Bitcoin VS Ethereum: [The Ultimate Step-by-Step Comparison ...

Price Discovery in Bitcoin exchange

About thirty days ago I shared a chart on Price Discovery in this sub. There was a lot of interest in it and I promised to explain in detail a Bitcoin price discovery algorithm.. I do so in this post.
*this text post is a slightly shorter version of what I wrote in my blog.

TL;DR

I applied price discovery algorithms to 5 Min OHLCV data from Bitmex and CME contracts and Bitstamp, Coinbase, HitBTC, Kraken, Poloniex, Binance, and OkEx BTCUSD/BTCUSDT markets from March 2016 to May 2020. Some exciting results I got was:

Introduction

Price discovery is the overall process of setting the price of an asset. Price discovery algorithms identify the leader exchanges whose traders define the price. Two approaches are most famous for use in Price Discovery. Gonzalo and Granger (1995) and Hasbrouck (1995). But they assume random walk, and a common efficient price. I do not feel comfortable assuming random walk and common efficient price in Bitcoin Markets. So I used this little know method by De Blasis (2019) for this analysis. This work assumes that "the fastest price to reflect new information releases a price signal to the other slower price series." I thought this was valid in our market. It uses Markov Chains to measure Price Discovery. Without going into the mathematical details the summary steps used was:
De Blasis (2019) names this number Price Leadership Share (PLS). High PLS indicates a large role in price discovery. As the sum of the numbers is 1, they can be looked at as a percentage contribution. I recommend reading the original paper if you are interested to know more about the mathematical detail.

Data

Andersen (2000) argues that 5 Minute window provides the best trade-off between getting enough data and avoiding noise. In one of the first work on Bitcoin's Price Discovery, Brandvold et al. 2015 had used 5M window. So I obtained 5M OHLCV data using the following sources:
Futures data are different from other data because multiple futures contract trades at the same time. I formed a single data from the multiple time series by selecting the nearest contract until it was three days from expiration. I used the next contract when the contract was three days from expiration. This approach was advocated by Booth et al ( 1999 )

Analysis

I can't embed the chart on reddit so open this https://warproxxx.github.io/static/price_discovery.html
In the figure above, each colored line shows the total influence the exchange had towards the discovery of Bitcoin Price on that day. Its axis is on the left. The black line shows a moving average of the bitcoin price at the close in Bitfinex for comparison. The chart was created by plotting the EMA of price and dominance with a smoothing factor of 0.1. This was done to eliminate the noise. Let's start looking from the beginning. We start with a slight Bitfinex dominance at the start. When the price starts going up, Bitfinex's influence does too. This was the time large Tether printing was attributed to the rise of price by many individuals. But Bitfinex's influence wanes down as the price starts rising (remember that the chart is an exponential moving average. Its a lagging indicator). Afterward, exchanges like Binance and Bitstamp increase their role, and there isn't any single leader in the run. So although Bitfinex may have been responsible for the initial pump trades on other exchanges were responsible for the later rally.
CME contracts were added to our analysis in February 2018. Initially, they don't have much influence. On a similar work Alexandar and Heck (2019) noted that initially CBOE contracts had more influence. CBOE later delisted Bitcoin futures so I couldn't get that data. Overall, Bitmex and CME contracts have been averaging around 50% of the role in price discovery. To make the dominance clear, look at this chart where I add Bitmex Futures and Perp contract's dominance figure to create a single dominance index. There bitmex leads 936 of the total 1334 days (Bitfinex leads 298 days and coinbase and binance get 64 and 6 days). That is a lot. One possible reason for this might be Bitmex's low trading fee. Bitmex has a very generous -0.025% maker fee and price discovery tend to occur primarily in the market with smaller trading costs (Booth et al, 1999). It may also be because our market is mature. In mature markets, futures lead the price discovery.
Exchange bitmex_futures bitfinex coinbase bitmex okex binance cme bitstamp okcoin kraken poloniex
Days Lead 571 501 102 88 34 12 8 7 6 4 1
 Table 1: Days Lead 
Out of 1334 days in the analysis, Bitmex futures leads the discovery in 571 days or nearly 43% of the duration. Bitfinex leads for 501 days. Bitfinex's high number is due to its extreme dominance in the early days.
Exchange binance huobi cme okcoin bitmex_futures okex hitbtc kraken poloniex bitstamp bitfinex coinbase bitmex
Correlation 0.809190 0.715667 0.648058 0.644432 0.577147 0.444821 0.032649 -0.187348 -0.365175 -0.564073 -0.665008 -0.695115 -0.752103
 Table 2: Correlation between the close price and Exchange's dominance index 
Binance, Huobi, CME, and OkCoin had the most significant correlation with the close price. Bitmex, Coinbase, Bitfinex, and Bitstamp's dominance were negatively correlated. This was very interesting. To know more, I captured a yearwise correlation.
index 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
0 bitfinex 0.028264 -0.519791 0.829700 -0.242631 0.626386
1 bitmex 0.090758 -0.752297 -0.654742 0.052242 -0.584956
2 bitmex_futures -0.011323 -0.149281 -0.458857 0.660135 0.095305
3 bitstamp 0.316291 -0.373688 0.600240 -0.255408 -0.407608
4 coinbase -0.505492 -0.128336 -0.351794 -0.410874 -0.262036
5 hitbtc 0.024425 0.486229 0.104912 -0.200203 0.308862
6 kraken 0.275797 0.422656 0.294762 -0.064594 -0.192290
7 poloniex 0.177616 -0.087090 0.230987 -0.135046 -0.154726
8 binance NaN 0.865295 0.706725 -0.484130 0.265086
9 okcoin NaN 0.797682 0.463455 -0.010186 -0.160217
10 huobi NaN 0.748489 0.351514 -0.298418 0.434164
11 cme NaN NaN -0.616407 0.694494 -0.012962
12 okex NaN NaN -0.618888 -0.399567 0.432474
Table 3: Yearwise Correlation between the close price and Exchange's dominance index
Price movement is pretty complicated. If one factor, like a dominant exchange, could explain it, everyone would be making money trading. With this disclaimer out of the way, let us try to make some conclusions. This year Bitfinex, Huobi, and OkEx, Tether based exchanges, discovery power have shown a high correlation with the close price. This means that when the traders there become successful, price rises. When the traders there are failing, Bitmex traders dominate and then the price is falling. I found this interesting as I have been seeing the OkEx whale who has been preceding price rises in this sub. I leave the interpretation of other past years to the reader.

Limitations

My analysis does not include market data for other derivative exchanges like Huobi, OkEx, Binance, and Deribit. So, all future market's influence may be going to Bitmex. I did not add their data because they started having an impact recently. A more fair assessment may be to conclude this as the new power of derivative markets instead of attributing it as the power of Bitmex. But Bitmex has dominated futures volume most of the time (until recently). And they brought the concept of perpetual swaps.

Conclusion

There is a lot in this data. If you are making a trading algo think there is some edge here. Someday I will backtest some trading logic based on this data. Then I will have more info and might write more. But, this analysis was enough for to shift my focus from a Bitfinex based trading algorithm to a Bitmex based one. It has been giving me good results.
If you have any good ideas that you want me to write about or discuss further please comment. If there is enough interest in this measurement, I can setup a live interface that provides the live value.
submitted by warproxxx to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

For Trading July 16th

For Trading JULY 16th
GS Earnings a Beat Prop-Trading Helps
NASDAQ Still Weaker
TWTR HACKED
Today’s market got off to a decent start with the futures indicating a gain of about 500+, but it didn’t live up to its promise, falling back and reaching up “only” 428 and making that high by 9:45 and trading sideways to lower and making a low around 12:15 at + just 50 before turning back up to make a lower high +240 and selling off again, but making a late gain back to +310 before the last little selloff to close +227.51 (.85%), NASDAQ +61.91 (.59%), S&P 500 +29.04 (.91%), the Russell +50.05 (3.5%) and the big winner, DJ Transports +424.96 (4.56%). Market internals were strong with the NYSE A/D 5:1 and NAZ 4:1 with slightly higher volume than yesterday. The DJIA was 25:5 with the big gainer BA, +55 and UNH the big loser -31 DP’s. There was plenty of good news from the Beige Book gains, Industrial production +5.4% v 4.6 est., import / export gains and mortgage apps +5.1%. Tomorrow we have Initial and continuing claims, retail sales, Phili Fed, NAHB housing and business inventories. Plenty to obsess about!
Our “open forum” on Discord, which allows me to interact with subscribers and others to allow direct questions and chart opinions on just about any stock, continues to grow with more participants every day. It is informative and allows me to share insights as the market is open and moving. The link is: https://discord.gg/ATvC7YZ and I will be there and active from before the open and all day. It’s a great place to share ideas and gain some insights, and we’ve grown to almost 3000 members. I also did this video titled “How to survive being an options trader and not blow up your account,” over the long weekend. I think it’s highly informative as a guide to stock selection and option choices. The link is https://youtu.be/Y7H9RpWfLlo Enjoy!!
Tonight’s closing comment video https://youtu.be/hEiml2wDNeA
SECTORS: Goldman Sachs (GS) reported great numbers, buoyed by proprietary trading and while the stock traded as high as $225.24, it couldn’t hold those gains and finished $216.90 +2.89 (1.35%). So, as I mentioned in tonight’s video (link above) the airlines and cruise lines were propelled higher by the news from Moderna (MRNA) that their vaccine produces twice the antigens as those from patients that have recovered from the illness. MRNA finished $80.22 +5.18 (6.9%) after trading as high as $88.37. The airlines were AAL+1.87 (16%), DAL +2.49 (9.5%), LUV +.60 (2.2%), while the cruise lines were CCL +2.44 (16.2%), RCL +10.21 (21%), and NCLH +3.17 (20.6%). If I had to pick one that I’d go with, it would be none of these. I think the play will be in EXPE $90.23 +7.76 (9.4%) since people will need to book regardless of what they want to do or where they want to go. The TWTR hack of several high profile users, Obama, Biden, Bill Gates, Kanye West and Elon Musk was a crypto scam announcing a giveaway that required the sender to deposit .1 BTC in order to receive .2 BTC back…yeah, right…I’m so sure Joe Biden wants to double my money! And, the HOMERUN of the day was the Australian Biotech, Genetic Tech (GENE), whose “Severity Risk Test” was updated on a webinar. The stock was as low as $1.41 earlier this year and closed on Tuesday @ $2.26 and opened the day today @ 2.75 and ran up to $10.30 before closing $5.67 +3.41 (150.89%). Clearly a homerun!
FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN was LOWER with TSN +1.71, BGS -.27, FLO -.13, CPB -1.06, CAG -.37, MDLZ -.19, CALM -.14, JJSF +2.11, SAFM +1.77, HRL -.27, SJM -1.31 and PPC $16.53 +.30 (1.85%).
BIOPHARMA was HIGHER with BIIB +1.69, ABBV +1.60, REGN -8.49, ISRG +22.46, GILD -.44, MYL +.43, TEVA +.88, VRTX +1.28, BHC +1.25, INCY -.05, ICPT +1.93, LABU +4.17 and IBB $142.74 +2.48 (1.77%).
CANNABIS: was HIGHER with TLRY +.24, CGC +.81, CRON +.67, GWPH -3.99, ACB +1.11, CURLF +.10, KERN +.42, and MJ $13.64 +.38 (2.87%).
DEFENSE: was HIGHER with LMT +9.94, GD +2.64, TXT +1.05, NOC +5.21, BWXT +1.24, TDY +21.12, RTX +2.73 and ITA $165.19 +5.58 (3.5%).
RETAIL: was HIGHER with M +.39, JWN +1.12, KSS +1.88, DDS +1.73, WMT +.37, TGT +1.59, TJX +2.57, RL +4.23, UAA +.87, LULU +4.19, TPR +.95, CPRI +1.35
FAANG and Big Cap: were LOWER with GOOGL -5.74, AMZN -86.00, AAPL +.61, FB -.53, NFLX -.38, NVDA -8.78, TSLA -5.80, BIDU -.69, CMG +33.98, BABA +.25, CAT +2.62, BA +6.32, DIS +1.74, and XLK $107.64 +.58 (.54%). PLEASE BE AWARE THAT THESE PRICES ARE LATE MARKET QUOTES AND DO NOT REPRESENT THE 4:00 CLOSES.
FINANCIALS were HIGHER with GS +1.54, JPM +.99, BAC +.52, MS +1.32, C +1.60, PNC +2.89, AIG +.76, TRV +.79, AXP +2.54, V +2.72 and XLF $24.15 +.47 (1.98%).
OIL, $41.20 +.91. Oil was lower in last night’s trading before we rallied in the morning. I mentioned in last night’s charts with comments section in the Weekly Strategies letter, prices are trying to work higher towards $45.00. We needed a close over the previous high close of $40.83 and we finally did that today. The stocks were higher with XLE $37.38 +.79 (2.16%).
GOLD $1,813.80 +.40. It was a continuation rally and a new recovery high of $1,829.80. I have only the NEM August 65 / 70 spread on in the Gold market while we have been back in the Silver (SLV) calls @ $ .92 from Friday. Silver rallied from a down overnight session and the calls closed $1.40 +.12. We also added a GLD 7/24 170 call position @ $1.22 that finished $1.54 -05.
BITCOIN: closed $9,190 -120. After trading back to 8985 we rallied back to close – only $5. Since last week we have closed between 9200 – 92.85 every day with narrow ranges and today was a good start to move higher. A break over 10,000 still sends us higher. We added 350 shares of GBTC @ $10.02 to our position of 400 @ $8.06, bringing our average price to $8.97. GBTC closed $9.48 - .25 today.
Tomorrow is another day.
CAM
submitted by Dashover to OptionsOnly [link] [comments]

