Drafts

Bitcoin Forum > Drafts

Drafts are saved whenever you preview or post a topic, post, or PM. Up to 100 drafts are kept. Drafts are deleted after 7 days.

It is undeniable that bitcoin has become a religious cult for many (not all, obviously) of its enthusiasts. Tell-tale signs include: * Unfaltering belief in dogmas like "anonymous", "safe store of value", "governments cannot control it", "safe from hackers", "cannot be seized", "banks are afraid of it", etc., in spite of major events that clearly contradict them; * Deep hatred for other "religions" (altcoins) that are just like their own, only with other "priests"; * Compulsion to convert the "infidels", * Creation of a community consisting of believers only, with forums and media restricted to "canonical" and positive views by believers; * Uncritical assumption that anyone who praises the "religion" is a saint, anyone who criticizes it is working for the "devil"; * Belief that their "religion" is not just an incremental improvement to society, but an event that will change it radically and forever; * Rejection of middle ground: either one accepts the full canonical doctrine, or one is an infidel; * Feeling that a believer should sacrifice his wealth for the cause; * Interpretation of any criminal charges against "priests" as perscution of their "religion" by the state; * Suppression of the sense of ridicule when praising their "religion"; * Belief that insulting an unbeliever is not the same as insulting a person. * Sanctification of the "religion"'s First Prophet; * Belief that the writings of the First Prophet are perfect and unquestionable Holy Words, that terminate any discussion; * A clique of Reverent Fathers who interpret and expand the First Prophet's writings, and claim that their interpretations are just as Holy; * Praise of blind ignorant faith in Bitcoin as a virtue, and claims that it is a basic necessity for Bitcoin's success; * Avoidance of non-believers and censorship of negative options, [i]because they may weaken the faith[/i]; * Transformation of rejection and ridicule by the majority into a positive feeling of "chosen ones" or "enlightened minority"; * Use of "doomsday" prophecies (dollar collapse, mega stocks crash) to scare doubters into the faith; * Unshakable belief in a "redemption" at some unspecified future, when the true believers who endured to the end will be rewarded with unimaginable benesses, [i]just for having believed[/i], while the infidels will be left groveling in the mud at their feet. Actually one of the things I like in this thread is that many people here are [b]not[/b] cultists, just ordinary gamblers hoping to make money out of other gamblers -- possibly by bluffing and tricking them, as in any poker game. (In constrast, there are threads in this forum where the Sons of Unabomber are discussing the detais of how Bitcoin will allow them to take over the planet and destroy all governments, without them ever having to leave the basements of their log cabins in the woods, revealing their identities, or meeting other human beings face to face.)

Just to irritate the extrapolators and pattern matchers: [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-07-123611-HUBI-annotated.png][img width=600]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-07-123611-HUBI-annotated.jpg[/img][/url]

Just to irritate the extrapolators and pattern matches: [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-07-123611-HUBI-annotated.png][img width=600]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-07-123611-HUBI-annotated.jpg[/img][/url]

[quote author=p0peji link=topic=178336.msg6588211#msg6588211 date=1399450978] What if Huobi now has a system in place that would only let the price fluctuate 50 yuan a day? To protect its traders? edit: I know it sounds crazy but we are dealing with an exchange in distress here. [...] fake sells as soon as price rises too much and fake buys as soon as price drops too much? Or stop processing buy or sell orders as soon as max or min price for that day has been reached? edit: like I said before it is far fetched, but it would kill volatility [/quote] A really fake transaction is possible only within the real spread, so it cannot change the price beyond those bounds. I believe MtGOX did that to suggest that the price was rising when there was no volume, OKCoin does that perhaps to increase volume, and other exchanges do that to mask the absence of real trades. That may be why the charts of Bitstamp etc. look like broad bands rather than thin staircases (like BTC-China used to be in the voucher era). To stop the price from rising beyond a certain limit the exchange would have to do [i]real[/i] sales of BTC at that chosen price. That would cost the exchange an unbounded amount of BTC, since every buyer who was willing to pay a higher price would buy into the exchange's wall. Ditto for the other direction. After one of the large crashes (forgot the year), real stock exchanges implemented a safety switch that stops trading automatically if the price changes too much too fast. But that cannot be abused: the exchange's job is to make trading possible, if the clients want the price to be X the exchange must let them do it.

PS. Re Huobi's volume: it has suddenly resumed. Perhaps the robot pilots were expecting fees to start immediately, and only now they have read the attachment that says "starting May 10th ..."

[quote author=mooncake link=topic=178336.msg6583963#msg6583963 date=1399427128] How will [ Huobi's new HFT fee policy ] affect btc price? [/quote] I have no idea, I can't even understand exactly what the note says. However, today Huobi's volume was abnormally low up to 09:30 local time (01:30 UTC), it usually starts to pick up at 07:00. Perhaps they have already curbed some robot trading.

[quote author=Adrian-x link=topic=178336.msg6583316#msg6583316 date=1399423010] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6581322#msg6581322 date=1399411762] [b]NOTE[/b]: There is nothing notable today. [/quote] I thought Adam asking you to get some skin in the game was notable ;) Not drinking while playing the drinking game is cause for suspicion. [/quote] Please suspiciate at will. ;) As I said many times, I will buy bitcoin if and when I believe that it will be worth the trouble, compared to credit card etc. I will not buy "just to try", not for investment, not "just in case it becomes worth a zillion some day". (By the way, I consider that last argument a sleazy sales trick to get thousands of small buyers, not only to raise the price - 100'000 people buying 0.1 BTC is 10'000 BTC taken off the market - but also to claim "increasing adoption".)

Huobi posted the "five exchanges agreement" notice on their homepage, and also added the following attachement explaining their new/upcoming fee policy for high-frequency trading: [quote] 关于高频交易收取服务费以及关闭融资融币服务的说明时间：2014-05-06 13:35:07 来源：火币网尊敬的火币网用户：使用高频交易（API交易）收费说明高频交易用户在为市场带来巨大流动性的同时，也增加了市场的投机性。为了遏制过度投机，保护普通投资者利益，对使用API进行高频交易的用户收取适当的服务费，适度提高高频交易的成本，是业内目前达成的共识。 1、普通api：进行交易频率和次数的限制，普通用户可以免费使用； 2、机构api：进一步升级api服务，不限制频率和次数，收取一定的服务费用；机构api具体收费方式将在业内达成共识后，于近期公布。正式公布细则前，所有api交易仍然免收手续费。关闭融资融币服务实施细则 1、5月10日0点开始，火币网将停止新的融资融币，在全部融资或融币还清后停止杆杠交易业务。 2、5月10日0点之后仍然有未还清借贷的用户，可以选择任意时间还款； 3、5月10日0点开始，取消借贷费率每10天增加20%的规则； 4、5月10日0点开始，没有未还清借贷的用户，系统将不再展示借贷及预约借贷功能模块，有未还清借贷的用户，可以访问借贷功能进行还款操作。火币网运营部 2014年5月6日 [/quote] Google Translate, with a few fixes (Fire coins network --> Huobi.com): [quote] Charge service fees on high-frequency trading and closed financing currency financial service description Time :2014 -05-06 13:35:07 Source :Huobi.com Dear Huobi.com users : Use of high-frequency trading (API transaction ) fee Description HFT users tremendous liquidity to the market, but also increases the speculative market. In order to curb excessive speculation and protect the interests of ordinary investors, the use of high-frequency trading API for users to receive appropriate service fee, an appropriate increase in the cost of high-frequency trading, is the consensus reached by the industry at present . 1, the general api: restrict the number and frequency of transactions, ordinary users can make free use; 2, the agency api: further escalation api service does not limit the frequency and number of charge a service fee; Agencies api specific charges after the way the industry will reach a consensus on the recent announcement. Prior to the formal announcement of Association, all api transaction is still handling charge. Close currency financing financial services implementing rules 1. beginning May 10th at 0:00, Huobi.com new financing will stop financing currency after currency to pay off all of the facility or stopping leveraged finance transactions. 2. after May 10th at 0:00 still has not repaid borrowings user can choose any time of repayment; 3. beginning May 10th at 0:00, canceled lending rates increased by 20 % rule every 10 days; 4. Beginning May 10th at 0:00, did not pay off the loan with no user, the system will no longer show lending and borrowing reservation function module, a user does not pay off borrowing, lending functions can be accessed repayment operation. Huobi.com Operations May 6, 2014 [/quote]

[quote author=BCEmporium link=topic=522325.msg6228500#msg6228500 date=1397558495] Mas quem é que raio necessita de um "banco de bitcoins"?! A ideia da bitcoin é mesmo descentralizar e tem 1001 formas de a guardar voc? mesmo sem necessitar de colocar nada em banco nenhum. [/quote] N?o vou discutir isso, mas so notar que a "comunidade bitcoin" elogiou muito o projeto, e Andreas Anotonopolous, um dos gurus da comunidade, inclusive deu consultoria para a Neo & Bee e a avalizou. Agora descobriram que Danny Brewster, o ingl?s que lançou esse projeto, era um vigarista habitual com histórico de várias empresas falidas na Inglaterra. Infelizmente os "crentes" do bitcoin s?o no geral muito ing?nuos Basta que um cara fale bem do bitcoin e eles imediatamente acreditam que ele é boa pessoa, e investem no projeto dele sem mesmo entender direito do que se trata, sem investigar o passado do sujeito, e sem ler direito o contrato. Além disso muitos bitcoineiros "compram" junto com bitcoin a ideologia libertariana, segundo a qual governo, lei e polícia s?o bandidos, e quem a polícia persegue é herói. Ent?o, quando um vigarista dá o golpe, em vez de denunciá-lo ? polícia os bitcoineiros lesados ficam lamenttando nos fóruns, e os outros ficam culpando as vítimas por terem sido bobas. Por tudo isso, o que mais dá no "mundo bitcoin" é vigarista... >:(

[quote author=BCEmporium link=topic=522325.msg6228500#msg6228500 date=1397558495] Mas quem é que raio necessita de um "banco de bitcoins"?! A ideia da bitcoin é mesmo descentralizar e tem 1001 formas de a guardar você mesmo sem necessitar de colocar nada em banco nenhum. [/quote] Não vou discutir isso, mas so notar que a "comunidade bitcoin" elogiou muito o projeto, e Andreas Anotonopolous, um dos gurus da comunidade, inclusive deu consultoria para a Neo & Bee e o avalizou. Agora descobriram que Danny Brewster, o inglês que lançou esse projeto, era um vigarista habitual com várias empresas falidas na Inglaterra. Infelizmente os "crentes" do bitcoin são no geral muito ingênuos Basta que um cara fale bem do bitcoin e eles imediatamente acreditam que ele é boa pessoa, e investem no projeto dele sem mesmo entender direito do que se trata, sem investigar o passado do sujeito, e sem ler direito o contrato. Além disso muitos bitcoineiros "compram" junto com bitcoin a ideologia libertariana, segundo a qual governo, lei e polícia são bandidos, e quem a polícia persegue é herói. Então, quando um vigarista dá o golpe, em vez de denunciá-lo à polícia os bitcoineiros lesados ficam lamenttando nos fóruns, e os outros ficam culpando as vítimas por terem sido bobas.

[quote author=John999 link=topic=178336.msg6577510#msg6577510 date=1399396702] You can see the sponsors [of the Beijing Bitcoin Summit ] there on the lower right side http://www.globalbtcsummit.com/en/ [/quote] Yes, but I wonder about that BitFund.pe. The Summit seems to be a marketing event to legitimize that specific (offshore?) investment fund. The Chinese exchanges apparently pulled out of it. Their recent joint statement seems to promise that they will refrain from questionable marketing, among other things. Could they be referring to that Summit?

[b]Chinese Slumber Method prediction for Wednesday May 07[/b] [b]Prediction valid for:[/b] Wednesday 2014-05-07, 19:00--19:59 UTC (not before, not after) [b]Huobi's predicted price:[/b] 2672 CNY [b]Bitstamp's predicted price:[/b] 430 USD [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-06-prediction-check-HUBI-annotated.png][img]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-06-prediction-check-HUBI-annotated.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-06-prediction-check-BSTP-annotated.png][img]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-06-prediction-check-BSTP-annotated.jpg[/img][/url] [ [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-06-prediction-check-legend.txt]Plot legend[/url] ] The data point for today May/05 was very good (S = 0.0011, W = 0.974). It was signficantly above the previously assumed trend, so it seems that the trend was broken again. With only one data point, we must use the banal "tomorrow like today" prediction. The Bitstamp prediction, as usual, is the Huobi prediction divided by the currency conversion factor R, taken to be 6.22 CNY/USD. Its value was 6.23 today (May/06), but 6.18 yesterday, and 6.16, 6.17, 6.08, 6.11, 6.22 on the previous good sample times. [b]Checking the previous prediction[/b] Prediction was posted on: Monday 2014-05-04, 21:33 UTC Prediction was valid for: Tuesday 2014-05-06, 19:00--19:59 UTC (~22 hours later) The predicition for Huobi was not that wrong, considering the swings of the day: Huobi's predicted price: 2635 CNY Huobi's actual price (L+H)/2: 2672 CNY Error: 37 CNY (~6 USD) The prediction for Bitstamp was more accurate, due to an unexpected change in the R factor: Bitstamp's predicted price: 427 USD Bitstamp's actual price (L+H)/2: 429 USD [b]Error: 2 USD[/b] [b]NOTE[/b]: There is nothing notable today.

[quote author=adamstgBit link=topic=178336.msg6578297#msg6578297 date=1399399496] [quote] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6577821#msg6577821 date=1399397798] [ ... ] [/quote] Jorge has been wooed by Chinas pretty volume numbers and actually thinks they own 90% of the coins. [/quote] GIGO Garbage in, garbage out [/quote] Ahem, ahem, my Masters thesis in 1979 was on [b]garbage collection[/b]. So THAT is something I am competent at. You should see my office if you don't believe it. ;) EDIT fixed [ quote ]s

[quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6578194#msg6578194 date=1399399152] Chinese markets were open as early as 2011 so your mistaken [ in relating them to the Oct/2013 bubble ]. .[/quote] Are you refering to BTC-China? When did Huobi and OKCoin open? On Bitcoinwisdom, BTC-China's data starts 2011-06-09 with ~1.5 BTC/day, OKCoin's data starts on 2013-06-12 with 0.004 BTC/day, Huobi's starts on 2013-09-01 with 134 BTC/day. BTC-China always charged trading fees; I am not sure about OKCoin, but I think I read that they initially charged fees until Huobi came up with its zero-fee policy and they had to follow. So maybe it was the zero-fee trading by Huobi, specifically, that attracted the Chinese habitual speculators. [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6577622#msg6577622 date=1399397165] I cannot follow that reasoning. The busting of SR made people realize that bitcoin transactions were not invisible to the FBI at all. How could that have helped other uses? The "cleansing"of bitcoin's image (which did not actually happen, it is still the "coin of crime" for many people) cannot possibly explain a rise of 1000% in 2 months. "Other uses" could not and did not expand that fast. The Chinese market could and did. By the way, I still don't know what caused the April/2013 jump. Some said it was videos on YouTube; perhaps. Could it have been the opening of the illegal drug market by SilkRoad? Or was it the initial opening of the non-Mainland Chinese market by BTC-China?[/quote] [quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6578194#msg6578194 date=1399399152] The only thing people like you had to say about BTC was its just used for buying drugs theres no other reason for it etc etc. Well look , the price didn't go to $0 as many were trying to say guess what that does? All the detractors who wrote it off as drug money are suddenly very interested, I mean how can something that was only used to buy drugs have value outside of drugs :o Really with the same old rhetoric ? The dollar and its ponzi scheme is the coin of crime. [/quote] There can't possibly be other people like me. ;) It is not me who is saying that "bitcoin is the coin of crime", that is still a common perception out there. But on the other hand, based on what people write here and in other forums, I would think that at least 10% of the bitcoin enthusiasts still love it because they (naively) think that it will allow them to make illegal payments and protect their illegal money from confiscation. ("Illegal" here in the literal sense of "prohibited by the laws of the land and times." That includes tax evasion, bribes, contributing to outlaw organizations, etc.) [quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6578194#msg6578194 date=1399399152] Silk Road was open in 2011 so no. [/quote] Well, then that leaves only BTC-China and those YouTube videos. By the way, Wikipedia says that "Company CEO Bobby Lee [ who had experience in Yahoo Exclamation and Walmart China ] approached the then two-person company in early 2013, and after investing his own money and attracting investors, oversaw the company's rapid expansion and marketshare growth by the end of the year." Which seems to fit quite nicely with the timing of the April 2013 bubble... [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6577622#msg6577622 date=1399397165] You seem to think the market is 100% speculation and needs 'news' to move. The market can move by normal dynamics such as adoption as well you know. [/quote] The bitcoin market now is still probably >95% speculation. Dumping by miners and buying for long-term investment must be a small fraction of the exchange's volume, and buying for use in commerce must be almost nil. I agree that mere "news" have little influence in the market. The things that moved the market since Dec/2013 were not "news" but hard facts (sometimes false): the December five-agency decree, the Huobi and OKCoin workarounds, the "bug in bitcoin", the bank account closures. News were merely the channel through which the market learned the facts. On the other hand, many of the "positive developments" that people keep mentioning here were just news (rather: thinly edited commercial press releases) which did not materialize. [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6577622#msg6577622 date=1399397165] As it currently stands millions of dollars of vc funds and normal investors are building Bitcoin businesses, everyday those services open and gain a wider customer base. [/quote] I see venture capital and established investors shunning bitcoin per se and investing instead in services like Bitpay, bitcoin fund management (SMBIT, PBP), and exchanges, which are profitable independently of the price of bitcoin. Bitpay for example claimed to have made 100 M$ of payments last year. Their revenue is the fees on that, a few million dollars. They must still be lucrative in spite of the 50% BTC price loss since January. But how much of that volume is new bitcoin adopters, and how much is bitcoiners who have piles of cheap old BTC and are spending some of them? EDIT fix bad [ quote ] marks

[quote author=Bronstad link=topic=178336.msg6578378#msg6578378 date=1399399796] Hey Guys look what I found on pastebin, looks like someone leaked some marching orders from the puppet masters. How embarrassing! [quote] [b][size=18pt]Troll Talking Points [/size][/b] May 6th, 2014 Greetings gentlemen, first let me start off and say you have been doing very good work lately. However we would like to remind you that you need to post in other forums besides Speculation, as it is becoming quite apparent when you purchased your account from a real member since the account stopped posting in other forums. Remember keep up your appearances, so as to not blow your cover. Also some of you have been posting too much in "TOTAL TROLL" mode. Remember you need to dial it back every now and then and post like an actual moderate bear would. This lends you creditability for your "TOTAL TROLL" mode, when it is deemed necessary by the powers that be. And also keeps the actual bears on your side, and they will even back you up sometimes... LOL. Now onto today's talking points: [b]* OPERATION FUD[/b] - People were starting to react positively to the term FUD being thrown around, and it was starting to dilute our message. As you know the effort to re-term it to mean Fact U Dislike has worked moderately. Please keep mentioning it when someone points out our actual use of FUD. [b]* CHINA, CHINA, CHINA[/b] - The powers that be are coming to the end of the China ban milking. Now that China's actual influence on the markets has dwindled its time to switch tactics. Let's try "China is the only thing that makes Bitcoin worth more than $100". Find correlations between events in China to price rising and failing. Nevermind the growth outside of China, keep them focused on China. We want maximum panic when the exchanges finally mention they are leaving China. [b]* CHARTS[/b] - Now that you've all been through "negative slope" training, don't forget throw up a couple trendlines that point out how Bitcoin is going down to $0. Remember its not you making the numbers go down, its just what the trend it pointing out. Don't forget an emoticon for an effective reaction ;) That's it for today. Your Bitcoin payments are on their way. Don't forget to put your shorts in, as you know we definetely will let YOU know when the squeeze begins.[/quote] [/quote] Why, those three points are a short and lucid summary of the bitcoin community and market situation today. (Although a bit pessimistic. It is only the linear extrapolation that gives 0$ by Sep/2014; the log extrapolation can't go to zero ever. ;D) Thanks for posting, I will tell my patrons to send you a small comission too. ;)

[quote author=adamstgBit link=topic=178336.msg6578297#msg6578297 date=1399399496] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6577821#msg6577821 date=1399397798] [ ... ] [/quote] Jorge has been wooed by Chinas pretty volume numbers and actually thinks they own 90% of the coins. [/quote] GIGO Garbage in, garbage out [/quote] Ahem, ahem, my Masters thesis in 1979 was on [b]garbage collection[/b]. So THAT is something I am competent at. You should see my office if you don't believe it. ;)

[quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6578194#msg6578194 date=1399399152] Chinese markets were open as early as 2011 so your mistaken [ in relating them to the Oct/2013 bubble ]. .[/quote] Are you refering to BTC-China? When did Huobi and OKCoin open? On Bitcoinwisdom, BTC-China's data starts 2011-06-09 with ~1.5 BTC/day, OKCoin's data starts on 2013-06-12 with 0.004 BTC/day, Huobi's starts on 2013-09-01 with 134 BTC/day. BTC-China always charged trading fees; I am not sure about OKCoin, but I think I read that they initially charged fees until Huobi came up with its zero-fee policy and they had to follow. So maybe it was the zero-fee trading by Huobi, specifically, that attracted the Chinese habitual speculators. [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6577622#msg6577622 date=1399397165] That came only after the Oct/Nov rally. By early december there were still many who claimed that MtGOX withrawals were mostly working, only a bit slow. [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6577622#msg6577622 date=1399397165] I cannot follow that reasoning. The busting of SR made people realize that bitcoin transactions were not invisible to the FBI at all. How could that have helped other uses? The "cleansing"of bitcoin's image (which did not actually happen, it is still the "coin of crime" for many people) cannot possibly explain a rise of 1000% in 2 months. "Other uses" could not and did not expand that fast. The Chinese market could and did. By the way, I still don't know what caused the April/2013 jump. Some said it was videos on YouTube; perhaps. Could it have been the opening of the illegal drug market by SilkRoad? Or was it the initial opening of the non-Mainland Chinese market by BTC-China?[/quote] [quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6578194#msg6578194 date=1399399152] The only thing people like you had to say about BTC was its just used for buying drugs theres no other reason for it etc etc. Well look , the price didn't go to $0 as many were trying to say guess what that does? All the detractors who wrote it off as drug money are suddenly very interested, I mean how can something that was only used to buy drugs have value outside of drugs :o Really with the same old rhetoric ? The dollar and its ponzi scheme is the coin of crime. [/quote] There can't possibly be other people like me. ;) It is not me who is saying that "bitcoin is the coin of crime", that is still a common perception out there. But on the other hand, based on what people write here and in other forums, I would think that at least 10% of the bitcoin enthusiasts still love it because they (naively) think that it will allow them to make illegal payments and protect their illegal money from confiscation. ("Illegal" here in the literal sense of "prohibited by the laws of the land and times." That includes tax evasion, bribes, contributing to outlaw organizations, etc.) [quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6578194#msg6578194 date=1399399152] Silk Road was open in 2011 so no. [/quote] Well, then that leaves only BTC-China and those YouTube videos. By the way, Wikipedia says that "Company CEO Bobby Lee [ who had experience in Yahoo Exclamation and Walmart China ] approached the then two-person company in early 2013, and after investing his own money and attracting investors, oversaw the company's rapid expansion and marketshare growth by the end of the year." Which seems to fit quite nicely with the timing of the April 2013 bubble... [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6577622#msg6577622 date=1399397165] You seem to think the market is 100% speculation and needs 'news' to move. The market can move by normal dynamics such as adoption as well you know. [/quote] The bitcoin market now is still probably >95% speculation. Dumping by miners and buying for long-term investment must be a small fraction of the exchange's volume, and buying for use in commerce must be almost nil. I agree that mere "news" have little influence in the market. The things that moved the market since Dec/2013 were not "news" but hard facts (sometimes false): the December five-agency decree, the Huobi and OKCoin workarounds, the "bug in bitcoin", the bank account closures. News were merely the channel through which the market learned the facts. On the other hand, many of the "positive developments" that people keep mentioning here were just news (rather: thinly edited commercial press releases) which did not materialize. [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6577622#msg6577622 date=1399397165] As it currently stands millions of dollars of vc funds and normal investors are building Bitcoin businesses, everyday those services open and gain a wider customer base. [/quote] I see venture capital and established investors shunning bitcoin per se and investing instead in services like Bitpay, bitcoin fund management (SMBIT, PBP), and exchanges, which are profitable independently of the price of bitcoin. Bitpay for example claimed to have made 100 M$ of payments last year. Their revenue is the fees on that, a few million dollars. They must still be lucrative in spite of the 50% BTC price loss since January. But how much of that volume is new bitcoin adopters, and how much is bitcoiners who have piles of cheap old BTC and are spending some of them?

[quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6578231#msg6578231 date=1399399266] Jorge has been wooed by Chinas pretty volume numbers and actually thinks they own 90% of the coins. [/quote] They certainly do not own 90% of [i]all[/i] bitcoins, but it seems quite possible that the Chinese [i]speculators[/i] (active exchange clients) own 80-90% of all the bitcoins owned by [i]speculators[/i] worldwide. (Of course there is no sharp divide between speculators and investors, but you get the idea, I hope.) Most of the bitcoins that exist are probably owned by Western hoarders and long-term investors. Which should be another reason to worry, besides the closing of the Chinese market: if a small fraction of those coins were to be dumped on the public market, they could easily push the price below 100$/BTC. There is no dispute on this point, I suppose?

[quote author=oda.krell link=topic=178336.msg6576289#msg6576289 date=1399392295] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6576075#msg6576075 date=1399391610] [quote author=Teppino link=topic=178336.msg6572734#msg6572734 date=1399380294] As far as i know we had bubbles of comparable magnitude before, with or without China. [/quote] The evolution of the BTC price since Oct/2013 can be explained in terms of Chinese events only, and does not seem to react to any events outside China. Even the Feb/10 drop related to MtGOX was probably due to Mark's claim of a 'bug in the protocol' rather than the dealings of MtGOX itself. [b]So it is hard to deny that the rise from ~100$ to ~1000$ and the current ~450$ are entirely due to the Chinese market.[/b] If we consider percentual increase in price, indeed there were comparable bubbles before. [b]If we consider total demand for BTC, China was about 10x all the previous bubbles combined.[/b] [/quote] Obviously. Because price and demand driving the price are in a linear relation, huh? [/quote] Agreed, that "10x demand" is just a very rough guess, based not only on the price increase but also on the demographics of the market as some articles have described it (not nerds, but mostly amateur speculators with no computer expertise, who used to speculate on other things - a profile that seems to be common in China but not in the US). What is [i]your[/i] guess for the number of coins that Chinese speculators have bought to speculate with -- 2x, or 50x, the Western number? ;)

[quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6576269#msg6576269 date=1399392209] it is asinine to suggest that any rise in price since OCT was entirely due to the Chinese market I dont see why you make such broad, unsubstantiated and above all unprovable point. [/quote] I repeat: every move of the price since Oct/2013 correlates with events in China, starting with the opening of the Mainland Chinese market a couple of months before. The crash of early december, the recovery in late decenber/january, the decline since february - all can be explained with China only, with no obvious sign of influence from Western events. Understandably, bitcoin enthusiasts and entrepreneurs in the West must hate the idea that bitcoin price is set by Chinese speculators, at the mercy of an extremely "statist" foreign government. How can you promise profits and security to investors in that context? [quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6576269#msg6576269 date=1399392209] The fact that the biggest exchange in the world stopped fiat withdrawals so the only way out was BTC of course did nothing to the price. [/quote] That came only after the Oct/Nov rally. By early december there were still many who claimed that MtGOX withrawals were mostly working, only a bit slow. The dollar withdrawal delays explained why MtGOX prices were 10% higher than those in other exchanges, but they cannot possibly explain the 1000% increase. [quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6576269#msg6576269 date=1399392209] Added to that the fact that SR was busted and everyone realized there was more to [btc] than just SR that didnt help at all. [/quote] I cannot follow that reasoning. The busting of SR made people realize that bitcoin transactions were not invisible to the FBI at all. How could that have helped other uses? The "cleansing"of bitcoin's image (which did not actually happen, it is still the "coin of crime" for many people) cannot possibly explain a rise of 1000% in 2 months. "Other uses" could not and did not expand that fast. The Chinese market could and did. By the way, I still don't know what caused the April/2013 jump. Some said it was videos on YouTube; perhaps. Could it have been the opening of the illegal drug market by SilkRoad? Or was it the initial opening of the non-Mainland Chinese market by BTC-China? [quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6576269#msg6576269 date=1399392209] Every single positive thing that happened between $100 - $1000 was of course down to the Chinese ::) [/quote] No, only that the "positive" things that happened outside China had very small effect, because they were relevant to only a small part of the market. Why would the Chinese care about things like Overstock or SMBIT? Besides, the rise from 100$ to 1000$ took less than 2 months. What earth-shaking bitcoin developments happened in that interval? Moreover many of those "positive" things were just vaporware or fizzled, and others had a negative impact when they failed.

[quote author=RUEHL link=topic=178336.msg6575539#msg6575539 date=1399389900] Yea, the BTC Summit is going to be a bust. [/quote] Who are the sponsors? I saw a page that mentioned a company with apparent Chinese ownership and with ".pe" (Peruvian) domain, but never heard of them before.

[quote author=Teppino link=topic=178336.msg6572734#msg6572734 date=1399380294] As far as i know we had bubbles of comparable magnitude before, with or without China. [/quote] The evolution of the BTC price since Oct/2013 can be explained in terms of Chinese events only, and does not seem to react to any events outside China. Even the Feb/10 drop related to MtGOX was probably due to Mark's claim of a 'bug in the protocol' rather than the dealings of MtGOX itself. So it is hard to deny that the rise from ~100$ to ~1000$ and the current ~450$ are entirely due to the Chinese market. If we consider percentual increase in price, indeed there were comparable bubbles before. If we consider total demand for BTC, China was about 10x all the previous bubbles combined.

[quote author=Searing link=topic=178336.msg6569501#msg6569501 date=1399365409] I'm unclear does all this apply to bitcoin manufacturer's? ....in other words you have a company that 'builds' asic devices for sale ....does this also effect them? [/quote] I would guess that the Chinese government has no objections to bitcoin mining and manufacture of mining harware, as long as their products are sold overseas. On the contrary, they contribute to the country's exports and are therefore good.

[quote author=windjc link=topic=178336.msg6569157#msg6569157 date=1399363437] The chinese businessman in the other thread explains it very well. Basically the PBOC is too big to typical involve itself with something as small as bitcoin (which shows how threatened they are by it). For this reason, because the PBOC communicates with only the top level bank officials, the top level bank officials feel its beneath their pay grade to deal with and it gets passed down and eventually lost, because the people authorized with the responsibility don't want to do it - its embarrassing for them. It is in fact the exact opposite of what many bitcoin enthusiasts imagine - bitcoin is actually TOO SMALL for the banks to want to deal with closing all the accounts. [/quote] I don't know how much we should trust that Chinese businessman's analyses. (How much would you trust a random American businessman's analysis of the US Government's policy about bitcoin?) That said, most of it seems to make sense. Huobi's trade volume is sometimes over 100 kBTC/day which means 50 M$/day, but that is only internal accounting and generates zero revenue. They may take 1-2% of cash withdrawals, but even with 1 M$/day of withdrawals that would give 20'000 $/day at most. Is insider trading their real source of revenue? In any case, their revenue is probably less than that of a typical supermarket. Would the US Federal Reserve Bank care about the troubles of five US supermarkets? However, I would guess that money, rather than embarrassment, was the cause of the delays at the bottom of the command chain. The banks definitely charge a few % for deposits and withdrawals. Several thousand dollars per day may mean nothing for the PBoC, but may quite significant revenue for a single bank branch. The branch managers would want to keep that revenue coming in as much as they can, I would think.

[quote author=windjc link=topic=178336.msg6569157#msg6569157 date=1399363437] The chinese businessman in the other thread explains it very well. Basically the PBOC is too big to typical involve itself with something as small as bitcoin (which shows how threatened they are by it). For this reason, because the PBOC communicates with only the top level bank officials, the top level bank officials feel its beneath their pay grade to deal with and it gets passed down and eventually lost, because the people authorized with the responsibility don't want to do it - its embarrassing for them. It is in fact the exact opposite of what many bitcoin enthusiasts imagine - bitcoin is actually TOO SMALL for the banks to want to deal with closing all the accounts. [/quote] I don't know how much we should trust that Chinese businessman's analyses. (How much would you trust a random American businessman's analysis of the US Government's policy about bitcoin?) That said, most of it seems to make sense. Huobi's trade volume is sometimes over 100 kBTC/day which means 50 M$/day, but that is only internal accounting and generates zero revenue. They may take 1-2% of cash withdrawals, but even with 1 M$/day of withdrawals that would give 20'000 $/day at most. Is insider trading their real source of revenue? In any case, their revenue is probably less than that of a typical supermarket. Would the US Federal Reserve Bank case about the troubles of five US supermarkets? However, I would guess that money, rather than embarrassment, was the cause of the delays at the bottom of the command chain. The banks definitely charge a few % for deposits and withdrawals. Several thousand dollars per day may mean nothing for the PBoC, but may quite significant revenue for a single bank branch. The branch managers would want to keep that revenue coming in as much as they can, I would think.

[quote author=mooncake link=topic=178336.msg6568409#msg6568409 date=1399359130] it is highly possible there had been discussions with PBOC. [/quote] The exchanges are half a doen small businesses by Chinese standards, I doubt whether the PBoC would get down to discuss policies with them. (The traded volumes look like a lot of money, but that is just internal accounting; what counts is their revenue from withdrawal fees, and possibly from self-trading or shady plays with customers' coins.) Also, the squeeze doesn't seem to come from the PBoC anyway, only [i]through[/i] it. Illegal payments and protecting the small investor are the concern of other agencies. (The PBoC may have objected to leveraged trade perhaps, as it would turn the exchanges into money lending businesses?)

[quote author=rpietila link=topic=178336.msg6540264#msg6540264 date=1399212824] A large percentage have not even heard of china. [/quote] I see. No wonder there are still people who buy bitcoin to escape dollar inflation. ;) [quote] If bitcoin goes down another 6 months, all the coins belong to the likes of me. You still think the price will go down afterwards? [/quote] So we should believe that the price will go to 4000$ or more [i]because[/i] it is very likely that it will go down to 400$ or less. I must tell that to the OGX shareholders. I do not know why, that made me recall the example of logic that I was given in high school: "Everything good that is rare is expensive. A cheap good horse is rare. Therefore, a cheap good horse is expensive." ;)

[quote author=xulescu link=topic=178336.msg6567832#msg6567832 date=1399356020] Hey Jorge, I heard you named Earth Mover Distance in like... last century. Came up in my research. My respect for you grows. [/quote] Thanks, but it turned out that the concept had been discovered in the next-to-next-to-last-century already, by Gaspard Monge in 1781, precisely for the problem of moving earth in roadworks: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaspard_Monge[/url] The paper in question seems to be "Sur la théorie des déblais et des remblais" (Mém. de l?acad. de Paris, 1781), but I haven't read it. See also [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_mover%27s_distance[/url] (check the Talk page) The Russians apparently prefer to give all the honor to the Russian Wasserstein rather than Monge: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasserstein_metric[/url] :)

[quote author=windjc link=topic=178336.msg6567308#msg6567308 date=1399352918] I'm sorry, but if there is anyone on here that does not see the blatant similarities to the market's sell off behavior now vs. the days leading up to the Gox closure, then you deserve not to make any money. [/quote] I don't know whether there is similarity yet. FXBTC closed down neatly - stopped deposits, stopped trading, allowed ample time for withdrawals. Exactly the opposite of MtGOX. (By blocking withdrawals while allowing deposits and posting a price 10-20% over market, Mark tricked who-knows-many newbie investors into a trap that he knew would eat their money. That is NOT mere incompetence, sorry.) Will Huobi and OKCoin also close down neatly? I find it worrisome that Huobi still has posted no announcement about it on their homepage; the last notice there is still from Apr/17. Are they BTC and/or CNY solvent? I would rather think so, MtGOX's collapse should have been a clear lesson. If they [i]are[/i] insolvent, however, they will may have to block withdrawals early and without warning, and then their CEOS will probably be in deep trouble. Sudden collapses may actually be the best scenario for the price, since it will decouple those exchanges from the market before all their BTC balances are taken out. If they are solvent and close neatly like FXBTC, more coins will be taken out, therefore more coins will hit the western exchanges, and the price will drop more. On the other hand, more GOX-style failures may lower the public confidence in Bitcoin and thus lower its price too. Who knows.

The "google investigation" on Mr. Brewster's background seems to indicate that Neo & Bee was not merely a well-meaning project that failed due to inadequate planning and lack of financial competence. >:(

[quote author=derpinheimer link=topic=178336.msg6566219#msg6566219 date=1399346174] Did China just eat ~2.5k ask wall??? [/quote] I saw two walls a few CNY apart, each ~1400 BTC. I believe they were eaten in one gulp each.

Huobi should reorganize as a ballet theater and charge admission fees to let people watch their order book.

[quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6467089#msg6467089 date=1398825913] Libertarians tend to oppose coercive monopolies. From the party platform: [/quote] The documents of every party usually paint a much nicer picture of what the party members believe and do... [quote]2.6 Monopolies and Corporations: We defend the right of individuals to form corporations, cooperatives and other types of companies based on voluntary association. We seek to divest government of all functions that can be provided by non-governmental organizations or private individuals. We oppose government subsidies to business, labor, or any other special interest.[/quote] The key word there is "can". [quote]Industries should be governed by free markets.[/quote] A free market is one where customers are free to choose among suppliers, suppliers are free to sell to any customers, both are free to offer and ask whatever price they see fit, and, most importantly, there is no barrier to the entry of new suppliers. In those circumstances, if a product/service is highly lucrative, new suppliers will enter the market and offer the same product/service at lower price -- until that market is about as attractive to entrepreneurs as any other. That usually means that the price is the production cost of the item/service, plus a profit of a few percent of cost. In a monopoly market there is only one supplier, and no other suppliers can enter; so those customers who want the product/service must pay whatever price that supplier asks. The supplier then will set the price that maximizes its revenue, which can be arbitrarily higher than free market price. (One can also have an oligopoly where a few suppliers collude to split the market and fix prices. The effect is basically the same as a monopoly so I will lump both together.) A free market is [b]not[/b] an unregulated market, where suppliers are free to do whatever they please. A supplier that gets into a position of some dominance in a market (or has somehow got sufficient power from other sources) will inevitably try to drive out the competition and block the market to new entrants, by any means it can, fair or unfair -- including dumping, bribing politicians, spreading lies, locking customers by proprietary features, etc.. If "market forces" are left unchecked, every market quickly stops being free and degenerates into a monopoly (or oligopoly). It takes a lot of regulations and constant policing -- and a strong, "populist" government -- to ensure that free markets remain free.

[quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6467089#msg6467089 date=1398825913] Now. Your comparison of bitcoin holders (even hoarders) to monopolies is another issue. How can you make this comparison? There is no monopoly there yet. In fact, the US Government's holdings will eliminate the possibility of any non government monopolistic BTC group even forming. There is no monopoly now, and it will be hard for there to be in the future. [/quote] No, the monopoly I am referring to is Bitcoin excluding other cryptocurrencies. [quote author=thezerg link=topic=178336.msg6467242#msg6467242 date=1398826978] I suppose libertarians might tolerate monopolies by competence not monopolies by fiat or force. [/quote] In what sense could "the" Bitcoin be a "monopoly of competence"? The bitcoin protocol is open and can be used by any altcoin, and there is no deep knowledge needed to set one up. The Bitcoin network can easily choose to maintain and mine any other altcoin An exchange or payment processor that can handle two cryptocoins can handle any number of them; and it is in their interest to handle any coin that has some minimum volume. Payment processors could accept any of those coins from a customer and pay the merchant in any other coin. Basically, the only substantial difference between all bitcoin-like altcoins is the [i]contents[/i] of their blockchains. So, what is in Satoshi's Blockchain that could make it more attractive to new cryptocurrency users than any other of those blockchains? The "Bitcoin magnates" -- the few thousand people who now own most of the Bitcoins that exist -- expect to be rewarded one day with billions or trillions of dollars worth of goods and services in exchange for the "service" of letting other people use their bitcoins in e-commerce. But, suppose that the "Bananacoin magnates" were willing to do the same service to society in exchange of a mere few thousand dollars: why would society choose to use Bitcoin rather than Bananacoin?

It is undeniable that bitcoin has become a religious cult for many (not all, obviously) of its enthusiasts. Tell-tale signs include: * Unfaltering belief in dogmas like "anonymous", "safe store of value", "governments cannot control it", "safe from hackers", "cannot be seized", "banks are afraid of it", etc., in spite of major events that clearly contradict them; * Deep hatred for other "religions" (altcoins) that are just like their own, only with other "priests"; * Compulsion to convert the "infidels", * Creation of a community consisting of believers only, with forums and media restricted to "canonical" and positive views by believers; * Uncritical assumption that anyone who praises the "religion" is a saint, anyone who criticizes it is working for the "devil"; * Belief that their "religion" is not just an incremental improvement to society, but an event that will change it radically and forever; * Rejection of middle ground: either one accepts the full canonical doctrine, or one is an infidel; * Feeling that a believer should sacrifice his wealth for the cause; * Interpretation of any criminal charges against "priests" as perscution of their "religion" by the state; * Suppression of the sense of ridicule when praising their "religion"; * Belief that insulting an unbeliever is not the same as insulting a person. * Sanctification of the "religion"'s First Prophet; * Belief that the writings of the First Prophet are perfect and unquestionable Holy Words, that terminate any discussion; * A clique of Reverent Fathers who interpret and expand the First Prophet's writings, and claim that their interpretations are just as Holy; * Praise of blind ignorant faith in Bitcoin as a virtue, and claims that it is a basic necessity for Bitcoin's success; * Avoidance of non-believers and censorship of negative options, [i]because they may weaken the faith[/i]; * Transformation of rejection and ridicule by the majority into a positive feeling of "chosen ones" or "enlightened minority"; * Unshakable belief in a "redemption" at some unspecified future, when the true believers who endured to the end will be rewarded with unimaginable benesses, [i]just for having believed[/i], while the infidels will be left groveling in the mud at their feet. Actually one of the things I like in this thread is that many people here are [b]not[/b] cultists, just ordinary gamblers hoping to make money out of other gamblers -- possibly by bluffing and tricking them, as in any poker game. (In constrast, there are threads in this forum where the Sons of Unabomber are discussing the detais of how Bitcoin will allow them to take over the planet and destroy all governments, without them ever having to leave the basements of their log cabins in the woods, revealing their identities, or meeting other human beings face to face.)

[quote author=Stelios link=topic=529946.msg6561355#msg6561355 date=1399321367] [quote] Investors are people who buy equity in a company. Creditors are people who loan money or goods to a company and thus create liabilities for the company. Creditors expect and have a legal right to be paid what they loan, including interest. Investors have no guarantee they will ever see their money again. When a company is liquidated, creditors have priority over investors in sharing in the proceeds. [/quote] Just in case anyone was wondering ;) [/quote] Yes, I am aware of that. Also I believe that the N&B shares were not equity (a piece of the company, possibly worth something if it is liquidated) but profit-only "shares" (thus worth zero if the company is liquidated), correct? Or I am mixing up with some other failed business? If that is correct, I suppose that any assets remaining from the liquidation, after paying the real creditors, will go to the company owner -- namely, Mr. Brewster. :P

[quote author=spooderman link=topic=178336.msg6563565#msg6563565 date=1399331738] Didn't know about this guy, a good spokesperson http://rt.com/shows/sophieco/156756-bitcoin-currency-roger-ver/#.U2dDpetOt_o.twitter [/quote] Hm... when people started wondering whether MtGOX was solvent, Roger Ver (a good friend of Mark Karpel?s) posted a video on YouTube where he claimed to have seen MtGOX's bank statements and guaranteed that it was solvent.

[quote author=adamstgBit link=topic=178336.msg6561639#msg6561639 date=1399322459] Jorge imagine if you did put at least one satellite into orbit, or capture a small asteroid! imagine the possibilities! buy now while price is low! [/quote] If I did that I would have less time left to post on the space forum. :D

[quote author=flynn link=topic=178336.msg6561480#msg6561480 date=1399321825] I bet you were a Millenium and Deuteros player [img]http://thehouseofgames.org/files/m/millenium_22/millenium_22-2.gif[/img] [/quote] Interesting! No, I never heard of that game. My kids used to play Nintendos a lot but I never got interested in commercial video games. In 1979 or 1980 I got to play some early versions of Asteroids and Space Invaders on [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto]this machine[/url], the first widely used (but not yet commercial) computer with a GUI and mouse. At the Xerox and DEC labs where I worked people wrote a few games of their own, and their own version of Tetris.

[b]Chinese Slumber Method prediction for Tuesday May 06[/b] [b]Prediction valid for:[/b] Tuesday 2014-05-06, 19:00--19:59 UTC (not before, not after) [b]Huobi's predicted price:[/b] 2635 CNY [b]Bitstamp's predicted price:[/b] 427 USD [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-HUBI-annotated.png][img]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-HUBI-annotated.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-BSTP-annotated.png][img]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-BSTP-annotated.jpg[/img][/url] [ [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-legend.txt]Plot legend[/url] ] The data point for today May/05 was fairly good (S = 0.0041, W = 0.716). It was below but fairly close to the previously assumed trend, so it seems most reasonable to stick with it. Fitting again a straight line to the last four data points, by weighted least squares, gives A + B*(d-d0), where (d-d0) is the number of days since May/02, A = 2746.70, B = -27.96. The Bitstamp prediction, as usual, is the Huobi prediction divided by the currency conversion factor R, taken to be 6.17 CNY/USD. Its value was 6.18 today (May/05), 6.16 yesterday, and 6.17, 6.08, 6.11, 6.22, 6.25, 6.05 on the previous good sample times. [b]Checking the previous prediction[/b] Prediction was posted on: [s]Saturday[/s]Sunday 2014-05-04, 23:26 UTC Prediction was valid for: [s]Sunday[/s] Monday 2014-05-05, 19:00--19:59 UTC (~20 hours later) The Method was just a tad too bullish: Huobi's predicted price: 2676 CNY Huobi's actual price (L+H)/2: 2656 CNY [b]Error: 20 CNY (~3.24 USD)[/b] Bitstamp's predicted price: 434 USD Bitstamp's actual price (L+H)/2: 430 USD [b]Error: 3 USD[/b] [b]NOTE[/b]: "The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad." --Salvador Dalí EDIT: May/04 was Sunday, May/05 is Monday.

[b]Chinese Slumber Method prediction for Tuesday May 06[/b] [b]Prediction valid for:[/b] Tuesday 2014-05-06, 19:00--19:59 UTC (not before, not after) [b]Huobi's predicted price:[/b] 2635 CNY [b]Bitstamp's predicted price:[/b] 427 USD [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-HUBI-annotated.png][img]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-HUBI-annotated.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-BSTP-annotated.png][img]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-BSTP-annotated.jpg[/img][/url] [ [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-legend.txt]Plot legend[/url] ] The data point for today May/05 was fairly good (S = 0.0041, W = 0.716). It was below but fairly close to the previously assumed trend, so it seems most reasonable to stick with it. Fitting again a straight line to the last four data points, by weighted least squares, gives A + B*(d-d0), where (d-d0) is the number of days since May/02, A = 2746.70, B = -27.96. The Bitstamp prediction, as usual, is the Huobi prediction divided by the currency conversion factor R, taken to be 6.17 CNY/USD. Its value was 6.18 today (May/05), 6.16 yesterday, and 6.17, 6.08, 6.11, 6.22, 6.25, 6.05 on the previous good sample times. [b]Checking the previous prediction[/b] Prediction was posted on: Saturday 2014-05-04, 23:26 UTC Prediction was valid for: Sunday 2014-05-05, 19:00--19:59 UTC (~20 hours later) The Method was just a tad too bullish: Huobi's predicted price: 2676 CNY Huobi's actual price (L+H)/2: 2656 CNY [b]Error: 20 CNY (~3.24 USD)[/b] Bitstamp's predicted price: 434 USD Bitstamp's actual price (L+H)/2: 430 USD [b]Error: 3 USD[/b] [b]NOTE[/b]: "The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad." --Salvador Dalí

[b]Chinese Slumber Method prediction for Tuesday May 06[/b] [b]Prediction valid for:[/b] Tuesday 2014-05-06, 19:00--19:59 UTC (not before, not after) [b]Huobi's predicted price:[/b] 2635 CNY [b]Bitstamp's predicted price:[/b] 427 USD [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-HUBI-annotated.png][img]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-HUBI-annotated.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-BSTP-annotated.png][img]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-BSTP-annotated.jpg[/img][/url] [ [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-05-prediction-check-legend.txt]Plot legend[/url] ] The data point for today May/05 was fairly good (S = 0.0041, W = 0.716). It was below but fairly close to the previously assumed trend, so it seems most reasonable to stick with it. Fitting again a straight line to the last four data points, by weighted least squares, gives A + B*(d-d0), where (d-d0) is the number of days since May/02, A = 2746.70, B = -27.96. The Bitstamp prediction, as usual, is the Huobi prediction divided by the currency conversion factor R, taken to be 6.17 CNY/USD. Its value was 6.18 today (May/05), 6.16 yesterday, and 6.17, 6.08, 6.11, 6.22, 6.25, 6.05 on the previous good sample times. [b]Checking the previous prediction[/b] Prediction was posted on: Saturday 2014-05-04, 23:26 UTC Prediction was valid for: Sunday 2014-05-05, 19:00--19:59 UTC (~19.5 hours later) The Method was just a tad too bullish: Huobi's predicted price: 2676 CNY Huobi's actual price (L+H)/2: 2656 CNY [b]Error: 20 CNY (~3.24 USD)[/b] Bitstamp's predicted price: 434 USD Bitstamp's actual price (L+H)/2: 430 USD [b]Error: 3 USD[/b] [b]NOTE[/b]: "The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad." --Salvador Dalí

[quote author=adamstgBit link=topic=178336.msg6560288#msg6560288 date=1399317067] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6560247#msg6560247 date=1399316928] Strange Monday at Huobi: a bit of trade in the morning and early afternoon, very little from 5:00 pm local time onwards. Usually it is the other way around, trade peaks in the late afternoon and evenings. [/quote] how do you notice that and not have any bitcoin totally blows my mind. [/quote] In the late 1980s and early 1990s I spent as much time discussing space exploration on the USENET sci.space forum as I am spending here. Here is [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/ramblings/hist/world/ColumbusBudget.msg]one of my posts[/url] from that time. By the way, "mining" then meant extracting [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/ramblings/sci/space/ElementPrices.msg]precious elements[/url] from asteroids to build spaceships or space colonies. But no one ever told me that I had to put at least one satellite into orbit, or capture at least a small asteroid of my own, for my ramblings to be worthy of that forum. ;) PS. In 1986 the internet was restricted to universities and some computer companies, such as DEC where I [s]pretended to work[/s] worked, and was managed by (D)ARPA. There was no WWW; only FTP, e-mail, and USENET (a distributed bulletin board with its own protocol, UUCP). There were no anonymous users; if anyone misbehaved badly, other people would complain to his employer/university, and that usually solved the problem. Can you imagine an internet with no spam, no advertising, no phishing, no viruses, no webpages that steal your cycles to mine bitcoins, no silly avatars? In 1986 the first computer worm was still 3 years away. Sigh... :'(

[quote author=adamstgBit link=topic=178336.msg6560288#msg6560288 date=1399317067] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6560247#msg6560247 date=1399316928] Strange Monday at Huobi: a bit of trade in the morning and early afternoon, very little from 5:00 pm local time onwards. Usually it is the other way around, trade peaks in the late afternoon and evenings. [/quote] how do you notice that and not have any bitcoin totally blows my mind. [/quote] In the late 1980s and early 1990s I spent as much time discussing space exploration on the USENET sci.space forum as I am spending here. Here is [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/ramblings/hist/world/ColumbusBudget.msg]one of my posts[/url] from that time. By the way, "mining" then meant extracting [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/ramblings/sci/space/ElementPrices.msg]precious elements[/url] from asteroids to build spaceships or space colonies. But no one ever told me that I had to put at least one satellite into orbit, or capture a small asteroid of my onw, for my ramblings to be worthy of that forum. ;) PS. In 1986 the internet was restricted to universities and some computer companies, such as DEC where I [s]pretended to work[/s] worked, and was managed by (D)ARPA. There was no WWW; only FTP, e-mail, and USENET (a distributed bulletin board with its own protocol, UUCP). There were no anonymous users; if anyone misbehaved badly, other people would complain to his employer/university, and that usually solved the problem. Can you imagine an internet with no spam, no advertising, no phishing, no viruses, no webpages that steal your cycles to mine bitcoins, no silly avatars? In 1986 the first computer worm was still 3 years away. Sigh...

Strange Monday at Huobi: a bit of trade in the morning and early afternoon, very little from 5:00 pm local time onwards. Usually it is the other way around, trade peaks in the late afternoon and evenings.

What happens now to Neo & Bee, legally? I understand that, in some jurisdictions, the creditors can start the legal liquidation of the company and the distribution of its assets, even if the CEO is in Shangri-La and the employees have all quit their jobs. Is that happening in Cyprus?

It is undeniable that bitcoin has become a religious cult for many of its enthusiasts. Tell-tale signs include: * Unfaltering belief in dogmas like "anonymous", "safe store of value", "governments cannot control it", "safe from hackers", "cannot be seized", "banks are afraid of it", etc., in spite of major events that clearly deny them; * Deep hatred for other "religions" (altcoins) that are just like their own, only with other "priests"; * Compulsion to convert the "infidels", * Creation of a community consisting of believers only, with forums and media restricted to "canonical" views by believers; * Absolute certainty that anyone who praises the "religion" is a "saint", anyone who criticizes it is working for the "devil"; * Belief that their "religion" is not just an incremental improvement to society, but an event that will change it radically and forever; * Rejection of middle ground: either one accepts the full canonical doctrine, or one is an infidel; * Compulsion to sacrifice one's wealth for the cause; * Interpretation of any criminal charges against "priests" as perscution of their "religion" by the state; * Spontaneous constests to see who can come up with the most ridiculously exaggerated praise for the "religion", and the most scathing insults for the heretics; * Sanctification of the "religion"'s First Prophet; * Belief that the writings of the First Prophet are perfect and unquestionable Holy Words, that terminate any discussion; * A clique of Reverent Fathers who interpret and expand the First Prophet's writings, and claim that their interpretations are just as Holy; * Praise of blind ignorant faith in Bitcoin as a virtue, and claims that it is a basic necessity for Bitcoin's success; * Avoidance of non-believers and censorship of negative options, [i]because they may weaken the faith[/i]; * Transforming rejection and ridicule by the majority into a positive feeling of "chosen ones" or "enlightened minority"; * Unshakable belief in a "redemption" at some unspecified future, when the true believers who endured to the end will be rewarded with unimaginable benesses while the infidels will be left groveling in the mud at their feet. Actually one of the things I like in this thread is that many people here are [b]not[/b] cultists, just ordinary gamblers hoping to make money out of other gamblers -- possibly by tricking them, as in any poker game. (In constrast, there are threads in this forum where the Sons of Unabomber are discussing the detais of how Bitcoin will allow them to take over the planet and destroy all governments, without them ever having to leave the basements of their log cabins in the woods, revealing their identities, or meeting other human beings face to face.)

It is undeniable that bitcoin has become a religious cult for many of its enthusiasts. Tell-tale signs include: * Unfaltering belief in dogmas like "anonymous", "safe store of value", "governments cannot control it", "safe from hackers", "cannot be seized", "banks are afraid of it", etc., in spite of major events that clearly deny them; * Deep hatred for other "religions" (altcoins) that are just like their own, only with different "priests"; * Compulsion to convert the "infidels", * Creation of a community consisting of believers only, with forums and media restricted to "canonical" views by believers; * Immediate certainty that anyone who praises the "religion" is a "saint", anyone who criticizes it is working for the "devil"; * Belief that their "religion" is not just an incremental improvement to society, but an event that will change it radically and forever; * Rejection of middle ground: either one accepts the full canonical doctrine, or one is an infidel; * Compulsion to sacrifice one's wealth for the cause; * Interpretation of any criminal charges against "priests" as perscution of their "religion" by the state; * Spontaneous constests to see who can come up with the most ridiculously exaggerated praise for the "religion", and the most scathing insults for the heretics; * Sanctification of the "religion"'s First Prophet; * Belief that the writings of the First Prophet are perfect and unquestionable Holy Words, that terminate any discussion; * A clique of Reverent Fathers who interpret and expand the First Prophet's writings, and claim that their interpretations are just as Holy; * Praise of blind ignorant faith in Bitcoin as a virtue, and claims that it is a basic necessity for Bitcoin's success; * Avoidance of non-believers and censorship of negative options, [i]because they may weaken the faith[/i]; * Unshakable belief in a "redemption" at some unspecified future, when the true believers who endured to the end will be rewarded with unimaginable benesses while the infidels will be left groveling in the mud at their feet. Actually one of the things I like in this thread is that many people here are [b]not[/b] cultists, just ordinary gamblers hoping to make money out of other gamblers -- possibly by tricking them, as in any poker game. (In constrast, there are threads in this forum where the Sons of Unabomber are discussing the detais of how Bitcoin will allow them to take over the planet and destroy all governments, without them ever having to leave the basements of their log cabins in the woods, revealing their identities, or meeting other human beings face to face.)

[quote author=Vlad2Vlad link=topic=316297.msg6450589#msg6450589 date=1398752267] Trust me, Bankers will own over 25%+ of Bitcoin by this Christmas and over 50% in the next 18 months. I said last year Wall-Street was gonna come in strong this year and I was laughed at. [/quote] Is there any evidence that the banks or "Wal Street" (whatever that means) are buying bitcoins for themselves? Any public news? SecondMarket's BIT and Pantera's PBP do not buy for themselves; they only skim fees from common investors who buy bitcoins through them. It is these investors who bear all the risk. Fortress had invested in Bitcoin, but it only gave them a red stain in their quarterly report. I read that they gave their bitcoins to Pantera in exchange for equity in their fund management company -- which, like SMBIT and PBP, will make money for the managers no matter what happens to the bitcoin price. Bitpay stated that they do not keep any bitcoins themselves. So, who are those "Wall Street' investors? [quote author=Vlad2Vlad link=topic=316297.msg6450589#msg6450589 date=1398752267] [ Banks/Wall Street ] may first try a Newly launched coin but that will probably fail. [/quote] It is quite likely that banks and/or credit card companies will eventually adopt the offline key/address generation method and crypto-signed "digital checks", which is the only part of the crytocurrency concept that is obviously a win. However, a bank-managed crytpocurrency will not need any of the other parts of the Bitcoin protocol, such as mining and distributed confirmation by voting; and therefore would be much faster and more resource-efficient (hence cheaper to operate, hence could drive Bitcoin out of the "market" just by making more profit with lower fees). Indeed, by negating some of Bitcoin's "features" (such as irreversibility, anonymity, and immunity to confiscation) such a BankCoin will be better than Bitcoin from the consumer and/or law enforcement viewpoints. Once such a law- and consumer-friendly BankCoin is available, governments will surely outlaw the "Bitcoin International Bank" (the miner network) for not complying with AML, KYC, etc. I would hate this outcome, but I can't see why it could not happen.

I though that some might appreciate this map: [img width=400]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.jpg[/img] [ [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.png]png version[/url] ] EDIT: map source: [url=http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1862_Johnson_Map_of_England_and_Wales_-_Geographicus_-_England-johnson-1862.jpg]http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1862_Johnson_Map_of_England_and_Wales_-_Geographicus_-_England-johnson-1862.jpg[/url] EDIT 2014-05-05: Colchester should have been Coventry, sorry. Corrected the map.

[quote author=mmitech link=topic=178336.msg6554419#msg6554419 date=1399294414] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6553573#msg6553573 date=1399290001] [quote author=check07 link=topic=178336.msg6553450#msg6553450 date=1399289382] Isn't it ironic that the libertarian bitcoiners, champions of laissez-faire capitalism, are betting all their life savings on the hope that the Satoshi Bitcoin will be one day the only cryptocurrency in the market, so that they can charge monopoly prices for it? [/quote] Hm, isn't that copy-paste from a post of mine? [/quote] copyrights ? does it matter ? [/quote] No, just surprised to have a fan here. :D

[quote author=niothor link=topic=178336.msg6553470#msg6553470 date=1399289457] Besides, you shoudn't take this board as a model of how the market feels. I doubt that more than 10% of the top 10 traders and holders of [btc] use this forum frequently. [/quote] Only 338 people bothered to reply to Adam's poll, so perhaps only 337 traders read this thread regularly. ;)

[quote author=minerpart link=topic=529946.msg6551820#msg6551820 date=1399279972] Yes nice County map, but you pretty much have half on England there so it doesn't narrow anything down. And this Lithuanian guy is not necessarily in the picture anymore for the neobee episode. [/quote] My guess (just a guess) is that the Lithuanian young man of that CV (posted 2010 - it says "age 21") is indeed the person Mr. Brewster was alluding to in that interview, but he may not even be aware of having become owner of Future Entertainment. I do not think that he had anything to do with Neo & Bee. There are several people with last name "Antonovicius" in Googleland, but no other "Romualdas Antonovicius". Not only was he in England in 2010, near the time of the cancelled event (2012), but the range of the towns he mention in his CV (Coventry, Wisbech) overlaps that of the towns associated to Mr. Brewster (Doncaster, Manton, Lincoln). Manton is almost halfway from Coventry to Wisbech. According to that CV, Mr. Antonovicius went to England in 2008 or 2009 (at age 19 or 20), was between jobs in 2010, and was only 23 at the time of the cancelled event. He may have bought the company without realizing what it implied (and without the sale being officially registered). Or he may have been only a casual acquaintance of Mr. Brewster, who may have given his name to the reporter to send the creditors on a wild goose chase. For all I know, Mr. Antonovicius may not even have been in England in 2012.

[quote]Earlier this year, Mr Brewster told the BBC he had separated himself from the company running the festival - Future Entertainment Ltd - "legally and lawfully", and it had been sold to a man called [b]Ramluda Antonictvius[/b]. Mr Brewster was unable to provide any further contact information or details.[/quote] Needless to say, Google finds no mention of that name except that same news article. However it could be a mangling of "Romualdas Antonovicius", a valid Lithuanian name, e.g. [url=http://www.employmentrecruitment.co.uk/cv-resumes/im-very-hard-worker-and.125]http://www.employmentrecruitment.co.uk/cv-resumes/im-very-hard-worker-and.125[/url] [b]Please note[/b] that the name "Romualdas Antonovicius" is just [b]my guess[/b], that the person above may not be the only person with that name in the UK, and that Mr. Brewster may have been using the "Keyser Söze" trick with the reporter. EDIT: On the other hand. that (undated) CV has Mr. Antonovicius living in [s]Colchester[/s] Coventry with previous work experience in Wisbech. Mr. Brewster was said to have lived/worked in the Doncaster area. [s]Colchester[/s] Coventry, Wisbech, Lincoln, and Doncaster are all in Eastern England, [s]almost in a straight line[/s]. Wait, this can only mean one thing ... could Mr. Antonovicius be ... Satoshi Nakamoto? :o ;) EDIT 2014-05-05: Mr. Antonovicius's residence was Coventry not Colchester, sorry. Closer to Manton, Lincoln, and Doncaster, but not in a straight line (and more like Central than Eastern England).

[quote author=minerpart link=topic=529946.msg6551820#msg6551820 date=1399279972] Yes nice County map, but you pretty much have half on England there so it doesn't narrow anything down. And this Lithuanian guy is not necessarily in the picture anymore for the neobee episode. [/quote] My guess (just a guess) is that the Lithuanian young man of that CV (posted 2010 - it says "age 21") is indeed the person Mr. Brewster was alluding to in that interview, but he may not even be aware of having become owner of Future Entertainment. There are a few people with last name "Antonovicius" in Googleland, but no other "Romualdas Antonovicius". Not only was he in England near the time of the cancelled event (2012), but the range of the town he mention in his CV (Coventry, Wisbech) overlaps that of the towns associated to Mr. Brewster (Doncaster, Manton, Lincoln). Mr. Antonovicius was unemployed in 2010, and only 23 at the time of the cancelled event. He may have bough the company without realizing what it implied. Or he may have been a casual acquaintance of Mr. Brewster, who picked his name as a way to buy time. He may even have left England between 2010 and 2012.

[quote author=check07 link=topic=178336.msg6553450#msg6553450 date=1399289382] Isn't it ironic that the libertarian bitcoiners, champions of laissez-faire capitalism, are betting all their life savings on the hope that the Satoshi Bitcoin will be one day the only cryptocurrency in the market, so that they can charge monopoly prices for it? [/quote] Hm, isn't that copy-paste from a post of mine?

[quote author=windjc link=topic=178336.msg6550874#msg6550874 date=1399273958] This market is just DYING for some bad news. It can't even keep itself up in anticipation of it. We are just going to drift lower, bouncing at 2650, 2600, 2555 and going back up each time, until we get some bad news to flush all this out. [/quote] The bad news are already out there: May/10 seems to be for real, one Chinese exchange already closed, and the CEOs of the other exchanges apparently can't find anything upbeat to say. Not at all like a month ago, after the Caixin leak, when they thought that they had found workarounds. I can't see why the price would not go below 2300 CNY (~375 USD) by the end of the week. It got there on Apr/11, on mere [i]rumors[/i] that this would happen...

[quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=590970.msg6532754#msg6532754 date=1399165083] * If someone can pocket a large pile of money without any risk of concrete punishment, he most surely will. [/quote] Just to clarify this last point: * What a company promises or "explains" on a forum or on TV is totally irrelevant, only contracts and legally binding documents matter. * If a contract leaves any point optional or unspecified, one should assume the alternative that will maximize the money pocketed by the management. * In particular, a contract must be carefully examined for loopholes like "[size=8pt]after subtracting expenses[/size]" or "[size=8pt]as determined by a future audit[/size]" or "[size=8pt]at the discretion of management[/size]" etc. * The contract is worthless if the company is constituted, located, or registered in such a way that the management cannot be prosecuted for violating it.

[quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=590970.msg6532754#msg6532754 date=1399165083] * If someone can pocket a large pile of money without any risk of concrete punishment, he most surely will. [/quote] Just to clarify this last point: * What a company promises or "explains" on a forum or on TV is totally irrelevant, only contracts and legally binding documents matter. * If a contract leaves any point optional or unspecified, one should assume the alternative that will maximize the money pocketed by the management. * In particular, a contract must be carefully examined for loopholes like [size=8pt]after subtracting expenses[/size] or [size=8pt]as determined by a future audit[/size] or [size=8pt]at the discretion of management[/size] etc. * The contract is worthless if the company is constituted, located, or registered in such a way that the management cannot be prosecuted for violating it.

I though that some might appreciate this map: [img width=400]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.png[/img] [ [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.png]png version[/url] ]

I thought some might appreciate this map: [img width=400]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.jpg[/img] [ [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.png]png format[/url] ] [ if it shows truncated, it's a forum software bug ]

I thought some might appreciate this map: [img width=600]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.jpg[/img] [ [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.png]png format[/url] ] [ if it shows truncated, it's a forum software bug ]

I thought some might appreciate this mapl: [img width=600]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.jpg[/img] [ [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.png]png format[/url] ] [ if it shows truncated, blame it on the forum's support ]

I thought some might appreciate this map: [img width=200]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.jpg[/img] [ [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.png]png format[/url] ]

I thought some might appreciate this map: [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.png][img width=200]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.jpg[/img][/url]

I thought some might appreciate this map: [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.png][img width=400]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/east-england-johnson-1862-wp-annotated.jpg[/img][/url]

[quote author=JayJuanGee link=topic=178336.msg6547907#msg6547907 date=1399251851] You, Jorge, seem to like to do this with some of your negative speculations, to explore matters that are theoretically possible but are about as likely as my getting struck by lightning in Brazil in the next 24 hours. [/quote] Well, if you find a true believer who owns a private jet plane, you can buy the plane from him and hire him as a pilot with 0.01 BTC. Then you can be flying over Brazil in 10 hours maybe. Then you only have to find a tropical thunderstorm over the Amazon (almost certainly there will be one somewhere), fly into it, parachute out of the plane and unravel a roll of fine copper wire on the way down.

[quote]Earlier this year, Mr Brewster told the BBC he had separated himself from the company running the festival - Future Entertainment Ltd - "legally and lawfully", and it had been sold to a man called [b]Ramluda Antonictvius[/b]. Mr Brewster was unable to provide any further contact information or details.[/quote] Needless to say, Google finds no mention of that name except that same news article. However it could be a mangling of "Romualdas Antonovicius", a valid Lithuanian name, e.g. [url=http://www.employmentrecruitment.co.uk/cv-resumes/im-very-hard-worker-and.125]http://www.employmentrecruitment.co.uk/cv-resumes/im-very-hard-worker-and.125[/url] [b]Please note[/b] that the name "Romualdas Antonovicius" is just [b]my guess[/b], that the person above may not be the only person with that name in the UK, and that Mr. Brewster may have been using the "Keyser Söze" trick with the reporter. EDIT: On the other hand. that (undated) CV has Mr. Antonovicius living in Colchester with previous work experience in Wisbech. Mr. Brewster was said to have lived/worked in the Doncaster area. Colchester, Wisbech, Lincoln, and Doncaster are all in Eastern England, almost in a straight line. Wait, this can only mean one thing ... could Mr. Antonovicius be ... Satoshi Nakamoto? :o ;)

In response to the threat posed by the rebellious altcoins, this board should forsake its tradition of tolerance and institute a Bitcoin Inquisition, to evaluate all posts for possible heresy or offensiveness to the One and Only Cryptocurrency.

May be of interest: Bitcoin in Chinese dilemma : the lack of recharge channel blockage scenarios (in Chinese) Source: Sina Technology Post Time :2014 -05-05 00:24 [url]http://3c.ycwb.com/2014-05/05/content_6666425.htm[/url] (Note that Google Translate's "fire currency network", in random order, is "huobi.com"; "Paypal" is "Alipay")

[b]Chinese Slumber Method prediction for Monday May 05[/b] [b]Prediction valid for:[/b] Monday 2014-05-05, 19:00--19:59 UTC (not before, not after) [b]Huobi's predicted price:[/b] 2676 CNY [b]Bitstamp's predicted price:[/b] 434 USD [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-04-prediction-check-HUBI-annotated.png][img]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-04-prediction-check-HUBI-annotated.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-04-prediction-check-BSTP-annotated.png][img]http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-04-prediction-check-BSTP-annotated.jpg[/img][/url] [ [url=http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-05-04-prediction-check-legend.txt]Plot legend[/url] ] The data point for today May/04 was very good (S = 0.0020, W = 0.921). It was well off the previously assumed trend, but that trend dependend on yesterday's data point, which was very weak (W = 0.009). Fitting a straight line to the last three points, by weighted least squares, gives A + B*(d-d0), where (d-d0) is the number of days since May/02, A = 2743.73, B = -22.49. The Bitstamp prediction, as usual, is the Huobi prediction divided by the currency conversion factor R, taken to be 6.16 CNY/USD. Its value was 6.16 today (May/04), 6.17 yesterday, and 6.08, 6.11, 6.22, 6.25, 6.05, 6.09 on the previous good sample times. [b]Checking the previous prediction[/b] Prediction was posted on: Saturday 2014-05-03, 23:12 UTC Prediction was valid for: Sunday 2014-05-04, 19:00--19:59 UTC (~20 hours later) Huobi's predicted price: 2600 CNY Huobi's actual price (L+H)/2: 2699 CNY Error: 99 CNY (~16 USD) Bitstamp's predicted price: 427 USD Bitstamp's actual price (L+H)/2: 438 USD Error: 11 USD [b]NOTE[/b]: This predition is entirely free, as in free beer. Satisfaction guaranteed or 20% of your money back, minus our expenses.

[quote author=BitAddict link=topic=178336.msg6542001#msg6542001 date=1399220793] What about Btc-e? They can sell them for CNH. Of course is not the same than CNY, but they can keep trading with their currency. [/quote] But can they withdraw the CNH from BTC-e to their mainland bank account?

[quote author=igorr link=topic=178336.msg6541732#msg6541732 date=1399219420] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6541675#msg6541675 date=1399219230] If the Chinese exchanges are going to close, where would they sell them? For most Chinese, the non-Chinese exchanges must be as viable as the Chinese ones are for Westerners. [/quote] Logic, Chinese people will sell all on Bitstamp. [/quote] Arbitragers and some other clients will do that. But most Chinese clients would need to open a bank account in the West in order to withdraw dollars from Bitstamp, and then will have to convert those dollars to CNY so that they can spend them at home. Since the price at Bitstamp is unlikely to go much higher than now in the near future, many will rather sell now at Huobi.

[quote author=podyx link=topic=178336.msg6540927#msg6540927 date=1399215610] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6540703#msg6540703 date=1399214661] Here is one: they are traders (possibly unexperienced) who bought at much higher price, say 4000?. They have been waiting patiently for the price to go up again to those levels. But now that the the future of Chinese exchanges is uncertain they got desperate and are clumsily trying to push the price up with those fake bid walls. [ ... ] [/quote] Why would they not be able to send them to their wallet and sell some other time when price is better then? [/quote] If the Chinese exchanges are going to close, where would they sell them? For most Chinese, the non-Chinese exchanges must be as viable as the Chinese ones are for Westerners.

[quote author=rpietila link=topic=178336.msg6540264#msg6540264 date=1399212824] A large percentage have not even heard of china. [/quote] I see. No wonder there are still people who buy bitcoin to escape dollar inflation. ;) [quote author=rpietila link=topic=178336.msg6540264#msg6540264 date=1399212824] If bitcoin goes down another 6 months, all the coins belong to the likes of me. You still think the price will go down afterwards? [/quote] So we should believe that the price will go to 4000$ or more [i]because[/i] it is very likely that it will go down to 400$ or less. I must tell that to the OGX shareholders. I do not know why, that made me recall the example of logic that I was given in high school: "Everything good that is rare is expensive. A cheap good horse is rare. Therefore, a cheap good horse is expensive." ;)

[quote author=dreamspark link=topic=178336.msg6538842#msg6538842 date=1399206865] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=178336.msg6538775#msg6538775 date=1399206614] Huobi's order book is insane. Must be kids playing traders while their parents are away. Or the traders are all drunk. [/quote] Yep never seen it quite like this. Any ideas on the cause? [/quote] Here is one: they are traders (possibly unexperienced) who bought at much higher price, say 4000?. They have been waiting patiently for the price to go up again to those levels. But now that the the future of Chinese exchanges is uncertain they got desperate and are clumsily trying to push the price up with those fake bid walls. But they cannot just leave the bids there, since they definitely do not want to buy. So they must remove them whenever they have to leave the computer for any reason.

[quote author=rpietila link=topic=178336.msg6539081#msg6539081 date=1399207921] The awareness of bitcoin is so much larger now than in the beginning of 2013 that anything can be a catalyst for the next cohort coming [ ... ] These millions of people who are curious about Bitcoin and are not influenced by the FUD but just observe the price willing to buy low [... ] [/quote] How does China fit into this picture? And the growing list of scams and failures of bitcoin-related ventures?

Huobi's order book is insane. Must be kids playing traders while their parents are away. Or the traders are all drunk.

[quote author=hardpick link=topic=587295.msg6533144#msg6533144 date=1399167693] please note I think sunlot are buying mtgox at a bargain price if mtgox had not "stuffed up" and lost all our money it could be worth as much as $700 mil ( about 700,000 customers at $100 per customer . ) [/quote] This is quite incorrect. First, for the purposes of a recovery plan, each customer is worth a NEGATIVE amount equal to its account balance (that is what MtGOX owes him), plus a positive amount equal to the fees that he is expected to generate over, say 2 years. IIRC, the sum of the accounts was found to be about 800'000 bitcoins, worth about 400'000'000 USD at current prices, plus a large amount of dollars. That is the NEGATIVE part. For the positive part, only active customers count; inactive customers, that do not trade, generate no income. IIRC, according to analysis of the database leak by @rpietila, MtGOX had around 70'000 active customers, and that with a very generous definition of "active". To pay 100 US$ of trading fees, a customer would have to trade a lot. If the NewMtGOX decided to charge significant maintenance fees, most of those 70'000 customers would probably close their accounts. So this positive term -- the value of MtGOX's customer base -- is very small, maybe only 1/100 of the negative term above. The significant positive terms in the evaluation of MtGOX are the bitcoins and dollars that MtGOX actually had (I lost count, was it 220'000 BTC?). Adding everything gives a huge NEGATIVE value for the company. Who would pay even a satoshi for the "privilege" of having to pay hundreds of millions of dollars of debts? The Sunlot proposal makes sense for them only because they propose to assume only the positive terms above, spend some of that money for certain expenses, and then perhaps distribute the crumbs to customers, thus declaring the debts extinct.

[quote]Earlier this year, Mr Brewster told the BBC he had separated himself from the company running the festival - Future Entertainment Ltd - "legally and lawfully", and it had been sold to a man called [b]Ramluda Antonictvius[/b]. Mr Brewster was unable to provide any further contact information or details.[/quote] Needless to say, Google finds no mention of that name except that same news article. However it could be a mangling of "Romualdas Antonovicius", a valid Lithuanian name, e.g. [url=http://www.employmentrecruitment.co.uk/cv-resumes/im-very-hard-worker-and.125]http://www.employmentrecruitment.co.uk/cv-resumes/im-very-hard-worker-and.125[/url] [b]Please note[/b] that the name "Romualdas Antonovicius" is just [b]my guess[/b], that the person above may not be the only person with that name in the UK, and that Mr. Brewster may have been using the "Keyser Söze" trick with the reporter. EDIT: On the other hand. that (undated) CV has Mr. Antonovicius living in Colchester with previous work experience in Wisbech. Mr. Brewster was said to have lived/worked in the Doncaster area. Colchester, Wisbech, Lincoln, and Doncaster are all in Eastern England, almost in a straight line. Wait, this can only mean one thing ... could Mr. Antonovicius be ... Satoshi Nakamoto? :o ;)

It seems that the Chinese bulls who woke up at 4:30 am to play "up the price" have run out of gas. The bears got up now, and are having some fun with bitcoin while waiting for lunch to be served.

[quote]Earlier this year, Mr Brewster told the BBC he had separated himself from the company running the festival - Future Entertainment Ltd - "legally and lawfully", and it had been sold to a man called [b]Ramluda Antonictvius[/b]. Mr Brewster was unable to provide any further contact information or details.[/quote] Needless to say, Google finds no mention of that name except that same news article. However it could be a mangling of "Romualdas Antonovicius", a valid Lithuanian name, e.g. [url=http://www.employmentrecruitment.co.uk/cv-resumes/im-very-hard-worker-and.125]http://www.employmentrecruitment.co.uk/cv-resumes/im-very-hard-worker-and.125[/url] [b]Please note[/b] that the name "Romualdas Antonovicius" is just [b]my guess[/b], that the person above may not be the only person with that name in the UK, and that Mr. Brewster may have been using the "Keyser Söze" trick with the reporter. EDIT: On the other hand. that (undated) CV has Mr. Antonovicius living in Colchester with previous work experience in Wisbech. Mr. Brewster was said to have lived/worked in the Doncaster. Colchester, Wisbech, Lincoln, and Doncaster are all in Eastern England, almost in a straight line. Wait, this can only mean one thing ... could Mr. Antonovicius be ... Satoshi Nakamoto? :o ;)

[quote author=edmundedgar link=topic=587295.msg6533320#msg6533320 date=1399168873] The problem here is that if you've only got the order of 20% to 25% of what you owe, it only takes a small proportion of creditors to say "No, I insist that you pay me in full" to torpedo the whole thing. Presumably that (plus the general mendaciousness and shadiness of the people involved) is probably why the court hasn't been taking the idea very seriously. [/quote] Not disagreeing, just observing that the "concrete" debts (salaries, contractors, landlord, etc.), if any, must be much less than the remining assets. So these could get paid in full by liquidation. I stil don't know how the clients will be handled by the liquidation court. Will they be considered normal creditors, together with contractors and competing with them; or will they be considered a lower priority class?

[quote author=TERA link=topic=178336.msg6532337#msg6532337 date=1399162652] If EC is broken before we get around to doing a difficult planned and controlled upgrade to a different algorithm, then everyone's wealth will be permanently lost and redistributed. [/quote] I believe (on no basis whatsoever, just a blind guess) that such thing will not happen before he bitcoin protocol becomes obsolete for some other reason, with or without loss of the blockchain balances. But, just to discuss hypotheticals, if that were to happen it would be a nightmare scenario. At the very least it would mean the freezing of all cryptocoin payments until the new protocol is defined and the miners and clients upgraded to it. That could take weeks or months. Any business that depended entirely on bitcoin payments would have a hard time. Depending on who breaks EC, bitcoins may get silently stolen for months before the maintainers realize what is happening. By that time, there will be many legitimate transactions mixed up with illegitimate ones, and it may be practically impossible to distinguish them, or do a general rollback.