rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;)

[Majormax]

I can see how they mix very well: as paypal being an off-chain BTC payments processor with "added value" (chargebacks, consumer protection).

Exactly. But any merchant that integrates Bitcoin via PayPal can also directly integrate Bitcon payments, in minutes. Faster, no middlemen, no need to be banked, lower fees. PayPal stands to lose a chunk of its business, and is moving not to lose it all.

Paypal will only gain. Look at the situation in Merchant Services. There is a huge integration of Visa/Mastercard used through Paypal, in preference to direct with the card issuers. The reason is the accessability of Paypal.

[1714466496]

1714466496

[1714466496]

1714466496

[notme]

I can see how they mix very well: as paypal being an off-chain BTC payments processor with "added value" (chargebacks, consumer protection).

Exactly. But any merchant that integrates Bitcoin via PayPal can also directly integrate Bitcon payments, in minutes. Faster, no middlemen, no need to be banked, lower fees. PayPal stands to lose a chunk of its business, and is moving not to lose it all.

Paypal will only gain. Look at the situation in Merchant Services. There is a huge integration of Visa/Mastercard used through Paypal, in preference to direct with the card issuers. The reason is the accessability of Paypal.

The reason is merchants prefer to push PCI compliance off to paypal.

[rpietila]

I left that out of the speculation, since a hit would have been quite easy in the headlights from 20 meters.

Have a manned security station with a gate. Have a spike belt to flatten tires of the unwelcomed. Guns are your friend.

If I choose that line of defence, it never ends. If I cannot be harassed in my place, my car may accidentally blow up. Or I may get suicided in a hotel room or unexpectedly jump to the icy sea from a Tallinn ferry.

I believe it's much better to be friendly with everyone, while not sacrificing truthfulness, and have powerful friends.

[upupup]

Any smart current status reports/insigths? Where are we now with BTC? I missed positive news and LM updates, it looks like we are far away from predicted price. Nobody expected to october with <400$

[danielW]

Any smart current status reports/insigths? Where are we now with BTC? I missed positive news and LM updates, it looks like we are far away from predicted price. Nobody expected to october with <400$

Need comforting words  .

TBH I am also interested in how we are in regards to long term trendline.

[yokosan]

Any smart current status reports/insigths? Where are we now with BTC? I missed positive news and LM updates, it looks like we are far away from predicted price. Nobody expected to october with <400$

Need comforting words  .

TBH I am also interested in how we are in regards to long term trendline.

We are well below every trendline drawn before August.

[crazy_rabbit]

I left that out of the speculation, since a hit would have been quite easy in the headlights from 20 meters.

Have a manned security station with a gate. Have a spike belt to flatten tires of the unwelcomed. Guns are your friend.

If I choose that line of defence, it never ends. If I cannot be harassed in my place, my car may accidentally blow up. Or I may get suicided in a hotel room or unexpectedly jump to the icy sea from a Tallinn ferry.

I believe it's much better to be friendly with everyone, while not sacrificing truthfulness, and have powerful friends.

Whats your opinion on the current price situation rpietila?

[coinits]

I left that out of the speculation, since a hit would have been quite easy in the headlights from 20 meters.

Have a manned security station with a gate. Have a spike belt to flatten tires of the unwelcomed. Guns are your friend.

If I choose that line of defence, it never ends. If I cannot be harassed in my place, my car may accidentally blow up. Or I may get suicided in a hotel room or unexpectedly jump to the icy sea from a Tallinn ferry.

I believe it's much better to be friendly with everyone, while not sacrificing truthfulness, and have powerful friends.

genius, i'm nowhere near as btc-rich but that is exactly my philosophy

Unfortunately the bad guys prey on this type of philosophy.

[sgbett]

Bitcoin is a creation of the new money billionaires who are fighting a war with the old money billionaires.

Richard Branson et al cannot come out and simply say so, but btc is a direct challenge to the centralised power structures.

Look at the actions of the new money billionaires like Branson and Gates, they spend billions trying to make the world a better place.

The old money like the rothschilds who own the banking system, and many other things, rely on centralised power structures to maintain their position.

The new money billionaires like Gates, Branson etc make more money with further decentralisation.