Epic Cash AMA Recap with CryptoDiffer Community

CryptoDiffer team Hello, everyone! We are glad to meet here: Max Freeman (@maxfreeman4), Project Lead at Epic Cash Yoga Dude (@Yogadude), PR&Marketing at Epic Cash Xenolink (@Xenolink), Advisor at Epic Cash
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash Thanks Max, we are excited to be here!
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash Hello Everyone! Thank you for having us here!
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash Thank you to the CryptoDiffer team and CryptoDiffer community for hosting us!
CryptoDiffer team Let`s start from the first introduction question: Q1: Can you introduce yourself to the community? What is your background and how did you join Epic Cash?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
Hello! My background is Marketing and Business Development, I’ve been in crypto since 2011 started with Bitcoin, then Monero in 2014, Ethereum in 2015 and at some point Doge for fun and profit. I joined Epic Cash team in September 2019 handling PR and Marketing.
I saw in Epic Cash what was missing in my previous cryptos — things that were missing in Bitcoin and Monero especially.
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Hello Cryptodiffer Community, I am not an original co-founder nor am I a developer for the Epic Cash project. I am however a community member that is involved in helping scale this project to higher levels. One of the many beauties of Epic Cash is that every single member in the community has the opportunity to be part of EPIC’s team, it can be from development all the way to content producing. Epic Cash is a community driven project. The true Core Team of Epic Cash is our community. I believe a community that is the Core Team is truly powerful. EPIC Cash has one of the freshest and strongest communities I have seen in quite a while. Which is one of the reasons why I became involved in this project. Epic displayed some of the most self community produced content I have seen in a project. I’m actually a doctor of medicine but in terms of my experience in crypto, I have been involved in the industry since 2012 beginning with mining Litecoin. Since then I have been doing deep dive analysis on different projects, investing, and building a network in crypto that I will utilize to help connect and scale Epic in every way I can. To give some credit to those people in my network that have been a part of helping give Epic exposure, I would like to give a special thanks to u/Tetsugan and u/Saurabhblr. Tetsugan has been doing a lot of work for the Japanese community to penetrate the Japanese market, and Japan has already developed a growing interest in Epic. Daku Sarabh the owner and creator of Crypto Daku Robinhooders, I would like to thank him and his community for giving us one of our first large AMA’s, which he has supported our project early and given us a free AMA. Many more to thank but can’t be disclosed. Also thank you to all the Epic Community leaders, developers, and Content producers!
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
I’m Max Freeman, which stands for “Maximum Freedom for Mankind”. I started working on the ideas that would become Epic in 2018. I fell in love with Bitcoin in 2017 but realized that it needs privacy at the base layer, fungibility, better scalability in order to go to the next level.
CryptoDiffer team
Really interesting backgrounds I must admit, pleasure to see the team that clearly has one vision of the project by being completely decentralized:)
Q2: Can you briefly describe what is Epic Cash in 3–5 sentences? What technology stands behind Epic Cash and why it’s better than the existing one?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
I’d like to highlight the differences between Epic and the two highest-valued privacy coin projects, Monero and Zcash. XMR has always-on privacy like Epic does, but at a cost: Its blockchain is over 20x more data intensive than Epic, which limits its possibilities for scalability. Epic’s blockchain is small and light enough to run a full node on cell phones, something that is in our product road map. ZEC by comparison can’t run on low end devices because of its zero knowledge based approach, and only 1% of transactions are fully private. Epic is simply newer, more advanced technology than prior networks thanks to Mimblewimble
We will also add more algorithms to widen the range of hardware that can participate in mining. For example, cell phones and tablets based around ARM chips. Millions of people can mine Epic that can’t mine Bitcoin, and that will help grow the network rapidly.
There are some great short videos on our YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQBFfksJlM97rgrplLRwNUg/videos
that explain why we believe we have created something truly special here.
Our core architecture derives from Grin, so we are fortunate to benefit on an ongoing basis from their considerable development efforts. We are focused on making our currency truly usable and widely available, beyond a store of value and becoming a true medium of exchange.
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
Well we all have our views, but in a nutshell, we offer things that were missing in the previous cryptos. We have sound fiscal emission schedule matching Bitcoin, but we are vastly more private and faster. Our blockchain is lighter than Bitcoin or Monero and our tech is more scalable. Also, we are unique in that we are mineable with CPUs and GPUs as well as ASICs, giving the broadest population the ability to mine Epic Cash. Plus, you can’t forget FUNGIBILITY 🙂 we are big on that — since you can’t have true privacy without fungibility.
Also, please understand, we have HUGE respect to all the cryptos that came before us, we learned a lot from them, and thanks to their mistakes we evolved.
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
To add on, what also makes Epic Cash unique is the ability to decentralize the mining using a tri-algo model of Random X (CPU), Progpow (GPU), and Cuckoo (ASIC) for an ability to do hybrid mining. I believe this is an issue we can see today in Bitcoin having centralized mining and the average user has a costly barrier of entry.
To follow up on this one in my opinion one of the things we adopted that we have seen success for , in example Bitcoin and Monero, is a strong community driven coin. I believe having a community driven coin will provide a more organic atmosphere especially when starting with No ICO, or Premine with a fair distribution model for everyone.
CryptoDiffer team
Q3: What are the major milestones Epic Cash has achieved so far? Maybe you can share with us some exciting plans for future weeks/months?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
Since we went live in September of 2019, we attracted a very large community of users, miners, investors and contributors from across the world. Epic Cash is a very international project with white papers translated into over 30 languages. We are very much a community driven project; this is very evident from our content and the amount of translations in our white papers and in our social media content.
We are constantly working on improving our usability, security and privacy, as well as getting our message and philosophy out into the world to achieve mass adoption. We have a lot of exciting plans for our project, the plan is to make Epic Cash into something that is More than Money.
You can tell I am the Marketing guy since my message is less about the actual tech and more about the usability and use cases for Epic Cash, I think our Team and Community have a great mix of technical, practical, social and fiscal experiences. Since we opened our YouTube channels content for community submissions, we have seen our content translated into Spanish, French, German, Polish, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, Russian, and other languages
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
Our future development roadmap will be published soon and includes 4 tracks:
Usability
Mining
Core Protocol
Ecosystem Development
Core Protocol
Epic Server 2.9.0 — this release improves the difficulty adjustment and is aimed at making block emission closer to the target 60 seconds, particularly reducing the incidence of extremely short and long blocks — Status: In Development (Testing) Anticipated Release: June 2020
Epic Server 3.0.0 — this completes the rebase to Grin 3.0.0 and serves as the prerequisite to some important functional building blocks for the future of the ecosystem. Specifically, sending via Tor (which eliminates the need to open ports), proof of payment (useful for certain dex applications e.g. Bisq), and our native mobile app. Status: In Development (Testing) Anticipated Release: Fall 2020
Non-Interactive Transactions — this will enhance usability by enabling “fire and forget” send-to-address functionality that users are accustomed to from most cryptocurrencies. Status: Drawing Board Anticipated Release: n/a
Scaling Options — when blocks start becoming full, how will we increase capacity? Two obvious options are increasing the block size, as well as a Lightning Network-style Layer 2 structure. Status: Drawing Board Anticipated Release: n/a
Confidential Assets — Similar to Raven, Tari, and Beam, the ability to create independently tradable assets that ride on the Epic Blockchain. Status: Drawing Board Anticipated Release: n/a
Usability
GUI Wallet 2.0 — Restore from seed words and various usability enhancements — Status: Needs Assessment Anticipated Release: Fall 2020
Mobile App — Native mobile experience for iOS and Android. Status: In Development (Testing) Anticipated Release: Winter 2020
Telegram Integration — Anonymous payments over the Telegram network, bot functionality for groups. Status: Drawing Board Anticipated Release: n/a
Mining
RandomX on ARM — Our 4th PoW algorithm, this will enable tablets, cell phones, and low power devices such as Raspberry Pi to participate in mining. Status: Needs Assessment Anticipated Release: n/a
The economics of mining Epic are extremely compelling for countries that have free or extremely cheap electricity, since anyone with an ordinary PC can mine. Individual people around the world can simply run the miner and earn meaningful money (imagine Venezuela for example), something that has not been possible since the very early days of Bitcoin.
Ecosystem Development
Atomic Swaps — Connecting Epic to other blockchains in a trustless way, starting with ETH so that Epic can trade on DeFi infrastructure such as Uniswap, Kyber, etc. Status: Drawing Board Anticipated Release: n/a
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
From the Community aspect, we have been further developing our community international reach. We have been seeing an increase in interest from South America, China, Russia, Japan, Italy, and the Philippines. We are working on targeting more countries. We truly aim to be a decentralized project that is open to everyone worldwide.
CryptoDiffer team
Great, thank you for your answers, we now can move to community questions part!
Cryptodiffer Community
You have 3 mining algorithms, the question is: how do they not compete with each other? Is there any benefit of mining on the GPU and CPU if someone is mining on the ASIC?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
The block selection is deterministic, so that every 100 blocks, 60% are for RandomX (CPU), 38% for ProgPow (GPU), and 2% for Cuckoo (ASIC) — the policy is flexible so that we can have as many algorithms with any percentages we want. The goal is to make the most decentralized and resilient network possible, and with that in mind we are excited to work on enabling tablets and cell phones to mine, since that opens it up to millions of people that otherwise can’t take part.
Cryptodiffer Community
To Run a project smoothly, Funding is very important, From where does the Funding/revenue come from?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Yes, early on this was realized and in order to scale a project funds are indeed needed. Epic Cash did not start with any funding and no ICO and was organically genesis mined with no pre-mine. Epic cash is also a nonprofit community driven project similar to Monero. There is no profit-driven entity in the picture. To overcome the revenue issue Epic Cash setup a development fund tax that decreases 1% every year until 2028 when Epic Cash reaches singularity with Bitcoin emissions. Currently it is at 7.77%. This will help support the scaling of the project.
Cryptodiffer Community
Hi! In your experience working also with MONERO can you please clarify which are those identified problems that EPIC CASH aims to develop and resolve? What’s the main advantage that EPIC CASH has over MONERO? Thank you!
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
First, I must admit that I am still a huge fan and HODLer of Monero. That said:
✅ our blockchain is MUCH lighter than Monero’s
✅ our transaction processing speed is much faster
✅ our address-less blockchain is more private
✅ Epic Cash can be mined with CPU (RandomX) GPU (ProgPow) and Cuckoo, whereas Monero migrated to RandomX and currently only mineable with CPU
Cryptodiffer Community
  1. the feature ‘Cut Through’ deletes old data, how is it decided which data will be deletes, and what are the consequences of it for the platform and therefore the users?
  2. On your website I see links to download Epic wallet and mining software for Linux,Windows and MacOs, I am a user of android, is there a version for me, or does it have a release date?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
  1. This is one of the most exciting features of Mimblewimble, which is its extraordinary ability to compress blockchain data. In Bitcoin, the entire history of a coin must be replayed every time it is spent, and comprehensive details are permanently stored in the blockchain. Epic discards spent transaction inputs and consolidates outputs, storing neither addresses or amounts, only a tiny kernel to allow sender and receiver to prove their transaction.
  2. The Vitex mobile app is great for today, and we have a native mobile app for iOS and Android in the works as well.
Cryptodiffer Community
$EPIC Have total Supply of 21,000,000 EPIC , is there any burning plan? Or Buyback program to maintain $EPIC price in the future?
Who is Epic Biggest competitors?
And what’s makes epic better than competitors?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
We respect the older generation coins like Bitcoin. But we have learned that the supply economics of Bitcoin is very sound. Until today we can witness how the Bitcoin is being adopted institutionally and by retail. We match the 21 million BTC supply economics because it is an inelastic fixed model which makes the long-term economics very sound. To have an elastic model of burning tokens or printing tokens will not have a solid economic future. Take for example the USD which is an inflating supply. In terms of competitors we look at everyone in crypto with respect and also learn from everyone. If we had to compare to other Mimblewimble tech coins, Grin is an inelastic forever inflating supply which in the long term is not sound economics. Beam however is an inelastic model but is formed as a corporation. The fair distribution is not there because of the permanent revenue model setup for them. Epic Cash a non-profit development tax fund model for scaling purposes that will disappear by 2028’s singularity.
Cryptodiffer Community
What your plans in place for global expansion, are you focusing on only market at this time? Or focus on building and developing or getting customers and users, or partnerships?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
Since we are a community project, we have many developers, in addition to the core team.
Our plans for Global expansion are simple — we have advocates in different regions addressing their audiences in their native languages. We are growing organically, by explaining our ideology and usability. The idea is to grow beyond needing a fiat bridge for crypto use, but to rather replace fiat with our borderless, private and fungible crypto so people can use it to get goods and services without using banks.
We are not limiting ourselves to one particular demographic — Epic Cash is a valid solution for the gamers, investors, techie and non techie people, and the unbanked.
Cryptodiffer Community
EPIC confidential coin! Did you have any problems with the regulators? And there will be no problems with listing on centralized exchanges?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
In terms of structure, we are carefully set up to minimize these concerns. Without a company or investors in the picture, and having raised no funds, there is little scope to attack in terms of securities laws. Bitcoin and Ethereum are widely acknowledged as acceptable, and we follow in their well-established footprints in that respect. Centralized exchanges already trade other privacy coins, so we don’t see this as much of an issue either. In general, decentralized p2p exchange options are more interesting than today’s centralized platforms. They are more censorship resistant, secure, and privacy-protecting. As the technology gets better, they should continue to gain market share and that’s why we’re proud to be partnered with Vitex, whose exchange and mobile app work very well.
Cryptodiffer Community
What are the main utility and real-life usage of the #EPIC As an investor, why should we invest in the #EPIC project as a long-term investment?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
Because our blockchain is so light (only 1.16gb currently, and grows very slowly) it is naturally well suited to become a decentralized mobile money standard because people can run a full node on their phone, guaranteeing the security of their funds. Scalability in Bitcoin requires complicated and compromised workarounds such as Lightning Network and light clients, and these problems are solved in Epic.
With our forthcoming Mobile Mining app, hundreds of millions of cell phones and tablets will be able to easily join the network. People can quickly and cheaply send money to one another, fulfilling the long-envisioned promise of P2P electronic cash.
As an investor, it’s important to ask a few key questions. Bitcoin Standard tokenomics of disinflation and a fixed supply are well proven over a decade now. We follow this model exactly, with a permanently synchronized supply from 2028, and 4 emission halvings from now until then, with our first one in about two weeks. Beyond that, we can apply some simple logical tests. What is more valuable, money that can only be used in some cases (censorable Bitcoin based on a lack of fungibility) or money that can be used universally? (fungible Epic based on always-on privacy by default). Epic is also poised to be a more decentralized and therefore resilient network because of wider participation in mining. Epic is designed to be Bitcoin++ Privacy, Fungibility, Scalability
Cryptodiffer Community
Q1. What are advantages for choosing three mining algorithms RandomX+, ProgPow and CuckAToo31+ ?
Q2. Beam and Grin use MimbleWimble protocol, so what are difference for Epic? All of you will be friends for partners or competitors?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
RandomX and ProgPow are designed to use the entirety of a CPU / GPU’s unique processing capabilities in a way that other types of hardware don’t work as well. You can run RandomX on a GPU but it doesn’t work nearly as well as a much cheaper CPU, for example. Cuckoo is a “memory hard” algorithm that widens the range of companies that can produce the hardware.
Grin and Beam are great projects and we’ve learned a lot from them. We inherited our first codebase from Grin’s excellent Rust design, which is a better language for community participation than C++ that Beam currently uses.
Functionally, Mimblewimble is similar across the 3 coins, with standard Confidential Transactions, CoinJoin, Dandelion++, Schnorr Signatures and other advanced features. Grin is primarily ASIC-targeted, Beam is GPU-targeted, and Epic is multi-hardware.
The biggest differences though are in tokenomics and project structure. Grin has permanent inflation of 60 coins per block with no halvings, which means steady erosion of value over time due to new supply pressure. It also lacks a steady funding model, making future development in jeopardy, particularly as the per coin price falls. Beam has a for-profit model with heavy early inflation and a high developer tax. Epic builds on the strengths of these earlier mimblewimble projects and addresses the parts that could be improved.
Cryptodiffer Community Some privacy coin has scalability issues! How Epic cash will solve scalability issues? Why you choose randomX consensus algorithem?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Fungibility means that you can’t distinguish one unit of currency from another, in example Gold. Fungibility has recently become a hot issue as people have been noticing Bitcoins being locked up by exchanges which may of had a nefarious history which are called Tainted Coins. In example coins that have been involved in a hack, darknet market transactions, or even processing coin through a mixer. Today we can already see freshly mined Bitcoins being sold at a premium price to avoid the fungibility problem Bitcoin carries today. Bitcoin can be tracked by chainalysis and is not a fungible cryptocurrency. One of the features that Epic has is privacy with added fungibility, because of Mimblewimble technology, Epic has no addresses recorded and therefore nothing can be tracked by chainalysis. Below I provide a link of an example of what the lack of fungibility is resulting in today with Bitcoin. One of the reasons why we chose the Random X algo. is because of the easy barrier of entry and also to further decentralize the mining. Random X algo can be mined on old computers or laptops. We also have 2 other algos Progpow (GPU), and Cuckoo (ASIC) to create a wider decentralization of mining methods for Epic.
Cryptodiffer Community
I’m a newbie in crypto and blockchain so how will Epic Cash team target and educate people who don’t know about blockchain and crypto?
What is the uniqueness of Epic Cash that cannot be found in other project that´s been released so far ?
Yoga Dude Pr&Marketing at Epic Cash
Actually, while we have our white paper translated into over 30 languages, we are more focused on explaining our uses and advantages rather than cold specs. Our tech is solid, but we not get hung up on pure tech talk which most casual users do not need to or care to understand. As long as our fundamentals and tech are secure and user friendly our primary goal is to educate about use cases and market potential.
The uniqueness of Epic Cash is its amalgamation of “whats good” in other cryptos. We use Mimblewimble for privacy and anonymity. Our blockchain is much lighter than our competitors. We are the only Mimblewimble crypto to use a unique cocktail of mining algorithms allowing to be mined by casual miners with gaming rigs and laptops, while remaining friendly to GPU and CPU farmers.
The “uniqueness” is learning from the mistakes of those who came before us, we evolved and learned, which is why our privacy is better, we are faster, we are fungible, we offer diverse mining and so on. We are the best blend — thats powerful and unique
Cryptodiffer Community
Can you share EPIC’s vision for decentralized finance (DEFI)? What features do EPIC have to support DEFI?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
We view Epic as ideally suited to be the decentralized digital reserve asset of the new Private Internet of Money that’s emerging. At a technology level, atomic swaps can be created to build liquidity bridges so that wrapped Epic tokens (like WBTC, WETH) can trade on other networks as ERC20, BEP2, NEP5, VIP180, Algorand and so on. There is more Bitcoin value locked on Ethereum than in Lightning Network, so we will similarly integrate Epic so that it can trade on networks such as Uniswap, Kyber, and so on.
Longer term, if there is market demand for it, thanks to Scriptless Script functionality our blockchain has, we can build “Confidential Assets” (which Raven, Tari, and Beam are all also working on) that enable people to create tokenized assets in a private way.
Cryptodiffer Community
If you could choose one celebrity to promote Epic-cash, who that would be?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
I am a firm believer that the strength of the project lies in allowing community members to become their own celebrities, if their content is good enough the community will propel them to celebrity status. Organic celebrities with small but loyal following are vastly more beneficial than big name professional shills with inflated but non caring audiences.
I remember the early days of Apple when an enthusiastic dude named Guy Kawasaki became Apple Evangelist, he was literally going around stores that sold Apple and visited user groups and Evangelized his belief in Apple. This guy became a Legend and helped Apple become what it is today.
Epic Cash will have its OWN Celebrities
Cryptodiffer Community
How does $EPIC solve scalability of transactions? Current blockchains face issues with scalability a lot, how does $EPIC creates a solution to it?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Epic Cash is utilizing Mimblewimble technology. Besides the privacy & fungibility aspect of the tech. There is the scalability features of it. It is implemented into Epic by transaction cut-through. Which means it allows nodes to remove all intermediate transactions, thus significantly reducing the blockchain size without affecting its validation. Mimblewimble also does not use addresses like a BTC address, and amount of transactions are also not recorded. One problem Monero and Bitcoin are facing now is scalability. It is evident today that data is getting more expensive and that will be a problem in the long run for those coins. Epic is 90% lighter and more scalable compared to Monero and Bitcoin.
Cryptodiffer Community
what are the ways that Epic Cash generates profits/revenue to maintain your project and what is its revenue model ? How can it make benefit win-win to both invester and your project ?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
There is a block subsidy of 7.77% that declines 1.11% per year until 0, where it stays after that. As a nonprofit community effort, this extremely modest amount goes much further than in other projects, which often take 20, 30, even 50+ % of the coin supply. We believe that this ongoing funding model best aligns the long term incentives for all participants and balances the compromises between the ends of the centralized/decentralized spectrum of choices that any project must make.
Cryptodiffer Community
Q1 : What are your major goals to archive in the next 3–4 years?
Q2 : What are your plans to expand and gain more adoption?
Yoga Dude Pr&Marketing at Epic Cash
Max already talked about our technical plans and goals in his roadmap. Allow me to talk more about the non technical 😁
We are aiming for broader reach in the non technical more mainstream community — this is a big challenge but we believe it is doable. By offering simpler ways to mine Epic Cash (with smart phones for example), and by doing more education we will achieve the holy grail of crypto — moving past the fiat bridges and getting Epic Cash to be accepted as means of payment for goods and services. We will accomplish this by working with regional advocacy groups, community interaction, off-line promotional activities and diverse social media targeting.
Cryptodiffer Community
It seems to me that EpicCash will have its first Halving, right? Why a halving so soon?
Is a mobile version feasible?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
Our supply emission catches up to that of Bitcoin’s first 19 years after 8 years in Epic, so that requires more frequent halvings. Today’s block emission is 16, next up are 8, 4, 2, and then finally 0.15625. After that, the supply of Epic and that of BTC stay synchronized until maxing out at 21m coins in 2140.
Today we have a mobile wallet through the Vitex app, a native mobile wallet coming, and are working on mobile mining.
Cryptodiffer Community
What markets will you add after that?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
Well, we are aiming to have ALL markets
Epic Cash in its final iteration will be usable by everyone everywhere regardless of their technical expertise. We are not limiting ourselves to the technocrats, one of our main goals is to help the billions of unbanked. We want everyone to be able to mine, buy, and most of all USE Epic Cash — gamers, farmers, soccer moms, students, retirees, everyone really — even bankers (well once we defeat the banking industry)
We will continue building on the multilingual diversity of our global community adding support and advocacy groups in more countries in more languages.
Epic Cash is More than Money and its for Everyone.
Cryptodiffer Community
Almost, all cryptocurrencies are decentralized & no-one knows who owns that cryptocurrencies ! then also, why Privacy is needed? hats the advantages of Private coins?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
With a public transparent blockchain such as Bitcoin, you are permanently posting a detailed history of your money movements open for anyone to see (not just legitimate authorities, either!) — It would be considered crazy to post your credit card or bank statements to Twitter, but that’s what is happening every time you send a transaction that is not private. This excellent video from community contributor Spencer Lambert https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0blbfmvCq\_4 explains better than I can.
Privacy is not just for criminals, it’s for everyone. Do you want your landlord to increase the rent when he sees that you get a raise? Your insurance company to raise your healthcare costs because they see you buying too much ice cream? If you’re a business, do you want your employees to see how much money their coworkers make? Do you want your competitors to trace your supplier and customer relationships? Of course not. By privacy being default for everyone, cryptocurrency can be used in a much wider range of situations without unacceptable compromises.
Cryptodiffer Community
What are the main utility and real-life usage of the #EPIC As an investor, why should we invest in the #EPIC project as a long-term investment?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Epic Cash can be used as a Private and Fungible store of value, medium of exchange, and unit of account. As Epic Cash grows and becomes adopted it can be compared to how Bitcoin and Monero is used and adopted as well. As Epic is adopted by the masses, it can be accepted as a medium of exchange for store owners and as fungible payments without the worry of having money that is tainted. Epic Cash as a store of value may be a good long term aspect of investment to consider. Epic Cash carries an inelastic fixed supply economic model of 21 million coins. There will be 5 halvings which this month of June will be our first halving of epic. From a block reward of 16 Epic reduced to 8. If we look at BTC’s price action and history of their halvings it has been proven and show that there has been an increase in value due to the scarcity and from halvings a reduction of # of BTC’s mined per block. An inelastic supply model like Bitcoin provides proof of the circulating supply compared to the total supply by the history of it’s Price action which is evident in long term charts since the birth of Bitcoin. EPIC Plans to have 5 halvings before the year 2028 to match the emissions of Bitcoin which we call the singularity event. Below is a chart displaying our halvings model approaching singularity. Once bitcoin and cryptocurrency becomes adopted mainstream, the fungibility problem will be more noticed by the general public. Privacy coins and the features of fungibility/scalability will most likely be sought over. Right now a majority of people believe that all cryptocurrency is fungible. However, that is not true. We can already see Chainalysis confirming that they can trace and track and even for other well-known privacy coins today such as Z-Cash.
Cryptodiffer Community
  1. You aim to reach support from a global community, what are your plans to get spanish speakers involved into Epic Cash? And emerging markets like the african
  2. How am I secure I won’t be affected by receiving tainted money?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
Native speakers from our community are working to raise awareness in key markets such as mining in Argentina and Venezuela for Spanish (Roberto Navarro called Epic “the holy grail of cryptocurrency” and Ethiopia and certain North African countries that have the lowest electricity costs in the world. Remittances between USA and Latin American countries are expensive and slow, so Epic is also perfect for people to send money back home as well.
Cryptodiffer Community
Do EPICs in 2020 focus more on research and coding, or on sales and implementation?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
We will definitely continue to work on research and coding, with emphasis on improved accessibility (especially via smartphones) usability, security and privacy.
In terms of financial infrastructure will continuing to add exchanges both KYC and non KYC.
Big part of our plans is in ongoing Marketing and PR outreach. The idea is to make Epic Cash a viral sensation of sorts. If we can get Epic Cash adopters to spread the word and tell their family, coworkers and friends about Epic Cash — there will be no stopping us and to help that happen we have a growing army of content creators, and supporters.
Everyone with skin in the game gets the benefit of advancing the cause.
Folks also, this isn’t an answer to the question but an example of a real-world Epic Cash content —
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtAVEqKGgqY
a challenge from one of our content creators to beat his 21 pull ups and get 100 epics! This has not been claimed yet — people need to step up 🙂 and to help that I will match another 100 Epic Cash to the first person to beat this
Cryptodiffer Community
I was watching some videos explaining how to send and receive transactions in EpicCash, which consists of ports and sending links, my question is why this is so, which, for now, looks complex?
Let’s talk about the economic model, can EpicCash comply with the concept of value reserve?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
In V3, which is coming later this summer, Epic can be sent over Tor, which eliminates this issue of port opening, even though using tools like ngrok.io, it’s not necessarily as painful as directly configuring the router ports. Early Lightning Network had this issue as well and it’s something we have a plan to address via research into non-interactive transactions. “Fire and Forget” payments to an address, as people are used to in Bitcoin, is coming to Epic and we’re excited to develop functionality that other advanced mimblewimble coins don’t yet have. We are committed to constant improvement in usability and utility, to make our money system the ease of use leader.
We are involved in the project (anyone can join the Freeman Family) because we believe that simply by choosing to use a form of money that better aligns with our ideals, that we can make a positive change in the world. Some of my thoughts about how I got involved are here: https://medium.com/epic-cash/the-freeman-family-e3b9c3b3f166
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
Huge thanks to our friends Maks and Vladyslav, we welcome everyone to come say hi at one of our friendly communities. It is extremely early in this journey, our market cap is only 0.5m right now, whereas the 3 other mimblewimble coins are at $20m, $30m and $100m respectively. Epic is a historic opportunity to follow in the footsteps of legends such as Bitcoin and Monero, and we hope to become the first Top 5 privacy coin project.
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Would like to Thank the Cryptodiffer Team and the Cryptodiffer community for hosting us and also engaging with us to learn more about Epic. If anyone else has more questions and wants to know more about EPIC , can find us at our telegram channel at https://t.me/EpicCash .
Yoga Dude Pr&Marketing at Epic Cash
Thank you, CryptoDiffer Team, and this wonderful Community!!!
Cryptodiffer TEAM
Thank you everyone for taking your time and asking great questions
Thank you for your time, it was an insightful session
Spread the love
submitted by EpicCashFrodo to epiccash [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Market Cycle: Headed Towards Point of Maximum Financial Opportunity

Author: CoinLive News Team Jun 18, 2018 at 12:47
(Click the link to visualize the article from the original source)
There are many venues one can venture when it comes to analyzing the state of affairs in a particular market. However, from a psychological perspective, it is human nature to see repetitive patterns play out over and over. In this article, we want to bring to the readers' attention the psychology behind a market cycle, how it tends to trick one's emotions, and what stage the crypto space might be at.

Understanding the Psychology of a Market Cycle

Credit goes to Karen Bennett, writer at cheatsheet.com, whose chart (below) on the psychology of a market cycle has become an absolute classic to explain the different emotional phases of any volatile market. The chart illustrates the type of feelings and sentiment traders and investors alike experience as the price fluctuates. These inevitable human emotions, coupled with market fundamentals, help to explain the price dynamics and what we should expect based on the type of emotional phase we project to be in.
In this article, we will attempt to draw some parallels between the chart of Bitcoin and the psychological cycles investors go through as described by Karen Bennett. Let's, first of all, explore the chart below and extract a few insights out of it. It is of cardinal importance to always be reminded that markets go through periods of expansion and contraction, which describes the times where the market alternates between trending in a defined direction and moving sideways. This phenomenon can be extrapolated to multiple facets of our lives (thermal, matter, solid, liquids...).
It is during the periods of most contraction that the majority of the market crowd will leave by selling their holding (weak-handed players) to those that are interested in buying to accumulate at what is perceived as attractive prices. The contraction of the market partly occurs due to the compressive effect of those strong-handed players absorbing selling orders.
![](https://coinlive.io/ckeditor_assets/pictures/1000/content_psychology_cycles.png)

Applying Market Cycle Psychology to Bitcoin & Market Cap

By comparing the psychology of market moves and its emotions to the rollercoaster seen in Bitcoin ever since its peak from its irrationally exuberant rally from Dec-Jan, we have taken the initiative to draw what we believe could be some common parallels that may provide some extra insights about the potential market phase we might be at, as perceived by market participants. In our opinion, a period of depression, which leads up to disbelief might be the most accurate terrain we find ourselves at this moment in time, especially after the harsh sell-off resumption seen ever since mid-May.
![](https://coinlive.io/ckeditor_assets/pictures/1003/content_btc01.png)
We can best define this period as the one that sees a consistent loss of hope, with investors no longer expecting a significant upward correction in the near future that may get them out of the deep hole they find themselves in. A significant portion of market participants give up on the idea that their capital has been wisely invested. We seem to have entered a phase where investors aim to save whatever funds left in desperation even if they realize that cutting the losses for whatever capital is left will still represent a major setback.
This phase leads to a potential paradigm shift in their belief about the underlying fundamentals that they first considered so disruptive, or they simply come to the realization that the only reason they invested was out of an adrenaline-led hype vs a proper understanding of the technology and its revolutionary consequences to advance society as we know it. This loss in the overall interest keeps prices at depressed levels, which tends to coincide, at times, with the lowest point in the current cycle.
Stable prices in a compressed range tend to follow, in what might be an arduous and torturous stage lasting quite some time before a new bullish trend re-emerges. Note how the ATR has been consistently compressing since the peak, which suggests we are gradually heading towards the compression phase and point of maximum financial opportunity.

Keep in Mind Return to the 'Mean'

Another critical component to understand is the term "return to the mean". Given that the price of Bitcoin is now way below the most widely followed moving averages (5, 100, 200-Daily Moving Average), one could apply the usefulness of drawing trending lines to estimate where the fair value or mean may be located. Note, different interpretations (lines drawn) should be considered.
By connecting the most number of highs /lows from various price sequences, we come up with at least 3 different trendlines that serve as an estimate to calculate where the market may perceive the mean or fair value of Bitcoin. No one can really tell whether the first green box is the one the market is paying most attention to (follow volumes for valuable tips). However, this exercise helps us determine, from a market cycle/mean reversion standpoint, that the range between $6.5k and $3k appears to be an area where a period of accumulation (perception of value) will most likely occur.
![](https://coinlive.io/ckeditor_assets/pictures/1005/content_btc02.png)
Mean reversion is extremely critical. Over a short span, the markets can behave in such an erratic manner, and anything can happen, however, when we scan the market conditions as part of an extended period of time, which may go from months to years - that's when statistics and certain patterns tend to more accurately play out, with 2 plus 2 more often than not equal 4. Performance that is well above average eventually reverts back to an equilibrium point as it no longer can defy gravity, while performance that is well below average has a tendency to improve.
At CoinLive we are always open for interpretations that can be logically explained and have a mathematical backing. We have been long endorsing the approach taken by the user of BitcoinTalk that goes by the name Trolololo and its logarithmic non-linear mean regression chart. According to the chart below, we might be closer to the upper edge of the $6.5k-$3k range, although as usual, a caveat applies. In the past, the price of Bitcoin has had a tendency to spend significant periods of time in an undervalued area below the mean reversion (red line).
![](https://coinlive.io/ckeditor_assets/pictures/1006/content_btc03.png)
The formula%2Fweeks)+-+8.81809) that utilizes can also be applied to the total crypto market capitalization (currently at $270b), which can be found below:
![103.23720 log((weeks since Friday, January 9, 2009/week) - 8.81809)](http://www4d.wolframalpha.com/Calculate/MSP/MSP131ei58i8420g3f1eh00005h2a3221h21b15i6?MSPStoreType=image/gif&s=37) = ![1.78×1011](http://www4d.wolframalpha.com/Calculate/MSP/MSP171ei58i8420g3f1eh00002icb526a8ff605ie?MSPStoreType=image/gif&s=37)
Twitter user @TommyWorldPower, a crypto influencer and Creator of @energicrypto, notes: "My observations of the market is that current fair value of market: $175B. Current growth rate ~150%/yr (decaying at 20%/yr, so next year would be ~120% growth). Thus, though we are overvalued now, we would reach fair market value in about 8 months at current valuation. I'm hodling."

What Can We Learn from the Analysis?

Some of the main takeaways from this analysis include:
submitted by Ivo333 to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

US Economic Warfare and Likely Foreign Defenses – by Michael Hudson • 23 July 2019

https://outline.com/VM2DEM • 5,400 Words •
Today’s world is at war on many fronts. The rules of international law and order put in place toward the end of World War II are being broken by U.S. foreign policy escalating its confrontation with countries that refrain from giving its companies control of their economic surpluses. Countries that do not give the United States control of their oil and financial sectors or privatize their key sectors are being isolated by the United States imposing trade sanctions and unilateral tariffs giving special advantages to U.S. producers in violation of free trade agreements with European, Asian and other countries.
This global fracture has an increasingly military cast. U.S. officials justify tariffs and import quotas illegal under WTO rules on “national security” grounds, claiming that the United States can do whatever it wants as the world’s “exceptional” nation. U.S. officials explain that this means that their nation is not obliged to adhere to international agreements or even to its own treaties and promises. This allegedly sovereign right to ignore on its international agreements was made explicit after Bill Clinton and his Secretary of State Madeline Albright broke the promise by President George Bush and Secretary of State James Baker that NATO would not expand eastward after 1991. (“You didn’t get it in writing,” was the U.S. response to the verbal agreements that were made.)
Likewise, the Trump administration repudiated the multilateral Iranian nuclear agreement signed by the Obama administration, and is escalating warfare with its proxy armies in the Near East. U.S. politicians are waging a New Cold War against Russia, China, Iran, and oil-exporting countries that the United States is seeking to isolate if cannot control their governments, central bank and foreign diplomacy.
The international framework that originally seemed equitable was pro-U.S. from the outset. In 1945 this was seen as a natural result of the fact that the U.S. economy was the least war-damaged and held by far most of the world’s monetary gold. Still, the postwar trade and financial framework was ostensibly set up on fair and equitable international principles. Other countries were expected to recover and grow, creating diplomatic, financial and trade parity with each other.
But the past decade has seen U.S. diplomacy become one-sided in turning the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, SWIFT bank-clearing system and world trade into an asymmetrically exploitative system. This unilateral U.S.-centered array of institutions is coming to be widely seen not only as unfair, but as blocking the progress of other countries whose growth and prosperity is seen by U.S. foreign policy as a threat to unilateral U.S. hegemony. What began as an ostensibly international order to promote peaceful prosperity has turned increasingly into an extension of U.S. nationalism, predatory rent-extraction and a more dangerous military confrontation.
Deterioration of international diplomacy into a more nakedly explicit pro-U.S. financial, trade and military aggression was implicit in the way in which economic diplomacy was shaped when the United Nations, IMF and World Bank were shaped mainly by U.S. economic strategists. Their economic belligerence is driving countries to withdraw from the global financial and trade order that has been turned into a New Cold War vehicle to impose unilateral U.S. hegemony. Nationalistic reactions are consolidating into new economic and political alliances from Europe to Asia.
We are still mired in the Oil War that escalated in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq, which quickly spread to Libya and Syria. American foreign policy has long been based largely on control of oil. This has led the United States to oppose the Paris accords to stem global warming. Its aim is to give U.S. officials the power to impose energy sanctions forcing other countries to “freeze in the dark” if they do not follow U.S. leadership.
To expand its oil monopoly, America is pressuring Europe to oppose the Nordstream II gas pipeline from Russia, claiming that this would make Germany and other countries dependent on Russia instead of on U.S. liquified natural gas (LNG). Likewise, American oil diplomacy has imposed unilateral sanctions against Iranian oil exports, until such time as a regime change opens up that country’s oil reserves to U.S., French, British and other allied oil majors.
U.S. control of dollarized money and credit is critical to this hegemony. As Congressman Brad Sherman of Los Angeles told a House Financial Services Committee hearing on May 9, 2019: “An awful lot of our international power comes from the fact that the U.S. dollar is the standard unit of international finance and transactions. Clearing through the New York Fed is critical for major oil and other transactions. It is the announced purpose of the supporters of cryptocurrency to take that power away from us, to put us in a position where the most significant sanctions we have against Iran, for example, would become irrelevant.”[1]
The U.S. aim is to keep the dollar as the transactions currency for world trade, savings, central bank reserves and international lending. This monopoly status enables the U.S. Treasury and State Department to disrupt the financial payments system and trade for countries with which the United States is at economic or outright military war.
Russian President Vladimir Putin quickly responded by describing how “the degeneration of the universalist globalization model [is] turning into a parody, a caricature of itself, where common international rules are replaced with the laws… of one country.”[2] That is the trajectory on which this deterioration of formerly open international trade and finance is now moving. It has been building up for a decade. On June 5, 2009, then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev cited this same disruptive U.S. dynamic at work in the wake of the U.S. junk mortgage and bank fraud crisis.
Those whose job it was to forecast events … were not ready for the depth of the crisis and turned out to be too rigid, unwieldy and slow in their response. The international financial organisations – and I think we need to state this up front and not try to hide it – were not up to their responsibilities, as has been said quite unambiguously at a number of major international events such as the two recent G20 summits of the world’s largest economies.
Furthermore, we have had confirmation that our pre-crisis analysis of global economic trends and the global economic system were correct. The artificially maintained uni-polar system and preservation of monopolies in key global economic sectors are root causes of the crisis. One big centre of consumption, financed by a growing deficit, and thus growing debts, one formerly strong reserve currency, and one dominant system of assessing assets and risks – these are all factors that led to an overall drop in the quality of regulation and the economic justification of assessments made, including assessments of macroeconomic policy. As a result, there was no avoiding a global crisis.[3]
That crisis is what is now causing today’s break in global trade and payments.
Warfare on many fronts, with Dollarization being the main arena
Dissolution of the Soviet Union 1991 did not bring the disarmament that was widely expected. U.S. leadership celebrated the Soviet demise as signaling the end of foreign opposition to U.S.-sponsored neoliberalism and even as the End of History. NATO expanded to encircle Russia and sponsored “color revolutions” from Georgia to Ukraine, while carving up former Yugoslavia into small statelets. American diplomacy created a foreign legion of Wahabi fundamentalists from Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq, Syria and Libya in support of Saudi Arabian extremism and Israeli expansionism.
The United States is waging war for control of oil against Venezuela, where a military coup failed a few years ago, as did the 2018-19 stunt to recognize an unelected pro-American puppet regime. The Honduran coup under President Obama was more successful in overthrowing an elected president advocating land reform, continuing the tradition dating back to 1954 when the CIA overthrew Guatemala’s Arbenz regime.
U.S. officials bear a special hatred for countries that they have injured, ranging from Guatemala in 1954 to Iran, whose regime it overthrew to install the Shah as military dictator. Claiming to promote “democracy,” U.S. diplomacy has redefined the word to mean pro-American, and opposing land reform, national ownership of raw materials and public subsidy of foreign agriculture or industry as an “undemocratic” attack on “free markets,” meaning markets controlled by U.S. financial interests and absentee owners of land, natural resources and banks.
A major byproduct of warfare has always been refugees, and today’s wave fleeing ISIS, Al Qaeda and other U.S.-backed Near Eastern proxies is flooding Europe. A similar wave is fleeing the dictatorial regimes backed by the United States from Honduras, Ecuador, Colombia and neighboring countries. The refugee crisis has become a major factor leading to the resurgence of nationalist parties throughout Europe and for the white nationalism of Donald Trump in the United States.
Dollarization as the vehicle for U.S. nationalism
The Dollar Standard – U.S. Treasury debt to foreigners held by the world’s central banks – has replaced the gold-exchange standard for the world’s central bank reserves to settle payments imbalances among themselves. This has enabled the United States to uniquely run balance-of-payments deficits for nearly seventy years, despite the fact that these Treasury IOUs have little visible likelihood of being repaid except under arrangements where U.S. rent-seeking and outright financial tribute from other enables it to liquidate its official foreign debt.
The United States is the only nation that can run sustained balance-of-payments deficits without having to sell off its assets or raise interest rates to borrow foreign money. No other national economy in the world can could afford foreign military expenditures on any major scale without losing its exchange value. Without the Treasury-bill standard, the United States would be in this same position along with other nations. That is why Russia, China and other powers that U.S. strategists deem to be strategic rivals and enemies are looking to restore gold’s role as the preferred asset to settle payments imbalances.
The U.S. response is to impose regime change on countries that prefer gold or other foreign currencies to dollars for their exchange reserves. A case in point is the overthrow of Libya’s Omar Kaddafi after he sought to base his nation’s international reserves on gold. His liquidation stands as a military warning to other countries.
Thanks to the fact that payments-surplus economies invest their dollar inflows in U.S. Treasury bonds, the U.S. balance-of-payments deficit finances its domestic budget deficit. This foreign central-bank recycling of U.S. overseas military spending into purchases of U.S. Treasury securities gives the United States a free ride, financing its budget – also mainly military in character – so that it can taxing its own citizens.
Trump is forcing other countries to create an alternative to the Dollar Standard
The fact that Donald Trump’s economic policies are proving ineffective in restoring American manufacturing is creating rising nationalist pressure to exploit foreigners by arbitrary tariffs without regard for international law, and to impose trade sanctions and diplomatic meddling to disrupt regimes that pursue policies that U.S. diplomats do not like.
There is a parallel here with Rome in the late 1st century BC. It stripped its provinces to pay for its military deficit, the grain dole and land redistribution at the expense of Italian cities and Asia Minor. This created foreign opposition to drive Rome out. The U.S. economy is similar to Rome’s: extractive rather than productive, based mainly on land rents and money-interest. As the domestic market is impoverished, U.S. politicians are seeking to take from abroad what no longer is being produced at home.
What is so ironic – and so self-defeating of America’s free global ride – is that Trump’s simplistic aim of lowering the dollar’s exchange rate to make U.S. exports more price-competitive. He imagines commodity trade to be the entire balance of payments, as if there were no military spending, not to mention lending and investment. To lower the dollar’s exchange rate, he is demanding that China’s central bank and those of other countries stop supporting the dollar by recycling the dollars they receive for their exports into holdings of U.S. Treasury securities.
This tunnel vision leaves out of account the fact that the trade balance is not simply a matter of comparative international price levels. The United States has dissipated its supply of spare manufacturing capacity and local suppliers of parts and materials, while much of its industrial engineering and skilled manufacturing labor has retired. An immense shortfall must be filled by new capital investment, education and public infrastructure, whose charges are far above those of other economics.
Trump’s infrastructure ideology is a Public-Private Partnership characterized by high-cost financialization demanding high monopoly rents to cover its interest charges, stock dividends and management fees. This neoliberal policy raises the cost of living for the U.S. labor force, making it uncompetitive. The United States is unable to produce more at any price right now, because its has spent the past half-century dismantling its infrastructure, closing down its part suppliers and outsourcing its industrial technology.
The United States has privatized and financialized infrastructure and basic needs such as public health and medical care, education and transportation that other countries have kept in their public domain to make their economies more cost-efficient by providing essential services at subsidized prices or freely. The United States also has led the practice of debt pyramiding, from housing to corporate finance. This financial engineering and wealth creation by inflating debt-financed real estate and stock market bubbles has made the United States a high-cost economy that cannot compete successfully with well-managed mixed economies.
Unable to recover dominance in manufacturing, the United States is concentrating on rent-extracting sectors that it hopes monopolize, headed by information technology and military production. On the industrial front, it threatens to disrupt China and other mixed economies by imposing trade and financial sanctions.
The great gamble is whether these other countries will defend themselves by joining in alliances enabling them to bypass the U.S. economy. American strategists imagine their country to be the world’s essential economy, without whose market other countries must suffer depression. The Trump Administration thinks that There Is No Alternative (TINA) for other countries except for their own financial systems to rely on U.S. dollar credit.
To protect themselves from U.S. sanctions, countries would have to avoid using the dollar, and hence U.S. banks. This would require creation of a non-dollarized financial system for use among themselves, including their own alternative to the SWIFT bank clearing system. Table 1 lists some possible related defenses against U.S. nationalistic diplomacy.
As noted above, what also is ironic in President Trump’s accusation of China and other countries of artificially manipulating their exchange rate against the dollar (by recycling their trade and payments surpluses into Treasury securities to hold down their currency’s dollar valuation) involves dismantling the Treasury-bill standard. The main way that foreign economies have stabilized their exchange rate since 1971 has indeed been to recycle their dollar inflows into U.S. Treasury securities. Letting their currency’s value rise would threaten their export competitiveness against their rivals, although not necessarily benefit the United States.
Ending this practice leaves countries with the main way to protect their currencies from rising against the dollar is to reduce dollar inflows by blocking U.S. lending to domestic borrowers. They may levy floating tariffs proportioned to the dollar’s declining value. The U.S. has a long history since the 1920s of raising its tariffs against currencies that are depreciating: the American Selling Price (ASP) system. Other countries can impose their own floating tariffs against U.S. goods.
Trade dependency as an aim of the World Bank, IMF and US AID
The world today faces a problem much like what it faced on the eve of World War II. Like Germany then, the United States now poses the main threat of war, and equally destructive neoliberal economic regimes imposing austerity, economic shrinkage and depopulation. U.S. diplomats are threatening to destroy regimes and entire economies that seek to remain independent of this system, by trade and financial sanctions backed by direct military force.
Dedollarization will require creation of multilateral alternatives to U.S. “front” institutions such as the World Bank, IMF and other agencies in which the United States holds veto power to block any alternative policies deemed not to let it “win.” U.S. trade policy through the World Bank and U.S. foreign aid agencies aims at promoting dependency on U.S. food exports and other key commodities, while hiring U.S. engineering firms to build up export infrastructure to subsidize U.S. and other natural-resource investors.[4] The financing is mainly in dollars, providing risk-free bonds to U.S. and other financial institutions. The resulting commercial and financial “interdependency” has led to a situation in which a sudden interruption of supply would disrupt foreign economies by causing a breakdown in their chain of payments and production. The effect is to lock client countries into dependency on the U.S. economy and its diplomacy, euphemized as “promoting growth and development.”
U.S. neoliberal policy via the IMF imposes austerity and opposes debt writedowns. Its economic model pretends that debtor countries can pay any volume of dollar debt simply by reducing wages to squeeze more income out of the labor force to pay foreign creditors. This ignores the fact that solving the domestic “budget problem” by taxing local revenue still faces the “transfer problem” of converting it into dollars or other hard currencies in which most international debt is denominated. The result is that the IMF’s “stabilization” programs actually destabilize and impoverish countries forced into following its advice.
IMF loans support pro-U.S. regimes such as Ukraine, and subsidize capital flight by supporting local currencies long enough to enable U.S. client oligarchies to flee their currencies at a pre-devaluation exchange rate for the dollar. When the local currency finally is allowed to collapse, debtor countries are advised to impose anti-labor austerity. This globalizes the class war of capital against labor while keeping debtor countries on a short U.S. financial leash.
U.S. diplomacy is capped by trade sanctions to disrupt economies that break away from U.S. aims. Sanctions are a form of economic sabotage, as lethal as outright military warfare in establishing U.S. control over foreign economies. The threat is to impoverish civilian populations, in the belief that this will lead them to replace their governments with pro-American regimes promising to restore prosperity by selling off their domestic infrastructure to U.S. and other multinational investors.
chart hudson
There are alternatives, on many fronts
Militarily, today’s leading alternative to NATO expansionism is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), along with Europe following France’s example under Charles de Gaulle and withdrawing. After all, there is no real threat of military invasion today in Europe. No nation can occupy another without an enormous military draft and such heavy personnel losses that domestic protests would unseat the government waging such a war. The U.S. anti-war movement in the 1960s signaled the end of the military draft, not only in the United States but in nearly all democratic countries. (Israel, Switzerland, Brazil and North Korea are exceptions.)
The enormous spending on armaments for a kind of war unlikely to be fought is not really military, but simply to provide profits to the military industrial complex. The arms are not really to be used. They are simply to be bought, and ultimately scrapped. The danger, of course, is that these not-for-use arms actually might be used, if only to create a need for new profitable production.
Likewise, foreign holdings of dollars are not really to be spent on purchases of U.S. exports or investments. They are like fine-wine collectibles, for saving rather than for drinking. The alternative to such dollarized holdings is to create a mutual use of national currencies, and a domestic bank-clearing payments system as an alternative to SWIFT. Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela already are said to be developing a crypto-currency payments to circumvent U.S. sanctions and hence financial control.
In the World Trade Organization, the United States has tried to claim that any industry receiving public infrastructure or credit subsidy deserves tariff retaliation in order to force privatization. In response to WTO rulings that U.S. tariffs are illegally imposed, the United States “has blocked all new appointments to the seven-member appellate body in protest, leaving it in danger of collapse because it may not have enough judges to allow it to hear new cases.”[5] In the U.S. view, only privatized trade financed by private rather than public banks is “fair” trade.
An alternative to the WTO (or removal of its veto privilege given to the U.S. bloc) is needed to cope with U.S. neoliberal ideology and, most recently, the U.S. travesty claiming “national security” exemption to free-trade treaties, impose tariffs on steel, aluminum, and on European countries that circumvent sanctions on Iran or threaten to buy oil from Russia via the Nordstream II pipeline instead of high-cost liquified “freedom gas” from the United States.
In the realm of development lending, China’s bank along with its Belt and Road initiative is an incipient alternative to the World Bank, whose main role has been to promote foreign dependency on U.S. suppliers. The IMF for its part now functions as an extension of the U.S. Department of Defense to subsidize client regimes such as Ukraine while financially isolating countries not subservient to U.S. diplomacy.
To save debt-strapped economies suffering Greek-style austerity, the world needs to replace neoliberal economic theory with an analytic logic for debt writedowns based on the ability to pay. The guiding principle of the needed development-oriented logic of international law should be that no nation should be obliged to pay foreign creditors by having to sell of the public domain and rent-extraction rights to foreign creditors. The defining character of nationhood should be the fiscal right to tax natural resource rents and financial returns, and to create its own monetary system.
The United States refuses to join the International Criminal Court. To be effective, it needs enforcement power for its judgments and penalties, capped by the ability to bring charges of war crimes in the tradition of the Nuremberg tribunal. U.S. to such a court, combined with its military buildup now threatening World War III, suggests a new alignment of countries akin to the Non-Aligned Nations movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Non-aligned in this case means freedom from U.S. diplomatic control or threats.
Such institutions require a more realistic economic theory and philosophy of operations to replace the neoliberal logic for anti-government privatization, anti-labor austerity, and opposition to domestic budget deficits and debt writedowns. Today’s neoliberal doctrine counts financial late fees and rising housing prices as adding to “real output” (GDP), but deems public investment as deadweight spending, not a contribution to output. The aim of such logic is to convince governments to pay their foreign creditors by selling off their public infrastructure and other assets in the public domain.
Just as the “capacity to pay” principle was the foundation stone of the Bank for International Settlements in 1931, a similar basis is needed to measure today’s ability to pay debts and hence to write down bad loans that have been made without a corresponding ability of debtors to pay. Without such an institution and body of analysis, the IMF’s neoliberal principle of imposing economic depression and falling living standards to pay U.S. and other foreign creditors will impose global poverty.
The above proposals provide an alternative to the U.S. “exceptionalist” refusal to join any international organization that has a say over its affairs. Other countries must be willing to turn the tables and isolate U.S. banks, U.S. exporters, and to avoid using U.S. dollars and routing payments via U.S. banks. To protect their ability to create a countervailing power requires an international court and its sponsoring organization.
Summary
The first existential objective is to avoid the current threat of war by winding down U.S. military interference in foreign countries and removing U.S. military bases as relics of neocolonialism. Their danger to world peace and prosperity threatens a reversion to the pre-World War II colonialism, ruling by client elites along lines similar to the 2014 Ukrainian coup by neo-Nazi groups sponsored by the U.S. State Department and National Endowment for Democracy. Such control recalls the dictators that U.S. diplomacy established throughout Latin America in the 1950s. Today’s ethnic terrorism by U.S.-sponsored Wahabi-Saudi Islam recalls the behavior of Nazi Germany in the 1940s.
Global warming is the second major existentialist threat. Blocking attempts to reverse it is a bedrock of American foreign policy, because it is based on control of oil. So the military, refugee and global warming threats are interconnected.
The U.S. military poses the greatest immediate danger. Today’s warfare is fundamentally changed from what it used to be. Prior to the 1970s, nations conquering others had to invade and occupy them with armies recruited by a military draft. But no democracy in today’s world can revive such a draft without triggering widespread refusal to fight, voting the government out of power. The only way the United States – or other countries – can fight other nations is to bomb them. And as noted above, economic sanctions have as destructive an effect on civilian populations in countries deemed to be U.S. adversaries as overt warfare. The United States can sponsor political coups (as in Honduras and Pinochet’s Chile), but cannot occupy. It is unwilling to rebuild, to say nothing of taking responsibility for the waves of refugees that our bombing and sanctions are causing from Latin America to the Near East.
U.S. ideologues view their nation’s coercive military expansion and political subversion and neoliberal economic policy of privatization and financialization as an irreversible victory signaling the End of History. To the rest of the world it is a threat to human survival.
The American promise is that the victory of neoliberalism is the End of History, offering prosperity to the entire world. But beneath the rhetoric of free choice and free markets is the reality of corruption, subversion, coercion, debt peonage and neofeudalism. The reality is the creation and subsidy of polarized economies bifurcated between a privileged rentier class and its clients, their debtors and renters. America is to be permitted to monopolize trade in oil and food grains, and high-technology rent-yielding monopolies, living off its dependent customers. Unlike medieval serfdom, people subject to this End of History scenario can choose to live wherever they want. But wherever they live, they must take on a lifetime of debt to obtain access to a home of their own, and rely on U.S.-sponsored control of their basic needs, money and credit by adhering to U.S. financial planning of their economies. This dystopian scenario confirms Rosa Luxemburg’s recognition that the ultimate choice facing nations in today’s world is between socialism and barbarism.
Keynote Paper delivered at the 14th Forum of the World Association for Political Economy, July 21, 2019.
Notes
[1] Billy Bambrough, “Bitcoin Threatens To ‘Take Power’ From The U.S. Federal Reserve,” Forbes, May 15, 2019. https://www.forbes.com/sites/billybambrough/2019/05/15/a-u-s-congressman-is-so-scared-of-bitcoin-and-crypto-he-wants-it-banned/#36b2700b6405.
[2] Vladimir Putin, keynote address to the Economic Forum, June 5-6 2019. Putin went on to warn of “a policy of completely unlimited economic egoism and a forced breakdown.” This fragmenting of the global economic space “is the road to endless conflict, trade wars and maybe not just trade wars. Figuratively, this is the road to the ultimate fight of all against all.”
[3] Address to St Petersburg International Economic Forum’s Plenary Session, St Petersburg, Kremlin.ru, June 5, 2009, from Johnson’s Russia List, June 8, 2009, #8,
[4] https://www.rt.com/business/464013-china-russia-cryptocurrency-dollar-dethrone/ . Already in the late 1950s the Forgash Plan proposed a World Bank for Economic Acceleration. Designed by Terence McCarthy and sponsored by Florida Senator Morris Forgash, the bank would have been a more truly development-oriented institution to guide foreign development to create balanced economies self-sufficient in food and other essentials. The proposal was opposed by U.S. interests on the ground that countries pursuing land reform tended to be anti-American. More to the point, they would have avoided trade and financial dependency on U.S. suppliers and banks, and hence on U.S. trade and financial sanctions to prevent them from following policies at odds with U.S. diplomatic demands.
[5] Don Weinland, “WTO rules against US in tariff dispute with China,” Financial Times, July 17, 2019.
https://xenagoguevicene.wordpress.com/2019/07/29/u-s-economic-warfare-and-likely-foreign-defenses-by-michael-hudson-%e2%80%a2-23-july-2019/
submitted by finnagains to conspiracy [link] [comments]

Breaking! If My Theory is Correct, Fair Value Completely Exposes Monero/Dash Market Manipulation!

Fair value is a brilliant new way to model currencies relative to each other. It is based on the mathematical work of a guy name pablompa online, and you can find it here My theory is based off of what his theory states at the bottom, i.e. that its possible to determine how much speculation has been ongoing using the fair value.

TL;DR right here:

From there it is a short leap to say the charts show clearly that someone has been artificially propping the monero price up while the fair value remains the same. Since a conclusion of the theory is that currencies always eventually return to trading at their fair values once the majority of speculation is accounted for, CURRENCIES THAT DO NOT DO THIS (.i.e. whose fair value and price do not converge) do not do so because their prices are being manipulated either artificially suppressed through aggressive short selling, or artificially supported through aggressive buying ala the PPT!

To view this for yourself, go to coinfairvalue.com, click on the price/fair value charts and see for yourself. Most normal currencies have frequent periods where the fair value and price converge and diverge as price discovery continually takes places. This is in line with the theory. However, coins that are being manipulated show a lack of convergence between the fair value and price. Depending on which is higher, you can determine which way the coin is being manipulated. If you click on the Monero chart you can clearly see that its price has stopped converging with its fair value since April of 2017. Which means someone is artificially inflating its price since then.

/TL;DR

What is fair value?
Fair value is a better way to price currencies.
The concept of fair value might sound familiar to an investor. There are two kinds of assets; those whose fair value is intrinsic, and those whose fair value can be expressed as a function of intrinsic fair values.
The intrinsic fair value is the function that converts the ordinal preferences of an individual’s mind into a price. Therefore, the price at which a person buys something ordinary (eg. a banana) is always smaller or equal to the fair value that the individual assigns to the thing he is buying. When many people trade an ordinary good or service, we can refer to the current fair value of that good or service as the price of it. If we were to invest in that ordinary good or service (eg. bananas), then we would need to predict the future changes in the scale of preferences that exist in society with regard to the specific ordinary good or service. We can refer to this unit as; the fair value, predicted fair value, future fair value, or speculated fair value.
In other words, 'fair value' is the predicted value that society will ascribe to a coin.
We can further conclude that the compounded fair value represents any fair value that is expressed as a function of intrinsic fair values, the existence of which can be justified under the rules of compounded assets. One would first assess the intrinsic fair values of the underlying ordinary assets, and then use the rational function to obtain a compounded fair value. Some examples of compounded assets with compounded fair values are stocks, bonds, derivatives, mortgages or currencies. All these derive their fair values from intrinsic fair values like cash flows, interest rates, ordinary goods and services, or even other compounded fair values (such as in the case of financial derivatives).
So basically, fair value is a calculated, compounded estimation of a currency's value relative to others using other intrinsic properties about the currency like Velocity (how willing people are to spend the currency). The lower the velocity the less willing people are to spend, the higher the fair value. Do you see? Fair value incorporates intrinsic properties of the currency so as to arrive at a psychological human limit to the valuation of a good (in this case a cryptocurrency). So how willing are people to spend their currency? This is different than 'tx/unit time' which depends on the number of people using the network. Velocity is how those people using the network feel/behave. Tx/unit time is based on how many people are actually transacting.
So by using these intrinsic fair values to calculate a compounded one, they arrive at a theoretically sound approximation of the ACTUAL PRICE people are willing to trade at. And because fair value and price almost always converge, you can tell when a coin is being manipulated by the fact that they do NOT converge. Look at Monero's chart for example. Up until about April of last year, the fair value and the price regularly converged and separated.
This is market forces at work attempting to determine the price. But after that the price and fair value NEVER CONVERGE AGAIN. The price remains sky high at around $128, while the fair value remains steady at $22. This indicates the ACTUAL true size of the monero economy/marketcap is MUCH SMALLER THAN IT APPEARS and that its elevated price is being artificially propped up by market manipulators. Try it! Almost every other coin has fair value/price convergences on a regular basis.

Theory

Only coins with an extended history of non-convergence between the fair value and the price are being heavily manipulated.

Corollary 1

If the Fair value is below the price for an extended period of non-convergence, then the manipulation is by propping up buys (i.e. false buys to make it seem larger as a coin)

Corollary 2

If the Fair value is above the price for an extended period of non-convergence, then the manipulation is by accelerated selling (i.e. aggressive short-selling designed to cause a sell feedback loop)

Short reiteration/summation

  1. Assume that the economic theory behind fair value is correct.
  2. From #1 this means that coins fair value and price must converge over time when all speculation is accounted for.
  3. From #2, this means that any time you see significant periods of time where the price and fair value do not converge, it is due to speculation.
  4. From #3 and #1 this speculation must be manipulation because market forces would cause fair value and price to converge, since they don't in the case of Monero for example, it must be because someone is artificially pumping the price.
End Theory
Any compounded fair value has a degree of uncertainty. The source of biggest uncertainty is usually the inclusion of future intrinsic fair values in the rational model. One of the best-known variables based upon the future, included in almost any fair value model is the interest rate.
One last thing to mention is that the cardinal value of something can only be expressed in terms of another. There is no such thing as an absolute price. Every price comprises of a pair of assets which consists of the priced asset, and the reference asset. For instance, one can say that a car is worth ’N’ units of a currency (eg. USD), however it is impossible to imply that the car is worth an absolute number [thethrowaccount21: Like market cap does, since the current supply is an arbitrary number]. Everything has a relative value in economics because the value of everything is derived from the ordinal scale of preferences that apply to each and every individual. Therefore, when determining the fair value of a currency, one will find themselves always comparing the value of one currency to another.
This is the best part:

Is it possible to check if the model works?

One of the most interesting parts of Currencies Fair Value model is that it arrives at the rational conclusion that currencies must be trading at their fair value when the number of speculative trades in the particular currency itself is negligible with respect the the total number of overall trades conducted using the same currency as a tool, such as in the case of when someone trades BTC for BCH because he thinks BCH will perform better. It also arrives at the conclusion that even when the number of speculative trades is not negligible, and the aggregated number speculative trades is also unbiased and cancels out, then this indicates that the currency must be trading at its Fair Value. With that in mind, while analyzing the charts, it is in fact possible to determine how much speculation occurred. Furthermore, it can be observed that if the fair value model was wrong, then the values yielded by it would not have anything to do with the price itself, they would actually be totally different numbers, which may differ by any factor between 0 and somewhere in the millions. The reality however is that the findings are as a matter of fact quite close together, which is something reassuring. Proofs are empirical, the more data that’s made available, the more one can be sure that the model is much closer to reality.
submitted by thethrowaccount21 to dashpay [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Madness: How to Simulate Bitcoin Prices in Google Sheets

Original Medium post can be found here: https://medium.com/@spreadstreet/bitcoin-madness-how-to-simulate-bitcoin-prices-in-google-sheets-c61cb42f26ed
You know the scenario...
Bitcoin had another huge increase, but you missed the opportunity. You wanted to get in, but your gut instinct told you no. And rightfully so...no one knows where the price is going to go. What if you invested, and it had another 20% loss? These sort of price movements are common in the volatile world of cryptocurrencies.
Seriously...how far can this Bitcoin price really go?

BITCOIN IS A VOLATILE BEAST

Risk analysis must be a part of every decision you make.
You are constantly faced with uncertainty, ambiguity, and variability. Variability, in the case of Bitcoin, unlike anything we have ever seen before. And even though we have unprecedented access to information, we can’t accurately predict the future.
Luckily, we have methods that enable you to see all the possible outcomes of your decisions, and assess the impact of risk.

WHERE TO START?

Running simulations can prepare us for the worst.
Monte Carlo simulation (also known as the Monte Carlo Method) allows for better decision making under uncertainty.
One of the most common ways to estimate risk is the use of a Monte Carlo simulation (MCS). From Investopedia:
For example, to calculate the value at risk (VaR) of a portfolio, we can run a Monte Carlo simulation that attempts to predict the worst likely loss for a portfolio given a confidence interval over a specified time horizon - we always need to specify two conditions for VaR: confidence and horizon. (For related reading, see The Uses And Limits Of Volatility and Introduction To Value At Risk (VAR) - Part 1 and Part 2.)
A MCS can be run with many different models. Our own process will be:
  1. Specify a model (for here, we will use geometric Brownian motion)
  2. Get historical daily bitcoin prices
  3. Calculate daily returns
  4. Name the daily return range
  5. Summary statistics
  6. Simulate a year
  7. Simulate a year many times
  8. Multi-year summary statistics
  9. Quick analysis of results

STEP 1. WTF IS GEOMETRIC BROWNIAN MOTION?

The geometric Brownian motion (GBM) is a statistical method that is used heavily in the forecasting of stock prices. The reason the process is so attractive for this is because of the following:
The GBM is technically a Markov process, which is a fancy way of saying "A random process whose future probabilities are determined by its most recent values." Said another way, past price information is already incorporated and the next price movement is "conditionally independent" of past price movements.
Math geeks have a habit of making things infinitely more complicated than they have to be. I will do my best to make this as simple as possible.
The formula for GBM is as follows:
gBm formula
Where:
This formula can be broken down into two very important terms: "drift" and "shock".
For each time period, our model assumes the price will "drift" up by the expected return. But the drift will be shocked (added or subtracted) by a random shock. The random shock will be the standard deviation "s" multiplied by a random number "e". This is simply a way of scaling the standard deviation.

STEP 1A. THE THUNDER GOD ELI5

The ELI5 version: The thunder god Zeus is a great god. A just god.
But Zeus is subject to wild mood swings.
Every day Zeus can shoot his magic lightning into the price of Bitcoin, and cause it to go up or down.
Some days he is in such a good mood, that he shocks the price up by a random amount. On other days, he is in such a poor mood that he shocks the price down for opposing him.
Zeus Striking Down the Price
And thus, we have the essence of GBM: a series of steps with an expected upward drift, where each step is hit with a plus/minus shock (which is a function of the stock's standard deviation).

STEP 2. HISTORICAL DAILY BITCOIN PRICES

Copy the raw data scores from coinmarketcap. Paste the data into your own spreadsheet.
For this exercise, your columns will be: Time, Open, Close, High, Low, Volume.
Columns Setup OHLCV
Want to automatically pull in Bitcoin prices? Use the Spreadstreet Google Sheets Add-in.

STEP 3. CALCULATE DAILY RETURNS

Calculate daily returns from the "Close" price. in H2 put the formula:
=LN(C2/B2) 
Drag it all the way down to the end of the prices to fill the entire Returns column
Calculate Daily Returns

STEP 4. NAME THE DAILY RETURNS RANGE

Create a named range from the returns column, called returns, to make our life easier. Highlight all the data in column H, i.e. cells H1:H1000, then click on the menu Data > Named ranges… and call the range returns:
Name the range returns

STEP 5. SUMMARY STATISTICS

Set up a small summary table with the close, daily volatility, annual volatility, daily drift, annual drift, and mean drift of our population. The formulas are:
In K1, enter:
=C2 
and name it close.
In K2, enter:
=STDEV(returns) 
and name it dailyVolatility
In K3, enter:
=dailyVolatility*SQRT(365) 
and name it annualVolatility
In K4, enter:
=AVERAGE(returns) 
and name it dailyDrift
In K5, enter:
=dailyDrift*365 
and name it annualDrift
In K6, enter:
=dailyDrift-0.5*dailyVolatility^2 
and name it meanDrift
Create Summary Statistics Table

STEP 6. SIMULATE A YEAR

Setup the yearly simulation table with Time, Normdist, Log Return, and Simulated Price

Time

In J12 put 0, and in J13 put:
=J12+1 
Drag it all the way down to your preferred forecast timeframe. Here I simulated a year (365 days), so I copied down to J377
Time

Normdist

Let’s set up the normal distribution curve values.
Google Sheets has a formula NORMDIST which calculates the value of the normal distribution function for a given value, mean and standard deviation. Since we ascribe to the random walk theory, we want to use a mean of 0, and a standard deviation of 1.
In K13, put the formula:
=NORMINV(RAND(),0,1) 
Drag it all the way down to K377 to fill the whole Normdist column:
Normdist

Log Return

To get the percentage of daily stock movement, we will calculate log return.
In L13, put the formula:
=meanDrift+dailyVolatility*K13 
Copy the formula all the way down to L377:
Log Return

Simulated Price

Now to the real meat. Let's calculate the simulated Bitcoin price.
In M12 put the Close price, and in M13, put:
=M12*EXP(L13) 
Copy the formula all the way down to M377:
Simulated Price

Forecasted Bitcoin price for one year

Let's see what the pricing data looks like.
Select from M12 to M377, then Insert - Chart and select line chart:
Simulated Price for One Year
We have now successfully completed one simulation. And depending on your results, they could look normal...or downright crazy.

STEP 7. SIMULATE A YEAR MANY TIMES

We completed one simulation, but we want to run many different trials.
Create a scenario tab, setup a table to simulate 1,000 different one-year trials. In A3 to A1003, put the numbers 1 through 1000.
In B3, put the formula:
=Close*EXP((annualDrift-0.5*annualVolatility^2)+annualVolatility*norminv(rand(),0,1)) 
Copy the formula down all the way. Name this range "scores":
Simulate Bitcoin Prices for Many Years

STEP 8. MULTI-YEAR SUMMARY STATISTICS

Set up a small summary table with the mean, median, standard deviation, min, max, and range of our new population. The formulas are:
=AVERAGE(scores) =STDEVP(scores) =MIN(scores) =MAX(scores) =E6-E5 
Multiyear Summary Statistics

STEP 9. QUICK ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

My results will look different than yours (due to the random nature of NORMDIST and the time you pulled the Bitcoin prices). But let's take a look at the results:
Mean $27,147 Median $16,097 St. Dev $37,243 Min $556 Max $479,586 Range $479,029 3sd $1,486 2sd $3,005 1sd $5,850 Cur $16,098 1sd $43,896 2sd $81,998 3sd $190,129 
How to read: We can be 95% certain that the price of Bitcoin will fall between $3,005, and $81,998 in one year.
Wait really? Should I buy? No, this is not telling you to buy. This should be one tool of many to help you in your buying and risk decisions.
Lognormal Distribution of Bitcoin Prices

CONCLUSION

You now know how to complete a geometric Brownian motion analysis of Bitcoin prices. Congratulations!
Good statistical analysis methods can be scary, but they don't have to be. Here we covered off on a great method for estimating future Bitcoin prices, which can also be applied to other cryptocurrencies.
With this new tool in place, you can be confident in your risk analysis methods by seeing all the possible outcomes of your decisions, and assess the impact of risk.
Deliberate. Analytical. Intelligent.

WANT YOUR OWN COPY?

Simulate Bitcoin Prices Download

RELATED POSTS

High-Flyers and Shitcoins: What I Learned from Analyzing CoinMarketCap Data in Google Sheets
7 Smart Ethereum Price Prediction Methods for HODL’ers

About the Author

John Young is the founder of Spreadstreet, former financial analyst for a big-ass company, and runner-up in the 6th grade spelling bee. He would have invested in Google if he knew about it...and had any money.
He is the author of the Spreadstreet blog, which has over 3 readers (not a typo). He hopes to hit 10, but honestly writing is a lot of work.
submitted by 1kexperimentdotcom to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

Book excerpt: Imogen Heap: “Tiny Human”. Total sales: $133.20.

I’ve told this story before, but somehow the sales figure “$133.20” has yet to be burnt into the history of Blockchain from now unto the end of time. Webpage version, with working links for all the references.
Others had already been thinking along blockchain lines. Imogen Heap has been recording through major labels for a couple of decades now, and, in the course of a string of chart albums and Grammy nominations, has experienced quite her share of the music industry’s duplicitous incompetence, and wants something better.
In late 2015, Heap introduced Mycelia, running on the Ethereum blockchain. Her motivation was to cut through the tangle of bad deals and obscure rights the record industry offered. She found herself free of previous deals, and so released her new song “Tiny Human” as the test case. “Its success will come from the adoption of millions of music lovers.” (1) Mycelia worked with Ujo Music, an attempt to automate the back-room disbursement side put together by Ethereum development company ConsenSys, whose Vinay Gupta had first told Heap about smart contracts.
Heap’s explicit goal is to have all music you’ve “bought” (not just hers) behave as spyware: (2)
We know less about what our songs get up to once they’ve left ‘home’. What would I like to read on these postcards from our songs? Well, how many times it was played, by who and where would be a great start.
The last Imogen Heap release with spyware was the 2005 Speak For Yourself CD with Sony’s rootkit malware, an initiative that didn’t go down so well then either.
The press coverage of Heap’s new initiative was vast, and her name is still routinely brought up whenever blockchaining the music industry is mentioned. What I’ve yet to see anyone mention is how well it did in practice. Total sales of “Tiny Human” through Ujo Music on the Ethereum blockchain were … $133.20. Not $133,200 – but one hundred and thirty-three dollars and twenty cents. (3) It literally got more press pieces than sales. It was taken off sale some time in 2016. (4)
It didn’t help that purchasing it was almost impossible for an ordinary human music fan. You went to the page, clicked “Download”, followed the instructions to create an Ethereum wallet, and went off to a Bitcoin exchange to buy bitcoins then exchange those for ether, as ETH wasn’t widely traded directly to dollars at the time. Getting hold of the Bitcoins required you either to send a pile of government identification to an unregulated exchange, deal with crooks or both. Once you’d done all this, you got a download key. The process was also ridiculously glitchy and buggy. “The exact ether amount is a bit of a gamble.” (5)
Ujo Music later posted a rambling nonexcuse for the “Tiny Human” disaster, in which they admitted that they’d only researched what the hell they were doing after they’d done it. As they put it: “we are but a few bright-eyed technologists with a special hammer, looking for the right nail.” (6)
You’d think that at that point Heap would be wishing she’d just put it up on Bandcamp, but she’s still pursuing the blockchain dream and selling others on it, particularly the Featured Artists Coalition, i.e., the stars who did quite well out of the old major label system and would like to keep something that works like that. Never give up!
A record shop needs not to be harder to use than a BitTorrent client. iTunes, Netflix and Spotify made it big by being more convenient than piracy, and there is nothing convenient about dealing with blockchains. For buying music online, Bandcamp has all comers beat for a convenient record shop experience that delights both buyers and sellers, pays 85% to the artist and doesn’t have any use for a blockchain.
1 George Howard. “Imogen Heap’s Mycelia: An Artists’ Approach for a Fair Trade Music Business, Inspired by Blockchain”. Forbes (contributor blog), 17 July 2015.
2 Imogen Heap. “What Blockchain Can Do for the Music Industry”. Demos Quarterly #8, Spring 2016.
3 Screenshot of payouts as of August 2016, uploaded by me 6 November 2016.
4 Screenshot of the Ujo Music purchase page for “Tiny Human” when I clicked “Download” in August 2016.
5 andrewkeys. “Purchase Imogen Heap’s “Tiny Human” with Ether on ConsenSys project, Ujo, the decentralized peer-to-peer music platform!” Reddit /ethereum, 3 October 2015.
6 “Emerging from the Silence”. Ujo Music blog, 29 August 2016.
submitted by dgerard to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Madness: How to Simulate Bitcoin Prices in Google Sheets

Original Medium post can be found here: https://medium.com/@spreadstreet/bitcoin-madness-how-to-simulate-bitcoin-prices-in-google-sheets-c61cb42f26ed
You know the scenario...
Bitcoin had another huge increase, but you missed the opportunity. You wanted to get in, but your gut instinct told you no. And rightfully so...no one knows where the price is going to go. What if you invested, and it had another 20% loss? These sort of price movements are common in the volatile world of cryptocurrencies.
Seriously...how far can this Bitcoin price really go?

BITCOIN IS A VOLATILE BEAST

Risk analysis must be a part of every decision you make.
You are constantly faced with uncertainty, ambiguity, and variability. Variability, in the case of Bitcoin, unlike anything we have ever seen before. And even though we have unprecedented access to information, we can’t accurately predict the future.
Luckily, we have methods that enable you to see all the possible outcomes of your decisions, and assess the impact of risk.

WHERE TO START?

Running simulations can prepare us for the worst.
Monte Carlo simulation (also known as the Monte Carlo Method) allows for better decision making under uncertainty.
One of the most common ways to estimate risk is the use of a Monte Carlo simulation (MCS). From Investopedia:
For example, to calculate the value at risk (VaR) of a portfolio, we can run a Monte Carlo simulation that attempts to predict the worst likely loss for a portfolio given a confidence interval over a specified time horizon - we always need to specify two conditions for VaR: confidence and horizon. (For related reading, see The Uses And Limits Of Volatility and Introduction To Value At Risk (VAR) - Part 1 and Part 2.)
A MCS can be run with many different models. Our own process will be:
  1. Specify a model (for here, we will use geometric Brownian motion)
  2. Get historical daily bitcoin prices
  3. Calculate daily returns
  4. Name the daily return range
  5. Summary statistics
  6. Simulate a year
  7. Simulate a year many times
  8. Multi-year summary statistics
  9. Quick analysis of results

STEP 1. WTF IS GEOMETRIC BROWNIAN MOTION?

The geometric Brownian motion (GBM) is a statistical method that is used heavily in the forecasting of stock prices. The reason the process is so attractive for this is because of the following:
The GBM is technically a Markov process, which is a fancy way of saying "A random process whose future probabilities are determined by its most recent values." Said another way, past price information is already incorporated and the next price movement is "conditionally independent" of past price movements.
Math geeks have a habit of making things infinitely more complicated than they have to be. I will do my best to make this as simple as possible.
The formula for GBM is as follows:
gBm formula
Where:
This formula can be broken down into two very important terms: "drift" and "shock".
For each time period, our model assumes the price will "drift" up by the expected return. But the drift will be shocked (added or subtracted) by a random shock. The random shock will be the standard deviation "s" multiplied by a random number "e". This is simply a way of scaling the standard deviation.

STEP 1A. THE THUNDER GOD ELI5

The ELI5 version: The thunder god Zeus is a great god. A just god.
But Zeus is subject to wild mood swings.
Every day Zeus can shoot his magic lightning into the price of Bitcoin, and cause it to go up or down.
Some days he is in such a good mood, that he shocks the price up by a random amount. On other days, he is in such a poor mood that he shocks the price down for opposing him.
Zeus Striking Down the Price
And thus, we have the essence of GBM: a series of steps with an expected upward drift, where each step is hit with a plus/minus shock (which is a function of the stock's standard deviation).

STEP 2. HISTORICAL DAILY BITCOIN PRICES

Copy the raw data scores from coinmarketcap. Paste the data into your own spreadsheet.
For this exercise, your columns will be: Time, Open, Close, High, Low, Volume.
Columns Setup OHLCV
Want to automatically pull in Bitcoin prices? Use the Spreadstreet Google Sheets Add-in.

STEP 3. CALCULATE DAILY RETURNS

Calculate daily returns from the "Close" price. in H2 put the formula:
=LN(C2/B2) 
Drag it all the way down to the end of the prices to fill the entire Returns column
Calculate Daily Returns

STEP 4. NAME THE DAILY RETURNS RANGE

Create a named range from the returns column, called returns, to make our life easier. Highlight all the data in column H, i.e. cells H1:H1000, then click on the menu Data > Named ranges… and call the range returns:
Name the range returns

STEP 5. SUMMARY STATISTICS

Set up a small summary table with the close, daily volatility, annual volatility, daily drift, annual drift, and mean drift of our population. The formulas are:
In K1, enter:
=C2 
and name it close.
In K2, enter:
=STDEV(returns) 
and name it dailyVolatility
In K3, enter:
=dailyVolatility*SQRT(365) 
and name it annualVolatility
In K4, enter:
=AVERAGE(returns) 
and name it dailyDrift
In K5, enter:
=dailyDrift*365 
and name it annualDrift
In K6, enter:
=dailyDrift-0.5*dailyVolatility^2 
and name it meanDrift
Create Summary Statistics Table

STEP 6. SIMULATE A YEAR

Setup the yearly simulation table with Time, Normdist, Log Return, and Simulated Price

Time

In J12 put 0, and in J13 put:
=J12+1 
Drag it all the way down to your preferred forecast timeframe. Here I simulated a year (365 days), so I copied down to J377
Time

Normdist

Let’s set up the normal distribution curve values.
Google Sheets has a formula NORMDIST which calculates the value of the normal distribution function for a given value, mean and standard deviation. Since we ascribe to the random walk theory, we want to use a mean of 0, and a standard deviation of 1.
In K13, put the formula:
=NORMINV(RAND(),0,1) 
Drag it all the way down to K377 to fill the whole Normdist column:
Normdist

Log Return

To get the percentage of daily stock movement, we will calculate log return.
In L13, put the formula:
=meanDrift+dailyVolatility*K13 
Copy the formula all the way down to L377:
Log Return

Simulated Price

Now to the real meat. Let's calculate the simulated Bitcoin price.
In M12 put the Close price, and in M13, put:
=M12*EXP(L13) 
Copy the formula all the way down to M377:
Simulated Price

Forecasted Bitcoin price for one year

Let's see what the pricing data looks like.
Select from M12 to M377, then Insert - Chart and select line chart:
Simulated Price for One Year
We have now successfully completed one simulation. And depending on your results, they could look normal...or downright crazy.

STEP 7. SIMULATE A YEAR MANY TIMES

We completed one simulation, but we want to run many different trials.
Create a scenario tab, setup a table to simulate 1,000 different one-year trials. In A3 to A1003, put the numbers 1 through 1000.
In B3, put the formula:
=Close*EXP((annualDrift-0.5*annualVolatility^2)+annualVolatility*norminv(rand(),0,1)) 
Copy the formula down all the way. Name this range "scores":
Simulate Bitcoin Prices for Many Years

STEP 8. MULTI-YEAR SUMMARY STATISTICS

Set up a small summary table with the mean, median, standard deviation, min, max, and range of our new population. The formulas are:
=AVERAGE(scores) =STDEVP(scores) =MIN(scores) =MAX(scores) =E6-E5 
Multiyear Summary Statistics

STEP 9. QUICK ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

My results will look different than yours (due to the random nature of NORMDIST and the time you pulled the Bitcoin prices). But let's take a look at the results:
Mean $27,147 Median $16,097 St. Dev $37,243 Min $556 Max $479,586 Range $479,029 3sd $1,486 2sd $3,005 1sd $5,850 Cur $16,098 1sd $43,896 2sd $81,998 3sd $190,129 
How to read: We can be 95% certain that the price of Bitcoin will fall between $3,005, and $81,998 in one year.
Wait really? Should I buy? No, this is not telling you to buy. This should be one tool of many to help you in your buying and risk decisions.
Lognormal Distribution of Bitcoin Prices

CONCLUSION

You now know how to complete a geometric Brownian motion analysis of Bitcoin prices. Congratulations!
Good statistical analysis methods can be scary, but they don't have to be. Here we covered off on a great method for estimating future Bitcoin prices, which can also be applied to other cryptocurrencies.
With this new tool in place, you can be confident in your risk analysis methods by seeing all the possible outcomes of your decisions, and assess the impact of risk.
Deliberate. Analytical. Intelligent.

WANT YOUR OWN COPY?

Simulate Bitcoin Prices Download

RELATED POSTS

High-Flyers and Shitcoins: What I Learned from Analyzing CoinMarketCap Data in Google Sheets
7 Smart Ethereum Price Prediction Methods for HODL’ers

About the Author

John Young is the founder of Spreadstreet, former financial analyst for a big-ass company, and runner-up in the 6th grade spelling bee. He would have invested in Google if he knew about it...and had any money.
He is the author of the Spreadstreet blog, which has over 3 readers (not a typo). He hopes to hit 10, but honestly writing is a lot of work.
submitted by 1kexperimentdotcom to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]

Look at these graphs, and you will see that Luke-Jr is *lying* when he says: "At the current rate of growth, we will not hit 1 MB for 4 more years."

Luke-Jr says:
"At the current rate of growth, we will not hit 1 MB for 4 more years."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/47f0b0/f2pool_testing_classic/d0d6g7z
Luke-Jr & Core/Blockstream are denying basic facts of economics, capacity planning, and simple mathematics.
Anyone can see that Luke-Jr is lying, by looking at these graphs:
https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=
https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/historical/1w-f-txval_per_tot-01071-blksize_per_avg-01071
https://www.smartbit.com.au/charts/block-size?from=2011-2-25&to=2016-2-25
http://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=498
And yet Core/Blockstream dev Luke-Jr continues to deny reality, saying black-is-white and up-is-down:
Luke-Jr: "At the current rate of growth, we will not hit 1 MB for 4 more years."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/47f0b0/f2pool_testing_classic/d0d6g7z
This is what happens when devs follow the "party line" of Core/Blockstream - they start lying.
This is the reason why this debate has been unresolved for years - because one side is lying.
By spreading falsehoods, Core/Blockstream has lost all legitimacy in this debate. They should be ignored.
The Nine Miners of China: "Core is a red herring. Miners have alternative code they can run today that will solve the problem. Choosing not to run it is their fault, and could leave them with warehouses full of expensive heating units and income paid in worthless coins." – tsontar
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3xhejm/the_nine_miners_of_china_core_is_a_red_herring/
I know for a fact that multiple large firms are choosing to postpone involvement with Bitcoin because there isn't currently capacity for it to grow.
~ Roger Ver
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/47ekqu/i_know_for_a_fact_that_multiple_large_firms_are/
Just click on these historical blocksize graphs - all trending dangerously close to the 1 MB (1000KB) artificial limit. And then ask yourself: Would you hire a CTO / team whose Capacity Planning Roadmap from December 2015 officially stated: "The current capacity situation is no emergency" ?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3ynswc/just_click_on_these_historical_blocksize_graphs/
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

Here is a transcript from the Ripple Consensus Presentation (May 22nd)

https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/5203-ripples-big-demo-and-why-you-missed-the-big-deal/?do=findComment&comment=49659
MY TRANSCRIPTION... 0:19
PATRICK GRIFFIN: All right I think we're gonna get started. There's total capacity. People at the door - there's a little room over here inside. There's chairs here - there’s chairs over here don't be shy. All right in case you don't know this, you are in “XRP In Action,” a live demo and expert Q & A.
I’m Patrick Griffin [with] David Schwartz and Stefan Thomas. We've got an hour today. We'll walk you through, we’ll do a quick round of introductions. Stefan is going to do a demo. We have a self-guided Q&A where I basically tee up some questions for these guys that will all be softballs don't worry! Then we'll turn it over to you guys to ask questions for the technical experts. Maybe we'll do it the quick round of intros, starting with Stefan:
1:07 STEFAN THOMAS: Yeah so, my name is Stefan Thomas I am CTO with Ripple. Before Ripple I was involved with BitCoin for several years and now I work on the vision and technical direction for Ripple.
1:22 DAVID SCHWARTZ: My name is David Schwartz. I'm the chief cryptographer at Ripple. I’ve been working on Ripple since 2011 and public ledger tech. Before that I was working on cryptographic messaging systems and cloud storage for government and military applications.
1:35 PATRICK GRIFFIN: I am Patrick Griffin. I’m the head of business development. I don’t know why I’m up here, but there’s our CTO and our head of cryptography, but actually I think we are the, to be honest here, I think we are the, we are the one two and three first employees of Ripple. Well, two one and three. We've been here for quite some time and it's been a long journey. So why don't we first start off with the demo and I think I'll tee it up: This is a demo that demonstrates our technical our technology start of the inter ledger protocol, moving payments in and out of XRP and Stefan will do a better job of articulating what you are about to see.
2:22 STEFAN THOMAS: All right thanks Patrick. So here we're gathered to have a quick round table on XRP. I want to go through the demo pretty quickly so we can get to the actual discussion Q&A which I thin is the meat of this session. Basically, what we're trying to do at Ripple is we're trying to make money move like information. This has been our mission since day one, and it has never changed and so we're building a number of different technologies that all integrate to make this vision a reality. And so what we think about how information actually moves I think it's really it's really this chart that captures it.
So what's happened is that the cost of moving information has really declined over the last couple decades and very strongly so. And as a result the volume of information that’s been moving has exploded. And so, very often you know, our customers will be talking to me about, you know:
Oh are you focused on corporate payments? Are you focused on consumer payments?
I think what you have to realize is that we're somewhere down here in that curve and so you know when you say like two-thirds of all payments are corporate payments you're really talking about two-thirds of almost nothing. I think what we're focused on is this growth that you can create if you increase the efficiency of the system enough.
And so the way that we're kind of approaching that is we want to streamline the way that liquidity works today. So today you have 27 trillion dollars in float sitting around the world that is essentially there to facilitate real-time payments when the underlying systems are not real time.
3:59 STEFAN THOMAS: So, for instance, I swipe my credit card somewhere there has to be an actual creditor or money available to pay that merchant if that's supposed to happen instantly if the underlying money can't move in real time. And so that's been the case ever since we were using gold and fiat currencies in order to move money internationally, but with digital assets there's actually opportunity to improve upon that and actually move real assets in real time.
So if you have something like XRP you don't need to pre-fund float all around the world. You can actually just have this digital asset and if you want to transfer value to somebody, you want to transfer value internationally, you can just transfer that asset and that moves instantly okay?
4:40 STEFAN THOMAS: So that's really the improvement. So with that I want to give you sort of a case example in a demo. This is something that already happens on blockchains today where there are money sources business that are using, businesses they're using block chain in order to move funds so they might sort of offer this as a service to small and medium businesses where if I want to let's say pay somebody in a different country I can go to one of these companies and they will move that money for me.
5:09 STEFAN THOMAS: So, in this example, we're kind of pretending that we're a publisher, we have a reporter in the field. and we’d like to pay them. And so, you know we don't really build apps, but we enable banks and other money service businesses to build apps on top of our platform. So this is kind of a mock-up that we’ve developed where, you can imagine, this would be just built into the the particular app of that company. And so I can basically pick any amount, so let’s say I want to send, say $7, and what happens is that you can see is that amount updates so what happens during that time is that we actually try to find the cheapest path from where the sender is to which are provided at the recipient uses and then once we found that cheapest path, we figure out what the exact cost is going to be, so we have that transparency upfront. What is the cost of this payment and this is all powered by the open source protocol InterLedger. Now, when I send this payment, it goes through right away. I don't have to wait for a ton of confirmations and so on.
6:11 STEFAN THOMAS: So let's talk a little bit about what is happening there in the background. So first, we basically look at the topology of the network and then we try to find a path. So say it found a path through XRP. Once we select the path, we basically send a code request to figure out what we think that cost is going to be and then we send the money through in two phases as per InterLedger Protocol, and that's enabled on XRP using a feature called escrow that we just launched earlier this year and so now XRP is it's fully InterLedger enabled.
6:50 STEFAN THOMAS: So, if we look at the kind of a cost calculation, this is kind of some fictional numbers but it's correct in terms of order of magnitude, right. So you have Bitcoin, you have Theory, we have XRP, we have Swift, and so our algorithm basically goes in and it tries to select the best option and so people often ask me like why does InterLedger help XRP? or why are you guys working on InterLedger as a completely neutral protocol when you actually have this vested interest in XRP?
7:18 STEFAN THOMAS: Well, because the reason is that XRP is right now by far the best digital asset but it's not being used as much as Bitcoin, for instance, and so in order to close that gap we want to get to a point where the selection of asset is kind of automated and you have algorithms to just pick the best one in which case, right now, XRP would get picked all the time. So that's why we have such a vested interest in just enabling more efficient selection. All right. So as you can see, it's the lowest fee right now and it’s the fastest turn right.
7:48 STEFAN THOMAS: Now, going a little bit further into the future, I was kind of talking about that huge explosion in volume and I think where that comes from is completely new user inter faces that we don't necessarily think about today. So one example would be, you have something like a publisher and a reader and a reporter and the reader is actually browsing an article and they're not having to sign up and go through a paywall in order to do that Their browser just pays them on their behalf automatically and then as a publisher I can see the money sort of coming in, in real time as users are browsing my website. And so you're basically providing the sort of metered access to your content. There's just one example. I think there's a lot of cases of APIs and other parts the industry that could benefit from micro-payments as a more granular way of transacting. So I don't have time to talk about that, but with that I hope you've got sort of a taste of both what XRP looks like today as well as what the future holds in terms of doing micro payments through payment channels, and so on, on InterLedger. So with that, I'll hand it over to Patrick to start the discussion.
9:00 PATRICK GRIFFIN: Very cool. So maybe it’s worth stepping back and also looking at our company strategy and having a conversation around what it means when we talk about an Internet of Value, which I think well this is a Silicon Valley company and for most people that doesn't mean a whole lot so maybe we can take a first stab at trying to explain what is an Internet of Value and Stefan, I’ll start with you. Actually, why don’t we start with David and give you a break.
9:24 DAVID SCHWARTZ: Yeah, so what is the Internet of Value and what are we working on? Well, the Internet has brought connectivity to billions of people around the world. They have smart phones. They have easy access to the movement of information but money is still siloed. It's still trapped in systems that don't talk to each other. Moving payments are expensive. They're slow. There's high friction. There's trillions of dollars that moves across borders and that's moved mostly by financial institutions, and we need to move that money more efficiently. We need to know where it is. We need to improve that flow.
10:02 DAVID SCHWARTZ: I don't know if any of you have made international payments or most of you have on traditional systems and you know that it's very hard to know where that money is. It’s very hard to know how much it's going to cost you ahead of time. The user experience is not great. A significant fraction of those payments fail. It takes several days. It's almost easier to ship money than it is to use our existing payment system. So we want to provide an Internet of Value where there is instant payment. Payment on demand, without failure. When you know ahead of time how much money is going to deliver. You know what path is going to take and because that transaction is set up using modern internet protocols you know ahead of time exactly what the requirements are at the destination so you don't have a failure because you didn't have the right information at the beginning.
10:45 STEFAN THOMAS: Yeah so um whenever I think of the Internet of Value, I think the number one thing that happened with the internet was that it kind of commoditized reach. So, before the Internet, if you wanted to be an online service provider like AOL or CompuServe the number one thing that you needed to have in order to be competitive is a lot of users. And if the main thing you're competing over is just having a lot of users it's very hard to get into that market for obvious reasons because you start out with zero users so how do you attract the first couple? But once you have something like the internet where all the different networks are actually tied together, suddenly the number of users you have is completely irrelevant, right? Because all of the networks are tied together you can reach all the websites, you can email all the people on the internet and so the competition has to be about something else and what does it become about? It becomes about about the efficiency of the system.
11:35: STEFAN THOMAS: And so, this fundamental transition has not happened with money yet. Like right now the the biggest consumer payment systems are things like Visa and MasterCard and they're very much competing on: We’re the biggest. We have the most merchants. We have the most customers, and so how are you going to compete with us, right? We would not even have to try to be efficient, necessarily, right? Because we're only competing with each other. It's very hard to get into that market, and so what we're trying to do with InterLedger, by creating an internet working protocol we're allowing you to go across multiple hops across multiple steps through the financial system and as a result you can tie a lot of smaller providers, a lot of smaller banks together and as a result make a system that’s much more competitive.
12:15: PATRICK GRIFFIN: I’ll just add my two cents in. I when I talk about the Internet of Value with customers it's typically the conversation on the cost and opportunities and for us you know, one of the analogies it's overused in the internet I think the Internet of Value, at least for me, is the function of bringing the marginal cost of payment processing down to as close to zero as possible. Now you can do that in one of two ways: Lower the cost of payment processing. Just for the sake of conversation these two things are 50/50. Payment processing: the messaging going between institutions and the cost of reconciling transactions as they go from one siloed network to another siloed network. Those are huge costs that the system currently bears just as a function of tracking down lost payments or fixing mistakes and broken transactions.
13:00 PATRICK GRIFFIN: Something like 12% of all international wires fail. That is an astonishing number if you come from Silicon Valley where you're typically used to five nines of reliability. The financial system isn’t working even with one nine of reliability. The other side of the equation so that it’s a processing function. We are able to achieve better processing by starting that sort of settlement layer, it’s a little bit academic, but then ultimately what our customers are buying from us today is just a payment processing capability.
13:30 PATRICK GRIFFIN: The second stool, leg of the stool, if you will, this two-legged stool, for this Internet of Value, is liquidity. And this iquidity cost is a huge component of the payments that infrastructure today. And so, when you think about the cost that you pay when you wire money internationally, it's not just processing costs and fees. Banks and financial institutions and payment processors have to cover their cost of capital. They are laying out a massive amount of cash in different overseas accounts to make sure that when you send a payment to Japan there's cash on hand in Japan to service your payment.
14:05 PATRICK GRIFFIN: The whole visual that we saw here with XRP that's really where we see there being a large opportunity to bring the liquidity costs down if you can fund your payment instantly on demand without pre-floating cash or opening up credit lines with your counter-parties you can really bring down this component of that cost so those two things together in my mind at least that's that is what really comprises the internet of value. You tackle those two things: processing and liquidity really starts to open up and level the playing field. And on leveling the playing field maybe a question back to you Stefan is and a little bit about the strategy so as we go out and roll out these new APIs for bank to bank or financial institution processing, this narrative around using the digital assets upon payment certainly there's no reason why you couldn't insert Bitcoin in there or Etherium or some other digital assets do you view this as maybe leveling the playing field for all digital assets and creating an opportunity for other digital assets to come in and basically compete for that case?
STEFAN THOMAS: 15:12 Yeah so, we definitely look at it as as a way to create more competition I think that I'm just looking at the market today, most of the digital assets out there are not really designed for enterprising spaces, right? There they're coming from a background of direct to consumer use. They're kind of designed in a way that maybe isn't always necessarily totally in line with how regulators think about the financial system and as a result it’s quite difficult for companies to use these assets, so I think maybe some of people in the room are Bitcoin entrepreneurs and so you may know some of these struggles and you know some of these difficulties of using an asset like Bitcoin. I think you know me, speaking as CTO, more from the technical side, there are definitely big differences between the different digital assets, and so if you look at things like settlement speed on Ripple you get below four seconds most of the time four seconds on average. On Bitcoin you have to wait nine minutes between just to get one confirmation.
16:14 STEFAN THOMAS: There's things like finality. On Ripple when you get one confirmation you can hundred percent trust it, it cannot get reversed because the set of validators that are known so it can't be some validator you've never heard of suddenly coming up with a different answer. Whereas on Bitcoin, there can always be a longer chain that you just haven't heard of yet so you have to wait for multiple confirmations to gain more confidence. Another difference is that you know Ripple is non-deterministic and so bitcoin is is random so what that means is that the actual delay between blocks on Ripple is pretty consistent. It's four seconds with the standard deviation of 0.8 seconds so it's almost always exactly four seconds. And so, with Bitcoin it's more variable, right? So you could have a block after a minute. You can have a block after half an hour. And so, it's much harder for businesses to kind of rely on a system that has that high variability because it increases your risk as you holding an asset.
17:12 STEFAN THOMAS: So these are just some examples of why we think that XRP is best suited for payments use cases. And I think I'll give, be giving a talk later today on on going into a bit more depth on some of these differences
17:28 DAVID SCHWARTZ: And and we're not afraid of a level playing field. As Stefan said we think we can succeed on a level playing field but also you can get people to build a level playing field. It's very hard to get other people to stand behind something that has a built-in bias in favor of one company. Twitter doesn’t, it doesn't mind the fact that the internet wasn't built for Twitter. Facebook doesn't mind. They like the fact that there's an open platform that everybody can support and use and they're willing to compete on that level playing field and if they lose on that level playing field you know, so be it, somebody else will win and the world will be a better place for it. We believe that we have the advantages today and we believe that we can get the industry behind an open standard that facilitates these types of instantaneous payments.
18:07 PATRICK GRIFFIN: So David, this is a question coming back to you. In this level playing field obviously there are digital assets can compete on different characteristics. Obviously I think that Bitcoin as scalability challenges have been I think very famous recently could you comment a little bit on Bitcoin’s recent lows some of the things that have come up around resiliency scalability and maybe draw a contrast to XRP and how XRP is working.
18:32 DAVID SCHWARTZ: Sure. I think the idea that you don't need governance. The idea that you can just have this decentralized system that magically government itself doesn't really work. The internet is a decentralized system it has governance. Bitcoin currently is experiencing a little bit of a governance failure due to with dis-alignment of incentives. Historically the minerss have had an incentive to keep the system working. Everybody needs the Bitcoin system to work, whether you hold, whether you try to do payment’s, whether you're mining. This system has to work or nobody has anything. Everybody's benefited from the value of Bitcoin going up. If you’re a miner, you want the value to go up. If you hold Bitcoin, you want the value to go up. If you're using it for payments having more liquidity and lower risk and holding bitcoins is good for you.
19:11 DAVID SCHWARTZ: So everybody's incentives were aligned. They're starting to become dis-aligned recently because miners have been getting a lot of revenue from transaction fees Miners like high transaction fees. Users obviously would prefer to pay less for their payments. People who want to use Bitcoin as a payment platform want frictionless payments and they're not getting them because of the fees. So there's been a little bit of a governance breakdown due to that misalignment of incentives and it's not clear how you resolve that. It's not really clear how the stakeholders can realign their incentives.
19:39 DAVID SCHWARTZ: I’m confident that Bitcoin will come out come through it but I think it shows that governance is important. You should understand how a system is governed whatever system it is because there is going to have to be governance. It’s not going to magically govern itself. Now Ripple, the stakeholders are the validators and the validators are sort of chosen by the other validators, so right now Ripple is obviously very big in that space. We’re the major stakeholder on the network, but the recent interest into the price increase has begun diversifying the stakeholders and so we hope to see different jurisdictions, different companies and those will be the people who will be the stakeholders and they'll make the decision if there are going to be changes in the rules behind in that market. We think that that will work better and I think if you, once you accept that there has to be governance, you really want it to be the people who are using the network. You don't want the technology to force you into having other stakeholders whose interest may be adverse to the people who just want to use the system to store value and make payments.
20:32 PATRICK GRIFFIN: So what stuff, I mean do you have anything to add just in terms of the underlying design of the systems and how they're confirming transactions? I think when you go way way way back to our company's beginning it was billed as Bitcoin 2.0. And you know we felt like there was another way you could build a decentralized digital asset without without mining. So maybe talk a little about the confirmation engine behind XRP and some of its advantages over other systems
21:04 STEFAN THOMAS: Yeah, so as I mentioned in the introduction, I was fairly involved in the in the Bitcoin community back in 2010-2011 and one of the features that I contributed to was paid to script hash as a reviewer it was one of the first people to re-implement Bitcoin and I pointed out some flaws and you know we ended up with a much better solution. And so, through that experience going through the cycle of new feature on Bitcoin, even back then when the committee was much smaller I realized that it was actually very painful to do even a uncontroversial improvement to the system and that was partly because people had a very strong tendency to be conservative which is a good thing, for any, like whenever you're modifying a live system. But there was also just like no good process for introducing changes.
22:00 STEFAN THOMAS: We had to come up with a process ad hoc. We came up with this whole voting on mining power and so on. Now, from that experience I remember going back to a wiki page on the big part of working called the hard fork wish list and I kind of looked at and is sort of the list of things other things that we wanted to do and a lot of them were in my opinion, in my humble opinion, must haves for any kind of mainstream or enterprise adoption and so I was kind of like putting numbers next to them like this would take eight months this would take 12 months this would take two years and it started to add up like I'm not going to see this get to that point if we go at this rate.
22:38 STEFAN THOMAS: And then you know Ripple approached me and they had a lot of that hard fork wish list already implemented but maybe more importantly they had a different idea on the governance structure and I think there's sort of two key differences: The first key difference is there is an entity that's actually funding the development of the asset and all the technology behind the asset. And so you know, I was looking at the Bitcoin foundation website the other day and they're currently, their most recent blog post is to promote this lawsuit in New York to try to strike down the bit license and apparently the foundation feels that it's strategically important for Bitcoin to kind of fund this lawsuit and they looked at how many people had actually donated to the donation address that they were giving and it was just over a thousand dollars basically. Almost nothing
23:31 STEFAN THOMAS: And I was thinking like well if XRP you know had any strategic issue like that there would be millions of dollars immediately that just Ripple would put behind the issue and so as a holder of the asset that's really important for me to know that, you know, there is some some entity that's actually defending it from a technical standpoint, from a legal standpoint, from a business standpoint. That makes a big difference
23:53 STEFAN THOMAS: And then the second big difference that I saw was how features and how generally the evolution of the technology is managed. So on Ripple, there's voting among the validators, which is not too dissimilar from you know the kind of mining voting that we're doing on Bitcoin. However the validators on Ripple are largely chosen by the users or they are chosen by the users. And so they're not chosen by so this algorithm or just by their virtue of being very efficient in mining. And so as David pointed out earlier, the incentives are very different. On Ripple, the incentives are you know I want the people who are appointing me to be validators to be happy with my validations because otherwise you know there's what they will stop paying me. And so you know there's a much more closely aligned incentive for the value of some Ripple to do what the actual users want to do.
24:46 DAVID SCHWARTZ: And I would add that there there are sort of vulnerabilities in both types of systems. Like with the miners, it would be a double spend. With the validators, they could simply stop validating and the network would halt, but one tremendous difference is that you know how to fix one and it's not clear how you would fix the other so if you had the miners that were being pressured, let's say by a friend in government, or they were double spending or for whatever reason they are holding transaction fees high, let's say the block size issue got to the point where it was absolutely critical and there was no ability to come up with an agreement. It's not clear how you solve that. You change the mining algorithm? Like that's the nuclear option? Nobody knows what you do. With the system on consensus it is clear what you do. You can, you can change the validators. The validators work at the pleasure of the users, the holders, the real stakeholders of the network.
25:33 DAVID SCHWARTZ: That, I think that is a fairly significant advantage once you realize how important governance is. And it's not just a handle of failure as Stefan pointed out there's going to be evolution of the system unless you think the systems are absolutely perfect today. Well bitcoin is already proven that there they're not absolutely perfect today. I can’t, I certainly wouldn't try to claim the Ripple is perfect today. We have a wish list of features too, limited by engineering time, but we have to get people to agree to implement those features and I think that's also an argument why you can't have one blockchain to rule them all. There are features that also have costs and every feature has a cost because if you have a public blockchain everybody that uses that public blockchain, at a minimum, when there's a new feature they have to do a security review and make sure that that feature doesn't create a vulnerability for them. So there's a fixed cost that's fairly high. There's a huge bug bounty on Bitcoin and on Ripple right? Billions of dollars if you could steal money on the system. So the cost to implement a feature is high. So if there's a feature that somebody really wants it would be really useful for them they're probably not going to get that's not enough to get any feature on the system, so you're going to have a diversified system of multiple block chains and multiple ledger systems of all kinds competing with each other for share. that's why I think InterLedger is important because InterLedger will permit people who use different block chains and different systems, for good reasons, to be able to make payments to each other quickly seamlessly and without the risk associated with little pays problem.
26:53 PATRICK GRIFFIN: hmm Maybe just a last question before we turn it over to the audience and you've mentioned InterLedger. Stefan is the creator of InterLedger or the chief architect of it. When you walk around the conference today, you'll see a lot of companies that have blockchain offering. So, sort of going back to 2014, now if you remember, the the terminology and the marketing was all about it's not about Bitcoin it's about the blockchain. And so now we have some sound perspective on that. What's your take on the fundamental premise of a de-centralized distributed database without a digital asset and what's the trade-offs in terms of functionality versus utility? What's your opinion given the architecture IOP.
27:42 STEFAN THOMAS: Well that's a question I could easily spend hours on, so let me try to summarize. So as you mentioned, my colleague Evan Schwartz and I, we we came up with this protocol InterLedger and that came out of actually in a couple of different work streams but one in particular I remember was I was trying to figure out how to make Ripple more scalable and I was thinking about a particular kind of scalability which is similar to what David just mentioned, which was scalability in terms of functionality not just in terms of how many transactions can you do per second. Like how do I serve very different use cases that have you know mutually conflicting trade-offs. So as I was thinking about that problem I was kind of saying well maybe you don't even have to keep that one set of global state. Maybe you can have state in different places and a lot of that is honestly just rediscovering database knowledge that we've had since the 70s. Now just looking at Jim Gray's papers and just oh yeah that works for blockchains too
28:41 STEFAN THOMAS: So we took those ideas and we combined them with ideas around from the internet from the internet background in terms of networking and the concept of internet working and so on. And so, when I look at these private blockchains type approaches I think they are doing the first of those two steps namely they're applying sort of modern data, modern database thinking or classical database thinking to blockchain but I don't think they're really applying the Internet thinking yet because they're if they're attempting to achieve interoperability just by homogeneity which does not give you that diversity of use cases and so if you want that you have to think about what are the simple stateless protocols they can actually tie these different systems together without dictating how they work internally. So I can have my private blockchains that has all these like special features and it works in this way and you can have your private box and it works in the other way but we can still talk through a neutral protocol and you know the way that we're thinking about InterLedger, we're not married to InterLedger being a thing like I'm completely happy if it's lightning or if it's something else but I think as an industry to agree on some kind of standard on that layer.
29:51 STEFAN THOMAS: I think one of the reasons that we can is because unlike a blockchain a standard is neutral you know there's no acid anyone's getting rich off of. There's no there's a lot less to agree on. The list of decisions you have to make is a lot shorter. You know my colleague Evan, he makes a point, a very good point about with InterLedger only like seven eight major decisions that you have to make in the architecture to really arrive at it and so I think we have really good reasons for each one of them and so we think that there will be a certain convergence on on one standard protocol for again not just blockchains, but like any kind of ledger.
30:26 DAVID SCHWARTZ: I just ant to add that InterLedger is completely neutral to how the ledger works internally. Any ledger that can support a very short list of very simple operations. Every banking ledger can perform those operations. Almost anything the tracks ownership of value of any kind is capable of confirming that value exists, putting that value on hold, transferring that value between two people and those are the only primitives that InterLedger builds on. It's just by the clever combination of those operations in a way that provides insurance that all of the stakeholders get out of the transaction the thing that they're supposed to get out and get back whatever they were going to put in if they don't get out what they're supposed to get out. It’s, it's astonishingly simple at the protocol level.
31:08 PATRICK GRIFFIN: Okay, with that I will turn it over to the room for questions and some Q&A Aany questions in the back?
QUESTION: Yeah, I’m kind of new to this and I just have some really basic questions. I read something recently where, Ripple was now the second most funded, or invested. Bitcoin was first, and Etherium was third. Can you tell me how you got to that position? You seem like you’re poking up about Bitcoin and how Ripple probably is more efficient and better. Then I had a second question - Where do I get a Ripple T-Shirt?
32:06 PATRICK GRIFFIN: The first question is how did, how did we get to this position we're in and does that generally capture the essence of that question and then Ripple t-shirts I'm not sure about that (Come work for us!) I will attempt to answer the first question and if you guys want to jump in. I think that is a function of one: Silicon Valley companies do one thing I think very well, they pick a lane and they go deep on it. For us, what we've been very very focused on it the use case. as a company we but we picked a long time ago to go deep on cross-border payments and in particular wholesale cross-border payments that’s financial institution to institution. It’s at the enterprise level and so when we look at digital assets today we think that there is a very very very use case around the consolidation of capital to fund payments overseas, which is exactly what we just demonstrated. Being able to transfer an asset from a server in one country to a server in another country and basically allow for payments companies to operate with much less capital deployed overseas. It's a, it's a quantifiable use case. Today there's 27 and a half trillion dollars in float in the banking system just wait sitting idly waiting for payments to arrive. That's compounded when you go to look at corporates and you look at payment service companies. So there's a very very very very very big number and I think that the recent traction that we've gotten has been an acknowledgement of the use case how it fits into our overall product offering. Ssome of the technical benefits of XRP itself and then when you look around, I mean I think that its head, you're hard-pressed to find another digital asset with as clearly articulated the use case that where the time horizon is now. I think there's lots of really exciting things going on in IOT and device-to-device payments and sort of the future some of things that I that Etherium people talk about for example, but it still feels like it's still at the horizon and I think this is being deployed today. There is a a path to commercial production and ultimately I think that's part of the reason why we're getting some traction.
34:18 DAVID SCHWARTZ: I think we also sort of crossed an important threshold. If an asset doesn't have value and it doesn't have liquidity you can't really use it even if it has the properties that are perfect for your use case simply because you can't you can't get enough of it without moving the market and I think we crossed a threshold (not the end) -
*use the link above to view the entire transcript.**
submitted by ripcurldog to Ripple [link] [comments]

WEEKLY WATCH LIST - BEST INTRADAY STOCKS FOR NEXT WEEK -FULL TECHNICAL ANALYSIS - EPISODE 16 Wearing Fashion Nova Outfits For A Week - YouTube Teil 1: Gemischtes Hack LIVE mit Felix Lobrecht und Tommi ... LivingBobby - YouTube Genesis mining. how to make money online promote ... - YouTube

Bitcoin price today is $13,073.32 USD with a 24-hour trading volume of $23,603,626,066 USD. Bitcoin is up 0.48% in the last 24 hours. The current CoinMarketCap ranking is #1, with a market cap of $242,210,721,011 USD. It has a circulating supply of 18,527,100 BTC coins and a max. supply of 21,000,000 BTC coins. You can find the top exchanges to trade Bitcoin listed on our Above is a sample BTC price line chart from Paxful’s Bitcoin Calculator page. It shows the price of bitcoin across the last week of November. These charts have the price per bitcoin on the Y-axis and time on the X-axis. The closing prices are plotted to make the price line. The precision of this chart depends on how much we can fragment the time. But these types of charts can only give out ... Bitcoin; Markets; Charts; About. Oct 25, 2020 22:34:44 (UTC) Advertise on Bitcoincharts. Pricechart; Volume comparison ; Symbol. Time Period. Custom Time — < day > Chart Type. Price Band. Moving Averages. Technical Indicators large indicators. Options Show Volume Bars Volume in Currency Parabolic SAR Log Scale Percentage Scale. Link to this chart · Larger chart. This chart is licensed under ... A projection of future Bitcoin prices (gray chart line) based on Chris Burger's Power Law Corridor model assuming 4 year cycles. As you can see, Bitcoin's price (blue chart line) is extremely volatile, which drag on investor's nerves, but so far there has always been a lower low similar to stock indices. There is no guarantee that this scenario will happen. Past performance is not indicative ... Bitcoin VS Ethereum Bitcoin vs. Ethereum is the Ali vs. Frazier of the crypto space. Even though these two are the most significant projects in the space, their primary purposes are entirely different. In this guide, we are going to take a look at the differences and similarities between these project. Bitcoin at a Glance Key Highlights October 31, 2008: Bitcoin whitepaper published.

[index] [30127] [48927] [3462] [12261] [19691] [30050] [38936] [51538] [3670] [7308]

WEEKLY WATCH LIST - BEST INTRADAY STOCKS FOR NEXT WEEK -FULL TECHNICAL ANALYSIS - EPISODE 16

The second candle is black and sits higher on the chart than the first. This tells us that the equity gapped up to start the trading day, and fell just a little by the end of the day. It may have ... whose line bitcoin whose line colin bitcoin why bitcoin will fail why bitcoin will change everything why bitcoin has value why bitcoin is better than gold why bitcoin mining why buy bitcoin why ... Gemischtes Hack, auch bekannt als Felix Lobrecht und Tommi Schmitt waren bei 1LIVE 3 Tage wach! im Schauburg Filmpalast in Gelsenkirchen zu Gast. Den zweiten... Welcome to my channel - LivingBobby! I am a travel vlogger that explores the world through 24 hour challenges, unique accommodations, and lesser-known places... Join Trading view to analysis for live chart : https: ... How Kraken Accelerates Cryptocurrency Adoption Bitcoin 2020 ALL AP INFO TECH 49,496 watching. Live now; The Ultimate Candlestick Patterns ...

#