Chat Forum
It is currently Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:40 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2215 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53 ... 56  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 2:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12180
sewa wrote:
The Sun God wrote:
sewa wrote:


You know what you get trying to pick bottoms ??


I was being sarcastic. Everytime these coins tank Sorcerer goes on about the money he made based on the drop



No, I don't. I have BTC I've bought at $14000. I also have BTC bought at $200. Ideally, I'd be happy for it to be trading double what it is now. My XRP trade yesterday was got out at 0.321 and got back in at 0.293 it's now at 0.28351. My 30 day volume is heavily down at around ZAR400k (December 2017, it was > ZAR21000000). I don't trade for a living. I do have stop losses set.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 5:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm
Posts: 18084
Quote:
Joe Weisenthal
‏ @TheStalwart
7h7 hours ago

If you lived in Argentina, and instead of holding pesos, you converted them to Bitcoin at the beginning of the year, then you would have lost even more money.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 5:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12180
paddyor wrote:
Quote:
Joe Weisenthal
‏ @TheStalwart
7h7 hours ago

If you lived in Argentina, and instead of holding pesos, you converted them to Bitcoin at the beginning of the year, then you would have lost even more money.


If you'd bought them exactly 1 year ago today you'd be up over 40%.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 11:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8580
The Sun God wrote:


https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/06/goldman ... r=sharebar

Quote:
A top Goldman Sachs executive looked to clear the air Thursday about the bank's cryptocurrency ambitions after reports that it was abandoning plans to open a trading desk for cryptocurrencies.

"I never thought I would hear myself use this term but I really have to describe that news as fake news," Goldman Sachs Chief Financial Officer Martin Chavez said on stage at the TechCrunch Disrupt Conference in San Francisco.

The CFO said Goldman is working on a type of derivative for bitcoin because "clients want it."

"The next stage of the exploration is what we call non-deliverable forwards, these are over the counter derivatives, they're settled in U.S. dollars and the reference price is the bitcoin-U.S. dollar price established by a set of exchanges," Chavez said.

The price of bitcoin and other top cryptocurrencies tumbled after the initial report by Business Insider earlier this week. The Wall Street giant has been considering the launch of some sort of cryptocurrency option for clients for the past year. But it's never been quite clear just what the bank was planning.

"In response to client interest in digital currencies, we are exploring how best to serve them in this space," a Goldman spokeswoman told CNBC in October.




Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2018 1:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 11028
paddyor wrote:
Quote:
Joe Weisenthal
‏ @TheStalwart
7h7 hours ago

If you lived in Argentina, and instead of holding pesos, you converted them to Bitcoin at the beginning of the year, then you would have lost even more money.


:lol:

Moon! Lambo!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2018 1:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6794
Seneca of the Night wrote:
The Sun God wrote:
sewa wrote:


You know what you get trying to pick bottoms ??


An unwelcome evening out on the town with milo yiannopolus?


:lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 6:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 11028
Crypto crash now worse than dotcom

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... s-reach-80


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8580
Bowens wrote:


It's not even Bitcoin's worst % loss in the last 5 years.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 11028
I thought this was the crypto thread now. Ethereum ate shit I see.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12180
goeagles wrote:
Bowens wrote:


It's not even Bitcoin's worst % loss in the last 5 years.



I don't even bother with the FUD anymore. CNBC is the worst.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 64088
Quote:
It's not even Bitcoin's worst % loss in the last 5 years.


IT wasn't all about Bitcoin.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 11028
Maybe he didn’t read the article :?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12180
bimboman wrote:
Quote:
It's not even Bitcoin's worst % loss in the last 5 years.


IT wasn't all about Bitcoin.


Yeah, don't worry Bimbs. We're watching everything, all the time. I read this article several hours ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 64088
sorCrer wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Quote:
It's not even Bitcoin's worst % loss in the last 5 years.


IT wasn't all about Bitcoin.


Yeah, don't worry Bimbs. We're watching everything, all the time. I read this article several hours ago.



Good for you, not really related to my point. How's your trading day going?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12180
bimboman wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Quote:
It's not even Bitcoin's worst % loss in the last 5 years.


IT wasn't all about Bitcoin.


Yeah, don't worry Bimbs. We're watching everything, all the time. I read this article several hours ago.



Good for you, not really related to my point. How's your trading day going?


I'm very much on the sidelines currently. Have a software project I've written and am busy rolling out to 40 restaurants with another 90+ in the pipeline. I am watching it and talking to my fellows. Late June it was around nearly 10% lower than currently. I don't hold any ETH.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 578
goeagles wrote:
Bowens wrote:


It's not even Bitcoin's worst % loss in the last 5 years.

Image

That's a very deceptive graph.

Using a log price scale makes it look like an investor at the peak has only suffered minor losses.

The true scale of fall since the peak are clear when you scale the price linearly:
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8580
Bowens wrote:
I thought this was the crypto thread now. Ethereum ate shit I see.


Ethereum has been eating shit in large part because of ICO company selling pressure (ICOs raised money via ETH, have no product and need to pay bills). There's still quite a bit of selling pressure for the foreseeable future, though: https://twitter.com/lawmaster/status/10 ... 9934837760

Bowens wrote:
Maybe he didn’t read the article :?


The article itself was laughable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8580
derriz wrote:
goeagles wrote:
Bowens wrote:


It's not even Bitcoin's worst % loss in the last 5 years.

Image

That's a very deceptive graph.

Using a log price scale makes it look like an investor at the peak has only suffered minor losses.

The true scale of fall since the peak are clear when you scale the price linearly:
Image


How is it deceptive? It shows the percentage decrease, which is what was being discussed. It's not meant to show what an investor at its peak lost. It's intended to show that BTC has suffered larger losses in the past and recovered.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 64088
Quote:
show that BTC has suffered larger losses in the past and recovered.



As the notionals grow the losses are larger.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Posts: 37063
Location: Planet Rock
goeagles wrote:
derriz wrote:
goeagles wrote:
Bowens wrote:


It's not even Bitcoin's worst % loss in the last 5 years.

Image

That's a very deceptive graph.

Using a log price scale makes it look like an investor at the peak has only suffered minor losses.

The true scale of fall since the peak are clear when you scale the price linearly:
Image


How is it deceptive? It shows the percentage decrease, which is what was being discussed. It's not meant to show what an investor at its peak lost. It's intended to show that BTC has suffered larger losses in the past and recovered.

It's still deflating. Where it stops nobody knows.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 10:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8580
Anonymous. wrote:
goeagles wrote:
derriz wrote:
goeagles wrote:
Bowens wrote:


It's not even Bitcoin's worst % loss in the last 5 years.

Image

That's a very deceptive graph.

Using a log price scale makes it look like an investor at the peak has only suffered minor losses.

The true scale of fall since the peak are clear when you scale the price linearly:
Image


How is it deceptive? It shows the percentage decrease, which is what was being discussed. It's not meant to show what an investor at its peak lost. It's intended to show that BTC has suffered larger losses in the past and recovered.

It's still deflating. Where it stops nobody knows.


It's been holding steady above 6k for a few months. Wouldn't be surprised to see it go to 4500 though. Would be surprised to see it drop below 4k.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 10:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 578
goeagles wrote:
How is it deceptive? It shows the percentage decrease, which is what was being discussed. It's not meant to show what an investor at its peak lost. It's intended to show that BTC has suffered larger losses in the past and recovered.

It makes no sense to use log scale unless dealing with values that span more than 6 or so orders of magnitude. There was another advantage in the past - before electronic calculators - because the y-axis acted like a slide-rule allowing you to quickly compute % returns between two dates. But they suck as tools for visualization even if technical analysts/charlatans still like them because they add mystique to their "art". Their problems are particularly bad if the range includes values close to zero.

In the case of your graph there is no justifiable reason for using a log scale here and it's deceptive because unless you examine the scale to see what is going on, it looks like the fall of more than 60% in the last year is mearly a small wobble in an overall upward trend. Log price scales are particularly poor for highlighing volatility as the graph demonstrates - bitcoin doesn't look that risky at all when you log the prices. If it wasn't a graph being peddled by bitcoin pump merchants, then I'd probably give them the benefit of the doubt and consider it stupid instead of deceptive.

There's a whole section in the wikipedia "misleading graph" article on the use of log scales.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 11:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8580
derriz wrote:
goeagles wrote:
How is it deceptive? It shows the percentage decrease, which is what was being discussed. It's not meant to show what an investor at its peak lost. It's intended to show that BTC has suffered larger losses in the past and recovered.

It makes no sense to use log scale unless dealing with values that span more than 6 or so orders of magnitude. There was another advantage in the past - before electronic calculators - because the y-axis acted like a slide-rule allowing you to quickly compute % returns between two dates. But they suck as tools for visualization even if technical analysts/charlatans still like them because they add mystique to their "art". Their problems are particularly bad if the range includes values close to zero.

