Quote from: AnonyMint on December 03, 2013, 07:09:18 PM

Bitcoin's only intrinsic value is confidence.

Flash crashes (and note this recent one was planned along with a DNS DoS against this forum) could serve two purposes at least if I am correct about who created Bitcoin and their ultimate objective:

1. Condition Bitcoiners to try to trade because they don't have more cash flow to buy more with on next flash crash then their BTC declines as they sell lower than they rebuy.

2. Condition those with cash flow to become more fully invested in the ponzi bubble.

This will further the purpose of destroying the libertarian, free market resistance to the NWO.

This will be a problem as long as there are humans who do not make decisions in line with Perfect Rationality. (If we made decisions as a species that were Superrational, perhaps we wouldn't need exchanges at all.) Simply using past data and holding the currency prevents a flash crash from becoming more than a blip. Out of principle I wait to sell during a flash crash a decent bit past what could normally be considered normal trading blip, even in the event of obvious coordinated DDOS events across bitcoinland, but I cannot force users to behave superrationally, so at that point (having satisfied my morality) I will exercise my own attempt at Perfect Rationality and acquire more coins.

Even still, the events we have seen indicate a trend toward stability where this is less effective each successive time. Since my interpretation of the economic variables using game theory indicates that large holders cannot cash out back to fiat in less than perhaps several years, the only remaining thing to do will be to invest and participate in the Bitcoin economy. I also believe that the economy only grows less top-heavy as time progresses (asymptotically approaching what I expect will approximate a Pareto distribution), and even with some initial consolidation of wealth, which will naturally occur because of the adoption model during the bottom half of the adoption s-curve, the only option for these lucky few is for this to be held, or sold to those who want it.

Aside: A great study source for technology adoption models, since that was contested upthread, is here: http://personal.stevens.edu/~ysakamot/BIA658/man/week13/innovationdiffusion.pdf
Also here for thread posterity: https://mega.co.nz/#!5QsyELAQ!QPviZmp3MtOfppiYLmHreD7FtKAXfFmS-XJKDix1HFU

Since the creation of a wealthy elite in Bitcoin can only serve to dilute the buying power of the current wealthy elite (as it gains adoption, they will inevitably need some, but will be forced to buy at much closer to its realized value), this can hardly be said to be a worse situation than the one with which we started.

I don't believe there can be free market resistance to any attempt an an NWO-like entity without a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin. Perhaps it will not always be Bitcoin. Perhaps it is Anoncoin! We will never let "them" monopolize Bitcoin, because it was never about Bitcoin. There will never be a way for the elite to enjoy the fruits of their wealth monopolization, and prevent its erosion at the same time, outside of a major evolutionary split where the uberrace is an order of magnitude (or more) higher in intelligence. There will always be another Satoshi, until it is no longer necessary.

Quote from: rpietila on December 03, 2013, 07:36:46 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on December 03, 2013, 07:09:18 PM

Bitcoin's only intrinsic value is confidence. So "weak hands" will mean strong hands, and vice versa at some point in the future if I am correct.

An interesting metric would be: what percentage of coins are in the hands of people, for whom the holding represents X% of portfolio.

This does not necessarily correlate with the weakness of hand though. If someone has near 100% in BTC, he is probably quite strong, otherwise he would not have so much. Those with over 100% are leveraged and weak. Those with quite much could be the weakest, since they sell periodically and give their coins to new entrants. Those with little should be strong, since it is not a big deal to them. On the other hand many of them are newbies and easy to scare, or are only after a quick double and then sell, or just have not developed their confidence yet.

But I see a great asset in the 930 (mBTC=USD) millionaires, me included. This number is up from only about 150 a month ago! We are in the position to continue the world-changing because money is not an issue any more. So in this sense the world-changing potential has gone up 6x when price increased only 5x. And there are many more to come in the BTC100-BTC1,000 category

I would say that the number of full-time bitcoiners is also growing fast. Where I live, the first million does not give economic freedom, but a paid-for house, and a million in the bank does.

I agree with this strongly. The "middle class" of Bitcoin will be its backbone, as it did was the US economy before greed and poor economic theory resulted in the extreme tampering which has made existing in that bubble improbable (you're driven above or below it). Currently probably the strongest of hands exist in the 10 - 100 BTC range, assuming that it is also around 50 - 90% of their fungible wealth. Extra points for each factor on a list that includes being young, single, or at least no kids, etc. They've got way too much invested to not be confident in where it is going, but not enough to panic that a short-term crash will deprive them of their ability to direct funds toward anything that matters (kid's unexpected hospital bill, or erasing a big part of the college fund, etc).