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

[Ibian]

You are invested in [ freicoin ], I assume? After all, you preach about the merits of money that loses value over time so surely you would be? And if not, of course that error will be rectified in the very near future, yes?

No I am not invested in it, or in any crypto.  I may have read about Freicoin before, but did not know (or forgot) that it has demurrage.  If it does, it would be silly to invest in it, no?  That is the whole point...

So how do you rationalize advocating the concept if you won't support it with your own money?

[Cconvert2G36]

I don't know enough about Keynes (or Economics) to tell whether I am a Keynesian.  But I certainly do not "hate people saving their money", quite the opposite:  I wish people (and my compatriots especially) would consume less and invest more.  But I would like to see them choose productive investments; and hoarding currency (or gold) is not productive.

Hoarding currency is bad for the individual, because all currency will lose value eventually. (As you well know, I am sure that will happen to bitcoin, too, even if there may be another bubble or two.)  Hoarding currency is also bad for society because it harms the currency, by destabilizing its value.

Let me reming people that this discussion started when someone asked for my idea of a good cryptocurrency.  Well, among other things, a good cryptocurrency should be designed so that no one will be tempted to hoard it.

Screw you bitch. Having enough savings that I don't have to work for the rest of my life gives me options and freedom that most people can't even dream of. Spending most of your life working for others merely for food and a shelter is the life of a slave.

It's really annoying to see people freak out about Stolfi. He's pretty straightforward about why he's here: Bitcoin is a fucking interesting experiment, in computer science, cryptography, economics, psychology, politics...

You can vehemently disagree with someone without throwing little tantrums about it. (Which btw... makes him seem like the reasonable and thoughtful side of the debate to curious spectators.)

As to his "ideal coin" it would be nice if it was coded up and competing in the marketplace. The fixed emission schedule is so important and central to satoshi's code. I highly doubt it was an afterthought or mistake. I think it was intended as a bootstrapping method... encouraging adoption and attracting value while starting out. Hopefully the last 18 months have demonstrated that btc hoarding is not the easy way to realize massive gains. It also demonstrates that people should invest their savings through the careful consideration of the opportunity cost of not investing in other things.

The genesis block gives a clue that Bitcoin is more than just a fancy way to move Keynesian directed fiat around the internet. It is the Austrian School's view towards an ideal currency coded together and launched. Success is by no means guaranteed, but it should be quite interesting to see how it all plays out.

Give me Stolfi posts any day in lieu of "when is we arising?" "see you on the Moon!" posts. I disagree with him on many things, agree on some... One thing should be clear by now, an echochamber of agreement and back patting is dangerous and annoying.

[Ibian]

I don't know enough about Keynes (or Economics) to tell whether I am a Keynesian.  But I certainly do not "hate people saving their money", quite the opposite:  I wish people (and my compatriots especially) would consume less and invest more.  But I would like to see them choose productive investments; and hoarding currency (or gold) is not productive.

Hoarding currency is bad for the individual, because all currency will lose value eventually. (As you well know, I am sure that will happen to bitcoin, too, even if there may be another bubble or two.)  Hoarding currency is also bad for society because it harms the currency, by destabilizing its value.

Let me reming people that this discussion started when someone asked for my idea of a good cryptocurrency.  Well, among other things, a good cryptocurrency should be designed so that no one will be tempted to hoard it.

Screw you bitch. Having enough savings that I don't have to work for the rest of my life gives me options and freedom that most people can't even dream of. Spending most of your life working for others merely for food and a shelter is the life of a slave.

It's really annoying to see people freak out about Stolfi. He's pretty straightforward about why he's here: Bitcoin is a fucking interesting experiment, in computer science, cryptography, economics, psychology, politics...

You can vehemently disagree with someone without throwing little tantrums about it. (Which btw... makes him seem like the reasonable and thoughtful side of the debate to curious spectators.)

As to his "ideal coin" it would be nice if it was coded up and competing in the marketplace. The fixed emission schedule is so important and central to satoshi's code. I highly doubt it was an afterthought or mistake. I think it was intended as a bootstrapping method... encouraging adoption and attracting value while starting out. Hopefully the last 18 months have demonstrated that btc hoarding is not the easy way to realize massive gains. It also demonstrates that people should invest their savings through the careful consideration of the opportunity cost of not investing in other things.

The genesis block gives a clue that Bitcoin is more than just a fancy way to move Keynesian directed fiat around the internet. It is the Austrian School's view towards an ideal currency coded together and launched. Success is by no means guaranteed, but it should be quite interesting to see how it all plays out.

Give me Stolfi posts any day in lieu of "when is we arising?" "see you on the Moon!" posts. I disagree with him on many things, agree on some... One thing should be clear by now, an echochamber of agreement and back patting is dangerous and annoying.

Curious spectators who can't see through polite-trolling are worthless anyway. The guy is here to argue, not to debate. He is not being honest.

[Norway]

Taking down the bears, just like the Hulk!

[Fatman3001]

Bitcoin was created to be exactly what it is and to be used in whatever way one sees fit. Why are people still engaging that argument, and those people, as if it and they had any merit?

Because a tool that was carefully designed for one purpose is usually inadequate for other purposes, even if it happen to be the best tool available for them.

Bitcoin was designed from top to bottom with the assumption that it would be used as a currency that did not require trusted third parties.  For example, that is why it has blocks every 10 minutes (it should have been much less, but technical constraints prevented it).  

Satoshi did not expect mining to be industrialized and concentrated in half a dozen companies; not at this stage of adoption at least.  Had he known that the price today would be 230 USD/BTC, he might have scheduled the block reward to be 0.001 BTC/block today, so the mining industry would earn 0.144 BTC per day --  not enough for 1 guy doing GPU mining.  But that low reward might have made bitcoin more attractive to speculators... Frankly, I don't see how the mining centralization problem could have been avoided without demurrage...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=532.msg6306#msg6306

Sorry to spoil your fun there Professor.

I know that quote, but it does not deny what I wrote.  He knew that the protocol would not work if a majority of the mining power were to collude.  If he ever became convinced that mining would become concentrated as much as it is now, he would have given up on bitcoin and ... wait ...  

Here is what he wrote a few months earlier:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=12.msg54#msg54

So him saying that he likes that CPU mining is possible in 2009 somehow negates the fact that he's perfectly comfortable with future mining farms in 2010?

Where's lambie? I want someone with brains to troll me.

[Norway]

Just killed 40 Lambie-"I can't post naked gay pics anymore boo hoo"-puppets! This is getting fun!

[Cconvert2G36]

-snip-

Curious spectators who can't see through polite-trolling are worthless anyway. The guy is here to argue, not to debate. He is not being honest.

Debate: contention in argument; strife, dissension, quarrelling, controversy; especially a formal discussion of subjects before a public assembly or legislature, in Parliament or in any deliberative assembly.

You prefer more impolite-trolling? Seems there is a very dedicated individual to provide you with that...

Where exactly is he being dishonest? He's just stating his personal opinion, which may be proven to be correct or incorrect.

 

[Ibian]

-snip-

Curious spectators who can't see through polite-trolling are worthless anyway. The guy is here to argue, not to debate. He is not being honest.

Debate: contention in argument; strife, dissension, quarrelling, controversy; especially a formal discussion of subjects before a public assembly or legislature, in Parliament or in any deliberative assembly.

You prefer more impolite-trolling? Seems there is a very dedicated individual to provide you with that...

Where exactly is he being dishonest? He's just stating his personal opinion, which may be proven to be correct or incorrect.

 

He is advocating a crypto-system which already exists and which he refuses to back with his own money. He is a shill, paid or otherwise.

[JayJuanGee]

Jorge and other Keynesians hate people saving their money because then nobody has a safety net. Without a safety net this necessitates the government to provide it. And there is nothing Keynesians love more than government force.

I don't know enough about Keynes (or Economics) to tell whether I am a Keynesian.  But I certainly do not "hate people saving their money", quite the opposite:  I wish people (and my compatriots especially) would consume less and invest more.  But I would like to see them choose productive investments; and hoarding currency (or gold) is not productive.

Hoarding currency is bad for the individual, because all currency will lose value eventually. (As you well know, I am sure that will happen to bitcoin, too, even if there may be another bubble or two.)  Hoarding currency is also bad for society because it harms the currency, by destabilizing its value.

You are talking out of both sides of your ass, here.  First you assert that bitcoin is problematically flawed because it does NOT lose value like other currencies and that it needs to have inflation of currency built into it, then you say that bitcoin is like all other currencies...

WTF?  can you be a little less self-contradictory in your ridiculous assertions in order to really pinpoint some kind of meaningful issue rather than just making things up..  ?

Let me reming people that this discussion started when someone asked for my idea of a good cryptocurrency.  Well, among other things, a good cryptocurrency should be designed so that no one will be tempted to hoard it.

potential hoarding is a feature and not a bug.   

If bitcoin were the only currency or storage of value, and if someone wants to eat, i'm sure that that person would give up a little bitcoin to buy some food, no?  or will they starve themselves to death because they believe that BTC is too valuable?     

[Fatman3001]

Stolfi-economics is a sorry mess

[JayJuanGee]

I think that my various responses had the right tone.   I have been reading his posts for at least a year and a half. 

 There is NO personal attack contained within my responses... a little colorful language and to suggest that someone is simplifying and misleading is NOT a personal attack, it is an attack on his generally disingenuous presentation and he should know better regarding a variety of his points, that he is full of shit... and that is NOT a personal attack..   

Or complexifying and misleading, in any event, he's doing it for the lulz.

Fatman3001 - I believe that we largely agree. 

From time to time over the past 18 months, I have engaged with Stofli, and sometimes he will stand up fairly vigorously to his various trolling arguments, and then other times, he seems to engage in a passive aggressive bitchism by NOT responding, especially to materially relevant points.  Accordingly, sometimes, his oversimplification is to leave out material and relevant facts.  At other times, he (Stofli) brings in a bunch of irrelevant arguments and facts to make something more complex with his discussion of the various irrelevancies and asserting tat those various irrelevancies are super important. 

So yes, I agree, sometimes we also see complexifying tactics, too, from Stofli.

In either event, his posts seem to be designed in part to incite strong responses from other members because as an alleged professor, he should know a lot better than to engage in such fantasy, disinformation tactics, which causes me to suspect that he is likely financially profiting, in a variety of ways from the amount of time that he is spending on this forum and in other related bitcoin discussions.

It wasn't meant as a correction. I'm sorry if it came out that way.

Professors can be assholes too, believe me. He knows what he's doing.

I've read your posts from before you drank the juice of brevity so If you want to have a go at stolfi you're more than welcome. I know you can handle it.

Hahahahahaha... I have my moments of brevity and lack thereof... 



One problematic nature of this supposed "professor status" is that such proclamation is misleading in itself, and serves as an appeal to authority.  Therefore, to some extent whether Stolfi is a professor or NOT, it is an unnecessary title - because his arguments should stand in an of themselves, rather than striving to bring credibility to his on line persona through a supposed position of professorship.

[Norway]

Stolfi, are you paid to research bitcoin?

[JorgeStolfi]

So how do you rationalize advocating the concept if you won't support it with your own money?

You still don't get it?  The purpose of a currency is not to be an investment. 

If someone has to make some payment for which XCoin would be the best choice, he should buy as much XCoin as he needs and spend it.  If some merchant thinks that accepting XCoin would give him 1% more profit, he can accumulate the XCoins that he gets for a couple of weeks (a 2% per year loss will not be significant) and then either sell them, or use them to pay other XCoin-accepting entities.  If someone earns a substantial amount of XCoin that he does not intend to spend in a couple of months, he should use it to buy some more profitable investment.  That is how a currency is supposed to be used.

[JayJuanGee]

Screw you bitch. Having enough savings that I don't have to work for the rest of my life gives me options and freedom that most people can't even dream of. Spending most of your life working for others merely for food and a shelter is the life of a slave.

Great, let's all do that then. 

Imagine if only we could give 0.003 bitcoins to every person on the planet. Once 1 bitcoin becomes worth a billion dollars, no one will have to work anymore.  Bitcoin cannot just put an end to hunger and corruption in the world, it can also abolish work!

You are speculating way too much.  We are a hell-of-a-long way from everyone owning bitcoin, and I again looked at that pie chart that was posted with the koolaide man, and in any event BTC occupies only about .004% of the currency at the moment... ... a long way before your little problem becomes any kind of real potential concern. 

Additionally, like i mentioned earlier, if someone is hungry, they are likely going to buy food rather than hold onto bitcoin.. HELLO, is anyone home??

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[hdbuck]

Screw you bitch. Having enough savings that I don't have to work for the rest of my life gives me options and freedom that most people can't even dream of. Spending most of your life working for others merely for food and a shelter is the life of a slave.

Great, let's all do that then.  

Imagine if only we could give 0.003 bitcoins to every person on the planet. Once 1 bitcoin becomes worth a billion dollars, no one will have to work anymore.  Bitcoin cannot just put an end to hunger and corruption in the world, it can also abolish work!

You are speculating way too much.  We are a hell-of-a-long way from everyone owning bitcoin, and I again looked at that pie chart that was posted with the koolaide man, and in any event BTC occupies only about .004% of the currency at the moment... ... a long way before your little problem becomes any kind of real potential concern.  

Additionally, like i mentioned earlier, if someone is hungry, they are likely going to buy food rather than hold onto bitcoin.. HELLO, is anyone home??

lmao +1

[Fatman3001]

I think that my various responses had the right tone.   I have been reading his posts for at least a year and a half. 

 There is NO personal attack contained within my responses... a little colorful language and to suggest that someone is simplifying and misleading is NOT a personal attack, it is an attack on his generally disingenuous presentation and he should know better regarding a variety of his points, that he is full of shit... and that is NOT a personal attack..   

Or complexifying and misleading, in any event, he's doing it for the lulz.

Fatman3001 - I believe that we largely agree. 

From time to time over the past 18 months, I have engaged with Stofli, and sometimes he will stand up fairly vigorously to his various trolling arguments, and then other times, he seems to engage in a passive aggressive bitchism by NOT responding, especially to materially relevant points.  Accordingly, sometimes, his oversimplification is to leave out material and relevant facts.  At other times, he (Stofli) brings in a bunch of irrelevant arguments and facts to make something more complex with his discussion of the various irrelevancies and asserting tat those various irrelevancies are super important. 

So yes, I agree, sometimes we also see complexifying tactics, too, from Stofli.

In either event, his posts seem to be designed in part to incite strong responses from other members because as an alleged professor, he should know a lot better than to engage in such fantasy, disinformation tactics, which causes me to suspect that he is likely financially profiting, in a variety of ways from the amount of time that he is spending on this forum and in other related bitcoin discussions.

It wasn't meant as a correction. I'm sorry if it came out that way.

Professors can be assholes too, believe me. He knows what he's doing.

I've read your posts from before you drank the juice of brevity so If you want to have a go at stolfi you're more than welcome. I know you can handle it.

Hahahahahaha... I have my moments of brevity and lack thereof... 



One problematic nature of this supposed "professor status" is that such proclamation is misleading in itself, and serves as an appeal to authority.  Therefore, to some extent whether Stolfi is a professor or NOT, it is an unnecessary title - because his arguments should stand in an of themselves, rather than striving to bring credibility to his on line persona through a supposed position of professorship.

It does come up pretty quickly no matter how you play it. Such a title will have an effect on some. Some people tend to seek to authority for guidance and some cultures tend to have great respect for title systems. But if you look at what he's writing it's all a big joke on the world. And please note, he's not a professor of economics. But I'm sure he could get my old OKI Microline 280 up and running again. I hope for his own sake that his colleagues are in on the joke, if not he'll look like a royal twerp when they read all the drivel he's been writing in here.

[Norway]

Good hunt today. 4 kills.
Please help and report Lambie to the moderator as soon as you can. Make it a habbit and a hobby  
(Unless you like naked gay porn pics, or ascii art of it. Yes, Fatman! You are just too easy to entertain, ha ha ha!)

EDIT: Make that five.

[Fatman3001]

Good hunt today. 4 kills.
Please help and report Lambie to the moderator as soon as you can. Make it a habbit and a hobby  
(Unless you like naked gay porn pics, or ascii art of it. Yes, Fatman! You are just too easy to entertain, ha ha ha!)

EDIT: Make that five.

He's defanged. Now he's no worse than the regulars.

[Divitiae miserae]

So how do you rationalize advocating the concept if you won't support it with your own money?

You still don't get it?  The purpose of a currency is not to be an investment. 

If someone has to make some payment for which XCoin would be the best choice, he should buy as much XCoin as he needs and spend it.  If some merchant thinks that accepting XCoin would give him 1% more profit, he can accumulate the XCoins that he gets for a couple of weeks (a 2% per year loss will not be significant) and then either sell them, or use them to pay other XCoin-accepting entities.  If someone earns a substantial amount of XCoin that he does not intend to spend in a couple of months, he should use it to buy some more profitable investment.  That is how a currency is supposed to be used.

Margaritas ante porcos.