4 ms·

The tulip derivative bubble lasted for a few months; beanie babies were a year or two at most. Bitcoin is over ten years old. Do you have any examples of a bub

The tulip derivative bubble lasted for a few months; beanie babies were a year or two at most. Bitcoin is over ten years old. Do you have any examples of a bubble which - lasted more than 5 years - recovered from previous drops in value of more than 50 %? What kind of evidence would convince you that bitcoin were different from these past bubbles?

andrewmcwatters 6y ago
The dot-com bubble played out over a decade. Bitcoin’s price history has only been significant for 3 years. It otherwise looked like any other penny asset.
- vmception 6y ago
  > It otherwise looked like any other penny asset. Before 3 years ago, it wouldn't have looked like "any other penny asset" it would have had a similar chart as now because its prior booms and busts 3 years prior to that all had similar degrees of amplitude. Just zoom in on a chart and pretend that it is summer 2017 with no future price history available, just like all the traders at the time had. Regarding "penny asset" again, in price 3 years ago and 6 years ago Bitcoin would have been hundreds of dollars, which is not like penny assets, and even if comparing "penny stocks" to a digital commodity the marketcap of bitcoin 3 even 6 years ago would be greater than 99.9% of anything in the penny stock markets (bulletin boards, pink sheets), of which - of course - commodities and commodities derivative do not trade on. You speak in hyperbole for emphasis and that's generally fine, but that only works if you know what you are talking about and it is pretty clear you just conflate concepts over and over again. Its fine if you personally don't want to or don't have the risk profile to be in this market, yes you are missing a lot of alpha from sitting on the sidelines. No, you don't have any insight to support you sitting on the sidelines. But again, it is a completely valid choice to do so.
  - andrewmcwatters 6y ago
    You’re seeking some deeper meaning here than one that exists. It’s supposed to be a currency. And yet it’s not. It doesn’t exhibit any of the traits of a currency I’d want to spend at least. Maybe you’re OK with that, so have fun. It’s fundamental existence doesn’t work for me.
    - vmception 6y ago
      > It’s supposed to be a currency. And yet it’s not. It doesn’t exhibit any of the traits of a currency I’d want to spend at least. ah that argument, I read that recently, those are skeumorphs, here is a quote > When it comes to this asset class, there are still people that argue against the concept of Bitcoin, mostly in reaction to one of its sales pitches without ever noticing what this really is. For example, people are likely to debate about the “coin” or “currency” nomenclature of “bitcoin” and “cryptocurrency” respectively. Ultimately, what we have is an asset with a fixed known supply, which has some attributes of all other asset classes, some improvements, is continually updated to have more attributes and improvements, in a world with massive inflation. This is the macro story of bitcoin, the big picture. You might begin to notice that I use the term "digital asset" and "crypto" in its new asset-based context very reliably. It can be transferred peer to peer and I frequently do that, I don't use the term currency and I typically don't single bitcoin out specifically as I'm not usually talking about bitcoin specifically.
      - andrewmcwatters 6y ago
        The creator was trying to make “electronic cash” that evaded central banking manipulation from what I can tell. Except there’s a fixed supply. There isn’t a fixed supply of value in the world.
        vmception 6y ago
        That is correct, there are a lot of things as well as incomplete features in the first versions of bitcoin that were deprecated by the open source community, some of it while in ongoing communication with Satoshi Nakamoto. One of the strengths of this asset class is that it has no static limitations, while any improvements to its core concept must reach overwhelming consensus otherwise it debilitates the entire system. The amendment ratification process has a long lead time, even when it is not politicized. The current Taproot and Schnoor amendments actually improve the "electronic cash" feature set, and has signaling consensus already but they must signal for I think 6-12 months before the nodes start updating their software. Hopefully wallets and exchanges use this time to implement the technology as default for the users (but they won't, human nature)
- lowdest 6y ago
  3 years to whom? I've been following the price since the first "bubble" up to $200, in early 2013.
  - vmception 6y ago
    That one from one dollar to $32 is the best of all time
personlurking 6y ago
>Bitcoin is over ten years old. Plus the Lindy effect. If it's lasted 10 yrs, it's likely to last another 10.

andrewmcwatters 6y ago

The dot-com bubble played out over a decade. Bitcoin’s price history has only been significant for 3 years. It otherwise looked like any other penny asset.

vmception 6y ago
> It otherwise looked like any other penny asset. Before 3 years ago, it wouldn't have looked like "any other penny asset" it would have had a similar chart as now because its prior booms and busts 3 years prior to that all had similar degrees of amplitude. Just zoom in on a chart and pretend that it is summer 2017 with no future price history available, just like all the traders at the time had. Regarding "penny asset" again, in price 3 years ago and 6 years ago Bitcoin would have been hundreds of dollars, which is not like penny assets, and even if comparing "penny stocks" to a digital commodity the marketcap of bitcoin 3 even 6 years ago would be greater than 99.9% of anything in the penny stock markets (bulletin boards, pink sheets), of which - of course - commodities and commodities derivative do not trade on. You speak in hyperbole for emphasis and that's generally fine, but that only works if you know what you are talking about and it is pretty clear you just conflate concepts over and over again. Its fine if you personally don't want to or don't have the risk profile to be in this market, yes you are missing a lot of alpha from sitting on the sidelines. No, you don't have any insight to support you sitting on the sidelines. But again, it is a completely valid choice to do so.
- andrewmcwatters 6y ago
  You’re seeking some deeper meaning here than one that exists. It’s supposed to be a currency. And yet it’s not. It doesn’t exhibit any of the traits of a currency I’d want to spend at least. Maybe you’re OK with that, so have fun. It’s fundamental existence doesn’t work for me.
  - vmception 6y ago
    > It’s supposed to be a currency. And yet it’s not. It doesn’t exhibit any of the traits of a currency I’d want to spend at least. ah that argument, I read that recently, those are skeumorphs, here is a quote > When it comes to this asset class, there are still people that argue against the concept of Bitcoin, mostly in reaction to one of its sales pitches without ever noticing what this really is. For example, people are likely to debate about the “coin” or “currency” nomenclature of “bitcoin” and “cryptocurrency” respectively. Ultimately, what we have is an asset with a fixed known supply, which has some attributes of all other asset classes, some improvements, is continually updated to have more attributes and improvements, in a world with massive inflation. This is the macro story of bitcoin, the big picture. You might begin to notice that I use the term "digital asset" and "crypto" in its new asset-based context very reliably. It can be transferred peer to peer and I frequently do that, I don't use the term currency and I typically don't single bitcoin out specifically as I'm not usually talking about bitcoin specifically.
    - andrewmcwatters 6y ago
      The creator was trying to make “electronic cash” that evaded central banking manipulation from what I can tell. Except there’s a fixed supply. There isn’t a fixed supply of value in the world.
      - vmception 6y ago
        That is correct, there are a lot of things as well as incomplete features in the first versions of bitcoin that were deprecated by the open source community, some of it while in ongoing communication with Satoshi Nakamoto. One of the strengths of this asset class is that it has no static limitations, while any improvements to its core concept must reach overwhelming consensus otherwise it debilitates the entire system. The amendment ratification process has a long lead time, even when it is not politicized. The current Taproot and Schnoor amendments actually improve the "electronic cash" feature set, and has signaling consensus already but they must signal for I think 6-12 months before the nodes start updating their software. Hopefully wallets and exchanges use this time to implement the technology as default for the users (but they won't, human nature)
lowdest 6y ago
3 years to whom? I've been following the price since the first "bubble" up to $200, in early 2013.
- vmception 6y ago
  That one from one dollar to $32 is the best of all time

personlurking 6y ago

>Bitcoin is over ten years old. Plus the Lindy effect. If it's lasted 10 yrs, it's likely to last another 10.