There are many people that bought BTC at many prices.
The sole fact that people are investing in BTC will give it credibility.
that is a most dangerous mentality to have, "credibility" should come by proven performance not by way of following another -- please leave that to fashion. . Most people that will (hopefully) use bitcoin in the future will not have a technical understanding as to how it works nor how secure it is. They would have no real way to be able to measure bitcoin's performance |
|
|
|
How can pools be reliably inhibited from growing too large?
. By educating people (miners) about variance and how small of a factor it is compared to other factors (assuming a pool is at a sufficient size.) Variance can be a large factor assuming that the bigger pool can get you closer to 100% Variance is not a large factor with any pool over 1PH. Other factors have a higher influence on overall profits. Math here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=651450.msg7301307#msg7301307
Another issue with ghash is that they offer merged mining that can increase profitability by ~3% and merged mine coins that have no value now but could possibly in the future (basically a lottery ticket) but the coins are held at the pool so there is no need to download a client of a shit coin.
ghash's merged mining does not increase profits by anywhere near 3%. In fact IXC and DVC are worth so little that merged mining them probably increases stales shares more than the potential profit to be made. Namecoin is less than 1% (0.84% at the time of this writing), and the other two are more like 0.01-0.05% each. You can speculate that they may be worth more in the future, but that really has no place in a calculation of today's profits. Yes the value of the coins add very little to today's profits in terms of GAAP accounting, but merged mining does not cost anything to do. Market participants will also try to get the best deal for them. If someone is selling their product they will sell it to the person willing to offer the highest price even if that price is .005% higher then the next highest bidder. |
|
|
|
Hiya,
I've been using the Satoshi client for a long time now, and since my internet speed and CPUs are horribly slow, well blockchain synchronization takes forever. However, I very much like the coin control feature in the client.
Is there any alternative client where I don't have to download the entire blockchain but there is still coin control features?
Thanks.
The only other wallet service that I am aware of that allows you to control your coins at the level that Bitcoin-QT does is blockchain.info's wallet. You can us custom send to specify which addresses to use for inputs, the change address and the miners fee (custom send) Yes, I am well aware of that possibility. However, I was looking for something similar to the level of control as Bitcoin Core, where you can control the individual inputs. Per-address input selection is just not fine enough for me. I believe there is an option on the blockchain.info website that allows you to push a signed TX to the network without a client. If you were to create and sign a TX with your individual inputs that you want to spend then you could use blockexplorer to keep track of your spent and unspent inputs. |
|
|
|
Well to scale I would say it would average around 80,000 a day
That said this is just a speculation on how much volume they will get it will probably remain higher for a while before leveling off
That said 8000 a day is 2 million nine hundred twenty thousand dollars a year
2,920,000
That's a pretty good sum of revenue for an additional option
Lets calculate how much they saved. Costs if they had used Visa / Master (Normally they charge 2.8% fee, since Overstock is a very large company, we could assume the charges at around 2%) - $2,920,000*0.02 ==> $58,400. Profit from using Bitpay (2% - 0.99%) ==> $29,492 Not bad at all.  It is not only that but they would likely generate additional revenue because they accept bitcoin. Much if not most of the sales that the "early" big companies that accept bitcoin will like have sales that they would not otherwise have. Yep that is a pretty good savings right there not including that it is additional revenue from lower fees so it goes to their bottom line but also adding the fact that some of those sales would not have occurred otherwise. Anyways good news and more merchants will help to grow that segment of the business it's not even a year old with overstock so it has a lot of marketing potential and user adoption to gain market-share and maintain it as the bitcoin user base grows  Expedia has a near monopoly status now for Hotel Bookings with bitcoin Not saying complete because there may be other services that count such as renting in a hostel using Bitcoin etc. This will be good for the community because when it becomes known how much expedia has made off of bitcoin sales, their competitors will take note and add bitcoin to their list of payment options. |
|
|
|
When bitcoin rises it is in terms of fiat.
When alt-coins fall it is in terms of BTC.
In terms of fiat, alt-coins stay at roughly the same price.
True enough for "a few days or weeks", but some alt/usd have made stunning moves. For example, Namecoin used to have a normal range of ~$0.40 to ~$0.70, then it exploded and went to around $10 each, which is a monster % gain for people who caught even part of the move. Now NMC acts like it is 'dead forever', but someday...? Personally I think that most alt-coins are really just a way that their creators are trying to get rich. With NMC being the exception, pretty much all alt-coins do not provide any value that bitcoin does not already provide. If you are going to deal in alt-coins then you are speculating IMO (not that anything is wrong with that but speculating is not the same as investing) |
|
|
|
GHASH.IO vs ELIGIUS.ST
Which pool is more profitable. Its seems GHASH.IO more appealing. What you say?
Ghash is effectively more profitable. They both merge mine namecoins but ghash mines dvc and ixc as well. They are both worth basically nothing but that little bit does make a difference. Does it? A new template has to be generated every time DVC and IXC block changes. If this increases your stale rate by even 0.1% it's a net loss. my stale rate isn't even .00001% so it's not an issue. Already made money off my ixc that I mine. If the other pool operators weren't so greedy this wouldn't be an issue. The DVC and IXC coins are basically lottery tickets that cost nothing. In theory they could explode in value in the future and the miners at ghash would profit, if they do not then the miners could simply sell the coins on an exchange and still make something off of the coins. |
|
|
|
What ultimately matters is if a bitcoin ETF eventually starts trading on a stock exchange or not.
Once it starts trading on a stock exchange then trading volume will surge.
That was exactly my thought. Also; relevant future contract on our site: Don't the majority of stocks (and ETFs) trade on the NASDAQ? Even if a stock primarily trades on an other exchange it will often (always?) trade on several other exchanges. I think the only exception to this rule are stocks that are not listed on the NYSE as I think the NYSE only trades stocks that are listed there, although ARCA (owned by the NYSE) trades stocks that are listed elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Yeah he should have kept hold of some as a future investment, but I can see why he'd want to sell.
He sold his coins in order to start a business. I believe that his business deals in BTC. If his business is successful then he could potentially earn more BTC then he sold to start his business. |
|
|
|
Satoshi lives, but we can not know where does he live, he isn't in prison or dead, he enjoys his money now  He would actually have a very hard time in enjoying his money unless he mined coins that we do not know about. if he were to try to move/sell the coins that are coins that are believed to been mined by him then he would likely not be able to stay anon. He may have been an early adopter of GPU mining and/or did consulting for ASIC devs and made money that way. |
|
|
|
So it's ethical to overcharge for a lamp, but unethical to overcharge for healthcare?
What is your definition of over charging? Buyers don't buy based on price alone. You need to take trust, after sales service into account. Let me rephrase the question. Is it ethical to overcharge for a lamp, but unethical to overcharge for healthcare? The term "overcharging" cannot be easily defined. It is fair to allow people to make a profit off of the time and capital they invest in their business. The only true way to "overcharge" someone for something is to charge a price that is above the market rate, but if you charged this much then you would not be able to sell your product/service. What planet are you from that doesn't have salesmen? A salesman will try to get you to buy their specific product, or a product that you may not otherwise purchase. They would still need to charge a "fair" price, otherwise even if you are "sold" on the product you would not buy from the salesmen, and/or would buy the product from another channel |
|
|
|
So in one of the threads i saw somebody worrying whether making money off of Bitcoin is ethical or not. Meanwhile here people are trying to figure out how to hide wealth from their spouses.  I would not say that this thread is about how to hide money from their soon-to-be spouses, it is more about the question of could it be done. |
|
|
|
I cannot in any way understand why anyone gives a flying fuck about what that dying dinosaur of a walled garden does. With the way they operate as a company they ought to be completely irrelevant in this world  You have a very unusual definition of dying dinosaur, as Apple is both growing and profitable. Maybe I'm underestimating peoples joy of being sodomized. Android hosts 99% of mobile malware and even flagship android phone buyers are often left out on upgrades. The android upgrade problem is do bad the majority of android devices are out of date. So who is getting fucked more? Apple does a very good job at screening their apps against malware, apps with "hidden" charges and useless apps (one example of this was the app that cost $999 and was basically a bright picture of gold, and literally did nothing). In the process of doing this they also censor things they do not like. It is somewhat of a tradeoff. I was pretty pissed, like most were, when Apple wouldn't allow Bitcoin Apps on their ISO devices. Clearly many were extremely upset and started to even destroy their IPhones. That said, what you hit on is bringing up an important issue - Security. I have yet to buy a Smart Phone, as my Ipad is enough of a time waster, though useful at work. The latest I heard on a podcast (Think it was Epicenter Bitcoin) is that Apple is allowing wallets but might not be allowing Apps that allow the buying and selling of Bitcoin. (Local Bitcoins, Coinbase? Correct me if I am wrong). So, this battle might just be getting started. I can see Apples perspective if they are being careful legally. But if it comes out that they are being self interested or the like here (which doesn't look to be the case with the latest bans), then they just opened up a mountain of problems. Its about sharing I think part of the issue is consumer protection and part of it is they do not understand Bitcoin fully. Since bitcoin transactions cannot be reversed once confirmed by the blockchain (and really once they are sent to the network) if a person makes a mistake or is scammed then they are simply out of luck. I think that a large amount of bitcoin related thefts have more to do with social engineering and less about security. Apple likely wants to tread lightly before allowing people to download an app that could potentially hold thousands of dollars of a user's money that could be stolen and would be no way to reverse a theft. |
|
|
|
I'm guessing this must be why the price of bitcoin just decided to take a downward spiral. It's good timing for me, at least if it keeps it up for a while, since I'm planning on buying pretty soon.
