I don't deny it is a crash, the problem is in bitcoin there is no baseline for the use-value, it is in fact 0. All you have is, you can say the appreciation was to high in april, and the correction came to quickly.
Can you give me an example of any currency that has a baseline use-value over 0? I was mulling this over as well. Does "legal tender law" create a baseline use-value? (That it must be accepted as payment for a debt or tax.) Other than fiat, there are value based currencies (gold and silver). When I finish my current projects and marry bitcoin to gold and silver, it will be as good as gold. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the advice data_teks. As I said, it would take around 150 coins preordered at 1.4 BTC/ea to cover the fixed and variable costs (including funding the coins). I am not sure I could generate that much in pre-orders, but it is so hard to tell how much of a market is out there! I might just create a quick market survey to find out.
I really wish I had the funding to just bootstrap it myself. I mean, I could if I took out some debt, but I really don't have any room in my budget to support debt payments. We're a single-income family with college loans, a mortgage, and all of that, there's just not that much room there. Still looking around for whatever options present themselves. I've spoken with a few people interested in investing, but haven't had any satisfactory deals work out on that end either.
Put me down for 10 of the first 150. |
|
|
|
Your data is a year old and only considers government entities, excluding private investors both in and out of the US. I remain unconvinced, but I've got PMs, bitcoin, land, and marketable skills so I should be fine if I'm wrong.
That was the data requested, foreign purchases. It includes all foreign.. It is from the treasury report. The latest data is there, in the link provided, but maybe you are in our future. They also have domestic data, but you can look it up yourself, now that you know that it is there. Make the graph that suits you best. NET PURCHASES OF U.S. TREASURY BONDS & NOTES BY MAJOR FOREIGN SECTOR: FOREIGN OFFICIAL INSTITUTIONS, OTHER FOREIGNERS, AND INTERNATIONAL & REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS (IN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS) (NEGATIVE FIGURES INDICATE NET SALES BY FOREIGNERS TO U.S. RESIDENTS OR A NET OUTFLOW OF CAPITAL FROM THE UNITED STATES) TOTAL INTERNATIONAL NET FOREIGN AND FOREIGN OFFICIAL OTHER REGIONAL MONTH PURCHASES INSTITUTIONS FOREIGNERS ORGANIZATIONS ------- --------------- ------------ ------------ --------------- 2013-03 5,289 -16,816 25,750 -3,645 2013-02 2,614 -6,697 8,315 996 2013-01 32,302 53,128 -23,075 2,249 2012-12 29,893 8,366 19,974 1,553 2012-11 28,085 -1,697 30,401 -619 2012-10 12,043 7,841 3,834 368 2012-09 -17,492 919 -22,127 3,716 |
|
|
|
Seriously, can you guys stop feeding this troll? He has absolutely zero understanding of how bitcoin actually works, so he made up a bunch of nonsense in his head, and now he whines on the forums that his imaginary version doesn't work right.
....
This is so full of fail that I'm not sure where to even start. I guess I could say that addresses don't delete themselves once used, but I think my words would fall on (willfully) deaf ears.
The words are not for the troll alone. This criticism is not altogether uncommon and truthfully, 99% of the people on the planet know less than LvM does about bitcoin. Who knows, maybe we are writing his term paper for him (or some one else reading this). Its not horribad to rehash this criticism every once in a while. It won't be the last time. |
|
|
|
I fully support this spike. I would be glad to preorder/invest in/etc to help make this happen.
Count me as a customer/supporter as well. Especially if you will take payment in silver/gold.  If you want to partner. I have the manufacturing/design/distribution elements covered as well for minting, though your project seems to be a better fit for engraving over minting. I may be able to see many of the pitfalls that are ahead for you, if you want to chat about it sometime. |
|
|
|
Correct me if I am wrong, but this price/time betting looks like an unregulated securities derivatives transaction. The Commodities Futures Trading Commission better never find out about this. They may want a piece of the action. Gotta pay the vig, capiche? fugetaboutit.  |
|
|
|
|
I'd be interested in whether trading frequent flier miles for BTC is possible.
|
|
|
|
Jeff, thanks for the response.
Was there some kind of recorded discussion about why it was done this way?
I remember the discussion from about 8 years ago. Recording was specifically prohibited during the discussion. The reasons for that may be obvious. |
|
|
|
You could just start a Kickstarter project where you send them a coin with the hologram/wallet ID/private key in place but the coin is just unfunded; this also makes it so a donation can be a lot less and they still get a coin. Then just leave it to them to fund the coin if they wish. This would drastically reduce your start-up cost and not have to worry about the money transmitter issue.
You would just have to research the cost of your die, custom hologram, accessories, shipping, etc before starting the project so you don't cut yourself off at the knees. At the end of the day, your main cost will just be the initial master die ($200-$1500) and master hologram (high as $5000). After those are done, reorders are pretty cheap. Also, don't pay for a graphic designer. Most companies have in-house ones that will do it for free if you're making your coins with them. They also do it for a living on coins, so they know what will work and will look good.
There are a lot of concerns in design. Not just the look, but it starts there. If you want the coins to circulate, you also have to consider how they will wear. If you are using precious metal, there are different characteristics of each of these, hardness, malleability, melting temp (which relates to pressure when struck in the press), as well as how the metal will flow into the die, and the different sorts of luster you can achieve with different finishes as well as a vast amount of historical design across the world. If you are a collector, or numismatist, you probably have some idea of what works and what doesn't over time. The zinc content in the Indian Rupee for example. It is light and looks fine when new, but wears out fast. With your project, circulation issues may not be a high concern as it will be for my project. My goal is different though. Looking for high volume and to keep them in circulation as much and as long as possible, and not to lose any value when "used". |
|
|
|
|
Whale = big player in the trading.
Some folks have guessed that there is a lot of selling for USD to pay for some ASIC manufacturing costs.
There are other theories that I think are more likely.
|
|
|
|
I think we got a bigger drop incoming.
me too... price adjusting to new difficulty.. Thanks ASIC scumbags! How does difficulty skyrocketing make prices go *down*? I view difficulty basically as a measure of scarcity ... and as we know basic economics dictates scarcity is one part of what makes something valuable. The other is demand. I don't see demand suddenly going away or difficulty somehow causing demand to go down. Maybe I'm totally missing something here. You answered your own question: more ASICs => Scarcity of BTC decreases => price drops Nice work dumbass! Whoa slow down there man... I was just asking a question trying to understand something. So I'll ask more questions and feel free to call me a dumbass [sic]. Nice to see this is how the newbie forum works... How does more ASIC's equal scarcity of BTC decreases? The Bitcoin network adjusts difficulty dynamically... so the more ASIC's that enter the network the hard it becomes to discover a new block and be rewarded the 25 Bitcoins. You have it right. Increased difficulty does not lead to any change in scarcity, it does however lead to a reduced margin value for mining, which does not lead to a price drop. It is happening for another reason entirely. Okay, so I was wrong in my initial statement that difficulty was somehow related to scarcity. But right in a roundabout way I guess. Difficulty is the mechanism by which the Bitcoin network attempts to keep the introduction of new Bitcoin linear. Which actually works well.. http://blockchain.info/charts/total-bitcoinsSo we can say that profitability in mining isn't really directly related to current market prices. This makes much more sense to me. Mining profitability is directly related to market price, or expected market price. But adding more mining does not lead to lower prices. Selling BTC for USD > buying BTC for USD leads to lower prices in USD. |
|
|
|
I think we got a bigger drop incoming.
me too... price adjusting to new difficulty.. Thanks ASIC scumbags! How does difficulty skyrocketing make prices go *down*? I view difficulty basically as a measure of scarcity ... and as we know basic economics dictates scarcity is one part of what makes something valuable. The other is demand. I don't see demand suddenly going away or difficulty somehow causing demand to go down. Maybe I'm totally missing something here. You answered your own question: more ASICs => Scarcity of BTC decreases => price drops Nice work dumbass! Whoa slow down there man... I was just asking a question trying to understand something. So I'll ask more questions and feel free to call me a dumbass [sic]. Nice to see this is how the newbie forum works... How does more ASIC's equal scarcity of BTC decreases? The Bitcoin network adjusts difficulty dynamically... so the more ASIC's that enter the network the hard it becomes to discover a new block and be rewarded the 25 Bitcoins. You have it right. Increased difficulty does not lead to any change in scarcity, it does however lead to a reduced margin value for mining, which does not lead to a price drop. It is happening for another reason entirely. |
|
|
|
On the contrary, forcing me to write "I, [name here], used this bill to pay for a beer in the evening of the 8th of June 2013 in the pub named [insert name]" on each and every bill I use would be a PITA.
The bar will either just have an internal receipt system where the barkeeper enters my purchase + note or even just do a total "We had xxx EUR before opening, we have XXXXX EUR after closing" calculation. Why should I as customer be exposed to their accounting practices? It's in my best interest to consume alcohol an NOT fill out forms or attach messages to my payments!
Also the payment of the change money (coins...) I received back should have come with a "message" - again, I didn't need or want that, as it was and still is simply not possible and also not necessary to follow GAAP in these kind of cash transactions.
If one simply follows recommended usage patterns in Bitcoin and uses each address exactly once, these addresses itself become the "messages" or identifiers for each and every transaction. Also it is not necessary to know where money actually came from (outside of KYC territory) to do proper accounting of it. I still don't see the issue where you cannot do proper accounting with Bitcoins. Just because the internal lingo is a bit off (imagine "account" as a bunch of addresses instead of a single one and you're golden) does not mean that this system is doomed, badly engineered or completely impossible to use in accounting.
You are totally missing the point. Your money and change comes with message. You don't need to write it down of course. You can say it. YOu can point your finger to beer, whatever. Person to person contact is inherent feature of cash and that is why you don't need to write message on notes. You always see person you trade with. It is part of 'cash protocol'. Bitcoin is different and without ability to attach message it is similiar to making cash transaction without ability to see or communicate with other side Right. Why confuse the money with a "payment system"? When you send money online with your bank, you can add all sorts of information to it that are not a part of the money. They are a part of the payment system. It isn't the issue for Bitcoin, it is the issue for the Bitcoin payment system, which includes wallet software and accounting packages and etc |
|
|
|
So you simply agree that you attached message to your payment and not being able to do so would be real PITA. You could probably workaround this issue but hey, why don't just fix it?
On the contrary, forcing me to write "I, [name here], used this bill to pay for a beer in the evening of the 8th of June 2013 in the pub named [insert name]" on each and every bill I use would be a PITA. The bar will either just have an internal receipt system where the barkeeper enters my purchase + note or even just do a total "We had xxx EUR before opening, we have XXXXX EUR after closing" calculation. Why should I as customer be exposed to their accounting practices? It's in my best interest to consume alcohol an NOT fill out forms or attach messages to my payments! Also the payment of the change money (coins...) I received back should have come with a "message" - again, I didn't need or want that, as it was and still is simply not possible and also not necessary to follow GAAP in these kind of cash transactions. If one simply follows recommended usage patterns in Bitcoin and uses each address exactly once, these addresses itself become the "messages" or identifiers for each and every transaction. Also it is not necessary to know where money actually came from (outside of KYC territory) to do proper accounting of it. I still don't see the issue where you cannot do proper accounting with Bitcoins. Just because the internal lingo is a bit off (imagine "account" as a bunch of addresses instead of a single one and you're golden) does not mean that this system is doomed, badly engineered or completely impossible to use in accounting. Right! And then the wallet software or cash register or accounting package can be used to assign whichever variables the particular regulatory regime requires at the time. |
|
|
|
|
Bookmarked bitjoy.org
Consider having clickable elements in a different color or intensity.
|
|
|
|
The simple reason is that you don't fix accounting compliance matters in the currency, you put those fixes in accounting software.
The accounting software stores all the additional fields that are important to it as a part of the transactions.
Then the small business quickbooks software, can send a payment to the larger company SAP software (which has to contend with multi-jurisdictional compliance issues) which further issues payroll in 11 different countries.
The fact that there isn't a currency that does GAAP compliance on its own may be because GAAP rules change, and currency is not meant to change, it is meant to be stable.
The surest way to get a project to fail, is to try to make that project do things that it ought not be doing.
Attaching message to payment is about convenience, not about GAAP compliance. Is bitcoin success depending on NOT FOLLOWING any of GAAP rules? No, but it might depend on ignoring them on occasion. The currency remains the wrong place to put this convenience. Bitcoin AND ALL CURRENCIES are not the place to solve this problem. The right places could be in a bitcoin wallet, the accounting software, or in the financial service provider, or in any of the volatile entities that rise and fall with the constantly changing regulatory environments in the thousands of jurisdictions worldwide. This is not an example of a design flaw, but one of design success. By not attempting to resolve problems outside the domain of the currency, the currency is more resilient and stable. It also provides for the industrious Bitcoin Wallet programmers to localize wallet software that can accommodate the peculiar regulatory issues of the different constituencies. The competitive software market can decide how to send these additional messages to each other through bitmessage, or through some other channel that satisfies the standards. Another issue which can get complicated is the "unit of account" field. Again it is a complicated issue for a multi-jurisdictional currency. And it is best solved in the accounting software, not in the currency. To make the point a more clear, GAAP may not be the prevailing standard for much longer even in the US as there is an increasing tendency to adopt the "principle-based" system of IFRS over the "rule-based" GAAP. If compliance needed to be incorporated into the money, such a change would be less feasible. If the US had to burn and reprint all the dollars to comply with a different standard, that would be a mess indeed. There are many pieces to an economic ecosystem, resolving issues in the proper places helps to keep it tidy, what the OP is suggesting is a way to make it messier rather than cleaner, but it IS a problem to be addressed, just needs to be done in the right places. |
|
|
|
|
Good news for all.
More healthy babies born because of better money.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
