Topic: Long term, massive scale manipulation (Read 1458 times)

The formula that I have in my mind is this:

Bitcoin = gold + convenience + adventure - regulation
stocks = gold + gambling + extra profit from insider knowledge
gold = dollars - inflation + regulation

The funny thing is, I completely agree to everything you just said, yet, I don't see any contradiction to what I was saying.

The only aspect of Bitcoin that makes it _a bit_ like a Ponzi is the financial incentive to attract more people after you are in.
You don't have that with religion. You don't have that with belief. You don't have that with idea. If you have a great idea, your financial incentive is to keep it secret until you implement that idea as a startup. If you have bitcoins, your financial incentive is to attract more Bitcoin users. If you bought into a Ponzi, your financial incentive is, usually, to attract more victims.

The aspect that makes them different is that Ponzi is a negative-sum game, whereas Bitcoin is a positive-sum game.
When you get involved in a Ponzi, society as a whole loses. Those who bought in last, lose the most.
With Bitcoin, society as a whole wins. Those who bought in last, profit the least, but they still profit, in the long run.

Let me stop you right there. I know you said "a bit like", but still, tired of hearing this for third year straight. People should already drop that term. No, bitcoin is not a "ponzi". By your (lack of) definition, any religion, practice, idea, or belief would be a ponzi as well.

An important part of a ponzi scheme definition is that it should attract money at an increasing rate or it collapses, because it can not generate any legitimate profits itself.

Bitcoin is completely different. First, even when new money are completely gone, nothing happens - conversion rate adjusts of course since there's less demand, but bitcoin does not lose any of it's properties, see second half of 2011. And second, bitcoin generates quite a lot of profit even in a closed eco-system when serving it's purpose - as a common exchange medium for any digital (or even real) goods.

So no, even though short-term speculators are interested in driving the exchange price up, you are mistaking wishes of a small subforum population for bitcoin property. It is not. Speculation subforum may be a ponzi - there are in fact hundreds of HYIPs (ponzies) running on top of bitcoin - but it is nothing but a tiny dot on the side of the world-wide phenomenon that is BTC.

I actually suspect that stock market is primarily driven by limited supply of those stocks. It's not that you gain much value from investing your money into stocks, but you have a chance to sell them when you get old, and not lose too much, whereas, if you keep your money in dollars, you may lose more.

I'm not a trader, though, so I may be missing something.

Well, if Apple stocks were infinitely divisible, instantly transferrable, with pseudonymous ownership, if their trading was difficult to regulate, and there was a 100% guarantee that Apple never goes out of business...
Then Apple stocks would have roughly the same properties as Bitcoin, and it wouldn't matter much which one you use as a currency.

Why should big swinging dicks play with internet money (with a total capitalization around 300 million usd -lol) when they have everything else to play with (with billions at leverage 50x)?

If it was not for SR I would have not given a chance to this geek money and just sat on my silver and gold.

I have heard plenty, but I would really like to hear *your* take on it.

You mean it work exactly like stocks? Have you heard about this apple stock.

In a way, it doesn't matter who controls what and who manipulates what. There is one aspect of Bitcoin that makes it a bit like a Ponzi. Once you are in (but not before that), you have a financial incentive to attract as many new users as possible, to drive the price up. Aliens? Fine, I'll help them spread the word. Some rich guy? Fine, I'll help him spread the word.

haha, no not aliens. what he is saying is semi right but its not famous people more or less just rich people.

all im gonna say is you have it about right but your missing a few pieces of the puzzle 

Yes, it was a cycle of initial bitcoins redistribution. There will be more cycles for sure, until everybody holding significant portions of coins gives up and falls for the fiat compensation. Then, when majority is in the "right hands" it could be used as world's reserve currency.

Call me a conspiracy theorist all you want, but I want you to notice something.

Bitcoin has been chugging along for several years now. It has had some mainstream attention, but the lack of public enthusiasm seems to be a factor holding it back. I have a theory as to why this is the case.

Back when the BTC reached parity with a dollar. I think that is when somebody noticed. Somebody with a big financial club to swing decided to step into the market.

Nobody with the kind of capital that such an entity would need, could be so stupid as to buy in and never stop buying. It would have made sense back then, but the market would have been swept away, and the slippage would be enormous.  Therefore I believe they did what smart money does. They kept quiet.

If any prominent investor, economist, hedge fund, or rich guy endorsed buying Bitcoins, imagine the impact it could have on public perception. Don't tell me that in all this time nobody important has looked at the fundamentals of Bitcoin and been impressed. Yet despite obvious pros and phenomenal potential as a long-hold, nobody with much clout has come out as a supporter. This isn't because they are too dumb to see the potential, they are smart enough to keep quiet.

I wouldn't be surprised if half of all coins are currently in corporate wallets, and half of all the trade on gox is between different arms of Wall ST, taking profit off each other and the Bitcoin general economy.

I expect that the first crash was orchestrated to shake confidence in the BTC, so that they could build up their reserves for a continued cycle of manipulation.

Now, I am aware that you can track all of the coins, and the transactions. I simply suggest that it is not beyond the means of a single person or organization to break up a large sum of coins and move them in a deceptive way to appear as if they were many autonomous users.

What this means in the long term: There would be no reason to manipulate a valueless premise, the manipulators would come out even. Thus I expect BTC to be a very profitable long-hold. Expect shocking revelations about who controls which coins in the distant future. Everything is going according to plan, enjoy having a ticket on someone else's rollercoaster.