Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[stereotype]

oil @ 49.90

Just wow.

[1714214536]

1714214536

[1714214536]

1714214536

[1714214536]

1714214536

[cypherdoc]

oil @ 49.90

Just wow.r

This is war on Shale - mainly the US Shale and thus we could see US junk bonds implode.

Could this be the start of the big collapse everyone here is hoping for?

Given the unprecedented nature of that price divergence from its normal relationship with stocks one has to assume something big can happen. Certainly is also possible that tech has rebooted us to permanent nirvana but I tend to doubt it given that nothing got fixed after 2008 and all we did was double the national debt, quintupled the money supply, and let the criminals multiply like viruses.

And by my estimation, Bitcoin has the potential to end all this in a positive manner, so I'm loading up further every chance I get.

[Odalv]

oil @ 49.90.  the only thing sweet about sweet crude oil is the sweet smell of Deflation.

The more dollars are printed the more scarce they are :-) ... I don't get it.

[cypherdoc]

oil @ 49.90.  the only thing sweet about sweet crude oil is the sweet smell of Deflation.

The more dollars are printed the more scarce they are :-) ... I don't get it.

Debt implosion> money printing

[justusranvier]

The USD desperately wants to appreciate.

The reason the USD lost so much value over the last century was due, not to base money printing, but to credit expansion, a.k.a debt issuance.

Debt is temporary. It's either repaid, or else defaulted. Either way of resolving debt shrinks the money supply as much as the original issuance expanded it.

As long as the population was growing, and as long as the middle class had positive savings, it was possible to expand credit. Now both conditions are no longer true.

Since it's no longer possible to continue credit expansion, the only way to stop the deflation caused by debt repayment and defaults is to print more base money (QE).

When QE stops, the USD resumes its natural appreciation.

[sidhujag]

The USD desperately wants to appreciate.

The reason the USD lost so much value over the last century was due, not to base money printing, but to credit expansion, a.k.a debt issuance.

Debt is temporary. It's either repaid, or else defaulted. Either way of resolving debt shrinks the money supply as much as the original issuance expanded it.

As long as the population was growing, and as long as the middle class had positive savings, it was possible to expand credit. Now both conditions are no longer true.

Since it's no longer possible to continue credit expansion, the only way to stop the deflation caused by debt repayment and defaults is to print more base money (QE).

When QE stops, the USD resumes its natural appreciation.

Rates will have to rise and after a few raises we will finally see more qe and final collapse of trust

[cypherdoc]

The USD desperately wants to appreciate.

The reason the USD lost so much value over the last century was due, not to base money printing, but to credit expansion, a.k.a debt issuance.

Debt is temporary. It's either repaid, or else defaulted. Either way of resolving debt shrinks the money supply as much as the original issuance expanded it.

As long as the population was growing, and as long as the middle class had positive savings, it was possible to expand credit. Now both conditions are no longer true.

Since it's no longer possible to continue credit expansion, the only way to stop the deflation caused by debt repayment and defaults is to print more base money (QE).

When QE stops, the USD resumes its natural appreciation.

Exactly with an additional subtlety. Not only does the Fed have to print, they have to stimulate confidence because they can never print enough to fill the debt hole  and especially the derivatives mountain. If anything, the last 6 years has shown dubious levels of confidence, if any, along with demonstrably worse real wage growth. The Internet has spawned nearly instantaneous documentation of all the stealing going on.

The last few ramps this year have been nearly vertical short squeezes by the invisible hand which shows increasing desperation, imo. Now is the time to be cautious.  

sidhuajag, I really don't think you're gonna find your masses piling into a final blow off top.

[justusranvier]

Rates will have to rise and after a few raises we will finally see more qe and final collapse of trust

The consequences of resuming QE are unaccceptable.

So are the consequences of not resuming QE.

Must be fun to be in any kind of decision-making position at the Federal Reserve right now.

[cypherdoc]

Rates will have to rise and after a few raises we will finally see more qe and final collapse of trust

The consequences of resuming QE are unaccceptable.

So are the consequences of not resuming QE.

Must be fun to be in any kind of decision-making position at the Federal Reserve right now.

I heard an interesting theory on a podcast the other day which matched my observation. Every Fed head has their crisis with which they are forced to deal with and given that's a fact, they prefer to take it early on in their term so they can clean up before the next head comes in. Nows the time for Janet.

[justusranvier]

What can she actually do, though?

[cypherdoc]

What can she actually do, though?

she's a woman.  she'll tell you when she's good and ready.

[tvbcof]

What can she actually do, though?

she's a woman.  she'll tell you when she's good and ready.

Have you checked?  It's not clear to me just by looking.

[cypherdoc]

What can she actually do, though?

she's a woman.  she'll tell you when she's good and ready.

