Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2016, 02:14:22 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   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 ... 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 [409] 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1808742 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 03:18:33 PM
 #8161

Isn't he now saying there's value in the transfer tech, but not the currency?

Here's the progression of all the gold-bug bitcoin naysayers:

1) 2011: "Bitcoin is a silly nerd fad that'll be dead in a month or two."
2) 2012: "Bitcoin has no intrinsic value."
3) 2013: "The government will never let bitcoin survive."
4) 2014: "Bitcoin as a payments technology has value, but the currency won't have lasting value."

Hasn't Peter been saying #4 a bunch lately? Funny - this current trend of former total naysayers talking about how the network/tech has lasting value but the currency doesn't is really dumb. They're so obviously trying to save a little face by giving some grudging kudos to bitcoin, but can't fully admit how wrong they are/were.

I can't wait 'till we get over the false notion that the network/currency-unit are completely distinct and these guys accept the entangled (and valuable) nature of the whole beast.


Edit: Boom. $500 taken out on Bitstamp as I was typing.



For some reason they still don't understand exactly why the bitcoin token cannot be separated from the Bitcoin network. I think they believe that there is a way in which to make them separate entities, thus removing value from the token, but they are misinformed.

i hate to say it but it's b/c of Andreas.

i've had to become much more vocal against him saying the Bitcoin the currency is "just" the first app layered over the blockchain protocol implying that we can get rid of the currency yet still retain the value of Bitcoin with just the blockchain.  in his mind, the blockchain is paramount, which is totally wrong.  and you see this attitude has spilled over into many other topics/projects he advocates such as Ethereum and the concept that there will be "thousands of altcoins", etc.

the right way to think of this is that the Bitcoin units are integral and fundamental to the Bitcoin network and can never be separated from the blockchain.  they were designed to function within it.  it is a self contained financial system:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=51590.0  if you really think about what Satoshi was trying to do with Bitcoin, it was this:  he started with the inviolable concept of how to design a fixed supply of currency (mimicking gold) and then combined various tools from separate fields and came up with the blockchain technology around the currency units to secure this fundamental principle.  yeah, he mentions things like smart contracts and stuff in a separate post on the forum but he designed the blockchain to ensure the fixed supply currency as priority #1.

this is why i'm so vocal against the concept of Sidechains.  if you look thru my comments over on Reddit, i've argued this extensively from an economic and technical standpoint.  b/c Sidechains will need to be merged mined, by definition, they will never be as secure as the main blockchain.  this presents a huge opportunity for a non-economic malicious attacker to wait until approximately 20-30% of all BTC migrate over to a popular Sidechain and then launch an attack.  if successful, all those BTC will be wiped out and i think the blowback effect would be to destroy Bitcoin.  we already have a hard enough time convincing the general population to accept a fixed supply currency.  if you then lose 20-30% of BTC from a Sidechain failure, it will destroy confidence in Bitcoin forever as a too deflationary intense to be workable new form of money.  there are many more arguments i've presented but that one is the most important.

don't get me wrong, i'm a big fan of Andreas as we need someone like him to speak the unspeakable to rally the masses.  but he's just wrong in this particular area of his abstraction.
1481465662
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481465662

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481465662
Reply with quote  #2

1481465662
Report to moderator
1481465662
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481465662

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481465662
Reply with quote  #2

1481465662
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481465662
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481465662

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481465662
Reply with quote  #2

1481465662
Report to moderator
1481465662
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481465662

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481465662
Reply with quote  #2

1481465662
Report to moderator
1481465662
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481465662

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481465662
Reply with quote  #2

1481465662
Report to moderator
wachtwoord
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498



View Profile WWW
May 22, 2014, 03:22:57 PM
 #8162

Bitcoin may be the first application of the Blockchain, it's an essential one, without which everything falls apart.

bitcoinsrus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 03:29:42 PM
 #8163

Isn't he now saying there's value in the transfer tech, but not the currency?

Here's the progression of all the gold-bug bitcoin naysayers:

1) 2011: "Bitcoin is a silly nerd fad that'll be dead in a month or two."
2) 2012: "Bitcoin has no intrinsic value."
3) 2013: "The government will never let bitcoin survive."
4) 2014: "Bitcoin as a payments technology has value, but the currency won't have lasting value."

Hasn't Peter been saying #4 a bunch lately? Funny - this current trend of former total naysayers talking about how the network/tech has lasting value but the currency doesn't is really dumb. They're so obviously trying to save a little face by giving some grudging kudos to bitcoin, but can't fully admit how wrong they are/were.

