|
SD is fine, no losses whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
|
"What if the internet explodes - no more bitcoin"
OMG I hadn't thought of that?!? What if it DOES explode!?!?
|
|
|
|
|
Agree fully!
For a long time the cost of credit cards has been hidden to the public. It's paid by the merchant, and only indirectly borne by the customer in higher prices that they're never aware of. More and more, you'll start seeing merchants adding the explicit fee on top of the shelf price, now that they can legally do so.
It'll take a while for this to take effect, but I'd imagine in 2-3 years people will be used to paying X% more when they use their cards. Just one more macro driver of Bitcoin adoption.
|
|
|
|
Worth noting: this guy posts about Bitcoin in his byline a lot, so it's not like this particular article is that unusual. The Bloomberg one is a big deal, though. Matonis writes about Bitcoin all the time - but I mentioned it because his articles get parroted often and this one had a particularly fun headline that might make the rounds. |
|
|
|
Another good news: A Mega reseller hosting.co.uk/mega.php is no longer accepting PayPal and is now accepting Bitcoin.
Source?!? I just checked, it's true! Was hosting.co.uk always accepting BTC or is this new?!  |
|
|
|
Another good news: A Mega reseller hosting.co.uk/mega.php is no longer accepting PayPal and is now accepting Bitcoin.
Source?!? |
|
|
|
Yes, the CB's are doomed and Bitcoin will rise like a Phoenix.
Let's not be hasty. I think Bitcoin is on the way up, but no matter the usefulness of bitcoins, government-issued currency can do certain useful things bitcoins can't. Legally unambiguous settlement of debt or tax obligations, for example. Also, doesn't "rising like a phoenix" imply that Bitcoin will have to die first? $32-->$1.98 was it's death, albeit premature. Hard to call it a death, really, when it was still over 100% higher at that lowest point than it had been at the start of the year  |
|
|
|
Made front page:  |
|
|
|
Pretty darn accurate, I am 90% male myself.
lol |
|
|
|
This rally is pointless, if we hit 19 again we'll just get another smack down.
On what basis do you conclude that? My take is that Bitcoin is still undervalued* and that the only reason we had the shakeout is because enough people believe growth that fast shouldn't be sustainable. If it really is as undervalued as I believe then the an increase in price closer to a realistic evaluation is only waiting on enough people realising how undervalued it still is. Sometimes such things are easier for people on the outside to see than those who may be over-familiar with previous patterns. Given that so many here are not comfortable with fast growth and may be looking at things from the perspective of their purchase price it is not surprising every now and again that we have a good shake out. However there are as far as I can see and as far as others have pointed out quite eloquently, plenty of fundamentals pointing to an exponential growth (at least for some time) which eventually, despite the pressure of those refusing to believe it, is bound to be reflected in the shape of the growth chart. * This whole post is based on the undervalued assumption which is the assumption upon which my trading decisions are made. This is not to say that I deny I may be wrong. It's not what I'm arguing. What I'm questioning is why others who are bullish in the bigger picture are seeing an unlikelihood of buying pressure continuing after the weekend? Speculation is the main factor driving the price, so bitcoin will always be overvalued. If bitcoin was worth 17$ due to supply and demand, speculation would drive the price in the 100's. Yes this may well be true, but there is a difference between legitimate speculation and illegitimate speculation. If the future of Bitcoin is very bright, then speculative froth up to $100 may be justified. If the future of Bitcoin is dim, then any speculation over $17 may be foolish. Of course, all we can do is make informed guesses about the future of this technology. |
|
|
|
- People who likes bitcoins don't usually likes PayPal
Hahahaha yes that is correct!  Thanks for your post, very interesting to see the experience of new community members. And welcome to the greatest project on Earth. |
|
|
|
|
Update: Yes it appears it's an amateur DDoS attack coming from some Tor nodes. We've tweaked some things, and the site is working much better now. Will keep monitoring. Regardless of site availability, bet options always work, since Bitcoin is so badass.
|
|
|
|
I still can't connect to it
it was Running a half hour.... Now the Site is Down... I saw a tweet yesterday that SealsWithClubs was under DDoS... perhaps some bastard is attacking SD as well. Joke is on them, since people don't really need the site at all to play Bets are processing fine. I just won a couple bucks from myself. |
|
|
|
SatoahiDICE IS DOWN! Everyone sell your shares of s.dice Not sure why it was down. Just went back up for me but am monitoring it now. |
|
|
|
Only when those of us confident enough about higher prices hold them can the higher price be sustained.
Exactly. This is what is meant (imo) about the moving from weak hands to strong hands. Yeah - because selling makes you weak - be strong - hold your coins no matter what. That's the kind of argumentation I would expect from Madoff or some scientologist. A strong hand is described by a low selling pressure - which translates into a strong bargaining position. Price is rather irrelevant - it's more about the economic freedom to choose. Exactly. The actual price doesn't matter. It is the sentiment of the investor. Example of a weak shand. Someone too scared to buy into BTC and watched it rise from $10 to $15. The entire time was convinced it would crash to <$10 so they didn't want to buy. Finally due to the spike from $15 to $19 they buy in (capitulation buy). They don't really want to buy in at this price point but their short term plan has failed and they feel "forced" to buy in now or risk missing out on even more price appreciation. This hypothetical investor now has too much invested at too high of a price (relative to their own internal valuation). This investor is just looking for a quick spike to >$20 to sell for a profit. They are very likely to dump on any significant price movement upward which caps their gains however the larger risk is they are too long relative to their internal valuation and thus are very likely to panic sell if the price moves against them. Their impulse purchase, entry point, objective, and internal valuation all conspire to create a scenario where their upside potential is small and they have a large risk of selling in any downside correction. Example of a strong hand. Someone dollar cost averaged with multiple strategic buys between $10 and $15 over the course of months. The investor believes long term the valuation should be north of $50 and thus $1 to $2 price moves are really irrelevant. While this investor may have a large nominal amount invested they don't "need" the funds and are psychologically prepared to suffer a unrealized loss for months of even years. They anticipate significant corrections and have undeployed capital ready to "buy on dips". The investor also accepts there is a non zero chance that the Bitcoin experiment will fail and this speculative investment will be completely worthless. This hypothetical investor has a strong hand. They are more likely to be buying on dips and selling some (but not all) on unrealistic spikes to continually improve their basis. Over time coins (and thus wealth) are more likely to move from weak hands to strong hands. Wow, very well said! |
|
|
|
Keep in mind the time of this original post was right after the huge crash in 2011 where everyone was saying Bitcoin was done for. It echoes the sentiment of the time.
The only people who thought bitcoin was done for, were those only in it for the profit and not informed enough to understand bitcoin's significance. The price of bitcoins does not matter for bitcoin the protocol. I remember those "dark months" after the bubble, where nearly everyone on the forum was spouting the most negative crap. I think people who didn't understand this thing lost a lot of money, and wanted to make the community feel bad about it. Those of us who stuck through it were the ones who took their profit. From weak hands to strong. This capital is too important to be in the hands of those who don't understand the potential of this system. |
|
|
|
Wow that's awful  |
|
|
|
How come there aren't like... five million copycat sites of this yet? All I can think of is BTCDice and it doesn't even seem to work?
I think because it actually is harder to get it right than it seems. You need a deep understanding of the bitcoin protocol as most of the stuff you have to do is beyond the capabilites of the standard client. Besides BTCDice if I remember correctly I think there were one or two additional 1:1 copies that also went down quickly. And SDice will have forever the first-mover advantage, so any 1:1 copy will have a very hard time. If you want to compete with SDice you have to differentiate, not just copy (which is what I am trying with bitbattle.me ). Actually I don't think there's much of a first mover advantage, if a site copied SDice exactly (actually I prefer the old SDice interface, so copy that please), with a well known operator, has reasonable max bet (minimum 200 BTC at the top), and a slightly less house edge (like 1.7%). I'd switch to the new site in a heart beat. Reducing the house edge, even down to something like 1.7%, adds significant new volatility risk for the house. Combine it with high max bets, and the house is liable to go bankrupt unless it has a very large bankroll. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
