Posted this on Reddit and got basically no responses. Still wondering:
I'm really not sure what to do. I have significant Litecoin holdings. I've been holding out for that next Bitcoin spike were LTC also goes up. I planned to cash out at that point. But it's just not happening. And seeing the decoupling of the two price trends, when they were so closely tied for so long, further concerns me.
Those of you holding relevant amounts of Litecoin: Are you going to convert to Bitcoin pretty soon here? Or is there still some indication out there that LTC will be the next welcome currency after Bitcoin? To businesses. etc. If we base this on infrastructure and merchant adoption, we are looking at pretty much zilch on the horizon.
Will we get one more spike in price? Or should we convert to Bitcoin now...
-B-
so the recent adoption(s) for Bitcoin that showed a net price decline encouraged you? save economic wipe-out your about to be a 2x bag holder. Bitcoin is heavily speculated on but in the long run those adoptions are what will be the foundation of the currency. People expect big news like that already, they've bought BTC thinking such things were bound to happen. Just because the price didn't go up doesn't mean that those adoptions weren't massive victories for Bitcoin. not if the network collapses in on itself though hey? Yeah, if Bitcoin has problems in the future its mainly going to be related to lack of technical progression and lack of improvements related to ease of use. But for now I'm impressed with how business are embracing Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
No, I don't think that at all.
Even if you use your TA to give a price range and corresponding probabilities I still think it's no better than random unless you can statistically prove that its not.
|
|
|
|
All of these indicators that people use should be able to be easily proved by back testing them in a large enough sample of data.
Is it theoretically possible that someone could come up with a system based on TA that can show a profit when automatically applied over a statistically significant about of time? Yes.
Is it likely at all that someone drawing lines on charts and attempting to seek patterns is going to accurately predict something that when viewed in a short time frame acts similar to a random walk? No.
My monkey does pretty well for himself (and me). Yeah, I do okay too. I've always managed to profit in both coin and $$ in the long run. If you can pull a 60% win rate, that's pretty damn good, to be honest. It's all about cutting out your bad trades early and letting the good ones run. Some of you anti-TAers around here are just using empty rhetoric. I realized I had a knack for trading the same way I had a knack for online poker (too bad liquidity is dead there for US players). Reading probabilities and managing risk. That's it.Feeling that you have an intuitive understanding of trading and the market doesn't mean that TA works. Also having a 60% win rate doesn't tell us anything about the EV of a set of trades. To use a poker analogy, I feel most people who follow TA are the same people who call a naked gutshot on the turn with no showdown value against a bet that doesn't give them odds because they 'feel' it. Except in this case they draw lines and use fancy sounding indicators that they think predict something that is incredibly complex underneath it all. I think there is lots of potential for people to apply a quantitative approach to any market, but this type of thing is so far beyond your average internet TA guy that it might as well not be considered. Most people doing that sort of thing would never think of sharing their work. Or they work for a company that contractually forbids them from doing so. I think I can sum up my feelings on TA this way: If you're not a quant, anyone who only looks at the 'what' of the market, without asking 'why' is essentially gambling. You can have 50 fancy lines and curves on your graph but without understanding the underlying movements they are meaningless and only tell you what has happened. They are not predictive. And if they are, they can be statistically proven to have a correlation with the price and anyone not doing the math to show that is just trying to find water with metal rods. |
|
|
|
Proposal to establish a user 'price' for every day usage in transactions: User Price = (5 Day Average Production Cost + 3 Day Average Market Price) / 2
Eventually though when there is enough liquidity in the trade market the cost of production won't be necessary right? We do not know, production cost and price tag tend to influence each other, one can be down whilst the other is up and conversely. Adding them together and dividing by two may balance and soften changes to either, similar to measuring market price by the middle of the spread. It's the same information yet more gentle in change. If we provide all the numbers with averages at different times, people can decide which to use for themselves. Perhaps a chart showing them all will allow those with need to make their own decision. Right. It's not something we get to decide. The best we can do is provide all the relevant information and let people make their own choices.  |
|
|
|
What still makes me feel a little awkward...ORA is not a coin, but an asset, as I have understood. And it's issued at the nxt platform. I've read a lot of what seems to be fud about nxt. Would someone please explain to me why or why not nxt is good or bad? I want to make sure of this before stepping a bit more here.
NXT is good. Nothing wrong with NXT. You probably hear so much FUD because people are fearful of new technology and are mad that they missed out. |
|
|
|
Proposal to establish a user 'price' for every day usage in transactions: User Price = (5 Day Average Production Cost + 3 Day Average Market Price) / 2
I am thinking about providing a simple data api on bitmark.co which lists production cost and price tag averages for different periods of time, with the above as a proposed default for users and businesses. What do you all think about this? checkpoints updated at block 17500Eventually though when there is enough liquidity in the trade market the cost of production won't be necessary right? |
|
|
|
Monero: Priquiditas por homoj. Keeping with the theme, esperanto sounds decidedly less profound unfortunately.  |
|
|
|
Illegal use of USD affecting its value?
Yes, it creates more demand for USD driving the price up.  |
|
|
|
These blockchain.info phishing sites are popping up like weeds.
Yeah, usually see at least a few every month. I guess it's an easy scam really. Wouldn't be so much of it if it wasn't so lucrative. I've always used inspect element on random links. One of the worst ones that happened a little while ago was the one that was a google ad. When you googled blockchain.info an ad would be the first thing listed which said it was a link to blockchain.info. And google search links are all forwarded through a google tracking url so you don't even see what url you're actually going to. I found out about it after someone on here posted that they got their wallet cleaned out.  Personally I try to avoid web wallets. Lots more ways you can lose your BTC. |
|
|
|
As time has gone on, there has been less and less talk of the illegal uses of Bitcoin. I think this is because it has gotten a lot of legitimacy as the larger corporations are starting to recognize and accept it as a means of payment...
Yeah, I rarely see this brought up in mainstream articles these days. While two or three years ago no journalist would ever leave the fact that people buy drugs online with Bitcoin out of an article. It's good to see the media not focus on such a small part of Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Monero offers unparalleled priquidity. I made that up. I'm proud of it. (privacy * liquidity) = priquidity. I also haven't slept in too darn long.
This should be Monero's new slogan! |
|
|
|
as happened before when Luke-jr attacked some random alt with an ASIC farm.
It's funny because he posted about it and denies it completely, while everyone else says he did. I thought that I read him denying using eligius hashing to attack the altcoin but acknowledging he used his own ASIC farm or something similar. I think he wanted to avoid people thinking he stole their hash from the pool. |
|
|
|
Posted this on Reddit and got basically no responses. Still wondering:
I'm really not sure what to do. I have significant Litecoin holdings. I've been holding out for that next Bitcoin spike were LTC also goes up. I planned to cash out at that point. But it's just not happening. And seeing the decoupling of the two price trends, when they were so closely tied for so long, further concerns me.
Those of you holding relevant amounts of Litecoin: Are you going to convert to Bitcoin pretty soon here? Or is there still some indication out there that LTC will be the next welcome currency after Bitcoin? To businesses. etc. If we base this on infrastructure and merchant adoption, we are looking at pretty much zilch on the horizon.
Will we get one more spike in price? Or should we convert to Bitcoin now...
-B-
so the recent adoption(s) for Bitcoin that showed a net price decline encouraged you? save economic wipe-out your about to be a 2x bag holder. Bitcoin is heavily speculated on but in the long run those adoptions are what will be the foundation of the currency. People expect big news like that already, they've bought BTC thinking such things were bound to happen. Just because the price didn't go up doesn't mean that those adoptions weren't massive victories for Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
I see significantly more the "zilch" on the horizon.
I determine the potential of a currency to have long term staying power and value increase .... entirely based on what businesses are considering accepting it as a payment option. And subsequently which consumers will be getting paid in it, and ultimately spending it. When I say Zilch, I mean I see Zilch on the horizon as these factors pertain to LTC. Have you seen otherwise? There was a short period of time last year where everyone loved to say LTC is silver, BTC is gold. That phrase, I am sure, drove most of the price value increase speculation for Litecoin. But that phrase has now died out. If it had maintained, I could see some forward-thinking businesses adding both coins, as a "package", to meet different purchasing needs of their customers. But I am seeing no plans of this on the horizon anywhere. Its all Bitcoin. And that makes sense. Because whether or not Bitcoin is the best option, its the first option, and basic knowledge of sociology / human behavior dictates that they will stick with something familiar, because it feels "safe". The one with the most infrastructure, and most rich people invested in it, ensuring its continued success. The Network Effect is more powerful than a bunch of accurately-critical crypto enthusiasts who know the ins and outs of the functionality of many types of coins. None of that matters. At all. Except in this little microcosm. Doesn't help that when I go to the Litecoin Reddit, nobody is posting. A thread or two per week max. Not a good sign. -B- I think the Litecoin community decided to phase out that phrase on purpose. Since you seem interested in currency that is meant to be long term and focused on transacting, I'd suggest following Bitmark( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=660544.0). It's a new project focused on adoption and daily use as opposed to following trends. Long term is the key here though, years, not months. So I'd recommend maybe bookmarking it and checking it every couple of weeks or so to see the progress. The development is very active as well. It's an honest and fair project and this is not meant as recommendation for you to buy any. But since you consider business and consumer adoption the primary goal I thought you might be interested in watching it develop. |
|
|
|
What does it matter what Satoshi intended it to be? It is what it is and the people will use it as they wish. Nobody can stop it now.
