Home
Forums
New posts
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Living
Money
The Bitcoin (BTC) thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JayJuanGee" data-source="post: 1363370" data-attributes="member: 5330"><p>The non-correlated asset meme is dying only in the minds of people who fail/refuse to zoom out a little bit in order to attempt to really understand what is going on in bitcoin, and instead they seem to be trying to figure out how to make nonsensical connections that do not exist in any kind of direct way, as you seem to be suggesting, burner.</p><p></p><p>Of course, there is going to be short term correlation from time to time, including some short term dynamics in which the excess cash ends up flooding into bitcoin in ways that you are describing, burner, but that short-term correlation to the extent that it exists does not cause bitcoin to all of a sudden become directly connected to traditional markets, whether we are talking about gold or equities or otherwise.</p><p></p><p>If you are only able to consider or recognize Bitcoin in terms of its purported connection to traditional markets on the short term, then it seems quite likely that you are missing part of the foundational backings of the various BTC price prediction models that hardly have any traditional market component contained therein, except perhaps various overall presumptions that over time value is going to gravitate into the most sound of moneys, which happens to be bitcoin currently in terms of the best of the sound moneys which has the likely ongoing result of value continuing to gravitate into bitcoin in the long term, even if in the shorter term there is a lot of potential noise and confusion along the way.</p><p></p><p>So, maybe it bears repeating that the BTC price prediction models have a lot of components, and just to list them out again 1) stock to flow, 2) 4 year fractal, 3) exponential s-curve adoption based on metcalfe and networking principles.</p><p></p><p>It takes a bit of study and analysis to understand the seeming ongoing validity of various BTC price prediction models, and I doubt that you are NOT aware of some of those foundational principles, burner. Of course, you may likely subscribe to some of the theories that attempt to equate or grant value to a variety of shitcoin projects, which could be taking you away from giving much if any credence to the sound money thesis that has been underpinning the ongoing strength of a variety of bitcoin fundamentals. So, I am not really attempting to blame you for framing bitcoin matters with those seemingly different value references.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JayJuanGee, post: 1363370, member: 5330"] The non-correlated asset meme is dying only in the minds of people who fail/refuse to zoom out a little bit in order to attempt to really understand what is going on in bitcoin, and instead they seem to be trying to figure out how to make nonsensical connections that do not exist in any kind of direct way, as you seem to be suggesting, burner. Of course, there is going to be short term correlation from time to time, including some short term dynamics in which the excess cash ends up flooding into bitcoin in ways that you are describing, burner, but that short-term correlation to the extent that it exists does not cause bitcoin to all of a sudden become directly connected to traditional markets, whether we are talking about gold or equities or otherwise. If you are only able to consider or recognize Bitcoin in terms of its purported connection to traditional markets on the short term, then it seems quite likely that you are missing part of the foundational backings of the various BTC price prediction models that hardly have any traditional market component contained therein, except perhaps various overall presumptions that over time value is going to gravitate into the most sound of moneys, which happens to be bitcoin currently in terms of the best of the sound moneys which has the likely ongoing result of value continuing to gravitate into bitcoin in the long term, even if in the shorter term there is a lot of potential noise and confusion along the way. So, maybe it bears repeating that the BTC price prediction models have a lot of components, and just to list them out again 1) stock to flow, 2) 4 year fractal, 3) exponential s-curve adoption based on metcalfe and networking principles. It takes a bit of study and analysis to understand the seeming ongoing validity of various BTC price prediction models, and I doubt that you are NOT aware of some of those foundational principles, burner. Of course, you may likely subscribe to some of the theories that attempt to equate or grant value to a variety of shitcoin projects, which could be taking you away from giving much if any credence to the sound money thesis that has been underpinning the ongoing strength of a variety of bitcoin fundamentals. So, I am not really attempting to blame you for framing bitcoin matters with those seemingly different value references. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Living
Money
The Bitcoin (BTC) thread
Top
