Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 20810. (Read 26608069 times)
September 12, 2015, 10:28:18 PM
Demurrage is boring tho. In fact economics is a total snooze fest. Somebody break something
September 12, 2015, 10:20:53 PM
do you mean to keep the value low such that people dont need to use "mBTC/uBTC/satoshis/etc"? Most bitcoin software allows you to send payment in mBTC or $USD (converted to BTC value). having decimals is not a bad thing, and if that is a problem for some people even when thier wallet software does the 'mBTC/satoshi' conversion its an issue of ignorance.
You cant use a wallet every time you want to think about the price of something. "Is 0.00023 Foocoins too much for a cup of coffee?" "Is 0.03 milliFoocoins more or less than 3200 Footoshis?"
The smallest unit of the currency should be worth maybe 1/10 of the smallest thing that is worth buying separately. Since it takes at least one minute to make an independent purchase, including the decision to purchase, there is no point having means of payments with a much smaller granularity than the value of a minute of one's time. (That must be why true micropayments have still to find their use, in spite of 30 years of attempts to make them work.)
Quote
again, you talk about making bitcoin unappealing so that it is not desirable as a store of value, why?
Not bitcoin; any cryptocurrency. I explained why: because a currency that attracts hoarders and speculators is a terrible currency.
Quote
you already pay fees like [ the proposed 2% negative interest ] via transaction fees and via the network currently inflating at ~12% (dropping to 6% next year). The concept of 'inactivity fees' is sheer insanity
It is insanity only if you start from the axiom that a cryptocurrency's goal is to rise in price so as to make investors rich. If you start from the assumption that the goal is to serve as a currency, then insanity is what happened to bitcoin.
Bitcoin's transaction fees are too small to destroy the illusion of fabulous gains, and the 12% inflation of the currency base does not directly act on hoarders' holdings, because it is not paid by them but by the new investors. So much so that the price (and therefore the hoarders' paper fortunes) grew by 1000% per year while that inflation was even higher than now.
A cryptocurrency with demurrage tax would fall directly on holders, and therefore hopefully discourage hoarding.
September 12, 2015, 10:02:04 PM
September 12, 2015, 09:29:50 PM
In fact, many of the problems that he describes are in fact features and NOT bugs
Since you are a holder and speculator, of course we disagree on that. In my view, you are one of bitcoin's problems.
Little bit disingenuous of you to participate in a thread to judge others who are investing into something and to call them "problems" because they are investing. What are you investing in? naysaying the activities of others?
a claim that there needs to be a built in approximate 2% inflation (or devaluation) is preposterous because it supposedly addresses a non-existing problem, at least at this time.
so make it a bad investment?
Bitcoin was created to be a currency, not another speculative asset- and dividend-free investment fund (or pyramid scheme, its more honest name). There is no shortage of the latter, and (as I wrote earlier) that use of bitcoin will not make the world better, create new wealth, or render some useful service; it will just move wealth from some people to other people.
You are full of shit!!!! Bitcoin was created for a variety of purposes, including the currency aspect. You seem to be oversimplifying matters in order to create strawmen arguments. and mislead others by oversimplification.
Economists have know for 500 years that a currency must have some inflation, otherwise people will hoard it and it will not be available for use as a currency.
Yeah.. appeal to authority... 500 years OMG... you really are saying something here........ NOT. You are just making up facts out of your ass.
The use of bitcoin for investment and speculation had two other bad consequences. First, it lifted the price to 100 times what it should have been, given its current level of usage. The price is floating in the air, high up, anchored to itself through the hopes of traders and holders. It could crash from there at any moment. No company in its right mind would want to hold it, even temporarily. Imagine a manager accepting a payment of 1000 BTC today, and the price crashing tomorrow, before he can spend or sell those coins. How could he explain that to the company owners? (You can find out there an audio of Overstock's CEO trying to explain something like that to the other shareholders; but AFAIK he is the majority holder, so he won't get fired for that...)
YES.... what if, what if... You know better than that. if you are using bitcoin as a payment system, then you have the option to cash out right away or to hold them for a specific cash out time. With anything new, there may be a learning curve concerning decisions regarding when to cash out, if cashing out is part of the plan.
Second, but tied to the first: bitcoin's use as instrument of speculative trade made its price extremely volatile. Even in times of "stability", like the past 7 months, the price has changed by ±10% in a few hours, several times. Volatility is bad for a currency: the user who buys BTC to pay for something will lose money if the BTC price drops between the two actions, and will not really win if it goes up -- because he will be left with a small amount of BTC that he may not find a good use for.
That is why a good cryptocurrency must be designed to NOT be a good investment.
Yes, if an asset is volatile, then that needs to be taken into account, but that volatility does NOT mean that it is a bad thing because, as I already mentioned, BTC is much more than a currency. You again are attempting to frame facts in an incomplete way in order to engage in scare tactics....
All of these months in bitcoin, and you still have NOT learned how to be more comprehensive in your analysis rather than simplified and selective extrapolations?
his suggestion that Satoshi would agree... 
Wat da fuck?
Wat da fuck?From what I have read, I am satisfied that Satoshi intended bitcoin to be what he wrote in the whitepaper: a system for peer to peer payments through the internet that did not require a trusted third party. He believed that the world needed such a thing, but no one knew how to build it, and thought that he had found a way. That seems to have been his motivation to design the bitcoin protocol; and he then implemented it to see whether the idea worked out in practice.
But Satoshi was a computer scientist, not an economist. He thought that it would be nice if the currency had no inflation. For "everybody" knows that inflation is bad, right? I thought so too.
His he pleased about what bitcoin turned out to be? Well, on one hand it is always satisfying to do something big, even if it is a big nuclear accident or the sinking of the Titanic. But I doubt that he is happy about what his creature has become...
Your further explanation supports that you are engaged in a BIG ASS guessing game regarding what Satoshi thought or what he would think. It does little to no good for you to engage in this kind of speculation to go back to "original intent" or to attempt to attribute the direction of bitcoin to the "founder," because in fact, Satoshi either removed himself or fell out of the bitcoin scene.... Accordingly, bitcoin became a dynamic phenomenon that is influenced by a variety of players (rather than by any one player). in other words, bitcoin has become a sort of community asset, and there is some freedom for anyone to buy into it or to refrain from such. Even though you are fairly informed about bitcoin, you seem to be someone who has knowingly chosen NOT to financially invest into bitcoin, but instead chosen to invest into denigrating bitcoin.... I'm fairly certain that some anti-bitcoin entities would be willing to pay you to continue in such supposedly voluntary and unpaid conduct. So, are you being paid for all of the time that you spend in the various bitcoin forums? You must be receiving some payments for your work and/or your publications and/or your attempts to build your reputation as some kind of anti-bitcoin "expert."
Sorry to some of you for using the term "expert" in the same sentence in which I am referring to Stolfi.....
September 12, 2015, 09:02:45 PM
The bitcoin shitstorm that is unfolding right now summed up in one picture
If we go much lower, it will be a very nice buying opportunity.
If we go much lower, it will be a very nice buying opportunity.
It's already a nice buying opportunity...
September 12, 2015, 09:02:04 PM
September 12, 2015, 09:00:53 PM
In fact, many of the problems that he describes are in fact features and NOT bugs
Since you are a holder and speculator, of course we disagree on that. In my view, you are one of bitcoin's problems.
a claim that there needs to be a built in approximate 2% inflation (or devaluation) is preposterous because it supposedly addresses a non-existing problem, at least at this time.
so make it a bad investment?
Bitcoin was created to be a currency, not another speculative asset- and dividend-free investment fund (or pyramid scheme, its more honest name). There is no shortage of the latter, and (as I wrote earlier) that use of bitcoin will not make the world better, create new wealth, or render some useful service; it will just move wealth from some people to other people.
Economists have know for 500 years that a currency must have some inflation, otherwise people will hoard it and it will not be available for use as a currency.
The use of bitcoin for investment and speculation had two other bad consequences. First, it lifted the price to 100 times what it should have been, given its current level of usage. The price is floating in the air, high up, anchored to itself through the hopes of traders and holders. It could crash from there at any moment. No company in its right mind would want to hold it, even temporarily. Imagine a manager accepting a payment of 1000 BTC today, and the price crashing tomorrow, before he can spend or sell those coins. How could he explain that to the company owners? (You can find out there an audio of Overstock's CEO trying to explain something like that to the other shareholders; but AFAIK he is the majority holder, so he won't get fired for that...)
Second, but tied to the first: bitcoin's use as instrument of speculative trade made its price extremely volatile. Even in times of "stability", like the past 7 months, the price has changed by ±10% in a few hours, several times. Volatility is bad for a currency: the user who buys BTC to pay for something will lose money if the BTC price drops between the two actions, and will not really win if it goes up -- because he will be left with a small amount of BTC that he may not find a good use for.
That is why a good cryptocurrency must be designed to NOT be a good investment.
Then the value of 1 coin would be determined by its use for e-payments, according to the money velocity equation.
thats basically how it works now. people buy bitcoin for what the market feels it is worth. economics 101Not really. The money velocity equation (which I too learned thanks to bitcoin) is P = V × T / N, where P is the value of one unit of the currency (say, USD/BTC), V is the volume of payments using it (USD/day), T is the average time between two payments using the same coin (days), and N is the number of units of the currency in circulation (BTC).
My best optimistic guess for V is 5 million USD/day, and T = 14 days seems a reasonable guess to me. If there was no hoarding and speculative trading, N would be about 14 million BTC. That gives P = 5 USD/BTC.
The 46-fold contrast between that and the price now (230 USD/BTC) is due to hoarding and speculative
his suggestion that Satoshi would agree... Wat da fuck?
Wat da fuck?From what I have read, I am satisfied that Satoshi intended bitcoin to be what he wrote in the whitepaper: a system for peer to peer payments through the internet that did not require a trusted third party. He believed that the world needed such a thing, but no one knew how to build it, and thought that he had found a way. That seems to have been his motivation to design the bitcoin protocol; and he then implemented it to see whether the idea worked out in practice.
But Satoshi was a computer scientist, not an economist. He thought that it would be nice if the currency had no inflation. For "everybody" knows that inflation is bad, right? I thought so too.
His he pleased about what bitcoin turned out to be? Well, on one hand it is always satisfying to do something big, even if it is a big nuclear accident or the sinking of the Titanic. But I doubt that he is happy about what his creature has become...
September 12, 2015, 08:28:04 PM
Feels good to remove the weed from the garden. Everybody should make a habit of reporting Lambie to the moderator. The system works!
Back to bitcoin:
Can we stay in this range, 220-300, for another eight months?
Back to bitcoin:
Can we stay in this range, 220-300, for another eight months?
Why? would that actually be good for bitcoin? I know that us HODLERS can acquire more BTC during that time; however, would that really be good for bitcoin?
It seems that Bitcoin needs to be at a price that is at least twice the current value to be practical for a lot of big user cases, and really the bitcoin infrastructure has been built quite a lot in the last 2 years, so accordingly, the bitcoin infrastructure could sustain a price of $1000 per BTC for an extended period of time to bring a little more practicality ... however, I kind of understand your point, that the $220 to $300 range does allow BTC to keep a bit of a lower profile, while continuing to be developed.... which could be a bit better to absorb mass adoption a little bit better, when mass adoption likely becomes more and more of an occurrence in bitcoinlandia.
He he, I don't WANT the price to stay in this range for eight more months. In fact, I want it to go to moon as soon as possible. But I have sympathy with guys who need a few more months to accumulate. Been doing that myself for one and a half year.
At the same time, I think it's interesting to see that bitcoin beats most fiat currencies as a store of value the last eight months. (In 2014, it was the worst currency, lol!)
The thing is: I don't think bitcoin can stay in this range for eight more months. And it will certainly not go to zero, like prof. Bitcorn & prof. Stolfi believe
Agreed... if we look at the past 8 months, there has been a lot of difficulties in the various attempts to drive BTC prices below $220.... yes, there have been a couple of successful short periods of BTC bears to push BTC prices below $220, but definitely NOT long lasted.
Yes, I am someone who is continuing to accumulate BTX- even though I already have a pretty decent stash them.
At this point, I accumulated nearly 2/3 of my BTC holdings before October 2014 (actually between about November 2013 and September 2014), and the remaining 1/3 of my BTC holdings after that time period.
In some sense, I am glad to see BTC prices in the mid $200s, because between about January and April 2015, I was NOT able to buy very many BTC because of some negative developments in some of my other business activities - accordingly, I had to dedicate much of my available fiat to my other business activities, during that period.
Between about May of this year and present, I have taken care of lot of those other business matters, and once again, I am able to continue to accumulate BTC with some spare fiat... so overall, I remain optimistic regarding BTC's expected price performance in the upcoming 8 months.
Possibly, BTC prices could remain stagnant in a $220 to $290 range, and surely there could be successful efforts to drive BTC prices below $220 or even below $200; however, given the recent trade volume (especially over the past 4 weeks), I think that the bears are having quite a few real difficulties keeping BTC prices within a $220 to $290 price range.
Interesting times.. yes, interesting times in deed, "soon" to be gentlemen....
Sounds like we have pretty much followed the same strategy. I am slightly in green now, I guess you are slightly in red at the moment. But that doesn't matter. I would rather have 10 BTC in the red, than 1 in the green.
We have seen the future
And we have bought a piece of it
This is gentlemen!
(Ehrm... Not right now, but later)
And we have bought a piece of it
This is gentlemen!
(Ehrm... Not right now, but later)
YEP!!!!!!! I'm still a bit in the red; however, I have a pretty decent financial plan forward in which in a large number of scenarios, I can most likely continue to accumulate BTC and continue to bring down my average cost per BTC...
September 12, 2015, 08:02:06 PM
September 12, 2015, 07:31:50 PM
PS: I like your trolling. I like to do it myself sometimes
macsga is lambie
BURN THE TROLL!!!
Your mastery of pattern recognition has finally paid off! Somebody get on the red phone. The List is an unparalleled demonstration of pure lulzy narcissism. Mind blown.
September 12, 2015, 07:29:50 PM
IF we will reach to %75 XT nodes the fork will occur ...... Is there any solution for avoid the fork ? or Bitcoin project will fail ?
no, not 75% of nodes. 75% of blocks! thats a little difference. 75% will never happen as the biggest pools already voted against 101.
September 12, 2015, 07:22:08 PM
Bitcoin XT is like MOD for emule.
It stays ... it works ... like others releases.
People need to have memory ... to see the things in perpective.
by the way, not everybody read the changelog of Bitcoin XT.
It stays ... it works ... like others releases.
People need to have memory ... to see the things in perpective.by the way, not everybody read the changelog of Bitcoin XT.
September 12, 2015, 07:20:07 PM
IF we will reach to %75 XT nodes the fork will occur ...... Is there any solution for avoid the fork ? or Bitcoin project will fail ?
no. if 75% of nodes switch, then XT becomes Bitcoin and core becomes a dead branch, a string of orphaned blocks. Then all the money sitting on the sidelines will start pouring in because we will finally have a network that scales.
this XT or die attitude is boring!
September 12, 2015, 07:02:02 PM
September 12, 2015, 06:48:01 PM
This thread is getting awesome again.
September 12, 2015, 06:31:26 PM
I must say that the mods did a nice job of draining the swamp that trollypop was attempting to create up in here.
September 12, 2015, 06:13:02 PM
Great fun to see Peter Todd make a fool out of himself during the scaling conference today.
Don't make a fool out of yourself!Peter is a brilliant mind.
Anyway, this openness with this conference and the fork option makes me really believe that bitcoin will survive and thrive.
The best code will win.
"Special interests" can't hijack the best code.
lmao
both you are so fulla shit.
September 12, 2015, 06:02:04 PM
September 12, 2015, 05:02:02 PM
September 12, 2015, 04:49:34 PM
Don't worry, here comes incredible BTCitcoin-Man
A thug?
That even looks like a police sketch.
Imagine some colors. That changes everything. No, not dark blue...
Jump to: