|
362
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: January 26, 2015, 08:37:38 AM
|
Fuck that Adam guy.
Hilarious. Confirmation (if it were ever needed) that this thread is plunging unchartered depths. I imagine there's a profusion of pics of rockets, trains and moons ready to be posted just as there were last March, June (June was a particularly good month for being over-confident) and November. Of course, its different this time.  I guess Magsca was correct, the new Greek govt is going to go all in on BTC.  |
|
|
|
|
364
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Calling the Bottom
|
on: January 15, 2015, 01:54:20 PM
|
I'm just dying to hear what Risto makes of this (Stamp 155 and falling).
Blockchain, as a technology, is indestructible. A reasonable starting point is to understand that crypto is here to stay, and no laws or wars can stop it. Any individual cryptocoin, Bitcoin included, has challenges particular to it, and local laws and wars may prove detrimental to individuals' wealth, as well as life. People can only learn more about Bitcoin, unlearning is not possible. With any technology, invention or innovation, there is an adoption curve that is the aggregate of all the people's individual propensities of learning about a new thing, deciding to use it, trying it, and amplifying their usage to significant levels. On average, the process from first hearing about something, to trying it, takes 2 years. From trying to actual adoption, we might add 1 more year. The current number of Bitcoin owners is likely a paltry 1-2 million. Even smaller is the number of people who actively use Bitcoin in their life. The first number, at least, has not grown significantly in 2014. Enthusiasm has given way to apathy, evidenced by both price and volume of trades lagging far behind their highs. Meanwhile, the 2 years average delay from first hearing to first trial, is slowly becoming fulfilled in hundreds of millions of people. There were millions who heard about the bubble in 2011, and their "2 years" started counting. Not enough of them were ready to buy in 2012, which was still a year of slow price appreciation. But in 2013, the great advances were made by the people who had had 2 years to ensure themselves that it was not a fly-by-night. In 2012, the global media coverage about Bitcoin was tiny, but in 2013 all changed. In two years, we are talking about 100x more people in the pipeline of becoming Bitcoin owners. This gives rise to the exponential trendline. There is only one way to draw a trendline with the best R^2 fit (follows from the fact that goodness-of-fit is a universal criterion), and it is shown here. The number of Bitcoin users is so small at 1-2 million that the trendline should stay exponential 2 more orders of magnitude minimum. An added reason is that because Bitcoin is money, and the exponential trendline means exponential gains for everyone involved, it makes sense to speculate and buy a large number of bitcoins instead of the fair share. (The fair share assuming worldwide adoption is BTC0.002 and assuming that only the elite of 3% world's richest and most connected buy it, BTC0.07.) An increasing number of people are already ready to buy bitcoins. Banks, ETF's, private services, etc. have the infrastructure ready for launch. Both are waiting. Bitcoin holders are anxious, but as long as their anxiety results in them selling more bitcoins to the deep-pocket investors, the wait continues. In 2012 it continued quite long, with price going up only a little (more than 100% though). Hearing about Bitcoin is the start of your Bitcoin pregnancy. Of these pregnancies, not all perhaps result in a healthy baby (adopting Bitcoin as your home currency), but luckily here, the time is not limited to 9 months. The average with those who currently are power users may have been 3 years (or less, since the delay is shorter with people with the early adopter mindset), but for others it may be 5 years. Miscarriages happen often, but the reverse-miscarriage is also a very typical occurrence. We have a world-record number of Bitcoin pregnancies going on now, and hardly any births for several months already. I believe that the laws of nature and mathematics will take care that the babies will be seen in increasing numbers.  The trendline shows how much behind we are currently. The price shows the daily birth rate. I am writing this from a castle that I bought with money earned by trading Bitcoin based on the very premise I have explained to you here. I believe that the next one might carry us north of $10,000. The longer time we spend here, the more explosive it gets. The supermove from $2 to $266 (133x price appreciation) took 17 months. Extrapolate that with the starting point of $340 in 2014-4-11. You read it, right? You understood it? You can say that something in the last 5 months has disproven something that I have claimed in it? If the answer is NO, NO, NO, please do not post again. This is a self-moderated thread for a reason. Before replying, read it once again. It is one of the good posts among my 1000+ existing. PS. I have seen both of the other big exchanges hitting lower values. It only happens when you are in risk of losing your money (which happened re: MtGox). Don't want to go there again. Even if Stamp hits $0, I am only buying OTC. Risto, Glad to see you managed to get the 'castle' into your response, although I think many here would argue it is actually a manor - castle's tend by definition to be built of stone and have turrets but I digress. For all these pregnancies you speak of there has been some pretty high profile abortions, miscarriages, SIDS and infanticides, which unfortunately tend to hog headlines far more than pregnancies (which are, lets face it, ten a penny in the real world). So, we return to perceptions and Jorge's argument that 'new blood' ie new markets (new buyers) are needed. China is falling away, the mainstream in the West thinks BTC is a bit of joke after the last 12 months after the (continuing) run of disasters, frauds and robberies. So, where are these new buyers coming from? Perhaps we could get the 'man in the street' interested? But wait, you don't use exchanges, you buy OTC. This sounds like the sort of privileged two tier system I thought BTC was going to eradicate. Reading this sort of attitude I can imagine the how the 'man in the street' may feel. (I posted the quote from Animal Farm above because I think you should reread it.) And what of the miners, who are switching off and calling it a day -- doesn't that threaten the 'indestructible' network? I popped into the forum to see what was happening and saw that you were "calling the bottom" so assumed this involved some numbers, clearly not. I recall 12 months back you were calling the next bull run as being in May (then Aug, Sept, Nov etc) in between which you unsuccessfully predicted a range of 'bottoms', so your record (I'm sure you are aware) is a bit tarnished at this point. I really don't care, forgive you your mistakes and respect your right to make as many predictions as you want. But please, if you love BTC so much, realise perhaps your behaviour may be actually causing some of the PR issues we encounter. |
|
|
|
|
365
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Calling the Bottom
|
on: January 15, 2015, 01:28:34 PM
|
I'm just dying to hear what Risto makes of this (Stamp 155 and falling).
Haven't you heard of the latest technical improvement to the protocol? The development team determined that price does not matter. "For the time being, certainly, it had been found necessary to make a readjustment of rations (Squealer always spoke of it as a "readjustment," never as a "reduction"), but in comparison with the days of Jones, the improvement was enormous. Reading out the figures in a shrill, rapid voice, he proved to them in detail that they had more oats, more hay, more turnips than they had had in Jones's day, that they worked shorter hours, that their drinking water was of better quality, that they lived longer, that a larger proportion of their young ones survived infancy, and that they had more straw in their stalls and suffered less from fleas. The animals believed every word of it. Truth to tell, Jones and all he stood for had almost faded out of their memories. They knew that life nowadays was harsh and bare, that they were often hungry and often cold, and that they were usually working when they were not asleep. But doubtless it had been worse in the old days. They were glad to believe so. Besides, in those days they had been slaves and now they were free, and that made all the difference, as Squealer did not fail to point out." Animal Farm, Chapter 9 (although pretty much the whole book is fast becoming a parallel to BTC). |
|
|
|
|
368
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Calling the Bottom
|
on: January 14, 2015, 02:25:07 AM
|
Rpietila promised me $10k coin by last Christmas. Are we still on track?
You remember wrong. It was 300k USD. Not even kidding. What possible reason will there be for no more speculation or hoarding in a currency that is designed specifically for that?
The white paper does not mention that, does it? The declared purpose of bitcoin was to be a currency for e-payments, not a get-rich-by-sittng-on-it instrument. Given that goal, making the supply fixed probably was a mistake, as economists keep saying (after all, "Satoshi" was a computer scientist, not an economist.) Besides perhaps the mistaken notion that the inflation of national currencies is a bad thing, the fixed money supply is something that a computer scientist would have chosen for ease of implementation. An unbounded money supply would have been a pain to program; he could not have used a fixed block and transition layout with 64-bit long ints, he would have needed a variable-length multiword integer, in the layout and in the implementation. That is only one of many details in the protocol that suggest that it was never meant to be more than a computer experiment. Take, for example, the abrupt halving of the reward every 4 years: it is a source of instability and uncertainty, the 2016 halving is already having people worried now. Why didn't he specify a more gradual decrease, that would give the same 0.5 factor in 4 years but in small monthly steps? The only reason I can think of is that it would have required another page or two of source code, and a table of 48 steps, properly rounded, and another paragraph in the white paper... Oh Jorge....this sort of stuff is the equivalent of drawing a cartoon of Muhammad with coke and hookers: criticising Satoshi will have the cultists calling Fatwah on you  "All hail Satoshi" Je suis Jorge Stolfi.  Brilliant Blitz, you've still got it I'm having that one!! | | | V |
|
|
|
|
369
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Calling the Bottom
|
on: January 13, 2015, 02:27:14 PM
|
Oh Jorge....this sort of stuff is the equivalent of drawing a cartoon of Muhammad with coke and hookers.
