wow, quite the reversal from yesterday's initial 1609 ramp in response to Spain.
That's paper, not real gold. When wheat falls in price, you get excited to buy it at a discount. Gold works the same way because it's physical! Paper gold does not behave the same as physical gold. The fact that there's two separate forms of gold, paper and physical, is exactly why I've come to dislike it. There's only one bitcoin, so its frictionless and that makes it much harder for TPTB to manipulate the price. |
|
|
|
Here's another chart I just found, total debt - public (gov) and private (businesses and consumers). Shows that we're still early in the deleveraging cycle. Without inflation, gold won't go up.  does this look like inflation?  |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the update genjix. At least I now know who is at the top of my shitlist (Andrew Thornhill).
|
|
|
|
This is actually an interesting example of a rather intriguing idea. If the ponzi is big enough, and goes on long enough that it affects the money supply, it will eventually invite a response from the central bank. The central bank will interpret the constricted money supply as deflation, and print. But, instead of reversing the "deflation", this newly-printed money will simply feed the ponzi and cause it to grow.
And, if you think about it, this is exactly what the too-big-to-fail banks did over the last decade or so in the US. They simply took the money that the FED printed for them, and traded it back and forth among themselves in a pointless unproductive game, creating $600 trillion in fraudulent derivatives in the process. When this eventually dried up all the money in the real economy, leading to the crash of '08, the FED's response was to print more money to give to the banks, perpetuating and expanding the ponzi.
But here's the thing, the amount of money the Fed can print isn't a drop in the bucket of that $600 trillion in credit/leverage/derivatives which disappeared in the blink of an eye when the house of cards collapsed. That's what most goldbugs don't get. "Printing money" (Fed buying its own treasuries aka quantitative easing, TARP bailout, stimulus funds, etc.) and credit expansion (isn't happening even at zero interest rates) are two different things. So the question becomes then, in a way, was the '08 financial crash just another example of blowback? We know that the CIA had a hand in crashing the Soviet economy in the late 80's / early 90's. The failed Soviet economy prompted Mavrodi to develop his ponzi in '94, which was wildly successful due to the widespread economic destruction in Russia at the time. So, perhaps it got the attention of someone who exported it to America? That would give the banks just enough time to begin lobbying for the repeal of Glass-Steagall in '95 in order to address "market realities" by removing the barrier between printed FED money and ponzi investments, enabling US banks to "compete with foreign firms" ie Russian ponzi schemes. This legislative coup eventually succeeded in '99, just in time for the "terrorist attacks" in '01 and the resulting money printing that followed.
The rest, as they say, is history.
So, perhaps there is some truth to Paulson's claim that Russia caused the '08 crash. Maybe he knew more about this than he let on.
Interesting theory, but I wouldn't say his ponzi in '94 was wildly successful. It only lasted 6 months! Back in February 1994, amid the turmoil of the country's transition to a market economy, the mathematician organized a Ponzi scheme called MMM. He offered returns of 100 percent a month and advertised aggressively on national television. Before the pyramid crashed in July 1994...
|
|
|
|
The first thing that came to mind as I read the article - Pirateat40.
I almost mentioned him in the OP. iirc there's some speculation he puts his deposits in MMM. Not to single out Pirateat40. I'm equally wary of anything GLBSE related. As for global finance, always funny to remember that in an interview last year Bernie Madoff said the "whole government is a Ponzi scheme." |
|
|
|
There are a substantial number of apparently fraudulent claims.
Indeed the total of claims submitted is more than was ever held at bitcoinica.
Hopefully that will put in perspective why this is taking so long.
Those of who filed claims haven't received a single e-mail follow-up. There was supposed to be additional fields added to a new claims form so users could provide more information, but haven't heard any follow-up on that either.. |
|
|
|
There's no conspiracy with zhoutong at the center. Bitcoin Consultancy was a company running the British exchange Intersango before zhoutong even heard of bitcoin. Please stop posting pictures of zhoutong, he didn't make proper backups of the database but the claims process is out of his hands. Bitcoin Consultancy is in total control now. These repeated bouts of silence on the part of Bitcoin Consultancy is unforgivable. If anyone wants a place to stay, I have an extra bed and a sofa for people to crash on. Also lots of floor space.
|
|
|
|
Cool story bro,
So where are the refunds?
