Live data from Hacker News

Researchers find that one person likely drove Bitcoin from $150 to $1,000

techcrunch.com

91–100 of 199 posts

Re: Researchers find that one person likely drove Bitcoin from $150 to $1,000

#91

Interesting. I am curious to know who drove up the Bitcoin price to $18K.

You can see on a regular basis that South Korean exchanges are always paying 25-50% more than Western exchanges.

The Bitcoin pump to 20k, the entire history of Bitcoin Cash, and recently the Ripple pump to $3 were all pumped by Bithumb, Upbit, etc. Hence the controversy with Coinmarketcap removing Korean exchanges for a second resulting in the marketcap dropping 50 billion.

Even right now, almost 50% of XRP volume is in SK all paying > $2, but there's no Western exchange trading above $2. See: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ripple/#markets

Re: Researchers find that one person likely drove Bitcoin from $150 to $1,000

#92
post #73

All crypto markets have always been shallow and rife with manipulation. It's still almost a total free-for-all.

It is a bit nerve racking seeing the distribution of coins to such few addresses: https://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-bitcoin-addresses.... I wonder if there is any collusion among the top 2000 addresses. Mind you one person can even have multiple addresses.

>I wonder if there is any collusion among the top 2000 addresses

I would bet my life on it.

Re: Researchers find that one person likely drove Bitcoin from $150 to $1,000

#93
post #90
post #83

The number of seemingly throwaway accounts (created in the last few days) commenting on this thread is interesting too: - https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=astund - https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=simplemath__ - https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=zhjansbnas - https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=barbegal

Just people are very cautious online with signaling that they have any crypto.

I don't buy that. What's the threat vector?

Are you not able to be anonymous with an HN account if you choose? So much so that creating multiple accounts doesn't matter?

Re: Researchers find that one person likely drove Bitcoin from $150 to $1,000

#95
post #85
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The USD backing Tethers could be used to buy Tethers! Instant capitalisation!

That’s comfortingly close to fractional reserve banking (which unfashionably I’m a big fan of).

Except in a real fractional reserve system, the central bank usually sets reserve and/or capital requirements.

Re: Researchers find that one person likely drove Bitcoin from $150 to $1,000

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any recent manipulations ? especially in 2017 end ?

Most recently, there's the tape-painting bot Picasso: https://medium.com/@bitfinexed/meet-picasso-the-painter-on-g... If you were paying attention in the week that followed this post, the spread between GDAX and the other major US exchanges narrowed from $1000+ per coin to just about $11 right now, and trade volumes on GDAX plummeted. Maybe theres's some other reason, though there's some crazy correlation there at le…

His case relies on random assumptions.

Re: Researchers find that one person likely drove Bitcoin from $150 to $1,000

#97
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue that nothing useful is coming of it now, and that during dot com, the internet was extremely useful.

Is that rose tinted glasses / nostalgia though? Do you have a bunch of examples to support your conclusion?

Err, are you asking whether the internet was useful during/prior (and despite) the dot.com bubble? The answer is, yes, it was hugely useful. Initially for information (e-mail, ftp, finger, usenet, gopher, WWW), later for commerce.

It was far more useful, and far more frequently used, even years before the dot.com bubble, than cryptocurrencies are now.

If you took away cryptocurrencies right now, impact on me and almost everyone I know would be basically nil. If you had taken away the internet in 1996, I and many other people would have complained.

Re: Researchers find that one person likely drove Bitcoin from $150 to $1,000

#98
post #95
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s comfortingly close to fractional reserve banking (which unfashionably I’m a big fan of).

Except in a real fractional reserve system, the central bank usually sets reserve and/or capital requirements.

Yep, but that’s a legal requirement tacked on by governments, not an actual theoretical requirement.

Re: Researchers find that one person likely drove Bitcoin from $150 to $1,000

#99
post #93
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just people are very cautious online with signaling that they have any crypto.

I don't buy that. What's the threat vector? Are you not able to be anonymous with an HN account if you choose? So much so that creating multiple accounts doesn't matter?

Yes, you can be anonymous on HN - that assumes you've stayed anonymous. Obviously these people didn't and so they need a new account. The motivation is huge.

Re: Researchers find that one person likely drove Bitcoin from $150 to $1,000

#100
post #97
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that rose tinted glasses / nostalgia though? Do you have a bunch of examples to support your conclusion?

Err, are you asking whether the internet was useful during/prior (and despite) the dot.com bubble? The answer is, yes, it was hugely useful. Initially for information (e-mail, ftp, finger, usenet, gopher, WWW), later for commerce. It was far more useful, and far more frequently used, even years before the dot.com bubble, than cryptocurrencies are now. If you took away cryptocurrencies right now, impact on me and almo…

> Err, are you asking whether the internet was useful during/prior (and despite) the dot.com bubble?

Look, I was there from the mid 90s. I'm curious about the various viewpoints, as well as a more objective, less biased summary which attempts to ignore the nostalgia factor.

> Initially for information (e-mail, ftp, finger, usenet, gopher, WWW), later for commerce.

Thanks, OK, those are examples I can work with.

E-mail -> Still exists. Was it better back in those days? We had spam back then, right? Although not so much in the earlier parts of the 90s. FWIW, I did not have access to IMAP server. I had to use POP3 and webmail instead. Nor was IMAPS or POP3S used. Man, did POP3 and webmail sucked (until Gmail came along).

FTP -> Barely used anymore. Perhaps only in "the scene", though I know in the end of '00s that already happened via autoxfer bots. We got better, more secure means of data transfer though.

Usenet -> Still exists. Spammers largely moved on. Now and then two worlds: text and binary. One grew a lot, but a lot of smaller providers didn't grow with the insane data storage amounts. So a few big players nowadays. Same with ASPs (aka ISPs) in general for that matter. It has its + and - I guess.

Finger -> Replaced by blogs I guess?

Gopher -> Barely used anymore. Replaced by WWW. I didn't experience Gopher. My first browser was Netscape 2 What about the more server/UNIX world? Was that better back then as well, with these large UNIX molochs like NeXT, SGI, HP, SUN, IBM, SCO?

Arguably though, the widespread adoption of TLS/SSL has made us more secure now than in the 90s. Back in those days, we did not have technologies like Tor.

> If you took away cryptocurrencies right now, impact on me and almost everyone I know would be basically nil. If you had taken away the internet in 1996, I and many other people would have complained.

I wasn't looking at it from that angle, I assumed the OP was comparing the internet of then with the internet of now; not comparing cryptocurrency.

Cryptocurrency is just a pleasure to observe for me, like rats running around in a cage. A bunch of NTs getting manipulated by a small number of psychopaths, that's how I'd sum cryptocurrency up.

Post reply on HN