US Marshalls auction...what time will results/winner be announced today?

[vuduchyld]

Right now, I'm in limbo...not buying or selling until I see a more clear picture of market direction.

Love all the media coverage that finally just started...NYT article showed up on my phone this morning, so MSM is taking note.  But I'm concerned it's something of a setup.  The Huobi premium was as high as $50 yesterday, now back to $20 ish.

In my opinion, the odds of the market settling here ($400.92 as I type) are pretty minimal.  There WILL be more volatility.  I'd actually be happiest if it settled here, but I don't think it will.  My opinion is that it might settle lower.

FWIW, my personal estimate of value is $420-430 right now.  I'm sure everybody has their own fundamental methodology, but that's what mine says.  With a big move down, I'm a buyer around $280.  With a big move up, I'd sell (did sell one at $475).

It's POSSIBLE that the auction results will be the catalyst for a move up or down.  When will that be released?

[1714927142]

1714927142

[jaredboice]

Charts, data and/or Analysis or it's just like, your opinion man.
I think that $300s could be gone for good, but that's just like, my opinion

[houseo]

It's POSSIBLE that the auction results will be the catalyst for a move up or down.  When will that be released?

the results are never released unless the buyer decides to disclose.

[vuduchyld]

Charts, data and/or Analysis or it's just like, your opinion man.
I think that $300s could be gone for good, but that's just like, my opinion

Even with charts, data, and analysis, it's just opinion.  Nobody KNOWS anything.  And I'm not trying to sell mine or convince anybody they should share it or validate it. 

In fact, my opinion is only about VALUE, not PRICE.  I don't even attempt to guess about price.  When price goes far enough below my opinion of value, I buy.  When it goes far above my opinion of value, I sell.  (That rarely happens...my opinion of bitcoin is generally higher than the opinion the market expresses.)

It's too boring and long to type in the 10 minutes I have available, but my opinion of value is based on an analysis of global money supply, specifically M0 and M1 money supply.  It's based on how much market share I expect bitcoin to have in terms of its use as currency and in remittance markets in a rolling 5 year period.  My opinion on the 2019-2020 value (not price, value) hasn't changed much in the last couple of years and may not until we see more evidence of adoption, especially in remittance markets.  Then I take the 2019-2020 value and discount it back to present using an implied capitalization rate, that, again, is just an opinion. 

You've probably seen the various slider graphs that allow a person to select certain options for adoption?  It's kinda like that, BUT I believe very strongly that most of those that I've seen are massively flawed because they appear to count mining transactions in their velocity calculations, which is beyond ridiculous.  The velocity of bitcoin is significantly lower than they estimate. 

Of course, it's all just a guess.  But I THINK that at $400, price and value are reasonably close right now, which is quite rare.  And when bitcoin crosses the price/value line, it typically over-corrects massively. I'm expecting some kind of over-compensation one way or another.  If we go down much from here, I'm a buyer. 

[vuduchyld]

It's POSSIBLE that the auction results will be the catalyst for a move up or down.  When will that be released?

the results are never released unless the buyer decides to disclose.

Thanks for the info.

[mr angry]

It's being held now between 8:00am EST and 2:00pm EST, so it's due to finish in two hours. They never release the prices of the bids, we will have to wait until some bidders tell us. It usually takes a few days for the results to get out, I don't expect to hear anything until after the weekend.

Are the usual suspects bidding again this time?

[adamstgBit]

It's being held now between 8:00am EST and 2:00pm EST, so it's due to finish in two hours. They never release the prices of the bids, we will have to wait until some bidders tell us. It usually takes a few days for the results to get out, I don't expect to hear anything until after the weekend.

Are the usual suspects bidding again this time?

there being extra secretive this time as to who is bidding.

[Hunyadi]

It's being held now between 8:00am EST and 2:00pm EST, so it's due to finish in two hours. They never release the prices of the bids, we will have to wait until some bidders tell us. It usually takes a few days for the results to get out, I don't expect to hear anything until after the weekend.

Are the usual suspects bidding again this time?

there being extra secretive this time as to who is bidding.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oS1g55EAZbY

[gentlemand]

there being extra secretive this time as to who is bidding.

Well, the original leak of bidding applications was a mistake. I don't think anyone is supposed to know anything and it's up to those who took part to let information slip if they wish.

[mr angry]

there being extra secretive this time as to who is bidding.

Well, the original leak of bidding applications was a mistake. I don't think anyone is supposed to know anything and it's up to those who took part to let information slip if they wish.

Did the US Marshalls get sued for that leak? America is the land of the lawsuit, and there were people with serious money whose identity was revealed. They could argue that it affected their Bitcoin business interests. Maybe I haven't heard about any lawsuit because they got an out of court settlement, or maybe I'm out of touch with the news.

[gentlemand]

Did the US Marshalls get sued for that leak? America is the land of the lawsuit, and there were people with serious money whose identity was revealed. They could argue that it affected their Bitcoin business interests. Maybe I haven't heard about any lawsuit because they got an out of court settlement, or maybe I'm out of touch with the news.

Not to my knowledge and it was only a list of people who'd expressed an interest in registering rather than actual registered bidders. Still, I'm sure it raised a few eyebrows hither and thither.

[jaredboice]

Charts, data and/or Analysis or it's just like, your opinion man.
I think that $300s could be gone for good, but that's just like, my opinion

Even with charts, data, and analysis, it's just opinion.  Nobody KNOWS anything.  And I'm not trying to sell mine or convince anybody they should share it or validate it.  

In fact, my opinion is only about VALUE, not PRICE.  I don't even attempt to guess about price.  When price goes far enough below my opinion of value, I buy.  When it goes far above my opinion of value, I sell.  (That rarely happens...my opinion of bitcoin is generally higher than the opinion the market expresses.)

It's too boring and long to type in the 10 minutes I have available, but my opinion of value is based on an analysis of global money supply, specifically M0 and M1 money supply.  It's based on how much market share I expect bitcoin to have in terms of its use as currency and in remittance markets in a rolling 5 year period.  My opinion on the 2019-2020 value (not price, value) hasn't changed much in the last couple of years and may not until we see more evidence of adoption, especially in remittance markets.  Then I take the 2019-2020 value and discount it back to present using an implied capitalization rate, that, again, is just an opinion.  

You've probably seen the various slider graphs that allow a person to select certain options for adoption?  It's kinda like that, BUT I believe very strongly that most of those that I've seen are massively flawed because they appear to count mining transactions in their velocity calculations, which is beyond ridiculous.  The velocity of bitcoin is significantly lower than they estimate.  

Of course, it's all just a guess.  But I THINK that at $400, price and value are reasonably close right now, which is quite rare.  And when bitcoin crosses the price/value line, it typically over-corrects massively. I'm expecting some kind of over-compensation one way or another.  If we go down much from here, I'm a buyer.  

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.  $280, IN MY OPINION, is long gone.  However I can add substance to this opinion by presenting the following chart:



Except for a flash-crash with a very fast bounce, Bitcoin has never really (after recovering from a long bull/bear cycle) gone parabolic up to almost half of its previous all-time-high and then gone back down and retraced even half of the move.  Other then a very quick flash crash and a bounce, if it goes down to $280, it will be the first move of its kind in the entire history of bitcoin.

You can see from the chart that at the tail end of each cycle, once it started getting up to half of its previous ATH, it was pretty much off to the races.  There was an anomolous crash right before the 2013 rally, but it did not last longer than a day and the bounce occurred almost right away.  If History repeats, $280 might be possible very briefly but it would likely retrace the crash in less than a day or so.  If you're trying to guarantee you get your hands on more bitcoin, it's a strategy with a low probability for a favorable outcome.
  

[vuduchyld]

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.  $280, IN MY OPINION, is long gone.  However I can add substance to this opinion by presenting the following chart:



Except for a flash-crash with a very fast bounce, Bitcoin has never once (after recovering from a long bull/bear cycle) gone parabolic up to almost half of its previous all-time-high and then gone back down and retraced even half of the move.  Other then a very quick flash crash and a bounce, if it goes down to $280, it will be the first move of its kind in the entire history of bitcoin.

You can see from the chart that at the tail end of each cycle, once it started getting up to half of its previous ATH, it was pretty much off to the races.  ie.  There was an anomolous crash right before the 2013 rally, but it did not last longer than a day.  If History repeats, $280 might be possible for a day or two if you are lucky

I think that is credible analysis on your part.  You may well be correct.

You're looking much harder at price than I do.  I try to look at value, note differences between price/value, and then act on those differences as I perceive them.  I'm also not THAT interested in trading, far more in HODLing.  So I'm ONLY looking to act when I see what I perceive as extremes.  My last buys were in August at $215 and $230 and my last sell was this week at $475. 

So $280 is simply a 33.3% discount to my perception of current value.  That's where it came from.  Nothing magical about it at all.  If we don't hit that, I won't be a buyer.  For now.  Which is cool with me.  I don't trade on my entire stash, anyway.  But eventually, my perception of the current discounted value may increase or the price may decrease enough to flash my signal. 

[jaredboice]

I hear you.  Not totally following you though.  For me, Bitcoin's value is probably a million dollars.  But I digress.  Once we put a dollar sign in front of it, we're talking about price, which is what it's "worth" at any given moment to someone else.

[vuduchyld]

I hear you.  Not totally following you though.  For me, Bitcoin's value is probably a million dollars.  But I digress.  Once we put a dollar sign in front of it, we're talking about price, which is what it's "worth" at any given moment to someone else.

Right!  Exactly right.

Well, I understand that there are differences, but I'm trying to approach bitcoin the way of the Benjamin Graham school.  Graham, if you're not familiar with him, Graham taught Warren Buffet about investing.  In the stock market, you are actually buying a piece of ownership in a company.  Graham would analyze the company to understand the fundamental value--looking at things like earnings and growth to determine fundamental value.  If you think IBM is worth (VALUE) $80 per share, but the market says (PRICE) it's worth $70 per share, you buy.  If the market says it's worth $90, you sell what you have because you get $90 for something you think is worth $80.  

Among other things, one of my professional pursuits is business valuation.  Banks hire me to put a value on small, closely-held businesses.  So my approach to bitcoin is certainly not impartial, but rather it is formed by my (professional) lens on the universe.  I could be totally wrong about it.  I find it impossible to put a current price on the fundamentals of bitcoin, so I've chosen to reach out 5 years to determine the 2020 value.  There really ARE no current fundamentals.  It can't really be valued, in my view.  So to get a value, I look at what I think will happen in 2020, what bitcoins role will be in payments and remittances, what portion of the total global M0 and M1 money supply that would be.  Again, my projections are lower than what you'd normally see, because I think EVERYBODY ELSE (pretty conceited, I know) has mistakenly evaluated velocity.  I think bitcoin is probably worth $2500 in 2019-2020 based on the role I see it taking on.  Then I discount it back based on cap rates close to 40%, which reflects significant risk of failure.  Why?  I think BLOCKCHAIN is here to stay.  I'm NOT sure that bitcoin is the ultimate manifestation of the blockchain.  There are issues with block size, transaction times, etc... that represent enough risk for me to imply a high cap rate.  

That all gets me to my current "value".  It's totally subjective.  Like I say, I'm not trying to convince anybody else.  Barring more clarity on adoption and development, this time next year, I'd say it might be closer to $600-630 (value, not necessarily price).  Then, using my own subjective value, I make decisions about whether or not I think the price is telling me to sell or telling me to buy.  

I will tell you...I have rarely sold.  I continue to think the market undervalues bitcoin.  But I don't think it undervalues it quite as much as you think it does.  Could it be worth $1mm?  Sure, but I'd have to a lot more development of the technology and a lot more of a trend towards adoption (in the areas I see likely adoption).  My fundamental VALUE is subject to change every day based on new information.  I would also say that right now the market opinion of value (price) comes pretty close to matching my opinion of underlying value.  So I'll sit on what I've got and wait!

[jaredboice]

I hear you.  Not totally following you though.  For me, Bitcoin's value is probably a million dollars.  But I digress.  Once we put a dollar sign in front of it, we're talking about price, which is what it's "worth" at any given moment to someone else.

Right!  Exactly right.

Well, I understand that there are differences, but I'm trying to approach bitcoin the way of the Benjamin Graham school.  Graham, if you're not familiar with him, Graham taught Warren Buffet about investing.  In the stock market, you are actually buying a piece of ownership in a company.  Graham would analyze the company to understand the fundamental value--looking at things like earnings and growth to determine fundamental value.  If you think IBM is worth (VALUE) $80 per share, but the market says (PRICE) it's worth $70 per share, you buy.  If the market says it's worth $90, you sell what you have because you get $90 for something you think is worth $80.  

Among other things, one of my professional pursuits is business valuation.  Banks hire me to put a value on small, closely-held businesses.  So my approach to bitcoin is certainly not impartial, but rather it is formed by my (professional) lens on the universe.  I could be totally wrong about it.  I find it impossible to put a current price on the fundamentals of bitcoin, so I've chosen to reach out 5 years to determine the 2020 value.  There really ARE no current fundamentals.  It can't really be valued, in my view.  So to get a value, I look at what I think will happen in 2020, what bitcoins role will be in payments and remittances, what portion of the total global M0 and M1 money supply that would be.  Again, my projections are lower than what you'd normally see, because I think EVERYBODY ELSE (pretty conceited, I know) has mistakenly evaluated velocity.  I think bitcoin is probably worth $2500 in 2019-2020 based on the role I see it taking on.  Then I discount it back based on cap rates close to 40%, which reflects significant risk of failure.  Why?  I think BLOCKCHAIN is here to stay.  I'm NOT sure that bitcoin is the ultimate manifestation of the blockchain.  There are issues with block size, transaction times, etc... that represent enough risk for me to imply a high cap rate.  

That all gets me to my current "value".  It's totally subjective.  Like I say, I'm not trying to convince anybody else.  Barring more clarity on adoption and development, this time next year, I'd say it might be closer to $600-630 (value, not necessarily price).  Then, using my own subjective value, I make decisions about whether or not I think the price is telling me to sell or telling me to buy.  

I will tell you...I have rarely sold.  I continue to think the market undervalues bitcoin.  But I don't think it undervalues it quite as much as you think it does.  Could it be worth $1mm?  Sure, but I'd have to a lot more development of the technology and a lot more of a trend towards adoption (in the areas I see likely adoption).  My fundamental VALUE is subject to change every day based on new information.  I would also say that right now the market opinion of value (price) comes pretty close to matching my opinion of underlying value.  So I'll sit on what I've got and wait!

All I got from that information is that your "evaluation methods" of PRICE are completely subjective.  You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

There's only going to be 21 million of them.  The US just added $300 Billion to our $18 Trillion dollar debt just a few days ago. The Chinese have something like $22 Trillion in bank deposits.  The Bitcoin market is only $5 Billion.  It's a drop in the bucket.  

In response to your statement: "There really ARE no current fundamentals."

As far as value goes, it's an open-source decentralized payment and data retrieval system that owes allegiance to no borders or boundaries, and can transmit value virtually instantaneously to anyone in the world for little to no fees and without a middle man.  The VALUE of that protocol is worth Trillions in market cap when you consider all the traditional payment technologies it can displace 

[freedomno1]

there being extra secretive this time as to who is bidding.

Well I assume Tim Draper may want more coins, the rest of the interested parties we will know more of after the auction is completed.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/05/us-usa-bitcoin-auction-idUSKCN0SU28Q20151105

The U.S. Marshals Service said a six-hour online auction it held for about 44,341 bitcoins worth more than $17.2 million drew 11 registered bidders and 30 bids.

No further details will be released until the bitcoins have been transferred to any winners, which could occur by Monday, said Lynzey Donahue, a Marshals Service spokeswoman.

RIP Silk Road Coins

[gentlemand]

there being extra secretive this time as to who is bidding.

Well I assume Tim Draper may want more coins, the rest of the interested parties we will know more of after the auction is completed.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/05/us-usa-bitcoin-auction-idUSKCN0SU28Q20151105

The U.S. Marshals Service said a six-hour online auction it held for about 44,341 bitcoins worth more than $17.2 million drew 11 registered bidders and 30 bids.

No further details will be released until the bitcoins have been transferred to any winners, which could occur by Monday, said Lynzey Donahue, a Marshals Service spokeswoman.

RIP Silk Road Coins

I think Mr Draper has said he's not taking part. As for the coins themselves they have a new life to look forward to in high society with that grade a seal of government approval. I hope they don't get bullied.

[freedomno1]

there being extra secretive this time as to who is bidding.

Well I assume Tim Draper may want more coins, the rest of the interested parties we will know more of after the auction is completed.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/05/us-usa-bitcoin-auction-idUSKCN0SU28Q20151105

The U.S. Marshals Service said a six-hour online auction it held for about 44,341 bitcoins worth more than $17.2 million drew 11 registered bidders and 30 bids.

No further details will be released until the bitcoins have been transferred to any winners, which could occur by Monday, said Lynzey Donahue, a Marshals Service spokeswoman.

RIP Silk Road Coins

I think Mr Draper has said he's not taking part. As for the coins themselves they have a new life to look forward to in high society with that grade a seal of government approval. I hope they don't get bullied.

Maybe I was just thinking of Silk Road coin winners, on the other hand they may enjoy being part of high society, but they will always have their roots of coming from a drug filled world

(I can just imagine the coin taint XD)

[zimmah]

In my opinion we are at about that dip you see late 2012.

We might see up to 3 large spikes in a row.

$3000~5000 for the first, dropping down to $1500~1750 ish
$15000~25000 ish for the second, dropping down to $4000~6000ish
and in case of a 3rd, $30,000~50000 ish dropping down to $16000~20000 ish.


note this whole process might take a year or so to complete.

[vuduchyld]

All I got from that information is that your "evaluation methods" of PRICE are completely subjective.  

Well, evaluating PRICE is pretty easy.  It's not subjective at all.  The market tells you every single minute what the PRICE is.  As for VALUE, though, yes, I think every method is pretty subjective.  Not just mine, but any method anybody is using.  Again, this ain't like stock in an operating business where there are underlying earnings, GAAP book value, or anything else on which one could objectively base fundamental analysis.  There are no real industry group comparables to compare, as there are with stocks.  I know only enough to tell you that I don't KNOW anything.  In my opinion, it is unknowable.    

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

If you want to go back and read posts from long ago that show the work a little more:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=723219.msg8298674#msg8298674
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.msg8626991#msg8626991
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652652.msg7725333#msg7725333  --this one is good because there is a link to the Honest Node article that, as I recall, a lot of people ran with.  I'm pretty sure that article discusses the velocity issue.

There's only going to be 21 million of them.  The US just added $300 Billion to our $18 Trillion dollar debt just a few days ago. The Chinese have something like $22 Trillion in bank deposits.  The Bitcoin market is only $5 Billion.  It's a drop in the bucket.  

Yes, you are right.  The market cap of bitcoin is just a drop in the bucket.  And right now, bitcoin is also just a drop in the bucket in terms of global usage and adoption.  Should it increase by virtue of its technological superiority?  Probably...if the world operated strictly on merit.  But the world doesn't work that way, unfortunately.  There are political considerations and entrenched powers that have vested interest in their fiat currencies.  These are BIG problems that you point out, I agree.  But a universe might well exist in which bitcoin is not the only answer, not the chosen answer among possible answers (many of which are still as of yet unknown or uninvented), even a universe in which the problems simply are not solved due to lack of political will.  

In response to your statement: "There really ARE no current fundamentals."

As far as value goes, it's an open-source decentralized payment and data retrieval system that owes allegiance to no borders or boundaries, and can transmit value virtually instantaneously to anyone in the world for little to no fees and without a middle man.  The VALUE of that protocol is worth Trillions in market cap when you consider all the traditional payment technologies it can displace

Again, great points.  I don't disagree with any of it.  But in my opinion (only an opinion, and I'm not trying to convince you that you should share mine) these are things of QUALITATIVE value.  How one chooses to assign QUANTITATIVE value are, quite simply, necessarily going to be subjective at this point when it comes to bitcoin.  

Banks pay me good money to take QUALITATIVE aspects of a business, things like customer concentration, supply chain diversity, key management stability, reputation, etc... and translate those QUANTITATIVELY into things like enterprise goodwill or personal goodwill.  In the case of an operational business, though, there is a hook.  There are historical cash flows, and we hope to have some visibility of future cash flows.  I'm absolutely not shy about translating qualitative value into quantitative, in general.  With bitcoin, I don't believe it can be done as of November 2015 with any meaningful degree of confidence.

You make great points above, but how would you assign quantitative value to those points?  I've explained, not in great depth, in some of the posts above how I assign the value that I've assigned.  I basically look at bitcoin as a currency--examine both use and also as a store-of-value.  I've estimated adoption rates in certain areas, looked at what kind of money supply that would require, and calculated bitcoin's value through the lens of money supply.  I'd also admit that it's basically for my personal use, for my personal investment/speculation goals, for my strategy.  It fits in with what I hope to accomplish.  Your goals and your strategy for investment may be different.  I'm 47, almost 48, and if you are younger (or older) I'd hope and suspect your goals are not the same as mine.  I don't need to get a 1000x return or even a 100x return or even a 10x return to think an investment is worthwhile at this point in my life.  

One more important point.  Looking at these qualitative items you correctly pointed out:
--open source
--decentralized
--owes allegiance to no borders
--transmit instantaneously
--no middle man

You're describing bitcoin.  But REALLY you are describing the blockchain ledger.  In other words, there COULD be blockchain-related solutions that are NOT bitcoin.  I think it is worth noting that there are several companies out there building blockchain platforms that are NOT bitcoin. Most of these aren't related to currencies, but more along the lines of registries. Bitcoin doesn't have exclusive domain to those items you listed.  Bitcoin DOES have some limitations, as I pointed out earlier, in the area of block size and ability to to handle quantity of transactions (what is it...like 7 per second, max, right now?).  If bitcoin had some financial claim on everybody who developed open ledger registries, that would be great, but to my knowledge, that doesn't exist.  

Other solutions could come along that are just as disruptive to bitcoin as bitcoin is to fiat.  For this reason, when I discount my perception of future back to a present value, I use a pretty high cap rate.  That, in my view, recognizes the risk of other potential as-of-yet unknown solutions that scale past bitcoin's limitations in terms of transactions.  My GUESS is that those solutions may be based on open ledger registries, or a blockchain-like technology.  But bitcoin won't "own" them just by virtue of them using a similar concept.  

Look, I LOVE bitcoin.  It's so far beyond genius that I can't imagine how Satoshi conceived it, if Satoshi is even just one person.  It's AMAZING.  And frankly, at a potential rate of return of 40% annually over the next 5 years, bitcoin is a worthwhile speculation to make, in my opinion.  I'm not going to dump my entire investment portfolio into it.  I've got a plan (overall, all investments) that I believe is very strong, very flexible, and aggressive enough to reach my goals.  I'm watching this current run closely because I might well choose to double or even triple the aggressive, high-risk portion of my portfolio in this speculative play.  But I'll do it at a price that I find palatable based on the risk (as I perceive it) and reward (as I perceive it).  I keep a constant eye on developments, because new developments could impact my perception of the 2020 value.  Honestly, in the last 18-24 months, I haven't seen any new developments that have impacted my model.  

I understand that there are people who see a much higher upside than I do.  They might be right.  If bitcoin does better than I think it will, I'm fine with that.  I'll participate to the upside and be happy about it.  I won't be crying about not buying more, because I'm also pretty sure that I'll be able to follow my overall plan, regardless of what bitcoin does.  

[jaredboice]

"If you want to go back and read posts from long ago that show the work a little more:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=723219.msg8298674#msg8298674
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.msg8626991#msg8626991
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652652.msg7725333#msg7725333  --this one is good because there is a link to the Honest Node article that, as I recall, a lot of people ran with.  I'm pretty sure that article discusses the velocity issue."

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

"There are political considerations and entrenched powers that have vested interest in their fiat currencies."

There will be a battle between centralized elitists and an exponentially growing decentralized peer-to-peer network.  It would be easier for them to stop peer-to-peer file sharing then it would be for them to stop bitcoin.  If they can't keep Piratebay down for good, they don't have a chance of stopping Bitcoin.

"there COULD be blockchain-related solutions that are NOT bitcoin"

yes, there will be lots of them.  There's already thousands of crypto-currencies out there now thanks to Bitcoin being open-source.  Yet Bitcoin still is top dog by Billions and Billions of dollars.  The hashrate of the network is more powerful then all the world's supercomputers combined.  Bitcoin rising 3 Million Percent from $0.001 to $350+ (jn less than 6 years) is a monumental achievement.  And it speaks volumes of its resistance to attack.  Look at BitcoinObituaries.com for the 78+ times the mainstream media has pronounced Bitcoin dead, yet Bitcoin keeps on growing.

" Honestly, in the last 18-24 months, I haven't seen any new developments that have impacted my model."

You're treating the subject of technological development as something that's required for Bitcoin to succeed.  It's absolutely not.  Other than the Block Reward issue which the network has known about since the early days (something that was artificially set and will sort itself out organically), all Bitcoin needs is a free market of entrepreneurs willing to design new apps and new ways to interface easier with the Bitcoin Protocol.  And that happens every single day.  

[vuduchyld]

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

[jaredboice]

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

Agree to disagree, The mother of cop-outs.  No I asked you a very simple question and you send me links to a bunch of posts you made, and then you append that with a novel of bad arguments that smell like FUD which are all well known and easily countered.  Right, like I'm going to waste my time going in circles trying to figure out what you think you meant by "velocity" and why Bitcoin isn't undervalued. If you can't summarize the answer to the question in a few sentences or a couple short paragraphs then you don't have one.

"Kill Debate with Lots and Lots of Words that will Exhaust the Debater."  That's what your responses feel like.  Especially that last big one.  Try simplifying your arguments.  It will be much more clear and concise and people will take you more seriously

[rtrtcrypto]

Just forget about answering this dude, your answers and points were fine and your tone was more than reasonable. The guy just wants to hear "BTC WILL BE 1000000000000 DOLLARS BY 2017 100% CHANCE" because he is afraid he is bag holding.

I respect your gut feeling as to the current value of BTC, I understand your arguments... I place the value at BTC at a higher point than you do, but, I'm 100% ready to be wrong on this front (as you are on your front).

All in all, I think BTC has a great chance, I'm happy to be part of the ecosystem. I'm sure you feel the same.

Jaredboice wants to hear that his bet is a 100% sure winner and that the true value is obviously 10k or 100k or 10million... I'm not sure why he is fighting you over your opinion, being that you clearly stated it as such.

All the best,

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

[rtrtcrypto]

My god man, will you shut the hell up? You've been baiting this guy for two pages now. Enough. He gave you his opinion in a clear enough manner. Stop being a whinny bitch about the fact that he has placed a different value on BTC at this juncture in the game. Both of you are long term holders (as am I)... we will see in 2017 what the price is in 2017 and we will see in 2025 what the price is in 2025.

SMH

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

Agree to disagree, The mother of cop-outs.  No I asked you a very simple question and you send me links to a bunch of posts you made, and then you append that with a novel of bad arguments that smell like FUD which are all well known and easily countered.  Right, like I'm going to waste my time going in circles trying to figure out what you think you meant by "velocity" and why Bitcoin isn't undervalued. If you can't summarize the answer to the question in a few sentences or a couple short paragraphs then you don't have one.

"Kill Debate with Lots and Lots of Words that will Exhaust the Debater."  That's what your responses feel like.  Especially that last big one.  Try simplifying your arguments.  It will be much more clear and concise and people will take you more seriously

[jaredboice]

Just forget about answering this dude, your answers and points were fine and your tone was more than reasonable. The guy just wants to hear "BTC WILL BE 1000000000000 DOLLARS BY 2017 100% CHANCE" because he is afraid he is bag holding.

I respect your gut feeling as to the current value of BTC, I understand your arguments... I place the value at BTC at a higher point than you do, but, I'm 100% ready to be wrong on this front (as you are on your front).

All in all, I think BTC has a great chance, I'm happy to be part of the ecosystem. I'm sure you feel the same.

Jaredboice wants to hear that his bet is a 100% sure winner and that the true value is obviously 10k or 100k or 10million... I'm not sure why he is fighting you over your opinion, being that you clearly stated it as such.

All the best,

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

So you think this is part of a clear and concise response to why he thinks Bitcoin isn't undervalued:

"I've got a plan (overall, all investments) that I believe is very strong, very flexible, and aggressive enough to reach my goals.  I'm watching this current run closely because I might well choose to double or even triple the aggressive, high-risk portion of my portfolio in this speculative play.  But I'll do it at a price that I find palatable based on the risk (as I perceive it) and reward (as I perceive it).  I keep a constant eye on developments, because new developments could impact my perception of the 2020 value."


 

I call FUD as I see it.  I'll continue to call FUD as I see it.  The fact that you used the term "bag holding" tells me that you might be a shill, and possibly even the same guy I've been talking to.  I'd be happy to hear a bearish point of view if it has merit.  Bearish predicitons (if they are logical) might convince me to wait for another entry point.  The rest of them are just trying to convince people to dump their coins because you missed the train or you have a stake in the traditional financial system.

Saying you agree with the guy who says "I believe in bitcoin but I'm a buyer at $280" tells me that you're either a dumbass, a paid internet troll, or some poor kid who missed the bus (which puts you back in the category of dumbass)

Have a nice day

[rtrtcrypto]

I actually don't share his opinion or the value he estimates BTC to have at this stage, my number is comfortably higher than his and I am a buyer at these prices because of it.

BUT,

He told you he was just giving his opinion and he stated (correctly) that trying to value BTC in a quasi-theoretical way is pointless right now. So, I take his opinion for what it is, and OPINION.

I'm perfectly conscious of the fact that maybe he is in fact WRONG in valuing it TOO HIGH and that BTC goes to zero in 5 years. I am ready to LOSE my money and time invested into the space. To pretend that this is all a sure shot is absolutely a mistake.

I think there is a less than zero chance we see 1 million per BTC and I think a 2020 value in the five figures is very much possible. The % I place on that possibility is a factor in how much money and time I risk TODAY on BTC.

If this guy is more conservative than I am, so be it. I take decisions based on MY feeling and current understanding of the state of the field and BTC specifically.

Just forget about answering this dude, your answers and points were fine and your tone was more than reasonable. The guy just wants to hear "BTC WILL BE 1000000000000 DOLLARS BY 2017 100% CHANCE" because he is afraid he is bag holding.

I respect your gut feeling as to the current value of BTC, I understand your arguments... I place the value at BTC at a higher point than you do, but, I'm 100% ready to be wrong on this front (as you are on your front).

All in all, I think BTC has a great chance, I'm happy to be part of the ecosystem. I'm sure you feel the same.

Jaredboice wants to hear that his bet is a 100% sure winner and that the true value is obviously 10k or 100k or 10million... I'm not sure why he is fighting you over your opinion, being that you clearly stated it as such.

All the best,

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

So you think this is part of a clear and concise response to why he thinks Bitcoin isn't undervalued:

"I've got a plan (overall, all investments) that I believe is very strong, very flexible, and aggressive enough to reach my goals.  I'm watching this current run closely because I might well choose to double or even triple the aggressive, high-risk portion of my portfolio in this speculative play.  But I'll do it at a price that I find palatable based on the risk (as I perceive it) and reward (as I perceive it).  I keep a constant eye on developments, because new developments could impact my perception of the 2020 value."


 

I call FUD as I see it.  I'll continue to call FUD as I see it.  The fact that you used the term "bag holding" tells me that you might be a shill, and possibly even the same guy I've been talking to.  I'd be happy to hear a bearish point of view if it has merit.  Bearish predicitons (if they are logical) might convince me to wait for another entry point.  The rest of them are just trying to convince people to dump their coins because you missed the train or you have a stake in the traditional financial system.

Saying you agree with the guy who says "I believe in bitcoin but I'm a buyer at $280" tells me that you're either a dumbass, a paid internet troll, or some poor kid who missed the bus (which puts you back in the category of dumbass)

Have a nice day

[jaredboice]

I actually don't share his opinion or the value he estimates BTC to have at this stage, my number is comfortably higher than his and I am a buyer at these prices because of it.

BUT,

He told you he was just giving his opinion and he stated (correctly) that trying to value BTC in a quasi-theoretical way is pointless right now. So, I take his opinion for what it is, and OPINION.

I'm perfectly conscious of the fact that maybe he is in fact WRONG in valuing it TOO HIGH and that BTC goes to zero in 5 years. I am ready to LOSE my money and time invested into the space. To pretend that this is all a sure shot is absolutely a mistake.

I think there is a less than zero chance we see 1 million per BTC and I think a 2020 value in the five figures is very much possible. The % I place on that possibility is a factor in how much money and time I risk TODAY on BTC.

If this guy is more conservative than I am, so be it. I take decisions based on MY feeling and current understanding of the state of the field and BTC specifically.

Just forget about answering this dude, your answers and points were fine and your tone was more than reasonable. The guy just wants to hear "BTC WILL BE 1000000000000 DOLLARS BY 2017 100% CHANCE" because he is afraid he is bag holding.

I respect your gut feeling as to the current value of BTC, I understand your arguments... I place the value at BTC at a higher point than you do, but, I'm 100% ready to be wrong on this front (as you are on your front).

All in all, I think BTC has a great chance, I'm happy to be part of the ecosystem. I'm sure you feel the same.

Jaredboice wants to hear that his bet is a 100% sure winner and that the true value is obviously 10k or 100k or 10million... I'm not sure why he is fighting you over your opinion, being that you clearly stated it as such.

All the best,

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

So you think this is part of a clear and concise response to why he thinks Bitcoin isn't undervalued:

"I've got a plan (overall, all investments) that I believe is very strong, very flexible, and aggressive enough to reach my goals.  I'm watching this current run closely because I might well choose to double or even triple the aggressive, high-risk portion of my portfolio in this speculative play.  But I'll do it at a price that I find palatable based on the risk (as I perceive it) and reward (as I perceive it).  I keep a constant eye on developments, because new developments could impact my perception of the 2020 value."


 

I call FUD as I see it.  I'll continue to call FUD as I see it.  The fact that you used the term "bag holding" tells me that you might be a shill, and possibly even the same guy I've been talking to.  I'd be happy to hear a bearish point of view if it has merit.  Bearish predicitons (if they are logical) might convince me to wait for another entry point.  The rest of them are just trying to convince people to dump their coins because you missed the train or you have a stake in the traditional financial system.

Saying you agree with the guy who says "I believe in bitcoin but I'm a buyer at $280" tells me that you're either a dumbass, a paid internet troll, or some poor kid who missed the bus (which puts you back in the category of dumbass)

Have a nice day

That's great that you voice your approval for somebody's unsubstantiated opinion.  It shows that you value your liberty as an individual to conduct free speech on the internet. That's absolutely fantastic.  Watch as I do the same and dismantle unsubstantiated opinions in a forum category entitled, "Speculation."  I hope that you continue to make investment decisions based on unsubstantiated opinions.  I'll continue to call people out for opinions that have no substance and make absolutely no sense.  Thanks again for your coments 

[rtrtcrypto]

I actually live in North Korea, so I have no free speech. I was told by the lord and emperor to post what I posted. 

But seriously, I'm not quite sure, STILL, how you want the guy to be more specific when he already had stated that he was giving his opinion and that he feels you can't properly evaluate crypto economically speaking?

Maybe you should argue THAT point with him.

I actually don't share his opinion or the value he estimates BTC to have at this stage, my number is comfortably higher than his and I am a buyer at these prices because of it.

BUT,

He told you he was just giving his opinion and he stated (correctly) that trying to value BTC in a quasi-theoretical way is pointless right now. So, I take his opinion for what it is, and OPINION.

I'm perfectly conscious of the fact that maybe he is in fact WRONG in valuing it TOO HIGH and that BTC goes to zero in 5 years. I am ready to LOSE my money and time invested into the space. To pretend that this is all a sure shot is absolutely a mistake.

I think there is a less than zero chance we see 1 million per BTC and I think a 2020 value in the five figures is very much possible. The % I place on that possibility is a factor in how much money and time I risk TODAY on BTC.

If this guy is more conservative than I am, so be it. I take decisions based on MY feeling and current understanding of the state of the field and BTC specifically.

Just forget about answering this dude, your answers and points were fine and your tone was more than reasonable. The guy just wants to hear "BTC WILL BE 1000000000000 DOLLARS BY 2017 100% CHANCE" because he is afraid he is bag holding.

I respect your gut feeling as to the current value of BTC, I understand your arguments... I place the value at BTC at a higher point than you do, but, I'm 100% ready to be wrong on this front (as you are on your front).

All in all, I think BTC has a great chance, I'm happy to be part of the ecosystem. I'm sure you feel the same.

Jaredboice wants to hear that his bet is a 100% sure winner and that the true value is obviously 10k or 100k or 10million... I'm not sure why he is fighting you over your opinion, being that you clearly stated it as such.

All the best,

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

So you think this is part of a clear and concise response to why he thinks Bitcoin isn't undervalued:

"I've got a plan (overall, all investments) that I believe is very strong, very flexible, and aggressive enough to reach my goals.  I'm watching this current run closely because I might well choose to double or even triple the aggressive, high-risk portion of my portfolio in this speculative play.  But I'll do it at a price that I find palatable based on the risk (as I perceive it) and reward (as I perceive it).  I keep a constant eye on developments, because new developments could impact my perception of the 2020 value."


 

I call FUD as I see it.  I'll continue to call FUD as I see it.  The fact that you used the term "bag holding" tells me that you might be a shill, and possibly even the same guy I've been talking to.  I'd be happy to hear a bearish point of view if it has merit.  Bearish predicitons (if they are logical) might convince me to wait for another entry point.  The rest of them are just trying to convince people to dump their coins because you missed the train or you have a stake in the traditional financial system.

Saying you agree with the guy who says "I believe in bitcoin but I'm a buyer at $280" tells me that you're either a dumbass, a paid internet troll, or some poor kid who missed the bus (which puts you back in the category of dumbass)

Have a nice day

That's great that you voice your approval for somebody's unsubstantiated opinion.  It shows that you value your liberty as an individual to conduct free speech on the internet. That's absolutely fantastic.  Watch as I do the same and dismantle unsubstantiated opinions in a forum category entitled, "Speculation."  I hope that you continue to make investment decisions based on unsubstantiated opinions.  I'll continue to call people out for opinions that have no substance and make absolutely no sense.  Thanks again for your coments 

[jaredboice]

Get to know this word and its meaning.  Perfect way to identify trolls and shills

Bloviate: to talk at length, especially in an inflated or in an empty way.

[jaredboice]

I totally argued that point with him.  It's lost in the haystack of the quoted empty words that are between my words.  See if you can find them

[rtrtcrypto]

To be perfectly frank, I felt your level of analysis in responding to him was no "deeper" or more "substantial" than any of his answers to you. I think, in truth, that neither of you can properly value this technology. That if we are right (since all three agree that BTC could be huge / trillions in market cap) we will have great returns. Otherwise, we bust.

That is about all that seems CERTAIN right now. That you imply that there is certainty in the moon shot and the tech is what I find problematic.

Btw, I find it problematic for others (this is, in a way, a warning to you on the matter), I have risked what I think reasonable and I have done so knowing it can fail - you, on the other hand, seem certain it WILL GO MOON, this makes me worry you have in fact risked more than you can afford to lose.

I hope you are right... for what it's worth, and have put my money and time on your side of things.

Get to know this word and its meaning.  Perfect way to identify trolls and shills

Bloviate: to talk at length, especially in an inflated or in an empty way.

[rtrtcrypto]

Ok,

I thought I read all exchanges, maybe I missed some... if so, I apologize.

Regardless, I just don't read him as that big of a FUD/skeptic... there are some many worse examples on this forum. Not sure why his cautious but optimistic reading of the potential of BTC left you so annoyed at him.

Anyway, let's leave it at that. We will soon know if we made the right choices.

I totally argued that point with him.  It's lost in the haystack of the quoted empty words that are between my words.  See if you can find them

[jaredboice]

"To be perfectly frank, I felt your level of analysis in responding to him was no "deeper" or more "substantial" than any of his answers to you."

Would you care to address WHY you felt that way, and specifically WHICH PARTS of my responses you are referring to.  Pleases quote my response and add your reasons...or else, you are also very guilty of: BLOVIATING

[jaredboice]

Anyone who bloviates the way that guy did are either newbs who are completely out of touch, or they are more likely trolls.  Bloviating is seriously the number one identifier.

[nicked]

I'm pretty sure that spelling words in all caps is bloviating.

[rtrtcrypto]

Sure!!!

All of these responses are no good; they act much in the same way his responses act towards your points. The only difference in my mind is that you are stating these positions as being guaranteed outcomes and he has put his positions forward as opinions that influence his current stance. Further, he has stated he doesn't wish to impose his views on you and you are arguing that he should be FORCED to accept your position.
 
Look over what you wrote:

-The first thing, for example, you simply wrote an entire paragraph stating that the way in which he has written is not convenient for you.

-the second thing, you simply assume things - I think your guess is likely right, but, saying it will happen because it will happen is not really an analysis of the situation. Btw, I actually think it would be easier to damage BTC vs piratebay... but, that is for another time.

-this third part is also empty. Yes the hash rate is incredible. Yes there are lots of alt coins and BTC out capitalizes them by an incredible margin. Yes it is amazing that it went up "3 million %". Etc.

Yet, this is not an analysis of future outcomes. Again, they may give advantages for us. I hope those advantages are enough. But, there is no guarantee of that. Yahoo was vastly ahead of GOOGLE (same for myspace vs FB)... network effects alone are not necessarily enough. I think in this case they might be. But, that is just a hunch. To really study this issue would take considerable effort and study. Pretending what you wrote is "analysis" is silly. Pretending that because the network has not been successfully attacked means it CANT be attacked is silly. LINDY effect and all.

Anti fragile systems are interesting, I think that BTC is a great example of such a system. But, to really analyze this is a complex issue demanding a formal paper. I don't think we should hold one another to that standard on a forum like this - but then, we have to let someone else get away with saying "hey, this is my personal opinion, this is my hunch, etc" without demanding more from them then we are willing to do ourselves.



 

"If you want to go back and read posts from long ago that show the work a little more:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=723219.msg8298674#msg8298674
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.msg8626991#msg8626991
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652652.msg7725333#msg7725333  --this one is good because there is a link to the Honest Node article that, as I recall, a lot of people ran with.  I'm pretty sure that article discusses the velocity issue."

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

"There are political considerations and entrenched powers that have vested interest in their fiat currencies."

There will be a battle between centralized elitists and an exponentially growing decentralized peer-to-peer network.  It would be easier for them to stop peer-to-peer file sharing then it would be for them to stop bitcoin.  If they can't keep Piratebay down for good, they don't have a chance of stopping Bitcoin.

"there COULD be blockchain-related solutions that are NOT bitcoin"

yes, there will be lots of them.  There's already thousands of crypto-currencies out there now thanks to Bitcoin being open-source.  Yet Bitcoin still is top dog by Billions and Billions of dollars.  The hashrate of the network is more powerful then all the world's supercomputers combined.  Bitcoin rising 3 Million Percent from $0.001 to $350+ (jn less than 6 years) is a monumental achievement.  And it speaks volumes of its resistance to attack.  Look at BitcoinObituaries.com for the 78+ times the mainstream media has pronounced Bitcoin dead, yet Bitcoin keeps on growing.

" Honestly, in the last 18-24 months, I haven't seen any new developments that have impacted my model."

You're treating the subject of technological development as something that's required for Bitcoin to succeed.  It's absolutely not.  Other than the Block Reward issue which the network has known about since the early days (something that was artificially set and will sort itself out organically), all Bitcoin needs is a free market of entrepreneurs willing to design new apps and new ways to interface easier with the Bitcoin Protocol.  And that happens every single day.  

[rtrtcrypto]

 

MORE CAPS!!!!

Anyway, just to stick to the thread. I have a hunch we will find out early next week that the losing bids for the auction were above the 400 dollar mark. I'm betting on higher prices next week because of it. 

On the FUD side, my main concern over this week has been trying to find out how much of an influence MMM really had on the price move. I'm worried that even if the entire scam was actually not all that significant it will still be presented as such in the media.

Medium term, if MMM proves to not be a problem and the block size debate gets "resolved" properly (I think the entire issue has been overblown) - I would be ultra bullish.

$400-800 is the band I would logical up until around the middle of next year. Just so I don't get confused with a bear, my 2020+ number is over 10,000. Way over, in fact, as we get closer to the full supply being available to the market (3030's). 

[jaredboice]

"All of these responses are no good; they act much in the same way his responses act towards your points."

Why are you wasting your time in a forum category about speculating if you think all responses about speculation are no good?  You are either a troll or you are retarded.


"The only difference in my mind is that you are stating these positions as being guaranteed outcomes..."

No, the only difference is that I'm actually adding substance to my positions with an explanation that adds specific reasons and doesn't bloviate on and on about how my opinion is subjective and I have experience in GPAA and I don't think this and I don't believe in that and I like the color blue, and I like to wear white shirts on thursdays, and I like to eat cereal for breakfast, etc.. ... .. No substance.  No reasons.  Just opinions and beliefs.

"Further, he has stated he doesn't wish to impose his views on you and you are arguing that he should be FORCED to accept your position."

First off, I'm not forcing anyone to accept my positions.  I'm requesting REASONS for a particular opinion or belief.  If you're not adding substance to your views here, you might as well just be masterbating.  
 
"Look over what you wrote:

-The first thing, for example, you simply wrote an entire paragraph stating that the way in which he has written is not convenient for you."

Yes, it's absolutely not convenient to intellectual progress to just state a view in a speculation thread with absolutely no reason why. You might as well not even participate.

"I actually think it would be easier to damage BTC vs piratebay... but, that is for another time."

  Where's your reason why!?  YOU ARE BLOVIATING  


"I hope those advantages are enough. But, there is no guarantee of that."

I have already stated that there's no guarantees.  But should I have to state that?  Isn't that obvious?  Isn't it implied that nobody knows the future IN A THREAD ABOUT SPECULATION.  My god, all I'm asking for is SUBSTANCE.  I don't need a guarantee.  


"Yahoo was vastly ahead of GOOGLE (same for myspace vs FB)... network effects alone are not necessarily enough."

Finally!  You attempt to add substance.  Yes, there's no guarantee that Yahoo was going to stay top dog forever.  But it certainly was used by hundreds of millions of people and made shit tons of money.  There are big differences with Yahoo, however, when compared to Bitcoin.  Bitcoin is completely open source.  It's development potential is distributed.  If something came around that offered a superior property that bitcoin needed but didn't have, Bitcoin could be updated rather quickly.  So it's not so easy to bypass Bitcoin the way Google bypassed Yahoo.  

"Pretending what you wrote is "analysis" is silly. "

You seem to think all speculation is opinion and adding substance to your views is silly.  It's fortunate for me that I don't invest according to the same principals


"Pretending that because the network has not been successfully attacked means it CANT be attacked is silly."

I'm not pretending anything.  There's been plenty of attacks on Bitcoin.  78+ "Bitcoin is dead" articles from the mainstream media over the course of the last few years is very telling to the actual resilience to bitcoin and the actual agenda of the mainstream press. http://www.bitcoinobituaries.com

"But, to really analyze this is a complex issue demanding a formal paper. I don't think we should hold one another to that standard on a forum like this - but then, we have to let someone else get away with saying "hey, this is my personal opinion, this is my hunch, etc" without demanding more from them then we are willing to do ourselves."

Bahaha!  What a bunch of hubris.  OK, so let's not hold ourself to standards such as adding support and substance to our views.  

I DO demand much more from myself.  Notice that throughout this entire thread I have added substance and support for my arguments.  I don't bloviate on and on.  

Bloviate: to talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way.

[jaredboice]

MORE CAPS!!!!

Anyway, just to stick to the thread. I have a hunch we will find out early next week that the losing bids for the auction were above the 400 dollar mark. I'm betting on higher prices next week because of it. 

On the FUD side, my main concern over this week has been trying to find out how much of an influence MMM really had on the price move. I'm worried that even if the entire scam was actually not all that significant it will still be presented as such in the media.

Medium term, if MMM proves to not be a problem and the block size debate gets "resolved" properly (I think the entire issue has been overblown) - I would be ultra bullish.

$400-800 is the band I would logical up until around the middle of next year. Just so I don't get confused with a bear, my 2020+ number is over 10,000. Way over, in fact, as we get closer to the full supply being available to the market (3030's). 

My Caps were used as emphasis in my SUPPORTED ARGUMENTS. LOL  
Feel free to add caps to supported arguments of your own.

Yes of course the media will want people to think that Bitcoin is only going up because of some ponzi scheme.  That is standard operating procedure.  

[jaredboice]

"All of these responses are no good; they act much in the same way his responses act towards your points."

Why are you wasting your time in a forum category about speculating if you think all responses about speculation are no good?  You are either a troll or you are retarded.


"The only difference in my mind is that you are stating these positions as being guaranteed outcomes..."

No, the only difference is that I'm actually adding substance to my positions with an explanation that adds specific reasons and doesn't bloviate on and on about how my opinion is subjective and I have experience in GPAA and I don't think this and I don't believe in that and I like the color blue, and I like to wear white shirts on thursdays, and I like to eat cereal for breakfast, etc.. ... .. No substance.  No reasons.  Just opinions and beliefs.

"Further, he has stated he doesn't wish to impose his views on you and you are arguing that he should be FORCED to accept your position."

First off, I'm not forcing anyone to accept my positions.  I'm requesting REASONS for a particular opinion or belief.  If you're not adding substance to your views here, you might as well just be masterbating.  
 
"Look over what you wrote:

-The first thing, for example, you simply wrote an entire paragraph stating that the way in which he has written is not convenient for you."

Yes, it's absolutely not convenient to intellectual progress to just state a view in a speculation thread with absolutely no reason why. You might as well not even participate.

"I actually think it would be easier to damage BTC vs piratebay... but, that is for another time."

  Where's your reason why!?  YOU ARE BLOVIATING  


"I hope those advantages are enough. But, there is no guarantee of that."

I have already stated that there's no guarantees.  But should I have to state that?  Isn't that obvious?  Isn't it implied that nobody knows the future IN A THREAD ABOUT SPECULATION.  My god, all I'm asking for is SUBSTANCE.  I don't need a guarantee.  


"Yahoo was vastly ahead of GOOGLE (same for myspace vs FB)... network effects alone are not necessarily enough."

Finally!  You attempt to add substance.  Yes, there's no guarantee that Yahoo was going to stay top dog forever.  But it certainly was used by hundreds of millions of people and made shit tons of money.  There are big differences with Yahoo, however, when compared to Bitcoin.  Bitcoin is completely open source.  It's development potential is distributed.  If something came around that offered a superior property that bitcoin needed but didn't have, Bitcoin could be updated rather quickly.  So it's not so easy to bypass Bitcoin the way Google bypassed Yahoo.  

"Pretending what you wrote is "analysis" is silly. "

You seem to think all speculation is opinion and adding substance to your views is silly.  It's fortunate for me that I don't invest according to the same principals


"Pretending that because the network has not been successfully attacked means it CANT be attacked is silly."

I'm not pretending anything.  There's been plenty of attacks on Bitcoin.  78+ "Bitcoin is dead" articles from the mainstream media over the course of the last few years is very telling to the actual resilience to bitcoin and the actual agenda of the mainstream press.

"But, to really analyze this is a complex issue demanding a formal paper. I don't think we should hold one another to that standard on a forum like this - but then, we have to let someone else get away with saying "hey, this is my personal opinion, this is my hunch, etc" without demanding more from them then we are willing to do ourselves."

Bahaha!  What a bunch of hubris.  OK, so let's not hold ourself to standards such as adding support and substance to our views.  

I demand much more from myself.  Notice that throughout this entire thread I have added substance and support for my arguments.  I don't bloviate on and on.  

Bloviate: to talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way.

Maybe you can't read makecake.  The definition stated "to talk at length IN AN EMPTY WAY.  I have added substance to my views.  That's the big difference. Thanks again for your comments  

[bButtercup]

...
My Caps were... standard operating procedure.  

CAP LOCK = CRUISE CONTROL 4 COOL!!!11!11!one

[jaredboice]

...
My Caps were... standard operating procedure.  

CAP LOCK = CRUISE CONTROL 4 COOL!!!11!11!one

There's a difference between using caps for EMPHASIS, and EXAGGERATING THE USE OF CAPS TO SUCH AN EXTENT AS AN ATTEMPT TO HUMILIATE AND DISCREDIT A GUY USING SUBSTANCE AND REASONS IN HIS RESPONSES TO A BUNCH OF TROLLS AND SHILLS WHO ARE JUST TRYING TO AFFECT SENTIMENT WITH A BUNCH OF EMPTY RHETORIC AND BASELESS BELIEFS.  

 

[makeacake]

"All of these responses are no good; they act much in the same way his responses act towards your points."

Why are you wasting your time in a forum category about speculating if you think all responses about speculation are no good?  You are either a troll or you are retarded.


"The only difference in my mind is that you are stating these positions as being guaranteed outcomes..."

No, the only difference is that I'm actually adding substance to my positions with an explanation that adds specific reasons and doesn't bloviate on and on about how my opinion is subjective and I have experience in GPAA and I don't think this and I don't believe in that and I like the color blue, and I like to wear white shirts on thursdays, and I like to eat cereal for breakfast, etc.. ... .. No substance.  No reasons.  Just opinions and beliefs.

"Further, he has stated he doesn't wish to impose his views on you and you are arguing that he should be FORCED to accept your position."

First off, I'm not forcing anyone to accept my positions.  I'm requesting REASONS for a particular opinion or belief.  If you're not adding substance to your views here, you might as well just be masterbating.  
 
"Look over what you wrote:

-The first thing, for example, you simply wrote an entire paragraph stating that the way in which he has written is not convenient for you."

Yes, it's absolutely not convenient to intellectual progress to just state a view in a speculation thread with absolutely no reason why. You might as well not even participate.

"I actually think it would be easier to damage BTC vs piratebay... but, that is for another time."

  Where's your reason why!?  YOU ARE BLOVIATING  


"I hope those advantages are enough. But, there is no guarantee of that."

I have already stated that there's no guarantees.  But should I have to state that?  Isn't that obvious?  Isn't it implied that nobody knows the future IN A THREAD ABOUT SPECULATION.  My god, all I'm asking for is SUBSTANCE.  I don't need a guarantee.  


"Yahoo was vastly ahead of GOOGLE (same for myspace vs FB)... network effects alone are not necessarily enough."

Finally!  You attempt to add substance.  Yes, there's no guarantee that Yahoo was going to stay top dog forever.  But it certainly was used by hundreds of millions of people and made shit tons of money.  There are big differences with Yahoo, however, when compared to Bitcoin.  Bitcoin is completely open source.  It's development potential is distributed.  If something came around that offered a superior property that bitcoin needed but didn't have, Bitcoin could be updated rather quickly.  So it's not so easy to bypass Bitcoin the way Google bypassed Yahoo.  

"Pretending what you wrote is "analysis" is silly. "

You seem to think all speculation is opinion and adding substance to your views is silly.  It's fortunate for me that I don't invest according to the same principals


"Pretending that because the network has not been successfully attacked means it CANT be attacked is silly."

I'm not pretending anything.  There's been plenty of attacks on Bitcoin.  78+ "Bitcoin is dead" articles from the mainstream media over the course of the last few years is very telling to the actual resilience to bitcoin and the actual agenda of the mainstream press.

"But, to really analyze this is a complex issue demanding a formal paper. I don't think we should hold one another to that standard on a forum like this - but then, we have to let someone else get away with saying "hey, this is my personal opinion, this is my hunch, etc" without demanding more from them then we are willing to do ourselves."

Bahaha!  What a bunch of hubris.  OK, so let's not hold ourself to standards such as adding support and substance to our views.  

I demand much more from myself.  Notice that throughout this entire thread I have added substance and support for my arguments.  I don't bloviate on and on.  

Bloviate: to talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way.

Maybe you can't read makecake.  The definition stated "to talk at length IN AN EMPTY WAY...

I can read just fine, now stop Bloviating like a gigantic Bloviator

[jaredboice]

I don't think you can.  Bloviating means talking without any substance.  I've added all kinds of substance.  Therefore, you are a troll.  
And I am a Troll Slayer  

[makeacake]

I don't think you can.  Bloviating means taking without any substance.  I've added all kinds of substance.  Therefore, you are a troll.  
And I am a Troll Slayer  

No, you just bloviated yourself into a Stupid bloviation, you Stupid Person.
Now deal with it

[rtrtcrypto]

"There's been plenty of attacks on Bitcoin.  78+ "Bitcoin is dead" articles from the mainstream media over the course of the last few years is very telling to the actual resilience to bitcoin and the actual agenda of the mainstream press"

WHAT ANALYSIS!!!!! MUCH WOW!!!!

So much better than my points! We can even include links to websites to "prove" that we are using deep analytical tools in breaking down the arguments of others? Incredible!

Are you a scholar? May I read your published work anywhere?

The analysis you provided in this thread so far, I must say, it is groundbreaking:

-a link to a website and even the number of articles written?! Incredible research.
-analytically deep comments like "Yet Bitcoin still is top dog by Billions and Billions of dollars", man, the ability to look up market cap on coinmarketcap is the stuff of legend.
-"Bitcoin is completely open source.  It's development potential is distributed.  If something came around that offered a superior property that bitcoin needed but didn't have, Bitcoin could be updated rather quickly"... man, are you sure you are not satoshi himself? Because, this level of analysis is really unheard of.

-There will be a battle between centralized elitists and an exponentially growing decentralized peer-to-peer network.  

ONE MAN, ONE DESIRE... in 2016, THERE WILL BE AN EPIC BATTLE OF INCREDIBLE BLOCKCHAINEAN PROPORTIONS.

Truth is, every single point brought up as "substance" doesn't go much further than "because I said so". This is not substance, this is not scholarship, this is not anything but your semi-informed opinion from having read a bunch of bitcoin blogs and this forum. It would be fine, but, you pretend it is otherwise.

Speculate all you want, and I think you are right in betting on bitcoin, but to pretend that your "analysis" in this thread is anything other than you having read this forum and a few wikipedia entries is a joke.

"All of these responses are no good; they act much in the same way his responses act towards your points."

Why are you wasting your time in a forum category about speculating if you think all responses about speculation are no good?  You are either a troll or you are retarded.


"The only difference in my mind is that you are stating these positions as being guaranteed outcomes..."

No, the only difference is that I'm actually adding substance to my positions with an explanation that adds specific reasons and doesn't bloviate on and on about how my opinion is subjective and I have experience in GPAA and I don't think this and I don't believe in that and I like the color blue, and I like to wear white shirts on thursdays, and I like to eat cereal for breakfast, etc.. ... .. No substance.  No reasons.  Just opinions and beliefs.

"Further, he has stated he doesn't wish to impose his views on you and you are arguing that he should be FORCED to accept your position."

First off, I'm not forcing anyone to accept my positions.  I'm requesting REASONS for a particular opinion or belief.  If you're not adding substance to your views here, you might as well just be masterbating.  
 
"Look over what you wrote:

-The first thing, for example, you simply wrote an entire paragraph stating that the way in which he has written is not convenient for you."

Yes, it's absolutely not convenient to intellectual progress to just state a view in a speculation thread with absolutely no reason why. You might as well not even participate.

"I actually think it would be easier to damage BTC vs piratebay... but, that is for another time."

  Where's your reason why!?  YOU ARE BLOVIATING  


"I hope those advantages are enough. But, there is no guarantee of that."

I have already stated that there's no guarantees.  But should I have to state that?  Isn't that obvious?  Isn't it implied that nobody knows the future IN A THREAD ABOUT SPECULATION.  My god, all I'm asking for is SUBSTANCE.  I don't need a guarantee.  


"Yahoo was vastly ahead of GOOGLE (same for myspace vs FB)... network effects alone are not necessarily enough."

Finally!  You attempt to add substance.  Yes, there's no guarantee that Yahoo was going to stay top dog forever.  But it certainly was used by hundreds of millions of people and made shit tons of money.  There are big differences with Yahoo, however, when compared to Bitcoin.  Bitcoin is completely open source.  It's development potential is distributed.  If something came around that offered a superior property that bitcoin needed but didn't have, Bitcoin could be updated rather quickly.  So it's not so easy to bypass Bitcoin the way Google bypassed Yahoo.  

"Pretending what you wrote is "analysis" is silly. "

You seem to think all speculation is opinion and adding substance to your views is silly.  It's fortunate for me that I don't invest according to the same principals


"Pretending that because the network has not been successfully attacked means it CANT be attacked is silly."

I'm not pretending anything.  There's been plenty of attacks on Bitcoin.  78+ "Bitcoin is dead" articles from the mainstream media over the course of the last few years is very telling to the actual resilience to bitcoin and the actual agenda of the mainstream press. http://www.bitcoinobituaries.com

"But, to really analyze this is a complex issue demanding a formal paper. I don't think we should hold one another to that standard on a forum like this - but then, we have to let someone else get away with saying "hey, this is my personal opinion, this is my hunch, etc" without demanding more from them then we are willing to do ourselves."

Bahaha!  What a bunch of hubris.  OK, so let's not hold ourself to standards such as adding support and substance to our views.  

I DO demand much more from myself.  Notice that throughout this entire thread I have added substance and support for my arguments.  I don't bloviate on and on.  

Bloviate: to talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way.

[rtrtcrypto]

He has added ALL KINDS of substance guys... including feces, it seems.

I don't think you can.  Bloviating means talking without any substance.  I've added all kinds of substance.  Therefore, you are a troll.  
And I am a Troll Slayer  

[jaredboice]

I don't think you can.  Bloviating means taking without any substance.  I've added all kinds of substance.  Therefore, you are a troll.  
And I am a Troll Slayer  

No, you just bloviated yourself into a Stupid bloviation, you Stupid Person.
Now deal with it

  ok bro, whatever you say

[jaredboice]

"So much better than my points! We can even include links to websites to "prove" that we are using deep analytical tools in breaking down the arguments of others? Incredible!"