Hopefully they get done soon I think. One of the points outlined today by Tihan was: "This is what I need from each of you today: 1) A sign of life that the claims processing has begun -- an announcement to that effect and/or actually paying people back ..." So things are moving forwards now after the hiatus. Most people involved are in agreement on what needs to be done. Sounds like you guys got the go-ahead. |
|
|
|
|
I'm wondering if this "legal wrangling" / bureaucratic hurdles might be Tihan (or whoever the owner is) trying to force bitcoinica consultancy out of their contract. Or maybe they're arguing over which party will be liable for the theft or potential loss of profits. Whatever it is, it feels like depositors are serving as hostages in these additional delays to the claims process.
|
|
|
|
I have, and it hurt my profits.
I'm glad you're back. Me too. But I'm sad he deleted most of his posts! There are many factors that could affect profits, stochastic variations (outside the assumptions of a particular quantitative probabilisitic model) for one. Bitcoinica spreads could be another. Chodpaba should put his model back up. It might increase profits if perhaps instead of trying to follow market, the market tries to follow chodpaba! |
|
|
|
Please say something. The price this rebounding and some of us had long positions quite large, were closed a week ago? still open? Will be closed from the now with good benefits? will be ignored?
Each day that passes increases the net value of accounts retained ...
They said already... all positions were closed weeks ago. |
|
|
|
Again with the walls... They come, they go, unless you know in advance where they will show or drop it's not tradeable.
Market makers adjust the depth of their limit orders to the rate of market orders (usually). Thin depth on one side indicates high demand and low supply. As short-term signals they are as good as anything else, probably one of the best. Who can deny that the recent action is due to the massive bid wall? Nobody knows anything in advance (except insiders). What's more tradable than walls? Quantitative probability... I suppose you're right. And if you calculate that for the rest of us mere mortals, you can use it to give us... walls. |
|
|
|
|
Third time is the motherfucking charm goddamit!!
|
|
|
|
Again with the walls... They come, they go, unless you know in advance where they will show or drop it's not tradeable.
Market makers adjust the depth of their limit orders to the rate of market orders (usually). Thin depth on one side indicates high demand and low supply. As short-term signals they are as good as anything else, probably one of the best. Who can deny that the recent action is due to the massive bid wall? Nobody knows anything in advance (except insiders). What's more tradable than walls? |
|
|
|
<pats self on back>
That was another good call proudhon. Somehow we both managed to be right today! |
|
|
|
I scoff at your 'walls'...
The walls set the price. The walls come and go. They don't effect the probability/price distributions, and contain about the same amount of information as noise. I have measured it. And that is about all the information I feel like feeding this market. Its not easy to measure the information in a signal. I guess I have to sacrifice one of my own secrets to win this battle. One of the key observations of inventory models is that the shape of the order book is predictive of impending changes in the market price. Figure 10.4 illustrates the phenomenon identified by Cao, Hansch, and Wang (2004). In panel (a), market price is “pushed” by a large concentration of conservative limit orders.
Cao, Hansch, and Wang (2004) find that the shape of the limit order book is actively exploited by market-making traders. Cao, Hansch, and Wang (2004) also find that the breadth and depth (also known as the length and height) of the limit order book predicts 30 percent of the impending price moves. Furthermore, the asymmetry in the order book generates additional information.
|
|
|
|
I scoff at your 'walls'...
The walls set the price. |
|
|
|
was that a sell or just the manipulator pulling of the wall?
it's time, the real investors take up the upward pressure and not let themselves being manipulated
It was a 13k sell into the smaller bidwall. The huge bidwall got pulled. Edit: And the askwall got a lot smaller. Accumulators be accumulatin'... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
