Is anyone else starting to become a bit excited?

makeorbrake

Nobelium wrote: »

If don't know blockchain is not going to be exclusive to bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, and they have no intrinsic value, you can kiss your money goodbye.

The 'intrinsic value' argument. Been done to death but here we go...
- The paper/cotton/hideous assortment of bacteria in your wallet you call FIAT currency - what gives that value? Isn't it just a piece of paper? You'll think the suggestion is absurd, no doubt. However, FIAT currencies fail all the time.

The ability to custody your own money - doesn't that have value? Again, you'll think whats the beef? Around the world, peoples money is simply taken off them - either through banks going bust due to mismanagement or through governments going bust through mismanagement. You'll say that doesn't happen here right? So western europe and the U.S. may be more stable but that doesnt mean it cant or hasnt happened. It happened in cryprus and greece. We came within a hairs breath of it. And then on a second sweep we came within a hairs breath of it again....only Noonan decided to raid our pensions instead (after reads of re-inforcing the message to irish society the importance of a pension!).

Secondly, does Gold have value? How does it have value? What calculation do you carry out to assess its value? Now, some will say but shur gold has industrial use cases. It does - but the reality is that the vast majority of its use case is as a store of value. Its the store of value aspect that determines the price. Peoples belief in it determines the price.

Bitcoin has had a value for 10 years. It will have a value in 10 years time.


By the way, when we revisit the euro project shambles and we have to go back to the irish punt, you might want to convert to bitcoin round that time - or else watch your savings devalue.

Nobelium

grindle wrote: »

Tell me why outside sources should trust any one company's blockchain my love.

"No, I will post a few more times making no sense whilst skirting around that issue thank you very much!"

Okay.

I'm not your love, bro, pal or anything else.

Because the companies themselves will have to share it to trust their inter firm transactions.

They don't need bitcoin pet. No one does.

paleoperson

makeorbrake wrote: »

The 'intrinsic value' argument. Been done to death but here we go...

It hasn't been done to death as it's an inherent flaw of bitcoin. As long as bitcoin exists it'll be the flaw. It's not magically going away. Do you think people are just going to stop complaining about it some day, they'll say "enough of that now"? When people are acting greedy others call them out.

makeorbrake wrote: »

The 'intrinsic value' argument. Been done to death but here we go...

- The paper/cotton/hideous assortment of bacteria in your wallet you call FIAT currency - what gives that value? Isn't it just a piece of paper? You'll think the suggestion is absurd, no doubt. However, FIAT currencies fail all the time.[/quote]

I don't think that suggestion is absurd at all and neither would anyone else who is anti-bitcoin. Why would you think that? You clearly don't understand the issue at all. The issue isn't just volatility (though that is one part), it's about general uselessness and lack of any democratic control of it.

As a word of advice in general, don't say "no doubt" about things where there's the slightest doubt. Because I guarantee you not a SINGLE person here thinks that's an absurd argument.

The ability to custody your own money - doesn't that have value? Again, you'll think whats the beef? Around the world, peoples money is simply taken off them - either through banks going bust due to mismanagement or through governments going bust through mismanagement. You'll say that doesn't happen here right? So western europe and the U.S. may be more stable but that doesnt mean it cant or hasnt happened. It happened in cryprus and greece. We came within a hairs breath of it. And then on a second sweep we came within a hairs breath of it again....only Noonan decided to raid our pensions instead (after reads of re-inforcing the message to irish society the importance of a pension!).

Sorry this is below the standard of discussion I can stoop to. Nonsense. "the ability to custody your own money", are you legit a real poster?

makeorbrake

Nobelium wrote: »

They don't need bitcoin pet. No one does.

So you can't see any redeeming qualities in decentralised digital currency? Seems to me that you simply don't understand the proposition.

Nobelium

makeorbrake wrote: »

So you can't see any redeeming qualities in decentralised digital currency? Seems to me that you simply don't understand the proposition.

It doesn't have to be bitcoin. Seems you don't understand that.

grindle

Nobelium wrote: »

I'm not your love, bro, pal or anything else.

Because the companies themselves will have to share it to trust their inter firm transactions.

They don't need bitcoin pet. No one does.

I don't want anybody to need bitcoin, my most beloved. People who want or need Bitcoin for whatever reason (I have no idea why they'd want it, you're presuming a lot about me) will use it.

If anybody wants or needs to use a public blockchain, they'll use it. For anybody to trust a transaction (even between companies) public makes better sense.

Hope you get well soon, xx.

makeorbrake

Nobelium wrote: »

It doesn't have to be bitcoin. Seems you don't understand that.

Well, perhaps you can enlighten us a bit more. You're a bit scant on detail there, fella.

It doesn't have to be Bitcoin for what purpose? And if it's not Bitcoin, what should it be?

Nobelium

grindle wrote: »

I don't want anybody to need bitcoin, my most beloved. People who want or need Bitcoin for whatever reason (I have no idea why they'd want it, you're presuming a lot about me) will use it.

If anybody wants or needs to use a public blockchain, they'll use it. For anybody to trust a transaction (even between companies) public makes better sense.

Hope you get well soon, xx.

Your ad homiem fallacy, and therefore lack of any decent argument . . says it all

Dohnjoe

paleoperson wrote: »

Don't think we'll see $20,000 ever again either.

Bitcoin, like all cryptocurrencies, are inherently stupid.

They produce nothing of value, just a lot of people constantly looking at numbers going in random directions like gamblers.

At best a waste of time.

Indeed, but people sent it to $20,000

Perhaps cryptos are stupid, but it's very apparent there is a big demand to speculate/gamble on them. Logically casinos don't make much sense either, but people continue to flood into them

Maybe it will all crash to dust, or perhaps the value of cryptos, like BTC, will just keep (on aggregate) rising as they have for the last 8 years

If you personally believe that BTC is going to zero - likewise there's a market for that.

Nobelium

makeorbrake wrote: »

Well, perhaps you can enlighten us a bit more. You're a bit scant on detail there, fella.

It doesn't have to be Bitcoin for what purpose? And if it's not Bitcoin, what should it be?

you do understand that blockchain technology can be used by anything other process that wants to ? There's endless uses, and none of them will require bitcoin.

q85dw7osi4lebg

paleoperson wrote: »

Don't think we'll see $20,000 ever again either.

Bitcoin, like all cryptocurrencies, are inherently stupid.

They produce nothing of value, just a lot of people constantly looking at numbers going in random directions like gamblers.

At best a waste of time.

Possibly a waste of time for you but bitcoin profit has paid my car insurance for the year, a week in Ibiza in May, and a week in Croatia in August. It's very hard to argue the hard facts that a lot of us in here are making good money off it.

We can pretend it's only Blockchain we are interested in but let's be honest good money has been made and will continue to be as the bulk run commences.

makeorbrake

Nobelium wrote: »

you do understand that blockchain technology can be used by anything other process that wants to ? There's endless uses, and none of them will require bitcoin.

Once again, you're quite short on detail, buddy. Blockchain technology can be used for all manner of use cases - beyond the digital money use case.

If you are discussing Bitcoin, for the most part (there are exceptions), it's assumed you're talking about the digital money and store of value use cases. So in the context of digital money/store of value, if it doesn't have to be Bitcoin, what should it be?


(and ironically, the guy you're arguing with a couple of posts above agrees with you on that).

makeorbrake

paleoperson wrote: »

It hasn't been done to death as it's an inherent flaw of bitcoin. As long as bitcoin exists it'll be the flaw. It's not magically going away. Do you think people are just going to stop complaining about it some day, they'll say "enough of that now"? When people are acting greedy others call them out.

Ok, so there is rampant speculation in cryptocurrency. If that's what you're saying, then I agree 100%. Whilst some may get over exuberant, is there also a logic to their belief that the price of certain cryptocurrencies has the potential to climb? In my view, there is.

If you're asking me do I believe that over time, people will come to realise that cryptocurrency is a legitimate digital money, I certainly do. The speculation aspect is a side show.

paleoperson wrote: »

-I don't think that suggestion is absurd at all and neither would anyone else who is anti-bitcoin. Why would you think that? You clearly don't understand the issue at all. The issue isn't just volatility (though that is one part), it's about general uselessness and lack of any democratic control of it.

As a word of advice in general, don't say "no doubt" about things where there's the slightest doubt. Because I guarantee you not a SINGLE person here thinks that's an absurd argument.

And respectfully, as a 'word of advice', you need to take a little bit more time with your postings. You've quoted the same tract of text as before. I have no earthly idea of what point you are trying to make here. By all means, revise and repost - and if I understand the point you're making, I'm more than happy to discuss it.

paleoperson wrote: »

Sorry this is below the standard of discussion I can stoop to. Nonsense. "the ability to custody your own money", are you legit a real poster?

I guess you don't understand what it is to custody your own money or the implications of that? I mean, I can try to explain it to you if you ask nicely. Otherwise, I'm not getting a warm, fuzzy feeling about being so altruistic about that with you at this point.

stockshares

makeorbrake wrote: »

The 'intrinsic value' argument. Been done to death but here we go...
- The paper/cotton/hideous assortment of bacteria in your wallet you call FIAT currency - what gives that value? Isn't it just a piece of paper? You'll think the suggestion is absurd, no doubt. However, FIAT currencies fail all the time.

The ability to custody your own money - doesn't that have value? Again, you'll think whats the beef? Around the world, peoples money is simply taken off them - either through banks going bust due to mismanagement or through governments going bust through mismanagement. You'll say that doesn't happen here right? So western europe and the U.S. may be more stable but that doesnt mean it cant or hasnt happened. It happened in cryprus and greece. We came within a hairs breath of it. And then on a second sweep we came within a hairs breath of it again....only Noonan decided to raid our pensions instead (after reads of re-inforcing the message to irish society the importance of a pension!).

Secondly, does Gold have value? How does it have value? What calculation do you carry out to assess its value? Now, some will say but shur gold has industrial use cases. It does - but the reality is that the vast majority of its use case is as a store of value. Its the store of value aspect that determines the price. Peoples belief in it determines the price.

Bitcoin has had a value for 10 years. It will have a value in 10 years time.


By the way, when we revisit the euro project shambles and we have to go back to the irish punt, you might want to convert to bitcoin round that time - or else watch your savings devalue.

My problem with BTC and other Coins is not their Value but how they can be secured and how hard they are to access.

It's great that people can have custody of their own money but they must be able to access and secure it. I think these are the things that will prevent mass adoption.

Think of what's happening in Venezuela. Their Currency(Bolivar) is worthless. Crypto is a solution for some but not all can access it and if they can how do they secure it in a lawless society.

Nobelium

makeorbrake wrote: »

Once again, you're quite short on detail, buddy. Blockchain technology can be used for all manner of use cases - beyond the digital money use case.

If you are discussing Bitcoin, for the most part (there are exceptions), it's assumed you're talking about the digital money and store of value use cases. So in the context of digital money/store of value, if it doesn't have to be Bitcoin, what should it be?


(and ironically, the guy you're arguing with a couple of posts above agrees with you on that).

I'm not your buddy, or any other sneering ad homien you can think of, and bitcoin, or any other crypto-currency does not have a monopoly on blockchain tech. No one is going to be tied to using bitcoin or any cryptocurrency. Simple as. Deal with it.

makeorbrake

stockshares wrote: »

My problem with BTC and other Coins is not their Value but how they can be secured and how hard they are to access.

It's great that people can have custody of their own money but they must be able to access and secure it. I think these are the things that will prevent mass adoption.

Agree completely. Rome wasn't built in a day. Crypto's like BTC were built by geeks. We need some Steve Jobs like innovation to make crypto more user friendly. No question.

Dohnjoe

makeorbrake wrote: »

Agree completely. Rome wasn't built in a day. Crypto's like BTC were built by geeks. We need some Steve Jobs like innovation to make crypto more user friendly. No question.

Or Zuckerberg..

Sorry couldn't resist

makeorbrake

Nobelium wrote: »

I'm not your buddy, or any other sneering ad homien you can think of, and bitcoin, or any other crypto-currency does not have a monopoly on blockchain tech. No one is going to be tied to using bitcoin or any cryptocurrency. Simple as. Deal with it.

Take some deep breaths, (I was going to add 'my friend' but I guess I better not lest it be misinterpreted). You're coming across a tad aggressive.


I never suggested for a second that Bitcoin had a monopoly on blockchain technology. Blockchain technology is broad - and cuts through more use cases in more industries than we even know about yet.

What should be used then in the stead of Bitcoin (or any other coin that is pointed towards the use case of digital money and/or store of value)?

grindle

Nobelium wrote: »

No one is going to be tied to using bitcoin or any cryptocurrency. Simple as. Deal with it.

Tell us what the value proposition is for a closed-source eternally private chain.

Explain in detail. Sweetheart.

makeorbrake

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Or Zuckerberg..

Sorry couldn't resist

I'm not a fan of FB or the FB organisation but I too believe that if they can get some traction on it, the FB coin could have positive knock on for 'real' crypto.

Nobelium

makeorbrake wrote: »

Take some deep breaths, (I was going to add 'my friend' but I guess I better not lest it be misinterpreted). You're coming across a tad aggressive.

I'm not the one that can't discuss the issue without getting personal, that says more about you than me.

paleoperson

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Perhaps cryptos are stupid, but it's very apparent there is a big demand to speculate/gamble on them. Logically casinos don't make much sense either, but people continue to flood into them.

Well yeah, casinos are stupid as well. At least though people get to play games in there, and there's fun to be had in the games.

Addison Fancy Macrame wrote: »

Possibly a waste of time for you but bitcoin profit has paid my car insurance for the year, a week in Ibiza in May, and a week in Croatia in August. It's very hard to argue the hard facts that a lot of us in here are making good money off it.

It's not hard to argue at all. It's like arguing against someone who says their lotto or gambling wins paid for all this stuff. If you honestly truly believe your gains were from anything other than pure luck then I'd have concerns over your conception of money.

makeorbrake wrote: »

Ok, so there is rampant speculation in cryptocurrency. If that's what you're saying, then I agree 100%. Whilst some may get over exuberant, is there also a logic to their belief that the price of certain cryptocurrencies has the potential to climb? In my view, there is.

It has the potential to fall as well. Money should climb over time itself if you put it in the bank/savings investment.

makeorbrake wrote: »

If you're asking me do I believe that over time, people will come to realise that cryptocurrency is a legitimate digital money, I certainly do. The speculation aspect is a side show.

What money is "legitimate" or not is purely subjective.

makeorbrake wrote: »

I guess you don't understand what it is to custody your own money or the implications of that? I mean, I can try to explain it to you if you ask nicely. Otherwise, I'm not getting a warm, fuzzy feeling about being so altruistic about that with you at this point.

Nah, I think I'll pass. I'm going by my/the common understanding of custody, not whatever made up terminology there is about it.

makeorbrake

Nobelium wrote: »

I'm not the one that can't discuss the issue without getting personal, that says more about you than me.

I have not wished you any ill-will - so you may need to explain that.

That's if you must explain it. I'd rather we actually discussed the topic at hand. Go back again to my last post. You don't seem to want to discuss the topic at all - just get enraged. If you'd like to discuss - and I'm interested in you making your point (as regards what should be used as opposed to Bitcoin), then please do post again.

q85dw7osi4lebg

Nobelium wrote: »

I'm not the one that can't discuss the issue without getting personal, that says more about you than me.

Calm down sunshine.

q85dw7osi4lebg

paleoperson wrote: »

Well yeah, casinos are stupid as well. At least though people get to play games in there, and there's fun to be had in the games.



It's not hard to argue at all. It's like arguing against someone who says their lotto or gambling wins paid for all this stuff. If you honestly truly believe your gains were from anything other than pure luck then I'd have concerns over your conception of money.



It has the potential to fall as well. Money should climb over time itself if you put it in the bank/savings investment.



What money is "legitimate" or not is purely subjective.



Nah, I think I'll pass. I'm going by my/the common understanding of custody, not whatever made up terminology there is about it.

I dunno, I think BTC has a bit more substance to it than Paleo.

makeorbrake

paleoperson wrote: »

Well yeah, casinos are stupid as well. At least though people get to play games in there, and there's fun to be had in the games.

I guess people get their kicks in different places and activities.

I've no problem in stating that speculation is rampant in crypto.

However, speculation seems to be a part of other things as well...such as Forex trading, Futures, Day Trading...and yet, people don't seem to get animated at all about these. Why is that?

paleoperson wrote: »

It's not hard to argue at all. It's like arguing against someone who says their lotto or gambling wins paid for all this stuff. If you honestly truly believe your gains were from anything other than pure luck then I'd have concerns over your conception of money.

I've also (inadvertently...at least in terms of my original interest in crypto way back when) made gains in crypto. As already acknowledged, it's highly speculative. However, as regards you're concerns over his 'conception of money', then chances are there is going to be a gap between the two of you there. Whilst people may speculate on crypto, they also have a belief behind their speculation. If you see NO redeeming qualities in a cryptocurrency, then I (and quite a few here I'd imagine) are going to believe that you have not arrived at a credible conclusion.

paleoperson wrote: »

It has the potential to fall as well. Money should climb over time itself if you put it in the bank/savings investment.

There is quite literally nobody here who doesnt believe that investing money in crypto is anything other than high risk. Most cryptocurrencies will vapourise into nothing.

However, the point you make about money in the bank - tell that to the Greeks, the Cypriots - tell it to the Venezuelans right now. FIAT money fails all the time. Banks fail all the time (unless they suddenly turn socialist temporarily and we bail them out with public money).

paleoperson wrote: »

What money is "legitimate" or not is purely subjective.

Insofar as you don't agree that its money? For sure, it's subjective in that respect - yes. Lets see what the future brings, shall we?

paleoperson wrote: »

Nah, I think I'll pass. I'm going by my/the common understanding of custody, not whatever made up terminology there is about it.

Ok, so you just want to spit bile and not discuss it? Totally up to yourself. Probably best to refrain from posting if you don't actually want to discuss anything.

Dohnjoe

paleoperson wrote: »

Well yeah, casinos are stupid as well. At least though people get to play games in there, and there's fun to be had in the games.

Indeed, there's also fun to be had in speculating, or "buying crypto before 2017" in terms of sheer gains. Some of my coins have gone up 100x (and gone down also)

That is a huge draw in itself, currently a $250bn "market"

My point is that, blockchain aside, significant numbers of people and large quantities of money are drawn purely to crypto speculation

A lot of people say Bitcoin is stupid for various reasons (more than a few I would agree with), but the value of it keeps rising on aggregate over the years

So when individuals comment that "Bitcoin is going to zero soon", a) I'd like to know when and b) why don't they ever bet on that?

It's like rhetoric that has no conviction to it.

Nobelium

Addison Fancy Macrame wrote: »

Calm down sunshine.

I'm not your sunshine. It seems this thread is more about making snide personal remarks than anything else, and incapable of discussing the actual subject, which speaks volumes.

q85dw7osi4lebg

Nobelium wrote: »

I'm not your sunshine. It seems this thread is more about making snide personal remarks than anything else, and incapable of discussing the actual subject, which speaks volumes.

Seems someone can’t have a laugh!

Short us your short position and I’ll happily discuss it like an adult.

Nobelium

Addison Fancy Macrame wrote: »

Seems someone can’t have a laugh!

Short us your short position and I’ll happily discuss it like an adult.

I doubt it, but the personal remarks have confirmed a lot more than you probably realise. Cheers.

Grumpypants

Lads the good times are back, the idiots are showing up to tell us that bitcoin has no use/value/pyramid scheme/resource hog.

It's been a while since we had new financial guru.

makeorbrake

Nobelium wrote: »

I'm not your sunshine. It seems this thread is more about making snide personal remarks than anything else, and incapable of discussing the actual subject, which speaks volumes.

Post No. 871. You're reading into things that aren't there. Secondly, it's you that won't engage with the discussion. Quite happy to read what you have to say - but it doesn't write itself. The same with Paleoperson. Dumps some bile here but won't engage with the actual discussion.

makeorbrake

On the Facebook Coin thing, interesting to now see the full list of backers - who all paid over $10 million to run a node and gain full access to the network (and its rich data). https://www.theblockcrypto.com/2019/06/14/facebooks-cryptocurrency-partners-revealed-we-obtained-the-entire-list-of-inaugural-backers/

It's interesting that the banksters haven't gotten involved. Seems there are some techie vs. banking old guard battle lines being drawn there.

stockshares

makeorbrake wrote: »

On the Facebook Coin thing, interesting to now see the full list of backers - who all paid over $10 million to run a node and gain full access to the network (and its rich data). https://www.theblockcrypto.com/2019/06/14/facebooks-cryptocurrency-partners-revealed-we-obtained-the-entire-list-of-inaugural-backers/

It's interesting that the banksters haven't gotten involved. Seems there are some techie vs. banking old guard battle lines being drawn there.

Great find.

Interesting to see that they tried to get Wall Street on board but no takers.

These are the backers from the crypto world:

Coinbase – cryptocurrency wallet and exchange platform

BisonTrails – infrastructure-as-a-service company. Its platform enables a variety of features including staking, validating, voting, transacting and securing blockchain protocols

Xapo – cryptocurrency custody provider

Anchorage – custodial service for digital assets

Also Interesting to see Vodafone and Spotify getting involved

q85dw7osi4lebg

Not sure about the bears here but I’m up another €100 since the arguments started in here earlier.

makeorbrake

The FB coin news feed continues to trickle down.
https://www.theblockcrypto.com/2019/06/14/facebook-to-launch-libra-blockchain-testnet-next-week-backed-by-libra-reserve/

Libra Asset Reserve to be established next week.

FB Coin testnet to be launched next week.

stockshares

makeorbrake wrote: »

The FB coin news feed continues to trickle down.
https://www.theblockcrypto.com/2019/06/14/facebook-to-launch-libra-blockchain-testnet-next-week-backed-by-libra-reserve/

Libra Asset Reserve to be established next week.


FB Coin testnet to be launched next week.

From the Article:
Facebook also notes that while some cryptocurrency projects have aimed to “disrupt the existing system and bypass regulations,” the firm believes “collaborating and innovating with the financial sector, including regulators and experts across a variety of industries, is the only way to ensure a sustainable, secure, and trusted framework underpins this new system.”

As Facebooks Coin is.a Stablecoin it can't be speculated upon. Is that correct?

I presume they will make their money from attracting more people to their platform and selling more advertising etc.

Grumpypants

stockshares wrote: »

I presume they will make their money from attracting more people to their platform and selling more advertising etc.

Yeah think along the lines of seeing an international advert on Facebook and buying it with Libre instead of converting euro to dollars.

q85dw7osi4lebg

Attempt 2 at 9k incoming

SauNewb

Joined Binance and bought a small amount of ChainLink.

Found it to be a difficult process.

Strapped in for the moon now.

Grumpypants

SauNewb wrote: »

Joined Binance and bought a small amount of ChainLink.

Found it to be a difficult process.

Strapped in for the moon now.

First time is always the hardest

vargoo

Is Binance the only platform with link?

Dont see on kraken/bitstamp...can't be arsed setting up another....

grindle

https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/chainlink/#markets

One market not listed there is ForkDelta.app, it's the most decentralised DEX, no account fückery to contend with but a janky process of signing transactions - the spread and liquidity are awful.

https://forkdelta.app/#!/trade/LINK-ETH

makeorbrake

Addison Fancy Macrame wrote: »

Attempt 2 at 9k incoming

I'm looking at $9184 as i type this. Interesting week ahead if that FB coin whitepaper is published on Tuesday. It's a shame Bakkt isn't ready to go.

Bob24

makeorbrake wrote: »

I'm looking at $9184 as i type this. Interesting week ahead if that FB coin whitepaper is published on Tuesday. It's a shame Bakkt isn't ready to go.

$9300 now. 10000 is not that far away and could be a catalyst to grab headlines and get people excited.

Bob24

On Facebook’s Libra coin thing, what do people think the impact will be on bitcoin (and others)?

Broadly I can see 3 ways to look at it:
1) the negative view: the Silicon Valley and bankers are taking control of this space and with all their weight they will crush everything else -> it is bad for bitcoin.
2) the neutral view: Facebook’s offering is completely different from what bitcoin is: a stable coin controlled by the king of surveillance capitalism and likely intended to be used as a payment token for online purchases has very little overlap with a decentralised privacy oriented coin which is becoming a store of value and a speculative asset -> it will have little impact on bitcoin.
3) the positive and enthusiastic view: the fact that Facebook is going all in with this and has convinced that many partners across multiple industries is a proof that there is a future in crypto. This is good news for crypto in general which will attract more interest, and there is space for multiple entities -> it is positive for bitcoin.

q85dw7osi4lebg

Due another dip back before 10k I'd say. I've loaded all the dips so far and intend to keep doing so.

When it's $100,000 I will be kicking myself for not buying more. And no I'm not even being ridiculous.

Frozen Veg

The Russians made a big pump overnight.

Blueshoe

Addison Fancy Macrame wrote: »

Due another dip back before 10k I'd say. I've loaded all the dips so far and intend to keep doing so.

When it's $100,000 I will be kicking myself for not buying more. And no I'm not even being ridiculous.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dutch_tulip_bulb_market_bubble.asp

stockshares

Frozen Veg wrote: »

The Russians made a big pump overnight.

Who