delete

(04-02-2017 10:18 PM)Isaac Jordan Wrote:  

(04-02-2017 06:49 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  What am I missing? If everyone wants to talk about something else, what the fuck you doing in the bitcoin thread?

I don't think anyone disagrees with the assertion that Bitcoin is (currently) by far the most important cryptocurrency, whether you're looking at it from a historical perspective, or technological, or financial, etc.

Don't get me wrong. I am not basing any of my bitcoin thread purity assertions on any kind of claim that bitcoin is superior.

I am merely asserting that this thread was created with bitcoin as a topic, and initially the topic, as created by Pants, was "wow look at bitcoin the price has gone up a lot."

With the passage of time, this thread became the all things bitcoin thread, and largely when other guys attempted to create bitcoin related threads in the forum, they were directed to this thread.

There is not really any reason (as far as I know) that a new bitcoin related thread could not be created on RVF so long as the thread offers something different from this thread... and maybe even some kind of twist.. but we have an alt coin thread and we have a bitcoin thread, and if RVF guys are sufficiently interested in some subtopic of a thread, there could be other RVF threads that could be created. I don't know, but for some reason, contrary to what seems reasonable, RVF guys seem to be a bit less interested in bitcoin than they should be.

I mean, I consider bitcoin to be a very decent tool that can be used very well in traveling - but maybe in the end, RVF guys are not really finding this aspect of bitcoin to be as practical as might be theoretically considered to be the case.

I have a few reasons for getting into bitcoin, but one aspect of bitcoin was definitely the portability aspect to be able to potentially have access to assets while traveling and not having to declare or to potentially report at borders.

(04-02-2017 10:18 PM)Isaac Jordan Wrote:  But Bitcoin has spurred the creation of an entirely new industry ("FinTech"), in which many systems (like Ethereum) will undoubtedly play an important role, and the decisions made regarding one blockchain often have consequences for other cryptos. You simply can't discuss Bitcoin any more without including in the conversation the larger context of the cryptocurrency space as whole. You miss a lot otherwise.

Hey Isaac, there is nothing wrong with that. If you are making various connections in your discussions about various other cryptos, whether that is Ethereum or any other crypto, then I doubt anyone (including me) is going to complain that you are off topic for this bitcoin thread.

I think that I have more of a problem with guys coming into this thread to pump various alts and without even attempting to make any connection with bitcoin, and that is called thread hijacking and really there is no reason those kinds of posts might not be more suitable for the alt coin thread.

Why do we need to read such clutter here if there is not even attempt to connect the topic to bitcoin, especially when bitcoin is already a pretty fucking BIG topic (as you already mentioned several times in your earlier posts)

(04-02-2017 10:18 PM)Isaac Jordan Wrote:  And sure, for the purposes of this thread in particular I would think that any alt-coin discussions should in some way include the impact on Bitcoin's price/development/industry role/etc. Any conversations focusing SPECIFICALLY on an alt-coin without ANY bearing on Bitcoin should of course go in the Alternatives to Bitcoin thread (or perhaps a thread of their own).

I think that is the general idea. I mean RVF is already kind of known by its longer term members as a pretty decent forum when it comes to disallowing trolls and thread hijackers.

(04-02-2017 10:18 PM)Isaac Jordan Wrote:  But saying that we shouldn't discuss other cryptos in the Bitcoin thread is like saying we shouldn't talk about Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama in the Donald Trump thread. Yeah, it's technically titled the DONALD TRUMP thread, but the other players are obviously relevant in various contexts within the political sphere. Same goes for Bitcoin and other cryptos.

I'm not really sure if you are bringing up the greatest analogy, but I think that I get your point, and I don't really think that I am saying that you cannot talk about alts, because I already conceded that there is likely 5% to 10% of posts that deviate in that direction - however, I am saying that it seems inappropriate when the thrust of your post is about other coins and there is a much better thread for that (the alt coin thread), and in that regard, what the fuck are guys posting in the bitcoin thread about alts, except for the fact that they believe that the bitcoin thread has a bigger audience. A bigger audience seems to be an insufficient reason to post about alt coins in the bitcoin thread.

It is like going to the Donald Trump thread and posting something about Hilary Clinton that has nothing to do with Donald Trump and, merely because you believe that the Donald Trump thread has a bigger audience.... The topics of Hilary Clinton may be connected with Donald Trump, but if you are merely posting about ear infection that she had in 1995, then guys might wonder why the fuck are you posting about that in the Donald Trump thread.

Isaac. I think that in the end, you and I don't really see this topic too differently, yet I can understand why you and possibly other guys may come to the conclusion that I am attempting to create and dictate rules for this bitcoin thread, when I really don't think that I am (even though I understand how reasonable RVF guys might come to that conclusion from time to time)

I mean in the end, when push comes to shove, if RVF guys are coming to the bitcoin thread and just posting here and there about alt coins, I doubt that anyone is going to say anything, even me... But if there seems to be a pattern in which they are appear to be derailing and/or cluttering the bitcoin thread with non-relevant topics, then that would likely cause me to say something, I mean if I noticed it... but most of the time, pointing out that there is a better thread for the alt coin topic should not be offensive to anyone who is really attempting to talk about thread relevant substance rather than attempting to distract and/or derail thread topics.

For example, if someone comes into the bitcoin thread and generally posts about bitcoin topics, no one is really going to say anything if he posts a couple times about other coins... but if someone comes into the thread several times, and continues to post about off topics, wouldn't that cause concern from RVF guys? Don't we want to be courteous to other RVF members regarding attempting to post our bitcoin and alt coin topics within the topic appropriate threads?

(04-02-2017 10:24 PM)Isaac Jordan Wrote:  In other news, Erik Voorhees, serial Bitcoin entrepreneur and owner of crypto asset exchange ShapeShift, came out with a new post today encouraging the Bitcoin community to come together and adopt a new compromise/proposal called "SegWit2MB":

Quote:On March 31, Sergio Lerner and the RootStock team proposed “SegWit2MB” to the Bitcoin Core mailing list.

The basics of the proposal…

95% miner support required for consensus

Upon consensus:

SegWit is immediately activated
2MB hardfork countdown begins (to occur Dec 14, 2017)

SegWit is Bitcoin Core’s version (soft fork). The 2MB hardfork aspect is BIP 102, as coded by Jeff Garzik.

Stated plainly, SegWit2MB is a combination of SegWit and a hard fork to a 2MB base block size cap. The two are tied together such that 95% miner support triggers both.

What’s the purpose? In Lerner’s words, “Segwit2Mb is the project to merge into Bitcoin a minimal patch that aims to untangle the current conflict between different political positions regarding segwit activation vs. an increase of the on-chain blockchain space through a standard block size increase. It is not a new solution, but it should be seen more as a least common denominator.”

And I’d like to make the case that it should be considered…

I agree with him in that the proposal makes for an excellent compromise between the two camps, and I encourage folks to head over and read the full post in detail.

I remain of the position that 2mb is not necessary, and the segwit2mb, is also an unnecessary compromise, even if it is endorsed by Eric Voorhees, who by the way has been irrationally siding with the big blockers for quite a long time (and without any real justification beyond the fact that he is Eric Voorhees).

I continue to believe that there is no emergency beyond bullshit attempts at a hostile take over, and there is no need to negotiate with terrorists when there are likely better ways to getting seg wit adopted first before any kind of increase in the blocksize is necessary. The fact of the matter is that seg wit resolves pretty much all of the blocksize limit issues for a hell-of-a long time into the future, and there is no need to incorporate various bullshit compromises that blindly increase to 2mb when that has not been agreed to, vetted or tested, and there is no real factual or logical justification (beyond the fact that some group is holding a gun to the head of the rest of the community).

I don't know how much BTC price pressures comes from something like Kim.com's propositions to begin megaupload 2.0 with BTC.

I think that there have already been three announcements about megaupload 2.0 coming soon.


https://twitter.com/KimDotcom/status/848731692638453761

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/kim-dotc...s-bitcoin/

There seems to be some additional bitcoin recognition going on in Mexico too.

Interesting, and could cause some additional upwards price pressures on BTC.

https://news.bitcoin.com/mexico-bill-bit...um=twitter

(04-02-2017 11:59 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  

(04-02-2017 10:24 PM)Isaac Jordan Wrote:  In other news, Erik Voorhees, serial Bitcoin entrepreneur and owner of crypto asset exchange ShapeShift, came out with a new post today encouraging the Bitcoin community to come together and adopt a new compromise/proposal called "SegWit2MB":

Quote:On March 31, Sergio Lerner and the RootStock team proposed “SegWit2MB” to the Bitcoin Core mailing list.

The basics of the proposal…

95% miner support required for consensus

Upon consensus:

SegWit is immediately activated
2MB hardfork countdown begins (to occur Dec 14, 2017)

SegWit is Bitcoin Core’s version (soft fork). The 2MB hardfork aspect is BIP 102, as coded by Jeff Garzik.

Stated plainly, SegWit2MB is a combination of SegWit and a hard fork to a 2MB base block size cap. The two are tied together such that 95% miner support triggers both.

What’s the purpose? In Lerner’s words, “Segwit2Mb is the project to merge into Bitcoin a minimal patch that aims to untangle the current conflict between different political positions regarding segwit activation vs. an increase of the on-chain blockchain space through a standard block size increase. It is not a new solution, but it should be seen more as a least common denominator.”

And I’d like to make the case that it should be considered…

I agree with him in that the proposal makes for an excellent compromise between the two camps, and I encourage folks to head over and read the full post in detail.

I remain of the position that 2mb is not necessary, and the segwit2mb, is also an unnecessary compromise, even if it is endorsed by Eric Voorhees, who by the way has been irrationally siding with the big blockers for quite a long time (and without any real justification beyond the fact that he is Eric Voorhees).

I continue to believe that there is no emergency beyond bullshit attempts at a hostile take over, and there is no need to negotiate with terrorists when there are likely better ways to getting seg wit adopted first before any kind of increase in the blocksize is necessary. The fact of the matter is that seg wit resolves pretty much all of the blocksize limit issues for a hell-of-a long time into the future, and there is no need to incorporate various bullshit compromises that blindly increase to 2mb when that has not been agreed to, vetted or tested, and there is no real factual or logical justification (beyond the fact that some group is holding a gun to the head of the rest of the community).

A follow up to my earlier post. It does appear that seg wit support is inching up little by little, we were in the 25% territory prior to the BU hardforking FUD hype.. and then now it appears that signaling for seg wit is around 32%.

https://coin.dance/blocks


Who knows whether we are going to achieve high enough consensus levels in order to actually implement seg wit in the coming months... but in spite of the misinformation coming from the terrorists, seg wit is not really that controversial among technical folks in regards to the levels of fixes and achievements that it would bring to bitcoin.

Regarding change for the sake of change, or compromise for the sake of compromise, that kind of thinking is dangerous for bitcoin. In the end, if seg wit does not pass, it is not the end of the world for bitcoin. Maintaining the status quo in bitcoin is a feature and not a bug. We don't want folks going in and being able to make changes willy nilly, and a lot of the big block proposals of XT, classic, and BU and including additional compromises are attempting to fold in some kind of change in the governance threshold in order to make it a lot easier to make changes to bitcoin, and those would not be beneficial to bitcoin to have low threshold abilities to make changes.

By the way, I suspect that if seg wit begins to get anywhere near 60% support, there will be some piling on of additional support at some point - unless miners begin to believe that it remains in their interest to purposefully block bitcoin innovations (including seg wit).

Definitely a lot of ongoing upwards BTC price action, even beyond what I had been considering to have been likely.... in other words, we have a pretty decent rebound from breaking below $900 to our current state of affairs.

As I type, I'm thinking that if prices break through $1,200 in the coming weeks, then we have a pretty decent likelihood of retesting ATH levels (which currently are in the mid-$1300s)....

Yeah, we may not go straight up, and we could experience a price correction (or profit taking) at any time, but still the ongoing price pressures and the upwards movements seem to be pretty decent - even especially over the last couple of days... above and beyond expectations, as I already stated...

Are you really only one person? Can't be, no way.

I read four words of one your posts above, was like WTF, scrolled down for 5 minutes. I almost fell out of my chair it was so long.

You have a team right?

(04-03-2017 07:22 PM)Armogan Wrote:  Are you really only one person? Can't be, no way.

I read four words of one your posts above, was like WTF, scrolled down for 5 minutes. I almost fell out of my chair it was so long.

You have a team right?

hahahahahaha

Nope.. just me.. and I am not a bot, either.

(04-03-2017 07:22 PM)Armogan Wrote:  Are you really only one person? Can't be, no way.

I read four words of one your posts above, was like WTF, scrolled down for 5 minutes. I almost fell out of my chair it was so long.

You have a team right?

More than two thousand words in one post, more than three thousand words within 24 hours. Probably not very healthy to be that much asperger-bitcoin. Ever considered turning off the computer, going outside to meet some women, JJG?

(04-03-2017 05:05 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  Definitely a lot of ongoing upwards BTC price action, even beyond what I had been considering to have been likely.... in other words, we have a pretty decent rebound from breaking below $900 to our current state of affairs.

As I type, I'm thinking that if prices break through $1,200 in the coming weeks, then we have a pretty decent likelihood of retesting ATH levels (which currently are in the mid-$1300s)....

Yeah, we may not go straight up, and we could experience a price correction (or profit taking) at any time, but still the ongoing price pressures and the upwards movements seem to be pretty decent - even especially over the last couple of days... above and beyond expectations, as I already stated...

I'm going to write this as a bit of a supplement to my earlier post, and part of the mistake that I made in my earlier post was NOT to state the price at the time that I made the post.

So in the earlier post, BTC prices were floating in the $1,140s - and as I type this post, we are pretty much in the same place with a bit of teetering into the lower $1,150 arena. In the past several hours, we had some little ups and downs, but largely continuing to gravitate back into the $1,140s.

Part of the reason for this update too, is that the daily weighted top 50 days prices just got published for updating the last couple of days.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=...sg18450024

So, I am not sure how this 50 day chart information can be viewed as really bringing any kind of reasonable "bitcoin is dead" or "bitcoin is dying" or even "bitcoin is less important" conclusions.

Yeah, of course at any time, BTC prices could receive another significant downward correction - and maybe bring us down into the lower $1,000s or the upper $900s, but absent some meaningful FUD spreading (including even attempts at distractions in threads like this one), it remains a very decent feat to be showing that the last four days have rankings all time high weighted daily BTC prices at 24, 31, 32, and 36 respectively (with weighted prices at $1,127, $1083, $1078 and $1054) and prices would have to go below $1021 to take Bitcoin prices out of the top 50 rankings.

So, guys can spout all that they want about "bitcoin is dead," "bitcoin is diluted," "we need to talk about other coins in order to stay up with the times," yet the fact of the matter is that bitcoin remains quit strong and quite a powerful force in recent times - and like I said, maybe we will get a downward correction, but even if prices were to stay above $800 for several months, it is likely that bitcoin is going to stay in a pretty decent place.

Don't get me wrong here. As far as short term BTC price predictions, I remain a bit on the optimistic side regarding the strength of the ongoing upwards price pressures, so I can see continued upwards, but I also attempt to prepare myself for either price direction... so as the price goes up I sell.. and as the price goes down I buy (so yeah, I have been selling all the way up from about $940.. so yeah, I would like to buy some of those back, but it is not a big deal to me either, if I do not buy them back because I sell only about 1% of my portfolio for every 10% rise in price) ...

so you are selling now but urge others to buy? sounds like a pyramid to me.

(04-04-2017 06:47 AM)Satoshi Wrote:  so you are selling now but urge others to buy? sounds like a pyramid to me.

You are trying to cause confusion where little confusion should exist.... I think that can be fairly called FUD spreading or trolling, no?

Guys should do what they feel comfortable with in regards to bitcoin, and I already explained many times that I sell on the way up and buy on the way down. That has pretty much been my practice since I started - and since nearly the first two years that I was in bitcoin BTC prices had been mostly going down, I was mostly buying and I was not selling.

I probably could have sold more in the beginning, but i felt that I was in a bitcoin accumulation phase, so that was my personal choice to accumulate a sufficient quantity before I felt comfortable getting into the selling practice.

The last year and a half the price has been going up, so I have been selling, but of course bitcoin is volatile, so I buy, too. Currently, I will also dollar cost average a bit, too. My current allocation of my total bitcoin related investment is about 92% bitcoin and 8% dollars - approximately.. my records are a little screwy lately... but that is approximately where i am with the allocations of my bitcoin dedicated funds.

If guys do not have any stake in BTC then dollar cost averaging can work or buying on dips can work or waiting can work. How they approach is up to them, but sometimes the price goes up and it does not come back down, so that would be one of the risks in waiting.

I am not trying to sell anything about what guys should do but instead sharing information about a topic...

Ultimately, guys should do what they like with information from me or share their own information to the extent that they believe it is helpful to the discussion, and of course personal experiences and perspectives can vary.

What are you recommending guys should do in regards to bitcoin, Satoshi? Sell all of their bitcoins, if they have any? Short them, if they do not have any? Don't buy and stay away? Do you have any specifics that you would like to provide in regards to an approach to bitcoins and reasons why?

Personally, I would take anything you say with a considerable grain of salt because you have been predicting bitcoin's demise since the mid$200s, and you have been recommending selling or shorting since then without really much likelihood of that strategy to have been a success (even though a stopped clock can still be correct a couple times a day).

Anyhow, feel free to provide some bitcoin perspective if you believe it will be helpful for guys considering whether or how to allocate any possible bitcoin related risks.

(04-04-2017 06:47 AM)Satoshi Wrote:  so you are selling now but urge others to buy? sounds like a pyramid to me.

By the way, Satoshi, if you have not realized by now that bitcoin is not a pyramid scheme (you had been in bitcoin from at least 2012 until 2015 and then supposedly shorting it in 2016), and you are trying to make those kinds of accusations regarding bitcoin, either you have a lot to learn about what pyramid schemes are and/or about what bitcoin is.

Otherwise, if you already understand that bitcoin is not a pyramid scheme (which is the more likely scenario - because I really doubt that you are that dumb), then you should man up and admit that you are only throwing out those kinds of stupid-ass and ill-thought-out accusations regarding bitcoin as a pyramid scheme because you are trying to mislead guys about the topic of this thread.

Here's an interesting article that talks about governmental problems in Venezuela and has a reference to bitcoin in the end of the article.

It also has a 6 minute video that discusses bitcoin advantages for south american people.


http://reason.com/blog/2017/03/31/venezu...-supreme-c

Dont mean to change the topic but what are your thoughts on Ethereum? Is it going to keep dropping as Bitcoin goes up? I am 50/50 invested in both

This is the 'Bitcoin Thread', not the 'Pump-and-Dump Thread'.

No other coins allowed. It's against the rules.

(04-04-2017 06:04 PM)FRO Wrote:  Dont mean to change the topic but what are your thoughts on Ethereum? Is it going to keep dropping as Bitcoin goes up? I am 50/50 invested in both

Who the fuck knows?

Sometimes there is an inverse correlation with price movement and sometimes not.

I think that you are bit risky on ethereum if you are going 50/50, but what do I know?

Sometimes it depends on your timeline and if you feel pretty comfortable that you will be able to get out at a time that works for you... or at least to reallocate at a time that works for you.

You made a choice to go 50/50 based on some considerations of your own. Why don't you share some of those considerations? Are you thinking about reallocating? How long have you been in? Have you always been 50/50 or was that a recent adjustment? Do you have other coins, or only bitcoin and ethereum?

(04-04-2017 06:16 PM)Armogan Wrote:  This is the 'Bitcoin Thread', not the 'Pump-and-Dump Thread'.

No other coins allowed. It's against the rules.

hahahahaha

it's starting to sink in...


GREAT!!!!!!


Some nuts are hard to crack, but looks like you are coming around, Armogan.

Unfortunately I was not an early adopter of Bitcoin like some of you. I saw the early volatility and the 2014 crash as being reasons not to invest. I didnt make the jump into BTC until Nov 2014 ($700) and Ethereum at little after in Dec ($10.50). Both prices have risen which is good but there wasnt a solid strategy, just timing. Now a days I am looking for a strategy but it seems like everyone has an opinion. It seems like what you have to do is be glued to your computer and wait for a tweet about a hard fork or govt report from China to figure out what to do.

There's a lot of uncertainty and disagreement in the BTC community right now, while Ethereum is going to have several big developments in the next 3 months, ENS (no more hex addresses needed), Raiden (1,000,000 + tx/sec), zk-SNARKS (privacy).

The fork is going to be a big thing. But you should really ask yourself this question. Which coin do you think has better chance of doubling at year-end? BTC to $2,200 or ETH at $90? Whatever way you think should be pretty obvious in guiding allocation questions.

JJG has some one-sided views (He's a China miner issue denialist) so take that in objectively. I'm just here to make money with any pump-and-dump shit coin of the day.

(04-04-2017 07:10 PM)FRO Wrote:  Unfortunately I was not an early adopter of Bitcoin like some of you. I saw the early volatility and the 2014 crash as being reasons not to invest.

Hey... it's all relative. There are a lot of people who have no clue about bitcoin, so to them, you are an "early adopter."

Your reaction is very understandable, and there are a lot of people who invest in bitcoin and they are nervous about it, and there are a lot of people who don't because they are afraid to invest in something that they do not understand.

You can follow bitcoin a long time and still NOT really understand it very well. I certainly follow bitcoin a lot and I have a lot of strong opinions, but I still don't understand a lot of things, too.

