I was just looking at the chart for historical halvings, and noticed that the last having literally happened right before our meteoric rise to $1100. That's when the block reward went from 50 to 25. Is that coincidental?
Well, if you consider a two month delay as "right before", I suppose the halving did occur "right before" the rise in February to $260. Either way, the rise to $1100 didn't start until October, nearly a year later. The price was down or flat for the 6 months before that bubble started. You might consider Nathaniel Poppers explanation that the presentations to Silicon Valley venture capitalists by Wences Cesares convinced a few to buy a bunch in February, triggering the bubble that popped in April.
|
|
|
The point is that you think that you can get 1 bitcoin easily but it is not easy at all
Getting 1 bitcoin is only a little more difficult than getting $290. For some, that is difficult, and for others it is not. A person in the U.S. with a minimum wage job earns enough to buy a bitcoin every week, though a person with a minimum wage job should probably be investing their money in skill development, rather than bitcoin.
|
|
|
It depends on where you are and who you serve. To be legal in the U.S. or to serve U.S. customers, you must comply with U.S. federal regulations and typically the regulations of the states that you serve. You can read more about legal issues in the Legal forum: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=74.0
|
|
|
I was just reading an article on the subject of cryptocurrency, and decided to see the exchange rate of bitcoins to GBP... Ģ180! God damn!
I decided to look into it further, specifically on how to attain bitcoins... I wasn't going to spend my money on them, they can be rendered almost worthless in a short period of time.
Think about it. Nobody is going to give everyone on the internet something worth Ģ180 for free. If you want to obtain bitcoins, it will cost you something of value -- money, effort, or time. The most efficient and effective way to obtain bitcoins is to do something productive and get paid for it. If you aren't paid directly in bitcoins, then buy them. Faucets are a waste of time.
|
|
|
I have sent my bitcoins to a address generated in bitcoin core , so i want to withdraw the funds from another site, but it is asking for PRIVATE KEY i donīt have it how do i know my private key so i can conclude this transaction?
The walletWhen someone sends you bitcoins, then send to an address in your wallet. Only the wallet knows the private keys of the addresses it holds, so if you want to send those bitcoins, you must send from that wallet. Note that a wallet doesn't hold bitcoins, it controls bitcoins at the addresses it holds. Moving a private key between walletsIt is possible to export a private key from one wallet (using dumpprivkey, in your case) and import it into another wallet, but there are very few times you would want to do that. Keep in mind that both wallets now manage the address associated with that private key now. Moving bitcoins between walletsIt is not clear what you mean by "withdraw the funds", so some explanation might help. If you want to spend the bitcoins, then as stated above, you must send the bitcoins from the wallet that controls them. If you want to use a different wallet, such as an online wallet or wallet provider, then simply send the bitcoins from your bitcoin core wallet to an address in your new wallet or account first.
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not a great store of value (5) and it's a terrible unit of account (2). I would give Bitcoin a score of 8.0. I expect it to improve in the future.
can you explain what makes you say bitcoin is not a great store of value? is the current volatility the problem, or is it something else? I feel it is not a good store of value because it has little to no utility, other than as a medium of exchange. Its value currently depends on the whims of the people that use it and could evaporate at any time. Anyway, "store of value" is not well-defined so I expect many different opinions. The volatility makes it a poor unit of account.
|
|
|
The problem with wide ditribution is that you are giving it mostly to people that don't want it or that think it has no value.
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not a great store of value (5) and it's a terrible unit of account (2). I would give Bitcoin a score of 8.0. I expect it to improve in the future.
|
|
|
That is like asking if tides are good for the ocean.
A recession is not good or bad for an economy -- it is a natural part of an economy. A recession is a result of poor investment during a boom.
|
|
|
Consider a new coin called USD (or perhaps Digital Dollars or Electronic Dollars DDR or EDR). Perhaps a 2nd new coin called Physical Dollars (PDR or PDL). Some thought might be given to Pennies, Dimes, Nickels, Quarters, etc.
What does THAT do for you? On a 1 to 1 basis, you could track every single dollar created by the Fed. Each digital dollar would be identifiable and unique. An end to digital counterfeiting aka a bank or other entity creating an accounting entry that misrepresents the number of dollars in existence.
It does nothing for me. What it does for the U.S. government is it allows them to track every dollar. In order to allow fractions of a dollar, you would need to track every penny. I don't know what kind of effort it would take to track 400,000,000,000,000 electronic pennies, but it probably wouldn't be easy or cheap.
|
|
|
This is why Bitcoin exists enough smart people are tired of getting fucked by the money masters.
... To me it seems the only way that FRB can exist with bitcoin is if lenders can somehow convince massive amounts of people to let them hold their bitcoins for them, and I just don't see that happening. ... I wouldn't be surprised if the number of bitcoins held by Coinbase, Circle, Xapo, and other wallet providers, as well as the exchanges, already exceeds the total number held by individuals.
|
|
|
We have to be careful when talking about "supply" in this context. It can mean 2 things: - the money supply (14 million BTC and adding 3600 / day)
- the mining production output (amount of 'commodity' the producers are willing to provide to the market)
In the second meaning, the categorization of the halving as a 'supply shock' is correct. A "supply shock" is a sudden shift in the supply curve. Technically, tere is a supply shock every ten minutes when 25 bitcoins are added to the money supply. You could also say there is a daily supply shock relating to the addition of 3600 BTC. It depends on the time scale. The halving is not a supply shock. It is a reduction in the severity of the ongoing supply shocks.
|
|
|
traders are dumping and buying 100k per day? can you point me the source of this? i don't really care about the demand and supply but only the supply so i can compare better the reduction in the "mining supply"
if it's indeeded 100k per day than ok 1800 is nothing to that lower than 2% and will cause a 4% up in demand like you said
You're looking at it the wrong way, I think. It doesn't matter how many coins are flipped by traders each day. What matters is the net demand and net supply. I agree, but there is no way to measure that. Furthermore, supply and demand are not numbers. They are curves. The price is at the intersection of the curves. The reduction of mined bitcoins will shift the supply curve, but without knowing what the curves look like, there is no way to determine what effect that shift will have. There are different ways of estimating the effect of the change in supply. If you assume that demand is constant over time (which is not realistic, of course), then a good estimate of the effect of inflation is simply to reduce the price by about the amount of the inflation. So, in this case at the time of the halving, the price would change from dropping by 8% per year to dropping by 4% per year. Another way is to look at the change in volume over the entire exchange volume. This comparison itself overestimates the effect because people exchange bitcoins for other things of value, not just currency. People are also treating the halving as a supply shock, when it isn't. While rate of increase in the money supply changes suddenly from 3600 BTC per day to 1800 BTC per day, the relative change in the money supply itself is quite small.
|
|
|
How do you detect "spam TX" that are just put in the block by the miners to reach the maximum amount possible, e.g. send coins from miner A to miner A's 2nd (3rd...) address? Why would a miner do that when there is nothing to be gained from it? There are plenty of natural transactions to process for fees? Because you wrote that the higher number of transactions would win. Anyway, if you assume that all the blocks are full then that criteria is not important. How do you detect whether a miner is actualy creating only a single hash and thus relying on luck or secretly creates many hashes in order to have a higher chance to win? Only one hash would be allowed from every node so, you'd need a separate node for every hash you want to play. If the network uses IP addresses to distinguish nodes, how many IP addresses do you think it would take to increase your odds of winning when the odds of winning are 2 256-1 to 1? Answer: 1000x more than exist. Having two nodes would double my chances, and double my income. Also, the odds are not 1 in 2 256-1 because you wrote that the lowest hash wins. If there are 3 miners, then 1 of the three always wins -- the odds are 1/3 (unless I have two nodes, in which case my odds are 2/3).
|
|
|
There's no relation between Bitcoin prices and mining prices. Bitcoin prices are based on market trading volume and on the mood of Whales. But the mining prices are based on network difficulty.
Ah, think about it a little bit more. here's a little example. If electricity would cost 10 usd/hour and for miners would mine a btc in like 50 hours how could they sell it for less than 500 usd? And in this case we can't even speak about breakeven People bought bitcoins at $1000 each a while back -- how could they sell them for less? Yet, they do. People frequently lose money on investments, selling them for less than they cost. A smart miner whose operating costs are greater than the value of the mined coins will simply stop mining so they don't have to sell at a loss.
|
|
|
traders are dumping and buying 100k per day? can you point me the source of this? i don't really care about the demand and supply but only the supply so i can compare better the reduction in the "mining supply"
if it's indeeded 100k per day than ok 1800 is nothing to that lower than 2% and will cause a 4% up in demand like you said
If you go to http://bitcoincharts.com/markets/, you can see daily exchange volumes for most exchanges. The total today is about 100k BTC, but it doesn't include all exchanges.
|
|
|
Person A deposits 1.000 BTC in bank A. Total bitcoins: 1.000 Bank A loans 0.900 BTC to person B who deposits it in bank B. Total bitcoins: 1.900 BTC Bank B loans 0.810 BTC to person C who deposits it in bank C. Total bitcoins: 2.710 BTC Bank C loans 0.729 BTC to person D who deposits it in bank D. Total bitcoins: 3.439 BTC Bank D loans 0.656 BTC to person E who deposits it in bank E. Total bitcoins: 4.095 BTC ...
Wouldn't that be more difficult since anybody can check their own address on the blockchain and that Bitcoin have a supply limit ? People that store bitcoins at a bank or other third party don't have an address. They have an account. When the bitcoin price drop because so much bitcoin is available and the same number of people want some, who's there to "guarantee" it's value? No one. The value disappears.
Yes, FRB will cause severe downward pressure on the value of a bitcoin, countering its rise in value from mass adoption. This is why the value will never be millions of dollars, as some people fantasize. OR, better yet, when people realize that their loans can't be required to be repaid and they decide not to repay the lender loses and goes out of business, which also requires all lenders to flee in response.
Fractional reserve lending requires that there's an entity that can "create" more money by making loans out of thin air. That can't happen in Bitcoin...not without SEVERE risk to the lender and the account supporting the lender.
Bank runs and default are the major flaws in FRB, but that doesn't mean that it won't be implemented. Banks will lessen the risk by pooling their deposits in order to insure each other. When the Federal Reserve was created in 1913, the U.S. was on the gold standard and dollars couldn't be created out of thin air. A Bitcoin Federal Reserve would be created to perform the same function as the original Fed, holding deposits to back up its member banks. I see now. I guess the only question then is why would anyone want to deposit their bitcoins in a bank??? I can understand the exchanges, but as far as I know no exchanges are offering loans, and I suspect any exchange that started offering loans would be immediately suspect of FRL.
Banks will pay interest on deposits. Savers will decide that earning interest is worth the risk.
|
|
|
Fractional reserve banking is likely to become a part of the bitcoin economy, but perhaps to a lesser degree than the dollar.
What I fail to understand is how this could even be possible to happen with bitcoin. Can you explain?? Here is the simplified explanation by example: Person A deposits 1.000 BTC in bank A. Total bitcoins: 1.000 Bank A loans 0.900 BTC to person B who deposits it in bank B. Total bitcoins: 1.900 BTC Bank B loans 0.810 BTC to person C who deposits it in bank C. Total bitcoins: 2.710 BTC Bank C loans 0.729 BTC to person D who deposits it in bank D. Total bitcoins: 3.439 BTC Bank D loans 0.656 BTC to person E who deposits it in bank E. Total bitcoins: 4.095 BTC ...
|
|
|
Fractional reserve banking is likely to become a part of the bitcoin economy, but perhaps to a lesser degree than the dollar.
|
|
|
this is math, man... it's not my logic, you can't say 4% based on a subtraction of the inflation rate from 8 to 4, that's not correct
if you want real numbers then you should compare the total coins that will be less dumped(presumably 1800) with the total coins(including the mined coins) that will be dumped each day, or that are dumped each day
if for example the total coins dumped per day is 10k coins(i doubt is so high) per day for now(including the 3600 mined coins), with the halving this will lead to a reduction of almost 20%(10k-1800), which mean that the demand will go up by roughly 25%
this assuming that the demand will remain the same until halving, so even if the demand will remain the same and the price the same, with the halving alone the price will increase by 25% which mean around $360
I don't know what you mean by "total coins dumped per day". The total volume of coins traded per day is in the 100s of thousands, and a change by only 1800 per day is not going to have a noticeable daily effect, though it will have a long term effect.
|
|
|
|