I have more of my lawyer friends starting to want to buy bitcoins!~~~ @ 500 it was a joke?... at 1000 now they want in LOL!!! Grin
So true ... at 5-10k it will be the accountants, doctors and dentists ... above that the majority will begin to arrive. |
|
|
|
Yep. Something like this ... giving the one hundred satoshi unit a specific name is a good way all around. Better hurry though I think the Foundation is already working on getting XBT into ISO currency definitions. 1 BTC = 100,000,000 satoshis
1 XBT = 100 satoshis
1 BTC = 1,000 mBTC = 1,000,000 XBT = 1M XBT = 1 MXBT
0.001 BTC = 1 mBTC = 1000 XBT = 1k XBT = 1 kXBT
0.000,001 BTC = 0.001 mBTC = 1 XBT
At the moment:
$1 = 2160 XBT = 2.16 mBTC
1000 XBT = 1 mBTC = $0.46
1 XBT = 0.001 mBTC = $0.00046
Phase out BTC over time, because it'll just be too big.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok ... gonna dig into this a bit more now I think.
|
|
|
|
For most people, holding 100% of the initial amount is not a wise choice. It is good to diversify by selling into strength to account for the possibility of a black swan event in Bitcoin technology. This way you steadily accumulate also non-BTC assets, and can learn how to handle wealth. You sleep better and don't see dips in price as an opportunity to panic, but rather an opportunity to buy back if you really feel like so. The selling plan must be based on percentages, which means that no matter how high bitcoin goes, you still have more value in your remaining BTC.
If you have BTC1,000 and you absolutely want to have the same number when it hits $million, then it is best to just bury the paper wallet into ground and wake up when you are a billionaire. Trading only makes you lose the most of it over time with no gain. But it is not healthy for anyone to suddenly become a billionaire.
If instead, you flex your Excel muscle and devise a plan to sell BTC900 in decreasing increments at exponentially rising price points, you will already be rich and well-established when bitcoin hits $1 million, and totally content with the idea that your remaining stash is still worth a cool $100M. For me, Bitcoin is not an investment - it's immigration. Instead of being a fiat native who dabbles in Bitcoin, I'm now a Bitcoin native who only deals with fiat reluctantly, when it's unavoidable. At the present time I pay for more than 50% of my monthly expenses with BTC and that percentage is trending up. The great tech exit ... texit. |
|
|
|
Ahhh...there's that spike I could feel.
Went out and did some weeding...always a sure thing the market will move while I'm away.
So, educated madames et monsieurs....where do we take profits before this trend reverses?
somewhere between 1700 and 2200 ... my calcs are putting this next peak somewhere between 2500-3200 ... but not until March or so. One thing to note is the total time taken for the run-ups at each adoption phase is longer than the last ... i.e. each bull wave gets more powerful than the last. |
|
|
|
|
Btc is gonna pass gold parity and no-one will hardly notice it will be gone that fast.
There is nothing so powerful as an idea who's time has arrived.
|
|
|
|
I've often wondered about variations along this line myself ... and also if some kind of homomorphic encryption might used to conceal tx details completely and yet still have verifiable blocks ?
Adam had a whole thread on encrypted transactions. Though without compact zero knowledge proofs (like the stuff I discussed in the coinwitness thread) it's hard to make them not super brittle and inefficient, because anyone you pay has to receive and validate the whole decrypted history of a coin, since it can't be validated without the history. If you had a zero knowledge proof that the transaction was valid (e.g. that all the outputs and inputs added up) which the network checked then you could accept the coin without re-verifying the history and, importantly, without revealing the history to the recipients. The trick is finding a system for zero knowledge proofs which is powerful enough to prove the right things but fast and low bandwidth enough to actually use which doesn't have annoying limitations like requiring a trusted initialization. Thanks ... guess we'll keep searching for that trick. |
|
|
|
|
ok ... a chan-like dev thread, this is new.
|
|
|
|
A thought occurred to me this morning. Why are the blocks structured in such a way that you can tell in the first place which txins and txouts go with which transactions? By the time the block is found most peers have already seen the transactions that the block is composed of. We need a list of transactions, a list of txins, and a list of txouts. There's no need to give information in the block about which txins and txouts go with which transactions.
Those who have seen the transactions already know. So they can still check everything they've seen in the block. And the block structure doesn't need to make it easy to reconstruct the individual transactions. After the fact people can still check validity by treating a block the same way they treat a transaction now.
That makes coinjoin completely superfluous. And free. And the default for all transactions.
Of course it's a hard fork. But it's worth it.
I've often wondered about variations along this line myself ... and also if some kind of homomorphic encryption might used to conceal tx details completely and yet still have verifiable blocks ? |
|
|
|
Cool, cool, very cool! Spaceship two is getting towards final stages of testing ... http://www.space.com/22660-virgin-galactic-spaceshiptwo-rocket-test.html ... this is real and happening, Burt Ratan is a great engineer and Branson is a visionary entrepreneur, there are not many better endorsements from 'establishment' wealth I would want than this one. And to note Branson has had a long history with trying to break into the banking cartels turf ... if it might matter at all. |
|
|
|
yes of course. i appreciate that hard work! but if you look in the future, maybe 3-5 years ahead, the busniness today will look like little puppies *wufff* ;-)
I 'm not so sure about that. The entry barrier will be much higher for businesses to start in 3-5 years even if they are backed by big investors. Those that are already here have quite of an advantage. Except that most of them are dishonourable sharks or outright scammers (not to say the current banking system is any better) it appears to be a widespread malady of our time in regards to financial actors ... and that indeed was instrumental in the spawn of bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
heh ... i don't think sunnaker will have to bother with speaking circuits for years to come ... then again he might just vanish
|
|
|
|
...
knuckleheads...
Some people seem to make paranoia about the government their religion. Like any zealot the facts have no persuasive effect. Don't get me wrong. I have a lot of criticisms of my government. But I don't find them malicious, just incompetent. Really? Did you not read the Snowden leaks? ... seems pretty fucking malicious to me ... unless it is just incompetence they happened to instigate an orwellian dragnet pan-opticon super-state apparatus? Cognitive dissonance is what you should ask your shrink about ... |
|
|
|
I like it that some of the old timers are still regularly posting on this thread ... if anywhere from grows a bitcoin island it will be this thread  Password: carrots |
|
|
|
Goldbugs are just angry that money is flowing out of gold and into digital currency. At some point bitcoiners are going to have enough moolah to buy up the gold market as an afterthought to breaking the corrupt paper-gold banks ... bitcoin will become more than a third front but the place where the final battle will be waged. |
|
|
|
Govt plz
This regulation could be positive. The thing stopping btc from going mainstream and the hedgefunds and banks getting involved is the possibility of btc getting totally regulated/killed - a little regulation would do btc a world of good imo (for price speculators that is).
I think this is an outright fallacy, or at best a conjecture without any evidential backing. Bitcoin could go "mainstream" without any kind of oversight or regulation ... in fact it already is well on its way to becoming widespread with zero regulation. The whole BS argument about bitcoin needing regulation or else it wont go mainstream is entirely unsupported as far as I can tell. It may even be that it WILL go mainstream because it is unregulated, now THAT is what they are really afraid of. |
|
|
|
.... and safeguard our national security." He's specifically invoked the spook clause (not the first time either), it will only go downhill from here. Secret courts, sham trials, water-boarding miners, who know where that rabbit hole will lead? |
|
|
|
|
Nice troll Mike ... now cut it out and get back to your real job, these high bitcoin prices must have given you too much time on your hands?
|
|
|
|
No opinion on the validity of the news, but I would not put something like this past governments, especially post NSA. And appealing to peoples greed, is definitely nothing new.
If this was implemented though. Would it only apply to US merchants?
Yeah, just like FACTA only applies to US banks  anything that touches a US citizen or passes through US infrastructure, fibres, satellites etc will be caught up in the fucked up dragnet mentality. If you think this wont go the same way as the NSA surveillance Orwellian nightmare you are naive in the extreme. Tin foil hats or not these guys are out-of-fucking-control and only some serious shit is going to wake the dumbass yanks up to what their government has become ... luckily the bitcoin system is not helpless against such overt (or covert) attacks, malignancy will be expelled like the cancerous growth it is, and there are many options for counter-attack. Make no mistake, this is an attack on bitcoin viability by the demonstrably most aggressive agent working against monetary freedom and peace on the planet. Idiots like Yifu and Alex proably they have no idea they have been co-opted to work against bitcoin, yet. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
