I don't even know where to start in terms of how hilarious all of this is, please write more!

Seriously, OP is some kind of accidental comedic genius.

I think there's really a lot more to it than this. A majority of miners deciding to impose some new rules don't suddenly have the power to force all nodes to accept their blocks as valid out of nowhere. If 50% of mining hashpower decided they were operating under rules contrary to the consensus of full bitcoind nodes out there, they will just be mining their own altcoin and the total proper Bitcoin hash rate will simply have dropped.

Ripple as #2 is hilarious.

You can short on Bitfinex.

The existence of an options market within a particular asset is not what hedging as a investment principle means.

Jamie Dimon

1H84TqJ1LxXc559AYbkqzpzKJvXP862VMV

OP can't express any idea whatsoever without insulting the reader and completely spazzes out the moment anyone disagrees about anything. This thread really isn't actually about a topic anymore, we 're just grabbing popcorn and witnessing a nervous breakdown unfold right before our eyes.

OP does not comprehend the concept of "hedging" and basically invented his own fairy tale caricature of what he believes an institutional investor to be in order to improvise some FUD, end of story.

This pretty much sums everything up--

http://youtu.be/d285LX7x9Xo

I think what we can conclude from this information is that Bitcoin is already a huge winner, because people in China want it and the government has to do all kinds of weird gymnastics to even influence it.

It's absolutely beautiful that the Chinese government itself is causing the very price dips that they are purportedly working to protect their citizens against! It couldn't be more obvious this is 100% about CNY vs CNH and capital controls, though wrapped in rhetoric about "speculation" and "gambling". It makes sense too within the auspices of their system, you simply can't have a domestic Bitcoin market circumventing capital controls, but watch once the Chinese exchanges only use the offshore currency, suddenly the PBOC has no problem with anything.


I'm pretty sure the Canadian shill is just some loser and does not represent the prevailing opinion of institutional investors. Bitcoin has an enormous upside across multiple gigantic use cases, yet somehow institutional investors are pissed that people other than them got to buy in sub-$1? Honestly that's how dummies think. There were people who said exactly the same things about double-digit Bitcoins, except these weren't institutional investors, they were just random yahoos on the internets who believed somehow they missed it, and nothing apparently is worth getting involved in unless it's a lottery-sized windfall. This is not how professional investors think, this is how unsuccessful people think, to paralyze themselves from acting in any situation, and cultivating envy.

It just progressively lumps your bet distribution into a smaller number of trials to give you the illusion that you did something different than just betting the same small amount repeatedly, by exponentially increasing the amount of variance you're exposing any given set amount of betting money to.

ALL bet distributions/"strategies" are mathematically "proven" to be break even under these conditions, because of the very nature of how multiplication and addition work in the first place.

The Martingale "system" has no sound rational basis to even be called a system in the first place, because it does not actually do anything statistically that in any way improves outcome of any arbitrary series of fixed bets.

All the Martingale system actually does is play psychological games with your perception of wins and losses, and appeals to a misguided sense that the individual bets are somehow not statistically-independent events.

The labor theory of value has never been correct.

There is essentially 0 risk of double-spending, because even trying to do something like this requires what amounts to a very sophisticated Sybil attack whereby you've essentially ostracized the retailer's node from seeing your double spend long enough for that double spend to beat your original transaction in network propagation.

The chance of success is completely probabilistic in nature and extremely remote, and the moment we're talking about an amount of value where that even remotely becomes worth pursuing, now we're in the realm of waiting for confs, and that entire vector of attack goes out the window the moment a single conf even happens.

This was actually kind of beautiful, it was a vaguely coherent verbal vomit tour de force of practically all the FUD and myths out there, with a serving of anecdotes about a personal lack of judgement applied as though they were universal law.

Retail transactions are routinely performed at 0 confirmations, because transaction propagation alone validates any given transaction better than any other payment method in existence already. 10 minute blocks being a hindrance to retail application is the biggest myth that absolutely refuses to die.

It's a pretty standard narcissistic cry for attention. It's entertaining to watch an individual with a completely delusional sense of self worth and entitlement throw these temper tantrums because swarms of inferiors do not celebrate his obvious genius.

OP is just an NXT/NEM/altcoin troll.