While I think I get where Mr. Pietila is really coming up with the $1 million figure, I'd really like to hear his thoughts on how it could be possible for the infrastructure to adapt to that. Even with his supernodes idea, it seems just too fast for human structures to form, be vetted, and reach full capacity. So many things would have to change so incredibly quickly.

I don't see that really being addressed except by invoking "Supernodes!" In other words, I'd like a clear and detailed explanation of how supernodes could form quickly enough for all this to happen within the year. Why aren't there all sorts of other infrastructural challenges that would realistically limit growth to the merely exponential ($10,000 by year end)?

If you want to defend any terms (be they investing terms or scientific ones) as "not nonsense," the place to start is by supplying definitions of them.

Saying X has been observed doesn't communicate anything until we both know what we are talking about when we say "X."

Once definitions have been supplied, the key question is whether the definitions can be used consistently.

Nonsense words are the main currency of theoretical math and physics: words like point, set, line, plane, mass, force, gravity, momentum, space, infinity, time, and most of the rest - words that seem like they have a definite single meaning but actually don't. (Fortunately engineering, where math and physics actually hit road, has real-world/market tests that largely weed that stuff out or work around it in a way that sequesters the silliness.)

To bring this back on topic, speculation is another nonsense word. Or rather a word that has multiple, subtly different definitions that people will switch between as is convenient for their argument (same as math/physics people do with the word infinity). To speak of speculation (or infinity) "as such" with no elaboration in what is supposed to be a rigorous context is then effectively nonsense - uninterpretable.

Speculation means variously "investing for short-term gains," "investing in something as a store of value," or both. People use the equivocation to rope all the people covered by the latter definition under the umbrella of those who only invest for short-term gains. They'll act like "speculation" is bad, using the implied argument that of course weak hands are bad (first definition), but then use that to reach the conclusion that therefore Bitcoin should only be valued for its medium-of-exchange uses, and that all the store-of-value ("speculation" definition #2) imputed value is somehow illegitimate.

When people try to make a careful/rigorous argument this way, they end up spouting nonsense. It is of course expensive for an investor to harbor nonsense notions about the value of an asset.

Exactly.

/r/Bitcoin users are also stagnant. I think it's just the psychological burnout after the bubble-and-crash. Growth went ballistic for a while and is now reverting to the exponential mean, which means a slowdown where excitement dips. The spurts and lulls even out into normal exponential growth.

This may not last long enough to actually revert before the next rise, though.

Black holes are nonsense, because infinite gravity is nonsense (literally a meaningless string of words). /OT

Could you elaborate on the mechanism? Do you mean people the newly rich will brag to their friends and get everyone in on it? Or something more than that?

"Singularity" is a human term, referencing when exponential growth crosses significant human-scale thresholds.

For example, if a middle-class guy bought 100 BTC for $200 last year, exponential growth of his holdings even up to $20,000 has felt to him like "neat, but not a big deal."

However, if that exponential growth continues apace and his worth reaches $2,000,000 next year, suddenly it's life-changing. And then in another two years he's one of the richest men alive. It feels like a singularity, because even though the growth has followed the same exponent all along, it just recently passed the thresholds of his human scale that make a big difference for him.

Sad to see you go...

Subtract out the DDoS causing faster and deeper fall, and they look very much alike.

In terms of shape they look very similar, despite the 30-day action being so huge. Sure, the 30-day chart spikes higher, faster and dips lower, but otherwise they looks almost the same. I just reached my phone's data limit otherwise I'd post pics, but are we seeing a fractal pattern?

I recall it was around 15,000-17,000 a few days ago, too.

You need to get verified in order to withdraw more than $1000 per day or more than $10,000 per month, so this is not all people wanting to buy.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to hearing more about your daily business, Mr. Pietila. This and the Wall Observer are about the only two threads I read anymore. I for one don't care if you like to throw money around for fun. I'd probably do the same if I had as much as you or Goat or BitcoinBillionaire.

Perhaps the point of having an "official price" is to let people get away with accounting shenanigans? Or use tax loopholes?

Meh.

The Reptile can afford to make it rain just for kicks. Rich people are eccentric, get over it.

Stopped reading here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth

Even under the insanely centralized, old boys club, centuries-institutionalized monopoly fiat money system in the United States, the top **1%** (let alone the top 0.1%) control only 35% of the wealth. Under Bitcoin this distribution will be far flatter, especially without monopoly privilege to print money granted to wealthy dynasties that control other power centers like government, education, and the media, that would allow them to keep the money rather than lose most of it as they spend it on luxuries.

This is a completely unrealistic scenario.

The fact that there a significant percentage people who apparently think Paypal adoption could possibly hurt Bitcoin, is very bullish for the price. It means many investors, even here, have little understanding of the investment situation.

+1

Never a dull day at MtGox HQ. The DDoSers must be milking every last chance before the big exchanges at CoinLab and CoinSetter arrive, and before BitStamp gets bigger. Once there is more than one big exchange, DDoS of any one will have much less effect. Meanwhile the entire system grows stronger every time it is attacked, with the attackers being rewarded for their services in strengthening the system, effectively paving the way for further growth.

Without the attacks that have been occurring at a billion-dollar market cap, Bitcoin wouldn't be ready for the kinds of attacks that will come at ten and a hundred billion dollars.