(04-04-2017 07:10 PM)FRO Wrote:  I didnt make the jump into BTC until Nov 2014 ($700) and Ethereum at little after in Dec ($10.50). Both prices have risen which is good but there wasnt a solid strategy, just timing.

That is understandable, too. Sure it is much better to be in a place with profits than it is to be in a place with losses, but I understand some of the difficulties of your dilemma because you might be torn about whether you should take profit, how much and maybe which one.

(04-04-2017 07:10 PM)FRO Wrote:  Now a days I am looking for a strategy but it seems like everyone has an opinion.

Of course people have opinions, but in the end, you gotta find something that works for you, your finances, your outlook, your risk tolerances, your timeline etc.

When I got into bitcoin, I had some ideas about the approach that I wanted to take, and I posted quite a lot of that here, and some of my approach has evolved through the years, but of course, if I was a different person with a different personality, with different finances, it is likely that I would have tailored my approach differently.

Some guys have posted here about their approach and attempted to bounce ideas off other guys, but in the end, you can work out your own strategy.. and maybe even experience some mistakes along the way?

(04-04-2017 07:10 PM)FRO Wrote:  It seems like what you have to do is be glued to your computer and wait for a tweet about a hard fork or govt report from China to figure out what to do.

I don't think that you need to do that, but if you are really worried about that kind of thing, then you might be over invested.

The amount of time that you monitor the price is up to you, and you can attempt to tailor your approach in such a way that it is more hands off, or you can tailor your approach in such a way that you are watching your computer all day.. there is a lot of variation, and there is no one way fits all, that's for sure.

(04-04-2017 07:22 PM)Armogan Wrote:  There's a lot of uncertainty and disagreement in the BTC community right now, while Ethereum is going to have several big developments in the next 3 months, ENS (no more hex addresses needed), Raiden (1,000,000 + tx/sec), zk-SNARKS (privacy).

The fork is going to be a big thing. But you should really ask yourself this question. Which coin do you think has better chance of doubling at year-end? BTC to $2,200 or ETH at $90? Whatever way you think should be pretty obvious in guiding allocation questions.

JJG has some one-sided views (He's a China miner issue denialist) so take that in objectively. I'm just here to make money with any pump-and-dump shit coin of the day.

There is nothing wrong with having differing opinions, and I doubt that it is necessary to assert that my view is one-sided, merely because I have a different approach from yours, a different way of framing issues and some different considerations about probabilities, but I suppose if that is what you believe, then so be it...

Further, I do think that there are ways to challenge another person's point of view and beliefs and logic and relied upon facts without necessarily devolving into borderline personality attacks or suggesting seemingly unnecessary argumentative "bias".

Regarding Ethereum versus BTC and the what is the most likely to double, even you know that you gotta go by more than just price per unit (which you mentioned as price potentials of $2200 vs $90).

Further, you gotta consider both the upside potential and the downside potential when you are hedging your bets and allocating your resources into different asset classes.

In that regard, there is going to be a spectrum of price probabilities on both ends (up and down), and those price probabilities are going to depend on a lot of factors that may or may not play out - both on the upside and on the downside of each asset class that you are considering distributing your eggs (or should I say which baskets you are putting your eggs into? ).

Also, hopefully guys can choose for themselves based on attempts at providing unbiased information rather than attempting to convince RVF guys (maybe this relatively small market) to go into one thing or another in order to pump it or to dump it.

Turns out I bought my bitcoin on the day that is was the most expensive it has ever been...

Glad I also bought Ethereum which has somewhat offset the loss on BTC.

(04-05-2017 03:39 AM)Sooth Wrote:  Turns out I bought my bitcoin on the day that is was the most expensive it has ever been...

Glad I also bought Ethereum which has somewhat offset the loss on BTC.

You bought BTC at $1350? or some other price?

Are you going to just hold it, and wait until higher? maybe it could take a long time to get back over your buy price? or are you just playing the situation by ear, in terms of whether you hold or sell or partially sell?

Sometimes the first purchases can be the most risky. I mean questioning whether to start out with a high number or a low number, and frequently dollar cost averaging can cause you to buy over a real long term but only buy very small amounts - like $10 or $20 per week, but it adds up over the long run, and usually over the long run you will be able to see the positive return.

If you buy lump sums, then you do run the risk that you may get caught for a while, but you can still continue to dollar cost average with a smaller amount, as long as you are bullish on the asset in the long run.

If you are bearish on the asset in the long run, then that is a whole other story.