10000x or some X times is to make my point of abnormal growth ..with some exaggeration
I am not against bitcoin,but the rogue manipulators/traders who will do more harm to bitcoins, than good
You can not compare amazon to bitcoin..
Amazon is regulated and do not pose any threat to Govt..where crypto currencies are opposite
(I am not against bitcoins or blockchain or the technology ..bit against speculative trading)
Fair enough. In principle, I am also against speculative trading; though I certainly do not complain about appreciation of my bitcoins’ value! I am in Bitcoin primarily for reasons of ideology. I know full well that not every person in the entire world can get rich by applying some magic formula, ICO scammers’ advertisements to the contrary notwithstanding.
But 10x–20x growth in the course of a year is not
ipso facto indicative of a bubble. It’s unusual, to be sure. Still, in growth per time, that’s five orders of magnitude different from 10000x in a fortnight. Again, the comparison to Amazon applies: The major web companies, the ones which survived the 2000 shake-out, have had points where they experienced >10x actual growth in a year. Had Amazon “grown” 10000x in two weeks—well, there would no longer be any such company.
I do share your concern about certain apparent political collision courses, perhaps inevitable. That’s why I try to inform people about the historical incidence when
gold was banned for four decades in the U.S. But rapid growth of the Bitcoin market enhances its robustness against such potential attacks; whereas comparisons to tulips seem only to befit calls for instant regulation, to “protect people from themselves”.
I also don’t think that regulatory concerns negate the comparison to Amazon. Amazon also faced regulatory concerns, such as the enmity of states which were losing sales tax. On this, they eventually joined the enemy, so to speak. I hope the analogy is not
too perfect here.
If you have a large holding from 2011, then just enjoy it and support Bitcoin’s further development and social acceptance.
This last is important, because Bitcoin is more than a technology: Bitcoin and its value are a sociological phenomenon. As the latter, Bitcoin does have an excellent prospect for surmounting all obstacles and becoming ubiquitous. If that happens, then in ten years, $20k/BTC will look like your 2011 exchange rates. Calling for smugness about tulip bulbs cuts in the opposite direction; it hampers social acceptance. It’s just cheap FUD. If you’re such a long-time Bitcoiner, I think you can do better than that!
somehow ( I am think as scientist ) all that debate about growth reminds me 'machine learning' and the famous "Iris flower data set" ...
Interesting thought. I will need to chew on that one for awhile. Thanks.
ps-> nullius how did you get a PGP Ed25519: 0xC .... ?
GnuPG supports
ECC since version 2.1. Requires options `--full-gen-key --expert` (or noninteractive key generation as I used). NIST and Brainpool curves are supported; but also: “For many people the NIST and also the Brainpool curves have an doubtful origin and thus the plan for GnuPG is to use Bernstein’s Curve 25519 as default. GnuPG 2.1.0 already comes with support for signing keys using the Ed25519 variant of this curve. This has not yet been standardized by the IETF (i.e. there is no RFC) but we won’t wait any longer....”
Much PGP software does not yet support my Curve25519 keys. My .sig reminds me of the 90s, when people had both PGP2/PGP5 keys. In the mass market, interestingly, Keybase can use my ECC keys just fine. I’m not sure if that’s a good thing.
(Apologies for the offtopic discussion. It’s an important issue, especially when asked by a GnuPG supporter!)
yep, I follow a bit the cypherpunk list on Curve255 ... when I asked was because I was kind more interested on the hardware that generate that curve ( I also do Apologies for the 'offtopic' ( of course related to bitcoin it is not 'off topic' at all )
The were on question on why distrust RSA....
btw nice to review Ron Rivest, co-inventor of RSA
"RSA-129" posed a challenge experts said would take 40 quadrillion years to solve - but took 17....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQw124CtvO0 Featuring Ron Rivest, co-inventor of RSA