Bitcoin

winkyincanada posted:
Peter Dinh posted:
kuma posted:

Did you?

As Simon said, I also did (at the bottom yesterday), and will watch carefully for another correction cycle.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news...-a-blockchain-cruise

The people you gave your money to are spending it in stuff like this. And Lamborghinis.

Unlikely that people buying Lambos were the panic sellers this week. Even if they were selling what does that have to do with anything? What's wrong with people buying Lambos? Would it make you feel better if they were selling their Amazon stock to fund their Lambo purchases?

Kevin Richardson posted:
winkyincanada posted:
Peter Dinh posted:
kuma posted:

Did you?

As Simon said, I also did (at the bottom yesterday), and will watch carefully for another correction cycle.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news...-a-blockchain-cruise

The people you gave your money to are spending it in stuff like this. And Lamborghinis.

Unlikely that people buying Lambos were the panic sellers this week. Even if they were selling what does that have to do with anything? What's wrong with people buying Lambos? Would it make you feel better if they were selling their Amazon stock to fund their Lambo purchases?

There's nothing wrong with people buying Lambos. But where do you think the money came from?

Also pretty good.   This makes a lot of sense to me.

 


Subject: Bitcoin Explained



Have you ever wondered about  "bitcoin". . .  . . . .
Well, here's a full explanation in terms everyone can understand.

A lot of monkeys lived near a village. They ran loose all over the place.

One day a merchant came to the village to buy these monkeys!

He announced that he would buy the monkeys @ $100 each!

The villagers thought that the man was mad.

They thought how can somebody buy stray monkeys at $100 each?

Still, some people caught some monkeys and gave them to the merchant and, sure enough, he gave $100 for each monkey!

This news spread like wildfire and people caught monkeys and sold them to the merchant.

After a few days, the merchant announced that he would now buy monkeys @ $200 each!

Even the lazy villagers  ran around to catch the remaining monkeys!

And they sold those monkeys @ $200 each!

Then the merchant announced that he would buy monkeys @ $500 each!

The villagers started to lose sleep! ... They caught six or seven monkeys, but that was all that were left, and got $500 each!

The villagers were waiting anxiously for the next announcement.

Then the merchant announced that he was going home for a week.  But when he returned, he would buy monkeys at $1000 each!

He asked his employee to take care of the monkeys he had already bought.  He, alone, was taking care of all the monkeys in a cage.

The merchant went home.

The villagers were very sad as there were no more monkeys left for them to sell at $1000 each.

Then the employee told them that he would sell some monkeys, privately, @ $700 each in secret.

This news spread like fire.  Since the merchant would buy monkeys @ $1000 each, there was a $300 profit for each monkey!

The next day, villagers made a queue near the monkey cage!

The employee sold all the monkeys at $700 each.  The rich bought monkeys in big lots.  The poor borrowed money from money lenders and also bought monkeys!

The villagers took care of their monkeys and waited expectantly for the merchant to return.

But nobody came! ...So they ran to the employee...

But he had already left, too !

And then the villagers realized that they had just bought useless stray monkeys @ $700 each and were unable to sell them!


The Bitcoin probably will be the next "monkey business".


It will make a lot of people bankrupt, but a few people filthy rich in this-"monkey business".


Skip posted:

Also pretty good.   This makes a lot of sense to me.

 


Subject: Bitcoin Explained



Have you ever wondered about  "bitcoin". . .  . . . .
Well, here's a full explanation in terms everyone can understand.

A lot of monkeys lived near a village. They ran loose all over the place.

One day a merchant came to the village to buy these monkeys!

He announced that he would buy the monkeys @ $100 each!

The villagers thought that the man was mad.

They thought how can somebody buy stray monkeys at $100 each?

Still, some people caught some monkeys and gave them to the merchant and, sure enough, he gave $100 for each monkey!

This news spread like wildfire and people caught monkeys and sold them to the merchant.

After a few days, the merchant announced that he would now buy monkeys @ $200 each!

Even the lazy villagers  ran around to catch the remaining monkeys!

And they sold those monkeys @ $200 each!

Then the merchant announced that he would buy monkeys @ $500 each!

The villagers started to lose sleep! ... They caught six or seven monkeys, but that was all that were left, and got $500 each!

The villagers were waiting anxiously for the next announcement.

Then the merchant announced that he was going home for a week.  But when he returned, he would buy monkeys at $1000 each!

He asked his employee to take care of the monkeys he had already bought.  He, alone, was taking care of all the monkeys in a cage.

The merchant went home.

The villagers were very sad as there were no more monkeys left for them to sell at $1000 each.

Then the employee told them that he would sell some monkeys, privately, @ $700 each in secret.

This news spread like fire.  Since the merchant would buy monkeys @ $1000 each, there was a $300 profit for each monkey!

The next day, villagers made a queue near the monkey cage!

The employee sold all the monkeys at $700 each.  The rich bought monkeys in big lots.  The poor borrowed money from money lenders and also bought monkeys!

The villagers took care of their monkeys and waited expectantly for the merchant to return.

But nobody came! ...So they ran to the employee...

But he had already left, too !

And then the villagers realized that they had just bought useless stray monkeys @ $700 each and were unable to sell them!


The Bitcoin probably will be the next "monkey business".


It will make a lot of people bankrupt, but a few people filthy rich in this-"monkey business".


Nobody is forcing anybody else to buy bitcoins. Some people get involved because they see it as a short cut to wealth generation. The reality is that you need to be able to hold them for years if you want to "get rich". Those who are investing with debt are unlikely to be able to ride out the volatility and are usually the panic sellers.

This "monkey business" analogy is just typical anti Bitcoin propaganda created by bitter nocoiners. 

If it’s to be a bubble, it will need to grow hugely more... the global nature of crypto takes it into uncharted territories which makes it interesting ... also in the U.K., the relatively large growth of hitec jobs in the Ciry of London around crypto currencies and block chain...which suggests the type of adoption is evolving... the other things about bubbles is that they grow and grow... well this is not the case so far with cryptos... at least in monetary value terms... there has been quite a cooling off since early December... which seems to follow a fairly consistent annual pattern... a kind of correction. I think a lot of people who jumped on the media bandwagon of getting rich quick have become very disillusioned.... they have realised it doesn’t work like that... perhaps they should buy tulips instead....

it will be interesting to see how this mainstream adoption evolves.... it still feels a bit like the explosion of the web in the 90s... although this unlike cryptos was mostly based in Europe and the US... and cryptos ate totally international with different adoption cultures and behaviours globally... both from populations and governments... 

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

If it’s to be a bubble, it will need to grow hugely more... the global nature of crypto takes it into uncharted territories which makes it interesting ... also in the U.K., the relatively large growth of hitec jobs in the Ciry of London around crypto currencies and block chain...which suggests the type of adoption is evolving... the other things about bubbles is that they grow and grow... well this is not the case so far with cryptos... at least in monetary value terms... there has been quite a cooling off since early December... which seems to follow a fairly consistent annual pattern... a kind of correction. I think a lot of people who jumped on the media bandwagon of getting rich quick have become very disillusioned.... they have realised it doesn’t work like that... perhaps they should buy tulips instead....

it will be interesting to see how this mainstream adoption evolves.... it still feels a bit like the explosion of the web in the 90s... although this unlike cryptos was mostly based in Europe and the US... and cryptos ate totally international with different adoption cultures and behaviours globally... both from populations and governments... 

The thing that strikes me regarding Cryptos as "currencies" (or underpinning contracts) is that they don't need to be fundamentally worth very much at all. Just as a dollar note doesn't cost anything like a dollar to make, the crypto-coin doesn't have to be expensive to make. In fact most regular dollars don't exist in a physical sense at all, so they are essentially costless to make; and they are just a means of quantifying the promise/contract. They are effectively just a derivative, of which as many can be assumed to exist as is necessary to denominate all contracts in place. They are arguably more like a language, in that they are just a trusted means of conveying information about a contract (the value of it). Trust still needs to exist between the parties until settlement. In our societies, that trust is underpinned by trusted intermediaries and by the rule of law. I send you money using a credit card, you send me stuff. That sort of thing. I send you bitcoin, you send me a Lamborghini seems riskier to me somehow.

So, expensive-to-make crypto-coins make no sense to me, and nor does inflated prices on these virtual objects well in excess of even that cost. The success of blockchain ledgers will not depend on speculatively inflated pricing of the underlying units of contract. In fact, the opposite is perhaps true. A crypto needs to be trusted (high certainty of being legitimate) for them to become accepted more generally, but that's not a function of their price. In fact, while the crypto-coins are subject to speculation, greed and organised crime and hackers, they are unlikely to be widely chosen as a trusted means of pricing a contract. I guess what I'm saying is that blockchain doesn't make sense to me until it is cheap and trusted. That's not how I see the current sentiment in the markets. Touting future wide acceptance as a justification for inflated prices is an oxymoron.

Kind regards,

Bitter Nocoiner

winkyincanada posted:
Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

If it’s to be a bubble, it will need to grow hugely more... the global nature of crypto takes it into uncharted territories which makes it interesting ... also in the U.K., the relatively large growth of hitec jobs in the Ciry of London around crypto currencies and block chain...which suggests the type of adoption is evolving... the other things about bubbles is that they grow and grow... well this is not the case so far with cryptos... at least in monetary value terms... there has been quite a cooling off since early December... which seems to follow a fairly consistent annual pattern... a kind of correction. I think a lot of people who jumped on the media bandwagon of getting rich quick have become very disillusioned.... they have realised it doesn’t work like that... perhaps they should buy tulips instead....

it will be interesting to see how this mainstream adoption evolves.... it still feels a bit like the explosion of the web in the 90s... although this unlike cryptos was mostly based in Europe and the US... and cryptos ate totally international with different adoption cultures and behaviours globally... both from populations and governments... 

The thing that strikes me regarding Cryptos as "currencies" (or underpinning contracts) is that they don't need to be fundamentally worth very much at all. Just as a dollar note doesn't cost anything like a dollar to make, the crypto-coin doesn't have to be expensive to make. In fact most regular dollars don't exist in a physical sense at all, so they are essentially costless to make; and they are just a means of quantifying the promise/contract. They are effectively just a derivative, of which as many can be assumed to exist as is necessary to denominate all contracts in place. They are arguably more like a language, in that they are just a trusted means of conveying information about a contract (the value of it). Trust still needs to exist between the parties until settlement. In our societies, that trust is underpinned by trusted intermediaries and by the rule of law. I send you money using a credit card, you send me stuff. That sort of thing. I send you bitcoin, you send me a Lamborghini seems riskier to me somehow.

So, expensive-to-make crypto-coins make no sense to me, and nor does inflated prices on these virtual objects well in excess of even that cost. The success of blockchain ledgers will not depend on speculatively inflated pricing of the underlying units of contract. In fact, the opposite is perhaps true. A crypto needs to be trusted (high certainty of being legitimate) for them to become accepted more generally, but that's not a function of their price. In fact, while the crypto-coins are subject to speculation, greed and organised crime and hackers, they are unlikely to be widely chosen as a trusted means of pricing a contract. I guess what I'm saying is that blockchain doesn't make sense to me until it is cheap and trusted. That's not how I see the current sentiment in the markets. Touting future wide acceptance as a justification for inflated prices is an oxymoron.

Kind regards,

Bitter Nocoiner

A USD note == USD bank deposit == $1 value

If I want to send 1,000,000 USD in value using USD's I need to send 1,000,000 USD. This is possible because there are trillions of USD floating around the world.

If bitcoins were worthless then I could never send 1,000,000 USD value. If Bitcoin is successful it will have to grow in value relative to USD. It will eventually need market cap in the trillions of USD. So the difference between USD and BTC is USD solution is to create more USD; BTC solves the problem by increasing value of the finite number of BTC.

Any contract that settles in USD could be rewritten to settle in BTC. There is the possibility for entrepreneurs to create businesses providing some of the features of credit cards into a BTC payment system. I predict we will eventually see blockchain based asset transfers that allow for escrow and title transfer.

Crypto is not going to take over Global finance overnight. This is just the beginning..... It might take 20 years but it'll happen.

 

Kevin Richardson posted:
winkyincanada posted:
Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

If it’s to be a bubble, it will need to grow hugely more... the global nature of crypto takes it into uncharted territories which makes it interesting ... also in the U.K., the relatively large growth of hitec jobs in the Ciry of London around crypto currencies and block chain...which suggests the type of adoption is evolving... the other things about bubbles is that they grow and grow... well this is not the case so far with cryptos... at least in monetary value terms... there has been quite a cooling off since early December... which seems to follow a fairly consistent annual pattern... a kind of correction. I think a lot of people who jumped on the media bandwagon of getting rich quick have become very disillusioned.... they have realised it doesn’t work like that... perhaps they should buy tulips instead....

it will be interesting to see how this mainstream adoption evolves.... it still feels a bit like the explosion of the web in the 90s... although this unlike cryptos was mostly based in Europe and the US... and cryptos ate totally international with different adoption cultures and behaviours globally... both from populations and governments... 

The thing that strikes me regarding Cryptos as "currencies" (or underpinning contracts) is that they don't need to be fundamentally worth very much at all. Just as a dollar note doesn't cost anything like a dollar to make, the crypto-coin doesn't have to be expensive to make. In fact most regular dollars don't exist in a physical sense at all, so they are essentially costless to make; and they are just a means of quantifying the promise/contract. They are effectively just a derivative, of which as many can be assumed to exist as is necessary to denominate all contracts in place. They are arguably more like a language, in that they are just a trusted means of conveying information about a contract (the value of it). Trust still needs to exist between the parties until settlement. In our societies, that trust is underpinned by trusted intermediaries and by the rule of law. I send you money using a credit card, you send me stuff. That sort of thing. I send you bitcoin, you send me a Lamborghini seems riskier to me somehow.

So, expensive-to-make crypto-coins make no sense to me, and nor does inflated prices on these virtual objects well in excess of even that cost. The success of blockchain ledgers will not depend on speculatively inflated pricing of the underlying units of contract. In fact, the opposite is perhaps true. A crypto needs to be trusted (high certainty of being legitimate) for them to become accepted more generally, but that's not a function of their price. In fact, while the crypto-coins are subject to speculation, greed and organised crime and hackers, they are unlikely to be widely chosen as a trusted means of pricing a contract. I guess what I'm saying is that blockchain doesn't make sense to me until it is cheap and trusted. That's not how I see the current sentiment in the markets. Touting future wide acceptance as a justification for inflated prices is an oxymoron.

Kind regards,

Bitter Nocoiner

A USD note == USD bank deposit == $1 value

If I want to send 1,000,000 USD in value using USD's I need to send 1,000,000 USD. This is possible because there are trillions of USD floating around the world.

If bitcoins were worthless then I could never send 1,000,000 USD value. If Bitcoin is successful it will have to grow in value relative to USD. It will eventually need market cap in the trillions of USD. So the difference between USD and BTC is USD solution is to create more USD; BTC solves the problem by increasing value of the finite number of BTC.

Any contract that settles in USD could be rewritten to settle in BTC. There is the possibility for entrepreneurs to create businesses providing some of the features of credit cards into a BTC payment system. I predict we will eventually see blockchain based asset transfers that allow for escrow and title transfer.

Crypto is not going to take over Global finance overnight. This is just the beginning..... It might take 20 years but it'll happen.

 

My point is not that a bitcoin should be worth zero. To be a language for contracts it obviously needs a non-zero value. But the expectation that a severely deflationary unit of value is a basis for replacing currency is flawed. Yet that is what the crypto-speculators insist will happen. Huge transaction costs are a further drag on Bitcoin. There does not need to be Bitcoin of equivalent value to some notion of the number of USD. The use of derivatives means that contracts, anchored in the price of a trusted entity can be written and settled between parties that trust each other without ever troubling the US treasury. For example, at any given time, the notional value of gold contracts far, far exceeds the "market cap" (ounces in existence x price per ounce) of gold.

I don't know whether or not distributed ledgers are the future. They certainly have some appeal. But picking a "winner" for the purpose of speculation is a fool's errand in my view. 

Peter Dinh posted:

Time will tell if it is a bubble. Btw, Peter Thiel is pro bitcoin, and his record is remarkable.

I think I am going to consider investing in Bitcoin when Warren gives his thumbs up. :/

Guess I am pretty old school when it comes to investing. Altho, if I were a whipper snapper Millennial, I would probably play since it doesn't matter if I lost it all.

winkyincanada posted:

Pretty grim out there right now. Even ETH which had been fairly resilient is now getting hammered.

The short-term volatility and volume is currently unbelievable. I think someone may have figured out an arbitrage trade and are buying and selling at a high frequency. 

Everything is down this week except rhodium.

The volatility is painful but not new in crypto. Keep in mind we had a run up from $1,950 to $19,800 in just a few months. This is a longterm "bet" with many people hoping to "get rich quick" getting burned by the reality that the short term is currently unpredictable.

The crypto world is evolving and growing which shows it’s healthy  ... and the stronger cryptocurrencies  with smarter technologies are emerging and evolving too .. crypto is still one of the more interesting  albeit riskier tech  investments out there in my opinion ... but do your research .. there is a lot of rubbish out there and hype to attract the gullible such as ripple, alas I suspect a lot poorly informed people have lost a lot of money on that.. ... in my opinion the better tech is less volatile but has the best longer term growth and utility outside of currency ... ethereum is an example of this...

I think we are starting to see the founder first generation cryptos wane in influence and make way for second generation cryptos... Bitcoin for example I suspect will becomes less prominent  albeit I suspect it will be with us for many years yet... 

Kevin Richardson posted:
count.d posted:

...and here's the slow drip that occurs with every bubble burst. Everyone thinks it will bounce back, but in reality it slowly sucks the life out of them. USA year 2,000 rings a bell.

NASDAQ did bounce back to eventually set new ATH.

You're comparing Bitcoin with the whole Nasdaq market? I could list numerous huge companies which I followed around the 2000 era that ceased to exist within a couple of years.

Also, I'm just stating facts about investing, so there's no need to be so defensive about Bitcoin. I'm on the sidelines watching and don't have a preference either way atm. I don't get emotionally involved and certainly don't defend performance of investments.

The thing with crypto if you are trading it is to be patient, the dips, sometimes severe ones, are relatively short lived. The converse is true, the peaks are also relatively short... such as the early December peak that much of the media woke up to (and yes I personally took advantage of).. if you are in the longer term these average out and there has been steady increase in value over the months and years for many of the cryptos  ... of course this doesn’t pander to the more sensationalist get rich quick and tulip bubble narrative from some of the populist media and those observers that don’t really understand the ecosystem... 

Things are looking better from my POV. LTC has recovered quite a bit and ETC is back in mid 30's. This is a bumpy road but worth the trip.

I am just going to keep hodling the "big 3", NEO, and ETC. VTC has been in the dumps but I'm also going to hodl that to da moon. STRAT, however, has been nothing but a pain to own. Probably going to dump that into ETC on the next pump (if that ever happens.)

Add Reply

Likes (2)
Minh Nguyenynwa250505
×
×
×
×