I can't wait 'till we get over the false notion that the network/currency-unit are completely distinct and these guys accept the entangled (and valuable) nature of the whole beast.


Edit: Boom. $500 taken out on Bitstamp as I was typing.



For some reason they still don't understand exactly why the bitcoin token cannot be separated from the Bitcoin network. I think they believe that there is a way in which to make them separate entities, thus removing value from the token, but they are misinformed.

i hate to say it but it's b/c of Andreas.

i've had to become much more vocal against him saying the Bitcoin the currency is "just" the first app layered over the blockchain protocol implying that we can get rid of the currency yet still retain the value of Bitcoin with just the blockchain.  in his mind, the blockchain is paramount, which is totally wrong.  and you see this attitude has spilled over into many other topics/projects he advocates such as Ethereum and the concept that there will be "thousands of altcoins", etc.

the right way to think of this is that the Bitcoin units are integral and fundamental to the Bitcoin network and can never be separated from the blockchain.  they were designed to function within it.  it is a self contained financial system:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=51590.0  if you really think about what Satoshi was trying to do with Bitcoin, it was this:  he started with the inviolable concept of how to design a fixed supply of currency (mimicking gold) and then combined various tools from separate fields and came up with the blockchain technology around the currency units to secure this fundamental principle.  yeah, he mentions things like smart contracts and stuff in a separate post on the forum but the fixed supply currency was priority #1.

this is why i'm so vocal against the concept of Sidechains.  if you look thru my comments over on Reddit, i've argued this extensively from an economic and technical standpoint.  b/c Sidechains will need to be merged mined, by definition, they will never be as secure as the main blockchain.  this presents a huge opportunity for a non-economic malicious attacker to wait until approximately 20-30% of all BTC migrate over to a popular Sidechain and then launch an attack.  if successful, all those BTC will be wiped out and i think the blowback effect would be to destroy Bitcoin.  we already have a hard enough time convincing the general population to accept a fixed supply currency.  if you then lose 20-30% of BTC from a Sidechain failure, it will destroy confidence in Bitcoin forever as a too deflationary intense to be workable new form of money.  there are many more arguments i've presented but that one is the most important.

don't get me wrong, i'm a big fan of Andreas as we need someone like him to speak the unspeakable to rally the masses.  but he's just wrong in this particular area of his abstraction.

You make some great points.  I believe Andreas is speaking so highly of the blockchain, mainly because he is deeply involved in it (and its expected....like if anyone where in the same situation, they would probably plug their own project etc).

I believe new layers can be good.  A few comment-ors discussed a coin that is distributed by how many bitcoins you already have.  Some thing like this would be a "new layer" and have a built in following (since it basically would not start from scratch).  (The new coin could be improved and not frustrate deeply involve members....since the beginning circa 2009-2011)

I agree with the whole satoshi thing you mentioned above.

I like the idea of sidechains because it is another layer.  I have not thought about it the way you have, and your ideas are interesting (especially since I am new and eventually I might have similar wisdom after learning more about things like sidechains).

 
impulse
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 151


View Profile
May 22, 2014, 03:40:37 PM
 #8164

Isn't he now saying there's value in the transfer tech, but not the currency?

Here's the progression of all the gold-bug bitcoin naysayers:

1) 2011: "Bitcoin is a silly nerd fad that'll be dead in a month or two."
2) 2012: "Bitcoin has no intrinsic value."
3) 2013: "The government will never let bitcoin survive."
4) 2014: "Bitcoin as a payments technology has value, but the currency won't have lasting value."

Hasn't Peter been saying #4 a bunch lately? Funny - this current trend of former total naysayers talking about how the network/tech has lasting value but the currency doesn't is really dumb. They're so obviously trying to save a little face by giving some grudging kudos to bitcoin, but can't fully admit how wrong they are/were.

I can't wait 'till we get over the false notion that the network/currency-unit are completely distinct and these guys accept the entangled (and valuable) nature of the whole beast.


Edit: Boom. $500 taken out on Bitstamp as I was typing.



