Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[iCEBREAKER]

Bitcoin and shitcoins are technological dinosaurs. We all know what happened to dinosaurs amirite?

The dinosaurs needed to lay their eggs in nests inaccessible to those pesky little mammals, so they evolved into birds.

[tabnloz]

Dearest NLC,

It's "inseparable from bitcoin" only according to pyramid schemers like you.

Bitcoiners: "So we have this blockchain thing, it's a "DECENTRALISED" distributed ledger and it has potential but bitcoin is a necessary component, you are forced to adopt it if you want the blockchain"

Everybody else: "Ok, but we don't need this bitcoin currency "I don't think anyone needs this bitcoin currency", only drug dealers, paranoid libertards, scammers and ponzi speculators do"

Bitcoiners: "We don't care. You want the blockchain? You need to adopt bitcoin"

Everybody else: "Alright, then we will create a blockchain/CONSENSUS/distributed ledger thing that doesn't force people to adopt, use, and give a high value to a new currency they don't need. If it's a little CENTRALIZED it's not a problem FOR ME, cuz I THINK decentralization is for libertards."

Bitcoiners: "You can't. It's impossible™"

Everybody else:
http://www.newsbtc.com/2015/01/22/blockchain-things-bot-not-internet-things/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkYVc1YsGCc


More coming soon.

Avoid being disingenuous by omitting relevant information.

Stop conflating your opinion with fact.

[cypherdoc]

Dearest NLC,

It's "inseparable from bitcoin" only according to pyramid schemers like you.

Bitcoiners: "So we have this blockchain thing, it's a "DECENTRALISED" distributed ledger and it has potential but bitcoin is a necessary component, you are forced to adopt it if you want the blockchain"

Everybody else: "Ok, but we don't need this bitcoin currency "I don't think anyone needs this bitcoin currency", only drug dealers, paranoid libertards, scammers and ponzi speculators do"

Bitcoiners: "We don't care. You want the blockchain? You need to adopt bitcoin"

Everybody else: "Alright, then we will create a blockchain/CONSENSUS/distributed ledger thing that doesn't force people to adopt, use, and give a high value to a new currency they don't need. If it's a little CENTRALIZED it's not a problem FOR ME, cuz I THINK decentralization is for libertards."

Bitcoiners: "You can't. It's impossible™"

Everybody else:
http://www.newsbtc.com/2015/01/22/blockchain-things-bot-not-internet-things/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkYVc1YsGCc


More coming soon.

Avoid being disingenuous by omitting relevant information.

Stop conflating your opinion with fact.

that post just shows he doesn't understand the first thing about Bitcoin and is only here to troll.

[cbeast]

People are looking at the prices on exchanges that will soon be obsolete.  When the next jump happens, the exchanges will be bypassed in favor of Wall Street. Billions will be traded and amateur exchanges will melt. We won't need to check price websites. They will be quoting Winkdex.

[hdbuck]

People are looking at the prices on exchanges that will soon be obsolete.  When the next jump happens, the exchanges will be bypassed in favor of Wall Street. Billions will be traded and amateur exchanges will melt. We won't need to check price websites. They will be quoting Winkdex.

Imho there is no jump to be expected until next halving. Everything else happening is just noise.

Ps: screw wall street!

[NotHatinJustTrollin]

People are looking at the prices on exchanges that will soon be obsolete.  When the next jump happens, the exchanges will be bypassed in favor of Wall Street. Billions will be traded and amateur exchanges will melt. We won't need to check price websites. They will be quoting Winkdex.

Cool story bro.
I have been hearing this "Wall Street is coming" vague fantasy since the beginning of 2014.
I thought they were supposed to come (for real this time) with Coinbase regulated™ exchange. Where are they? In the 800k in bids there?

Oh yes, I forgot they are secretly crashing the price to accumulate  




Hint: Opening up a market where they could get in doesn't mean they will  

    
  
 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

Imho there is no jump to be expected until next halving. Everything else happening is just noise.

I've never seen the halving-drives-bubbles argument fully explained. It seems to me that since we are talking about CCMF price jumps of at least tenfold, and the inflation rate is nowhere near that, then either most bitcoins are immovable or the halving isn't in fact that important.

For example, if we have an inflation rate of 10% per year but investment increases tenfold during the year, then we still get roughly a 9x increase in price. Now if half the coins are immovable, either because they are lost or because for some reason the holders refuse to cash any out, then the effective inflation rate looks more like 20%. If 3/4 of the coins are immobile, then 40%. And if investment only increases by say 4x per year, then I think that's only like a 2.5x price increase during the non-halving years. But 4x vs. 2.5x is still not that much of a difference.

If the halving does make a huge difference, I would have to conclude that it's because few bitcoins actually make it to market for whatever reason. Perhaps it's the Bitcoin Baron's Paradox: "After the first few million dollars, why cash out any more? Fiat currency is a downright dangerous place to park your money!" (It could get frozen, banks could fail, dollar could collapse, etc. Gold has jurisdictional risks. Bitcoin is the ideal place for savings, so even if the price rises there is no reason to cash out very much more.)

[justusranvier]

If the halving does make a huge difference, I would have to conclude that it's because few bitcoins make it to market for whatever reason. Perhaps it's the Bitcoin Baron's Paradox: "After the first few million dollars, why cash out any more? Fiat currency is a downright dangerous place to park your money, it could get frozen, banks could fail, dollar could collapse, etc. Gold has jurisdictional risks. Bitcoin is the ideal place for savings, so even if the price rises there is no reason to cash out significantly more."

Bitcoin adoption is a form of emigration.

Prediction models whose accuracy depends on a long term stable equilibrium between Bitcoin and national currencies are wrong.

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

Bitcoin adoption is a form of emigration.

Prediction models whose accuracy depends on a long term stable equilibrium between Bitcoin and national currencies are wrong.

I guess we can say that either the halvings do make a huge difference and emigration into Bitcoin is already happening to a substantial degree, presumably usually for the practical reasons I mentioned, or the halvings don't make a huge difference and emigration isn't really happening but instead people are mostly optimizing for ending up with the most fiat. If the next halving triggers another moonshoot then we'll have additional confirmation that emigration is a much bigger factor than merely people playing for fiat profit.

I certainly don't expect a long-term stable equilibrium: if Bitcoin succeeds, fiat has nowhere to go but zero. However, I'm surprised that the emigration dynamic could already be taking hold to the extent that halvings would make such an enormous difference.

Do you think the emigration dynamic is being driven by the reasons I mentioned (Bitcoin Baron's Paradox / Bitcoin is just a safer, wiser, more flexible and reliable place to keep your nest egg), or more by ideology, or something else?

[hdbuck]

Imho there is no jump to be expected until next halving. Everything else happening is just noise.

I've never seen the halving-drives-bubbles argument fully explained. It seems to me that since we are talking about CCMF price jumps of at least tenfold, and the inflation rate is nowhere near that, then either most bitcoins are immovable or the halving isn't in fact that important.

For example, if we have an inflation rate of 10% per year but investment increases tenfold during the year, then we still get roughly a 9x increase in price. Now if half the coins are immovable, either because they are lost or because for some reason the holders refuse to cash any out, then the effective inflation rate looks more like 20%. If 3/4 of the coins are immobile, then 40%. And if investment only increases by say 4x per year, then I think that's only like a 2.5x price increase during the non-halving years. But 4x vs. 2.5x is still not that much of a difference.

If the halving does make a huge difference, I would have to conclude that it's because few bitcoins actually make it to market for whatever reason. Perhaps it's the Bitcoin Baron's Paradox: "After the first few million dollars, why cash out any more? Fiat currency is a downright dangerous place to park your money!" (It could get frozen, banks could fail, dollar could collapse, etc. Gold has jurisdictional risks. Bitcoin is the ideal place for savings, so even if the price rises there is no reason to cash out very much more.)

Im not quite sure I have the linguistics to fully explain my thoughts on this halving matter but i'll try..

So I understand Bitcoin's price as an equilibrium between the costs of the network to be operational (& secure) and pure speculation, which mostly derive from news (whether about Gox or Wall Street, which i rather call noise anyway).

However, regarding huge variations, which also happens quickly, i figured the speculation (news) part lags and tend to follow the price. Ergo, during last bubble, one might have had the illusion that the 'senate hearing' caused the ATH, but it was underway before that if you look closely.

I know that there has been more 'bubbles' than halvings since 2009, but i wouldnt weight equally the 2$ - 30$ - 200$ vs the 1200$ bubble.
For the first three, speculation and a bit of push from the early investors probably did the trick.
The last one OTOH was driven by more than simple speculation and MK's willy bot. The goodwill to sustain such skyrocketing direction and the inflow of money necessary was due, in my sense, to the simple anticipation of half less bitcoins hitting the market.

So for now, bitcoin monetary system is inflatory since ~5k BTC are mined everyday. Im not arguing where they end up, sold or hold, im just stating a fact, but i know people would disagree b/c of the 21M cap.
But whatever, economically, the effect is that we are in an inflatory system - for now. Hence, down we go.

However this inflation will be disturbed by halvings, making bitcoins less and less abundant. This is a deflationary mechanism. Hence, up we go.

The beauty of halving to me is that it encompasses both basic but huge economical and speculation effects. You just cant fight it.

So better watch out when the block reward will be halved to 12,5BTC

Anyhow thats just my 2cent on the matter..

If the halving does make a huge difference, I would have to conclude that it's because few bitcoins make it to market for whatever reason. Perhaps it's the Bitcoin Baron's Paradox: "After the first few million dollars, why cash out any more? Fiat currency is a downright dangerous place to park your money, it could get frozen, banks could fail, dollar could collapse, etc. Gold has jurisdictional risks. Bitcoin is the ideal place for savings, so even if the price rises there is no reason to cash out significantly more."

Bitcoin adoption is a form of emigration.

Prediction models whose accuracy depends on a long term stable equilibrium between Bitcoin and national currencies are wrong.

Bitcoin is a safe haven. People emigrating shouldnt if they only aim at buying frappucinos. It a wonderful and even more powerful tool to break free from financial oppression - or at least part of, cuz you still live in The System^TM ya know..

Anyhow true that there wont be a stable equilibrium between Bitcoin and national currency debt.

[cypherdoc]

i'd be interested. 

http://www.mediafire.com/view/aql2lsu7713pq55/nash_ideal_money.pdf

Thank you

[molecular]

Imho there is no jump to be expected until next halving. Everything else happening is just noise.

I've never seen the halving-drives-bubbles argument fully explained. It seems to me that since we are talking about CCMF price jumps of at least tenfold, and the inflation rate is nowhere near that, then either most bitcoins are immovable or the halving isn't in fact that important.

For example, if we have an inflation rate of 10% per year but investment increases tenfold during the year, then we still get roughly a 9x increase in price. Now if half the coins are immovable, either because they are lost or because for some reason the holders refuse to cash any out, then the effective inflation rate looks more like 20%. If 3/4 of the coins are immobile, then 40%. And if investment only increases by say 4x per year, then I think that's only like a 2.5x price increase during the non-halving years. But 4x vs. 2.5x is still not that much of a difference.

If the halving does make a huge difference, I would have to conclude that it's because few bitcoins actually make it to market for whatever reason. Perhaps it's the Bitcoin Baron's Paradox: "After the first few million dollars, why cash out any more? Fiat currency is a downright dangerous place to park your money!" (It could get frozen, banks could fail, dollar could collapse, etc. Gold has jurisdictional risks. Bitcoin is the ideal place for savings, so even if the price rises there is no reason to cash out very much more.)

I believe the halfing will have strong impact and I think you answered your own question (why?) at least partly: a lot of coins are immobile.

You're looking at inflation rate. Let me offer another way to look at this:

(I'm assuming miners are selling 100% of mined coins for simplicity, the argument works with less)

3600 BTC are mined each day. At current market price that's $900,000 worth. These BTC are being bought every day by demand. Now this selling pressure halves and the demand stays the same. Surely what will happen is the price will rise. In case of constant demand of $900k/day it should rise to 500 USD/BTC (merely double). But neither supply nor demand stay constant in such a scenario: supply is likely to decrease, because miners get to hoard more and most importantly demand will rise. Yes, I know, economic theory says demand should drop with a higher price,... but that's forgetting human psychology and the hype a 100% price rise will cause. In other words: the halving (reduction of supply) itself is just the ignition, the real momentum comes from increase of demand.

