budget of the secret space program. There are real improvements that can be made to Bitcoin with a hardfork.
If the community could come to agreement on it, it would help Bitcoin compete in the near term at least.
Are you talking about things from the HF wishlist (Wiki)? What would you prefer to be included in a HF? I think what Luke Jr wants to be included is a small Christian prayer written into every block and every seven days all the worlds mining resources diverted to attack an altcoin. The nice thing about that is that, as far as I can tell, he doesn't mix his religious convictions with his vision for Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Pfft. I'm not going to mislead people by failing to call it what it is-- going to have some secret meeting where you are massively outnumbered with no strong negotiator on your side where you let yourself get compelled to commit to random things which are either largely meaningless or violate other people's trust and confidence in you (or, in fact, commitments you made to others before leaving) is a truly foolish move, if not quite "publicly endorsing scammer-wright" grade.
It's not the end of the world, people screw up, shit happens, goes on on-- but someone here asked the question as to why Luke was going around polling segments of the community what kind of hardforks they'd find acceptable, and that is why. It is a disappointment because its likely to exacerbate and prolong some drama which could otherwise be largely over now.
We learn from our mistakes if we are well-meaning, and if they promised some things they can't get consensus on, then it's simply to their dishonor and not to the detriment of Bitcoin.  They weren't willing to walk, were they? "Travelled all the way to China, not going to go back empty handed" mentality. Folks, learn what negotiation means from Donald Trump. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