For some reason they still don't understand exactly why the bitcoin token cannot be separated from the Bitcoin network. I think they believe that there is a way in which to make them separate entities, thus removing value from the token, but they are misinformed.

i hate to say it but it's b/c of Andreas.

i've had to become much more vocal against him saying the Bitcoin the currency is "just" the first app layered over the blockchain protocol implying that we can get rid of the currency yet still retain the value of Bitcoin with just the blockchain.  in his mind, the blockchain is paramount, which is totally wrong.  and you see this attitude has spilled over into many other topics/projects he advocates such as Ethereum and the concept that there will be "thousands of altcoins", etc.

the right way to think of this is that the Bitcoin units are integral and fundamental to the Bitcoin network and can never be separated from the blockchain.  they were designed to function within it.  it is a self contained financial system:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=51590.0  if you really think about what Satoshi was trying to do with Bitcoin, it was this:  he started with the inviolable concept of how to design a fixed supply of currency (mimicking gold) and then combined various tools from separate fields and came up with the blockchain technology around the currency units to secure this fundamental principle.  yeah, he mentions things like smart contracts and stuff in a separate post on the forum but he designed the blockchain to ensure the fixed supply currency as priority #1.

this is why i'm so vocal against the concept of Sidechains.  if you look thru my comments over on Reddit, i've argued this extensively from an economic and technical standpoint.  b/c Sidechains will need to be merged mined, by definition, they will never be as secure as the main blockchain.  this presents a huge opportunity for a non-economic malicious attacker to wait until approximately 20-30% of all BTC migrate over to a popular Sidechain and then launch an attack.  if successful, all those BTC will be wiped out and i think the blowback effect would be to destroy Bitcoin.  we already have a hard enough time convincing the general population to accept a fixed supply currency.  if you then lose 20-30% of BTC from a Sidechain failure, it will destroy confidence in Bitcoin forever as a too deflationary intense to be workable new form of money.  there are many more arguments i've presented but that one is the most important.

don't get me wrong, i'm a big fan of Andreas as we need someone like him to speak the unspeakable to rally the masses.  but he's just wrong in this particular area of his abstraction.

Agreed. I can't help but think that the Ethereum mania will end badly for anyone who gets heavily involved financially early on. There are a lot of moving parts and technical and economic uncertainties at the moment, and WAY too much hype. Similarly, while I agree that we will likely see a lot of blockchain implementations and alternate "currencies", the vast majority of them will have little or no value. I rather like the "spin-off" ideas that were being discussed a while back, and I feel like their existence is an inevitability. It will be difficult for innovative and competing systems to prevent bitcoin users from "co-opting" their technology. I like Andreas as well, but he is very strong headed, which is both an asset and potentially a liability at times Smiley
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 03:45:30 PM
 #8165

Isn't he now saying there's value in the transfer tech, but not the currency?

Here's the progression of all the gold-bug bitcoin naysayers:

1) 2011: "Bitcoin is a silly nerd fad that'll be dead in a month or two."
2) 2012: "Bitcoin has no intrinsic value."
3) 2013: "The government will never let bitcoin survive."
4) 2014: "Bitcoin as a payments technology has value, but the currency won't have lasting value."

Hasn't Peter been saying #4 a bunch lately? Funny - this current trend of former total naysayers talking about how the network/tech has lasting value but the currency doesn't is really dumb. They're so obviously trying to save a little face by giving some grudging kudos to bitcoin, but can't fully admit how wrong they are/were.

I can't wait 'till we get over the false notion that the network/currency-unit are completely distinct and these guys accept the entangled (and valuable) nature of the whole beast.


Edit: Boom. $500 taken out on Bitstamp as I was typing.



For some reason they still don't understand exactly why the bitcoin token cannot be separated from the Bitcoin network. I think they believe that there is a way in which to make them separate entities, thus removing value from the token, but they are misinformed.

i hate to say it but it's b/c of Andreas.

i've had to become much more vocal against him saying the Bitcoin the currency is "just" the first app layered over the blockchain protocol implying that we can get rid of the currency yet still retain the value of Bitcoin with just the blockchain.  in his mind, the blockchain is paramount, which is totally wrong.  and you see this attitude has spilled over into many other topics/projects he advocates such as Ethereum and the concept that there will be "thousands of altcoins", etc.

the right way to think of this is that the Bitcoin units are integral and fundamental to the Bitcoin network and can never be separated from the blockchain.  they were designed to function within it.  it is a self contained financial system:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=51590.0  if you really think about what Satoshi was trying to do with Bitcoin, it was this:  he started with the inviolable concept of how to design a fixed supply of currency (mimicking gold) and then combined various tools from separate fields and came up with the blockchain technology around the currency units to secure this fundamental principle.  yeah, he mentions things like smart contracts and stuff in a separate post on the forum but he designed the blockchain to ensure the fixed supply currency as priority #1.

