rpietila Calling the Bottom

[Adrian-x]

As a hardcore hodler you know the market is in despair when your mental attitude switches from "*hark* *hark* all those cheap coins, come to daddy!" to "oh crap better sell some now this thing could actually go down, better save than sorry".  

This is going to be the longest down trend in history, those private keys will have to be pried from my cold dead hands.

I had my "oh crap" moment at the end of 2012, and I can't imagine any futurist investors investing big thinking it may be a good idea to be overextended to Bitcoin, my bet is they're in it to the end.

I'm watching Silbert, when he gets squirmish, I'll know the tide is about to turn.

[SlipperySlope]

I bought some fractional bitcoin today from my local gunshop's ATM. Feels good.

[JorgeStolfi]

I bought a castle because I understood the content of the OP last year. Now, even though there is much more evidence that it is true, and this is a Bitcoin forum, and the text is freely available for all, still many people not only refuse to believe it, but actually ridicule me!

I don't know whether that comment is directed a me and that old "10%" joke, but assuming it is:

I did not intend to ridicule your person (ahem, even though you wrote some nasty things about my person on another thread  ). But I did intend to ridicule your logic, "my method works because I got rich following it".

You got rich because you bought a lot of BTC at 3$ each and held most of them until now.  Period.   Your decision was certainly very profitable, but it cannot be assumed that is was wise, rather than just lucky.  Just because you used one particular reasoning to decide to hold, it does not follow that the reasoning was sound, much less that the method will give the right decision for the next year or two.  If you had used tarot cards and they told you to hold, you would be just as rich, but the method would be just as invalid, and any future predictions from them would be just as irrelevant.

You saw the WorldCom plot.  After five years of nearly perfect exponential growth, by your reasoning there should have been at least two more years of the same.  Well, there weren't.   In mid-2000, when the price was visibly below that trend, by your reasoning there should have been a sharp rise, to bring it back to the trend.   Well, there wasn't.

Will there be another Bitcoin bubble?  Analysis of past prices cannot tell you that.  The past bubbles were not caused by some mysterious Price Extrapolation Force, but by specific events that suddenly expanded the demand.  So one should ask whether similar events will occur in the future.   We just cannot tell that at this time.

[Bitcopia]

I bought a castle because I understood the content of the OP last year. Now, even though there is much more evidence that it is true, and this is a Bitcoin forum, and the text is freely available for all, still many people not only refuse to believe it, but actually ridicule me!

I don't know whether that comment is directed a me and that old "10%" joke, but assuming it is:

I did not intend to ridicule your person (ahem, even though you wrote some nasty things about my person on another thread  ). But I did intend to ridicule your logic, "my method works because I got rich following it".

You got rich because you bought a lot of BTC at 3$ each and held most of them until now.  Period.   Your decision was certainly very profitable, but it cannot be assumed that is was wise, rather than just lucky.  Just because you used one particular reasoning to decide to hold, it does not follow that the reasoning was sound, much less that the method will give the right decision for the next year or two.  If you had used tarot cards and they told you to hold, you would be just as rich, but the method would be just as invalid, and any future predictions from them would be just as irrelevant.

You saw the WorldCom plot.  After five years of nearly perfect exponential growth, by your reasoning there should have been at least two more years of the same.  Well, there weren't.   In mid-2000, when the price was visibly below that trend, by your reasoning there should have been a sharp rise, to bring it back to the trend.   Well, there wasn't.

Will there be another Bitcoin bubble?  Analysis of past prices cannot tell you that.  The past bubbles were not caused by some mysterious Price Extrapolation Force, but by specific events that suddenly expanded the demand.  So one should ask whether similar events will occur in the future.   We just cannot tell that at this time.

Did WorldCom create one of the most innovative and useful platforms of this generation? Did WorldCom have an arena of venture capitalists investing into different businesses built on its protocol? No. In fact:

WorldCom, plagued by the rapid erosion of its profits and an accounting scandal that created billions in illusory earnings, last night submitted the largest bankruptcy filing in United States history.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/22/us/worldcom-s-collapse-the-overview-worldcom-files-for-bankruptcy-largest-us-case.html

This kind of situation you are correlating as a potential near-term future for Bitcoin is exactly one of many situations the Bitcoin protocol is quite capable of preventing. Prevention of fraudulent accounting. Absolute transparency for public companies, officials, records, governments, etc. Anyway, that's off topic.

The point is, WorldCom and Bitcoin have absolutely nothing in common. WorldCom bubbled and collapsed because they were fudging their books. You can stop correlating it to Bitcoin now.

[JorgeStolfi]

The point is, WorldCom and Bitcoin have absolutely nothing in common.

The argument that some bitcoiners use to "prove" that a new Bitcoin bubble is due "very soon now" is solely that the price in log scale seems to fit a straight line.   They claim that we do not need to look for the reasons of past bubbles, the plot alone is "proof" enough that they must occur regularly, because that is how the exponential trend has been created.  And the next bubble is overdue, they say, because the price plot is falling below that straight line.

Well, the WorldCom share price too fit a straight line in log scale, even better than bitcon's.   By the extrapolators' logic, it should not matter why WorldCom stopped following the trend.

That is why WorldCom is a totally pertinent example: it shows that the past history of the price is irrelevant for predicting the future.  One must look for the causes of that past growth, and try to figure out whether those causes will prevail in the future, and be aware that  unpredictable events (like the WorldCom managers' fraud) may spoil the trend at any moment.

Did WorldCom create one of the most innovative and useful platforms of this generation?

Did Bitcoin?  We still have to see how useful it will be.

You seem to be confusing "bitcoin" with "distributed cryptocurrency".  Note that "the" Bitcoin is to distributed cryptocurrency as WorldCom was to long-distance communications.    Even if an innovative service turns out to be terribly useful, it does not follow that a particular entreprise that provides it will be a success.

Did WorldCom have an arena of venture capitalists investing into different businesses built on its protocol? 

I see many shrewd businessmen investing in different ways of getting money from people who believe in bitcoin, yes.

By the way, WoldCom's market cap was in the tens of billions at its highest.  As a long-distance communications company, you can bet that there were many companies building their businesses around its services.

This kind of situation you are correlating as a potential near-term future for Bitcoin is exactly one of many situations the Bitcoin protocol is quite capable of preventing. Prevention of fraudulent accounting. Absolute transparency for public companies, officials, records, governments, etc.

How can you say that, after MtGOX and the hundreds of thefts and scams that have already occurred in Bitcoin's short history, almost all made possible -- and almost all still unsolved -- because of bitcoin's alleged "qualities"?  Bitcoin attracts and facilitates scams, theft, and embezzlement like no other payment method ever.  Indeed, these "qualities" are one of several reasons why I am quite skeptical about its longterm success.

[2weiX]

Doesn't look too good.
If we go break out of the triangle on the downside, we're good for another crash.
If we reverse and break out on the upsid, 580 is the next resistance.

[rpietila]

I bought a castle because I understood the content of the OP last year. Now, even though there is much more evidence that it is true, and this is a Bitcoin forum, and the text is freely available for all, still many people not only refuse to believe it, but actually ridicule me!

You saw the WorldCom plot.  After five years of nearly perfect exponential growth, by your reasoning
...

Did you actually read the OP?   Please revisit my reasoning. Hint: "pregnant with WorldCom" never existed.

Will there be another Bitcoin bubble?  Analysis of past prices cannot tell you that. - -  We just cannot tell that at this time.

I could tell last time. I can tell this time (within the bounds of realistic +EV such as 50/50 chance of winning 1000%, in which Kelly suggests to invest 50% of your holdings, which I have done, and you should too). Analysis is not luck. Finding mechanism for past price developments and applying them to the future is not luck. Following sound concepts from other brands of mathematics is not luck.

That a professor is trying to label my investing over the past 21 years when I started using other than saving accounts for risk management, "luck", is lamentable. It is not an indication of his very good capability in this area.

[BitCoinNutJob]

Thanks OP for bringing some sense to speculation.  If BTC is $40k? in 17 months like you suggest i will be buying a castle of my own.  

Im a believer.

[falllling]

Doesn't look too good.
If we go break out of the triangle on the downside, we're good for another crash.
If we reverse and break out on the upsid, 580 is the next resistance.

of cause bitcoin is going down!

[Zarathustra]

of cause bitcoin is going down!

Of cause?
The more such illiterate fools we find in the bear camp, unable to deliver any kind of analysis, the better for bitcoin.

[Newbie1022]

of cause bitcoin is going down!

Of cause?
The more such illiterate fools we find in the bear camp, unable to deliver any kind of analysis, the better for bitcoin.

Says the hodlers?

[mmortal03]

...
Ahh ... but where are the network effects in religion with respect to Pascal's Wager? Do more believers make a certain God more likely to exist?

I used Pascal's wager as an illustration of an argument that appears reasonable until examined.  I hope I didn't accidently suggest that Bitcoin is God.  The network effect is at work in every mass-adoption scenario.  It does, indeed, tend towards exponential growth.  Until it doesn't.
The network effect is not a law of nature, it is a way of explaining exponential growth when it happens.  There was an 80s TV ad for Faberge Organics shampoo:

"When I first tried Faberge Organics Shampoo with pure wheat germ oil and honey, it was so good I told two friends about it.  And they told two friends.  And so on, and so on…"

Network effect in action.
Now the whole world is using nothing but Faberge Organics shampoo.  Couldn't have ended any other way.
You use Faberge Organics?

lol: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL2r5dEUKac

[mmortal03]

As a hardcore hodler you know the market is in despair when your mental attitude switches from "*hark* *hark* all those cheap coins, come to daddy!" to "oh crap better sell some now this thing could actually go down, better save than sorry".  

This is going to be the longest down trend in history, those private keys will have to be pried from my cold dead hands.

I had my "oh crap" moment at the end of 2012, and I can't imagine any futurist investors investing big thinking it may be a good idea to be overextended to Bitcoin, my bet is they're in it to the end.

I'm watching Silbert, when he gets squirmish, I'll know the tide is about to turn.

It'd definitely be nice to see some libertarian, futurist billionaires invest large amounts into it because they are supportive of the concept.

[rpietila]

Blockchain, as a technology, is indestructible. A reasonable starting point is to understand that crypto is here to stay, and no laws or wars can stop it. Any individual cryptocoin, Bitcoin included, has challenges particular to it, and local laws and wars may prove detrimental to individuals' wealth, as well as life.

People can only learn more about Bitcoin, unlearning is not possible. With any technology, invention or innovation, there is an adoption curve that is the aggregate of all the people's individual propensities of learning about a new thing, deciding to use it, trying it, and amplifying their usage to significant levels. On average, the process from first hearing about something, to trying it, takes 2 years. From trying to actual adoption, we might add 1 more year.

The current number of Bitcoin owners is likely a paltry 1-2 million. Even smaller is the number of people who actively use Bitcoin in their life. The first number, at least, has not grown significantly in 2014. Enthusiasm has given way to apathy, evidenced by both price and volume of trades lagging far behind their highs.

Meanwhile, the 2 years average delay from first hearing to first trial, is slowly becoming fulfilled in hundreds of millions of people. There were millions who heard about the bubble in 2011, and their "2 years" started counting. Not enough of them were ready to buy in 2012, which was still a year of slow price appreciation. But in 2013, the great advances were made by the people who had had 2 years to ensure themselves that it was not a fly-by-night. In 2012, the global media coverage about Bitcoin was tiny, but in 2013 all changed. In two years, we are talking about 100x more people in the pipeline of becoming Bitcoin owners.

This gives rise to the exponential trendline. There is only one way to draw a trendline with the best R^2 fit (follows from the fact that goodness-of-fit is a universal criterion), and it is shown here. The number of Bitcoin users is so small at 1-2 million that the trendline should stay exponential 2 more orders of magnitude minimum.

An added reason is that because Bitcoin is money, and the exponential trendline means exponential gains for everyone involved, it makes sense to speculate and buy a large number of bitcoins instead of the fair share. (The fair share assuming worldwide adoption is BTC0.002 and assuming that only the elite of 3% world's richest and most connected buy it, BTC0.07.)

An increasing number of people are already ready to buy bitcoins. Banks, ETF's, private services, etc. have the infrastructure ready for launch. Both are waiting. Bitcoin holders are anxious, but as long as their anxiety results in them selling more bitcoins to the deep-pocket investors, the wait continues. In 2012 it continued quite long, with price going up only a little (more than 100% though).

Hearing about Bitcoin is the start of your Bitcoin pregnancy. Of these pregnancies, not all perhaps result in a healthy baby (adopting Bitcoin as your home currency), but luckily here, the time is not limited to 9 months. The average with those who currently are power users may have been 3 years (or less, since the delay is shorter with people with the early adopter mindset), but for others it may be 5 years. Miscarriages happen often, but the reverse-miscarriage is also a very typical occurrence.

We have a world-record number of Bitcoin pregnancies going on now, and hardly any births for several months already. I believe that the laws of nature and mathematics will take care that the babies will be seen in increasing numbers.

The trendline shows how much behind we are currently. The price shows the daily birth rate. I am writing this from a castle that I bought with money earned by trading Bitcoin based on the very premise I have explained to you here.

I believe that the next one might carry us north of $10,000. The longer time we spend here, the more explosive it gets. The supermove from $2 to $266 (133x price appreciation) took 17 months. Extrapolate that with the starting point of $340 in 2014-4-11.

[mmortal03]

How can you say that, after MtGOX and the hundreds of thefts and scams that have already occurred in Bitcoin's short history, almost all made possible -- and almost all still unsolved -- because of bitcoin's alleged "qualities"?  Bitcoin attracts and facilitates scams, theft, and embezzlement like no other payment method ever.  Indeed, these "qualities" are one of several reasons why I am quite skeptical about its longterm success.

Cash still has it beat on those terms by a large margin.

[JorgeStolfi]

How can you say that, after MtGOX and the hundreds of thefts and scams that have already occurred in Bitcoin's short history, almost all made possible -- and almost all still unsolved -- because of bitcoin's alleged "qualities"?  Bitcoin attracts and facilitates scams, theft, and embezzlement like no other payment method ever.  Indeed, these "qualities" are one of several reasons why I am quite skeptical about its longterm success.

Cash still has it beat on those terms by a large margin.

NO. 

MtGOX's "theft" was about 5% of the total BTC in existence.  Tell me of a cash heist or theft that has taken 5% of all the dollars in existence at the time. 

I will be generous and even let you quote heists whose author was eventually identified and/or the cash was recovered.

What chances do you give for the MtGOX thief being one day caught, and the stolen coins being returned to their legitimate owners?

[NotLambchop]

JorgeStolfi:
Your logic is old-fashioned and totally obsolete.  We developed an exciting new formal system, with unique grammar and inference ruleset, for today's fast-paced and competitive financial modeling.  

Behold the descriptive and prescriptive powers of Teh Scientifistic Method!



*While the pony~ and the annotations are mine, the chart isn't.  It's meant to be taken seriously, not even kidding.  Here.

[mmortal03]

How can you say that, after MtGOX and the hundreds of thefts and scams that have already occurred in Bitcoin's short history, almost all made possible -- and almost all still unsolved -- because of bitcoin's alleged "qualities"?  Bitcoin attracts and facilitates scams, theft, and embezzlement like no other payment method ever.  Indeed, these "qualities" are one of several reasons why I am quite skeptical about its longterm success.

Cash still has it beat on those terms by a large margin.

NO. 

MtGOX's "theft" was about 5% of the total BTC in existence.  Tell me of a cash heist or theft that has taken 5% of all the dollars in existence at the time. 

I will be generous and even let you quote heists whose author was eventually identified and/or the cash was recovered.

What chances do you give for the MtGOX thief being one day caught, and the stolen coins being returned to their legitimate owners?

The value of the theft proportional to ALL value in existence is what you should be focusing on, not its percentage of total BTC. Much higher dollar values have been stolen, and will continue to be.

[mmortal03]

JorgeStolfi:
Your logic is old-fashioned and totally obsolete.  We developed an exciting new formal system, with unique grammar and inference ruleset, for today's fast-paced and competitive financial modeling.  

Behold the descriptive and prescriptive powers of Teh Scientifistic Method!



*While the pony~ and the annotations are mine, the chart isn't.  It's meant to be taken seriously, not even kidding.  Here.

You must not understand how regression works. Mind you, if he's hand fitting that, it's not the best example of a fitted regression line, but it's not THAT far off.

[NotLambchop]

...but it's not THAT far off.

That's the beauty of Scientifisism--"not THAT far off" is always a boolean 1.
In the Scientifistic ruleset, this is derived from the Law of Almost Universal Noncontradiction: ^Almost~(A & ~A).
Powerful stuff...