Actually fed is talking about negative interest rates. So if raising rates is required for your predictions then it might be awhile.
Sorry to be so frank, but do you have the inability to see certain words in what I write? Did you entirely miss the part where I wrote that the market controls interest rates and not the Fed. Btw, I also referred to the shrinking monetary base. Note since writing that Armstrong has clarified more his sling shot timing and also the timing of the low, so it has dragged out a couple to few more months. This is because the Fed decided to rescue Europe by not raising interest rates, which is going to make the rise much more precipitous when it comes.
That is what my post that started this discussion was detailing Ah - yes. I missed it. My bad. |
|
|
|
|
Yep. Still going for pretty damn accurate summary.
So it looks to me like XMR has bottomed. I could be way off but this is a lot of volume compared to what I remember XMR being several months ago (500K). Also this is really going to be the last several months that Monero has reasonable emissions in my opinion.
At some point it feels like Monero has to go past Dash. The only thing I can really come up with is that the artificial controls for the Dash emission combined with the super high XMR inflation rate early on has really skewed with the market caps on both. I feel like it's pretty safe to assume that Monero jumps past Dash this year. After that I don't know.
If an anon currency came in that cleaned up and made Monero obsolete AND bitcoin tanked to the point of a market depression hitting and all alts outside of whoever is leading (bitcoin / ethereum) then I suppose Monero would drop further. But outside of that event it's really hard for me to see the downside being all that much compared to the upside.
|
|
|
|
Of course you are going to write a presumption that attacks me, even I didn't write what you just presumed. I don't see question market on your accusation. Do you have any facts to back up that slander? Not slander at all ... intended to use a question mark. I was just summarizing this long self analysis that you are rattling on about in the speculation thread. I figured if I summarized those interested could digest it quicker. 'Backsplaining'. Your summary didn't even apply any accurate mental effort. How can you write a summary that presumes what wasn't written.  That is not the definition of a summary. What did I presume that wasn't written? TPTB accurately predicts things but has had bad life luck that's lost him money by things out of his control (was unable to sell silver even though it was at it's all time high and he wanted to. Was desperate to make money due to domestic reasons). Also let someone talk him into a bad investment even though he knew it was a bad investment. How is that inaccurate? Now we can move on instead of debating your abilities. |
|
|
|
Of course you are going to write a presumption that attacks me, even I didn't write what you just presumed. I don't see question market on your accusation. Do you have any facts to back up that slander? Not slander at all ... intended to use a question mark. I was just summarizing this long self analysis that you are rattling on about in the speculation thread. I figured if I summarized those interested could digest it quicker. The fucking useless egos are here are too much. I am out of this thread. Enjoy yourselves.
You take yourself too seriously. You continually make yourself the topic of discussion so it's not really out of line. (IE - if TBT wants to discuss his abilities as a speculator then summarizing what he says about himself or questioning his abilities are on topic). The rest of us are just chiming in with opinions ... your ego is really the only thing being discussed which you wanted to talk about. You simply have no tolerance for opinions you don't like apparently. |
|
|
|
I think what he was eluding to is that by making such a comment you must then be really wealthy if you are nearly always right?
My response made it clear I understood what he meant and I also explained that if I were invested I wouldn't be as objective. Also claiming that someone can make correct predictions the majority of the time means they should be rich from speculating is lacking some basic understanding of life. One of the main reasons I failed as a speculator is because I was unwilling to revolve my life around speculating, so for example even though I made the correct prediction of when to buy and sell silver, I didn't have my fiat and silver in the right places to make the trades. I had fiat in the USA that I couldn't get to Manila without putting me in some FATCA reporting scenario and I had physical in Manila that the dealer refused to buy or find a buyer at $48. I am a programmer and a sportsaholic, and have my head and free time deep in other priorities. I don't want to be a speculator and be married to my investments 24 x 7. That doesn't diminish my ability to analyze markets. The other reason I failed as a speculator is because I didn't know how to control my rationality when the combination of my illness messing with my adrenal function right after the May ER hospitalization, and my ex showing up to yank my kids unannounced in the same month, sent me into a tizzy trying to score big in the markets so I could afford to do something drastic about that situation. Which caused me to double-down ($75,000) on an irrational premature short bet on China. I wasn't doing research, I was acting on my desires of what I wanted to happen. So yeah I decided not to speculate because I made a lot of money in my life programming and creating. And lost most of it speculating, even though I had many correct predictions. So basically you're awesome at predictions but you don't make any money due to emergencies that always hit you between the eyes whenever you get close to winning big. |
|
|
|
Damnit wrong username. Yeah so I don't really care about the moral flaws. But they will be reflected in the economic flaws. A single individual who can make more mining with his own botnet will choose to do so rather than dealing with multiple individuals to rent it out. In the end the governance of this coin will reflect the difference between ASICs (Chinese who aren't paying for their own electricity - it is being subsidized by the government) and GPU miners. My point is that that A - in large part botnet miners won't lease out their mining to others which means they control the network. B - they won't take an active role in choosing any type of direction for the network security in the same way Chinese miners haven't for bitcoin because they aren't paying the electric bill. Person A is paying for what Person B is taking and selling. There's less incentive for Person B (who IS controlling the network) to put forth active effort in governing (which is what he's doing) than there is a Person C who chooses to use his equipment and electricity to obtain something or participate in something he believes to be profitable. It's not a moral argument in right vs wrong. It's an argument that botnets won't be healthy from a governance perspective. The point is that botnets are much more free market than electricity. Again. I couldn't disagree more. Moral arguments aside (right, wrong etc doesn't matter) as long as you can be handcuffed and tossed in jail for doing something it is not part of a free market. It's an underground market that threatens serious life altering consequences ... this is not free marketI think you've misread me arguing from some moral basis. From a practical standpoint there's very little different from me walking to my electric meter and plugging a wire into the supply side instead of the demand side & botnet mining. Both will get me thrown in jail. Both are exploiting the resources that others have not properly secured. And neither are a free market. |
|
|
|
Go defend your fragile ego in your 5 year old throwing sand box. I don't have time for you.
A poll on bitcointalk would quickly reveal who has the "fragile ego" The ignore button is just to your left. Feel free to use it.  |
|
|
|
Saying botnets are a healthy free market when the price of using one is getting tossed in jail in most countries of the world if caught is one of the stupidest things I've heard from an intelligent person.  |
|
|
|
Ehhhh disagree. Electricity is closer to a free market than botnets.
I won't argue with an idiot who doesn't even refute what I wrote. Read again and try to comprehend what I wrote. "an idiot" ... You continue to try to trigger people with insults who disagree with you. It's just as easy to come across as factual without personal insults ("I won't argue with someone who doesn't refute what I wrote"). For instance maybe I'm not an idiot. Even if you are in the right and I'm in the wrong maybe my six year old distracted me. Or I stubbed my toe and picked up on the wrong paragraph without realizing it. Or just mis-read. Which is pretty much why I've decided you'll go nowhere with your ambitions. You may be smart but your arrogance burns pretty much every bridge you've had to anyone. I've watched it happen over and over again for the last three years. You are emotionally immature & love to start insult matches and then get off on accusing the other guy of impugning your character. Speaking with you requires the same difference in emotional maturity that a 30 year old has to show to a 6 year old in order to get along. And yes - I refuted that botnets are free markets (they are different than growing tomatoes or free range hens.). The skill entry is much closer to that of ASICs. Slightly different (it requires breaking the law and less skill) but still closer to that of ASICs than GPU mining. Basically deciding if botnets, ASICs and GPU mining are free markets is like discussing if building houses, growing gardens and mining gold are free markets. Each requires different resources (all of which you can buy with enough money). ASICs require heavy investment (that you can buy a small piece of with money). Botnets require breaking the law and a certain amount of skill (that you can buy from a farmer ... but requires you to break the law too). GPU mining requires a moderate amount of skill and a moderate amount of investment. I'm willing to risk some money and time to GPU mine. I'm not going to risk going to jail for renting some botnets on the blackmarket (I imagine dealing drugs would be more profitable without much more downside on jailtime with a first time offender). Plus I'm smarter than most drug dealers I've met and not as smart as most botnet farmers. Which is what you would find with the majority of people interested in securing your botnet coin. |
|
|
|
In case anyone missed my point. I am saying botnets are a free market thus we can all go rent one. This will raise the price which raise their availability. Which will raise the hashrate difficulty and this security. Botnets are great!
Hmmmm. The amount of skill it takes to capture a botnet is above the amount of skill to setup a GPU miner (and less than that to create an ASIC). Sure you can buy a botnet for more than the farmer paid for it - just like you can buy an ASIC for more than the maker paid to have it created. But there's still a market pretty much captured by specialized skill. I see a lot in common with ASIC & botnets. Obviously skill based free market isn't immoral but it seems that it might not be optimal for securing a network where you basically want as many users as possible making it impossible for the security to become centralized. Raise the demand, thus the economies-of-scale, thus the amount extracted by the fungible skill becomes quite a low, insignificant percentage. It is way free markets work. Electricity is not a free market. ASICs are not a free market. Because they require very large fixed capital investments (which also makes them easy to regulate). Acquiring the skills to farm botnets requires only a personal investment of time. This the price of that skill will be driven down to the opportunity cost of the person, not to the fixed capital cost of constructing a hydroelectric dam or creating a silicon fab. Ehhhh disagree. Electricity is closer to a free market than botnets. Plus you are pretty much requiring people willing to break the law in order to compete in securing your network (punishing people who play by the rules) ... seems like a bad idea for keeping the right crowd advertising / using your coin. |
|
|
|
Is there a reason why ethereum and monero prices are soo linked right now- Eth rises, monero rises, eth goes down, xmr also.
If you watched - Monero's rise from the $0.50 - $0.60 to $1.50 was a delayed reaction to Eth's rise. Basically people got rich diversifying their bitcoin in Eth and then diversified their Eth with Monero (or that's what the market timing seemed to indicate). After the huge pump to $13 XMR jumped. It jumped again bigtime on a small dip to $10 or $11 if I remember correctly. There was a really interesting reddit post about a guy who is anticipating some things from bitcoin wrapped around closed door meetings with IBM and Blockstream ... wish I could find it. Anyway - might be some insider trading going on in bitcoin. Honestly I'm afraid to touch it. Halvening -> Miners going offline -> Network clogging -> Price dropping -> Miners going offline could turn into a nasty cycle. I'm also convinced there is a lot of money sitting in bitcoin waiting to get out and a lot of speculators that will "sell on news" no matter what the price does. Ethereum and Monero bring value to the table that's not just speculation and first mover advantage. Eth is def way more inflated than Monero at this point (but less inflated than BTC IMO). A lot of money has to flow into bitcoin to double it. Risk isn't worth the reward for me. |
|
|
|
In case anyone missed my point. I am saying botnets are a free market thus we can all go rent one. This will raise the price which raise their availability. Which will raise the hashrate difficulty and this security. Botnets are great!
Hmmmm. The amount of skill it takes to capture a botnet is above the amount of skill to setup a GPU miner (and less than that to create an ASIC). Sure you can buy a botnet for more than the farmer paid for it - just like you can buy an ASIC for more than the maker paid to have it created. But there's still a market pretty much captured by specialized skill. I see a lot in common with ASIC & botnets. Obviously skill based free market isn't immoral but it seems that it might not be optimal for securing a network where you basically want as many users as possible making it impossible for the security to become centralized. |
|
|
|
I think the biggest unknown is whether privacy for crypto-currency really has a big potential market. I could be wrong. But travelling for several months to SE Asia & meeting people who are more globally minded ... I believe every year brings people who drive the world forward with technology and innovation to a point where they believe privacy matters. And in money more than perhaps anything. Not because they want to hide from government entities so much as they want technology inventions that keep governments in check. If I'm right about this trend then even as bitcoin (or whatever leads the market at the time) becomes more popular the niche of people who grow to understand that it isn't required to settle for transparent blockchains will grow. And not because they are interested in hiding from TPTB - but because they are interested in keeping them in check and see this as a way to do it. |
|
|
|
I think the biggest unknown is whether privacy for crypto-currency really has a big potential market.
I think the upside for Monero may come more from its CPU-friendly hash and greater decentralization (compared to Bitcoin's trajectory) than for its privacy. In that case, Zcash seems to have the wrong philosophy about distribution and they have yet to announce their proof-of-work algorithm.
I view Zcash mostly has a technology incubator. Ditto Monero's privacy. The boots on the ground feature of Monero is its distribution and CPU hash.
Ehhh from what I've read ZCash will have a much similar worldview on their algo as Ethereum. Botnets are bad. ASICs are bad. GPU's are good. I suppose you see it as CPU > GPU > ASICs. I'm not really sure what to think at this point. |
|
|
|
We're going from bad to worse.....
I purchased a bit right before polo went down.
What's the price at?Exceedingly stable, at 0.00231169 Kind of like a safety meeting: Nobody Works, Nobody Gets Hurt. How can you call a 40% drop in a few days "Exceedingly stable"? I get that you are long on XMR, but that is delusional as hell. ThePatient asked about price since polo went down. I answered quite literally. No change is stable. Loosen up a little. Oh, so no change in the last 1-2 hours qualifies as "Exceedingly stable" unlike the last 48 hours where XMR took a fat shit on everyone who had been buying into the hype. Its that kind of ridiculous pump/hype spin that people hate about crypto and alt coins. It perfectly qualifies in context. You are the bad faith troll in this case. Welcome to my ignore list, by the way wtf, there's no context where you could define the current XMR price "exceedingly stable" Exactly. It's an absurd statement that has no basis in reality. The last few hours have been "Exceedingly stable". Perhaps when compared to the damn near record breaking fall that has happened over the last couple days, anything could be considered "Exceedingly stable" Its not just that one guy either, there are actually people defending that train of thought. That's exactly what I was talking about. The kind of complete bullshit spewed by these pumpers/hype-artists/"marketing" scammers. XMR is a good alt coin, but a lot of this community is so full of shit. If you want people to eat the shit you are trying to shovel them, tone it down a bit closer to reality. Slow and steady wins the race. No need to pump (and dump) constantly. It wasn't that long ago that it was $0.50. The rise obviously came from people diversifying Eth. It appears that this money is now going back into fiat or bitcoin (for the amount alts have dropped - bitcoin hasn't risen. In the same way bitcoin didn't fall with the altcoin rise. I find both very puzzling when we are talking about volume in the alt market that is over half of bitcoins total volume). Maybe Risto is jumping ship for the halvening (wouldn't surprise me). Anyway. I bought in when it was $0.50ish. I feel like $1.50 is a much fairer valuation. I've quit buying silver to pay off my mini GPU farm and switched to buying Monero. Hope I don't hate myself later. But XMR should fairly be at the price of Dark/Dash ... it isn't because of the emission curve. Isn't the GUI coming soon? Emission curve should be slowing down this year. Only unkown is ZCash. This is just one more of dozens of examples of where people can be pointed to when they accuse XMR of instamine. High emission rate screwed early adopters as much as late adopters. |
|
|
|
Try 99.99% impossible.
There is 0 chance ETH will ever rival the price of BTC.. What happened to the .01 in that assessment |
|
|
|
I personally think anyone trading altcoins this close to BTC halving is insane, but that's just my opinion, man.
I think a lot of bitcoin speculators will be badly burned in July, as everyone seems so sure the price is going to increase with the halving. In reality, I expect the BTC price to plummet as miners abandon ship en masse.I do agree with you, however, that the delusion will certainly steal some thunder from the alt scene (at least at first). I would have agreed with you before I saw the rise of Ethereum with 50% of bitcoins volume and reaching 1/6th of it's market cap. I'm not so sure that bitcoin can't go down at the same rate as alts go up under the right circumstances. |
|
|
|
Yup. Where are the chartists who saw that coming? Which chart explained any of the recent dump? NONE. That's why TA etc are just dumb tools to dupe newbies (regardless of legitimacy of a coin). Overall this is coin has more slimeballs than even DASH and ETH combined. Normally I use crude language to go with this but it serves no purpose.
Just don't introduce anyone to XMR. BTC is the best one can do and that's what should be supported. Otherwise it's just dump a coin, come to this thread with a TA line to mock everyone, post negative sentiments when you want to buy, positive when you are ready to dump. Rinse, laugh and repeat.
Don't forget to post at what price you want to get back in. What price you want to sell right now. Everything out in the open, to steal from the guy posting before you in this very thread. Works everytime.
Bitcoin is a walking deadman. No one knows it yet. Not sure what will take it's place but it will be worth less two years from now than it is today. It has both stagnant development (or development to benefit one primary company - not the protocol as a whole) and non functioning governance. First mover advantage can't compensate in this arena with those problems. Every year in crypto is like 20 in the real world. Every other coin has it's problems. Monero has it's ridiculous emissions curve & larger blockchain (although as time goes on the latter is less of a problem). Ethereum has the massive presale which is effectively a 100% premine. ZCash will have a 20% tax and is effectively centralized at the development arm and if they don't change anything will inherit all of bitcoins problems (minus ASICs). IMO ETH, Monero and ZCash (when it's released) are the only things I'm interested in. Despite the flaws of everything else - Dash is and always has been a joke. |
|
|
|
Calm down, everybody in here is nervous about Monero so don't let it grab you too. Just take a cup of tea, make your predictions and trade as you like  Monitoring the short-term exchange(s) noise continuously can be very stressful. Monero won't have Bitcoin's scaling problem until the transaction rate and market cap are much higher. Interim it should have an upgrade to RingCT, so I think it is given that 2016 - 2017 Monero will have a very significant rise as priced in BTC. Clearly XMR has broken out above of the downwedge as priced in BTC. I do think we still have a correction in BTC coming though, so I'd be keeping some dry US dollar powder on the table for a few months before going all in. Beyond that it gets murkier. Because for example, I presume I will launch in 2017 with a real solution to the economies-of-scale economics of the scaling problem but even I recognize there is a long way to go between that plan and the actual accomplishment, so even I can't predict with 100% surety that event, much less all the other variables in play. I don't see any other altcoin in 2016 ready to displace Monero as the free market, reliable alternative for parking money escaping the accelerating collapse of the peripheral markets (outside the USA) with Europe ready to march over the cliff after the BREXIT vote. I might have a Seedr IPO within 2016 at best, but that will be for the corporation not the token (which will be separately fair proof-of-work launched). I am not referring to other pumps that are approaching as I can't predict the timing irrationality of gamblers, scammers, and the n00b prey who are learning by fire. I am referring to those well informed, serious investors who need to hedge against Bitcoin's scalepocalyspe and increasing centralization of mining especially 65% pool control in China. Look around and there is no other option with a CPU friendly hash function that is ready for prime time. Note I have not analyzed for example Lisk and Waves. I presume Lisk is more smart contract nonsense. Waves appears to be about colored coins, but I haven't studied thoroughly. We don't know yet when Zerocash (Z.cash) will launch and whether it will really be ready for prime time. One would presume it will have issues given the inexperience in crypto-currency of the developers. Fluffypony et al, IMO now is the time to double-down on your coding effort and get the upgrade out as well as the GUI (if that is still an issue). To others and their altcoins, I am not saying you have no chance to see a free market driven (not pump scam) rise in price also. On a case-by-case basis. Disclaimer: I haven't really been paying close attention (because my head also needs to be in the sand on my own work) and others may have more well researched opinion. Don't you think zcash is a factor in this? Maybe I'm misreading the tea leaves but the ethereum market cap seems to indicate that people are more comfortable funding development via premine / taxed mining rewards than not having any subsidies and slower development. (XMR and Dash would be another comparison ... and those are two coins where the economic winner is clearly not the technical winner). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