For people who think the Rothschilds are not hugely powerful you only have to see how one junior 30 year old family member gets exposedi n a multibillion dollar trade deal involving russian oligarchs, members of parliament etc to imagine what his father/uncles are up to.

The old money rely on centralised power structures, such as the CIA/military industrial complex. A recent example was Gadaffi, they fund him, they put him into power, they allow him to accumulate the worlds largest fortune (500 bn) and then when he's no longer useful they kill him off, and none of his fortune is recovered. All those hundreds of billions he thought he'd safely stashed in their offshore banks, siphoned off by the old money.

Old money make money by destruction and control, new money make money thru freedom and enterprise.

There is a war on, and decentralisation is the trenches. Bitcoin is but one tool.

Interesting post. Like how old business and new business run things differently (e.g. clocking in and clocking out vs 20% time)

[sgbett]

Can someone explain me why the hashrate going up is good for the price?

I mean, I know economics. I know that the supply is a function of price and cost. So if cost goes up for miners, then the supply will shrink. But why the hashrate should be consider as proxy of cost?

It's is quite possible that the cost for most of the miners is actually going down while the hashrate and difficulty are increasing. If there is a consolidation of the mining market, big mining farms are making economy of scales, so their margins increase while the hashrate increase too, so they could very well selling a greater proportion of their mined coins to enjoy their high margin.

All of that to say that I am not convince that the hashrate is a good proxy for evaluating the cost of mining BTC, therefore not necessary a good indicator for the future price of BTC.

I agree with you. There have been lengthy arguments about "hashrate follows price" or "price follows hashrate" for years now. I'm in the former camp.

I was never involved in that argument about hash rate follows price / price follows hash rate, so ill chip in here I think both happens but cyclically.

As price rises so does hashrate, however hash rate lags price. As the price climbs people start to see mining gear as a better investment then buying BTC direct, so less money goes into the market and more goes into mining. This causes a cyclical top. When price tops out you still have a buttload of hash rate that is on order, waiting to be deployed, or in the process of coming online. As price drops, this puts pressure on miners to sell, and as the hash rate increases  so does selling pressure, at which point price starts to lag hash rate. As mining becomes less profitable the tide changes, all the money going into mining gear shifts back to buying cheap coin. Which drives up demand, only this time there is even more dollars chasing that limited supply (based on the principal that adoption is constantly increasing). As the prise starts to rise, miners are able to recoup their capital investment in dollar terms and start to think that perhaps holding is a better option, as the price is rising. This cuts supply and drives the price higher, and thus the cycle repeats.

This cycle exists because miners are (imho wrongly) still measuring things in dollars. When miners start looking in terms of BTC only thats when this cycle will start to break down. That's where your piece of pie comes in, and thats what people should really be looking at long term. (miners or investors). If BTC becomes money, what percentage of it do you own.

When you compare that to the present situation with dollars, pounds or whatever your local currency, you see how little you need just to 'hedge' your position. It astounds me that people don't at least buy that *just in case* especially given how little that actually costs right now.

I guess thats why banks are so rich though eh

[crazy_rabbit]

Can someone explain me why the hashrate going up is good for the price?

I mean, I know economics. I know that the supply is a function of price and cost. So if cost goes up for miners, then the supply will shrink. But why the hashrate should be consider as proxy of cost?

It's is quite possible that the cost for most of the miners is actually going down while the hashrate and difficulty are increasing. If there is a consolidation of the mining market, big mining farms are making economy of scales, so their margins increase while the hashrate increase too, so they could very well selling a greater proportion of their mined coins to enjoy their high margin.

All of that to say that I am not convince that the hashrate is a good proxy for evaluating the cost of mining BTC, therefore not necessary a good indicator for the future price of BTC.

I agree with you. There have been lengthy arguments about "hashrate follows price" or "price follows hashrate" for years now. I'm in the former camp.

I was never involved in that argument about hash rate follows price / price follows hash rate, so ill chip in here I think both happens but cyclically.

As price rises so does hashrate, however hash rate lags price. As the price climbs people start to see mining gear as a better investment then buying BTC direct, so less money goes into the market and more goes into mining. This causes a cyclical top. When price tops out you still have a buttload of hash rate that is on order, waiting to be deployed, or in the process of coming online. As price drops, this puts pressure on miners to sell, and as the hash rate increases  so does selling pressure, at which point price starts to lag hash rate. As mining becomes less profitable the tide changes, all the money going into mining gear shifts back to buying cheap coin. Which drives up demand, only this time there is even more dollars chasing that limited supply (based on the principal that adoption is constantly increasing). As the prise starts to rise, miners are able to recoup their capital investment in dollar terms and start to think that perhaps holding is a better option, as the price is rising. This cuts supply and drives the price higher, and thus the cycle repeats.

This cycle exists because miners are (imho wrongly) still measuring things in dollars. When miners start looking in terms of BTC only thats when this cycle will start to break down. That's where your piece of pie comes in, and thats what people should really be looking at long term. (miners or investors). If BTC becomes money, what percentage of it do you own.

When you compare that to the present situation with dollars, pounds or whatever your local currency, you see how little you need just to 'hedge' your position. It astounds me that people don't at least buy that *just in case* especially given how little that actually costs right now.

I guess thats why banks are so rich though eh

that is a fascinating analysis.

[wachtwoord]

Can someone explain me why the hashrate going up is good for the price?

I mean, I know economics. I know that the supply is a function of price and cost. So if cost goes up for miners, then the supply will shrink. But why the hashrate should be consider as proxy of cost?

It's is quite possible that the cost for most of the miners is actually going down while the hashrate and difficulty are increasing. If there is a consolidation of the mining market, big mining farms are making economy of scales, so their margins increase while the hashrate increase too, so they could very well selling a greater proportion of their mined coins to enjoy their high margin.

All of that to say that I am not convince that the hashrate is a good proxy for evaluating the cost of mining BTC, therefore not necessary a good indicator for the future price of BTC.

I agree with you. There have been lengthy arguments about "hashrate follows price" or "price follows hashrate" for years now. I'm in the former camp.

I was never involved in that argument about hash rate follows price / price follows hash rate, so ill chip in here I think both happens but cyclically.

As price rises so does hashrate, however hash rate lags price. As the price climbs people start to see mining gear as a better investment then buying BTC direct, so less money goes into the market and more goes into mining. This causes a cyclical top. When price tops out you still have a buttload of hash rate that is on order, waiting to be deployed, or in the process of coming online. As price drops, this puts pressure on miners to sell, and as the hash rate increases  so does selling pressure, at which point price starts to lag hash rate. As mining becomes less profitable the tide changes, all the money going into mining gear shifts back to buying cheap coin. Which drives up demand, only this time there is even more dollars chasing that limited supply (based on the principal that adoption is constantly increasing). As the prise starts to rise, miners are able to recoup their capital investment in dollar terms and start to think that perhaps holding is a better option, as the price is rising. This cuts supply and drives the price higher, and thus the cycle repeats.

This cycle exists because miners are (imho wrongly) still measuring things in dollars. When miners start looking in terms of BTC only thats when this cycle will start to break down. That's where your piece of pie comes in, and thats what people should really be looking at long term. (miners or investors). If BTC becomes money, what percentage of it do you own.

When you compare that to the present situation with dollars, pounds or whatever your local currency, you see how little you need just to 'hedge' your position. It astounds me that people don't at least buy that *just in case* especially given how little that actually costs right now.

I guess thats why banks are so rich though eh

that is a fascinating analysis.

It's highly likely to be true. It also matches Zangelbert Bingledack's earlier analysis https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg9007751#msg9007751

[solex]

Simple, brilliant conclusion

that is a fascinating analysis.

It's highly likely to be true. It also matches Zangelbert Bingledack's earlier analysis https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg9007751#msg9007751

I think for the first time I understand the driver of the massive ramps in Bitcoin's long-term price.

[AlexGR]

Cryptocurrencies are weird animals, as far as markets are concerned. There is a great degree of anomalous behavior that allow the markets to behave in a less "rational" and predictable manner.

With hundreds of thousands of BTCs hacked and on the loose, a single hacker can crash the price for the lulz by dumping a small percentage of his holdings, and make everyone wonder "is it the Alibaba? Is it price stagnation? Is it something else? Why is someone selling below mining costs?" when the accrual of hacked BTCs might have come at zero cost for him - so he can dump at will, without much price consideration... any price is good as far as he's concerned.

Most analyses overlook that aspect, expecting the market to be 100% "rational", which it would be if every player had a normal accumulation cost and a normal exit strategy / trading strategy.

This was further highlighted with the altcoin exodus a few weeks back when -what I suspect were hacked BTCs- were pulled out of altcoin investments with totally irrational liquidation prices.

[prophetx]

Cryptocurrencies are weird animals, as far as markets are concerned. There is a great degree of anomalous behavior that allow the markets to behave in a less "rational" and predictable manner.

With hundreds of thousands of BTCs hacked and on the loose, a single hacker can crash the price for the lulz by dumping a small percentage of his holdings, and make everyone wonder "is it the Alibaba? Is it price stagnation? Is it something else? Why is someone selling below mining costs?" when the accrual of hacked BTCs might have come at zero cost for him - so he can dump at will, without much price consideration... any price is good as far as he's concerned.

Most analyses overlook that aspect, expecting the market to be 100% "rational", which it would be if every player had a normal accumulation cost and a normal exit strategy / trading strategy.

This was further highlighted with the altcoin exodus a few weeks back when -what I suspect were hacked BTCs- were pulled out of altcoin investments with totally irrational liquidation prices.

yes let the BTC move into Alts, move them around a bit, then pull them back out.  come out with a few POS coins that have a 2 week POS period no one knows about use clean money to mine them.  Pump the shit out of them with the dirty, sell out into BTC, cash out like it ain't no thing...

You all don't think it was pure coincidence that suddenly there was interest in "dark" coins with automated mixing.

Also there were some big movements of very old addresses from end of last year to the first half of this year.

[institutionaltrader]

Can someone explain me why the hashrate going up is good for the price?

I mean, I know economics. I know that the supply is a function of price and cost. So if cost goes up for miners, then the supply will shrink. But why the hashrate should be consider as proxy of cost?

It's is quite possible that the cost for most of the miners is actually going down while the hashrate and difficulty are increasing. If there is a consolidation of the mining market, big mining farms are making economy of scales, so their margins increase while the hashrate increase too, so they could very well selling a greater proportion of their mined coins to enjoy their high margin.

All of that to say that I am not convince that the hashrate is a good proxy for evaluating the cost of mining BTC, therefore not necessary a good indicator for the future price of BTC.

I agree with you. There have been lengthy arguments about "hashrate follows price" or "price follows hashrate" for years now. I'm in the former camp.

I was never involved in that argument about hash rate follows price / price follows hash rate, so ill chip in here I think both happens but cyclically.

As price rises so does hashrate, however hash rate lags price. As the price climbs people start to see mining gear as a better investment then buying BTC direct, so less money goes into the market and more goes into mining. This causes a cyclical top. When price tops out you still have a buttload of hash rate that is on order, waiting to be deployed, or in the process of coming online. As price drops, this puts pressure on miners to sell, and as the hash rate increases  so does selling pressure, at which point price starts to lag hash rate. As mining becomes less profitable the tide changes, all the money going into mining gear shifts back to buying cheap coin. Which drives up demand, only this time there is even more dollars chasing that limited supply (based on the principal that adoption is constantly increasing). As the prise starts to rise, miners are able to recoup their capital investment in dollar terms and start to think that perhaps holding is a better option, as the price is rising. This cuts supply and drives the price higher, and thus the cycle repeats.

This cycle exists because miners are (imho wrongly) still measuring things in dollars. When miners start looking in terms of BTC only thats when this cycle will start to break down. That's where your piece of pie comes in, and thats what people should really be looking at long term. (miners or investors). If BTC becomes money, what percentage of it do you own.

When you compare that to the present situation with dollars, pounds or whatever your local currency, you see how little you need just to 'hedge' your position. It astounds me that people don't at least buy that *just in case* especially given how little that actually costs right now.

I guess thats why banks are so rich though eh

The problem is that it will not happen in the near future.

Real life is in dollars. You have to buy hardware parts in dollars to build mining rig. You pay electricity in dollars. So unfortunately for all of us, it is gonna crash hard...

[sidhujag]

Can someone explain me why the hashrate going up is good for the price?

I mean, I know economics. I know that the supply is a function of price and cost. So if cost goes up for miners, then the supply will shrink. But why the hashrate should be consider as proxy of cost?

It's is quite possible that the cost for most of the miners is actually going down while the hashrate and difficulty are increasing. If there is a consolidation of the mining market, big mining farms are making economy of scales, so their margins increase while the hashrate increase too, so they could very well selling a greater proportion of their mined coins to enjoy their high margin.

All of that to say that I am not convince that the hashrate is a good proxy for evaluating the cost of mining BTC, therefore not necessary a good indicator for the future price of BTC.

I agree with you. There have been lengthy arguments about "hashrate follows price" or "price follows hashrate" for years now. I'm in the former camp.

I was never involved in that argument about hash rate follows price / price follows hash rate, so ill chip in here I think both happens but cyclically.

As price rises so does hashrate, however hash rate lags price. As the price climbs people start to see mining gear as a better investment then buying BTC direct, so less money goes into the market and more goes into mining. This causes a cyclical top. When price tops out you still have a buttload of hash rate that is on order, waiting to be deployed, or in the process of coming online. As price drops, this puts pressure on miners to sell, and as the hash rate increases  so does selling pressure, at which point price starts to lag hash rate. As mining becomes less profitable the tide changes, all the money going into mining gear shifts back to buying cheap coin. Which drives up demand, only this time there is even more dollars chasing that limited supply (based on the principal that adoption is constantly increasing). As the prise starts to rise, miners are able to recoup their capital investment in dollar terms and start to think that perhaps holding is a better option, as the price is rising. This cuts supply and drives the price higher, and thus the cycle repeats.

This cycle exists because miners are (imho wrongly) still measuring things in dollars. When miners start looking in terms of BTC only thats when this cycle will start to break down. That's where your piece of pie comes in, and thats what people should really be looking at long term. (miners or investors). If BTC becomes money, what percentage of it do you own.

When you compare that to the present situation with dollars, pounds or whatever your local currency, you see how little you need just to 'hedge' your position. It astounds me that people don't at least buy that *just in case* especially given how little that actually costs right now.

I guess thats why banks are so rich though eh

The problem is that it will not happen in the near future.

Real life is in dollars. You have to buy hardware parts in dollars to build mining rig. You pay electricity in dollars. So unfortunately for all of us, it is gonna crash hard...

says the noob jumping to conclusions.

[institutionaltrader]

Can someone explain me why the hashrate going up is good for the price?

I mean, I know economics. I know that the supply is a function of price and cost. So if cost goes up for miners, then the supply will shrink. But why the hashrate should be consider as proxy of cost?

It's is quite possible that the cost for most of the miners is actually going down while the hashrate and difficulty are increasing. If there is a consolidation of the mining market, big mining farms are making economy of scales, so their margins increase while the hashrate increase too, so they could very well selling a greater proportion of their mined coins to enjoy their high margin.

All of that to say that I am not convince that the hashrate is a good proxy for evaluating the cost of mining BTC, therefore not necessary a good indicator for the future price of BTC.

I agree with you. There have been lengthy arguments about "hashrate follows price" or "price follows hashrate" for years now. I'm in the former camp.

I was never involved in that argument about hash rate follows price / price follows hash rate, so ill chip in here I think both happens but cyclically.

As price rises so does hashrate, however hash rate lags price. As the price climbs people start to see mining gear as a better investment then buying BTC direct, so less money goes into the market and more goes into mining. This causes a cyclical top. When price tops out you still have a buttload of hash rate that is on order, waiting to be deployed, or in the process of coming online. As price drops, this puts pressure on miners to sell, and as the hash rate increases  so does selling pressure, at which point price starts to lag hash rate. As mining becomes less profitable the tide changes, all the money going into mining gear shifts back to buying cheap coin. Which drives up demand, only this time there is even more dollars chasing that limited supply (based on the principal that adoption is constantly increasing). As the prise starts to rise, miners are able to recoup their capital investment in dollar terms and start to think that perhaps holding is a better option, as the price is rising. This cuts supply and drives the price higher, and thus the cycle repeats.

This cycle exists because miners are (imho wrongly) still measuring things in dollars. When miners start looking in terms of BTC only thats when this cycle will start to break down. That's where your piece of pie comes in, and thats what people should really be looking at long term. (miners or investors). If BTC becomes money, what percentage of it do you own.

When you compare that to the present situation with dollars, pounds or whatever your local currency, you see how little you need just to 'hedge' your position. It astounds me that people don't at least buy that *just in case* especially given how little that actually costs right now.

I guess thats why banks are so rich though eh

The problem is that it will not happen in the near future.

Real life is in dollars. You have to buy hardware parts in dollars to build mining rig. You pay electricity in dollars. So unfortunately for all of us, it is gonna crash hard...

says the noob jumping to conclusions.

It is a sign of tulipomania when people don't want to ear any bearish prediction (or put anyone that disagree with them on ignore list).

Listen to all opinions. All of them make a market not only the one in your head.

Guys, stay smart and factual.

[prophetx]

Can someone explain me why the hashrate going up is good for the price?

I mean, I know economics. I know that the supply is a function of price and cost. So if cost goes up for miners, then the supply will shrink. But why the hashrate should be consider as proxy of cost?

It's is quite possible that the cost for most of the miners is actually going down while the hashrate and difficulty are increasing. If there is a consolidation of the mining market, big mining farms are making economy of scales, so their margins increase while the hashrate increase too, so they could very well selling a greater proportion of their mined coins to enjoy their high margin.

All of that to say that I am not convince that the hashrate is a good proxy for evaluating the cost of mining BTC, therefore not necessary a good indicator for the future price of BTC.

I agree with you. There have been lengthy arguments about "hashrate follows price" or "price follows hashrate" for years now. I'm in the former camp.

I was never involved in that argument about hash rate follows price / price follows hash rate, so ill chip in here I think both happens but cyclically.

As price rises so does hashrate, however hash rate lags price. As the price climbs people start to see mining gear as a better investment then buying BTC direct, so less money goes into the market and more goes into mining. This causes a cyclical top. When price tops out you still have a buttload of hash rate that is on order, waiting to be deployed, or in the process of coming online. As price drops, this puts pressure on miners to sell, and as the hash rate increases  so does selling pressure, at which point price starts to lag hash rate. As mining becomes less profitable the tide changes, all the money going into mining gear shifts back to buying cheap coin. Which drives up demand, only this time there is even more dollars chasing that limited supply (based on the principal that adoption is constantly increasing). As the prise starts to rise, miners are able to recoup their capital investment in dollar terms and start to think that perhaps holding is a better option, as the price is rising. This cuts supply and drives the price higher, and thus the cycle repeats.

This cycle exists because miners are (imho wrongly) still measuring things in dollars. When miners start looking in terms of BTC only thats when this cycle will start to break down. That's where your piece of pie comes in, and thats what people should really be looking at long term. (miners or investors). If BTC becomes money, what percentage of it do you own.

When you compare that to the present situation with dollars, pounds or whatever your local currency, you see how little you need just to 'hedge' your position. It astounds me that people don't at least buy that *just in case* especially given how little that actually costs right now.

I guess thats why banks are so rich though eh

The problem is that it will not happen in the near future.

Real life is in dollars. You have to buy hardware parts in dollars to build mining rig. You pay electricity in dollars. So unfortunately for all of us, it is gonna crash hard...

says the noob jumping to conclusions.

It is a sign of tulipomania when people don't want to ear any bearish prediction (or put anyone that disagree with them on ignore list).

Listen to all opinions. All of them make a market not only the one in your head.

Guys, stay smart and factual.

stay factual yet listen to all opinions?  sounds like a waste of time...

you should know that most orders from the earliest ASIC chips were denominated in BTC, even before that many components for GPU riga could be bought in BTC.

you don't understand the complexities of this economy and how it works. what is happening now has very little to do with people paying electric bills.

even the explanation above is rather simplistic and 1 dimensional.

[wobber]

rpietilla, what's your price projection for the end of the year? is btc going further into bear market or we will see a recovery?