|
Ok, makes sense. I just started playing, am on a trial account with 1 day left, and still debating whether I want to subscribe or not. So, my only question is, can I redeem a PLEX on a trial account to turn it into a "full" account? I have bought the game (was on sale for $5), but have not actually subscribed to it.
|
|
|
|
|
Backing? Uh, no. Backing would mean someone guaranteeing to buy all Bitcoins in existence at a certain price. Someone might back Bitcoin with $21 million held in escrow guaranteed to buy any and all Bitcoins for $1 each, for example.
Not only that, the article is wrong about Bitcoins being protected from a company bankruptcy. Only Euro balances are protected.
Bad fudzilla writer is bad.
|
|
|
|
Good - more Bitcoins for me and my GPU's!  |
|
|
|
If you think 500 TH/s is a low estimate, I will gladly take you up on a bet of significant size. There's no way in hell we're reaching 500 TH/s within 2 months.
Maybe but I would like some arguments here. I ordered a 60gh in november, so I assume I'm part of the 2nd batch, order number is +13 000... 13000 * 60 = 780Th... Please justify what you are saying. My point is that when the second batch will arrive (wtv if it's 1,2 or 3 month after the fisrt one) profitability will be null. Not saying you are wrong just curious where I am wrong. 95% of those order numbers are not orders. It'll generate an order number as soon as a person clicks to buy on BFL's website, but they can choose whether or not to pay for it. And I can guarantee that some people purposefully do that to increase the order number and discourage others from ordering. OK, let's say that is it true. What shoud we think about the BFL statement ?? " The good news is that our shipment of chips will be substantial and we are re-addressing the quantities and compacting the shipment dates. We will have just shy of 100,000 chips available and in our hands before the end of the year, coming in two waves. The first wave blablabla..." https://forums.butterflylabs.com/bfl-forum-miscellaneous/437-asic-update-26-november-2012-a.htmlSo if there is something I don't understand please help me cause here I just interpret that as a 500Th in 2month...(100 000 chips ..?) That's at least 5 times the chips they will need to fill all current preorders. |
|
|
|
|
So a PLEX is a 30-day subscription, basically?
Interesting...
|
|
|
|
If you think 500 TH/s is a low estimate, I will gladly take you up on a bet of significant size. There's no way in hell we're reaching 500 TH/s within 2 months.
Maybe but I would like some arguments here. I ordered a 60gh in november, so I assume I'm part of the 2nd batch, order number is +13 000... 13000 * 60 = 780Th... Please justify what you are saying. My point is that when the second batch will arrive (wtv if it's 1,2 or 3 month after the fisrt one) profitability will be null. Not saying you are wrong just curious where I am wrong. 95% of those order numbers are not orders. It'll generate an order number as soon as a person clicks to buy on BFL's website, but they can choose whether or not to pay for it. And I can guarantee that some people purposefully do that to increase the order number and discourage others from ordering. |
|
|
|
There is one problem with your site - it doesn't include the Minecraft Faucet! (link in my sig).  I'm curious about how long your site has been generating 0.015 BTC per day from CoinURL. Also, how many pageviews (daily) do you get? In your admin panel screenshot, it shows Views and Clicks - can you describe what those numbers mean in this context? What is the difference between views and clicks for each of the site links? |
|
|
|
|
How much ISK is in a PLEX?
|
|
|
|
|
If you think 500 TH/s is a low estimate, I will gladly take you up on a bet of significant size. There's no way in hell we're reaching 500 TH/s within 2 months.
|
|
|
|
Re: MoonShadow
...
I just want the block reward to keep doing what its doing.
And you really think 0.023 BTC in rewards over the course of decades is going to keep a significant number of miners still mining? Yes. I am struggling to replicate the $0.05 figure of TC.. most important of the problems is that it is highly sensitive to assumptions of growth in Gross World Product (which I think would probably work better) and/or the money supply of the world's countries over the next 130 years, which is pretty much an unforcastable nightmare. Also, economic output has lots of positive derivatives the rate of the rate of growth is increasing...were annual output growth to ever reach ~17% (seems possible to me) the block reward would start increasing relative to the purchasing power of those BTC (economic output more than doubling, reward halving), such that, after a period of possible irrelevance, as you suggest, eventually each block reward would buy more and more mining equipment and say 200 years from now the mining subsidy again becomes a huge incentive, and stays that way. MoonShadow seems to think "my" proposal will actually just implement itself anyway. Sounds good to me. (Thanks to MoonShadow for answering my technical question. Can anyone confirm/disagree with the answer?) 17% annual GWP growth?? No wonder you're getting these crazy ideas with assumptions like that... 30 years from now, anyone could flip burgers and still be a multi-millionaire (inflation-adjusted) in a year! Sounds good to me! |
|
|
|
Seems the important point is the Put Blah Blah Blah in your signature space. This isn't a purchase so Yeah if you want a shot put it in your signature it costs nothing. Maybe pride or ego but nothing monitarily. I am pretty sure there is no accepted exchange rate for pride or ego to $.
Providing advertising for a company is a form of consideration. Requiring some form of consideration for a sweepstakes turns it into an illegal lottery. It's only advertising as much as requiring people to like & share a page on Facebook is (thereby advertising it on their newsfeed). If this is illegal, then I know of a whole host of companies on Facebook who should face similar indictments. There was a CEO that got slammed by the SEC for a Facebook message, I forget which company though. ...which is completely irrelevant to this. He was slammed for announcing information over Facebook that should have been "more formally shared with investors" first. |
|
|
|
A major bonus of Litecoins is the fact that transactions confirm so much faster. That alone will add to the value of them.
A common misconception, the number of confirmations on a transaction doesn't make it safer from a 51% attack, its time that does that. 4 LTC confirmations = same protection as 1 BTC confirmation. Sure it get confirmations faster, but thats of no benefit at all. Well, getting one confirmation faster IS a benefit (see recent SatoshiDice fraud). A small one, but a benefit nonetheless. Comparing at least one confirmation on both sides though, and I agree, they are equal. |
|
|
|
Selling my "BDKp Donation Package" on BitcoinMall.net for 0.5 Bitcoins (If you want to donate more just send more Bitcoins to the receipt address and much will be appreciated!) Here is the link to the donation page: http://cheaperinbitcoins.com/product.php?id=64The check out page will ask for your email and I will send you a download link just for you thanks  I tried... get a page not found error when I tried to click "Generate Receipt" to pay. |
|
|
|
|
Just thought of something. With the recent unconfirmed transaction reversal scheme that someone was able to do vs satoshidice, essentially forcing sites like that to wait for 1 confirmation before even telling the player whether they won or not, wouldn't Litecoin carry an advantage with the 2-minute-blocks setup? I think that advantage just became marginally more significant.
|
|
|
|
Re: MoonShadow
For starters I do not claim the ability to foresee the implications of a nonexistent block reward ("the right answer"). No one can honestly make such a statement, in any direction, about events 100+ years in the future. I am just saying "Why change anything?", and in fact the best part of this idea is that it ignores the impact of 0 BR, whether that impact be small, negligible, good, catastrophic, whatever, and just sidesteps it. I personally am just not comfortable saying that everything will be fine when 0 BR not only potentially fails to guarantee a secure hashrate but (worse) represents a change from the existing incentive-structure.
Secondly, if you have a non-hard-fork way of adding decimal places, it sounds great to me. By all means, expand or contract that as required.
Lastly, though, I disagree with this 'we have years to figure it out' line of reasoning. People are interested in the endgame for obvious reasons: if it wont work in 2150, it will be worthless in 2150, making it a big risk in 2149, recursion, 2148, etc. However, I assume your 'simple solution', while very convenient, would not automatically allow for <1 satoshi block rewards? I thought the BR code just takes bitshift of some constant until it becomes an actual 0. Is that true? What, if anything, would let the BR continue to shift without a hard fork?
I just want the block reward to keep doing what its doing.
And you really think 0.023 BTC in rewards over the course of decades is going to keep a significant number of miners still mining? Like Tangible said, a satoshi would only be worth $0.05 in the best-case scenario where Bitcoin took over the whole world, which means 0.023 BTC would only equal $115,000. Divide that over the course of a few decades and you're left with $3,833/year. That'd finance three, maybe four ASIC miners at today's costs. Compare that with the billions of dollars that will be given annually to miners via transaction fees if Bitcoin indeed took over the world, and it is less than a drop in a bucket. Completely negligible, and not worthwhile to pursuit in any way, shape, or form. This is one of those things that I look at and ask myself, why is this even a discussion? |
|
|
|
...it might become a better option for some people just because it is cheaper. The poor mans BTC if you like.
This is a strange statement to make. How is it cheaper for someone to send 200 LTC instead of 1 BTC? Or 2 LTC instead of 0.01 BTC? That said, I don't think LTC has any future, because it isn't different enough from Bitcoin. But I've held on to a couple hundred LTC just in case. |
|
|
|
ASIC adoption will continue unabated for at least 6 months.
Network capacity will rise to 700 TH in 6-8 months.
At least one ASIC mfg will reduce $/GH by 30-50% in 6 months.
That is all.
And by then (6-8 months), any ASICs purchased now will have paid for themselves already. So what's your point? |
|
|
|
It's a much much poorer investment than gpus were.
I probably shouldn't say this (for my own behalf, I want to discourage others from buying ASICs as much as possible), but I will anyway. ASICs have yet to be proven as a much poorer investment than GPU's, especially GPU's after the 2011 crash. I expect that, after all preorders for ASICs are met, we'll still be looking at around 200 TH/s of total hashing power. This gives an estimated difficulty of 27,852,735. Even at that difficulty, a $1,299 BFL miner @ 60 GH/s would generate $436/month. It would fully pay for itself in just 3 months. After the crash, and all the way up to today, there wasn't any way for a GPU to pay for itself in less than 6 months that I saw. And even if you double the estimated hashrate, break even is still only 6 months. If I had more money to invest in ASICs right now, I would do so in a heartbeat. |
|
|
|
Is that camera from the 90's?
No, it's just the shitty one that's attached to the top of my laptop monitor.  Fair enough. |
|
|
|
Seems the important point is the Put Blah Blah Blah in your signature space. This isn't a purchase so Yeah if you want a shot put it in your signature it costs nothing. Maybe pride or ego but nothing monitarily. I am pretty sure there is no accepted exchange rate for pride or ego to $.
Providing advertising for a company is a form of consideration. Requiring some form of consideration for a sweepstakes turns it into an illegal lottery. It's only advertising as much as requiring people to like & share a page on Facebook is (thereby advertising it on their newsfeed). If this is illegal, then I know of a whole host of companies on Facebook who should face similar indictments. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
