|
Parazyd
|
 |
June 05, 2014, 06:33:36 AM |
|
Could somebody give me the link of the chart which shows that Metcalfe law is verified in Bitcoin? It is to convince someone to invest in Bitcoin  I can't find it.  The law is a fail though. |
|
|
|
|
|
blatchcorn
|
|
June 05, 2014, 06:40:56 AM |
|
TLDR: There is no evidence that the Chinese market influences the US market |
|
|
|
|
|
edwardspitz
|
|
June 05, 2014, 06:41:04 AM |
|
Good morning! How are we doing today?
Good morning to you! We are doing ok as no one has dumped (too much) tonight. It seems we are clawing our way back to the line we were following yesterday. If we can do another $25-ish rise today (like we did yesterday) I will be very impressed. That $650 needs to go soon  I don't see why we shouldn't have a rally to $666. If that is followed by a dump then the head and shoulders pattern has been confirmed. A rally to 666 followed by a dump would be very bitcoin |
|
|
|
|
|
Parazyd
|
|
June 05, 2014, 06:48:31 AM |
|
Such low volume on Bitstamp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ZephramC
|
|
June 05, 2014, 06:55:47 AM |
|
If BTCChina is dead then why the volume is quite high (~100BTC/hour) there?
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTCfan1
|
|
June 05, 2014, 06:58:43 AM |
|
so.....bored.....argh!
|
|
|
|
|
aminorex
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1029
Sine secretum non libertas
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:00:16 AM |
|
WTH is happening with XC? Can anyone give a FUDless unbiased opinion? -_-
vaporware  No improvement over CryptoNote technically, some glitches, nothing too serious. trying to add anonymity features but not really competitive, due to trusted nodes, so abstractly similar to drk. price-wise, competition with cryptonote may be part of the story, some dumping of premined coins seems likely, but mostly just hot money flows fleeing on any weakness - profit taking. I own some xmr - sold drk to buy xmr when it first came out as bmr - so consider the bias implications, if any. If I thought xc had competitive privacy features I would be a buyer at some price below 0.001, but I don't. |
|
|
|
|
|
Parazyd
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:01:12 AM |
|
If BTCChina is dead then why the volume is quite high (~100BTC/hour) there?
Who said they're dead? |
|
|
|
|
aminorex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1029
Sine secretum non libertas
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:03:39 AM |
|
The law is a fail though.
Why? It seems obvious enough. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raystonn
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:13:38 AM |
|
TL;DR: The paper claims growth is n log(n) and not n^2. |
|
|
|
|
bpnave
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:16:10 AM |
|
TL;DR: The paper claims growth is n log(n) and not n^2. Honestly, it would only be n^2 if every node connected with every other node. I'm certainly not friends with EVERYONE who ever is or was on facebook! |
|
|
|
|
aminorex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1029
Sine secretum non libertas
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:25:29 AM |
|
TL;DR: The paper claims growth is n log(n) and not n^2. Okay, the zipf weighting makes sense, but only when you start adding low value nodes, i.e. nodes with lower transaction potential. As long as your proxy for n is the recently active addresses metcalfe should continue to hold. Wake me up if the price trend starts to deviate from that. |
|
|
|
|
aminorex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1029
Sine secretum non libertas
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:31:39 AM
Last edit: June 05, 2014, 08:18:18 AM by aminorex |
|
TL;DR: The paper claims growth is n log(n) and not n^2. Honestly, it would only be n^2 if every node connected with every other node. I'm certainly not friends with EVERYONE who ever is or was on facebook! That doesn't matter. What matters is that metcalfe makes the simplifying assumption that each node has an equal likelihood of transacting with any added node, and those transactions are of uniform value. Clearly this is not true. In fact the value in the first half of the adoption curve should be increasing, and in the latter part decreasing. I would expect value to exceed metcalfe in future, and later to fall below. As marketcap rises the upper bound on transaction value rises. As adoption increases the likelihood that a transaction can be made in btc increases. As interest and participation by wealth holders rises the available value to transmit increases. All this is yet to come for the most part. As adoption saturates marginal players are added to the network. Their value-add will tend to zero. That is several years in the future. Using recently active addresses tends to compensate for variations in proclivity to transact. It fails to account for factors affecting the average value of individual transactions. |
|
|
|
|
|
Parazyd
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:35:20 AM |
|
Bitstamp showing movement!  |
|
|
|
|
|
kryptopojken
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:39:02 AM |
|
Bitstamp showing movement! Yes, price is up a whopping $4.5 with no volume at all |
|
|
|
|
|
Parazyd
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:42:18 AM |
|
It's at least something. It's been hibernating the entire morning  |
|
|
|
|
aminorex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1029
Sine secretum non libertas
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:45:59 AM |
|
Yes, price is up a whopping $4.5 with no volume at all
Are you counting chinese volume? No? Then you are not counting volume. Stamp is just following. |
|
|
|
|
|
kryptopojken
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:48:21 AM |
|
Yes, price is up a whopping $4.5 with no volume at all
Are you counting chinese volume? No? Then you are not counting volume. Stamp is just following. and that makes us bullish or what? |
|
|
|
|
aminorex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1029
Sine secretum non libertas
|
|
June 05, 2014, 07:52:28 AM |
|
Yes, price is up a whopping $4.5 with no volume at all
Are you counting chinese volume? No? Then you are not counting volume. Stamp is just following. and that makes us bullish or what? Doesn't affect me or my monkey. We were bullish anyhow. |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