Have you checked?  It's not clear to me just by looking.

lol, as obnoxious and nonsensical as you can get, i've been roflmao with several of your posts this last week.

have you been drinking again?

[smooth]

As long as the population was growing, and as long as the middle class had positive savings, it was possible to expand credit. Now both conditions are no longer true.

Population not growing?

[rocks]

nice quote Marc Andreessen

Paraphrasing (Bitcoin's value is it's blockchain not the BTC)

My fundamental issue with SC is they don't secure the value just the BTC. SC offer economic hackers a way to steal that value.

It's economic ignorance to believe the value in the blockchain is inherent.

I've been saying this for a long time now. The Blockchain will be the only aspect of Bitcoin that survives.

Marc made 26 great tweets today defending both Bitcoin and BTC. He clearly does not believe that Bitcoin's value is the blockchain and not BTC, which is impossible since the two are inseparable.

https://www.coinprices.io/articles/marc-andreessen-defends-bitcoin-on-twitter-in-latest-tweetstorm

[ssmc2]

nice quote Marc Andreessen

Paraphrasing (Bitcoin's value is it's blockchain not the BTC)

My fundamental issue with SC is they don't secure the value just the BTC. SC offer economic hackers a way to steal that value.

It's economic ignorance to believe the value in the blockchain is inherent.

I've been saying this for a long time now. The Blockchain will be the only aspect of Bitcoin that survives.

Marc made 26 great tweets today defending both Bitcoin and BTC. He clearly does not believe that Bitcoin's value is the blockchain and not BTC, which is impossible since the two are inseparable.

https://www.coinprices.io/articles/marc-andreessen-defends-bitcoin-on-twitter-in-latest-tweetstorm

Great stuff! And yes, you are totally misinterpreting him if you think he doesn't understand the basics of the bitcoin protocol.

[msin]

Marc made 26 great tweets today defending both Bitcoin and BTC. He clearly does not believe that Bitcoin's value is the blockchain and not BTC, which is impossible since the two are inseparable.

https://www.coinprices.io/articles/marc-andreessen-defends-bitcoin-on-twitter-in-latest-tweetstorm

Great stuff! And yes, you are totally misinterpreting him if you think he doesn't understand the basics of the bitcoin protocol.

Marc is the best kind of representative/cheerleader that BTC can have.

[justusranvier]

Newest video from Cypherdoc's favourite artist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEBP9dpVM70

[solex]

with anything new like this, i'm interested in knowing the upper and lower bounds of the IBLT data size.

lower bound:  theoretically, as the UTXO set difference shrinks to zero with 0 network latency, the IBLT will shrink similarly but can never reach zero since it has to at minimum relay enough data to convey the exact subset of tx's included in the miner's block.  how small can this data get esp in relation to the avg block size now?

upper bound:  if the UTXO set difference is 100%, how big does the IBLT data size get?  or does the entire IBLT concept fall apart at some intermediate set difference?

OK, so the bounds.

Note that UTXO is unspent tx outputs held in the blockchain, but unconfirmed tx are in node mempools, pending inclusion into the blockchain by miners. What Satoshi achieved with his PoW blockchain breakthrough was consensus on the whole transaction history, and resulting UTXOs. I think of that as the steel-work in a skyscraper. What IBLT does is go to further by enforcing consensus on unconfirmed transactions, it pours concrete into that steel reinforcing. This is a significant improvement to cryptocurrency, but it is truly effective only at high volumes, volumes too high for the existing standard method of block propagation.

The reason is that right now the whole network could agree on the same 2000 unconfirmed tx, real-world business, but the next block mined can contain none of them. It could be full of previously unknown gambling dice-bot spam tx, a set which is 100% different. Because these tx validly spend UTXO, then the block is accepted, and the 2000 unconfirmed tx have to wait for the next block. However, when blocks are too big to propagate in the existing method, and require IBLT, then miners have to rely on the majority of the nodes knowing their unconfirmed tx in advance, they can only include a few unknown tx as the more unknowns they include the more likely their IBLT will fail to get decoded, and it gets rejected.

I expect IBLT blocks to be a constant size, starting at about 500KB or 1MB and staying at the same size for a long time, then increasing in steps, perhaps doubling after a number of years, just as the block reward halves periodically. A 1MB IBLT contains about 1500 differences, which means a 1% difference in mempools allows for 150,000 tx or 60MB disk blocks. A 32MB IBLT could support 3GB disk blocks, or 20,000 TPS, as by then differences of <1% should be the norm.

[hdbuck]

2,5+ billion euros bankrun in greece within december only. acknowledgedly by anticipation of Syriza winning the election and thus resulting in a possible exit of the euro zone...

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/soziales/neuwahlen-griechen-heben-2-5-milliarden-euro-von-konten-ab-a-1010865.html#ref=plista

note that the first media reporting it is german..