All posts made by MaxwellsDemon in Bitcointalk.org's Wall Observer thread
1.
Post 4079516 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.45h):
I have been thinking a lot about the doge phenomenon and it is really quite interesting.
Conceived as a parody, think of it as an actual implementation of CosbyCoin, it is one of the more elaborate mass trolls of our time.
I believe its intention was to point out the absurdity of cryptocurrencies in general, fair enough, this is a pretty out-there idea whatever its merits, but it has kind of blown up in the creators faces and threatens to teach the creators a lesson about the fundamental nature of money; that ANYTHING can be money if only people agree that it is. It puts me in mind of the
Rai stones of Micronesia.
It's the very definition of funny money
But Dogecoin is not just based on a meme, it is a meme itself. Therefore, it will follow the rules of memetic epidemiology - rise exponentially for a while, then disappear.
2.
Post 4082830 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.45h):
I still don't understand this post. Was it large chunks moved hence 'days destroyed' or was it many small amounts?
"So a high number of bitcoin days destroyed means that either old coins that haven't moved for a long time are moving, or that someone with a large number of bitcoins are spending them (or both)."
In this case you can actually tell that it's old coins.
The total output volume yesterday was about 1 million BTC, which is below the recent average. The days destroyed were about 134 million, which is WAY above average. Therefore you can assume that most of the coins transacted were "regular" young coins, but some of them were very very old.
To back this up, blockchain.info has a feature that filters days destoryed by coin age. If you filter with a minimum of 1 year, those transactions account for 131 million out of 134 million total days destroyed yesterday. Since most of the coins moved on an average day are just a few days old, this further suggests that a significant amount of coins more than 1 year old were moved.
Assuming no more than 100,000 old coins are involved (probably much less), they would have to be at least 3.5 years old. So it seems likely that a very big miner from 2009/2010 just moved a lot of coins for the first time since mining them.
3.
Post 4083642 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.45h):
This can't be it, these are brand new coins...
It's probably a bunch of small transactions. As mentioned on reddit, the big 2009/2010 miners usually kept each 50 BTC block reward in a separate address, so it's possible the mystery whale moved them out in separate transactions for each address.
4.
Post 4083757 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.45h):
This can't be it, these are brand new coins...
It's probably a bunch of small transactions. As mentioned on reddit, the big 2009/2010 miners usually kept each 50 BTC block reward in a separate address, so it's possible the mystery whale moved them out in separate transactions for each address.
Could it be the FBI moving DPR's remaining 400k coins @ average 1 year old?
Possible, but that would probably spike the total transaction volume quite a bit. Seems to make more sense that it's a smaller sum but very old.
Also, I thought DPR had much less than 400k coins...
5.
Post 4083991 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.45h):
I believe they seized almost 30k of customer's funds:
https://blockchain.info/address/1F1tAaz5x1HUXrCNLbtMDqcw6o5GNn4xqXPlus 144k of DPR's money:
https://blockchain.info/address/1FfmbHfnpaZjKFvyi1okTjJJusN455paPHThe 600k figure was an estimate of the total revenue Silk Road had ever made. It doesn't account for tens of thousands of Bitcoins that he had spent over the years (on things like server expenses, paid employees, fake hitmen etc...).
6.
Post 6919354 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.46h):
And why are those two mutually exclusive in your opinion? Is making Bitcoin useful for businesses detrimental to the democratic nature of Bitcoin? I don't see how really, and I also don't see how the initial ideals can ever come to fruition if you don't make it useful for businesses and palatable to politics.
Here you go:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/26apno/bitstamp_will_not_process_withdrawal_unless_you/This is what happens when you try to make bitcoin palatable to the state.
7.
Post 6919458 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.46h):
And why are those two mutually exclusive in your opinion? Is making Bitcoin useful for businesses detrimental to the democratic nature of Bitcoin? I don't see how really, and I also don't see how the initial ideals can ever come to fruition if you don't make it useful for businesses and palatable to politics.
Here you go:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/26apno/bitstamp_will_not_process_withdrawal_unless_you/This is what happens when you try to make bitcoin palatable to the state.
So don't use Stamp anymore.
I assure you, I won't. But this is part of a growing trend.
Compliance
will come at the expense of privacy and fungibility. There's no way around that.
8.
Post 6919557 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.46h):
And why are those two mutually exclusive in your opinion? Is making Bitcoin useful for businesses detrimental to the democratic nature of Bitcoin? I don't see how really, and I also don't see how the initial ideals can ever come to fruition if you don't make it useful for businesses and palatable to politics.
Here you go:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/26apno/bitstamp_will_not_process_withdrawal_unless_you/This is what happens when you try to make bitcoin palatable to the state.
That's just Bitstamp, and it's precisely because of the unclear regulatory nature of Bitcoin right now that they are erring on the safe side. Not all the exchanges are asking those kind of intrusive questions, so if you don't like it then use another exchange or don't use an exchange at all.
That's just it, I don't think they're erring on the safe side. I think they're heralding the future.
It's just a question of time until all exchanges are forced to become this intrusive. It's just what governments do.
If this becomes the norm, bitcoin will lose its primary benefits: privacy and fungibility. It will then either disappear or become a backend solution for the existing financial system.
9.
