I don't know if it's over, but I do know that I've never trading something so resilient as BTC. All those little crashes on they way to 260 were blips after a few days.
It's because there are no shorts. Everyone that is trading is long by definition. If they sell, it's to buy back at a lower price or to take profits.
It creates massive swings, but has huge upside.
+1. To add: People have tendency to project their own actions or thought to the general public. I, for one, am super bullish long term, have done my homework, bought on equity (not credit) on the way to $100, stopped buying, sold a tiny bit over $200 (had intention to sell 25% at an average price of $400 but we never got that far), resumed buying at $100 and now I am slowly accumulating more as I don't have "excess" assets that could be converted to BTC (my silver is also getting interesting..), I would never panic sell, but I did panic buy several times on the way up. I think most of the new entrants in Jan-March were like me. If someone, on the other hand, actually bought on margin, solely for the reason that it went up, and is now either exited or busted, he may very well think that most of the new money was from the likes of him. What I think, however, is that some time from now on, it will come from the likes of me. True believers. It will be an excellent entry point, as we cannot go but up from the point where all sellers have sold already. The "bears" in this forum are people waiting to buy back, the successful speculators have no reason to come here to spread FUD, they are already pumping the next bubble in Madagaskar real estate or something with their quick gains. |
|
|
|
3) He doesn't care about personal wealth.
See, this doesn't really hold water for me. Even if he doesn't care about personal wealth, he can give them away. He could purchase some goods with Bitcoins and have them sent to a local charity. If he doesn't care about his Bitcoins, but still has control over them, then distributing them, one way or another, during either of the last two run-ups would have had a hugely beneficial effect on the Bitcoin economy. I don't want to turn this into "Satoshi should spend his Bitcoins." Perhaps he shouldn't. I'm just saying there are only a few scenarios that really make sense, and they all have consequences. In order for Bitcoin software to work, it must be connected to another node. So Satoshi must have had other machines in addition to the backbone miner. These would easily have generated 10,000s of coins during 2009-2010, which Satoshi could have, and probably has, partially spent anonymously. What if Satoshi has an active wallet of BTC50,000 now? I would think everyone is happy! I would give 10% chance that any of the mystery miner coins will ever be spent. It just doesn't seem that way. I like it. |
|
|
|
This bubble burst in 5 days instead of 5 months. ...
My numbers would be that $100 is the new $5 for the following months. Bubble bursting follows a double exponential rate of decay, which is the opposite of what happened in the run up. Post peak, one would expect the price halving time to increase - thus the first halving from 266 down to 133, then the second very quickly down to 66.5. In contrast to your view, I think that the having time to 33.25 will be some weeks away - if the rate of decline slows down as in a typical bubble collapse. What is your basis for the growth rate of the bitcoin economy? A linear regression of the log closing price on Mt. Gox starting in 2010 to present suggests a bitcoin economy growth rate of 4.8x annually = 580%. That is a fantastic growth rate, but the market gets ahead of that when doubling several times in a few months. Mt.Gox first day = 0.06, yesterday 73. No linear regression, just (days_open/30)th root (73/0.06) ~1.26, hence 3 months double. It is more than you think. If we continue this way, $300k is expected in 2016  |
|
|
|
Where is the most important part of any ad: the header?
Visible to a naked eye from 5 meters, BITCOINEJA (engl. "bitcoins!"). This is the last page, so even when folded, the paper may end up showing this ad. Where is a call to action?
Huge media attention over the last two days before ad placement. 2-page brilliant article in the leading newspaper, morning TV, lots of buzz. Where are the benefits of checking out your website?
