Quote from: Peter R on April 03, 2014, 12:47:41 AM

Quote from: Trolololo on April 03, 2014, 12:07:11 AM

Thanks, Peter.

I just put one chart upon the other in photoshop and it astonished me how well they fit.

How could adoption grow this quickly?
You have answered that question better than I could.

You also make me realize a very good point:
the supercrash of 2015 (100k to 3k) would correspond to the CHASM of bitcoin adoption (1-3%).
That correspondence increases the probability of the 2014 superbubble scenario, in my opinion.

Thanks again for your fractal chart. Just to confirm: is the vertical scale stretched on the photoshopped version? The growth spurt predicted in % for the "super bubble" is actually bigger than the growth spurt in 2011, correct? Do you know what the scaling factor is?

In my opinion, for bitcoin to witness a "super bubble," we'd need ETFs trading on NASDAQ or NYSE and significant deployment of bitcoin ATMs around the world. People must have he ability to buy big. Therefore, I think the bubble would have to occur either after the ETFs are available, or, more likely, the bubble would start a month before the ETF is ready (due to pre-emptive buying by insiders). Since I doubt we'll see ETFs until late 2014 or 2015, a huge ramp in price before the fall 2014 would surprise me (but I am not implying that the price will remain stable at $450 either).

Witnessing a "super bubble" would be fascinating. I expect the media would begin to talk about all the benefits of bitcoin that we've known all along, as well as trivialize its challenges. It would be a 180 deg shift in sentiment. Some of the people you know who have dismissed bitcoin up to this point would become users, while simultaneously maintaining the view that it makes sense now (Bitcoin 2.0) because it's been "cleaned up" or it's "matured" or some nonsense like that.

And then it would crash harder than ever.

NOTE TO READERS: this is not a prediction--just a thought experiment.

Peter R at al, before you go on with this nonsense direction of thinking about arbitrary charts which have no basis in reality like they came from a child with an Etch-A-Sketch (not ad hominem to Trolololo, just trying to color my point with drama), and since I know you try to be based in data and fact checking, I suggest you try to find even one example in this history of man where the adoption accelerated after it was evidently slowing. And remember I am talking about rate of growth, not the nominal size of growth. The nominal size is getting larger and huge, and this will make us feel like the growth is growing, because humans can't differentiate between slowing rate and larger nominals.

You won't find it. Larger things don't suddenly change adoption curves, because the inertia is ingrained structure that provided the very high adoption rate in the beginning.

I am very confident because I have history and rationality on my side.