All posts made by greenlion in Bitcointalk.org's Wall Observer thread
1.
Post 3887387 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.34h):
The crash was basically a big profit-taking dump masquerading as supposedly negative China news in order to suck in more panic sellers for the re-buy.
2.
Post 3887448 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.34h):
I think a large proportion of this is bot-driven, because there is absolutely no way the EMA method is this damn good in reality.
3.
Post 3902004 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.35h):
I think Chase is trying to get in very fast, because the only differentiator working in their favor is that they basically can write whatever regulations they want and it gets rubber stamped, and the value of that situation decays dramatically over time as Bitcoin achieves adoption.
4.
Post 3902048 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.35h):
Looking at the patent paperwork, is it possible there is something in here that JP Morgan Chase is expecting to be able to go after Bitcoin with on software patent grounds, particularly pertaining to future development?
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=20130317984&OS=20130317984&RS=20130317984
5.
Post 3942690 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.37h):
News provides the nebulous background for rationalizing away what are obvious pump-and-dump profit-taking maneuvers by whales, and provides the fictitious context for provoking the mass panic sells that these strategies require.
6.
Post 4538911 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.56h):
It looks like the next jump in difficulty will be HUUUUGE!
Some 800 mil!!!
Law of Large Numbers.
You can't say anything about the next difficulty jump based on blocks JUST AFTER re-targeting.
7.
Post 4598948 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.57h):
There was no such drop in previous Sundays, nor during the Christmas/Jan 1 holidays. (I suppose that Chinese employees generally don't have weekends off, do they?)
China has exactly the same workweek.
8.
Post 4625448 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.57h):
Mtgox has no verified USD withdrawals since Sept 2013. Even EU withdrawals is like once a month for a small amount.
It baffles me why anybody even considers gox an exchange anymore, when you can't actually exchange.
9.
Post 4625497 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.57h):
had $2000 left there myself. waited over two months before I gave up, cut my losses and converted back to BTC at their outrageously inflated prices, but at least i got something. FtGox is dying running out of coins to trade. that's hwy the price is so high there. I lost close to 20%. Mark pissed away a billion dollar opportunity with that company.
The only possible use for gox anymore is to trade on volatility to increase your BTC position, then move the BTC elsewhere. That begs the question though, why not just do the same thing somewhere else?
10.
Post 4646782 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.57h):
There's a very obvious Occam's Razor-style explanation for why the price hasn't appeared to be so news-sensitive. Maybe it's really been reacting mostly to fundamentals all along, and our consensus of relating it to news is just ex post facto attribution error?
11.
Post 5319584 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.16h):
Observing your charts from a distance makes it look like you are always right (of course hindsight makes that easy). Zooming in, it looks like if you use the indicator at the bottom, you are making the buy/sell very late (most of your arrows are not perpendicular, the bottom indicator lags the actual price movement). Considering trading fees, I can't imagine you are making enough money here to justify the risk for any of these positions. One wrong call will wipe out all of your profits from the previous multiple correct calls (even if you've called them perfectly).
EMA indicators always lag price movement, because the price movement has to happen in order to register in the indicator's arithmetic. That's totally normal, TA is not precognition, it's reacting to what the graph actually does. These indicators are astonishingly accurate against Bitcoin price movements in a way that you don't normally see with other asset classes.
12.
Post 5395006 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.20h):
Sure, except that the original whitepaper reads as though its written by a genius, and this guy is full retard in every imaginable way.
13.
Post 5410613 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.21h):
The notion of forking for reasons that relate to establishing certain balances is the most dangerous idea imaginable and will completely kill Bitcoin dead. Arbitrarily adjudicating the status of certain parties' coins turns the Bitcoin userbase itself into a centralized counterparty and leads down the slippery slope of deciding winners and losers in fork bailouts.
14.
Post 5998032 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.31h):
"So far, two biggest exchanges Huobi and Okcoin claimed that they haven't received any notice or document yet. "
http://www.bitell.com/t/2063Is it possible this means that China is about to start handing out actual licenses for the biggest players, like they do with practically every new industry eventually, and the exchanges that are getting notifications are the ones that haven't made the cut?
15.
Post 5998075 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.31h):
"So far, two biggest exchanges Huobi and Okcoin claimed that they haven't received any notice or document yet. "
http://www.bitell.com/t/2063Is it possible this means that China is about to start handing out actual licenses for the biggest players, like they do with practically every new industry eventually, and the exchanges that are getting notifications are the ones that haven't made the cut?
lol cognitive dissonance at work.
Plenty of possible theories what's going on no doubt, but it might mean something that the biggest Chinese exchanges haven't purported to have heard anything.
16.
Post 6092839 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.33h):
The Martingale "system" has no sound rational basis to even be called a system in the first place, because it does not actually do anything statistically that in any way improves outcome of any arbitrary series of fixed bets.
All the Martingale system actually does is play psychological games with your perception of wins and losses, and appeals to a misguided sense that the individual bets are somehow not statistically-independent events.
17.
Post 6092865 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.33h):
You have to keep doubling and betting until you win. It is mathematically proven at least to be a break even strategy as long as the odds are exactly 50/50 like flipping a coin or black and red on a roulette wheel... so long as there are NO betting limitations. Your point is that a guy would run out of money sooner or later, but overall it is at least a break even strategy... and pretty unlikely that a guy or gal would lose more than 10 times in a row.
ALL bet distributions/"strategies" are mathematically "proven" to be break even under these conditions, because of the very nature of how multiplication and addition work in the first place.
18.
Post 6093081 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.33h):
The Martingale "system" has no sound rational basis to even be called a system in the first place, because it does not actually do anything statistically that in any way improves outcome of any arbitrary series of fixed bets.
All the Martingale system actually does is play psychological games with your perception of wins and losses, and appeals to a misguided sense that the individual bets are somehow not statistically-independent events.
The "system" does account for them being statistically-independent events, but allows a way to systematize so you never walk away from the table at a loss b/c sooner or later you are going to be successful and win back all losses, plus the additional 1 unit bet that you started with.
It just progressively lumps your bet distribution into a smaller number of trials to give you the illusion that you did something different than just betting the same small amount repeatedly, by exponentially increasing the amount of variance you're exposing any given set amount of betting money to.
19.
Post 6133947 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.34h):
The miners decide what the rules are. Increasingly, that means ghash.io, discus fish, eligius, and btcguild. Biggest threat to bitcoin today.
I think there's really a lot more to it than this. A majority of miners deciding to impose some new rules don't suddenly have the power to force all nodes to accept their blocks as valid out of nowhere. If 50% of mining hashpower decided they were operating under rules contrary to the consensus of full bitcoind nodes out there, they will just be mining their own altcoin and the total proper Bitcoin hash rate will simply have dropped.
20.
Post 6164780 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.35h):
Miners are screwed, it is like 450 wasnt enough unprofitable, now they have to deal with 350
ASICs are only good for mining and electricity costs are marginal. So they can only mine and hope for better times
It's not at all marginal, if you max out a typical home 1440 watt line @ a US average rate of 0.15/kwatthr your cost is about $5.18 per day.
21.
Post 6173125 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.36h):
What's strange to me is that there's really no news here. We already knew China wasn't outright banning BTC...yet.
A long shot here, but if fundamentals are actually in play, the idea of side-chains being explained to the public now is some of the biggest news ever as far as speculative future underlying value/utility.
22.
Post 6194671 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.36h):
the last time I checked,the amortized mining cost of 1 bit coin was 700 dollars using the latest cheapest equipment. the overwhelming bulk of all coin mining is being done with the latest cheapest equipment, as can be easily inferred from the hash rate graph.
these coins will not be sold for less than $700 I can assure you
That's not really how it works at all. That's basically the sunk cost fallacy and the fallacious labor theory of value merged into one conclusion.
Production costs do not directly cause price. Market price does naturally converge on cost plus a standard economic rate of return given stable demand due to changes in the supply function. But that is not a direct causal relationship to price.
A miner would only rationally hold out for >$700 if he didn't anticipate needing liquidity prior to the expectation of that price arising. The marginal utility of dollars necessarily increases relative to Bitcoin if the miner has a pressing need for dollars.
23.
Post 6200961 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.37h):
the last time I checked,the amortized mining cost of 1 bit coin was 700 dollars using the latest cheapest equipment. the overwhelming bulk of all coin mining is being done with the latest cheapest equipment, as can be easily inferred from the hash rate graph.
these coins will not be sold for less than $700 I can assure you
That's not really how it works at all. That's basically the sunk cost fallacy and the fallacious labor theory of value merged into one conclusion.
Production costs do not directly cause price. Market price does naturally converge on cost plus a standard economic rate of return given stable demand due to changes in the supply function. But that is not a direct causal relationship to price.
A miner would only rationally hold out for >$700 if he didn't anticipate needing liquidity prior to the expectation of that price arising. The marginal utility of dollars necessarily increases relative to Bitcoin if the miner has a pressing need for dollars.
That was one of the most ludicrous strings of verbiage I have seen since the Sokal/Socialtext affair. Simple arithmetic refutes you outright. If I seek anything other than bankruptcy I simply can not sell coins mined today with the most cost-effective hashing hardware in the known universe for less than 700. If I am not holding my only rational choice is to sell the hardware to someone who will.
I don't know where you get your economics from, but what you're arguing amounts to saying that no one ever will just take a loss on anything.
Your cute little internet arguments that you have names for have nothing to do with actual economics btw.
24.
Post 6201141 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.37h):
I don't know where you get your economics from, but what you're arguing amounts to saying that no one ever will just take a loss on anything.
If that's what you are reading then I have expressed myself poorly.
No rational actor with a classical monetary utility function will act to foreseeably incur catastrophic long term losses is about as close as I would come to that.
A miner would only rationally hold out for >$700 if he didn't anticipate needing liquidity prior to the expectation of that price arising. The marginal utility of dollars necessarily increases relative to Bitcoin if the miner has a pressing need for dollars.
25.
Post 6418817 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.40h):
I think extrapolation of the historical chart patterns is a stronger argument than extrapolation of risto's bets....
just launched my bet on bitbet.... $4000 before $400. should be approved tonight
Bold. Size of bet?
You consider ~1000% appreciation more likely than ~15% depreciation?
It's a derivative. Even if you believe it's going to appreciate to that level, you still always bet on it depreciating as a form of insurance.
26.
Post 6464562 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.41h):
If we really do capitulate to $200 or lower, a lot of people are going to get crazy rich off this thing!
27.
Post 6464589 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.41h):
If we really do capitulate to $200 or lower, a lot of people are going to get crazy rich off this thing!
a shit ton of poeple have already gotten rich of the emergence of digital currency
welcome to 2014
I mean a lot of people who weren't before.
28.
Post 6469871 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.41h):
Bitcoin is actually a total win in China. The point is not necessarily that people need to be able to freely buy with CNY on online exchanges. The reality is that Chinese miners have good access to ASICs, there is an infrastructure in place for in-person trading for cash, and all of that is totally legal and outside the regulatory purview of PBOC. They can still drive up the price without exchanges as we know them, because the intrinsic value proposition for the Chinese people is immense. A Chinese Bitcoin holder has what amounts to a Swiss bank account on steroids, which they can trade offshore for hard currency anytime they want. Merely holding these coins as a store of value exerts upward pressure on the price via the supply schedule.
29.
Post 6497903 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.42h):
Around ten years from now only 450 or so coins will be mined per day. There's only ever going to be 21 million regardless of how quickly any of us manage to get our hands on them.
21 milion will be mined for 120 year, regardless of mining speed (network hashrate),
but bitcoin will dies for next 5-6 months.
This is a pedantic observation, but since you're an obvious substanceless troll, it's worth pointing out that it does depend on hashrate, because retargeting is never perfect to exactly 10 minutes over a difficulty period, so in the face of increasing network hashrate, the rate at which new coins are mined does depend on how fast the hashrate is growing.
30.
Post 6498040 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.42h):
"How long will it take to generate all the coins?
The last block that will generate coins will be block #6,929,999 which should be generated at or near the year 2140. The total number of coins in circulation will then remain static at 20,999,999.9769 BTC.
Even if the allowed precision is expanded from the current 8 decimals, the total BTC in circulation will always be slightly below 21 million (assuming everything else stays the same). For example, with 16 decimals of precision, the end total would be 20,999,999.999999999496 BTC."https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin The "at or near" part is what I'm bringing to your attention, because the reasoning behind your original post on the matter suggested a lack of understanding of that fact.
31.
Post 6498789 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.42h):
Are we seeing now the lowest point in bitcoin price for the next 6 months?
Probably the highest point in the next 6months.
100% true, never again $ 500
that's right. And it's not gonna stay long at the 400 level
The price $ 450 will be halved, and after this comnig recovery price to $ 370, and again, again, again to zero.
View Screen Capture
32.
Post 6530510 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.42h):
Saddam also 3d printed the casings, and rode Uber to stay at places he booked over Airbnb.
33.
Post 6586494 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.43h):
The PBOC ban will catalyze the technological innovation in decentralized exchanges.
Buyer will directly transfer fiat to the seller through online banking. With some cryptography the auditor could verify the bank transaction without knowing the online banking password of the payer or payee. This is not only theoretical. The actual development is in progress. Read more at:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=173220.msg6160307#msg6160307PBOC can't kill bitcoin. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
PBOC really dug their own grave on this one.
They could've taken this whole thing seriously and just lightly regulated domestic exchanges to conform to their capital control policies and everything could've been fine. "Recharging" online exchange accounts could've just required the same procedures as obtaining CNH for example. That would have given them exactly the control they want in this situation and all the RMB exchanges would've played ball.
Instead, they've MASSIVELY incentivized technological innovation to circumvent their controls. This never ends well.
34.
Post 6586792 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.43h):
The long protracted bear markets are super necessary for the long-term success of this thing. We need alot more infrastructure and service platform development and innovations before being ready for any of the trillion-plus market cap use cases lighting up, and Bitcoin's possible future Eternal September.
35.
Post 6676631 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.44h):
Interesting newer member in BTC-e chat, indicates he is a Wall Street trader.
Of course, he can be some kid in his parent's basement but his
chat logs suggest he does have experience trading and education in business mathematics. Interesting things said like:
"if CFTC approves of an exchange entity to trade BTC on the like NYMEX or CBOT or any of the commodity trading houses you will see 100k-1,000k% rise weeks before the approval"
"imagine god hit you up and offered you some gold before he cast it onto the earth... now we have bitcoin and its like god is saying to us all who know today hey im about to make the new gold want in before I give it up to everyone"yea that's bullshit lol
100k-1kk% imply a price range of $450k-4.5mil.
The percentages may be a several order of magnitude overestimation, but the underlying princple is extremely plausible.
36.
Post 6695059 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.44h):
I think he really means the use case of Ripple as a platform for BTC trades, and not specifically XRP as an asset.
37.
Post 6697077 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.44h):
I think Ripple is at best a stepping stone toward a more crypto centric mainstream and not in any way an improvement on the satoshi concept. Ripple doesn't allow for use cases without counterparty risk unless you're strictly in XRP, and their distribution of XRP basically guarantees that will never happen. Ripple is attractive in the short term if you believe that regulators will succeed in not letting us have nice things, but otherwise I don't see any advantages over truly-decentralized solutions.
38.
Post 6697581 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.44h):
I think Ripple is at best a stepping stone toward a more crypto centric mainstream and not in any way an improvement on the satoshi concept. Ripple doesn't allow for use cases without counterparty risk unless you're strictly in XRP, and their distribution of XRP basically guarantees that will never happen. Ripple is attractive in the short term if you believe that regulators will succeed in not letting us have nice things, but otherwise I don't see any advantages over truly-decentralized solutions.
Imagine that btc-e become a gateway too. Then you could immediatly transfer some USD from bitstamp to btce to do some arbitrage. You could also send your bitcoin in instant (instead of waiting +/- 45min) to btce, trade it then withdraw it.
I never let my bitcoins too long on an exchange, I keep them on exchange just the time I need to trade.
This is not different with the Ripple Network. So you can use it as a way to transfer your crypto or anything. If it's a decentralized trustless token like bitcoin then you can (and you should) withdraw it to your wallet as soon as your transfer/trade is done.
So this has the same problems, you need to trust an exchange platform/gateway the time it takes for you to trade/transfer your coins.
Otherwise there are only advantages using such system.
I think there's merit to that opinion, in the sense that Ripple is not necessarily directly competing with what a Satoshi-style system is purporting to do, but it has a strong use-case in improving the legacy counterparty-laden interface between crypto and the status quo.
39.
Post 6735865 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.44h):
There was an article 6 months ago where paypal said they were looking at btc and had been for a while. Now they are looking at btc. So?
No I don't have a link, only my faulty memory.
This can be the new anti-China. "Paypal STILL considering Bitcoin"!
40.
Post 6800749 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.45h):
Nice trades on Huobi, the whole trade window is basically 0.01 BTC sell followed by 0.01BTC buy, one after another, short time spans. Feels like everyone took a snack break in China.
It's like the BTC-e trollbox has become a sentient being.
41.
Post 6837028 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.45h):
Most reliable bullish technical indicator: Winkelvoss twins attention spike in MSM.
42.
Post 6838825 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.45h):
We are witnessing the exodus of coins from chinese exchanges before they finally get shut down for good.
*edit*
Fueled by foreigners who cannot withdraw fiat because they do not have chinese bank accounts.
Glad to witness some insight in this wretched place.
If this were true then this wouldn't be lead by Stamp. You'd be getting a Gox effect in Huobi, OKCoin, etc. That's not what's happening.
43.
Post 6842195 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.45h):
If the Winklis won´t launch their ETF soon, there won´t be any place around to sell your precious BTC for USD.
Will this affect SR 2.0 too, i´m a bit worried.
I'm not sure this guy actually understands what an ETF even is. Lot of irrational grasping at straws going on just to rationalize away any possibility that there found really be a reversal of technical trends happening.
44.
Post 6860827 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.45h):
Schiff flip-flops all the time... he just goes with what's popular...
He's obviously going through like a Bitpay or some such company, so I bet you thinks of it as just another way to take dollars.
45.
Post 6865684 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.45h):
Actually, I have been giving some thought to this Rpietila plan to NOT sell any BTC below $2,000, which seems to be in some tension with his SSS (smart,simple,sane) plan to rake some profits (such as 10% of BTC holdings) upon the doubling of the BTC price. My plans to rake some profits from my BTC holdings will kick in around $1,700 or $1,800, but I suppose such a raking of profits plan will vary for me depending upon how quickly BTCprices go up and whether there are any imminent and probable expectations that any large investors would be coming into the BTC space. Always there are these kinds of rumors about big investors coming in (and some information is more reliable than other info), yet there is also frequently going tto be some closed lipped manipulations of BTC prices, too.
Rpietila's plan is extremely rational for a long-term investor because it completely takes emotion out of the equation and provides a very simple hedge. You can tweak the parameters (like how often to rake, what %, whether it's a fixed %, whether to prioritize making back the starting investment as soon as possible, etc.), but the underlying concept is very sound to periodically take some profits as a hedge against failure to continue to grow at some point. It provides a completely predictable schedule as far as "if Bitcoin goes to this price, I know I have this".
46.
Post 6866751 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.45h):
All the other "features" of the bitcoin protocol address other goals, and can be viewed as defects by those who do not see the goals desirabe or worth the cost.
These are the exact entities that risk disintermediation, and it's just a truism that these actors would not want this system.
The cryptographic security of accounts is not even the tip of the iceberg of the benefit of this system. The benefit of this system is that its design incentivizes completely disparate actors to work to create the underlying infrastructure that then companies can build right on top of with profoundly lower cost than current proprietary and centralized systems.
True this is not attractive to the entities you describe, but the rebuttal to that is "who the hell cares?". The preferences of current rent-seeking oligarchs is only relevant as long as they can maintain control, which they can't forever.
