[BTC-TC] BTC Growth: Capital Growth via Hedge Fund-Style Investing

[Ytterbium]

I think it's 1.6 pageviews/visitor, not 1.6 pageviews/day.

Oops, you're right.  It doesn't even list pageviews/day.  Probably because there aren't enough to register.  And only one site links in: cahella.com, which also gets no traffic and is apparently a hackernews outlet.

Sorry guys, there's no real evidence this guy has much of an "Academic" record to speak of, or anything else other then a handful of websites he probably setup himself.

[stripykitteh]

I think it's 1.6 pageviews/visitor, not 1.6 pageviews/day.

Oops, you're right.  It doesn't even list pageviews/day.  Probably because there aren't enough to register.  And only one site links in: cahella.com, which also gets no traffic and is apparently a hackernews outlet.

Sorry guys, there's no real evidence this guy has much of an "Academic" record to speak of, or anything else other then a handful of websites he probably setup himself.

I've stalked your posts on bitcointalk (it's a free country, eh) and I actually agree with most things you've written, so I am prepared to give your views consideration. You don't seem to be a pure troll.

OK, maybe I spoke too loosely when I said Dr Mulhauser had an "impressive" academic career. So what? You can read his resume and articles as well as I can. Does he sound like an idiot to you? He's pointed out a few things about bitcoin that I believe he was the first to elucidate, e.g., that what is missing from bitcoin exchanges is a means of taking any position, long or short, for different time horizons. There's an unmet need for hedging. That's one of the services he intends to offer. I agree that at some point there will be a company or companies successfully offering that service in bitcoin, and this looks like it has a good chance of being one of them.

You haven't really offered any reason why you think he is the next Pirateat40; if you've got any evidence though I'm all ears.

[greatscott]

Couple things (please note, I'm not taking sides on the issue. I'm playing devil's advocate).

1. If you Google well enough, he has some legitimate publications. Here's the FWD of his book: http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bfm%3A978-94-011-5104-7%2F1.pdf Springer is a legitimate academic press.

2. Here's someone who wrote an actual academic review of his book: http://www.theassc.org/files/assc/2495.pdf

3. He's not a professor (as far as I can tell). It's not uncommon for people who aren't professors yet who did a PhD to only have a few (sometimes if any) publications.

4. I do get a gimmicky vibe from his blogs, but that's mostly because they're new and don't have much of a following (yet?). You've got to start somewhere.

5. His public track-record via Google is light, and what there is seems to be more focused on psychology/therapy/philosophy.

6. @ Greg: Bitcoin users have a healthy dose of skepticism and conspiratorial thoughts from its rich history scamming, so heat over credibility and identity comes with the territory.

7. @ Greg: If you do want to lend yourself some more credibility, you might consider posting a more formatted CV and list your publications (ideally with direct links to grab them).

[zacharycebu]

When is this fund going into action??? It's worth hasn't moved much for sh*t since it was made available.

[stripykitteh]

When is this fund going into action??? It's worth hasn't moved much for sh*t since it was made available.

Fund went live 2-3 weeks ago. The reason the price hasn't moved is because it's not due to report for another couple of weeks.

[Ytterbium]

I think it's 1.6 pageviews/visitor, not 1.6 pageviews/day.

Oops, you're right.  It doesn't even list pageviews/day.  Probably because there aren't enough to register.  And only one site links in: cahella.com, which also gets no traffic and is apparently a hackernews outlet.

Sorry guys, there's no real evidence this guy has much of an "Academic" record to speak of, or anything else other then a handful of websites he probably setup himself.

I've stalked your posts on bitcointalk (it's a free country, eh) and I actually agree with most things you've written, so I am prepared to give your views consideration. You don't seem to be a pure troll.

OK, maybe I spoke too loosely when I said Dr Mulhauser had an "impressive" academic career. So what? You can read his resume and articles as well as I can. Does he sound like an idiot to you?

Well, I think his "academic" work on "Quantum mind theory" is rather...  It seems like the kind of thing that someone would write if they thought they were a lot smarter then they actually were.  It doesn't seem like stuff that requires super-genius to come up with at all.  His investing articles are fairly quotidian.

He's pointed out a few things about bitcoin that I believe he was the first to elucidate, e.g., that what is missing from bitcoin exchanges is a means of taking any position, long or short, for different time horizons. There's an unmet need for hedging. That's one of the services he intends to offer. I agree that at some point there will be a company or companies successfully offering that service in bitcoin, and this looks like it has a good chance of being one of them.

Well, if his plan was simply to make money by writing on a large pool of capital by writing lots of puts and calls and getting people to buy them then you could conceivably make money before other people moved into the market and swamped you out.  But there aren't very many investors on these exchanges and most probably don't even know how options work, so there might not be much volume. If you could actually get people to buy your options you might make some money.   But he's not saying "I'm going to create liquidity for options by writing puts and calls and collecting the fees", he's saying he'll take investments and not tell you what he's doing with the money.

Although it's interesting that that's somewhat similar to what Bernie Madoff claimed to have been doing.

Madoff's sales pitch was an investment strategy consisting of purchasing blue-chip stocks and taking options contracts on them, sometimes called a split-strike conversion or a collar.[36] "Typically, a position will consist of the ownership of 30–35 S&P 100 stocks, most correlated to that index, the sale of out-of-the-money 'calls' on the index and the purchase of out-of-the-money 'puts' on the index. The sale of the 'calls' is designed to increase the rate of return, while allowing upward movement of the stock portfolio to the strike price of the 'calls'. The 'puts', funded in large part by the sales of the 'calls', limit the portfolio's downside."

You haven't really offered any reason why you think he is the next Pirateat40; if you've got any evidence though I'm all ears.

IDK, just seems scammy to me. Like xCrowd did. Plus the whole sales pitch of "I'm super smart so give me your money and don't ask questions, I'll totally make money for you" I'm not seeing enough evidence of super-smartness.

[Sou]

Fact is we'll all see if this is what everyone think it is in a few weeks. Just get your popcorn, folks.

[Oleander]

I think the problem here is that the monthly report schedule seems very slow in bitcoin time.

- ASICMiner pays dividends once a week.
- Coinlenders pays interest once a day.
- Just-Dice shows investors' balances to 8 decimals, in real time. 

Some bitcoin investors simply may not have the attention spans for an investment like this.

[drawingthesun]

I think the problem here is that the monthly report schedule seems very slow in bitcoin time.

- ASICMiner pays dividends once a week.
- Coinlenders pays interest once a day.
- Just-Dice shows investors' balances to 8 decimals, in real time. 

Some bitcoin investors simply may not have the attention spans for an investment like this.

Haha the beauty of Bitcoin is the diversity. I agree with you too.

I think that a long term investment such as this would be good for bitcoin, maybe get some people used to slowing down a little.

[DrGregMulhauser]

Psychological Investor?  You mean this site with almost zero traffic?

I mentioned the site for those who might like to take a moment to read and understand something I'd written there. In your case, unfortunately, you've passed up the opportunity for substantive engagement in favour of criticising the traffic levels of a new site that's barely 4 months old and contains just a couple dozen articles. And no, not everything in life is an SEO project with success measured in the millions of page views; sometimes I just like to write. I make no apologies for that, to you or to anyone else.

As for some earlier personal insults about SEO, yes, I have a little background in that. "Greg's High Performance SEO" isn't the most popular WordPress plugin in the world, but enough people have found it helpful to their work to have downloaded it a couple of hundred thousand times.

And I have looked at your writing, or at least skimmed it... Your "Academic" work on "Quantum mind theory" or whatever you call it looks to be on par with the Sokal hoax. Vapid "quantum" logorrhea with no real math whatsoever.

Wow, yet more demonstrations of a really convincing determination to avoid anything of substance...

Anyone who takes the time to read and understand anything I have written on the topic -- including picking up my book if they feel the need for "real math" -- will immediately comprehend that my 1990s-era work on quantum decoherence was specifically aimed at debunking quantum theories of mind. Only someone either hell-bent on hurling personal insults or determined to avoid anything deeper than "skimming" could believe that I have anything whatsoever to do with quantum theories of mind, except to debunk them.

...Plus the whole sales pitch of "I'm super smart so give me your money and don't ask questions, I'll totally make money for you" I'm not seeing enough evidence of super-smartness.

Now it seems to me you're just being offsensive. To the best of my recollection, the only person who has sought to comment on my intelligence at all, in any way, is you -- and you have now done so repeatedly. You have either disingenuously or grossly ignorantly misrepresented my writing on quantum decoherence, you have strung together a few words and phrases about puts and calls without delivering much in the way of actual meaning (and certainly without offering any meaningful engagement with anything I have written), and you have steadfastly refused to offer anything at all of substance or even to do more than "skim" the relevant material I have provided -- apparently preferring instead just to twirl around and spray insults in all directions, in the hope that something will stick.

For my part, I have much better things to do with my time, and it leaves me feeling dirty and grimy even engaging with another human being at this level of conversation.

I would suggest again that for the benefit of those of us who would like to carry on more meaningful and less grossly disrespectful conversations, you might consider setting up your own thread elsewhere for your accusations, rather than continuing to pollute this one.

[creativex]

Ouch.

I was planning to wait for the first report prior to investing, but this guy talks mostly perty good! ^^^

[Ytterbium]

...Plus the whole sales pitch of "I'm super smart so give me your money and don't ask questions, I'll totally make money for you" I'm not seeing enough evidence of super-smartness.

Now it seems to me you're just being offsensive. To the best of my recollection, the only person who has sought to comment on my intelligence at all, in any way, is you -- and you have now done so repeatedly. You have either disingenuously or grossly ignorantly misrepresented my writing on quantum decoherence, you have strung together a few words and phrases about puts and calls without delivering much in the way of actual meaning (and certainly without offering any meaningful engagement with anything I have written), and you have steadfastly refused to offer anything at all of substance or even to do more than "skim" the relevant material I have provided -- apparently preferring instead just to twirl around and spray insults in all directions, in the hope that something will stick.

For my part, I have much better things to do with my time, and it leaves me feeling dirty and grimy even engaging with another human being at this level of conversation.

You know, you actually seem quite insecure about your own intelligence. Clinging to the "Doctor" title so much you put it in your forum handle. I know people who have PhDs in mathematics and computer science, and they never refer to themselves as "Dr." - it reads as more then a little desperate.

The fact that you've had an apparent adverse emotional reaction to someone pointing out your less then stellar academic record further indicates your insecurity about your actual academic abilities and record.

I don't want people to get scammed and lose all their money. I also don't want people to lose all their money by investing with charlatans. I don't think it's "trolling" to pose questions about a fund manager asking for other people's money, especially when they're not even willing to tell people what they're going to do with it. To me, you appear to be presenting yourself as someone who's more successful then they actually are. That presentation seems fundamentally dishonest to me.

If people want to trust you, that's obviously they're choice. But there's nothing wrong with pointing out problems and concerns people should have.

If that bothers you, well, that's just too bad.

Ouch.

I was planning to wait for the first report prior to investing, but this guy talks mostly perty good! ^^^

Well, have fun with that - I guess.

[xchrisxsays]

You know, you actually seem quite insecure about your own intelligence. Clinging to the "Doctor" title so much you put it in your forum handle. I know people who have PhDs in mathematics and computer science, and they never refer to themselves as "Dr." - it reads as more then a little desperate.

The fact that you've had an apparent adverse emotional reaction to someone pointing out your less then stellar academic record further indicates your insecurity about your actual academic abilities and record.

I don't want people to get scammed and lose all their money. I also don't want people to lose all their money by investing with charlatans. I don't think it's "trolling" to pose questions about a fund manager asking for other people's money, especially when they're not even willing to tell people what they're going to do with it. To me, you appear to be presenting yourself as someone who's more successful then they actually are. That presentation seems fundamentally dishonest to me.

If people want to trust you, that's obviously they're choice. But there's nothing wrong with pointing out problems and concerns people should have.

If that bothers you, well, that's just too bad.

Ok give it a rest man, everyone understands your position. you think it seems scammy, you think he isn't smart, and you think he should identify himself but he shouldn't share the fact that he has a doctorate. Thank you for being a concerned bitcoin community member, but please just give it a rest now.

[jedunnigan]

...Plus the whole sales pitch of "I'm super smart so give me your money and don't ask questions, I'll totally make money for you" I'm not seeing enough evidence of super-smartness.

Now it seems to me you're just being offsensive. To the best of my recollection, the only person who has sought to comment on my intelligence at all, in any way, is you -- and you have now done so repeatedly. You have either disingenuously or grossly ignorantly misrepresented my writing on quantum decoherence, you have strung together a few words and phrases about puts and calls without delivering much in the way of actual meaning (and certainly without offering any meaningful engagement with anything I have written), and you have steadfastly refused to offer anything at all of substance or even to do more than "skim" the relevant material I have provided -- apparently preferring instead just to twirl around and spray insults in all directions, in the hope that something will stick.

For my part, I have much better things to do with my time, and it leaves me feeling dirty and grimy even engaging with another human being at this level of conversation.

You know, you actually seem quite insecure about your own intelligence. Clinging to the "Doctor" title so much you put it in your forum handle. I know people who have PhDs in mathematics and computer science, and they never refer to themselves as "Dr." - it reads as more then a little desperate.

The fact that you've had an apparent adverse emotional reaction to someone pointing out your less then stellar academic record further indicates your insecurity about your actual academic abilities and record.

I don't want people to get scammed and lose all their money. I also don't want people to lose all their money by investing with charlatans. I don't think it's "trolling" to pose questions about a fund manager asking for other people's money, especially when they're not even willing to tell people what they're going to do with it. To me, you appear to be presenting yourself as someone who's more successful then they actually are. That presentation seems fundamentally dishonest to me.

If people want to trust you, that's obviously they're choice. But there's nothing wrong with pointing out problems and concerns people should have.

If that bothers you, well, that's just too bad.

Ouch.

I was planning to wait for the first report prior to investing, but this guy talks mostly perty good! ^^^

Well, have fun with that - I guess.

Wow. Honestly, I have no skin in the game nor do I really care, but I must say your losing credibility by the second. You clearly avoid addressing the rational counter points he makes and instead choose to attack some ethereal insecurity that you only see because you've ignored the substance of his post.

If you want to call him a scammer go do a background check, do some digging on whois see if he is a fraud or has a history of some nonsense. If this is an elaborate scam this guy is clearly a pro and would have done something like this before. Or maybe, actually read his work and not make incomplete judgments about his work. You're not even good at calling him a scammer.

FWIW, the insecurity you cling so desperately is not even insecurity; it's frustration. It goes without saying that people should question the mans intellect, but you are doing so like a child. If you came with reasonable points, quotes from his book, links to direct content of his papers and pointed out reasonable things we wouldn't be having this conversation. Instead, you throw rocks in the air and hope it lands in the right place. Just poor investigative anti-scammer tactics that are doing more harm then good. Worst part is, now you're trying to make it look like you know what you're doing. And you don't.

[Ytterbium]

Wow. Honestly, I have no skin in the game nor do I really care, but I must say your losing credibility by the second. You clearly avoid addressing the rational counter points he makes and instead choose to attack some ethereal insecurity that you only see because you've ignored the substance of his post.

*shrug* I don't have any skin in the game either.  If people really want to invest with this guy, that's obviously their choice. It's obviously not going to be my problem if they do.

I'm also not really sure what the substantive points were supposed to be. I'm not going to spend a bunch of time reading and critiquing his papers about "quantum mind theory", (even if they are attempts to disprove it, they would still be pretty pointless to read).  I didn't see any particular insight in his other papers that would indicate any kind of exceptional trading skill.

If that upsets people, that's too bad I guess. *shrug*

Obviously we will see who was right in the long run.

[jedunnigan]

Wow. Honestly, I have no skin in the game nor do I really care, but I must say your losing credibility by the second. You clearly avoid addressing the rational counter points he makes and instead choose to attack some ethereal insecurity that you only see because you've ignored the substance of his post.

I'm also not really sure what the substantive points were supposed to be. I'm not going to spend a bunch of time reading and critiquing his papers about "quantum mind theory", (even if they are attempts to disprove it, they would still be pretty pointless to read).  I didn't see any particular insight in his other papers that would indicate any kind of exceptional trading skill.

The horse you ran on was half founded on the idea that his work with quantum of theory of mind was a joke:

some new-agey gobbledygook about 'quantum minds' written in the 90s that isn't even formatted like a proper academic article.

Then comes this gem from him, which you ignored:

Anyone who takes the time to read and understand anything I have written on the topic -- including picking up my book if they feel the need for "real math" -- will immediately comprehend that my 1990s-era work on quantum decoherence was specifically aimed at debunking quantum theories of mind.

So there goes your number 2 argument. Your number one argument was against the "success" of his academic criteria, a label not given to him by himself, but a random passerby:

The next Pirateat40. Anyone who invests in this is going to get destroyed.

I can't prove that you're wrong but I would at least ask you to ask yourself why someone who has had an impressive career in academia, the professions and industry would 'do a' Pirateat40. Greg would be giving up a lot to do that.

Now if you look at the Dr.'s (yes, I'm gonna say that just because I can, with no valence attached to the signifier) original post nowhere does he say that he had a "successful" or otherwise impressive career. He just states it as such:

With educational background in mathematics, philosophy, and later in mental health, Dr Mulhauser has worked at the Pentagon, UK universities, and telecommunications giant BT. Originally employed at BT as a research scientist in cognition, complex systems and biologically inspired computation, he was also responsible for curiosities such as the Lattice of Extended Turing-Style Automata, which he designed as a novel computational architecture for implementation with FPGAs in a fashion similar to cellular automata. He later left the Complex Systems Laboratory for business strategy roles and advised on corporate venturing and on derivatives strategies associated with M&A projects. He contributed to the company's Asian portfolio management, assessed flotation and alternative demerger options for its wireless operation, and developed strategy for its £500 million indirect channels business. In 2002, he left a strategic partnering role in security and mobile technology to found his own firm, securing consulting contracts ranging from ground-based air defence systems at Northrop Grumman and the UK Ministry of Defence to internal communication at the UK's national Police IT Organisation (PITO). A British Marshall Scholar and Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, Mulhauser lives in Devon, England with his wife and daughter.

...and directs you to check out his sites. Now, want to prove he is a phony or a scammer, prove something up there is a fallacy.

Then you go say this

I didn't see any particular insight in his other papers that would indicate any kind of exceptional trading skill..

Who said his academic career was his strongest asset for trading? Read his work experience again, see that bit about derivitive strategies and portfolio management? See where I'm going with this?

If that upsets people, that's too bad I guess. *shrug*

To be clear: what upset people is not the accusation as such, but the fact that you were pulling shit out of your ass and then when it got real you ignored the substance and just kept throwing baseless personal insults. Get real mate, this is real life real consequences your words have weight. Think before you do.

disclaimer: i have not invested, nor do i know if this is a scam or not. i just know a bad accusation when i see one. they deserve polarization just like a true scammer does. it's like girl who cried rape but wasn't really raped. it leaves a stain.

[Ytterbium]

Then comes this gem from him, which you ignored:

Anyone who takes the time to read and understand anything I have written on the topic -- including picking up my book if they feel the need for "real math" -- will immediately comprehend that my 1990s-era work on quantum decoherence was specifically aimed at debunking quantum theories of mind.

So there goes your number 2 argument.

That's nice.  Feel free to read it and tell us all why it's so groundbreaking.

Your number one argument was against the "success" of his academic criteria, a label not given to him by himself, but a random passerby:

The next Pirateat40. Anyone who invests in this is going to get destroyed.

I can't prove that you're wrong but I would at least ask you to ask yourself why someone who has had an impressive career in academia, the professions and industry would 'do a' Pirateat40. Greg would be giving up a lot to do that.

Now if you look at the Dr.'s (yes, I'm gonna say that just because I can, with no valence attached to the signifier) original post nowhere does he say that he had a "successful" or otherwise impressive career. He just states it as such:

Okay then. If you want to invest with a "Worthy of managing money until proven guilty of fraud" attitude more power too you.     I'm not a prosecutor trying to get a conviction in a court of law, I'm simply sharing my opinion that I think this guy strikes me as fishy.  You don't have to agree with it or like it, nor do I need to care how you feel about it.

[jedunnigan]

Then comes this gem from him, which you ignored:

Anyone who takes the time to read and understand anything I have written on the topic -- including picking up my book if they feel the need for "real math" -- will immediately comprehend that my 1990s-era work on quantum decoherence was specifically aimed at debunking quantum theories of mind.

So there goes your number 2 argument.

That's nice.  Feel free to read it and tell us all why it's so groundbreaking.

Really? This will be my last post on the subject because I'm over this, but because you just did to me what you have been doing to him all along I think this deserves some love.

Again, no one said groundbreaking. I was just pointing out that you were COMPLETELY wrong about what the book was even about to begin with. Like you thought the exact opposite was true. I was just pointing it out.

Okay then. If you want to invest with a "Worthy of managing money until proven guilty of fraud" attitude more power too you.     

Lol where are you coming up with this stuff? All I said is that if you're gonna call someone a scammer at least have some real proof. Your spidey sense ain't gonna cut it mate, especially when you are throwing around misinformation.

This is just the beginning of the first wave of many DIY fund managers that may or may not succeed; proof will be in the pudding as you say. I'm sure there are many out there who can do plenty with this kind of funding and less 'real world' experience.

Is he a scammer? IMO the jury is still out, you certainly proved nothing though.

[Ytterbium]

Lol where are you coming up with this stuff? All I said is that if you're gonna call someone a scammer at least have some real proof. Your spidey sense ain't gonna cut it mate, especially when you are throwing around misinformation.

This is just the beginning of the first wave of many DIY fund managers that may or may not succeed; proof will be in the pudding as you say. I'm sure there are many out there who can do plenty with this kind of funding and less 'real world' experience.

Is he a scammer? IMO the jury is still out, you certainly proved nothing though.

I'm not saying he is certainly a scammer.  I'm saying he comes across as suspicious to me.  I don't need any standard of evidence to share my opinion, and if you want to ignore it you are free to do so.

You can even click ignore if my posts bother you.  As I said, it's not my problem if you lose money.

[zefyr0s]

Why don't you call him Ytt? If he can swing your staunch attitude with a phone call, maybe you'd be more at ease?