Not gonna happen.....

 


- I mean the sideways part.

 

Pump and dump can still be part of adoption, and if the demands on bitcoin is greater than the selling pressure, then who gives any shits if some BIG wigs believe that they are getting ahead by selling all of their bitcoin when they end up getting left behind because they sell too much too early and then they have to FOMO buy back into BTC if they want to regain their position.

In other words, there is no clear answer that pump and dumpers are always negative on bitcoin's overall price dynamics, even in 2017, there were a whole lot of folks who speculated that BTC was only going within a $3k to $5k price arena, so a lot of folks dumped their bitcoin in that range or even before that range out of anticipation of front-running.. but then some of them may have ended up getting screwed out of their bitcoin because the BTC price went 4x to 6x higher than their highest of expectations and even the ones who might have wanted to sit out the volatility might not have even been able to get back in below $3k like they were hoping on the severe dip... so it is not always so clear that pumper/dumpers come out ahead in the long run if they don't play their cards right... and really nothing to say that this time is going to be any different with many folks selling too much too soon again.. even while nothing is guaranteed, either way.

Of course, the calculation regarding whether to spend your bitcoins will be different for people in differing places and whether they have other options available to them.

My recollection of the Lazlo pizzas example is that Lazlo was one of the earliest of GPU miners, and perhaps he felt a bit guilty regarding the mining advantage that he had in terms of generating so many bitcoins while they hardly had any actual monetary value at the time, so I am NOT very tied into the sob stories regarding folks who spent too many bitcoins too soon because they could have been worth 1,000x more valuable down the road.

In that regard, we choose our payment mechanism based on what kinds of payments we have available to us, and if we can easily replace whatever bitcoins that we spend, then we might have a greater incentive to spend the bitcoins because it is not really much of a difference regarding what payment form that we choose.

However, the longer that bitcoin has had a monetary value, and even the fact that some companies might even be placing extra KYC/AML costs on people to acquire bitcoins, and governments might be becoming more stringent in terms of requiring an accounting for tax purposes or whatever, then greater disincentives will also be created for spending, and why not just spend my credit card and earn bonus points, or spend one of my other cryptos that are not as likely to retain value... which are Gresham Law type incentives.

We also cannot really know exactly whether bitcoin is going to compete some other payment processors out of existence - or what payment processor options that we might have available, including if some of the payment processors might attempt to attract customers by gaining credibility by linking themselves to bitcoin in one way or another.. .but there is likely a lot of development and passage of time that needs to take place before speculating too much about if we might be more inclined to spend our bitcoins based on whether we have other spending options and if we were to assume that there are no other spending options, except bitcoin because bitcoin has competed away all of the other lesser forms of money, we still could consider how we would spend our bitcoin for some seemingly basic needs like housing, utilities, food, transportation because if we only have bitcoin as a payment option, we still would likely choose to spend our bitcoin on those basic living needs, but we might become a bit more selective whether we might want to consume right away or to delay gratification if we were faced with decisions about whether to consume some luxury/more discretionary items, such as hookers, lambos and blow, depending on how many bitcoins that we have and where we are at in our lives in terms of earning power (or bitcoin cashflow), too.

Presuming BTC prices are able to sustain an average trade/volume adjusted price of over $11k in the coming day, then we are going to be able to say "goodbye" to $10k - level BTC prices being listed within the top 100 chart forever and ever and ever. 

The end of an increasingly higher and higher level era.   


- a kind of Lindy Effect, perhaps?

It is going to be much more profitable to prepare for $100k bitcoins way before BTC prices even get close to that level.

Of course, we are likely going to be able to revel in the fact that BTC prices have gotten to $100k and even to $1million, just like we are reveling now in the current BTC price - especially for us who have both been in bitcoin for a while and had been acting to prepare for these kinds of prices, even when today's prices seemed like pie in the sky in around 2015 - or even 2016 or even about the first 8-9 months of 2017



Are you suggesting that high prices are going to make bitcoin less useful or that bitcoin should only be considered valuable as a payment system?  Furthermore how about the many other coins and even second or third layers that also could be used as payment systems.

Seems to me that even though bitcoin can be used for payments, and it is nice to be able to have various liquidation avenues including the ability to directly send and receive bitcoins from anyone else who happens to have bitcoins or a bitcoin wallet, the ability to directly control your value or to choose how to store your value (hopefully without getting stuck in some system of 3rd parties holding your bitcoin keys), then by holding your own bitcoin, it seems that you have a whole hell of a lot more power through bitcoin than you would have with almost any other asset, even if we might consider the value propositions of various shitcoins being able to be used as payment method, there continues to be a lot more value in bitcoin because it seem to have way more certainty that it is going to retain its value for several years, and perhaps even 10 years or more if we were to set our bitcoins in some kind of cold storage - even though currently, there do seem to be some questions regarding preferable ways to cold storage your bitcoins, so currently some attempts at being technically savvy does seem to provide a bit more confidence and power in terms of how to cold storage your bitcoins.

