Is anyone else starting to become a bit worried? mod note in first post

makeorbrake

Bob24 wrote: »

If some of the transaction cost which is currently covered by the network (by generating new coins and giving them to miners) is transfered to the 2 parties carrying out the transaction (as a transaction fee), there would presumably be less transactions i.e. the bitcoin market would become less liquid.

I see your point now. I hadn't accounted for a need for an increase in tx. fees. However, I guess what Grindle said....

Bob24

smacl wrote: »

As crypto moves from PoW to PoS this tends to become less of an issue.

Thanks this is a interesting link and it explains the difference quite clearly. I think we are all still getting our head around this and I’m just throwing ideas, but after reading this it seems like to me PoS wouldn’t necessarily be good for liquidity.

If I understand it correctly, PoS gives transaction processors an incentive to own as many coins as possible (the more you own, the more chances you have of being selected to validate transactions and hence earn fees). It means that for someone to operate as a “PoS miner” (poor terminology but I guess you know what I mean) they would need to hold a large number of coins and never sell them. So if I get it right (not guaranteed but I think I do!) the whole thing will required that whoever wants to act as a transaction processor and earn fees keeps a large number of coins idle - which seems bad for liquidity.

Bob24

grindle wrote: »

I can see what you're thinking but your logic seems to be that Bitcoin will remain technologically static until the last Bitcoins are mined - if Bitcoin is around in 120 years (unlikely) it'll have an absurd valuation, scale properly and have a zillion side-chains and scaling mechanisms attached so that nobody would be thinking negatively about transaction fees.

Sure it’s hard to predict what will happen and the only thing we can be pretty sure of is that if it is still around it will be vastly different from what we have today. But I guess the same argument could be used to put the cap on total number of bitcoins in doubt.

grindle

Bob24 wrote: »

If I understand it correctly, PoS gives transaction processors an incentive to own as many coins as possible (the more you own, the more chances you have of being selected to validate transactions and hence earn fees). It means that for someone to operate as a “PoS miner” (poor terminology but I guess you know what I mean) they would need to hold a large number of coins and never sell them. So the whole thing will required that whoever wants to act as a transaction processor and earn fees keeps a large number of coins idle - which seems bad for liquidity.

PoS rewards scale up or down as the amounts being staked fall or rise. If it got to the point where PoS rewards are trailing far behind an average index fund we'd have an unusual amount of idiots staking for little reason, if we got to the point where the rewards are 10% or even 15%+ you'd see a lot of people piling into pools and reducing that reward.

Worries about liquidity for genuine network use - it's maybe a bit early for that. 1ETH provides for a large amount of txs and within two years 1ETH will provide multiple orders of magnitude more txs via sharding, Plasma and whatever other sidechains get released.

Bob24 wrote: »

Sure it’s hard to predict what will happen and the only thing we can be pretty sure of is that if it is still around it will be vastly different from what we have today. But I guess the same argument could be used to put the cap on total number of bitcoins in doubt.

Is the cap on total numbers of bitcoins in doubt? We don't and can't know what the true circulating supply is thanks to lost wallets and dead people (though we can know the supply is lower than what has been mined), but the total amount mined and what's left to be mined is a known hardcoded quantity.
I might be picking your point up wrong.

Bob24

grindle wrote: »

Is the cap on total numbers of bitcoins in doubt? We don't and can't know what the true circulating supply is thanks to lost wallets and dead people (though we can know the supply is lower than what has been mined), but the total amount mined and what's left to be mined is a known hardcoded quantity.
I might be picking your point up wrong.

I mean the total quantity of coins to be mined it is just number defined in an algorithm. So from a technical point of view changing that limitation it is very easy and the only thing to prevent it from happinging is a consensus not to do it.

So when making an argument that if it survives bitcoin in 50 or a 100 years will be very much different from bitcoin today, the possibility that for whatever reason a decision is made at some point to increase the maximum number of coins to be mined is on the table.

makeorbrake

Should increased hash rate necessarily correlate with price? The news feed today seems to be that hash rate has increased 50% in a month and has now reached 60 quintillion hashes per second.

Presumably the thinking is that there's increased mining spend and this has to work its way out in terms of btc price?

...but it ain't necessarily so, right?

sexmag

makeorbrake wrote: »

Should increased hash rate necessarily correlate with price? The news feed today seems to be that hash rate has increased 50% in a month and has now reached 60 quintillion hashes per second.

Presumably the thinking is that there's increased mining spend and this has to work its way out in terms of btc price?

...but it ain't necessarily so, right?

Ive found that overall over the last 48 to 72 hours the media have been quite kind and positive about crypto, as if something over night changed their minds and this is seeing the increase in the over global spend but BTCs dominance has reach 52% which is quite scary

makeorbrake

sexmag wrote: »

I've found that overall over the last 48 to 72 hours the media have been quite kind and positive about crypto

Can't trust em! For example, some recent analysis found that CNBC crypto reports were a reasonably good indicator of the opposite happening!

sexmag wrote: »

as if something over night changed their minds and this is seeing the increase in the over global spend

I think they're just reacting to the bump in the price. How many times have they been unable to explain price rises/falls...and then they grasp at some nonsense reason?

sexmag wrote: »

but BTCs dominance has reach 52% which is quite scary

Is that necessarily a bad thing?

Dohnjoe

Market cap now scraping a hair below EUR 200bn, caught some nice rises there but missed out on a few also. I would be surprised to see us hitting those lows again this year (for the alts) but this market is of course unpredictable as hell

Bob24

makeorbrake wrote: »

Is that necessarily a bad thing?

+1, since for now the only successful practical use of crypto is as store of value (possibly not a perfect one, but it is one), there is no point in having loads of different coins performing that role and it is a logical move to see some sort of consolidation around the leading one. The positive I see in it is that it brings more clarity.

makeorbrake

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I would be surprised to see us hitting those lows again this year (for the alts) but this market is of course unpredictable as hell

Yeah, I had episodes of FOMO over the last couple of days but I try not to dwell There are always possibilities in crypto (to go either direction!) so matters not.

makeorbrake

Bob24 wrote: »

there is no point in having loads of different coins performing that role and it is a logical move to see some sort of consolidation around the leading one. The positive I see in it is that it brings more clarity.

The Alts didn't get killed off this time round - but some day, it will happen. It's nice to see a bit more focus on what real world partnerships and implementations cryptos are forming now - rather than simply consideration of the concept. Time will tell which ones truly prove to be the good 'un's.

el diablo

makeorbrake wrote: »

Can't trust em! For example, some recent analysis found that CNBC crypto reports were a reasonably good indicator of the opposite happening!

best free image hosting

Fian

https://www.independent.ie/business/world/bitcoin-price-crash-cryptocurrency-market-in-sudden-mysterious-meltdown-37285702.html

sexmag

Fian wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/business/world/bitcoin-price-crash-cryptocurrency-market-in-sudden-mysterious-meltdown-37285702.html

14 billion gone in a matter of an hour, that is a collective effort and shows how much of the crypto world is controled by robots

JJJJNR

in for the bounce ?

Dohnjoe

I read it was due or partially due to 200k Eth being dumped on Bitfinex

Bob24

sexmag wrote: »

14 billion gone in a matter of an hour, that is a collective effort and shows how much of the crypto world is controled by robots

It is not unusual though, the attached chart for the past 30 days shows a few other simallar (or bigger) drops during that period.

Autochange

Independent stating that other crypto coins also dropped. Of course they did. Shows how little they know about crypto markets.

Bob24

Autochange wrote: »

Independent stating that other crypto coins also dropped. Of course they did. Shows how little they know about crypto markets.

Yes as far as I can see it’s just a click-grabbing article.

Just their introduction makes little sense: “Bitcoin and other major cryptocurrencies are crashing in an unexplained and dramatic market collapse”.

Since this type of drops can occur several times a month on crypto markets (and that particular one is no even the strongest in the past 30 days), their statement that somehow in this case we are in front of an “unexplained and dramatic crash” seems a bit hyperbolic. There were similar drops on the 14th and the 22nd of August, and a much more pronounced one on the 7th. I’d like to hear from their journalist what these ones were less unexplained and dramatic :-)

listermint

Bob24 wrote: »

Yes as far as I can see it’s just a click-grabbing article.

Just their introduction makes little sense: “Bitcoin and other major cryptocurrencies are crashing in an unexplained and dramatic market collapse”.

Since this type of drops can occur several times a month on crypto markets (and that particular one is no even the strongest in the past 30 days), their statement that somehow in this case we are in front of an “unexplained and dramatic crash” seems a bit hyperbolic. There were similar drops on the 14th and the 22nd of August, and a much more pronounced one on the 7th. I’d like to hear from their journalist what these ones were less unexplained and dramatic :-)

Yes all the other publications that covered it outside Ireland must have got it wrong too.

Pintman Paddy Losty

This dramatic drop did not come as a surprise to me.

I've tweaked my PPL price prediction model has incorporated some elements of advanced game theory which has dramatically increased its predictive ability and got me back on track.

I'm toying with the idea of trying to use machine learning AI techniques with the model.

Tango One

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I read it was due or partially due to 200k Eth being dumped on Bitfinex

Another article suggests its due to goldman sachs dropping its plans for crypto trading.

wally1990

I will open with my opinion that I am a novice on the financial markets however When I see such large and vast movements in the buy and sell markets I get curious as to what is driving some mass money movements

Seeing bitcoin drop 7-10% in 30min candles to me is crazy but then I found this article which answers /shines light on such trading

Thought it would be interesting to share with you in this thread https://www.ccn.com/6-billion-daily-crypto-volume-is-being-faked-how-can-it-be-combated/

JJJJNR

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

This dramatic drop did not come as a surprise to me.

I've tweaked my PPL price prediction model has incorporated some elements of advanced game theory which has dramatically increased its predictive ability and got me back on track.

I'm toying with the idea of trying to use machine learning AI techniques with the model.

Interested to hear how you use ML in your model, ML needs a historical data training set, I wouldn't have thought there is enough data to accurately predict what’s going to happen in crypto, The market was skewed last year.

sexmag

https://www.cryptoglobe.com/latest/2018/09/bitcoin-drops-to-6900-after-mysterious-whale-moves-over-100-million-to-exchanges/

TallyRand

sexmag wrote: »

https://www.cryptoglobe.com/latest/2018/09/bitcoin-drops-to-6900-after-mysterious-whale-moves-over-100-million-to-exchanges/

Bitcoin would be a pink sheet by now if not for Darkweb use, mostly in drugs. Dream market and such places all whilst burning through electricity like nobodies business. The libertarian purist cause is bust, it’s just for punters now.

Whelo79

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

I probably sound like a 'beaten docket' at this stage, but Tether remains the enormous elephant in the room. Another couple of hundred millions of dollars of it printed during August. This can then be used to margin trade on Bitfinex, or sent over to Binance to buy alt-coins. But there's absolutely no idea about who is putting this money aside to allow this sort of trading to take place. 2.76 billion dollars of daily liquidity has supposedly been placed in a bank account by someone or someones to allow this to happen. For no benefit, cause Tether is always pegged to the dollar. It's actually losing money against the standard rate of global inflation. We still don't know where the bank account actually is.

There's a reason the cash gateways won't touch it - Gemini, Coinbase etc.

There's something not right in the State of Denmark.

You still have some questions to respond to before resuming posting in this forum as per MOD's instruction. Good lad.

Grumpypants

TallyRand wrote: »

Bitcoin would be a pink sheet by now if not for Darkweb use, mostly in drugs. Dream market and such places all whilst burning through electricity like nobodies business. The libertarian purist cause is bust, it’s just for punters now.

Yeah we should stick with cash. That's never used to buy drugs.

sexmag

Grumpypants wrote: »

Yeah we should stick with cash. That's never used to buy drugs.

And 100% traceable aswell to ensure no one does anything shady with it:D

hots

Whelo79 wrote: »

You still have some questions to respond to before resuming posting in this forum as per MOD's instruction. Good lad.

...

sexmag

hots wrote: »

...

Please see below

LoLth wrote: »

mod note:
I really want to accommodate both side of discussion in this forum as I believe it is healthy to question, even things you believe wholeheartedly.

JohnnyFlash, I've had words with you before about your conduct here. From this latest spurt of posting you have displayed some very "troll-like" posting traits, you are NOT discussing, you are soapboxing and deliberately misleading.

Now, SMACL posted a response to your request for examples of viable organisations using blockchain technology. You have ignored that in favour of attacking another poster for daring to have an opinion that differs from your own.

DO NOT POST HERE AGAIN UNTIL YOU HAVE ADRESSED SMACL'S POST THAT YOU CAN FIND HERE: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=107838257&postcount=1755

and discuss the contrarian point of view but drop the smart arse "I dont know much but...." . Its not helping the discussion at all.

grindle

sexmag wrote: »

Please see below

Pfft. Ruining his tactic of ignoring the forum for a while until he thinks we've forgotten the last dribble of piss that escaped his mouth

Exact same tactic as PPL in the past. Not inferring anything at all, just a crazy coincidence to be sure to be sure.

hots

sexmag wrote: »

Please see below

I was just highlighting it

Bob24

Grumpypants wrote: »

Yeah we should stick with cash. That's never used to buy drugs.

sexmag wrote: »

And 100% traceable aswell to ensure no one does anything shady with it:D

In terms if traceability, while not perfect there are ways to do if both with cash and bitcoins (but it will likely get harder and harder with crypto as some coins are designed specifically to prevent it).

In terms of use for illegal purposes, sure there are also bank transfers made for illegal purposes. It is obvious any mean of exchanging value can be used to support criminal activity; the question is more with which ones it is more proiminant, i.e. what is the proportion of dodgy dealings in cash exchanges, wire transfers, and crypto transactions?

TallyRand

Grumpypants wrote: »

Yeah we should stick with cash. That's never used to buy drugs.

That’s a weak weak argument. It would be like comparing a gun with a kitchen knife, they can both kill!

Cryptos near sole reason to exist seems to be dark web and speculators (punters) even though it’s manipulated to high degree by the few.

It’s not a currency by conventional means and never will be either.

sexmag

TallyRand wrote: »

That’s a weak weak argument. It would be like comparing a gun with a kitchen knife, they can both kill!

Cryptos near sole reason to exist seems to be dark web and speculators (punters) even though it’s manipulated to high degree by the few.

It’s not a currency by conventional means and never will be either.

Have you actually read anything in this thread?

The amount of real word uses posted in this thread outweighs all the negative posts that say this will never work

Volkswagen next year will be using IOTA, hotels during the world cup were accepting bitcoin,https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/9dgnqf/strip_club_accepting_cryptocurrencies/?utm_source=reddit-android a strip club accepting crypto, hell there's a cafe in dublin based solely on cryptocurrency

Also the sole reason was not dark web, read up on satoshis vision before making claims like that.

You argument is baseless and adds nothing to the debate/discussion

Pintman Paddy Losty

grindle wrote: »

Pfft. Ruining his tactic of ignoring the forum for a while until he thinks we've forgotten the last dribble of piss that escaped his mouth

Exact same tactic as PPL in the past. Not inferring anything at all, just a crazy coincidence to be sure to be sure.

Think you're a bit obsessed with me lad.

grindle

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Think you're a bit obsessed with me lad.

Ye're the main negative focal points on a sparsely populated forum, there's no obsession necessary when bringing up "It's all a scam!" viewpoints on this forum - you're literally one of two people whose name I'd remember because you're a relatively frequent poster in a forum with few users.

The liquidity of positive vs negative viewpoints in this forum very closely resembles the liquidity of crypto - it's prone to sharp movements and ye two are like hawks on a downturn.

I am also fiercely attracted to any man who's mad for the sesh so you've brought this upon yourself you sesh-demon you.
Will.
You.
Marry.
Me?

Answers negative, positive or even unrelated answers on any other thread in any other boards.ie sub-forum will be considered an emphatic "YES!"

TallyRand

sexmag wrote: »

Have you actually read anything in this thread?

The amount of real word uses posted in this thread outweighs all the negative posts that say this will never work

Volkswagen next year will be using IOTA, hotels during the world cup were accepting bitcoin,https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/9dgnqf/strip_club_accepting_cryptocurrencies/?utm_source=reddit-android a strip club accepting crypto, hell there's a cafe in dublin based solely on cryptocurrency

Also the sole reason was not dark web, read up on satoshis vision before making claims like that.

You argument is baseless and adds nothing to the debate/discussion

I’ll address some of your points, Satoshi's vision? Let me tell you one thing about “Satoshi” he has had a right touch and had of plenty of money I’d imagine that was his main vision.

Volkswagen / iota, ironically iota isn’t even using block chain

Hotels, a strip club and one cafe in Dublin accepted btc, not setting the world on fire for day to day use is it (more of a freeadvertising gimmick), when we see tesco, McDonalds, river island adapting I’ll be sure to acknowledge I’m wrong

sexmag

TallyRand wrote: »

I’ll address some of your points, Satoshi's vision? Let me tell you one thing about “Satoshi” he has had a right touch and had of plenty of money I’d imagine that was his main vision.

Volkswagen / iota, ironically iota isn’t even using block chain

Hotels, a strip club and one cafe in Dublin accepted btc, not setting the world on fire for day to day use is it (more of a freeadvertising gimmick), when we see tesco, McDonalds, river island adapting I’ll be sure to acknowledge I’m wrong

I addressed your points, you responded with the same vage argument that I responded too,if you want to provide links and evidence to support your claim and I'll happily debate but if you want to throw in "I don't see it here so it's not working" then I'll be done debating with you

Edit: however since you mentioned mcdonalds https://bitcoinexchangeguide.com/mcdonalds-launches-maccoin-cryptocurrency-for-big-mac-50th-anniversary/

Bob24

sexmag wrote: »

Edit: however since you mentioned mcdonalds https://bitcoinexchangeguide.com/mcdonalds-launches-maccoin-cryptocurrency-for-big-mac-50th-anniversary/

So McDonalds releases physical tokens which are essentially vouchers to redeem another burger when you buy one ... and this gets flagged as an exemple of use of crypto currencies?

Do I get that right?!!

smacl

TallyRand wrote: »

Volkswagen / iota, ironically iota isn’t even using block chain

Weak argument. IOTA is still a cryptocurrency and the difference between the DAG topology used in Tangle versus Blockchain is a technical one that basically just increases degree of connectivity. IOTA is still an immutable ledger of records using cryptography as the mechanism to detect tampering.

sexmag

Bob24 wrote: »

So McDonalds releases physical tokens which are essentially vouchers to redeem another burger when you buy one ... and this gets flagged as an exemple of use of crypto currencies?

Do I get that right?!!

I need to edit my quote, it was supposed to have a smiley as a tounge in cheek post:D

Bob24

sexmag wrote: »

I need to edit my quote, it was supposed to have a smiley as a tounge in cheek post:D

Prime exemple of crypto fanboyism/clickbaitism though ... the guy who wrote the piece you linked to seems damn serious about it being a crypto currency and didn’t include that smiley face.

sexmag

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/09/07/iran-north-korea-and-venezuela-turning-to-cryptocurrency-to-bypass-us-sanctions-experts-warn.html

smacl

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

I've been told I can be a cynical sort, so here's something to lighten the mood.

Pintman Paddy Losty

smacl wrote: »

The dude is the vision I have of most canny crypto day traders. Men with greasy hair, unkempt beards, smoke copious amounts of jazz fags, spent most of their lives lounging around at home in bathrobes and posting online about lambos and coins going to the moon.

JJJJNR

Candles, candles everywhere.

Autochange

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

The dude is the vision I have of most canny crypto day traders. Men with greasy hair, unkempt beards, smoke copious amounts of jazz fags, spent most of their lives lounging around at home in bathrobes and posting online about lambos and coins going to the moon.

While all of the rats get up a 6am for 12 hour days.