Perhaps, or perhaps it was the GHash.io scare. But I do not find either explanation convincing. I would argue that since the market can see that there will be a large influx of supply of coins in the near future people are anticipating a future drop in price. When a large institutional investor is planning on selling their stock in a particular company they do not make an announcement because people would trade ahead of them causing the price of that stock to fall before they sell. |
|
|
|
I'm about to make a cash out of about $40k+ and am wondering if I will be met with any resistance. For someone under 18 and residing in Canada what obstacles would there be? I will most likely be selling on something like localbitcoins for cash to a verified person. I will be reporting this $40k+ to taxes (I'm not an idiot I'm not going to try and evade tax on big purchases). If I follow all rules filing taxes etc. Will I receive any trouble? Also will my guardians be notified of my money when I file my taxes?
You will likely raise a lot of red flags if you are trying to transact that amount of funds period. You will raise even more red flags if you are underage, even if you did earn the funds legitimacy. I cannot tell you how many times I was questioned when I tried to take money out of the bank (in the US) when I was 16 and 17 years old. |
|
|
|
Competition is almost always a healthy thing.
Competition is always a good thing. The only time it is not a good thing is when the competition is undercutting your prices (really not possible to get TX fees much lower to make a difference) or when the competition has a monopoly. |
|
|
|
The centralization of bitcoin Although there will likely be several central "authorities" that control a large part of some part of the bitcoin economy I doubt that bitcoin will ever actually become centralized based on today's standards. |
|
|
|
There are about 6 million addresses which have at least one unspent output. So, there are not more than 6M people who trust/use bitcoin? Not a big number There are a lot of services (like coinbase) that combine multiple people's addresses and keep track of balances individually. There are also a lot of people who have a number of bitcoin addresses that have at least unspent output. It would be hard to say for sure as to how many people own bitcoin. It would be fair to say that when more people start to adapt to bitcoin the price will likely be much higher then it is now. |
|
|
|
Karpeles stole those Bitcoins. No questions about it. He's as crooked as they come and I'm surprised he's not locked up yet.
I would consider this speculation. I would consider Karpeles an idiot but I am not 100% sure about being a thief. I do find it disconcerting that he tried to sell his discounted coins on other exchanges via arbitrage prior to GOX's collapse. |
|
|
|
|
You can send bitcoin anywhere in the world.
Just make sure that your family has a way to convert the bitcoin to fiat and/or convert the bitcoin they receive into the good/services that they need.
Compared to services like Western Union bitcoin is much cheaper.
|
|
|
|
I want to be able to just fund a bitcoin address given to me by the registrar, and the registrar withdraw payment as necessary when it is due for renewal. Is this possible anywhere?
All I've seen during my search require you to either manually go through a third party payment processor, or manually set up a renewal order so it can't be automated (without a credit card). A manual setup is fine, but I want to be able to let scripts handle it after that. Very frustrating.
That is not possible with bitcoin. You cannot have a 3rd party withdraw coins from your address like that. My proposed solution to your problem is to prepay for your domain for a decade or two while using bitcoin. There are a few domain registrars that accept bitcoin for payment. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
