OpenCoin Inc spent VC money to buy up XRPs on the open markets to get a bigger market cap so they can attract more VC funding. They can't release too much or the price will fall back to the real values (without their own buying).
That's an interesting accusation. Do you have any evidence of this? What evidence would you need? Is the "if you can't beat'em, join'em" approach of the Ripple network with regard to financial institutions and the law a necessary step for the future of cryptocurrency?
This is not the approach of Ripple. The approach of Ripple is pump-and-dump. Stop trying to muddy it, not gonna fly. There's no relation between Ripple on one hand and finance, financial institutions, innovation, Bitcoin, the future, cryptocurrencies etc. If I'm shilling, then I'm shilling for the technological advancement of the human race, and the enrichment of the entire cryptocurrency community.
Right, because if you were shilling for fiddy bucks you'd be saying "If I'm shilling, it's for fiddy bux". Totally, I can see it. |
|
|
|
a) it's an "I look at the sheer volume traded on the exchanges" since, say, beginning of this year. since OTC-volume is recorded exactly nowhere, it's safe to assume (imho) that it's lower. you prove me wrong. o shit, that's not what you do, you just spout insults and light straw men for arguments.
In this case I just nod and move on. |
|
|
|
MPOE-PR you are free to take whatever direction suits your interests best, and trolling in this thread will do not help you pass your extensive knowledge over the issue to the masses either.
Technically bitcoins are created by miners and never move from the place in the blockchain where they were placed, or precisely the block where they showed up originally. People only move around digitally signed ownership contracts over bitcoins, not the physical possession over a tangible object. Think bigger, don't be dense. You are entitled to use your bitcoins if you can properly sign the property transfer with your private keys. Bitcoins don't suddenly cease to exists if you are incapable to prove ownership of them.
I could go on for a while but I count on your higher than average intellect to grasp this concept right away.
You've got nothing. |
|
|
|
...I believe they think that being valued over Bitcoin market cap is a fair price, or that they think they must maintain it to continue generating profits selling their coins. Note that OpenCoin can't force anyone to buy XRP. The price is set purely through free market forces. Yeah yeah, neither did Pirate force anybody. He just used idiots to shill it all to fuck. Affinity fraud includes investment frauds that prey upon members of identifiable groups, such as religious or ethnic communities, language minorities, the elderly, or professional groups. The fraudsters who promote affinity scams frequently are -- or pretend to be -- members of the group. They often enlist respected community or religious leaders from within the group to spread the word about the scheme, by convincing those people that a fraudulent investment is legitimate and worthwhile. Many times, those leaders become unwitting victims of the fraudster's ruse. |
|
|
|
Did I strike a nerve? Anyways, I didn't know - but even if it's not a precedent, I think moving to a weekly dividend pay-out could make confidence in the stock return more quickly...
The model here is to deliver long term value, not to cater to the Ponzi crowd. |
|
|
|
(1) Switch to paying the dividend weekly. Even though this isn't normal, all the popular ASICMiner divs seem to be setting a precedent with this.
Asicminer is not setting any sort of precedent. Dividends used to be weekly back in the old Global Scam Exchange days (with some daily). MPEx set a precedent by getting rid of the sort of bullshit. The only surviving corp off the Global Scam Exchange hasn't yet gotten the memo, they're stubborn. They'll learn. So will you. (2) Eric should probably get an independent audit done on the statistics by someone or a company who specializes in gaming.
Google "MtGox heist auditor" or something. In particular, I think the standard deviation / variance on the game needs to be mapped out and have the min/max bet calculations reset correctly.
You need to read up on Bitcoin. Don't start with the concept of provably fair, start with the very basics. Further, I'm guessing people have looked at this already, but it should be verified that that taking the top digits of a sha512 hash on txids is a good uniform distribution. Either way, making the stdev smaller should help reduce these profit swings and keep profits in the green with a higher probability.
You need to read up on cryptography. Don't start with "why does a hashing function have to yield uniform distributions", start with the very basics. You must be new here. Good suggestions get ignored and burried with post of irrelevance. Shits tragic.
Tragic indeed. Why are you doing it? |
|
|
|
a) highly doubt that TBH, at least for the last 18 months.
But is this based on anything at all or nothing whatsoever? Is it more of a "I don't believe black swans exist in Australia, in spite of me never having been there, on the grounds that all the swans I ever saw here in England were white and none even slightly gray", or is it more of a "I heard reports of black swans, but I've investigated the various places and could find none"? b) it doesn't matter at all what I believe. it just matters how it is handled and regulated. handling and regulating it as a commodity/property would be one of the more stupid options.
You are basically arguing that "handling" whatever that means and regulation are going to follow the smart path or avoid the stupid options? Through what thought process exactly do you come to this conclusion? It's not supported historically, or by any sort of mechanism I can think of. Other than that, regulation is irrelevant in this discussion. We are talking about what Bitcoins are. If for instance some government comes forth with regulation requiring water to be viewed as an alcohol this won't at all change the fact that water is an oxide. It will maintain the properties of oxides (such as inflammability) and not acquire the properties of alcohols. More narrowly, in the discussion of title, which is a term of art, nobody has any title to any Bitcoin. The working of titles does not change with regulation. |
|
|
|
Because OpenCoin has no plans in monetary policy and likely spontaneously changes their plans based on where the price is and where they would like it to go, it is probably prone to bubbles, even more so than Bitcoin, where the block chain relentlessly distributes according to an algorithm, no matter what.
Wherein by "prone to bubbles" what you really mean is "OpenCoin are deliberately trying to inflate a bubble in the hopes they will profit off the ignorant Bitcoin user". |
|
|
|
That would mean none of the big investors want to acquire any more stake in S.DICE even with this 'undervalued' share price. Even if this is true, it's not positive.
From my (limited) experience and from what I could get together eavesdropping on MPEx people, generally speaking investing works thusly: optimal chunks are decided (we want 1%, 0.1%, 10% of this company for strategic investors, we want 1%, 0.1%, 10% of our capital in this company for everyone else). This process is based on some sort of fundamental considerations, into which price (current or historical) does not figure. The trades are then executed (there may be some timing skulduggery involved here) and the desired positions entered. This situation continues until a new decision as to the optimal chunks is made (perhaps on a yearly review), after which more trades are executed to attain the new desired position. I'm not saying it's positive necessarily, I'm not really discussing that angle. Just trying to make the point that not everybody is as last price driven as the average forum user - in a probably doomed attempt to restore some balance to the discussion. And when I say "not everybody" what I really mean is "no actual investor". I'm thinking that most people aren't selling because they believe that SDICE will still keep it's marketshare even without doing anything (which I disagree with) or that SDICE will add updates and promised features like account betting sometime soon. The situation of "nobody selling" is not going to continue forever (unless people lost their gpg keys). With every second the competitors gain more trust while offering features like actually instant betting.
I suspect people are looking at the dividends and the market share, then try to read some of the forum discussion but quickly shrug and move on. Informal polling shows that not a single one of the larger investors we know of/are in contact with actually reads this forum. Oh, and you need to explain where the costs are going to in detail (ie how it is calculated) to shareholders. Especially when you just hired a PR rep that has not signed in for a week. What are you paying them for?
Why are you telling me this?! |
|
|
|
Link?
That's just my personal opinion I haven't really investigated that far into my sources, I don't really spend time in gossip, I just make sure the members are protected. Your "personal opinion" is that I have purchased advertising space (which I've never done) to scam (which I've never done) but you don't really spend time in "gossip" (which is what you're doing) and you don't look into your "sources" (other people's gossip) because you want to "protect" people? You're more entertaining than dank. Actually you may be on to something, he does sound a lot like dank. |
|
|
|
|
This is probably the best thread of the day.
For my own curiosity, will this be a new Bitcoin/fiat exchange, a Bitcoin forex or a new ASIC miner?
|
|
|
|
NO HONEST COMPANY buys their own stock on an exchange while they are in the process of issuing shares.
This was what was most concerning to me. That and the overhyped press releases. I do hope that these are just honest mistakes from a tech business owner who doesn't have much experience running a stock, but there is too much here that I question for me to stay in. I did get out at a profit. If I'm mistaken I'll probably reinvest later, but too much didn't feel right here for me to stay in for the short term. The fraudulent press releases are gone from Bitfunder now. Thanks Ukyo! AMC = BFL 2.0 has to be the best explanation of this company I have seen. Awww, but I was looking forward to more increased estimated output of virtual mining equipment press releases (did I add enough nouns in there?). |
|
|
|
My sympathies. Indeed compared to investing in bitcoins, sdice has been a disaster the past months. Basically totally collapsing from around 0.0070 to the current 0.0020, losing 70% of it's btc value. It's rightful to feel bad about that.
I agree with you that they are undervalued. It's very simple, it returns an average 10% dividend, but $ earnings and $ value have been tenfolding in only 1 year. This means this extremely fast growing company is valued at a P/E of 10. That is ridiculous. Sure there is a lot of legal uncertainty but still. Normally such fast growing company is valued at a P/E of 50 (dividend 2%).
