Quote from: nullius on December 19, 2017, 02:36:52 AM

Quote from: BlackRock on December 19, 2017, 01:47:24 AM

10000x or some X times is to make my point of abnormal growth ..with some exaggeration
I am not against bitcoin,but the rogue manipulators/traders who will do more harm to bitcoins, than good

You can not compare amazon to bitcoin..
Amazon is regulated and do not pose any threat to Govt..where crypto currencies are opposite
(I am not against bitcoins or blockchain or the technology ..bit against speculative trading)

Fair enough. In principle, I am also against speculative trading; though I certainly do not complain about appreciation of my bitcoins value! I am in Bitcoin primarily for reasons of ideology. I know full well that not every person in the entire world can get rich by applying some magic formula, ICO scammers advertisements to the contrary notwithstanding.

But 10x20x growth in the course of a year is not ipso facto indicative of a bubble. Its unusual, to be sure. Still, in growth per time, thats five orders of magnitude different from 10000x in a fortnight. Again, the comparison to Amazon applies: The major web companies, the ones which survived the 2000 shake-out, have had points where they experienced >10x actual growth in a year. Had Amazon grown 10000x in two weekswell, there would no longer be any such company.

I do share your concern about certain apparent political collision courses, perhaps inevitable. Thats why I try to inform people about the historical incidence when gold was banned for four decades in the U.S. But rapid growth of the Bitcoin market enhances its robustness against such potential attacks; whereas comparisons to tulips seem only to befit calls for instant regulation, to protect people from themselves.

I also dont think that regulatory concerns negate the comparison to Amazon. Amazon also faced regulatory concerns, such as the enmity of states which were losing sales tax. On this, they eventually joined the enemy, so to speak. I hope the analogy is not too perfect here.

If you have a large holding from 2011, then just enjoy it and support Bitcoins further development and social acceptance. This last is important, because Bitcoin is more than a technology: Bitcoin and its value are a sociological phenomenon. As the latter, Bitcoin does have an excellent prospect for surmounting all obstacles and becoming ubiquitous. If that happens, then in ten years, $20k/BTC will look like your 2011 exchange rates. Calling for smugness about tulip bulbs cuts in the opposite direction; it hampers social acceptance. Its just cheap FUD. If youre such a long-time Bitcoiner, I think you can do better than that!

Quote from: Andre_Goldman on December 19, 2017, 02:13:13 AM

somehow ( I am think as scientist ) all that debate about growth reminds me 'machine learning' and the famous "Iris flower data set" ...

Interesting thought. I will need to chew on that one for awhile. Thanks.

Quote from: Andre_Goldman on December 19, 2017, 02:13:13 AM

ps-> nullius how did you get a PGP Ed25519: 0xC .... ?

GnuPG supports ECC since version 2.1. Requires options `--full-gen-key --expert` (or noninteractive key generation as I used). NIST and Brainpool curves are supported; but also: For many people the NIST and also the Brainpool curves have an doubtful origin and thus the plan for GnuPG is to use Bernsteins Curve 25519 as default. GnuPG 2.1.0 already comes with support for signing keys using the Ed25519 variant of this curve. This has not yet been standardized by the IETF (i.e. there is no RFC) but we wont wait any longer....

Much PGP software does not yet support my Curve25519 keys. My .sig reminds me of the 90s, when people had both PGP2/PGP5 keys. In the mass market, interestingly, Keybase can use my ECC keys just fine. Im not sure if thats a good thing.

(Apologies for the offtopic discussion. Its an important issue, especially when asked by a GnuPG supporter!)

yep, I follow a bit the cypherpunk list on Curve255 ... when I asked was because I was kind more interested on the hardware that generate that curve ( I also do Apologies for the 'offtopic' ( of course related to bitcoin it is not 'off topic' at all )

The were on question on why distrust RSA....

btw nice to review Ron Rivest, co-inventor of RSA
"RSA-129" posed a challenge experts said would take 40 quadrillion years to solve - but took 17....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQw124CtvO0

Wink

Featuring Ron Rivest, co-inventor of RSA