Very true. Satoshi (whoever he is) does not own Bitcoin. With the amount that he mined he's may not own it but he definitely has the ability to bring it to its knees if he wanted to. |
|
|
|
Sent 1 million ORA to DarkhorseofNxt, fragORA and Pentamon for their contributions so far.  Looks like anyone who has the inclination to contribute has a good chance of having it pay off well in the future when ORA begins to take shape. I like the incentives. Best of luck |
|
|
|
Just crafted IRC bot, feel free to join #bitmark on irc.freenode.net and say hello to BitMarcy!
Awesome. Thanks a lot for this. We've been wanting a bot for a while now. |
|
|
|
i am saving my BTC, because it will go up in value. BUT if all the stores around me took BTC, then i would be converting my pay checks to BTC and spending them that way. I would use it as my main currency if i could.
You could use the Xapo debit card. They did lie about the whole no fees thing though. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is attractive to libertarians.
.... because of the inherent design principles of the protocol. Why didn't Satoshi discuss the value of the bitcoin framework to socialists, communists, representative governments? Why did he only mention libertarianism and show extreme distrust with governments? "Yes, [we will not find a solution to political problems in cryptography,] but we can win a major battle in the arms race and gain a new territory of freedom for several years. Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally controlled networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem to be holding their own." - Satoshi Nakamoto “We don’t want to lead with 'anonymous.' I am definitely not making any such taunt or assertion [that] 'The developers expect that this will result in a stable-with-respect-to-energy currency outside the reach of any government.'"- Satoshi Nakamoto Wanting fair money or wanting to invent a revolutionary currency is enough on it's own and doesn't imply any specific political agenda. You can still be a socialist, communist, or believe in representative government and see the value in Bitcoin. It's not exclusive. I think everyone distrusts most modern governments regardless of what political ideology you believe in. Even a hardcore Marxist would agree with Satoshi's statements that you quoted. All his quotes are simply stating facts. And if you read into them more he's clearly trying to avoid identifying Bitcoin with any one particular political ideology. He might have been a libertarian. He probably was. But he definitely took care not to bog down his project with unnecessary political association. |
|
|
|
Mh, we really don't know if there is already a botnet out in the wild mining XMR coins. We know for sure, however, that there is a positive likelihood for the event that a botnet will enter the mining market, just because one can make little/big money with selling XMR coins. (IMO, botnet miners are likely to drive the price down by immediately selling their mined coins; but that is another point to be discussed.) Nevertheless, botnets are unlikely to overcome FPGAs and ASICs, once those enter the game, right?! That's why I'm mostly concerned about FPGA (and later ASIC) miners entering the field.
Did anyone use FPGAs for Bitcoin mining activities back in the good old BTC days? Would you agree that FPGAs could become a threat to today's Monero miners - worse then botnets (thinking of mining power percentages and cheaply mined coins)?
Several people have already said that they know people mining with botnets, so botnets are likely a thing, however how much of a problem botnets are remains to be seen. Also, I think that FPGA mining would be the best spot for us to be in. Anyone can get hold of a FPGA and the code can be loaded from an open source repo, much like today's GPU miners. However this might pull power away from CPU miners and end the constant FUD about botnets. Even if botnets are not a problem, FPGA's ending the perceived botnet threat would do Monero good. I agree with you. CryptoNote/CryptoNight algo FGPAs would be a good thing. An open market with anyone table to both buy FGPAs or rent hashing power from them is a much better situation overall I think. That's part of the reason I've recently come to prefer scrypt again. It has a mature market where anyone can purchase ASICs or rent as much hash power as they can afford. Networks are pretty secure and no one is left out. It would be pretty expensive to mount attacks on a decent sized network. SHA-256 is always an option but with the scale of Bitcoin mining I would be pretty scared of pissing the wrong person off or something, as happened before when Luke-jr attacked some random alt with an ASIC farm. I don't really see the point of all these exotic algos other than for marketing purposes. I mean, in theory I guess their intentions are good, they want to make it more fair for everyone. But in reality I think we've seen that's not really the case. But it's not a disaster or anything either. Networks can run just fine on some of these algos, but a tested and mature PoW is better I believe. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