Well here's the thing, past 30 day volume (all PTs included) is 372,209 shares, or about 500-1k BTC. That's another way of saying nothing (about 0.1% of total corp mkt cap or thereabouts). So therefore: A. Current price is reflective of not much with a view to nothing at all. The people holding it obviously aren't selling, the book hasn't much moved etc. Seems like a few speculators working on very little capital have been working themselves into a tizzy, going into some sort of downward spiral the past month or so. This trend can easily reverse in about five minutes, which leads us to: B. Lay off all the analytical talk and buy some shares. Obviously B may not be feasible for very practical reasons, but I do think all the excitement over what looks more like market inefficiency/immaturity that any sort of actual changes is perhaps a little over the top. S.DICE is not significantly different from whatever it was back in January, when it was trading at 3x current share prices, the dooglus reports still show it at 5x% of all network transactions, what exactly is the problem? I doesn't take into account the fact of SD's competition. It's simply being out out competed. There are more and more sites popping up with better features, lower house odds and more invested developers
None of this matters, as has been discussed constantly since about August, as has been proven constantly since August. Anyone can make a website in about five minutes, that's not a business. S.DICE has the proven ability to pay 10s of ks of BTC to winners. No competitor has this. End of story, really. SD is having it's cake cut slice by slice while it waits to be out performed by all these alternative sites. It will only survive a year if it acts now whilst it still is largely in the bitcoin community public eye. Otherwise this user base will slowly dwindle and diversify into all the other sites leaving SD a husk of a once potential filled 'business'.
By this sort of reasoning Coca Cola would not exist today. You have to at some point appreciate that the "developers matter", "a website is a business", "stuff has to happen!!!" ADD approach to life and everything else is specific to a very narrow group of people (young, mostly male, mostly poor, mostly urban etc) which doesn't translate into much social traction or broader relevance (if it did they'd have more sex and chill the fuck out). It's, in other words, a market nobody wants to sell to (this is why they mostly buy computer games rather than luxury cruises, sky and scooba gear, exotic vacations and other high value, high turnover pastimes). |
|
|
|
If the chips fail to meet the expected performance the manufacturer will provide the mine
with additional boards to achieve the expected hashrate of 100TH/s (or 0.2GH/s per
raised 1USD). If the chips fail to achieve the expected power efficiency the manufacturer
will renegotiate the management deal with the hosting data center and compensate the
100TH-mine project for the losses. If the chips fail completely a substantial delay in
mining will occur. The manufacturer will undertake an effort to reimburse the investors
not only for the invested capital but also for the lost income up to the level of 10 USD per
invested 5 USD I don't know who in his right mind imagines such fantasy is worth the forum paper it's printed on. With what money will a manufacturer that blew its product compensate investors "not only for capital but also for "lost" income"? If it didn't need the capital to build the chip it wouldn't need the investors. If it spends the capital on building the chip it has nothing left over to compensate anyone. Look at bASIC (this guy's previous pseudo"investment"), look at BFL, look wherever you want. This "we invest and if things go well we make bank yet if things go badly we get everything back plus more" doesn't exist outside of Kramerica Industries. |
|
|
|
Those guys need to get their acts together if they want to be a legit exchange. They are single handily responsible for destroying the bitcoin values everytime it starts to get popular/increase due to the constant technical issues and stability.
They're going to jail anyway, so little reason to bother anymore. |
|
|
|
A good friend of mine told me that bitcointalk is full of scammers and fraudsters. I did not believe him at first and he pointed out this thread. This is just epic. Some things are not quite clear but it is still an eye openiner. Lots of ponzy runners are still active on the forum, some changed their nicks like pay.btc -> chowyunfat, some simply trying to bury history under disguise of being helpful to noobs like Goat. All that after clearly criminal activity right here on this forum. Unbelievable! Beware people, this is a den of thieves. Do not get fleeced. Another epic thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91252.0 started shortly before pirate collapse. It gets really heated in the middle. Nicely shows who is who. You're pretty much exactly correct. Refreshing to see new people as oriented as this. |
|
|
|
I just tried to go to blockchain.info, mtgox.com, bitstamp.net and btc-e.com and they all gave me 504 Gateway timeouts.
Is there a massive DDOS attack occurring right now? I haven't seen any news on the boards.
This is often enough your own ISP failing to route. |
|
|
|
Good News If you had any Bitcoins stored on Mega Upload when they got shut down. "Almost half a year has passed since Megaupload’s servers were raided by the U.S. Government, and still there is no agreement on how former users can retrieve their files." Mega is getting all of their files back. (at least Some court has ordered copies be made and sent back) I'm a little worried. Their are a lot of Big Bitcoin accounts that have not moved in years. What would you do if you started to see coins moving out of them? http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-megaupload-users-can-have-their-files-back-but-120606/You appear uniquely confused. There's absolutely no relation of any import to Bitcoin or probable impact on Bitcoin of anything to do with Fatass Whatshisname. His increasingly irrelevant attempts to cling onto Internet fame will probably culminate in some retarded book/TV show and from there on to the speaking circuit, culminating to midwestern high school motivational speaking. Either that or prison. |
|
|
|
irrelevant since the SEC can control many/most (the biggest and most important) veins INTO and OUTOF the BTC.
This is the naive PoV specific to those captive on the web. Most BTC/fiat trade happened OTC, at all points historically. Since MtGox' recent collapse the OTC preeminence has accentuated significantly. i do not for a minute subscribe to this "digital property" bull.
Why do you think that matters at all? It is what it is, not what you subscribe to it being. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
