Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[zeetubes]

fundamentals aside, what do you guys think of this technical pic of silver?

There is no such thing as a technical pic of silver, but some of the base metals' prices still seem to be driven by supply and demand. Price discovery in economics ended many years ago. Perhaps we can talk about a technical pic of Libor (Barclays used to run an ad proclaiming they had the best "fixed" rates for savers).

[adamstgBit]

fundamentals aside, what do you guys think of this technical pic of silver?

silver had a bubble, then it corrected itself, now its trying to bottom. silver is very volatile, I think 17.5$ coming relatively soon, silver possibly as low as 13$ for a day in 2014-2015 for

[domob]

Bank Run!

http://stratrisks.com/geostrat/20075

Yes, I was very surprised to read about it, too.  (Not that the general situation surprises me, but that the media report about things like these is relatively new to me.)  Here's another report (in German): http://orf.at/stories/2235964/  They even refer to the ones telling others to withdraw their money as "criminals".  Very interesting indeed!

[Adrian-x]

Here's a claim I cannot believe:

• Today we're at 100,000 people a day buying their first bitcoin. (14:40)

what? Where's he getting this number. Seems way too high to me.

Yeah, I have no idea where he got this number from - it is more likely that 100,000 per month (I hope).

I understood it as an interpretation. I heard 100,000 buying Bitcoin like the statistic was derived from active training.

[FRNZ]

Professor Bitcorn is about to go down in history.

This article contains some fresh quotes from the good professor.

https://news.vice.com/article/silk-road-bitcoin-auction-opened-by-us-marshals-service

had no idea he's still around

[cypherdoc]

Professor Bitcorn is about to go down in history.

This article contains some fresh quotes from the good professor.

https://news.vice.com/article/silk-road-bitcoin-auction-opened-by-us-marshals-service

what's so mystifying is that someone, with his supposed expertise in markets, can make such ludicrous statements about the Bitcoin price and the market place surrounding it. 

his logic is even worse than some of the trolls that populate this forum.  i'd even go as far as to say they are childish in that it's clear he has an agenda and is most offended by the price NOT doing what he wants it to.  i wonder if he's ever traded a stock or bond in his life. 

what's also hypocritical is that he supposedly owns some bitcoin.

sometimes it's worse not to know what you don't know. 

[cypherdoc]

Looks to me like altcoins decoupling inversely to Bitcoin:

[windjc]

Looks to me like altcoins decoupling inversely to Bitcoin:

Good time to buy altcoins then.

[smoothie]

Looks to me like altcoins decoupling inversely to Bitcoin:

Good time to buy altcoins then.

Not yet...wait for blood in the streets.

[justusranvier]

Good time to buy altcoins then.

There's never a good time to buy altcoins.

The only people who profit from altcoins are those who are in on the premine, because they don't have to buy theirs.

[windjc]

Good time to buy altcoins then.

There's never a good time to buy altcoins.

The only people who profit from altcoins are those who are in on the premine, because they don't have to buy theirs.

Not true. In fact, blatantly false.

[Melbustus]

Looks to me like altcoins decoupling inversely to Bitcoin:

...

Yes, indeed. What I think is happening is that, finally, mercifully, the market is understanding that none of the popular alts today offer anything meaningful over bitcoin. So why not just use bitcoin?

A few dynamics are playing out:

1) The litecoin fanboys' idiotic "ASIC-resistant"/scrypt-is-better rationale is finally empirically false (though those of us with just 1/3 of a brain figured that out in 2012). So that entire family tree of coins is now obviously just clones/tweaks.
2) The new crop of anonymity promising coins is getting even the relatively thick-headed to question why these alts that offer nothing over bitcoin command such value. All the discussion of fungibility has raised the anon issue to the surface, and I think many people have realized that it might be the first meaningful "feature" an alt could actually offer. It looked like the test was going to be Zerocoin, but now we're seeing the CryptoNotes supposedly offer this. Whatever the ultimate reality of whether those coins do what they claim, or what may ultimately win that particular use-case battle, the point is that more would-be lite- nxt- dark- feather- junk- coin fanboys are now asking "why?" just a little more deeply. And that's not a good thing for any coin but bitcoin.

[cypherdoc]

The blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as money - cypherdoc  

note how i might have to start slapping my name on all my memes because of dudes like Zhoutonged.

[Melbustus]

The blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as money-cypherdoc  -
...

That one I'm not so sure about. The bitcoin blockchain is a fantastic timestamped authority of record. Money is memory, so obviously that's a wonderful use (probably the best use). But there are others.

IIRC, your above assertion was original spawned out of a discussion pertaining to sidechains and Ethereum; I think your assertion is more specifically saying that the blockchain may never be applicable to something that's as functionally unbounded as those ideas.

[smoothie]

Looks to me like altcoins decoupling inversely to Bitcoin:

...

Yes, indeed. What I think is happening is that, finally, mercifully, the market is understanding that none of the popular alts today offer anything meaningful over bitcoin. So why not just use bitcoin?

A few dynamics are playing out:

1) The litecoin fanboys' idiotic "ASIC-resistant"/scrypt-is-better rationale is finally empirically false (though those of us with just 1/3 of a brain figured that out in 2012). So that entire family tree of coins is now obviously just clones/tweaks.
2) The new crop of anonymity promising coins is getting even the relatively thick-headed to question why these alts that offer nothing over bitcoin command such value. All the discussion of fungibility has raised the anon issue to the surface, and I think many people have realized that it might be the first meaningful "feature" an alt could actually offer. It looked like the test was going to be Zerocoin, but now we're seeing the CryptoNotes supposedly offer this. Whatever the ultimate reality of whether those coins do what they claim, or what may ultimately win that particular use-case battle, the point is that more would-be lite- nxt- dark- feather- junk- coin fanboys are now asking "why?" just a little more deeply. And that's not a good thing for any coin but bitcoin.

You forgot the dynamic where certain Bitcoin only fanboys were saying "Litecoin is doing to die blah blah blah" when Litecoin was $0.005 each in 2012.

Look at how wrong they were.

Of course we are seeing a shift from alts to Bitcoin, but the cycle will continue I believe as long as there is the free-space to have alts.

Don't be surprised if a coin like Litecoin sticks around much longer than some may anticipate. I'm not bullish on Litecoin now but I do believe you will see it bottom out and rebound as it has so many times before.

[majamalu]

The blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as money - cypherdoc  

note how i might have to start slapping my name on all my memes because of dudes like Zhoutonged.

You should record that in the blockchain  

[cypherdoc]

The blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as money-cypherdoc  -
...

That one I'm not so sure about. The bitcoin blockchain is a fantastic timestamped authority of record. Money is memory, so obviously that's a wonderful use (probably the best use). But there are others.

IIRC, your above assertion was original spawned out of a discussion pertaining to sidechains and Ethereum; I think your assertion is more specifically saying that the blockchain may never be applicable to something that's as functionally unbounded as those ideas.

Yes, as it stands now, services like POE are useful. I'm fully aware of that and i cant be sure of my theory yet.

but imagine a world where bitcoin does in fact become the global reserve currency and block size never grows out of fear of disrupting the protocol. the price of a single bitcoin would skyrocket and a single Satoshi could be worth several thousand.

modifying the  protocol to push the decimal point to the right wouldn't be worth the risk to embed $2.00 items.

[Melbustus]

Looks to me like altcoins decoupling inversely to Bitcoin:

...

Yes, indeed. What I think is happening is that, finally, mercifully, the market is understanding that none of the popular alts today offer anything meaningful over bitcoin. So why not just use bitcoin?

A few dynamics are playing out:

1) The litecoin fanboys' idiotic "ASIC-resistant"/scrypt-is-better rationale is finally empirically false (though those of us with just 1/3 of a brain figured that out in 2012). So that entire family tree of coins is now obviously just clones/tweaks.
2) The new crop of anonymity promising coins is getting even the relatively thick-headed to question why these alts that offer nothing over bitcoin command such value. All the discussion of fungibility has raised the anon issue to the surface, and I think many people have realized that it might be the first meaningful "feature" an alt could actually offer. It looked like the test was going to be Zerocoin, but now we're seeing the CryptoNotes supposedly offer this. Whatever the ultimate reality of whether those coins do what they claim, or what may ultimately win that particular use-case battle, the point is that more would-be lite- nxt- dark- feather- junk- coin fanboys are now asking "why?" just a little more deeply. And that's not a good thing for any coin but bitcoin.

You forgot the dynamic where certain Bitcoin only fanboys were saying "Litecoin is doing to die blah blah blah" when Litecoin was $0.005 each in 2012.

Only if those who were saying "Litecoin is doing to die blah blah blah" gave a timeframe AND didn't see the potential for a temporary rise due to the then-current ignorance of the community. Being right on the fundamentals often comes with a high-tolerance for waiting until the market catches up with you.

Of course we are seeing a shift from alts to Bitcoin, but the cycle will continue I believe as long as there is the free-space to have alts.

I actually think there is space to have alts as well. But as with the precious-metals market, I think there will only ever be a few that have lasting value, and one that has orders-of-magnitude dominant value.

Don't be surprised if a coin like Litecoin sticks around much longer than some may anticipate. I'm not bullish on Litecoin now but I do believe you will see it bottom out and rebound as it has so many times before.

Litecoin hasn't been faced with the two things I noted above before:
1) Having some of its core misguided thesis irrefutably disproved.
2) The emergence of coins with actual feature-benefits to the ecosystem, not just more me-too clones.

I agree that litecoin will continue to exist, probably with non-trivial value. But if I had to bet at even-money that LTC would be the #2 crypto in 5yrs?...nope.

[justusranvier]

You forgot the dynamic where certain Bitcoin only fanboys were saying "Litecoin is doing to die blah blah blah" when Litecoin was $0.005 each in 2012.

You're measuring the exchange rate of Litecoin in the wrong units.

http://www.cryptocoincharts.info/period-charts.php?period=alltime&resolution=day&pair=ltc-btc&market=btc-e

[vokain]

my favorite one was this one

Bitcoin is not an experiment.   It is a living organism - much like a virus.   It mutates.