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

makeorbrake

kaymin wrote: »

But I understand a reluctance to do so as I expect actual usage levels are dismal.

FFS These are public blockchains! Go out and find the info if that's what you want but quit with the inaccurate nonsense. Trading volumes are freely available all over the web but I've spent enough time on this tonight. Go have a look at coinmarketcap to start with.

kaymin

makeorbrake wrote: »

I'm sure it is if you want to dig it out. I'm not sure where you're going with that though? I know bitcoin trading volume was reported as having surpassed that of paypal back in August if that helps?

When you say trading do you mean buying and selling bitcoins or using bitoins to transact in real world things.

JJJJNR

Eh I use free datasets from kaggle that list all crypto markets going back to 2013, it's all up there you just need a bit of patience and learn a basic bit of python.

kaymin

makeorbrake wrote: »

FFS These are public blockchains! Go out and find the info if that's what you want but quit with the inaccurate nonsense. Trading volumes are freely available all over the web but I've spent enough time on this tonight. Go have a look at coinmarketcap to start with.

Less of the anger.

You constantly promote cryptos. Surely you have some idea of the levels of adoption and how they have increased or decreased over time?

makeorbrake

kaymin wrote: »

When you say trading do you mean buying and selling bitcoins or using bitcoins to transact in real world things.

If you want to make the point that the majority of trade is currently based around speculative investing, that's no secret. I don't know if anyone has broken it down between the two - but google it. I'd be interested in checking it out myself (if there was time for everything).

kaymin

makeorbrake wrote: »

If you want to make the point that the majority of trade is currently based around speculative investing, that's no secret. I don't know if anyone has broken it down between the two - but google it. I'd be interested in checking it out myself (if there was time for everything).

It's basic due diligence. Something that should be known before a penny is invested frankly.

JJJJNR

kaymin wrote: »

It's basic due diligence. Something that should be known before a penny is invested frankly.

Don't do it.

makeorbrake

kaymin wrote: »

Less of the anger.

I won't apologise for it because you were suggesting that there was something underhand at play when its not possible on a public blockchain. It's kind of central to the whole thing.

kaymin wrote: »

You constantly promote cryptos.

Again - language. I 'discuss'. I don't 'promote' jack. I can list a shed load of flaws I've referred to surrounding crypto in discussions on here - it would be a long list.

kaymin wrote: »

Surely you have some idea of the levels of adoption and how they have increased or decreased over time?

I'm not going rummaging for stats on it right this minute as I've already spent much longer on this sub-forum tonight than I had envisaged.
However, I know that bitcoin hit a scaling issue that got laid bare at the time of the surge. That has affected uptake. Other proof of work based coins are similarly affected. Newer coins are addressing this but then they have not had the same road testing as BTC.
BTC is trying to get around this via layer 2 solutions. There were reports of some modest growth in LN usage recently - but all of this is still early.

Suffice it to say - real world usage is not where we would all like it to be rightn now. I'd imagine that the stats will reflect that - by all means, dig them out and report back and let us know.

So....getting to your point - if you wish to prove that real world usage is poor today, then sure - no question. Doesn't mean that it has to remain that way perennially.

makeorbrake

kaymin wrote: »

It's basic due diligence. Something that should be known before a penny is invested frankly.

The point of this thread is not about my due diligence. :rolleyes:
Now, I was trying to be helpful in my last few posts WITHOUT going rummaging for the info to help YOU make YOUR point. If you have a point to make (and I believe I've probably already made it for you?), then go and make it.

Don't you worry your pretty little head about my due diligence.

kaymin

makeorbrake wrote: »

So....getting to your point - if you wish to prove that real world usage is poor today, then sure - no question. Doesn't mean that it has to remain that way perennially.

No it doesn't but any traditional start-up / tech company lives and dies by its quarterly reported growth rates. If you equate investing in crypto to investing in traditional stocks then cryptos should also be judged by the same criteria that traditional stocks are judged by. And by your own reckoning they have performed dismally. The rational thing to do is to sell out. And that's not to suggest Blockchain won't ultimately be a success.

kaymin

makeorbrake wrote: »

The point of this thread is not about my due diligence. :rolleyes:
Now, I was trying to be helpful in my last few posts WITHOUT going rummaging for the info to help YOU make YOUR point. If you have a point to make (and I believe I've probably already made it for you?), then go and make it.

Don't you worry your pretty little head about my due diligence.

Less of the condescension

makeorbrake

kaymin wrote: »

No it doesn't but any traditional start-up / tech company lives and dies by its quarterly reported growth rates. If you equate investing in crypto to investing in traditional stocks then cryptos should also be judged by the same criteria that traditional stocks are judged by. And by your own reckoning they have performed dismally. The rational thing to do is to sell out. And that's not to suggest Blockchain won't ultimately be a success.

Have we not already established that conventional forms of assessments cant function when it comes to crypto for the most part?

We're talking about a tech that is still ironing out the knots. The ecosystem needs to be built out. According to your view, there would never be any early stage investment in anything.

kaymin

makeorbrake wrote: »

Have we not already established that conventional forms of assessments cant function when it comes to crypto for the most part?

We're talking about a tech that is still ironing out the knots. The ecosystem needs to be built out. According to your view, there would never be any early stage investment in anything.

No we haven't established that. That's your view but its wrong.

As I said, start-ups live and die by their growth rates. In what universe does that translate to 'there would be no early stage investment in anything'?

makeorbrake

kaymin wrote: »

Less of the condescension

You can get off your high horse on that one. If you want to make a point, go out and get your own facts and data to support it. It's a bit rich asking me for the data and then clobbering me for not having it to hand!

Either you have sufficient interest in the discussion or you don't.

kaymin

makeorbrake wrote: »

You can get off your high horse on that one. If you want to make a point, go out and get your own facts and data to support it. It's a bit rich asking me for the data and then clobbering me for not having it to hand!

Either you have sufficient interest in the discussion or you don't.

Sorry but you've spent the guts of a year defending crypto without basic information on which to judge it. It's laughable.

makeorbrake

kaymin wrote: »

No we haven't established that. That's your view but its wrong.

There was a question there but no problem. So is there anything else apart from growth rates that can be used with a technology that has as yet not settled and a more conventional tech startup? Do tell.

kaymin wrote: »

As I said, start-ups live and die by their growth rates. In what universe does that translate to 'there would be no early stage investment in anything'?

How would you have growth rates in something if the product is as yet not fully market ready? If something has potential at that stage, are you saying that nobody should put money into it?

makeorbrake

kaymin wrote: »

Sorry but you've spent the guts of a year defending crypto without basic information on which to judge it. It's laughable.

That's a lie. I've done no such thing - and just because you summon me to produce data to support your point - doesn't mean that I'm going to go running to get it.

It's absurd.

Find your own data to support your own points!

Otherwise, you have no idea what data - quantitative or qualitative - i've used to arrive at my own decisions. Must not have worked out too bad though given that I quit the day job.

TallyRand

A “tech” that is still ironing out the knots.

Ecosystems that have to be built.

Zealots where mentioned earlier, you are one makeorbrake.

Crypto is a niche for certain cohorts, not for adoption in the mainstream.

To switch a hypotethical scenario around, if offered every crypto nut a million in cash or a USB key with their a million value crypto of choice I have a funny feeling what they’d choose, they know where their bread is buttered.

In it for profit while sticking it to the G Man, nothing else, you can have all the ecosystems you want

makeorbrake

TallyRand wrote: »

A “tech” that is still ironing out the knots.

What's your point? Was the web/internet a finished tech in 1975, 85, 95, 05?

TallyRand wrote: »

Ecosystems that have to be built.

Again, is there a point?

TallyRand wrote: »

Zealots where mentioned earlier, you are one makeorbrake.

That my friend is where you are wrong. I can provide a long list of shortcomings I've found with cryptocurrency and blockchain. On the other hand, we figured out (that despite all your postings here) that you couldn't list one item that you found useful in blockchain tech - not one.
Now, WHO is the zealot?

TallyRand wrote: »

Crypto is a niche for certain cohorts, not for adoption in the mainstream.

We've been over this ground already. You seem to be talking about a straight swap out - sovereign currency for crypto. It's not an either/or scenario (aside from the fact that you only seem to think that blockchain tech implicates money and nothing else!).
Otherwise, your use of the word 'cohorts' betrays your lack of objectivity re. the tech.

TallyRand wrote: »

To switch a hypotethical scenario around, if offered every crypto nut a million in cash or a USB key with their a million value crypto of choice I have a funny feeling what they’d choose, they know where their bread is buttered.

Betrays a total lack of understanding of how a tech of this magnitude is developed but that's your problem.

TallyRand wrote: »

In it for profit while sticking it to the G Man, nothing else, you can have all the ecosystems you want

Is there something wrong with making a profit? As regards your sticking it to the man routine, it boils down to trustless systems. I prefer them to trusted systems. You're free to do as you wish...more fool you if that's your outlook.

el diablo

Muscles Schultz wrote: »

Is now a good time to get a few of these bitycoins?

Possibly a good time to start dollar cost averaging. Quite possible that we can go below $3,000 in the coming days and weeks though. I'll be reentering the market to purchase some BTC this week probably.

@makeorbrake: you're fighting an admirable battle trying to educate the skeptics. :cool:

hots

TallyRand wrote: »

The likes of makeorbrake, who don’t trust banks or governments by and large, is the complete minority (we all have peeves but 99% of punters are happy with having and utilizing a ban account)

This is something the crypto-fan seems stuck on. Just because you strongly believe something doesn’t mean the vast majority do (or even care).

Imagine asking a 1,000 people would they like next months wages in fiat cash or crypto coin?

If you’re explaining you’re losing............

There's loads of arguments why crytpo is nonsense but this isn't one of them. If you asked someone in 1950 would they like spend using a piece of plastic they would have laughed at you too, same applies for any major change.

hots

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

Alt-right crypto bros losing their arse? What's not to like?

when did crypto become alt-right? I better hand back my antifa membership.

hots

Sleeper12 wrote: »

That's Wikipedia. That's not fact. I can write what I want in Wikipedia.

I also said that crypto currency is "like" a Pyramid scheme. No assets & early adoptors make money off the back of the later adoptors. Your shares in a Pyramid scheme are based solely on supply & demand the same as crypto. If the crypto currency goes bust the investor doesn't get a penny because there are no assets. Nada. If the Pyramid investment goes bust the exact same thing happens. Zip, Nada

Can you explain /show in practical ways how it's not like a Pyramid scheme? You do know that unlike most "investments" you don't get a dividend from crypto. Your only possible chance for profits or even your money back is what someone else might be willing to pay

You don't seem to understand what an investment is or a pyramid scheme is? Be careful with your "punts", with knowledge like that you might come unstuck.

Sleeper12

makeorbrake wrote:

The little guy suffers in conventional markets also. Furthermore, don't think this is the end - this cycle will repeat itself.

The little guy even in a crash still holds stock that has assets. The assets still hold some tangible value

When people suggest that crypto is "like" a Pyramid scheme replying with "it's not a Pyramid scheme" isn't a good enough reply. Like a Pyramid scheme isn't saying that it is a pyramid scheme.

Many posters have explained in detail why it's "like" a Pyramid scheme yet I haven't seen any replies explaining why it's not "like" one.

hots

TallyRand wrote: »

A “tech” that is still ironing out the knots.

Ecosystems that have to be built.

Zealots where mentioned earlier, you are one makeorbrake.

Crypto is a niche for certain cohorts, not for adoption in the mainstream.

To switch a hypotethical scenario around, if offered every crypto nut a million in cash or a USB key with their a million value crypto of choice I have a funny feeling what they’d choose, they know where their bread is buttered.

In it for profit while sticking it to the G Man, nothing else, you can have all the ecosystems you want

That's a very strange hypothetical... would you rather a million in cash or a million worth of anything else?

Sleeper12

I asked :

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Can you explain /show in practical ways how it's not like a Pyramid scheme? You do know that unlike most "investments" you don't get a dividend from crypto. Your only possible chance for profits or even your money back is what someone else might be willing to pay

Your reply was:

JJJJNR wrote: »

So whats your opinion on dark pools, or worse the caymen islands, thats all ok I guess.

There's really not much point continuing if that's the depth of your replies tbh

rapul

Get off your high horse sleeper. Read back makeorbrake and grindle have definitely answered all your questions many times and far more detailed than any of you deserve, do your own study lads if you care so much to be posting about it lately

Sleeper12

rapul wrote: »

Get off your high horse sleeper. Read back makeorbrake and grindle have definitely answered all your questions many times and far more detailed than any of you deserve, do your own study lads if you care so much to be posting about it lately

No one has replied detailing how this isn't like a pyramid scheme. Well apart from saying "it's not a pyramid scheme". That isn't the question put to them.

rapul

If you care so much read back all the pages for your answer

smacl

el diablo wrote: »

@makeorbrake: you're fighting an admirable battle trying to educate the skeptics. :cool:

Trying to teach a pig to sing more like

JJJJNR

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I asked :



Your reply was:




There's really not much point continuing if that's the depth of your replies tbh

I wouldn't put much effort into entertaining you tbf.

kerplun k

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

This is an excellent article about the paradox within Botcoin.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/11/26/only-currency-worse-than-bitcoin-is-venezuelas/

I’m all for a reasonable arguments with the pros and cons of crypto, but that article seems very biased and makes a number of false claims

we still haven’t found one use for it

Wrong, I use my crypto on a weekly basis.

it was supposed to replace the U.S. dollar as the way people did business around the world.

No it wasn’t.

But why would people use their bitcoin when, as we just said, they think their prices are only going to go up?

No one is under any illusion that the price will just rise and rise. I think people generally agree that it’s fairly volatile and are not sure where it will go.

This won’t dissuade bitcoin’s biggest fans from being sure that it’s still on its way to displacing the dollar.

A very tiny minority of “fans” actually believe this. I mean you’d be hard pressed to find a single user on here that agrees with that statement.

Sleeper12

rapul wrote: »

If you care so much read back all the pages for your answer

I have followed this thread since the start. I gave up posting after awhile as it's trying to talk to brainwashed cult members. (No insult intended). I have read many posters go into great detail showing how crypto is like a pyramid scheme. I have not seen a single reply to genuinely rebut this. Saying it's not a pyramid scheme is not an answer. Saying someone else answered this a few pages back isn't an answer.

JJJJNR wrote: »

I wouldn't put much effort into entertaining you tbf.

And I rest my case.

Pintman Paddy Losty

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

This is an excellent article about the paradox within Botcoin.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/11/26/only-currency-worse-than-bitcoin-is-venezuelas/

Excellent article. Very succinct.

rapul

Lol 2 boys at it again

el diablo

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

Alt-right crypto bros losing their arse? What's not to like?

This is without doubt the most nonsensical post in the whole thread. I don't even know where to start with this. Embarrassing stuff. :rolleyes:

makeorbrake

el diablo wrote: »

This is without doubt the most nonsensical post in the whole thread. I don't even know where to start with this. Embarrassing stuff. :rolleyes:

I agree albeit that it's insightful (or should that be 'inciteful'?). I've stated it many times before - the contrarian view is healthy. However, when its rooted in deep seated prejudices about 'alt-right' this and 'anti-establishment' that, objectivity is totally lacking. Furthermore, not articulating beyond 'crypto is rubbish' jibes doesn't further any discussion - it just drags it down degeneratively.

There's certainly a couple here that are challenging for the mantle of the infamous 'podge n' rodge' of this thread.

Frunchy

I've got buy orders ready for 1k.

TheAnalyst_

The two go hand in hand. Follow a few crypto bros on twitter and you'll see it for yourself.

grindle

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Excellent article. Very succinct.

I'd agree with most of it, it's a fair synopsis of Bitcoin nowadays.
Hardly "Excellent" though - I've stated most of those points and never gotten an "Excellent" or a "succinct" out of you. I'm well-jell.
If there's one bone to pick with the article I don't agree with it's the notion that nobody would spend it if it worked properly. It's not like you have to buy a set amount and stop buying, just spend and replace and the hoarded nest-egg remains untouched.
That's by-the-by because it doesn't work properly and if it was being used the fees would destroy it's utility. Maybe if Lightning ever works properly and doesn't require invoicing.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

No one has replied detailing how this isn't like a pyramid scheme. Well apart from saying "it's not a pyramid scheme". That isn't the question put to them.

Pyramid schemes operate in order for each level from the top down to profit from the next layer. Is somebody who bought Bitcoin in January doing better than somebody who buys today?
No? Cool. Not a pyramid scheme then. Just one person buying Bitcoin for a higher value vs somebody buying for a lower value. If neither needed nor wanted the Bitcoin they should not have bought the Bitcoin. Every scarce commodity that finds itself in demand is a pyramid scheme by your logic.

I get that both Bitcoin and pyramid schemes generally (i.e. when BTC isn't getting sold to the ground) share the single benefit of rewarding the earliest adopters and that that's an incentive for adoption.
Let's look at the possible end games for both:

Ending of every pyramid scheme: At the bottom? Somebody else has your money. Always. If you can't replace it with other people's money you are fúcked.

Ending 1 for Bitcoin: Some other crypto takes it's place due to advancement. Your choice if you should sell or not & maybe you make a terrible choice. Some win, some lose, might be guesswork, may not be. A raffle or an educated decision.

Ending 2 for Bitcoin - which I don't consider likely but could be proven wrong if the Core devs are actually trying to Trojan Horse via this awful Store of Value coin-hoard meme: Bitcoin is money. Either all the money or a large portion of it has become Bitcoin and if that's into the tens of trillions the volatility will be as tolerable and slow as gold or oil's current volatility relative to fiat. Nobody loses anything.

That was easy - you may now stop calling all commodities pyramid schemes. You are welcome, I've likely granted minutes of your life back you. No need to buy me an Xmas present.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You do know that unlike most "investments" you don't get a dividend from crypto. Your only possible chance for profits or even your money back is what someone else might be willing to pay

Almost right - oh no, the "almost" there means you are in fact wrong. You do know that you are wrong of course because you wouldn't constantly spout horseshít about something you can't be bothered researching...w-w-would you? Anyway, you don't seem to realise dividend-paying cryptos are a thing - profit sharing based on the success of a business actually exists - it can even be programmed into the contract and your earnings can be automatically pushed to you.

It's probably one of the most interesting uses for crypto and most likely to make sense in the future - company shares can be sold and programmed to share profits at whatever interval the company or government wishes. Can't see any large stock exchanges or accountants and lawyers being too happy with this in the future tbh. That's not to say they'll be completely eradicated as every company is going to want some oversight but they'll be downsizing departments considerably once a multitude of secure smart contract templates are finalised and available with very little cost to publish to the platform.

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

The two go hand in hand. Follow a few crypto bros on twitter and you'll see it for yourself.

I've met as many liberals as conservatives who like crypto, t'was quite a retarded statement to make. I know one stereotypical alt-right Trump-loving redpilling 4chan goblin pariah who loves Taylor Swift. Are all Taylor Swift fans now alt-right? Grow up.
Special star for you.

sexmag

Great post grindl, can't quote it all.

To argue the point of "it's not a pyramid scheme but it's like a pyramid scheme"

First of all moving the goal posts is always the last refuge of a losing argument

Secondly saying that it's like a pyramid scheme is like saying nfl is not rugby but it's like rugby because they have the same shape ball, doesrnt work.

Not to mention what pyramid scheme has people sell off their assets and then by other assets or put more money in and out as they please that benifit the people who are doing the exact same thing?

Grumpypants

Typical, first time in a few months I sent money to Coinbase to buy some coins, it takes three days to complete. It lands today just as there is a 10% bump !!!

makeorbrake

sexmag wrote: »

To argue the point of "it's not a pyramid scheme but it's like a pyramid scheme"
......saying that it's like a pyramid scheme is like saying nfl is not rugby but it's like rugby because they have the same shape ball, doesn't work.

"Scam" - "Ponzi Scheme" - "Pyramid Scheme"

It has been and is being called that by certain naysayers at all levels- in the full knowledge that those terms involve a conscious effort by someone to do wrong, to part someone with their money - to organise a bad deed. There is no such person or persons doing that in the case of Bitcoin or Ethereum, etc.

If people who have only a passing knowledge of crypto (which is most people) continually hear it being explained in these terms, they will assume that there's criminal intent behind crypto. This is the goal of those that use those terms.

He used 'pyramid scheme' and then I gave him the wiki definition. Said wiki was rubbish, so I then gave him the Oxford dictionary version. With that nailed down, he then tries to go with 'like a pyramid scheme'. One way or another, people are intent on tar and feathering it.

It's the same when there are shysters that use bitcoin as a means of payment for their scam. Bitcoin gets featured in the headline but if it was cash, there wouldnt be a mention of it.

makeorbrake

Grumpypants wrote: »

Typical, first time in a few months I sent money to Coinbase to buy some coins, it takes three days to complete. It lands today just as there is a 10% bump !!!

I wouldn't worry. There are always opportunities in crypto. There had to be some form of bounce given the dramatic drop. I'd imagine crypto will be bumping along the bottom for the next 3-6 months anyway. You should have plenty of opportunity to buy in.

hots

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

The two go hand in hand. Follow a few crypto bros on twitter and you'll see it for yourself.

I think you're confusing two groups of loud people on the internet with each other.

makeorbrake

hots wrote: »

I think you're confusing two groups of loud people on the internet with each other.

I think you're being very generous. To wish something bad on someone is never a positive human trait. You can believe it to be foolish to invest in crypto but to go beyond that is just spiteful and bitter. There are probably plenty of people that got badly burnt in the last few weeks. Anyone with any class would have said they were foolish but they certainly wouldn't wish them to be in a bad place.

On top of that, he's labelling people as belonging to some political leaning or other (in this case, 'alt-right'). Again, it's plain wrong. There are people interested in crypto from all strands of society.
This is a common theme amongst the zealous naysayers here - some deep seated hate of people of a certain societal/political viewpoint whom they associate with crypto - and hate as a consequence (rather than weigh up the positives and negatives of the technology itself).

Lastly, the nastiness of his posting was pointed out to him. The graceful thing to do would be to acknowledge it as an error - but he doubled down and tried to suggest it's justified because there's someone else out there (not on this thread....somewhere!) that's worse than him. Classy.

TheAnalyst_

makeorbrake wrote: »

I think you're being very generous. To wish something bad on someone is never a positive human trait. You can believe it to be foolish to invest in crypto but to go beyond that is just spiteful and bitter. There are probably plenty of people that got badly burnt in the last few weeks. Anyone with any class would have said they were foolish but they certainly wouldn't wish them to be in a bad place.

On top of that, he's labelling people as belonging to some political leaning or other (in this case, 'alt-right'). Again, it's plain wrong. There are people interested in crypto from all strands of society.
This is a common theme amongst the zealous naysayers here - some deep seated hate of people of a certain societal/political viewpoint whom they associate with crypto - and hate as a consequence (rather than weigh up the positives and negatives of the technology itself).

Lastly, the nastiness of his posting was pointed out to him. The graceful thing to do would be to acknowledge it as an error - but he doubled down and tried to suggest it's justified because there's someone else out there (not on this thread....somewhere!) that's worse than him. Classy.

They really are the worst of humanity. Greedy, wasteful and smug types who knew it all.

Pintman Paddy Losty

The person who posted here about a rope and a wobbly stool is a scumbag. I've made my views on crypto clear but no need for that.

Also whilst there is a very strong libertarian anarcho capitalist cohort involved in the bitcoin scene, there isn't really many of the alt right types who are a different kettle of fish.

el diablo

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

The person who posted here about a rope and a wobbly stool is a scumbag. I've made my views on crypto clear but no need for that.

Also whilst there is a very strong libertarian anarcho capitalist cohort involved in the bitcoin scene, there isn't really many of the alt right types who are a different kettle of fish.

Didn't see anything about a rope and a wobbly stool. TheAnalyst_ again I assume. I also certainly never would've associated crypto with the alt-right. I assume TheAnalyst_ has come across an obnoxious alt-right crypto supporter on Twitter and for some reason believes it's representative of the whole space. :rolleyes:

To have such a strong opinion could indicate losing big and then putting on an act.