Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 25045. (Read 26720645 times)

QE4 is Coming
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZBoP2aBbuw

Hashrate is a measure of miners, not pools. Miners are independent entities that can change pools at any time. You can't use pools as a reliable source because they are not physical, only the miners themselves are physical.

Those transactions pay fees. You think people just move money around for no reason? If you don't like the metric, then claim that it needs to be weighted, not discounted. I would conservatively guess transaction volume about 20% as actual transactions because businesses report actual sales in bitcoins.

You are the one claiming that people use Metcalfe's Law to describe Bitcoin growth. That model is too simple for my tastes. I never read anything about Metcalfe's Law being fractal where you could zoom in and out to see the same patterns. It seems to me it's not really a predictive model and that there are many variations. Your argument is a strawman, because you haven't specified exactly which variant is "used in bitcoin."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_short_selling



 


((yawn))

Explanation

There are several problems there...

For one thing, how to define the "size of the network", and how to measure it?

Total hash power is a poor measure, since over the lst couple of years the hash power is now concentrated in a few large pools.  The justification given for Metcalfe's law is that each node can interact with all the other N-1 nodes, so as N increases the number of possible interactions grows as N², and the value of the network is guessed to be proportional to that number.  But if the network, instead of adding mode nodes,  is concentrating all use in a few big nodes, the interaction actually goes down.  And, aniway, miners don't interact with each other.

I explained already why I believe that the blockchain traffic (whether measured in TX, BTC, or USD) is mostly bitcoins moving between addresses with the same owner; so it cannot be assumed to measure the size of the network, either.  In fact, we do not have any reliable data about the bitcoin economy, except the market price, the number of coins mined, and the total hash power.

In the plots that are said to show that bitcoin follows Metcalfe's law, the last year is squeezed into a tiny area a few millimeters tall by a couple centimetres wide.   But that is where most of the "weight" is.  It is like plotting some property of bodies of water, from a teaspoon to the Pacific Ocean, and having the data for all the seas and oceans squeezed into that tiny sliver of the plot.  Why should one assume that a property that holds for small bodies of water, from teaspoon-size to lake-size, will continue holding for ocean-size ones?  (And indeed we know that real oceans have many phenomena that you don't see in lakes, like currents driven by climate differences.  In particular, for all small bodies of water there are bodies that are 10x bigger; but that is not true for oceans...) If that "Bitcoin Metcalfe" plot were to be trimmed to the last 12 months and expanded to fill all the plot area, what would it show?

so it would SEEM

It looks like at current market prices 1 piggy coin will get you about 10 satoshis, so it appears that currently piggy is 10x more valuable than the satoshi.

  LMAO

btw DOGE > PIGGY   

Explanation

its alright tho i have a plan, i have 1million piggy coins, as soon as they hit 1$ each, I'm agan be rich!

 

yes i know, and i sold long ago! FFS I can't catch a break.

i sold it for ether.... 

bitchick is that you??

Lol, Cannabiscoin has taken over Monero in marketcap. I like that :-D
I don´t own any of them.
XMR chart looks pretty horrible, even new lows have been made, haven´t watched it for a while. Any hodlers in here?

Fair enough!!!!!   I was asserting that I am more concerned about either fraudulent manipulations or other manipulations in which there is trading of more coins than are in existence.  To the extent that there may be normal manipulations, such as withdrawing fiat, I am NOT as worried about that b/c I get the sense that if that is all that they are doing, then sooner or later they are likely going to run out of coins... yet I know that they could work the system for a long time.  I also get a sense that if either big banks or governments are striving to destroy bitcoin or to undermine it, they are going to be more than willing to work at a loss in order to attempt to accomplish such.. and part of their gimmicks would also be to engage in criminal and/or bullying activities such as stealing coins or confiscating coins.

wall fight on stamps. doesn't look too good 

You seem to be describing interruptions to the growth of the network, but you are NOT describing the law to be invalid.... because the question becomes whether the network keeps growing or NOT and that may NOT be known while we are in the middle of the growth whether it has substantially slowed down or stopped... but after the fact, we may be able to look back and see the direction of the growth... or have better means to measure the extent of the growth... which some of those measurement systems already exist in bitcoin... but still does NOT necessarily tell us to where the trajectory is going or whether the trajectory has been materially and significantly interrupted.

I CANT!  

i think ether will work out better than most predict.

Of course, I am exaggerating as well. And I am not talking about fractional reserve tricks (except Noe&Bee, Mt.Gox, Moolah and the like frauds...), just legit trading (trading with coins while ending up with fiat gains).