|
Well given it has a value in it, the 70 million it isn't really something dramatic.
The thing with proofs about number theory is: Scale does not matter, only relationships which work on any scale count. It's still an accomplishment but scientific progress in mathematics depends on fundamental proofs.
|
|
|
|
Looking at past action, you would always do well to hold (unless you can call those tops and bottoms like a pro - but do you want to get caught with your pants down considering what we are talking about with BTC?)
Interesting... If really you want to be the careful type, shouldn't you wait on the sideline with your fiat ready, as price has a tendency to fall faster than going up? There's always the fear of a black swan event rocketing bitcoin into the sky. I don't know why, but I think many bulls have this fear including myself. I don't like to sit on the sidelines for too long, I can sit out a weekend but that's it really.  Just like the Christians fear of the rapture and the Scientologists fear of the return of Xenu. |
|
|
|
Check this techcrunch article, it comes with the ultimate perma-bull calculator, you can tweak different variables in it (including % of success for BTC) and get how much one BTC will be worth. http://techcrunch.com/2013/06/02/calculating-the-long-term-value-of-a-bitcoin/I will tell you something: regardless of what you put in that calculator, it goes to high 4 digits, and it tells you: BUYI just entered 0.01% everywhere with 100% success rate and got $66. What?? I cannot enter less than 1% Well I can. |
|
|
|
Check this techcrunch article, it comes with the ultimate perma-bull calculator, you can tweak different variables in it (including % of success for BTC) and get how much one BTC will be worth. http://techcrunch.com/2013/06/02/calculating-the-long-term-value-of-a-bitcoin/I will tell you something: regardless of what you put in that calculator, it goes to high 4 digits, and it tells you: BUYI just entered 0.01% everywhere with 100% success rate and got $66. |
|
|
|
DOWN Down down 
|
|
|
|
Problem with stopping it not going into the negative is that it no longer keeps the graph centered, it looks a little weird  Even when you only do it when it actually goes past 0? You could also scale the ask side to match the same width, it just would have to have another scale than the bid side. Zooming out would stop at the bids and just display the asks further up. What also would work is log scale... |
|
|
|
|
I don't view my gold/silver coins as an investment, just something that should help when things get tough.
Other than that I don't invest, I speculate.
|
|
|
|
Some altcoins have utility. They derive value the same way Bitcoin does:
The ways of acquiring them, the people interested in doing so and economic activity taking place because and after it.
Litecoin had utility initially because its different hashing algorithm, which became more pronounced with the release of Bitcoin ASICs, it would never have gotten that far without that and only recently secondary economic activity started taking place. I don't see any other altcoin archiving that, except namecoin which derives it's utility by other means.
This not true, LTC copied the scrypt hashing algorithm from tenebrix, yet tenebrix failed. tenebrix was not a coin. It was inflationary, and it was pre-mined. Had it not been either of these things it probably would have succeeded. It lacked utility in a sense that the time till inflation would have negated the gargantuan pre-mine would have been many years. Fairbrix would have succeeded if it had protection against a 51% attack. |
|
|
|
franky1 you are confusing 'value' with 'cost'. Value (economics), a measure of the benefit that an economic actor can gain from either a good or serviceBitcoins does not provide a gain based on the effort that is taken to create them. A bitcoin on it's own does not even provide any benefit, only the properties of the network can provide one. addendum: You can also not imply that the value must always be larger than the cost, it is normally true under sound economical conditions, but this is not always the case. Certain "renewable" energy sources for example, like alcoholic fossil fuel substitutes take more energy to create than they provide historically. This is possible because of irrational market participants like politicians who provide subvention for these technologies. value is as you say and the value to a miner has to be above its COST or is not any beneficial value to them to mine any more. hense the LOW price is the beneficial value to miners to keep producing.. same story goes with farming too, there is a cut off point where farmers will give up making and selling their harvests. and thats the intrinsic value of the food you eat. [...] No the intrinsic value of the food I eat is the calories, vitamins, proteins, taste, texture and smell. Intrinsic value is always at the consumer end. Items can have the same intrinsic value if it costs a fortune to make or is practically free. |
|
|
|
franky1 you are confusing 'value' with 'cost'. Value (economics), a measure of the benefit that an economic actor can gain from either a good or serviceBitcoins does not provide a gain based on the effort that is taken to create them. A bitcoin on it's own does not even provide any benefit, only the properties of the network can provide one. addendum: You can also not imply that the value must always be larger than the cost, it is normally true under sound economical conditions, but this is not always the case. Certain "renewable" energy sources for example, like alcoholic fossil fuel substitutes take more energy to create than they provide historically. This is possible because of irrational market participants like politicians who provide subvention for these technologies. |
|
|
|
Even cash is debt; that's why they are Federal Reserve Notes, representing an IOU from the government to you.
And Bitcoin, big surprise is pegged to them. It's a closed system folks. Could you go into more detail on how bitcoins are pegged to USD? I look at bitcoincharts.com and I see that the exchange rate between the two floats around with great volatility, just about as far from pegged as one can be! I would be very surprised if he knew what a 'currency peg', or a 'closed financial system' was. Ok lets pretend... I have no idea, you explain it. |
|
|
|
|
Some altcoins have utility. They derive value the same way Bitcoin does:
The ways of acquiring them, the people interested in doing so and economic activity taking place because and after it.
Litecoin had utility initially because its different hashing algorithm, which became more pronounced with the release of Bitcoin ASICs, it would never have gotten that far without that and only recently secondary economic activity started taking place. I don't see any other altcoin archiving that, except namecoin which derives it's utility by other means.
|
|
|
|
|
Wenn ich ein Single pre-order hätte wäre ich verdammt sauer auf BFL. Denn selbst im besten Fall wurde difficulty durch eine Masse vorher ausgelieferter jalas weiter rauf getrieben.
Würde mich nicht wundern wenn der durchschnittliche Jala mehr reinbringt als der durchschnittliche Single...
|
|
|
|
the same with bitcoin, there is speculation (bitcoin high price) but if you look at the low price and put some thought behind it, no sane person would sell bitcoin cheaper then the electrical/time costs of making that coin. making mining costs the intrinsic value, much like minimum wage is for bank notes
No, as said these are entirely different things. Golds intrinsic value comes for its inherent usefulness which any physical material has to some extent. Intrinsic value does not apply to goverment issued money there it is backing which is a guarantee of the ability to settle debt with it and it is required to pay taxes, both of which is enforced. Neither intrinsic value nor backing does apply to Bitcoin. However Bitcoins have utility, that is the amount of people interested in acquiring them and the economic activity associated with it. |
|
|
|
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? Any actual evidence will be fine. oh and LOL (don't mind me laughing) |
|
|
|
you people are pathetic. the majority of you all missed the boat.
You sound kind of mad, do you want to talk about it? |
|
|
|
Nothing's impossible. Bitcoin could be trading for $10, $50, $100 or even higher over the next few months.
That's wrong. Everything's impossible, except the one and only possible past and future. There is only one world. Possibilities are existing in our brains only. The scientific consensus on quantum theory disagrees with you on that. |
|
|
|
|
If it goes anywhere near 50 we plunge below it. A triple bottom just doesn't happen on these time scales.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