this is why i'm so vocal against the concept of Sidechains.  if you look thru my comments over on Reddit, i've argued this extensively from an economic and technical standpoint.  b/c Sidechains will need to be merged mined, by definition, they will never be as secure as the main blockchain.  this presents a huge opportunity for a non-economic malicious attacker to wait until approximately 20-30% of all BTC migrate over to a popular Sidechain and then launch an attack.  if successful, all those BTC will be wiped out and i think the blowback effect would be to destroy Bitcoin.  we already have a hard enough time convincing the general population to accept a fixed supply currency.  if you then lose 20-30% of BTC from a Sidechain failure, it will destroy confidence in Bitcoin forever as a too deflationary intense to be workable new form of money.  there are many more arguments i've presented but that one is the most important.

don't get me wrong, i'm a big fan of Andreas as we need someone like him to speak the unspeakable to rally the masses.  but he's just wrong in this particular area of his abstraction.

Agreed. I can't help but think that the Ethereum mania will end badly for anyone who gets heavily involved financially early on. There are a lot of moving parts and technical and economic uncertainties at the moment, and WAY too much hype. Similarly, while I agree that we will likely see a lot of blockchain implementations and alternate "currencies", the vast majority of them will have little or no value. I rather like the "spin-off" ideas that were being discussed a while back, and I feel like their existence is an inevitability. It will be difficult for innovative and competing systems to prevent bitcoin users from "co-opting" their technology. I like Andreas as well, but he is very strong headed, which is both an asset and potentially a liability at times Smiley

when you speak as frequently as he does, sometimes one struggles to find "new material".  in Bitcoin's case, that's not necessary.  it's complicated enough to explain the basics.  he should just stick to discussing various parts of the protocol instead of trying to always introduce new mind blowing economic concepts.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 03:47:48 PM
 #8166

Isn't he now saying there's value in the transfer tech, but not the currency?

Here's the progression of all the gold-bug bitcoin naysayers:

1) 2011: "Bitcoin is a silly nerd fad that'll be dead in a month or two."
2) 2012: "Bitcoin has no intrinsic value."
3) 2013: "The government will never let bitcoin survive."
4) 2014: "Bitcoin as a payments technology has value, but the currency won't have lasting value."

Hasn't Peter been saying #4 a bunch lately? Funny - this current trend of former total naysayers talking about how the network/tech has lasting value but the currency doesn't is really dumb. They're so obviously trying to save a little face by giving some grudging kudos to bitcoin, but can't fully admit how wrong they are/were.

I can't wait 'till we get over the false notion that the network/currency-unit are completely distinct and these guys accept the entangled (and valuable) nature of the whole beast.


Edit: Boom. $500 taken out on Bitstamp as I was typing.



For some reason they still don't understand exactly why the bitcoin token cannot be separated from the Bitcoin network. I think they believe that there is a way in which to make them separate entities, thus removing value from the token, but they are misinformed.

i hate to say it but it's b/c of Andreas.

i've had to become much more vocal against him saying the Bitcoin the currency is "just" the first app layered over the blockchain protocol implying that we can get rid of the currency yet still retain the value of Bitcoin with just the blockchain.  in his mind, the blockchain is paramount, which is totally wrong.  and you see this attitude has spilled over into many other topics/projects he advocates such as Ethereum and the concept that there will be "thousands of altcoins", etc.

the right way to think of this is that the Bitcoin units are integral and fundamental to the Bitcoin network and can never be separated from the blockchain.  they were designed to function within it.  it is a self contained financial system:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=51590.0  if you really think about what Satoshi was trying to do with Bitcoin, it was this:  he started with the inviolable concept of how to design a fixed supply of currency (mimicking gold) and then combined various tools from separate fields and came up with the blockchain technology around the currency units to secure this fundamental principle.  yeah, he mentions things like smart contracts and stuff in a separate post on the forum but the fixed supply currency was priority #1.

this is why i'm so vocal against the concept of Sidechains.  if you look thru my comments over on Reddit, i've argued this extensively from an economic and technical standpoint.  b/c Sidechains will need to be merged mined, by definition, they will never be as secure as the main blockchain.  this presents a huge opportunity for a non-economic malicious attacker to wait until approximately 20-30% of all BTC migrate over to a popular Sidechain and then launch an attack.  if successful, all those BTC will be wiped out and i think the blowback effect would be to destroy Bitcoin.  we already have a hard enough time convincing the general population to accept a fixed supply currency.  if you then lose 20-30% of BTC from a Sidechain failure, it will destroy confidence in Bitcoin forever as a too deflationary intense to be workable new form of money.  there are many more arguments i've presented but that one is the most important.

don't get me wrong, i'm a big fan of Andreas as we need someone like him to speak the unspeakable to rally the masses.  but he's just wrong in this particular area of his abstraction.

