From the 2011 section:


Right, because that makes Bitcoins appear by the bucket!

From the 2013 section:


NOBODY CARES ABOUT RANDOM NEWSFLASH SPAM M'KAY?

From "central bank":


And miners are the botnet's bitches, hahahaha!!!


Yes! Them mining servers host the network! Nodes connect to them for all their banking needs!!!


Historical stuff before it's history: smart

Edit wars are annoying. If anyone has time to wage this one, I'd appreciate it.

That statement does look like investment advice.

It would be better to keep these things separate from statements by the exchange. Keeping the mania alive is very much in Gox' interest and a naïve person might go by it.

Holy... what in the...

Now THAT IS VOLUME, SERIOUSLY!

Gox did not cause the crash last time either. The initial crash even happened before any problems back then.

Not a cool story? Right! That's why people tend to change the order of history when they tell it. They also don't tell that after the hack, prices remained stable for weeks and the bust started for no apparent reason.

What we learn from that: bad speculators make losses; really bad speculators make losses and nonsensical explanations for them.

The options don't cover a lot of cases.

I have already sold and have not yet decided whether to re-enter serious Bitcoin speculation -- apart from a few low catch-orders if something really crazy happens.

If this was a bubble top -- which it looks like -- we might get months of chaos and then more months of bust. I might be able to let the decision wait until later this year.

The bots most likely impose some sort of price movement friction while being agnostic to market state, so they buy at that point.

It doesn't tell anything. Why do a magic conspiracy when there's money to be made without even caring why the market is as nutty as it is? Maniacs drive price around, bots take their share. It's just how it works.

What is annoying is that those tiny orders are allowed and drive up the lag. If Gox took a little bit off their high fees and imposed a 1$ trade fee in turn, there would be a lot less noise.

I'd not trust a word that guy says. Hasn't he been posting nonsense about a billion dollar coming so everybody hold? That's pump and dump (nobody with a billion dollars buying announces it in advance.)



As for the price action... trollolol. It'll be even harder to keep the bubble going after this wake-up call.

It'll burst, then some time to make up fantasy explanations without a bubble, and when the bust sets in there'll be drama for everyone.

Being a bear at 2$ and being a bear at 200$ does not give equal chances. No matter how much people like logscales.

Yup.

And fat returns for the old-timers who sold a few.

That's what I find so weird: I doubt even 20% of the people buying in now will come out of this okay if a bust comes. They're at more than tenfold the risk former Bitcoiners were at. Why do this? If someone buys BTC for speculation, how about doing it at 5 dollars, or 14 if you're slow, but >200? Smart money whoo.

Stop!

If there was no reason for you to buy below 20 three months ago, why is there any reason to buy above 200 now? That's a >1000% change in opinion. This is not how a real speculator earns money. Check again what you're doing and until then, stop.

Well. With just the exponential of last week a single Bitcoin reaches a trillion dollars by christmas.

I'm too lazy to look at the superexponential part. It would be some absurd number shortly.



Just don't draw straight lines on logscale for prediction purposes except when predicting very unstable human insanity. Doing a superexponential instead does not make it any better.

This thread. I'll never forget it! When I see trend-followers, I tell the story of Goomboo, the guy with the trailing averages and his comfy chair.

If I'm to predict the future, then after the next trend break, it'll be like after the last ones. Many of the loudest users now will have gone silent. Some new loud ones will appear, with a revolutionary method to get rich in weeks, posting how weak and stupid everyone else is. And, every once in a while, there'll be a post featuring a comfy chair.

I wish I could do that too. But, here, there's a sort of VAT on silver. So it's effectively suppressed as a means of exchange.

No.

I've been in here speculating since 2011, why would I buy at the by far highest price ever?

Why people do it, I can only guess. I doubt it's because Silk Road suddenly had a demand surge. Probably, the rally is being caused by comparably inefficient speculators. Certainly not my kind of game to play.

It's a good thing people start realizing this outcome. I personally would recommend productivity-based population control to prevent B) happening en masse, but the vast majority seems to prefer the starving. Or maybe they don't care, which is a more plausible explanation.



Regarding "libertarian": I call myself that and guess you won't like that. I'm mostly a capitalist liberal in the literal sense, with a major exception against the forming of monopolies. That's long and most people still don't understand what it means. What should I call myself?

I'm certainly not an anarchist, statist, communist or conservative, nor do I fully agree with the mainstream approach to economics that produces gigantic corrupt entities. I'm annoyed myself that "libertarian" seems to be ill-defined. It still seems to be the closest word.

This is mixing up two different topics. The Invisible Hand need not be a super-brain using unseen technology. It beats monolithic top-down systems even with normal humans and various sets of rules that are even known suboptimal.

But a World War 3... I'm skeptical. The non-statist intellectuals are mixed in with societies everywhere and badly organized. It doesn't take more than a little police action to end such a "war" today.

If there were a segregation in terms of countries, I doubt the window of opportunity for statist attacks would be very long. IMO, modern society's productive output is at a fraction of its potential. A country utilizing that difference should not be a viable target to bully.



Bottom line, it all comes down to organization. Most non-statists are horribly organized and split into various groups that often have unsustainable ideas. For example, I know hardly anyone who believes in the same solutions as I do. That leaves me with the options that I'm either as crazy as the rest or that almost everyone has no clue about the real solutions. It's rather grim either way. Without a more orderly approach there won't even be anything to side with or against.

Earning Bitcoins? Think about all the price spikes, Ponzis, leverage parties and drama we'd be missing out on then! Bitcoin would actually be a normal economy! Unheard of!

This is one of the things that made me wake up in the 2011 bubble. In NASDAQ .com, they said the same thing. "This is the internet, this is revolution!"

They were completely right. The market still crashed though. With all the difference and all the revolution, the madness of crowds had stayed the same.

No offense, but a lot of people reading this thread are likely thinking "not again..."

Difficulty follows price such that on average, a miner makes a small profit. This mechanism is slow, so it lags behind on huge rallies or crashes.

As for the difficulty spike: The first commercially functional ASICs were ready just when the difficulty hike started. Take a guess what the reason is: your scale factor is off now because ASICs have a higher hashpower per unit price.

TL;DR: this is not a useful method for price prediction. It doesn't detect peaks, bubbles, rallies, crashes, or anything of the sort.

I thought Zuckerberg was the guy who buys souls.

Maybe they're soul speculators! Souls are high, sell sell sell!