47.
Post 6879077 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.46h):
anyone think there's anything to these Indian exchanges opening up? you think demand will develop there like we saw in China last year?
Indian exchanges would be huge on a fundamental level, because India is a significant destination for remittances from immigrant labor in the Arab gulf states.
48.
Post 6904142 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.46h):
3) What could in principle be an actual problem of gox-ian proportions if they would require proof that users can't reasonably provide. So far, after having read mentions of the KYC procedure around 40 times (my ballpark guess) in the past months, I have /today/ heard the first time of unnecessary proof being required (in the reddit thread). That's 1 out of 40 cases (from my own perspective) and it doesn't exactly make me jump to the conclusion that Bitstamp asks for this regularly now.
Gox accomplished exactly what you're saying in this point also by repeatedly rejecting totally valid documents for verification until harassing customer service back and forth, then later on switching their verification procedure to involve actually mailing physical documents to their Tokyo offices.
49.
Post 6964085 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.47h):
Here's a tip for those people who keep dumping around 600. If you don't dump the price will go up and your coins will be worth more. Crazy rocket science, i know.
That's a prisoner's dilemma type situation though that could never happen in practice, because one bad actor dumps and takes advantage of the other people holding.
50.
Post 6985671 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.47h):
Could you post in point form (as you have done above) why you are skeptical on the long term success of bitcoin? I have seen you criticizing bitcoin but other than saying its success is limited, you do not seem to say why. It would be insightful to understand the reasons of failure from your point of view.
The "reason" is that there's people here that think otherwise that serve as an audience. I've never seen anything of any real substance other than pompous bluster.
51.
Post 7076420 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.49h):
Do you guys still believe this Willy word press bullshit had any significance? Pls.
I think Willy was very significant in showing how stupid and gullible people are in blindly accepting whatever conforms to their confirmation bias.
52.
Post 7099441 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.50h):
WAT DOES IT MEAN
The waves of profit-taking that constituted the bearish trend is over. Sellers willing to sell at prices seen during the rundown are exhausted.
53.
Post 7099599 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.50h):
Log trendline is the null hypothesis on this joint. Past performance blah blah blah is regurgitated generic pedantic crap. For the first time in human history we have an asset that follows self-reinforcing network effect growth, where the fundamentals themselves mathematically scream logistic function, yet somehow a logarithmic growth curve until saturation is supposed to be controversial? That's preposterous.
54.
Post 7133455 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.50h):
TERA, very interesting. So it means that currently resistance is $678 and support $566? I think we also have a smaller resistance now at ~$650, which coincides with sMA 200 and the neckline from recent triple top.
If you draw the bottom at $340, then you have support at $530 and resistance at $650. If you draw the bottom at $380, then you have support at $560 and resistance at $675. I'm not sure which one to use.
Both are in play at the same time.
55.
Post 7230182 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.51h):
I love this bit from the article (emphasis mine):
Now we have a small piece of pure, incorruptible mathematics enshrined in computer code that will allow people to solve the thorniest problems without reference to “the authorities”.
Which is bullshit, unfortunately.
There is
no mathematical proof that the mining problem is hard, or that it is hard to get the private key of any given address.
No one has found how to do either of those things efficiently yet, but a smart teenager may find one tomorrow. Or may have found it already.
But bitcoiners need not worry, if that happens not only bitcoin, but all current e-commerce protocols will be compromised...
Oh for goodness' sake, Jorge. Do you have any understanding of the maths behind this, or how long it would take to implement a vulnerability in a useful way? Either you do, in which case this is pure and simple trolling. Or else you don't, which also raises plenty of questions. In either case I hope none of your students stumble across this thread.
i think he has finally lost the plot
The fake professor needs to go back to his bread and butter making up meaningless stuff about China volume, this cryptography stuff is simply outside of his wheelhouse.
56.
Post 7283063 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.52h):
This is the just the retracement from the triple top around June 3rd playing out, nothing too exciting going on.
57.
Post 7290171 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.52h):
That's what ineffective competition leads too. Some people are just bashing ghash for being too good.
Maybe some are, but they're not seeing the real issue.
The problem is that many people would like to compete with CEX and ghash but they are hamstrung by the SEC.
I feel like this is very comparable to the reality that Gox was the US government's fault, because so many extremely reputable startups have been bending over backward to comply with everything yet still getting nowhere when it comes to getting permission.
58.
Post 7416910 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.54h):
Jorge will go down in history as one of the most successful trolls to have ever lived. Intelligent people here still don't understand he's a troll.
Is there anyone who ever said Jorge is not a troll
Oda for one.
I don't think Jorge is a troll, per se -I think he just decided on the thesis for the book he plans to write about
The Great Bitcoin Ponzi Scheme long before he showed up here to start doing research - so now he cannot allow himself to be swayed.
Sad because he would probably make more money investing in bitcoin than he is ever likely to make from any such book.
He's basically a master of Sigmund Freud-style Kettle Logic.
That sort of thing is appropriate in a setting such as an academic debate, where the discussion consists of an isolated event in which the negative team marks a win with success in just one of the prima facie issues, and thus self-contradictory lines of reasoning are indicated as a competitive strategy. But in the context of exchanging ideas with other people on an informal and on-going basis, this is suicide, because its impossible to trust the judgment of an individual who is willing to say whatever it takes to advance a completely pre-determined conclusion.
59.
Post 7628231 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.56h):
priceless
That's the same exact thing I saw. Even still, just seeing that worthless clowns name is too much..
In one of those ignored posts you missed a really messed up threat by the fake professor.
60.
Post 7741035 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.58h):
That Reagan/AT&T divestiture thing earlier was one of the funniest things I've seen on there.
The Professor sure is some kind of troll superhero.
61.
Post 7743127 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.58h):
Anarchy on a larger scale often arises involuntarily after the collapse of a centralized government with a complex administrative infrastructure
Anarchy does not arise after the collapse of a government.
That's a flawed as saying that atheism arises after a church burns down.
It's not worth it, this guy will just keep redefining what he thinks anarchy is until whatever he's claiming is unfalsifiable but completely meaningless.
62.
Post 7743203 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.58h):
So what we've learned today is that the Reagan / AT&T divestiture comment was trollbait to just copy/paste the wikipedia page, and twist something that everyone with any common sense knows (that the thing didn't arise out of thin air in one second) into some kind of red herring support for a statement that didn't even make sense in the first place. I.e. turning something very nuanced and sophisticated and open to all kinds of analysis and interpretation into a Jeopardy question in order to produce irrelevant support for a pretty shit generalization in the first place.
This guy is either the biggest asshole ever, or a pretty skilled and subtle troll.
63.
Post 7966164 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.00h):
Wasn't some major regulatory decision due in the next few days, or did that already happen?
NYDFS released a prelimary draft of the "Bitlicense" regs.
64.
Post 7972069 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.00h):
Can anyone make a case that the price will not be at least twice this level within 90 days after COIN lists?
So for you it's just a matter of "when".... I'm glad.
Objectively speaking, once an ETF is available as a public investment vehicle, anyone who does not at least have exposure as a small percentage of a tax-deferred retirement portfolio is completely out of their mind. That alone is a monstrous amont of capital, total US retirement assets are on the order of $20 trillion. Capturing just one tenth of one percent of that would be about $20 billion slamming right into the float.
65.
Post 8002075 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.00h):
It's doubtful that market movement has anything to do with ether ipo dumping, the scale of the ipo so far is only around $40,000 worth of bitcoin. Ethereum does have a "FUD" element about it though as far as market sentiment, because the speculative motivation for purchasing is the greatest altcoin pump-and-dump script in history, whereby they intend to solve every single problem or limitation inherent to Bitcoin with a fresh general-purpose system that doesn't exist yet or may not even ever be technologically possible.
66.
Post 8002302 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.00h):
Wow I was mistaken in order of magnitude in the quick mental math because of the figures they proposed for the news leading up to the delayed February IPO.
This seems super duper sketchy that they can raise VC-level money on a crowd sale for something that is not even guaranteed to ever exist. And that they shopped around for a jurisdiction that would allow them to do this without immediately getting investigated for securities fraud.
67.
Post 8002760 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.00h):
Have you even looked into the ethereum technology? You sound kind of bitter on a new tech. because ... there is money involved (?), it makes no sense, especially seen through the eyes of bitcoin early adopter ...
The only real response I can muster to this kind of tone is "trollololololol".
68.
Post 8269340 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.03h):
That is one reason why I am skeptical of bitcoin: I have yet to see a "business plan", a consistent and fairly complete description of a future "bitcoin economy", with explicit numbers for volume of commercial use, fees, confirmation delays, deflation rate, wealth distribution, hoarding, banking, legal status, taxes, mining costs, etc.
Might as well ask for a unicorn while you are at it
.
I want a rainbow castle in the sky!
Breaking news: Professor Trolololol is against everything that has to be figured out over time by various people independently of each other!
69.
Post 8290156 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.03h):
So by the Chinese numerology / homophone reasoning, for us the numeral 1 should make us think of victory, 6 some happy fun time, and possibly 8 is positive if you're hungry.
70.
Post 8391843 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.05h):
I'm not expecting another major wave of buying until tomorrow or even later..
It would be nice to see the price settle and gain support here
what happen next when price stabilize on low volume? if you don't know then you must be new here!
Stabilization at no volume is the same as no noise when it is night and there is no one to make noise because everyone is sleeping
If the price falls in a forest and no one is there to trade, does it make a sound?
71.
Post 8430041 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.06h):
you have no credibility unless you tell us who you "used to be" which I notice you declined to do...nor the names of the people flocking to you for advice... everything that comes out of your mouth and that of your sockpuppets is total crapola.
if you absorb views from an evil dummy you have only youself to blame, i think. just ignore and save us all some grief. would you listen to 'freddy kruger'?
For a moment I thought you had written "freddy krugman" and that actually sounded scarier to me.
72.
