Coinbase is outta coins again.
Clearly a sign of a crash waitwat?
Topic: BTC Crash!!! (Read 4894 times)
Clearly a sign of a crash waitwat?
Coinbase is outta coins again.
Prepare for liftoff!
Not the same thing at all - Ripple seems to be just a social network solution to simplify some of the transactions people want to perform with eachother so that no middleman is needed (or has to be paid extra). It addresses none of the problems of money-as-debt fiat-currencies.
just as Bitcoin is both a currency and a payment system, there's also more to Ripple (the original idea anyway). It's exactly all about what you describe: self-issued credit.
I think it is not very practical, since the value of products changes over time, some products have to be consumed quickly, some products degrade very fast, so it means you have to constantly destroy your digital coin with each consumed product, otherwise there will be more and more coins out there without corresponding products
Sure it's practical: you just alter your specific redemption rate to create an incentive for people to buy your product when it's most convenient for you to sell it. As for degradation, when demand for your product declines, so does the value of your specific coin relative to all other coins - this is handled by exchange rate servers, always comparing available buy and sell orders denominated in all coins.Quote
a successful currency system should only ensure that the price of currency stays stable
"Price of currency" makes no sense. Currency shouldn't have a price, as it shouldn't have a value of its own. Only products and services should have a price, i.e. real values should be converted symbolically into currency units.Quote
There are lots of real wealth do not have corresponding currency, because they do not participate in exchange during normal time.
That's with the current system.
Not the same thing at all - Ripple seems to be just a social network solution to simplify some of the transactions people want to perform with eachother so that no middleman is needed (or has to be paid extra). It addresses none of the problems of money-as-debt fiat-currencies.
reverse in trend ? it take weeks to stop and reverse. :-) (drop from 31 to 28 and back to 29 in one day, is not reverse in trend)
Its cute how quickly people are to ...
... say that the next few days is going to really determine whether or not we are seeing a actual reverse in trend
... say that the next few days is going to really determine whether or not we are seeing a actual reverse in trend
Since currency only exists to represent symbolically and allow the exchange of real values, any successful currency system should be able to ensure that there is always exactly as much currency as is needed to represent the existing real values on the market, no more, no less (so no inflation and no deflation if possible). Bitcoin has no mechanism for this and is in fact worse than fiat currency in this respect - at least with fiat currency you have some central authority that intervenes now and then to adapt the money supply to the size of the "real economy", but with Bitcoin no such intervention is even possible. An obviously better system would be a system based on the notion of "self-issued credit", where every producer of goods and services is also the issuer of a specific type of coin with which said goods and services can be bought. Then on the whole there will always be a ratio of coin-to-product that stays very close to 1:1 and any inflation or deflation will only affect a specific producer who happened to make mistakes in calculating how much of their own specific type of coin to issue considering how much product they're offering. The only digital system I know so far that has this feature is Paul Grignon's "Digital Coin".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripple_monetary_system
https://ripple.com/
https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ripple%20site%3Abitcointalk.org
Oh no, we're still at $29. Obviously, BTC is dead.
A mccorvic is now only 1:290
Pizza bux are dead :[
Oh no, we're still at $29. Obviously, BTC is dead.
This "digital coin" looks exactly like a dumbed down view of stock market to me. Nothing interesting there, just some invented names for existing financial instruments.
Since currency only exists to represent symbolically and allow the exchange of real values, any successful currency system should be able to ensure that there is always exactly as much currency as is needed to represent the existing real values on the market, no more, no less (so no inflation and no deflation if possible). Bitcoin has no mechanism for this and is in fact worse than fiat currency in this respect - at least with fiat currency you have some central authority that intervenes now and then to adapt the money supply to the size of the "real economy", but with Bitcoin no such intervention is even possible.
An obviously better system would be a system based on the notion of "self-issued credit", where every producer of goods and services is also the issuer of a specific type of coin with which said goods and services can be bought. Then on the whole there will always be a ratio of coin-to-product that stays very close to 1:1 and any inflation or deflation will only affect a specific producer who happened to make mistakes in calculating how much of their own specific type of coin to issue considering how much product they're offering. The only digital system I know so far that has this feature is Paul Grignon's "Digital Coin".
An obviously better system would be a system based on the notion of "self-issued credit", where every producer of goods and services is also the issuer of a specific type of coin with which said goods and services can be bought. Then on the whole there will always be a ratio of coin-to-product that stays very close to 1:1 and any inflation or deflation will only affect a specific producer who happened to make mistakes in calculating how much of their own specific type of coin to issue considering how much product they're offering. The only digital system I know so far that has this feature is Paul Grignon's "Digital Coin".
Interesting thought
I think it is not very practical, since the value of products changes over time, some products have to be consumed quickly, some products degrade very fast, so it means you have to constantly destroy your digital coin with each consumed product, otherwise there will be more and more coins out there without corresponding products
And, a successful currency system should only ensure that the price of currency stays stable. There are lots of real wealth do not have corresponding currency, because they do not participate in exchange during normal time. When financial crisis hit, many people have to sell assets to get money, and that's one of the reason the demand for currency suddenly doubled or tripled
Its cute how quickly people are to turn when dumps do happen,
Yesterday was a pretty interesting day, it is surprising to see that we didnt bounce as quick as we did in the prior dumps and have adjusted my assessments as necessary,
I would say that the next few days is going to really determine whether or not we are seeing a actual reverse in trend but I am hopeful since tuesdays has usually led to green candles
Hope everyone made some good trades yesterday I know there were quite a few people making money last night!
Edit:
Recently saw some Big 1K+ coin purchases around 28.40, big support around 28 was bigger yesterday but some of it was taken
Yesterday was a pretty interesting day, it is surprising to see that we didnt bounce as quick as we did in the prior dumps and have adjusted my assessments as necessary,
I would say that the next few days is going to really determine whether or not we are seeing a actual reverse in trend but I am hopeful since tuesdays has usually led to green candles
Hope everyone made some good trades yesterday I know there were quite a few people making money last night!
Edit:
Recently saw some Big 1K+ coin purchases around 28.40, big support around 28 was bigger yesterday but some of it was taken
But in practice the fiat system is inflating the money supply as if there were no tomorrow while the economy (real value on the market) is decreasing. This is ultimately inevitable if a central authority is in charge of the money supply.
It's not inevitable, it's just one of the possible policy options for reacting to an economic downturn if you want to get the economy growing again. What makes it necessary is not that there's a central authority, but that the money in use is based on ever-compounding debt - this means that there is always an imperative for the economy to keep growing or the monetary system collapses. 
Since currency only exists to represent symbolically and allow the exchange of real values, any successful currency system should be able to ensure that there is always exactly as much currency as is needed to represent the existing real values on the market, no more, no less (so no inflation and no deflation if possible). Bitcoin has no mechanism for this and is in fact worse than fiat currency in this respect - at least with fiat currency you have some central authority that intervenes now and then to adapt the money supply to the size of the "real economy", but with Bitcoin no such intervention is even possible.
But in practice the fiat system is inflating the money supply as if there were no tomorrow while the economy (real value on the market) is decreasing. This is ultimately inevitable if a central authority is in charge of the money supply.
Since currency only exists to represent symbolically and allow the exchange of real values, any successful currency system should be able to ensure that there is always exactly as much currency as is needed to represent the existing real values on the market, no more, no less (so no inflation and no deflation if possible). Bitcoin has no mechanism for this and is in fact worse than fiat currency in this respect - at least with fiat currency you have some central authority that intervenes now and then to adapt the money supply to the size of the "real economy", but with Bitcoin no such intervention is even possible. An obviously better system would be a system based on the notion of "self-issued credit", where every producer of goods and services is also the issuer of a specific type of coin with which said goods and services can be bought. Then on the whole there will always be a ratio of coin-to-product that stays very close to 1:1 and any inflation or deflation will only affect a specific producer who happened to make mistakes in calculating how much of their own specific type of coin to issue considering how much product they're offering. The only digital system I know so far that has this feature is Paul Grignon's "Digital Coin".
good argument!
+1 I like it too! Must research Paul Grignon's "Digital Coin".
Since currency only exists to represent symbolically and allow the exchange of real values, any successful currency system should be able to ensure that there is always exactly as much currency as is needed to represent the existing real values on the market, no more, no less (so no inflation and no deflation if possible). Bitcoin has no mechanism for this and is in fact worse than fiat currency in this respect - at least with fiat currency you have some central authority that intervenes now and then to adapt the money supply to the size of the "real economy", but with Bitcoin no such intervention is even possible. An obviously better system would be a system based on the notion of "self-issued credit", where every producer of goods and services is also the issuer of a specific type of coin with which said goods and services can be bought. Then on the whole there will always be a ratio of coin-to-product that stays very close to 1:1 and any inflation or deflation will only affect a specific producer who happened to make mistakes in calculating how much of their own specific type of coin to issue considering how much product they're offering. The only digital system I know so far that has this feature is Paul Grignon's "Digital Coin".
good argument!
I do not expect less than $25. :-)
But based on your graph (which I think is right) it still can go to 20 or so (three bottom arrows). I still think we're in a side channel for a while, but theoretically 20 is possible... 15, not so much.
yep ...
Jump to: