Topic: r0ach's Cryptomarkets Watch & Scamcoin Observer - page 22. (Read 47262 times)

The article is some dirtbag daytrader that barely knows anything about cryptocurrency and says "I think Ethereum, as designed by Vitalik Buterin is a great concept".  Look at the picture of the guy.  It's some guy from New York whose most common phrase is something like, "HEY YO LADY, WHERE YOU WANT DIS TV TO GO".

It can be argued that the commodities starting a rally from a decisive low do not have the condition of the supply coming to market cut in half with no way to expand production. This is what makes Bitcoin different from commodities in general, but one Bitcoin halving in the past is not enough historical data to draw conclusions. It can be also argued that halving may have more negative than positive consequences due to likely decrease in hashrate, mining centralization and everything that will result from this event, but the article doesn't mention this at all. There is also understanding that most of Bitcoin has already been mined and most of traded coins are from holders not from miners. Bottomline, nobody knows what's going to happen

you mean ethereum? or decred, litecoin have nothing decent anymore, not sure why poeple are so folded into it, it's an ancient relic at this moment i think, i also think that the top 10 altcoin, will resist to the next big crash of altcooin, and i think also that the halving of bitcoin will bring new money for other altcoin as well, it make everything profitable again

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-price-tipping-point/

IMO,
Depends on the effect,
BTC stays ~ $350  to $425 , probably no real noticeable effect on Alts at all.

BTC move up to $750 or higher, mass sell off in ALT PoW coins,
Some PoS coin communities will also have hugh sell offs, while some PoS Coin Communities will stay about the same price as before the halving.
(Then you get to see which communities truly believe in their coin, and which don't.)  

BTC falls $250 or below, mass buying in Alt coins (most likely PoS coins, as if BTC (PoW leader dives , Bad PR for all PoW coins.)


 

Looks like altcoin will be all down after block halving.. bitcoin is the most powerful coin for me and i think no altcoin can be the same as bitcoin for now.. its popular in some country and more store are accepting bitcoin as payment..
But what is the real effect of block halving for altcoin?

Alts jut bring new money to bitcoin mostly and are good for testing features. Next bitcoin bubble will see many of them die off and then a little pump of the decent ones like LTC

Me too. It's also way more impressive. Platinum is actually dull compared to silver's reflectiveness (silver=the most reflective metal, aside from being the most conductive one). But it's only for a while... then silver will bond and make sulfides and chlorides that will tarnish it. It's a bummer that you can't really touch your uncirculated coins for fear of damaging them - something that doesn't really apply for pure gold or platinum coins. You can touch them and they will not be harmed by the oil of your fingers - or practically anything that you'll throw at them.

As for the upside potential, indeed. If the gold/silver ratio adjusts towards a more rational level it could easily double or triple.

I don't know why, but I get more excited looking at a silver coin for some reason.  I'm not sure if it's because my brain is fine tuned to sense a higher upside potential or what.

The Earth is a molten core, which potentiates all matter received into the various forms that we call unique (we generally only think of the assemblies and disassemblies  that happen at the mantle levels)--when our lives shift to more virtual realities, will these meager differences (which make something more shiny, more beautiful, or more precious) matter that much?

And what will be even more heart breaking is when the tiny differences that make someone smarter, more likeable, or even more spiritual become part of easily accessible DB's and human consciousness becomes an information data core with all potentials available--it used to take drug addiction, religion, or a brain trauma to shift personas (though Daniel Day Lewis does it for a living), someday it will be as easy as logging-in.  

This assumes VR (and even more invasive technologies) becomes ubiquitous--which is no gimme, but should determine if virtual currencies become mainstream.

1) Because fiat will always be "toilet paper". Arbitrary quantities can be printed out of thin air.
2) Because the 200-year old discovery of platinum ensures it.

Platinum has better anti-corrosion and anti-counterfeiting characteristics than gold (having a density of >21g/cm3 - while gold has 19g - which is very close to the much cheaper tungsten) while it is resistant even to aqua regia in lower temps.

You can't counterfeit the weight of platinum with any cheap material like tungsten and if you try to do so you'll need irridium or osmium which are very rare and in very low global supply volumes (=if there was need for counterfeiting platinum, their price would very quickly become multiple times that of platinum). Should I also mention that contrary to gold's inertness, platinum is a prime chemical catalyst and thus extremely useful for industrial reasons. Yet, despite these advantages, gold remains as the #1.

The only uncertainty regarding gold is the price of energy. If energy costs go to near-zero, then the extraction of gold can become much cheaper. There is gold EVERYWHERE. If you look out your window and see soil, well, there is gold in that soil. The only problem for not recovering it so far, is that it's probably in such low quantities that the energy expended to extract it would not be worthwhile. This changes if you have near-zero cost energy.

Well I agree that man has gradually changed what is money to what has superior attributes such as durability, divisibility, transportability. But remember (pure not legal tender) gold's main function has always a hedge against government. Thus my argument is that until crypto-currency can prove it is immune to centralization and centralized control over the internet, then it can't replace gold's function. That is entirely my point.

Yea, gold is guaranteed to not be fiat, but where do you draw your claim from that it's guaranteed to continue to be a form of money at all?  This is an unknown.  Maybe gold is wothless in the future except for jewlery and anti-corrosive plating and only Bitcoin and a Helium3 backed dollar or something exists.  Then gold loses it's entire network effect derived value and becomes the same thing as current day copper.

You are evaluating gold systemically in terms of whether it is a replacement for fiat. I am pointing out that for the wealthy person, the use case of gold is irrelevant to whether the masses don't adopt gold:

How is that a weak argument?  All that a cat burglar gets by breaking into McMansions right now is maybe a $1000 Samsung TV and some power tools.  If everyone keeps their life savings inside their house, the reward is now 100-200x+ higher.  When someone robs a bank they probably don't even get that much.  So why rob a bank when you can just rob every house on the street with far less security?  They would probably even prefer if you're home when it happens so you can show them where it is and open the safe instead of dragging it down the street with a truck.

On the other hand, there's obviously little future for gold due to this scenario.  Almost everyone would place their gold in a 3rd party vault and now it's the same thing as fiat.  As for someone who wants to not outsource control of their gold, it's pointless.  It would be exactly like present day.  You would not be able to spend those gold coins anywhere because people only accept IOUs.  Cryptocurrency wins because it's easier to secure and easier to spend.

Very weak argument. One who can't hide well 100 Kruggerands, is an inept person. Rather the strong points for Bitcoin are:

1. Transportable without confiscation at airports.
2. Electronically spendable and transferable.
3. Effortlessly divisible.
4. No assay needed (cheating is mathematically impossible).

The strong points for gold are:

1. Can't fail.
2. Untraceable.
3. Eternal

Clearly I think crypto-currency is better for most needs, but gold still has some unique use cases, i.e. 1 - 5% of networth as a hedge against apocalypse.

I appreciate an appreciating asset as much as the next guy, but I tend to evaluate things with somewhat of a transcendentalist approach:

"Transcendentalists believed that society and its institutions ultimately corrupted the purity of the individual, and had faith that people are at their best when truly "self-reliant" and independent."

Both Bitcoin and gold have value in that department, but it's difficult for someone to build and guard their own gold vault all day.  You need a way to store wealth that still allows you to function and be somewhat nimble.  Using Bitcoin in this approach, you're effectively a rogue proletariat benefitting from the collective technological and verification upkeep burden, of the vertically integrated civilization you've opted out of (I'm sure Anonymint will derive some sort of claim Bitcoin is doomed from this sentence).

Which brings us to:






Definitely the largest semantics argument I've ever seen presented, but yea.

It'd appear I'm splitting hairs, but gold is better in dealing with devaluation, rather than inflation.

Inflation is usually dealt with, internally, in a given country. What developing countries do is simple: If in 2015 you needed 1000 local currency to get you through the month, and you are getting paid 1000 local currency from your job, and in 2016 you need 1300, then they pass a law that says that wages must be raised a minimum of 30%. So now you are also getting paid 1300 and paying 1300. The inflationary effect is not so visible in things like rent, hiring a plumber to fix your home, utility bills like telcos and water (power is usually "felt" more), but it will be very visible if you try to buy a new car that is imported.

For wealth preservation purposes, what countries with high inflation can do (and often do) is equally simple: Big deposit interests and big sovereign bond interests, always denominated in local currency. Say inflation is running at 25% per year. The government's bond or a bank deposit may give you 28% so that you stop looking around for investments like gold and keep your money in local currency. So you will have theoretically "preserved" your wealth by the end of the year. That's assuming the inflation rate is accurately reported (which it rarely is for reasons having to do with growth... as growth equals gdp increase minus inflation, and thus most countries underreport inflation to pretend their inflation is ...gdp growth). Typically, in a high inflation environment, it goes like this in terms of popularity - but the order can be different depending cultural differences

a) high interest bank deposits and gov bonds
b) real estate (fiat dumped for land, buildings etc) which will create future inflation-adjusted revenue for the land-holder, by requiring rents or leases in future inflated prices.
c) foreign currency - if one can access it
d) gold
e) stock market (which is also perceived as a gamble by the masses)

Since the devaluation rate can be larger than the inflation rate, (c) and (d - gold) might offer better performance than (a). So gold can be far better than a local bank deposit or government bond.

Yet (b) / real estate will tend to be perceived as the best investment of all times in an inflationary environment. There is a continually confirmed perception (which becomes self-reinforced perception and reality) that prices can only go upwards and thus it is considered the safest bet ever. With money supply ever increasing, wages rising, cost of life rising, it makes no sense to expect that houses will be cheaper tomorrow than today. This creates a momentum in dumping fiat savings and buying land, houses, flats etc that creates an avalanche of demand and appreciation which can exceed in performance (a) and can rival (c), (d), or (e) - because it's not only the rise of the property itself, but also the ability of real estate to "pay" the owner a stable income, in the form of rent/lease.

It would be an understatement to say that most westerners who haven't lived through protracted periods of high inflation, do not typically understand the above, thinking that gold is the primary antidote to inflation when in reality it's things as mundane as ...land and buildings while gold is better suited to counter shadow currency devaluation. However, there are cultures like India, where possession of gold is directly related to social status and the rule book is entirely rewritten.

Now, regarding the barbarous relic argument, I see it differently.

This reality, at its fabric, is not solid. It's not even energy because at the quantum level the photon can either be a particle or a wave, depending the observer. So what gives this energy/matter its solid-state in the macrocosm is information. There is a process which informs the photon on what to be. So, in a way, this reality is an information-based reality. In other words => a program.

The "programmer" of this "program" has hardcoded something like

const Primary_Currency = 79; // atomic number of gold element
const Secondary_Currency = 47; //silver
const Third_Currency = 29; // copper  

All human attempts to replace these hardcoded const of the "programmer" have failed*. Currencies come and go, gold remains. Debt-backed money, which we currently have, is severely flawed as it always requires more money than the total existence of money in order to repay the debt of creating the money supply. It can only operate temporarily by rolling-over the debt and pretending it is serviceable as long as the economy is in "growth" and then, when it is not serviceable anymore, the liquidity crunch comes and wipes everything off.

Gold, as a monetary system, hasn't failed. It can't fail unless you design a system which is based on fiat and pretend that it is ...gold backed, which then opens the door for fractional practices and abuse. Otherwise gold/silver/copper are excellent forms of money. Some say gold is not granular, well, it doesn't need to. It's the high-value asset. If gold was used as a global currency, an ounce might cost 100.000 usd by replacing the tens of trillions of fiat currencies and getting revalued upwards as a result. At that point the second and third consts(silver & copper) would be the granular alternatives for everyday transactions.


* BTC is the first attempt of humans to rewrite the "program" while being ...inside the program. They are programming money when money has already been programmed. Even fiat was never intended to replace this reality programming. It was a means for the Elite to take the metals away from the people, being too valuable, and replacing them with worthless papers. The Elite was "honoring" the primary program by actually acknowledging gold's value. Their motivation was to hoard gold for themselves and taking it from the ordinary man - which was left with papers instead. What BTC does is a level of "heresy" that is groundbreaking. It is thus ensured that programmed money which is "doubting" the primary programs hardcoded consts will face enormous and multifaceted resistance. I can assure you that there is nothing ...barbaric with gold. It is programmed in its place, and in the human psyche, by the highest level of "programmers".

But gold has a utility that crypto-currency doesn't have, which is that it can't disappear due to the centralization inherent in profitable mining of proof-of-work or the centralization inherent in any proof-of-stake variant (don't make me justify this statement as we've discussed it ad nauseum before).

The utility of crypto-currency from a personal standpoint is it much more prone to become a top-down controlled fiat and thus lose its permission-less quality.

Gold systemically doesn't solve the fiat problem, but to a wealthy person it is personally it is guaranteed to not be a fiat, as I hold it in my hand and no government can cancel gold as they routinely do for cash[1]. They can erect capital controls, but my gold can remain buried until the government has changed.

In short, gold is more durable than crypto-currency. Whether that is useful to me personally or not, is a matter of personal analysis, perspective, and opinion.

[1]

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/europes-practice-of-cancelling-currency-the-dirty-little-secret-everyone-overlooks/ https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/americas-current-economy/the-war-on-cash-2/ https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/writings/2012-2/the-truth-about-gold-why-you-should-buy-it/ https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/says-law/

Well...technically all matter is energy.  It's just difficult to do work with it unless it's in a metastable state.  This is why they call gold a "barbarous relic".  You can't do any real work with it, and it's biggest use is a counter to vampires inflation.  If you can't do work with it, and you can't stop inflation with it since you have to issue IOUs, which will turn into endless fractional reserve, it's use is basically some type of stability/anti-corrosive agent like copper on the bottom of a boat.