Post 8466444 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.07h):
Can we touch US$585 today?
For the 3-day SAR?
73.
Post 8471150 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.07h):
That man was a disaster! Western civilizations downfall is partly this mans fault.
The more I think about it, the more I cannot find a single modern nightmare problem that Richard Nixon did not have a gigantic hand in. Although I do agree, Churchhill is a huge racist imperialist dick.
74.
Post 8481685 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.07h):
China central bank has a new ban coming soon, under the name of "anti money laundering" because ALL chinese exchangers are using "illegal coupons through 3rd party" to deposit/withdraw, they can't do it legally because ALL chinese banks REFUSED to work with them months ago, it's like central bank saying to exchangers: "You have been warned not engage in any bitcoin business since long time ago but you carried on regardless, so don't blame me if i kick your ass hard time by time"
This is pure fantasy designed to appeal to complete lack of understanding of the Chinese AML regime and the purview of PBOC as opposed to MIIT.
75.
Post 8507870 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.08h):
Absolutely false on its face.
All trade is by definition positive sum, and a market is merely the aggregation of all trades. This arises because the preferences of individual participants are not monolithic.
The whole anti-TA strain I can understand is very compelling from a sense of misguided skepticism and not wanting to be made a fool, but all of these knee jerk non-criticisms transparently come out of a lack of understanding of what TA even is in the first place.
76.
Post 8510033 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.08h):
Absolutely false on its face.
All trade is by definition positive sum, and a market is merely the aggregation of all trades. This arises because the preferences of individual participants are not monolithic.
The whole anti-TA strain I can understand is very compelling from a sense of misguided skepticism and not wanting to be made a fool, but all of these knee jerk non-criticisms transparently come out of a lack of understanding of what TA even is in the first place.
Imagine this scenario:
10 men are locked in a room. They are given different quantities of 2 assets each. They start exchanging those 2 assets among them, effectively creating a 'market' and determining a 'price' of asset A measured in asset B and viceversa.
This price is recorded day by day, and a graph drawn on the wall of the room.
Now, as times goes on, 9 of these 10 men start seeing things in the graph. They seems to
fool themselves into thinking that somewhat future prices are determined by previous ones. They take rules and compasses and start identifying 'trends' and 'patterns' in the graph. They think: "price has gone up for the last 3 days, it is more probable that it will go up today, instead of going down". They completely forgot the base mechanics, as you recall correctly: trades and trades alone determine price.
The 10th man, more wise, don't believe this mumbo jumbo. He understand the mechanics. He also know, now, that another mechanic has been added to the game: beliefs.
So at the start of the day he buy a bit of B,
fooling the others into thinking: "see? what did i told you? trend is up". And they buy, and buy...
It is at that point that our trading hero sell.
So, while these 9 men think they are smart because they can see 2 moving averages cross, the other one
fool them. A lot.
After a year the room is unlocked. Every pieces of A and B are in the pockets of our hero. The others pockets are empty.
Here endeth the lesson.
That's not a lesson, that's reinventing the wheel from scratch on the basis of no direct knowledge of the subject, to create some perverse "lifeboat ethics" thought experiment deceptively designed to vaguely produce the outcome that you want.
The real way to learn about this subject is to learn about this subject, and then produce critiques later from a position of knowledge instead of a position of sophomoric generality.
Here's a lesson for you: the way that you define what a market is at the beginning is a cargo-cult definition that does not subsume the primary conceptual features of what a market really is, but just shows the consequent trappings of how a market looks. And at the very beginning of the second paragraph you just go ahead and assume what you're trying to prove, which again, is a problem that won't go away here.
77.
Post 8557645 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.08h):
it's about the time to go back to $4xx now
Does it ever get tiring being a twat?
78.
Post 8787095 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.12h):
Just ignore Professor Chinavolume, he's not interested in real conversations, he just provokes you so he can launch into tl;dr preconceived sophomoric monologues. Very stereotypical inferiority complex behavior for mediocre professional academics filling a hole in their heart because they do not get the esteem they expected from their real life interpersonal relationships.
79.
Post 8953449 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.15h):
blockchain.info's wallet is not a web wallet
its runs in the browser yes, but its all client side JS.
Where is the private key stored?
encrypted somewhere on my computer.
They have the private key encrypted and they transmit it to you to decrypt locally in client side JS.
This is how they're able to send you encrypted backup wallet files via email and such.
80.
Post 8982866 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.16h):
ok you've got my intention there, this suggest that you have most of the issues figured out, how do you think we will solve:
1-The Block size limit when the number of transaction/minute is 100 times higher than today.
2-The block chain size when it exceeds 200GB or 1TB ? most users or services will have to use clusters of storage, if the adoption rate picks up this has to be fixed really fast.
3-The energy waste, it has been known that when the price goes up mining becomes more profitable and more resources are brought online...resources that most of us consider wasted, as of today the hashrate is more that 250 Petahash/s, assuming that the worst chip on the network consume 0.5w/ghs (which is way too optimistic) this means that at this point miners consume way more than 125 hourly Megawatts... just FYI a typical nuclear plant produce from 500-2000 hourly Megawatts.
4-DDOS attacks: when Bitcoin become bigger, there will be Big services that run the Bitcoind in order to offer their services, organized groups can run denial of service attacks against these services, you can read more about how they can do it in that wiki I provided before.
5-Malleability issue, and don't tell me it is not an issue, because it really is, and it is not fixed yet, they just found some work around it.
6-Double Spending, even if you don't have 51% of the network you can perform double spending with as little as 25% of the network,
7- The 51% attack, we all know what it is, it is achievable, any government can achieve it if they want to kill Bitcoin, even at this point.
8-man in the middle or packet sniffing, also described in that wiki.
There many more issues, but these are the one that concerns me for now. now I would like to hear your solutions.
Two more:
9- The average wait time for 1 confirmation is about 10 minutes; and, in a significant fraction of cases, can be 30 minutes or more. That is too much even for internet payments, and is unacceptable for shopping at brick-and-mortar stores. (In contrast, verification and payment with a chip-enabled credit card, which is the standard here in Brazil, takes less than 1 minute.)
10- There is no way to correct mistakes (like sending bitcoins to the wrong address) or to recover stolen coins.
There is also the question of security against theft, but I am tired of arguing the obvious there...
If you really care about the answer to questions such as these, you should probably ask in the 'Development & Technical Discussion Forum'. The people in there can answer your questions handily, and very few of them read this thread, I think.
These sort of people would never dare post in such an area, because the opposition to their tired unsophisticated "critiques" would get completely decimated and ignored by people with any kind of subject matter expertise.
81.
Post 8983096 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.16h):
These sort of people would never dare post in such an area, because the opposition to their tired unsophisticated "critiques" would get completely decimated and ignored by people with any kind of subject matter expertise.
And it is exactly this sort of reply by "bitcoin experts" (the kind who claim that paying with BitPay or Coinbase is "paying with bitcoin") that keeps most people away from bitcoin.
trololololol!
82.
Post 9008450 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.17h):
Somebody check Satoshi's wallets!
Not Satoshi's, more like Hal Finney's.
Everybody is missing the obvious. The coins being sold are Hal's.
He was the first to receive coins from Satoshi.
He probably had 500,000 maybe more.
He started cashing in June 1.
His family is still cashing in coins but it will end soon.
The Finney family is the mythical bearwhale?!
83.
Post 9008621 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.17h):
i'm gonna be declaring a hell of a capital loss this year.
ONLY if you sell..... ARE YOU SELLING?
i cant do this "marked market" BS accounting i've heard about ?
"Mark-to-market"
or some shit
its all very confusing
Maybe I do NOT understand either, but I thought that any capital gains or losses, only matter once they are realized, and that is once they are sold? I am NOT sure whether market to market would matter, and if you are engaging in trades? Or if you move them around would probably NOT matter. I would only count if I actually cashed out, which trading on an exchange could make matters more complicated, I suppose.
Mark-to-market works differently, you realize gain or loss as if the property were sold on the last of the year.
84.
Post 9285557 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.25h):
We simulate the trading strategy described
above on a third of total data in the duration of May
6, 2014 to June 24, 2014 in a causal manner to see how
well our strategy does.
What a remarkable coincidence to have picked a range of dates where even random trades would've likely been profitable.
85.
Post 9339040 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.26h):
Bitcoin is a Goldbergian contrivance, at best a cludgy solution to a problem existing only in the minds of a few batty libers.
I heartily agree. Disintermediating central payment clearance by constructing a peer-to-peer network achieving consensus with a practical workaround of the Byzantine General's problem is obviously for stupid Libertarian assholes. What a bunch of idiots, finding value in a system that is trying to do something pointless like make money and property exchange clearance fast and cheap!
86.
Post 9339431 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.26h):
Bitcoin is a Goldbergian contrivance, at best a cludgy solution to a problem existing only in the minds of a few batty libers.
I heartily agree. [bunch complicated stuff attempting to do something which is done much simpler and to everyone's satisfaction already]
Goldbergian, yeah.
Preach that 'ligion! What a bunch of Libertarian retards, caring about ideas that are annoying and complex!
87.
Post 9342221 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.27h):
The only reason why BTC will grow and increase in price is Anonymity. Each and everyday people are tired of showing ids and passports to banks to send money to someone or receive. With BTC its all cool and your anonymous what more is needed? BTC Can grow a lot more in developed countries with high tax rate and strict control. As people want to live free not in a cage. One of the reason Sweden loves bitcoin is this.
There are way better alt coins for that.
It does not have to be 100% privacy. It can just be something that is similar to cash: payment is visible for the receiver, but the identity of the payee is not necessarily known to the rest of the world (e.g., stored in a central system with access for government officials).
Yeah, there are better coins for that.
Bitcoin is just an outdated pump and dump coin.
I'm beginning to suspect you are either butthurt or trolling for profit. Hmm
Trolling is a dangerous occupation this days, two years jail cant be fun
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29678989is it even trolling they are talking about?!
Nobody even knows what trolling is, it's become just a meaningless catch-all phrase for anything on the internet somebody doesn't like. Nine out of ten times what people really mean is "flaming".
88.
Post 9361498 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.27h):
...
Did it just suddenly got a colder where you live? (It did here.)
You became considerably smaller.
I know lizards don't like the cold.
>can't tell 2D images from 9D reality
Pathetic earthling.
~Your Beneficent Reptilian Overlords.
Sorry. In my country, the world which is the literal translation of "lizard" is sometimes used in place of "penis" when you don't want to use "culturally inappropriate" words for the same thing.
I figured it probably a unique thing but I did my best to make you understand the "joke" regardless (I edited the original post to assist you better).
In idiomatic American English we have something that is exactly the same thing, although in a very specific context, i.e. the phrase "draining the lizard".
89.
Post 9370329 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.27h):
There's NOTHING that is really bearish about the data contained in your first two links above, and your last point seems to be near total pie in the sky speculation with NO real world evidence to support the point that you seem to be attempting to outline (as if bitcoin is kind of dying away... hehehehe.. yeah, right...)
YOU are saying "bitcoin is kind of dying away", not me.
But, indeed, there is NO real world evidence about bitcoin usage. Those plots do not show such growth, and we have no idea of what that blockchain traffic really is. That is all of my point.
But, if you care to know, I also believe that the bitcoin entrepreneurs like Andreessen, Sielbert, Draper, Matonis etc. (and the bitcoin "news" sites that they support, like Coindesk) have no interest in such data becoming available, because they know that it would be depressing and bad for their sales. Just like they want people to believe that China is irrelevant. I believe that last point is a bit much, and merely seems to be playing into concepts that BTC is a ponzi scheme, which you should realize by now that it is NOT a ponzi scheme, even though you want to continue to project theories and to see data that are in support of those kinds of ideas and the spreading of those kinds of frameworks.
Whackjob conspiracy theories to support a very artificial worldview about Bitcoin painted with a broad brush is way easier than a sober nuanced assessment of skin in the game vs talking their own book for these individual players. Stop the presses everybody, some retard on the internet who can't even spell the names of the entrepreneurs just figured them all out!
90.
Post 9738176 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.36h):
notlampchop is one of the best trolls I have ever seen. I hope he get paid well, in case he isn't he should seriously consider professionalizing his abilities.
kudos to him
No way, he's just an asshole acting out because there are no consequences.
Trollfi is a great troll, because he starts conversations with innocuous-sounding questions or observations, but he's just weaving a trap to dump some bullshit on you.
91.
Post 9770107 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.37h):
It is a joke article made for a joke site.
Just in case some people don't read the full article
I did read it but couldnt find any of these jokes!
92.
Post 9782521 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.38h):
A note on the difficulty:
What it seems to me is that the S4's are on the market and people everywhere are dumping their old miners. I came across a post from 1l1l11ll1l last night (
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=813649.msg9110299#msg9110299).. As people dump their old miners for the new ones, or just dump old ones for power issues - there is a significant amount of power leaving the pools.
Granted some of it is being replaced but I'd argue that a lot of it isn't.. Combine that with people who used to mine Bitcoin but have decided to switch to scrypt and I'd say that these two factors are what has been driving the difficulty down.. As more people pick up the old S2's and S1's the difficulty will increase again but it might take a couple of weeks.
I myself just picked up a S2 for $350 on ebay and in doing so I've taken about 243 gh/s offline. And the person that sold it to me took about 1000 gh/s offline.. It's the ripple effect of new miners taking over - it will go back up but right now all the miners are playing musical chairs with their hashing power.
I think this explanation is not plausible at all, because the only reason to take ASIC machines offline is because of difficulty increase putting expected revenues below power cost, but the very thing that causes difficulty increase is putting newer faster more efficient machines onto the network.
Furthermore people who resell old hardware are selling to people who will use that hardware to mine, in no way does that represent "significant amount of power leaving the pools". Even with the delay in shipping during which the old machine is taken offline, there are way too many stars that have to align for these effects to be in coherence such that you actually see a systematic change in difficulty, as there is no reason to believe that these are not randomly-distributed events.
If you do some napkin math on the specs of various ASICs since the very beginning of ASIC mining up to today, you will see that by the time a given generation/fab/process node falls below the threshold efficiency to mine ahead of electricity cost, every single piece of mining hardware in existence at the time that unit was deployed will only come out to a single-digit percentage of the current total hashing power at most.
The only effect that can really drive a declining network hash rate is bitcoin price dropping at a rate that efficiency increases in hardware cannot meet.
93.
Post 9782615 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.38h):
The only effect that can really drive a declining network hash rate is bitcoin price dropping at a rate that efficiency increases in hardware cannot meet.
Just imagine what might happen when the block rewards get cut in half...
Something's got to give.
We already saw one, and it's not necessarily a big deal because the moving parts are happening at different times.
At the exact moment a black halving happens, the machines that immediately get taken offline are those that are at a point in their life cycle where they weren't producing bitcoin revenue at 2x the rate of electricity consumption.
Depending on what kind of efficiency curve we see on waves of deployed hardware at or around that exact moment, the proportion of existing hashpower that falls below that efficiency threshold may not actually be all that significant.
94.
Post 9849908 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.39h):
Why won't xrp stop rising?
XRP is easy to pump, because the only "bad news" in Ripple is Ripple itself.
95.
Post 9892153 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.40h):
If XRP is any example, Bitcoin needs a fatal protocol flaw to rally.
96.
Post 9905614 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.40h):
all that talk about mass adoption and price skyrocketing, especially in 3rd world countries.
did any of you consider scenario where mass adoption leads to massive price decrease?
the more people use it to transfer value (transfer as opposed to hodl) less value it has.
Perhaps you can talk us through the precise mechanism whereby millions of people buy in to bitcoin but the price falls.
Quantity theory of money, equation of exchange, velocity increasing, ceteris parabis.
97.
Post 9905827 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.40h):
all that talk about mass adoption and price skyrocketing, especially in 3rd world countries.
did any of you consider scenario where mass adoption leads to massive price decrease?
the more people use it to transfer value (transfer as opposed to hodl) less value it has.
Perhaps you can talk us through the precise mechanism whereby millions of people buy in to bitcoin but the price falls.
Quantity theory of money, equation of exchange, velocity increasing, ceteris parabis.
Your analysis shows how price rises with adoption not falls.
You do understand what the "Quantity theory of money" applies to don't you?
Try again?
(Or are you expecting a sudden "quantitative contraction" of all fiat?)
I'm not the person with the "analysis", read what you're replying to.
What I'm saying is exactly correct and unambiguous, providing supporting information to explain the theoretical basis for the claim made by the original person quoted.
98.
Post 9906515 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.40h):
all that talk about mass adoption and price skyrocketing, especially in 3rd world countries.
did any of you consider scenario where mass adoption leads to massive price decrease?
the more people use it to transfer value (transfer as opposed to hodl) less value it has.
Perhaps you can talk us through the precise mechanism whereby millions of people buy in to bitcoin but the price falls.
Quantity theory of money, equation of exchange, velocity increasing, ceteris parabis.
Your analysis shows how price rises with adoption not falls.
You do understand what the "Quantity theory of money" applies to don't you?
Try again?
(Or are you expecting a sudden "quantitative contraction" of all fiat?)
I'm not the person with the "analysis", read what you're replying to.
What I'm saying is exactly correct and unambiguous, providing supporting information to explain the theoretical basis for the claim made by the original person quoted.
Then you do understand. Appreciate the clarification.
As to unambiguous, you offered only bullet points without stating your conclusion or position.
With all due respect, you're just passive-aggressively grasping at straws to continue fighting me like a douche.
Exactly what I'm saying is immediately obvious to anybody with any cursory exposure to introductory economics whatsoever. I don't need to write the kind of sophomoric wall of text bullshit I'm seeing here to be correct about a very obvious point.
99.
Post 9935339 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.41h):
I wish I could wish you all a Merry Christmas with fat trading profits... but I can't, since one trader's profit is another trader's loss.
Sadly, there's really nothing anybody can do with this level of stupidity.
100.
Post 9982146 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.42h):
Many thanks for your comprehensive answer!
It seems, as I've found in the last couple of hours, the use faulty PSRNG's might pose a threat, maybe significant enough to drive the price further down.
The unfolding story is here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=107172.msg8939173#msg8939173 I hope you'll find it interesting enough to consider including it in your great work (I'm closely following your posts) that you're doing on studying/documenting the whole ecosystem.
Thanks for the link and the compliment!
As I understood it, those Hyena guys claim that many wallet tools use PSRNGs that generate less than the required 2^160 bits of entropy. They claim that the entropy is low enough that the chance of a collision is not negligible; and they have set up a lot of disk and computing power to catch for such collisions.
I doubt whether good PSRNGs, correctly implemented and used, have such a low entropy. However, the probability of coding errors makes the project more plausible. In conditional probability notation:
P(security broken) =
P(software is correct) * P(security broken IF software is correct) +
P(software is buggy) * P(security broken IF software is buggy)
A strong cryptographic method only ensures that the factor P(security broken IF software is correct) in the first term is astronomically small. However, the factors P(software is buggy) and P(security broken IF software is buggy) are large enough to matter. For bitcoin, empirically, the second term may be on the order of 1 in 10'000 or more, and is unlikely to decrease. (As time passes, the best implementations may get somewhat more secure; but the number of implementations will grow, so there will be fewer competent eyes checking each of them, and reports of coin theft will get less attention.) Thus, P(security broken) should be large enough to notice, and will not be improved by switching to 512 bit keys or whatever.
For anyone really concerned, they may want to generate a private key with some dice.
Trollfi has no understanding of the issue of poor PSRNGs, and is quoting this Hyena person that is making a completely spurious and ridiculous claim. Troll quoting a troll in order to troll.
The issue with poor PSRNGs has noting to do with address generation, the only way poor randomness could be exploited with addresses is if you could reproduce the poor randomness yourself.
The issue is that poor PSRNGs conceivably could reuse or have insufficient entropy in "R" values in
signing transactions, which allows an attacker looking at the transactions either in the blockchain or mempool to
reverse ECDSA. This scenario is the real attack, because it doesn't necessarily require anything other than an understanding of the elliptic curve mathematics and scanning through transactions until you find a vulnerable public key.
This "Hash Hyena" is making the ridiculous claim that running vanitygen plus having a very large hard drive equals some kind of production of a collision database that produces non-trivial amounts of hits. That has no relevance to the issue of poor randomness, but I guess it sure sounds like it does!
The only thing here more ridiculous than Hash Hyena's claim about address security, is that pedantic P(security broken) formula, which at this point might as well be a laxative.
101.
Post 10199322 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.51h):
Bitcoin wont fail because the technology was revolutionary. But I cant argue with someone who says its worth .50 cents or someone else who ways 1 unit is worth 1 million dollars
Apparantly someone thought 10000 of them was worth a large pizza, and another person thought it was worth $1200 last spring
Bitcoin acquires value exactly like anything else--bread, tulip bulbs, SexCoin. The value of USD is not "set" by any authority (you're free to ask $1 or $1,000 for your
BTCeanie).
Speculative value is fine.
That's technically true in a somewhat meaningless tautological sense, but highly disingenuous because the explicitly stated purpose of monetary policy via central banking is to produce intentional macroeconomic outcomes through manipulating money. Using the word "set" to describe the alleged mechanism is a strawman oversimplification of very basic facts.
102.
Post 10275194 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.53h):
Good news for bitcoin, like always...
Why would an organization that is literally tasked with the legal authority to create what amounts to database entries even consider adopting all this trustless third-party-free blockchain stuff? There is no point to them volunteering to put Bitcoin on the map, when all they really need is their own proprietary shitty Ripple. If the Fed ever has anything to do with Bitcoin it wouldn't be this, it would be interacting with it as an asset after it had already established itself outside of their purview.
103.
Post 10281223 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.53h):
Why aren't the Greeks and Russians buying?
Can't say anything for Greeks, but Russians are buying USD, because RUB is being inflated much faster than USD, so the majority of the people don't notice any USD inflation.
I'm skeptical of any capital flight pump theories (including Cypress 2013), because lacking robust Bitcoin remittance flows entering the country, if for example a Russian had a way already to put USD or euro on an exchange in the first place, the Russian has already solved his capital controls problem prior to even purchasing Bitcoin. Also in the case of stringent capital controls in these scenarios, I have a hard time seeing what mechanism will arbitrage that local price action into a rising price on the exchanges. Cypress is understandable as a eurozone nation, but ostensibly the buys would've happened after the haircuts already transpired, and what would the supposed Russian oligarchs purchase Bitcoin in Cypress instead of freely converting USD accounts within the eurozone (ostensibly there may be frictions here of which I'm not aware).
104.
Post 10306655 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.54h):
Its hilarious how quiet this thread goes when the price is rising compared to when it falls $10. Just trolls left = confirmed.
10,000 pages ago there actually were interesting posts where people were really analyzing TA and tossing ideas around. Now the best we have is TL;DR walls of text from concern trolls. Lately they've been coming for /r/bitcoinmarkets too.
105.
Post 10441949 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.58h):
So what I've learned catching up on the thread the last couple days is that this is basically the personal blog / tumblr of a few high profile obnoxious idiots, and that "bitcoiners" are apparently stupid assholes because they have high expectations that are often wrong of a completely new technology that nobody has ever seen before and nobody actually knows how to value or project yet.
106.
Post 10452076 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.58h):
Contrarian projection: by the end of the year, Ripple will drown in a puddle of AIDS.
107.
Post 10452741 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.58h):
Any speculations on what will happen with the price, once the Ethereum comes in next month ?
Ethereum launching to a jawbreaking yawn closes the door on Vitalik's year-long FUD tour de force and triggers renewed interest in Bitcoin.
108.
Post 10452811 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.58h):
Ripple is an impressive and astounding accomplishment in marketing hoax. Ripple Labs has successfully painted their brand as friendly and amenable to establishment players, yet there is practically zero adoption whatsoever, and Ripple requires establishment adoption because there is essentially no way for it to be useful on a purely peer-to-peer basis. The business model of Ripple Labs depends on XRP being preferred as a reserve currency for building exchange paths, yet the massive founder holdings and mickey mouse lolfunbucks distribution swings like a sword of damacles of counterparty risk over any possible appreciation due to adoption in that way. Ripple is absolutely terrifying, because I am hard pressed to think of any FUD story that is unfairly hoisted upon Bitcoin that doesn't turn out to be literally true about Ripple.
109.
Post 10453037 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.58h):
Ripple is an impressive and astounding accomplishment in marketing hoax. Ripple Labs has successfully painted their brand as friendly and amenable to establishment players, yet there is practically zero adoption whatsoever, and Ripple requires establishment adoption because there is essentially no way for it to be useful on a purely peer-to-peer basis. The business model of Ripple Labs depends on XRP being preferred as a reserve currency for building exchange paths, yet the massive founder holdings and mickey mouse lolfunbucks distribution swings like a sword of damacles of counterparty risk over any possible appreciation due to adoption in that way. Ripple is absolutely terrifying, because I am hard pressed to think of any FUD story that is unfairly hoisted upon Bitcoin that doesn't turn out to be literally true about Ripple.
The way I understand it is that the ripple network is less dependant on XRP that what you are describing. It is mostly a bridge currency, useful but not that necessary in my view.
Also, we perfectly know who holds the XRPs, the same cannot be said for the top bitcoin whales who own 50k-100k coins.
Recently we have seen integration with Fidor bank, Earthport and others. The "adoption" ripple labs is going for is doing pretty fine if you ask me. On top of that, the technology is still very new.
I think the dudes at Ripple Labs are onto something huge, and that is actually useful. I'm not 100% convinced on XRP as an investment long term tho.
This is 100% a regurgitation of Ripple Labs disingenuous PR.
110.
Post 10461361 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.58h):
Has anyone interviewed Professor Bitcorn lately about his predictions? Becaus I'd really like some $15 coins and I'd like to know where to get them.
Ask Stolfi instead.
He says BTC is doomed long term(no date so we will never the wrong), and posts here(has this thread in his watchlist)
It doesn't work like that, he would just come up with some passive-aggressive way to change the subject to the fact that you're asking, then pose some seemingly innocuous question to the floor, to which he responds with some trolling that's already locked and loaded.
111.
Post 10463120 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.58h):
What is it about mathematicians that, towards the end of their productive period, they venture into the "softer" fields, and, well, generally flame out there?
Indeed. Newton and Pascal come to mind. But there are exceptions - Euler and Gauss, for example, if I am not mistaken.
Well, what would you do after your productive period is over?
Golf
112.
Post 10508538 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.59h):
To dial it back more big picture and less in terms of mechanics, I think the emotional dynamic of success in this situation is --
1) Your potential for success goes through the roof if she genuinely admires you;
2) You can't ask in a bitchy way like you're asking for a chore or ordeal from her, you literally create the "no" for her already by asking the wrong way. The right way to put across the vibe that it will be fun and doing it will make you very happy with her. Which is actually the truth if you're not a dirtbag.
Unfortunately neither of those criteria can really be faked expressly for the purpose of getting anal. Also I'm considering the situation of fairly well-adjusted virtuous people and not crazy headcases, because the scenario I'm describing is pretty much involves her being super into you and you wanting to do anal because you genuinely like having sex with her, so big picture I think the way you really succeed is by being the sort of dude your sexual partner will want to do things for, and you wanting to do it for the right reasons.
113.
Post 10546130 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.59h):
BTCeanie BTCabies entrepreneur Cameron Johnson was 9 years old when he started SELLING his BTCeanies online. When he was 15, his business started generating sums of $15,000 a day. He made his first million before graduating from high school.
I'm going to translate this to non-faggot.
Kid started selling his sister's collection, then started buying directly from Ty at wholesale to sell directly on places like ebay. He made about $50,000 after about a year.
Now the "$15k/day" / "first million" business, which our trucker-blowing compadre wants to insinuate came from Beanie Babies, was from a weird MLM online advertising scheme.
114.
Post 10580117 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.00h):
What I meant is that "bitcoin insurance" can probably only be what circle and coinbase are offering, basically telling people that "it's all insured" but if your computer/account gets hacked you are screwed and they don't give you a penny.
Considering bitcoin is irreversible and all, good luck with actual consumer protection.
I think you have a very curious idea of what insurance actually is, and you're inventing some weird troll-y fiction to support a completely artificial view of insurance.
If the risks can be reasonably quantified through actuarial analysis, there can be insurance. Stolen cars aren't exactly always reversible.
115.
Post 10604178 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.01h):
Ps: i recently moved my blockchain files from my 128GB SSD to an HDD, and was shocked how much longer loading bitcoin-qt took. It went from being about 40-60 second loadtime to 3-4 minutes. SSD drives are the future, and will make read/write/storage of the blockchain quick and simple
But most of the blockchain is static, unused data, making it a poor candidate for SSD. And I wonder it Bitcoin is SSD friendly. Does it do a lot of read/writes or is that mostly when a block comes in? I wonder if it would make sense to have the client split the blockchain to use the appropriate device for the appropriate use case. Maybe this could be done with symlinks on *nix.
What he's referring to is the startup where blocks are verified during the splash screen, in this situation an SSD is massively massively faster. I did exactly the same thing a while back during the 0.9.x-era and noticed the same.
116.
Post 10605745 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.01h):
if u are selling or shorting now you must be stupid.
we all know price will go up eventually, thats why we all are here, even the trolls.
there must be another bubble, all know it. But the question is when it happens.
I guess it will happen after the resolution of the mtgox desaster and all fbi coins sold.
in long term it can only go up, fundamentals havent changed.
Today a very clear triple top formed on Bitstamp, which ordinarily would be screaming to put in a short @ that level once the second happened, but after the third top we're getting a lot of chop instead of any kind of normal downward retracement, it's like we're working off different fib levels all of a sudden. Anybody have any insight into what's going on w/ the technicals?
117.
Post 10623882 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.01h):
Well, the price being 252$, it means that everybody who who owns bitcoin thinks that they are worth more than 245$; but, on the other hand, everybody in the world who has some money to spare thinks that 1 BTC is not worth 255$.
You really
are not much of an economist, are you ?
How does such an oversimplifying way to look at economic choice even go together with your ability to solve abstract mathematical problems?
Okay. To name just
one objection to such an incredibly naive model of the market:
Misrepresentation of your actual valuation for strategic purposes.
Similar to the misrepresentation, "tactical voting", in voting theory: sometimes it is individually rational for an actor not to cast a vote according to his sincere preference.
He is basically right this time. Since bitcoins are neither produced not destroyed (by consumption), the only basis for demand is people who think it is worth more, and the only source of supply is people who think it is worth less. Historic value could for some be of importance, but should not, again since they are not consumable there is no reference. Only expected future value should matter. Just like cold and heat, where cold is just absence of heat, and darkness and light, where darkness is just absense of light, bitcoin supply is the same as absence of demand. So in case of bitcoin (and other pure money types), there is really only one parameter: The demand.
The speculation is about projecting the demand for bitcoins in the future. Those never exposed to the idea are one source of future demand.
This not correct whatsoever, because future value is discounted by time preference.
118.
Post 10633036 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.01h):
You're going on a bit of detour there, doc
I already mentioned several of your points (e.g. that mining is based on the "currently best know procedure", not the provably optimal procedure).
And I know of course you're not facetious about the (lack of) intrinsic value of bitcoins, but you probably were facetious when you were asking what their weight is...
Good point about quantum computing possibly getting around the (Landauer) limit though. Well outside my field though, so I can only wonder if it'd simply
lower the limit, or entirely remove it possibly.
It's just the kind of specious FUD that people have to resort to when the price is rising. I think that's a good indicator of reversal, where suddenly the narrative shifts to grasping at straws on bizarre misguided technical grounds that are akin to arguing "well what if somebody invents free energy?'.
119.
Post 10681830 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.03h):
EU citizens will start jumping in bitcoin soon.
But... But.... I was told fiat currencies are super stable and only change like low single digit percentages in any given year??
Wasn't Bitcoin a "joke" and "not a currency" because it moves at all??
120.
Post 10682727 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.03h):
[Did you look up what "Kρίσις" means?
Google translate does not give anything funny (basically "critical", which coms from Kρίσις actually). Should I look for a slang dictionary instead?
It's a noun because of -σις.
Transliterate the letters instead of just dumping it into google translate and you will immediately see what it means via the English (and Latin) loanwords.
121.
Post 10691350 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.03h):
Alright. So, by now, I believe you know that I don't follow your basic premise ("Current price is a function of 'bubble like' market events that are closely linked to external events, like new markets."), and that you don't follow mine ("Current price is largely a function of the current and previous market state, with minor input from external events, which is best thought of as some sort of cyclical 'market mood' periods.").
But I'm interested nonetheless what you have to say, even though you're wrong
Which leads to me to my question: is there any predictive element in your model? From what I can tell, the answer is no, correct.
Put differently then: any idea how to
extend the model to be somewhat predictive of future market states (doesn't matter what kind, direction, volatility, return)?
The value in his model is that it's a futile exercise in overcomplication a la Ptolemaic epicycles in order to support his misplaced ideological beliefs.
122.
Post 10808340 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
You have spent hundreds of hours looking for points of failure, honed them ad nauseam, and these 6 issues are the best you can come up with? Gosh, if anything, I'd say that is a most compelling argument for the technology.
Thanks for providing such diligent service, "Stolfi". It is very useful. I do mean it.
To be perfectly fair, he did also write something completely mentally retarded about people sitting in a circle playing hot potato with dollars, with a sweet little zinger at the end mentioning Bitcoin, whose perceived wittiness can only be explained by geriatric dementia.
123.
Post 10815953 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
Well Said!
The sad truth is that not only does Jorge fail to comprehend how PoW consensus works, but he also fails to understand why Bitcoin is sound money. He has spent a year on here, most of that time totally wasted, including the time of many of us here in this forum who are willing to learn from others.
It really doesn't matter, he's just going to change the subject to another ill-conceived FUD talking point, and grace us with some patronizing wall of text, and set pedantic traps for people to respond to so he can launch into some pre-conceived nonsense he was planning to all along. I think this kind of behavior is a cautionary tale of what is to be expected from your garden-variety self-appointed do-gooder asshole who comes to the discussion motivated purely by an agenda and veritable attics full of unacknowledged political baggage.
124.
Post 10816296 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
Well Said!
The sad truth is that not only does Jorge fail to comprehend how PoW consensus works, but he also fails to understand why Bitcoin is sound money. He has spent a year on here, most of that time totally wasted, including the time of many of us here in this forum who are willing to learn from others.
It really doesn't matter, he's just going to change the subject to another ill-conceived FUD talking point, and grace us with some patronizing wall of text, and set pedantic traps for people to respond to so he can launch into some pre-conceived nonsense he was planning to all along.
I think this kind of behavior is a cautionary tale of what is to be expected from your garden-variety self-appointed do-gooder asshole who comes to the discussion motivated purely by an agenda and veritable attics full of unacknowledged political baggage.I think you really need to get a hold of yourself there. If you dont like what he says, just move on. If what he says annoys you so much that you are inclined to write the above drivel, then you really need to reassess your life's priorities.
At least others had the ability to argue a point.
I think you really need to get a hold of yourself there. If you dont like what I say, just move on. If what I say annoys you so much that you are inclined to write the above drivel, then you really need to reassess your life's priorities.
At least others had the ability to argue a point.
125.
Post 10839178 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
hmmmm ... yes ... 10 minute blocks of time going by on finex , apparently the preferred exchange nowadays , without a single buy or sell occurring ... sorry folks that's not what a healthy "global currency market" looks like ... hell it's not what any healthy traded finance market looks like ... meanwhile the novelty idea of "bitcoin is the future of money" has worn off for most people as they come to realize it's actually nothing more than a poorly-branded experimental decentralized floating value ledger system backed up by a little computer processing power , which was severely abused by mtgox in a massive ponzi scheme from the very beginning of bitcoin up until other exchanges existed , roughly 6 out of the total of 7 years of bitcoin's existence being completely fraudulently manipulated in terms of price ... leaves us with a "leftover" price resultant from their fraudulent actions , a pseudo-merchant acceptance process whereby 99% of merchants accept that you can sell your bitcoins at exchange value and pay them in real fiat for their goods via payment processors , and a massive slapped together mining infrastructure built to chase the false price but now faced with the reality of not being able to pay their power bills without $1000 bitcoin ... fucked would be a generous assessment ...
What he said
It's a very gripping anecdote, very good decision for dramatic purposes for the writer to choose to exaggerate beyond recognition or outright make up every single supporting detail, makes for a much more dramatic story than what happened in real life.
126.
Post 10923064 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.07h):
Patience broskis. Next week will be dumpy.
There is NO real evidence to establish that BTC prices are going below $240s. I am NOT saying that it will NOT happen, but seems more likely that we will get either sideways or up, rather than downward BTC price movement.
What's the real evidence for sideways or up, in contrast to the non-real evidence for down?
50 paragraphs or less, please.
The evidence is Ripple gives you AIDS.
127.
Post 10962903 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.08h):
How come that you bitcoiners think that in every crypto technology the fucking token is the main point?
XRP is just a token that is not even necessary for the ripple protocol to work (it's an addition as a bridge and as a spam mechanism, but not really necessary), its price could be at a fraction of a penny and nobody would even need to touch it.
The ripple protocol is a very promising technology and still is, same goes with Eris Industries or Ethereum and others.
Stop focusing on the friggin' "coins". It's very probable that they won't even be a part of the future of crypto (where distibuted ledgers/databases are the real useful innovation).
Well, there are like 32 billion coins going on 100 billion which has to be taken into consideration when markets try to price this thing. That´s why they´re called markets I guess.
The ripple network is a distributed ledger system to move fiat currencies instantly, globally, for cheap, kinda like bitcoin but without the drama, the volatiliy, the 0 consumer protection irreversibility, the POW, etc.
The cryptocurrency XRP is just a spam mechanism and an addition as a bridge currency, supposedly (but that is not necessary, the USD could play that role in the network eventually for example), anybody wanting to use the ripple network can give 0 fucks about XRP and its price.
Stop. Focusing. On. The. Friggin. Tokens.
Let's break down each claim:
- "distributed ledger system to move fiat currencies instantly":
sort of true, although it's not "distributed" right now and it's not clear that the consensus mechanism will actually work if it's actually distributed- "for cheap":
true- "kinda like bitcoin but without the drama":
I'm not sure how pushing Jed out of the company w/ the Wells Fargo situation, and his Yoko Ono-type situation isn't drama- "the volatiliy" [sic]
false- "the 0 consumer protection irreversibility"
false- "the POW"
true- "The cryptocurrency XRP is just a spam mechanism and an addition as a bridge currency, supposedly (but that is not necessary, the USD could play that role in the network eventually for example)..."
true- "...anybody wanting to use the ripple network can give 0 fucks about XRP and its price."
false, because Ripple Labs runs 100% of the basic infrastructure, and their main business model concerns XRP appreciating in price.In conclusion fuck your Ripple bullshit, and telling people emphatically like a douche to not focus on the tokens, when Ripple is completely about the founders enriching themselves with the tokens.
128.
Post 10966985 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.08h):
Hey I heard on the news that Bitcoin was bad, but The Blockchain is amazeballs. Where do I buy Blockchains??
129.
Post 10967248 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.08h):
I'm so curious as to what Stolfi's other obsessions have been. Model trains?
(Could we get some shnappy DOOOOOM going? Looking for an entry point.)
I'll buy him a nice set of golf clubs if he's willing to go away and spare us his pretentious attention-whoring FUD troll bullshit.
