Bitcoin or gold?

[Amph]

Canned meat can be stored a few dozen years. But I guess if that was a question, you should better care for the safety and preservation of your ammo...

A balanced diet requires vegetables, cereal grains, fruits & nuts, meat / fish, and other edibles such as oil, sugar and salt. One can't survive by eating meat alone. And regarding the storage of fire-arms and ammo, it is not that difficult. If taken proper precautions while storing, Ammo can be stocked up for many decades.

i disagree with this, we are a bit off topic, but one can survive by just eating eggs, banana and walnuts, those three element provide everything that your body needs, mineral, vitamins, omega3, 6 in proportion of 6:1(which is very compared to many standard diet in the world with ratio 12:1 or more) and macronutrient in the right proportion

don't get fooled by cholesterol level in the eggs, it is a blatant bullshit, one can eat as many as he want, they are also rich in lecithin, which fight cholesterol very well, it is also known that eggs actually lower the level of ldl and rise hdl

I don't think that bananas will be easily available in the Mad Max-style post-apocalyptic world. Gold would most certainly shine in this scenario. Gold and ammo, the former to buy food, the latter to protect it...

So a stack of gold and ammo is enough

i don't think that in a apocalyptic scenario, you need a currency at all,.. to buy stuff, in a scenario like that, people would simply , steal everything, and none will ever care

gold and bitcoin would be useless, at best there would be a form of barter

[Wexlike]

As a child of the internet revolution, it is pretty obvious, that i chose bitcoin over gold.

[avalonboy]

I think both. Gold and bitcoin . Nowadays is toot risky invest in 1 item.

[RealBitcoin]

1) This is the formula for my "downward volatility" , i dont know exactly the term for it, but if you calculate this, you will get that value, which will then show you the volatility of only the down movements, which should give you a risk understanding of bitcoin price crashes, because price increase doesnt matter, that is beneficial.

This is a formula for calculating standard deviation. But it makes no sense in the way you use it (that most likely explains the reason why you don't know a name for it), since when calculating an average for x, you use all values...

Your "only downward volatility" by implication includes "upward volatility" as well

No it doesnt. This is the formula which gives you the "relative downward volatility" to be more precise. Yes you need the upward values to calculate them mean, but that is neutral.

So you only look for the downward volatility, relative to the mean, that is a more precise definition.

It does make sense and it has pretty good statistical significance.

Could you please provide external references showing this notion usefulness (for anything)? I think you will have a hard time explaining why you use an average value to calculate what you call "downward volatility", since it will be meaningless (whether you like it or not) if the price moves all way up while you would still get some pretty high positive value for your "downward volatility" when it evidently should be equal to 0. I guess you should use the mean of all downward price movements to reach where you aim at. It seems more logical and viable in regards to your idea of "downward volatility"...

And I'm curious if you understand what "statistical significance" actually means

Hmm maybe you have a point there about the mean of downward movements. I completely forgot to check that out.

Yes i know what statistical significance means.

I prefer water and food before that both.....

Well... taking in to account the fact that an average human being requires 0.2 cubic meters of water every day, you might need to store some 14,600 cubic meters of water, if you want a family to survive for 50 years without any supplies from outside. It will require a lot of space. And the case with food is even more trickier. Most of the food items will get damaged after 6 or 7 months. How will you store them?

Canned meat can be stored a few dozen years. But I guess if that was a question, you should better care for the safety and preservation of your ammo...

Yes but you want a very value-dense material, in the sense of most value / less volume (m^3)

So the best thing for that is diamonds, not gold. Diamonds have the most value / less volume, so i dont understand why you go with gold.

If we go with "materialism", then obviously diamonds are far superior store of value to gold.

But we want to go with intangible things, because any material stuff can be easily stolen by a burglar.

Thus bitcoin is superior to: platinum,gold,silver,diamonds, emeralds,etc

[GreenStox]

I think both. Gold and bitcoin . Nowadays is toot risky invest in 1 item.

It has always been, in the past 3 years if you invested in gold you`d be under. But funny that bitcoin had exactly the upward movement when gold went under.

So if you had bought gold at 2011 and bitcoin too at 50-50% portfolio, you would still be in profit if you sold at 2013, because with bitcoin you made a bigger return which canceled out the losses in gold. AND EVEN MADE MONEY!

[2double0]

Bitcoin is the best investment so far I have seen, except for those who entered when the prices were above $1k, but know that a fair chance (2nd chance) will be there for them too to get out while there have been recent talks of Bitcoin to go to $1.2k just because there are no quantitative sellers between $260-$1300 and we are expecting a spike because a sinking country is adopting Bitcoins as their main currency.

[BTCevo]

I think both. Gold and bitcoin . Nowadays is toot risky invest in 1 item.

Yes you can diversify it to both of them but saying gold is risky enough to invest I dont think so because gold price is stable and it will rise each year so gold is not a risky investment to make. May be bitcoin is risky but it depends on how you trade it and you need some luck too

[deisik]

Hmm maybe you have a point there about the mean of downward movements. I completely forgot to check that out.

I guess you just didn't know. But even if you calculated the mean of all downward movements, it would still be pretty much useless for anything practical. You could get a higher value for your "downward volatility" with the price going up and vice versa. The fact that it was higher a year ago tells you essentially nothing in respect to actual price behavior. In effect, anything involving averages is practically useless and meaningless beyond normal distribution...

And alas, market prices do not belong there

Yes i know what statistical significance means.

Then you should have known that your reference to statistical significance was meaningless. Essentially, statistical significance shows how a certain data set refers to a given population that data set is drawn from. How your formula (or results obtained through it) can have "statistical significance" is beyond my imagination...

[deisik]

Canned meat can be stored a few dozen years. But I guess if that was a question, you should better care for the safety and preservation of your ammo...

Yes but you want a very value-dense material, in the sense of most value / less volume (m^3)

So the best thing for that is diamonds, not gold. Diamonds have the most value / less volume, so i dont understand why you go with gold.

Unlike diamonds, gold is divisible, and, what is more important, gold is standardized, that is, a given bullion of some purity is not much different than other such bullion of the same purity. There are no two diamonds that are identical and valued identically, hence raises the difficulty in assessing the value of a certain diamond...

In short, no one will care for diamonds when canned beans become the staple of one's diet

[RealBitcoin]

Canned meat can be stored a few dozen years. But I guess if that was a question, you should better care for the safety and preservation of your ammo...

Yes but you want a very value-dense material, in the sense of most value / less volume (m^3)

So the best thing for that is diamonds, not gold. Diamonds have the most value / less volume, so i dont understand why you go with gold.

Unlike diamonds, gold is divisible, and, what is more important, gold is standardized, that is, a given bullion of some purity is not much different than other such bullion of the same purity. There are no two diamonds that are identical and valued identically, hence raises the difficulty in assessing the value of a certain diamond...

In short, no one will care for diamonds when canned beans become the staple of one's diet

It is standardized as paper currency, but no more. So if i would have to pay exactly 1.67€ for some service, then i need a 1€ bill a 50 eurocent coin , a 10 eurocent coin, a 5 eurocent coin, and 2x 1 eurocent coin.

So that is 6 different units that i need to pay that specific price (now with the current rate of inflation obviously pennys dont matter anymore, but lets just assume they do).

The same with gold, unless you got all sub-coins in gold at you in your pocker, you need to cut the coin in half in order to pay in a specific gram.

For example if you got 2 gram coins, but you have to pay 1.65 grams of gold, then what do you do?

With bitcoin ,you dont need a torch to cut it in pieces, you only need a smartphone, an internet wallet, and let the phone calculate the fractions

Also bitcoin is weightless, or atleast it weights a few electrons inside your PC's circuit, c`mon you dont want to carry heavy gold coins in your pocket do you?

[markj113]

Canned meat can be stored a few dozen years. But I guess if that was a question, you should better care for the safety and preservation of your ammo...

Yes but you want a very value-dense material, in the sense of most value / less volume (m^3)

So the best thing for that is diamonds, not gold. Diamonds have the most value / less volume, so i dont understand why you go with gold.

Unlike diamonds, gold is divisible, and, what is more important, gold is standardized, that is, a given bullion of some purity is not much different than other such bullion of the same purity. There are no two diamonds that are identical and valued identically, hence raises the difficulty in assessing the value of a certain diamond...

In short, no one will care for diamonds when canned beans become the staple of one's diet

Diamonds and precious stones in general are a poor investment.

Diamonds are controlled by a monopoly - DaBeers, they are not particularly scarce just the supply is controlled.  They can also be recreated to perfection in a lab which DaBeers is currently having a nose bleed over and trying to paper over with propaganda.

[RealBitcoin]

Canned meat can be stored a few dozen years. But I guess if that was a question, you should better care for the safety and preservation of your ammo...

Yes but you want a very value-dense material, in the sense of most value / less volume (m^3)

So the best thing for that is diamonds, not gold. Diamonds have the most value / less volume, so i dont understand why you go with gold.

Unlike diamonds, gold is divisible, and, what is more important, gold is standardized, that is, a given bullion of some purity is not much different than other such bullion of the same purity. There are no two diamonds that are identical and valued identically, hence raises the difficulty in assessing the value of a certain diamond...

In short, no one will care for diamonds when canned beans become the staple of one's diet

Diamonds and precious stones in general are a poor investment.

Diamonds are controlled by a monopoly - DaBeers, they are not particularly scarce just the supply is controlled.  They can also be recreated to perfection in a lab which DaBeers is currently having a nose bleed over and trying to paper over with propaganda.

Perhaps but if you think the diamons are a conspiracy, then what about gold?

The same can be true with gold too. How do you know there isnt 50.000 tons of gold hidden in some vault, that was put there in the medieval ages.

For example the Aztec and Mayan gold, they got one of the biggest gold empires back then, how do you know some elites dont keep that gold secret and hidden just to manipulate the price.

Or the medieval gold gathered from the crusades from the middle east? How about the roman gold, they had pretty big gold reserves aswell.

What about El Dorado gold? The legend says that there are entire cities underground covered with gold 

Or do you believe that the CB around the world are so honest that they will account the gold available to them by every gram?

With bitcoin you know for a fact, that there will be only 20999999.9769 bitcoins out there (maximum global supply ever), not a single bit more

[deisik]

With bitcoin you know for a fact, that there will be only 20999999.9769 bitcoins out there (maximum global supply ever), not a single bit more

I guess it would take only a few minutes to change that condition (at least, there is a possibility of doing just that). You can't do that with gold by any means, no matter what you try, that is, increase the amount of gold by some arbitrary decision...

Even if you get consensus over that

[markj113]

With bitcoin you know for a fact, that there will be only 20999999.9769 bitcoins out there (maximum global supply ever), not a single bit more

I guess it would take only a few minutes to change that condition (at least, there is a possibility of doing just that). You can't do that with gold by any means, no matter what you try, that is, increase the amount of gold by some arbitrary decision...

Even if you get consensus over that

Agree with the above, all it takes is for the devs to change their mind and a few key strokes later its BTC to infinity.  Gold was made in the center of a supernova, wont be any time soon that happens again here on earth in a cost effective way.

@ Realbitcoin, what if one or a few of these big BTC holders suddenly decide to cash out their stash, still the top 1% hold the majority of the wealth just like the dreaded fiat, they could easily manipulate the market at will -

BITCOIN TOP-500: 1-50 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=321265.0)

1.  BTC 980,000*. Satoshi Nakamoto
2.  BTC 400,000*. HD Moore (AHA)
3.  BTC 400,000*. Dustin D. Trammell (AHA)
4.  BTC 400,000*. Tod Beardsley (AHA)
5.  BTC 350,000*. "Dread Pirate Roberts" a.k.a. "DPR"
6.  BTC 300,000.  Roger Ver
7.  BTC 300,000*. "knightmb"
8.  BTC 200,000. Mark Karpeles
8.5  BTC 182,592. "Loaded"
9.  BTC 174,000*. FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation, USA)
10.  BTC 119,000. AsicMiner Management Team of 3 (names?)
11.  BTC 110,000. Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss
12.  BTC 100,000. "klaus"
13.  BTC 100,000. "mezzomix"
14.  BTC 75,000. "artforz"
15.  BTC 70,000. Erik Voorhees
17.  BTC 30,000. "nakowa"
18.  BTC 30,000. Mircea Popescu
19.  BTC 30,000. "Goat"
20.  BTC 25,000. Chamath Palihapitiya
21.  BTC 25,000. Gavin Andresen
22.  BTC 20,000. Max Keiser
23.  BTC 20,000. "Theymos"

[deisik]

It is standardized as paper currency, but no more. So if i would have to pay exactly 1.67€ for some service, then i need a 1€ bill a 50 eurocent coin , a 10 eurocent coin, a 5 eurocent coin, and 2x 1 eurocent coin.

So that is 6 different units that i need to pay that specific price (now with the current rate of inflation obviously pennys dont matter anymore, but lets just assume they do).

The same with gold, unless you got all sub-coins in gold at you in your pocker, you need to cut the coin in half in order to pay in a specific gram.

For example if you got 2 gram coins, but you have to pay 1.65 grams of gold, then what do you do?

Coins usually come in different denominations, just enough to settle in cash the majority of accounts you may ever think of. In medieval history gold had been used to make large purchases, silver was used as change. Since we are talking not about past but about future (and post-apocalyptic one at that), it is pretty clear that 7.62×39mm (aka AK-47) ammunition will be used as a small coin...

[manselr]

With bitcoin you know for a fact, that there will be only 20999999.9769 bitcoins out there (maximum global supply ever), not a single bit more

I guess it would take only a few minutes to change that condition (at least, there is a possibility of doing just that). You can't do that with gold by any means, no matter what you try, that is, increase the amount of gold by some arbitrary decision...

Even if you get consensus over that

Agree with the above, all it takes is for the devs to change their mind and a few key strokes later its BTC to infinity.  Gold was made in the center of a supernova, wont be any time soon that happens again here on earth in a cost effective way.

@ Realbitcoin, what if one or a few of these big BTC holders suddenly decide to cash out their stash, still the top 1% hold the majority of the wealth just like the dreaded fiat, they could easily manipulate the market at will -

BITCOIN TOP-500: 1-50 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=321265.0)

1.  BTC 980,000*. Satoshi Nakamoto
2.  BTC 400,000*. HD Moore (AHA)
3.  BTC 400,000*. Dustin D. Trammell (AHA)
4.  BTC 400,000*. Tod Beardsley (AHA)
5.  BTC 350,000*. "Dread Pirate Roberts" a.k.a. "DPR"
6.  BTC 300,000.  Roger Ver
7.  BTC 300,000*. "knightmb"
8.  BTC 200,000. Mark Karpeles
8.5  BTC 182,592. "Loaded"
9.  BTC 174,000*. FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation, USA)
10.  BTC 119,000. AsicMiner Management Team of 3 (names?)
11.  BTC 110,000. Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss
12.  BTC 100,000. "klaus"
13.  BTC 100,000. "mezzomix"
14.  BTC 75,000. "artforz"
15.  BTC 70,000. Erik Voorhees
17.  BTC 30,000. "nakowa"
18.  BTC 30,000. Mircea Popescu
19.  BTC 30,000. "Goat"
20.  BTC 25,000. Chamath Palihapitiya
21.  BTC 25,000. Gavin Andresen
22.  BTC 20,000. Max Keiser
23.  BTC 20,000. "Theymos"

First of all the coins by Satoshi are probably lost forever, at this point it's obvious since the coins never moved.
Then DPR will not be making any use of his coins anytime soon.
The FBI tend to sell their coins.
I mean a lot of people there of the big holders don't really own the coins.
Then the Winklevoss will never cash out, they arent dumb and they are here long term, selling would mean shitting on their own backyard.

The rest will probably slowly sell every time we have a bubble. When we reach 1K again, a lot will sell, not dump all of it, but a considerable amount. When we reach 10k, they will sell again... etc etc.. at the end, they will up with no Bitcoins and with fiat only. Then 10 years later BTC goes to 100k-1MM and the fiat currencies collapse, and they cry in regret.

[lister storm]

BTC
Sure, there will be bounces all the way down and therefore there will be fast and high rewarding investment opportunities

[GreenStox]

With bitcoin you know for a fact, that there will be only 20999999.9769 bitcoins out there (maximum global supply ever), not a single bit more

I guess it would take only a few minutes to change that condition (at least, there is a possibility of doing just that). You can't do that with gold by any means, no matter what you try, that is, increase the amount of gold by some arbitrary decision...

Even if you get consensus over that

Agree with the above, all it takes is for the devs to change their mind and a few key strokes later its BTC to infinity.  Gold was made in the center of a supernova, wont be any time soon that happens again here on earth in a cost effective way.

@ Realbitcoin, what if one or a few of these big BTC holders suddenly decide to cash out their stash, still the top 1% hold the majority of the wealth just like the dreaded fiat, they could easily manipulate the market at will -

BITCOIN TOP-500: 1-50 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=321265.0)

1.  BTC 980,000*. Satoshi Nakamoto
2.  BTC 400,000*. HD Moore (AHA)
3.  BTC 400,000*. Dustin D. Trammell (AHA)
4.  BTC 400,000*. Tod Beardsley (AHA)
5.  BTC 350,000*. "Dread Pirate Roberts" a.k.a. "DPR"
6.  BTC 300,000.  Roger Ver
7.  BTC 300,000*. "knightmb"
8.  BTC 200,000. Mark Karpeles
8.5  BTC 182,592. "Loaded"
9.  BTC 174,000*. FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation, USA)
10.  BTC 119,000. AsicMiner Management Team of 3 (names?)
11.  BTC 110,000. Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss
12.  BTC 100,000. "klaus"
13.  BTC 100,000. "mezzomix"
14.  BTC 75,000. "artforz"
15.  BTC 70,000. Erik Voorhees
17.  BTC 30,000. "nakowa"
18.  BTC 30,000. Mircea Popescu
19.  BTC 30,000. "Goat"
20.  BTC 25,000. Chamath Palihapitiya
21.  BTC 25,000. Gavin Andresen
22.  BTC 20,000. Max Keiser
23.  BTC 20,000. "Theymos"

I think satoshi burned his coins already. And i also think the FBI already auctioned those coins isnt it?

So we are only left with a few whales, who would not cashout. Why? Why would they? Everyone expects bitcoin to go to the moon.

[Zorrocoin]

If you had to convert all your wealth to either Bitcoin or gold and keep it there for 10 years, which would you choose? Keep in mind the fact that Bitcoin has only been around for 5 years, and could be fundamentally different in any number of ways in 10 years.

both are equally great . I would take gold though cause it looks like a safer investment than bitcoin.With the rising  inflation , gold will profit me without risks and is predictable. Meanwhile bitcoin  seems like a great investment and might provide a promising future , I'd play it safe if the deal is for 10 years.

[greBit]

If you had to convert all your wealth to either Bitcoin or gold and keep it there for 10 years, which would you choose? Keep in mind the fact that Bitcoin has only been around for 5 years, and could be fundamentally different in any number of ways in 10 years.

both are equally great . I would take gold though cause it looks like a safer investment than bitcoin.With the rising  inflation , gold will profit me without risks and is predictable. Meanwhile bitcoin  seems like a great investment and might provide a promising future , I'd play it safe if the deal is for 10 years.

Some might question your ability to not take risks and rather play it safe, but honestly I do the same. Gold has always been around for a long time, used by our parents, grand parents. We all know how fucking rare it is, how expensive it is, then its much better to have it that way, invest in something which holds value and always will rather than put it on a gamble.