Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 02:02:27 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 [1155] 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1806726 times)
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
April 25, 2015, 11:24:20 PM
 #23081

hm, that's interesting. So USD tx volume is roughly stable but number of transactions skyrockets. This means the average amount of a tx is going down.

Any rationale for this?
Number of transactions is an objective number that's easy to measure.

There's more uncertainty about USD volume, since there's no way to be 100% sure which output in a transaction is a spend and which one is change.
1481248947
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481248947

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481248947
Reply with quote  #2

1481248947
Report to moderator
1481248947
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481248947

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481248947
Reply with quote  #2

1481248947
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481248947
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481248947

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481248947
Reply with quote  #2

1481248947
Report to moderator
1481248947
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481248947

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481248947
Reply with quote  #2

1481248947
Report to moderator
1481248947
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481248947

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481248947
Reply with quote  #2

1481248947
Report to moderator
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
April 25, 2015, 11:25:05 PM
 #23082

hm, that's interesting. So USD tx volume is roughly stable but number of transactions skyrockets. This means the average amount of a tx is going down.

Any rationale for this?
Number of transactions is an objective number that's easy to measure.

There's more uncertainty about USD volume, since there's no way to be 100% sure which output in a transaction is a spend and which one is change.

Is there a reason to expect this error to change over time?
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
April 25, 2015, 11:27:00 PM
 #23083


Something I don't think I've explained very well yet is that the payment code proposal provides the missing "from address" that everybody wants, in a way that doesn't compromise privacy.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/From_address
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
April 25, 2015, 11:28:06 PM
 #23084

Is there a reason to expect this error to change over time?
Quite possibly, as new wallets come into use that operate in ways different than what Blockchain's heuristics expect.

As transactions become more complex in general, the less accurate that estimate becomes.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
April 25, 2015, 11:31:07 PM
 #23085

Is there a reason to expect this error to change over time?
Quite possibly, as new wallets come into use that operate in ways different than what Blockchain's heuristics expect.

As transactions become more complex in general, the less accurate that estimate becomes.

I'd be interested in a specific hypothesis we could test. There seems to be a sustained trend over a period of years. I agree it is possible that wallets in use could be a factor. For example, Coinbase has gotten very large during this time period (though I'm not sure how much transaction activity is tied to them as opposed to number of registered users).

On the other hand I'm not sure that shifting wallet adoption overall has been such a continuous process and I think the simpler explanation is that transactions actually are getting smaller (or remaining constant in BTC terms). I threw out a couple of arguably plausible reasons why that might be, but that is certainly not a complete list, and it may not even be true. The Bitpay hypothesis (more retail-type transactions which are smaller than speculator transactions) is another one.
bucktotal
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 211


View Profile
April 26, 2015, 01:57:04 AM
 #23086


chart linked by NotHatinJustTrollin:



hm, that's interesting. So USD tx volume is roughly stable but number of transactions skyrockets. This means the average amount of a tx is going down.

Any rationale for this?


just brainstorming...

if we take a closer look at the last 2 yrs in log plots, and completely ignore the second gox bubble, usd tx volume has increased about 2.5-3x. 

if we take a closer look at the last 2 yrs of the number of tx excl pop add., for the same range of time, txs have increased about 4x.  its not crazy different. a lot of usd tx volume centered around gox and huge prices.

there could also just be more micro tx being used in the economy (more xcp tx, colored coins, etc)

solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
April 26, 2015, 04:20:11 AM
 #23087

just brainstorming...

if we take a closer look at the last 2 yrs in log plots, and completely ignore the second gox bubble, usd tx volume has increased about 2.5-3x. 

if we take a closer look at the last 2 yrs of the number of tx excl pop add., for the same range of time, txs have increased about 4x.  its not crazy different. a lot of usd tx volume centered around gox and huge prices.

there could also just be more micro tx being used in the economy (more xcp tx, colored coins, etc)

Well, the USD has appreciated against many other currencies by 20% in the last 2 years. So that 2.5-3x can be increased by 10-15% to take account of that.

BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 808


View Profile
April 26, 2015, 06:23:09 AM
 #23088

What's happening with cash is crazy: http://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2015/04/25/the-swiss-have-eliminated-the-zero-lower-bound/

It seems BTC will ultimately not be useful against inflation but against negative rates.
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142



View Profile
April 26, 2015, 06:53:27 AM
 #23089

hm, that's interesting. So USD tx volume is roughly stable but number of transactions skyrockets. This means the average amount of a tx is going down.

Any rationale for this?
Number of transactions is an objective number that's easy to measure.

There's more uncertainty about USD volume, since there's no way to be 100% sure which output in a transaction is a spend and which one is change.

good point.

So it could be that distribution of funds across addresses increased (probably correlated to lower address reuse and increased use of HD wallets). When funds are spread accross more addresses within wallets, naturally the error in measuring transaction volume decreases, because wallets can find more suitable inputs from the larger set => change percentage in transactions decreases => error decreases.

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142



View Profile
April 26, 2015, 06:55:12 AM
 #23090

What's happening with cash is crazy: http://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2015/04/25/the-swiss-have-eliminated-the-zero-lower-bound/

It seems BTC will ultimately not be useful against inflation but against negative rates.

Aren't "inflation" (monetary) and "negative rates" directly correlated (by central bank action)?

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142



View Profile
April 26, 2015, 07:27:20 AM
 #23091


That article is well worth a read.

The argument for denying the large cash withdrawal the Pension Fund Association wanted to make goes from

Quote
International anti-money laundering (AML) guidelines require banks to monitor and report suspicious activity on accounts.

to

Quote
Banks are completely within their rights to refuse to enact transactions that they believe may be intended to facilitate financial crime or money laundering.

So the argument goes from "required by guidelines to report transactions" to "judge transactions and refuse to enact them". Quite a jump.

So essentially the bank is both judge and executor? wow. And the "international guidelines on AML" (which seem to get elevated to law here) are written by who?

It'll be interesting to follow this. If the refusal of the cash withdrawal is deemed lawful (which I assume will happen), the mechanism which Hans Peter Konrad doesn't want to admit he understands can continue.

The director of the Pension Fund Association ASIP, Hans Peter Konrad, has been angry for weeks about the fact that pension funds suffer from negative interest rates. He says: “We do not understand why the banks are getting involved.”

If on the other hand the bank is forced to allow the cash withdrawal... get out the wheelbarrows?

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
April 26, 2015, 07:44:25 AM
 #23092

hm, that's interesting. So USD tx volume is roughly stable but number of transactions skyrockets. This means the average amount of a tx is going down.

Any rationale for this?
Number of transactions is an objective number that's easy to measure.

There's more uncertainty about USD volume, since there's no way to be 100% sure which output in a transaction is a spend and which one is change.

good point.

So it could be that distribution of funds across addresses increased (probably correlated to lower address reuse and increased use of HD wallets). When funds are spread accross more addresses within wallets, naturally the error in measuring transaction volume decreases, because wallets can find more suitable inputs from the larger set => change percentage in transactions decreases => error decreases.

Okay then, for a start, is the average output size decreasing (and at the same rate or at least with some correlation)?

Remember, also, that "error" can be positive or negative, so much if it will cancel out. Just making the argument that error is decreasing in magnitude doesn't explain a year-long trend in one direction. There could be some systematic (one directional) trend in error though, but not necessarily.

Address balances don't matter by the way, nor does address reuse, because outputs feed transactions, not addresses.
funundercoinking
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
April 26, 2015, 07:45:50 AM
 #23093

yes it does so.......
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 26, 2015, 08:41:00 AM
 #23094

This is where everyone has to dig deep.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 26, 2015, 08:54:29 AM
 #23095


That article is well worth a read.

The argument for denying the large cash withdrawal the Pension Fund Association wanted to make goes from

Quote
International anti-money laundering (AML) guidelines require banks to monitor and report suspicious activity on accounts.

to

Quote
Banks are completely within their rights to refuse to enact transactions that they believe may be intended to facilitate financial crime or money laundering.

So the argument goes from "required by guidelines to report transactions" to "judge transactions and refuse to enact them". Quite a jump.

So essentially the bank is both judge and executor? wow. And the "international guidelines on AML" (which seem to get elevated to law here) are written by who?

It'll be interesting to follow this. If the refusal of the cash withdrawal is deemed lawful (which I assume will happen), the mechanism which Hans Peter Konrad doesn't want to admit he understands can continue.

The director of the Pension Fund Association ASIP, Hans Peter Konrad, has been angry for weeks about the fact that pension funds suffer from negative interest rates. He says: “We do not understand why the banks are getting involved.”

If on the other hand the bank is forced to allow the cash withdrawal... get out the wheelbarrows?


This is a variant of a bank run.
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142



View Profile
April 26, 2015, 09:05:13 AM
 #23096

This is a variant of a bank run.

Yes.

A central bank run?

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 26, 2015, 09:08:45 AM
 #23097

Going to be changing the poll soon so get your votes in.
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142



View Profile
April 26, 2015, 09:16:15 AM
 #23098

So it could be that distribution of funds across addresses increased (probably correlated to lower address reuse and increased use of HD wallets). When funds are spread accross more addresses within wallets, naturally the error in measuring transaction volume decreases, because wallets can find more suitable inputs from the larger set => change percentage in transactions decreases => error decreases.

Address balances don't matter by the way, nor does address reuse, because outputs feed transactions, not addresses.

You could be right. After much thinking and playing with some numbers, I'm not sure anymore. Postponed.

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
rpietila
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400


Crypto Kingdom (Creator)


View Profile
April 26, 2015, 12:00:01 PM
 #23099

Does anyone see the connection between Mt.Gox and the western banking system?

Your balances in the bank are soon only nominally same thing as cash in hand. They never were quite the same, but as convertibility is severed, the price will also diverge.

NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
April 26, 2015, 02:29:25 PM
 #23100

So the argument goes from "required by guidelines to report transactions" to "judge transactions and refuse to enact them". Quite a jump.

It pits the notion of "Legal Tender" and "right to refuse service" at odds.  The bank wins both ways.

Central banking has waged an international war on cash for a long time.
We are down to about 10% off ledger money (cash) now in the USA for example.

The banker's goal is for money to only ever exist or move at their pleasure.  It becomes monetary totalitarianism.  To quote Bernard von Nothaus, "People can not be free until their money is free".

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
Pages: « 1 ... 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 [1155] 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 ... 1560 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!