Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[1714626952]

1714626952

[1714626952]

1714626952

[adamstgBit]

It's time to buy.
we go up from here on out.

Hoist the Colours!!!!

https://youtu.be/fINeo6sWqGI?t=57s

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[JorgeStolfi]

"Zero cost"... Aside from the cost of nearly every major hodler of bitcoin dumping them instantaneously if the 21 mil cap is put in serious jeopardy.

That is not "cost".  Even if bitcoins lose all their value, no resources or concrete assets will be destroyed.  The world will not become any poorer. Only, a few hundred thousand people who expected to get hold one day of mansions and Lamborghinis  will see those hopes vaporize, and those assets go to other people instead.

I don't think however that the introduction of extra inflation into bitcoin -- say, 1% per year, beyond the block rewards -- would necessarily induce all holders to dump, and the price to crash.  

In late 2013, when I first learned about bitcon, the Gospel of Antonopoulos was that bitcoins would become extremely valuable because they would replace credit cards and other traditional digital payments, and then demand for that use would drive the price up, according to the money velocity equation.  Moreover, that would happen very soon, because the price had been growing 1000% per year, and no one could look at that straight line on the log plot and doubt that it would continue.

Well, 1% of inflation per year would not destroy that argument; at most, it would delay the growth a little.  After all,  that growth of 1000% per year happened while the miners were creating an inflation of more than 10% per year.

But the Gospel has changed several times since then.  Mircea, for example, wants us to believe that the "Moon" will come just because the supply is fixed.  Even if it were true -- again, 1% of inflation per year, even extended for 20 years, could not possibly prevent the price from rising 1000% in that interval.

Blockstream, on the other hand, wants us to believe that bitcoin will go to the Moon because not only the supply will be capped by 21 million, but the transactions will be capped to 150'000--180'000 per day, and somehw that will induce some companies to pay more for bitcoins. Whatever.  Again, 1% inflation per year cannot possibly spoil such a powerful "whatever".

But, on the other hand,  I agree with one thing: it is very unlikely that those "20 businessmen" who will decide the future of bitcoin will ever agree to putting any sort of inflation or demurrage in it.  That was not a prediction that I was making.  My point was only that the 21 million cap is not "guaranteed by math", but only by people.

I still believe that bitcon's price will go to zero in a few years; but almost certainly not by that route...

[adamstgBit]

Blockstream, on the other hand, wants us to believe that bitcoin will go to the Moon because not only the supply will be capped by 21 million, but the transactions will be capped to 150'000--180'000 per day, and somehw that will induce some companies to pay more for bitcoins. Whatever.  Again, 1% inflation per year cannot possibly spoil such a powerful "whatever".

Bahahahaha!

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Any substantive discussion on scaling will have to wait until the Hong Kong portion of the show. https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/642397611178217472

[Cconvert2G36]

"Zero cost"... Aside from the cost of nearly every major hodler of bitcoin dumping them instantaneously if the 21 mil cap is put in serious jeopardy.

That is not "cost".  Even if bitcoins lose all their value, no resources or concrete assets will be destroyed.  The world will not become any poorer. Only, a few hundred thousand people who expected to get hold one day of mansions and Lamborghinis  will see those hopes vaporize, and those assets go to other people instead.

I don't think however that the introduction of extra inflation into bitcoin -- say, 1% per year, beyond the block rewards -- would necessarily induce all holders to dump, and the price to crash.  

In late 2013, when I first learned about bitcon, the Gospel of Antonopoulos was that bitcoins would become extremely valuable because they would replace credit cards and other traditional digital payments, and then demand for that use would drive the price up, according to the money velocity equation.  Moreover, that would happen very soon, because the price had been growing 1000% per year, and no one could look at that straight line on the log plot and doubt that it would continue.

Well, 1% of inflation per year would not destroy that argument; at most, it would delay the growth a little.  After all,  that growth of 1000% per year happened while the miners were creating an inflation of more than 10% per year.

But the Gospel has changed several times since then.  Mircea, for example, wants us to believe that the "Moon" will come just because the supply is fixed.  Even if it were true -- again, 1% of inflation per year, even extended for 20 years, could not possibly prevent the price from rising 1000% in that interval.

Blockstream, on the other hand, wants us to believe that bitcoin will go to the Moon because not only the supply will be capped by 21 million, but the transactions will be capped to 150'000--180'000 per day, and somehw that will induce some companies to pay more for bitcoins. Whatever.  Again, 1% inflation per year cannot possibly spoil such a powerful "whatever".

But, on the other hand,  I agree with one thing: it is very unlikely that those "20 businessmen" who will decide the future of bitcoin will ever agree to putting any sort of inflation or demurrage in it.  That was not a prediction that I was making.  My point was only that the 21 million cap is not "guaranteed by math", but only by people.

I still believe that bitcon's price will go to zero in a few years; but almost certainly not by that route...

I appreciate the effort in your response. Can you imagine a design of cryptocurrency that would be to your liking, or is the concept as a whole damned to failure in your mind?

If miners decide that increasing the money supply algorithm is in their interests, I guess they'll find out. I would be running for the exits tho, flawed as such exits may be ...

[adamstgBit]

Any substantive discussion on scaling will have to wait until the Hong Kong portion of the show. https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/642397611178217472

there no need for a conference i've solved the scaling problem already.

proof:

What would we do without your genius 

Scrap this weekend's Scaling Bitcoin conference you solved it all for us!!

your welcome.

[coinableS]

I still believe that bitcon's price will go to zero in a few years; but almost certainly not by that route...

I think you are dismissing die-hards and fanatics in that equation.
There are still people that play Quake III and pay for servers even though the game is 16 years old. There is still a select few that still play.
I know bad example, except for those of us in the 30's age group.
Anyways my point is that there will always be a demand and use for bitcoin. If not by mainstream then at least by niche users and diehards. There are some people that wouldn't be able to resist buying 100,000 BTC for $10.00.

A zero price could only be achieved by a major flaw in the protocol that either revealed private keys, or allowed people to generate 'counterfeit' bitcoins.

[macsga]

"Zero cost"... Aside from the cost of nearly every major hodler of bitcoin dumping them instantaneously if the 21 mil cap is put in serious jeopardy.

That is not "cost".  Even if bitcoins lose all their value, no resources or concrete assets will be destroyed.  The world will not become any poorer. Only, a few hundred thousand people who expected to get hold one day of mansions and Lamborghinis  will see those hopes vaporize, and those assets go to other people instead.

This would be utterly wrong. There actually IS an "internal" value inside every bitcoin and it's the amount of resources (computers/miners/electricity) to build its block. As time goes by, the aforementioned "value" will rise because the difficulty to build one will be greater and the block reward will be halved. YES, there's a chance this "value" will be destroyed but not because of what you're claiming, but because you lost your wallet's password - or your computer got on fire; but your loss will add more value to the rest of bitcoins spread around the world.

You see, what you fail to understand (which is common sense to my way of thinking) is what would it take for somebody to use something as a currency. The keyword is "trust".

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Any substantive discussion on scaling will have to wait until the Hong Kong portion of the show. https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/642397611178217472

there no need for a conference i've solved the scaling problem already.

proof:

What would we do without your genius 

Scrap this weekend's Scaling Bitcoin conference you solved it all for us!!

your welcome.

Theymos solved it before you did! https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3kl09r/pastebin_by_theymos_possible_method_of_compromise/

[billyjoeallen]

"Zero cost"... Aside from the cost of nearly every major hodler of bitcoin dumping them instantaneously if the 21 mil cap is put in serious jeopardy.

That is not "cost".  Even if bitcoins lose all their value, no resources or concrete assets will be destroyed.  The world will not become any poorer. Only, a few hundred thousand people who expected to get hold one day of mansions and Lamborghinis  will see those hopes vaporize, and those assets go to other people instead.

I don't think however that the introduction of extra inflation into bitcoin -- say, 1% per year, beyond the block rewards -- would necessarily induce all holders to dump, and the price to crash.  

In late 2013, when I first learned about bitcon, the Gospel of Antonopoulos was that bitcoins would become extremely valuable because they would replace credit cards and other traditional digital payments, and then demand for that use would drive the price up, according to the money velocity equation.  Moreover, that would happen very soon, because the price had been growing 1000% per year, and no one could look at that straight line on the log plot and doubt that it would continue.

Well, 1% of inflation per year would not destroy that argument; at most, it would delay the growth a little.  After all,  that growth of 1000% per year happened while the miners were creating an inflation of more than 10% per year.

But the Gospel has changed several times since then.  Mircea, for example, wants us to believe that the "Moon" will come just because the supply is fixed.  Even if it were true -- again, 1% of inflation per year, even extended for 20 years, could not possibly prevent the price from rising 1000% in that interval.

Blockstream, on the other hand, wants us to believe that bitcoin will go to the Moon because not only the supply will be capped by 21 million, but the transactions will be capped to 150'000--180'000 per day, and somehw that will induce some companies to pay more for bitcoins. Whatever.  Again, 1% inflation per year cannot possibly spoil such a powerful "whatever".

But, on the other hand,  I agree with one thing: it is very unlikely that those "20 businessmen" who will decide the future of bitcoin will ever agree to putting any sort of inflation or demurrage in it.  That was not a prediction that I was making.  My point was only that the 21 million cap is not "guaranteed by math", but only by people.

I still believe that bitcon's price will go to zero in a few years; but almost certainly not by that route...

You really don't know much about economics, do you Professor? Try appraoching the issue from a different direction: Bitcoin price is fueled by speculative investors. These people are forward thinking. They don't buy BTC based on current utility value, but implied future utility value. Just as stocks are valued by implied (and discounted) future rate of returns, we are betting that these cryptographic token thingies will become (more) useful down the road.  Basically we are paying for the right to write on a very secure immutable ledger in the future. ANY inflation beyond the baked-in block reward means that the ledger will get diluted and polluted with extra data to a degree that we hitherto didn't factor in. Also, there is the slippery slope of if we can increase by 1% after so many assurances that it would NEVER happen, you have to add the uncertainty that this inflation rate may be adjusted higher in the future.  

Why do you think there is so much hand-wringing about the Federal Reserve's proposed 0.25% rate increase? it would mean almost nothing on it's own, but Wall Street knows rate increases are almost never a one-off. They are likely followed by more increases.  They know the Fed wants 'normalized" rates in the vicinity of 5 to 8%, and that Yellen will keep hiking until either she gets there or causes another recession.

Economics is the science of studying incentives. The challenge for an economist is to look for the HIDDEN costs (often opportunity costs) and unintended consequences of a given policy.  No change happens in a vacuum and ripple effects can permeate the whole system.  

[Cconvert2G36]

Any substantive discussion on scaling will have to wait until the Hong Kong portion of the show. https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/642397611178217472

there no need for a conference i've solved the scaling problem already.

proof:

What would we do without your genius 

Scrap this weekend's Scaling Bitcoin conference you solved it all for us!!

your welcome.

Theymos solved it before you did! https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3kl09r/pastebin_by_theymos_possible_method_of_compromise/

Wholly shit. He confirms it with a defense? [cheesy redaction]

[adamstgBit]

Any substantive discussion on scaling will have to wait until the Hong Kong portion of the show. https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/642397611178217472

there no need for a conference i've solved the scaling problem already.

proof:

What would we do without your genius 

Scrap this weekend's Scaling Bitcoin conference you solved it all for us!!

your welcome.

Theymos solved it before you did! https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3kl09r/pastebin_by_theymos_possible_method_of_compromise/

i propose no compromise
but rather compressing the blocks so they propagate 250X faster!

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Any substantive discussion on scaling will have to wait until the Hong Kong portion of the show. https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/642397611178217472

there no need for a conference i've solved the scaling problem already.

proof:

What would we do without your genius 

Scrap this weekend's Scaling Bitcoin conference you solved it all for us!!

your welcome.

Theymos solved it before you did! https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3kl09r/pastebin_by_theymos_possible_method_of_compromise/

Wholly shit. He confirms it with a defense? [cheesy redaction]

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[Fatman3001]

Many consumers have exclaimed they will leave Bitcoin to go to an altcoin which suits their "needs" if they don't get their way in Bitcoin being perverted into a system to compete with Visa. What they don't realize is the consequences they will face if they choose this option.




full article: http://qntra.net/2015/09/consumers-begin-revolting-bitcoin-is-not-visa/

And what are the consequences?

read much?

…before the end of 2015 there's about a thousand to a million different Bitcoin forks, each with its ten million-ish monetary base worth about a dollar, on global average.

The size of the inter-Bitcoins market, the complexity and confusion ensuing makes pretty much everything unmanageable for the "ordinary person".

derp

Did he actually just predict altcoins?

Apparently. It was either very poorly written or very brilliantly written. I read the whole article and I couldn't wrap my head around it.

@Andre# agreed

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation