Topic: BTC Beginning of the End ! - page 2. (Read 6698 times)

 

This chart says all: https://blockchain.info/de/charts/miners-operating-profit-margin

Welcome to new dificulty 3.12 bilion and new mining factor 9 cents/Gh at 24h  

View Screen Capture


View Screen Capture

BTC quickly losing popularity, and now we have mining factor 14.6 cents per GH at 24h

View Screen Capture

View Screen Capture

this is why PeerCoin or nxt can skyrocket, mining tax not there.

Welcome to the new difficulty and new mining factor  

View Screen Capture

View Screen Capture

And MtGox exchange loses credibility,and has the lowest trading vulume.
(btce, bitstamp and bitfinex have the larger volume than MtGox)

View Screen Capture

I kept mining at an unprofitable ratio, back in the days when BTC were exchanged around 2 U$...
As beleving in a 10 000 + U$ ill keep mining forever

misinformation is one thing. what i have noticed is that people very much overemphasize the importance of FUD. everyone gets their panties in a bunch about it without ever considering that news/FUD are not the only determining factors on price, and may not be important at all.

I'll re-enter normal 'Peter R' mode because we are not in the 'Confirmed Bad News Thread' (where I reserve the right to unleash my inner troll).  My post you quoted (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4606471) was just another parody on bitcoin FUD and our reliance on "experts" and pseudo "confirmation."

Someone from the MSM read Risto's original thread here (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/distribution-of-bitcoin-wealth-by-owner-316297), and published an article that implied these wealth distribution estimates were "facts."  Then more and more people started assuming they were indeed facts since it was "confirmed" by the MSM.  And now we have "professors" like Dr. Williams seemingly "reconfirming" what were essentially "guesses" by some random guy from an internet forum, and then adding things like "these 47 people colluded to push up the price."

After I embraced my inner troll (thanks to Proudhon) a couple of days ago, it's really opened my eyes to the extent of misinformation everywhere.  Even people in prestigous positions parrot the latest FUD without ever checking the original source.  

You're pushing the boat out a bit there aren't you? So where is your proof of this collaborative effort? I strongly doubt such collaboration but if you have any direct evidence carry on.

I've thought about the wealth distribution. If Bitcoin were only a currency then it wouldn't make sense, agreed. But Bitcoin is not only a currency at all. It is also a payment network, which is inseparable from the currency. In some ways a Bitcoin is also a share, as if the Bitcoin network was a company (digital payments platform). It is not unusual for the founders of a company to hold many more shares than those who buy in at IPO for example. This is perfectly normal.

This way of assessing the situation is certainly more accurate than simply arguing about wealth distribution as if Bitcoin were fiat currency.

What if those "47 Ronis" already had spread their wealth on another beta-coin ?  

so now we have two topics about confirmed bad news from sources? this is spreading, soon all forum will understand the true truth about things! too late to sodl and shotr already, crash is already happens.

same with dollars and gold and silver and any form of money that ever was.

how many US dollars does china own?

this is a ridiculous argument / conclusion.

As long as the bitcoin cartel of the largest holders keep holding, creating artificial scarcity, the current very high prices won't drop too much.
But if they decide to sell a significant proportion, for whatever reason, it's going to be single digits for a while.

Interesting and worrisome article.  Their research showed (see newspaper image above) that 47 people own 29% of all bitcoins and that 930 people own 50% of all the bitcoins.  Mark Williams is a Boston University Finance Professor so it's confirmed that he did his due diligence and we can take everything in that newspaper article as fact, especially since one of the sources is Forbes.    

But now look at this completely independent thread form Risto.  Here Risto uses advances techniques such the Pareto principle and other sophisticated deductations to also definitively conclude the exact same thing!  In fact, both of their methodologies are so precise that they both estimate exactly 47 people control 29% of the BTC.  Not 46 or 48 but 47.  These guys are that good.  


So, Risto says that 47 people control 3.5M of the 12.1M coins.  3.5M / 12.1M *100% = 29%.  These are the "47 powers" that control 29% of the BTC that Williams stated "collaborated to push up the prices to where they are today."  

Risto says that 47 + 880 = 927 people control 3.5M + 2.6M = 6.1M.  And 6.1M / 12.1M = 50%.  And the newspaper article above states that 930 people control 50% of all the coins.  Coincidence?  Obviously not.  

So, we can clearly conclude two things:

1.  Risto's deductive reasoning is literally amazing.  He was able to essentially guess the exact wealth distribution of bitcoin which has now been verified by multiple independent sources.  

2.  Prof Williams used advanced methodology from the Science of Economics, and sources including Forbes, to independently come up with precisely the same top-heavy distribution.  Using this same methodology, he was also able to show that exactly 47 people colluded to push up the price.

3.  We have confirmation that we indeed have confirmed the precise wealth distribution on an individual-by-individual basis in bitcoin. This is obviously the beginning of the end of bitcoin.  

Another begging "please-drop-the-fiat-price-because-I-really-want-to-buy" story ...

With China and Russia it's permanent. Totalitarian regimes don't want their powers undermined by cryptos.
If they will feel a need, they'll launch their own state-controlled crypto, with some of the properties of bitcoin.

I don't usually gloat, but I have to say it will be very tempting to contact Professor Williams mid-year to see if he would like to make another widely-publicized announcement, to follow up on his story.

OMFG ... SLELL all of it . It is going to $10 !! 

I think I see more 'flex' in the situation than some of you.  

Just because a country (China, Russia, etc) may legislate against Bitcoin in the short term doesn't mean that decision is necessarily permanent.  

The same nations banned individual checking accounts and credit cards too, until it became clear that those bans put them on the losing side of economic history.  And then the bans fell.  

If they ban Bitcoin now, while it takes off in the North America, South America, Western Europe, Southeast Asia, Australia, and Africa, it's pretty clear that the ban will be on the losing side of economic history.  I don't see those bans holding up for more than two or three years, and I don't see Bitcoin prices falling much during that time given that the uptake in other places is rapidly accelerating.

Bans will though have a horrible economic effect on the countries doing the banning, and they will realize this probably a bit too late.  They'll be keeping it banned through a long run-up in price.  That's a huge amount of wealth being distributed to other nations where Bitcoins are held and circulated.  The nations banning Bitcoin are cut out of this wealth, and further behind the economic eightball every week the bans stay up.