We are all about equal opportunities in this here thread.

Peeps can post their properly own dick pics no matter who they might happen to be, even if they might happen to be a bot or a cat, for example.  

Largely, I agree with you thecodebear in terms of bitcoin users figuring out whether bitcoin provides some kind of use case for them and then, if it does, then using bitcoin in the way that they believe is suitable to their needs.  If bitcoin does not provide certain use cases for certain "would be users" that they would like to have in bitcoin, then surely they can attempt to get those kinds of features or use cases added to bitcoin, but in the end, bitcoin is not going to give any shits, if someone wishes that they could use bitcoin to buy a latte and not pay any fees for that transaction.. and do it with zero confirmations and to have their transactions immediate.

Of course, in accordance with Gresham's law, most people are going to use whatever payment processing service that is either the least valuable in terms of holding value or the least costly to use, and maybe some day, BTC will supplant a bunch of the currently existing payment processors too because value will likely continue to gravitate into BTC.. but seems more likely that a variety of payment processors are going to continue to exist for some time, and perhaps payment processing on bitcoin or pegged to bitcoin is going to happen on some kind of second or third or fourth layer rather than directly on the BTC blockchain.. even though right now, some transactions can go for relatively low fees, that might not always be the case.. absent some surprise developments that push bitcoin to change in the on-chain payment processing direction.

Surely, bitcoin provides a powerful option that was not available earlier (before bitcoin was invented and implemented), in terms of a sound money that is kind of similar to gold, but better than gold in almost all ways (except the physical tangibility aspect of gold - which is also a cost of gold), and recognizing that bitcoin is better than gold in almost all money ways seems to be a better way of thinking about what bitcoin currently is and what bitcoin has to offer in terms of bitcoin being more scarce, more portable, more divisible, more verifiable, and just something that is capable of being individually held and managed, either without a third party or just way less expensive to manage in terms of either how to hold, how to manage or not having to get permission regarding sending or receiving it... which give powerful options to bitcoin in and of themselves, even if I have not described all of the possibilities that a better kind of Gold has, with the passage of time, it seems quite likely that more and more people are going to recognize a variety of use cases around bitcoin which will continue to cause value to gravitate towards and into bitcoin, which likely was part of the incentive that Microstrategy had in terms of their decision to take a decently-sized stake in bitcoin at supra $10k prices (seems to have been around $11,653-ish per BTC that they would have paid).

O.k.  Look at ur lil selfie closely in the mirror.. concentrate.... concentrate...


Now..

 do you resemble the top row, third from the left?

Protip:  Don't partake in any semblance of a Bawb titanium plates methodology;^tm you do realize what it did to him?  



Ok... fair enough... a process of elimination seems to be in the works, here.

How about any of these?

Essentially, while stealing the profound insights of purported wordy man in your earlier post, you subsequently are proclaiming that such purported wordy man was not wordily enough for your likenings; therefore you stole purported wordy man's profound insights and you added more words to your post to explain such observations of yours.   

I'm starting to feel like this in trying my best to follow your logic.

Hey!!!!

Copy pussy.    

Too early to call it.

We have barely even tried to break above $12k.. .

Sure a bit of floating around in that price area, but still.. hardly can know, currently, and based on a bit of dabbling around in that price area, whether $12k is going to be any kind of meaningful and/or significant resistance.


Me and jonoiv, we go way back.. we are besties, kind of like this:





"what do VPs do anyway?"

They become Ps, if the P dies.

I don't see any reason to be thankful for that scammer twat or any of the gangsters who financed his misleading and self-serving narcissistic behaviors, the fact that he engaged in a clownshow to bring attention to himself and to the bitcoin space... so fucking what?

Sure, it is something that actually did happen and is in the process of still happening in one degree or another, and sure, it is probably a good idea to attempt to recognize the actual facts for whatever they have been or continue to be, including that there was a kind of a shit show that is continuing through the activities of those ongoing scammers... yet those facts that the scams have happened or continue to happen does not mean that any of those water under the bridge activities actually added value, even though the activities actually happened and continue to happen... .

Seems to me that sometimes it is better to criticize something for what it is and to denigrate it rather than trying to put some kind of positive spin on something that hardly even seems positive.

I personally believe that you are giving way too much credit to normies being able to figure out various subtleties in trading, and I believe that the vast majority of normies fit more closely in the category that I place them in which they deserve to be able to establish some kind of basic investment strategy, which is mostly dollar cost averaging, and the only meaningful assessments that they need to make is to get their basic finances in order so that they do not invest more than they can afford to lose and they engage in a kind of reasonable DCA approach.

