Dogecoin market manipulation? • Hacker News Board

Re: Dogecoin market manipulation?

#161

Post by wmf » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 7:33 PM UTC

GFischer wrote: post #159

wmf wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an argument that the world needs one cryptocurrency but not two. Therefore the first one (Bitcoin) is not a scam, but all others are.

Your second point doesn't necessarily derive from the first. I can understand standardizing on only one cryptocurrency, but why not one that addresses many of Bitcoins' limitations? I'm not saying it should be Dogecoin, actually I hope not, but it could be.

I agree that the one cryptocurrency doesn't have to be Bitcoin. What I left unsaid is that so far none of the altcoins provide enough improvement over Bitcoin that it's worth breaking compatibility.

Re: Dogecoin market manipulation?

#162

Post by HNaTTY » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 9:11 PM UTC

socillion wrote: post #106

KVFinn wrote: post #29

Anyone have a link to a tl;dr on how market manipulation like this works? It seems like crypto-currencies are ripe for for this of thing and it doesn't take much money to do it. Presumably the hidden information you have from being part of a cabal means it's different than just changing your risk distribution like a Martingale betting strategy does.

The way it works is to use a giant bid or ask wall to push the price around. Say the asset has bids at 220 and asks at 222, and you want to push the price downwards. You put up an ask of an amount equivalent to maybe 6hours volume at 224 (an "ask wall"). Anyone selling will put their orders below that wall, and as you slowly move the wall downwards people will sell into the market in the expectation that they can buy…

That was a good explanation, except for the fact that I think you're referring to eg 220, 222, and 224 as the Satoshi/DOGE exchange rate, and by pushing the price downwards, you'll actually get more Satoshi for each DOGE.

Pushing the price "down" to 224 from 220 is very confusing and caused me to have to read your post several times to make sure I understood correctly.

Re: Dogecoin market manipulation?

#163

Post by empraptor » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 9:13 PM UTC

plantain wrote: post #132

It seems quite likely the dogecoin reddit moderators are involved with this due to absolute radio silence about market manipulation on the subreddit.

I was curious so searched for manipulation on the dogecoin subreddit. Got the following as first hit. I don't know enough about reddit algo to speculate why it doesn't show up on front page of the subreddit.

http://www.reddit.com/r/dogecoin/comments/1w7otj/dogecoin_ma...

Re: Dogecoin market manipulation?

#164

Post by SectioAurea » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 10:20 PM UTC

XorNot wrote: post #66

socillion wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of these altcoins are the epitome of the greater fool theory, where most participants are perfectly aware that it is a rationally poor decision to invest in them but do it anyway because they think someone will buy it for more later. It turns out people can make huge returns even from investing in known scams - certainly not guaranteed, but it's better odds than gambling.

Really? Only "altcoins"? They have the exact same mechanics, structure, and backing as Bitcoin...

False. They do not all have the same structure as Bitcoin. Many of them are explicitly structured as pyramid schemes (premining, instamining, stealth launches, closed source launches).

While very few have unique selling points over Bitcoin, it is dangerous to assume they are 'at least as useful' as Bitcoin.

Re: Dogecoin market manipulation?

#165

Post by XorNot » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 10:29 PM UTC

SectioAurea wrote: post #164

XorNot wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Only "altcoins"? They have the exact same mechanics, structure, and backing as Bitcoin...

False. They do not all have the same structure as Bitcoin. Many of them are explicitly structured as pyramid schemes (premining, instamining, stealth launches, closed source launches). While very few have unique selling points over Bitcoin, it is dangerous to assume they are 'at least as useful' as Bitcoin.

Bitcoin was extensively pre-mined.

Re: Dogecoin market manipulation?

#166

Post by BrandonM » Tue, Jan 28, 2014, 2:42 AM UTC

andrewflnr wrote: post #119

XorNot wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gambling is when the game is purely driven by luck. Investing is when the instrument has measurable properties and explanations for why it will become more valuable - i.e. you invest in making your factory larger, so it can produce product more cheaply. Betting on completely unregulated currency markets (which have good reasons that they shouldn't have any value at all) is gambling, because you're entirely depending…

So, poker isn't gambling? That's news to most of the world. It seems pretty clear to me that gambling and investing are a continuum, with craps at one end and Treasury bonds at the other.

Poker absolutely isn't gambling for skilled individuals, any more than a casino is gambling by offering games of chance that have a house advantage.

Re: Dogecoin market manipulation?

#167

Post by socillion » Tue, Jan 28, 2014, 2:55 AM UTC

HNaTTY wrote: post #162

socillion wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way it works is to use a giant bid or ask wall to push the price around. Say the asset has bids at 220 and asks at 222, and you want to push the price downwards. You put up an ask of an amount equivalent to maybe 6hours volume at 224 (an "ask wall"). Anyone selling will put their orders below that wall, and as you slowly move the wall downwards people will sell into the market in the expectation that they can buy…

That was a good explanation, except for the fact that I think you're referring to eg 220, 222, and 224 as the Satoshi/DOGE exchange rate, and by pushing the price downwards, you'll actually get more Satoshi for each DOGE. Pushing the price "down" to 224 from 220 is very confusing and caused me to have to read your post several times to make sure I understood correctly.

I mean that putting a large sell order at 224 would make the buys (at the moment, at 220) move lower as the orders are filled by other people selling to them. You could then move the wall downwards, say to 221, when the sells in the orderbook had also moved downwards from 222. At this point the market's state would be something like buys at 218, sells at 220, and your wall at 221, effectively having pushed the market downwards from where you started.

I hope this made what I meant a bit clearer.