|
In Anbetracht der Accountkauf-Vorwürfe, dem Versuch Personaldaten zu sammeln und jetzt diesem Thread, fordere ich eine Bitcoin-Adresse mit signifikantem Betrag und eine dazugehörige signierte Nachricht zu posten, um die Legitimität dieses Angebots zu bestätigten.
|
|
|
|
1. Those coins to buy SD are already bought. 2. Those coins will be bought tomorrow. 3. Current holders invest in other assets. 4. Current holders sell their coins. Well.. 2 3 uber positive, 1 negative and 1 neutral.. I call that quite positive news.  Edit: 5. Giant media attention incoming. |
|
|
|
LTC-Global fits that bill nicely, although it is traded in Litcoins not Bitcoins, on litecoinglobal.com. As far as I can see there isn't a passthrough on btc-tc (yet). For the sake of transparency I own at least 10 shares of it and am therefor a board member, so keep that in mind. (For the sake of bragging I bought in a few months ago at under 70LTC, and it has traded for over 300LTC recently.  ) Actually there is even a PT: https://btct.co/security/BTC-TRADING-PT |
|
|
|
If you're having trouble with keeping the miners cool might I suggest posting a motion to use part of the 1000BTC towards another a/c (or whatever equipment you feel necessary) to bring the miners towards a higher efficiency? I think this is already addressed: Ordered some high performance fans for the singles and Avalons. I've already replaced some of the fans on the Avalons, but I need more deltas and 90mm fans meh...who keeps them around? Glad I'm in the process of moving everything to a dedicated "cold room", those deltas are LOUD.
Order Summary
Sales Order Number: 17421xxxx
Sales Order Date: 7/16/2013 9:55:58 AM
11 x Delta AFB1212GHE-CF00 120mm Case cooler
10 x bgears b-Blaster 90 90mm Case Fan
Total Amount: 3.63181585
Cheers.
Not sure though if this covers the new rig also..  |
|
|
|
A friendly reminder from a 2011 survivor.  Ah this again ...  |
|
|
|
I see wanting to buy direct from the issuer if there is a large order 0.00001 below the IPO price. True, this is a side effect of a poorly executed IPO, BUT, for the investors wanting to fund the company, it'd still be nice to be able to bypass those and go straight to the issuer's order.
The other thing this would do (the highlighting) is make it slightly harder for the issuer to manipulate the price. Because you could see all their buy/sell orders. I say slightly because they could still transfer the shares to an alt account and sell from there, however, as soon as you transfer the shares they become market shares not treasury shares, so it's easy to detect. Forcing to buy only from one source is not really acceptable imho. If a holder can't place asks, his only chance of selling would be to sell into available bids. They would essentially be trapped and only left with hope that everything goes fine and fast. Buyers could abuse this by placing very low bids and wait till holders lose their patience. There are several more scenarios... but I'm sure, you are aware of the consequences. I really like the highlighting idea. Not sure about persistent highlights for issuer's orders though. +1 for transparency, but ... well, I'm not sure. Other possibilities would be to only do this for IPOs or make it optional at all. Fillig a specific order would be very nice feature also. In combination with color highlights this would be very helpful pre-IPO and there are more use cases. For example: if I want to buy/sell into my own orders safely. There should be some limitations in a way that it would be impossible to create a very different impression of an asset, i.e. by pushing 24h high/low or something. To fill a specific order there could be an advanced view of the order book which would show the orders unstacked. |
|
|
|
**Important Announcement**
bASIC-Mining virtual shareholders,
I'd like to get shareholder approval to fund the purchase of an immediately available BFL minirig with shares. The purchase price is 1300 shares payable when I take physical possession of the unit. An additional 325 shares would be issued to me at that time as per bASIC-Mining's contract. Dividends on these shares will offset the significant expense involved with hosting such a powerful piece of mining equipment. I believe this to be a good move for bASIC-Mining as it would increase our hashrate by over 100% while adding only 1625 outstanding shares(+3.25%). As this is a time sensitive negotiation I will be posting a motion within the hour.
Cheers.
I'm impressed. You're always ready with another sweet surprise. Just to confirm: It's the 500 GH/s rig, right? What is the ETA after the motion has passed? |
|
|
|
AM Launches The Worlds Fastest Bitcoin Mining Machine At 24.576 TH/s Kinda misleading. You didn't launch anything but a preorder for a product, that isn't ready yet. Which is no problem for me, but this doesn't negate the fact, that the title is misleading. The Fast-Hash-One is available at: ... Same complaint. It's not available, but a preorder is. |
|
|
|
I priced these as american but I don't know whether btct uses american or european. You should check if it's important to you. It's american. |
|
|
|
Why has there been such a big disconnect between ASICMINER-PT (now bid 4.327) and TAT.ASICMINER (now bid 0.04198) prices of late?
I'd arbitrage AM-PT -> TAT.AM, but I'm all out of AM-PT!
Yeah. The distance is getting wider. TAT.AM is great and so is btct.co! *blink* |
|
|
|
|
My balance is fine.
Does Wallet - Withdrawal History show anything strange?
|
|
|
|
I was wondering from where this "whales are stupid" attitude originates? I somehow doubt "they don't have any knowledge nor care that much, because they have tons of money" for the plain simple reason, that they have so much money. I think I'll take some time soon and replay the market to see, if they usually have a correct feeling for the direction or not. The stuff I read elsewhere was often something like "try to follow the big money". Edit: Loozik -> https://www.google.com/search?q=420 |
|
|
|
Great! Good work! I'm still wondering, if there is any way to get "recent posts by user" in a more parsable format. So far I was unable to add wap2 or xml to the list of user posts, but I never found out, if I just used the wrong syntax or if this is not possible. Any hint would be appreciated. |
|
|
|
Why is the exchange running on London time and not UTC?
You can edit the time zone under Account - Settings. |
|
|
|
|
What was the input for d410f6a9737d28efade7ab888fc412e787ea85ef500a00c31a0702baa1741bcc?
|
|
|
|
I noticed they are doing exactly the opposite people here think. Nobody was expecting that rise in the price last week. Now everybody expecting a dump but it wont happen. When you start to feel comfortably and buy back at $140 then they will dump. No offence, but ...  |
|
|
|
@dexX7... es wäre noch interessant zu wissen wie groß diese Trays sind. 10 x 20 chips sind es mindestens, aber leider ist nicht die volle Breite zu sehen. Wenn ich das wüßte könnte ich ausrechnen ob die Verpackungen die ich schon hab ausreichen.
Der ESD-Beutel sagt 2600 Chips, aber man kann auch nicht sehen wie viele Trays übereinander liegen. Womöglich sind es dann 13 trays von je 10x20 chips also 200 chips pro tray.
Hi, ein Tray scheint 10x26 Chips zu fassen. Etwas komisch ist nur, dass er ein Bild mit 11 zusammengefassten Trays zeigt und dabei angibt, dass dies 2600 Chips sind. Sind wohl nicht alle bestückt gewesen. Die Trays sind selbst in diesen kleineren Kartons, wie oben zu sehen und ein größeres richtiges Paket fasst bis zu 6 dieser Kleineren. Ich vermute jetzt einfach mal, dass du einen dieser größeren Kartons erhälst, in dem theoretisch Platz für 15600 Chips sein müsste. |
|
|
|
I presume your "longest bet run" means longest sequence of consecutive loses. If so, I am a little bit concerned that out of all your attempts, your longest bet run is either 27 or 28. Seems a bit strange that regardless of balance at any point in time, it should remain more or less static.
Not sure if I got the question right. The "longest bet run" is indeed the longest losing streak. It is not a fixed number because of rounding issues, I guess. It is almost a fixed number, because I adjusted betsize to Max(Initial Betsize, Initial Betsize * Balance). Think of it that way: Balance = 10, smallest possible balance = 1, halfes every loss: Balance = 10,
Balance = 5,
Balance = 2.5,
Balance = 1.5,
Loss The longest possible losing streak in this case is guaranteed less than 5. My bet scheme behaves in the same way, because of the betsize adjustment. To be honest, I realized this "fact" the first time after reading your post. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
