• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About darkmarket

  • Rank
    HPC Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

683 profile views
  1. Residential Property Price Index exclusive thread

    Yes. You don't get to pretend you're in support of a reasonable market on the one hand, and then push HPI at every turn. Look at how these figures were reported when the UU negatives were ignored, not even bothering to warn the market that all the data available suggests a correction is underway. You did exactly the same. You know very well I'm talking about bulk datasets of individual transactions free for public consumption, as in the rest of the UK. The correction in the market is crystal clear and your posts are just another cog in the wheel desperately trying to find greater fools with this 'everything is fine' fantasy.
  2. Some of the drop in the FTSE is hidden by the drop in the pound, but ~1% is still peeking out. Given the drop in small cap UK companies is smaller, looks more like the effects of the Trump tax reform trade collapsing.
  3. Also last year's circuit breaker incident on the Shanghai SE, where it paused trades for 15 minutes at +/-5% (in comparison with 13% on the S&P). At +/-7% trading was closed for the day (20% on the S&P). From an SSE review:
  4. Residential Property Price Index exclusive thread

    The lag means the data doesn't cover the period readers might expect, and media portray. To that extent, you'd expect the NI HPI to turn negative in turn. It's a problem because the misrepresentation causes people to think the market isn't falling now, when according to the more recent data it is. Obviously we need individual sales data like the rest of the UK and I'm sure developers have been lobbying for that transparency.
  5. I'm okay with the events that are unfolding currently.
  6. At the start they said it was from such a low base, they didn't need to panic. Now it's been spiking for three quarters and still the dollar was sold off with rate hike odds down 10%. The Fed is stuck. As ever, wonder what's happening with the derivatives trading on this debt.
  7. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-17/dip-buyers-beware-this-selloff-came-with-slew-of-worrying-signs It's over.
  8. Another poor soul on MSE...

    The old 37-year mortgage, nothing to stress about.
  9. The Bubbly Bitcoin Thread -- Merged Threads

    'Centralised ownership', the idea that a few people have a lot of bitcoin, is nothing to do with centralisation. "I said contribute to the protocol, not the network. They don't run the network, they secure it." You can just disagree, but this is all factual to help clear up your confusion. This is still too confused to make sense of, going back through your multiple posts Price would fall to reflect the drop in security. You're not even talking about decentralisation any more, your posts are barely legible and you're not trying to back up any of your claims.
  10. The Bubbly Bitcoin Thread -- Merged Threads

    If you mean too many bitcoins are held by too few people, this is a question of equality, not decentralisation. I said contribute to the protocol, not the network. They don't run the network, they secure it. The fork hasn't concluded. Adequate for what? Your writing is too unclear to respond. It's not clear what you're trying to say here again, if you can try and break down your thoughts a bit more it'd be helpful.
  11. The Bubbly Bitcoin Thread -- Merged Threads

    Your original sentence, "Decentralised what? 1. Ownership - no", was about ownership, as was my reply. No, it inherently tends to centralisation. In mining. Which isn't a concern because miners have no control over the protocol. They could contribute to the protocol in all the ways I mentioned above, but there is little in the way of open source development at all in China. Yes, it was true. If you can show in what way to "a very limited and managed degree" I'm sure I could respond, otherwise your assertion will remain unfounded. It would in no way demonstrate the opposite of my assertion, I'm not even sure what you're suggesting here. Your final sentence isn't clear again, so I can't respond.
  12. The Bubbly Bitcoin Thread -- Merged Threads

    1. This is not clear. The person with the private keys to a particular UTXO alone can spend the bitcoins. If you mean Bitcoin, nobody 'owns' it. 2. As I said, it's been clear since the outset that mining inherently tends to centralisation. It's of no concern because miners have no control over the protocol. 3. Bitcoin is open source, there are a number of implementations: https://coin.dance/nodes. Anyone can contribute to any of the projects, or fork one and modify it, or create their own from scratch. The Bitcoin Core project is not a democracy, that doesn't mean Bitcoin is not decentralised. The version of Bitcoin that holds value is the version that nodes run, including individual and business nodes serving customers. Due to its value miners will mine it. That's how decentralisation works in Bitcoin. By way of proof, you may well be about to see what happens when miners try to influence the protocol by mining something that people with bitcoin nodes don't want to run.
  13. The Bubbly Bitcoin Thread -- Merged Threads

    Bitcoin mining inherently tends towards centralisation, but the miners have no control over the protocol and the network itself, taken as the aggregate of P2P nodes autonomously validating according to the same rules of consensus, meets any sane definition of decentralisation.
  14. The Bubbly Bitcoin Thread -- Merged Threads

    You can follow their progress to some degree. Goldman Sachs has patented its SETLCoin and most other major banks were involved with the R3 project, set up by ex-Bitcoin developer Mike Hearn after his attempt to split Bitcoin failed. Most of their projects now are based on Ethereum and a variety of private blockchain models which are yet to show any value. https://github.com/hyperledger Despite their efforts and the myriad altcoins, bitcoin is yet to have a serious rival as a cryptocurrency.
  15. From the BoE post cited in the Irish Times article (my emphasis): https://bankunderground.co.uk/2017/08/15/car-finance-whats-new/ This from the organisation providing the cheap credit, in the multiple forms of direct corporate bond purchases from those finance houses, the TFS and monetary policy. And they wrap up saying they're not even feigning vigilance with the non-bank lenders. The Bank of England is becoming a serious threat to the UK.