Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

Ghash still down:

Everything is ok now that they are pointing their miners at other pools!

well that's the thing.

It's the open source ethos. Transparency and accountability.

You gotta be an optimist at some point in your life.

[_mr_e]

I'll feel much better when I see that p2pool pie slice look like ghash's.

[cypherdoc]

We need to prove this dude wrong:

"Inexorable consolidation will make the big banks even bigger. Economies of scale and the boundary-less nature of electronic technology will doom most small institutions."

http://www.moneynews.com/Economy/Gorman-bigger-banks-consumers/2014/07/10/id/581928/

[cypherdoc]

The emigration out of gold continues:

Considering the similarities between gold and Bitcoin, many expect Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies to take some of the market share of gold and other precious metals due to its superiority in ease of transport and a more convenient means of transfer. This new rush of gold companies into Bitcoin seems to validate these views."

http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/gold-companies-rushing-bitcoin/2014/07/11

[_mr_e]

Good tool:

If you use http://mempool.info/pools to look at the hash distribution you can use the following syntax to specify how many blocks to include:

http://mempool.info/poolrange/144

[cypherdoc]

Good tool:

If you use http://mempool.info/pools to look at the hash distribution you can use the following syntax to specify how many blocks to include:

http://mempool.info/poolrange/144

that is cool

[Peter R]

Funny how I used to laugh at those people who called gold the "barbarous relic" but since I've discovered Bitcoin I'm beginning to feel the same way. As a former precious metals dealer I appreciate how Bitcoin is so darn easy to use and precious metals are such a chore to deal with.

Me too.  I was preparing for a sale of some silver recently when the full impact of this hit me: man this stuff is heavy!  Moving forward, I see gold as a hedge against a security fault in bitcoin and something that central banks may cling to in a final effort to save fiat.  The concept of silver as money I now see as essentially pointless. 

[cypherdoc]

Funny how I used to laugh at those people who called gold the "barbarous relic" but since I've discovered Bitcoin I'm beginning to feel the same way. As a former precious metals dealer I appreciate how Bitcoin is so darn easy to use and precious metals are such a chore to deal with.

Me too.  I was preparing for a sale of some silver recently when the full impact of this hit me: man this stuff is heavy!  Moving forward, I see gold as a hedge against a security fault in bitcoin and something that central banks may cling to in a final effort to save fiat.  The concept of silver as money I now see as essentially pointless. 

queue heavy man pic

[thezerg]

This is a great article on the economic prospects and mass psychology behind the success of Uber. Much of this applies to bitcoin.

http://abovethecrowd.com/2014/07/11/how-to-miss-by-a-mile-an-alternative-look-at-ubers-potential-market-size/

The article mentions accuracy vs. precision, but is too kind.  This is a very common failing of economists -- formally they know better but in practice if they put a lot of work into a model they forget that it can be no more accurate than its input.

Engineers have a saying "garbage in -> garbage out"

[Trader Steve]

Funny how I used to laugh at those people who called gold the "barbarous relic" but since I've discovered Bitcoin I'm beginning to feel the same way. As a former precious metals dealer I appreciate how Bitcoin is so darn easy to use and precious metals are such a chore to deal with. I'm excited to see what the future will continue to bring. Maybe Open Transactions anonymous digital cash secured by bitcoin? Now that would be cool...

That's because gold as money/store of value wasn't outdated until bitcoin showed up.
You were right to laugh then, and you are right to feel this way now.

So true. Bitcoin was the unexpected "Black Swan."

[cypherdoc]

Funny how I used to laugh at those people who called gold the "barbarous relic" but since I've discovered Bitcoin I'm beginning to feel the same way. As a former precious metals dealer I appreciate how Bitcoin is so darn easy to use and precious metals are such a chore to deal with. I'm excited to see what the future will continue to bring. Maybe Open Transactions anonymous digital cash secured by bitcoin? Now that would be cool...

That's because gold as money/store of value wasn't outdated until bitcoin showed up.
You were right to laugh then, and you are right to feel this way now.

So true. Bitcoin was the unexpected "Black Swan."

Bitcoin is gold's Black Swan.

Sorta has a ring to it.

[ArticMine]

Funny how I used to laugh at those people who called gold the "barbarous relic" but since I've discovered Bitcoin I'm beginning to feel the same way. As a former precious metals dealer I appreciate how Bitcoin is so darn easy to use and precious metals are such a chore to deal with. I'm excited to see what the future will continue to bring. Maybe Open Transactions anonymous digital cash secured by bitcoin? Now that would be cool...

That's because gold as money/store of value wasn't outdated until bitcoin showed up.
You were right to laugh then, and you are right to feel this way now.

So true. Bitcoin was the unexpected "Black Swan."

Bitcoin is gold's Black Swan.

Sorta has a ring to it.

Precious metals have a huge weakness in that it is very expensive and difficult to take delivery. As a result holders and traders of PMs have for millennia relied on trusted third parties to 1) Guarantee the fineness of PMs and 2) Store and transport PMs. Over these same millennia these "trusted third parties" have engaged in their own shenanigans from the debasement of the Denarius during the Roman Empire to fractional reserve banking by the Rothschilds to the conspiracy theories surrounding the German gold at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. It is these critical flaws with PMs that led to the rise of fiat currencies.

Bitcoin solves these critical flaws with PMs by eliminating the need for these "trusted third parties" and their shenanigans.

[tvbcof]

Funny how I used to laugh at those people who called gold the "barbarous relic" but since I've discovered Bitcoin I'm beginning to feel the same way. As a former precious metals dealer I appreciate how Bitcoin is so darn easy to use and precious metals are such a chore to deal with.

Me too.  I was preparing for a sale of some silver recently when the full impact of this hit me: man this stuff is heavy!  Moving forward, I see gold as a hedge against a security fault in bitcoin and something that central banks may cling to in a final effort to save fiat.  The concept of silver as money I now see as essentially pointless. 

I had a taxi drop me off at the bank with some silver once on the way back from the airport.  As soon as he left I remembered that my safe deposit box key was in my apartment some blocks away.  Shit!  I couldn't very well just leave the stuff on a park bench so I had to lug it all the way to my apartment to get my key then all the way back (my car being parked closer to the bank than to my apartment anyway and parking in the Bay area being a nightmare.)

Ya, Bitcoin has a variety of advantages.  Some of these, and this one in particular, were key to Bitcoin capturing my interest some years later.

To you point about 'money', I see it as the opposite.  Gold is fairly useless as 'money' because it is to valuable.  Junk silver is just about right.  I should point out that I don't see either as being useful as 'money' as long as the USD works fine, and it performs admirably as money at the moment.  If I had confidence in this state of affairs persisting in perpetuity I would not be terribly interest in gold, silver, or Bitcoin.

[cypherdoc]

I should point out that I don't see either as being useful as 'money' as long as the USD works fine, and it performs admirably as money at the moment.  If I had confidence in this state of affairs persisting in perpetuity I would not be terribly interest in gold, silver, or Bitcoin.

Alot of the time when I read your posts I think you just enjoy listening to yourself talk. Of course, I could be guilty of that myself but I usually don't write in contradictions.

Thinking that the USD performs admirably while investing significantly in pm's and bitcoin, at least to the extent that you've told us, sounds ridiculous. Perhaps you meant "tolerably" at best.  Given the Fed's 2% inflation policy, USD hegemony in all its forms, QE, legal fiat status for taxes and debt settlement (forced acceptance), etc, I think that would be a more accurate description don't you?

[ArticMine]

I should point out that I don't see either as being useful as 'money' as long as the USD works fine, and it performs admirably as money at the moment.  If I had confidence in this state of affairs persisting in perpetuity I would not be terribly interest in gold, silver, or Bitcoin.

Alot of the time when I read your posts I think you just enjoy listening to yourself talk. Of course, I could be guilty of that myself but I usually don't write in contradictions.

Thinking that the USD performs admirably while investing significantly in pm's and bitcoin, at least to the extent that you've told us, sounds ridiculous. Perhaps you meant "tolerably" at best.  Given the Fed's 2% inflation policy, USD hegemony in all its forms, QE, legal fiat status for taxes and debt settlement (forced acceptance), etc, I think that would be a more accurate description don't you?

It depends on the time frame. If one is looking to preserve wealth for under a 1 month period USD or another of the G7 fiat currencies are an excellent choice. If one is looking to preserve wealth for a period of 18 months or more BTC wins hands down. By the way I am currently invested 102.2% in BTC 0.2% in LTC and -2.4% in CAD. My second choice after BTC / LTC (for diversification from BTC / LTC) would actually be USD or another of the G7 fiat currencies. As for PMs I am staying well away. Ditto for stocks and real estate (the latter because I live in Canada). PMs can crash brutally and even in their best scenario a inflationary collapse of USD are very likely to under perform BTC.

One does not have to expect the collapse of USD in order to invest in BTC.

[Peter R]

To you point about 'money', I see it as the opposite.  Gold is fairly useless as 'money' because it is to valuable.  Junk silver is just about right.  I should point out that I don't see either as being useful as 'money' as long as the USD works fine, and it performs admirably as money at the moment.  If I had confidence in this state of affairs persisting in perpetuity I would not be terribly interest in gold, silver, or Bitcoin.

I should have clarified what I meant: given that bitcoin was invented, silver is pointless.  But I think gold still has some benefit as a high-density purely physical store of value (e.g., as a hedge against the unlikely event IMO that bitcoin fails).  

If bitcoin had never been invented, then silver is useful for exactly the reason you said: gold is too valuable to ever be useful for day-to-day purchases.

Slightly off topic, but it's interesting to note that we both seem to agree that the point of monetary silver is to make up for a deficit in gold (it's hard to scrap off $2 of gold to buy a loaf of bread).  Because of bitcoin's divisibility and weightlessness, the notion that some alt-coin will become the "silver to bitcoin's gold" is nonsense.

[thezerg]

To you point about 'money', I see it as the opposite.  Gold is fairly useless as 'money' because it is to valuable.  Junk silver is just about right.  I should point out that I don't see either as being useful as 'money' as long as the USD works fine, and it performs admirably as money at the moment.  If I had confidence in this state of affairs persisting in perpetuity I would not be terribly interest in gold, silver, or Bitcoin.

I should have clarified what I meant: given that bitcoin was invented, silver is pointless.  But I think gold still has some benefit as a high-density purely physical store of value (e.g., as a hedge against the unlikely event IMO that bitcoin fails).  

If bitcoin had never been invented, then silver is useful for exactly the reason you said: gold is too valuable to ever be useful for day-to-day purchases.

Slightly off topic, but it's interesting to note that we both seem to agree that the point of monetary silver is to make up for a deficit in gold (it's hard to scrap off $2 of gold to buy a loaf of bread).  Because of bitcoin's divisibility and weightlessness, the notion that some alt-coin will become the "silver to bitcoin's gold" is nonsense.

Yes in regards to litecoin.  But I see a micropayment coin being successful.  It will have a fundamentally different structure.   Instead of history it will have a db.  Blockchain will cointain hash of the db state and the txns reqd to get there from prior state.  Old blockchain can therefore be forgotten.   It will encourage address reuse by higher txn fee to new addr.  This will make the db size grow much slower than number of txns does which is key feature of u payment coin.

[Peter R]

Yes in regards to litecoin.  But I see a micropayment coin being successful.  It will have a fundamentally different structure.   Instead of history it will have a db.  Blockchain will cointain hash of the db state and the txns reqd to get there from prior state.  Old blockchain can therefore be forgotten.   It will encourage address reuse by higher txn fee to new addr.  This will make the db size grow much slower than number of txns does which is key feature of u payment coin.

I acknowledge the usefulness of micropayments, but I can't imagine an entirely separate currency (as in a currency with an exchange rate that floats with respect to bitcoin) being the solution.  I don't have an answer for what I think the solution will look like, however, but I think it will be tied intimately to bitcoin's ledger.  I do see your point about the db minimizing blockchain growth. 

[thezerg]

Yes in regards to litecoin.  But I see a micropayment coin being successful.  It will have a fundamentally different structure.   Instead of history it will have a db.  Blockchain will cointain hash of the db state and the txns reqd to get there from prior state.  Old blockchain can therefore be forgotten.   It will encourage address reuse by higher txn fee to new addr.  This will make the db size grow much slower than number of txns does which is key feature of u payment coin.

I acknowledge the usefulness of micropayments, but I can't imagine an entirely separate currency (as in a currency with an exchange rate that floats with respect to bitcoin) being the solution.  I don't have an answer for what I think the solution will look like, however, but I think it will be tied intimately to bitcoin's ledger.  I do see your point about the db minimizing blockchain growth. 

Yes sidechain would be better

[tvbcof]

I should point out that I don't see either as being useful as 'money' as long as the USD works fine, and it performs admirably as money at the moment.  If I had confidence in this state of affairs persisting in perpetuity I would not be terribly interest in gold, silver, or Bitcoin.

Alot of the time when I read your posts I think you just enjoy listening to yourself talk. Of course, I could be guilty of that myself but I usually don't write in contradictions.

Thinking that the USD performs admirably while investing significantly in pm's and bitcoin, at least to the extent that you've told us, sounds ridiculous. Perhaps you meant "tolerably" at best.  Given the Fed's 2% inflation policy, USD hegemony in all its forms, QE, legal fiat status for taxes and debt settlement (forced acceptance), etc, I think that would be a more accurate description don't you?

I use 'money' for transaction.  PM's and Bitcoin are, to me, a different asset class, and at least in part solutions for problems that we don't currently have (and hopefully never will.)

Legal Tender is kind of the 'killer app' for USD since I spend a lot of my time in the real world and not some fantasy la-la-land.  I also appreciate the predictability of the USD for use as money in terms of inflation rate.  I've been sitting tight on my Bitcoin for half a year now since it is down like 50% from what I'd like to get for it.  Gold/Silver much longer than that.

I've never been comfortable doing many transactions with Bitcoin because it just won't scale.  Sure, in the early times (which we are still in) it would be practical to use it for all kinds of shit (even Satoshi Dice messaging back in the day) but that situation is transient.  I don't want to get habituated to something I know won't work, and I even less want to see Bitcoin hammered into a different shape to overcome this problem (before a real solution like sidechains or treechains comes along.)  When I do do Bitcoin transactions from my own client I pay like $10 or whatever as a transaction fee because that is how I think the system could sustain in the form I would like to see.  I'm a man of principle I guess   Said a different way, I don't really visualize Bitcoin as 'money' in the same way I don't see gold as playing that role.  Both are ill-suited to any but specialized transactions.

Lastly, I consider Bitcoin to be experimental and quite risky.  We've dodged several notable bullets so far, and as the solution grows, ducking and weaving will become less practical.  And it's always a possibility that a direct hit could come along.  1) The BDB mis-config was solved by the grace of friendly miners.  If not-so-friendly entities, or those under control of not-so-friendly entities had been around the outcome could have been different.  2) The mutability thing was annoying mostly because Bitcoin is still in it's infancy, but exposed some dev priority issues and lack of rigor.  3) The Heartbleed thing could have been utterly devastating if anyone used the stupid payment protocol x.509 crap.  And God knows what else is lurking in OpenSSL and/or your friendly RNG of choice (someone's choice, but probably not yours.)  Both have been subjects of extreme interest by the likes of the NSA for a while.

All that said, I still float quite a lot of value in BTC, and it would hurt plenty to lose it.  Part of why I do is that I've taken out a hell of a lot more than I put in.  Being rigorous in a scheme which precludes loss or theft is exceedingly technical and cumbersome (to my level of precision.)  Yet another reason why Bitcoin sucks as 'money.'  OTOH, I keep loose (bitcoin) change kicking around so that isn't a terribly big deal really.