The Money Mustache Community

Learning, Sharing, and Teaching => Investor Alley => Topic started by: Tonyahu on June 23, 2017, 01:31:26 PM

Title: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on June 23, 2017, 01:31:26 PM
OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion

(https://images.angelpub.com/2017/03/41876/fintech_responsive.jpg)
Hey MMers,

This thread is not to discuss if crypto-currencies are good, bad, high risk, low risk...etc but simply to post your current/future holdings. This should start a positive discussion that will leave us all smarter and more wealthy. Please do not post here with negative generalized and non-factual based statements or opinions.

Core positions:

- Ethereum
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UBk1e5qnr4&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UBk1e5qnr4&feature=youtu.be)
- Bitcoin
- Monero
- Ardor
- EOS


I am a firm believer in Ethereum and Monero long term.  I look forward to hearing from you all.

Cheers,

Anthony
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Financial.Velociraptor on June 23, 2017, 01:36:08 PM
Ether was briefly at 10 cents today during a flash crash.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on June 23, 2017, 01:40:03 PM
Ether was briefly at 10 cents today during a flash crash.

That is false. Ether has not dipped under ~$320 on any exchanges today.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Financial.Velociraptor on June 23, 2017, 01:42:02 PM
Ether was briefly at 10 cents today during a flash crash.

That is false. Ether has not dipped under ~$320 on any exchanges today.

Bloomberg is reporting that it did: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-23/buffett-deals-and-blockchain-crashes?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=bd&utm_campaign=headline&cmpId=yhoo.headline&yptr=yahoo (https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-23/buffett-deals-and-blockchain-crashes?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=bd&utm_campaign=headline&cmpId=yhoo.headline&yptr=yahoo)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: ketchup on June 23, 2017, 01:48:36 PM
0.05303289 BTC.  About $143 at present exchange rates.  Currently generating about 0.0053 BTC/day.

I'm mining using NiceHash across three GTX 1070s (one of them only part-time) I bought just before the recent surge in demand/out-of-stock-ness/price-gouging.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on June 23, 2017, 01:58:13 PM
0.05303289 BTC.  About $143 at present exchange rates.  Currently generating about 0.0053 BTC/day.

I'm mining using NiceHash across three GTX 1070s (one of them only part-time) I bought just before the recent surge in demand/out-of-stock-ness/price-gouging.

Very cool! Have you considered mining other coins? Bitcoin miining is very competitive but there are other coins you may receive higher USD gains from (unless your plan is to hold the BTC after you get it, of course).

Ether was briefly at 10 cents today during a flash crash.

That is false. Ether has not dipped under ~$320 on any exchanges today.

Bloomberg is reporting that it did: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-23/buffett-deals-and-blockchain-crashes?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=bd&utm_campaign=headline&cmpId=yhoo.headline&yptr=yahoo (https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-23/buffett-deals-and-blockchain-crashes?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=bd&utm_campaign=headline&cmpId=yhoo.headline&yptr=yahoo)

YESTERDAY - There was market manipulation on one exchange  which caused a quick crash and recovery within seconds, technically yes it touched the price for a split second. The price quickly recovered.

But, ETH price is stable across all platforms. This was a Black Swan due to market manipulation. It's horrible but part of the game as this is an entirely new world of trading.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: ketchup on June 23, 2017, 02:07:35 PM
0.05303289 BTC.  About $143 at present exchange rates.  Currently generating about 0.0053 BTC/day.

I'm mining using NiceHash across three GTX 1070s (one of them only part-time) I bought just before the recent surge in demand/out-of-stock-ness/price-gouging.

Very cool! Have you considered mining other coins? Bitcoin miining is very competitive but there are other coins you may receive higher USD gains from (unless your plan is to hold the BTC after you get it, of course).
NiceHash automatically mines whatever is most profitable given present market conditions and efficiency of your hardware with different hashing algorithms.  It's been mostly having me mine ETH and Zcash.  It pays out in BTC once a week.

I consider it a speculative investment of about $1200 (three cards plopped into two existing PCs).  I hope to at least make my money back before mining is unprofitable on the hardware.  Worst case, I end up selling two, and it'll just mean I bought my girlfriend a fancy graphics card for her PC at a discount.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Vindicated on June 23, 2017, 02:17:57 PM

YESTERDAY - There was market manipulation on one exchange  which caused a quick crash and recovery within seconds, technically yes it touched the price for a split second. The price quickly recovered.

 It's unfortunate. I personally lost my trading stack ($15,000) but had friends lose much more (over $200,000 for one friend). It's unfortunate and there will surely be lawsuits due to gross negligence of the exchange and a breach of their own Terms and Conditions and Terms of Service.

But, ETH price is stable across all platforms. This was a Black Swan due to market manipulation. It's horrible but part of the game as this is an entirely new world of trading.

I'm so confused here.  You lost $15k yesterday, but it's just unfortunate?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on June 23, 2017, 03:00:47 PM
0.05303289 BTC.  About $143 at present exchange rates.  Currently generating about 0.0053 BTC/day.

I'm mining using NiceHash across three GTX 1070s (one of them only part-time) I bought just before the recent surge in demand/out-of-stock-ness/price-gouging.

Very cool! Have you considered mining other coins? Bitcoin miining is very competitive but there are other coins you may receive higher USD gains from (unless your plan is to hold the BTC after you get it, of course).

Ether was briefly at 10 cents today during a flash crash.

That is false. Ether has not dipped under ~$320 on any exchanges today.

Bloomberg is reporting that it did: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-23/buffett-deals-and-blockchain-crashes?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=bd&utm_campaign=headline&cmpId=yhoo.headline&yptr=yahoo (https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-23/buffett-deals-and-blockchain-crashes?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=bd&utm_campaign=headline&cmpId=yhoo.headline&yptr=yahoo)

YESTERDAY - There was market manipulation on one exchange  which caused a quick crash and recovery within seconds, technically yes it touched the price for a split second. The price quickly recovered.

 It's unfortunate. I personally lost my trading stack ($15,000) but had friends lose much more (over $200,000 for one friend). It's unfortunate and there will surely be lawsuits due to gross negligence of the exchange and a breach of their own Terms and Conditions and Terms of Service.

But, ETH price is stable across all platforms. This was a Black Swan due to market manipulation. It's horrible but part of the game as this is an entirely new world of trading.

Huh? $15K (or $200K) of alleged value of cryptocurrency gone?  Sorta makes one wonder...

Who is going to be sued and where and by whom and what sort of recovery would be sought?

Since these currencies are not a real thing and the account values are not backed by, or legal tender according to, any country's government, I suspect that if a suit were somehow brought against a responsible party the court would consider these cryptocurrency regimes to be essentially Ponzi schemes.  Basically a system where new money is used to pay prior "investors" when the cash out.  I mean, not everyone could sell at once and get the cash market value of their cryptocurrency in actual cash right? In such situations, recovery --  if any is granted at all -- is usually limited to the actual amount of cash that one brought in and not to the amount of any paper (imaginary) gains that may have been reported to the dupe in the interim.

With any sort of investment scheme its always important to remember that the cash is gone at the point when one buys -- the investment or asset can be sold for cash again but to the extent there is a market.

These currencies are a "real" thing, you are misinformed on how block chain and block chain assets function. But yes, they are not FIAT currency if that is your comparison.

Furthermore, I lost 15K, a friend lost 200K and many people lost millions yesterday. There will be a massive lawsuit due to gross negligence of the exchange.



YESTERDAY - There was market manipulation on one exchange  which caused a quick crash and recovery within seconds, technically yes it touched the price for a split second. The price quickly recovered.

 It's unfortunate. I personally lost my trading stack ($15,000) but had friends lose much more (over $200,000 for one friend). It's unfortunate and there will surely be lawsuits due to gross negligence of the exchange and a breach of their own Terms and Conditions and Terms of Service.

But, ETH price is stable across all platforms. This was a Black Swan due to market manipulation. It's horrible but part of the game as this is an entirely new world of trading.

I'm so confused here.  You lost $15k yesterday, but it's just unfortunate?

Yes sir, very unfortunate. Given that the lost ETH is currently $15k in value, it will most likely be worth around $100,000 in a year or two.

Oh well, live and learn!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on June 23, 2017, 04:41:18 PM
Tonyahu, sorry about your 15k.  If you don't mind my asking, does that leave you in a net gain or net loss position for your cumulative investments in crypto-currency?

I don't have any, so just curious.  Best of luck!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Retire-Canada on June 23, 2017, 04:57:43 PM
Yes sir, very unfortunate. Given that the lost ETH is currently $15k in value, it will most likely be worth around $100,000 in a year or two.

Oh well, live and learn!

If the price only crashed for a second or two why did you lose any money at all? If you started with $15K worth of that crypto currency and it went to $1 for a second then the price recovered you would still have $15K worth of it.

What did you learn?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Optimiser on June 23, 2017, 05:15:20 PM
0.05303289 BTC.  About $143 at present exchange rates.  Currently generating about 0.0053 BTC/day.

I'm mining using NiceHash across three GTX 1070s (one of them only part-time) I bought just before the recent surge in demand/out-of-stock-ness/price-gouging.

Is this worth doing if I don't have fancy graphics cards? What are good resources for a noob to learn about mining?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: WhiteTrashCash on June 23, 2017, 05:26:19 PM
I'd rather invest in something more stable and reliable than cryptocurrency. Like beanie babies.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Honest Abe on June 23, 2017, 05:36:08 PM
Geez... look I hold BTC and ETH and I have to tell you... all ETH guys do is pump, pump, pump.

All investments have risk, and all of the crypto space is immature from a technological standpoint. It does hold a tremendous amount of potential for solving many of the world's problems related to finance and property ownership. But investing in it is ONLY for people who have a strong stomach and a willingness to ride it out for a long period of time.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Rosy on June 23, 2017, 06:49:40 PM
Good thing I didn't buy in yet, I'd hate to have been wiped out right after I started. This is obviously an investment opportunity where one has to anticipate losing all and being called a fool - that's OK, I don't plan to put my life savings into it.

I am interested in Ethereum, mainly because from what I've read so far it has a lot more potential than bitcoin, which seems to be a one trick pony. Not that I really know what I am talking about - but I am setting aside a little fun money for crazy investments that I feel have potential. For me it falls under the category of risky investments, but hey, nothing ventured - nothing gained.

So where and how is the best place to begin?

Geez... look I hold BTC and ETH and I have to tell you... all ETH guys do is pump, pump, pump.

All investments have risk, and all of the crypto space is immature from a technological standpoint. It does hold a tremendous amount of potential for solving many of the world's problems related to finance and property ownership. But investing in it is ONLY for people who have a strong stomach and a willingness to ride it out for a long period of time.

So Honest Abe, what do you mean by pump?


Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on June 23, 2017, 11:39:51 PM
I don't buy cryptocurrency other than to facilitate online purchases.

However, I am very interested in mining Ethereum and ZCash if there are every any RX-470s for sale again.

It seems like diversification to me?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on June 23, 2017, 11:47:38 PM
Following.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mxt0133 on June 24, 2017, 01:24:26 AM
Yes sir, very unfortunate. Given that the lost ETH is currently $15k in value, it will most likely be worth around $100,000 in a year or two.

Oh well, live and learn!

Would you care to share how exactly you lost $15K in ETH?  Did someone hack your account and stole them.  Isn't the whole point of blockchain so that people cant modify the chain and steal your money?  They would have to hack all the nodes to modify the transactions on who owns the currency right?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on June 24, 2017, 01:27:58 AM
He apparently had coins kept at that particular exchange with a stop loss order in that filled during the flash crash.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on June 24, 2017, 07:44:07 AM
I don't believe in crypto-currencies.  I don't think they are real.

just like the money in your bank account - roughly 8% of all money is physical, the rest 1's & 0's which "aren't real".

I'd rather invest in something more stable and reliable than cryptocurrency. Like beanie babies.

if you actually knew anything about them, you'd realize that most of them are very stable... it's apparent you're only aware of bitcoin, which is ironically the most antiquated token.

It's unfortunate and there will surely be lawsuits due to gross negligence of the exchange and a breach of their own Terms and Conditions and Terms of Service.

sorry for your loss. i highly doubt there will be a lawsuit as the GDAX crashed because someone dumped 100,000 ETH. those who lost anything either had stop losses or were trading on margin. were you?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on June 24, 2017, 12:12:47 PM
I'd been debating whether or not it made sense to start a thread about my experiment with crypto currency, but since I came back to the forum to discover there's already going on, here's my first update on my less than three week old old experiment with both mining (ZEC) and currency appreciation (BTC + a little ZEC). The numbers will seem quite low compared to folks like Tonyahu, but patterns should hopefully be representative.

Currently running 4 GTX 1060s (purchased for the experiment) and 1 GTX 970 (in the computer I use for VR). Have a 5th 1060 out of commission at the moment, potentially this is just an issue with a bad riser. 1060s are a bit slower than the cards a lot of folks run, but due the demand driving up the cost of 1070 on up, when I pulled the trigger these had the shortest payback time. Currently mining ZEC and getting paid in BTC through NiceHash but I've also experimented with mining ZEC directly through flypool.

I wanted to separate out the idea of "mining crypto currency for profit" from the idea of "owning crypto currency for price appreciation" in my records. "Mining income" assumes I sell everything for dollars at the prevailing price on the day it was earned. "Capital Gains/Losses" tracks the difference between mining income and the actual net worth of the cryptocurrency.  I jumpstarted the currency appreciation half of my experiment with ~0.44 bitcoins I found leftover on an old computer. Since if I wasn't doing the experiment I would have cashed that out, I reset my starting value on those coins to the price they would have received on the day I started the experiment.

My sunk costs would be lower if I built a second machine (by $200, or $400 if I subtract out what I spent on the last 1060 that may still come online at some point), but the only way I could have gotten to the point of knowing how to build the second machine was to build the first one. Currently 3 weeks in. Averaging about $13.50/day in mining income and $4.30/day in capital gains. If I can keep that up I'm 58 days from my break even point overall and 84 days away from my break even point considering only income from mining.

The rate at which the difficulty for ZEC mining is increasing has me a little concerned about the likelihood of success for my little experiment. From the start of my experiment to today, difficulty has increased from ~2M to ~3.5M. So far the price of ZEC has increased roughly proportionately ($240/ZEC->$360/ZEC, so I'm not seeing a big decline in my average daily mining take but it looks like the price may be starting to level off.

(https://i.imgpile.com/nNz0KW.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nNz0KW)

Anyway, lots of things could go wrong, but it continues to be a fun experiment, the rack I built could easily scale to 24 total graphics cards if I ever decide to put real money into this, and worse case scenario, I've got everything I've spent so far down in my monthly accounts as entertainment/hobby spending, not investment.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Teachstache on June 24, 2017, 01:12:14 PM
Following. Spouse mines Eth & has a small amount of BTC from years ago.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: hm__ on June 24, 2017, 06:05:56 PM
The unfortunate: I started mining BTC back in 2012/2013  and also bought a few coins for fun when the value was under $20 USD but quickly gave up and sold because it seemed pointless and there was little immediate value to doing so. If I would have left my PC chugging along back then I would have thousands/hundreds of thousands $$ at this point.

Now: My rent includes flat rate utilities, so I have been taking advantage of that to mine BTC with a gaming PC I built 2 years ago. Seems like a good chance to make a small/albeit risk-free (no additional cost to me) investment in an otherwise risky investment.

Currently amassed only .03 BTC, mining at about .0013 BTC per day (somewhere around $100 per month at current exchange rate). Holding anything I mine long term and hoping that someday I randomly log in to find a massive increase in the value.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on June 24, 2017, 06:27:58 PM
i hold BTC and ETH.  i've been holding BTC for years and plan to continue to hold both as an asset not correlated to stocks/bonds.

my concern with ETH, wrt holding, is that it does not have its long-term issuance policy defined.  BTC is more "K.I.S.S." or "tried and true" and has been following a simple issuance schedule.  i know exactly how many bitcoin will have been created 10 years from now.  with ETH, 10 years from now, what will be happening with proof-of-stake?  and will that actually work in practice?  BTC doesn't have these questions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on June 24, 2017, 08:56:33 PM
BTC doesn't have these questions.

BTC has 3 mining pools controlling 51%+ of the hash. the largest pool (antpool) is controlled by bitmain which jihan wu started. jihan wu runs patented hardware (asicboost) which is incompatible with segwit, which is why the blockchain is stuck at 1MB and why he and people like roger ver were pushing for a secondary blockchain. segwit will supposedly activate with an expanded (to 2MB blocks), but it's such a fucking mess... trust me that for the people who are heavy into mining / investing, there are more questions than answers.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on June 24, 2017, 09:07:33 PM
MOD NOTE: About a dozen posts removed discussing whether or not crypto-currency counts as an "investment" or "speculation."

This thread is not for discussing semantics of what makes an investment, or if crypto-currencies count.

If you want to start a new thread to argue about this, feel free to do so, or look up one of the other crypto-currency threads that already has this same back and forth.  Please not derail this thread with this argument yet again.

Cheers!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on June 24, 2017, 09:44:41 PM
The unfortunate: I started mining BTC back in 2012/2013  and also bought a few coins for fun when the value was under $20 USD but quickly gave up and sold because it seemed pointless and there was little immediate value to doing so. If I would have left my PC chugging along back then I would have thousands/hundreds of thousands $$ at this point.

You sound like me. Back right around that time I experimented with CPU mining with a few cores I wasn't using on my work computer. Even at that point, CPU mining was considered not worthwhile, but I wasn't paying for the electricity and it was more of a way to educate myself than actually make money. After several weeks of this I had accumulated approximately 1 BTC and a few altcoins. Given the valuations at the time I was earning only about a dollar or two per week from it, and I had gotten all the educational value I wanted out of it, so I stopped mining because the money wasn't worthwhile. But looking back on it, getting a good fraction of a BTC per month on top of my regular salary would be nothing to sneeze at!

Since then I've occasionally used BTC to pay for online software bundles and the like (trading bits for bits, as it were), but haven't done any trading on exchanges. I still have about 1 BTC and a few thousand XRP from when they did a grid computing promotion a while back. I think I'm going to hold it a while and see where it goes. I have no immediate need to liquidate, but will be happy to do so if the value doubles a few more times.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on June 24, 2017, 09:59:37 PM
arebelspy,

Perhaps I should have been more specific. There is a big difference between mining cryptocurrency and purchasing cryptocurrency, at least as far as investing. Of note, in the US, you are taxed on the cryptocurrency the day that you mine it at the ordinary income rate (https://bitcoin.tax/blog/filing-your-bitcoin-taxes-income-spending-mining/). This also means that if there is a big crash before you sell, you still get to pay tax!

There is also a big difference between PoW (Proof of Work) based cryptocurrencies (which, at this point is all of them?) and PoS (Proof of Share) based cryptocurrencies (Ethereum wants to move to a PoS model). No one knows what PoS will mean for Ethereum, no one has ever done it before. Ethereum has already had one hard fork, when they move to PoS they risk another. These things matter for investors.

More reading / watching:
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/an-idiots-guide-to-building-an-ethereum-mining-rig
https://www.cryptocompare.com/mining/mineshop/ethereum-mining-rig-168mhs/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfE_QidD75M
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on June 24, 2017, 10:10:30 PM
I'm following with curiosity, and to remind myself to learn more.

I'm interested in the blockchain technology and it's application. Have a very small (hundreds of USD) holding of BTC at the moment, for no particularly good reasons except curiosity, "skin in the game" to give myself incentive to  learn more  (and speculation) :) I may add a bit of ETH, .

I haven't been mining, but made my small purchases with Coinbase (https://www.coinbase.com/join/5925a32688fc15120c64f4c6). I think I'm gonna play at it with combining with other hobby and eat the large fees to empty out some credit card gift cards I have lying around. The volatility is enough, that it sort of "absorbs" the fees (all of this is with no good reason).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: aspiringnomad on June 24, 2017, 10:27:53 PM
Own about $4k USD worth of ETH that I initially purchased for much less. I've been aware of and/or following distributed ledger technology from early days thanks to my dad being a comp sci professor who took interest and a couple friends being big BTC promoters. They've obviously done well, but I was always reticent to buy in since I've had serious doubts about BTC's use case and the restrictiveness of the underlying code. And I still have those doubts, so I'm pretty bearish on BTC as anything other than a store of value (whatever the hell that means, I still can't figure out gold either) or as a means of conducting illicit activity (and I want nothing to do with that). But I'm very bullish on applications that use distributed ledger tech to remove friction, so I'm optimistic about the use case for the Ethereum protocol. I've also perused some of the work put out by Ethereum's founder and think the hype surrounding him is legit. But to be honest, I'm neutral on ETH itself despite owning some since I have no idea how its protocol's usefulness will impact ether's selling price, especially in a world with new coins with various features launched seemingly every day.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on June 24, 2017, 10:55:33 PM
Perhaps I should have been more specific. There is a big difference between mining cryptocurrency and purchasing cryptocurrency, at least as far as investing.

To clarify: Feel free to talk about these two things, and how they differ, and why you think they're important.  This post that I'm quoting, for example, was quite informative. There's just no need to quibble for pages about if one, or the other, or both, is, or is not, "investing" under various definitions of the word.  :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on June 24, 2017, 11:12:16 PM
I'm in the process of making a rig.  I spent $2,100 on 6x PNY GTX 1060 3gb GPU's (on sale at BestBuy) and everything else.  It should all be here around July 4 and I'm going to set it up.  I will probably mine ZEC.  I think its fun and I do hope to mine enough coins to break even on the rig and electricity.  Hopefully I can break even after 4 months.

I will join a pool to mine.  I'm considering Claymore (if I can mine two coins at once with my GPU).  Nicehash seems interesting too but I'm not sure if I want to be paid in BTC. 

Is nicehash a pool?  What do they charge?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: starguru on June 25, 2017, 07:37:17 AM
How would one even go about buying ethereum coins (on a mac)?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on June 25, 2017, 07:39:07 AM
How would one even go about buying ethereum coins (on a mac)?

Step 1 is google "how to buy etherium".
Probably setting up an account at coinbase is the easiest way.  Make sure to move them off to your own wallet after.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: wienerdog on June 25, 2017, 07:48:16 AM
Adding this video playlist as it is interesting for a newbie.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiFMZOlhgsYKKOUOVjQjESCXfR1cCYCod

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: tralfamadorian on June 25, 2017, 08:41:42 AM
following
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: starguru on June 25, 2017, 09:09:00 AM
How would one even go about buying ethereum coins (on a mac)?

Step 1 is google "how to buy etherium".
Probably setting up an account at coinbase is the easiest way.  Make sure to move them off to your own wallet after.
Is coinbase what everyone uses?  Is there a chance someone can run off with customers funds on that platform?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on June 25, 2017, 09:17:36 AM
How would one even go about buying ethereum coins (on a mac)?

Step 1 is google "how to buy etherium".
Probably setting up an account at coinbase is the easiest way.  Make sure to move them off to your own wallet after.
Is coinbase what everyone uses?  Is there a chance someone can run off with customers funds on that platform?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Note that my only other step was to move the coins to your own wallet. You should never keep coins at an exchange, because they can be, and are, hacked.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: starguru on June 25, 2017, 09:58:19 AM
How would one even go about buying ethereum coins (on a mac)?

Step 1 is google "how to buy etherium".
Probably setting up an account at coinbase is the easiest way.  Make sure to move them off to your own wallet after.
Is coinbase what everyone uses?  Is there a chance someone can run off with customers funds on that platform?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: starguru on June 25, 2017, 10:00:05 AM
How would one even go about buying ethereum coins (on a mac)?

Step 1 is google "how to buy etherium".
Probably setting up an account at coinbase is the easiest way.  Make sure to move them off to your own wallet after.
Is coinbase what everyone uses?  Is there a chance someone can run off with customers funds on that platform?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Note that my only other step was to move the coins to your own wallet. You should never keep coins at an exchange, because they can be, and are, hacked.


I'll have to figure that part out.  Any opinions on the Gemini exchange?  Seems more regulated and doesn't appear to support lite coin.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on June 25, 2017, 10:32:22 AM
How would one even go about buying ethereum coins (on a mac)?

Step 1 is google "how to buy etherium".
Probably setting up an account at coinbase is the easiest way.  Make sure to move them off to your own wallet after.
Is coinbase what everyone uses?  Is there a chance someone can run off with customers funds on that platform?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Note that my only other step was to move the coins to your own wallet. You should never keep coins at an exchange, because they can be, and are, hacked.


I'll have to figure that part out.  Any opinions on the Gemini exchange?  Seems more regulated and doesn't appear to support lite coin.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

check out bittrex.com

bittrex was (and still might be) the only exchange which was dedicated to being fully and legally compliant with the ever changing crypto landscape. they were one of the first to apply for new york's bit license.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: andystkilda on June 25, 2017, 10:55:19 AM
I want to learn more about the field but I am buying a small portion of ETH (probably in the low thousands or tens of thousands) for now as an initial investment.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: aspiringnomad on June 25, 2017, 12:24:27 PM
How would one even go about buying ethereum coins (on a mac)?

Step 1 is google "how to buy etherium".
Probably setting up an account at coinbase is the easiest way.  Make sure to move them off to your own wallet after.
Is coinbase what everyone uses?  Is there a chance someone can run off with customers funds on that platform?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Note that my only other step was to move the coins to your own wallet. You should never keep coins at an exchange, because they can be, and are, hacked.

I moved mine from Coinbase to Jaxx based on a friend's recommendation. But yeah, definitely get them off whatever exchange you use and into a wallet.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: farfromfire on June 26, 2017, 06:56:57 AM
Seeing how volatile crypto currencies are, and considering that exchanges will not stop trading no matter what, margin trading is pretty dumb.

I hold some eth for the long term.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on June 26, 2017, 11:08:47 AM
Great discussions so far guys, I hope we can get many more to learn about this developing technology.

Tonyahu, sorry about your 15k.  If you don't mind my asking, does that leave you in a net gain or net loss position for your cumulative investments in crypto-currency?

I don't have any, so just curious.  Best of luck!

The exchange actually decided to credit those who lost due to it being blatant market manipulation. But if that had still been a loss, I am still up nearly 700%.

Geez... look I hold BTC and ETH and I have to tell you... all ETH guys do is pump, pump, pump.

All investments have risk, and all of the crypto space is immature from a technological standpoint. It does hold a tremendous amount of potential for solving many of the world's problems related to finance and property ownership. But investing in it is ONLY for people who have a strong stomach and a willingness to ride it out for a long period of time.

There is that "pump" aspect in most of the sub-communities. I am very long on ETH so short term I am not too concerned bout. Right now is a good time to get in due to the large dip due to that troublesome Bitcoin.


Good thing I didn't buy in yet, I'd hate to have been wiped out right after I started. This is obviously an investment opportunity where one has to anticipate losing all and being called a fool - that's OK, I don't plan to put my life savings into it.

I am interested in Ethereum, mainly because from what I've read so far it has a lot more potential than bitcoin, which seems to be a one trick pony. Not that I really know what I am talking about - but I am setting aside a little fun money for crazy investments that I feel have potential. For me it falls under the category of risky investments, but hey, nothing ventured - nothing gained.

So where and how is the best place to begin?

I would just keep reading up on Ethereum everywhere you can. I would look up "Ethereum Enterprise Alliance" as well, and look into what those big companies are doing with Ethereum.


JP Morgans "Quorum" is an interesting project.



Yes sir, very unfortunate. Given that the lost ETH is currently $15k in value, it will most likely be worth around $100,000 in a year or two.

Oh well, live and learn!

Would you care to share how exactly you lost $15K in ETH?  Did someone hack your account and stole them.  Isn't the whole point of blockchain so that people cant modify the chain and steal your money?  They would have to hack all the nodes to modify the transactions on who owns the currency right?

I had a margin long open and there was market manipulation causing a short term plummet to essentially $0. This caused me (and many others) to get our margins called (and some peoples stops to get blown up) and losees of millions of dollars. This is being remedied by the exchange though, I will not be eating the loss anymore. Thank God!

MOD NOTE: About a dozen posts removed discussing whether or not crypto-currency counts as an "investment" or "speculation."

This thread is not for discussing semantics of what makes an investment, or if crypto-currencies count.

If you want to start a new thread to argue about this, feel free to do so, or look up one of the other crypto-currency threads that already has this same back and forth.  Please not derail this thread with this argument yet again.

Cheers!


Thank you for your additions to this thread!

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on June 26, 2017, 11:39:47 AM
I am a simple troll and will hold my two bit coins that I purchased about a year ago for the long haul.  No other crypto currencies for me.

I was mining using an S9 for a while but I figured hardware only does down in value and the recent surge let me sell the unit for a small profit.  When I was mining I estimated my breakeven to be 1200$/BTC so was holding all the BTC and hoping for a surge. I net made about 20% mining so after I sold that BTC and hardware.

I don't know if I was speculating, investing or running a business but I am satisfied with the outcome :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on June 26, 2017, 05:41:56 PM
happy bloody monday!

anyone buying the market on discount?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: FIreSurfer on June 27, 2017, 11:22:11 AM
following!!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: hodedofome on June 27, 2017, 12:23:42 PM
Some good thoughts I read the other day from Albert Wenger of Union Square Ventures (Tumblr, Twitter, Kickstarter, Zynga, Coinbase etc).

http://continuations.com/post/161700099130/monetary-policy-for-crypto-tokens

http://continuations.com/post/161776542685/optimal-token-sales
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BobTheBuilder on June 27, 2017, 12:44:48 PM
I have to admit, I still don't see the deal about these "currencies". The generation scheme seems crazy to me. Just burning up electricity to compute useless hashes. Anyways I saw the potential for speculation too. I had a suitable graphics card in my PC, a Radeon RX 470. I loved my pick as far as love goes for computer stuff, but I sold it on ebay seeing the crazy bidding war over these cards. 363 Euros! I got it for 240 5 months ago. So here I am, not playing video games in the middle of summer, as I never do, waiting for prices to go down again to buy the next generation in autumn :-D
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on June 27, 2017, 12:49:00 PM
happy bloody monday!

anyone buying the market on discount?

Grabbed a few NMR today. Really hoping to add to my XMR and FCT position soon but thin on FIAT.

EOS ICO is intriguing but Terms and Conditions of coin are quite scary.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on June 27, 2017, 01:06:53 PM
People need to quit doing these stop losses.  A mentor of mine who is about 65 lost $17,000 during that stock market flash crash back in 2015.  It's even stupider with the crypto currencies since they are free from any SEC-type regulation. 

This past weekend I didn't check the prices at all and my grand total of 2 ETH's and 1 litecoin lost about $200 in value.  Boo-hoo.  My intention is to hold these until one year from their purchase date. 

Back when people were buying illegal drugs and paying out bonuses the IRS couldn't track with bitcoin, it was actually being used as a currency.  Now that you can't really buy anything with bitcoin or ETH that you can't with regular cash, they have no special use and everyone's just speculating. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shotgunwilly on June 27, 2017, 01:33:33 PM
I'm just going to leave this link here for all of the "Vanguard Index Funds or Bust!" people coming in here and blabbering that cryptocurrencies are a joke.  That's because there's more to Blockchain technology that you haven't educated yourself on.  I can only give you my opinion and suggestion that you should, at the least, learn about them.

http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/blockchain/  (http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/blockchain/)

Blockchain Technology will have a very large effect on many industries.  IMO this is one of the greatest investment opportunities of a generation.  But there will be risks, scams, and security measures we will have to wade through.   

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on June 27, 2017, 02:50:18 PM
People need to quit doing these stop losses.  A mentor of mine who is about 65 lost $17,000 during that stock market flash crash back in 2015.  It's even stupider with the crypto currencies since they are free from any SEC-type regulation. 

This past weekend I didn't check the prices at all and my grand total of 2 ETH's and 1 litecoin lost about $200 in value.  Boo-hoo.  My intention is to hold these until one year from their purchase date. 

Back when people were buying illegal drugs and paying out bonuses the IRS couldn't track with bitcoin, it was actually being used as a currency.  Now that you can't really buy anything with bitcoin or ETH that you can't with regular cash, they have no special use and everyone's just speculating.

It's absolutely speculation, no doubt. But money only has value if everyone agrees it has value. There are some unique properties of cryptocurrencies (decentralization, limited supply in some cases, etc.)  that people seem to agree give them value. So here we are.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on June 27, 2017, 03:32:58 PM
I'm just going to leave this link here for all of the "Vanguard Index Funds or Bust!" people coming in here and blabbering that cryptocurrencies are a joke.  That's because there's more to Blockchain technology that you haven't educated yourself on.  I can only give you my opinion and suggestion that you should, at the least, learn about them.

http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/blockchain/  (http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/blockchain/)

Blockchain Technology will have a very large effect on many industries.  IMO this is one of the greatest investment opportunities of a generation.  But there will be risks, scams, and security measures we will have to wade through.

The block chain is great.

That doesn't mean the currencies will necessarily have any value.

Etherium the block chain will be successful. That doesn't mean ETH the currency will, they're two separate things.

(Obviously you know this, but it makes me wonder why you bring up block chain in a digital currency thread except to confuse. Yes, block chains are useful. That's not an argument that a corresponding digital currency will be, or will last.)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shotgunwilly on June 27, 2017, 07:44:27 PM
I'm just going to leave this link here for all of the "Vanguard Index Funds or Bust!" people coming in here and blabbering that cryptocurrencies are a joke.  That's because there's more to Blockchain technology that you haven't educated yourself on.  I can only give you my opinion and suggestion that you should, at the least, learn about them.

http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/blockchain/  (http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/blockchain/)

Blockchain Technology will have a very large effect on many industries.  IMO this is one of the greatest investment opportunities of a generation.  But there will be risks, scams, and security measures we will have to wade through.

The block chain is great.

That doesn't mean the currencies will necessarily have any value.

Etherium the block chain will be successful. That doesn't mean ETH the currency will, they're two separate things.

(Obviously you know this, but it makes me wonder why you bring up block chain in a digital currency thread except to confuse. Yes, block chains are useful. That's not an argument that a corresponding digital currency will be, or will last.)

I bring it up because I believe the blockchain technology is the underlying important part of these "cryptocurrencies," and that a lot of people do not understand that.  A lot of people, especially ones that instantly dismiss crypto as valueless magic internet coins, have not delved into the technology behind them and how it could possibly be disruptive. 

You are absolutely correct that a corresponding digital "currency" or coins made on top of a blockchain will not necessarily have value.  There are ALOT of cryptocurrencies out there and many are a joke, or a scam. Many will eventually be worthless, although they have a USD value tied to them at the moment.  ALL of the current cryptocurrencies out right now, including Bitcoin or Ethereum, could be valueless at some point.   But there are many of these distributed ledger technologies that have different porotocols looking to be the one to change certain industries.  You and I know, Ethereum doesn't even consider itself a currency.  It just has a protocol for "gas" (Ether) and these are what everyone are trading.  But others may not know that. 

A new, advanced distributed ledger protocol could be released, which has a "coin" that becomes extremely valuable,  or there may be companies implementing Blockchain technology that increase greatly in value. But there will be investment opportunities, even if not by purchasing these coins directly.  There may even be a Vanguard index fund tracking a whole sector based on blockchain technology in the future! :)

I thought some might could benefit from the link, if they are curious.  Also, the title of the thread did say "Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion."
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: signhere on June 28, 2017, 08:43:17 AM
Don't post here much but since I've gained so much valuable information from the site, though I'd give back a little.

Blockchain technology is possibly the next paradigm shift in technology. Everyone wants exposure to the next internet/mobile phone/integrated circuit/assembly line. The problem with blockchain technology is that it isn't clear how to get  financial exposure to it. Buying BTC or ETH may get you there, it may not. Think of it as believing cell phones being the next big thing and buying stock in Nokia. The difference is that if the cell phone failed, you still have an investment in a real company making other products. With cryptocurrencies, you're presumably going to be left with a worthless digital asset.

I have around 10% of my portfolio in crypto right now and plan to hold for at least a few years.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on June 28, 2017, 09:55:21 AM
Don't post here much but since I've gained so much valuable information from the site, though I'd give back a little.

Blockchain technology is possibly the next paradigm shift in technology. Everyone wants exposure to the next internet/mobile phone/integrated circuit/assembly line. The problem with blockchain technology is that it isn't clear how to get  financial exposure to it. Buying BTC or ETH may get you there, it may not. Think of it as believing cell phones being the next big thing and buying stock in Nokia. The difference is that if the cell phone failed, you still have an investment in a real company making other products. With cryptocurrencies, you're presumably going to be left with a worthless digital asset.

I have around 10% of my portfolio in crypto right now and plan to hold for at least a few years.

My view of this is if you're really convinced that a general technology (blockchains, AI, 3D printing, drones, CRISPR, robotic warehouses, or whatever else) is going to change the world the only way to really get exposure to it is to develop expertise in the field. As your Nokia example points out, it's quite easy to be right about the technology but for none of the publicly traded companies working in the area when you make that realization to be good investments with the benefit of hindsight.

Groundbreaking change the way people live their day to days lives stuff tends to either come out of startups (privately held until after most of their explosive growth has already happened) or giant companies where the impact of some amazing new advance that comes out of one of their R&D units gets averaged out with a huge amount of other business as usual economic units before it filters back into shareholder value.

FWIW, I agree with you that blockchains are going to be, in fact are already becoming, a game changer, regardless of what happens with the current batch of cryptocurrencies.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on June 28, 2017, 10:00:35 AM
So do people here believe that blockchain will allow banks and other entities with a lot of IT staff employed in security to significantly reduce their staffs?  If so, it portends a significant long-term productivity gain. 

But as a poster just noted, if there is no "blockchain company", then there is no specific place in which to invest. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Ichabod on June 28, 2017, 10:04:10 AM
Blockchain technology is possibly the next paradigm shift in technology. Everyone wants exposure to the next internet/mobile phone/integrated circuit/assembly line. The problem with blockchain technology is that it isn't clear how to get  financial exposure to it. Buying BTC or ETH may get you there, it may not. Think of it as believing cell phones being the next big thing and buying stock in Nokia. The difference is that if the cell phone failed, you still have an investment in a real company making other products. With cryptocurrencies, you're presumably going to be left with a worthless digital asset.

Have you thought about getting exposure through AMD or Nvidia? I don't know that blockchain technology would be possible without GPUs. That also gets you exposure to VR and some of the deep learning technology that rely on GPUs.

Companies that sell cloud computing (Amazon with AWS or Microsoft with Azure) might also have exposure. I've read that AWS could profitably mine currencies if they reach certain price points.

You can also get exposure through the companies that plan to leverage the blockchain or stand to otherwise benefit from it. I'd start by looking at the companies in Enterprise Ethereum Alliance. I'd be interested to hear of other ways to get exposure.

If cryptocurrencies do become a big part of the economy, a basket of those stocks should capture much of those growth with much less risk than a basket of the cryptocurrencies themselves.

Having said all that, I'm still 100% index funds, but it's all fascinating.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BrandNewPapa on June 28, 2017, 11:25:54 AM
My Current holdings:

BTC: 0.579 (mined)
ETC: 3.425 (purchased @$90)
LTC: 4.000 (purchased @$30)

Just planning to hold. I want to buy some more BTC, missed my chance this week end the price dipped, but I didn't have any spare cash.

I experimented with mining a few years ago. I purchased two Antminer S1s from eBay for $700 shipped with a power supply. I ran them for about 8 months, generating about 2.5 BTC. Then the price started to plummet and my mining was losing money (electric cost more per day than I was generating in BTC), so I stopped. The market kept falling and it seemed like everyone was loosing faith in BTC, so I decided to sell about 2 BTC so I could at least break even. I also sold the miners on craigslist for $100. Regretting those decisions now!

Was thinking about emailing the guy that bought them to see if he still has 'em.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on June 28, 2017, 04:28:59 PM
The generation scheme seems crazy to me. Just burning up electricity to compute useless hashes.

not every token is mined (ie. XRP (ripple) - their protocol is based on consensus. depending on who you talk to (99% of the "crypto-anarchists"), they're considered a travesty to this "new world", despite having the fastest and most innovative technology.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on June 28, 2017, 05:03:46 PM
The generation scheme seems crazy to me. Just burning up electricity to compute useless hashes.

not every token is mined (ie. XRP (ripple) - their protocol is based on consensus. depending on who you talk to (99% of the "crypto-anarchists"), they're considered a travesty to this "new world", despite having the fastest and most innovative technology.

Please don't come and shill XRP in here bud...lol just kidding!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Nad on June 28, 2017, 05:41:41 PM
Do you guys have any resources to learn more about the different cryptocurrencies?

I just got in (BTC and ETH) yesterday with a tiny fraction of my portfolio and my position is already 25% up. It doesnt make any sense to me that there are such big swings. My plan is to increase my position to maybe 5-10% of my portfolio because I feel there is something there but I want to get a better understanding first.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on June 28, 2017, 06:27:35 PM
Please don't come and shill XRP in here bud...lol just kidding!

just stating facts 😉
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on June 28, 2017, 06:30:19 PM
Do you guys have any resources to learn more about the different cryptocurrencies?

i like / visit:

bitcointalk.org (messageboard and great place to learn)
bitcoinmagazine.com (news)
coindesk.com (news)
cointelegraph.com (news)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: dakota5176 on June 28, 2017, 06:42:07 PM
I am interested in this post and while I am not currently invested in any cryptocurrencies I have started following the market through coinbase.  I will probably start a position but I wanted to learn a little more about it.  Perhaps some kind soul could answer a few questions for me:

Is it too late to invest in Bitcoin?  Have I missed the train and should focus entirely on something like Eth? Or is it worth starting a small stake?

Obviously I would recognize that this is speculative and there are no guarantees. Of course like any Mustachian I would prefer not to lose my money entirely.  Can I use stop/losses effectively to hedge against risk?  If so what % do you set them for so that they're not constantly triggering in response to market volatility?

Do stock strategies apply to this market? For example should I dollar cost average a set amount every month?

Is it worth learning about the lesser known coins or do you have to be a computer expert to understand them?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Nad on June 28, 2017, 06:44:59 PM
i like / visit:

bitcointalk.org (messageboard and great place to learn)
bitcoinmagazine.com (news)
coindesk.com (news)
cointelegraph.com (news)

Awesome, thanks for the links!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on June 28, 2017, 08:29:36 PM
I am interested in this post and while I am not currently invested in any cryptocurrencies I have started following the market through coinbase.  I will probably start a position but I wanted to learn a little more about it.  Perhaps some kind soul could answer a few questions for me:

Is it too late to invest in Bitcoin?  Have I missed the train and should focus entirely on something like Eth? Or is it worth starting a small stake?

Obviously I would recognize that this is speculative and there are no guarantees. Of course like any Mustachian I would prefer not to lose my money entirely.  Can I use stop/losses effectively to hedge against risk?  If so what % do you set them for so that they're not constantly triggering in response to market volatility?

Do stock strategies apply to this market? For example should I dollar cost average a set amount every month?

Is it worth learning about the lesser known coins or do you have to be a computer expert to understand them?

The whole problem with Bitcoin is that it might experience a first-mover disadvantage.  Ethereum is the first competitor to really rise and start challenging it.

Also, as I mentioned previously, the cryptocurrencies can't really buy you anything right now that cash or paypal or whatever can't.  Bitcoin was actually being used as currency when Silk Road was up and during the brief period of time when the IRS didn't notice companies paying bonuses with Bitcoin.  At any moment some new window might appear and the cryptocurrencies will be able to do something cash can't.  Or it might never happen.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on June 29, 2017, 09:44:15 AM
Back when people were buying illegal drugs and paying out bonuses the IRS couldn't track with bitcoin, it was actually being used as a currency.  Now that you can't really buy anything with bitcoin or ETH that you can't with regular cash, they have no special use and everyone's just speculating.

Also, as I mentioned previously, the cryptocurrencies can't really buy you anything right now that cash or paypal or whatever can't.  Bitcoin was actually being used as currency when Silk Road was up and during the brief period of time when the IRS didn't notice companies paying bonuses with Bitcoin.  At any moment some new window might appear and the cryptocurrencies will be able to do something cash can't.  Or it might never happen.

This is the second time you've mentioned that.  I'm not sure why you think it is the case.

1) You can buy everything on the dark web that you could before. Just because one marketplace (Silk Road) is gone doesn't mean there aren't other places to buy the same things.

2) Cryptocurrencies have apparently been useful in countries with massively fluctuating, hyperinflating, or restricted currency (e.g. Venezuela) or places that have eliminated cash (e.g. India).  That's a use for it that cash can't do, because cash doesn't exist or is close to worthless.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on June 29, 2017, 11:58:04 AM
I had not thought of #2.  Probably useful in some situations for people in unstable areas, but then again, relatively few people have much money in poor countries to begin with, and those that do are more often than not up to no good. 

As for #1, I have no first-hand experience.  I am acquainted with people who did use silk road and because of the working knowledge they gained a few years ago they were early adopters of Ethereum and one bought $5,000 back in early March that is now worth about $30,000.  However I don't think any of them are actually using Bitcoin or Ethereum to buy or sell stuff anymore. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: ketchup on June 29, 2017, 12:00:25 PM
As for #1, I have no first-hand experience.  I am acquainted with people who did use silk road and because of the working knowledge they gained a few years ago they were early adopters of Ethereum and one bought $5,000 back in early March that is now worth about $30,000.  However I don't think any of them are actually using Bitcoin or Ethereum to buy or sell stuff anymore.
I know someone still using Bitcoin to purchase things online that they shouldn't.  It's definitely still being used for that.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shotgunwilly on June 30, 2017, 08:58:53 AM
  However I don't think any of them are actually using Bitcoin or Ethereum to buy or sell stuff anymore.

Ether (the token of Ethereum) is not, and never was, intended to be used to buy or sell "stuff."
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: vodsonic on June 30, 2017, 10:23:00 AM
2) Cryptocurrencies have apparently been useful in countries with massively fluctuating, hyperinflating, or restricted currency (e.g. Venezuela) or places that have eliminated cash (e.g. India).  That's a use for it that cash can't do, because cash doesn't exist or is close to worthless.

I had not thought of #2.  Probably useful in some situations for people in unstable areas, but then again, relatively few people have much money in poor countries to begin with, and those that do are more often than not up to no good. 

In October of last year, India banned bills (cash) in denominations larger than the equivalent of about US$5. According to Fast Company (https://www.fastcompany.com/3066085/why-did-india-just-take-86-of-its-cash-out-of-circulation),

Quote
India runs on cash. According to Bloomberg, “India has among the highest usage of cash across global economies,” accounting for up to 98% of all transactions. Modi’s bill ban took 86% of it out of circulation, instantly. When he announced the ban on October 8, he gave just four hours notice.

To put this in perspective, consider that India is nearly as populous as China, and struggles to formally document or ID citizens in rural areas, many of whom don't even use surnames.

Banning banknotes in India is like banning coins in a penny arcade and expecting it to stay in business.

Of course any usuable tool, i.e. cryptocurrency, is going to get sucked in to fill the vacuum. For most people suffering under this kind of high-handed meddling in their lives, cash is not about running a criminal enterprise. It's about staying afloat.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on June 30, 2017, 08:01:53 PM
But as a poster just noted, if there is no "blockchain company", then there is no specific place in which to invest.

There are many blockchain companies, trying to create and apply technology in different fields (mainly financial), they are mainly (or all) privately held startups, small businesses, etc. And most will probably die before you hear of them.

You could invest in them and many would like funding but you would be investing in the private market (And you may have to be an accredited investor)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 01, 2017, 08:48:43 AM
The obvious question with certain things like this factom becomes: why can't another currency just duplicate it, and be used, if it becomes too expensive, thus capping the amount it'll grow?

From your first article:
Quote
Example: A big bank has 1,000,000 clients. Every day the bank needs to time stamp the status of its clients’ accounts, in an immutable way, with the possibility of segregating that data afterwards. Let’s assume 1 EC allows one to store the data of 1 client. You need 1,000,000 EC = 1,000 USD = 111 FCT. Over a month time, 111 * 30 = 3,330 FCT are burned for this sole purpose. As the supply is 73,000, you need only 73,000 / 3,330 = 22 entities to operate at this scale to consume the full 73,000, causing the total number of FCT to shrink substantially. To this example, add the demand for FCT triggered by the Bill & Melinda Gates project, and also the DHS security project, the Chinese smart city initiative, the dLoc project, etc. And this is only the beginning!

Of course, this exercise is done by keeping the price constant. The huge amount of demand for FCT will make the price skyrocket. In fact it has to, in order to prevent deflation. Keep in mind that very large institutions are in discussions with Factom and about to sign contracts. Plus, the Harmony suite was probably made with the help of big actors in the industry to get a tailor-made product. (Factom has a number of former exec-level real estate movers on their staff.) The take-away is this: the more companies that use the Factom protocol, the higher the price of FCT must climb.

Okay, so let's say a bank IS using a blockchain like this (which I think they will).  Why would they use FCT?  They can just create another blockchain, their own.  A BofA blockchain, and a Wells Fargo blockchain, etc.  Or there could be a "Banking" blockchain and a "medical" one, or whatever.

But when the price of FCT rises above the cost of just using another blockchain, why would anyone keep using Factom instead of a different one or recreating it?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on July 01, 2017, 10:37:03 AM
^Yes, I have had the same question.  What's interesting is that it puts us 500 years back, when early banks issued their own currencies. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Parkingmeter on July 01, 2017, 03:43:04 PM
I'd been debating whether or not it made sense to start a thread about my experiment with crypto currency, but since I came back to the forum to discover there's already going on, here's my first update on my less than three week old old experiment with both mining (ZEC) and currency appreciation (BTC + a little ZEC). The numbers will seem quite low compared to folks like Tonyahu, but patterns should hopefully be representative.

Currently running 4 GTX 1060s (purchased for the experiment) and 1 GTX 970 (in the computer I use for VR). Have a 5th 1060 out of commission at the moment, potentially this is just an issue with a bad riser. 1060s are a bit slower than the cards a lot of folks run, but due the demand driving up the cost of 1070 on up, when I pulled the trigger these had the shortest payback time. Currently mining ZEC and getting paid in BTC through NiceHash but I've also experimented with mining ZEC directly through flypool.

I wanted to separate out the idea of "mining crypto currency for profit" from the idea of "owning crypto currency for price appreciation" in my records. "Mining income" assumes I sell everything for dollars at the prevailing price on the day it was earned. "Capital Gains/Losses" tracks the difference between mining income and the actual net worth of the cryptocurrency.  I jumpstarted the currency appreciation half of my experiment with ~0.44 bitcoins I found leftover on an old computer. Since if I wasn't doing the experiment I would have cashed that out, I reset my starting value on those coins to the price they would have received on the day I started the experiment.

My sunk costs would be lower if I built a second machine (by $200, or $400 if I subtract out what I spent on the last 1060 that may still come online at some point), but the only way I could have gotten to the point of knowing how to build the second machine was to build the first one. Currently 3 weeks in. Averaging about $13.50/day in mining income and $4.30/day in capital gains. If I can keep that up I'm 58 days from my break even point overall and 84 days away from my break even point considering only income from mining.

The rate at which the difficulty for ZEC mining is increasing has me a little concerned about the likelihood of success for my little experiment. From the start of my experiment to today, difficulty has increased from ~2M to ~3.5M. So far the price of ZEC has increased roughly proportionately ($240/ZEC->$360/ZEC, so I'm not seeing a big decline in my average daily mining take but it looks like the price may be starting to level off.

(https://i.imgpile.com/nNz0KW.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nNz0KW)

Anyway, lots of things could go wrong, but it continues to be a fun experiment, the rack I built could easily scale to 24 total graphics cards if I ever decide to put real money into this, and worse case scenario, I've got everything I've spent so far down in my monthly accounts as entertainment/hobby spending, not investment.

I'm curious if you're tracking/estimating your electricity costs and including that in your graph?

I think this could be one of those things like uber, where some of the "hidden" costs wipe out a significant portion of the return. It's even worse if your rigs are in an air conditioned space..
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 01, 2017, 05:14:33 PM
t's a good question. Electricity is a bit messier to track but based on my back of the envelope calculations I should be only spending an extra $25/month on electric if I achieve 100% uptime. My next monthly bill will be almost a complete month of mining, so I'll compare that to what I spent last June is see if that back of the envelope math is in the right ballpark. If so I'll probably put that in as a monthly deduction to the graph. To put that in context it's between 5-10% of the monthly income the mining rig is throwing off at the moment.

Mining rig is in an unused corner of the basement which stays quite cool even in summer (include the summer I went three months without a working AC), so my guess is that it isn't making my AC work any harder. If the experiment lasts will winter I may relocate the rig to an upstairs part of the house to harness the waste heat. But again I expect the effect of reduced heating costs, if any, to be too small to quantify.

Here's the updated graph. As you can see the recent decline in price for both BTC and ZEC is definitely having an effect on cumulative capital gains. On the mining side, my average daily earnings over the last week were 1/3 lower than the prior week.

(https://i.imgpile.com/nUhAaP.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nUhAaP)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: YYK on July 02, 2017, 12:44:29 PM
Anyone tried lending on the call market for BTC?
I've know about cryptos for a long time but never bothered to get in, though I'm starting to consider taking a position as a portfolio diversifier.
Rather than buy/mine and hold for appreciation in the long run I'm interested in generating a yield from them with lending. Seems potentially extremely risky though, more than just holding such volatile currencies in the first place.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on July 02, 2017, 08:06:16 PM
t's a good question. Electricity is a bit messier to track but based on my back of the envelope calculations I should be only spending an extra $25/month on electric if I achieve 100% uptime.

If you are curious maybe borrow a killowat electricity monitor from someone (might affect your up-time to plug it in and out). I've heard some libraries lend them out to people. They are also cheap to buy, if you anticipate future use. I'd be curious to see electricity usage included in your charts.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 02, 2017, 09:34:49 PM
Your question reminded me that I actually own a kill-a-watt meter from an efficiency kick about five years ago. Followed me through three different states and I don't think I've taken it out of the box since the first time it was packed (until this evening). Thanks!

(https://i.imgpile.com/nUD7rX.jpg) (https://imgpile.com/i/nUD7rX)

86 watts just from turning the (dedicated mining) computer on. 356 watts once I start the mining software running. This is only three GPUs. The other two are in a computer that needs to stay online anyway. So let's budget those at the same marginal wattage per GPU (356-86)/3 = 90 watts exactly. So total wattage would be 356+90+90 = 536 watts. (536*24)/1000 = 12.8 kilowatt hours day. I'm paying ~$0.085/kilowatt-hour so that's $1.09/day or $33/day.* A bit higher than I estimated but the right order of magnitude. Corrected chart below.

(https://i.imgpile.com/nUDuda.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nUDuda)

(Click for higher res version of the chart.)

*For those interested in the greenhouse gas emissions of cryptocurrencies, that means my mining operation is releasing an amount of carbon equivalent to burning one tank of gas (~11.5 gallons) per month (calculated using numbers taken from this source: https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-and-references)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on July 03, 2017, 08:52:37 AM
But as a poster just noted, if there is no "blockchain company", then there is no specific place in which to invest.

There are many blockchain companies, trying to create and apply technology in different fields (mainly financial), they are mainly (or all) privately held startups, small businesses, etc. And most will probably die before you hear of them.

You could invest in them and many would like funding but you would be investing in the private market (And you may have to be an accredited investor)

Here's a list of companies that are exploring blockchain technology.
https://entethalliance.org/members/

Granted, it's probably a small portion of their business, so it's not even remotely close to a pure play on blockchain.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 07, 2017, 04:15:21 PM
Almost have all my rigs built. My goal is $100 day. So far so good...

Little scared when I look at the stack of empty video card boxes in the corner. I really hope I can make enough to pay off the initial investment and let the rest ride. Current estimates is about a 4 month break even.

Wow! You're at ~10x my target daily income, but if you make it past break-even that starts to become serious money (my target is more just beer money). Good luck!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Cassie on July 07, 2017, 06:00:02 PM
Both my son and us have 17 bitcoins each. These were obtained by mining.  A few years ago some friends of ours lost 5k because my son kept telling them not to leave their coins at the exchange but they did not listen and lost it all.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on July 08, 2017, 07:21:05 AM
I have 6x gtx 1060's dual mining Eth and Sia.  I'm running on 492 watt's ang get 123mh/s hash on Eth and 960 mh/s hash on Sia.

I see a lot of potential in Sia.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on July 08, 2017, 08:06:27 AM
I see a lot of potential in Sia.

+1.

i don't mine SC, but think it was a great move for them to release a miner. they also have a super strong/active dev team.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on July 08, 2017, 11:28:15 AM
In case anyone wants a quick overview of the Bitcoin blockchain this video is accessible:
https://youtu.be/bBC-nXj3Ng4 (https://youtu.be/bBC-nXj3Ng4)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on July 09, 2017, 07:10:15 PM
Question for Canadians with a crypto-currency portfolio.  I opened a coinbase account, but for methods of purchasing, it only lets me use Visa or MasterCard?  There is a 4% fee, and i'm not sure what my credit card will charge (like a cash-advance fee) if i use it to buy.  Also, how do i get my money out?  Back through my credit card? 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on July 10, 2017, 11:22:21 AM
Question for Canadians with a crypto-currency portfolio.  I opened a coinbase account, but for methods of purchasing, it only lets me use Visa or MasterCard?  There is a 4% fee, and i'm not sure what my credit card will charge (like a cash-advance fee) if i use it to buy.  Also, how do i get my money out?  Back through my credit card?

I used a prepaid debit card to buy and my bank charged me an international fee of $9 or something like that.  I haven't sold yet so I don't know what happens. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 10, 2017, 06:08:43 PM
In the last three weeks a few of the high flying altcoins have lost close to half of their value.

I'm sure there's a website somewhere that makes this same sort of graph, but I find it's useful to put the recent declines in the price of Ethereum and ZCash in a bit of context. Essentially ZEC, ETH, and DOGE are behaving like high beta stocks. When bitcoin is going up, they go up even more. When bitcoin goes down, they drop a lot more.

(https://i.imgpile.com/nU6aSw.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nU6aSw)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 11, 2017, 04:28:33 PM
So let's talk hypotheticals, for a second.

How much would you be willing to gamble/invest (whichever term you prefer) on this?

Typical "rule of thumb" is speculate with no more than 5% of your portfolio.

So I was thinking about this in terms of real numbers.

I'll use some large round numbers to illustrate it.  Let's say you have 1MM. 5% of that is 50k.  Alright.

So say you take 50k, and split it among 3 Cryptocurrencies.  16.67k each.

Let's say one of them grows 1000% (10x increase).  It's now worth 167.67k.  We'll pretend the others hold their value (likely if one goes up, the others will too, but we're granting a pretty large increase. You can maths it so one goes up 500% and the others 250% each, or whatever, but either way, let's say it essentially equals out to 10x total increase on 1/3 of it).

You've made 150k profit, yay!

But you risked 50k to do it.  If cryptocurrencies as a "thing" don't pan out (and again, correlated), and all three go to essentially 0, you lose it all.

Is it worth risking 50k to make 150k (3x on your money)?  Do you think 3.3 to 1 odds is a good payoff for betting that you'll get a 10x increase rather than a (mostly complete loss)?

Now all this math hinges on the fact that I set up the scenario as you splitting your investment.  Naturally if you have it all in one, the whole thing could 10x (and your 50k could be 500k), but if you have it all in one, and you pick the wrong one, you're more likely to go bust, and less likely to have it go 10x than if you have it split.  Say Factom is chosen tomorrow by banks. Or Siacoin replaces Dropbox/cloud storage. And they 10x. But you were in ETH.

So to increase your change of 10x, you split it, but in practical terms, that means a smaller part of your bet is in the part that 10x's (i.e. only 1/3 of your amount invested, in this case, rather than the whole thing, which reduces your payout from 10x to 3.3x).

The risk v. reward doesn't seem quite worth it to me, especially when I put it in actual numbers.

This is putting aside mining. That's strictly a question of "will the payout I get be more than I spent"?  I'm talking about holding and/or buying cryptocurrencies for appreciation purposes.

Thoughts?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on July 11, 2017, 07:20:16 PM
i don't think the "risk 50k to make 150k" scenario is worth it.  but if a particular cryptocurrency does make it big and survives/thrives for decades, especially an "eventually deflationary" currency, i think the 10x growth number is way too low.  that improves the upside of the gamble/invest scenario.

if you're talking about holding established coins for multiple decades, as opposed to trying to catch a newish coin make 10x gains in a single year, you should be able to watch the trajectory for each coin.  whether it's seeing how that coin's mining system works over several years, how quickly security problems get patched, how chain forks and upgrades are handled, if scalability appears to be on track, how/if the coin is being regulated by governments, how the coin's price responds to stock/bond market crashes, etc., it probably won't be a big surprise if a particular coin positions itself for long-term survival.  also, the network effect could theoretically lead to several coins gaining a large user base and becoming entrenched.

on a related note something like the Bit20 "index fund" of multiple cryptocurrencies might be something to look into.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on July 11, 2017, 07:25:39 PM
related to long-term bitcoin holding, the next few weeks could be very interesting.  signaling and upgrades and potential forks are on the table.  if things don't go well bitcoin (and other cryptos) could get pretty volatile.

i plan to just ride out whatever happens and not spend any coins until the dust settles.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 11, 2017, 08:21:08 PM
I agree. It's helpful to remember that bitcoin only hit dollar parity six years ago, so in the last six years its return has been ~2,500:1 not 10:1. Who is to say if the cryptocurrency world will ever see anything like that rate of return in the future,* but I think the folks who are buying up currencies and hoping for appreciation was imaging something on the same order of magnitude.

*And past performance is obviously no guide to future returns.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 11, 2017, 08:27:40 PM
if you're talking about holding established coins for multiple decades, as opposed to trying to catch a newish coin make 10x gains in a single year, you should be able to watch the trajectory for each coin.  whether it's seeing how that coin's mining system works over several years, how quickly security problems get patched, how chain forks and upgrades are handled, if scalability appears to be on track, how/if the coin is being regulated by governments, how the coin's price responds to stock/bond market crashes, etc., it probably won't be a big surprise if a particular coin positions itself for long-term survival.  also, the network effect could theoretically lead to several coins gaining a large user base and becoming entrenched.

But by the time it has that years and years of history, it'll be mainstream enough to have the majority of the price gains already done (the people who took the earlier risk get the higher rewards), so you can hold for some sort of diversification, but why would you expect crazy gains at that point?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Radagast on July 11, 2017, 09:19:44 PM
I'm interested in this. I could see it being 5% of my total portfolio, which I would automatically rebalance out of if it doubled (nonopled?) to be sure of a profit but did not rebalance back into except within a narrow range. I would do it like ARS suggested and equally weight 10 currencies (or so) because even if nine break even, if a single one rises 1000% I have it made. Dollar cost averaging should be very effective for building a large position in something that is crazy volatile.

The problem is convincing myself to sink the money. I'd prefer to go the mining route. The even harder problem would be convincing my wife to let a few thousand go for either of those purposes.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on July 11, 2017, 09:27:09 PM
Question for Canadians with a crypto-currency portfolio.  I opened a coinbase account, but for methods of purchasing, it only lets me use Visa or MasterCard?  There is a 4% fee, and i'm not sure what my credit card will charge (like a cash-advance fee) in addition if i use it to buy.  Also, how do i get my money out?  Back through my credit card?

I used a prepaid debit card to buy and my bank charged me an international fee of $9 or something like that.  I haven't sold yet so I don't know what happens.

So, as a Canadian, is there another site i should use if i want to buy and sell from my bank account? 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on July 11, 2017, 09:52:42 PM
And i just checked, coinbase doesn't support the selling of digital currency in Canada.  So, i can buy, pay 4%, plus possible cash advance charges, and I can't ever sell it.  What the hell?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on July 11, 2017, 10:25:32 PM
And i just checked, coinbase doesn't support the selling of digital currency in Canada.  So, i can buy, pay 4%, plus possible cash advance charges, and I can't ever sell it.  What the hell?

Can you withdraw to Paypal account? Then from Paypal to Canadian bank.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on July 11, 2017, 10:56:44 PM
And i just checked, coinbase doesn't support the selling of digital currency in Canada.  So, i can buy, pay 4%, plus possible cash advance charges, and I can't ever sell it.  What the hell?

Can you withdraw to Paypal account? Then from Paypal to Canadian bank.

I dunno, the site just automatically knows im in Canada, and only gives me the option to link a credit card and as far as I can tell, no paypal or other options
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 11, 2017, 11:38:50 PM
I'm interested in this. I could see it being 5% of my total portfolio, which I would automatically rebalance out of if it doubled (nonopled?) to be sure of a profit but did not rebalance back into except within a narrow range. I would do it like ARS suggested and equally weight 10 currencies (or so) because even if nine break even, if a single one rises 1000% I have it made. Dollar cost averaging should be very effective for building a large position in something that is crazy volatile.

The problem is convincing myself to sink the money. I'd prefer to go the mining route. The even harder problem would be convincing my wife to let a few thousand go for either of those purposes.

But that's exactly my point. You wouldn't "have it made"... if 1/10th of 5% of your portfolio (or a half a percent of your portfolio) went 10x, you'd suddenly be up 5% on your whole portfolio.  Whoopee!

Is it worth risking 5% of your portfolio for that chance to gain... 5% on your portfolio?

Sure doesn't seem like it to me.

And yes, maybe there are more massive gains, or maybe you make nothing at all, and get wiped out.  But a reasonable scenario just doesn't excite me.  You'd have to take massive risks (large % of your portfolio) and/or get very lucky, and at that point, if you think you will get very lucky, why not just go to the casino?

Or do you think it'll gain 2500x like maze mentions?  And if so, does it have a 1 in 2500 shot to do that, basically?

I don't feel like anyone talks about amounts, or odds. They're just like "well, i think it'll go up. i think cryptocurrencies have a future."

okayyy... and?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shotgunwilly on July 12, 2017, 09:40:06 AM
I'm interested in this. I could see it being 5% of my total portfolio, which I would automatically rebalance out of if it doubled (nonopled?) to be sure of a profit but did not rebalance back into except within a narrow range. I would do it like ARS suggested and equally weight 10 currencies (or so) because even if nine break even, if a single one rises 1000% I have it made. Dollar cost averaging should be very effective for building a large position in something that is crazy volatile.

The problem is convincing myself to sink the money. I'd prefer to go the mining route. The even harder problem would be convincing my wife to let a few thousand go for either of those purposes.

But that's exactly my point. You wouldn't "have it made"... if 1/10th of 5% of your portfolio (or a half a percent of your portfolio) went 10x, you'd suddenly be up 5% on your whole portfolio.  Whoopee!

Is it worth risking 5% of your portfolio for that chance to gain... 5% on your portfolio?

Sure doesn't seem like it to me.

And yes, maybe there are more massive gains, or maybe you make nothing at all, and get wiped out.  But a reasonable scenario just doesn't excite me.  You'd have to take massive risks (large % of your portfolio) and/or get very lucky, and at that point, if you think you will get very lucky, why not just go to the casino?

Or do you think it'll gain 2500x like maze mentions?  And if so, does it have a 1 in 2500 shot to do that, basically?

I don't feel like anyone talks about amounts, or odds. They're just like "well, i think it'll go up. i think cryptocurrencies have a future."

okayyy... and?

But if you pick one of the coins that "make it", that is, their protocol gets adopted by some industry or the world, then you definitely aren't looking at x10.  You're looking at 100x...1000x...more.  There's coins that have done 1000x within a year period on nothing other than speculation by a very tiny part of the population.   

I think it's very hard to determine just how risky of an investment it could be with crypto's.  I do think picking 10 different coins (or diversifying to your liking) is a good idea.  IMO, 5% of a portfolio is worth it.

It's funny you used Factom and Siacoin and ETH earlier in your examples.  These are my 3 main gambles.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 12, 2017, 12:28:51 PM
But if you pick one of the coins that "make it", that is, their protocol gets adopted by some industry or the world, then you definitely aren't looking at x10.  You're looking at 100x...1000x...more.

Sure. Let's talk about Maize's 2500x gain for a second.

Let's stick with Bitcoin, to start with.

Bitcoin, over six years, went from ~1, to ~2500.  Cool.

Now let's say you buy, or mine, or have, some Bitcoin. Are the same gains feasible?

I don't think so, and here's why.  Each coin would be worth $6,250,000. If that doesn't sound absurd, consider this.

Every person who bought at least $400 worth of Bitcoin (or mined enough) when it was cheap ($1 or less) is now a "Bitcoin Millionaire."  If the coin 2500x again, they'd each have 2.5 billion, or more (if they had more coins, so they had more than exactly 1MM right now).

Can we have that many bitcoin billionaires?  Well, why does bitcoin rise in value? For the same reason gold might rise in value; it's what people are willing to pay. It's not producing an income, the way a stock market investment might. It's just what people are willing to pay.

The problem with valuing a bitcoin at 6.25MM is that people can't afford to drive the prices that high. You can't make that many billionaires out of a speculative item, because not only do you hit a point where people don't want to pay that, you hit a point where there's literally not enough money in the world to make each one worth that*.

*Yes, if massive inflation happens, but then those billions aren't worth much anyways; I'm talking real dollars.

Okay, so if Bitcoin can't 2500x any more, the vast majority of its gains are gone.  What about ETH, the second most popular coin?  Well, being at ~250 (+/-... ~190 as of this typing, but as high as ~400 a month ago), it's just a factor of 10 below BTC. It'll have the same problem that it can't grow that much.

So you're left with the other coins, if you're hoping for massive gains. But which ones? And who's to say they'll see those gains, or that you'll be in the right coin?  What if a new coin pops up you aren't invested in, and then immediately sees a ton of growth you miss out on? (Say a government DOES decide they want a cryptocurrency; doubtful, as they wouldn't have control, but let's pretend--why wouldn't they issue their own, new coin, that would immediately jump up before you can get in?) Or are you going to keep investing in every new coin issued?

Even if not, you're probably trying to pick coins worth mere cents, and at that point, you're basically betting on penny stocks.

And how much do you have to bet to make it worthwhile?  If you're investing in 10-20 coins, and want the amount your money goes up to actually be significant change, you'll probably need to invest thousands in each one.

Is that the best investment strategy with your money? (Again, I'm ignoring mining. If you can do that profitably, okay. Just talking buying and/or holding coins for appreciation's sake.)

My point with this post is that it doesn't seem like the big coins can make those sort of gains based on where they already are, and if you're trying to pick the longshots, why not go bet the ponies?

Maybe you hold some of the bigger coins for more modest gains (10x?), but then you get back to my previous question at the bottom of the last page of is it worth it for those sort of gains?  I think I covered the problems with that already; I just wanted to address the "2500x" possibility here.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Socmonkey on July 12, 2017, 02:38:56 PM
I just want to mention that I have accumulated 10,500 STEEM coins and 900 Steem dollars posting on www.Steemit.com (http://www.Steemit.com)

No mining rigs required. No monetary investment required.

If you want to get into cryptocurrency 'for free' try posting there. You can trade your STEEM or Steem dollars for Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency you want.

My hoard was worth over $25,000 at the top of the market last month. It's still worth 5 figures. All from just from making posts on the site.

I wrote a bit more about it on this thread: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/new-side-gig-earning-possibility-steemit/ (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/new-side-gig-earning-possibility-steemit/)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on July 12, 2017, 03:24:59 PM
Someone else mentioned earlier in the thread that if you are interested in the possibility of the technology, one of your best bets might be to educate your self on those skills and sell your abilities, i.e. your personal capital. This seems somewhat consistent with what I've seen on the consulting / freelancing job sites with the posts of people looking for people skilled at blockchain development, creating a new cryptocurrency, applying existing toolkits, etc. I haven't dug far enough to see what the hourly consulting rates are, but I imagine they'd be lucrative? Anyone dug in?

In a gold rush, it doesn't hurt to be the one selling shovels.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on July 12, 2017, 05:54:03 PM
Someone else mentioned earlier in the thread that if you are interested in the possibility of the technology, one of your best bets might be to educate your self on those skills and sell your abilities, i.e. your personal capital. This seems somewhat consistent with what I've seen on the consulting / freelancing job sites with the posts of people looking for people skilled at blockchain development, creating a new cryptocurrency, applying existing toolkits, etc. I haven't dug far enough to see what the hourly consulting rates are, but I imagine they'd be lucrative? Anyone dug in?

In a gold rush, it doesn't hurt to be the one selling shovels.

I have seen billrates from $150 to $250hr depending on the skills needed. Others are just offering profit sharing (percent of profits). It is a GREAT time to be a software developer, I never seem to have enough time to do all the work that seems to float by.

Thanks. That seems consistent with what I would have imagined in terms of lucrative.
I can even imagine people with experience, at larger / better financed gigs are pulling even higher unadvertised rates if they can convince the client it's worth it.

"It is a GREAT time to be a software developer, I never seem to have enough time to do all the work that seems to float by."

Make hay while the sun shines!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 12, 2017, 06:05:41 PM
Sure. Let's talk about Maize's 2500x gain for a second.

Let's stick with Bitcoin, to start with.

Bitcoin, over six years, went from ~1, to ~2500.  Cool.

Now let's say you buy, or mine, or have, some Bitcoin. Are the same gains feasible?

I don't think so, and here's why.  Each coin would be worth $6,250,000. If that doesn't sound absurd, consider this.

Every person who bought at least $400 worth of Bitcoin (or mined enough) when it was cheap ($1 or less) is now a "Bitcoin Millionaire."  If the coin 2500x again, they'd each have 2.5 billion, or more (if they had more coins, so they had more than exactly 1MM right now).

Can we have that many bitcoin billionaires?  Well, why does bitcoin rise in value? For the same reason gold might rise in value; it's what people are willing to pay. It's not producing an income, the way a stock market investment might. It's just what people are willing to pay.

The problem with valuing a bitcoin at 6.25MM is that people can't afford to drive the prices that high. You can't make that many billionaires out of a speculative item, because not only do you hit a point where people don't want to pay that, you hit a point where there's literally not enough money in the world to make each one worth that*.

*Yes, if massive inflation happens, but then those billions aren't worth much anyways; I'm talking real dollars.

This got me thinking. Can we define what the best case scenario for bitcoin (or something similar) would look like? I'm not even going to touch estimating how likely a best case scenario is to occur.

To me it seems like the absolute best case for bitcoin is that is replaces the USD essentially entirely for all purposes. Assuming the velocity of money remains constant (again a big assumption and I'm not even going to try to estimate how likely that is), we'd need about as much bitcoin value as the M0 money supply, the value of all us currency currently in circulation. I looked a couple of places as the estimated M0 money supply for US dollars is about $3.7 trillion.*

Right now all the bitcoin mined to date is worth about $40B. There's still a bit more bitcoin to be mined in the future, but there's also a non-trivial number of coins that have been irretrievably been removed from the money supply. People lost private keys, or the coins were sent to intentionally false addresses.** So let's assume the two of those cancel out. For $40B in bitcoins to grow to $3.7T in total currency, the price would need to appreciate ~93x. That's a back of the envelope estimate for the maximum possible return on bitcoin price appreciation going forward.

Edit: marginal revision. I found an estimate that says the velocity of the US money supply is currently ~1.2 /quarter (so the average US dollar is spend approximately 1.2 times every three months) and the velocity for bitcoin is currently around ~1.6/quarter. If those velocities remained constant, we'd need only $2.8T in bitcoin to replace $3.7T in USD. This yields an estimate of a maximum of 70x additional growth in the price of bitcoins.

*Source: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BASE

**This old article from 2014 estimated that perhaps 1/3 of all bitcoins mined were lost from circulation.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 12, 2017, 06:42:54 PM
Good thought, maize.

A 93x best case scenario that requires a complete replacement of the US dollar seems pretty meh, to me.

I bet a lot of people speculating on BTC think they'll make 1000x return, and just don't even run any numbers to see that it's just not possible (liklihood aside). I think your thought experiment shows that 100x probably isn't even possible.

I mean, we can imagine wilder scenarios (it replaces every currency on the planet), but not ones that are remotely plausible on any sort of time frame that's reasonable, IMO.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on July 12, 2017, 07:54:24 PM
Good comments. 

I think the further problem will be the continued proliferation of new-and-improved cryptocurrencies.  So if $3T+ in cryptocurrencies are in used in 10 years, that value will be spread across dozens of major currencies and hundreds or thousands of lesser-used currencies. 

I do think that mass chaos is possible very soon if individual banks or even individual retailers start their own currencies.  For example, Macy's and Target and everyone else could take the store credit card one step further by having a store currency.  Maybe it could be cheaper to administer than a store credit card or gift cards, if only because it would mitigate security issues. 

It's crazy to think that an exchange might trade Macy's Coins and Target Coins.  It would also take a lot of traffic out of the traditional credit card system, so it would be bad for credit card points and the various card routing services that have been skimming every transaction since the 1960s.  The more credit cards decline in use and benefits the more Store Coin activity we'd see. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 12, 2017, 08:01:30 PM
Good comments. 

I think the further problem will be the continued proliferation of new-and-improved cryptocurrencies.  So if $3T+ in cryptocurrencies are in used in 10 years, that value will be spread across dozens of major currencies and hundreds or thousands of lesser-used currencies. 

I do think that mass chaos is possible very soon if individual banks or even individual retailers start their own currencies.  For example, Macy's and Target and everyone else could take the store credit card one step further by having a store currency.  Maybe it could be cheaper to administer than a store credit card or gift cards, if only because it would mitigate security issues. 

It's crazy to think that an exchange might trade Macy's Coins and Target Coins.  It would also take a lot of traffic out of the traditional credit card system, so it would be bad for credit card points and the various card routing services that have been skimming every transaction since the 1960s.  The more credit cards decline in use and benefits the more Store Coin activity we'd see.

All of this sounds totally plausible to me, and none of it helps the person currently investing in currently available cryptocurrencies.

Quote
I think the further problem will be the continued proliferation of new-and-improved cryptocurrencies.

This especially stood out as important to me in what you wrote. If you think Factom or Siacoin have novel applications, that may be true, but do you think it'll be such that a better version won't come along that supplants it?

First mover advantage isn't nothing, but given their lack of implementation currently, they don't even have that yet, IMO.

Better versions will come along, and newer coins that do other things.  Unless you invest in every new coin (if you even can, before it goes mainstream), how likely are you to get in early enough on one that goes mainstream?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on July 12, 2017, 09:58:00 PM
...an estimate of a maximum of 70x additional growth in the price of bitcoins.

i'm no economist, but for a hypothetical upper-bound scenario, wouldn't you have to take into account the other markets bitcoin would likely take a large slice of, in addition to the US dollar?  what about the gold market, international real estate, and other fiat currencies?

as maizeman said bitcoin is deflationary because bitcoins are lost all the time.  soon (if not already) more bitcoins will be lost every year than are mined.  i believe this deflationary behavior would lead bitcoin to take a slice of the global invested monetary value.  so a fraction of the total global wealth may be another way to calculate it.

if the global wealth is 256T (according to the Credit Suisse report below), and bitcoin captures 1% of that (2.56T), that makes each of 20M bitcoins (low assumption of 1M lost bitcoin) worth $128k, or 53x the current value.  if bitcoin captures 5% of world wealth, that makes it 266x the current value.

another thing to consider is that only ~100k bitcoins are traded daily, out of the current 16.4M bitcoin in circulation.  i believe this shallow market drives the market price up significantly.  assuming bitcoin in cold storage aren't being somehow traded in the far future, if we say the day-to-day exchange rate is double the "true" value of a bitcoin, that 266x could become 500x at the exchange.  this would be my rainbows+unicorns 30 year outlook.

or if there are nicely liquid ETFs and whatnot available in the future to eliminate the market price doubling effect, a best-case scenario of world currency with 10% of global wealth still gets us to that 500x number.

https://www.credit-suisse.com/corporate/en/articles/news-and-expertise/the-global-wealth-report-2016-201611.html

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 12, 2017, 11:01:28 PM
...an estimate of a maximum of 70x additional growth in the price of bitcoins.

i'm no economist, but for a hypothetical upper-bound scenario, wouldn't you have to take into account the other markets bitcoin would likely take a large slice of, in addition to the US dollar?  what about the gold market, international real estate, and other fiat currencies?


You bring up three different things here, with very different answers:

Can definitely make the case for bitcoin taking a slice out of additional national currencies. I skipped over that because I wanted to balance this against other cyptocurrencies taking a slice out of bitcoin though. But yes, if you throw in all the other national currencies, you can goose the maximum growth factor a fair bit more (although less than you'd think based the the US's share of the global economy. For example, China's economy is ~60% the size of ours, but their M0 money supply is only 25% as large.)

Gold is trickier. Right now all the gold ever mined is worth ~$8.2T (so a bit more than twice the value of all physical US currency in circulation). But if people started to sell gold to buy bitcoin in significant numbers, the price of gold would drop rapidly so you wouldn't have $8.2T available to buy bitcoins. I'm not sure how to model this one, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't have an effect on the ultimate value of a bitcoin in the best case scenario.

Bitcoin really can substitute for dollars or RMB or yen, but I don't see how owning bitcoins is a substitute for owning your home or other real estate. Could you elaborate on that point?

Quote
another thing to consider is that only ~100k bitcoins are traded daily, out of the current 16.4M bitcoin in circulation.  i believe this shallow market drives the market price up significantly.  assuming bitcoin in cold storage aren't being somehow traded in the far future, if we say the day-to-day exchange rate is double the "true" value of a bitcoin, that 266x could become 500x at the exchange.  this would be my rainbows+unicorns 30 year outlook.

This gets back to the question about the velocity of money. The figure I found was 1.6 trades per coin per quarter, or 1.6 trades per coin per 90 days = 0.0178 trades per coin per day. The number you're using is 100k trades day/16.4M coins  = 0.006 trades per coin per day. If you're right, then the velocity of bitcoins is only 1/3 of what I used above, and that would mean the final potential value of bitcoins if they completely replaced the USD would be 3x higher than what I calculated, which is in the same range of multipliers as what you estimate above.

This chart suggests the number of bitcoins exchanged each day is closer to 250k rather than 100k which would be consistent with the higher of the two estimated velocities of money circulation for bitcoin. https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume But please do feel free to correct me if I'm misunderstanding your point here, or if you think that the link above is not a reliable estimate of the number of bitcoins traded on a daily basis.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: LessIsLess on July 13, 2017, 07:19:23 AM
There's some serious money being made and lost in cryptos at the moment.  But let's take a breather and think about the economic value.  Nothing survives unless it offers value, and you don't want to be caught in the excitement and lose your mind, followed by your wallet.

Let's compare briefly crypto currencies to fiat currencies.  The danger with FIAT is when you live under an irresponsible government, such gov't will inflate the FIAT into the sky, making it worthless.  But if you live in the US, that hasn't happened yet.  Also, fiat is defended by the force of law and by the armed forces of the state.  On the other hand, crypto is defended by what?  A development team that someone can capture and hold hostage?  By crytographic algorithm that someone can crack in the future?  There are practically no safeguards.  Once the wallet is lost or emptied out, your "wealth" vanishes.  Can you imagine working your whole life and placing your savings into a crypto currency wallet?

However the blockchain technology itself is quite promising.  It enables great record keeping and many other things.  Many companies are trying to figure out "What can blockchain do for me?"  We seem to be in a period of hyper fever, where anyone can start a "blockchain company" with nothing more than a white paper, and rake in millions of fiat dollars.

All that said, I may consider a small speculative position with the knowledge that I could be the proverbial "greater fool" that is left holding an empty wallet.  Maybe I'll start with mining.  How much does it cost to setup a mining machine that won't burn the house down?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: farmecologist on July 13, 2017, 08:01:21 AM

I always think of Bitcoin as the 'gamers currency'.  Sure, some people have made a ton of money on it...but many people have lost a ton of money on it.  I know of people on both sides of the equation.

As with many things like this...it's great if you get in early.  It seems like many of the people that tout these huge returns are, in fact, early adopters.  As it sits now, I just don't see it as being very viable if you are new to the game.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on July 13, 2017, 10:24:02 AM
Hey miners,

What do you think of the SIA ASIC, Obelisk?

https://www.reddit.com/r/siacoin/comments/6m5870/obelisk_sia_asic_miner_is_in_presale_for_a/

They are selling 4,000 of them on pre-order.  The first 4,000 will capture around 70% of the hashrate.  I read they are expected to mine approximately 5000 SC a day for the first month but it will be down to 3,200 SC a day by years end (but if they release more Obelisk it would greatly reduce the profit).  Seems like too big of a risk but it is intriguing. 

I'm following it but I'll stick with GPU mining SC while its still somewhat profitable.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: KarefulKactus15 on July 13, 2017, 11:17:54 AM
I read this whole thread and did the Goldman Sachs introduction. 

After all that reading my opinion is as follows:

1.)  Mining is very interesting
2.) Buying the actual crypto currencies is just speculative hoping the next guy pays more.
3.) The real winner will be whoever is invested in the blockchain that goes main stream (not the currency)
4.) The most under rated suggestion (IMO) was buying AMD/Nvidia stock as the mining is becoming a hot item.

Pure opinion.    My BIL put Most of their savings into Etherium at close to 300$.   I think that was incredibly foolish and voiced my opinion as such.  That is the only reason I ended up reading this thread.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: kenaces on July 13, 2017, 11:48:20 AM
I am more interested in odds of getting 10x move up in BTC?  Or BTC's possible role as portfolio diversifier?  Hedge against some kind of US dollar crisis?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shotgunwilly on July 13, 2017, 11:55:32 AM
Pure opinion.    My BIL put Most of their savings into Etherium at close to 300$.   I think that was incredibly foolish and voiced my opinion as such.  That is the only reason I ended up reading this thread.

Ouch. Yea, that was foolish.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 13, 2017, 01:23:31 PM
My BIL put Most of their savings into Etherium at close to 300$.   I think that was incredibly foolish and voiced my opinion as such.  That is the only reason I ended up reading this thread.

Did he sell when it was close to $400?

(Also, FWIW, someone who does something like that probably doesn't have a ton of savings.)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: KarefulKactus15 on July 13, 2017, 01:43:58 PM
No sell near 400$.  Still has it, and I believe its at a lower value then when purchased.  And yes, I assume the same thing you assumed.   The overall value probably isnt a very large amount.


Also after looking at AMD and Nvidia - I dont think either is a good buy at their current price.  In fact I think they are both terrible buys...   My opinion again...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shotgunwilly on July 13, 2017, 03:51:38 PM
The mainstream is just barely dipping in. This is almost like 1995 when the public started their investments in internet stocks and the market went beyond crazy and invested in any company that said they may create a webpage.

That's literally what is going on right now.  Everyone and their mom is creating a whitepaper with an ICO (Initial Coin Offering) and selling it (exactly like the IPO's of the internet bubble).  There are companies (I wouldn't even call them companies) gathering tens to hundreds of millions of dollars before they have a product.

The Market Cap of cryptocurrencies is currently about $80 billion, and was something like $110 billion at it's peak a few weeks ago.

I just don't know how far along this bubble we are.  I don't think crypto is quite "mainstream" yet, but I also don't know how many people it has to reach for it to be considered "mainstream."  I think it's interesting to compare the internet bubble, but I don't know what percentage of the public was actually buying up stocks in them back then.  I was actually searching for the total market cap for something like the top 100 internet or tech stocks in 1999, to back of the napkin compare the frenzy, but it's probably impossible to compare the two accurately. 

I would be very weary at buying up cryptocurrency's at this point.  I am a proponent for the technology of some of them, and I believe there will be good investment opportunities at the right time, but there is a frenzy of money being thrown at many of them without any knowledge of what they're actually trying to accomplish, if anything at all.  Gamble at your own risk.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on July 13, 2017, 03:52:35 PM
The mainstream is just barely dipping in. This is almost like 1995 when the public started their investments in internet stocks and the market went beyond crazy

Yeah, possibly.  But stocks are stocks and invented currencies aren't ownership and don't pay a dividend.  But I agree that it won't take much to get some middle-aged and retirees with deep pockets to be persuaded to buy a chuck of these currencies.  Coinbase is a pretty accessible site to anyone who is familiar with online banking but something that is marketed in an even slicker way could help attract that group of people. 

Also, re: the guy moving his savings into Ethereum...something I haven't seen anyone bring up are the problems associated with an estate retrieving cryptocurrencies.  Since few people using Coinbase or similar services are old, no doubt there is no process in place for an estate to withdrawal the funds.  We have seen a few cases where Bitcoins are seized in drug raids and auctioned off but there is no regulation in place for unexpected deaths. 

It's conceivable that someone's crypto accounts could grow exponentially in size during an illness and if there is no will the family might not know the deceased has anything in these accounts.  No doubt some early buyers of Bitcoin have died in accidents or from illnesses over the past five years and their accounts are now worth millions but their heirs are unaware.


Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 13, 2017, 04:59:12 PM
Yeah, possibly.  But stocks are stocks and invented currencies aren't ownership and don't pay a dividend.

A lot of the ICOs state that they will indeed pay dividends (PeerPlays, TaaS, ETHbits).

Note that 1) that doesn't mean they will pay dividends 2) the dividends are generally paid in the same currency used in the ICO which could easily become worthless. 3) Doing this is almost certainly illegal in the USA and could bring the SEC down on the companies doing it.

*shrug*
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on July 13, 2017, 07:02:00 PM
...if people started to sell gold to buy bitcoin in significant numbers, the price of gold would drop rapidly so you wouldn't have $8.2T available to buy bitcoins. I'm not sure how to model this one...

right.  i think some percentage of the gold market (especially folks holding gold ETFs) would move their money into bitcoin if bitcoin sees sustained success.  this would drive up the price of bitcoin regardless of the market cap of gold.

Quote
I don't see how owning bitcoins is a substitute for owning your home or other real estate. Could you elaborate on that point?

going along with the best-case scenario, if bitcoin is seeing multi-decade success i would think some percentage of real estate held as speculation would be sold to buy bitcoin, driving up the bitcoin price.  real estate and bitcoin are both attractive for international investors trying to diversify out of their home countries.

Quote
The number you're using is 100k trades day/16.4M coins  = 0.006 trades per coin per day. If you're right, then the velocity of bitcoins is only 1/3 of what I used above, and that would mean the final potential value of bitcoins if they completely replaced the USD would be 3x higher than what I calculated, which is in the same range of multipliers as what you estimate above.

the 100k bitcoins traded per day number was based on a quick eyeballing of the last 30 days of data.  in last 2 years, according to the bitcoinity.org link below, there was 542M/.4003% = 1.353B bitcoin traded on exchanges (some of the Chinese exchange volume may be inflated, but we'll ignore that).  1.353B / (365*2 days) = 1.85M bitcoin traded per day.  but the same math for the 6-month data gives an average of only ~76k bitcoin traded per day. the daily traded volume is decreasing as least as of late -- so i'm still comfortable with that 100k/day number which as you say triples your calculated potential gains.

the upside still looks to me to be at least 200x current prices in a best-case scenario, and by wiggling some numbers we can get that much higher.

another factor to consider is that the market is unregulated and runs 24/7 -- even if the average price of a bitcoin has an upside of 200x current prices, you could probably sell some bitcoin during the hysteria of an inevitable bubble for several times that.

http://data.bitcoinity.org/markets/volume/2y?c=e&t=b
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 13, 2017, 07:21:14 PM
Ah, so you're only considering reported crypto-to-not-crypto transactions, and I'm considering bitcoins changing hands (could be for USD, could be for goods or services). That explains the 3x differential between the values reported at my link and at yours.

It appears the fundamental divergence in our thinking is that I'm trying to estimate what the maximum value of bitcoin would be if it becomes successful and widely adopted as a medium of exchange while you are trying to estimate the maximum value bitcoin could reach from people buying it because they expect it to keep increasing in value. So I'd say it makes sense we're coming up with different answers because we're asking different questions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on July 13, 2017, 07:35:36 PM
i see the 300k bitcoins transacted per day: (actual bitcoins transacted, not traded on exchanges)

https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume?timespan=2years&daysAverageString=7

i agree that we're coming at this from two different angles.  i think the majority of value of bitcoin in a best-case scenario would be as a global store of wealth, not as a medium of exchange for everyday transactions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on July 13, 2017, 08:05:08 PM
No sell near 400$.  Still has it, and I believe its at a lower value then when purchased.  And yes, I assume the same thing you assumed.   The overall value probably isnt a very large amount.


Also after looking at AMD and Nvidia - I dont think either is a good buy at their current price.  In fact I think they are both terrible buys...   My opinion again...

Nvidia has seen an incredible past few years.  I too share concern about how fast it has grown but the balance sheet is sexy, their products are still above the rest and they not just a GPU company.   Nvidia is involved in autonomous driving and artificial intelligence.  I'm still bullish on Nvidia despite its meteoric rise.  If I had money to buy some shares I would because its going to continue to rise.

AMD is hot right now because of the cryptocurrency fad.  They make the best cards for mining at the moment but they are not as good as Nvidia for gaming (though I think they just came out with a new card that is supposed to compete/beat Nvidia's current high-end gpu for gaming).  AMD has also revealed that it will be producing a new CPU that was a shot across the bow at Intel.  This was huge.  I think there is a lot of upside at AMD but i think it carries more risk than Nvidia and not necessarily more reward.

For that reason, Nvidia is a buy and AMD is a hold in my book.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: cantgrowone on July 13, 2017, 10:06:01 PM
I wouldn't dump my real money into cryptocurrency. It's too volatile. However, I did invest in a 6 GPU rig that is churning on free electricity. Once I pay the rig off I'll keep currency which may be worth nothing one day.

In all movies taken place in the future there is one currency that we see. It's interesting this is not where we are headed.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Krolik on July 14, 2017, 08:32:38 AM
Following

To add to the thread, we have some ETH (Ethereum), LTC (Litecoin) and XRP (Ripple). Total investment at the beginning of the year = ~5K, more of an experiment than any investment strategy. I fully understand it is pure speculation.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on July 14, 2017, 08:52:03 AM
I currently hold Bitcoin as a rainy day savings, an investment and also a monthly budgeting medium. My wife and I both have Shift debit cards that allows us to spend bitcoin anywhere Visa is accepted. This requires us to put our spending Bitcoin in our Coinbase accounts. We each have a little bit of spending money each month and it allows us to budget easily using this separate "bucket" of money. It also helps me limit my risk from an identity theft stand point since I am only storing a few hundred in Coinbase at a time, so if my Shift CC# is ever stolen, only a couple hundred could be stolen. Not that I'd be liable anyway, but it is still good to limit the damage and exposure.

The majority of my Bitcoin is in my offline wallet and is where I store my Bitcoin investment and my rainy day fund. The liquidity of Bitcoin allows me to access the funds in just a few minutes if I needed it by sending a Bitcoin transaction to Coinbase where I can either spend it immediately with my debit card or withdraw it to my bank account.

I believe Bitcoin has an extremely strong future and this setup allows me to store more value into Bitcoin while also keeping the liquidity I need in case of emergencies.


Okay, so if Bitcoin can't 2500x any more, the vast majority of its gains are gone.  What about ETH, the second most popular coin?  Well, being at ~250 (+/-... ~190 as of this typing, but as high as ~400 a month ago), it's just a factor of 10 below BTC. It'll have the same problem that it can't grow that much.

I don't quite follow this post and especially this excerpt. Just because a majority of an investment's growth is behind it doesn't make it a poor investment for the future. The same thing could be said about Amazon. It will not likely see gains like it had early on, but that doesn't mean Amazon is a poor investment for the future.

The problem is that people are looking at Bitcoin at its face value. They are looking at the percentage that it has risen and fallen looking at what it was valued at last year compared to where it is today (~$2200-2500).

However, if you look at it from a market capitalization perspective (which is where its value is ultimately derived), then things are much easier to put into perspective. Because of its limited supply, its value is directly tied to its market capitalization. Right now its market capitalization is around $40billion. This is just a drop in the bucket as far as currencies go. Bitcoin could easily reach $100billion in just couple years and it wouldn't even take much investment to do that. This would roughly double the value of Bitcoin to about $5000.

There are so many ways in which Bitcoin could receive the influx of money to reach a market capitalization of $100billion. Even just some simply good news (ETF approval, scaling fixes, etc) could improve market sentiment that further drives investment. Look at what Japan is doing that has driving new money into Bitcoin.

Now, think to yourself how many investments you could make that would double your money in just a couple years? I don't think Bitcoin is as big of a risk as it is made out to be and I don't think you're giving it as much of an upside as it deserves.

I also don't understand your comment about people "not being able to afford to drive prices higher". Bitcoin extremely divisible. So even if Bitcoin was valued at $100,000 today, that would divide today's single Bitcoin down to .025 of a Bitcoin. Currently it is divisible to down to .00000001 of a Bitcoin. That means there is a ton of room to grow before anyone would be "priced out of Bitcoin". I don't even see that as a possibility because it is almost a self-defeating prophecy. In order for it to price people out of it, it would need to reach mainstream adoption at which point everyone would be benefiting from its increased value. At that point, it would be almost impossible to price society out of something they already own and use. If that were the case, income inequality of that scale would make today's look paltry and we'd probably have much bigger problems to worry about.

You can own fractions of a penny of a Bitcoin at the moment and will be able to do so even when the market capitalization where to reach trillions of dollars. At that point, Bitcoin would have seen enormous gains that could be earned.

A majority of the Bitcoins have already been mined and the rate of new Bitcoins will continue to decrease. That means, any new investments into Bitcoin will directly result in an increase of its value.

At this point, I don't see Bitcoin failing and I don't see any other currency replacing it. But, I do see room for more than one crypto-currency. Bitcoin does one thing and does it really well. It facilitates an exchange of value between two parties. Other currencies that build upon this functionality, while becoming more useful at a very specific task, they are also intrinsically tied to their purpose. For example, Storj is a coin used in the development of a cloud storage solution. It really is an awesome technology and I think that it or Siacoin could really compete with the likes of Amazon, Apple, Google or Microsoft for the cloud storage market. But, that's really the only market I see them competing in. Because of this, I don't see coins like this replacing Bitcoin or its functionality.

It would take a huge shift in the current sentiment to change Bitcoin's fate. Government's would need to change their course and start condemning/outlawing it (the opposite of what is happening).  There is way more upside than any downside at this point.

Bitcoin's biggest risk comes from scaling to meet its future potential. So it could either fail to scale (the next couple months will be very telling), or a coin that is very similar to Bitcoin (primarily acts as a medium of exchange) that is much faster at processing transactions comes along.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on July 14, 2017, 09:13:11 AM
Question for Canadians with a crypto-currency portfolio.  I opened a coinbase account, but for methods of purchasing, it only lets me use Visa or MasterCard?  There is a 4% fee, and i'm not sure what my credit card will charge (like a cash-advance fee) in addition if i use it to buy.  Also, how do i get my money out?  Back through my credit card?

I used a prepaid debit card to buy and my bank charged me an international fee of $9 or something like that.  I haven't sold yet so I don't know what happens.

So, as a Canadian, is there another site i should use if i want to buy and sell from my bank account?

JAYSLOL, for what it is worth, when I purchased Bitcoin with a credit card through Coinbase, the credit card company (Barclays) treated it as a regular purchase. That means I earned points on the purchase of my Bitcoin. With about 2.1% earned back from my credit card in cash with these miles, that essentially reduced the fee I had to pay through Coinbase to about 2% on the purchase of Bitcoin which is almost what the fee is for a bank transfer purchase.

YMMV, but if you can't find another purchasing alternative, then purchasing through Coinbase with a credit card that earns you decent miles is an option.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BrandNewPapa on July 14, 2017, 10:55:37 AM
Personally, I don't see Bitcoin or other crypto currencies replacing any fiat currency in my lifetime (hopefully another 60 years).

I've always thought of it more as a store of value similar to that of gold. I don't own any gold because I find it impractical.

However, I do want a way to hedge the US dollar in the event of a war, global crisis, or incredibility stupid president/congress. The hedge should be simple, easy to adjust, and be easy to exchange for goods and services. That's where BTC comes in for me (and I think many others like me).

I'm not looking for amazing returns (they would be nice though), I'm looking to maintain my purchasing power.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 14, 2017, 07:26:48 PM
Update on the mining experiment.

(https://i.imgpile.com/nwUxK1.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nwUxK1)
(click to zoom in)

The recent decline in cyptocurrency prices has essentially halted the growth in difficulty for ZEC mining, but the difficulty isn't going down at all either. Presumably everyone who bought new graphics cards during the recent runup is trying to recoup as much of their investment as possible even if the decline in price is great enough that buying new graphics cards for mining doesn't make financial sense at the moment (and since all the other currencies seem to be moving down in concert people cannot simply switch over to mining a different currency). So unless the price decline continues to the point where mining drops below the cost of the electricity to run the cards or the value of another currency that's mineable with GPUs spikes, I don't expect mining difficulty to actually decline.

I'm having a lot of fun gaming out different people's incentives and the possibilities in different future scenarios. However, it seems like this might be a stressful time if I had sunk real money into my mining hardware.

Link to the original description of the ZEC mining experiment.  (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/official-crypto-currency-portfolios-and-discussion/msg1600715/#msg1600715)

Link to details of how I updated to include electrical costs (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/official-crypto-currency-portfolios-and-discussion/msg1610593/#msg1610593) (thanks CanuckExpat)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on July 14, 2017, 09:20:27 PM
Update on the mining experiment.

(https://i.imgpile.com/nwUxK1.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nwUxK1)
(click to zoom in)

The recent decline in cyptocurrency prices has essentially halted the growth in difficulty for ZEC mining, but the difficulty isn't going down at all either. Presumably everyone who bought new graphics cards during the recent runup is trying to recoup as much of their investment as possible even if the decline in price is great enough that buying new graphics cards for mining doesn't make financial sense at the moment (and since all the other currencies seem to be moving down in concert people cannot simply switch over to mining a different currency). So unless the price decline continues to the point where mining drops below the cost of the electricity to run the cards or the value of another currency that's mineable with GPUs spikes, I don't expect mining difficulty to actually decline.

I'm having a lot of fun gaming out different people's incentives and the possibilities in different future scenarios. However, it seems like this might be a stressful time if I had sunk real money into my mining hardware.

Does that chart suggest you are losing money due to electricity?  Mining is still profitable.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 14, 2017, 09:45:34 PM
Nope. I'm just earning money more slowly if you account for the extra charge on my electrical bill. If I was losing money (after electricity) the slope of the blue line would be negative.

Right now I'm still making approximately 4x as much from mining as I pay for the extra electricity, which is a reasonable profit margin if you don't worry about paying off the cost of the mining right. A few weeks ago it was 10x.

(I am losing money right now on the value of the bitcoins and ZEC I haven't converted to USD, but that's a completely separate issue from whether mining makes money or not.)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on July 14, 2017, 11:03:07 PM
Maizeman, thanks for updating your experiments.  They add to the already thought-provoking discussions on this thread.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on July 15, 2017, 10:27:44 AM
Nope. I'm just earning money more slowly if you account for the extra charge on my electrical bill. If I was losing money (after electricity) the slope of the blue line would be negative.

Right now I'm still making approximately 4x as much from mining as I pay for the extra electricity, which is a reasonable profit margin if you don't worry about paying off the cost of the mining right. A few weeks ago it was 10x.

(I am losing money right now on the value of the bitcoins and ZEC I haven't converted to USD, but that's a completely separate issue from whether mining makes money or not.)

Ok thanks for the update.  I'm seeing similar results with my six underclocked 1060's.  I'm dual mining Eth and SC and the current value mined is $266 but with $45 of electricity costs.  A little closer to 5x electricity costs but it was 15x+ a couple weeks ago when the Eth difficulty was lower and the price higher.  I'm late to the party so I didn't actually benefit from the higher profit as I was building my rig.  Doh!  I'm in it for the longrun though and 4x cost is still not a bad return.  I'm speculating the prices of coins will drop atleast 50% before they go up a bit.  I have a weird feeling Eth will go back down to $45.  It's pure speculation though and I'm not selling what I have until mid-August-September.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 15, 2017, 01:27:35 PM
I haven't messed around at all with underclocking. Do you find that it makes a significant difference in your power consumption?

Back when electricity was only 10% of my mining income, it seemed like it wasn't a great trade off to spend time trying to optimize power consumption, but if current trends continue I imagine it's something I'll want to explore more.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on July 16, 2017, 09:00:51 AM
I haven't messed around at all with underclocking. Do you find that it makes a significant difference in your power consumption?

Back when electricity was only 10% of my mining income, it seemed like it wasn't a great trade off to spend time trying to optimize power consumption, but if current trends continue I imagine it's something I'll want to explore more.

Definitely.  I can get each of my 6 gpu's to mine Ether with an additional 3mh/s by reducing power to 65% from 100% (default settings) and increasing memory.  My rig consumes 520 watts and gets 141mh/s Ether and 1080 mh/s SC.  My SC hash is lower when dual mining because my cards are only 3gb.  I haven't measured its power consumption above 65% power but the difference between 60 and 65% was 28 watts an each card gained .5% Ether mh/s.  If prices continue to plummet i will adjust it down to 60%.

I'm not sure if this is true but I've read AMD's are not stable when underclocked.  I underclock 6x GTX 1060's.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: StudentEngineer on July 16, 2017, 02:09:43 PM
I purchased 16 ethereum coins in november at ~$12 a coin then got fed up with the price moving sideways as btc took off from $600 to $2k+ and sold out at $12 or $13 then it took off to nearly $400..... If only I had put a couple thousand on eth at $12/coin.... thats a life changing amount of gains...

My biggest problem is that I don't understand the true fundamentals behind it.  I would have no idea how safe any coin is or how easy it would be for them to split etc... thus its extremely difficult to hold as it drops.

Any helpful info on that?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 16, 2017, 02:32:34 PM
What if is a very dangerous road to go down. I remember reading about bitcoin on slashdot years before it crossed the dollar parity threshold. This was back in the era before GPU mining, so all it would have taken was installing mining software on the old HTPC that've followed me through a half dozen moves to accumulate a non-trivial number of bitcoins. The second "what if" for me was back in early 2013, when I started to get excited about bitcoins for the first time (price was around $100/bitcoin), I figured out I could squeeze maybe $500/month out of my budget to start accumulating some but didn't end up following through for lots of silly reasons.

The thing to remember is that you make decisions with the time with the information you have at the time. Just because a decision turned out to have good or bad consequences with the benefit of hindsight doesn't tell you whether it was good or bad decision with the information you had at the time you made it.

My biggest problem is that I don't understand the true fundamentals behind it.  I would have no idea how safe any coin is or how easy it would be for them to split etc... thus its extremely difficult to hold as it drops.

Any helpful info on that?

In terms of safety, any particular cryptocurrency could go to zero (or close enough to zero so as to make no difference). That's the nature of currencies, they have value only because we all agree they do. Of course you could say the same of any non-crypto currency as well. In this way all currencies are different from stocks or commodities.

Unlike USD or RMB or Euros, there is also a chance the value of cryptocurrencies will increase 10x or maybe even 100x. How likely is zeroing out compared to the likelihood of increasing in price by, say, 10x or more for a given cryptocurrency? If I knew that I'd be rich.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: redstar on July 16, 2017, 02:38:08 PM
I am currently holding a bit in ETH, BTC, and LTC because they were easy to acquire with just GDAX and Coinbase. However, I'm looking to create a DIY index fund of currencies by market cap. The services that will handle this for me, like Shapeshift's Prism and ICONOMI aren't out to the public yet, so I figure I might do it myself by buying the top 10-20 coins.

The rebalancing would suck though.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 16, 2017, 02:58:03 PM
Interesting idea. Would you just go with the top twenty entries on this list? (https://coinmarketcap.com) I'd be temped to weed out currencies like ripple and bitshares that are really using blockchain technology to do something really different, but I don't know if that'd help or hurt over the long term.

If you do a cap weighted index, you shouldn't have to do much rebalancing at all, should you?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: redstar on July 16, 2017, 03:14:10 PM
Yes, something like that. I'm tempted to weed out certain coins that I don't believe in, but I may just be overconfident, so I feel like I should trust the index.

Rebalancing within the index shouldn't be a problem with market cap weighting (except when new coins enter/leave?), but the volatility relative to the rest of my portfolio will probably throw my asset allocations out of whack very quickly. I feel like most people rebalance like once a year, but in the cryptocurrency space, that would not be frequent enough.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: redstar on July 16, 2017, 03:32:29 PM
There seems to be something like this here: http://www.bittwenty.com/bit20.php

I haven't given it much of a look yet, and I'm not sure I trust them over doing it myself. It's worth noting that the do exclude certain coins like Ripple and Tether, and they also cap each coin to 10% of the index to avoid dominance.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 16, 2017, 03:40:43 PM
Gotcha. Yes, rebalancing into and out of your self-made index would indeed be a big pain. If I were doing it, I'd be tempted to just drop a chunk of money into it -- an amount I could afford to loose -- and then just let it ride without rebalancing. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on July 17, 2017, 07:11:14 AM
There seems to be something like this here: http://www.bittwenty.com/bit20.php

I haven't given it much of a look yet, and I'm not sure I trust them over doing it myself. It's worth noting that the do exclude certain coins like Ripple and Tether, and they also cap each coin to 10% of the index to avoid dominance.

That's very interesting. I didn't know there was a crypto index fund like that. I'll have to check it out. Seems like an easy way to diversify. Thanks for sharing that.

I wonder how they would handle a situation of a chain split for any given currency in the index. Nothing like that is mentioned on their site. Seems like it would be rather important for the trust of the investors to understand that.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on July 17, 2017, 07:47:50 AM
Question for Canadians with a crypto-currency portfolio.  I opened a coinbase account, but for methods of purchasing, it only lets me use Visa or MasterCard?  There is a 4% fee, and i'm not sure what my credit card will charge (like a cash-advance fee) in addition if i use it to buy.  Also, how do i get my money out?  Back through my credit card?

I used a prepaid debit card to buy and my bank charged me an international fee of $9 or something like that.  I haven't sold yet so I don't know what happens.

So, as a Canadian, is there another site i should use if i want to buy and sell from my bank account?

JAYSLOL, for what it is worth, when I purchased Bitcoin with a credit card through Coinbase, the credit card company (Barclays) treated it as a regular purchase. That means I earned points on the purchase of my Bitcoin. With about 2.1% earned back from my credit card in cash with these miles, that essentially reduced the fee I had to pay through Coinbase to about 2% on the purchase of Bitcoin which is almost what the fee is for a bank transfer purchase.

YMMV, but if you can't find another purchasing alternative, then purchasing through Coinbase with a credit card that earns you decent miles is an option.

Thanks, thats good to know.  I'm still debating whether i should buy at the moment, knowing that it would be a buy and hold for now as they won't let me sell it at the moment. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on July 17, 2017, 01:07:56 PM
I purchased 16 ethereum coins in november at ~$12 a coin then got fed up with the price moving sideways as btc took off from $600 to $2k+ and sold out at $12 or $13 then it took off to nearly $400..... If only I had put a couple thousand on eth at $12/coin.... thats a life changing amount of gains...

My biggest problem is that I don't understand the true fundamentals behind it.  I would have no idea how safe any coin is or how easy it would be for them to split etc... thus its extremely difficult to hold as it drops.

Any helpful info on that?

regarding ETH, keep in mind that there is NO SUPPLY CAP. they were smart to capitalize on the enterprise aspect, which was extremely smart and IMO is the reason why they've managed to hold on.

even though cryptocurrencies are a new asset class, i would study investing psychology and fundamentals as most of them probably apply. many people have panicked and sold (some at huge losses), assuming the market will never come back. consider looking back through history with how every market downturn resulted in a market come back at some point. those who kept buying (dollar cost averaging) or just held on, ultimately fared better than those who panicked and sold.

*to add, when choosing a token to invest in/buy, look at tokens which have a real use case that could result in widespread adoption and active dev teams. with the proliferation of ICO's, read that company's white paper, and engage with the general crypto-community (bitcointalk.org for instance). good luck.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 17, 2017, 02:17:56 PM


consider looking back through history with how every market downturn resulted in a market come back at some point.

Well that's not true.

Quote
those who kept buying (dollar cost averaging) or just held on, ultimately fared better than those who panicked and sold.

Nor that.

Do you think there's never been any assets that went to zero?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on July 17, 2017, 07:20:39 PM
Well that's not true.

well, it is. financial markets ultimately recover at some point.

Quote
Nor that.
i'm not talking about a single asset, i mentioned markets.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onewayfamily on July 17, 2017, 09:55:44 PM
There are also some markets that don't go to zero, and do recover, but you'd have to wait decades for the recovery. Which for many people would simply mean they have to exit all/part of their position as they need the money to spend or for other things, or the downturn in that market/asset class simply outlives them.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: cheddarpie on July 18, 2017, 06:52:19 AM
Following with some questions but haven't read the whole thread yet so will do that first ... :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 18, 2017, 04:49:54 PM
Well that's not true.

well, it is. financial markets ultimately recover at some point.

Quote
Nor that.
i'm not talking about a single asset, i mentioned markets.

Tell me how the tulip market (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania) is doing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on July 18, 2017, 05:06:11 PM
Tell me how the tulip market (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania) is doing.

great, my tulip portfolio is up 8.7% over the last 24hrs.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on July 18, 2017, 06:35:53 PM
why does tulip mania always come up in these discussions?  of course there are such things as bubbles in all kinds of markets.  looking at the charts in the wikipedia link or in the link below, tulip mania (even if the popular retelling is overblown) lasted only a couple years at most. 

cryptocurrencies have enjoyed an 8 year run.  so far so good outlasting the tulip bubble :)

https://stratechery.com/2017/tulips-myths-and-cryptocurrencies/ (https://stratechery.com/2017/tulips-myths-and-cryptocurrencies/)

another note: bubbles in cryptocurrencies have popped, dramatically, and several times even, and yet they are still hanging around.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 18, 2017, 08:35:42 PM
It comes up because it's an easy comparison.

I agree cryptocurrency is different, and I wouldn't even say it's necessarily in a bubble.  But it's a good ridiculous counter to ridiculous statements like these:
consider looking back through history with how every market downturn resulted in a market come back at some point.

Well that's not true.

Quote
those who kept buying (dollar cost averaging) or just held on, ultimately fared better than those who panicked and sold.

Nor that.

Do you think there's never been any assets that went to zero?

Those who kept buying always do better?  What about when it goes to 0? No market has ever gone to 0?  Tell that to the currency market for the Zimbabwe dollar.

What about when they sell (yes low) and put it into a market or asset that performs better going forward? The opportunity cost going forward is all that matters, and you can't say that someone who held always did better than someone who sold (and invested in something else).

Cryptocurrency has a lot going for it, possibly. We don't need hyperbole and inaccurate statements to muddy the waters.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on July 19, 2017, 05:51:55 AM
Tell me how the tulip market (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania) is doing.
great, my tulip portfolio is up 8.7% over the last 24hrs.

The interesting question is why did it go up 8.7% in one day? 
Was there a major announcement? 
Have the fundamentals changed? 
Where do we expect the value to go tomorrow or next week?

I believe this kind of growth/speculation is damaging in the long run.  I experienced the dot com hysteria and subsequent crash - this feels very similar.

Actually yes, there was pretty good news yesterday that a large number of Bitcoin miners have begun running the new code release yesterday that supports Segwit adoption. That's very good news. The recent drop in prices was related to concern about whether or not there would be a chain split come August first. The fact that so many miners are now adopting SegWit means that a chain split is less likely and users of Bitcoin are more confident. I think the August 1st upgrade date will be a non-issue and Bitcoin will be able to facilitate a lot more transactions than previously and this will result in a large price increase by the end of August.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mcampbell on July 19, 2017, 05:59:17 AM
I purchased 16 ethereum coins in november at ~$12 a coin then got fed up with the price moving sideways as btc took off from $600 to $2k+ and sold out at $12 or $13 then it took off to nearly $400..... If only I had put a couple thousand on eth at $12/coin.... thats a life changing amount of gains...

My biggest problem is that I don't understand the true fundamentals behind it.  I would have no idea how safe any coin is or how easy it would be for them to split etc... thus its extremely difficult to hold as it drops.

Any helpful info on that?

regarding ETH, keep in mind that there is NO SUPPLY CAP. they were smart to capitalize on the enterprise aspect, which was extremely smart and IMO is the reason why they've managed to hold on.

even though cryptocurrencies are a new asset class, i would study investing psychology and fundamentals as most of them probably apply. many people have panicked and sold (some at huge losses), assuming the market will never come back. consider looking back through history with how every market downturn resulted in a market come back at some point. those who kept buying (dollar cost averaging) or just held on, ultimately fared better than those who panicked and sold.

*to add, when choosing a token to invest in/buy, look at tokens which have a real use case that could result in widespread adoption and active dev teams. with the proliferation of ICO's, read that company's white paper, and engage with the general crypto-community (bitcointalk.org for instance). good luck.

There currently isn't a single ICO with real world value. The ICOs are not equity in the company but based on some future value of utility. They are really dangerous instruments compared to Bitcoin/Ethereum that have at least some proven themselves with at least one use case currency


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on July 19, 2017, 06:40:52 AM
There currently isn't a single ICO with real world value. The ICOs are not equity in the company but based on some future value of utility. They are really dangerous instruments compared to Bitcoin/Ethereum that have at least some proven themselves with at least one use case currency


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is so much wrong with this statement. To make a bold claim that there isn't a single ICO with real world value is vastly ignorant to the technology and what ICO's represent and the benefit they provide.

No, they're not equity in any company themselves, but they are equity in a protocol that a company could build itself completely off of. ICOs give developers the opportunity to develop protocols while giving incentive to users to adopt the protocol by giving them a share of the monetization that the protocol provides. Previously it was always a "chicken or the egg" scenario when trying to develop a new technology protocol. A developer might want to create a brand new protocol that would provide a huge benefit, but it might rely on a vast amount of early adopters to get the protocol off the ground.

A great example of this is decentralized cloud storage (ie, Siacoin and Storj). To get a new decentralized cloud storage solution off the ground, it would require a large number of users in the system to ensure there are enough nodes to decentralize the storage of files for new users looking to store their files. But, if there is no incentive to give people to put their hard earned free space up for rent, then it would be very difficult for a solution like that to ever get off the ground. ICOs provide an immediate stake into the solution by creating an incentive in the form of a crypto-currency to those individuals that become a part of the protocol. This allows a system like this to immediately build the framework needed to bring users and adoption to their new protocol. To say that this has no real-world value is insane. These solutions could dramatically shake up the cloud storage market that is in need of one desperately. A decentralized cloud storage solution you can trust is exactly what the market needs.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: AlanStache on July 19, 2017, 10:43:33 AM
Thanks for the great read.  I am nearly at a point to start small level speculation. 

Up thread ARS asked "is it worth it?":  My thought would be to dollar cost average into a few currencies at a total of few hundred
 per month total.  Doing this would postponed my barebones FIRE date by 2-3 months if the entire speculation went to zero.  I tested it assuming the buys were not part of my RE budget.  So the downside seems manageable while there is a good upside potential. 

Any thoughts on how crypto currencies would fair in a broad scale market down turn?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on July 19, 2017, 11:00:58 AM
Tell me how the tulip market (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania) is doing.
great, my tulip portfolio is up 8.7% over the last 24hrs.

The interesting question is why did it go up 8.7% in one day? 
Was there a major announcement? 
Have the fundamentals changed? 
Where do we expect the value to go tomorrow or next week?

I believe this kind of growth/speculation is damaging in the long run.  I experienced the dot com hysteria and subsequent crash - this feels very similar.

Actually yes, there was pretty good news yesterday that a large number of Bitcoin miners have begun running the new code release yesterday that supports Segwit adoption. That's very good news. The recent drop in prices was related to concern about whether or not there would be a chain split come August first. The fact that so many miners are now adopting SegWit means that a chain split is less likely and users of Bitcoin are more confident. I think the August 1st upgrade date will be a non-issue and Bitcoin will be able to facilitate a lot more transactions than previously and this will result in a large price increase by the end of August.

This also happened yesterday: https://entethalliance.org/enterprise-ethereum-alliance-becomes-worlds-largest-open-source-blockchain-initiative/
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mcampbell on July 19, 2017, 01:06:27 PM
There currently isn't a single ICO with real world value. The ICOs are not equity in the company but based on some future value of utility. They are really dangerous instruments compared to Bitcoin/Ethereum that have at least some proven themselves with at least one use case currency


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is so much wrong with this statement. To make a bold claim that there isn't a single ICO with real world value is vastly ignorant to the technology and what ICO's represent and the benefit they provide.

No, they're not equity in any company themselves, but they are equity in a protocol that a company could build itself completely off of. ICOs give developers the opportunity to develop protocols while giving incentive to users to adopt the protocol by giving them a share of the monetization that the protocol provides. Previously it was always a "chicken or the egg" scenario when trying to develop a new technology protocol. A developer might want to create a brand new protocol that would provide a huge benefit, but it might rely on a vast amount of early adopters to get the protocol off the ground.

A great example of this is decentralized cloud storage (ie, Siacoin and Storj). To get a new decentralized cloud storage solution off the ground, it would require a large number of users in the system to ensure there are enough nodes to decentralize the storage of files for new users looking to store their files. But, if there is no incentive to give people to put their hard earned free space up for rent, then it would be very difficult for a solution like that to ever get off the ground. ICOs provide an immediate stake into the solution by creating an incentive in the form of a crypto-currency to those individuals that become a part of the protocol. This allows a system like this to immediately build the framework needed to bring users and adoption to their new protocol. To say that this has no real-world value is insane. These solutions could dramatically shake up the cloud storage market that is in need of one desperately. A decentralized cloud storage solution you can trust is exactly what the market needs.

Cloud storage market won't be shaken up from this. If you are technical you will realize that the extra redundancy requirements and high chance of data loss. Means they will never be competitive with Amazon. I worked for a large cloud hosting company and it's difficult even at massive scale to come to pricing parity with Amazon. Having some random people host it and with many more copies is a joke. It will never be in the same price realm. Each of these ICOs is hyping some future vaporware.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on July 19, 2017, 01:48:09 PM
There currently isn't a single ICO with real world value. The ICOs are not equity in the company but based on some future value of utility. They are really dangerous instruments compared to Bitcoin/Ethereum that have at least some proven themselves with at least one use case currency


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is so much wrong with this statement. To make a bold claim that there isn't a single ICO with real world value is vastly ignorant to the technology and what ICO's represent and the benefit they provide.

No, they're not equity in any company themselves, but they are equity in a protocol that a company could build itself completely off of. ICOs give developers the opportunity to develop protocols while giving incentive to users to adopt the protocol by giving them a share of the monetization that the protocol provides. Previously it was always a "chicken or the egg" scenario when trying to develop a new technology protocol. A developer might want to create a brand new protocol that would provide a huge benefit, but it might rely on a vast amount of early adopters to get the protocol off the ground.

A great example of this is decentralized cloud storage (ie, Siacoin and Storj). To get a new decentralized cloud storage solution off the ground, it would require a large number of users in the system to ensure there are enough nodes to decentralize the storage of files for new users looking to store their files. But, if there is no incentive to give people to put their hard earned free space up for rent, then it would be very difficult for a solution like that to ever get off the ground. ICOs provide an immediate stake into the solution by creating an incentive in the form of a crypto-currency to those individuals that become a part of the protocol. This allows a system like this to immediately build the framework needed to bring users and adoption to their new protocol. To say that this has no real-world value is insane. These solutions could dramatically shake up the cloud storage market that is in need of one desperately. A decentralized cloud storage solution you can trust is exactly what the market needs.

Cloud storage market won't be shaken up from this. If you are technical you will realize that the extra redundancy requirements and high chance of data loss. Means they will never be competitive with Amazon. I worked for a large cloud hosting company and it's difficult even at massive scale to come to pricing parity with Amazon. Having some random people host it and with many more copies is a joke. It will never be in the same price realm. Each of these ICOs is hyping some future vaporware.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sia already offers this service to users for the insane cost of $2 per TB.  I suspect the price will go up as an incentive to attract more hosts but the business model has worked so far on a smaller scale, the developers are actively improving the model and there is a group of successful tech investors that have a stake in Sia's parent company.  Your statement regarding redundancy and high chance of data loss seems contradictory.  Data hosts only get paid at the end of the contract and there are currently 4 copies of every tiny piece of data spread, so if three are offline the fourth will allow a complete set of data to be opened.  The developers have also indicated in their announcement that they will continue research into where the sweet-spot is to ensure there is a 99.999% chance the user's data will be accessible.  If they can continue to do this and still price their services at anything close to the 10x cheaper than the competition then I don't see why anyone would dismiss them.  It's a young company, that recently received a $400k grant from an investor, that is not yet ready to host Netflix's data but give it a couple years to see if they can deliver.  As you may have guessed, I personally believe in the business model.

Their model has the added benefit of being more secure as well because only the "tenant" has the key to the data and the data is broken down, encrypted and stored in small packages on various hard-drives.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on July 19, 2017, 08:09:42 PM
And i just checked, coinbase doesn't support the selling of digital currency in Canada.  So, i can buy, pay 4%, plus possible cash advance charges, and I can't ever sell it.  What the hell?

Can you withdraw to Paypal account? Then from Paypal to Canadian bank.

I dunno, the site just automatically knows im in Canada, and only gives me the option to link a credit card and as far as I can tell, no paypal or other options

Should have the option when you go to sell, if you click through "add payment method"
Something like the following screens:
1)
(http://i.imgur.com/GeVWAjO.png)
2)
(http://i.imgur.com/75iA5W1.png)
3)
(http://i.imgur.com/JX3GdyX.png)

I can imagine not linking to a Canadian bank account, but would be surprised if Paypal was not supported for Canadians

Barring that, you can always send me the Bitcoin and I could send it to you. I'm totally trustworthy. On an unrelated note, everyone, I might have found an even better way of getting bitcoin than mining :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on July 19, 2017, 09:23:12 PM
And i just checked, coinbase doesn't support the selling of digital currency in Canada.  So, i can buy, pay 4%, plus possible cash advance charges, and I can't ever sell it.  What the hell?

Can you withdraw to Paypal account? Then from Paypal to Canadian bank.

I dunno, the site just automatically knows im in Canada, and only gives me the option to link a credit card and as far as I can tell, no paypal or other options

Should have the option when you go to sell, if you click through "add payment method"
Something like the following screens:
1)
(http://i.imgur.com/GeVWAjO.png)
2)
(http://i.imgur.com/75iA5W1.png)
3)
(http://i.imgur.com/JX3GdyX.png)

I can imagine not linking to a Canadian bank account, but would be surprised if Paypal was not supported for Canadians

Barring that, you can always send me the Bitcoin and I could send it to you. I'm totally trustworthy. On an unrelated note, everyone, I might have found an even better way of getting bitcoin than mining :)

LOL.  Yep, sounds totally safe.  On another note, I did actually buy ~$100 or so of ETH and BTC when prices dipped early Monday morning.  I haven't decided if I'm going to buy a fixed amount per week or just throw random chunks of money at it when prices dip.  I mean, it's already highly speculative, why not make it full on gambling with some market timing too?  No matter what, I do plan to keep this as a very small percentage of my portfolio. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on July 20, 2017, 06:23:25 AM
Cloud storage market won't be shaken up from this. If you are technical you will realize that the extra redundancy requirements and high chance of data loss. Means they will never be competitive with Amazon. I worked for a large cloud hosting company and it's difficult even at massive scale to come to pricing parity with Amazon. Having some random people host it and with many more copies is a joke. It will never be in the same price realm. Each of these ICOs is hyping some future vaporware.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe not immediately, but it will become a major competitor I believe. How is it vaporware? The Storj network infrastructure is usable today. I used it the other day to store files and those files were stored redundantly, encrypted (with a private key that I own), and split into small fragments across 5+ geographically diverse nodes. If you were technical, you'd know why your statement is ridiculous. The only downside is that it isn't as usable at the moment. You need to use some cli scripts to upload and download files and the commands used require specifying unfriendly file and bucket IDs to upload and download files. So technically, the system works as designed, they just need to work on the usability of it so that it can appeal to a broader market.

Because the files are fragmented across many nodes, download speeds are high because the bandwidth is split across those nodes similar to how Bittorrent achieves its high download speeds.

Decentralized cloud storage will be way cheaper than what any other cloud storage provider. The cost of Storj is about $0.015/GB per month. Amazon is $0.023/GB per month and Microsoft is $0.030/GB per month. It is way easier to achieve scale when it is distributed and decentralized as opposed to one single entity trying to match those costs at scale.

Just look at Bitcoin itself. It is capable of achieving processing speeds that are more than 500 times more powerful than the top 500 supercomputers on earth combined. No single entity could ever achieve that. The reason is because the costs are distributed across the network and share among the network's users. The same thing happens with any decentralized solution. Whether it is Bittorrent, cloud storage, computing, etc.

Why do you think that even some larger providers choose to host larger downloads via Bittorrent as opposed to trying to serve those downloads themselves? Because it is simply cheaper to do it in a distributed/decentralized method as opposed to paying the higher costs of hosting it centrally.


EDIT: Just noticed OneCoolCat responded similarly. Kudos.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mcampbell on July 20, 2017, 06:48:16 AM
Cloud storage market won't be shaken up from this. If you are technical you will realize that the extra redundancy requirements and high chance of data loss. Means they will never be competitive with Amazon. I worked for a large cloud hosting company and it's difficult even at massive scale to come to pricing parity with Amazon. Having some random people host it and with many more copies is a joke. It will never be in the same price realm. Each of these ICOs is hyping some future vaporware.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe not immediately, but it will become a major competitor I believe. How is it vaporware? The Storj network infrastructure is usable today. I used it the other day to store files and those files were stored redundantly, encrypted (with a private key that I own), and split into small fragments across 5+ geographically diverse nodes. If you were technical, you'd know why your statement is ridiculous. The only downside is that it isn't as usable at the moment. You need to use some cli scripts to upload and download files and the commands used require specifying unfriendly file and bucket IDs to upload and download files. So technically, the system works as designed, they just need to work on the usability of it so that it can appeal to a broader market.

Because the files are fragmented across many nodes, download speeds are high because the bandwidth is split across those nodes similar to how Bittorrent achieves its high download speeds.

Decentralized cloud storage will be way cheaper than what any other cloud storage provider. The cost of Storj is about $0.015/GB per month. Amazon is $0.023/GB per month and Microsoft is $0.030/GB per month. It is way easier to achieve scale when it is distributed and decentralized as opposed to one single entity trying to match those costs at scale.

Just look at Bitcoin itself. It is capable of achieving processing speeds that are more than 500 times more powerful than the top 500 supercomputers on earth combined. No single entity could ever achieve that. The reason is because the costs are distributed across the network and share among the network's users. The same thing happens with any decentralized solution. Whether it is Bittorrent, cloud storage, computing, etc.

Why do you think that even some larger providers choose to host larger downloads via Bittorrent as opposed to trying to serve those downloads themselves? Because it is simply cheaper to do it in a distributed/decentralized method as opposed to paying the higher costs of hosting it centrally.


EDIT: Just noticed OneCoolCat responded similarly. Kudos.

Centralized system will have better pricing, the core costs are hard drives and electricity. Both are cheaper at scale. P2p file sharing has been around for 20 years. This is great for piracy, not if you want to have consistent reliable storage. There is a whole thread on hacker news where people go into more detail here, this is actually a technical forum https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14806440

If you want to look at pure underlying economics, one of our competitors has a great post detailing how much it costs to run a storage costs.

* From https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-cost-per-gigabyte/ 1TB of storage cost around $25. * I'll assume 3 year life-span for a drive. * Add 50% costs for the infrastructure and electricity to support the storage. * Add another 17.6% due to redundancy (17 data shards + 3 parity) - https://www.backblaze.com/blog/vault-cloud-storage-architecture/

Gives a minimum cost (before employee costs, marketing etc) of $1.22/TB/month.
If we do the same with Siacoin (which I believe stores 3 copies of your data) we get $3.12/TB/month.


I know the company I'm at has a few million clients and even at our scale competitions with Amazon on price is nearly impossible on the storage side. It's not where the margins are

I think people are just hyped about ethereum so just trying to find any valid usecase to use blockchain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: jrbrokerr on July 20, 2017, 02:32:24 PM
Tulip mania is an interesting analogy because it's a story of a failed alternative currency.  Tulip bulbs experienced explosive growth in a short time and attracted many speculators. 

Items that attract speculators and have their value driven irrationally upwards are at high risk of major crashes.  The explosive growth in value could be the trigger that invalidates the currency.  The value must stabilize for the currency to be useful.

ir doesn´t matter, tulip was still a MARKET, so for purposes of the discussion it is a valid one, since it shows how MARKETS not ALWAYS RECOVER... , I don´t know that much about crypto but it is very comparable to the tulipe mania because I can tell you, people are just buying in hopes to sell higher and make a profit, not investing because of the VALUE these  "currencies" give.... like many say, nobody knows when it is a bubble until it pops and everyone is left behind, I bet you in those times nobody knew tulip was becoming a gigantic bubble
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: jrbrokerr on July 20, 2017, 02:44:14 PM
sorry, REPLIED to the wrong POST, this was the one I was trying to REPLY to:


Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #168 on: July 18, 2017, 06:35:53 PM »
Quote
why does tulip mania always come up in these discussions?  of course there are such things as bubbles in all kinds of markets.  looking at the charts in the wikipedia link or in the link below, tulip mania (even if the popular retelling is overblown) lasted only a couple years at most. 

cryptocurrencies have enjoyed an 8 year run.  so far so good outlasting the tulip bubble :)

https://stratechery.com/2017/tulips-myths-and-cryptocurrencies/

another note: bubbles in cryptocurrencies have popped, dramatically, and several times even, and yet they are still hanging around.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on July 20, 2017, 02:49:04 PM
A couple good points have been raised earlier, directly and indirectly: what portion of your portfolio would you allocate to cryptocurrencies, and how would you know when to sell?

I don't know how to answer either one in my case, which leads me to believe I don't have a good reason for holding any. I guess if you had a specific allocation, then you could sell as you rebalance out. I don't have a target price, but might institute monthly profit taking, or find some small portion of my portfolio I'm comfortable with it at.

We do allow 5% of our portfolio for other (non stocks or bonds), but that also includes high yield bonds and lending, and variety of private investments, so any crypto currency allocation would have to also be carved further out of that. Which is fine with me.. I don't want to hold that much at this point.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on July 20, 2017, 04:46:38 PM
The interesting question is why did it go up 8.7% in one day? 

i have a large / diversified crypto portfolio, so some fared better than others. the volatility in general is ridiculous...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on July 20, 2017, 05:00:54 PM
I agree cryptocurrency is different, and I wouldn't even say it's necessarily in a bubble.  But it's a good ridiculous counter to ridiculous statements like these:

Those who kept buying always do better?  What about when it goes to 0? No market has ever gone to 0?  Tell that to the currency market for the Zimbabwe dollar.

What about when they sell (yes low) and put it into a market or asset that performs better going forward? The opportunity cost going forward is all that matters, and you can't say that someone who held always did better than someone who sold (and invested in something else).

Cryptocurrency has a lot going for it, possibly. We don't need hyperbole and inaccurate statements to muddy the waters.

how is it a ridiculous statement? you're comparing 1 country's currency (a country who is one of the most corrupt), to an entire market which in theory eliminates most of the problems with what traditional "currency" is/can be - comparing the 2 is beyond foolish.

you're taking everything i've said and "ran" with it, instead of just reading it at face value. of course you can always buy into something else, but again, i was using the comparison to a market not an single asset. please feel free to roll the dice and time the market if you'd like.

"muddying" the water is stating that cryptocurrencies "possibly" have a lot going for it... you're obviously a bystander.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: kenaces on July 20, 2017, 05:03:17 PM
The interesting question is why did it go up 8.7% in one day? 

i have a large / diversified crypto portfolio, so some fared better than others. the volatility in general is ridiculous...

up 26.5% today!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on July 20, 2017, 05:30:40 PM
The interesting question is why did it go up 8.7% in one day? 

i have a large / diversified crypto portfolio, so some fared better than others. the volatility in general is ridiculous...

up 26.5% today!

it's up because miners are finally (seemingly) organizing to implement a years' overdue protocol upgrade.  also the price could be rising more than usual because lots of folks removed their coins from exchanges in anticipation of a possible fork.

depending on what the miners/forks do in the next few days and weeks the volatility could get even crazier.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hvillian on July 20, 2017, 07:43:25 PM
After some background reading and a couple podcasts, I think I (generally) understand the blockchain technology and some of the possible uses.

My question is what are the coins for, particularly with the applications of the technology that don't seem like they want to be an alt-currency.  For example, two of the coins mentioned up thread, Sia and Storj.  I checked both websites, generally understand what they are trying to do with the distributed storage and content access, but don't understand why anyone would want to own the coins.   

Anyone have an explanation for amateur?
Thanks.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on July 21, 2017, 07:41:37 AM
Centralized system will have better pricing, the core costs are hard drives and electricity. Both are cheaper at scale. P2p file sharing has been around for 20 years. This is great for piracy, not if you want to have consistent reliable storage. There is a whole thread on hacker news where people go into more detail here, this is actually a technical forum https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14806440

If you want to look at pure underlying economics, one of our competitors has a great post detailing how much it costs to run a storage costs.

* From https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-cost-per-gigabyte/ 1TB of storage cost around $25. * I'll assume 3 year life-span for a drive. * Add 50% costs for the infrastructure and electricity to support the storage. * Add another 17.6% due to redundancy (17 data shards + 3 parity) - https://www.backblaze.com/blog/vault-cloud-storage-architecture/

Gives a minimum cost (before employee costs, marketing etc) of $1.22/TB/month.
If we do the same with Siacoin (which I believe stores 3 copies of your data) we get $3.12/TB/month.


I know the company I'm at has a few million clients and even at our scale competitions with Amazon on price is nearly impossible on the storage side. It's not where the margins are

I think people are just hyped about ethereum so just trying to find any valid usecase to use blockchain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Comparing the costs of a decentralized cloud storage system to a centralized cloud storage system (Amazon, iCloud, etc) on a per TB basis completely ignores the underlying premise of a decentralized system. A decentralized cloud storage system doesn't depend on the per TB costs to operate. Which is exactly the reason why it can offer prices way lower than what Amazon can compete with.

That's exactly the same mistake that the user "hudon" makes in the thread you linked to. He/she tries to estimate the economic costs at scale for hosting data. The mistakes are numerous, but the biggest reason why this thought is not correct is because it doesn't realize the fact that unused storage (just like unused bandwidth) doesn't earn any money. So if a user tried to scale an operation to the point where economies of scale came into play, no amount of economies of scale can compete with someone who wants to give something away of the same quality that they don't use. Let me further clarify this...

Amazon, in order to achieve economies of scale, must scale their own network in order to sell it extremely cheap in a way that meets demand. If Amazon purchases way too much network than the demand can meet, then their costs will be way too high and they won't be able to meet the demand price point required to be competitive. So Amazon must scale their network extremely carefully so that they can offer supply that meets demand precisely. Why? Because as I said, unused bandwidth and storage don't earn you anything.

This is exactly why distributed systems are effective at beating centralized systems at scale. Why? Because there is a crap ton of unused storage/bandwidth out there that has already been purchased that goes unused every single day. That's why when downloading a file over bittorrent that has a lot of seeders, you can achieve a way faster download speed than I can ever achieve downloading something from Amazon or Microsoft. This is because you're taking advantage of bandwidth offered from 50 different people who's bandwidth is just sitting idle anyway. You can't compete (from an economic stand point) against someone who is willing to give away something that they aren't using. So while economies of scale makes sense from a centralized solution perspective, those same economies of scale don't apply to decentralized solutions. Further elaborating on this..."John" purchases a 1TB hard drive for a personal reason, but then he only ends of using 50% of it. The other 50% of it goes unused until he realizes that he could earn a little bit of extra money with it. It isn't enough extra money to allow him to turn it into a business model, but it is better than letting unused space go to waste. So why not? This is the very reason why a decentralized solution will out-price any centralized solution. Because it takes economies out of the picture. A little bit here and there from millions of users turns into a massive solution that prices way lower than anything Amazon could provide at any scale.

That's why applying the "per TB costs" to Sia as you didn't is not the correct approach. The network doesn't depend on per TB costs to operate. It just depends on people realizing that unused disk space doesn't earn them anything at all and costs them nothing to "rent out". Therefore, earning something on something that costs them nothing additional makes perfect economic sense.

Look at Bittorrent, you can download a file way faster than any centralized provider and there isn't even an economic incentive provided by Bittorrent simply because people have bandwidth that their paying for anyway (for internet access) doing nothing throughout the day. The same is true (probably even more so) for storage.

This is true for Bittorrent. It is true from a compute perspective with crypto-currencies (it is why a 51% attack would be extremely difficult to perform by a single entity). It is also true for storage.

My question is what are the coins for, particularly with the applications of the technology that don't seem like they want to be an alt-currency.  For example, two of the coins mentioned up thread, Sia and Storj.  I checked both websites, generally understand what they are trying to do with the distributed storage and content access, but don't understand why anyone would want to own the coins.   

Anyone have an explanation for amateur?
Thanks.

Crypto-currencies don't necessarily need to be used as a medium of exchange to hold value. For example, Sia and Storj, as mentioned are essentially a coin that represents a holding of value in the particular system they represent. Just like anything that has a represented value to it, as long as there are buyers and sellers agreeing on the value, then they can be traded or exchanged for something else of equal value. So while you can't go out and buy bread with Siacoin, there are exchanges (like Poloniex) where you can then go and exchange Siacoin for another currency that can be used as a medium of exchange (Bitcoin). Or, in these two cases, the coin as part of the storage is used to purchase storage space in their respective solutions. So buyers of Siacoin can use Siacoin to purchase storage and store their files in the network. It's all about buyers and sellers really. After all, isn't that what all markets are about?

Check out the Poloniex and OpenLedger exchanges. A whole world of Crypto-currency trading will open up to you. Fees are almost neglible.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on July 21, 2017, 07:52:10 AM
Good explanation on the distributed storage 

In a similar vein, think about why airbnb or Uber can be cheaper than hotels or taxis.

People can make money off their idle assets. If it's stilling unused, it's making nothing. So you can undercut prices and still make more than nothing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on July 21, 2017, 08:58:03 AM
How do people feel about SegWit and this august 1 possible change/fork whatever you want to call it? This seems like a huge risk to any stability from BTC.  BTC's widespread actual use (compared to other alt-coins) is its big advantage and this seems like it could mess up that real work use.

I've sold enough BTC to be net ahead on everything I bought about a year and a half ago so I can hold the last couple coins with Coinbase for the long haul and feel like I still did ok. In the libertarian spirit of alt currencies, the most recent BTC sale proceeds will be put into physical silver and stored in a secure, non disclosed location.  I hope I am on the correct side of the fork!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 21, 2017, 09:29:38 AM
How do people feel about SegWit and this august 1 possible change/fork whatever you want to call it? This seems like a huge risk to any stability from BTC.  BTC's widespread actual use (compared to other alt-coins) is its big advantage and this seems like it could mess up that real work use.

I've sold enough BTC to be net ahead on everything I bought about a year and a half ago so I can hold the last couple coins with Coinbase for the long haul and feel like I still did ok. In the libertarian spirit of alt currencies, the most recent BTC sale proceeds will be put into physical silver and stored in a secure, non disclosed location.  I hope I am on the correct side of the fork!

Don't hold them in coinbase. Transfer them back to a wallet where you control the private key personally before August 1st. Then in the (unlikely) event of a fork, you'll be on both sides of it instead of hoping to only be on the right side. ;-)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on July 21, 2017, 10:26:28 AM
Coinbase will not permit the purchase or sale of Bitcoin on July 31.  I'm not sure if the other exchanges will also shut down. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 24, 2017, 07:11:43 PM
Decided it was about time to update the numbers on the ZEC mining experiment again.

(https://i.imgpile.com/n5Cdm1.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/n5Cdm1)

Mining continues to make a profit even after factoring in the cost of electricity, but remains much less profitable than June. A rebound in the price of bitcoin (and to a lesser extent in the price of zcash) moved my capital gains/losses back into positive territory. Some folks had speculated that if prices stayed as low as they were in mid-July a lot of higher end nvidia cards might start showing up on ebay and hashrates for some currencies might have started to fall, but with the recent rebound (thanks in part to segwit) this seems less likely.

Apparently two major darknet marketplaces (more recent versions of silkroad) were shutdown in July one of which was turned into a honeypot by european law enforcement for some weeks beforehand, but that seems to have had much less impact on the prices of either currency than the segwit issue. I'm not sure whether to take that as a sign that legitimate commerce is driving a lot more of the demand for bitcoin than the drug trade, or that currency speculation is driving a lot more of the demand for bitcoin than actual financial transactions of any sort.

Link to the original description of the ZEC mining experiment.  (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/official-crypto-currency-portfolios-and-discussion/msg1600715/#msg1600715)

Link to details of how I updated to include electrical costs (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/official-crypto-currency-portfolios-and-discussion/msg1610593/#msg1610593) (thanks CanuckExpat)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on July 25, 2017, 10:14:34 AM

[/quote]

Don't hold them in coinbase. Transfer them back to a wallet where you control the private key personally before August 1st. Then in the (unlikely) event of a fork, you'll be on both sides of it instead of hoping to only be on the right side. ;-)
[/quote]

Ok, getting out of coinbase gives control and it appears the overall risk of a fork is greatly diminished.  Warning! ramble of an old guy trying to understand BTC :)

This really ties into the Tulip discussion that always goes on with BTC/Eth/lite coin/wankercoin/trollcoin ect. BTC can actually be used to conduct business right now. I compare it to PayPal. My dad doesn't accept PayPal is real money because "its not a real bank". OK fine.   I've got a paypal balance I just used to order some tools online instead of my credit card so it sure feels like real money to me. Can I use the term fungible?  With BTC I would take a haircut on fees/conversion rates but there are out there in the world retail chains taking BTC and legit places like overstocked.com taking BTC, so I don't know if I could have bought the tools but I can buy the light fixture the wife wants. This helps establish some value as a practical medium of exchange even if its not a currency or store of value. 

I don't know what BTC is intrinsically really worth right now, but I do know it trades at a value and I can both sell my BTC for that value or trade my BTC for goods I need (well, maybe want :) )  at that value.

Even if one is on the majority side of a Fork, the fork splits users and it would seem the two halves will always be worth less than the sum.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on July 25, 2017, 01:58:55 PM
Quote from: trollwithamustache
Even if one is on the majority side of a Fork, the fork splits users and it would seem the two halves will always be worth less than the sum.

A hard fork doesn't split users, it splits miners. It may seem like a small difference, but it is technically an important detail to differentiate between. Users would end up holding the same amount of coin on both chains. Whereas the miners would be split between supporting one blockchain's rules or the other. How much value each coin has on each chain depends upon the market and how much value its users place on each chain's coin.

Also, it isn't true that the two halves would be less than their sum prior to the split. For example, after Ethereum's split, both halves were totaled to more than it was prior to the split. So users who held their keys on both chain's ended up with more money following the split simply because the market's continued to value the coins on both chains.

It has already been shown that there is plenty of room in this world for numerous crypto-currencies. So it is very likely that any split of one of these currencies could still yield enough support behind it from both miners and users to continue to exist within the marketplace. Though, generally it is in the best interest of miners to reach a consensus among the mining community. Since they're all likely trying to run a business and stay economically solvent, it behooves them to operate on a blockchain that has widespread usage and value.

NOTE: When I say "users", I mean in reference to the holder of the private key on the bitcoin blockchain. So in the case where a user keeps their bitcoin in an exchange (Coinbase), the exchange would actually own the private key on both blockchains and it would be up to the exchange whether they would want to support both blockchains or not. Whether they chose to support both chains is still irrelevant to whether or not the private/public key pair exists on the chain though. The blockchains are identical at the time of the split. Hence why it is critical in the event of a potential blockchain split that you own your private keys yourself. That way you own the coins on both chains and thus own the total value of the sum of the coins on both chains.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 29, 2017, 02:06:45 PM
Random figure looking at the correlation of daily price changes across bitcoins and a bunch of the altcoins.

(https://i.imgpile.com/nRTJyN.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nRTJyN)

Some things make sense. The prices of ethereum and ethereum classic tend to move together and are also closely correlated with Dash. All three allow much faster payments than most cryptocurrencies.

Zcash and Monero (both currencies focusing on better anonymity than bitcoin) also tend to move together, but not with bytecoin (also focused on anonymity, but with some weird pre-mining stuff going on that really destroyed the currency's credibility early on).

Litecoin (the original altcoin) is tightly linked with bitcoin (the original cryptocurrency), although peercoin is in there too. Don't have a good story for that.

I don't know that this provides anything actionable and even the proposed explanations above are only "just so" stories. I've just been curious about where there are obvious "market sectors" within cryptocurrencies like there are within the stock market.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on July 29, 2017, 06:09:44 PM
Good analysis maizeman. It definitely makes sense that there would be price correlations between currencies in the same niche.

With SegWit inevitably coming to Bitcoin, I've been reading a lot on the Lightning Network and what it can provide. It seems like there are a ton of benefits and would really help Bitcoin scale indefinitely and do so with zero to low fees. But there are some draw backs such as possible centralization if it were to go mainstream, capital being tied up in the network, and transaction monetary size limitations. But it is a completely opt-in network and wouldn't require a change in Bitcoin itself in anyway (once SegWit activates that is). So I do think it will be good for Bitcoin in the long run since it would help it go mainstream. Much of the mainstream probably doesn't care about decentralization much and so centralized "credit unions" could help the lightning network scale and provide the capital necessary to keep many payment channels open to facilitate payments across the globe.

I thought this was a good video explaining how it works by Jackson Palmer (creator of Dogecoin).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Gz6d-xaVU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Gz6d-xaVU)

The original whitepaper is here:

https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf (https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf)

I could really see a tech like this competing against the likes of VISA or Mastercard.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on July 29, 2017, 07:46:17 PM
Wondering if someone can clear something up for me.  Bitcoin is supposed to be inherently deflationary, correct?  Presumably good as a store of wealth if that all works out, however isn't having a predominately deflationary currency (in the case of the depression, a gold-backed us dollar) a good part of what caused the Great Depression to be so severe?  Aren't we setting up what could be the largest global depression in history if Bitcoin goes mainstream and everybody hoards it because it always goes up?  Spending and real investing stop, economy tanks, causing a deflationary feedback loop making everything worse.  Thoughts? 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mxt0133 on July 29, 2017, 08:35:38 PM
Wondering if someone can clear something up for me.  Bitcoin is supposed to be inherently deflationary, correct?  Presumably good as a store of wealth if that all works out, however isn't having a predominately deflationary currency (in the case of the depression, a gold-backed us dollar) a good part of what caused the Great Depression to be so severe?  Aren't we setting up what could be the largest global depression in history if Bitcoin goes mainstream and everybody hoards it because it always goes up?  Spending and real investing stop, economy tanks, causing a deflationary feedback loop making everything worse.  Thoughts?

I completely agree.  How can it function as a medium of exchange if people are just going to horde it. I know that gold was an effective store of wealth and medium of exchange because at the time it was able to keep in step with productivity and creation of value.

Since bitcoin at its present state will eventually run out of new issued coins it cannot represent the creation of new value through productivity.  I for one would not be incentivized to compete for a fixed asset by working and making those who just hold more wealthy.  It just doesn't feel right.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on July 30, 2017, 12:30:00 PM
agreed, i think the deflationary aspect of bitcoin will limit its adoption as a medium of exchange in the long term.  i'm not too worried about a deflationary spiral or anything because unlike with gold or national currencies, a "peasants revolt" in cryptocurrencies is as easy as just creating a new currency.

i think since cryptocurrencies compete with each other, the best currency for the most people will win in the long term.  it may not be bitcoin or any other deflationary cryptocurrency.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on July 30, 2017, 05:06:12 PM
Regarding deflation, I actually think that property of bitcoin will help its adoption as a medium of exchange. If a merchant has a choice to make a transaction in dollars or bitcoin, it ultimately comes down to the choice of whether the merchant prefers the properties of the dollar versus bitcoin. If the merchant understands that after making an exchange in bitcoin the result of that transaction will hold its value for a longer period of time, then it makes sense for the merchant to want to accept bitcoin as a payment option. If more merchants see the value in bitcoin as a payment option, then it will end up being adopted quicker in the marketplace.

On the consumer side, deflationary spirals are bad in a traditional economy because they are unexpected. But, deflation with bitcoin is expected and static. It is a property of the currency and cannot be manipulated. Therefore the concept of a traditional deflationary spiral doesn't apply to bitcoin. If someone wants a TV today, then they'll purchase it when they can afford it knowning that the next bitcoin they earn will have the same deflationary property as the one they just spent. Traditional deflationary spirals can't provide that assurance when the government controls the currency because there is no telling when the currency supply contraints will fluctuate. Therefore, currency hoarding takes place under those circumstances.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on July 30, 2017, 07:21:38 PM
it ultimately comes down to the choice of whether the merchant prefers the properties of the dollar versus bitcoin

that and also whether the customer would prefer to spend some bitcoin vs some fiat currency.  if they had both, i'd expect the customer to choose to spend the fiat first.  well, perhaps unless the merchant can give a substantial discount for bitcoin purchases.

--

another thing to mention WRT deflation is transaction fees.  if for example the typical household has some bitcoin miners (the "household water heater" example) then there would be some redistribution of bitcoin happening there through transaction fees and mining payouts.

also, if deflation gets out of hand then presumably the volume of transactions would shrink, which would make transactions cheaper, which would increase the velocity of money to offset some of the hoarding.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on July 30, 2017, 07:22:11 PM
Regarding deflation, I actually think that property of bitcoin will help its adoption as a medium of exchange. If a merchant has a choice to make a transaction in dollars or bitcoin, it ultimately comes down to the choice of whether the merchant prefers the properties of the dollar versus bitcoin. If the merchant understands that after making an exchange in bitcoin the result of that transaction will hold its value for a longer period of time, then it makes sense for the merchant to want to accept bitcoin as a payment option. If more merchants see the value in bitcoin as a payment option, then it will end up being adopted quicker in the marketplace.

On the consumer side, deflationary spirals are bad in a traditional economy because they are unexpected. But, deflation with bitcoin is expected and static. It is a property of the currency and cannot be manipulated. Therefore the concept of a traditional deflationary spiral doesn't apply to bitcoin. If someone wants a TV today, then they'll purchase it when they can afford it knowning that the next bitcoin they earn will have the same deflationary property as the one they just spent. Traditional deflationary spirals can't provide that assurance when the government controls the currency because there is no telling when the currency supply contraints will fluctuate. Therefore, currency hoarding takes place under those circumstances.

I still don't get why that couldn't happen with Bitcoin.  If it goes up consistantly and there is a limited supply, why wouldn't people hoard it?  Its not even mainstream yet and people are already hoarding it and paying exponentially higher amounts for it practically every day. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on July 30, 2017, 10:40:56 PM
Because it's really not money, it's more like electronic gold. It's designed to be hoarded, not spent.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on July 30, 2017, 11:09:59 PM
Because it's really not money, it's more like electronic gold. It's designed to be hoarded, not spent.

-W


See, the thing is that's totally cool with me, i don't really care if people hoard an electronic asset designed to preserve wealth, i'd probably participate.  I'm also totally cool with a crypto currency designed to make digital commerce easier/cheaper/better, i'd definitely participate.  The problem comes when the asset being hoarded ALSO becomes the global mainstream currency on which commerce depends on, then it seems to me we'd be up shit creek soon after.   
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 31, 2017, 05:43:07 AM
Because it's really not money, it's more like electronic gold. It's designed to be hoarded, not spent.

-W


See, the thing is that's totally cool with me, i don't really care if people hoard an electronic asset designed to preserve wealth, i'd probably participate.  I'm also totally cool with a crypto currency designed to make digital commerce easier/cheaper/better, i'd definitely participate.  The problem comes when the asset being hoarded ALSO becomes the global mainstream currency on which commerce depends on, then it seems to me we'd be up shit creek soon after.   

I think that the two functions can largely co-exist at least the way things are right now.

Generally folks selling things in bitcoin don't have fixed bitcoin prices. They have fixed prices in euros or dollars or RMB or what have you. If you pay in bitcoins you send them however much of a bitcoin corresponds to the price in the local currency at that particular moment. Similarly, lots of folks paying for things in bitcoins aren't keeping a lot of bitcoin around, but go out and buy some (either personally or the program they're using to send money does it for them) depending on how much they need to spend on a particular transaction.

As long as that stays the case, the deflation of bitcoin doesn't really present any economic challenges. The deflation issue would only be a problem if contacts started specifying future payment amounts in bitcoins:

If a hypothetical person took out a mortgage where the monthly payment was 3 bitcoins a month back when bitcoin was $900/coin, that person would be in trouble right now (actually so would the bank if they made a lot o these mortgages and no one could pay them anymore).

If a cryptocurrency startup had hired a super programmer at 20 bitcoins/month hack when the price was $900/coin the startup would be in trouble right now.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on July 31, 2017, 06:55:53 AM
I still don't get why that couldn't happen with Bitcoin.  If it goes up consistantly and there is a limited supply, why wouldn't people hoard it?  Its not even mainstream yet and people are already hoarding it and paying exponentially higher amounts for it practically every day. 

As long as that stays the case, the deflation of bitcoin doesn't really present any economic challenges. The deflation issue would only be a problem if contacts started specifying future payment amounts in bitcoins:

If a hypothetical person took out a mortgage where the monthly payment was 3 bitcoins a month back when bitcoin was $900/coin, that person would be in trouble right now (actually so would the bank if they made a lot o these mortgages and no one could pay them anymore).

If a cryptocurrency startup had hired a super programmer at 20 bitcoins/month hack when the price was $900/coin the startup would be in trouble right now.

First, it should be noted that the rapid price increases we are seeing today with bitcoin are not related at all to deflation. Bitcoin at the moment is a very inflated currency. The increase in price has more to do with an extreme increase in demand because it is so new.

The discussion about deflation isn't relevant to bitcoin until demand has stabilized, new bitcoins are no longer created (or at at least created at a much slower pace than today), and bitcoin becomes the primary currency of society. These three 3 won't happen for a very long time. When they do happen, the value of bitcoin will rise at a slow and gradual rate, not like the rate that we're seeing today. This means that there will still be an incentive to invest that currency into businesses who would be able to turn that investment into profits better than if that currency were to just sit around idle in a wallet. At the time of this slow transition, the economy will likely contract as it adjusts, but over time it will lead to a slower growing economy that is more resilient to recessions.

If those three things do occur, then it will likely be a very slow process to get there. We're so used to the inflationary nature of our currency, that many things are just tailored to an inflationary economy. For example, as Maizeman mentioned, things like wages are designed around today's inflationary nature of our currency. Every year people receive wage increases (hopefully) to help their earnings keep pace with inflation. With a deflationary currency, we'd no longer need these wage increases annually. Naturally, lower and middle class earnings would rise with the economy instead of stagnating today relying upon our governments to increase earnings for the poor. This will provide higher buying power for people who currently lack it today.

As far as lending goes, interest rates are part of the lending process because the government manipulates those rates along with the currency supply. With a static deflationary currency, we'd no longer need interest rates when lending. Instead, if you take a loan to purchase something and that something costs 5 bitcoin, then you simply pay say 5 bitcoin back over the course of 5 years. Because the currency is deflationary in nature, the lender will make their money through the lending process simply because of the fact that the currency is deflationary, unlike today where lenders make money through interest rates. Or, in the case of borrower risk, the lender can simply measure the interest rate based on that risk without the need to adjust that rate based on the government prime rate. The borrower won't have any problem paying it back because the payments are steady as well as their wages. Nothing would really change there. The only thing that would change is no longer requiring manipulated interest rates by the government to artificially inflate the economy.

Also, because the government can no longer artificially inflate the economy through the money supply, recessions wouldn't be as common as they are today and our economy would become more resilient. This will result in less of a wealth gap because recessions lead to increasing wealth gaps in society. Combine that with a lower and middle class who's wages increase naturally and you have a much healthier financial economy and society.

These things won't happen for a long time. We're a long way off from ever being paid by our employers in bitcoin. In the mean time, prices for goods sold in bitcoin will be continued to be measured in fiat currency and thus the government will continue to control the price of goods, the monetary supply, wages, etc and bitcoin won't have much of an impact on any of that.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on July 31, 2017, 07:44:13 AM
Because it's really not money, it's more like electronic gold. It's designed to be hoarded, not spent.

-W


See, the thing is that's totally cool with me, i don't really care if people hoard an electronic asset designed to preserve wealth, i'd probably participate.  I'm also totally cool with a crypto currency designed to make digital commerce easier/cheaper/better, i'd definitely participate.  The problem comes when the asset being hoarded ALSO becomes the global mainstream currency on which commerce depends on, then it seems to me we'd be up shit creek soon after.   

I think that the two functions can largely co-exist at least the way things are right now.

Generally folks selling things in bitcoin don't have fixed bitcoin prices. They have fixed prices in euros or dollars or RMB or what have you. If you pay in bitcoins you send them however much of a bitcoin corresponds to the price in the local currency at that particular moment. Similarly, lots of folks paying for things in bitcoins aren't keeping a lot of bitcoin around, but go out and buy some (either personally or the program they're using to send money does it for them) depending on how much they need to spend on a particular transaction.

As long as that stays the case, the deflation of bitcoin doesn't really present any economic challenges. The deflation issue would only be a problem if contacts started specifying future payment amounts in bitcoins:

If a hypothetical person took out a mortgage where the monthly payment was 3 bitcoins a month back when bitcoin was $900/coin, that person would be in trouble right now (actually so would the bank if they made a lot o these mortgages and no one could pay them anymore).

If a cryptocurrency startup had hired a super programmer at 20 bitcoins/month hack when the price was $900/coin the startup would be in trouble right now.


I still don't get why that couldn't happen with Bitcoin.  If it goes up consistantly and there is a limited supply, why wouldn't people hoard it?  Its not even mainstream yet and people are already hoarding it and paying exponentially higher amounts for it practically every day. 

As long as that stays the case, the deflation of bitcoin doesn't really present any economic challenges. The deflation issue would only be a problem if contacts started specifying future payment amounts in bitcoins:

If a hypothetical person took out a mortgage where the monthly payment was 3 bitcoins a month back when bitcoin was $900/coin, that person would be in trouble right now (actually so would the bank if they made a lot o these mortgages and no one could pay them anymore).

If a cryptocurrency startup had hired a super programmer at 20 bitcoins/month hack when the price was $900/coin the startup would be in trouble right now.

First, it should be noted that the rapid price increases we are seeing today with bitcoin are not related at all to deflation. Bitcoin at the moment is a very inflated currency. The increase in price has more to do with an extreme increase in demand because it is so new.

The discussion about deflation isn't relevant to bitcoin until demand has stabilized, new bitcoins are no longer created (or at at least created at a much slower pace than today), and bitcoin becomes the primary currency of society. These three 3 won't happen for a very long time. When they do happen, the value of bitcoin will rise at a slow and gradual rate, not like the rate that we're seeing today. This means that there will still be an incentive to invest that currency into businesses who would be able to turn that investment into profits better than if that currency were to just sit around idle in a wallet. At the time of this slow transition, the economy will likely contract as it adjusts, but over time it will lead to a slower growing economy that is more resilient to recessions.

If those three things do occur, then it will likely be a very slow process to get there. We're so used to the inflationary nature of our currency, that many things are just tailored to an inflationary economy. For example, as Maizeman mentioned, things like wages are designed around today's inflationary nature of our currency. Every year people receive wage increases (hopefully) to help their earnings keep pace with inflation. With a deflationary currency, we'd no longer need these wage increases annually. Naturally, lower and middle class earnings would rise with the economy instead of stagnating today relying upon our governments to increase earnings for the poor. This will provide higher buying power for people who currently lack it today.

As far as lending goes, interest rates are part of the lending process because the government manipulates those rates along with the currency supply. With a static deflationary currency, we'd no longer need interest rates when lending. Instead, if you take a loan to purchase something and that something costs 5 bitcoin, then you simply pay say 5 bitcoin back over the course of 5 years. Because the currency is deflationary in nature, the lender will make their money through the lending process simply because of the fact that the currency is deflationary, unlike today where lenders make money through interest rates. Or, in the case of borrower risk, the lender can simply measure the interest rate based on that risk without the need to adjust that rate based on the government prime rate. The borrower won't have any problem paying it back because the payments are steady as well as their wages. Nothing would really change there. The only thing that would change is no longer requiring manipulated interest rates by the government to artificially inflate the economy.

Also, because the government can no longer artificially inflate the economy through the money supply, recessions wouldn't be as common as they are today and our economy would become more resilient. This will result in less of a wealth gap because recessions lead to increasing wealth gaps in society. Combine that with a lower and middle class who's wages increase naturally and you have a much healthier financial economy and society.

These things won't happen for a long time. We're a long way off from ever being paid by our employers in bitcoin. In the mean time, prices for goods sold in bitcoin will be continued to be measured in fiat currency and thus the government will continue to control the price of goods, the monetary supply, wages, etc and bitcoin won't have much of an impact on any of that.

Thanks both for the responses.  I do get that theres no issues with deflation as long as Bitcoin is being used as a medium of exchange between traditional currencies.  I also get that if Bitcoin ever became a primary currency for trade without other government issued currencies involved it would either be, or have to become, much more stable and slower growing than it is now.  That said, gold is about as stable as an asset can get historically, but when the US currency was backed by gold, a deflationary asset, we ran into some serious problems when the markets tanked and people preferred a deflationary currency over spending and investment.  I realize that wasn't the only reason the Great Depression was so severe, but when you compare it to the Great Recession, it's the one thing really seems to stand out
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 31, 2017, 07:55:11 AM
JAYSLOL, the only extra thing I'd add to your most recent response is that bitcoin wouldn't have to mediating transactions between people who are pricing things in traditional currencies. A good example of how to divorce fixed prices from the effects of a currency that fluctuates widely in value is the ether:gas model for pricing computer services on the ethereum network. No government issued currencies involved, but it still produces the same protection from default/inflation issues as the current bitcoin:USD model.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 31, 2017, 07:48:39 PM
Any wallet where you have access to your own private keys would mean you'd be able to spend on both blockchains if there really is a fork.

I looked more into the ethereum fork and it turns out that even some places like coinbase where your coins aren't stored in a wallet where you control the private key and didn't support "ethereum classic" still allowed people who had ethereum deposited with them to withdraw the forked currency for several months after the split (although there is no guarantee that they'd do that again).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on July 31, 2017, 08:34:47 PM
Any wallet where you have access to your own private keys would mean you'd be able to spend on both blockchains if there really is a fork.

I looked more into the ethereum fork and it turns out that even some places like coinbase where your coins aren't stored in a wallet where you control the private key and didn't support "ethereum classic" still allowed people who had ethereum deposited with them to withdraw the forked currency for several months after the split (although there is no guarantee that they'd do that again).

for that example, wouldn't coinbase have to broadcast the transaction on both chains then?  did they do that in an unofficial way?
 either way, yeah it seems a good idea to make sure everything's kept at a privately-controlled wallet for the time being.

i think there will definitely be a fork (and there probably always should be for big protocol upgrades for "backup"), but who knows how much support it'll get.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 31, 2017, 08:51:19 PM
Here's the Coinbase FAQ about ETC: https://support.coinbase.com/customer/en/portal/articles/2524725-ethereum-classic-faq

Basically the currency split in late July last year and they started calculating separate ETH and ETC balances, and provided the chance to withdraw but not deposit the ETC until Dec of the same year. Key answer:

Quote
What should I expect if another digital currency supported by Coinbase experiences a future hard fork?

The industry is evolving rapidly and we expect that best practices will develop over time on how to handle hard forks. Right now we are handling each one on a case by case basis.

The latest estimate I've read is something like 95% support for the upgraded protocol which would leave maybe 5% support for bitcoin cash and would mean solving the first block will take close to three hours. It'll certainly be fun to watch from the sidelines tomorrow morning though!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hvillian on July 31, 2017, 10:26:18 PM
In a somewhat suprising move, Coinbase explicitly said they would not support Bitcoin cash.  Naturally this announcement was followed by mass withdrawal and the all-too-predictable delays.

Quote from: Coinbase
"Customers who wish to access both bitcoin (BTC) and bitcoin cash (BCC) need to withdraw bitcoin stored on Coinbase before 11.59 pm PT July 31, 2017. If you do not wish to access bitcoin cash (BCC) then no action is required."
https://cointelegraph.com/news/coinbase-advises-users-to-transfer-btc-

Happy Fork Day, nevertheless.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on August 03, 2017, 10:09:41 AM
I went ahead and built a mining rig. Parts as follows:

 $$$ - Description
 118 - ASRock H81 PRO BTC R2.0
  53 - Intel Celeron G1840 Processor
  33 - 4GB RAM
 176 - EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G2 power supply
  40 - 6 x PCIe riser cable
1380 - 6 x SAPPHIRE NITRO Radeon RX 470 4GB "video cards"
  40 - Home made case/frame
  20 - 15A surge suppressor
------------
$1860

I had a spare SSD laying around. I'm not counting the $19 that I spent on the Kill A Watt Electricity Usage Monitor that is in the photo or the tools and parts that I needed to run Ethernet to the garage.

I'm running Ubuntu 16.04 and Calymore's dual miner 9.7. I'm getting ~122Mh/s at Ethereum while simultaneously getting ~3675Mh/s at Sia. I'm drawing ~1320W which seems on the ragged edge of the power supply that I chose. Dual mining Sia increased power consumption by about 30% and decreases Ethereum production by ~3%. I pay $0.08/kWh.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on August 03, 2017, 06:21:42 PM
In a somewhat suprising move, Coinbase explicitly said they would not support Bitcoin cash.

in another twist, Coinbase decided to support Bitcoin Cash (withdrawals only?) starting in... January.  i can't think of a good reason to wait that long other than just to be sure they don't affect markets too much with their actions:

https://blog.coinbase.com/update-on-bitcoin-cash-8a67a7e8dbdf
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 04, 2017, 06:42:54 PM
I went ahead and built a mining rig. Parts as follows:
 ...snipped...
I had a spare SSD laying around. I'm not counting the $19 that I spent on the Kill A Watt Electricity Usage Monitor that is in the photo or the tools and parts that I needed to run Ethernet to the garage.

I'm running Ubuntu 16.04 and Calymore's dual miner 9.7. I'm getting ~122Mh/s at Ethereum while simultaneously getting ~3675Mh/s at Sia. I'm drawing ~1320W which seems on the ragged edge of the power supply that I chose. Dual mining Sia increased power consumption by about 30% and decreases Ethereum production by ~3%. I pay $0.08/kWh.

I'm curious because I don't have any experience mining alt-coins with GPUs, but I do mine Bitcoin. What is your profitibility in mining alt-coins with GPUs? Your upfront costs seem pretty hefty for such minimal mining power (MH/s). How does that hashrate translate with alt-coin profitibility taking into account your upfront cost of $1800?

I have a 7.5TH/s miner that draws 1150W. At Bitcoin's current difficulty and price, it brings in about $7 or .0025 BTC each day. My electricity costs are about $100 a month ($.12/KWh) and revenue is at about $210 a month.

The miner cost me about $1100 total (miner, PSU, shipping). I figure I will run this unit for 2 years even if it is barely keeping pace with the electricity costs since I have a feeling Bitcoin will go up in price (possibly even doubling) in that time.

I'm just curious as to how that stacks up against alt-coin mining. I know GPUs are out of stock like crazy, so it is clearly profitable. I'm just wondering how well that scales and how well does an investment like yours pay off?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on August 05, 2017, 07:33:25 AM
I'm curious because I don't have any experience mining alt-coins with GPUs, but I do mine Bitcoin. What is your profitibility in mining alt-coins with GPUs? Your upfront costs seem pretty hefty for such minimal mining power (MH/s). How does that hashrate translate with alt-coin profitibility taking into account your upfront cost of $1800?

As of right now (current difficulty and price) I am mining $6.89 worth of Ethereum and $1.86 worth of Sia per day while spending $2.53 on electricity ($0.08/kWh). So, that's $6.22 per day after electricity. Obviously as prices and difficult change that can change a lot. So, I guess that's $189 after electric costs per month.

I'm not sure that this is a great investment, but I max out my 401k every month with equities. To me this is a fun side project that *might* earn me some money. Obviously, I don't just want to burn $1800, but I know just how risky this is.

EDIT - I hope to use the parts for 3 years.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on August 05, 2017, 09:18:30 AM
It looks like coinbase is ooching towards supporting bitcoin cash. Anyone have any thoughts on what to do with the new cash-coins? Is bitcoin cash actually getting used out there in the real world?

my current thinking is as soon as I can, I will dump the bitcoin cash coins and be happy with whatever I get for them as its essentially free money.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on August 05, 2017, 07:00:30 PM
i'm going to sit on my coins on both chains for the time being.  the miners could do anything and it's up to them, really.  if bitcoin cash goes to 0 there's no real loss there.

once the cash chain difficulty drops or if the segwit2x outlook looks shaky, miners may be incentivized to switch to the cash chain.  all it takes is one larger miner to make the change to severely slow down the old chain.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on August 05, 2017, 07:02:12 PM
Another semi-regular semi-scheduled update from my ZEC mining experiment.

(https://i.imgpile.com/nREglX.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nREglX)

Mining income continues to flatten out, although I'm still significantly ahead of the cost of electricity. I may still get bailed out by capital appreciation I'm getting by letting my ZEC mining earnings accumulate in bitcoins and zcash instead of converting them back to dollars as I go.* I'm treating all the bitcoins that were in wallets I controlled on August 1st as now existing as both BTC and BCC (and counting the sum of ZEC BTC and BCC to calculate capital gains) and any new earnings since then as only BTC.

Like PDXT I knew the risks going in and see this as a fun side project and it continues to be fascinating.

*This is really cheating when it comes to deciding whether my decision to build a mining rig payed off, because it's an entirely different activity from mining, and I could have just put the dollars I spent on my mining hardware directly into BTC and ZEC and had the same effect if not more.

Link to the original description of the ZEC mining experiment.  (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/official-crypto-currency-portfolios-and-discussion/msg1600715/#msg1600715)

Link to details of how I updated to include electrical costs (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/official-crypto-currency-portfolios-and-discussion/msg1610593/#msg1610593) (thanks CanuckExpat)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on August 05, 2017, 07:23:16 PM
A year from now [Bitcoin Cash] could be worth $0 or $5000 per coin.  It has all the same characteristics of bitcoin with bigger blocks, and more exchanges are starting to support it.  ... From where I stand though I don't see how one can be a believer in bitcoin and not think the same price increases can happen for bitcoin cash.

However, you can make that exact same statements for bitcoin, bitcoin cash, and at least a dozen other altcoins.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: neonlight on August 06, 2017, 10:44:25 AM

It looks like coinbase is ooching towards supporting bitcoin cash. Anyone have any thoughts on what to do with the new cash-coins? Is bitcoin cash actually getting used out there in the real world?

my current thinking is as soon as I can, I will dump the bitcoin cash coins and be happy with whatever I get for them as its essentially free money.

From what I see bitcoin cash is like getting in on the ground floor of bitcoin.  Why not hold or add to your bitcoin cash position?  A year from now it could be worth $0 or $5000 per coin.  It has all the same characteristics of bitcoin with bigger blocks, and more exchanges are starting to support it. 

I'm watching from the sidelines, not willing to speculate with my own cash in any crypto.  From where I stand though I don't see how one can be a believer in bitcoin and not think the same price increases can happen for bitcoin cash.

There is hardly any logic or past info which we can reference. Maybe one ETH and ETC. ETH which is the new-but-official coin went sky-high while the old-and-unofficial grew steadily(slow by crypto standard).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on August 06, 2017, 11:40:41 PM
I'm curious because I don't have any experience mining alt-coins with GPUs, but I do mine Bitcoin. What is your profitibility in mining alt-coins with GPUs? Your upfront costs seem pretty hefty for such minimal mining power (MH/s). How does that hashrate translate with alt-coin profitibility taking into account your upfront cost of $1800?

As of right now (current difficulty and price) I am mining $6.89 worth of Ethereum and $1.86 worth of Sia per day while spending $2.53 on electricity ($0.08/kWh). So, that's $6.22 per day after electricity. Obviously as prices and difficult change that can change a lot. So, I guess that's $189 after electric costs per month.

I'm not sure that this is a great investment, but I max out my 401k every month with equities. To me this is a fun side project that *might* earn me some money. Obviously, I don't just want to burn $1800, but I know just how risky this is.

EDIT - I hope to use the parts for 3 years.

I stopped mining Eth + SC and have been mining Signatum (SIGT).  I've mined $25 worth of SIGT, 6x 1060's, since yesterday afternoon and I was in a bad pool for about half the time.  The price has skyrocketed but so has the difficulty.  If the price holds, it could be a very profitable coin. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on August 06, 2017, 11:55:38 PM
How many watts is your rig running on?  AMD or Nvidia? 

This new rig, x8 1060 6gb is running just under 800 watts which is pretty amazing really. All cards have memory overclocked and power turned down to 60% using MSI afterburner.

Kaby Celeron,
Asus Prime Z270 (this mb is amazing)
4gb whatever was cheapest
60gb ssd (Windows 10)
Mix of 1060 6gb (stupid limits, have to mix and match brands and sizes).
EVGA G2 1000W PS

The best thing about building rigs, I am getting pretty good with aluminum which is a really useful skill to have I am finding out. It is so strong, light, looks cool, and is very cheap if you buy the right size.

Nice, watts seems a little high to me.  My 6x 1060's use 480 watts on 60% power.  Perhaps because mine are 3gb, idk.  Yours are better and you can dual mine SC more efficiently than me.  i was dual mining Eth + SC with 141 Eth and 180 SC hash.  The SC took a big hit on the 3gb gpus. 

You should definitely be mining Sigt right now.  You will double profits.  If you dont want to hodle, send the coins to your Cryptopia wallet and sell them throughout the day for Eth/SC.  You will end up with twice as much per day.  Use Pav's ccminer for good results.  If you are a risk-taker, or savy about virus', download sp's modified ccminer from a reliable source (some leaked copies have trojans).  Thats the best Sigt miner but you either have to pay or be careful about who you download it from.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on August 07, 2017, 12:00:01 AM
Just want to add Sigt uses a new Skunk algo.  1060's get 18-19 mh/s on it.  I don't quite get that, I get closer to 16.5mh/s.  Whattomine shows you will make about $32 per day with your rig but I found its not very accurate with this algo.  You can expect just a little over half what it reports.  The problem is the pools don't actually report what the ccminer does.  For instance, my 101 mh/s on my ccminer is stable but Suprnova fluctuates between 40-145mh/s.  Its still the best option at the moment so get it on it while you can.

https://whattomine.com/coins/191-sigt-skunkhash?utf8=%E2%9C%93&hr=144.0&p=800.0&fee=0.0&cost=0.12&hcost=0.0&commit=Calculate
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: krypt0miner on August 07, 2017, 10:58:00 PM
For those who are wondering how digital currencies will be used as a form of money:
- Bitcoin is designed to be a store of value (fixed, decreasing inflation rate and limited total supply)
- Litecoin is designed to be a medium of exchange (also with a fixed, decreasing inflation rate but with a much larger total supply and faster transaction confirmation time)
- Ethereum is designed to be a token that is used to power decentralized applications that run on top of the Ethereum blockchain

Zcash, Monero, and Dash (and a handful of other, similar coins) are designed as mediums of exchange but offer a privacy-oriented transaction mechanism that makes it nearly impossible to identify a user by their transaction history (which is what Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Ethereum currently allow). I see government regulation as a huge hurdle for these privacy-oriented coins, so I plan on watching from the sidelines for the time being, and learning more about them as the digital currency market grows legs.

Now that the digital currency market has ballooned to $100 billion+ in total capitalization, there seems to be a coin for everything and everybody. Some of these have very interesting use cases that may or may not disrupt entire industries (Ripple, Sia, etc..). But since we are investors here on the Mr. Money Mustache forum, we need to be able to separate the signal from the noise. That is why, in my opinion, it really only makes sense to buy Bitcoin, since you are looking to put your money into an asset that will consistently gain value over time. Ethereum is also worth considering as the demand for its applications outpaces the supply of Ether tokens. However, as other users have mentioned, it does not have a clear monetary policy.

I put together this little document for those who are interested in getting started with digital currencies but aren't sure where to start. Comments are enabled!

https://docs.google.com/document/d/11FSUczla4BOxpLfirYoc7PhFgAlUOQMvjwSL0lmJ2IM/edit?usp=sharing

Full disclosure: I mine Ethereum in the Ethermine pool (12x 1060 GTX 6GB @ ~238 MH/s) and buy Bitcoin during price drops (I transfer $500 or so per month to GDAX where it sits until I decide to buy in).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: neonlight on August 08, 2017, 02:43:46 AM
For those who are wondering how digital currencies will be used as a form of money:
- Bitcoin is designed to be a store of value (fixed, decreasing inflation rate and limited total supply)
- Litecoin is designed to be a medium of exchange (also with a fixed, decreasing inflation rate but with a much larger total supply and faster transaction confirmation time)
- Ethereum is designed to be a token that is used to power decentralized applications that run on top of the Ethereum blockchain

Zcash, Monero, and Dash (and a handful of other, similar coins) are designed as mediums of exchange but offer a privacy-oriented transaction mechanism that makes it nearly impossible to identify a user by their transaction history (which is what Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Ethereum currently allow). I see government regulation as a huge hurdle for these privacy-oriented coins, so I plan on watching from the sidelines for the time being, and learning more about them as the digital currency market grows legs.

Now that the digital currency market has ballooned to $100 billion+ in total capitalization, there seems to be a coin for everything and everybody. Some of these have very interesting use cases that may or may not disrupt entire industries (Ripple, Sia, etc..). But since we are investors here on the Mr. Money Mustache forum, we need to be able to separate the signal from the noise. That is why, in my opinion, it really only makes sense to buy Bitcoin, since you are looking to put your money into an asset that will consistently gain value over time. Ethereum is also worth considering as the demand for its applications outpaces the supply of Ether tokens. However, as other users have mentioned, it does not have a clear monetary policy.

I put together this little document for those who are interested in getting started with digital currencies but aren't sure where to start. Comments are enabled!

https://docs.google.com/document/d/11FSUczla4BOxpLfirYoc7PhFgAlUOQMvjwSL0lmJ2IM/edit?usp=sharing

Full disclosure: I mine Ethereum in the Ethermine pool (12x 1060 GTX 6GB @ ~238 MH/s) and buy Bitcoin during price drops (I transfer $500 or so per month to GDAX where it sits until I decide to buy in).

As a hobbyist with tech background I cannot agree with you more. There are a lot of noises and it's hard to figure out which is which as a hobbyist. The best bet is to stick with the main coins first: BTC, LTC, ETH and start dabbling: buy, read, sell, read, read, read and repeat.

Once you get comfortable with the three you can move down the table, Try NOT to buy new coins that are freshly launched, the days of spotting ETH is largely gone. There are simply too much noises out there, every coin claim they are revolutionary, heck even I feel like launching a new coin! So stay out of fresh coins, but if you miss out on the next breakout don't blame me ;)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: neonlight on August 08, 2017, 11:23:51 PM
For new people, coinbase has an Auto invest feature you can setup weekly/monthly in the 3 major coins. It is by far the easiest way to get started. Just sign up for their website, link a checking account, and turn on auto invest for the coin(s) you want. No need to learn all this complex mining if you don't want to. Until there is an official ETF, this is a good start.

Didn't know that, good info
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on August 14, 2017, 07:09:53 AM
So this thread seems oddly quiet lately, especially with a crazy run up of Bitcoin and other crypto values.  So, anyone's guess how high this is going to go?  Who's made shitloads of money?  I haven't made much as I only have a very small portfolio of a few coins. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 14, 2017, 07:49:27 AM
Yup! Things have been very good lately. I've made several times more in bitcoin the last two months than I have in my real job.

I predicted that Bitcoin would hit $3500 in August and continue going up from there, so this has well blown past my predictions.

I think a number of factors are at play. I believe how well Bitcoin handled the hard fork has given a lot of investors a lot more confidence in bitcoin knowing that any contention to the main chain isn't likely to be very successful. Also, Japanese adoption continues to be going bonkers. Combine that with all the worldwide uncertainty of war with North Korea and the traditional markets declining and bitcoin seems to be emerging as a very nice safe haven.

The future of bitcoin looks even brighter.

I do predict a somewhat downturn come November as investors get nervous again when the second phase of SegWit2X comes into play. This time miners of the main chain will actually need to upgrade software in unison as opposed to simply doing nothing avoid a chain split. But after a successful upgrade the price surge will continue up again.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: neonlight on August 15, 2017, 01:56:53 AM
Yup! Things have been very good lately. I've made several times more in bitcoin the last two months than I have in my real job.

I predicted that Bitcoin would hit $3500 in August and continue going up from there, so this has well blown past my predictions.

I think a number of factors are at play. I believe how well Bitcoin handled the hard fork has given a lot of investors a lot more confidence in bitcoin knowing that any contention to the main chain isn't likely to be very successful. Also, Japanese adoption continues to be going bonkers. Combine that with all the worldwide uncertainty of war with North Korea and the traditional markets declining and bitcoin seems to be emerging as a very nice safe haven.

The future of bitcoin looks even brighter.

I do predict a somewhat downturn come November as investors get nervous again when the second phase of SegWit2X comes into play. This time miners of the main chain will actually need to upgrade software in unison as opposed to simply doing nothing avoid a chain split. But after a successful upgrade the price surge will continue up again.

Please do not predict, our ability to predict dwarfs the whims and fancies of the whaler. If a whaler wakes up with epiphany and starts selling, then it's the big dump. Early holders have way too much holdings to make any technical analysis stands.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 15, 2017, 06:46:43 AM
Please do not predict, our ability to predict dwarfs the whims and fancies of the whaler. If a whaler wakes up with epiphany and starts selling, then it's the big dump. Early holders have way too much holdings to make any technical analysis stands.

Whales create noise, but not trends.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on August 15, 2017, 08:24:24 AM
maizeman I was thinking about your mining experiment, what would it look like if you added a line to account for mining income minus opportunity cost of the hardware? Not sure what the fair equivalent would be, if you sunk the equivalent cost of the hardware into the same coin you mine at the beginning and let it appreciate perhaps
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 15, 2017, 09:55:27 AM
maizeman I was thinking about your mining experiment, what would it look like if you added a line to account for mining income minus opportunity cost of the hardware? Not sure what the fair equivalent would be, if you sunk the equivalent cost of the hardware into the same coin you mine at the beginning and let it appreciate perhaps

I've thought about that myself with my own mining as well. With the huge gains that Bitcoin has seen over the last several months, it is hard for mining to keep up with compared to if you had simply investing the up front costs in Bitcoin itself instead of the equipment (I think that's what your getting at).

However, it is hard to (or at least unfair to) calculate in the short term because in the long term mining will win out so long as you are able to mine back all the Bitcoin you spent on the equipment and then some. As long as you can mine back all the Bitcoin spent on your equipment plus a little more, then you'll be able to realize the gains you originally missed out on plus all future gains of the asset if you continue to hold.

In other words, if I spent 1 bitcoin to mine one bitcoin, then there really isn't any opportunity cost involved regardless of what happened to the price of Bitcoin during the time it took to mine that 1 bitcoin. Therefore, if I spend 1 Bitcoin to mine 1.5 bitcoin, then I profit 0.5 Bitcoin regardless of what its worth is at any point in time.

The only difference between the two investment options would be if the Bitcoin (or whatever crypto-currency) price plummeted while mining work is still being performed. At that point you've already made the capital investment in the equipment and your only option would be to continue to mine in hopes that the price returns or to bail and recoup some of the equipment costs by selling the hardware. Whereas if you had simply just invested the initial money in Bitcoin you could sell immediately and mitigate some of your losses right away.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on August 15, 2017, 03:55:04 PM

[/quote]


In other words, if I spent 1 bitcoin to mine one bitcoin, then there really isn't any opportunity cost involved regardless of what happened to the price of Bitcoin during the time it took to mine that 1 bitcoin. Therefore, if I spend 1 Bitcoin to mine 1.5 bitcoin, then I profit 0.5 Bitcoin regardless of what its worth is at any point in time.

[/quote]

Does opportunity cost really work this way for mining?  One can buy one BTC for x dollars or etc or bannanas or babbage coins today.  At least for BTC, difficulty keeps going up and the reward steadily goes down with each Halving. So going forward one doesn't really know what one can get from mining.  As a year or two go by its likely your miner may no longer be cutting edge/competitive. Maybe one can say that one must be willing to switch to a more profitable crypto currency?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on August 15, 2017, 04:01:26 PM
If you build your own rig it would take you approximately 9 months to pay off your equipment and cover electricity cost.  However, if you would have built a rig about 6 months ago you would have paid it off in 3 months tops.  People with $2,000 rigs were mining $800 a month a couple months ago.  Its now about $300 (electricity is probably $40-$50 per month extra depending upon your rate).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on August 15, 2017, 04:18:38 PM
@OneCoolCat, those numbers have gotta be ZEC or ETH mining right? The price/difficulty of bitcoin mining doesn't change that rapidly anymore does it?

@CanuckExpat, it's a good question. I'm out of town all week but would be interesting to run the numbers once I am back on my home computer. Could compare to putting the same amount of money I spent on mining equipment right into the cyptocurrency (right now I know I'd come out way behind just because bitcoin has been on a big run up in price), or into stock/bond index funds.

One important question to resolve, would you say it makes more sense to only consider the potential increase/decrease in value of the investment, or the total value of the investment? The money I spent building my miner is gone (maybe I could get a couple of hundred bucks for the parts if I wanted to mess around on ebay), which my charts show me starting off more than $1,000 in the hole. For an investment in the currencies themselves (or a stock index fund) I'd still be able to get my original investment out at any time (less any capital losses).

@lifeanon

Your analysis assumes that the mining is being uses as a method of buying bitcoins (or other currencies) which lumps together two very different financial questions: whether it makes financial sense to mine BTC/ETH/ZEC/etc and whether it makes sense to hold BTC/ETH/ZEC for appreciation. I'm currently doing some of both, but it could very easily be that once we're looking at this with the benefit of hindsight, one (either one) will have made financial sense and the other did not. So I'm trying to separate out the two effects as I go along.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 15, 2017, 06:06:09 PM
Does opportunity cost really work this way for mining?  One can buy one BTC for x dollars or etc or bannanas or babbage coins today.  At least for BTC, difficulty keeps going up and the reward steadily goes down with each Halving. So going forward one doesn't really know what one can get from mining.  As a year or two go by its likely your miner may no longer be cutting edge/competitive. Maybe one can say that one must be willing to switch to a more profitable crypto currency?

I'm not really sure I get what you're saying. The miner I have today will absolutely become obsolete some day. That doesn't mean that it won't mine me more bitcoin than I spent on it. Unless there is some drastic change in the difficulty and massive unexpected jump in the network hash rate, then I expect to make more bitcoin with my miner than I spent on it. I paid for the miner with bitcoin, so disregarding the price of bitcoin at any point in time, then I will fully expect by the time my miner becomes obsolete that I will end up with more bitcoin than I spent. Determining success or failure in the end would ultimately depend solely on the value of the bitcoin that I mined at some point in the future.

The big question about profitibility then becomes chiefly about what happens to the price of bitcoin. The only way to analyze success or failure is with the benefit of hindsight. Since both mining and investing success in bitcoin both depend upon the appreciation of bitcoin, then the main difference between the two is the mining difficulty during the mining period.

Therefore, I'd say that the biggest difference between mining bitcoin versus investing in bitcoin is that mining bitcoin is a little more risky since if the price of bitcoin plummets to the point where mining is longer profitable, then the sunken cost of the mining equipment purchase becomes much more difficult to recoup in a market devoid of willing purchasers of obsolete mining equipment. Also, with an upfront investment purchase of bitcoin, if the price begins to plummet, once can simply sell the bitcoin and limit the downside risk.

That being said, mining bitcoin also has much more upside since in general you can mine more bitcoin than was spent (say 150% of the original investment give or take with today's difficulty and an efficient miner). That means, if holding the bitcoin long and the price appreciates even modestly, the gains will outpace those that would've been realized had one just simply invested the money instead.

At least this is based on my own mining experience. YMMV. The biggest variation in one's outcomes would likely be electricity costs. If electricity costs are expensive, then in an investment scenario one could invest the money that would've been spent on electricity for mining to continue purchasing bitcoin dollar cost averaging along the way. This could greatly diminish the benefit of mining over a pure investment strategy.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: calpolyjohn on August 17, 2017, 02:34:02 PM
For new people, coinbase has an Auto invest feature you can setup weekly/monthly in the 3 major coins. It is by far the easiest way to get started. Just sign up for their website, link a checking account, and turn on auto invest for the coin(s) you want. No need to learn all this complex mining if you don't want to. Until there is an official ETF, this is a good start.

I'm very new to this, so I apologize if this is a dumb question.  I bought 8 ETH using coinbase this week.  My plan is a long term hold just in case it goes crazy like BTC and its a small part of my portfolio I'm willing to risk big losses with.  My question - is it safe to keep in coinbase?

Thanks 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: RetroFIRE on August 17, 2017, 08:08:33 PM
Following!  Great discussion all!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 18, 2017, 06:07:25 AM
I'm very new to this, so I apologize if this is a dumb question.  I bought 8 ETH using coinbase this week.  My plan is a long term hold just in case it goes crazy like BTC and its a small part of my portfolio I'm willing to risk big losses with.  My question - is it safe to keep in coinbase?

Thanks

I'll assuming your personal cyber-security is strong here (strong passwords, two-factor authentication enabled, secure browsing habits, etc), because if you're Coinbase account is ever compromised then someone could empty your wallet and you'd lose your funds with little recourse.

So assuming that isn't a concern (truthfully it should be though), then it mostly comes down to your risk appetite. The risk being how much do you trust Coinbase to continue to operate in the foreseeable future. They are one of the most reputable and largest exchanges around, so they are certainly very trust-worthy and have received tons of funding. There's also the risk that regulations in any given state could cause them to stop serving customers in those states, but usually in those cases they'll allow customers to withdraw funds until a certain deadline...but you never know.

Also, the above was all in regards to whether or not your ethereum is "safe". But "safe" could also mean ensuring your digital currency follows the proper blockchain. There is always the risk of a fork with digital currencies where changes to the code could cause blocks mined under those differences to create separate chains. In this case, because your crypto-currencies is held by an exchange, you technically don't own the private key to those coins. Therefore, you're at the mercy to how the exchange determines what chain the coins you own will follow. If they make the wrong choice or don't give you an option, then that could cause you to lose the value of your investment unnecessarily. Things like this can all be mitigated simply by owning your own private keys in a wallet you own.

The way I see it is Coinbase can be used similar to how you would a checking account. I keep some spending bitcoin in Coinbase each month and have a bitcoin debit card (Shift) linked to my Coinbase account that I use for spending. They make spending bitcoin directly with other merchants very easy. However, just like with a checking account, any large amount of funds that you don't see yourself spending for a long period of time, is it worth the given risks above? Especially considering that there is very little effort needed to completely mitigate that risk. That effort being to simply install some wallet software on your computer to store your bitcoin instead and then secure your wallet seed physically somewhere. So any money beyond what I see myself spending short-term I move to my personal wallet for long term safe-keeping.

I know you said you purchased ethereum, but the same idea applies.


TLDR: Coinbase is not a bank account for storing large sums of money. But for small funds or for spending money, then they're sufficient as long as you take the necessary cyber-security precautions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Aggie1999 on August 18, 2017, 08:21:33 AM
Good advice by the previous poster. I'll re-enforce by saying that one should NEVER leave substantial coins in online wallets. Way to many instances in the past of the online wallet operators taking off with the money.

No clue on Ethereum but one of the safest ways to protect bitcoins is do an offline wallet on a computer never connected to the Internet. Put a strong password on that wallet and then print out the keys without a password and store the print out in a safe deposit box. That away if the off line computer gets stolen/destroyed/etc you can always recover. Also, if you kick the bucket whoever has access to your safe deposit box can recover using the print out without having to know the password.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: effigy98 on August 18, 2017, 06:48:12 PM
Get a hardware wallet like with one of these: https://www.ledgerwallet.com/products/ledger-nano-s or print your wallet private keys on paper but not near any cameras or anything and put in a safe or safety deposit box. Hardware and paper is probably the most secure right now. Do not keep too much money on exchanges, that is what you always hear about when you see news about bitcoin hacks. Nobody hacks the actually blockchain/coins, its the exchanges.

Also there is a new bitcoin documentary on Netflix that is pretty interesting.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Buckthundaz on August 18, 2017, 07:14:36 PM
Any sentiments on BTC v. BCH  re: hash rate?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 18, 2017, 08:03:33 PM
Any sentiments on BTC v. BCH  re: hash rate?

A ton of overblown chatter going on, especially on Reddit, regarding BTC and BCH hashrate. Most of it isn't really even true. All kinds of crazy talk like miners are going to move over to BCH and BTC is going to come to a halt and fail. Meanwhile BTC hashrate is at an all time high. BCH will absolutely become more profitable to mine and its hashrate will increase as well, but not to the detriment of BTC. A lot of this nervous chatter is only happening because the BCH network is speeding up as the price climbs as well (driving mining profitability up), but meanwhile SegWit has yet to activate on the BTC network which will take place next week. Once that activates then the talk about BCH overtaking BTC will die down for sure.

Plus, to add to all the drama, the 2X BTC1 hardfork in November has received a lot of attention for BTC the last couple days. People just need to chill out though. November is still a ways out and a lot is going to be happening with BTC until then. So no need to get ahead of ourselves and talk about the possibility of another hardfork. The truth is that a lot of money is on the line for all the stakeholders in play and when it comes to running a business, they likely won't want to be doing anything that will jeopardize the value of the currency that their business depends on. So while some businesses may be pushing the idea of another hardfork, at this point in time it is still to early to determine what will happen.

In the end, after all this drama shakes out we will still have a solid BTC foundation that is resistant to any type of shake-up coming from a loud minority. This will only serve to drive the value of BTC up even further just like when BTC remained stable through the BCH hardfork.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: B_M on August 19, 2017, 09:55:09 AM
What's folks opinion on cloud mining? It's pricked my interest but seems so straightforward I'm doubting it. Given the high cost of the coins at the moment it obviously seems good but just wondering what other folks think.
Been looking at this:
https://pool.bitcoin.com/index_en.html?
 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Roland of Gilead on August 19, 2017, 10:19:50 AM
It seems that some company like Amazon could kill all of the other crypto-currencies in a relatively short time by coming up with their own version which is actually backed by Amazon store credit.   Amazon is so valuable to me right now that I would take $500 of Amazon credit in lei of $400 hard cash if I were selling someone a used lawnmower or something.  I know that Amazon already has gift cards but these are not as secure as a crypto-currency?  If Amazon developed an exchange like Coinbase and established their own crypto-currency, it would just shoot to first place.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on August 19, 2017, 11:57:29 AM
It seems unlikely that cloud mining is ever going to be a way to turn an immediate profit because the folks building and maintaining the machine are generally only going to sell it to you if they figure you're paying more than they could make running it for themselves.* But there could always be exceptions, so that's a general analysis, not running the numbers on any particular scenario. It'd be interesting to compare the cost of one of these machines to buying hashrate on one of the 3rd party aggregators (like nicehash) where you can essentially rent out other people's miners on a minute by minute basis. Hopefully you're getting a much better deal by essentially committing to an indefinite contract.

OTOH, cloud mining (or any kind of mining) where you don't sell the coins as you mine them is one way to speculate that the cost of bitcoins will rise in the future. If that's your goal you could also take the amount of money you were going to spend on your remote mining rig and just buy the currency with it.

*And this assumes all parties are operating in good faith. There are always some stories about folks who either found they were getting much lower hashrates than promised (potentially running on shared rather than unique hardware), ran into long delays actually getting a machine deployed after paying for it and speculated that the company had been running the machine for their own use for a few months first, or companies that just completely vanish with all their servers when a big uptick in price makes mining more profitable. YMMV
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on August 19, 2017, 03:07:15 PM
So embarrassingly my idea build a mining income for income seems to have been a quite poor one, while holding cryptocurrency has really paid off in the last month. Had to reset my y-axis and move the legend to the other side of the graph to make room for all the capital appreciation.

(https://i.imgpile.com/nTgFYR.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nTgFYR)

Recent flatness of the mining income line reflects my main miner going down for most of the last week while I was out of town. I'm now in the black overall for the experiment in cryptocurrencies, although as will be explained below, that is really in spite of my attempt to be a miner rather than because of it. ;-)

maizeman I was thinking about your mining experiment, what would it look like if you added a line to account for mining income minus opportunity cost of the hardware? Not sure what the fair equivalent would be, if you sunk the equivalent cost of the hardware into the same coin you mine at the beginning and let it appreciate perhaps

So I started out with approx. ~$1,130 in leftover bitcoins and spent ~$1,430 on my mining equipment in early June. Let's leave aside the existing bitcoin holdings (which are really the only thing that pulled my portfolio into the black).

Right now my mining income is worth $1,050 (so -$380 in the hole).*

If I'd spent the money for my mining gear on bitcoins, I'd have $2,950 today ($1,520 in capital gains, plus initial principal).**
If I'd spent the money for my mining gear on zcash, I'd have $1,320 (-$110 in capital capital losses, plus initial principal).
If I'd spent the money for my mining gear on an S&P index fund I'd have $1,430 (essentially my initial principal)

Now mining continues to be profitable for my machine even net of electricity costs and may well remain so for several months (or maybe even into the winter), so it is quite possible that I'll catch up to the "just buy a buy of zcash" or "be a responsible person and sweep your excess hobby money into your stash to buy index funds." It's quite unlikely I'll catch up to "put it all on bitcoins" but if I'm being honest with myself about my state of mind in early June I was much more excited about zcash than bitcoin so the second scenario was a more likely outcome than the first. Easy with the benefit of hindsight, huh?

*If I'd been selling my mining income as it came in I'd have $530 ($900 in the hole).
**Includes the value of bitcoin cash in addition to bitcoin for bitcoins held in private wallets on the day of the fork.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on August 20, 2017, 04:41:06 PM
What happens if you lose or break your hardware wallet?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on August 20, 2017, 05:19:25 PM
How does one justify the environmental impact of mining?  I've read that processing BTC transactions takes 1000x+ the power of processing a credit card transaction.  It seems like an anti-mustachian way to make money for this reason.

In the context of your (developed world) lifestyle, it's probably not real meaningful. Is it a waste of electricity? Yes. Is it worse than, say, mining gold (another hoardable "asset")? Certainly not!

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Roland of Gilead on August 20, 2017, 07:22:53 PM
If it drives technology and creates some new inventions or faster processors then the energy consumption might be worth it in the long run anyway.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on August 20, 2017, 08:33:57 PM
I've thought about that myself with my own mining as well. With the huge gains that Bitcoin has seen over the last several months, it is hard for mining to keep up with compared to if you had simply investing the up front costs in Bitcoin itself instead of the equipment (I think that's what your getting at).

However, it is hard to (or at least unfair to) calculate in the short term because in the long term mining will win out so long as you are able to mine back all the Bitcoin you spent on the equipment and then some. As long as you can mine back all the Bitcoin spent on your equipment plus a little more, then you'll be able to realize the gains you originally missed out on plus all future gains of the asset if you continue to hold.

@CanuckExpat, it's a good question. I'm out of town all week but would be interesting to run the numbers once I am back on my home computer. Could compare to putting the same amount of money I spent on mining equipment right into the cyptocurrency (right now I know I'd come out way behind just because bitcoin has been on a big run up in price), or into stock/bond index funds.

One important question to resolve, would you say it makes more sense to only consider the potential increase/decrease in value of the investment, or the total value of the investment? The money I spent building my miner is gone (maybe I could get a couple of hundred bucks for the parts if I wanted to mess around on ebay), which my charts show me starting off more than $1,000 in the hole. For an investment in the currencies themselves (or a stock index fund) I'd still be able to get my original investment out at any time (less any capital losses).

@lifeanon

Your analysis assumes that the mining is being uses as a method of buying bitcoins (or other currencies) which lumps together two very different financial questions: whether it makes financial sense to mine BTC/ETH/ZEC/etc and whether it makes sense to hold BTC/ETH/ZEC for appreciation. I'm currently doing some of both, but it could very easily be that once we're looking at this with the benefit of hindsight, one (either one) will have made financial sense and the other did not. So I'm trying to separate out the two effects as I go along.

I think you are both right, and this is a trickier question to answer than I thought. What is the best alternative..
It's easy-ish to answer in hindsight, but that's not a fair comparison. It might turn out to be different for each person depending on your goals.

If your goal is to accumulate as much BTC/ETH/ZEC as possible and hold onto it indefinitely, then lifeanon makes a good point, that you will presumably "break even" at some point as long as you can mine back the cost of your hardware in that currency. It means you should measure and plot your y-axis in that currency, and the time period to break even is really a shift of the x-axis (assuming mining difficulty doesn't get prohibitively harder as you wait, I don't know enough about mining to think about this).

If your ultimate goal is to maximize USD (or other fiat currency) by accumulating and then selling cryptocurrency at any arbitrary point in time, which is what I think maizeman is implicitly getting at since his y-axis is in USD, then a "fair" comparison might be buying the equivalent of your mining hardware in that cryptocurrency and tracking the appreciation in USD to that arbitrary point. If you wait long enough that you would have mined it back anyways, I suppose you still break even just with much less liquidity.

So I'm not sure what is the right answer. Opportunity cost is hard.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on August 20, 2017, 08:34:17 PM
Maizeman, continued thanks for the clarity of your experiments and reporting.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Mr Mark on August 20, 2017, 10:29:33 PM
Maizeman, et al

If a company has large inhouse computing capacity that is (say) not being used to full capacity 24/7, is there any value to getting the under utilised compute capacity to mine bitcoins while otherwise idle? We also generate our own power, btw.

My company does a lot of computing, but it won't of course be those specialised mining hardware set ups...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: effigy98 on August 21, 2017, 06:18:19 AM
What happens if you lose or break your hardware wallet?

You get a new one and put in your secret key you wrote down and put in your safe. BAM! New hardware wallet with same addresses.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: effigy98 on August 21, 2017, 06:21:38 AM
If it drives technology and creates some new inventions or faster processors then the energy consumption might be worth it in the long run anyway.

I don't think the ends will justify the means in this case.  I think many don't understand the massive scale of power going into cryptocurrencies right now.  That's why I wrote the above post.

It takes 100s of people to verify a "normal" old world money transactions. If you added up the commutes, individual consumption, compute power they use to move those bits around, etc... You are most likely coming out at least even, but probably much more ahead on crypto currencies then traditional credit cards, bank transfers, western union, etc. The point of gold is a good one as well.

Buy something at the store with your visa. There are a lot of people and computers behind the scenes that process that transaction, record it to ledgers, etc.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 21, 2017, 06:46:47 AM
Currently, bitcoin accounts for a tiny but growing piece of the worldwide currency usage.  Imagine what could happen as transaction volume grows by 10x, or 100x?  (Transaction volume is what consumes the power, not the price of a Bitcoin).  This seems entirely possible, if not likely, given the hash rate has grown by 4x in the past year alone.


No doubt the energy consumption of bitcoin is massive at the moment. The problem however is that the energy consumption of bitcoin is always measured in energy spent per transaction. That type of calculation isn't exactly the most fair to bitcoin. However, it is one of the only common metrics we have between bitcoin and the VISA network, for example. So that is what generally gets used as a comparison.

The reason why it is unfair to measure energy consumption on a per transaction basis with bitcoin is because of the fact that the amount of energy consumed is the same whether there are 4,000 transactions in a block or there are 20,000. It is the work put into hashing the transaction block that consumes energy, not the input to the block that matters. That means that as the network scales, it will inevitably become more energy efficient as time goes on. Contrast that with your typical backend database solution (any non-blockchain system) and you get the opposite effect; the more the network grows the more energy it consumes.

Furthermore, with SegWit being enabled, the possibility for the Lightning Network to play a role in payment transactions will allow the bitcoin network to scale dramatically while being able to do so with the equivalent compute power of a home desktop PC. That will allow way more transactions to be processed with a much lower energy footprint than today. That being said, the bitcoin blockchain would still be confirming payment channel transactions and so the network would still need to scale more from a transaction and energy perspective.

I do feel in the case the ends justifies the means. Bitcoin has the opportunity to create a ton of social good in the world where power over money corrupts. Furthermore, because of bitcoin's inherent need for efficiency when it comes to mining profitability, that means that bitcoin will be a main driver toward lower cost renewable electricity (we're already seeing that). The fact that bitcoin consumes electricity means that its transition toward clean energy is destined to be, unlike say the transportation industry that will require dramatic infrastructure changes. So as we solve our world's energy problems, bitcoin will be right there adopting energy solutions that will allow the network as a whole to become more and more sustainable. Planning for power is something that is done at the earliest stages of bringing a mining operation online which isn't something you see in many industries today where power consumption is an afterthought.

The biggest problem I see with bitcoin (with regards to energy consumption) is the fact that bitcoin's greatest energy demands come at a time when its energy sources will be the dirtiest in bitcoin's lifetime.

TLDR: Bitcoin's inherent need for lower power consumption above all else to achieve mining profitability means that the power problem for bitcoin will ultimately solve itself in the long run. Not using a system that has potential for so much social good is short-sighted given this fact. As the world adopts electronic payment systems, a blockchain based approach is much more energy efficient than traditional systems at scaling over the long term.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on August 21, 2017, 08:51:59 AM
I would agree with all of that with the caveat that Bitcoin isn't (and probably never will be) "money" in the sense that it's widely used for transactions. The inherently deflationary design IMO ensures that it will instead be a gold-like store of value (assuming it's anything at all in the long run, it could of course be abandoned for some other crypto system).

So the proper comparison, environmentally, is probably to physical gold.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 21, 2017, 10:01:53 AM
I would agree with all of that with the caveat that Bitcoin isn't (and probably never will be) "money" in the sense that it's widely used for transactions. The inherently deflationary design IMO ensures that it will instead be a gold-like store of value (assuming it's anything at all in the long run, it could of course be abandoned for some other crypto system).

So the proper comparison, environmentally, is probably to physical gold.

-W

For what its worth, gold was used as a universal currency for centuries. The reason why we moved toward paper money was due to convenience. It's not as easy to carry around a sack of gold coins as it is a wallet with folded money.

Bitcoin combines the value of gold with the convenience of electronic transactions.

Whether or not you believe any deflationary currency is good for the economy is another topic of economics altogether. I believe the world is in desperate need for a non-manipulative deflationary currency. The fact that it is extremely convenient to use will help ensure its mainstream adoption.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on August 21, 2017, 03:09:03 PM
@bender

As lifeanon has also talked about, while you can certainly calculate an average energy cost per transaction for bitcoin by dividing the number of transactions by the amount of power consumed, the marginal energy cost of each bitcoin transaction is essentially zero.

Energy use scales with the total network hashrate, not with the number of transactions. Consider the case of bitcoin cash. Up to 8x as many transactions per block, and only 1/10th as high a hashrate. So right now the energy cost per transaction of bitcoin cash is 1/80th that of bitcoin itself or ~12.5x the cost of a visa transaction.* Continued increases in transaction scale per block have the potential to reduce average energy use per transaction further, and if something like proof of stake ends up in a widely adopted cryptocurrency, that would reduce power useage even more.

@Mr Mark

For bitcoin proper, it is likely that even with essentially "free" computer hardware, if you're using CPUs the amount of income you get from mining wouldn't be worth the extra wear and tear on your servers. If the company had a GPU heavy server farm and/or was interested in mining various altcoins where mining isn't dominated by custom fabricated ASICs built specifically for mining as has happened to bitcoin, it might prove to be a profitable way to use up idle compute cycles.

@Bicycle_B

Thank you, it makes me happy to hear the ongoing reports from my little experiment are of interest.

*Based on the statement about bitcoin using 1000x as much energy per transaction as visa.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on August 21, 2017, 03:13:26 PM
We will have to agree to disagree on the deflationary part. If I were designing my libertarian fantasy currency, it would probably have some very slight inflation built in, just for the sake of keeping money moving through the system (not to mention preventing deflationary spiral sort of problems).

Regardless, Bitcoin is a LONG way from being used as a currency in any meaningful sense. The recent rise in popularity/price has certainly caused a lot of folks to buy fancy mining rigs and hoard their bitcoins, but that's not the same as walking to the store and getting a bag of apples. I know a few folks (normal folks who aren't interested in buying illegal Chinese drugs or whatever) who have bitcoin holdings and they look at me like I'm crazy if I suggest they could *purchase* something - there is no chance in hell they'll spend them, ever (though if the price drops enough, they'll panic-sell them!)

That's not a great setup for widespread adoption as currency. But I've been wrong before.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 22, 2017, 06:41:42 AM
Regardless, Bitcoin is a LONG way from being used as a currency in any meaningful sense. The recent rise in popularity/price has certainly caused a lot of folks to buy fancy mining rigs and hoard their bitcoins, but that's not the same as walking to the store and getting a bag of apples. I know a few folks (normal folks who aren't interested in buying illegal Chinese drugs or whatever) who have bitcoin holdings and they look at me like I'm crazy if I suggest they could *purchase* something - there is no chance in hell they'll spend them, ever (though if the price drops enough, they'll panic-sell them!)

That's not a great setup for widespread adoption as currency. But I've been wrong before.

-W

What do you mean by "not a great setup"? The hurdle to POS usage is merchant adoption, not the userbase.

A large portion of people putting money into bitcoin are simply doing so with their expendable or investable income. This is money that, if it weren't in bitcoin, would likely be in some other investment where it wouldn't be getting used for POS transactions there either. So the reason for that money not being spent isn't because the money is in bitcoin, but rather simply because the money that is being put into bitcoin is non-spending money to begin with.

That being said, once merchant adoption takes place (its only a matter of time), then given the fact that bitcoin is extremely liquid, the money will be right there available from the user base ready to be spent.

In the meantime, we have ample amount of bridge technologies using existing networks to help people spend their bitcoins if they need to. For example, for myself, I have a bitcoin debit card that allows me to keep my spending money in bitcoin up until the point in time when I spend it at a store. I simply move my paycheck into bitcoin and then use my debit card to spend it where ever I want. This allows me to dollar cost average bitcoin with my after-tax income. Considering bitcoin doubled over the last couple of months, this has allowed me to effectively double my take home pay. When taking this approach, using bitcoin doesn't cause someone to avoid spending, but simply be able to save more than they'd otherwise be able to. All it takes is a merchant to accept bitcoin and I can then simply cut out the middle-man (VISA) and pay directly with bitcoin to the benefit of both the merchant and I.

This leads me to my final point about deflation. The fear of a deflationary spiral with bitcoin is unfounded. Deflationary spirals can occur with traditional centrally manipulated fiat currencies because they are unpredictable. With bitcoin, at the point where deflation actually kicks in (a long time from now), deflation will be consistent and expected. That means that people won't forgo spending in favor of hoarding because of the knowledge that the bitcoin that they'd earn tomorrow will have the same deflationary properties as the bitcoin that they'd be spending today. We see this every day. If someone wants a new iPhone, then history shows that they'll purchase that iPhone when they want it even if it means that they'll save more money by simply delaying their purchase of it. While this isn't deflationary economics at play, it is consumer behavior economics. This consumerism will still be alive in a deflationary economic model. That means that regardless of whether or not the currency being used is inflationary or deflationary, consumers will still choose to purchase the goods they want over delaying that purchase even if it means they'll save more money in the long run.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on August 22, 2017, 07:38:57 AM
Lifeanon, would you mind pointing me towards the service that provides your bitcoin denominated debt card? I remember hearing some folks talk about those as a possibility years ago, but hadn't realized they were actually out in the wild already. Does the company providing the service take a significant chunk out of either your deposits or spending as fees? Recently found out the city where I live already has a "bitcoin atm" where folks can either deposit cash to purchase bitcoins or convert their bitcoins to dollars and instantaneously withdraw as cash. Fees are ... unfavorable to say the least though.

WRT deflation/inflation, the change in the absolute money supply of bitcoin is going to be very predictable over time. That doesn't necessarily mean that rates of inflation/deflation will also remain fixed, because changes in the velocity of money (how often the average bitcoin/euro/RMB/dollar is spent) can produce significant increases or decreases in the effective money supply. In good times people tend to spend more of the money they make and spend it quickly, so the effective money supply increases, creating inflation. In bad times, people tend to hold on to their money for much longer and build up emergency funds because they're worried about their next paycheck, decreasing the money supply and either reducing inflation or causing deflation.

Now to be fair, I should add that hyperinflation, which generally occurs when a government starts printing new money to service its debt, driving up inflation and hence interest rates which requires more money be printed to service the debt, is basically impossible with a cryptocurrency, but I did want to make the point that deflationary spirals are still quite possible with bitcoin or bitcoin like currencies (and remember the initial deflationary spiral of the great depression occurred with a gold-backed currency where the government really had very little power to increase or decrease the money supply).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on August 22, 2017, 07:46:35 AM
I was not going to bring the great depression into this, but yes, Maizeman makes my point quite well. There are advantages to not having a central authority control the money supply (no hyperinflation) but we need to recognize that there are also HUGE disadvantages WRT the business cycle and the ability of a central authority to mitigate downside risks through currency manipulation.

Now, you might think the gov't does a shitty job of that. I'm not sure I'd disagree. But doing a shitty job of it might still very well be better than nobody doing the job at all.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 22, 2017, 09:48:16 AM
Lifeanon, would you mind pointing me towards the service that provides your bitcoin denominated debit card?

The card I use is the Shift card. They have a partnership with Coinbase that allows you to spend your bitcoin residing in Coinbase using this card. So I just keep my small amount of spending money each month in Coinbase (the rest in a private wallet) so that I can spend my bitcoin just like I would with a checking account. The awesome part is that there are no transaction fees involved. There is a one time $10 fee to purchase the card and then there are $2.50 ATM withdrawal fees (just like about every VISA card out there), but I don't really use it at any ATMs so that is not a big deal. That's it. No annual fee either. The cool thing as well though is that it functions just like any other debit card. So in cases where I'm at the store and pay with the card as "debit", then if the store allows it, I can ask for cash back if I need it. That allows me to instantly turn my bitcoin back into USD cash without paying any conversion/transaction fees at all.

https://www.shiftpayments.com/card/ (https://www.shiftpayments.com/card/)

There are a few other bitcoin debit cards out there, but most of them are prepaid cards that store the value on the card in USD as opposed to bitcoin. So you only receive the value of your bitcoin at the time you load the card. I didn't like that approach and most of those have many additional fees to them as well.

I was not going to bring the great depression into this, but yes, Maizeman makes my point quite well. There are advantages to not having a central authority control the money supply (no hyperinflation) but we need to recognize that there are also HUGE disadvantages WRT the business cycle and the ability of a central authority to mitigate downside risks through currency manipulation.

WRT to inflation/deflation, don't get me wrong, I didn't mean to oversimplify the economy down to just the money supply policy alone. There are other factors for sure that come into play when it comes to what contributes to market ups and downs. But the argument that there are outside forces that contribute to the effective money supply (such as fractional-reserve banking) is hardly an argument against having a decentralized non-manipulated deflationary currency. Any given type of currency isn't going to solve all the woes of a very complex economy.

The thing about bitcoin however isn't that it is necessarily forever static and can't be changed. It is the fact that it is decentralized and gives the power to a majority of its users instead of a powerful minority. In other words, if we got into a situation where the currency itself was what was holding our economy back (again, highly unlikely), then the currency (bitcoin) could only be changed if the benefit of that change received support from the community as a whole. This is where the idea of social good comes from with regards to bitcoin. But as was stated, it is highly unlikely that bitcoin's inherent nature will be the root culprit of any future economic perils and it will be more than likely that other destructive economic forces will be at play. Those other forces could be everything from fractional-reserve banking (that inherently leads to recessions at regular intervals), horrible lending practices, large-scale speculative bubbles, etc.

Finally, for what it is worth (since the depression was thrown out there), economists looked throughout American history and found that, outside of the Great Depression, there is no correlation between depression/recession and deflation (Atkeson, Andrew and Kehoe, Patrick. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Deflation and Depression: Is There an Empirical Link? January 2004). Yes, deflation made what took place with the Great Depression worse, but it wasn't and can't be the cause of it. For example, defaulting loans during an economic hardship can have the same effect as a contracting money supply that presents itself in a recession, but that doesn't mean that the resulting deflationary pattern was a root cause that gave way to that recession. The idea that deflation hinders economic growth is completely baseless.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on August 22, 2017, 10:34:15 AM
Yeah, agree to disagree. IMO anything used as "money" (for exchange) needs to grow in supply sufficiently that hoarding it is never a good strategy (encourages investing, which is good, and consumption, which has positives and negatives). If you use your extra money to invest in... itself, that's not especially useful economically.

Bitcoin as constituted is mostly being hoarded, and the design of the system encourages this behavior. I don't see the current population of bitcoin owners (who as far as I can tell are speculators) agreeing to any major change that would increase the supply. Maybe that will change, but I'd bet on another crypto currency that is better designed winning out if we're talking about something used to facilitate exchange. I think bitcoin can survive long term as a substitute for gold - which of course you can also spend. Like gold, though, people generally won't spend it in everyday transactions.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 22, 2017, 11:06:05 AM
Yeah, agree to disagree. IMO anything used as "money" (for exchange) needs to grow in supply sufficiently that hoarding it is never a good strategy (encourages investing, which is good, and consumption, which has positives and negatives). If you use your extra money to invest in... itself, that's not especially useful economically.

Bitcoin as constituted is mostly being hoarded, and the design of the system encourages this behavior.

Bitcoin is only being invested in itself because of the fact that it has the potential to become the groundwork for a new global economy. Therefore, those investing in it now will be paid dividends for being early adopters. If, however, bitcoin does become a fabric of our global economy, then it will reach a point where its volatility and rapid rise in price will be greatly diminished. The idea that bitcoin could be mainstream while at the same time producing the returns we see today is false. At that point, individuals using it as a long term investment seeking gains will be a disappointed when compared with traditional investments in businesses that produce a profit.

Gold is not a good investment, it is a hedge against riskier but more profitable investments. The only reason why people don't spend their gold is because of the fact that it isn't convenient or liquid enough to spend. Therefore we resort to spending our dollars instead, but those dollars lose value over time. This loss of value impacts lower/middle class citizens more than it does the rich since a larger percentage of their income and net worth exists in USD. Having a currency that protects against this will help preserve the wealth of a larger portion of our population. This will have a huge impact on the distribution of wealth and the end result will be a much more stable economy. If however the economy were to go belly up do to poor economic policies or corporate greed (resulting in those riskier investments declining), then having a decentralized currency that citizens could flock to as a safe haven would be just what the world would need to help preserve the wealth of our most at risk populations. On the other side of that catastrophe would be citizens ready and willing to reinvest their preserved wealth into companies resilient enough to turn a profit. In fact, our next economic recession is when we'll see bitcoin's most important role become immediately apparent.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on August 22, 2017, 12:44:25 PM
I disagree with basically all of that, but I don't think there's much point arguing about it further. Regardless, it will be interesting to see what develops over the next few decades.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on August 22, 2017, 01:27:41 PM
Hey all, glad the discussion is going well.

I want to let everyone know that IOTA is something you want to do some research on while the market cap is still under-valued.

Cheers!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on August 23, 2017, 08:09:29 PM
Lifeanon, would you mind pointing me towards the service that provides your bitcoin denominated debit card?

The card I use is the Shift card. They have a partnership with Coinbase that allows you to spend your bitcoin residing in Coinbase using this card. So I just keep my small amount of spending money each month in Coinbase (the rest in a private wallet) so that I can spend my bitcoin just like I would with a checking account. The awesome part is that there are no transaction fees involved. There is a one time $10 fee to purchase the card and then there are $2.50 ATM withdrawal fees (just like about every VISA card out there), but I don't really use it at any ATMs so that is not a big deal. That's it. No annual fee either. The cool thing as well though is that it functions just like any other debit card. So in cases where I'm at the store and pay with the card as "debit", then if the store allows it, I can ask for cash back if I need it. That allows me to instantly turn my bitcoin back into USD cash without paying any conversion/transaction fees at all.

https://www.shiftpayments.com/card/ (https://www.shiftpayments.com/card/)

There are a few other bitcoin debit cards out there, but most of them are prepaid cards that store the value on the card in USD as opposed to bitcoin. So you only receive the value of your bitcoin at the time you load the card. I didn't like that approach and most of those have many additional fees to them as well.

I was not going to bring the great depression into this, but yes, Maizeman makes my point quite well. There are advantages to not having a central authority control the money supply (no hyperinflation) but we need to recognize that there are also HUGE disadvantages WRT the business cycle and the ability of a central authority to mitigate downside risks through currency manipulation.

WRT to inflation/deflation, don't get me wrong, I didn't mean to oversimplify the economy down to just the money supply policy alone. There are other factors for sure that come into play when it comes to what contributes to market ups and downs. But the argument that there are outside forces that contribute to the effective money supply (such as fractional-reserve banking) is hardly an argument against having a decentralized non-manipulated deflationary currency. Any given type of currency isn't going to solve all the woes of a very complex economy.

The thing about bitcoin however isn't that it is necessarily forever static and can't be changed. It is the fact that it is decentralized and gives the power to a majority of its users instead of a powerful minority. In other words, if we got into a situation where the currency itself was what was holding our economy back (again, highly unlikely), then the currency (bitcoin) could only be changed if the benefit of that change received support from the community as a whole. This is where the idea of social good comes from with regards to bitcoin. But as was stated, it is highly unlikely that bitcoin's inherent nature will be the root culprit of any future economic perils and it will be more than likely that other destructive economic forces will be at play. Those other forces could be everything from fractional-reserve banking (that inherently leads to recessions at regular intervals), horrible lending practices, large-scale speculative bubbles, etc.

Finally, for what it is worth (since the depression was thrown out there), economists looked throughout American history and found that, outside of the Great Depression, there is no correlation between depression/recession and deflation (Atkeson, Andrew and Kehoe, Patrick. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Deflation and Depression: Is There an Empirical Link? January 2004). Yes, deflation made what took place with the Great Depression worse, but it wasn't and can't be the cause of it. For example, defaulting loans during an economic hardship can have the same effect as a contracting money supply that presents itself in a recession, but that doesn't mean that the resulting deflationary pattern was a root cause that gave way to that recession. The idea that deflation hinders economic growth is completely baseless.

Why would you spend your BTC?!?!? 

LOL JK.

Personally I hodl though.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on August 23, 2017, 08:10:43 PM
Hey all, glad the discussion is going well.

I want to let everyone know that IOTA is something you want to do some research on while the market cap is still under-valued.

Cheers!

The problem with IOTA is that noone actually knows how it works.  WTF is tangle?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: bacchi on August 23, 2017, 11:22:34 PM
Hey all, glad the discussion is going well.

I want to let everyone know that IOTA is something you want to do some research on while the market cap is still under-valued.

Cheers!

The problem with IOTA is that noone actually knows how it works.  WTF is tangle?

A graph with a start and an end (but not necessarily followed in sequence).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed_acyclic_graph

My first thought about IOTA is that, holy shit, it would gobble up RAM like nothing else.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on August 24, 2017, 01:09:16 PM
Hey all, glad the discussion is going well.

I want to let everyone know that IOTA is something you want to do some research on while the market cap is still under-valued.

Cheers!

The problem with IOTA is that noone actually knows how it works.  WTF is tangle?

A graph with a start and an end (but not necessarily followed in sequence).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed_acyclic_graph

My first thought about IOTA is that, holy shit, it would gobble up RAM like nothing else.

It is already optimized to be able to be ran on a regular smart phone, long term they want it to require as minimal processing for the "work" as possible.

Long term, I expect to see commercial Drones flying around us and landing on wireless charging stations (sharing economy) and payment will be done in IOTA :]
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on August 24, 2017, 03:57:24 PM
So on here IOTA has a volume to market cap ratio of <1%, while a lot of other currencies in the top 10 seem to be more in the 2-4% range. Does anyone know of structural reasons for this to be the case or is it just a random piece of statistical noise?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on August 25, 2017, 05:57:04 AM
So on here IOTA has a volume to market cap ratio of <1%, while a lot of other currencies in the top 10 seem to be more in the 2-4% range. Does anyone know of structural reasons for this to be the case or is it just a random piece of statistical noise?

Ya, that's one of my biggest concerns with IOTA. It isn't very liquid at the moment and almost all trading for it (> 90%) takes place on just one exchange. I would never feel comfortable putting more than just a few bucks in it. That being said, a few bucks in it might totally be worth it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on August 25, 2017, 11:15:48 AM
So on here IOTA has a volume to market cap ratio of <1%, while a lot of other currencies in the top 10 seem to be more in the 2-4% range. Does anyone know of structural reasons for this to be the case or is it just a random piece of statistical noise?

Ya, that's one of my biggest concerns with IOTA. It isn't very liquid at the moment and almost all trading for it (> 90%) takes place on just one exchange. I would never feel comfortable putting more than just a few bucks in it. That being said, a few bucks in it might totally be worth it.

New exchanges will be added soon, I see it settling around $1 when that happens

That exchange does not let me register. I have no way to trade for it even if I wanted to.

Bitfinex no longer allows US Customers
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Padonak on August 27, 2017, 01:08:47 PM
Following
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: daverobev on August 27, 2017, 05:06:44 PM
I have... 0.02 Bitcoin from a free signup thing a couple of years ago, that I'd not thought about until I read this thread.

Apparently that's about $86 USD.

As a Canadian resident - what's the easiest way of getting this 'out' somehow? It's currently on Circle.

Can I transfer it to Paypal (I have both a US and Canadian account)? Google Play Credit?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: zazpowered on August 27, 2017, 05:07:23 PM
I built an iOS app recently to help ppl track their cryptocurrency portfolios easily. Would appreciate any feedback on it. Thanks!

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/coinbuddy-track-your-cryptocurrency-portfolio/id1271644974?mt=8
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on August 28, 2017, 09:07:43 AM
Any ideas as to why Litecoin is pushing higher?  I bought exactly one Litecoin for about $25 back in May and it's now at $65.  Obviously, I wish I had bought more, since the Ethereum tokens I bought as part of the same round of purchasing have barely budged. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on August 28, 2017, 09:40:24 AM
Any ideas as to why Litecoin is pushing higher?  I bought exactly one Litecoin for about $25 back in May and it's now at $65.  Obviously, I wish I had bought more, since the Ethereum tokens I bought as part of the same round of purchasing have barely budged.

No idea, but got lucky and bought 2 right before the recent surge in price
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BrandNewPapa on August 28, 2017, 10:53:11 AM
Any ideas as to why Litecoin is pushing higher?  I bought exactly one Litecoin for about $25 back in May and it's now at $65.  Obviously, I wish I had bought more, since the Ethereum tokens I bought as part of the same round of purchasing have barely budged.

Not sure how much can be attributed...
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/litecoin-surges-to-new-record-high/
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on August 28, 2017, 11:38:15 AM
Any ideas as to why Litecoin is pushing higher?  I bought exactly one Litecoin for about $25 back in May and it's now at $65.  Obviously, I wish I had bought more, since the Ethereum tokens I bought as part of the same round of purchasing have barely budged.

Litecoin is just highly undervalued IMO. Same technology as Bitcoin but faster block times, bigger blocks, cheaper transaction fees...etc.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: neonlight on August 28, 2017, 12:19:04 PM
I built an iOS app recently to help ppl track their cryptocurrency portfolios easily. Would appreciate any feedback on it. Thanks!

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/coinbuddy-track-your-cryptocurrency-portfolio/id1271644974?mt=8

Nice! I see you showing Neo in your screenshots. Cheeky way to tell everyone the app is up to date :))
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on August 29, 2017, 05:06:38 PM
I built an iOS app recently to help ppl track their cryptocurrency portfolios easily. Would appreciate any feedback on it. Thanks!

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/coinbuddy-track-your-cryptocurrency-portfolio/id1271644974?mt=8

Nice! I see you showing Neo in your screenshots. Cheeky way to tell everyone the app is up to date :))

Quality post to username ratio, friend
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on August 31, 2017, 11:44:45 AM
Any ideas as to why Litecoin is pushing higher?  I bought exactly one Litecoin for about $25 back in May and it's now at $65.  Obviously, I wish I had bought more, since the Ethereum tokens I bought as part of the same round of purchasing have barely budged.

Litecoin is just highly undervalued IMO. Same technology as Bitcoin but faster block times, bigger blocks, cheaper transaction fees...etc.

Still pushing higher toward $75.  It appears that its presence on Coinbase is the main reason why the price keeps pushing.  No doubt a bunch of people, just like I did, said I'll buy a few just to diversify.  These same casual users aren't going to the great lengths necessary to diversify into the rest of the top-10 coins since they're a hassle to buy. 

For that reason, Coinbase and similar exchanges hold a lot of power.  They are the kingmakers.  No doubt a lot of money is changing hands to both get specific coins on those exchanged AND off of them. 

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on August 31, 2017, 01:27:03 PM
Any ideas as to why Litecoin is pushing higher?  I bought exactly one Litecoin for about $25 back in May and it's now at $65.  Obviously, I wish I had bought more, since the Ethereum tokens I bought as part of the same round of purchasing have barely budged.

Litecoin is just highly undervalued IMO. Same technology as Bitcoin but faster block times, bigger blocks, cheaper transaction fees...etc.

The same could be said about just about every other cryptocurrency. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on August 31, 2017, 05:48:05 PM
Any ideas as to why Litecoin is pushing higher?  I bought exactly one Litecoin for about $25 back in May and it's now at $65.  Obviously, I wish I had bought more, since the Ethereum tokens I bought as part of the same round of purchasing have barely budged.

Litecoin is just highly undervalued IMO. Same technology as Bitcoin but faster block times, bigger blocks, cheaper transaction fees...etc.

The same could be said about just about every other cryptocurrency.

Hey man, you must be new to the whole sphere. There are few coins that are as fast as Litecoin right now. The only one that would edge it out is a private coin like XRP, possibly Dash and the GOAT (Ethereum).

Do a transaction with UBIQ (still love the platform) and let me know how long it takes to get 25 transactions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on August 31, 2017, 06:16:30 PM
Well to clarify there are "faster transactions" and "faster block times"

Litecoin's blocktime is 2.5 minutes, which is much faster than bitcoin but not exceptional among altcoins*, but my understanding is that the lightening network is already up and running on litecoin, so individual transactions can settle much faster than waiting for the next block.

*DASH and ZEC are also 2.5 minutes, Ethereum is 15-17 seconds
Title: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: robdwny on August 31, 2017, 08:14:36 PM
I'm using coinbase for ETH
I'm in the U.S.
Is there a good place that buys and sells all of the cryptocurrency with usd ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on August 31, 2017, 08:18:18 PM
What I do is go here (https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/neo/), click on the currency I am interested in, then on "markets" to find the places where that currency is being traded. In many cases it may be easier to buy bitcoins with USD with whichever exchange works best for you, then move the bitcoins to whatever site has active trading in the actual currency you want to buy.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on August 31, 2017, 09:46:20 PM
Any ideas as to why Litecoin is pushing higher?  I bought exactly one Litecoin for about $25 back in May and it's now at $65.  Obviously, I wish I had bought more, since the Ethereum tokens I bought as part of the same round of purchasing have barely budged.

Litecoin is just highly undervalued IMO. Same technology as Bitcoin but faster block times, bigger blocks, cheaper transaction fees...etc.

The same could be said about just about every other cryptocurrency.

Hey man, you must be new to the whole sphere. There are few coins that are as fast as Litecoin right now. The only one that would edge it out is a private coin like XRP, possibly Dash and the GOAT (Ethereum).

Do a transaction with UBIQ (still love the platform) and let me know how long it takes to get 25 transactions.

You misunderstand.  I replied just about every other crypto has faster block times, bigger blocks, cheaper transaction fees than BTC.

I am new.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hvillian on September 01, 2017, 07:20:35 AM
I'm using coinbase for ETH
I'm in the U.S.
Is there a good place that buys and sells all of the cryptocurrency with usd ?


I also use coinbase to deposit/convert $USD into BTC, ETH, or LTC, then send some of those to Bittrex to buy some of the other coins.  I have been able to find most coins that I am interested on there, and have had no major problems.  Just be careful to transfer the correct currency into the correct wallet.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: robdwny on September 01, 2017, 09:40:03 AM
I'm using coinbase for ETH
I'm in the U.S.
Is there a good place that buys and sells all of the cryptocurrency with usd ?


I also use coinbase to deposit/convert $USD into BTC, ETH, or LTC, then send some of those to Bittrex to buy some of the other coins.  I have been able to find most coins that I am interested on there, and have had no major problems.  Just be careful to transfer the correct currency into the correct wallet.

I have not done this yet, if I buy BTC
And it goes up in price. I take it and and buy another Côin from bittrex.
Will coinbase send me paperwork on profits ?
I'm just confused on how you keep track of all this if I was buying 3-4 different coins. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on September 01, 2017, 03:24:10 PM
Any ideas as to why Litecoin is pushing higher?  I bought exactly one Litecoin for about $25 back in May and it's now at $65.  Obviously, I wish I had bought more, since the Ethereum tokens I bought as part of the same round of purchasing have barely budged.

Litecoin is just highly undervalued IMO. Same technology as Bitcoin but faster block times, bigger blocks, cheaper transaction fees...etc.

The same could be said about just about every other cryptocurrency.

Hey man, you must be new to the whole sphere. There are few coins that are as fast as Litecoin right now. The only one that would edge it out is a private coin like XRP, possibly Dash and the GOAT (Ethereum).

Do a transaction with UBIQ (still love the platform) and let me know how long it takes to get 25 transactions.

You misunderstand.  I replied just about every other crypto has faster block times, bigger blocks, cheaper transaction fees than BTC.

I am new.


ahhh I did misunderstand but I would still disagree in part. Either way, all good!

Glad you are on board, these % gains are once in a lifetime. I see this market slowing down volatility wise by 2018/2019 so now is the time to cash in...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on September 01, 2017, 05:56:56 PM
just speculation, but a lawyer employed by the firm representing the Winklevoss bitcoin ETF will now be in charge of ETF approvals at the SEC.  this could explain the recent bitcoin price surge (just about to reach $5k).

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-04/getting-that-etf-approved-may-grow-easier-as-sec-shakes-up-team

http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20170831/FREE/170839978/sec-names-dalia-blass-director-of-investment-management

ETFs are another step in the right direction for legitimizing cryptocurrencies and giving everyday investors access to them.  i expect a huge bubble to form when this happens, whether it's sooner or later.  long-term crypto holders will be fine but i think a lot of folks new to cryptos will get burned.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on September 01, 2017, 08:17:09 PM
I'm using coinbase for ETH
I'm in the U.S.
Is there a good place that buys and sells all of the cryptocurrency with usd ?


I also use coinbase to deposit/convert $USD into BTC, ETH, or LTC, then send some of those to Bittrex to buy some of the other coins.  I have been able to find most coins that I am interested on there, and have had no major problems.  Just be careful to transfer the correct currency into the correct wallet.

I have not done this yet, if I buy BTC
And it goes up in price. I take it and and buy another Côin from bittrex.
Will coinbase send me paperwork on profits ?
I'm just confused on how you keep track of all this if I was buying 3-4 different coins. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is a way to convert fiat to crypto for 0% fees on gdax but you have to wait 4-7 days for your bank deposit to clear.  You deposit cash from your bank account and place a limit order on BTC, LTC or ETH.  Transfer the crypto to an exchange and trade it for whatever coin you want.  I generally do LTC because it has less transaction fees.  Pretty much regret exchanging my LTC now though...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on September 02, 2017, 02:01:05 AM
just speculation, but a lawyer employed by the firm representing the Winklevoss bitcoin ETF will now be in charge of ETF approvals at the SEC.  this could explain the recent bitcoin price surge (just about to reach $5k).

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-04/getting-that-etf-approved-may-grow-easier-as-sec-shakes-up-team

http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20170831/FREE/170839978/sec-names-dalia-blass-director-of-investment-management

ETFs are another step in the right direction for legitimizing cryptocurrencies and giving everyday investors access to them.  i expect a huge bubble to form when this happens, whether it's sooner or later.  long-term crypto holders will be fine but i think a lot of folks new to cryptos will get burned.

I think this is a really bad idea.  A huge bubble will form and then burst.  All of the Wall Street guys can smell that bubble and want a piece of the action, so pressure to legitimize cyrpto as an asset class is very real.  But there is absolutely zero SEC or other regulation of crypto so I don't see how they could ever permit it. 

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: robdwny on September 02, 2017, 06:43:49 AM
I decided to to buy some cryptocurrency I started through Coinbase and bought ETH
Now I'm trying to buy some other coins through bittrex. 
The biggest thing I'm trying to do is not leave the coins in either exchange. I am not the best with computers.
I'm just trying to find the easiest way to move it and what is the cost to take it out of these exchanges and into a wallet
Thanks for the  help


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on September 03, 2017, 03:13:46 PM
I didn't feel like updating my mining experiment this weekend since at this point the currency fluctuations of bitcoin are overpowering any income from mining. I idled my more energy intensive mining rig, but am still currently bringing in ~$100/month and paying $~20/month in extra electricity.

So instead here are a couple of updates to the cryptocurrency market capitalization and market capitalization graphs. Currencies selected based on a mixture of overall marketshare and how much I see them discussed in this and other forums.

(https://i.imgpile.com/ndbHLr.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/ndbHLr)

(https://i.imgpile.com/ndboyR.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/ndboyR)

You can find versions of the first graph lots of places, but to me the second one is more interesting in a lot of ways. Since early August when the bitcoin cash fork occurred, the overall market cap of this basket of cyptocurrencies is up something like 85%, but if you look at the market composition over that same period, it's actually been quite stable, which suggests that people are dumping money into all the currencies roughly proportionately to their market caps (a lot like how index funds invest), or alternatively maybe for a lot of these cyptos, the currency:BTC exchanges rates are more "sticky" than currency:USD exchange rates, so their dollar prices are increasing to at least maintain bitcoin exchange rate parity.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: flyersman on September 03, 2017, 11:35:48 PM
I decided to to buy some cryptocurrency I started through Coinbase and bought ETH
Now I'm trying to buy some other coins through bittrex. 
The biggest thing I'm trying to do is not leave the coins in either exchange. I am not the best with computers.
I'm just trying to find the easiest way to move it and what is the cost to take it out of these exchanges and into a wallet
Thanks for the  help


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Same question.

How easy is it to buy and sell a Bitcoin or Ethereum?

For instance, let's say BTC is $4k each and ETH is $500.

Can I just go on coinbase with $10k and purchase 2 Bitcoins and 4 units of Ether?

Then transfer them to an external hardrive wallet and disconnect it from my PC.

Then 1 year from now the prices double (BTC - $4k each / ETH - $1000). How easy it to sell and walk about with $20k (10k profit)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on September 04, 2017, 09:42:50 AM
I decided to to buy some cryptocurrency I started through Coinbase and bought ETH
...
I'm just trying to find the easiest way to move it and what is the cost to take it out of these exchanges and into a wallet

there are fees involved when buying/selling on coinbase, but it's not a big deal if you're only buying occasionally.  the ETH fee for transferring your ETH to an offline wallet for storage is minimal.

Same question.

How easy is it to buy and sell a Bitcoin or Ethereum?

For instance, let's say BTC is $4k each and ETH is $500.

Can I just go on coinbase with $10k and purchase 2 Bitcoins and 4 units of Ether?

Then transfer them to an external hardrive wallet and disconnect it from my PC.

Then 1 year from now the prices double (BTC - $4k each / ETH - $1000). How easy it to sell and walk about with $20k (10k profit)

yes you've got the basics down.  you will need to prove your identity to coinbase first though, but you can do simple identity verification for the amount you're looking to buy.  withdrawing to a wallet on an external hard drive is probably fine for keeping the coins safe for a year.  for storing coins longer than that there are a bunch of options out there depending on your needs and risk tolerance.

to sell on coinbase you'd simply have to send the coins back to your coinbase wallet, wait for the transaction to confirm, and then click 'sell' and withdraw the USD to your bank account.

you'd then need to report the USD gains as capital gains for your taxes.  keep your own records for dates/prices/quantities bought and sold and then make sure the tax documentation coinbase provides matches your records.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: robdwny on September 04, 2017, 11:39:00 AM
I decided to to buy some cryptocurrency I started through Coinbase and bought ETH
...
I'm just trying to find the easiest way to move it and what is the cost to take it out of these exchanges and into a wallet

there are fees involved when buying/selling on coinbase, but it's not a big deal if you're only buying occasionally.  the ETH fee for transferring your ETH to an offline wallet for storage is minimal.

Same question.

How easy is it to buy and sell a Bitcoin or Ethereum?

For instance, let's say BTC is $4k each and ETH is $500.

Can I just go on coinbase with $10k and purchase 2 Bitcoins and 4 units of Ether?

Then transfer them to an external hardrive wallet and disconnect it from my PC.

Then 1 year from now the prices double (BTC - $4k each / ETH - $1000). How easy it to sell and walk about with $20k (10k profit)

yes you've got the basics down.  you will need to prove your identity to coinbase first though, but you can do simple identity verification for the amount you're looking to buy.  withdrawing to a wallet on an external hard drive is probably fine for keeping the coins safe for a year.  for storing coins longer than that there are a bunch of options out there depending on your needs and risk tolerance.

to sell on coinbase you'd simply have to send the coins back to your coinbase wallet, wait for the transaction to confirm, and then click 'sell' and withdraw the USD to your bank account.

you'd then need to report the USD gains as capital gains for your taxes.  keep your own records for dates/prices/quantities bought and sold and then make sure the tax documentation coinbase provides matches your records.

Perfect explanation
The one that is getting me the biggest problems understanding because I'm not the best with computers. It's how to protect the different altcoins in a wallet or cold storage.  It just seems to be going over my head because you can't put them all in one place. I believe every coin has its own wallet I'm just not sure if they are safe to leave there also. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on September 04, 2017, 12:46:12 PM
So it sounds like China has decided to also ban ICOs (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/04/chinese-icos-china-bans-fundraising-through-initial-coin-offerings-report-says.html). Given that these are already generally illegal in the USA if you actually are getting a share of profits/decision making power (essentially anything that behaves like stock) that's probably going to limit the market for new companies trying to get their initial funding by launching a cryptocurrency. Although I guess they are still legal in the EU?*

*No an expert, please consult your local laws.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on September 04, 2017, 12:50:39 PM
The one that is getting me the biggest problems understanding because I'm not the best with computers. It's how to protect the different altcoins in a wallet or cold storage.  It just seems to be going over my head because you can't put them all in one place. I believe every coin has its own wallet I'm just not sure if they are safe to leave there also. 

i haven't used one, but for a non-technical person i think the Ledger Nano S (https://www.ledgerwallet.com/products/ledger-nano-s) is maybe the best option.  looks like it works as secure storage for several altcoins (and also allows you to make transactions).  keep the included recovery sheet secure in a separate location from the Ledger itself.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mcampbell on September 05, 2017, 09:51:31 AM
Bitcoin Investment Trust (GBTC) ... Bitcoin Investment Trust (GBTC) is trading at a greater than 100% premium to its net asset value and charges a whopping 2% fee, 

I think I would just buy post tax


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on September 05, 2017, 10:18:32 AM
At that point couldn't they be issuing additional shares, use the money from the new issue to buy more bitcoins and essentially be printing free money for themselves? I agree with mcampbell, pass on this.

From what I could find the weekly limit at coinbase is $10k/week (so you could invest more than half a million over the course of a year).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on September 05, 2017, 12:33:34 PM
I did all the verification on coinbase and still only at 5k

My weekly limit when using a US checking account is currently $15k ($6k for credit card purchases). It has been that amount for quite some time, so I think that might be the max. The more I purchased with them, the more they increased it over time. So long as you did all the verification, just keep making purchases and it will gradually keep going up.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on September 05, 2017, 02:01:07 PM
So I am hitting my limits on CoinBase and I want more. I heard GDAX was a good place to buy with lower fees once you get comfortable with wallets but I think I want to diversify into my 401k.

Now I am not sure this is a good approach to buying bitcoin, but for me I am willing to take the risk. I have most investments in tax sheltered accounts which would be great for trading bitcoin in. Unfortuntaly the only game in town right now seems like GBTC you can buy with fidelity. It seems to have a .0928 backing for every share kind of like IAU or GLD for gold, so at right nows price the value of BTC they hold is worth $405.88 a share and it costs about $750 a share. Huge premium.

I am going to take the plunge anyway and here is why.
  • I am trading with pretax money, and no taxes on the trades
  • No other options in my tax advatage accounts that I know of to hold btc
  • It is uncorrelated to all my other assets which makes my golden butterfly portofolio overall potentially better
  • The price could look inexpensive 5 years from now, good chance of amazon like growth

If another better priced fund comes a long that is a risk for the premium I am paying and could take some losses, but I will just switch to the other fund. I rather have an ETF that tracks the top coins, but this is what we have right now.

Check out Gemini.com, buy and hold the coins yourself, off the exchanges. Buying through a Trust or ETF defeats the entire purpose of this, not even considering the premium.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on September 05, 2017, 03:54:06 PM
If you really want to do this, have you looked into using a self directed IRA to buy cryptocurrency?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on September 05, 2017, 06:16:50 PM
i agree with everyone else.  avoid GBTC.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Jeferson on September 06, 2017, 07:00:39 AM
Most of my money is currently in Bitcoin and Ethereum. But lately, it's has been really tough (especially yesterday) to stay calm with my positions. I have almost all the time the urge to check it, how both BTC and Ethereum are doing, it's almost like some sort of addiction :D Even though I have invested them because I believe in the long term rise.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on September 06, 2017, 04:12:38 PM
Most of my money is currently in Bitcoin and Ethereum. But lately, it's has been really tough (especially yesterday) to stay calm with my positions. I have almost all the time the urge to check it, how both BTC and Ethereum are doing, it's almost like some sort of addiction :D Even though I have invested them because I believe in the long term rise.

Yeah, it can be addictive. I can feel that way at times, 80-90% of my net worth is tied up in Crypto-Currencies and I have a portfolio consisting of 20+ companies / coins which I keep up to date with. I am effectively a part-time analyst.

It's worth it, but I wonder if this is how stock pickers felt during the the early 1900s on Wall Street
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on September 06, 2017, 04:55:43 PM
I can feel that way at times, 80-90% of my net worth is tied up in Crypto-Currencies and I have a portfolio consisting of 20+ companies / coins which I keep up to date with. I am effectively a part-time analyst.

It's worth it, but I wonder if this is how stock pickers felt during the the early 1900s on Wall Street

Hi Tonyahu, if you don't mind sharing I'm curious is the 80-90% of your net worth in crypto reflects you making a huge bet with most of your liquid savings, or a small bet a couple of years ago (or more) which has just grown to the point where it dwarfs all your other assets.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on September 06, 2017, 05:26:05 PM
Robert Shiller calls bitcoin a classic bubble:
https://qz.com/1067557/robert-shiller-wrote-the-book-on-bubbles-he-says-the-best-example-right-now-is-bitcoin/

From some of the comments here we see the sort of emotion that drives bubbles.  I have a hard time believing that we're still going to be talking about bitcoin specifically (blockchains yes and perhaps one or more cryptocurriencies) in 20 years, which makes the business of putting it in an IRA a bit ridiculous. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on September 07, 2017, 06:27:33 AM
Robert Shiller calls bitcoin a classic bubble:
https://qz.com/1067557/robert-shiller-wrote-the-book-on-bubbles-he-says-the-best-example-right-now-is-bitcoin/

From some of the comments here we see the sort of emotion that drives bubbles.  I have a hard time believing that we're still going to be talking about bitcoin specifically (blockchains yes and perhaps one or more cryptocurriencies) in 20 years, which makes the business of putting it in an IRA a bit ridiculous.

I don't think you can go into a thread talking about crypto-currencies and use the exuberance there as evidence that there is a bubble. Nor do I think Shiller's evidence of the same when he talks with students regarding bitcoin as evidence of a bubble. Bubbles can pop for quite a number of reasons. The irrational exuberance idea relates to when there are no more possible buyers after a speculative frenzy to feed the market further into the up trend. The dotcom bubble popped because everyone was invested in dotcom stocks that had no true value. Everyone was investing and purchasing real-estate up to 2007-2008. At some point if those investments fail (bad businesses) or there is some mechanism at play that causes a market forcing (defaulted debt), then you end up having the value of those investments plummet or people pull their money out in droves. We couldn't be any further from that with bitcoin. Stepping back from this thread and the media, take a look around yourself in the real world and you'll see that there are actually so few people that are putting their money into Bitcoin at the moment.

I did see a bubble qualities in a lot of the bogus ICOs that were created that really we not going to provide any real long term value and there are a lot of tokens out there that don't really have a purpose. So in the greater crypto-currency realm I could see some potential for a bubble, but it is so small that if it were to pop, it would hardly be felt. Also, China's recent ruling on ICOs will go a long way toward preventing that bubble from truly forming. The recent pull back in bitcoin due to that decision was good since it helped the market correct now to prevent a much larger correction later down the road.

Whenever I see opponents of bitcoin make claims of bubbles, they rarely ever do it with any sort of deep insight into the market. The article you linked to showed how Robert Shiller really has very little understanding of bitcoin or the crypto-currency world and he provides about zero evidence as to why he thinks it might be a bubble. Even more telling is the fact that he doesn't even know what an ICO is and has never heard of the term before. Then he immediately goes on to give his "wisdom" by claiming that it is a bubble when he literally just heard of the term two seconds prior. Laughable at best.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on September 07, 2017, 12:08:47 PM
I agree that we are not in the sort of bubble territory that tech stocks were in the 90s because many people have still barely heard about bitcoin and don't know where to buy it.  So there is definitely room for cryptocurrency and token speculation to build.  But no one has been able to prove that Bitcoin is actually filling a need or will be of real use at some point.  I think the token prices are so easily manipulated that we're essentially back in the 1800s with salesman selling railroad stock certificates to farmers, then absconding with the money.   



Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on September 07, 2017, 01:20:48 PM
If you are in a bubble, what percent of people know about/are investing is a good metric to judge how close you are to having the bubble pop.

But it isn't a particularly good metric to distinguish between what is and isn't a bubble. For example many people know about and invest in the stock market, yet it is not a bubble. OTOH the Rhodium bubble of 2008 certainly WAS a bubble even though the vast majority of people didn't participate and probably couldn't even point to the element on a periodic table.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shotgunwilly on September 07, 2017, 02:53:23 PM
If you are in a bubble, what percent of people know about/are investing is a good metric to judge how close you are to having the bubble pop.

But it isn't a particularly good metric to distinguish between what is and isn't a bubble. For example many people know about and invest in the stock market, yet it is not a bubble. OTOH the Rhodium bubble of 2008 certainly WAS a bubble even though the vast majority of people didn't participate and probably couldn't even point to the element on a periodic table.

I agree. So, I'm curious of your opinion Maizeman... where are we at?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: surfhb on September 07, 2017, 04:44:41 PM
You guys realize this is an early retirement forum right?    What's the point of FIRE if you loose your ass speculating on Crypto currency?

Don't speculate....invest!    Learn from the past.

Then again, I doubt most on this thread know anything about what a bear market is....too young, most of you.   ;)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on September 07, 2017, 05:07:43 PM

It is risky for sure, but 9 years is a long time in the technology world, it has endured longer then most tech companies. Do people hold Google, Facebook, etc in thier IRA?

Some do, but those are stocks, not tokens.  Stocks are regulated.  Tokens are not.  Real currencies are regulated.  Cryptos are not. 

The success or failure of these currencies and tokens will be totally random.  Basically nothing remains of the massively-hyped 1999 internet companies.  The people who got wealthy during the 90s tech boom like Mark Cuban sold at the right time without realizing it.  Those who bought high never recovered (Yahoo laid out close to $10 billion for Cuban's company and for Geocities...those acquisitions made zero money...nascent Google filled the void and left Yahoo in its dust). 

Few things from the 90s have survived.  So that first-mover advantage wasn't much of one.  Bitcoin has first-mover advantage and Ethereum is the first major token.  Google was about the 7th or 8th search engine, all of the rest are gone.  Facebook came after Myspace which came after Friendster. 
 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on September 07, 2017, 06:52:26 PM
Some do, but those are stocks, not tokens.  Stocks are regulated.  Tokens are not.  Real currencies are regulated.  Cryptos are not. 

regulation has nothing to do with how well or poorly an asset performs.  national currencies and stocks have plenty of problems.

Quote
The success or failure of these currencies and tokens will be totally random.

it won't be random.  as you say, it's an unregulated free market and the best cryptocurrencies will win.

Quote
Few things from the 90s have survived.

many foundational technologies from the 90s, 80s, and 70s have survived, including the internet and public key cryptography which cryptocurrencies are based on.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on September 07, 2017, 08:08:48 PM
regulation has nothing to do with how well or poorly an asset performs.  national currencies and stocks have plenty of problems.

Of course it does.  All of the things the SEC does (or your county auditor for real estate transactions) is a response to the abuses that existed before those regulations were enacted.  Any call you hear for an "elimination of regulations" is usually a shyster who recognizes how he can swindle someone when that seemingly onerous regulation is lifted. 

We've already seen various short-term surges and falls in prices thanks to hoaxes, but that's really just the beginning.     

Quote
The success or failure of these currencies and tokens will be totally random.

it won't be random.  as you say, it's an unregulated free market and the best cryptocurrencies will win.
[/quote]

Well Litecoin, et al., are all "better" than bitcoin, yet bitcoin reigns supreme, several years after these better competitors appeared.  There are endless examples throughout history of a lesser product winning over a better one.  Better salesmen and better luck.  Bitcoin has the Winklevoss Twins and other high-profile champions.  Litecoin does not. 


Quote
many foundational technologies from the 90s, 80s, and 70s have survived, including the internet and public key cryptography which cryptocurrencies are based on.

Blockchain will be around for a long time. We're obviously going to see some changes in how digital banking transactions are carried out. The specific stew of cryptocurrencies that are attracting speculation at the moment probably won't survive for more than 10 years. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on September 07, 2017, 08:32:44 PM
If you are in a bubble, what percent of people know about/are investing is a good metric to judge how close you are to having the bubble pop.

But it isn't a particularly good metric to distinguish between what is and isn't a bubble. For example many people know about and invest in the stock market, yet it is not a bubble. OTOH the Rhodium bubble of 2008 certainly WAS a bubble even though the vast majority of people didn't participate and probably couldn't even point to the element on a periodic table.

I agree. So, I'm curious of your opinion Maizeman... where are we at?

I'm honestly not sure at all. I've been following bitcoin off and on since stories about it started showing up on slashdot 6-7 years ago as a curiosity, and had an actual bitcoin wallet since before the mid-2013 price bubble burst. And I'm pretty sure I'm not better at predicting what the price is going to do than you'd get from flipping a coin. But it's awfully fun to watch.

Helps that the only money I've put into mining/crypto was drawn from my entertainment spending, not investment.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mcampbell on September 08, 2017, 03:26:30 AM
So filecoin just raised $250M USD and kept another $250M USD in premined coins for themselves, for a premarket, precustomer product. If this doesn't scream bubble I'm not sure what would. Read the analysis below


https://tokeneconomy.co/the-analysis-filecoin-doesnt-want-you-to-read-e60d5243f17c
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shotgunwilly on September 08, 2017, 06:30:22 AM
If you are in a bubble, what percent of people know about/are investing is a good metric to judge how close you are to having the bubble pop.

But it isn't a particularly good metric to distinguish between what is and isn't a bubble. For example many people know about and invest in the stock market, yet it is not a bubble. OTOH the Rhodium bubble of 2008 certainly WAS a bubble even though the vast majority of people didn't participate and probably couldn't even point to the element on a periodic table.

I agree. So, I'm curious of your opinion Maizeman... where are we at?

I'm honestly not sure at all. I've been following bitcoin off and on since stories about it started showing up on slashdot 6-7 years ago as a curiosity, and had an actual bitcoin wallet since before the mid-2013 price bubble burst. And I'm pretty sure I'm not better at predicting what the price is going to do than you'd get from flipping a coin. But it's awfully fun to watch.

Helps that the only money I've put into mining/crypto was drawn from my entertainment spending, not investment.

I too have owned Bitcoin since before the 2013 "bubble."  There's really no telling what Bitcoin can do, BUT that doesn't mean I can't have an opinion :) .... I'm leaning towards Bitcoin itself failing* at some point. (When? Much harder to tell.)  I believe it has flaws that will make it be pushed aside for an improved "digital currency."   What I'm really interested in, are blockchains that solve real world problems like, for example, data authentication without having to trust a central organization.

It's wading through all of the hype, scams, and bubbles that's going to be the challenge.

As far as the entire crypto-currency space, while we will go through hype cycles and "bubbles" bursting and corrections, (as seen when Bitcoin skyrocketed to $22 and then a bubble burst and when Bitcoin skyrocketed to $1200 and a bubble burst and when Bitcoin skyrocketed to $4900 and then....) the total market cap of cryptocurrencies WILL continue to go up in time.

*By failing I do not mean the protocol itself.  I mean it has problems with scaling and it will become obsolete to an improved blockchain coin designed to be a digital currency.  It would probably still remain more as a souvenir type thing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on September 08, 2017, 07:11:50 AM

I too have owned Bitcoin since before the 2013 "bubble."  There's really no telling what Bitcoin can do, BUT that doesn't mean I can't have an opinion :) .... I'm leaning towards Bitcoin itself failing* at some point. (When? Much harder to tell.)  I believe it has flaws that will make it be pushed aside for an improved "digital currency."   What I'm really interested in, are blockchains that solve real world problems like, for example, data authentication without having to trust a central organization.

It's wading through all of the hype, scams, and bubbles that's going to be the challenge.

As far as the entire crypto-currency space, while we will go through hype cycles and "bubbles" bursting and corrections, (as seen when Bitcoin skyrocketed to $22 and then a bubble burst and when Bitcoin skyrocketed to $1200 and a bubble burst and when Bitcoin skyrocketed to $4900 and then....) the total market cap of cryptocurrencies WILL continue to go up in time.

*By failing I do not mean the protocol itself.  I mean it has problems with scaling and it will become obsolete to an improved blockchain coin designed to be a digital currency.  It would probably still remain more as a souvenir type thing.

I agree with you that there will likely be some sort of cryptocurrency widely used to facilitate payments in the future. Bitcoin definitely has scaling problems* but also the advantage of significant network effects from its first mover position. A lot of other currencies have significant advantages at a protocol level, and its likely even further improved currencies will emerge over time. That could be enough to let them overtake and replace (like facebook supplanted myspace), or they could fail despite being technically superior (like betamax failed to supplant VHS).

Speaking of hype and scams and bubbles, the whole ICO mess is getting a bit embarrassing though. In principle I liked the idea of tracking ownership of shares or things that behave like shares using a blockchain but because the way SEC regulations are set up, most ICO tokens don't represent a share of profits or rights to vote in company decisions, but essentially just pre-sales of hypothetical products. More like kickstarter if you could trade your rights to the hypothetical future delivery of a laser razor on the secondary market and most people were buying the hypothetical right to a laser razor** only in the hope that someone else would pay more for it in the future.

*Theoretically bitcoin also the potential to update the protocol over time to address them, although as we have seen in the last few months this tends to be rather messy in practice.

**An actual kickstarter campaign. No, nobody received any laser razors. Yes, it's really fun to say laser razor.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on September 08, 2017, 09:03:22 AM
The sort of standard mushy definition of a bubble is when people are buying something because they heard it's something everyone is buying, when they don't actually have any use for it or really know what it is.

There are all sorts of secondary symptoms - companies popping up to sell various similar products (or the concept of a similar product), financial companies and "analysts" marketing only vaguely related services, and these days, lots of uncritically positive chatter (this time it's different!) about the product on social media.

Tulips, Beanie babies, crappy condos in Sacramento in 2005, etc. Same symptoms every time.

Schiller is right - it's got all the classic bubble signs. That's not to say it won't hit $100,000 or something, or that the underlying math/tech isn't a good idea that will be with us for a long time, but the crypto currency world certainly looks like a bubble right now.

I'd personally bet on either a government or big international company (or group of companies) entering with a currency (actually designed well for the purpose of exchanging goods and services), backed by a big publicly known entity, and marketed as such, and that currency displacing everything already out there.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on September 08, 2017, 11:16:44 AM
The beautiful thing about this chat is it will be a good historical placeholder. In a few years when these technologies are thriving and taking over those who took the risk will be rewarded heavily and those who nay-sayed without doing their due diligence will see what they missed.

So filecoin just raised $250M USD and kept another $250M USD in premined coins for themselves, for a premarket, precustomer product. If this doesn't scream bubble I'm not sure what would. Read the analysis below


https://tokeneconomy.co/the-analysis-filecoin-doesnt-want-you-to-read-e60d5243f17c

There is definitely a bubble in terms of start up ICO's, but something like Ethereum or IOTA is very undervalued.


I'd personally bet on either a government or big international company (or group of companies) entering with a currency (actually designed well for the purpose of exchanging goods and services), backed by a big publicly known entity, and marketed as such, and that currency displacing everything already out there.

-W

Looks like you have yet to do much research on Ethereum :]
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mcampbell on September 08, 2017, 12:06:23 PM
The beautiful thing about this chat is it will be a good historical placeholder. In a few years when these technologies are thriving and taking over those who took the risk will be rewarded heavily and those who nay-sayed without doing their due diligence will see what they missed.

So filecoin just raised $250M USD and kept another $250M USD in premined coins for themselves, for a premarket, precustomer product. If this doesn't scream bubble I'm not sure what would. Read the analysis below


https://tokeneconomy.co/the-analysis-filecoin-doesnt-want-you-to-read-e60d5243f17c

Reward? $250M for zero equity. The ICOs seem like no reward. There may be reward in Bitcoin or Ethereum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on September 08, 2017, 12:12:48 PM
Quote
The success or failure of these currencies and tokens will be totally random.

it won't be random.  as you say, it's an unregulated free market and the best cryptocurrencies will win.

Yeah.  The unregulated free market always picks the best technology to win.  That's why betamax destoyed VHS.  Wait . . .
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on September 08, 2017, 12:46:29 PM
To clarify, I do believe that 70%+ of these currencies will fail but we still have much larger valuations to hit before any "bubble talk" can be had. Eventually, yes, the bubble (2019-2020ish) will deflate and only those with unique value propositions will remain.

https://hackernoon.com/why-everyone-missed-the-most-mind-blowing-feature-of-cryptocurrency-860c3f25f1fb
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shotgunwilly on September 08, 2017, 01:20:06 PM
To clarify, I do believe that 70%+ of these currencies will fail but we still have much larger valuations to hit before any "bubble talk" can be had. Eventually, yes, the bubble (2019-2020ish) will deflate and only those with unique value propositions will remain.

https://hackernoon.com/why-everyone-missed-the-most-mind-blowing-feature-of-cryptocurrency-860c3f25f1fb

You are making some absolutely wild assumptions that no one on this Earth could humanly know, to the point that it's starting to make the opposing view's case even stronger.

And I'm for Blockchain technology.   
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on September 08, 2017, 05:12:54 PM
regulation has nothing to do with how well or poorly an asset performs.  national currencies and stocks have plenty of problems.
Of course it does.  All of the things the SEC does (or your county auditor for real estate transactions) is a response to the abuses that existed before those regulations were enacted.  Any call you hear for an "elimination of regulations" is usually a shyster who recognizes how he can swindle someone when that seemingly onerous regulation is lifted. 

do you not believe in free markets?  there are many examples of inferior products that only exist because they are protected by regulation and lobbying.  one example is the crumbly old slow internet-averse global financial system.  another example is the fossil fuel automotive industry.

Quote
Quote
The success or failure of these currencies and tokens will be totally random.
it won't be random.  as you say, it's an unregulated free market and the best cryptocurrencies will win.
Well Litecoin, et al., are all "better" than bitcoin, yet bitcoin reigns supreme, several years after these better competitors appeared.  There are endless examples throughout history of a lesser product winning over a better one.  Better salesmen and better luck.  Bitcoin has the Winklevoss Twins and other high-profile champions.  Litecoin does not. 

bitcoin was invented first, luck has nothing to do with it.  litecoin (and other coins forked from bitcoin's source code) are cheap clones backed by way weaker mining networks.  that's why bitcoin reigns supreme.  litecoin was a failed attempt to make an ASIC-proof coin.

Blockchain will be around for a long time. We're obviously going to see some changes in how digital banking transactions are carried out. The specific stew of cryptocurrencies that are attracting speculation at the moment probably won't survive for more than 10 years. 

bitcoin's been running for almost nine years now.  you mean one more year or ten more?

Quote
The success or failure of these currencies and tokens will be totally random.

it won't be random.  as you say, it's an unregulated free market and the best cryptocurrencies will win.

Yeah.  The unregulated free market always picks the best technology to win.  That's why betamax destoyed VHS.  Wait . . .

and VHS, DVD, and BluRay have all been abandoned in favor of streaming and DVRs.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on September 08, 2017, 05:58:00 PM
Quote
The success or failure of these currencies and tokens will be totally random.

it won't be random.  as you say, it's an unregulated free market and the best cryptocurrencies will win.

Yeah.  The unregulated free market always picks the best technology to win.  That's why betamax destoyed VHS.  Wait . . .

and VHS, DVD, and BluRay have all been abandoned in favor of streaming and DVRs.

My point was that there exist many examples in the past where the best stuff available was passed over for more inferior competitors by the unregulated free market.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on September 08, 2017, 09:18:39 PM
right, but only temporarily until superior competitors came along.  it appears random in the short term, but it's not random.  if you zoom out you can clearly see that VHS, the temporary "winner," is long gone and deservedly so.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on September 11, 2017, 07:31:21 AM
right, but only temporarily until superior competitors came along.  it appears random in the short term, but it's not random.  if you zoom out you can clearly see that VHS, the temporary "winner," is long gone and deservedly so.

Right.  But figuring out which technology will be the winner is not possible at the time that it matters for investing . . . because sometimes the market chooses the worst option.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on September 13, 2017, 12:33:06 PM
regulation has nothing to do with how well or poorly an asset performs.  national currencies and stocks have plenty of problems.
Of course it does.  All of the things the SEC does (or your county auditor for real estate transactions) is a response to the abuses that existed before those regulations were enacted.  Any call you hear for an "elimination of regulations" is usually a shyster who recognizes how he can swindle someone when that seemingly onerous regulation is lifted. 

do you not believe in free markets?  there are many examples of inferior products that only exist because they are protected by regulation and lobbying.  one example is the crumbly old slow internet-averse global financial system.  another example is the fossil fuel automotive industry.

Quote
Quote
The success or failure of these currencies and tokens will be totally random.
it won't be random.  as you say, it's an unregulated free market and the best cryptocurrencies will win.
Well Litecoin, et al., are all "better" than bitcoin, yet bitcoin reigns supreme, several years after these better competitors appeared.  There are endless examples throughout history of a lesser product winning over a better one.  Better salesmen and better luck.  Bitcoin has the Winklevoss Twins and other high-profile champions.  Litecoin does not. 

bitcoin was invented first, luck has nothing to do with it.  litecoin (and other coins forked from bitcoin's source code) are cheap clones backed by way weaker mining networks.  that's why bitcoin reigns supreme.  litecoin was a failed attempt to make an ASIC-proof coin.


Furthermore, those who claim "Litecoin is faster" are short sighted.

Sure it's faster when experiencing 10% of the network stress, but if LTC experienced the same transaction volume of BTC it would be much slower, have higher fees...etc.


To clarify, I do believe that 70%+ of these currencies will fail but we still have much larger valuations to hit before any "bubble talk" can be had. Eventually, yes, the bubble (2019-2020ish) will deflate and only those with unique value propositions will remain.

https://hackernoon.com/why-everyone-missed-the-most-mind-blowing-feature-of-cryptocurrency-860c3f25f1fb

You are making some absolutely wild assumptions that no one on this Earth could humanly know, to the point that it's starting to make the opposing view's case even stronger.

And I'm for Blockchain technology.   

Which assumptions in particular?

Let's get them clarified so we can revisit them in the future to see if what I said panned out.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on September 13, 2017, 02:40:41 PM
I thought this was an interesting article in the NYT. I knew bitcoin was primarily a Chinese thing, but I didn't realize just how much of it is being done in China.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/business/bitcoin-mine-china.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fbusiness&action=click&contentCollection=business&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: surfhb on September 13, 2017, 03:29:13 PM
right, but only temporarily until superior competitors came along.  it appears random in the short term, but it's not random.  if you zoom out you can clearly see that VHS, the temporary "winner," is long gone and deservedly so.

Right.  But figuring out which technology will be the winner is not possible at the time that it matters for investing . . . because sometimes the market chooses the worst option.

Exactly.    I once invested thousands of dollars in a HD-DVD authoring system only to see Blu-Ray win the battle.   The only reason BD won was because Sony paid the studios to release their content on BD ONLY.    Leaving small time producers like myself priced out of the market.   
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Saskatchewstachian on September 13, 2017, 04:55:44 PM
Apologies if I missed this earlier in the thread but looking to gather thoughts on investing in GBTC (Bitcoin Investment Trust).

It seems like it would be a good vehicle to gain exposure to bitcoin without having to complete things like setting up a wallet, getting registered on an exchange,etc. Instead it can trade OTC directly in your brokerage account.

Am I missing a main downfall of using GBTC instead of directly buying BTC?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on September 13, 2017, 05:25:35 PM
i'll add that with GBTC you never see the private keys of the underlying bitcoin, so you don't know that it actually exists, and this defeats the purpose of bitcoin.  the rule of thumb is that if you don't have exclusive ownership of the private keys you don't own the bitcoin.  you might not care about this if you just want to make a quick buck.

if a different bitcoin blockchain fork takes the lead a month from now, or a year from now, or whatever, will you still own what is considered to be "bitcoin" or will you own worthless coins on the dead blockchain?  you don't have to worry about this if you own the private keys before the fork.

it may be a worthwhile gamble if your goal is to make a quick buck, not if you actually want to own bitcoin long term.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on September 14, 2017, 11:21:26 PM
I keep my BTC and LTC on a Trezor wallet and ETH on a web based wallet via Trezor. But I just picked up a few Monero through Kraken and am not sure what to do with them. Any ideas?

A lot of the crypto trading scene reminds me of aspects of the penny stock scene 15-20 years ago, except more liquidity, more volatility and 24hr trading. Can be a bit wild out there as proven by the past 6 months.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on September 15, 2017, 07:47:37 AM
We watch the trading of GBTC around the office here. It's pretty entertaining when you can get a year's worth of appreciation (or decline) in a single trading day.

Truly no one seems to have any idea what this stuff is actually worth! That's a source of excitement as well as stress. But if investment is about accepting volatility in exchange for a return, I cannot see how the return would be worth the volatility here. I suppose investing 1% of your stach would be defensible. If it triples next year, you got 2% more than you'd have with gold. But that other 99% of your portfolio is giving you 9.9%/year, amiright?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on September 15, 2017, 09:15:32 AM
Truly no one seems to have any idea what this stuff is actually worth! That's a source of excitement as well as stress. But if investment is about accepting volatility in exchange for a return, I cannot see how the return would be worth the volatility here. I suppose investing 1% of your stach would be defensible. If it triples next year, you got 2% more than you'd have with gold. But that other 99% of your portfolio is giving you 9.9%/year, amiright?

I don't think investing is about accepting volatility in exchange for a return. I think it is about accepting risk in exchange for a return. You can have a non-volatile investment that is extremely risky and vice versa you can have an extremely volatile investment that doesn't have much relative risk.

So rather than categorizing bitcoin in your investment portfolio based on its volatility, it should be categorized based on its risk/reward and how you see that fitting into your overall investment strategy. If you feel bitcoin has a lot of risk to it, then you can include that in with your other high risk/high reward investments. The portion of your overall investment profile that consists of high risk investments should be determined based on your risk tolerance.

I don't view bitcoin as risky as others might view bitcoin and I am also long on bitcoin. Therefore its short-term volatility doesn't matter much to me. I also include it as a slightly larger portion of my portfolio than others might be willing to tolerate because of my high risk tolerance. So to me, the risk is worth the reward and it has become one of my primary after-tax investment options.

I also don't think it is fair to say that nobody has any idea how much bitcoin is worth. I just think that everyone has their own different idea on how much it is worth and everyone is willing to sell their bitcoin at differing values. The same goes for just about every asset out there. Someone with a holding of gold will part with it at a certain market price while someone with the same amount of gold holdings might part with theirs at a completely different price. They value their gold differently just like everyone is valuing their bitcoin differently. It's just that there are far fewer people who own bitcoin and so these differences in valuations are felt more in the market which is why we see so much volatility.

Finally, to me, its value also comes from beyond just its price point in the market. I feel that bitcoin and the technology behind it represents a huge shift in how currency is handled by humans. I see bitcoin as revolutionary as the internet itself. Therefore I am willing to put some of my money into bitcoin based on this idea without taking into consideration any risk or reward by doing so.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on September 18, 2017, 08:57:42 AM
Thanks for this well-thought-out response.

The difficulty I have with valuing bitcoin is the same difficulty I would have with any commodity: there is no apparent income stream/earnings equivalent. I'm a lot more comfortable valuing a business based on its earnings than I am valuing currency.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on September 18, 2017, 10:16:58 AM
I feel that bitcoin and the technology behind it represents a huge shift in how currency is handled by humans. I see bitcoin as revolutionary as the internet itself. Therefore I am willing to put some of my money into bitcoin based on this idea without taking into consideration any risk or reward by doing so.

Bitcoin is almost 10 years old.  Nobody was really talking about it being "the future" until its value started getting ridiculous in the last year.  Yeah, there was that push back in 2012 or 2013, but after the crash, it returned to being the butt of jokes.   
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on September 18, 2017, 10:34:37 AM
I feel that bitcoin and the technology behind it represents a huge shift in how currency is handled by humans. I see bitcoin as revolutionary as the internet itself. Therefore I am willing to put some of my money into bitcoin based on this idea without taking into consideration any risk or reward by doing so.

Nobody was really talking about it being "the future" until its value started getting ridiculous in the last year.

I think you may have the cause and effect backwards.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on September 18, 2017, 10:47:58 AM
Bitcoin is almost 10 years old.  Nobody was really talking about it being "the future" until its value started getting ridiculous in the last year.  Yeah, there was that push back in 2012 or 2013, but after the crash, it returned to being the butt of jokes.   

What does its age have to do with anything?

Not sure what you mean by nobody, unless you're only following bitcoin based on what the media is saying at any given moment. Why did you put "the future" in quotes? What jokes are you referring to when you say that bitcoin is the butt of them?

Bitcoin doesn't have to be used in every coffee transaction for it to be an astronomical success or for it to drastically change how currency is treated by humans across the world. At the moment, if a government enacts poor monetary policies or strict tyrannical controls of currency in any given country, there isn't much that the citizen population can do against that at the moment. Their wealth is at the complete mercy of their government. All money today must typically adhere to institutional practices which are enforced from the government down. Gold is too cumbersome to move and not freely liquid enough for the common citizen. Some of the only other options are obscure legal arrangements/loopholes to skirt around laws that usually require immense assets to take advantage and are therefore out of reach of the common citizen.

The threat of bitcoin completely changes all of this. You may think that this isn't important, but going forward, the capability of bitcoin to allow any citizen anywhere in the world to exit any economy at any time is a huge financial freedom. It is a freedom that hasn't really existed in the modern era. In this sense, bitcoin has already succeeded and it will only become more apparent as time goes on. This freedom is not dependent upon the price of bitcoin in any given market.

And that's just one of its many benefits.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on September 18, 2017, 11:23:57 AM
Cheers to anyone who bought the dip last week! I didn't have any liquid fiat I was willing to use.

I keep my BTC and LTC on a Trezor wallet and ETH on a web based wallet via Trezor. But I just picked up a few Monero through Kraken and am not sure what to do with them. Any ideas?

A lot of the crypto trading scene reminds me of aspects of the penny stock scene 15-20 years ago, except more liquidity, more volatility and 24hr trading. Can be a bit wild out there as proven by the past 6 months.

www.MyMonero.Com always make sure you double check the website, there are phishing sites around.

Monero is in final testing with Ledger soon, which will open up Hardware wallet support. I expect Trezor to follow suit.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on September 18, 2017, 11:41:10 AM


What does its age have to do with anything?

Not sure what you mean by nobody, unless you're only following bitcoin based on what the media is saying at any given moment. Why did you put "the future" in quotes? What jokes are you referring to when you say that bitcoin is the butt of them?


Back when Bitcoin was invented, nobody was talking about the actual coins being a buy-and-hold investment.  The coins were used as currency for a time, although most of it was either tax evasion (paying bonuses in bitcoin, for example) or to buy illegal drugs.  People who heard about bitcoin but had no reason to do that stuff had no reason to figure out how to buy bitcoins, so they didn't. 

Also, the "dream" held out there that bitcoin will be a tool for the little guy is very much a be careful what you wish for situation.  There has been a dark side to all of the so-called disruptive innovations of the last decade -- downsides that blind proponents refuse to acknowledge.  Uber, airbnb, etc., have all caused as many problems as they have solved, and cryptocurrency and tokens are no different. 



Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on September 18, 2017, 12:26:18 PM
Back when Bitcoin was invented, nobody was talking about the actual coins being a buy-and-hold investment.  The coins were used as currency for a time, although most of it was either tax evasion (paying bonuses in bitcoin, for example) or to buy illegal drugs.  People who heard about bitcoin but had no reason to do that stuff had no reason to figure out how to buy bitcoins, so they didn't. 

Also, the "dream" held out there that bitcoin will be a tool for the little guy is very much a be careful what you wish for situation.  There has been a dark side to all of the so-called disruptive innovations of the last decade -- downsides that blind proponents refuse to acknowledge.  Uber, airbnb, etc., have all caused as many problems as they have solved, and cryptocurrency and tokens are no different.

I am really having a hard time trying to follow the point you're trying to make. Maybe it is me, but I've reread your original post where you quoted me as well as this quote about and I don't understand what you're saying.

I agree that most of the original bitcoin owners were not looking at bitcoin as a long term investment. In fact, most early-adopters treated it as an experiment and proof of concept. I'd argue that most people who were using bitcoin in the very early days when its value was negligible were the very people who believed in the social good or technological aspect of it more than any investment property of it. If you read Satoshi's whitepaper on bitcoin, this is bitcoin's very aim.

There were certainly some inflows of nefarious activity with bitcoin that developed thereafter as usually those groups of individuals have a greater pressing need for advancements that further their capabilities than the general population. However, Homeland Security has even stated that they've found the amount of nefarious activity within bitcoin stagnate lately and that their tracking capabilities have increased.

So if the point is to state that the social bad outweighs the social good, time will tell. In my opinion though freedom will always come at cost, but I believe that there is always more good that outweighs bad in the world and therefore any freedom applied to the human population as a whole will always benefit the greater good more proportionally than it will the bad in the world.

No doubt there are always downsides to additional freedoms, I fully acknowledge that and am not blind to them. In your example, I fully realize that AirBnB has led to price increases in numerous neighborhoods that has been caused by renting specifically for the AirBnB business model.

If the point is that the bad outweighs the good, then I would certainly argue against that. Was that the point you're making? I hope I addressed the point you were talking about. If I went on a tangent completely irrelevant to your point, then I apologize.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on September 19, 2017, 08:52:33 PM
Quote
China is moving forward with plans to shut down Bitcoin exchanges in the country, starting with trading platforms in key cities. All Bitcoin exchanges in Beijing and Shanghai have been ordered to submit plans for winding down their operations by 20 September. ... All exchanges are required to send regulators a detailed "risk-free" plan of how they intend to exit the market before 18:30 local time on Wednesday 20 September.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-41320568

Now at the same time, it seems like the price of bitcoin is moving up rather than down. On September 15th it hit a recent minimum of just under $3000, and is now back up close to $4000. As I write this it's about 11 in the morning in Beijing, so in seven and a half hours their exchanges should start going dark. .... Going to be fascinating to see how this plays out!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on September 20, 2017, 05:32:39 PM
If anyone is looking to get into a new position I would check out VTC. It should get atomic swaps with LTC by year end and then with BTC within 1-2 years. It's currently not even in the top 100 market cap but is one of the older alts. Currently trading at about 90 cents.

Fundamentals are good and team is good, HYPE hasn't hit it yet.

Cheers
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on September 20, 2017, 05:39:49 PM
Fundamentals are good and team is good, HYPE hasn't hit it yet.

Cheers

I'm honestly curious - what "fundamentals" do cryptocurrencies/exchanges/companies have?

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: zuht on September 21, 2017, 05:49:26 PM
I hold BTC, ETH, and XMR (Monero) in roughly equal portions -- not a lot, maybe $1,000-$1,500 in all. All of that has come from mining ETH and XMR with a combination of CPU (i7 and E5 Xeons) and GPU (1070, 480, 570s). I mined Litecoin a few years ago, but liquidated the coin and hardware quickly (made a few hundred bucks in the process). At this point, I view the mining as "buying" coin at a discount (the cost of electricity and hardware versus market price) to hold, rather than trying to make regular income by selling whatever comes in.

Of the coins I hold, they all feel a little different. Bitcoin is about as close to "fiat" as cryptocurrency gets, though it's starting to show its age. With Monero, it's all about anonymity. Ethereum is really neat in concept with the smart contracts, and that's why you see so many offshoots and so much corporate interest. As a software developer and security buff though, I feel like those smart contracts are going to end up being its biggest liability. Just like it's easy to build flashy software riddled with vulnerabilities, it's easy to create a contract riddle with vulnerabilities -- there's a heck of a lot of money one the line with the contracts though!

Blockchain tech is definitely intriguing though, and I'll keep at it until the wasted electricity costs too much to make sense. I do feel a little guilty about how much power I'm using on this hobby.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on September 21, 2017, 06:07:08 PM
Fundamentals are good and team is good, HYPE hasn't hit it yet.

Cheers

I'm honestly curious - what "fundamentals" do cryptocurrencies/exchanges/companies have?

-W

lol
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on September 22, 2017, 03:59:02 PM
I'm honestly curious - what "fundamentals" do cryptocurrencies/exchanges/companies have?
lol


Fundamentals are good and team is good, HYPE hasn't hit it yet.
This kind of comment is what I'd expect from a PUMP & DUMP kind of investor.  The statements made about future value have no basis.  It would be more productive if you give some review of this new coin you just bought and how it's better than others rather than a shameless pump.

agreed.  we shouldn't be doing empty sales pitches for various cryptocurrencies.  if you want to argue why a particular coin is valuable the requirement should be to defend the position you've taken with a coin with lots of posts and discussion here -- not a single one-off post.

if coin X has "atomic swaps" with coins Y and Z, why wouldn't you just buy coins Y and Z?  why would X still be valuable if Y and Z aren't?

--

as for "what fundamentals cryptocurrencies have" i think it can be broken down like:

since the code and features are in my opinion not "fundamentals," we should only be looking at the health of the community of users/miners/developers/companies for a coin, and government favorability as well.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: alena30 on September 28, 2017, 04:46:08 AM
We must accept the fact that the cryptocurrency is the future of currency as the blockchain technology is far better than the traditional way followed by the central banks.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on September 28, 2017, 07:37:21 AM
We must accept the fact that the cryptocurrency is the future of currency as the blockchain technology is far better than the traditional way followed by the central banks.

No we mustn't.  No cryptocurrency to date has taken the place of fiat currency or proved itself as a useful means of exchange for goods.  It's interesting technology - something to think about, and something that might be a good idea to keep an eye on.  By no means is there any kind of certainty regarding it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on September 28, 2017, 08:34:26 AM
Don't bother, those are just sock puppets spamming us.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on September 30, 2017, 12:21:09 AM
I didn't invest at Google IPO because I didn't quite understand how it all worked.I hate the feeling I have now looking at what could have been.

I threw a little play money at some crypto because I didn't want to have that same feeling 10 years from now.

Yes there are tons of gimmicky ICO's and pump and dump is for real,  but there is also some very interesting blockchain technology happening and also an entirely new model of funding for start ups. Why hassle with VCs and banks when you can just issue a coin....
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on September 30, 2017, 12:42:37 AM
One thing I've noticed when discussing cryptocurrencies elsewhere is that actual discussion of things that can materially effect the future of cryptocurrency is almost totally absent among crypto boosters.

For example: by the end of 2018, it's quite likely that the single biggest cryptocurrency on earth will be one developed by a consortium of six banks for the purposes of simplifying cross-border transfers. This project was announced about two months ago, and doesn't make use of any existing cryptocurrencies; instead it uses blockchain technology to simply make the existing system easier. If you think crypto has a future beyond fringe uses, this should be genuinely earth-shattering: we've just been shown that existing cryptocurrencies will be irrelevant to perhaps 99.9% of the world's money market activity. And yet, the day this appeared in the Financial Times, bitcoin's price simply kept going up. Even here, I don't believe there's been a single mention of it. At the very least, crypto is limited to interpersonal transactions that can't be done using existing currencies: at the most, even that is potentially under threat as it's now clear that banks can build their own systems for these purposes. And yet there's nothing; no acknowledgement of what this means, no acknowledgement that it's even happening.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on September 30, 2017, 08:10:05 AM
For example: by the end of 2018, it's quite likely that the single biggest cryptocurrency on earth will be one developed by a consortium of six banks for the purposes of simplifying cross-border transfers.

Saying that institutional banks utilizing blockchain technology to become more efficient is a threat to an open and decentralized bitcoin is like saying that a gas powered pickup truck model increasing its miles per gallon from 15MPG to 25MPG is a threat to Tesla. Bitcoin is such a huge paradigm shift that an efficiency improvement for centralized financial institutions utilizing fiat money will not be what impacts its success.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on September 30, 2017, 08:21:28 AM
For example: by the end of 2018, it's quite likely that the single biggest cryptocurrency on earth will be one developed by a consortium of six banks for the purposes of simplifying cross-border transfers.

Saying that institutional banks utilizing blockchain technology to become more efficient is a threat to an open and decentralized bitcoin is like saying that a gas powered pickup truck model increasing its miles per gallon from 15MPG to 25MPG is a threat to Tesla. Bitcoin is such a huge paradigm shift that an efficiency improvement for centralized financial institutions utilizing fiat money will not be what impacts its success.

Well, as a sort of normal non-aligned person who uses money, I'd be much more likely to use (for actually buying stuff) a crypto currency issued by a major bank or government than Bitcoin or some other free-range crypto. The various horror stories of exchanges disappearing, people having their crypto stolen, etc all add up (for me, and probably for most folks without a strong preexisting opinion) to total distrust of any of them.

When ordinary people (not rich Chinese trying to hide money or speculate) start buying and selling actual stuff with Bitcoin on a large scale, you could convince me.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on September 30, 2017, 09:56:25 AM
Well, as a sort of normal non-aligned person who uses money, I'd be much more likely to use (for actually buying stuff) a crypto currency issued by a major bank or government than Bitcoin or some other free-range crypto. The various horror stories of exchanges disappearing, people having their crypto stolen, etc all add up (for me, and probably for most folks without a strong preexisting opinion) to total distrust of any of them.

When ordinary people (not rich Chinese trying to hide money or speculate) start buying and selling actual stuff with Bitcoin on a large scale, you could convince me.

-W

I have no doubt that there will be advances is payment technologies utilizing fiat currencies, etc. In fact, there already has been (ApplePay/Google wallet/SamsungPay, NFC, EMV chip cards, etc). Please explain how central banks or financial institutions that utilize blockchain technology to reduce overhead costs will make any sort of difference for the consumer. Maybe it will be a slight change in the point of sale transaction where they use their cell phone to pay (similar to ApplePay) instead of swiping a card. Or maybe the consumer pays lower fees for international transfers (although the greater likelihood is that banks will simply improve their profit margins with these efficiencies). A blockchain backend within a centralized system isn't really much different than a database backend in a centralized system.

Exchanges disappearing and crypto getting stolen are all part of the pain points of an early technology getting its start. Larger exchanges that are more tightly regulated and better funded will naturally appear over time (look at Coinbase as an example). That isn't a criticism against an open decentralized bitcoin though. Who knows, maybe some day there won't be a need for an exchange which would make that argument seem ridiculous in hindsight. New apps and consumer education will make it easier for endusers to store and secure their bitcoin without as much worry about losing it.

If you think that the people buying bitcoin are rich Chinese, then you're sorely mistaken. Especially now given the fact that the Chinese market has largely evacuated the market since the Chinese government clamped down on exchanges. The Chinese market makes up a very small portion of the market.

But you miss the whole point of bitcoin. Given some of your statements about bitcoin, I think this would be a good read for you to help you understand Bitcoin a little better:

https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/why-bitcoin-matters/ (https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/why-bitcoin-matters/)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on September 30, 2017, 11:35:36 AM
For example: by the end of 2018, it's quite likely that the single biggest cryptocurrency on earth will be one developed by a consortium of six banks for the purposes of simplifying cross-border transfers.

Saying that institutional banks utilizing blockchain technology to become more efficient is a threat to an open and decentralized bitcoin is like saying that a gas powered pickup truck model increasing its miles per gallon from 15MPG to 25MPG is a threat to Tesla. Bitcoin is such a huge paradigm shift that an efficiency improvement for centralized financial institutions utilizing fiat money will not be what impacts its success.

That is firstly a wildly optimistic assessment of the state of the US car market and Tesla's share of it (they're only just barely on the radar, and it remains very much an open question whether they'll scale up fast enough to prevent established car companies cutting the ground from under them), and secondly a wildly optimistic assessment of Bitcoin's position. Tesla represents less than 1% of new car sales in the United States, and compared to Bitcoin that's a staggering success. Bitcoin transactions total about a quarter of a million a day: for comparison, Starbucks sells about 25 times that many drinks in the same time. Compared to fiat currency transactions, Bitcoin activity is a rounding error - and that's including God knows how many speculative transactions that have no purpose beyond trying to get rich trading the damn stuff.

Here's a question: what percentage of daily transactions in the United States is composed of purchases of goods or services using cryptocurrencies? I suspect it's beyond microscopic: Bitcoin isn't Tesla, it's not even your friend Dave who upgrades his car every year and sells the old one on Craigslist. It's a libertarian crank selling coal-rolling kits on eBay.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on September 30, 2017, 01:28:28 PM
market share has nothing to do with it, i believe the point was that the markets don't overlap.  that's why it's not earth-shattering for the crypto community.  people who buy teslas don't care about the latest models of gas-powered pickups.  likewise, people who believe in the future of non-government cryptocurrencies don't care about a new way banks are going to be transacting with fiat currency.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on September 30, 2017, 02:24:11 PM
market share has nothing to do with it, i believe the point was that the markets don't overlap.  that's why it's not earth-shattering for the crypto community.  people who buy teslas don't care about the latest models of gas-powered pickups.  likewise, people who believe in the future of non-government cryptocurrencies don't care about a new way banks are going to be transacting with fiat currency.

That was exactly my point.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on September 30, 2017, 03:17:20 PM
market share has nothing to do with it, i believe the point was that the markets don't overlap.  that's why it's not earth-shattering for the crypto community.  people who buy teslas don't care about the latest models of gas-powered pickups.  likewise, people who believe in the future of non-government cryptocurrencies don't care about a new way banks are going to be transacting with fiat currency.

That was exactly my point.

If there are people who think Bitcoin's price shouldn't necessarily bear any relation to market share, we're in an even bigger and more ridiculous bubble than I thought.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 01, 2017, 08:52:51 AM
If there are people who think Bitcoin's price shouldn't necessarily bear any relation to market share, we're in an even bigger and more ridiculous bubble than I thought.

First off, marketshare of what? Second, in what world is the price of anything ever dictated by marketshare? By that measure, any new product, asset or commodity that comes to market would automatically start with a value of $0. It is no different for currencies.

The value of something in an open market is strictly determined by supply and demand. The more demand for something with a limited supply, then the greater its value. The market determines the value. Bitcoin is one of the few completely open and unmanipulated marketplaces out there, so if this economic principle were ever true for anything, it would be for bitcoin. You can argue that some people are purchasing bitcoin at today's price on the premise that its future marketshare of the gold market (for example) will be a certain amount, but that doesn't change the fact that today's value of bitcoin is based on today's market forces (supply/demand) of bitcoin, not tomorrow's. So the given price of bitcoin today is strictly based on today's supply and demand for it. So long as people continue to view it as a good store of value, then there will continue to be new people looking to bitcoin to store some of their wealth. The premise that it is a good store of value has a direct relationship with how well the network operates and whether or not it is technologically stable, which for the last almost 10 years, it has been so incredibly.

Now, if you'd excuse me, I am off to demand that I purchase a Ferrari for a few bucks while their marketshare is negligible.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on October 01, 2017, 09:06:46 AM

Now, if you'd excuse me, I am off to demand that I purchase a Ferrari for a few bucks while their marketshare is negligible.

If that works, get one for me too.  Good point about market share vs price
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on October 01, 2017, 09:17:02 AM
If there are people who think Bitcoin's price shouldn't necessarily bear any relation to market share, we're in an even bigger and more ridiculous bubble than I thought.

First off, marketshare of what? Second, in what world is the price of anything ever dictated by marketshare? By that measure, any new product, asset or commodity that comes to market would automatically start with a value of $0. It is no different for currencies.

The value of something in an open market is strictly determined by supply and demand. The more demand for something with a limited supply, then the greater its value. The market determines the value. Bitcoin is one of the few completely open and unmanipulated marketplaces out there, so if this economic principle were ever true for anything, it would be for bitcoin. You can argue that some people are purchasing bitcoin at today's price on the premise that its future marketshare of the gold market (for example) will be a certain amount, but that doesn't change the fact that today's value of bitcoin is based on today's market forces (supply/demand) of bitcoin, not tomorrow's. So the given price of bitcoin today is strictly based on today's supply and demand for it. So long as people continue to view it as a good store of value, then there will continue to be new people looking to bitcoin to store some of their wealth. The premise that it is a good store of value has a direct relationship with how well the network operates and whether or not it is technologically stable, which for the last almost 10 years, it has been so incredibly.

Now, if you'd excuse me, I am off to demand that I purchase a Ferrari for a few bucks while their marketshare is negligible.

There's no point in continuing this particular thread of the conversation. We're at cross-purposes. I still cannot for the life of me see how a history of less than a decade, punctuated by astronomical gains and horrendous losses in price, and specifically named by the guy who wrote the Nobel-winning book on asset bubbles as being a perfect example of an asset bubble, can be sanely compared to gold, which has been used as a store of value for several thousand years and is more or less immediately convertible to usable money. Especially not when a significant number of its proponents don't even believe a currency should be a store of value.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on October 01, 2017, 09:57:58 AM
I think Bitcoin could conceivably be e-gold. The design of they system (inherently deflationary/limited supply) is actually ideal for store-of-value use. The hyper-volatility and various scams/frauds/thefts are obviously a problem.

As a currency, it's a bad joke. I am not sure how you could do a worse job designing a currency.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mcampbell on October 01, 2017, 11:17:20 PM
Invested in my first ICO. It was painless. I feel like I am on the ground floor of an amazon, microsoft, or pets.bomb. I am ready for moon or total loss. So exciting. I still rather have a highly diversified crytpo ETF that spreads out the risks.

You can’t “invest” in an ICO cause you don’t get equity. You get speculation tokens you hope will appreciate. It’s no where near getting in ground floor of an Amazon


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on October 02, 2017, 07:50:14 AM
I didn't invest at Google IPO because I didn't quite understand how it all worked.I hate the feeling I have now looking at what could have been.

The mind is kinda selective though.  You remember Google because they were the winner.  There were a lot of losers, and picking the winner was not easy to do:

(http://www.wordstream.com/images/internet-search-engines.jpg)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on October 02, 2017, 09:40:54 AM
For perspective: if you compare Google's share price post-IPO and Bitcoin's price from the point at which it reached a dollar, you can see that Bitcoin is growing in price about eight to ten times as fast as Google. Whether that's indicative of limitless potential or an impending collapse is up to the observer.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on October 02, 2017, 09:44:20 AM
The mind is kinda selective though.  You remember Google because they were the winner.  There were a lot of losers, and picking the winner was not easy to do...

That's a very good point. I loved Alta Vista. Google attacked a fortified hill and won.

EDIT- Actually, the fought (at least) a two front battle with Alta Vista and Yahoo.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 02, 2017, 10:30:50 AM
Speaking of attacking fortified hills and winning.

(http://heidicohen.com/wp-content/uploads/Facebook-and-MySpace-From-Google-Trends.jpg)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on October 02, 2017, 01:59:38 PM
Google came along at the moment when Yahoo blew $3 billion buying out Mark Cuban for something that went absolutely nowhere. Later, Yahoo stayed alive because of its lucky investment in Alibaba. 

Switch a few things around back in 1996-97 (someone buys a condo in the same association as someone else, or something like that) and the history of the internet as we know it would be quite different.  That's why early investors are more lucky than good.  And not only do they have to buy the right stock, they have to hold it for a decade or more. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 02, 2017, 03:16:07 PM
If you are based in the USA, you are either not "getting in on the ground floor" or the companies you are investing in through ICOs are going to end up in big trouble with the SEC. At best, companies in the USA are able to offer kickstarter-like ICOs where you are prepaying for a product that may exist in the future, potentially at a discount to its ultimate market price.

To understand the difference between these two transactions, ask anyone who helped kickstart the Oculus Rift with $2.4M in funding what their share of the profit was when Lucky Palmer went on to sell the company to facebook for a sweet $2.3B less than two years later (1000x return in two years).

Outside the USA you could indeed be getting in on the ground floor with various business ventures with something like an equity stake, but keep in mind that many VCs and Angel investors end up losing money, even the ones that make money expect to lose money on between 9/10 and 19/20ths of their investments, and that's after careful review of business plans and assessing the qualifications and personal qualities of the founders. As long as you really are prepared for a total loss though... here's hoping you shoot the moon!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Jeferson on October 02, 2017, 03:19:04 PM
I see that not many money mustache folkes support and believe in these digital coins. I am, however of an opposite opinion and I believe that they have their place in the twenty-first century. I don't see much of a use for Bitcoin, because the fees that are associated with Bitcoin transactions are quite extensive, plus the process time isn't exactly great. Saying that, Bitcoin's only purpose is only to transfer money from one individual to another, nothing else. Other cryptocurrencies, such as Ethereum has also other usages, such as the dapps. You can check this crypto guide (https://tradingbeasts.com/cryptocurrency-trading-for-beginners/), if you are not sure how to determine the potential of a cryptocurrency. But still, if you don't think they have future, even after you read smth about them, there is no point for you to invest in them.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mcampbell on October 02, 2017, 03:23:11 PM
If you are based in the USA, you are either not "getting in on the ground floor" or the companies you are investing in through ICOs are going to end up in big trouble with the SEC. At best, companies in the USA are able to offer kickstarter-like ICOs where you are prepaying for a product that may exist in the future, potentially at a discount to its ultimate market price.

To understand the difference between these two transactions, ask anyone who helped kickstart the Oculus Rift with $2.4M in funding what their share of the profit was when Lucky Palmer went on to sell the company to facebook for a sweet $2.3B less than two years later (1000x return in two years).

Outside the USA you could indeed be getting in on the ground floor with various business ventures with something like an equity stake, but keep in mind that many VCs and Angel investors end up losing money, even the ones that make money expect to lose money on between 9/10 and 19/20ths of their investments, and that's after careful review of business plans and assessing the qualifications and personal qualities of the founders. As long as you really are prepared for a total loss though... here's hoping you shoot the moon!

Theoretically companies outside USA could offer equity via an ICO, I have yet to see any that have done this. Cause they haven’t needed to cause people are essentially giving them free Kickstarter type money, hoping the tokens will raise in value. It’s illegal in USA to even have on your website that the tokens can raise in value or they are any kind of “investment”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on October 03, 2017, 12:14:36 AM
One thing I've noticed when discussing cryptocurrencies elsewhere is that actual discussion of things that can materially effect the future of cryptocurrency is almost totally absent among crypto boosters.

For example: by the end of 2018, it's quite likely that the single biggest cryptocurrency on earth will be one developed by a consortium of six banks for the purposes of simplifying cross-border transfers. This project was announced about two months ago, and doesn't make use of any existing cryptocurrencies; instead it uses blockchain technology to simply make the existing system easier. If you think crypto has a future beyond fringe uses, this should be genuinely earth-shattering: we've just been shown that existing cryptocurrencies will be irrelevant to perhaps 99.9% of the world's money market activity. And yet, the day this appeared in the Financial Times, bitcoin's price simply kept going up. Even here, I don't believe there's been a single mention of it. At the very least, crypto is limited to interpersonal transactions that can't be done using existing currencies: at the most, even that is potentially under threat as it's now clear that banks can build their own systems for these purposes. And yet there's nothing; no acknowledgement of what this means, no acknowledgement that it's even happening.

Informative and thought-provoking comment; thanks for posting.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 03, 2017, 02:31:17 AM
Fair points ICO's should not be considered an "investment", but they have potential for making you real money. I'm not sure how a kickstarter does that.

How do you make real money pre-purchasing a product at a discount? You resell your product to someone who is willing to pay more for it than you were. People actually did this with Oculus Rift pre-orders and some of them doubled their money.

Cryptocurrency-like tokens makes the process of buying and reselling a lot lower friction, which reduces transaction costs, but produces greater elasticity of supply, which means you're unlikely to see the biggest mismatches between supply and demand which is when people make the most money on reselling products.

TL;DR I'm not arguing there isn't potential to make money on ICOs, but they're not set up to give "invest in a successful silicon valley startup" scale returns, even if the underlying company turns out to be the next amazon/google. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: flyersman on October 03, 2017, 08:03:18 AM
What are everyones thoughts on Crypto Index's?

https://crypto20.com/en/

I just signed up for that one and also read an article that a few Google Employees started one as well.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on October 03, 2017, 11:02:14 AM
My personal opinion is that a crypto index fund is a very bad idea. The risks involved in investing in Bitcoin are almost identical to the risks involved in investing in Ethereum, or Ripple, or Monero - they all have wildly volatile price swings, they're all more or less completely unusable as actual currency, and they're all effectively in the same mode characterised by Robert Shipper as indicative of a bubble. Building an index fund does nothing to negate those risks, which are vastly bigger than the risks specific to individual altcoins.

Further to that, an index fund runs the risk of building false confidence. Someone who invests in a crypto index fund may well think they're properly diversified, but they're still entirely exposed to the vicissitudes of what remains a very immature industry.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 03, 2017, 12:54:02 PM
My personal opinion is that a crypto index fund is a very bad idea.

Further to that, an index fund runs the risk of building false confidence. Someone who invests in a crypto index fund may well think they're properly diversified, but they're still entirely exposed to the vicissitudes of what remains a very immature industry.

So your stance is essentially that the crypto-currency industry as a whole does not have any worthwhile future at all? Wow, that's quite the bearish stance. Even some of the most bearish of bears on crypto-currencies yield to the fact that crypto-currencies in general are here to stay.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on October 03, 2017, 01:30:56 PM
My personal opinion is that a crypto index fund is a very bad idea.

Further to that, an index fund runs the risk of building false confidence. Someone who invests in a crypto index fund may well think they're properly diversified, but they're still entirely exposed to the vicissitudes of what remains a very immature industry.

So your stance is essentially that the crypto-currency industry as a whole does not have any worthwhile future at all? Wow, that's quite the bearish stance. Even some of the most bearish of bears on crypto-currencies yield to the fact that crypto-currencies in general are here to stay.

My personal opinion is that the cryptocurrency industry as it's currently comprised is in a spectacular bubble phase. There may be cryptocurrencies in the future (although it's instructive to note that perhaps 99% of the population of the US have never once used cryptocurrency, and perhaps 99% of the remainder haven't used it for anything except speculative investment or illegal activity), but there's no reason to assume that what's currently popular will be what turns out to be any use whatsoever.

There's no day-to-day use case for crypto as it stands, and ten years in it doesn't look as though there ever will be. There's nothing stopping organisations which like blockchain technology from simply using that without reference to existing cryptocurrency. A gigantic chunk of the money that's currently in cryptocurrency is only there because of the promise of massive gains: if we believe the market will crash (and I have very little doubt that it will), we have no basis for trying to figure out what cryptocurrencies will be worth when the dust settles. Nothing. Bitcoin could fall to a dollar; Ethereum could fall to a cent. With that kind of uncertainty,  putting money in a crypto index is close to pointless.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 03, 2017, 02:23:27 PM
My personal opinion is that the cryptocurrency industry as it's currently comprised is in a spectacular bubble phase. There may be cryptocurrencies in the future (although it's instructive to note that perhaps 99% of the population of the US have never once used cryptocurrency, and perhaps 99% of the remainder haven't used it for anything except speculative investment or illegal activity), but there's no reason to assume that what's currently popular will be what turns out to be any use whatsoever.

There's no day-to-day use case for crypto as it stands, and ten years in it doesn't look as though there ever will be. There's nothing stopping organisations which like blockchain technology from simply using that without reference to existing cryptocurrency. A gigantic chunk of the money that's currently in cryptocurrency is only there because of the promise of massive gains: if we believe the market will crash (and I have very little doubt that it will), we have no basis for trying to figure out what cryptocurrencies will be worth when the dust settles. Nothing. Bitcoin could fall to a dollar; Ethereum could fall to a cent. With that kind of uncertainty,  putting money in a crypto index is close to pointless.

It is clear from what you've posted you have your biases and misunderstands of the technology and how it works. The blatant bogus statistics that you spout out are ridiculous and for someone who denounces speculation, you sure are doing an awful lot of it yourself.

Also, I don't think you understand how the crypto indexes work (such as BTWTY and Crypto20). They reallocate themselves to the top twenty crypto-currencies every month or so. So unless the crypto-currency market completely dries up (extremely unlikely), then a crypto-index fund has a lot of value. Plus, unlike mutual funds today, they're low maintenance with non-existent fees (driven by programming) and can't be manipulated and you don't have to worry whether or not your institution is gambling your money away behind the seasons. This is the power that mathematics, openness, and programmable money will bring to the financial industry.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on October 03, 2017, 03:00:30 PM
One of the things I find odd about the crypto currency folks is how emotional they are about it (not you Maizeman!)

I own lots of stuff - stocks, bonds, a couple houses, many big fancy tools, etc. All of those things have some intrinsic value to varying degrees.

When I want to sell or buy something, I could care less what I use to make that transaction as long as it's easy, relatively secure, and that the currency is stable in value and accepted pretty much everywhere. I have no interest in whether or not that's dollars, bitcoins, dirty socks, you name it. I'm agnostic on the specific currency as long as it has those basic attributes.

As of right now, none of that applies, and the "success" of crypto looks more to me like failure, since none of them have managed to become commonly used or even stable in value. I have no interest in buying something that has no use and is only transacted with itself (I don't go out and buy a bunch of dollars to stick under my bed either, and those at least are easy to use for buying stuff I actually want).

So an index fund to me seems more like the cherry on top of a speculation sundae than evidence that the markets are "mature" or that you can "invest" in the technology as a whole by buying such a fund.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on October 03, 2017, 03:23:55 PM
My personal opinion is that the cryptocurrency industry as it's currently comprised is in a spectacular bubble phase. There may be cryptocurrencies in the future (although it's instructive to note that perhaps 99% of the population of the US have never once used cryptocurrency, and perhaps 99% of the remainder haven't used it for anything except speculative investment or illegal activity), but there's no reason to assume that what's currently popular will be what turns out to be any use whatsoever.

There's no day-to-day use case for crypto as it stands, and ten years in it doesn't look as though there ever will be. There's nothing stopping organisations which like blockchain technology from simply using that without reference to existing cryptocurrency. A gigantic chunk of the money that's currently in cryptocurrency is only there because of the promise of massive gains: if we believe the market will crash (and I have very little doubt that it will), we have no basis for trying to figure out what cryptocurrencies will be worth when the dust settles. Nothing. Bitcoin could fall to a dollar; Ethereum could fall to a cent. With that kind of uncertainty,  putting money in a crypto index is close to pointless.

It is clear from what you've posted you have your biases and misunderstands of the technology and how it works. The blatant bogus statistics that you spout out are ridiculous and for someone who denounces speculation, you sure are doing an awful lot of it yourself.

Also, I don't think you understand how the crypto indexes work (such as BTWTY and Crypto20). They reallocate themselves to the top twenty crypto-currencies every month or so. So unless the crypto-currency market completely dries up (extremely unlikely), then a crypto-index fund has a lot of value. Plus, unlike mutual funds today, they're low maintenance with non-existent fees (driven by programming) and can't be manipulated and you don't have to worry whether or not your institution is gambling your money away behind the seasons. This is the power that mathematics, openness, and programmable money will bring to the financial industry.

What's with the furiously emotional response?

You asked about my position, and I explained it. I specifically avoided discussing the specifics of the technology, because the reasons I believe cryptocurrencies will collapse have nothing to do with the technology itself.

Regarding the rebalancing: I don't think you've read what I've written. I argued that indexing cryptocurrencies is futile, because they're all exposed to the same major risks, and explained that I expect to see a severe crypto crash. I do expect to see a drastic shrinkage in the crypto market, so monthly rebalancing and near-zero fees make no difference. Why would I mention monthly rebalancing when discussing a fund I fully expect will lose perhaps 90% of its value? If I have absolutely no faith in the underlying asset class, then it doesn't matter how the index fund operates.

On the subject of my numbers: yes, I guessed, because real figures are hard to come by. That said, though, I'd be pretty confident that less than three million Americans have actually possessed cryptocurrency. And I'd be outright astonished if thirty thousand Americans have managed to actually pay for a legal good or service with crypto.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shotgunwilly on October 03, 2017, 04:38:48 PM
One of the things I find odd about the crypto currency folks is how emotional they are about it (not you Maizeman!)

I own lots of stuff - stocks, bonds, a couple houses, many big fancy tools, etc. All of those things have some intrinsic value to varying degrees.

When I want to sell or buy something, I could care less what I use to make that transaction as long as it's easy, relatively secure, and that the currency is stable in value and accepted pretty much everywhere. I have no interest in whether or not that's dollars, bitcoins, dirty socks, you name it. I'm agnostic on the specific currency as long as it has those basic attributes.

As of right now, none of that applies, and the "success" of crypto looks more to me like failure, since none of them have managed to become commonly used or even stable in value. I have no interest in buying something that has no use and is only transacted with itself (I don't go out and buy a bunch of dollars to stick under my bed either, and those at least are easy to use for buying stuff I actually want).

So an index fund to me seems more like the cherry on top of a speculation sundae than evidence that the markets are "mature" or that you can "invest" in the technology as a whole by buying such a fund.

-W

Your posts, and many others here crying that cryptocurrencies are useless because "you can't buy shit or use it to transact in an efficient way", make it blatantly clear that you have a very narrow minded grasp on how blockchain can be used.  No, Bitcoin is not widely used for transferring money, and buying or selling things.  Yes, it has some issues that are keeping it from being a currency.  But there are extremely exciting use cases for blockhain, and therefor a token that runs the chain.  So much that it will change industries.  And when you have a blockchain, you have a token, or coin, or "cryptocurrency" (which is what most people are using as the term for these tokens) that is used for the protocol to maintain decentralization.  And they can grow in value as a blockchain is used or adopted.

Right now, there is a speculative bubble in all of these cryptocurrencies as a whole. (This can be seen when comparing value derived from actual use vs the value the coins are listed at today due to speculation.) MANY will fail.  Lot's of money will be made and lost, and new companies and blockchains will be created for different use cases.  Many more will fail, and some will become successful.  This doesn't mean that "cryptocurrencies" as a whole are useless and will be a failure, any more than saying all internet companies were a failure because of the dot com bubble.

I believe you are confusing "cryptocurrency" with a blockchain token meant to be used as an actual currency, which very few are.  Ethereum, for example, runs on a token called Ether.  It was never designed to be used as a currency.  Yet it get's listed under the term "cryptocurrency."  I think as the market matures it will develop better distinguishing terms for various coins. (Maybe?)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 03, 2017, 04:54:53 PM
What's with the furiously emotional response?

You asked about my position, and I explained it. I specifically avoided discussing the specifics of the technology, because the reasons I believe cryptocurrencies will collapse have nothing to do with the technology itself.

Regarding the rebalancing: I don't think you've read what I've written. I argued that indexing cryptocurrencies is futile, because they're all exposed to the same major risks, and explained that I expect to see a severe crypto crash. I do expect to see a drastic shrinkage in the crypto market, so monthly rebalancing and near-zero fees make no difference. Why would I mention monthly rebalancing when discussing a fund I fully expect will lose perhaps 90% of its value? If I have absolutely no faith in the underlying asset class, then it doesn't matter how the index fund operates.

On the subject of my numbers: yes, I guessed, because real figures are hard to come by. That said, though, I'd be pretty confident that less than three million Americans have actually possessed cryptocurrency. And I'd be outright astonished if thirty thousand Americans have managed to actually pay for a legal good or service with crypto.

What was it about my post that was "furiously emotional"? I don't think I posted anything or wrote any sentence that exuded any emotion at all, in fact. Was there something specific about my post that led you to believe it was furiously emotional?

I did read what you wrote and to be honest I didn't really see much of any specifics other than your opinion on the matter...

Quote
-"If there are people who think Bitcoin's price shouldn't necessarily bear any relation to market share, we're in an even bigger and more ridiculous bubble than I thought."
-"The risks involved in investing in Bitcoin are almost identical to the risks involved in investing in Ethereum, or Ripple, or Monero"
-"they all have wildly volatile price swings, they're all more or less completely unusable as actual currency, and they're all effectively in the same mode characterised by Robert Shipper as indicative of a bubble."
-"Building an index fund does nothing to negate those risks, which are vastly bigger than the risks specific to individual altcoins."
-"My personal opinion is that the cryptocurrency industry as it's currently comprised is in a spectacular bubble phase."
-"There's no day-to-day use case for crypto as it stands, and ten years in it doesn't look as though there ever will be."
-"Why would I mention monthly rebalancing when discussing a fund I fully expect will lose perhaps 90% of its value"
-"If I have absolutely no faith in the underlying asset class, then it doesn't matter how the index fund operates."
-"Bitcoin could fall to a dollar; Ethereum could fall to a cent. With that kind of uncertainty,  putting money in a crypto index is close to pointless."
-"My personal opinion is that a crypto index fund is a very bad idea."
-"Someone who invests in a crypto index fund may well think they're properly diversified, but they're still entirely exposed to the vicissitudes of what remains a very immature industry."
-"That said, though, I'd be pretty confident that less than three million Americans have actually possessed cryptocurrency."
-"And I'd be outright astonished if thirty thousand Americans have managed to actually pay for a legal good or service with crypto."

These are all the things from the last several posts of yours and most of it is either just speculative itself, misinformed and opinionated, or just outright false.

Investing in a crypto index fund allows an individual to diversify among crypto-currencies as a whole. It is no different than someone who feels that technology companies will do well, but rather than investing in specific companies, they invest in a fund that diversifies among the largest tech companies. You don't invest in a fund like that unless you're already comfortable investing in the underlying market itself. The same goes for a crypto index fund. Clearly, for someone like you who doesn't think crypto-currencies will be around in 10 years, then its not a fund targeted toward an individual like yourself. But, to say that they're a bad idea when they're clearly designed for individuals comfortable with the idea of crypto-currencies fails to understand the benefit they provide. They're for the individuals who feel that crypto-currencies have a place in the world, but aren't comfortable picking a winner just yet. If a particular crypto-currency fails and loses market cap, then it will fall out of the index fund and another currency will take its place. Overall, however, if one feels that the overall market will continue to grow (so far it has), then the index fund will as well.

I don't mind debating crypto-currencies and one look back at my previous posts throughout this threat and others regarding crypto-currencies will show that I enjoy a good debate and will always keep things cordial and free from personal attacks. However, looking at your previous quotes above, it is difficult to have an adequate debate regarding a topic when one side fails to talk about anything specific or outright uses false or exaggerated information.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 03, 2017, 05:09:39 PM
One thing that I think many don't realize about crypto-currencies is the boom in innovation that is going to take place on the internet because of them. Previously, inventing new protocols and internet technologies involved the classic "chicken or the egg" problem. Inventing a new protocol typically depends upon its inherently widespread use among users. However, without its widespread use, it won't be adopted by users. Crypto-currencies change this. It monetizes the protocols themselves. This will allow for a ton of innovation over the next decade or so that I don't think a lot of people realize. Take for example SMTP. It is the protocol that email rides over and it is completely out of date. Yet, even though it is very outdated and lacks any sort of security at all, it is still widely used simply because nothing can supplant its widespread use.

Monetizing the protocols (which crypto-currencies allow for) allows for individuals to become invested in the protocols themselves and thus receive economic gains when the protocol sees widespread use and by becoming invested in these protocols, they also become users of the protocol. This solves the "chicken or the egg" problem. All the protocols in use on the internet today, despite the fact that brilliant minds poured into them, weren't monetized. DNS, SMTP, TCP, HTTP, etc. No one received economic benefit directly from those protocols even though they've completely revolutionized our way of life. Protocol innovation has now stagnated because of this and I believe crypto-currencies will completely revolutionize internet innovation because of the benefit they provide. We will no longer be handcuffed by the "chicken or egg" problem that is holding innovation back.

So you want a use case? There is one for you and I can't wait to see where it takes us.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 03, 2017, 07:58:58 PM
I'm unable to follow this.  Is blockchain the protocol?  So investing/trading in the currency (e.g. bitcoin) will result in adoption of blockchain technology as a standard?  I don't understand how that in turn would make the tokens more valuable. 

I know all the protocols listed above and have a working understanding of how protocols are developed and evolve through consortiums and standards bodies like IETF.  So I get about half of your comment above, but I don't think it ties together like you suggest.

My understanding is that blockchain is the protocol, like TCP/IP or HTTP are protocols.  The coins are what travels over the protocol, like a particular webpage or Netflix show would.  Now that we have this new protocol, companies (like banks) are starting to put it to all kinds of new uses.  Recording the transfer of digital tokens is a nice proof of concept, but it seems the protocol can move on to bigger things without the original tokens that got it started.

Take, for example, Siacoin. If someone wanted to create a decentralized storage network to compete against Amazon, you'd have a chicken and the egg problem. No one would store their files on the network because there isn't enough people offering storage on the network to be decentralized and with enough capacity to support a user base...and without a user base, no one is going to offer up their storage to a service that doesn't make it worth their while. So a system like that with an open protocol would never be able to get off the ground. With blockchain technology, users become financially invested in the protocol itself. So users are then incentivized to offer storage on the network since that is what earns the tokens as part of the protocol. Now, since there is an entire protocol being supported by incentivized contributors, the user base can grow and adopt it.

We're going to see all sorts of new innovations like this that we're never possible before simply because economics never allowed it to be possible.

Here is a further read on the subject. Not the exact article I was looking for when I first read about the concept, but still a decent read:

http://continuations.com/post/148098927445/crypto-tokens-and-the-coming-age-of-protocol (http://continuations.com/post/148098927445/crypto-tokens-and-the-coming-age-of-protocol)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on October 04, 2017, 12:11:09 AM
So what happens to the value of Bitcoin when Wall St. gets exchanges shut down in the United States just like they were in China? 

At some point in the near future the investment banks are going to develop their own blockchain network and their own daily "cash" currency and their own digital "gold" and they'll get the exchanges shut down. 

They have been harassing peer-to-peer lending and microlending for several years now.  This is the next thing. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on October 04, 2017, 02:41:03 AM
What's with the furiously emotional response?

You asked about my position, and I explained it. I specifically avoided discussing the specifics of the technology, because the reasons I believe cryptocurrencies will collapse have nothing to do with the technology itself.

Regarding the rebalancing: I don't think you've read what I've written. I argued that indexing cryptocurrencies is futile, because they're all exposed to the same major risks, and explained that I expect to see a severe crypto crash. I do expect to see a drastic shrinkage in the crypto market, so monthly rebalancing and near-zero fees make no difference. Why would I mention monthly rebalancing when discussing a fund I fully expect will lose perhaps 90% of its value? If I have absolutely no faith in the underlying asset class, then it doesn't matter how the index fund operates.

On the subject of my numbers: yes, I guessed, because real figures are hard to come by. That said, though, I'd be pretty confident that less than three million Americans have actually possessed cryptocurrency. And I'd be outright astonished if thirty thousand Americans have managed to actually pay for a legal good or service with crypto.

What was it about my post that was "furiously emotional"? I don't think I posted anything or wrote any sentence that exuded any emotion at all, in fact. Was there something specific about my post that led you to believe it was furiously emotional?

I did read what you wrote and to be honest I didn't really see much of any specifics other than your opinion on the matter...

Quote
-"If there are people who think Bitcoin's price shouldn't necessarily bear any relation to market share, we're in an even bigger and more ridiculous bubble than I thought."
-"The risks involved in investing in Bitcoin are almost identical to the risks involved in investing in Ethereum, or Ripple, or Monero"
-"they all have wildly volatile price swings, they're all more or less completely unusable as actual currency, and they're all effectively in the same mode characterised by Robert Shipper as indicative of a bubble."
-"Building an index fund does nothing to negate those risks, which are vastly bigger than the risks specific to individual altcoins."
-"My personal opinion is that the cryptocurrency industry as it's currently comprised is in a spectacular bubble phase."
-"There's no day-to-day use case for crypto as it stands, and ten years in it doesn't look as though there ever will be."
-"Why would I mention monthly rebalancing when discussing a fund I fully expect will lose perhaps 90% of its value"
-"If I have absolutely no faith in the underlying asset class, then it doesn't matter how the index fund operates."
-"Bitcoin could fall to a dollar; Ethereum could fall to a cent. With that kind of uncertainty,  putting money in a crypto index is close to pointless."
-"My personal opinion is that a crypto index fund is a very bad idea."
-"Someone who invests in a crypto index fund may well think they're properly diversified, but they're still entirely exposed to the vicissitudes of what remains a very immature industry."
-"That said, though, I'd be pretty confident that less than three million Americans have actually possessed cryptocurrency."
-"And I'd be outright astonished if thirty thousand Americans have managed to actually pay for a legal good or service with crypto."

These are all the things from the last several posts of yours and most of it is either just speculative itself, misinformed and opinionated, or just outright false.

Investing in a crypto index fund allows an individual to diversify among crypto-currencies as a whole. It is no different than someone who feels that technology companies will do well, but rather than investing in specific companies, they invest in a fund that diversifies among the largest tech companies. You don't invest in a fund like that unless you're already comfortable investing in the underlying market itself. The same goes for a crypto index fund. Clearly, for someone like you who doesn't think crypto-currencies will be around in 10 years, then its not a fund targeted toward an individual like yourself. But, to say that they're a bad idea when they're clearly designed for individuals comfortable with the idea of crypto-currencies fails to understand the benefit they provide. They're for the individuals who feel that crypto-currencies have a place in the world, but aren't comfortable picking a winner just yet. If a particular crypto-currency fails and loses market cap, then it will fall out of the index fund and another currency will take its place. Overall, however, if one feels that the overall market will continue to grow (so far it has), then the index fund will as well.

I don't mind debating crypto-currencies and one look back at my previous posts throughout this threat and others regarding crypto-currencies will show that I enjoy a good debate and will always keep things cordial and free from personal attacks. However, looking at your previous quotes above, it is difficult to have an adequate debate regarding a topic when one side fails to talk about anything specific or outright uses false or exaggerated information.

"The blatant bogus statistics that you spout out are ridiculous."

This is what I was referring to as an emotional response.

Regarding the statistics I mentioned (and freely admitted were very rough guesses): it appears as though I have severely overestimated the number of American cryptocurrency users. This item of research from Cambridge University (http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/study-highlights-growing-significance-of-cryptocurrencies) indicates that the total number of users worldwide is three million, so my estimate of the same number for America alone was off by quite a distance. Cryptocurrency is in fact a good deal more niche than I had thought.

Regarding my estimate of 1% of transactions being for the purchase of legal goods or services: I freely admit that this is a shot in the dark. There's very little data on this at present; the best I could find just now was a survey done at a Chinese conference, where the self-reported figure for such transactions was 5%. If you have data to the contrary, feel free to share; I'm happy to recant in the face of better data.

On the specific subject of cryptocurrencies as a method for monetising protocol adoption: I have to say, I've been discussing cryptocurrencies with ardent advocates for a while now, and you're the first person I've seen coming in with this as a potential use case. It makes for interesting reading, and makes sense of some of what I've read elsewhere that was poorly explained. I'd still be extremely wary of investing in crypto at the moment, as I'm convinced prices have bee badly inflated by speculative investment, but I'm a good deal less cynical about its uses in ten to fifteen years than I was yesterday.

Would I be right in saying that this effectively means buying Siacoin is equivalent to putting money into an early-stage startup?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 04, 2017, 06:36:11 AM
"The blatant bogus statistics that you spout out are ridiculous."

This is what I was referring to as an emotional response.

Regarding the statistics I mentioned (and freely admitted were very rough guesses): it appears as though I have severely overestimated the number of American cryptocurrency users. This item of research from Cambridge University (http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/study-highlights-growing-significance-of-cryptocurrencies) indicates that the total number of users worldwide is three million, so my estimate of the same number for America alone was off by quite a distance. Cryptocurrency is in fact a good deal more niche than I had thought.

Regarding my estimate of 1% of transactions being for the purchase of legal goods or services: I freely admit that this is a shot in the dark. There's very little data on this at present; the best I could find just now was a survey done at a Chinese conference, where the self-reported figure for such transactions was 5%. If you have data to the contrary, feel free to share; I'm happy to recant in the face of better data.

On the specific subject of cryptocurrencies as a method for monetising protocol adoption: I have to say, I've been discussing cryptocurrencies with ardent advocates for a while now, and you're the first person I've seen coming in with this as a potential use case. It makes for interesting reading, and makes sense of some of what I've read elsewhere that was poorly explained. I'd still be extremely wary of investing in crypto at the moment, as I'm convinced prices have bee badly inflated by speculative investment, but I'm a good deal less cynical about its uses in ten to fifteen years than I was yesterday.

Would I be right in saying that this effectively means buying Siacoin is equivalent to putting money into an early-stage startup?

That Cambridge survey was also conducted over a year ago starting in Sept 2016 when the market cap for bitcoin was less than $10 billion and the total market cap for all crypto-currencies was at around $12 billion. The market has grown 10-fold since then. So you're essentially excluding the largest growth year for the market by citing those statistics. Going by Coinbase's sign-ups alone, there are about 10.8 million accounts with Coinbase and recently they've been adding accounts up to a magnitude of about 100k-200k a day.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that crypto-currencies are widely used and I'd even accept figures that are arguably very small, so it isn't necessarily that I was arguing the numbers themselves. Outside of the handful of people I've gotten into crypto-currencies myself, I'd only know one other person who actually owns any. But, I think the more important figure isn't what the current adoption levels are, but what the trend is for those adoption levels. This is an extremely new market and concept and so it is going to have a small market, but the trend shows that it is growing and growing fast. The fact that a lot of people know about bitcoin because of the media shows that it is only a matter of time before its continued existence will bring in more people willing to give it a try.

I fully agree that the number of ICOs that are poorly designed or even worse, fraudulent, are extremely high. A vast majority will fail. That will largely have its biggest impact on the ICO tokens themselves and the blockchain they're built on (Ethereum). I don't think the impact on bitcoin will be felt as much. Bitcoin is certainly the reserve currency for all other cryptos, but the demand that these other cryptos place on bitcoin is extremely fleeting. The current market demand for bitcoin is mostly for bitcoin itself.

I don't think investing in Siacoin is quite the same as investing in a fledgling startup. Most startup investments (even outside of crypto), in my opinion, are bold promises or based upon prototypes that are hoped to become widely used. Investing in one of these startups is largely speculative based on the idea that they'll become successful. Sia is a completely usable network today. So while it is still in a fledgling state and has new features being added all the time, it is still a completely usable product. So in that sense there is something that can actually be purchased with Siacoin. As long as there is something that is receivable, I think it is less speculative than a startup that is based on promises. Purchasing and owning the product itself is vastly different than investing in a company that has yet to prove itself. Sia is a usable product today and its usability can be attributed 100% to the breakthrough of the blockchain concept.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 04, 2017, 09:24:14 AM
Interesting example on Sia.  On the surface it looks like a valid concept and real use of digital currency for decentralized cloud storage. 

I did some digging and have some concerns though.  This thing could be just taking off, or it could be failing - I'm not sure.  The coin itself had a spike in July, but now is down about 75% from the peak.  I guess this was due to speculation?  It seems that speculators driving up the price could effectively kill the whole thing before it gets off the ground by driving up the price too high.

I see the top hosts are offering storage for free now as well.  So in effect, the coin is not being used at all for it's intended purpose right now?  There is so much over-capacity in the network and so few early users that hosting storage is not profitable (income=0).

I have no idea whether Sia will succeed or fail. The decentralized storage space is starting to really pickup with many other competitors out there now (Storj, MaidSafe, Filecoin, etc). I do think however that any decentralized storage solution needs to remain cheap to be competitive. The economics of decentralized storage need to remain unprofitable. What I mean by that is that in order to out price its centralized competitors, decentralized cloud storage needs to remain cheap so that it prevents the profitability of large scale storage solutions from taking over the network (thus removing the decentralized nature of it). The point is to make it so hosts simply offer up their unused disk space to the network to utilize.

Also, when you upload your files to the network, it is spread out over many hosts. So even a few hosts offering free storage does not mean that your storage contract on the network is free for the files you upload.

Anyway, the example of Sia isn't whether or not it is a success story, but merely an example of the fact that crypto-currencies will allow for protocol monetization that was previously impossible. In that regard, Sia is a shining success given the fact that there is an abundance of storage offered up on the network even without a large user base to justify it. That effectively shows that the "chicken and the egg" problem didn't come into play which was the main point I was making. We're going to see a lot of innovation because of this; where great ideas no longer die before they were even started.

The possibilities are endless. Another concept that isn't feasible with fiat currencies is the concept of micro-payments. Currently, there isn't a way to pay for something cheaper than a penny and the current financial system that is built upon and supported by fees doesn't support payments that are too low to support those fee structures. With micro-payments, monetized protocols and machine-based currencies, we could very well see a world where sending an email could cost 1/100th of a penny. This would be a negligible cost for the individual who sends a few emails a day or for a business that sends several thousand emails a day. But, for the spammer who sends out millions or even billions of emails out in any given spam campaign, it suddenly makes that spam campaign economically unfeasible. Something like that could make spam email a thing of the past. Obviously nothing like that is in the works, but even the fact that these concepts are now theoretically possible because of crypto-currencies shows the vast potential of them.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Ravenik on October 04, 2017, 10:07:42 AM

I did some digging and have some concerns though.  This thing could be just taking off, or it could be failing - I'm not sure.  The coin itself had a spike in July, but now is down about 75% from the peak.  I guess this was due to speculation?  It seems that speculators driving up the price could effectively kill the whole thing before it gets off the ground by driving up the price too high.


Yes, speculation drives these markets.  There have been a few major events that have impacted the ecosystem since the summer, and they cause bitcoin to plummet.  When bitcoin drops, then most altcoins drop even harder.  Their value in satoshis goes down, and the value of the satoshis themselves go down.  Double whammy.  Then you have market sentiment on the individual altcoins themselves, the actions of "whales", rumors/news, etc.  It's crazy.  Speaking to Siacoin itself, it is an older and more established coin, and lately it feels like most people are investing in the newer coins for a greater chance at big profits.

Just my 2 cents.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mcampbell on October 04, 2017, 02:58:27 PM
Just found a great video on Bloomberg where they interview a hedge fund guy and how he is exploring Bitcoin and Ethereum, he has one of the most positive but most compelling talks on the subject. https://youtu.be/DozrRY2NENU


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on October 04, 2017, 03:53:13 PM
The OP was pretty clear that this was not a thread to debate if crypto currency is legit/real/of value/etc. But to discuss crypto portfolios, unfortunately it has been hijacked pretty hard.
Can you all stop now?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on October 04, 2017, 04:09:45 PM
The OP was pretty clear that this was not a thread to debate if crypto currency is legit/real/of value/etc. But to discuss crypto portfolios, unfortunately it has been hijacked pretty hard.
Can you all stop now?

Exactly.

If you don't agree with investing in this "asset class", then feel free to argue over PM's with eachother.

This thread is for those who invest and/or plan to invest in order to reap the benefits of this volatility.

EXAMPLE:
Today on 10/04/2017, 1 Monero is $91, 1 Ether is $292, 1 Lisk is $5.45, 1 LINK is $.39 and 1 ARDR is $.16.

I will go ahead and bump this in 90 days to show you that there is rewards to be had by investing in this area.

For transparency sake, the market will be facing a decent downturn staring as soon as now (or as late as a few weeks) and will go until mid/late November. This is due to Political and Technological disagreements among the Bitcoin community. If you have been considering joining this market, the time will be then. As always, DCA into positions.

Cheers
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on October 05, 2017, 07:34:57 AM
The OP was pretty clear that this was not a thread to debate if crypto currency is legit/real/of value/etc. But to discuss crypto portfolios, unfortunately it has been hijacked pretty hard.
Can you all stop now?

The name should probably be changed then . . . currently it reads "Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion".  You're suggesting that something like "Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency - Only Promotion And Good Words Allowed" would be more apt.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on October 06, 2017, 02:32:18 AM
- Banker friendly coin: XRP
I personally do not like the thought of centralized coins, but this is a hedge more then anything that banks like control and will start using this platform.

Limiting myself to the terms of the thread: going by the announcement from the six-bank consortium, financial institutions are going to skip the middleman and build their own cryptocurrency rather than use someone else's.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 06, 2017, 05:35:52 AM
- Banker friendly coin: XRP
I personally do not like the thought of centralized coins, but this is a hedge more then anything that banks like control and will start using this platform.

Limiting myself to the terms of the thread: going by the announcement from the six-bank consortium, financial institutions are going to skip the middleman and build their own cryptocurrency rather than use someone else's.

I don't particularly like Ripple/XRP, but I see your six bank consortium that has said they may develop their own blockchain in the future but haven't actually done so yet and raise you 75 banks which are already working with Ripple for settling international and domestic payments.*

Note that this is not an argument for people to buy XRP for appreciation. Ripple could become wildly successful as displacing between-bank international payments by being cheaper and faster than SWIFT and it wouldn't necessarily mean that the price of XRP would appreciate dramatically.

*Source: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/75-banks-now-ripples-blockchain-network-162939601.html
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: hualon on October 06, 2017, 06:41:14 AM
In the spirit of the original post I thought I'd share a bit of my personal experience with crypto for those interested.

I've been doing the Mustachian method of index funds, slow-and-steady, etc. for 20 years. It has served me well. I kept a couple percent of my money reserved in cash for opportunities and then put a small percentage of that money into active investing (we're talking at most $2000 or so) mainly for entertainment. Trading individual stocks got me more active in something I enjoy so I played with it in a low-risk manner for a while. Good, wholesome, nerdy fun.

I learned about Bitcoin back when it was around $200 or so and bought $5 worth on a paper wallet from a friend. I just wanted to know how the technology worked, really. I set it aside and then learned more, bought a little more, etc. I went to a Crypto conference in August, 2014 and listened to a very compelling talk given by Vitalik Buterin about this new thing he was building called Ethereum and I immediately saw potential - if he and the team were able to pull it off, of course.

I put a few hundred dollars worth of my speculative "play" investment money into it and promptly forgot about it for a year and a half or so. I didn't even realize that people were trading it in any serious way until I looked up Ethereum and my $0.30 Ethers were trading at over $1 each. Crazy ROI especially for something so speculative. It went up so fast after that that I didn't know what to do. I sold enough to recoup my investment and to realize a little profit and let the rest ride. It was all safe money now.

Fast forward to a few months ago and what was left had gone up to be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. It went from "price of a new car" to "price of a decent house" so quickly that I was gobsmacked. My wife and I decided to get out while the getting was great and realized enough gains to pay off our house! We're in our late 30s and there's enough left to buy another house with... all from a speculative bet 3 years ago.

I don't want to get anyone's hopes up nor do I want to proclaim that I'm some kind of investing genius. I won the lottery and I know it. This was a once in a lifetime speculation done entirely with money that was outside of our normal investment plan. Had I lost the few hundred dollars, fine - not a huge setback.

As to current holdings, I remain fascinated by the space. I hold Ethereum (inside and outside of an IRA), a little Bitcoin inside an IRA, and a few smaller startups (LINK, QTUM, NEO, MTH, OMG) that I managed to purchase at their ICO or close to it. Some are up, some are down. I doubt that I'll strike oil again like I did with ETH though.

Now I'm trying to reconcile just how far out of whack my overall asset allocation is. I never intended for crypto to be such a large portion of my portfolio and I'm trying to slowly divest. The tax situation is such that I want to do it slowly because of the capital gains. Come January 1st I'll be liquidating some more and moving it into good 'ol VTSAX. :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mustache you a question on October 06, 2017, 06:59:13 AM
A piece of investing advice that I read that made sense to me was to just put 1% of your net worth into bitcoin or etherium.  It's a gamble, but basically a hedge in case bitcoin is the disrupting force some people think it will be.  I just recently did this, if it goes to zero it's ok, I'm not risking a ton.  But if it explodes then it could pay off nicely. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on October 09, 2017, 09:10:00 AM
When I want to sell or buy something, I could care less what I use to make that transaction as long as it's easy, relatively secure, and that the currency is stable in value and accepted pretty much everywhere. I have no interest in whether or not that's dollars, bitcoins, dirty socks, you name it. I'm agnostic on the specific currency as long as it has those basic attributes.

As of right now, none of that applies, and the "success" of crypto looks more to me like failure, since none of them have managed to become commonly used or even stable in value. I have no interest in buying something that has no use and is only transacted with itself (I don't go out and buy a bunch of dollars to stick under my bed either, and those at least are easy to use for buying stuff I actually want).

I live in the US (own ETH and BTC) and agree with you that they are not yet mature currencies. However, I was talking to a friend from Vietnam and he told me that no one in Vietnam trusts the value of their currency (the dong) and that today many transactions are carried out with gold. For a place like that ETH or BTC could be way more convenient and secure than carrying around enough gold to buy a house (literally).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on October 09, 2017, 10:39:18 AM
In the spirit of the original post I thought I'd share a bit of my personal experience with crypto for those interested.

I've been doing the Mustachian method of index funds, slow-and-steady, etc. for 20 years. It has served me well. I kept a couple percent of my money reserved in cash for opportunities and then put a small percentage of that money into active investing (we're talking at most $2000 or so) mainly for entertainment. Trading individual stocks got me more active in something I enjoy so I played with it in a low-risk manner for a while. Good, wholesome, nerdy fun.

I learned about Bitcoin back when it was around $200 or so and bought $5 worth on a paper wallet from a friend. I just wanted to know how the technology worked, really. I set it aside and then learned more, bought a little more, etc. I went to a Crypto conference in August, 2014 and listened to a very compelling talk given by Vitalik Buterin about this new thing he was building called Ethereum and I immediately saw potential - if he and the team were able to pull it off, of course.

I put a few hundred dollars worth of my speculative "play" investment money into it and promptly forgot about it for a year and a half or so. I didn't even realize that people were trading it in any serious way until I looked up Ethereum and my $0.30 Ethers were trading at over $1 each. Crazy ROI especially for something so speculative. It went up so fast after that that I didn't know what to do. I sold enough to recoup my investment and to realize a little profit and let the rest ride. It was all safe money now.

Fast forward to a few months ago and what was left had gone up to be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. It went from "price of a new car" to "price of a decent house" so quickly that I was gobsmacked. My wife and I decided to get out while the getting was great and realized enough gains to pay off our house! We're in our late 30s and there's enough left to buy another house with... all from a speculative bet 3 years ago.

I don't want to get anyone's hopes up nor do I want to proclaim that I'm some kind of investing genius. I won the lottery and I know it. This was a once in a lifetime speculation done entirely with money that was outside of our normal investment plan. Had I lost the few hundred dollars, fine - not a huge setback.

As to current holdings, I remain fascinated by the space. I hold Ethereum (inside and outside of an IRA), a little Bitcoin inside an IRA, and a few smaller startups (LINK, QTUM, NEO, MTH, OMG) that I managed to purchase at their ICO or close to it. Some are up, some are down. I doubt that I'll strike oil again like I did with ETH though.

Now I'm trying to reconcile just how far out of whack my overall asset allocation is. I never intended for crypto to be such a large portion of my portfolio and I'm trying to slowly divest. The tax situation is such that I want to do it slowly because of the capital gains. Come January 1st I'll be liquidating some more and moving it into good 'ol VTSAX. :)


Beautiful, what a great story!!!

I believe there will still be more stories like these to come. The institutional money is just starting to trickle in, I fully expect this sphere to get to at least 1T market cap in the near/mid term.

Best of luck to everyone, take as much risk as you feel necessary.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on October 09, 2017, 12:05:48 PM
So if I want to short crypto currency, should I be long in bank stocks? Credit Stocks? Paypal?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 09, 2017, 02:12:38 PM
You can short crypto directly, a number of the exchanges, such as Bitfinix and Kraken allow short selling.

Although there are obvious concerns about counterparty risk since the people you'd be dealing with would be heavily invested in crypto. ;-)

Right now bitcoin cryptocurrency in general is interesting because it might disrupt the business models of companies like Western Union or the major credit card companies. But if that disruption fails to materialize it won't cause a big rebound in the share prices of those companies because right now the potential disruption isn't "real" enough yet to cause any downward pressure on their share prices.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on October 09, 2017, 02:32:50 PM
Hualon, thanks for sharing your story so straightforwardly.  Glad your experiments paid off!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on October 09, 2017, 05:33:54 PM
Here are some prime examples of why you don't short the greatest bull market the world has ever seen.

https://twitter.com/bitmexrekt?lang=en

Yes, those are actual shorts / longs...yes, I know it hurts your heart.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on October 10, 2017, 12:47:16 AM
I only have a small amount of play money invested. Invested in Ripple partly as a hedge against the other cryptos. Many crypto gurus dismiss it because of it's centralized nature. Purchased at 0.17 was at 0.29 yesterday. the potential to replace SWIFT is also there.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on October 10, 2017, 12:52:59 AM
The OP was pretty clear that this was not a thread to debate if crypto currency is legit/real/of value/etc. But to discuss crypto portfolios, unfortunately it has been hijacked pretty hard.
Can you all stop now?

The name should probably be changed then . . . currently it reads "Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion".  You're suggesting that something like "Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency - Only Promotion And Good Words Allowed" would be more apt.
I am not suggesting anything other than the OP's initial post. Personally I love debating the pros/cons/hype/potentials/scams/ etc just not here on this thread.
From the very first sentence in the first post: "This thread is not to discuss if crypto-currencies are good, bad, high risk, low risk...etc but simply to post your current/future holdings. This should start a positive discussion that will leave us all smarter and more wealthy. Please do not post here with negative generalized and non-factual based statements or opinions."
Someone starts a thread with a specific request, it seems pretty straightforward to honor it, no?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on October 12, 2017, 01:00:15 PM
New day, new all-time high.

Scared money don't make money!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 12, 2017, 01:13:17 PM
New day, new all-time high.

Scared money don't make money!

Yup, it's been a good week for bitcoin! The last day or so just shows how much dominance bitcoin has over the rest of the market. It now has a market cap of over $88 billion which is over 50% of the total crypto market. Much of the rest of the crypto market is down while bitcoin is way up. Bitcoin is here to stay.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on October 12, 2017, 04:30:22 PM
BTC over $5200! This little crytpo thing is 3% of my total portfolio but 90% of the gains. Pretty insane. Triggered another rebalance.

Man, if you could just chill and re-balance in a year you'd be able to retire a few years early :}
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 12, 2017, 11:37:08 PM
I believe omg to be the strongest contender despite the omg blockchain not yet existing, as compared to the current top 12 in coinmarketcap.com.

....

If anyone has questions, I'll share what I know.

I guess my question would be: why do you think that? What's the elevator pitch for why you think people are likely to adopt omg?

(The equivalents for other coins: IOTA -- potential for lots and lots of micropayments, ZEC -- best for anonymity instead of pseudonymity, DASH -- much faster transactions*, ETH -- more complicated transactions through smart contracts.)

*Although this comparative advantage is going away with the lightening networks on BTC and LTC.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: kivex on October 13, 2017, 12:30:38 AM
Being MMM, low cost passive index funds are well proven. Applying the same to crypto currencies is what the Crypto 20 (C20) token provides. The fund contains the top 20 coins, is autonomous, and rebalanced weekly.

https://crypto20.com

If you feel that crypto will grow over time then this is a great way to have exposure to the top 20 coins in the market.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 13, 2017, 06:06:25 AM
Being MMM, low cost passive index funds are well proven. Applying the same to crypto currencies is what the Crypto 20 (C20) token provides. The fund contains the top 20 coins, is autonomous, and rebalanced weekly.

https://crypto20.com

If you feel that crypto will grow over time then this is a great way to have exposure to the top 20 coins in the market.

I tried getting into Crypto20 last weekend when it first opened the ICO, but it looks like they aren't opening the ICO to US residents/citizens. Likely because of the regulations with how the SEC plans to treat ICOs as securities. So if you're in the US, you're out of luck. I'm hoping that once the ICO goes live that the token start being traded on some other exchanges that aren't as stringent with the KYC laws. In the meantime, you can trade the BTWTY crypto index on the OpenLedger DEX.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on October 13, 2017, 11:36:46 AM
Just to be clear, I'm a longterm holder of eth as well.

I think that much of the value for those crypto comes from the fact that they are existing and functioning blockchains.

Iota is currently centralized and using a coordinator to springboard the network until it achieves enough network effect where it no longer needs to rely on the coordinator. I'm not convinced that it will be able to effectively remove the coordinator. In addition, there is the controversy surrounding it regarding cryptographic vulnerabilities.

The zksnark zero-proof in zec is planned for use in eth, and I don't see why it won't be adapted into omg.

From an empirical perspective, eth has a more foundational infrastructure, greater developer mindshare, and superior ecosystem over dash.

As for omg, once it goes live, it can integrate into an existing payment network infrastucture and allow various payment networks to transact with each other. Exclusive loyalty or reward programs, in-game currencies, etc, have the potential to be unlocked and transacted as value into a greater network. Also, an advantage omg will have over many of the existing blockchains is that a standardized onboarding cash in/out process is expected to be unveiled before year end; instead of relying on other crypto to get it, people will directly be able to trade for it with cash at supporting establishments (possibly convenience stores). Merchants and consumers will have a reason to use omg (reduced transactional barriers, lower overhead costs, trustless trust standard, etc).

Furthermore, Omise is already a well established company who is growing rapidly. They even won a large "startup company of the year award" recently. In addition, they just landed a deal with Mc. Donalds and are in talks with collaborating with Google for something.

OMG will be huge, I have about 2% of my total crypto portfolio in it and expect great returns over the next few years.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 13, 2017, 11:48:44 AM
So if I'm reading correctly the elevator pitch is that omg (once it is up and running) should be much easier to transfer into and out of (either from normal currencies, other cryptocurrencies, or game/reward program points) without requiring the use of 3rd party exchanges?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on October 13, 2017, 11:53:57 AM
So if I'm reading correctly the elevator pitch is that omg (once it is up and running) should be much easier to transfer into and out of (either from normal currencies, other cryptocurrencies, or game/reward program points) without requiring the use of 3rd party exchanges?

That's part of it, they want to create a decentralized exchange for fiat, more information still needs to be released on how they will do this.

A big part to mention is that this will be the first project built on PLASMA: A love child between Poon (lightning network creator) and Vitalik (Ethereum creator).

YUGE
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 13, 2017, 12:35:04 PM
OMG will be huge, I have about 2% of my total crypto portfolio in it and expect great returns over the next few years.

What ethereum wallet are you using to store your OMG tokens?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: advanced on October 18, 2017, 11:19:46 AM
my current portfolio

AEternity
IOTA
ART
SNGLS
GNT
BNT
ANT

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on October 19, 2017, 01:55:19 PM
my current portfolio

AEternity
IOTA
ART
SNGLS
GNT
BNT
ANT

Interesting, most of your choices are platforms built on Ethereum.

What makes you feel that you can pick the winners (essentially stock picking) out of a blooming new field with thousands of new developments as opposed to just picking Ethereum (essentially holding the index)?
Title: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: kivex on October 19, 2017, 06:29:23 PM
my current portfolio

AEternity
IOTA
ART
SNGLS
GNT
BNT
ANT

Interesting, most of your choices are platforms built on Ethereum.

What makes you feel that you can pick the winners (essentially stock picking) out of a blooming new field with thousands of new developments as opposed to just picking Ethereum (essentially holding the index)?

Or literally holding an index of the top 20 crypto currencies using C20 - https://crypto20.com

A good overview of C20 with links to YouTube interviews -
https://cryptocurrencyinvesting.news/crypto20-offers-peace-of-mind-with-the-first-crypto-index-fund/
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on October 20, 2017, 01:42:40 PM
my current portfolio

AEternity
IOTA
ART
SNGLS
GNT
BNT
ANT

Interesting, most of your choices are platforms built on Ethereum.

What makes you feel that you can pick the winners (essentially stock picking) out of a blooming new field with thousands of new developments as opposed to just picking Ethereum (essentially holding the index)?

Touching on this, there are alot of shilling, misinformation, and pump-and-dumps in crypto. Projects get intensely hyped and made out to be extremely promising.

Most of these projects are purely whitepaper! They have no product. The idea-makers have no inkling of the pitfalls and challenges of the business world or getting a product to market and adoption. Even if they have code to show for a product, or actually launch a product, it's not a guarantee of success. There is also a very subtle form of scamming, where the ico projects put on the front of actively working on a product and releasing continuous updates, knowing the product will never pick up momentum.

If you are in the cryptoworld, be very conservative where you put your money.

This is why I am a firm believer in Ethereum. It's literally the back-bone of the future landscape of public Blockchain development.

my current portfolio

AEternity
IOTA
ART
SNGLS
GNT
BNT
ANT

Interesting, most of your choices are platforms built on Ethereum.

What makes you feel that you can pick the winners (essentially stock picking) out of a blooming new field with thousands of new developments as opposed to just picking Ethereum (essentially holding the index)?

Or literally holding an index of the top 20 crypto currencies using C20 - https://crypto20.com

A good overview of C20 with links to YouTube interviews -
https://cryptocurrencyinvesting.news/crypto20-offers-peace-of-mind-with-the-first-crypto-index-fund/

Thanks for the input man. Can you please avoid posting that anymore? I don't know your affiliation but mentioning it twice in such a short amount of time is coming off as self seeking. If not, I apologize but I just wanted to get this out in the clear.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: kivex on October 20, 2017, 02:41:15 PM
Thanks for the input man. Can you please avoid posting that anymore? I don't know your affiliation but mentioning it twice in such a short amount of time is coming off as self seeking. If not, I apologize but I just wanted to get this out in the clear.

My apologies. Rereading this thread, my posts do come off as promotion - wasn't my intention. I have no affiliation other than having participated in their ICO. Being MMM, the discussion of which individual crypto currencies will perform well is akin to stock picking, and runs against the norm on this forum which favours index investing. I wanted to let others know that the ability to invest in a crypto index is available.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: surfhb on October 20, 2017, 08:14:10 PM
Oh man.    This is a millennial train wreck.   

You guys are going to lose your asses.   
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on October 20, 2017, 10:40:00 PM
The peeps selling the "index of crypto" stuff (and the ones selling mining rigs) will do fine. Levi Strauss, baby...

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on October 21, 2017, 12:57:19 AM
Oh man.    This is a millennial train wreck.   

You guys are going to lose your asses.   

Many of them have already made more money than all of us Gen Xers combined. Just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean it's necessarily a train wreck.

$100 of BTC 7 years ago is $140 million and then some today.

I'm up about 75% this year with some play money.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Jeferson on October 22, 2017, 11:47:35 AM
Bitcoin really hitting new highs, currently at 5963.01 dollars per unit, looking for a spot to buy few coins, but the price is too high right now.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on October 22, 2017, 06:25:16 PM
Bitcoin really hitting new highs, currently at 5963.01 dollars per unit, looking for a spot to buy few coins, but the price is too high right now.

Same, I sold a week ago when it hit $7300 CDN, i'll start getting back in when values come back down a little
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: surfhb on October 22, 2017, 07:27:17 PM
Crypto currencies are to investing what a brand new GM truck is to Mustachians.   

Isn't this the opposite of what this blog preaches ?     Do any of you ever experienced an extended bear market?   Where you lost hundreds of thousands in equity value in a matter of months? 

 If so, do you feel comfortable with things like bitcoin?     Yes?  How?

I want to hear from the 40+ crowd who have experienced these kinds of events.   

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on October 22, 2017, 09:37:12 PM
Crypto currencies are to investing what a brand new GM truck is to Mustachians.   

Isn't this the opposite of what this blog preaches ?     Do any of you ever experienced an extended bear market?   Where you lost hundreds of thousands in equity value in a matter of months? 

 If so, do you feel comfortable with things like bitcoin?     Yes?  How?

I want to hear from the 40+ crowd who have experienced these kinds of events.   

A better analogy might be buying a lotto ticket.  I don't know how anyone can bet large amounts on bitcoin, for me its 1% of my investments
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 23, 2017, 07:30:08 AM
Crypto currencies are to investing what a brand new GM truck is to Mustachians.   

Isn't this the opposite of what this blog preaches ?     Do any of you ever experienced an extended bear market?   Where you lost hundreds of thousands in equity value in a matter of months? 

 If so, do you feel comfortable with things like bitcoin?     Yes?  How?

I want to hear from the 40+ crowd who have experienced these kinds of events.   

Can you further explain your analogy? The comparison you make to a GM truck doesn't really make sense at all.

Being "mustachian" is more about living a simple frugal life to achieve a high savings rate and become financially independent than it is about any one particular investment strategy. Even Mr. Money Mustache has invested in high risk/high reward investments.

So I don't think being "mustachian" excludes one from investing in crypto-currencies.

I feel very comfortable investing in bitcoin for numerous reasons.

1) It isn't correlated with any other investment class and it has so far shown itself to be disassociated with most other markets. Therefore it is a good investment option for diversifying against my other index funds.

2) I work in the technology field (Information Security) and I understand the technology of bitcoin deeply. Therefore, investing in a technology that I firmly believe has a bright future makes sense to me. I think it is one of the greatest technological achievements since the Internet. For the first time, we can now create something that is both digital and scarce and can't be copied.

3) I invested in bitcoin early on and therefore my investment has seen tremendous growth over the last several years. Even if bitcoin experiences an extreme drop from today's value or an extensive bear market for the foreseeable future, I will has still made more money had I just invested my money in any other traditional investment option.

4) I am extremely bearish on current traditional financial systems and think that we're in one of the largest debt bubbles ever. Until Bitcoin came along, there was really no way to hedge against something like this as just about ever other asset class is either manipulated and/or intertwined with everything else that makes up our economy. Bitcoin's true value won't be understood until we experience another financial crisis. While I continue to invest in my traditional index funds and max out all my pre-tax investment options, Bitcoin provides me a hedge against those in the event something horrible happens.

5) Bitcoin is extremely liquid and fungible, unlike many retirement investment accounts. This is a great benefit to someone who is planning to retire early, which is something that goes against society's norms. While I plan on retiring in my early 40's, sometimes life can throw a curve ball, so it is nice to have a decent chunk of money that is for retirement, but is available any time of day that can be accessed and used in any way I see fit. There aren't many good investments that I can be long on, while still having the ability to access it at any time without restrictions or penalties.

6) If crypto-currencies are seen as a "millennial" investment, wouldn't it make sense that I invest in something that has a growing number of young investors in the future investing in something that has a positive feedback loop relative to its adoption? If most millennials don't understand why gold is a store of value and yet are fully willing to adopt Bitcoin as such, then it makes sense that Bitcoin would have a stronger future market as those millennials begin choosing where to put their money.

I can go on digging further into why I think Bitcoin is a good investment option, but there are just some of the reasons why I choose to put some of my money in it and why it shouldn't just be seen as some obscure fad.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on October 23, 2017, 09:04:00 AM
Lifeanon269-

Have you purchased a tangible good or service with your bitcoin?

I'd like to know if you've used it for its intended purpose, or if it's only an investment vehicle for you.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 23, 2017, 10:15:25 AM
Lifeanon269-

Have you purchased a tangible good or service with your bitcoin?

I'd like to know if you've used it for its intended purpose, or if it's only an investment vehicle for you.

All my spending money is in Bitcoin (I've stated this in past posts here as well, so I'm not just saying this in response to you). I'd rather have my spending money in Bitcoin as opposed to USD as this allows me to further increase my savings. If my spending money goes up 10% one month, then that allows me to put more into savings than I otherwise would have. Its volatility isn't as painful when it comes to my spending money since 1) I don't spend much each month and 2) my monthly spending is spread out over the course of the month, therefore Bitcoin's price volatility evens out for all my expenditures.

In case you're wondering, I have a Bitcoin debit card that allows me to make purchases using Bitcoin. My money is stored in Bitcoin until the time of the transaction where it is converted to USD without any transaction fee. This is what I referred to above where I said that Bitcoin is extremely liquid. I can have my money in Bitcoin and at any moment, I can spend it. I also do make purchases directly with Bitcoin on a few websites that support it (Amazon purchases through Purse, Overstock, NewEgg, etc).

With that said, I would like to question why the question was posed in the first place. Were you questioning its use as a currency? Its current adoption level matches its current merchant acceptance. That is to say it is very low. The reason why it has been such a good investment hinges solely on the fact that it is such a young market. At the point at which we see its value as currency being realized (ie, merchant acceptance and widespread use), its value as an investment will have diminished. Irregardless of any of this, however, its value as a store of value will always remain since that is mostly dependent upon the soundness and stability of the technology itself.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on October 23, 2017, 11:09:19 AM
All my spending money is in Bitcoin (I've stated this in past posts here as well, so I'm not just saying this in response to you). I'd rather have my spending money in Bitcoin as opposed to USD as this allows me to further increase my savings.

It certainly provides some protection from making mindless purchases.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on October 23, 2017, 12:04:42 PM
Lifeanon269-

Have you purchased a tangible good or service with your bitcoin?

I'd like to know if you've used it for its intended purpose, or if it's only an investment vehicle for you.

All my spending money is in Bitcoin (I've stated this in past posts here as well, so I'm not just saying this in response to you). I'd rather have my spending money in Bitcoin as opposed to USD as this allows me to further increase my savings. If my spending money goes up 10% one month, then that allows me to put more into savings than I otherwise would have. Its volatility isn't as painful when it comes to my spending money since 1) I don't spend much each month and 2) my monthly spending is spread out over the course of the month, therefore Bitcoin's price volatility evens out for all my expenditures.

In case you're wondering, I have a Bitcoin debit card that allows me to make purchases using Bitcoin. My money is stored in Bitcoin until the time of the transaction where it is converted to USD without any transaction fee. This is what I referred to above where I said that Bitcoin is extremely liquid. I can have my money in Bitcoin and at any moment, I can spend it. I also do make purchases directly with Bitcoin on a few websites that support it (Amazon purchases through Purse, Overstock, NewEgg, etc).

With that said, I would like to question why the question was posed in the first place. Were you questioning its use as a currency? Its current adoption level matches its current merchant acceptance. That is to say it is very low. The reason why it has been such a good investment hinges solely on the fact that it is such a young market. At the point at which we see its value as currency being realized (ie, merchant acceptance and widespread use), its value as an investment will have diminished. Irregardless of any of this, however, its value as a store of value will always remain since that is mostly dependent upon the soundness and stability of the technology itself.

Your debit card sounds absolutely amazing! I apologize for being so late to the discussion that I hadn't properly read other posts of yours.

Indeed I am trying to figure out whether Bitcoin is a currency, or if the emphasis on investing through it has transformed it more into a commodity a la gold.

My big concern about websites like overstock is that they still quote the prices in $$ until the very end, then they give you the option to pay via Bitcoin. I'm worried that until we start thinking about prices totally within Bitcoin (and you sound like you've built the infrastructure--personally--to do this), it won't be a currency, but more a medium of exchange will be something more akin to payment processing that credit cards are currently providing, rather than being something like the Euro.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on October 23, 2017, 12:21:26 PM
Irregardless of any of this, however, its value as a store of value will always remain since that is mostly dependent upon the soundness and stability of the technology itself.

It's quotes like this that make me extremely wary of cryptocurrencies. That's simply untrue. The only "value" that cryptocurrencies have as a store of value is completely and totally dependent on other people being willing to trade goods / services / other currencies for them. Same as anything else. The technology can be completely sound and stable, but if no one wants to buy your bitcoin then it has lost every bit of its value. Will that happen any time soon? I don't know, but "bitcoin has no real value so it's real value is potentially INFINITE" type quotes certainly don't make me want to trade my USD for your bitcoin.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on October 23, 2017, 12:45:30 PM
Crypto currencies are to investing what a brand new GM truck is to Mustachians.   

Isn't this the opposite of what this blog preaches ?     Do any of you ever experienced an extended bear market?   Where you lost hundreds of thousands in equity value in a matter of months? 

 If so, do you feel comfortable with things like bitcoin?     Yes?  How?

I want to hear from the 40+ crowd who have experienced these kinds of events.   

Can you further explain your analogy? The comparison you make to a GM truck doesn't really make sense at all.

Being "mustachian" is more about living a simple frugal life to achieve a high savings rate and become financially independent than it is about any one particular investment strategy. Even Mr. Money Mustache has invested in high risk/high reward investments.

So I don't think being "mustachian" excludes one from investing in crypto-currencies.

I feel very comfortable investing in bitcoin for numerous reasons.

1) It isn't correlated with any other investment class and it has so far shown itself to be disassociated with most other markets. Therefore it is a good investment option for diversifying against my other index funds.

2) I work in the technology field (Information Security) and I understand the technology of bitcoin deeply. Therefore, investing in a technology that I firmly believe has a bright future makes sense to me. I think it is one of the greatest technological achievements since the Internet. For the first time, we can now create something that is both digital and scarce and can't be copied.

3) I invested in bitcoin early on and therefore my investment has seen tremendous growth over the last several years. Even if bitcoin experiences an extreme drop from today's value or an extensive bear market for the foreseeable future, I will has still made more money had I just invested my money in any other traditional investment option.

4) I am extremely bearish on current traditional financial systems and think that we're in one of the largest debt bubbles ever. Until Bitcoin came along, there was really no way to hedge against something like this as just about ever other asset class is either manipulated and/or intertwined with everything else that makes up our economy. Bitcoin's true value won't be understood until we experience another financial crisis. While I continue to invest in my traditional index funds and max out all my pre-tax investment options, Bitcoin provides me a hedge against those in the event something horrible happens.

5) Bitcoin is extremely liquid and fungible, unlike many retirement investment accounts. This is a great benefit to someone who is planning to retire early, which is something that goes against society's norms. While I plan on retiring in my early 40's, sometimes life can throw a curve ball, so it is nice to have a decent chunk of money that is for retirement, but is available any time of day that can be accessed and used in any way I see fit. There aren't many good investments that I can be long on, while still having the ability to access it at any time without restrictions or penalties.

6) If crypto-currencies are seen as a "millennial" investment, wouldn't it make sense that I invest in something that has a growing number of young investors in the future investing in something that has a positive feedback loop relative to its adoption? If most millennials don't understand why gold is a store of value and yet are fully willing to adopt Bitcoin as such, then it makes sense that Bitcoin would have a stronger future market as those millennials begin choosing where to put their money.

I can go on digging further into why I think Bitcoin is a good investment option, but there are just some of the reasons why I choose to put some of my money in it and why it shouldn't just be seen as some obscure fad.

Very well said, my friend! I am excited to hear a reply from SurfHB.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on October 23, 2017, 12:59:04 PM
I disagree that point 3 is of any advantage, and it is more likely a disadvantage.  Buying bitcoin is not an investment in "blockchain", it is rolling the dice with this nebulous thing with minimal practical use called bitcoin.  As I have stated previously, blockchain might prove very useful to traditional banks so far as improving security and reducing the need for expensive IT security staff.  One of my friends from high school is head of security for a company everyone here has heard of.  He's a nutty dude.  Executives don't like those kinds of guys but they are a necessary evil, from their perspective. 

I remember when my dad was put in charge of his company's Y2K effort.  He has no background in computers but was stuck managing a small gang of dungeons & dragons dudes who milked the clock for two years leading up to the anticlimactic event.  He couldn't wait to lay their goofy asses off.  I'd have to ask him but I don't doubt that he had them escorted out of the building before MLK Day, 2000.   

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 23, 2017, 01:04:10 PM
Irregardless of any of this, however, its value as a store of value will always remain since that is mostly dependent upon the soundness and stability of the technology itself.

It's quotes like this that make me extremely wary of cryptocurrencies. That's simply untrue. The only "value" that cryptocurrencies have as a store of value is completely and totally dependent on other people being willing to trade goods / services / other currencies for them. Same as anything else. The technology can be completely sound and stable, but if no one wants to buy your bitcoin then it has lost every bit of its value. Will that happen any time soon? I don't know, but "bitcoin has no real value so it's real value is potentially INFINITE" type quotes certainly don't make me want to trade my USD for your bitcoin.

I knew someone was going to respond with a post like this quoting that exact sentence. Allow me to explain further.

I wasn't suggesting that Bitcoin's value is "infinite". The reason why I say its store of value is tied to how sound the technology is because of the fact that those putting their money in it looking for their money to hold value are doing so on the premise that the network will continue to operate as it does today without any problems or downtime.

If the Bitcoin network experiences downtime or failures or was found not to be as secure as it is against any form of attack, then people would not be willing to store their money in it. First and foremost, it is because Bitcoin is such a sturdy protocol that people feel safe storing their money in it. So long as there are people who continue to feel that Bitcoin is safe from a technological perspective, then there will be people who are looking to buy it. Like you said, any asset's value comes from those who are willing to trade it. The longer the Bitcoin network is online and secure, the harder it will be for people to ignore its value as a secure asset.

The argument you make against Bitcoin above is the same "inherent value" argument against bitcoin that is erroneously often made, you just worded it differently. You can claim that Bitcoin has no inherent value, but I beg to differ. Bitcoin's inherent value comes from the fact that it is an extremely secure and un-manipulated currency who's technology is based on sound mathematical cryptography that has been developed over the course of 40 years. The longer the network remains online, the more and more this holds true.

Essentially what you're suggesting is that all the people who today feel that bitcoin is a safe and secure protocol and are willing to put their hard earned cash in it will someday cease to feel it is a safe and secure protocol...and thus its value would plummet. In order for that to happen, then the network would need to experience some type of hiccup or compromise. In that case, the network would've failed and I'd fully expect its value to drop accordingly (because the technology failed). However, should Bitcoin continue to operate soundly as it does today, then I'd expect that more and more people will continue to see that Bitcoin as a protocol does have value. Outside a worldwide clamp down by governments (even then I do expect Bitcoin to resist such a scenario), then I firmly believe Bitcoin's value is directly correlative to the soundness of the technology itself.

For perspective, even if Bitcoin's market capitalization remained constant from here on out (about $100 billion), then its future value in the year ~2140 when all 21 million Bitcoins are mined would still be about $4760. That's a decline of about 18% over the course of about 123 years or about .146% decline annually. Compared to the USD which declines over 3% annually (more so recently), that's a tremendous store of value comparatively for a currency. That means that even just modest growths in the Bitcoin market over the next several decades will continue to yield Bitcoin being a good store of value for one's money.

Also, my above statement was in regards to the fact that this is all true whether or not Bitcoin is ever used as an everyday currency or not. Bitcoin does not need to be used as an everyday currency for people to realize that it still has value because of the security it provides as a store of value.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 23, 2017, 01:16:47 PM
Your debit card sounds absolutely amazing! I apologize for being so late to the discussion that I hadn't properly read other posts of yours.

Indeed I am trying to figure out whether Bitcoin is a currency, or if the emphasis on investing through it has transformed it more into a commodity a la gold.

My big concern about websites like overstock is that they still quote the prices in $$ until the very end, then they give you the option to pay via Bitcoin. I'm worried that until we start thinking about prices totally within Bitcoin (and you sound like you've built the infrastructure--personally--to do this), it won't be a currency, but more a medium of exchange will be something more akin to payment processing that credit cards are currently providing, rather than being something like the Euro.

Until Bitcoin's volatility declines, then I fully expect businesses who transact directly in bitcoin to utilize a more stable asset (USD) for pricing their goods. I don't see this as a good or bad thing, just as something that is to be expected. There are even crypto-currencies that are developed with price-stability in mind to allow for exchanges between currencies to occur based on a pegged value. Until the market grows big enough where the volatility decreases substantially (complete adoption), then I fully expect good prices to be pegged to a more stable currency such as the USD. That wouldn't stop Bitcoin from being used as a currency however, so I don't really see it as a concern.

EDIT: To further clarify, to address the "mental" perspective you mentioned of one's ability to determine the value of Bitcoin relative to the value of any specific good or service, I don't think there needs to be a complete critical mass understanding of it. Even with USD, many people still have a hard time understanding the value of a good or service as valued in USD. That's why we had a TV show called "The Price is Right" that had participants show how accurately they could determine a good's price in USD. Most people have a rough estimate as to the cost of a good in USD and that is good enough to allow it to act as a universal medium of exchange. Other than that rough understanding, we simply pay what the merchant tells us to pay. Sometimes there is even shock that something cost as much as it did (like when we get a check at a restaurant). Once volatility in Bitcoin diminishes to the point where over the course of a year we can maintain a rough sense of how much something costs in Bitcoin, then the personal mental hurdles of using Bitcoin for purchases will be overcome if merchants ever decide to price their goods solely in Bitcoin without an underlying value in USD.

We're a long way of from having to worry about that though.   :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on October 23, 2017, 03:18:47 PM
Essentially what you're suggesting is that all the people who today feel that bitcoin is a safe and secure protocol and are willing to put their hard earned cash in it will someday cease to feel it is a safe and secure protocol...and thus its value would plummet. In order for that to happen, then the network would need to experience some type of hiccup or compromise [paraphrasing] or there would have to be a worldwide governmental clamp down.

But you're doing it again. Neither of those things are required. All that's required for people to stop feeling safe and secure is for them to stop feeling safe and secure. Again, I don't know that this is the case, but I'm 50-50 on whether the next widespread economic downturn completely crashes bitcoin. If all the speculators "wake up" and realize they need "real money" to buy groceries / pay rent / pay taxes and start trying to sell, then the value of bitcoin will crash to near-nothing. Will there be a sizeable number of people who are willing to keep pouring money into bitcoin in the midst of the next stock market crash and keep the value afloat? Maybe. Will there be a bunch of people who start pouring money into it again afterwards? Maybe. But I don't know that, nor really see a reason they would.

For perspective, even if Bitcoin's market capitalization remained constant from here on out (about $100 billion), then its future value in the year ~2140 when all 21 million Bitcoins are mined would still be about $4760...

Also, my above statement was in regards to the fact that this is all true whether or not Bitcoin is ever used as an everyday currency or not. Bitcoin does not need to be used as an everyday currency for people to realize that it still has value because of the security it provides as a store of value.

But there's no reason whatsoever to assume that the market cap will remain constant or close to constant. It could skyrocket, it could crash to zero. The one and only factor that differentiates these scenarios is people's willingness to continue pouring money into the bitcoin marketplace. It's all pure speculation on future behavior.

I mean, I know I'm being a downer on cryptocurrencies in a crytpcurrency thread. So by all means you do your thing. I will stick to government-backed currencies and investments backed by real appreciating assets.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 23, 2017, 05:56:38 PM
All that's required for people to stop feeling safe and secure is for them to stop feeling safe and secure.

I agree, but people don't just change attitudes about things without some type of forcing. You do realize your statement sounds a little ridiculous, right? Why would someone change their opinion about something unless there was something that caused them to have a change of attitude toward it? In the same way that people's opinions of Bitcoin will favorably change over time given Bitcoin's continued stability, the opposite would also be true. If you agree that people would need to no longer feel that Bitcoin is a safe a secure asset, under what condition would they likely suddenly feel that? I think if you put aside your biases against Bitcoin (you have clear biases when you put "wake up" and "real money" in quotes) and truly answer that question, you'll begin to see how Bitcoin will continue to have a future so long as the technology behind it continues to remain safe and secure.

What makes you feel that the next economic downturn would crash bitcoin? You do realize that the technology came before the speculation correct? The speculation would not have occured had Bitcoin, as a protocol, not shown itself to be a stable and secure network. In fact, the earliest of users of the network weren't speculators, they were visionaries and technologists looking to test the system and get the network up and running and put it through its paces. As the network continued to operate, more and more people saw that it was turning away from being merely an experiment and into something that was truly sound and operational. Therefore, when you make the claim that "Bitcoin will crash to near-nothing", you're suggesting that something would happen to the Bitcoin network that would take it from away from "sound and operational" as it was in its earliest of days when it was indeed worth next to nothing. That means the technology itself would need to fail, which brings me back to my original statement. That's why I ultimately feel that unless there is a true compromise of the network and its secure and sound operation (or something better comes along which is another subject altogether), then Bitcoin will never go to zero in the way that you suggest.

Take gold for example. People always argue how gold has "inherent value" given its uses in industry, electronics, medicine, etc. However, has the market cap for gold ever dropped all the way down to its base market value that only covered its uses for industry, electronics, medicine, etc? If the answer to that is no (which it is), then even during all the economic calamities that gold has withstood as a store of value, it still held value simply because people felt it did, not because of its uses or "inherent value". That means that even during some of the most troubling of economic times, there was still money in gold simply because humans deemed it had some value "just because". The more Bitcoin holds value simply because people feel it does, then it will continue to hold value so long as its technology remains stable enough to justify it.

In other words:

Its the technology that drives its value, not the speculation.

But there's no reason whatsoever to assume that the market cap will remain constant or close to constant. It could skyrocket, it could crash to zero. The one and only factor that differentiates these scenarios is people's willingness to continue pouring money into the bitcoin marketplace. It's all pure speculation on future behavior.

I mean, I know I'm being a downer on cryptocurrencies in a crytpcurrency thread. So by all means you do your thing. I will stick to government-backed currencies and investments backed by real appreciating assets.

I agree, the market cap will likely not remain constant. The point I was making wasn't whether or not the market cap will remain constant. It almost certainly will not. The point I was making was that for Bitcoin to remain a decent store of value long term, very little additional money into the market is required for it to remain a decent store of value. I already addressed above how unlikely it is that Bitcoin will go to zero unless there is a technological mishap. So barring a technical catastrophe, it is more than likely that Bitcoin instead will continue to be a stable store of value given the fact that very little money needs to be infused into the market for it to remain so over the long term. It isn't pure speculation on future market behavior, if anything it is speculation on whether or not the Bitcoin network will remain safe and secure given that fact that its security is what will ultimately drive its adoption rate as has already historically been shown to be true. Given that fact, as someone who has a firm grasp on the technology itself, it will continue to remain a safer investment for me over many of the other options available to me at the moment.

You say that you'll stick with government backed currencies, but all the same critiques you've leveled against Bitcoin can be said of government backed currencies. Fiat currencies are backed by the government, but all that means is that they back them as legal tender under national borders. That doesn't mean that they guarantee their value. That is unless you feel that guaranteeing that they'll be worth less in the future is a valid guarantee. History has shown that citizen faith in any given fiat currency can plummet regardless of whether the government backs its currency.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: jeromedawg on October 23, 2017, 06:53:51 PM
FWIW just came across this article... sorry if this is a repost, nothing that hasn't already been stated, or adding fuel to the fire... I haven't read through the thread much as I haven't garnered much interest in blockchain/crypto (though I probably should just for educational purposes at the very least):
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/23/wolf-of-wall-street-warns-raising-money-through-icos-is-the-biggest-scam-ever.html
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on October 24, 2017, 07:39:23 AM
All right, since you're asking I'll answer one more time.

All that's required for people to stop feeling safe and secure is for them to stop feeling safe and secure.

I agree, but people don't just change attitudes about things without some type of forcing. You do realize your statement sounds a little ridiculous, right? Why would someone change their opinion about something unless there was something that caused them to have a change of attitude toward it?

I told you why in the part you snipped out. If people realize they need to pay their bills and they can't do it with bitcoin, they'll start selling. If a large number of people start selling, the market value of a bitcoin plummets. If the market value of a bitcoin plummets, speculators panic sell to try to retain some gains or recoup at least some of their losses.

You seem to be assuming that all people who own bitcoins are perfectly rational beings who only own bitcoins for perfectly rational reasons. History tells us that's never been the case about anything. You don't have to have some sort of technological flaw for people to be people. And for the record the fact that I put "wake up" and "real money" in quotes indicates that I was using those terms tongue-in-cheek. If I hadn't put them in quotes that would be the indication of my "clear bias".

Take gold for example. People always argue how gold has "inherent value" given its uses in industry, electronics, medicine, etc. However, has the market cap for gold ever dropped all the way down to its base market value that only covered its uses for industry, electronics, medicine, etc? If the answer to that is no (which it is), then even during all the economic calamities that gold has withstood as a store of value, it still held value simply because people felt it did, not because of its uses or "inherent value".

I agree that gold is an excellent comparison with bitcoin. The difference is that gold has a multi-thousand year history of being the de-facto international currency / value store, and that basically everyone in the world agrees that gold has value in that regard. Bitcoin is trying to be the new gold, but only a very very few people know it exists or care about it at all. Plus it is trying to unseat an established monopoly (gold) in the non-currency value-store market. Which is why it will be much more vulnerable than gold to speculation, crashes, and reverting back to its "inherent value". I don't own gold either for what it's worth.

You say that you'll stick with government backed currencies, but all the same critiques you've leveled against Bitcoin can be said of government backed currencies. Fiat currencies are backed by the government, but all that means is that they back them as legal tender under national borders. That doesn't mean that they guarantee their value.

I think you need to turn that backwards. I agree that "fiat currencies" are vulnerable to many of the same problems that bitcoin-as-a-currency is vulnerable to. The difference is that for government-backed currencies, you have an entire nation (at least) full of people with a vested interest in ensuring that currency has value. The government wants to ensure it can participate in international trade and feed its people (so the politicians don't all get shot in the revolution). The rich people (with lots of power because they are rich) want to ensure that they stay rich. There are whole organizations and agencies full of people who's whole job is to ensure that the country's economy is growing and the currency has semi-stable value.

Bitcoin has none of those.

You keep on insisting that cryptocurrencies will have some stable value unless there is some type of technological problem. Common sense and a quick glance at cryptocurrency markets tells us that's not true. A bitcoin is only worth what someone is willing to pay you for it. If there are a billion people holding bitcoin, but none are buying, the value is nothing - you cannot sell your bitcoin. If there are 1.5 people selling for every 1 person buying, the value crashes precipitously until it gets low enough that an extra half-person decides to buy. Neither of those situations requires a technological problem, merely an economic or psychological problem are sufficient.

Like I said, I get that this is a crytocurrency thread, so go do your thing. I will not participate, and I'll stop arguing with you about it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shotgunwilly on October 24, 2017, 08:02:57 AM

In other words:

Its the technology that drives its value, not the speculation.

Wow, you actually believe this right now?

The exact opposite is true, actually.

I'm for Crypto, and have money in various coins.  But you are lying to yourself if you think blockchain cryptocurrencies prices aren't driven by almost pure speculation at this point.  The majority of people that own Bitcoin are doing it for a ROI.  Period.

And THAT is why this thing COULD come crashing down very fast.  It's propped up on speculation, and could crumble, actually much faster, than the housing and tech markets did.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: surfhb on October 24, 2017, 09:13:35 AM
I'm sure I'll be written off as the tired old man here. I'm 49.   

Was concerns me the most is that most of the under 35 crowd has only know an EXTREME period of market growth their entire investing lives.   Not just extreme but unprecedented!     

Twice I've seen my stash grow to unbelievable levels and lose its value in a matter of a year.   I've seen friends lose homes, jobs, spouses, etc. over these market crashes .   

I suggest you don't speculate a large portion of your net worth.   Believe me


Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 24, 2017, 09:18:29 AM

In other words:

Its the technology that drives its value, not the speculation.

Wow, you actually believe this right now?

The exact opposite is true, actually.

I'm for Crypto, and have money in various coins.  But you are lying to yourself if you think blockchain cryptocurrencies prices aren't driven by almost pure speculation at this point.  The majority of people that own Bitcoin are doing it for a ROI.  Period.

And THAT is why this thing COULD come crashing down very fast.  It's propped up on speculation, and could crumble, actually much faster, than the housing and tech markets did.

No, I fully believe that the REASON why a lot people are putting their money into Bitcoin is based on a lot of speculation. The reason why someone is putting their money doesn't matter as much (I'll explain why).

You're misconstruing my words though and/or missing the point I'm making.

The price of Bitcoin is strictly tied to the demand for it given its limited supply. The more demand, the higher the price for it in the market place. Therefore, its price is almost a self-fulling prophecy. The more people that demand it, the higher the price will go. The higher the price will go, the more people will demand it. It is a positive feedback loop that will drive its adoption toward critical mass. All mass appeal technology adoptions follow an S-curve. The same is true for Bitcoin, so at some point adoption will level off and because of this its price will level off as well. This means its price is strictly based on its adoption level and rate, regardless of the reason why the market is putting their money in it.

However, when I say that it is the technology that drives its value is because of the fact that underlying all those market forces is technology. If Bitcoin doesn't provide a safe place for people to place their money, if Bitcoin wasn't based on sound mathematics that is built on open-source software and is run on a decentralized network, then people wouldn't be putting their money into Bitcoin in the first place. If one day, Bitcoin ceases being a safe and secure protocol, then the whole system will fail and people will rush to get whatever money they can out of it. However, the opposite is also true. If Bitcoin continues to be a safe and secure protocol, then people will continue to put their money in it and the above positive feedback loop will continue to occur.

It is the technology that is ultimately driving this thing. Tell me, if the technology of Bitcoin isn't what it is, would people be putting their money in it? No, they wouldn't. That's what underpins this whole thing.

Keep in mind I am strictly talking about Bitcoin, not other cryptos or ICOs. ICOs are a different beast all together as they're not based on the same principles as Bitcoin and usually have failing companies behind them and/or worse are just simply fraud. The driving force behind those will at some point become apparent that they were fraudulent and therefore there will be many that will go to a value of $0. That won't effect Bitcoin's price much however since the money is usually moved in and out of Bitcoin pretty quickly to invest in these and therefore they don't impact Bitcoin's overall demand and price much long term.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on October 24, 2017, 09:20:06 AM
I'm sure I'll be written off as the tired old man here. I'm 49.   

Was concerns me the most is that most of the under 35 crowd has only know an EXTREME period of market growth their entire investing lives.   Not just extreme but unprecedented!     

Twice I've seen my stash grow to unbelievable levels and lose its value in a matter of a year.   I've seen friends lose homes, jobs, spouses, etc. over these market crashes .   

I suggest you don't speculate a large portion of your net worth.   Believe me


Kinda a sweeping statement.  I'm 36, and I had around 100 grand invested in 2008.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 24, 2017, 09:31:39 AM
I'm sure I'll be written off as the tired old man here. I'm 49.   

Was concerns me the most is that most of the under 35 crowd has only know an EXTREME period of market growth their entire investing lives.   Not just extreme but unprecedented!     

Twice I've seen my stash grow to unbelievable levels and lose its value in a matter of a year.   I've seen friends lose homes, jobs, spouses, etc. over these market crashes .   

I suggest you don't speculate a large portion of your net worth.   Believe me

This would also go against just about every other sentiment I've heard regarding the 35 and younger crowd regarding their feelings on the stock market. You make it sound like all they've experienced in their lives are complete unprecedented abundance. The opposite couldn't be further from the truth. Most of them actually were put right into the market at the time of one of the worst recessions and the growing sentiment among that crowd is that they're very distrusting of the stock market. From the surveys I've seen from the 35 and younger crowd is that they have an extreme dislike for Wall Street because of that. Any one who is too young to have experienced the latest recession and its aftermath is likely too young to have fully enjoyed the abundant upswing after as well, so I think your viewpoint is a little skewed.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on October 24, 2017, 11:26:08 AM
"All mass appeal technology adoptions follow an S-curve."

All mass appeal technology adoptions involve a drastic reduction in price as the technology is adopted. They would be utter failures otherwise.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 24, 2017, 11:49:46 AM
"All mass appeal technology adoptions follow an S-curve."

All mass appeal technology adoptions involve a drastic reduction in price as the technology is adopted. They would be utter failures otherwise.

That's true of the technology is a mass-produced good with no scarcity that can achieve production improvements over time. That's not true for a limited scarce asset that achieves critical mass adoption.

The adoption S-curve and the price of said technology are two different functions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 24, 2017, 12:16:20 PM
If there are a billion people holding bitcoin, but none are buying, the value is nothing - you cannot sell your bitcoin. If there are 1.5 people selling for every 1 person buying, the value crashes precipitously until it gets low enough that an extra half-person decides to buy. Neither of those situations requires a technological problem, merely an economic or psychological problem are sufficient.

Your scenarios are only half of it though. If a billion people own Bitcoin and no one is selling, that means that everyone values the Bitcoin that they own way above what anyone is able to pay for it. In other words, they'd be priceless. That would never happen because you're assuming that no one would ever put a price on the Bitcoin they own. Everyone always has a price. Therefore, if a billion people own Bitcoin, there will always be Bitcoin for sale. Everyone will have different prices for what they're willing to part with their Bitcoin for, but you can be sure that there will always be Bitcoin for sale if a billion people own some. That's simply how free and open markets work, of which Bitcoin is one of the most free and open markets out there.

The other side of the coin is also true. The problem with saying that psychologically if everyone is selling and no one is buying is that would mean that suddenly no one values Bitcoin at all for any value. For that to happen, it would need to experience a technical failure or perhaps another currency came along that supplanted it. If it doesn't experience a technical failure, then there will always be buyers just as their are today that are willing to purchase it at some price based on the fact that the decentralized network itself has value. I'm not saying that the price of it can never go down. There will certainly be ebbs and flows. I'm simply saying that the longer that Bitcoin is around and operational, the more and more people will find it harder to ignore the fact that it is one of the only computer networks with an up time and security reputation as good as it is that is capable of facilitating financial transaction in our economy in and open and decentralized way. I'll say it again, make no mistake, the success or failure of the technology of Bitcoin will drive the market, not the speculation.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on October 24, 2017, 12:26:48 PM
If there are a billion people holding bitcoin, but none are buying, the value is nothing - you cannot sell your bitcoin. If there are 1.5 people selling for every 1 person buying, the value crashes precipitously until it gets low enough that an extra half-person decides to buy. Neither of those situations requires a technological problem, merely an economic or psychological problem are sufficient.

Your scenarios are only half of it though. If a billion people own Bitcoin and no one is selling, that means that everyone values the Bitcoin that they own way above what anyone is able to pay for it.

Sherr didn't say a billion people owning and no one selling, Sherr said no one buying. That's a crucial difference. You're right that everyone values their bitcoin above what people are willing to pay in that scenario, and that value is (some amount of money -- e.g. 0.01 for lots of bitcoins) and no buyers are willing to pay any amount of money.

Quote
In other words, they'd be priceless.

Not priceless, worthless.

Quote
That would never happen because you're assuming that no one would ever put a price on the Bitcoin they own. Everyone always has a price. Therefore, if a billion people own Bitcoin, there will always be Bitcoin for sale.

Right. There will be some for sale in this scenario. Lots of it, in fact. With no one buying.

Just wanted to clarify, because you seemed to understand the scenario as "it's at value $x, but no one will sell below $x, and no one will buy at $x, so the price is flat and no one can sell, because they won't reduce their price" but in this case, x = 0, and they can't reduce their price.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on October 24, 2017, 12:49:40 PM
Indeed, price/demand doesn't work that way. If you have no buyers, and even one person *needs* to sell, then the value of the item is zero,  no matter how much all the current owners paid. Obviously that isn't the case but anytime you have more sellers than buyers, the price of the item will drop (though with some things like houses it may take a while and transaction volume will drop instead until enough sellers become desperate and capitulate).

Bitcoin has plenty of buyers right now. So did many things in the past that are today worth nothing.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 24, 2017, 01:10:01 PM
Sherr didn't say a billion people owning and no one selling, Sherr said no one buying. That's a crucial difference. You're right that everyone values their bitcoin above what people are willing to pay in that scenario, and that value is (some amount of money -- e.g. 0.01 for lots of bitcoins) and no buyers are willing to pay any amount of money.

Ah, you're right, I read that wrong. I saw he said there were two different scenarios at the end of the paragraph and then I got the two scenarios in my head (no buyers versus no sellers) and started writing about them both. Either way, I covered both scenarios in my post even though Sherr was only talking about the one.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on October 24, 2017, 02:07:33 PM
"All mass appeal technology adoptions follow an S-curve."

All mass appeal technology adoptions involve a drastic reduction in price as the technology is adopted. They would be utter failures otherwise.

That's true of the technology is a mass-produced good with no scarcity that can achieve production improvements over time. That's not true for a limited scarce asset that achieves critical mass adoption.

The adoption S-curve and the price of said technology are two different functions.

I'd argue that they're actually quite closely related, and that disregarding one in a prediction of likely future behaviours is equivalent to assuming that the Cleveland Browns won a match because they scored fifteen points.

But that's beside the principal point, which is that there's no evidence that cryptocurrencies are actually following a technology-adoption S-curve rather than a classical bubble trajectory. At the moment, the pattern for demand fits both; however, as far as I'm aware, the technology S-curve has historically been marked by an increase in supply that outstrips the increase in demand, hence the reduction in price. That's not an easily dismissed incidental; it's been a core feature of how technology has been adopted throughout history. What cryptocurrencies are doing is far closer in terms of supply/demand relationships to historical bubbles, which would indicate that we're better off looking at tulip bulbs and the Irish property market (where ever-increasing demand crashed against limited supply growth and triggered booms in pricing) than the iPod and the printing press (where supply continuously ramped up as demand kept increasing) for an idea of what the crypto market is likely to do.

This isn't a particularly controversial point: the guy who literally wrote the book on economic bubbles (and won a Nobel for it) has specifically argued that cryptocurrencies are in a bubble. You've even acknowledged that the motivations of investors in the market is principally speculative.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 24, 2017, 05:04:13 PM
as far as I'm aware, the technology S-curve has historically been marked by an increase in supply that outstrips the increase in demand, hence the reduction in price.

I don't think that is true. The adoption S-curve has nothing to do with the supply of the innovation in question and everything to do with the rate at which the public adopts the innovation. Cars, radio, TV, electricity, the internet, cell phones, GPS, social networks, etc are all technologies that have followed or are currently following an S-curve for adoption. The S-curve has less to do with supply and demand and more simply to do with the adoption of the innovation by the public at large. The price of commodities has more to do with supply and demand and production economies of scale and less to do with the S-curve of its public adoption.

What cryptocurrencies are doing is far closer in terms of supply/demand relationships to historical bubbles, which would indicate that we're better off looking at tulip bulbs and the Irish property market (where ever-increasing demand crashed against limited supply growth and triggered booms in pricing) than the iPod and the printing press (where supply continuously ramped up as demand kept increasing) for an idea of what the crypto market is likely to do.

What criteria are you using for your analysis? You see, this is the main problem I have with those who are making claims about bubbles. Howard Marks, Peter Schiff, Mark Cuban, Jamie Dimon, Robert Shiller, ...these are all people who called Bitcoin a bubble, fad, a pyramid scheme and yet not a single one of them have given a decent analysis as to why they think so. Most of them in their critique have shown (or blantantly said) that they clearly don't understand the technology itself. Ultimately, their analysis has been based simply on the price of Bitcoin alone and nothing more. Howard Marks called it a pyramid scheme even though that's impossible for Bitcoin to be one and even acknowleged that he doesn't understand the technology. Mark Cuban once called it a bubble and yet now he's investing in crypto and changing his tune on Bitcoin. I've yet to see these experts who claim that Bitcoin is a bubble reveal any detailed or reasoned analysis as to why they think Bitcoin is a bubble.

Let look at it this way:

Bitcoin is currently has a market cap of about $90-100 billion. A year ago it was about $10b. That's about $90 billion dollars that have flooded into Bitcoin over the last year. Let's look short term. Where do we think this could go next year? I firmly believe over the next year we'll see Bitcoin go up at least the same amount and hit a market cap of about $200 billion and give it a price above $10,000. Why? Here are a few markers that I believe lead this to be likely:

1) The continued stable operation of the Bitcoin network.
2) Bitcoin options/futures trading
3) The eventual approval of a Bitcoin ETF
4) Continued government approval and regulation (see Japan, Australia, Mexico, Russia, Ukraine, etc)
5) Increased hedge fund crypto investment
6) Massive sign-up rates for online wallets in recent months

You see all these things are creating and generating sentiment and a tailwind for Bitcoin that will allow its continued adoption among users. This is all fueled, as I said, by the fact that the technology that underpins it will continue to operate smoothly.

Now I fully understand that theoretically Bitcoin can go to $0. But, what are some situations that would make that possible?

Perhaps governments all over could crack down on it. But, that would require a drastic change of heart coming from many democratic countries all over the world. China just recently cracked down on exchanges and ICOs and yet Bitcoin still continued on upward. So a crackdown on a few countries (even one as large as China) is not enough to impact Bitcoin. For governments to have a hinderance on Bitcoin's adoption, you'd need a complete worldwide crackdown on some of the world's largest economies, many of which are democratic (and thus less likely to enact such a crackdown).

There could come along another crypto-currency which does exactly what Bitcoin does, only better. Maybe, but Bitcoin has such a drastic lead on other crypto-currencies, that such a huge change in circumstances is highly unlikely to occur over the next year. Also, features that other crypto-currencies have that would give reason for the market to move to something different could be implemented into Bitcoin itself (see SegWit activation).

Then, like I suggested, another possible outcome is that something happens to the Bitcoin network that causes a catastrophic failures which in turn causes the market to lose its trust in Bitcoin. This is certainly possible, but Bitcoin is software and with so much money in the economy, it is more likely that such an economy would look to resolve a failure and fix what's broken instead of abandon it. However, you never know how the market would react to such a failure, so its always possible that a technology failure could cause a market failure. This, however, I find highly unlikely.

Do you have any other thoughts on what might cause a drastic market decline over the next year? Given the markers for positive gain over the next year and the unlikelihood of some of the leading possibilities that could lead to a market decline, it is much more likely that Bitcoin will continue to see heavy growth in 2018. Not just a mediocre growth. I'm talking about a doubling in price which would again make Bitcoin a better investment than just about any other traditional option out there.

This isn't a particularly controversial point: the guy who literally wrote the book on economic bubbles (and won a Nobel for it) has specifically argued that cryptocurrencies are in a bubble.

As I said for you, the same goes for any other person who feels they're an expert. If someone is going to claim bubble, then it behooves them to explain their rationale for making such a claim that goes beyond just a simple price analysis.

You've even acknowledged that the motivations of investors in the market is principally speculative.

I've already said that doesn't matter. The market price for gold has never dropped to the point where it only met the demand for its industry usage. The price for gold above and beyond that is strictly based on speculation as well and yet through all sorts of economic conditions gold has continued to be valued based on speculation alone. What drives this speculative market? The fact the investors place value on its scarcity. Bitcoin is digital scarcity that has been developed based on decades of cryptographic research. People put value on this just like they put value on the scarcity of gold. It is my belief that this will always continue to hold value. This is obviously hard to imagine because this is the first time that something has ever been digital and scarce at the same time. But, this is a big innovation and I see things going in Bitcoin's favor well into 2018.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 24, 2017, 05:49:07 PM
In response to the technology adoption s-curve and it's correlation with the decline in the cost of the technology:

The price of one bitcoin has essentially no relationship to the cost of the technology.

To use bitcoin as a technology to store value, the cost is 1) the fees charged by exchanges to buy bitcoin and general headache of learning how to transfer money to exchanges, how to buy bitcoins, and how to store them once you have them 2) any loss in value from the fluctuating price of bitcoin.

To use bitcoin as a medium of exchange, the cost is 1) same as #1 above and 2) the cost of transaction fees charged by miners to actually send bitcoins from one wallet to another.

The cost of #1 has been coming down (slowly) as a result of both improved technology and educational resources, as well as competition between exchanges. OTOH, #1 increases from time to time when new regulations or limitations come out exchanges. I'm not sure if the overall trend over the last several years is towards higher or lower prices at this point.

For #2 in using bitcoin as a medium of exchange, the price has actually been increasing dramatically as a result of blockchain congestion (although maybe segregated witness will fix this eventually?). For #2 in using bitcoin as a store of value, this cost is linked to volatility, more volatility = higher cost for using it as a store of value, less volatility = less cost for this use. I haven't actually seen any analyses on whether the volatility of bitcoin has been increases, decreasing, or staying the same.

*shrug*

Anyway, my point is just that an increase in the cost per unit of an individual cryptocurrency doesn't tell you anything either way about whether the cost of using the cryptocurrency is increases or decrease. And it's the cost of using it, not the cost of the currency units, that needs to decline is you're going to see an S-curve shaped adoption of the technology.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on October 24, 2017, 06:17:52 PM
Indeed. Widespread use (that doesn't mean constantly converting back and forth to dollars to buy things) and a low transaction cost, along with *stable prices* would mean you could start talking about how efficient/inefficient it was for it's purpose (facilitating exchange of real-world goods and services). So far none of those conditions exist, so you can't really say anything one way or the other about Bitcoin as a *currency*.

As e-gold/store of value it is certainly cheaper than handling physical gold. Thus far it's not as secure, however.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 24, 2017, 06:42:02 PM
Walt, this is a point where I know you and I disagree. I think bitcoin (or similar currencies) can do a great job as a medium of exchange even if all prices are still set in dollars and everyone trades in an out of their native currencies before and after every transaction. But it does require that the cost of transactions (in both currency and time/hassle) continue to decrease over time.

Note that this use case says nothing about the value of bitcoin. It can work just as well if bitcoin is $0.01/coin of $1M/coin as long as the exchange markets between bitcoin and other currencies highly liquid (which they are today).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on October 24, 2017, 09:15:41 PM
I guess that could be the case, though it would be more of a vote of confidence if you paid someone directly in bitcoin, and they then could use it for the next transaction and so on.

I agree that the price itself doesn't matter (you can just pay with tiny fractions of a bitcoin if it's worth $1,000,000). Stability of that price over long periods of time *does*, though. I don't see that happening anytime soon.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 25, 2017, 06:07:00 AM
I don't necessarily think that the stability in Bitcoin's price is a huge barrier for its use as a medium of exchange if the price of goods is still set in fiat currency. This comes from someone who uses Bitcoin as their spending money.

If Bitcoin goes up or down $300 when its price is around $5500, then that's a change of around 5%. That's not an unheard of daily change for Bitcoin, but I'd also say that its well above average for a daily change.

So if I have $315 in spending money, then that means I could check my balance in the morning and have $315 and then check again later that evening and have $300 or maybe $330. But, that change matters even less when I go to spend it that day. If I spend $20 on a day where the price changed 5%, then that's really only an extra dollar difference +/-. So long as the price of the good stays the same since it is set in fiat currency, then my expenditures will generally average out over the course of a month. Because my spending money is generally exhausted each month, it usually only sees minor gains over the course of each month depending on what transpired with Bitcoin's price during that time. Unless you're doing extremely large purchases, then the volatility matters less when it comes to daily purchases.

With that said, I do think volatility would need to level out if we ever were to get to a point where goods are priced in Bitcoin and people's salaries are set in Bitcoin. I doubt we'd ever see that day in my lifetime, but volatility would certainly be bad in those cases. If goods themselves are priced in Bitcoin, then people need to have a general sense of what a good costs relative to what a Bitcoin is worth and that number would have to remain fairly stable from month to month.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: simonsez on October 25, 2017, 06:23:25 AM
The S-curve has less to do with supply and demand and more simply to do with the adoption of the innovation by the public at large.
That just sounds like demand.  How can the public adopt an innovation but not buy it?  If they really are separate concepts, how do you measure the adoption rate/prevalence without looking at how many good and services are bought?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 25, 2017, 06:48:30 AM
That just sounds like demand.  How can the public adopt an innovation but not buy it?  If they really are separate concepts, how do you measure the adoption rate/prevalence without looking at how many good and services are bought?

Demand is slightly different than adoption. They're certainly close in concept, but they are different. Demand is how much of or often something is utilized or purchased, whereas adoption is simply how much of the public at large is using a given technology.

For example, demand could be the measure of how many cars I am buying, whereas adoption would be whether or not I've chosen to buy a car at all. If I purchase a car, then I've adopted it, but if I only purchase one car and keep that same car for 15 years, then my demand is low. However, I could go even further and purchase a new car every two years and my demand for cars is high. So they're closely related, but not the same.

The adoption S-curve only measures the adoption rate of the technology, not the demand for it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 25, 2017, 07:22:01 AM
I agree that the price itself doesn't matter (you can just pay with tiny fractions of a bitcoin if it's worth $1,000,000).

Agreed, but I was actually also trying to make the opposite point. Widespread adoption of any particular currency as a medium of exchange (but not a store of value) doesn't necessarily mean that the value of the currency would increase a lot. So that fact I'm arguing that the medium-of-exchange bit is likely to happen (whether is bitcoin or some other cryptocurrency) doesn't tell you a lot about whether buying whichever currency it turns out to be for capital appreciation is a good idea or not.

I could imagine a hypothetical future where cryptocurrency is widely used to settle payments, but the tools for trading in and out of it on both ends are so fast/efficient that the total value of that cryptocurrency only needs to be a few billion to facilitate millions of transactions per day.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MystryBox on October 26, 2017, 02:12:36 PM
Crypto currencies are to investing what a brand new GM truck is to Mustachians.   

Isn't this the opposite of what this blog preaches ?     ...

I want to hear from the 40+ crowd who have experienced these kinds of events.   

I'm new here but will respond to this as I'm pushing 50 and yet have been in crypto since 2012.  I agree that crypto is not what this blog is about and that most people should probably stay away.  However crypto is a new asset class with unique properties and the potential for significant impact on the world.  For those with the technical background to understand it and the ability and resources to manage some limited risk, I see it as a valid high-risk/high-return speculation.

Quote
Do any of you ever experienced an extended bear market?   Where you lost hundreds of thousands in equity value in a matter of months? 

I have seen several bear markets. I got cooked in the tech crash of 2000 and lost a significant amount of my investing assets and a good chunk of my 401k.  I managed to move my 401k to cash several months before the 2008 crash but before you call me a genius I failed to get back in until after missing much of the later recovery.  My paranoia of being cooked like I was in 2000 has driven a long term interest in trading and index timing (which is also not in line with much of this blog).

However it's worth noting that Wall Street bear markets are nothing compared to bear moves in crypto.  You cannot be successful in crypto without being able to deal with massive moves down even as longer term the asset is moving up.  For example bitcoin investors had to deal with falls from $10 down to $1 and later $1100 down to $250. They've also had to dodge dozens of potential pitfalls including malware wallet thefts, exchanges being hacked, millions of scams, etc. 

Quote
If so, do you feel comfortable with things like bitcoin?     Yes?  How?

I'm a Computer Scientist with 30 years of software development experience.  Beyond that my main side interests ever since the internet took off have been money and markets.  When I eventually found bitcoin I felt like my whole life had been preparing me for it.

Again I don't think crypto really fits with this blog, however if you have the knowledge and the ability to deal with massive volatility, putting a bit of speculative money into crypto might result in big returns.  I never put more into crypto than would be too much for me to lose, and it has worked out extremely well for me.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on October 27, 2017, 08:02:12 AM
For those with the technical background to understand it

I know that this is not what you're doing, so don't take it personally because I'm not accusing you of anything. I'm just going to piggyback on your comment to say something that's been on my mind.

I've seen a lot of comments in this thread and other places that tend to imply that those who "understand" cryptocurrencies are for them, and that people who aren't don't. I just wanted to state for the record that I'm also a Senior Software Engineer. I understand the technology. I think it's probably nothing but a pyramid scheme and a tulip-style speculation bubble that will eventually pop. So does everyone else I work with.

There seems to be a recurring dismissal of finance guys who are calling Bitcoin a worthless bubble as "just not getting it". I think they probably do, you don't get to be the CEO of JPMorgan or whatever by being a dummy. I think it's somewhat arrogant to dismiss all criticisms as "well they just don't understand as much as I do" (again, I know you're not doing this).

I think MystryBox's approach is actually very rational and well-grounded. Using play money to speculate in an uncorrelated asset class seems to me to be exactly what the crypto market is good for right now. If that's what you (generic reader) are doing then more power to you, have fun. However if you're someone who is caught up in the hype and is investing serious money in crypto because "everyone who understands it agrees it's a good investment", maybe take a step back and realize that's not true.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 27, 2017, 09:03:25 AM
I understand the technology. I think it's probably nothing but a pyramid scheme

This seems to contradict the idea that you understand the technology of Bitcoin. Either you don't understand Bitcoin or you don't understand what a pyramid scheme is.

There seems to be a recurring dismissal of finance guys who are calling Bitcoin a worthless bubble as "just not getting it". I think they probably do, you don't get to be the CEO of JPMorgan or whatever by being a dummy. I think it's somewhat arrogant to dismiss all criticisms as "well they just don't understand as much as I do" (again, I know you're not doing this).

There are plenty of valid criticisms of bitcoin and crypto-currencies that have been discussed throughout this thread (bogus/fraudulent ICOs, harmful regulations, competing currencies, scaling issues, etc). However, when Jamie Dimon, that CEO of JP Morgan Chase that you refer of, is in an interview and is asked a question about ICOs and that is literally the first time he's ever heard of the term ICO, then that makes me question his knowledge on the subject matter of which he is speaking. Therefore, when he makes the claim that Bitcoin is a bubble, I have little faith that he's actually done any analysis to come up with that claim. The same goes for Howard Marks, where as I mentioned before, in his memo that he released to his investors, he actually admitted that he doesn't understand the technology at all.

So I find it hard to agree with you on idea that some of these people that are claiming Bitcoin is a bubble actually have done a detailed analysis as to why they think so. No doubt they are very smart people, but that doesn't make them an expert of all things. They certainly haven't shared their analysis from what I've seen outside of a simple "yup, the price is too high too fast!" In fact, I rarely ever hear an analysis as to why someone thinks Bitcoin is a bubble, all I hear is that another financial person has claimed Bitcoin is a bubble and then it makes a news headline. When that's been going on for several years, it grows increasingly difficult to take them seriously.

I agree that you shouldn't invest any money in crypto-currencies that you aren't prepared to lose. I also think that the amount of money you put into crypto-currencies should be proportional to the amount of understanding you have of the technology. That same advice could be said of just about any investment. For example, I'd advise against putting money into the stock of a company that you have little understand of and don't follow on a daily/hourly basis. I also don't think you should invest in real estate if you don't understand the real estate market in which you're investing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on October 27, 2017, 09:14:59 AM
I understand the technology. I think it's probably nothing but a pyramid scheme

This seems to contradict the idea that you understand the technology of Bitcoin. Either you don't understand Bitcoin or you don't understand what a pyramid scheme is.

There seems to be a recurring dismissal of finance guys who are calling Bitcoin a worthless bubble as "just not getting it". I think they probably do, you don't get to be the CEO of JPMorgan or whatever by being a dummy. I think it's somewhat arrogant to dismiss all criticisms as "well they just don't understand as much as I do" (again, I know you're not doing this).

There are plenty of valid criticisms of bitcoin and crypto-currencies that have been discussed throughout this thread (bogus/fraudulent ICOs, harmful regulations, competing currencies, scaling issues, etc). However, when Jamie Dimon, that CEO of JP Morgan Chase that you refer of, is in an interview and is asked a question about ICOs and that is literally the first time he's ever heard of the term ICO, then that makes me question his knowledge on the subject matter of which he is speaking. Therefore, when he makes the claim that Bitcoin is a bubble, I have little faith that he's actually done any analysis to come up with that claim. The same goes for Howard Marks, where as I mentioned before, in his memo that he released to his investors, he actually admitted that he doesn't understand the technology at all.

So I find it hard to agree with you on idea that some of these people that are claiming Bitcoin is a bubble actually have done a detailed analysis as to why they think so. No doubt they are very smart people, but that doesn't make them an expert of all things. They certainly haven't shared their analysis from what I've seen outside of a simple "yup, the price is too high too fast!" In fact, I rarely ever hear an analysis as to why someone thinks Bitcoin is a bubble, all I hear is that another financial person has claimed Bitcoin is a bubble and then it makes a news headline. When that's been going on for several years, it grows increasingly difficult to take them seriously.

I agree that you shouldn't invest any money in crypto-currencies that you aren't prepared to lose. I also think that the amount of money you put into crypto-currencies should be proportional to the amount of understanding you have of the technology. That same advice could be said of just about any investment. For example, I'd advise against putting money into the stock of a company that you have little understand of and don't follow on a daily/hourly basis. I also don't think you should invest in real estate if you don't understand the real estate market in which you're investing.

Way to demonstrate exactly my point an hour and one minute after I posted.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MystryBox on October 27, 2017, 09:25:32 AM
For those with the technical background to understand it

I know that this is not what you're doing, so don't take it personally because I'm not accusing you of anything. I'm just going to piggyback on your comment to say something that's been on my mind.

...
To clarify, when I say people should have the technical background, I was talking about the technical aspects of the bitcoin asset that make it difficult for the non-technically savvy to even use it safely.  For example, it acts like cash or gold in that if it gets stolen or you forget your passwords it is gone.  You can't call up someone and get it back. 

I realize not everyone that understands bitcoin thinks it's a good investment and I respect your view that it's a speculation.  It is a speculation.  Though it's not a pyramid scheme by definition (if you read the details on a pyramid scheme bitcoin doesn't fit), but it is a tulip-style bubble in some ways.  However most monies are basically bubbles, including the US dollar.

Before I got into bitcoin and other crypto, I was a gold bug.  I spent a lot of time studying commodity money, symbolic money, representative money, fiat money, etc. The breakthrough that bitcoin achieved was a non-replicable, transferable, digital token--essentially it was the first digital asset that literally acted like physical property. People giving that useful token value came naturally, just as people giving unique shiny rocks (gold) came naturally. I recognized what was happening early, why it was happening, and where it might go--and I got on board.  It was a risk but it was a good risk.  I knew bitcoin wasn't what people were calling it for years...  it wasn't a fraud, a scam, or a pyramid scheme.  It was something new and groundbreaking and would have some real value and lead to even bigger things.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 27, 2017, 09:30:18 AM
Way to demonstrate exactly my point an hour and one minute after I posted.

I love a good debate that involves analysis on any given subject. I'll also try and never make personal attacks with those I debate with. If I dismiss someone's statement on a given subject matter, it is usually only due to a lack of reasoning behind said statement. Therefore, I don't dismiss "financial gurus" simply because they're "financial gurus". Jamie Dimon could've just as easily been a developer who was originally involved with Bitcoin and had he made the same statements Jamie Dimon did without giving his reasons, then I'd question it all the same. I'm prejudice not against stature or job title, but against a lack of reasoning.

If you want to debate the potentials of an ICO bubble and its potential impacts on Bitcoin, that's fine. There is a debate to be had there. But saying Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme or calling it a bubble simply because one believe's so just doesn't jive with me. The same goes for those that say that Bitcoin will one day reach $300,000 by such and such date without giving their reasons.

The more you post about Bitcoin being a bubble without actually giving your detailed reasons for it being so, then the more you prove my point.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on October 27, 2017, 10:24:36 AM
I could imagine a hypothetical future where cryptocurrency is widely used to settle payments, but the tools for trading in and out of it on both ends are so fast/efficient that the total value of that cryptocurrency only needs to be a few billion to facilitate millions of transactions per day.

Yes, this is sort of where I see it going. As it stands, if you want to pay for something electronically (with a debit card, we'll leave credit cards out of this) you swipe the card, and then the card processor charges the merchant a fee (~3%) in exchange for transferring the money between you and providing some level of fraud prevention/security.

But they *don't* trade your dollars into Visa-Bux and back again to do that. And there's not really a reason that bitcoin/blockchain tech needs to have a "currency" attached to it with *any particular value* in order to facilitate transactions, if both parties just want dollars in the end. All the bitcoin on earth could be worth $500 million and you could use it for exchange that way (dollars instantaneously to bitcoin instantaneously to dollars) or it could be worth $500 quadrillion. Doesn't matter.

At some point you start to wonder about the point of having the "currency" part of it at all, if you're just transferring dollars to dollars.

So while I see the technology being a great thing and possibly a wonderful way to get the vampire squid credit/debit card companies from siphoning 2-3% of the every transaction, I *don't* think that means buying bitcoins (or any other crypto "currency") is a good investment or correlated to the potential of the technology.

I think that's where my main disagreement here is. I think you could invest in companies that are developing this technology (still pretty speculative since most of them will fail) and maybe do great, but buying the currency itself seems crazy when it's hardly used for transactions and mostly owned by crazy rich Asians (great book, btw) who are trying to hide their money from the government and/or living in the Chinese equivalent of late 1800s America and investing willy-nilly in every crazy crypto/railroad scheme that comes along. 

We ended up with a kickass rail system... and most of the investors lost everything in the process. I'd guess crypto will be the same story.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Scortius on October 27, 2017, 10:30:26 AM
I think some of the recent debate brings up a good point. Bitcoin is touted as a currency, hell, coin is part of its name. But, by most definitions of true currency, Bitcoin falls short.  Where it does line up is as a commodity, just like gold. You 'mine' it. It has limited supply. You can exchange it for currency. And, like gold these days, it has little (but some) intrinsic value (compared to a more utilized metal like copper, for example).

Bitcoin has all the hallmarks of what made gold so valuable before the advent of paper currency.  It was difficult to counterfeit, it could be quickly verified as genuine, it was easy to label, and it was relatively liquid and easy to exchange.

To that end, I see something like Bitcoin (or most any other crypto) as eventually mirroring behavior seen in a commodity market. It will be used as a hedge against inflation, possibly a store of value against the destruction of the US economy (although that would pretty much wipe Bitcoin out).  It will have value in allowing black market exchanges and hiding wealth.

The catch then is that the value of Bitcoin becomes heavily tied to consumer confidence in Bitcoin.  There is no 'gold standard', it's not tied to any economy, thus it has the potential to fluctuate wildly with ebbs and flows of consumer speculation and valuation, and yes possibly creating speculation bubbles.

Blockchain technology has some fascinating potential, but Bitcoin itself is just a token. Blockchain isn't some magic formula anymore, and Bitcoin has no 'moat' beyond its current branding and market share. What's to stop some independent nation state from promoting their own blockchain currency using the same formula, but physically backing it with local currency (say, the Cayman Islands, or even Switzerland, which promise to provide a secure and anonymous exchange).  Sure, it would lose some of its value in being only semi-autonomous, but the implementation could be distributed, and backing a new crypto with real currency would increase consumer confidence in this new coin, giving it stability.  Black market players and tax avoiders could continue to operate only in Swiss-coins while legal intermediaries could buy and sell coins and exchange them for cash. Not that this scenario is likely, but one point here is that Bitcoin itself would have zero claim to the value of any other coin as they would be fundamentally decoupled. The value of Bitcoin is only equal to the value the market believes it has.

What about the use of blockchain technology to verify financial transactions, like a digital handshake? Maybe to provide confidence in the validity of a national election in some way.  Once again, Bitcoin has zero claim to capitalize on any new system using the same technology. It only has the value people believe it does. That value could persist for a long long time, or maybe just a long time. But, there is no fundamental backing to it.  At some point something new could come along and the value of Bitcoin could go to zero overnight in a way that physical commodities never could.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MystryBox on October 27, 2017, 11:07:25 AM
Why would a blockchain token having a backing tie to some foreign currency be particularly useful?  Just use the foreign currency, they are already digital.

The value crypto brings is in how it is disconnected from any government/nation state and from banks.  It can't be inflated by some government nor confiscated, nor devalued, etc. If you hold the crypto yourself it won't be loaned out by your bank, nor can it be taken out of your account due to legal demand.  Understanding why this is valuable is difficult if you don't have much wealth.  If you don't have much wealth you don't worry about protecting it, moving it, or it being locked down or taken away from you. 

To get a idea what I mean, consider you held several million worth of crypto.  A crypto wallet, including all crypto balances and historical transactions, can be completely encoded by a dozen secret words you can memorize.  So now no matter where you go, those dozen words uniquely control your millions, and nobody else can touch it.  If you get on a plane and fly to another country, when you land your millions went with you, in your head.  You don't have to request a bank to send money to another country, no bank can put a hold on that wealth, no government can confiscate it, and no physical asset had to be shipped.  The other people in the plane had to report even small amounts of cash they were traveling with, your millions already exist everywhere on the planet already.  No other money or asset in the world has that ability.  Crypto is like nothing else.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on October 27, 2017, 11:21:30 AM
"Either you don't understand Bitcoin or you don't understand what a pyramid scheme is."

This is, to put it mildly, an extravagantly dismissive attitude. It's not an exact copy of a pyramid scheme (because if it was, it would be completely illegal), but the characteristics are not too dissimilar. In each case, you're seeing a progressively larger flow of money into a product, fuelled by the gains realised by prior investors, and fuelling a still larger flow of money into the product. There are enough characteristics in common that the comparison isn't unwarranted. It's not as tight a match as with Robert Schiller's description of a bubble, but it's still a reasonable comparison to make.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 27, 2017, 11:30:38 AM
As it stands, if you want to pay for something electronically (with a debit card, we'll leave credit cards out of this) you swipe the card, and then the card processor charges the merchant a fee (~3%) in exchange for transferring the money between you and providing some level of fraud prevention/security.

At some point you start to wonder about the point of having the "currency" part of it at all, if you're just transferring dollars to dollars.

That's part of the problem and one of the very reasons why Bitcoin was created in the first place. This was discussed in the first part of the Bitcoin whitepaper. Financial institutions currently facilitate our transactions on the internet and fraud is rampant. A certain level of fraud in simply accepted and the costs of combating that fraud is very high. Because trust must be placed in a financial institution for transactions, completely non-reversible transaction aren't possible and this is a problem if your business is selling non-reversible services. Furthermore, because of the costs of a system like this (~3% fees), micro-transactions are not economical which prevents the ability to offer services or systems that could benefit from micro-transactions. Bitcoin can offer these benefits along all while preventing massive amounts of online credit card fraud. So even if Bitcoin's only use is to facilitate transactions where both parties simply convert immediately to fiat, there are still a lot of benefits to be had that Bitcoin provides. As an Information Security professional that works directly with PCI compliance, I'd certainly welcome a change such as this to our current system that would help prevent fraud in the financial space. To those that invest in this system and help it become a reality, then I'd be glad to see their financial fortunes benefit as a result.

I think some of the recent debate brings up a good point. Bitcoin is touted as a currency, hell, coin is part of its name. But, by most definitions of true currency, Bitcoin falls short.

Bitcoin has all the hallmarks of what made gold so valuable before the advent of paper currency.

I think part of the problem is that people are simply trying to mold Bitcoin into existing models of currency and assets that they're already familiar with as opposed to just seeing the benefits of Bitcoin as they are and seeing how they can be transformative. Why does Bitcoin need to have all of the criteria of a currency to be a currency and why does Bitcoin need to have all of the benefits of gold to be a store of value?

The way I see it, Bitcoin can be both partly currency and partly store of value and provide something that is the best of both worlds in a whole new type of asset. Gold was great as a store of value throughout history and for a long time was great as a currency. But it isn't very portable and therefore better currencies came along to help us facilitate or daily transactions. Bitcoin, while it may not have the history that gold has as being a store of value, can still be such while being much better as a transactional currency. Meanwhile, our current fiat currencies and the systems that are based on them are adequate at facilitating transactions, but they're horrible as a store of value and history has repeatedly shown that they're, not portable, corruptible, devalued, manipulated, and depending on where you live can be discriminatory. In both of these areas (store of value/medium of exchange) I can see Bitcoin providing a lot of benefits to our world.

In a world that is becoming more and more globally interactive, I see a future for Bitcoin. A friend of mine just left the US to go live in Europe for several months. All he brought with him (financially speaking) is his Bitcoin. Although, he really didn't bring anything with him since Bitcoin is technically just stored on the blockchain. He then just set up and account with a local exchange upon reaching Europe and he's just been exchanging what he needs from Bitcoin as he needs it. You see, Bitcoin is universal and allows people to move anywhere and have their finances travel with them without worry. No one can take his Bitcoin from him as he travels beyond borders. Our current traditional financial system cannot provide this value to people.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 27, 2017, 11:35:44 AM
This is, to put it mildly, an extravagantly dismissive attitude. It's not an exact copy of a pyramid scheme (because if it was, it would be completely illegal), but the characteristics are not too dissimilar. In each case, you're seeing a progressively larger flow of money into a product, fuelled by the gains realised by prior investors, and fuelling a still larger flow of money into the product. There are enough characteristics in common that the comparison isn't unwarranted. It's not as tight a match as with Robert Schiller's description of a bubble, but it's still a reasonable comparison to make.

Bitcoin has the same exact supply/demand economic model as any scarcely limited resource on this planet. To take that very basic economic model and compare it to a fraudulent scheme that requires exponential recruitment of investors into the scheme in order to support itself fails to understand the important differences. So no, I'm not being dismissive when I say that Bitcoin is not a pyramid scheme.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Scortius on October 27, 2017, 11:37:55 AM
Why would a blockchain token having a backing tie to some foreign currency be particularly useful?  Just use the foreign currency, they are already digital.

The value crypto brings is in how it is disconnected from any government/nation state and from banks.  It can't be inflated by some government nor confiscated, nor devalued, etc. If you hold the crypto yourself it won't be loaned out by your bank, nor can it be taken out of your account due to legal demand.  Understanding why this is valuable is difficult if you don't have much wealth.  If you don't have much wealth you don't worry about protecting it, moving it, or it being locked down or taken away from you. 

To get a idea what I mean, consider you held several million worth of crypto.  A crypto wallet, including all crypto balances and historical transactions, can be completely encoded by a dozen secret words you can memorize.  So now no matter where you go, those dozen words uniquely control your millions, and nobody else can touch it.  If you get on a plane and fly to another country, when you land your millions went with you, in your head.  You don't have to request a bank to send money to another country, no bank can put a hold on that wealth, no government can confiscate it, and no physical asset had to be shipped.  The other people in the plane had to report even small amounts of cash they were traveling with, your millions already exist everywhere on the planet already.  No other money or asset in the world has that ability.  Crypto is like nothing else.

Yes, I understand what crypto-currency is.

No, I'm not saying Switzerland runs the crypto-coin, and I especially am not saying that they have access to any type of ledger.  Further, the network is by definition distributed, so a country backing a coin would have no more ability to examine the exchanges than any other independent entity.

You mention your millions, yes they are encrypted and safe in a cold or paper wallet. Now, those millions are coins, not currency.  They are tokens that can be given to other people, but they are not de facto government currency. And yes, I get that this is considered a good thing.

If you want to exchange money, there will be a record if you use foreign currency.  If you exchange crypto-coins backed by a currency, there will still be no record.  The only thing backing means is that the government honors exchanges of coins to their currency at a specific valuation. That provides price stability and intrinsic value. People wanting to avoid operating in a foreign currency can continue to do so.  This is exactly how the US dollar worked while backed by gold. In a vast majority of transactions It was not exchanged for gold, it was exchanged for labor, goods, or other services.  But the fact that it could be exchanged for gold gave consumers confidence in the value of the token they held (which in this case would be a dollar bill or the like).

Since the value of any crypto-coin is heavily tied to the level of market confidence in that coin, it is possible that the value gained by the backing of a coin by a legitimized public entity may outweigh the loss in value the potential coin loses by being tied to a institution.  I'm not saying this will happen, I'm just pointing out a scenario where a new coin is introduced to the market in a new way that might fundamentally undermine the value of a separate coin like Bitcoin. Once again, Bitcoin has no moat beyond its current market share and consumer confidence.  Its market share is a somewhat dangerously recursive valuation, as any loss in market share could lead to a rapid feedback loop of further decreasing consumer confidence and market share.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MystryBox on October 27, 2017, 12:01:46 PM
...
The only thing backing means is that the government honors exchanges of coins to their currency at a specific valuation. That provides price stability and intrinsic value.

It provides stability, but not intrinsic value as government currency has no intrinsic value either.  Your entire argument has an underlying assumption that government money is somehow "real" money with "real" value while crypto value is not real, but that's simply not true.  In some ways crypto value is more real than government money value as it came from a global market, not by decree of a single government. Governments and their fiat currencies come and go, global assets (including crypto) are not so transitory.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on October 27, 2017, 12:37:11 PM
Dude, if you want intrinsic value, you want stocks, or land, or useful commodities, or something else that produces something. No currency (at least none that I'm aware of) has "intrinsic" value, bitcoin included. In fact you don't really even want currency to have intrinsic value, since you want it used for exchange, not hoarding.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MystryBox on October 27, 2017, 01:21:48 PM
Crypto would be valuable even if it didn't have intrinsic value, but it's arguable that crypto has intrinsic value.  At its core crypto is digital property that has various uses, including uses that nothing else can do.  Some of the newer cryptos, like ethereum, include an entire programmable environment (smart contracts) that can solve a near infinite number of monetary/legal/contract issues in a cheaper, automated way.  The future for such systems is thought to be as big a deal as the internet was.  These are useful, intrinsic properties that have value and give crypto an intrinsic value. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Scortius on October 27, 2017, 01:57:08 PM
I think I got off track on the intrinsic value piece. The point I was trying to focus on more was the vulnerability of the value and adoption of any one type of coin to be completely overtaken by another newer coin with some extra feature.  We could argue about the intrinsic value of non-commodity backed national currency like the US dollar (which is backed by the value of the US economy, although susceptible to inflation/deflation), but that's more of a red herring in this context.

Crypto is valuable, extremely valuable. You could definitely make the argument that a system of exchange involving digital coins/tokens/keys/hashes/whatever is valuable. But the value to me seems more in the conceptualization of the distributed process itself and not the actual tokens. This can be seen to some extent in how easily and quickly new coins are popping up. The idea itself is in the public domain, even if your set of Bitcoins are not. What makes Bitcoin more valuable than Dogecoin? Is it the technology or the adoption? I think in the end that is really my question. What forces are out there that will make sure Bitcoin will not be overtaken by Dogecoin, or Etherium, or Litecoin, or Etherium-v2, or whatever the next leap is. Because without that moat, the Bitcoin tokens themselves will only be valuable until the next coin takes over its market share. You can still play the game by keeping a broad portfolio of coins, but with no barrier to entry in the market, I don't see how things will ever stabilize on any one coin to the point where you would feel confident using them as long term speculative investments. If anyone can make their own coin by forking public code repos, there will be no need to be dependent on one type of coin for specific use cases. Thus I don't see how coins can be considered good vehicles for the long-term storage of wealth. But then maybe I'm missing something and you guys can help me out.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 27, 2017, 02:22:19 PM
I could imagine a hypothetical future where cryptocurrency is widely used to settle payments, but the tools for trading in and out of it on both ends are so fast/efficient that the total value of that cryptocurrency only needs to be a few billion to facilitate millions of transactions per day.

Yes, this is sort of where I see it going. As it stands, if you want to pay for something electronically (with a debit card, we'll leave credit cards out of this) you swipe the card, and then the card processor charges the merchant a fee (~3%) in exchange for transferring the money between you and providing some level of fraud prevention/security.

But they *don't* trade your dollars into Visa-Bux and back again to do that. And there's not really a reason that bitcoin/blockchain tech needs to have a "currency" attached to it with *any particular value* in order to facilitate transactions, if both parties just want dollars in the end. All the bitcoin on earth could be worth $500 million and you could use it for exchange that way (dollars instantaneously to bitcoin instantaneously to dollars) or it could be worth $500 quadrillion. Doesn't matter.

At some point you start to wonder about the point of having the "currency" part of it at all, if you're just transferring dollars to dollars.

So while I see the technology being a great thing and possibly a wonderful way to get the vampire squid credit/debit card companies from siphoning 2-3% of the every transaction, I *don't* think that means buying bitcoins (or any other crypto "currency") is a good investment or correlated to the potential of the technology.

So I think we're in agreement about a lot of this. However, I would argue having the currency part actually is important, even if you're ultimately buying and selling in dollars, just because I really can send you bitcoins/ethereum/whatever over the internet without us both needing a trusted third party (like mastercard or western union), whereas if I did want to sent you dollars directly over the internet, we're always going to need some kind of trusted third party, and they're always going to extract the highest fees that they can manage for serving in that role. That's just the inherent nature of dollars.

And of course if I'm buying with RMB, but you want to sell in USD, the importance of an intermediate currency like bitcoin becomes even more important (regardless of the price of an individual bitcoin) since there are currency controls on actually sending RMB out of China.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 27, 2017, 02:31:56 PM
What makes Bitcoin more valuable than Dogecoin?

What makes gold more valuable than silver? People simply value it more. You can argue about gold's industrial uses, but gold was still held in high value long before those industrial uses came along. Personally, I like the look of silver or platinum more in jewelry than gold. Gold is simply valuable because a lot of people place value on it. Because of that value placed on it combined with its scarcity (you can't just go in your back yard and dig some up), it has a lot of value. There are some metals out there that are more scarce, have more industrial function, or even perhaps are better ornamentally, yet gold is still one of the better store of values. Gold historically has no "moat" against other precious metals outside of humans just blindly valuing it for what it is.

The same is true for Bitcoin. There may be better functioning alt-coins out there for specific tasks. There may be better alt-coins out there that are more secure or anonymous. There may be better alt-coins that are technologically or cryptographically better or easier to use. But, they're not better enough to overtake Bitcoin as a store of value. People simply value it more than all other currencies by a lot. Some reasons make sense as to why, some don't. However, unlike gold that is a static element, Bitcoin is not so static. It can be molded through consensus to become what the market needs it to be. There are other alt-coins that are similar enough where specific functionality can be tested within smaller markets to see how they perform and then those very same features can be added to Bitcoin if needed. Bitcoin's market lead along with the fact that new features can and likely will be added will keep Bitcoin as the #1 currency for the foreseeable future.

A new crypto-currency popping up out of the blue is no more of a threat to Bitcoin's value than a new metal being discovered is a threat to gold's value as a precious metal. That's not to say I wouldn't keep a close eye on the market over the next several years to see what's going on in the industry to see what new technology is out there. Anything is possible and if you're just blindly stashing away Bitcoin and turning your back on it, there is always a chance you'll get burned. But, I don't see the threat of other alt-coins as a reason to avoid Bitcoin altogether. I'd merely view other currencies as lively experimentation is a burgeoning new industry; definitely something to keep an eye on.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MystryBox on October 27, 2017, 02:45:58 PM
I think I got off track on the intrinsic value piece. The point I was trying to focus on more was the vulnerability of the value and adoption of any one type of coin to be completely overtaken by another newer coin with some extra feature.  We could argue about the intrinsic value of non-commodity backed national currency like the US dollar (which is backed by the value of the US economy, although susceptible to inflation/deflation), but that's more of a red herring in this context.

First off, I agree with your points about the value of crypto being questionable due to new cryptos coming online, forks, etc.  When I first got into crypto there was really just bitcoin and the arguments about bitcoin being "digital gold" seemed quite strong.  However since then there have been thousands of new coins as well as forks of bitcoin itself.  Gold doesn't fork and gold isn't at risk of gold 2.0 coming out next year.  So no, bitcoin is not "digital gold" and crypto is a speculation.  I think it will have a significant role in the future but exactly what the future looks like and what value it will have are unknowns. I'm still interested in participating in the road crypto is traveling, but I'm not fool enough to believe bitcoin (or any crypto) is the end-all-be-all of digital currency value.  I actually think bitcoin is going to lose its lead coin status in the next year or so.

However I disagree with you about the US dollar.  The US dollar is not backed by the value of the US economy in any meaningful meaning of the word "backed."  Governments and their fiat currencies regularly fail despite the country having rich resources and functional economies.  At best you might say the US dollar value is related to the US economy, but unfortunately its more related to how the government manages the currency and its own finances.  The US government can (and IS) going further and further into debt, adding more and more unfunded liabilities, and otherwise walking the path to bankruptcy which very well could one day result in defaults, overhauls of the government, and significant collapse the dollar's value (if not outright destruction of the currency).  However the economy of the US itself can continue on, new government structures and monies can be created, etc.  In short any value and stability of a fiat currency is much more linked to the government making the fiat mandate than the links to economy, resources, military, or other sources.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Scortius on October 27, 2017, 02:56:54 PM
What makes Bitcoin more valuable than Dogecoin?

What makes gold more valuable than silver? People simply value it more. You can argue about gold's industrial uses, but gold was still held in high value long before those industrial uses came along. Personally, I like the look of silver or platinum more in jewelry than gold. Gold is simply valuable because a lot of people place value on it. Because of that value placed on it combined with its scarcity (you can't just go in your back yard and dig some up), it has a lot of value. There are some metals out there that are more scarce, have more industrial function, or even perhaps are better ornamentally, yet gold is still one of the better store of values. Gold historically has no "moat" against other precious metals outside of humans just blindly valuing it for what it is.

The same is true for Bitcoin. There may be better functioning alt-coins out there for specific tasks. There may be better alt-coins out there that are more secure or anonymous. There may be better alt-coins that are technologically or cryptographically better or easier to use. But, they're not better enough to overtake Bitcoin as a store of value. People simply value it more than all other currencies by a lot. Some reasons make sense as to why, some don't. However, unlike gold that is a static element, Bitcoin is not so static. It can be molded through consensus to become what the market needs it to be. There are other alt-coins that are similar enough where specific functionality can be tested within smaller markets to see how they perform and then those very same features can be added to Bitcoin if needed. Bitcoin's market lead along with the fact that new features can and likely will be added will keep Bitcoin as the #1 currency for the foreseeable future.

A new crypto-currency popping up out of the blue is no more of a threat to Bitcoin's value than a new metal being discovered is a threat to gold's value as a precious metal. That's not to say I wouldn't keep a close eye on the market over the next several years to see what's going on in the industry to see what new technology is out there. Anything is possible and if you're just blindly stashing away Bitcoin and turning your back on it, there is always a chance you'll get burned. But, I don't see the threat of other alt-coins as a reason to avoid Bitcoin altogether. I'd merely view other currencies as lively experimentation is a burgeoning new industry; definitely something to keep an eye on.

I'm not sure I agree with a lot of these points.  There are some very specific reasons why gold is more valuable than silver.  Two big ones are that 1) gold is more rare, and 2) it's chemically inert (whereas silver tarnishes for example). In fact, gold is extremely unique in its combination of softness and chemical stability. So right off the bat we have two good predictors on value: rarity and practicality. That does seem to make sense to me.

Bitcoin certainly gets to claim rarity on the grounds that it has a finite supply, but then so does any other crypto coin, so I'm honestly not sure how to factor that in. As for practicality, again it's hard to measure how Bitcoin directly compares to other coins as the comparison may be use-case dependent. But, you do see effects like Etherium (which maybe should be called Bitcoin-v2) coming out of nowhere and claiming a significant market share due to perceived practicality improvements.

And that's the thing. You mention that Bitcoin is not so static, but I look at it and see it as being very static. A coin is a token that can be anonymously exchanged with a way to verify the exchange. There are going to be a fixed number of coins, and that's that. I don't get this idea of it 'becoming what the market needs it to be'.  They are what they are, and that's a secure distributed system for the validated exchange of tokens. But, anyone can pretty much on a whim fork/clone the code and create their own parallel system decoupled from the valuation of any other system.

And yes, I agree that most of Bitcoin's value is due to it being first-to-market, but if that's the main reason it's worth over 1,000 times more than equivalent (or even functionally superior) alt-coins, I don't see how that represents a stable system over a significant number of years. If at any single point in the near or distant future Bitcoin starts to lose market share to an emerging new technology, there will be nothing to stop its value from plummeting due to this feedback loop of its value being tied to its market share.  If everyone's jumping to Super-coin and Bitcoin's market share starts dropping, who's going to be sitting there willing to buy Bitcoins at their current price when the value of Super-coin is exploding and there's possible reason to thing that Bitcoin will be come a completely outdated dominated implementation of the next big crypto-currency? If consumer confidence starts declining, the value of a Bitcoin could evaporate in a cloud of smoke as hoarders make a 'run on the bank' and try and offload their inventory in exchange for The Next Big Thing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 27, 2017, 06:29:58 PM
I'm not sure I agree with a lot of these points.  There are some very specific reasons why gold is more valuable than silver.  Two big ones are that 1) gold is more rare, and 2) it's chemically inert (whereas silver tarnishes for example). In fact, gold is extremely unique in its combination of softness and chemical stability. So right off the bat we have two good predictors on value: rarity and practicality. That does seem to make sense to me.

Bitcoin certainly gets to claim rarity on the grounds that it has a finite supply, but then so does any other crypto coin, so I'm honestly not sure how to factor that in. As for practicality, again it's hard to measure how Bitcoin directly compares to other coins as the comparison may be use-case dependent. But, you do see effects like Etherium (which maybe should be called Bitcoin-v2) coming out of nowhere and claiming a significant market share due to perceived practicality improvements.

And that's the thing. You mention that Bitcoin is not so static, but I look at it and see it as being very static. A coin is a token that can be anonymously exchanged with a way to verify the exchange. There are going to be a fixed number of coins, and that's that. I don't get this idea of it 'becoming what the market needs it to be'.  They are what they are, and that's a secure distributed system for the validated exchange of tokens. But, anyone can pretty much on a whim fork/clone the code and create their own parallel system decoupled from the valuation of any other system.

And yes, I agree that most of Bitcoin's value is due to it being first-to-market, but if that's the main reason it's worth over 1,000 times more than equivalent (or even functionally superior) alt-coins, I don't see how that represents a stable system over a significant number of years. If at any single point in the near or distant future Bitcoin starts to lose market share to an emerging new technology, there will be nothing to stop its value from plummeting due to this feedback loop of its value being tied to its market share.  If everyone's jumping to Super-coin and Bitcoin's market share starts dropping, who's going to be sitting there willing to buy Bitcoins at their current price when the value of Super-coin is exploding and there's possible reason to thing that Bitcoin will be come a completely outdated dominated implementation of the next big crypto-currency? If consumer confidence starts declining, the value of a Bitcoin could evaporate in a cloud of smoke as hoarders make a 'run on the bank' and try and offload their inventory in exchange for The Next Big Thing.

Bitcoin's scarcity doesn't just come from the limited number of coins that are programmed into the code. It's scarcity comes from the network itself. There is a massive amount of proof-of-work that went into mining the coins that are in existence today just like there was a massive amount of work that went into mining gold from the ground. It isn't just scarcity that matters when determining the value that humans place on a limited supply commodity, it is also the amount of work it took to get that commodity into existance and the amount of work it will take to create more. This is why alt-coins don't pose as much of a threat to Bitcoin. Sure, other coins can just come along and appear out of no where, but they won't have the same amount of proof-of-work or hashrate behind them and therefore they won't equate to the same amount of value and rarity that Bitcoin possesses. The computing power that is a part of the Bitcoin network is more power than the top 600 supercomputers combined. This provides a huge amount of resistance to attacks and adds to the security of the network. It also ensures that Bitcoins that are being mined require a sufficient amount of proof-of-work to justify their value that the market puts on them. This is why just any alt-coin that gets created today won't have the same amount of value placed on it by investors. It takes something like $50 billion dollars to try and create one fraudulant Bitcoin. Bitcoin is completely resistant to counterfeiting. That is something that almost no other physical commodity can make a claim to. Not only is Bitcoin an established crypto-currency from a community and industry point of view, it is also an established network from an infrastructure point of view.

Bitcoin is not static. It has been changed and upgraded several times. It has weathered forks. Segregated Witness, which was a feature added to Bitcoin a couple months ago, allows for other overlay networks on top of Bitcoin that will ensure that it remains flexible enough in the future for additional functionality without necessarily the need for hardforks. Smart Contracts are also a possibility. So no, I don't think Bitcoin is as static as you make it out to be. However, one thing is certain, it requires consensus in order to change. That means that it won't change unless the entire network (or an overwhelming majority) agrees to it. That's the glory of a decentralized network like this. The overlay networks that are added on top of Bitcoin (like the Lightning Network) are completely opt-in. Therefore, you can still use Bitcoin just as it always was while allowing users who choose so to take advantage of additional functionality all on top of the stable and secure network that Bitcoin has established itself as. This not only will add more and more value to Bitcoin, but provides a huge amount of resistance to other crypto-currencies from overtaking Bitcoin as the dominant coin.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MystryBox on October 28, 2017, 11:28:36 AM
Here's some advice from someone who reached FI using crypto.

What To Do

- Don't spend more than you can afford to lose
- Know what you are buying and why
- Make your purchase
- Move to a paper wallet (or similar offline wallet)*
- Store offline wallet in a safety deposit box or other secure location where you won't be tempted to move the coins without good reason
- Hold
- Sell only when your target is reached, or if something significant and fundamental in the investment or situation changed
- Keep good records and pay your taxes

* If you don't know how to make a paper wallet safely you're probably not technically savvy enough to be in crypto

What Not To Do

1) Do not leave coins on exchanges.  Exchanges have a large number of risks.  All the following have happened...  Funds can be stolen by hackers or insiders. Funds can be lost by error or incompetence. Exchanges and funds can be seized by governments (for money laundering or whatever). These risks are real--even by 2014 (the last time I checked) half of all exchanges had failed or lost funds somehow.  The exceptions to this are if you're not technically competent to secure your own crypto (in which case you shouldn't be in crypto), or if you worry about being able to prove source of funds later (see #3). In that case accept the risk of loss and leave on the exchange, but don't touch!

2) Do not trade.  To trade you'll have to leave funds on exchanges, see (1).  If you trade you will almost surely do worse than just holding, usually much worse.  If you trade and somehow manage to make an overall gain, taxes (which will be a pain-in-the-ass to figure out) will eat up a huge chunk of that gain, again making you make less than you would've just holding.  I know a lot of people who were in crypto early and very few of them have actually made what they should have due to not following (1) and (2).

3) Avoid "anonymous" crypto.  Using anonymous crypto makes proving source of funds difficult or impossible.  If you actually succeed in your goal and make a lot of wealth in crypto, yet you cannot show source of funds, you'll find it very difficult to convert back to fiat.  Many exchanges that convert to fiat don't want to deal with you if have a lot of crypto and you can't show source of funds.  You could be a drug dealer as far as they know and they don't want to be shut down for laundering money so they will just refuse to deal with you.  Taxes potentially become more difficult also. 

4) Avoid anonymizing services, gambling sites, darknet, etc. for the same reasons as (3). Also there are additional risks in that you might not get your money back, and these services attract criminals and such.  You don't want to be associated with potentially illegal uses of crypto.  Exchanges that convert crypto to fiat have to be very careful not to deal with criminals.  These exchanges can and do examine crypto movement of customers and will refuse to convert your crypto into cash or even lock your account and funds if they see shady usage. 

5) Avoid the "investments" that constantly pop-up in crypto. Most of these don't end well.  Besides, crypto is the breakthrough, potentially world changing technology, not whatever these companies are offering.  Especially avoid shady, or anonymous businesses for risks of (1,3,4) beyond the other obvious reasons.

Does anyone have further advice?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on October 28, 2017, 02:14:59 PM
"Either you don't understand Bitcoin or you don't understand what a pyramid scheme is."

This is, to put it mildly, an extravagantly dismissive attitude. It's not an exact copy of a pyramid scheme (because if it was, it would be completely illegal), but the characteristics are not too dissimilar. In each case, you're seeing a progressively larger flow of money into a product, fuelled by the gains realised by prior investors, and fuelling a still larger flow of money into the product. There are enough characteristics in common that the comparison isn't unwarranted. It's not as tight a match as with Robert Schiller's description of a bubble, but it's still a reasonable comparison to make.

isn't that an exact description of the stock market?  if you own VTSAX or any other index fund you're not researching individual companies.  most of the return on stocks is simply waiting for someone else to come along and buy it from you later for a higher price than you paid.  dividends of course result in the proportional reduction of the share price so those don't count as returns.  the price/book ratio of the s&p 500 is over 3.0, so don't tell me you're gladly purchasing something for more than 3x the "intrinsic value".  you buy stocks because you hope buyers will be there when you go to sell 4% of your shares every year.


Dude, if you want intrinsic value, you want stocks, or land, or useful commodities, or something else that produces something. No currency (at least none that I'm aware of) has "intrinsic" value, bitcoin included. In fact you don't really even want currency to have intrinsic value, since you want it used for exchange, not hoarding.

-W

is a 24/7 global, secure, cheap, fast, censorship-resistant payment network not producing value?  are visa, paypal, and western union valueless as well?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on October 28, 2017, 02:23:48 PM
Does anyone have further advice?

great advice in that post.

i would add:
-do not sell more than 5% of your holdings in any given year even if everyone is shouting about bubbles, tops, and tulips.  this applies to blockchain forks as well.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 28, 2017, 02:31:39 PM
MystryBox, a good set of advice. I'm not sure about #3 on the what-not-to-do list just because I think assumed anonymous nature of cryptocurrencies was one of the things that got people really excited about bitcoin in the early days (before people realized how straightforward it would often be to link an anonymous "wallet" to a particular person). So I still think the anonymous cryptocurrencies are likely candidates if there ever is a significant switch from bitcoin to something else.

That said, even if I'm right about that, you certainly raise a very valid point about the difficulty of getting money back out of crypto without looking like a potential drug dealer if you've got a lot of money sitting in monero or zcash (or whichever other anonymous coins are out there).

Dude, if you want intrinsic value, you want stocks, or land, or useful commodities, or something else that produces something. No currency (at least none that I'm aware of) has "intrinsic" value, bitcoin included. In fact you don't really even want currency to have intrinsic value, since you want it used for exchange, not hoarding.

-W

is a 24/7 global, secure, cheap, fast, censorship-resistant payment network not producing value?  are visa, paypal, and western union valueless as well?

I cannot speak for Walt, but I certainly think the bitcoin network and the ability to send payments all over the world is producing value. But the folks who produce that value (and get paid for it) are the miners, not the folks who hold bitcoin. Now if at some point in the future there is a switch to a proof-of-stake instead of proof-of-work on a major cryptocurrency (I think that is still on Ethereum's roadmap), then the folks who just buy and hold the currency could, indeed, be producing value.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on October 28, 2017, 02:55:34 PM
Now if at some point in the future there is a switch to a proof-of-stake instead of proof-of-work on a major cryptocurrency (I think that is still on Ethereum's roadmap), then the folks who just buy and hold the currency could, indeed, be producing value.

i don't know how Ethereum's PoS will work but i imagine it would have to somehow involve spending money on electricity and computer hardware to process transactions and store the blockchain -- therefore a nonzero input to keep generating value via the payment network.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 28, 2017, 03:08:30 PM
It's been a long time since I've updated on my ZEC mining experiment.* I stopped updating because the capital appreciation on the fees from ZEC mining which I was holding in bitcoin was going up so fast that it really dwarfed the financial effects of continuing to mine. But my mining rig has continued to chug away in the corner of my basement the last couple of months, so I thought I'd pull together an update.

The last data in my records is from August 18th, 2017, at which point I had climbed out of the ~$1,400 cost of setting up my rig and was up ~$800 (so total gain of approx. $2,200) based on ~$550 of mining income with the rest coming from capital appreciation. Two months later I'm up to ~$1,700 net (so total gain ~$3,100), with mining income at ~$750. I don't have detailed records for the last two months, but whenever I've checked my rig has been pretty consistently pulling in $100/month (~3x the cost of the electricity). People seem to have mostly stopped talking about investing in mining hardware (or maybe it's just an artifact of which forums I do or don't frequent), which is consistent with the profit from mining being a lot more stable.

(https://i.imgpile.com/nMmZwu.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nMmZwu)

All in all, I may still break even on the cost of hardware from mining fees at some point. I certainly did end up making money as the result of this experiment, but it was from an unconsidered side effect of my plan (holding more cryptocurrency), not the actual thing I set out to do (turn a profit from setting up a bunch of GPUs in my basement).


*Original details here on the first page of the thread. (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/official-crypto-currency-portfolios-and-discussion/msg1600715/#msg1600715). Details on power usage here on the second page. (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/official-crypto-currency-portfolios-and-discussion/msg1610593/#msg1610593)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 28, 2017, 03:26:37 PM
Now if at some point in the future there is a switch to a proof-of-stake instead of proof-of-work on a major cryptocurrency (I think that is still on Ethereum's roadmap), then the folks who just buy and hold the currency could, indeed, be producing value.

i don't know how Ethereum's PoS will work but i imagine it would have to somehow involve spending money on electricity and computer hardware to process transactions and store the blockchain -- therefore a nonzero input to keep generating value via the payment network.

Agreed, but the vast majority of the current computer hardware and energy usage from cryptocurrencies that use proof of work (basically all the big ones everyone has heard of right now) isn't spent on storing the blockchain or communicating about transactions, it is spent on what is essentially a security measure to prevent people from rewriting the blockchain (churning away at asymmetrically hard math problems).

In proof of stake you probably still need to have a computer running in order to help mine (or do they call it minting with PoS?), but you don't get extra minting/mining rewards from having extra more computers/CPUs/GPUs/ASICs only from owning more of the currency and being willing to stake that currency on not allowing invalid transactions to go forward.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Scortius on October 28, 2017, 05:16:46 PM
Just wanted to chime in and say thanks for the comments. While I do feel that crypto could be hanging on a speculation bubble, I truly am excited about the possible applications of the underlying technology, especially in areas beyond basic currency exchanges. I'll certainly be keeping my eyes on things and the technology continues to progress.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MystryBox on October 28, 2017, 06:12:25 PM
MystryBox, a good set of advice. I'm not sure about #3 on the what-not-to-do list just because I think assumed anonymous nature of cryptocurrencies was one of the things that got people really excited about bitcoin in the early days (before people realized how straightforward it would often be to link an anonymous "wallet" to a particular person). So I still think the anonymous cryptocurrencies are likely candidates if there ever is a significant switch from bitcoin to something else.

I would've agreed with you in the past, but after some direct experience cashing out a non-trivial amount of crypto my view has changed.  Fully anonymous crypto are sure to be used for transactions, especially on the darknet, but as an investment I don't think they will ever be very big.  I could be wrong, but here's my thinking:
- Exchanges are likely to run into regulatory issues converting them to fiat in large amounts in many countries.
- I suspect large institutional traders and hedge funds will avoid them precisely because of the anonymous factor/darknet-link and the above exchange issues.  Value won't go very far without larger traders buying.

I think cryptos that are normally traceable but can have anonymization when needed (like eth and bitcoin will eventually support) are better investments than a fully anonymous crypto.  JMO.

Quote
That said, even if I'm right about that, you certainly raise a very valid point about the difficulty of getting money back out of crypto without looking like a potential drug dealer if you've got a lot of money sitting in monero or zcash (or whichever other anonymous coins are out there).

I would recommend if you invest in anonymous cryptos and expect significant gains, you should leave them on the exchange.  Then when it is time to sell there is no question about where they came from.  These concerns are only for significant amounts of crypto.  And if you have a lot of crypto you can run into other problems like hidden caps that some exchanges have on fiat movement, even if source of funds isn't a problem.  For example I believe Kraken has an annual limit where even for highest tier customers it would take you literally 10 years to cash out of a million dollars worth of crypto off the exchange.  So make sure your exchange will actually handle the value you expect to end up with.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 28, 2017, 08:06:03 PM
Thanks! I certainly don't have direct experience cashing out large sums of cypto (anonymous or otherwise) so it's great to hear from someone who has gone through the process recently and seen where the potential snags are.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on October 28, 2017, 09:49:29 PM
Maizeman, I continue to love the clarity and reliability of your mining reports. 

MystryBox, welcome to the forum.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 29, 2017, 08:25:02 AM
The most recent Bitcoin difficulty change was pretty significant. It dropped my daily BTC earning from about .00185 to about .00146. Back when I first got this rig in July I was earning about .00269. So it has dropped by almost half in about 3 months. Luckily the price has skyrocketed since then as well. I believe I'll still be profitable with my mining for the foreseeable future, but the difficulty has risen significantly with all the recent BTC price increases. I'm curious to see how the hashrate responds if the 2X fork ends up going through. I'm torn, I think the 2X fork is wreckless and poorly executed because it doesn't have replay protection, but I wouldn't mind seeing some hashrate go to another chain to allow BTCs difficulty to go down or at the very least hold steady for a while.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 29, 2017, 08:40:06 AM
That's a good point, lifeanon. I should have specified that, stated in dollars, my mining income has been relatively constant. However, since the price of bitcoin in dollars has increased over that time period, stated in bitcoin, my mining income has continued to decline over the last several months.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MystryBox on October 29, 2017, 09:29:33 AM
I'm torn, I think the 2X fork is wreckless and poorly executed because it doesn't have replay protection, but I wouldn't mind seeing some hashrate go to another chain to allow BTCs difficulty to go down or at the very least hold steady for a while.

The 2X/1X fork is being executed this way on purpose by both sides.  The value in bitcoin is no longer in its technology--it's not remotely leading tech anymore, and it's barely usable by comparison to other coins due to delays and fees--its value is in the Bitcoin brand.  Neither side wants to implement replay protection because whoever changes and implements replay protection becomes the altcoin and arguably won't get the "bitcoin"/"btc" branding.  So both sides are playing a game of chicken to see who will take majority hashing and usage to walk away with the brand and forcing the other side into vanishing or "altcoining" itself.

To me the whole thing is risking the value (and lead coin status) of BTC.  Ethereum took a huge hit in value when it forked off classic without replay protection (though it eventually rebounded).  No matter how it goes I think it's another nail in the coffin of bitcoin maximalism.  The fault lies squarely with Core and its complete inability to cooperate with bitcoin mining, business, and user communities.  Unfortunately I don't see Core improving its leadership abilities and even if 1X wins it only means there will be even more drama soon (or perhaps a defection of businesses and usage to Bitcoin Cash or Ethereum).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Full-Life on October 29, 2017, 09:48:03 AM
How do you manage your Crypto-Currency Portfolios?

On the basis of market capatilization I'm planning to invest in the top 5 crypto currencies and to rebalance every month.
Like a typical passiv index fonds. What is a cheap and simple way to do this? 

PS. I haven't read every post in this threat, only the first pages and couldn't find an answer.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on October 29, 2017, 10:00:00 AM
How do you manage your Crypto-Currency Portfolios?

On the basis of market capatilization I'm planning to invest in the top 5 crypto currencies and to rebalance every month.
Like a typical passiv index fonds. What is a cheap and simple way to do this? 

PS. I haven't read every post in this threat, only the first pages and couldn't find an answer.

If you're trying to replicate a cap weighted index fund you shouldn't be doing any rebalancing at all. In addition, rebalancing every month would either mean losing an awful lot in transaction fees or keeping your cryptocurrency at an exchange, which is a very bad idea.

I'd highly suggest reading MystryBox's post on the previous page (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/official-crypto-currency-portfolios-and-discussion/msg1750281/#msg1750281) about things to do and things not to do when investing in cryptocurrencies before you actually spend any money.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Full-Life on October 29, 2017, 10:12:52 AM
Thanks for the link. These are exactly the information what  I need Very informative. Especially the taxation and changing to firat currencies.

I'm planing to invest every month 100,-€ in crypto currencies. Money that doesn't hurt me if lost. Rebalancing for me would mean to buy to rebalance and to sell only if the currencies is not in the top 5 anymore.

How do you recommend to invest constantly passiv in crypto currencies?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 29, 2017, 12:20:25 PM
The 2X/1X fork is being executed this way on purpose by both sides.  The value in bitcoin is no longer in its technology--it's not remotely leading tech anymore, and it's barely usable by comparison to other coins due to delays and fees--its value is in the Bitcoin brand.  Neither side wants to implement replay protection because whoever changes and implements replay protection becomes the altcoin and arguably won't get the "bitcoin"/"btc" branding.  So both sides are playing a game of chicken to see who will take majority hashing and usage to walk away with the brand and forcing the other side into vanishing or "altcoining" itself.

To me the whole thing is risking the value (and lead coin status) of BTC.  Ethereum took a huge hit in value when it forked off classic without replay protection (though it eventually rebounded).  No matter how it goes I think it's another nail in the coffin of bitcoin maximalism.  The fault lies squarely with Core and its complete inability to cooperate with bitcoin mining, business, and user communities.  Unfortunately I don't see Core improving its leadership abilities and even if 1X wins it only means there will be even more drama soon (or perhaps a defection of businesses and usage to Bitcoin Cash or Ethereum).


I've been observing the space before my mmm account age. It's highly political. Both sides are not without blemish and information distortion. However, I believe core is the greater evil.


I'm going to have to disagree here. Every fork should have replay protection of some form implemented to protect the user base and their money. If a hard fork is implemented with replay protection and it has enough community support, then the value, the name of Bitcoin, the community, hashrate, and all will follow it. If there is a fork and non of those things follow, then the community has spoken that the fork is not Bitcoin. Implementing a fork without replay protection should be seen as an attack on Bitcoin itself since it is trying to accomplish altering Bitcoin without consensus. Luckily support for 2X has been declining rapidly lately. Unfortunately, if 2X still goes forward, there is still the risk of fraudulent transactions due to no replay protection.

The Core development team isn't evil, they're conservative and I'm greatful for that since I have money in Bitcoin. It is what has made the Bitcoin network as stable as it is. SegWit was just activated and there needs to be time given to see how that impacts the network before implementing additional changes. As far as fees go, most of the high fees are actually due to poor wallet fee estimation. Most wallets that don't allow the user to directly specify a fee use fee algorithms that way overestimate what fee should be used for a transactions. Luckily, this has also been changing lately as many popular wallets are now allowing the user to specific fee rates. At the moment I can send transactions consistently for 20-30 Satoshis per byte which is very low. This is without SegWit even being widely utilized yet. Implementing a irreversible hardfork to increase the blocksize to 2MB when it isn't necessary yet and to do so without implementing replay protection is wreckless.

B2X is already being listed by most exchanges as different than BTC, so continuing forward in order to capture the Bitcoin name is futile since they attempted to do so without community support.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on October 29, 2017, 12:45:31 PM
Wait, wait, a cabal of self-interested people who are only slightly answerable to the participants is running the show?!?

Sounds sort of a like... government.

-W

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MystryBox on October 29, 2017, 12:51:38 PM

We'll have to disagree on these points. I really want to avoid the politics here, but if you insist, I can provide a statement.

I'm with you.  Nothing stated in all that had any basis in reality, but I'll just shut my mouth.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 29, 2017, 12:56:48 PM
We'll have to disagree on these points. I really want to avoid the politics here, but if you insist, I can provide a statement.

That's fine. This thread is one large debate regarding Bitcoin and crypto-currencies, so I don't think discussing the technical and logistical aspects of Bitcoin and its various forks necessarily needs to be political or negative. But, I don't think you avoided anything by calling Bitcoin core the "greater evil" either.   ;-)

Wait, wait, a cabal of self-interested people who are only slightly answerable to the participants is running the show?!?

Sounds sort of a like... government.

-W

Haha, well depending on how the 2X fork goes, they could be shown to be fully answerable. Time will tell.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on October 29, 2017, 01:43:09 PM
Wait, wait, a cabal of self-interested people who are only slightly answerable to the participants is running the show?!?

Sounds sort of a like... government.

-W

Can I just say how much I love your posts
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 30, 2017, 11:38:41 AM
I figured I'd post this for all the crypto lovers here to maybe stoke some even more love you all have for the promise of crypto-currencies. It is an old article (2010) related to the 2008 global financial crisis that I saved to refer back to when I want to be reminded of the blatant fraud that occurs on Wall Street and the promise the crypto-currencies could bring to the table by being counterfeit proof. The article is still relevant today though. It is when I read articles like this that I get really excited about crypto-currencies and how they can help fix our broken economy and help revolutionize our financial sector. It is an excellent read from Rolling Stone if you haven't read it before. It isn't just the US economy that operates like this either, it is the entire world economy that operates on a counterfeit and fraudulent basis.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wall-streets-naked-swindle-20100405 (https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wall-streets-naked-swindle-20100405)

If anyone ever tells you that Bitcoin or crypto-currencies are in a bubble, just have them read this article. When you can have 12 paper oil barrels trading for every 1 physical oil barrel, then it isn't Bitcoin that should be worried about a bubble. Our whole economy is based on counterfeit trading.

The fact that Bitcoin is counterfeit proof gives it a leg up on the rest of the economy. At least the Bitcoin I own I know are real and legitimate Bitcoin.

That being said, I'd imagine that once derivatives trading starts becoming more popular with Bitcoin, then those derivatives would likely be vulnerable to the same counterfeiting which is why it is always good advice to just invest and hold directly in Bitcoin and not in any derivative markets.

Enjoy the read and go buy some Bitcoin!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MystryBox on October 30, 2017, 02:06:09 PM
The fact that Bitcoin is counterfeit proof gives it a leg up on the rest of the economy. At least the Bitcoin I own I know are real and legitimate Bitcoin.

That being said, I'd imagine that once derivatives trading starts becoming more popular with Bitcoin, then those derivatives would likely be vulnerable to the same counterfeiting which is why it is always good advice to just invest and hold directly in Bitcoin and not in any derivative markets.

Too bad core, who you seem to love, is busy killing the original design of bitcoin and turning it into a settlement system that they will then use to power higher level derivative networks like sidechains and lightning.  I had a big argument with nullc (Greg Maxwell) a few years back about how they were moving away from the "digital property" breakthrough that bitcoin achieved to create a bunch of derivatives on top of bitcoin which would start right down the same road of the mainstream financial system.  He didn't care, he's never cared about those aspects of bitcoin.

Their entire refusal to increase the blocksize is not what they claim, it is to obsolete the old bitcoin model and force any new usage into newer derivative technologies (which they of course profit from).   So why bother posting about how great those attributes of bitcoin are when you are cheering the group that is killing those attributes?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 30, 2017, 04:01:43 PM
Too bad core, who you seem to love, is busy killing the original design of bitcoin and turning it into a settlement system that they will then use to power higher level derivative networks like sidechains and lightning.  I had a big argument with nullc (Greg Maxwell) a few years back about how they were moving away from the "digital property" breakthrough that bitcoin achieved to create a bunch of derivatives on top of bitcoin which would start right down the same road of the mainstream financial system.  He didn't care, he's never cared about those aspects of bitcoin.

Their entire refusal to increase the blocksize is not what they claim, it is to obsolete the old bitcoin model and force any new usage into newer derivative technologies (which they of course profit from).   So why bother posting about how great those attributes of bitcoin are when you are cheering the group that is killing those attributes?

Wow, MystryBox, you're very antagonistic. First you comment about how my post has no basis in reality (without actually refuting anything), then you comment about how you're going to instead keep quiet on the matter. Then you follow that up with another aggressive post and tell me not to bother posting things about the merits and benefits of Bitcoin as if somehow I'm not a big believer and proponent of the tech.

First off, if you look through this thread and others on this forum, you'll see I am a big advocate of Bitcoin and its capabilities. I'm a firm believer in all that Bitcoin stands for...decentralization, cryptography, open source, consensus, deflationary, etc.

Second, I never said that I love Bitcoin core, I said that they're not evil. For the record, I do support increasing the block size, just not right now and certainly not with the awful SegWit2X implementation that has no active development behind it and doesn't implement replay protection properly. Support for the 2X fork in November has been crumbling lately. Tell me, what defense do you have for any hardfork that doesn't implement replay protection?

Third, increasing the block size is not a scaling solution. If we want Bitcoin to be usable as a medium of exchange, it needs to go beyond just 7 tx/sec (1MB blocks), 14 tx/sec (2MB blocks), or even 55 tx/sec (8MB blocks). Those are not scaling solutions. Bitcoin as it is designed will never be capable of processing transactions at the same rate that VISA is capable of if we're trying to just stick with on-chain transaction blocks. I agree that we absolutely need to increase the block size in order to increase the number of on-chain transactions, but using that as a scaling solution in hopes that it will continue to support the growing demands of all transaction is not going to work. Unless we find a way to move transactions off-chain, then Bitcoin can't scale to what we all want it to become. That is, I would love for a day to come where I can purchase a drink with Bitcoin.

Fourth, that doesn't even touch on the fact that in order for the network to be able to support transaction rates that high, the network would end up being much more centralized. Which out of all properties for Bitcoin, its decentralized nature is probably one of the most important to have come from Satoshi's original whitepaper. It is extremely important for Bitcoin to remain decentralized. At the moment, my Bitcoin node taxes my home network a lot. It took almost a week to download the whole chain. But, it isn't storage that I'm concerned about. I can always purchase additional storage, that's cheap and always getting cheaper. However, the bandwidth that my node uses is a lot and if the block size were to increase much more, then that would probably make it so that I wouldn't be able to host my own node in the very foreseeable future.

Also, sidechains are completely opt-in. No one is forced to use them. That's why SegWit was implemented with a UASF. Bitcoin as it is today is and can still be used the same as it was previously. If a production Lightning Network goes live, no one has to force you to use it. Those who choose to can however. The settlement still happens on the Bitcoin blockchain however and therefore the Lightning Network is still backed by the same verifiable and counterfeit proof Bitcoin blockchain. Explain to me how the Lightning Network is a derivative of Bitcoin as you say? The Lightning Network still settles in Bitcoin. When payment channels close, they're confirmed on the Bitcoin blockchain and payment channel transactions are multisig between the parties involved, so either party can broadcast the transaction in the event of a dispute. I'm not saying that Lightning Network is perfect. I don't like how payment channels need to be constantly monitored, for example. But it isn't a derivative and it is a much longer term scaling solution than simply increasing the blocksize.

Finally, I just wanted to add (I touched on this earlier) that one of Bitcoin's highest risks come from other capable cypto-currencies taking its place as the number one currency and making Bitcoin obsolete. Crypto-currencies are constantly coming up with new ideas and features. There aren't many ways that I could see Bitcoin ever going to $0, but one of those ways that I could see it happening is if a better currency came along to take its place. I believe sidechains will have greatly reduced that risk of ever occuring. They allow Bitcoin to be much more responsive to what the market needs it to be. If Bitcoin requires vastly higher transaction speeds to meet demand or micro-transaction capability, then sidechains will allow for that to occur, thus keeping the value of POS transactions strictly on the Bitcoin network as opposed to having that use-case go to another competitive currency.

Anyway, I just wanted to clear the air. I don't like it when people attempt to call me delusional without at least giving me the courteousy of telling me why the think so. If you want to have a debate with me, go ahead and do so. I'm capable of having a debate based on information without the need to be antagonistic or aggressive.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on October 30, 2017, 07:30:24 PM
First off, if you look through this thread and others on this forum, you'll see I am a big advocate of Bitcoin and its capabilities. I'm a firm believer in all that Bitcoin stands for...decentralization, cryptography, open source, consensus, deflationary, etc.

you are certainly an awesome advocate and you know your stuff.  i am debating with myself whether or not to reply to your individual points -- but what the hell.  this isn't r/bitcoin -- so we can have a debate!  in fact, the exact same debate that's been had zillions of times since blocks have been full.

Quote
I do support increasing the block size, just not right now...

blocks have been full for a while -- it should have never even got close to this point.  the block size limit should have been doubled to 2MB years ago, and probably doubled again at least once more by now.  even if monetizing sidechains or the lightning network is the surreptitious goal, you need to raise the block size for it all to work.

Quote
Third, increasing the block size is not a scaling solution ... Bitcoin as it is designed will never be capable of processing transactions at the same rate that VISA is capable of.

VISA levels of tx/sec is a straw man argument.  no one is trying to get that to work at this point.  2MB-8MB blocks are more than enough for the next few years.

Quote
Fourth, that doesn't even touch on the fact that in order for the network to be able to support transaction rates that high, the network would end up being much more centralized. Which out of all properties for Bitcoin, its decentralized nature is probably one of the most important to have come from Satoshi's original whitepaper.

the original unmodified white paper mentions that "server farms" would be nodes, not individual users.  most folks don't run their own email server or web server, yet the internet remains decentralized.

also, the lightning network by design relies on centralization.  if you're concerned the peer-to-peer qualities of bitcoin are at risk then you should be against the current lightning network proposals.

Quote
Also, sidechains are completely opt-in. No one is forced to use them... the Lightning Network is still backed by the same verifiable and counterfeit proof Bitcoin blockchain

sidechains are not opt-in if the block size is 1MB and you're in a bidding war to even get your tx in a block.

the lightning network destroys the original alignment of incentives that give us the incredible security of the today's bitcoin mining network.  if fewer people can make on-chain transactions, and the block reward has been halved a few times, why would the miners even mine any longer?

Quote
sidechains ... allow Bitcoin to be much more responsive to what the market needs it to be.

so do hard forks.  any feature could be added to bitcoin.  bitcoin's supposed to be a honey badger, not a deer in the headlights.  increasing the block size limit to 2MB-8MB by the way isn't a "feature" -- it's a much simpler change than that: it allows bitcoin to perform the same way it's performed since 2009.

Quote
If you want to have a debate with me, go ahead and do so. I'm capable of having a debate based on information without the need to be antagonistic or aggressive.

i think we're all on the same page with that here.  agreed.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 30, 2017, 08:23:14 PM
you are certainly an awesome advocate and you know your stuff.  i am debating with myself whether or not to reply to your individual points -- but what the hell.  this isn't r/bitcoin -- so we can have a debate!  in fact, the exact same debate that's been had zillions of times since blocks have been full.

I enjoy good debates, so I certainly welcome any counterpoints and am an open-minded individual.

Quote
blocks have been full for a while -- it should have never even got close to this point.  the block size limit should have been doubled to 2MB years ago, and probably doubled again at least once more by now.  even if monetizing sidechains or the lightning network is the surreptitious goal, you need to raise the block size for it all to work.

The mempool was completely empty this week, so that would go against the argument that the current blocksize is not sufficient to handle the current transaction rate demanded of the network. The mempool backup that occurred over the summer was due to a lot of transaction spam in an effort to push support for a blocksize increase. Furthermore, Segwit is a 2MB blocksize increase without demanding 2MB of per block data of the Bitcoin network.

Quote
VISA levels of tx/sec is a straw man argument.  no one is trying to get that to work at this point.  2MB-8MB blocks are more than enough for the next few years.

It isn't a strawman argument if it is constantly called into question the idea that Bitcoin is being moved in a direction that is against Satoshi's original vision. That vision was to have Bitcoin be a peer-to-peer payment network that would be a direct competitor against current payment networks like VISA that charge 3% fees to merchants. If Bitcoin is to truly be a competitor to that, then it needs to scale way beyond just 60 tx/sec. That's especially true if the adoption rate kicks into high gear and becomes exponential again like it did this year. You talk about how the blocksize should been increased long ago. That can certainly be argued, but how can that be argued now and at the same time not argue for looking further down the road again and see the writing on the wall that Bitcoin might not be up to the task of handling transactions should adoption exponentially increase yet again.

Quote
the original unmodified white paper mentions that "server farms" would be nodes, not individual users.  most folks don't run their own email server or web server, yet the internet remains decentralized.

also, the lightning network by design relies on centralization.  if you're concerned the peer-to-peer qualities of bitcoin are at risk then you should be against the current lightning network proposals.

There is a difference between trust-based centralization and trust-less centralization. First, most folks don't run their own email server, but they can if they choose to (I choose to). If Bitcoin is forced into a centralized structure, then that puts Bitcoin into more and more control of centralized parties. If Bitcoin is forced to be hosted on nodes that are only hosted by larger organizations, then those very organizations become targets for government pressure and that means that Bitcoin can be controlled. That's much harder to do if your common everyday user is also capable of hosting nodes as well. Look at the response that the community has had against the threat of the 2X fork (https://coin.dance/nodes/core). The number of Bitcoin Core nodes has dramatically gone up over the last month or so and that is all possible because your common user can do so. That's against the very aim of a decentralized peer-to-peer system. The Lightning Network can (and likely will) lead to centralized "credit union" style hubs, but like I said, the Lightning Network is completely opt-in. So no one is forced into using centralized hubs if they don't want to.

Quote
sidechains are not opt-in if the block size is 1MB and you're in a bidding war to even get your tx in a block.

the lightning network destroys the original alignment of incentives that give us the incredible security of the today's bitcoin mining network.  if fewer people can make on-chain transactions, and the block reward has been halved a few times, why would the miners even mine any longer?

In one argument you're talking about blocks being completely full which would force users into sidechains. Then in the next argument you're talking about blocks being empty which would cause miners to stop mining. Which is it? You can't argue both. The truth is that neither of those scenarios would come to pass. In order to open payment channels on the Lightning Network, you'd still need to put confirmed transactions on the Bitcoin blockchain. Opening and closing payment channels requires that to happen. Therefore, even in a fully utilized Lightning Network, there will still be Bitcoin transactions being broadcast on the network. Also, the Lightning Network is ideally used for smaller payments as payment channels will likely be opened with smaller payments in mind. This makes it possible for micro-transactions and everyday transactions to occur between parties. Larger transactions that aren't ideal for the Lightning Network would still be broadcast on the Bitcoin network as usual and if they require larger fees, then that's OK because a $2 fee to send $10,000 is a pretty darn good deal.

Quote
so do hard forks.  any feature could be added to bitcoin.  bitcoin's supposed to be a honey badger, not a deer in the headlights.  increasing the block size limit to 2MB-8MB by the way isn't a "feature" -- it's a much simpler change than that: it allows bitcoin to perform the same way it's performed since 2009.

I agree, hard forks are great too...so long as replay protection is used for those forks to protect the end users' money. Like I said, I'm OK with increasing the block size and I'm not necessarily advocating against it. But I am advocating against the SegWit2X hardfork that is planned for November since it has been poorly planned, it's timing doesn't give SegWit a chance, it fails to implement replay protection, and doesn't have community support behind it.

Quote
i think we're all on the same page with that here.  agreed.

Yup, thanks for the response!   :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on October 30, 2017, 09:41:17 PM
The mempool was completely empty this week, so that would go against the argument that the current blocksize is not sufficient to handle the current transaction rate demanded of the network.

you can't cherry pick data to fit your argument.  blocks had been getting closer to being full for years, and now they have been full for some time: https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=all&daysAverageString=7

Quote
If Bitcoin is to truly be a competitor to that, then it needs to scale way beyond just 60 tx/sec. That's especially true if the adoption rate kicks into high gear and becomes exponential again like it did this year. You talk about how the blocksize should been increased long ago. That can certainly be argued, but how can that be argued now and at the same time not argue for looking further down the road again and see the writing on the wall that Bitcoin might not be up to the task of handling transactions should adoption exponentially increase yet again.

it seems silly to have to say this but doubling the block size as needed and working on sidechains and lightning network are not mutually exclusive.  it's pretty simple: if most of the network agrees that blocks are full, then double the block size limit if current technology can handle it.  if the block size can't be doubled for technical reasons, then yes unveil the next iteration of whatever sidechain solution you have.

Quote
Quote
the original unmodified white paper mentions that "server farms" would be nodes, not individual users.  most folks don't run their own email server or web server, yet the internet remains decentralized.

my mistake -- the mining farms were mentioned in a satoshi email, not the whitepaper: http://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/2/

Quote
There is a difference between trust-based centralization and trust-less centralization. ... The Lightning Network can (and likely will) lead to centralized "credit union" style hubs, but like I said, the Lightning Network is completely opt-in.

again i think the VISA argument is arbitrary straw man but just to clarify -- in your scenario on the order of 10-100s of tx/sec are on-chain with "trust-less centralization" and on the order of 10,000s tx/sec are off-chain on lightning network hubs with "trust-based" centralization -- and that's ok?  where only a few percent of users can use bitcoin in a trustless manner?

Quote
In one argument you're talking about blocks being completely full which would force users into sidechains. Then in the next argument you're talking about blocks being empty which would cause miners to stop mining. Which is it? You can't argue both.

nope, in my argument the tiny blocks are full as you say with lightning channel opening/closing tx, and the block reward is trending to zero.  difficulty however is not trending to zero, so miners are now mining at a loss because they're not capturing fees for the bulk of transactions, which are off-chain.  somewhere before this scenario occurs the miners and users will simply migrate to a chain with larger blocks so they can capture more tx fees.

Quote
I am advocating against the SegWit2X hardfork that is planned for November since it has been poorly planned, it's timing doesn't give SegWit a chance, it fails to implement replay protection, and doesn't have community support behind it.

the fork has had >80% support since mid-june.  https://coin.dance/blocks/proposals

if segwit can't compete with 2MB blocks then perhaps the time isn't right for more intricate solutions, see my point above.  if bitcoin will exist for years there will be plenty of time to introduce these new wrinkles.  the conservative solution is simply increasing the block size now (by "now" i mean after segwit -- the really conservative solution would have been just 2MB) and in the meantime yes, by all means, continuing to work on all manner of "down the road" scaling solutions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 31, 2017, 06:26:12 AM
you can't cherry pick data to fit your argument.  blocks had been getting closer to being full for years, and now they have been full for some time: https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=all&daysAverageString=7

You say I'm cherry picking data, and then you link to a chart about the block size? The mempool is a better correlation as to whether the network is backed up than block size is now. Many blocks are not even full. Blocks are able to go beyond 1MB now, so saying they're completely full is extremely misleading of you. The effect of this is that I'm able to send transactions with extremely low fees (20 Satoshi's per byte) and have them confirmed in under an hour. As SegWit continues to get adopted, this trend will continue with more transactions per block with low fees.

Quote
it seems silly to have to say this but doubling the block size as needed and working on sidechains and lightning network are not mutually exclusive.  it's pretty simple: if most of the network agrees that blocks are full, then double the block size limit if current technology can handle it.  if the block size can't be doubled for technical reasons, then yes unveil the next iteration of whatever sidechain solution you have.

They can absolutely be worked on at the same time, but that doesn't mean they need to be implemented at the same time. A UASF is much less impactful on the network than a hard fork is. Again, you're making statements that aren't true. Blocks aren't full to the point where transactions aren't being confirmed in a timely fashion. Transaction fees aren't high. Most wallets miscalculate fee estimates and that's a bigger problem than fee competition is right now. The mempool, which as I said is a better indicator of a bottleneck, is not overloaded with unconfirmed transactions.

Quote
again i think the VISA argument is arbitrary straw man but just to clarify -- in your scenario on the order of 10-100s of tx/sec are on-chain with "trust-less centralization" and on the order of 10,000s tx/sec are off-chain on lightning network hubs with "trust-based" centralization -- and that's ok?  where only a few percent of users can use bitcoin in a trustless manner?

You misunderstand my statement on trust-less versus trust-based. My reference to trust-based was in regards to VISA. Performing transactions over the VISA network requires that you trust them. They're the ultimate mediator of transactions. Transactions are reversible because of this and a lot of fraud occurs which becomes a large cost to VISA. This results in VISA charging large fees to merchants and therefore gives VISA a lot of power. Centralized hubs on the Lightning Network however are trust-less. Those hubs don't control the transactions that traverse through them. They only control which payment channels are set up with who. Furthermore, the Lightning Network can allow for additional anonymity that currently isn't present today with Bitcoin because transactions each payment channel that a transaction traverses is only aware of the intermediary route it is taking (similar to Tor), not necessarily the originator or final recipient.

Also, using the Lightning Network doesn't force you to also use centralized hubs. The two are exclusive of each other. You can still use the Lightning Network without using hubs. Again, it is all opt-in which gives the users options on how they'd like to use their money. This is a very good thing for adoption.

Quote
nope, in my argument the tiny blocks are full as you say with lightning channel opening/closing tx, and the block reward is trending to zero.  difficulty however is not trending to zero, so miners are now mining at a loss because they're not capturing fees for the bulk of transactions, which are off-chain.  somewhere before this scenario occurs the miners and users will simply migrate to a chain with larger blocks so they can capture more tx fees.

How are miners not capturing fees with full blocks as you say? If blocks are full, then they'd be capturing a lot of fees. You're contradicting yourself. The percentage of total transactions that are off-chain is completely irrelevant here when talking about the fee economy for miners. If blocks are full, then miners are getting paid. The reverse of your scenario is much more likely to be true. If you have overly large blocks that are never full, then what would be the point of ever adding a fee to your transaction if it will get confirmed anyway? Vastly empty blocks is bad for the fee economy for miners.

I bolded the statement you just made there that makes absolutely no sense. It is highly contradictory of the entire argument that is ever had for larger blocks. Larger blocks result in lower fees because there is more space than is needed for transactions and therefore there is no reason to include a large fee with your transaction. With the Lightning Network, it enables the capability for micro-transactions to occur (since fees would be non-existent or negligible on the LN), and on-chain transactions where payment channels are opened and larger transactions are made that won't fit on the Lightning Network will have higher fees to accommodate the tighter block sizes.

Quote
the fork has had >80% support since mid-june.  https://coin.dance/blocks/proposals

if segwit can't compete with 2MB blocks then perhaps the time isn't right for more intricate solutions, see my point above.  if bitcoin will exist for years there will be plenty of time to introduce these new wrinkles.  the conservative solution is simply increasing the block size now (by "now" i mean after segwit -- the really conservative solution would have been just 2MB) and in the meantime yes, by all means, continuing to work on all manner of "down the road" scaling solutions.

What do you mean if SegWit can't compete? SegWit had wide support right up until adoption and that support had to remain for a vast majority of blocks in order for it to be activated. Support for SegWit2X however has been declining a lot lately. The support numbers you're showing is just miner signaling (of which Bitmain is a heavy SegWit2X supporter) and miners don't own and dictate the entire network. How is a hard fork (with no replay protection) a more conservative solution than a UASF that was thoroughly tested and even saw exposure on another very similar blockchain (LTC)?? I've yet to hear of a defense for having a hardfork without replay protection.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on October 31, 2017, 11:51:59 AM
I'm not sure where you're getting your information from and how you're evaluating it. Most of your statements, like above, are inaccurate.

Segwit did not have the support it needed for adoption until the majority of the business and mining community got together and signed the New York agreement to first upgrade the protocol to segwit and then later to 2mb. This was the only way segwit passed.

https://medium.com/@DCGco/bitcoin-scaling-agreement-at-consensus-2017-133521fe9a77

Like I said, I support a block size increase to 2MB, just not now and not how it is being implemented currently. I don't believe anything I've said is untrue and if you feel I am being misleading, that is not my intention.

However, you call me misleading and then you link to the NYA agreement as if it was some binding agreement among all those involved with Bitcoin is extremely misleading. The NYA agreement was a closed door meeting involving the Digital Currency Group which is really just a group of financial investors and venture capitalists that claim to represent the overall Bitcoin community (http://dcg.co/who-we-are/ (http://dcg.co/who-we-are/)). That meeting didn't involve anyone from the development team that has worked years on developing Bitcoin. Anyone who values the concept that Bitcoin is resistant to influential entities from manipulating the direction that Bitcoin takes should be troubled by the concept that a small group of investors were able to push a plan forward in the way that they did.

Many of the original companies that signed onto the NYA back in spring after it was announced simply signed on because they wanted to see progress in scaling Bitcoin. I use Coinbase heavily (probably more so than most since I use the Shift debit card for all my daily transactions that is tied to their system). I don't think they are evil and the same goes for many of those companies. I just think they're stuck in a very difficult position. Ultimately their latest announcement regarding how they're going to handle the fork is one of their few options they have without resulting in countless lawsuits if they decided not to support one chain or the other. I was supportive of the NYA agreement at the time as well. I remember when the news came out that I got really excited about the future of Bitcoin and that finally it would be scaled appropriately after years of debate.

Things have changed for numerous reasons since then however. SegWit adoption is only at around ~8% currently. The original Segwit2MB proposal was heavily in favor of SegWit adoption and seeing that in action prior to a 2MB hard fork. It also suggested that 95% of the hashrate signal for the hard fork and that it should be delayed if necessary. The fact that many companies have for a long time used "high fees" as a reason to support SegWit2MB and yet many of those same companies have yet to implement SegWit in their platforms before moving on with a hard fork shows that ultimately they didn't care about actually adopting SegWit to begin with and they certainly didn't care about reducing fees.

I work in IT and never have I ever seen a system get put into production unless we knew that there would be absolutely minimal impact in doing so. This is a $100 billion market now. That can't be said with how the SegWit2X/BTC1 fork has been implemented. As I've said numerous times, a lack of replay protection, naming it BTC1 (confusing users), lack of active development, limited testing, transaction spamming, declining support signaling leading up to the fork date; all of these things make performing a hard fork at this time extremely risky. This is especially true given the fact that additional adoption of SegWit to allow for more transactions per block is an immediate win that can take place without having any impact on the network at all while at the same time introduce additional benefits like

Anyway, like I said, I think we all agree on what needs to happen to Bitcoin to scale it into the future, we just ultimately disagree on the timing on when those things should occur.

My original comment that started this debate was simply that Bitcoin core devs are not evil. I find it odd that you talk about how others are calling companies supportive of SegWit2X as "enemies of bitcoin" and yet there are some in this thread that have ostracized the core dev team as "evil" themselves. I still stand by that statement that they're not evil and you can read this thread by one of the core devs that discusses some of the advances they've made that we should all be grateful for if we want to see Bitcoin succeed.

https://medium.com/@jfnewbery/what-did-bitcoin-core-contributors-ever-do-for-us-39fc2fedb5ef (https://medium.com/@jfnewbery/what-did-bitcoin-core-contributors-ever-do-for-us-39fc2fedb5ef)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on October 31, 2017, 01:33:11 PM
meh, all this old man arguing about forks is boring.

lets spice this S%$(* with derivatives.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/31/cme-plans-to-launch-bitcoin-futures-by-year-end.html

this is like holy guacamole exciting for BTC holders. It makes the Alt coins pretty alternative if you can sling your BTC around on the CME like granddad used to do with his pork bellies.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on October 31, 2017, 01:57:00 PM
You guys really had to bring the block weight debate in here huh lol.

Glad everyone is participating and contributing.

QUESTION: Do you see Bitcoin out-performing Alts next year?

It's an interesting discussion to be had given that Hedge Funds are rapidly moving into the space and now we already have 2 derivative providers. I personally still feel Alts (the quality ones) will outperform but the debate can definitely be had for the opposing view.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on October 31, 2017, 02:42:21 PM
The liquidity on any individual BTC exchange just isn't that great compared to markets my grandfather would accept as "real".  With CME futures and hedge fund activity you will see a hell of a lot more volume of BTC being moved or needed for hedging ect than any Alt coin will have.

Plus, the futures let you play BTC without forcing a BTC transaction, so the big boys can sling a billion dollars/euros/whatever around amongst future months and it doesn't affect the network. Day after Day of this.

liquidity begets respectability. Or, maybe it will let enough money rush in to really get us to a bubble.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 01, 2017, 07:36:11 AM
The CME futures announcement worries me. I knew it was only a matter of time before Bitcoin derivatives would start getting traded, but it is still so early in the game without a $100 billion dollar market cap. I was hoping that derivatives would be supplemented to Bitcoin's growth, but at this stage it could end up driving growth which I don't think is good.

My post above about the global financial crisis was in direct regards to the derivative manipulation that happens on Wall Street. Also, futures won't actually create demand for Bitcoin today, they'll just be trading "paper bitcoin" today. I can foresee hundreds of thousands of paper bitcoin being traded where only a fraction of that is backed up by actual bitcoin on the blockchain. That's dangerous. I'm curious to see how this ends up getting regulated.

The whole point about bitcoin is that it can't be counterfeit. If you hold bitcoin on the blockchain, then you know it is 100% real. That's not the case with derivatives.

Either way, the news is good for bitcoin however as it just gives it more press and legitimacy to those who actually trade in the real deal.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on November 01, 2017, 08:19:39 AM
why are futures so worrying to you?

Sure, the futures contract for a given forward month may have a huge number of open contracts or a small number.  There will be a self correcting effect if to many contracts are out there and traders are nervous about getting BTC to cover them, they simply buy/sell as appropriate to close the contracts.  Most commodity contracts are closed out like this prior to delivery.

Derivatives are dangerous for the institution issuing them if a counter party cannot pay and they end up with a very very highly leveraged position on a security. This is neither good nor bad for the underlying security.  When derivatives trigger indexes to be bought and sold, this creates volume that stock following computers pick up on and amplify.  But, since the Merc future is the only place those kind of guys can trade, how can they wreck the underlying?


This all may be hyperbole and have no effect if the BTC future is USD settled off an index. If that's the case, institutions may not really trade the futures since they cannot hold underlying to offset positions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 01, 2017, 08:46:41 AM
why are futures so worrying to you?

Sure, the futures contract for a given forward month may have a huge number of open contracts or a small number.  There will be a self correcting effect if to many contracts are out there and traders are nervous about getting BTC to cover them, they simply buy/sell as appropriate to close the contracts.  Most commodity contracts are closed out like this prior to delivery.

Derivatives are dangerous for the institution issuing them if a counter party cannot pay and they end up with a very very highly leveraged position on a security. This is neither good nor bad for the underlying security.  When derivatives trigger indexes to be bought and sold, this creates volume that stock following computers pick up on and amplify.  But, since the Merc future is the only place those kind of guys can trade, how can they wreck the underlying?


This all may be hyperbole and have no effect if the BTC future is USD settled off an index. If that's the case, institutions may not really trade the futures since they cannot hold underlying to offset positions.

Read the Rolling Stone article above that I link to. It is an excellent read with eye-opening info on how Wall Street handles derivatives.

On paper it may seem like a good thing, but the truth of the matter is that with the corruption on Wall Street, there will likely be 10 "paper bitcoins" being traded for every one bitcoin that is actually on-chain. People might think their derivative is backed by real bitcoins, but the reality is that they probably aren't.

Again, I'm not saying this will be the case with CMEs futures contracts. I'm just saying that going down the derivative road will likely lead this to be true considering that it is true for just about everything else that is traded on Wall Street; oil, soy beans, gold, even US Treasury bonds.

Holding bitcoin on-chain will keep you safe since they can't be counterfeit, but I'd stay as far away from holding any bitcoin derivative of any kind as possible.

"Your key, your bitcoin. Not your key, not your bitcoin."
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on November 02, 2017, 03:59:11 PM
It appears the futures will be dollar settled, so while at times, the number of open contracts could exceed the number of bitcoins, the settlement of contracts won't force BTC transactions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on November 02, 2017, 07:07:04 PM
So what's the use case of buying or selling a bitcoin future rather than a bitcoin itself? The hedging purposes of futures make sense to me for things that are constantly being produced and where industrial buyers know they will need to purchase fixed amounts at regular timepoints (like oil or porkbellies), but I still cannot wrap my head around this for cytocurrencies.

Are they significant futures markets for euros or RMB? If so, what do people use them for?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: hgjjgkj on November 02, 2017, 10:49:42 PM
Two Questions

1) Is there money in BTC exchange arb? Buying low on one exchange and selling on another?

2) For BTC investors who have seen recent high gains, how do you plan you strategy going forward? Do you take gains and put them in something more stable? How do you think about incremental additional investments when this will now raise your cost basis a ton?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 03, 2017, 07:18:45 AM
IF they pass the law proposal that you can spend like $600 a transaction tax free, I might use it to pay my household bills or buy more mining hardware.

That is a big IF! I would LOVE for that legislation to pass. If it did, bitcoin would become my main tax-free spending money in my early retirement years while my pre-tax accounts get laddered into my Roth.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MVal on November 03, 2017, 08:42:37 AM
Is anyone here using Bitconnect? I've got a little Bitcoin on there making me a few dollars a week and I'm planning on doing the continuous re-lending thing for a while and see how it goes.

Also, who is buying more Bitcoin before the hard fork this month? I'm hesitant to with Bitcoin rallying like it is right now, but I'm lured by the prospect of "doubling" my coin with the Segwit2x thing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on November 03, 2017, 03:31:33 PM
So what's the use case of buying or selling a bitcoin future rather than a bitcoin itself? The hedging purposes of futures make sense to me for things that are constantly being produced and where industrial buyers know they will need to purchase fixed amounts at regular timepoints (like oil or porkbellies), but I still cannot wrap my head around this for cytocurrencies.

Are they significant futures markets for euros or RMB? If so, what do people use them for?

The two main areas I know of.
1. Leverage... You can buy A LOT of bets for (call) or against (put) which sell in lots of 100 for very cheap. Most of the cost is time value... So if BTC moves $1 in an hour (very possible) you can make $100 with a relatively small investment. I am not sure what the premium is going to be since BTC itself is so scarce, but my guess is it will be fractionalized up the a**.
2. Gets around rules to allow trading on the main exchanges "pretend BTC" which is really cash based and has no real conneciton with reality without being an accredited investor so everyone can buy in.

This may either propel BTC to stupid crazy high prices fast because of the hype or stabalize the price... I am not sure which way it will go.

I thought there was a difference between futures contracts and options contracts (puts/calls). With futures you generally pay "full price" now, for delivery at some point in the future. If you look at the pricing for futures contracts on corn or oil or porkbellies they tend to be in the neighborhood as current prices (perhaps a bit higher or a bit lower based on what the market expects future demand to look like). But okay, if we're talking about options contracts rather than futures, I agree with you on point #1, you can certainly lever up a lot more with options than with the underlying asset and as a result make (or lose) a lot more money with a lot less starting capital.

For #2, if the trading is entirely cash based and a lot of the buyers and sellers on non-accredited investors it seems like the counter party risk would be through the roof. Even if you made a killing on bitcoin options contracts, is whoever you bet against actually going to have the money to pay?

Anyway, whatever I think of the rationality of the motivations, I at least understand what the motivations might be now, thanks!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on November 06, 2017, 11:48:29 AM
Bitconnect is a ponzi.

This is 100% correct. It's officially blocked and banned by Malware Bytes as well.

http://cryptocougar.com/malwarebytes-anti-malware-software-added-bitconnect-blocked-website-list/

LMFAO, please watch this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbR1SXIje1U
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 08, 2017, 11:38:59 AM
The Segwit2X hardfork has been suspended this month. Bitcoin rallies! There was much rejoicing! I'm happy there will not be a split in the community.

Edit: "hardfork" not "hardwork"...stupid autocorrect.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on November 08, 2017, 03:49:03 PM

LMFAO, please watch this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbR1SXIje1U

Looks like another well known non tax paying scam. It's amazing how gullible people can be.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on November 12, 2017, 12:02:35 AM
The Segwit2X hardfork has been suspended this month. Bitcoin rallies! There was much rejoicing! I'm happy there will not be a split in the community.

i don't think we're out of the woods quite yet.  we'll see if some group of miners goes forward with the 2x fork, we'll see what happens with the new BCH DAA, and the BTC mempool is getting huge.

things are even crazier than normal in the bitcoin world with BTC crashing and BCH going vertical (for the time being).  from a bitcoin portfolios perspective i still think the safest option is to do nothing (don't buy or sell any bitcoin on any fork) and wait (weeks/months) for some sort of resolution.  it seems too easy to me to publish a statement saying "2x is canceled" in an attempt to manipulate the market, miners are free to hop from chain to chain, exchanges still have to react to the 2x cancellation, etc.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 13, 2017, 06:33:56 AM
i don't think we're out of the woods quite yet.  we'll see if some group of miners goes forward with the 2x fork, we'll see what happens with the new BCH DAA, and the BTC mempool is getting huge.

things are even crazier than normal in the bitcoin world with BTC crashing and BCH going vertical (for the time being).  from a bitcoin portfolios perspective i still think the safest option is to do nothing (don't buy or sell any bitcoin on any fork) and wait (weeks/months) for some sort of resolution.  it seems too easy to me to publish a statement saying "2x is canceled" in an attempt to manipulate the market, miners are free to hop from chain to chain, exchanges still have to react to the 2x cancellation, etc.

Yup, that was posted immediately after the SegWit2x cancellation. Crazy times indeed. The bouncing between BCH and BTC has been seen before as well as the pump and dump between the two. It is currently over 4 times more profitable to mine BTC than BCH at the moment. BCH is down over 30% since yesterday and BTC is rebounding. This is the same type of pattern we saw back in August/September after the hard fork. The BTC mempool is clearing out now as well. Once the new BCH DAA goes through, that should help prevent miners from jumping back and forth and simply using BCH as a quick means of profit manipulation.

I'm not so sure having miners push through the SegWit2x hard fork is in their best interest. The same miners that are pro-BCH are the ones that were pro-SegWit2X. So that would just split their hash power between the two even more which would give Bitcoin Core even further strength against them both. I would think BCH is more inline with the big blocker agenda anyway since they didn't really want SegWit activated to begin with. But, hey, I guess you never know, anything can happen.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 16, 2017, 10:08:25 AM
How do people feel about the CME futures market that will supposedly be opening up in mid-December. Since it is all cash settled, I'm wondering what this will do for the demand of actual on-chain bitcoin. Market makers will want to hedge long bets to ensure that the actual bitcoin market goes up on the exchanges where the price is pegged. Do you guys think that the market makers will end up holding bitcoin to back these futures contracts or do we think that this market will just balloon up to astronomical proportions and dwarf the actual bitcoin markets and thus suppress demand for actual on-chain bitcoin. This could certainly help decrease volatility, but I'm worried it might depress demand for actual bitcoin.

On the upside, I do think this will give more legitimacy to bitcoin as an asset and if the futures market is massive then that will make it that much lower of a likelihood that the government would ever want to squash bitcoin since a lot of institutional investors will have money now in play.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 17, 2017, 09:36:03 AM
Unbelievable. So nodes that were running the BTC1 software for the SegWit2X hardfork that was planned to go through today ended up getting stuck on block 494782. It appears as if Jeff Garzik made an off-by-one mistake in his code. The reason why that wasn't caught was because there was ZERO code review for those for code commits. And this is the way that they want to develop software that's expected to support a $120 billion dollar market? Insane! This is exactly what I was talking about in my earlier posts about why we should have been concerned about this hardfork that they were trying to push through. Imagine if the community supported this hot mess? We're talking about billions of dollars likely being lost as a result of the panic that would ensue as all the nodes on the network would cease functioning until the entire network received appropriate patches to fix it. People may critique the bitcoin core devs for being too conservative, but this is exactly why you don't rush things with code that is expected to support a multi-billion dollar industry.

https://twitter.com/AaronvanW/status/931513254861471749 (https://twitter.com/AaronvanW/status/931513254861471749)
https://twitter.com/pierre_rochard/status/931529855245496321 (https://twitter.com/pierre_rochard/status/931529855245496321)
https://twitter.com/pierre_rochard/status/931530935983656962 (https://twitter.com/pierre_rochard/status/931530935983656962)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on November 17, 2017, 04:35:05 PM
the segwit2x fork bug is a good example of why we need miners and nodes to run bitcoin implementations published by multiple development teams.  i believe some miners use their own bitcoin implementations, but this would have definitely broken many nodes and miners, shaken confidence, and probably caused a price crash.

sorry but core is plainly the opposite of conservative -- to support their business model they changed and added thousands of lines of new code rather than changing a single line of code for max block size.  as a result bitcoin fees skyrocketed this week in the frenzy after the 2x cancellation... and the mempool is still at 90MB with tens of thousands of unconfirmed transactions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 17, 2017, 07:29:05 PM
the segwit2x fork bug is a good example of why we need miners and nodes to run bitcoin implementations published by multiple development teams.  i believe some miners use their own bitcoin implementations, but this would have definitely broken many nodes and miners, shaken confidence, and probably caused a price crash.

sorry but core is plainly the opposite of conservative -- to support their business model they changed and added thousands of lines of new code rather than changing a single line of code for max block size.  as a result bitcoin fees skyrocketed this week in the frenzy after the 2x cancellation... and the mempool is still at 90MB with tens of thousands of unconfirmed transactions.

You don't determine the future and direction of a currency based on the number of lines of code it takes to implement design decisions. SegWit was tested thoroughly on testnet for over a year and a half. On top of that, SegWit also saw real world production usage on the Litecoin network to see how it would behave in action with real life money. To say that they were the opposite of conservative simply because the number of lines of code involved is a misunderstanding of a proper development lifecycle.

Regarding fees, first off, one of the biggest factors in rising fees for bitcoin is simply due to the fact that the price of a single bitcoin has risen astronomically over the last 2 years. Rather than focusing on the fee paid in USD for any given transaction, it should be the fee rate that should be of primary concentration. When you look at fee rates on Bitcoin Cash, the median fee rate is somewhere around 60-70 satoshis/byte. That results in a fee of about 18 cents on the Bitcoin Cash network for a transaction of average size. That same fee rate would result in a fee of $1.15 if the price of Bitcoin Cash were equivalent to the price of Bitcoin today (~$7700). Now, the median fee rate on the bitcoin network today is around 90 satoshis/byte. With an average transaction size of about 230 bytes, this results in your median fee being around $1.60 on the bitcoin network. That's not too far from what the Bitcoin Cash network would look like now if its price were the same as Bitcoin's.

However, obviously, the load on these two networks are drastically different. The bitcoin cash network sees a much lower volume of transactions than bitcoin does. So at the moment, the bitcoin core network measures block density through block weight (not block size) due to the SegWit implementation. The percentage of SegWit transactions is only around 10-11%. This means that there is still potential to decrease these fees by not only freeing up block weight space for additional transactions and thus decreasing competition in the fee market (lowering the fee rate), but also by decreasing the average size of a transaction using SegWit enabled wallets/addresses. But where does bitcoin cash go with an increasing load? Competition for block space is already low due to the low transaction volume and large block size. Therefore there isn't much capability for bitcoin cash to decrease the actual fee rate paid and fee of transactions in USD from where they are today. If bitcoin cash were to see the same load of the bitcoin network then that would mean the only option to keep the fee rate the same as it is today would be to increase the block size yet again. Decreasing the fee rate is what is ultimately critical if you want to maintain the capability to make a coffee purchase under conditions where the price of the token in question could potentially rise into the tens of thousands. This is where second layer solutions will be really needed in order to allow for micro-transactions long into the future.

If increasing the block size only allows you to maintain the fee rate that we have today, that means that if the price of bitcoin cash were to increase dramatically, then we'd be in the same position with high fees (in USD) while at the same time decreasing centralization immensely.

Now let's talk about centralization. The SegWit2X network consisted of almost 90% AWS nodes that were likely spun up by a single entity given the fact that they appeared and disappeared in dramatic fashion very quickly. The hashrate of both the SegWit2x and BCH network are also greatly centralized consisting of mostly  miners out of China. I think this is a perfect example on why having a smaller block size yields a more decentralized network as whole. Bitcoin's decentralization is its key characteristic that will determine its survival in the long run. There appear to be two different approaches here. One sacrifices decentralization in an effort (a faulty one) to support coffee purchases. The other sacrifices the ability to purchase coffee to maintain its decentralization. Given the fact that there are many solutions out there that can support purchasing coffee and yet no valid solutions out there that are completely decentralized and trustless, it is my opinion that we should not sacrifice one for the other. There are always second layer approaches to enable coffee purchases with crypto-currencies, but there is only one option for keeping a network decentralized at layer 1.

Finally, as far as unconfirmed transactions go, there was clearly a transaction spam campaign that occurred after the fork cancellation due to the enormous number of transactions that were broadcast that all had fees of 10 satoshis/byte or lower. This was a very anomalous event. However, this doesn't impact legitimate users who are trying to get transactions through since all it takes to prioritize a legitimate transaction over one of these spam transactions is to submit a fee that is just a few satoshis/byte higher than those spam transactions. That means those spam transactions are simply just sitting there in the mempool, but don't actually effect the fee market much since they're not really competitive with regards to fees. So saying that transactions are backed up is extremely misleading in the current circumstances.

That doesn't even take into consideration the poor wallet fee estimation that also plays a very large part in users overpaying for fees at the moment that I spoke about earlier.

I hope this clears up some information as I feel like there is a lot of misinformation out there on fees, scaling, etc with regards to the bitcoin network.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on November 18, 2017, 11:27:03 AM
Regarding fees, first off, one of the biggest factors in rising fees for bitcoin is simply due to the fact that the price of a single bitcoin has risen astronomically over the last 2 years. Rather than focusing on the fee paid in USD for any given transaction, it should be the fee rate that should be of primary concentration. When you look at fee rates on Bitcoin Cash, the median fee rate is somewhere around 60-70 satoshis/byte. That results in a fee of about 18 cents on the Bitcoin Cash network for a transaction of average size. That same fee rate would result in a fee of $1.15 if the price of Bitcoin Cash were equivalent to the price of Bitcoin today (~$7700). Now, the median fee rate on the bitcoin network today is around 90 satoshis/byte. With an average transaction size of about 230 bytes, this results in your median fee being around $1.60 on the bitcoin network. That's not too far from what the Bitcoin Cash network would look like now if its price were the same as Bitcoin's.

Could you tell me a bit more about why you'd expect transaction fees priced in satoshis to stay constant as the price of the currency (in dollars/RMB/euros) increases?

Here's why I'm having trouble with that assumption: Transaction fees should be driven by supply and demand. Since the block size is currently fixed for both currencies, we can put aside the supply side entirely (technically I believe this is called having completely inelastic supply). If the price of the currency doubles but people are buying and selling the same goods (from cups of coffee to drug deals to purchases on overstock.com) for the same prices in USD, wouldn't you expect demand curve for bitcoin transactions to stay the same? For example, if I'm willing to buy a $5 cup of coffee with bitcoins if I have to up to but no more than $0.50 in transaction fees when the price of bitcoin was $3,500/bitcoin, I don't think it necessarily true that if the price of bitcoin doubles to $7,000 that I'm now willing to pay up to $1.00 in transaction fees to buy the same $5 cup of coffee.

What I suspect is actually happening is that as the price of conventional bitcoin continues to increase, it draws in more total people (whether they're using the currency as intended or buying in the hopes that the the price continues to increase), which creates more transactions trying to be confirmed, raising the minimum price people have to pay to ensure their transactions get included in a block. This still means that as prices (in USD/RMB/EURO) go up, transaction fees (USD/RMB/EURO) go up, but if I'm right then there is indeed a positive correlation between increasing cryptocurrency price and increasing transaction fees, however there is no reason to think the two increases are linked at a 1:1 rate. If bitcoin doubles in price it might bring in 50% more people (4:3), if bitcoin doubles in price it might bring in twice as many new people as are in the current user community (2:3).* But that 1:1 link is what you'd need for transaction fees to stay constant in terms of satoshis/byte.

*Technically it's not the number of people, it's the number of transactions. A single new user who is going to make 30 bitcoin transactions a month is going to increase the demand curve for bitcoin transactions more than twenty new users who are going to make 1 transaction a month each.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 18, 2017, 01:15:32 PM
Regarding fees, first off, one of the biggest factors in rising fees for bitcoin is simply due to the fact that the price of a single bitcoin has risen astronomically over the last 2 years. Rather than focusing on the fee paid in USD for any given transaction, it should be the fee rate that should be of primary concentration. When you look at fee rates on Bitcoin Cash, the median fee rate is somewhere around 60-70 satoshis/byte. That results in a fee of about 18 cents on the Bitcoin Cash network for a transaction of average size. That same fee rate would result in a fee of $1.15 if the price of Bitcoin Cash were equivalent to the price of Bitcoin today (~$7700). Now, the median fee rate on the bitcoin network today is around 90 satoshis/byte. With an average transaction size of about 230 bytes, this results in your median fee being around $1.60 on the bitcoin network. That's not too far from what the Bitcoin Cash network would look like now if its price were the same as Bitcoin's.

Could you tell me a bit more about why you'd expect transaction fees priced in satoshis to stay constant as the price of the currency (in dollars/RMB/euros) increases?

Here's why I'm having trouble with that assumption: Transaction fees should be driven by supply and demand. Since the block size is currently fixed for both currencies, we can put aside the supply side entirely (technically I believe this is called having completely inelastic supply). If the price of the currency doubles but people are buying and selling the same goods (from cups of coffee to drug deals to purchases on overstock.com) for the same prices in USD, wouldn't you expect demand curve for bitcoin transactions to stay the same? For example, if I'm willing to buy a $5 cup of coffee with bitcoins if I have to up to but no more than $0.50 in transaction fees when the price of bitcoin was $3,500/bitcoin, I don't think it necessarily true that if the price of bitcoin doubles to $7,000 that I'm now willing to pay up to $1.00 in transaction fees to buy the same $5 cup of coffee.

What I suspect is actually happening is that as the price of conventional bitcoin continues to increase, it draws in more total people (whether they're using the currency as intended or buying in the hopes that the the price continues to increase), which creates more transactions trying to be confirmed, raising the minimum price people have to pay to ensure their transactions get included in a block. This still means that as prices (in USD/RMB/EURO) go up, transaction fees (USD/RMB/EURO) go up, but if I'm right then there is indeed a positive correlation between increasing cryptocurrency price and increasing transaction fees, however there is no reason to think the two increases are linked at a 1:1 rate. If bitcoin doubles in price it might bring in 50% more people (4:3), if bitcoin doubles in price it might bring in twice as many new people as are in the current user community (2:3).* But that 1:1 link is what you'd need for transaction fees to stay constant in terms of satoshis/byte.

*Technically it's not the number of people, it's the number of transactions. A single new user who is going to make 30 bitcoin transactions a month is going to increase the demand curve for bitcoin transactions more than twenty new users who are going to make 1 transaction a month each.

I wasn't trying to imply that the increase in the price of bitcoin is the sole reason why transaction fees have drastically risen over the last year (as priced in USD), but I do feel that it is the largest driver thus far given the fact that the price in bitcoin has increased at a much faster rate than the total number of transactions has. Coffee transactions don't just have to compete with other coffee transactions. They have to compete for block space with other large monetary transactions as well. Obviously a fair fee for larger monetary transactions is much higher than that of a fair fee for a small coffee payment. There will always need to be competition for block space. If there is no competition, then there is no need to apply a fee to any transaction at all, regardless of the size. Therefore, if the fee market requires a block size that forces certain transactions to wait to be confirmed in order to promote a fee market, then it will always be the smallest transactions (priced in USD) that are forced out of the block and be suspended in the mempool for a given duration because of the limited willingness to use a higher fee for such a small monetary transaction. This very model makes it unsuitable to scale for micro-transactions.

In the instance of bitcoin cash, since block size is essentially being used as the sole means of scalability, this means that the fee market is a delicate balance between ensuring that the mempool isn't always empty and that the blocks aren't always full. As I said above, since large monetary transactions are competing for the same block space as micro-transactions, then it will always be the micro-tranactions that are priced out of the block first. Now, that doesn't mean that in the long term the fee rate won't go down if it were to ever reach mainstream adoption and the adoption S-curve stabilized. However, reaching mainstream adoption depends directly on a token price that increases dramatically in order to support billions of users and a massive influx of money. This also means that the number of transactions will sky-rocket and the block size would need to be adjusted accordingly. In order to maintain a fee market during this phase of increasing adoption, it would absolutely require micro-transactions to be priced out of the block space since the fee rate would likely not decrease correspondingly since large monetary transactions are willing to pay those fee rates.

As you said in your last paragraph, there is a difference between the number of users versus the number of transactions. There is certainly a correlation between the two, but likewise there is a correlation between the value of the token and the number of users. So if there are 100 users on the network, the token will likely have a higher value than a network with only 10 users (regardless of the number of transactions taking place). This is the network effect that has been shown to essentially explain about 90% of bitcoin's price movement since inception. So if we are to expect that a network like bitcoin cash is to scale to accomodate a certain number of users as its adopted, then it should be expected that the value of the token would rise in relation. Since the fee market depends on forcing some transactions out of the block, then again micro-transactions will always be the first to go since their fees can't compete against the fees of larger transactions. This is why I feel the fee rate will result in higher and higher fees (priced in USD) during the adoption phase of a crypto-currency.

Obviously this doesn't discuss the feasibility of such block size increases to even accomodate a number of transactions that could potentially increase parabolically. For that discussion, I'll simply refer to Andreas:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AecPrwqjbGw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AecPrwqjbGw)

In my opinion, the only scalability solution that will feasibly work long term is to use secondary layers where fees for micro-transactions don't need to compete directly against fees for large monetary transactions and where enormous amounts of transactions don't need to fit into a block of any given size at any given time.

PS. I hope that makes sense, I did a lot of rambling. Feel free to correct me where you feel I may have made incorrect conclusions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on November 18, 2017, 03:05:39 PM
No, thanks that's a set of interesting thoughts.

I completely agree with you that relatively small transactions are going to be the first ones to be priced out of inclusion in blocks when demand for bitcoin (or bitcoin cash) transactions exceeds supply. The reason I focused on something like buying coffee is that these smaller commercial transactions also tend to be the marginal transactions which are more sensitive to transaction fees, and hence they play an outsized role in determining what the transaction fees actually end up looking like for everyone.

Imagine a world with 4 transactions per block, and right now in each block there are are five people trying to make transactions, one willing to pay $0.50 in transaction fees, one willing to pay $10 in transaction fees, and three willing to pay $100 in transaction fees. Right now the market clearing transaction fee is $0.51, because at that price, the number of potential transactions willing to pay that price equals the number of transactions which can be included in the block. Now imagine one additional person decides they want to make a transaction and is willing to pay up to $20 in fees. It make take a few blocks for supply and demand to work itself out, but when the dust settles the market clearing price has jumped from $0.51 to $10.01, which is enough to price out two of the people who wanted to spend bitcoin, so supply equals demand again. A 20% increase in the number of potential transactions produced a 2,000% increase in price. The change in the price of transaction fees doesn't have to have a linear relationship with the number of potential transactions.

One thing to keep in mind is that transaction fees are only a relatively small part of the revenue miners get from adding to the blockchain at the moment. Right now the block reward is still 12.5 bitcoins (~$100,000). The average transaction fees per block are only 2.2 bitcoins (~$17,000). Even if there was some empty space in some blocks, I think there will always be lots of microtransactions or dust transactions which would be happy to pay lower but greater than zero fees to be included in the blockchain. However you won't see these in the mempool because people know they'd never get confirmed and so don't even bother to try to get them to go through.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 18, 2017, 04:29:00 PM
No, thanks that's a set of interesting thoughts.

I completely agree with you that relatively small transactions are going to be the first ones to be priced out of inclusion in blocks when demand for bitcoin (or bitcoin cash) transactions exceeds supply. The reason I focused on something like buying coffee is that these smaller commercial transactions also tend to be the marginal transactions which are more sensitive to transaction fees, and hence they play an outsized role in determining what the transaction fees actually end up looking like for everyone.

...

One thing to keep in mind is that transaction fees are only a relatively small part of the revenue miners get from adding to the blockchain at the moment. Right now the block reward is still 12.5 bitcoins (~$100,000). The average transaction fees per block are only 2.2 bitcoins (~$17,000). Even if there was some empty space in some blocks, I think there will always be lots of microtransactions or dust transactions which would be happy to pay lower but greater than zero fees to be included in the blockchain. However you won't see these in the mempool because people know they'd never get confirmed and so don't even bother to try to get them to go through.

I totally agree that the micro-transactions are the transactions that ultimately dictate the fee rate. If a $10,000 transaction is willing to pay $100 in fees, but only needs to pay $1 to get a transaction confirmed, then why pay $100? There are a much larger number of micro-transactions than there are large sum transfers. If the block size is large enough to accomodate all large sum transfers, then it is ultimately only the micro-transactions that need to compete for block space. Since these are the only competitors, then they're the ones that will set the fee rate for all others.

The thing about the bitcoin network is that at the very start, there weren't very many large sum transfers since not many people were willing to use the network with large sums of money. So I don't think we really saw much competition between small and large transactions. Also, since the block size wasn't a limit, large sum transactions were getting a really good fee deal in the beginning. I feel that the more institutional money comes in, we're going to see more and more large sum money transactions that will end up competing for block space.

As far as the number of micro-transactions that could potentially be included in blocks, but are never broadcasted to begin with; this raises another important consideration. Transaction spamming needs to always be considered when determining the approriate block size and unfortunately it is almost impossible to do because of the fact that it isn't something that you can easily predict. Anyone can broadcast any number of transactions using any fee rate they choose (at a cost obviously). Therefore, if there is always a large amount of transactions that are borderline missing out completely from block space, this can be easily abused with transaction spamming. Since a massive influx of transactions at small fee rate (10 satoshis/byte) will effectively blanket all transactions at that fee rate, then all micro-transactions at that fee rate that want to get confirmed will need to marginally increase their fee rate to 11 satoshis/byte. Since transactions at 10 satoshis/byte are no longer being confirmed, then the spammer doesn't need to worry about actually paying many of those fees and they've effectively raised the fee rate on the network for the lowest margin and most vulnerable transactions. This is another problem that the fee market doesn't have a good solution for when it comes to accomodating micro-transactions and is another reason why second layer solutions are necessary. Block sizes consisting of mostly larger sum transactions won't have this problem since these transactions can support larger fees and since some of the spammed transactions actually do go through, it will be much more costly for the spammer to conduct such a campaign.

I think the predictability of fees is another problem that has caused many people to pay much larger fees than they actually need to. Until wallets can accurately predict the lowest fee necessary, then we'll always have people pay $2 for a transaction when they could've easily only paid $1 and been confirmed in the same amount of time. Having a network vulnerable to transaction spamming only exacerbates the problem with fee estimation algorithms.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on November 18, 2017, 07:01:59 PM
To say that they were the opposite of conservative simply because the number of lines of code involved is a misunderstanding of a proper development lifecycle.

core allowed blocks to get full rather than making a one-line code change.  they allowed fees to increase and have killed user enthusiasm and adoption for bitcoin because they refused to make a conservative one-line code change.  they are the opposite of conservative.

yes, by all means, test segwit code for years and on other coins before deploying it.  but the conservative move was to change the one line of code while doing the testing to avoid this transaction fee market escalation.

Regarding fees, first off, one of the biggest factors in rising fees for bitcoin is simply due to the fact that the price of a single bitcoin has risen astronomically over the last 2 years.

this is wrong.  the price does not determine rising fees.  rising fees are explained by available block space going to zero.  look at the first chart in this link:

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#30d
(or see chart image attachment on this post)

many transactions remain unconfirmed with low fees (<10 sat/byte) because there's no available block space.  users/wallets ARE attempting to send low-fee transactions, they just isn't room to confirm them.

Rather than focusing on the fee paid in USD for any given transaction, it should be the fee rate that should be of primary concentration.

i disagree.  to grow the user base for bitcoin, the actual paid USD fee is the important number.  a $0.05 median fee means users and merchants will use the coin, and a $1.00 (or lately for BTC, $3.00+) fee means users and merchants will abandon the coin.

When you look at fee rates on Bitcoin Cash, the median fee rate is somewhere around 60-70 satoshis/byte. That results in a fee of about 18 cents on the Bitcoin Cash network for a transaction of average size.

again, this is wrong.  where are you getting your data for median fees (in satoshis/byte) for BCH?  i couldn't find it anywhere.   i'll provide a link below that shows the median fee for bitcoin cash has recently spiked to 11 cents, and for the last few months has often been well below 4 cents.  well below your "18 cents" value given.

https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/median_transaction_fee-bch.html#3m

That same fee rate would result in a fee of $1.15 if the price of Bitcoin Cash were equivalent to the price of Bitcoin today (~$7700). Now, the median fee rate on the bitcoin network today is around 90 satoshis/byte. With an average transaction size of about 230 bytes, this results in your median fee being around $1.60 on the bitcoin network. That's not too far from what the Bitcoin Cash network would look like now if its price were the same as Bitcoin's.

fees are determined by the fee market, not the price of the coin.  you cannot compare the fees in sat/bye of BTC, with full blocks, to BCH, where blocks are not full.  just to show the data, here is average block size of BTC vs BCH, showing BTC blocks are full and BCH blocks are not:

https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/size-btc-bch.html#3m

The percentage of SegWit transactions is only around 10-11%. This means that there is still potential to decrease these fees by not only freeing up block weight space for additional transactions and thus decreasing competition in the fee market (lowering the fee rate), but also by decreasing the average size of a transaction using SegWit enabled wallets/addresses.

BTC users could use segwit transactions, which should increase the supply of available space for transactions to 2MB:

https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4ff0kw/36_mb_blocks_on_the_segwit_testnet/d28lljd/

we'll see if users begin to do that more often.  but given an equal size of the user base and an equal coin price in USD, full 2MB BTC blocks will require higher fees than full 8MB BCH blocks.

But where does bitcoin cash go with an increasing load? Competition for block space is already low due to the low transaction volume and large block size. Therefore there isn't much capability for bitcoin cash to decrease the actual fee rate paid and fee of transactions in USD from where they are today.  If bitcoin cash were to see the same load of the bitcoin network then that would mean the only option to keep the fee rate the same as it is today would be to increase the block size yet again.

this is not true.  BCH blocks are not full, so users/wallets could send lower fee transactions TODAY, even 0-fee transactions.

yes obviously, if BCH blocks were full then increasing block size would be the only way to lower fees.  supply and demand.

If increasing the block size only allows you to maintain the fee rate that we have today, that means that if the price of bitcoin cash were to increase dramatically, then we'd be in the same position with high fees (in USD) while at the same time decreasing centralization immensely.

you're basing this on your above false premise that BCH fees cannot be lowered today.

Finally, as far as unconfirmed transactions go, there was clearly a transaction spam campaign that occurred after the fork cancellation due to the enormous number of transactions that were broadcast that all had fees of 10 satoshis/byte or lower. This was a very anomalous event.

again, you are spreading misinformation.  please stop doing this.  where are you getting your data from?  below is a link (first "unconfirmed transaction count" chart) that shows the number of unconfirmed 0-10 satoshis/byte transactions on BTC did not suddenly increase after the fork cancellation on November 8th:

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#30d
(or see chart image attachment on this post)

if anything it shows a clear linear accumulation of 0-5 sat/byte fee transactions since Oct 26th and a relatively constant number of unconfirmed 5-10 sat/byte free transactions since then -- nobody is spamming these transactions.

I hope this clears up some information as I feel like there is a lot of misinformation out there on fees, scaling, etc with regards to the bitcoin network.

you are spreading misinformation without citing your sources.  you are systematically using false premises to make it seem like BCH would have the same transaction fees as BTC if their USD price was the same.  BCH has 8MB blocks, and BTC has 1MB blocks (or 1.7MB-2MB blocks if segwit is used, see link below).  it's supply and demand.  an 8MB block will have a lower-priced fee market than a 2MB block.  it's a simple as that.

https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4ff0kw/36_mb_blocks_on_the_segwit_testnet/d28lljd/

I wasn't trying to imply that the increase in the price of bitcoin is the sole reason why transaction fees have drastically risen over the last year (as priced in USD), but I do feel that it is the largest driver thus far given the fact that the price in bitcoin has increased at a much faster rate than the total number of transactions has.

and why do you think the number of transactions hasn't increased?  it's because blocks are full.  transaction fees are going up because blocks are full.

In the instance of bitcoin cash, since block size is essentially being used as the sole means of scalability, this means that the fee market is a delicate balance between ensuring that the mempool isn't always empty and that the blocks aren't always full.

the fee market is simply the supply of block space vs. the demand for making transactions.  it has nothing to do with ensuring the mempool isn't always empty.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 18, 2017, 09:20:29 PM
Phil22,

I agree with much of what you're saying. Rereading your original response I see that you're comment was mainly in regards to the recent run up in fees and transactions related to the fork event. Like I said, this was highly anomalous. Taking out events such as the forks in August and November and things look much different with transactions in the 10-20 satoshi/byte range routinely getting processed each day.

My points weren't to compare the Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash networks as they are in their own states today. That's obviously not a fair comparison for several reasons, some of which were touched on by the both of us. For one, as was said, Bitcoin Cash's blocks aren't full. Therefore discussing a fee market where blocks aren't full is like simply trying to compare the generosity of one userbase to a competitive fee market in another. Blocks on the Bitcoin network only started getting regularly full around March of this year. Bitcoin Cash is a good demonstration of this however. As I said earlier, often wallets over-estimate fees and this is clearly seen on the BCH network in action as well. The same is true on the BTC network. Unfortunately, a lot of work still needs to occur to accurately estimate proper fees. If wallets/users would estimate fees appropriately, this would do a lot to drive down the median fee rate on the BTC network. It doesn't benefit anyone to pay a higher fee than necessary (except the miners of course).

I agree that since BCH blocks aren't full, then the fee rate could potentially be lower. But, my point was that 8MB won't always be empty. They're empty because the network isn't utilized. The same critiques against BTC today could be had against BCH in a few years if its adoption rate matched BTC's. So how would full blocks at 8MB be any different than full blocks at 1MB with regards to the fee market? The points discussed between Maizeman and I would still hold true with regards to fee competition. Like I said, the only option then to once again alleviate the strain on the fee market would be to increase block size, to which I linked the Andreas video as to why that is not a viable long term solution.

Also, since BCH blocks are never full, then essentially that means that transactions never need to wait more than the next block to be confirmed (which thankfully with the latest DAA adjustment will be more regular). So one thing that hasn't been discussed in this conversation yet is time. The fee market is all about competing for block space and paying a fee to be included in that block space. But, the third part of that equation that hasn't been discussed is time. It often isn't necessary for all transactions (especially micro-transactions) to be included in the next block, or even the next 5 blocks. That's why I find John Newberry's response to Erik Voorhees' tweet a little while back very honest about the state of Bitcoin fees:

https://twitter.com/jfnewbery/status/927615263058653184 (https://twitter.com/jfnewbery/status/927615263058653184)

Often, fees are looked at as an average or median over the course of time (whether that's a day, and hour, etc). But, rather the fees in any given block is essentially a snapshot of what the fee market looked like at the time the block was mined. That doesn't tell you how long those transactions were waiting in the mempool prior to that block being mined. If we can assume that allowing for a micro-transaction to be confirmed within a day is reasonable, then saying that the blocks are full is extremely misleading since we know that all the blocks in any given day are not all full. At the moment, transactions with fees less than 10 satoshis/byte are being cleared out of the mempool. Outside of the anomaly transaction loads that I mentioned, 10-20 satoshis/byte fees are routinely being processed each day. Also, like I said, SegWit is opt-in and only being about 10% utilized on the network. If more people (and companies) would chose to utilize it, it would make fee rates of 20 satoshis/byte be even lower when denominated in USD because you're lowering the byte side of the fee rate as well.

Again, to reiterate, just because a blocksize increase is a simple change to make, doesn't mean it is an easy one or the right one. Once you increase the block size, you can't go backward. So it is absolutely critical that if it is chosen to go forward with such a decision, it is done when it is absolutely necessary and right to do so. Given all of our options for fees and scalability on the network as it stands already, I don't think the right conclusion is to make a decision to hardfork to a higher block size.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on November 18, 2017, 09:56:08 PM
That is a really cool visualization of the mempool phil22, thanks for the link!

I got curious about the huge spike in pending transactions a week ago. Looks like bitcoin lost almost half of its hashing power to BCC for about two days. On Nov 11th and 12th, the blocktime was all the way up at 18 minutes (it's supposed to be 10) because the hash rate on the BTC network was so low.

Anyone know if there are any plans to change how fast BTC's difficulty adjusts as the hashrate changes? Having two compatible blockchains with valuations and hash rates of the same order of magnitude would seem to make it much more likely that we'll see more big swings in hashing power on time scales shorter than the 14 days that it normally takes the difficulty rate to adjust.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on November 19, 2017, 10:34:19 AM
Rereading your original response I see that you're comment was mainly in regards to the recent run up in fees and transactions related to the fork event. Like I said, this was highly anomalous. Taking out events such as the forks in August and November and things look much different with transactions in the 10-20 satoshi/byte range routinely getting processed each day.

the size of the spike is anomalous... but spikes in the mempool size are NOT anomalous.  you can see in the 3-month chart link below (the bottom chart on the page, "mempool size in MB") that the BTC mempool regularly spiked above 10MB throughout September and October (requiring users to wait 10 blocks for their transactions to clear):

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#3m
(or see attached chart to this post)

So how would full blocks at 8MB be any different than full blocks at 1MB with regards to the fee market?

it's supply and demand.  you make the point later with larger segwit bloks: with a larger supply of block space, given the same demand that can fill both 8MB and 1MB blocks, fees will be lower on the 8MB blocks.

Once you increase the block size, you can't go backward. So it is absolutely critical that if it is chosen to go forward with such a decision, it is done when it is absolutely necessary and right to do so.

this is not true.  after you increase the block size, if a really good 2nd-layer solution is developed and actually gets traction and allows users to make small transactions off-chain, you could then theoretically lower the block size.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 19, 2017, 01:09:18 PM
the size of the spike is anomalous... but spikes in the mempool size are NOT anomalous.  you can see in the 3-month chart link below (the bottom chart on the page, "mempool size in MB") that the BTC mempool regularly spiked above 10MB throughout September and October (requiring users to wait 10 blocks for their transactions to clear):

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#3m
(or see attached chart to this post)

So how would full blocks at 8MB be any different than full blocks at 1MB with regards to the fee market?

it's supply and demand.  you make the point later with larger segwit bloks: with a larger supply of block space, given the same demand that can fill both 8MB and 1MB blocks, fees will be lower on the 8MB blocks.

this is not true.  after you increase the block size, if a really good 2nd-layer solution is developed and actually gets traction and allows users to make small transactions off-chain, you could then theoretically lower the block size.

Spikes in the mempool are not a problem so long as they drop and the netwok starts clearing out lower fee transactions (10-20 satoshis/byte) in a reasonable amount of time. Taking out the anomalous spikes around the fork dates and the large spikes in transactions all drop down with in a day or so down to the point where 0-20 satoshi/byte transactions are being cleared out. Waiting a day for a micro-transaction to be confirmed is not going to kill adoption. Especially given the fact that with credit cards, a merchant needs to wait 30 days to receive payment and payments are potentially reversible. Bitcoin transactions are irreversible and waiting a day to receive a small transaction to be confirmed on the network is not a problem. Merchants even take risk when accepting cash for transactions given the fact that they likely are not checking for counterfeits on transactions so small. I think the biggest problem is the fact that wallets have not done a good enough job in allowing users to specify a reasonable fee for their transactions to make it easier for them to judge what type of fee to use for their transaction. Perhaps wallets can even start including some of the fee data from websites like earn.com (some wallets do).

Do you feel it is a problem that 30 cent fees for smaller transactions take a day to confirm?

I think you missed my point regarding full 8MB blocks and full 1MB blocks. The point I was making is that, regardless of the block size, if you have full blocks, then that means you have to force some transactions to wait to be confirmed (not a bad thing as I mentioned) and thus this promotes fee competition (again, not a bad thing). The point I was making was that if 8MB blocks are full and transaction demand gets to the point where 8MB blocks are not sufficient, then the only option is to increase the block size yet again (I've talked about why that is not a good solution).

Also, as I mentioned earlier in the thread. I'm not against raising the block size to 2MB. It would be good if this were planned for 2018. I was against the SegWit2X fork due to the poor implementation of it (and was proven to be the case). I don't think block size increases should be immediately used whenever we start to have some transaction congestion. Like I said, once you increase the block size, you can't go back and if you could, it wouldn't exactly be easy. That's because Bitcoin nodes, when they download the blockchain, they validate all the blocks that they receive. If their rules state that all blocks must be 1MB, then they'll stop accepting blocks up to the point where a larger block is received. Maybe you could state rules that blocks between say 500000-510000 are allowed to be 2MB, but that isn't exactly an elegate solution and likely getting consensus around something like that would be difficult. With a network that requires consensus, you don't implement solutions around the idea that they could potentially be removed later knowing full well how difficult it is to get new rules implemented to begin with. Second layer solutions are a much better alternative to prevent micro-transactions from having to compete with large transactions in the same fee market.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on November 19, 2017, 02:14:54 PM
Waiting a day for a micro-transaction to be confirmed is not going to kill adoption. Especially given the fact that with credit cards, a merchant needs to wait 30 days to receive payment and payments are potentially reversible. Bitcoin transactions are irreversible and waiting a day to receive a small transaction to be confirmed on the network is not a problem.

bitcoin doesn't compete with just credit cards.  it competes with all other cryptocurrencies.  preventing use of microtransactions now, when there's no reason to do so, is harming adoption.  bitcoin is crippling itself at its own peril.

Do you feel it is a problem that 30 cent fees for smaller transactions take a day to confirm?

i agree that waiting a few hours or up to a day in the worst case is probably fine for most small transactions IF users and merchants are willing to do that rather than use a different cryptocurrency.  merchants shouldn't have trouble with that.  the problem is when a transaction for a $200 purchase on overstock or newegg, or even a $5 cup of coffee, is stuck in the mempool for several days and is eventually dropped completely out of the mempool altogether.  then the merchant would rather wait 30 days for a credit card transaction rather than get no payment at all.

and i think 5 cent fees taking a day to confirm is bearable in the worst case -- 30 cent fees should be much quicker than a full day.  a 30 cent fee is 3% of a $10 transaction, which is where we are with credit cards.

if 5 cent fees require 20MB blocks then yes that's too much too soon.  we may need good 2nd-layer solutions to allow those microtransactions to work, but the wrong way to do that is to force users to other cryptocurrencies at this stage by artificially keeping the block size low.  the decision to attempt to incentivize users to use off-chain transactions by artificially keeping the block size low was either intentional to try to kill bitcoin, or an attempt to redirect transaction fees to entities other than miners, or plain stupidity.

The point I was making was that if 8MB blocks are full and transaction demand gets to the point where 8MB blocks are not sufficient, then the only option is to increase the block size yet again (I've talked about why that is not a good solution).

you could continue to develop and roll out 2nd-layer solutions to keep smaller transactions off-chain.  you don't necessarily need to always increase block size.  but if a large majority of nodes can handle larger blocks, then there's no reason not to increase the max block size -- and this is where we are now.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on November 21, 2017, 05:08:14 PM
I want to point out that Bitcoin is up 296% since the original posting of this thread which was roughly 5 months ago.

Cheers to all who are in this market :]
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on November 21, 2017, 06:07:59 PM
Agreed.  When you're on a hot streak, the best thing to do is to keep gambling.  It never ends poorly.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on November 21, 2017, 07:45:00 PM
more snark.  how enlightening.

what if one was to hypothetically sell just enough of their crypto holdings to simply take a nice profit on their original fiat investment... and leave the rest of their crypto holdings intact?

in fact i sold a portion of my bitcoin a few years ago for a nice profit on the original fiat... now that the "fiat profit" aspect is taken care of i can let it ride and watch the fork drama and mudslinging from a comfortable position.  have any other holders here done this?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on November 22, 2017, 09:34:37 AM
more snark.  how enlightening.

what if one was to hypothetically sell just enough of their crypto holdings to simply take a nice profit on their original fiat investment... and leave the rest of their crypto holdings intact?

in fact i sold a portion of my bitcoin a few years ago for a nice profit on the original fiat... now that the "fiat profit" aspect is taken care of i can let it ride and watch the fork drama and mudslinging from a comfortable position.  have any other holders here done this?

I plan to methodically pull out most of my holdings during the course of 2018 and allocate it to Real Estate. I will let the long term holds ride but lots of short / mid term position I plan to close.

Agreed.  When you're on a hot streak, the best thing to do is to keep gambling.  It never ends poorly.

I pity the fool that remains steadfast in his ignorance.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on November 22, 2017, 11:16:23 AM
I want to point out that Bitcoin is up 296% since the original posting of this thread which was roughly 5 months ago.

Cheers to all who are in this market :]

You haven't made any money until you sell.  Bitcoin isn't a rental property or dividend stock. 


Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on November 23, 2017, 05:02:42 AM
I want to point out that Bitcoin is up 296% since the original posting of this thread which was roughly 5 months ago.

Cheers to all who are in this market :]

This isn't terrifying to bitcoin holders? A commodity you're holding is rising in price at a 700+% annualised rate? That's about 25 times as fast as Google's share price has grown since IPO, and that was before even Gmail existed. That isn't concerning at all?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on November 23, 2017, 07:42:27 AM
I want to point out that Bitcoin is up 296% since the original posting of this thread which was roughly 5 months ago.

Cheers to all who are in this market :]

This isn't terrifying to bitcoin holders? A commodity you're holding is rising in price at a 700+% annualised rate? That's about 25 times as fast as Google's share price has grown since IPO, and that was before even Gmail existed. That isn't concerning at all?

Gamblers on a hot streak don't usually see potential down sides.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on November 25, 2017, 08:47:37 PM
Adding a quick update to the ZEC mining experiment.*

(https://i.imgpile.com/nP5791.png) (https://imgpile.com/i/nP5791)

The price of ZEC is up 50% in the past little while, and as a result, my daily income is starting to tick back upwards (I'm currently averaging ~$5/day). I'm at -$564 vs the cost of my mining rig based on mining income only (assumes I sell all cryptocurrency income as it hits my account), so if things remains stable -- which is probably the one thing that certainly won't happen -- I'll break even in about another four months.

Now that said, I'm at +$4,950 if you include capital gains and forks/airdrops: other currencies you end up with (or able to get) just because you're holding bitcoin in a wallet where you control the private key. At this point my capital gains reflect ~$1,000 in bitcoin cash from when BTC and BCC forked, and ~$250 in bitcoin gold from when BTC and BTG forked in addition to the change in the price of bitcoin itself.

I'm curious how much more forking/airdropping is going to happen going forward. Bitcoin Gold is essentially a new altcoin, except that everyone who owned BTC received an equal amount of BTG and they kept the word "bitcoin" in the name. However unlike most newly launched altcoins BTG is already the 5th largest cryptocurrency by market cap and 8th largest currency by transaction volume. Given the success -- so far -- of both BCC and BTG, I imagine that many more groups are at least planning to try similar splits/airdrops in the future.

Important disclaimer: based on my original investment thesis, I still haven't broken even. In this case, I've been bailed out by the skyrocketing prices of the currencies I've been letting my mining earnings accumulate in, but if anything this should provide even more evidence that I'm terrible at predicting the future.

*Original details here on the first page of the thread (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/official-crypto-currency-portfolios-and-discussion/msg1600715/#msg1600715). Details on power usage here on the second page. (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/official-crypto-currency-portfolios-and-discussion/msg1610593/#msg1610593)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on November 25, 2017, 09:45:08 PM
Definitely important advice, shadow.

I have to admit that so far I haven't swept either the BTG or BCC out of my BTC addresses because I have indeed been worried about the security of private keys. I will definitely move the BTC out first when I am actually ready to do so.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: ketchup on November 26, 2017, 07:00:59 AM
BTC is above $9000 now.  What's my best way (safe, low fees, etc) to sell some BTC (and BCH) for USD if I've got them in a BitGo wallet?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on November 26, 2017, 08:59:52 AM
You probably already know this. Just a reminder for anyone else: if you plan to access your btg, move all your bitcoin variants into new addresses first, so you don't share private keys with btg. (https://bitcoingold.org/critical-warning-nov-26/). As an alternative, you can use coinomi.

I had been holding off on redeeming BTG since I didn't want to go through the hassel of moving my BTC to new private keys since my coins are split among a ton of addresses, so the fees would be pretty large for a transaction of that size. But, I recently just took the plunge and moved my BTC to a new SegWit enabled wallet. This freed me up to now move my BTG now that my old BTC wallet is empty.

Coincidentally I decided to use the Coinomi app and the Changelly exchange service. It was all pretty straightfoward, but I've haven't received the BTC yet. I'm guessing the delay is just because the BTC transactions need to go through and/or the Changelly service just takes a little while. At any rate, I'm at the mercy of the Changelly service right now. I did read on Twitter they had some issues over the holiday, but those have been resolved apparently.

Should be a nice bonus after it goes through. I wouldn't have guessed that BTG would be trading at ~$350, especially given its rocky start.


UPDATE: I just wanted to update this post to say that I did receive my BTG exchange for BTC through Coinomi/Changelly after a couple hours that same day. I didn't want to leave this post here making it seem like I was questioning the quality of their service. Everything was very smooth and easy to use.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on November 28, 2017, 10:55:15 PM
what if one was to hypothetically sell just enough of their crypto holdings to simply take a nice profit on their original fiat investment... and leave the rest of their crypto holdings intact?

in fact i sold a portion of my bitcoin a few years ago for a nice profit on the original fiat... now that the "fiat profit" aspect is taken care of i can let it ride and watch the fork drama and mudslinging from a comfortable position.  have any other holders here done this?

Probably psychologically satisfying, and I understand the desire to take such a position, but if you want to be "rational" with your decision making, you should probably realize this is a form of mental accounting.

What you purchased for is immaterial at this point for whether you should hold or not. You could immediately convert to fiat currency at the current values.
Your unrealized (opportunity) cost is the current fiat value, not what you originally paid.
If you wouldn't buy it, you should sell and all that.

The above all ignores transaction/taxes, but those should be relatively minor
(taxes more so of an issue, but you also don't want to to let the tax tail wag the decision making dog)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on November 29, 2017, 05:16:01 PM
Your unrealized (opportunity) cost is the current fiat value, not what you originally paid.
If you wouldn't buy it, you should sell and all that.

i agree it's probably wise to sell some portion of your holdings if you wouldn't take the same position again today.  but where do you draw the line?  sell half?  and how often do you repeat this exercise?  does this also apply to everything i own that could potentially be sold for fiat currency?

hasn't there been an opportunity cost in the coins i've sold in past years?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on November 29, 2017, 06:08:51 PM
does this also apply to everything i own that could potentially be sold for fiat currency?

Yes. Everything you own is costing you money. All the time.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: arebelspy on November 30, 2017, 06:51:15 AM
does this also apply to everything i own that could potentially be sold for fiat currency?

Yes. Everything you own is costing you money. All the time.

-W

I LOL'd.

And also nodded.

Of course it applies to everything. 

Opportunity cost is a bitch.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on December 01, 2017, 08:10:01 AM
With normal investing, I feel like checking it 4x a year and rebalancing is fine.

But Bitcoin (and, yes, the Bitcoin investment trust) change so rapidly that I could not imagine waiting three months to rebalance. Does anyone have a rule of thumb that's keeping him/her sane?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on December 01, 2017, 09:49:56 PM
i agree it's probably wise to sell some portion of your holdings if you wouldn't take the same position again today.  but where do you draw the line?  sell half?  and how often do you repeat this exercise?  does this also apply to everything i own that could potentially be sold for fiat currency?

Yes, with caveats.

Here's a perhaps related article: If You Wouldn’t Buy it, You Should Probably Sell it (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2015/07/02/if-you-wouldnt-buy-it-you-should-probably-sell-it/)

The stuff you own exists on spectrum of how easily they can be sold, how accurately you can value them, and the transaction costs.

The clothes on your back, your car, your house (if you choose to own any of those), are all relatively hard to value to 100% accuracy until you find a willing buyer, and there is some legwork involved in selling them.

Stocks, bonds, currencies (including crypto), that you hold electronically can be sold at the click of a mouse. They are interchangeable with each other and you have very accurate pricing information.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on December 03, 2017, 08:21:27 AM

This is how I do it in the tax sheltered account since rebalance does not cause tax issues.

20% Total Market
20% Small Cap
20% Gold
20% Bitcoin
20% Long Term Treasury

5% swings trigger a rebalance.

When any one of these hits 25% I sell and buy the rest to get them back to 20%. Below 15% I do the same. My brokerage also does free trades on 3 of the 5 of these funds, and $4.95 for the rest so the costs are minimal. These assets have relatively low correlation so you buying low and selling high all the time.

@effigy98, how long have you been doing this with Bitcoin as one of the asset categories?  How much has converting Bitcoin to fiat increased the amount that is in the fiat-denominated categories?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on December 03, 2017, 09:14:36 AM
Small cap and not small cap value? Why in particular?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: hgjjgkj on December 03, 2017, 07:24:25 PM
How do people feel about Ripple?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Jeferson on December 04, 2017, 10:28:19 AM
I don't know how about Ripple, but IOTA is currently doing exceptionally well. Let's see where it can go.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on December 05, 2017, 02:47:31 PM
Why would cash be replaced with Bitcoin and not Long Term Bonds?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on December 06, 2017, 01:16:10 PM

EXAMPLE:
Today on 10/04/2017: 1 Bitcoin is $4,800, 1 Monero is $91, 1 Ether is $292, 1 Lisk is $5.45, 1 LINK is $.39 and 1 ARDR is $.16.


Today on 12/06/2017: 1 Bitcoin is $13,400, 1 Monero is $282, 1 Ether is $430, 1 Lisk is $9.10 1 LINK is $.31 and 1 ARDR is $.55.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 06, 2017, 01:24:36 PM
It's interesting that the most recent run-up in bitcoin has been relatively isolated from the broader cryptocurrency economy, when previously the prices of the various cryptocurrencies in dollars tended to move more in concert with each other.

(Tonyahu your post brought this to mind, bitcoin and monero have essentially tripled, but looking through the data on coin market cap most others have less than doubled, with many gains "only" in the 30-50% range.)

If I were a paid commenter I'm sure I could come up with some elaborate story for what that pattern means.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Optimiser on December 06, 2017, 02:20:06 PM
Quote
Unfortunately, there has been a security breach involving NiceHash website. We are currently investigating the nature of the incident and, as a result, we are stopping all operations for the next 24 hours.
Importantly, our payment system was compromised and the contents of the NiceHash Bitcoin wallet have been stolen. We are working to verify the precise number of BTC taken.
Clearly, this is a matter of deep concern and we are working hard to rectify the matter in the coming days. In addition to undertaking our own investigation, the incident has been reported to the relevant authorities and law enforcement and we are co-operating with them as a matter of urgency.
We are fully committed to restoring the NiceHash service with the highest security measures at the earliest opportunity.
We would not exist without our devoted buyers and miners all around the globe. We understand that you will have a lot of questions, and we ask for patience and understanding while we investigate the causes and find the appropriate solutions for the future of the service. We will endeavour to update you at regular intervals.
While the full scope of what happened is not yet known, we recommend, as a precaution, that you change your online passwords.
We are truly sorry for any inconvenience that this may have caused and are committing every resource towards solving this issue as soon as possible.

It sounds like about $60 million USD worth of BTC was stolen. The price of BTC fell for a few minutes and then went right back up.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 06, 2017, 02:27:21 PM
Yikes! Thanks for posting that Optimiser. Nicehash was really quite convenient for mining one currency and getting paid in another.

Also this just popped up in my RSS feed.

Quote
As of today, Steam will no longer support Bitcoin as a payment method on our platform due to high fees and volatility in the value of Bitcoin.

In the past few months we've seen an increase in the volatility in the value of Bitcoin and a significant increase in the fees to process transactions on the Bitcoin network. For example, transaction fees that are charged to the customer by the Bitcoin network have skyrocketed this year, topping out at close to $20 a transaction last week (compared to roughly $0.20 when we initially enabled Bitcoin). Unfortunately, Valve has no control over the amount of the fee. These fees result in unreasonably high costs for purchasing games when paying with Bitcoin. The high transaction fees cause even greater problems when the value of Bitcoin itself drops dramatically.

Historically, the value of Bitcoin has been volatile, but the degree of volatility has become extreme in the last few months, losing as much as 25% in value over a period of days. This creates a problem for customers trying to purchase games with Bitcoin. When checking out on Steam, a customer will transfer x amount of Bitcoin for the cost of the game, plus y amount of Bitcoin to cover the transaction fee charged by the Bitcoin network. The value of Bitcoin is only guaranteed for a certain period of time so if the transaction doesn’t complete within that window of time, then the amount of Bitcoin needed to cover the transaction can change. The amount it can change has been increasing recently to a point where it can be significantly different.

The normal resolution for this is to either refund the original payment to the user, or ask the user to transfer additional funds to cover the remaining balance. In both these cases, the user is hit with the Bitcoin network transaction fee again. This year, we’ve seen increasing number of customers get into this state. With the transaction fee being so high right now, it is not feasible to refund or ask the customer to transfer the missing balance (which itself runs the risk of underpayment again, depending on how much the value of Bitcoin changes while the Bitcoin network processes the additional transfer).

At this point, it has become untenable to support Bitcoin as a payment option. We may re-evaluate whether Bitcoin makes sense for us and for the Steam community at a later date.

The part of cryptocurrency I don't care about (making money from rapid changes in price) is starting to significantly compromise the part I do care about (an interesting new way to make payments and move money around the world without having to worry about greedy payment processors or currency controls).

Edit: The good news there are lots of other cryptocurrencies which aren't experiencing the same issues. The downside is that right now none of them are accepted by nearly as many "real world" business, so I fear the current situation really may set back the adoption of payment processor free online transactions significantly.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on December 06, 2017, 03:34:20 PM
The Steam news is unfortunate. It just highlights the need to get these small transactions off chain. If anything, it is another kick in the pants for the solution to be completed.

They mention fees, but Steam wouldn't care about fees if that was the only problem. The customers paid the fees, it doesn't hurt Steam. The real problem is the massive volatility in Bitcoin of late.  If Steam is accepting payments and then the price changes +/- 20% in the time it takes to clear, that's a problem.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 06, 2017, 09:08:42 PM
Today the price of bitcoin increased $2,500. That's a one day gain greater than its entire value as recently as July.

Some of the coverage I read pointed to the fact that prices on coinbase (which is one of the more user friendly exchanges) have been up to $500 ahead of the average overall price on US exchanges, suggesting that the current spike in prices is being driven by bitcoin newbies who have been drawn in by recent news coverage of how fast the price of bitcoin is rising.

Whatever you think about the long term prospects of bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies -- personally I remain optimistic -- to me the price movements we've seen since August remind me a lot of the 2013 bubble in bitcoin prices.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: marty998 on December 07, 2017, 03:23:18 AM
It's just gone up $1000 in an hour :O

Just saw it at US$14,998    :O   :O   :O
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on December 07, 2017, 05:58:01 AM
Has anyone been following the recent happenings with Andreas Antonopoulos yesterday?

For those that don't know who he is, he is probably one of the most tireless educators for bitcoin and speak at countless conferences on the technology often without expenses covered. He literally wrote the book on bitcoin and offers that book for free on the internet.

Well the other day, Roger Ver called him out for receiving funds from individuals through a website called Patreon. He uses those funds to help him travel and offset the costs of going to conferences and such. Roger Ver (which this speaks to the type of character he is) said that if he had managed his finances better, he'd be a bitcoin millionaire already (https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status/938137951518773248 (https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status/938137951518773248)). Not sure why someone would call out another's finances, especially over a public forum like twitter.

Andreas also wrote a more detailed response to his followers which you can read here which details his story a little more.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7hylea/andreas_antonopoulos_posted_this_response_to_a/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7hylea/andreas_antonopoulos_posted_this_response_to_a/)

But what took place next has been pretty remarkable. The bitcoin community which loves Andreas rallied to his defense. Not only has everyone responded in kind to his amazing work that he's done over the years, but they've also flooded in massive amounts of donations to him.

Needless to say, he is now most certainly a bitcoin millionaire with over 100 bitcoin being donated to him from the community at large.
https://blockchain.info/address/1andreas3batLhQa2FawWjeyjCqyBzypd (https://blockchain.info/address/1andreas3batLhQa2FawWjeyjCqyBzypd)

As is typical for Andreas, he has been traveling while this was going on and after getting off the plane and taking his phone off airplane mode, he came to realize the reaction the community has had in such a short amount of time.

His response on twitter...

"Words are my craft but tonight I am speechless ... Processing"

https://twitter.com/aantonop/status/938518021106257920 (https://twitter.com/aantonop/status/938518021106257920)


I couldn't be happier for Andreas. He is truly a wonderful and humble person.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on December 07, 2017, 08:45:52 AM
It's just gone up $1000 in an hour :O

Just saw it at US$14,998    :O   :O   :O

There are still lots of grandmas and fraternity brothers and strippers who are done with flipping condos waiting to get in, though, right?

I'm just glad the total amount of money involved (thus far) isn't enough to do any real damage to the actual economy when the crash comes.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Roland of Gilead on December 07, 2017, 09:40:24 AM
This recent runup in bitcoin has given me hope for the beanie babies I will inherit from my parents.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Apple_Tango on December 07, 2017, 09:47:14 AM
Guys. I know we don't market time here. But I feel like Bitcoin isn't really an investment so I don't feel bad about it. I put about $180 ($200 with fees added) into Bitcoin back in September, and I told myself- "Self, when it reaches $1000 you will sell $750". I was expecting it to take years, but it happened today. The price of Bitcoin was over $19,000, my "investment" was over $1000, so I sold. And I chickened out a little and only sold $700. So with the fees taking a percentage,  I have $689 coming into my account in the next week. But. About 5 minutes after I sold the price dropped $3000. So I'm feeling quite lucky!!! Made my money back, and now the plan is to hold what I have for years and years to see what it does. I think my new instructions to "self" are to sell when my current $300 remaining in Bitcoin reaches $10,000. (I picked a crazy number on purpose). When it hits $10,000 I will sell $7000. Lol. Thank you, self.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on December 07, 2017, 10:07:20 AM
Guys. I know we don't market time here. But I feel like Bitcoin isn't really an investment so I don't feel bad about it. I put about $180 ($200 with fees added) into Bitcoin back in September, and I told myself- "Self, when it reaches $1000 you will sell $750". I was expecting it to take years, but it happened today. The price of Bitcoin was over $19,000, my "investment" was over $1000, so I sold. And I chickened out a little and only sold $700. So with the fees taking a percentage,  I have $689 coming into my account in the next week. But. About 5 minutes after I sold the price dropped $3000. So I'm feeling quite lucky!!! Made my money back, and now the plan is to hold what I have for years and years to see what it does. I think my new instructions to "self" are to sell when my current $300 remaining in Bitcoin reaches $10,000. (I picked a crazy number on purpose). When it hits $10,000 I will sell $7000. Lol. Thank you, self.

You gotta know when to hold 'em.  Know when to fold 'em.  Know when to walk away . . . and know when to run.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 07, 2017, 10:44:27 AM
Price divergence between different exchanges continuing to expand. Bitcoin prices at bitstamp and coinbase are now $1,000 off from each other. I don't understand why it's taking so long for prices to converge. Shouldn't it be easy for people to buy bitcoins at bitstamp, transfer them over to coinbase and sell for an instant profit? Or do the exchanges impose long wait times on bitcoin deposits?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: ketchup on December 07, 2017, 10:48:22 AM
Price divergence between different exchanges continuing to expand. Bitcoin prices at bitstamp and coinbase are now $1,000 off from each other. I don't understand why it's taking so long for prices to converge. Shouldn't it be easy for people to buy bitcoins at bitstamp, transfer them over to coinbase and sell for an instant profit? Or do the exchanges impose long wait times on bitcoin deposits?
Coinbase (and GDAX) have been a clusterfuck for the past hour.  My guess is once the exchanges have ironed things out so that this stops happening, there will be minimal price discrepancies between exchanges.

I'd hate to be in Coinbase's IT department today.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 07, 2017, 11:38:39 AM
Thanks Ketchup, that makes much more sense now.

I'd hate to be in Coinbase's IT department today.

+1

Quote
The number of people with Coinbase accounts has gone from 5.5 million in January to 13.3 million at the end of November, according to data from the Altana Digital Currency Fund. In late November, Coinbase was sometimes getting 100,000 new customers a day — leaving the company with more customers than Charles Schwab and E-Trade. 

....
Recently, every last inch of space has been pressed into action. The day after Bitcoin hit $10,000 last week, a training session for Coinbase managers was moved to the game room because the engineering team needed to set up an emergency war room in the regular conference room.

The engineering team was trying to get Coinbase back up after the company’s site was knocked offline, overwhelmed by a wave of incoming traffic. The number of visitors was double what it had been during the previous peak — two days earlier — and eight times what it had been in June, the peak until recently.

Full nytimes article: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/06/technology/coinbase-bitcoin.html
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on December 07, 2017, 02:01:50 PM
I have been expecting a correction for some time now, I feel a healthy point is anywhere between $5K-$8K USD.

How does everyone else feel?

Fundamentally I am much more bullish on Ethereum in the mid and long term but never underestimate the uninformed public.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on December 07, 2017, 02:57:38 PM
I have been expecting a correction for some time now, I feel a healthy point is anywhere between $5K-$8K USD.

How does everyone else feel?

Fundamentally I am much more bullish on Ethereum in the mid and long term but never underestimate the uninformed public.

I agree -- I think bitcoin is too replaceable.  Just like how if Uber disappeared 5 imitators could easily take its place in two months.  If Ethereum catches any momentum it's going to be way bigger and less replaceable. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on December 07, 2017, 03:38:03 PM
I have been expecting a correction for some time now, I feel a healthy point is anywhere between $5K-$8K USD.

How does everyone else feel?

Fundamentally I am much more bullish on Ethereum in the mid and long term but never underestimate the uninformed public.

I agree -- I think bitcoin is too replaceable.  Just like how if Uber disappeared 5 imitators could easily take its place in two months.  If Ethereum catches any momentum it's going to be way bigger and less replaceable.

I don't think Bitcoin is easily replaceable. There are too many things that Bitcoin has that no other alt-coin from both a network and ecosystem perspective. The computing behind bitcoin dwarfs the computing behind all other alt-coins and that means more security and stability. That's actual vast amounts of capital that's a part of the bitcoin network. Sure there are other cryptos out there that use SHA256 that the hashrate could go to, but then those currencies also don't have the legitimacy that Bitcoin has from an ecosystem standpoint. That is much more irreplacable than anything else. Bitcoin has legitimacy now from numerous derivatives markets opening up. It is only a matter of time before an ETF is approved as well. The shear number of wallets, apps, exchanges, payment operators, etc that all support bitcoin dwarfs every other alt-coin by comparison. So I don't understand the argument that Bitcoin is easily replaceable. Looking at things strictly from one angle doesn't paint the whole picture of how entrenched Bitcoin is at the number one spot. Trying to get that entire ecosystem as a whole to suddenly switch and adopt another crypto-currency is going to be an extremely tough sell from the perspective of any individual company considering that their business is on the line. This is an enormous hurdle for other alt-coins to get over. I'm not saying that it is an impossible hurdle, but it is enough of a hurdle for me to be bearish on all but Bitcoin at the moment.

For example, I don't think Ethereum is any threat to Bitcoin. Rootstock was just released this month as a Bitcoin sidechain that will allow smart contracts backed by the Bitcoin blockchain. Rootstock will allow for the same smart contracts that Ethereum supports. So if you're a developer looking to develop for either Bitcoin or Ethereum, there will be a very large draw towards developing a smart contract solution that is backed by the largest and most secure blockchain network on the planet. Ethereum will be left with a large number of bogus ICOs whereas bitcoin can start fresh with a blank slate of new smart contract ideas under a now more tightly regulated ICO space. Ethereum wasn't designed as a store of value either, so the scarcity just isn't there.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 08, 2017, 12:22:04 AM
Hey all, glad the discussion is going well.

I want to let everyone know that IOTA is something you want to do some research on while the market cap is still under-valued.

Cheers!

Just noticed IOTA has climbed into the #4 slot in terms of cryptocurrency market cap (ahead of Ripple, right behind bitcoin cash) on extremely high trading volume since Dec 4th. Congrats on the prediction coming true, @Tonyahu.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Roland of Gilead on December 08, 2017, 08:35:29 AM
Trying to get that entire ecosystem as a whole to suddenly switch and adopt another crypto-currency is going to be an extremely tough sell from the perspective of any individual company considering that their business is on the line.

Not really.  Imagine Amazon coming up with a crypto-currency, Amazoncoin or similar.  Bitcoin goes from $19,000 to $19 overnight.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JetBlast on December 08, 2017, 09:23:25 AM
I have been expecting a correction for some time now, I feel a healthy point is anywhere between $5K-$8K USD.

How does everyone else feel?

$5k-$8k is healthy based on what? 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: TheAnonOne on December 08, 2017, 09:51:52 AM
Trying to get that entire ecosystem as a whole to suddenly switch and adopt another crypto-currency is going to be an extremely tough sell from the perspective of any individual company considering that their business is on the line.

Not really.  Imagine Amazon coming up with a crypto-currency, Amazoncoin or similar.  Bitcoin goes from $19,000 to $19 overnight.

I doubt it, coins don't share one pool of resources, you would likely see brand new money flow into AMAcoin. Also, BTC would be exchangeable whatnot.

I don't see it tumbling based on a single extra coin. In-fact BTC gets a lot of it's value by being agnostic in the first place.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mpg350 on December 08, 2017, 02:34:04 PM
I have been expecting a correction for some time now, I feel a healthy point is anywhere between $5K-$8K USD.


Looking at chart that seems low...I think support would kick in before that price....I think support would be around the 10-12k range.   Has short term support near $15k if it holds that for awhile thats a pretty bullish sign.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: mpg350 on December 08, 2017, 02:36:10 PM
Trying to get that entire ecosystem as a whole to suddenly switch and adopt another crypto-currency is going to be an extremely tough sell from the perspective of any individual company considering that their business is on the line.

Not really.  Imagine Amazon coming up with a crypto-currency, Amazoncoin or similar.  Bitcoin goes from $19,000 to $19 overnight.

Why would Amazon go thru all the trouble and cost to make a currency, why would I put my dollars into amazoncoin just to use on amazon.   Atleast with bitcoin you can get a debt card and use it at other places. 

My biggest issue with bitcoin is transaction cost they need to get that low to near a credit card level or lower for world wide acceptance.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on December 08, 2017, 05:07:39 PM
I have been expecting a correction for some time now, I feel a healthy point is anywhere between $5K-$8K USD.


Looking at chart that seems low...I think support would kick in before that price....I think support would be around the 10-12k range.   Has short term support near $15k if it holds that for awhile thats a pretty bullish sign.

it's a big "if," but if there's a big prolonged correction (like a 50%+ fall that lasts weeks/months) then you could see miners abandon the main chain for bitcoin cash.  this happened briefly in November where 60+% of miners showed they are willing to simply mine the more profitable fork at any given time.

depending on how prices/difficulty oscillate between bitcoin and bitcoin cash at that point, the market could get very spooked.

i agree, except for a crisis like that i don't think prices would fall much below a 50% correction which would be in that $5-8k range.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on December 11, 2017, 08:50:39 AM
This market is messed up by the "systemic risk" argument. Since the big banks won't let you margin up buying BTC, there isn't much systemic risk. But its worse, most retail brokers won't even let you short the BTC futures.  So the dumb money is going long because its the only thing they can do.

 The smart money is buying BTC and selling over priced futures contracts. They will close the near contract and open the next.  This will keep a buying pressure on actual bitcoin for the next few months at least.  sure you have capital holding costs and some MESSY transaction costs, but there is over a 1300 spread between a coin now on coinbase and a January 17th coin on the CBOE.

I don't see a correction for a few months at a minimum.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: jorjor on December 11, 2017, 11:58:50 AM
Back to the discussion of portfolios...

Anyone holding LTC? I've been following the recent rise. Any chance it actually makes it to 0.25 BTC down the road? Or hell, even 0.1 BTC (it is just over 0.01 BTC now)?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on December 11, 2017, 12:48:25 PM
The smart money is buying BTC and selling over priced futures contracts. They will close the near contract and open the next.  This will keep a buying pressure on actual bitcoin for the next few months at least.  sure you have capital holding costs and some MESSY transaction costs, but there is over a 1300 spread between a coin now on coinbase and a January 17th coin on the CBOE.

^^This

I don't see a correction for quite some time. This cash-and-carry arbitrage between the underlying and the futures price is going to give the underlying bitcoin steady buying pressure. There are no storage costs to holding the underlying bitcoin asset and the transactions fees are negligible. You could even take out a low interest loan and hold the underlying without any risk and still make a locked-in profit in either direction. There will be plenty of traders looking to take this easy profit and this is going to create a bottom support that will prevent bitcoin from falling much from where it is now.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on December 11, 2017, 01:55:45 PM
Hey all, glad the discussion is going well.

I want to let everyone know that IOTA is something you want to do some research on while the market cap is still under-valued.

Cheers!

Just noticed IOTA has climbed into the #4 slot in terms of cryptocurrency market cap (ahead of Ripple, right behind bitcoin cash) on extremely high trading volume since Dec 4th. Congrats on the prediction coming true, @Tonyahu.

Thank you brotha!

Everyone should take a look at Ardor as well.

Based on NXT which was the first Proof of Stake system and the first Alt-Coin coded completely from scratch. Ardor has taken this and how allowed for scalability with Child Chains and Pruning.

Cheers to all buyers, sellers, traders and hodlers!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on December 11, 2017, 02:49:29 PM
Trying to get that entire ecosystem as a whole to suddenly switch and adopt another crypto-currency is going to be an extremely tough sell from the perspective of any individual company considering that their business is on the line.

Not really.  Imagine Amazon coming up with a crypto-currency, Amazoncoin or similar.  Bitcoin goes from $19,000 to $19 overnight.

This post demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of where cryptocurrencies derive value from. What would be the point of a centralized coin by Amazon? And if it's not centralized, then why would it appeal to anyone over the other cryptocurrencies?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: West996 on December 11, 2017, 05:39:52 PM
I know I'm late to the party but I'm thinking of about 10k in Bitcoin. My networth is about 150k. I wouldn't be happy if it all went poof but I understand you also have to take some risk to really get a jump forward. I'm just really scared about the storage and security of it. I'm researching paper wallets and all of that but it is as scary as hell.

Should I split up the 10k into two 5k wallets? Or smaller?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: k-vette on December 11, 2017, 09:26:32 PM
Back to the discussion of portfolios...

Anyone holding LTC? I've been following the recent rise. Any chance it actually makes it to 0.25 BTC down the road? Or hell, even 0.1 BTC (it is just over 0.01 BTC now)?

Nearly tripled my LTC value in 2 weeks.  I'll take It!  Insanity of cryptocurrency.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on December 12, 2017, 08:34:38 AM
I know I'm late to the party but I'm thinking of about 10k in Bitcoin. My networth is about 150k. I wouldn't be happy if it all went poof but I understand you also have to take some risk to really get a jump forward. I'm just really scared about the storage and security of it. I'm researching paper wallets and all of that but it is as scary as hell.

Should I split up the 10k into two 5k wallets? Or smaller?

chop that into a quarter and that's about the right position size. This is a spicy meatball of a momentum play and the winner of the game gets off the train one stop before the derailment.  You shouldn't take a position size that large without your own value model.  unless of course its VTSAX :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: West996 on December 12, 2017, 09:54:32 AM
I know I'm late to the party but I'm thinking of about 10k in Bitcoin. My networth is about 150k. I wouldn't be happy if it all went poof but I understand you also have to take some risk to really get a jump forward. I'm just really scared about the storage and security of it. I'm researching paper wallets and all of that but it is as scary as hell.

Should I split up the 10k into two 5k wallets? Or smaller?

chop that into a quarter and that's about the right position size. This is a spicy meatball of a momentum play and the winner of the game gets off the train one stop before the derailment.  You shouldn't take a position size that large without your own value model.  unless of course its VTSAX :)

Are you suggesting I only invest 2.5k period or do it in 2.5k chunks and store those separately?

@shadow the problem with the Nano solution is they are expensive I wouldn't want to buy more then one.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Optimiser on December 12, 2017, 10:02:16 AM
Back to the discussion of portfolios...

Anyone holding LTC? I've been following the recent rise. Any chance it actually makes it to 0.25 BTC down the road? Or hell, even 0.1 BTC (it is just over 0.01 BTC now)?

Nearly tripled my LTC value in 2 weeks.  I'll take It!  Insanity of cryptocurrency.

I received some mining profits last week in LTC and hadn't sold them out of laziness. I was quite pleasantly surprised to see them up well over 100% in that time.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on December 12, 2017, 10:57:12 AM
I know I'm late to the party but I'm thinking of about 10k in Bitcoin. My networth is about 150k. I wouldn't be happy if it all went poof but I understand you also have to take some risk to really get a jump forward. I'm just really scared about the storage and security of it. I'm researching paper wallets and all of that but it is as scary as hell.

Should I split up the 10k into two 5k wallets? Or smaller?

chop that into a quarter and that's about the right position size. This is a spicy meatball of a momentum play and the winner of the game gets off the train one stop before the derailment.  You shouldn't take a position size that large without your own value model.  unless of course its VTSAX :)

Are you suggesting I only invest 2.5k period or do it in 2.5k chunks and store those separately?

@shadow the problem with the Nano solution is they are expensive I wouldn't want to buy more then one.

keep your total position size small, to the 2.5 k ish total size, if you understand what a momentum play is. If you don't, then skip this speculation.  BTC plays right now require an exit plan.

Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) isn't a good strategy. 

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on December 12, 2017, 01:12:15 PM
I've come to the conclusion that a mere $10 trillion crypto marketcap won't suffice. We will most likely see a marketcap that dramatically surpasses that amount.

Old-thinking is stuck and mired in physical assets, while new paradigm ushers in an era of algorithmic and digital assets. There's alot of unknown unknown potential, but people recognize the potential nonetheless.

I feel anything under 1T (where we are) is still weak sauce and not even near mainstream.

The Dot Com bubble was 7T when adjusted for inflation.

10T is not out of the realm of possibility. If that happens, oh boy.....oh boy....

But to be frank, I am already starting to implement my risk management and will be pulling out 5% of total portfolio at every stop. First stop hit, second stop is very close.

Cheers to all, enjoy this wild ride!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on December 12, 2017, 02:24:43 PM
Counterpoint:

When people who know nothing of "Bit Coin" are taking on debt to buy them as the next major investment, people are mortgaging their homes to buy it, and you've got trends for "bitcoin credit card" doing, well, this: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2017-01-01%202017-12-31&q=bitcoin%20credit%20card

And mainstream media is covering it extensively?

Historically, that looks like what things look like at the peak, just before a bubble bursts.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 12, 2017, 02:46:58 PM
Mid-point:

It is quite possible for the statements "bitcoin is in a bubble" and "bitcoin will be worth $1 trillion someday" to both be true at the same time. US real estate was in a major bubble in the mid-2000s, but that doesn't mean prices went to zero or that prices never increased again after the crash.

I tend to think the first statement is almost certainly true, we're seeing lots and lots of people buy bitcoin (both in the USA and in places like Korea) without knowing anything about it except that they read somewhere that the price is going up a lot.

I also tend to think the second statement is likely to be true if you amend it to "bitcoin or some other cryptocurrency will be worth $1 trillion someday." I also think the current surge in prices and transaction fees has made it less likely (though certainly not impossible) that currency with be bitcoin. The one big advantage bitcoin had over all the altcoins was the network effects of being the currency the most people had heard about and the currency the most online and in person businesses were already set up to accept payments in. Those two advantages will be substantially impaired by another major price crash (when/if it happens), and by the $20 transaction fees (already causing major merchants to either back off of accepting cyptocurrency payments entirely or switch over to lower fee currencies like ETH/LTC/BCC/MON*).

If the lightning network were already active today maybe it would be different, but I think we will find that once people switch over to using a different currency to process payments the long term damage is done.

*These are the only cryptocurrencies I've actually heard of people using to buy things online, apologies if I've missed others.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on December 12, 2017, 03:43:02 PM
Anyone holding LTC? I've been following the recent rise. Any chance it actually makes it to 0.25 BTC down the road? Or hell, even 0.1 BTC (it is just over 0.01 BTC now)?

I bought a solitary Litecoin at $26 back in May.  The ETH I bought at the time has merely 2-3X'd, not 10X'd.  Obviously I wish I had bought more! 

I know a guy who bough a single bitcoin in 2016 for $650.  He just sold it last week for $18,000.  There aren't many people out there who pulled that off. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on December 12, 2017, 05:37:25 PM
I know I'm late to the party but I'm thinking of about 10k in Bitcoin. My networth is about 150k. I wouldn't be happy if it all went poof but I understand you also have to take some risk to really get a jump forward. I'm just really scared about the storage and security of it. I'm researching paper wallets and all of that but it is as scary as hell.

Should I split up the 10k into two 5k wallets? Or smaller?

chop that into a quarter and that's about the right position size. This is a spicy meatball of a momentum play and the winner of the game gets off the train one stop before the derailment.  You shouldn't take a position size that large without your own value model.  unless of course its VTSAX :)

Are you suggesting I only invest 2.5k period or do it in 2.5k chunks and store those separately?

@shadow the problem with the Nano solution is they are expensive I wouldn't want to buy more then one.

if you were using actual physical paper wallets then yes you could use more than one and keep them in separate locations.  if you're using a hardware Ledger wallet then you would only buy one of those and keep the seed phrase written down, on paper, in several secure locations -- NOT on any computer anywhere .  if you are not comfortable holding $10k in a single wallet or the technical aspect of securely storing it, then perhaps it's still too early on for you to speculate with bitcoin.  perhaps wait until an ETF is available.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Roland of Gilead on December 12, 2017, 07:48:52 PM
I still have some Etoys stock certificates around here somewhere...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on December 13, 2017, 10:59:27 AM
Cover your expenses so you do not have any regrets and let the rest ride if you are still bullish!

Done and then some. I also covered a very not mustachian dinner :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on December 14, 2017, 02:10:18 PM
I hope everyone is doing good, life is good!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO2UOhGEC_A&feature=youtu.be&t=1070

Never forget what (part) of this movement is about.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: FrugalSaver on December 14, 2017, 10:32:23 PM
Anyone buying XRP ?  Supposed to be the next big cc
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on December 15, 2017, 12:43:02 PM
Anyone buying XRP ?  Supposed to be the next big cc

No, it's ridiculously overpriced. Centralized. Ripple owns 50%+ of supply. Ripple doesn't even use XRP for their protocol.

It's a useless vehicle based purely on speculation, IMO.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: bobcobb7 on December 15, 2017, 03:50:03 PM
So for those in the US, how are you tax planning for cryptos? The simple buy-hold-sell of the same coin is simple to treat like stocks. But, it appears the crypto to crypto exchanges do not count as like-kind exchanges so all of those trades will trigger a taxable event even though you received no cash. I think that it is how it works, but not positive. That definitely makes things a bit more difficult.

Also the BCH and BTG splits could be considered taxable and assigned a cost basis of their value on the first day you took position. The value when you received them would count as income.

I'm planning on doing the taxes as best declared by the experts and IRS briefing in 2014. I know there are a few crypto tax programs out there.

How are the rest of you handling this? Apologies if this has been discussed previously.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on December 16, 2017, 04:06:12 AM
Old-thinking is stuck and mired in physical assets, while new paradigm ushers in an era of algorithmic and digital assets. There's alot of unknown unknown potential, but people recognize the potential nonetheless.

I really can't believe that I'm now seeing non-ironic uses of this phrase on a regular basis.
I feel privileged to be a witness to the ongoing lesson of cryptocrazy, however it turns out.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on December 16, 2017, 07:42:01 AM
I really can't believe that I'm now seeing non-ironic uses of this phrase on a regular basis.
I feel privileged to be a witness to the ongoing lesson of cryptocrazy, however it turns out.

"A good understanding of the history of commodity currencies would have led to my own island by now." :)

Sadly, not really the case.

Though a friend did get a bitcoin investment tip from a guy working at a gas station, which I feel is pretty close to "stock tips from a shoe shine boy."
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: FrugalSaver on December 16, 2017, 06:52:47 PM
Anyone buying XRP ?  Supposed to be the next big cc

No, it's ridiculously overpriced. Centralized. Ripple owns 50%+ of supply. Ripple doesn't even use XRP for their protocol.

It's a useless vehicle based purely on speculation, IMO.

What about GBTC?  I don't see hardly anyone mentioning that on this thread.Tripled since thanksgiving.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 16, 2017, 07:04:22 PM
What about GBTC?  I don't see hardly anyone mentioning that on this thread.Tripled since thanksgiving.

Terrible, terrible deal. Each share of GBTC represents ~$1,600 of underlying crypocurrency, but sells for ~$2,600.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on December 16, 2017, 07:11:06 PM
What about GBTC?  I don't see hardly anyone mentioning that on this thread.Tripled since thanksgiving.

if someone really doesn't understand the technical side and doesn't want to get involved with personally securing private keys -- basically, they want to purely speculate on bitcoin -- then GBTC is the only way to do that now.  it's a terrible idea, but it's the only way.

for example, bitcoin has forked a few times recently and GBTC just sold their customer's coins on another fork.  there is no reason for an impartial custodian to do this.  GBTC is not fork-neutral which could blow up in their faces if there ever actually is a "flip" from one fork to another fork (becoming the consensus fork) and they loose all their investors' money.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: FrugalSaver on December 17, 2017, 12:46:57 AM
Anyone buying XRP ?  Supposed to be the next big cc

No, it's ridiculously overpriced. Centralized. Ripple owns 50%+ of supply. Ripple doesn't even use XRP for their protocol.

It's a useless vehicle based purely on speculation, IMO.

Can you elaborate? Serious question
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Dutchie on December 19, 2017, 06:03:03 AM
Hi :) I haven't posted here in a long time, and I came back to see some "broader" opinions on cryptocurrencies, compared to the obviously biased opinions on crypto-forums.
I've been reading MMM's blog for many years now, but barely use the forum.

I know I'm late to the party but I'm thinking of about 10k in Bitcoin. My networth is about 150k. I wouldn't be happy if it all went poof but I understand you also have to take some risk to really get a jump forward. I'm just really scared about the storage and security of it. I'm researching paper wallets and all of that but it is as scary as hell.

Should I split up the 10k into two 5k wallets? Or smaller?
chop that into a quarter and that's about the right position size.
Paper wallets are pretty straight forward, although not very intuitive. Make sure you understand them before going in big. Bitaddress.org is the most trusted site to generate them, but don't take my word for it: do your own due diligence.
Splitting them up doesn't matter now, but it makes it much easier if you want to sell only a part of your holdings later on. If you spread 1 Bitcoin over four wallets with 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 Bitcoin each, you can just choose which one to empty to sell in the future. Paper wallets should not be used to withdraw only a part of the balance!

My story
I started keeping track of the value of my Bitcoin in May 2016, it was worth just under 1% of my networth. Before that, it wasn't worth registering the value, I collected it as "play money".
In January this year, it reached 3% of my networth, and since May this year I've started selling small amounts. This year I also got into some altcoins, but never more than 10-20% of my total crypto holdings. So far, I've sold (at current value) 7% of my networth (25% of my crypto), and my current crypto holdings are approximately 30-40% of my networth (I keep a broad margin because of it's volatility).
Now the scary part: I'm torn between FOMO and FUD! I'd never invest this much in something this volatile if I wouldn't have it already (=the FUD part), but I also don't want to miss out on a possible x10 in the coming years (=the FOMO part). I realize this isn't rational, but it has kinda grown on me.
If I would never have sold any crypto, my net worth would be 8% higher now.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: ketchup on December 19, 2017, 08:28:47 AM
Now the scary part: I'm torn between FOMO and FUD! I'd never invest this much in something this volatile if I wouldn't have it already (=the FUD part), but I also don't want to miss out on a possible x10 in the coming years (=the FOMO part). I realize this isn't rational, but it has kinda grown on me.
If I would never have sold any crypto, my net worth would be 8% higher now.
My way of tackling this concern is cashing out a bit along the way.  I'm already ahead (on a USD basis) after my mining experiment, what I have left in BTC/BCH is just extra gains.  With what remains I think I'll cash out 25% of present holdings if it doubles from when I last sold (at $11,600), and if it keeps going, continue doing that.  This way, I've already more than made back my investment, I get to keep riding it in case we get to $1M/BTC by 2020 like John McAfee wants, but I get extra cash out along the way in case this whole thing is a bubble that pops down to $1/BTC in a month or a year.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: hgjjgkj on December 19, 2017, 10:07:35 PM
Let's say you had $10,000 of short term capital gains income in 12/31/17. So you get taxed on that. But then on1/2/2018 bitcoin crashes and your 10K (which you plowed back into BTC) then goes to 0. You still owe the tax from the prior year's gain right? Does the IRS offer some way to balance this out?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: FrugalSaver on December 19, 2017, 11:44:45 PM
Let's say you believe John McAfee and wanted to buy a bit coin that today was trading about $16,000.


How do you recommend to buy it?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Finallyunderstand on December 20, 2017, 05:56:10 AM
Let's say you had $10,000 of short term capital gains income in 12/31/17. So you get taxed on that. But then on1/2/2018 bitcoin crashes and your 10K (which you plowed back into BTC) then goes to 0. You still owe the tax from the prior year's gain right? Does the IRS offer some way to balance this out?

only in the sense that you could then write off that loss on your 2018 taxes
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on December 20, 2017, 09:21:38 AM
Let's say you had $10,000 of short term capital gains income in 12/31/17. So you get taxed on that. But then on1/2/2018 bitcoin crashes and your 10K (which you plowed back into BTC) then goes to 0. You still owe the tax from the prior year's gain right? Does the IRS offer some way to balance this out?

You can apply the loss against 2018 taxable income and capital gains.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on December 20, 2017, 09:52:46 AM
Let's say you had $10,000 of short term capital gains income in 12/31/17. So you get taxed on that. But then on1/2/2018 bitcoin crashes and your 10K (which you plowed back into BTC) then goes to 0. You still owe the tax from the prior year's gain right? Does the IRS offer some way to balance this out?

What the other guys said, but I want to make sure there's not a more fundamental misunderstanding here. You would only have any short-term capital gains if you sold your bitcoin ("realized" the gains). Just having the value of an asset appreciate on paper means nothing tax-wise, you only get taxed on the gains when you sell it. So in your scenario you're talking about having the value of your bitcoin appreciate $10k, selling it, and then buying bitcoin again with that money, and then watching it crash, and then selling it again (to "realize" the loss).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: calpolyjohn on December 20, 2017, 11:08:19 AM
Let's say you believe John McAfee and wanted to buy a bit coin that today was trading about $16,000.


How do you recommend to buy it?

You could make a coinbase account, sync your bank account, and use use that to process the buy.  I believe it takes about a week to actually "get" your bitcoin into your coinbase vault, but you will get it for the price it was the day you bought.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Aggie1999 on December 20, 2017, 11:29:21 AM
Let's say you believe John McAfee and wanted to buy a bit coin that today was trading about $16,000.


How do you recommend to buy it?

You could make a coinbase account, sync your bank account, and use use that to process the buy.  I believe it takes about a week to actually "get" your bitcoin into your coinbase vault, but you will get it for the price it was the day you bought.

Comments:

- The week to get the bitcoin is because Coinbase for some reason takes around a week to process an ACH bank transfer. No clue why it takes them so long when bank to bank, bank to brokerage, etc is 24 hours. Note if you buy with a credit card (just a small amount) then I think you get the bitcoin right away.

- Don't use Coinbase to buy/sell any big amount (1 BTC certainly counts). Coinbase takes a ~1.5% commission when buying and when selling. Use GDAX (Coinbases actual exchange). Google their maker/taker fee structure on how to trade for free.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on December 20, 2017, 05:24:15 PM
Let's say you believe John McAfee and wanted to buy a bit coin that today was trading about $16,000.

How do you recommend to buy it?

You could make a coinbase account, sync your bank account, and use use that to process the buy.  I believe it takes about a week to actually "get" your bitcoin into your coinbase vault, but you will get it for the price it was the day you bought.

Comments:

- The week to get the bitcoin is because Coinbase for some reason takes around a week to process an ACH bank transfer. No clue why it takes them so long when bank to bank, bank to brokerage, etc is 24 hours. Note if you buy with a credit card (just a small amount) then I think you get the bitcoin right away.

- Don't use Coinbase to buy/sell any big amount (1 BTC certainly counts). Coinbase takes a ~1.5% commission when buying and when selling. Use GDAX (Coinbases actual exchange). Google their maker/taker fee structure on how to trade for free.

if you're ok with the price on coinbase i think it's fine to just buy/sell with coinbase and not on GDAX.  the price on GDAX swings way more then 1.5% daily so you may or may not benefit from the lack of fees depending on the exact day/hour/minute you buy/sell.

and if you want to put ~$X into bitcoin, i would seriously consider buying the same unit value of both BTC and BCH right now (0.1 or 0.5 of both), or wait a few weeks/months for the craziness to play itself out.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on December 20, 2017, 05:41:38 PM
Yeah, you could easily lose 1.5% by chasing a limit order. Not discouraging anyway, but just be aware of that.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on December 21, 2017, 11:15:25 AM
I read a lot of criticism of GBTC (disclosure: no position) because of the premium over NAV.

I think it's useful to think about what that premium buys you: same-day liquidity in an investment account. As long as the market continues to value that premium in a constant way, you buy it going in and sell it going out.

And if that investment account is tax-deferred, you get the ability to rebalance that money in a tax-deferred way.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on December 21, 2017, 11:55:52 AM
I read a lot of criticism of GBTC (disclosure: no position) because of the premium over NAV.

I think it's useful to think about what that premium buys you: same-day liquidity in an investment account. As long as the market continues to value that premium in a constant way, you buy it going in and sell it going out.

And if that investment account is tax-deferred, you get the ability to rebalance that money in a tax-deferred way.

There are reasons for investing GBTC. People just need to be aware of the risks.

Yes, if the premium stays the same while you get in and get out, it's not an issue. But if an ETF is announced, the premium could vanish in an instant.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 21, 2017, 12:02:47 PM
"As long as the market continues to value that premium in a constant way, you buy it going in and sell it going out."

I think you've hit the nail on the head. My concern with the GBTC is indeed the stability of the premium. If things go great for bitcoin the premium should decline (because you'll see things like ETFs and futures launch). And if things go terrible the premium should also decline (because people will stop wanting to buy bitcoin in their retirement accounts if the price is declining). It seems a relatively safe prediction that a few years from now, things will either get better or get worse than they are today.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on December 21, 2017, 01:58:43 PM
Here comes Goldman Sachs.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-21/goldman-is-setting-up-a-cryptocurrency-trading-desk
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on December 21, 2017, 07:55:03 PM
I went ahead and built a mining rig. Parts as follows:

 $$$ - Description
 118 - ASRock H81 PRO BTC R2.0
  53 - Intel Celeron G1840 Processor
  33 - 4GB RAM
 176 - EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G2 power supply
  40 - 6 x PCIe riser cable
1380 - 6 x SAPPHIRE NITRO Radeon RX 470 4GB "video cards"
  40 - Home made case/frame
  20 - 15A surge suppressor
------------
$1860

...

I wanted to do a quick update. Since the beginning of August this hardware has mined 3.0 ETH which is currently worth (as of this moment) ~$2160. I think I have spent ~$250 on electricity to do so, so I've now broken even on my hardware investment. Also, it has definitely been fun.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on December 21, 2017, 07:59:52 PM
I went ahead and built a mining rig. Parts as follows:

 $$$ - Description
 118 - ASRock H81 PRO BTC R2.0
  53 - Intel Celeron G1840 Processor
  33 - 4GB RAM
 176 - EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G2 power supply
  40 - 6 x PCIe riser cable
1380 - 6 x SAPPHIRE NITRO Radeon RX 470 4GB "video cards"
  40 - Home made case/frame
  20 - 15A surge suppressor
------------
$1860

...

I wanted to do a quick update. Since the beginning of August this hardware has mined 3.0 ETH which is currently worth (as of this moment) ~$2160. I think I have spent ~$250 on electricity to do so, so I've now broken even on my hardware investment. Also, it has definitely been fun.

Of course if you had just spent the $1,860 on ETH in August instead of mining hardware you would have about $7,000 worth right now.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 21, 2017, 08:00:53 PM
Congratulations, PDXTabs!

I checked today and a recent run up in the price of zcash combined with a decline in difficulty (I think a lot of GPU rigs jumped over to ethereum), means the earning on my own mining rig has jumped back $300/month, numbers I haven't seen since last June. (For most of the fall it was bringing in closer to $100/month).

Considering the effect of price appreciation I broke even a while ago, but I'm hopeful now I may yet manage to do so on mining profits alone.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on December 21, 2017, 08:03:03 PM
Of course if you had just spent the $1,860 on ETH in August instead of mining hardware you would have about $7,000 worth right now.

Where's the fun in that ;) ?

EDIT - just to add a twist to this: I purchased the hardware on a 0% CC (I have the money to pay it off before they start charging me interest) that I opened to possibly sell future tradelines on.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: FrugalSaver on December 23, 2017, 05:57:03 PM
After the crypto crash, is it time to buy again?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on December 23, 2017, 08:48:34 PM
After the crypto crash, is it time to buy again?

Boingy, boingy, boingy!  Bounce, bounce, bounce!

Just because a dead cat bounces a few times doesn't make it a live cat.

Realistically, I expect there is a ton of "BTFD" ("Buy The Fine Dip") going on which means that prices will bounce along, for a while.  How long?  No clue.

This is acting entirely like the fizzy, fluffy, foamy froth at the top of a bubble.  I think buying now would be quite stupid.  IMO.

... so, uh, watch as it hits $50k or something before heading down.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: FrugalSaver on December 25, 2017, 07:05:14 PM
I guess that's a no
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on December 25, 2017, 08:55:13 PM
I guess that's a no

That would be a firm "Oh hell no."

Bitcoin, currently, is acting a ton like "late stage bubble."  There may be some growth left in it, there may not, but investing into this stage of the bubble is comically unwise, historically.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on December 26, 2017, 12:01:39 AM
Anyone buying XRP ?  Supposed to be the next big cc

No, it's ridiculously overpriced. Centralized. Ripple owns 50%+ of supply. Ripple doesn't even use XRP for their protocol.

It's a useless vehicle based purely on speculation, IMO.

I purchased Ripple as a hedge against all the other crypto currencies. Ripple is working with the banks rather than trying to replace them, they have agreements with Standard Charter, American Express, Japanese bank consortium and many more. I bought the majority of my stake at 0.17, and some  at 0.60.Currently up to $1. Ripple has performed very, very well for me and currently looks on track to take over some of Swift's market share.

Saying "something is overpriced" in the crypto world is really silly, unless you can back up that statement with hard math.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sisto on December 26, 2017, 05:49:03 PM
I've been trying to buy some Ripple, but account verification is taking forever. I only plan to invest $1K and it I make that back I'll likely pull it out and keep some invested.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on December 27, 2017, 12:12:16 AM
It is 500 times faster than bitcoin and a tiny fraction of the cost in fees. It is already being used by financial institutions. Pay closer attention to decentralized cryptos and you will notice a trend of centralization through mining cartels taking place.
Like I said , I purchased Ripple as a hedge against my other crypto holdings ( centralized/decentralized), it turns out to be the one looking most likely for widespread adoption because banks are already using it for it's speed and low cost.
My understanding is that Ripple uses  verified validators . As this trusted network grows it will be more  decentralized/distributed which will be the longer term future.

Do you feel anxiety holding other crypto?

I made an initial $10k crypto purchase last summer, pulled back $13k into my savings in November ( original investment plus a little profit). My current holdings are over $20k in value all without adding a single penny. Because this is "play money" I have zero anxiety. I hold Ripple, Monero, Bitcoin cash and Ethereum. One should never feel anxious about investments.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JuicyCrab on December 27, 2017, 12:47:08 AM
Been reading this thread eagerly with the craziness of the crypto market this year.

Wondering what exposure people are placing in cryptos compared to other invested assets?

For me I'm only comfortable with about 5% in cryptos, which is probably too hot for some, but would love to see what others are doing.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on December 27, 2017, 02:28:04 PM
Ripple is centralized. Why will it be adopted over a decentralized crypto? What's the value proposition? What do you guys know that I don't?

I have no ripple. I would feel anxiety holding it.

no, it's not (certainly not anymore than bitcoin).

ripple provides a utility asset which decreases transaction costs for banks regarding cross-border settlement. this is also accomplished within 3-7 seconds and at a cost less than $0.01. why exactly would you feel anxious about holding it? it's one of the most legitimate tokens in existence solving a real world problem. i would have more anxiety holding bitcoin.

there's a wealth of knowledge at xrpchat.com. you can learn a lot there.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on December 27, 2017, 05:36:06 PM
Ripple is centralized. Why will it be adopted over a decentralized crypto? What's the value proposition? What do you guys know that I don't?

I have no ripple. I would feel anxiety holding it.

no, it's not (certainly not anymore than bitcoin).

ripple provides a utility asset which decreases transaction costs for banks regarding cross-border settlement. this is also accomplished within 3-7 seconds and at a cost less than $0.01. why exactly would you feel anxious about holding it? it's one of the most legitimate tokens in existence solving a real world problem. i would have more anxiety holding bitcoin.

there's a wealth of knowledge at xrpchat.com. you can learn a lot there.

Bolded to agree 100%. It was fun riding BTC on the bubble ride up but clearly the actual utility of BTC is nothing ( except as a store of "value"), Ripple on the other hand......
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: frozen on December 27, 2017, 07:44:47 PM
I've been trying to buy some Ripple, but account verification is taking forever. I only plan to invest $1K and it I make that back I'll likely pull it out and keep some invested.

What are you using to buy Ripple? I am thinking of buying $1000 as well but can’t decide what to use to buy it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: forgerator on December 28, 2017, 11:24:30 AM
I've been trying to buy some Ripple, but account verification is taking forever. I only plan to invest $1K and it I make that back I'll likely pull it out and keep some invested.

What are you using to buy Ripple? I am thinking of buying $1000 as well but can’t decide what to use to buy it.

Here's a YouTube video explaining how to buy ripple using currency transfer between BTC and XRP.

https://youtu.be/1L5L-bjZ3fA

In summary you will need to have accounts in both Coinbase and Binance. You will withdraw your existing BTC from Coinbase and deposit the BTC into Binance.  You can do this directly which is easier but has a transfer fee or via GDAX (video shows that).

Finally once the btc is in Binance you can exchange it for XRP (Ripple coin). Hope that helps.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sisto on December 28, 2017, 11:39:42 AM
I've been trying to buy some Ripple, but account verification is taking forever. I only plan to invest $1K and it I make that back I'll likely pull it out and keep some invested.

What are you using to buy Ripple? I am thinking of buying $1000 as well but can’t decide what to use to buy it.
Planning to use Kraken, but still waiting on final verification.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on December 28, 2017, 11:52:02 AM
Kraken takes for ever and when the market is crazy will frequently crash but it is what I have used. Transfering LTC or ETH from Coinbase.
I have had more success using it very late at night for  what it is worth, even on crazy days.

Ripple is frequently either stable price wise or in the green when the broader crypto market is tanking.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on December 28, 2017, 10:26:02 PM
In bitcoin, there is far greater distribution of the coins. In ripple, the creators own 60%. 

the top 3 mining pools control 51%+ of the BTC hash... there is definitely not a greater distribution. only 1/5 of the total supply is held by the creators (not 60%). 80% of what was held by the founders were given to ripple labs with the intention to incentivize market maker activity and to increase XRP liquidity.

i trust ripple more than BTC or ETH as they're working with regulators and are far more transparent than any other project. anyone remember when the ETH dev's premined an additional 17% of the 72m at launch?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on December 28, 2017, 11:33:06 PM
I can't catch them all.

Wait, are they like pokemon? 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on December 29, 2017, 09:02:33 AM
Not a lot of talk about Monero here.... any thoughts?  while there appears to be some privacy advantages, the marketing to the music industry as a way to get wider adoption is what tickled me.

I guess I am not that bullish since I am planning on firing up a couple GPUs to get back into mining with Monero, so more hobby time than a money investment. Bubble Warning: the Dear Lady Troll has seen enough crypto news to know its the new thing and thus I am allowed to run "loud" computers all day and night again.

In other news, when coinbaise gave me my bitcoin cash, I moved some to the Kraken Exchange and established my Ripple position, so I've thrown in with that crown as well.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 29, 2017, 09:34:00 AM
Yup. In the past couple of weeks I've had bitcoin come up in discussions with investors in their late 50s who I'm reasonably sure don't actually use e-mail, and with family members both one and two generations older than me. Pretty clear that the price of bitcoin specifically is currently being driven by news about how much the price has gone up in the past (the classical definition of a bubble).

With regards to monero, it offers the privacy a lot of folks seem to assume bitcoin offers but doesn't. I've heard the consumer wallets available for monero are a bit obnoxious GUI wise, but that's hearsay, not first hand knowledge and easily fixed even if true. The nerdy part of me gets really excited about the zero knowledge proofs which underly zcash/zclassic/zencash, but right now using those systems to actually make transactions is a much bigger pain and as a result, they aren't accepted much of anywhere while monero is maybe in the top five in terms of businesses that actually accept it in payment (btc, bcc, ltc, and eth are all clearly more widely accepted).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: FrugalSaver on December 29, 2017, 12:20:53 PM
Anyone buying XRP ?  Supposed to be the next big cc

You're welcome
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: forgerator on December 29, 2017, 02:10:18 PM
I've been trying to buy some Ripple, but account verification is taking forever. I only plan to invest $1K and it I make that back I'll likely pull it out and keep some invested.

What are you using to buy Ripple? I am thinking of buying $1000 as well but can’t decide what to use to buy it.
Planning to use Kraken, but still waiting on final verification.

hope you were able to get in on the action today. Ripple up almost 50% to above $2 today !
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on December 29, 2017, 03:14:42 PM
I've been trying to buy some Ripple, but account verification is taking forever. I only plan to invest $1K and it I make that back I'll likely pull it out and keep some invested.

What are you using to buy Ripple? I am thinking of buying $1000 as well but can’t decide what to use to buy it.
Planning to use Kraken, but still waiting on final verification.

hope you were able to get in on the action today. Ripple up almost 50% to above $2 today !

Is there any news behind this rise? I've been holding a few XRPs since Ripple had a promotion a few years ago to give some away in exchange for doing some grid computing. XRP was worth about 2 cents at the time. I haven't been following the technology much since then. The coins I own are now worth enough that I should come up to speed again...or just sell them like a hot potato.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: forgerator on December 29, 2017, 04:52:54 PM
Ripple may end up rendering the current SWIFT system of international bank transfer obsolete and that is a trillion+ dollar industry. I'm not sure what the big news was though
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on December 29, 2017, 07:02:21 PM
Anyone buying XRP ?  Supposed to be the next big cc

No, it's ridiculously overpriced. Centralized. Ripple owns 50%+ of supply. Ripple doesn't even use XRP for their protocol.

It's a useless vehicle based purely on speculation, IMO.

It was between $0.50 and 0.78 when you called it "ridiculously overpriced". Two weeks later and it is around $2.40 at the moment and has displaced bitcoin in daily volume. Displaced Ethereum in market cap. This "useless vehicle" is used by Japanese bank consortium, American Express and Standard Charter among many others and Venture backed by Google among many others.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: frozen on December 29, 2017, 07:11:28 PM
Forbes recommends Bitstamp, Kraken, and Gatehub to purchase Ripple. Anyone have a preference for any of the 3?

http://fortune.com/2017/12/27/ripple-buy-how-to-cryptocurrency-bitcoin/

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on December 29, 2017, 07:14:40 PM
Forbes recommends Bitstamp, Kraken, and Gatehub to purchase Ripple. Anyone have a preference for any of the 3?

http://fortune.com/2017/12/27/ripple-buy-how-to-cryptocurrency-bitcoin/



Recommendations on the best way to convert XRP to USD would also be appreciated. I got my XRPs for free and have never sold any.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: forgerator on December 29, 2017, 07:19:21 PM
Forbes recommends Bitstamp, Kraken, and Gatehub to purchase Ripple. Anyone have a preference for any of the 3?


http://fortune.com/2017/12/27/ripple-buy-how-to-cryptocurrency-bitcoin/

Tried all 3 and couldn't get beyond verification.
Went with Binance and was glad I got in before the big jump today. Go with Binance
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on December 30, 2017, 12:31:23 AM
Binance is quicker apparently.
Kraken takes many days and is a PITA to set up but is US based, Binance is in Hong Kong. Fees at Kraken are smallish.

If you just want to sell your XRP open an account at Kraken, sell your XRP into BTC, then BTC to LTC ( quicker and less fees to send to other exchange then send to Coinbase ( open Coinbase account first) trade your Litecoin for USD direct deposit into your bank account.
 
Why not trade directly xrp to USD in Kraken instead of this convoluted and fee heavy method you ask? Even though I am tier 3 verified the bank deposit or withdrawl has NEVER worked, but Coinbase has worked every time, hence the run around.....yeah the exchanges need some serious oversight IMO, it 's the wild west out there, makes pink sheets look stable.

You could just open an account at Coinbase and wait and believe the rumor that XRP will be listed there soon. In which case you should wait for that spike. Heads up that opening any of these accounts takes numerous days and several hoops to jump through.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on December 30, 2017, 07:21:27 AM
Binance is quicker apparently.
Kraken takes many days and is a PITA to set up but is US based, Binance is in Hong Kong. Fees at Kraken are smallish.

If you just want to sell your XRP open an account at Kraken, sell your XRP into BTC, then BTC to LTC ( quicker and less fees to send to other exchange then send to Coinbase ( open Coinbase account first) trade your Litecoin for USD direct deposit into your bank account.
 
Why not trade directly xrp to USD in Kraken instead of this convoluted and fee heavy method you ask? Even though I am tier 3 verified the bank deposit or withdrawl has NEVER worked, but Coinbase has worked every time, hence the run around.....yeah the exchanges need some serious oversight IMO, it 's the wild west out there, makes pink sheets look stable.

You could just open an account at Coinbase and wait and believe the rumor that XRP will be listed there soon. In which case you should wait for that spike. Heads up that opening any of these accounts takes numerous days and several hoops to jump through.

For a "currency" that claims to aspire to act as a bridge between every other currency, this seems unnecessarily convoluted. Is there really no way to convert XRP directly to USD with an organization that will actually pay out USD (you know, the most important part of a currency conversion)?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on December 31, 2017, 12:27:57 PM
The claim that they hold 1/5 is disingenuous. If you want to be particular about semantics: they issued out less than 40% and control more than 60%. That they control it means it is still under their ownership. No matter how they plan to distribute it, at their whim, that's a huge percentage they retain control over.

Multiple sources indicate the percentage held/controlled by ripple founders:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/26/bitcoin-rival-ripple-is-sitting-on-many-billions-of-dollars-of-xrp.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/Ripple/comments/69emtr/question_what_of_all_xrp_are_now_being_held_by/
https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ripple/#charts
https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@boxmining/dear-ripple-investors-do-you-even-know-what-ripple-is

There's nothing stopping people from joining or creating pools in btc and btc isn't premined. This is not an equivalent comparison with ripple's trust validator and premined. Ripple is not permissionless and it's concept of decentralization doesn't hold in crypto.

why is it disingenuous? the founders retain 1/5 supply for themselves, and the remaining amount is in an escrow account, which again, happened to create market trust. people can mathematically verify the max supply which can enter the market. ripple is by far one of the most transparent projects within this space. the majority of mainstream media outlets continue to report inaccurately, and anyone can post their opinion or "false facts" on reddit and steemit...

yes, anyone can join or create a pool, so what? that doesn't change the fact that the top 3 pools control 51%+ of the hash... how is that decentralized, or is a concept which holds true in crypto? ripple is also open-sourced and anyone can run a validator...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on December 31, 2017, 03:25:17 PM
https://medium.com/@slinafirinne/on-december-29th-lots-of-coins-went-missing-on-the-xrp-ripple-network-a1655e8d636d (https://medium.com/@slinafirinne/on-december-29th-lots-of-coins-went-missing-on-the-xrp-ripple-network-a1655e8d636d)

When you can send a transaction over the Ripple network and have it essentially disappear because one of the Ripple servers (s2.ripple.com) was down, then that's a pretty good sign that there are some centralization problems on the network. This is not an outlier experience.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on December 31, 2017, 03:40:48 PM
Is there really no way to convert XRP directly to USD with an organization that will actually pay out USD (you know, the most important part of a currency conversion)?

I think you must not be a true believer.  I thought the whole point of internet currencies was that they were supposed to make holding USD irrelevant? 

The coming crypto crash will separate out the chaff.  People who are only invested to make a quick buck will bail when it becomes clear that these things are not, themselves, real money in the same way that pounds or pesos are real money.  The folks who have more fully internalized the hype will ride it all the way down to zero, because their core belief is that cryptos are more real than real money, even if you can't use them to buy bread.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CoffeeR on December 31, 2017, 06:51:36 PM
I think you must not be a true believer.  I thought the whole point of internet currencies was that they were supposed to make holding USD irrelevant? 
No, you misunderstand. Let me clarify this for you: the whole point of crypto currencies is to sell your tulips to some one else at a higher price then what you paid for them.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on December 31, 2017, 08:49:37 PM
Is there really no way to convert XRP directly to USD with an organization that will actually pay out USD (you know, the most important part of a currency conversion)?

I think you must not be a true believer.

Guilty as charged. :-)

I think cryptocurrencies are a neat idea. It was fun to set my computer mining for a few weeks back in the day to obtain some, just as a practical learning exercise to figure out how it all worked. I stopped because the mining was slowing down my computer too much for the $1-2 per day I was getting out of it. Should have kept going...

In 2013 I spent 0.12 BTC on a Humble Bundle of e-books, because it seemed appropriate to trade intangible computer money for intangible computer reading material. Those coins are worth more than $1,000 now. I don't feel quite as dumb in hindsight as the guy who spent 10,000 BTC on a pizza, but still...

I had mostly forgotten about the whole thing until these past few months when the prices went crazy. I was happy enough to hold on to a few random cryptocurrencies when my wallets were worth tens or even hundreds of dollars. It was a fraction of a percentage of my net worth and converting to more widely accepted forms of money seemed like a big hassle (still does, apparently). Now that we're talking about thousands of dollars it's a different story.

I still think cryptocurrencies are a neat idea. I just don't think that any particular implementation of that idea is fleshed out well enough that the tokens on its blockchain should be worth billions of dollars. Time to bring my holdings back down to three digits or less.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on January 01, 2018, 04:07:11 PM
Forbes recommends Bitstamp, Kraken, and Gatehub to purchase Ripple. Anyone have a preference for any of the 3?

http://fortune.com/2017/12/27/ripple-buy-how-to-cryptocurrency-bitcoin/



Recommendations on the best way to convert XRP to USD would also be appreciated. I got my XRPs for free and have never sold any.

Kraken verification will take a good week for the couple levels you need to sell your ripple. I used them when Coinbase finally gave out their BCH and managed to avoid the shnowzer show at Coinbase by immediately transferring them to Kraken and selling them off.  So maybe not super fast but it works.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bateaux on January 01, 2018, 07:19:25 PM
I bought some Litecoin a while back.  Not a huge purchase, just some play money.   The big run up came and peaked.  I sold while still very nicely ahead.  I made enough to buy me a nice touring bicycle when I'm ready for one.  I think dilution by some many so called alt coins will continue and governments are starting to regulate and tax the individual transactions.   I may get back in if there is a crash, too much speculation for me right now.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on January 01, 2018, 09:10:33 PM
Forbes recommends Bitstamp, Kraken, and Gatehub to purchase Ripple. Anyone have a preference for any of the 3?

http://fortune.com/2017/12/27/ripple-buy-how-to-cryptocurrency-bitcoin/



Recommendations on the best way to convert XRP to USD would also be appreciated. I got my XRPs for free and have never sold any.

Kraken verification will take a good week for the couple levels you need to sell your ripple. I used them when Coinbase finally gave out their BCH and managed to avoid the shnowzer show at Coinbase by immediately transferring them to Kraken and selling them off.  So maybe not super fast but it works.

How do you explain what @powskier said about Kraken's USD withdrawals not working? That seems like a major red flag to me, if them not giving you your money is something that they can do for no apparent reason.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Apple_Tango on January 01, 2018, 10:25:44 PM
https://youtu.be/TTsI2F5c9VI

Kerry always has interesting thoughts, and today’s are about the blockchain and how it might negatively impact our futures. It’s a long and winding video where she goes through her thoughts about how humans seek to avoid pain and increase pleasure by decreasing the amount of work we do, but this behavior to avoid reality makes life increasingly complex.. And with blockchain, the hyper democratizing, de-centralized aspect will feel like a pain reducing practice  but it will actually decrease our free will over time and make life more complex. Just wanted to share the video with y’all. It’s heavy on psychology, not so heavy on the nuts and bolts of the tech.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on January 02, 2018, 09:08:13 AM
Forbes recommends Bitstamp, Kraken, and Gatehub to purchase Ripple. Anyone have a preference for any of the 3?

http://fortune.com/2017/12/27/ripple-buy-how-to-cryptocurrency-bitcoin/



Recommendations on the best way to convert XRP to USD would also be appreciated. I got my XRPs for free and have never sold any.

Kraken verification will take a good week for the couple levels you need to sell your ripple. I used them when Coinbase finally gave out their BCH and managed to avoid the shnowzer show at Coinbase by immediately transferring them to Kraken and selling them off.  So maybe not super fast but it works.

How do you explain what @powskier said about Kraken's USD withdrawals not working? That seems like a major red flag to me, if them not giving you your money is something that they can do for no apparent reason.

Possibly no  good explanation, but its the internet so I will try anyways! :)  Make sure you are in a state that Kraken is allowed to send money too and Tier 4. Tier 4 is about the same info you would have to provide a real brokerage firm, ie, you wanna move real money in the USA you gotta pay your taxes. Sorry ladies, but remember that's how they got Capone.

All of these places are still wild west... half the time I log into kraken it crashes or I guess really their servers are overloaded from too much traffic. So it took a few attempts and everything eventually worked. The process isn't ready for Grandma.

The problem is we all had play money in this that suddenly turned to real money, but it is still play infrastructure.

where else would you go? (serious question, I feel a bit stuck with Kraken as the only safe-ish option for alt-coin)
 Bittrex isn't accepting new accounts.  Non US based exchanges seem even riskier, but some operation called Qyrtos has the highest price. Mr. Exchange is my favorite Chinglesh name for a bush league Chinese exchange. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sisto on January 02, 2018, 09:57:28 AM
I've been trying to buy some Ripple, but account verification is taking forever. I only plan to invest $1K and it I make that back I'll likely pull it out and keep some invested.

What are you using to buy Ripple? I am thinking of buying $1000 as well but can’t decide what to use to buy it.
Planning to use Kraken, but still waiting on final verification.

hope you were able to get in on the action today. Ripple up almost 50% to above $2 today !
Unfortunately no, still waiting. This is why I viewed the entire $1K as gambling. I have terrible luck in timing these things which is why I just buy/hold Vanguard for my FIRE money.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: FrugalSaver on January 03, 2018, 02:10:39 PM
Ahhhh Ripple ripping
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: farmecologist on January 04, 2018, 07:34:25 AM
You guys see MMM's article on the front page?  I'm not going to pass judgement on it but it was interesting that he threw in his 2 cents.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Retire-Canada on January 04, 2018, 07:40:40 AM
You guys see MMM's article on the front page?  I'm not going to pass judgement on it but it was interesting that he threw in his 2 cents.

I think it's smart to tamp down enthusiasm in the masses who don't understand crypto - myself included. If you are a crypto-head and feel you know far more than MMM you can ignore him. However, for a lot of people that really want to FIRE taking a gamble on crypto just because it could short circuit years of accumulation the temptation needs to be tempered with the understanding that it's a huge risk as well that can do exactly the opposite if the bubble bursts at the wrong moment for them.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on January 04, 2018, 08:00:14 AM
You guys see MMM's article on the front page?  I'm not going to pass judgement on it but it was interesting that he threw in his 2 cents.

I think it's smart to tamp down enthusiasm in the masses who don't understand crypto - myself included. If you are a crypto-head and feel you know far more than MMM you can ignore him. However, for a lot of people that really want to FIRE taking a gamble on crypto just because it could short circuit years of accumulation the temptation needs to be tempered with the understanding that it's a huge risk as well that can do exactly the opposite if the bubble bursts at the wrong moment for them.

Yup. +1 to all of this. I find the tech really exciting, but I wouldn't buy it as an investment, and it's been scary seeing how many people who don't understand the tech at all are now either considering or actually spending significant fractions of their networth into buying bitcoin (rarely other cryptocurrencies).

I could argue with some technical details around the margin, but I think it is much much better for the members of our community that MMM wrote a post saying "don't buy bitcoin" than one saying "buy bitcoin."
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on January 04, 2018, 08:58:32 AM
Yup. +1 to all of this. I find the tech really exciting, but I wouldn't buy it as an investment, and it's been scary seeing how many people who don't understand the tech at all are now either considering or actually spending significant fractions of their networth into buying bitcoin (rarely other cryptocurrencies).

Actually, what's scarier (especially at the moment) is that a lot of new people who don't understand the technology are branching out and buying into other crypto-currencies without really understanding the differences in the technology that they're buying. They're simply buying these currencies because they look "cheap" price-wise thinking that they're in on the ground floor of the next big thing. The liquidity in many of these markets for alt-coins are very low and there is no ground floor base of holding supporters like you have with Bitcoin which means when the pump is over, it will end up dumping to a very large degree.

On top of that, 5 out of the top 10 crypto-currencies by market cap (as if market cap means anything anymore) are all pre-mined currencies. Also, 6 out of the top 10 currencies have prices that are below $10 which confirms the theory that a lot of people are caught up in a frenzy to simply buy whatever currencies look "cheap" (as if the price means anything too).

I don't think this trend can last for long.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on January 04, 2018, 09:22:32 AM
I hadn't run into that but now that you bring it up, it doesn't surprise me that it is happening.

Back when the price of gold was spiking, I remember reading about lots of people who were buying silver because they were sure it was going to "go up next" and even people who were paying inflated prices for copper rounds/bars with the same reasoning. (A 1 oz copper coin is only worth about 0.20 as actual metal).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on January 04, 2018, 11:15:00 AM
Also, 6 out of the top 10 currencies have prices that are below $10 which confirms the theory that a lot of people are caught up in a frenzy to simply buy whatever currencies look "cheap" (as if the price means anything too).

Here's hoping this trend makes my Dogecoins go to the moon! They cost less than a penny right now.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 04, 2018, 03:13:07 PM
Here's hoping this trend makes my Dogecoins go to the moon! They cost less than a penny right now.

I see, I see a vision of the future...  a future in which every cryptocoin is a dogecoin.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on January 04, 2018, 03:51:54 PM
Here's hoping this trend makes my Dogecoins go to the moon! They cost less than a penny right now.

I see, I see a vision of the future...  a future in which every cryptocoin is a dogecoin.

So foresight. Much wise. Wow.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sisto on January 04, 2018, 04:06:59 PM
Binance is quicker apparently.
Kraken takes many days and is a PITA to set up but is US based, Binance is in Hong Kong. Fees at Kraken are smallish.

If you just want to sell your XRP open an account at Kraken, sell your XRP into BTC, then BTC to LTC ( quicker and less fees to send to other exchange then send to Coinbase ( open Coinbase account first) trade your Litecoin for USD direct deposit into your bank account.
 
Why not trade directly xrp to USD in Kraken instead of this convoluted and fee heavy method you ask? Even though I am tier 3 verified the bank deposit or withdrawl has NEVER worked, but Coinbase has worked every time, hence the run around.....yeah the exchanges need some serious oversight IMO, it 's the wild west out there, makes pink sheets look stable.

You could just open an account at Coinbase and wait and believe the rumor that XRP will be listed there soon. In which case you should wait for that spike. Heads up that opening any of these accounts takes numerous days and several hoops to jump through.
This is the route I took. I ended up buying BTC in Coinbase and then transferring it to Binance where I bought Stratix and XRP.

Edit: Should note I bought in at $500 while waiting on the Kraken verification (now at tier 2, just one more to go). My $500 in Coinbase cost nearly $20 in fees and then another $14 to transfer to Binance, but it's been sitting around $625. Yes, I consider this gambling and not investing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: CanuckExpat on January 04, 2018, 04:40:54 PM
You guys see MMM's article on the front page?  I'm not going to pass judgement on it but it was interesting that he threw in his 2 cents.

Here’s some sage advice I saw recently:
“My time-saving hack for 2018:  Any time you read "Bitcoin" in a link title, just skip it.“

Maybe also applies to forum posts :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on January 04, 2018, 05:51:56 PM
So foresight. Much wise. Wow.

I see what you did there. lol
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on January 05, 2018, 11:01:37 AM
It is a fact that ripple uses a system of "trusted validators" (node gateways). These node gateways can freeze or reverse transactions:

https://ripple.com/build/freeze/
https://cointelegraph.com/news/ripple-directs-bitstamp-to-freeze-funds-of-former-co-founder-jed-mccaleb

This is a permissioned network. Bitcoin is a permissionless network. Concentrated mining farms does not mean centralization; those farms can go down and bitcoin would still function. In ripple, a trusted validator goes down, and transactions sent to them don't get processed until they are back up. I'm not a fan of bitcoin or ripple, but ripple is a permissioned network.

comparing networks is apple and oranges (in this case between ripple and bitcoin), because they're 2 totally different assets with different use cases. ripple is settling remittances with banks, which parties needed to be verified and trusted. payments can still occur between counter-parties with individual or global freezes.

that cointelegraph article is almost 3 years old. jed mccaleb's funds were frozen because he and ripple signed a contract stating that he was only allowed to sell a certain amount per week. this was to enable market trust, and that he'd be unable to move an entire market if he decided to sell a large majority of his holdings at once. the founders also donated large majorities of their holdings back to the company (ripple labs). ripple also recently completed a 55b escrow to further create market trust.

yes, those farms could go down and btc could still function, same with ripple. arguing that ripple is centralized and bitcoin is not, is foolish. btc is still controlled by a minority. ripple at least has compliance under a regulatory framework, in which they couldn't flood a market at this point. do you think chinese mining farms/pools/factories operate in a similar way?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: IndyPendent on January 05, 2018, 11:34:12 AM
I managed to hop on the BTC and ETH wave from early-mid 2017 to now. Though I understood blockchain and had been researching it off and on over the last few years, I had it in my mind that this was pure gambling and more likely than not I'd lose a significant portion. I allocated gambling money appropriately.

Through sheer dumb luck, it quadrupled into an amount that was not insignificant, so I sold 75% and bought index funds. Now I'm comfortably back down into gambling money territory.

I had some very odd conversations where I simultaneously explained what bitcoin, ether, and blockchain were, why I was speculating, and in the same breath told everyone "don't buy in".
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on January 05, 2018, 05:10:32 PM
1. Are any banks using xrp token and do they need it for their transactions?

2. Does ripple network need xrp token to function?

3. Does ripple have a functional decentralized economic model?

If you can definitely answer yes to these questions, we can continue this discussion. Otherwise, ripple remains what it is: a permissioned, centralized network with trusted validators, 100% premined xrp tokens, of which a majority are controlled by the creators.

1. yes. pt.2 - depends on what service they're using.

2. yes. pt.2 - depends on what service they're using.

3. to a degree, yes (and the chief cryptographer is making his 2018 goal to make ripple more decentralized than bitcoin).

again, their network needs to operate in this way given the industry(ies) they're working with, regulations, etc... the founders do not own the majority of supply, and only control it to a degree.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on January 05, 2018, 06:29:47 PM
1. yes. pt.2 - depends on what service they're using.

2. yes. pt.2 - depends on what service they're using.

3. to a degree, yes (and the chief cryptographer is making his 2018 goal to make ripple more decentralized than bitcoin).

again, their network needs to operate in this way given the industry(ies) they're working with, regulations, etc... the founders do not own the majority of supply, and only control it to a degree.

1) Most banks are currently using the xCurrent platform which does not utilized XRP at all. Only one company has publicly claimed they were using XRP (Cuallix).

2) The answer is no. It does not need XRP to function. It can be utilized, but the only benefit for banks using it would arise if there were enough liquidity in the XRP market to make it worth while, which there isn't. Otherwise it just makes sense for financial institutions to take on the counter-party risk and use trusted gateways to send value across the network.

3) Ripple is not a decentralized network. Ripple uses a unique node list (UNL) that currently only contains 5 core validators all run by Ripple. To get on this node list Ripple must make sure that you're a trusted entity in order to maintain consensus (since there is no other consensus mechanism on the network). Therefore anyone who's sane should just be utilizing Ripple's own core validators (s1.ripple.com, s2.ripple.com, s3.ripple.com, etc). Anyone can set up and run their own validator, but doing so does not provide any consensus control or decentralization to the network unless someone actively choses to use them. Since they're not on the UNL, no one using XRP should use them since at any time they could suddenly find themselves following a non-consensus fork of XRP which could jeopardize your transactions. So no, the network is not decentralized.

I understand the Ripple needs to operate this way and that is perfectly fine. It is perfectly fine to position a company with an offering to financial institutions that has benefits over current platforms like SWIFT. In fact, that's exactly what banks are looking for. But to market Ripple as an open decentralized blockchain crypto-currency is extremely misleading to the general public when it is far from being that.

https://www.coindesk.com/100-billion-controversy-xrps-surge-raises-hard-questions-ripple/ (https://www.coindesk.com/100-billion-controversy-xrps-surge-raises-hard-questions-ripple/)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on January 06, 2018, 09:47:34 AM
Also, 6 out of the top 10 currencies have prices that are below $10 which confirms the theory that a lot of people are caught up in a frenzy to simply buy whatever currencies look "cheap" (as if the price means anything too).

Here's hoping this trend makes my Dogecoins go to the moon! They cost less than a penny right now.

Of course two days later the price has gone up to 1.55¢. Do people not understand that this is a joke cryptocurrency that has been worth a few hundredths of a cent for most of its history?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 06, 2018, 10:38:38 AM
Of course two days later the price has gone up to 1.55¢. Do people not understand that this is a joke cryptocurrency that has been worth a few hundredths of a cent for most of its history?

Dogecoin is up 1500% in a 45 days!  It's the future!  Quick, buy now before it's too late! 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on January 06, 2018, 11:05:59 AM
Of course two days later the price has gone up to 1.55¢. Do people not understand that this is a joke cryptocurrency that has been worth a few hundredths of a cent for most of its history?

I suspect lifeanon is right that many of the new people who have been drawn in by all the stories about how fast the price of bitcoin has increase are looking at the "unit price" and thinking ones with lower unit prices are better deals than ones with higher prices.

My understanding is that the same reasoning is one of the reasons corporations used to do stock splits. People were more likely to consider buying shares in corp A a good deal if the shares where $20 (with 5 million shares outstanding) than $100 (with 1 million shares outstanding).

It would be interesting (from a behavioral economics standpoint anyway) to see how current buyers of a currency like litecoin could get away with announcing a 1:100 "currency split" where they moved the decimal point over two positions and 1 unit of litecoin was now worth ~$3 instead of ~$300, but everyone who already had the currency now had 100x as much litecoin.

In practice this would be hard to do, and the people who actually understand cryptocurrencies would certainly point and laugh, but my guess is that it might actually get more of the sort of people who are still putting money into the market to buy in.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on January 06, 2018, 11:41:49 AM
My understanding is that the same reasoning is one of the reasons corporations used to do stock splits. People were more likely to consider buying shares in corp A a good deal if the shares where $20 (with 5 million shares outstanding) than $100 (with 1 million shares outstanding).

It's not. Stocks split because if you're actually directly buying stocks (as opposed to buying in to a mutual fund worth billions of dollars) you have to buy them in whole-share increments. So if you "only" have $500 to invest this month you couldn't buy a stock that cost $1000. So there's an entirely rational reason for keeping the price of an individual share of stock at a reasonable price.

Unlike the crypto market, which has nothing at all rational about it at the moment.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on January 06, 2018, 11:49:19 AM
I suspect lifeanon is right that many of the new people who have been drawn in by all the stories about how fast the price of bitcoin has increase are looking at the "unit price" and thinking ones with lower unit prices are better deals than ones with higher prices.

My understanding is that the same reasoning is one of the reasons corporations used to do stock splits. People were more likely to consider buying shares in corp A a good deal if the shares where $20 (with 5 million shares outstanding) than $100 (with 1 million shares outstanding).

It would be interesting (from a behavioral economics standpoint anyway) to see how current buyers of a currency like litecoin could get away with announcing a 1:100 "currency split" where they moved the decimal point over two positions and 1 unit of litecoin was now worth ~$3 instead of ~$300, but everyone who already had the currency now had 100x as much litecoin.

In practice this would be hard to do, and the people who actually understand cryptocurrencies would certainly point and laugh, but my guess is that it might actually get more of the sort of people who are still putting money into the market to buy in.

There has already been talks with Bitcoin about utilizing different denominations to help make it easier for people to transact with a currency who's whole price is in the tens of thousands. Moving to a unit of "bits" will also help drive the idea that bitcoin isn't "expensive" from a price perspective because price isn't really relevant with an infinitely divisible currency. A "currency split" isn't really a systemic or programmatic change but merely a behavioral change to get people to start displaying the units of account differently. Here is the link to BIP176 that was proposed for Bitcoin:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0176.mediawiki (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0176.mediawiki)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on January 06, 2018, 11:55:19 AM
I suspect lifeanon is right that many of the new people who have been drawn in by all the stories about how fast the price of bitcoin has increase are looking at the "unit price" and thinking ones with lower unit prices are better deals than ones with higher prices.

My understanding is that the same reasoning is one of the reasons corporations used to do stock splits. People were more likely to consider buying shares in corp A a good deal if the shares where $20 (with 5 million shares outstanding) than $100 (with 1 million shares outstanding).

It would be interesting (from a behavioral economics standpoint anyway) to see how current buyers of a currency like litecoin could get away with announcing a 1:100 "currency split" where they moved the decimal point over two positions and 1 unit of litecoin was now worth ~$3 instead of ~$300, but everyone who already had the currency now had 100x as much litecoin.

In practice this would be hard to do, and the people who actually understand cryptocurrencies would certainly point and laugh, but my guess is that it might actually get more of the sort of people who are still putting money into the market to buy in.

There has already been talks with Bitcoin about utilizing different denominations to help make it easier for people to transact with a currency who's whole price is in the tens of thousands. Moving to a unit of "bits" will also help drive the idea that bitcoin isn't "expensive" from a price perspective because price isn't really relevant with an infinitely divisible currency. A "currency split" isn't really a systemic or programmatic change but merely a behavioral change to get people to start displaying the units of account differently. Here is the link to BIP176 that was proposed for Bitcoin:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0176.mediawiki (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0176.mediawiki)

"Hey we should get everyone on the internet to change their behavior for 'reasons' we ourselves admit are completely irrational." Yup, totally sounds like something that would be floated by the bitcoin community right about now.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on January 06, 2018, 12:42:43 PM
My understanding is that the same reasoning is one of the reasons corporations used to do stock splits. People were more likely to consider buying shares in corp A a good deal if the shares where $20 (with 5 million shares outstanding) than $100 (with 1 million shares outstanding).

It's not. Stocks split because if you're actually directly buying stocks (as opposed to buying in to a mutual fund worth billions of dollars) you have to buy them in whole-share increments. So if you "only" have $500 to invest this month you couldn't buy a stock that cost $1000. So there's an entirely rational reason for keeping the price of an individual share of stock at a reasonable price.

Unlike the crypto market, which has nothing at all rational about it at the moment.

There are basically three (maybe more) economic models for why companies do stock splits.

1) It's a signaling mechanism which shows the confidence of management in their ability to continue to grow the company.
2) Investor psychology (low information investors are more likely to buy stocks with cheap unit prices than large unit prices).
3) Greater liquidity when the size of traded units of ownership are smaller.

I'd be happy to debate the evidence for the relative significance of these three factors in when and whether or not companies decide to split their stock, but if that would be of interest would you be up for creating a new thread, since this doesn't seem particularly relevant to blockchain/cryptocurrency issues?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on January 06, 2018, 02:08:05 PM
I suspect lifeanon is right that many of the new people who have been drawn in by all the stories about how fast the price of bitcoin has increase are looking at the "unit price" and thinking ones with lower unit prices are better deals than ones with higher prices.

My understanding is that the same reasoning is one of the reasons corporations used to do stock splits. People were more likely to consider buying shares in corp A a good deal if the shares where $20 (with 5 million shares outstanding) than $100 (with 1 million shares outstanding).

It would be interesting (from a behavioral economics standpoint anyway) to see how current buyers of a currency like litecoin could get away with announcing a 1:100 "currency split" where they moved the decimal point over two positions and 1 unit of litecoin was now worth ~$3 instead of ~$300, but everyone who already had the currency now had 100x as much litecoin.

In practice this would be hard to do, and the people who actually understand cryptocurrencies would certainly point and laugh, but my guess is that it might actually get more of the sort of people who are still putting money into the market to buy in.

There has already been talks with Bitcoin about utilizing different denominations to help make it easier for people to transact with a currency who's whole price is in the tens of thousands. Moving to a unit of "bits" will also help drive the idea that bitcoin isn't "expensive" from a price perspective because price isn't really relevant with an infinitely divisible currency. A "currency split" isn't really a systemic or programmatic change but merely a behavioral change to get people to start displaying the units of account differently. Here is the link to BIP176 that was proposed for Bitcoin:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0176.mediawiki (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0176.mediawiki)

"Hey we should get everyone on the internet to change their behavior for 'reasons' we ourselves admit are completely irrational." Yup, totally sounds like something that would be floated by the bitcoin community right about now.

If you're using it as an actual currency, spending a few ten-thousandths of a base currency unit for a small purchase is going to throw people off. Better to have the base unit be something in the same general order of magnitude as many of the other major world currencies, rather than ten thousand times higher.

If you're treating it as a stock, the actual price is irrelevant.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on January 06, 2018, 02:59:42 PM
1) Most banks are currently using the xCurrent platform which does not utilized XRP at all. Only one company has publicly claimed they were using XRP (Cuallix).

2) The answer is no. It does not need XRP to function. It can be utilized, but the only benefit for banks using it would arise if there were enough liquidity in the XRP market to make it worth while, which there isn't. Otherwise it just makes sense for financial institutions to take on the counter-party risk and use trusted gateways to send value across the network.

3) Ripple is not a decentralized network. Ripple uses a unique node list (UNL) that currently only contains 5 core validators all run by Ripple. To get on this node list Ripple must make sure that you're a trusted entity in order to maintain consensus (since there is no other consensus mechanism on the network). Therefore anyone who's sane should just be utilizing Ripple's own core validators (s1.ripple.com, s2.ripple.com, s3.ripple.com, etc). Anyone can set up and run their own validator, but doing so does not provide any consensus control or decentralization to the network unless someone actively choses to use them. Since they're not on the UNL, no one using XRP should use them since at any time they could suddenly find themselves following a non-consensus fork of XRP which could jeopardize your transactions. So no, the network is not decentralized.

I understand the Ripple needs to operate this way and that is perfectly fine. It is perfectly fine to position a company with an offering to financial institutions that has benefits over current platforms like SWIFT. In fact, that's exactly what banks are looking for. But to market Ripple as an open decentralized blockchain crypto-currency is extremely misleading to the general public when it is far from being that.

https://www.coindesk.com/100-billion-controversy-xrps-surge-raises-hard-questions-ripple/ (https://www.coindesk.com/100-billion-controversy-xrps-surge-raises-hard-questions-ripple/)

1. sbi has already confirmed that it's going live with xrp this spring. ripple has also stated that 3 of the 5 top global money transfer companies will use xrp in payment flows this year too.

2. as i said, it depends on the services. xrp is needed as an anti-spam measure for transaction purposes otherwise it's further use in transactions can be completely optional.

3. as i said, to a degree it is (and it's a priority to create further decentralization in 2018). ripple will replace their nodes with attested third-party validating nodes. for every two attested third-party validating nodes which meet consensus agreement rate, uptime, and verification of identity and public attestation, ripple will remove one of their validating nodes until no entity operates a majority of trusted nodes on the XRP Ledger. they're extremely transparent.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on January 06, 2018, 05:55:39 PM
There has already been talks with Bitcoin about utilizing different denominations to help make it easier for people to transact with a currency who's whole price is in the tens of thousands. Moving to a unit of "bits" will also help drive the idea that bitcoin isn't "expensive" from a price perspective because price isn't really relevant with an infinitely divisible currency. A "currency split" isn't really a systemic or programmatic change but merely a behavioral change to get people to start displaying the units of account differently. Here is the link to BIP176 that was proposed for Bitcoin:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0176.mediawiki (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0176.mediawiki)

Very cool, thanks for the link! The write up also makes the point (which I hadn't thought of, but agree with having had it pointed out to me), that numbers starting with lots of zeros are a lot easier to confuse either when you are looking at them quickly when reading or when you type them in.  For example 0.000421 vs 0.000042
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Apple_Tango on January 06, 2018, 08:04:44 PM
Kerry McCarpet posted another video about blockchain on her YouTube channel, and I find her opinion fascinating. I just figure this thread is as good as any to post the link. This time the  topic is about how Blockchain will make us work harder to maintain the value of our money.

https://youtu.be/tswLAdW2IIQ
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on January 07, 2018, 10:09:03 AM
lifeanon269 is correct. Ripple is a permissioned network that uses trusted validators.

i never once said you or him were incorrect. the issue is people continue to talk in absolutes and report false facts without knowing what's happening. again, ripple is working toward no single entity operating a majority of trusted nodes on the XRP Ledger.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on January 07, 2018, 02:33:32 PM
Binance is quicker apparently.
Kraken takes many days and is a PITA to set up but is US based, Binance is in Hong Kong. Fees at Kraken are smallish.

If you just want to sell your XRP open an account at Kraken, sell your XRP into BTC, then BTC to LTC ( quicker and less fees to send to other exchange then send to Coinbase ( open Coinbase account first) trade your Litecoin for USD direct deposit into your bank account.
 
Why not trade directly xrp to USD in Kraken instead of this convoluted and fee heavy method you ask? Even though I am tier 3 verified the bank deposit or withdrawl has NEVER worked, but Coinbase has worked every time, hence the run around.....yeah the exchanges need some serious oversight IMO, it 's the wild west out there, makes pink sheets look stable.

You could just open an account at Coinbase and wait and believe the rumor that XRP will be listed there soon. In which case you should wait for that spike. Heads up that opening any of these accounts takes numerous days and several hoops to jump through.

For a "currency" that claims to aspire to act as a bridge between every other currency, this seems unnecessarily convoluted. Is there really no way to convert XRP directly to USD with an organization that will actually pay out USD (you know, the most important part of a currency conversion)?
The currency isn't the problem, the exchange is. I can sell the XRP for USD no problem, but because the exchange is overwhelmed I cannot currently move that USD in USD form to my bank account.Hence the need to use other coins to transfer "the value". I am verifed to do this action but it won't go through. They have had 2 different "fix it" tickets to see what is wrong but haven't fixed it. I have not had this issue on Coinbase, but Coinbase does not currently list XRP.

Edited to add: the exchanges are the place that will see regulation first, hopefully. Easily overwhelmed, unreliable. Crypto is gambling for sure, but the exchanges make it seem like gambling in a dark alley on top of cardboard boxes instead of a nice casino. I suspect that during the dumps , the big holders get their rewards and everyone else watches their money disappear because the exchange just says "sorry, services down".
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on January 07, 2018, 04:08:25 PM
The currency isn't the problem, the exchange is. I can sell the XRP for USD no problem, but because the exchange is overwhelmed I cannot currently move that USD in USD form to my bank account.Hence the need to use other coins to transfer "the value". I am verifed to do this action but it won't go through. They have had 2 different "fix it" tickets to see what is wrong but haven't fixed it. I have not had this issue on Coinbase, but Coinbase does not currently list XRP.

Edited to add: the exchanges are the place that will see regulation first, hopefully. Easily overwhelmed, unreliable. Crypto is gambling for sure, but the exchanges make it seem like gambling in a dark alley on top of cardboard boxes instead of a nice casino. I suspect that during the dumps , the big holders get their rewards and everyone else watches their money disappear because the exchange just says "sorry, services down".

That makes me think that there is a demand for better exchanges. How do we invest in an exchange?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on January 07, 2018, 05:04:55 PM
The problem is that the regulatory burden for running an exchange/money transmitting business in the USA is quite high compared to many other first world nations. This is why a lot of foreign banks refuse to open accounts for americans since FATCA passed in 2010 and why some major cryptocurrency exchanges like Bitfinex won't let americans open accounts either.

Coinbase appears to be keeping all of their ducks in a row with regards to legal compliance paperwork, but it means identity validation can take quite a while. They actually seem to spend a lot of time and effort tracking where customers send their bitcoins after their are purchased because they will often freeze user accounts if purchased bitcoins end up being used to pay for things like online gambling or if they think you are selling your bitcoins on platforms like localbitcoins. I imagine it may also be part of the reason they are slower and more reluctant to open up trading in new currency pairs since presumably each new currency increases their regulatory compliance costs significantly.

I know I sure wouldn't want to run an cryptocurrency exchange in the USA. On one side you have crazy high volatility and sudden surges of trading volume that are going to overwhelm however many servers you have stood up, on the second side you're painting a giant target on your back for hackers who'd like to pull money out of your various corporate wallets, and on the third side draconian penalties for failures to comply with banking regulations designed for a previous era applied not just to you, but to anyone you do business with (which makes it hard to maintain relationships with traditional banks to wire customer's money to them).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on January 07, 2018, 05:59:59 PM
No intent to derail - thanks to everyone for the fascinating discussion! I have zero interest in "investing" in purchasing currency, crypto or not, but I'm excited to see if cryptos can break the credit card vampire squid stranglehold on payments that we have to live with.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on January 08, 2018, 08:53:21 AM
No intent to derail - thanks to everyone for the fascinating discussion! I have zero interest in "investing" in purchasing currency, crypto or not, but I'm excited to see if cryptos can break the credit card vampire squid stranglehold on payments that we have to live with.

-W

This is what first got me playing in Crypto... why do we have to pay banks to use our money?
  Everyone complains about BTC transaction costs but remember, every credit card transaction VISA and the banks get 1-2%... its just built into everyone's prices.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on January 08, 2018, 03:23:49 PM

EXAMPLE:
Today on 10/04/2017: 1 Bitcoin is $4,800, 1 Monero is $91, 1 Ether is $292, 1 Lisk is $5.45, 1 LINK is $.39 and 1 ARDR is $.16.


Today on 12/06/2017: 1 Bitcoin is $13,400, 1 Monero is $282, 1 Ether is $430, 1 Lisk is $9.10 1 LINK is $.31 and 1 ARDR is $.55.

Today on 1/8/2018: 1 Bitcoin is $14,900, 1 Monero is $400, 1 Ether is $1,150, 1 Lisk is $31, 1 LINK is $1.30 and 1 ARDR is $1.61

Once in a lifetime opportunity.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Mustachio Bashio on January 08, 2018, 08:56:12 PM
Just started to get into this alt-coin game a couple days ago because of all the fomo.  It's definitely slightly addicting.  Anyone have a new fave they're excited about?  Looking for big things from QASH.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 08, 2018, 09:31:11 PM

EXAMPLE:
Today on 10/04/2017: 1 Bitcoin is $4,800, 1 Monero is $91, 1 Ether is $292, 1 Lisk is $5.45, 1 LINK is $.39 and 1 ARDR is $.16.


Today on 12/06/2017: 1 Bitcoin is $13,400, 1 Monero is $282, 1 Ether is $430, 1 Lisk is $9.10 1 LINK is $.31 and 1 ARDR is $.55.

Today on 1/8/2018: 1 Bitcoin is $14,900, 1 Monero is $400, 1 Ether is $1,150, 1 Lisk is $31, 1 LINK is $1.30 and 1 ARDR is $1.61

Once in a lifetime opportunity.

Is this not worrying to some crypto boosters? Based on those numbers, you're looking at an annualised increase of somewhere between 8,000 and 1,000,000 per cent. Given the number of people arguing that we're looking at a bubble, is there an increase that would cause you to consider whether they were right?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on January 08, 2018, 10:48:52 PM
Is this not worrying to some crypto boosters? Based on those numbers, you're looking at an annualised increase of somewhere between 8,000 and 1,000,000 per cent. Given the number of people arguing that we're looking at a bubble, is there an increase that would cause you to consider whether they were right?

I don't know if you would call me a crypto booster (I've mined 3 ETH), but I definitely think that we are in a bubble. Dogecoin has over a $1B market cap! However, I think that we are in a bubble the way that .com bubble was a bubble. People knew that the internet would create incredible wealth, they just didn't know how, or by which companies. Years later the internet has created incredible wealth, but many of the .com stocks of the late 90s are gone. I'm pretty sure that cryptocurrency is here to stay, but no one really know which ones will survive. Also, some that survive may later fail (just like internet companies, or countries).

EDIT - Not that cryptocurrency can create wealth, except possibly to the extent that it can usurp alternative payment systems.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on January 09, 2018, 08:16:11 AM
Just started to get into this alt-coin game a couple days ago because of all the fomo.  It's definitely slightly addicting.  Anyone have a new fave they're excited about?  Looking for big things from QASH.

I've got an old computer mining AEON. yes it is FOMO!  the dear lady troll has announced that she is ready for the crypto bubble to burst as she feels like a wife of a sports fan every time check prices.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: forgerator on January 09, 2018, 09:39:17 PM
Just started to get into this alt-coin game a couple days ago because of all the fomo.  It's definitely slightly addicting.  Anyone have a new fave they're excited about?  Looking for big things from QASH.

Would recommend to diversify crypto portfolio just like you would a regular stock market based one. I would recommend to make Ethereum the bulk of it as it has incredible support and future growth prospects as a Smart contract platform. Other than that look at ones which are working on exciting tech and have a great team that can deliver. Examples, Raiblocks, Substratum, Power Ledger, Stratis , to name a few.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BrandNewPapa on January 10, 2018, 10:21:22 AM
Just curious what everyone thinks about China's move to shut down miners. How do you think it will affect the BTC and other markets?

I don't know what to make of it. Just looking for opinions.

https://www.ft.com/content/adfe7858-f4f9-11e7-88f7-5465a6ce1a00
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on January 10, 2018, 11:40:06 AM
Just curious what everyone thinks about China's move to shut down miners. How do you think it will affect the BTC and other markets?

I don't know what to make of it. Just looking for opinions.

https://www.ft.com/content/adfe7858-f4f9-11e7-88f7-5465a6ce1a00

If they are completely successful in the crackdown and people don't just move their dedicated mining equipment (ASICs) across the border into other countries, this would reduce the energy consumption of bitcoin by 75% in one fell stroke without decreasing the number of transactions which can be processed on that particular blockchain at all (once the difficulty adjusted).

Of course if all the chinese miners are shutdown and the price of bitcoin stays the same, the profitability of mining would increase a lot (about 4x), which would drive more people to start mining, which would bring energy consumption back up eventually.

If the link above doesn't work, often you can access FT articles without a subscription by googling the title of the article and clicking through from there. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=China+moves+to+shutter+bitcoin+mines
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on January 10, 2018, 03:58:40 PM
Just curious what everyone thinks about China's move to shut down miners. How do you think it will affect the BTC and other markets?

I don't know what to make of it. Just looking for opinions.

https://www.ft.com/content/adfe7858-f4f9-11e7-88f7-5465a6ce1a00

It may actually be really good for BTC long term price increase.  Most of the big Chinese miners knew this was coming and had moved some small  to medium size operations out of China, so while this may shut down a lot of mining hardware, its not like it will stop mining. The network will continue to function process (slowly) transactions.

Shutting down all that hardware with subsidized power will potentially make it easier for all the hobbyist worldwide to mine again and be slightly profitable. That could really invigorate the faithful.

Add in something like this Kodak mining scheme (which seems crazy/desparate?)? Network Hashrates go down and cloud mining with "respectable" Kodak is profitable?  It could get people a lot more excited.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: asosharp on January 10, 2018, 06:49:31 PM
Just started to get into this alt-coin game a couple days ago because of all the fomo.  It's definitely slightly addicting.  Anyone have a new fave they're excited about?  Looking for big things from QASH.

Would recommend to diversify crypto portfolio just like you would a regular stock market based one. I would recommend to make Ethereum the bulk of it as it has incredible support and future growth prospects as a Smart contract platform. Other than that look at ones which are working on exciting tech and have a great team that can deliver. Examples, Raiblocks, Substratum, Power Ledger, Stratis , to name a few.

I read an opinion from CoinFi that said for people who don't want to get too involved but want to try it out for the long term they should invest in the top 20 coins and see how it goes in 3 years time. He reckons one of them should at least make good gains to offset the others.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 10, 2018, 08:31:13 PM
I read an opinion from CoinFi that said for people who don't want to get too involved but want to try it out for the long term they should invest in the top 20 coins and see how it goes in 3 years time. He reckons one of them should at least make good gains to offset the others.

You can also improve your odds in the lottery by buying 20 tickets.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on January 10, 2018, 09:37:51 PM
I can't believe how profitable GPU mining has been lately. Also, the supply of GPUs are at an all time low and prices are averaging the highest I have seen since I started mining last spring. Interesting time.

I've noticed this as well. Was close to shutting my rig down as it had about paid for itself (not counting price inflation of previously mined coins, with that it had been quite profitable, but that's more luck than anything else) and was only making about 3x as much per month as I was spending on extra electricity. When I initially built it, mining income was about 10x the cost of electrical consumption.

However, for about the last month or so, income has spiked as high as 20x electricity consumption, so I guess my little experiment isn't quite over after all. Just means my next plan for the machine (trying out TensorFlow to train pattern recognition algorithms) will have to wait a bit longer.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on January 11, 2018, 07:37:08 PM
ZCL to BTCP is an interesting opportunity to make some money if it happens.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ZClassic/comments/7mg5je/zcl_btcp_faq/

It seems like people have decided that forking bitcoin (and having bitcoin right in your name) tends to produce bigger and more active communities than launching a new currency from scratch.

I would imagine this trend will continue to grow until there are dozens if not hundreds of currencies which trace their lineage back to a bitcoin fork.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Padonak on January 13, 2018, 09:12:03 PM
I have been thinking about market drivers behind the current price levels of crypto currencies and their impact on future price levels. Full disclosure: I do not have any investments in crypto but have been following this space closely for the last couple of months. Here are a few thoughts.

Current prices of crypto currencies ($14K for Bitcoin and $1.4K for Ethetium at the moment) are supported by the fact that people are willing to buy them and pay these amounts of FIAT currencies for them.

There is a lot of hype around various ICOs and tokens. For example, Vechain, Raiblocks, the list goes on. Some of these token prices already increased 10X or more, some have potential to go up significantly in the short term. Most of these startups will likely fail but some of their tokens have potential for high risk speculation, at least in the short term.

Many people want to buy these tokens hoping to get huge returns. ICOs and their tokens exist in the Etherium platform. The tokens can be bought for Etherium coin, so the way to buy tokens for new investors is to buy ETH. For example, new investors can buy ETH on Coinbase/GDAX, convert them to tokens on another exchange such as Binance. Those who already have crypto coins can convert them to ETH and then buy tokens or use ETH they already have.

The main thing that supports high price of ETH is the fact that it can be used to buy ICO tokens. For other cryptos, such as Bitcoin (also for ETH to some extent), it's a combination of momentum and hope that they will partially or even fully replace gold and/or FIAT money (gold as a store of value and FIAT as a store of value and medium of exchange).

The fact that some crypto exchanges struggle to register new customers (e.g. Binance) shows how much hype there is in this space and how many people line up to spend their FIAT money to buy crypto currencies and tokens.

Questions:

How long will this bubble continue to inflate? A few months? A few years? How much will the prices of crypto currencies go up before the bubble pops? This can't go on forever. The prices can't go up to infinity.

What event or a series of events will make this bubble pop? Governments cracking down on crypto? Banks and governments shutting down on/off ramps between FIAT and crypto? Most of the popular ICOs turning out to be either scams or just shitty ideas that never make any money? A new recession in the FIAT economy? Just a random big drop in crypto prices leading to a massive selloff and crypto investors/speculators retreating to FIAT?

What will come out of this bubble? Very little or nothing? New blockchain companies current financial giants such as NYSE, Goldman Sachs, Citibank and Western Union? A completely new paradigm similar to the internet that will change our lives forever when it comes to storing and exchanging value, authenticating products and much more? A completely different world without FIAT where the state is separated from money the same way it was separated from church a long time ago?

PS. I was going to post this in the crypto skeptics thread but as I typed this I realized that I will probably get more thoughtful replies in this thread because in that thread there are too many people who very little or nothing about the crypto space and just hate the whole thing blindly. I am hoping to get some thoughts on this subject from both skeptics and enthusiasts. Also, please correct me if any of the assumptions and facts I stated above are wrong.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: VolcanicArts on January 13, 2018, 10:31:13 PM
Just saw this thread. My current holdings are BTC, ETH, LTC, XMR, STEEM, POT, EMC2. ETH is my current favorite out of these with a 2018 price target of 3to5k per coin.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: theolympians on January 13, 2018, 11:05:46 PM
Second time I am going to type this on this site today: This sounds like gambling to me.

What are these valuations based on?....More suckers pumping money into the system, as long as that happens it will go up, I guess. I asked roughly this on another thread here but was never answered (I believe): How many crytpo "currencies" are there, and what is the point of having so many? I mean, if one works why buy any other? If you don't like "fiat" currency, wtf is bitcoin or any of the hundreds out there? Everyone takes US dollars, I have heard of no one buying a loaf of bread with it.

Think of it this way: YOU are undermining your country's currency by "investing" in any crypto. If by some wild dream Bitcrap becomes the currency of the future, your dollars are worthless. SS is paid in dollars, you are paid in dollars, your real investments are paid in dollars.

I bet if you bought a brick of cocaine you could make 10x your investment too...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on January 13, 2018, 11:26:43 PM
Think of it this way: YOU are undermining your country's currency by "investing" in any crypto. If by some wild dream Bitcrap becomes the currency of the future, your dollars are worthless. SS is paid in dollars, you are paid in dollars, your real investments are paid in dollars.

In the US cryptocurrencies are taxed as if they were foreign currencies, gold, or stocks. Do those undermine the US dollar? Does me holding euros or gold really threaten SS? PS - I pay FICA on my mining profits.

EDIT - Also, my VTWSX is priced in dollars, but if the dollar ceased to exist tomorrow I would still own a slice of the global stock market. All of those companies would still exist.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: simonkkkkk on January 14, 2018, 04:51:10 AM
(http://goo.gl/gqqjFD)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Retire-Canada on January 14, 2018, 06:42:15 AM
I bet if you bought a brick of cocaine you could make 10x your investment too...

I'm not a crypto fan, but to be fair it seems like the risks of a gangland execution are lower with crypto.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 14, 2018, 11:20:42 AM
I bet if you bought a brick of cocaine you could make 10x your investment too...

I'm not a crypto fan, but to be fair it seems like the risks of a gangland execution are lower with crypto.

Maybe, but I still see a relevant correlation.  There's probably a good reason why cocaine and bitcoin are both so popular with criminals, right?  Do you think it's purely coincidence?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on January 14, 2018, 11:35:04 AM
I'm not a crypto fan, but to be fair it seems like the risks of a gangland execution are lower with crypto.

Maybe, but I still see a relevant correlation.  There's probably a good reason why cocaine and bitcoin are both so popular with criminals, right?  Do you think it's purely coincidence?

Sure, but it is just replacing US currency. 85% of hard US currency is unaccounted for (http://mentalfloss.com/article/53616/mystery-missing-money). El Chapo alone is purported to have $14B (https://www.forbes.com/sites/doliaestevez/2017/01/25/does-mexican-drug-lord-el-chapo-guzman-have-the-14-billion-the-u-s-wants-from-him/#db10ac5669b8).

But I can understand why they might prefer BTC to USD since At His Peak Pablo Escobar Was Losing $2.1 Billion A Year Due To Rats Eating Money In Storage (https://www.barstoolsports.com/iowa/at-his-peak-pablo-escobar-was-losing-2-1-billion-a-year-due-to-rats-eating-money-in-storage/)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on January 14, 2018, 12:08:18 PM
Jesus, what do you think the ER rates are for drug dealers?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 14, 2018, 12:53:36 PM
Jesus, what do you think the ER rates are for drug dealers?

Probably depends on when they get caught.

How long does it take to commit enough crime to get a life sentence?  That's the holy grail of early retirement, right there.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Padonak on January 14, 2018, 03:29:56 PM
Oy! Don't post their faces.

What if ETH price goes up to $1,000,000,000 and the dollar becomes green toilet paper? These guys will become super rich compared to the average person. Many poor people will be pissed off when the dollar goes to shit and try to track down and kidnap those guys and their girlfriends. The US has more guns than people, remember?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: SimpleSpartan on January 14, 2018, 03:35:07 PM
Anyone else into substratum (SUB)?

Decentralizing the web, full public beta release soon.

One of the few crypto projects that will make a difference.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 14, 2018, 05:03:14 PM
What if ETH price goes up to $1,000,000,000 and the dollar becomes green toilet paper? These guys will become super rich compared to the average person.

I think this comment fundamentally misconstrues the nature of wealth.  You're not a trillionaire if you own two thousand shares of stock "valued" at a half billion each, unless there are enough buyers out there to buy them all at that price, and you sell them at that price.  That net worth isn't any more real than market cap is real.  It's an artifice, a fake number found buy multiplying an instantaneous transaction price for one transaction times the theoretical maximum number of transactions, without considering how additional transactions will impact market price.

Dogecoin went from 0.01 cents to 1.5 cents.  There are something like 21 trillion of them, so the founder is technically a billionaire because he has billions of them.  But they're still effectively worthless, he can't actually sell billions of them at that price.  If he sold more than a few thousand per day, the price would plummet because there's just not that much demand for a meme coin.  He didn't actually make anything of value.  He doesn't control a profit-generating enterprise.  He has no capital, no real estate, no employees, no business model, no nothing.  All he has is trillion digitally signed files that he made on his home computer, and he's managed to sell some of them for around a penny.  Is he really a billionaire?

I think not.  That link posted above suggests that the originator of Etherium was briefly worth more than Mark Zuckerberg, who controls a majority stake in one of the largest and most profitable companies in history.  Does anyone really believe that a minority stake in Etherium can make someone wealthier than the Zuck?

So no, I'm not worried about the "green toilet paper" scenario.  Tulip bulbs went though this same phase, where the price of a single lot of bulbs times the number of lots in the market far exceeded the GDP of the nation.  Just because SOME people are willing to pay outlandish prices for tulips does not mean that person has more wealth than the entire nation does.  He couldn't possibly sell them all at that price because there isn't that much money.  It's ridiculous from every angle.  Wealth is not determined by market price.

Wealth generates cash flow.  Power confers control.  Crypto-bros have neither.  All they have are modern day penny stocks they've effectively pumped up to naive investors.  Remember that for every buyer there needs to be a seller, and every coin sold is someone deciding to cash out of their GDP-sized tulip bulb stake for actual dollars that can be used to pay rent and buy bread. 

The stock market works the exact same way, btw.  If your vtsax balance is one million dollars, you're only a millionaire if there are enough buyers for you to liquidate at that price.  By the time you're Warrren Buffet and you control tens of billions of dollars, finding that many buyers becomes problematic.  If you tried to sell it all, you'd crash the market and destroy your own wealth along with everyone else's.

It's like the entire country has forgotten that liquidity is a thing.  Market cap isn't a real value.  Crypto billionaires aren't really billionaires unless they can deceive people long enough to liquidate their holdings.  The more people sell, the harder it is for them to do that.  Hence the fanatical HODL mentality.  Can't have anyone selling and ruining the gravy train for the sellers, that would ruin their artificial scarcity.

It's a giant economic comedy, and I love it.  Hollywood is going to make some great movies about this, in a few years.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Padonak on January 14, 2018, 05:32:51 PM
Sol, my comment was tongue and cheek and I agree with you about net worth.

The only thing I'd like to add is that the smarter ones among those crypto millionaires and billionaires already cashed out their initial investments and then some, so they are playing with house money. They can take excessive risks and still be ok even if this whole crypto house of cards collapses tomorrow.

The dogecoin guy can't cash out, but many people in that space can and already have, at least partially. There are more than enough greater fools for now to buy coins and tokens from those who were lucky to get in before the prices exploded. Maybe even those who start now can 10X their "investments", who knows? However, the last bunch of greater fools will get screwed big time, many of them will be the shoeshine boy types who probably use credit card debt to buy stupid coins. When this will happen is anybody's guess.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: forgerator on January 14, 2018, 09:05:25 PM
Anyone else into substratum (SUB)?

Decentralizing the web, full public beta release soon.

One of the few crypto projects that will make a difference.

Yes I have it. Was enjoying when it went above $3 but now back to under 2.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: VolcanicArts on January 15, 2018, 01:57:37 PM
I have been trying to find unique cryptocurrencies that are not just different versions of Bitcoin. The two small ones I have found are STEEM and EMC2, as well as my large holding in ETH which I have been adding to for months. Does anyone have any other ideas for unique altcoins? I’ve also purchased POT just so I can have an investment in cannabis.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on January 15, 2018, 02:25:42 PM
Slightly OT - if you want exposure to the cannabis industry, I'd be buying ADM or Phillip Morris or something. Your hippy neighbor is not going to be able to compete when the actual agriculture people get involved, POTcoins or not.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: theolympians on January 15, 2018, 11:06:03 PM
I have't been on this site a super long time, but this is getting crazy. Why don't people just buy lotto tickets? All the conversation is about what is going up, unrelated to what it is. What happened to investing for retirement? Stocks, bonds, etfs? It seems this site is becoming more of a get rich quick, jump on the band wagon BS.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on January 15, 2018, 11:19:30 PM
I have't been on this site a super long time, but this is getting crazy. Why don't people just buy lotto tickets? All the conversation is about what is going up, unrelated to what it is. What happened to investing for retirement? Stocks, bonds, etfs? It seems this site is becoming more of a get rich quick, jump on the band wagon BS.

In the 35 posts on the most recent page of this thread, the most I could even charitably read as suggesting people buy [or that the poster had bought] some cryptocurrency because the price is going up, or may go up in the future was 7, and if I don't lean over backwards to read in intent that may not be there it's more like 3-4.

10-20% of posts in a discussion is hardly "all the conversation," wouldn't you agree?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on January 15, 2018, 11:44:40 PM
I have't been on this site a super long time, but this is getting crazy. Why don't people just buy lotto tickets? All the conversation is about what is going up, unrelated to what it is. What happened to investing for retirement? Stocks, bonds, etfs? It seems this site is becoming more of a get rich quick, jump on the band wagon BS.

LOL, you must have skimmed the thread. Some of us are quickly generating 10's of thousands of dollars having already claimed back original "investment/gamble" and plowing the proceeds into more VTI and VEA. I've at least knocked a year off my fire date in 5 months.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 15, 2018, 11:57:38 PM
You have to admit, that's kind of funny.  Immediately after maizeman very reasonably says "well we're not actually saying you should buy" someone chimes in to say "you should buy".  Literally minutes later.  That's gold, right there. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on January 16, 2018, 12:07:38 AM
You have to admit, that's kind of funny.  Immediately after maizeman very reasonably says "well we're not actually saying you should buy" someone chimes in to say "you should buy".  Literally minutes later.  That's gold, right there.
You read what you wanted to read. I certainly did not say " you should buy".
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on January 16, 2018, 08:33:09 AM
I have been trying to find unique cryptocurrencies that are not just different versions of Bitcoin.

There are tons of coins that are quite different than BTC. Two I like are ETH and XMR.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on January 16, 2018, 08:37:04 AM
The New York Times just published a good article about the future of cryptocurrencies and why it's such an exciting space.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/16/magazine/beyond-the-bitcoin-bubble.html

Edit: It's mainly about ETH and why it's so important, but it does talk about the space in general, too.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on January 16, 2018, 08:53:45 AM
You have to admit, that's kind of funny.  Immediately after maizeman very reasonably says "well we're not actually saying you should buy"

Uh, that's not what he said.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 16, 2018, 09:50:22 AM
You have to admit, that's kind of funny.  Immediately after maizeman very reasonably says "well we're not actually saying you should buy"

Uh, that's not what he said.

He seemed to say that he was really happy with his bitcoin investment, had made a whole bunch of money, and was continuing to invest in it.  I don't think it was reading too much between the lines to say that sounds like an endorsement.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on January 16, 2018, 09:54:48 AM
You have to admit, that's kind of funny.  Immediately after maizeman very reasonably says "well we're not actually saying you should buy"

Uh, that's not what he said.

He seemed to say that he was really happy with his bitcoin investment, had made a whole bunch of money, and was continuing to invest in it.  I don't think it was reading too much between the lines to say that sounds like an endorsement.

I can't tell if you're being serious. That's not what maizeman said.

But regardless, why are you even in this thread? It's about "Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion." You obviously don't own any cryptocurrencies and you spend your time talking about anything but said topic. I believe that's called trolling.

You know what I say about things I'm not interested in? Nothing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 16, 2018, 10:04:55 AM
You have to admit, that's kind of funny.  Immediately after maizeman very reasonably says "well we're not actually saying you should buy"

Uh, that's not what he said.

He seemed to say that he was really happy with his bitcoin investment, had made a whole bunch of money, and was continuing to invest in it.  I don't think it was reading too much between the lines to say that sounds like an endorsement.

I can't tell if you're being serious. That's not what maizeman said.

But regardless, why are you even in this thread? It's about "Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion." You obviously don't own any cryptocurrencies and you spend your time talking about anything but said topic. I believe that's called trolling.

Did I unfairly characterize what maizeman said, or what powskier said?  Either way, it's just a joke.  You can safely relax.

As for part two of your post, are you asking me to not share my opinion on a public internet forum?  Oh please, ask again.  That always works.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on January 16, 2018, 10:09:52 AM
You have to admit, that's kind of funny.  Immediately after maizeman very reasonably says "well we're not actually saying you should buy"

Uh, that's not what he said.

He seemed to say that he was really happy with his bitcoin investment, had made a whole bunch of money, and was continuing to invest in it.  I don't think it was reading too much between the lines to say that sounds like an endorsement.

I can't tell if you're being serious. That's not what maizeman said.

But regardless, why are you even in this thread? It's about "Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion." You obviously don't own any cryptocurrencies and you spend your time talking about anything but said topic. I believe that's called trolling.

Did I unfairly characterize what maizeman said, or what powskier said?  Either way, it's just a joke.  You can safely relax.

As for part two of your post, are you asking me to not share my opinion on a public internet forum? 

No, I'm not asking you to not share your opinion on a public forum (your reading comprehension difficulties continue). I'm asking if you can stay on topic. Pretty sure that's not a radical concept.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 16, 2018, 10:21:04 AM
I'm asking if you can stay on topic. Pretty sure that's not a radical concept.

I do love a good tangent.  Not in this thread, though.

Was there a specific comment in this thread about cryptocuurrencies that you felt was insufficiently related to cryptocurrencies?  If you're going to throw out accusations, I'm happy to entertain them if you have specifics.  It seems kind of off topic for this thread, but I'll follow you there if you want.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Socmonkey on January 16, 2018, 10:38:59 AM
I have been telling people about STEEM on this forum for a while now. I have been blogging there since August of 2016 and now have STEEM worth around $85,000 with no outside investment. The only crypto I hold is STEEM as I believe that the uses for it will continue to strengthen it in comparison to the hundreds of coins that don't do much.

Steem now has a YouTube-like site called D.Tube which pays content creators STEEM coins. That includes a live-streaming off shoot that is similar to Twitch.tv.
There is also D.Music for musicians to get paid for their songs.

There is SteemShot, which is like Instagram.

Steem has a Twitter-like App called Zappl.

Steem has created Smart Media Tokens (SMT) which allow other websites to use the steem blockchain. The first use of this is coming out soon using the VICE Token, and all Steem holders will get a 1-1 dividend in their accounts. VICE is a pornography site backed by large outfits like Penthouse that will pay video creators in VICE tokens. Similar to Steem, 75% of the upvoted reward will go to the video creator while 25% will go to those who have curated it by upvoting. Yes, this site will pay viewers to watch porn. And this is just the first use of the SMT's.

STEEM is the #1 transacted cryptocurrency per day. The Steem blockchain has ZERO transaction fees, can perform 10,000 per second, and only takes 3 seconds to confirm.

Steemit.com is rapidly rising in the Alexa ranking, up around 1300 worldwide and it is less than 2 years old.

There are currently about 263 million STEEM coins in existence, and it is inflating at a rate of 9% this year, dropping by 1% per year until reaching an inflation rate of 1% where it will stay. That means there will only be about 600 million STEEM coins in 20 years. Additionally, to be receive more upvote and curation rewards, users need to "power up" their STEEM. This process locks it in as illiquid. To make it transferable again, a user needs to power down - a process which takes 13 weeks with 1/13th liquefied per week.

This also creates protection against account loss as any hacker obtaining your password still has to wait 7 days before they can have any of your powered up STEEM. In a change from any other cryptcurrency, Steemit has a sort of customer service which can verify you and give you back control of your account if you lose control of your password key.

Since STEEM has so many uses, you can "delegate" it to other users in a rental transaction. Currently, I can receive a 40% APR for giving the use of my STEEM to high bidders. The STEEM never leaves your wallet, it is just temporarily controlled by the other party.

All-in-all, this is by far the most useful cryptocurrency coin I know of. This is why it is my only holding in the cryptocurrency market. The future of crypto does not belong to Bitcoin, it belongs to coins which have use and pay you for becoming a stakeholder.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: KTG on January 16, 2018, 01:08:37 PM
GUYS! Just found out about a new crypto called K-CoinTheBomb and its really cool. Prob worth around $1 each but I am getting some insider info that this thing is going to blow up big.

Best part about it is that you can't spend it anywhere. But it will really look nice in your crypto portfolio.

PM for email on where to send your Paypal payments to.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Optimiser on January 16, 2018, 01:21:57 PM
GUYS! Just found out about a new crypto called K-CoinTheBomb and its really cool. Prob worth around $1 each but I am getting some insider info that this thing is going to blow up big.

Best part about it is that you can't spend it anywhere. But it will really look nice in your crypto portfolio.

PM for email on where to send your Paypal payments to.

50% of your posts are related to cryptocurrency. We get it, you think cryptocurrencies are a bad investment. I tend to agree with you, but you don't need to post it over and over again. If you have something interesting to share, that's fine, but posts like this are just obnoxious.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on January 16, 2018, 01:40:26 PM
I have been telling people about STEEM on this forum for a while now. I have been blogging there since August of 2016 and now have STEEM worth around $85,000 with no outside investment. The only crypto I hold is STEEM as I believe that the uses for it will continue to strengthen it in comparison to the hundreds of coins that don't do much.

Steem now has a YouTube-like site called D.Tube which pays content creators STEEM coins. That includes a live-streaming off shoot that is similar to Twitch.tv.
There is also D.Music for musicians to get paid for their songs.

There is SteemShot, which is like Instagram.

Steem has a Twitter-like App called Zappl.

Steem has created Smart Media Tokens (SMT) which allow other websites to use the steem blockchain. The first use of this is coming out soon using the VICE Token, and all Steem holders will get a 1-1 dividend in their accounts. VICE is a pornography site backed by large outfits like Penthouse that will pay video creators in VICE tokens. Similar to Steem, 75% of the upvoted reward will go to the video creator while 25% will go to those who have curated it by upvoting. Yes, this site will pay viewers to watch porn. And this is just the first use of the SMT's.

STEEM is the #1 transacted cryptocurrency per day. The Steem blockchain has ZERO transaction fees, can perform 10,000 per second, and only takes 3 seconds to confirm.

Steemit.com is rapidly rising in the Alexa ranking, up around 1300 worldwide and it is less than 2 years old.

There are currently about 263 million STEEM coins in existence, and it is inflating at a rate of 9% this year, dropping by 1% per year until reaching an inflation rate of 1% where it will stay. That means there will only be about 600 million STEEM coins in 20 years. Additionally, to be receive more upvote and curation rewards, users need to "power up" their STEEM. This process locks it in as illiquid. To make it transferable again, a user needs to power down - a process which takes 13 weeks with 1/13th liquefied per week.

This also creates protection against account loss as any hacker obtaining your password still has to wait 7 days before they can have any of your powered up STEEM. In a change from any other cryptcurrency, Steemit has a sort of customer service which can verify you and give you back control of your account if you lose control of your password key.

Since STEEM has so many uses, you can "delegate" it to other users in a rental transaction. Currently, I can receive a 40% APR for giving the use of my STEEM to high bidders. The STEEM never leaves your wallet, it is just temporarily controlled by the other party.

All-in-all, this is by far the most useful cryptocurrency coin I know of. This is why it is my only holding in the cryptocurrency market. The future of crypto does not belong to Bitcoin, it belongs to coins which have use and pay you for becoming a stakeholder.

Seriously though, the mods need to decide if they're going to allow chain letters, Ponzi schemes and pump-and-dump schemes to just post outright nonsense like this.

And to the guys trying to keep rational discussion out of their cryptocurrency thread - no, we will not stop reminding you that it's all stupid and that you're being misled, potentially making incredibly bad decisions about money. Others will learn from our posts and the post history will record the differing opinions of the time.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Socmonkey on January 16, 2018, 02:39:09 PM
Sorry, I will refrain from passing on information expanding the background behind blockchain platforms that I have been a part of for the last 18 months.

You may continue trading cryptos on hype and rumors instead of actual use and utility.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 16, 2018, 02:45:10 PM
You may continue trading cryptos on hype and rumors instead of actual use and utility.

Just so we're clear, people are objecting to your post precisely because it is hype and rumors.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Ben Hogan on January 16, 2018, 02:47:31 PM
The big correction is finally here. :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: 2Birds1Stone on January 16, 2018, 02:58:35 PM
The big correction is finally here. :)

It will bounce back. This is just a buying opportunity.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on January 16, 2018, 03:00:37 PM
The big correction is finally here. :)

It will bounce back. This is just a buying opportunity.

In the parlance of our times,  they are HODL :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on January 16, 2018, 06:25:51 PM
The big correction is finally here. :)

I think cryptocurrencies are an awful investment (cough cough pure speculation) but I disagree. This is just another day in the crazy volatile world of Bitcoin. It will bounce back for now.

I think the big correction will come in the next big worldwide recession. People will realize they need to eat and pay rent, and that will be it for cryptocurrencies.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: asosharp on January 16, 2018, 09:46:12 PM
I think the most exciting thing about cryptocurrency is the development of blockchain technology.

Don't forget the reason we can have these advantages in technology are because of people who hate the banks and government post-sub prime mortgages. They see the banks and government as being corrupt, and that blockchain is better for whatever reason. That's how we ended up with Bitcoin in the first place.

Regardless of whether you agree with them or not, the advancement of blockchain technology is a revolution as it's not only used for the financial payments but also used for all kinds of things e.g. tracking energy (like solar power generation) to smart contracts (legal space).

The truth is, the tech whitepapers and such are beyond most people's comprehension. That's why fake coins like Dogecoin have gained recently for some ridiculous reason despite the fact it has no value. While the market has tumbled this year and I believe it will continue to tumble due to government regulation and so on, I believe if the governments intend to regulate it and there's backing for it etc that the prices of REAL cryptocurrency will go up for the long term.

According to Gartner blockchain still not in the 'plateau of productivity' in the hype cycle for emerging technology. They say that it will undergo a period of doubt called the 'trough of disillusionment' just like other tech. Other tech that is on the loop that they chart include VR, AR, machine learning, smart robots, connected homes/smart homes, autonomous vehicles, drones and more.

You can see the one for 2017 at https://blogs.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/files/2017/08/Emerging-Technology-Hype-Cycle-for-2017_Infographic_R6A.jpg

What I find interesting about the government race to cryptocurrency is that there are a number of government's already considering the use of digital currency. I also find it amusing that Russia has banned cryptocurrency but Government officials are allowed to trade it (hmm!). I think cryptocurrency will survive in the long-term, but there are definitely bad aspects to it even if you are against the system that are bad like money laundering and the ability to fund terrorism 'anonymously'.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on January 17, 2018, 01:06:07 AM
Other tech that is on the loop that they chart include VR, AR, machine learning, smart robots, connected homes/smart homes, autonomous vehicles, drones and more.

You can see the one for 2017 at https://blogs.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/files/2017/08/Emerging-Technology-Hype-Cycle-for-2017_Infographic_R6A.jpg

Machine learning underpins most applications of ‘big data’. Smart robots are already making products we use and replacing factory workers. Google Home and other smart home products are being bought and used and generating profits. Autonomous vehicle technology is already integrated into many vehicles and constant incremental improvements are being made towards the end goal of totally autonomous vehicles. Drones are everywhere, for both consumer fun or business applications. I strap on a VR headset almost every day, and everyone who has ever used an Instagram filter has applied AR technology.

Honestly, what has blockchain brought us except quantum leaps in scam technologies and a ever-expanding roster of overhyped silly digicoins? Really think about this; where is it actually being applied for competitive advantage that would make it an undeniable, essential, desirable tool for either consumers or business applications? It’s had 10 years. Where is this happening?

There is just no comparison, it doesn’t belong on this chart alongside actual emerging technologies. If it belongs anywhere, it’s in the depths of Computer Science textbooks alongside other data structures and algorithms, detailing its very specific use cases.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Notch on January 17, 2018, 02:27:54 AM
Other tech that is on the loop that they chart include VR, AR, machine learning, smart robots, connected homes/smart homes, autonomous vehicles, drones and more.

You can see the one for 2017 at https://blogs.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/files/2017/08/Emerging-Technology-Hype-Cycle-for-2017_Infographic_R6A.jpg

Machine learning underpins most applications of ‘big data’. Smart robots are already making products we use and replacing factory workers. Google Home and other smart home products are being bought and used and generating profits. Autonomous vehicle technology is already integrated into many vehicles and constant incremental improvements are being made towards the end goal of totally autonomous vehicles. Drones are everywhere, for both consumer fun or business applications. I strap on a VR headset almost every day, and everyone who has ever used an Instagram filter has applied AR technology.

Honestly, what has blockchain brought us except quantum leaps in scam technologies and a ever-expanding roster of overhyped silly digicoins? Really think about this; where is it actually being applied for competitive advantage that would make it an undeniable, essential, desirable tool for either consumers or business applications? It’s had 10 years. Where is this happening?

There is just no comparison, it doesn’t belong on this chart alongside actual emerging technologies. If it belongs anywhere, it’s in the depths of Computer Science textbooks alongside other data structures and algorithms, detailing its very specific use cases.

Illegal online transactions.  Well, at least it was, until 2017.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: jorjor on January 17, 2018, 09:58:38 AM
Honestly, what has blockchain brought us except quantum leaps in scam technologies and a ever-expanding roster of overhyped silly digicoins? Really think about this; where is it actually being applied for competitive advantage that would make it an undeniable, essential, desirable tool for either consumers or business applications? It’s had 10 years. Where is this happening?

There are some out there.

The UAE is implementing it into their government processes and expect to save a bunch on document processing. They're also implementing it in their healthcare system to improve payments and medical record storage.

I know of another that is focused on logistics and supply chain solutions. Product tracking, cross-border shipments, anti-counterfeiting in countries where that is a major problem. They actually have a fair number of companies who they are working with. There are a couple in that space.

Another applying it to insurance to improve claims, payments, coverage determinations via smart contracts. They are already working with a fair number of hospitals and insurers in their market

Another looking to provide a solution that can easily connect and convert between different fiat currencies as a behind-the-scenes payment processor. They're already processing payments for places like fast food restaurants and airlines and are flipping that over to a blockchain solution once finished.

Another using it to improve the trade of renewable energy, particularly in microgrids, where logistics were difficult before.

All but the UAE one have (or will have once live) a native cryptocurrency, but I think "currency" is misnomer in those cases (actually, a lot of cases in crypto). No one is going to the store to pay with those currencies. That isn't the intent. The currency is used within the system to pay to use the network and/or to provide incentive to investors/individuals to take part in the decentralized network. It isn't really a stock because you don't own a part the company, but you do retain rights to some portion of network use fees for having stake in the network. Investing in any of those are still highly speculative. You are speculating that those solutions will be adopted with enough scale that you will be paid off with a stream of passive income, not all that dissimilar to dividends.

As far as the "10 years" thing, most of the smart contract work which those are building off of didn't really start development until a few years ago. The development of the particular solutions above didn't start until the last year or two. They are starting to roll out now. It doesn't happen overnight.

I agree that a currency for currency's stake (like bitcoin) doesn't provide any value. Many of the critiques of crypto as a whole are really critiques of bitcoin and its clones. There is at least some evidence that the instances I listed above do have value, at least there are real-life companies who feel that way and have partnerships to be users of the technology.

We'll see though. It might work. It might fail. I'm interested in keeping up with it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on January 17, 2018, 11:06:28 AM
I'm going to ask that you provide links to back up any/all of them.

Most/all 'applications' of blockchain, when you actually pick through them and apply a bit of critical thinking, turn out to be not blockchain (eg just databases, nothing new), low-level trials that don't go anywhere, or literally just empty hype, a press release or something that gets massively overblown by pro-crypto news sources.

Smart contracts (immutable programs run off the blockchain) are a terrible idea right from the start as has been demonstrate by several multiple-hundred-million-dollar failures. Programs will have bugs and need to be kept updated and modified and human decision making should always be kept in the loop.

These vague rumors, low-level trial programs and mislabeled backend data structures are not blockchain 'just starting to roll out now'. They are either deliberately misrepresented by advocates with an agenda or simply interpreted as 'good news' through motivated reasoning.

The best demonstration of what blockchain can achieve so far is CryptoKitties.

Literally beanie babies on the blockchain. Great stuff! (oh and even its minor popularity brought the ethereum network to its knees, aptly demonstrating blockchains' inability to scale. Freeing a database of the need for 'trust' is incredibly expensive and most of the time unnecessary.)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BrandNewPapa on January 18, 2018, 10:30:04 AM
Getting this thread back on track....

I recently took some profits from my ETH (~$500USD) and sent it to Kraken.

I bought the following:
EOS
ICN
MLN
REP
XLM
ZEC
XRP

I tried to limit it to coins/tokens that seem to have some real purpose and support from outside companies.

I'm also still holding LTC, BTC, BCH, and ETH.

Undecided how long I will hold. Initial thoughts were to try to make a quick 2X, but after the down turn this week, I'm thinking I might HODL.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on January 18, 2018, 10:35:22 AM
The best demonstration of what blockchain can achieve so far is CryptoKitties.

Really? What about ICOs? Granted, it has enabled some shady activities, but that doesn't diminish the underlying tech. The ability for small companies to raise capital outside of traditional channels is surely more significant than CryptoKitties. Don't you think?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 18, 2018, 12:07:27 PM
One of the reasons for a code of law is facilitating coordination and reducing interactive friction. This is a form of social governance.

I don't see the friction reducing benefit of ICOs over kickstarter or gofundme.  I agree the internet has made it easier to raise money through non-traditional means, I just think cryptocurrencies are the least innovative way to do that.

Quote
What's significant in crypto is we're starting to see algorithmic governance in digital space; decentralized consensus through protocol, reducing corruptive elements.

Lol, if you think cryptos are reducing corruption then you haven't been paying attention.  *cough(tether). 

Nice job with the content-free word salad though, I always appreciate sentences that make my brain spin up.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 18, 2018, 12:17:04 PM
The ability for small companies to raise capital outside of traditional channels is surely more significant than CryptoKitties.

One of the reasons for a code of law is facilitating coordination and reducing interactive friction. This is a form of social governance.

What's significant in crypto is we're starting to see algorithmic governance in digital space; decentralized consensus through protocol, reducing corruptive elements. How this will evolve will become readily apparent in time.

Crypto price slides have been arrested by an influx of four hundred million dollars in unverified funds flooding into Bitfinex from a company owned by the same people (something they denied until it was confirmed in the Paradise Papers) which has never provided any evidence that it actually holds the hundreds upon hundreds of millions it claims backs Tether. And this is what reduced corruption looks like?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: WoodStache on January 18, 2018, 12:25:45 PM
The big correction is finally here. :)

I think posts like this are kind of gross. I don't know your posting history so excuse me if I'm taking yours specifically wrong, but I see this all over. On here, twitter and on other sites. So take "you" here as a royal you, if necessary.

The thing is, you can think crypto is a bad investment and not get a smile when the prices go down. Sadly, and stupidly, people have huge chunks of their lives tied up into this. There are people I've seen on reddit the past few days that have sunk their retirement into cryptos. Hope for change, hope for education but there are tons of people that are seemingly gleeful at the proposition of this coming crashing down.

In a way, it's similar to the FOMO attitude that recent "investors" have exhibited, just meaner spirited. "I didn't get mine so I hope you don't either." Or some sort of need to feel smarter than the rest and above it all.

You see this with some in the FI crowd that are "excited" for the next big buy opportunity in the stock market. Peoples lives, careers and retirements end over stuff like this. Someone might believe it's necessary, and in many cases these things open up a buying opportunity, but that's different than the reveling that you see around this board and others.

/soapbox.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Finallyunderstand on January 18, 2018, 02:23:17 PM
I posted this in another crypto thread when Tether came up.  This article talks about last bitcoin price bubble 5 years ago. If Tether really is propping up the market you could replace "person" with "company" and we have the same thing going on.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/15/researchers-finds-that-one-person-likely-drove-bitcoin-from-150-to-1000/

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Finallyunderstand on January 18, 2018, 02:47:46 PM
I posted this in another crypto thread when Tether came up.  This article talks about last bitcoin price bubble 5 years ago. If Tether really is propping up the market you could replace "person" with "company" and we have the same thing going on.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/15/researchers-finds-that-one-person-likely-drove-bitcoin-from-150-to-1000/

additional reading material about Tether for those so inclined.  I'm well aware you can't take everything as gospel on the internet so draw your own conclusions.  It was this sort of information that caused me to sell almost every holding I had.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/7ih0hd/guess_who_controls_over_half_a_billion_tethers/
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on January 18, 2018, 05:24:24 PM

additional reading material about Tether for those so inclined.  I'm well aware you can't take everything as gospel on the internet so draw your own conclusions.  It was this sort of information that caused me to sell almost every holding I had.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/7ih0hd/guess_who_controls_over_half_a_billion_tethers/

The only rational response to such massive and obvious systemic fraud.

There should be no ‘getting this thread back on track’ until it’s explained or exposed. To continue discussing crypto prices and portfolio holdings takes a cognitive dissonance which absolutely staggers me. Investing on a prayer.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 18, 2018, 05:51:12 PM
The only rational response to such massive and obvious systemic fraud.

There should be no ‘getting this thread back on track’ until it’s explained or exposed. To continue discussing crypto prices and portfolio holdings takes a cognitive dissonance which absolutely staggers me. Investing on a prayer.

I for one am shocked, SHOCKED, to discover than an entirely new and unregulated asset class suddenly worth hundreds of billions of dollars for no apparent reason after being invented on the internet could possibly be anything except wholly legitimate and trustworthy.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on January 18, 2018, 06:14:46 PM
it is ironic that bitcoin, whose genesis block decries bailouts:

Quote
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"

is (most likely) being artificially supported by a virtual currency being printed out of thin air.

in my opinion it's only a matter of time before either this artificial support crumbles and kills BTC, or the high congestion/fees of BTC kills it.  i think the latter may kill BTC first.  if that happens i would not be surprised to see miners abandon BTC and move to BCH, giving it traction, and i suspect the people that are desperately inflating the BTC price are exactly the same people who sold all their BCH holdings.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Ben Hogan on January 19, 2018, 08:13:44 AM
Really interesting, I have always wondered how Tether and Exchange's own currency works. But this does not look good at all.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 19, 2018, 10:39:29 AM

Crypto price slides have been arrested by an influx of four hundred million dollars in unverified funds flooding into Bitfinex from a company owned by the same people (something they denied until it was confirmed in the Paradise Papers) which has never provided any evidence that it actually holds the hundreds upon hundreds of millions it claims backs Tether. And this is what reduced corruption looks like?

I'm uncertain about tether, being that it is centrally issued, especially by a non-authoritative entity. I had warning posts about it a couple of months ago.

Quote
If it turns out tethers is being fraudulently printed, there is a high chance it will severely impact the cryptoworld. You should do what you think is best based on what you believe.   

Quote
There is huge risk in the space right now. Especially for bitcoin, due to potentially fraudulent tether. Proceed with caution.

As for 'reduced corruption', I refer to the protocol's governance. In a decentralized protocol, if one stranger sends a digital unit of accounting over to another stranger, the chance of any corruption with that transaction is infinitesimally low. The protocol reduces or mitigates corruption regarding its transactive (algorithmic) governance. For example, there will only be one hundred units. An entity owns one unit and sends it to another entity. Adhering to protocol rule and consensus, we can expect there will never be more or less than one hundred units. Ownership of a unit, within the protocol, cannot be tampered with by another. In a non-decentralized system, the intermediary is always a huge risk for corruption and displays less transparency.

This is a completely different definition of corruption to that used by more or less everyone else in the world outside cryptocurrency circles. Corruption in payment processing has pretty much nothing to do with the redirection of funds mid-flow to the wrong place for nefarious gain. It has everything to do with a swathe of other factors completely unrelated to the payment processing technology, none of which blockchain does anything to prevent.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 19, 2018, 03:29:47 PM
There's no point in discussing this. Either we agree on what we're talking about when we discuss corruption in financial transactions, in which case cryptocurrency does the quadratic root of fuck all to address it, or we don't agree on what corruption actually means in that context, in which case we might as well be speaking different languages.

There is no endemic problem relating to corruption in existing international payment systems that is solved by cryptocurrency.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on January 21, 2018, 06:22:29 PM
Things in crypto space that are sketchy/corrupt/not cool :
- unregulated exchanges
 -blatant price manipulation by exchanges
 -concentration of majority of any coin with a very small group of people
-concentration of mining groups
- insider trading prohibitions of the stock market do not apply in crypto
- bots manipulating prices
-coordination of buying/selling by whales

Plenty of these items are well covered in articles by Bloomberg, NYT, WAPO, etc , I am not going to provide links someone with more time on their hands can if they wish.  Blockchain can indeed prevent corruption, improve transparency, etc, etc but the entire crypto space is full of people taking advantage of others in ways that are clearly illegal ( although likely done) in other markets. Have fun , make some money if you wish ( I am) but don't drink so much Kool aid that you end up drowning. The post government/banking libertarian utopia that many crypto enthusiasts expect is highly unlikely. Some applications of blockchain technology will likely become valuable and of great use, but to be clear the entire market itself is just about a transfer of wealth from the many to the few. Same as the rest of finances. Make sure to take gains and only gamble what you can afford to lose, or don't play.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on January 22, 2018, 01:02:22 PM
The big correction is finally here. :)

the low for bitcoin for the entire year, has been in january for the last 4 years.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 23, 2018, 12:27:29 AM
The big correction is finally here. :)

the low for bitcoin for the entire year, has been in january for the last 4 years.

It has not, however, been a near 50% drop in any of those years, and it's debatable whether the largest exchange had spent the previous few months furiously working to prop up the price in other years.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 23, 2018, 10:22:33 AM
It's debatable whether the largest exchange had spent the previous few months furiously working to prop up the price in other years.

I think it's pretty clear that the price of bitcoin has been systematically manipulated by bad actors.  This probably shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

It's a completely unregulated market in what are essentially penny stocks, and we've all seen how that story ends.  The whole model is to promote positive media coverage to scare up new investor money with fomo on the next big thing, but there is no underlying value behind the asset.  Every part of that sentence is exactly like penny stocks.  How quickly we forget.

It's especially egregious to me that THIS community, of all places, has penny stock promoters.  The whole thrust of this forum's financial advice is that you can't pick the next big thing, but you can reliably get rich by regularly investing in boring dependable assets that represent aggregate performance.  You minimize risk by sharing it.   

The entire cryptocurrency space looks like a cynical cash grab by brazen criminals.  The exchanges are corrupt.  The product is imaginary and the revenue stream is non-existent.  Just like with booming penny stocks, all they have is a clever idea and an overhyped media presence, which they use to fleece the late comers.  It's an elaborate scam.

Bitcoin is antithetical to everything this website represents.  This is probably the wrong place to shill for it.  And yet here we are, listening to poster after poster pushing their fomo agenda with promises of instant gratification.  Get real, peeps.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on January 23, 2018, 03:38:45 PM
More uses for the Ethereum network.

Canada trialing use of Ethereum blockchain to enhance transparency in govt funding (https://globalnews.ca/news/3977745/ethereum-blockchain-canada-nrc/)

I guess someone forgot to tell the Canadian government that cryptocurrencies are scams and useless.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 23, 2018, 03:55:20 PM
More uses for the Ethereum network.

Canada trialing use of Ethereum blockchain to enhance transparency in govt funding (https://globalnews.ca/news/3977745/ethereum-blockchain-canada-nrc/)

This seems like a great example of why this craze is so overblown.  Enhancing government transparency is great, but as far as I can tell blockchain adds absolutely nothing to this process.  Canada could just publish this same information online, like they currently do.  Even if you believe that the Canadian government is forging its records of research funding for some reason, blockchain doesn't help because they can still forge the same records when they create the blockchain in the first place.  If you're worried that the Candadian government is trying to retroactively forge their science funding numbers, well this is what the internet is for!  PUBLICation means everyone gets to see it as it comes out, and we collectively keep each other honest.  We already archive all previously published data both individually (right click, save-as) and collectively (the wayback machine and its equivalents).

I'm familiar with four different databases that the US government uses to record scientific data and make it available to the public.  Making any one of them unalterable would be a complete disaster.  Science is by definition an iterative process, in which we constantly seek out mistakes and then correct them by annotating the original data. 

Some of these databases are better than others at presentation and searchability, but in zero cases do I feel like the integrity of the record is the primary weakness in a system.  They are already backed up in multiple locations.  They already have professional DBAs who manage the records and facilitate the flow of data in and out.  They are already have GUIs organized by theme, or by location, or by data type, or by project, or by date, or all all of the above.  What does blockchain possibly bring to these complicated systems with decades of history and revisions?

Blockchain may still discover a killer app, but it's not currency and it's not data management.  Keep looking, fanbois, I'm pulling for you because I like cleverness.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on January 23, 2018, 09:49:52 PM
this idea is far from the low hanging fruit, but no one wants to make databases unalterable.

a cryptographic signature of any document, stored on a secure public blockchain, doesn't take up much space and can be used from then on to prove the copy of the document you're looking at hasn't been altered.  revisions would be in a separate document, also with a recorded signature.  it's a valuable idea in general, but yes perhaps not a lot of added value for government records in particular at this point.

i think micropayments might eventually be where cryptocurrencies can prove useful, especially since you can load say $5 into an account per week and not worry too much about fluctuations in market price.  obviously, scalability issues will have to be solved:

how about micropayments for websites (say 1/10 cent per page load) instead of seeing ads?  (yes something along the idea of the brave browser or google contributor.)
how about micropayments for streamed TV show episodes instead of a monthly bill?  or for internet usage by the MB instead of a flat monthly bill? for cell phone minutes? or printing mail postage?  or maybe you could require a micropayment to receive email, to prevent a certain email address from being spammed.

there may be a couple ideas here and there that could be valuable... being bullish on cryptocurrencies i think something will pop up at some point.



Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 24, 2018, 12:44:52 AM
There's no reason why micropayments would be done via cryptocurrency rather than simply through dollars or euro. Even assuming payments of below a single cent, it would be easier to collate the totals and bill to the nearest cent monthly than to go through the rigmarole of converting money into crypto and for the recipient to do the reverse.

In addition to that, it seems fairly unambiguous that subscription models are the way forward. I'm not aware of anywhere that micropayments have taken off, but subscription services are everywhere.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 24, 2018, 04:20:44 AM
The total volume of Tether produced in the last four weeks now stands at a billion dollars. The last hundred million was produced just after yesterday's fall in Bitcoin.

I'm genuinely curious at this point: how can any of the crypto bulls maintain the belief that this isn't heading straight for disaster? At this point, the current crypto market is built on the assumption that Tether is backed by US dollars. It's becoming close to impossible to sustain that belief. What happens when the realisation hits?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: gp_ on January 24, 2018, 10:32:28 AM
It has not, however, been a near 50% drop in any of those years, and it's debatable whether the largest exchange had spent the previous few months furiously working to prop up the price in other years.

not disagreeing with that.

the way roger ver / jihan wu claimed that bcash was the "true bitcoin" coinciding with the CME launching btc futures was/is very suspect to me.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on January 24, 2018, 05:20:28 PM
There's no reason why micropayments would be done via cryptocurrency rather than simply through dollars or euro.

that may or may not be true in the US or Europe, but cryptocurrencies are in theory more accessible to more people in more countries.

Even assuming payments of below a single cent, it would be easier to collate the totals and bill to the nearest cent monthly than to go through the rigmarole of converting money into crypto and for the recipient to do the reverse.

if you're collating payments into a larger payment then it's not a micropayment.  the payer could cancel their account or withdraw their money or dispute a payment in the meantime, where with cryptocurrencies each micropayment would be final.  i think that's the benefit of micropayments to the payee.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 25, 2018, 02:26:02 AM
There's no reason why micropayments would be done via cryptocurrency rather than simply through dollars or euro.

that may or may not be true in the US or Europe, but cryptocurrencies are in theory more accessible to more people in more countries.

Even assuming payments of below a single cent, it would be easier to collate the totals and bill to the nearest cent monthly than to go through the rigmarole of converting money into crypto and for the recipient to do the reverse.

if you're collating payments into a larger payment then it's not a micropayment.  the payer could cancel their account or withdraw their money or dispute a payment in the meantime, where with cryptocurrencies each micropayment would be final.  i think that's the benefit of micropayments to the payee.

Oh, for heaven's sake. Do I have to list every bloody currency on earth every time I compare Bitcoin to existing currencies? Do I have to amend my statement to "There's no reason why micropayments would be done by cryptocurrency rather than simply through dollars, euro, sterling, kronur, kroner, koruna, forint, pesos, francs, rands, yuan, yen, dong..."

And on the subject of micropayments: it's entirely possible to build a micropayment system that's irreversible, by requiring customers to preload their accounts but allow for withdrawal of unused balances at any time. Then you simply pay the money instantly whenever a customer authorises a micropayment. Hey presto! But nobody does that, because nobody uses micropayments, because business after business after business has figured out that subscription models are superior. It's a more consistent revenue stream, the global nature of the internet allows companies to run a profit even on low subscription fees, customers paying a subscription are almost certainly less likely to stop using your service, and the act of paying for the subscription may actually drive usage (someone with a Netflix account may opt to watch more Netflix to make the most of their spending).

If you were starting an online company today, would you want to go for micropayments or a subscription model? Just about everyone in the market - from Netflix to the Wall Street Journal, from Dollar Shave Club to Spotify, from the Lancet to whatever particular flavour of online nudity you find most interesting - is using a subscription model, which is a pretty clear indicator. Even where subscription involves no actual payments - like on Youtube - you'll see reminders at the end of videos to subscribe to the channel, because the entire business model is built on subscribers. The subscription model is vastly preferable to both customers (a predictable and smooth cost for something from a consistently good source) and to sellers (a regular revenue stream with low turnover which enables far more detailed forward planning than day-to-day sales), and crypto isn't needed for subscriptions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: k-vette on January 25, 2018, 05:25:33 PM
Robinhood is adding Cryptocurrency trading for FREE!  I'm excited to see where this leads.  If you don't have Robinhood for stock trading, you can get a free stock if you use someone's referral link.  (Lots on the thread here:  https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/free-stock-from-robinhood/)  Spread the referrals around a bit rather than giving you mine. 

That means stock trading and crypto on the same platform with the same money.  I see that as very valuable.  I trade often throughout the day as I am able.  Starting in February I could close out some positions at the end of the day, then continue using that money on cryptocurrency trading after hours, then turn it back into SPY or somethings stable earning interest while I'm at work.  This seems like a win-win for Robinhood.

As of today you can already watch several currencies, starting in February you'll be able to buy and sell Bitcoin and Ethereum, more will be added.  It's somewhat limited to certain states so far, but the rollout will continue.  I think Coinbase is going to get killed over this.  Why would anyone pay a fee when you can avoid it altogether?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 25, 2018, 06:26:36 PM
Why would anyone pay a fee when you can avoid it altogether?

Because the price is better?  Most of the "free" trading options make their money by juicing the bid-ask spread. 

TANSTAAFL.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on January 25, 2018, 06:37:09 PM
There's no reason why micropayments would be done via cryptocurrency rather than simply through dollars or euro.

that may or may not be true in the US or Europe, but cryptocurrencies are in theory more accessible to more people in more countries.

Oh, for heaven's sake. Do I have to list every bloody currency on earth every time I compare Bitcoin to existing currencies? Do I have to amend my statement to "There's no reason why micropayments would be done by cryptocurrency rather than simply through dollars, euro, sterling, kronur, kroner, koruna, forint, pesos, francs, rands, yuan, yen, dong..."

oh you're right.  we have all these great fiat currencies and banks already.  i guess we'll wait around for them to introduce micropayments.  those chinese banks love experimenting.  /s

If you were starting an online company today, would you want to go for micropayments or a subscription model? Just about everyone in the market - from Netflix to the Wall Street Journal, from Dollar Shave Club to Spotify, from the Lancet to whatever particular flavour of online nudity you find most interesting - is using a subscription model, which is a pretty clear indicator.

so micropayments shouldn't be used because micropayments aren't used...?  nobody uses micropayments because it's not really an option yet, as cryptocurrencies are relatively new and the big ones have scaling problems.  i'm just saying there's potential there.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on January 25, 2018, 07:09:46 PM
Phil, are you claiming that fiat currency is somehow holding back the micropayments concept from being widely adopted?

I mean, I agree that micropayments are a great way to solve some annoying problems. People have been talking about them for at least 20 years, AFAIK. But I don't see why I couldn't set up such a system just using existing currency(s). Which makes me think the roadblocks have nothing to do with currency, hence not much reason to think cryptos would somehow make micropayments a big thing.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 26, 2018, 01:11:50 AM

so micropayments shouldn't be used because micropayments aren't used...?  nobody uses micropayments because it's not really an option yet, as cryptocurrencies are relatively new and the big ones have scaling problems.  i'm just saying there's potential there.

At the risk of sounding dismissive: did you read the damn post at all?

Did you get to the chunk pointing out that subscription models are a superior option for both buyers and sellers?

Or did you just decide after reading the very first line what your response was going to be and ignore the rest? I mean, you quoted the first line of my last paragraph, completely disregarded the rest of it, and then delivered a kicking to an argument I hadn't actually made. Subscription models are everywhere because they're a far better option for businesses and for customers.

I don't think I can adequately explain how infuriating it is to have someone selectively misquote a subset of what I've written and then argue against something I've never said, so I'm just going to reproduce what I actually wrote and what you wrote in response:

"And on the subject of micropayments: it's entirely possible to build a micropayment system that's irreversible, by requiring customers to preload their accounts but allow for withdrawal of unused balances at any time. Then you simply pay the money instantly whenever a customer authorises a micropayment. Hey presto! But nobody does that, because nobody uses micropayments, because business after business after business has figured out that subscription models are superior. It's a more consistent revenue stream, the global nature of the internet allows companies to run a profit even on low subscription fees, customers paying a subscription are almost certainly less likely to stop using your service, and the act of paying for the subscription may actually drive usage (someone with a Netflix account may opt to watch more Netflix to make the most of their spending).

If you were starting an online company today, would you want to go for micropayments or a subscription model? Just about everyone in the market - from Netflix to the Wall Street Journal, from Dollar Shave Club to Spotify, from the Lancet to whatever particular flavour of online nudity you find most interesting - is using a subscription model, which is a pretty clear indicator. Even where subscription involves no actual payments - like on Youtube - you'll see reminders at the end of videos to subscribe to the channel, because the entire business model is built on subscribers. The subscription model is vastly preferable to both customers (a predictable and smooth cost for something from a consistently good source) and to sellers (a regular revenue stream with low turnover which enables far more detailed forward planning than day-to-day sales), and crypto isn't needed for subscriptions."

"so micropayments shouldn't be used because micropayments aren't used...? nobody uses micropayments because it's not really an option yet, as cryptocurrencies are relatively new and the big ones have scaling problems."

...

Seriously: what is the point of engaging, if this is what comes back as a response? I wrote a clear and short explanation of why I believe companies have gone with a subscription model, added in an explanation of why I think it actually benefits consumers as well, and brought in supporting evidence that the subscription model is the best one available for businesses even when the subscription is completely free. In return, I get...strawman arguments and selective and misleading quotations, and no effort to discuss what I actually said. It's incredibly frustrating.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: pennyrobbins on January 26, 2018, 10:29:30 AM
Hoping that transactions and accessibility get easier, now that Robinhood is entering the game.  Should be seeing a general lift among crypto when the barriers to entry are reduced like this.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on January 26, 2018, 05:24:33 PM
"so micropayments shouldn't be used because micropayments aren't used...? nobody uses micropayments because it's not really an option yet, as cryptocurrencies are relatively new and the big ones have scaling problems."

...

Seriously: what is the point of engaging, if this is what comes back as a response? I wrote a clear and short explanation of why I believe companies have gone with a subscription model, added in an explanation of why I think it actually benefits consumers as well, and brought in supporting evidence that the subscription model is the best one available for businesses even when the subscription is completely free. In return, I get...strawman arguments and selective and misleading quotations, and no effort to discuss what I actually said. It's incredibly frustrating.

you wrote that companies today use subscription models, and gave a few reasons.  but you didn't compare subscriptions to micropayments.  what you should have said is "companies like subscription models, not micropayments, because paying subscribers often don't even use the service.  this boosts profit margins for companies."  you said almost everything but that.

from a customer's point of view, subscription models suck because if you don't use the product, you still pay.  that's why consumers would want microservices.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on January 26, 2018, 05:35:53 PM
At the risk of sounding dismissive: did you read the damn post at all?
...
Seriously: what is the point of engaging, if this is what comes back as a response?
...
I get...strawman arguments and selective and misleading quotations, and no effort to discuss what I actually said. It's incredibly frustrating.

the frustrating dismissive response here was me mentioning how cryptocurrencies could potentially be used for micropayments, and your response is essentially "nobody should use micropayments".

i should have just ignored your post.  sorry for responding.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on January 26, 2018, 07:22:35 PM
the frustrating dismissive response here was me mentioning how cryptocurrencies could potentially be used for micropayments, and your response is essentially "nobody should use micropayments".

i should have just ignored your post.  sorry for responding.

I have to say, Phil, he's (she's?) right - you really did seem to ignore the context of the post. You're backing off of that now with some new idea about how subscriptions *aren't* ideal for consumers which is interesting - but that wasn't what you said originally. You quoted without context and you're coming off as bit of a loon. Chill out.

Also, you never addressed my question about why cryptos are so much better for micropayments. I see no reason you couldn't do micropayments with any currency you want. What makes cryptos so much better for this?

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 27, 2018, 01:35:27 AM
"so micropayments shouldn't be used because micropayments aren't used...? nobody uses micropayments because it's not really an option yet, as cryptocurrencies are relatively new and the big ones have scaling problems."

...

Seriously: what is the point of engaging, if this is what comes back as a response? I wrote a clear and short explanation of why I believe companies have gone with a subscription model, added in an explanation of why I think it actually benefits consumers as well, and brought in supporting evidence that the subscription model is the best one available for businesses even when the subscription is completely free. In return, I get...strawman arguments and selective and misleading quotations, and no effort to discuss what I actually said. It's incredibly frustrating.

you wrote that companies today use subscription models, and gave a few reasons.  but you didn't compare subscriptions to micropayments.  what you should have said is "companies like subscription models, not micropayments, because paying subscribers often don't even use the service.  this boosts profit margins for companies."  you said almost everything but that.

from a customer's point of view, subscription models suck because if you don't use the product, you still pay.  that's why consumers would want microservices.

So what you really wanted was for me to make your argument for you. Come on, this is ridiculous. You still haven't read what I wrote, because every point I made about the advantages of subscription models was an advantage specifically compared to micropayments. For customers, it means their costs are far more predictable and they can subscribe to a provider of a consistently good product, meaning less time and money spent trying to find something good. For businesses, the principal benefit is that the subscription model means far more predictable revenue streams and better options for forward planning. You can fume all you want about businesses growing fat on subscriptions from people who don't use the product, but that's not a part of any sane business plan I've ever seen. It's an incidental effect, not the plan.

And my response wasn't "nobody should use micropayments". It was that nobody does, because the subscription model is a better option.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on January 27, 2018, 11:12:18 AM
It's debatable whether the largest exchange had spent the previous few months furiously working to prop up the price in other years.

I think it's pretty clear that the price of bitcoin has been systematically manipulated by bad actors.  This probably shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

It's a completely unregulated market in what are essentially penny stocks, and we've all seen how that story ends.  The whole model is to promote positive media coverage to scare up new investor money with fomo on the next big thing, but there is no underlying value behind the asset.  Every part of that sentence is exactly like penny stocks.  How quickly we forget.

It's especially egregious to me that THIS community, of all places, has penny stock promoters.  The whole thrust of this forum's financial advice is that you can't pick the next big thing, but you can reliably get rich by regularly investing in boring dependable assets that represent aggregate performance.  You minimize risk by sharing it.   

The entire cryptocurrency space looks like a cynical cash grab by brazen criminals.  The exchanges are corrupt.  The product is imaginary and the revenue stream is non-existent.  Just like with booming penny stocks, all they have is a clever idea and an overhyped media presence, which they use to fleece the late comers.  It's an elaborate scam.

Bitcoin is antithetical to everything this website represents.  This is probably the wrong place to shill for it.  And yet here we are, listening to poster after poster pushing their fomo agenda with promises of instant gratification.  Get real, peeps.

1. Please re-read the opening post of this thread.
2. Cease posting in here.

Thank you.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on January 27, 2018, 11:21:35 AM
1. Please re-read the opening post of this thread.
2. Cease posting in here.

Oh I'm so sorry.  Did I not quietly acquiesce to your ridiculous demands?

Here's a tip.  If you start a thread asking people to talk about how great slavery is, you're probably going to find a few posts you don't agree with there, too. 

This is a forum about financial advice.  Starting a thread to give people bad financial advice is unlikely to go unchallenged.  I think I will not sit quietly, despite your good manners.  Which really are lovely, btw, thanks for that.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 27, 2018, 11:27:18 AM
You want this thread to stick purely to discussing holdings and avoid any critical commentary of cryptocurrencies as a whole?

That particular horse has long since bolted, written a white paper, set up its own cryptocurrency, strategically hyped HorseCoin on social media, and sold half its holdings just before HorseCoin's value collapsed.

Not to mention that there's something deeply unpleasant about seeing demands that people stop posting negative stuff when there still isn't a cogent explanation for how someone bought a billion dollars worth of Bitcoin by first buying it in Tether, or why Tether can't provide any evidence that this billion dollars exists. This isn't even a discussion of whether cryptocurrency is in a bubble anymore: it's a question of whether its price is being inflated by criminal behaviour, and there's credible circumstantial evidence that it is.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Padonak on January 27, 2018, 11:51:31 AM
1. Please re-read the opening post of this thread.
2. Cease posting in here.

Oh I'm so sorry.  Did I not quietly acquiesce to your ridiculous demands?

Here's a tip.  If you start a thread asking people to talk about how great slavery is, you're probably going to find a few posts you don't agree with there, too. 

This is a forum about financial advice.  Starting a thread to give people bad financial advice is unlikely to go unchallenged.  I think I will not sit quietly, despite your good manners.  Which really are lovely, btw, thanks for that.

Crypto shills are shaming us no coiners because they are running out of greater fools and getting desperate. They need a bunch of greater fools to hold the bag full of shitcoins when this bubble finally bursts.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on January 27, 2018, 12:28:37 PM
You got out, right Tony? You had a bunch of threads asking about investing over the last 6 weeks ago. Hope you sold and put the money to work in less risky ways.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on January 27, 2018, 12:34:27 PM
I don't hold any crypto, but feel this thread's original purpose had value.  In addition, a variety of discussions have occurred through the thread that are not criticism of cryptocurrency in general, but instead are reasoned opinions about the value and nature of particular cryptocurrencies.  I think that a thread focused on stating crypto holdings and discussing the specific characteristics and valuation of particular currencies is a reasonable thing to ask.

Stating a zero holding of crypto and expounding once that the reason is because you think all cryptocurrency is a shell game is something you can reasonably do once in the thread, because it differentiates your position from one like mine - I hold no crypto, but am an agnostic of sorts who is genuinely curious.  But repeated posting of a general crypto-sucks opinion is going too far in thread.  Crypto holders should have a place to talk where they can come to their own conclusions without others badgering them.  MMM's founder already posted his opinion elsewhere.  Let the crypto holders work through this in peace.

Tonyahu, you yourself have shown on more than one thread that you have been both active in crypto and actively considering sale of some cryptocurrency for the purpose of buying fiat-denominated investments.  I'm hoping for the best for you.  Any updates you'd be willing to share about your crypto holdings? 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 28, 2018, 01:48:27 AM
"Crypto holders should have a place to talk where they can come to their own conclusions without others badgering them."

It's debatable whether that place should be on the MMM forum. As you note, MMM himself is quite clear that he has no faith in the pricing of cryptocurrencies, and sol has also given a very clear explanation for why he/she regards crypto as fundamentally inimical to MMM principles. A thread focused entirely on positive or neutral discussion of crypto makes about as much sense as a thread called "Show Us Your Brand New SUV" where nobody's allowed to point out that brand new SUVs are a terrible waste of money.

This is a forum based on a website that routinely tells people they deserve a punch in the face for their poor financial decisions. It is absolutely not a place for a discussion that doesn't allow sustained criticism of a poor financial decision.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on January 28, 2018, 01:56:14 AM
Empty ‘Amen’ post. Well said.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on January 30, 2018, 02:44:05 PM
Everything in that article screams "this is going to be an almighty shitshow". There isn't a single reassuring detail.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on January 30, 2018, 03:46:56 PM
Crypto shills are shaming us no coiners because they are running out of greater fools and getting desperate. They need a bunch of greater fools to hold the bag full of shitcoins when this bubble finally bursts.

I sold, I'm completely out. 

My furnace went out the first week of December and my transmission blew on Christmas morning. -$11,000 for the month.  The heating/cooling place didn't accept bitcoin and neither did the Ford dealership. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: phil22 on January 30, 2018, 08:59:24 PM
Consider addressing the issues rather than turn around every argument that pokes holes in your fantasy crypto utopia.

cryptos are traded on shallow, heavily-manipulated markets run on exchanges prone to hacks, theft, and general incompetence.  tether looks to be fraudulently propping up a good chuck of the market.  many of the newer coins are simply scams.  many coins are having scaling issues as the size of the user base grows.  many coins have power consumption issues.  yes, they are a terrible "investment."  putting money into a crypto "portfolio" is a terrible idea.

all that being said... cryptocurrencies are not going to magically go "poof" and disappear one wednesday morning.  i don't know if this counts as a "fantasy crypto utopia" but they are here to stay, and things arguably couldn't get much worse for cryptos.  judging by the vitriol from the anti-crypto crowd here i doubt we can agree on that much.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on January 30, 2018, 09:13:20 PM
I'm not anti-crypto. I'm *pro* crypto. I want to pay for stuff (and get paid for stuff) without paying 2-5% to various stupid middlemen.

However all the existing implementations are a miserable failure at doing this, many of the popular ones seemingly by design. I don't want to "invest" in currency and hold onto it in the hopes it'll gain value, I want a nice easy to use cheap secure *tool* for making transactions.

I think the "anti" crypto folks are just as annoyed as I am that people have fallen for what appears to be a con. Nobody is against an inexpensive and secure way to pay for things, but millions of people bidding up the value of the various tokens such that they're unusable for transactions, IMO, makes that outcome *less* likely.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: anisotropy on January 30, 2018, 10:02:37 PM

all that being said... cryptocurrencies are not going to magically go "poof" and disappear one wednesday morning.  i don't know if this counts as a "fantasy crypto utopia" but they are here to stay, and things arguably couldn't get much worse for cryptos.  judging by the vitriol from the anti-crypto crowd here i doubt we can agree on that much.

Few years ago, during the previous pot hype, I traded shares of various pot companies of the day: PHOT, FITX, etc. At the end of the pump/dump cycle, for whatever it's worth, I left some money on the table in each of these companies just to see if I would get lucky and maybe one of them would actually hit it big.

Today, most of them are still around. They are "here to stay" you could argue, but most of them are worth perhaps 1% of what they were valued during the hype. The pot frenzy is renewed, but with a different list of candidates. I fail to see how it is different from the current crypto scene, especially if we are talking about coins.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Nate79 on January 30, 2018, 10:17:14 PM
Capital One 360 now blocking purchases of bitcoin from my account onto coinbase. This is the exact reason why we need crypto in our lives. Who are they to tell me how I can or can't spend my hard earned money. A few years ago I was also hassled by a bank, who made me feel like a terrorist due to a large cash deposit. I closed my account with them at the time. No reason for this bull-shit.
You are not spending your money. You are getting a loan (credit card) to buy something. That credit can be pulled at any time. Buying investments on margin is highly risky and the credit card companies are worried, and rightly so that they will not get paid back.

Feel free to buy this crap using your own money.

Good for them to shut this down.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Nate79 on January 30, 2018, 10:33:33 PM
Capital One 360 now blocking purchases of bitcoin from my account onto coinbase. This is the exact reason why we need crypto in our lives. Who are they to tell me how I can or can't spend my hard earned money. A few years ago I was also hassled by a bank, who made me feel like a terrorist due to a large cash deposit. I closed my account with them at the time. No reason for this bull-shit.
You are not spending your money. You are getting a loan (credit card) to buy something. That credit can be pulled at any time. Buying investments on margin is highly risky and the credit card companies are worried, and rightly so that they will not get paid back.

Feel free to buy this crap using your own money.

Good for them to shut this down.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Huh? I'm not using a credit card. This was to be pulled from my checking account. And come on, you really think credit card companies are worried about me losing my money????? They do charge us 30% or higher, if we don't pay our balance after all!!!!
My bad. I thought you were referring to the recent announcements of credit cards blocking the purchase of bitcoin.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on January 31, 2018, 09:41:52 AM
It's fine to be skeptical and have criticisms. The thing that I wonder about is how much research was done before offering these criticisms. Many of the things being questioned, such as databases or engineering scalability issues or security or viability, and other issues have been deeply analyzed. If the google searches are still unconvincing, then maybe we can discuss which aspects.

I don't want to "invest" in currency and hold onto it in the hopes it'll gain value, I want a nice easy to use cheap secure *tool* for making transactions.

You don't have to "invest" or buy in. Just wait and see if something emerges that you'll find useful or not. Right now, alot of different protocols are being experimented and speculated on. There are alot of scams too but also legitimate development. Possibly in the near future, you may even be using a blockchain backend without realizing it.

And there's the reason for the criticisms.  This thread has been going on for 6 months and was started not to discuss or debate the value of the underlying technology, but rather showcase "OMG, look at all the money I'm making!"  Either intentionally or through a Freudian slip, you acknowledge speculation is going on.  That's not a positive thing in discussing investments for most folks.  That deep analysis you mentioned has been found wanting. Billions of dollars are disappearing from this niche market their hacks and ponzi schemes and the oversight of this niche is not yet equipped to handle it.  Any attempts at forming regulation of these markets by national bodies is met with tin-foil derision.  The same people who complained that 2008 happened because of greed and not enough regulation are now boasting how unregulated crypto is the wave of the future.  Facebook is now longer allowing crypto advertising because of the rampant speculation and murky waters of this market.  They don't want to be associated with it right now and I can't blame them.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on January 31, 2018, 12:05:37 PM
It's fine to be skeptical and have criticisms. The thing that I wonder about is how much research was done before offering these criticisms. Many of the things being questioned, such as databases or engineering scalability issues or security or viability, and other issues have been deeply analyzed. If the google searches are still unconvincing, then maybe we can discuss which aspects.

I don't want to "invest" in currency and hold onto it in the hopes it'll gain value, I want a nice easy to use cheap secure *tool* for making transactions.

You don't have to "invest" or buy in. Just wait and see if something emerges that you'll find useful or not. Right now, alot of different protocols are being experimented and speculated on. There are alot of scams too but also legitimate development. Possibly in the near future, you may even be using a blockchain backend without realizing it.

And there's the reason for the criticisms. 

Not clear what you're trying to say here. Are you saying that my comment about how some of the criticisms indicate a lack of research is the reason for criticisms? Or do you mean "there's a reason for criticisms?" If you mean the latter, no disagreement on my part. There are plenty of valid criticisms.

Quote
This thread has been going on for 6 months and was started not to discuss or debate the value of the underlying technology, but rather showcase "OMG, look at all the money I'm making!"  Either intentionally or through a Freudian slip, you acknowledge speculation is going on.  That's not a positive thing in discussing investments for most folks.

The people that believe in crypto, are curious what others are paying attention to and why. To me, it's more about about the discussion surrounding crypto and less about "look at how much I'm making." It's always been about speculation for me; I never indicated otherwise or attempted to hide it. If I want to take a small position speculating on something I believe has promise, I don't see that as a bad thing. Someone is always taking the risk somewhere, whether individually or collectively. I don't argue or deny traditional investments and I would not encourage people to actually take from this and invest into crypto.

Quote
That deep analysis you mentioned has been found wanting.

The scalability issue has been a known problem and is something widely researched. The questions about how blockchain would affect and alleviate issues with databases and other tech have been examined. The issues about bitcoin have been acknowledged and researched and various crypto have sprung up filling in the gaps. Also, from the crypthusiast perspective, they discuss crypto in general and not really bitcoin, but bitcoin gets thrown in there alot.

Quote
Billions of dollars are disappearing from this niche market through hacks and ponzi schemes and the oversight of this niche is not yet equipped to handle it.

I agree, this is true. There are various sophisticated scams ongoing, and various issues with oversight and governance. Hence, the speculation and risk.

Quote
Any attempts at forming regulation of these markets by national bodies is met with tin-foil derision. 

I have a neutral stance on this and am observing how it plays out. There are already regulation taking shape. Kyc laws, fintech legislation, ico, etc.

Quote
The same people who complained that 2008 happened because of greed and not enough regulation are now boasting how unregulated crypto is the wave of the future.

Not my position.

Quote
Facebook is no longer allowing crypto advertising because of the rampant speculation and murky waters of this market.  They don't want to be associated with it right now and I can't blame them.

I don't have too much of an opinion on this other than it seems to me they want to protect users against fraud and scams.

Re: criticisms: I highlighted "speculation and scams" because that's where a lot of the criticism stems from.  The chief criticisms of the crypto-market are that it is a speculative bubble not yet (or maybe ever?) backed by enough of a lasting business model that justifies current market cap in addition to current regulatory and security flaws.
Re: speculation: The number of posts denying this on this and many other financial threads across the internet fuels the criticism.  I appreciate that you're up-front about your position; however, the number of people on this forum let alone the rest of the world who have been convinced this is a valid investment on par with traditional equities is troubling. 
Re: crypto is not necessarily bitcoin: agreed. The difference gets lost far too often in discussions though. Bitcoin is more or less the standard-bearer of the market and where it goes, the discussion goes with it.
Re: regulatory concerns. I wasn't saying those opinions were necessarily yours, but they comprise enough of the pro-stance that I felt it needed to be said.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on February 01, 2018, 12:18:03 AM
Things in stock market that are sketchy/corrupt/not cool :
- unregulated exchanges
 -blatant price manipulation by exchanges
 -concentration of majority of any coin with a very small group of people
-concentration of mining groups
- insider trading prohibitions of the stock market do not apply in crypto
- bots manipulating prices
-coordination of buying/selling by whales

Funny how most of this can be changed to talk about most finanical markets... Humans are mostly corrupt and out for themselves. That is natural and normal. We as a society can deny that all we want, but it is just the way it is. I personally would prefer algorithms to take over and evolve over time to remove as much "human" as possible to provide fairness and transparency to our markets and reward system. We are getting closer and this is a pretty amazing start of a revolution.
If you are going to quote a post of mine and change words in it, you should fuvcking make it clear that you changed words in it,simply bolding  those words isn't enough.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on February 01, 2018, 12:20:57 AM
Things in stock market that are sketchy/corrupt/not cool :
- unregulated exchanges
 -blatant price manipulation by exchanges
 -concentration of majority of any coin with a very small group of people
-concentration of mining groups
- insider trading prohibitions of the stock market do not apply in crypto
- bots manipulating prices
-coordination of buying/selling by whales

Funny how most of this can be changed to talk about most finanical markets... Humans are mostly corrupt and out for themselves. That is natural and normal. We as a society can deny that all we want, but it is just the way it is. I personally would prefer algorithms to take over and evolve over time to remove as much "human" as possible to provide fairness and transparency to our markets and reward system. We are getting closer and this is a pretty amazing start of a revolution.

This is wrong.

The stock market has had a century of regulation and progress.  The corruption/manipulation in the stock market is barely detectable compared to crypto.

You'll never remove the human aspect.  Algorithms don't evolve and take over on their own - there are humans behind every line of code.

Consider addressing the issues rather than turn around every argument that pokes holes in your fantasy crypto utopia.
In my post I wrote all of those things about crypto exchanges, and effigy 98 replaced those words with "stock market". This is bullshit.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: powskier on February 01, 2018, 12:24:47 AM
Things in crypto space that are sketchy/corrupt/not cool :
- unregulated exchanges
 -blatant price manipulation by exchanges
 -concentration of majority of any coin with a very small group of people
-concentration of mining groups
- insider trading prohibitions of the stock market do not apply in crypto
- bots manipulating prices
-coordination of buying/selling by whales

Plenty of these items are well covered in articles by Bloomberg, NYT, WAPO, etc , I am not going to provide links someone with more time on their hands can if they wish.  Blockchain can indeed prevent corruption, improve transparency, etc, etc but the entire crypto space is full of people taking advantage of others in ways that are clearly illegal ( although likely done) in other markets. Have fun , make some money if you wish ( I am) but don't drink so much Kool aid that you end up drowning. The post government/banking libertarian utopia that many crypto enthusiasts expect is highly unlikely. Some applications of blockchain technology will likely become valuable and of great use, but to be clear the entire market itself is just about a transfer of wealth from the many to the few. Same as the rest of finances. Make sure to take gains and only gamble what you can afford to lose, or don't play.
Here is my post as it was, before effigy98 quoted it making a significant change without actually making clear the change he had made, this is a very deceptive way to make a point. I am sure Putin or Trump would love to hire you effigy98.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Mr Mark on February 01, 2018, 02:36:49 AM
^^^

Powskier,
If only the forum was logged on some kind of, say, distributed blockchain ledger, then this type of malicious manipulation couldn't happen
;-)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on February 01, 2018, 01:26:23 PM
^^^

Powskier,
If only the forum was logged on some kind of, say, distributed blockchain ledger, then this type of malicious manipulation couldn't happen
;-)

If you're trying to make an actual point instead of just a joke then you failed. Here in the regular old-fashioned database we have powskier's original post, unalterable by anyone except him or the mods. It's also still perfectly possible to take something stored on the blockchain, alter it, and claim that it's from the original poster (though, like here, if anyone bothers to try to verify that they'll see it isn't true).

Powskier: I didn't read effigy's changes as malicious, he just was trying to make an (incorrect) point and didn't quite make the change clear enough.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Chuck on February 02, 2018, 12:06:01 PM
At what point does everyone figure themselves for a bag holder and sell? Institutional money is fleeing crypto right now.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 02, 2018, 12:43:48 PM
At what point does everyone figure themselves for a bag holder and sell? Institutional money is fleeing crypto right now.

Like, six months ago?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on February 03, 2018, 01:34:59 AM
At what point does everyone figure themselves for a bag holder and sell? Institutional money is fleeing crypto right now.

You don't understand, man! It's not about the price, man, it's about the philosophy, man, bro! Like.. decentralised.. secure.. *mumble mumble*.. fucking central banks, man! Just ignore the FUDS, bro, goddamn FUDS all over the place at the mo. Just HODL, bro. Just HOLD it. They said it was a bubble back in 2014, man, look at us now! They're running scared, mate. Yo, did you watch the latest Andreatta Andriopolousnesse's youtube clip man? He's, like, just, speaking the truth, bro.

/s
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Padonak on February 03, 2018, 12:52:04 PM
Crypto "investors" keep saying that unlike fiat money, crypto currencies are not inflationary. I think this is a bunch of bullshit.

Yes, bitcoin and most (not all) crypto currencies are not inflationary because there is a limited supply of each of them as well as limits placed on maximum number of coins that can be mined. However, anybody can fork bitcoin, Etherium and many other coins or issue their own coins and tokens.

If you look at the entire crypto space instead of each coin separately, the number of crypto coins and tokens increases over time while the amount of money people "invest" will not be increasing forever. In fact, as soon as more money is transferred from cryto back to fiat than the money going in the opposite direction, the total amount of fiat chasing crypto will start decreasing. More crypto coins vs less fiat money chasing them means crypto inflation. Maybe it has already started which would explain why crypto prices have dropped recently pretty much across the board.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on February 04, 2018, 05:28:46 PM
It's funny that crypto crashes 50% and all of a sudden the people who didn't like crypto are patting themselves on their backs.  In reality, crypto just lost one months worth of gains and if someone got involved in November 2017 they would still be up a few years of S&P 500 gains.  You're right crypto opponents, this is the end of crypto, it won't recover, and everyone who bought crypto lost everything.  :p

It was fully expected that this would happen sooner or later.  Its not the first time its happened and it won't be the last.  Do what you want but be respectful of others decision to invest a small portion of their investments into a speculative asset.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on February 04, 2018, 09:08:50 PM
It's funny that crypto crashes 50% and all of a sudden the people who didn't like crypto are patting themselves on their backs.  In reality, crypto just lost one months worth of gains and if someone got involved in November 2017 they would still be up a few years of S&P 500 gains.  You're right crypto opponents, this is the end of crypto, it won't recover, and everyone who bought crypto lost everything.  :p

It was fully expected that this would happen sooner or later.  Its not the first time its happened and it won't be the last.  Do what you want but be respectful of others decision to invest a small portion of their investments into a speculative asset.

This is more or less exactly why a lot of people are bearish on crypto. Losing over 50% of value in about six weeks and still being ahead compared to less than three months ago is utter batshit lunacy. It should be regarded as a warning sign carved in hundred-metre-high letters made of continuously burning fuel. I'd be less convinced crypto was in a bubble if a 50% drop was a catastrophe wiping out years of steady gains, because that would be consistent with a sudden but not total drop in demand and a reasonable prospect of settling at the new level. What's happening with Bitcoin is the opposite: it's a blindingly obvious sign that there's nothing concrete backing up prices at all.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Ben Hogan on February 05, 2018, 10:34:11 AM
Heading in the right direction to where it normally should be. This bubble is finally re setting.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on February 05, 2018, 03:04:49 PM
Here is a price comparison, of Bitcoin and all altcoins mentioned in the OP, from the date this thread was started to today. 

BTC - $2,616.03… $7,287
ETH - $325.74… $727.07
XMR - $47.59… $191.49
OMG – >$0.50… $9.85
IOTA - $0.50… $1.50
LTC - $44.95… $131.64
FCT - $30.60… $22.46
LSK - $3.27… $16.05
Ardor - $0.26… $0.38
ARK - $0.69… $3.31
NEO - $6.16… $88.12
QTUM - $16.05… $21.65

Basically, despite this bloodbath, unless you were all in on FCT, you would still be very much in the green!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 05, 2018, 03:07:47 PM
Basically, despite this bloodbath, unless you were all in on FCT, you would still be very much in the green!

Awesome! 

So which ones of those coins do you recommend buying today?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: pegleglolita on February 05, 2018, 03:31:44 PM
Ugh, son convinced me to buy Bitcoin (not real money, just a few hundred bucks of silly play-money) in December.  This is why you don't take financial advice from kids, no matter how much time they spend on Reddit crypto forums LOL.  I'm gonna hodl, since I considered it lost/gambling money when I spent it.  Maybe I'll forget about it and be a Bitilllionaire in 50 years.  Or maybe Cryp-Top was in... ;)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on February 05, 2018, 04:04:32 PM
Basically, despite this bloodbath, unless you were all in on FCT, you would still be very much in the green!

Awesome! 

So which ones of those coins do you recommend buying today?

I don't make recommendations to people with respect to stocks or crypto.  The only financial recommendation I will make is to invest in the S&P 500 index as your paychecks come in and don't look at it. When I'm asked about crypyo, I will offer my opinion that the crypto markets are not a fit for everyone because 70% drops are not unusual.  I disclose that I personally only put in a very small amount of my money into crypto and suggest that they only invest what you can afford to lose.  I recommend against using crypto as a primary source of investment.  I give responsible advise and advise that I don't know what the future holds as I'm no expert but I personally believe crypto is a good investment for those that can stand deep cuts periodically and not sell at the sight of red.

With that said, I'm not familiar with the tech, teams, development and use-case for many of those cryptos.  On a speculative level, I think they will all probably outperform the stock market by a significant amount within the next three years.  The ones that I am familiar with [ETH, BTC, LSK, IOTA], I expect they will stand a much greater chance of doing this.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 05, 2018, 04:44:44 PM
The ongoing US regulatory investigation into bitfinex and its use of tether to buy bitcoin (and other coins) without USD backing has basically ended any faith I may have once aspired to have in the crypto market. 

It's looking more and more like the entire cyrptocurrency space is just another fiat currency system, effectively privatized by rogue bankers claiming to destroy the global banking system.  They've created more money out of thin air in the past year than Bear Stearns ever did.  They've manipulated prices, lied to regulators, concealed their bookkeeping, and failed every audit.

I'm kind of sad about it, really.  I think digital currencies are a neat idea and I was hoping they found a good use case.  Unfortunately, like so many cases where there are billions to be made, it looks like criminals took over and rigged the system.  Tether is apparently a fraud, which means every single crypto coin traded for tether isn't priced based on the market, but on deception.

Bitcoin was supposed to have a fixed number of unique tokens, but it is being bought and sold with an unlimited supply of tether, which are theoretically tied to the US dollar but there is zero evidence that is actually true.  There is no gold reserve behind the tether standard.  There is no fiat currency behind the tether standard.  It's looking more and more like there is nothing at all behind tether, except a mostly Chinese hacker group operating through a British Virgin Islands exchange.  There are so many red flags here I'm not quite sure where to start.

There are lots of smart people here.  Some of you know crypto a lot better than I do.  Can someone please explain to me why there are billions of dollars worth of tether flooding into crypto investments without any money behind them?  Is it really just simple market manipulation, like it appears on its face?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 05, 2018, 04:52:16 PM
With that said, I'm not familiar with the tech, teams, development and use-case for many of those cryptos.  On a speculative level, I think they will all probably outperform the stock market by a significant amount within the next three years.  The ones that I am familiar with [ETH, BTC, LSK, IOTA], I expect they will stand a much greater chance of doing this.

I've been trying to mostly just shut up and listen in this thread, but I can't help myself here....You don't want any currency to outperform the stock market, right?  Because if that happens, that means your currency isn't stable--which makes it 100% useless as currency.   If anything, you probably want it do decrease slightly over time. 

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say that before any crypto gains any traction at all in the regular economy, it will have to function and behavior sort of like money.  The crypto proponents don't seem to care about that, or even see it as desirable. 


Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: aspiringnomad on February 05, 2018, 05:20:39 PM
I'm kind of sad about it, really.  I think digital currencies are a neat idea and I was hoping they found a good use case.  Unfortunately, like so many cases where there are billions to be made, it looks like criminals took over and rigged the system.

For now and into the foreseeable future, the best use case for crypto (speculation does not count as a use case, per my own definition) is for fraudulent activity that is difficult for authorities to follow or control. There are other use cases to be sure, but I'd wager that after speculative activity, more bitcoin has been exchanged for the purposes of money laundering, purchases of illegal goods, and tax sheltering than for all other reasons combined. So criminals may have gotten more directly involved when the market share of crypto moved into the tens and hundreds of billions of USD, but they've been massive players in this space since shortly after the Bitcoin protocol was released into the wild.

To be fair, cash has always been pretty good for those types of transactions too, but cash still has to be moved physically, and car tires, mattresses, bodies, and mail have long since been risky media to move it in. The blockchain, not so much, at least perhaps until very recently.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on February 06, 2018, 08:53:52 AM
I'm kind of sad about it, really.  I think digital currencies are a neat idea and I was hoping they found a good use case.  Unfortunately, like so many cases where there are billions to be made, it looks like criminals took over and rigged the system.

For now and into the foreseeable future, the best use case for crypto (speculation does not count as a use case, per my own definition) is for fraudulent activity that is difficult for authorities to follow or control. There are other use cases to be sure, but I'd wager that after speculative activity, more bitcoin has been exchanged for the purposes of money laundering, purchases of illegal goods, and tax sheltering than for all other reasons combined. So criminals may have gotten more directly involved when the market share of crypto moved into the tens and hundreds of billions of USD, but they've been massive players in this space since shortly after the Bitcoin protocol was released into the wild.

To be fair, cash has always been pretty good for those types of transactions too, but cash still has to be moved physically, and car tires, mattresses, bodies, and mail have long since been risky media to move it in. The blockchain, not so much, at least perhaps until very recently.

This is not accurate.  The blockchain technology is the single greatest use of crypto.  It's transparent and immutable barring a hard-fork, but if a hard-fork occurs its up to the community to determine which chain to follow.  The blockchain has many uses other than just being the best form of currency governance (no one can print more Bitcoins to pay off their debt, no one can freeze your account, merchants can get paid within seconds or even instantly as opposed to waiting days with VISA/Mastercard, cheaper transaction fees, you control and are responsible for your own assets).  Project's utilize their blockchains to verify the authenticity of files [DeepOnion], verify supermarket products are genuine [Wabi], allow immutable record keeping [Factom], and the ever improving smart contract development of various coins that allow cheap and seamless transactions.  New uses of the blockchain technology arises everyday and even the staunchest adversaries of crypto appreciate the blockchain capabilities. 

Bitcoin is the last medium I would use for any illicit purposes.  Bitcoin is not private as its built upon a public ledger and there are government entities out there that successfully link Bitcoin accounts to owners.  This is why cash, not Bitcoin, is king of the black market.  There are however privacy coins, again not Bitcoin, that utilize unique technologies to allow untraceable payments.  These coins make up a much smaller portion of the broader marketcap.

Regarding to comment on whether I want crypto to continue outperforming the stock market... Of course I do.  Blockchain technology is still in its infancy and it adds value to the underlying cryptocurrencies.  As the blockchain technology further develops, I'll use Bitcoin as an example, i.e. resolves its scalability issues with the Lightning Network, it would be completely feasible to use Bitcoin for daily purchases and not worry about transaction speeds and costs.  More people may be drawn to crypto and we may see mass adoption of cryptocurrency as a currency.  Lightning transactions are already being conducted on Bitcoin's mainet so the future is bright.  No one denies that much of Bitcoin's price is driven by speculation.  This creates bubbles which is why I and just about everyone else fully expected this bubble pop (which is why we aren't freaking out) but just didn't know when it would be.  This speculation driven investment is not unique to crypto, it happens in stocks all the time.  With P/e ratios so high, most prominently in tech (hmmmm), its only rational to acknowledge tech stocks are largely driven by speculation.  As long as the speculation is rational and one doesn't go all-in on it then I don't see a problem with it.

Regarding Tether, people in crypto don't like Tether for precisely that reason.  I believe the people holding it are ill-informed.  One of the things about crypto is that you are responsible for your own actions and keys.  Tether reeks and a lot of people may get burned.  The warning bells have been going off since it came out.  It doesn't say anything about the blockchain or cryptocurrencies as a whole other than stress the necessity of doing your own due diligence.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 06, 2018, 11:06:55 AM
It doesn't say anything about the blockchain or cryptocurrencies as a whole other than stress the necessity of doing your own due diligence.

You don't think outright fraud on the biggest exchange says anything about cryptocurrencies?

How do you feel about unregulated and totally opaque fractional reserve banking?  Because that's how tether (a privately owned corporation) is underwriting the entire global crypto market.  They're using the exact same form of fiat currency control that crypto was designed to avoid!  Only no one is even checking them!  It's lunacy, as far as I can tell.

I suspect the wholele thing will come crashing down eventually.  As soon as people lose faith in it, there will be a run on tether and it will suddenly be painfully obvious that there are no dollars behind it.  And George Bailey won't be able to claim that your money is invested in your neighbor's house, because it's not like there are any tangible assets behind crypto lending.  The current price appears to be smoke and mirrors, held up by nothing except the hodl meme.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 06, 2018, 01:44:55 PM
Regarding to comment on whether I want crypto to continue outperforming the stock market... Of course I do.  Blockchain technology is still in its infancy and it adds value to the underlying cryptocurrencies.  As the blockchain technology further develops, I'll use Bitcoin as an example, i.e. resolves its scalability issues with the Lightning Network, it would be completely feasible to use Bitcoin for daily purchases and not worry about transaction speeds and costs.

As a currency gets more and more valuable, by definition that means the currency is deflating right?   Deflation is not a good thing.  At some point, people forgot that the second part of "cryptocurrency" is "currency."  Unstable currencies are useless as money.  Let's look at a common type of transaction: paying wages.  In a deflationary environment--which you say you hope occurs--wages get more and more expensive as the currency gets more and more valuable.  What businesses do then is cut payroll.  That means people spend less, which causes more deflation.  And there are all sorts of other problems with deflation too.   As the currency deflates, things get cheaper.  So it makes sense to defer purchases as long as possible.  That means demand drops, and you can see where that leads.  Not Good.   This is not hypothetical.  An example of what happens in times of deflation was the Great Depression.  And you are saying every economist's nightmare scenario is your preferred outcome?  I don't think you realize how insane that sounds. 

Then you go onto say there is nothing wrong with a bit of speculation.  Fair enough.  That's fine...for stocks.  But not for currency.  All businesses operate on credit in some form.  Even say, a plumber does the work, and gets paid after the job is done.   If the currency value can over night....how soon does he need to get paid?  And how long is his bid good for?  And virtually all businesses use at least some debt.  GM, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, all have debt on the books.  How can you take out a loan, if you can't estimate the future costs of the loan?  If your currency is bouncing around in value, you can't accurately calculate future costs or schedule future payments, and scheduling future payments is how the world financial system operates.   And if you think about it, how it always has operated.  The thing you don't see a problem with actually makes crypto 100% useless as currency. 

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on February 06, 2018, 02:17:06 PM
It doesn't say anything about the blockchain or cryptocurrencies as a whole other than stress the necessity of doing your own due diligence.

You don't think outright fraud on the biggest exchange says anything about cryptocurrencies?

How do you feel about unregulated and totally opaque fractional reserve banking?  Because that's how tether (a privately owned corporation) is underwriting the entire global crypto market.  They're using the exact same form of fiat currency control that crypto was designed to avoid!  Only no one is even checking them!  It's lunacy, as far as I can tell.

I suspect the wholele thing will come crashing down eventually.  As soon as people lose faith in it, there will be a run on tether and it will suddenly be painfully obvious that there are no dollars behind it.  And George Bailey won't be able to claim that your money is invested in your neighbor's house, because it's not like there are any tangible assets behind crypto lending.  The current price appears to be smoke and mirrors, held up by nothing except the hodl meme.

You misunderstood me.  I dislike Tether very much and most of the crytpo community shares my sentiment towards it.  I also suspect Tether will go down in a blaze of agony.  If it is a scam then its wouldn't be the first and it won't be the last time the majority of the crypto community sighs and mumbles, "I told you so."  The fact that Tether "may", ok probably, is a fraud doesn't speak to the cryptocurrencies as a whole.  People are free to keep Tether if they want and all we can do is tell them its probably a fraud.  Literally 95% of the crypto community has been calling Tether out since it came out so I don't understand how the centralized tether represents the broader crypto markets as a whole.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on February 06, 2018, 02:44:01 PM
Regarding to comment on whether I want crypto to continue outperforming the stock market... Of course I do.  Blockchain technology is still in its infancy and it adds value to the underlying cryptocurrencies.  As the blockchain technology further develops, I'll use Bitcoin as an example, i.e. resolves its scalability issues with the Lightning Network, it would be completely feasible to use Bitcoin for daily purchases and not worry about transaction speeds and costs.

As a currency gets more and more valuable, by definition that means the currency is deflating right?   Deflation is not a good thing.  At some point, people forgot that the second part of "cryptocurrency" is "currency."  Unstable currencies are useless as money.  Let's look at a common type of transaction: paying wages.  In a deflationary environment--which you say you hope occurs--wages get more and more expensive as the currency gets more and more valuable.  What businesses do then is cut payroll.  That means people spend less, which causes more deflation.  And there are all sorts of other problems with deflation too.   As the currency deflates, things get cheaper.  So it makes sense to defer purchases as long as possible.  That means demand drops, and you can see where that leads.  Not Good.   This is not hypothetical.  An example of what happens in times of deflation was the Great Depression.  And you are saying every economist's nightmare scenario is your preferred outcome?  I don't think you realize how insane that sounds. 

Then you go onto say there is nothing wrong with a bit of speculation.  Fair enough.  That's fine...for stocks.  But not for currency.  All businesses operate on credit in some form.  Even say, a plumber does the work, and gets paid after the job is done.   If the currency value can over night....how soon does he need to get paid?  And how long is his bid good for?  And virtually all businesses use at least some debt.  GM, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, all have debt on the books.  How can you take out a loan, if you can't estimate the future costs of the loan?  If your currency is bouncing around in value, you can't accurately calculate future costs or schedule future payments, and scheduling future payments is how the world financial system operates.   And if you think about it, how it always has operated.  The thing you don't see a problem with actually makes crypto 100% useless as currency.

Inflation/deflation is a concern for all economies.  Everyone knows Bitcoin is not ready for mainstream adoption because its still speculative and hence subject to extreme volatility.  Most economist predicted that the advent of futures trading would bring a crushing reality to cryptocurrencies which would be followed by dramatically less volatility.  The volatility has been great for gains but it presents a barrier to business integration of cryptocurrencies.  We've seen companies such as Steam outright discontinue accepting cryptocurrency as a form of payment due to the volatility.  Many crypto hodlers, predicted the futures would bring big money into crypto and drive prices higher; they were wrong and the economist were right.  If they continue to be right, volatility will be much less which would be attractive for many businesses; they have said so themselves.  The more businesses that accept it, the more mainstream crypto use becomes which leads to even less volatility.  Then you can start thinking about taking your wages in crypto.  Crypto is still in its infancy but the seeds are sprouting and the roots have dug in.  This is the reason why the crypto community recognizes that futures trading is good for the ultimate goal of mass adoption even if at the core the community is distrusting of Wall Street. 

People take out loans in cryptocurrencies all the time.  It's done P2P and collateral is used.  Many people make a living off it.  As it becomes more widely used, there will be no reason for the traditional loans to be made with crypto.  There aren't any barriers that won't be resolved by reduced volatility. 

In fact, I can foresee lending being enhanced by the blockchain because contracts could be signed within the immutable blockchain.  Transfers of funds could be quick and easy and the signed block within the blockchain is pretty good evidence of a loan.  Heck, the actual contract itself can be hashed and that hash value imprinted directly onto DeepOnion's blockchain right now.  There are lots of cool things that the blockchain is already being used for and even more projects are sprouting up to improve on it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on February 06, 2018, 03:16:16 PM
Very interesting hearings today at the Senate Banking Committee.

Quote
I was an early investor in cell phones back in the '80s, and I believe #blockchain has the potential to be just as transformational as cell phones. As our government begins to look at #crypto, I don't think you can separate #cryptocurrencies from the technology they're based on.

https://twitter.com/MarkWarner/status/960986368523587584
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: aspiringnomad on February 06, 2018, 04:18:42 PM
I'm kind of sad about it, really.  I think digital currencies are a neat idea and I was hoping they found a good use case.  Unfortunately, like so many cases where there are billions to be made, it looks like criminals took over and rigged the system.

For now and into the foreseeable future, the best use case for crypto (speculation does not count as a use case, per my own definition) is for fraudulent activity that is difficult for authorities to follow or control. There are other use cases to be sure, but I'd wager that after speculative activity, more bitcoin has been exchanged for the purposes of money laundering, purchases of illegal goods, and tax sheltering than for all other reasons combined. So criminals may have gotten more directly involved when the market share of crypto moved into the tens and hundreds of billions of USD, but they've been massive players in this space since shortly after the Bitcoin protocol was released into the wild.

To be fair, cash has always been pretty good for those types of transactions too, but cash still has to be moved physically, and car tires, mattresses, bodies, and mail have long since been risky media to move it in. The blockchain, not so much, at least perhaps until very recently.

This is not accurate.  The blockchain technology is the single greatest use of crypto.  It's transparent and immutable barring a hard-fork, but if a hard-fork occurs its up to the community to determine which chain to follow.  The blockchain has many uses other than just being the best form of currency governance (no one can print more Bitcoins to pay off their debt, no one can freeze your account, merchants can get paid within seconds or even instantly as opposed to waiting days with VISA/Mastercard, cheaper transaction fees, you control and are responsible for your own assets).  Project's utilize their blockchains to verify the authenticity of files [DeepOnion], verify supermarket products are genuine [Wabi], allow immutable record keeping [Factom], and the ever improving smart contract development of various coins that allow cheap and seamless transactions.  New uses of the blockchain technology arises everyday and even the staunchest adversaries of crypto appreciate the blockchain capabilities. 

Bitcoin is the last medium I would use for any illicit purposes.  Bitcoin is not private as its built upon a public ledger and there are government entities out there that successfully link Bitcoin accounts to owners.  This is why cash, not Bitcoin, is king of the black market.  There are however privacy coins, again not Bitcoin, that utilize unique technologies to allow untraceable payments.  These coins make up a much smaller portion of the broader marketcap.

Regarding to comment on whether I want crypto to continue outperforming the stock market... Of course I do.  Blockchain technology is still in its infancy and it adds value to the underlying cryptocurrencies.  As the blockchain technology further develops, I'll use Bitcoin as an example, i.e. resolves its scalability issues with the Lightning Network, it would be completely feasible to use Bitcoin for daily purchases and not worry about transaction speeds and costs.  More people may be drawn to crypto and we may see mass adoption of cryptocurrency as a currency.  Lightning transactions are already being conducted on Bitcoin's mainet so the future is bright.  No one denies that much of Bitcoin's price is driven by speculation.  This creates bubbles which is why I and just about everyone else fully expected this bubble pop (which is why we aren't freaking out) but just didn't know when it would be.  This speculation driven investment is not unique to crypto, it happens in stocks all the time.  With P/e ratios so high, most prominently in tech (hmmmm), its only rational to acknowledge tech stocks are largely driven by speculation.  As long as the speculation is rational and one doesn't go all-in on it then I don't see a problem with it.

Regarding Tether, people in crypto don't like Tether for precisely that reason.  I believe the people holding it are ill-informed.  One of the things about crypto is that you are responsible for your own actions and keys.  Tether reeks and a lot of people may get burned.  The warning bells have been going off since it came out.  It doesn't say anything about the blockchain or cryptocurrencies as a whole other than stress the necessity of doing your own due diligence.

Yes there are now blockchain specialists that can trace accounts to people with enough ancillary information to aid their sleuthing, but for several years authorities were not keeping up and thus bitcoin was a means of conducting a shit ton of illegal activity. It's still the strongest use case today and has expanded into alt coins despite the crack downs in certain countries.

A lot of what you wrote was also purely your opinion, which is fair because I was largely starting my own. I only point that out because you really didn't present any facts I didn't already know. A lot of crypto enthusiasts seem to think they know more than everyone else, and ipso facto, blockchain is the best thing ever invented. I've been following bitcoin, other crypto, and blockchain use cases to some degree for over five years now. I own and have used crypto mainly so I could get sense of its usefulness relative to other mediums of exchange and for a bit of fun speculation. I'm still bearish on all existing crypto and think that blockchain tech, while certainly a cool innovation in accounting, has been overhyped by crypto enthusiasts who want to conflate that with the speculative value of their crypto holdings. I guess we'll see over time whether it really does become the most life-changing innovation since harnessing electricity.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on February 06, 2018, 06:09:54 PM
In fact, I can foresee lending being enhanced by the blockchain because contracts could be signed within the immutable blockchain.  Transfers of funds could be quick and easy and the signed block within the blockchain is pretty good evidence of a loan.  Heck, the actual contract itself can be hashed and that hash value imprinted directly onto DeepOnion's blockchain right now.  There are lots of cool things that the blockchain is already being used for and even more projects are sprouting up to improve on it.


Well it's pretty damn easy to get a loan today, given the massive indebtedness of the American public.  The last time I got a car loan was 2006 and I remember the process being quick and painless.  Applied on Bank of America's website, a day later a dude called me from their office, the next day the money was in my account.  More recently I emailed the credit union for a personal loan to buy a small piece of land.  They wrote back the same day and said let us know when you need it and we'll put it in your account.  A week later I wrote back and said hey I've got a closing date.  The money showed up that day or the next.

The whole problem with the blockchain "revolution" is that we're already 20 years into internet banking.  You can already do almost everything instantly or within a few business days.  It's very rare that an ordinary person needs to borrow or move around a massive amount of money RIGHT NOW. 

Blockchain could disrupt ordinary credit cards and store credit cards, as I speculated here months ago, if stores create their own currencies and charge 3% more to use a traditional credit card.  But this doesn't present any sort of advantage for the consumer, other than hopefully reducing prices in part by reducing a company's IT expenses.   




Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 06, 2018, 06:32:51 PM
Unless you are one of the 30 million people in america who are underbanked.

How does crypto help the unbanked?  They just fire up their laptops and log in to coinbase?

The problem with the unbanked is not their data security or transfer verifiability, it's their lack of access to technology.  I don't see how blockchain helps them. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 06, 2018, 07:51:08 PM
Well it's pretty damn easy to get a loan today.

Unless you are one of the 30 million people in america who are underbanked. The world market is much worse.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2014/10/30/99967/millions-of-americans-are-outside-the-financial-system/

I'll bite.  I don't have a bank account and I want use Bitcoin to get a loan and buy a car.    Walk me through the process. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on February 06, 2018, 08:23:25 PM
I'm kind of sad about it, really.  I think digital currencies are a neat idea and I was hoping they found a good use case.  Unfortunately, like so many cases where there are billions to be made, it looks like criminals took over and rigged the system.

For now and into the foreseeable future, the best use case for crypto (speculation does not count as a use case, per my own definition) is for fraudulent activity that is difficult for authorities to follow or control. There are other use cases to be sure, but I'd wager that after speculative activity, more bitcoin has been exchanged for the purposes of money laundering, purchases of illegal goods, and tax sheltering than for all other reasons combined. So criminals may have gotten more directly involved when the market share of crypto moved into the tens and hundreds of billions of USD, but they've been massive players in this space since shortly after the Bitcoin protocol was released into the wild.

To be fair, cash has always been pretty good for those types of transactions too, but cash still has to be moved physically, and car tires, mattresses, bodies, and mail have long since been risky media to move it in. The blockchain, not so much, at least perhaps until very recently.

This is not accurate.  The blockchain technology is the single greatest use of crypto.  It's transparent and immutable barring a hard-fork, but if a hard-fork occurs its up to the community to determine which chain to follow.  The blockchain has many uses other than just being the best form of currency governance (no one can print more Bitcoins to pay off their debt, no one can freeze your account, merchants can get paid within seconds or even instantly as opposed to waiting days with VISA/Mastercard, cheaper transaction fees, you control and are responsible for your own assets).  Project's utilize their blockchains to verify the authenticity of files [DeepOnion], verify supermarket products are genuine [Wabi], allow immutable record keeping [Factom], and the ever improving smart contract development of various coins that allow cheap and seamless transactions.  New uses of the blockchain technology arises everyday and even the staunchest adversaries of crypto appreciate the blockchain capabilities. 

Bitcoin is the last medium I would use for any illicit purposes.  Bitcoin is not private as its built upon a public ledger and there are government entities out there that successfully link Bitcoin accounts to owners.  This is why cash, not Bitcoin, is king of the black market.  There are however privacy coins, again not Bitcoin, that utilize unique technologies to allow untraceable payments.  These coins make up a much smaller portion of the broader marketcap.

Regarding to comment on whether I want crypto to continue outperforming the stock market... Of course I do.  Blockchain technology is still in its infancy and it adds value to the underlying cryptocurrencies.  As the blockchain technology further develops, I'll use Bitcoin as an example, i.e. resolves its scalability issues with the Lightning Network, it would be completely feasible to use Bitcoin for daily purchases and not worry about transaction speeds and costs.  More people may be drawn to crypto and we may see mass adoption of cryptocurrency as a currency.  Lightning transactions are already being conducted on Bitcoin's mainet so the future is bright.  No one denies that much of Bitcoin's price is driven by speculation.  This creates bubbles which is why I and just about everyone else fully expected this bubble pop (which is why we aren't freaking out) but just didn't know when it would be.  This speculation driven investment is not unique to crypto, it happens in stocks all the time.  With P/e ratios so high, most prominently in tech (hmmmm), its only rational to acknowledge tech stocks are largely driven by speculation.  As long as the speculation is rational and one doesn't go all-in on it then I don't see a problem with it.

Regarding Tether, people in crypto don't like Tether for precisely that reason.  I believe the people holding it are ill-informed.  One of the things about crypto is that you are responsible for your own actions and keys.  Tether reeks and a lot of people may get burned.  The warning bells have been going off since it came out.  It doesn't say anything about the blockchain or cryptocurrencies as a whole other than stress the necessity of doing your own due diligence.

Yes there are now blockchain specialists that can trace accounts to people with enough ancillary information to aid their sleuthing, but for several years authorities were not keeping up and thus bitcoin was a means of conducting a shit ton of illegal activity. It's still the strongest use case today and has expanded into alt coins despite the crack downs in certain countries.

A lot of what you wrote was also purely your opinion, which is fair because I was largely starting my own. I only point that out because you really didn't present any facts I didn't already know. A lot of crypto enthusiasts seem to think they know more than everyone else, and ipso facto, blockchain is the best thing ever invented. I've been following bitcoin, other crypto, and blockchain use cases to some degree for over five years now. I own and have used crypto mainly so I could get sense of its usefulness relative to other mediums of exchange and for a bit of fun speculation. I'm still bearish on all existing crypto and think that blockchain tech, while certainly a cool innovation in accounting, has been overhyped by crypto enthusiasts who want to conflate that with the speculative value of their crypto holdings. I guess we'll see over time whether it really does become the most life-changing innovation since harnessing electricity.

Your statement that the best use case for crypto is for fraudulent activity is argumentum ad nauseam.  I already explained why its untrue.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on February 06, 2018, 08:27:05 PM
Unless you are one of the 30 million people in america who are underbanked.

How does crypto help the unbanked?  They just fire up their laptops and log in to coinbase?

The problem with the unbanked is not their data security or transfer verifiability, it's their lack of access to technology.  I don't see how blockchain helps them.

Check out OmiseGO.  Omise is an established company in South East Asia that offers lending services.  Their whole crypto project is supposed to have something to do with banking the unbanked.  I haven't researched it but I'm sure your answer is in their white paper.  This is me speculating here, but perhaps the unbanked have access to smart phones? 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Padonak on February 06, 2018, 08:51:59 PM
Unless you are one of the 30 million people in america who are underbanked.

How does crypto help the unbanked?  They just fire up their laptops and log in to coinbase?

The problem with the unbanked is not their data security or transfer verifiability, it's their lack of access to technology.  I don't see how blockchain helps them.

Check out OmiseGO.  Omise is an established company in South East Asia that offers lending services.  Their whole crypto project is supposed to have something to do with banking the unbanked.  I haven't researched it but I'm sure your answer is in their white paper.  This is me speculating here, but perhaps the unbanked have access to smart phones?

Their goal is not to bank the unbanked, it's to unbank the banked (check their website if you don't believe me). Which means that when their "investors" lose money they paid for overpriced "tokens", the won't need banks anymore. Boom! Mission accomplished.

But don't believe my FUD. OmiseGo signed Thai McDonalds as a merchant, also Thai Ministry of Finance supports them, so PayPal watch out! Their CEO also speaks Japanese as a first language and crypto bullshit jargon as a second language.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on February 07, 2018, 11:48:15 AM
Unless you are one of the 30 million people in america who are underbanked.

How does crypto help the unbanked?  They just fire up their laptops and log in to coinbase?

The problem with the unbanked is not their data security or transfer verifiability, it's their lack of access to technology.  I don't see how blockchain helps them.

I'm assuming the unbanked have cell phones. Pay as you go, not a good deal?, mission impossible burner phones sure. But nonetheless they are already paying for the device.  If you install a mobile wallet, you pay a small fee to get your BTC transferred to your wallet and then it can sit their for no cost other that what it costs you to maintain the device.

whats your bank equivalent?  I keep a monster balance and have direct deposit to get my checking account for free. The savings account has a transaction limit too. If you are irregularly making a few k a month you will never avoid bank fees.

Yes, I am assuming that BTC/crypto of choice is actually a store of value. Its also assuming something like the Lightening network for BTC comes to be in the real world and is everything its promised to be.  So, the technology when its fully baked could be very helpful to the unbanked.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on February 07, 2018, 12:57:33 PM
Unless you are one of the 30 million people in america who are underbanked.

How does crypto help the unbanked?  They just fire up their laptops and log in to coinbase?

The problem with the unbanked is not their data security or transfer verifiability, it's their lack of access to technology.  I don't see how blockchain helps them.

I'm assuming the unbanked have cell phones. Pay as you go, not a good deal?, mission impossible burner phones sure. But nonetheless they are already paying for the device.  If you install a mobile wallet, you pay a small fee to get your BTC transferred to your wallet and then it can sit their for no cost other that what it costs you to maintain the device.

whats your bank equivalent?  I keep a monster balance and have direct deposit to get my checking account for free. The savings account has a transaction limit too. If you are irregularly making a few k a month you will never avoid bank fees.

Yes, I am assuming that BTC/crypto of choice is actually a store of value. Its also assuming something like the Lightening network for BTC comes to be in the real world and is everything its promised to be.  So, the technology when its fully baked could be very helpful to the unbanked.

Let me get this right:

Option A is suboptimal (existing bank structures).
Option B is suboptimal, has herpes, and is on fire (the existing crypto system).

You have more faith in Option B's future?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 07, 2018, 01:15:49 PM
Well it's pretty damn easy to get a loan today.

Unless you are one of the 30 million people in america who are underbanked. The world market is much worse.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2014/10/30/99967/millions-of-americans-are-outside-the-financial-system/

Those people can't get a loan because they have no assets, collateral, or steady income sufficient to justify giving them one. Having a bank account does suck for them, but it has nothing to do with their creditworthiness. Why would I give one of those folks a loan in Bitcoins (or whatever) when I won't give them a loan in dollars?

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on February 07, 2018, 02:05:19 PM
Well it's pretty damn easy to get a loan today.

Unless you are one of the 30 million people in america who are underbanked. The world market is much worse.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2014/10/30/99967/millions-of-americans-are-outside-the-financial-system/

Those people can't get a loan because they have no assets, collateral, or steady income sufficient to justify giving them one. Having a bank account does suck for them, but it has nothing to do with their creditworthiness. Why would I give one of those folks a loan in Bitcoins (or whatever) when I won't give them a loan in dollars?

-W

Because . . . smart contract, mumble mumble, FIAT CURRENCY BAD . . . libertarian mumble whitepaper mumble unbanked, mumble don't understand the technology man!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 07, 2018, 04:20:16 PM
This is pretty insane. There are a lot of people (mostly millenials) investing in small transactions for stocks using RobinHood. Now they will do the same with crypto. This also puts massive pressure on existing exchanges to do better and lower fees. As millenials grow in their careers (which I see all over the tech space) they make huge leaps in earning power that will be pooring in for the next 10 years. All of this is great for both crypto and stocks.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/over-1-mln-people-sign-up-for-early-access-to-robinhoods-zero-fees-trading-service

Look at the recent robinhood user growth!
https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/26/robincorn/

Robinhood has literally the stupidest business model I've ever heard:

Robinhood has gone straight for this problem, and made it zero-fee, even though it will essentially be a ‘loss leader’ meaning they will not be making money off of this feature. Robinhood are more interested in growing their crypto community base, and by growing their base, they will also be taking users away from those who are profiting from the fees.


"What we lose on every transaction we make up for in volume..."

Re:  The Winklevie Twins.  The first Winklevie Twin clearly has no concept about what money is or how it works.  Gold doesn't work very well as currency, in part because the supply is fixed, or at least it is hard to grow it at the same rate as the economy, which leads to all sorts of problems.  I mean, if gold worked well, how come nobody uses for currency?  Hint:  It doesn't work well. 

The second Winklevie Twin spouted a bunch smug blather that sounded like English, but had no meaning. 


Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on February 07, 2018, 04:42:08 PM
@trollwithamustache @sol,

Do you know any unbanked people? My local credit union definitely has fee free options for people with irregular income. Everyone I know that is unbanked is unbanked because they have some sort of unpaid debt that would get collected from their accounts. Cryptocurrency can solve this problem, but not in any great way (stable value, etc).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 07, 2018, 04:53:43 PM
@trollwithamustache @sol,

Do you know any unbanked people? My local credit union definitely has fee free options for people with irregular income. Everyone I know that is unbanked is unbanked because they have some sort of unpaid debt that would get collected from their accounts. Cryptocurrency can solve this problem, but not in any great way (stable value, etc).

It could solve that problem, if there was reasonable acceptance of cryptocurrency as payment.  But no grocery stores, gas stations, landlords, utility companies, etc. accept crypto for payment.  They do however, accept cash.  And as you point out, cash is unlikely to lose half its value in two months like we saw with Bitcoin.



Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 07, 2018, 05:12:40 PM
@trollwithamustache @sol,

Do you know any unbanked people?

Yes, many.

Most of them work in cash, to avoid paper trails.  Illegal immigrants and drug dealers, for example, typically avoid bank accounts.

I've also met more than my fair share of people living in poverty around the world, which is by far the larger share of the unbanked population.  They don't have electricity or indoor plumbing, but lots them have gardens that produce food they can sell (and eat) or tools that they use to perform labor.  They also mostly deal in cash, or sometimes with local credit arrangements within neighborhoods or communities.  Like I'll share my nut harvest if you share your goat milk, or I'll help you replace your roof if you help me repair my fence.

Some of them have cell phones, which in the developing world can now be used for electronic banking.  That was true long before crypto came along.

I just don't see how blockchain helps any of these people.  Their problems are not solved by distributed encryption.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 07, 2018, 05:34:18 PM
I just don't see how blockchain helps any of these people.  Their problems are not solved by distributed encryption.

Yes!!  Block chain is a distributed ledger that everyone can read.  So, what types of problems might block chain solve? I can see internal transactions between divisions of a company, chain-of-title for real estate, provenance for works of art, supply chain,  aircraft maintenance, stuff like that.  It isn't hard to think up of lots of areas where block chain might be helpful. 

So why does the under banked population need a distributed ledger that everyone can read?   They don't!!  These are not hard concepts. 

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 01:02:15 AM
MMM is an awesome resource! I had moderately mustachian financial habits already - I never carry revolving credit debt, aggressively pay down mortgage/long term debt, buy reliable cars and keep them for long periods, exercise environmental stewardship through reuse and purchasing used items, insource as many tasks as possible, etc.  I've been powering through these blog / forum posts and it's really given me a push to make further strides as there is so much more to learn and do.  Really grateful for all the info on here and this community!

I was excited to see a crypto discussion thread here on MMM forum, it's disappointing it's devolved so much.  I have been researching cryptocurrencies and will do my best to provide some useful information.   Disclaimer: I hold BTC and a selection of alts, in an amount that I'm comfortable losing.

My personal interpretation of Mustachianism is to work hard and live frugally such that we will be financially sound across as many possible future scenarios as possible.

By design this eliminates a host of get-rich-quick schemes as they will only yield financial security in a small handful of possible futures.  This includes cryptocurrencies.  If you aren't already maxing out 401ks and paying down high interest debt, save this for later.

So you're building your 'stash, paid down your high interest debt, and living frugally. So why bother with crypto?

Cryptocurrencies' main role in a modern portfolio is diversification

In some potential futures crypto growth outstrips that of conventional investments and having a small piece adds to overall profitability of one's portfolio.

A reasoned analysis of blockchain tech impact in the modern world by harvard business review, turning the "disruptive technology" idea on its head:
https://hbr.org/2017/01/the-truth-about-blockchain

tl;dr: Blockchain's utility is not to overthrow traditional institutions, it is to create new foundations for better versions of traditional institutions. This is a gradual process that will take years/decades.

The vast majority of future timelines contain a continued and successful traditional financial market, along with streamlined digital transactions that save users money and make currently difficult tasks much easier such as payments, digital identity verification, and proof of ownership.  This is an entire new sector and having it represented in one's portfolio may offer advantages, though at increased risk.

It can be unpleasant to contemplate highly unlikely yet highly impactful future outcomes such as hyperinflation.   All our eggs are in one giant basket - the traditional financial markets.  Crypto may provide a hedge against the traditional markets in the event the worst should happen. Precious metals have a place in this space as well, even though they can be difficult to transact with.  Being able to do business with anyone using only your cell phone is vastly more practical than carrying around chunks of metal.

Do your research before choosing a cryptocurrency. Things to look out for:
-what is the circulating supply? Total supply? Was the coin "pre-mined" (created out of thin air, usually founders take a huge cut)
-verify mechanistic and political levels of decentralization.  How distributed is the mining / staking that supports it? does a private entity control the ledger?  Is there any evidence that the ledger is not immutable?

Some practical measures:

-only use exchanges for the short term purpose of obtaining the desired currency.  Immediately transfer tokens to a local software or hardware wallet on your computer.
-backup your wallet, preferably offline.  there are many online tutorials for how to do this.

There is a wealth of information out there for security best practices when it comes to managing your own crypto assets.  Do your homework.  And don't use money you cannot afford to lose.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 12, 2018, 06:09:22 AM

So you're building your 'stash, paid down your high interest debt, and living frugally. So why invest in crypto?

Cryptocurrencies' main role in a modern portfolio is diversification

Facepunch.

If you assume that crypto currencies are actually currencies (which is a stretch, but let's assume that for now), then crypto should replace or supplement the portion of your portfolio that is currently held in non-dollar currencies.  That portion of your portfolio should equal exactly zero to begin with.  Unless you are currency speculator, but that's speculating, not investing. 

Your whole analysis breaks down breaks because you are assuming there is such a thing as adoption of Bitcoin.  There isn't.  Almost no one uses it for anything.   The only people who need Bitcoin are child pornographers and drug dealers.  For everybody else, the USD works perfectly.  And even if you are a child pornographer or drug dealer, you still don't need Bitcoin.  You could use Litecoin, or Dogecoin, or Etherium, or Fidleius, or any of a zillion cryptos out there. 

No one, repeat no one, invests in Bitcoin.  People speculate in Bitcoin.  If you want to speculate, more power to ya.  But you are a damn fool if you think speculation is the same as diversification. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 12, 2018, 06:47:26 AM
It can be unpleasant to contemplate highly unlikely yet highly impactful future outcomes such as hyperinflation. 

I swore I wasn't going to nitpick your post, but I just have to comment on this. 

Let's go ahead and contemplate the unpleasant topic of hyperinflation.  BTC has lost 50% of its value in two months.  That is hyperinflation. 

So you are touting a hyperinflating currency as a hedge against hyperinflation?

Really?  That's a selling point?  A primary feature of Bitcoin is that instead of highly unlikely hyperinflation of the USD in the future you can enjoy actual hyperinflation of BTC right now. Sign me up!

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 12, 2018, 07:48:04 AM
Don't be discouraged, Surf.  You're unlikely to get a warm welcome here if you show up sounding like a paid Bitcoin promoter, but if you are a real person who understands the MMM message then you'll find the form generally welcoming and supportive.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on February 12, 2018, 08:12:59 AM
@trollwithamustache @sol,

Do you know any unbanked people? My local credit union definitely has fee free options for people with irregular income. Everyone I know that is unbanked is unbanked because they have some sort of unpaid debt that would get collected from their accounts. Cryptocurrency can solve this problem, but not in any great way (stable value, etc).

I have no argument with the statement that my bank sucks.  what is the minimum balance for a free account at your credit union?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 09:01:56 AM
Don't be discouraged, Surf.  You're unlikely to get a warm welcome here if you show up sounding like a paid Bitcoin promoter, but if you are a real person who understands the MMM message then you'll find the form generally welcoming and supportive.

Thanks Sol, I appreciate that!

The MMM blog and forums have resonated deeply with me.  I'm learning so much every day from it that and I wanted to contribute.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 09:09:32 AM

So you're building your 'stash, paid down your high interest debt, and living frugally. So why invest in crypto?

Cryptocurrencies' main role in a modern portfolio is diversification

Facepunch.

If you assume that crypto currencies are actually currencies (which is a stretch, but let's assume that for now), then crypto should replace or supplement the portion of your portfolio that is currently held in non-dollar currencies.  That portion of your portfolio should equal exactly zero to begin with.  Unless you are currency speculator, but that's speculating, not investing. 

Your whole analysis breaks down breaks because you are assuming there is such a thing as adoption of Bitcoin.  There isn't.  Almost no one uses it for anything.   The only people who need Bitcoin are child pornographers and drug dealers.  For everybody else, the USD works perfectly.  And even if you are a child pornographer or drug dealer, you still don't need Bitcoin.  You could use Litecoin, or Dogecoin, or Etherium, or Fidleius, or any of a zillion cryptos out there. 

No one, repeat no one, invests in Bitcoin.  People speculate in Bitcoin.  If you want to speculate, more power to ya.  But you are a damn fool if you think speculation is the same as diversification.

Hey Telecaster! 

I won't debate whether the USD works perfectly or whether people are actually using BTC.  The idea is simply that in some potential future timelines there are scenarios where bitcoin adoption becomes widespread, and since its value is tied to usage rate, in those scenarios the value will likely be quite high.  Owning some will provide financial advantages in those timelines. 

I see from the child pornographer comment that you have strong emotional responses to crypto.  This post isn't for you, then, as you don't seem to want to understand it, and that's okay.

Thanks for the warm welcome. :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 09:13:27 AM


I was excited to see a crypto discussion thread here on MMM forum, it's disappointing it's devolved so much. I have been researching cryptocurrencies and will do my best to provide some useful information.  Disclaimer: I hold BTC and a selection of alts, in an amount that I'm comfortable losing.



Wow.  First post is a bit of lip-service to MMM principles followed by a long articulate defense of cryptos on what I'm sure many of us were hoping would become a dead thread.  Bravo... Slow clap...

Your devolution is another's evolution.  I'm frankly glad that the resident crypto shills had mostly given up... or at least given it a rest for the time being.  The MMM investing forum was turning into a crypto battleground, that I think was distracting forum members from the true goal of investing which is to become financially secure and/or independent.

Since you have been "powering through the blog," then I'm sure you are by now aware that MMM himself has called bullshit on bitcoin ( http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2018/01/02/why-bitcoin-is-stupid/ ). So you should not be surprised to find folks around here to be against cryptos.  If you want to talk cryptos, you can save yourself the trouble and just move along.  Or stay here but talk about literally anything else related to investing.  Expect to get horribly flamed if you continue to try to advance the pro-crypto agenda.  The anti-crypto members have a few things going for them: (1) foremost they are right, cryptos are basically B.S. and therefore it will be impossible to prove otherwise,  (2) many are much more intelligent and educated than you and have done more research than you and will systematically dissect any B.S. pro-crypto argument, and (3) many have likely been investing longer than you have been alive and have the experience needed to repel this sort of baloney.

Thank you for disclosing that you own cryptos and have a pecuniary interest*.  I think that is the most important part of your first post.  It's helpful for everyone to know that you are here talkin' your book and will profit if bitcoin goes back up.  There is basically no way for you to be objective.  We know that you will be completely unconvinced by any argument which would would suggest, imply, or prove that they shouldn't go up in price.   

*Disclaimer: I do not own an interest, long or short, in any bitcoins or other shit-coins.  I try to talk people out of them because they are used to finance criminal activity, terrorism, and rogue states.  And I think that they divert capital from legitimate financial markets where it would have been used to finance true economic growth.

Hey LAS,

There's a mod post on the first or second page of this thread asking users to refrain from flaming so that an objective discussion can take place.  I didn't know the consensus was that logical discussion should die.

I did read MMM's blog post about bitcoin.  He seems very good at creating content that will generate heaps of views, which is great because the majority of what is on here is extremely valuable info that should be mandatory reading in high school economics classes.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 09:19:00 AM
My personal interpretation of Mustachianism is to work hard and live frugally such that we will be financially sound across as many possible future scenarios as possible.

You've missed the sustainability and environmental aspects of MMM.  These are fundamental values of MMM.  Cryptos are so incredibly wasteful when it comes to the energy.

Supporting crypto is like driving a gigantic gas guzzling $100k SUV to work 100 miles each way and say it's ok because you can easily afford it.  Also, you leave it running all day while you work.

Hey bender,

Environmental sustainability is the most important issue facing everyone alive today.

Sustainable energy is often the cheapest energy, and thus mining companies are gravitating towards it faster than traditional companies.

It's difficult to use the eco argument as a pro-finance, anti-crypto stand as owning a US stock index means you directly profit off of the countless oil/gas/coal fossil fuel companies that are destroying our planet and lobbying our government for the rights to do so at greater rates.

Personally I do not run any mining rigs, and I am extremely conscious of my own carbon footprint.  If everyone in america behaved in a mustachian way we could be well on our way to reversing co2 emmisions imo.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 09:37:14 AM

Facepunch.



I just punched myself in the face on accident putting my wetsuit on.  Chipped my incisor a bit. :(   Message received lol.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 09:47:48 AM
LAS,

It's also worth a bit of perspective that everyone here, and in every finance forum, is "talkin their own book" as you call it, in that they all benefit if new investors join the stock market investing pool.  We do not write off their expertise because of financial self-interest.

There are many possible future scenarios.  I'd like to be set in all of them. 

Several scenarios, with wildly different probabilities:

1) Status quo maintained, cryptos eventually wither to nothingness.  (likely)

2) Status quo maintained, cryptos eventually boom.  (likely)

3) Stock markets falter (very unlikely)

4) USD falters (exceedingly unlikely)

 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: TheAnonOne on February 12, 2018, 10:27:58 AM
I own maybe 20k worth of LITECOIN.

That being said I own 400k worth of VTSAX.


I don't get why people feel so strongly either way, Litecoin is actually being taken as tax payment in Arizona and can be used for transactions at some stores.

LITEPAY already soft-launched with a bigger release in the next few weeks. Given a 1-3% discount I may choose LTC over my rewards card.

I don't expect it to go "To the moon" but it's hardly devoid of value or uses.


EDIT: I don't want this to sound like an advert. It isn't I really don't care at this point what it does price wise. When I re-read this, it came off that way. Apologize for that. Also: LTC is basically just a less pricy BTC, the prices are linked in a soft sort-of-way and it is one of the main "non-scammy" alt-coins
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 12, 2018, 10:40:19 AM
I own maybe 20k worth of LITECOIN.

I don't expect it to go "To the moon" but it's hardly devoid of value or uses.

I'm curious - why do you have $20k worth of it, if you don't expect it to appreciate in value? I have maybe $500 in actual cash at any given time, plus maybe $10k in a checking account, just because I'm too lazy to keep careful track of the balance and want to make sure I don't bounce any checks. And that's arguably way too much cash, really. I should have more of it invested in something.

So why $20k worth of crypto? Do you expect to pay $20k in AZ taxes in April or something? Do you have massive amounts of litecoin going in/out at any given time and need that balance to make sure you don't get caught short? Something else?

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on February 12, 2018, 10:56:40 AM
My personal interpretation of Mustachianism is to work hard and live frugally such that we will be financially sound across as many possible future scenarios as possible.

You've missed the sustainability and environmental aspects of MMM.  These are fundamental values of MMM.  Cryptos are so incredibly wasteful when it comes to the energy.

Supporting crypto is like driving a gigantic gas guzzling $100k SUV to work 100 miles each way and say it's ok because you can easily afford it.  Also, you leave it running all day while you work.

Hey bender,

Environmental sustainability is the most important issue facing everyone alive today.

Sustainable energy is often the cheapest energy, and thus mining companies are gravitating towards it faster than traditional companies.

It's difficult to use the eco argument as a pro-finance, anti-crypto stand as owning a US stock index means you directly profit off of the countless oil/gas/coal fossil fuel companies that are destroying our planet and lobbying our government for the rights to do so at greater rates.

Personally I do not run any mining rigs, and I am extremely conscious of my own carbon footprint.  If everyone in america behaved in a mustachian way we could be well on our way to reversing co2 emmisions imo.

So we're clear on this point: the consumption of oil/gas/coal that drive the economies of most of the world and have tangible daily benefits is comparable to a speculative barely-used currency with little immediate economic benefit that has been consuming so much energy it would rank in the upper third of nations if it were a nation itself?  Crypto mining has had sketchy profitability lately, and even if Bitcoin went mainstream as a currency like you suggest where does the mining/energy consumption end?  The models suggest mining could take decades with energy consumption increasing exponentially. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on February 12, 2018, 12:34:23 PM
Quote
In a new post today, Microsoft announced their embrace of public blockchains, such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, for use in decentralized identity systems. Initially, the longtime tech giant will support blockchain-based decentralized IDs (DIDs) through the Microsoft Authenticator app.

More: Microsoft To Embrace Decentralized Identity Systems Built On Bitcoin And Other Blockchains (https://www.forbes.com/sites/ktorpey/2018/02/12/microsoft-to-embrace-decentralized-identity-systems-built-on-bitcoin-and-other-blockchains/#10d0f6845ada)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Finallyunderstand on February 12, 2018, 12:54:47 PM
I own maybe 20k worth of LITECOIN.

I don't expect it to go "To the moon" but it's hardly devoid of value or uses.

I'm curious - why do you have $20k worth of it, if you don't expect it to appreciate in value? I have maybe $500 in actual cash at any given time, plus maybe $10k in a checking account, just because I'm too lazy to keep careful track of the balance and want to make sure I don't bounce any checks. And that's arguably way too much cash, really. I should have more of it invested in something.

So why $20k worth of crypto? Do you expect to pay $20k in AZ taxes in April or something? Do you have massive amounts of litecoin going in/out at any given time and need that balance to make sure you don't get caught short? Something else?

-W

I would venture to guess he didn't start with $20k worth of litecoin but that it grew to that amount.  I did the same thing last summer.  Bought 100 litecoin around $60-70 per coin and then sold out around $210.  It was a venture into something new and pure speculation on my part.  I don't know what to believe will happen in the future.  I made money on crypto and got out.  I didn't get out at the top because litecoin went up to $360 or so and then back to $140 and then up to $305 and then back to $104 and now at $160.  I sold during that rollercoaster somewhere.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on February 12, 2018, 02:29:20 PM
LAS,

It's also worth a bit of perspective that everyone here, and in every finance forum, is "talkin their own book" as you call it, in that they all benefit if new investors join the stock market investing pool.  We do not write off their expertise because of financial self-interest.

There are many possible future scenarios.  I'd like to be set in all of them. 

Several scenarios, with wildly different probabilities:

1) Status quo maintained, cryptos eventually wither to nothingness.  (likely)

2) Status quo maintained, cryptos eventually boom.  (likely)

3) Stock markets falter (very unlikely)

4) USD falters (exceedingly unlikely)

If you allocated 1% of your portfolio to every scheme or technology that could theoretically boom in value you’ll very quickly have a portfolio that is 100% rubbish. Even if your number 2 outcome came about (and I also thoroughly disagree with your ridiculous assessment there of ‘likely’) the chance of ‘cryptos eventually boom’ meaning that the Bitcoin you’re holding today specifically represents that future value is exceedingly unlikely.

Also love your unsubtle accusation that MMM’s bitcoin post was clickbait. Your eyes obviously glazed over when reading the actual content of the article.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 03:18:30 PM

If you allocated 1% of your portfolio to every scheme or technology that could theoretically boom in value you’ll very quickly have a portfolio that is 100% rubbish. Even if your number 2 outcome came about (and I also thoroughly disagree with your ridiculous assessment there of ‘likely’) the chance of ‘cryptos eventually boom’ meaning that the Bitcoin you’re holding today specifically represents that future value is exceedingly unlikely.

Also love your unsubtle accusation that MMM’s bitcoin post was clickbait. Your eyes obviously glazed over when reading the actual content of the article.

Agree completely that if you allocate even 0.5%-1% of your portfolio to every random scheme that could theoretically boom it would quickly become diluted.  It's imperative to make every financial decision based on logic and sound reasoning rather than emotions.

Most of MMM's posts have catchy, emotionally charged titles that attract viewership.  A big part of his success is his showmanship and ability to portray financial responsibility and consumer restraint as something awesome, which it is.

I thoughtfully read his bitcoin post.  He said he did extensive research, and I believe him. 

His response was emotionally charged and included straw man arguments.  He was either unable to see past his own filters, something that happens to all of us at different times, or chose to express a wholehearted condemnation in an effort to protect those of the community that might do something foolish such as sink their net worth into such a high volatility instrument.  Either way it was not an analytical assessment so much as an emotional one.

So far all the responses include assumptions about who I am and what I believe. I'm about as logical a person as you might ever come across and will be happy to consider analysis to the contrary and incorporate it when it has higher value.

Your point about the likelihood of bitcoin representing the primary value added in the end is an important one.  There are countless alts out there and history has shown that the earliest entrant into a space is not always, or even often, the eventual winner.

Firstly, the road between where we are and the ultimate end point is a continuous one.  New data come to light and revisions can be made along the way.  If other technologies show advantages over btc an educated investor can migrate ownership to the more promising projects and sell his/her btc.

Secondly, btc is closer in entity to the linux project(open source community backed) than it is to facebook(closed source privately held corporation).  We're not waiting for the next great linux project to come along because it already provides the highest value in the space it occupies. 
Additionally the properties of network value(see metcalfe's law) indicate that the largest and most widely supported networks provide the highest value.  So long as that continues to be the case w/ btc then it is the leader and likely winner, as being the highest value network attracts more adoption and developer support.  This may change at some point and again, an educated investor will move to the most promising project at such a time.

As with all things, it's about risk management and estimations of outcomes based on a logical, statistical appraisal.

So you are correct, there are a host of other options and some of them may contain superior technology that eventually may overtake btc in utility, or may provide inspiration for btc improvements.  If one chooses to get into crypto it is important to keep tabs on the nearest competitors.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: TheAnonOne on February 12, 2018, 03:29:41 PM
I own maybe 20k worth of LITECOIN.

I don't expect it to go "To the moon" but it's hardly devoid of value or uses.

I'm curious - why do you have $20k worth of it, if you don't expect it to appreciate in value? I have maybe $500 in actual cash at any given time, plus maybe $10k in a checking account, just because I'm too lazy to keep careful track of the balance and want to make sure I don't bounce any checks. And that's arguably way too much cash, really. I should have more of it invested in something.

So why $20k worth of crypto? Do you expect to pay $20k in AZ taxes in April or something? Do you have massive amounts of litecoin going in/out at any given time and need that balance to make sure you don't get caught short? Something else?

-W

I would venture to guess he didn't start with $20k worth of litecoin but that it grew to that amount.  I did the same thing last summer.  Bought 100 litecoin around $60-70 per coin and then sold out around $210.  It was a venture into something new and pure speculation on my part.  I don't know what to believe will happen in the future.  I made money on crypto and got out.  I didn't get out at the top because litecoin went up to $360 or so and then back to $140 and then up to $305 and then back to $104 and now at $160.  I sold during that rollercoaster somewhere.


Pretty much this, I have no real intention of selling it yet. The big "Crash" seems to mostly be over and it could conceivably skyrocket in another speculation explosion. So I guess I am speculating after all.

Oh well.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 03:51:29 PM
So we're clear on this point: the consumption of oil/gas/coal that drive the economies of most of the world and have tangible daily benefits is comparable to a speculative barely-used currency with little immediate economic benefit that has been consuming so much energy it would rank in the upper third of nations if it were a nation itself?  Crypto mining has had sketchy profitability lately, and even if Bitcoin went mainstream as a currency like you suggest where does the mining/energy consumption end?  The models suggest mining could take decades with energy consumption increasing exponentially.

To clear up a couple points:
-energy consumption did increase during 2017, mostly due to new mining companies.  It is not required, however, for it to continue to increase.  Second layer protocols would allow for using the current energy consumption to stay flat and number of transactions to increase exponentially.
-more transactions do not require more electricity. the hash difficulty is adjusted automatically regularly based on the mining available which is independent of the number of transactions
-as crypto mining profitability drops off, so does the number of crypto miners.  This will reduce energy consumption.
-most new crypto mining facilities are being centered around sustainable energy sources, moving off of fossil fuels at a very rapid pace.
-one core of MMM philosophy is that the current state of fossil fuel addiction in our society is both wasteful and unsustainable, and I agree.  Every single person who drives an AWD SUV around alone with no cargo is getting plenty of value from his waste, that value is just completely useless in our well-paved society. . 
-many of the companies in the index funds we all enjoy are making staggering amounts of money turning fossil fuels into plastics that pollute our planet at an ever increasing rate.  If environmental stewardship is important to you there's far more low hanging fruit for improvements to our world in existing wasteful industries than there is in crypto, which is deriving larger and larger shares of the electricity from sustainable sources and produces no physical waste products for consumption.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 03:55:42 PM
I really wanted to offer useful information to the community after reading the first page and seeing countless people expressing interest.  I was not wearing my flamesuit and this has been a rather unpleasant experience.

If anyone is interested I'd be happy to go into more detail about btc and alts, how to scout an alt and know what to avoid, etc.

If anyone would like to have a logical discussion about it or has new / useful information I would be excited to hear that as well.

My wife is encouraging me to step away from the computer as she says I have a "helping addiction." I'm currently sweating through my shirt going through these vitriolic replies.  I'm glad I tried to provide value even if this didn't go well.

Thanks again for all the value this forum provides in all the other threads, I'm excited to be here and hoping to not get flamed out of my chair in other threads, though I tend to mostly lurk in forums.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 12, 2018, 04:18:34 PM
Next time, you might want to read a bit further, given that the first page of posts is ~8 months old. All the logical discussions you want to have have already happened. If you want to speculate on "currency", have at it. Lots of people like to pick stocks, play the options game, play nickel slots, etc. They're all bad ideas in general, but you can get lucky, too.

Now, if you have some Microsoft stock, blockchain might actually be making you richer soon...

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 05:00:32 PM
Next time, you might want to read a bit further, given that the first page of posts is ~8 months old. All the logical discussions you want to have have already happened. If you want to speculate on "currency", have at it. Lots of people like to pick stocks, play the options game, play nickel slots, etc. They're all bad ideas in general, but you can get lucky, too.

Now, if you have some Microsoft stock, blockchain might actually be making you richer soon...

-W

The first attempts to discuss the merits of different cryptos devolved quickly into back and forth ad hominem attacks and useless debates on semantics. There was very little utility for anyone interested in actually learning how to get involved in the space.

My aim was to bring quality information as there's a learning curve and I felt I could offer value back to a site that had given me much value.  The first couple pages had many one line responses to the effect of "interested" or "following" and that high quality discussion never materialized.
Ripple, for example, has a huge market cap relative to other alts yet has pretty dismal fundamentals and is worth avoiding.

My retirement account includes funds that contain microsoft stock, as with most of you, so that's good news for all of us.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on February 12, 2018, 05:33:09 PM
Next time, you might want to read a bit further, given that the first page of posts is ~8 months old. All the logical discussions you want to have have already happened. If you want to speculate on "currency", have at it. Lots of people like to pick stocks, play the options game, play nickel slots, etc. They're all bad ideas in general, but you can get lucky, too.

Now, if you have some Microsoft stock, blockchain might actually be making you richer soon...

-W

The first attempts to discuss the merits of different cryptos devolved quickly into back and forth ad hominem attacks and useless debates on semantics. There was very little utility for anyone interested in actually learning how to get involved in the space.

My aim was to bring quality information as there's a learning curve and I felt I could offer value back to a site that had given me much value.  The first couple pages had many one line responses to the effect of "interested" or "following" and that high quality discussion never materialized.
Ripple, for example, has a huge market cap relative to other alts yet has pretty dismal fundamentals and is worth avoiding.

My retirement account includes funds that contain microsoft stock, as with most of you, so that's good news for all of us.

You don’t seem to understand or want to acknowledge that the actual ‘quality information’ available on the topic inevitably leads to the conclusion that your money is better placed elsewhere. Discussion of how to get involved has rightly been trumped in this thread by the discussion about why you should even bother.

This thread needs to stay dead. I especially despair at it being revived by people whose only posts on the entire forum have been solely about crypto. Start somewhere else man, I’m sure you’ve got plenty other contributions to make.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on February 12, 2018, 05:56:53 PM

-many of the companies in the index funds we all enjoy are making staggering amounts of money turning fossil fuels into plastics that pollute our planet at an ever increasing rate.  If environmental stewardship is important to you there's far more low hanging fruit for improvements to our world in existing wasteful industries than there is in crypto, which is deriving larger and larger shares of the electricity from sustainable sources and produces no physical waste products for consumption.

I can multitask.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 12, 2018, 09:31:34 PM
News broke today that JP Morgan's global research division published a report that cryptocurrency "could potentially have a role in diversifying one's global bond and equity portfolio."

They are quite cautious about it, rightly so.  The volatility now is intense as the market is so young, and their vision is towards a near future when the market is more mature and more widely acceptable for everyday investment.
 
IMO anyone with a short timeline is either gambling, or daytrading, or both. 

https://www.americanbanker.com/news/jpmorgan-cryptocurrencies-could-potentially-have-a-role-in-investor-portfolios

Also from JP Morgan global research division, bullet point #10 highlights cryptocurrencies in their "10 facts for corporate decision making for 2018":

https://www.jpmorgan.com/country/US/EN/cib/investment-banking/corporate-finance-advisory/striking-facts-2018?source=cib_di_jp_2dis917

And that's it, I'm out.  If anyone wants to talk feel free to msg me, I'm done being flamed for trying to help, and then being trolled for a sincere post about how I was trying to add value to the forums.  Class acts all around.

We all have step 4 lurking over us:
https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/10/religion-for-the-nonreligious.html
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 12, 2018, 09:51:15 PM
I think owning index funds already gives you exposure to whatever utility/value blockchain tech eventually provides (or not). I don't have any interest in owning tokens that may or may not be worth anything in the future (that includes dollars) - I want to own companies, or real estate, or commodities that have actual uses. The minimum number of dollars/yen/Chuck-E-Cheese money to allow me to buy and sell stuff without hassle is plenty.

Assuming you're sincere in your belief that you want to help people out, spend a few months participating in the rest of the forum. Crypto is a sideshow of a sideshow here. Then read through any remaining crypto threads and see if you actually have something new to say. If you do, we'll all be interested to hear it.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 10:26:50 AM
And that's it, I'm out.

Great - let's all get out of crypto and out of this thread.  Mods please lock it down... 🔒

Man you sure are proud of yourself for your ability to stomp out logical discussions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 13, 2018, 12:55:43 PM
Man you sure are proud of yourself for your ability to stomp out logical discussions.

Dude, you jumped into a HUGe thread that's 8 months old and regurgitated stuff that has already been said (and broadly rejected). What did you expect to happen?

Also, if you're gonna flounce, flounce, man!

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 01:09:59 PM
Man you sure are proud of yourself for your ability to stomp out logical discussions.

Dude, you jumped into a HUGe thread that's 8 months old and regurgitated stuff that has already been said (and broadly rejected). What did you expect to happen?

Also, if you're gonna flounce, flounce, man!

-W

I get it, you and LAS and tele and sol are all fully anti-crypto and unwilling to absorb any new information at this point. That's fine, I didn't post for you, I posted for the dozens of other members who expressed interest in obtaining high quality information.

I presented many concepts found nowhere else in this thread - Metcalfe's law, harvard business review evaluation of blockchain/bitcoin impact on society and inversion of traditional blockchain disruption theory, core concept of diversification as a small percent of portfolio into crypto and the reasons why some may find it useful(which within the week found support from JPMorgan global review!), and began to offer my personal observations over several years of market trends having studied them in real time.  I have no TA background and purely approach from fundamentals / long term standpoint so I stuck to what I had studied.

The anti-crypto contingent stomped me into the ground, one guy literally said he was punching me in the face, replied with straw man attacks about child pornographers, without parsing ANY of the high quality information I provided. So YEAH, i'm a little frustrated that i spent hours trying to help and got this in return.

It is your right to put your money where you please.  Other members of the community may decide to look into crypto and I was trying to give high quality info to reduce the number of people who got burned making completely avoidable errors and help any who were interested in making more educated choices.  I got nowhere near that point because I got shouted down instantly.

As I said before, class acts all around.

edit: the last post prior to mine was 5 days ago. it was still on the front page. I didn't necro an 8 month gone thread.
edit2: this forum is under "Learning, Sharing, and Teaching" and I naturally gravitated to this section when I first decided I wanted to contribute.  Crypto is in my wheelhouse and anything I had to say about conventional investing would be worse than useless so I don't say anything there.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 13, 2018, 01:25:05 PM
"Facepunching" is a MMM forum term of art to refer to brutal honesty. Many threads are titled things like "Hair on fire debt emergency, facepunches solicited!"  Nobody was threatening you with any physical harm.

Again, if you'd bothered to read up a bit first and get familiar with this forum, you still probably wouldn't have found much agreement, but at least the general reaction wouldn't have surprised/upset you.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on February 13, 2018, 01:28:38 PM
The anti-crypto contingent stomped me into the ground, one guy literally said he was punching me in the face, replied with straw man attacks about child pornographers, without parsing ANY of the high quality information I provided. So YEAH, i'm a little frustrated that i spent hours trying to help and got this in return.

You should know that a "facepunch" is MMM parlance for calling someone out for unmustachian behavior. Usually being unnecessarily spendy or purchasing flashy luxury goods, but can be applicable to other things too. And since MMM himself has come out as anti-crypto, it's probably not a stretch to call a pro-crypto position "unmustachian".

So that's not nearly as aggressive of a phrase as you seem to have taken it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 01:37:04 PM
Thank you for the clarification I am fully aware of the MMM facepunching reference, I spent a week tearing through MMM blog posts and forum posts before feeling like the value I had obtained warranted me making an effort to give back. 

The poster said Facepunch not "I'm going to punch you in the face" so i got the distinction.  It is still a brutally unpleasant and unsolicited rejection of a reasoned and analytical gesture of goodwill that took me several hours to put together with the intention of adding value to this community.  It was not offered with good will, or with "hey let me help you out," but a closeminded rejection of my ability to contribute value because he disagreed with the fundamental premise that crypto is actually a thing.

Again there's this continuous undercurrent taht I'm some sort of outsider with assumptions about ulterior motives and whether or not I have hte right to contribute here that is xenophobic and disturbing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on February 13, 2018, 02:16:05 PM
All right, I've got an honest question for you surf (but if you choose not to reply and bow out of the thread I understand).

You've stated that you believe Bitcoin should be people's primary crypto investment because:
A) it is the coin-of-reference in the crypto world. Eg. people buy Bitcoin with USD, and then trade Bitcoin for other alts.
B) even if Bitcoin is not the long-term cryptocurrency the transition would be gradual, and that people should re-evaluate as more information comes to light.

It seems to me that A is entirely for historical reasons and is becoming less relevant all the time, and that B is not necessarily true at all.

Bitcoin is the coin-of-reference because it was first and was always the "biggest" (in mindshare at least) even after others entered the market. So the banked exchanges allowed you to purchase Bitcoin, and the unbanked exchanges gave you the opportunity to trade all the others. However that's becoming less true as time goes on. Coinbase for example now allows you to directly purchase Bitcoin, Etherium, and Litecoin. I can't imagine that that list will ever shrink; it doesn't take much effort to continue allowing already-written code to run. And more options will be added.

It seems to me that Bitcoin has no use other than as a coin-of-reference at the moment. Very few actual purchases are transacted through Bitcoin, and the merchant support for alts will grow. There are already other coins that are faster and cheaper by design than Bitcoin could ever be. Merchants will never price things directly in Bitcoin because of its volatility.

It seems to me that Bitcoin is already useless and has no future, and the only thing preventing its plummet is the mob mentality agreeing that it's valuable. And one day that will probably change, and everyone will abandon Bitcoin and jump to the New Thing (and then probably eventually the one after that, and the one after that, etc). Maybe it will be Litecoin, or Bitcoin Cash, or Dogecoin (probably not, but I'm rooting for that little guy), or Ripple, or something as-yet undeveloped. But it should eventually happen.

And when it does, there's no reason to think that it would be (B) slow or gradual and allow people the opportunity to rebalance their "investments". Crypto crashes happen incredibly quickly. Selling everything in the middle of a panic crash is usually something everyone tells you is incredibly foolish. Except it's not in this case. A crash in Bitcoin while another stronger coin surges probably would be the trigger that changes the mob mentality. If that happens, and people collectively decide that Litecoin (or whatever) is the new Bitcoin, then not selling in the middle of the crash (assuming you can find anyone to buy at any price) would be the wrong choice and would leave you owning a lot of nothing, forever.

So I guess my question is, why am I wrong?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 13, 2018, 02:36:45 PM
Again there's this continuous undercurrent taht I'm some sort of outsider with assumptions about ulterior motives and whether or not I have hte right to contribute here that is xenophobic and disturbing.

Haha! Xenophobic?!? Really? People disagreeing with you is actually allowed here, you know. You're not required to have a huge post count to be taken seriously, but when you post something that almost nobody agrees with, as your first post, and then you *whine* about things like xenophobia (after repeatedly claiming you aren't going to participate in the discussion anymore, then coming right back to whine more) and misinterpret a commonly used term from the forum... how do you think you end up looking?

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 13, 2018, 03:02:52 PM
It's always hard for new people to learn the culture of an established community like this one. Unfortunately, surf jumped into this one head first without first reading enough to take the temperature of the room.

So I applaud the enthusiasm, but the planning was lacking and the execution fell flat.  Helpful posters with thoughtful content are always welcome, but you have to know your audience.  You'd get much the same reaction if you started out with a 5k word essay on which corvette is best for your mid life crisis, or the best city to buy a mcmansion, or the benefits of loan sharking.  Cryptocurrencies are just antithetical to the MMM philosophy. 

That should have been obvious from the blog, and it should have been obvious from reading forum posts.  In this case, it looks like surf was so keen to contribute that he/she didn't get far enough to figure that out.

Unfortunately, this forum is big enough and influential enough to have acquired a long history of paid shills who show up and promote a product or website under the guise of earnest friendly advice.  Like surf, they often post lengthy and well researched posts right out of the gate.  Like surf, they always deny they are paid advertisers.  Like surf, they are often treated unkindly by the forum members.

Surf, you write well and are welcome to join the community.  Would you still be interested if you were never allowed to talk about crypto again, or is that your only interest?  Because paid shills are usually single topic posters, which is what you appear to be now.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 13, 2018, 04:44:38 PM
Stop the madness. 🔒

Oh, I don't know.  I think we benefit by swatting the flies.  Ridiculous posts need to be heard, and ridiculed.

Now I'm off to start a new thread about vitamix blenders.  Blenders have changed my life!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 13, 2018, 06:51:09 PM

I get it, you and LAS and tele and sol are all fully anti-crypto and unwilling to absorb any new information at this point.

For a guy who complains about ad ad hominems, you sure like to dish them out.  Go back and find an exactly where I attacked you, and not your argument.  Hint:  I only attacked your arguments.

Quote from: surf
The anti-crypto contingent stomped me into the ground, one guy literally said he was punching me in the face, replied with straw man attacks about child pornographers, without parsing ANY of the high quality information I provided. So YEAH, i'm a little frustrated that i spent hours trying to help and got this in return.

A "straw man" argument is misrepresenting someone's position in order to make it easier to attack.  The child pornographers bit wasn't a straw man, because it wasn't your argument.  It was my argument.  I was using hyperbole to make a point, namely there is very little legitimate use of Bitcoin.  Since your whole premise is based on the notion there will one day be wide adoption of Bitcoin, or at least some form of crypto, that's a critical point. 

Here's an example of a straw man:

Quote from: Surf
I won't debate whether the USD works perfectly or whether people are actually using BTC.

I never said the USD works perfectly.  You misrepresented what I said so you could avoid my point.  I just said that if you have concerns about hyperinflation, it makes no sense to invest in something that is currently experiencing hyperinflation.    That's just common sense, right?  But if that point is wrong, it would have a perfect time for you to explain how you arrived at that conclusion.  Showing your work, in other words.  Instead you just ran away. 

I appreciate it when some points out my fly is open.  If someone points out I'm doing something wrong, they are doing me a favor because then I can learn the right way to do it. 

Quote from: surf
It is your right to put your money where you please.  Other members of the community may decide to look into crypto and I was trying to give high quality info to reduce the number of people who got burned making completely avoidable errors and help any who were interested in making more educated choices.  I got nowhere near that point because I got shouted down instantly.

You got disagreed with instantly.   But instead of responding to those disagreements, you lashed out at the people disagreeing with you.   

That said, I'm here for the same reasons as you.  Help people avoid making mistakes. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 09:08:09 PM
All right, I've got an honest question for you surf (but if you choose not to reply and bow out of the thread I understand).

You've stated that you believe Bitcoin should be people's primary crypto investment because:
A) it is the coin-of-reference in the crypto world. Eg. people buy Bitcoin with USD, and then trade Bitcoin for other alts.
B) even if Bitcoin is not the long-term cryptocurrency the transition would be gradual, and that people should re-evaluate as more information comes to light.

It seems to me that A is entirely for historical reasons and is becoming less relevant all the time, and that B is not necessarily true at all.

Bitcoin is the coin-of-reference because it was first and was always the "biggest" (in mindshare at least) even after others entered the market. So the banked exchanges allowed you to purchase Bitcoin, and the unbanked exchanges gave you the opportunity to trade all the others. However that's becoming less true as time goes on. Coinbase for example now allows you to directly purchase Bitcoin, Etherium, and Litecoin. I can't imagine that that list will ever shrink; it doesn't take much effort to continue allowing already-written code to run. And more options will be added.

It seems to me that Bitcoin has no use other than as a coin-of-reference at the moment. Very few actual purchases are transacted through Bitcoin, and the merchant support for alts will grow. There are already other coins that are faster and cheaper by design than Bitcoin could ever be. Merchants will never price things directly in Bitcoin because of its volatility.

It seems to me that Bitcoin is already useless and has no future, and the only thing preventing its plummet is the mob mentality agreeing that it's valuable. And one day that will probably change, and everyone will abandon Bitcoin and jump to the New Thing (and then probably eventually the one after that, and the one after that, etc). Maybe it will be Litecoin, or Bitcoin Cash, or Dogecoin (probably not, but I'm rooting for that little guy), or Ripple, or something as-yet undeveloped. But it should eventually happen.

And when it does, there's no reason to think that it would be (B) slow or gradual and allow people the opportunity to rebalance their "investments". Crypto crashes happen incredibly quickly. Selling everything in the middle of a panic crash is usually something everyone tells you is incredibly foolish. Except it's not in this case. A crash in Bitcoin while another stronger coin surges probably would be the trigger that changes the mob mentality. If that happens, and people collectively decide that Litecoin (or whatever) is the new Bitcoin, then not selling in the middle of the crash (assuming you can find anyone to buy at any price) would be the wrong choice and would leave you owning a lot of nothing, forever.

So I guess my question is, why am I wrong?

Excellent points Sherr! 

On a periodic basis I re-evaluate if a bitcoin hold is still a logical proposition, I currently believe it is a profitable long term bet, but it is an admittedly risky one.  Healthy amounts of doubt about one's positions lead to analytic revision of incoming data.

A) bitcoin as coin-of-reference: it is more than just mechanics and btc facilitating transactions to other coins.

crypto traders value their investments using bitcoin as their frame of reference.  Entire crypto portfolios are valued by how much each alt is worth when it is converted to bitcoin, and when things get rough, or btc gets bullish that is what they do.  The "shitcoin" speculation of obscure alts within the crypto community is entirely based around creating an increased amount of bitcoin for the speculator/ TA trader.
 
There are other coins such as Eth that seek to offer a different type of value which can and do exist in parallel with btc.  They compete for investor money in the short term but occupy different tech territory in a longer timeline.  BTC currently cannot execute smart contracts the way eth can(though this is purportedly in the works), and eth is centralized and mutable and much more suitable as a platform for decentralized app development and an overall platform for incorporating blockchain tech esp into the corporate realm, rather than a global financial instrument.

The value of a blockchain can be best understood through metcalfe's law - the value of a communications network is the square of the participants.  This explains neatly (if imperfectly) why twitter is worth billions but the group chat with me and my aunt and grandma is worth nothing, other than to the 3 of us.

Market cap is misleading from this perspective. For example, bcash appears overvalued, it has a market cap 1/7th of btc.   

Number of transactions per day is one gauge of the overall participation rate on a blockchain. 

Bcash network averages roughly 20k transactions per day.  Bitcoin averages roughly 200k transactions per day.  Given a roughly equal number of users making transactions (which may be off by a moderate margin in either direction) Metcalfe's law indicates that this is not a 10 fold difference, rather an exponential difference in network utility.   The price gap is only a factor of 7, while from a value standpoint bitcoin may provide 100x utility(give or take reasonable calculation errors) over bcash!

This is purely on the network value, ignoring the infrastructure advantage bitcoin has over bcash(I can buy plane tickets or book hotels or buy goods online with btc, or convert to USD at bitcoin atms through the US, while bcash is much more difficult to spend. BTC is also legal tender in Japan) or the scaling issues bcash has - if it averaged the same number of transactions per day as bitcoin the fees would be higher by a factor of 2-4x depending on assumptions used.  Further this ignores the substantial developer community working on improving bitcoin protocols which is a large advantage over bcash's niche support.

Core features of bitcoins utility such as decentralization, immutability, and the game theory basis that maintains the integrity of the system originate from its design and utilization of Proof of Work. 
The microsoft blockchain analysis cited earlier in the thread assessed that alternate blockchains to btc sacrificed either decentralization or immutability or both in order to obtain advantages in speed and efficiency.  A SQL database on a server somewhere would vastly outperform bitcoin from a performance standpoint, but would have neither decentralization nor immutability and thus there would be no reason to trust it to authorize financial transactions.
 
Microsoft's conclusion was that second layer protocols to the bitcoin blockchain are the best solution for scaling without sacrificing the underlying fundamentals of btc and by and large the crypto community agrees.

B)  We don't know whether a theoretical flip to another dominant coin would be gradual or not.  If bitcoin were a valueless system that noone actually used then certainly the possibility for an extremely fast crash and replacement would be not just possible but probable.  Due to metcalfe's law if participation rate on the blockchains are 0 then all their values are 0 so substituting one for another should be probable and statistically happen by chance regularly.  That this has never happened or even come close certainly indicates that there are real humans obtaining real value and metcalfe's law has at least partial validity.

Humans are creatures of habit and as this entire crypto movement shows are slow to make change.  All the users out there utilizing btc for various reasons would have to abandon it at once, in unison.  That makes the "sudden plunge to 0" outcome less and less likely the more users are added to the base and the networks utility grows.  It is not impossible or even improbable, so "don't invest money you can't afford to lose" must be paramount.

It is important to consider that it can be very true that you personally have no use for bitcoin in its current form, and at the same time be true that people in other circumstances consider it invaluable.  And that in its future forms you may benefit from it substantially in either a passive or active capacity, or not, depending on its ultimate use cases.  The likelihoods of those various scenarios are where buying bitcoin to hold long term come into play.  Bitcoin's equilibrium value will depend directly on how many users it stabilizes at and only the future will tell what that is.

I will continue to keep tabs on the crypto space and will be prepared to move on from btc if or when such a time comes.  I will also be prepared to take small portions of btc and allocate them to potential tech that offers paradigm-shift style upgrades over bitcoin in the rare event that they come along.  I have only researched a couple dozen alts (there are 1500+) and acquired precious few.

As I proofread this post and review yours to make sure I responded to the important ideas you raised, it occurs to me that I may be Charlie Brown with the football here, and your entire post may have actually been an elaborate dismissal.   Fingers crossed!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 09:28:21 PM

So I applaud the enthusiasm, but the planning was lacking and the execution fell flat.  Helpful posters with thoughtful content are always welcome, but you have to know your audience.  You'd get much the same reaction if you started out with a 5k word essay on which corvette is best for your mid life crisis, or the best city to buy a mcmansion, or the benefits of loan sharking.  Cryptocurrencies are just antithetical to the MMM philosophy. 

Surf, you write well and are welcome to join the community.  Would you still be interested if you were never allowed to talk about crypto again, or is that your only interest?  Because paid shills are usually single topic posters, which is what you appear to be now.

I Lol'd at the first part.  Well played sir.  The speculative frenzy surrounding cryptocurrencies is completely antithetical to the MMM philosophy, agreed.   The underlying technology is separate and it's one of the reasons it drives me nuts when my mom calls and says her friend told her to buy Ripple.(Anyone interested do some googling Ripple is basically everything bitcoin is not, and not in a good way)

FWIW there's no such thing as "paid shills" because there is no bitcoin corporation.

Finally I am excited to be a part of this community and if a mod forbade me from posting in crypto threads I would happily participate elsewhere.  FWIW I used the search function to look for existing threads on topics I have other expertise at, like surfing, with no success.  A finance forum is mostly about finance, I'm absorbing traditional finance info from you fine folks and have little to offer in that regard.  I guess I could start a thread asking for situation-specific help but I always feel weird leeching benefit from a community without contributing to it first.

Also, thank you for treating me like a human and not a troglodyte. It's refreshing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 09:42:42 PM

So you're building your 'stash, paid down your high interest debt, and living frugally. So why invest in crypto?

Cryptocurrencies' main role in a modern portfolio is diversification

Facepunch.

If you assume that crypto currencies are actually currencies (which is a stretch, but let's assume that for now), then crypto should replace or supplement the portion of your portfolio that is currently held in non-dollar currencies.  That portion of your portfolio should equal exactly zero to begin with.  Unless you are currency speculator, but that's speculating, not investing. 

Your whole analysis breaks down breaks because you are assuming there is such a thing as adoption of Bitcoin.  There isn't.  Almost no one uses it for anything.   The only people who need Bitcoin are child pornographers and drug dealers.  For everybody else, the USD works perfectly.  And even if you are a child pornographer or drug dealer, you still don't need Bitcoin.  You could use Litecoin, or Dogecoin, or Etherium, or Fidleius, or any of a zillion cryptos out there. 

No one, repeat no one, invests in Bitcoin.  People speculate in Bitcoin.  If you want to speculate, more power to ya.  But you are a damn fool if you think speculation is the same as diversification.

I bolded the parts where you either insulted me directly, said "USD works perfectly" or made up an argument that btc's only use case is child pornographers/drug dealers.

Also Facepunch is not a useful way to begin a reasoned discussion.

Your reply was the FIRST one to a logic-driven analysis trying to open up high quality discussion following the parameters set by the mod on the first page.  That I foolishly spent hours on and literally lost sleep to write.

I've done my best to keep my replies civil but the wheels start to fall off after awhile. Helping others is a high value priority for me and every time I try to make it better and it gets worse and I see replies treating me like some sort of scum it is painful. I'm only still here "complaining" and changing my sweaty shirt regularly because I'm trying to not completely throw in the towel on providing some value to those who might be reading but not posting, as I often do.

Also it's really hard not to reply when people are harsh and then lord it over you when you give up. I'm human.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 09:49:05 PM
Again there's this continuous undercurrent taht I'm some sort of outsider with assumptions about ulterior motives and whether or not I have hte right to contribute here that is xenophobic and disturbing.

Haha! Xenophobic?!? Really? People disagreeing with you is actually allowed here, you know. You're not required to have a huge post count to be taken seriously, but when you post something that almost nobody agrees with, as your first post, and then you *whine* about things like xenophobia (after repeatedly claiming you aren't going to participate in the discussion anymore, then coming right back to whine more) and misinterpret a commonly used term from the forum... how do you think you end up looking?

-W

You're right, I do not take harsh criticism well.

Also I knew as soon as I was being all dramatic writing about the "Facepunch" comment that it was going to be mis interpreted as lack of understanding of the community.  It's hard to explain but I was so stunned that the first word of the first reply was an allusion to physical violence to me.  Even though I knew it was within the mustachian spirit(if certainly not kind), that I literally punched myself in the face putting my wetsuit on I was so shaken up. I've done that like twice in my entire life. 

(for non-surfers: when you pull on a thick wetsuit you have to grab the shoulder cuff area and stuff your arm through it.  If you pull too hard on the shoulder section as you slide your arm through, and simultaneously lose your grip, you can accidentally punch yourself in the face.  My sweaty palms didn't help I'm sure.)

I was having a bit of a dramatic moment as my hope to bring logical value and discussion to the messy back-and-forth was completing its implosions.  My apologies.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 10:04:04 PM
I just said that if you have concerns about hyperinflation, it makes no sense to invest in something that is currently experiencing hyperinflation.    That's just common sense, right?  But if that point is wrong, it would have a perfect time for you to explain how you arrived at that conclusion.  Showing your work, in other words.  Instead you just ran away. 

My apologies, I didn't think you were actually trying to raise that as a logical point of discussion.  I did run away after all the facepunching. Actually, I went surfing. It was nice, and helped me clear my head.

Agreed, trying to protect from hyperinflation by investing in something hyperinflationary would make no sense whatsoever.

I can't tell if you really want me to answer this or if you are just throwing me a bone. Here goes:

Bitcoin experienced a speculative frenzy-bubble pop cycle at the end of Q4 '17 and beginning of Q1 '18. This has happened on multiple occasions across its history.
 
Using a tiny sample such as the prior 8 weeks of purchasing power loss without accounting for coin supply/cap, long term trends, or analysis of how a diminishing-supply, universally accessible currency would behave in the event of a government-backed currency's failure appeared to be willful ignorance and signaled an end to logical debate.  I guess I misinterpreted?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 13, 2018, 10:08:07 PM
FWIW there's no such thing as "paid shills" because there is no bitcoin corporation.

That's a terribly unconvincing argument, in this specific instance.

Because all of the easy money in cryptos is built around speculation, and speculation is fostered by internet forums.  We already know that small bands of active crypto posters on reddit have deliberately and repeatedly manipulated public sentiment about specific altcoins immediately after converting their holdings.  It's classic pump and dump.  Buy into ripple, have three respected (but relatively anonymous and apparently unaffiliated) internet posters spend a week talking about how awesome ripple is, and then sell out of ripple at 50% gains.  Rinse and repeat for Monero, and Litecoin, and whatever else you think you can convince people to buy.  This sort of coordinated market manipulation has been hugely profitable for a core group of early adopters, because so much of the crypto market is based on internet rumors anyway.  How do you think ~40 internet-famous 20-somethings each turned $10k into $50m in two years?  It sure wasn't riding BTC up and down.  They got in and out of the crazy cycles they helped to control.

So you don't need a bitcoin corporation to be a paid shill, because you can be an independent shill.  Crypto markets are so fragile, so volatile, that it only takes a handful of thoughtful and well educated writers to "generate" a billion dollars in market cap in a few weeks time.  There is no underlying revenue stream on which to base valuations, so it's purely 100% speculation and rumor.  Those can be manufactured by people like you.  All discussion of the technology itself is just smoke. 

Any time you (anyone, not you specifically) promote a coin that you hold, you are playing this game on a small scale.  If you're doing it with big money, or in coordination with other internet personas, then you're playing it on a grand scale.  This stuff is blatantly illegal when wall street does it, but crypto is still the wild wild west. 

That's not a good thing, the west was ugly.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: astvilla on February 13, 2018, 10:10:38 PM
Thank god I did not jump on this crypto train.

I don't know what it is, I don't know how to use it, I don't know anyone who actually uses it, I don't know what the practical use of it is. I don't understand it, so I won't put hard earned USD backed by strongest economy and military in history of mankind on something I don't know.

I know a lot of people aren't smart enough to use it or how to use it or how it works like me.

And it seems there's always some new crypto coming out, what are you supposed to use? Do vendors accept? I don't know if you can even use this in daily life. Can you tax it? To me this crypto is a bad idea right now. Maybe in the far future may work.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 10:47:19 PM
crypto traders value their investments using bitcoin as their frame of reference.  Entire crypto portfolios are valued by how much each alt is worth when it is converted to bitcoin, and when things get rough, or btc gets bullish that is what they do.  The "shitcoin" speculation of obscure alts within the crypto community is entirely based around creating an increased amount of bitcoin for the speculator/ TA trader.

You can't qualify this for all crypto traders. These statements are not wholly true. Many people do not acquire other coins to increase their bitcoin stack.

You are correct, these statements are not wholly true, and I should have phrased them as such.

I edited that section several times and for brevity cut off the sections describing how many coins have devoted followers who have no desire to own any other coin.  My observations were made based on the (admittedly limited) cross section of social media crypto trading "experts" and the replies of their followers(many have hundreds of thousands of followers) and from the short 2 to 3-degrees-of-separation from me out to(again limited) acquaintances in the crypto community.

There are distinctly different segments of the crypto population from HODLers of various coins to TA traders to social media wizards to my aunt calling to tell me her friend bought cardano and it's awesome and I should buy some - speculative noise.


Quote

There are other coins such as Eth that seek to offer a different type of value which can and do exist in parallel with btc.  They compete for investor money in the short term but occupy different tech territory in a longer timeline.  BTC currently cannot execute smart contracts the way eth can(though this is purportedly in the works), and eth is centralized and mutable and much more suitable as a platform for decentralized app development and an overall platform for incorporating blockchain tech esp into the corporate realm, rather than a global financial instrument.

Eth is not centralized. Eth is as immutable as bitcoin. Your statements about eth are untrue.

Apologies for the terminology error.  Eth is mechanistically decentralized in that it is supported by a global community of  miners. 

Eth is politically centralized in that one private entity, The Ethereum Foundation, which has no distributed consensus mechanism for decision making, has authority over it. Which they have used to alter the blockchain, see the DAO hard fork:

https://www.change.org/p/ethereum-hard-fork-ethereum-to-revert-the-hack-of-the-dao

Yes, Vitalik Buterin has said he only did it because the tech was nascent.  If it's possible for an individual entity to make such a move, then no, the ledger is not immutable, no matter how much he says he won't do it again.  If you have evidence to the contrary I would be heartened to hear it as I think Eth has tremendous potential.

Quote
The value of a blockchain can be best understood through metcalfe's law - the value of a communications network is the square of the participants.  This explains neatly (if imperfectly) why twitter is worth billions but the group chat with me and my aunt and grandma is worth nothing, other than to the 3 of us.

Network effects are meaningless metric for bitcoin relative to other blockchains. In blockchains, network effect can be replicated and is not exclusive to bitcoin. Network effects, in the current phase of crypto, are also very fleeting.

Agreed, network effects can be replicated on any blockchain.  Disagree, that you can ignore network effect because of this. 

Thought experiment:

Imagine enough users jumped ship from bitcoin to bitcoin cash such that their userbase was swapped, because it provided better utility or their memes were better or whatever. All the HODLers switched sides, all the everyday users, everything.
The very act of all those users selling their btc to obtain bcash to do their transactions(even if their transaction was buy coins and hold them) would swap the market caps as their supply is nearly identical,  and network effect analysis would again be useful for determining how much more utility all the new bcash users were receiving over those stuck on old btc. 

People can't transact with coins they don't have and the act of acquiring them to do so drives up the value - metcalfe's law in action.  It is not a perfect tool and would be difficult/impossible to use it to ascribe dollar numbers to an individual blockchain, but it is useful for comparing two or more blockchains.

Quote
Market cap is misleading from this perspective. For example, bcash appears overvalued, it has a market cap 1/7th of btc.   

Number of transactions per day is one gauge of the overall participation rate on a blockchain. 

Bcash network averages roughly 20k transactions per day.  Bitcoin averages roughly 200k transactions per day.  Given a roughly equal number of users making transactions (which may be off by a moderate margin in either direction) Metcalfe's law indicates that this is not a 10 fold difference, rather an exponential difference in network utility.   The price gap is only a factor of 7, while from a value standpoint bitcoin may provide 100x utility(give or take reasonable calculation errors) over bcash!

These are assumptions and are not conclusive.

??
These are not financial numbers, just a back-of-napkin attempt at showing the amount of utility that each blockchain is offering to its end users compared to their relative market caps.


Quote
The microsoft blockchain analysis cited earlier in the thread assessed that alternate blockchains to btc sacrificed either decentralization or immutability or both in order to obtain advantages in speed and efficiency.  A SQL database on a server somewhere would vastly outperform bitcoin from a performance standpoint, but would have neither decentralization nor immutability and thus there would be no reason to trust it to authorize financial transactions.
 
Microsoft's conclusion was that second layer protocols to the bitcoin blockchain are the best solution for scaling without sacrificing the underlying fundamentals of btc and by and large the crypto community agrees.

It's not clear yet how or which ones microsoft will coordinate layer 2 protocols on. "Some public blockchains (Bitcoin [BTC], Ethereum, Litecoin, to name a select few) provide a solid foundation for rooting DIDs, recording DPKI operations, and anchoring attestations....To overcome these technical barriers, we are collaborating on decentralized Layer 2 protocols that run atop these public blockchains to achieve global scale, while preserving the attributes of a world class DID system."

https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/enterprisemobility/2018/02/12/decentralized-digital-identities-and-blockchain-the-future-as-we-see-it/

Yes that is an excellent point and I can see how what I wrote came off different than what I intended. 

Microsoft is researching using the open-source btc codebase(or possibly other blockchains) and then writing their own second layer protocols to make use of it.  None of this would have any impact on the value of whichever open source blockchain they chose other than purely through the lens of public perception.

I also should not have made any generalizations about what the crypto community endorses or does not endorse.  It's an incredibly diverse group and any speculation to overall trends about what is supported is merely a guess.

I should have said that btc developers support a second layer option to increase throughput. I personally believe this is the highest value approach, as so far the blazing-fast/cost effective competitors like ripple have suffered from mechanistic centralization or political centralization or both, and as such I do not trust them with any of my transactions.  The foundations of BTC that protect the participants and ensure immutability and security are glaringly absent.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 10:51:09 PM
FWIW there's no such thing as "paid shills" because there is no bitcoin corporation.

That's a terribly unconvincing argument, in this specific instance.

Because all of the easy money in cryptos is built around speculation, and speculation is fostered by internet forums.  We already know that small bands of active crypto posters on reddit have deliberately and repeatedly manipulated public sentiment about specific altcoins immediately after converting their holdings.  It's classic pump and dump.  Buy into ripple, have three respected (but relatively anonymous and apparently unaffiliated) internet posters spend a week talking about how awesome ripple is, and then sell out of ripple at 50% gains.  Rinse and repeat for Monero, and Litecoin, and whatever else you think you can convince people to buy.  This sort of coordinated market manipulation has been hugely profitable for a core group of early adopters, because so much of the crypto market is based on internet rumors anyway.  How do you think ~40 internet-famous 20-somethings each turned $10k into $50m in two years?  It sure wasn't riding BTC up and down.  They got in and out of the crazy cycles they helped to control.

So you don't need a bitcoin corporation to be a paid shill, because you can be an independent shill.  Crypto markets are so fragile, so volatile, that it only takes a handful of thoughtful and well educated writers to "generate" a billion dollars in market cap in a few weeks time.  There is no underlying revenue stream on which to base valuations, so it's purely 100% speculation and rumor.  Those can be manufactured by people like you.  All discussion of the technology itself is just smoke. 

Any time you (anyone, not you specifically) promote a coin that you hold, you are playing this game on a small scale.  If you're doing it with big money, or in coordination with other internet personas, then you're playing it on a grand scale.  This stuff is blatantly illegal when wall street does it, but crypto is still the wild wild west. 

That's not a good thing, the west was ugly.

Hmmm. That is very thought provoking and makes me want to not talk crypto anymore.  Thank you.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 13, 2018, 11:10:03 PM

Agreed, trying to protect from hyperinflation by investing in something hyperinflationary would make no sense whatsoever.

Using a tiny sample such as the prior 8 weeks of purchasing power loss without accounting for coin supply/cap, long term trends, or analysis of how a diminishing-supply, universally accessible currency would behave in the event of a government-backed currency's failure appeared to be willful ignorance and signaled an end to logical debate.  I guess I misinterpreted?

Okay, let's see your data then. I would love, love, love, to be wrong.  I love stats and numbers, and especially economics, so seeing coin supply/cap, long term trends, and analysis of how a diminishing-supply, universally accessible currency would behave in the event of a government-backed currency's failure is right up my alley.  So please post your analysis.  I'm ready for the deep dive.  I'm serious as a heart attack.  Spreadsheets are my thang.   I really, really, want to see your analysis.   I'm on board.

Oh, and "willful ignorance?"  You gotta admit that things like how a  "diminishing-supply, universally accessible currency would behave in the event of a government-backed currency's failure" isn't something that most people have experience with.  I mean, I didn't learn about it in college.    And I have no personal experience with it either.   
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 11:41:04 PM

Agreed, trying to protect from hyperinflation by investing in something hyperinflationary would make no sense whatsoever.

Using a tiny sample such as the prior 8 weeks of purchasing power loss without accounting for coin supply/cap, long term trends, or analysis of how a diminishing-supply, universally accessible currency would behave in the event of a government-backed currency's failure appeared to be willful ignorance and signaled an end to logical debate.  I guess I misinterpreted?

Okay, let's see your data then. I would love, love, love, to be wrong.  I love stats and numbers, and especially economics, so seeing coin supply/cap, long term trends, and analysis of how a diminishing-supply, universally accessible currency would behave in the event of a government-backed currency's failure is right up my alley.  So please post your analysis.  I'm ready for the deep dive.  I'm serious as a heart attack.  Spreadsheets are my thang.   I really, really, want to see your analysis.   I'm on board.

Oh, and "willful ignorance?"  You gotta admit that things like how a  "diminishing-supply, universally accessible currency would behave in the event of a government-backed currency's failure" isn't something that most people have experience with.  I mean, I didn't learn about it in college.    And I have no personal experience with it either.

I'm PM'ing you and happy to go over it to you to the extent of my knowledge, which is limited.

We all don't know what we don't know.  Sol pointed out some things that I didn't know that were quite disturbing.  I'm not going to continue this discussion publicly as I refuse to be, even indirectly, a part of any of what he described.  I've amended my initial post as well.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 13, 2018, 11:44:49 PM
Stop the madness. 🔒

Oh, I don't know.  I think we benefit by swatting the flies.  Ridiculous posts need to be heard, and ridiculed.

Now I'm off to start a new thread about vitamix blenders.  Blenders have changed my life!

Looked for it, couldn't find it.  Vitamix is awesome, I'm a smoothie junky.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on February 14, 2018, 08:34:04 AM
Stop the madness. 🔒

Oh, I don't know.  I think we benefit by swatting the flies.  Ridiculous posts need to be heard, and ridiculed.

Now I'm off to start a new thread about vitamix blenders.  Blenders have changed my life!

Looked for it, couldn't find it.  Vitamix is awesome, I'm a smoothie junky.

It's somewhere in the Shame and Comedy section. I'm certain we've taken that particular kitchen device out behind the tool shed.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on February 14, 2018, 08:59:43 AM
FWIW there's no such thing as "paid shills" because there is no bitcoin corporation.

That's a terribly unconvincing argument, in this specific instance.

Because all of the easy money in cryptos is built around speculation, and speculation is fostered by internet forums.  We already know that small bands of active crypto posters on reddit have deliberately and repeatedly manipulated public sentiment about specific altcoins immediately after converting their holdings.  It's classic pump and dump.  Buy into ripple, have three respected (but relatively anonymous and apparently unaffiliated) internet posters spend a week talking about how awesome ripple is, and then sell out of ripple at 50% gains.  Rinse and repeat for Monero, and Litecoin, and whatever else you think you can convince people to buy.  This sort of coordinated market manipulation has been hugely profitable for a core group of early adopters, because so much of the crypto market is based on internet rumors anyway.  How do you think ~40 internet-famous 20-somethings each turned $10k into $50m in two years?  It sure wasn't riding BTC up and down.  They got in and out of the crazy cycles they helped to control.

So you don't need a bitcoin corporation to be a paid shill, because you can be an independent shill.  Crypto markets are so fragile, so volatile, that it only takes a handful of thoughtful and well educated writers to "generate" a billion dollars in market cap in a few weeks time.  There is no underlying revenue stream on which to base valuations, so it's purely 100% speculation and rumor.  Those can be manufactured by people like you.  All discussion of the technology itself is just smoke. 

Any time you (anyone, not you specifically) promote a coin that you hold, you are playing this game on a small scale.  If you're doing it with big money, or in coordination with other internet personas, then you're playing it on a grand scale.  This stuff is blatantly illegal when wall street does it, but crypto is still the wild wild west. 

That's not a good thing, the west was ugly.

Hmmm. That is very thought provoking and makes me want to not talk crypto anymore.  Thank you.

Just wanted to comment that sol's post is not in any way speculative or conspiracy-theory oriented. We have definitely seen several new brand new users pop up, post one time about their scam ico / pump-and-dump "shitcoin" (linking to their blog that's similarly singularly focused in their signature), and then promptly disappear forever after the mods removed it. I have flagged one or two for the mods to look at myself.

Cryptocurrencies are absolutely in the wild west, and it will be very hard for them to climb out of that untrusted state. It seems every single week (if not day) you hear about yet another ICO scam, a new exchange exit scam / "getting hacked", a new coin-mining malware / unethical websites using your browser to mine without telling you / people using university / government / corporate computers to mine for them (illegally / unethically). Add on top of that the regular old giant speculative bubbles where regular Joes get tricked into "investing" at the top due to the FOMO, possible (probable?) regular old fraud that's underwriting maybe a third of the crytpo market from Tether, the correct fact that cryptos are in fact used to a large degree for purposes that would otherwise be illegal / unethical, and the difficulty of convincing people that an asset that has no fundamentals or revenue stream or traditional value proposition is an "investment".

I don't know if the proper solution is just to stop talking about it whatsoever, I actually probably agree that cryptocurrencies are here to stay and will have some sort of very-long-term value proposition. But at some point just throwing the "do your own research" and "don't invest more than you're willing to lose" and "well you should have known not to store your money on an exchange" buzzwords around is not sufficient, and will make people suspicious of your ulterior motives. Cryptos are burning through public trust very quickly right now. There has never been a more clear argument *for* financial regulations that I've ever seen.

All right, I've got an honest question for you surf
As I proofread this post and review yours to make sure I responded to the important ideas you raised, it occurs to me that I may be Charlie Brown with the football here, and your entire post may have actually been an elaborate dismissal.   Fingers crossed!

It wasn't, it was an honest question, although I'm obviously fairly sceptical of the current state of cryptos.

If I may summarize your response, you believe that Bitcoin will be the long-term winner because the momentum of the large current user / merchant / developer base will allow it to react and evolve faster than anything else could grow. You may be right but I actually hope you're not. Bitcoin seems to be one of the worst cryptos in regard to energy requirements for mining, and I don't agree that mining will become less valuable if Bitcoin continues to be king. That adds up to a terrible waste of energy just because people are unwilling to move to a better solution.

I meant to mention it earlier but I found your comparison to Linux interesting. I think it's probably a fair comparison, but not in the favourable way you meant it. I think an individual cryptocurrency is probably comparable to an individual Linux distribution, not to the whole Linux ecosystem. Linux distributions come and go and gain and lose popularity all the time. And yes, there are some big players who stay relevant for a long time. But there are no guarantees, and since everything in the Linux world is open source and freely available there is nothing to prevent some upstart from creating their own distribution that does something better and convincing a huge portion of the userbase to switch. It's a safe bet that Linux as an operating system will stay relevant forever. Any individual distribution not so much.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: ketchup on February 14, 2018, 09:04:46 AM
Stop the madness. 🔒

Oh, I don't know.  I think we benefit by swatting the flies.  Ridiculous posts need to be heard, and ridiculed.

Now I'm off to start a new thread about vitamix blenders.  Blenders have changed my life!

Looked for it, couldn't find it.  Vitamix is awesome, I'm a smoothie junky.
FYI, Surf, you've mentioned the forum search function a couple times.  It's borderline-worthless; the best way to search the forum is to just use Google and site:forum.mrmoneymustache.com to filter the results.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 14, 2018, 10:23:33 AM
Stop the madness. 🔒

Oh, I don't know.  I think we benefit by swatting the flies.  Ridiculous posts need to be heard, and ridiculed.

Now I'm off to start a new thread about vitamix blenders.  Blenders have changed my life!

Looked for it, couldn't find it.  Vitamix is awesome, I'm a smoothie junky.
FYI, Surf, you've mentioned the forum search function a couple times.  It's borderline-worthless; the best way to search the forum is to just use Google and site:forum.mrmoneymustache.com to filter the results.

You are absolutely correct, thank you.  I did notice the forum search was ineffective and used that method. And felt kind of silly for not doing it immediately, haha.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 14, 2018, 10:25:23 AM
Stop the madness. 🔒

Oh, I don't know.  I think we benefit by swatting the flies.  Ridiculous posts need to be heard, and ridiculed.

Now I'm off to start a new thread about vitamix blenders.  Blenders have changed my life!

Looked for it, couldn't find it.  Vitamix is awesome, I'm a smoothie junky.

It's somewhere in the Shame and Comedy section. I'm certain we've taken that particular kitchen device out behind the tool shed.

I did not realize that was tongue-in-cheek.  I got my vitamix 9 years ago on a refurb sale and have used it daily since then.  It's more than paid for itself as I was burning out blenders about once a year before getting mine.  Just used it to make a lunch smoothie and it's still kicking!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on February 14, 2018, 01:34:09 PM
Stop the madness. 🔒

Oh, I don't know.  I think we benefit by swatting the flies.  Ridiculous posts need to be heard, and ridiculed.

Now I'm off to start a new thread about vitamix blenders.  Blenders have changed my life!

Looked for it, couldn't find it.  Vitamix is awesome, I'm a smoothie junky.

It's somewhere in the Shame and Comedy section. I'm certain we've taken that particular kitchen device out behind the tool shed.

I did not realize that was tongue-in-cheek.  I got my vitamix 9 years ago on a refurb sale and have used it daily since then.  It's more than paid for itself as I was burning out blenders about once a year before getting mine.  Just used it to make a lunch smoothie and it's still kicking!

Everybody should have the ability to chop food. It's the $500 device that will miraculously cure all your ills that some folks here take issue with.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on February 14, 2018, 01:43:39 PM
People who burn out blenders confuse me.  I've got a 1970s Osterizer (it has some fancy faux wood panelling on the side so I figure it's from the 70s?) that I've been using since before university.  I blend shit all the time.  Everything from green kale or red beet smoothies, to breaking up ice for mixed drinks, to pureeing stuff to thicken drinks.  That thing has had constant use for years, and provided you occasionally oil the spinny parts (I use some olive oil) it seems like it will never die.

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/J7QAAOSw3YJZTAz3/s-l300.jpg)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 15, 2018, 12:31:41 AM

Just wanted to comment that sol's post is not in any way speculative or conspiracy-theory oriented. We have definitely seen several new brand new users pop up, post one time about their scam ico / pump-and-dump "shitcoin" (linking to their blog that's similarly singularly focused in their signature), and then promptly disappear forever after the mods removed it. I have flagged one or two for the mods to look at myself.

That makes me feel a little better about the savage welcome.

Cryptocurrencies are absolutely in the wild west, and it will be very hard for them to climb out of that untrusted state. It seems every single week (if not day) you hear about yet another ICO scam, a new exchange exit scam / "getting hacked", a new coin-mining malware / unethical websites using your browser to mine without telling you / people using university / government / corporate computers to mine for them (illegally / unethically). Add on top of that the regular old giant speculative bubbles where regular Joes get tricked into "investing" at the top due to the FOMO, possible (probable?) regular old fraud that's underwriting maybe a third of the crytpo market from Tether, the correct fact that cryptos are in fact used to a large degree for purposes that would otherwise be illegal / unethical, and the difficulty of convincing people that an asset that has no fundamentals or revenue stream or traditional value proposition is an "investment".

Agreed the ICO scamcoin phenomenon is in desperate need of regulation, it's a black eye on the crypto community.

Agreed the FOMO speculator aspect is a problem, as is the periodic bubble cycle it drives.  People have and will get burnt.  Users whose only goal is to resell later at a profit provide no value to the network and take away from the entire point of the technology and interfere with its adoption.

The malware issue is separate. I was a victim-witness in a federal trial when a computer of mine was hacked. It was used as part of a botnet for an ad click scheme that stole a staggering amount of money.  The issue with distributed mining malware is with computer security.

Tether may or may not be fraud, I cannot verify so I do not use it. There's what, 2bln tether?  The crytpo market cap is ~450bln right now.  I have not done research to determine the overall price shift that would occur if tether were to be fraudulent.  The exchanges make so much money that there is a non-zero chance that it's actually backed by USDs.

The illicit activity topic I cannot verify or deny without data.  I'm a tax paying law abiding citizen and do not use crypto for illicit activity.  Nearly all forms of money are used for criminal purposes.

I don't know if the proper solution is just to stop talking about it whatsoever, I actually probably agree that cryptocurrencies are here to stay and will have some sort of very-long-term value proposition. But at some point just throwing the "do your own research" and "don't invest more than you're willing to lose" and "well you should have known not to store your money on an exchange" buzzwords around is not sufficient, and will make people suspicious of your ulterior motives. Cryptos are burning through public trust very quickly right now. There has never been a more clear argument *for* financial regulations that I've ever seen.

Agreed regulation is sorely needed.

All right, I've got an honest question for you surf
As I proofread this post and review yours to make sure I responded to the important ideas you raised, it occurs to me that I may be Charlie Brown with the football here, and your entire post may have actually been an elaborate dismissal.   Fingers crossed!

It wasn't, it was an honest question, although I'm obviously fairly sceptical of the current state of cryptos.

I'm grateful, thank you.


If I may summarize your response, you believe that Bitcoin will be the long-term winner because the momentum of the large current user / merchant / developer base will allow it to react and evolve faster than anything else could grow. You may be right but I actually hope you're not. Bitcoin seems to be one of the worst cryptos in regard to energy requirements for mining, and I don't agree that mining will become less valuable if Bitcoin continues to be king. That adds up to a terrible waste of energy just because people are unwilling to move to a better solution.

Yes, cautiously.  Its fundamentals are sound and being the largest means the most utility offered.  I don't think it will react faster, but it is upgradeable and many desirable features are in development.  It just has to evolve those features the community desires before they leave for a different blockchain.

Owning a cryptocurrency is kind of like owning a telephone. You don't have to make calls on it every day to derive utility.  The fact that you are available to make or receive calls(in this case send or receive funds) contributes value to the network.  If you're the only one with the phone, it's useless.  If much of the world has it(or at least entities you want to , it's valuable. 

The energy use is an issue yes. The amount of miners competing for rewards is likely outpacing the adoption rate. 
However, scaling the network to more users is not linked to the amount of mining power required to verify the network. Also since electricity is an operating cost the miners are incentivized to use renewables because they are cheaper.

I too hope a more energy efficient, yet still secure, algorithm gains traction.


I meant to mention it earlier but I found your comparison to Linux interesting. I think it's probably a fair comparison, but not in the favourable way you meant it. I think an individual cryptocurrency is probably comparable to an individual Linux distribution, not to the whole Linux ecosystem. Linux distributions come and go and gain and lose popularity all the time. And yes, there are some big players who stay relevant for a long time. But there are no guarantees, and since everything in the Linux world is open source and freely available there is nothing to prevent some upstart from creating their own distribution that does something better and convincing a huge portion of the userbase to switch. It's a safe bet that Linux as an operating system will stay relevant forever. Any individual distribution not so much.

That is an excellent point. 

Corporations like facebook are very good at creating profit, but vulnerable to being overtaken by competitors(RIP myspace).  Open source distributions like Linux are very good at offering value to the userbase, and often fold would-be competitors into their community, but generate little profit.  As a result they are more resilient.
 
The overlap here is that the fiscal value of a blockchain network is directly linked to the utility value offered to the user base.  Basically, a linux-style approach may yield the highest utility product, which is also the highest fiscal value product.  In this instance there is no corporation to pay profits to, so anyone who participates in the network benefits from the increased value, until it reaches equilibrium.  Whether equilibrium is 0 users or millions will decide the fiscal value.

The reason scamcoins are valueless is A) noone uses them(metcalfe's) and B) they rarely do anything better than the established blockchains.

Agree completely that any one distribution/coin may or may not be relevant on a long time frame.

Bitcoin "distribution" variants come as hard forks, where an owner of 1btc receives 1 of the new version of the bitcoin open source, if it becomes successful.  Thus by holding bitcoin you obtain all future versions.
This is NOT the case for non-btc competing blockchain technologies, which makes paying attention to the top market players important.  If one offers better value, and you hold $5k of bitcoin, you can sell it for $5k of Coin X if its long term prospects are higher.  This requires research and vigilance.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 15, 2018, 12:38:48 AM
People who burn out blenders confuse me.  I've got a 1970s Osterizer (it has some fancy faux wood panelling on the side so I figure it's from the 70s?) that I've been using since before university.  I blend shit all the time.  Everything from green kale or red beet smoothies, to breaking up ice for mixed drinks, to pureeing stuff to thicken drinks.  That thing has had constant use for years, and provided you occasionally oil the spinny parts (I use some olive oil) it seems like it will never die.

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/J7QAAOSw3YJZTAz3/s-l300.jpg)

That's awesome!  They don't make 'em like that anymore.  The modern shiny $75 blender has all plastic gearing, no matter how much stainless they waste on the outside.  If you blend frozen fruit the gears get shredded in short order.

Buying a $500 vitamix to try and cure your health is silliness.

I bought one for $250 refurb because I burned out 2 blenders in 2 yrs, and I use it daily(usually breakfast or lunch, but also for soups and sauces) and have stopped contributing to landfills and saved $ astonishingly.  It's neither pretty nor shiny(i got the lowest model) but it's all metal gears and an effective tool.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on February 15, 2018, 11:11:25 AM
Tether may or may not be fraud, I cannot verify so I do not use it. There's what, 2bln tether?  The crytpo market cap is ~450bln right now.  I have not done research to determine the overall price shift that would occur if tether were to be fraudulent.  The exchanges make so much money that there is a non-zero chance that it's actually backed by USDs.

Just FYI:
https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/7xae98/understanding_tether_why_it_accounts_for_a/
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Finallyunderstand on February 15, 2018, 01:47:27 PM
Surf, as a new member, it's been suggested you post elsewhere for a while, outside the crypto space.  Yet, you've now on post #30, all in the same crypto thread.

I think you're at risk of getting banned at this point.  Please take a break from this controversial thread.  MMM forums don't need this.

Devils advocate here...  A lot of his posts and responses have been well thought out and he's not simply telling people to buy XYZ coin.  He's posting in a cryptocurrency thread which is where cryptocurrency conversation is supposed to happen.  If he was spamming cooking, real estate, case study threads, etc with crypto talk then it would make sense to mention banning.  If other MMM members don't want to see a "controversial" thread topic like cryptocurrencies then simply don't click the thread or have the Mods remove the thread all together. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Finallyunderstand on February 15, 2018, 02:02:50 PM
Surf, as a new member, it's been suggested you post elsewhere for a while, outside the crypto space.  Yet, you've now on post #30, all in the same crypto thread.

I think you're at risk of getting banned at this point.  Please take a break from this controversial thread.  MMM forums don't need this.

Devils advocate here...  A lot of his posts and responses have been well thought out and he's not simply telling people to buy XYZ coin.  He's posting in a cryptocurrency thread which is where cryptocurrency conversation is supposed to happen.  If he was spamming cooking, real estate, case study threads, etc with crypto talk then it would make sense to mention banning.  If other MMM members don't want to see a "controversial" thread topic like cryptocurrencies then simply don't click the thread or have the Mods remove the thread all together.

The point is that if all you have to offer in 3 days as a new member is 30 posts in support of crypto, you probably came to the wrong forum altogether.

I agree with that assessment but just wanted to point out at least he's not spamming other threads.  Time will tell if he dives into other areas with as much gusto.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on February 15, 2018, 02:20:39 PM
Surf, as a new member, it's been suggested you post elsewhere for a while, outside the crypto space.  Yet, you've now on post #30, all in the same crypto thread.

I think you're at risk of getting banned at this point.  Please take a break from this controversial thread.  MMM forums don't need this.

It's been a 2-way conversation so far, and a couple posters may have even changed his mind on a few points.  It's definitely a controversial and niche subject, but it's not like he's been close minded.  We've had far worse appear here in those regards.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: robartsd on February 15, 2018, 03:48:23 PM
So you don't need a bitcoin corporation to be a paid shill, because you can be an independent shill.  Crypto markets are so fragile, so volatile, that it only takes a handful of thoughtful and well educated writers to "generate" a billion dollars in market cap in a few weeks time.  There is no underlying revenue stream on which to base valuations, so it's purely 100% speculation and rumor.  Those can be manufactured by people like you.  All discussion of the technology itself is just smoke. 

Any time you (anyone, not you specifically) promote a coin that you hold, you are playing this game on a small scale.  If you're doing it with big money, or in coordination with other internet personas, then you're playing it on a grand scale.  This stuff is blatantly illegal when wall street does it, but crypto is still the wild wild west. 

That's not a good thing, the west was ugly.
Yes, certain communications by those in control of companies or markets to pump-and-dump stock are illegal and the SEC can take legal action because of it. It is in no way illegal for the average Joe to talk about why he chooses to hold (or not) stock XYZ. Nothing like the SEC is watching over those in control of crypto-currencies or their exchanges making this the wild wild west; and it looks like there has been plenty to be concerned about in this realm. Based on what I have read by @Surf here I don't think that he is a part of that. You could reasonably argue that all most of on this forum are guilty of promoting securities that we hold (usually in the form of low-cost index funds). I appreciate the arguments based on the differences between the types of securities (companies doing business to create profits vs. tokens that do nothing other than represent their volatile value on an immutable decentralized public ledger).

I've appreciated the bits of actual discussion of the technology behind crypto-currency that has appeared on this thread. I'm a bit of an optimist about the long term prospects of crypto-currency, but not enough to convince me to invest in it (huge learning curve to understand it well enough to not just be the greater fool). I imagine that some of my optimism stems from my libertarian political leanings - a currency that is not in the control of the government sounds very nice in the context of a libertarian utopia; but I have enough experience with my political leanings to know that pragmatism can be much more effective than idealism.

@Surf, you ought to start a thread about your surfing hobby (especially if you can focus on keeping the hobby frugal). Eventually someone will come along promoting some spendypants surfing equipment as "totally worth it" and you'll see just as much gusto in facepunching them. That's the culture here. @sol can be quite interesting to read when he's talking about stuff that he likes, but like you, I tend to dislike his style when responding to things he disagrees with.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 15, 2018, 05:01:09 PM
@sol can be quite interesting to read when he's talking about stuff that he likes, but like you, I tend to dislike his style when responding to things he disagrees with.

Yea, I can be a real bitch.  Sorry, not sorry.

And for the record, people don't get banned here for disagreeing with the forum, they get banned for being rude about it.  I think surf is fine.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on February 15, 2018, 05:57:29 PM
Surf, as a new member, it's been suggested you post elsewhere for a while, outside the crypto space.  Yet, you've now on post #30, all in the same crypto thread.

I think you're at risk of getting banned at this point.  Please take a break from this controversial thread.  MMM forums don't need this.

Devils advocate here...  A lot of his posts and responses have been well thought out and he's not simply telling people to buy XYZ coin.  He's posting in a cryptocurrency thread which is where cryptocurrency conversation is supposed to happen.  If he was spamming cooking, real estate, case study threads, etc with crypto talk then it would make sense to mention banning.  If other MMM members don't want to see a "controversial" thread topic like cryptocurrencies then simply don't click the thread or have the Mods remove the thread all together.

The point is that if all you have to offer in 3 days as a new member is 30 posts in support of crypto, you probably came to the wrong forum altogether.

We has some nice blender discussion going for a little bit.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Fantasticmrfox on February 17, 2018, 01:27:55 AM
Hey, fellow Mustachians!

So my official position on crypto is that I fully support blockchain technology and crypto, in my current view, is the best way to bring blockchain tech to the point where these other technologies become economically and socially viable. I also see that our official currencies are also mostly based on trust and speculation (this is obviously ignoring other economic factors such as production and earnings) and so see crypto as a new globalised currency that, using smart contracts, can help both businesses and individuals who transfer large sums across borders.

That said, I mine Ethereum and invest it into a tokenised Index fund inspired by the S&P 500. It's called Crypto20, and as the name suggests, it holds 20 of the top performing coins on the market. I feel that this significantly reduces my risk and allows me to focus on the long-term gains.

I invested $1800 in November at $0.8 per coin and the current value is roughly $2 after 4 months. That puts my potential earnings at $1440. I only put in as much as I was willing to lose. Now I mine and use what I make from mining to invest in Crypto20. Within the next few months, I plan to withdraw the cost of my miner $2500 and the initial $1800 to break even, leaving the mined Crypto20 fund for the next 10 years. I may not withdraw the initial cash injection, instead, leaving it to mature, or not, as I was willing to lose it in the 1st place.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Finallyunderstand on February 17, 2018, 06:22:07 AM
Hey, fellow Mustachians!

So my official position on crypto is that I fully support blockchain technology and crypto, in my current view, is the best way to bring blockchain tech to the point where these other technologies become economically and socially viable. I also see that our official currencies are also mostly based on trust and speculation (this is obviously ignoring other economic factors such as production and earnings) and so see crypto as a new globalised currency that, using smart contracts, can help both businesses and individuals who transfer large sums across borders.

That said, I mine Ethereum and invest it into a tokenised Index fund inspired by the S&P 500. It's called Crypto20, and as the name suggests, it holds 20 of the top performing coins on the market. I feel that this significantly reduces my risk and allows me to focus on the long-term gains.

I invested $1800 in November at $0.8 per coin and the current value is roughly $2 after 4 months. That puts my potential earnings at $1440. I only put in as much as I was willing to lose. Now I mine and use what I make from mining to invest in Crypto20. Within the next few months, I plan to withdraw the cost of my miner $2500 and the initial $1800 to break even, leaving the mined Crypto20 fund for the next 10 years. I may not withdraw the initial cash injection, instead, leaving it to mature, or not, as I was willing to lose it in the 1st place.

Now this is a shill without any logical discussion.  I invested in a specific  X and now it’s worth X.  Nothing significant was brought to the table.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Capyy on February 17, 2018, 08:39:25 AM
Has there been discussion about investing in blockchain tech without buying a coin? I don't believe in the future of the coins in the near term.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 17, 2018, 10:39:50 AM
That said, I mine Ethereum and invest it into a tokenised Index fund inspired by the S&P 500. It's called Crypto20, and as the name suggests, it holds 20 of the top performing coins on the market. I feel that this significantly reduces my risk and allows me to focus on the long-term gains.

And of course this index fund has filed prospectus with the SEC...right?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 17, 2018, 04:15:24 PM
Has there been discussion about investing in blockchain tech without buying a coin? I don't believe in the future of the coins in the near term.

As an example, Microsoft is looking to take advantage of open-source blockchain tech, without buying any tokens.  So you should have residual exposure from your index funds in the event that large players like MS increase profits through blockchain tech.

Other than stock-picking the corps that look to be investing the most heavily in blockchain, I am not currently aware of a way to do what you are asking.

There are some cryptos that seek to flatten out volatility by operating a pool of investment capital as some combination of USD and top performing cryptos, but at that point you are still fully in the crypto world as you would be buying their token to participate.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 17, 2018, 04:37:42 PM
That said, I mine Ethereum and invest it into a tokenised Index fund inspired by the S&P 500. It's called Crypto20, and as the name suggests, it holds 20 of the top performing coins on the market. I feel that this significantly reduces my risk and allows me to focus on the long-term gains.

Hey Fantasticmrfox,

A true crypto-index fund would be very useful.  I looked over Crypto20, it's a cool concept. A couple turnoffs:

-it is not an index, at all.  Don't fool yourself that you are gaining the benefits of a true index, which requires broad market coverage from the smallest to the largest to distribute risk and capture growth across the entire spectrum.

-if you wanted these 20 coins(I daresay you could choose a better 20 with a couple hours of googling), you would be MUCH better off buying them a la carte and controlling your own private keys.   By investing in Crypto20 you are turning over control of your assets in the hope that they will return them to you when you ask.  There's a non-zero chance that they wont, this defeats the entire point of crypto, which is you control your own finances and do not have to trust a 3rd party.

-Crypto20 appears only a couple months old.  Essentially you are taking on the risk of a fledgling token with the growth rates 20 coins from the top 50 or so.  That's a terrible trade IMO.

-finally, the 20 coins covered include some that I wouldn't touch with a 30 foot pole, and some that have flaws that may or may not preclude them from long term viability.  Some are solid, some I haven't looked into.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on February 20, 2018, 01:21:40 PM
Historical data doesn't give us a time when Crypto- performed over an extended weak market (such as the 2001-2010 decade for SP500).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on February 20, 2018, 06:54:07 PM
Guess Jamie "bitcoin is a fraud" Dimon has changed his mind.

"We examine the potential role of CCs in terms of offering diversification in a global portfolio, given both their high returns over the past several years and their low correlation with the major asset classes, offsetting some of the cost of high volatility. If past returns, volatilities and correlations persist, CCs could potentially have a role in diversifying one’s global bond and equity portfolio."

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-11/jpmorgan-publishes-bitcoin-bible

I am still bullish on using asset allocation strategies like the Larry portfolio, Golden Butterfly, and Bernsteins teachings but including CC in them as a diversifier and hedge. The returns on the modified Golden butterfly portfolio are beating S&P 500 (90/10), pure GB, Larry, and all the other asset mixes I track even with the crazy volatility. I tilt towards diversification and portfolios with the highest returns and the lowest potential drawdowns however. Drawdowns do not concern most people on this forum and if that is the case just stay 100% in VSTAX and keep hating on CCs (and gold).

Whatever the merits of cryptocurrency, a portfolio including it is not a portfolio with the lowest potential drawdown.  Since cryptocurrency has the shortest track record of asset mentioned in the above post, plus many analysts pointing out the possibility/probability of larger drops than any other "asset" class, a crypto-heavy portfolio has the highest potential drawdown.  Whatever rewards it may bring, such a portfolio incurs a larger risk.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on February 21, 2018, 09:11:08 AM
Our MMM community seems to include both crypto-skeptics and crypto-boosters.

But let's say that I'm a crypto-skeptic. Does that still mean the optimal allocation to crypto is zero? I can see how the variability of price means I can rebalance to having 1% of a portfolio in crypto and feel like I'm well-positioned for a low-probability, high-value future in which the boosters are vindicated.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on February 21, 2018, 10:16:35 AM
Our MMM community seems to include both crypto-skeptics and crypto-boosters.

But let's say that I'm a crypto-skeptic. Does that still mean the optimal allocation to crypto is zero? I can see how the variability of price means I can rebalance to having 1% of a portfolio in crypto and feel like I'm well-positioned for a low-probability, high-value future in which the boosters are vindicated.

Quote from: literally one page ago
If you allocated 1% of your portfolio to every scheme or technology that could theoretically boom in value you’ll very quickly have a portfolio that is 100% rubbish. Even if your number 2 outcome came about (and I also thoroughly disagree with your ridiculous assessment there of ‘likely’) the chance of ‘cryptos eventually boom’ meaning that the Bitcoin (or any other currently existing coin) you’re holding today specifically represents that future value is exceedingly unlikely.

Come on mate, you've been around long enough to see this discussion had before. If you want to gamble/speculate with your money on sketchy internet ponzi schemes plagued by scams, hacks, propaganda and misinformation instead of investing it according to well studied and historically sound asset portfolios, go ahead, but don't call it 'optimal' or 'well-positioned'.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on February 21, 2018, 10:21:24 AM
Has there been discussion about investing in blockchain tech without buying a coin? I don't believe in the future of the coins in the near term.

If it has any practical application towards competitive advantage for existing firms (lol it doesn't and never will) it'll be covered by your index funds. It is completely safe and preferable to ignore it for now. Better future techs to speculate on would be things like solar and other renewables, machine learning, maybe VR/AR, etc. Better yet, don't speculate and instead let your productive assets (stocks/bonds/real estate) work for you to produce income over time.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 21, 2018, 11:16:04 AM
But let's say that I'm a crypto-skeptic. Does that still mean the optimal allocation to crypto is zero?

Yes.  Yes it does.

That's my personal opinion of course, and you can take it or leave it, but I wouldn't touch crypto with a ten foot pole made of other people's money.  The entire space is rife with criminal manipulators with shady motivations.

The economic importance of blockchain, as a clever software idea, is definitely not clear yet but no one believes it is worth a half trillion dollars (the current market cap).  Crypto bears all of the hallmarks of past scams, and none of the attributes of past emerging technologies like electricity, autos, or the internet.  It's a bad investment and everyone is going to get burned, because it only exists to defraud retail investors.  It was created for the sole purpose of criminal fraud (avoiding sanctions, making illegal purchases, and now rotating pump and dump securities fraud). 

Who would willingly invest in something that was designed from the outset to cause financial ruin?  Only the sharks doing the stealing, that's who.  And the minnows they can trick into parting with their hard earned cash.  Which are you?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on February 21, 2018, 12:53:34 PM
But let's say that I'm a crypto-skeptic. Does that still mean the optimal allocation to crypto is zero?

The economic importance of blockchain, as a clever software idea, is definitely not clear yet but no one believes it is worth a half trillion dollars (the current market cap). 

well, block chain is  potentially worth that much or more. That doesn't mean the BTC market cap is the real value of the idea of the block chain idea. 

BTC or even Joe-shitposters favorite coin can still end up being worth 0 or a million dollars in 5 years completely independent of how widespread block chain usage ends up being. 

its interesting that in this whole block chain portfolio discussion we always focus on crypto coins and none of the software companies or other applications.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 21, 2018, 01:13:36 PM
its interesting that in this whole block chain portfolio discussion we always focus on crypto coins and none of the software companies or other applications.

It makes perfect sense, actually. Blockchain outside of the coins and scams is pretty boring (and open source) and lots of companies will use it for lots of useful/lucrative things - but you already probably own stock in those companies if you're an index fund investor. So there's really not much to discuss.

If you like to pick stocks, you could get interested in which companies are doing what with blockchain.

If you just like to gamble, then the coins are the only thing to talk about. Which is why people are so interested in talking about them.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: zazpowered on February 21, 2018, 11:50:04 PM
I made an app recently to help ppl track their cryptocurrency portfolio value. It's probably only useful if you have coins outside of BTC, LTC, ETH and what's store on Coinbase because then you could just use Coinbase to track your portfolio. No registration required and all data is anonymous and only stored on your phone. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/coinbuddy-track-your-crypto/id1271644974?mt=8

Would love to get any thoughts/feedback!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 22, 2018, 02:25:45 PM
^ I was thinking it, but I wasn't going to say it. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on February 22, 2018, 03:20:53 PM
Yep, complete nonsense. Blockchain is a novel data structure, of academic interest, which has serious flaws (eg complete inability to scale without vast energy consumption) and is also wholly unneccessary because in the real world the average person is perfectly happy with centralised, trusted actors. The cost of trustless decentralisation is much too high to be a practical solution for literally any problem, and is also generally undesirable because trusted actors bring with them the benefits of regulation, reliability, accountability and system control (two examples; chargebacks, system updates - with blockchain solutions transactions are irreversible which is a terrible idea in general, and system updates require agreement and cooperation between distributed actors, which, for example, is why the Bitcoin block size has not been changed in way too long and every attempt to do so ends in a reddit meme war).

Plenty of companies have done your 'behind the scenes' secret trials and the reason you don't hear about them is because they don't amount to anything.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 22, 2018, 03:48:13 PM
I can see some uses.  Blockchain is a distributed ledger.  So you could use to do things like track the provenance of pieces of art, or maybe firearms, diamonds, cars,  bottles of alcohol, real estate, or anything you wanted to keep track of. 

So it might be useful, but it is an incremental step in bookkeeping.  It isn't like discovering fire or antibotics. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on February 22, 2018, 04:03:45 PM
I can see some uses.  Blockchain is a distributed ledger.  So you could use to do things like track the provenance of pieces of art, or maybe firearms, diamonds, cars,  bottles of alcohol, real estate, or anything you wanted to keep track of. 

So it might be useful, but it is an incremental step in bookkeeping.  It isn't like discovering fire or antibotics.

Or you could use a permissioned database and not have to worry about block generation, inability to correct mistakes, etc.

The closest thing to a practical application that blockchain has is Github. And it's not blockchain.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: effigy98 on February 22, 2018, 05:09:22 PM
Ok you guys have won. I am tired of contributing anything to this board. I (Naively) was hoping for a logical, constructive conversation about crypto on probably what I thought was the best FI board on the internet. The community that is mostly responding to this thread now is hostile and too emotional for useful discussion.

Edit: I am wrong to say the whole community. There is a large percentage of people who are amazing, thoughtful, and actually trying to help others get to FI. Those are the virtuous people who make this community great. The thread started out well and there are many people trying to help out and provide useful information. I wish I could isolate to just those posters, but I cannot and it seems like now if you post ANYTHING positive on this thread, you get massivly attacked.

Sounds like the same old arguments for the internet in the 90s. Ya right, chat room is really going to revolutionize society. Napster is for theives, nobody wants a lower quality MP3 if they can get a CD. Shopping online? Why would I do that when I have to pay shipping, wait a day or two, and I can just drive to the store? What a stupid idea...

Most people just do not have the time or energy to understand why it is so important. This is normal and ok. Eventually, you will understand when it is the backbone of society. Early adopters that see the potential want others to prosper, especially on this board since so many other ideas have helped everyone here towards their journey to FI. Being so negative and closed minded is just hurting others and not logical. I am surprised that this board out of all boards is so closed minded about a potentially disruptive technology that can help many people in the world reach FI... Let's go attack stock options stragegies because that is "complicated", or maybe gold in our asset allocation, or some other useless investments because they are not S&P 500 or bonds. Oh and never EVER mention paying off your house because 100% loan and 100% into S&P fund at 33%+ ShillerPE is the right choice every time.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on February 22, 2018, 05:16:51 PM
Napster was for thieves though.  See how well the company did when it kicked off the thieves and tried to go legit?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on February 22, 2018, 05:21:12 PM
I like how he didn't respond to a single point and instead immediately launched out a full ad-homenim attack.

'FUD!, FUD!' he screamed as he slowly shrunk and retreated from reasonable critique.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 22, 2018, 09:13:24 PM
There is a large percentage of people who are amazing, thoughtful, and actually trying to help others get to FI.

Thanks.  Your recognition of my efforts genuinely means a lot to me.  Sometimes I feel like I spend all this time and effort trying to help people, and all I get is attacked for it.  I'm still here plugging away though, warning people away from bad investments.

Quote
it seems like now if you post ANYTHING positive on this thread, you get massivly attacked.

Yea, I know how you feel.  I keep trying to give people helpful advice in this thread, and some of them just get all huffy instead of listening.  That's okay, not everyone on the internet actually wants to have a logical and constructive debate.  Some people are just here for the confirmation bias.

Quote
Sounds like the same old arguments for the internet in the 90s. Ya right, chat room is really going to revolutionize society. Napster is for theives, nobody wants a lower quality MP3 if they can get a CD. Shopping online? Why would I do that

Funny, I was recently thinking that the crypto hype was much more like the segway hype (http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,186660-1,00.html).  It's going to revolutionize the way we organize cities!  It's going to bigger than the PC! 

Quote
Eventually, you will understand when it is the backbone of society.

I think crypto will be hugely important.  Blockchain, not so much. 

The backbone of society?  That's trust, not encryption. 

Quote
I am surprised that this board out of all boards is so closed minded about a potentially disruptive technology that can help many people in the world

What is it about cryptocurrency that you think is disruptive?  What industries will be disrupted?  I'm just not seeing what all the hype is about.  It's a clever software idea, but in it's current form it's poorly implemented and in it's ideal form I still don't see a use case that isn't better served by existing alternatives. 

Quote
Let's go attack stock options stragegies because that is "complicated", or maybe gold in our asset allocation, or some other useless investments because they are not S&P 500 or bonds.

We don't attack stock options because they are complicated.  We attack gold for the same reason we attack cryptocurrency.

I applaud your enthusiasm and I encourage you to invest your own money in any way you think is wise.  You can even come here and tell us all about it.  But when you cross the line into trying to convince other people, largely new investors who don't know any better, to invest their money just so that you can make more money?  Now you're looking a little shady.  You don't seem to understand the fundamentals of crypto as an asset class, as distinct from its fundamentals as a technology, and lots of people have tried to explain the difference to you with little or no success. 

But please, continue to offer us your opinions and we will continue to offer you slightly different opinions, and the forum will record our conversation as a record of the points on both sides.  If you're right, you'll win fabulous prizes! 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on February 23, 2018, 07:36:11 AM
Napster was for pirates though.

Corrected. Pirating != theft, no matter how often the RIAA or similar tries to drown us in that particular bit of propaganda. One is making an illegal copy, one removes the original from the rightful owner and therefore does more damage and is a worse crime.

But yes I agree, Napster was 100% for pirates. Even today although torrenting does have some legitimate use-cases, it's still mostly for pirates and will never replace direct download.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on February 23, 2018, 07:42:06 AM
Napster was for pirates though.

Corrected. Pirating != theft, no matter how often the RIAA or similar tries to drown us in that particular bit of propaganda. One is making an illegal copy, one removes the original from the rightful owner and therefore does more damage and is a worse crime.

But yes I agree, Napster was 100% for pirates. Even today although torrenting does have some legitimate use-cases, it's still mostly for pirates and will never replace direct download.

Agreed, I was just trying to keep consistent language.

Napster is a great comparison to Bitcoin though.  It was a new technology (P2P sharing), it popularized use of new technology (mp3s), it became popular because of the benefit for illicit use, it was the top of the pile for a while and then it was supplanted by related new technology (torrents) and was totally unable to make any money in the end despite all that early promise.

If you invested in Napster because you believed in the usefulness of the underlying technology - P2P sharing, you would kinda look like an idiot today.  The argument that you should invest in Bitcoin because you believe in the usefulness of the underlying technology - blockchain . . . well, I guess time will tell.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: robartsd on February 23, 2018, 09:23:48 AM
Even today although torrenting does have some legitimate use-cases, it's still mostly for pirates and will never replace direct download.
Torrent downloads should replace free direct downloads in most cases. The best way to publicly distribute large files over the internet is through torrent downloads where the publisher continuously seeds the torrent. If few people are downloading the file, they'll mostly direct download from the publisher; if many people are downloading the file, the peer-to-peer network will relieve strain on the publisher's server and increase throughput for everyone. This is why many Linux distributions use torrents. For large files, the only reason not to torrent is to control who has access to the download.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 23, 2018, 10:19:32 AM
Torrent downloads should replace free direct downloads in most cases. The best way to publicly distribute large files over the internet is through torrent downloads where the publisher continuously seeds the torrent. If few people are downloading the file, they'll mostly direct download from the publisher; if many people are downloading the file, the peer-to-peer network will relieve strain on the publisher's server and increase throughput for everyone. This is why many Linux distributions use torrents. For large files, the only reason not to torrent is to control who has access to the download.

Even this use case is conceptually flawed in the exact same way that blockchain is.  You don't think the big publishers use the same idea as torrents, on the back end of their internal systems?  You think YouTube is serving files using DOS?

P2P, like blockchain, was an interesting distribution model that was eventually swallowed up by and disappeared into traditional power structures.  It's invisible to the end user, because now that technology has morphed into "the cloud".  It's still clever, and still useful, but those early implementations that got so many web fanbois worked up about changing the world with data sharing now look pretty silly in the Facebook era.

I expect blockchain will suffer the same fate.  All of the early names will disappear, and the underlying technology will be utilized by big corporations in ways that are not obvious to us now, or to the public in the future.  Bitcoin, like Napster, will be another interesting footnote in the history of software development.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on February 23, 2018, 11:35:07 AM
Even today although torrenting does have some legitimate use-cases, it's still mostly for pirates and will never replace direct download.
Torrent downloads should replace free direct downloads in most cases. The best way to publicly distribute large files over the internet is through torrent downloads where the publisher continuously seeds the torrent. If few people are downloading the file, they'll mostly direct download from the publisher; if many people are downloading the file, the peer-to-peer network will relieve strain on the publisher's server and increase throughput for everyone. This is why many Linux distributions use torrents. For large files, the only reason not to torrent is to control who has access to the download.

I think you're wrong. Like Sol said, the benefits of a peer-to-peer network are already incorporated and surpassed in Content Distribution Networks that employ geographically distributed datacenter caches. And that is and always will be a better distribution model than true peer-to-peer networking or torrenting. The low latency and high bandwidth of CDN networks (not to mention other features, like cache invalidation if you want to pull something back) will never be matched by torrents that rely on the last-mile connection to Joe Shmoe.

And it will always be cheaper for the companies involved to do it this way too. The bandwidth that ISPs offer consumers is what you'll get on average given their statistical usage models, but it is vastly vastly overcommitted. If everyone started uploading something at once you would not see anything close to your advertised upload speed. It is much cheaper to do things like they are now - with datacenters that have enormous bandwidth that are in close physical proximity to the customers they are serving - that it would be to upgrade everyone in the world's last-mile connection (and all the upstream switches and wires that would have to be upgraded a billion-fold to match).

Linux distributions use torrents because they are free community projects that don't have budget to pay a CDN for their services and so have to settle for the next-best thing, not because they are visionaries that see something that YouTube or Netflix doesn't.

And like GuitarStv said, we shall see, but I can't see how it'll be any different for Blockchain technology. As with torrents there will be a few legitimate long-term use-cases, but there will be better technical solutions for most things.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on February 23, 2018, 10:58:06 PM
I'm not sure if this point has been made before, but I have been puzzled as to why supporters of crypto currencies spend so much time trying to argue with crypto currency skeptics.

If the rise of crypto currencies is going to be so utterly disruptive, why wouldn't you simply double down on buying up more and more while they are still 'cheap'?

If the rise of crypto currencies is so inevitable, why bother arguing with a few skeptics on a forum? If crypto currency adoption is so inevitable, you shouldn't really need to argue with the skeptics. They'll simply be proven wrong when the global economy abandons government backed fiat currency once and for all and adopts crypto currency, or whatever the end scenario might be.

I'm not convinced by the claim by some that they are altruistically motivated to get others on board so they benefit. If the skeptics don't want to invest, then that's just more for the true believer.

My sneaking feeling is that in the absence of any proven economic fundamentals, the typical crypto currency believer is making a bet on a dream.  When you're so invested in a dream coming true, and the market fundamentals of that dream seem so maddeningly elusive, is the validation of others the best you can hope for?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on February 24, 2018, 03:45:47 AM
I think it's because, unconsciously or not, they realise that the only solid increase in value comes from people hearing and swallowing their bullshit. 'Scuse my language. Might be a bit of reinforcing cognitive dissonance, too. Convincing themselves by regurgitating the same arguments over and over.

On the other hand, you could say the same 'why bother arguing' thing to skeptics too. Just let them lose their money. I would say it's because I care at least a little bit about complete strangers' finances, but if you're going to afford me the right to reasons of altruition I don't see any reason why the other side shouldn't be afforded them as well.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on February 24, 2018, 05:18:54 AM
Yes, interesting point about the altruistic motivations of the crypto currency skeptic.  Although I don't think the altruistic tendencies are symmetrical in this instance.

On the one hand, a crypto currency skeptic might be forgiven for trying to strong arm people away from liquidating their life savings/going into credit card debt and buying cryptos for fear that they will lose it all. I've had a friend who have never expressed interest in finance and investment suddenly emerge as a potential crypto investor.  I was pretty motivated to talk her out of it, but it only seemed to encourage dig into her position.

However, while a crypto currency supporter might be motivated to tell everyone about a great opportunity,  if others aren't interested, or actually openly critical, then how much time do they want to waste arguing the point?

I guess I find the psychology of investment interesting. In this instance the mixture of limited experience, limited information, hubris and over confidence, FOMO and mass hysteria has been quite the spectacle.

I'm also conscious that some fans of cryptos may actually be sitting on significant paper gains of a magnitude that they would never have imagined. Of course, despite these gains being unforeseen, it's human nature to attribute great investing skill and foresight to these past decisions.  I imagine it's pretty difficult to persuade someone sitting on real or paper crypto gains that what they did is attributable to luck, and is in the long term, highly likely to be unsustainable as from their perspective they've already been proven right.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 24, 2018, 10:00:25 AM
Crypto proponents literally make themselves rich by convincing other people to bid up the price of coins they already own.  It's classic conflict of interest.

Crypto skeptics generally have nothing to gain by convincing people to avoid investing in crypto.  I don't own any, so I don't make or lose any money based on your decisions.

I guess this simplified analysis could be clouded by shorters.  Is it even possible to short sell cryptos yet?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on February 24, 2018, 02:05:28 PM
I guess I find the psychology of investment interesting. In this instance the mixture of limited experience, limited information, hubris and over confidence, FOMO and mass hysteria has been quite the spectacle.

I will say that one good thing to come out of all this is the chance to watch one of these mass delusion bubbles happen in real time instead of a history book. You can even kinda feel the psychology tugging at your own brain. "These people are all so dumb, I could just throw a couple grand in and double it.." I don't quite know what the difference is between me and all the people who dip the toe in and then take a dive - a sickly cocktail of a little bit greedier, maybe a little bit more dissatisfaction with current state of life (looking for 'cheap winnings' to escape situation), a little bit less financially cautious. Maybe the wrong google searches taking them to r/bitcoin instead of r/buttcoin, maybe they actually believe all the ludicrous hype, maybe they've had bad experiences with banks and are looking for alternatives in all the wrong places.

One of the smartest guys I know has fallen down the well and his favourite argument is the 'store of value' - an argument which has many hideous flaws that you really have to just outright ignore if you're going to continue to use it as your justification for speculation. My point here is I'm not sure that outright intelligence is a factor. In fact it almost seems by design to target people who feel they are of higher than average intelligence (let's them say that other people just 'don't understand' blockchain/crypto/etc).

Anyway, you're right - it's fascinating. The hook gets into peoples' brains for a whole bunch of different reasons and likewise the skeptics must belabour many different points of critique to try and get them out. I tend to keep it to internet forums though, it's not worth losing friends over.

Ugh, even my brother is buying and checking charts all the time apparently. He's already in such a good financial position already! Why bother?? Ugh.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on February 24, 2018, 02:52:28 PM
I think you are all being uncharitable to crypto proponents. I think they (by and large, although there are exceptions) are genuinely interested in and excited about the technology and want to share. The same reason everyone else is here on the forum, be it investing or frugality or tax information or whatever else, they want to help people.

Now, I think they're wrong. And the conflict of interest is real regardless how pure their intentions. But there's no reason to assume that they don't have the best interest of their fellow Mustachian at heart.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on February 25, 2018, 04:34:46 AM
I will say that one good thing to come out of all this is the chance to watch one of these mass delusion bubbles happen in real time instead of a history book. You can even kinda feel the psychology tugging at your own brain. "These people are all so dumb, I could just throw a couple grand in and double it.." I don't quite know what the difference is between me and all the people who dip the toe in and then take a dive - a sickly cocktail of a little bit greedier, maybe a little bit more dissatisfaction with current state of life (looking for 'cheap winnings' to escape situation), a little bit less financially cautious. Maybe the wrong google searches taking them to r/bitcoin instead of r/buttcoin, maybe they actually believe all the ludicrous hype, maybe they've had bad experiences with banks and are looking for alternatives in all the wrong places.

Great analysis there and I can relate.

I'll be the first to admit that the idea of putting some money into crypto currency had previously crossed my mind. My interest was initially piqued by the hype about the disruptive nature of the technology. But even when I became more skeptical I still thought it could be a 'greater fool' type speculation, although the ethics of doing that turns me off. But a younger version of myself probably would have thought more seriously about diving in. I've certainly made a few stock picks earlier on in my life that turned into a centrifuge of value destruction. 

But I don't think crypto fans are dumb, although they perhaps aren't skilled at extracting their own desires from a disinterested and objectively analysis of this phenomena.  My guess is that they are drawing rational conclusions based on the information they have. Their psychological investment seems to suppress critical evaluation. There's also a strong confirmation bias mixed with relative inexperience that then starts filtering out all the information that seems to conflict with the outcome they are hoping for.  I can definitely relate to this when I think back to my earlier stock picking mistakes.

The people who I have personally come across who are into crypto do seem to have something in common.  They appear to be trying to make quick gains to compensate for living beyond their means for the previous decade, or two decades, or in one instance three and half decades. It's like they never ever thought to think long term about their finances either due to disinterest, lack of financial literacy, lack of confidence, a sense of hopelessness or a combination of any of the above and more.  One day they realise they need to do something about their situation and 7% average returns per annum via the stockmarket just doesn't cut it, or they don't have enough savings for it to be of interest, and btw, the Stockmarket is risky/overvalued/going to fall any minute, didn't you hear? And so bizarrely they find themselves researching bitcoin.

So if you haven't turned your mind to investing, and if it's frankly too late to let compounding returns of diversified investments work for you, then the gains that are breathlessly reported in the media certainly creates conditions where the allure becomes irresistible.

That's not to say all crypto fans are in this situation, and probably doesn't account for the early or earlier adopters. I'm probably more familiar with late comers to the hype.


Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 25, 2018, 08:37:46 AM
Penny stocks are a stupid investment.  The community here, including MMM, have determined crypto is much the same.

At least penny stocks are technically regulated by the SEC to prevent outright fraud.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 25, 2018, 11:24:53 AM
Insightful post mrhorsey.  It makes me wonder more about the youthfulness/financial experience of crypto supporters.

Having lived through the tech bubble of 2000 and the 2008 financial crisis, I can tell you these events have shaped my views on investing.  I think that those who experienced one or both of these events, especially with significant financial exposure to the market are more likely to shun crypto.

For example if you remember the Pets.com TV ads, with the sock puppet stating "pets.com... because pets can't drive!" - you're probably not a crypto supporter.  We've seen the hype and 'irrational exuberance' and have seen how a vast majority of these end.

Indeed.  This point is worth exploring a bit more.  It was clear to a lot of people that the Internet had the potential to be a hugely disruptive technology--and they were right.  In the 90s, even the general public could see the Internet was a transformational technology and wanted to invest.   However, things that seemed clear at the time turned out quite a bit differently than a reasonable person might expect.   For example, look at the early ISPs, like Compuserve, Prodigy, and America Online.   Those found clearly saw the way things were headed, long before most people had even heard of the Internet.  However, they didn't anticipate the web brower, which essentially killed Compuserve and Prodigy.  AOL managed to get out in front of it, and became an enormous company, buying out Time Warner in the largest corporate merger in history up until that time.  But AOL didn't anticipate that broadband would kill dial-up, and now AOL is a tiny shell of its former self.

Another instructive tale is Yahoo!.   Again, it was clear to the founders the world needed a searchable portal, which they created, and Yahoo! became the most popular site on the Internet for a number of years.  Yahoo! had features like Yahoo! mail, sort of an early Dropbox-type feature called Briefcase, music streaming, and a whole bunch of nifty features, many of which I saw for the first time on Yahoo!.    Interestingly, Yahoo! used Google search technology for a time, and was in talks to buy Google twice, and passed both times.   Ultimately Yahoo! couldn't develop superior search technology on its own, and is now a tiny shell of its former self.  There were another of other companies similar to Yahoo! like Lycos, Infoseek, and Excite, and they all clearly saw where things were headed and came out with good products, that just didn't survive. 

Then there were companies like Webvan, promising Internet grocery delivery.  That's not a terrible idea, Amazon, Instacart, and some grocery chains are doing it today.   Just didn't work out for Webvan.  Same with Kozmo.com that had one hour delivery of videos and other things, and was even starting to make money in some locations.  Again, internet ordering and quick delivery is still around, just not from Kozmo.  Of course, there is social networking.  There was Friendster, which got replaced by Myspace, which in turn was replaced by Facebook. 

Point is, a lot of smart people saw which way the winds were blowing,  got in on the ground floor, and launched products that people wanted and used but either couldn't stay capitalized long enough, or got replaced by something even better.  So even if you truely believe crypto is the way things are headed,  there is still no reason to believe any particular crypto won't simply be replaced by a newer, better crypto sometime down the road. 

That said, I don't see a need for crypto.  It doesn't function like money.   I do see some potential uses for blockchain, but I already own the companies that make use of it in my index funds. 

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on February 25, 2018, 02:37:36 PM
A minor side point but personally I think Google won the search battle based on design. Yahoo! was revolting web 1.0 and Google made the correct case for web minimalism. As far as I know most of their search innovation came after they had made it big and actually had the money and resources to invest in research.

Great post, but also just wanted to reiterate not to buy into the blockchain/internet comparison. It's a total non-sequitur to relate the two, which i hope is totally obvious to anyone with half a brain.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on February 25, 2018, 04:46:20 PM
Great analysis of the could-have-beens, should'vebeens, has beens of the techboom Telecaster.

One point I'd like to add is that crypto fans seem to miss is that disruptive technologies are all around us. Cars, Airlines, The Internet.  And they've all had their booms, they've all attracted capital from investors trying to capitalise on their booms, but in the beginning of each boom it's near impossible figuring out which companies will a) survive, b) prosper and c) dominate once an industry matures.

If you had bet that cars would take over the world, you'd be right.  But as one example, which horse and carriage maker converting to automobiles would you have put your money on?  There are many many many car manufacturers that never made it.

Airlines were the big thing in the sixties that drew in significant investment capital. A slightly different example as many countries insisted on their own national carrier at the time, but the fierce competition within the US domestic industry probably helped consumers at the time, but investors overall were probably the losers.

Other recent or current booms I know of that suck in investment into little companies all competing with each other, but ultimately burning up investor capital with little return are rare earth miners, as well as lithium miners.  Actually medicinal marijuana is probably another one.

I don't know enough about Crypto currency to really be able to say anything sensible about it's viability as a disruptive technology.   

But one of the key differences between the tech boom, cars, airlines etc, and crypto currency is that former represent disruptive technologies where investors lost a lot of money trying to bet on which company would be successful exploiting that technology, and ultimately a few companies grew to prosper and in some cases dominate a particular industry. Of course those investors who picked Apple over Apricot, and stuck with it, did very well indeed.

Whereas with crypto currency purchases, while the underlying technology may promise disruption of existing forms of value exchange, by buying the crypto currency an investor isn't actually investing in a business or enterprise  that can actually exploit competitive advantage to create value and wealth.

I know this is old hat to most people on this forum.  But I think it's a distinction worth making when comparing the tech boom and its few successes many failures, and the crytpo currency boom.



Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 25, 2018, 05:24:28 PM
Great analysis of the could-have-beens, should'vebeens, has beens of the techboom Telecaster.

One point I'd like to add is that crypto fans seem to miss is that disruptive technologies are all around us. Cars, Airlines, The Internet.  And they've all had their booms, they've all attracted capital from investors trying to capitalise on their booms, but in the beginning of each boom it's near impossible figuring out which companies will a) survive, b) prosper and c) dominate once an industry matures.

If you had bet that cars would take over the world, you'd be right.  But as one example, which horse and carriage maker converting to automobiles would you have put your money on?  There are many many many car manufacturers that never made it.

Indeed.  Here is an exerprt from Warren Buffett's famous 1999 Forbes article.  For context, this is when Internet stocks were flying high and could do no wrong.  Emphasis mine. 

The other truly transforming business invention of the first quarter of the century, besides the car, was the airplane--another industry whose plainly brilliant future would have caused investors to salivate. So I went back to check out aircraft manufacturers and found that in the 1919-39 period, there were about 300 companies, only a handful still breathing today. Among the planes made then--we must have been the Silicon Valley of that age--were both the Nebraska and the Omaha, two aircraft that even the most loyal Nebraskan no longer relies upon.

Move on to failures of airlines. Here's a list of 129 airlines that in the past 20 years filed for bankruptcy. Continental was smart enough to make that list twice. As of 1992, in fact--though the picture would have improved since then--the money that had been made since the dawn of aviation by all of this country's airline companies was zero. Absolutely zero.

Sizing all this up, I like to think that if I'd been at Kitty Hawk in 1903 when Orville Wright took off, I would have been farsighted enough, and public-spirited enough--I owed this to future capitalists--to shoot him down. I mean, Karl Marx couldn't have done as much damage to capitalists as Orville did.

I won't dwell on other glamorous businesses that dramatically changed our lives but concurrently failed to deliver rewards to U.S. investors: the manufacture of radios and televisions, for example. But I will draw a lesson from these businesses: The key to investing is not assessing how much an industry is going to affect society, or how much it will grow, but rather determining the competitive advantage of any given company and, above all, the durability of that advantage. The products or services that have wide, sustainable moats around them are the ones that deliver rewards to investors.


http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1999/11/22/269071/index.htm
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 26, 2018, 12:09:40 AM
Even today although torrenting does have some legitimate use-cases, it's still mostly for pirates and will never replace direct download.
Torrent downloads should replace free direct downloads in most cases. The best way to publicly distribute large files over the internet is through torrent downloads where the publisher continuously seeds the torrent. If few people are downloading the file, they'll mostly direct download from the publisher; if many people are downloading the file, the peer-to-peer network will relieve strain on the publisher's server and increase throughput for everyone. This is why many Linux distributions use torrents. For large files, the only reason not to torrent is to control who has access to the download.

I think you're wrong. Like Sol said, the benefits of a peer-to-peer network are already incorporated and surpassed in Content Distribution Networks that employ geographically distributed datacenter caches. And that is and always will be a better distribution model than true peer-to-peer networking or torrenting. The low latency and high bandwidth of CDN networks (not to mention other features, like cache invalidation if you want to pull something back) will never be matched by torrents that rely on the last-mile connection to Joe Shmoe.

And it will always be cheaper for the companies involved to do it this way too. The bandwidth that ISPs offer consumers is what you'll get on average given their statistical usage models, but it is vastly vastly overcommitted. If everyone started uploading something at once you would not see anything close to your advertised upload speed. It is much cheaper to do things like they are now - with datacenters that have enormous bandwidth that are in close physical proximity to the customers they are serving - that it would be to upgrade everyone in the world's last-mile connection (and all the upstream switches and wires that would have to be upgraded a billion-fold to match).

Linux distributions use torrents because they are free community projects that don't have budget to pay a CDN for their services and so have to settle for the next-best thing, not because they are visionaries that see something that YouTube or Netflix doesn't.

And like GuitarStv said, we shall see, but I can't see how it'll be any different for Blockchain technology. As with torrents there will be a few legitimate long-term use-cases, but there will be better technical solutions for most things.

Agreed p2p may not be faster or more efficient, it is simply a way to reduce the burden of bandwidth/cost when involving very large files or very large numbers of downloads or both.

When Windows10 was in its free distribution phase, it utilized peer to peer downloading systems.  If you didn't uncheck a box buried in the options menu your internet connection would be used to seed other people's downloads as your pc was downloading your copy.

This is quite a sidetrack though as the relative utility of the p2p download model is a small niche within a well-off subculture, namely those who owned personal computers, used them for leisure activities, and paid for high speed internet.  It provided no additional access or value to anyone outside of that subculture, and the value added was marginal as it only impacted recreation and a tiny fraction of discretionary spending.

I can see how to some this would appear to parallel blockchain.  P2p didn't solve any fundamental societal interactions, though.  Blockchain solves the issue of trust, and is currently directly usable for financial transactions.  This decoupling of trust from 3rd parties is a paradigm shift.  There are layers of institutions and middlemen built into our society to facilitate trust that have implicit costs in our daily lives.  We've all accepted them because they've always been there, but they may not always have to be.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: privatefarmer on February 26, 2018, 12:24:16 AM
This market is messed up by the "systemic risk" argument. Since the big banks won't let you margin up buying BTC, there isn't much systemic risk. But its worse, most retail brokers won't even let you short the BTC futures.  So the dumb money is going long because its the only thing they can do.

 The smart money is buying BTC and selling over priced futures contracts. They will close the near contract and open the next.  This will keep a buying pressure on actual bitcoin for the next few months at least.  sure you have capital holding costs and some MESSY transaction costs, but there is over a 1300 spread between a coin now on coinbase and a January 17th coin on the CBOE.

I don't see a correction for a few months at a minimum.

LOL. Woops.

Price on 12/11/17 : ~$17000
Price today : ~$10,000

loss of 41%.

Your post sounded all intelligent and stuff though. Nice job.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 26, 2018, 12:45:32 AM
Crypto proponents literally make themselves rich by convincing other people to bid up the price of coins they already own.  It's classic conflict of interest.

Crypto skeptics generally have nothing to gain by convincing people to avoid investing in crypto.  I don't own any, so I don't make or lose any money based on your decisions.

I guess this simplified analysis could be clouded by shorters.  Is it even possible to short sell cryptos yet?

This is a false dichotomy as everyone in here who stomps on crypto and beats the drum of index funds benefits when everyone else sticks to the plan of index funds.  The wall of pain thrown up against any discussion has a territorial protecting-our-turf feel to it.  If you're reading these posts from the mindset of "crypto is worthless and there's nothing you can say to convince me" then we are all wasting our time.

I've learned from both sides and am honestly quite intimidated by the entire prospect of managing my long-term finances.  I read all the JCollins stock articles.  they seem great and very bullish but he has holes in his gameplan for possible future timelines. And an unscientific flair for extolling stock virtues that, if you replaced the word "stock" with ICO could be mistaken for a crypto launch post.

The more I learn about financial markets in all forms the more I want to have eggs in as many baskets as possible.  I know that goes against the "100% vanguard index fund allin" plan advocated in general here.  Mustachianism resonates powerfully with me, though I can't figure out why that one specific investment vehicle has taken over this world to the exclusion of others, when nearly everything else about Mustachianism is about moderation/restraint. 

Also the more I learn about traditional markets, the more the "Stay away it's all market manipulation!" argument against crypto gets weaker. 

But yeah, don't buy shitcoins and participate in random ICOs bc they have a flashy website, please.  And don't buy crypto to try and get rich.  It's simply a relatively uncorrelated, new asset class that diversifies a portfolio and may provide a hedge against traditional markets/currencies.   

I'll get flamed for saying that but it's basically the opinion of the JPMorgan Global Research Division, and their CEO calls bitcoin a fraud.  B/c y'know, CEOs of banks are terrified that CCs will undermine their massive profits.  In Bank of America's annual report to the SEC https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000007085818000009/bac-1231201710xk.htm (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000007085818000009/bac-1231201710xk.htm) they cited cryptocurrencies as a direct competitor and threat to their profit margins.

From a philosophical standpoint the reason why you buy bitcoin for example, over microsoft stock that is using open source bitcoin code, is for the reason my economics 101 prof taught me long before crypto existed: that the marble wrapped huge bank building is a wasteful monument to the past.  The physical operation of it wastes money and the armies of employees and executives that run each bank siphon tremendous amounts of money out of the financial ecosystem to make trusted transactions possible.  But we use it, he said, because of habit, because change is ponderous, because it is entrenched, and mainly because we have no other option.

Once you realize that cumbersome and expensive system is suddenly optional it opens up a whole new perspective.  And once you participate in it and realize how game changing it could be you want to share it with everyone.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 26, 2018, 12:57:47 AM

Great analysis there and I can relate.

I'll be the first to admit that the idea of putting some money into crypto currency had previously crossed my mind. My interest was initially piqued by the hype about the disruptive nature of the technology. But even when I became more skeptical I still thought it could be a 'greater fool' type speculation, although the ethics of doing that turns me off. But a younger version of myself probably would have thought more seriously about diving in. I've certainly made a few stock picks earlier on in my life that turned into a centrifuge of value destruction. 

But I don't think crypto fans are dumb, although they perhaps aren't skilled at extracting their own desires from a disinterested and objectively analysis of this phenomena.  My guess is that they are drawing rational conclusions based on the information they have. Their psychological investment seems to suppress critical evaluation. There's also a strong confirmation bias mixed with relative inexperience that then starts filtering out all the information that seems to conflict with the outcome they are hoping for.  I can definitely relate to this when I think back to my earlier stock picking mistakes.

The people who I have personally come across who are into crypto do seem to have something in common.  They appear to be trying to make quick gains to compensate for living beyond their means for the previous decade, or two decades, or in one instance three and half decades. It's like they never ever thought to think long term about their finances either due to disinterest, lack of financial literacy, lack of confidence, a sense of hopelessness or a combination of any of the above and more.  One day they realise they need to do something about their situation and 7% average returns per annum via the stockmarket just doesn't cut it, or they don't have enough savings for it to be of interest, and btw, the Stockmarket is risky/overvalued/going to fall any minute, didn't you hear? And so bizarrely they find themselves researching bitcoin.

So if you haven't turned your mind to investing, and if it's frankly too late to let compounding returns of diversified investments work for you, then the gains that are breathlessly reported in the media certainly creates conditions where the allure becomes irresistible.

That's not to say all crypto fans are in this situation, and probably doesn't account for the early or earlier adopters. I'm probably more familiar with late comers to the hype.

This description sounds like the speculative-bubble type crypto enthusiast.  These are the people in it for the wrong reasons, who are going to get burned, and who are not going to provide value to the network.  If you read misterhorsey's post and it resonated at all with you for reasons to get into crypto, DO NOT DO SO.
Crypto is about adding another layer to your portfolio to diversify, hedge, and yes take advantage of a rapidly growing asset class.  Don't throw darts at junk coins to try and make it huge.  If you seriously want to participate, do your research, find a project that has strong support and a meaningful long term purpose that provides value, and be in it for the long run.  Anything on a short timeline is straight gambling.  2017 was an outlier year.  It may happen again someday but it will not happen consistently, and perhaps not for years.

Myself and those I know who are involved in it live within our means, have a strong focus on savings and traditional market retirement plans.  We're bullish on the technology and its potential long term implications. Crypto if anything makes me want to be more financially restrained as now there are more baskets that I want to be putting eggs into.  And yes I do spend my crypto when the time comes, I've paid for my last two computers with btc, for example.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 26, 2018, 12:59:50 AM
Great analysis of the could-have-beens, should'vebeens, has beens of the techboom Telecaster.

One point I'd like to add is that crypto fans seem to miss is that disruptive technologies are all around us. Cars, Airlines, The Internet.  And they've all had their booms, they've all attracted capital from investors trying to capitalise on their booms, but in the beginning of each boom it's near impossible figuring out which companies will a) survive, b) prosper and c) dominate once an industry matures.

If you had bet that cars would take over the world, you'd be right.  But as one example, which horse and carriage maker converting to automobiles would you have put your money on?  There are many many many car manufacturers that never made it.

Indeed.  Here is an exerprt from Warren Buffett's famous 1999 Forbes article.  For context, this is when Internet stocks were flying high and could do no wrong.  Emphasis mine. 

The other truly transforming business invention of the first quarter of the century, besides the car, was the airplane--another industry whose plainly brilliant future would have caused investors to salivate. So I went back to check out aircraft manufacturers and found that in the 1919-39 period, there were about 300 companies, only a handful still breathing today. Among the planes made then--we must have been the Silicon Valley of that age--were both the Nebraska and the Omaha, two aircraft that even the most loyal Nebraskan no longer relies upon.

Move on to failures of airlines. Here's a list of 129 airlines that in the past 20 years filed for bankruptcy. Continental was smart enough to make that list twice. As of 1992, in fact--though the picture would have improved since then--the money that had been made since the dawn of aviation by all of this country's airline companies was zero. Absolutely zero.

Sizing all this up, I like to think that if I'd been at Kitty Hawk in 1903 when Orville Wright took off, I would have been farsighted enough, and public-spirited enough--I owed this to future capitalists--to shoot him down. I mean, Karl Marx couldn't have done as much damage to capitalists as Orville did.

I won't dwell on other glamorous businesses that dramatically changed our lives but concurrently failed to deliver rewards to U.S. investors: the manufacture of radios and televisions, for example. But I will draw a lesson from these businesses: The key to investing is not assessing how much an industry is going to affect society, or how much it will grow, but rather determining the competitive advantage of any given company and, above all, the durability of that advantage. The products or services that have wide, sustainable moats around them are the ones that deliver rewards to investors.


http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1999/11/22/269071/index.htm

This is a very informative and thought provoking citation, thank you.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 26, 2018, 01:02:19 AM
This market is messed up by the "systemic risk" argument. Since the big banks won't let you margin up buying BTC, there isn't much systemic risk. But its worse, most retail brokers won't even let you short the BTC futures.  So the dumb money is going long because its the only thing they can do.

 The smart money is buying BTC and selling over priced futures contracts. They will close the near contract and open the next.  This will keep a buying pressure on actual bitcoin for the next few months at least.  sure you have capital holding costs and some MESSY transaction costs, but there is over a 1300 spread between a coin now on coinbase and a January 17th coin on the CBOE.

I don't see a correction for a few months at a minimum.

LOL. Woops.

Price on 12/11/17 : ~$17000
Price today : ~$10,000

loss of 41%.

Your post sounded all intelligent and stuff though. Nice job.

Agreed anyone looking at a price chart by early December could see that the market was in for a correction, the question was just "how soon?"
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: privatefarmer on February 26, 2018, 04:13:39 AM
Crypto proponents literally make themselves rich by convincing other people to bid up the price of coins they already own.  It's classic conflict of interest.

Crypto skeptics generally have nothing to gain by convincing people to avoid investing in crypto.  I don't own any, so I don't make or lose any money based on your decisions.

I guess this simplified analysis could be clouded by shorters.  Is it even possible to short sell cryptos yet?

This is a false dichotomy as everyone in here who stomps on crypto and beats the drum of index funds benefits when everyone else sticks to the plan of index funds.  The wall of pain thrown up against any discussion has a territorial protecting-our-turf feel to it.  If you're reading these posts from the mindset of "crypto is worthless and there's nothing you can say to convince me" then we are all wasting our time.

I've learned from both sides and am honestly quite intimidated by the entire prospect of managing my long-term finances.  I read all the JCollins stock articles.  they seem great and very bullish but he has holes in his gameplan for possible future timelines. And an unscientific flair for extolling stock virtues that, if you replaced the word "stock" with ICO could be mistaken for a crypto launch post.

The more I learn about financial markets in all forms the more I want to have eggs in as many baskets as possible.  I know that goes against the "100% vanguard index fund allin" plan advocated in general here.  Mustachianism resonates powerfully with me, though I can't figure out why that one specific investment vehicle has taken over this world to the exclusion of others, when nearly everything else about Mustachianism is about moderation/restraint. 

Also the more I learn about traditional markets, the more the "Stay away it's all market manipulation!" argument against crypto gets weaker. 

But yeah, don't buy shitcoins and participate in random ICOs bc they have a flashy website, please.  And don't buy crypto to try and get rich.  It's simply a relatively uncorrelated, new asset class that diversifies a portfolio and may provide a hedge against traditional markets/currencies.   

I'll get flamed for saying that but it's basically the opinion of the JPMorgan Global Research Division, and their CEO calls bitcoin a fraud.  B/c y'know, CEOs of banks are terrified that CCs will undermine their massive profits.  In Bank of America's annual report to the SEC https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000007085818000009/bac-1231201710xk.htm (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000007085818000009/bac-1231201710xk.htm) they cited cryptocurrencies as a direct competitor and threat to their profit margins.

From a philosophical standpoint the reason why you buy bitcoin for example, over microsoft stock that is using open source bitcoin code, is for the reason my economics 101 prof taught me long before crypto existed: that the marble wrapped huge bank building is a wasteful monument to the past.  The physical operation of it wastes money and the armies of employees and executives that run each bank siphon tremendous amounts of money out of the financial ecosystem to make trusted transactions possible.  But we use it, he said, because of habit, because change is ponderous, because it is entrenched, and mainly because we have no other option.

Once you realize that cumbersome and expensive system is suddenly optional it opens up a whole new perspective.  And once you participate in it and realize how game changing it could be you want to share it with everyone.

yeah. I just don't buy it. CC is essentially the same concept as any other currency, ie gold. when Jesus walked the earth, 1oz of gold could buy a nice robe. Today, 1oz of gold can buy a nice suit. in other words, gold has bounced around more than the stock market, however in the end after thousands of years it's worth essentially the same amount.

How can bitcoin be a reliable currency when it fluctuates an insane amount in a day? How can Apple possibly price it's iphones in Bitcoin, for example, if the value of bitcoin goes up and down so much? They can't. A currency needs to be STABLE, not more volatile than the stock market on crack.

The comment about marble banks being a thing of the past - yeah I agree. It's called Ally bank. Discover Bank. Simple Bank. etc. etc. online banking is replacing brick and mortar. Credit Cards replaced cash. Paypal replaced wire transfers. But one fundamental difference - they all use DOLLARS as their currency. We can exchange DOLLARS back and forth electronically w/ ease and instantaneously for nearly nothing these days, and it's safe! AND backed by FDIC insurance... Technology will improve, maybe block chain has a role in that, but buying ANY currency whether it be gold, bitcoin, or sheep skin, is SPECULATING. not investing. big big BIG difference.

Investing is owning something that PAYS you a share of it's profits. Ie a business. Or owning a loan instrument that PAYS you interest (bond, CD, etc). Or maybe owning a piece of real estate that PAYS you rent. At the end of the day, if you aren't being PAID you aren't investing. It's that simple. Buying something and then hoping a bigger fool will come along and buy it from you for a higher price is gambling, not investing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 26, 2018, 08:00:49 AM
CEOs of banks are terrified that CCs will undermine their massive profits.  In Bank of America's annual report to the SEC https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000007085818000009/bac-1231201710xk.htm (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000007085818000009/bac-1231201710xk.htm) they cited cryptocurrencies as a direct competitor and threat to their profit margins.

That's not my interpretation of that document at all, though it is the one I've seen reported on breathlessly pro-crypto web sites.  Rather, that document says crypto is a hugely volatile asset class with no regulation or oversight to keep people from getting burned, and they are worried their banking customers will lose a fortune.  This makes crypto a systemic risk to their lending portfolios that they cannot control.  It's not a risk to their business model, it's a threat to their customers.  Customers who will have to empty all of their bank accounts when they lose everything.

Notice the subtle distinction between the two statements.  Crypto doesn't directly threaten banking, it threatens the assets of investors who use banking.  No business wants its customers to all go broke on the same day.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: robartsd on February 26, 2018, 09:43:02 AM
This market is messed up by the "systemic risk" argument. Since the big banks won't let you margin up buying BTC, there isn't much systemic risk. But its worse, most retail brokers won't even let you short the BTC futures.  So the dumb money is going long because its the only thing they can do.

 The smart money is buying BTC and selling over priced futures contracts. They will close the near contract and open the next.  This will keep a buying pressure on actual bitcoin for the next few months at least.  sure you have capital holding costs and some MESSY transaction costs, but there is over a 1300 spread between a coin now on coinbase and a January 17th coin on the CBOE.

I don't see a correction for a few months at a minimum.
LOL. Woops.

Price on 12/11/17 : ~$17000
Price today : ~$10,000

loss of 41%.

Your post sounded all intelligent and stuff though. Nice job.
To be fair, these posts are more than 2 months apart. Of course, the recent low for bitcoin was before 2/11/2018 - ~$7000 on 2/5/18 and the price has remained below $17,000 since 1/6/2018. If the prediction had been "I see a correction within a few months maximum" it might have been spot on (assuming the correction is over rather than simply resting - hard to tell with current data).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on February 26, 2018, 10:51:36 PM
i don't wish to address every point you make but these two points struck me:

The more I learn about financial markets in all forms the more I want to have eggs in as many baskets as possible.  I know that goes against the "100% vanguard index fund allin" plan advocated in general here.  Mustachianism resonates powerfully with me, though I can't figure out why that one specific investment vehicle has taken over this world to the exclusion of others, when nearly everything else about Mustachianism is about moderation/restraint. 

Having all your money invested in a 100% US Vanguard index fund certainly isn't putting your funds into every single basket.  But it sure is a lot of baskets.

I'm writing this as an Australian who has around 50% allocated to international indexes. I wish I could have the US domestic market as my home market as it's significantly more diverse than Australia (which like Canada is dominated by resources and financial companies).

No market is perfect, but the stockmarket is a workable compromise that offers diversification, some degree of transparency, reasonable regulatory oversight, a ready market of buyers and sellers and liquidity. It's a functional proxy for the US economy, but structured in such a way that you can get in and out without too many transactions costs. Which is made easier via an index fund.

If 100% stocks isn't your thing then you could go to one of the blended life strategy funds that mixes in international exposure, as well as fixed interest, property or whatever mix they are offering.

You probably know about these options and they may not be for you and that's fine. 

I thought I'd point it out however as the idea of wanting to maximise your return by slicing and dicing every single egg to put it into every single basket is potentially a case of over thinking, over optimising and spending energy to maximise returns, but engaging in an exercise that really offers marginal benefits.

Don't forget that the more time you spend trying to become an expert in crypto currency, index investing, stock picking etc etc, is less time you spend going surfing, hiking, learning new recipes, riding a bike which are investments with undeniably tangible returns on mental and physical health.  Frankly, squeezing a few more extra per cent out of a asset allocation is a waste of your precious time on this planet compared to enriching your experiential world!

(Woops, that escalated quickly).


From a philosophical standpoint the reason why you buy bitcoin for example, over microsoft stock that is using open source bitcoin code, is for the reason my economics 101 prof taught me long before crypto existed: that the marble wrapped huge bank building is a wasteful monument to the past.  The physical operation of it wastes money and the armies of employees and executives that run each bank siphon tremendous amounts of money out of the financial ecosystem to make trusted transactions possible.  But we use it, he said, because of habit, because change is ponderous, because it is entrenched, and mainly because we have no other option.

Once you realize that cumbersome and expensive system is suddenly optional it opens up a whole new perspective.  And once you participate in it and realize how game changing it could be you want to share it with everyone.

I love the reference to "marble wrapped huge bank building is a wasteful monument to the past".

The recent GFC experience of staid trading banks mutating into excessively risk taking investment banks has undermined my faith in the role banks have in lubricating the economy.  All the douchebags banker types acting without moral hazard, snorting cocaine, stealing from clients, defrauding their own companies and driving expensive sports cars makes their claim as having a critical role in the efficient allocation of capital in a sophisticated economy seem really dubious.  Australia has by comparison with the US a very strictly regulated banking regime dominated by 4 banks which run as a stable, but uncompetitive cartel.  It's the price we seem to think we need to pay for stability.

So i'm sympathetic to the idea of certain technologies having a disruptive effect on the status quo.

However, as much as you'd like it to be, it doesn't necessarily follow that crypto currency innovation is the silver bullet to central bank control over an economy, on a societal and economic level. There's a whole range of intertwined and vested interests, from bankers to individuals, that have a lot to lose from the current system, and little to gain from whatever is being proposed.

And similarly, it doesn't following that buying crypto currency is a good investment on an individual level. The volatility is too high, the risk of your investment going to zero is too real, there are no earnings, it has no yield. It has no market fundamentals.

The only thing going for it is price appreciation. Which has obviously made it extremely successful as a speculative play for some.

As always, eager to learn more.



Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 27, 2018, 10:32:35 AM
The more I learn about financial markets in all forms the more I want to have eggs in as many baskets as possible.  I know that goes against the "100% vanguard index fund allin" plan advocated in general here.  Mustachianism resonates powerfully with me, though I can't figure out why that one specific investment vehicle has taken over this world to the exclusion of others, when nearly everything else about Mustachianism is about moderation/restraint. 

You think that investing in a diversified stock mutual fund is insufficiently diverse because it doesn't include new asset classes like crypto?

By that same logic, you can be healthier if you diversify your fitness plan by eschewing diet and exercise and including a small allocation to heroin use.  For the sake of moderation.  You wouldn't want to put all of your eggs in the "diet and exercise" basket when there are so many alternatives out there for diversification.  Why risk missing out on the potential upside of heroin?

Blockchain is an interesting idea, but as far as I can tell crypto coins are all 100% scam products designed from the outset to defraud investors.  They are deliberately constructed to avoid regulations and consumer protections, to bypass sanctions, and to facilitate illegal activity.  Their only value to anyone is as a way to cash in on internet hype by convincing people to give you money in exchange for a digital object that creates no revenue stream.  It's modern day snake oil, all breathless promises and no substance.

I really really wanted to love bitcoin.  I tried so hard to justify it's existence, to find a profitable use case that would justify a nonzero price, but so far I'm coming up empty.  If someone out there in mustache land has an economic justification for a price above zero, I'm still eagerly seeking it out.  Please share.

At this point I'd rather invest in beanie babies.  At least there are collectors out there that value pristine examples of early edition ones, and they are distinguishable physical objects that took real work to create.  They also lack a revenue stream or a justification for existing beyond fanboy demand, but at least they literally exist in the universe instead of just as tradeable ideas.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 28, 2018, 12:06:10 AM
The more I learn about financial markets in all forms the more I want to have eggs in as many baskets as possible.  I know that goes against the "100% vanguard index fund allin" plan advocated in general here.  Mustachianism resonates powerfully with me, though I can't figure out why that one specific investment vehicle has taken over this world to the exclusion of others, when nearly everything else about Mustachianism is about moderation/restraint. 

You think that investing in a diversified stock mutual fund is insufficiently diverse because it doesn't include new asset classes like crypto?

I think a diversified stock fund/vanguard index / etc is the ideal investment vehicle for equities.

My retirement account is my priority, it is primarily in exactly those such funds, with a very small portion of individual picks.

I tend towards exhaustive research and careful action.  JCollins series for example is a wealth of data.  His experience and calm countenance are a great antidote for short term market angst.  The critical point of long term buy and hold is to stick to the plan, and I plan to do so.

Yet I have been trained to think scientifically, and the entire premise behind the 100% index fund allin is the utterly unscientific "the market always goes up."   The US stock market has always done so, it will hopefully continue to do so. 

A number of factors are substantively different now than in the first 100 years, weakening that empirical evidence.  Volatility is much higher.  Algorithmic trading/HFT and the seemingly consequence-free major stock market firms are siphoning money out of the market.  The US stock market is zero-sum (technically, slightly negative sum after fees), though it continues to grow on the whole.  I only have glimpses into today's market through the expertise of others, but as someone who utilizes statistics, I understand generally that:
as volatility increases, and growth rates are reduced(by entities like HFT and traditional firms pulling money from the market as an unnecessary intermediary layer for example), the likelihood of outlier events both short and long term go up.  These are concerns from my limited knowledge, there's much I don't know.

As a result, i find it difficult to embrace an all-in investment philosophy that starts by ignoring certain sets of future possibilities, such as a prolonged decline in the equity markets.  Having a plan is good, having a plan for when your plan fails is better.

Bitcoin does not offer interest, true.  Its value is directly tied to the user base, and equilibrium price will be achieved when adoption rate slows to a trickle.  Some cryptos (proof of stake) offer interest for validating the network, typically 3-5%.

Bitcoin has historically exhibited some characteristics of antifragility - crashes and bubble pops, negative news and criticism, and economic uncertainty have all eventually resulted in growth.  This is the type of asset I want a small piece of as a hedge.

Sustained inflation, for example, would make a fixed-supply, widely accessible and autonomous, fungible asset like btc desirable to many as a way to protect their net worth while still being able to spend as needed.
 
Such a surge in adoption would see a commensurate surge in price, then a new equilibrium.  These adopters would be seeking to transact in bitcoin as a means of stabilizing their finances(ironically given today's climate), not speculate. 

This is why the speculative bubbles are such a hindrance to crypto, because they are the antithesis of its long term utility.

By that same logic, you can be healthier if you diversify your fitness plan by eschewing diet and exercise and including a small allocation to heroin use.  For the sake of moderation.  You wouldn't want to put all of your eggs in the "diet and exercise" basket when there are so many alternatives out there for diversification.  Why risk missing out on the potential upside of heroin?

Blockchain is an interesting idea, but as far as I can tell crypto coins are all 100% scam products designed from the outset to defraud investors.  They are deliberately constructed to avoid regulations and consumer protections, to bypass sanctions, and to facilitate illegal activity.  Their only value to anyone is as a way to cash in on internet hype by convincing people to give you money in exchange for a digital object that creates no revenue stream.  It's modern day snake oil, all breathless promises and no substance.

I really really wanted to love bitcoin.  I tried so hard to justify it's existence, to find a profitable use case that would justify a nonzero price, but so far I'm coming up empty.  If someone out there in mustache land has an economic justification for a price above zero, I'm still eagerly seeking it out.  Please share.

At this point I'd rather invest in beanie babies.  At least there are collectors out there that value pristine examples of early edition ones, and they are distinguishable physical objects that took real work to create.  They also lack a revenue stream or a justification for existing beyond fanboy demand, but at least they literally exist in the universe instead of just as tradeable ideas.

Yes I'm aware of your aversion for crypto as your colorful analogies imply.  I'm also aware that you do not understand why it could be useful.

FWIW I've read that Legos actually hold their value quite well, I base this on very little tho so do your own research and don't keep any Legos on exchanges.

As an aside, have you used BTC at all?  Getting started with it takes a bit of effort, but it's fascinating to transact with once you have it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 28, 2018, 12:33:59 AM
Crypto proponents literally make themselves rich by convincing other people to bid up the price of coins they already own.  It's classic conflict of interest.

Crypto skeptics generally have nothing to gain by convincing people to avoid investing in crypto.  I don't own any, so I don't make or lose any money based on your decisions.

I guess this simplified analysis could be clouded by shorters.  Is it even possible to short sell cryptos yet?

This is a false dichotomy as everyone in here who stomps on crypto and beats the drum of index funds benefits when everyone else sticks to the plan of index funds.  The wall of pain thrown up against any discussion has a territorial protecting-our-turf feel to it.  If you're reading these posts from the mindset of "crypto is worthless and there's nothing you can say to convince me" then we are all wasting our time.

I've learned from both sides and am honestly quite intimidated by the entire prospect of managing my long-term finances.  I read all the JCollins stock articles.  they seem great and very bullish but he has holes in his gameplan for possible future timelines. And an unscientific flair for extolling stock virtues that, if you replaced the word "stock" with ICO could be mistaken for a crypto launch post.

The more I learn about financial markets in all forms the more I want to have eggs in as many baskets as possible.  I know that goes against the "100% vanguard index fund allin" plan advocated in general here.  Mustachianism resonates powerfully with me, though I can't figure out why that one specific investment vehicle has taken over this world to the exclusion of others, when nearly everything else about Mustachianism is about moderation/restraint. 

Also the more I learn about traditional markets, the more the "Stay away it's all market manipulation!" argument against crypto gets weaker. 

But yeah, don't buy shitcoins and participate in random ICOs bc they have a flashy website, please.  And don't buy crypto to try and get rich.  It's simply a relatively uncorrelated, new asset class that diversifies a portfolio and may provide a hedge against traditional markets/currencies.   

I'll get flamed for saying that but it's basically the opinion of the JPMorgan Global Research Division, and their CEO calls bitcoin a fraud.  B/c y'know, CEOs of banks are terrified that CCs will undermine their massive profits.  In Bank of America's annual report to the SEC https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000007085818000009/bac-1231201710xk.htm (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000007085818000009/bac-1231201710xk.htm) they cited cryptocurrencies as a direct competitor and threat to their profit margins.

From a philosophical standpoint the reason why you buy bitcoin for example, over microsoft stock that is using open source bitcoin code, is for the reason my economics 101 prof taught me long before crypto existed: that the marble wrapped huge bank building is a wasteful monument to the past.  The physical operation of it wastes money and the armies of employees and executives that run each bank siphon tremendous amounts of money out of the financial ecosystem to make trusted transactions possible.  But we use it, he said, because of habit, because change is ponderous, because it is entrenched, and mainly because we have no other option.

Once you realize that cumbersome and expensive system is suddenly optional it opens up a whole new perspective.  And once you participate in it and realize how game changing it could be you want to share it with everyone.

yeah. I just don't buy it. CC is essentially the same concept as any other currency, ie gold. when Jesus walked the earth, 1oz of gold could buy a nice robe. Today, 1oz of gold can buy a nice suit. in other words, gold has bounced around more than the stock market, however in the end after thousands of years it's worth essentially the same amount.

How can bitcoin be a reliable currency when it fluctuates an insane amount in a day? How can Apple possibly price it's iphones in Bitcoin, for example, if the value of bitcoin goes up and down so much? They can't. A currency needs to be STABLE, not more volatile than the stock market on crack.

The comment about marble banks being a thing of the past - yeah I agree. It's called Ally bank. Discover Bank. Simple Bank. etc. etc. online banking is replacing brick and mortar. Credit Cards replaced cash. Paypal replaced wire transfers. But one fundamental difference - they all use DOLLARS as their currency. We can exchange DOLLARS back and forth electronically w/ ease and instantaneously for nearly nothing these days, and it's safe! AND backed by FDIC insurance... Technology will improve, maybe block chain has a role in that, but buying ANY currency whether it be gold, bitcoin, or sheep skin, is SPECULATING. not investing. big big BIG difference.

Investing is owning something that PAYS you a share of it's profits. Ie a business. Or owning a loan instrument that PAYS you interest (bond, CD, etc). Or maybe owning a piece of real estate that PAYS you rent. At the end of the day, if you aren't being PAID you aren't investing. It's that simple. Buying something and then hoping a bigger fool will come along and buy it from you for a higher price is gambling, not investing.

Really good points.

Bitcoin's current volatility is a substantial hindrance.   The speculative bubble cycles are madness.  The intervening times have actually been pretty stable.  It needs to mature substantially to have widespread utility.

The internet-based bank is an excellent point.  It's a step in the right direction, but you still pay CEOs and large employee pools to facilitate trust.

FWIW in order to liquidate our stock positions, a "bigger fool" must be present to buy them.  I understand what you are saying about investing, this is an unconventional asset class. Purchasing btc is a bet that the future userbase will be larger than it is today, or as a hedge that potential future timelines where the userbase is larger are also timelines where traditional assets are struggling.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on February 28, 2018, 01:19:19 AM
i don't wish to address every point you make but these two points struck me:

The more I learn about financial markets in all forms the more I want to have eggs in as many baskets as possible.  I know that goes against the "100% vanguard index fund allin" plan advocated in general here.  Mustachianism resonates powerfully with me, though I can't figure out why that one specific investment vehicle has taken over this world to the exclusion of others, when nearly everything else about Mustachianism is about moderation/restraint. 

Having all your money invested in a 100% US Vanguard index fund certainly isn't putting your funds into every single basket.  But it sure is a lot of baskets.

I'm writing this as an Australian who has around 50% allocated to international indexes. I wish I could have the US domestic market as my home market as it's significantly more diverse than Australia (which like Canada is dominated by resources and financial companies).

No market is perfect, but the stockmarket is a workable compromise that offers diversification, some degree of transparency, reasonable regulatory oversight, a ready market of buyers and sellers and liquidity. It's a functional proxy for the US economy, but structured in such a way that you can get in and out without too many transactions costs. Which is made easier via an index fund.

If 100% stocks isn't your thing then you could go to one of the blended life strategy funds that mixes in international exposure, as well as fixed interest, property or whatever mix they are offering.

You probably know about these options and they may not be for you and that's fine. 

I thought I'd point it out however as the idea of wanting to maximise your return by slicing and dicing every single egg to put it into every single basket is potentially a case of over thinking, over optimising and spending energy to maximise returns, but engaging in an exercise that really offers marginal benefits.

Don't forget that the more time you spend trying to become an expert in crypto currency, index investing, stock picking etc etc, is less time you spend going surfing, hiking, learning new recipes, riding a bike which are investments with undeniably tangible returns on mental and physical health.  Frankly, squeezing a few more extra per cent out of a asset allocation is a waste of your precious time on this planet compared to enriching your experiential world!

(Woops, that escalated quickly).

Jealous! Australia is my favorite country, I'd love to live there.

I do take advantage of such funds and they are my primary retirement investment vehicle.

Your latter point is great, and I will strive to take it to heart. I've been spending way too much time on a variety of financial topics, to the detriment of higher quality life endeavors.

One clarification is that I'm not seeking to optimize fractional increases in growth, rather seeking to optimize the variety of financial futures in which I am still financially robust.  Basically, trying to avoid a long term strategy that despite foreseeable problems could result in me being broke/struggling.


From a philosophical standpoint the reason why you buy bitcoin for example, over microsoft stock that is using open source bitcoin code, is for the reason my economics 101 prof taught me long before crypto existed: that the marble wrapped huge bank building is a wasteful monument to the past.  The physical operation of it wastes money and the armies of employees and executives that run each bank siphon tremendous amounts of money out of the financial ecosystem to make trusted transactions possible.  But we use it, he said, because of habit, because change is ponderous, because it is entrenched, and mainly because we have no other option.

Once you realize that cumbersome and expensive system is suddenly optional it opens up a whole new perspective.  And once you participate in it and realize how game changing it could be you want to share it with everyone.

I love the reference to "marble wrapped huge bank building is a wasteful monument to the past".

The recent GFC experience of staid trading banks mutating into excessively risk taking investment banks has undermined my faith in the role banks have in lubricating the economy.  All the douchebags banker types acting without moral hazard, snorting cocaine, stealing from clients, defrauding their own companies and driving expensive sports cars makes their claim as having a critical role in the efficient allocation of capital in a sophisticated economy seem really dubious.  Australia has by comparison with the US a very strictly regulated banking regime dominated by 4 banks which run as a stable, but uncompetitive cartel.  It's the price we seem to think we need to pay for stability.

So i'm sympathetic to the idea of certain technologies having a disruptive effect on the status quo.

However, as much as you'd like it to be, it doesn't necessarily follow that crypto currency innovation is the silver bullet to central bank control over an economy, on a societal and economic level. There's a whole range of intertwined and vested interests, from bankers to individuals, that have a lot to lose from the current system, and little to gain from whatever is being proposed.

And similarly, it doesn't following that buying crypto currency is a good investment on an individual level. The volatility is too high, the risk of your investment going to zero is too real, there are no earnings, it has no yield. It has no market fundamentals.

The only thing going for it is price appreciation. Which has obviously made it extremely successful as a speculative play for some.

As always, eager to learn more.

Agree completely that the entrenched system has little incentive to adopt crypto/likely will actively resist, and it is unlikely for it to be a "silver bullet" especially with the political clout these institutions wield.

Also agree it does not have market fundamentals in the conventional sense.  It's a very unorthodox asset class. 

It also does not have corporate overhead, or institutionalized middlemen siphoning money out of the ecosystem while providing no value.  Exchanges charge a modest fee but you can deposit USD to coinbase and buy limit-order on GDAX for 0% fee.

Once you have your btc you hold or spend it as you wish, you require no trusted 3rd party with your funds, and transaction fees are (aside from nov-mid january insanity) extremely low, and go towards miners who provide value to the network.  I sent a transaction last week and the fee was $0.09. 

It's a self contained ecosystem that doesn't require increased adoption or approval to continue existing and providing value to the user base.   It's organically driven and does not have the "grow or fail" dichotomy of a corporate startup.  It can settle into some ancillary role nicely and remain there indefinitely as long as its userbase is deriving value from it by participating in the network.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 28, 2018, 07:37:58 AM
I hate to burst your "scientific" bubble here, but the stock market (and the larger economy that it is a rough proxy for) is not at all a zero sum game. Why on earth would you think that?

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 28, 2018, 10:55:09 AM
I hate to burst your "scientific" bubble here, but the stock market (and the larger economy that it is a rough proxy for) is not at all a zero sum game. Why on earth would you think that?

-W

The proof of this is that in this country, and more dramatically world wide, more people are living at a higher standard of living than they ever have.  This means the greater economy must be creating wealth.   Therefore one would logically expect that a proxy for the economy--like the value of all the publicly traded companies--would also increase in value over time.  And it has, just as we would expect. 

It is interesting to look at professions where the skill set hasn't changed much over time.  Like say, a barber or a professional violinist.  It takes the same amount of skill to be a barber or violinist today as it did 100 years ago.  Yet, even after adjusting for inflation, a barber or violinist today makes vastly more money than they did 100 years ago.  Why?  Because the economy has created a vast amount of wealth during that time. 

That's why stocks will always go up over time, baring a zombie apocalypse, Yellowstone erupting, or a meteor strike or some such.  In those events  a comfortable retirement is the least of our worries.  And of course noting that the market can go bonkers in either direction for uncomfortably long periods. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on February 28, 2018, 08:25:20 PM
As always, eager to learn more.

If you are sincere and not sarcastically shitting on crypto enthusiasts, I recommend getting a little bit of skin in the game; $50 or so and think of it as a consumable. I'm assuming you have no crypto and have not used it, and maybe that's limiting you from understanding it better. If, after this, you remain skeptical, then you'll have more references to debate from.

If you're interested, I'm willing to guide you through the process as well as offer more in-depth perspectives on why I believe in crypto. The steps can be time-intensive, and will also address pc security.

Yes, totally sincere and eager to learn more and totally not shitting on nobody!  Tone is difficult to convey across the internet.

I totally subscribe to the view that the best way to learn is by doing, so buying $50 worth may be one way of learning the ins and outs (just wish I'd bought in 2010....). And that's a very kind offer to take me under your crypto wing and be my guide.

However, my curiosity about Crypto currency is probably about the the way that it has been the starting point for a speculative craze, at the moment, and the psychology of investing.  I'm primarily interested in the way people make investment decisions based on whatever imperfect information that they may have at hand at any given time. I'm interested in how people become anchored in certain investment decisions, the way confirmation bias kicks in, the way people have an aversion to certain types of risk but also, due to what I think is access to poor quality information or subscribing to a simplified model of the world that makes sense in their own minds, embrace a level of risk they might otherwise be unwilling to take in other circumstances.

It's not just crypto of course where people behave 'irrationally'.  Plenty of people keep their savings in cash, because it's 'safe' not realising that the stead erosion caused by inflation makes it, in the long term, an undesirable store of value.

I'm personally skeptical about crypto speculation because it's a fascinating real time version of all the bubbles you read about (Mississipi company, South Sea bubble, Tuplips, Dot.Com etc).

I'm personally dubious about the utility of crypto on a economic / societal level as the current system, with all it's imperfections and distortions, seems to work okay with a low barrier to entry, good confidence, and minimal transactional friction to users on an individual level. 

I dare say a lot of the interest in the utility of crypto is used to justify the spectacular price appreciation of the former. I think, as I think Surf has set out, that the two are quite distinct considerations. However, how much interest in the former would there be without the price appreciation?

But ultimately, the key reason why i won't take you up on your offer is I just have too many calls on my time at the moment.  Too many things I want to do. Books to read on other subjects.  This stuff is fascinating, and I've read a few articles about it,  but I'm happy to read about it on the sidelines and either see the bubble fizzle out, or eventually welcome our decentralised, distributed currency non-overlords and a world free of rent seeking financial institutions and governments!

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on February 28, 2018, 08:33:21 PM
One clarification is that I'm not seeking to optimize fractional increases in growth, rather seeking to optimize the variety of financial futures in which I am still financially robust.  Basically, trying to avoid a long term strategy that despite foreseeable problems could result in me being broke/struggling.

One thing I wanted to note here is that no-one really ever does go into these kinds of things or even more staid stock picking investments for fractional increases in growth. 

But once you factor in the time spent learning about investments, and after the passage of time, marginal gains is all that you tend to get!

I speak from my own experience.  My first year of stock picking yielded around a 30% gain, the next year about 25%. These were great returns at the time. The next year I probably performed around -5% then 0% the next year.

Eventually I got sick of all the time I spent researching and stressing about stock picks and decided to cut my losses and move to indexes. Eventually after the passage of time is taken into account, I probably outperformed the indexes, but given the amount I put into it, and the small gains I experienced, I would have been so much better off if I'd tried learning another language, improving my guitar playing, you get the picture!

Now that I'm in indexes I stopped worrying about performance of my portfolio but my world is so much richer for the amount of mind expanding reading I've been doing instead of Annual report nonsense and analyst notes.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: privatefarmer on March 01, 2018, 12:12:18 AM


FWIW in order to liquidate our stock positions, a "bigger fool" must be present to buy them.  I understand what you are saying about investing, this is an unconventional asset class. Purchasing btc is a bet that the future userbase will be larger than it is today, or as a hedge that potential future timelines where the userbase is larger are also timelines where traditional assets are struggling.

I have seen variations of this falsehood being repeated over and over by the pro-crypto bunch.  People who invest in the stock market do not require greater fools for their investment to be successful.  A share of stock entitles the owner to a share of future earnings of a company, or in the case of an index fund, all of the companies represented on the index.  The share of future earnings is realized by the payment of dividends and as an accumulation of retained earnings which will accrue to book value and as investments in future profitability of the company.  The stock price is a market-based discounting mechanism of the net-present value of those two things, nothing more.  Usually the price is an accurate representation of the NPV, but it can swing in one direction or another from time to time.  In the same way that a person who buys a whole company can be a perfectly successful investor without ever selling it -- because all of the profits are his own and he can sell an asset of the company, e.g. a forklift, and pay himself the proceeds -- a person who buys a share of a publicly traded company on the stock market can also be a perfectly successful investor without ever needing to sell.

The continued argument from the pro-crypto bunch that in order for an investment in the stock to be successful an ever expanding pool of "greater fools" to come in and buy at a higher price is needed is a naive and unsophisticated understanding of stocks and a stock market and it exhibits a fundamental lack of understanding of the nature of investment.

This.

The lack of understanding of how the stock market works is astounding. Investing in companies, sharing in their profits, is INVESTING. Buying something that just sits there and doesn't pay you anything, whether it be a rock, a piece of gold, or a bitcoin, is SPECULATING. You are SPECULATING that a bigger fool will pay more than what you paid for it. If you own a share of a company you are BEING PAID via dividends/buybacks. When Apple sells an iphone, a percentage of that sale goes to YOU the shareholder. Stocks and bitcoin are apples and oranges. One is investing, sharing the profits, increasing your wealth over time, the other is gambling.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: privatefarmer on March 01, 2018, 12:13:05 AM
If there were a company who "mined" bitcoin, sold that bitcoin and made a profit doing so, I would consider buying shares of that company. THAT would be investing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Mr Mark on March 01, 2018, 12:55:36 AM


FWIW in order to liquidate our stock positions, a "bigger fool" must be present to buy them.  I understand what you are saying about investing, this is an unconventional asset class. Purchasing btc is a bet that the future userbase will be larger than it is today, or as a hedge that potential future timelines where the userbase is larger are also timelines where traditional assets are struggling.

I have seen variations of this falsehood being repeated over and over by the pro-crypto bunch.  People who invest in the stock market do not require greater fools for their investment to be successful.  A share of stock entitles the owner to a share of future earnings of a company, or in the case of an index fund, all of the companies represented on the index.  The share of future earnings is realized by the payment of dividends and as an accumulation of retained earnings which will accrue to book value and as investments in future profitability of the company.  The stock price is a market-based discounting mechanism of the net-present value of those two things, nothing more.  Usually the price is an accurate representation of the NPV, but it can swing in one direction or another from time to time.  In the same way that a person who buys a whole company can be a perfectly successful investor without ever selling it -- because all of the profits are his own and he can sell an asset of the company, e.g. a forklift, and pay himself the proceeds -- a person who buys a share of a publicly traded company on the stock market can also be a perfectly successful investor without ever needing to sell.

The continued argument from the pro-crypto bunch that in order for an investment in the stock to be successful an ever expanding pool of "greater fools" to come in and buy at a higher price is needed is a naive and unsophisticated understanding of stocks and a stock market and it exhibits a fundamental lack of understanding of the nature of investment.

This.

The lack of understanding of how the stock market works is astounding. Investing in companies, sharing in their profits, is INVESTING. Buying something that just sits there and doesn't pay you anything, whether it be a rock, a piece of gold, or a bitcoin, is SPECULATING. You are SPECULATING that a bigger fool will pay more than what you paid for it. If you own a share of a company you are BEING PAID via dividends/buybacks. When Apple sells an iphone, a percentage of that sale goes to YOU the shareholder. Stocks and bitcoin are apples and oranges. One is investing, sharing the profits, increasing your wealth over time, the other is gambling.

+1 more

Another alternative is active investing - in an area where you have 'inside' knowledge that enables you to beat the market. Legally this can be done in your local real estate market. It takes work but local knowledge can give you an edge that some REIT manager in NY simply doesn't have.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on March 01, 2018, 12:59:51 AM
I won't quote all the text but I'm replying to privatefarmer's post immediately above...

Is a potential source of confusion the fact that while one can invest by buying stocks (that earn an income, and holding them long turn), you can also in some cases also buy stocks for purely speculative reasons?

It's actually not quite so black and white, i.e. stocks = good, crypto = bad.  In an effort to dispel some of the myths of the Stockmarket propounded by crypto fans, I feel sometimes the shortcomings of the Stockmarket are ignored. Short term speculative trading in stocks can be equally bad news.

So while not recommended, the greater fool approach to buying and selling stocks can apply. The market can be gamed.  Whether via taking a punt on the latest biotech without earnings, or engaging in illegal 'pump and dumps'.  Then you can leverage up and add in options to increase the pain.

Most people new to the Stockmarket seem to initially educate themselves via mainstream business news - which ignores the boredom of ongoing compounding returns in favour of booms, busts, day traders and line charts that inevitably crash. So they inevitably equate stock trading with gambling, unless they choose to educate themselves further.

Bitcoin hype in the mainstream media seems to attract some people to thinking about investments, but sends them down the path of speculation.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on March 01, 2018, 12:09:39 PM
I won't quote all the text but I'm replying to privatefarmer's post immediately above...

Is a potential source of confusion the fact that while one can invest by buying stocks (that earn an income, and holding them long turn), you can also in some cases also buy stocks for purely speculative reasons?

It's actually not quite so black and white, i.e. stocks = good, crypto = bad.  In an effort to dispel some of the myths of the Stockmarket propounded by crypto fans, I feel sometimes the shortcomings of the Stockmarket are ignored. Short term speculative trading in stocks can be equally bad news.

So while not recommended, the greater fool approach to buying and selling stocks can apply. The market can be gamed.  Whether via taking a punt on the latest biotech without earnings, or engaging in illegal 'pump and dumps'.  Then you can leverage up and add in options to increase the pain.

Most people new to the Stockmarket seem to initially educate themselves via mainstream business news - which ignores the boredom of ongoing compounding returns in favour of booms, busts, day traders and line charts that inevitably crash. So they inevitably equate stock trading with gambling, unless they choose to educate themselves further.

Bitcoin hype in the mainstream media seems to attract some people to thinking about investments, but sends them down the path of speculation.

Absolutely stocks can be speculated; however, there are mechanisms in place that spell out to you if your purchase is going anywhere.  In the late 1990s, anything with "net" in the name got an IPO and people throwing money at it.  They bought the hype and there was a run up on many of these companies that turned out to be worthless.  The controls were already in place to alert them to this situation, but people ignored them.  Before you buy a stock, you can conduct research of that company and find out beforehand if the company actually produces something and either is or might make a profit in the future.  We talk about P/E here all the time and whether a stock price accurately reflects its real value.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on March 01, 2018, 12:26:51 PM
It advances asymmetric cryptography and allows for a new form of digital communication.

I'm not so sure.  I think PGP was a much bigger step forward in terms of making cryptography useful for digital communications, but almost nobody uses it anymore.  We've all just decided that weak privacy through ad-supported corporate services is more convenient. 

We have the illusion of enhanced privacy with "incognito mode" that doesn't actually encrypt anything.  We like having password recovery options, because we want to put trust in real people instead of secret codes to protect us.  And if you want to be more anonymous you can always play with tor, but just like bitcoin it's mostly criminal and illegal activities that benefit there.

Civilization thrives with trust.  Instead of giving everyone the best deadbolt for their front door, we pay police to deter burglary and hunt down criminals, including busting down their front doors.  Instead of irreversible anonymous financial transactions, we pay banks to track terrorism and drug money and freeze the assets of rogue actors.  In all aspects of society from schools to traffic to real estate, trust makes the system work and individual cryptography just incentives crime. 

I understand the argument about crypto protecting people from overzealous government intrusion, but we need and want our government to stabilize society as long as it is democratically elected and corruption free.  America protects your freedoms by NOT giving you perfect privacy.  You are not allowed to keep a child sex slave in your basement, and we want government to be able to forcibly intervene in that situation.  Perfect encryption, like an impenetrable door lock, gives you the power (and the "freedom") to break the law at will.  That infringes upon the freedoms of everyone else.

If you want to live in modern society, you have to forfeit some of your freedoms.  You cannot murder without consequences, so you forfeit your freedom to murder in exchange for protection from being murdered.  Crypto is the opposite deal; you get to do anything at all, but the price is that you have no protections.  You can't stop child porn of your kids from being distributed with crypto.  Your cryptocoins are not insured or otherwise retrievable when the exchange gets hacked.  The terrorist plot goes undetected until the buildings start to fall.

Perfect cryptography literally undermines the very idea of civilization.  It is power without responsibility, freedom without protection, personal gain at the expense of society as a whole.  It is arguably an evil idea, even when well intentioned.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on March 01, 2018, 01:59:46 PM
We already had this discussion. Crypto is double-edge, just like the internet, science, weapons, medicine, any other technology.

I don't think it's at all analogous.  Science and the internet and medicine are all pro-social ideas.  They can help societies thrive by making life better.

Cryptography doesn't advance the interests of civilized society.  It can't be used to build trust and cooperation, to facilitate progress, or to help people live better lives. It can only be used to do the opposite.

Maybe weapons are a better analogy?  Weapons are designed to kill people, and we sometimes use them to kill people in order to protect the rights of other people, but I feel like that role should be reserved to the state.  I don't want every citizen to have RPGs locked and loaded by the front door, or claymores around the perimeter of their lawn, or sarin gas in their refrigerator.  These things are destructive tools that should not be widespread among the public, but reserved for use in exceptional cases by a democratically elected representative government.  And basically prohibited to everyone else, because they are powerfully evil.  They do not serve society by becoming widely distributed.  You don't make society better by giving out sarin nerve gas.

I can see a legitimate governmental use for perfect unhackable cryptography.  I don't see many legitimate private uses yet, but I sure do see a whole bunch of illegitimate and dangerous and illegal ones.

If cryptography fundamentally undermines the basic social contract on which civilization is built, do we really want everyone to have unlimited access to it? Do we really have a choice anymore?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on March 01, 2018, 03:18:00 PM
I can see a legitimate governmental use for perfect unhackable cryptography.  I don't see many legitimate private uses yet, but I sure do see a whole bunch of illegitimate and dangerous and illegal ones.

If cryptography fundamentally undermines the basic social contract on which civilization is built, do we really want everyone to have unlimited access to it? Do we really have a choice anymore?

I wouldn't go that far.  Your web browser uses security hash algorithms to make secure connections.   Most likely the same one that Bitcoin relies on.  I agree with your point about trust and the social contract, but security is important too.  That's why we have locks on our doors, and our online banking is protected by passwords.  We constantly hear stories how Target (or whoever) was hacked and the thieves stole 20,000,000 credit card numbers.  How come those numbers weren't encrypted?   If they had been encrypted they couldn't have been stolen.  Security helps keep out the bad actors, and that allows us to trust things like credit card transactions. 

But back to your point on trust.  All money is a figment of our imagination.  We just all believe it to exist...and there it is.  But people don't really believe in Bitcoin.  How do we know?  Because the price compared to something we do believe in, the USD, changes radically over time.   And that's the fundamental problem.  People don't really believe in it. 

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on March 01, 2018, 11:46:53 PM


FWIW in order to liquidate our stock positions, a "bigger fool" must be present to buy them.  I understand what you are saying about investing, this is an unconventional asset class. Purchasing btc is a bet that the future userbase will be larger than it is today, or as a hedge that potential future timelines where the userbase is larger are also timelines where traditional assets are struggling.

I have seen variations of this falsehood being repeated over and over by the pro-crypto bunch.  People who invest in the stock market do not require greater fools for their investment to be successful.  A share of stock entitles the owner to a share of future earnings of a company, or in the case of an index fund, all of the companies represented on the index.  The share of future earnings is realized by the payment of dividends and as an accumulation of retained earnings which will accrue to book value and as investments in future profitability of the company.  The stock price is a market-based discounting mechanism of the net-present value of those two things, nothing more.  Usually the price is an accurate representation of the NPV, but it can swing in one direction or another from time to time.  In the same way that a person who buys a whole company can be a perfectly successful investor without ever selling it -- because all of the profits are his own and he can sell an asset of the company, e.g. a forklift, and pay himself the proceeds -- a person who buys a share of a publicly traded company on the stock market can also be a perfectly successful investor without ever needing to sell.

The continued argument from the pro-crypto bunch that in order for an investment in the stock to be successful an ever expanding pool of "greater fools" to come in and buy at a higher price is needed is a naive and unsophisticated understanding of stocks and a stock market and it exhibits a fundamental lack of understanding of the nature of investment.

I am aware of the functioning of stocks, and I own plenty.  You disagreed with something I didn't say.

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/equity-investment.html
Quote
Money that is invested in a firm by its owner(s) or holder(s) of common stock (ordinary shares) but which is not returned in the normal course of the business. Investors recover it only when they sell their shareholdings to other investors, or when the assets of the firm are liquidated and proceeds distributed among them after satisfying the firm's obligations. Also called equity contribution.

I said in order to liquidate your investment you must have someone to sell the shares(or have the firm liquidate all its assets, whatever's left after satisfying their debts).  I didn't say you had to liquidate them in order to be profitable.

The illustrative point is that if all the future stock investors disappeared those who were left holding shares would have no way out(without the company liquidating.)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on March 02, 2018, 12:06:05 AM
I hate to burst your "scientific" bubble here, but the stock market (and the larger economy that it is a rough proxy for) is not at all a zero sum game. Why on earth would you think that?

-W

Whew I put up a LOT of information there and the two direct replies were either a complete misreading (first one) or harping on an ancillary point that again actually misreads what I wrote.

I should have included "trading" or "competing" for clarification.  My sentence about zero-sum stands, though.  Individual trades in the market are zero sum, one person buys, the other sells, no new money is created.  Technically slightly negative sum as a fee is extracted.  If you are trading all day you are participating in a zero sum environment vs other entities and you best make sure you are in the top half.

The second half of my statement "which grows over time" indicates that the buy-and-hold aspect of the stock market is NOT zero sum.  Companies gain value and that value is transferred to the stock owners.  That's why we all own stock funds.

@waltworks  Any thoughts on the (hopefully thought provoking) ideas I offered?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on March 02, 2018, 12:16:16 AM

But back to your point on trust.  All money is a figment of our imagination.  We just all believe it to exist...and there it is.  But people don't really believe in Bitcoin.  How do we know?  Because the price compared to something we do believe in, the USD, changes radically over time.   And that's the fundamental problem.  People don't really believe in it.

This is an excellent point, one I discussed recently after reading "Sapiens," which I recommend.

One could take an alternative perspective:  Despite the volatility, humanity has continued to believe Bitcoin is worth something.  To the best of my very limited knowledge no modern instrument has survived multiple speculative bubble pops and stabilized after each one.

It is a fascinating little experiment.  Value tied to adoption rate, adoption rate tied to utility provided.  Eventual utility level unknown as it is still in active development. 

Speculation mimics actual adoption and so sees surge in price, but provides no sustained utility to the network and eventually get-rich-quick-ers abandon ship.  This erodes confidence in btc as volatility increases and corrections/crashes ensue, but those who derive value from the network stick around and it eventually flattens out.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on March 02, 2018, 07:45:45 AM
Whew I put up a LOT of information there and the two direct replies were either a complete misreading (first one) or harping on an ancillary point that again actually misreads what I wrote.

You did say that "the market always goes up" is "unscientific". Without getting into a philosophy of science debate, you are saying that you question whether the economy of the world/US will continue to grow (as, in the case of the world, it has since prehistory, albeit with some fits and starts), essentially. If you actually believe that, then yes, you will need either a metric ton of money, or some alternative investment/consistent winning in the now-zero-sum game in order to be FI.

Might just as well invest in fertile land and ammunition at that point, not "currency" that requires a ton of energy and computers/internet access just to use/spend, but everyone's different. 

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on March 02, 2018, 08:08:17 AM
I can see a legitimate governmental use for perfect unhackable cryptography.  I don't see many legitimate private uses yet, but I sure do see a whole bunch of illegitimate and dangerous and illegal ones.

If cryptography fundamentally undermines the basic social contract on which civilization is built, do we really want everyone to have unlimited access to it? Do we really have a choice anymore?

This seems a bit melodramatic.  why can't your thoughts be private?

With the internet providing a stored record of everything, my kids thoughts aren't private anymore. All the stupid shit I thought and said growing up, as a teenage, in college is behind me and there isn't any Facebook timeline of.  Now, if I am interested in an obscure topic and research it a bit, all of my banner adds change to match .    if cryptography gives the privacy to explore an idea before you decide if you like it or not that's something I support.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on March 02, 2018, 09:14:34 AM
Whew I put up a LOT of information there and the two direct replies were either a complete misreading (first one) or harping on an ancillary point that again actually misreads what I wrote.

You did say that "the market always goes up" is "unscientific". Without getting into a philosophy of science debate, you are saying that you question whether the economy of the world/US will continue to grow (as, in the case of the world, it has since prehistory, albeit with some fits and starts), essentially. If you actually believe that, then yes, you will need either a metric ton of money, or some alternative investment/consistent winning in the now-zero-sum game in order to be FI.

Might just as well invest in fertile land and ammunition at that point, not "currency" that requires a ton of energy and computers/internet access just to use/spend, but everyone's different. 

-W

The basic approach of the scientific method is to posit a hypothesis and attempt to disprove it.  There is no structural mechanism for proving something conclusively true.  This isn't philosophy, it's the bedrock of scientific reason that brought us out of medieval thinking.

What we can do is make statistical estimates about growth rates and volatility, and use confidence intervals to model a likely range of outcomes. 

What is true is that as growth rates shrink, and/or volatility increases, the wider a range of likely (95%) outcomes that include prolonged downturns or sideways stretches. 

Conflating the advancement of human civilization with the continued returns of the equities market is philosophical optimism, not scientific analysis.

As mustachians we have a core belief in restraint and conservation.  The world would be a vastly better place if there were a paradigm shift away from corporate profits and towards long term sustainability.  In some small way we are betting against our fundamental beliefs when we ride the backs of the corporations, many of whom do much to harm our species long term viability for short term gains.

We are financially incentivized to participate between tax advantages, corporate matching, and the simple fact that owning stocks is the best way to obtain a small slice of these short term gains. 

Ignoring the statistical risks, or investing from an illusory moral high ground, is not scientific.  We do it because it is likely to work, and having more money enables us to lead lives of value.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on March 02, 2018, 09:20:22 AM

I said in order to liquidate your investment you must have someone to sell the shares(or have the firm liquidate all its assets, whatever's left after satisfying their debts). 



No. This is not what you said.  You said that a "bigger fool" must be present.  This is simply wrong in the context of stocks.  Bigger fools are not required.

Maybe we have a misunderstanding here.  My exact sentence was that in order to liquidate your shares there must be someone to sell them to.  The concept of "bigger fool" is an emotional label that you used, and i re-used for illustrative purposes.  Are you saying that the people buying shares are not fools?  Because that's an issue of labeling. 

If you are saying they are not necessary, then how are you going to liquidate your assets without them?  I understand dividends and other mechanisms, but if you have 1M in an index fund and the market stops growing, and there is no one to buy your shares, where does that leave you? 

Just food for thought that you may not think you need "fools" but every time a 20something shows up and says "wow does this really work" her adoption of our collective investment strategy directly benefits us all.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on March 02, 2018, 10:23:02 AM
The basic approach of the scientific method is to posit a hypothesis and attempt to disprove it.  There is no structural mechanism for proving something conclusively true.  This isn't philosophy, it's the bedrock of scientific reason that brought us out of medieval thinking.

Ok, so we're getting very metaphysical here, and maybe we'll have to agree to disagree - but there is no "science" in the sense you are talking about involved here. We are not doing experiments under controlled conditions or testing hypotheses. Rather, we are making educated statistical guesses about what will happen in the future based on what has happened in the past.

Even if you can start doing futuristic Asimov style psychohistorical science, what on earth makes you think cryptocurrencies are a good alternative to the stock market? You can certainly believe that stocks are going to all be worthless/return nothing going forward, but that really has nothing to do with crypto being a good alternative investment, does it? If you don't like stocks, there are bonds, real estate of both the arms-length and DIY varieties, direct lending of all sorts of levels of risk, business franchises, etc.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on March 02, 2018, 08:06:09 PM
Why hack a wallet when you can just steal the mint?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/bitcoin-heist-600-powerful-computers-stolen-iceland-n852811?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_nw (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/bitcoin-heist-600-powerful-computers-stolen-iceland-n852811?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_nw)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: the_gastropod on March 02, 2018, 09:12:22 PM

I said in order to liquidate your investment you must have someone to sell the shares(or have the firm liquidate all its assets, whatever's left after satisfying their debts). 



No. This is not what you said.  You said that a "bigger fool" must be present.  This is simply wrong in the context of stocks.  Bigger fools are not required.

Maybe we have a misunderstanding here.  My exact sentence was that in order to liquidate your shares there must be someone to sell them to.  The concept of "bigger fool" is an emotional label that you used, and i re-used for illustrative purposes.  Are you saying that the people buying shares are not fools?  Because that's an issue of labeling. 

If you are saying they are not necessary, then how are you going to liquidate your assets without them?  I understand dividends and other mechanisms, but if you have 1M in an index fund and the market stops growing, and there is no one to buy your shares, where does that leave you? 

Just food for thought that you may not think you need "fools" but every time a 20something shows up and says "wow does this really work" her adoption of our collective investment strategy directly benefits us all.

I don't want to speak for L.A.S., but I suspect they're referring to price vs value. Stocks have a value (ownership in a productive business). Cryptocurrencies have no value (in the economic sense—they're unproductive assets). Things with value can be priced at least somewhat objectively. There can, of course, be differences of opinion, but the price is ultimately grounded in reality. Valueless assets (cryptocurrencies, paintings, beanie babies, rare coins, etc.) have no rational basis for their price. They are speculative. Speculative investments depend on "bigger fools" to purchase them from you. Productive assets depend on rational actors.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on March 02, 2018, 09:24:28 PM
It's worth noting that there certainly can be a scenario where nobody will buy your stocks from you, and you are screwed.

In the grand scheme of things, that's the asteroid-impact/zombie apocalypse scenario, though, so who cares? You're dead.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on March 03, 2018, 05:37:08 AM

I said in order to liquidate your investment you must have someone to sell the shares(or have the firm liquidate all its assets, whatever's left after satisfying their debts). 



No. This is not what you said.  You said that a "bigger fool" must be present.  This is simply wrong in the context of stocks.  Bigger fools are not required.

Maybe we have a misunderstanding here.  My exact sentence was that in order to liquidate your shares there must be someone to sell them to.  The concept of "bigger fool" is an emotional label that you used, and i re-used for illustrative purposes.  Are you saying that the people buying shares are not fools?  Because that's an issue of labeling. 

If you are saying they are not necessary, then how are you going to liquidate your assets without them?  I understand dividends and other mechanisms, but if you have 1M in an index fund and the market stops growing, and there is no one to buy your shares, where does that leave you? 

Just food for thought that you may not think you need "fools" but every time a 20something shows up and says "wow does this really work" her adoption of our collective investment strategy directly benefits us all.

There's definitely a misunderstanding in terminology here.

The greater fool theory is not an emotional label. The 'greater fool theory' describes a form of speculation. It's where someone buys an asset (and that can be crypto, tulips, stocks, bonds, real estate) and has a sincere belief that although that the price of that asset is no longer accurately correlated with the value of the asset, they are willing to buy it in order to sell shortly afterwards at a profit.  The speculator in this instance may believe the asset is priced well above it's value, or they may believe it has no intrinsic value.  However, they do not care. They are buying the asset, in order to sell it, to a 'greater fool' who will happily pay more for it.

Forgive me for citing wikipedia here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory

But when you sell stocks, you aren't necessarily selling them because you think they aren't worth anything, and want to offload them to a 'bigger' or 'greater fool'.  You may actually need to liquidate stocks for other reasons. For example, you can't buy food with stocks - and you might want to eat! So you sell some shares for cash.  You could also be in a position where you believe your stocks to be a certain value, where you believe that the value may well increase, but you still decide to sell these stocks.  This is simply liquidating a position from stocks to cash.  You may then use that cash to invest in a different asset class that may be more attractive for other reasons.

I could be wrong, but your post seems to suggest that the only time one would ever sell stocks is to liquidate your entire position.   Or if you no longer believe they are of value.

Another situation is where someone adjusts their asset allocation based on their age.  At age 70 it's prudent to adjust your asset allocation to more capital stable investments. You may decide to sell stocks in exchange for cash, but it's not because you don't believe they are of value but because you prefer the stability of cash over the volatility of stocks.  The buyer might be a 20 year old just starting out in investment. The value of the stocks remains the same - however what is appropriate for each investor is relative to their own life circumstances.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on March 03, 2018, 09:14:10 AM
Valueless assets (cryptocurrencies, paintings, beanie babies, rare coins, etc.) have no rational basis for their price.

Crypto has value. Dapps and other services require crypto; the form of digital social contract people are engaging in require crypto. People are using it as medium-of-exchanges.

Pokemon cards have value.  Engaging in a card based game of Pokemon requires them.  People even trade Pokemon cards, using them as a medium of exchange.

The problem with your argument is that each instance of 'value' brought forth is vanishingly small, and only of value to the tiny niche group of people who have bought into the hype.  This is also true of comic books, beanie babies, tulips, rare coins, etc.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on March 03, 2018, 12:27:40 PM
Oh, come now. How many of those 13 million people are buying *anything* IRL with that crypto? How many are just trading crypto around with each other (or just buying/holding for "investment" purposes)?

I think "niche" is a fair term here. It's well established that you can buy virtually nothing with crypto, and if you do, it'll probably cost you a fortune/take forever/get you defrauded.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on March 03, 2018, 01:18:59 PM
Valueless assets (cryptocurrencies, paintings, beanie babies, rare coins, etc.) have no rational basis for their price.

Crypto has value. Dapps and other services require crypto; the form of digital social contract people are engaging in require crypto. People are using it as medium-of-exchanges.

Pokemon cards have value.  Engaging in a card based game of Pokemon requires them.  People even trade Pokemon cards, using them as a medium of exchange.

The problem with your argument is that each instance of 'value' brought forth is vanishingly small, and only of value to the tiny niche group of people who have bought into the hype.  This is also true of comic books, beanie babies, tulips, rare coins, etc.

The difference from these collectibles is that some crypto generate fees for its hodlers. 'Delegates' in some crypto systems, which I'm not a fan of, earn transaction fees through validating the network. They are require to set up a crypto node or participate in a pool. Proof-of-stake systems will allow any hodler with a minimum, such as 1 unit, to validate the network, earning transaction fees. 

'Vanishingly small' and 'tiny niche group', where are you getting these numbers from? Coinbase alone has over 13 million users, verified with photo id and linked bank accounts. In one year, the number of transactions for one of the top crypto went from 50,000 to 750,000 daily with a high over 1.2 mil. Crypto usage has also seen rise for social network tips and charitable donations.   

Proof of stake just gives you more of the same thing, it's literally a circular argument in terms of value.

Let's be real here, the only value is to those who are needing illegal cross border transactions, those requiring anonymity or people of a very particular anti-centralised anything political persuasion. Everyone else is speculating that one day they will have a wider value to common people.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on March 03, 2018, 04:37:45 PM
That crypto is being using as speculation does not mean that crypto is solely used for that. People are using crypto for various purposes, including entertainment and other purchases and services.

Thus far, you can't pay for rent, or groceries, or energy with cryptocurrencies.  Trading it back and forth between users for "entertainment" does not make it a currency.  I used to trade baseball cards back and forth with other baseball card enthusiasts, but we never mistook them for currency because we couldn't use them in the broader economy and they weren't backed by anyone. 

Even if you find a merchant who will accept payment in baseball cards, that STILL doesn't make them currency. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on March 03, 2018, 07:51:43 PM
Just because landlords, supermarkets or energy utilities don't accept cryptocurrency doesn't mean it's not a currency. If someone accepts crypto in exchange for goods and services, anticipating that they can then use that crypto to purchase goods and services, then it's a currency.

It's like tobacco or ramen in prison.  It's used as a store of value in a closed economic system.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/22/ramen-prison-currency-study

I don't think it serves the arguments of crypto skeptics to deny the utility of crypto currency, wherever one may find it. 

However, based on my understanding, that utility seems extremely limited.

As a currency they suffer some pretty significant draw backs.  They are nowhere near as universal as the USD, the Euro, Yen, AUD etc etc, and they are incredibly niche in their acceptance. Their volatility and high transaction fees make them very unattractive as a source of value exchange.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/6/16743220/valve-steam-bitcoin-game-store-payment-method-crypto-volatility

That may change in the future. But it may not.

One of the ironies I struggle to look beyond is that although the rationale behind the rapid price appreciation of crypto currencies is they represent the disruptive currencies of the future, yet at the moment, the rampant speculation resulting in extreme volatility of these crypto currencies actually renders them incredibly unattractive for actual use as a currency.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on March 04, 2018, 06:59:44 AM
Just because landlords, supermarkets or energy utilities don't accept cryptocurrency doesn't mean it's not a currency. If someone accepts crypto in exchange for goods and services, anticipating that they can then use that crypto to purchase goods and services, then it's a currency.

It's like tobacco or ramen in prison.  It's used as a store of value in a closed economic system.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/22/ramen-prison-currency-study

I don't think it serves the arguments of crypto skeptics to deny the utility of crypto currency, wherever one may find it. 

However, based on my understanding, that utility seems extremely limited.

As a currency they suffer some pretty significant draw backs.  They are nowhere near as universal as the USD, the Euro, Yen, AUD etc etc, and they are incredibly niche in their acceptance. Their volatility and high transaction fees make them very unattractive as a source of value exchange.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/6/16743220/valve-steam-bitcoin-game-store-payment-method-crypto-volatility

That may change in the future. But it may not.

One of the ironies I struggle to look beyond is that although the rationale behind the rapid price appreciation of crypto currencies is they represent the disruptive currencies of the future, yet at the moment, the rampant speculation resulting in extreme volatility of these crypto currencies actually renders them incredibly unattractive for actual use as a currency.

Literally any good is a currency by this definition, because any good can be used as a store of value given the right circumstances.  Seems kinda goofy.  I think that you have to look as the other available stores of value in a system and compare them. Calling Pokemon cards or crypto a currency makes little sense when compared to the ubiquity and utility use of say, US dollars.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on March 04, 2018, 02:04:39 PM
It's kind of my point to point out the goofiness.

Ultimately, any good has the potential to be a currency.  But that doesn't mean it makes a good currency.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/02/15/131934618/the-island-of-stone-money

But there's a distinction between currencies, which are things traded for their function as a store of value, and collectables, things that are traded for their inherent and perceived value. Critics of crypto currency seem to sometimes miss this distinction when they lump crypto together with other subjects of speculative bubbles.

People might trade Pokemon cards, but that doesn't make it a currency. They don't use Pokemon as a  store of value that they exchange for goods or services, as far as I know.

There's no doubt that crypto currency is also the subject of a speculative bubble.

But my point is simply that denying the (extremely limited, niche and conditional) utility of crypto currency is to invite a counter argument establishing the utility from crypto currency users.  However accepting that it currently does have use as a currency, allows for a more qualitative assessment about the nature of that utility.

I guess I sense that among certain fans of crypto currency there's the belief that because crypto currency is accepted for payment in certain places, it's the portent of things to come.  But there's no magic or wizardry involved - all it takes is for a a consensus to use it. And that consensus doesn't have to be very big.  The internet allows a small group of people (relative to the larger economy) to use crypto currency, but be geographically spread out. For some, this may make the consensus seem larger than it really is.

And my reason for wanting to point all this out is that I think the better argument against crypto currency is simply to accept that yes, it can be used as a currency, but there are so many better options that do a better job as a currency (i.e. that are stable in value, universally accepted) why would you use it?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on March 04, 2018, 05:21:30 PM
there are so many better options that do a better job as a currency (i.e. that are stable in value, universally accepted) why would you use it?

1.  To move illegal drug money you can't transfer with a bank.

2.  To finance terrorist organizations without the FBI finding out.

3.  To support a rogue state, like North Korea, that is suffering under economic sanctions by the international community that prohibit direct contributions.

4.  As an unregulated penny stock you can pump and dump to get rich by misleading uninformed retail investors.

5.  For entertainment value, because you think the first four primary uses aren't at all concerning.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on March 04, 2018, 07:30:42 PM
Ha yes, good points.

Actually one that you didn't mention is if you are a Chinese Prince-ling, or Russian Oligarch, or even a well to do person in a state that doesn't enforce the rule of law, and you wish subvert capital controls and move money out of your home country as otherwise it will always be subject to seizure by the state if you keep it there.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Mr Mark on March 04, 2018, 08:48:28 PM
there are so many better options that do a better job as a currency (i.e. that are stable in value, universally accepted) why would you use it?

1.  To move illegal drug money you can't transfer with a bank.

2.  To finance terrorist organizations without the FBI finding out.

3.  To support a rogue state, like North Korea, that is suffering under economic sanctions by the international community that prohibit direct contributions.

4.  As an unregulated penny stock you can pump and dump to get rich by misleading uninformed retail investors.

5.  For entertainment value, because you think the first four primary uses aren't at all concerning.

And notice that none of these uses imparts an intrinsic relative value. As a agency of transfer it doesn't matter if a BTC costs $100000 or $1 as long as it's stable-ish while the transfer occurs.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on March 05, 2018, 08:41:18 AM
I'm always curious how much Pot is smoked by the people who hammer bitcoin first and foremost for being used for illegal drug purchases.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on March 05, 2018, 09:56:27 AM
I'm always curious how much Pot is smoked by the people who hammer bitcoin first and foremost for being used for illegal drug purchases.

If that was directed at me, then the answer is "none".  My job precludes most types of drug use.

Not that it really matters.  The problem with drug money isn't privately owned US dispensaries that grow in a co-op, the problem is international cartels that murder people and put their dismembered heads on the backs of desert tortoises. 

I don't avoid flying because terrorists have used airplanes, because there are legitimate uses for airplanes.  Cryptocurrencies don't seem to have any legitimate uses in their design brief.  They were created for the sole purpose of breaking the law.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on March 05, 2018, 12:08:37 PM
there are so many better options that do a better job as a currency (i.e. that are stable in value, universally accepted) why would you use it?

1.  To move illegal drug money you can't transfer with a bank.

2.  To finance terrorist organizations without the FBI finding out.

3.  To support a rogue state, like North Korea, that is suffering under economic sanctions by the international community that prohibit direct contributions.

4.  As an unregulated penny stock you can pump and dump to get rich by misleading uninformed retail investors.

5.  For entertainment value, because you think the first four primary uses aren't at all concerning.

My modified #1 appears the be the closest thing to a legitimate use case for cryptocurrency; however, the only way a government will allow it to be considered a legitimate form of money is if it can be monitored and audited for reasons of #1-4 and for tax purposes.  I've seen far too many proponents talk about "getting one over on The Man" and avoiding the paper trails common with currency. That's not a benefit folks, that's a significant bar to being considered legal. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on March 06, 2018, 04:23:52 PM
We interrupt these arguments to bring you some news:

Brazilian State Bank to Tokenize Brazilian Real on Ethereum’s Public Blockchain (https://www.trustnodes.com/2018/03/06/brazilian-state-bank-tokenize-brazilian-real-ethereums-public-blockchain)

Coinbase is launching a weighted index fund for cryptocurrencies. (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/06/bitcoin-exchange-coinbase-launches-the-dow-jones-of-cryptocurrencies.html)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: James_001 on March 14, 2018, 08:12:05 AM
Has anyone invested in this? https://crypto20.com/en/

Its an index fund for the top 20 crypto coins. I would be curious to hear your thoughts...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on March 14, 2018, 10:44:35 AM
We interrupt these arguments to bring you some news:

Brazilian State Bank to Tokenize Brazilian Real on Ethereum’s Public Blockchain (https://www.trustnodes.com/2018/03/06/brazilian-state-bank-tokenize-brazilian-real-ethereums-public-blockchain)

Coinbase is launching a weighted index fund for cryptocurrencies. (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/06/bitcoin-exchange-coinbase-launches-the-dow-jones-of-cryptocurrencies.html)

In other news, Google is banning all cryptocurrency advertising from June onwards.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: aspiringnomad on March 14, 2018, 09:10:46 PM
We interrupt these arguments to bring you some news:

Brazilian State Bank to Tokenize Brazilian Real on Ethereum’s Public Blockchain (https://www.trustnodes.com/2018/03/06/brazilian-state-bank-tokenize-brazilian-real-ethereums-public-blockchain)

Coinbase is launching a weighted index fund for cryptocurrencies. (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/06/bitcoin-exchange-coinbase-launches-the-dow-jones-of-cryptocurrencies.html)

In other news, Google is banning all cryptocurrency advertising from June onwards.

Guess I'll stop seeing ads for that dorky turtle neck wearing "Crypto Genius" on these forums.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on March 19, 2018, 12:01:27 PM
News

Kevin O'Leary: NYC hotel wants to use a $400 million cryptocoin offering to sell ownership like a stock (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/19/kevin-oleary-new-york-city-hotel-hopes-to-launch-400-million-dollar-coin-offering.html)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on March 19, 2018, 01:22:17 PM
Guess I'll stop seeing ads for that dorky turtle neck wearing "Crypto Genius" on these forums.

Way up there on my list of people who I'd really like to punch.  Up there with him is that guy with the glasses in LA showing off his [rented] Beverly Hills house and [rented] Lambo. 

That second guy was a little late to the crypto circus, as illustrated by a video that appeared in late 2017 where you could tell he was trying to posit himself as the "crypto genius" while not quite knowing what he was talking about. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on March 19, 2018, 01:28:56 PM
Guess I'll stop seeing ads for that dorky turtle neck wearing "Crypto Genius" on these forums.

Way up there on my list of people who I'd really like to punch.  Up there with him is that guy with the glasses in LA showing off his [rented] Beverly Hills house and [rented] Lambo. 

That second guy was a little late to the crypto circus, as illustrated by a video that appeared in late 2017 where you could tell he was trying to posit himself as the "crypto genius" while not quite knowing what he was talking about.

To whom are you referring? The only guy I know matching that description is in hiding and being sued for shilling Bitconnect.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on March 21, 2018, 06:42:40 PM
More news...and very interesting.

Microsoft helps launch world’s first blockchain-based investment product (https://news.microsoft.com/en-gb/2018/03/21/microsoft-azure-helps-nivaura-launch-worlds-first-blockchain-based-investment-product/)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: appleshampooid on March 27, 2018, 07:04:22 AM
I decided to get in to the game a couple of weeks ago. Less about speculation and trying to get rich and more about my belief that cryptocurrency will play some role in the future of commerce (my libertarian streak showing through). I wanted to wait a bit from the $20k high and see if prices would drop much more.

I didn't invest a life-changing amount (only a crazy person would IMO); in fact the amount is so small that even a 100x increase wouldn't change my life that much (although obviously it would make me happy). I signed up on Coinbase/GDAX and Gemini at the same time; Gemini is still "verifying" my identity and GDAX was done immediately, so GDAX it is (plus I wanted some LTC which Gemini doesn't support). Waited my 4 business days for the ACH to clear (ridiculous) and then set up some limit orders for BTC, ETH, LTC, and BCH.

Yesterday my limits fired for ETH and LTC, but not BTC or BCH. Later in the evening I decided to pull the trigger with a market order on those two. I was waiting for $7500/BTC and got tired of waiting when the price went above $8000 again.

With my $500 I went $200 into BTC, $200 into ETH, $50 into LTC and $50 into BCH.

Down about $18 bucks this morning, lol. I will be HODLing these until they go bust or appreciate significantly, and am hoping to actually use them to transact at some point. Not sure where I would do that, as nowhere that I usually spend money accepts crytpo, and I'm not about to go spending money willy nilly just to participate (this being the MMM forum and all).
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Seradoc on March 27, 2018, 07:27:10 AM
I haven't bought crypto, but have found it interesting to watch.

The trends I have watched makes this the least likely time so far that I would purchase.  Of course, humans are great at finding patterns where there are none, so this whole thing will probably reverse trend just to spite me.

Attached is an image from today with a trend line I noticed since the peak.  So far, Bitcoin seems to be tracking a pretty consistent downward trend since peaking out last winter.

I also tend to feel like you can really see people manipulating the market in real time.  The rapid rises and falls of exactly 3-5% have always come across to me as pumping and dumping manipulations of the market.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on March 27, 2018, 09:56:26 AM

I also tend to feel like you can really see people manipulating the market in real time.  The rapid rises and falls of exactly 3-5% have always come across to me as pumping and dumping manipulations of the market.

There are YouTube channels and a redit or two where pump and dump groups were exposed in the last couple months.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: appleshampooid on March 29, 2018, 04:40:06 AM
I haven't bought crypto, but have found it interesting to watch.

The trends I have watched makes this the least likely time so far that I would purchase.  Of course, humans are great at finding patterns where there are none, so this whole thing will probably reverse trend just to spite me.

Attached is an image from today with a trend line I noticed since the peak.  So far, Bitcoin seems to be tracking a pretty consistent downward trend since peaking out last winter.

I also tend to feel like you can really see people manipulating the market in real time.  The rapid rises and falls of exactly 3-5% have always come across to me as pumping and dumping manipulations of the market.
What's that they say about trying to catch a falling knife? If I had just sat on my $7500 limit order it would have fired off this morning. So you are probably right. :cries:

It's okay, only $500. That's all I could convince the wife to go with. If prices really tank I might try to get back in with another $500 later on. Could be buying right to zero, but I personally believe they will go back up, a lot. Of course that is just my opinion, man.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Seradoc on March 29, 2018, 06:50:44 AM
I haven't bought crypto, but have found it interesting to watch.

The trends I have watched makes this the least likely time so far that I would purchase.  Of course, humans are great at finding patterns where there are none, so this whole thing will probably reverse trend just to spite me.

Attached is an image from today with a trend line I noticed since the peak.  So far, Bitcoin seems to be tracking a pretty consistent downward trend since peaking out last winter.

I also tend to feel like you can really see people manipulating the market in real time.  The rapid rises and falls of exactly 3-5% have always come across to me as pumping and dumping manipulations of the market.
What's that they say about trying to catch a falling knife? If I had just sat on my $7500 limit order it would have fired off this morning. So you are probably right. :cries:

It's okay, only $500. That's all I could convince the wife to go with. If prices really tank I might try to get back in with another $500 later on. Could be buying right to zero, but I personally believe they will go back up, a lot. Of course that is just my opinion, man.

At least with only $500 invested you can always just call it entertainment money if things go south, like lottery tickets.  Just make sure you know why you are buying more if you keep chasing it later.

I got burned throwing good money after bad chasing an oil stock a few years ago.  In the end I was technically in the black, but the opportunity cost when compared to just putting it into an index fund wasn't exciting.  It was a good learning experience for me though.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on April 18, 2018, 03:03:44 PM
Now that the prices have come down, it seems there's less people shitting all over this thread. However, there is still a ton of development going on.

Brave Browser, one of the more promising projects on the Ethereum network just had a big announcement today:

Ad-blocking Brave browser signs deal with Dow Jones Media Group (https://www.cnet.com/news/ad-blocking-brave-browser-gets-dow-jones-subsidiary-as-partner/)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on April 18, 2018, 04:50:40 PM
Now that the prices have come down, it seems there's less people shilling all over this thread. However, there is still a ton of hilarious scams going on.

https://cryptovest.com/news/another-scam-ico-savedroid-founder-exits-with-50m-to-chill-on-a-beach/
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on April 19, 2018, 12:47:31 PM
I bought in at the start of this year. It's hard to make money when you have a 40% wind at your head.

Etherium has traded under $380, but back up into the 500's now. Still ample chances to make money speculating.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: theolympians on April 19, 2018, 06:24:10 PM
i haven't stepped in her in a bit and was wondering what was up with this thread. I took a look at the last couple pages, it seems some of the same ideas are being re-washed. I still don't know anyone personally that has used it. After bitcoin took a dump, all the chatter at work has dwindled to nothing.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: theolympians on April 19, 2018, 06:31:36 PM
"I haven't stepped in here"
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on April 20, 2018, 11:06:13 PM
Now that the prices have come down, it seems there's less people shilling all over this thread. However, there is still a ton of hilarious scams going on.

https://cryptovest.com/news/another-scam-ico-savedroid-founder-exits-with-50m-to-chill-on-a-beach/

ICOs are in desperate need of regulation.

That said, see followup link at top of article here:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/over-50-million-savedroid-ico-135731412.html

tl;dr apparently German sense of humor didn't come through correctly as this was an awful publicity stunt, not an exit scam, so far as we know at this point.

FWIW I do not own and have no intentions of owning SaveDroid.

Shunning the entirety of the crypto space by pointing out the most egregiously flawed / illicit projects is like pointing out the third party chinese counterfeiters plaguing amazon that are ripping off legitimate small businesses with impunity and saying therefore amazon must have no value.

To make high quality decisions get educated about the impact of the technology and its most promising projects, rather than looking for the most rotten apple in order to disregard the whole bunch.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on April 21, 2018, 02:17:24 AM
Now that the prices have come down, it seems there's less people shilling all over this thread. However, there is still a ton of hilarious scams going on.

https://cryptovest.com/news/another-scam-ico-savedroid-founder-exits-with-50m-to-chill-on-a-beach/

ICOs are in desperate need of regulation.

That said, see followup link at top of article here:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/over-50-million-savedroid-ico-135731412.html

tl;dr apparently German sense of humor didn't come through correctly as this was an awful publicity stunt, not an exit scam, so far as we know at this point.

FWIW I do not own and have no intentions of owning SaveDroid.

Shunning the entirety of the crypto space by pointing out the most egregiously flawed / illicit projects is like pointing out the third party chinese counterfeiters plaguing amazon that are ripping off legitimate small businesses with impunity and saying therefore amazon must have no value.

To make high quality decisions get educated about the impact of the technology and its most promising projects, rather than looking for the most rotten apple in order to disregard the whole bunch.

The biggest exchange on the planet is accused of artificially pumping fake dollars into the market to shore up Bitcoin prices while the exchange's owners try to find a real-world bank willing to deal with them. The biggest exchange on the planet before that collapsed as a result of a colossal robbery. The biggest cryptocurrency has been publicly described as a bubble by the world's leading authority on bubbles, the founder of the most dominant software company on earth, the head of one of the planet's largest banks, and the most consistently successful investor in history. The entire market bounces violently up and down, completely unmoored from reality, while convincing analyses demonstrate that price moves in the past have been the result of deliberate market manipulation. This is nothing like dismissing Amazon on the basis of some dodgy merchants; it's far deeper and more pervasive, to the extent that we have absolutely no idea whether the prices currently being quoted bear any relevance to what they might be in five years.

I have still not seen a single case of a cryptocurrency price being supported with specific reference to a well-presented breakdown of the market being targeted, a SWOT analysis of the crypto's position relative to incumbents in the field, a sober estimate of the percentage of the market that can realistically be captured over the following three to five years, and an explanation of the dollar value of capturing that share of the market. This is absolute bread-and-butter stuff for any publicly traded company, and indeed for any company seeking investment from an outside source, but it's more or less utterly absent from the crypto sphere, because nobody investing in crypto is looking for it. The entire marketplace is infected with a get-rich-quick mentality, mixed with a fairly unpleasant libertarian dislike of government, and the kind of thing that would be regarded as an absolute minimum standard in terms of business reporting is simply not bothered with. I still have not seen a single case of a cryptocurrency with a stable price correlated closely with its actual prospects for success.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on April 22, 2018, 06:54:15 PM
The entire marketplace is infected with a get-rich-quick mentality, mixed with a fairly unpleasant libertarian dislike of government, and the kind of thing that would be regarded as an absolute minimum standard in terms of business reporting is simply not bothered with.

This weekend I had some lenthly conversations with one of my friends who is an active crypto miner and "investor", and he made a pretty convincing case that cryptos are now played much like penny stocks.  He says no one views them as a serious investment.  They don't even attempt to deny the blatantly illegal pump and dump schemes that characterize the marketplace. 

All he see is a wildly fluctuating unregulated asset class rife with speculators, some of which are organized crime and some of which are clueless housewives, and he thinks there is money to be made (or potentially lost) playing the waves.  He doesn't have any illusions that cryptocurrency is going to supplant the USD.  He just thinks that, like penny stocks, this is a high-risk game in which you can 10x or 100x your investment in a matter of weeks, with a little bit of luck and slightly more knowledge than the average crypto investor (who has virtually nil).

From his perspective, this whole thing makes a lot more sense to me.  There is no future in it.  Of course it's a bubble.  It's 50% fraud and 50% pyramid scheme, and every serious investor should stay far far away.  But!  It's also a legitimate "get rich quick" scheme just like penny stocks are, if you can get in and out early on each artificially manipulated price wave, precisely because so many people are getting fleeced after buying into the hype.  HODL is for suckers.  Learn to watch the markets and time your exits, and there is real money to be made in the short term if you're morally flexible enough to embrace it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on April 22, 2018, 07:13:59 PM
Sol!  Today is April 21, not April 1!

:)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on April 22, 2018, 11:57:54 PM
Now that the prices have come down, it seems there's less people shilling all over this thread. However, there is still a ton of hilarious scams going on.

https://cryptovest.com/news/another-scam-ico-savedroid-founder-exits-with-50m-to-chill-on-a-beach/

ICOs are in desperate need of regulation.

That said, see followup link at top of article here:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/over-50-million-savedroid-ico-135731412.html

tl;dr apparently German sense of humor didn't come through correctly as this was an awful publicity stunt, not an exit scam, so far as we know at this point.

FWIW I do not own and have no intentions of owning SaveDroid.

Shunning the entirety of the crypto space by pointing out the most egregiously flawed / illicit projects is like pointing out the third party chinese counterfeiters plaguing amazon that are ripping off legitimate small businesses with impunity and saying therefore amazon must have no value.

To make high quality decisions get educated about the impact of the technology and its most promising projects, rather than looking for the most rotten apple in order to disregard the whole bunch.

The biggest exchange on the planet is accused of artificially pumping fake dollars into the market to shore up Bitcoin prices while the exchange's owners try to find a real-world bank willing to deal with them. The biggest exchange on the planet before that collapsed as a result of a colossal robbery. The biggest cryptocurrency has been publicly described as a bubble by the world's leading authority on bubbles, the founder of the most dominant software company on earth, the head of one of the planet's largest banks, and the most consistently successful investor in history. The entire market bounces violently up and down, completely unmoored from reality, while convincing analyses demonstrate that price moves in the past have been the result of deliberate market manipulation. This is nothing like dismissing Amazon on the basis of some dodgy merchants; it's far deeper and more pervasive, to the extent that we have absolutely no idea whether the prices currently being quoted bear any relevance to what they might be in five years.

I have still not seen a single case of a cryptocurrency price being supported with specific reference to a well-presented breakdown of the market being targeted, a SWOT analysis of the crypto's position relative to incumbents in the field, a sober estimate of the percentage of the market that can realistically be captured over the following three to five years, and an explanation of the dollar value of capturing that share of the market. This is absolute bread-and-butter stuff for any publicly traded company, and indeed for any company seeking investment from an outside source, but it's more or less utterly absent from the crypto sphere, because nobody investing in crypto is looking for it. The entire marketplace is infected with a get-rich-quick mentality, mixed with a fairly unpleasant libertarian dislike of government, and the kind of thing that would be regarded as an absolute minimum standard in terms of business reporting is simply not bothered with. I still have not seen a single case of a cryptocurrency with a stable price correlated closely with its actual prospects for success.

Your points are distinct from BattlaPs one-and-done exit scam link. 
FWIW the chinese counterfeiters on amazon is a much bigger problem than "some dodgy merchants." Legitimate small business are being crowded out of their own sales space with no recourse whatsoever, while amazon's own products (The amazonbasics line specifically) play by a different set of rules and do not permit 3rd party foreign merchants to offer their products for sale or resale.

The altcoin space is the wild west, not in a good way.  It has market manipulation issues and there are very real scams out there.  There are some promising projects too but they are so far away from becoming established / successful.  Low signal:noise right now but there are interesting things being worked on.
 
Bitcoin has indeed been decried as a bubble, and that bubble has burst four times.  It's also been declared dead, regularly, since its inception.  Yet the number of users continues to increase.  Venezuelans are using it to order goods online as the Bolivar has failed them.  They don't care if bill gates thinks its a bubble, they just want to be able to buy stuff on amazon, which you can do - buy gift cards with btc and then use them at amazon.

The market being targeted by btc is "people who have an internet connection and have use for frictionless, secure transactions with low fees requiring no central authority."  How big that market winds up being is yet to be determined.   Yes exchanges have been hacked and yes it's an abstract concept that doesn't fit into classic corporate evaluations, because it's not a corporation.  And it actually works, if you take the time to learn about it / use it.  To date it is the most elegant solution to the problem of trust that anyone has come up with.

The reason for long term potential is the ability to fix problems that are baked in to our current way of doing business - ID theft, the high cost of requiring banks to facilitate economic transactions, the 10 to 4 mon-fri hourly restrictions, etc.  The earliest and most obvious use cases are the ones where systems have failed completely(eg venezuela), but it's the prospect of reducing / eliminating systemic problems in stable countries, and the increased userbase that would create,  that gives it the asymmetrical risk/reward and potential upside.

The amazon analogy is to simply show that finding one element that is categorically broken/illegal is to miss the entire point of educating oneself on the big picture in order to make high quality decisions. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on April 23, 2018, 02:51:19 AM
Why is is that every time cryptocurrency advocates reach for a real-world use case, they end up talking about Venezuela?

Oh, I remember: it's because it took the near-total collapse of civil society and the rule of law, combined with an economic meltdown that's virtually impossible for any country in the world without oil, to make bitcoin seem like an attractive option as a currency. And even then, trading volumes within Venezuela are running at about USD 5m a week, or about 0.1% of economic activity in Venezuela.

But sure, keep telling yourself that cryptocurrency skeptics aren't educating themselves sufficiently on the big picture to make high quality decisions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: SparkyPeanut on April 23, 2018, 07:57:12 PM
The entire marketplace is infected with a get-rich-quick mentality, mixed with a fairly unpleasant libertarian dislike of government, and the kind of thing that would be regarded as an absolute minimum standard in terms of business reporting is simply not bothered with.

This weekend I had some lenthly conversations with one of my friends who is an active crypto miner and "investor", and he made a pretty convincing case that cryptos are now played much like penny stocks.  He says no one views them as a serious investment.  They don't even attempt to deny the blatantly illegal pump and dump schemes that characterize the marketplace. 

All he see is a wildly fluctuating unregulated asset class rife with speculators, some of which are organized crime and some of which are clueless housewives, and he thinks there is money to be made (or potentially lost) playing the waves.  He doesn't have any illusions that cryptocurrency is going to supplant the USD.  He just thinks that, like penny stocks, this is a high-risk game in which you can 10x or 100x your investment in a matter of weeks, with a little bit of luck and slightly more knowledge than the average crypto investor (who has virtually nil).

From his perspective, this whole thing makes a lot more sense to me.  There is no future in it.  Of course it's a bubble.  It's 50% fraud and 50% pyramid scheme, and every serious investor should stay far far away.  But!  It's also a legitimate "get rich quick" scheme just like penny stocks are, if you can get in and out early on each artificially manipulated price wave, precisely because so many people are getting fleeced after buying into the hype.  HODL is for suckers.  Learn to watch the markets and time your exits, and there is real money to be made in the short term if you're morally flexible enough to embrace it.

Rubbish
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on April 24, 2018, 12:45:31 AM
Why is is that every time cryptocurrency advocates reach for a real-world use case, they end up talking about Venezuela?

Oh, I remember: it's because it took the near-total collapse of civil society and the rule of law, combined with an economic meltdown that's virtually impossible for any country in the world without oil, to make bitcoin seem like an attractive option as a currency. And even then, trading volumes within Venezuela are running at about USD 5m a week, or about 0.1% of economic activity in Venezuela.

So you're saying that the failure of a state backed currency created a situation where the population is finding btc useful for both store of value against hyperinflation, and ability to make purchases that would be otherwise impossible.  I don't think we are in disagreement.

Quote
But sure, keep telling yourself that cryptocurrency skeptical aren't educating themselves sufficiently on the big picture to make high quality decisions.

I'm skeptical, and I hope others are too. 

Your word choice indicates that you have mentally written off the entire crypto space and have a healthy amount of condescension for those who find potential in it.  That's okay.


I edited this like 30 times.  I'm putting way too much effort into this.  Here's my waste of an hour trying to explain my POV:


crypto raises difficult and sometimes painful ideas about the nature of money in general and how to handle potential future economic disasters.   This can interfere with people's ability to evaluate data effectively.

Maybe it's just a side effect of a career evaluating risk and assigning effective probabilities, but the idea of 0% and 100% are only theoretical concepts to me when dealing with such complex entities as economies and currencies.  Statements such as "the stock market always goes up" or "crypto is guaranteed to fail" have no semantic content as they are mathematically indefensible.

Low probability events such as a global impact of transformative fintech like btc, or a major economic depression / debt bubble pop of a major country can have tremendous consequences.  It behooves us to try and accurately assess those small differences and use the data we have available to plan for those low probability events in some fashion.

Preparedness does not guarantee solvency.  But head-in-the-sand approaches maximize failure rates when faced with large scale outlier events.

BTC is asymmetrical risk coupled with a potential hedge/recourse against negative outlier events. 

Arguments such as Bill Gates says it's bad! and Exchanges got hacked! utterly miss the big picture.  There's a long line of talking heads decrying it, and others exhorting it. They're all speculating about future scenarios through the filter of their own biases.

Exchanges have been hacked - this indicates regulation is needed, and is the same problem JP Morgan faced when it got hacked.  It's an argument that blockchain has a valid use case, that centralized financial entities are disproportionately vulnerable.

I'm going to keep socking my retirement money into VTSAX.  I read JCollin's stuff, it's great.  I also read many anti-stock market analyses as well.  I have no illusions about 100% success rates, but it's a good bet and tax incentives are robust, it's the best way to play the game.  I am also doing my best to be prepared in the event that the rules of the game change, that another game(btc) turns out to be more profitable, or the game breaks altogether.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on April 24, 2018, 12:52:09 AM
The entire marketplace is infected with a get-rich-quick mentality, mixed with a fairly unpleasant libertarian dislike of government, and the kind of thing that would be regarded as an absolute minimum standard in terms of business reporting is simply not bothered with.

This weekend I had some lenthly conversations with one of my friends who is an active crypto miner and "investor", and he made a pretty convincing case that cryptos are now played much like penny stocks.  He says no one views them as a serious investment.  They don't even attempt to deny the blatantly illegal pump and dump schemes that characterize the marketplace. 

All he see is a wildly fluctuating unregulated asset class rife with speculators, some of which are organized crime and some of which are clueless housewives, and he thinks there is money to be made (or potentially lost) playing the waves.  He doesn't have any illusions that cryptocurrency is going to supplant the USD.  He just thinks that, like penny stocks, this is a high-risk game in which you can 10x or 100x your investment in a matter of weeks, with a little bit of luck and slightly more knowledge than the average crypto investor (who has virtually nil).

From his perspective, this whole thing makes a lot more sense to me.  There is no future in it.  Of course it's a bubble.  It's 50% fraud and 50% pyramid scheme, and every serious investor should stay far far away.  But!  It's also a legitimate "get rich quick" scheme just like penny stocks are, if you can get in and out early on each artificially manipulated price wave, precisely because so many people are getting fleeced after buying into the hype.  HODL is for suckers.  Learn to watch the markets and time your exits, and there is real money to be made in the short term if you're morally flexible enough to embrace it.

It's difficult to determine whether the moral high-horsing, rampant condescension, egoic characterization of the "others" as disproportionately criminals, or splash of sexism is the most offensive.  Hmm.  Definitely the sexism.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on April 24, 2018, 03:34:52 AM
"Statements such as 'crypto is guaranteed to fail' have no semantic content as they are mathematically indefensible."

There is no way you are serious here. This is math-based absolutism applied to a field that doesn't deal in absolutes. Replace the word "crypto" in your statement with the phrase "PayUsToMailHumanShitToYou.com", and read it back to yourself. Nobody on the forum uses phrases like you've described as descriptors of mathematical certainty, and it's bullshit sophistry to act as though they do and then pretend you're smarter than everyone else for spotting a mathematical error in a non-mathematical sentence.

If you're hedging against a crypto future by buying a small amount of crypto, how do you evaluate which crypto is the most likely winner? It's like stock picking, except none of the companies will reveal anything about their finances. How do you evaluate the likely future value of the crypto once you've picked what you think is the winner? Successfully choosing Ethereum as the currency of the future, but buying it at 300 dollars only to find out in the future that it's only worth fifty, is worse than doing absolutely nothing.

If you think crypto taking over is a possibility worth hedging against, the smart option isn't to pick a couple of random coins and hope you're the world's greatest stock picker. The smart option in that case is to load your investment portfolio with companies heavy on stock and light on cash. Companies with significant debt denominated in dollars and significant current assets will gain in such a scenario, with no risk of losing out by picking the wrong crypto - so someone who was serious about covering the possibility would be increasing their holdings with that kind of company, rather than bidding up a cryptocurrency that requires a catastrophic collapse of civil society to see its share of transactions rise to one-tenth of one percent of economic activity.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on April 24, 2018, 08:52:21 AM
It's difficult to determine whether the moral high-horsing, rampant condescension, egoic characterization of the "others" as disproportionately criminals, or splash of sexism is the most offensive.  Hmm.  Definitely the sexism.

Lol!  Did I strike a nerve somehow?  Aggressive personal attacks against an individual are not the normal way we operate here, but I'll give you a pass because you're still finding your footing.  My condescension is benevolent.

So let's get back on track, and try to address the contents of the argument at hand with logical and reasoned responses.  I'll go first!  There is no intended sexism in my previous post, not at you nor at anyone in general.  Was it my use of "housewives" to describe people swept up in the crypto craze that you found objectionable? 

And I thought people like you would be happy that I presented a justification for buying crypto:  money changes hands!  Just like penny stocks, large sums are gained and lost in crypto relatively quickly, for reasons unrelated to fundamentals, and if you're good and/or lucky you can be on the receiving end of that transfer. 

As to the "criminal" charge, I'm not the one characterizing the crypto base that way.  The FBI did that.  The exchanges themselves do that.  You've done that!  So why all the pent-up anger?  You seem to have a lot of frustration on this issue, and it's harshing your mellow, man.  Maybe take a little vacation and try to relax a little?  That always works wonders for me.

Now that we've addressed your personal attacks on me, I will patiently await your attacks on the arguments that precipitated your personal attacks.  Those are more welcome.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on April 24, 2018, 12:25:51 PM
"Statements such as 'crypto is guaranteed to fail' have no semantic content as they are mathematically indefensible."

There is no way you are serious here. This is math-based absolutism applied to a field that doesn't deal in absolutes. Replace the word "crypto" in your statement with the phrase "PayUsToMailHumanShitToYou.com", and read it back to yourself. Nobody on the forum uses phrases like you've described as descriptors of mathematical certainty, and it's bullshit sophistry to act as though they do and then pretend you're smarter than everyone else for spotting a mathematical error in a non-mathematical sentence.

I agree math-based absolutism does not work in fields that are too complex for such black-and-white decision making.

The gist of many of the previous replies is, in essence, that crypto is destined to fail.  Your hypothetical company about feces seems to have a very low success rate, but humans are unpredictable and perhaps it would find a niche market among fertilizer enthusiasts / fetishists / pranksters.

These replies often come from the frame of mind that it's inconceivable for this new technology to have any long term impact or success, because of short term problems. 
Use bitcoin for a short while and it becomes clear for example that Western Union is facing a future similar to Kodak in the 90s, unless they can adapt.  The ability to remit value across great distances no longer requires an intermediary to take a large cut.


Quote
If you're hedging against a crypto future by buying a small amount of crypto, how do you evaluate which crypto is the most likely winner? It's like stock picking, except none of the companies will reveal anything about their finances. How do you evaluate the likely future value of the crypto once you've picked what you think is the winner? Successfully choosing Ethereum as the currency of the future, but buying it at 300 dollars only to find out in the future that it's only worth fifty, is worse than doing absolutely nothing.

This is an excellent question.  It occurs to me that this may be a rhetorical argument to prove the futility of such an endeavor, but here goes.
Each blockchain is a communication network that transmits value. Metcalfe's law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalfe%27s_law) gives us a reasonable estimation framework for the utility of said network, and with supply fixed/limited for most cryptos it is simply the one with the largest user base that is the most profitable, and most likely to succeed, at any given time.  Cryptos are strongly correlated with one another so pick the top couple and rebalance periodically and your bases should be covered pretty well.

Quote
If you think crypto taking over is a possibility worth hedging against, the smart option isn't to pick a couple of random coins and hope you're the world's greatest stock picker. The smart option in that case is to load your investment portfolio with companies heavy on stock and light on cash. Companies with significant debt denominated in dollars and significant current assets will gain in such a scenario, with no risk of losing out by picking the wrong crypto - so someone who was serious about covering the possibility would be increasing their holdings with that kind of company, rather than bidding up a cryptocurrency that requires a catastrophic collapse of civil society to see its share of transactions rise to one-tenth of one percent of economic activity.

Everyone has different risk tolerances and different methods for making contingency plans.  It's comforting  to think that such a plan will eliminate risk, but that does not make it so. 

I have very little faith in the long term viability of the majority of the ~1500 cryptocurrencies.  Or in the long term viability of trillions of dollars of ever escalating debt for modern countries.  Or in the long term viability of the relentless consumer culture that drives this 100+year growth frenzy.  Or the increasing amount of money being siphoned out of the equities markets while providing no value.

Therefore it makes sense to me to have as distributed an allocation as possible to defray risk, acknowledging that individual components of the portfolio will have outsized risk, but largely for different future scenarios.   I would be plenty happy if the next 50 years go by and crypto disappears and the status quo is maintained, aside from a shift to sustainable consumption to preserve our planet's future.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Surf on April 24, 2018, 12:40:57 PM
It's difficult to determine whether the moral high-horsing, rampant condescension, egoic characterization of the "others" as disproportionately criminals, or splash of sexism is the most offensive.  Hmm.  Definitely the sexism.

Lol!  Did I strike a nerve somehow?  Aggressive personal attacks against an individual are not the normal way we operate here, but I'll give you a pass because you're still finding your footing.  My condescension is benevolent.

So let's get back on track, and try to address the contents of the argument at hand with logical and reasoned responses.  I'll go first!  There is no intended sexism in my previous post, not at you nor at anyone in general.  Was it my use of "housewives" to describe people swept up in the crypto craze that you found objectionable? 

The "clueless housewives" bit of sexism struck a nerve, yes. 

I'm glad your condescension is benevolent.  I was under the impression that candidly calling people out on their BS was kind of the way things operated around here.

Quote

And I thought people like you would be happy that I presented a justification for buying crypto:  money changes hands!  Just like penny stocks, large sums are gained and lost in crypto relatively quickly, for reasons unrelated to fundamentals, and if you're good and/or lucky you can be on the receiving end of that transfer. 

"people like you" ??
 
You seem to have very strong opinions about who you think I am, and it doesn't seem to be based at all on the things I say other than I find it possible that crypto will have a role in our future society, and you don't.

Quote
As to the "criminal" charge, I'm not the one characterizing the crypto base that way.  The FBI did that.  The exchanges themselves do that.  You've done that!  So why all the pent-up anger?  You seem to have a lot of frustration on this issue, and it's harshing your mellow, man.  Maybe take a little vacation and try to relax a little?  That always works wonders for me.

Now that we've addressed your personal attacks on me, I will patiently await your attacks on the arguments that precipitated your personal attacks.  Those are more welcome.

If there's any point at which I said half of crypto users were criminals and the other half were clueless rubes, I misspoke.  I'm reasonably certain the major exchanges have not issued any such statement either?  I could be wrong, as usual.

It's fine dude, you're allowed to your opinions.  And you're probably right, all of crypto is criminals and idiots.  You're safe!  Because you're smart enough to avoid the trap that all the criminals and idiots are setting for you.  Hooray!  Back to the high horse.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on April 24, 2018, 01:04:55 PM
"Use bitcoin for a short while and it becomes clear for example that Western Union is facing a future similar to Kodak in the 90s, unless they can adapt.  The ability to remit value across great distances no longer requires an intermediary to take a large cut."

As per the below link, a single bitcoin transfer now uses up about two hundred and fifteen kWh. I don't know where you are, but in the EU that's about forty quid's worth of electricity. And unlike Western Union, the advancement of technology more or less guarantees that figure will go upwards.

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ywbbpm/bitcoin-mining-electricity-consumption-ethereum-energy-climate-change

Pro-crypto postings very often seem to start from an uncontroversial beginning ("banks are charging us too much") before leaping immediately to a drastic conclusion ("bitcoin is the future"). Banks are worried about losing sources of profit, but they're barely even registering cryptocurrencies as a threat: fintech companies are what's scaring the crap out of them. I'm in the EU rather than the States, and there's an enormous amount of change in the financial services sector, more or less none of which involves cryptocurrencies, and almost all of which involves customers being offered better services for less money. Crypto advocates are frequently right that a given incumbent service provider is expensive, cumbersome and difficult to use, but they're almost invariably wrong when they assume that the best solution is to switch to crypto.

Revolut enables instant FX transfers at more or less the mid-rate with no fees, which is astounding. N26 is offering a current account that's close to being best in class in every market they operate in, and account charges are effectively zero. There's some curiosity about blockchain, and whether it will turn out to be useful, but cryptocurrencies themselves are not what banks and other incumbent financial institutions are worried about. Visa and Mastercard, for example, are facing what could be an existential threat in the EU from new payment service providers thanks to the second payment services directive, and none of those providers will be operating via cryptocurrencies. Mortgage lenders are worried about the prospects of a Dutch-style shakeup, where pension funds saw weakness and carved out a fifth of the mortgage market in a couple of years. Pension funds, in turn, live in mortal fear of Vanguard deciding to move into the European pension markets - when Vanguard opened an office in London a few years back, the announcement alone produced a visible drop in the share price of incumbent pension providers. People and companies are carving chunks out of each other's profit margins all over Europe's financial sector, and crypto is almost entirely irrelevant to it all. It's regarded as an object of curiosity at best, and a catastrophic bubble at worst.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on April 24, 2018, 02:19:27 PM
"Statements such as 'crypto is guaranteed to fail' have no semantic content as they are mathematically indefensible."

There is no way you are serious here. This is math-based absolutism applied to a field that doesn't deal in absolutes. Replace the word "crypto" in your statement with the phrase "PayUsToMailHumanShitToYou.com", and read it back to yourself. Nobody on the forum uses phrases like you've described as descriptors of mathematical certainty, and it's bullshit sophistry to act as though they do and then pretend you're smarter than everyone else for spotting a mathematical error in a non-mathematical sentence.

I agree math-based absolutism does not work in fields that are too complex for such black-and-white decision making.

The gist of many of the previous replies is, in essence, that crypto is destined to fail.  Your hypothetical company about feces seems to have a very low success rate, but humans are unpredictable and perhaps it would find a niche market among fertilizer enthusiasts / fetishists / pranksters.

These replies often come from the frame of mind that it's inconceivable for this new technology to have any long term impact or success, because of short term problems. 
Use bitcoin for a short while and it becomes clear for example that Western Union is facing a future similar to Kodak in the 90s, unless they can adapt.  The ability to remit value across great distances no longer requires an intermediary to take a large cut.

I think this technology will have little long term impact or success because of structural, not short term, problems.  Western Union is an interesting example.  In today's world of electronic bill pay offered by every bank, as well as Paypal and credit cards, what on Earth do we need Western Union for?  The answer is in many parts of the world people don't have access to a traditional banking system, and need to be able to send and receive cash.   Bitcoin isn't cash, so it doesn't help with that problem.   As an aside, while WU is a legitimate company, the irreversibly of WU transactions and accompanying scams have essentially eliminated it as a viable method of money transfer except for when both parties already know each other because the mere mention of WU screams "scam" to most people.  That's not a bright future for Bitcoin. 

Another structural problem, which is actually two structural problems, has to do with contracts.  Namely, our economy (and some say civilization) relies on the ability to pay for goods and services now for delivery in the future, and receive goods and services now, but pay for them in the future.  Mortgages, wages, Amazon Prime, construction, your bar tab, all operate on this principle.  But it is all supported because most contracts are legally binding, there are are legal ways to seek relief in the event of noncompliance. 

The other structural problem is that you can't enter into contracts priced in Bitcoin. I know down to the penny how much my mortgage payment will be ten years from now.  But there is no way I could price it in Bitcoin because the price isn't stable.  You can't even price a contact this week in Bitcoin.  Most businesses have margins that too small for that risk.  Transaction costs also play into this, because while you know how much MasterCard will be charging you next month, you have no idea what the Bitcoin transactions will cost you.   You can't do business like that.  Maybe as a novelty, but it doesn't scale.  The easy solution is don't accept Bitcoin. 

The next structural problem is that Bitcoin doesn't scale.  Because of the blocksize limit, the theoretical number of transactions per second is also limited--to a tiny number.  Far too tiny to support the economy of even a reasonably sized city.    There are proposed workarounds, but then you don't have Bitcoin, do you?  You have some other coin called BitcoinFun or something.  And you better get on the BitcoinFun fork fast before everyone stops using the old Bitcoin and its value goes away.  On the flip side it doesn't matter if a dollar bill was issued 20 years ago, or 20 minutes ago.  It still spends the same. 

The next structural problems is that in almost every country (maybe every country, I dunno) taxes and wages must be paid in legal currency.  Since taxes and wages are typically two of the biggest if not the two biggest expenses of any business, businesses need dollars to stay solvent.   You gotta make payroll and you gotta have dollars to do that.  And let's say you booked a lot of sales at Christmas when Bitcoin was high.  Now in April taxes are due, and Uncle Sam wants his cut and so you go to sell some of your Bitcoin which you've been saving just for this occasion.    Oops, Bitcoin is half what it was, but Uncle Sam doesn't care.  He wants the December profits even though that money evaporated, which could be very painful.  Like shut down your business and seize your assets painful.   The easy solution is don't accept Bitcoin. 

I could go on and on but hopefully you see my point.  The last point alone is reason why Bitcoin or any crypto will never see any significant market penetration.  There are too many structural problems. 

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on April 24, 2018, 11:54:07 PM
The entire marketplace is infected with a get-rich-quick mentality, mixed with a fairly unpleasant libertarian dislike of government, and the kind of thing that would be regarded as an absolute minimum standard in terms of business reporting is simply not bothered with.

This weekend I had some lenthly conversations with one of my friends who is an active crypto miner and "investor", and he made a pretty convincing case that cryptos are now played much like penny stocks.  He says no one views them as a serious investment.  They don't even attempt to deny the blatantly illegal pump and dump schemes that characterize the marketplace. 

All he see is a wildly fluctuating unregulated asset class rife with speculators, some of which are organized crime and some of which are clueless housewives, and he thinks there is money to be made (or potentially lost) playing the waves.  He doesn't have any illusions that cryptocurrency is going to supplant the USD.  He just thinks that, like penny stocks, this is a high-risk game in which you can 10x or 100x your investment in a matter of weeks, with a little bit of luck and slightly more knowledge than the average crypto investor (who has virtually nil).

From his perspective, this whole thing makes a lot more sense to me.  There is no future in it.  Of course it's a bubble.  It's 50% fraud and 50% pyramid scheme, and every serious investor should stay far far away.  But!  It's also a legitimate "get rich quick" scheme just like penny stocks are, if you can get in and out early on each artificially manipulated price wave, precisely because so many people are getting fleeced after buying into the hype.  HODL is for suckers.  Learn to watch the markets and time your exits, and there is real money to be made in the short term if you're morally flexible enough to embrace it.

I leave for a few months and as expected, you still still over here all salty :P
 
Hope everyone bought the dip! I plan to add to the equities bucket once we are down another 10-20%.

Cheers!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on April 25, 2018, 11:05:14 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/25/nasdaq-is-open-to-becoming-cryptocurrency-exchange-ceo-says.html

Just like you old farts had an entire generation buying equities with you in retirement accounts, it's easy to see where the millennial generation will be putting their (albeit less) money towards.

Look macro, play it accordingly.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on April 26, 2018, 12:04:16 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/25/nasdaq-is-open-to-becoming-cryptocurrency-exchange-ceo-says.html

Just like you old farts had an entire generation buying equities with you in retirement accounts, it's easy to see where the millennial generation will be putting their (albeit less) money towards.

Look macro, play it accordingly.

Dismissive attitude to people who disagree, comment that doesn't actually relate to the link provided, wild claim offered with no supporting evidence. We have a trifecta.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on April 26, 2018, 10:18:19 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/25/nasdaq-is-open-to-becoming-cryptocurrency-exchange-ceo-says.html

Just like you old farts had an entire generation buying equities with you in retirement accounts, it's easy to see where the millennial generation will be putting their (albeit less) money towards.

Look macro, play it accordingly.

Dismissive attitude to people who disagree, comment that doesn't actually relate to the link provided, wild claim offered with no supporting evidence. We have a trifecta.

1) He has consistently not followed the rules of the thread.

2) I am glad you ignored the link, fits your agenda.

3) Ask 10 millennial's what they think about Stock Market and then ask them about Bitcoin.


Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on April 26, 2018, 11:40:35 AM
3) Ask 10 millennial's what they think about Stock Market and then ask them about Bitcoin.

I am an (older) millennial. I work with a lot of people younger than me. As a programmer, in a high-tech company. Every single person I know thinks that Cryptocurrencies are at best a silly way to speculate (not invest), at worst an outright scam. There are some people around here who are pro-crypto, but they are a small minority. Nowhere near the number of people that invest in the stock market.

If you think otherwise I suspect it is because you have intentionally surrounded yourself with like-minded people. Which is not necessarily bad, but you might want to watch out for group-think when making significant financial decisions.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on April 26, 2018, 11:47:24 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/25/nasdaq-is-open-to-becoming-cryptocurrency-exchange-ceo-says.html

2) I am glad you ignored the link, fits your agenda.

I also have no idea what you think this proves. Of course the CEO of an exchange is interested in expanding his business and being an exchange for more stuff. Why wouldn't he be? More exchange fees to charge, more income for his business. That says nothing at all about whether cryptocurrencies are a good thing to "invest" in.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on April 26, 2018, 12:04:07 PM
I'm a couple of years too old to be considered a Millennial (the cutoff is 1980 or so, right?) but my wife, siblings, and most of our friends are millennials. Tech savvy hipster ones, too. Not one that I know of gives a rat's ass about cryptocurrencies, and the ones that invest at all invest in... wait for it... the stock market, the bond market, and real estate.

Even if crypto completely replaced all other forms of money, why would anyone stop investing in the stock market? They have basically nothing to do with each other - the companies involved (mostly) make actual products and provide actual services. They can take payment in dollars, or bitcoin, or rare comic books, or whatever, and that business will still be just as valuable and just as worth investing in regardless.

Now, some big crypto company might someday become the next Visa, or something, and maybe be publicly listed and worth investing in. If you got in on the ground floor, you might end up rich, just like any new and upcoming company. But that company won't kill off Microsoft or Unilever, it can only really displace companies that are purely providing payment processing services.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on April 26, 2018, 12:12:18 PM
I'm a millennial.  Crypto is not an investment . . . generously it can be called speculation.  The stock market by way of index funds is (in contrast) a pretty decent place to park your money to achieve long term appreciation that beats inflation.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on April 26, 2018, 01:15:01 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/25/nasdaq-is-open-to-becoming-cryptocurrency-exchange-ceo-says.html

Just like you old farts had an entire generation buying equities with you in retirement accounts, it's easy to see where the millennial generation will be putting their (albeit less) money towards.

Look macro, play it accordingly.

Dismissive attitude to people who disagree, comment that doesn't actually relate to the link provided, wild claim offered with no supporting evidence. We have a trifecta.

1) He has consistently not followed the rules of the thread.

2) I am glad you ignored the link, fits your agenda.

3) Ask 10 millennial's what they think about Stock Market and then ask them about Bitcoin.

1: There are no rules in this thread. You don't get to arbitrarily decide upon rules for particular threads, because that's not how this forum works. If you want somewhere you don't have to see any dissenting opinion, go over to Reddit's crypto subs. Otherwise, you're not the arbiter of what's acceptable in a thread: the mods are. You're on a website whose front page flags a post with the title WHY BITCOIN IS DUMB, for fuck's sake.

2. That link proves the quadratic root of fuck all. It's literally the head of a stock exchange saying "maybe in the future we could be a crypto exchange". That's it. You've ignored the fact that the same person derided ICOs in the same article, for God's sake.

3. I'm a millennial. So are most of my friends. I don't know a single one who thinks Bitcoin is a good idea. Literally not a single one. I know plenty who think investing in index funds is a good idea, though.

Seriously, this is shitposting. You're putting up cheap garbage with no effort to support any of it. It's crappy behaviour and this forum deserves better than mindless crypto shilling. I'm becoming increasingly convinced that this is just trolling.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on April 26, 2018, 01:23:14 PM
0/4 millennials on board the cryptocurrency train.  Surely we can find just six more?  :P
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on April 26, 2018, 01:56:42 PM
0/4 millennials on board the cryptocurrency train.  Surely we can find just six more?  :P

Make that 0/5.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on April 26, 2018, 02:00:51 PM
Ya'll seem to be taking this way too seriously.  Do we really expect someone recommending a newfangled get rich quick scheme to come here with reasoned arguments?  To respond to critique with thoughtful consideration? 

Shitposting is the order of the day here.  I say we let them have their fun.  You can argue all you want, but like any ponzi scheme the "true believers" are only here to stir up interest and generate buzz among susceptible new buyers.  Your informed opinions are mere distractions to that effort, because they're not really talking to you.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on April 26, 2018, 02:10:19 PM
Shitposting is the order of the day here.  I say we let them have their fun.  You can argue all you want, but like any ponzi scheme the "true believers" are only here to stir up interest and generate buzz among susceptible new buyers.

Well I don't disagree, but I think it would be a disservice to potential susceptible new buyers that may be reading this to just give up on the conversation entirely.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on April 26, 2018, 02:51:14 PM
Ya'll seem to be taking this way too seriously.  Do we really expect someone recommending a newfangled get rich quick scheme to come here with reasoned arguments?  To respond to critique with thoughtful consideration? 

Shitposting is the order of the day here.  I say we let them have their fun.  You can argue all you want, but like any ponzi scheme the "true believers" are only here to stir up interest and generate buzz among susceptible new buyers.  Your informed opinions are mere distractions to that effort, because they're not really talking to you.

Fair point; I do react poorly to bad faith arguments...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Optimiser on April 26, 2018, 03:15:48 PM
0/4 millennials on board the cryptocurrency train.  Surely we can find just six more?  :P

Make that 0/5.

I'm a millennial. Currently 1% of my portfolio* is crypto the other 99% is in the stock market.

*I personally don't consider crypto to be investment or part of my portfolio, but I did some GPU mining and haven't sold off all of the proceeds yet.

So I guess we are up to .01/6
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: jambongris on April 26, 2018, 03:37:16 PM
0/4 millennials on board the cryptocurrency train.  Surely we can find just six more?  :P

Make that 0/5.

I'm a millennial. Currently 1% of my portfolio* is crypto the other 99% is in the stock market.

*I personally don't consider crypto to be investment or part of my portfolio, but I did some GPU mining and haven't sold off all of the proceeds yet.

So I guess we are up to .01/6

Another millennial who doesn’t “invest” in crypto and I can vouch for several others that don’t.

The only person I know that has admitted to investing in crypto is a middle aged (definitely not a millennial) coworker who was buying bitcoin back in December. I haven’t heard anything from them since.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: nazar on April 28, 2018, 03:45:38 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Db5DqgyUwAASLJr?format=jpg)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on April 29, 2018, 06:52:57 PM
The entire marketplace is infected with a get-rich-quick mentality, mixed with a fairly unpleasant libertarian dislike of government, and the kind of thing that would be regarded as an absolute minimum standard in terms of business reporting is simply not bothered with.

This weekend I had some lenthly conversations with one of my friends who is an active crypto miner and "investor", and he made a pretty convincing case that cryptos are now played much like penny stocks.  He says no one views them as a serious investment.  They don't even attempt to deny the blatantly illegal pump and dump schemes that characterize the marketplace. 

All he see is a wildly fluctuating unregulated asset class rife with speculators, some of which are organized crime and some of which are clueless housewives, and he thinks there is money to be made (or potentially lost) playing the waves.  He doesn't have any illusions that cryptocurrency is going to supplant the USD.  He just thinks that, like penny stocks, this is a high-risk game in which you can 10x or 100x your investment in a matter of weeks, with a little bit of luck and slightly more knowledge than the average crypto investor (who has virtually nil).

From his perspective, this whole thing makes a lot more sense to me.  There is no future in it.  Of course it's a bubble.  It's 50% fraud and 50% pyramid scheme, and every serious investor should stay far far away.  But!  It's also a legitimate "get rich quick" scheme just like penny stocks are, if you can get in and out early on each artificially manipulated price wave, precisely because so many people are getting fleeced after buying into the hype.  HODL is for suckers.  Learn to watch the markets and time your exits, and there is real money to be made in the short term if you're morally flexible enough to embrace it.

I leave for a few months and as expected, you still still over here all salty :P
 
Hope everyone bought the dip! I plan to add to the equities bucket once we are down another 10-20%.

Cheers!

Tonyahu, you're back!

I keep wondering what happened to your plan to sell much of your then-almost-enough-for-FIRE crypto holdings, ending up with roughly even buckets of cash, stock, real estate, crypto and something I can't remember.  So what happened?

Did you sell any crypto?  What are the proportions of various asset categories now?  At current market prices, is your portfolio (including crypto since you still have some) enough to support your FIRE, supposing that the 4% rule applies to all portions of it?

(Yes, naysayers, I know the Trinity study didn't include any crypto.  I'm just curious about our OP here.)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: LessIsLess on April 30, 2018, 07:35:13 AM
These replies often come from the frame of mind that it's inconceivable for this new technology to have any long term impact or success, because of short term problems. 

Getting someone to change their frozen mind, might be harder than getting a space alien to visit Earth. 
Even if crypto had destroyed entire industries, the critics would still say it's a fraud.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on April 30, 2018, 08:00:17 AM
Keep in mind that it's also possible to believe in the long term possibilities of the technology AND simultaneously that there's no way to invest in said future right now. Remember the entire historical return of the US airline industry? It's zero. Zero. You can be incredibly successful and disruptive - and not make your investors a dime.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on May 01, 2018, 12:29:50 AM
These replies often come from the frame of mind that it's inconceivable for this new technology to have any long term impact or success, because of short term problems. 

Getting someone to change their frozen mind, might be harder than getting a space alien to visit Earth. 
Even if crypto had destroyed entire industries, the critics would still say it's a fraud.

Oh, if crypto had eaten entire industries whole, I'd be absolutely willing to listen to a valuation somewhere around 3-4% of where it is now.

Bitcoin is just shy of being a decade old. By the time Google hit a decade, they had taken a wrecking ball to the advertising industry, the print news industry and the concept of non-academic reference texts. They'd virtually wiped out the field of email account providers and were about to take a hatchet to Nokia and Garmin simultaneously by releasing the first Android phones. And they'd gone public in 2004 to boot.

Google stock has appreciated at about 25-30% annually since IPO. Bitcoin is somewhere in the region of ten to a hundred times that rate. But yeah, it's the crypto sceptics who aren't thinking properly.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on May 01, 2018, 12:51:34 AM
Bitcoin is just shy of being a decade old. By the time Google hit a decade, they had taken a wrecking ball to the advertising industry, the print news industry and the concept of non-academic reference texts. They'd virtually wiped out the field of email account providers and were about to take a hatchet to Nokia and Garmin simultaneously by releasing the first Android phones. And they'd gone public in 2004 to boot.

See, you're still thinking in terms of fundamentals.  That's your problem.

Cryptos aren't valued the same way stocks are.  It's not about market penetration or upseting outdated business models or revenue streams or anything at all, really, except public perception aka hype.  The whole crypto business model is to publicly promote the idea until you convince new money (during a time in which the economy is flush with spare cash) to invest in a controlled finite supply, thus driving up the instantaneous price point to ridiculous levels and then using the single transaction price to estimate market cap.  Transactions are hard to execute on purpose and units are randomly destroyed all the time, thus depleting the supply and keeping the instantaneous price high.  This is how bitcoin can claim to be "worth" hundreds of billions of dollars based on a single buy order for $7k.  Even the most rudimentary business analysis reveals the absurdity of it.

So let all of that stuffy reliable analysis go!  Don't pretend there's a revenue stream or a use case, because it doesn't matter.  All that matter is finding a greater fool, which is why so many crypto enthusiasts are so keen to promote their ideas to an ever-widening audience.  Just like penny stocks, you can double or triple your money in a matter of hours, if you know what coin is being manipulated next, and this coordinated manipulation is exactly what turned a handful of 20-something trust funders with $10k burning holes in their pockets into multimillionaires in less than two years.  If they could actually liquidate at those crazy high prices they'd be genuinely rich, but of course the problem is that the price (and thus the value of your asset) decreases every time you sell.  Which is why HODL is the rallying cry, because they need to suppress sales as much as possible.

I think it's a fascinating business model.  These people may own ten million dollars worth of a crypto, but they can only sell a few hundred dollars per day without negatively impacting market prices.  They need to drip it out slowly to keep the price high, but they have real expenses to cover in the mean time, so every new youtube video they make that convinces another person to buy in is basically going right into their pocket as sales, and so from that perspective the "currency" side is totally irrelevant.  They're in sales like anyone else in retail, pocketing take-home cash buy convincing people to buy their product.  Generating a few hundred dollars per day off of $10k of original money is fantastic.  Doing it on ten million in current asset value is kind of disappointing.  Unfortunately, sales don't scale with asset price, and they need to balance those competing interest.

I've decided that I love cryptocurrencies.  They are everything that is wrong the modern age, embodied in a new speculative bubble that will be remembered for generations as a symbol of our folly.  Like Donald Trump, they are exactly what America deserves.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: EscapeVelocity2020 on May 01, 2018, 01:21:22 AM
The BitCoin Achilles heel is that just about any reasonably funded private entity can start a currency on an equivalent playing level.  There is no moat, no barrier to entry, no intrinsic value.  Even Oscar-Mayer has jumped in (https://www.coindesk.com/bring-home-bacoin-oscar-mayer-debuts-crypto-campaign/).  What if Apple just decided one day that it wanted to be a real player and back-stopped it's 'I-currency' with both technical ability as well as real cash reserves.  What if a 3rd world country decided to use 'Wakanda' blockchain currency backstopped with it's natural resources? 

Just about anything could render BitCoin effectively worthless if a new Crypto overshadows or splinters the market.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: trollwithamustache on May 01, 2018, 08:04:50 AM
.  What if a 3rd world country decided to use 'Wakanda' blockchain currency backstopped with it's natural resources? 


well, to answer your last question it appears you have to cut the price of your crude oil by 30% as a teaser to get people to buy your  crypto and use that to buy your oil....

The BTC moat is its widespread usage, which is both incredibly powerful and potentially incredible weak.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on May 09, 2018, 12:32:25 PM
Don't worry about Apple issuing its own crypto currency. Worry about Amazon doing it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on May 09, 2018, 02:23:46 PM
Amazon are already starting to eat the banking industry, but from an entirely unexpected direction: they're offering loans to small businesses which sell their products on Amazon itself. It's a very shrewd move, because they have an incredibly detailed view of the borrowers' financials and operations, because they can utterly bury a business that refuses to pay what's owed, and because they get two bites of the apple by charging for the marketplace as well as for the financing. Those factors combine to produce a loan book that would make any credit risk analyst weep for joy.

There's money to be made in disrupting established banking organisations. Just not in fucking crypto.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on May 09, 2018, 08:42:40 PM
The BitCoin Achilles heel is that just about any reasonably funded private entity can start a currency on an equivalent playing level.  There is no moat, no barrier to entry, no intrinsic value.  Even Oscar-Mayer has jumped in (https://www.coindesk.com/bring-home-bacoin-oscar-mayer-debuts-crypto-campaign/).  What if Apple just decided one day that it wanted to be a real player and back-stopped it's 'I-currency' with both technical ability as well as real cash reserves.  What if a 3rd world country decided to use 'Wakanda' blockchain currency backstopped with it's natural resources? 

Just about anything could render BitCoin effectively worthless if a new Crypto overshadows or splinters the market.

Bigger players will enter the crypto scene, thats for sure.  I don't think it will hurt the big players like Bitcoin, Monero and Ethereum because most people involved in crypto appreciate the decentralized nature of it.  That's the primary reason Bitcoin was first created and it remains an essential aspect of cryptocurrency.  I think there will be successful decentralized and centralized cryptos.  Ripple is a perfect example of how they can both succeed. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: js82 on May 11, 2018, 05:22:45 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/25/nasdaq-is-open-to-becoming-cryptocurrency-exchange-ceo-says.html

Just like you old farts had an entire generation buying equities with you in retirement accounts, it's easy to see where the millennial generation will be putting their (albeit less) money towards.

Look macro, play it accordingly.

I'm a millennial.  I see Blockchain as a useful technology.  I suspect there are uses which have not been significantly explored yet, for which it will prove its merits as a future.

When I "look macro", I prefer assets with intrinsic value, and ones that offer a return even in the absence of wild price fluctuation.  Shares of corporations offer that.  Smart real estate investment offers that.  Crypto?  Not so much.

Cryptocurrencies themselves are at best, a useful means of making a transaction, but with no intrinsic value.  At worst, they're an ecological trainwreck and their use is limited due to transaction costs/speeds(see: Bitcoin's electricity consumption and speed).

Do they have uses?  Sure.  Does a crypto-coin have intrinsic value in the way a share of a publicly-traded corporation does?  Heck no.  At best, by "investing" in crypto, you're doing the equivalent of "investing" in gold, in hopes of price gains over time from an item whose value(in terms of usefulness) is largely decoupled from its market price.  This is reinforced by the extent to which the overwhelming majority of cryptos track together - what we have right now is mass investing in the crypto "asset class", but with relatively little regard to the merits of many of the individual cryptocurrencies.  Most of the 1000+ "currencies" out there today are useless garbage, good for little other than speculation.

In the end, crypto isn't creating wealth(In fact, when you consider the absurd quantities of energy being expended on mining, it's delivering negative value).  It's a transactional process, pushing electrons around to benefit one party at the expense of another, much like the existing banking system.  The only difference is who wins and who loses, and the size of the transaction fees.  And given the sheer amount of energy it takes to process a single transaction for Bitcoin and Ethereum, crypto definitely isn't winning in the transactional costs department in the vast majority of cases - which is what the average end user will care about.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MustacheAndaHalf on May 12, 2018, 08:05:21 AM
In an interview with Warren Buffet earlier this week, he mentioned that if someone says they don't think Apple stock will do well, Buffet doesn't get angry about it.  He just has a different view.  But if you tell someone who owns Bitcoin you don't think it's a good investment, they tend to take it very personally.

Charlie Munger had even stronger opinions about the matter, but it would be practically be trolling to quote his comments here.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on May 12, 2018, 08:46:10 AM
Charlie Munger had even stronger opinions about the matter, but it would be practically be trolling to quote his comments here.

Ooh ooh, let me!

Charlie Munger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Munger) is a legend in the investment and finance world, and he thinks "Bitcoin is worthless artificial gold." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBVDqAHQ4-M)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on May 13, 2018, 05:46:58 PM
An interesting read on the economics of ASICs.

It also answered a question I've been wondering about for a long time, which is why a company that built custom miners that turned a net profit would ever sell them, and why custom asics which didn't turn a profit would ever be purchased. It's all about timing.

Quote
In the case of Bitmain’s A3, a small batch of miners were sold to the public with a very fast shipping time, less than 10 days. Shortly afterwards, YouTube videos started circulating of people who had bought the miners and were legitimately making $800 per day off of their miner. This created a lot of mania around the A3, setting Bitmain up for a very successful batch 2.

While we don’t know exactly how many A3 units got sold, we suspect that the profit margins they made on their batch 2 sales are greater than the potential block reward from mining using the A3 units. That is to say, Bitmain sold over a hundred million dollars in mining rigs knowing that the block reward was not large enough for their customers to make back that money, even assuming free electricity. And this isn’t the first time, they pulled something similar with the Dash miners. We call it flooding, and it’s another example of the dangerous asymmetry that exists between manufacturers and customers.

https://blog.sia.tech/the-state-of-cryptocurrency-mining-538004a37f9b
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: TheSinner on May 14, 2018, 01:43:18 PM
In an interview with Warren Buffet earlier this week, he mentioned that if someone says they don't think Apple stock will do well, Buffet doesn't get angry about it.  He just has a different view.  But if you tell someone who owns Bitcoin you don't think it's a good investment, they tend to take it very personally.

Charlie Munger had even stronger opinions about the matter, but it would be practically be trolling to quote his comments here.
Lol, some take it personally, most don't. It's the vocal people you usually hear/see (especially on the internet).

Buffet/Munger have been wrong plenty of times. Especially on (new) technology.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on May 14, 2018, 04:45:53 PM
Lol, some take it personally, most don't. It's the vocal people you usually hear/see (especially on the internet).

Buffet/Munger have been wrong plenty of times. Especially on (new) technology.

How about Bill Gates? 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Padonak on May 14, 2018, 05:41:57 PM
Lol, some take it personally, most don't. It's the vocal people you usually hear/see (especially on the internet).

Buffet/Munger have been wrong plenty of times. Especially on (new) technology.

How about Bill Gates?

I'm not defending Crypto, but as far as I remember, Gates was wrong about the Internet and its potential.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on May 14, 2018, 05:54:56 PM
Lol, some take it personally, most don't. It's the vocal people you usually hear/see (especially on the internet).

Buffet/Munger have been wrong plenty of times. Especially on (new) technology.

How about Bill Gates?

I'm not defending Crypto, but as far as I remember, Gates was wrong about the Internet and its potential.

Bill Gates is enough of an antichrist to the open source movement (even though he seems like a perfectly nice man) that there are whole websites set up to track his bad predictions:

Quote
"We will never make a 32-bit operating system," Bill Gates said at the launch of MSX in 1983.

Gates declared in January 2004 at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland that spam would be dead in 24 months. Two years later, security firm Barracuda said that in 2007, 95-percent of e-mail messages were spam.

"This antitrust thing will blow over," Bill Gates was quoted as telling a group of Intel executives at a meeting on 11 July, 1995

There's also the famous "No one will need more than 637KB of memory for a personal computer. 640KB ought to be enough for anybody" although it's not clear if he really ever said that or not (he now denies it).

....I don't know that this proves anything in particular, but there it is.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on May 14, 2018, 08:09:38 PM
Lol, some take it personally, most don't. It's the vocal people you usually hear/see (especially on the internet).

Buffet/Munger have been wrong plenty of times. Especially on (new) technology.

How about Bill Gates?

I'm not defending Crypto, but as far as I remember, Gates was wrong about the Internet and its potential.


You sure?  Here is Gate's 1995 "Internet Tidal Wave" memo.  It seems to me he understood very clearly the direction things were headed:

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/atr/legacy/2006/03/03/20.pdf

That said, just because Gate's understanding of tech made him one of the richest human beings who ever lived, by itself, doesn't mean he is correct about crypto. 

But in my mind, if someone with that level of expertise has concerns, then it is reasonable to take those concerns seriously.  Same with Buffett and Munger.  Do any crypto proponents care to address their concerns?  Or is it simply enough to dismiss their points because they have been wrong in the past?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on May 14, 2018, 11:23:34 PM
Maybe it’s enough to ignore all the shit people talk on either side and just keep counting the days, months and years that crypto fails to revolutionise anything. There’s no steady progress here, just empty hype based on weaker and weaker evidence. I’m very happy that the wave of nonsense has receded out of pop media.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: shinn497 on May 14, 2018, 11:26:35 PM
Can you guys seel me your GPUs. I want to build a deep learning rig.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on May 19, 2018, 01:01:42 AM
Interestingly, I've just read an article on how blockchain technologies may be affected by the EU's General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR). Link here: https://medium.com/wearetheledger/the-blockchain-gdpr-paradox-fc51e663d047.

TLDR: as of the 25th of May, according to the link, holding any personal data whatsoever on a blockchain will be effectively completely illegal across the entire European Union. For those Mustachians resident outside Europe, or those within Europe who aren't particularly interested in European legal news, this is a Very Big Deal. The European court system is EXTREMELY serious about making sure that things within the EU follow the EU's rules, to the extent that a large part of European legal history consists of the union itself successfully prosecuting the absolute shit out of individual governments for pricking around.

If the article is correct, and it's impossible to make blockchain GDPR-compliant without turning it into a simple lookup table, then the number of potential blockchain applications in the EU has just gone to absolute zero, along with the number of potential blockchain applications that involve the EU in any way whatsoever.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on May 19, 2018, 08:31:49 AM
If the article is correct, and it's impossible to make blockchain GDPR-compliant without turning it into a simple lookup table, then the number of potential blockchain applications in the EU has just gone to absolute zero, along with the number of potential blockchain applications that involve the EU in any way whatsoever.

That would be delicious, if a technology designed by privacy advocates was laid low by privacy concerns. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Cache_Stash on May 21, 2018, 09:30:00 AM
Way to big a thread to read it all. 

Has there been any discussion on the amount of electrical power draw currently being utilized to support bitcoin mining?  I read somewhere, very recently, by the end of the year bitcoin mining will have a consumption of 0.5% of the worlds current electrical demand. 

Anyone see a problem here?

I certainly do.  Especially if you hold strong beliefs in climate change, pollution in general, etc...

Seems like a can of worms is being opened.

Edited to Add:

The current technology doesn't seem sustainable.  I think it is a good first wack at something that could be greatly beneficial, but the jury is out on first mover advantage of Bitcoin and the other 5,000 crypto's out there now.  I would say the final winner of the crypto war (which I believe it is) will not be first mover.

(This post is not saying anything about block chain.   Block chain is the fundamental underlying technology.   It's about the current use of blockchain for crypto currency)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on May 21, 2018, 12:26:31 PM
Way to big a thread to read it all. 

Has there been any discussion on the amount of electrical power draw currently being utilized to support bitcoin mining?  I read somewhere, very recently, by the end of the year bitcoin mining will have a consumption of 0.5% of the worlds current electrical demand. 

Anyone see a problem here?

I do too.  No ability to scale. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on May 21, 2018, 12:59:50 PM
Way to big a thread to read it all. 

Has there been any discussion on the amount of electrical power draw currently being utilized to support bitcoin mining?  I read somewhere, very recently, by the end of the year bitcoin mining will have a consumption of 0.5% of the worlds current electrical demand. 

Anyone see a problem here?


Yes, it's been discussed. Repeatedly.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on May 31, 2018, 09:56:58 AM
Can you guys seel me your GPUs. I want to build a deep learning rig.

I've got a few GTX980s I'm looking to part with, and could be convinced to sell a Radeon 290X.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: zazpowered on June 06, 2018, 05:46:01 PM
Fidelity is working on a crypto exchange. https://www.ccn.com/breaking-fidelity-is-quietly-building-a-cryptocurrency-exchange/

Pretty good validation for the industry
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on June 07, 2018, 07:32:31 AM
How many people are using it Fidelity's crypto exchange?  If it's zero, can we wait until it has a couple billion transactions under it's belt before we get excited about it . . . or do we have to pretend that every bit of unsubstantiated gossip about a possible crypto future is meaningful?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on June 07, 2018, 07:59:00 AM
The type of exchange that we need to show some sort of future use case is, of course, exchanging crypto for real-world stuff. "Exchanges" where crypto gets traded for crypto is just showing that it's got the same use case (so far) as baseball cards.

I get that lots of financial institutions want to make money on this by taking a percentage of what various suckers spend trading with each other. That makes perfect sense.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on June 07, 2018, 12:49:04 PM
If the article is correct, and it's impossible to make blockchain GDPR-compliant without turning it into a simple lookup table, then the number of potential blockchain applications in the EU has just gone to absolute zero, along with the number of potential blockchain applications that involve the EU in any way whatsoever.

That would be delicious, if a technology designed by privacy advocates was laid low by privacy concerns.

I know this is a late post, but I just wanted to add...

The article that was linked to was mainly relevant only to permissioned blockchains. You can be sure that anyone who is actually serious about privacy is not going to use a permissioned blockchain. An open blockchain that is privacy focused is not going to store any PII data on it anyway and therefore the entire article and GDPR is not applicable in that case.

While the article does make some good points in regards to permissioned blockchains, I think if anything, it misses the real point about how permissioned blockchains often don't provide any more benefit above and beyond what relational databases already provide organizations. There is so much blockchain hype out there looking to find ways to implement blockchain tech without actually looking at the problem that needs solving and what tech is best suited for solving it. Relational databases are also append databases like blockchains in the way that their logging takes place, they're just missing the cryptography components that blockchains utilize. You can still distribute relational databases in much the same way as you could a blockchain. If a blockchain is centrally controlled, managed, and permissioned to the point where being a trustless system is not a feature, then cryptography won't provide much of a benefit above what a typical relational database already provides.

In this regard, blockchains are very inefficient databases to run when compared to relational databases. In a permissioned blockchain where you don't care about being trustless, you can centrally enforce consensus on the network. In that case, proof of work is then not necessary to prevent double-spending. If that's the case, then there isn't much of a benefit of running a blockchain. Why create an immutable and decentralized ledger that is in the hands of a centralized entity that can decide whether or not immutability is actually true or not at any point in time?

This is why tokenized blockchain applications are all mostly hype at this point. It makes much more sense to develop those centrally managed 2nd layer blockchain applications onto an existing trustless decentralized base-layer blockchain like Bitcoin. This way you're backed by true immutability of the most secure blockchain on the planet, but any type of data you want to put into your application to make it work can be applied off-chain in ways that will work with regulations instead of against them. But don't tell this to any ICO developers/investors...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on June 07, 2018, 03:49:10 PM
If the article is correct, and it's impossible to make blockchain GDPR-compliant without turning it into a simple lookup table, then the number of potential blockchain applications in the EU has just gone to absolute zero, along with the number of potential blockchain applications that involve the EU in any way whatsoever.

That would be delicious, if a technology designed by privacy advocates was laid low by privacy concerns.

I know this is a late post, but I just wanted to add...

The article that was linked to was mainly relevant only to permissioned blockchains. You can be sure that anyone who is actually serious about privacy is not going to use a permissioned blockchain. An open blockchain that is privacy focused is not going to store any PII data on it anyway and therefore the entire article and GDPR is not applicable in that case.

While the article does make some good points in regards to permissioned blockchains, I think if anything, it misses the real point about how permissioned blockchains often don't provide any more benefit above and beyond what relational databases already provide organizations. There is so much blockchain hype out there looking to find ways to implement blockchain tech without actually looking at the problem that needs solving and what tech is best suited for solving it. Relational databases are also append databases like blockchains in the way that their logging takes place, they're just missing the cryptography components that blockchains utilize. You can still distribute relational databases in much the same way as you could a blockchain. If a blockchain is centrally controlled, managed, and permissioned to the point where being a trustless system is not a feature, then cryptography won't provide much of a benefit above what a typical relational database already provides.

In this regard, blockchains are very inefficient databases to run when compared to relational databases. In a permissioned blockchain where you don't care about being trustless, you can centrally enforce consensus on the network. In that case, proof of work is then not necessary to prevent double-spending. If that's the case, then there isn't much of a benefit of running a blockchain. Why create an immutable and decentralized ledger that is in the hands of a centralized entity that can decide whether or not immutability is actually true or not at any point in time?

This is why tokenized blockchain applications are all mostly hype at this point. It makes much more sense to develop those centrally managed 2nd layer blockchain applications onto an existing trustless decentralized base-layer blockchain like Bitcoin. This way you're backed by true immutability of the most secure blockchain on the planet, but any type of data you want to put into your application to make it work can be applied off-chain in ways that will work with regulations instead of against them. But don't tell this to any ICO developers/investors...

As far as I understand, a record of transactions does not need to have any identifying details for individuals to risk falling foul of GDPR. If the identity of the owner of a given wallet is made public, then the blockchain carrying information regarding that wallet immediately becomes a GDPR violation.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on June 07, 2018, 08:09:09 PM
As far as I understand, a record of transactions does not need to have any identifying details for individuals to risk falling foul of GDPR. If the identity of the owner of a given wallet is made public, then the blockchain carrying information regarding that wallet immediately becomes a GDPR violation.

But if it is a decentralized open blockchain, then even if the GDPR cries violation over any particular piece of data, then it would be extremely difficult for GDPR to enforce such a violation again open blockchains like that.

Also, the GDPR does give a decent amount of flexibility for data controllers and processors to pseudonymize data and that pseudonymized data is classified as an "appropriate safeguard" for meeting GDPR requirements of data held for historical purposes. Considering that most open blockchains maintain data that is pseudonymized for historical purposes, this would fall into this category. Finally, my statement was mostly in regards to privacy focused blockchains and many of them go beyond even just pseudonymization of data using techniques like zero-knowledge proofs that can further conceal ownership/identification of that data.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Nate79 on June 07, 2018, 10:48:08 PM
The type of exchange that we need to show some sort of future use case is, of course, exchanging crypto for real-world stuff. "Exchanges" where crypto gets traded for crypto is just showing that it's got the same use case (so far) as baseball cards.

I get that lots of financial institutions want to make money on this by taking a percentage of what various suckers spend trading with each other. That makes perfect sense.

-W
Wait, are you saying people need to actually use Bitcoin to buy things instead of speculating on the value just increasing? Then how do expect us to all become rich off of this sure thing?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on June 08, 2018, 02:33:39 AM
As far as I understand, a record of transactions does not need to have any identifying details for individuals to risk falling foul of GDPR. If the identity of the owner of a given wallet is made public, then the blockchain carrying information regarding that wallet immediately becomes a GDPR violation.

But if it is a decentralized open blockchain, then even if the GDPR cries violation over any particular piece of data, then it would be extremely difficult for GDPR to enforce such a violation again open blockchains like that.

Also, the GDPR does give a decent amount of flexibility for data controllers and processors to pseudonymize data and that pseudonymized data is classified as an "appropriate safeguard" for meeting GDPR requirements of data held for historical purposes. Considering that most open blockchains maintain data that is pseudonymized for historical purposes, this would fall into this category. Finally, my statement was mostly in regards to privacy focused blockchains and many of them go beyond even just pseudonymization of data using techniques like zero-knowledge proofs that can further conceal ownership/identification of that data.

The issue isn't necessarily the adequacy of anonymisation. It's that one of the key pillars of GDPR is that data has to be deletable; as far as I understand it, that's not possible on most blockchains.

As for enforcement: there is a persistent idea that crypto somehow makes it easy to evade the reach of the law. If the Commission decides a technology is illegal, then it's trivially easy to enforce. At a certain point, crypto needs to be converted back into actual currency: the Commission can simply hammer down on that point of transfer and crypto effectively ceases to operate in the EU. If you doubt the reach or effectiveness of western governments in financial matters, try getting your hands on some Iranian currency.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: lifeanon269 on June 08, 2018, 06:14:51 AM
The issue isn't necessarily the adequacy of anonymisation. It's that one of the key pillars of GDPR is that data has to be deletable; as far as I understand it, that's not possible on most blockchains.

As for enforcement: there is a persistent idea that crypto somehow makes it easy to evade the reach of the law. If the Commission decides a technology is illegal, then it's trivially easy to enforce. At a certain point, crypto needs to be converted back into actual currency: the Commission can simply hammer down on that point of transfer and crypto effectively ceases to operate in the EU. If you doubt the reach or effectiveness of western governments in financial matters, try getting your hands on some Iranian currency.

That is actually not true at all and a myth with regards to the GDPR. All data under the GDPR does not suddenly have to be deletable. Article 17 of the GDPR (right to erasure) is not a far reaching clause that suddenly forces all data to be deletable. There is quite a bit of flexibility in Paragraph 3 that allows data controllers to retain data even if the data subject invokes their right to be forgotten. Like I said, the GDPR gives flexibility to data controllers and processors when it comes to handling data for scientific, statistical, or historical purposes in ways where erasure of such data would render impossible or impair the objectives of the system at hand. In such cases, the GDPR states that pseudonymization and anonymization of data are "appropriate safeguards" for protecting a data subject's personal information.

Secondly, my comments with regards to enforcement wasn't pertaining to the overall government's ability to clamp down on exchanging any given crypto-currency if it so desires. It was in regards to the Information Commissioner's Office's (GDPR) ability to levy fines and actually effectively enforce the GDPR's compliance on any given open and decentralized blockchain if it finds a violation in one. First and foremost, with a decentralized open blockchain, there is no central entity to enforce a fine on. This then means it then comes down to the ICO needing to enforce compliance on each individual node maintainer of the given blockchain network in question. Just look at how effective policing anti-piracy laws are at clamping down on illegally shared music and movies are on the internet. Very rarely do law enforcement agencies go after individuals that happen to be downloading movies and music just to levy a small fine on that individual. It just isn't worth the time and effort. It just isn't in the ICO's interest to seek out and levy punitive fines to the thousands of individuals who happen to be hosting blockchain nodes. And I don't think the ICO has quite the jurisdiction that you think it has.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on June 08, 2018, 09:31:09 AM
I thought the point of bitcoins and other cryptos is they essentially operated outside of the bounds of the laws of any one nation or nations.  That is their selling point! They can't be seized, the block chain has no mechanism to be served with or respond to a court order or other lawful order, and governments can't really regulate them except by trying to regulate local conditions for the miners (e.g. power consumption and cost, worker conditions, property taxes, etc).  Suppose the EU does try to bring some sort of legal action against cryptos, who do they bring it against?  The users? PPHHbbtttt, good luck.  The miners? They are like amoebas and can close up and open shop in more friendly jurisdictions.  The exchanges?  Perhaps, but I think determined users will find a way to circumvent whatever the safeguards are put in place by the exchanges to prevent GDPR violations.

Declare that conversion of crypto to dollars and usage of crypto in general is classed as money laundering and banned for any entity doing business in the United States, and crypto would effectively cease to exist for Americans and most of the western world. It doesn't matter how secure and impregnable the crypto network is when all the government has to do is stand at the exits with a spiked bat. They can simply decide that being caught using it is an instant charge of terrorism or money laundering, and the undeleteable nature of the blockchain means that once they tie a single transaction to you, they have you by the balls for every transaction you've done.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Rosy on June 09, 2018, 01:38:14 PM
The type of exchange that we need to show some sort of future use case is, of course, exchanging crypto for real-world stuff. "Exchanges" where crypto gets traded for crypto is just showing that it's got the same use case (so far) as baseball cards.

I get that lots of financial institutions want to make money on this by taking a percentage of what various suckers spend trading with each other. That makes perfect sense.

-W
Wait, are you saying people need to actually use Bitcoin to buy things instead of speculating on the value just increasing? Then how do expect us to all become rich off of this sure thing?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

How about buying a 4 Mil property in Florida with bitcoin - real enough for you?
http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/realestate/In-a-first-you-can-buy-a-4-million-gulf-front-Tampa-Bay-home-with-bitcoin-_168979277

or

How about releasing a movie via blockchain?
http://www.tampabay.com/features/movies/A-Plant-City-movie-to-make-history-by-becoming-first-released-on-a-blockchain_167565905
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Rosy on June 09, 2018, 01:58:54 PM
I thought the point of bitcoins and other cryptos is they essentially operated outside of the bounds of the laws of any one nation or nations.  That is their selling point! They can't be seized, the block chain has no mechanism to be served with or respond to a court order or other lawful order, and governments can't really regulate them except by trying to regulate local conditions for the miners (e.g. power consumption and cost, worker conditions, property taxes, etc).  Suppose the EU does try to bring some sort of legal action against cryptos, who do they bring it against?  The users? PPHHbbtttt, good luck.  The miners? They are like amoebas and can close up and open shop in more friendly jurisdictions.  The exchanges?  Perhaps, but I think determined users will find a way to circumvent whatever the safeguards are put in place by the exchanges to prevent GDPR violations.

Declare that conversion of crypto to dollars and usage of crypto in general is classed as money laundering and banned for any entity doing business in the United States, and crypto would effectively cease to exist for Americans and most of the western world. It doesn't matter how secure and impregnable the crypto network is when all the government has to do is stand at the exits with a spiked bat. They can simply decide that being caught using it is an instant charge of terrorism or money laundering, and the undeleteable nature of the blockchain means that once they tie a single transaction to you, they have you by the balls for every transaction you've done.

Put in those terms cryptocurrency sounds sinister, a dark web technology for criminals. Sort of like an offshore account for Millennials with ties to international money laundering aspirations.

Isn't the idea to move money as cheap and as speedy as possible? Move it within seconds - a global currency exchange? Like Ripple is currently doing, signing up a bank a week?

Maybe it would make more sense to invest in the bank in CA (Silvergate in San Diego) who has become a clearinghouse for cryptocurrencies since they are traded on the exchange.

While it is a bit of the Wild West we should still be at a stage where one might find investment opportunities in the blockchain technology in a more round about way - not just the actual crypto currencies.
Wouldn't the banks once they've figured out how to use the blockchain technology to their advantage then work on killing off the cryptocurrencies in the US even if in some developing countries they were to become viable?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on June 09, 2018, 03:33:53 PM


How about buying a 4 Mil property in Florida with bitcoin - real enough for you?
http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/realestate/In-a-first-you-can-buy-a-4-million-gulf-front-Tampa-Bay-home-with-bitcoin-_168979277


Quote
Once a home inspection is completed, the purchaser would be required to convert the bitcoins to U.S. dollars and put the full contract amount in escrow.

So it's still a cash transaction?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Nate79 on June 09, 2018, 07:12:08 PM
The type of exchange that we need to show some sort of future use case is, of course, exchanging crypto for real-world stuff. "Exchanges" where crypto gets traded for crypto is just showing that it's got the same use case (so far) as baseball cards.

I get that lots of financial institutions want to make money on this by taking a percentage of what various suckers spend trading with each other. That makes perfect sense.

-W
Wait, are you saying people need to actually use Bitcoin to buy things instead of speculating on the value just increasing? Then how do expect us to all become rich off of this sure thing?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

How about buying a 4 Mil property in Florida with bitcoin - real enough for you?
http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/realestate/In-a-first-you-can-buy-a-4-million-gulf-front-Tampa-Bay-home-with-bitcoin-_168979277

or

How about releasing a movie via blockchain?
http://www.tampabay.com/features/movies/A-Plant-City-movie-to-make-history-by-becoming-first-released-on-a-blockchain_167565905
No, not even close. How about this. You walk into a fast food restaurant and pay with bitcoin instead. And your employer paid your salary in bitcoin. And no one converts back to dollars in any of these transactions immediately because they don't want the volatility to cause their monthly paycheck to be bouncing up and down.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on June 09, 2018, 08:18:26 PM


How about buying a 4 Mil property in Florida with bitcoin - real enough for you?
http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/realestate/In-a-first-you-can-buy-a-4-million-gulf-front-Tampa-Bay-home-with-bitcoin-_168979277


Quote
Once a home inspection is completed, the purchaser would be required to convert the bitcoins to U.S. dollars and put the full contract amount in escrow.

So it's still a cash transaction?

Yeah, I could also buy that place by selling $4 million worth of baseball cards...

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: js82 on June 10, 2018, 12:16:54 PM

While it is a bit of the Wild West we should still be at a stage where one might find investment opportunities in the blockchain technology in a more round about way - not just the actual crypto currencies.

I would go even further:

Bitcoin - and cryptocurrencies in general, are not long-term investments in the way that equity is.  They are at best, shorter-term, relatively speculative investments that one might purchase if one believes them to be mispriced, with the expectation that their price moves towards a proper valuation in time.  On the other hand, companies selling the hardware to drive blockchain networks and/or companies using blockchain technology to create useful services/products with blockchain are potentially great investments going forward.  Witness the impact of mining demand on GPU prices as a recent example.

But anything resembling a currency (crypto or not) is a pretty awful choice as a long-term investment.  It works a lot like gold - it works as a short-term inflation hedge and/or makes sense as a short-term buy if it's significantly mispriced, but it doesn't actually PRODUCE value in itself.  Conversely, equity ownership produces real value as a company grows, *AND* acts as inflation hedge - because ultimately the value of a company is a function of the value of its assets and ability to produce future profits, both of which go up in the event of inflation.

It's possible(and for some cryptocurrencies, likely) that cryptos are currently underpriced and their value will go up with increasing demand/adoption.  But on a rational level they are not assets that produce income/value merely by holding them, and at some point as the technology matures they will arrive at a relative equilibrium, and will behave more like a typical currency(or a commodity, a la gold) - i.e. something makes zero sense as a long-term investment.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Mr Mark on June 11, 2018, 06:47:39 AM
Bitcoin down 10% over the weekend after another breach on a Korean exchange. 

LMAO. It's down more than 50% this year.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on June 12, 2018, 09:27:19 AM
Bitcoin has had other years in which it went down 50%. I'm not sure how the remarkable losses suffered in the early part of 2018 are meant to convince people it's any more flawed than what they thought during 2017 when it gained a lifetime's returns.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: the_gastropod on June 13, 2018, 06:19:00 AM
Bitcoin has had other years in which it went down 50%. I'm not sure how the remarkable losses suffered in the early part of 2018 are meant to convince people it's any more flawed than what they thought during 2017 when it gained a lifetime's returns.

Because there were a finite number of people to con. Bitcoin is no longer the niche nerd interest it was in early 2017. The absurd gains it saw last year generated  a ton of media attention, which drove the price “to the moon” toward the end of the year. I very much doubt most of normal people who bought into this malarkey feel very good about it anymore. Guess we’ll see...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Rosy on June 13, 2018, 10:26:39 AM

While it is a bit of the Wild West we should still be at a stage where one might find investment opportunities in the blockchain technology in a more round about way - not just the actual crypto currencies.

I would go even further:

Bitcoin - and cryptocurrencies in general, are not long-term investments in the way that equity is.  They are at best, shorter-term, relatively speculative investments that one might purchase if one believes them to be mispriced, with the expectation that their price moves towards a proper valuation in time.  On the other hand, companies selling the hardware to drive blockchain networks and/or companies using blockchain technology to create useful services/products with blockchain are potentially great investments going forward.  Witness the impact of mining demand on GPU prices as a recent example.

But anything resembling a currency (crypto or not) is a pretty awful choice as a long-term investment.  It works a lot like gold - it works as a short-term inflation hedge and/or makes sense as a short-term buy if it's significantly mispriced, but it doesn't actually PRODUCE value in itself.  Conversely, equity ownership produces real value as a company grows, *AND* acts as inflation hedge - because ultimately the value of a company is a function of the value of its assets and ability to produce future profits, both of which go up in the event of inflation.

It's possible(and for some cryptocurrencies, likely) that cryptos are currently underpriced and their value will go up with increasing demand/adoption.  But on a rational level they are not assets that produce income/value merely by holding them, and at some point as the technology matures they will arrive at a relative equilibrium, and will behave more like a typical currency(or a commodity, a la gold) - i.e. something makes zero sense as a long-term investment.

Agree.

And I'll go even further.

Cryptos are no where near as good as gold store of value/speculation (if that is what someone is looking for instead of a real investment).  Gold at least has the benefit of physically existing.  Once extracted from the earth and purified into a shiny lump it can be secreted or deposited in a physical location and then it doesn't need any intervention to continue to exist. Cryptos are a data structure and series of computer rules which must be continuously implemented.   Without a constant infusion of computers furiously playing patty-cake with each other, and burning through prodigious amounts of non-renewable fossil fuels, cryptos would cease to exist.

Many crypto enthusiasts do not consider bitcoin or any "pure" currency function as functional medium-of-exchanges, digital gold, or stores of value. With consideration to other multipurpose crypto, the currency coins as a medium-of-exchange are subject to price volatility; usd-back and other stablecoins or even "fuel" types provide superior utility in this aspect. As digital gold or stores-of-value, currency coins depend on network sentiment, which ultimately is a greater fool scheme, and therefore fail as digital gold or store-of-value. Bitcoin, right now, still has legacy infrastructure and first mover as trading pair going for it, but that can swiftly change.

That is an interesting statement. If the enthusiasts who probably work with it on a daily basis do not consider bitcoin as a functional medium of exchange ...
I'd love to know how to recognize .... Bitcoin, right now, still has legacy infrastructure and first mover as trading pair going for it? What form is that likely to take?
Actually, I thought that there were already better infrastructures than those built by Bitcoin, but I may have misunderstood what I read.

Portfolio update:

Reduced omg to less than 5% and diversified from that into other crypto (membership, network validation, governance types, etc). 



Shadow, you look like you are deep into this but I think that 5% of your portfolio is reasonable for any omg:) investment risk.
One rarely profits big by playing it entirely safe.

Just wondering if you follow some of the R&D - start-ups might be a bit tightlipped until they are ready to pounce at which point it would be too late to profit, yet again. I found it strategically brilliant that Ripple gave MIT $50mil for R&D.
I'm seriously considering making the Silvergate Bank in CA my omg investment because of their involvement with crypto. It's fun to speculate and I like the excitement and potential surrounding this new technology. Regardless, I'll have to do more due diligence all around before I voluntarily dip my toe into such volatility.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Nate79 on June 13, 2018, 11:42:37 PM
Price manipulation? Say it ain't so.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on June 14, 2018, 07:31:35 AM
Portfolio update:

Reduced omg to less than 5% and diversified from that into other crypto (membership, network validation, governance types, etc).

It's good to see a report of moves by someone who did buy crypto. Thanks, Shadow.

@Tonyahu, what's your update? You were near FI based on the value of your crypto holdings, and on the brink of selling, but that was near Bitcoin's peak to date. Did you sell or HODL? What % of your FI number is now in crypto, what % in non-crypto? (Has your FI number changed?)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on June 28, 2018, 04:42:15 PM
Hopefully this attachment works. 

I sold everything in early January, closed my Coinbase account, and a few weeks later in February walked into a bicycle shop with those proceeds and bought the bike you see here...with cold hard U.S. Dollars.  I felt okay buying a new toy with the windfall, and I do subscribe to Dave Ramsey's advice re: buying toys with cash. 

It felt good to get out of crypto and stop worrying about it.  I can't help but shake my head at the declines and the disappearance of crypto news from mainstream news. 

I want to thank Benjamin Graham's old The Intelligent Investor, and its lengthy discussion of investing versus speculating, for helping me recognize that crypto was in a crazy bubble in December and January.  The emotions were classic bubble emotions.  The gimmick changes but human emotions do not. 

I honestly feel for all of the people out there who have lost huge amounts of money.  Real money.  Some people who got in early are still way up, but nothing like what they had six months ago.  But there are many who blew their 2017 Christmas bonuses on...nothing.  I know one guy who I suspect lost $20k on Ripple (he bought at the exact high...Jan 4 or so) but he will not admit it. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Retire-Canada on June 28, 2018, 04:53:54 PM
...and bought the bike you see here...with hard cold U.S. Dollars. 

Nice bike. Have fun with it. :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on June 28, 2018, 05:13:44 PM
Pshaw, bikes are a fad. What's the realistic use case for wheels and gears? Ridiculous.

You're probably just one of those initial-spoke-offering shills trying to make a quick buck getting more suckers to buy into your worthless "low cost fun 150 year old transportation technology". I've reported you to the mods.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Nate79 on June 28, 2018, 10:48:57 PM
Hopefully this attachment works. 

I sold everything in early January, closed my Coinbase account, and a few weeks later February walked into a bicycle shop with those proceeds and bought the bike you see here...with hard cold U.S. Dollars.  I felt okay buying a new toy with the windfall, and I do subscribe to Dave Ramsey's advice re: buying toys with cash. 

It felt good to get out of crypto and stop worrying about it.  I can't help but shake my head at the declines and the disappearance of crypto news from mainstream news. 

I want to thank Benjamin Graham's old The Intelligent Investor, and its lengthy discussion of investing versus speculating, for helping me recognize that crypto was in a crazy bubble in December and January.  The emotions were classic bubble emotions.  The gimmick changes but human emotions do not. 

I honestly feel for all of the people out there who have lost huge amounts of money.  Real money.  Some people who got in early are still way up, but nothing like what they had six months ago.  But there are many who blew their 2017 Christmas bonuses on...nothing.  I know one guy who I suspect lost $20k on Ripple (he bought at the exact high...Jan 4 or so) but he will not admit it.
Why didn't you buy the bike with your crypto? Oh yeah that's right. No one really takes crypto to buy anything and no one actually uses to buy anything.

Nice bike!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on June 29, 2018, 09:28:44 AM
Hmm, Kraken showing signs of manipulation in Tether:

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tether-kraken-trades/
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on June 29, 2018, 03:49:48 PM
Hope everyone is doing well and enjoying this bear season.

If you don't have a position and are interested in this asset class, this is a great time to start DCA in, given current valuations.

I think we will see an SEC qualified custodian and a Bitcoin ETF within 12 months. In addition, I expect the market capitalization to be over 1 T by the end of 2019, current at 225B.

Cheers!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on June 30, 2018, 07:58:54 AM
@Tonyahu, you're back! Cheers.

Last time I saw posts from you, it was around December and you were considering selling some crypto to shift partially into non-crypto assets. You almost had enough to FI if the 4% rule were to be applied, but were hesitant about the risks of stocks IIRC.

So what happened? Did you sell any crypto, or are you still pretty much all in?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: aspiringnomad on June 30, 2018, 10:44:42 AM

this is a great time to start DCA in, given current valuations.


I'd be interested to see your mathematical valuation analysis.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on June 30, 2018, 11:20:07 AM
Hope everyone is doing well and enjoying this bear season.

Yup. I'm back to getting to read about cool tech and interesting new approaches which may or may not work.

Much more fun than having the same argument over and over again about how power consumption per bitcoin transaction isn't a useful metric, since you cannot spend more power to send more transactions, and sending fewer doesn't reduce power consumption.

I hope you are well @Tonyahu
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on July 01, 2018, 07:32:22 PM
Pshaw, bikes are a fad. What's the realistic use case for wheels and gears? Ridiculous.

You're probably just one of those initial-spoke-offering shills trying to make a quick buck getting more suckers to buy into your worthless "low cost fun 150 year old transportation technology". I've reported you to the mods.

-W

LOL
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Tonyahu on July 01, 2018, 09:58:06 PM
Hope everyone is doing well and enjoying this bear season.

Yup. I'm back to getting to read about cool tech and interesting new approaches which may or may not work.

Much more fun than having the same argument over and over again about how power consumption per bitcoin transaction isn't a useful metric, since you cannot spend more power to send more transactions, and sending fewer doesn't reduce power consumption.

I hope you are well @Tonyahu

Glad you are still learning! Discussions about Consensus Mechanisms are hard enough to have, let alone someone who doesn't understand basic nuances of SHA 256 PoW. It get's more fun when we dive into PoS vs DBFT vs DPOS....etc....etc...

:]


this is a great time to start DCA in, given current valuations.


I'd be interested to see your mathematical valuation analysis.

Hey mad, glad to see you are interested! Check out some of the work done by Chris Burniske :]

@Tonyahu, you're back! Cheers.

Last time I saw posts from you, it was around December and you were considering selling some crypto to shift partially into non-crypto assets. You almost had enough to FI if the 4% rule were to be applied, but were hesitant about the risks of stocks IIRC.

So what happened? Did you sell any crypto, or are you still pretty much all in?

Current allocation of traditional assets would not last forever if I started drawing 4% now (because its mostly in cash and precious metals), I feel equities and real estate is over priced right now and I am a patient buyer. I am still at a 60% savings rate from my business and work/life balance is absolutely astonishing. Technically if I went all in equities now with it, I would still be able to survive most situations I propped up in my Monte Carlo simulations but I am going to play it slightly different.

Life is good!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on July 02, 2018, 01:49:18 AM
Nothing reinforces my conviction that crypto is doomed to burn more effectively than posts from crypto boosters.

Literally the last post before Tonyahu's update is a Bloomberg article indicating that Tether is being manipulated on Kraken, and instead of addressing that in any way, we instead get a prediction that the crypto market will more than quadruple in size within eighteen months, offered with no supporting argument.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 02, 2018, 05:48:31 AM
Nothing reinforces my conviction that crypto is doomed to burn more effectively than posts from crypto boosters.

Literally the last post before Tonyahu's update is a Bloomberg article indicating that Tether is being manipulated on Kraken, and instead of addressing that in any way, we instead get a prediction that the crypto market will more than quadruple in size within eighteen months, offered with no supporting argument.

I don't think it is at all controversial that Tether's "dollar backing" seems likely to be fraudulent. In fact didn't this already get discussed a fairly long way up thread? Yup, at least as early as January/page 18.

So I suspect the reason you don't see more responses to Bicycle_B's (really interesting) link isn't that people are ignoring it, but because people have already been assuming something or other was fishy with tether for months.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on July 02, 2018, 05:58:50 AM
Oh, I know the details of Tether on Bitfinex have been discussed before. Tonyahu, however, has not even mentioned it once. Ignoring it is pretty consistent with their posting history.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on July 02, 2018, 01:27:58 PM
You're probably just one of those initial-spoke-offering shills trying to make a quick buck getting more suckers to buy into your worthless "low cost fun 150 year old transportation technology". I've reported you to the mods.

-W

Yeah I've jumped over (full disclosure: picked up and carried) a few fallen 150 year-old trees out in the woods.  Took it downtown to ride on the 150 year-old cobbles and streetcar tracks.  I even rode it down a 150 year-old freight railroad between two farmer's fields, between the rails and over the ties and gravel. 

Gives new meaning to the phrase "rails-to-trails" when you can ride a mountain bike a half mile down an active railroad and it's a pretty smooth ride. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on July 02, 2018, 01:37:23 PM
Quote
Why didn't you buy the bike with your crypto? Oh yeah that's right. No one really takes crypto to buy anything and no one actually uses to buy anything.

Nice bike!


The guy at the bike shop told me I was the second guy to come in and buy a new bike with crypto earnings. 

I'm a pretty cheap person but I was easily persuaded to buy the $1,400 bike instead of the first one I rode, which was about $800.  No comparison.

And no comparison between the $1,400 bike and my last mountain bike, which was $450 with 26" wheels from 2002.  The advances in mtb construction are just seismic and the sport itself has evolved to be almost unrecognizable.  The "old" mtb trails in my area from the 1990s have been semi-abandoned in favor of the newer flow and downhill trails.

If there's anything I took away from the MMM articles, it was the advice to get "cheap hobbies".  Luckily I was already doing that, since even with decent-quality bikes, bicycling is still a very cheap hobby as compared to fishing, skiing, boating, etc. 


Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on July 02, 2018, 03:29:36 PM
Quote
Why didn't you buy the bike with your crypto? Oh yeah that's right. No one really takes crypto to buy anything and no one actually uses to buy anything.

Nice bike!


The guy at the bike shop told me I was the second guy to come in and buy a new bike with crypto earnings. 

I'm a pretty cheap person but I was easily persuaded to buy the $1,400 bike instead of the first one I rode, which was about $800.  No comparison.

And no comparison between the $1,400 bike and my last mountain bike, which was $450 with 26" wheels from 2002.  The advances in mtb construction are just seismic and the sport itself has evolved to be almost unrecognizable.  The "old" mtb trails in my area from the 1990s have been semi-abandoned in favor of the newer flow and downhill trails.

If there's anything I took away from the MMM articles, it was the advice to get "cheap hobbies".  Luckily I was already doing that, since even with decent-quality bikes, bicycling is still a very cheap hobby as compared to fishing, skiing, boating, etc.

Road bikes have evolved almost as drastically - the top-of-the-line bikes that were used by Grand Tour winners at the turn of the millennium are now objectively inferior to $800 entry-level machines, while the current high-end models are so far beyond those older bikes that they might as well be in a different sport. It's one of the most promising signs in road cycling as a professional sport that the last decade or so of ever-advancing wind tunnel testing, weight shaving, kit shrinking and mathematically precise training and dietary plans is only now producing times marginally faster than 2001-2007.

All this is unfortunately off topic, though, so...rabble rabble Bitcoin rabble rabble Ponzi rabble rabble transformative rabble rabble?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on July 02, 2018, 04:59:56 PM
Road bikes have evolved almost as drastically - the top-of-the-line bikes that were used by Grand Tour winners at the turn of the millennium are now objectively inferior to $800 entry-level machines, while the current high-end models are so far beyond those older bikes that they might as well be in a different sport. It's one of the most promising signs in road cycling as a professional sport that the last decade or so of ever-advancing wind tunnel testing, weight shaving, kit shrinking and mathematically precise training and dietary plans is only now producing times marginally faster than 2001-2007.

All this is unfortunately off topic, though, so...rabble rabble Bitcoin rabble rabble Ponzi rabble rabble transformative rabble rabble?

Yeah I was at a group ride recently where a guy showed up with a circa-2002 Trek Madone.  It looked like a museum piece.  Hell, my 2015 Felt Z5 already looks dated.  Hopefully it lasts another 10 years.  You've just got to not care that you're going to be in the bottom 30% on Strava segments, no matter what! 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on July 03, 2018, 08:15:56 AM
I'd never be one to argue that a modern expensive bike isn't a very nice thing to ride . . . but 90% of the weight and aerodynamics is going to be related to the shape and position of the engine on that bike.  I ride around on a 25+ lb steel frame touring bike, and it's pretty unusual for me to get dropped on a ride.

It's always going to be much cheaper to take 5 lbs off the engine than the bike, and the rider's body position and clothing worn matters an awful lot more than the aerodynamics of the frame he/she is on.  :P
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Retire-Canada on July 03, 2018, 08:18:47 AM
I'd never be one to argue that a modern expensive bike isn't a very nice thing to ride . . . but 90% of the weight and aerodynamics is going to be related to the shape and position of the engine on that bike.  I ride around on a 25+ lb steel frame touring bike, and it's pretty unusual for me to get dropped on a ride.

It's always going to be much cheaper to take 5 lbs off the engine than the bike, and the rider's body position and clothing worn matters an awful lot more than the aerodynamics of the frame he/she is on.  :P

Tires and appropriate frame flex are more important than either aerodynamics [between typical road bikes] or 5lbs in weight.

Just to stay on topic I want to say that using crypto to buy bikes is a great idea. Then I can tell my GF I have no idea where the new machine came from and she can't trace the payment back to me. ;)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on July 03, 2018, 10:56:23 AM
Just to stay on topic I want to say that using crypto to buy bikes is a great idea. Then I can tell my GF I have no idea where the new machine came from and she can't trace the payment back to me. ;)

Now THERE we have a legit legal use for crypto!!!



I'd never be one to argue that a modern expensive bike isn't a very nice thing to ride . . . but 90% of the weight and aerodynamics is going to be related to the shape and position of the engine on that bike. 

We have an annual ride up a few of the city's steep 20%+ streets...this year a guy on a 20+ year-old aluminum frame was beating all the guys on new carbon bikes by 100-200 feet on every hill.  He was about 6'2" and 140lbs.  I enjoy fried chicken a little too much to contend for local bragging rights. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on July 03, 2018, 12:28:44 PM
As a 90+kg rider with a sprinter's power profile, I can't say I approve of course profiles that look like crypto price histories. I'm more of a fan of routes that look like the histories for cash funds.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Orin! on July 05, 2018, 02:14:14 AM
I have lost 5k on crypto. 5.5k is my current value. I plan to just hold onto this variety of holdings as I do have long-term belief in it.

Otherwise I have been busy selling tradelines, signing up for bank bonuses and credit card bonuses over the last two months have made 7k there so I consider this has covered the hole my crypto investment made short term.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Bicycle_B on July 05, 2018, 12:53:51 PM
I have lost 5k on crypto. 5.5k is my current value. I plan to just hold onto this variety of holdings as I do have long-term belief in it.

Otherwise I have been busy selling tradelines, signing up for bank bonuses and credit card bonuses over the last two months have made 7k there so I consider this has covered the hole my crypto investment made short term.

Great report, @Orin! !

Good luck on all of your adventures.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Orin! on July 05, 2018, 01:40:12 PM
I have lost 5k on crypto. 5.5k is my current value. I plan to just hold onto this variety of holdings as I do have long-term belief in it.

Otherwise I have been busy selling tradelines, signing up for bank bonuses and credit card bonuses over the last two months have made 7k there so I consider this has covered the hole my crypto investment made short term.

Great report, @Orin! !

Good luck on all of your adventures.

Thank you !

If someone put enough energy into it, they could achieve financial independence just off bank bonuses, credit card sign ups and tradelines.

I mean - isn’t that what banks do?

The banking system is too rigged for them to profit in. It is also inefficient and too regulated which is why I believe in long term value of crypto.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: LurkingMustache on July 09, 2018, 05:15:17 PM
I have lost 5k on crypto. 5.5k is my current value. I plan to just hold onto this variety of holdings as I do have long-term belief in it.

Otherwise I have been busy selling tradelines, signing up for bank bonuses and credit card bonuses over the last two months have made 7k there so I consider this has covered the hole my crypto investment made short term.

Great report, @Orin! !

Good luck on all of your adventures.

Thank you !

If someone put enough energy into it, they could achieve financial independence just off bank bonuses, credit card sign ups and tradelines.

I mean - isn’t that what banks do?

The banking system is too rigged for them to profit in. It is also inefficient and too regulated which is why I believe in long term value of crypto.

Legitimately curious in how you could possibly average 7k in churning/tradelines in two months.  I've done tradelines and commissions on them at least for what I saw was about $100-$200 per user, and at most I'd end up with 4 in a month.  Banking bonuses typically pay quarterly or every 180 days.  Would love to hear what else you are doing!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on July 09, 2018, 09:52:14 PM
Legitimately curious in how you could possibly average 7k in churning/tradelines in two months.  I've done tradelines and commissions on them at least for what I saw was about $100-$200 per user, and at most I'd end up with 4 in a month.  Banking bonuses typically pay quarterly or every 180 days.  Would love to hear what else you are doing!

I am also curious about this - my spreadsheet says I've had 54 different credit cards (some repeats before Chase cracked down) over roughly the last 5 years. I've made about $21k in bonuses, plus maybe $10k in normal cashback. That's great, but it's $6k a year, not FI money. It also winds down after a while - I still get the occasional Amex offer, and I have a ton of Hilton points and other non-cash rewards - but I can't actually get much in the way of signup bonuses anymore.

Now, if the Chase rinse-and-repeat cards were still an option, you could kill it. Bummer.

Bank bonuses (if you have plenty of spare cash, which most folks here do) can get you maybe 500 bucks a quarter if you spread money around and spend a lot of time on it. Again, not enough to be FI, and quite a bit of work to boot (in fact, probably less than most of us make at our day jobs).

I don't know jack about tradelines, but I'd be pretty shocked if you could do more than $500 a month or something.

I guess if you did all of it simultaneously, you could squeak out $10k a year until you started running out of credit card bonuses.

But maybe I'm missing something?

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Orin! on July 12, 2018, 11:37:40 PM
@waltworks
@LurkingMustache

Credit cards:
Chase Sapphire - $550 for 4K spend with adding one AU
Amex PGR - 50k Amex points for 1k spend. Sold points for $625

Bank bonuses:
Chase - $300
Disc savings - $200
Disc savings player 2 - $200
Valley National Bank - $200
Suntrust - $500
Memory bank - $100
PNC - $200
TD - $150
Hancock Whitney - $300
Elements - $200
5/3rd - $250
Fidelity - $200
Chase player 2 - $200

All bank bonuses posted 5/15 to present.
I started applying for them approx 4/15.

Tradelines:
9 lines available. 28 slots sold. 16 slots I sold myself. 12 I sold through two tradeline companies. I turned down two recent buys from one of the tradeline companies as I need to wait three weeks as I am currently maxed out the lines per card in a two month time period (average 3 per line which is on the slightly aggressive side).

The above equals 7.8k (tradelines, bank bonuses and cc bonuses).

It is on the aggressive side and the bank bonuses could not be maintained at that rate every three months. Neither could tradelines as I would not routinely do more than 2 per line per 2 months.

But if you had a player 2 to work with (a spouse or friend or family member) it could be done 3-4K every three months.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on July 13, 2018, 01:43:46 AM
Sure, but lots of what you're doing (especially the Chase stuff) is one time only. Trust me, I know.

Amex can be gamed a bit more as they're desperate for business lately, but all the other stuff you're doing with cards and bank bonuses can't easily be repeated. It's great while it lasts, though. I've probably made $10k off of Chase (over many years), so I understand why they won't give me bonuses for anything anymore.

To be clear: kudos. I did the exact same things for a couple of years (though not the credit line thing). It's a nice kick of free cash. It's not, and will never be, a way to be FI on it's own, however.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Orin! on July 17, 2018, 07:50:57 PM
Back to the thread topic - bitcoin up 9% in last 24 hours. Think a bull run is on?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on July 17, 2018, 08:17:11 PM
lol.

No, I don't think a bull run is on.  This thread is dead for a reason.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on July 17, 2018, 09:17:06 PM
Is there any actual fundamental reason cited for the ridiculous run-up, or is it just the same old people manipulating prices again?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on July 18, 2018, 11:07:40 AM
Is there any actual fundamental reason cited for the ridiculous run-up, or is it just the same old people manipulating prices again?

It's the... you know, markets, stability, crypto, future blockchain based app ecosystem things!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on July 18, 2018, 11:27:36 AM
So I can tell you the reasons it's being attributed to. However, keep in mind this is just like those articles written every day about the the stock market went up or down. If the market moved the opposite direction each day, people could certainly articles with just as much/little logic:

-The Financial Stability Board (which is tied in to the G20 somehow?) put out a report that said "bitcoin and cryptocurrencies do not currently pose a material risk to the global financial system."

-Blackrock, whose CEO previously had a lot of negative things to say about bitcoin announced they are investigating the potential for investing in cryptocurrencies/blockchain applications (yes this is as hand wavy as it sounds).

-Goldman Sachs lost their previous CEO and appointment their current COO to the role, who was seen as more positive on bitcoin than the outgoing guy.

Anyway, I suspect all three are just so stories that people have identified after the fact to explain the way the markets moved. *shrug*
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on August 14, 2018, 11:10:44 PM
I just re-watched this interview from the peak of Bitcoin hype in December 2017.  Look at the comments...everyone's talking about how dumb Joe Rogen is.  Pretty much all of those commenters lost money -- some of them a lot of it -- just a few weeks later:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JSEiCl136Q

Whoever this guy is who they interviewed saw a ton of money disappear.  Ripple, for example, is down 90%.  From over $3 to just 26 cents.  How does Ripple now recruit new employees?  It's like working for Myspace. 

The guy I knew who was up well over $100,000 on ETH is now only up $20,000.  In just a few months he went from being an object of jealousy to a bit of a joke.  Why didn't you sell when all those ETH's you bought at $50 were worth $1,400?  It's all so obvious in hindsight. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on August 15, 2018, 03:32:38 AM
I read the other day that even though the Turkish lira is in free fall, with commentators seriously discussing the possibility of capital controls or an IMF intervention, it has still held value better so far in 2018 than bitcoin.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on August 15, 2018, 06:16:06 AM
Hahaha. You're not wrong.

Bitcoin is -54% since the end of December. Turkish Lira is -38%. Of course last December is about the peak of bitcoin. Going back twelve months bitcoin is +54% and the Turkish Lira is -43%.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: dividendman on August 16, 2018, 02:56:57 PM
I wonder if Top is in for bitcoin.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on August 16, 2018, 03:18:13 PM
I wonder if Top is in for bitcoin.

Local top was in a few months back around $17k or so (yes, it bubbled along to $20k and you couldn't get much through the network at that point, so it wasn't a useful value).

Or are you referring to the bouncing around $6k-$8k thing?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: dividendman on August 16, 2018, 05:04:59 PM
I wonder if Top is in for bitcoin.

Local top was in a few months back around $17k or so (yes, it bubbled along to $20k and you couldn't get much through the network at that point, so it wasn't a useful value).

Or are you referring to the bouncing around $6k-$8k thing?

Oh, I was just equating this thread to the Top is in thread since they're both ridiculous for kind of opposite reasons :)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: aspiringnomad on November 24, 2018, 11:38:33 PM
Any updates from crypto fiends or foes? Hanging in there? Buying the dip? Selling in panic? Smiling smugly? Patting yourself on the back for talking friends and family out of their crypto "investments" during the 2017 holidays?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: HPstache on November 25, 2018, 07:37:59 AM
Any updates from crypto fiends or foes? Hanging in there? Buying the dip? Selling in panic? Smiling smugly? Patting yourself on the back for talking friends and family out of their crypto "investments" during the 2017 holidays?

Smiling smugly.  Couldn't talk the BIL out unfortunately!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on November 25, 2018, 08:01:51 AM
Crypto as an investment.  LOL
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on November 25, 2018, 08:54:44 AM
Today on 1/8/2018: 1 Bitcoin is $14,900, 1 Monero is $400, 1 Ether is $1,150, 1 Lisk is $31, 1 LINK is $1.30 and 1 ARDR is $1.61

Once in a lifetime opportunity.

Today on 11/25/2018: 1 Bitcoin is 3,700, 1 Monero is 55, 1 Ether is 109, 1 Lisk is 1.29, 1 LINK is 27 cents and 1 ARDR is five and a half cents.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on November 25, 2018, 09:30:46 AM
Today on 1/8/2018: 1 Bitcoin is $14,900, 1 Monero is $400, 1 Ether is $1,150, 1 Lisk is $31, 1 LINK is $1.30 and 1 ARDR is $1.61

Once in a lifetime opportunity.

Today on 11/25/2018: 1 Bitcoin is 3,700, 1 Monero is 55, 1 Ether is 109, 1 Lisk is 1.29, 1 LINK is 27 cents and 1 ARDR is five and a half cents.

This is the best laugh I've had in days.  Thanks rbr.

Also hilarious, looking at Tonyahu's post history, is his report of going all in on crypto around June and then this little gem:

I expect the market capitalization to be over 1 T by the end of 2019, current at 225B.

Just for reference, today's bitcoin market cap is about 68B, or down a further 70% since the day he was predicting we would see a 444% increase.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on November 25, 2018, 10:30:41 AM
Today on 1/8/2018: 1 Bitcoin is $14,900, 1 Monero is $400, 1 Ether is $1,150, 1 Lisk is $31, 1 LINK is $1.30 and 1 ARDR is $1.61

Once in a lifetime opportunity.

Today on 11/25/2018: 1 Bitcoin is 3,700, 1 Monero is 55, 1 Ether is 109, 1 Lisk is 1.29, 1 LINK is 27 cents and 1 ARDR is five and a half cents.

What a nice Black Friday sale! Buy buy buy!!!!1!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: theolympians on November 25, 2018, 11:21:49 AM
I've been a crypto-skeptic since it began. Why so many options?

In once sense it is a throwback to the days of yore when banks would print their own money. That creates a problem for the user (like crypto) as to who will accept it as payment. Not a good place to be then, or now.

Crypto essentially undermines legitimate currencies. It's best use is to avoid tracking and taxes. My opinion is that it is mostly used by criminals; and speculated on by the get-rich-quick types. IMO for John Q. Public there are no reasons to replace the dollar.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on November 25, 2018, 12:09:17 PM
Any updates from crypto fiends or foes? Hanging in there? Buying the dip? Selling in panic? Smiling smugly? Patting yourself on the back for talking friends and family out of their crypto "investments" during the 2017 holidays?

Relaxing because I don't spend nearly as much time debating with strangers on the internet who don't understand that the reason I get excited about cryptocurrency has nothing to do with replacing the dollar and everything to do with replacing visa/mastercard/western union (see case in point below).

The value to mining difficulty ratio zcash crossed below the break even point some time back, so I've been able to redeploy the graphics cards from my mining experiment for training neural networks, which has been a lot of fun but doesn't really relate to the topic at hand.

I don't count cryptocurrency as part of my net worth, but if I had, it would have peaked at ~5% last winter during the run up in bitcoin and is now in the 1-2% range as a result of both price declines and regular old savings growth.

Crypto essentially undermines legitimate currencies. It's best use is to avoid tracking and taxes. My opinion is that it is mostly used by criminals; and speculated on by the get-rich-quick types. IMO for John Q. Public there are no reasons to replace the dollar.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: misterhorsey on November 25, 2018, 05:22:06 PM
I strongly discouraged a non-investment minded friend, who was not in regular employment, from putting $1,000 into Ripple in Dec 2017, when she asked my advice.

She countered with:
- it's different to Bitcoin
- it's the future
- I don't have much savings, so I can't rely on average returns (6-7% p.a), I need to make lots of $ quick

I gave her various reasons not to, including by pointing out if you don't have much money saved up, then an average return of 6-7% is so much better than losing 90%...but I could tell my arguments weren't terribly convincing.  Although perhaps if I was encouraging it would have convinced her to buy? Who knows.

Anyway, remained pretty committed to the idea, but she decided not to buy any.

Fast forward to around September 2018, after the dust had settled, and she got back into regular employment and the cryptocurrency bubble had subsided, I updated her on how her $1,000 would have performed.  It would have become $140 at the time.  She was relieved.

I'd like to comfort myself that speculative bubbles in any investment class are fine so long as you are a seasoned investor and allocate at percentage of your portfolio you'd be happy to risk....however, it's pretty clear that these bubbles gain their traction and momentum from sucking in lots of money from people who are unlikely to understand all the risks of these kinds of investments. 

I do feel for the people who have lost out from their holdings. Greed is a motivation for investing, but so too is anxieties from the fear of being left behind/missing out. And if they were motivated to strike it big to make up for years of not saving/investing etc, this just puts them into a bigger hole.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on November 27, 2018, 08:39:11 AM
I'm out of crypto now.

About $350 in the red. Could have been much, much worse, but I got out in May to switch phones, and I got out again right before leaving the continent last month. I'm grateful to have lost only that.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on December 07, 2018, 06:30:47 AM
https://boingboing-net.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/boingboing.net/2018/12/05/blockchain-cruise.html/amp?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fboingboing.net%2F2018%2F12%2F05%2Fblockchain-cruise.html

A British journalist named Laurie Penny, who usually focuses on feminism, somehow got sent on a crypto cruise around the Mediterranean. The ensuing article is both quite funny and quite depressing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: appleshampooid on December 07, 2018, 06:44:01 AM
https://boingboing-net.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/boingboing.net/2018/12/05/blockchain-cruise.html/amp?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fboingboing.net%2F2018%2F12%2F05%2Fblockchain-cruise.html

A British journalist named Laurie Penny, who usually focuses on feminism, somehow got sent on a crypto cruise around the Mediterranean. The ensuing article is both quite funny and quite depressing.

Link to the actual article. (https://breakermag.com/trapped-at-sea-with-cryptos-nouveau-riche/)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on December 07, 2018, 07:21:48 AM
Thank you - was linking on my phone and clearly copied and pasted the wrong one.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on December 07, 2018, 08:49:36 AM
Indeed, quite a funny read (and worth the time to read the whole thing). The author is a very talented writer so that it'd be worth reading regardless of the topic matter.

Quote
Correlation does not equal causation, and for all I know the guy has been hip-deep in Ukrainian models somewhere offstage the whole time, but I suspect not. I suspect he has been doing what he normally does: having arguments on the internet.

...

I twice hear Pierce telling people who have clearly never licked an Amazonian frog just to see what would happen that “the first four letters of ‘EVOLVE’ are ‘EVOL.’ Reverse that and you get ‘LOVE.’”
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Kahooli on December 07, 2018, 09:13:41 AM
I must be one of the few who made money in crypto - and guess what it wasn't the crypto I made money on!
I got into mining, built a few rigs. I had stacks of 1080 ti boxes.

How did I make money? Sold GPUs when idiots were piling in late and paying $1200 for used $700 cards.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on December 07, 2018, 09:47:00 AM
Indeed, quite a funny read (and worth the time to read the whole thing). The author is a very talented writer so that it'd be worth reading regardless of the topic matter.

Quote
Correlation does not equal causation, and for all I know the guy has been hip-deep in Ukrainian models somewhere offstage the whole time, but I suspect not. I suspect he has been doing what he normally does: having arguments on the internet.

...

I twice hear Pierce telling people who have clearly never licked an Amazonian frog just to see what would happen that “the first four letters of ‘EVOLVE’ are ‘EVOL.’ Reverse that and you get ‘LOVE.’”

I do quite like the line "John McAfee has never been convicted of rape or murder, but -crucially - not in the way you or I have never been convicted of rape or murder."
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on December 07, 2018, 07:45:10 PM
I must be one of the few who made money in crypto - and guess what it wasn't the crypto I made money on!
I got into mining, built a few rigs. I had stacks of 1080 ti boxes.

How did I make money? Sold GPUs when idiots were piling in late and paying $1200 for used $700 cards.

The people who struck it rich during the Gold Rush didn't go looking for gold. They sold shovels and sandwiches to all the people looking for gold.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on December 08, 2018, 08:41:52 AM
I must be one of the few who made money in crypto - and guess what it wasn't the crypto I made money on!
I got into mining, built a few rigs. I had stacks of 1080 ti boxes.

How did I make money? Sold GPUs when idiots were piling in late and paying $1200 for used $700 cards.

The people who struck it rich during the Gold Rush didn't go looking for gold. They sold shovels and sandwiches to all the people looking for gold.

Casinos and brothels did pretty well too.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on December 08, 2018, 02:32:33 PM
It's been super interesting watching crypto currency implode over the last year.  This time last year some friends of mine on Facebook that hardly post anything were posting about how they were so right about BitCoin/Crypto and that it was on track to be "over $40k US/Bitcoin by this time next year".  I put some money in a while back, but when it trippled to around $7k/coin, I took half of it out, then took the rest out when it doubled again.  I left a couple of LiteCoin in that I'd paid $50 for, guess I should have spent those when they were worth $300+ each.  Oh well.  I only bet fun money on it, and came away ~$1700 ahead when the dust settled.  I feel for those that put everything in at the top, not so much for those that had been pushing everyone else in for years and were really smug about their "investments" this time a year ago. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: beee on December 12, 2018, 11:21:58 AM
I'll just leave this link here:
Bitcoin Projection for 2018
https://www.cryptoculturemagazine.com/cryptocurrency/bitcoin-projection-for-2018/

Quote
Based on these figures, here is a summary and average of these predictions: $43,138. Wow! Amazing to consider that at the current value of just under $8,000, that’s a speculative return of 539%!

Todays BTC price: $3,433
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on December 12, 2018, 11:50:57 AM
I'll just leave this link here:
Bitcoin Projection for 2018
https://www.cryptoculturemagazine.com/cryptocurrency/bitcoin-projection-for-2018/

Quote
Based on these figures, here is a summary and average of these predictions: $43,138. Wow! Amazing to consider that at the current value of just under $8,000, that’s a speculative return of 539%!

Todays BTC price: $3,433

Their percentage prediction was almost exactly right, except for a factor of ten in the wrong direction.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on December 12, 2018, 02:28:04 PM
That's nothing.  John Maafee predicts Bitcoin will be at $1,000,000 by the end of 2020.   

https://twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/935900326007328768

That my friends, is how you really pump up the speculative return.   
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: frugledoc on December 12, 2018, 02:40:09 PM
That's nothing.  John Maafee predicts Bitcoin will be at $1,000,000 by the end of 2020.   

https://twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/935900326007328768

That my friends, is how you really pump up the speculative return.

He offers to eat his dick if he’s wrong.  Hard not to trust his opinion
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: beee on December 13, 2018, 10:19:54 AM
That's nothing.  John Maafee predicts Bitcoin will be at $1,000,000 by the end of 2020.   

https://twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/935900326007328768

That my friends, is how you really pump up the speculative return.

He offers to eat his dick if he’s wrong.  Hard not to trust his opinion

nah, he already found a way out of his promise:
https://twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/1071395711244267525
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BrandNewPapa on December 14, 2018, 10:35:52 AM
I recently sold my Bitcoin position with the constant downturn. I got in pretty early, with expectations of speculation. Overall I made about $2k. Do I regret not selling when I could have cleared nearly $20k? Not really. I made money and had fun, plus I didn't have much invested to begin with.

I've still got some money in ETH, LTC, and a few others. They are sitting at slightly under the break even point. I think I'm going to let them ride and see what happens. Even if they all go to zero, I'll still be positive with the money from BTC.

I might reinvest some back into BTC if it seems like the market is done tanking.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on December 20, 2018, 10:56:34 AM
But how do you know if it's done tanking?!?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thorstach on December 20, 2018, 02:57:51 PM
Crypto bottom is in as it shows strength and inverse correlation to tanking markets.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Cassie on December 20, 2018, 03:03:51 PM
We made 40k and my son 100k. We are holding the 7 we still have.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on December 21, 2018, 07:41:40 AM
Crypto bottom is in as it shows strength and inverse correlation to tanking markets.

He's baaaaaaack!!

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on December 22, 2018, 05:20:23 PM
Crypto bottom is in as it shows strength and inverse correlation to tanking markets.

He's baaaaaaack!!

-W

So a year ago when the market was up 15% and Bitcoin was up upteen hundred percent - inverse correlation again?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on December 23, 2018, 12:00:26 PM
Crypto bottom is in as it shows strength and inverse correlation to tanking markets.

Or more likely random fluctuations of digital currency that have no fundamentals.   
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BrandNewPapa on January 03, 2019, 06:25:52 AM
But how do you know if it's done tanking?!?

You don't....that's half the fun! Right now Crypto is more like gambling than anything else. Don't be dumb (e.g. mortgage your house). Just enjoy the ride.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on January 04, 2019, 01:46:05 PM
Your post made me think about these guys

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/17/this-family-bet-it-all-on-bitcoin.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/17/this-family-bet-it-all-on-bitcoin.html)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on January 04, 2019, 02:08:47 PM
Your post made me think about these guys

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/17/this-family-bet-it-all-on-bitcoin.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/17/this-family-bet-it-all-on-bitcoin.html)

It looks like they make money on their "course" and ad clicks, so I bet they're ok, at least for now. But they certainly didn't make money on their "investment" so far, unless they got smart and sold a lot of it a year ago.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 04, 2019, 03:27:19 PM
It has been said that lack of regulation is a feature, not a liability of cryptocurrencies. 

After the founder of Canada’s biggest cryptocurrency exchange, QuadrigaCX, died unexpectedly, about 115,000 clients have been unable to retrieve $190 million in holdings — because the owner was the only one who knew the password to access them, the company said.

Gerald Cotten, 30, died of complications with Crohn’s disease while doing philanthropic work in India in early December, according to a post on QuadrigaCX’s Facebook page. The company didn’t announce Cotten’s death until more than a month after he died, and as customers panicked and tried to withdraw their funds, QuadrigaCX’s website went down, and the company went off the grid.

When QuadrigaCX broke its silence a week later, the company revealed it had filed for creditor protection in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, according to reporting from Coindesk. Evidently, Cotten was the sole person responsible for transferring QuadrigaCX funds between the company’s “cold wallet” — secure, offline storage — and its “hot wallet” or online server, according to court documents.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/02/04/cryptocurrency-company-owes-customers-million-it-cant-repay-because-owner-died-with-only-password/?utm_term=.57967cf7b87f

As you can imagine, the crypto community is in full-on, conspiracy theory melt-down mode, and there is some question if QuadrigaCX even still has the coins.   But simple screw-up or conspiracy, I truly feel bad for those who lost their money.  And this is the exact reason why banks and stock exchanges are tightly regulated and have strict transparency and reporting requirements.   The system isn't fool proof by a long shot but, it heads and shoulders better than the only person with access to your money is a dead guy.

And in other news, blockchain attorney Preston Byrne thinks there is something fishy going on with Etherum:

https://prestonbyrne.com/2019/01/18/ethereum-is-arguably-centralized/

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on February 05, 2019, 11:19:46 AM
Saw the same article on another site this morning and came here to post it.  Either the worst possible way to run a business, or a con. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on February 05, 2019, 11:36:46 AM
Buying cryptocurrency but then having someone else store it for you negates essentially every comparative advantage of the payment technology relative to regular old credit cards or cash.

The only motivation to do so is if you're speculating on the price going up or down but have no interest at all in the underlying tech. <-- which I recognize probably describes the vast majority of people who own or have owned cryptocurrency at this point. SMH.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 05, 2019, 11:46:48 AM
How many billions of dollars worth of crypto have gone "missing" from exchanges, one way or another?  Is anyone keeping count?

Because to a casual observer, this looks like the riskiest, most insecure, most fraud-prone "asset class" ever invented.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on February 05, 2019, 11:56:03 AM
How many billions of dollars worth of crypto have gone "missing" from exchanges, one way or another?  Is anyone keeping count?

Because to a casual observer, this looks like the riskiest, most insecure, most fraud-prone "asset class" ever invented.

Keeping crypto at an exchange has a very different (and worse) set of risks associated with it compared to having crypto that you control yourself.

Just like the types and degree of risks are different if you have cash stashed under your mattress or deposited at a bank.
Or buy a bunch of shares of VTI vs start a small business.
Or own a gold ETF vs have gold coins buried in the backyard.

Does it make sense why these two things are not the same as each other? If not, and you are interested, I'm happy to discuss what the different risks are and why they exist.

Or alternatively, do you disagree that these two different things are different in terms of risk types/degree?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on February 05, 2019, 12:25:04 PM
How many billions of dollars worth of crypto have gone "missing" from exchanges, one way or another?  Is anyone keeping count?

Because to a casual observer, this looks like the riskiest, most insecure, most fraud-prone "asset class" ever invented.

Keeping crypto at an exchange has a very different (and worse) set of risks associated with it compared to having crypto that you control yourself.

Just like the types and degree of risks are different if you have cash stashed under your mattress or deposited at a bank.
Or buy a bunch of shares of VTI vs start a small business.
Or own a gold ETF vs have gold coins buried in the backyard.

Does it make sense why these two things are not the same as each other? If not, and you are interested, I'm happy to discuss what the different risks are and why they exist.

Maize, I'll bite. I'm not seeing the comparison.  If your bank or Vanguard HQ get hit by a meteor tomorrow, your funds are still secure.  Your bank is FDIC insured and Vanguard's assets are secured/handled by a third party.  Both examples have layers of regulation and closely monitored security.  If the same meteor lands on your house and obliterates your cash or gold coins you're screwed.  If Vanguard or your bank are subject to a theft, then the same insurance/backups/guarantees kick in.  I don't know what the ratio of hacking losses are for exchanges vs privately-owned wallets, but it seems that in either case there is no recourse.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 05, 2019, 12:56:25 PM
Keeping crypto at an exchange has a very different (and worse) set of risks associated with it compared to having crypto that you control yourself.

I see that the risks are different.  I was merely commenting on what seems to be a continuous stream of bad outcomes for crypto holders, suggesting that the types of risk are less important than the literal losses that have resulted from those risks.  Like what percentage of crypto has gone "missing" in the past two years, compared to the equivalent percentage of stocks or gold?

I don't mean the day to day price fluctuations.  I mean the theft, loss, and destruction of assets.  Reuters reported (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-crypto-currency-crime/cryptocurrency-thefts-scams-hit-1-7-billion-in-2018-report-idUSKCN1PN1SQ) 1.7 billion in thefts alone in 2018, mostly from a handful of high-profile heists of several hundred million dollars each.  And that doesn't include "losses" like this most recent password loss due to founder death at QuadrigaCX, which also seems to have destroyed hundreds of millions of dollars worth of crypto (though may be another heist disguised to look like destruction).

The entire global crypto market appears to be worth something less than $300 billion, suggesting that approximately half a percent of the global store of value was stolen in 2018 alone, not counting however much was "lost" for other reasons.  Does anyone have any idea how to find equivalent number for the amount of savings account that are stolen, or stocks, or gold?  Fraud and identity theft are approaching $20b per year, but that's out of something like 30 trillion dollars.  That rough math suggests that you are approximately ten times more likely to suffer losses due to crypto theft than you are to other kinds of financial theft. 

You can certainly fudge those numbers a little bit depending on how you measure stuff, but I think the general conclusion is sound.  Crypto looks insecure in practice, despite being an idea wholly built around security.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Mr Mark on February 05, 2019, 12:59:10 PM
How many billions of dollars worth of crypto have gone "missing" from exchanges, one way or another?  Is anyone keeping count?

Because to a casual observer, this looks like the riskiest, most insecure, most fraud-prone "asset class" ever invented.

even Dutch tulips didn't just 'disappear'... because say the guy warehousing them died knowing the only password.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on February 05, 2019, 01:09:14 PM
I don't know what the ratio of hacking losses are for exchanges vs privately-owned wallets, but it seems that in either case there is no recourse.

I do want to repeat here that my thesis isn't cryptocurrencies are more or less safe than cash, bank deposits, stocks, or gold (either ETFs or buried in the back yard).

My thesis is that looking at the safety record of exchanges and what kinds of problems they run into is not going to provide useful information about the type about the safety record or types of risks for people who actually use cryptocurrencies will encounter.

Why do people use crypto-exchanges in the first place? The word "exchange" makes me think of a stock exchange, but it sounds like in this particular case this hot/cold storage was being used more like a traditional bank.  If the latter, then why? Are the owners of those coins not confident in managing their own wallets that they put them in a third party's hands?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on February 05, 2019, 02:23:19 PM
How many billions of dollars worth of crypto have gone "missing" from exchanges, one way or another?  Is anyone keeping count?

I'm sure someone is, though the details of accounting would be tricky - do you count the value deposited, value when it's actually missing, or value when it's discovered widely that it's missing (with a large gap, often, between #2 and #3, depending on how many shenanigans the place losing coins goes through to hide the loss)?

Quote
Because to a casual observer, this looks like the riskiest, most insecure, most fraud-prone "asset class" ever invented.

With great risk comes great opportunity...

I'll certainly grant that the risks involve with cryptocurrencies are different than many other classes of asset, but "The riskiest, most insecure, most fraud-prone..." - eh.  I'm not sure I'd go there.  That's an awful lot of absolute statements.

However, quite a bit of the risk is from people who take assets designed for direct person-to-person exchange, and then put them in third party run exchanges, and leave them there.  Without any clue what those exchanges are really doing, or how well secured they are.  Cryptocurrencies aren't designed for that use case, and it turns out, they break badly when you do that.  There's nothing wrong with putting the assets in an exchange to exchange them/trade them/etc, but leaving them there for the long term, empirically, is certainly risky.  So don't do that.

Why do people use crypto-exchanges in the first place? The word "exchange" makes me think of a stock exchange, but it sounds like in this particular case this hot/cold storage was being used more like a traditional bank.  If the latter, then why? Are the owners of those coins not confident in managing their own wallets that they put them in a third party's hands?

In general, the exchanges should be used for trading between various asset classes (cash, various cryptocurrencies, etc), with the results pulled out, but people tend to get lazy and leave them there - and, empirically, an awful lot of people do that.  I think it's stupid, personally, but... well, I'm not exposed to risk from third party exchanges running God knows what software stack at some poorly secured cloud provider.

Even mining pools tended to use a hot/cold storage system, though.  It's simple risk management - for the same reason most people don't carry all their cash on them at any given point in time, a pool or exchange will likely have a reasonably large amount present, and the hot wallet value is at risk.  You need some liquid funds on hand for paying out when people transfer back to their private wallets, but not all of it, and having all of it online is more likely to result in losses than having some of it offline.

And then, for your cold storage, well, you still need to balance the risks.  Password protecting a personal wallet is one such risk - what are the risks of having your wallet stolen by malware or something, versus the risks of you forgetting the password?  I can't answer that for other people, but I'll suggest it largely depends on what your overall "cyber" risks are.  If you're a gamer who mines on your gaming rig and pirates lots of video games, maybe keeping the hot wallet on that system isn't such a good idea.

In terms of losing the wallet, there are quite a few options to make very durable wallets (printing them, punching out metal cards, etc), and you can store it many places - again, look at the risk factors for your specific use case.

Exactly. They heard crypto was going up (or think they can make money trading the swings when it is going down), so they decided to buy some either happens in person or on exchanges, but then didn't bother to learn enough about the technology to actually set up a wallet of their own.

If someone tells me to "Short Tesla" and I'll make a gazillion, and I do it without understanding, it's still my fault for losing money there...

Quote
Cryptocurrencies are not stocks. If anything they are closer to some weird hybrid between a currency and a commodity. Anyone buying them to get rich, especially folks who don't take the time to understand the technology behind them enough to actually use them, is unlikely to have a good time.

I've come to describe them as "Synthetic digital commodities."  It's the most accurate description I've yet found - they act more like a commodity than a currency, they're purely synthetic, and they exist only in a digital realm.  However, I'd also argue that during a pure gold standard era, you're not using a currency, but a commodity - just one conveniently broken up for exchange.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: aspiringnomad on February 05, 2019, 10:00:59 PM

In general, the exchanges should be used for trading between various asset classes (cash, various cryptocurrencies, etc), with the results pulled out, but people tend to get lazy and leave them there - and, empirically, an awful lot of people do that.  I think it's stupid, personally, but... well, I'm not exposed to risk from third party exchanges running God knows what software stack at some poorly secured cloud provider.


In my admittedly limited experience, moving crypto from an exchange to a cold wallet and back again costs you a chunk of your crypto. It's not necessarily cost prohibitive, but certainly more expensive than modern fiat exchanges which generally allow free transfers. More broadly, crypto still seems to be an expensive, volatile, and potentially insecure solution to a problem that doesn't really exist unless you're laundering money, spreading ransomware, or living in Venezuela.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 06, 2019, 10:36:44 AM
If you trust anything of potential value to random strangers on the internet, bad stuff is going to happen fairly often.

Why does crypto appear to be so much more vulnerable to this than other types of investments?

I mean I trust random internet strangers like Vanguard and Fidelity with most of my life savings, and I never lose a minute's sleep over it.  I also have tens of thousands of dollars stored with the random internet strangers at various online banks.  We don't see losses from these types of online storage "fairly often" if at all. 

I think that the very security that crypto was designed to offer is exactly what makes it so vulnerable.  The fact that it's decentralized and irreversible is what makes it a lucrative target for thieves.  Strong encryption offloads all of the responsibility for safety to the user, and users are notoriously bad at that.  It's almost like cryptocurrenies were tailor-made to be the perfect target for theft. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on February 06, 2019, 11:05:36 AM
I think that the very security that crypto was designed to offer is exactly what makes it so vulnerable.  The fact that it's decentralized and irreversible is what makes it a lucrative target for thieves.  Strong encryption offloads all of the responsibility for safety to the user, and users are notoriously bad at that.  It's almost like cryptocurrenies were tailor-made to be the perfect target for theft. 

I think you've got it exactly right. Vanguard and Fidelity can give tons of employees access to perform transactions with your money because if they go rogue and defraud you there are ways to undo it. With cryptocurrencies, anyone who has the key to the account holding your money can steal it with no recourse other than the possibility of jail time if caught. No power on earth can force them to reverse that transaction if they choose not to surrender their private keys. Hence the practice of this exchange of only having one person who knows the private key. The downsides with this are obvious in hindsight. A better system might be to break the key into a dozen pieces and make sure multiple people have each piece so there's no single point of failure.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on February 06, 2019, 11:12:19 AM
Strong encryption offloads all of the responsibility for safety to the user, and users are notoriously bad at that.

Yup. Hence, those of us who put in the time to understand how to use it safely find it both appealing and secure (since how secure it is depends on our own actions or inactions rather than those of other people) at the same time that the news is full of stories of people who get a different outcome because they aren't going a good job of taking responsibility for their own safety but also aren't recognizing that, if they aren't willing to take that responsibility, they'll get a much safer outcome if they didn't touch crypto with a ten foot pole.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 06, 2019, 11:45:47 AM
those of us who put in the time to understand how to use it safely find it both appealing and secure

I guess I just don't see the attraction, unless you're a criminal.  Why would I choose crypto, which apparently has a huge online theft problem, over some other form of digital value storage like a bank or mutual fund company, that appears to be much more secure?

I understand that some people don't trust banks, all evidence to the contrary, and prefer to bury gold coins in their back yard.  Storing your crypto privately feels to me just like burying gold.  It can still be stolen!  Physically hiding your stuff is literally the least secure way to protect it!  Anyone can break into your home and steal your crypto, or your jewelry or your gold or your art.  Keeping valuables in your home is far less secure than keeping them in a bank vault, or an online brokerage house.  A bank will store it safely for free, because they can lend against it.  That's how banking works.  The profits from that lending are used to insure against fraud and theft.  Everyone wins.

If I was a career criminal, however, and wanted to convince people to put vast sums of money into forms that I could steal in bulk without ever leaving the comfort of my home office, then crypto seems like a genius idea.  There are some slightly more subtle complications in the comparison between crypto and online banking, for example the "real" value vs the fractional reserve and the fluctuations in current exchange price vs the carrying costs.  Market cap is not the same as true value, just like M0 is not M3.  Even delving into these ideas, though, makes me think that crypto is a criminal's dream.  I haven't yet thought of any angles from which crypto is superior to the existing traditional financial system.  That doesn't mean they don't exist, just that I haven't found them yet.

From one perspective, this whole debate boils down to your philosophy of society.  Do you believe we succeed when we cooperate and trust one another, or when we retreat into private warring factions?  If you're a rugged individualist who hand pumps his own well water and poops in his back yard, then privately protecting your gold bars or crypto might make sense.  For everyone else, who has built a life based on civilization's social contract, you've already accepted that cooperation and trust are the key to our success as a species, and banks with checks and balances are a great idea.  Cryptography allows one person and one person alone to have 100% of the power in a specific narrow instance, but I'm not sure that's a good idea.  Ask those QuadrigaCX people how that worked out.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 06, 2019, 12:21:38 PM
I don't claim to speak for Maizeman, but he and I have both talked about this here in the past, so let me explain what the appeal is (to me, keeping in mind that I currently don't own any crypto at all):

-Currently I need a third party in many cases to pay someone. I could be paying for a purchase to be shipped to me, or settling a debt, or buying something at the grocery store. I can of course pay with cash/checks, but those are a pain for a number of reasons. So I'll usually use a credit card, or paypal, or something like that to process the transaction.

-Those third parties (mostly credit card companies) charge a lot of money to 1) provide some fraud protection, and 2) make a profit. They get a BIG chunk (sometimes like 4%) of the transaction.

-If we had a way to transact between strangers that was inherently secure, we wouldn't need a third party, and both parties would save significantly.

To me, *that* is the appeal. I want to be able to securely pay anyone (or get paid) in the world, for free or close to free.

Currently that's not very practical. Maybe someday it will be. The fraud protection angle (no recourse if I never receive my purchase, except to personally go track down the seller) is a big issue for your average consumer too.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: maizefolk on February 06, 2019, 01:07:39 PM
Waltworks, you did a great job of summarizing the points I find appealing about the technology as well. It's, in principle, a technological solution to a problem that right now a bunch of very profitable businesses extra large "rents"* from society for solving. I'll be the first to admit that right now, in practice, cryptocurrencies aren't fasters/cheaper/more efficient than western union/mastercard/paypal. But their technology means that they do have the potential to be. And that's just cool from a tech perspective. It's also nice from an economic perspective, because rents tend to distort the economy and make it less productive over the long hall.**

@sol, you're clearly a smart guy, but it is frustrating that we cannot seem to ever disagree without you trying to demonize people for taking the other side of an argument from you. No, I am not a criminal. I am also not a goldbug.*** No I am not advocating a retreat from general society into groups of warring factions. Nor I am not a rugged individualist who is ungrateful for or unaware of the countless benefits and blessings being born into a functioning and affluent society has provided for myself over the years (and hopefully will continue to do so). As we established in a previous thread, I am also not a nazi.

I wish I could find a way to convince you people can look at the same data as you, come to a different conclusion from you, and that doesn't mean that they buy into every idea you disagree with. It makes it frustrating/depressing to have conversations with you. From my perspective, life is too short for that. From your perspective, surely there is some value to being able to continue to be exposed from ideas from people of differing perspectives rather than being left in a bubble of only people who agree with you on every topic and maybe a few people who really DO disagree with you on every topic?

* In the economic sense of the word.

** Even though there can be short term economic pain when a previously profitable sector goes under.

*** If nothing else surely my track record on this thread demonstrates that I am not a gold bug? https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/precious-metals/50/
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 06, 2019, 01:12:22 PM
Currently I need a third party in many cases to pay someone.

That's a feature, not a bug!  That third party is what MAKES the system secure.  Operating without one is like buying on the black market with suitcases full of cash.  You're just asking to get robbed.

I agree that some third party fees are high, like credit cards, but that's purely a matter of you choosing to pay for convenience.  There is no cost at all to using a regular bank, because the bank makes money by lending against your account balance.  Banks will happily transfer money for you electronically, for free, it's just slow and inconvenient.  If you prefer to use a little plastic chip that you carry in your wallet that is accepted literally everywhere and offers you fraud protection and chargeback privileges, then you pay a little more for the convenience.  But you don't have to. 

Crypto also charges fees to transfer back and forth to other forms of currency, so it's not like this problem is unique to credit cards, and crypto is terribly inconvenient if you want to use it at your local gas station.

If you regularly need to conduct immediate transactions with unbanked individuals in foreign countries who don't have access to a third party, then I can see utility in a direct crypto transfer from your phone to his.  That person is setting himself up to be robbed, though, just like if he had met in person for a suitcase full of cash.  The bank's accounts are insured against theft, and are free to set up and use.  I'm not such a recluse that I think avoiding participating in the benefits of civilization is somehow a virtue.  What's next, smelting my own aluminum to make circuit boards in case someone hardware hacked the laptop I bought from Vietnam?  At some point, you have to learn to trust the system we have built, warts and all.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 06, 2019, 02:02:28 PM
And that's just cool from a tech perspective.

I can definitely understand dabbling with something just because you think it's cool technology, like drones or solar panels or ham radios.  Those feel like someone's potential hobbies, to me.

Quote
it is frustrating that we cannot seem to ever disagree without you trying to demonize people

I think you might be taking things a bit too personally.  You're one of my favorite posters here, and I always look forward to your contributions.  I don't feel any conflict, nor any demons.  I didn't mean to accuse you personally of anything.  I know you're not a gold bug, or a nazi. 

Quote
I wish I could find a way to convince you people can look at the same data as you, come to a different conclusion from you

Of course!  And when that happens repeatedly with someone whose opinions I value and respect, I tend to push a little harder to figure out why.  Crypto is one of those prime examples were I just genuinely don't understand what all the hype is about, but lots and lots of smart people are totally hyped about it.

It's cool tech, I get that.  It's also popular with online communities, so I think there's a little bit of groupthink behind it.  But as a practical matter, it has some significant drawbacks that basically make it DOA in terms of serving as a useful currency, in my opinion.  The rampant theft issue is one of those, and seems particularly ironic because cryptocurrencies were specifically promoted as offering people added security, then turned out to be way less secure than traditional currency banking.  It's like when Norton Antivirus promises to speed up your computer by removing malware, but then bogs your system down with virus scans.  Or people who buy firearms because they don't feel safe at home, and then end up having an accidental firearm fatality at home because of it.  Like, whoops maybe this wasn't as great of an idea as we thought it was.

Quote
It makes it frustrating/depressing to have conversations with you.

Well that's too bad, I kind of enjoy our conversations and I like your logical and quantitative approach to numerous forum discussion.  Maybe this a tone issue rather than a substance one?  Would it be easier if you pictured me with a big goofy smile whenever you read a post with my name next to it?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on February 06, 2019, 02:40:37 PM
I agree that some third party fees are high, like credit cards, but that's purely a matter of you choosing to pay for convenience.

Ah, no.  Wrong.  You pay for the convenience, even if you use cash.

Quote
There is no cost at all to using a regular bank, because the bank makes money by lending against your account balance.

They... really don't exactly lend against consumer balances, and the fees my bank attempts to regularly charge me for a checking account indicate that there's more than "no cost."

Quote
Banks will happily transfer money for you electronically, for free, it's just slow and inconvenient.

The wire transfer fees I pay beg to differ.

Quote
If you prefer to use a little plastic chip that you carry in your wallet that is accepted literally everywhere and offers you fraud protection and chargeback privileges, then you pay a little more for the convenience.  But you don't have to.

Literally everywhere, huh?  Try again, outside Seattle.

And I pay the same if I use it or not, per vendor's merchant agreements that prohibit them from offering cash discounts.

Quote
Crypto also charges fees to transfer back and forth to other forms of currency, so it's not like this problem is unique to credit cards, and crypto is terribly inconvenient if you want to use it at your local gas station.

A credit card is terribly inconvenient if I want to use it at one of the local farmer's markets, because it's not accepted.  So... use the proper medium for the transaction?

Quote
What's next, smelting my own aluminum to make circuit boards in case someone hardware hacked the laptop I bought from Vietnam?  At some point, you have to learn to trust the system we have built, warts and all.

Aluminum is awful for circuit boards.  And in general, the board layout isn't the problem - the firmware is a far, far easier place to put bonus functions.  You'd be better off investing in a secure SPI flasher to pull the firmware and compare it against the reference, or to just fully flash a new firmware onto the various non-volatile storage chips in the machine.

And, yes, laptops do come with bonus functionality on a regular basis.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on February 06, 2019, 03:24:29 PM
the firmware is a far, far easier place to put bonus functions.  You'd be better off investing in a secure SPI flasher to pull the firmware and compare it against the reference, or to just fully flash a new firmware onto the various non-volatile storage chips in the machine.

I knew, as soon as I wrote what I thought was nonsensical paranoia, that someone would actually take it seriously. 

There is a community of tin foil hat wearing folks out there, and some of them think banks are evil and some of them think cryptocurrency is awesome, and there is some overlap between those groups.  Some of them are also way into "permaculture" or "prepping" and will hoard emergency rations or ammunition, but I'm not sure how much overlap there is between the folks paranoid about the government melting (like the preppers) and the folks paranoid about fiat currency melting (like the crypto bros).  I'm guessing, at least a little?

Most of the cast of Cryptonomicon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptonomicon), for example, were digital libertarians with hard-ons for crypto, free information sharing, guns, and stockpiles of gold.  That's kind of the stereotype I envision whenever this topic comes up, and it just seems silly to me.

Hey man, it's a free country.  If you're really worried about secret backdoors in your laptop, then by all means take whatever precautions you find necessary.  You're also free to stockpile guns and gold.  This just feels like a weird place to be having this conversation, in the middle of a forum that exists for the express purpose of helping people achieve financial freedom by actively participating in the system that seems so scary.  The main pathway to FI promoted here is investing in the stock market, which means buying into capitalism and globalism and fiat currency and central banking.  They're all tied up together, creating a world in which an average-earning 40 year old can retire and never work again.  It seems pretty great, to me.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on February 06, 2019, 04:35:43 PM
I knew, as soon as I wrote what I thought was nonsensical paranoia, that someone would actually take it seriously.

2018 happened.  The {Meltdown, Spectre, L1TF, etc} bugs would have been laughed at had they been described accurately in a Hollywood movie in 2016 because they were that comically bad, and couldn't possibly have been in Intel processors.  Except they were (L1TF being, by far, the worst of those, allowing a total bypass of the protections provided by SGX).

Nonsensical paranoia has a way of turning into reality alarmingly quickly. :/

Quote
There is a community of tin foil hat wearing folks out there, and some of them think banks are evil and some of them think cryptocurrency is awesome, and there is some overlap between those groups.  Some of them are also way into "permaculture" or "prepping" and will hoard emergency rations or ammunition, but I'm not sure how much overlap there is between the folks paranoid about the government melting (like the preppers) and the folks paranoid about fiat currency melting (like the crypto bros).  I'm guessing, at least a little?

I'd expect maybe a 20-30% cross-membership in those groups.  They're certainly related issues.  However, dismissively tossing "permaculture" and "preppers" together is a bit dishonest, if you're at all familiar with the groups (I assume you're not).

Quote
Hey man, it's a free country.  If you're really worried about secret backdoors in your laptop, then by all means take whatever precautions you find necessary.  You're also free to stockpile guns and gold.  This just feels like a weird place to be having this conversation, in the middle of a forum that exists for the express purpose of helping people achieve financial freedom by actively participating in the system that seems so scary.  The main pathway to FI promoted here is investing in the stock market, which means buying into capitalism and globalism and fiat currency and central banking.  They're all tied up together, creating a world in which an average-earning 40 year old can retire and never work again.  It seems pretty great, to me.

The main pathway, yes.  The only pathway, certainly not.  Quite a few of the MMM posts are entirely useful if you're going different paths - spending radically less than you make is useful if you're investing in markets as many are, or if you're investing heavily into productive property improvements along the solar/permaculture path.  IIRC, you've got solar, but zero grid-down running capability on that system.  I happen to think that's a bit silly, and am doing something quite a bit more robust.

A main difference I see between the core thinking here and the wings is that the core group basically assumes everything will continue, as it has, for at least most of the rest of their lives.  If you're older, sure, that's probably a good bet, but for those under 40, I'm far less optimistic - I think the various headwinds of debt, climate change, all our eggs in one computer basket, and diminishing returns on investment are likely to lead to a reduction in market returns sometime before the end of my life.  So I'm interested in alternative paths that offer returns, even if the markets don't.

Metals and crypto are useful hedges against various things that can (and, quite reliably, do) go wrong with fiat currencies.  Do you think the US Dollar will still be a major world reserve currency in 500 years?  How about 5?  Things don't last forever, and neither do nations or currencies.  So... there's remarkably little mitigation of that woven into the core thinking.  Gold, in particular, isn't so much an "investment" as a "long term value store."  It fluctuates in value over time, especially when compared to one particular currency, but it holds value throughout time.  The same cannot be said of fiat currencies - my $50T Zimbabwe dollar is an entertaining reminder of this.

I started a thread about 2 years ago that led to quite a few pages of discussion on this concept: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/thoughts-on-fire-in-a-declining-nation/ - I don't recall if you were engaged in that particular thread.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 06, 2019, 05:07:25 PM
Hey, we're back to gold and fiat currencies!

Which is what is wrong with crypto right now. Sigh.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on February 06, 2019, 05:08:43 PM
Hey, we're back to gold!

Which is what is wrong with crypto right now. Sigh.

Sorry, gold is wrong with crypto?  ::confused::

Both of them are commodities that have been used as value stores, so the parallels are greater than the differences...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on February 06, 2019, 05:40:42 PM
What's wrong is that people are using crypto as a value store/commodity, like gold. That's when they're not speculating with it.

That makes it basically useless for actually doing transactions. Which is what I care about.

I want cheap boring crypto. That nobody owns for more than a few seconds to do a transaction. That nobody in their right mind would hoard or "invest" in or even want to own. The ultimate valueless token that makes transactions faster and cheaper. That's not what has happened so far.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 07, 2019, 03:51:55 PM
^ Exactly.  The features of crypto are also liabilities.   Because Bitcoin is designed to be self-limiting, it is by design deflationary.   If a currency is deflationary, you hold it.  But if everyone is holding it, it will never become a widely accepted means of payment.  Therefore it won't work as currency.   
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on February 08, 2019, 02:02:57 AM
For advocates of a borderless currency, there's often a tendency to US-focused myopia among American crypto enthusiasts. Most of the flaws identified as being endemic to the existing banking system - the time and expense involved in wire transfers, for example - are endemic to the American banking system, and don't necessarily apply at all outside.

I live in Ireland. I hold a current account with a German bank. They charge me no fees of any kind, and when I transfer funds from an Irish account into my German one it takes about one day and coats me nothing. When I went to the States last year, I brought a current account card from Revolut, which allowed me to convert funds instantly from euro to US dollars at the current interbank exchange rate with no additional charges. The problems people describe as reasons to go crypto are actually reasons to go with a better banking system.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on February 10, 2019, 09:49:59 PM
This particular exchange issue getting more interesting...

Court-appointed accounting firm cannot find any evidence of accounting records or even a bank account in QuadrigaCX's name.

https://business.financialpost.com/technology/blockchain/deciphering-quadrigas-finances-extraordinary-challenge-with-no-apparent-accounting-records (https://business.financialpost.com/technology/blockchain/deciphering-quadrigas-finances-extraordinary-challenge-with-no-apparent-accounting-records)

How did the employees get paid if there are no records or bank accounts?  Did this Cotton fella run the company entirely in his own head and do all of the financial transactions himself?


QuadrigaCX may have never had a cold wallet for its operations after all.
https://www.ccn.com/wheres-the-missing-150-million-crypto-exchange-quadrigacxs-fiasco-gets-weirder-with-new-research (https://www.ccn.com/wheres-the-missing-150-million-crypto-exchange-quadrigacxs-fiasco-gets-weirder-with-new-research)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on February 22, 2019, 10:16:16 AM
I want cheap boring crypto. That nobody owns for more than a few seconds to do a transaction. That nobody in their right mind would hoard or "invest" in or even want to own. The ultimate valueless token that makes transactions faster and cheaper. That's not what has happened so far.

Transactions can be fast and cheap, and even free if the cost is passed on to developers vs users, however the native token that secures the network can't be valueless, and the token value itself must increase as more value is created through the network.

Isn't increasing value exactly what you don't want? A deflationary environment encourages hording.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on March 07, 2019, 05:02:32 PM
More on  QuadrigaCX:

Millions of dollars were missing when the CEO of a crypto exchange died without sharing the passwords to his accounts. Investigators, who have secured his laptop and other devices, have revealed the money is gone...

... Using public blockchain records, it determined the digital wallets thought to contain millions were emptied in April, eight months before Cotten's death, it said in a report last week.
"In April 2018, the remaining bitcoin in the Identified Bitcoin Cold Wallets was transferred out bringing the balances down to nil," the report said.

The investigators said they found other issues too, such as that Quadriga kept "limited books and records" and never reported its financials.
Ernst & Young also reported that 14 user accounts were internally created under various aliases, traded on Quadriga's exchange, and withdrew cryptocurrency to addresses not tied to Quadriga.


https://markets.businessinsider.com/currencies/news/crypto-ceo-died-with-passwords-to-137-million-but-the-money-is-gone-2019-3-1028009684

For some people, unregulated markets are a feature of crypto.   Not so much for others.   
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on March 07, 2019, 05:04:51 PM
... Using public blockchain records, it determined the digital wallets thought to contain millions were emptied in April, eight months before Cotten's death, it said in a report last week.
"In April 2018, the remaining bitcoin in the Identified Bitcoin Cold Wallets was transferred out bringing the balances down to nil," the report said.

So the biggest exchange in the entire country was an outright fraud?  They straight up stole everyone's money?

It's a libertarian utopia!
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Hash Brown on March 07, 2019, 05:21:57 PM
So I was going through my safe last week for something and I found a random business card with a long series of letters and numbers written on the back.  It wasn't what I was looking for and I didn't throw it out but a day or two ago I thought to myself...that's my old crypto wallet password

I now remember people back in 2017 advising newbies to not label your crypto wallet password as such...in case somebody breaks into my house, yanks a safe bolted to a concrete basement floor, and goes through everything for something labeled "crypto"? 

How many people out there have thrown out their crypto wallet passwords by mistake?  I came relatively close to doing it last week.  I sold everything at the top of the insanity in early 2018, so I don't have anything to lose, but still. 

I just don't have much faith that most people who actually had a lot of crypto at the top of the market got organized and put their wallet passwords in a safety deposit box (or two), and labeled everything.  As the years tick by, most crypto is going to end up fizzling out, locked in wallets that nobody can open. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Travis on March 07, 2019, 07:32:18 PM
I don't know the significance of this tidbit, but the article makes it a point to state that they still haven't cracked the laptop. They figured out the latest through other records.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: MustacheAndaHalf on March 07, 2019, 08:35:23 PM
Portfolio update: My final and insignificant crypto speculation is almost 100% in loom network. 

***

I want cheap boring crypto. That nobody owns for more than a few seconds to do a transaction. That nobody in their right mind would hoard or "invest" in or even want to own. The ultimate valueless token that makes transactions faster and cheaper. That's not what has happened so far.
As blockchain uses expand beyond online services such as gambling, ...  The time will come when public blockchains are an integral part of civilization and myriad dapps created that many people will want to use.
Blockchain is a public database.  I don't want my private information exported, and I think EU countries feel that even more strongly.  Will health care records be lost if I forget my cryptographic key?  Someone having a heart attack will remember their key, so their drug allergies can be considered?  And if I don't have a cryptographic key, what's the point of a public database as far as I'm concerned, as a member of the public?

Bitcoin is accepted more widely offline than other currency, and it's still barely used compared to cash or credit.  People are speculating with it, not using it.  The only people using it as a store of value are in countries like Venezuela where the currency is even riskier than BTC.  When someone decides "this has less chance of crashing to zero", that's using it as a store of value.  When people claim BTC will become the world currency, and they got there first, they're speculating.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on March 08, 2019, 06:36:17 AM
... Using public blockchain records, it determined the digital wallets thought to contain millions were emptied in April, eight months before Cotten's death, it said in a report last week.
"In April 2018, the remaining bitcoin in the Identified Bitcoin Cold Wallets was transferred out bringing the balances down to nil," the report said.

So the biggest exchange in the entire country was an outright fraud?  They straight up stole everyone's money?

It's a libertarian utopia!

There do seem to be a lot of parallels to Galt's Gulch.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on March 18, 2019, 08:45:38 AM
There are already "non physical" tokens for basically all games, though, right? I'm not a gamer but is this actually a useful application? Does Minecraft actually mail you a physical card when you want to buy stuff in the game?

Hell, I use a ton of credit-card scheme gift cards and even those rarely get mailed in physical form anymore. You just download them to your phone and away you go.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on March 18, 2019, 12:40:59 PM
I think you're reaching on the gaming thing. All of the stuff you're talking about already happens without blockchain, AFAIK.

Again, not a gamer, though. Maybe WOW gold is a real pain in the neck/the Fortnite Illuminati are secretly screwing you over and blockchain gold would be better or something. The fact that we're even talking about this says to me that blockchain isn't going bigtime anytime soon.

I mean, seriously - with some very rare exceptions, players video game time and effort do not *have* any IRL value. It's recreation. Within the game, existing electronic money/gold/whatever already does what you want without any need for blockchains.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on March 18, 2019, 01:06:08 PM
Players' time and effort can be meaningfully captured and valued through blockchain.

Is this a current problem that needs to be fixed? 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on March 18, 2019, 02:54:54 PM
Most gaming happens on a platform run by an administrator. Blockchain is sold to the masses via the idea that these transactions can be verified without a central administrator.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on March 19, 2019, 08:42:32 AM
Players' time and effort can be meaningfully captured and valued through blockchain.

Is this a current problem that needs to be fixed?

I for one, only play video games for money.  I mean, that's why playing video games is called 'work' not 'recreation', right?

:P
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on March 19, 2019, 09:23:57 AM
I for one, only play video games for money.  I mean, that's why playing video games is called 'work' not 'recreation', right?

Lots of people spend money to play video games as recreation, instead of earning money in an office as work.

But any time there is a transfer of money, one party is spending and the other party is earning.  Video games absolutely count as work, for hundreds of thousands of people who make their full time living developing them.

The current economics of this system, though, would seem to support using centralized financial institutions (i.e. regular banks) to purchase hardware and software, and then using centralized databases to support in-game transactions.  Because that's the way for these companies to be most profitable, which is probably why they're all doing it that way instead of venturing out into cryptocurrencies.

The defining feature of crypto is that it's irreversible.  Lots of people seem to think that's an advantage, but reality has proven otherwise. The entire industry seems rife with fraud and abuse precisely because it's irreversible.  One of the most important reasons that we use centralized banking and "fiat currency" is so that government can support economic growth by controlling the medium of exchange, stabilizing prices, seizing the assets of rogue actors like terrorist groups, printing money when necessary, reversing illegal transactions, and insuring people's accounts so that they can safely use them as a store of value.  Crypto undermines all of that, on purpose, and then claims these are somehow helpful advancements.  Sure, helpful if you're a criminal or a hacker.  Not so helpful for anyone else.

Some folks here keep pointing to places like Venezuela, where the historical benefits of traditional currencies and centralized financial systems have been significantly undermined by corruption and mismanagement, but that doesn't mean you should replace a mismanaged successful model with a broken model that just trades one set of problems for another.  Crypto would not have solved or avoided Venezuela's problems.  All systems are subject to abuse if enough people are willing to break it for personal profit.  Just look at the ever-growing list of crypto thefts and scams.  It's hard to argue that crypto is any more secure then traditional fiat currency, when it is digitally and irreversibly stolen ~ten times as often.


Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on March 19, 2019, 09:45:01 AM
Current games are developed in a very centralized process, are vulnerable to hacking which impacts online social play, and there here is a lack of true scarcity in gaming assets.
...
Putting digital assets on a blockchain negates these issues; and if blockchain advances enough in terms of scalability and reduced costs, you can put entire game states or the entire game or other complex applications on these blockchains.

I understand this technical argument, but I think it misses the point.  Video games are made by for-profit corporations.  They are developed and sold to make money for the developers.  Why would they want a block-chain protected user-mod to be freely available?  How would they make money off of that?  They don't really care about "lack of true gaming scarcity" because ultimately they are trying to sell in-game items and the more they sell the more they make.  Fraud and dupes aren't a concern for them until they start cutting into sales, and most of their revenue already comes from the initial up-front game purchase, not microtransactions or auction houses.

The changes you want are what gamers want, not what studios want.  Studios make all of the decisions here, because they are the ones doing the work in order to make money.  Customers (gamers) can demand any crazy-ass changes they want, but they're living in a (MMPORPG) fantasy world if they think the studios are going to forego profits on their behalf. 

It's like people who watch tv demanding that networks stop airing commercials.  Um, the commercials are the reason the shows exist.  If they got rid of commercials there would be no shows in between them for you to watch.  Customers (viewers) just have to accept that they are not going to get the experience they really want, because that's how the industry works.  We all want something better, for free.  Identifying the things you don't like about games/tv/movies/cars/groceries is easy, but the things you don't like generally exist for profit-motivated reasons.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on March 19, 2019, 10:20:59 AM
Sorry, this is just 1) not a meaningful problem within currently existing games, to the best of my knowledge, and 2) so minor that even talking about it undercuts the whole "blockchain will revolutionize your life" theme.

If the best we can come up with is that it'll make World of Warcraft gold somewhat more fair (which is actually dubious in the first place), that's pathetic.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on March 19, 2019, 10:47:14 AM
Yes, blockchain will change my life by making my Magic the Gathering deck more awesome...

Jesus.

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on March 19, 2019, 11:29:44 AM
Yes, blockchain will change my life by making my Magic the Gathering deck more awesome...

Jesus.

-W

I thought Magic the Gathering: Online Exchange stopped handling crypto?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on March 19, 2019, 12:12:30 PM
I thought Magic the Gathering: Online Exchange stopped handling crypto?

The founder (who was the only one who knew the laptop password) faked his own death, stole all the rare crypo-super-Gandalf cards, and now roams anonymously, deploying his unbeatable deck against poor saps at middle schools around the world.

Will crypto-Pokemon be next? This thing is going to be BIG!

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on March 19, 2019, 01:54:10 PM
Sorry, this is just 1) not a meaningful problem within currently existing games, to the best of my knowledge, and 2) so minor that even talking about it undercuts the whole "blockchain will revolutionize your life" theme.

If the best we can come up with is that it'll make World of Warcraft gold somewhat more fair (which is actually dubious in the first place), that's pathetic.

-W

That's very subjective. When amazon introduced online book orders, critics at the time didn't really perceive it as solving any meaningful problem.

Here's some examples of "centralized" gaming issues:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPTC-gJT1eM&feature=youtu.be (store removes rare cards and reseals package)
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/buyer-beware-2004-04-26
https://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-2472-i-made-obscene-money-forging-magic-gathering-cards.html
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/59p7qd/this-man-has-survived-by-hacking-mmo-online-games

How would blockchain apply to physical card games?   What's next blockchain Blackjack?  (Blockjack?) 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sveltino on March 26, 2019, 04:46:38 PM
Today [spam link removed] btc have 3946 as previous support become resistance (classic support and resistance ). This level also as Fibonacci 618 resistance.
If this level able to hold bullish , it will confirm bearish with a new lower target at 3807 (fibonacci 1.618)

This pattern still unconfirmed as bullish 3 drives, and it will complete as bullish 3 drives once we reach 3807 with target at 3982

*I already close my short at 3860, now i wait for new short around 3946 with target at 3807. (https://www.tradingview.com/i/spTlbON9/)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on March 26, 2019, 05:02:09 PM
Technical analysis and cryptocurrencies, all in one post? I feel like I win crackpot investing bingo.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: tralfamadorian on March 26, 2019, 05:34:15 PM
Technical analysis and cryptocurrencies, all in one post? I feel like I win crackpot investing bingo.

I know, right? What a bunch of shite.

Quote
Fibonacci 618 resistance
*snort
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: waltworks on March 26, 2019, 05:57:57 PM
Looks like something I could make with some peyote and MSpaint...

-W
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sol on March 26, 2019, 06:28:59 PM
Technical analysis and cryptocurrencies, all in one post? I feel like I win crackpot investing bingo.

Wait, you mean that post wasn't satire.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on March 26, 2019, 07:43:01 PM
I like the triangle and shit.  That's how you know the graph is totally serious.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: JAYSLOL on March 26, 2019, 07:54:42 PM
Technical analysis and cryptocurrencies, all in one post? I feel like I win crackpot investing bingo.

Don't forget it's from a first time poster, I think that does make it bingo.  Im surprised there wasn't a link to some kind of "sure thing crypto investment opportunity". 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: theolympians on March 27, 2019, 12:19:29 AM
I like the triangle and shit.  That's how you know the graph is totally serious.

"Triangle and shit", THAT is hilarious! I can't stop laughing.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: sherr on March 27, 2019, 06:33:27 AM
Holy cow. Does anyone anywhere actually take that word vomit seriously?

Edit: on second thought, I agree that this is clearly a troll account.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: forgerator on April 02, 2019, 05:40:55 PM
How do you like that short position now with the rise of flaming green 25% di$do from this morning? 😁

Today [spam link removed] btc have 3946 as previous support become resistance (classic support and resistance ). This level also as Fibonacci 618 resistance.
If this level able to hold bullish , it will confirm bearish with a new lower target at 3807 (fibonacci 1.618)

This pattern still unconfirmed as bullish 3 drives, and it will complete as bullish 3 drives once we reach 3807 with target at 3982

*I already close my short at 3860, now i wait for new short around 3946 with target at 3807. (https://www.tradingview.com/i/spTlbON9/)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: erjkism on May 13, 2019, 06:03:54 PM
bitcoin is back? Is this a good time to get in?
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on May 13, 2019, 08:39:18 PM
bitcoin is back? Is this a good time to get in?

No and no.   
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Stimpy on May 14, 2019, 07:33:34 AM
bitcoin is back? Is this a good time to get in?

It's back... to the 8k range.... still down over 50% from it's all time high.... So really, no, it's not.

Per a friend: "It's always a good time to get in, it's going to 200k a coin!!!!!!!@#$@#!$@@!@"   Me personally, I enjoy a good gamble here and there, BUT I want a chance to actually win.  How do you value bitcoin?  Answer: You can't.   So if you want to take a gamble with a real chance it's going to go to zero, sure get in.  Me, I think I'll stick to day trading stocks, it's safer.....   /Sarcasm
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BobTheBuilder on May 14, 2019, 03:25:42 PM
I mined 0.2 Ether out of curiosity. Let's see were the hype train number three goes. Remind to convert that into an extra ETF contribution once Ether hits 500€ /560$ again so I get the satisfaction of hitting a round number of 100€ for increasing my ETF contributions ahead of schedule.

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on May 15, 2019, 10:45:03 PM
I mined 0.2 Ether out of curiosity. Let's see were the hype train number three goes. Remind to convert that into an extra ETF contribution once Ether hits 500€ /560$ again so I get the satisfaction of hitting a round number of 100€ for increasing my ETF contributions ahead of schedule.

Just set an alarm for Tuesday.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on May 15, 2019, 11:29:30 PM
bitcoin is back? Is this a good time to get in?

It's back... to the 8k range.... still down over 50% from it's all time high.... So really, no, it's not.

That depends when you bought. My house got two of them for less than $500 each. Of course, we used half of it to actually buy stuff online.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on May 16, 2019, 07:40:15 AM
Yeah, by that logic Bre-X was a stunning investment too.  As long as you managed to use your crystal ball to buy at exactly the right time and sell at exactly the right time.  Easy peasy.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on May 16, 2019, 08:49:19 AM
Yeah, by that logic Bre-X was a stunning investment too.  As long as you managed to use your crystal ball to buy at exactly the right time and sell at exactly the right time.  Easy peasy.

That sort of volatility is also a pretty bad feature in a currency.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on May 16, 2019, 10:06:09 AM
I thought we established long ago that Bitcoin (and all the clones) are terrible for use as a currency.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on May 16, 2019, 10:36:12 AM
I thought we established long ago that Bitcoin (and all the clones) are terrible for use as a currency.

How long have they been around? I just got done reading David Graeber's Debt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt:_The_First_5000_Years) and I have been convinced that new financial instruments often have wildly fluctuating values. Just because cryptocurrency is a shit currency today doesn't mean that will hold true in 100 years.

I still prefer ETH and BTC to Venezuela Bolívars, which is to say that everything is relative.

Of course, that still doesn't make them a good investment.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: GuitarStv on May 16, 2019, 10:49:57 AM
Fair enough.  I guess we'll see what another decade of bitcoin brings.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on May 16, 2019, 10:54:04 AM
I thought we established long ago that Bitcoin (and all the clones) are terrible for use as a currency.

How long have they been around? I just got done reading David Graeber's Debt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt:_The_First_5000_Years) and I have been convinced that new financial instruments often have wildly fluctuating values. Just because cryptocurrency is a shit currency today doesn't mean that will hold true in 100 years.

I still prefer ETH and BTC to Venezuela Bolívars, which is to say that everything is relative.


I do too, but that's a pretty low bar.   At its peak BTC went from $20,000 down to about $4,000.   That's some impressive hyperinflation so matter how you slice it. 

There have been some efforts to create stable coins pegged to a fiat currency, which would solve a lot of problems, except for the problem that you are pegged to a fiat currency.  And of course, the peg can break.     


Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: runbikerun on May 17, 2019, 02:53:32 AM
I thought we established long ago that Bitcoin (and all the clones) are terrible for use as a currency.

How long have they been around? I just got done reading David Graeber's Debt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt:_The_First_5000_Years) and I have been convinced that new financial instruments often have wildly fluctuating values. Just because cryptocurrency is a shit currency today doesn't mean that will hold true in 100 years.

I still prefer ETH and BTC to Venezuela Bolívars, which is to say that everything is relative.

Of course, that still doesn't make them a good investment.

In fairness, comparing the best possible cryptocoins to the single worst case of hyperinflation in recorded history doesn't exactly give an accurate picture. The Turkish lira had a horrific 2018, to the extent that the IMF almost came in and the economy came quite close to melting down, and it still had a better year than Bitcoin. If you live in a country with a reasonably diversified economy and a competent system of government, or if you have access to the currency of such a country, you're better off with that than with any cryptocoin.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: PDXTabs on May 17, 2019, 10:23:14 AM
In fairness, comparing the best possible cryptocoins...

They're the ones I own. Well, that and a tiny bit of XMR. All of my ETH and XMR was mined, and all of my BTC was purchased to use in commerce.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on May 31, 2019, 09:09:18 PM
If anyone is interested in learning about the use cases for blockchain technology in business, you might find this presentation from Paul Brody interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxyqBcAxUg0&

Brody is the blockchain lead for Ernst & Young (EY). EY recently released an open source protocol for making private transactions on the public Ethereum blockchain. You can read about that here if you're interested: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ey-open-sources-nightfall-code-142024265.html

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on June 13, 2019, 01:36:35 PM
More news today from Google.

Building hybrid blockchain/cloud applications with Ethereum and Google Cloud (https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/data-analytics/building-hybrid-blockchain-cloud-applications-with-ethereum-and-google-cloud)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Paul990 on June 19, 2019, 12:53:05 PM
There have been some efforts to create stable coins pegged to a fiat currency, which would solve a lot of problems, except for the problem that you are pegged to a fiat currency.  And of course, the peg can break.   
The peg can't break as long as the stablecoin is 100% backed.
Fiat-backed stablecoins are not the only ones, there are stablecoins pegged to commodities too
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Telecaster on June 19, 2019, 02:09:33 PM
There have been some efforts to create stable coins pegged to a fiat currency, which would solve a lot of problems, except for the problem that you are pegged to a fiat currency.  And of course, the peg can break.   
The peg can't break as long as the stablecoin is 100% backed.
Fiat-backed stablecoins are not the only ones, there are stablecoins pegged to commodities too

It raises the question though, if the stablecoin is 100% backed, what do you need the stablecoin for?   It raises another question, who makes sure the backing is really there and available?  And is it even really backed?  For example, Tether states “no guarantee any right of redemption or exchange of Tethers by us for money.”   So it is backed, unless it isn't. 

And stablecoin pegs have broken in the past. 

If you want a decentralized ledger, that's a good reason for blockchain.  But you don't need a token for that. 
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on June 19, 2019, 04:24:32 PM
More news today.

https://blog.cloudflare.com/cloudflare-ethereum-gateway/

Basically you're going to have fully decentralized websites.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: thenextguy on June 19, 2019, 05:20:28 PM
Whoops...missed this one. It's getting harder to keep up.

MetLife Plans To Disrupt $2.7 Trillion Life Insurance Industry Using Ethereum Blockchain (https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenehrlich/2019/06/19/metlife-plans-to-disrupt-2-7-trillion-life-insurance-industry-using-ethereum-blockchain/#74798ae62770)
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: BattlaP on June 19, 2019, 06:44:49 PM
It's easier to keep up when you realise that none of these 'pilot programs' never amount to any competitive advantage for the company and therefore never amount to anything.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Paul990 on June 20, 2019, 04:45:15 AM
There have been some efforts to create stable coins pegged to a fiat currency, which would solve a lot of problems, except for the problem that you are pegged to a fiat currency.  And of course, the peg can break.   
The peg can't break as long as the stablecoin is 100% backed.
Fiat-backed stablecoins are not the only ones, there are stablecoins pegged to commodities too

It raises the question though, if the stablecoin is 100% backed, what do you need the stablecoin for?   It raises another question, who makes sure the backing is really there and available?  And is it even really backed?  For example, Tether states “no guarantee any right of redemption or exchange of Tethers by us for money.”   

"If the stablecoin is 100% backed, what do you need the stablecoin for?"
If the major point of cryptos is that of representing an alternative to fiat money, then fiat-backed cryptos have indeed no major point.
Nonetheless Stablecoins offer some benefits vs. traditional money transactions.
They are the same benefits offered by all cryptos in general, due to the technology they are based on (blockchain).
As for a layman like me, the benefits I can reach an understanding of are these:

1. Transactions
In traditional business dealings, brokers, agents, and legal representatives can add significant complication and expense to what should otherwise be a straightforward transaction. There’s paperwork, brokerage fees, commissions, and any number of other special conditions which may apply.
One of the advantages of cryptocurrency transactions is that they are one-to-one affairs, taking place on a peer-to-peer networking structure that makes “cutting out the middle man” a standard practice. This leads to greater clarity in establishing audit trails, less confusion over who should pay what to whom, and greater accountability, in that the two parties involved in a transaction each know who they are.

2. More Confidential Transactions
Under cash/credit systems, your entire transaction history may become a reference document for the bank or credit agency involved, each time you make a transaction. At the simplest level, this might involve a check on your account balances, to ensure that sufficient funds are available. For more complex or business-critical transactions, a more thorough examination of your financial history might be required.
Another one of the great advantages of cryptocurrency is that each transaction you make is a unique exchange between two parties, the terms of which may be negotiated and agreed in each case. What’s more, the exchange of information is done on a “push” basis, whereby you can transmit exactly what you wish to send to the recipient – and nothing besides that.
This guards the privacy of your financial history and protects you from the threat of account or identity theft which is greater under the traditional system, where your information may be exposed at any point in the transaction chain.

3. Greater Access to Credit
Digital data transfer and the internet are the media facilitating the exchange in cryptocurrencies. So these services are potentially available to anyone who has a viable data connection, some knowledge of the cryptocurrency networks on offer, and ready access to their relevant websites and portals.
It’s estimated that there are currently 2.2 billion individuals across the world who have access to the Internet or mobile phones, but don’t currently have access to traditional systems of banking or exchange. The cryptocurrency ecosystem holds the potential to make asset transfer and transaction processing available to this vast market of willing consumers – once the required infrastructure (digital and regulatory) is put in place.

4. Individual Ownership
In a traditional banking or credit card system, you effectively turn stewardship of your funds over to a third party that can exercise the power of life or death over your assets. Accounts may be closed without notice for infringements of a financial institution’s Terms of Service – requiring you as the account holder to jump through hoops in order to get yourself back into the system.
Perhaps the greatest of all advantages of cryptocurrency is that unless you’ve delegated management of your wallet over to a third party service, you are the sole owner of the corresponding private and public encryption keys that make up your cryptocurrency network identity or address.

5. Strong Security
Once a cryptocurrency transfer has been authorized, it can’t be reversed as in the case of the “charge-back” transactions allowed by credit card companies. This is a hedge against fraud which requires a specific agreement to be made between a buyer and seller regarding refunds in the event of a mistake or returns policy.
Finally, the strong encryption techniques employed throughout the distributed ledger (blockchain) and cryptocurrency transaction processes are a safeguard against fraud and account tampering, and guarantors of consumer privacy.

https://blog.finjan.com/advantages-of-cryptocurrency/
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Paul990 on June 20, 2019, 04:53:31 AM
It raises the question though, if the stablecoin is 100% backed, what do you need the stablecoin for?   It raises another question, who makes sure the backing is really there and available?  And is it even really backed?
Third party audits, on a regular basis, through an internationally renown auditing company, e.g. Bureau Veritas.

For example, Tether states “no guarantee any right of redemption or exchange of Tethers by us for money.”
The first two things to look at, in order to judge a x-backed stablecoin project, are a) independent auditing, and b) redemption option, the possibility of converting the coins for what they represent.
b) is particularly important in case of precious metals-backed Stablecoins.
Without a) and b), hands off
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: erjkism on December 26, 2020, 07:40:01 PM
bitcoin is back? Is this a good time to get in?

No and no.

prescient advice, thank you
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: forgerator on December 26, 2020, 08:53:03 PM
Nobody can predict the future. Any person who tells you not to buy something just because, don't know jack shit.
It's getting really tiring to see all the btc haters bash it when it's down, writing it off as a bubble that will burst to $0. Well it's been 12 yrs and it is showing no sign of slowing down.  One can continue to justify reason for not investing in it because its an energy drain, or it's a money laundering tool, or it has no intrinsic value, but guess what. The market thinks otherwise.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: Syonyk on December 26, 2020, 09:47:48 PM
I was wondering if this thread would pop back up again as BTC sails past $26k USD/BTC and keeps climbing...

It's getting really tiring to see all the btc haters bash it when it's down, writing it off as a bubble that will burst to $0.

If it's high, it's a speculative bubble, pyramid scheme (I guess that's a term you call things that you don't understand that people are making money on?), tulip mania, etc.  If it's low, well, laugh at all the losers who bought into it and put their life's savings in it back when it was $500 or $1000 or something...  And if it's stable, well, it's boring, why bother, can't get rich quick on something stable.  Of course, there's also the problem that it uses more energy than the world generates (based on extrapolating the current hash rate on GPU efficiency numbers), is only used for drugs and crime, and... honestly, I don't even read any articles on mainstream tech sites about Bitcoin, because it's utterly predictable and that's before you hit the comment threads.

I can't figure out how much is people being misinformed, how much is well informed dislike, and how much is just sour grapes.

Quote
The market thinks otherwise.

It certainly seems to.  And the "buy a few, put the keys somewhere safe, and forget about them..." approach to it seems to have been some pretty solid advice in years past.  I've certainly known people who dealt with plenty of bitcoin and just had itchy fingers, just couldn't stand the concept of putting some aside for a long hold.  Which, admittedly, does describe their more general approach to finances as well...
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on December 27, 2020, 12:41:31 PM
The real FOMO hasn't started yet.  I don't think we are anywhere near the 2017 level of awareness of the Bitcoin climb as of this writing.  I'm still very bullish on the short term future of Bitcoin.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: forgerator on December 27, 2020, 04:31:35 PM
The real FOMO hasn't started yet.  I don't think we are anywhere near the 2017 level of awareness of the Bitcoin climb as of this writing.  I'm still very bullish on the short term future of Bitcoin.

Correct. Based on the 4 year boom/bust btc cycle this is equivalent of 2016. More people are aware of it this time around but still not able to grasp the notion of it being a store of value which competes with gold. To them it is a fake, energy sapping asset used for illegal activities and they will continue to convince themselves of it until the point it is 400k/coin.
Wait till pension funds / 401k plans start auto investing into this. I doubt anyone could say at that point that they don't invest in it.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on December 27, 2020, 08:24:35 PM
The real FOMO hasn't started yet.  I don't think we are anywhere near the 2017 level of awareness of the Bitcoin climb as of this writing.  I'm still very bullish on the short term future of Bitcoin.

Correct. Based on the 4 year boom/bust btc cycle this is equivalent of 2016. More people are aware of it this time around but still not able to grasp the notion of it being a store of value which competes with gold. To them it is a fake, energy sapping asset used for illegal activities and they will continue to convince themselves of it until the point it is 400k/coin.
Wait till pension funds / 401k plans start auto investing into this. I doubt anyone could say at that point that they don't invest in it.

People in 2017 saw the trend a mile away but timing was soul crushing due to the massive gains leading up to the crash.  I didn’t sell enough due to greed but I stopped buying around $4k due to the trend.  I think history will repeat itself in 2021.  Lots of bitcoiners say this run will be different due to institutional investors.  I don’t know but I’ve stopped buying BTC for now (despite being very very bullish on the short term).  I’m very risk adverse.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on December 28, 2020, 11:35:25 AM
I've done very limited speculation in Crypto.

Haven't completely worked out the accounting, but over 2018-summer of this year, I was probably about $400 in the hole.

Beginning with the 10/31 pay-cheque, I've been rebuilding a position, which is still small. Every pay-check, I put enough in to get to the next value using the price at the time. Lately, gains in price mean my purchases have been smaller, and--if it really runs ahead--I may pull some out this Thursday.

I think this is the best way to deal with the volatility while slowly increasing my stake.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: seattlecyclone on December 28, 2020, 08:16:07 PM
I was wondering if this thread would pop back up again as BTC sails past $26k USD/BTC and keeps climbing...

It's getting really tiring to see all the btc haters bash it when it's down, writing it off as a bubble that will burst to $0.

If it's high, it's a speculative bubble, pyramid scheme (I guess that's a term you call things that you don't understand that people are making money on?), tulip mania, etc.  If it's low, well, laugh at all the losers who bought into it and put their life's savings in it back when it was $500 or $1000 or something...  And if it's stable, well, it's boring, why bother, can't get rich quick on something stable.  Of course, there's also the problem that it uses more energy than the world generates (based on extrapolating the current hash rate on GPU efficiency numbers), is only used for drugs and crime, and... honestly, I don't even read any articles on mainstream tech sites about Bitcoin, because it's utterly predictable and that's before you hit the comment threads.

I can't figure out how much is people being misinformed, how much is well informed dislike, and how much is just sour grapes.

I definitely don't consider myself misinformed. I've read Satoshi's original paper. I mined a couple BTC (and a few other coins) back in 2011. I used some in online transactions, sold some, still hold some. The amount of cryptocurrency I still own has recently crept back up to about 2% of my net worth, and I really don't know how I should feel about that. I don't think "well informed dislike" applies to me either. I don't dislike cryptocurrency at all! I definitely see the utility in a technology that allows for financial transactions outside the traditional corporate/government-controlled banking system.

At the same time, I have no earthly idea what a bitcoin should be worth. Why $26,000 and not $26 million or just $26? The blockchain network is just as useful for money transfers regardless of how many zeroes are in the number. And why this particular blockchain implementation? The proof of work aspect of the BTC protocol is incredibly energy inefficient. Another network that can perform the same decentralized transaction recording function with less resource usage should by all rights supplant BTC in time. For these reasons I really can't recommend that someone should "invest" in BTC. The price seems largely made up. I'll probably keep hodling what I have because I have no need or desire to realize a big capital gain right now, but there's no way I'm going to go out and buy more either. Maybe I'll see if I can take advantage of this new spike/bubble/whatever to transfer it to my DAF account.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: forgerator on December 29, 2020, 09:05:18 AM
I've done very limited speculation in Crypto.

Haven't completely worked out the accounting, but over 2018-summer of this year, I was probably about $400 in the hole.

Beginning with the 10/31 pay-cheque, I've been rebuilding a position, which is still small. Every pay-check, I put enough in to get to the next value using the price at the time. Lately, gains in price mean my purchases have been smaller, and--if it really runs ahead--I may pull some out this Thursday.

I think this is the best way to deal with the volatility while slowly increasing my stake.

Agreed. I was in the hole around 5k on ethereum back in 2018, having foolishly bought a majority of the coins around the $1k mark. After that I slowly started DCAing, buying minor amounts at dips, fast forward 2020 I am now up 15k on my overall Ethereum investment.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: talltexan on January 05, 2021, 08:56:41 AM
I was so meticulous with my accounting while I was losing money during CY 2018.

I haven't paid attention at all during the last 3 months, except to look at the price--not even logging into my account--and feel smug.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: billy on January 16, 2021, 01:34:22 PM
Can you still buy USDT in the USA?

Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: onecoolcat on January 16, 2021, 05:25:31 PM
Can you still buy USDT in the USA?

Yeah, but why would you want to buy USDT?  Its probably a scam.
Title: Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
Post by: billy on January 16, 2021, 09:01:42 PM
ya....but blockfi is offering a bit more interest than USDC.