I went through bitsolo.net FAQ. They say they have found ZERO Bitcoin blocks until now.
They're merge-mining Namecoin and have found ONE Namecoin block.
They found one the other day: https://twitter.com/BitSolo1 I did some research and it was paid to the btc address that supposedly hit the block. Gave me enough confidence to point about 210gh at it for the next 2 or 3 days. the issue isn't so much that the found block was paid it is more that the chances of your miner finding a block are so low that you are essentially wasting money on electricity |
|
|
|
Best option would be using a local trusted exchange, if you have this option in your country. You can ask for reliable local exchanges in the subforum of your language, if you are not from an english-speaking country, or maybe here, if your language is english but your home is not UK or USA.
Or find some friend with bitcoin, but unlikely, since bitcoin still is underground.
Exchanges will not allow you to buy the same day. Here I can transfer or deposit money from a local bank account, then send the deposit's information and they put the money deposited minus fees on my account. Usually happens in the same business day, if I make deposit and send confirmation before noon. Don't know how things are in USA and in other parts of the world. You might need to verify ID, but at least here it quick, and there is at least one exchange that lets you make cash deposits without veryfiying, but with low daily limit, and with no direct bank transfer. What I was saying is that exchanges will make you wait several days after you send them funds while they wait for the funds to clear If you use virwox, you don't need to verify your documents and you can transfer using PayPal instantly. That only applies to PayPal though. They let you transfer money to them using paypal? How do they prevent themselves from getting scammed? They are first converted from the money to SLL, they can prove that the user actually recieved the SLL that was brought. They are established business with their own merchant account. They do not only sell bitcoin and they also have higher fees and lower limits. This sounds very inefficient for someone who wants to buy bitcoin as an investment, or really even as a method of buying something as this would likely take away most if not all of bitcoin's efficiencies. |
|
|
|
Maybe this is a stupid question, but if the Bitcoin Foundation is supposed to support the health of the bitcoin community couldn't they set up a free pool to compete with Ghash? They could limit membership or something. I guess that would really hurt the other pools, but Ghash is already doing that.
There are other 0% fee pools out there. Ghash is very good at marketing and making their stats pages, and website in general look very "pretty" |
|
|
|
He said "a homeless shelter"
You completely changed the topic.
No, that doesn't change my message at all. Giving bitcoin to homeless shelters is not going to spur innovation either. MIT students are far more likely to start some sort of program for the homeless using bitcoin than some overworked shelter which barely has enough manpower to hand out soup and blankets. You are living in a fantasy world. Give it to the students who will create the innovations in the network that will allow it to serve the homeless population well. Homeless shelters are not really known for technological innovation, in case your dumb ass didn't notice. You think anymore than maybe 1% or 2%, if even that, on these boards are using it for innovation? No they are no even spening it. They are holding and bullshitting about how rich and eliet they will be someday. You dumb ass. That is why bitcoin is generally not given away for free on these forums. The people giving away the bitcoin are giving it to people who are likely to innovate as a result of their "gift" |
|
|
|
TBH not sure how far $100k will go to pay developers to maintain and add features to a site like this, if that's his bankroll he needs to be making money pretty quick off the bat.
Good point. Even if he does make that million by 18, he should still go to college. 1 million at that age isn't a lot of money considering how long he has to live. Kid seems pretty damn smart though, so I'm sure he will figure it out. I'd still head to college though, who knows the valuable connections he could make while there. 1,000,000$ well invested at 18 is huge but if he is using it to live, it isn't that much anymore He will meet friends and learn things on life in college College is god for an "experience" but is not necessarily good from an "education" prospective. |
|
|
|
The exchanges will never allow transfers directly on another exchanges. They can't because of the law.
This is not necessarily the law, but rather would make it much more difficulty to do AML due diligence so much exchanges would likely prohibit it. |
|
|
|
Actually bought tickets two weeks back from Expedia. Won't be wasting BTCs for this, though it does sound cool Thank you for your feedback So you can tickets too now? Not only pay for hotel booking Expedia is only booking hotel rooms via bitcoin as of now. You will need to use fiat to pay for airline flights if booking via expedia |
|
|
|
How would you find out who the nodes belong to?
each node could have a BTC address associated with it |
|
|
|
The whole problem is that he was acting in bad faith as he turned assets into BTC. Even is the law is not the same, the judges all over the world do not like this kind of behaviour. At the end it does not matter if he was buying gold or BTC.
Bitcoin is known and has some laws regarding it but alt coins do not and a major law will not be implemented over a civil divorce case, if he is trying to hide his funds Bitcoin is not the way to do that probably darkcoin is. When the marriage is irretrievably broken down, you will be reliable for the money you spent that is not beneficial or commun for the household, buying darkcoin would be the same as hiding cash The fact that it was "irretrievably broken down" at any one point in time can be disputed, and while it may be easy to say that with 20/20 hindsight vision, it would be difficult to say that with certainty in the present |
|
|
|
If bitcoin is "property" and not currency, then it certainly cannot be accused of involvement with money laundering, but that would make it a currency.
