The price has been floating around 19USD for the last couple of days. Does anyone have any idea why?
The pedantic answer would be an equilibrium of buyers and sellers. There have been a few interruptions in trading with Mt.Gox, as Tux is working through some issues brought about by his growth and random DDoS events. Tradehill seems to have stayed in the game, so at least there's an alternative available. You shouldn't worry so much about absolute price, though. Get people interested, this is the currency of the future. |
|
|
|
|
I'm not so wild about your post title.
What is your point? Do you really have to articulate your market opinions in such a way as to sensationalize?
I mean, christ, how about "Think BTC is going stay below 30?".
Instead we get something that looks like FOX News wrote the summary. "Up Next - MINEDUMPERS and CONTINUED PRE-PRICE (whatever the hell that means) DUMPING ... STAY TUNED"
I'd love to read a post from you that wasn't a direct feed from your negative-pricing bile duct. Or at least something constructive enough that I could take you seriously. I believe that the market will fluctuate, and I don't believe that your artificial price 'ceiling' will hold.
|
|
|
|
Ummm, msnbc? Jim Cramer? Wall Street Journal?
Oh lord no, not Jim "Mad Money" Cramer. That guy is the kiss of death. I hope he hates it, that would give a nice contrarian boost  |
|
|
|
Adrien Chen is a tool. Every story he's posted about bitcoin is only to cast it in a negative light. His writing style mimics that of a college freshman. You can practically see him giggling as he hammers out his prose. |
|
|
|
I don't think Bitcoin is ever going to replace USD or EUR. If anything, it's going to end up as an auxiliary currency like silver or gold. Rather than threatening governments, Bitcoin might actually help governments with their monetary policy once they start holding it as a "foreign reserve".
Don't be naive in thinking that bitcoin can be used to evade taxes. This might work with smaller amounts below 10,000 USD, but as soon as you start spending serious amounts of money (no matter whether 500 Euro notes or BTC) you inevitably leave a trail in meatspace.
I respectfully disagree with your point that bitcoin will not replace 'legacy' currencies. Because as of this moment, that is exactly what they are. There isn't an "if" but merely "when", in my mind. As for taxes, you are correct as the system stands now - but when bitcoin replaces legacy systems, it would be more difficult unless governments adapted to such a system. One poster in another thread made a comment that if companies pay in bitcoin, it would naturally follow that governments would require some kind of control for tax purposes. That is entirely possible, but I'm not sure if that would be enough to save the legacy tax-collection system. I suppose we'll see... |
|
|
|
Bitcoin enables massive theft evasion from the world's monopolies on force. Of course it will change the world.
Absolutely right. Keeps the bastards out of the pie, we get to decide what is worthy - not just their bottom line. |
|
|
|
|
While I support bitcoin wholeheartedly, there is one (of many) glaring problems in the current client.
Not a single goddamned thing tells you it is 'waiting' to download the friggin blockchain. That will cost you a lot of user goodwill, right there.
"Why can't I do anything?"
"Why is the bitcoin I just sent/received just hanging at zero confirms?"
We understand the system, so this behaviour of the client isn't foreign to us, but to someone totally green - it seems like some arbitrary obstacle, if they ever spend the energy to learn about it, that is.
|
|
|
|
|
+100 Class Points for just coming out and giving the full story once you discovered the root cause.
I respect that.
|
|
|
|
The only serious concern I've found with Bitcoin so far is the probability that Satoshi has one or two million stashed away somewhere. That would represent up to 33% of current bitcoins and 10% of eventual bitcoins. http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=9745.20I can immediately think of two implications: 1. Bitcoin is vulnerable to massive market manipulation in the future by a single individual. This will deter anyone wanting to use a currency that floats freely in a market that's both unregulated and unmanipulated. 2. This could eventually represent an enormous amount of wealth. If the price rose to $10,000/BTC that's about the $20B that Larry Page is worth, so no problem. But if Bitcoin rises to be a significant fraction of the world's economy, that's a whole load of power in a single individual's hands. I hope Satoshi doesn't turn out to be The Joker. 1. If you believe that the founder of a system would turn around and destroy that same system - you are 'mentally challenged'. 2. Your lurking envy is transparent. And yet another statement where you seem to imply the whole network of bitcoin is potentially in the hands of a raving lunatic. It is not. I believe in the strength of bitcoin. Its encryption, its peer-to-peer robustness. I also believe in its ability to outlast simple minds such as yours. |
|
|
|
lol, proof? proof of what? proof that a guy who is known to have knowledge nobody else in the world has about a rapidly increasing market is using it to his own personal gain? why would he not, and why should he not? If he is not, then he is just as dumb as the sites that don't have dark pools, and doesn't deserve the extra income anyway. I'm seeing nothing here that needs proven. If you don't want mt gox to be tipped your information then don't friggin tip him it, some will and some won't and life goes on. It would be like complaining that other people are sending him donations. We are all free to do what we wish with our money and knowledge, and people who complain about it are probably just jealous that nobody tips them, and in time hopefully they will grow up and accept it.
