Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1971. (Read 3313076 times)

Technical analysis is hardly usable in such a illiquid market as the XMR one. People can easily game important price levels. Although what I've said before, some people still use it and it indeed looked like a head&shoulders. On top of that, I think it is falling back in the ascending channel that you can draw from the 0.00978 bottom and that is actually a good thing. We shot out of the channel when soaring to 0.0043, but in my opinion it is better to fall back in it and gradually move back up.

EDIT: Channel I was talking about: (credits to dnaleor)

Note: This was drawn 12-16 hours ago, the bottom line is now somewhere around 0.0034, so we bounced nicely of that.

This big market buy that just happened broke that pattern, didn't it?

A very nasty looking head and shoulders there...

I'm no chart genius, but... ... ...

Oh thank you, do you think the blockchain being decentralized is to any benefit at all? Or would a centralized solution work just as well? (For creating or powering "consciousness"/memory, learning, etc.

Feel free to PM me on IRC I'll show you the logs. I am in #monero @ freenode (if not familiar with IRC, just use this -> https://webchat.freenode.net/ (set your nick and set the channel to #monero) under the same nick. I am going to bed soon though, so if I am not there, try again tomorrow.

PS: This apply to others as well, just shoot me a PM on IRC!

Meh.. no need for drama-queens anyway.

any background info on this?

This thread is amazingly quiet having today's action in mind. That being said, it's mostly 1 guy that is selling off since he is pissed at fluffypony.

Yes, right now holding parity with btc requires more than 10,000-20,000 btc.
For this price the mining activity still is way too high.
It probably needs 10,000-20,000 btc daily minimum to hold the parity.
Right now it is not that realistic, but once we get big guys buying (billionaires), it might hold there. If this happens, it actually can trigger a new btc rally, too since 10,000-20,000 btc need to be bought from the market daily to keep up the price.

I think many have sold a large stash of their coins before we reach the parity - only the strongest coins are there for sale from the community. Thus, I am not expecting any bigger dumping taking place there anymore. The dumping take place probably on  the way to 0.1-> since new millionaires need to be created. When that has been done, it is ready to rise for the second class of millionaires and that is taking place when the price rises 100 times from that.
Though, it is possible that btc will be denominated in Moneros in the future.  

BTW, I see Doge's marketcap on the horizon.

This was defined as the end result of the simulation, so hardly worth a disagreement  


All agreeable, but this whole simulation is the answer to TrueCryptonaire fallacious claim that 10-20k BTC to be transferred to XMR will likely put and keep them in parity, while 1M is closer to the truth as shown. The simulation was not intended to expound the triangular dynamics nor the forward escape in a larger context (the post following had).


It does not matter squat in which currency it is expressed - here BTC and USD are both shown, but XMR not because its value changes too much during the simulation.


It directly follows from the premises. It is similar in nature to "the diagonals of a square divide each other in half". It just cannot by otherwise.


The elasticity factor in peaks such as the blowoff top in April 2013 was ~60 IIRC.

When measured from the period of no price change, it is == 0 always by definition as well.

=> The method has its limitations.


For sure if something is perceived to have become more valuable, its valuation in the market can change without new money entering in.

Yes, and no. There is inherent risk for states running their own specialised coin and network. Imagine a smaller state with less funds. Another rogue state could attack the coin. Heck, even a multinational company could attack such a coin.

On a larger scale, such as any of the G7 nations, this could still apply. Rogue states attacking other rogue states. And US is inherently a rogue state, according to many thought leaders.

Yeah, when the usefulness of this call is evaluated, scale it like this:

- put a monthly average chart on
- think that you need 200,000 XMR
- voilá after the 3-month accumulation window starting from my call, you have it. Cheaply.

* *

Try (for once) think in context. I am not here issuing orders to daytraders of 50 XMR; that's something I can hardly spare my time to think how to do profitably.

I have a master's degree in Bio- and Medical Informatics. I can't think of any reasonable blockchain uses as a data structure to hold biological data. There are other bioinformatics people in the Monero community (and probably biologist, biochemist, geneticist), but I don't think they'll find such uses too. There is an off-topic monero thread somewhere and a whole off-topic section in the Monero forum.

Edit: A hash or a signiture of a biological data probably, but that applies to any other data.

I agree.


I disagree.

At present XMR is functionally a subsystem of BTC.  To buy XMR, you first buy BTC, representing a flow of capital into BTC.  When you buy XMR, it is an exchange of XMR and BTC, with no impact on the capitalization of BTC in fiat, and no impact on the flow of capital into/out-of BTC at the fiat boundary.  Increasing the market cap of XMR is more likely to increase the market cap of BTC than it is to decrease it.

The picture only changes when XMR can approach a dis-intermediated equilibrium with fiat.  Then triangular arbitrage will enable equilibration at the XMR/BTC interface as well.  Massive profits and losses would occur at that time.


A reasonable conclusion on your premises.  I disagree with how you expressed the mechanics.  Capital flight from BTC to XMR can only be measured in BTC or XMR, not in fiat, except as an integral of instantaneous valuations.


Your parenthetical comment strikes me as an independent speculative assumption, or the consequence of an unstated premise underlying multiple explicit premises, rather than a consequence of the core scenario.

The elasticity factor you describe is a fairly good way to measure the relative proportions of reserve demand versus economic use, when in an equilibrium state.  It is likely to change substantially during the course of an equilibration.  It would approach 1:1 at parity (by a symmetry argument), and vary around a simple attractor curve which is monotonic in the market cap ratio.  (Parity != equilibrium, as the two are independent concepts.)

If the value growth in XMR facilitates the entry of new agents into the overall crypto economy, the market caps of both BTC and XMR could rise simultaneously, even without a net inflow from fiat, for the same reasons of elasticity ratio, this time relative to fiat.





,

Bitcoin might become an important altcoin of Monero in the future.
BTC will not cease to exist but the price may never rise to ATH again. There simply is a lack of stupid money these days.
As Monero gets its own exchange and is sold to big buyers (probably a lot via OTC), the price cannot simply keep this low.

Monero doesn't need to "replace BTC" any more than pepper needs to replace salt.

The latter features radical transparency, the former radical opacity.  There is no competition, except for the amusing sideshow pissing contest of market cap.

Litecoin is like the little spare doughnut tire you find hidden under the trunk.

When BTC has a blowout, we just pull over and bolt it on.  It will do the job until the mechanic opens.  Just take it easy on the corners.

The 'LTC is useless' meme is wrong.  A spare tire is similarly useless, until it isn't.  Same logic applies to fire extinguishers and earthquake kits.

Despite all best efforts, BTC will fork again.  Prepare accordingly.

5) coffee and coffee accessories!
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9618340

Considering a saying commonly known amongst traders, "Buy on rumor, sell on news," one should take the recommendation, "Now is the time to buy," at face value as a recommendation to start buying on October 12.

That LordSonjai would take too significant the recommendation is a reflection upon those who follow. It's not like it's a bad call, in the grand scheme of things.

Webwallet was released on 25 november 2014 IIRC, price soared from 0.00136 to 0.00172 but tanked shortly after that. So I think that argument could be debunked, since we overtook that atleast one more time after that.

price now is the first time that the price is higher than the price at the time the post recommended a buy? Maybe think for yourselves?