Net assets under management already reached $21.8 million, which I guess means how much dollars they have taken in(?).
Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 1234. (Read 2032266 times)
The BIT is kicking ass, and bringing in millions each week:
Net assets under management already reached $21.8 million, which I guess means how much dollars they have taken in(?).
Net assets under management already reached $21.8 million, which I guess means how much dollars they have taken in(?).
But you don't have a tipping address in your sig. 
That's true. I used to have one there but then I said "why bother, nobody's sending anything anyway". The day I removed it, I got a small donation, haha.
I think we have derailed the thread enough, already
On-topic: I have put significantly more in terms of $$ into gold and silver, than into BTC, yet the size of the holdings is about the same now, measured in $. I don't plan on rebalancing any time soon. Maybe I'll buy some nice 1oz gold coin once it reaches parity.
Boy, the way you are capable of putting so much in so little space is great.
Not joking, hat off.
Not joking, hat off.
Thank you very much! Feedback like this is much appreciated and gives me more hope to one day fulfill my dream of becoming a writer living off BTC donations
And since you put me on a tiny pedestal here, I might as well shout:
I did not learn to write like this in school, but IN SPITE of it.
But you don't have a tipping address in your sig.
I know you what you mean about "in spite of" school. I learned more about essay writing by participating in Usenet debates about Playstation vs. Nintendo 64 for a few weeks than I ever learned in school. And of course that was only the beginning. I knew a guy who always seemed kind of slow until he dropped out of school and spent all his time playing online games and posting on forums. One year later he was suddenly shining with intelligence, quick-minded, discerning, and could write. It was like a miracle. I'm convinced school was keeping him down.
Boy, the way you are capable of putting so much in so little space is great.
Not joking, hat off.
Not joking, hat off.
Thank you very much! Feedback like this is much appreciated and gives me more hope to one day fulfill my dream of becoming a writer living off BTC donations
And since you put me on a tiny pedestal here, I might as well shout:
I did not learn to write like this in school, but IN SPITE of it.
"Do not question authority" is the most harmful message.
It trains you to submit and never think outside the box. They'll encourage you to "think outside the box," but it's bastardized into an exercise in not being bound by logical consistency or definitional clarity. They never teach you to question assumptions or pin down definitions. Such things are outside the culture and antithetical to it. The only "outside the box" thinking allowed is absurdism, nothing actually productive.
Mathematics was what I thought was the last stand of true rigor and unquestionable correctness, but it's full of holes on the theoretical side, which weaken the applications side as well. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REeaT2mWj6Y
It trains you to submit and never think outside the box. They'll encourage you to "think outside the box," but it's bastardized into an exercise in not being bound by logical consistency or definitional clarity. They never teach you to question assumptions or pin down definitions. Such things are outside the culture and antithetical to it. The only "outside the box" thinking allowed is absurdism, nothing actually productive.
Mathematics was what I thought was the last stand of true rigor and unquestionable correctness, but it's full of holes on the theoretical side, which weaken the applications side as well. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REeaT2mWj6Y
Actually it's quite fun to watch. Even highly intelligent and knowledgeable gold bugs and Austrian economists are taking their time in understanding Bitcoin and are only slowly, one by one coming around. And that's the worthwhile minority of economists. The guys who swallowed all of that Keynesian stuff? I gather they'll be among the "laggards" which adopt BTC, together with my grandmother and my autistic nephew.
QFTQuote
I've long held the opinion that the most important thing about todays system of schooling is not the content of the curriculum, but the structure of the whole activity in schools. Sort of like Marshall McLuhans "the Media is the Message" - it doesn't matter what is ON TV, what matters is that TV, as a medium influences thought and action in a certain way, regardless of what content is shown.
So what do our schools teach us? The first thing they teach you is that you are not the sovereign master of your time. They teach you that all your life, there will be predetermined periods of time, during which you have to be at a certain location, doing specific things. After that you will generously get some "free time".
Next thing you learn is that there is exactly one correct answer for everything and don't bother trying to come up with it yourself, we already have, so just memorize it.
And do NOT question authority. Mistakes are wrong, be afraid of mistakes, you will be punished for them.
QFT #2So what do our schools teach us? The first thing they teach you is that you are not the sovereign master of your time. They teach you that all your life, there will be predetermined periods of time, during which you have to be at a certain location, doing specific things. After that you will generously get some "free time".
Next thing you learn is that there is exactly one correct answer for everything and don't bother trying to come up with it yourself, we already have, so just memorize it.
And do NOT question authority. Mistakes are wrong, be afraid of mistakes, you will be punished for them.
Boy, the way you are capable of putting so much in so little space is great.
Not joking, hat off.
I've slowly learned that almost every single thing I learned in school and university was wrong, or else in some way majorly corrupted. No fields are spared as far as I've seen, besides maybe the practical ones like engineering (there's a market test for wrongness in engineering). Economics of course, but math (pure math, like analysis) and physics and linguistics and logic have severe fundamental issues that have a strong and far-reaching corrupting effect. It's just government funding and the power structure of intellectuals that allows them to equivocate and win by flashiness and the illusion of rigor rather than actual rigor.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
I've long held the opinion that the most important thing about todays system of schooling is not the content of the curriculum, but the structure of the whole activity in schools. Sort of like Marshall McLuhans "the Media is the Message" - it doesn't matter what is ON TV, what matters is that TV, as a medium influences thought and action in a certain way, regardless of what content is shown.
So what do our schools teach us? The first thing they teach you is that you are not the sovereign master of your time. They teach you that all your life, there will be predetermined periods of time, during which you have to be at a certain location, doing specific things. After that you will generously get some "free time".
Next thing you learn is that there is exactly one correct answer for everything and don't bother trying to come up with it yourself, we already have, so just memorize it.
And do NOT question authority. Mistakes are wrong, be afraid of mistakes, you will be punished for them.
All in all these places stifle creative thinking and personal development, reinforce conformity and submissiveness to authority. In other words they achieve their goal splendidly. What goal? George Carlin pointed it out years ago: the point of schools is to create obedient workers. Just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork and just dumb enough to passively accept all the rigged bullshit of this system.
When I abandoned university after a couple of years of
I've slowly learned that almost every single thing I learned in school and university was wrong, or else in some way majorly corrupted. No fields are spared as far as I've seen, besides maybe the practical ones like engineering (there's a market test for wrongness in engineering). Economics of course, but math (pure math, like analysis) and physics and linguistics and logic have severe fundamental issues that have a strong and far-reaching corrupting effect. It's just government funding and the power structure of intellectuals that allows them to equivocate and win by flashiness and the illusion of rigor rather than actual rigor.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
Huh, it's not like mathematics, logic and physics are invented after the modern governments grabbing power, or after there is a public school system, at least not those you are expected to understand.
Most of the real madness started about 100 years ago, but yeah actually it's not all due to government influence, some is due to human nature and status games. Government just makes it way worse.
I don't know what to say, but I guess since you have such strong opinions about logic, math and science shouldn't make much sense to you as well.
I've slowly learned that almost every single thing I learned in school and university was wrong, or else in some way majorly corrupted. No fields are spared as far as I've seen, besides maybe the practical ones like engineering (there's a market test for wrongness in engineering). Economics of course, but math (pure math, like analysis) and physics and linguistics and logic have severe fundamental issues that have a strong and far-reaching corrupting effect. It's just government funding and the power structure of intellectuals that allows them to equivocate and win by flashiness and the illusion of rigor rather than actual rigor.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
Huh, it's not like mathematics, logic and physics are invented after the modern governments grabbing power, or after there is a public school system, at least not those you are expected to understand.
Most of the real madness started about 100 years ago, but yeah actually it's not all due to government influence, some is due to human nature and status games. Government just makes it way worse.
How was school before? How was school when it was ideal?
Obviously at no time was it ideal, but aren't we talking about since when government starts to have a hand in school affairs?
I've slowly learned that almost every single thing I learned in school and university was wrong, or else in some way majorly corrupted. No fields are spared as far as I've seen, besides maybe the practical ones like engineering (there's a market test for wrongness in engineering). Economics of course, but math (pure math, like analysis) and physics and linguistics and logic have severe fundamental issues that have a strong and far-reaching corrupting effect. It's just government funding and the power structure of intellectuals that allows them to equivocate and win by flashiness and the illusion of rigor rather than actual rigor.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
Huh, it's not like mathematics, logic and physics are invented after the modern governments grabbing power, or after there is a public school system, at least not those you are expected to understand.
Most of the real madness started about 100 years ago, but yeah actually it's not all due to government influence, some is due to human nature and status games. Government just makes it way worse.
How was school before? How was school when it was ideal?
I've slowly learned that almost every single thing I learned in school and university was wrong, or else in some way majorly corrupted. No fields are spared as far as I've seen, besides maybe the practical ones like engineering (there's a market test for wrongness in engineering). Economics of course, but math (pure math, like analysis) and physics and linguistics and logic have severe fundamental issues that have a strong and far-reaching corrupting effect. It's just government funding and the power structure of intellectuals that allows them to equivocate and win by flashiness and the illusion of rigor rather than actual rigor.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
Huh, it's not like mathematics, logic and physics are invented after the modern governments grabbing power, or after there is a public school system, at least not those you are expected to understand.
Most of the real madness started about 100 years ago, but yeah actually it's not all due to government influence, some is due to human nature and status games. Government just makes it way worse.
I've slowly learned that almost every single thing I learned in school and university was wrong, or else in some way majorly corrupted. No fields are spared as far as I've seen, besides maybe the practical ones like engineering (there's a market test for wrongness in engineering). Economics of course, but math (pure math, like analysis) and physics and linguistics and logic have severe fundamental issues that have a strong and far-reaching corrupting effect. It's just government funding and the power structure of intellectuals that allows them to equivocate and win by flashiness and the illusion of rigor rather than actual rigor.
I know what you mean. The difference sometimes lies in the teacher you have. I've had some great teachers who "get it" and can pass on how to their students, and some who poison students with seemingly valid falsehoods. Some people really get lost in the dogma. I just found out one of the banking law professors at my school (Sarah Jane Hughes) is serving on the Senate panel on Tuesday... I couldn't leave it to chance whether or not she "got it" and emailed her urgently about the scope her decision might make on the US and that I very much need to share my thoughts with her, as a fellow Hoosier. Let's see...But I love neuroscience so much...I wouldn't know where else I could get my foot in the door in regards to that subject. And at least my professors make a point to tell us that the assumptions that neuroscience bases itself upon are still so preliminary it changes month to month upon new revelations. I love that. Now, as for my econ minor, I don't even know if I want to finish it simply because it's so inane and I see what it creates (see: Andrew Huszar: Confessions of a Quantitative Easer). That game theory course in a year makes me think it will be worth it though. Honestly, I just take academics with a grain of salt, and take what I can from it if it fits in to my paradigm.
But all I want to do upon graduation is to go out into isolation and read for awhile, reset a little bit, Walden style. I probably should after I finish this project I'm working on.
I've slowly learned that almost every single thing I learned in school and university was wrong, or else in some way majorly corrupted. No fields are spared as far as I've seen, besides maybe the practical ones like engineering (there's a market test for wrongness in engineering). Economics of course, but math (pure math, like analysis) and physics and linguistics and logic have severe fundamental issues that have a strong and far-reaching corrupting effect. It's just government funding and the power structure of intellectuals that allows them to equivocate and win by flashiness and the illusion of rigor rather than actual rigor.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
Huh, it's not like mathematics, logic and physics are invented after the modern governments grabbing power, or after there is a public school system, at least not those you are expected to understand.
I've slowly learned that almost every single thing I learned in school and university was wrong, or else in some way majorly corrupted. No fields are spared as far as I've seen, besides maybe the practical ones like engineering (there's a market test for wrongness in engineering). Economics of course, but math (pure math, like analysis) and physics and linguistics and logic have severe fundamental issues that have a strong and far-reaching corrupting effect. It's just government funding and the power structure of intellectuals that allows them to equivocate and win by flashiness and the illusion of rigor rather than actual rigor.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
There is absolutely no substitute for learning to think for yourself.
This is the dilemma for 99% of financial guys out there.
Their "education" on economics is actually working as a stumbling block to their ability to grasp and accept Bitcoin.
They think they know everything, therefore something that doesn't fit the mold is automatically nonsense.
Their "education" on economics is actually working as a stumbling block to their ability to grasp and accept Bitcoin.
They think they know everything, therefore something that doesn't fit the mold is automatically nonsense.
Good observation. I used to work in finance and noticed this, too. Whenever explaining anything from the area of economics, the last people to grasp the concept were people who studied economics - because they have had their heads filled with a lot of bullshit concepts during their edumakation, preventing them to see things for what they were, because there were just too many (mostly bogus) concepts getting in their way.
To be fair they were followed by people like lawyers and psychologists, who thought they understand and know everything and were mostly a pain in the ass to deal with.
I had the easiest time with people unsullied by "higher education" or people from computer science or engineering backgrounds.
Actually it's quite fun to watch. Even highly intelligent and knowledgeable gold bugs and Austrian economists are taking their time in understanding Bitcoin and are only slowly, one by one coming around. And that's the worthwhile minority of economists. The guys who swallowed all of that Keynesian stuff? I gather they'll be among the "laggards" which adopt BTC, together with my grandmother and my autistic nephew.
Peter Schiff is a good example of someone who understands the economics but not the cryptography. He also isn't afraid to think independently but he has a weakness in that he is dismissive of that which he doesn't understand. At this point he should just say, "I can't see how it can work," and get to doing his research on it. I'm afraid his personality will make it take quite a while before he gets around to it, though.
Their "education" on economics is actually working as a stumbling block to their ability to grasp and accept Bitcoin.
They think they know everything, therefore something that doesn't fit the mold is automatically nonsense.
this is the speed of adoption that miscreanity underestimated in our earlier debates in 2011. and he's a young man too.
i'm an old man. what's that say?:
The Geeks Fail to Understand That Which They Hath Created.
i'm an old man. what's that say?:
The Geeks Fail to Understand That Which They Hath Created.
Remember this chart from the middle of last year?
The projections are exponential curves at discrete levels determined by empirical data, and there are four that I've focused on. At the bottom is an approximately 4.40% weekly growth rate from the beginning of market price availability (sourced from Bitcoincharts.com MtGox data). Next up is ~5% weekly, followed by the post-2011 bubble at ~5% as well (not shown). I found the latter level intriguing because it was the first external use (Silk Road) with a significant impact on the system.
Finally, the current weekly growth rate. That happens to have accelerated somewhat since I made the above chart, from just under 6% to about 6.7% per week.
At the end of December 2012, the above levels for the week of November 11th were:
- 4.40% $101.27
- 5.00% $266.74
- 5.00% $389.56 (post-2011 bubble)
- 5.95% $1224.52
As of this week, the current growth number puts the value at:
- 6.74% $4,298.90
My estimates have been particularly conservative because there's a lot that could still impede growth (not stop it), and after watching gold for so many years I find it best to allow for extended listless periods. However, even pessimistically we should see $100k within three years.
It'll be interesting to see how the present regulatory coin validation fiasco flies with the dark wallet opposition potentially gaining major traction. In the end I have no doubt the Faustian gambit will crumble, but it'll be a vicious war. What will concern me is when western goverments promote Bitcoin...
So that guy, revans, who says in this board that slicing a pie debases its value... it's Schiff!
By his logic, he must also think that removing the half-penny from American circulation increased the value of the dollar, lololol. Because it made the "dollar" more "scarce."
I used to watch the PM prices all day, but I haven't for a while. I have a meager stack of silver and a couple slivers of gold. I'd feel bad about the drop in value, if I weren't so happy about the rise in value of my meager stack of bitcoins.
P.S. Anyone know a site with persistent image URLs for gold and silver spot charts?
P.S. Anyone know a site with persistent image URLs for gold and silver spot charts?
kitco.com ?
Don't suppose there's anyone else here from the old kitco forum of the late 90s?
Namaste
We need to make BTC facebook easy before it really takes off. But by then BTC will be worth $10,000 each so I'm sure we could fund it...
Wait five years and circle.com will to take care of FB and Walmart (my prediction).Hire of Raj Date Boosts Bitcoin Credibility
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accel_Partners
Jump to: