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

[stompix]

I didn't say that the price should be controlled, I told that the marker should have been smarter. There is a difference.



So who the fuck was supposed to sell at the bottom to make this smart transition and how would that be smart? What an asshole!  It should go down more so it can go up more, right? I guess you are whining that you didn't get enough of an opportunity to prey on panic sellers.

The market is the market, douchenozzle. That's like saying the weather should be smarter. It's not even coherent enough to be wrong.

Slowest people should sell at the bottom, like always. It will also be like this right now, but the process will take a lot longer then needed.
I think that it is healthy to tell the market about their mistakes and how they were stupid. As I said, this market needs some criticism to bring people back to reality.

If everybody would be selling at the top and buying at the bottom , there would not be any bottom or tops.

[Nemo1024]

The laws of economics cannot be repealed by legislative fiat. You could sooner repeal the Law of Gravity.

Chinese may have a Communist government, but it's mainly so in name only. When it comes to the sensibilities of economics, they take a far more liberal stance, than most "democracies".

They just did that a few month ago , didn't they?

Did what? Say that bitcoin should be treated no different than any other foreign currency? As far as I remember they didn't even circulation of bitcoins between individuals, while the businesses need to apply for a kind of "money transmitter" license.

[Nemo1024]

How many coins are being mined these days?   At the price they would fetch outside China, would they be enough for significant evasion?

I don't think that those coins would be easy or safe to get. How would the evaders contact the miners and pay them?  Big miners have large installations and huge electricity bills, they cannot easily hide from the government.

Exactly the same amount as in February last year. The emission is (more-or-less) constant until next halving. That's why difficulty goes up when the total network speed goes up: to maintain the constant emission of bitcoins.

[kkaspar]

To your other points, what will a superior crypto have that Bitcoin lacks?

Are privatized money systems based on trust?

Superior crypto would need a better system for creating new coins, since proof-of-work is not a smart way to create coins. The increase of miners should increase the security of network, and therefor give more value to BTC, but because the miners are pooled together, there is no increase in security. So resources are spent without any new gain. I think that Proof-of-Stake is more advanced, but I don't know any proof-of-stake coin that can hold on it's own. But I do bet that there will be a new wave of better quality coins. What we would need is an software company with experience and financial backing to create a coin. As long as coins are created by students or hobbyists, we won't see any serious competition to BTC.

Of course, money is always based on trust. Trust that you can use money to trade value without any unnecessary loss.
I think that bitcoin won't lose it's trust because of the flaws in software code, but it will lose faith because of the flawed market system. When there are no consequences to create a "scam exchange" that can play the competent exchange role for a year, just to gain trust, and then to run away with their customers money, then the market system is far from being secure. Most bitcoin enthusiasts are religious on the subject, and they actually believe that the market will be fine, since everyone has faith in the future of bitcoin and won't start "scam exchanges" because they can get more profit with legal methods.
But there are people out there who can see Bitcoin just as an temporary phenomenon and those people are motivated to build an exchange just to run away with their customers money. And they can actually do this without "running away", because they can just blame it on being a victim of hacking, lost database or whatever, and they won't see any jailtime.

[Drabla]

News:

http://businesstech.co.za/news/banking/53087/standark-bank-throws-out-bitcoin-idea/


Seems like gox is testing its daily low again :/

[billyjoeallen]

Basically the only way to convert Yuan to/from Bitcoin now is through a Chinese bank.  Both the bank and the exchange will want your ID. 

What do you mean exactly by "evading capital controls and State restrictions"?

There are many miners in China. The Chinese could buy or trade from them even if all the exchanges closed.

How many coins are being mined these days?   At the price they would fetch outside China, would they be enough for significant evasion?

I don't think that those coins would be easy or safe to get. How would the evaders contact the miners and pay them?  Big miners have large installations and huge electricity bills, they cannot easily hide from the government.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/11/21/finally-a-proper-use-for-bitcoin-avoiding-capital-controls/

If you don't understand how black markets work, that's a separate issue, but there will always be black markets were there are willing buyers and sellers of prohibited goods and services. Did prohibition stop alcohol consumption? War on drugs stop weed smoking? Nobody uses prostitutes or gambles where it's forbidden? Technology that aids smugglers, contraband sellers and other free marketeers will always be in demand. Even the hypocritical State functionaries will use it.

[JorgeStolfi]

I just had a vision of Chinese people in gambling dens betting bitcoin on cock fights.

I wonder what the Chinese investors expect from Bitcoin.

Since their government has banned the use of cryptocoins as currency, they cannot possibly believe in the old spiel: "One day there will be no Yuan, only bitcoins; so divdiding A by B it is obvious that each bitcoin will be worth a fortune".  They know that bitcoin will "never" be used for payments, much less replace the Yuan.

So, I suspect that there are no "hodlers" in China, except perhaps some ignorant guys who have been told just the conclusion of that spiel, and believed it without understanding why.

I suspect that practically all the investors in China see bitcoin only as a suitable speculation object, and look forward only to its price rising just enough and soon enough for them to make a good profit -- in Yuan.

For them, bitcoin trading itself must be just a form of gambling.

[pjviitas]

To your other points, what will a superior crypto have that Bitcoin lacks?

Are privatized money systems based on trust?

Superior crypto would need a better system for creating new coins, since proof-of-work is not a smart way to create coins. The increase of miners should increase the security of network, and therefor give more value to BTC, but because the miners are pooled together, there is no increase in security. So resources are spent without any new gain. I think that Proof-of-Stake is more advanced, but I don't know any proof-of-stake coin that can hold on it's own. But I do bet that there will be a new wave of better quality coins. What we would need is an software company with experience and financial backing to create a coin. As long as coins are created by students or hobbyists, we won't see any serious competition to BTC.

Of course, money is always based on trust. Trust that you can use money to trade value without any unnecessary loss.
I think that bitcoin won't lose it's trust because of the flaws in software code, but it will lose faith because of the flawed market system. When there are no consequences to create a "scam exchange" that can play the competent exchange role for a year, just to gain trust, and then to run away with their customers money, then the market system is far from being secure. Most bitcoin enthusiasts are religious on the subject, and they actually believe that the market will be fine, since everyone has faith in the future of bitcoin and won't start "scam exchanges" because they can get more profit with legal methods.
But there are people out there who can see Bitcoin just as an temporal phenomenon and those people are motivated to build an exchange just to run away with their customers money. And they can actually do this without "running away", because they can just blame it on being a victim of hacking, lost database or whatever, and they won't see any jailtime.

There would be nothing wrong with proof-of-work as long as all the lazy speculators out there got off their ass and started to help out and do some mining.

That's the big problem with this world...what can everyone else do for me...me me me me me.

[pjviitas]

Basically the only way to convert Yuan to/from Bitcoin now is through a Chinese bank.  Both the bank and the exchange will want your ID. 

What do you mean exactly by "evading capital controls and State restrictions"?

There are many miners in China. The Chinese could buy or trade from them even if all the exchanges closed.

How many coins are being mined these days?   At the price they would fetch outside China, would they be enough for significant evasion?

I don't think that those coins would be easy or safe to get. How would the evaders contact the miners and pay them?  Big miners have large installations and huge electricity bills, they cannot easily hide from the government.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/11/21/finally-a-proper-use-for-bitcoin-avoiding-capital-controls/

If you don't understand how black markets work, that's a separate issue, but there will always be black markets were there are willing buyers and sellers of prohibited goods and services. Did prohibition stop alcohol consumption? War on drugs stop weed smoking? Nobody uses prostitutes or gambles where it's forbidden? Technology that aids smugglers, contraband sellers and other free marketeers will always be in demand. Even the hypocritical State functionaries will use it.

++1

[Richy_T]

God, you're annoying. On ignore. Bye.

Your Ignore List includes more people than the value a of Gox-BTC.

 

The fact that he feels the need to broadcast it to the world every time he ignores someone makes me tempted to ignore him.

[kkaspar]

Fair enough...  I hear you... but the whole buying in and selling thing is not for me personally, as for me there is no point.. my strategy thus far negates the need

 I am not a miner never have been.. but I have been buying for a long while,  I buy dips and trade alts to increase my BTC, and I also have invested in an alt or two, and I actually now take most of my wages in BTC, and I spend it where I can... and I know a good group who are all doing the same... I am trying to get more and more local businesses to accept BTC and I am in the process of looking to intergrate taking payments in BTC for the business I currently manage. Most of my friends are now BTC hodlers and buyers and only one of them a miner-  though I am talking to my friends about setting up some nodes.   Also I do not think guys with angry girlfriends running a few little rigs in their little flats are propping up the market... there are guys with underground caves being powered by geothermal power right now with asic farms that would make your eyes water.. and I do not even think that is what is propping up the market... but assuming that they are... sure money is not endless but the players coming into the game with those set ups, and the ones already established in the game they gotz funding...  most of the players coming into the game (not just in mining) now have gots funding and deep deep wallets and are playing a long term game...  I am also playing a long term game... and the price movement of the past month, few months does not surprise me...  the market is going to decide for sure... I still see the fundamentals as strong... I guess we will have to wait and see .... for me the key is not price, not at all the key is adoption rate and user figures, can the network growth do its thing for a few more cycles? I think that the money coming into the ecosystem at this point is banking on YES, which is why they are coming into the game and coming with depe pockets and will do all they can to make it work, which gives me confidence... and if this remains true and we do get another few cycles of the network effect play out. then to me the long term fundamantals still look good.. not certain but good... and that would mean another set of parabolic price rises as time goes by.

I am mostly interested in adoption and use rates not the price.

One of the greatest failings of humanity is its failure to understand the exponential function.

(That being said BTC has in my mind over the next 1-3 years got a binary outcome)

When visiting miner forums, then it's full of desperation. Remember that the mining network brings in about 3600 BTC per 24h. The question if most of these coins will go for sale, or for keeping, will decide a very big part of the market trend.
I do believe that BTC has some juice still left in it and it will probably go over 2000$ before it's final death, since those who have invested big into BTC, will invest more into marketing to build new demand. But still I believe that BTC will live for around 2 years, because it lacks the properties to become anything more then an innovative gambling platform. Without price stability, it won't ever be useful as an currency. And the increase in market cap. won't create stability, but it will only attract players with deeper pockets and better knowledge on how to play the market. So, there will always be volatility that will stop bitcoin in becoming a quality currency.
My only hope is that the end of bitcoin won't be the end of crypto, but the end will be with value flowing from bitcoin to some other crypto.

[billyjoeallen]

I just had a vision of Chinese people in gambling dens betting bitcoin on cock fights.

I wonder what the Chinese investors expect from Bitcoin.

Since their government has banned the use of cryptocoins as currency, they cannot possibly believe in the old spiel: "One day there will be no Yuan, only bitcoins; so divdiding A by B it is obvious that each bitcoin will be worth a fortune".  They know that bitcoin will "never" be used for payments, much less replace the Yuan.

So, I suspect that there are no "hodlers" in China, except perhaps some ignorant guys who have been told just the conclusion of that spiel, and believed it without understanding why.

I suspect that practically all the investors in China see bitcoin only as a suitable speculation object, and look forward only to its price rising just enough and soon enough for them to make a good profit -- in Yuan.

For them, bitcoin trading itself must be just a form of gambling.

Obviously you are wrong, because according to you, 95% of November rally price is from China and it hasn't dropped to 5% of ATH yet, or is that what you are  predicting? If I lived in China, I'd be a hodler. Moreso than now even. I can do international wire xfers. The Chinese can't. Bitcoin can be spent almost anywhere. The renmimbi can only be spent in China.

[fonzie]

http://businesstech.co.za/news/banking/53087/standark-bank-throws-out-bitcoin-idea/

“No customers participated in the pilot,” the bank added.

Bullish as fuck again?

[kkaspar]

To your other points, what will a superior crypto have that Bitcoin lacks?

Are privatized money systems based on trust?

Superior crypto would need a better system for creating new coins, since proof-of-work is not a smart way to create coins. The increase of miners should increase the security of network, and therefor give more value to BTC, but because the miners are pooled together, there is no increase in security. So resources are spent without any new gain. I think that Proof-of-Stake is more advanced, but I don't know any proof-of-stake coin that can hold on it's own. But I do bet that there will be a new wave of better quality coins. What we would need is an software company with experience and financial backing to create a coin. As long as coins are created by students or hobbyists, we won't see any serious competition to BTC.

Of course, money is always based on trust. Trust that you can use money to trade value without any unnecessary loss.
I think that bitcoin won't lose it's trust because of the flaws in software code, but it will lose faith because of the flawed market system. When there are no consequences to create a "scam exchange" that can play the competent exchange role for a year, just to gain trust, and then to run away with their customers money, then the market system is far from being secure. Most bitcoin enthusiasts are religious on the subject, and they actually believe that the market will be fine, since everyone has faith in the future of bitcoin and won't start "scam exchanges" because they can get more profit with legal methods.
But there are people out there who can see Bitcoin just as an temporal phenomenon and those people are motivated to build an exchange just to run away with their customers money. And they can actually do this without "running away", because they can just blame it on being a victim of hacking, lost database or whatever, and they won't see any jailtime.

There would be nothing wrong with proof-of-work as long as all the lazy speculators out there got off their ass and started to help out and do some mining.

That's the big problem with this world...what can everyone else do for me...me me me me me.

When resources are spent without any new gain, then there is something wrong. The arms race in bitcoin mining doesn't make any sense. Electricity and hardware wasted for something that won't actually be useful to the bitcoin network. If increase of miners would increase the security of the network or speed of transactions, only then would the proof-of-work method make any sense.
Satoshis logic was to simulate gold mining, but in my idea it doesn't work anymore because gold does have practical value not just speculative value. If miners could be used for practical work as well, then it would be another thing. Proof-of-Work would only work if mining would be done without pools, and with CPU or at least GPU, that would have other application besides mining bitcoins. Pools and ASICs ruined the entire original concept.

[JorgeStolfi]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/11/21/finally-a-proper-use-for-bitcoin-avoiding-capital-controls/

Note that the article was written before the Chinese stomped on bitcoin.

But even if nothing had changed, there is one little snag in that article.  If a Chinese citizen uses Yuan to buy bitcoins in China and then sells them for dollars in the US, there is no export of Yuan to the US actually.  Instead the guy gives his Yuan to other Chinese traders, and the US traders give him a bunch of dollars. 

So why would the Chinese government object to a Chinese national receiving a gift from americans?

Sure, after that transaction there would be fewer bitcoins in China and more bitcoins in the US.  But since bitcoins have no intrinsic value, the material wealth of China would not change. There would be still the same amount of food and cars in the Chinese market, and the same amount of Yuan in circulation inside China.

If bitcoins could be used to buy things in China, there might be some Yuan inflation as the bitcoins became scarce and the Yuan lost value relative to them.  But that is why the government banned their use in commerce.

[aminorex]

Obviously you are wrong, because according to you, 95% of November rally price is from China and it hasn't dropped to 5% of ATH yet, or is that what you are  predicting? If I lived in China, I'd be a hodler. Moreso than now even. I can do international wire xfers. The Chinese can't. Bitcoin can be spent almost anywhere. The renmimbi can only be spent in China.

I will happily accept your RMB.

[billyjoeallen]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/11/21/finally-a-proper-use-for-bitcoin-avoiding-capital-controls/

Note that the article was written before the Chinese stomped on bitcoin.

But even if nothing had changed, there is one little snag in that article.  If a Chinese citizen uses Yuan to buy bitcoins in China and then sells them for dollars in the US, there is no export of Yuan to the US actually.  Instead the guy gives his Yuan to other Chinese traders, and the US traders give him a bunch of dollars. 

So why would the Chinese government object to a Chinese national receiving a gift from americans?

Sure, after that transaction there would be fewer bitcoins in China and more bitcoins in the US.  But since bitcoins have no intrinsic value, the material wealth of China would not change. There would be still the same amount of food and cars in the Chinese market, and the same amount of Yuan in circulation inside China.

If bitcoins could be used to buy things in China, there might be some Yuan inflation as the bitcoins became scarce and the Yuan lost value relative to them.  But that is why the government banned their use in commerce.

So if there are fewer bitcoins in China, but the same amount of demand to use bitcoins for the same purpose that the bitcoins that left China were used for, then the price goes up. What is so difficult about supply and demand for you to understand?

[JorgeStolfi]

Obviously you are wrong, because according to you, 95% of November rally price is from China

...before the Chinese government banned its use in commerce.  The "believers" probably left at that point, leaving only the speculators, with the obvious effect on the price.

If I lived in China, I'd be a hodler. Moreso than now even. I can do international wire xfers. The Chinese can't. Bitcoin can be spent almost anywhere. The renmimbi can only be spent in China.

Yes, and that is what I mean.  Except for a few who can use bitcoin while traveling abroad, most Chinese cannot use their bitcoins as currency, and have no expectation of doing so.  So, why would they put their real money into bitcoins, and hold on to them?

[aminorex]

Except for a few who can use bitcoin while traveling abroad, most Chinese cannot use their bitcoins as currency, and have no expectation of doing so.  So, why would they put their real money into bitcoins, and hold on to them?

Two reasons come to mind:  They want to invest in the technology, or they want to hedge against a change in government.  Governments often change.  Fiat currencies, historically, have always failed.  Just as they cannot use gold in commerce, so too they cannot use bitcoin in commerce.  Just as they buy gold as a store of value, so too they buy bitcoin as a store of value.  Both are free of counterparty risk, unlike fiat currencies.  The Chinese national appetite for gold proves that they understand this well, and act upon it, en masse, practically.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation