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

[BlackSpidy]

Har, har. Let me guess the joke "bitcoin went down in price constantly for about a year". Yeah, that got real real old real fast. LambChop wore it out 100 pages ago.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[billyjoeallen]

Do you have a clue to what you are talking about or are you just talking out your ass?

Yes I do. When it comes to economics, even my ass is smarter than a Marxist.

So whats your relationship between marginal utility and exchanging fiat for bitcoin? Enlighten me

I buy bitcoin because it is more efficient and easier (for me) than mining it. Specialization allows greater efficiency because miners benefit from economies of scale.

Large sums of fiat are difficult to store and move. Bitcoin is relatively easier if you know how to do it.

Alright that totally doesnt answer my question but we will leave it at that.

You should state your question better then. You asked about my relationship. Individuals act according to their own subjective values of utility.

Yes Exactly! MU is determined by this subjectiveness. So how you could paint such a broad definition was a bit beyond me.  

definition of what? MU? I wasn't using MU as a defense of bitcoin's value. I was using it as an example of Jorge's ignorance of economic theory.

[billyjoeallen]

Do you have a clue to what you are talking about or are you just talking out your ass?

Yes I do. When it comes to economics, even my ass is smarter than a Marxist.

So whats your relationship between marginal utility and exchanging fiat for bitcoin? Enlighten me

I buy bitcoin because it is more efficient and easier (for me) than mining it. Specialization allows greater efficiency because miners benefit from economies of scale.

Large sums of fiat are difficult to store and move. Bitcoin is relatively easier if you know how to do it.

Alright that totally doesnt answer my question but we will leave it at that.

You should state your question better then. You asked about my relationship. Individuals act according to their own subjective values of utility.

Yes Exactly! MU is determined by this subjectiveness. So how you could paint such a broad definition was a bit beyond me.  

definition of what? MU? I wasn't using MU as a defense of bitcoin's value. I was using it as an example of Jorge's ignorance of economic theory.

MU isn't a defense of Bitcoins value because MU is subjective. Jorge's ignorance stems from him not understanding that the only thing that will change is the ratio of fiat exchanged for Bitcoin.

I think that's more of a result of his ignorance than the cause. I think he was using a flawed theory of value. If his premise is incorrect, then his conclusion will be incorrect, even if his logic is sound.

[marcus_of_augustus]

00000000000000000b63fd2b074637a7252d9d456968d9d0e747f279dd8bc131

What does this number represent?

[inca]

Shorts over 24000. Price static. 1400 coins available to borrow at any price. Go retail!


 

[billyjoeallen]

Do you have a clue to what you are talking about or are you just talking out your ass?

Yes I do. When it comes to economics, even my ass is smarter than a Marxist.

So whats your relationship between marginal utility and exchanging fiat for bitcoin? Enlighten me

I buy bitcoin because it is more efficient and easier (for me) than mining it. Specialization allows greater efficiency because miners benefit from economies of scale.

Large sums of fiat are difficult to store and move. Bitcoin is relatively easier if you know how to do it.

Alright that totally doesnt answer my question but we will leave it at that.

You should state your question better then. You asked about my relationship. Individuals act according to their own subjective values of utility.

Yes Exactly! MU is determined by this subjectiveness. So how you could paint such a broad definition was a bit beyond me.  

definition of what? MU? I wasn't using MU as a defense of bitcoin's value. I was using it as an example of Jorge's ignorance of economic theory.

MU isn't a defense of Bitcoins value because MU is subjective. Jorge's ignorance stems from him not understanding that the only thing that will change is the ratio of fiat exchanged for Bitcoin.

I think that's more of a result of his ignorance than the cause. I think he was using a flawed theory of value. If his premise is incorrect, then his conclusion will be incorrect, even if his logic is sound.

Garbage in, Garbage out. Just be careful with economic theory because the end result can be mothers not being able to feed their children. 

Sadly true. Anything that is powerful is dangerous.

[marcus_of_augustus]

00000000000000000b63fd2b074637a7252d9d456968d9d0e747f279dd8bc131

What does this number represent?

Hash of the latest block?

yes, but more importantly it represents the result of petahashes of computing power working for ~10mins to find an extremely difficult number (look at all those zeros!) that can not be reproduced, faked or counterfeited ... it is tangible, quantifiable, easily verified proof of very hard work.

Not to mention it is currently worth around $850k ...

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[buddhamangler]

https://www.bitfinex.com/pages/stats

It now shows the amount used, this is helpful.

Total sum of active swaps   Total amount used in margin positions
USD   16,652,318.73 USD   16,583,217.30 USD
BTC   24,434.66 BTC           24,041.24 BTC

[podyx]

[DaRude]

https://www.bitfinex.com/pages/stats

It now shows the amount used, this is helpful.

Total sum of active swaps   Total amount used in margin positions
USD   16,652,318.73 USD   16,583,217.30 USD
BTC   24,434.66 BTC           24,041.24 BTC

Sweet didn't know that. I knew there was a reason i still drop by this thread

[Andre#]

Passing on the initial ignore list. Feel free to add as they create new accounts.   Haha


kwukduck
Wandererfromthenorth
MatTheCat
fonzie
12345mm
exocytosis
Silverspoon
NotLambchop
Mervyn_Pumpkinhead
fonsie
YourMother
Dump3er
fat buddah
homo homini lupus
Warren Buffett
Warren Buffert
NotHatinJustTrollin
Arpeggio
Second-base
bitards

Thanks for sharing!

[NoIgnore4u]

http://s1.dlnws.com/files/BeanieBabiesPriceTrend.jpg

Har, har. Let me guess the joke "bitcoin went down in price constantly for about a year". Yeah, that got real real old real fast. LambChop wore it out 100 pages ago.

Guess what the best part about it is? Is not even a joke!

[mybitcoincharts]

And if the crypto fails, there will be no one to exchange it for euros at a fixed rate.  Again trillions will have changed hands, with no relation to work done.

This is tacit admission that the good professor is using the thoroughly discredited Marxist Labor Theory of Value. The LTOV has been obsolete for more than a century when several economists (including William Stanley Jevons) independently came up with what is known today as Marginal Utility.

Marginal Utility is used by all non marxist economists today, not just Austrians. Keynesians, Monetarists, neoclassical economist all accept it as a better metric. It's like Newton's laws of motion. It's foundational.
If you talk economics and don't understand it, any real economist will know that you are talking out your ass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_utility

“It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.”

― Murray N. Rothbard

Marginal Utility as a concept cannot discredit LTV for the simple reason that both try to explain similar but not identical phenomena. The subject of LTOV is the economy as a whole, whereas marginalists and neoclassical theories describe only markets, a subset of the economy. Marginal Utility fails to describe reality where markets end. That humans reproduce, for example, is an essential variable in an economy, yet it happens outside of markets. Raising kids at home means work has to be done, and in the future potentially results in productive participants of the economy. LTV try to integrate that into the theory, whereas price-oriented theories only become aware of that new person the moment he/she enters the market.

Another example: Simple Machines Forum, the software this forum runs on, is open source, it has been written by people in their free time. Marginalism cannot describe why it is useful despite having been created outside the market.

Despite having read quite a bit from both sides, I still have no clear position on what I prefer. What I dislike about marginalists, though, is that they simply factored out the hard, fuzzy parts of the whole economy and settled on describing just markets.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[viboracecata]

Another bear coming？

[billyjoeallen]

And if the crypto fails, there will be no one to exchange it for euros at a fixed rate.  Again trillions will have changed hands, with no relation to work done.

This is tacit admission that the good professor is using the thoroughly discredited Marxist Labor Theory of Value. The LTOV has been obsolete for more than a century when several economists (including William Stanley Jevons) independently came up with what is known today as Marginal Utility.

Marginal Utility is used by all non marxist economists today, not just Austrians. Keynesians, Monetarists, neoclassical economist all accept it as a better metric. It's like Newton's laws of motion. It's foundational.
If you talk economics and don't understand it, any real economist will know that you are talking out your ass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_utility

“It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.”

― Murray N. Rothbard

Marginal Utility as a concept cannot discredit LTV for the simple reason that both try to explain similar but not identical phenomena. The subject of LTOV is the economy as a whole, whereas marginalists and neoclassical theories describe only markets, a subset of the economy. Marginal Utility fails to describe reality where markets end. That humans reproduce, for example, is an essential variable in an economy, yet it happens outside of markets. Raising kids at home means work has to be done, and in the future potentially results in productive participants of the economy. LTV try to integrate that into the theory, whereas price-oriented theories only become aware of that new person the moment he/she enters the market.

Another example: Simple Machines Forum, the software this forum runs on, is open source, it has been written by people in their free time. Marginalism cannot describe why it is useful despite having been created outside the market.

Despite having read quite a bit from both sides, I still have no clear position on what I prefer. What I dislike about marginalists, though, is that they simply factored out the hard, fuzzy parts of the whole economy and settled on describing just markets.

Marginalism can absolutely describe why open source projects are valuable. What it cannot do and neither can LToV is put an objective vale on such things because objective value doesn't exist. I see the attraction. It would be easier if it did exist, but then again physics would be simpler w/o relativity too. Unfortunately, neither Newtonian physics nor objective value describe reality as well as a more advanced understanding of the fields of study. People are not interchangable. The same person isn't even interchangeable with himself at a different time and place.

[inca]

No. Look at the orderbooks.

[KryptoFoo]

come on, eat those sell orders on finex and we go higher.