wasn't hsbc the biggest money launderer in the world? - I remember some stuff with iran as well as with gaddafi and drug cartels... |
|
|
|
The bitfinex bot is simply accumulating to prepare for dumping once the markets goes bananas after the SR auction (expect +$450 then dump). It's a gamble though, he is assuming that all the coins will be sold (we won't ever know the price though), but most likely they will be and the market will react in a positive way. Simple strategy. Most likely the markets will start going up before the auction is finished (anticipation).
Are you sure ? Or is it only a theory ? However will bitcoin reach 500 $ before the end of the year ? or must we wait the next year? I am 100% sure (lol). No, but really it makes a lot of sense considering the circumstances. This is how you make easy money. the only thing that makes sense is that the owner of the bot knows what he is going to bid regarding the confiscated coins on the auction - therefore it makes sense for him to accumulate for a price lower than his own bid |
|
|
|
|
regarding xcp insider trading (delete it if it is nonsense)
being in xcp since its inception and following the project closely it was speculated since spring/summer that there is a connection between xcp and overstock which can be found here or also in the counterparty forum. i thought it was (poorly) priced in because the price was buttoning around april or something and on a low level rising since that point: what was a positive surprise was the scale to which overstock was using the protocol which let immediately buy more xcp after the announcement (I think this was true for a quite a lot of close followers). totally unexepcted was the announcement regarding "forking" ethereum which let to a second price explosion.
I do not think that there was major insider trading - the price rise as well as the incline now is given by the nature of most if not all cryptocurrencies - see risto pietilas post regarding that issue - a "pump" is not neccessarily an artificial behaviour of the market. it is simply the point where people do not want to sell anymore and a lot of people want to buy. the "over"selling now is given by the inverse function of that characterisation.
on a larger scale you see exactly that beviour with btc.
|
|
|
|
|
where do I find information regarding trezor/xcp?
|
|
|
|
|
the sell off before was beyond retarded.
anyway the guys who bought/buy have a ~25% chance of getting a two maginutude gain mid to long term.
|
|
|
|
even if this a non-perfect solution it is better than no solution which excludes a huge amount of people. as always I quote my reference project for development counterparty/xcp, which made exactly the same step back in march to include a wider range of users with a non-perfect solution which in the end turned out to be great: And if people want to sell their XCP as soon as the web wallet comes out, they should go for it. I think it's kind of like stepping over a dollar to pick up a nickel though.
this is at least as true for xmr as it was for xcp |
|
|
|
|
I do understand the problems regarding btc - but xmr was belonging to the group they have/had access to - why do you not send them to the users?
|
|
|
|
very very nice work  looks great |
|
|
|
Whats the point? He's not the FBI so he can't write an Email to Amazon, DO and whatever masternode hoster and force them to give them access to the servers. Nor does he have money to waste for such stuff; your arguments are simply invalid as you can't compare a forum user here to a powerful attacker. On the other hand, you might as well ask DRK guys to trace a Darkwallet transaction and question them if BTC isn't enough.... PS: If you are really interested in the cn ringsignatures stuff you might read for example this from gmaxwell: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7765455 - i am still not sure if you are just trolling and provoking or...whatever. Is BTC not enough? Darkwallet transactions will suffice until a mergmined cryptonote sidechain with superior liquidity replaces it. Why must there be an altcoin to provide privacy? Merely to make you rich? the question you should ask is about the elasticity of the utility curve of privacy - I have assumptions regarding that and that is why I think monero is the big thing edit: even if he is trolling, his questions are valid - we do not know if bitcoins privacy is enough, neither do we know if darkcoins privacy is enough, it is about the utility of privacy. |
|
|
|
regarding the fed auction - I assume it will be as bearish as the last one was  at these prices I assume they will change hands with a 10-20 % mark-up - gl to the shorters  I'm hoping some big pocket swoops all of them in one set a la Draper and advertises the purchase and its price Too bad we're not likely to have a leaked list of bidders like last time  these auctions will be a bullish thing as long as there is no ther place to buy 50000 btc without an insane counterparty risk - once we have these places it will probably turn bearish |
|
|
|
regarding the fed auction - I assume it will be as bearish as the last one was at these prices I assume they will change hands with a 10-20 % mark-up - gl to the shorters |
|
|
|
|
a page full of fear and uncertainty
probably we will laugh at page 20000 about bitcoins current state
|
|
|
|
Even if in the end you did not win, the strategy is correct if it is +EV. I'd wager $100k on a coin toss any day if I'd be paid back 300k.
this cannot be emphazised more. outcome does not really matter. for some reason the market is not behaving like this regarding monero. I do not know if some guys are using a splitted tongue as an exit strategy and I basically do not care. under expected value aspects monero is a no brainer - but also adjust your positions to the risk existent. |
|
|
|
It is a crappy investment because it is trivial to dilute it infinitely.
I guess sir and I really normally appreciate your analysis as well as your opinion - you are wrong here. Do you think it is non-trivial to dilute XCP, or do you think that trivially dilutable issuances can be investment grade nonetheless? I am not exactly sure what you mean by dilutable - but I assume that you use it the way that the function of xcp can be copied within its own protocol. I think you are right regarding that - this was true until last week. But even in this case it was reasonable to assume that the native currency of the protocol was more widely accepted and used than the newly created tokens. Even point 1 changed a little bit due to the ethereum fork and the usage of xcp as fee. There is a second point regarding the crappy investment. I was with these guys since the inception of counterparty aka page 2 of the announcement thread. They knew exactly what they wanted to do and basically did it over the whole period of time. After ~3 month they left our beloved nest of bitcointalk to join the financial industry and tell the world what they created. They convinced worldwide quite a group of important people that it is worth taking a look - the effects of this can be seen now. Counterparty is regarding the quality of manpower/ development as well as the outcome of that the reference in the altcoin scene - we should not forget that it is 11 months old. I raised over the whole period of time exactly the same question which you are raising now - what is this strange token xcp and why should it be worth something. They did not convince me (exception maybe now the with the ethereum fee) by purely economical reasons, even though they were also existent. but they convinced me by action. I stopped raising this question. This is not xmr, which is definetely under all logical aspects the investment with the highest long term expected value which was started this year. But code as well as projects are driven by people, which is at least as important as the logical reasoning - for more information look in the msc thread . |
|
|
|
maybe the wrong place to say it but I assume we see another magintude the second we have good way for common investors to invest in bitcoin.
I think most people here completely underestimate how much money some insitutions and private persons have.
The challenge will be how to let the masses know that it's a good idea for Average Joe to hold some bitcoins in an IRA, and (once the EFT exists) that it's easy to do. I don't expect to see the mainstream media tripping over themselves giving this kind of investment advice! The thing that's great about the SecondMarket BIT is that there's a sales force actually talking to rich people, convincing them to invest in Bitcoin. Will the ETF have a sales force? I expect the Winklevi will get some media splash if and when COIN goes live, but that will only last for a few weeks. Once the price falls from the next peak, who's going to be pushing Bitcoin then? Hopefully, SecondMarket BIT will still be doing that! A great sales tactic might be to say, remember when I suggested last year that you buy our Bitcoin fund, and you weren't interested? Well it's 10 times the price now, and I expect it to continue to do extremely well. You should listen to me this time! Of course, for that to work, they have to be pushing it now! And the numbers suggest that they haven't been selling much lately. they will probably not need some huge marketing campaign - they will simply explain aka enlighten these people what bitcoin really is. the learning curve is in my opinion one of the greatest barriers to entry. the moment an etf starts they have a monetary incentive to produce high quality campaigns. I also do not think it will be average joe buying first in but rich to very rich people - their perspective is to stay as rich as they are know. risto ones put it this way - if you are rich you are better off having some bitcoin than not having some bitcoin. I think he is right. |
|
|
|
|
if you get your objectives clear (no chow chow short term as well as binary outcome) it is probably the best investment you can make this year.
I still give it more than 25% to become the dominant decentralized private ledger.
|
|
|
|
person talking sense
thanks for the great insight. I always thought that the quantity theory of money would fail to deal with the store of value function of money (or hodling) assuming that money is always neutral. You seem to have a deeper understanding of that - so I have a few questions: 1.) I think that bitcoins function as a store value will for quite a long time be more important than its usage (even though being interdependent). Can you give more insight regarding factor T? Or provide a good (academic) article regarding that factor in this particular kind of analysis in QTM? 2.) It is obvious that the price is hugely driven by speculation - but given todays market capitalization (~5 Billion) we could say that it shows (no one knows if this is really possible on methodological level) that we give it a 1 % chance to get 1 % of the trade and store of value of the world economy (500 Billion). or do I misunderstand that? 3.) I always have the assumption that we as economist fail when time comes into play . But you tried to give some insight regarding that, when you say that you do not think that it will be an overnight ride to the moon and assume that it takes a decade. But let us simply assume that perception regarding bitcoin changes due to some factors. At question 2 we had a 1% chance at todays prices to reach 1% of the world market. for simplification let us assume we change to a 10% chance. Don't you think that prices would climb much faster, even given the same or nearly the same velocity? 4.) given your formula. Do you think it is possible to fill it with numbers, to give us a speculation free price of bitcoin - I think I do not completely get your factor t and how to use it. |
|
|
|
Why are there people so damn desperate to keep the price below 400? What are they afraid of? What do they want?
