I disagree. I see Ripple as one of bitcoin's biggest threats. Not because it is better, but because it is worse, but in a convenient way.
All the points you mentioned (except for the last one) are irrelevant for consumers (and small businesses) who just want some convenient and cheap way to use "digital money".
The marketing of the Ripple team so far is impressive, and they try to position themselves in such a way that they seem to pose no threat to bitcoin.
In fact, they're actively trying to warm up the bitcoin community for their project -- they sort of want us to think of Ripple as "another layer on top of bitcoin". Maybe that's how it really is. No objection from me then. But I suspect the Ripple people wouldn't exactly object either in case Ripple manages to take the place of bitcoin as an actual currency and store of value.
tl;dr There's something decidedly disinenginous about the way Ripple markets itself, and I'm not completely sure the people behind it won't try, and perhaps even manage, to become a "bitcoin replacement". Don't underestimate them.
Indeed, I think what avid bitcoiners dislike about Ripple, laymen/prospective bitcoiners don't care all that much about. (eg centralization) IMO transaction speed and interface are two huge things that Ripple has going for it. I think many people may come to see Ripple as having the novelty of bitcoin (eg being crypto), while maintaining appeal that is more akin to say, Paypal. Altcoins thus far haven't set themselves apart in any way. But I am not sleeping on Ripple. |
|
|
|
In the stock market, the only reason technical analyis works is because enough people make purchase and sell decisions using it. People often say this, but... not exactly easy to prove. |
|
|
|
They can stop digital fiat exchange in their country. They can't stop the rest of the world and they can't stop cash transactions.
They can also target exchanges outside of the country through bank seizures. They can't stop the rest of the world, but think of a) the influence that the US government, for example, has on the policies of other governments, and b) what would happen to the price of bitcoin if the legal bitcoin-related market of major countries were to disappear. As for cash, we can't go back to the stone age. Continued growth IMO requires fast, electronic payment solutions. I don't know maybe I'm completely wrong but when I see goverment being afraid (banning/complicating things) I would personally say to myself - hey they are frightened to death by that thing - there must be a reason for it, so how can I exploit it to my own benefit? I always have this in mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102Maybe it's just me. I have no idea what average Joe will do, but considering what has happened in Cyprus and how many ordinary folks hate EU I would not underestimate them. IMO events like "Cyprus" only affect speculators. I think average people want proven stores of value that are easy to transact in (both in terms of fiat/asset exchange and ease of use). At this point, bitcoin can't offer this. The real problem re government is that if bitcoin does achieve significantly rising adoption levels, it won't be so thinly traded. It is at that point that it may receive unwanted attention. If the US government is afraid of something, it tends to squash it. In this context, bitcoin may or may not achieve the mass appeal that would thrive despite government crackdown. Not so sure it will. I've seen it suggested here that drug prohibition is analogous to bitcoin prohibition -- crazy! Drug consumers don't have alternatives. Consumers have too many viable alternatives to bitcoin. The next question, then, is whether bitcoin can truly grow into more than its principal uses as a speculative vehicle for fiat, and currency for black market goods (drugs, gambling, etc). So, not assuming either will happen, which comes first? A truly viable bitcoin economy? Or a government crackdown? I suppose that's the final question... I think that really depends on how useful people find bitcoin. Downloading/uploading movies via bittorent is illegal almost everywhere in some form or another, yet the audience and userbase of bittorent only continues to grow.
But file-sharing protocol is not an asset. People are not willing to pay for it. There is no market for money there -- I don't think it applies to bitcoin. I mean, who doesn't love free shit...  Yes, this specifically is one of the things in the back of my mind that colors my longterm outlook on bitcoin. If this were to happen, the centralization that Gox entails could cripple bitcoin. |
|
|
|
 No volume to confirm, could be a false break. But maybe cheap coins in near future. |
|
|
|
 I see somewhat of a bearish wedge from the bottom at 79 (although resistance is not rising). That flatline in the middle was the DDOS right? Otherwise I think we may have seen movement closer to 125. The previous support we saw at 120-125 is now resistance. Slight break in volume trend on that "breakout" but not far outside general downtrend. Not much strength to this short-term rise. |
|
|
|
I revised my calculation with your numbers. I got $22k, which is closer to $40k than it is to $25. Regardless of the precise number, it is far greater than $25.
Also, please act more civilly.
Geez. Last time. If you're using irrelevant statistics, none of this matters. I never claimed $25 was right (nor would I -- talk to the person who said it). Not sure why you keep mentioning that. Also, average household size is 3.10, not 4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#CIA_World_Factbook This would put the number around $17k, not $22k. (So, $25 is actually closer) Again, all I said was that your numbers were wrong, and I explained why. That's it. Why you're so defensive, I can't imagine, considering your numbers are so off... Lesson learned -- next time you pull numbers out of your ass, I'll simply ignore you. Likewise, don't lash out with strawmans and accuse people of "taking you out of context" just because you're being called out for making up numbers. Considering that, I have been civil. |
|
|
|
If you didn't take my quote out of context, you would have know that I was referring to household income, of which the corrected number is still far larger than $25/year.
 Nobody took you out of context. You used an irrelevant statistic to calculate income. That's all I said. You talk as if I claim that $25/year is correct... In fact, you used GDP per capita to calculate personal income, which you then used to estimate household income. So, you're being kind of ridiculous here. |
|
|
|
China GDP per capita = $10000 Family = 4 people Therefore, average family income = $40000/year. Where do you get $25/year from? GDP per capita doesn't = personal income. It is more useful to indicate standard of living. Average gross salary = USD $457 monthly (2010), or ~ $5500/year. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_China$40k? LOL..... Average gross salary ≠ household income. At 4 people per household, that would still be around $22k. I simply said that you can't calculate income based on GDP. |
|
|
|
China GDP per capita = $10000 Family = 4 people Therefore, average family income = $40000/year. Where do you get $25/year from? GDP per capita doesn't = personal income. It is more useful to indicate standard of living. Average gross salary = USD $457 monthly (2010), or ~ $5500/year. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_China$40k? LOL..... |
|
|
|
This forum is quite a bubble itself...  |
|
|
|
It's getting old listening to people complain about volume. Volume is awesome!
The speculator driven volume of April got us into trouble, we don't even want that.
Looking at the past week, not April. volume was not enough yet to confirm break out of triangle IMO I agree. That was my original (unquoted here) point.   We'll see, but could easily be a false breakout. |
|
|
|
It's getting old listening to people complain about volume. Volume is awesome!
The speculator driven volume of April got us into trouble, we don't even want that.
Looking at the past week, not April. |
|
|
|
|
I was told of breakout. Where is volume.
|
|
|
|
How can government do anything about Bitcoin? It's ridiculous idea - even if they did build a Great Chinese firewall you can always go through proxy or VPN and there will always be at least some countries which will never censor internet.
Your missing the point. It's all about the perceptions of future adopters. It doesn't matter whether governments can technically take down the bitcoin network/protocol... they can massively inflate the perceived risks of future adopters. When push comes to shove, the layman sees many alternatives to what bitcoin provides (especially since the vast majority only see bitcoin in terms of fiat and little more). If governments want to hurt bitcoin, they can censor, make transactions illegal (or cast them in a legally questionable light such that users will seek safer alternatives), use banks to target exchanges, businesses and even users -- seizing assets and crippling operations along the way. The negative press any such actions would bring would blow out of the water any and all fundamentally bullish indicators. |
|
|
|
When you predict the end of the world, tell people to sell their investments, have a pretty chart with lines, that pretty much means you're trying to buy back in. Even if you weren't, turns out you were wrong and should probably stay quiet until God tells you where BTC is going again.
Hopefully no one listened because they probably lost money. Everytime a day trader sells his BTC, he runs to the forum and shits FUD until he can buy back in. We get it, you want the market to drop so you can get back into BTC. Act like a normal adult and save the drama. We don't need a new thread, we don't need chicken little charts, and stop telling people to buy or sell.
So much butthurt around here...  Tidbit-- just because some of you are entirely too emotional over short-term price movements, that doesn't mean that those of us who speculate in the speculation forum are trying to drive prices. Some of us also aren't so fucking stupid to think we could affect the market this way. Also, this thread doesn't qualify as FUD. See trolls like fourkey and jaroslaw for reference. But seriously, dude? 9 days into a prediction of further downslide (with many references to 2011 ITT), and you cry like a bitch shouting strawmans like this? People like you are so much worse than the FUD trolls. If something is FUD, then analyze it as such and drop some knowledge on the forum. Don't bitch and create strawmans because you can't develop a superior argument. Sorry for the derail. But fucking fuck, man. |
|
|
|
|
Sounds good. Show me links and we can go from there.
|
|
|
|
|
We'll see after this bubble is finished.
|
|
|
|
|
Looks to me like that trend is broken.
|
|
|
|
|
$5 million is a drop in the bucket. If things go south, it's a very cheap exit, really. I haven't looked into it, but if there is a 1% trading fee, I won't be looking into it.
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry, I don't see a downtrend on the one-month chart.
 How so? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
