Immutable is correct. It is what is used by the industry. If you knew as much about crypto as you claim to you would know that is the correct term that has been used since the very beginning. This is what I'm talking about. You do not really know or understand Bitcoin and crypto.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Coinbase Onramp Now Supports Buying Crypto With Apple Pay
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What's your point? You are still wrong.
Also, that's not what you said. Plus, the U.S. government wouldn't be able to sell all of its assets to cover the dollars in circulation. That's completely unrealistic and a completely pointless data point.
You've described yourself here. I only posted after there was misinformation posted by others. I only corrected that misinformation. I'm not promoting anything and not selling anything. I don't care if you invest in crypto or not. But if I see lies and misinformation I'm going to say something. It's not a scam and I've shown how it's not. There's not data or proof that it's a scam.
Again, stock prices don't go up without someone putting money into the stock at that price. Same concept.
Gold is a commodity. If Bitcoin is like gold, then Bitcoin is a commodity.
Again, yes there is gambling in crypto. That's meme coins and such. People gamble with options and futures in regular investments too. Remember GameStop and the meme stock craze? Gambling. No different.there seems to be a fervor to make crypto anything other than gambling
However, not all of crypto is gambling, just like not all of it is a scam.
I think you guys should stop reading only news headlines and spouting out only those. There is zero substance to your argument.
It's literally a casino rigged by a dozen insiders and all the exchanges are cooperating with each other to enrich themselves and various bankers, political parties and intelligence agencies tied to them. You cannot separate the technology and the price movements from the people who control it.
Everyone involved is under their control and that's the end of the story. Any excuses is just denialism.
Nonsense conspiracy theories. Bitcoin is decentralized. Bitcoin is controlled by miners that are numerous and located all over the world. Not even a small group of them are able to just take control of it. The price is independent of that because it's based on supply and demand of the trading. You are wrong, and you have no evidence or data to substantiate anything that you are saying, because it's just a bunch of lies, misinformation, and FUD.
You will never accept it is centralised and rigged.
Stop wasting your energy trying to convince people who know better. You're not going to convince us to join your scam cult.
I will if you can prove it is centralized and rigged. Go ahead and show your evidence.
Again, not trying to convince anyone to buy Bitcoin. You're wrong and everything you've said is out of emotion and false information. It's not a scam, and you have zero evidence to show that it is.
Also, you were probably one of the people that thought the Internet was a scam and a fad, and predicted its imminent failure, back in the 90's.
75% of this discussion is literally one guy losing it.
It's really sad to see what cults and scams can do to a person.
It's really sad to see what cults and scams can do to a person.
Exactly along the lines of what I thought you would respond with, simply because you have no evidence or data to back up what you're saying.
ALL crypto IS gambling.
There is no real value physical or intellectual value lurking behind it.
It is just a pot of money put in by people.
It grows in no other way than new people putting money in as others take theirs out.
Picking the time to make a gain on what you put in is luck.
If new people dont keep getting brought in to top up whats' there, the con fails.
For all the other discussion over 12 pages, that's the crux of it.
The difference is if readers follow Nostrodumass' advice, they dont risk losing money.
They wont possibly make money (by diddling someone else out of theirs) but they wont be the person being diddled.
Suddenly rose and crashed 10% twice this week for no reason, the exchanges all collude to fleece incoming money, they do a major pump n dump every 4 years to rinse the rubes, the execs and VCs brag about the money they made and politicians they bought, and the rubes still think it is decentralised.
All investments have risk. The more risk the greater your potential return. You can go invest in the stock market and have a certain return, which is average of around 10% per year. There is a certain level of risk with that. You can also go and invest in Bitcoin and get a certain return (average of 3,500% per year over the last 15 years or 590% per year over the last 5 years), but you'll have more risk and much higher standard deviation. You can also invest in Treasuries and have a much lower return with an inherent much lower risk level.
Just face it, you don't understand Bitcoin or crypto and therefore your personally don't find value in it for your own portfolio. That doesn't mean it doesn't have value at all. If it didn't then you wouldn't have hundreds of companies building on top of the various crypto blockchains. But there are. If it didn't have value you wouldn't have institutions and companies (especially public ones) and governments adopting it. Yet there are.
If everyone suddenly stopped buying Apple stock, what do you think would happen to the stock value? It would fall until someone finally decides to say "I'll buy". There's no difference in how that works between stocks and crypto. What is different is where the value is derived from. And the value is there, as I described previously.
There's always a reason, and it's not the exchanges colluding.
Here's what happened on Thursday: Some investors were leveraged long on Bitcoin. Bitcoin declined in value below $99,000. They were margin-called, but couldn't meet the margin call. So they got liquidated, resulting in a drop in the price. Estimates of the amount of the liquidation range from $400 million to $1 billion. It's impossible to know at this point exactly how much it was. When there is low liquidity to begin with, a liquidation of that size will cause a cascading effect with additional liquidations as the price continues to drop, and that makes the asset value plummet 10% or more. It's plummeted much more than that in the past for similar reasons. It also gained back those losses within a couple hours as other investors and traders bought the dip.
Not the first time, and certainly won't be the last because it never fails that speculators take insane crazy risks that adds a lot of volatility to the market. It's an example of why extreme caution is needed when using leverage.
Last edited by a moderator:
But it's NOT an investment.
it's GAMBLING...
And like all gambling there are addicts who can justify their addiction as investing.
I worked with a guy who did it with horses. He used the same words. Another with poker machines.
One was luckier than the other.
Both had more money when they finally woke up and stopped doing it.
You still can't argue what the real value of it is. Something physical or intellectual that is worth real money.
Justifying it on "other people" or "other companies" is like saying "put your head in the fire, it wont hurt".
People who believe you on faith get burned.
Comparing to Apple stock is silly.
Apple have cash reserves, stock, IP. It's worth real money.
For some it's an investment. For some it's probably gambling, and that could be in the way they invest (leverage, etc.)
For me it's an investment. I'm careful with my process. I dollar cost average. I buy when it's down. I sell to lock in profits when it's up. That's not gambling. I do the same with regular stocks, as do millions of other investors.
Horse race betting and poker are gambling, as the prospect of winning with those is purely the product of chance. Bitcoin is not based on chance. It's known how it functions and operates. It has real-world applications like secure transactions, cross-border payments, immutable ledger, etc. An investment in Bitcoin is an investment in the long-term adoption of the technology and its use case as a store of value.
Volatility and amount of risk doesn't make it gambling. Bitcoin/crypto is a high-risk, high-reward investment. The stock market also has risks and volatility, but you aren't calling that gambling.
That said, there is gambling in crypto (and in stocks). The key difference is intention. If you’re buying Bitcoin because you believe in blockchain technology and the potential of decentralized systems, you’re making an informed investment. But if you’re just throwing money at it hoping it’ll double in a week without understanding what it is, then yeah, that’s pretty much gambling.
Apple does not have cash reserves or assets worth the value of its market cap. Investing in Apple will certainly have lower risk, but it will have lower upside as well. And that's fine if that's your preference.
He’ll just say you don’t know what you are talking about and blah blah blah there’s no criminal activity at all and the exchanges are all transparent, none of the owners have ever been arrested and all those offshore firms in the Bahamas and Dubai are totally not doing crimes or running pump n dumps scams 24/7 in boiler rooms. Literally everyone on Reddit knows what’s going on but this guy is trying to get folks on macrumors to throw money at his cult.
That's an interest statistic, but it comes with some caveats.
It was 152 weeks in the most recent cycle from the low to the high, so that is correct.
Technically the low for the cycle before that was in the week of August 17, 2015, which was $162. It was 122 weeks to the high in the week of December 11, 2017. However, interestingly enough, if you go back 152 weeks from that high you get the other low the week of January 12, 2015, which was $166.45.
For the cycle before that the high was the week of November 25, 2013. 152 weeks back from that is the week of December 27, 2010. That was the middle of a 10 week rally that saw the price increase from $0.23 to $0.90.
However, if you use the April 1, 2013 week high instead, going back 152 weeks gets you the week of April 26, 2010. The week before that was only a local low. The actual low was 13 weeks earlier, the week of December 7, 2009. Also, the April 1 high was $164.90 and the November 25 high was $242.00, so I don't know using the April 1 high is justified to satisfy this statistic.
This is all data on Trading View, and the data that early on is limited.
That would have been a wild statistic if it were true, but that would make things too easy. Personally, I wouldn't bank on a high next October. It could easily happen earlier or later. It's even possible we've already seen the high for this cycle. There's no way to know.
Yes, that's how I did it. You can see that if you look at my screenshot. Zero at recent cycle low (November 2022) and 1 at the previous all-time high (November 2021).
You guys just can't read. That's the issue here. No one ever said there's no criminal activity at all. Yes, there are FTX executives currently in prison for various crimes related to the collapse of FTX in which they stole money from their customers. That has nothing to do with any fault with crypto. That was because of the people running that company.
That could have easily happened with a broker-dealer or investment manager of traditional stocks. And you know what!? It has! More than once!
And, yes, there are also other people involved in crypto that have broken the law and are either in jail, were in jail, and/or were fined.
Go back and read my previous posts. You'll see that I acknowledged that there is criminal activity, illicit use, and scams in crypto. At the same time I pointed out many times that there is more illicit use of fiat than crypto.
To be clear, AGAIN! There is criminal activity and illicit use in crypto. However, it's a very small percentage, as shown in what I linked to very early on in this thread. Fiat has a higher percentage AND higher dollar amount of illicit use and criminal activity. That is a INDISPUTABLE FACT.
I guess we should all stay away from banks, fiat, stocks, bonds, and everything else if it's ever been used by criminals or scams.
You guys are unreal.
This makes absolutely no sense (you're changing what was said, so let me quote it again):
If I said, I'm willing to pay a buck fifty for your bitcoin, you'd say no. If I said "I really really want it for a buck fifty", you'd still say no. If I said "Me a a group of my best friends really really want it for a buck fifty", you'd still say no.
It doesn't matter how much demand there is if no transaction ever closes. There has to be demand at a given price and there has to be supply at a given price. The price only changes when buyers and sellers find agreement and a transaction clears. There has to be a buyer for every seller, there has to be a corresponding ask/bid pair with the same ask/bid price. It doesn't matter how many bid or ask orders are queued if they don't close.
There is still demand for an item while the price is falling-- the demand is just at a lower price. The whole idea of the law of supply in demand is that the price is set at the price where the quantity demanded and the quantity supplied are the same. Always the same. The picture you may have in your head of supply and demand schedule lines crossing is most likely for retail goods where price is set by the manufacturer and the shape of the supply curve represents the efficiencies of mass production. There's not really a mass production efficiency for the trades we're discussing. The curves will look different but the same principle holds for more dynamic prices as you'd find in stocks or crypto though the curves will also be more dynamic and essentially change for each transaction (quantity in this case is the quantity for a single transaction, not an aggregate) or even for unique items like a house (where the quantity is necessarily one every time). In many cases the supply and demand schedules will go to zero outside the acceptable bands.
The "market" price you see reported by an exchange is the price agreed upon most recently-- not necessarily the price you would transact at. This is why your holdings are measured with an "unrealized" gain or loss-- because that number is only an estimate until a transaction transaction to sell takes place at which point the price will be different than the currently reported price.
I have the same issue with "convince" as I do with "entice". You're treating it like an exercise in marketing, and presenting a pitch. That fits what I observe in the crypto market, but less what I see in other markets. As you say repeatedly, you don't know who your counter party is, so there's not a lot of convincing going on. Stacking up orders might act as some sort of peer pressure, but I don't imagine many sophisticated traders are so easily swayed and the market isn't driven by peer pressure.
What is actually moving the price isn't a stack of bids or asks pushing and pulling, but individuals going into the market with the belief that the current market price is too high or too low based on their personal valuation of the product.
When I say "fundamentals", I mean basically estimating what you're calling "intrinsic value". When pricing departs significantly from fundamentals it necessarily has to return to them. There are no fundamentals in crypto because, as we agree, it has no intrinsic value. It is a purely speculative market.
Hostile to your view of technical analysis? Not at all. I'm bit tired of being told what I don't understand in this conversation though, so you may be seeing me mirror that back.
Eh... I almost rejected this out of hand, but I think it's just your way of saying that fundamental analysis tells you what something is worth and technical analysis highlights market inefficiencies. That I agree with. For a market to be efficient, there shouldn't be recognizable patterns. If there is, and you trade on them, then you're just improving the overall market efficiency.
What I take issue with though is any sense that understanding technical analysis tells you anything about the value of crypto itself. The fact that graphs can be drawn and indicators extracted doesn't actually say anything about the viability of crypto itself. It's only saying what technical analysis has always said: people are irrational. In this case more irrational than they typically are in that they're buying something that has no real future. The idea of "blue chip" crypto is absurd.
Let's say your 4 year theory has any validity to it and that it's something about crypto driving it (halving festivals or what have you) and not either random or tied to something else that's on a 4 year cycle like US presidential elections. How does this play out?
Bitcoin has no use other than speculation. When you buy at the bottom and predictably sell at the top, you're taking someone else's money out. As I've said before, if you're making gains you've set someone else up for a loss. As the price tanks and they're watching their investment collapse, they panic and do one of two things: they sell with everyone else and take the loss or follow your advice and hold on hoping for another peak in 4 years. If they sell, they're accelerating the crash. If they hold, they're synchronizing to the cycle. Either way, you can bet that the next time it peaks they'll be in the don't-get-fooled-again crowd and will start selling at the next higher peak setting someone else up for a greater loss. As more and more people fall in sync, the cycles become more and more severe. Eventually people realize that you don't even need to hold coins at the peak, you can sell them short and buy them back at the trough. And the cycles become more and more severe. Then it starts siphoning investment from the real economy because the potential returns seem enormous if you ride this cycle, and business stalls, people lose their jobs, and the cycles become more and more severe. There is no lower bound to the value like there is on a stock or bond that represents ownership of something-- the lower bound is zero because that's what crypto is intrinsically worth.
At some point those cycles become so severe and so volatile that bitcoin loses any semblance of coherency. What's the point of mining the ledgers if your payout is worth zero? But until that time, a lot of people get hurt every 4 years.
I guess it's all ok because, in the words of Milo Minderbinder, "everyone has a share"...
Exactly. Which is why I don't care if they disagree with me and certainly don't assume they're smarter than me. There are plenty of idiots in finance.