Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

this doesn't look good:

neither does this. remember, energy companies invest in a wide range of energy products, like solar, so this shows the economy is not making an energy transition; it is slowing down:

retail sales poor, i'm sure. still haven't seen the numbers:

still catching down. i'm actually expecting a short term bounce somewhere along here but still clinging to dear life to my DXD:

i might have to go back to shorting metals soon:

 

[cypherdoc]

@Smoothie

i've talked about the mechanisms many times before . good to see you, btw.

after 6-7 yrs of proving itself, i think Bitcoin has enough awareness to be a safe haven. that, plus the disappointing breakdown and under performance of the metals. the digital age of money is here and all signs point to the fiat financial system making the transition to crypto, not to mention breaking down themselves. the negative correlation btwn Bitcoin's final double bottom in August roughly correlating to the beginning's of the breakdown in the stock mkts tell me all systems GO. the Bitcoin chart has moved into a bullish configuration with a rising 200 DMA with price well above the line.

despite all the negative Bitcoin community controversy, sometimes you just have to look at the charts. as opposed to trying to just interpret the fundamentals. it's telling me, at least, that the market sees a solution going forward. i don't know what that solution is; it may be as simple as knowing that the 21M coin fixed supply is immutable and nothing to do with blocksize. alot of ppl around here hate SW. i think there is promise there. esp if implemented alongside a blocksize increase. the most important thing for me about SW that no one seems to be talking about is that it supposedly allows us a way to change signature algorithms away from ECDSA to something like Schnorr sigs. that's been one of Bitcoin's major concerns esp in light of the NSA no longer recommending ECDSA (yes, could be self interest). there are many other positives in SW despite it being an obvious means to allow LN.

also, i believe the USD dollar has already had it's bull run from the bottom of July 2014. you know what the Fed needs to do to stop this deflationary slowdown; print. each crisis is different, we're unlikely to be as lucky as 2008 when both the USD & UST's rallied paradoxically (easy to explain in hindsight). everyone expects the USD to rally in the next crisis as it did then. i don't.

of course, i could be wrong. we'll see.

 

[awemany]

Announcing Bitcoin Unlimited Voting (BUV)

Hey guys,

as you might have noticed, I cut down on my posts here, but only to find some more time to be productive with regards to Bitcoin (Unlimited)

I am proposing that we use a more fancy and machine readable way to deal with proposals, votes for them and membership info. Therefore, I wrote some preliminary code and defined some data structures which I am envisioning could be a good way to have a (machine) verifiable and transparent way to deal with all BUIPs, membership issues and so forth for BU.

Basically, I see us semi-manually producing an authenticated data structure, not unlike git or a 'proof-of-membership' blockchain to record all votes and results. It is all text file based and human readable, but should be able to be processed automatically for fully transparent voting results.

To not spam this thread further, I invite everyone to look at my code and the example vote data (which can be read by anyone, also non-programmers) and continue the discussion over here.

 

[Zarathustra]

@Smoothie

i've talked about the mechanisms many times before . good to see you, btw.

after 6-7 yrs of proving itself, i think Bitcoin has enough awareness to be a safe haven. that, plus the disappointing breakdown and under performance of the metals. the digital age of money is here and all signs point to the fiat financial system making the transition to crypto, not to mention breaking down themselves. the negative correlation btwn Bitcoin's final double bottom in August roughly correlating to the beginning's of the breakdown in the stock mkts tell me all systems GO. the Bitcoin chart has moved into a bullish configuration with a rising 200 DMA with price well above the line.

despite all the negative Bitcoin community controversy, sometimes you just have to look at the charts. as opposed to trying to just interpret the fundamentals. it's telling me, at least, that the market sees a solution going forward. i don't know what that solution is; it may be as simple as knowing that the 21M coin fixed supply is immutable and nothing to do with blocksize. alot of ppl around here hate SW. i think there is promise there. esp if implemented alongside a blocksize increase. the most important thing for me about SW that no one seems to be talking about is that it supposedly allows us a way to change signature algorithms away from ECDSA to something like Schnorr sigs. that's been one of Bitcoin's major concerns esp in light of the NSA no longer recommending ECDSA (yes, could be self interest). there are many other positives in SW despite it being an obvious means to allow LN.

also, i believe the USD dollar has already had it's bull run from the bottom of July 2014. you know what the Fed needs to do to stop this deflationary slowdown; print. each crisis is different, we're unlikely to be as lucky as 2008 when both the USD & UST's rallied paradoxically (easy to explain in hindsight). everyone expects the USD to rally in the next crisis as it did then. i don't.

of course, i could be wrong. we'll see.

I guess we'll see at least one more wave up to new all time highs (DAX/S&P500) before armageddon.
Depends on China. If the state terrorists there are not able to prevent the revolution any longer, the global game will be over. There is a crack in everything - that's how the light gets in:

 

[cypherdoc]

SLW definitely making a break for it:

don't knife catch:

launching:

[doublepost=1452536809,1452536115][/doublepost]after all the problems, oil is down today another -6.68%!!!

 

[Richy_T]

Hmm ... how old is Peter Todd? How old is theymos? How old is luke-jr?

I don't want to discrimate the youth, but sometimes I think one of Bitcoin's fate was that it made young people, that didn't do more than being on the right place at the right time, to entrepreneurs and richmen, while they were not made for running a business (e. G. Mark Karpeless) or they didn't have enough live-experience to deal with being rich.

Its success also attracted many who are technically adept but not in tune with the principles (free market and self-interest) behind its operation.

 

[Justus Ranvier]

Now we can start writing his name as Peter "confessed thief" Todd.

 

[Ivanhoe]

Not smart to do when in a position as his, you would expect someone to be a little bit wiser.

 

[cypherdoc]

nice one, FCX! copper? who needs copper? lows not seen since 10/2001!!!:

 

[VeritasSapere]

@awemany That sounds like a great idea, look forward to seeing it further fleshed out.

Been commentating on Bitcointalk a bit today, certain people have been promoting some strange ideas, like increased fee will not hinder adoption, and that Bitcoin is not free. Or the old favorite that we must choose between settlement network or currency now. Some type of strange collective madness it seems, just joking around a bit there. I made a post on there anyway, I was rather pleased with it.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1318519.msg13517342#msg13517342

 

[cliff]

@VeritasSapere - Good points. As I've harped on before in comparing bitcoin transactions to real estate transactions, this whole technology is about preventing double-spending and preserving chronology. Bitcoin is a big clock that stamps blocks as they're assembled. Its an old concept applied in a new way. Tinkering with how transactions are validated too much alters time tested rules. From Satoshi's whitepaper:

"In this paper, we propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer distributed timestamp serverto generate computational proof of the chronological order of transactions."

EDIT - Further, tinkering too much allows tx fees to be a tool of the wealthy - they can buy their way to the front of the line (the line of to-be-validated TXs) whether their TX was broadcast first or not. Seems highly unfair.

 

[rocks]

Coinbase should let law enforcement know, then Peter will see how well zero-confirm transactions work in the real world with legal services.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/40ibcs/peter_todd_suspended_from_reddit_after_disclosing/?ref=share&ref_source=link
and

 

[Emperor Bob]

It's a particularly silly demonstration because the product purchased was reddit gold, a digital subscription.

There isn't anything safer in the entire world to accept zeroconf for than digital goods inside a controlled platform:

1. Assume buyer isn't fraudulent.
2. If they are, take the goods back. Ban the account for good measure.

Even if your fraud rate is 50% you can still accept zeroconf profitably (as long as you automate #2).

 

[Zarathustra]

 

[Justus Ranvier]

Even if your fraud rate is 50% you can still accept zeroconf profitably (as long as you automate #2).

You're thinking like a real business operator rather than a game theory automaton.

Obviously reality is broken for failing to conform to a simplified mathematical model.

 

[Emperor Bob]

RE Illegal:

ytdm is reaching a bit here. I doubt just setting the flag would be itself fraud. And businesses (or the people they trust to run payment verification) can just ignore any non-confirmed opt-in RBF transaction.

The real danger (and what I believe is Peter Todd's goal) is the following:

1. Full blocks means fees vary wildly and unpredictably.
2. Therefore everyone uses RBF (regardless of intent to defraud).
3. All wallets switch to using RBF by default.
4. Therefore the entire market has effectively switched to an RBF environment, which has basically been Peter's goal for 2-3 years now.

 

[cypherdoc]

time for a bounce.

but look at FCX. down 20.33%!!! let them squeeze the shorts. it'll just be a chance to add:

 

[YarkoL]

If you start to think that the "solution" to fast
zeroconf transfers is to have them backed by police
then why do we need confirmations anyway?
Or blockchain for that matter? Unwieldy, expensive to
secure. Not to mention the p2p network. Just write everything
into a central database and you will have an efficient and
safe system protected by the benevolent State forces.

 

[Justus Ranvier]

If you start to think that the "solution" to fast zeroconf transfers is to have them backed by police

Bitcoin maintains ledger integrity automatically, even when actively attacked by scammers who are attempting to double spend. All that works without human intervention.

Double spend scammers are still scammers, though. A scammer in any context who gets caught frequently experiences negative consequences as a result.

It's absolutely valid for individual businesses to make risk allocation decisions based on the probability of catching scammers - that's got nothing to do with Bitcoin.

 

[Inca]

Never a dull day in bitcoin

I see that Peter Todd is damaging bitcoin again and now probably shitting himself in case Coinbase either sue him or report him to the authorities. Good luck on retaining employment as a bitcoin developer with this kind of public performance. Oh my, there really are a lot immature kids involved in bitcoin right now.

I guess I probably shouldn't use change my reddit handle to my IRL forename (also Peter) appended by my initial - seems a quick way towards a reddit site wide ban these days!

Also the price action is looking bullish to me.