That's way too low even for Jorge. He's often wrong but he can't be that dumb. You need hard work to equal such level of obnoxious stupidity. I'm a big fan of Jorge's, he doesn't hide behind a pseudonym, he actually has credentials in the field and (most importantly) he has been proved correct more often than wrong in this forum. My post was mocking the cultists and of course people like you, who resort to adhoms as the first line of defence when their views are challenged. As Shroomsy would say, "welcome to ignore" |
|
|
|
|
370
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Calling the Bottom
|
on: January 13, 2015, 02:05:11 PM
|
What possible reason will there be for no more speculation or hoarding in a currency that is designed specifically for that?
The white paper does not mention that, does it? The declared purpose of bitcoin was to be a currency for e-payments, not a get-rich-by-sittng-on-it instrument. Given that goal, making the supply fixed probably was a mistake, as economists keep saying (after all, "Satoshi" was a computer scientist, not an economist.) Besides perhaps the mistaken notion that the inflation of national currencies is a bad thing, the fixed money supply is something that a computer scientist would have chosen for ease of implementation. An unbounded money supply would have been a pain to program; he could not have used a fixed block and transition layout with 64-bit long ints, he would have needed a variable-length multiword integer, in the layout and in the implementation. That is only one of many details in the protocol that suggest that it was never meant to be more than a computer experiment. Take, for example, the abrupt halving of the reward every 4 years: it is a source of instability and uncertainty, the 2016 halving is already having people worried now. Why didn't he specify a more gradual decrease, that would give the same 0.5 factor in 4 years but in small monthly steps? The only reason I can think of is that it would have required another page or two of source code, and a table of 48 steps, properly rounded, and another paragraph in the white paper... Oh Jorge....this sort of stuff is the equivalent of drawing a cartoon of Muhammad with coke and hookers: criticising Satoshi will have the cultists calling Fatwah on you "All hail Satoshi" |
|
|
|
|
371
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: January 04, 2015, 03:49:51 PM
|
Bitstamp | Total bids: 2616909 USD. Total asks: 26962 BTC. Ratio: 97.05565 USD/BTC.
😈
Not sure how much relevant is this Blitz? With all this selling there is alot of fiat on the sideways... Waiting for the right moment. I think that real problem is that ask sides on all the markets are still thin. Imposible to make a large (4k+) buy back without moving the market for 40$. 12k to 400$ on Bitstamp and Bitfinex, 19k shorts on finex... And we still haven't seen the real buying back. This will be fun Of course it's not much relevant, it is no more than a snapshot. However, there's been a divergence for quite some time: Ah... the legendary, mythical "fiat on the side", just waiting to come into play....biding its time for the last eleven months, no doubt distracted by the unicorns and mermaids keeping it company. |
|
|
|
|
372
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: January 04, 2015, 03:45:43 PM
|
I guess I'm the only one that sees the pattern for the timing of this bear trap. It's just too perfect.
What do you mean? Traders selling at the end of Wave 5 - epic bear trap as move up from the bottom? I love the Elliot Wave adherents the best -- remember Chessnut: months and months of "definitely Wave 3 of v up to 620 by Wednesday"; "no, its wave iv of 3, nestled in a seven of nine, up $50 tomorrow". Wrong every time. Comedy gold.  |
|
|
|
|
374
|
Bitcoin / Legal / Re: labcoin lawsuit
|
on: December 28, 2014, 02:23:28 PM
|
|
The BTC eco-system is a magnet for scum-bags; as it grows we will no doubt see bigger (corporate) scumbags take over and everyone will rejoice at how respectable things have become.
|
|
|
|
|
377
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: November 25, 2014, 10:22:27 AM
|
Two noticeable things:
Six to eight hours ago there was near parity across the exchanges now we have a $12 spread.
LTC usually 'follows' BTC to a greater or lesser extent, but in the last 48hours LTC has remained flat.
Makes me wonder how sustainable this rally is?
During real BTC rallies, LTC tends to lag 1-2 weeks before joining the party. When we went from 300 to 450 last month LTC followed in almost lockstep....but was that a real rally. There was some lag last November but I don't think it sets a precedent. I don't know what to think but I'm suspicious this is another false dawn, similar to MArch/April. But I did just see a report suggesting commodities prices may have turned a corner, whihc may be good for BTC in terms of sentiment. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
