To help you get out of the funk, if only fleetingly, here is a link to news about glaring security problems with legacy cash transfer infrastructure: http://www.providencejournal.com/breaking-news/content/20140830-armored-car-rolls-over-spilling-money-bags-onto-route-10-in-cranston-truck-occupants-hurt.ece.

Also a small fact: some noobs are new, some are puppets, some just don't want you to remember them.

i take it he means that ww3 not going to happen anytime soon, but eventual breakdown of current world order is more than likely.

i have to agree that the red baiting is ridiculous. it is trivial to see which country is bent on geopolitical domination. it seems also clear that it shall fail, and go broke in the attempt.

You have not wondered hard enough. How about they are gathering info in order to decide whether it is a good time to enter / buy moar?

no you have not.

Why not? It looks like EBay/PayPal/Braintree/Coinbase are on their way towards implementing a simple, secure worlwide payment network via BTC.  They chose to announce that the day before Apple talks about its mobile payment solution.

In other words, the competition is on. But if the BTC route proves better/more profitable, Apple is free to correct.

On the other hand, confirmation of Satoshi's accounts being hacked is a tad . . . much.


 

Lady, gentlemen: I am all in.

or not

grappa, JJG, please chill out. there already are enough trolls around here, you don't need to join them by trolling each other. go back to being funny/useful instead.

if bored, you can:

a) watch the unfolding XMR exploit drama, serious real time action:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789978.0;all


b) read about troll personality disorder, aka stolfi syndrome:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-online-secrets/201409/internet-trolls-are-narcissists-psychopaths-and-sadists

(too bad the actual paper is behind a friggin' elsevier paywall:  

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886914000324 )


c) examine what options you got to come up with some fiat to take advantage of the current sale.

monkey is the in-house oracle. its predictions are right about half the time.

not sure how you are counting.

BTC hit $32 on june 2011. It only hit that mark again on february 2013, 620 days later.  It has been around 300 days since last ATH.

The thought that Bitcoin "will not take over the world" is often repeated. See for example:

- Report of the recent IMF/WB meetings in Washington (p.5):
http://www.cbbanorte.com.mx/analisis/flashes/Economicos/IMF_WB_AnnualMeeting.pdf

- Minneapolis Fed director and author of the astounding 'Money is memory' paper:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/16/us-usa-fed-kocherlakota-bitcoin-idUSBREA3F03120140416

It is not an argument per se, it appears to be based on the (sensible enough) thought that Bitcoin becoming global reserve currency would entail a total revolution in the world order, and it is just too improbable for this to happen.

To my mind, the important thing is that the directors of the Fed and the IMF are taking Bitcoin extremely seriously. And, as inca said, we need not wait for the entirety or the majority the world's wealth to be denominated in Bitcoin.  On one recent estimate (you can look that one up), the world's wealth stands at 263 trillion USD. If merely one tenth of one percent of the world's wealth is denominated in Bitcoin, then the market capitalization of the coin would stand at 263 billion USD. Dividing that by, say, 18 million BTC (we'll be there in 2020), gives you ~USD$16,000/BTC.

I think the same, if only because Bitcoin is not suitable for a debt-based economic system. But surely it could take over 0.1% of the economy!

dream on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_Internet_sockpuppetry
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Threat_Research_Intelligence_Group

that would make no difference. if/when it comes down to it, there are no jurisdictions, there is no law. that much is certain. 

It is not quite so simple. Standard economists worry that if inflation becomes too low (or if there is deflation), incentive to hoard increases and incentive to invest drops, which could lead to negative growth, the bête noire of capitalism.

Congratulations, that constitutes probable cause. All your communications are now being closely followed. Jurisdiction is irrelevant. The recordings of all your phone, cell phone and internet useage during the past five years will be analyzed for possible illegal activity. You should assume that encryption provided by your VPN is backdoored.

good man.

More likely, he got dumped. 

ignominious indeed.

about 19.

Nasty. Ignored.

Or without being paid per post.

Not much info on the nuts and bolts, or the business model. It does look nice.

speaking of which, anyone knows what happened to goat?

Anyone who got goxed & proceeded to get stamped is a certified fool.

No, it's a value judgement. Sometimes those are appropriate too.

more like the total boredom phase, in which we come to this thread even if we don't expect to get any meaningful insight from it.

if you think BTC will stand or fall as a result of some entity's short term trading strategy, you might as well exit asap.

just like anything else, then.

bring them on!

you need to review your calc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate_value_theorem

Szabo's stuff is also breathtaking. Except you won't find the word 'bitcoin' in there.
http://szabo.best.vwh.net
http://unenumerated.blogspot.com


But you already know this, and are just drawing us out. I have come to enjoy your jpegs, though.

A little more Krugman bashing: on how the implementation of anti-inflationary policy by the FED depended on the whim of the Great Communicator. I suppose the author wants us to feel grateful.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-samuelson-volcker-reagan-and-history/2015/01/11/9c32e822-982a-11e4-aabd-d0b93ff613d5_story.html?hpid=z3

BTC is uncorrelated to stocks and bonds. If you like its fundamentals, allocating a part of your portfolio to it is a conservative choice.

If you don't like/understand its fundamentals, and are just tradin', that is also your (far less conservative) choice.

yeah, you are right, i was wrong. was waiting to see if someone called me on it.

ich auch

1- offensive for a brazilian to be called argentinian: just a football rivalry joke. please travel more.

2- insult hurling greatly diminishes the value of this thread. if irked by a troll to the point of losing civility, simply put it on ignore.

3- to see long-term potential in bitcoin is to come to the conclusion, already expressed in the original paper, that it is irrational for an actor or cartel to perform a 50.1% attack on the network, as it costs more to successfully carry out the attack than what can be expected to be gained by it.

4- the exception to the above is if the attacker's goal is to undermine the network irrespective of cost. however, the entities capable of doing this do not seem, so far, to consider it to be in their interest. for example, multiple USG agencies have stated their goal not to stifle innovation that stands to benefit/provide redundancies to the US economy in the long run.

support thinning on stamp

Nice. That's what my gut told me to do back then but I failed to listen. But learning.

You are doing better than anyone who got in in 2014. Now be conservative, don't get into anything you don't understand, do not go in too deep.

@drbrock: also, probably best not to go around saying how much BTC you hold. this place teems with all manner of sophisticated crooks.

you hold a 256-bit number in your head? i seriously doubt it. but if you did, that is not safe, cause you'll forget it next time you have a few.

oi, you can see so many moves ahead, you make magnus carlsen look like a cherub.

Good.

Also, in future perhaps bulls should aim to restrict train pics to doubling events.

I have to say, Lamb was really hitting his stride during the panic. Hilarious stuff. In fact, his posts are the main reason to be coming to this thread at this point.

MOAR!

Now price needs to double before we really start to be out of the woods.

But Coinbase Exchange is open for NY. I find this confusing too.

On the other hand, the previously operating US exchanges (e.g. coinsetter) must be working under some regulatory framework, and don't seem to have limitations according to state.

Is solitude's post supposed to be a joke?

Ha ha, yes, the Fed proposes to have a conversation over the fact that the legacy payments system is broke. Their idea is to have some task forces get to work over the next few years to broker a more efficient one.

Bitcoin not considered mature enough at the moment, but a similar option, except with a centralized authority, is seen as an option.

https://fedpaymentsimprovement.org
https://fedpaymentsimprovement.org/wp-content/uploads/strategies-improving-us-payment-system.pdf

no, they are looking out for themselves.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg10275270#msg10275270

Speaking of having a problem, who is it that spends hours every day posting pics in a forum related to a technology he considers to be dead?

That said, you may be on to something with BP.

Except Adam really was addicted to being here ...

And what was that? I still feel some discomfort.

at what time was the poll posted yesterday? doubt we'll make it.

anyways, i voted no, where is my lollipop.

That is mind-numbingly obvious. Anyone with money to invest, in this or in any asset, could invest, and if they haven't, it's because they've decided its too risky.

We're just waiting for when they decide it's too risky not to invest.  

Looks like we'll hit bearwhale price shortly.

My (analog monkey's) guess is we are at $315 by EOW.

literally awesome

Switch to duckduckgo.com? And eliminate that verb from your vocab?

question answered thoroughly in current poll.

no, you should short it.

^That is retarded and really not funny.

^ or not.

and how will you know that?

do not confuse inflation with devaluation

That's monumentally weak; that is a useless number.

Instead they could piggyback on:

http://www.teraexchange.com/index.html

https://twitter.com/Bloomberg/status/601484610665586688
http://newsletters.briefs.blpprofessional.com/document/3o88YiJSewlwctQnzv.3UA--_39z18euvdyhzvm6y0a/front

featuring prof. Bitcorn!

you have tera posting in this page. but i think she's a she.

next stop 4000 yuan renminbi.

i lurk here just to read NLC. effing brilliant.

Thankfully I missed that. I don't even wanna know.

either
1. the hypothetical bad miners are consciously, permanently jeopardizing the blockchain, which would only make sense if the amount they are being paid for attacking it is superior to their total investment + expected returns.  these are not "extremely small costs" but very large amounts, given the already concentrated nature of mining. under these conditions the attacker might as well start mining itself, which takes us back to the original 51% attack and its "internal" game theory.

or
2. the hypothetical bad miners aim to make some cash on the side by colluding with the attacker, but will only do as much of it consistent with not permanently undermining the blockchain, their total investment and their expected returns. furthermore, corrupt miners running pools must bloat the blockchain in non-evident way, or they would lose hashrate. hence their spamming must be to some extent limited.

[EDIT: in fact, all corrupt miners must be cautious with their spamming or risk having their blocks orphaned as jbreher below notes; that the attacker would pay for the orphaned blocks is irrelevant as orphaned blocks do not make it to the blockchain and therefore cannot bloat it.]

so the question becomes: can enough bloat be purchased from such venal miners consistent with actually putting the blockchain in permanent jeopardy? is this even a remotely probable scenario?

set your exit points in advance.

enjoy life.

link or nada.

The economy needs to be stable or improving steadily from now till 2019 for that pencilled-in scenario to be signed in ink. Right now it looks like a pipe dream. Until then, economists will assure you everything is fine, and if and when it isn't, they will say the fall was unforeseeable.

bitcoinity. if you check any exchange that opened in 2014 or later, there is a good chance you will see the flashing sign today.

for absolute ATH, you'll have to keep your eye on stamp.

bitcoinity's code shows a flashing sign for any exchange when it reaches its ATH.  i saw one today.

traders at stamp are completely out of cash.
price glued at $1,118, $40 below spot. nobody arbing until deposits come in.

yes this is called a buying opportunity.

you can both hold, and trade from a separate non-DCA stash. making > 20% returns on that stash is phenomenal by normal standards. and today is one of those days you can expect to make a move that nets around that.

i could tell you about a certain brazilian academic who professed ad nauseam that bitcoin was a despicable ponzi, not in any way comparable to government-backed real money, despite having had his savings wiped out by the banco central do brasil no fewer than three times in as many decades.

but i'll spare you the pain.

except bitcoin isn't.

most patient wins

so how will those convinced of the virtues of SegWit trade the fork?

don't let the drinking of your hatorade cocktail prevent you from appreciating that bitcoin's built-in, last word, first of its kind governance mechanism is being deployed for the first time.

it is awesome.