How To Use Bitcoin – The Most Important Creation In The History Of Man

[kevsta]

hahaha http://fiatleak.com/ "money" appears to be leaking..

 

[Belz...]

The point is that not everybody is as good at reading graphs as you are.

Many people will not even look at the scale - especially if they are only giving the graph a quick glance. Therefore, they will be fooled by any scale distortion.

Well assuming they're really that bad at understanding things, does it really matter if the graph is correct ?

 

[remirol]

Well assuming they're really that bad at understanding things, does it really matter if the graph is correct ?

Not to mention that in a graph over the last 10 days, including a number (0) at the bottom end that doesn't exist on the graph itself and would effectively leave half the graph blank is even more dishonest. It would just be more obvious that one was trying to disguise the volatility by "flattening" the graph.

No, that graph is quite accurate. It's just damning to the concept that bitcoin is at all useful as a currency, and of course no criticism of bitcoin, no matter how valid, can be left unchallenged -- sort of like the gold bugs.

 

[psionl0]

Not to mention that in a graph over the last 10 days, including a number (0) at the bottom end that doesn't exist on the graph itself and would effectively leave half the graph blank is even more dishonest. It would just be more obvious that one was trying to disguise the volatility by "flattening" the graph.

How could the truth possibly be dishonest?

No, that graph is quite accurate grossly misleading.

ftfy.

It implies that the price of bitcoin rose 15-fold (a rise of 1400%) before losing half its peak value a little more than 24 hours later. The correct figures are a rise of 80% and a fall of 30% leaving a net gain of a little less than 30%. Even these much more moderate numbers sound serious - until you realize that the start and end points of the graph were cherry picked.

Well assuming they're really that bad at understanding things, does it really matter if the graph is correct ?

It's just damning to the concept that bitcoin is at all useful as a currency, and of course no criticism of bitcoin, no matter how valid, can be left unchallenged -- sort of like the gold bugs.

As you can see, a misleading graph can thoroughly fool somebody.

 

[Belz...]

How could the truth possibly be dishonest?

http://www.gobookee.org/how-to-lie-with-statistics/

 

[remirol]

It implies that the price of bitcoin rose 15-fold (a rise of 1400%) before losing half its peak value a little more than 24 hours later.

That's not confusion, that's deliberate misreading in an effort to defend bitcoin at all costs. Someone who cannot look at the Y axis and see "200" to "400" is incapable of reading graphs anyway.

The correct figures are a rise of 80% and a fall of 30% leaving a net gain of a little less than 30%. Even these much more moderate numbers sound serious - until you realize that the start and end points of the graph were cherry picked.

Selecting "the time of posting" as the endpoint and "the last ten days" as the overall graph time is hardly cherry picking, I'm sorry. This mostly just goes to prove what I said before though: bitcoiners will defend it at all costs, even when the evidence shows them wrong.

It's spiked back up today, BTW -- this makes swings of over $100 per unit both up AND down in less than a week. The very definition of volatility.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

hahaha http://fiatleak.com/ "money" appears to be leaking..

Even if we leave aside the fact that that graph only shows the money going to bitcoin, and not money coming back.

Oh and also if we leave aside the fact that in the last hour the total global transactions in this world destroying currency are < €20,000

You're still left with more than 90% of the transactions being for CNY, and considering it's the middle of the night in China now that seems a bit odd?

 

[psionl0]

Someone who cannot look at the Y axis and see "200" to "400" is incapable of reading graphs anyway.

You are the one who complained that including zero in the graph would "disguise the volatility by "flattening" the graph" (ie fail to exaggerate the volatility). Is it now your argument that readers should realize that the graph is "flatter" than it appears to be?

Selecting "the time of posting" as the endpoint and "the last ten days" as the overall graph time is hardly cherry picking, I'm sorry. This mostly just goes to prove what I said before though: bitcoiners will defend it at all costs, even when the evidence shows them wrong.

I don't need to defend bitcoin. I look at all the data. I don't wait until I see a price fall then scream "volatility".

 

[remirol]

You are the one who complained that including zero in the graph would "disguise the volatility by "flattening" the graph"

This is correct, because it would leave half the graph blank -- thus disguising the actual content by including non-data and pretending that it's data.

My graph is perfectly accurate as shown -- it includes a reasonable date range, the upper and lower Y bounds are consistent with the actual spread of values over that date range, and the values included are all meaningful in reality.

I don't need to defend bitcoin.

And yet you can't let a single criticism, no matter how valid, pass without responding Do you even own any bitcoins or is this just play-money speculation like some of our goldbugs do?

 

[psionl0]

This is correct, because it would leave half the graph blank -- thus disguising the actual content by including non-data and pretending that it's data.

WOW, look at the volatility of this Dow Jones chart - and over only 5 days too!

Good thing we didn't include the zero level - it would have left most of the graph blank and "flattened" the graph.

And yet you can't let a single criticism, no matter how valid, pass without responding

What valid criticism? You are just trying to deny that the average price of bitcoin doubles every 4 months but you can't make the data agree with you.

Call it "volatile" if you like but even people who bought bitcoin at its price peak during the Cyprus crisis are now making a profit.

 

[remirol]

WOW, look at the volatility of this Dow Jones chart - and over only 5 days too!
http://i44.tinypic.com/t7l3t2.jpg
Good thing we didn't include the zero level - it would have left most of the graph blank and "flattened" the graph.

That is volatile, over the given price range. The given price range is only a fraction of the total potential range, however, which is why the chart is misleading. If you wanted a chart with a wider range you would have to reach back more days; if you can't reach back far enough to include the prices you want to include, then perhaps the chart doesn't show what you think it does

In my chart, the given price range included a full 50% of the total price range over the commodity's history, rather than 0.2% as in yours. Significantly more accurate.

What valid criticism? You are just trying to deny that the average price of bitcoin doubles every 4 months but you can't make the data agree with you.

What are you babbling about?

1. Please quote where I said that the average price of bitcoin doesn't double every 4 months.
2. Non sequitur; the point is its volatility, not whether its price doubles. I have shown irrefutably that it is highly volatile and thus unsuitable as a currency.

The price doubling every 4 months would make it very nice as a speculator's toy, though, especially since it has had several catastrophic crashes as well to enable rebuys.

Finally: My opinion of recommendations that are based on play-money postdictions is "low, at best". But even though this is also play-money, let's do a little experiment:

1. What would you do if you had, say, 100 BTC right now? Would you buy, sell, or hold? Why?
ETA: Assume you bought in at $50/BTC, so you actually have skin in the game.

2. Would you buy in right now if you had 0 BTC and $40,000 to invest? If not, what price would it have to drop to for you to buy in?

 

[psionl0]

In my chart, the given price range included a full 50% of the total price range over the commodity's history, rather than 0.2% as in yours. Significantly more accurate.

LOL!!! You got fooled by your own misleading chart. The fall was actually half that and even then it was only in response to a series of price rises that was significantly higher than the longer term trend. It's all playing out exactly as I described it in posts #2161 and #2197.

Regardless, you can't say that it is OK for you to truncate the price scale on bitcoin charts but not for somebody to do so with another commodity.

2. Non sequitur; the point is its volatility, not whether its price doubles. I have shown irrefutably that it is highly volatile and thus unsuitable as a currency.

The price doubling every 4 months would make it very nice as a speculator's toy, though, especially since it has had several catastrophic crashes as well to enable rebuys.

Totally false. The long term trend in the price far outweighs even the most severe price shocks. Everybody who has ever bought and held onto their bitcoins is making an obscene profit. You are so desperate to deny this that you can't see the data objectively.

1. What would you do if you had, say, 100 BTC right now? Would you buy, sell, or hold? Why?
ETA: Assume you bought in at $50/BTC, so you actually have skin in the game.

2. Would you buy in right now if you had 0 BTC and $40,000 to invest? If not, what price would it have to drop to for you to buy in?

I would hold onto any bitcoins I had for as long as possible and any money I had to spare I would invest in bitcoins. Bitcoin has defied every single naysayer's prediction that "it won't last" and shows no sign of going away any time soon.

 

[remirol]

In my chart, the given price range included a full 50% of the total price range over the commodity's history, rather than 0.2% as in yours. Significantly more accurate.

LOL!!! You got fooled by your own misleading chart. The fall was actually half that

1. Please cite where I referred to only the price fall.
2. The price range I included was between $200 and $400; the total price range of bitcoin over its entire existence has been between $0 and $400.

Please make an effort to respond to what I actually write, rather than what you wish I had written.

Regardless, you can't say that it is OK for you to truncate the price scale on bitcoin charts but not for somebody to do so with another commodity.

I explained why in the prior message; please reference that if you're confused.

The long term trend in the price far outweighs even the most severe price shocks. Everybody who has ever bought and held onto their bitcoins is making an obscene profit. You are so desperate to deny this that you can't see the data objectively.

1. Please cite where I have denied that "everybody who bought and held onto their bitcoins is making an obscene profit".
2. Non sequitur; the discussion is about volatility, something which bitcoin is (proven above), which makes it unsuitable as a currency.

Please make an effort to respond to what I actually write, rather than what you wish I had written.

I would hold onto any bitcoins I had for as long as possible and any money I had to spare I would invest in bitcoins. Bitcoin has defied every single naysayer's prediction that "it won't last" and shows no sign of going away any time soon.

Then why don't you own any bitcoins?

 

[psionl0]

Please make an effort to respond to what I actually write, rather than what you wish I had written.

You are just weaseling.

 

[remirol]

Yes, the value of bitcoins is still (and maybe always will be) too volatile to be considered a reliable store of value.

It can still be used as a medium of exchange however. And its value volatility makes it a great commodity for speculators to play around with - especially if you can short them.

You are just weaseling.

Who's weaseling again?

 

[psionl0]

Yes, the value of bitcoins is still (and maybe always will be) too volatile to be considered a reliable store of value

Prior to October 2011 the price was more volatile. Of course, bitcoin was just a curiosity then and buyers were more easily spooked by bad news items such as the hacking of MtGox.

Who's weaseling again?

You are.

 

[Shrinker]

I would hold onto any bitcoins I had for as long as possible and any money I had to spare I would invest in bitcoins. Bitcoin has defied every single naysayer's prediction that "it won't last" and shows no sign of going away any time soon.

Can I ask where you would keep them? Not trying to be clever, just genuinely curious what is considered a safe way to store your life savings.

 

[psionl0]

Can I ask where you would keep them? Not trying to be clever, just genuinely curious what is considered a safe way to store your life savings.

A bitcoin wallet is as secure as your hiding place if you store it on removable media or as secure as your encryption software/password if the wallet is accessible on-line. Just never keep an unencrypted wallet on your computer. (See also http://bitcoin.org/en/secure-your-wallet).

Even though I would most likely have several life savings in short order, I would not use my rent money to buy bitcoin - let alone my life savings. When "nothing could possibly go wrong", that's when it usually does.

 

[Democracy Simulator]

Bitcoin doesn't seem to be going away. Many people seemed to think that the pump and dump earlier this year would be the stake through the heart of Bitcoin, but here we are half a year later reaching new highs.

Yes is is relatively volatile. Yes there is an upward trend. Both statements are true and not mutually exclusive.

The question that interests me is what is the trend in purchases using Bitcoin? This would surely be the key pointer as to where Bitcoin may be headed.

Also, I liked Liam Halligan's article in the DT and I thought it was a fair summation for the uninitiated:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...-laugh-Bitcoin-is-making-a-serious-point.html

An interesting development:

Yet Bitcoin isn’t illegal. Legitimate institutional investors, themselves exasperated at QE, are getting involved, taking small “pilot positions”. The big development for me, though, was the publication last week of a “Bitcoin Primer” by the Chicago branch of the Federal Reserve.
“Should Bitcoin become widely accepted,” opined the world’s most powerful central bank, “it is unlikely it will remain free of government intervention … That said, it represents a remarkable conceptual and technical achievement, which may well be used by existing financial institutions (which could issue their own Bitcoins) or even by governments themselves”.

 

[Tyke]

The weakness is still having to convert to and from other currencies.

Well, it's one of the weaknesses.

I'm unsure if that was meant to be a concession or not. I can only agree with your statement "bitcoin has no equal for transferring large sums of money around the world" in the sense that it's quite probably the worst option available at the moment.

It seems more fair to say that the existing banking system has no equal for transferring large sums of money around the world, and Bitcoin users are still totally reliant on it. The best I can say about the Bitcoin system is that it has no equal for transferring Bitcoins.

_localbitcoins_ is a better option but the limits are lower than what you are alluding to.

It does also rely on there being someone nearby who wishes to buy the right amount of bitcoins at the right price, yes? That doesn't sound like a great solution.