i may be wrong, but i don't think he can claim it even if already registered 'cause it was already a very well known brand. It is like registering the word internet in 1992.
Not in Japan. Japan has a first to file law not a first to use law. I know this cause some Japanese guy filed my trademark and I had to buy it off him |
|
|
|
I was thinking more in line of stimulus. Like QE, but direct to private enterprise for the purpose of entrepreneurship or job creation. Entrepreneurs capitalized from the Feds money without banks in the middle. Fed owns equity in the business. Then ring fence speculative trading or only allow cash based speculation without derivatives. Let the hedge funds gamble but not on leveraged instruments. If they go bust it doesn't drag down the rest of the system
Maybe Job Guarantee? Govt as employer of last resort.
I don't know. Its a tough thing to ponder There are a lot of moving parts to take into consideration. Something like that I would see as a stopgap measure at best because it doesn't really get to the basis of the problem, because leveraged trading is far from the only way that capital is misallocated by our society. Yeah I know there's a lot of moving parts. That's why it's hard to design a system that incorporate everything. I don't see leveraged instruments as capital misallocation. I see de-leveraging as contributor to liquidity crisis. I wouldn't outlaw derivatives just ring fence them |
|
|
|
Decentralized political economy --- Is this like feudalism? more like prior to feudalism Individualized artisan production -- Pre Industrial production? post industrial Whats prior to feudalism? Empires or tribalism? How would you unravel our modern systems to obtain this state? |
|
|
|
What is the optimum system? *Decentralized political economy and mix of individualized artisan quality production and automation to replace consumerism and authoritarian top down control of collectivized production. Decentralized political economy --- Is this like feudalism? Individualized artisan production -- Pre Industrial production? I was thinking more in line of stimulus. Like QE, but direct to private enterprise for the purpose of entrepreneurship or job creation. Entrepreneurs capitalized from the Feds money without banks in the middle. Fed owns equity in the business. Then ring fence speculative trading or only allow cash based speculation without derivatives. Let the hedge funds gamble but not on leveraged instruments. If they go bust it doesn't drag down the rest of the system Maybe Job Guarantee? Govt as employer of last resort. I don't know. Its a tough thing to ponder |
|
|
|
I agree with mgburks77 here, the more individuals become cells in a larger system, whether hierarchical or networked it doesn't matter. They sacrifice degrees of freedom (free will) to the superstructure. I think only the top layer can enjoy free will or "liberty", it's inevitable, but not unacceptable.
A superstructure will always exist. Complete freedom is an illusion. We can not break free from the laws of physics, from our emotions, or from the need for a coherent human society (we are social animals). The best thing we can do is make our "prison" more enjoyable, ie make a society that is fairer for everyone. But we will always be individual cells in a body called mankind. I think we need to accept that, and stop believing freedom is the holy grail, because 1. it doesn't exist 2. it would not even solve anything. I agree. I think its all about the rules. In a game like Monopoly eventually there will one winner and everyone loses. In a game like Rock-Paper-Scissors each player takes turn winning (not good example but I can't think of another game that doesn't allow concentration of power) The inevitable end of free market Capitalism is monopoly & the opposite Communism/ Socialism doesn't work either. What is the optimum system? Nobody knows yet. But we all know what we have doesn't work. |
|
|
|
If you claim you can predict then why is BTC not $500?
This is like if a sharpshooter claims that they are pretty good and you ask them "If you are pretty good, then why can't you hit a mosquito's left eyeball from 2,000 meters away with a blindfold on?" It's not perfect, as I've said many, many times. It is sometimes wrong, which is why it readjusts its predictions every hour. If you read the older posts you would have seen that it readjusted its prediction one hour after I posted this, saying that it would not reach $500. The neural network successfully predicted a pretty significant rise in price. It doesn't have to be 100% perfect. I was arguing against the ridiculous claim that it is literally impossible to predict bitcoin prices. I'll give you that it's impossible to predict bitcoin prices 100% correctly 100% of the time, but it's very possible to predict them correctly within a reasonable margin of error the majority of the time. This is better than most (probably any, actually) humans could do. I'm saying its impossible to mathematically model markets because they are based on human interactions which are totally unpredictable. The one thing I find "predictable" is that implied volatility reverts to mean. Not really a prediction. Just that statistically speaking, volatility is mean reverting (not prices) How are you predicting price? What is your model based on? |
|
|
|
Any trader knows its impossible to predict the future.
Look up Random Walk Theory
It's not impossible and people do it all the time. People make ridiculous amounts of money by predicting stock price movement seconds ahead of time and making super short term trades, seconds apart. This is just trying to do it on a longer term scale. And it seems to be working pretty well. Definitely better than any human could do. Who are these people? You mean HFT? They are front running trades to capture the spread. It's similar to what a Market Maker does. My friend works at an HFT shop in NJ. All their positions are delta hedged. They don't make money on predicting the future. They make money on rebates & capturing the spread If you claim you can predict then why is BTC not $500? |
|
|
|
|
Interesting article.
On one hand you have merchants using Bitpay. These merchants don't want to hold BTC. They convert it to fiat before it touches their account. They are BTC sellers
On the other side you have hoarders who don't wanna to spend BTC because they are buying it for speculation.
As more merchants accept BTC thru Bitpay; this creates an asymmetry of sellers over buyers. This puts a lot of selling pressure on BTC driving the price down.
So at some point the future the price will be driven low enough where there is an equilibrium of sellers vs buyers in order for BTC stabilize. But if a better tech comes along like Ripple, BTC might just go extinct.
|
|
|
|
|
Any trader knows its impossible to predict the future.
Look up Random Walk Theory
|
|
|
|
You can buy anything with it. That is the point. It is the most sellable good on the market. You can not aggregate everything of value in the real world, and think that there must be money to buy everything. There is no such relation. The aggregate value of money is different from the aggregate value of things to buy. The aggregate value of money is the aggregate of what value each participant wants to have in reserve. I agree. My comment is directed at hoarding bit coins |
|
|
|
You only own 10% of the world if you can actually buy it with the money you have.
Comparing the money supply with everything you could buy with money, you will find that these numbers are a factor 1000 different.
Bootstrapping a new currency like Bitcoin where everyone got a little would have been nice. But while the imperfect distribution of the nascent bitcoin money may mean some lucky guys get 'unfairly' rich, it really doesn't mean there will be zillionaires that determine our future if bitcoin becomes de facto money.
Correct, there is no connection between the value of money and what there is in the world to buy, or what is produced for that matter. The value depends only on what value the owners of money want to hold for day to day consumption or to hold for a rainy day. Then what's the point of money if you can't buy anything with it? |
|
|
|
|
First you have to ask "why do we need an economy?" We are humans and we want to avoid death. In order to avoid death we need food & shelter at the most fundamental level.
We are way past the point of an egalitarian society so most people need to produce in order to trade their production for food & shelter. I'm using "production" broadly to mean anything from goods to services to finance. What you produce is called "capital". An economy is just what happens when capital is exchanged between participants
Money is just a concept to make the exchange of capital easier. Its a type of credit, an IOU. Historically speaking, money has always existed. Money existed as credit before metal coins. But for a while money was backed by precious (rare) metals. This didn't work too well because the economy expanded too fast due to technological advances along w population growth. There was was more demand for money than supply of money. In order to address this issue the world decided to go off the gold standard and used fiat money instead. Central Banking is the latest iteration of money tech. Its because the world realized that for stability money needs to be elastic at times and disciplined at other times. Money needs to be created AND destroyed in order to serve the economy
Bitcoin is not good money because it can be created but slowly and only to a max cap of 21M. It could be destroyed but once destroyed you can't create more after the max is mined
|
|
|
|
i have nothing big against IRS definition that they class bitcoin as an asset. as long as they confine their taxes to only be a requirement at the point that people sell their assets for FIAT.
you don't understand capital gains tax |
|
|
|
With exponential growth already on the charts I'm not going to fight the trend.
I meant. Is there a technical reason? Why do you do Technical Analysis w log vs linear? |
|
|
|
Then just use miliBTC or nanoBTC Why didn't Satoshi just set total BTC amount to 21 Trillion? Its just an arbitrary number. Ever thought of that? |
|
|
|
I have long since retired asic miners. And BFL gen 1. Now looking at retiring BitFury. Running Cointerra happily. Looking at A1s. And yes, if you buy A1s today, and sell under $600 you are taking a loss. Since the hash rate just jumped a LOT recently, probably $700 is a better estimate of break-even. Since the majority of mining capacity was bought at a much higher price than today's capacity, almost all miners are losing money unless they hold out for much higher prices.
Yikes, sorry to hear that. I never thought about the economics of BTC mining. What happens if the miners close shop? Don't you need miners to support the network? What about the commercial operations? Does it cost them the same? I suppose its cheaper where electricity is cheaper |
|
|
|
Wait, counting in base ten is confusing? Decimals are too hard?
Please explain how you learned this extremely complex system:
$1.00 = 100% of 1 dollar
$0.25 = 25% of 1 dollar
$0.10 = 10% of 1 dollar
$0.01 = 1% of 1 dollar
BTC1 = 100% of one BTC
etc
etc
etc
and so on and so forth. BTC is far more divisible and the fact that there will only be 21M is simply an argument to strengthen the thought that Satoshis may very well end up the major unit of usage for the general public.
I'm just glad that we don't have to worry about inflation and words like decabitcoin and the like.
The OPs point I believe. Is that dividing the coins down to 8 decimal places is cumbersome. Has nothing to do with math and everything to do with pragmatics |
|
|
|
Another thing to note is that when the US classed Bitcoin as a commodity, Ross Ulbricht may also escape his money laundering accusation, as the law does not claim bitcoin as a currency. Perhaps he will be charged with commodity laundering.
Did he launder USD or BTC? If he used BTC to launder USD then it's still money laundering. I don't know anything about PayPals TOS or Ebays for that matter. But as private companies they can do set whatever terms suits them as long as the terms don't conflict w standing trade laws. |
|
|
|
First, thank you for those of you who have provided a ton of information in this forum to noobs like myself. I appreciate it.
I am new to BitCoin, I believe in it as the technology and economics of it are sound (limited quantity, decentralized, etc). I also recently purchased about 10 BitCoins at $600.
From what I gather the price is going to fluctuate and be volatile for obvious reasons. More so than other commodities as the supply of bitcoin is fixed and the price is fully dependent on demand.
Now my question:
In the foreseeable future. What are the factors/predictions to drive these forum predicted prices like $10000 or drop to sub-$100?
From what I gather things like the below are correct. What are your thoughts or opinions? or am i missing something obvious?
My guess is something like technology that increase the usability of bitcoin which will allow for rapid adoption. Or a large company like Google or Bank announcing support. (though if that was the case why did Stripe adoption not drive the price up? or did it with this past temporary bump?)
As for drop, If the major holders of bitcoin sell a lot (though this seems odd as with the quanities they hold it would be hard to find buyers for that many without massively dropping the price) and in that matter I still see minor holders keeping what they have.
-- I wanted to add clarification to my question, I am not asking for speculation. I am asking what examples can you provide which would affect the price. Outside of the few thoughts I had.
The only thing that is going to increase the price, is people buying bitcoin. But they aren't doing that. That's why you see no jump in price with the Stripe news, and continued price falling even with the TON of merchant integration since the $1200 mark. People can't spend what they don't have and people are afraid of bitcoin. Now the IRS has basically destroyed any near-term chance at bitcoin being used as a currency. So what would make it go up to $10,000? A miracle. What would make it drop to sub-100? Everything you see happening now. The only thing that can push price up is if BTC people need/want BTC and the demand exceeds the supply so they have to pay for it. Bitcoin is a open source protocol like bit torrent. There might be companies making money providing Bitcoin services but the BTC itself has no intrinsic value. Its not even a currency more of a commodity. |
|
|
|
I disagree, anything below 600 is desastrous for miners that have invested heavily in it. at the current exchange I can hold production for two more months, if the price doesn't go up, I will have to shut everything off  This is interesting. So you are saying it costs more than $600 to mine 1 BTC? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
