Quote from: nutildah on March 24, 2018, 12:39:28 AM

Quote from: exstasie on March 24, 2018, 12:16:51 AM

"Its essence is digital?" If I say the essence of gold is metal, does that tell you something about how the gold market moves? I don't think so. What does it have to do with anything? The nature of Bitcoin is not changing all the time.

Actually it is. Recently a new version of Core was released that contained some upgrades that helped scale bitcoin and reduce tx fees.

How does that change the "nature of Bitcoin?" A new version may affect the network's prospects for scale and adoption (fundamentals), the perception of which affects supply and demand. So what? Like all markets, everything boils down to supply and demand.

Quote from: nutildah on March 24, 2018, 12:39:28 AM

Quote from: exstasie on March 24, 2018, 12:16:51 AM

Why would it be immune to market dynamics, the understanding of which underpins TA?

For most of its history it wasn't and its rise has been uniquely spectacular. However, when the price goes higher, the ave tx fee is bound to simultaneously increase, due to people shelling out more BTC to speed through a transaction. Trading stocks and bonds and commodities doesn't work this way. Most trade brokers offer a flat trading fee -- it doesn't change with the price of the security being traded.not meant for speculation. Then again, most things that are traded aren't.

If transaction fees rise over time, why does it follow that TA doesn't apply to Bitcoin?

If stock brokers have flat fees, why does it follow that TA doesn't apply to Bitcoin?

Quote from: nutildah on March 24, 2018, 12:39:28 AM

Quote from: exstasie on March 24, 2018, 12:16:51 AM

Take a chart of median/average transaction fees paid over time. Then lay the chart over a Bitcoin price chart for the same period.

Seems like the opposite is true. As fees rise, so does Bitcoin's price.

Okay so I did what you asked. BTC reached its all-time high on 12-10-17. The all-time high for fees was on 12-20. So what was your point again?

Um, peaking only 10 days apart just proves my point.

Both fees and price significantly trended upwards throughout 2017.
After both fees and price peaked in December, they trended downwards throughout 2018.

You argued that fees had a negative correlation to price. Any data to support that? Because you're ignoring an obvious and established correlation which suggests the opposite.

Quote from: nutildah on March 24, 2018, 12:39:28 AM

Anybody can read anything however they want to and make a compelling argument for their prediction. I believe bitcoin's upward potential is limited by an increasing non-competitiveness in transaction fees, which means its intrinsic value morphs according to its price, or adjustments made to the Core client.

You're saying that demand is limited by fees. I get it. The idea is not intuitively wrong if Bitcoin's only value is cheap fees (I disagree). Anyway, I was just pointing out that the evidence isn't there.

Quote from: nutildah on March 24, 2018, 12:39:28 AM

That's why its different from anything that's ever been traded before: first of all, unlike most things that are traded, it was built to be traded.

No it wasn't. It was built to remove trusted third parties from financial transactions.