Mining? With node.js?
bwahaha, it must be so SLOW!
I guess you don't know that much about mining. Dood node.js is JAVASCRIPT. Do you have any idea how slow that language is? The only way it would get within a tenth of C++ performance is if the C++ were executed by the node.js server. In which case you could just run the mining software standalone and save time and the potential to get exploited. But then you wouldn't be able to make trollish claims on forums.... It appears to me that you are assuming that the hashing was done on a CPU with Javascript, and then you are comparing that to hashing done on a CPU with C++, as if that is any better. Maybe I'm wrong, but then I don't get your point. |
|
|
|
Can anyone help me ...I received one real monero coin today morning...but I don't know how to use that so please help me
Don't use it. Hold it. Like all physical crypto coins, the coin is worth more than just the crypto it holds because it is collectible. |
|
|
|
Utter nonsense if you ask me, what does it mean they sent cheques asking to buy bitcoins? who was giving money anyways in this story?
My guess is that it works like this: The victim deposits the checks into their own account, and then buys bitcoins with their own money and sends the bitcoins to the scammers. Then the checks bounce. Are you telling me that residents of a first world country were so naive to buy into the usual scam ponzi attempts?
Yes. There are naive people in every country. |
|
|
|
|
When a miner mines a block, they get a reward. The block reward consists of two parts: the subsidy and the transaction fees. Currently, the subsidy is 12.5 BTC and transaction fees are a few BTC.
The subsidy is the source of new bitcoins. It halves every year until it reaches 0 satoshis after another 120 years or so. After the subsidy runs out, miners will still get transaction fees.
|
|
|
|
Mining? With node.js?
bwahaha, it must be so SLOW!
I guess you don't know that much about mining. |
|
|
|
President elect Jihan Wu will guarantee that your blocks remain unfull, so your transactions are fast and cheap. Centralization? don't worry, you are safe in Jihan's hands.
Please don't dump your Reddit shit on this site. I don't care if people piss all over each other on Reddit, but I don't like it here. |
|
|
|
exchange
ɪksˈtʃeɪndʒ,ɛksˈtʃeɪndʒ
noun
1.
an act of giving one thing and receiving another (especially of the same kind) in return.
2.
the changing of money to its equivalent in the currency of another country.
By the first definition and arguably by the second it is definitely an exchange. This pedantic argument over a word is not going to change Bitcoin and I see this is as an attempt to discredit its legitimacy.
Keep in mind that the original interview was in Chinese ( http://www.yicai.com/news/5245112.html) and this article is reporting on the Chinese article, probably using a Google translation to English. While Google translates 交易所 to "exchange" and 交易平台 to "trading platform", these terms have additional meanings that aren't not expressed in the words "exchange" and "trading platform". |
|
|
|
... If i'm a supplier and the price is to low for me to sell and i hold my good back for that reason than they are not part of the quantity for this particular moment and price. This is what i mean by saying that if i hold my Coins, they are not for sale now and therefor not part of the supply. ...
Whether or not they are on an exchange and in the order book is not important because if the price is right, you would put them on the exchange and sell them at that price. Therefore, your coins are on the supply curve and they are part of the supply. |
|
|
|
Although a considerable amount of those coins is locked away by holders, the number of traded coins is still higher then the daily mined coins.
Coins that are "locked away by holders" are still part of the supply. Saying that coins are "locked away" by someone is just saying that the exchange rate (or "price") for those coins isn't high enough yet for those "holders" to sell. That is true of EVERYONE that has a higher "sell" price on an orderbook than the current exchange price. There is nothing special about "holders" that removes their coins from the supply side of supply-and-demand. If the demand is high enough and the price is high enough, then those holders will eventually either sell or use their bitcoins. In my opinion Supply and demand are always bond to a price. What you describe would mean that all 16 million Bitcoins (minus timelocked once and the one with lost private key and such) are supply. By the same logic there is also a demand for all the Coins, as i would buy them all at the price of 0.01 cent per coin. So we have 100% demand and 100% supply. It makes more sense to me if we take a price and a certain time and say that for this price and time there is a certain supply and demand. And if someone is holding and the price is to low, then he is not part of the supply right now. In Economics, the term "supply and demand" refers to two curves -- the "supply" curve and the "demand" curve. The axes of the curves are price and quantity. Where the two curves intersect is an equilibrium point, and it determines the price. You refer to "supply" and "demand" as if they are numbers, but they are curves. Note that there can be a third axis: time. Over time, the supply and demand curves can change. The changes to the supply and demand curves result in movement of the equilibrium point, and thus changes in the price over time. Here is an Investopedia explanation with a lot more detail: Economics Basics: Supply and DemandNow, there is another "supply", which seems to cause a lot of confusion. It is the "money supply". That is the total number of bitcoins that can be spent. It is a number and it is not the same as the "supply" in "supply and demand"; however, it is related. The coins in the supply curve make up the total number of spendable coins, which is the "money supply". I hope this helps you understand what DannyHamilton wrote. FYI, I don't know who DannyHamilton is, how old (s)he is, or what kind of background (s)he has, but I can say that over the years (s)he has demonstrated to me a solid knowledge of both Bitcoin and Economics. |
|
|
|
B2: Yes and no. You will have to pay transfer(miners)-fee, so it will be less than 1 BTC.
Let me add to this: NO NO NO! You can mess up your change address if you don't know what you're doing, so just swipe the entire balance (and pay a transaction fee for this) instead of importing the private key. I like using Mycelium Android wallet, it's very easy to import from the QR-code. it's sweep, not swipe, though I guess you can use whichever one you want. |
|
|
|
I am only using one right now and that is Genesis Mining. I've been with them for over a year. I'm testing a new
site, [name of probable scam], but I've only been with them for a week or two so I can't speak to their legitimacy just yet.
Regarding Genesis Mining: What was the cost of your mining contracts, and how much have they paid (in BTC, please)? I bought .06 btc worth of sha256 hashing power (approx 0.35 Th/s) and they have paid out 0.04 BTC so far. So, you have lost 30% so far. Do you expect to break even, given the ever-rising difficulty? My mining calculator shows that you will break even only if the difficulty rises less than 2.5% each period for the next 18 months. Unfortunately, it has been rising at the rate of about 10% so far this year, which means that your mining fees will exceed your revenue in about 4 months, and you will never break even. Are your results the same? As long as they don't shut down anytime soon, I will eventually break even. It's certainly not a fast ROI by any stretch. I'm curious why you invest in cloud mining when your goal is to just break even. |
|
|
|
I am only using one right now and that is Genesis Mining. I've been with them for over a year. I'm testing a new
site, [name of probable scam], but I've only been with them for a week or two so I can't speak to their legitimacy just yet.
Regarding Genesis Mining: What was the cost of your mining contracts, and how much have they paid (in BTC, please)? I bought .06 btc worth of sha256 hashing power (approx 0.35 Th/s) and they have paid out 0.04 BTC so far. So, you have lost 30% so far. Do you expect to break even, given the ever-rising difficulty? My mining calculator shows that you will break even only if the difficulty rises less than 2.5% each period for the next 18 months. Unfortunately, it has been rising at the rate of about 10% so far this year, which means that your mining fees will exceed your revenue in about 4 months, and you will never break even. Are your results the same? |
|
|
|
I would like to add one more thing to the previous answers. Of course Demand and Supply is one main reason, but you should also have one thing in mind. The miners. They are mining or producing the Bitcoins and therefore the supply. ...
That is a common fallacy. Bitcoins are not consumed, so the supply includes all bitcoins, not just the ones created in the last ten minutes. Furthermore, the number of new bitcoins is a small fraction of the total trade volume, so it is difficult to claim that miners have much influence on the price. I beg to differ. You are right that Bitcoin isn't something that gets used up and the number of newly mined coins is way lower then the total number of mined Bitcoins. More or less 1800 new coins a mined every day which is nothing compared to the 16 million Bitcoins that are already out there. Although a considerable amount of those coins is locked away by holders, the number of traded coins is still higher then the daily mined coins. Still we will look at the miners to find the right price. If you want to buy or sell coins then you will check the offer you got and compare it to the market price. The market price orients itselfs on the cost of mining. If you want to buy then you would not buy at a higher price then the miners are asking for as you don't want to overpay. Also a seller would not sell at a lower price then what miners ask for or he would pass an opportunity to make more money. It is almost the same with cars. almost the same, because these will eventually get used up. This should also work if we only consider new cars. The number of cars that exist is bigger then the daily production and buying or selling one we always orient on the price the producer asks for. You wouldn't pay more and a dealer wouldn't want to sell for less. Miners as a group have little to no influence on the price given their small portion of the market supply. Why would 5% of the market determine the price for the other 95% of the market when there is no distinction between market participants? The car market cannot be compared to bitcoins because miners produce the same number of bitcoins regardless of the price or profit, but car production (and thus supply) depends on price and profit. Furthermore, there is a difference between a new car and a used car, whereas there is no difference between a new bitcoin and a bitcoin mined 7 years ago. |
|
|
|
I am only using one right now and that is Genesis Mining. I've been with them for over a year. I'm testing a new
site, [name of probable scam], but I've only been with them for a week or two so I can't speak to their legitimacy just yet.
Regarding Genesis Mining: What was the cost of your mining contracts, and how much have they paid (in BTC, please)? |
|
|
|
How is the value of bitcoin calculated?
The value is not "calculated", it is reported. The price you see is generally the price of the last trade on some exchange somewhere. Sometimes, the reported price is an average of the prices reported by several exchanges. That's why you see different prices in different places. I would like to add one more thing to the previous answers. Of course Demand and Supply is one main reason, but you should also have one thing in mind. The miners. They are mining or producing the Bitcoins and therefore the supply. ...
That is a common fallacy. Bitcoins are not consumed, so the supply includes all bitcoins, not just the ones created in the last ten minutes. Furthermore, the number of new bitcoins is a small fraction of the total trade volume, so it is difficult to claim that miners have much influence on the price. |
|
|
|
if I by reading the MACD chart in sight
MACD is fundamentally flawed. It contains no information about future prices, just noise. |
|
|
|
No mention of Bitcoin, except in passing: The recent booming of CNY trade volume on localbitcoins is hailed by many as the doomsday of centralized exchanges.
|
|
|
|
|
Articles about forum posts are stupid.
|
|
|
|
...
So thinking there going to be always full blocks filled up to maximum capacity is wrong, its the miners who decide what transactions to add and some define spam as for example under 25 Satoshi/byte transaction not worth adding even if there is available space.
Why wouldn't a miner include a 25 s/b transaction? It certainly doesn't cost them that much to include it. Why wouldn't it be worth including it? Because during some days/hours people send more transactions (peak times), it make sense to increase block sizes above 1MB, so the Bitcoin user experience is good even at peak times.
In that case, it would be natural for the fees to be higher during times of high demand and lower during times of low demand. No change of block size is necessary. |
|
|
|
|
My guess is that they are testing propagation times or orphan rates of blocks of different sizes.
BTW, there is no such thing as "congestion". If someone's transaction is not being included in a block, it is not because there is "congestion" blocking their transaction. It is because other people are willing to pay more to get their blocks included sooner. Paying more to get a transaction included can hardly be called "congestion" or even "spam".
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