130.
Post 10976288 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.09h):
Why do you presume you have the consensus on your side? Do you think a majority of the users/miners/pools will suddenly adopt your, or a like minded model?
You come across with great egotism and hubris, like you have all the answers. As if no-one has ever dared deliberate your concerns.
He's a concern-troll in sheep's clothing, grasping at straws to perpetuate any half-baked FUD story he can come up with. I strongly recommend reading his retarded analogy about people sitting in a circle passing dollars around to see what kind of disingenuous mentality we're dealing with here.
131.
Post 11031779 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.10h):
New coindesk survey: "Survey: Is the Bitcoin Community Just Young, White, Male and Retarded ?"
Reading this thread the answer is obviously YES
That would require people who are actually in the "Bitcoin community" to be on this thread, which doesn't actually appear to be the case.
132.
Post 11188164 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.12h):
If bitcoin is to succeed, then these points must be argued against. But that rarely happens. The poster will be simply called a troll, a few ad hominen attacks on him and then put on a stupid, pointless ignore list.
The sad thing is that even the most rabid bitcoiners find it difficult to string a few words together into a logical argument to defend bitcoin. Thats what worries me most.
There's a world of difference between genuine argument, discussion, debate, etc., and humoring someone with a proven track record of shameless concern-trolling.
The misguided "professor" in question is an inveterate Buttcoiner through and through, believes that Bitcoin is inherently a scam, yet feigns airs of curiosity and moderation to suck people into his egotistical troll web. He has very predictable patterns of disingenuously just "asking questions" as troll bait to setup pre-conceived wall of text rants.
It's impossible to really engage this kind of mentality because he bombards you with a sheer volume of pointless text that is too exhausting for anyone sincere to deal with, whereas the troll revels in this imaginary domination of people on the internet on the basis of nothing. You can confront this kind of person with facts and arguments all you want, and he repays you with passive-aggressive self-deprecation. No amount of rationalization for this behavior as some kind of self-appointed do-gooder obligation overcomes the natural reaction that such a toxic participant can fuck right off.
133.
Post 11204974 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.12h):
There is no "cheap" if you paid more than double digits for your interwebs money. I
Found this. Good old Igorr and his updated trend doesn´t get any fame today, which is sad, he was always spot on. Hipster bears gave all their love to falling.
Never forget:
You're frivolous kid.
trend does not look good.
and you are a perma bear troll!
Igorr's trendline predicts negative $422.57 for today, that's not particularly impressive.
134.
Post 11208362 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.12h):
cant you guys see we are making lowers highs and higher lows ? we are 100% going sub 200. every good trader knows that. what we dont know is when.
No they don't, because a symmetrical triangle can lead to either a continuation or a reversal. Ironically the "when" part is way more knowable than the direction when it breaks!
135.
Post 11219157 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.13h):
The way coins were bought on BTCe today makes me think someone... somewhere... is running a fractional reserve and needed to acquire some BTC fast before being discovered.
Perhaps there's some connection to Josh Garza's exchange offering to buy Bitcoin over market price recently, which was outed immediately before they could do any significant volume?
136.
Post 11461308 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.16h):
The separation of exchanges into two categories seems to already be starting because of KTC regulations. The most compliant exchanges require so much official paperwork that it's difficult to register at them. The other less scrupulous exchanges are easier to register at but are often accused of running fractional reserves because they are never audited.
bitfinex was audited a year or so ago by a trusted community member (it's about time to do it again).
Just because an exchange doesn't do KYC/AML doesn't mean it can't (or shouldn't) be audited.
I don't think this practice is remotely acceptable for the kind of volume these exchanges go through.
They undoubtedly have the money to hire a proper auditing firm, and I think the only reason they get away with these kinds of substandard practices while still keeping customers is the fact that a meltdown has not happened yet, and regulated exchanges are extremely slow to emerge in the US.
137.
Post 11483655 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.16h):
Arstechnica's headline sucks as well!
138.
Post 11503121 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.16h):
"Bitcoin-XT" is another implementation of the bitcoin protocol, started by Mike Hearn. It is still compatible with Bitcoin-core; either version can be used with the same wallet files. Gavin recently said that he would be joining Mike in the development of this software. Gavin mentioned very recently that he may use this version to push for the 20 MB change, since the current core devs do not seem to be in a hurry,
Bitcoin-XT is not a re-implementation, it's a patch on top of Bitcoin Core that adds two features, double-spend relaying (which can be flagged for inspection) and the BIP64 getutxos message (which he needs for Lighthouse). The reason XT exists is because Mike Hearn can't get BIP64 implementation merged into Core (
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/4351). Gavin happened to be for putting BIP 64 in, so moving forward if this happened, Bitcoin-XT would be a proper fork based on the actual Core codebase, simply with these two differences plus the blocksize changes. The fact that moving to XT is considered a viable option might suggest that there is a much larger "turf war" going on here since at least the middle of 2014.
139.
Post 11505546 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.16h):
Sounds like the FUD that only JorgeStolfi would write.
No, you've actually come across uncharacteristically, for lack of a better word, sane with regard to this block size stuff.
Should we be concerned for your well-being that something is terribly wrong?
140.
Post 12317593 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.25h):
My personal impression is that hash rate is dictated by price and (more importantly?) technology, with rate reacting to price and not the inverse. The two big ramps were directly related to a paradigm shift in mining tech, CPU to GPU, and GPU to ASIC. With ASIC gear becoming increasingly efficient we will probably see a rise in hashrate even in the face of a flat or modestly declining price. The upcoming halving should be pretty interesting for those watching this relationship.
It's not inconceivable that hashrate actually drives price in certain scenarios, once you consider the possibility of mining operations hedging by entering into futures contracts, and potentially establishing a floor based on buying instead of mining to satisfy those contracts at certain price levels.
141.
Post 12355245 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.25h):
I still think that the limit will be raised, and the Blockstream guys will either cede or be left sucking their thumbs. But I may be overestimating again...
The play as of late appears to be saving face spinning the situation as though they have been for relaxing the cap all along.
142.
Post 12355708 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.25h):
After having admired Dr. Back's words, and even having had the honor of debating directly with him on reddit, I must say that, for his technical and ethical qualities, he is one of the most outstanding bitcoin personalities -- right there besides Roger Ver. I do hope that his career develops the way he deserves.
Who pays you though?
Sometimes I'm curious if you, Lambtroll and a couple others sit at the office cafeteria table and try to think of the most stupid brain dead shit to say
As much as I think some what this dude has to say is incredibly idiotic, I can appreciate the sarcasm.
Herr Doktor Adam Back Ph.D. is a lightweight who gained prominence with t-shirt activism. He joined the bandwagon once it was clear this Bitcoin thing actually had some legs, and now he's trying to paint himself as this omniscient champion of process control. It's so unbelievably laughable to anyone with any real world business/project experience.
143.
Post 12409409 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Economists have know for 500 years that a currency must have some inflation, otherwise people will hoard it and it will not be available for use as a currency.
What economists advocated this position in 1515?
I've never come across these scholars in my actual academic work, or even the notion of economics as a discipline per se existing at that time, so whatever you've discovered must be truly groundbreaking.
144.
Post 12478188 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Usage only matters if people are holding. Take this, for example:
We have 100 BTC. There are 100 people interested. All 100 are buying and instantly selling their BTC.
1000 more people get interested. The market is constantly buying and selling, so they jump in as well.
This has no effect. If people HODL, this will change things. But that's just as easy to do with 1k people as it is with 1m.
The intermediary doing the conversions is a HODL'er.
They have to hold reserves in the asset pair in order to operate.
145.
Post 12478240 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
does this look like a HEAD AND SHOULDERS pattern to anyone here?
it looks like a self-similar fractal repetition of the Spring 2013 through past-summer of 2014, compressed over shorter timescale and over shorter amplitude. Exception being at the end it dropped relatively lower, but all the major features are there.
146.
Post 12494031 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.26h):
Good morning Bitcoinland.
I see we had a little action last night but we seem to be coming back to $230 pretty consistently lately.
Must be driving the daytraders crazy. Long-term holders yawn.
What is actually our (long term hodling cult, inc.) target? 10 000? 100 000?? 1 000 000???
32K
52 K
520k
I had an anxiety dream where we hit $103k but all the exchanges were smashed with traffic and I couldn't take any profits in fiat.
147.
Post 12679965 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.27h):
Yet another type (3) of attack may be a miner creating and solving a large bock to cause relay nodes and some clients to crash. Rumor is that the 1 MB limit was introduced to prevent hypothetical type (3) attacks, or some similar one. But there was no such attack during the 20 months or so in 2009 and 2010 that bitcoin operated with a 32 MB block size limit; and it is not clear whether such a rogue miner could do much damage except to himself.
There is also a cap on the number of sigops per block that more directly addresses this concern, but for some reason that seems to never get mentioned.
148.
Post 12702902 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.28h):
I believe you are referencing PPC/ NuBits? UIAB(upon information and belief) Nubits is pegged/ tied to each one being worth $1
No, Brock Pierce's company was originally RealCoin and renamed Tether, which was originally built on Mastercoin which was renamed Omni.
Their model is not to create an artificial peg like Nubits or Bitassets, they hold actual dollars custodially and issue tokens. Legendary internet moron Trace Meyer once tried to convince them (on his podcast) to hold physical cash in a vault instead of using banks to do this.
149.
Post 12835973 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.30h):
They have to say this for political reasons, to ingratiate themselves to the government.
150.
Post 17887768 (copy this link) (by greenlion) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_15.03h):
At some point last year (maybe 2 years ago) my node was saturating my upload to the point where normal web browsing would not function smoothly. I had to reduce max connections (to around 20) in order to continue supporting the network. I guess a gimped node is better than none at all.
I'm not sure your concept of "gimped" makes any sense.
20 inbound connections is enough to broadcast to the entire network and then some in 3 hops.
Why is it "gimped" to not completely saturate your uplink 24/7 without any QoS measures in place?
View Screen Capture
