Topic: Speculation Rule: buy when others are irrationally pessimistic or too cautious - page 8. (Read 36103 times)

Yes, 1255-1275 is an area of significant resistance. The battle is at 1165 so I expect we can see a decline to around 1000-1100 if we don't get beyond 1280. Beyond 1280 the 1400-1440 range comes into play.


The BTCe charts are a little different but show long-term trends from a point when Poloniex was not the dominant LTC exchange. There is a long-term downtrend line that is now sitting at a little above LTCBTC 0.01 and had been breached on April 5-6th but not closed above on a daily basis. Once we close above that line there should be a run toward 0.015-0.02 and eventually ATH.

On both charts, the downtrend channel has been broken out of. Now we just have to see whether we trend sideways for a bit like ETH or resume the uptrend. Speaking of ETH, it is only a few days away from a potential breakout, probably to the upside.

The LTC UASF situation is much different than Bitcoin's. For now, in BTC, there is a stale mate between miners so any attempt, be it UASF, BU HF or whatever is doomed to fail until there is a clear winner.

Litecoin on the other hand already has ~70% of the miners behind SegWit (and others that want it are not signalling yet, like ProHashing), want development built on top of it, the community wants SegWit and economic nodes want SegWit. One person blocking this cannot stand, and he won't be able to do anything about it.

If UASF is enforced and Jihan does not upgrade, he will fork himself out and mine an empty chain that nobody is using, similar to how LTC was not very long ago. Meanwhile, the other miners' profitability will go through the roof, as ~25% of the hash power has suddenly stopped competing for blocks.

Btw, I want PoW but I'm also interested in your concept. Can't wait for it to be out into the wild.

Yeah but we have to start moving up tomorrow else we break below that uptrend channel.


But while he can block us from activating SegWit, he can't HF by himself to do something naughty, because the other miners will turn against him and he apparently doesn't control 51% by himself. He forced alliances on this SegWit issue, but I don't think he could for naught activities.

Btw, I agree that having one manufacturer that makes such a large percentage of the ASICs is not good. But that is PoW. I actually am trying to develop a replacement for PoW.

If you don't want PoW, then go to PoS coin instead. ETH was able to take control because Vitalik is going to fork to a POShit eventually anyway, so there is no investment in ASICs.


You try and you will lose your money. I warned you. The big money will not tolerate a non-hashrate driven MOB. If they could tolerate it, they would already have invested in PoShit tokens.

You say you want PoW then you say your don't want PoW. Make up your mind.

Regarding price action, litecoin has broken out of the ~2 year downtrend in ltcbtc, and broken a ~2 year consolidation around $4 and the previous high at $9.  Fireworks are to be expected, but it might take a few more weeks to get there.

But I think you are wrong regarding UASF. What is currently going on is a hostage situation where 1 man is holding back an entire network. Two, actually.
You say "immutability", I say "his own benefit". Who knows what it will be next, and before you know it, he's in bed with certain entities.

UASF is, currently, the best way to put him and other mining entities back in their places and set a precedent, as a warning to anyone that attempts to attack the network. And, strictly from a speculative pov, people seem more than happy to put their money where their mouth is wrt this UASF event, opposite of your claim that people don't want to store value on a democratic chain.

BTC has been rising on declining volume. That indicates to me that this rise will not make it to a new ATH before it falters. I am sticking with my theory that BTC is range bound until Litecoin gets SegWit.

I think we are going to see another leg up on LTC as the SegWit signaling has climbed back up to 68%.

This pullback has brought us back to the uptrend line, which I expected we would come back to test one more time and especially given BTC is  up today.

Given the steepness of that uptrend line (on the right chart quoted below) we either have to fail and crash or start another leg up soon. Failing and crashing seems to not be very likely. So I say load up now on the LTC you want for the next run up. If that uptrend line holds, we have to be back above 0.009 within 6 days 0.011 within 2 weeks. So that is a minimum 40% increase in your BTC within 2 weeks if the uptrend line holds (which it has thus far throughout this crazy volatile rise).

Also today we broke out above that downward blue channel in the left chart quoted below!

Thoughts?

Litecoin hashrate seems to be varying widely. I have not done the math to see how much variance is attributable to the range.

1. My own view on immutability has changed since I was buying ETH some weeks ago.

2. My main reason for diversifying into ETH was to sidestep the uncertainty in BTC. And because I think Vitalik can possibly incite another bubble. And ETH may get scaling Lightning Networks (in a rudimentary form) first, which might be good for a pump.

3. Yeah ETH is bet on things with blockchains other than store-of-value and fungible money. It is sort of in my knowledge age concept of a bifurcation. Thus I invest in ETH as a hedge against them accomplishing what I want to do with my BitNet project before I am able to. But I see some serious flaws in ETH that leads me to believe I could beat them if ever I can get any momentum going. We'll see. Any way, yeah ETH is a different beast.

(On Bitcoin at least) the majority of the mining hashrate will refuse to mine on blocks that chain on any SegWit enabled blocks. Thus you're soft fork will become a hard fork, else the users will accept defeat. If the users insist then they will be on fork with a minority of the hashrate. The smart money like myself (and especially whales) will sell coins on that illegal (democracy) fork and spend the money to buy more tokens on the legal (immutable) fork. Also the miners from majority fork can do difficulty attacks on the minority fork or even completely shut down all transactions on the minority fork.

UASF is nonsense. Hashrate and people buying and selling the forks is all that matters. Jihan doesn't give a fuck about noisy retards, and would love to take their money from them with the help all those coin holders and whales who understand that democracy would destroy blockchains.

Also soft forks turn into hard forks if there is contention. That is why soft forks don't activate without 75 - 95% hashrate support. The authors of UASF are retarded.

Lowering the activation threshold for soft fork of SegWit on Litecoin to say ~60% which is effectively what UASF would be, is very risky. Jihan may be hiding hashrate that can use to create a HF with (he might even be signaling SegWit secretly with some of his hardware in order to lure the UASF into overconfidence).

Why not positive (Bitcoin blocksize debate anyone)? If the penalty for miners to create bigger blocks (more transactions) is lower than the transactions fees paid, there is an incentive to increase the blocksize. A blocksize controlled by the free market instead of an arbitrary set threshold value.

I quite like this recent tweet from Vitalik Buterin:
"From an outside view, probability that 1MB is exactly optimal tradeoff from pure tech standpoint is tiny."


It will be ~0.6 monero per block, and less than 1% inflation. This is likely less moneros than get lost in boating accidents on a yearly basis. It does however give an incentive for miners to keep mining. Very important for the long term security of the network and no discussions required to artificially set high transaction fees.


There actually is a Monero Graphical User Interface wallet if you please: GUI beta 2 has recently been released.


Purely from a mining decentralization point of view, botnets are great. However you can't know whether Monero is mined by botnets. Monero however does have a scheduled every six months hardfork for protocol updates. No hardfork is good/bad debates required, but very inconvenient for static configured botnets.

Secondly botnets don't pay for hardware and electricity (they are basically mined for free) so the moneros are likely dumped on exchange no matter their true costs: you can sporadically buy moneros below their true cost price (!).

UASF does not turn Bitcoin or Litecoin into a democracy. A soft fork is different from a hard fork, UAHF would effectively turn Bitcoin into a democracy and I agree that would be bad. But soft forks are backwards compatible so people who do not want to upgrade are free to choose not to do so. You also need a large majority support to do a soft fork, but that is clearly the case when you look at https://coin.dance/poli. Jihan is not going to wage war against the users of the coin he wants to sell them, and if he does he is cutting into his own fingers. We'll see, either we get Segwit UASF and everyone including miners are happy and will profit. Or miners will refuse UASF and their profits will vanish together with the value of the coin. Let's see how tough Jihan really is.

No. I think we have to trade this manipulation on Litecoin, noting that he will again run the price up and then frustrate everyone to incite a UASF fork attempt. My new speculative theory is he wants us to feel like we are on a yoyo that he controls in order to incite the MOB to break out their pitch forks. Or just stay on the immutable fork of Bitcoin as the safest holding.

Sell any and all forks not approved by Jihan. You will take money from Block(stream)heads who believe in democracy.

Other smallcap altcoin speculation is orthogonal to this.

I have a new theory on what Jihan's strategy may be...


I don't know if Jihan plans to try block SegWit entirely from Litecoin. I don't understand what his motivation to do that would be. It seems insane.

But I will say that none of your UASF shit will work. So Jihan might be trying to create a fight with you so that he can take your LTC and BTC from you. The more I think about this, the more I realize he may be trying to draw you UASF retards into a fork war trap so he can strip you of your wealth. Everybody who values the value of blockchains will sell the UASF fork, because democracy totally devalues blockchains and makes them worthless. I think Jihan wants to make money while also making an ideological point. It is survival-of-the-fittest and he wants to impoverish all those who don't understand that immutability is what makes blockchains valuable and democracy is what makes everything bankrupt, untrustable, and valueless. However, after bankrupting all the USAF, BU, Blockstream retards, I think he might allow SegWit to proceed on Litecoin as its final upgrade (because otherwise scaling will move to another altcoin which he can't profit on). I think he may be stalling and playing shenanigans not only to maximize profit interim, but also to instigate a fork fight with retards, so he can once and for all teach them they can never succeed. What better way to teach than by taking all their money. I try to teach with words. Jihan is more efficient. He understands that men understand spanking better than words.

Interesting discussion going on over there... (click the quote if you're interested to go read the context)

Your reasoning skills are excellent and folks like me are learning from the likes of you - though I admit, at times I get lost in some of your rhetoric I read back and get lost all over again. Lol. But you're pretty good at educating noobs like me so just keep doing what you do best and convince us until we're satisfied  cheers.

Why Jorge Stolfi lied to the SEC that commodity money is an equity? Bitcoin ETF.

---

Anyone who doubts my expertise should read this exchange with @dinofelis:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18543926
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18541315
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18532076
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18530076

My conceptualization of commodities and taxonomy should also provide some insight into my reasoning skills:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18545359

SWIFT is not restricted to power brokers. SWIFT allows any Joe Blow to wire $1000.

Bitcoin's block size is more than sufficient.

The entire point is to keep the riff-raff off of Bitcoin, so it doesn't need to be regulated. And isn't constantly assailed with such nonsense as UASF.

---

They will raise the transaction fees so high that your BTC isn't even enough to pay the transaction fee, so it will be impossible for you to spend them on chain.

So you'll be forced to move your BTC to an exchange (or off chain in centralized hubs of Lightning Network), so you can be regulated and taxed (maybe even confiscated/hacked/lost in "bank run" on fractional reserves). The blockchain won't be regulated, but you won't be able to afford to transact there, only the $billionaires will.

I think they want the SegWit and Lightning Networks stuff to be not on Bitcoin, so that highly variable block size load doesn't pollute the reliability of Bitcoin. They'd rather push the masses onto another "Lite" blockchain (e.g. Litecoin). This reliability issue is why power brokers will hold their net balances (i.e. reserves) in BTC on the Bitcoin blockchain. This is why I foresee that Bitcoin will still attain huge demand even if scaling is on Litecoin.

I'm included in the "riff-raff".

---

Yeah Monero being a good coin in the recent days with its unexpected growth. Same time few other coins too grew high as well got an increased capital than most other digital currencies that are growing potentially. XMR and other digital tokens growth were considered as an temporary surge, so bitcoin users​ fear converting to it.

so black market is pedo ? Site using monero sell drugs, guns, counteract but no pedophile picture/video.

Anyway, monero on a short trade could be a good shot, I'm not sure it will replace btc or maybe in 2-3 years.
Deepweb market don't really move fast because of all protection they need, one bug and they loose all there btc.
+ customers and sellers are not ready yet to fully change btc to xmr, once again that need a lot of time.

Agreed I had been planning to buy some < $15.

monero pedo pennies dumps fairly hard whenever the other top shitcoins moon, so there's opportunities to buy in when it dumps. Imo it seems to be establishing itself as the official pedo (black market) coin, so it has an opportunity to replace bitcoin in that niche when bitcoins high fees become an issue,  long term the price should rise. 

Monero is anonymous(ring-signatures) and therefore much bigger transaction sizes than Bitcoin(>3x), has a variable blocksize(not necessary a positive feature), infinite block reward of 1 monero(not necessary a positive feature), no gui interface - only command line, fair mining schedule but had a rather big botnet mining problem in its existence. I find it currently rather expensive(or fair ).