Bitcoin - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Damn,

I should have thought of that, the wallet IDs would be known to the company, or recoverable from the wallet software and from there they just have to pull out all the transactions from the block chain.

Hence the "uh-oh" moment.

Meanwhile, I've just bought $10 worth of bitcoins, the kind that are meaningless, shiny bits of metal. I'd been wondering where the various pictures of piles of shiny bitcoins were coming from, and it just occurred to me to check on amazon.

No idea what I'm going to do with them, but I do like shiny.

It's entirely possible, but probably unlikely, that one day they'll be worth more than what I paid for them yesterday.
 
novaphile said:
I dunno.

At least psionl0 doesn't buy things because they're shiny.
Click to expand...

I have a pile of those coins on my desk. I have several variations on the bitcoin, an etherium coin, and some other replica coins including a fake krugerand. I also have some magnets and can use them to link them all together to make a curtain of gold coins suspended from my file cabinets.
 
Ah, that sounds like fun.

Unfortunately the ones I have just ordered are a copper/aluminium mix, or perhaps copper core, plated with copper and aluminium.

(Thus no magnets).
 
Flirting with 5K today - what's going on here? I got a text from my wife saying "Bitcoin is exploding!" I'm terrified I'm about to own a Bitcoin.
 
Belz... said:
Get rid of her before it's too late!
Click to expand...

I'm too lazy to look it up now, but I read that a 'Whale' is pumping up the price.

Not sure that checks out, I've been seeing more and more positive articles, blog-posts, Tweets etc about crypto for about two months.

So there is a changing mood out there.

Maybe it works like this:
-PR and activism hype crypto, much of it well-intentioned.
-The Internet echo chamber starts to repeat the talking points
-The public starts to buy into it
-Crypto starts to rise
-Some Whales start to pump the price
-mainstream media reports about it
-Public gets hopeful and buys crypto
-Whales hang on for a while and then take profit
-Crypto slides
-Mainstream media reports it
-Crypto crashes
-Libertarian/Anarchist hopes dashed again!
-Rinse
-Repeat
 
Eddie Dane said:
Maybe it works like this:
-PR and activism hype crypto, much of it well-intentioned.
-The Internet echo chamber starts to repeat the talking points
-The public starts to buy into it
-Crypto starts to rise
-Some Whales start to pump the price
-mainstream media reports about it
-Public gets hopeful and buys crypto
-Whales hang on for a while and then take profit
-Crypto slides
-Mainstream media reports it
-Crypto crashes
-Libertarian/Anarchist hopes dashed again!
-Rinse
-Repeat
Click to expand...
I doubt it. The price would be more predictable if it kept repeating the same pattern over and over again.

All we know is that sudden price changes are usually associated with sudden trading spikes. Even then, we don't know if the spikes are due to the decision of a "whale" or a larger number of smaller BTC holders acting in unison. And there is no way to tell when such a trading spike will occur.
 
Belz... said:
Well, it does keep repeating the same pattern, roughly: go up, crash, go more up, crash, go more more up, crash...
Click to expand...
Maybe so but it is not a regular pattern and is not explained by the theory that Eddie Dane made up. So there is no predictability.
 
trustbutverify said:
Why is wheat "perhaps" a commodity?
Click to expand...
I have the impression that trust but verify thinks that only natural raw materials like gold and oil are by definition commodities, while wheat is a product of human activity. Otherwise I have no idea. By that understanding Bitcoin would indeed not be a commodity.
Interestingly, if you google "define commodity" the first thing that comes up is
a raw material or primary agricultural product that can be bought and sold, such as copper or coffee.
"commodities such as copper and coffee"​
so I suspect that is TBV's source.
 
Last edited:
Crypto money depresses me beyond belief.
This rally seemed technically inevitable, I have no skin in the game, but it feels like melting glaciers and drowning polar bears through the looking glass.
 
Samson said:
Crypto money depresses me beyond belief.
This rally seemed technically inevitable, I have no skin in the game, but it feels like melting glaciers and drowning polar bears through the looking glass.
Click to expand...
If your TA failed to pick the price surge then you only have yourself to blame.
 
psionl0 said:
If your TA failed to pick the price surge then you only have yourself to blame.
Click to expand...
Picked on all scales multiple times.
You never followed did you, the algorithm that I portrayed on the TA threads is lethal on Bitcoin and the demise of ethics and proper labour.
I was so disgusted at what the algo suggested I bit my tongue.
 
Craig B said:
I have the impression that trust but verify thinks that only natural raw materials like gold and oil are by definition commodities, while wheat is a product of human activity. Otherwise I have no idea. By that understanding Bitcoin would indeed not be a commodity.
Interestingly, if you google "define commodity" the first thing that comes up is
a raw material or primary agricultural product that can be bought and sold, such as copper or coffee.
"commodities such as copper and coffee"​
so I suspect that is TBV's source.
Click to expand...

You have user names mixed up, I believe.
 
Samson said:
Crypto money depresses me beyond belief.
This rally seemed technically inevitable, I have no skin in the game, but it feels like melting glaciers and drowning polar bears through the looking glass.
Click to expand...

It didn't seem technically inevitable to you. I thought you were posing yourself as some sort of expert?

As far as having no skin in the game; nonsense.
 
psionl0 said:
Yes, it is a commodity* that is used primarily for speculation.

* I guess it depends on which dictionary you use.
Click to expand...
Well, which one are you using? Per the Wikipedia definition: "In economics, a commodity is an economic good or service that has full or substantial fungibility"

Are you considering Bitcoin “goods” or are you considering it “services”? Based on it’s lack of utility I don’t think it’s either so IMO it's not a commodity.
 
psionl0 said:
Well that makes it official. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

If you don’t like Wikipedia I’ve already invited you to provide a link to the definition someplace else. Thus far you have not provided one.
psionl0 said:
This concept is probably too complicated for you but a commodity doesn't need to be a physical substance in order to be traded.
Click to expand...

Services can indeed be commodities. Are you saying you consider bitcoin a service?

Question for the peanut gallery. In your opinion is Bitcoin more useful or less useful than MMO currencies like Gold, Plat, Gil or ISK?
 
I don't see any point to arguing over how this hair should be split. If money of any kind can be considered a commodity, then I see no reason why that label shouldn't also be applied to Bitcoin. At the same time, if the label is applied or not doesn't change anything about the fundamental nature of Bitcoin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom