... You can use SEPA, OKpay, etc. The exchange is just starting, but it has lots of potential. At least, it is impossible to take down.
ELI5 who I wire actual irl money to, and why it won't get stolen immediately. 1) The bitcoins are programmed to be released only when two of three people agree that the money has been received. 2) When the money gets to your bank account you and the buyer release your coins. 3) If you lie about it, the buyer and a random aribitrator release your coins. Not sure that I would trust it... but seems legit. Did this with a SEPA transfer on bitquick once. The guy sent me 180 euro. I saw the transfer go through to my account. I released the bitcoins. 2 days later my bank calls me and says the person's account that sent me the money was hacked and that they needed to refund the 180 euro. Nothing I could do at that point. I had the same thing happen on Venmo... those fuckers.
|
|
|
This rally won't stop until it has hit $490 then it will shrink back down. We have seen this all before. With the halving happening by then who knows, a new player to this is coming.
You have a real bad sense of market dynamics if you believe that prices stop/reverse at $490... sure it could stop before that time, but if prices make it it $490, we have pure momentum and psychology that easily brings us into the mid-$500s and more likely into the mid $600s... though, surely such momentum can stop at any time, it just takes a lot more effort to go against a trend, and when we hit certain price points, there becomes a strong trend and $490 is one of those price points that is likely upwards rather than a reversing point...
|
|
|
the whole point of btc is you can have certainty about supply, so why cant you price that in?
of course you can price it in, and a whole hell-of-a lot of other people can price it in too; however, all of those people still do not make the whole market or the market behavior from those known events there continue to remain a lot of unknowns, including a number of market actors who do not realize the impact and whose actions cannot be predicted ahead of time. Therefore, halfing is only partially priced in because market information is imperfect (even with known factors) and humans are not completely rational... and accordingly, the behaviors of some irrational people are going to affect the rational and irrational behaviors of others, creating even more unknowns.
|
|
|
leverage is not useful for me i have money in the bank and bitcoins in my pocket i never trade with more than like 20% of them at one time if i wanted to leverage i'd "lend myself" $ or BTC
but lambos? want a lambo? easy what dose that cost like 200,000$? go to the bank barrow 200,000$ put it all on red, win, pay the bank back and then go buy a lambo with the profits! i'd feel too nervous placing so much money at risk for a move up or down on the bitcoin market at any given time... any market. i just dont have the balls. MAYBE if we truly bubble and i can see clear as day a correction is imminent i'll sell all my bitcoins and borrow more to sell more, and then buy back on the first swing down. if i wasn't so risk adverse i'd be pretty rich right now, but i did the sensible thing and cashed in large sums of bitcoin here and there as price rose, and rose and rose and then exploded. you need balls of steel to be able to place all your money + barrow some more to place a bet on the market... I don't like leverage either, because it is too much like gambling with something that is very highly capable of being manipulated... and manipulations can take place to truly screw us over (especially with leverage). Maybe without leverage, we are not going to get rich from BTC market movements; however, we now know that bitcoin is capable of 10x(s)... and we should be able to do very well with BTC with anything approaching a 10x... even a 2x or a 5x... Anyhow, since there have been several 10x(s) in the past, and there remains considerable potential for at least a couple more 10x(s), we should put ourselves in such a position to profit from such, if considerable upwards movement(s) were to occur... Probably, we have to play to preserve our capital sufficiently in case there is not any additional 10x(s); however, since we know that 10x(s) are reasonably possible, we still need to sufficiently prepare our BTC investment portfolio(s) for those kinds of possibilities. In other words, like you describe, try to take measured and small profits along the way, and do not sell all or a large portion of BTC merely based on a 2x or a 5x price movement, unless there is fairly convincing information that a 10% or so correction is occurring.. even though it may be a good idea to sell some of them, maybe up to 50% at various stages. and maybe allocate some of the sales proceeds for taking off the table completely and some for buying back.
|
|
|
bitcoin still has a flaw that it cannot scale.. you can take that anyway you want to. .. if its fud well too bad.. bitcoin still cannot scale. i have the intelligence to understand and accept this fact, while you on the other hand only have the intelligence to insult people who disagree with you. i think my little seven year old niece can do that and her brain isnt even fully developed yet.
once again, it doesnt matter if the price goes up since i am sitting on a pile of coins in cold storage.. if the price were to go lower to a point i feel is a buy then i might buy more. what i am not going to do is sit here an come up with different bullshiat to lie to myself and everyone like you do everyday. +1 Aztecminer is exactly right and I am in the same position. You can keep pumping and make my cold storage coins more valuable if you want, but I'm not putting in one more dime until scaling gets fixed and it's not fixed. Yeah... you are like two dumb peas in a pod. Good luck with that lack of perspective .... seems to be working for me. i really do have a good pile of coins from mining. any new coins i would potentially buy would most likely go to trading anyways. maybe i might dump some more into cold storage if i get them. i don't know for sure cuz i feel bitcoins flaw that is NOT being addressed is a serious problem. i believe it introduces a risk. i'm not desperate for coins which is why i don't have to buy. its more like you are the dumbass juan that you can't see that strategy working fine. i keep a small amount of cash liquid on exchange in case something happens, or i decide to do something. silver is moving up too. i told everyone to buy silver when it was $14.50.. that happened to be the bottom. silver cruised through $16.00 like it wasnt even there yesterday. i wouldnt be surprised if this latest bitcoin pump was a manipulation to keep tardedbrains like juan from buying silver. btw juan, did you know i have a character in one my books name juan de lupio ?? .. kinda reminds me of you.. ROFL ..LOL.. don't get lost on your way to Antarctica juan! There's nothing wrong with having a BTC trade strategy that works for you; however, having such a strategy does not imply that strategy to be good for others. I would not waste my time looking into any of your writings, but at this point, I am not going to attempt to stop others who may be inclined in such ways. Don't consider my lack of not recommending your "supposed works" to be an endorsement.
|
|
|
Actually, your narrow focus on one word does not make you smart, but instead makes you patronizing and deviating from the actual point(s) that I made. Well, I've said once already that I agreed with the point you made! I just don't agree with the way you made it, i.e. misrepresenting an entire political philosophy as being a pernicious force in order to make your point. But the point stands, and I haven't said even once I disagreed, the opposite in fact. This has got nothing to do with my feelings ( ), but of simply representing facts correctly. Sorry if your feelings have somehow become involved, but they shouldn't be. I don't know why you would conclude that my feelings are involved in this at any higher level than necessary. \I am just making various points on the internet. You made your points and I made mine...
|
|
|
Core logic: if bitcoin nodes are only ran by a few 1000 large entities then bitcoin has failed. Classic logic: if bitcoin becomes a settlement layer only used by a few 1000 large entities then bitcoin has failed.
@adamstgBit logic - oops that actually doesn't exist (there is no logic behind your posts). Epic fail (and for those that are not aware he sold his account around a year ago so don't be fooled into thinking he has been around on this forum for years) U don't really know that he actually sold his account.
|
|
|
who will open LN channels and make 1000's of payments to each other? poeple like CoinBase and Bitpay. LN will interconnect these large entities and allow them to settle without the blockchain. here is a visual representation of the LN scaling solution Actually, that sounds great. Are you trying to sell Lightning network... and to discontinue your pursuit of XT/Classic and/or other variations? In the above described scenario, some of the bigger players will get off of the direct block; however, with LN they are still going to be within bitcoin and somewhat more transparent than they are currently with there variety of stupid-ass off chain transacting systems. Accordingly, LN is going to probably accomplish at least a few goals 1) keeping more transactions accountable on the blockchain which lessens likelihood of fractional reserve banking 2) freeing up more of the blockchain for direct transactions, without the big boys, 3) allowing further delays in keeping the blocksize limit down in order that we do not get too much bloating its a problem... when coinbase realizes it always has about 10X more user deposits then it does user funds tied up in the lighting network, and can easily start fractional reserve operation. IMO LN will fosters this type of scheme were coinbase behaves like a bank, and blockchain is a settlement layer the users dont have direct access to. Even though we are allowed to speculate here, we should attempt to stay within reality regarding some of our known facts, and you seem to be going on quite a tangent with your assumption that seg wit allows more opportunities for bitcoin-related fractional reserve banking. Let's consider that under our current bitcoin practice, we have quite a few bitcoin merchant entities and bitcoin exchanges that are holding private keys and therefore holding bitcoin's and conducting transactions off of the blockchain... in essence we have to trust that they are not trading more bitcoin's than they actually hold (through their off chain transactions). The weight of the credible evidence seems to suggest that Lightning Network creates structures and incentives to have more and more of these historical transactions to be connected with the blockchain. Even though they may not be immediately settled, they are connected with the blockchain, and entities using LN will not be able to transact with coins that they do not have. You seem to be suggesting the opposite, as if LN transactions will not be tied to the blockchain and entities utilizing LN can somehow create or use coins on the LN that they do not have... which makes little sense... based on the actual factual descriptions regarding what LN provides. also, I might not be able to send a 5$ donation to wikileaks because coinbase is a regulated entity and i am forced to deal with coinbase for TX <25$ because its to costly to do <25$ payments directly on the blockchain.
We gotta see how it plays out... It is way too early to be attempting to predict fees based on potential services that are going to be offered and the extent that there may be competition.
how to regulate the blockchain payments.
step 1, regulate large bank like bitcoin entities step 2, prohibit users from using the blockchain directly by imposing high fees.
DONE!
Makes little sense. There are going to be both regulated and non regulated conduct within this space for some time to come. I might be exaggerating the level of fees. fees might very well come down to 2012 levels once LN makes all the TX happening between bitpay coinbase bitfinex stamps etc etc all of chain, allowing users to keep making direct payment on the blockchain and leverage the LN to quickly move funds between coinbase and stamps or whatever.
yeah... you do seem to be exaggerating fees because we really do not know, yet.... because there are forces in both directions (bringing fees up and bringing fees down) but i can see how eventually ( should the 1MB limit never be raised )
It's possible that there will not be a need to increase the blockchain limit. Why raise it if it does not need to be raised? the blockchain will be over runned by LN open and close TX's and since millions of dollars will be transacted in these channels fees for opening and closing these channels could be 10's if not 100's of dollars.
I doubt that anytime soon we are going from free and penny transactions to $10 to $100 transactions.. makes little sense, in our life times. a fee of 50$ to transact the main chain means individuals payments MUST go through payment gateways which is a bad thing, which is what bitcoin was meant to avoid.
If fees are that high, then I'm sure people will search for and find alternative and less expensive means to transact value.
|
|
|
there is a lack of world governance, and therefore, a kind of anarchy Anarchy doesn't mean "no rules", it means "no rulers". No rules would be a bad thing. No rulers would be a good thing. Hence, anarchy good, government bad. I agree with your overall point about some rules being good - and there can be considerable arbitrariness with rulers; however, to me, it sounds as if you are attempting to make one of those lame libertarian and nonsensical distinctions. Well, the word "rule" and "ruler" are superficially similar, but the meanings are considerably different from one another. You're describing the distinction as "nonsense" and "lame"? I wouldn't like to be around you in a situation where that difference mattered. That difference makes a great deal of sense, even if you refuse to acknowledge it. They are separate words with separate spellings for a reason: because they're not the same word, and do not mean the same thing Actually, your narrow focus on one word does not make you smart, but instead makes you patronizing and deviating from the actual point(s) that I made. I've read several of your posts, and frequently, you make decent sense, except when you get on some of these dumb-ass tangents... Yes, we all know rule and ruler are two words and two related concepts; however, for the purposes and points that I was making, it doesn't fucking matter... thus.... this part of the discussion has become a considerable and irrelevant tangent... that possibly makes you feel good because you want to instruct regarding some irrelevant point that you are acting as if you know and others do not know?
|
|
|
Bitcoin is probably going back to 440$ today and then falling down to ~400$ in the next few days
Could be, but you seem to be engaged in wishful thinking rather than reality - because it seems to have taken quite a bit of coins and clarification of the XT/Classic related propaganda and misinformation to get to this point.. and the momentum is currently upwards, including based upon some public opinion that is buying less and less into the propaganda of bitcoin having some kind of "scaling problem" disquised in discussion of bitcoin's supposed "governance problem".. In fact, the technical scaling "problem" has been realized as really a made up idea that never really existed to anywhere near the extent that people were making out to be, and the governance "problem" is being discovered to be a feature rather than a bug.. to stop changes (or take overs) from easily being achieved... Yes, we could get a dump of 1000 or 2000 or even 10k coins, and experiencing dumps like that would really give a sense regarding whether there is sufficient upwards support, but in the end, it is really difficult to buck trends .. and maybe we gotta at least get into the $450s to $460s.. .to figure out if there is enough momentum.. to bring us up... volume is picking up a little bit, but it remains kind of low, currently.
|
|
|
What i see right now is that miners are afraid of a "change in government" this is the primary reason why XT and Classic failed to gain their support. its not a change of government i want, its a change in governance. if that makes any sense so i do everything i can to make that happen, run a BU node and chat about it. In essence, the above idea likely explains a great deal of your failing/refusing to accept and to seem inclined to falsely point out conspiracies in a large number of areas. In this regard, you take a few facts, and then you assign malevolence within speculating how they will play out.... Probably, you need to fix this yourself, rather than spewing out some of these various conspiracies on public forums... while apparently attempting to get others to jump onto your conspiratorial logic. Surely, skepticism is healthy, and I surely agree that there are a lot of true and real conspiracies out there that undermine regular people, but we gotta be somewhat practical in our acceptance that the world has a variety of explanations for outcomes and directions besides conspiracies. Accordingly, bitcoin's governance is not broken. Difficulty in making changes is a feature and not a bug, and it seems to be a very good thing that it is difficult to change it (such as implementing stupid ass governance changes within XT and classic - that really should be recognized as coup attempts).
|
|
|
who will open LN channels and make 1000's of payments to each other? poeple like CoinBase and Bitpay. LN will interconnect these large entities and allow them to settle without the blockchain. here is a visual representation of the LN scaling solution Actually, that sounds great. Are you trying to sell Lightning network... and to discontinue your pursuit of XT/Classic and/or other variations? In the above described scenario, some of the bigger players will get off of the direct block; however, with LN they are still going to be within bitcoin and somewhat more transparent than they are currently with there variety of stupid-ass off chain transacting systems. Accordingly, LN is going to probably accomplish at least a few goals 1) keeping more transactions accountable on the blockchain which lessens likelihood of fractional reserve banking 2) freeing up more of the blockchain for direct transactions, without the big boys, 3) allowing further delays in keeping the blocksize limit down in order that we do not get too much bloating
|
|
|
Morning gentlemen! What a great day so far! Woke up, checked the charts, and see we are up ~$12. Hope to see $440 within the next few hours.Even if it would be just for a short moment. Yes!!!! Decent BTC price movements in recent days and weeks..... and beginning to feel a bit more safe from sub-$400 price territories $450 and $467 are previous resistance points.... so it will be interesting to make it passed these two resistance points. Accordingly, it seems that if we can get prices into the $470s or $480s, there could be a decent path towards the $650 arena... Thoughts, anyone? i dont expect 467$ to be much of a resistance and tbh i expect the coming weeks/months a runup straight to 840$ I hope that you are correct..... I certainly have no crystal ball.. just hunches, like everyone else.. and my hunches frequently have to be reformulated based on unexpected transgressions. And, you know that frequently bitcoin overshoots various expectations, and maybe I have become a bit overcautious with my own thinking after more than two years of seemingly suppressed prices (and no bubble in that perios).... I do have a bit of a problem with any concept that brings us passed $800 in this particular run up, because I get the sense that once we get into the $800 territory, then there is likely going to be a push passed the current ATH of $1160... .. and really, I have my doubts about having enough built up ammunition for such a run-up, so in that regard, we are likely going to have a couple of preliminary movement and profit taking in the sub-$800 territory first... In any event, I don't really care whether I am correct or not.. I just plan for a variety of potential outcomes.. while putting a few more eggs in the outcome(s) that I believe to be more likely.
|
|
|
there is a lack of world governance, and therefore, a kind of anarchy Anarchy doesn't mean "no rules", it means "no rulers". No rules would be a bad thing. No rulers would be a good thing. Hence, anarchy good, government bad. I agree with your overall point about some rules being good - and there can be considerable arbitrariness with rulers; however, to me, it sounds as if you are attempting to make one of those lame libertarian and nonsensical distinctions. Frequently, libertarians get caught up on a strain of foggy logic in which they are making a bunch of inconsistent criticisms of the status quo (they also tend to mix up comments regarding the world as it is and the world as they perceive that it should be.. which tends to lead to even a higher level of nonsense), and then idealizing some kind of world that attempts to get rid of human actors. We are always going to have human actors who are able to exercise discretion and frequently become abusive of their power and/or position. A fact of life that we gotta deal with and attempt to build systems to put in check and also to disincentivize various abusive behaviors. I could give a ratt's ass whether technically I am using the correct word to describe the point that I wanted to make, because the word does not take away from the concept.. in that there remains a lot of lack of coordination of various governments on the international level... yeah sure some governments have more power than others, but in essence bitcoin is going to be able to build its strength in some of this current system.. which is anarchical... whether that be lack of leaders or lack of rules.. In the end , there is a lack of both on the international level and a lack of coordination regarding whatever exists.. especially when it comes to finances and the various combatting of financial systems on that international level, which creates a large number of pockets in which bitcoin can become useful... even if it may be banned in other pockets... and in the end, bitcoin is going to become stronger and stronger before anyone with any real and/or meaningful power is going to be able to do anything about either bringing it down or keeping it down.
|
|
|
Morning gentlemen! What a great day so far! Woke up, checked the charts, and see we are up ~$12. Hope to see $440 within the next few hours.Even if it would be just for a short moment. Yes!!!! Decent BTC price movements in recent days and weeks..... and beginning to feel a bit more safe from sub-$400 price territories $450 and $467 are previous resistance points.... so it will be interesting to make it passed these two resistance points. Accordingly, it seems that if we can get prices into the $470s or $480s, there could be a decent path towards the $650 arena... Thoughts, anyone?
|
|
|
You made a nice little rhyme, but factually inaccurate... Currently, ETH is in a bubble, and bitcoin is likely underpriced.... ... think about it.... 1) 2010 to 2013 - several 10x and 100x periods - appreciating in price from pennies to $1160 2) $1160 in November 2013 (likely in a bubble at that time), 3) downward correction for about a year - during 2014.. 4) Held down for more than 8 months - from January 2015 to August 2015... ... 5) some upward action - likely mini-bubble from August 2015 to early November 2015 6) extensive FUCDding spreading..... and attempts to bring BTC prices below $360 then $380 and $400.... ... 7) currently, upward price pressures, in part based on difficulties bringing price down in accordance with 6) above... I wouldn't describe current BTC prices as a bubble - however, if BTC prices shoot up in the $3 to $5k territory in the coming months or even within a year, we may be able to describe that as a bubble, depending upon how quickly prices go up to such a level... .. There are other BTC bubble scenarios, as well; however, currently, seems far from a BTC bubble and more likely underpriced, given the fundamentals.. mining power and infrastructure and other ongoing developing network effects. Related to the tense of the news below, you might get that I think of the future here ... Edit: Forcast here as well: http://blogs.barrons.com/asiastocks/2016/04/20/china-markets-tumble-as-goldman-raises-its-gdp-growth-forecast/O.k... but I stand behind my post... I would further assert that the performance of bitcoin may relate to various other macro-economic developments, but I doubt that bitcoin's relation to various macro-economics is direct... So in that regard, any analysis of bitcoin's price performance and development needs to account for bitcoin's historical cycles and also it's networking affects - and accordingly, whether bitcoin is in a decent position (on its own) to be able to absorb some of the value of various other financial turmoils.... In essence, bitcoin remains fairly trivial and unknown in various mainstream financial circles - because as a lot of us already know, if bitcoin were to absorb, even a fraction of the investment of even a small company or a small national currency or even some segment thereof, bitcoin's price would explode upwardly. Someday there will be some kind of explosive bitcoin growth, but currently, bitcoin remains as only a tangential factor within a lot of mainstream financial thinking and is not being generally used as a wealth transfer and/or storage mechanism for very much capital (especially larger players).
|
|
|
bitcoin still has a flaw that it cannot scale.. you can take that anyway you want to. .. if its fud well too bad.. bitcoin still cannot scale. i have the intelligence to understand and accept this fact, while you on the other hand only have the intelligence to insult people who disagree with you. i think my little seven year old niece can do that and her brain isnt even fully developed yet.
once again, it doesnt matter if the price goes up since i am sitting on a pile of coins in cold storage.. if the price were to go lower to a point i feel is a buy then i might buy more. what i am not going to do is sit here an come up with different bullshiat to lie to myself and everyone like you do everyday. +1 Aztecminer is exactly right and I am in the same position. You can keep pumping and make my cold storage coins more valuable if you want, but I'm not putting in one more dime until scaling gets fixed and it's not fixed. ditto! hahahahahaha. Searing... I didn't think that you were dumb like those two... ..... you haven't actually read his posts then. go on, i dare ya to read the same post 900 +++ times. hes much worse than that weird 'mornin' 'sideways' 'coffee' streak that jimbotoronto went on for a while.... I've read some of Searing's posts, and even though he seems to have incurred some mining losses over the years, and even has demonstrated that he has been worried about some of his BTC investment, he had not seemed close to as propaganda and FUCD spreading like BJA and Aztecminer. I mean BJA and Aztec are within another league of nonsense, with their stubborn attempts at spreading repetitive quasi-retarded garbage.. in talking their books, in always attempting to be right in their being prepared in any direction, while at the same time denigrating in order to seemingly talk their books.... Searing seems to be a different story in terms of his having made various honest efforts to invest in bitcoin but also shorting from time to time in order to attempt to protect his BTC investment... but maybe he has been persuaded by some of the repetitive spread of FUCD.. of some of this sky is falling scale or die nonsense that should becoming more and more clear that it really is nonsensical attempts to undermine bitcoin?
|
|
|
You made a nice little rhyme, but factually inaccurate... Currently, ETH is in a bubble, and bitcoin is likely underpriced.... ... think about it.... 1) 2010 to 2013 - several 10x and 100x periods - appreciating in price from pennies to $1160 2) $1160 in November 2013 (likely in a bubble at that time), 3) downward correction for about a year - during 2014.. 4) Held down for more than 8 months - from January 2015 to August 2015... ... 5) some upward action - likely mini-bubble from August 2015 to early November 2015 6) extensive FUCDding spreading..... and attempts to bring BTC prices below $360 then $380 and $400.... ... 7) currently, upward price pressures, in part based on difficulties bringing price down in accordance with 6) above... I wouldn't describe current BTC prices as a bubble - however, if BTC prices shoot up in the $3 to $5k territory in the coming months or even within a year, we may be able to describe that as a bubble, depending upon how quickly prices go up to such a level... .. There are other BTC bubble scenarios, as well; however, currently, seems far from a BTC bubble and more likely underpriced, given the fundamentals.. mining power and infrastructure and other ongoing developing network effects.
|
|
|
bitcoin still has a flaw that it cannot scale.. you can take that anyway you want to. .. if its fud well too bad.. bitcoin still cannot scale. i have the intelligence to understand and accept this fact, while you on the other hand only have the intelligence to insult people who disagree with you. i think my little seven year old niece can do that and her brain isnt even fully developed yet.
once again, it doesnt matter if the price goes up since i am sitting on a pile of coins in cold storage.. if the price were to go lower to a point i feel is a buy then i might buy more. what i am not going to do is sit here an come up with different bullshiat to lie to myself and everyone like you do everyday. +1 Aztecminer is exactly right and I am in the same position. You can keep pumping and make my cold storage coins more valuable if you want, but I'm not putting in one more dime until scaling gets fixed and it's not fixed. ditto! hahahahahaha. Searing... I didn't think that you were dumb like those two... .....
|
|
|
bitcoin still has a flaw that it cannot scale.. you can take that anyway you want to. .. if its fud well too bad.. bitcoin still cannot scale. i have the intelligence to understand and accept this fact, while you on the other hand only have the intelligence to insult people who disagree with you. i think my little seven year old niece can do that and her brain isnt even fully developed yet.
once again, it doesnt matter if the price goes up since i am sitting on a pile of coins in cold storage.. if the price were to go lower to a point i feel is a buy then i might buy more. what i am not going to do is sit here an come up with different bullshiat to lie to myself and everyone like you do everyday. +1 Aztecminer is exactly right and I am in the same position. You can keep pumping and make my cold storage coins more valuable if you want, but I'm not putting in one more dime until scaling gets fixed and it's not fixed. Yeah... you are like two dumb peas in a pod. Good luck with that lack of perspective ....
|
|
|
|