Explanation
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 29519. (Read 26608519 times)
February 19, 2014, 10:03:48 AM
February 19, 2014, 09:57:21 AM
Often I see here complaints about orders suddenly appearing from nowhere in order books, or statements like "there are only XXX coins left to {buy|sell} on exchange YYY".
The books at the larger sites must be huge (millions of entries perhaps), and each chart site in the world requests that data every few seconds.
Correct me if I am wrong, but those exchanges surely must truncate their answers, delivering only the first N (say, 2000) bids and asks in their order books.
The books at the larger sites must be huge (millions of entries perhaps), and each chart site in the world requests that data every few seconds.
Correct me if I am wrong, but those exchanges surely must truncate their answers, delivering only the first N (say, 2000) bids and asks in their order books.
Gox does, Stamp doesn't (Though I believe a full dataset is available from Gox but on a restricted timetable). If you look back at Chartbuddy (which you can't cause I now delete old images), the Gox charts would look "hairy" due to their truncation algorithm whereas for Stamp, I had to do the truncation myself so I could give it a nice, neat haircut.
February 19, 2014, 09:51:51 AM
February 19, 2014, 09:38:51 AM
well actually, if gox's finances in really bad shape, as gambling lady suggested (and it is seems very much so). then everything make a sense. Lock down btc withdrawals, buy btc at low rate, restore btc rate and sale it off books to private party. so what a problem, it is free world isnt it.
February 19, 2014, 09:31:57 AM
...nonsense...
You should realize that the same can be said of fiat. Unlike fiat, bitcoin is not designed to rob you.
Let me inject this little Rothschild quote in here to underline that statement:
"Give me the control of the credit of a nation, and I care not who makes the laws." The famous boastful statement of Nathaniel Meyer Rothschild, speaking to a group of international bankers, 1912: "The few who could understand the system (cheque, money, credits) will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on its favours, that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests." The boastful statement by Rothschild Bros. of London.
THIS, is why I invest in Bitcoin, I don't care if I loose a little money, I stand for my principles.
February 19, 2014, 09:28:15 AM
To me it looks like you treat bitcoins as some abstract paper bill with no use at all except for speculation
Yup, this is Jorge's problem. He seems to think that no one does anything with bitcoin other than buy and sell it on exchanges.
February 19, 2014, 09:23:01 AM
Jesus, such long ass posts.
Do some people on here actually work and sleep? Like Jorge, that man writes books.
Enough with the dramatic theory's, worse case scenarios and bible talks about this all.
Makes my head spin.
Do some people on here actually work and sleep? Like Jorge, that man writes books.
Enough with the dramatic theory's, worse case scenarios and bible talks about this all.
Makes my head spin.
Ok.. CCMF.. better now??
February 19, 2014, 09:16:54 AM
Jesus, such long ass posts.
Do some people on here actually work and sleep? Like Jorge, that man writes books.
Enough with the dramatic theory's, worse case scenarios and bible talks about this all.
Makes my head spin.
Do some people on here actually work and sleep? Like Jorge, that man writes books.
Enough with the dramatic theory's, worse case scenarios and bible talks about this all.
Makes my head spin.
February 19, 2014, 09:16:20 AM
in basic physics you learn that you cannot create mass, charge, or energy by smartly moving those things around.
yet in fractional reserve banking fiat is created in this way. bitcoin does not allow that.
February 19, 2014, 09:16:10 AM
As a rough guess, people who invested in bitcoin must have already poured around a billion dollars into the market, even discounting what they took out. How much of that went to the miners?
And how much of the billions spent on Apple stock went to Apple?
Yes, but when a long-term investor sells his stock to another, he is simply transferring the credit of the loan (and any future dividend and appreciations) to him. So it is as if the initial loan was made by both of them, and they split the profits and risks in a particular way.
How is this different from bitcoin?
Customers buying bitcoins just to make payments are not "buybacks by the network". They are like day traders who are forced to buy some stock but do not expect to make profit. Again, they are just the ultimate new investors that bring their wealth (money or goods) into the system, which is used to pay the profits of earlier entrants; and who will get that wealth back only by selling their bitcoins to someone else who will have to put the same amount of wealth in. Do I need to I tell you how they would fit into my "parable"?
People who buy bitcoins to make payments are not investors. They're just users of the service. They're not looking for profits.
February 19, 2014, 09:15:30 AM
Yup. Jorge is definitely a HODLER. Must be a late arrival and needs to average down his DCA.
Cheers!!
Cheers!!
PS. For those who insist in knowing my negative views, here is the link to that "parable": http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2014-02-17-HowToMakeSomeEasyMoney.html
February 19, 2014, 09:12:46 AM
...nonsense...
You should realize that the same can be said of fiat. Unlike fiat, bitcoin is not designed to rob you. It is designed to preserve and protect your savings. When you start to expend a proportionately larger effort in denouncing the ponzi scheme which is fiat, then I will no longer consider you a delusional hypocrite.
You want to protect your countrymen from exploitation? Convince them to stop using fiat. But no, instead you are cutting off their only practical avenue of escape from slavery. That is a despicable treason.
February 19, 2014, 09:11:20 AM
That is a great analogy of crypto currencies. +1
Reposted. Everybody needs to read this.
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/february/bitcoin-athey-srinivasan-021814.html
in case you just need some solid academic approval of bitcoin.
g r e a t interview. don´t miss it.
in case you just need some solid academic approval of bitcoin.
g r e a t interview. don´t miss it.
Quote
If the Internet was programmable communication, Bitcoin is programmable money. The analogy is actually a very good one. Before the Internet, in order to deploy a program that used the central communications network, you needed a deal with a network operator like AT&T. With the Internet, individual nodes could write programs to directly communicate with each other, without any central approval required.
In the same way, today, in order to deploy a program that uses the central financial network, you need a deal with a large bank or credit card company. With Bitcoin, individual nodes can write programs to directly send and receive money from each other, without any central approval required.
In the same way, today, in order to deploy a program that uses the central financial network, you need a deal with a large bank or credit card company. With Bitcoin, individual nodes can write programs to directly send and receive money from each other, without any central approval required.
Reposted. Everybody needs to read this.
February 19, 2014, 09:11:16 AM
Why don't people play this circle game in real life, if it makes everybody rich?
I'll go as far as agreeing with you that there will be people that won't benefit or only marginally benefit and those that will lose out for not adopting cryptocurrencies.
(note: I am not mentioning bitcoin specifically, lets talk about a new form of exchange that is emerging in a more general sense).
The later adoption happens the less you profit.
A far fetched example:
Every company is jumping onto this new "internet" thingy.
Those going in early are , on average, seeing increases in profit.
Now if Bob's Bakery also makes the jump after just about everyone and their pet has a website and has a page with online ordering it won't have the same impact as if he were the first to do it.
I don't understand why you have to explicitly link bitcoin to its perceived value. [edit] To me it looks like you treat bitcoins as some abstract paper bill with no use at all except for speculation [/edit]
Look at how the technology enables you to securely make transactions without having a central place that runs it all.
This in itself is a valuable new asset (you do know that you can add text to bitcoin transactions that is also stored on the blockchain so you could build all kinds of services around this)
February 19, 2014, 09:10:43 AM
so, what happens if the price levels out and the unit of exchange is used for the exchange of goods and services? who has lost? I'm geniunely curious.
The negativity surrounding bitcoin is only relevant if it declines in price. What happens if it sits still, for example
OK, in my parable, after the two swindlers leave, those who remain have less than they had invested. Each invested 50 or 100 dollars, the scoundrels have taken out 150 net. But the losers think that they have more than they invested, because they own a highly "valuable asset" -- their place in the circle. Let's say that they believe that their place is now worth 300 dollars.
A new "customer" comes in and wishes to buy a place in the line. He pays 300 dollars to one of the original investors, who walks out with that money. That first "customer" then immediately sells his place in the line to a second "customer" and walks out with 300 dollars.
So the "old investor" made a fat profit (invested 100, walked out with 300) and the "first customer" got in and out with no net profit or loss. Where did the profit of the old investor come from?
Why don't people play this circle game in real life, if it makes everybody rich?
You cannot be serious. Your logic can be applied to any assets. Most houses in US/Canada are really worth 40-50K, but they sell for 500-800K. Is land in the city really worth the money people are willing to pay.
Of course not. It is a dead land. You cannot grow any food on it,, cannot drill for oil or dig for some other resources. The water underneath it is polluted. So why people pay so much? Because they want it.
So yes, real-estate (a limited resource) is being bought by a "circle/line" of people. The last one to own it holds the "bag".
It is always a net zero game. Someone's profit it someone else loss (realized or unrealized). Don't get me started on other "financial instruments" like stocks, bonds, mutual funds etc. Same thing.
February 19, 2014, 09:08:32 AM
First a greeting to Jorge from Venezia 
Then a question: actually moving money around has a high cost and friction due to fees applied by banks and entities like paypal and so. How do you explain this in relation to the basic physic you named?
Could it be that we already have been made poor (thus engaged in a worldwide ponzi scheme driven by inflation) and bitcoin, being technologically superior, is giving us back a part of what has been taken (if not stolen)?
p.s. apologies for the bad grammar!
Then a question: actually moving money around has a high cost and friction due to fees applied by banks and entities like paypal and so. How do you explain this in relation to the basic physic you named?
Could it be that we already have been made poor (thus engaged in a worldwide ponzi scheme driven by inflation) and bitcoin, being technologically superior, is giving us back a part of what has been taken (if not stolen)?
p.s. apologies for the bad grammar!
Good question. Imagine the "money circle" game, except you are handing around those $50 bills in a circle of friends in 10 different countries. Using fiat and paying exorbitant fees this game would obviously not last long.
Next, imagine that there was some magical, mystical way that you could track the money as it floats from friend to friend and that as soon as one person tries to "pocket" the cash all the other participants would know instantly that the money did not go where it should have because they were all auditing everyone else's transactions in real time...
Agreed 100%, if that's the case the wealth influx needed to fuel bitcoin full growth has been already been payed by everyone using the current bank system in all those past years.
Then, whilst it is true that the " bitcoin takeoff" has been quite similiar of a ponzi scheme, once it becomes an official exchanged currency it will find his natural habitat and will get his value from other currencies (aka from the past).
February 19, 2014, 09:07:25 AM
Well Bitcoin would alsowork if the price for 1 Bitcoin would only be 1-100$.
What´s the problem? I thought you all love the technic/philosophy and not the actual $ value of Bitcoin.
What´s the problem? I thought you all love the technic/philosophy and not the actual $ value of Bitcoin.
Technically bitcoin works however you value it but its utility increases as its value increases because that determines how much
value you can transfer through it. Think of it as the "bandwidth".
This is the correct answer.
Plus, as liquidity increases, and perhaps adding to that some amount of exchange friction between markets (e.g. because of different legal approaches), we would also see volatility decrease gradually.
Which, by the way, is already slowly happening. I know the press is all screaming about "the biggest crash yet in Bitcoinland", but looking at actually more objective measures, like Bollinger Band Width (which essentially tracks normalized standard deviations of averaged price), we can actually see that volatility already *is* trending down slowly.
(I'll post it, if you request proof :D)
February 19, 2014, 08:58:28 AM
so, what happens if the price levels out and the unit of exchange is used for the exchange of goods and services? who has lost? I'm geniunely curious.
The negativity surrounding bitcoin is only relevant if it declines in price. What happens if it sits still, for example
OK, in my parable, after the two swindlers leave, those who remain have less than they had invested. Each invested 50 or 100 dollars, the scoundrels have taken out 150 net. But the losers think that they have more than they invested, because they own a highly "valuable asset" -- their place in the circle. Let's say that they believe that their place is now worth 300 dollars.
A new "customer" comes in and wishes to buy a place in the line. He pays 300 dollars to one of the original investors, who walks out with that money. That first "customer" then immediately sells his place in the line to a second "customer" and walks out with 300 dollars.
So the "old investor" made a fat profit (invested 100, walked out with 300) and the "first customer" got in and out with no net profit or loss. Where did the profit of the old investor come from?
Why don't people play this circle game in real life, if it makes everybody rich?
February 19, 2014, 08:49:45 AM
Well Bitcoin would alsowork if the price for 1 Bitcoin would only be 1-100$.
What´s the problem? I thought you all love the technic/philosophy and not the actual $ value of Bitcoin.
What´s the problem? I thought you all love the technic/philosophy and not the actual $ value of Bitcoin.
Technically bitcoin works however you value it but its utility increases as its value increases because that determines how much
value you can transfer through it. Think of it as the "bandwidth".
February 19, 2014, 08:48:54 AM
First a greeting to Jorge from Venezia
Then a question: actually moving money around has a high cost and friction due to fees applied by banks and entities like paypal and so. How do you explain this in relation to the basic physic you named?
Could it be that we already have been made poor (thus engaged in a worldwide ponzi scheme driven by inflation) and bitcoin, being technologically superior, is giving us back a part of what has been taken (if not stolen)?
p.s. apologies for the bad grammar!
Then a question: actually moving money around has a high cost and friction due to fees applied by banks and entities like paypal and so. How do you explain this in relation to the basic physic you named?
Could it be that we already have been made poor (thus engaged in a worldwide ponzi scheme driven by inflation) and bitcoin, being technologically superior, is giving us back a part of what has been taken (if not stolen)?
p.s. apologies for the bad grammar!
Good question. Imagine the "money circle" game, except you are handing around those $50 bills in a circle of friends in 10 different countries. Using fiat and paying exorbitant fees this game would obviously not last long.
Next, imagine that there was some magical, mystical way that you could track the money as it floats from friend to friend and that as soon as one person tries to "pocket" the cash all the other participants would know instantly that the money did not go where it should have because they were all auditing everyone else's transactions in real time...
Jump to: