LOL this bitch. Guessing ethnicities over the internet, how cute. You even think to make petulant assumptions about which one I am supposed to be  Tell me again how I am supposed to be a redneck Definitely proved my point about you being an ignorant fool who thinks having a mouth means having valued opinions. Ignorant fool? Coming from you - thanks.  After I inferred your attitude directly from your words and stated the obvious, you got mouthy and tried to jump to conclusions about who I am Yes, I think the typical ignorance and childish shallow hypocrisy of those who think they know something are obvious to anyone China demanded unequal trade, much like today, and was dominated and subjugated for its ignorance. They were not 'selling tea' - they were also barring numerous goods from other nations to protect their merchants while interfering with direct government force on anything that would bring foreigners serious profit. They were taught a lesson for that disrespect. A well deserved punishment for someone who was just asking for it. Interesting to see how they never learned and are repeating the same mistake today. Okay. Whatever dude. I'm sure words like "lesson" "disrespect" "punishment" has meaning in your world. Most probably coz you're a gimp. For the rest of us, we wear clothes, shoes, underpants all made in China. I recall recently PM Cameron practically going to China to beg for trade and investment. Such effective task masters the Brits. Many British lessons. Wow. |
|
|
|
Didn't the Brits fuck most of Africa as well? Then they fucked over the Muricans or at least tried to but lost. The Brits also tried to fuck over the Maoris in NZ but they fucked the Brits back just as hard. As I said, the Brits were just major fuckers. Is there anyone the Brits did not fuck with? Anyone at all?!?  |
|
|
|
LOL this bitch. Guessing ethnicities over the internet, how cute. You even think to make petulant assumptions about which one I am supposed to be Tell me again how I am supposed to be a redneck Definitely proved my point about you being an ignorant fool who thinks having a mouth means having valued opinions. Ignorant fool? Coming from you - thanks. |
|
|
|
Agree. China never invaded anyone. It was the Brits, Portuguese, Dutch, Spanish that did all the invading. Plus Japan in WW2. Ok, China may have invaded Tibet but that's about it.
China wants to sell you stuff so they can buy oil and iron ore to build empty apartments and feel rich. The Indians want to work in your airports and IT companies. No one is doing any invading as long as the Europeans back off on their superiority mindset and colonial attitudes. If the Germans don't try to wipe out the Russians again, everything will be fine.
Actually, the last major war was the Muricans in the Middle East.
What ignorance. Typical orientalist who thinks grass is greener on the other side. China has been invading and trying to subjugate its neighbors since the beginning of its history. No wonder the mongols and viets are pissed to this day. There's a reason why Genghis Khan hated the han chinese on a personal level. Don't even try to mention the turkish people of uyghr ancestry, their land, and Tibet. Those existed before chinese civilization even came into being. 'May have invaded'? What an obvious lie. They even try to whitewash history by not so subtly changing the wikipedia article title into "Incorporation of Tibet". It was originally Invasion of Tibet. What about korea, always with those chinese trying to make it into a tributary state. China always regarded the japs as 'those island monkies' and 'uncivilized miscreants'. Well, they were rightfully taught a lesson about that during WW2. During the first serious contact with the British Empire, chinese emperor displayed characteristic ignorance and actually demanded the ambassador kowtow. Brits fucked them good for showing such disrespect. 'Superiority Complex'? The fuck you on about? Your tone is full of ignorant biases and you actually think to tell others what they are thinking, while lying about your own attitude which isn't foolin anyone. 'China never invaded anyone'. LOL you can't make this shit up. China was rightfully taught many lessons about disrespecting its neighbors. Too bad they never learned from them. You should learn too, before you start writing checks your mouth can't cash in. You obviously don't have what it takes to do some honest self assessment. Orientalist? Wow... Good one buddy. Keep it up, show us how red your neck really is. BTW, the Brits were selling opium to China for gold and silver which the Chinese earned by selling tea. Then the Brits fucked over the Indians too. Let's not forget Malaysia and Singapore as well. Oh yeah, and the Aborigines in Australia. The Brits fucked them over to. All I can say is the Brits were just a bunch of fuckers. |
|
|
|
I don't think Europeans even feel like invading anyone any more. When was the last time a western European invaded anyone? WWII? I think you forgot to put "Germany" on that list of invading European countries - sure, they didn't do much in Africa or South American but they did a right old job in Europe  Russia come to think of it as well. You're right about the Germans. I added them postscript. Russia was actually only invading to build a buffer between it and Germany. Nowadays Russia is more interested in selling oil and gas than to invade. One potential problem area is Southern Europe. Won't take much to push Greece, Portugal, Spain or Italy into a Euro exit. |
|
|
|
WWWIII, China comes to collect their debt!
Move the civilians to the mountains now and position the troops on the coast, stat!
Lol Why position troops on the coast when we've already given them thousands of acres everywhere across the USA? They even have "economic zones" where they pay no taxes and operate under the rule of Chinese law. Similar to Native American reservations except owned by China... The American Military is nothing compared to the strength of the American people when it comes to the thought of any type of homeland invasion... I wouldn't want to be on the wrong side of that force. China knows it, the world knows it... You can't take over America by force until you've taken over America by mind... Unless you can convince Americans not to fight you can't win in conventional warfare. It's just not going to happen... P.S This isn't one of those "America the proud" BS posts. America pretty much sucks right now but certain things like an invasion would tend to bring Americans to a flash boil... Why are people going on about an invasion of America? Are you guys that paranoid? An invasion from space is more likely Agree. China never invaded anyone. It was the Brits, Portuguese, Dutch, Spanish that did all the invading. Plus Japan in WW2. Ok, China may have invaded Tibet but that's about it. China wants to sell you stuff so they can buy oil and iron ore to build empty apartments and feel rich. The Indians want to work in your airports and IT companies. No one is doing any invading as long as the Europeans back off on their superiority mindset and colonial attitudes. If the Germans don't try to wipe out the Russians again, everything will be fine. Actually, the last major war was the Muricans in the Middle East. |
|
|
|
your assuming that all other currencies are rejected worldwide and bitcoin emerges the dominant and sole means of currency with that.... which i really dont think is that likely as long as there is real and solid GOLD SILVER AND OTHER PRECIOUS METALS available on the planet.
This is true. But it will be something like this: "Sir, please scan your right forearm here so we can buy that gold from you." It is not inconceivable that every baby will have its DNA stored on a decentralised protocol for id purposes. The justifications are; the protocol is decentralised so no one controls it, it will be pseudonymous or even private, it will ensure that the person transacting is the right person. So for a transaction to occur, you would need your private key plus your dna signature. In theory it should not be particularly impossible to recognize individuals by their genetics then all kinds of interesting things become possible. Among them, designing something like a 100% mortality illness to which only a specific individual was susceptible. In that case it would be fairly straightforward to issue and execute capital punishment order without the hassle of trying to round someone up. A slight modification would be to have a cure for the otherwise terminal illness in which case anyone who was wanted by the authorities would be pretty likely to turn himself/herself in. Should they still refuse to do so the problem will solve itself. Of course what we'll need is a fairly complete catalog of every individual's genetic material and a reasonable mapping...I'm sure nobody is working on that. (Oh ya...best not to be an identical twin if it can be avoided...) Whoa... I'll counter that with genetic engineering via gene doping. |
|
|
|
your assuming that all other currencies are rejected worldwide and bitcoin emerges the dominant and sole means of currency with that.... which i really dont think is that likely as long as there is real and solid GOLD SILVER AND OTHER PRECIOUS METALS available on the planet.
This is true. But it will be something like this: "Sir, please scan your right forearm here so we can buy that gold from you." It is not inconceivable that every baby will have its DNA stored on a decentralised protocol for id purposes. The justifications are; the protocol is decentralised so no one controls it, it will be pseudonymous or even private, it will ensure that the person transacting is the right person. So for a transaction to occur, you would need your private key plus your dna signature. |
|
|
|
144 blocks per day
52560 blocks per year
1314000 BTC per year
The blocks have been mined at a substantially faster rate than the ideal of 6 blocks per hour. I think the average is more like 7.5 blocks per hour, which pencils out to 65,700 blocks per year and 1,642,500 btc per year. Using the 2.5% to 25% range, I get 0.10 to 1.02 bitcoins per share in potential mining revenue. Brilliant analysis guys. So, if someone bought at 0.3 they would almost be guaranteeing themselves a 30% to a 300% payoff? That is a really good return, IMHO. Should have done the maths a few weeks earlier! Anyway, I don't believe AM cannot mine 400,000 Btc over its lifetime from this point forward, which implies min of 1 Btc per share. Also, I can't see AM stopping at 2.5% of network with the most energy efficient chips (and possibly cheapest chips). I can't see AM stopping at anything less than 40% of network assuming the most energy efficient chips (unless they are selling chips at a higher margin compared to mining. Either way AM wins). Very bullish, and as a shareholder, I share the dream. But until we see a working chip, its just a dream. I should add risks too: 1. Someone develops an even more efficient chip/mining process 2. FC walks away 3. Something happens to FC 4. Someone steals chip design 5. AM goes private or is acquired |
|
|
|
144 blocks per day
52560 blocks per year
1314000 BTC per year
The blocks have been mined at a substantially faster rate than the ideal of 6 blocks per hour. I think the average is more like 7.5 blocks per hour, which pencils out to 65,700 blocks per year and 1,642,500 btc per year. Using the 2.5% to 25% range, I get 0.10 to 1.02 bitcoins per share in potential mining revenue. Brilliant analysis guys. So, if someone bought at 0.3 they would almost be guaranteeing themselves a 30% to a 300% payoff? That is a really good return, IMHO. Should have done the maths a few weeks earlier! Anyway, I don't believe AM cannot mine 400,000 Btc over its lifetime from this point forward, which implies min of 1 Btc per share. Also, I can't see AM stopping at 2.5% of network with the most energy efficient chips (and possibly cheapest chips). I can't see AM stopping at anything less than 40% of network assuming the most energy efficient chips (unless they are selling chips at a higher margin compared to mining. Either way AM wins). |
|
|
|
But you are contradicting yourself - 'they aren't historically a nation of savers. they are savers because'. Asian countries especially have traditionally been savers not because they have no access to credit but because they have never trusted their rulers and / or have been subject to invasions over the centuries etc.
Before the 90's most people in China had no access to household credit or even credit cards. In such an environment, it makes sense to save. Nowadays, people are getting more access to credit. Therefore it makes sense to take out a huge loan to buy an apartment as a form of forced savings and as an investment. Saving money in the current environment is bad for the ordinary person as their savings is being diluted by rampant inflation. Therefore, Chinese people invest in property and they buy trust products (which turn into company loans on the other side of the ledger) and they do lending schemes etc... Even though people are saving money in China, you will find that more and more Chinese people are taking out huge loans to buy apartments nowadays. So, it is not true that China is a great nation of savers. Overall, their credit growth in 2013, was the highest of any nation on the planet, at 49% of GDP per Fitch adjusted Total Social Financing figures. The motivations of the Chinese are exactly the same as the West, only the economic model is different. |
|
|
|
So guys is this a good time to buy some shares?
its kinda hard to tell now since it recently surged from 0,25 to 0,7. i wouldnt expect for the price to break 0,85 after announcement which could also be good/bad/late. its nearly impossible for its price to break 1BTC considering that the divs wont go back to previous highs (since there wont be no improvement of AM's hashrate and there is almost nothing left to sell...). but hey... never say never uh... If AM produces the most energy efficient chips (@0.2 watts/ghs) and outhashes everybody, how many Btcs will AM be able to theoretically mine in say one year? Give me a min and a max. |
|
|
|
Newbie with 2 activity reporting this? I call FUD. Driver side is undamaged. Plus picture of CEO is Bobby Lee not Huobi CEO. Very suspicious. |
|
|
|
It's rather interesting to see that >80% of the posts here discuss IPO and mining and very few posts discuss the interesting aspects like the scripting language or transaction logic, privacy, etc...
Greed!
How about making economically rational decisions in a resource scarce world? Spending without regard to economic consequences is luxury, unless you are doing this for the betterment of mankind. In that case, do so without complaint. |
|
|
|
For me, the Chinese aren't stupid. They seem a lot more calculated than the West. Still, they have a few other problems
1) its about jobs - as long as the people can put food on the table the risk of rebellion is kept in check but as US/EUR economies shrink, demand is muted (see large infrastructure projects as response to this)
2) historically a nation of savers. transforming to a consumer society will be difficult in the face of a few thousand years of habit.
3) China have had a few large spikes in the o/night rate in the last year but every time the central bank has provided liquidity eventually. It reads like shadow banking system is unregulated and very wild west like.
I wonder what the Lehmann moment could be?
my2c.
The Chinese are not stupid but the west is every bit as calculating. The Chinese economic structure is heavily top down and is prone to corruption and flaws in economic strategy. There is now the problem of social injustice in addition to unemployment. The rich are too rich and the poor cant even see the sun anymore. Literally. Chinese people are not historically a nation of savers. They are savers because people had no access to credit until recently. Moreover, credit growth in China is the highest of any nation on the planet right now at 49% of GDP according to Fitch. Most of the debt is corporate and local government. The shadow banking sector is very well regulated in that every trust issuer must be registered. The problem is that investors have never suffered losses and they invest without fear of loss. This is because they expect banks to make good on trust products or that the central government will bailout local governments. It is a risk pricing problem not a regulation problem. As the Chinese government adds liquidity each time there is a problem, they are building a bigger, and bigger, and bigger economic bomb for themselves. All the bad loans are now stored within the financial system just ready for a "Lehman" type spark. |
|
|
|
Well, because of the nature of international trade and commerce, when I large nation has rough economic trouble, it tends to effect other nations as well.
Agreed - I certainly can't see the Chinese economy "collapsing" - rather, its (till now) rapid rate of growth will decline. The west can't afford quite so much of that which it has been previously importing from China. The Chinese knew/had forecast this themselves and are trying to turn their economy around to a more home consumer demand driven type of setup. This combined with their growing stature and dominance in the global oil and gas market ( and the US being up to its neck in debt to China ??) seem sure to avert any sort of economic "collapse". Just my tuppeneth (2 pence worth for all none UK dwellers of this forum) China's economy in 2013 is as follows: 50% fixed asset formation, 50% consumption. Half the economy is involved with building things and it has a massive property bubble which the government is happy to maintain with more and more credit. The rich are super rich and the poor are dirt poor. Very unequal. In 2013, the construction part grew at a rate of 19.3% fuelled by more credit. Consumption grew a little bit. The construction bit is so big now that the steel, cement, glass and related industries make zero profits due to chronic overcapacity, as they kept building during the GFC to anticipate a global economic recovery. The global recovery never happened. Now these companies carry massive debt burdens. If China cuts credit, these industries will collapse and cause unemployment to rise. Consumption will also fall as unemployment rises. If China does not cut credit, it will worsen the overcapacity problem and choke its population to death with pollution. Beijing's pm2.5 measure is over 600 when the safe level recommended by the World Health Organisation is 45. China will run aground at some point due to massive social inequalities and horrendous pollution. |
|
|
|
If China collapses, the US still owes the debts to China. The US is obligated to protect both Japan and the Philippines so things could get interesting if China makes moves on either of those territories. In the event of war, the US could decline to pay its debts. But America is so broke, it would have to borrow money from China to intervene.
America owes all its debts in US dollars which it can print more of at anytime. The really dumb thing is why China and Japan would send real goods in exchange for US dollars. The US has long controlled oil, which makes US dollars valuable. China is trying to diversify by buying oil and gas elsewhere, plus establishing direct RMB swaps with 21 countries. The days of US dollar dominance are numbered. So the US will always be able to pay its debts. But going forward China will try to accumulate less US dollars. |
|
|
|
Manipulation of physical inventory is differentiated by the fact that bitcoin is not physical and can be divided to 8 decimals. Ie if you drive up the price of btcs, you do not create scarcity. You increase the purchasing power of existing holders of Btc, thus they go on a spending spree if they were so inclined. So I say to Goldman - please manipulate Btcs. This would do everyone a big favour. |
|
|
|
0.73! |
|
|
|
The purpose is to allow retail investors and pension funds to invest in bitcoins as an asset class and not have to worry about where to buy it, when to buy it, how to store it and when to sell it.
The WBT will probably act as a one way trapdoor for Bitcoins, driving up the value of remaining Bitcoins on the market. And that is a very, very good thing.
I would never trust such a legal monster. It's a paper market and once (if) established as a pricing mechanism for BTC, it may even present a nice attack surface for price manipulation. If you don't have exclusive access to the key, you don't own it. More than that the WBT will charge annual fees. As you have computer talent, you should definitely avoid the fund but for the rest of humanity, they are probably safer with the fund. I don't see how manipulation can take place unless the WBT lends out the btcs that they own. However, it's not smart to bet against a deflationary asset. The kind of manipulation that might take place is the WBT sucking up btcs. That I really don't think any of us would mind. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
