interesting survey being conducted (high sample size, already more than 2000 participants). example of a result:  (click link for all results) it seems 2014 is not a good year at all regarding adoption (only 1% heard about bitcoin in 2014). suprising the price doesn't slide more with ~ $2 million dollars worth of coins being mined each day (and probably quite a large part of them hitting the exchanges) thoughts? I would say this is bs.. if it is a survey of people from the Bitcointalk.org then maybe.... but from the general public... I cannot see it... 99% of all media coverage has been in the past 9 months. It's not from general public. 92% are r/bitcoin readers and 37% have a bitcointalk account. EDIT: click image for the other results |
|
|
|
interesting survey being conducted (high sample size, already more than 2000 participants). example of a result: (click link for all results) it seems 2014 is not a good year at all regarding adoption (only 1% heard about bitcoin in 2014). suprising the price doesn't slide more with ~ $2 million dollars worth of coins being mined each day (and probably quite a large part of them hitting the exchanges) thoughts? |
|
|
|
Why don't you use a trustless escrow service like one of these: - bitrated.com
- bitescrow.org
- coinb.in/multisig/
If you like I can act as an arbitrator (it's technically impossible that I run away with your money) I can only +1 this suggestion. This is bitcoin, why fiddle with this cumbersome trust stuff. For a gentlemans bet, you can just use 2 of 2 multisig and not even use arbitration. |
|
|
|
pro tip regarding this: it is possible to setup a passphrase that is "added" to the seed (you have to enter this on the wallet host). That way the passphrase has to be brute-forced, too (or key-logged beforehand). That passphrase is not stored on trezor. You can even use multiple different ones (resulting in different wallets) for plausible deniability.
AWESOME!!!! THIS IS SOOOOOO GREAT !! yes it is. They really thought this thing through quite well. |
|
|
|
In order to mitigate this risk it is possible to set up your TREZOR multiple times with multiple passphrases.
The goal is to have one “spoof” setup that only holds a few bitcoins or bitcents and one “real” setup that holds your fortune.
better make that 2 spoof setups. ;-) |
|
|
|
Good job! I hope to get one one day, too  What I couldn't find is the answer to the following two questions (or maybe it is buried somewhere in these 84 pages), not even in their official site: 1) What happens if someone steals the device, dumps its memory and bruteforce the 10000 PINs offline? Is the memory protected, like in a Smart Card? Is the encryption key hardened (like after 100,000 rounds of sha256? Or is it a race between the attacker and the owner to move the funds? pro tip regarding this: it is possible to setup a passphrase that is "added" to the seed (you have to enter this on the wallet host). That way the passphrase has to be brute-forced, too (or key-logged beforehand). That passphrase is not stored on trezor. You can even use multiple different ones (resulting in different wallets) for plausible deniability. |
|
|
|
The thing is... I like the white 'clean' look, problem is that white can easily become dirty grey...
don't you love the aged beige of old IBM pcs? |
|
|
|
we will see 5000 this year
next year ATH at least 10000, probably higher (20000 - 50000)
I don't see how $5000 is possible, but I am not a betting man. I don't think 5000 USD/BTC is likely to occur in 2014. I'd be willing to bet €1000 against that. |
|
|
|
hey cypherdoc, I appreciate your recent posting of related news items in here. I think it would add tremendous value if you pasted the title of the news item. |
|
|
|
This is the second time in a few days that I read this. Could you point to studies on the matter? I like that not even Austrians seem to be aware of this.
It's going to have to be forced down there throats, it shakes Mises's regression theorem at the core. At first I couldn't accept it but the earlier linked video sugar coats it and makes it taste nice. The regression theorem is on shaky feet since bitcoin anyway. Actually the regression theorem has nothing to do with Bitcoin. The regression theorem is about physical object substitutes for ledger systems, a.k.a. media of exchange. Bitcoin is not a medium of exchange; it obviates (makes unnecessary) the need for media of exchange. Media of exchange are a low-tech hack for doing what Bitcoin does. Hence the Austrian economists are technically correct when they say that Bitcoin isn't money and that it doesn't satisfy the regression theorem. It isn't money as they define it - that is, it isn't a medium of exchange. Again, it obviates the need for media of exchange. In Austrian parlance, then, it obviates the need for "money." Money in the Austrian sense is just a stopgag measure to deal with the technical difficulties of maintaining large accounting ledgers. That is a result of their starting definitions, though they may want to revise them now that Bitcoin exists. Bitcoin bypasses the entire Regression Theorem framework. Like someone said, Bitcoin and the Regression Theorem gaze at each other knowingly over a chasm. The one has nothing to say about the other. The Austrians who haven't come around yet because of the Regression Theorem are simply getting tripped up by their definitions, as well as by the way the Bitcoin has been marketed so far with the focus on "coins" rather than on the ledger. Thank your for this viewpoint. I will make it my own. Makes loads of sense. |
|
|
|
To go long you need collateral in USD.
Think the latest news update said you can use bitcoin as collateral to "self fund". Correct me if I am wrong. If true, doesn't that seem a tiny bit dangerous? |
|
|
|
So "bits" is proposed as a shorcut for 100 satoshis, the nearest SI prefix.
Get your point, but the nearest one would be nanoBTC: 0.1 satoshis. |
|
|
|
next week or this weekend we will be testing resistance higher up, a key level to watch/support is 640. it is imperative we POWN the 640 mark with gr8 force. make it happen poeple. I have been / will continue to buy so long as we are below 640. ( i will probably be buying higher too, i can not help it, i must buy, i am very bullish ) buy Buy BUY!
I also think that $640 is key. Going past $640 and we will be halfway to the moon! i disagree, 666 is the key.  685 |
|
|
|
|
To go long you need collateral in USD.
|
|
|
|
This is the second time in a few days that I read this. Could you point to studies on the matter? I like that not even Austrians seem to be aware of this.
It's going to have to be forced down there throats, it shakes Mises's regression theorem at the core. At first I couldn't accept it but the earlier linked video sugar coats it and makes it taste nice. The regression theorem is on shaky feet since bitcoin anyway. |
|
|
|
Molecular: These are loans funded by lenders sending hard cash to an unknown company in an unknown jurisdiction with no recourse if things go wrong. Nobody will lend money on that basis without a damn good return.
I'm not complaining about high swap rates. It's a free market. You might wonder why a trader would pay these rates. You'd have to ask them but my guess is convenience and simplicity plus what is the alternative if you want to margin trade btc but don't have ready access to cheap dollar loans. As you say, it's a free market. Well, there's Meta Trader 4 and FX Open. No interest/swaps. Isn't there no swaps on BTC.SX? Not sure. But you do then also have to deal with artificial spreads. But this kind of interest in a sideways market kills positions.It should kill positions. I'm not sure it does, doesn't look like it. Either revolving door (I don't believe it, we should see more volume) or those longs are just holding on desperately. (If they are longs at all) |
|
|
|
Igorr are you ready to admit defeat, or are we still right on the verge?
I too wonder where Igorr is, Bitcoin doesn't look bullish at all, Igorr should be around proclaiming that. Hm. He must be on my ignore list somehwere... maybe JorgeStolfi? |
|
|
|
Molecular: These are loans funded by lenders sending hard cash to an unknown company in an unknown jurisdiction with no recourse if things go wrong. Nobody will lend money on that basis without a damn good return.
I'm not complaining about high swap rates. It's a free market. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
