# Cryptocurrency price prediction using LSTMs TensorFlow ...

• Cryptocurrency price prediction using LSTMs TensorFlow ...
• Modeling Bitcoin Value with Scarcity Medium
• Understanding the Covariance Matrix DataScience+
• python - Sklearn PCA explained variance and explained ...
• What moves Bitcoin?. Predicting Bitcoin through news… by ...
##### Which type of curren(t) do you want to see(cy)? An analysis of the intention behind bitcoin(s). Part 3

Part 1
Part 2
So I have been subbed to /bitcoin since it had less than two thousand subs but haven't posted there in years. I think I took a break from researching bitcoin to take a foray into the world of conspiracy around 2014 and only got back in to it around the beginning of 2017 but with a bit of sense of skepticism and cynicism about everything. I think I returned to /bitcoin around that time but there had been a rift that had emerged in the community between those that said that bitcoin was censoring any discussion around big blocks but then also just censorship in general. This lead to the formation of /btc which became the main spot for big blockers to gather to talk about protocol development. Following the fork of Bitcoin Cash and SegWit (BTC) in August 2017 the camps were further divided when the fence sitters were denied their SegWit2x compromise. Many from the fence sitters then deferred back to the incumbent bitcoin as citing muh network effect, liquidity, and hashpower while some who felt betrayed by the failure of getting S2X through went to support BCH for some attempt at on chain scaling rather than through pegged side chains or Lightning Network.
Bitcoin cash initially went with a modest doubling of the blocksize to 2MB but implemented some other features like a new more rapidly adjusting difficulty algorithm to protect themselves against hashpower fluctuations from the majority chain. In about July of that year I had seen what I potentially thought was someone LARPing on /biz/ but screencapped, that segwit2x which was scheduled for november 2017 would be called off and then hashpower would switch to BCH causing congestion and chain death spiral on BTC and BCH would pump massively. I was partial to the idea as the game theory and incentives on a big block bitcoin should attract miners. About a month after SegWit2x was indeed called off while the BTC blockchain was hugely congested, BCH went through a violent pump reaching 0.5 BTC/BCH on a European exchange called Kraken while it also pumped ridiculously on American exchange coinbase. Shortly afterwards the market took a giant dump all over those people who bought the top and it has since retraced to roughly 30:1 or so now.
After that pump though BCH kind of gained some bagholders I guess who started to learn the talking points presented by personalities like Roger Ver, Jihan Wu, Peter Rizun and Amaury Sechet. Craig S Wright by this time had been outed as Satoshi but had in 2016 publicly failed to convince the public with the cryptographic proof he provided. To which he later published the article I don't have the courage to prove I am the bitcoin creator. In essence this allowed many to disregard anything he offered to the crypto community though his company nChain was very much interested in providing the technical support to scale what he saw as the true implementation of bitcoin. Following debate around a set of planned protocol upgrades between a bitcoin node implementation by his company nChain and the developers of another client Bitcoin ABC (adjustable block cap), the two parties both dug their heels in and wouldn't compromise.
As it became clear that a fork was imminent there was a lot of vitriol tossed out towards Wright, another big billionaire backer Calvin Ayre and other personalities like Roger Ver and Jihan Wu. Craig's credibility was disregarded because of his failure to provide convincing cryptographic proof but still people who wanted to pursue the protocol upgrades that nChain were planning (as it best followed their interpretation of the bitcoin white paper) pursued his variant, while others who followed the socia consensus deferred to the positions of their personalities like Wu, Ver, and Sechet but even developers from Ethereum and other protocols chimed in to convince everyone that CSW is a fraud. This was referred to as the hash war and was the first time that the bitcoin protocol had been contentiously hard forked.

Hashpower is the CPU cycles you can commit to the Proof of Work function in bitcoin and the majority will generate the longest chain as they have the most proof of work. To win the contentious hard fork legitimately and make sure your chain will always be safe going forward you need to maintain your version of the blockchain with 51% of the hashpower on the network and force the other parties to continue to spend money on building a blockchain that is never going to be inserted in to the majority chain. As well as this you need to convince exchanges that you have the majority chain and have them feel safe to accept deposits and withdrawals so that they don't lose money in the chaos. This is how it would play out if both parties acted according to the rules of bitcoin and the Nakamoto Consensus.

There was a lot of shit talking between the two parties on social media with Craig Wright making a number of claims such as "you split, we bankrupt you" "I don't care if there is no ability to move coins to an exchange for a year" and other such warnings not to engage in foul play.. To explain this aftermath is quite tedious so It might be better to defer to this video for the in depth analysis but basically Roger Ver had to rent hashpower that was supposed to be mining BTC from his mining farm bitcoin.com, Jihan Wu did the same from his Bitmain Mining Farm which was a violation of his fiduciary duty as the CEO of a company preparing for an IPO. In this video of a livestream during the hashwar where Andreas Brekken admits to basically colluding with exchange owners like Coinbase, Kraken (exchange Roger Ver invested in), Bitfinex and others to release a patched ABC client to the exchanges and introducing "checkpoints" in to the BCH blockchain (which he even says is arguably "centralisation") in order to prevent deep reorgs of the BCH blockchain.
>"We knew we were going to win in 30 mins we had the victory because of these checkpoints that we released to a cartel of friendly businesses in a patch so then we just sat around drinking beers all day".
By releasing a patched client that has code in it to prevent deep reorgs by having the client refer to a checkpoint from a block mined by someone who supported BCHABC if another group of hash power was to try to insert a new chain history, this cartel of exchanges and mining farm operators conspired in private to change the nature of the bitcoin protocol and Nakamoto Consensus. Since the fork there have been a number of other BCH clients that have come up that require funding and have their own ideas about what things to implement on the BCH chain. What began to emerge was actually not necessarily an intention of scaling bitcoin but rather to implement Schnorr signatures to obfuscate transactions and to date the ABC client still has a default blocksize of 2MB but advertised as 16MB.
What this demonstrates for BCH is that through the collusion, the cartel can immediately get a favourable outcome from the developers to keep their businesses secure and from the personalities/developers to work on obfuscating records of transactions on the chain rather than scaling their protocol. After the SegWit fork, many from the BCH camp alleged that through the funding to Blockstream from AXA and groups that tied to the Bilderbergs, Blockstream would be beholden to the legacy banking and would be a spoke and hub centralised model, so naturally many of the "down with central banks anarcho capitalist types" had gathered in the BCH community. Through these sympathies it seems that people have been susceptible to being sold things like coin mixing and obfuscation with developers offering their opinions about how money needs to be anonymous to stop the evil government and central banks despite ideas like Mises’ Regression Theorem, which claims that in order for something to be money in the most proper sense, it must be traceable to an originally non-monetary barter commodity such as gold.
What this suggests is that there is an underlying intent from the people that have mechanisms to exert their will upon the protocol of bitcoin and that if obfuscation is their first priority rather than working on creating a scalable platform, this demonstrates that they don't wish to actually be global money but more so something that makes it easier to move money that you don't want seen. Roger Ver has often expressed sentiments of injustice about the treatment of Silk Road found Ross Ulbricht and donated a large amount of money to a fund for his defence. I initially got in to bitcoin seeking out the Silk Road and though I only wanted to test it to buy small quantities of mdma, lsd, and mescaline back in 2011 there was all sorts of criminal activity on there like scam manuals, counterfeits, ID, Credit Card info, and other darknet markets like armoury were selling pretty crazy weapons. It has been alleged by Craig Wright that in his capacity as a digital forensics expert he was involved with tracing bitcoin that was used to fund the trafficking of 12-16 year olds on the silk road. There have been attempts at debunking such claims by saying that silk road was moderated for such stuff by Ulbricht and others, but one only has to take a look in to the premise of pizza gate to understand that there it may be possible to hide in plain site with certain code words for utilising the market services and escrow of websites like the silk road. The recent pedo bust from South Korea demonstrates the importance of being able to track bitcoin transactions and if the first thing BCH wanted to do after separating itself from Satoshi's Vision and running on developer and cartel agendas was to implement obfuscation methods, this type of criminal activity will only proliferate.
Questions one must ask oneself then are things like why do they want this first? Are some of these developers, personalities and cartel businesses sitting on coins that they know are tarnished from the silk road and want to implement obfuscation practices so they can actually cash in some of the value they are unable to access? Merchants from the silk road 1 are still being caught even as recently as this year when they attempted to move coins that were known to have moved through the silk road. Chain analytics are only becoming more and more powerful and the records can never be changed under the original bitcoin protocol but with developer induced protocol changes like Schnorr signatures, and coinjoin it may be possible to start laundering these coins out in to circulation. I must admit with the cynicism I had towards government and law enforcement and my enjoying controlled substances occasionally I was sympathetic to Ross and donated to his legal fund back in the day and for many years claimed that I wouldn't pay my taxes when I wanted to cash out of bitcoin. I think many people in the space possess this same kind of mentality and subsequently can be preyed upon by people who wish to do much more in the obfuscation than dodge tax and party.
Another interesting observation is that despite the fact that btc spun off as a result of censorship around big block scaling on bitcoin, that subreddit itself has engaged in plenty of censorship for basically anyone who wants to discuss the ideas presented by Dr Craig Wright on that sub. When I posted my part 2 of this series in there a week ago I was immediately met with intense negativity and ad hominems so as to discourage others from reading the submission and my post history was immediately throttled to 1 comment every 10 mins. This is not quite as bad as cryptocurrency where my post made it through the new queue to gather some upvotes and a discussion started but I was immediately banned from that sub for 7 days for reason "Content standards - you're making accusations based on no evidence just a dump of links that do nothing to justify your claims except maybe trustnodes link (which has posted fabricated information about this subreddit mods) and a Reddit post. Keep the conspiracy theories in /conspiracy" My post was also kept at zero in bitcoin and conspiracy so technically btc was the least censored besides C_S_T.
In addition to the throttling I was also flagged by the u/BsvAlertBot which says whether or not a user has a questionable amount of activity in BSV subreddits and then a break down of your percentages. This was done in response to combat the "toxic trolls" of BSV but within bitcoincashSV there are many users that have migrated from what was originally supposed to be a uncensored subreddit to discuss bitcoin and many such as u/cryptacritic17 has have switched sides after having been made to essentially DOXX themselves in btc to prove that they aren't a toxic troll for raising criticisms of the way certain things are handled within that coin and development groups. Other prominent users such as u/jim-btc have been banned for impersonating another user which was in actual fact himself and he has uploaded evidence of him being in control of said account to the blockchain. Mod Log, Mod Damage Control, Mod Narrative BTFO. Interestingly in the comments on the picture uploaded to the blockchain you can see the spin to call him an SV shill when in actual fact he is just an OG bitcoiner that wanted bitcoin to scale as per the whitepaper.
What is essentially going on in the Bitcoin space is that there is a battle of the protocols and a battle for social consensus. The incumbent BTC has majority of the attention and awareness as it is being backed by legacy banking and finance with In-Q-Tel and AXA funding blockstream as well as Epstein associates and MIT, but in the power vaccum that presented itself as to who would steward the big block variant, a posse of cryptoanarchists have gained control of the social media forums and attempted to exert their will upon what should essentially be a Set In Stone Protocol to create something that facilitates their economic activity (such as selling explosives online)) while attempting to leverage their position as moderators who control the social forum to spin their actions as something different (note memorydealers is Roger Ver). For all his tears for the children killed in wars, it seems that what cryptoanarchists such as u/memorydealers want is to delist/shut down governments and they will go to any efforts such as censorship to make sure that it is their implementation of bitcoin that will do that. Are we really going to have a better world with people easier able to hide transactions/launder money?
Because of this power vacuum there also exists a number of different development groups but what is emerging now is that they are struggling for money to fund their development. The main engineering is done by self professed benevolent dictator Amaury Sechet (deadalnix) who in leaked telegram screen caps appears to be losing it as funding for development has dried up and money raised in an anarchist fashion wasn't compliant with laws around fundraising sources and FVNI (development society that manages BCH development and these donations) is run by known scammer David R Allen. David was founder of 2014 Israeli ICO Getgems (GEMZ) that scammed investors out of more than 2500 Bitcoins. The SV supported sky-lark who released this information has since deleted all their accounts but other users have claimed that sky-lark was sent personal details about themselves and pictures of their loved ones and subsequently deleted all their social media accounts afterwards.
There are other shifty behaviours like hiring Japanese influencers to shill their coin, recruiting a Hayden Otto that up until 2018 was shilling Pascal Coin to become a major ambassador for BCH in the Australian city of Townsville. Townsville was claimed to be BCH city hosting a BCH conference there and claiming loads of adoption, but at the conference itself their idea of demonstrating adoption was handing a Point of Sale device to the bar to accept bitcoin payments but Otto actually just putting his credit card behind the bar to settle and he would keep the BCH that everyone paid. In the lead up to the conference the second top moderator of btc was added to the moderators of townsville to shill their coin but has ended up with the townsville subreddit wanting to ban all bitcoin talk from the subreddit.
Many of the BCH developers are now infighting as funding dries up and they find themselves floundering with no vision of how to achieve scale or get actual real world adoption. Amaury has recently accused Peter Rizun of propagandising, told multiple users in the telegram to fuck off and from all accounts appears to be a malignant narcissist incapable of maintaining any kind of healthy relationship with people he is supposed to be working with. Peter Rizun has begun lurking in bitcoincashSV and recognising some of the ideas coming from BSV as having merit while Roger has started to distance himself from the creation of BCH. Interestingly at a point early in the BCH history Roger believed Dr Craig Wright was Satoshi, but once CSW wouldn't go along with their planned road map and revealed the fact he had patents on blockchain technology and wanted to go down a path that worked with Law, Roger retracted that statement and said he was tricked by Craig. He joined in on the faketoshi campaign and has been attempted to be sued by Dr Wright for libel in the UK to which Roger refused to engage citing grounds of jurisdiction. Ironically this avoidance of Roger to meet Dr Wright in court to defend his claims can be seen as the very argument against justice being served by private courts under an anarchocapitalist paradigm with essentially someone with resources simply being able to either flee a private court's jurisdiction or engage a team of lawyers that can bury any chances of an everyday person being able to get justice.
There is much more going on with the BCH drama that can be explained in a single post but it is clear that some of the major personalities in the project are very much interested in having their ideals projected on to the technical implementation of the bitcoin protocol and have no qualms spouting rhetoric around the anti-censorship qualities of bitcoin/BCH while at the same time employing significant censorship on their social media forums to control what people are exposed to and getting rid of anyone who challenges their vision. I posit that were this coin to become a success, these "benevolent dictators" as they put it would love their new found positions of wealth/dominance yet if their behaviour to get there is anything to go by, would demonstrate the same power tripping practices of censorship, weasel acts, misleading people about adoption statistics and curating of the narrative. When the hashrate from Rogers bitcoin.com minging operation on BCH dropped dramatically and a lot of empty blocks were being mined, his employer and 2IC moderator u/BitcoinXio (who stepped in to replace roger as CEO) was in the sub informing everyone it was simply variance that was the reason when only a few days later it was revealed that they had reduced their hash power significantly. This is not appropriate behaviour for one of the primary enterprises engaged in stewarding BCH and encouraging adoption nor is the inability to be accountable for such dishonest practices as well. It seems bitcoin.com treats btc as their own personal spam page where Roger can ask for donations despite it being against the sub rules and spin/ban any challenge to the narrative they seek to create.
Let's see how the censorship goes as I post this around a few of the same places as the last piece. Stay tuned for the next write up where I take a deep dive in to the coin that everyone doesn't want you to know about.
submitted by whipnil to C_S_T [link] [comments]

##### Bitcoin/Shitcoin

Could you please comment with an educated guess about Bitcoin's next dip?
I have watched several Nouriel Roubini's videos, where he basically spits on cryptos, blockchain, shitcoins, and Bitcoin.
I have to say he speaks in an authoritarian way with a lot of confidence and what seems like anger but could be associated with allergy to a radically new socio-economical paradigm that Bitcoin and blockchain space could represent.
Although he is widely regarded as an "economy" guru etc... And I respect that; his whole character really bothers me because he is just a puppet that is here to alter the truth... So here is quick destruction of the beginning of his argumentation, I will remain extremely objective and will use external sources to answer his sometimes stupid assertion when any...

1. NR: "We don't need blockchain, we don't need crypto!" - How bold, how limited! We might not need blockchain, but we need crypto-currencies... So we need blockchain. Bitcoin is too volatile? Then use a stable coin. Below is a pretty simple description of the pro's and cons of stable coins (source: https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-Stablecoins-compared-to-traditional-cryptocurrencies ):
Stablecoin has a ton of points of interest.
• The most critical is that these digital currencies enable their proprietors to be moderately tranquil for their benefits, exploiting all the positive parts of cryptoeconomy.
• In certainty, stablecoins can be considered as dollars, gold, oil, etc exchanged crypto exchanges. Normally, against the foundation of different coins that don't have such an incredible base, they are substantially more steady.
For instance, we will take Tether. 1 USDT dependably had an estimation of 1 U.S. dollar. Practically speaking the most extreme expense of USDT was $1,05, and least —$0,92. Be that as it may, there was it at the snapshots of solid variances of the cryptomarket and the negative occasions associated with the working of the cash, for example, breaking and robbery of benefits for the aggregate over $30 million which has occurred in the fall of 2017. • During the most grounded fall of digital money showcase before the New Year, when numerous monetary standards dropped more than 30-70%, Tether again held out inside 8%. It isn't comprehended what will happen explicitly with USDT because of how designers respond to the occasions, however in itself guaranteeing the money with the dollar desires supported. • In certainty, an amazing dollar stablecoin will enable us to utilize the USD on cryptoexchanges. Presently numerous trades don't bolster fiat, and those that help, generally speaking, require the client to pass confirmation. The digital forms of money gave real qualities can be utilized in regular day to day existence, in little and medium business nearly without fears. Blockchain innovation enables the holder to make sure that his money is truly furnished with an advantage. Disadvantages of Stablecoin Be that as it may, stablecoin has various disservices and they don't enable it to make a noteworthy challenge to driving digital forms of money: • Stablecoin, in contrast to regular cryptographic forms of money, does not bode well to use as a venture resource. In the event that$ 100 stablecoins were purchased for $100, at that point in two years they will at present expense$ 100, paying little mind to what will happen to the dollar.
• Stablecoin, binded to a customary resource, ends up being reliant on it and on the customary money related structure, which involves dangers not found in regular cryptographic forms of money.
• Some clients aren't sure that the official to a customary financial framework can give a decentralizovannost, and to the proprietor — obscurity.
• Finally, if the digital currency speaks to a code which is recorded in the memory of the PC, at that point the customary resource frequently requests exceptional capacity conditions, assets for giving these conditions, etc.
As per Bitcoin: It is a speculative asset, not a currency that can be used to simply exchange value. In order for Bitcoin to become a currency, a country should make Bitcoin as its own national currency and should accept having no control over its own currency price fluctuation...
1. "NR: I would say 99% of crypto-currencies are worth 0" - If you know well, just short them... Skin in the game...
2. NR: "Why would I want to trust somebody in Russia or somebody in China to validate my transactions?" - Although we can not rationally explain this sentence, let's still suppose that all the Bitcoin transactions are validated by Russian and Chinese, as Nouriel seems to believe, then the reason are simple. a) It is faster b) It is cheaper c) It is safer d) It is 100% reliable d) It is more stable e) It is more transparent f) Ask former Lehman Brother's clients' why they might prefer using Bitcoin or other decentralized crypto currency...
3. NR: "To me this entire space has been the mother and the father of all financial bubbles" Come on! We are just out of the 2008 financial crisis that wiped:

• 23.1 million Americans, or 15% of the public, are out of work or unable to find full-time jobs using the broadest measure of unemployment, or U-6.
• 9.3 million Americans have lost their health insurance.
• 11 million homeowners, almost 1 in 4, are saddled with mortgages higher than the value of their homes. https://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticke2008-financial-crisis-cost-americans-12-8-trillion-145432501.html So who is the mother of all bubbles now? It's 5 minutes of research... No need to be a top economist like Nouriel to find those numbers. The whole crypto space never even reached USD 1 Trillion. So it appears to me that someone has a cow it milks happily and doesn't want to have them free... And then, of course, the Dot Com bubble, out of which not even 1% of companies have survived... https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dotcom-bubble.asp
I mean, I could go on and on and on, but having someone so famous that really lies so much with impunity makes me sick.
And tired actually... So yeah...
submitted by ricosworks to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Variance measures the variation of a single random variable (like the height of a person in a population), whereas covariance is a measure of how much two random variables vary together (like the height of a person and the weight of a person in a population). The formula for variance is given by $$\sigma^2_x = \frac{1}{n-1} \sum^{n}_{i=1}(x_i – \bar{x})^2 \\$$ where $$n$$ is the number of ... Bitcoin is the first scarce digital object the world has ever seen. In this article I quantify scarcity using stock-to-flow, and use stock-to-flow to model bitcoin value. explained_variance_ : array, shape (n_components,) The amount of variance explained by each of the selected components. Equal to n_components largest eigenvalues of the covariance matrix of X. New in version 0.18. explained_variance_ratio_ : array, shape (n_components,) Percentage of variance explained by each of the selected components. Creation. The domain name "bitcoin.org" was registered on 18 August 2008. In November 2008, a link to a paper authored by Satoshi Nakamoto titled Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System was posted to a cryptography mailing list. Nakamoto implemented the bitcoin software as open source code and released it in January 2009. Nakamoto's identity remains unknown. The BCHN full node team has the code hosted on the “Bitcoin Cash upgrade specifications” page. On July 23, 2020, Bitcoin ABC developer Amaury Séchet announced the DAA called Grasberg via the ...

[index] [24738] [48146] [29905] [35838] [13720] [43921] [9010] [8525] [51455] [22147]

## Bitcoin Halving Price Prediction [explained]

An overview of the Bitcoin protocol, source code, data structures and algorithms. This presentation was delivered at Nova Southeastern University on June 20, 2014 by Chris DeRose of bitcoinfl.org. What is The History of Bitcoin: Super Easy Explanation - https://blockgeeks.com/ We’ll start at the very beginning by understanding the history of blockchain... Start trading Bitcoin and cryptocurrency here: http://bit.ly/2Vptr2X Bitcoin is the first decentralized digital currency. All Bitcoin transactions are docume... Bitcoin Code Explained Bitcoin Code. Loading... Unsubscribe from Bitcoin Code? ... Building Bitcoin Software From Source Code - Duration: 22:42. Edge 26,751 views. 22:42. But how does bitcoin ... Verdienmodel vervelende Bitcoin Code advertenties uitgelegd - Duration: ... Bitcoin Basics (Part 1) - "Explained For Beginners" - Duration: ... First look at the Bitcoin source code - Duration: ...

#