If posts were food, that paragraph would be a greasy unidentifiable deep-fried mass of ... something. But since I don't specialize in dubious deep-fry 'cuisine' found at state fairs and unlicensed traveling carnivals, I'll let my original post stand. If you do make it long enough to pound your keyboard in a convincing way to construct an argument that can be parsed by an actual english-speaking native, please let me know. |
|
|
|
When the difficulty gets to 2Million mark price for BTC will have to be $120 / coin to maintain mining profitibility..
Actually, it will only have to be enough to offset electricity - as most miners in this stage of the game have already paid off their rigs. And in some cases, some don't even have to worry about that! I think your statement may be more true for someone just purchasing a $1,000 rig, given the reduction in payout. Otherwise, its pretty much full profit for the early-adopting miners. |
|
|
|
lol, donations work the other way round. you have a service and then you receive tips.
not someone pays you >$200 and then you deliver something.
He already does. A chart that was linked up above. It is also within his rights to ask for donations. Don't understand why ridicule is needed in this case. Unless that's just how you operate. |
|
|
|
If I sell Bitcoins to my neighbor, isn't that a dark pool of sorts? Why should that effect anyone else?
Quite right. We already have 'dark pools' happening in the blockchain. I've seen large sums change hands, (unless it was for some odd reason - a transfer to a wallet under the originators control), and I have to say they dwarf what lies in the pools on the exchanges. I don't quite understand the fury and noise of people railing against the pools. They provide depth to the market and actually reduce volatility. Most of the rambling comments on this forum are of the "OH NOES MANIPULATION" variety, which of course are never backed up with any kind of proof. (The verifiable kind, not the tinfoil-pulled-it-from-my-ass-kind.) I'll just keep on trading, like usual. |
|
|
|
The fact that this poll exists ensures that BTC will not see 100 (at least until everyone no longer believes it will happen)
Mary, mary, quite contrary, how does your wallet.dat grow? I see what you did there, but that only works for markets that have large-scale adoption, and the poll would have to cover *all* bitcoin users. I'm pretty sure world-wide they aren't all represented here, so your contrary strategy may have a large statistical hole in it. Good try... |
|
|
|
|
It is interesting the conversation about precious metals and hedging your bets further with bitcoin. I see advantages of having both, mostly for bitcoin's resistance to seizure (unless they got the only copy of your wallet file, in that case - shame on your shoddy backup plan), and gold/silver's store-of-value historically. Bitcoin will have truly 'arrived' when you have people openly recommending such strategies on the news. (But I'm not holding my breath.)
I'm wondering when we hit parity to both, I'd hazard a guess by the end of the year if not sooner.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say having both exchanges encourages price stability. The more traders you have participating in price, the deeper the combined order books. More orders == less variance when price moves, on a percentage basis. In short, you would want dark pools, regular traders, and as many exchanges functioning at any given time. Shifting everyone over to one exchange or another shouldn't be done on an artificial basis, but up to the traders themselves.
There's enough volume to have many more exchanges than we do now, and I'm sure we'll see that in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
There's nothing more telling than someone who is griping about a good trade. A trade is an assessment of risk for perceived value. Those who made the trade deserved their wins or losses. Anyone floating some 'redistribution' idea because these gains are 'unfair' really don't understand how markets work, or risk.
I wonder if we'll see the same people complaining about bad trades later on, where they sold at some mini-peak before prices surged again. "We need to distribute the loss, because it is unfair prices increased. Waa, waa, waaah."
Protip: Markets, like life, don't reward whining, only risk-taking.
|
|
|
|
EDIT: It lives. Shell company must be up lol.
The only shell I see is your fragile ego. Mt. Gox trades are flowing, Tradehill picked up the slack while gox was wrestling with some backend stuff. I assume they'll say something when they have a chance. |
|
|
|
|
The only thing exchanges can do is pre-announce downtime scheduling. Of course, there is always the unplanned type of downtime, but that is just how things work out sometimes. Given the current state of hardware and hot-standby for servers and the like, it would be possible to have a service that rarely has outages.
Like others have mentioned, when they are down - that costs them money. So their incentive to keep operating is pretty clear.
|
|
|
|
|
Circuit breakers, daily price limits, whatever you want to call them - only delay the inevitable. The person who wanted to sell at $29 will want to sell at $15, $10, and possibly $5. Likewise for those who want to buy. Let the market serve its function. I find it ironic that a currency that is free of regulation would have regulations placed on its trading.
Forget this idea, the exchanges do it in equities, and it has never prevented anything.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
