That Litecoin pump was pretty predictable.. People are actually interested in crypto's but bitcoin is just to expensive..
just buy half a bitcoin. This. I still don't know why the litecoin pump is still going on, I expected it to crash after the $4.75 USD mark... any idea how long it'll go? Not even sure why they are trying to pump litecoin... is the sole reason why they are buying LTC instead of BTC just that LTC is cheaper?  People bailing into litecoin because it's not about to be ruined by Gavin.  |
|
|
|
Slow and steady up to $600 300 over the next 3 months.
Confirmed!
Fixed!  |
|
|
|
plz tell me because I'm new & have much to learn about Bitcoin trading.
Since you are "new" I'll let you in on the secret. [...]  I'm predicting we'll stay in this range for the rest of the summer at least... Sideways all summer, enjoy your vacation. |
|
|
|
Guys, I'm new to this trading stuff. Does this sort of thing have a name? It means we're gonna keep chooching, right?  Sorry Sandy, your timeframe is pathetically short. Try to think bigger! Like this!  If you're trying to mimic or ridicule me, at least put in some effort! |
|
|
|
btc is dooooomed?
Maybe.  LOL! You know you've made it when the future president of the United States is twittering about you! You've come a long way, baby. CCFS (choo choo forever sideways)  |
|
|
|
Not to ruin the plot... but it's over already. The panic was less than impressive. Of course. It was just an accident, some core devs were awake watching anxiously the onset of BIP66, the two pools involved cooperated promptly, etc.. That was not an attack: someone just sneezed. See, the building stopped shaking already. Right. If bitcoin can survive the scorn and ridicule of a Brazilian professor, it can survive this little kerfuffle. This will just be used as ammo in the argument against larger blocks (rightly so, imo) |
|
|
|
I just did an estimate of the "Bitcoin National Debt" (BND), which is the minimum amount that the bitcoin system "owes" to the people who are holding bitcoins. It is between 483 million and 17.2 billion USD.
For example, someone who bought 10 BTC a year ago must have paid close to 600 $/Ƀ, the market price at that time. Therefore, he must be expecting to get at least 6600 $ if he were to sell or spend those bitcoins -- the 6000 $ that he invested, plus 10%/year of return. By doing that math for every bitcoin and adding the results we would get the BND.
Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing when any given lump of bitcoin was bought by its current owner. The purchase may not even have been recorded in the blockchain (e.g. if it was bought in an exchange and left there). We can only assume that the last purchase of a bitcoin that was mined on day X will (almost) surely have occurred on date X or after that. Therefore, by looking at the minimum and maximum price in that interval, we can get uper and lower bounds to the expectations of its owner.
For example, the 25 bitcoins that were mined on 2014-04-01 (when the price was ~450) may have been bought by their present owner(s) on 2014-06-01 (when the price was at its highest, ~680) or on 2015-01-14 (when the price was at its lowest, ~150). So, the current owners of those bitcoins, even if they are happy with a 10%/year return on investment, now expect to get from them between 25 × 150 $ and 25 × 680 $ plus the 10%/year.
I may post more details later if I get the time.
Too many variables to draw reliable conclusions concerning cause and effect, but could make for interesting data points in themselves. "National debt" is wrong, even with tongue firmly in cheek, a debt is a promise to repay... which bitcoin doesn't promise. The exchange rate volatility risk is foisted upon current owners and traders (not rights to future labor and income), and rightly so. Maybe "bagholder pain index" or BPI can be produced, at least partially, with this data. What happens to "bagholder pain index" when price exceeds $1200 ? Do we reach negative pain? Just like negative interest rates? |
|
|
|
No I am saying it can be mathematically proven that the controlling group can't have more than X% of the premine after the ICO. There is something clever I haven't revealed (as usual   ).
. not this again... Is it possible to prove that someone is full of shit if he never reveals the secret of the shit he is full of? |
|
|
|
I thought I had 'big brass ones' just hoarding all my LTC you Sir have such big brass ones you must 'clank' when you cross your legs...  I sir salute you! and shall cower in the LTC trenches as you march towards the sound of ASIC guns (shudder soooo scary) I'm just playing with house money, take a shot here and there and hope it pans out. I'm curious though, how much litecoin per month per titan are you getting? I think the Neptune were down to about 1.5 btc per month each before summer heat got to me and I turned them off. |
|
|
|
He said then that the ban is on any transactions, including payments for hotel accommodation, flights, rental property and the payment of wages, as well as fixed prices in any other currency except the Indonesian rupiah. Breaking the law can be punished with imprisonment of up to a year or a fine of $15,000. Declare fixing prices using other currency illegal, punishable by a fine of fixed price in other currency. Brilliant! |
|
|
|
well we've broken into the 260's. Onward and upward fellow bitcoiners
Too much, too soon, too fast... Slow down you maniacs, lol. |
|
|
|
price near to hit 260 $ , is it safe now to sell bitcoins or have to wait some more time before it achieves some peaks.
Sell now! Quickly! Before these maniacs take us to the moon! Seriously, you all need to settle down now or you'll ruin my "sideways all summer" prediction.  |
|
|
|
it's not blind trust. do you follow Reddit and other sources? there have been plenty of analyses of the scaling issue. i've also looked at Gavin's calcs and simulation. the Tradeblock analyses are good. basically, there's lots of good info on scaling if you're willing to look around. it should work out just fine. and yes, i trust Gavin way more than the BS devs. all the character assassinations don't help as well.
@thezerg how did this new coin achieve greater security and trust than bitcoin? How did "silver" become more trusted than "gold"?
I do not understand the fear, or the reason for it.
his theory depends on Bitcoin simply failing to execute Satoshi's vision. I do not follow reddit. If I'm directed to an interesting post I'll check it out, but I do not like the format. If you've looked into it and you're confident that it's a better choice, then that's good. I always appreciate considering an informed opinion. But when you're flat out trolling and spreading FUD like your comment from earlier then you forfeit any semblance of respect. |
|
|
|
@thezerg how did this new coin achieve greater security and trust than bitcoin? How did "silver" become more trusted than "gold"?
That is for me to know and for you to find out If you know how to spin lead into gold, why do you bother to goad me? |
|
|
|
you may be the one missing something.
what i think he was saying is that if Cripplecoin is allowed to remain in place even with the addition of SC's or LN, it won't be able to compete with a lighter nimble altcoin that has no such block limit. reason being, that some feel that SC's or LN, esp if Blockstream is allowed to continue it's financial confliction, will result in a centralized, settlement level, high tx value type unusable cryptocurrency only for institutions, geeks, and wealthy elite. that is, if it doesn't just outright die from small niche use.
a truly scalable Bitcoin knock off w/o this confliction and centralization might be able to truly take off and fund the masses even at the level of microtx's.
let's hope this isn't what has to happen.
This is what gives me the fear: This coin provides an integrated BTC wallet on both PC and phone, simply by forking existing open source Bitcoin wallets and adding "new coin" code (so this is not much harder than creating standalone "new coin" wallets). The wallet you make trustless anonymously exchanges between new coin and BTC. This is very easy to do technically: you add a special txn to the new coin which says "only valid if there is a Bitcoin TXN to this public address with N confirmations". Seller of new coin issues this its first, the Bitcoin seller issues its txn when it sees the new coin txn. If the Bitcoin seller's txn is not issued or confirmed, the new coin txn is invalidated (it remains on the new coin blockchain but becomes a no-op). @doc it seems I'm missing something indeed... You seem to assume that much bad stuff can happen from blocksteam and sc and ln and all this stuff, but none of that can happen unless we increase the block size, so this would seem to invite caution when assessing changes that increase the block size. -- yet you blindly trust and follow and support Mike Hearn and Gavin Andreessen's proposal to recklessly increase the blocksize? @thezerg how did this new coin achieve greater security and trust than bitcoin? How did "silver" become more trusted than "gold"? I do not understand the fear, or the reason for it. |
|
|
|
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSL5N0ZE0EF20150628?irpc=932"Banks will be closed and the stock market shut all week, and there will be a daily 60 euro limit on cash withdrawals from cash machines, which will reopen on Tuesday. Capital controls are likely to last for many months at least."I read right over that comment the first time, but on second glance I have a question: Capital controls for months?! Is this normal? Was it to be expected? I mean, everything's conjecture and rumor at this point... I've even heard bank holiday might last all week... but months!? Hoping for the best possible outcome, best of luck through this, you're effectively acting like the canary in the coal mine right now. Certainly the center of attention at the moment...
|
|
|
|
Shanghai composite collapsing.
Links help greatly if you're trying to share information. |
|
|
|
Once upon a time when gold was used as currency, silver was also used because you couldn't reasonably mint coin small enough to pay for things like a meal (I heard that this is also why the "bar tab" was invented -- when even silver became too valuable).
With Bitcoin, it seems like 1 Satoshi is small enough to ensure that a "silver to bitcoin's gold" does not happen. However, I think that this is untrue; 1 Satoshi is analogous to 1 atom of gold. The actual minimum bitcoin transfer can be estimated by the point where is becomes inconvenient or expensive to make the transfer. This varies by the individual but I feel it would be a transaction fee of somewhere between 1 and 10 percent.
So the Satoshi is not the smallest effective Bitcoin unit. The smallest practical bitcoin unit is something between 10 and 100 times the transaction fee.
I think that the result of an unscaled bitcoin blockchain is that small-payment niche will open up, allowing a scalable altcoin blockchain to gain market share (lightning network, centralized solutions, and sidechains may block this niche, to an unknown extent -- but note they didn't for gold). This cryptocurrency will begin as the "silver to bitcoin's gold", and a clever implementation might ride Bitcoin's coat-tails to adoption. If Bitcoin becomes extremely successful this new cryptocurrency will overtake it in daily use just like silver overtook gold. But what advantages will Bitcoin have over this new currency? Gold's advantage was essentially its greater value to volume (and weight) ratio. But (as with any crypto-currency), you'll be able to carry and transact large quantities of this new cryptocurrency just as easily as small. So Bitcoin will have no advantage. The new cryptocurrency will ultimately dominate transactions and market cap.
What do you think about this reasoning?
Very close, but no cigar. You miss the security gap. This is the real selling point for bitcoin. Silver and gold had very similar security profiles, with gold only being ever-so-slightly better (the value per weight). In crypto, each coin that has it's own chain has a distinctly different security profile. At this point, bitcoin is in the lead when it comes to security of the ledger. Unless this other coin offers better security, or at least very close to equal security, the scenario you theorize is not possible. It could happen, maybe, someday, but not currently possible. |
|
|
|
TOKYO, June 29 (Reuters) - The euro fell almost 2 percent and share prices tumbled across Asia on Monday as Greece looked set to default on its debt repayment this week, forcing Athens to impose capital controls to halt bank runs. Don't you love how they use the term "bank runs" instead of "lack of confidence"? This subconsciously puts the blame on the ones trying to retrieve their money rather than the bank that doesn't have their money. A simple narrative: "if it weren't for all these stupid Greeks lining up at the ATM'S there would be no problem." Same story with all fractional reserve shell games. Also... where are the "greece capital controls - bitcoin users not affected" memes well you know how fast they are going to ban buying bitcoin in europe once they see people starting to avoiding capital controls via bitcoin? You better do not want this to happen... Let Bitcoin do baby steps and not let it fall on it's head and get seriously hurt... Baby steps indeed, if possible. "As slow as possible for as long as possible." |
|
|
|
To any mining pool operators out there reading,
next year July your mining pool income will be cut in half by the block halving.
Are you doing ok cypher? You seem to be increasingly hyperbolic and desperate in your comments. This one in particular is exceedingly misleading and smells like a blatant attempt to use unfounded fear, uncertainty, and doubt to make your case and influence others. You do of course realize that if the price were to rise to 500 by next July their income will remain precisely the same as it is today? Luckily, I'm sure the miners understand the economics of mining well enough that they will not be taking your misguided advice. And if it doesn't rise, what's your long term plan for miners to supplement the lost block reward income? If the price does not rise, there's no extra security needed to protect the system... Why pay more to defend a system that's not increasing in value? We see this market force in action right now as the low prices have caused the global hash rate to stagnate. My long term plan is that users will be willing to pay increasing fees due to scarcity of embedding information in the most secure ledger on the planet. When you propose changes to a system that may have an effect on the security profile of such a system, you should expect serious opposition. a goal of increasing fees is a worthy goal. but when you propose to maintain a 1MB choke that was always meant to be a DoS protection mechanism to be removed when Bitcoin is ready, then YOU should expect serious opposition. Aha thank you. Now I understand the vehemence and panic that I sense from most of the people that are trying to push for bigger blocks. The problem here is that you cannot force me to accept your fork; you can't force me to accept your blocks; you can't force me to accept your unspent transactions. You. can't. force. me. You must convince me, but since you lack sufficient logical argument to convince, you resort to coercion, or as in your original post that ruffled my feathers , down right threats. As I posted earlier I am open to compromise or negotiation, and I think that eventually a rational solution will find consensus and bitcoin will move on. I just find the aggressive posturing and fear-mongering methods of many of the people pushing for bigger blocks to be tiresome, and frankly, childish. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
