ok for you: This situation is most profitable for operators of bots or automated trading systems using the mtgox api to spoon feed the traders on both ends.

The idea is that more BTC will be mined then usual in from the moment ASICs hit till first difficulty adjustment. Then those people would wanna be first to the market to offset their costs and also to be first before those who got theirs later will dump and thus bring the price down.

There are currently 65614.1 Bitcoins for sale on MtGox priced under $100. If you place an immediate order to buy all the Bitcoins available on MtGox priced below $100, and then bought .1 BTC of the $100 Bitcoins, the "last trading price" would be $100. The amount of money this would currently take is $1,087,817.82. Since you would be buying almost all the Bitcoins currently for sale in this exchange, you could maintain the $100 price cheaply, at least for the hour it would take other sellers to send more Bitcoins in.

You can do the same thing on a low volume exchange for much cheaper.

edit: it looks like MtGox doesn't correctly calculate the true price to buy xxxx BTC; the answer is currently $1,695,122 USD to buy to $100.

Since you would be buying almost all the Bitcoins currently for sale in this exchange, you could maintain the $100 price cheaply

Ah, thank you. I suspected that but wasn't sure since I had used the address for various other things too. I also was not notified about it by email.

Did you type that out on an iPhone? 

I was thinking... Why is a block being found the ONLY way a transaction can be verified?


Why cant a message just be sent out to the nodes/clients with a simple query of "hey... so it is cool if address X sends Y BTC to address Z... would you approve that in a future block?"

Randomly pick a dozen or so nodes to send it to and if all responses come back affirmative at least then there is substantially greater evidence of the transaction being legit verses completely unsafe.

MAkes sense to me at least.. but i'm not to intimately familiar with the technical side of transaction verification.

Thanks!

thanks


Because if they ship it statistically would increase the chances that the others ship too, although not directly influence it. And the health of the mining industry is a significant factor.
I wouldn't call creeping up to the 20s a rally. (This term is largely misused by the dramatization here when I say rally I mean new ATHs)

There are two strong fundamentals coming up imo:

• Mega accepting BTC or not accepting BTC
• Avalon shipping during the promised timeframe or not.
  

Both are discrete events which can only have one possible outcome (true or false) they cannot be predicted with reasonable accuracy.

• Should Mega accept BTC and Avalon ship we are going to rally.
• If one of em turns out to be true and the other not we are going to creep to the 20s.
• However if both of them turn out to be false we are going to grind down.

These predictions cannot be made using technical analysis.

So chinese dont have google translator? A shame..

But I thought we were capped at 21 million bitcoins?

Thank you.  Happy to be corrected and to learn something from those who understand these things better than me

I don't know if I'm being sensibly sceptical or whether hanging out in Bitcoinland has made me overly suspicious and cynical but...

Couldn't our 'whale' have just randomly picked an address from here to claim as his/her own in attempt to support his/her username persona as 'loaded'?

verifymessage 1BqcwhKevdBKeos72b8E32Swjrp4iDVnjP Hw6QbEy+Z5BNwiv0kPTyizzgU5T1H88RnPRvk7730VoGTReJndKzZ4Jnn1JjIkNiVwBIXsx19RwXQWVfWrZjW+M= "I am 'Loaded' of bitcointalk.org."

can you tell us at what price you got these?

Am I really the only one who makes detailed comparisons between bitcoin addresses to ensure they are the same?

I guess I must just be paranoid, maybe it's the irreversibility of a bitcoin transaction that scares me.