# bitcoin down to $14000.."healthy correction" ..



## trog100 (Dec 22, 2017)

all the other coins  are down %20 to %30 overnight but seem to have  bottomed out.. 

everything had got a bit silly  of late so a pull back is probably no bad thing..

trog


----------



## qubit (Dec 22, 2017)

...and the bubble bursts.


----------



## 64K (Dec 22, 2017)

Ars Technica hd an interesting article a while back about Bitcoin Mining and it's sustainability and the massive expense involved. 

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/bitcoins-insane-energy-consumption-explained/

I struggle to understand why anyone sees them as currency. I understand that most countries have fiat currency that isn't backed up by hard assets like gold but even looking at US dollars they are backed up by the US government (basically the US taxpayers). There is really nothing to support Bitcoins if they aren't perceived as valuable and their value plummets at some point.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Dec 22, 2017)

64K said:


> Ars Technica hd an interesting article a while back about Bitcoin Mining and it's sustainability and the massive expense involved.
> 
> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/bitcoins-insane-energy-consumption-explained/
> 
> I struggle to understand why anyone sees them as currency. I understand that most countries have fiat currency that isn't backed up by hard assets like gold but even looking at US dollars they are backed up by the US government (basically the US taxpayers). There is really nothing to support Bitcoins if they aren't perceived as valuable and their value plummets at some point.



US currency is technically monopoly money at the rate it's issued. What backs it is the fear of economic collapse by the rest of the world as they rely on lovely consumerism that we're really good at. And it helps to have enough firepower in a single carrier fleet to level a small country.


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 22, 2017)

64K said:


> I struggle to understand why anyone sees them as currency. I understand that most countries have fiat currency that isn't backed up by hard assets like gold but even looking at US dollars they are backed up by the US government (basically the US taxpayers). There is really nothing to support Bitcoins if they aren't perceived as valuable and their value plummets at some point.



And not just that , circulation is basically close to being nonexistent outside buying and dumping coins.


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Dec 22, 2017)

"Wow!" interjected awe, this summer it was 3k$ a pop, and you what exactly?
All the best ,happy holidays and a fruitfull new year!.


----------



## Sasqui (Dec 22, 2017)

qubit said:


> ...and the bubble bursts.



Maybe.  Each historical bubble is prefaced by "this is different"  and they all are.  One difference (and similarity) is liquidity.  It's hard to quantify (for me) how exchanges control the flow of this asset, and the ability to buy and sell ... aka liquidity.  Is the price driven by supply and demand, or control of supply, or both?


----------



## notb (Dec 22, 2017)

Love it!
https://www.tradingview.com/markets/cryptocurrencies/quotes-all/
Almost everything is down 30-50%.
I wish I had shorted it...


----------



## qubit (Dec 22, 2017)

Sasqui said:


> Maybe.  Each historical bubble is prefaced by "this is different"  and they all are.  One difference (and similarity) is liquidity.  It's hard to quantify (for me) how exchanges control the flow of this asset, and the ability to buy and sell ... aka liquidity.  Is the price driven by supply and demand, or control of supply, or both?


If you have a look at this BBC video, there's a financial expert on there who explained that investing in bitcoin is gambling, nothing more nothing less, since there's nothing behind it to back it up.

I just wish I'd jumped in early a few years ago and mined a whole lot of bitcoins when it was easy to do so. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and...in-bet-paid-off-but-is-it-too-late-for-others


----------



## cdawall (Dec 22, 2017)

qubit said:


> ...and the bubble bursts.



I don't know if I would say that just yet. It will probably shoot up after the first of the year. We will see a new all time high around April I wouldn't be surprised if we see it around 36K


----------



## qubit (Dec 22, 2017)

cdawall said:


> I don't know if I would say that just yet. It will probably shoot up after the first of the year. We will see a new all time high around April I wouldn't be surprised if we see it around 36K


Hey maybe, it's all a gamble!


----------



## 64K (Dec 22, 2017)

TheGuruStud said:


> US currency is technically monopoly money at the rate it's issued. What backs it is the fear of economic collapse by the rest of the world as they rely on lovely consumerism that we're really good at. And it helps to have enough firepower in a single carrier fleet to level a small country.



The US dollar has a unique position on the world stage right now because it's the World Reserve Currency but that could change if the EU and China institute an alternative basket of currencies to challenge the US dollars dominance and eventually with the never ending deficit spending here in the US and the lopsided foreign trade position that we are in there will have to be some kind of correction to this financial foolishness.


----------



## Sasqui (Dec 22, 2017)

notb said:


> Love it!
> https://www.tradingview.com/markets/cryptocurrencies/quotes-all/
> Almost everything is down 30-50%.
> I wish I had shorted it...



Wow, ouchies.



qubit said:


> If you have a look at this BBC video, there's a financial expert on there who explained that investing in bitcoin is gambling, nothing more nothing less, since there's nothing behind it to back it up.
> 
> I just wish I'd jumped in early a few years ago and mined a whole lot of bitcoins when it was easy to do so.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and...in-bet-paid-off-but-is-it-too-late-for-others



The people who buy into these things either see it as a gamble, or a sure thing ... or arguable both.  Same thing was going on during housing bubble here in the US back in 2003-2008 and that didn't end well.  Hindsight is 20/20, eh?


----------



## qubit (Dec 22, 2017)

Sasqui said:


> The people who buy into these things either see it as a gamble, or a sure thing ... or arguable both. Same thing was going on during housing bubble here in the US back in 2003-2008 and that didn't end well. Hindsight is 20/20, eh?


Don't get me started about hindsight! Now where's that crystal ball I had lying around...


----------



## 64K (Dec 22, 2017)

America is still great until the Federal Reserve debt unwinds and people retiring think that Social Security that they have been paying into for their whole life is guaranteed to be there. I was talking to a business associate the other day and she was under the impression that the Social Security Fund money was sitting in a bank somewhere and waiting to be withdrawn on retirement. It doesn't really exist. It's financial smoke and mirrors.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 22, 2017)

crypto has crashed back to where it was two weeks ago.. i have just lost the 6K or so i have made over the last two weeks.. 

easy come easy go.. he he..

trog


----------



## verycharbroiled (Dec 22, 2017)

been in crypto since 2011. this is the roller coaster im used to. just sit back and enjoy the ride!


----------



## Vayra86 (Dec 22, 2017)

qubit said:


> If you have a look at this BBC video, there's a financial expert on there who explained that investing in bitcoin is gambling, nothing more nothing less, since there's nothing behind it to back it up.
> 
> I just wish I'd jumped in early a few years ago and mined a whole lot of bitcoins when it was easy to do so.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and...in-bet-paid-off-but-is-it-too-late-for-others



Gosh, that's what I've been saying ever since its existence


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 22, 2017)

All these haters. LOL. It's down 30% for the DAY but only up you know like 1400% for the year.


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 22, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> All these haters. LOL. It's down 30% for the DAY but only up you know like 1400% for the year.


If you dumped money like crazy into it just recently and then see it go down by 30% in just one day you wouldn't care about that at all.


----------



## silentbogo (Dec 22, 2017)

My mining-obsessed friend told me few weeks ago that Bitcoin is gonna fall "a bit" by new year. I didn't expect that this "bit" will be over 25%


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 22, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> If you dumped money like crazy into it just recently and then see it go down by 30% in just one day you wouldn't care about that at all.



I knew what I was getting into when I started in crypto. It is volatile. It has crazy wild swings. If you invest more than you can afford to lose that is your problem and your decision.  People that have been holding for a long time know this is nothing new and if noob investors actually looked at the charts closely they would see that 3-5 drops a year at around 30% isn't unusual and actually could have waited/timed for the inevitable drop to buy instead of buying at the ATH.


----------



## flmatter (Dec 22, 2017)

according to cryptopia btc is around 12500 at the moment    ltc 225 and etn is at .08    for reference.


----------



## Papahyooie (Dec 22, 2017)

I was going to cash out the other day when it was at 19k and buy a graphics card with it. But I decided I'd wait until New Years to see if I could stretch it out to the next higher model. (Was going to get a 1070Ti, but decided to wait and see if it would go up enough for me to stretch to a 1080 or 1080Ti depending on my mining profits) Guess I'll have to wait a bit longer.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 22, 2017)

flmatter said:


> according to cryptopia btc is around 12500 at the moment    ltc 225 and etn is at .08    for reference.



Yup I purchased more LTC\ETH early this morning. LTC was at 205 and ETH around 520.


----------



## flmatter (Dec 22, 2017)

I took @cdawall  advice and started mining ETN. It is early and was just released so it is cheap and easy. Mine and forget it, as long as I don't format that hard drive with the wallet anytime in the future....     ETH is looking good too.   Cryptokitties is what I think when I see or hear ETH.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 22, 2017)

i think this article about sums things up accurately.. 

http://www.newsbtc.com/2017/12/22/recent-bitcoin-price-drop-long-overdue-will-recover/

trog


----------



## fullinfusion (Dec 22, 2017)

qubit said:


> ...and the bubble bursts.


or maybe Christmas has something to do with it? it's anybody's guess right now. I see everything is in the red today


----------



## cdawall (Dec 22, 2017)

flmatter said:


> I took @cdawall  advice and started mining ETN. It is early and was just released so it is cheap and easy. Mine and forget it, as long as I don't format that hard drive with the wallet anytime in the future....     ETH is looking good too.   Cryptokitties is what I think when I see or hear ETH.



I have been doing TZC as well since most of my rigs are nvidia. It is a lot more NV friendly. 



fullinfusion said:


> or maybe Christmas has something to do with it? it's anybody's guess right now. I see everything is in the red today



Not everything. Just the big names, most of the smaller alt coins are pushing 30-40-80% up right now on the trend. Now would be a good time for anyone holding weird alt coins to convert them over to eth/LTC/BTC/BTG to make some money on the rebound.


----------



## qubit (Dec 22, 2017)

fullinfusion said:


> or maybe Christmas has something to do with it? it's anybody's guess right now. I see everything is in the red today


Yeah, maybe. That financial expert I linked to did say it's a matter of when, not if, so seeing something like this does suggest that it might be happening now. We'll know for sure soon enough, lol.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 22, 2017)

qubit said:


> Yeah, maybe. That financial expert I linked to did say it's a matter of when, not if, so seeing something like this does suggest that it might be happening now. We'll know for sure soon enough, lol.



Every dollar spent on Crypto is a dollar not spent on traditional stocks...and every dollar not spent on traditional stocks is less commission for finance people. Consider that Crypto as a whole has a market cap of $600B that is $600B not being put into traditional stocks...The Government, Banks, and Wall Street all want it to fail and will say just about anything to undermine it.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 22, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Every dollar spent on Crypto is a dollar not spent on traditional stocks...and every dollar not spent on traditional stocks is less commission for finance people. Consider that Crypto as a whole has a market cap of $600B that is $600B not being put into traditional stocks...The Government, Banks, and Wall Street all want it to fail and will say just about anything to undermine it.



some of it would have gone into PMs they dont like those ether.. but you are correct about the banks and government being a tad biased as regards what they say..

trog

over the last six hours the (the bottom) %50 of the losses have been recovered.. the uptrend could reverse but i doubt it.. come tomorrow things  will be back where they were yesterday..

some big daddy btc hodler from the early days could engineer this sh-t.. dump enough coin on the market and panic sell sets in.. 


trog


----------



## Space Lynx (Dec 23, 2017)

the price actually went down to 11k not 14k today.  "14 hours ago - Coinbase said at 11:11 a.m. ET that "all buys and sells have been temporarily disabled," but the issue was resolved as of 1:44 p.m., according to the company's status website. The interruption in service comes as bitcoin briefly tumbled below _$11,000_, down 44 percent from its record high hit Sunday."

but coinbase halted all sells   how anyone can be a part of a currency that allows exchanges to do this to their money blows my mind.


----------



## flmatter (Dec 23, 2017)

lynx29 said:


> how anyone can be a part of a currency that allows exchanges to do this to their money blows my mind



the stock markets do it all the time, they have sell stops that limit losses or protect profits. So in essence every country that is part of the stock market  blows your mind.


----------



## notb (Dec 23, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Every dollar spent on Crypto is a dollar not spent on traditional stocks...and every dollar not spent on traditional stocks is less commission for finance people. Consider that Crypto as a whole has a market cap of $600B that is $600B not being put into traditional stocks...The Government, Banks, and Wall Street all want it to fail and will say just about anything to undermine it.


Actually it's not that simple. Cryptos are not state currencies. They were not "printed" by central banks.
The $600B you're talking about is not coming from money not put in stocks, i.e. it's not taken from the normal money supply (which is limited). It was mined. It's a product that someone might buy or not.

Don't worry about banks and the financial markets - they aren't as worried as you might think. They're actually rather excited about how much blockchain can give them.
The governments, however, are worried. They are worried, because they know, that someone will have to clean this mess when everything falls. It is their role to prevent it, because people would expect them to fix it afterwards.

And if you struggle to agree with the last part, just look at latest problem we've discussed here: Nicehash. It's a quasi-market operating outside of financial boundaries and regulations. And as long as it's OK, crypto fans love the freedom and think the state should stay out of it.
But when there is a hack and a lot of money vanishes, suddenly the same people expect an investigation.



ZenZimZaliben said:


> All these haters. LOL. It's down 30% for the DAY but only up you know like 1400% for the year.


Are you aware how percents work?


----------



## flmatter (Dec 23, 2017)

notb said:


> Are you aware how percents work?


really?
@ZenZimZaliben  has a valid point.   30% vs a 1400% increase is  moot point.   I will glady take a 30% hit on anything that earns 1400% value.   a dollar  $1.00 takes a 30% hit is worth 0.70.......  now if that dollar earned a 1400% over the last year  I would gladly take that 30%  hit and still make $1000.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 23, 2017)

who are these people that expect government  to fix things notb.. i for sure aint one of them.. he he he..

i wont comment on "normal" money being limited ether.. 

crypto is back on its way up to wherever its gonna go after what i at least consider a healthy reset which gives folks an idea of its bottom and trading range..

it will be interesting to see what happens to the over inflated stock market when it gets its next little test.. which is bound to come.. sometime.. he he

i have read that as little as a %5 sell off would will cause such a rush for the door and panic sell off that the lot comes crashing down..

currently its all being kept alive by copious supplies of that "limited" money you mentioned.. 

i would be interested to find out just what triggered the recent crypto sell off.. something did but nobody seems to know what.. i dont think these things happen by accident.. 

trog


----------



## notb (Dec 23, 2017)

flmatter said:


> really?
> @ZenZimZaliben  has a valid point.   30% vs a 1400% increase is  moot point.   I will glady take a 30% hit on anything that earns 1400% value.   a dollar  $1.00 takes a 30% hit is worth 0.70.......  now if that dollar earned a 1400% over the last year  I would gladly take that 30%  hit and still make $1000.


So there are more people with some understanding issues... Not just percents but also behaviour and financial markets.
And I'm so not surprised that you're all supporting investing in crypto. 

So the big question is: HOW MANY people bought cryptos or mining gear a year ago, with no further investments during the year. And by comparison: how many bought it last month?
Because the basic rule of bubbles is: people always invest the most just before the burst. Or in more mathematical terms: there is a very strong correlation between how much people invest and a derivative of the price, not the price itself.

Have you EVER seen a chart like this one? Do you understand the values shown?


Source: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ethereum/


----------



## Space Lynx (Dec 23, 2017)

flmatter said:


> the stock markets do it all the time, they have sell stops that limit losses or protect profits. So in essence every country that is part of the stock market  blows your mind.



Good thing most of my money is in pure gold and silver coins then.


----------



## notb (Dec 23, 2017)

trog100 said:


> who are these people that expect government  to fix things notb.. i for sure aint one of them.. he he he..


Did you read anything about the nicehash hack? Even on this forum you'll find examples of what I've described. And places like reddit are just full of them.


> i wont comment on "normal" money being limited ether..


It's a fact, not an opinion or a theory. No point to discuss this. No offense, but you should just learn a bit about a topic, if you want to understand what's happening...
Or you may not, live with your suspicions and be surprised often. Your choice. 


> crypto is back on its way up to wherever its gonna go after what i at least consider a healthy reset which gives folks an idea of its bottom and trading range..


"Trading ranges" in normal currencies come from either the actual value (so something related to actual relations between the 2 countries involved) or from government interference - because e.g. they don't want the currency value to be too high or too low.

There is no trading range for cryptos.


> it will be interesting to see what happens to the over inflated stock market when it gets its next little test.. which is bound to come.. sometime.. he he


It will drop, obviously. But there is at least some proper value behind the stock. The stock itself of course IS over- or undervalued - this is exactly what stock speculators look for.
With cryptos you don't have this benchmark. We don't know how much a crypto should be worth. It's all made up. 
With Bitcoin it *was* believed that it should be valued according to what it is: a payment system. You know: instead of paying with cash, card or transfer, you pay with a crypto. You might save money, the bank might save money and the seller might save money. All these savings combined would equal what a BTC is actually worth.
But after a few months of observation this theory collapsed. BTC is not reacting to some important events: like when Steam stopped accepting it or the latest China ban.


> i would be interested to find out just what triggered the recent crypto sell off.. something did but nobody seems to know what.. i dont think these things happen by accident..


If you want to know why things like this happen, you must know how instruments work. So once again I strongly suggest some learning: about both crypto and currencies, since the pricing involves both.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 23, 2017)

he he he..

you are a technically clever guy notb no question of that but you are here to troll crypto and no other reason.. unless you just like the argument.. 

you are pretty good.. to good for me.. i will bow to your technical knowledge of how instruments work.. 

trog


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 23, 2017)

notb said:


> It will drop, obviously. But there is at least some proper value behind the stock. The stock itself of course IS over- or undervalued - this is exactly what stock speculators look for.
> With cryptos you don't have this benchmark. We don't know how much a crypto should be worth. It's all made up.



All Fiat Currency is based on perception just like crypto.

Nearly all tech stocks and many others are based off perception. Do you really think Facebook is worth the perceived value? Twitter? What hard assets do they truely have to justify the price?  

One more thing could you try just turn down the condescending knob a little.  Maybe educate us with you vast knowledge of finance and explain how adding USD to crypto isn't taking away USD that I would normally invest in the stock market or put in a bank?


----------



## Jetster (Dec 23, 2017)

Currency is based off a promise and is insured on most cases. It's value is also controlled by the government. Print more and the value drops. Crypto is like a single stock with very little track record. It's worth what someone will pay. People start selling and it's value will drop.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 23, 2017)

TheGuruStud said:


> US currency is technically monopoly money at the rate it's issued. What backs it is the fear of economic collapse by the rest of the world as they rely on lovely consumerism that we're really good at. And it helps to have enough firepower in a single carrier fleet to level a small country.



Yup, we need to go back to being producers/manufacturers.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 23, 2017)

Jetster said:


> Currency is based off a promise and is insured on most cases. It's value is also controlled by the government. Print more and the value drops. Crypto is like a single stock with very little track record. It's worth what someone will pay. People start selling and it's value will drop.



Insured by what? A bank in essence that printed the money and can do nothing more than print more sheets of iou's?


----------



## notb (Dec 23, 2017)

cdawall said:


> Insured by what? A bank in essence that printed the money and can do nothing more than print more sheets of iou's?


I don't know what @Jetster meant, but it might have been deposit insurance. In US this is done by FDIC, who covers deposits up to $250k.



ZenZimZaliben said:


> All Fiat Currency is based on perception just like crypto.


By all means, no. Fiat currencies have a very well defined intrinsic value. And it's fairly easy to analyze as well. The base is always the state of economy and the interest rates - they define how much you can earn by holding that currency. Then you have banks (mostly central, occasionally commercial) that try to keep the price in some range. Above that there is some known correlation with stocks and commodities.
So having some data makes it possible to understand the historical price and - with decent precision - forecast the future development.

With Bitcoin... you don't know much. Not only is it extremely hard to forecast (apart from the fact that in long horizon it'll either totally collapse or grow further), but we also struggle to understand the past as well. Like the 30-50% drop we had yesterday - there is still no consensus on why it happened.



> Nearly all tech stocks and many others are based off perception. Do you really think Facebook is worth the perceived value? Twitter? What hard assets do they truely have to justify the price?


Companies are not evaluated based on assets, but based on cashflows.
As for Twitter - I don't know. I've never analyzed their stock, I don't know much about the company, I don't tweet, I don't read tweets. As Buffet once said: "_Never invest in a business you can't understand_". I live by this rule (and few other of his as well). 
As for Facebook - current price is in line with their financial situation. Moreover, it's been growing beautifully for the last 5 years. The only issue I have with them is the lack of dividend - the reason why I haven't invested yet. But they're a young company, so this is understandable. Many IT-companies start paying after as much as 20-30 years.



> Maybe educate us with you vast knowledge of finance and explain how adding USD to crypto isn't taking away USD that I would normally invest in the stock market or put in a bank?


This is feasible.
To understand this, you only have to answer one simple question.
Before cryptocurrencies became such a hit, there was a money supply of USD worth *X*. In other words, we had *X* US dollars to use (some of it printed, some only virtual).
A new thing appears in the world called cryptocurrencies - they're worth $600 billion.
What is the total sum of USD afterwards?


----------



## cdawall (Dec 23, 2017)

notb said:


> I don't know what @Jetster meant, but it might have been deposit insurance. In US this is done by FDIC, who covers deposits up to $250k.



Ain't going to help when the toilet paper backed by America's hopes and dreams money is worth nothing


----------



## bogmali (Dec 23, 2017)

Thread cleansed. Political comment/s do not belong in here-some of you should know better by now


----------



## notb (Dec 25, 2017)

cdawall said:


> Ain't going to help when the toilet paper backed by America's hopes and dreams money is worth nothing


We are not talking about a collapse of USD. We are talking about money being insured. The insurance means that you're protected against things like hacks, theft or bank default.
USA is the most important economy in the world right now and - based on all the global companies that operate from there - one of the most correlated with general civilization development.
If situation becomes so bad that US Dollar is "worth nothing", it would mean that we all have bigger problems than value of some painted pieces of paper.
And yes, I mean things like the scenario from Fallout. So if you don't believe in US future, so also the future of today's humanity, use whatever toiler paper USD you have and just buy bottle caps.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 26, 2017)

love him or hate him @notb has schooled all y'all with way more patients than I've had for this community in years. Keep it up notb. I enjoy reading your posts and miners trying to argue.


----------



## flmatter (Dec 26, 2017)

patients or patience?     hahaha   lol


----------



## trog100 (Dec 26, 2017)

"The insurance means that you're protected against things like hacks, theft or bank default."

more theory but in reality its all one big chain of debt.. all fine as long as nobody calls in any of that debt.. then the truth will emerge.. he he..

trog


----------



## notb (Dec 26, 2017)

trog100 said:


> "The insurance means that you're protected against things like hacks, theft or bank default."
> 
> more theory but in reality its all one big chain of debt.. all fine as long as nobody calls in any of that debt.. then the truth will emerge.. he he..
> 
> trog


It's not a theory. It's how banks work. They fund a kind of mutual insurance system (usually controlled by the state) that helps an unlucky one when it loses money because of a random event like those mentioned. And it happens from time to time. This is a proven concept.

The "chain of debt" is a totally different issue. And when someone asks me about it, I say the same thing: don't worry too much, it's really boring.
I have to - this is partly my work. But I just don't understand why people from outside the financial industry think about it so much. World would be much better if people started to think more about garbage segregation or advanced physics.

Just for your information: the state debt is built on long bonds - not on handshakes. No one is going to call in, ever.
Of course someone might stop paying the interest. This happens and such state is quickly brought to heel.
And if one day everyone stops paying, we might have World War III or a peaceful reset to how it was a century ago. And the same global system will develop or a different one - we don't know. Of course this "world order" is not the only scenario that would work. But it's one of the least bloody options one could think of.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 26, 2017)

most people outside the system are not interested at all they all assume its just gonna keep working.. you are part of the system and as such you have to assume its gonna keep working.. 

if (or when) it does stop working things wont be nice.. you are correct about the fall out 4 scenario.. you may see a peaceful reset but i dont see that as an option.. i think  we only have two options.. war or financial collapse.. i think some see war as the better option and they may be right.. a thought i find quite scary..

trog


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 26, 2017)

a) cryptocurrency isn't "currency" at all.  In order to be considered a currency, it has to be recognized as legal tender.  As far as I'm aware, no country does.

b) cryptocurrency is a "security" which puts it in the same category as stocks.

c) I don't think there's any country whose legal tender is not fiat.  Reserves went away for the same reason warehouses in general did: storing shit costs money and it generally isn't worth paying to keep it safe.  So instead of having a pool of resources that are just collecting dust, fiat declares that the country's economy is the pool of resources.  It works so long as it is well managed.

d) put the three points above together and cryptocurrency has about the chance of it raining on the moon when it comes to legal tender.  Imagine if your pocket change jumped 50% in value over night: you'd be gambling with every purchase you make or don't make.  Currencies get stability because supply is adjusted to match demand.  Cryptocurrency can't reasonable change it's rulebook on a quarterly basis without hugely impacting stability of it in the first place.

e) I honestly can't see fiat being replaced within my lifetime.  There may be the introduction of a new, global fiat currency that nations trade with each other but still will only be backed by the economies that use it.

f) Virtually all countries are in debt (except Timor-Leste, Hong Kong, and Macau): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2186rank.html


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 26, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> cryptocurrency isn't "currency" at all. In order to be considered a currency, it has to be recognized as legal tender.



I think you're really stretching definitions there.  Anything that has no inherent value other than for trading for goods is currency in my books.



TheMailMan78 said:


> love him or hate him @notb has schooled all y'all with way more patients than I've had for this community in years. Keep it up notb. I enjoy reading your posts and miners trying to argue.



If you call him telling me it would never breach 15k earlier this year "schooling me," cool.

In complete seriousness, the truth as usual lies somewhere inbetween the crypto-maniacs and the naysayer.  That's pretty much to be expected.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 26, 2017)

trog100 said:


> if (or when) it does stop working things wont be nice.. you are correct about the fall out 4 scenario.. you may see a peaceful reset but i dont see that as an option.. i think  we only have two options.. war or financial collapse.. i think some see war as the better option and they may be right.. a thought i find quite scary..


Countries that mismanaged government/debt (like Zimbabwe) are just like people and businesses that go into debt: they have to have a dialog with their debtors and restructure their debt.  The people that loaned them money want to get paid, not leave them out to dry.



R-T-B said:


> I think you're really stretching definitions there.  Anything that has no inherent value other than for trading for goods is currency in my books.


Then stocks and bonds would be currency but they are not.  There's nothing "currency" about cryptocurrency.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 26, 2017)

"Countries that mismanaged government/debt (like Zimbabwe) are just like people and businesses that go into debt: they have to have a dialog with their debtors and restructure their debt. The people that loaned them money want to get paid, not leave them out to dry."

theoretically correct.. but.. the entire world is currently mis-managing their debt.. in simple terms they have far too much of it and its still going up with no hope in hell of it ever being reduced or paid back..

we are all on a runaway train.. the driver is dead and deadmans brake has failed.. he he

trog


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 26, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Then stocks and bonds would be currency but they are not.



No, because no one really trades stocks and bonds for mainstream goods and services.

Many cryptos are actually used for goods and services, though I agree bitcoin has become impractical for this.



trog100 said:


> but.. the entire world is currently mis-managing their debt..



It's actually by and large just a few nations.  Quite a few nations actually have a positive treasury.  Crazy, I know.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 26, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> No, because no one really trades stocks and bonds for mainstream goods and services.
> 
> Many cryptos are actually used for goods and services, though I agree bitcoin has become impractical for this.
> 
> ...



US debt national is 20 trillion.. which nations do you think have a positive treasury where debt isnt a problem.... ??

china has massive internal debt maybe not external but they still have major debt problems..

the interesting thing is who is all this debt owed to.. no f-cker.. its all one huge musical chairs style system  where everyone owes everyone artificially kept alive by unrealistically low or zero interest rates (free money).. all it needs is one major default and the lot comes down..

having said that.. with so much free money about its hard to imagine how a default could happen.. insanity..

trog


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 26, 2017)

trog100 said:


> theoretically correct.. but.. the entire world is currently mis-managing their debt.. in simple terms they have far too much of it and its still going up with no hope in hell of it ever being reduced or paid back..


Not really.  If someone goes too far into debt then creditors won't give them any more money.  Japan has been drowning in debt for decades now but they still have access to a line of credit because they keep making payments against their debt.  Old debts are repaid while new ones are issued.  Debt is usually a revolving door.  What stops the door is defaulting on a debt which Peurto Rico did and they went into restructuring.



R-T-B said:


> No, because no one really trades stocks and bonds for mainstream goods and services.


Corporations pay people in stock frequently.



trog100 said:


> US debt national is 20 trillion.. which nations do you think have a positive treasury where debt isnt a problem.... ??


US GDP is $18 trillion and $270 trillion in assets.  USA could have a sale and pay off all that debt in less than a month.  Alternatively, it could stop borrowing money for a year and almost pay it off.


----------



## 64K (Dec 26, 2017)

trog100 said:


> US debt national is 20 trillion.. which nations do you think have a positive treasury where debt isnt a problem.... ??
> 
> china has massive internal debt maybe not external but they still have major debt problems..
> 
> ...



The USA can continue deficit spending using smoke and mirrors and relying on the fact that the US dollar is the World Reserve Currency.......at least for now. It's really a mess to try to understand what happens in the Govt Finance sphere. The Federal Reserve "prints" trillions and puts the debt on their books so it doesn't look so scary. The US govt borrows money from the Social Security Administration and leaves a piece of paper backing the loan with a promise that future generations of taxpayers will somehow repay it. Basically it's the US govt borrowing from themselves.

The Bitcoin thing is too volatile for me and really there's no substantial backing for it other than people's desire for them because they perceive them as valuable. Nothing of hard value is really created by mining.

I do believe that every investor should hold some gold though because gold has always been considered as valuable and it's uses in manufacturing are valuable too. But I would caution to not overdue it with gold hoarding and never buy gold on paper. Take physical possession of it and put it in your safe deposit box.


Edit: I read an interesting article a while back on Bitcoin mining.........

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/bitcoins-insane-energy-consumption-explained/

One could construe from this that Bitcoins are generating a debt based currency much like the US dollar if the value falls below the cost of the electricity and hardware to generate them in the first place. According to the above article it takes about 250 kWh in electricity alone to generate one coin. At my electricity rate that is around $25. But, unlike the US dollar there is no support structure should the value at some point plummet and some unlucky people may be stuck with bitcoins that aren't even worth what they cost to generate.


----------



## Outback Bronze (Dec 26, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> a) cryptocurrency isn't "currency" at all



So if it isn't currency, then why is it still based on the U.S.$?

Hey, isn't it called crypto"currency" : )


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 26, 2017)

trog100 said:


> "Countries that mismanaged government/debt (like Zimbabwe) are just like people and businesses that go into debt: they have to have a dialog with their debtors and restructure their debt. The people that loaned them money want to get paid, not leave them out to dry."
> 
> theoretically correct.. but.. the entire world is currently mis-managing their *debt*.. in simple terms they have far too much of it and its still going up with no hope in hell of it ever being reduced or paid back..
> 
> ...


You mean greed? Debt itself, without the underlying economics & politics surrounding it is worthless.

Apple wants you to buy their new & shiny $1000 phone, why do you want to buy it? Do you need it, want to flaunt it, *feel it* ~ presumably coming from the land of droids?

Why do people need a 100 pair of clothes, tens of shoes, gadgets that just decorate their closets? Why do you order clothes from Amazon, that don't fit & then need to be sent back for return/replacement at no extra cost? What about your carbon footprint when you could've easily bought the same types of clothes next door, even if it was a few bucks more?

You get the gist of it?

Money isn't the problem ~ *greed & power* is! Currency is just a means to an end, crypto is neither currency nor useful at this point in time!


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 26, 2017)

Outback Bronze said:


> So if it isn't currency, then why is it still based on the U.S.$?


It's not.  Exchanges trade cryptocurrency for legal tender.  Exchanges should sound familiar because there's one that's quite infamous and been around for two centuries: New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).  Stocks aren't legal tender either but just like crypto exchanges, they trade securities for legal tender.  You've probably heard of ForEx too: Foreign Exchange.  It's an exchange that trades one legal tender for another legal tender.

The reason why USD is used as a barometer for...well...everything...because that's the unit most exchanges operate off of.  USD is the most desired, available, and relatively stable fiat currency.  Any legal tender could really substitute for USD.

Chinese yuan used to be based off the USD, as in, they fixed the value of their currency to the value of the USD.  It's not anymore.  There is no intrinsct link (other than barometer + exchange) between USD and cryptocurrency.

Cryptocurrency is literally no different than me buying digital music off of Amazon: legal tender for digital good.  The only difference is that digital music has a crapload of strings attached so it's resale value is supposed to be $0 where cryptocurrencies encourages trading.  In that regard, it's more like Steam trading cards.  If demand on Steam trading cards was sky high and supply was very low, Steam trading cards could theoretically go as ridiculous priced as BTC is now and it could snowball like BTC did too.  That's really the baffling thing about BTC: why the demand?  Supply is severely constrainted so the value is bubbling because of demand.  The only logical answer is that people are demanding it because they are betting it will go higher.  Steam trading cards? I doubt many bet they're going to rise in value hence why most of them are well under a dollar (except foil).  When does BTC plummet? When there are no more buyers.


----------



## Papahyooie (Dec 26, 2017)

@FordGT90Concept , I think the sticking point people are having with your argument is that there is no requirement to be "legal tender" for something to be a currency. You're insinuating that crypto must be recognized by a state in order to qualify as a currency. That's simply not the case, and that's the whole basis that bitcoin was built on. If my neighbor and I set up a micro-economy in which we use bottle caps to keep track of promises made (I mow his yard for 2 bottle caps that I can later trade for him cleaning my gutter, etc) then bottle caps are a currency. No state is involved, and the bottle caps aren't legal tender, unless you consider the agreement to be a form of government (which is a fair analysis, but at that point we're just talking semantics.) I can buy computer hardware on Newegg with bitcoin right now. I can trade bitcoin, which is a promise backed by the cryptocurrency market that the bitcoin will have value, to be traded for further goods, or for other currency. 

That all being said, I'm kind of disappointed in what has become of bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general. It was created to be a stateless and unregulated currency... But since it has risen in value so much, people are now treating it as a stock/security. Since everybody thinks they're going to hodl and get rich, nobody actually spends bitcoin on goods, effectively neutering its utility as a currency. I still hope that its value will stabilize, and then more markets will accept it as a currency. Being more of the libertarian type, I'm excited for the prospect of a currency controlled by the people rather than bound to a coercive state... In all reality, that will probably never happen.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 26, 2017)

Papahyooie said:


> No state is involved, and the bottle caps aren't legal tender, unless you consider the agreement to be a form of government (which is a fair analysis, but at that point we're just talking semantics.)


Bottle caps would be the legal tender of your micro-economy, yes.



Papahyooie said:


> I can buy computer hardware on Newegg with bitcoin right now.


Newegg is taking an enormous risk by doing that.  But hey, people have always traded one item for another circumventing legal tender.  Newegg could accept sheep too, you know. 



Papahyooie said:


> That all being said, I'm kind of disappointed in what has become of bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general. It was created to be a stateless and unregulated currency... But since it has risen in value so much, people are now treating it as a stock/security. Since everybody thinks they're going to hodl and get rich, nobody actually spends bitcoin on goods, effectively neutering its utility as a currency. I still hope that its value will stabilize, and then more markets will accept it as a currency. Being more of the libertarian type, I'm excited for the prospect of a currency controlled by the people rather than bound to a coercive state... In all reality, that will probably never happen.


It can't stabilize because it can't spontaneously create more supply to match demand.  Until someone fixes that problem (not even sure it can), cryptocurrencies will continue to be inflated by demand.


----------



## Papahyooie (Dec 26, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Bottle caps would be the legal tender of your micro-economy, yes.
> Newegg is taking an enormous risk by doing that.  But hey, people have always traded one item for another circumventing legal tender.  Newegg could accept sheep too, you know.
> It can't stabilize because it can't spontaneously create more supply to match demand.  Until someone fixes that problem (not even sure it can), cryptocurrencies will continue to be inflated by demand.



That's exactly what I'm saying. You said that cryptocurrency wasn't a currency because it wasn't legal tender. And yet by your own admission, it IS legal tender, because I can indeed trade it for goods, services, or other currencies. So I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make. Is it a currency or not? You say it has to be "legal tender" insinuating that a state must recognize it, and yet you also acknowledge that an agreement between myself and newegg is a form of state. So which is it...? 

Indeed newegg is taking a risk. But that doesn't change the fact that cryptocurrency is indeed being used as a fiat currency in this case. The risk, or the object in question being used is irrelevant. 

I believe it will stabilize, not through spontaneously creating more supply, but rather through the collapse of the demand. It sucks that many people would lose out... but eventually, the speculation will run out, and the value will collapse to a more reasonable level. That would pave the way for bitcoin's use as an actual currency, IF it doesn't completely collapse and become completely worthless. Like I said... people are going to lose out. And it may never happen. Just saying that it HAS to happen for cryptocurrency to realize usage as an actual currency. As it stands, nobody spends crypto (or at least very few compared to the hodlers.) If it doesn't get spent, it can't be a currency. It's a security at the moment, which is not what it was designed to be. As I said, being more of the libertarian persuasion, I lament that.


----------



## Outback Bronze (Dec 26, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It's not



Apparently it is.. 1 BTC = XXXXX U.S. $$$$$ ATM.

Anyway, thanks for your detailed reply.

Much appreciated as I was looking forward to hearing what you had to say on this matter : )


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 26, 2017)

Papahyooie said:


> You said that cryptocurrency wasn't a currency because it wasn't legal tender.


There's no legal system backing nor enforcing it.  As I said, trading in BTC is at your own risk.


----------



## hat (Dec 26, 2017)

BTC is self-regulated, somewhat. Difficulty goes up, block rewards become less. The rewards for successfully mining your own block are already massive, but if you managed to do it today with the same block rewards from back when it started the rewards would be absolutely enormous. 

Also, Bitcoin is divisible. One dollar is made up of one hundred pennies. One bitcoin is made up of 100 million Satoshis. As it stands, 1000 Satoshis is worth about 16 pennies. For one Satoshi to be even equal to one penny, BTC would have to be worth $1 million each. You can't just look at 1 BTC and try to compare it in value to 1 USD anymore. BTC is like the top end of the Bitcoin currency denominations. That would be like thinking the only denomination of USD was the $100k Woodrow Wilson bill, and then saying the value of USD is too much.

The inherent problem here is the cost of the transition itself. Tons of power is wasted processing the, as it stands, terrible energy inefficient blockchain system. And since there are so many miners behind it, the system makes itself more "difficult" to sustain, otherwise miners would be receiving insane amounts of coin and the currency would become worthless. It's a vicious cycle. This may never have been the original intent of Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies in general, but here we are.


----------



## Papahyooie (Dec 26, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> There's no legal system backing nor enforcing it.  As I said, trading in BTC is at your own risk.



Risk has nothing to do with it... You just said you recognized my neighbor and I, agreeing to use bottlecaps, is legal tender in the sense that we have created a legality between us. A micro-state, if you will. 

Since I am making an agreement with Newegg, there IS a legal system backing and enforcing it... the agreement I made with Newegg is a micro-state, and between us we have created a mico-economy. You said yourself that was the case. 



FordGT90Concept said:


> Bottle caps would be the legal tender of your micro-economy, yes.


...

So I ask again... which is it?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 26, 2017)

Papahyooie said:


> So which is it...?


Is Steam trading cards a currency?  Casually, sure; legally, no.  Just like Monopoly money.


----------



## Papahyooie (Dec 26, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Is Steam trading cards a currency?  Casually, sure; legally, no.


That's not an answer. 

You said crypto wasn't a currency because it isn't legal tender. 

Then you recognized bottlecaps as legal tender as long as it was recognized by the two parties involved in a micro state/economy.

Then you maintain that crypto isn't a currency, even when recognized by two parties in the same situation. 

God bless you Ford, but you've always been the king of irrational justification. You keep doing you.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 26, 2017)

> The European Central Bank classifies bitcoin as a convertible decentralized virtual *currency.* In July 2014 the European Banking Authority advised European banks not to deal in virtual *currencies* such as bitcoin until a regulatory regime was in place



It is interesting how banks keep calling it currency.

source


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 26, 2017)

In the case of Newegg, you're transferring the risk from yourself to Newegg. In the case of sheep, if you agreed to accept my sheep before examining them yourself, the risk they represent is transferred from me to you. On delivery, you might discover their very diseased and very dead. You'd have to take me to court to dispute the trade before a judge. Lets say we substitute sheep for counterfeit legal tender. Now suddenly it goes from a small claims court decision to potentially a Federal criminal case.



Papahyooie said:


> That's not an answer.
> 
> You said crypto wasn't a currency because it isn't legal tender.
> 
> ...


This is what I replying to (without quoting it):


TheGuruStud said:


> US currency is technically monopoly money at the rate it's issued. What backs it is the fear of economic collapse by the rest of the world as they rely on lovely consumerism that we're really good at. And it helps to have enough firepower in a single carrier fleet to level a small country.


Here's the point you're fixated on:


FordGT90Concept said:


> a) cryptocurrency isn't "currency" at all.  In order to be considered a currency, it has to be recognized as legal tender.  As far as I'm aware, no country does.


So you're right, generally, cryptocurrency can be considered a currency but in this context, there's an important distinction that's missing: USD is legal tender where cryptocurrency is not.  There's a huge legal system backing USD that cryptocurrency does not have (nor Monopoly money).

In your bottlecap scenario, it assumes you have a legal system established for establishing and enforcing your bottlecap currency.  If do not, then you're just trading.  Calling it a "micro-state/economy" suggests there is a legal contract involved.



cdawall said:


> It is interesting how banks keep calling it currency.
> 
> source


Indeed but not legal tender.  No one is under any obligation to accept it.


----------



## Papahyooie (Dec 26, 2017)

Ford, I never made the claim that it was legal tender for any specific government. You're arguing that crypto isn't legal tender. The fact that it isn't legal tender for a specific government does not have any bearing on whether or not it is a currency. You said, point blank, that cryptocurrency isn't currency.



FordGT90Concept said:


> a) cryptocurrency isn't "currency" at all. In order to be considered a currency, it has to be recognized as legal tender. As far as I'm aware, no country does.



That statement, by your own admission, is false. That's all I'm trying to say. Arguing about risk, and whether there is legal recourse for fraud doesn't change that fact. That quote above, is all I am refuting. I couldn't care less about whether it's legal tender or not. YOU made the assertion that in order to be a currency, it has to be recognized as legal tender. My point is, that statement is patently false. Arguing that crypto isn't legal tender doesn't make it true.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 26, 2017)

I ask again, are Steam trading cards currency?  The only difference between Steam trading cards and BTC is that BTC has subunits.  They're both a medium of exchange (e.g. you can trade someone a bunch of cards for a game in someone else's inventory) so using a _very_ broad definition for currency, they both apply.  The matter at heart is that people throw the word "currency" around just because someone almost a decade ago called it that.  I don't think it is appropriate because it fits better under the definition of "security" over "currency," see #3: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/security.  If you lose your documentation of ownership (effectively, the coin), it's gone for good.  Currency traditionally means something physical or at least representation of something physical.  Cryptocurrency never had anything physical to begin with.

Following me now?

Yes, point (a) is false as quoted; however, Merriam-Webster provides an example of furs being used as a currency but no one called furs currency. Furs are furs.  That's the point I'm making: I have no problem calling BTC coins (#3) but they definitely aren't coinage (#1) which implies producing (usually) metal coins.

Meh, it's semantics but legal tender is not.


----------



## Papahyooie (Dec 26, 2017)

Yes, Steam trading cards are used as currency. Much the opposite of bitcoin, however, Steam trading cards' primary intended use is as a good. A collector's item. Bitcoin was intended to be used as currency, but due to the highly unstable value and possibility of appreciating, they are treated by most as a security. That's exactly what I was saying earlier. However, cryptocurrency fits every (monetary) definition of currency. Physical tokens are simply a convenience. As for "documentation of ownership" cash is exactly that, and is still a currency. A dollar bill is literally a document symbolizing ownership of a certain amount of value. If you lose the dollar bill, it's gone for good. Is it a security then? 

I realize that we're getting deep into semantics at this point. But my statement stands, because YOU made the assertion that BTC is not currency. It obviously is, no matter how you want to justify it. I never made any claim that crypto is legal tender for any specific state. YOU made the assertion that it must be to qualify as a currency, which we've established as false. All the other stuff I couldn't care less about. My original statement was that that is the sticking point, and why there is disagreement with your statement. Risk, legality, recourse... none of that matters. My only intended statement here is that cryptocurrency is indeed a currency. That's all.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 26, 2017)

Papahyooie said:


> Is it a security then?


If you're looking at just a banknote, yes (#2).  It's a promise from the Federal Reserve to be worth its stated value.  When you transfer it to someone else (or in this case, lose it and someone else finds it), that obligation transfers with it.  Fiat as a whole (crypto and legal tender) really suffers from that problem.  Even coinage, which used to be worth its cost in materials, has gone fiat.


----------



## 64K (Dec 27, 2017)

I think what Bitcoins are and aren't can be debated but one thing that Bitcoins aren't is legal tender. If you look on any US note you will see "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private" printed on them which makes US dollars different in a massive way from Bitcoins. Businesses in the USA have to accept dollar bills as payment for goods and services by law. They don't accept have to accept Bitcoins.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 27, 2017)

Ill just leave this here....

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/sav...ure-fomo/ar-BBHmI7q?li=AA4Zjn&ocid=spartandhp

and....

https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/statement-clayton-2017-12-11


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 27, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Corporations pay people in stock frequently.



That's great, but do they go home and buy food with them?


----------



## Steevo (Dec 27, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> That's great, but do they go home and buy food with them?




Many banks and financial institutions will give you cash in exchange for the stocks, or many places will allow you to borrow money using the stocks as a form of collateral or insurance. the power of a currency and its stability is the backing with guns part that crypto doesn't have, crypto is no different than buying or selling futures sugar, bacon, or coffee.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 27, 2017)

Steevo said:


> Many banks and financial institutions will give you cash in exchange for the stocks, or many places will allow you to borrow money using the stocks as a form of collateral or insurance. the power of a currency and its stability is the backing with guns part that crypto doesn't have, crypto is no different than buying or selling futures sugar, bacon, or coffee.



You're ignoring the "and" in "goods and services"

You can use crypto to buy goods AND services.  You can't use stock in such a context.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 27, 2017)

The funny thing about Bitcoin or any of these "currencies" is a single incident will eliminate them from circulation. Lets say some Allah-Peanut butter sandwich comes along and buys the goods to make a bomb with untraceable crypto-currency and kills a crowd of people. This info hits the news and guess what happens. All of a sudden the narrative of "Crypto-currency is the future!" turns into what it really is " Crypto-currency is for terrorists and drug dealers". Next up you will have congress calling for a knee-jerk response to ban all forms of Crypto-currency. Your lifetime investment is now worthless.

If you are being honest with yourself, you know this isn't far fetched and if by chance Crypto-currency actually becomes mainstream and competes with the dollar you can bet whatever coin you worship the US government will shut it down.

Ups or downs no real investor with any real world chops is saying "Get in to Crypto-currency!". Again I point to this.....

https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/statement-clayton-2017-12-11


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 27, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> If you are being honest with yourself, you know this isn't far fetched and if by chance Crypto-currency actually becomes mainstream and competes with the dollar you can bet whatever coin you worship the US government will shut it down.



Yeah good luck with "shutting it down"...LOL. cause you know there is a big switch in the Fed Reserve building that can just shut down all crypto...the most decentralized and in some cases untraceable way to exchange funds. That will work out about as well as shutting down piracy has gone.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 27, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Yeah good luck with "shutting it down"...LOL. cause you know there is a big switch in the Fed Reserve building that can just shut down all crypto...the most decentralized and in some cases untraceable way to exchange funds. That will work out about as well as shutting down piracy has gone.



You mean the non-us government run fed reserve right?


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 27, 2017)

cdawall said:


> You mean the non-us government run fed reserve right?



Yeah the private entity, that reports to no one, that prints all our legal tender.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 27, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Yeah the private entity, that reports to no one, that prints all our legal tender.



Yea its a good thing about all these currency laws.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 27, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> You're ignoring the "and" in "goods and services"
> 
> You can use crypto to buy goods AND services.  You can't use stock in such a context.


People can accept stock certificates in trade just like anything else.  They don't have to, of course, and that's completely up to the discretion of the store owner.  Most people, in that circumstance, would sell the shares to get liquid cash from them to expedite subsequent transactions.



ZenZimZaliben said:


> Yeah good luck with "shutting it down"...LOL. cause you know there is a big switch in the Fed Reserve building that can just shut down all crypto...the most decentralized and in some cases untraceable way to exchange funds. That will work out about as well as shutting down piracy has gone.


Ban the possession and transfer of cryptocurrency.  Think pot, heroin, cocaine, etc.  Police get wind of a crypto-farm in a house? Knock down the door for probable cause of being in procession of contraband.  Crypto would be driven underground in less than a year.



cdawall said:


> Yea its a good thing about all these currency laws.


Government moves at a snails pace.  Right now, securities regulation agencies are trying to get a grip on it but nothing of the above sort would happen unless a new law is written explicitly talking to cryptocurrencies.

As TMM said, it's not in the works now but one major event where people start crying about lost billions then, bam, law gets drafted and passed heavily regulating it.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 27, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Yeah good luck with "shutting it down"...LOL. cause you know there is a big switch in the Fed Reserve building that can just shut down all crypto...the most decentralized and in some cases untraceable way to exchange funds. That will work out about as well as shutting down piracy has gone.


And its worth will be what when you can not launder it for cash? Yeah that's what I thought.

One law and boom. All worth gone. No one messes with the Fed. Reserve. Id rather pick a fist fight with the entire 101st Airborne. Better chance of winning.

Also you do understand the US government has the ability to shut down the web right? At least in the states.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 27, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> And its worth will be what when you can not launder it for cash? Yeah that's what I thought.
> 
> One law and boom. All worth gone. No one messes with the Fed. Reserve. Id rather pick a fist fight with the entire 101st Airborne. Better chance of winning.
> 
> Also you do understand the US government has the ability to shut down the web right? At least in the states.



One law...like don't pirate? don't do drugs? don't sell humans? Don't kill for ivory, don't steal, murder, rape...but thankfully we have laws in place and none of those things happen anymore. If the US Gove tried to do that I believe it would have the opposite effect...I think it would increase the price even further. Who says I have to sell it in USA for US Currency?


----------



## trog100 (Dec 27, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> And its worth will be what when you can not launder it for cash? Yeah that's what I thought.
> 
> One law and boom. All worth gone. No one messes with the Fed. Reserve. Id rather pick a fist fight with the entire 101st Airborne. Better chance of winning.
> 
> Also you do understand the US government has the ability to shut down the web right? At least in the states.



The US government has the ability to do lots of things we had better hope it dosnt do them.. he he

trog


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 27, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> One law...like don't pirate? don't do drugs? don't sell humans? Don't kill for ivory, don't steal, murder, rape...but thankfully we have laws in place and none of those things happen anymore. If the US Gove tried to do that I believe it would have the opposite effect...I think it would increase the price even further. Who says I have to sell it in USA for US Currency?


Apples and oranges and normally I would fully agree with you. On this however you are talking about the US Reserve. This is a whole different game. The only reason Bitcoin is worth ANYTHING is because of what Buffet said. FOMO. When it becomes taboo/illegal or it messes with the world standard (US Dollar) it will go bottoms up in a week. Its NOT a stable/long term investment.

With that being said I had 32.6 coins back in the day...........I hate myself now.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 27, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> They don't have to, of course, and that's completely up to the discretion of the store owner.



Have you ever seen a storefront or webpage that says "we accept stock trades?" in the window?

They do this with various cryptos.



TheMailMan78 said:


> The only reason Bitcoin is worth ANYTHING is because of what Buffet said.



Uh, it was worth quite a bit more than a dollar before Buffet said anything.  Just FYI.



> Its NOT a stable/long term investment.



I agree, kinda.  It's not stable.  It's not a SAFE long term investment either.  But as your 32.6 coins illustrate (when it also wasn't a "safe investment") it might just be a good long term investment despite being high risk.

How'd you lose your coins, out of curiosity?



TheMailMan78 said:


> And its worth will be what when you can not launder it for cash? Yeah that's what I thought.



Probably the same.  It's seldom used for criminal activity anymore.  Too tracable, too expensive.  Monero is a better pick.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 27, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Apples and oranges and normally I would fully agree with you. On this however you are talking about the US Reserve. This is a whole different game. The only reason Bitcoin is worth ANYTHING is because of what Buffet said. FOMO. When it becomes taboo/illegal or it messes with the world standard (US Dollar) it will go bottoms up in a week. Its NOT a stable/long term investment.
> 
> With that being said I had 32.6 coins back in the day...........I hate myself now.



I 100% agree with your stance on stable/long term...know and accept the risks or don't play.

32.6 coins..hey as long as you made a profit that is what matters. It does suck but you can't look at investments like that.


----------



## notb (Dec 27, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> I think you're really stretching definitions there.  Anything that has no inherent value other than for trading for goods is currency in my books.


Thankfully, this is not the actual definition.


> If you call him telling me it would never breach 15k earlier this year "schooling me," cool.


First of all, I don't intend to "school" anyone - I'm simply trying to provide some basic theory of finance and of money to these otherwise pretty chaotic discussions.
And it's not just because people here don't know much about what money is and how state currencies work - I don't expect that in a gaming community. But it still amazes me that the same people, that despise the government and fiat currencies, are trying to convince others that cryptos are currencies. 
And having a slightly above-average financial knowledge doesn't mean I'm always right with my forecasts. No one is.

That said, I think we where talking about 50k, not 15k. Maybe I don't remember that discussion very well.
And yes: I'm still betting on the 50k. 

And I'm not against cryptos. I'm simply skeptical. I must be. We should all be.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 27, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> Have you ever seen a storefront or webpage that says "we accept stock trades?" in the window?


It's not a high-volume thing so unless their business is structured around it, it's not something that is advertised.  Case in point: virtually every store will accept gold and silver bullion but they don't advertise that either.



R-T-B said:


> Uh, it was worth quite a bit more than a dollar before Buffet said anything.  Just FYI.


But the facts haven't changed: there are no assets behind cryptocurrency.  People only buy it because they think it will rise in value because other people are buying it.  It's the very definition of a bubble and, even if it is worth only a penny, it's still a bubble.  It has no ceiling and no floor because it has no intrinsic value.  It's driven by greed, nothing tangible.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 27, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> But the facts haven't changed: there are no assets behind cryptocurrency.



Other currencies are still the asset behind it.  There's no asset behind "gold" either you know.  It also has no ceiling or floor beyond it's interested market.

You could argue gold has uses, but well, so does blockchain, frankly.

People didn't always buy it because they would think it would rise.  That's a recent thing.



notb said:


> Thankfully, this is not the actual definition.



What is?  Serious question since we don't seem to be accepting the dictionary in this discussion.



> That said, I think we where talking about 50k, not 15k. Maybe I don't remember that discussion very well.



That could be true, it doesn't really matter as I was just messing with mailman.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 27, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It's driven by greed, nothing tangible.



The perceived value is high but there is tangible value because it took time/money to create. It is as tangible as buying stock in Technology stock which has a perceived value far beyond it's intrinsic value. Facebook, Twitter and many others.


----------



## notb (Dec 27, 2017)

cdawall said:


> It is interesting how banks keep calling it currency.
> 
> source


Could you point where this publication calls crypto a currency? It's rather large.
In the meantime, the second paragraph starts with:
*Virtual currencies resemble money*


R-T-B said:


> Other currencies are still the asset behind it.


You'll have to explain that...


> There's no asset behind "gold" either you know.


Actually there is. Gold can be practically used as a material, so it can be priced as such.
Thing is... you're trying to support cryptos by saying that gold has similar history. But the actual truth is: gold was rubbish.
Yes, Bitcoin (or a different coin) alone could be a money anchor just like gold use to be. But Bitcoin is not alone. People create countless new cryptos all the time. There is no limit, no boundaries.



ZenZimZaliben said:


> The perceived value is high but there is tangible value because it took time/money to create.


1) By definition a tangible asset is something material.
2) If something takes time or money, it means it's *ge**nerating costs, not creating value*. It's negative in a balance sheet.
For example: burning money takes money (and some time as well). 
Value of an object is what someone else is willing to pay you for it. And he is not buying your work or time. He doesn't even know how much it costed you to produce. He's only buying an object that he will be able to use in some way afterwards.
In other words: price of an object is related to the value it can generate (the future), not the value that it consumed in production (the past).

There are a few observations that explain this very well
1) If one wants to buy the same object from two sellers, he'll be willing to pay the same price - despite the fact that they most likely had different production costs (time or money taken).
2) Lets say you're manufacturing nails. They are not identical, as there will be some variance of quality. Some nails will be usable, some not. They all costed the same to make, but they don't have the same value. Some will yield a negative value (a loss), because the only way to utilize them will be to recycle the material.


> It is as tangible as buying stock in Technology stock which has a perceived value far beyond it's intrinsic value. Facebook, Twitter and many others.


"Technology stocks" are evaluated exactly the same way any other stocks would be. AFAIR you've already made this mistake lately.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 27, 2017)

notb said:


> You'll have to explain that...



It's pretty selfexplanatory.  Investor interest in the technology IS it's backing.

Or was.  I'd argue at this point the whole thing is a bubble.  When it pops the value it settles on will restore normalcy.  I'm not quite convinced we've popped completely yet, either.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 27, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> Other currencies are still the asset behind it.


Not really when they can turn on it on any given day.



R-T-B said:


> There's no asset behind "gold" either you know.  It also has no ceiling or floor beyond it's interested market.


Gold, itself, is an asset.  Humans have desired it for millennia because it is shiny, because other people value it, and because it's an amazing metal (e.g. super conductor).  Legal tender went fiat in large part because gold prices were skyrocketing after WWII.  It was getting ridiculous trying to keep legal tender at sane value.



ZenZimZaliben said:


> Facebook, Twitter and many others.


Their business is advertising/marketing.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 28, 2017)

notb said:


> C
> 
> "Technology stocks" are evaluated exactly the same way any other stocks would be. AFAIR you've already made this mistake lately.



Not a mistake...a fact. Twitter's stock far exceeds its value and almost completely driven by perception. IF you do not think the way people (the market) perceive a stock as being valuable/worthless isn't a huge factor in stock pricing then you are missing out on something critical here. Market conditions and perception drive the stock value...not how much assets they are sitting on because if that was the case twitter would be worth like 3.50. You can throw as much math at this as you want but in the end it is people trading stock and the value is deemed on their perception of that value.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 28, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Not really when they can turn on it on any given day.



This is the case with any currency backed by the dollar, ford.



> Gold, itself, is an asset.  Humans have desired it for millennia because it is shiny, because other people value it, and because it's an amazing metal (e.g. super conductor)



Did you just completely ignore my acknowledgement of that and comparison to Blockchains inherent technological value?



			
				R-T-B said:
			
		

> You could argue gold has uses, but well, so does blockchain, frankly.
> 
> People didn't always buy it because they would think it would rise.  That's a recent thing.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 28, 2017)

notb said:


> Could you point where this publication calls crypto a currency? It's rather large.
> In the meantime, the second paragraph starts with:
> *Virtual currencies resemble money*









I mean I am not going to say it is in the title, but it is in the title.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 28, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> This is the case with any currency backed by the dollar, ford.


I can't name any country's legal tender not being recognized by another country.  The exchange rate of it may be next to nothing but it's still an agreement that is honored.  It once again goes back to assets.  Even though Zimbabwe's dollar has a terrible exchange rate, Zimbabwe itself has assets and their currency is still recognized as legal tender.



R-T-B said:


> Did you just completely ignore my acknowledgement of that and comparison to Blockchains inherent technological value?


Blockchain is fundamentally a distributed database technology.  Blockchain technology can be divorced from the cryptocurrency incentive system attached to it.

Blockchain is not licensed, copyrighted, trademarked, or anything.  It's intellectual property value is zero as a result of that.



ZenZimZaliben said:


> Not a mistake...a fact. Twitter's stock far exceeds its value and almost completely driven by perception. IF you do not think the way people (the market) perceive a stock as being valuable/worthless isn't a huge factor in stock pricing then you are missing out on something critical here. Market conditions and perception drive the stock value...not how much assets they are sitting on because if that was the case twitter would be worth like 3.50. You can throw as much math at this as you want but in the end it is people trading stock and the value is deemed on their perception of that value.


Twitter collects a lot of information on its users that it sells.  It also has intellectual property and facilities as assets.  Twitter is basically a 21st century version of a TV station.  The reach of it is what makes it valuable.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 28, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Twitter collects a lot of information on its users that it sells.  It also has intellectual property and facilities as assets.  Twitter is basically a 21st century version of a TV station.  The reach of it is what makes it valuable.



Welcome to the 21st century version of currency it's called crypto-currency its reach is world wide and no 1 nation controls it.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 28, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Welcome to the 21st century version of currency it's called crypto-currency its reach is world wide and no 1 nation controls it.



As I said: The technology, the network, this ias cryptos "intrinsic value" and sorry Ford, I don't think it's divorcable at all.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 28, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> The *perceived value* is high but there is tangible value because it *took time/money to create*. It is as tangible as buying stock in Technology stock which has a perceived value far beyond it's intrinsic value. Facebook, Twitter and many others.


That's like saying the barn you built next door is worth a million dollars, or whatever, for the effort you put in it. The answer to crypto is obviously the riddle Varys talked about in the GoT, power lies where


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 28, 2017)

R0H1T said:


> That's like saying the barn you built next door is worth a million dollars, or whatever, for the effort you put in it.



Uh, no, because it's easy to build a barn door and no one is going to say you earned a million dollars an hour.  The tech in bitcoin and crypto is by some industry titans admissions (including, and quoting Bill Gates) "a technical tour de force"  Whoeever or whatever Satoshi Nakamoto was, it's quite honestly amazing what he/she/they achieved.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 28, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> Uh, no, because it's easy to build a barn door and no one is going to say you earned a *million dollars an hour*.  The *tech in bitcoin* and crypto is by some industry titans admissions (including, and quoting Bill Gates) "*a technical tour de force*"  Whoeever or whatever Satoshi Nakamoto was, it's quite honestly amazing what he/she/they achieved.


We're talking about the intrinsic or even *perceived value* of the barn.

It is but BTC itself isn't worth $20k or whatever high it's gonna achieve, not without the (artificial) limited supply & the billions poured into it by many who *I assume* are looking to make a quick buck. In that BTC is like a security (instrument) or some form of investment, where people are looking just for returns. Without this hype, of *unlimited gains*, where do you think BTC would end up or would the avg Joe even invest into BTC? Hence the Varys reference.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 28, 2017)

R0H1T said:


> We're talking about the intrinsic or even *perceived value* of the barn.



By the public though.



> It is but BTC itself isn't worth $20k or whatever high it's gonna achieve, not without the (artificial) limited supply & the billions poured into it by many who *I assume* are looking to make a quick buck. In that BTC is like a security (instrument) or some form of investment, where people are looking just for returns. Without this hype, of *unlimited gains*, where do you think BTC would end up or would the avg Joe even invest into BTC? Hence the Varys reference.



I agree it's a bubble now.  I said that a few posts ago.

I still think it has a ways to pop, too.  But it's not without value entirely.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 28, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> By the public though.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Partly disagree with what you said. I don't really care about BTC per se, but the fallout will hurt many, not unlike the *2008 crash* ~ speaking from personal experience.

This is where the regulators need to step in & take control, I'm pretty sure the ones gaining most out of this current fad are the same bunch who make money every time a bubble bursts. I see use for blockchain in the banking system but crypto coins, without strict regulations are online casinos as far as I'm concerned. The tech has merit, most of the (current) tech based products are useless IMO.


----------



## notb (Dec 28, 2017)

cdawall said:


> I mean I am not going to say it is in the title, but it is in the title.


Oh. That's a big LOL.
The term used here is "virtual currency". It's been introduced into European legislation few years ago.

"Virtual currency" is no more a currency than "false advertising" is advertising or "poor understanding" is understanding.

Seriously, you should really study this topic a bit more. 


ZenZimZaliben said:


> Not a mistake...a fact. Twitter's stock far exceeds its value and almost completely driven by perception. IF you do not think the way people (the market) perceive a stock as being valuable/worthless isn't a huge factor in stock pricing then you are missing out on something critical here. Market conditions and perception drive the stock value...not how much assets they are sitting on because if that was the case twitter would be worth like 3.50. You can throw as much math at this as you want but in the end it is people trading stock and the value is deemed on their perception of that value.


I've said it earlier: I don't know much about Twitter and I won't comment on its stock price.
And you still don't understand the idea. Stocks are not directly related to assets (market capitalization is not equal net assets).
You're building your opinions on a principle that doesn't exist.


----------



## flmatter (Dec 28, 2017)

notb said:


> Stocks are not directly related to assets (market capitalization is not equal net assets).


  umm yes they are  that is where the value comes from initially. Without it everything is worth nothing and you are letting speculators build that value. You have to be and have an  asset, ie something of value for people to buy into for stocks and bonds to really make a difference.  Otherwise it is crap shoot.  Why would I buy stock in something that has no value or assets behind it?  Just like the railroads back in the 1800's   would you buy into a rail line that has no rails?


----------



## Outback Bronze (Dec 28, 2017)

Hey guys,

Would just like to say that I think this (weather crypto is currency or not) is making for a very interesting and awesome discussion.

I was asking my wife and she thinks it isn't. So I ask asked her why...

Then I ask my step father and he thinks it is. So I ask him why...

My best mate thinks it isn't......

Me personally, I think it is more currency than not.

There really is both side's of the fence on this discussion. I really feel its what you personally believe rather than any related given facts on both alternatives.

This might soon change though.
Cheers. 

Edit: 
*Definition of currency*

_plural_ currencies
1a *: *circulation as a medium of exchange
b *: *general use, acceptance, or prevalence


----------



## flmatter (Dec 28, 2017)

at the end of the day a person a has to ask themselves what they are willing to take for payment for services or goods rendered. Whether it is cold hard  $USD or something else barter and trade like it was 150 years ago. That is what defines currency. If you are business and willing to take everything at market value great, or just $usd great.  I am a mechanic and a hobbyist in weaponsmith and photography  I take payment in what I need at the time,  cash, bit, trade, whatever...  I have exchanged some crazy shit to complete jobs. Guess what....  the world still turns and everyone is still happy. I have had gold and silver bars in hand, guns, stocks and bonds, cash, bullets.... I have also traded or sold them off as well. The market is wide open to whoever is buying what. Bit, gold, usd   so at the end it is what the business or you are willing to take.  If they want sheep then so be it....


----------



## trog100 (Dec 28, 2017)

i am into crypto purely as an investment.. whatever people think it is.. commodity.. security or currency i dont really care because it could be any of them.. 

if i want to buy anything i still use paypal and i dont see that changing any time soon.. 

trog


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 28, 2017)

R0H1T said:


> Partly disagree with what you said. I don't really care about BTC per se, but the fallout will hurt many, not unlike the *2008 crash* ~ speaking from personal experience.



I don't think you understand my post.

I think it's already begun it's "pop."  I don't see it rising from here and frankly, the world hasn't ended yet.

I see another coin taking hold personally.  One with more utility.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 28, 2017)

To everyone in this thread its been a great read with zero flaming. Keep it up. Love the debate.

Saw an economist last night talking to Tucker and he was saying bitcoin is an interesting principle but, it has yet to catch the serious eyes of any government. He also seemed to allude to that its a risk UNTIL its regulated and it can't be considered a real currency until then.

What I see in that is what Rome had to do with coin back in the day. Bitcoin is verifiable but it's non-insured and isn't backed by anything. To me that's what keeps it from being a real threat to normal currency.

@R-T-B lost my coins because I lost my job which made me lose access to the servers I mined them on. Passwords and everything were in my desk.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 28, 2017)

south korea has just announced some crypto trading restrictions.. i suppose regulations might be a better word..

having said that crypto has been trading at a %25 premium compared to the rest of the world.. the "mania" is greater there for reasons unknown to me.. 

this is causing another general crypto pull back.. how low it goes is yet to be seen..

i dont think anything has popped yet.. just the normal pull backs on its way up..

trog

ps.. for what its worth the dollar is down and gold is up near the 1300 level..


----------



## notb (Dec 28, 2017)

flmatter said:


> umm yes they are  that is where the value comes from initially. Without it everything is worth nothing and you are letting speculators build that value. You have to be and have an  asset, ie something of value for people to buy into for stocks and bonds to really make a difference.  Otherwise it is crap shoot.  Why would I buy stock in something that has no value or assets behind it?


But every business has (should have ) some value behind it. It's just that not every value is reflected in the balance sheet.
Market valuation comes from future cashflow, i.e. future profits. What you're thinking about is more like a default analysis, i.e. you're evaluating a company based on its bankrupcy estate (what can be sold when you close the business).

But you are right there is some issue with current pricing of few internet/tech companies (in US). But it's not because it's way above their assets. It's because it's way above their earnings.
Investors look at a very simple indicator: P/E ratio (price / earnings).
For large, stable companies with good profit (especially in manufacturing) it's usually between 10 and 20, but 20-40 is still OK for growing internet companies.
Intel's forecasted PE ratio is ~14.
Apple: 19
Oracle: 20
Microsoft: 30
Facebook: 34
SAP: 34
Alphabet: 35
but...
Netflix: *190*
Amazon: *300*



trog100 said:


> i am into crypto purely as an investment.. whatever people think it is.. commodity.. security or currency i dont really care because it could be any of them..


But what are you investing in...? 
The whole financial industry tries to decide what cryptocurrency is for a reason - not because they're bored. The result will determine how we'll use cryptos in the future - hence, what they're worth.
If Bitcoin becomes the new world-wide currency, it'll be worth a lot. If it'll remain just an online payment method, it'll be worth a lot less. If it's banned, it'll be worth close to nothing.

Think about FCOJ (Frozen Concentrated Orange Juice). We know what it is, how it can be used. As a result, the price is fairly stable and it is considered a proper commodity for serious investing.
But for a moment imagine a situation, when we don't know, how FCOJ will be used in the future. Maybe it'll be a ubiquitous food product? Maybe it'll just be an aroma for dish detergent? And every day there would be a new report about how FCOJ affects health and which countries accept or ban it.
Think how this would affect price volatility... And this is where we are with cryptos today.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 28, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> As I said: The technology, the network, this ias cryptos "intrinsic value" and sorry Ford, I don't think it's divorcable at all.


Technology: I could write my own blockchain code right now and even create an ICO if I wanted to.  There is no hurdles for me doing that other than my time.  Blockchain, therefore, has no intellectual property, no assets, no intrinsict value.  It's a concept, no more and no less.

Network: cryptocurrency has no ownership of the network.  It's value, intellectual property, assets, and so on are derived from all the Internet service providers routers, switches, and gateways and the hardware of its users.  The network is a cost, not an asset.  It can only be monetized through coins which also have no intrinsict value.

You don't think it's divorcible because cryptocurrency has no incentive to exist without the coin incentive.  Blockchain does.  If I were a small business with three locations, I could have a server at each location and create a blockchain database that lives on each server.  It creates redundancy and security at realtively low cost.  There is no reason to incentivize third parties to get involved.  That's where blockchain will be in the future, not platforms to raise money.




R-T-B said:


> Uh, no, because it's easy to build a barn door and no one is going to say you earned a million dollars an hour.


Pretty sure I could create a new ICO in less time and cost than it would take me to build a barn to code.  All you need is Visual Studio Community or GCC and a little knowhow.   Building a barn, you need craploads of materials from cement, to screws, to wood.  You'll also need to get the approval of the county or city.  On top of that, your taxes will go up because it adds value to your property (assuming property tax is levied).  Depending on the size of barn, it's going to cost $30,000+ and that's not counting paying yourself.



trog100 said:


> ps.. for what its worth the dollar is down and gold is up near the 1300 level..


Trump administration changed the tax code and Federal Reserve raised interest rates.  Gold typically responds to those changes.



notb said:


> Netflix: *190*
> Amazon: *300*


They both have a lot of growth potential yet.  With Netflix, investors are watching what they do with subscription rates and how subscribers respond.  I think they bumped up the rate twice in recent history and the number of people that unsubscribed wasn't much.  It bolsters the likelihood of future profits.


----------



## Space Lynx (Dec 28, 2017)

South Korea just announced they will be closing down exchanges.  LOL  and here we go boys and girls, add in 2-3 more first world countries and Bitcoin is going to plummet.


----------



## notb (Dec 28, 2017)

Slightly off-topic 


FordGT90Concept said:


> They both have a lot of growth potential yet.  With Netflix, investors are watching what they do with subscription rates and how subscribers respond.  I think they bumped up the rate twice in recent history and the number of people that unsubscribed wasn't much.  It bolsters the likelihood of future profits.


I totally agree with Netflix analysis. They only need to increase their earnings 5 times to reach P/E of ~40, which I would call OK. That's feasible in few years. But current pricing is still somehow optimistic. Netflix was a pioneer of this business, but they're not alone anymore. They're still mostly a US-company (half of their subscribers live in US).
So in some ways they're like Apple. They dominated US, so they dominate english-speaking social media. But they'll have a smaller role globally.
Alternative providers grow in other countries - they offer content that is more interesting to the local customer (often for less money).

As for Amazon, I'm just not sure. The reason they have such a high P/E is because they didn't make much profit until now - everything was reinvested. AWS is starting to shine and it pulled 2016 results already. If it grows, they might reach investors' expectations, but that would mean Amazon dominates cloud computing worldwide. I just don't see what would stop local providers of creating similar services (with lower prices and lags).


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 28, 2017)

notb said:


> You're building your opinions on a principle that doesn't exist.



You are also being super hypocritical. You can't say that a stocks value is based on MORE than it's assets and not agree that the Market PERCEIVES that value beyond the assets that exist. The markets perception of the stock is what drives it beyond its simple holdings/assets.

IS anyone else getting into other ALTCoins? XRP/Ripple has been good from .$52 to $1.42. Looking into Cardano and Iota currently.


----------



## notb (Dec 28, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> You are also being super hypocritical. You can't say that a stocks value is based on MORE than it's assets and not agree that the Market PERCEIVES that value beyond the assets that exist. The markets perception of the stock is what drives it beyond its simple holdings/assets.


I've never said that stock prices are not based on something other than assets. Actually, I'm constantly reminding that stocks are NOT evaluated based on just the balance sheet.

You made other mistakes in your comments - that's why I've opposed them.
You suggested that technology stocks are evaluated differently than those of other types of companies. But more importantly, you said that value of something increases because it takes time or money to create.
While both sentences are false, the second one is just dreadful. Based on what we've seen in the latest net neutrality topics, I'm surprised no one has called you a communist yet.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 28, 2017)

lynx29 said:


> South Korea just announced they will be closing down exchanges.  LOL  and here we go boys and girls, add in 2-3 more first world countries and Bitcoin is going to plummet.



china did pretty much the same thing a couple of months back only a little  more so.. banned crypto exchanges.. bitcoins reaction.. a quick 30% dip.. i think it went down from 4000 to 3000.. and we all know what happened after that.. it was soon on its way up again..

i still think all we are seeing are healthy corrections with crypto doing pretty much the same in 2018 as it did in 2017..

south koreas news produced a "healhty" correction.. the more healthy corrections we get the more stable the whole crpto space becomes.. it shakes out the deadwood and the sillies..

we need to wait until we get into 2018 and then we will know more..

trog

ps.. i am an out and out hodler.. f-ck all is going to shake me out..


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 28, 2017)

notb said:


> I've never said that stock prices are not based on something other than assets. Actually, I'm constantly reminding that stocks are NOT evaluated based on just the balance sheet.
> 
> You made other mistakes in your comments - that's why I've opposed them.
> You suggested that technology stocks are evaluated differently than those of other types of companies. But more importantly, you said that value of something increases because it takes time or money to create.
> While both sentences are false, the second one is just dreadful. Based on what we've seen in the latest net neutrality topics, I'm surprised no one has called you a communist yet.



Neither sentences were wrong. Tech stocks are evaluated differently because they have to be. They aren't sitting on a ton of assets so their value is primarly derived from perceived value. I didn't say "something increase because it takes time or money...I said value can be established through time/money. If I sell you a house I am not just selling the lumber...I am selling the cost to build it, manpower and land...The market sets the pricing of those and all that wraps into the home price. Miners spend money and time on mining crypto--so there is an inherent value there IF the market agrees with that value.

As for the communist statement...Whatever Fascist.


----------



## notb (Dec 29, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Neither sentences were wrong. Tech stocks are evaluated differently because they have to be. They aren't sitting on a ton of assets so their value is primarly derived from perceived value.


They are not. Same methods, same mathematical formulas.


> I didn't say "something increase because it takes time or money...I said value can be established through time/money. If I sell you a house I am not just selling the lumber...I am selling the cost to build it, manpower and land...The market sets the pricing of those and all that wraps into the home price.


But I would not be paying you as much as you've spent on building this house. I would be paying as much as I would spend to build it. This is what I meant: price of an object is not connected to how much resources this particular object consumed. As a result, a building can be worth less than is have cost. Actually, it can be worth a lot less than just the materials, because you can't recycle everything. What you can recycle and sell would form the _bankruptcy estate_, which I've mentioned earlier.
So moving back to crypto...


> Miners spend money and time on mining crypto--so there is an inherent value there IF the market agrees with that value.


No, because there is no estate behind crypto (just like there is no behind most financial instruments - they're just agreements).
Sure, someone who wants to buy crypto may as well mine it himself. So this mining would consume something: computer gear, electricity, time etc. But these are costs (liabilities). And since you can't get these things back from a crypto coin, they don't form any asset other than the market price of coins.
As a result, crypto value comes only from how it can be used, i.e. from being a payment method. If this value is lower than the cost to mine, it just is. Many cryptos, including BTC, were not profitable to mine, so this situation is not unheard-of.
*And if a crypto becomes banned worldwide, it is worth zero - regardless of how much resources it consumed.*


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 29, 2017)

notb said:


> *And if a crypto becomes banned worldwide, it is worth zero - regardless of how much resources it consumed.*


It would still have value, but only through illegal channels (e.g. the dark web, large drug deals, etc.).  Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if Bitcoin was invented by a drug cartel explicitly for that purpose.


----------



## silkstone (Dec 29, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> You are also being super hypocritical. You can't say that a stocks value is based on MORE than it's assets and not agree that the Market PERCEIVES that value beyond the assets that exist. The markets perception of the stock is what drives it beyond its simple holdings/assets.
> 
> IS anyone else getting into other ALTCoins? XRP/Ripple has been good from .$52 to $1.42. Looking into Cardano and Iota currently.



I'm holding some Ripple. Not a huge amount as I just buy/sell to reshuffle my portfolio from mining. I also held about $15 worth of ZCL, unfortunately I sold it a day before it skyrocketed! Had I waited just 3 days, that $15 would have been worth $500! I didn't even need the money, I was just getting rid of my 'junk' coins. Big mistake.


----------



## notb (Dec 29, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It would still have value, but only through illegal channels (e.g. the dark web, large drug deals, etc.).


Think drugs vs guns.
Using hard drugs is illegal. Since there are no legal uses for e.g. heroin, you can albo be prosecuted for manufacturing or possessing.
Using guns is not illegal in general. So even though they are used by criminals (and this surely increases the market price), you are allowed to sell, keep and use them.

If Bitcoin was banned, it would not be a legal payment method anymore. As a result it would not have any official value and you could be charged for mining or trading. Moreover, PC parts' manufacturers could legally block mining. So yes, it would have some value (i.e. someone would be willing to buy them from you), but it wouldn't be officially quoted.


> Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if Bitcoin was invented by a drug cartel explicitly for that purpose.


Well yes... there are a few theories like this one. Invented by criminals, by GPU / CPU / ASIC manufacturers, by North Korea, by banks and so on.
Is it true for Bitcoin? Maybe. I don't know.
What I do know is that a mob, a GPU manufacturer or a dictatorship state can easily create another coin and make it very attractive (because they'll be having some "extra profit").


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 29, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It would still have value, but only through illegal channels (e.g. the dark web, large drug deals, etc.).  Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if Bitcoin was invented by a drug cartel explicitly for that purpose.


Getting warmer. Next up 512 bit encryption.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 29, 2017)

A lot of big drug busts occur through following the money.  Convert money to crypto at the point of sale and they protect their ecosystem.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 30, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Technology: I could write my own blockchain code right now and even create an ICO if I wanted to. There is no hurdles for me doing that other than my time. Blockchain, therefore, has no intellectual property, no assets, no intrinsict value. It's a concept, no more and no less.



And where is your network of users, Ford?



FordGT90Concept said:


> Building a barn...



Door, ford.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 30, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> And where is your network of users, Ford?


The moment the profit is gone, users leave the market.  No value to speak of really.  The same can be said for virtually all currencies.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 30, 2017)

bitcoin is heading down towards $1200 dollars and taking most other coins with it.. 

it looks bad but its only down the where it was three weeks ago.. i owner how low it will go.. naysayers comments of zero should be taken as the bollocks they are.. he he

trog


----------



## Totally (Dec 30, 2017)

notb said:


> Think drugs vs guns.
> Using hard drugs is illegal. Since there are no legal uses for e.g. heroin, you can albo be prosecuted for manufacturing or possessing.
> Using guns is not illegal in general. So even though they are used by criminals (and this surely increases the market price), you are allowed to sell, keep and use them.
> 
> ...



Uh you are glossing over one major fact, in your guns v. drugs analogy. Drugs are classified as contraband, and that's what makes the illegal to manfacture, distribute, and use, guns are just heavily controlled goods with certain types being contraband for civilian use. So unless crytocurrency itself is outlawed, mining and possesing would never be a crime.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 30, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> The moment the profit is gone, users leave the market.  No value to speak of really.  The same can be said for virtually all currencies.



That hasn't happened historically speaking with crypto, and it's had it's fair share of peaks and crashes, but we shall see.


----------



## Totally (Dec 30, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> Other currencies are still the asset behind it.  There's no asset behind "gold" either you know.  It also has no ceiling or floor beyond it's interested market.



I know I'm probably late but seriously how did you write such a statement with a clear conscience? It has a very real and hard floor because of it's material and chemical properties it has a use in just about every industry, not just scientific, food, medicine, technology, manufacturing, cosmetics, it would be easier to name the sectors that have no use for it or can substitute it. Because of that, that is why it is used as a currency and people are willing to invest into to because at some point someone needs, not _wants_, needs to pay money for it not just because it is rare and shiny. It is this aspect that crytocurrencies have failed to emulate.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 30, 2017)

Totally said:


> I know I'm probably late but seriously how did you write such a statement with a clear conscience? It has a very real and hard floor because of it's material and chemical properties it has a use in just about every industry, not just scientific, food, medicine, technology, manufacturing, cosmetics, it would be easier to name the sectors that have no use for it or can substitute it. Because of that, that is why it is used as a currency and people are willing to invest into to because at some point someone needs, not _wants_, needs to pay money for it not just because it is rare and shiny.



I know that.  I'm arguing Bitcoin and other cryptos network is their intrinsic value.

Gold has no floor "beyond it's interested market."  That's an important qualifier, because it's native properties in industry ensure it will always have some demand...  unless there is a big shakeup in how tech the worldover is done or something.

Likewise, unless bitcoins global reach is somehow compromised, it will maintain value.  Really that simple.

My conscience is clean, thank you for checking.


----------



## 64K (Dec 30, 2017)

Totally said:


> I know I'm probably late but seriously how did you write such a statement with a clear conscience? It has a very real and hard floor because of it's material and chemical properties it has a use in just about every industry, not just scientific, food, medicine, technology, manufacturing, cosmetics, it would be easier to name the sectors that have no use for it or can substitute it. Because of that, that is why it is used as a currency and people are willing to invest into to because at some point someone needs, not _wants_, needs to pay money for it not just because it is rare and shiny.



I would cite jewelry as the most obvious value of gold. Our most basic perceptions of value always include gold. Our minds are hard wired to perceive it that way. You don't need gold to live so it doesn't rank up there with food, water, shelter and clothing but once the necessities are met then our focus moves to providing the desires. Does anyone know anyone that doesn't own some gold jewelry after the necessities for life are taken care of? I don't.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 30, 2017)

take the precious metals.. they are a "solid" they vary massively in price.. silver has more uses than gold but is much cheaper.. the only reason being peoples perceptions of value.. they perceive gold to be of much greater value.. the key word being perceive..

all this bitcoin has no value because its not "real" argument is total bollocks.. if people perceive it to have value it has value..

in fact as we move further forwards into the coming digital age being "solid" will become a disadvantage.. its still not possible to move solid objects about instantly via the internet.. 

trog

ps.. the historical ratio between silver and gold is 17 to 1... its currently about 70 to 1.. perception do change as is the nature of them..


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 30, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> That hasn't happened historically speaking with crypto, and it's had it's fair share of peaks and crashes, but we shall see.


By "leave the market" I meant trade in LiteCoin instead of BTC, for example.  Once people sell what they hold, they're no longer a user.  There's nothing chaining them to a specific market.  If they sell all crypto then yeah, they leave the cryptocurrency market altogether.  What I am trying to get at is that cryptocoin (and USD) users aren't tied like Twitter and Facebook users are. Twitter and Facebook, users become residents.  Currencies they're revolving doors.



R-T-B said:


> Likewise, unless bitcoins global reach is somehow compromised, it will maintain value.  Really that simple.


USD and gold both have more global reach than crypto does.  Reach doesn't determine their value.  The value of all three is determined by supply and demand.  USD's supply attempts to match demand.  Gold supply has always been fairly steady with global GDP growth; industry and fear of fiat have caused demand to fluctuate wildly.  BTC supply started fast and exponentially decreases; demand is purely driven by fear of missing out (FOMO).  Of the three BTC is the least stable because of the supply (there will eventually be no more expansion) and demand (FOMO) paradigm.


----------



## Totally (Dec 30, 2017)

64K said:


> I would cite jewelry as the most obvious value of gold. Our most basic perceptions of value always include gold. Our minds are hard wired to perceive it that way. You don't need gold to live so it doesn't rank up there with food, water, shelter and clothing but once the necessities are met then our focus moves to providing the desires. Does anyone know anyone that doesn't own some gold jewelry after the necessities for life are taken care of? I don't.



Quite a bit of gold dust is used in food manufacturing, it is the reason why there is quite a health interest in trying to figure out a cost effective way to reclaim that gold from our sewage. I believe jewelry ranks lower, certainly behind electronics, cosmetics and technology.


----------



## 64K (Dec 30, 2017)

Totally said:


> Quite a bit of gold dust is used in food manufacturing, it is the reason why there is quite a health interest in trying to figure out a cost effective way to reclaim that gold from our sewage.



It almost never fails. No matter what the subject is for debate here it usually degenerates into shit.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 30, 2017)

a UK crypto poll.. 

https://coinreport.net/uk-gen-ys-to-own-crypto/

trog


----------



## notb (Dec 30, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> I know that.  I'm arguing Bitcoin and other cryptos network is their intrinsic value.


Even if it is, it's not as safe as with materials. Bitcoin's value is in its popularity. So another coin can appear that would replace BTC. Or it can be banned. Or the transaction costs might be just too much (they already kind of are).


> That's an important qualifier, because it's native properties in industry ensure it will always have some demand...  unless there is a big shakeup in how tech the worldover is done or something.


Here's the thing... "a shakeup" is extremely unlikely. Gold, as a material, has some great, very unique properties. It is very useful to our civilization.
In fact all chemical elements have unique properties, because... well... because that's how physics work. 


64K said:


> I would cite jewelry as the most obvious value of gold.


Correct. 50% of gold demand comes from jewelry, almost 10% from industry and the rest is used for investing.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/274684/global-demand-for-gold-by-purpose-quarterly-figures/


> You don't need gold to live so it doesn't rank up there with food, water, shelter and clothing but once the necessities are met then our focus moves to providing the desires.


Well... you don't need copper as well, but look around... Gold is very useful in industry (e.g. in medicine), but these uses aren't very well known. A typical person asked about it will only recall that gold is used as a conductor, because they've heard about gold-plated headphone plugs.


trog100 said:


> silver has more uses than gold but is much cheaper..


Silver has more uses, but they're less high-tech and profitable, because it's properties aren't as interesting as those of gold. But most importantly: *silver is 10 times more common*.


> in fact as we move further forwards into the coming digital age being "solid" will become a disadvantage.. its still not possible to move solid objects about instantly via the internet..


Gold is very digital-friendly. We don't move gold. We haven't done that for decades of gold-based currencies. Gold remains in a vault. It only matters who is on the list of eligible to take it home. It's all just accountancy.



trog100 said:


> a UK crypto poll..
> https://coinreport.net/uk-gen-ys-to-own-crypto/


A crypto-related pool organized by a crypto exchange ends up with a favourable result. Seriously, even if you believe in cryptos having an important role in our future, you can't believe in things like that...

I'd love to see the details: like what where actual questions and answers. And how did they choose those 2000 people.  Has anyone seen that?


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 30, 2017)

notb said:


> Even if it is, it's not as safe as with materials. Bitcoin's value is in its popularity. So another coin can appear that would replace BTC. Or it can be banned.



Of course.  But the argument I was countering was that they have NO intrinsic value.  That is simply untrue.



> Or the transaction costs might be just too much (they already kind of are).



With bitcoin, yes.  That's more a design limitation though.



Totally said:


> Quite a bit of gold dust is used in food manufacturing, it is the reason why there is quite a health interest in trying to figure out a cost effective way to reclaim that gold from our sewage. I believe jewelry ranks lower, certainly behind electronics, cosmetics and technology.



I'd really like to see some statistics to back this up.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 30, 2017)

this thread is being ruined by crypto trolls.. notb being the most glaring example..

green team red team.. a dyed in the wool bias so ingrained it will never shift.. nether side will convince the other side.. and its all been said before.. he he

the trolls seem to have an answer for everything and they have taken on the job of dissing cryto and its getting f-cking boring..

trog


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 30, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> Of course.  But the argument I was countering was that they have NO intrinsic value.  That is simply untrue.


Imagine if there was a global EMP event where all the electronics died.  Cryptocoin would be worth how much?  Legal tender would be worth how much? Gold would be worth how much?  My answers: nothing, less but still something (systems would fall back to their old analog ways and recover fairly quickly; coinage has intrinsic value), and a lot (grows from the scare), respectively.  

Defintion of intrinsic: "Of or relating to the essential nature of a thing; inherent"

Nothing purely digital has intrinisic value.  It has extrinisic value: people assign it value, it doesn't come from within.


----------



## notb (Dec 31, 2017)

trog100 said:


> the trolls seem to have an answer for everything and they have taken on the job of dissing cryto and its getting f-cking boring..


Do you, at least occasionally, consider a chance that "the trolls" are right?
That maybe they are really into investing or finance, they have the knowledge needed to analyze the situation and they just know better?

Listen... this is your thread. You've called it '*bitcoin down to $14000.. "healthy correction"*' and maybe you were looking for consolation, not honesty.
If you don't like sincere opinions, I can stop posting here immediately. It's not really what online discussions were invented for, but I don't want to cause you pain.

I'll open my own thread called '*bitcoin down to $12662... WTF is a bitcoin?*' and welcome all the people that would like to share or learn what "intrinsic value" means. That said, I'm sure we'll all learn this sooner or later.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 31, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Imagine if there was a global EMP event where all the electronics died.  Cryptocoin would be worth how much?  Legal tender would be worth how much? Gold would be worth how much?  My answers: nothing, less but still something (systems would fall back to their old analog ways and recover fairly quickly; coinage has intrinsic value), and a lot (grows from the scare), respectively.
> 
> Defintion of intrinsic: "Of or relating to the essential nature of a thing; inherent"
> 
> Nothing purely digital has intrinisic value.  It has extrinisic value: people assign it value, it doesn't come from within.



I consider that event so outlandish that frankly I wasn't even considering it.  Which is basically why I consider it practically meaningless to this discussion.

I doubt any form of society would survive your scenario to even debate this.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 31, 2017)

It was just a hypothetical to demonstrate the point: cryptocurrencies have no intrinsic value.  Digital concepts have to be realized to gain intrinsic value (e.g. building an aircraft from engineering designs: the aircraft has intrinsic value while the designs for it have extrinsic value).


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 31, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It was just a hypothetical to demonstrate the point: cryptocurrencies have no intrinsic value.  Digital concepts have to be realized to gain intrinsic value (e.g. building an aircraft from engineering designs: the aircraft has intrinsic value while the designs for it have extrinsic value).



I guess it comes down to where you draw the line at "intrinsic" is my point.  If there are no humans, gold sure as heck has no "intrinsic value" either.

I prefer to draw the line at things that have at least a chance of happening and me surviving.

As long as mankind still has a functioning communication grid, crypto will continue to function.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 31, 2017)

RE: "No humans:" gold still has intrinsic value, just not to humans.  Just because a resource is untapped by humans doesn't mean it's not valuable.  Case in point: that almost entirely iron asteroid in the asteroid belt that would crash the iron market if it ever got tapped.  No value to humans now but it likely will in the not-so-distant future because almost pure iron has intrinsic value

RE: "Crypto will continue to function:" Same could be said for computer worms, Trojans, and viruses.  Doesn't mean it's something that _should_ continue to function.  Cryptocurrencies are the digital malware form of pyramid schemes: those that hold the largest share of coins profit the most from people lower down buying into it.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 31, 2017)

I'll concede the point on the wording of intrinsic as I admittedly was not entirely familiar with the use of the word.

But I can't agree with your second paragraph in the least.

PS:  You should likewise concede your point on it being a "currency."


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 31, 2017)

I did some 80 posts ago:


FordGT90Concept said:


> Yes, point (a) is false as quoted;


Currency in it's most basic definition is medium of exchange.  Anything can be used as a currency.

How is cryptocurrencies not a pyramid scheme and not malicious in its design?  Without FOMO, the pyramid can't grow and thus, can't be profitable for anyone.  It's also designed to be wasteful with compute resources.


----------



## 64K (Dec 31, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I did some 80 posts ago:
> 
> Currency in it's most basic definition is medium of exchange.  Anything can be used as a currency.
> 
> How is cryptocurrencies not a pyramid scheme and not malicious in its design?  Without FOMO, the pyramid can't grow and thus, can't be profitable for anyone.  It's also designed to be wasteful with compute resources.



It is the financial tech equivalent of a Pyramid Scheme for the most part.


----------



## Vario (Dec 31, 2017)

Modern version of the Dutch Tulip Mania.


----------



## 64K (Dec 31, 2017)

Vario said:


> Modern version of the Dutch Tulip Mania.[/QUOTE



Well said.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 31, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> How is cryptocurrencies not a pyramid scheme and not malicious in its design? Without FOMO, the pyramid can't grow and thus, can't be profitable for anyone.



You're assuming that the recent craze is part of the intended design.  I disagree with that claim.  Crypto neither needs nor desires this craze to function.  It was functioning fine before it.  It will function fine (and harmlessly, dare I even say benificially?) when it all settles.




FordGT90Concept said:


> It's also designed to be wasteful with compute resources.



I've been through this with you.  PoW is wasteful, at least as presently designed.  Crypto is not inherently wasteful.



64K said:


> Well said.



And resaid since almost 2012.  I'm pretty confident this is a bubble, but I think it's popping will be far less dramatic than most here envision.  And I've been pretty dang accurate on calling these things.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 31, 2017)

debating whether bitcoin has real value or not is like debating whether the entire worlds financial system is real or not..

currently everything is in a bubble nothing is secure its all pumped up by too much free money..

as i have already said i fancied building a mining machine.. this got me into crypto in general..

i now have money invested in crypto which makes me want to see it survive for a while at least..

i think the value of pretty much everything except for a loaf of bread is based on nothing other than perception.. art. fancy cars.. 10 grand watches which tell the  time no better than 20 quid watches.. the list goes on..

we are what we perceive ourselves to be.. "reality" is what we perceive it to be..

what i do find pretty naive is the belief that fiat or the current "value" of fiat is secure.. it isnt.. that the stock markets are secure.. they aint..

if notb is for real and what he says he is he must be aware of all this bubble sh-t.. from what he says he dosnt seem to be.. unless being part of a system means you end up not being able to see the wood for f-cking trees.. this could be the case it often is..

all crypto is down.. its the last day of 2017.. i think its an end of year take fiat profit tidy up the books  event.. but it could be the beginning of the crypto end.. 2018 should tells us more.. i do find the entire thing rather fascinating.. he he

happy new year everyone and the best of all possible luck..

trog


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 31, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> You're assuming that the recent craze is part of the intended design.  I disagree with that claim.  Crypto neither needs nor desires this craze to function.  It was functioning fine before it.  It will function fine (and harmlessly, dare I even say benificially?) when it all settles.


Before "the recent craze" it was worth next to nothing (*cough*what's it's really worth*cough*).  No one could really even profit on mining BTC until courts approved its trade and other cryptocurrencies (especially ETH) began trading through BTC.  In other words: by itself it was doomed to always be worth next to nothing.


----------



## verycharbroiled (Dec 31, 2017)

Totally said:


> Quite a bit of gold dust is used in food manufacturing, it is the reason why there is quite a health interest in trying to figure out a cost effective way to reclaim that gold from our sewage. I believe jewelry ranks lower, certainly behind electronics, cosmetics and technology.






R-T-B said:


> I'd really like to see some statistics to back this up.



while there is gold in sewage none of the sources i quickly looked up mentioned gold from the food industry as any being any significant amount. its mainly from industrial processes and general wash off of things into drains etc... unless food workers are losing gold jewelry by accidentally dropping things into food vats and pies and such.

anyway a bit off topic.


----------



## Totally (Dec 31, 2017)

verycharbroiled said:


> while there is gold in sewage none of the sources i quickly looked up mentioned gold from the food industry as any being any significant amount. its mainly from industrial processes and general wash off of things into drains etc... unless food workers are losing gold jewelry by accidentally dropping things into food vats and pies and such.
> 
> anyway a bit off topic.



Google, E175 as food additive.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Dec 31, 2017)

trog100 said:


> i think the value of pretty much everything except for a loaf of bread is based on nothing other than perception.. art. fancy cars.. 10 grand watches which tell the  time no better than 20 quid watches.. the list goes on..
> 
> we are what we perceive ourselves to be.. "reality" is what we perceive it to be..
> 
> ...



Yes I also consider this very naive to blatantly refuse to accept that the People/Perception are the driving factor in any economy, stocks value, currency...the people are the market. (Which is why he thinks I am a Communist..which is the wrong description...I am a Capitalist.) I also think it has something to do with location. He is in Poland, Warsaw and they do have a different outlook on how an economy should be run. 

"Poland has a mixed economic system which includes a variety of private freedom, combined with centralized economic planning and government regulation."
 VS USA - This is also referred to as "pure *capitalism*" or "laissez-faire *capitalism*." 

So from his standpoint, up-bringing, education.. maybe this all does make sense to him..but in a pure capitalist view point his stance just doesn't hold water for me. I mean if his government is dictating what price to set for something then yeah that can sort of remove some of the market perception.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 31, 2017)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Yes I also consider this very naive to blatantly refuse to accept that the People/Perception are the driving factor in any economy, stocks value, currency...the people are the market. (Which is why he thinks I am a Communist..which is the wrong description...I am a Capitalist.) I also think it has something to do with location. He is in Poland, Warsaw and they do have a different outlook on how an economy should be run.
> 
> "Poland has a mixed economic system which includes a variety of private freedom, combined with centralized economic planning and government regulation."
> VS USA - This is also referred to as "pure *capitalism*" or "laissez-faire *capitalism*."
> ...



Poland  is relatively east European poor.. most of them have decamped to the UK.. i have a house full of them next door to me and its rare to hear an english voice in my local aldi super market.. 

trog


----------



## verycharbroiled (Dec 31, 2017)

Totally said:


> E175 as food additive.


interesting, thanks.

only gold in food i was aware of was those gold flack's in tequlia. a drink i dont touch now ever since a bad experience i had with it.

well, the latest bad experience with it anyway.


----------



## 64K (Dec 31, 2017)

trog100 said:


> Poland  is relatively east European poor.. most of them have decamped to the UK.. i have a house full of them next door to me and its rare to hear an english voice in my local aldi super market..
> 
> trog



You have a house full of Polish people next door to you? Did you really just say that? lmao

Archie Bunker lives on.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 1, 2018)

64K said:


> You have a house full of Polish people next door to you? Did you really just say that? lmao
> 
> Archie Bunker lives on.



i did.. its quite popular in the UK now to buy houses to let to young east european immigrants.. the house next door to me happens to be one of them..

its mostly ukrainians now it used to be the polish..

who the f-ck is archie bunker.. he he..

trog


----------



## 64K (Jan 1, 2018)

trog100 said:


> who the f-ck is archie bunker


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 1, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Before "the recent craze" it was worth next to nothing (*cough*what's it's really worth*cough*).



a lot more than next to nothing ford. Consult a price graph. We're talking a couple hundred per btc at worst.



> No one could really even profit on mining BTC until courts approved its trade and other cryptocurrencies (especially ETH) began trading.



Profit from holding is not the point of a currency, ford.

Mining is likewise not supposed to be profitable. According to Satoshi himself, it's only supposed to reimburse the electric at best.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 1, 2018)

"Price graphs" weren't created until after it established itself as something worth trading.  Remember buying a pizza costing thousands of BTC?  That probably is about what it was worth in terms of electricity.  As you said, it wasn't profitable and only a small population got involved in the beginning.  It only became profitable and worth mining after BTC became an intermediary for exchange.

See the irony in there?  When it served as a reward for itself, it wasn't a currency and was worth next to nothing.  When people started treating it as a currency it became a self destructive pyramid scheme.


----------



## Jetster (Jan 1, 2018)




----------



## R-T-B (Jan 1, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> "Price graphs" weren't created until after it established itself as something worth trading.



The craze happened way way later than price graphs, which have existed since the early days of Mt Gox.



FordGT90Concept said:


> It only became profitable and worth mining after BTC became an intermediary for exchange.



Patently false.  The majority of 2014-2015 is a prime example of non-profitable mining timeframes.  I know, because I lost a lot of money then.


----------



## verycharbroiled (Jan 1, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Patently false.  The majority of 2014-2015 is a prime example of non-profitable mining timeframes.  I know, because I lost a lot of money then.



what were you mining and with what hardware in that timeframe? my memory is a bit hazy (corrupted even?) as i am not even finished with my 1st coffee right now but i think i remember my fpga was *just* able to make a profit around then. barely.

that was around the end of gpu mining (for btc anyway) and the long crypto winter after the mtgox meltdown wasnt it? sorry brain is stalled out, and it wont start up for another few coffees (well hopefully the brain can restart, things look iffy at the moment), so errors in above thinking are purely mine.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 7, 2018)

verycharbroiled said:


> what were you mining and with what hardware in that timeframe? my memory is a bit hazy (corrupted even?) as i am not even finished with my 1st coffee right now but i think i remember my fpga was *just* able to make a profit around then. barely.
> 
> that was around the end of gpu mining (for btc anyway) and the long crypto winter after the mtgox meltdown wasnt it? sorry brain is stalled out, and it wont start up for another few coffees (well hopefully the brain can restart, things look iffy at the moment), so errors in above thinking are purely mine.



Litecoin on a gpu.


----------



## verycharbroiled (Jan 7, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Litecoin on a gpu.



yeah that seems right, once i switched to btc mining on a fpga i tried litecoin on my gpus. wasnt worth it.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Patently false.  The majority of 2014-2015 is a prime example of non-profitable mining timeframes.  I know, because I lost a lot of money then.


You're forgetting that it takes time for government to catch up. "The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, CFTC, classified bitcoin as a commodity in September 2015."  That's when it started trending upwards.  Everyone could start converting USD to BTC and back again at that point...and so BTC became the USD of crypto.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 17, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> You're forgetting that it takes time for government to catch up. "The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, CFTC, classified bitcoin as a commodity in September 2015."  That's when it started trending upwards.  Everyone could start converting USD to BTC and back again at that point...and so BTC became the USD of crypto.



It was convertible to USD and trending upwards way before then, ford.  I was around then.  Consult some historical coinbase charts for fun.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 17, 2018)

i am down four f-cking grand down over the last three days its time it started trending upwards again.. he he

and i recon its time some mericans caught up with the fact the US aint the driving force behind crypto.. its the asians.. 

trog


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> It was convertible to USD and trending upwards way before then, ford.  I was around then.  Consult some historical coinbase charts for fun.


Traded for, sure, directly convertible as a commodity, not so much.  There's a big difference between the two.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 17, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Traded for, sure, directly convertible as a commodity, not so much.  There's a big difference between the two.



There were direct usd<->btc exchanges operating.  What is the difference exactly?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 17, 2018)

http://www.cftc.gov/About/MissionResponsibilities/index.htm
TL;DR: it increased confidence in the market by legitimizing it.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 17, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> http://www.cftc.gov/About/MissionResponsibilities/index.htm
> TL;DR: it increased confidence in the market by legitimizing it.



There were several factors driving it upwards prior.  That was certainly a mark of legitimization, but you'll be hard pressed to convince me that is the sole reason it rose so drastically in value.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 17, 2018)

Pretty much everyone left BTC for dead.  Then CFTC made that announcement, and people started trading altcoins for BTC to convert it to legal tender.  It was slow at first but it picked up speed.


----------



## notb (Jan 17, 2018)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> He is in Poland, Warsaw and they do have a different outlook on how an economy should be run.


Wow. This went pretty personal.
The idea of economy in Poland is pretty similar to other European countries, so you don't have to worry that much. 


> "Poland has a mixed economic system which includes a variety of private freedom, combined with centralized economic planning and government regulation."


F... me. Where is this rubbish quoted from? It's 30 years old at least.
How is it possible that you don't know better?


> So from his standpoint, up-bringing, education.. maybe this all does make sense to him..but in a pure capitalist view point his stance just doesn't hold water for me. I mean if his government is dictating what price to set for something then yeah that can sort of remove some of the market perception.


And you're still going on! Man! Use wikipedia or ask your teacher! :-o


trog100 said:


> Poland  is relatively east European poor.. most of them have decamped to the UK.. i have a house full of them next door to me and its rare to hear an english voice in my local aldi super market..


Actually Poland is relatively OK now. Surely, no match for UK, but doing great compared to other EE countries.
And man... for such a successful crypto miner, you're still remaining very humble - buying stuff at a German discount supermarket with all those nasty Poles around you! 


notb said:


> I'll open my own thread called '*bitcoin down to $12662... WTF is a bitcoin?*' and welcome all the people that would like to share or learn what "intrinsic value" means. That said, I'm sure we'll all learn this sooner or later.


Follow up: how's the learning process going? 
Maybe I should have made that thread after all...


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 17, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Pretty much everyone left BTC for dead.



Yeah, no.

I mean your free to think what you want, but I can't think of a less accurate assessment of those times from my view.



notb said:


> Follow up: how's the learning process going?
> Maybe I should have made that thread after all...



That would be too easy, given the clockwork bitcoin collapses in January.


----------



## notb (Jan 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> That would be too easy, given the clockwork bitcoin collapses in January.


Yeah, I've seen that funny discussion. 
But I don't want to write there - I kind of got bored of these quasi-economical disputes. I come here just for entertainment and occasional xenophobic outbursts. :-D

It's not a "clockwork collapse", but just a major correction - sometimes triggered by external effects, sometimes not. These moves are happening few times a year.
The only reason why they seem to happen in January, is that it's a unique month - the first one of the year (i.e. new legal acts in force, change of corporate strategies and so on). I.e. there are a lot of triggers.

And the amplitude of this move is nothing special either. It's just that miners (or crypto supporters) are too attached to the asset and they treat an upward movement as expected, so they're shocked by a correction.

When you look at a 5Y log plot, you can see that BTCUSD is actually beautifully stable.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 17, 2018)

Like it or not, even on your chart, it still tanks 10-30% just about every January.  I've noticed this for a bit.   I made jokes about it being kids selling daddies useless "stocking bitcoin" it's been so long.


----------



## notb (Jan 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Like it or not, even on your chart, it still tanks 10-30% just about every January.  I've noticed this for a bit.   I made jokes about it being kids selling daddies useless "stocking bitcoin" it's been so long.


Of course. But it also dropped significantly on 10-15 different occasions since 2014. It gives roughly 1 correction every quarter - distributed fairly regularly (most likely because BTC is a constant bubble ).
What I meant is: assuming there's a correction due in December-February period, early January is the best moment, because of all the year-end triggers. Nothing special about it.

My humble (as always ) suggestion is only this: just because BTC went up after the last 3 corrections in January doesn't mean, that it will happen again. Don't build a pension saving strategy around this.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 17, 2018)

notb said:


> Don't build a pension saving strategy around this.



I never would, but I'll make forum bets 'till the cows come home.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Jan 17, 2018)

notb said:


> Wow. This went pretty personal.
> 
> It went personal only in the sense that your OPINION is personal and influenced by many factors..one being where you and I live differ quite a bit. Don't take offense just stating there are different ways to look at economics.
> 
> ...



When BTC falls below $300 I will officially be losing money...until then I just enjoy the ride...buy in these wonderful dips and HOLD.


----------



## notb (Jan 17, 2018)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> https://globaledge.msu.edu/countries/poland/memo


That's a LOL...
1) I don't really know much about this page - is it considered serious / credible in US?
Do they know about the broken HTML? 
2) The fragment saying that a country "has  a  mixed  economic  system  which includes  a  variety  of  private  freedom,  combined  with centralized economic planning and government regulation", in exact this form or with slight modifications, appears in summaries of the following countries (and surely many more that I haven't checked):
Germany, France, Ireland, Spain, Poland, Slovakia, Belgium, Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Croatia, Romania
and also: South Korea, Australia, Egypt, Thailand.

So when you said "they do have a different outlook on how an economy should be run" did you mean most of Europe or much of capitalist world?


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 17, 2018)

notb said:


> That's a LOL...
> 1) I don't really know much about this page - is it considered serious / credible in US?



It's a .edu, so it's an educational associated establishment at least.



> Do they know about the broken HTML?



What HTML?  It's a PDF man.


----------



## notb (Jan 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> It's a .edu, so it's an educational associated establishment at least.


I'm aware of the domain hierarchy, but thank you. 
Being an "educational associated establishment" doesn't really tell much about the quality. 
@ZenZimZaliben quoted this page like if it was a popular, credible source.


> What HTML?  It's a PDF man.


If you save it as PDF, it's a PDF. But before that happens, it's just HTML rendered as PDF. 
You can actually view the source.
And you can see the broken <p>'s in 2 paragraphs (languages and religions).


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Jan 17, 2018)

Who gives a crap about their less than stellar HTML...lol. OMG!! I just looked at http://www.um.warszawa.pl/en and noticed they didn't use external script links but instead just dumped raw CSS and JS in the raw html..THE HORROR..Wow...That totally discredits the entire country. Not to mention the lack of Alt/Title tags..guess they don't care about Visually Challenged people either. /s


----------



## notb (Jan 19, 2018)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Who gives a crap about their less than stellar HTML...lol. OMG!! I just looked at http://www.um.warszawa.pl/en and noticed they didn't use external script links but instead just dumped raw CSS and JS in the raw html..THE HORROR..Wow...That totally discredits the entire country. Not to mention the lack of Alt/Title tags..guess they don't care about Visually Challenged people either. /s


Seriously man, the <p> thing was meant to be a joke. The rest wasn't.
The problem in your comment was that you're making personal comments based on one's nationality - that's pretty bad on its own.
Also, since it seems you don't know much about Europe, I just suggest using better sources. These summaries from msu.edu are very dated and inaccurate - they will only confuse you...


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Jan 19, 2018)

notb said:


> Seriously man, the <p> thing was meant to be a joke. The rest wasn't.
> The problem in your comment was that you're making personal comments based on one's nationality - that's pretty bad on its own.
> Also, since it seems you don't know much about Europe, I just suggest using better sources. These summaries from msu.edu are very dated and inaccurate - they will only confuse you...



I was stating that where you are from and how you are raised can change your perceptions of things. Like Economic theory. I am 100% sure there are least 4 different ways to view Economics. But if you really want to take that personally then that's up to you.

Also on the Internet..when someone places a "/s" at the end of a statement it means Sarcastic and not Serious.

I will just continue seeing the world through my narrow, rose tinted, frame of reference. In the meantime you can keep your opinion and I can have mine. 

But whatever... way off topic now.

On a more positive note :


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 19, 2018)

been browsing a backlog of posts and i despair at the Basic knowledge of worldly things Exibited by some they quote or make statements  not irrelevant but glaringly WRONG
an "example" ( not picking on you by the way )


notb said:


> Think drugs vs guns.
> Using hard drugs is illegal. Since there are no legal uses for e.g. heroin,



legality and Criminality Vary by Different legal Jurisdiction
Heroin and Derivative drugs Such as morphine and methodone have legal use in the Medical Trade.

or do they use a baseball bat as anaesthesia  where you live  

When you post such utterly incorrect Statements   its hard to Take your posts as seriously as they might have been taken.


----------



## Sasqui (Jan 19, 2018)

Hey, did anyone happen to notice that Bitcoin is sitting at around $11,500 now? *

*he says... wondering if this thread is about the price of Bitcoin


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Jan 19, 2018)

Sasqui said:


> Hey, did anyone happen to notice that Bitcoin is sitting at around $11,500 now? *
> 
> *he says... wondering if this thread is about the price of Bitcoin



Yeah we derailed it pretty badly. Sorry about that. Went on a different tangent.

I wasn't happy it dropped to $9.6k for a few hours...but it bounced right back up. Been through this Mid January drop before...several times. But I was glad to see the floor seems to be 10k now...for now.


----------



## Sasqui (Jan 19, 2018)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> But I was glad to see the floor seems to be 10k now...for now.



From all I've read, the price of virtually all CC's is in the hands of only a few.  And their interest is to make money, so as long as that's the case, you'll see ups and downs... they make money when it goes down too.


----------



## hat (Jan 19, 2018)

Sure. The price of BTC doesn't concern me too much though. In fact I could stand to see it go quite a bit lower as long as it doesn't take mining profitability down with it. That just means I'd get more BTC from mining and wind up with more value later when it inevitably goes up again.


----------



## Papahyooie (Jan 19, 2018)

hat said:


> Sure. The price of BTC doesn't concern me too much though. In fact I could stand to see it go quite a bit lower as long as it doesn't take mining profitability down with it. That just means I'd get more BTC from mining and wind up with more value later when it inevitably goes up again.



Exactly. Dollar profitability is down, but BTC profitability is up. And if you're selling BTC for dollars now, you're wrong.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 19, 2018)

hat said:


> ...inevitably...


It is not an inevitability: keep that in mind.


----------



## Papahyooie (Jan 19, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It is not an inevitability: keep that in mind.


 I don't think anybody here actually believes it's an inevitability.


----------



## hat (Jan 19, 2018)

Well sure it's possible it won't go back up. Possible, but unlikely... the way I see it, BTC has basically turned into a scheme for high rollers to make money, largely supported by little guys like me trying to make a little money. Such is the way of the world... anyways, point being that if BTC never comes back up, high rollers aren't making money anymore, and them being the driving force behind it, I see that unlikely to happen. It's like saying a train _might_ stop if the conductor decides to stop it, but running the train is what the conductor does to make his money, so he won't be doing that...


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Jan 19, 2018)

I would also like it to drop more. Then we have the fat cats pulling out, all the day traders leaving, and all the pump/dumps would stop and back to pure Cypto..where the technology was more important than the value. The idea of a decentralized, 100% transparent, currency was the focus. Now BTC has been converted into a Storage of Value and that isn't the right direction in my opinion. If it is being used as a Value Store than it is not being used as the currency it was intended to be.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 19, 2018)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> I would also like it to drop more. Then we have the fat cats pulling out, all the day traders leaving, and all the pump/dumps would stop and back to pure Cypto..where the technology was more important than the value. The idea of a decentralized, 100% transparent, currency was the focus. Now BTC has been converted into a Storage of Value and that isn't the right direction in my opinion. If it is being used as a Value Store than it is not being used as the currency it was intended to be.



Part of why I don't take bitcoin seriously anymore is this direction it's taken.  I know what you mean.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 19, 2018)

hat said:


> Well sure it's possible it won't go back up. Possible, but unlikely... the way I see it, BTC has basically turned into a scheme for high rollers to make money, largely supported by little guys like me trying to make a little money. Such is the way of the world... anyways, point being that if BTC never comes back up, high rollers aren't making money anymore, and them being the driving force behind it, I see that unlikely to happen. It's like saying a train _might_ stop if the conductor decides to stop it, but running the train is what the conductor does to make his money, so he won't be doing that...








They likely took their earnings and put into to gold bullion.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 19, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> They likely took their earnings and put into to gold bullion.



If you think all the "high rollers" left there you are very very mistaken.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 19, 2018)

Didn't say all of them did but clearly a lot did.  Whomever they were put their money in something else, not BTC, and they're not likely to put it back into BTC.


----------



## hat (Jan 20, 2018)

Who's to say it's not a wash/rinse/repeat type job...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 20, 2018)

Because the intrinsic value of crypto is zero.  When people invest in a company via buying stocks, there's a quantifiable floor to how low the stock can go because the business has documented assets and liabilities.  Even if the company goes bankrupt, stockholders will get the balance sheet's worth of value out of their stocks.  Crypto, on the other hand, has nothing.  It's value is literally based on what other people are willing to pay for it.  If no one is willing to buy it, it's worth nothing.  The $20K it was at could be the most it ever will be.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 20, 2018)

i dont own any bitcoin only what nicehash owes me.. at the moment its tried to get past 12000 several times but each time it gets near its knocked back down again..

the only snag  is everything else i do own seems to be directly linked to bitcoin.. how closely all these coin move together convinces me it is all being manipulated..

it dosnt always all move in lockstep but it for sure does when there are large up and down moves..

i think each time it gets knocked down little fish are shaken off and get picked up by the whales..

and ford.. 20K might well be the most bitcoin will ever be.. i dont mind as long as one or two other coins go up to 20K as well.. he he

the  secret will be being able to pick which coin goes up and which coin goes down.. 

trog


----------



## Vario (Jan 20, 2018)

trog100 said:


> i dont own any bitcoin only what nicehash owes me.. at the moment its tried to get past 12000 several times but each time it gets near its knocked back down again..
> 
> the only snag  is everything else i do own seems to be directly linked to bitcoin.. how closely all these coin move together convinces me it is all being manipulated..
> 
> ...


Generally related investments are correlated, this is found in traditional securities and indices.  Doesn't mean it is entirely being manipulated.  Some of the psychology from one carries into the next.  Fear of regulation, optimism of new markets, sometimes arbitrage and hedging actions increase correlation by short selling one commodity while buying another long, causing price convergence.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 20, 2018)

11,949.77 is where it at now.. this is about the fifth time in a couple of day.. 

quite clearly its eventually gonna break out past that 12000 barrier.. when it does everything else will go up with it... at some point the "moving in lockstep" process will stop and the other coins will start to do their own thing.. until the next big knock down then it will be back to lockstep.. 

i have a few grand tide up in this stuff and watch how it moves on a regular basis.. sadly i have nothing else better to do.. 

trog


----------



## silkstone (Jan 20, 2018)

trog100 said:


> 11,949.77 is where it at now.. this is about the fifth time in a couple of day..
> 
> quite clearly its eventually gonna break out past that 12000 barrier.. when it does everything else will go up with it... at some point the "moving in lockstep" process will stop and the other coins will start to do their own thing.. until the next big knock down then it will be back to lockstep..
> 
> ...



Unless this period is just a bull-trap and everything continues to tank after the weekend.

I don't have a tonne of crypto, but I was trying to trade (from mined income) over the Christmas period. I learned a few things from it.

1 - It's almost impossible to time the markets (I sold coins a couple of days before they rocketed 1,000% - 10,000 % and bought before they tanked too often)
2 - When the risk/reward balance is lying heavily on the risk side (i.e. you wouldn't buy with fiat), then is the time to take profits
3 - Don't react immediately to news stories, the big players are going to be so much faster than you and 9 times out of ten, you end up selling on a dip. I was mostly able to buy back at the same price i'd sold on the bounces, but did get burned a couple of times.
4 - The markets actually take a couple of days to fully react to any news, bad news will often see a immediate big dip, followed by a recovery. If the news is bad, they will often then go back down further. If the news is positive (hard-fork, new tech, etc) you'll see an initial spike before leveling off. After a day or two is when you'll see the most gains.

One thing I've been looking into is which exchanges I can transfer money from non-US/EU accounts. I'd like to play the arbitrage game as ETH are always $100-$200 more expensive than the international market here, which is good for me as I mine. I want to see if there is a way that I can get $$$ into and international exchange and transfer it back to a local one, but so far I've not had much luck.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 20, 2018)

12,842.52.. its made ts break i think 13000 will be the next pause.. and as  expected everything else has followed it up..

i think we have already had the bull trap.. i still think its being manipulated but if the buying or selling pressure is strong enough it breaks through..

trog


----------