You make some great points.  I believe Andreas is speaking so highly of the blockchain, mainly because he is deeply involved in it (and its expected....like if anyone where in the same situation, they would probably plug their own project etc).

I believe new layers can be good.  A few comment-ors discussed a coin that is distributed by how many bitcoins you already have.  Some thing like this would be a "new layer" and have a built in following (since it basically would not start from scratch).  (The new coin could be improved and not frustrate deeply involve members....since the beginning circa 2009-2011)

I agree with the whole satoshi thing you mentioned above.

I like the idea of sidechains because it is another layer.  I have not thought about it the way you have, and your ideas are interesting (especially since I am new and eventually I might have similar wisdom after learning more about things like sidechains).

 

you're talking about Spin Offs which was hatched right in this thread by Peter R.  it's a devious and well thought out economic concept that has great potential.  i just hope he gets around to implementing it.  

if i were a coder, i'd be systematically going thru the altcoins, one by one, and taking this Spin Off stick to them, all the while profiting.
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 03:55:13 PM
 #8167

1) 2011: "Bitcoin is a silly nerd fad that'll be dead in a month or two."
2) 2012: "Bitcoin has no intrinsic value."
3) 2013: "The government will never let bitcoin survive."
4) 2014: "Bitcoin as a payments technology has value, but the currency won't have lasting value."

I think you need to somehow fit in the famous mantra: "if you can't hold it in your hands, you don't own it". Maybe that fits into all of the periods.

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

Activity: 840



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 03:58:59 PM
 #8168

A quote from the other forum talking about the coup in Thailand.

Anyway we have food to last us a bit, and gold to get us out if need be. No one is going to take fiat or BTC at the airport if it comes to that.



Sorry El Cabron, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Trolling
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622250.msg7030081#msg7030081
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 04:02:13 PM
 #8169

A quote from the other forum talking about the coup in Thailand.

Anyway we have food to last us a bit, and gold to get us out if need be. No one is going to take fiat or BTC at the airport if it comes to that.




quoting yourself?  oh, that's great. Roll Eyes
El Cabron
Gnomo
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 04:08:24 PM
 #8170

A quote from the other forum talking about the coup in Thailand.

Anyway we have food to last us a bit, and gold to get us out if need be. No one is going to take fiat or BTC at the airport if it comes to that.




quoting yourself?  oh, that's great. Roll Eyes

Yes, do you know any others on the ground in Thailand? Not my first coup.... I know what gets you things when shit goes sideways like this. Also I bought a case of Johny Walker Black just before the curfew. If this lasts more than a week that will come in handy. Gold is not the only thing that has worth.

I also raided the ATMs just cuz. If anyone takes the fiat great for me!

Sorry El Cabron, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Trolling
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622250.msg7030081#msg7030081
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 04:13:54 PM
 #8171

A quote from the other forum talking about the coup in Thailand.

Anyway we have food to last us a bit, and gold to get us out if need be. No one is going to take fiat or BTC at the airport if it comes to that.




quoting yourself?  oh, that's great. Roll Eyes
read a little deeper Goat just conceded, a preference for Bitcoin over gold, call it a statement not a quote.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
El Cabron
Gnomo
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 04:25:47 PM
 #8172

A quote from the other forum talking about the coup in Thailand.

Anyway we have food to last us a bit, and gold to get us out if need be. No one is going to take fiat or BTC at the airport if it comes to that.




quoting yourself?  oh, that's great. Roll Eyes
read a little deeper Goat just conceded, a preference for Bitcoin over gold, call it a statement not a quote.

oh that is no secret, i love BTC (or crypto coins) compared to gold. my only point is, gold is not yet dead and worthless.


Sorry El Cabron, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Trolling
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622250.msg7030081#msg7030081
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 04:48:05 PM
 #8173

A quote from the other forum talking about the coup in Thailand.

Anyway we have food to last us a bit, and gold to get us out if need be. No one is going to take fiat or BTC at the airport if it comes to that.


quoting yourself?  oh, that's great. Roll Eyes
read a little deeper Goat just conceded, a preference for Bitcoin over gold, call it a statement not a quote.

oh that is no secret, i love BTC (or crypto coins) compared to gold. my only point is, gold is not yet dead and worthless.