That is not true. People often use real estate to (attempt to) launder money all the time and real estate is not in any way currency. The same holds true with gold, diamonds and other "untraceable" assets |
|
|
|
As the public discovers that the current system is unsustainable (if they do) you will hear about paying back or at least tapering (expanding the money+debt supply less than that other political fraction would have done, had they won the election).
But both is out of the question really. It is not possible to taper (reducing the rate of expansion), and it is not possible to increase the interest rate.
Look for tapering talk, and at the same time covert debt expansion. Fake companies issuing bonds, loans parked in bad banks. New forms of securities issued. Government guarantees. Implicit government guaranties. Even a political statement like we have to stop global warning increases lending and thus the money+debt supply.
They have already started to taper the rate of QE. The FED had increased interest rate before and will do it again eventually To keep the rate low, the fed needs to keep buying up unsustainable amount of debt. One only has to observe the interest rate to see if they actually taper rather than sing a good song. There are other forces behind interest rates besides the rate at which the Fed purchases bonds |
|
|
|
I have engaged in alot of arbitrage over the years, though I must say that in BTC and LTC at this point, there is little spread, even with the most advanced bots (i don't think there are really such fast HFT bots in this space yet), you still cannot make money on a non-existent spread.
HFT programs seek to take advantage of spreads in pennies or less. The spreads between exchanges are much higher then that. HFT along with other traders still face the issue of moving funds between exchanges Can't move large sum of money between exchanges without getting attention from your bank and your government. Exactly. HFT on stock exchanges do not need to worry about moving money from exchange to exchange as all trades are settled via their bank account AFAIK |
|
|
|
The recent decrease in unemployment rate is masking people leaving the work force and not applying for jobs anymore and new jobs being low skilled low paid part time jobs
If you're looking for the jobs that'll REALLY be a kicker in America, it's anything that's low-priced, or a daily necessity. There will be lots of Walmarts and McDonald's openings, as people buying said products is very common, and thus the companies can expand their operations rapidly. Daily jobs, however, are anything from plumbers to electricians to guys who can do anything other people don't want to do. I know people that do said jobs, and they get quite a nice salary from the demand for simple things. But I'm not sure how long that will stay for, it all depends on supply and demand. Wallmart products will be increasingly more expensive as the USD depreciates against the Yuan because most Wallmart products are imported, maybe it will change when producing in the States will become more interesting but there will still be a huge cost to support the huge public sector; politicians don't eat for free and don't drive their own cars Walmart also has a huge amount of control over it's suppliers as they are such a large customer. If the US dollar were to weaken too much then Walmart could demand that their suppliers either cut costs, move someplace with a weaker currency or deal strictly in dollars. Labor cost in the US is too expensive. As for putting pressure on suppliers, Walmart can not push the cost down below production cost and labor cost. they could get their suppliers to move production to locations where the cost of production is lower |
|
|
|
In my opinion it would be better for every country to skip USD, it's masively, but this is true meaning of masively inflated currency and its debt is growing every day.
This is good advice to anyone. However, the euro seems to be walking down the same path... The Euro is much worse off. The EU will always need to support it's weaker member countries, while the US has massive taxing and borrowing capabilities. Reason why EU should just kick out the weak member countries. This would threaten the EU as being an ongoing concern. Many countries experience economic recession and this will not necessarily happen at the same time as the rest of the EU. |
|
|
|
The easiest way is signatures, they pay a lot of realiable bitcoin and it is more profitable than faucets.
Also it encourages you to keep informed about bitcoin.
Another good option is investing in a company or starting your own company and accept bitcoin.
can you explain more detail about signatures? Every post that you post will contain something below your post, your "signature" you are able to change your signature whenever you want and when changed your new signature will be displayed on your prior and future posts (until you change your signature again) |
|
|
|
I know you mean well, but you do not understand what you say. In order for BTC to ever help anybody, it needs to first be adopted by people who will actively develop it as a useful tool. Sorry, but that excludes every homeless person I have ever known. I am sure you could hunt down one or two homeless people who would actually start some sort of business or organization based on bitcoin if you gave them $100 of it, but personally, I would bet on the student having a better chance at helping to grow the network. Where could a homeless person even spend it? Seriously, you would not be helping anybody at all if you did that, and, in fact, you would ultimately be hurting the bitcoin network growth and indirectly harming the homeless people by stymieing any sort of benefits that bitcoin might have ever been able to give towards wealth equality. Give the homeless person $100 if you want, but don't do it in bitcoin. We aren't even close to the point in time where that would be helpful for anybody except to make you feel better about yourself. The difference between giving it to a homeless person and giving it to a student as a prestigious university is that a homeless person will ultimately use it to buy drugs/alcohol while the student will get inspired and will be able to further innovate EDIT: one person will be contributing to society while the other will be draining society |
|
|
|
US's broke, no money to bomb Syria and the US "help" to Ukraine is laughable, considering the Canadians sent more aircraft and advisors.
US can't fight a war with anyone - the Empire is gone, it's like the British Empire back in the 1950s.
USA has a president with brains now. Why should we give a rat's ass about Syria, the country is already infighting at this time and so is Ukraine. Why waste our money on it? There is just no reason to fight like a fool is the point when there is no need to. USA are in syria, iraq, libya, and not in north korea, is because of oil venuezla, and iran are next they have lots of oil too The vast majority of wars are based on oil. Almost all wars in history were based on competition over resources of some kind. I agree that US empire has reached its climax and is now collapsing. The US have made far too many enemies through their aggressive "foreign policy". Unfortunately new empires will emerge - hopefully less powerfull ones that will have to respect the rights of weaker nations to a greater extend than the US. The US empire is collapsing because of the fact that we have a president that doesn't have a clue what it is doing in relation to foreign policy (among other things). I would disagree that the US has made too many enemies. Several democracies have been formed shortly after Bush left office (as a result in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but IMO mostly Iraq). We have used our "big sward" to police the world and help countries in need (when they have no way of returning the favor). |
|
|
|
What makes you say that chinese exchanges are profitable? Couldn't they simply be well funded?
For one thing, the fact that there are many of them. Entrepreneurs do not rush to open businesses that are not profitable.  For another, that they have large fancy offices in prime locations, with many staff (Huobi had 50, IIRC). Either Huobi or OKCoin moved to larger offices some months ago. Finally, they are indeed well-funded, but why would anyone invest in them (10 million US$ just in one of them, IIRC) if they were not profitable? There are many laws that strictly forbid operators of ordinary stock exchanges from profiting by exploiting their privileged position -- namely, their knowledge of the order book before it is posted to the public -- to trade against their clients. Those laws do not apply to bitcoin exchanges. Why would the owners not do those things, if they are legal for them? China has a lot of excess capacity in many ways, mostly in commercial real estate but in other ways as well. The fact that they have offices in prime locations with a lot of staff could mean they are well funded. I would find it plausible that Chinese exchanges were trading using their own funds for profit and were making a lot of money. I would also say that this practice can be extremely risky and would make holding funds at these exchanges risky as well. |
|
|
|
The route [ dollars-->bitcoin-->merchandise ] does not need to be cheaper [ than dollars-->merchandise ], as it would not be cheaper, but would essentially cost the same (you could potentially have to "pay" the spread that coinbase charges).
Thanks, that is the problem: the customer who does not have the bitcoins yet will end up paying more by paying with bitcoins than by paying with dollars. If any such customer tries to pay with bitcoin just out of curiosity, he will be disappointed. Therefore those services are not going to help bitcoin adoption; they cater to the bitcoin believers who already have bitcoins and want to spend them. When you buy something with a credit card, the merchant will need to pay fees to the credit card processor for processing the transaction, this will normally translate into between 2%-3% with the rate probably being closer to 3% then 2%. The merchant will need to account for some level of fraud and/or chargebacks that the credit card company will need the company to pay for (these costs can vary widely from industry to industry). The customer will ultimately pay for these costs in the form of higher prices. These costs are essentially hidden from the customer. As of ~5 minutes ago, the buy price on Coinbase was $561.80, the sell price was $559.96, and the spread between the two prices was $1.84 or ~0.32%. Assuming offering such a discount would have a zero effect on sales, a merchant could afford to offer a 3% discount for paying in bitcoin and would have profits stay the same (no net cost). The customer would need to pay the coinbase "fee" of ~0.32% but would still end up paying ~2.68% less then they otherwise would. This is not only a lower net cost to the customer but the costs are more transparent. |
|
|
|
But the customer still has to transfer all the dollars of the multiple purchases to the exchange (or BitPay, Coinbase, etc.) in order to buy the bitcoins. So the route dollars-->bitcoins-->merchandise cannot incur in less fees than dollars-->merchandise.
Besides, the BTC price is still not rising, and may as well fall. At this time, buying bitcoin is not a sensible medium-term investment. That includes buying a bunch of bitcoin now in order to make multiple purchases over the next weeks or months.
At this time, paying with bitcoin only makes sense if one already has bitcoins that were mined or bought for investment, and has decided to sell them. If the merchant actually accepts bitcoin, the route bitcoin-->merchandise would incur in less fees than bitcoin-->dollars-->merchandise. However, most bitcoin payment processors like Bitpay actually do the latter, so the dollar transmission fees must be paid by someone sometime.
The customer could simply go through the KYC of getting verified for instant buys of BTC on coinbase (hassle but no money). The customer could then buy exact amount of BTC needed, send BTC to merchant (less the discount) receive the merchandise. But see the bolded sentence above. In order to buy the BTC one has to send dollars to Coinbase. How could that route be cheaper than sending those dollars directly to the merchant? The merchant is offering a discount for paying in bitcoin. The route does not need to be cheaper, as it would not be cheaper, but would essentially cost the same (you could potentially have to "pay" the spread that coinbase charges). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
