This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Markets In Turmoil - Stocks Sliding As Bitcoin Tops $400
With a shiny red ballon dog selling for $58 million, perhaps it was time to take a little profit in the equity exuberance. S&P futures are down 9 points from last night's close - which in the new normal is considerable (sadly) - with no macro data headlines this morning to spark a move, we will be watching JPY (which for now is rallying awkwardly) for signs of ignition. Meanwhile, as the USD flatlines (despite dispersion in FX), Bitcoin just toppped $400 for the first time ever - doubling in the last two weeks. Precious metals are up modestly; treasury yields are limping lower; and European equities (and sovereign bonds) are having another tough day.
S&P Futures an odd shade of green (called red we hear) this morning...
Bitcoin tops $400...
»
- 15500 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
You are incorrect. The transactions of any group (however large) that decided to change the protocol would still be rejected by everyone that didn't decide to change the protocol. Essentially, they will have created a brand new cryptocurrency that can't intermingle with Bitcoin (much like Litecoin, ppCoin, etc. already are).
The rest of us still on the bitcoin network will be unaffected and will experience no devaluation.
So if a large group changes max_coin and nothing else then the principles will allow for the new group to exit as a non-BTC entity?
I doubt that bro. Mob rules. You lose. You have a lot to learn my friend.
Over.
I'm not sure what you mean by "principles", "allow", "exit" or "non-BTC entity". Perhaps you can re-phrase?
The upshot is this, however: If you change the protocol, it doesn't matter how many people are on board with you, all you've done it create a competing cryptocurrency.
And that's cool! Competition is good. Bitcoins users will still be unaffected, however, the same as they are unaffected by Litecoin's different protocol, or ppCoin's different protocol.
Of course you don't. Read here:
http://bitcoin.org/en/about-us
"© Bitcoin Project 2009–2013 Released under the MIT license"
If no one owns it, who pays your hosting fees and domain registration? Jesus?
Over.
No one "owns" bitcoin. Bitcoin is a protocol that allows computers to talk about and verify transactions on a public ledger. That's it.
There are various software implementations of this protocol, but any implementation that doesn't follow the protocol to the letter does not have it transactions propagated or verified. Most implementations are open source. Some are not, I'm sure. Nothing about what they do or who "owns" the code effects the Bitcoin protocol.
What you have posted here is close to:
I'll say it again.
Man, you are DUMB. All the negative posts prove that you have no idea what you're talking about.
As I explained a few lines below, max_coin does not control the bitcoin limit, but the real limit for bitcoins does derive from the subsidy function, GetBlockValue() in main.cpp. And Saro explains correct.
W.C. Fields — 'If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.'
You guys try to spin this shit on a high technical level isn't going to work with me bro.
If you change max_coin it WILL deflate your currency. Period!
Over.
Of course you are entitled to have your own opinion. But that can in no way replace factual knowledge. It's you, who is trying to spin something here, without even comprehending the matter of the fact on a technical level. And just to be clear: I upvoted you - for citing W.C. Fields
"If you change max_coin it WILL deflate your currency. Period!"
As I explained above, modifications to the protocol will create a completely different cryptocurrency incompatible with the Bitcoin network, since transactions under the modified protocol will not be accepted.
If you can explain why you think this is not the case, I'd be very interested in hearing it, because that would be a major flaw and I should get out while I can. Can you?
Of course he can't explain it. Pretty obvious from his postings today and yesterday that he has little or no technical expertise and yet he has this long list of links trying to spread FUD on Bitcoin. Curious?
It automatically deflates once you hit max_coin. Like gold it is priced in 'legit' government currencies on each market not the other way around. It is simple math of concerning rates of growth for x/y where x is limited to growing to a max value. As long as x grows faster than y the bitcoin value appreciates. Once you hit max coin it depreciates as y keeps growing and x stays fixed. The central banks at that point if they really wanted to kill bitcoin they just need to embark on their own inverse QE equivalent into the market deflating its value to nothing by running the money printer and buying coins faster than retail can sell them unless I am misunderstanding something here they just need to set up a shell exchange and pump the dollars in to dillute the whole pool.
If you guys don't see what is coming the way the Central Banks are going to get into this game is when the standards are rewritten for the internet itself since standards for things like the communication layer i.e. IP were written in mind as the internet being a communication network and it has since evolved into a distribution network. Same thing will happen with the transport layers i.e. tcp/udp to deal with encryption issues. They are behind the 8-ball but probably that is on purpose so the kinks can be worked out in the wild aka the 'real' reason for the development of crypto-currencies like bitcoin. Cat and mouse game. Swfit system goes the way of the dinosaur also once this happens. Call it IPcoin or Unicoin for arguments sakes. It just becomes part of the overall TCP-IP protocol.
That is how they will go after the crypto-currency market and then crush the competition at the same time without having to outlaw it.
As for the Federal Reserve buying up all the bitcoins with endlessly printed money, see this discussion from last year:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=74349.0
As for the creation of new underlying IP protocols that will facilitate GovCoin, perfect surveillance or any other NWO fantasy, who knows... They can try.
But Bitcoin doesn't need IP protocol to work. And in the sea of new non-governement protocols that would emerge in the face of your totalitarian fantasy, I'm sure bitcoin would find a new home.
Dewey is such an idiot he makes Bernanke look like a genius.
Really, do you actually think before posting, or do you just have some boilerplate crazy in your paste buffer at all times?
Typically here on The Hedge we gravitate away from the ad hominem attack. Don't get me wrong, some like a hard punch but ad hominem turns it into an infantile punch and will sometimes negate your entire argument.
I know you green horns don't like school but we're here to help.
Over.
shill
So, you can say "the max_coin value in the header file" and that's just fine. And they say "the subsidy function, GetBlockValue() in main.cpp" and that is "high technical level" bullshit?
Nice double standard Bing.
You must speed read, I think he typed more than that McCoy, but I'll let you slide on your interpretation.
Over.
Maybe you can't print it, but what will stop Wall St from creating derivitives around it? Would have nearly the same effect as Fed printing, would it not?
They already are.
The Twinklevosses filed an amended S-1 last month.
Over.
Fundamentally, when it comes to manipulation, BTC is no better or worse than gold.
If you can manipulate the price of gold in a particular way, you can do the same with BTC, and vice versa.
This is actually a pretty interesting question. And no one really knows the answer about what will happen.
It is different than gold, because the underlying units are all fully accounted in the public domain. We know how many coins are at each address, we know how many are being produced and by who. Right now if you want to short bitcoins, you have to borrow them and sell them, evenutally needing to rebuy them and repay the loan.
I think when shorting becomes more widely available to market participants, we will see some Masters of the Universe attempt a Big Dump to try to break it. I think that will lead to some massive short squeezes that will show those chastened Masters that they will have to develop some news dirty tricks. What those are is not very clear.....
If it's limited by alogs, and algos are basically the only thing trading the markets, and algos get their info from 'reading' headlines or 'hearing' bullshit out of the mouths of lunatic sociopaths to make those trades...see where this is going.
Another words, it's not limited.
I still trust face to face communications with carbon based beings more than the silicon ghosts.
It is limited. Look here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/main.h
In Line 177 you find: "int64_t GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64_t nFees);"
From this subsidy function derives a real limit to bitcoins. After 210,000 blocks, the subsidy was right-shifted by 1 bit in binary, and will continue to be right-shifted by 1 bit in binary each 210,000 blocks until it reaches zero.
These guys are talking through their ass, Bearwagon. The goal is to slash and burn, not to learn.
Thanks for posting something real.
Bitcoin can be infinitely divided, so there is no real limit. All world currencies have a limit on the division of the main unit.
Bitcoin is a virtual pyramid scheme.
Bitcoins can be divided to 8 decimal places. It's possible that the displayed limit could be raised in the future to allow smaller denominations, but that isn't "making more" money.
If the smallest gold coin available was previously a 1/10th ounce coin, and a company started selling 1/20th ounce coins, does that mean they created new gold?
It's going to be so convenient when companies figure out how easy it is to price goods in 1/20000th of a bitcoin!
Get in early boys this stable alternative currency is going to the moon!*
*Cognitive dissonance
Are pennies harder to "price goods" in than dollars?
I expect people will eventually start pricing things in Satoshi (the smallest unit) and BTC clients will be modified to show your account balance in Satoshi as well.
Yep, like I'm buying silver at .05 BTC an ounce, or mBTC which is already being used. Not that hard for someone with two brain cells to fire off.
@adr
Ever hear of Zeno's paradox? Or logic? Or not being a complete fucking moron?
I'll give you a minute or two to google a bit, so you can recover from going full retard.
So code can't change ?
Finite - amount of gold on Earth
Infinite - How many bitcoins can be mined at a flick of the finger (and how many can be extinguished as well).
Sorry dude...not buying it. In my mind, the probabiliy of having a Bitcoin wallet confiscated is far greater than having my bullion confiscated. For me it's not about making money...but KEEPING it. There are far better ways to make money than buying Bitcoins and hoping they survive.
Bitcoin is many things all rolled into one. Perhaps overlooked is that Bitcoin is really about Doing Business (exchanging value) outside of the Central Banker's system. Possibly the best transaction system thus far, and it is decentralized so there are no obvious targets to attack. It is 100% reserve money, so participants need to acquire Bitcoin if they are to transact with it, much like gold. This requires some store of wealth. In order for Bitcoin to be useful for worldwide business-to-business and personal transactions, the total market cap (realized as the price of a Bitcon) has to rise manyfold from here in order to carry that load.
The code can change, but it doesn't matter, because the code isn't Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a protocol used to send and validate transactions in a public ledger. All transactions are verified by all participants, who have all agreed to the protocol in question. Any transactions outside the already established protocol will be rejected.
So yes, you can change a piece of software to insert whatever transactions you want onto the network, but no one else on the network will listen to those transactions.
The number of bitcoins are finite.
Yup, it's like saying "I hate typing HTTP:// From now on I'm going to only type HTP:/ cuz it's quicker."
Well in so doing you just stepped outside of the Web and it's gone on without you.
Awesome analogy. I always wanted to use * instead of @ when emailing, so I'll start my own email-ness. Who wants to join? No one? Well OK then.
But they are directly linked to something that can be printed out of thin air. Thus, they are unlimited, as well.
this is false. The amount of bitcoins is limited by an arbitrary convention. Technically, it would require to change 2-3 lines of code to modify the maximum limit.
Bitcoin network is centrally controlled by a small team of developpers. My guess is if they were to make a drastic change such as changing the maximum amount of bitcoin, a small minority of people, those who understand Bitcoin, would be very vocal about it but the large mass of sheeple would not even noticed the change and accept it.
It is at least not false unless those lines are modified. And that ain't that easy to do. Each node on the network checks that the subsidy claimed is not more than what they calculate in the function, when somebody produces a new block. The network would reject it, if someone would try to create more than is allowed. So, if someone tries to inflate the currency by creating more, everyone else would have to agree to it. That's why the limit by an arbitrary convention is in fact quite effective.
That change would cause a blockchain fork, essentially creating a brand new currency running parallel to Bitcoin. Bitcoin users would be unaffected.
@lano1106
My new rules of English state that you have to give me $1,000 dollars for every 'a' you use in your posts.
Please remit $30,000 in bitcoin to my address:
1JkKn478ivR6iux2pUCjsvqhguPywP3dFH
What? No? Well, guess what, arbitrarily changing Bitcoin's rules is much MUCH more difficult with millions of people in the world running it.
So please, stop being a useless fucking cunt. Thanks.
You guys get so defensive when we poke holes in your design.
It's for your own good but you don't understand that.
Before you release this code further, you should go back to the drawing board and implement something truly revolutionary.
You and I both know it, when you 'rush to market' and are the first one's there, you make mistakes. It happens, man. It's a product of that process. The Agile methodology, adopt it.
Don't get all butthurt, it's a sign of your immaturity, roll with the punches, go fix it up all nice and pretty, then come back and show us what you have.
We'll be waiting.
Over.
ps. don't bring the tired bullshit, break some real new ground. Innovate, keep me safe and secure, don't fucking hide for christ sakes, be proud and stand behind your product, but most importantly INNOVATE! and I'll throw money at it. No problem.
Oh, and one additional suggestion. Hide the complexity behind a layer of easy.
By the time Bitcoin's innards are hidden by an "idiocracy" level of interface, it will be going for $10,000 a coin or more.
I'm not butthurt, I have this wonderful cushion of thousands of percent in yields to sit on, my GOD is it comfortable.
Don't preach innovate to me, you've shown nothing but complete ignorance in every aspect of understanding Bitcoin. If you were willing to do just SOME homework, I might talk to you - but you know what? I'd rather just keep making money while your paper tokens turn into toilet paper.
Don't forget to flush, moron.
$400/BTC
suck it, bing
Because no government decrees that it be a currency. Look up the definition of fiat.
Right. An algo does. That's much better.
An algo does. That's much better.
YES, IT IS!
LEARN!
TEACH! instead of ape-ing around the place. We're waiting.
Over.
Man, this will not stand! I tried honestly to teach a few basics about the technicals of Bitcoin (and, by the way: I don't hold them, not even one satoshi.). And what was your reply? Let me cite you:
"You guys try to spin this shit on a high technical level isn't going to work with me bro."
Now calling for teachings doesn't fit with that. Better stick to binge-drinking.
Dear BeerWagon,
I dismissed your rhetoric as just that. You are wrong.
I'm trying to see if the Ape can add value or just drag knuckles so don't get jealous.
Over.
You dismiss a valid argument as simple rhetoric. That's deeply dishonest, and the question is not if I am wrong or not, but what the facts are, and you just don't seem to know them. That should at least keep you from judging those who know better. As I said: You have a right to have your own opinion - but that doesn't justify to dismiss my arguments as "wrong", just because they don't suit you. My arguments are fact based, so please base your refusal on facts, too. Are the facts wrong? I don't think so. Am I wrong? That's none of your business and not the point of this conversation! You get me?
I think his goal at this point is to not understand, by any means necessary. You can lead a horse to water, pearls before swine, etc.
It's probably best to forget about convincing him. Instead, realize that calmly responding to his willfully-ignorant statements, misconceptions, and outright lies with facts helps convince others who might be reading.
Yes, you're right. I don't plan to convince anyone - I just try to spread knowledge. Hard enough in a foreign language. But if just one reader has gotten a clue because of my efforts - it's been worth it.
@Bearwagon
Don't bother, Flying-On-Bunghole-Fumes can't even comprehend how a car works, much less Bitcoin. I find it is a useful litmus test for people who are either too fragile to adapt, or too stupid to understand.
He's clearly both.
- Isn't readily printable
- Isn't controlled by a government (it's distributed, by design)
- You can't pay your taxes with it
It is a fiat currency. But it's not "just another fiat currency" because it's not centrally controlled, so someone like Benny B can't just hit the print button ad infinitum. The main problem I see with it, is that it doesn't pass the test, "if it wasn't used for currency, would it still be desirable?" The answer to that quesiton is "no". If Gold wasn't used as a currency, would it still be desirable? Yes, people would still value it for use in jewelry and electronics. I do own some BTC, but as a speculation/novelty. If the lights go out, it will be hard to barter with. Although if you have to flee a country, it would be easier to "smuggle" BTC out, than say gold or silver. :)
In essence you are your own bank.
Simple.
It is NOT fiat - it is money. If only people could identify the properties of money, then all the confusion would go away.
When dollars were backed by gold, they were still fiat - because they were reciepts for money, reciepts can be printed at will by the issuing 'authority' - now they are in even a worse state because they are not even backed by gold, but can still of course be printed to oblivion.
The difference between a currency and money is simple, money is limited in supply, is difficult or impossible to counterfeit, it is durable. BTC is money - it does not need to be backed by ANYTHING. Saying BTC is not backed by anything is as stupid as saying gold isn't backed by anything - money doesn't have any requirement for anything backing it - it is not a reciept, it is not a money token - it is money.
If you think BTC is not durable, perhaps this comparison might be worth something. BTC is valuable information. The bible is also valuable information, and has been preserved for almost 2,000 years - important and valuable imformation stands the test of time, it is durable.
Straw man argument! I never said the problem with BTC was that it isn't backed by anything. Please reread my post. Thanks!
PS Dollars meet your definition of money:
Money is limited in supply->dollars are in limited supply (even if the supply keeps growing)
Difficult or impossible to counterfeit (you have to be a central banker to counterfeit dollars, so it is difficult to counterfeit)
it is durable (dollars last a while)
I'm not making a straw man argument, I am responding to the usual criticisms of BTC as being 'fiat' - and 'backed by nothing' - which usually comes right on the heels of the first statement.
Your assertion that dollars are somehow of 'limited supply', or 'hard to counterfeit' is pure nonesense and you know it. Limited supply means the supply is actually limited - meaning adding to the supply is time consuming and difficult, and there is some finite limit - there is nothing difficult about hitting a few computer keys to add a trillion dollars.
There is NO limit to dollars, they can add three zeroes to every note anytime they like. Also your assertion that counterfeiting is difficult because only central bankers can do it also completely disingenuous. Central bankers are the ones who counterfeit the dollar, and they are doing it at a massive rate, they dont need any help, but as it happens - through fractional reserve banking, every private bank is also counterfeiting dollars with every loan, and every credit card purchase.
BTC is of the most limited supply, it has in fact a finite supply, and a low flow to stock ratio - it is absolutely limited. Also - nobody is counterfeiting BTC - not anywhere.
@Amagnonx
Practically speaking, I concede you're right about dollars not being limited. I don't want to argue about dollars, I'm sure we both agree that centrally controlled fiat non-backed currency is poop.
I like bitcoin because it is decentralized/difficult to confiscate (impossible if you do it right). I also don't think its manipulated like the paper gold markets. I also agree that BTC is limited, and that there will never be more than 21 million bitcoins, and that they are "discovered/mined/whatever" at a known rate.
I don't like bitcoin, because if it stops being used as money/currency (I know you don't consider it currency), people wouldn't desire/value them. If people stop using gold as money, people still value it for its use in jewerly/electronics. Bitcoin also relies on 50% of the miners being honest (and possibly as high as 66%-75% of miners being honest), BTC guild controls 28% right now, GHash.IO controls 25%, if they colluded, they could take over the blockchain to add or delete transactions.
So because bitcoin doesn't have non-monetary use, I don't consider it money, the way I consider gold money. I consider bitcoin fiat, because it's value only comes from it being valued as a store of value, whearas gold is valued as a store of value, but also, because you can use it in computers, and in jewelry. Bitcoin could go to 0, if people stop using it as money/currency (it isn't being used as money/currency right now as it is), gold would not. I'm also concerned that bitcoin relies on over 50% of miners being honest. I rely on my bullion dealer to be honest, but once I know I have real gold, I don't have to worry about it being inflated away, or a blockchain getting compromised.
@Sonic
Thanks for the clear opinions. I appreciate where you are coming from.
I do think that Bitcoin does have potential use value outside of money/currency. It has to do with contracts. (The full article is here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Contracts )
The Bitcoin blockchain does a kind of digital magic in that it both shows information but blocks certain kinds of access to the same information (it's actually cryptographic magic). The capacity of making things public yet still privately owned can be leveraged to cover the management and ownership of other kinds of agreements and information. You could, for example, use the Bitcoin blockchain to create an open virtual property registry, with clear ownership chains and rights of transfer. This is why I tend to think of Bitcoin as a general purpose, programmable "value" protocol. (implementing these aspects of the protocol is still work to be done).
It's not controlled by any state, for one thing...
"How is Bitcoin not just another fiat currency?"
Because nobody is forcing you to transact in Bitcoin unlike government currency. Everyone who owns Bitcoin wants to own Bitcoin.
The fact that no one is forcing you to buy BTC doesn't mean it isn't a fiat currency. Just as if the government forced you to own gold, that wouldn't make gold a fiat currency.
The Feds are looking at fraud within the Bitcoin community - bye, bye!
That sounds eerily bass- ackwards ... ;-)
TPTB created it.
The emotional bitcoin nerds don't seem to understand this.
TPTB created it.
LOL... and you know because space aliens told you?
Get a fucking grip.
He has as much proof that you had for your, "Chinese are buying BTC" statement.
Watch this website for any amount of time then come back and tell me who YOU think are buying the bitcoins http://fiatleak.com/
"TPTB created it."
1. Provide evidence.
2. If so, so what?
#2 If you want to include DARPA and the military then, yes.... TPTB did in fact have a role in helping create the internet as well as the encryption used in Bitcoin.
So what? The military researchers also helped create thousands of other things we take for granted in everyday life.
Yeah, Satoshi was a Fed who installed malicious code into the Bitcoin! Seriously, just stop commenting on shit you have no clue about! The engineer building the bridge is not interested in your opinions on what steel to use. The Boeing engineer is not interested in your opinions on jet engines. The pathologist is not interested in your opinions on viruses. So why do you think the technical community should be interested in your opinion?
Sell your PMs while they're still worth any bitcoin.
Keep your PMs.
Sell your fiat for some BTC.
Ben's got it covered
"Doubled in the last two weeks"
Yeah, that sounds stable.
LOL... if you had listened to a few people here, you'd be singing a very different song.
Gains aren't real until you sell.
True, but neither are losses.
Trade back into fiat and I personally guarantee you a 100% loss.
On a long enough timeline, the market value of every fiat currency goes to zero.
"Yeah, that sounds stable."
Sounds to me like global fiat being sucked into a virtual black hole. Music to my ears.
Bitcoin is to today's market what Gold was to the rest of times market.
The reason is, it's perceived as not manipulated in the way gold is.
Therefore, it could go to insane heights so long as the printing goes on, and the other markets behave the way they have been.
In my humble opinion that is.
Therefore, it could go to insane heights so long as the printing goes on
You had me.....right up till the time you used the word.....insane.
All the people using BC are going Weimar!
Gonna buy that dream home in Zimbabwe.
please don't start charging for laughs. i got bitcoin if you do!
I got 50 trillion in local currancy I can loan you.
One issue with bitcoins is that as they go higher, no one is going to sell them and use them for their intended purpose. But prospective buyers will also get sticker shock. The btc powers that be need to start creating official mBTC and micro tags so that new buyers will buy and others will trade. Satoshis is is a bit of a lame name. I read that the winklevoss twins forecast a $400B market. I'm thinking about offloading more gold and putting it into btc.
Yeah, I read that article about those too.
Bitcoin still can rise... and I really don't see it in a great bubble as many think.
Though it got its problem... Bitcoin will never be Currency unless they use it for trading, but everyone only wants to accumulate it.
People believe something is very bubbly because Its price is very high... but Bitcoin exists only since what 2009? 2008? Of course it doubles... and it doubles hard!
It's only the beginning of a currency...and it takes a whole lot of time to find out its value
@mijev
I think you'll find the opposite happening. Sure, if you're below your "fuck you" money number where you can walk away from all the annoying bullshit in life like having to work for someone - you'll be more cautious about spending, but once you meet or exceed that number -- the impetus to not spend isn't so large.
As your holdings grow in value, you're actually spending less of them as time goes on, so it would spur an effect that most economist retards can't grasp. Actual incentive to spread wealth versus the inflationary bullshit we put up with now eroding currencies around the world.
Pile right on in gentlemen; I and others like me will wait patiently with our silver and our gold.
You wake up one morning and yer BTC is worth 40% less. Then another 80%.
Then news comes out of a hack or a rival e-currency and Bitcoin is over.
Step right up.
And then again...Gold dropped very hard... and the interest rates can be held down for another few years...
Gold will tank ... I think.
In a few years it might be worth accumulating it again, but not now. We will definently see prices under 1000 and 800 - easy
I'd listen to him.....he has 11 weeks of experience!
Nah, better listen to this Gold guy... It's way better to accumulate lots of Gold which will be woth 500$ in 2 years.
You know... back in history people too believed in rising Gold prices... and it fell...and fell...and fell.
In history there was not much but Gold to invest in! A save haven for everybody - But today It's different - There are a whole lot of more things...
Think about it
No offence man, It's just my believe
My gold is still worth four times what I bought it for......in the last 5000 years it has never gone to zero.
Start running.....when you get back.....I'll be sitting right here.
You know... back in history people too believed in rising Gold prices... and it fell...and fell...and fell.
Define "back in history". In 1971 1 oz of gold cost $35. Now it costs $1,275, that is an increase of 3,542%.
If you go from the 1971 price of $35 up to the peak of $1,900. That is an increase of 5,328%.
Yes, if you bought gold at it's absolute peak price of ~$1,900, and sold today, you would have lost around 33%.
You could also say that if you bought BTC at $.01, it's now up to $400, or about 4 million percent.
Duplicate.
Let's define it - sorry.
Let's say 1980s.
Of course I could say it^^... I just wondered why everyone is so keen on Gold nowadays. It is clear to everybody that the interest will be low and the market will be flooded with money.
If it's worth buying Gold it's not today - it's in a few years from now. In Addition people should be more open minded to other things and stop believing about Gold being a big great solution.
Times change - Why should Gold go upwards so much in a time like this?
Chinese millionares invest in Walnut shells, Digital Currencies are forming, we have a huge amount of platinum, people are starving nowadays....
Why should Gold be the one metal that will go up during a crisis??? I just think that Gold as a save haven finds its end with new technolgy in a new world.
Maybe I'm wrong - maybe not
You're right the way I see it Hongcha.
I'd much rather have gold and/or silver than bitcoin any day.
Before I went bankrupt, I had a lot of silver and I felt rich in a timeless way.
I doubt that I could ever feel the same way about any crypto-currency.
Essentially it's the same as a real woman in your bed, as oposed to a computer and an image (porno).
I wish the real women looked more like their digital porno counterparts. And bitcoins are easier to hide in the event of a divorce.
I do not understand how you go bankrupt AND lose your silver. Did you sell it, or make your lender aware that you had it as an asset? Why did you not take it boating?
It's good to have patience in the PM arena cause the last bear market for gold from 1980-2001 coincided with a time of massive debt creation and currency dilution. Efficient markets working their magic I suppose. OR Maybe gold does not yet have a real price discovery mechanism?
Perhaps bitcoin, not belonging primarily to government entities is free to exercise true price discovery? Who cares, I speculated with an amount of money I felt comfortable losing and my risk is being rewarded... Just trying to decide when to buy some more gold with my quadrupled (and counting) speculation.
I did enjoy the article on SD the other day where someone valued BTC at 700x the current price of gold. I think that's probably a bit like all the articles they run about "Imminent COMEX default"... but shouldn't hurt my position any.
Hongcha,
No doubt BTC is a riskier investment than gold at the moment, and with greater risk comes greater reward. The Bitcoin network has been around for 3 years and has been reviewed by leading security experts and countless hackers. At nominal $5 bln market cap, cracking Bitcoin would be the ultimate "I was that guy" for any hacker. It hasn't happened yet and the risk decreases with every passing day. I'm able to sleep reasonably well at night even though a portion of my wealth is in BTC.
Bitcoin is one of the very few industries where there is genuine innovation and job creation. And all it took was to have little or no government intervention. Those fuckers kill everything they touch. Could it be the next X industry? Digital currencies, yes. Will it be bitcoin or another iteration? We'll see. With the Chinese doing the bulk of the buying I'm interested in how much the fed can influence and manipulate but nothing will surprise me.
Exactly right!
There is a whole bitcoin ecosystem evolving right now. People who use bitcoin have stopped caring about fiat.
Really?
What jobs are being created because of Bitcoin that did not exist before Bitcoin.
The people who created Bitcoin didn't do it as a job.
Do I seriously have to answer that dumb as fuck ass question? If you are a coder with crypto skills you can name your own price. Or a hardware engineer designing ATM gear. The btc ATM didn't exist before btc. There are 100/s of millions of VC money pouring into btc. Stop being a retard.
always doesn't reason is just living up to his nickname.
What a fossil.
I have a few dollars of credit at Skype. I was going to make a Skype call and the words I read are 'Skype home unavailable'.
I try to download the new Skype, but no dice.
Bitcoin home unavailable will be words you will read, it's just a matter of time.
No thanks. Silver dimes are nice bitcoins and some are worth more than Bit(thedust)coin.
...Peer to peer...
"Bitcoin home unavailable" is as unlikely as finding no seeders and leechers for the data "Spiderman Movie" in Emule in the year of 2010
You might make it for a year or two until .gov mandates this new Internet protocol:
http://named-data.net
Then your packets will be wiped clean. Hostel targets identified by their content.
Or .gov friendly targets identified for taxation and tracking.
Over.
Backscatter from the Data Plane --- Threats to Stability and Security in Information-Centric Networking
http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.4778
How do they know, what is in the packets? Never heard of encryption?
Ever hear of dumbcryption?
Its encryption that dummies think can never be decrypted.
I see that you use dumbcryption.
Over.
Running-On-Bunghole-Fumes is just getting dizzy from all the methane. Hey man, let the old gal get back to her bingo game, you're crimping her style.
The wise holder of decentralized denationalized currency will hold in it's portfolio both metallic denationalized money and digital denationalized money. Risk and reward both are better diversified in this scenario.
I read that people can buy bitcoin, or parts of a bitcoin, without downloading the block chain.
Doesn't this defeat the purpose of Bitcoin?
If a person has a Bitcoin, but not the block chain, then their Bitcoin will be declared worthless because the transaction won't sync, correct?
Are people really downloading the complete block chain at the Bitcoin ATM?
It would be extremely easy to sell fake Bitcoin to unsuspecting momentum chasing investors. Most of the new investors probably have no idea what they are investing in.
It also seems to be very easy for a small group of people to influence the price. Yes the price needs to be validated by the block chain, but the price moves over the past few weeks don't look stable. With limited quantity it would be very easy to bid up the price on the exchange. Like the stock market nobody really cares about corruption as long as the value keeps going up.
Today there are several options that you don't have to download the Blockchain fully!
Bitcoins won't be worthless.
The problem here is, that...the whole point of Bitcoin is that i should be decentralized. But the Blockchains are getting bigger and bigger... and someday you can't store it anymore. So the Chain must be stored at a central place....
Developers are working on this one.
As for the exchanges. There are several exchanges that are manipulating the prices of Bitcoin day by day - That's why you need trusted exchanges and verified users.
It's not like Bitcoin hasn't got any flaws but developers are working day by day to make it better.
The blockchain is a complete record of every coin that was ever mined or transferred since the beginning of bitcoin. Having the blockchain on hand allows you to personally verify that transactions are on the up and up ("When Account ABC sent 3 bitcoins to Account XYZ, I can verify that Account ABC had those coins to send."), but it isn't strictly necessary. If you don't keep your own version of the blockchain, however, you are essentially trusting a third party to accurately send you the current balances of accounts upon request, which of course adds risk.
Me, I'm the paranoid sort. I prefer to have my own copy of the blockchain on hand.
EDIT:
Also note that they don't have to trust the ATM itself. People without the blockchain on their phone are not getting their account data from the ATM, but from whichever third party provides the wallet service. So the process look like this:
1. The ATM will send out a transaction on the network transferring the coins.
2. The network as a whole will validate the transaction ("mining") and the blockchain will get a new block added.
3. The users phone will request their account balance from their wallet service.
4. The wallet service will send over their current account balance as shown in the blockchain
The weakest link in this chain is the wallet service, since they could decide to send over a fake account balance. However, in practice they would be fools to try anything, since any discrepancy between the data reported to the users and the data in the blockchain could be easily detected by anyone.
Right, the wallet is the weakest link. That's why one would want a software wallet, not a web-service. Look here: http://bitcoin.org/en/choose-your-wallet
The safest wallet is a paper wallet or brain wallet, since it does not need to be stored on any computer. Generation needs only an off-line computer.
Just look up the public bitcoin address with your bitcoins on a block chain explorer website like blockchain.info.The only thing you need is a public bitcoin address and your secret key. You can generate both on an offline computer and write it down on a piece of paper. You only need to tell the seller of bitcoins your public bitcoin address.
POP goes the Baloon Dog
We're still arguing about this? It didn't go to zero last time, it won't go to zero this time, and it is not going away, get over it.
Go go cuda cores!
These fucking morons will still be bitching about it as it surges past $1,000 too. Its like watching a cage of animals drink their own piss and eat their own shit. Disgusting and unbelievable.
SUKI (tm) RELIGION doesn't accept Bitcoins. 'nuff said.
Bitcoin... US Dollars... Euros... just varied aspects of the pretend market.
All fiat money systems are either based on "trust" or "extortion". The rise of Bitcoin is due largely to the lack of "trust" in the monetary policies of nations and bankers. But where is the store of "value"? Bitcoin cannot be touched or physically traded. On exchange it is only worth it's perception. It is dependent on the internet. It can disappear with a few keystrokes. It is usless to barter in an emergency should information systems go down. Am I missing anthing here? Great idea to create an alternate to the sinking greenback but I am trust challenged these past few years. Holding some physical silver or gold seems to make sense. The investment markets make a "Nantucket Sleigh Ride" look like a walk in the park.
I want my cheese back from the rat bastards that created this mess over the past decades.
"All fiat money systems are either based"
Objection! The success of a currency is based on the size of the military that defends the currency Object. Even Zimbabwe has a military.
Where's bitCoin's? Without it, it's a Bit Con.
Over.
Agreed - size of military matters. That is where the "extortion" concept comes to life...followed by theft. One can hardly envy Zimbabwe's efforts in terms of their runaway currency devaluation however. Don't think it can't happen here... Thinking about filling my garage with toilet paper. Long COSTCO?
Bitcoin is defended by a really big wall called SHA-256.
Big wall to you, trivial to Intel.
Over.
Evidence?
B T C
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304672404579186223105265440
Former Morgan Stanley equity strategist Gerard Minack notes the U.S. Gini index, a gauge of income disparities that is also at a record, tracks with measures of political polarization. So he worries inequality could give rise to more political dysfunction that risks damaging the economy.
Another concern is that rising inequality creates financial instability. Raghuram Rajan, the economist now heading India's central bank, has posited that the credit bubble in the early part of the last decade was a consequence of inequality. In his telling, stagnating incomes led middle-and lower-income families to borrow excessively to raise standards of living.
But if inequality has risen to a point in which investors need to be worried, any reversal might also hurt.
One reason U.S. corporate profit margins are at records is the share of revenue going to wages is so low. Another is companies are paying a smaller share of profits on taxes. An economy where income and wealth disparities are smaller might be healthier. It would also leave less money flowing to the bottom line, something that will grab fund managers' attention.
According to Macquarie Research:
https://app.box.com/s/kazx1rawh3pxptn555c3
The Bold and the Brave
- In the current circumstances, it is becoming more likely that the successful reflation of the major economies will require some bold and brave policy initiatives that build on the current unconventional monetary policy measures. Not surprisingly, several clues to the way forward come from policy experiences in the Great Depression (notably the US and UK).
- Indeed, the Economist notes that lessons from Depression scholars like Ben Bernanke and Lars Svensson highlight several key ingredients to a monetary policy solution; namely:
- announce an inflation or price stability target that guarantees a period of above-average inflation;
- depreciate the exchange rate; and
- support the depreciation, to the extent necessary, through direct intervention in foreign exchange markets (ie: print money and buy foreign currencies and assets).
- Interestingly, the underlying strategy revolves around the focussed pursuit of inflation, not in beggar-thy-neighbour competitive exchange rate devaluations as many continue to fear as a consequence of ongoing QE monetary accommodation.
- In the event, the clear and present trap for the major central banks in the current environment is one of ‘role stereotyping’ by financial markets that is the result of over 20 years of policy success in targeting inflation. It will take some very bold and brave monetary policy initiatives to convince markets that these ‘independent’ institutions are prepared to do whatever it takes to sustainably reflate their economies.
Personally, I prefer tulips.
I prefer smart people, but hey, this is ZeroHedge, not mensa.
Wow, you're such a brilliant young sexy man, so elite and powerful. We're all silenced by you presence.
Over.
At least I'm not cribbing silly communication protocols in my posts like you. What's next "FLASH - MISS AMERICA AND ALL SHIPS AT SEA!!"?
How many goldbugs does it take to change a tulip bulb metaphor?