There's a difference between "prove" and "add substance."  There's not much you can prove in the realm of speculation.  But when there's already 78+ articles about the death of bitcoin within the last few years, and bitcoin is still not dead, that's got SUBSTANCE. I'm still waiting on your reasons why you think it should be easier for the government to kill Bitcoin than PirateBay.

"Are you a scholar? May I read your published work anywhere?"

Are you a scholar?  More importantly, are you trying to imply that one has to be a scholar in order to add support and substance to their views rather than just stating an empty opinion?

"The analysis you provided in this thread so far, I must say, it is groundbreaking:

-a link to a website and even the number of articles written?! Incredible research.
-analytically deep comments like "Yet Bitcoin still is top dog by Billions and Billions of dollars", man, the ability to look up market cap on coinmarketcap is the stuff of legend."

I linked to a website that shows 78+ articles written in the past few years that are trying to convince people that Bitcoin is dead.  Bitcoin is still alive and well.  That says a lot about the agenda of the media.  


"man, are you sure you are not satoshi himself? Because, this level of analysis is really unheard of."

Thanks!!  

"ONE MAN, ONE DESIRE... in 2016, THERE WILL BE AN EPIC BATTLE OF INCREDIBLE BLOCKCHAINEAN PROPORTIONS. "

Is that your attempt to be funny?  So I add substance to the view that there's already a battle going on between blockchain instances yet Bitcoin is still exponentially higher and exhibiting a very strong network effect...and you attack that?  You are attacking me for adding substance whereas you're all just like "Whatever, there's no guarantee of anything"  

"Truth is, every single point brought up as "substance" doesn't go much further than "because I said so". This is not substance, this is not scholarship, this is not anything but your semi-informed opinion from having read a bunch of bitcoin blogs and this forum. It would be fine, but, you pretend it is otherwise."

My "semi-informed opinion" is much more informed than yours.  People can feel free to scroll up and read the substance I added to my arguments they can see you are your trolling friend's constant bloviating and your attempt to appear as bitcoin bulls with all kinds of unsubstantiated bearish opinions.  They should just start at the beginning of the thread, however, as ever since i called the OP out on not adding any support to his bearish statements that were made to look bullish, they've been trying to convince readers that they actually do add support to their views....without adding any support at all.

"Speculate all you want, and I think you are right in betting on bitcoin, but to pretend that your "analysis" in this thread is anything other than you having read this forum and a few wikipedia entries is a joke."

You're a joke.  I added support to my responses and you attack me for trying to add supporting information.  Baseless opinions are so much more acceptable around here  

[rtrtcrypto]

you like the word "substance", huh?

[jaredboice]

you like the word "substance", huh?

You like getting paid to troll huh, and present baseless bearish statements in the guise of a bull?

Yes I like the word substance, because I won't let up.  I will keep asking for supporting information and substance for your retarded statements.

Tell me again, why do you think Bitcoin should be easier for the government to kill than The Pirate Bay?  Let's hear some SUBSTANCE

[makeacake]

.@rtrtcrypto: stop replying to jaredboice troll. I think he has Assburgers.

[jaredboice]

.@rtrtcrypto: stop replying to jaredboice troll. I think he has Assburgers.

 

No please, keep replying.  The longer this goes on the less of a shit people will give about you and your crony shills' bearish troll of a thread that's disguised to look like a bunch of bulls.  The guy pretends like he's the biggest bull he knows and then he's like, "The Government could kill Bitcoin easier than The Pirate Bay"

 

[rtrtcrypto]

Depends by what you mean by "kill" I suppose.

I don't think the BTC network can be destroyed, I think it is probably highly anti-fragile by now (Lindy effect on a network like this (p2p)? For 6 years? That is substantial).

Still, for the purpose of what was brought up in this thread, which was a value vs. price discussion that really (whether it wanted to or not) was focused on ROI?

I think PIRATEBAY can serve an utility even under extreme attack and distress. The bitcoin network can as well, no doubt, but, if your goal was to get a return on investment and you bought in around where we are now? There is no guarantee that the network can, under certain types of attacks, retain this capitalization - at least not in the short term. The volatility is there for a reason after all: thinly traded market, somewhat illiquid, less than fully professional services in key economic areas (exchanges in China, the largest market by far), worries about scams (like MMM this very moment).  

Like I've said previously, my target is for this network to attain a value in the trillions - I believe that will happen (what a crazy bear I am!!!!!) Certain models in network theory show that this is possible, the value of a network like this probably follows something similar to Zipf's Law - so, added adoption should have a massive impact on price/value... much more so than people can understand to be "sane". On a similar vein, I'm not too worried about distribution, as I believe Pareto distribution is going to take hold regardless... projects like NEM will find this out the hard way. Though, the GINI index for BTC is not something to be celebrated in its current form.

What I'm saying is, if your goal is ROI from THIS PONT FORWARDS, the utility of the BTC network could be compromised in a way that is maybe more extreme than the utility of PIRATEBAY under a similar scale of attack for each individual network.

Destroying BTC is impossible, in my estimation. But, a very coordinated attack worries me from an adoption stand point - and thinking about ROI at this stage is more or less a bet that falls purely on the extent the network is adopted.

 

you like the word "substance", huh?

You like getting paid to troll huh, and present baseless bearish statements in the guise of a bull?

Yes I like the word substance, because I won't let up.  I will keep asking for supporting information and substance for your retarded statements.

Tell me again, why do you think Bitcoin should be easier for the government to kill than The Pirate Bay?  Let's hear some SUBSTANCE

[jaredboice]

"Still, for the purpose of what was brought up in this thread, which was a value vs. price discussion that really (whether it wanted to or not) was focused on ROI? "

I haven't learned anything about your distinction between Value and Price from this statement.  Were you trying to indicate that the subject has been changed?  Well the subject was initially "US Marhsalls auction....what time will results/winner be announced today" and then the OP leads that into his belief that Bitcoin would be a good buy at $280 (but not at current prices) yet he tries to identify himself as a bull.  That's a lot of psychological manipulation going on there.

"There is no guarantee that the network can, under certain types of attacks, retain this capitalization"

There's no guarantee that any stock or share of anything will retain anything at any time.  Bitcoin has been attacked every which way through DDoS attacks and media attacks galore numbering over 78+ "Bitcoin is Dead" type arguments that have been documented.  It's still up over 3 Million percent since its inception only 6 years ago when it was like $0.001, and that was after several boom and bust cycles already.  If you think that doesn't add support for its ability to survive in the future (ability, not guarantee) than I don't think you're being intellectually honest.  

"The volatility is there for a reason after all: thinly traded market, somewhat illiquid, less than fully professional services in key economic areas (exchanges in China, the largest market by far), worries about scams (like MMM this very moment)."

Yes, it's certainly thinly traded.  The MMM Ponzi scheme worries are being exaggerated by the media the same way they exaggerated 78+ articles that claim Bitcoin died over the past few years.  I'm not worried about these scams because I'm not participating in them.  The mainstream media loves to try to connect bitcoin to ISIS, and Ponzi Schemes, and Drug Dealers because that is the ugly dark side of bitcoin markets.  USD has far darker black markets than Bitcoin.  Bitcoin only has a $5 Billion market cap.  That's probably the profit margin of some of the drug dealing and ponzi scheming going on with US Dollars. To claim Bitcoin is only going up because of a ponzi scheme and not because it's a decentralized open source autonomous trustless value transmission system that has no borders or boundaries and can trade value virtually instantaneously for little to no fees, is trolling.

"Like I've said previously, my target is for this network to attain a value in the trillions - I believe that will happen (what a crazy bear I am!!!!!)"

Yet you betray yourself by saying things like thinking the government can kill Bitcoin easier than The Pirate Bay, and concerns that the Blocksize issue will destroy bitcoin, and that ponzi schemes are what's probably responsible for the current rise.  OK sure, what a Bull you are.   Sounds more like you're mixing bullish sentiment with bearish declarations to stir Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD).

"Certain models in network theory show that this is possible, the value of a network like this probably follows something similar to Zipf's Law - so, added adoption should have a massive impact on price/value... much more so than people can understand to be "sane". On a similar vein, I'm not too worried about distribution, as I believe Pareto distribution is going to take hold regardless... projects like NEM will find this out the hard way. Though, the GINI index for BTC is not something to be celebrated in its current form."

See you say something like this, adding a bunch of smart sounding words to make you sound like a well-researched bull, and then, immediately after:

"What I'm saying is, if your goal is ROI from THIS PONT FORWARDS, the utility of the BTC network could be compromised in a way that is maybe more extreme than the utility of PIRATEBAY under a similar scale of attack for each individual network."

     

"Destroying BTC is impossible, in my estimation. But, a very coordinated attack worries me from an adoption stand point - and thinking about ROI at this stage is more or less a bet that falls purely on the extent the network is adopted."

yes, everybody understands this.  You're adding absolutely nothing.  Everybody knows that if adoption goes up, price is likely to go up and if adoption goes down, price is likely to go down.  Everybody knows that if the network gets attacked, price could go down because of weak hands and Fear and Greed, etc.  You've added absolutely nothing.  Just bloviating on and on

And you STILL haven't explained how exactly The Bitcoin Network could be killed easier than The Pirate bay.  In your last response, you basically just said That The Pirate bay is fairly resilient to attack but Bitcoin also is too, but the BTC Network "could be compromised in a way that is maybe more extreme than the utility of PIRATEBAY under a similar scale of attack for each individual network"

still without a single reason why!  AMAZING!  You wrote that long of a response WITHOUT A SINGLE ANSWER!!!  

For each individual network?  WTH are you talking about!?  How in the world is Pirate Bay going to be killed easier than an encrypted network with more distribution??

And PirateBay actually agrees with me!! Check out this article on how they discussed adopting bitcoin like properties, because:

"This means that blocking IP addresses, which UK ISPs have been ordered to do by courts, won’t work, as there is no central IP address to block."

https://recombu.com/digital/article/pirate-bay-bitcoin-p2p-network_M12668.html  

Bitcoin is referred to again in the following article on:

How The Pirate Bay Plans to Beat Censorship for Good
https://torrentfreak.com/how-the-pirate-bay-plans-to-beat-censorship-for-good-140105/

You see kids, you reallly can identify trolls and shills by how much they bloviate  
 

[makeacake]

.@rtrtcrypto: stop replying to jaredboice troll. I think he has Assburgers.

 

No please, keep replying.  The longer this goes on the less of a shit people will give about you and your crony shills' bearish troll of a thread that's disguised to look like a bunch of bulls.  The guy pretends like he's the biggest bull he knows and then he's like, "The Government could kill Bitcoin easier than The Pirate Bay"

 

"The Government" doesn't need to "kill" Bitcoin in the same sense as [it halfheartedly tries to kill] The Pirate Bay. I'm sure a few diehards will continue using Bitcoin to buy & sell drugs and child porn on fly-by-night Dark Net Markets, even if governments outlaw it, like Taiwan has, or if using it will get you 4 years in the gulag, as soon will be the case in Russia.

But governments can prevent large-scale adoption and use, because Granny won't be duped into using Bitcoin, no matter how stupid and desperate she is, if Bitcoin is made illegal & using it means risking a 4-year jail stretch. If made illegal, the value of BTC will plummet & return to the single digits where it belongs -- so that neckbeards too afraid to leave their basements to score decent drugs could continue overpaying for their shitty bath salts fix.

If you wish to learn more about the steps governments need to take to effectively eradicate Bitcoin, don't hesitate to ask

[rtrtcrypto]

The level of hand waving and incoherence here is just mind-boggling.

"Still, for the purpose of what was brought up in this thread, which was a value vs. price discussion that really (whether it wanted to or not) was focused on ROI? "

I haven't learned anything about your distinction between Value and Price from this statement.  Were you trying to indicate that the subject has been changed?  Well the subject was initially "US Marhsalls auction....what time will results/winner be announced today" and then the OP leads that into his belief that Bitcoin would be a good buy at $280 (but not at current prices) yet he tries to identify himself as a bull.  That's a lot of psychological manipulation going on there.

"There is no guarantee that the network can, under certain types of attacks, retain this capitalization"

There's no guarantee that any stock or share of anything will retain anything at any time.  Bitcoin has been attacked every which way through DDoS attacks and media attacks galore numbering over 78+ "Bitcoin is Dead" type arguments that have been documented.  It's still up over 3 Million percent since its inception only 6 years ago when it was like $0.001, and that was after several boom and bust cycles already.  If you think that doesn't add support for its ability to survive in the future (ability, not guarantee) than I don't think you're being intellectually honest.  

"The volatility is there for a reason after all: thinly traded market, somewhat illiquid, less than fully professional services in key economic areas (exchanges in China, the largest market by far), worries about scams (like MMM this very moment)."

Yes, it's certainly thinly traded.  The MMM Ponzi scheme worries are being exaggerated by the media the same way they exaggerated 78+ articles that claim Bitcoin died over the past few years.  I'm not worried about these scams because I'm not participating in them.  The mainstream media loves to try to connect bitcoin to ISIS, and Ponzi Schemes, and Drug Dealers because that is the ugly dark side of bitcoin markets.  USD has far darker black markets than Bitcoin.  Bitcoin only has a $5 Billion market cap.  That's probably the profit margin of some of the drug dealing and ponzi scheming going on with US Dollars. To claim Bitcoin is only going up because of a ponzi scheme and not because it's a decentralized open source autonomous trustless value transmission system that has no borders or boundaries and can trade value virtually instantaneously for little to no fees, is trolling.

"Like I've said previously, my target is for this network to attain a value in the trillions - I believe that will happen (what a crazy bear I am!!!!!)"

Yet you betray yourself by saying things like thinking the government can kill Bitcoin easier than The Pirate Bay, and concerns that the Blocksize issue will destroy bitcoin, and that ponzi schemes are what's probably responsible for the current rise.  OK sure, what a Bull you are.   Sounds more like you're mixing bullish sentiment with bearish declarations to stir Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD).

"Certain models in network theory show that this is possible, the value of a network like this probably follows something similar to Zipf's Law - so, added adoption should have a massive impact on price/value... much more so than people can understand to be "sane". On a similar vein, I'm not too worried about distribution, as I believe Pareto distribution is going to take hold regardless... projects like NEM will find this out the hard way. Though, the GINI index for BTC is not something to be celebrated in its current form."

See you say something like this, adding a bunch of smart sounding words to make you sound like a well-researched bull, and then, immediately after:

"What I'm saying is, if your goal is ROI from THIS PONT FORWARDS, the utility of the BTC network could be compromised in a way that is maybe more extreme than the utility of PIRATEBAY under a similar scale of attack for each individual network."

     

"Destroying BTC is impossible, in my estimation. But, a very coordinated attack worries me from an adoption stand point - and thinking about ROI at this stage is more or less a bet that falls purely on the extent the network is adopted."

yes, everybody understands this.  You're adding absolutely nothing.  Of course when the network gets attacked, value is likely to go down and then rebound like it has so many times.  Is this guaranteed?  Absolutely not.  But we are all adults here.  We all understand nothing is guaranteed, but we can still seek substance for why we believe it will go a certain direction with a certain magnitude.

And you STILL haven't explained how exactly The Bitcoin Network could be killed easier than The Pirate bay.  In your last response, you basically just said That The Pirate bay is fairly resilient to attack but Bitcoin also is too, but the BTC Network "could be compromised in a way that is maybe more extreme than the utility of PIRATEBAY under a similar scale of attack for each individual network"

still without a single reason why!  AMAZING!  You wrote that long of a response WITHOUT A SINGLE ANSWER!!!  

For each individual network?  WTH are you talking about!?  How in the world is Pirate Bay going to be killed easier than an encrypted network with more distribution??

And PirateBay actually agrees with me!! Check out this article on how they discussed adopting bitcoin like properties, because:

"This means that blocking IP addresses, which UK ISPs have been ordered to do by courts, won’t work, as there is no central IP address to block."

https://recombu.com/digital/article/pirate-bay-bitcoin-p2p-network_M12668.html  

Bitcoin is referred to again in the following article on:

How The Pirate Bay Plans to Beat Censorship for Good
https://torrentfreak.com/how-the-pirate-bay-plans-to-beat-censorship-for-good-140105/

You see kids, you reallly can identify trolls and shills by how much they bloviate  
 

you like the word "substance", huh?

You like getting paid to troll huh, and present baseless bearish statements in the guise of a bull?

Yes I like the word substance, because I won't let up.  I will keep asking for supporting information and substance for your retarded statements.

Tell me again, why do you think Bitcoin should be easier for the government to kill than The Pirate Bay?  Let's hear some SUBSTANCE

[/quote]

[jaredboice]

All it takes is one moderately sized country to accept bitcoin for another country's banning it to have little impact. That first country that accepts it outright would become a Bitcoin-Economy Power House.  File sharing is illegal too, dumbass.  So are drugs.  How do they stop people from file sharing?  Happens every day on an extremely large scale.  The joke is on government and their banks

[jaredboice]

The level of hand waving and incoherence here is just mind-boggling.

"Still, for the purpose of what was brought up in this thread, which was a value vs. price discussion that really (whether it wanted to or not) was focused on ROI? "

I haven't learned anything about your distinction between Value and Price from this statement.  Were you trying to indicate that the subject has been changed?  Well the subject was initially "US Marhsalls auction....what time will results/winner be announced today" and then the OP leads that into his belief that Bitcoin would be a good buy at $280 (but not at current prices) yet he tries to identify himself as a bull.  That's a lot of psychological manipulation going on there.

"There is no guarantee that the network can, under certain types of attacks, retain this capitalization"

There's no guarantee that any stock or share of anything will retain anything at any time.  Bitcoin has been attacked every which way through DDoS attacks and media attacks galore numbering over 78+ "Bitcoin is Dead" type arguments that have been documented.  It's still up over 3 Million percent since its inception only 6 years ago when it was like $0.001, and that was after several boom and bust cycles already.  If you think that doesn't add support for its ability to survive in the future (ability, not guarantee) than I don't think you're being intellectually honest.  

"The volatility is there for a reason after all: thinly traded market, somewhat illiquid, less than fully professional services in key economic areas (exchanges in China, the largest market by far), worries about scams (like MMM this very moment)."

Yes, it's certainly thinly traded.  The MMM Ponzi scheme worries are being exaggerated by the media the same way they exaggerated 78+ articles that claim Bitcoin died over the past few years.  I'm not worried about these scams because I'm not participating in them.  The mainstream media loves to try to connect bitcoin to ISIS, and Ponzi Schemes, and Drug Dealers because that is the ugly dark side of bitcoin markets.  USD has far darker black markets than Bitcoin.  Bitcoin only has a $5 Billion market cap.  That's probably the profit margin of some of the drug dealing and ponzi scheming going on with US Dollars. To claim Bitcoin is only going up because of a ponzi scheme and not because it's a decentralized open source autonomous trustless value transmission system that has no borders or boundaries and can trade value virtually instantaneously for little to no fees, is trolling.

"Like I've said previously, my target is for this network to attain a value in the trillions - I believe that will happen (what a crazy bear I am!!!!!)"

Yet you betray yourself by saying things like thinking the government can kill Bitcoin easier than The Pirate Bay, and concerns that the Blocksize issue will destroy bitcoin, and that ponzi schemes are what's probably responsible for the current rise.  OK sure, what a Bull you are.   Sounds more like you're mixing bullish sentiment with bearish declarations to stir Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD).

"Certain models in network theory show that this is possible, the value of a network like this probably follows something similar to Zipf's Law - so, added adoption should have a massive impact on price/value... much more so than people can understand to be "sane". On a similar vein, I'm not too worried about distribution, as I believe Pareto distribution is going to take hold regardless... projects like NEM will find this out the hard way. Though, the GINI index for BTC is not something to be celebrated in its current form."

See you say something like this, adding a bunch of smart sounding words to make you sound like a well-researched bull, and then, immediately after:

"What I'm saying is, if your goal is ROI from THIS PONT FORWARDS, the utility of the BTC network could be compromised in a way that is maybe more extreme than the utility of PIRATEBAY under a similar scale of attack for each individual network."

     

"Destroying BTC is impossible, in my estimation. But, a very coordinated attack worries me from an adoption stand point - and thinking about ROI at this stage is more or less a bet that falls purely on the extent the network is adopted."

yes, everybody understands this.  You're adding absolutely nothing.  Of course when the network gets attacked, value is likely to go down and then rebound like it has so many times.  Is this guaranteed?  Absolutely not.  But we are all adults here.  We all understand nothing is guaranteed, but we can still seek substance for why we believe it will go a certain direction with a certain magnitude.

And you STILL haven't explained how exactly The Bitcoin Network could be killed easier than The Pirate bay.  In your last response, you basically just said That The Pirate bay is fairly resilient to attack but Bitcoin also is too, but the BTC Network "could be compromised in a way that is maybe more extreme than the utility of PIRATEBAY under a similar scale of attack for each individual network"

still without a single reason why!  AMAZING!  You wrote that long of a response WITHOUT A SINGLE ANSWER!!!  

For each individual network?  WTH are you talking about!?  How in the world is Pirate Bay going to be killed easier than an encrypted network with more distribution??

And PirateBay actually agrees with me!! Check out this article on how they discussed adopting bitcoin like properties, because:

"This means that blocking IP addresses, which UK ISPs have been ordered to do by courts, won’t work, as there is no central IP address to block."

https://recombu.com/digital/article/pirate-bay-bitcoin-p2p-network_M12668.html  

Bitcoin is referred to again in the following article on:

How The Pirate Bay Plans to Beat Censorship for Good
https://torrentfreak.com/how-the-pirate-bay-plans-to-beat-censorship-for-good-140105/

You see kids, you reallly can identify trolls and shills by how much they bloviate  
 

you like the word "substance", huh?

You like getting paid to troll huh, and present baseless bearish statements in the guise of a bull?

Yes I like the word substance, because I won't let up.  I will keep asking for supporting information and substance for your retarded statements.

Tell me again, why do you think Bitcoin should be easier for the government to kill than The Pirate Bay?  Let's hear some SUBSTANCE

[/quote]

Again! No Substance!  Just baseless bullshit yet again

[makeacake]

All it takes is one moderately sized country to accept bitcoin for another country's banning it to have little impact.  File sharing is illegal too, dumbass.  So are drugs.  How do they stop people from file sharing?  Happens every day on an extremely large scale.  The joke is on government and their banks

All it takes for pigs to fly is total and complete absence of gravity and/or a set of powerful wings. Sadly (for the pigs that is, not for the rest of us not interested in being pelted by pigshit), neither is any more likely to happen than a country adopting Bitcoin as its legal tender.

Regarding file sharing, you can't stop people from doing it completely -- you, for instance, will keep downloading warez forever, due to your angsty thieving nature.
But normal people? We pay people for their work instead of sharing stealing it like you do, Wild One

[rtrtcrypto]

-for the record, I agree with none of you.

 

[randy8777]

i am more interested in what the actual buying price was for the auctioned coins. don't think it's much higher or lower than the market price.

[jaredboice]

All it takes is one moderately sized country to accept bitcoin for another country's banning it to have little impact.  File sharing is illegal too, dumbass.  So are drugs.  How do they stop people from file sharing?  Happens every day on an extremely large scale.  The joke is on government and their banks

All it takes for pigs to fly is tota and complete absence of gravity and/or a set of powerful wings. Sadly (for the pigs, that is, not for the rest of us not interested in being pelted by pigshit), neither is any more likely to happen than a country adopting Bitcoin as its legal tender.

Regarding file sharing, you can't stop people from doing it completely -- you, for instance, will keep downloading warez forever, due to your angsty thieving nature.
But normal people? We pay people for their work instead of sharing stealing it like you do, Wild One

I didn't say "adopt it as legal tender" I said "accept it" It certainly doesn't need to be somehow officially recognized to be wildly successful.

Either way, making Bitcoin illegal will have about the same impact as stopping mad gunmen from opening fire in gun free zones, and it will be even less successful than making file sharing illegal

[rtrtcrypto]

I think we might hear from the loser of the auction. I think the price will have gone over market. Well over in fact. Buying that many coins, I think we will find out 400 is a losing bid on all blocks.

Let's see what happens on Monday. Something will leak.

i am more interested in what the actual buying price was for the auctioned coins. don't think it's much higher or lower than the market price.

[makeacake]

All it takes is one moderately sized country to accept bitcoin for another country's banning it to have little impact.  File sharing is illegal too, dumbass.  So are drugs.  How do they stop people from file sharing?  Happens every day on an extremely large scale.  The joke is on government and their banks

All it takes for pigs to fly is tota and complete absence of gravity and/or a set of powerful wings. Sadly (for the pigs, that is, not for the rest of us not interested in being pelted by pigshit), neither is any more likely to happen than a country adopting Bitcoin as its legal tender.

Regarding file sharing, you can't stop people from doing it completely -- you, for instance, will keep downloading warez forever, due to your angsty thieving nature.
But normal people? We pay people for their work instead of sharing stealing it like you do, Wild One

I didn't say "adopt it as legal tender" I said "accept it" It certainly doesn't need to be somehow officially recognized to be wildly successful.

Either way, making Bitcoin illegal will have about the same impact as stopping mad gunmen from opening fire in gun free zones, and it will be even less successful than making file sharing illegal

Most governments already let you to play with your tokens, just like you're free to invest in and trade BTCeanie BTCabies. As long as it remains mostly irrelevant, kept to crooks robbing other, dumber crooks, why should governments intervene? Which is not to say that as soon as bitcoiners get a dose of surprise buttsecs from their fellow crypto aficionados, they don't cry like little girls & run straight to Nanny State and her Jackbooted Thugs to make it all better.

As for 'mad gunmen in gun-free zones'? Please limit your rage to teh internets & try not to hurt IRL people, k Wild One?

[vuduchyld]

I have three poker chips from Harrah's Casino New Orleans. My daughter is playing with them right now. Says they are worth $1 each.

[jaredboice]

All it takes is one moderately sized country to accept bitcoin for another country's banning it to have little impact.  File sharing is illegal too, dumbass.  So are drugs.  How do they stop people from file sharing?  Happens every day on an extremely large scale.  The joke is on government and their banks

All it takes for pigs to fly is tota and complete absence of gravity and/or a set of powerful wings. Sadly (for the pigs, that is, not for the rest of us not interested in being pelted by pigshit), neither is any more likely to happen than a country adopting Bitcoin as its legal tender.

Regarding file sharing, you can't stop people from doing it completely -- you, for instance, will keep downloading warez forever, due to your angsty thieving nature.
But normal people? We pay people for their work instead of sharing stealing it like you do, Wild One

I didn't say "adopt it as legal tender" I said "accept it" It certainly doesn't need to be somehow officially recognized to be wildly successful.

Either way, making Bitcoin illegal will have about the same impact as stopping mad gunmen from opening fire in gun free zones, and it will be even less successful than making file sharing illegal

Most governments already let you to play with your tokens, just like you're free to invest in and trade BTCeanie BTCabies. As long as it remains mostly irrelevant, kept to crooks robbing other, dumber crooks, why should governments intervene? Which is not to say that as soon as bitcoiners get a dose of surprise buttsecs from their fellow crypto aficionados, they don't cry like little girls & run straight to Nanny State and her Jackbooted Thugs to make it all better.

As for 'mad gunmen in gun-free zones'? Please limit your rage to teh internets & try not to hurt IRL people, k Wild One?

Exactly, most governments already let you use Bitcoin. Mostly irrelevant??  Is that why Dell, Microsoft and PayPal are getting their feet wet with Bitcoin.  Maybe you haven't heard of those companies...

[jaredboice]

I have three poker chips from Harrah's Casino New Orleans. My daughter is playing with them right now. Says they are worth $1 each.

You know you can play Poker with Bitcoin?  Bitcoin is up over 3 Million percent since inception.  Because it's a decentralized open-source network that can transmit data and value virtually instantaneously for little to no fee with no borders or boundaries and all without a middleman (ie. criminal banks!)  No wonder it has gone up in value by 3 Million Percent in only 6 years.  No wonder the banks hire so many trolls and shills to talk trash about bitcoin up and down internet forums.  Because the banks are already obsolete.  Start counting your yachts assholes!  

[makeacake]

All it takes is one moderately sized country to accept bitcoin for another country's banning it to have little impact.  File sharing is illegal too, dumbass.  So are drugs.  How do they stop people from file sharing?  Happens every day on an extremely large scale.  The joke is on government and their banks

All it takes for pigs to fly is tota and complete absence of gravity and/or a set of powerful wings. Sadly (for the pigs, that is, not for the rest of us not interested in being pelted by pigshit), neither is any more likely to happen than a country adopting Bitcoin as its legal tender.

Regarding file sharing, you can't stop people from doing it completely -- you, for instance, will keep downloading warez forever, due to your angsty thieving nature.
But normal people? We pay people for their work instead of sharing stealing it like you do, Wild One

I didn't say "adopt it as legal tender" I said "accept it" It certainly doesn't need to be somehow officially recognized to be wildly successful.

Either way, making Bitcoin illegal will have about the same impact as stopping mad gunmen from opening fire in gun free zones, and it will be even less successful than making file sharing illegal

Most governments already let you to play with your tokens, just like you're free to invest in and trade BTCeanie BTCabies. As long as it remains mostly irrelevant, kept to crooks robbing other, dumber crooks, why should governments intervene? Which is not to say that as soon as bitcoiners get a dose of surprise buttsecs from their fellow crypto aficionados, they don't cry like little girls & run straight to Nanny State and her Jackbooted Thugs to make it all better.

As for 'mad gunmen in gun-free zones'? Please limit your rage to teh internets & try not to hurt IRL people, k Wild One?

Exactly, most governments already let you use Bitcoin. Mostly irrelevant??  Is that why Dell, Microsoft and PayPal are getting their feet wet with Bitcoin.  Maybe you haven't heard of those companies...

Mostly irrelevant because Bitcoin's market cap is roughly double net worth of Ty Warner -- the genius behind BTCeanie BTCbabies.

Mostly irrelevant because mentioned companies do not accept bitcoin, but rather USD.
"In other words, Dell, Expedia, Microsoft, and Time, Inc. don’t actually “accept” bitcoins, per se. They accept U.S. dollars. It’s their bitcoin processing partners who accept bitcoin."

Though, I must concede,there are a few markets where Bitcoin is making substantial inroads.
Take criminal-to-criminal payments, for instance.
"Europol said that, according to its data, bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online."

Excelsior!

[jaredboice]

All it takes is one moderately sized country to accept bitcoin for another country's banning it to have little impact.  File sharing is illegal too, dumbass.  So are drugs.  How do they stop people from file sharing?  Happens every day on an extremely large scale.  The joke is on government and their banks

All it takes for pigs to fly is tota and complete absence of gravity and/or a set of powerful wings. Sadly (for the pigs, that is, not for the rest of us not interested in being pelted by pigshit), neither is any more likely to happen than a country adopting Bitcoin as its legal tender.

Regarding file sharing, you can't stop people from doing it completely -- you, for instance, will keep downloading warez forever, due to your angsty thieving nature.
But normal people? We pay people for their work instead of sharing stealing it like you do, Wild One

I didn't say "adopt it as legal tender" I said "accept it" It certainly doesn't need to be somehow officially recognized to be wildly successful.

Either way, making Bitcoin illegal will have about the same impact as stopping mad gunmen from opening fire in gun free zones, and it will be even less successful than making file sharing illegal

Most governments already let you to play with your tokens, just like you're free to invest in and trade BTCeanie BTCabies. As long as it remains mostly irrelevant, kept to crooks robbing other, dumber crooks, why should governments intervene? Which is not to say that as soon as bitcoiners get a dose of surprise buttsecs from their fellow crypto aficionados, they don't cry like little girls & run straight to Nanny State and her Jackbooted Thugs to make it all better.

As for 'mad gunmen in gun-free zones'? Please limit your rage to teh internets & try not to hurt IRL people, k Wild One?

Exactly, most governments already let you use Bitcoin. Mostly irrelevant??  Is that why Dell, Microsoft and PayPal are getting their feet wet with Bitcoin.  Maybe you haven't heard of those companies...

Mostly irrelevant because Bitcoin's market cap is roughly double net worth of Ty Warner -- the genius behind BTCeanie BTCbabies.

Mostly irrelevant because mentioned companies do not accept bitcoin, but rather USD.
"In other words, Dell, Expedia, Microsoft, and Time, Inc. don’t actually “accept” bitcoins, per se. They accept U.S. dollars. It’s their bitcoin processing partners who accept bitcoin."

Though, I must concede,there are a few markets where Bitcoin is making substantial inroads.
Take criminal-to-criminal payments, for instance.
"Europol said that, according to its data, bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online."

Excelsior!

Going from a market cap of $0 to $5 Billion in 6 years for something that was started by a bunch of geeks and talked down upon by the media is an enormous gain by any standard.  What was Apple's market cap after 6 years?  I'm curious?

here's what I do know.  Apple was founded in 1976.  In 1983 their annual revenue was $1 Billion Dollars.  In 1996, (20 years later) their market cap began declining from $10 Billion.  Bitcoin touched $10 Billion in the first 5 years LOL.  And there's plenty of room to grow considering that currencies are comprised of Trillion Dollar markets.

It's also a big step that you can pay for things with Bitcoin regardless of whether or not the currency is being instantly converted.  The more places that you can spend bitcoin (by any method) the more comfortable businesses and individuals will start getting to the idea of bitcoin in general.  Eventually, conversions won't even be necessary.  Because why convert when you can make up to thousand percent gains holding bitcoins for a few years.

And, lastly, Bitcoin has a LONG way to go to catch up to the criminal usage of the US Dollar, which is surely measured in the hundreds of billions!  

Say hi to your other troll friends for me...that is if they're not all being used by the same account holder.  

[makeacake]

All it takes is one moderately sized country to accept bitcoin for another country's banning it to have little impact.  File sharing is illegal too, dumbass.  So are drugs.  How do they stop people from file sharing?  Happens every day on an extremely large scale.  The joke is on government and their banks

All it takes for pigs to fly is tota and complete absence of gravity and/or a set of powerful wings. Sadly (for the pigs, that is, not for the rest of us not interested in being pelted by pigshit), neither is any more likely to happen than a country adopting Bitcoin as its legal tender.

Regarding file sharing, you can't stop people from doing it completely -- you, for instance, will keep downloading warez forever, due to your angsty thieving nature.
But normal people? We pay people for their work instead of sharing stealing it like you do, Wild One

I didn't say "adopt it as legal tender" I said "accept it" It certainly doesn't need to be somehow officially recognized to be wildly successful.

Either way, making Bitcoin illegal will have about the same impact as stopping mad gunmen from opening fire in gun free zones, and it will be even less successful than making file sharing illegal

Most governments already let you to play with your tokens, just like you're free to invest in and trade BTCeanie BTCabies. As long as it remains mostly irrelevant, kept to crooks robbing other, dumber crooks, why should governments intervene? Which is not to say that as soon as bitcoiners get a dose of surprise buttsecs from their fellow crypto aficionados, they don't cry like little girls & run straight to Nanny State and her Jackbooted Thugs to make it all better.

As for 'mad gunmen in gun-free zones'? Please limit your rage to teh internets & try not to hurt IRL people, k Wild One?

Exactly, most governments already let you use Bitcoin. Mostly irrelevant??  Is that why Dell, Microsoft and PayPal are getting their feet wet with Bitcoin.  Maybe you haven't heard of those companies...

Mostly irrelevant because Bitcoin's market cap is roughly double net worth of Ty Warner -- the genius behind BTCeanie BTCbabies.

Mostly irrelevant because mentioned companies do not accept bitcoin, but rather USD.
"In other words, Dell, Expedia, Microsoft, and Time, Inc. don’t actually “accept” bitcoins, per se. They accept U.S. dollars. It’s their bitcoin processing partners who accept bitcoin."

Though, I must concede,there are a few markets where Bitcoin is making substantial inroads.
Take criminal-to-criminal payments, for instance.
"Europol said that, according to its data, bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online."

Excelsior!

Going from a market cap of $0 to $5 Billion in 6 years for something that was started by a bunch of geeks and talked down upon by the media is an enormous gain by any standard.  What was Apple's market cap after 6 years?  I'm curious?

here's what I do know.  Apple was founded in 1976.  In 1983 their annual revenue was $1 Billion Dollars.  In 1996, (20 years later) their market cap began declining from $10 Billion.  Bitcoin touched $10 Billion in the first 5 years LOL.  And there's plenty of room to grow considering that currencies are comprised of Trillion Dollar markets.

It's also a big step that you can pay for things with Bitcoin regardless of whether or not the currency is being instantly converted.  The more places that you can spend bitcoin (by any method) the more comfortable businesses and individuals will start getting to the idea of bitcoin in general.  Eventually, conversions won't even be necessary.  Because why convert when you can make up to thousand percent gains holding bitcoins for a few years.

And, lastly, Bitcoin has a LONG way to go to catch up to the criminal usage of the US Dollar, which is surely measured in the hundreds of billions!  

Say hi to your other troll friends for me...that is if they're not all being used by the same account holder.  

Lol, @ all the backpedaling, 'Going from a market cap of $0 to $5 Billion in 6 years for something that was started by a bunch of geeks.'
Sure, when you start from nothing and end up with something, that's impressive; infinite % growth. That's also how every ponzi in the world works. Tho over the last 2 years, bit-coin has already lost 2/3 of its value on its way to zero.
For dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return

To put your 5 billion in perspective, the first iteration of Sergei Mavrodi's MMM ponzi snagged $10 Billion, so satoshi's paper $5 Billion is just meh. Sure, better than the shit ponzis created on bitcointalk, but meh nevertheless. And Bitcoin's 'market cap' is pure paper -- Bitcoin price would implode if someone tried to sell as little as, oh, a million bitcoins

As far as catching up to fiat's real money's criminal usage, compare Bitcoin's 5 billion 'market cap' to real money's $25 trillion. 5 million times more fiat, and yet "bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online."

[jaredboice]

All it takes is one moderately sized country to accept bitcoin for another country's banning it to have little impact.  File sharing is illegal too, dumbass.  So are drugs.  How do they stop people from file sharing?  Happens every day on an extremely large scale.  The joke is on government and their banks

All it takes for pigs to fly is tota and complete absence of gravity and/or a set of powerful wings. Sadly (for the pigs, that is, not for the rest of us not interested in being pelted by pigshit), neither is any more likely to happen than a country adopting Bitcoin as its legal tender.

Regarding file sharing, you can't stop people from doing it completely -- you, for instance, will keep downloading warez forever, due to your angsty thieving nature.
But normal people? We pay people for their work instead of sharing stealing it like you do, Wild One

I didn't say "adopt it as legal tender" I said "accept it" It certainly doesn't need to be somehow officially recognized to be wildly successful.

Either way, making Bitcoin illegal will have about the same impact as stopping mad gunmen from opening fire in gun free zones, and it will be even less successful than making file sharing illegal

Most governments already let you to play with your tokens, just like you're free to invest in and trade BTCeanie BTCabies. As long as it remains mostly irrelevant, kept to crooks robbing other, dumber crooks, why should governments intervene? Which is not to say that as soon as bitcoiners get a dose of surprise buttsecs from their fellow crypto aficionados, they don't cry like little girls & run straight to Nanny State and her Jackbooted Thugs to make it all better.

As for 'mad gunmen in gun-free zones'? Please limit your rage to teh internets & try not to hurt IRL people, k Wild One?

Exactly, most governments already let you use Bitcoin. Mostly irrelevant??  Is that why Dell, Microsoft and PayPal are getting their feet wet with Bitcoin.  Maybe you haven't heard of those companies...

Mostly irrelevant because Bitcoin's market cap is roughly double net worth of Ty Warner -- the genius behind BTCeanie BTCbabies.

Mostly irrelevant because mentioned companies do not accept bitcoin, but rather USD.
"In other words, Dell, Expedia, Microsoft, and Time, Inc. don’t actually “accept” bitcoins, per se. They accept U.S. dollars. It’s their bitcoin processing partners who accept bitcoin."

Though, I must concede,there are a few markets where Bitcoin is making substantial inroads.
Take criminal-to-criminal payments, for instance.
"Europol said that, according to its data, bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online."

Excelsior!

Going from a market cap of $0 to $5 Billion in 6 years for something that was started by a bunch of geeks and talked down upon by the media is an enormous gain by any standard.  What was Apple's market cap after 6 years?  I'm curious?

here's what I do know.  Apple was founded in 1976.  In 1983 their annual revenue was $1 Billion Dollars.  In 1996, (20 years later) their market cap began declining from $10 Billion.  Bitcoin touched $10 Billion in the first 5 years LOL.  And there's plenty of room to grow considering that currencies are comprised of Trillion Dollar markets.

It's also a big step that you can pay for things with Bitcoin regardless of whether or not the currency is being instantly converted.  The more places that you can spend bitcoin (by any method) the more comfortable businesses and individuals will start getting to the idea of bitcoin in general.  Eventually, conversions won't even be necessary.  Because why convert when you can make up to thousand percent gains holding bitcoins for a few years.

And, lastly, Bitcoin has a LONG way to go to catch up to the criminal usage of the US Dollar, which is surely measured in the hundreds of billions!  

Say hi to your other troll friends for me...that is if they're not all being used by the same account holder.  

Lol, @ all the backpedaling, 'Going from a market cap of $0 to $5 Billion in 6 years for something that was started by a bunch of geeks.'
Sure, when you start from nothing and end up with something, that's impressive; infinite % growth. That's also how every ponzi in the world works. Tho over the last 2 years, bit-coin has already lost 2/3 of its value on its way to zero.
For dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return

To put your 5 billion in perspective, the first iteration of Sergei Mavrodi's MMM ponzi snagged $10 Billion, so satoshi's paper $5 Billion is just meh. Sure, better than the shit ponzis created on bitcointalk, but meh nevertheless. And Bitcoin's 'market cap' is pure paper -- Bitcoin price would implode if someone tried to sell as little as, oh, a million bitcoins

As far as catching up to fiat's real money's criminal usage, compare Bitcoin's 5 billion 'market cap' to real money's $25 trillion. 5 million times more fiat, and yet "bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online."

Backpedaling?? Have you taken your meds today?   You were all acting like Bitcoin is insignificant.  Yet it has grown like 5 times faster than Apple did in its first decade.  Bitcoin could only be a ponzi scheme if every currency on the planet is a ponzi scheme. Bitcoin just happens to do currency better than governments can (not to mention currency is only one particular function served by Bitcoin, it also functions as a trustless, secure data storage and retrieval system, but I digress.)  Because it's a decentralized open-source network that can transmit data and value virtually instantaneously for little to no fee with no borders or boundaries and all without a middleman (ie. criminal banks!)  No wonder it has gone up in value by 3 Million Percent in only 6 years. Find me a ponzi scheme with fundamentals that strong and you can call me susan.

Bitcoin lost nearly 85% of its value after every previous bull & bear market cycle.  And then, after each downtrend, it eventually turns around and passes it's previous all-time-high by many multiples!  We are still up wayyyy over 3 Million Percent since 6 years ago and we're up over $200 from the bottom of this cycle (around $150-ish) several months ago.  The Bitcoin charts are exhibiting tendencies of a market cycle that has ended its bear trend and now, with a greater distribution of bitcoins after all the selling, it appears to be entering into the next bull cycle  

Send my condolences to your bankster employers  
The Death of Central Banks is nigh

[peter378]

I think we might hear from the loser of the auction. I think the price will have gone over market. Well over in fact. Buying that many coins, I think we will find out 400 is a losing bid on all blocks.

Let's see what happens on Monday. Something will leak.

i am more interested in what the actual buying price was for the auctioned coins. don't think it's much higher or lower than the market price.

Have we found out what one winner paid out of any of the auctions? Tim Draper wouldn't say and I can only remember a few losing bidders who disclosed what they bid. I don't think any of this auction's winners will disclose what they bid, one or two losing bidders might.

[rtrtcrypto]

No, I don't remember winning prices. But, we got past losing bids. I think that will leak again.

Let's see.

I think we might hear from the loser of the auction. I think the price will have gone over market. Well over in fact. Buying that many coins, I think we will find out 400 is a losing bid on all blocks.

Let's see what happens on Monday. Something will leak.

i am more interested in what the actual buying price was for the auctioned coins. don't think it's much higher or lower than the market price.

Have we found out what one winner paid out of any of the auctions? Tim Draper wouldn't say and I can only remember a few losing bidders who disclosed what they bid. I don't think any of this auction's winners will disclose what they bid, one or two losing bidders might.

[jaredboice]

I think we might hear from the loser of the auction. I think the price will have gone over market. Well over in fact. Buying that many coins, I think we will find out 400 is a losing bid on all blocks.

Let's see what happens on Monday. Something will leak.

i am more interested in what the actual buying price was for the auctioned coins. don't think it's much higher or lower than the market price.

Have we found out what one winner paid out of any of the auctions? Tim Draper wouldn't say and I can only remember a few losing bidders who disclosed what they bid. I don't think any of this auction's winners will disclose what they bid, one or two losing bidders might.

For me, all that matters is that artificial sell pressure (by selling seized coins that likely wouldn't have all been for sale) has been diminished further.  FBI has that many less coins to artificially "increase supply" with moving forward.  

[makeacake]

All it takes is one moderately sized country to accept bitcoin for another country's banning it to have little impact.  File sharing is illegal too, dumbass.  So are drugs.  How do they stop people from file sharing?  Happens every day on an extremely large scale.  The joke is on government and their banks

All it takes for pigs to fly is tota and complete absence of gravity and/or a set of powerful wings. Sadly (for the pigs, that is, not for the rest of us not interested in being pelted by pigshit), neither is any more likely to happen than a country adopting Bitcoin as its legal tender.

Regarding file sharing, you can't stop people from doing it completely -- you, for instance, will keep downloading warez forever, due to your angsty thieving nature.
But normal people? We pay people for their work instead of sharing stealing it like you do, Wild One

I didn't say "adopt it as legal tender" I said "accept it" It certainly doesn't need to be somehow officially recognized to be wildly successful.

Either way, making Bitcoin illegal will have about the same impact as stopping mad gunmen from opening fire in gun free zones, and it will be even less successful than making file sharing illegal

Most governments already let you to play with your tokens, just like you're free to invest in and trade BTCeanie BTCabies. As long as it remains mostly irrelevant, kept to crooks robbing other, dumber crooks, why should governments intervene? Which is not to say that as soon as bitcoiners get a dose of surprise buttsecs from their fellow crypto aficionados, they don't cry like little girls & run straight to Nanny State and her Jackbooted Thugs to make it all better.

As for 'mad gunmen in gun-free zones'? Please limit your rage to teh internets & try not to hurt IRL people, k Wild One?

Exactly, most governments already let you use Bitcoin. Mostly irrelevant??  Is that why Dell, Microsoft and PayPal are getting their feet wet with Bitcoin.  Maybe you haven't heard of those companies...

Mostly irrelevant because Bitcoin's market cap is roughly double net worth of Ty Warner -- the genius behind BTCeanie BTCbabies.

Mostly irrelevant because mentioned companies do not accept bitcoin, but rather USD.
"In other words, Dell, Expedia, Microsoft, and Time, Inc. don’t actually “accept” bitcoins, per se. They accept U.S. dollars. It’s their bitcoin processing partners who accept bitcoin."

Though, I must concede,there are a few markets where Bitcoin is making substantial inroads.
Take criminal-to-criminal payments, for instance.
"Europol said that, according to its data, bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online."

Excelsior!

Going from a market cap of $0 to $5 Billion in 6 years for something that was started by a bunch of geeks and talked down upon by the media is an enormous gain by any standard.  What was Apple's market cap after 6 years?  I'm curious?

here's what I do know.  Apple was founded in 1976.  In 1983 their annual revenue was $1 Billion Dollars.  In 1996, (20 years later) their market cap began declining from $10 Billion.  Bitcoin touched $10 Billion in the first 5 years LOL.  And there's plenty of room to grow considering that currencies are comprised of Trillion Dollar markets.

It's also a big step that you can pay for things with Bitcoin regardless of whether or not the currency is being instantly converted.  The more places that you can spend bitcoin (by any method) the more comfortable businesses and individuals will start getting to the idea of bitcoin in general.  Eventually, conversions won't even be necessary.  Because why convert when you can make up to thousand percent gains holding bitcoins for a few years.

And, lastly, Bitcoin has a LONG way to go to catch up to the criminal usage of the US Dollar, which is surely measured in the hundreds of billions!  

Say hi to your other troll friends for me...that is if they're not all being used by the same account holder.  

Lol, @ all the backpedaling, 'Going from a market cap of $0 to $5 Billion in 6 years for something that was started by a bunch of geeks.'
Sure, when you start from nothing and end up with something, that's impressive; infinite % growth. That's also how every ponzi in the world works. Tho over the last 2 years, bit-coin has already lost 2/3 of its value on its way to zero.
For dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return

To put your 5 billion in perspective, the first iteration of Sergei Mavrodi's MMM ponzi snagged $10 Billion, so satoshi's paper $5 Billion is just meh. Sure, better than the shit ponzis created on bitcointalk, but meh nevertheless. And Bitcoin's 'market cap' is pure paper -- Bitcoin price would implode if someone tried to sell as little as, oh, a million bitcoins

As far as catching up to fiat's real money's criminal usage, compare Bitcoin's 5 billion 'market cap' to real money's $25 trillion. 5 million times more fiat, and yet "bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online."

I got nothing, guess I'll just bloviate...

For me, all that matters is that artificial sell pressure (by selling seized coins that likely wouldn't have all been for sale) has been diminished further.  FBI has that many less coins to artificially "increase supply" with moving forward.

Hey, did you forget about GOXcoin disgorgement?  And, since "bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online," all Teh Man has to do is keep busting you, taking away your coins, and then selling them back to you. Profit!

[jaredboice]

All it takes is one moderately sized country to accept bitcoin for another country's banning it to have little impact.  File sharing is illegal too, dumbass.  So are drugs.  How do they stop people from file sharing?  Happens every day on an extremely large scale.  The joke is on government and their banks

All it takes for pigs to fly is tota and complete absence of gravity and/or a set of powerful wings. Sadly (for the pigs, that is, not for the rest of us not interested in being pelted by pigshit), neither is any more likely to happen than a country adopting Bitcoin as its legal tender.

Regarding file sharing, you can't stop people from doing it completely -- you, for instance, will keep downloading warez forever, due to your angsty thieving nature.
But normal people? We pay people for their work instead of sharing stealing it like you do, Wild One

I didn't say "adopt it as legal tender" I said "accept it" It certainly doesn't need to be somehow officially recognized to be wildly successful.

Either way, making Bitcoin illegal will have about the same impact as stopping mad gunmen from opening fire in gun free zones, and it will be even less successful than making file sharing illegal

Most governments already let you to play with your tokens, just like you're free to invest in and trade BTCeanie BTCabies. As long as it remains mostly irrelevant, kept to crooks robbing other, dumber crooks, why should governments intervene? Which is not to say that as soon as bitcoiners get a dose of surprise buttsecs from their fellow crypto aficionados, they don't cry like little girls & run straight to Nanny State and her Jackbooted Thugs to make it all better.

As for 'mad gunmen in gun-free zones'? Please limit your rage to teh internets & try not to hurt IRL people, k Wild One?

Exactly, most governments already let you use Bitcoin. Mostly irrelevant??  Is that why Dell, Microsoft and PayPal are getting their feet wet with Bitcoin.  Maybe you haven't heard of those companies...

Mostly irrelevant because Bitcoin's market cap is roughly double net worth of Ty Warner -- the genius behind BTCeanie BTCbabies.

Mostly irrelevant because mentioned companies do not accept bitcoin, but rather USD.
"In other words, Dell, Expedia, Microsoft, and Time, Inc. don’t actually “accept” bitcoins, per se. They accept U.S. dollars. It’s their bitcoin processing partners who accept bitcoin."

Though, I must concede,there are a few markets where Bitcoin is making substantial inroads.
Take criminal-to-criminal payments, for instance.
"Europol said that, according to its data, bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online."

Excelsior!

Going from a market cap of $0 to $5 Billion in 6 years for something that was started by a bunch of geeks and talked down upon by the media is an enormous gain by any standard.  What was Apple's market cap after 6 years?  I'm curious?

here's what I do know.  Apple was founded in 1976.  In 1983 their annual revenue was $1 Billion Dollars.  In 1996, (20 years later) their market cap began declining from $10 Billion.  Bitcoin touched $10 Billion in the first 5 years LOL.  And there's plenty of room to grow considering that currencies are comprised of Trillion Dollar markets.

It's also a big step that you can pay for things with Bitcoin regardless of whether or not the currency is being instantly converted.  The more places that you can spend bitcoin (by any method) the more comfortable businesses and individuals will start getting to the idea of bitcoin in general.  Eventually, conversions won't even be necessary.  Because why convert when you can make up to thousand percent gains holding bitcoins for a few years.

And, lastly, Bitcoin has a LONG way to go to catch up to the criminal usage of the US Dollar, which is surely measured in the hundreds of billions!  

Say hi to your other troll friends for me...that is if they're not all being used by the same account holder.  

Lol, @ all the backpedaling, 'Going from a market cap of $0 to $5 Billion in 6 years for something that was started by a bunch of geeks.'
Sure, when you start from nothing and end up with something, that's impressive; infinite % growth. That's also how every ponzi in the world works. Tho over the last 2 years, bit-coin has already lost 2/3 of its value on its way to zero.
For dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return

To put your 5 billion in perspective, the first iteration of Sergei Mavrodi's MMM ponzi snagged $10 Billion, so satoshi's paper $5 Billion is just meh. Sure, better than the shit ponzis created on bitcointalk, but meh nevertheless. And Bitcoin's 'market cap' is pure paper -- Bitcoin price would implode if someone tried to sell as little as, oh, a million bitcoins

As far as catching up to fiat's real money's criminal usage, compare Bitcoin's 5 billion 'market cap' to real money's $25 trillion. 5 million times more fiat, and yet "bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online."

I got nothing, guess I'll just bloviate...

For me, all that matters is that artificial sell pressure (by selling seized coins that likely wouldn't have all been for sale) has been diminished further.  FBI has that many less coins to artificially "increase supply" with moving forward.

Hey, did you forget about GOXcoin disgorgement?  And, since "bitcoin accounts for as much as 40% of criminal-to-criminal payments online," all Teh Man has to do is keep busting you, taking away your coins, and then selling them back to you. Profit!

Hey, did you forget that we're $225 higher than where we were several months ago?  Obviously the market is not so discouraged about what happened at Mt. Gox 2 years ago.  

Even if your metrics on the amount of criminal activity funded through bitcoin was correct, it is still hundreds of billions of dollars less than criminal activity that is funded with US Dollars.  It's absolutely no contest, mate.  

Here are several links about HSBC being fined for laundering billions of dollars for terrorists and drug cartels.  According to your own reasoning, US Dollars should be dumped immediately because it supports a hell of a lot of criminal activity.  

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/jul/17/hsbc-executive-resigns-senate
http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2012/07/16/hsbc-helped-terrorists-iran-mexican-drug-cartels-launder-money-senate-report-says/

And it's not so easy for the government to steal bitcoins.  You do realize they had to go to the library in disguise and wait for ross ulbricht to enter his password before they raided him?  If Ross had decided to surf porn that day instead, they would not have been able to take anything.  A valuable lesson has been learned.  If you're concerned about your private keys, keep your laptop/computer/trezor/paper wallet in a private place.  It would be much easier for the government (or any hacker) to take funds out of your bank account.

So how do you like trolling for the banks?  Do they pay you in bitcoin to talk trash? Or do they just counterfeit new dollars from the printing press and pay you with those devalued notes?  

[Guido]

it's looking like the prices paid at the auction are already known and leaked to the bigger players, or the players bidding in first place pumped to dump, then they will release price paid, significantly below price now and we will have a further CARSH

I would look to optimistic side and think price could be being manipulated donw now to accumalate based on a onday rally but record low of only 11 bidders were involved in auction
not looking good and imo we could see below 300 this week coming

[criptix]

5 pages and zero information.

good job guys  

@topic

i hope we will get some infos soon, its already monday in europe

[rtrtcrypto]

Like the fact that you got an actor as your avatar... because your story is pure fiction.

it's looking like the prices paid at the auction are already known and leaked to the bigger players, or the players bidding in first place pumped to dump, then they will release price paid, significantly below price now and we will have a further CARSH

I would look to optimistic side and think price could be being manipulated donw now to accumalate based on a onday rally but record low of only 11 bidders were involved in auction
not looking good and imo we could see below 300 this week coming

[makeacake]

^The $20 drop pure coincidence, or because winning bidders had to pay a huge premium above market & had to dump?

[jaredboice]

^The $20 drop pure coincidence, or because winning bidders had to pay a huge premium above market & had to dump?

The types of investors who are attending these auctions are not going to go through the process just to immediately dump the coins.  It's not even anywhere in the region of realistic

[Dexter770221]

No word from the winner?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/09/usa-bitcoin-auction-idUSL1N1342RP20151109#zzU9YmWEHHf8zAd7.97

[1Referee]

No word from the winner?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/09/usa-bitcoin-auction-idUSL1N1342RP20151109#zzU9YmWEHHf8zAd7.97

That's more than interesting. I thought the winners of the auctioned SilkRoad coins would remain in silence. 5 blocks of 2000BTC each equals 3.8 million US dollars with current rates. It surprises me that they are openly releasing this information, but the purchasing price will not be available I guess 

[acakf]

No word from the winner?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/09/usa-bitcoin-auction-idUSL1N1342RP20151109#zzU9YmWEHHf8zAd7.97

Thanks.
So itBit got 10k, and Cumberland Mining [probably] the lion's share.

[Guido]

Like the fact that you got an actor as your avatar... because your story is pure fiction.

it's looking like the prices paid at the auction are already known and leaked to the bigger players, or the players bidding in first place pumped to dump, then they will release price paid, significantly below price now and we will have a further CARSH

I would look to optimistic side and think price could be being manipulated donw now to accumalate based on a onday rally but record low of only 11 bidders were involved in auction
not looking good and imo we could see below 300 this week coming

looks like you should have listened to me, as I was right and you offered nothing at all. no insight

[rtrtcrypto]

The price fell and you were "right"?

Time to take more courses in the metaphysics of causation... you might enjoy those.

Btw. What were the prices paid? Since you imply that you know. Otherwise, I might just ascribe any other number of events to the falling of the price. The auction seems the least probable in my mind.

Like the fact that you got an actor as your avatar... because your story is pure fiction.

it's looking like the prices paid at the auction are already known and leaked to the bigger players, or the players bidding in first place pumped to dump, then they will release price paid, significantly below price now and we will have a further CARSH

I would look to optimistic side and think price could be being manipulated donw now to accumalate based on a onday rally but record low of only 11 bidders were involved in auction
not looking good and imo we could see below 300 this week coming

looks like you should have listened to me, as I was right and you offered nothing at all. no insight

[Guido]

The price fell and you were "right"?

Time to take more courses in the metaphysics of causation... you might enjoy those.

Btw. What were the prices paid? Since you imply that you know. Otherwise, I might just ascribe any other number of events to the falling of the price. The auction seems the least probable in my mind.

Like the fact that you got an actor as your avatar... because your story is pure fiction.

it's looking like the prices paid at the auction are already known and leaked to the bigger players, or the players bidding in first place pumped to dump, then they will release price paid, significantly below price now and we will have a further CARSH

I would look to optimistic side and think price could be being manipulated donw now to accumalate based on a onday rally but record low of only 11 bidders were involved in auction
not looking good and imo we could see below 300 this week coming

looks like you should have listened to me, as I was right and you offered nothing at all. no insight

as said, you provided nothing
I cannot know the exact price of auction, however it is clear to even a child, clearly not you though, that there was a fake pump before the auction.
did you notice that ?
then dumped
it's called manipulation.

it will keep going down imo. it's as simple as that. as i type this is happening

[rtrtcrypto]

And you provided?

"the price has risen"
"the price has fallen"
"the price keeps falling"

Watch me do the same:

the stock market has moved up/down
the sun has risen
the sun has set

WHAT ANALYSIS! Now, even better:

I brushed my teeth, the sun set that night - my brushing my teeth has set the sun.

BRAVO!

The price fell and you were "right"?

Time to take more courses in the metaphysics of causation... you might enjoy those.

Btw. What were the prices paid? Since you imply that you know. Otherwise, I might just ascribe any other number of events to the falling of the price. The auction seems the least probable in my mind.

Like the fact that you got an actor as your avatar... because your story is pure fiction.

it's looking like the prices paid at the auction are already known and leaked to the bigger players, or the players bidding in first place pumped to dump, then they will release price paid, significantly below price now and we will have a further CARSH

I would look to optimistic side and think price could be being manipulated donw now to accumalate based on a onday rally but record low of only 11 bidders were involved in auction
not looking good and imo we could see below 300 this week coming

looks like you should have listened to me, as I was right and you offered nothing at all. no insight

as said, you provided nothing
I cannot know the exact price of auction, however it is clear to even a child, clearly not you though, that there was a fake pump before the auction.
did you notice that ?
then dumped
it's called manipulation.

it will keep going down imo. it's as simple as that. as i type this is happening

[rtrtcrypto]

http://www.amazon.com/The-Misbehavior-Markets-Financial-Turbulence/dp/0465043577

Go learn something. Then come back. Thanks.

ps. IGNORE LIST.

The price fell and you were "right"?

Time to take more courses in the metaphysics of causation... you might enjoy those.

Btw. What were the prices paid? Since you imply that you know. Otherwise, I might just ascribe any other number of events to the falling of the price. The auction seems the least probable in my mind.

Like the fact that you got an actor as your avatar... because your story is pure fiction.

it's looking like the prices paid at the auction are already known and leaked to the bigger players, or the players bidding in first place pumped to dump, then they will release price paid, significantly below price now and we will have a further CARSH

I would look to optimistic side and think price could be being manipulated donw now to accumalate based on a onday rally but record low of only 11 bidders were involved in auction
not looking good and imo we could see below 300 this week coming

looks like you should have listened to me, as I was right and you offered nothing at all. no insight

as said, you provided nothing
I cannot know the exact price of auction, however it is clear to even a child, clearly not you though, that there was a fake pump before the auction.
did you notice that ?
then dumped
it's called manipulation.

it will keep going down imo. it's as simple as that. as i type this is happening