"Alennuskoodi" means "discount code", which obviously can be checked out only from my website. The campaign webpage was visited 800+ times, so this is not totally bad. Perhaps those people just need an additional 1-2 weeks before making their purchases. Even a sublink in the text of the campaign page, was clicked 122 times (edit: 35 more times in last 12 hours even though it's 8 AM here now!). I think the ad was good. What would you have done to make it better? Go to the website and teach me!  |
|
|
|
This would mean we are gonna recover faster You are saying that, by way of analogy and symmetry, that because the decline is faster this time, then the recovery will be too. That is plausible, but I think that the bottom will not be reached until people have forgotten about the bubble peak - months away. This bubble burst in 5 days instead of 5 months. Let's face it, $32 sustainable coin price any day from now, is becoming more and more of a slim chance. Even crossing $50 is difficult, since the price was tested 4 separate times in intraday trading during the last week. Last time we saw a quick recovery from $2 to $7, and then a long base at $5. My numbers would be that $100 is the new $5 for the following months. Since the opening of Mt.Gox, bitcoin's price has doubled on average in 90 days. I agree with all the ones saying that this rapid an appreciation is inherently chaotic, since the bubbles will inevitably form and burst. I think we are actually below the trendline now, and that this is a sweet entry spot. When Mt.Gox was opened, 1000 people knew about Bitcoin, and on average they were willing to invest $100. Now the price is up 1000-fold, but the fundamentals have gotten 10^4-10^5 times better. It is good to remember the big picture. In 2016 we'll hit $300k. |
|
|
|
Oh well.. good days, bad days. Tuesday I started my new OTC selling market. It's now been two days. I had high expectations of the ad making money in two days, but... ...the reality so far is one minimum size (€500) order. So far it is insignificant compared to my other businesses, where we are talking in excess of 10,000 euro deals and 1,000+ profit per day. Because although I am wrong most of the time, I don't like it. So I had a bad day. Roni was sick and didn't show up. Lauri was organizing the next round of newspaper ads. Also we had a higher echelon club meeting with low attendance. Perhaps people were in a bad mood because of bitcoin hitting $0.05, and did not care to show up. Also everyone was too tired after a stressful week that the meeting was closed already at about midnight. The following day was more of a success. I was very interested to find Sergio's newest analysis on the Bitcoin network of 2009. It seems that Satoshi himself mined most of the coins in 2009. This subject has intrigued me a long time, finally now I have the answer. Also because of customers showing up, I sold some silver and bitcoins today, and bought some scrap silver and gold. The total rake was about EUR 1,500 which is basically OK. A funny detail was a gentleman buying silver with 20 EUR notes. I did not want to count the bills, so I weighed them instead. About 260 grams of funnypaper bought him 6.5 kg of silver. We decided to organize a senior-level Bitcoin miniconference in June. A deep experience for a handful of people is our aim. I am currently restricted from providing any more info on this, but I am enthusiastic myself. What I believe will be my greatest service to the Bitcoin community, is to organize a "dealer network" of BTC dealers and traders. The aim is to develop a members-only clearing system for large USD/BTC transactions. Bitcoin needs to grow up - too many people think that Mt.Gox has anything to do with the fair value of BTC. A system with periodic orderbook matchings and clearings, price lock-in with no cash outlay, and T+3 settlement of trades (both fiat and BTC will change hands 3 days after the trade) works very well in physical silver, and will work with BTC. In contrast, the exchange-centered system is a neverending source of problems in both. Just have a look at silver price "dropping" in the COMEX exchange (due to persistent manipulation, fully exposed 5-10 years ago but still ongoing), while physical silver is about same price as before the crash, but harder to find for the reason that the exchange is messing with the price signals. Soon we will see a two-tier pricing of BTC if we do not remain vigilant... one price for bogus exchange trades, and one for actual hard blockchain transactions. The dealer network, connecting all interested parties with active BTC trades and 1,000,000m BTC or more trading capital, is what I will be helping to succeed. The weekend from now on I will spend in London, likely not posting here very much. We are now getting a green candle after a week of red. Very, very, good. I mean both the red ones and the green. My guess for the trading range a few days ago, was $0.10-$0.12. Since we spent such a long time sub-0.1, it is now a resistance. Support is in 0.05. Therefore if I had a trading mentality, I would sell at above $0.09, aiming to buy back lower. In reality swing trading is something I almost never do. Since my broker is sick, he can't do it either. So don't worry about any crashes because of my actions. Call this a week. |
|
|
|
|
If you have bitcoins, you don't need much education or voting any more.
|
|
|
|
|
Without knowing Proudhon's past, I would think he speaks quite well.
|
|
|
|
Most of the new market participants are unlike the old ones. They are in it for the quick profit, or they've already sold at loss and they're trying to recover their lost money by buying low and selling higher. Many will exit the market when they've managed to turn their losses into acceptable profit.
The only things supporting Bitcoin price at the moment are the remaining dumb money left over from the bubble frenzy and those early adopters who sold at $200 buying back coins with all their newly gained fiat.
-1. There will also be new 'true believers' that have arrived from all the media attention. There are plenty of people in the world that would love the concept of Bitcoin but never heard of it. Now they have and will continue to bring even more people into the fold. So while the panicing weak hands will flee with losses we will still have an ever larger group of people that believe in bitcoin's future.
+1. |
|
|
|
What was the basis for this? How does the author know this will happen? Theoretically, forced settlement at a fixed price is an ideal outcome for any naked short selling campaign. From this point of view the proposed scenario makes perfect sense. Not sure about the timing however. The are very good reasons why true gold bugs only accept physical gold. This is one of those reasons. This is also why Bitcoiners shall control their own bitcoins and do not trust any third parties such as exchanges, pools, online wallets with it for any larger amounts and for any longer than it is absolutely necessary. In 2008 there already was a default in silver. An Indian exchange forcibly paid spot+6% on the contract holders. It was about as blatant as the Cyprus deal (where no effort to pressure the debtors of the bank was taken, instead the creditors were erased). I mean, silver is in no way scarce, and the international shipping is far less than 6%. If there was opportunity to get silver at the fake spot price, surely the exchange would rather have delivered than defaulted, don't you think so??  Bitcoin is the only reason why I am not shortsqueezing the silver market right now.. |
|
|
|
And really, it is Satoshi's identity that lies at the core of these efforts. All of them.
'He' wants to remain anonymous, and I am ethically constructed in such a way that a request like that - from someone who has done no harm to anyone - is inviolate. Would selling 1M bitcoins do no harm to anyone? What you want is for this information to remain hidden because it is very damaging to bitcoin's reputation. No one who has not invested in bitcoins gives a shit about who Satoshi is. What they will care about is that this mysterious inventor has the currency by the balls. Oh. And you're a fool if you believe that. Entirely aside from the fact that I haven't expressed that, and certainly don't appreciate having words put in my mouth... There are exactly two things that have happened during the rise of bitcoin that - together - have done more for the adoption of the currency than all the others (reddit, Wikileaks, OWS, WordPress, Seals With Clubs, and all the others - more and more; faster and faster). They are: The disappearance of Satoshi and 'his' continuing anonymity, and The purchase of two pizzas for 10k BTC. Anyone who wants the currency to succeed understands that. You, of course - from what I'm able to glean from your postings - clearly want bitcoin to fail. Okay, so let me offer a third viewpoint, which is different than either of yours: Bitcoin's rise in 2013 can be attributed to people like me, who have the $$ to buy in the open market. Therefore my opinions matter, as they represent a large group of very high purchasing power which, when deployed, will raise Bitcoin to a next level. I think: - It is good if Satoshi's identity is revealed. Sorry for him, in case he wanted to stay anonymous. It was perhaps a coolness factor in 2012, but now we are talking about serious old school people who don't like surprises. - It is good that the early coins belong to Satoshi, as it seems that they were not generated to be spent, even if it were technically possible. - Even if the 1M coins were to be sold, it would not have any more lasting effect to the price than adjusting the price by 5-10% while keeping the marketcap. No killswitch lol. I own 5% of a certain company, nobody ever thought I would have a killswitch. |
|
|
|
What if the site did not take care of the BTC at all - I mean if all bets were escrowed with the trusted third party (example: MtGox), which is paid to release the funds after each round. The operator of the site would also need to deposit enough to fully cover all its obligations.
Is there anyone in this world who could be trusted with this much money, without it becoming a risk to the site and its users alike?
Three week does a lot to my thinking. I am currently not too interested in developing this kind of derivatives any more, I think instead of more casinos, bitcoin needs a liquid price-finding mechanism. Guess what, it is not going to be an exchange. It will be a dealer network. The age of casinos is over. |
|
|
|
he would be in personal danger if it were known for sure who he was.
I think this is an overstatement at this point. Bitcoin is up and running, and "they" cannot coerce anything out of Satoshi, nor influence the network functioning. There are people with much greater leverage in Bitcoin economy now. As far as I know, no one has been in any danger because of owning bitcoins so far. Cool if he wants to remain anonymous. What if he is just an uninteresting nerd anyway.. How long do you think the media would be interested? Two weeks maybe. "Mysterious Satoshi drives a Toyota and rolls his toilet paper from left to right." LOL |
|
|
|
|
I believe this is hugely bullish on bitcoin. The likelihood of "early coins on the move", has been reduced significantly. Not a wonder that the price shot up.
|
|
|
|
DPR = Dread Pirate Roberts = founder and main operator of Silk Road drug trafficking site that buys/sells things with BTC.
Nice article in Forbes about him.
I don't have nearly as many. He must be the richest person on Earth, then. Is there anyone else who publicly owns 100k BTC or more? |
|
|
|
Price is up $15 since he posted that picture ... maybe market feels better if satoshi has got the keys to the kingdom than god only knows who?
 |
|
|
|
Why aren't you using your skills to do something useful?
There is a principle in the universe that what can be done, will be done. I don't think we should blame Sergio if he mines public information. Or should we get rid of Julian Assange, too? |
|
|
|
Are you aware that DPR owns 600,000 coins (and that's a very conservative estimate)?
I don't know who is DPR? |
|
|
|
|
It is not inconceivable that the original computer that Satoshi used as the 24/7 backbone of the Bitcoin network in 2009 and early 2010, also happened to mine 1 million coins. Sergio is talking about this.
Now, we know that the genesis block cannot be spent, because Satoshi thought it would be "unfair". Perhaps he thinks the same about these coins. Perhaps not.
Probably he is at this very moment thinking, which would be better for the universe:
- Send a message using those private keys, telling that he is about to never spend them. Possibly the coins would even be collectively banned after such a message. (Some communists have suggested this solution as a forced group decision without asking the owner of the coins.)
- Start spending them, essentially forming the largest bitcoin wealth & power center, far above the Winklevoss and the smaller fish. This comes with both privileges and responsibilities.
- Leave us in the state of confusion for some more time.
At the point when you possess the capability of generating something as valuable as this, you have a very different mindset towards money than that of the ones who want to have more of it, for the reason of getting a better life.
|
|
|
|
|
"The mystery will be revealed in 3 days from now".
Heh, I was wondering if I needed to start convincing people that I am not satoshi... Now it will not be needed if satoshi's identity can be revealed.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
