SwoopTheWorld
The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - Printable Version

+- SwoopTheWorld (https://www.swooptheworld.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Forums (https://www.swooptheworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Lifestyle Forum (https://www.swooptheworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) (/showthread.php?tid=813)



RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 06-19-2020

(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote:
(06-18-2020, 10:23 PM)LeBeau Wrote: JJG we used to chat more on the RVF, but I've always enjoyed reading links and arguments both FOR and AGAINST Bitcoin appreciation.

You also mentioned the concept of ranges and breakouts. One of the areas that doesn't seem to get enough attention is exactly what catalysts are needed to see another huge increase (or decrease in price) in a short time frame.

Finally, anything related to small rigs or mining at home is always useful to keep up to date with new developments for retail participants.

I have an AGAINST thesis...
  • I happen to think Bitcoin's long-term security model is fundamentally questionable — fixed supply of coins sounds good but how will miners/transaction signers be incentivized to verify transactions and secure the network as the mining reward decreases and if transaction fees + volume don't prove to be adequate?

  • Having so much mining concentration in China, a political wildcard, is not good — 65% of hashrate is in China

  • The proof of work consensus algorithm (which determines who mines the next block of transactions) is incredibly wasteful from an energy perspective and there are better alternatives.

  • At present, Bitcoin has a very slow 7 transactions /second. It's not scalable and nothing on the horizon to indicate that it will scale further. It's current solution, to the scaling problem, the Lightning Network, is highly questionable

  • Bitcoin doesn't have effective privacy features that allow for truly private transactions. Transactions are at-best anonymous but it's often too easy to trace the identity and transaction amounts of known addresses.

  • Innovation (and therefore ecosystem and infrastructure development) is very sluggish and not promising compared to other projects in the space that have a lot more devs.

  • Other cryptos have more actual usage and higher network demand as indicated by higher transaction transaction fees

Bitcoin rules the roost today and may for awhile but other but I don't think Bitcoin's current advantages (easy to understand, liquidity, name-recognition) are enough of a moat to  overcome its disadvantages while also warding off other projects that have been gaining ground fast in several key areas. Bitcoin's first-mover advantage will be quickly eroded as people become comfortable with digital assets. 

It may have another pump and I hold some just in case, but when looking at the long horizon.  I'm comparatively pessimistic

Basically, I think that Bitcoin looks more like AOL than Microsoft.

Here you go LeBeau.  Here's your opportunity to engage with some repeated and seemingly evergreen bitcoin naysaying arguments that have largely been rebutted a number of times by me and by others, but hey, give it to billydingdong for having a decent amount of persistence in terms of his failure and refusal to recognize value in bitcoin (perhaps due to his pie in the sky beliefs in a smoke and mirrors product, aka ethereum).  

Anyhow, I will give you, LeBeau, and/or perhaps a few other guys an opportunity to respond to billydingdong before I consider responding to his repeated nonsense points.

By the way billydingdong, previously, you had been saying that you had not invested in BTC (you had supposedly gotten completely out of BTC and your crypto holdings were completely ethereum, according to your earlier representations), and so it seems that you have shifted your position (allocation) a little bit to include bitcoin, so I suppose that you are potentially progressing in a seemingly more meaningful direction in terms of at least getting a bit of a bitcoin stake in your portfolio - even though you are not disclosing any details regarding the size of your acknowledged new stake.. 

Hopefully, your BTC stake has been within a reasonable 1% to 10% size of your total investment portfolio... in order to be kind of meaningfu (rather than having a less than 1% stake, which might be quite inadequate beyond just symbolism, even though within the past month or so, Paul Tudor Jones did assert that he has taken about 1% of his billion dollar hedge fund into bitcoin and claims that he will allow it to grow to 2%.

Anyhow, I will likely respond to your other points again (like I am repeating mysellf), after giving some other members (such as LeBeau who seemed to have invited you or others) an opportunity to engage with you on your various largely nonsense bitcoin naysaying (seemingly out of the ethereum pumpening talking points handbook) assertions.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - LeBeau - 06-19-2020

I'm still not very technically savvy on Bitcoin, but there's 2 camps of arguments that really should be further separated and clarified.

1) Bitcoin as an inflation hedge and store of value
2) Bitcoin as a technological currency and further uses of the blockchain concept

I'm mostly interested in the 1st, and feel like that's where the real price appreciation will come from. However, it seems like people use arguments against the 2nd to justify why Bitcoin will fail and neglect to separate out the 1st argument as it's own unique value proposition.

To expand on my previous post, it's important to look at all arguments to avoid confirmation bias too.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - billydingdong - 06-20-2020

It seems like you're trying to figure this out, and I have a couple of comments.

(06-19-2020, 07:37 PM)LeBeau Wrote: I'm still not very technically savvy on Bitcoin, but there's 2 camps of arguments that really should be further separated and clarified.

1) Bitcoin as an inflation hedge and store of value
2) Bitcoin as a technological currency and further uses of the blockchain concept

Part of understanding whether Bitcoin is a durable 'inflation hedge' or 'store of value' over the long haul depends on understanding some of the technical aspects of it. If you can't answer:
  • what assures that the ledger of balances remains intact?
  • how are transactions processed?
  • what incentivizes the continual processing of transactions?

...then you're simply investing in a meme. I wouldn't even dignify it as investing, it's hopeful speculation.

A 21m limited supply token sounds nice, but imo you'd be wise to know in some level of detail what that's actually contingent on i.e. how Bitcoin more or less works, how transactions happen, how balances are securely maintained, and how network participants are incentivized to keep the whole thing going.

Quote:I'm mostly interested in the 1st, and feel like that's where the real price appreciation will come from. However, it seems like people use arguments against the 2nd to justify why Bitcoin will fail and neglect to separate out the 1st argument as it's own unique value proposition.

People use the tech argument against Bitcoin because it's a material threat.

A fast, stable, more useful crypto could absolutely throttle Bitcoin in the same way that Myspace got crushed by Facebook.

At one point in 2007, MySpace was the king of the internet and more highly trafficked than Google. We all know how that ended.

In this case, if people start onboarding onto other cryptos and start exchanging with them because they're faster, provably reliable, more feature-rich, less of a pain in the ass, and also integrate better into numerous apps, then that presents a measure of risk for Bitcoin.

Bitcoin's undeniably inferior tech could have it fall to a better developed and more technologically robust competitor that people come to have more confidence and faith in.

That also may not happen as there are plenty of examples where lesser systems/products end up winning out because the incumbent system/product has insurmountable network effects (Exhibit A: the imperial system over the metric system in the USA).

But there's no denying that better tech elsewhere poses a meaningful risk to the store of value thesis when considering that we're not even out of the 1st inning in the development and proliferation of this asset class.

----

edit You may also want to consider a third camp.

3) Those who think Bitcoin has a good chance of pumping in the near term due to speculative fervor but are doubtful of its long-term prospects.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 06-20-2020

(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote:
(06-18-2020, 10:23 PM)LeBeau Wrote: JJG we used to chat more on the RVF, but I've always enjoyed reading links and arguments both FOR and AGAINST Bitcoin appreciation.

You also mentioned the concept of ranges and breakouts. One of the areas that doesn't seem to get enough attention is exactly what catalysts are needed to see another huge increase (or decrease in price) in a short time frame.

Finally, anything related to small rigs or mining at home is always useful to keep up to date with new developments for retail participants.

I have an AGAINST thesis...

Of course, there is no problem presenting some against theses or raising questions, yet you surely do not seem to mind repeating your various bullshit bitcoin naysaying talking points, so I will just go through them one by one.




(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: [*]I happen to think Bitcoin's long-term security model is fundamentally questionable — fixed supply of coins sounds good but how will miners/transaction signers be incentivized to verify transactions and secure the network as the mining reward decreases and if transaction fees + volume don't prove to be adequate?
Yes, this problem is so damned imminent. Bitcoin mining rewards run out in 120 years and they are halved every 4 years, so we better rush out and fix this potential problem, to the extent that it even is a problem.

The nonsense of your asserted problem should be somewhat obvious on its face, but hey you want to speculate that a fee market might not develop, or that investors in bitcoin might not continue to mine out of self-interest in the coming years because the reward is slowly shrinking to zero over the coming 120 years?

Highly speculative problem that you outline that is hardly even relevant in any kind of tangible way without more evidence in regard how bitcoin dynamics of adoption or mining fees might not be sufficiently developing now, including even likelihood that BTC prices are going to continue to go up in line with the stock to flow model, four year fractal and exponential s-curve adoption based on networking and metcalfe principles. The progress of bitcoin over the next 120 years is likely going to show whether there is any viability to any aspect of your speculation, which I suspect that we are going to be able to adapt bitcoin if and as needed to account for this likely non-issue that you continue to repeat as if it were imminent and actually important in a current Bitcoin investment thesis.

(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: [*]Having so much mining concentration in China, a political wildcard, is not good — 65% of hashrate is in China

There have been FUD spreading bitcoin naysayers spout out concerns about China since 2013, and probably earlier. I doubt that it is any kind of problem that is anywhere near to the fears that are propounded. We can reasonably have these kinds of suspicions about the overplay of the china fears based on a variety of ways that the actual facts end up playing out. Recall in late 2016 when there were a zillion concerns because China had frozen almost all of its exchanges, so people were scared as fuck because supposedly 90% of the trading was happening in china, but they were cut off, and those Chinese folks who had their funds frozen on Chinese exchanges largely ended up missing out on the 2017 price run if they were not able to get involved in bitcoin during that time... so the Chinese regular people got fucked out of profiting from bitcoin, and BTC prices went up 20x while people were proclaiming that BTC was dead because china banned it.. blah blah blah .. china...

Remember in mid 2017 when people were trying to proclaim that miners decide the direction of bitcoin and they were going to fork into segwit2x and more than 90% of them were on board to change bitcoin.. blah blah blah.. Well, they kind of got fucked in that deal too because bitcoin did not change in the way that the miners supposedly wanted it to change.

So fuck china claims and fuck dominant miner claims, they are bullshit, and the danger of chinese mining has been spouted out, at least since 2013, and mining is even more spread out today than it was in 2013.. and also, even if we might concede that there is a considerable amount of difficulty knowing exactly where bitcoin's hashpower comes from, those kinds of purported black box mysteries have been thrown out more in regards to serve as something to be concerned about, rather than any actual undermining of bitcoin's current investment thesis.

You are free to be scared if you like, and don't invest in bitcoin, but you are likely going to continue to see that bitcoin goes up in price, and it is not merely some vague ponzi scheme but instead actual ongoing understanding that bitcoin has underlying value including the power of it's hashing power, in spite of various attempts to poo poo it.



(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: [*]The proof of work consensus algorithm (which determines who mines the next block of transactions) is incredibly wasteful from an energy perspective and there are better alternatives.

Nonsense.

There are no better alternatives to bitcoin's proof of work, and bitcoin's proof of work was actually a genius invention that created incentives in bitcoin to build and to mine and to network by showing and creating a censorship resistant chain of transactions and blocks that you are not going to be able to go back in time and change them unless you are ready, willing and able to overcome ongoing decentralized proof of work... good luck with breaking that security, and no other coin has it... they are just weak ass imitations proclaiming to be better than bitcoin blah blah blah.. but they do not have money and trasactions into them to really show that their systems actually work like bitcoin does... and bitcoin is not broken and continues to get stronger and stronger.. so good luck to any competitor because none is even close.. in spite of your nonsense assertions suggesting that there is supposedly some kind of problem with bitcoin.. when its invention of proof of work as it has been applied to value transmitted over the interwebs has been a paradigm shifting accomplishment that created an asset class like no other one previously seen.. and fuck the imitations.. they are no where near bitcoin, whether you are referring to the smoke and mirror scam of ethereum or any of the other shitcoins such as the bcash forks that are trying to act like they are actually bitcoin but they are just laughing stocks.. .



(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: [*]At present, Bitcoin has a very slow 7 transactions /second. It's not scalable and nothing on the horizon to indicate that it will scale further. It's current solution, to the scaling problem, the Lightning Network, is highly questionable

Sure, maybe there are going to be some increased fees and increased processing times, and probably lightning network is not ready for our next exponential growth period.

Still seems that bitcoin is still growing in spite of these issues. You can look at bitcoin metrics and see ongoing growth including growth in the value transacted over bitcoin, for some strange reason..

https://www.blockchain.com/charts/estima...volume-usd

Of course, there was a blip upwards in late 2017, but even with that blip, the overall value that is being transacted through bitcoin is continuing to trend upwards.




(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: [*]Bitcoin doesn't have effective privacy features that allow for truly private transactions. Transactions are at-best anonymous but it's often too easy to trace the identity and transaction amounts of known addresses.

yes... not completely anonymous.. still working on adding some more of those features, and I doubt that the ongoing work on bitcoin in the direction of privacy is going to hold it back in terms of having a good current investment thesis.

(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: [*]Innovation (and therefore ecosystem and infrastructure development) is very sluggish and not promising compared to other projects in the space that have a lot more devs.

Bitcoin does not need to be innovative. It already is a good value proposition, and one of its features (not a bug) is that it is difficult to change, which is good for money.

Now, if you are building multiple scams, such as the various projects that are creating tokens for everything in order that they can scam you, then yeah, there seem to be a lot of developers working on those scams... good luck with that.


(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: [*]Other cryptos have more actual usage and higher network demand as indicated by higher transaction transaction fees

There are a lot of smoke and mirrors in the ethereum bullshit, so good luck with your investing into that crap.. and they don't even have a working system, but they have all kinds of people building all kinds of crap on their various systems, so sure it may be designed to have several more pumpenings, but I still would not have confidence in their king of scams status.. and without even a working blockchain that allows for regular people to run full nodes.... instead you have to count on a centralized few that are scamming you into believing that ethereum is more decentralized than it actually is.. good luck with your building a blockchain that is secure.

(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: Bitcoin rules the roost today
Yes... at least you recognize that king daddy rules the roost.. that's for sure. There is nothing even close to it.


(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: and may for awhile but other but I don't think Bitcoin's current advantages (easy to understand, liquidity, name-recognition) are enough of a moat to  overcome its disadvantages while also warding off other projects that have been gaining ground fast in several key areas. Bitcoin's first-mover advantage will be quickly eroded as people become comfortable with digital assets. 
Any product that is going to unseat bitcoin better be more than 10 times greater, otherwise bitcoin (aka kingdaddy) is going to just absorb its features, to the extent that it has anything worth absorbing.



(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: It may have another pump


Yes.. bitcoin's pump is largely built on fundamentals, and it is likely to have a few more pumps based on fairly convincing and currently valid BTC price prediction models which includes: stock to flow model, four year fractal and exponential s-curve adoption based on networking and metcalfe principles.

Other coins are only able to pump at all because bitcoin provides them with a security blanket.. so sure some of the various shitcoins might pump more than bitcoin and built upon a bunch of bullshit and lame imitations, but still might pump more than BTC.. perhaps perhaps.. but it is still much safer to be in kingdaddy be cause any of us should be considering downside as well as upside.. which makes investing in shitcoins risky because of their downside that seems to be a lot greater than bitcoins..

do your own research, your milage may vary.. and good luck investing in shitcoins if you choose to include them in your investment portfolio.

(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: and I hold some just in case,

Yes. I asked you about this in my previous post, but so far you have ignored me on such inquiry that involves an assessment that you have changed your BTC position to add a bit more to your investments.

(06-19-2020, 01:40 AM)billydingdong Wrote: but when looking at the long horizon.  I'm comparatively pessimistic

Basically, I think that Bitcoin looks more like AOL than Microsoft.

Makes no sense. Bitcoin has foundational principles that all other coins are trying to imitate.. and there are no coins that come even close to bitcoin in terms of foundational security principles.. so your attempt to make a lame analogy does not seem to apply here.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - billydingdong - 06-20-2020

Wall of text, not gonna respond to all, be more concise.

Also not going to reveal how much I bought, but it was during the mid-March dip (not at exact bottom). Even so, it's not relevant to the question at hand. Hold period is around 1-4 years, or the next pump.

Will address this one though:

JayJuanGee Wrote:Yes, this problem is so damned imminent. Bitcoin mining rewards run out in 120 years and they are halved every 4 years, so we better rush out and fix this potential problem, to the extent that it even is a problem.

The nonsense of your asserted problem should be somewhat obvious on its face, but hey you want to speculate that a fee market might not develop, or that investors in bitcoin might not continue to mine out of self-interest in the coming years because the reward is slowly shrinking to zero over the coming 120 years?

Highly speculative problem that you outline that is hardly even relevant in any kind of tangible way without more evidence in regard how bitcoin dynamics of adoption or mining fees might not be sufficiently developing now, including even likelihood that BTC prices are going to continue to go up in line with the stock to flow model, four year fractal and exponential s-curve adoption based on networking and metcalfe principles.

[1] All the speculation is on your end. As the price goes up, Bitcoin requires more security to protect the network — especially if you're going to treat it as 'digital gold' or an enduring store of value.

We have no reason to believe that miners will continue to throw hashrate to secure to the network if their payout decreases. You have to assume that the price will go up and stay up, which is not a given. By 2028, the payout for those miners will be 1/4 of what it is today.


[2] Suggesting that a sufficient fee market will somehow develop is also more speculation on your end... especially when tx fees are a tiny fraction of block rewards. ZERO indication that fees will increase in such a way to compensate miners to throw the same amount of hashrate.

[3]'S-curve' adoption, 4-year fractal patterns, and metcalfe principles are circle jerk projection buzzwords. Even more speculation. Nobody knows what's going to happen. Myspace had promising S-Curve adoption (one of the most highly trafficked sites in 2007) and then fell off a cliff. Bitcoin is nowhere near that in terms of reach and is losing ground in a lot of key metrics.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 06-20-2020

(06-19-2020, 07:37 PM)LeBeau Wrote: I'm still not very technically savvy on Bitcoin,

I doubt that you need to be technically savvy in order to make decisions for yourself regarding whether you consider bitcoin to be a good investment, and consider the terms upon which you are going to invest, if at all.

As I already mentioned several times, you need to account for your own situation, which sure also includes your views upon bitcoin that you can tweak along the way too... but overall investment considerations are not easy to really get a grasp on and to achieve, but they are necessary for anyone who is investing rather than gambling..

And that is figuring out: your cash flow, your other investments, your views about bitcoin as compared with other investments, your risk tolerance, your timeline and your time and abilities to be able to establish strategies, research, trade (if at all) and to tweak your strategies from time to time


(06-19-2020, 07:37 PM)LeBeau Wrote: but there's 2 camps of arguments that really should be further separated and clarified.

1) Bitcoin as an inflation hedge and store of value
2) Bitcoin as a technological currency and further uses of the blockchain concept

I don't know if those above outlined concepts need to be separately considered because bitcoin remains a growing space, and its use cases are going to continue to grow too. Bitcoin has already established current uses cases, and development continues on bitcoin as well as other projects that might either be complements to bitcoin or trying to become bitcoin 2.0, and surely anyone's head is going to spin to attempt to either understand all of bitcoin or all of the various tangential developments around bitcoin.. but surely you can study along the way while investment, and don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good in terms of which areas you might consider yourself to be most ignorant and in need of studying, and surely for me, I had considered the hedge/store of value to be a great use case right from the start of my investment into bitcoin in late 2013 because that was kind of what I had been looking for with gold (but I had tentatively concluded that bitcoin was likely better than gold, even though time still needed to play out, and I don't really see any evidence (as I had continued to study the space in the past 6.5 years) that really undermines my initial considerations about bitcoin being better than gold in terms of the use case that I was looking for).

People are also not likely to come to the same conclusions in regard to their priorities, and really I have been finding a lot of the technical contribution arguments to be BIG ASS distractions regarding the problems that bitcoin is solving and likely to continue to solve in terms of sound money. So, technicalities are frequently not very important, even if some coin might show that it can do transactions faster or x, y or z feature is better, when they really don't have solid backing in terms of hash power and on the ground usage, so a lot of times a coin can proclaim that it is better in x, y and z ways, but that is on paper rather than really played out in the real world including any likelihood to garner networking effects, which take a while to build.

I don't know how much necessity there is to get into ethereum in this regard because there are proclamations that ethereum has network effects, but a lot of that is smoke and mirrors because they do not have a working product, but people are still building the fuck out of that shit, and sure, it might pump a few times, but seems really risky to be building or investing into matters that are not even secure on the base level in terms of regular people being able to verify transactions.





(06-19-2020, 07:37 PM)LeBeau Wrote: I'm mostly interested in the 1st, and feel like that's where the real price appreciation will come from. However, it seems like people use arguments against the 2nd to justify why Bitcoin will fail and neglect to separate out the 1st argument as it's own unique value proposition.

The evidence about bitcoin's supposed impending failure is becoming weaker and weaker with the passage of time, and sure there are a lot of distracting metrics to try to make those kinds of arguments, and consider bitcoin in 2013/2014 as compared to now, there have been quite a few battles, threats and attacks, and just the dominance of bitcoin after the 2017 forks and fork threats should have been pretty damned convincing evidence that a bunch of bullies/whiners are going to get their way with bitcoin, and bitcoin's being difficult to change remains a feature rather than a bug, because bitcoin is not broken in the first place.

If bitcoin ossified in place right now, it would still beat the fuck out of all of the other coins, but of course, there are ongoing developments and buildings, and sure lightning network and other second layer solutions do strive for more ease of use and adoption, and there continue to be small ongoing changes to the bitcoin code that remain voluntary whether to adopt or to follow. So, sure it might take a bit of time before bitcoin becomes widely adopted in terms of being able to walk into any store to spend, but it is still possible that you and I meet on the street and can easily do a bitcoin transaction directly, and some people act like bitcoin cannot do some of these kinds of things.

Sure there are also all kinds of KYC/AML attacks on bitcoin, and in mid 2019, services like local bitcoins had been quite hampered from operating in the USA because of these kind of government pressures... There are likely going to be services to replace local bitcoins, and there already are, but sometimes there will be various dances, including people figuring out other ways to just deal directly with each other, in the even that is what they want to do... because they are surely capable of doing that in bitcoin, even if a lot of merchants and hook up services and even exchanges get scared into having to guard on and off ramps, especially if they are dealing with fiat and that is where governments can attempt to crimp bitcoins increased (and likely inevitable) adoption..... more needed in unbanked areas of the world rather than with people who can use credit cards and have access to banking services.. but still even people who have access to banking services are likely going to continue to recognize value in having options that include something like bitcoin.


(06-19-2020, 07:37 PM)LeBeau Wrote: To expand on my previous post, it's important to look at all arguments to avoid confirmation bias too.

Of course, anyone who is investing in bitcoin might be perceived to have some confirmation bias, but I would not want to get caught with my pants down in the event that I am not considering various negative issues involving bitcoin to the extent that they are material and relevant.

At the same time, I am used to a lot of bullshit arguments naysaying bitcoin, so I doubt that my ongoing hostility
to some of that bullshit, especially when it seems to be intentional is caused by any confirmation bias that I have. I am more than willing to look at a variety of negative aspects, especially if guys are presenting them in good faith rather than pumping some bullshit. For example, if you are skeptical about bitcoin, then don't invest in it, even if I am recommending that all guys should try to figure out a way to establish a 1% to 10% stake in bitcoin, and surely a guy might decide to go lower or higher within that range, or even choose not to invest in bitcoin at all, but hopefully, here, we are able to explore these bitcoin related arguments that might involve trying to figure out individual strategies and also figuring out short, medium or long term BTC price movements, and of course the shorter term price movements tend to be harder to have any meaningful clue, and that is part of the reason for developing certain kinds of strategies of not over investing and having money prepared for bitcoin's price movement down as well as having some bitcoin so that you are prepared for up, too.. but the amount and the details are going to vary from guy to guy.. that's for sure.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 06-20-2020

(06-20-2020, 01:37 AM)billydingdong Wrote: It seems like you're trying to figure this out, and I have a couple of comments.

(06-19-2020, 07:37 PM)LeBeau Wrote: I'm still not very technically savvy on Bitcoin, but there's 2 camps of arguments that really should be further separated and clarified.

1) Bitcoin as an inflation hedge and store of value
2) Bitcoin as a technological currency and further uses of the blockchain concept

Part of understanding whether Bitcoin is a durable 'inflation hedge' or 'store of value' over the long haul depends on understanding some of the technical aspects of it. If you can't answer:
  • what assures that  the ledger of balances remains intact?
  • how are transactions processed?
  • what incentivizes the continual processing of transactions?

...then you're simply investing in a meme. I wouldn't even dignify it as investing, it's hopeful speculation.

Those come off as nonsensical and somewhat irrelevant questions. Sure, it might help a driver of a car to understand how his/her car works in terms of the difference between an engine and a transmission, and to understand how the carburetor works or the kind of diagnostic machine is compatible with your year, make and model of car in order to trouble shoot its electronics, but in the end, much of that shit does not matter, even if it might make the driver a more informed in his/her driving decision or whether he chooses a honda, lexus, lamborghini, masserati or a tesla.

Car drivers and owners do not necessarily need to know certain questions in order to make decisions about whether to drive, invest or buy certain kinds of cars, even though having more technical knowledge might be helpful to them in certain circumstances.

What they might need to know is what is their favorite color, is there a dealer/repair center near them, does the car tend to hold its value, are they going to use the car to go to the mountains and drive in snow or to go to the beach on the weekends to pick up babes (or attempt such).

So get the fuck out of here with any litmus test have to know answers to these questions. You are largely speaking gobble dee gook.

Of course, it might be good to know what makes bitcoin different from various shitcoins, but sometimes it might take a while for someone to have any kind of confidence in that while they might be dollar cost investing or even figuring out their own situation regarding how much of a budget that they might want to dedicate towards investing into bitcoin or how to allocate their portfolio.. and various other on ramp and off ramp considerations.

By the way, the attempt to distinguish between speculating and investing is surely not knew to this thread or other bitcoin-related discussions, and surely any asset class could be treated as either an investment, as speculation or some combination of ways of treating the asset, and surely anyone who makes sure that they assess their own situation first is going to realize the extent to which they might be treating any of their asset categories as investments, speculation or some combination, including figuring out their own risk tolerance and whether they are managing their risk in ways that are reasonable in terms of their whole situation including considering their cashflow, their investment in other assets, their timeline and their skills, time and abilities to manage their portfolio and tweaking their plan from time to time (as well as going through a process that actually creates a realistic individually tailored plan that they are able to tweak from time to time as either their situation changes or their views might change).


(06-20-2020, 01:37 AM)billydingdong Wrote: A 21m limited supply token sounds nice, but imo you'd be wise to know in some level of detail what that's actually contingent on i.e. how Bitcoin more or less works, how transactions happen, how balances are securely maintained, and how network participants are incentivized to keep the whole thing going.

Sure, 21 million has to do with scarcity, so yes, if you understand various aspects of the issuance of bitcoins, and get some grasp of bitcoin's history including understanding that there are a lot of shitcoins out there that try to imitate bitcoin in a variety of ways or to mislead people into believing that some shitcoin has something to offer, then yeah, you might want to get some ideas of some of the technical basics, but you are likely not going to be able to understand a lot of bitcoin right from the start, so their may well be some leaps of faith in the beginning and some need to continue to study the space to make sure that you are not doing anything too dumb or too impractical or that your ideas might be pie in the sky in terms of having no fucking clue about what it is that you are investing in... so shitcoins might trick you into believing that they have some kind of technical equivalency to bitcoin or potential or that they are not the shams that they tend to be... .so surely be careful about getting distracted into shitcoins.


(06-20-2020, 01:37 AM)billydingdong Wrote:
(06-19-2020, 07:37 PM)LeBeau Wrote: I'm mostly interested in the 1st, and feel like that's where the real price appreciation will come from. However, it seems like people use arguments against the 2nd to justify why Bitcoin will fail and neglect to separate out the 1st argument as it's own unique value proposition.

People use the tech argument against Bitcoin because it's a material threat.

People use the tech argument against bitcoin because they want to confuse you into believing either that there is something deficient with bitcoin or that their shitty coin has something to offer, which it does not.


(06-20-2020, 01:37 AM)billydingdong Wrote: A fast, stable, more useful crypto could absolutely throttle Bitcoin in the same way that Myspace got crushed by Facebook.

Yeah right... .. how they gonna do that? Which one of the 5,000 shitcoins should I waste my time investing into based on some kind of pie in the sky speculation that some shitcoin has anything beyond paper dreams?

(06-20-2020, 01:37 AM)billydingdong Wrote: At one point in 2007, MySpace was the king of the internet and more highly trafficked than Google. We all know how that ended.

Again,... your dumbass analogy does not apply here.. bitcoin is a protocol.. not an application.. .good luck with your investment into shitcoins based on hope that there might be some cooperative deficiencies in bitcoin.


(06-20-2020, 01:37 AM)billydingdong Wrote: In this case, if people start onboarding onto other cryptos and start exchanging with them because they're faster, provably reliable, more feature-rich, less of a pain in the ass, and also integrate better into numerous apps, then that presents a measure of risk for Bitcoin.

I doubt it... sure various shitcoins are likely to pump, and even though bitcoin's dominance is currently around 65%, bitcoin could get diluted by another thousand shitcoins and stable coins and other bullshit and go down to 10% market dominance.. who fucking cares? The fact that shitcoins are being developed based on inadequate security is not a meaningful threat to bitcoin at this point, even if some of those shit projects might pump.... go ahead, invest in those shitcoins because they might pump, but then again, they might not.


(06-20-2020, 01:37 AM)billydingdong Wrote: Bitcoin's undeniably inferior tech  

If you keep saying it, maybe some people might believe it. Bitcoin's innovation is not tech.. so get the fuck out of here with that, but instead the ongoing working of a proof of work system that is not even close to being competed against by any other coin.

(06-20-2020, 01:37 AM)billydingdong Wrote: could have it fall to a better developed and more technologically robust competitor that people come to have more confidence and faith in.

Yes.. you are wishing.. good luck with getting hashpower over to your shitty project... and by the way, good luck with building a working ethereum, because you don't even have a working ethereum, even though people are investing in that centralized shit that is trying to hold itself out as if it actually works or as if it is something close to the same thing as bitcoin, when it is just smoke and mirrors and deception built upon deception. Good luck, you are going to need it when you are proposing a plane that is on the ground and supposedly flies better than bitcoin, but your plane has 36 engines that seem a bit heavy to even get off the ground, even while it looks good on paper, while bitcoin has been flying for more than 11 years and doing a few aerials here and there too, including updates while in the air.. while your crappy ethereum has not even gotten off the ground except for its hanging onto bitcoin's wings. Hopefully, you can keep up the smoke and mirrors through another bitcoin pumpening cycle.


(06-20-2020, 01:37 AM)billydingdong Wrote: That also may not happen as there are plenty of examples where lesser systems/products end up winning out because the incumbent system/product has insurmountable  network effects (Exhibit A: the imperial system over the metric system in the USA).

Some more inept analogies that presume that bitcoin is broken in some kind of way... yeah right. Rolleyes Rolleyes Those are features that you are looking at, not bugs, billydingdong.

By the way, you better get your shit at least 10x better than bitcoin to even have a fighting chance... and you cannot even get off the ground... Tongue

(06-20-2020, 01:37 AM)billydingdong Wrote: But there's no denying that better tech elsewhere poses a meaningful risk to the store of value thesis when considering that we're not even out of the 1st inning in the development and proliferation of this asset class.

Sure, we are still in the early stages of bitcoin.. that's for sure. But there have been quite a few attempts at attacking and undermining king daddy, and not much success, so far.

(06-20-2020, 01:37 AM)billydingdong Wrote: ----

edit You may also want to consider a third camp.

3) Those who think Bitcoin has a good chance of pumping in the near term due to speculative fervor but are doubtful of its long-term prospects.

Yeah... those persons who are trying to hedge their bets so that they can argue bitcoin's failure later down the road, at a more opportune time because they do not have enough evidence of bitcoin's supposed failure now, so they just want to throw out speculative crap about what they believe is going to happen 120 years down the road and scare people out of their bitcoin investment currently... Anyhow, consider those nutjobs, too.. no problem.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 06-21-2020

(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: Wall of text, not gonna respond to all, be more concise.

Yeah... of course, you are not going to respond, and instead you will just keep spouting off your nonsense and failing and refusing to engage with actual facts and logic rather than pie in the sky fantasies and various shitcoin pumpening talking points.


(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: Also not going to reveal how much I bought, but it was during the mid-March dip (not at exact bottom). Even so, it's not relevant to the question at hand. Hold period is around 1-4 years, or the next pump.

Ok. more or less you are asserting that you are merely making a gambling move, and really there would not be any reason to disclose details, anyhow except sometimes sharing round about figures of your portfolio or your approach can sometimes lend some credibility regarding having your actions to be somewhat in sync with your words.... and also sometimes to get some assessments regarding the extent to which you might be talking your book rather than really attempting to engage with real world longer term dynamics.

So, accordingly, if you are taking a stake on a dump and waiting for a pump, you are not really committing to much of anything in terms of bitcoin beyond a belief that it has decent chances of pumping in the next 1-4 years and in accordance with that, you are likely to have some kind of general idea regarding various scenarios in which you might consider the pump to be sufficient to dump part or all of whatever you had purchased. It's a valuing your BTC wealth in terms of fiat, which is hardly any kind of committed BTC position, so I will give you that, to the extent that you are disclosing anything personally.


(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: Will address this one though:

JayJuanGee Wrote:Yes, this problem is so damned imminent. Bitcoin mining rewards run out in 120 years and they are halved every 4 years, so we better rush out and fix this potential problem, to the extent that it even is a problem.

The nonsense of your asserted problem should be somewhat obvious on its face, but hey you want to speculate that a fee market might not develop, or that investors in bitcoin might not continue to mine out of self-interest in the coming years because the reward is slowly shrinking to zero over the coming 120 years?

Highly speculative problem that you outline that is hardly even relevant in any kind of tangible way without more evidence in regard how bitcoin dynamics of adoption or mining fees might not be sufficiently developing now, including even likelihood that BTC prices are going to continue to go up in line with the stock to flow model, four year fractal and exponential s-curve adoption based on networking and metcalfe principles.

[1] All the speculation is on your end. As the price goes up, Bitcoin requires more security to protect the network — especially if you're going to treat it as 'digital gold' or an enduring store of value.

I would suggest that guys attempt to treat bitcoin as one portion of their investment portfolio, and they figure out what they are going to allocate into it whether such allocation is going to be between 1% and 10% or some other amount. Once they decide the amount that works for them, then they develop a strategy to reach their target amount and then more or less to DCA in proportion to attempting to maintain such allocation proportions in their various investments. Of course, they can consider some other tactics such as buying on dips and selling small amounts on price pumps, and with any of those tactics they can make adjustments that fit with their needs and their views about bitcoin.

In other words, my treatment of bitcoin is as a long term investment, but such a long term investment that I study on a fairly regular basis because I am interested and excited about the paradigm shifting aspect of it - and it seems to be quite a disruptive kind of new asset class that continues to be very interesting for the past 6.5 years.

Now, you on the other hand seem to be speculating 120 years into the future in regards to some kind of belief that the fee market is not going to sufficiently mature by the time the mining rewards start to shrink towards zero. 120 years is not any kind of immediate concern for me and it does not seem to disrupt my bitcoin investment thesis because not only are you describing way the fuck in the future, you are also presenting a scenario that also seems far fetched. In other words, actually what is going on seems to be much more important, and there are a variety of alternative scenarios that even seem more likely to me that are not doom and gloom for bitcoin - but I don't even have to fucking win the argument because it seemingly less than a 1% chance of relevance - whether we are talking now or even if we pick some point that is between now and 120 years from now... and likely if I were to live another 120 years or my couple of generations of heirs might be suffering with the supposed immediacy of your speculative problem, then they can decide what they are going to do, if that involves changing their allocation or getting completely out of bitcoin because some better system happens to come about.. in other words, there is no immediate or even close to immediate problem that is being presented by your nonsensical view into what might happen in 120 years.


(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: We have no reason to believe that miners will continue to throw hashrate to secure to the network if their payout decreases. 

Of course, but we currently do not have evidence of those sets of facts beyond pure speculation. Don't we need some evidence before we start to treat alternative scenarios as if they had some plausibility and we could make adjustments at a later date.... None of us are 100% locked into whatever investments that we are in at this particular moment. I could reallocate at any time that I want. Sure, I might need a few days, and the larger my position, the more time it might take to reallocate without disadvantaging myself too much.


(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: You have to assume that the price will go up and stay up, which is not a given.

That price going up thesis has been working out pretty damned great so far. When I got into bitcoin I dollar cost averaged for the first few years, and my personal goal was that the BTC price would go up in the ball park of 6% per year, so I have all kinds of cushion, billydingdong, in regards to where we are at and less preferable scenarios. In other words, bitcoin is way the fuck ahead of where I though that it would be at this time.

Sure, if someone is getting into bitcoin right now, then they have to come in with similar considerations in regards to how much do they believe that BTC prices need to go up in order for the bitcoin model to continue to be viable, and even thought there are a lot of pretty damned convincing BTC price prediction models that anticipate BTC prices going up way higher than my 6% per year amounts, I doubt that bitcoin has to perform even close to the levels of the currently dominant and convincing BTC price prediction models in order to be able to meet sustainability of mining/security needs.

You are free to conclude whatever you like in terms of what you believe is minimally viable or whatever other nonsense expectations that you have regarding what you think that bitcoin has to do, and I still think that bitcoin continues to have great chances of beating the performance of a vast majority of other possible alternative investments - especially if you attempt to look at the whole picture in terms of either fundamentals or both downside and upside potentialities.



(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: By 2028, the payout for those miners will be 1/4 of what it is today.

Sure. That's true. I usually suggest that people who are getting into bitcoin now have at least a 4-5 year investment timeline, and you are talking 8 years out. Are we locked into our investment if we believe that things are not going as anticipated in a few years, then we could get out correct?

By the way, my minimum investment timeline is way stronger now than it was in 2013.. in 2013, I was thinking at least 1 year and ideally 2 or more years, and these days, there is way more confidence to expect to have a longer bitcoin investment timeline and have a decent amount of confidence regarding that minimal investment timeline.

Of course, if someone happens to worry about a potentially down wardlly spiraling mining hashpower situation, then they can continue to keep their eye on such dynamic, and currently, we continue to see mining hashing power in bitcoin going up and up and up. We better try to work with facts rather than just making shit up.

https://www.blockchain.com/charts/hash-rate

Sure, in the short term, you see a little bit of a flattening in 2020, but that is not unusual to have a bit of gaming around the halvening, but I really expect the hashrate trend to continue to go up and even if it goes flat for a while, it continues to be a BIG so fucking what because hashrate is way beyond expectations, too.



(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: [2] Suggesting that a sufficient fee market will somehow develop is also more speculation on your end...

There already is a fee market. When the blocks become full, the fees go up. We saw that in late 2017 and early 2018, even though there seemed to have been a lot of spamming going on at that time.

Furthermore, there have been periods in which the blocks get full and the fees go up. I don't see what you are speculating to be a supposed problem, and of course, if we might have to keep monitoring how the fee situation is playing out, then if it starts to seem problematic then maybe we make adjustments to our investment decisions. Right now, you are making up a problem that does not exist and speculating that it is going to exist when it seems to be working, currently under the scenarios that have been presented to it, so far... and there is no real reason to believe that fees will not continue to adjust as they have in the past and maybe even have some extreme tests along the way, too.


(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: especially when tx fees are a tiny fraction of block rewards. ZERO indication that fees will increase in such a way to compensate miners to throw the same amount of hashrate.

You can believe what you want in regards to a supposed problem. I don't see the problem that you seem to be making up.

https://www.blockchain.com/charts/transaction-fees-usd

You can see that the fees adjust with traffic, and there are other charts related to fees too, including ones that monitor how much the mempool is backing up.

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#1,all

You can zoom in and out and monitor how these matters change, and there are other tools available for monitoring and likely going to continue to be tools that help investors to monitor and to try to figure out if they believe that the dynamics of the fees are playing out in terms of their investment thesis into bitcoin or if they believe that something might be sufficiently broken as to incentivize them to make changes to their bitcoin allocation amounts or other strategies that they might have in regards to how they are dealing with their bitcoin investment.


(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: [3]'S-curve' adoption, 4-year fractal patterns, and metcalfe principles are circle jerk projection buzzwords.

You forgot stock to flow model.

Anyhow, I know that I clump together the three currently dominant BTC price prediction models, and of course, they are not written in stone, but they do give some guidelines, and you dumbass shit coin pumpers need to take them into account because they are amongst the strongest of the bitcoin price prediction models... that can incorporate historical facts, cointegration with data and projections into the future, so you can poo poo it all that you like to your peril.

I am sure that I have already provided plenty of links in the past, but if you (or any other guy) are interested in any of this, then let me know, we can repeatedly go into some of these ideas if some guys, including you billy ding dong, remain unclear about what is being talked about while you are cursorily dismissing the concepts without hardly knowing about them because you are so tied into some smoke and mirrors shit projects that you cannot see reality in front of you.


(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: Even more speculation. Nobody knows what's going to happen.

Of course, looking at data and compiling it and trying to predict the future from it involves speculation, and of course, past performance does not guarantee future results. Nonetheless, that does not mean that we do not know shit, and there are ways that we can attempt to prioritize data in order to arrive at conclusions that are better than mere chance by also attempting to use our brains too.

Accordingly, we can attempt to base predictions about the future on data and logic and probabilities and try to be reasonable about the various factors that we taking into account in order to either challenge or agree with a model or to place some odds on the predictive powers of a model or some combination of models, and if we find our speculations to be helpful we can also adjust our investments or our investment theses in accordance with our attempting to consider the various matters that we deem to be relevant, and surely not everyone is going to come to the same conclusions, and that is part of the reason that we have people placing bets in different ways and also some price battles that take place at various price points and various times, and we might not even know how the price battles are going to resolve until they actually resolve, so sure there are a lot of factors, but having a lot of factors should not necessarily mean that we fail/refuse to take a position, or that we just take some random position that still could happen but does not seem to have the probabilities in its favor (from our viewpoint, as fraught with error that our viewpoints and factors, and data and logic might be)


(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: Myspace had promising  S-Curve adoption (one of the most highly trafficked sites in 2007) and then fell off a cliff.

Good luck, if you want to keep making that comparison.


(06-20-2020, 10:22 AM)billydingdong Wrote: Bitcoin is nowhere near   that in terms of reach and is losing ground in a lot of key metrics.

Also, good luck if you want to think that, too. Your choice about how you want to measure these things, and I have to take you with a decently large grain of salt if you getting some of your purported key nonsense metrics from making various comparisons to various largely centralized bitcoin imitating vaporware shitcoins.

If you want to actually talk about bitcoin rather than passive aggressively trying to promote nonsense shitcoins, then maybe there could be some usefulness in our ongoing discussion, but frequently I find that you largely don't even really want to engage in actually talking about bitcoin, including attempting to understand some of the more dominant bitcoin dynamics but instead get caught up in fringe and vague speculations about something supposedly being wrong with bitcoin its progress, its adoption level and whether bitcoin's longer term price is on track in terms of various price prediction models... .. instead throw out some vague and lame mud, billydingdong, and hope that some of your nonsense might possibly stick.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - billydingdong - 06-22-2020

edit: previous post deleted and modified for clarification
------
JayJuanGee Wrote:Now, you on the other hand seem to be speculating 120 years into the future in regards to some kind of belief that the fee market is not going to sufficiently mature by the time the mining rewards start to shrink towards zero.

As I've told you countless times, the problem could arrive a lot sooner.

Believing that the fee market will mature and that there will be adequate security in 5-10 years for a network that is anticipated to have more value is an article of faith on your end.

As of now, 30-day average for revenue from transaction fees is ~571K.

Meanwhile the 30-day average for miner's revenue is $9.3MM.

So today, on a 30-day average basis, transaction fees are about 6% of miner reward.

By 2028, current miner's reward will be 1/4 of what it is today ($2.3mm based on today's value of BTC at ~$9,500).

With 1/4 of miner revenue at today's Bitcoin price, fee revenues will have to increase by 12x for the same level of miner incentive for security ($517K --> 7m [ 7m is 75% of today's miner rev of $9m ]). And this assumes there is both block demand and willingness to pay the transfer fees AFTER supposed L2 solutions are implemented to improve throughput, LOL.

If these transaction fee revenues don't go up by 2028, then the price will need to go up by 4x.

So the suggestion that the network will remain as secure, even in 2028, as it is today is speculative on your end because you're the one who has to assume some mixture gigantic price increase (~4x) and/or increased fee demand (~12x) AND that miners will participate at the same levels as today in order to maintain current levels of security.

Now, I will say this: the 30-day average high for Bitcoin transaction fees at the height of the bubble in Jan 2018 hit $11.5m. So it's possible to see high fee numbers on a highly congested network. Then again, at that time, you had multiple days pending to transfer if your miner fee wasn't high enough and plenty of people got fucked over having to wait.

For those looking for a long-term investment that aspires to be a 'store of value' on par with gold, many aren't willing to make those kinds of risky assumptions.

Having to depend that 'price go up' by several multiples and/or a level of transaction volume that has yet to consistently materialize just to maintain current security levels on a network that is supposed to increase in value is one of the cases against Bitcoin — which is what Lebeau asked for.

I know you're a wild man who likes to speculate with a large percentage of your own net worth on this sort of stuff so have at it. I seriously hope it continues to work well for you and others who are hoping that Bitcoin will explode in value.

----

30-day average transaction fees: 1-year chart
[Image: J0r0sX6.png]

----

30-day average miner fees: 1-year chart
[Image: GH9cLwy.png]

JayJuanGee Wrote:You forgot stock to flow model.

Ah yes, everyone should really consider Stock to Flow... down the toilet!

I understand S2F gives some people the comfortable illusion of indefinite price increase, but it begs the question by presupposing a future of mass adoption.  Those S2F models are interesting but far from given and not particularly meaningful.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 06-23-2020

(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: edit: previous post deleted and modified for clarification
------

I am glad for that. Good thing that I did not attempt to respond too quickly.

(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote:
JayJuanGee Wrote:Now, you on the other hand seem to be speculating 120 years into the future in regards to some kind of belief that the fee market is not going to sufficiently mature by the time the mining rewards start to shrink towards zero.
As I've told you countless times, the problem could arrive a lot sooner.

Sure you did, but I doubt that it makes much of a difference regarding the points that I made and the extreme speculative nature of the problem that you are presenting. So largely my points still stand regarding that it should hardly have any effect on a present value investment thesis and a projection of future value, and even a possible ongoing desire to monitor developments in that direction, to the extent that there might be a potential issue.

What is your proposed way of thinking about the matter? You believe that such speculative issue negates the investment thesis and there is possibly some better way of dealing with the matter, since bitcoin (with this issue) is supposedly broken? or deficient?

What is the solution that you are proposing billydingdong? You just want to keep raising such nonsense issue for what reason? You are saying that there are supposedly better investments in terms of sound money?

Remember my personal reason for investing in bitcoin is the sound money angle. I don't give any ratt's ass about supposed programable future bullshit that is pie in the sky without even a sound base. So, bitcoin offers sound monetary out of the gate, and does not seem to have any competitor, currently, even assuming the supposed lessening of incentive to secure the chain in 120 years "or perhaps sooner" issue that you postulate. What comes close to bitcoin in terms of sound money? Come on? Say it? Do you have anything?


(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: Believing that the fee market will mature and that there will be adequate security in 5-10 years for a network that is anticipated to have more value is an article of faith on your end.

There already is a fee market. We just had a halvening, and you are conceding that the current reward is sufficient, right? So in 10 years, we have two more halvenings and the reward is 1/4 todays amount in terms of bitcoin. We going to decide today that we believe that it is not going to be secure enough then, when we don't even know several factors regarding adoption and various developments and second layer and a variety of factors, including price.

Let's say, right now, for some reason, the bitcoin price reduced by 4... I mean it goes down to 25% of the current rate. So therefore bitcoin prices are around $2k. Are you suggesting that there is a problem with that for the BTC network not being sufficiently secure because the reward dropped by 75%? Wouldn't the difficulty level adjust? Yes it does. The difficulty level adjusts every two weeks. How many adjustments would it take to become solid and secure? You are anticipating a downward spiral? Billydingdong, it seems quite likely that so many of your assumptions are not born out in facts or in the current level of bitcoin's security and even anticipating the tools that are already in place. Furthermore, let's see a price drop 75% and hold it there for a year or two. Where is the problem? Lot's of weak hands would be shaken including a lot of shitcoins purged from the space under such a scenario, but bitcoin? likely to survive, right?
Let's test your bullshit attempt at vague fear inducement... there is not likely going to be a problem because bitcoin has decently solid mechanisms in place that include difficulty adjustments every two weeks and let the miners figure out if they want to mine bitcoin or go somewhere else such as mining fed coin or facebook coin or bcash or ethereum or just shut down.

We already have evidence for my suppositions, and surely all scenarios have not been tested, yet it seems bitcoin is still quite solid, in spite of your desire to vaguely suggest some lackings or deficiencies or to say that I am speculating when you seem to be failing and refusing to look at the actual situation and spreading FUD to hope that is somewhere close to as broken as your piece of shit coin that does not even allow normal people to run a full node to verify its transactions.



(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: As of now, 30-day average for revenue from transaction fees is ~571K.

Meanwhile the 30-day average for miner's revenue is $9.3MM.

So today, on a 30-day average basis, transaction fees are about 6% of miner reward.

By 2028, current miner's reward will be 1/4 of what it is today ($2.3mm based on today's value of BTC at ~$9,500).

With 1/4 of miner revenue at today's Bitcoin price, fee revenues will have to increase by 12x for the same level of miner incentive for security ($517K --> 7m [ 7m is 75% of today's miner rev of $9m ]). And this assumes there is both block demand and willingness to pay the transfer fees AFTER supposed L2 solutions are implemented to improve throughput, LOL.  

Let's just say that BTC price stays the same in the next 8-10 years. Difficulty will adjust, right? Miners will leave, right?

I don't see the problem that you are trying to outline as being so detrimental to bitcoin. You are assuming another coin will come in and take the hashpower? So be it.... Let it happen, then we will all go over to that coin. I don't see the problem. We can decide our allocations in bitcoin and even decide today to keep our allocation in bitcoin low because we believe that the price is not going to go up and that miners are going to leave in the future.

Go ahead. Go to another coin if you believe bitcoin does not have a solid enough investment thesis today based on your conjecture.

I personally believe that you are speculating too negatively in regards to how the fee market and the mining is going to sustain the security of bitcoin's network, but sure, security does remain important in bitcoin, so if there is less security, then that would be a reason to invest less into it, but personally, I don't see any reason to lessen my allocations in bitcoin right now based on what you think might happen as we approach 2028-ish.

Again, what are you recommending that guys do, exactly based on your proposed direction of the hashing power and the fee to reward ratio that you are anticipating to be needed? It is also possible that BTC prices will be 12x or more higher in 2028, so wouldn't that resolve the supposed problem that you have hypothesized, too, to the extent that such problem even exists.

I just get the sense, billydingdong, that you are creating a kind of strawman argument because you are hypothesizing both the direction of the supposed deterioration of mining incentives and at the same time you are presuming that there are not going to be various other market reactions along the way that may well off-set such negative purported direction and then after you set forth your presumed facts, you allege that I am presuming too much to hypothesize that the market will be likely to take care of the problems that you had presumed.

Wouldn't we still have 4-8 years to see if the bitcoin market is devolving in the direction that you suggest? And couldn't we adjust our bitcoin allocation along the way, to either invest less in bitcoin, take some profits or just don't invest in it at all? Especially if it is playing out how you propose?


(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: If these transaction fee revenues don't go up by 2028, then the price will need to go up by 4x.

Ok. We have a plan then. If the BTC price does not go up by 4x to 12x in the next 8 years, then we are all getting out of BTC and going to buy ethereum or fed coin or facebook coin or some combination of those better shitcoins in order to make ourselves feel better about all the money we lost by investing in bitcoin or that we could have made if we had invested in the supposedly better shitcoins..

(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: So the suggestion that the network will remain as secure, even in 2028, as it is today is speculative on your end because you're the one who has to assume some mixture gigantic price increase (~4x) and/or increased fee demand (~12x) AND that miners will participate at the same levels as today in order to maintain current levels of security.

I am not assuming anything except that the system will continue to work, and will adjust along the way. If the BTC price stays flat then the system will adjust through mining difficulty, and if the BTC price goes down then the system will adjust through mining difficulty, and the same thing if the price goes up.

No matter where the BTC price goes, mining difficulty will adjust every two weeks and people will continue to decide whether to buy bitcoin or not, whether to build on bitcoin or not and whether to use various value transfer and storage systems on bitcoin. What is to assume besides the system is already built to adjust, and it has been adjusting for the past 11 years. Bitcoin is not broken even in its current state. The software is already there, even though software development continues on bitcoin too... so we might not know all of the adjustments that happen in the next 4-8 years, but if we are lucky enough to live that long, then we just adjust along the way too.

Current adjustments on a personal level should include determining how much of a stake to take in bitcoin, and then how to achieve such stake. I continue to suggest that guys have at least a 5 year investment time horizon, figure out their own financial circumstances and attempt to invest 1% to 10% of the quasi-liquid investment portfolio into bitcoin using DCA and buying on dips and HODL.. and of course, if guys have ongoing incoming cashflow they can continue to maintain and to learn along the way and tweak their strategy as needed.

(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: Now, I will say this: the 30-day average high for Bitcoin transaction fees at the height of the bubble in Jan 2018 hit $11.5m. So it's possible to see high fee numbers on a highly congested network. Then again, at that time, you had multiple days pending to transfer if your miner fee wasn't high enough and plenty of people got fucked over having to wait.

Sure, something like that could happen again, and so it will be interesting to see if something like that does happen again, because we also had some ongoing spam attack happening for a couple of months, too (between early December 2017 and late January 2018), so I did have some low fee transactions that were also stuck for two months, which was inconvenient for sure.

Part of the interesting aspect of these matters does continue to be the extent to which some tools have developed, such as replace by fee or if some practices are better too, including tools to figure out how much of a fee is reasonable under such circumstances. Incidents like that are not deathknells to bitcoin but they can be ways to learn, and they certainly are situations in which shitcoin pumpers like to point to as if they were representative periods, and sure some people may have got fucked, like you said, billydingdong, for various reasons when they lowballed their transaction fees and not having a wallet that allowed for replace by fee and then maybe got caught with their pants down and not knowing what to do or how to deal with a two month delay on transactions that had already been sent with low fees.


(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: For those looking for a long-term investment that aspires to be a 'store of value' on par with gold, many aren't willing to make those kinds of risky assumptions.

Bitcoin is better than gold in a lot of ways including scarcity, portability, verifiability, divisibility, lacking in needs to rely on third-parties, plausible deniability, upside potential in adoption (and profits), less manipulated (or ability to rehypothecate based on ability/cost to take possession) and way cheaper to store, manage, send, etc...

Nonetheless, if you believe gold is better than bitcoin or if you believe that some of the potential issues with bitcoin that you mentioned are problematic, then go ahead invest in gold. Good luck with that. You will likely need it.


(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: Having to depend that 'price go up' by several multiples

You are making shit up. The solidness of Bitcoin as an investment, a secure paradigm shifting technology/phenomena does not depend on price go up... price go up just seems to be a likely side benefit.

(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: and/or a level of transaction volume that has yet to consistently materialize just to maintain current security levels on a network that is supposed to increase in value is one of the cases against Bitcoin — which is what Lebeau asked for.

I doubt that your assumptions regarding transaction volume needing to go up is a requirement either, even though it seems to be quite likely that bitcoin is going to continue to grow, whether we like it or not. Bitcoin remains pretty damned solid, so there is no reason to doubt that it is going to continue to grow.. but growth is not a condition precedent for bitcoin to either be successful or to become successful. Bitcoin is already successful and functioning as is.

Maybe Lebeau can chime-in to suggest if there is some direction that he would like to go with this subject or if his questions are being addressed, more or less. So, sure, if Lebeau can direct the next question(s), if any, then great.


(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: I know you're a wild man who likes to speculate with a large percentage of your own net worth on this sort of stuff so have at it.

I doubt that wild is a good descriptor. I am pretty conservative, and my beginning approach to bitcoin was pretty conservative in 2013, too, but as I have mentioned, I did go from recommending a minimum investment timeline of 1 year in 2013 to suggesting a minimum investment timeline of 5 years, currently. Of course, guys will need to tailor to their own circumstances, and surely if your timeline is really short such as 1 or 2 years, then I would suggest either not investing in bitcoin (or maybe you call it gambling in that case?) or maybe I would be recommending a lower percentage of your portfolio be dedicated to bitcoin, such as 1% to 3% in those shorter scenarios rather than 1 to 10% that I would suggest for a longer investment scenario. Of course, tailoring to your own circumstances remains important to determine if my starting recommendation is good or if you feel some reasons to go outside starting boundaries that I suggest.


(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: I seriously hope it continues to work well for you and others who are hoping that Bitcoin will explode in value.

It has been working pretty good for me, and sure bitcoin continues to seem to be in a good position as an ongoing investment. My recommendations have not really changed a lot since I got in, although I tend to be able to narrow in on some of the things that guys might need to figure out for themselves, and surely sometimes the ways in and out have changed, and I am NOT using some of those services currently, so frequently guys might want to know about ways in and out, too.

(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote: ---
30-day average transaction fees: 1-year chart
[Image: J0r0sX6.png]



----

30-day average miner fees: 1-year chart
[Image: GH9cLwy.png]

I don't know what you are trying to show with those charts. You are trying to suggest that bitcoin is losing market share to some shitcoin? I doubt it, but still you have your shitcoin pumping agenda, and surely in the short term, shitcoins can pump.

I recall for most of 2017, there were a lot of shitcoins pumping more than bitcoin, and they were all the rage, but some people got stuck into those products and could not sell, so sometimes there are needs to be careful about figuring out ways in and out - especially if you are investing short term.. and figuring out if you have a solid investment if you are investing long term.



(06-22-2020, 11:13 PM)billydingdong Wrote:
JayJuanGee Wrote:You forgot stock to flow model.

Ah yes, everyone should really consider Stock to Flow... down the toilet!

I understand S2F gives some people the comfortable illusion of indefinite price increase, but it begs the question by presupposing a future of mass adoption.  Those S2F models are interesting but far from given and not particularly meaningful.

You are filled with nonsense and hopium, billydingdong.

I had never said that the various currently dominant BTC price prediction models are going to necessarily get the details correct, but the current BTC price prediction models seem to have quite a bit more data than previous years, so there tends to be some benefits in a lot of the analysis and attempted criticisms by a large number of smart people who try to undermine the models but largely having troubles in undermining them.

So the dominant BTC price prediction models currently are: 1) the stock to flow model, 2) four-year fractal and 3) s curve exponential adoption based on metcalfe and networking principles.

Price could deviate from the models or the models could be proven wrong. They are largely on track currently and seem to serve as decent guidelines in terms of attempting to study the BTC space. I could provide more information on these concepts but I have covered them in the thread several times, too including providing links... but with the stock to flow model a good place to start would be with plan b... or with this thread

Let me know if any of you want me to provide links for any discussions of the other models. Again, models are not meant to be set in stone, but instead to help you to get some better ideas of both BTC fundamentals and various market and price dynamics.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 06-25-2020

A nice little chart to get guys to think about how long it might take for the next ATH, perhaps.

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2FYkcCTsv%2FA3...GvXtT5UH6A]


Part of the question becomes whether we are getting closer and closer to such possibility of breaking the ATH duration record of the last time of 1180 days - which is not out of a reasonable realm of possibilities. 

My "back of the napkin" calculation puts 1180 days at around 3/21/21 (using Excel.... hahahahaha... I cheated)....  I am confident that many of us HODLers have been hoping NOT to have to wait so long....   by the end of 2020, even seems reasonable under current conditions...

By the way, what are the odds to break the ATH duration on this time?  I am thinking that odds are pretty decent (at least slightly better than 50/50.. maybe 53.5/46.5 that we get an ATH before 3/21/21, which would cause this time around to NOT be breaking any duration of wait records.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 06-27-2020

Here's an interesting chart that shows some interesting changes in the amounts of BTC that various exchanges are claiming to have on deposit.  

Bitfinex, Poloniex and Bittrex have been coming down in their numbers of coins on deposit.  

Bitstamp, Kraken and Gemini seem to be inching up with their coins on deposit, and really Gemini seems to be taking the lead amongst this grouping.

https://twitter.com/coinmetrics/status/1276522894537814017

[Image: EbcVnqCUEAIcLqQ?format=jpg&name=small]

Of course, these are not the only exchanges, and off the top of my head, I speculate that it might be interesting to see where Coinbase and Binance might fit into this scheme, and Bitmex has been getting a lot of attention in recent times, too.

Further down the same above-linked tweet thread, we see that GBTC has continued to be in the news in terms of the number of coins that it is supposedly buying on a regular basis too.. including assertions that by themselves, on an ongoing basis, they are accumulating more coins than the number of coins being newly issued.. could be?  could be?

Does not hurt to take the proclamations or even implications of the likely effects on BTC short-term price movements with a decently-sized grain of salt.

[Image: EbYnoZjXsAUrScT?format=jpg&name=small]


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 06-27-2020

Here's a good, interesting and well-written bitcoin article with lots of pretty/informative charts from yesterday and a tweet about such article for anyone who might either be new to bitcoin or attempting to understand some of the various myths/propaganda that are regularly spouted out in regards to bitcoin.

https://twitter.com/Beetcoin/status/1276774081787035649?s=20

>>>>>>Debuking these myths:

"Bitcoin is too volatile to serve as a store of value."
"Bitcoin is in a bubble."
"Bitcoin will lose value to ‘forks’ and digital copies."
"Bitcoin is for criminals."
"Bitcoin wastes too much energy."<<<<<


https://ark-invest.com/analyst-research/bitcoin-myths/


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 06-27-2020

(06-27-2020, 04:06 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote: Here's an interesting chart that shows some interesting changes in the amounts of BTC that various exchanges are claiming to have on deposit.  

Bitfinex, Poloniex and Bittrex have been coming down in their numbers of coins on deposit.  

Bitstamp, Kraken and Gemini seem to be inching up with their coins on deposit, and really Gemini seems to be taking the lead amongst this grouping.

https://twitter.com/coinmetrics/status/1276522894537814017

[Image: EbcVnqCUEAIcLqQ?format=jpg&name=small]

Of course, these are not the only exchanges, and off the top of my head, I speculate that it might be interesting to see where Coinbase and Binance might fit into this scheme, and Bitmex has been getting a lot of attention in recent times, too.

Further down the same above-linked tweet thread, we see that GBTC has continued to be in the news in terms of the number of coins that it is supposedly buying on a regular basis too.. including assertions that by themselves, on an ongoing basis, they are accumulating more coins than the number of coins being newly issued.. could be?  could be?

Does not hurt to take the proclamations or even implications of the likely effects on BTC short-term price movements with a decently-sized grain of salt.

[Image: EbYnoZjXsAUrScT?format=jpg&name=small]


Here's another pretty chart and tweet to supplement my earlier post, in regards to how many coins are supposedly being held on various exchanges.. adds up to a lot of coins being held on various exchanges and through various 3rd parties... that does not even account for GBTC and some of the futures folks like CME and BAKKT and some others who likely are holding some coins, too ( in theory). 

[Image: EbchM1aXQAA9CDn?format=jpg&name=small]


https://twitter.com/glassnode/status/1276525553261187072

>>>>>>14.3% of the circulating #Bitcoin

[Image: Bitcoin_2020.png]

[/url] supply (2.6 million [url=https://twitter.com/search?q=%24BTC&src=cashtag_click]$BTC) currently sits on centralized exchange wallets.

The largest holders are Coinbase (954k), Huobi (364k), and Binance (267k).<<<<<<<



RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 06-28-2020

Here's an interesting series of charts showing how many days BTC prices remained in various price ranges:

https://twitter.com/ChartsBtc/status/1276213746369585153

Here's a broad overview of the number of days in each 10x range starting from $.1


[Image: EbYmbj-VcAAQpO6?format=png&name=small]

>>>>>Here is # of days at each price in hundreds through 2016 (before bitcoin moved into the thousands).  It moved quick from the $600 comfort zone to new ATH's.<<<<<<

[Image: EbYIiieUwAAzwgy?format=jpg&name=small]

Here's number of days in each of various ranges in $1,000 increments above $1,000 to $20,000

>>>># of days at each price
$6,000-$9,999 is bitcoin's comfort zone.<<<<<

[Image: EbYFRKvVcAAtPV7?format=png&name=small]


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - rhodesian_bro - 06-28-2020

https://eng.ambcrypto.com/bitcoins-privacy-features-can-learn-a-thing-or-two-from-monero/

Seems like even BTC hardliners like Andreas Antonopoulos are getting behind Monero.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - Nolimitz - 07-01-2020

https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/under-new-law-cryptocurrency-could-become-illegal

"Bill proposed could make encryption illegal."

Far too late. If they wanted to stop Bitcoin the necessary actions should have been taken much earlier. Countries like Singapore are already enabling adoption. Game theory and the natural cut throat competition among world governments will not afford any long-term "ban" on Bitcoin. The dominoes have already fallen.

Expect a lot of squirming/flip-flopping.

edit: also a good idea to keep your long-term position off exchanges (common sense)


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 07-01-2020

(07-01-2020, 07:40 PM)Nolimitz Wrote: https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/under-new-law-cryptocurrency-could-become-illegal

"Bill proposed could make encryption illegal."

Far too late. If they wanted to stop Bitcoin the necessary actions should have been taken much earlier. Countries like Singapore are already enabling adoption. Game theory and the natural cut throat competition among world governments will not afford any long-term "ban" on Bitcoin. The dominoes have already fallen.

Expect a lot of squirming/flip-flopping.

edit: also a good idea to keep your long-term position off exchanges (common sense)

I agree with everything that you are saying, nolimitz, and surely any of us HODLers will need to be considering possible longer term implications of making sure to keep our coins secure and also to keep them in our control and maybe studying methods to create either more privacy regarding the coins or at least plausible deniability.

Of course, if some countries were to take really harsh steps in regards to bitcoin, then not only the jurisdictional competition, but perhaps some legitimacy to pretty major problematics and an underground economy, and some countries might purposefully do the opposite, like you have already suggested with the game theory dynamics and the reality that bitcoin already allows governmental like attacks that might cause the price to go down, but it could cause the opposite also.. remember that china retail largely got locked out of much of the 2017 BTC price run because of their then governmental attempts at stifling BTC usage between exchanges and their fiat system.. and locking accounts and value too during the 2017 BTC price run.. fucking over chinese customers but not stopping BTC prices from doing their thing.


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - Mikestar - 07-01-2020

Hey guys, not gonna lie I only invest in stocks and I’m a beginner but I’ve been hearing now could be a good chance as Bitcoin may be on the road to 10k. I just have one question, does bitcoin have trading hours like NASDAQ for example or is it always active? Is buying now a good idea?


RE: The Bitcoin Thread (price and other bitcoin related topics) - JayJuanGee - 07-01-2020

(07-01-2020, 08:53 PM)Mikestar Wrote: Hey guys, not gonna lie I only invest in stocks and I’m a beginner but I’ve been hearing now could be a good chance as Bitcoin may be on the road to 10k. I just have one question, does bitcoin have trading hours like NASDAQ for example or is it always active? Is buying now a good idea?

If you are uncertain about bitcoin, you can start a very modest DCA strategy while you study it.

For years, I have been recommending that guys should seriously consider 1% to 10% allocation of their quasi-liquid investment portfolio into bitcoin, and of course, the more conservative of investors would be on the lower end of the range and the more bullish or aggressive would be on the higher end of the range.

Generally, speaking bitcoin trading is 24/7/365.. and depending on your location, you might have different onramp and off ramps available to you... Are you in the UK or somewhere else?  

Sometimes it could take a while to figure out how to get in and what are your on and off ramps that are available to you that you want to use (including considering convenience, security, fees and maybe your own considerations too regarding what you are trying to achieve).  Sometimes it can take a bit of time to set up various accounts, and then it can take a while before they increase your buy limit or how much you can transfer... Sure a lot of them are increasing their KYC and AML practices, and some are easier to move coins on and off of exchanges once you have created an account.  I would not recommend any account that does not allow you to easily move coins on and off and even though some accounts might only allow buying or selling, as long as you have accounts that allow you to accomplish both, then at least you have options.

Furthermore, these days, I recommend that guys consider bitcoin to be at least a five year investment time horizon, and of course, you are your own person, so you can choose at any time that you like, if you want to get out, but if you come in with a 5 year time horizon, then you should fairly easily be able to establish your position and your comfort with the asset in the first year or two... and thereafter figure out if you want to be more or less aggressive in it (of course, in a personally tailored kind of way, and not including gambling... but sure I know some guys like to gamble, and I tend to recommend against investment strategies that seem to have too much gambling contained therein).

By the way, your thoughts about bitcoin going to $10k seem way too short-term in your thinking, and sure it is quite likely to go to $10k and much further, but it is a matter of when... .in the next days or in the next 5-10 years.  No one can tell you where bitcoin is going with any certainty, including that it might go to zero, too... so I would think that your investment strategy would attempt to figure out a way to prepare for both up and down and to have a strategy that works with a certain amount of inability to know short term BTC price direction with any kind of high level of confidence, even if there currently are some pretty decently strong and convincing long term BTC price prediction models.