I personally believe that my suggested approach would cause way more inclusiveness in terms of getting normies into investing rather than your expectation that peeps have skills that they are not likely to have, unless they happen to either be somewhat focused on learning trading or somehow specially skilled in their abilities to learn.



Ok. fair enough.  We can agree to disagree on this concept of what kinds of skills are more basic and accessible to normies.


We can agree to disagree about this too.

I am not suggesting that people should not try to become better and to improve themselves.  I just believe it is way too much to expect it as a kind of basic entrance level, whether we are referring to bitcoin or some other potential investments that might have fundamental justifications for long term value appreciation.



No I am not.   I am talking about basic entry level as DCA, and then go from there.  Of course, people can learn to whatever extent and desire that they want, but they should be attempting to learn DCA first as their entry level before going beyond their skill levels.l or even presuming that they know more than they do.... Peeps have to fight their inclinations towards gambling, and of course, so many people are inclined to gamble so in my thinking it is way better to promote a kind of anti-gambling approach which is DCA.. and then once they got DCA down, then they can go from there, whether that includes gambling techniques or not..  Sure, there are always going to be people who say, "fuck you.  Sop telling me what to do.  I don't need to do DCA because I am better than that.." blah blah blah.. and the vast majority of those know-it-all folks are likely to lose money because it would be in their best interest, generally speaking, to start with some kind of DCA-like approach first.  Of course, there are going to also be exceptions to any general rule, and I am not asserting that exceptional people should not strive to differentiate themselves from normies.. but of course, I am suggesting that it is a bit pretentious and problematic when normies presume themselves to be exceptional without either having genetic gifts or putting in a considerable amount of work to either get to that level or to attempt to perform at that level while knowing that they are likely to make a decent number of mistakes along the way.


Largely peeps gotta figure out these things for themselves, but I don't mind sharing some basic principles such as DCA strategies and things like that.  I also don't mind sharing other kinds of basic investment principles that involve figuring out your own situation in terms of figuring out how much to invest.. In other words, some concepts are way much more basic and should be learned first..

And, of course, there are some people who are much beyond the basics, and they already got their shit in order, and I have no problem conceding that some of those people should just move onto the more advanced techniques.. but I am not going to presume that people are already in the more advanced category... but if, for example, you proclaim that you are in the more advanced category, then I may take that with a grain of salt, and surely after interacting for a while, I likely would be able to recognize if some peeps might be in a more advanced category... and surely I don't presume to know more than everyone, either in this regard, but I do know that I have been practicing sound investment principles for a long enough time to know that for the most part I have developed a lot of skills that are beyond most normie peeps because a variety of basic financial planning and prudence is not usually taught to the vast majority of normies.. but there are going to be some peeps who have way greater knowledge than myself, too, whether we are talking about basic financial management and also trading and other investing techniques.. also the exception rather than the norm.



I doubt that I am assuming anything, but these days, when it comes to bitcoin investing, I am saying suggesting that as a starting principe it is good to come into bitcoin with at least a 4 year investment horizon and to plan to get to a position that 1% to 10% of their quasi-investible wealth is in bitcoin... Of course, some people might differ in their opinions about what their minimum investment time horizon might be and also in terms of what their BTC accumulation target might be.

Of course, if someone has already been in bitcoin for some time, then we might have to look at what they had already done in order to attempt to figure out what a prudent way forward might be.

But in terms of some newbie coming in, the ideal would be to come with a 4 year time line, at minimum... but if they happen to be 60 years old or even 80 years old, it might not be realistic for peeps in that age category to have a 4 year minimum investment time horizon.

Furthermore, each of us has total discretion to change our investment at any time that we want.. but that should NOT justify coming into bitcoin with some willy nilly ideas that I will sell "whenever" I start to feel nervous or profitable or some other vague and largely non-planned parameters.



That sounds like a good reason why the vast majority of these peeps should be attempting to develop way better basic plans rather than trying to time these kinds of matters.  You seem to be arguing my case, with some of your assertions of the actual empirical evidence..  hahahahahaha  


So, yeah, some of our starting out premises seem to be different... No problema.


Well my thinking is that if they are buying into what appears to be a bubble, either they invest very small amounts or they figure out some waiting techniques and even spreading out their initial investment stake over a longer period of time whether that is 6 months or two years or some other time period that they might believe is reasonable based on the asset class and their views of the asset.. maybe studying the asset, too, while they are making their initial investments, too, but they might not necessarily be able to figure out if they are buying into a bubble top or not.. or what to do exactly, but they could still establish some kind of a modified DCA strategy... depending where we are at exactly.

Let's take bitcoin, right now... where are we at?

If someone comes to me right now, and they have $6k now and $6k cash flow over the coming 6 months, and we have established that they really have their shit together regarding their cashflow and their other investments and the $6k x 2 is really something that prudently could be put into bitcoin.

