Bitcoin Price?!

[notme]

I don't get why people are so freaked out about Gox still. Are there people who can get their money out? FUCKING YES, so stop bitching. Sure, most small traders have to sell on another exchange. But the whales are doing just fine and anyone in Japan is doing just fine. If it were a problem we'd see equal sells on other exchanges due to folks cashing out, and we likely do hence the spread, and price is still rising on all exchanges. So STFU. "It's all gox" is just as annoying as "Omg 10% spread, the higher exchange is automatically fake," and "OMG 0% trading fees, therefore ALL the china volume is fake therefore BTC price is fake therefore the rally is fake therefore CRAAAASH." If there is a 10% spread, why don't we assume the lower exchange is 5% "too low" and the other is 5% too high? That's too complicated so we have all these "Goxbux are fake" comments. They're not fake if you live in japan or are rich. Again, HENCE THE FUCKING SPREAD, it's there for a reason, people selling Goxbux and buying CampBXbux or Stampbux or BTC-ebux.

So anyways now that we've got that nonsense cleared up, here is the good news:
-SR rebound shows resilience and schools the "bitcoin rides on silk road" fagtards
-Debt ceiling and shutdown bullshit slightly weakens confidence in fiat
-Increased capital controls in U.S. placed by private banks (significantly reduced accesibility/increased price for int'l wires, doing away with them for most customers)
-Moneera startup operating from financial-business-friendly Uruguay promises full suite of BTC services including sending/receiving via SMS
-One of Baidu's services (Jiasule, a hosting service IIRC) accepts BTC (but not Baidu itself)
-Winklevoss ETF not approved yet, but template page has shown up on trading sites. Appears to be moving forward. This is more long-term bullish.
-Increased activity in China
-Xinwen Lianbo appearance (basically means that the communist party in China doesn't hate BTC and wouldn't mind if chinese folk bought a few. Xinwen Lianbo is more or less the state news program.)

Conclusion: 2 Da Moon!

Sorry for breaking your balls bro. Didn't knew you where so sensitive there...

Probably just annoyed since you were only parroting the same FUD we've been hearing for months.  Try some original thought sometime.

[1713482117]

1713482117

[1713482117]

1713482117

[1713482117]

1713482117

[1713482117]

1713482117

[1713482117]

1713482117

[oda.krell]

[snip]

Probably just annoyed since you were only parroting the same FUD we've been hearing for months.  Try some original thought sometime.

It's all just FUD, LALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU


If your point is that the line "gox dollars aren't even real money", that is thrown around thoughtlessly all the time, is as annoying as it is wrong, I agree. If your point is that mtgox is doing just fine and the withdrawal delays aren't really a big deal -- well, believe whatever you want.

[notme]

[snip]

Probably just annoyed since you were only parroting the same FUD we've been hearing for months.  Try some original thought sometime.

It's all just FUD, LALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU


If your point is that the line "gox dollars aren't even real money", that is thrown around thoughtlessly all the time, is as annoying as it is wrong, I agree. If your point is that mtgox is doing just fine and the withdrawal delays aren't really a big deal -- well, believe whatever you want.

Yes, delays are very real for small traders in some regions.  But people have been screaming about the sky falling in every fucking thread for months.  We should be crushed by now.

[Asrael999]

[q
Yes, delays are very real for small traders in some regions.  But people have been screaming about the sky falling in every fucking thread for months.  We should be crushed by now.
[/quote]

Just because the sky hasn't hit you yet, doesn't mean it isn't falling.

[notme]

Yes, delays are very real for small traders in some regions.  But people have been screaming about the sky falling in every fucking thread for months.  We should be crushed by now.

Just because the sky hasn't hit you yet, doesn't mean it isn't falling.

Cool.  Can we get back on topic?

[Tzupy]

Back on topic: according to the scenario where the peak of wave 5 was 233$, we should be seeing more large drops.
IF those drops fail to happen, then IMO the 233$ peak wasn't wave 5, but just wave 3, and we are probably heading for a new ATH.

[Nemo1024]

Tzupy, is that just another way of saying, we just don't know where we are going? 

[btcxyzzz]

- Silk Road closed, a lot of news about this on worldwide TV. Also good news because you are not full anonymous with bitcoin.

I dare to say youre full anonymous with bitcoin if you connect through Tor. And being anonymous is good news, not bad news as you say.

[Tzupy]

Tzupy, is that just another way of saying, we just don't know where we are going? 

No, it means we'll know for sure which way we are going very soon, at least for China.
To me it looks like we already are in the 3rd sub-sub-wave of the first sub-wave of wave 5.
Only if the market mass panics this may morph into something else, and we'll crash again, but I doubt it.
If we were on a descending trend there would only be 2 sub-sub-waves. The third means we still are
on an ascending trend, which includes some drops, but could reach 300$ at the peak.
How Gox can reach 300$, that I can't yet imagine, maybe China will drag other markets up.

[TERA]

So far I have not seen anyone successfully predict anything about bitcoin using EW theory. Maybe we should just give up on that.

[theecoinomist]

Also good news because you are not full anonymous with bitcoin.

You can be fully anonymous if you want to, using tor.

Wow. I feel bad for all the newbs that believe this -- it seems to be a prevalent attitude.

but, but... the 6th member from lulzsec? 

[BldSwtTrs]

Back on topic: according to the scenario where the peak of wave 5 was 233$, we should be seeing more large drops.
IF those drops fail to happen, then IMO the 233$ peak wasn't wave 5, but just wave 3, and we are probably heading for a new ATH.

So if the price doesn't go down it will go up.

Amazing.

[superresistant]

Back on topic: according to the scenario where the peak of wave 5 was 233$, we should be seeing more large drops.
IF those drops fail to happen, then IMO the 233$ peak wasn't wave 5, but just wave 3, and we are probably heading for a new ATH.

So if the price doesn't go down it will go up.
Amazing.

Haha. Welcome to  Economics > Speculation.

[BitchicksHusband]

You lost me at "sub sub wave".

[JimboToronto]

good news because you are not full anonymous with bitcoin.

Good news? 

Good news would be the implementation of Zerocoin.

[log2exp]

How about another way to calculate the maximum value of 1 BTC, just for the kicks. It is based on the cost of 51% network overtake. If someone/gov can accumulate enough computing power to execute this attack, people doing the transactions will be affected, hence the confidence shattered. If the attacker can execute this attack on weekly or daily basis...

Formula is simple: $/TH * total network TH / total BTC mined

Let's take CoinTerra $3000/TH * 4000TH / 12000000 = $1/BTC, to overtake 51% is not at a forbidden cost.

[oda.krell]

How about another way to calculate the maximum value of 1 BTC, just for the kicks. It is based on the cost of 51% network overtake. If someone/gov can accumulate enough computing power to execute this attack, people doing the transactions will be affected, hence the confidence shattered. If the attacker can execute this attack on weekly or daily basis...

Formula is simple: $/TH * total network TH / total BTC mined

Let's take CoinTerra $3000/TH * 4000TH / 12000000 = $1/BTC, to overtake 51% is not at a forbidden cost.

*sigh*

That's like saying "the total cost of all the gold in the world = the money necessary to hire a fleet of small motor scooters to carry it to my hidden lair".

You are describing a possible, but far from certain attack vector on the network in general, the existence of which might or might not influence the current price (assuming enough traders are aware of it, and agree with your analysis), but concluding that the cost of the (hypothetical) attack sets the upper limit to the total valuation of btc is such a naive view of how markets work (and, as a prerequisite, how the human mind works) that I actually regret bothering and typing up this reply.

Meh.

*posts anyway*