It worked last time, I think the Q1 2013 rally was caused (or at least substantially contributed to) by the halfing.

Does this make sense at all or is it wishful thinking?

[cypherdoc]

Imho there is no jump to be expected until next halving. Everything else happening is just noise.

I've never seen the halving-drives-bubbles argument fully explained. It seems to me that since we are talking about CCMF price jumps of at least tenfold, and the inflation rate is nowhere near that, then either most bitcoins are immovable or the halving isn't in fact that important.

For example, if we have an inflation rate of 10% per year but investment increases tenfold during the year, then we still get roughly a 9x increase in price. Now if half the coins are immovable, either because they are lost or because for some reason the holders refuse to cash any out, then the effective inflation rate looks more like 20%. If 3/4 of the coins are immobile, then 40%. And if investment only increases by say 4x per year, then I think that's only like a 2.5x price increase during the non-halving years. But 4x vs. 2.5x is still not that much of a difference.

If the halving does make a huge difference, I would have to conclude that it's because few bitcoins actually make it to market for whatever reason. Perhaps it's the Bitcoin Baron's Paradox: "After the first few million dollars, why cash out any more? Fiat currency is a downright dangerous place to park your money!" (It could get frozen, banks could fail, dollar could collapse, etc. Gold has jurisdictional risks. Bitcoin is the ideal place for savings, so even if the price rises there is no reason to cash out very much more.)

I believe the halfing will have strong impact and I think you answered your own question (why?) at least partly: a lot of coins are immobile.

You're looking at inflation rate. Let me offer another way to look at this:

(I'm assuming miners are selling 100% of mined coins for simplicity, the argument works with less)

3600 BTC are mined each day. At current market price that's $900,000 worth. These BTC are being bought every day by demand. Now this selling pressure halves and the demand stays the same. Surely what will happen is the price will rise. In case of constant demand of $900k/day it should rise to 500 USD/BTC (merely double). But neither supply nor demand stay constant in such a scenario: supply is likely to decrease, because miners get to hoard more and most importantly demand will rise. Yes, I know, economic theory says demand should drop with a higher price,... but that's forgetting human psychology and the hype a 100% price rise will cause. In other words: the halving (reduction of supply) itself is just the ignition, the real momentum comes from increase decrease of supply.

It worked last time, I think the Q1 2013 rally was caused (or at least substantially contributed to) by the halfing.

Does this make sense at all or is it wishful thinking?

Up

[hdbuck]

its all about the hoarding anyway:


http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/end-the-fed-hoard-bitcoins/

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=144911.0

[cypherdoc]

the desperation is palpable.  almost as bad as NJHJT:

The Bitcoin Blockchain Could Be Used to Spread Malware, INTERPOL Says

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-bitcoin-blockchain-could-be-used-to-spread-malware-interpol-says?utm_source=mbtwitter

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

This thread should have an indexIbex.

Anybody know around what page you all were discussing the topic of transaction fees increasing as coinbase rewards decrease?

[NotHatinJustTrollin]

This thread should have an index.

Anybody know around what page you all were discussing the topic of transaction fees increasing as coinbase rewards are decreasing?

Index:

Pages 1-100: Delusions

Pages 101-300: Fiat sucks

Pages 301-500: Gold sucks too

Pages 501-700: The State and bankers are evil, Bitcoin whales* will save the world

Pages 701-1119: Moar delusions






*:





http://www.deepdotweb.com/2015/03/27/breaking-sheep-marketplace-owner-arrested/

[hdbuck]

the Tomas dude is pretty hilarious tho.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

the Tomas dude is pretty hilarious tho.

This is why we need decentralized autonomous organizations. I guess

[hdbuck]

the Tomas dude is pretty hilarious tho.

This is why we need decentralized autonomous organizations. I guess

no, we need boobies.