I may well suggest that such hypothetical person investing $2k to $4k right away and then figuring out some plan regarding the remaining $8k to $10k in terms of DCA, buying on dips or some other comfortable plan.. but whatever, there are ways to flesh out various BTC strategies and to attempt to prepare for both ups and downs in BTC's price direction, to have a continuous BTC buying approach while attempting to get some stake in BTC as an investment and to attempt to get them to their target, assuming we can figure out that 1% to  10% might be their target and that getting in within the next 6 months might be something like their target, too.. but we are trying to figure out how much to put in now versus waiting, and we might include DCA, buy on dips and prepare for bigger dips.. but at the same time attempt to prepare for UP, too.  

What are you going to suggest to this hypothetical person, right now at this time, who presumably wants to get into bitcoin either now or the coming 6 months and has $6k now and has $6k cashflow coming in in the next 6 months?  You going to say wait? You going to say invest everything?  You going to come forward with some kind of moderate plan?  You going to include DCA in your suggested plan?  You going to propose that they engage in DCA, but call it something else?  whatchagonna  doooo, exstasie?      

 

This below-linked podcast that came out today reminded me of this thread, in terms of talking about bitcoin precursors and the problems that were attempting to be solved in the lead up to bitcoin.

Unchained: Why Bitcoin Now: The History of Digital Currency - Ep.185

Oh gawd!!!!!!!

Look who the fuck the cat drug in.  

Seems that you are feeling pretty brave, currently, after a $800-ish dip (as I type, so far) from $12,080 to $11,283 in the past day and a half?

Gosh you are incorrigibly delusional to an extent that you are showing yourself to be the BIGGEST ASS clown, maybe even more so than other clowns that notably have come to this thread.

Yeah, right, calling me a clown is not really backed by evidence, but your stupidity has a historical trail... and I hardly know where from where to start or if it is worth giving any kind of synopsis of the level of your dumb... and an arrogant dumb at that.. surprising as that might be to some that do not know your clownishness.. Your avatar also looks like a clown (I will admit that mine does too), but you might want to switch yours to a clown.. for reals.

Let me just do a quickie rendition of your various examples of dumb.

1) you sold most, if not all your coin in the $600s in 2016 anticipating some kind of a correction (that did not come, and if it did come, you did not buy back because you were waiting for sub $500);

2) you have believed that you are investing BIG into BTC while free loading off grandma or that you have some kind of significant impact on the bitcoin space, while your BIG stash of BTC had only gotten into the .5BTC size arena and probably less and less ability to buy as much as you are not able to buy back as much because you tend to buy for much higher prices and then frequently sell too much BTC too soon while anticipating some kind of inevitable price correction that either does not come or you fail/refuse to take advantage of any kind of meaningful correction that does end up happening.. because you always want moar and moar and moar.. so your level of greed, dumb and arrogance gets in the way of actual sound prudence... including what you lose from opportunity costs, as well.

3) you bought back a piddly amount of BTC (that you thought was BIG but still was in the .5BTC arena) somewhere in the $2ks, and then you sold all of your BTC in the $6k arena in early 2019.. while preaching, hopening and preaching that a sub $6k correction was going to imminently come in late 2019, and then such correction did not come and you kind of seemed to have given up, and then we did not hear from you until March 2020 when we got a quick correction to $3,850 - and then we heard from you, but you failed/refused to buy any BTC in that price arena or at that time because you were waiting for BTC prices to correct to $2k or below or whatever... that did not end up happening..

I could go on to elaborate a bit more on the significance and the impact of some of your dumb within the dumb that I have already outlined including your arrogance, but I likely already have given you more attention than you really deserve by just highlighting a few of your dumbiness.. and including some levels of humor ....(because we sure don't mind having some kind of strong evidence of a clown) contributions to the BTC space.



 

What would we do without you, jonoiv?  You even can make the dumbest among us in this here thread feel like geniuses.  Thanks for that.  


Huh?  What the fuck is "crypto"?

I thought that we were talking about bitcoin?

Of course, that login would not have been the actual real life Hal..  There does not seem to be any dispute that Hal died in August 2014, which would have been within the same month of any last known posts from him through the account linked to OP of this thread and about a year and a half or so after posting OP..   

I recall hearing that there had been some activity from Hal's account or something like that, and the forum had locked/or blocked Hal's account sometime after there had been activity on the account.. and maybe that was the March 2017 - or so activity that shows up on the account?  I cannot recall the details at this time, as I type - or maybe I am getting him mixed up with some other member.. Sometimes forum accounts do get hacked into, too.

Nice to wake up to a little cat fight in the morning.






Meow!!!



Not quite.   




 

That is something similar to what I have been saying, but of course it is nice to hear credible others make similar assertions, too.

My assertion has been that the bull market started in April 2019, but it was not really confirmed as entering into bullish status until about the middle of May 2019.