Most people purchase Bitcoins in the speculative hope they can later profit by selling them at a higher price to other market participants. As it's mathematically impossible for this to continue ad infinitum it's foolish to think you can continue to make money at the expense of other market participants (of which you yourselves are among) beyond the peak of adoption. Once adoption rates have peaked, which they more than likely did last year, there's little left but a massive downside caused by an imbalance of those wishing to cash out vs new money coming in from those wishing to speculate on further price rises. As the imbalance becomes more apparent new adopters are likely to become fewer and fewer thus escalating the downside. As more people start to realize risk/reward is a bad bet and that the coins are gradually becoming worth less vs USD, a cash grab situation is likely to arise in which people will become aware coins are actually only backed by buy orders amounting to about 0.01% of the arbitrary market capitalization. This situation could be immensely profitable for those buying into the next round of folly. All those who have become rich from Bitcoin have simply done so at the expense of later market participants, many of whom are likely to realize large losses on the flip side at some point. Hence why it's reasonably comparable to a giant ponzi scheme.  it is sad to see how little people here understand of the economics of network effects as well as the economics of bitcoin. tell me what is the value of a global scale value ledger which can only be changed a consensus of its participants and is immune to any other intervention? additionally this ledger also has a function and is scarce. at this point of time the market capitalization is 0,05% of the gold market cap.... |
|
|
|
There is no doubt that the developers behind Counterparty are exceptionally talented and the coding may provide incredible utility for accomplishing revolutionary tasks. I was initially extremely attracted to this as a potential investment vehicle (Bryne's plans are impressive), especially since there is no mining and a cap of less than 3 million coins.
However, from an investment standpoint, I have a real problem with getting optimistic about the longer term valuations of Counterparty because 1) all of the code is open source and it can be duplicated & lacks proprietary value; 2) Bitcoin itself could end up adopting these features; 3) a big player like Google could bring yet another coin with all of these features (and much more) which could overtake the dominate role for this space; and 4) there are no guarantees that Bryne's dream of an alternate exchange will be the one that actually gets off the ground with all of the regulatory hurdles and track record of contrary political positioning that has been so unpopular with regulators and Wall St. The scum hate him with a passion. As a result, these factors pose a long term threat to the viability of this coin ever reaching significant value.
I would love to be proven wrong and, thus, provided with a good incentive to invest. But I am afraid that what Counterparty has created for the free market is somewhat similar to what pharmaceutical drug companies would be up against if they ever attempted to patent naturally occurring, unaltered herbs and healing plants as cures for diseases. There is nothing in place to protect the exclusivity or scarcity of this very impressive technology that has been released out into the wild.
So far Counterpart has shown to be extremely competent in finishing off projects. I would not worry about some other coming in, copying and trumping it. Unfinished, slow projects are a bane in this field. Its no surprise that Counterparty are doing well. additionally I doubt that a fork will spin-off at this point of time. the competitor was msc, I think they are done. dogeparty, clearinghouse etc. lack network effects, we have to see if ether manages to network - I at least got doubts. the only really good point is point two but as far as I understood sidechains and especially reliability of sidechains will at least take another 12-18 months. take the position of people tranferring very high amounts of money - would you trust a non bulletproof system or would you choose the more secure one? |
|
|
|
Counterparty is too slow. It's not smart to use btc's blockchain either way....BTC will eventually fall (to other cryptocurrencies), and so will the coins tied with it. Alternatives will take time to build up. The problem with Clearinghouse is , although VIA is custom built and fast, it does not have the distribution of BTC. So what you're saying is dogeparty? Dogeparty is a nice compromise between Counterparty and Clearinghouse, it just has the right combination of speed/community support/distribution. I see Dogeparty being more successful in the future than both of those. Just wait for someone to actually start trading serious with Counterparty, they'll be cursing the slowness of Bitcoin blockchain with every trade, not exactly a good user experience. What we're seeing now is a usual marketing hype, Auroracoin type, with no fundamental reasons, pure guesstimates and hyped beliefs. all these projects are done for niches. when you think what counterparty can provide - you see that it is on the most secure blockchain, it can use spin-off effects, as well as reliable technology. in case regulation works well it is a no-brainer. the argument with the slowness of the btc blockchain is true. byrne even argues that it is a feature that it is not that fast. counterparty wants the niche of high secure, low volume, high amounts trade. if you look closer in the finance market, these niche is existent and it is not the worst idea to fill it. high frequency trading will probably never be done on a blockchain, see vitaliks posts from the beginning of the year in the xcp thread. the difference between a one, five or ten minute confirmation is in certain fields not that important. all that said xcp is a highly risky investment. compared to all other 2.0 projects it is nevertheless at this point by far the best. further I doubt that it is possible to overtake it within the next six months regarding development, embeddedness as well as industry connections. look in the msc thread where they discuss the problem of not-being-first-mover anymore this is true for all competing projects. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
