rpietila Altcoin Observer

[sonoIO]

It seems the only thing going for Boolberry is that James is pumping it, James constantly lies about how much better Boolberry is.

As far as I am concerned, Boolberry is now just a pump and dump until CryptoZoidberg dumps James publically.

Acting as a diva is kinda cute  but if James is indeed pumping where is dumping from your statement coming from? You shouldn't feel offended, neither you or James dumped BBR today. Although a certain hologram is posting in this thread 

[drawingthesun]

It seems the only thing going for Boolberry is that James is pumping it, James constantly lies about how much better Boolberry is.

As far as I am concerned, Boolberry is now just a pump and dump until CryptoZoidberg dumps James publically.

Acting as a diva is kinda cute  but if James is indeed pumping where is dumping from your statement coming from? You shouldn't feel offended, neither you or James dumped BBR today. Although a certain hologram is posting in this thread 

You'll see when it happens.

James is much smarter than your average pumper, he's playing the long pump.

[iCEBREAKER]

What the hell is all of this about?

another crypto-drama, grab your popcorn

I love me some crypto-drama.  God forbid divas like DTS take this into account before writing their emotionally overwrought 'I HATE YOUR STUPID FACE' posts:

Narcissism of small differences

The narcissism of small differences is a term that describes 'the phenomenon that it is precisely communities with adjoining territories, and related to each other in other ways as well, who are engaged in constant feuds and ridiculing each other' – 'such sensitiveness [...] to just these details of differentiation'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_of_small_differences

As for SuperDuperNet, sorry James but this doesn't pass the KISS test.  Distributed oil painting?  Oh brother... 

At least BBR got some well-deserved long-overdue attention out of all the hoopla.   

[surfer43]

While I do regret making the sock puppet comment without a sound evidentiary basis (for which I previously, publicly apologized), I doubt that I have any real responsibility for his BBR pump - although it would be a sort of poetic justice for my misstep.

BBR was undervalued, so it was ripe for a pump & dump, and James is definitely the whale to do it. 

I fear CZ may regret making a deal with old scratch before long.

Having just wasted 40 minutes of my life reading the entire "SuperNET" thread, I think you were correct about the the sock puppet comment, whatever your evidentiary basis at the time. That thread is littered with dissociated identities. It's hard for me to understand why anyone takes this pump & dumper seriously. Half-way through the thread, someone calls him out on having issued assets on the NXT platform to himself. "James" then asserts that this must have been a scammer trying to make him look bad. See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=762346.msg8603930#msg8603930

Not reassuring.

I now recall why I avoided alts until Monero.

Well it clearly was a scammer. Anyone can name an asset anything. "That thread is littered with dissociated identities" - welcome to bitcointalk.

[thefunkybits]

XMR looks like it's due to retest 0.004....

Getting into XDN Ducknote in the meantime 

[kjadB]

I think consensus opinion from most reptiles in this altcoin observer thread is that there will end up being only one anon coin that survives due to network effect. Why is this opinion so strongly held? I don't see how this logic works, but I do see many counter argument though, that suggest many alt coins will compete eternally, just like products in other markets.

Fiat has government monopoly backed by the police & army, so we're all used to living with one major currency in each country (usually, there are exceptions), but with crypto being above/below the law, I think there can be many long term currencies existing together forever. Relative positions will always be changing, but there will never be a definitive winner, just endless jockeying. That is how markets work.

I think this dominant attitude - 'network effect will eventually lead to only bitcoin and a single anon coin' sounds like when the IBM guy said 'people will never wants computers in their homes' or Bill Gates (supposedly) said 'internet wont be that big a deal'. Famous last words, like 'network effect will kill all altcoins except bitcoin & one anon coin'.

I think once crypto is more user friendly we will see many long term alt survivors that compete on the same basis as other products in other markets where basic product is very similar. Marketing, branding, sponsorship, celebrity endorsement, trinket giveaways etc All the fluff that dominates modern market economy (depressing in many ways, but still likely outcome IMO).

Advertising hasn't had any effect on crypto adoption yet, but it probably will soon. When it does consumer choice fueled by marketing will take over. Barriers to entry are so low, much lower than in any other product almost. We all see that now with so many cone alt coins, but it's been done by amateurs so far.

When pro 'madmen' marketers launch a coin it will blow away all competition from identical clones that don't follow suit. If Don Draper works for Boolberry monero is dead lol If Don Draper works for Monero, boolberry is dead!

I think there is plenty of reasons to think many alts will survive. Liquidity is not a problem with payment networks existing like Ripple & Stellar. Those two versions of that tech might be corrupt and fail, but I have used them like many others, and they work, so the power of consumer choice to pick & pay in the currency of their choice will lead to mass marketing of coins, and IMO consumer love for options, and marketers love for advertising crap will overpower network effect. A Ripple clone (minus the 100 Billion premine) makes all currencies interchangeable, so liquidity will flow for many coins, not just one or two.

For example, I live in small/medium country that had regulated banks & phone companies for decades, so natural monopoly argument would have suggested new entrants would not survive, and so new entrants would not start up after deregulation. But, after deregulation that was not the case, and many small and medium entrants DID enter the market - many new banks, many new phone companies. Why?

Because consumers like choice, and new entrants can always attract customers away from existing operators for many reasons other than basic fundamentals of the tech. Advertising, marketing ... put David Beckman on a billboard with a phone from ACME phone Co. and some people will buy that phone over another phone, even at a premium, even if they are the same phone.

Consumers aren't logical, most marketing people know that. Branding and advertising spin work, and I think they will play a dominant roll in crypto adoption now that the basic proof of concept has shown the money is 'real'.

All phones connect to a federated network, all bank payments are connected to a federated network too, so consumer can choose which provider they use, and they can still phone anyone they want across all netorks, or use any ATM machine or point-of-sale terminal. So the network effect that would make one super bank, or one super phone company did not end up occurring as many thought.

Wont this also happen with currency too? The network effect idea comes from analogies like Facebook (if all my friends are using FB I can't use another social network, coz my buddies are already on the super network, and no other social network has a chance). BUT Facebook is closed network, but banking, phones ... and crypto currencies are federated networks, like email.

I think those who argue that network effect & liquidity constraints will lead to only one or two dominant coins surviving could be wrong. If I am wrong (which I might be) can someone show me how?

Federated networks and inter-operable protocols suggest many options, coz that is what human consumers like. Not guys on this forum who look under the hood, but the regular people. If an A-list movie star promoted boolberry in a TV advert, and monero didn't respond in kind, boolberry wins, or vice versa too.

[smooth]

Various good points

I've made these sorts of arguments before.

Historically money has had a huge network effect, because exchanging it has been impractical, inconvenient, or expensive. With crypto-to-crypto exchanges (including those built into payment networks you mention), this is no longer the case.

There is still some network effect, but it seems much smaller than before, and this may well lead to a different outcome

[kjadB]

Various good points

I've made these sorts of arguments before.

Historically money has had a huge network effect, because exchanging it has been impractical, inconvenient, or expensive. With crypto-to-crypto exchanges (including those built into payment networks you mention), this is no longer the case.

There is still some network effect, but it seems much smaller than before, and this may well lead to a different outcome

I actually HOPE I'm wrong, coz having coins dominate for reasons other than tech superiority is depressing, but that's what history shows. Advertising is extremely powerful.

One example to illustrate this power, In my country after shave 'Old Spice' got a big sales boost after a TV add from another country went viral on the internet - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owGykVbfgUE - usage boost of over 25%, and that add didn't even show in my country on TV.

IMO one of the biggest factors that will decide which version of which code base is successful 'could' come down to who makes the best funny add that goes viral. That's probably a bigger factor than blockchain bloat, anon, or even transaction speed. Who makes the best TV advert.

[smooth]

Various good points

I've made these sorts of arguments before.

Historically money has had a huge network effect, because exchanging it has been impractical, inconvenient, or expensive. With crypto-to-crypto exchanges (including those built into payment networks you mention), this is no longer the case.

There is still some network effect, but it seems much smaller than before, and this may well lead to a different outcome

I actually HOPE I'm wrong, coz having coins dominate for reasons other than tech superiority is depressing, but that's what history shows. Advertising is extremely powerful.

One example to illustrate this power, In my country after shave 'Old Spice' got a big sales boost after a TV add from another country went viral on the internet - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owGykVbfgUE - usage boost of over 25%, and that add didn't even show in my country on TV.

IMO one of the biggest factors that will decide which version of which code base is successful 'could' come down to who makes the best funny add that goes viral. That's probably a bigger factor than blockchain bloat, anon, or even transaction speed. Who makes the best TV advert.

It's kind of separate issues as to: 1) whether it becomes a winner-take-all (or close) market; and 2) if so, what determines the winner. If it does turn into WTA then I also agree with you that technical superiority (if that is even objectively meaningful) is very unlikely to determine the winner.

[smoothie]

Various good points

I've made these sorts of arguments before.

Historically money has had a huge network effect, because exchanging it has been impractical, inconvenient, or expensive. With crypto-to-crypto exchanges (including those built into payment networks you mention), this is no longer the case.

There is still some network effect, but it seems much smaller than before, and this may well lead to a different outcome

I actually HOPE I'm wrong, coz having coins dominate for reasons other than tech superiority is depressing, but that's what history shows. Advertising is extremely powerful.

One example to illustrate this power, In my country after shave 'Old Spice' got a big sales boost after a TV add from another country went viral on the internet - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owGykVbfgUE - usage boost of over 25%, and that add didn't even show in my country on TV.

IMO one of the biggest factors that will decide which version of which code base is successful 'could' come down to who makes the best funny add that goes viral. That's probably a bigger factor than blockchain bloat, anon, or even transaction speed. Who makes the best TV advert.

I wouldnt be expecting any TV advertising any time until after crypto as a whole as gone main stream already. Which means by then most coins will have died off and a select few will have garnered the majority of the crypto space market cap.

[rpietila]

It is network effect now, and also after 1 year from now. TV ads could just blow air to the bubble, and there is no need for them if the coin is solid.

Actually I've been thinking what was the reason that Monero has garnered the support from such many "powerful voluntaryists". This sounds cynical, but I believe a great reason is that with every other coin, the devs are in control, and the investors have to submit. With Monero, the devs collectively hold only the amount that keeps them interested now, and makes them rich in the future, but do not hold sway.

We as rich people know how to develop an ecosystem. With every other coin, really, the incentive is not there. Buying tokens from a pimple-faced IPOist, no thank you. But Monero - buy as many as you want from liquid, open markets. Then go on to make services. Freedom. I appreciate.

I am very satisfied that I found Monero (read: it was introduced to me by several people) early on to have the time to evaluate it, accumulate it, and see that my initial calculation that all my friends would likewise to be interested in it holds. Long term is it still very much of a buy, if you have seen all the development, especially the lining up of the people mentioned. You may think that they may come and go, but I know that they are in with 0.1%-10% of their stash, which is so small that they don't care to sell unless they decide it is over with Monero. It is also so small that they can buy the current market cap several times over if they get more interested (and this is what I am seeing).

Surely other type of people find some other coin more suitable to their needs. But this time that Monero has existed, has seen a slaughtering of many alts, and Monero has just prospered.

I believe I have chosen wisely. Not only when buying bitcoins at $3 but also with buying moneros at the same price.

[AnonyMint]

I made a couple of Big Picture posts about gold and crypto-currency:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=365141.msg8621544#msg8621544

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=761896.msg8617863#msg8617863

Risto thanks for the 2 BTC. It came in handy for an emergency I had this Labor Day weekend. So I am able to continue to share my research efforts.

[rpietila]

"the CFOs that I meet with RARELY have any degree in economics, finance, or banking. More often than not, they went to school for engineering. Degrees in social sciences are worthless for the student are simply taught “opinion” of the teacher – not factual hard-evidence."

This is just so true. Engineering is invaluable if you want to make sense of the world surrounding you. When I employ people in any higher level position, it is practically a must. (Not the paper but the mindset).

Finland used to have highest % of engineering students (25% of college) compared to USA lowest (7%). Well currently both are doing really bad but that's not for the lack of capable people, it's just the unwillingness to let the rule.

[drawingthesun]

"the CFOs that I meet with RARELY have any degree in economics, finance, or banking. More often than not, they went to school for engineering. Degrees in social sciences are worthless for the student are simply taught “opinion” of the teacher – not factual hard-evidence."

This is just so true. Engineering is invaluable if you want to make sense of the world surrounding you. When I employ people in any higher level position, it is practically a must. (Not the paper but the mindset).

Finland used to have highest % of engineering students (25% of college) compared to USA lowest (7%). Well currently both are doing really bad but that's not for the lack of capable people, it's just the unwillingness to let the rule.

What about law? Law is a social science but quite useful, and the mindset of a lawyer can be handy.

[AnonyMint]

It is network effect now, and also after 1 year from now. TV ads could just blow air to the bubble, and there is no need for them if the coin is solid.

Actually I've been thinking what was the reason that Monero has garnered the support...

Note that in my prior linked post about Gold, the rush to anonymity and avoid socialism-gone-mad taxation won't really kick into high gear until after 2015.75 at least.

Thus most of the network effects between now and then need to come from some other feature(s).

I believe I have chosen wisely. Not only when buying bitcoins at $3 but also with buying moneros at the same price.

I believe you have only chosen wisely if you are prepared to sell Monero at the right time and buy something better. Apparently which is what you did with Bitcoin, selling some to buy Monero. And remember I told you that Bitcoin price would not reach those wild projections you were making for 2014 and that the Bitcoin adoption curve is log-logistic not logistic.

Bitcoin is failing (to scale to ubiquity) because it is not decentralized. Heck languishing below 10 million users, it is not even Yahoo Geocities, much less friendster, myspace or Facebook.

Sorry but imo Monero is a joke pretending to be serious. (apologies not a nice thing to say but I don't mean it personally rather I just don't see it scaling to even 1 million users before 2016). And I am not criticizing the seriousness and capabilities of its development team, rather even the most expert and most serious can't overcome the wrong paradigm, e.g. Nokia had the great engineers but look what happened.

P.S. Rpietila told me to buy BTC < $10 and I didn't, but this is because I was not in a speculative position at that time. I was in a crisis management position in my life. So please let's not conflate.

[rpietila]

I have the opinion on lawyers and doctors, both of whom I know a lot (last Saturday I was testifying a marriage of one with the other), that a capable engineer could do the work of both of them in today's world. Engineers are just more adaptive, due to their work being grounded in real world instead of doctrines.

As for finance, everybody knows already that engineers do it better than keynesians.

I have finished economics major in a university of technology, yet do not have a degree. This is a combo that allows infiltration to many circles (esp. if only 1 or 2 of the facts are emphasized)  

[devphp]

There is not even 1 mln. users in Bitcoin yet. A Bitcoin user probably averages 10 Bitcoin addresses, if you count all the exchanges with a few satoshi left and all the other occasions a new address is used, 10 addresses per user is a safe number to assume, could be more than that.

[Este Nuno]

I believe you have only chosen wisely if you are prepared to sell Monero at the right time and buy something better. Apparently which is what you did with Bitcoin, selling some to buy Monero. And remember I told you that Bitcoin price would not reach those wild projections you were making for 2014 and that the Bitcoin adoption curve is log-logistic not logistic.

Bitcoin is failing (to scale to ubiquity) because it is not decentralized. Heck languishing below 10 million users, it is not even Yahoo Geocities, much less friendster, myspace or Facebook.

I think this is pretty key. Being objective enough to recognize a likely successor and have sufficient lack of emotional attachment to switch horses before it's too late is a rare skill.

People that don't get emotionally attached to their investments have a very big advantage. Cognitive dissonance kills portfolios.

Not saying that this is relevant right now. But who knows what the landscape will look like a year from now.

[devphp]

I think this is pretty key. Being objective enough to recognize a likely successor and have sufficient lack of emotional attachment to switch horses before it's too late is a rare skill.

People that don't get emotionally attached to their investments have a very big advantage. Cognitive dissonance kills portfolios.

Not saying that this is relevant right now. But who knows what the landscape will look like a year from now.

Good point.
Such views as the one below should certainly be avoided

I still hold litecoin to the death if needs be, wish me luck all

[rpietila]

Note that in my prior linked post about Gold, the rush to anonymity and avoid socialism-gone-mad taxation
...
Bitcoin is failing (to scale to ubiquity) because it is not decentralized.
...
Sorry but imo Monero is a joke pretending to be serious.

Wealth preservation is the art of allocating between the least-shitty alternatives.