In the case of your graph there is no justifiable reason for using a log scale here and it's deceptive because unless you examine the scale to see what is going on, it looks like the fall of more than 60% in the last year is mearly a small wobble in an overall upward trend. Log price scales are particularly poor for highlighing volatility as the graph demonstrates - bitcoin doesn't look that risky at all when you log the prices. If it wasn't a graph being peddled by bitcoin pump merchants, then I'd probably give them the benefit of the doubt and consider it stupid instead of deceptive.

There's a whole section in the wikipedia "misleading graph" article on the use of log scales.


The intention of the graph in this context is to show that Bitcoin has faced multiple drops, on a percentage basis, greater than this supposed all time worst crash. Because of that, log scale is absolutely appropriate. I don't really care whether or not you think the graph is misleading in some other context.

And Bitcoin isn't particularly risky when a small part (say 1%) of a larger portfolio because it is much less correlated with the market than other assets (although increasingly less so). Let's take 2 portfolios. Option A is 60% equities and 40% bonds. Option B is 60% equities, 39% bonds and 1% Bitcoin. Which do you think would have had greater volatility over the last year?

Edit to add that Bitcoin, like gold, is also a hedge against tail risk and that any discussion of how risky it is is incomplete without that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 11:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 64088
Quote:
The intention of the graph in this context is to show that Bitcoin has faced multiple drops, on a percentage basis, greater than this supposed all time worst crash.


Which would be relevant if the article was only about bit coin and in fact didn't state it thought Bitcoin was a winner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 1:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8580
bimboman wrote:
Quote:
The intention of the graph in this context is to show that Bitcoin has faced multiple drops, on a percentage basis, greater than this supposed all time worst crash.


Which would be relevant if the article was only about bit coin and in fact didn't state it thought Bitcoin was a winner.


Pretty much every other crypto that's been around awhile has gone through the same thing. Alts basically act as leveraged Bitcoin with regard to price.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 1:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm
Posts: 18084
Quote:
Myles Udland
‏ @MylesUdland

"Coinbase disclosed that almost twenty percent of executed volume on its platform was attributable to its own trading." Thanks for playing. https://virtualmarkets.ag.ny.gov/ (h/t @EpsilonTheory)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 6:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12180
paddyor wrote:
Quote:
Myles Udland
‏ @MylesUdland

"Coinbase disclosed that almost twenty percent of executed volume on its platform was attributable to its own trading." Thanks for playing. https://virtualmarkets.ag.ny.gov/ (h/t @EpsilonTheory)


That's a good read. Pleased to see that Bitstamp don't trade on their own platform. Best exchange for mine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 578
goeagles wrote:
The intention of the graph in this context is to show that Bitcoin has faced multiple drops, on a percentage basis, greater than this supposed all time worst crash. Because of that, log scale is absolutely appropriate. I don't really care whether or not you think the graph is misleading in some other context.

Except the price graph does a terrible job as humans do not naturally perceive percentage drops on log scales. Creativity with price graphs - stretching the scales, sliding the scales, using log scales has been the mark of the financial charletanism for a century at least.
goeagles wrote:
And Bitcoin isn't particularly risky when a small part (say 1%) of a larger portfolio because it is much less correlated with the market than other assets (although increasingly less so). Let's take 2 portfolios. Option A is 60% equities and 40% bonds. Option B is 60% equities, 39% bonds and 1% Bitcoin. Which do you think would have had greater volatility over the last year?

This makes no sense. Playing roulette - as long as it's only with 1% of your portfolio - will not greatly affect the overall volatility of the portfolio either.

And the less correlated aspect is useless to an investor if the expected return is negative.

And I'd be very surprised if the daily volatility of the Option B was lower. But feel free to show me the numbers: overall sharpes and the daily return coorelation matrix for the 3 asset classes. Although since you are talking about only 1% allocated to bitcoin, the differences of course will be minscule.
goeagles wrote:
Edit to add that Bitcoin, like gold, is also a hedge against tail risk and that any discussion of how risky it is is incomplete without that.

How is it a hedge against tail risk? Gold has 1000s of years of documented history as a hedge against calamity - what pedigree has bitcoin got? It didn't even exist before the GFC and its price bubble coincided with one periods of huge price inflation across multiple asset classes.

The closest time we have to be able to test it would be the period from mid-late 2011 to about a year later when equity volatility spiked and gold soared. Unlike gold, bitcoin shed half it's value.

The bitcoin boosters are always moving the goalposts; first it was going to revolutionize payments, until it turned out that it was sh1t for payments. Then it was going to free us from the tyranny of "the man" until China dominated mining - meaning the network could be fücked anytime the freedom loving Chinese govenment decided. Then it was going to act as a long term store of value, until it turned out to be sh1t for that too with 50% drawdowns occurring on a regular basis. Next it's a "haven" asset that people will rush to in times of crisis except the only time in its tiny history where we had a significant risk-off period, it shed value.

But I don't know why I bother with this stuff - it's hard to know whether I'm talking with someone who is sipping the coolaid or someone who is pressing the bottles into people's hands. Honestly, if you weren't an investor in BTC, would you be spending time defending it? It's absolutely worthless from every perspective - even the technology (cryptographic distributed ledger) is a curiosity and nothing more.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 2:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12180
derriz wrote:
goeagles wrote:
The intention of the graph in this context is to show that Bitcoin has faced multiple drops, on a percentage basis, greater than this supposed all time worst crash. Because of that, log scale is absolutely appropriate. I don't really care whether or not you think the graph is misleading in some other context.

Except the price graph does a terrible job as humans do not naturally perceive percentage drops on log scales. Creativity with price graphs - stretching the scales, sliding the scales, using log scales has been the mark of the financial charletanism for a century at least.
goeagles wrote:
And Bitcoin isn't particularly risky when a small part (say 1%) of a larger portfolio because it is much less correlated with the market than other assets (although increasingly less so). Let's take 2 portfolios. Option A is 60% equities and 40% bonds. Option B is 60% equities, 39% bonds and 1% Bitcoin. Which do you think would have had greater volatility over the last year?

This makes no sense. Playing roulette - as long as it's only with 1% of your portfolio - will not greatly affect the overall volatility of the portfolio either.

And the less correlated aspect is useless to an investor if the expected return is negative.

And I'd be very surprised if the daily volatility of the Option B was lower. But feel free to show me the numbers: overall sharpes and the daily return coorelation matrix for the 3 asset classes. Although since you are talking about only 1% allocated to bitcoin, the differences of course will be minscule.
goeagles wrote:
Edit to add that Bitcoin, like gold, is also a hedge against tail risk and that any discussion of how risky it is is incomplete without that.

How is it a hedge against tail risk? Gold has 1000s of years of documented history as a hedge against calamity - what pedigree has bitcoin got? It didn't even exist before the GFC and its price bubble coincided with one periods of huge price inflation across multiple asset classes.

The closest time we have to be able to test it would be the period from mid-late 2011 to about a year later when equity volatility spiked and gold soared. Unlike gold, bitcoin shed half it's value.

The bitcoin boosters are always moving the goalposts; first it was going to revolutionize payments, until it turned out that it was sh1t for payments. Then it was going to free us from the tyranny of "the man" until China dominated mining - meaning the network could be fücked anytime the freedom loving Chinese govenment decided. Then it was going to act as a long term store of value, until it turned out to be sh1t for that too with 50% drawdowns occurring on a regular basis. Next it's a "haven" asset that people will rush to in times of crisis except the only time in its tiny history where we had a significant risk-off period, it shed value.

But I don't know why I bother with this stuff - it's hard to know whether I'm talking with someone who is sipping the coolaid or someone who is pressing the bottles into people's hands. Honestly, if you weren't an investor in BTC, would you be spending time defending it? It's absolutely worthless from every perspective - even the technology (cryptographic distributed ledger) is a curiosity and nothing more.


Your view on Ripple?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21610
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2018/09/21/bitcoin-flaw-could-have-allowed-dreaded-51-takeover/

Part of my job is IT compliance / security so I get notified of issues. This sort of thing makes me laugh, its incredibly lax. Rank amateurism in fact


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12180
sewa wrote:
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2018/09/21/bitcoin-flaw-could-have-allowed-dreaded-51-takeover/

Part of my job is IT compliance / security so I get notified of issues. This sort of thing makes me laugh, its incredibly lax. Rank amateurism in fact


Patched and also in older versions anyway. Do you code?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21610
sorCrer wrote:
sewa wrote:
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2018/09/21/bitcoin-flaw-could-have-allowed-dreaded-51-takeover/

Part of my job is IT compliance / security so I get notified of issues. This sort of thing makes me laugh, its incredibly lax. Rank amateurism in fact


Patched and also in older versions anyway. Do you code?


I don't code, we use outside consultants for that. It is the comments under this that are very worrying

Tweeted respected cryptocurrency expert and Cornell University professor, Emin Gün Sirer

Emin Gün Sirer

@el33th4xor
· Sep 19, 2018
Major bug in Bitcoin Core, that can cause a total network fracture for BTC.

Empirically, bugs like this are found regularly in every coin. No implementation has been shown to be superior to others. All noise to the contrary is false marketing. https://twitter.com/bitcoincoreorg/stat ... 2224860161

Looks like the bug fix made its way to Litecoin, but only after the BTC fix was announced. Does not look like Litecoin devs were notified of the bug prior to patch.

Copycat currencies are at risk. By definition, there's always a group upstream that knows their vulnerabilities.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12180
sewa wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
sewa wrote:
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2018/09/21/bitcoin-flaw-could-have-allowed-dreaded-51-takeover/

Part of my job is IT compliance / security so I get notified of issues. This sort of thing makes me laugh, its incredibly lax. Rank amateurism in fact


Patched and also in older versions anyway. Do you code?


I don't code, we use outside consultants for that. It is the comments under this that are very worrying

Tweeted respected cryptocurrency expert and Cornell University professor, Emin Gün Sirer

Emin Gün Sirer

@el33th4xor
· Sep 19, 2018
Major bug in Bitcoin Core, that can cause a total network fracture for BTC.

Empirically, bugs like this are found regularly in every coin. No implementation has been shown to be superior to others. All noise to the contrary is false marketing. https://twitter.com/bitcoincoreorg/stat ... 2224860161

Looks like the bug fix made its way to Litecoin, but only after the BTC fix was announced. Does not look like Litecoin devs were notified of the bug prior to patch.

Copycat currencies are at risk. By definition, there's always a group upstream that knows their vulnerabilities.


Yeah. Look the Core code is open source. Anyone with sufficient knowledge can read it and look for holes. It's been around for coming on 10 years now. Holes get found and holes get closed. This is good. Bugs happen in software.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21610
sorCrer wrote:

Yeah. Look the Core code is open source. Anyone with sufficient knowledge can read it and look for holes. It's been around for coming on 10 years now. Holes get found and holes get closed. This is good. Bugs happen in software.


Eh, no its not good. Certainly not if you get up one morning and all your cash is gone. The worrying thing from a compliance perspective is having identified the weakness the why did the developers not inform the litecoin developers in a timely fashion? You have to build trust in your product and this does not help at all


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12180
sewa wrote:
sorCrer wrote:

Yeah. Look the Core code is open source. Anyone with sufficient knowledge can read it and look for holes. It's been around for coming on 10 years now. Holes get found and holes get closed. This is good. Bugs happen in software.


Eh, no its not good. Certainly not if you get up one morning and all your cash is gone. The worrying thing from a compliance perspective is having identified the weakness the why did the developers not inform the litecoin developers in a timely fashion? You have to build trust in your product and this does not help at all


You shouldn't have all your cash invested in BTC. I agree that it's not ideal. Software writing is difficult. I hadn't heard of this Litecoin angle before although I knew about the flaw. I'd agree that devs should notify other devs using a common codebase if there is a flaw. As you well know, in the majority of cases flaws are actually quite difficult to exploit in the real world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 6:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Posts: 37063
Location: Planet Rock
sorCrer wrote:
sewa wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
sewa wrote:
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2018/09/21/bitcoin-flaw-could-have-allowed-dreaded-51-takeover/

Part of my job is IT compliance / security so I get notified of issues. This sort of thing makes me laugh, its incredibly lax. Rank amateurism in fact


Patched and also in older versions anyway. Do you code?


I don't code, we use outside consultants for that. It is the comments under this that are very worrying

Tweeted respected cryptocurrency expert and Cornell University professor, Emin Gün Sirer

Emin Gün Sirer

@el33th4xor
· Sep 19, 2018
Major bug in Bitcoin Core, that can cause a total network fracture for BTC.

Empirically, bugs like this are found regularly in every coin. No implementation has been shown to be superior to others. All noise to the contrary is false marketing. https://twitter.com/bitcoincoreorg/stat ... 2224860161

Looks like the bug fix made its way to Litecoin, but only after the BTC fix was announced. Does not look like Litecoin devs were notified of the bug prior to patch.

Copycat currencies are at risk. By definition, there's always a group upstream that knows their vulnerabilities.


Yeah. Look the Core code is open source. Anyone with sufficient knowledge can read it and look for holes. It's been around for coming on 10 years now. Holes get found and holes get closed. This is good. Bugs happen in software.

I have very little knowledge of softy but I nearly LOL when I read "this is good"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 578
sorCrer wrote:
derriz wrote:
goeagles wrote:
The intention of the graph in this context is to show that Bitcoin has faced multiple drops, on a percentage basis, greater than this supposed all time worst crash. Because of that, log scale is absolutely appropriate. I don't really care whether or not you think the graph is misleading in some other context.

Except the price graph does a terrible job as humans do not naturally perceive percentage drops on log scales. Creativity with price graphs - stretching the scales, sliding the scales, using log scales has been the mark of the financial charletanism for a century at least.
goeagles wrote:
And Bitcoin isn't particularly risky when a small part (say 1%) of a larger portfolio because it is much less correlated with the market than other assets (although increasingly less so). Let's take 2 portfolios. Option A is 60% equities and 40% bonds. Option B is 60% equities, 39% bonds and 1% Bitcoin. Which do you think would have had greater volatility over the last year?

This makes no sense. Playing roulette - as long as it's only with 1% of your portfolio - will not greatly affect the overall volatility of the portfolio either.

And the less correlated aspect is useless to an investor if the expected return is negative.

And I'd be very surprised if the daily volatility of the Option B was lower. But feel free to show me the numbers: overall sharpes and the daily return coorelation matrix for the 3 asset classes. Although since you are talking about only 1% allocated to bitcoin, the differences of course will be minscule.
goeagles wrote:
Edit to add that Bitcoin, like gold, is also a hedge against tail risk and that any discussion of how risky it is is incomplete without that.

How is it a hedge against tail risk? Gold has 1000s of years of documented history as a hedge against calamity - what pedigree has bitcoin got? It didn't even exist before the GFC and its price bubble coincided with one periods of huge price inflation across multiple asset classes.

The closest time we have to be able to test it would be the period from mid-late 2011 to about a year later when equity volatility spiked and gold soared. Unlike gold, bitcoin shed half it's value.

The bitcoin boosters are always moving the goalposts; first it was going to revolutionize payments, until it turned out that it was sh1t for payments. Then it was going to free us from the tyranny of "the man" until China dominated mining - meaning the network could be fücked anytime the freedom loving Chinese govenment decided. Then it was going to act as a long term store of value, until it turned out to be sh1t for that too with 50% drawdowns occurring on a regular basis. Next it's a "haven" asset that people will rush to in times of crisis except the only time in its tiny history where we had a significant risk-off period, it shed value.

But I don't know why I bother with this stuff - it's hard to know whether I'm talking with someone who is sipping the coolaid or someone who is pressing the bottles into people's hands. Honestly, if you weren't an investor in BTC, would you be spending time defending it? It's absolutely worthless from every perspective - even the technology (cryptographic distributed ledger) is a curiosity and nothing more.


Your view on Ripple?

No strong opinion because I don't know much about it. Do you mean as a technology/platform or the coin?

I think all the current coins are worthless. It costs zero to create them and they deliver no or very little utility. The prices are sustained purely by hype and bullshit.

I used to think the tech was interesting and that there must be novel applications waiting to be discovered but even there I'm skeptical. I don't expect any interesting applications to emerge in the near future. All businesses/companies want to be able to use legal systems to correct mistakes - hard cryptography is simply not an attractive tool in such a world. PKI is an idea that's great in theory but has achieved fudge all traction despite it being around for decades. It's 10 times easier to just roll-out a serverless architecture on the cloud than try to deploy an application built on a distributed ledger.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2018 6:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12180
Lightning network grown another 10% this month with capacity up 15% to around 110 BTC.

Interesting video released this weekend paying for a Coke with a QR Code and Lightning Network.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Fb6Xww2P7c


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2018 4:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6794
Isnt Litecoin the best for maximising the Lightning Network?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2018 4:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Posts: 37063
Location: Planet Rock
It's all a steaming pile of excrement


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2215 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53 ... 56  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AlanBengio, CarrotGawks, earl the beaver, Evil_G, Floppykid, Google Adsense [Bot], HighKingLeinster, jdogscoop, juddy, Lazy Couch potato, Leinsterman, Liathroidigloine, maverickmak, Monk Zombie, Mr Mike, Pat the Ex Mat, Poshprop and 72 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group