Gyroscopic Investing

Spikes in trading is very creepy man. Check the history of these 2 months. I lowest touched point was 1,456 SP.

Jack Jones wrote:

dualstow wrote:I agree, but wasn't that the original idea for bitcoin?
Not for investing or hoarding, but for commerce?

Yeah. Unless the Bitcoin devs get their act together, Bitcoin will become a clearing system for large players. So you'll hold your bitcoin at a site like Coinbase, and if I use that bitcoin to pay you, another Coinbase customer who owns a coffee shop, that transaction will never actually go on the bitcoin blockchain; Coinbase will just make note of the differences in our accounts there. Due to high fees, the real bitcoin blockchain will only be used for large transactions.

Doesn't the world have plenty of ways to pay for a coffee extremely efficiently? I love bitcoin more than anyone but I use my credit card 100x more.

What the world does not have is an uncensorable digital money.

Sure it would (will?!) be nice to do micropayment transaction of $.00001 in bitcoin real time to view an article or listen to a song. Its not out of the question.

But the priority of many of the core bitcoin developers is bitcoin-as-a-settlement-layer. Then building second layers on top (coinbase sure, but also other networks like lightning network, rootstock, etc).

You can always build a censorable layer on top of an uncensorable one. But you cannot build uncensorable transactions on top of a censorable layer.

Bitcoin's most impactful original idea was uncensorable money.

bitcoininthevp wrote:Bitcoin's most impactful original idea was uncensorable money.

Could you explain why you think Bitcoin is "uncensorable"?

Perhaps I am just too imaginative, but it seems to me if I were in the government I could come up with a number of effective ways to "censor" it.

I get the sneaking suspicion that once Bitcoin becomes sufficiently large enough, the US Government will make it officially illegal. This may not stop its use entirely, but it will almost entirely halt its use by corporate entities as an acceptable form of payment, which would be devastating enough.

bitcoininthevp wrote:But the priority of many of the core bitcoin developers is bitcoin-as-a-settlement-layer. Then building second layers on top (coinbase sure, but also other networks like lightning network, rootstock, etc).

Rootstock, chicken stock, I don't know. It just seems like bitcoin was going to be a neat medium of exchange for the masses, and now it's something clever MIT students mined and/or hoarded early, like getting in early on a pyramid scheme.

(edited grammar)

eufo wrote:I get the sneaking suspicion that once Bitcoin becomes sufficiently large enough, the US Government will make it officially illegal. This may not stop its use entirely, but it will almost entirely halt its use by corporate entities as an acceptable form of payment, which would be devastating enough.

The US Government is figuring out how to sink its teeth into it, so I have doubts that it will become illegal:

http://fortune.com/2017/07/10/bitcoin-irs-coinbase/

Jack Jones wrote:

eufo wrote:I get the sneaking suspicion that once Bitcoin becomes sufficiently large enough, the US Government will make it officially illegal. This may not stop its use entirely, but it will almost entirely halt its use by corporate entities as an acceptable form of payment, which would be devastating enough.

The US Government is figuring out how to sink its teeth into it, so I have doubts that it will become illegal:

http://fortune.com/2017/07/10/bitcoin-irs-coinbase/

That's just the beginning... trust me.

LC475 wrote:

bitcoininthevp wrote:Bitcoin's most impactful original idea was uncensorable money.

Could you explain why you think Bitcoin is "uncensorable"?

Perhaps I am just too imaginative, but it seems to me if I were in the government I could come up with a number of effective ways to "censor" it.

I think the onus is on you to explain your ideas of how the government would censor bitcoin.

This might be a good place to start: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses

Some from that list that come to mind that a government might be able to undertake:

Attacker has a lot of computing power
Denial of Service (DoS) attacks
Breaking the cryptography
Attacking all users

Or maybe you had another?

eufo wrote:I get the sneaking suspicion that once Bitcoin becomes sufficiently large enough, the US Government will make it officially illegal. This may not stop its use entirely, but it will almost entirely halt its use by corporate entities as an acceptable form of payment, which would be devastating enough.

Totally agree that this would be devastating to the the price in the short term.

But there are 200 other governments in the world of which most of the world's population belong to. Maybe they would have a use for it? Maybe the people in the US that ignore laws would also still find a use for it? (this might be also be a large % of bitcoin users according to my research)

Maybe the USG banning bitcoin would actually make it more appealing for its governmental rivals as well?

dualstow wrote:

bitcoininthevp wrote:But the priority of many of the core bitcoin developers is bitcoin-as-a-settlement-layer. Then building second layers on top (coinbase sure, but also other networks like lightning network, rootstock, etc).

Rootstock, chicken stock, I don't know. It just seems like bitcoin was going to be a neat medium of exchange for the masses, and now it's something clever MIT students mined and/or hoarded early, like getting in early on a pyramid scheme.

(edited grammar)

Bitcoin as a store of value AND "a neat medium of exchange for the masses" is still not out of the question. Perhaps once scaling issues are worked out (if successful) that can still be a use case for bitcoin.

Re hoarding: http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/im ... -have-any/

Jack Jones wrote:

eufo wrote:I get the sneaking suspicion that once Bitcoin becomes sufficiently large enough, the US Government will make it officially illegal. This may not stop its use entirely, but it will almost entirely halt its use by corporate entities as an acceptable form of payment, which would be devastating enough.

The US Government is figuring out how to sink its teeth into it, so I have doubts that it will become illegal:

http://fortune.com/2017/07/10/bitcoin-irs-coinbase/

Some people think that in order for bitcoin to mature and success a few governments need to ban it first.

I have no illusions, personally, that this would be horrible for the price of bitcoin in USD. But it doesn't necessarily mean the end.

bitcoininthevp wrote:

LC475 wrote:

bitcoininthevp wrote:Bitcoin's most impactful original idea was uncensorable money.

Could you explain why you think Bitcoin is "uncensorable"?

Perhaps I am just too imaginative, but it seems to me if I were in the government I could come up with a number of effective ways to "censor" it.

I think the onus is on you to explain your ideas of how the government would censor bitcoin.
...
Or maybe you had another?

Oh, I am full of them, having seen the death of numerous digital currencies over the years (at this point, decades). Not all the autopsy reports are how-tos for bitcoin attacks.... but some are. But even without that historical background, all one needs is a relatively realistic and Machiavellian understanding of what power is and how it works.

It really doesn't even require very much imagination to think of ways the gov't could destroy bitcoin. But I'm not going to give them ideas. Maybe I've said too much already. If you can't come up with any yourself, well, maybe you have bought into the bitcoin sales pitch too thoroughly and need training in contrarian thinking?

But I think you can. Just give yourself 5 minutes.

But, hey, here is the bright side: just because they can doesn't mean they will. They haven't yet! It's possible they never will. The fact that they haven't shut down bitcoin yet may be an indication of the weakness (and decadence, and incompetence) of the regime.

bitcoininthevp wrote:

eufo wrote:I get the sneaking suspicion that once Bitcoin becomes sufficiently large enough, the US Government will make it officially illegal. This may not stop its use entirely, but it will almost entirely halt its use by corporate entities as an acceptable form of payment, which would be devastating enough.

Totally agree that this would be devastating to the the price in the short term.

I meant devastating to its maturing into a major world currency. The exchange rate has little to do with anything, in my opinion. Forex trading is something I could never stomach.

bitcoininthevp wrote:But there are 200 other governments in the world of which most of the world's population belong to. Maybe they would have a use for it? Maybe the people in the US that ignore laws would also still find a use for it? (this might be also be a large % of bitcoin users according to my research)

Maybe the USG banning bitcoin would actually make it more appealing for its governmental rivals as well?

I have no doubt that certain nefarious groups and individuals enjoy the idea of Bitcoin and may continue its use regardless of governmental interference.

I doubt any government would really want the large use of Bitcoin in their own country, however. They want to control the printing of currency and then tax all of its transactions. Bitcoin flies in the face of that.

LC475 wrote: Oh, I am full of them, having seen the death of numerous digital currencies over the years (at this point, decades). Not all the autopsy reports are how-tos for bitcoin attacks.... but some are. But even without that historical background, all one needs is a relatively realistic and Machiavellian understanding of what power is and how it works.

It really doesn't even require very much imagination to think of ways the gov't could destroy bitcoin. But I'm not going to give them ideas. Maybe I've said too much already. If you can't come up with any yourself, well, maybe you have bought into the bitcoin sales pitch too thoroughly and need training in contrarian thinking?

But I think you can. Just give yourself 5 minutes.

But, hey, here is the bright side: just because they can doesn't mean they will. They haven't yet! It's possible they never will. The fact that they haven't shut down bitcoin yet may be an indication of the weakness (and decadence, and incompetence) of the regime.

You don't seem to know anything about the topic at hand yet are trying to seem like you do.

I think I have proven that I am willing to hear good points from all sides and respond thoughtfully. But your response is completely vapid.

eufo wrote: I meant devastating to its maturing into a major world currency. The exchange rate has little to do with anything, in my opinion. Forex trading is something I could never stomach.

I am unable to conceive of bitcoin that would be mature(ing) into a world currency but not also have a huge value (exchange rate).

bitcoininthevp wrote:Re hoarding: http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/im ... -have-any/

Interesting read. Damn that board looks young!

dualstow wrote:

bitcoininthevp wrote:Re hoarding: http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/im ... -have-any/

Interesting read. Damn that board looks young!

That's a really sad read. Pump and dump early adopters are the real winners here. Greedy fools will be the losers. I suppose that's the way with most things.

eufo wrote:

dualstow wrote:

bitcoininthevp wrote:Re hoarding: http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/im ... -have-any/

Interesting read. Damn that board looks young!

That's a really sad read. Pump and dump early adopters are the real winners here. Greedy fools will be the losers. I suppose that's the way with most things.

Everyone is trying to get the most happiness they can given their limited resources in life. So to me it is less about the greed being the differentiating attribute of winners and losers. We are all being greedy. So since greed isnt explanatory here, lets move on to your other points...

Re "pump and dump": For certain there are some individuals that are trying to pump the USD price of bitcoin up up up. And some of those are pumping for purposes of selling. But so what? Isnt that the case for any stock, bond, gold, business, restaurant, asset, book publisher, etc?

Re "early adopters are the real winners here": Early adopters are always the winners in a venture that is successful. But they are also the ones that took on the risk before there was any momentum around that venture. Microsoft investors in the early days? Harry Browne in his gold call in the 70s? Early adopters of ideas and investments reap the benefits of their risky call when it pays off.

I assume your argument to that point would be that early adopters will cash out at some point during a peak perhaps. Again, how is this different than anything else? Harry sold his gold after it went up dramatically (and thus how the PP came to be). People sell MSFT stock at peaks. That these early adopters are profiting from selling at peaks doesnt mean that gold or MSFT doesnt have value in the future.

These points do not have explanatory power. So we are left with the real question when determining the value of bitcoin or anything else:

To what degree will people perceive value/utility from this in the future?

This question can be used to explain why I perceive current (and future) value in gold, stocks and bitcoin. It also explains why I believe future value of many (all?) of the ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings) and altcoins are likely to trend to zero.

Since all value and predictions in the future are subjective I could be wrong. But Ill be wrong because of incorrect predictions of utility and not because I used the irrelevant factors of greed, whether someone was pumping it or whether early adopters profited as determining factors.

bitcoininthevp wrote:You don't seem to know anything about the topic at hand yet are trying to seem like you do.

Think me blustering if you wish! Don't worry -- it won't hurt my feelings.

I think I have proven that I am willing to hear good points from all sides and respond thoughtfully. But your response is completely vapid.

Indeed! But don't be a sore pouter when someone is not interested in giving you any good points. Just accept it any move on with dignity.

bitcoininthevp wrote:

eufo wrote:

dualstow wrote: Interesting read. Damn that board looks young!

That's a really sad read. Pump and dump early adopters are the real winners here. Greedy fools will be the losers. I suppose that's the way with most things.

Everyone is trying to get the most happiness they can given their limited resources in life. So to me it is less about the greed being the differentiating attribute of winners and losers. We are all being greedy. So since greed isnt explanatory here, lets move on to your other points...

Re "pump and dump": For certain there are some individuals that are trying to pump the USD price of bitcoin up up up. And some of those are pumping for purposes of selling. But so what? Isnt that the case for any stock, bond, gold, business, restaurant, asset, book publisher, etc?

Re "early adopters are the real winners here": Early adopters are always the winners in a venture that is successful. But they are also the ones that took on the risk before there was any momentum around that venture. Microsoft investors in the early days? Harry Browne in his gold call in the 70s? Early adopters of ideas and investments reap the benefits of their risky call when it pays off.

I assume your argument to that point would be that early adopters will cash out at some point during a peak perhaps. Again, how is this different than anything else? Harry sold his gold after it went up dramatically (and thus how the PP came to be). People sell MSFT stock at peaks. That these early adopters are profiting from selling at peaks doesnt mean that gold or MSFT doesnt have value in the future.

These points do not have explanatory power. So we are left with the real question when determining the value of bitcoin or anything else:

To what degree will people perceive value/utility from this in the future?

This question can be used to explain why I perceive current (and future) value in gold, stocks and bitcoin. It also explains why I believe future value of many (all?) of the ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings) and altcoins are likely to trend to zero.

Since all value and predictions in the future are subjective I could be wrong. But Ill be wrong because of incorrect predictions of utility and not because I used the irrelevant factors of greed, whether someone was pumping it or whether early adopters profited as determining factors.

You have completely misconstrued my post. I wasn't making "points" for or against Bitcoin. I was remarking on the follies of man. I believe we're done here.

bitcoininthevp wrote:I believe future value of many (all?) of the ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings) and altcoins are likely to trend to zero.

Including Ethereum?

By the way, did you take the five minutes?

LC475 wrote:

bitcoininthevp wrote:I believe future value of many (all?) of the ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings) and altcoins are likely to trend to zero.

Including Ethereum?

Yes.

LC475 wrote: By the way, did you take the five minutes?

Spent years following and thinking about this. Still waiting for your genius to enlighten the entirety of the bitcoin community as to what was missed from the existing list: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses

I don't know how to delete a post.

TennPaGa wrote:I believe that bitcoininthevp is here with an open mind and wishes to interact with a community of posters with broad-ranging views.

I never said he wasn't!

Please stop the condescending schtick, LC475, or you will be banned. This is your last warning. You can start by deleting the last post.

I think it is time to realize that it's not a schtick. I am condescending and I am a jerk.

I apologize to everyone I've offended here. Seriously. I do. You're great people, and what's clear to me now is that I'm not. I have no place here. I am just a jerk. A last warning is pointless. Obviously it would only happen again. I have enough understanding of human nature to know that. If posting a bunch of funny (I thought) animations about Bitcoin going to the Moon is a bannable offense, then obviously, obviously I have no self-awareness, no social skills, and am so far gone and so much of a jerk to not even realize how much of a jerk I am.

You need to prevent evaporative cooling. See here: http://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2015/ ... l-network/ . So, I get it. I am probably a low quality participant, maybe even a negative-quality participant, and my inborn obnoxiousness will drive away all the good people. People like me shouldn't go out in public, and that includes the internet.

Thanks for the conversations over the years. Sorry to bring you all down.

Permanent Portfolio Forever!

LC475 wrote:

TennPaGa wrote:I believe that bitcoininthevp is here with an open mind and wishes to interact with a community of posters with broad-ranging views.

I never said he wasn't!

Please stop the condescending schtick, LC475, or you will be banned. This is your last warning. You can start by deleting the last post.

I think it is time to realize that it's not a schtick. I am condescending and I am a jerk.

I apologize to everyone I've offended here. Seriously. I do. You're great people, and what's clear to me now is that I'm not. I have no place here. I am just a jerk. A last warning is pointless. Obviously it would only happen again. I have enough understanding of human nature to know that. If posting a bunch of funny (I thought) animations about Bitcoin going to the Moon is a bannable offense, then obviously, obviously I have no self-awareness, no social skills, and am so far gone and so much of a jerk to not even realize how much of a jerk I am.

You need to prevent evaporative cooling. See here: http://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2015/ ... l-network/ . So, I get it. I am probably a low quality participant, maybe even a negative-quality participant, and my inborn obnoxiousness will drive away all the good people. People like me shouldn't go out in public, and that includes the internet.

Thanks for the conversations over the years. Sorry to bring you all down.

Permanent Portfolio Forever!

Illigetimi non carborundum.