I'll take your word for it and hold on. (i now see it as Armageddon insurance.)

As a passive observer here early on, I thought cypherdoc was being hypercritical and over confident when he was called out for using gold in his avatar, (yes I know never make an investment call on the colour of someone’s avatar) – actually I held cypherdoc, position as an uneducated default, I was being schooled in the value of gold by gold bug propaganda.

Anyway I decided to track and do the reverse cypherdoc experiment, split BTC and buy Gold and track the 2, I traded out what would later become a life changing amount of Bitcoin for Gold BTC @ $9 and Gold @ $1900 + delivery.

I don’t care what anyone says, until that split investment returns something comparable in value, Gold is collapsing and Bitcoin is UP I know i live it every day.

So gold is timeless, also probably stolen form Inkers or some Spanish ship by the Brits, the mottled history aside, I’ll make a spoon with my gold one day, if I can afford the energy to melt it, or I could invest the energy in mining Bitcoin and buy a dinner set and dining table.


Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
El Cabron
Gnomo
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 04:52:14 PM
 #8174

(i now see it as Armageddon insurance.)


A good way to look at gold!

I am however sorry you trade a fair amount of BTC for Gold. I would never tell anyone to trade more than 10% of their crypto for gold unless the thought a BTc correction was going to happen soon.

I'm 85% crypto, 10% PMs, and even 5% fiat cuz, well hookers and blow...

Sorry El Cabron, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Trolling
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622250.msg7030081#msg7030081
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 04:58:38 PM
 #8175

(i now see it as Armageddon insurance.)


A good way to look at gold!

I am however sorry you trade a fair amount of BTC for Gold. I would never tell anyone to trade more than 10% of their crypto for gold unless the thought a BTc correction was going to happen soon.

I'm 85% crypto, 10% PMs, and even 5% fiat cuz, well hookers and blow...

actually i can't disagree with this.  i've been pretty open that i still have 24 oz left for posterity.  i was thinking of selling even those too this past week however.  still $2500/oz miscreanity?  Wink
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 05:04:26 PM
 #8176

As a passive observer here early on, I thought cypherdoc was being hypocritical hypercritical and over confident when he was called out for using gold in his avatar, (yes I know never make an investment call on the colour of someone’s avatar) – actually I held cypherdoc, position as an uneducated default, I was being schooled in the value of gold by gold bug propaganda.


for the life of me, i never understood why anyone would draw any conclusions for using gold in my avatar, let alone think they've called me out. i'm a known, former gold bug and i still thinks it's pretty.

doesn't mean i think it's a good store of value or currency next to Bitcoin.  it is just a cool looking symbol representing a historical transition.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 05:06:00 PM
 #8177

(i now see it as Armageddon insurance.)


A good way to look at gold!

I am however sorry you trade a fair amount of BTC for Gold. I would never tell anyone to trade more than 10% of their crypto for gold unless the thought a BTc correction was going to happen soon.

I'm 85% crypto, 10% PMs, and even 5% fiat cuz, well hookers and blow...

I'll never fear a correction again, and it's a good lesson to make weighted and calculated decision. (at the time my Bitcoin went up 300% I thought that was unnatural and against the order of things and like many idiots called it a bubble.)  

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
El Cabron
Gnomo
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 05:06:14 PM
 #8178


actually i can't disagree with this. 

 Smiley Grin Smiley Grin Smiley

We are one and the same Smiley

(but really only 24 oz? I guess if you are single that might get you across a boarder or two.)


Sorry El Cabron, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Trolling
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622250.msg7030081#msg7030081
El Cabron
Gnomo
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 05:08:57 PM
 #8179

a bit off topic but it is so odd here, no one is on the road, everyone is at home cuz of the 10 pm curfew. there is no police or army check points but everyone has obeyed.

it is very odd, people in the west would never just obey like this.

Sorry El Cabron, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Trolling
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622250.msg7030081#msg7030081
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 22, 2014, 05:11:15 PM
 #8180

a bit off topic but it is so odd here, no one is on the road, everyone is at home cuz of the 10 pm curfew. there is no police or army check points but everyone has obeyed.

it is very odd, people in the west would never just obey like this.

i haven't been following the Thai news.  what's going on over there?

if i were in your shoes i could probably see how the gold/Bitcoin argument shifts a bit.
Pages: « 1 ... 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 [409] 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 ... 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!