6 ms·

Just like a bunch of pump and dumps... before they went down for the last time. I’m not taking a stand on crypto here, just pointing out a logical fallacy, nam

Just like a bunch of pump and dumps... before they went down for the last time. I’m not taking a stand on crypto here, just pointing out a logical fallacy, namely, the data is incomplete and we don’t know the future.

travoc 5y ago
We’re on year 13 of a pump and dump?
- mmastrac 5y ago
  The South Sea company bubble in the 1700s (arguably a similar circumstance) was ~9 years in, if I'm correct in my math. Tulip bubble was ~40 years in.
  - reginold 5y ago
    Tulip Mania: the classic story of a Dutch financial bubble is mostly wrong: https://theconversation.com/tulip-mania-the-classic-story-of-a-dutch-financial-bubble-is-mostly-wrong-91413 https://theconversation.com/tulip-mania-the-classic-story-of...
    - mmastrac 5y ago
      While the story itself might be inflated, it still shows that a bubble doesn't have to be at the start of the market. And the South Sea company collapse far beyond its founding _definitely_ had ramifications.
      - exdsq 5y ago
        I don't know if you read that link or have read elsewhere on the topic but modern economists argue the tulip mania thing wasn't even a bubble and if it was, it was far smaller than you probably assume. Even the wikipedia page covers these topics quite nicely.
  - lancemurdock 5y ago
    the tulip bubble lasted like 8 months
  - kjksf 5y ago
    According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania it was more like 3 years: "contract prices for some bulbs of the recently introduced and fashionable tulip reached extraordinarily high levels, with the major acceleration starting in 1634 and then dramatically collapsing in February 1637"
    - mmastrac 5y ago
      From the same page -- the Tulip market didn't start at the time of the bubble. Their popularity and cultivation in the United Provinces (now the Netherlands)[32] is generally thought to have started in earnest around 1593 after the Southern Netherlandish botanist Carolus Clusius had taken up a post at the University of Leiden and established the hortus academicus
- protoax 5y ago
  The dot-com bubble lasted around 10 years, increasing almost exponentially in the last 2-3. Subsequently dropped 80% and took 15 years to return to those prices.
  - exdsq 5y ago
    So it did return?
    - deadbolt 5y ago
      Depends on how you define 'it'. The stock market? Sure. It didn't for Cisco.
  - reginold 5y ago
    Once NASDAQ reached $5,000 dot-com prices in 2015 it tripled to $15,000 over the following 5 years.
exdsq 5y ago
At what point does that stop being a logical fallacy? We’re on year 13, is it year 30? 50? If there’s no end date then this can be said about everything and is therefore not a fallacy.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- reginold 5y ago
  If we take the USD as an example: 1. Created in 1792 2. Gold standard in 1900 3. Abandoned gold in 1971 Not sure at what point USD was no longer a logical fallacy. If it's the 1971 non-gold-standard dollar to now, then it's exactly 50 years as of now. Or for the full history of the dollar it's 229 years.
reginold 5y ago
Yeah I have these same concerns about the US dollar. People are like "oh but it's so stable yada yada". At most it's been that way since WW2. It's not THAT long. A blip in the history of human civilization at best.
tomcooks 5y ago
You do take a stand with your pumpdump comment, BTC is behaving differently and has been doing this for quite a long time so I don't really see similarities with shcoin scams
orena 5y ago
There is no logical fallacy, I did not said that it will continue to go up more that it goes down, I just said that history shows...

travoc 5y ago

We’re on year 13 of a pump and dump?

mmastrac 5y ago
The South Sea company bubble in the 1700s (arguably a similar circumstance) was ~9 years in, if I'm correct in my math. Tulip bubble was ~40 years in.
- reginold 5y ago
  Tulip Mania: the classic story of a Dutch financial bubble is mostly wrong: https://theconversation.com/tulip-mania-the-classic-story-of-a-dutch-financial-bubble-is-mostly-wrong-91413 https://theconversation.com/tulip-mania-the-classic-story-of...
  - mmastrac 5y ago
    While the story itself might be inflated, it still shows that a bubble doesn't have to be at the start of the market. And the South Sea company collapse far beyond its founding _definitely_ had ramifications.
    - exdsq 5y ago
      I don't know if you read that link or have read elsewhere on the topic but modern economists argue the tulip mania thing wasn't even a bubble and if it was, it was far smaller than you probably assume. Even the wikipedia page covers these topics quite nicely.
- lancemurdock 5y ago
  the tulip bubble lasted like 8 months
- kjksf 5y ago
  According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania it was more like 3 years: "contract prices for some bulbs of the recently introduced and fashionable tulip reached extraordinarily high levels, with the major acceleration starting in 1634 and then dramatically collapsing in February 1637"
  - mmastrac 5y ago
    From the same page -- the Tulip market didn't start at the time of the bubble. Their popularity and cultivation in the United Provinces (now the Netherlands)[32] is generally thought to have started in earnest around 1593 after the Southern Netherlandish botanist Carolus Clusius had taken up a post at the University of Leiden and established the hortus academicus
protoax 5y ago
The dot-com bubble lasted around 10 years, increasing almost exponentially in the last 2-3. Subsequently dropped 80% and took 15 years to return to those prices.
- exdsq 5y ago
  So it did return?
  - deadbolt 5y ago
    Depends on how you define 'it'. The stock market? Sure. It didn't for Cisco.
- reginold 5y ago
  Once NASDAQ reached $5,000 dot-com prices in 2015 it tripled to $15,000 over the following 5 years.

exdsq 5y ago

At what point does that stop being a logical fallacy? We’re on year 13, is it year 30? 50? If there’s no end date then this can be said about everything and is therefore not a fallacy.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
reginold 5y ago
If we take the USD as an example: 1. Created in 1792 2. Gold standard in 1900 3. Abandoned gold in 1971 Not sure at what point USD was no longer a logical fallacy. If it's the 1971 non-gold-standard dollar to now, then it's exactly 50 years as of now. Or for the full history of the dollar it's 229 years.

reginold 5y ago

Yeah I have these same concerns about the US dollar. People are like "oh but it's so stable yada yada". At most it's been that way since WW2. It's not THAT long. A blip in the history of human civilization at best.

tomcooks 5y ago

You do take a stand with your pumpdump comment, BTC is behaving differently and has been doing this for quite a long time so I don't really see similarities with shcoin scams

orena 5y ago

There is no logical fallacy, I did not said that it will continue to go up more that it goes down, I just said that history shows...