Post 6919984 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.46h):
I think your outlook is too pessimistic, what about the possibility of decentralized exchanges or direct peer-to-peer trades without a third party? I think that will be the future if all the exchanges are forced to become this intrusive. And there are also more anonymous coins coming on the market now and I don't think those governments want to push us all away from Bitcoin and towards those coins. So I think they will be forced to come to the bargaining table and loosen up on their intrusiveness.
I certainly hope you're right... Like oda.krell, I'm glad you're optimistic
Nevertheless, we must not ignore the existence of a conflict between the interests of the state and the core values of bitcoin. My view is that bitcoin is a revolutionary technology in political (and not just financial) terms. Stripped of its political significance, all it could ever be is a slightly cheaper way for moving money between existing financial institutions.
10.
Post 6974531 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.47h):
Last block on blockchain.info is over 2 hours old. Is there a tread about this?
I'm seeing 302879 through 302881 which are less than 2 hours old... Nevertheless, it is odd to see 3 blocks in the space of 2 hours...
EDIT: This seems absolutely real, not a blockchain.info glitch. 3 blocks in the last 2 hours. Accordingly, the number of transactions in each of these blocks is unusually high, and two of them are scraping the 1 MB limit.
11.
Post 7056266 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.48h):
Not even sure that the small errors in the physic models are needed. The beauty of René Thom"s chaos theory is that the non-determinism lies deep within the maths.
As an example, even if you know very precisely the speed and the position of the solar's system planets, and the external perturbations, you just can't do the maths, the 3-bodies equations are already too complicated to be solved. And which planet will be ejected from the solar system is still a mystery.
You don't need to solve the equations though. In a deterministic universe, if you know
precisely the starting conditions, you could run a simulation and get the prediction. Chaos theory says that small perturbations in the starting conditions can lead to vastly different outcomes. Quantum physics says small perturbations are intrinsic. Even with two initially identical systems, things will occur in one which will not in the other.
But to run a simulation you need to be able to solve the 3-body equations... Unless you're running some sort of simplified heuristic simulation, in which case it could never be absolutely deterministic anyway.
You have to distinguish practical predictability from theoretical predictability. Chaos theory (as well as the difficulty in solving 3-body equations and such) make the universe practically unpredictable. Quantum theory (and
only quantum theory) make the universe theoretically unpredictable.
12.
Post 7056387 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.48h):
Quantum theory makes the universe absolutely unpredictable on the quantum scale.
Actually it makes the universe unpredictable on
any scale.
One reason for this, as Richy_T pointed out, is that chaos theory compounds on top of quantum theory. Small perturbations on the quantum scale could have larger repercussions as per chaos theory.
Other reasons could be more simple and direct effects - the classical example, of course, being Schroedinger's cat. Schroedinger came up with that example precisely to demonstrate the effects of quantum uncertainty on the mesoscale.
13.
Post 7061724 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.48h):
Loving the quotes was my interest.
Have the same blood as you and others have
So, either he's not a bot or he just marginally passed the Turing test
Are you... alive?
14.
Post 7134469 (copy this link) (by MaxwellsDemon) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.50h):
I've noticed a curious duality in your posts recently. Where has magic monkey gone? Whilst I appreciate your own ideas I mourn his loss (though I have to wonder about his relationship with the painkillers you were taking).
I have run out of painkillers, which is making me grumpy. I am rather annoyed with the monkey as well. If I report his cogitations (which are always indecisive until he calls a turn) I risk my own reputation. Oh well, I am pseudonymous for a reason:
Monkey says 625 on the 10pm bar was a low. (He decided that at midnight, two hours later, with the price at 638.50.) Monkey likes the upside for at least 4 more hours, considers 656 likely resistance. EDIT: Monkey changed his mind and thinks its going down for 5 hours now.
On a daily basis, monkey is expecting to stay biased long until next Tuesday. He first started to like the upside on the 16th, which was a pretty good call, methinks. He had thought the 29th might turn south, but he was (a) wrong and (b) hedging.
On a weekly basis, the last time monkey gave up on his longs was the week of the 13th of December, 2013. He failed to call that top out clearly, although he was on the verge of doing so. He decided he liked the long side again the week of the 23rd of May, 2014, and is presently expecting to stay long for at least a month and a half.
Disclaimer: The monkey swills expensive single malts constantly. Invest accordingly (i.e., in distillers). Monkey is a fuzzy reasoner.
Sorry for my ignorance but what the fuck are you guys calling magic monkey? Is it a price prediction model?
Sigh. Evolutionary psychology 101:
Your brain is broadly divided into 3 parts. The oldest of these is the archaiopallium, which deals with the most fundamental instincts - the four "F"s (fight, flight, feeding and mating). This area of the brain is sometimes known as the reptile brain, as it's all that reptiles have, or popularly your "Chimp" (though this term can also include the limbic system). It roughly corresponds to what Freud called the 'id'.
In Aminorex's case, these instinctive functions also include financial modelling.
Most of the time the id is tempered by the superego, which deals with internalised concepts of morality, and mediated by the ego. However, when the "higher" functions are dulled through use of painkillers or expensive single malt, the chimp or monkey brain wins through. (It's why people fight and have sex a lot when they're drunk.)
What you are seeing in these instances is Aminorex's monkey: pure, instinctive, unmediated financial analysis, unfettered by social convention.
Ignore it at your peril.
This is why I bother to wade through these abominable forums. Once you've macheted your way through the thicket of unabashed trolling and relentless stupidity, you can find some real gems
