14 comments

[ 0.81 ms ] story [ 53.5 ms ] thread
How is a 2.4% price jump in a market as volatile and illiquid as bitcoin indicative of anything?
Since the post was published three days ago, bitcoin is up about 12%.
But bitcoin can just as easily lose 10% in a day without surprising anyone. So, that's still not exactly bullish.
Is the timestamp on this post incorrect? "Posted 3 days ago. June 27, 2014 at 7:44 PM"
The chart in the blog post is also from june 27-28, so it looks like you're right.
Note that this assumes the markets believe all bitcoins are fungible. There was some speculation buyers might pay a premium for coins held by the US government because they would be considered "clean".

That said, if you don't believe Bitcoins to be fungible I think you'd be crazy to buy millions of dollars worth of them. Bitcoin becomes far less useful if everyone has to worry whether their Bitcoins won't be accepted by certain users.

I always thought these Bitcoins might command a premium due to no counterparty risk and no need to give personal information to sketchy companies. Although from what I understand many bitcoin enthusiasts don't necessarily thrust the US government either...
More likely in my opinion: They might command a premium because buying them like this would be a lot less expensive than buying the same quantity on the open markets, where you would likely drive the price way up before you finished purchasing your target quantity.
Keep in mind, that this is pure speculation. There is no evidence whatsoever that whoever bought bitcoins below a certain price is in any way connected to the bidders, or even that those bitcoins were bought by a single individual.
"A weighted random number generator just produced a new batch of numbers." "Let's use them to build narratives!" --http://xkcd.com/904/
The next step, obviously, is a Markov chain sentence generator based on this. Hell, I'd like to see a completely AI-generated news site that works off scraping current events and a market report.