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

[wrs]

This is what actually interests me too, if anyone more knowledgeable could shine some light on.

You make two accounts and two wallets and do buy-sell transactions between those accounts. Let's say it's something like 100 BTC. How would that affect the market?

Look at the charts I have been posting. It's accounts much bigger than 100BTC and there are more than two of them, probably 10 or 20 for this much activity. If the accounts were established with BTC in the single digits, it wouldn't cost much to establish them. With prices where they are now, the original accounts are playing on suckers money now. I am sure they have likely liquidated more than they ever put in.

 

[remirol]

If it's a "weak ad hom", hey, whatever. It's charity from those EVIL BITCOINERS! You just gotta hate them while you take their free charts! LOL...

"There's a sucker born every minute," and BTC seems to be a well-stocked pond of fish indeed.

As I see it, you compared stock trading with bitcoin trading, found btc trading to not rank by some chosen measures, then jumped to some unsubstantiated conclusions and started hallucinating.

It'd be wiser to just look at the business deal: MtGox says trade limits X, Y, and payout in Z days. Do I want to do business with them yes/no? They or I don't care about your opinions or your experience with stock trading. This is what it is. Plus no one said you or I have to deal with an exchange, we could just buy bitcoins or sell bitcoins with another person directly.

It may be hard to understand that or accept it, but that's no reason for the wild accusations you've been sprouting.

Still no response to the issues raised, huh? Any time you want to explain why the problems identified either aren't problems or won't be problems, I'm sure the thread is waiting.

My guess is that pretty soon we won't see you for another six months.

 

[mhaze]

In somewhat related news, I've been exploring the surprisingly rocky terrain of actually selling a bitcoin.....

What a mess you describe...

I think it would be wiser not to go to google, but to the bitcoin wiki or the BitcoinFoundation.org and take the advice found there.

Just taking a quick look, Coinbase will sell my coins and provide the money to my bank account within a day or two. Daily limit buy/sell is 50. As of this moment buy=1013, sell=999.

 

[mhaze]

... Any time you want to explain why the problems identified either aren't problems or won't be problems, I'm sure the thread is waiting.

My guess is that pretty soon we won't see you for another six months.

Actually, that's correct. I'll just check back in for a semi annual re invigorating and refreshing look at how totally wrong some people can be.

Got your Hulu Plus yet? If you can't cope with simple parts of the real world such as my purchase of Hulu plus, how and why should anyone believe you on more complicated things?

Just asking...

 

[Beelzebuddy]

What a mess you describe...

I think it would be wiser not to go to google, but to the bitcoin wiki or the BitcoinFoundation.org and take the advice found there.

Just taking a quick look, Coinbase will sell my coins and provide the money to my bank account within a day or two. Daily limit buy/sell is 50. As of this moment buy=1013, sell=999.

Mtgox I knew of old, Kraken was the best-looking entry in the wiki and the others are used as sources for the preev ticker. Each of them had at least something going for them to assume they had decent odds of trustworthiness.

But thanks for the nod to coinbase, I'll look into that when I next have an opportunity.

 

[mhaze]

Mtgox I knew of old, Kraken was the best-looking entry in the wiki and the others are used as sources for the preev ticker. Each of them had at least something going for them to assume they had decent odds of trustworthiness.

But thanks for the nod to coinbase, I'll look into that when I next have an opportunity.

Y mtgox has layers to go through for international transaction, coinbase is US based....and they have committed to getting approval as a money trader in all states, which is very difficult and expensive.

 

[mhaze]

Preaching to the converted is hardly a "perfect" explanation. At the end of the day, all wrs has is suppositions and made-up facts.

In 6 months time we shall see if wrs had any basis for what he is talking about or if he is just another in a long line of nay-sayers who predicted the demise of bitcoin prematurely.

Well, he's crowing 'he was right' about the recent 1242 mark so it would appear to be an investment method based on the fundamentals - ...of stopped clocks being right twice a day....That should work.....pretty well....(not).....

But yeah, I can't even think or get into this day trading technical myth stuff, six months or a year is my personal minimum for even, say, offering a comment....

 

[mhaze]

Originally Posted by mhaze
If it's a "weak ad hom", hey, whatever. It's charity from those EVIL BITCOINERS! You just gotta hate them while you take their free charts! LOL...

"There's a sucker born every minute," and BTC seems to be a well-stocked pond of fish indeed.

A chartist, eh? A reader of stocks by the ouiji board method. That explains it all. JREF should really take "technical analysis" on as a myth driven scam.

I was serious, by the way. Supposedly 'taking on myths' by arguing against such things as Lock Nessie and Yeti is so totally, completely and laughably lame. Technical analysis suckers more people into losing more money than a hundred thousand Sylvia Browns.

Now to see here chartists - avowed, confessed believers in their own ability to read the tea leaves - calling bitcoin a scam and a fraud is indeed interesting. What about it threatens them?

Not only that but their predictions are documented in this thread as being wrong over, and over, and over.

 

[wrs]

Well, he's crowing 'he was right' about the recent 1242 mark so it would appear to be an investment method based on the fundamentals of stopped clocks being right twice a day.

That should work.....pretty well....(not).....

But yeah, I can't even think or get into this day trading technical myth stuff, six months or a year is my personal minimum for even, say, offering a comment....

I said, ICBW, TWT................

 

[mhaze]

I said, ICBW, TWT................

You do understand that technical analysis types and fundamentals types don't see eye to eye, right? Quite odd that would be mixed up in a discussion about bitcoin though isn't it?

Where the fundamenetals guy (me) is a holder of bitcoin and the chartist/technical (you) argues against it?

I don't know what to make of that. Maybe nothing, just chance. Or bitcoin destroys chartists belief patterns with it's craziness? Think of it as a drunken hopped up chartist madman on PCP?

 

[jhunter1163]

A chartist, eh? A reader of stocks by the ouiji board method. That explains it all. JREF should really take "technical analysis" on as a myth driven scam.

I was serious, by the way. Supposedly 'taking on myths' by arguing against such things as Lock Nessie and Yeti is so totally, completely and laughably lame. Technical analysis suckers more people into losing more money than a hundred thousand Sylvia Browns.

Now to see here chartists - avowed, confessed believers in their own ability to read the tea leaves - calling bitcoin a scam and a fraud is indeed interesting. What about it threatens them?

Nothing about Bitcoin threatens me. If it goes to zero, I lose nothing. If it goes to $10,000, it means nothing to me, since there's no way I would invest in anything as unstable as Bitcoin under any circumstances regardless of the price.

I find Bitcoin an interesting study in the ability of people to believe something in the face of enormous amounts of contrary evidence, though. The Bitcoin boosters' arguments in this thread are the Internet equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and saying "Lalalalalalala, I can't hear you!"

It'll be interesting to watch how this plays out.

 

[wrs]

You do understand that technical analysis types and fundamentals types don't see eye to eye, right? Quite odd that would be mixed up in a discussion about bitcoin though isn't it?

Where the fundamenetals guy (me) is a holder of bitcoin and the chartist/technical (you) argues against it?

I don't know what to make of that. Maybe nothing, just chance. Or bitcoin destroys chartists belief patterns with it's craziness? Think of it as a drunken hopped up chartist madman on PCP?

Why would you think my basis isn't also fundamental? I have made plenty of fundamental arguments against it. I own gold, I bought gold from 1999-2007. That was a fundamental decision based on price and value. I sold some in 2012, not at the top but more than 5 times what I originally paid. I still hold the rest. Fundamentals are good there and eventually it will be worth more than 1900.

Bitcoin isn't anything yet. It's hard to tell what it is, fundamentally it's an idea with no substance. Netscape was an idea with the same level of substance, browsers are still free....................

 

[remirol]

Nothing about Bitcoin threatens me. If it goes to zero, I lose nothing. If it goes to $10,000, it means nothing to me, since there's no way I would invest in anything as unstable as Bitcoin under any circumstances regardless of the price.

This. To continue the poker analogy, you don't start drawing to inside straights just because you folded and the next card dealt would've filled it for you. You don't consider that "money lost" or even "an opportunity lost", because that would be judging decisions made in the past as though information gained in the future were available at that time -- a recipe for madness.

History shows that drawing to inside straights is a great way to lose money in the long haul, even if you hit a few times. History also shows that speculation-driven bubbles such as BTC inevitably crash hard. There'll always be people who took the risk and made money, just like there's always be people who drew to the inside straight on their last dollar and hit. But the smart money only gets involved in stuff like this with funds they can afford to lose completely and never notice.

I find Bitcoin an interesting study in the ability of people to believe something in the face of enormous amounts of contrary evidence, though. The Bitcoin boosters' arguments in this thread are the Internet equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and saying "Lalalalalalala, I can't hear you!"

I hadn't seen any being made other than "Bitcoin will be different this time, because Internet and crypto". I understand both quite well and while the technological aspects of BTC are certainly interesting (cf. Buckcoin discussions earlier), they have no bearing on whether its price will ever stabilize enough to be anything other than a gambling toy -- they are merely the mechanism which facilitates the gambling in the first place.

 

[mhaze]

Why would you think my basis isn't also fundamental? ....Bitcoin isn't anything yet. It's hard to tell what it is, fundamentally it's an idea with no substance. ....................

This indicates gross misunderstandings, openly and freely admitted.

...Bitcoin boosters' arguments in this thread are the Internet equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and saying "Lalalalalalala, I can't hear you!"

It'll be interesting to watch how this plays out.

Okay. Why don't you pick some convenient data points then, like the recent price move from $1242 to 1013, and use that to reinforce your beliefs? You'll be quite happy I would think then.

..."Bitcoin will be different this time, because Internet and crypto".....

You were wrong six months ago about pizza, and now you are wrong about hulu. You wouldn't admit it then, and you won't admit it now. You were wrong about bitcoin's price and utility then, and you are still at it, and actually doing what is called in poker 'doubling down'.

 

[remirol]

You were wrong six months ago about pizza, and now you are wrong about hulu.

We already proved that you were lying about both of those -- both about purchasing with BTC (you were using USD through an intermediary) and about making the purchase in the first place. But believers always lie to protect their sacred cows; this is nothing new.

You were wrong about bitcoin's price and utility then, and you are still at it, and actually doing what is called in poker 'doubling down'.

Please reread:

History shows that drawing to inside straights is a great way to lose money in the long haul, even if you hit a few times. History also shows that speculation-driven bubbles such as BTC inevitably crash hard. There'll always be people who took the risk and made money, just like there's always be people who drew to the inside straight on their last dollar and hit. But the smart money only gets involved in stuff like this with funds they can afford to lose completely and never notice.

 

[pantsorama]

Like the exchanges would admit they're undercapitalized...

It's almost as if a currency holding system could benefit from a central authority setting deposit ratios and ensuring investor deposits.

This is EXACTLY why I was not impressed with Tippett's Sister's Uncle's Nephew's bitcoin Smaug horde, and the very question that psionl0 desperately tried to avoid even contemplating. See, you boys were counting your money while you were sitting at the table. Even Kenny knows that means little if you have nothing tomorrow.

I admit, that the future could surprise me, but it doesn't look too good.

 

[mhaze]

We already proved that you were lying about both of those -- both about purchasing with BTC (you were using USD through an intermediary) and about making the purchase in the first place.....

No, actually you've done no such thing as prove that I was lying. Neither does repeating your lie that I was lying make your lie any less a lie. Even when I posted the transaction screen you refused to admit you were wrong. Think about it. You "Proved" nothing, as you have no evidence. The transaction screen is evidence.

What you've done is tantamount to accusing someone of lying who said they went down to the corner store and bought some bubble gum, then continuing to do so when they showed you the receipt. That's dishonest, but more importantly it is comically ridiculous. Why would you want to make a public fool of yourself? It makes no sense, really.

Your hallucinations talking? Some weird sense of ego that makes you unable to admit when you are wrong?

Imagine....that anyone would even try to suggest that a currency designed for transactional purposes, was actually being used for....transactional...purposes....

Well, DUH!!!!!

 

[mhaze]

It's almost as if a currency holding system could benefit from a central authority setting deposit ratios and ensuring investor deposits.

This is EXACTLY why I was not impressed with Tippett's Sister's Uncle's Nephew's bitcoin Smaug horde, and the very question that psionl0 desperately tried to avoid even contemplating. See, you boys were counting your money while you were sitting at the table. Even Kenny knows that means little if you have nothing tomorrow.

I admit, that the future could surprise me, but it doesn't look too good.

Fixing your statement is soooo easy...

It's almost as if a currency holding system could benefit from a central authority printing money until those holding that currency have worthless paper and no savings left.

 

[ideogram]

Your hallucinations talking? Some weird sense of ego that makes you unable to admit when you are wrong?

This is not a real argument.

 

[jhunter1163]

This is not a real argument.

There are a lot of those kind of arguments in mhaze's posts.