Do you think some people might cash out of Bitcoins to buy the new iPhone?
Due to Apple censoring the Blockchain app therefore I am seriously considering boycotting the iPhone and going with a more open solution. Its back on the app store: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=105575.0 |
|
|
|
|
Simple straightforward advice. Common sense a lot would say. No doubt this will always need repeating.
I'd add another one:
4. Dont make investment decisions using emotions (especially fear and greed). Use common sense, pick a strategy and stick to it.
|
|
|
|
|
One aspect is its current market capitalisation. $100mill is considered very very small. We need to wait a little while for it to hopefully grow to something more meaningful before its even thought of to be used alongside fiat.
|
|
|
|
|
I just signed up to the blockchain.info wallet and I'm wondering how to use it to track the balance from my bitcoin-qt client. I've been adding all of the receive addresses but it does not show a correct balance. Am I doing something wrong? Is there supposed to be a specific address from my wallet that I use to add on blockchain.info?
Do I have to send the entire balance to myself so it shows as a new transaction?
|
|
|
|
Have you considered buying bitcoins on intersango and then transferring them to gox and withdrawing them there? You might lose out a little on the exchange pricing but it'll be a lot less painful then the long wait for intersango to fix their banking issues.
That makes absolutely no sense. Bitcoin transfers will continue to work just as rapidly as they always have been. My bad, I missed a step. I meant, buying coins on Intersango, transferring the coins to Gox, selling the coins on Gox, withdrawing GBP from Gox. |
|
|
|
Well, A gets 0.154 BTC which is $1.54, but he was only owed $1.00, so he's made a profit on the deal which doesn't seem right. I don't see why anyone would be entitled to get more than 100% of what they're owed, unless everyone does.
Fair point! And I'd rather this be settled without expensive fees being taken out by lawyers. I've already consulted one who has told me for claims any less than $40k, its simply not worth it as the costs will outweigh the potential return. Official letters have to be sent to serve as notice and fees alone for these letters to start the process are around at least in the hundreds of dollars. |
|
|
|
|
This will do big favours for the coverage of bitcoins. The bbc has massive a global reach in terms of audience.
|
|
|
|
I see two cases, X and Y:
(X): If we pay out using the old $1/BTC price, total debt = $1 + $1 = $2, we pay out 50%.
A gets 0.5 BTC = $5 and B get 0.5 BTC.
(Y): If we pay out using the new$10/BTC price, total debt = $1 + $10 = $11, we pay out 90.9%.
A gets 0.091 BTC = $0.90, B gets 0.909 BTC.
In X, where we use the old price, the dollar holders end up with more than they were owed, while the BTC holders end up with less.
In Y, using the new higher price, everyone gets the same fraction of what they were owed.
Y looks like the fairer case to me. What does anyone else think? Can someone make a case for dollar holders to be making a profit on the dollars they were holding when the price of BTC goes up? Maybe I'm missing something.
I was in a hurry yesterday when I posted. There are more options, including the one Seal proposed. He suggested converting BTC into AUD at the current price, but allocating it to creditors at the old price. Let's call that option Z. In Z, we sell the 1 BTC for the new price of $10, but use the old price to calculate the total debt ($1 + $1 = $2). So we can pay everyone out 500% of what they're owed: A gets $5 and B gets $5. Actually that seems to be exactly the same as (X) above, except that everyone is paid out in dollars, not bitcoins. From a practical point of view, I'd rather pay out in bitcoins. Then I don't have to work out how to make international bank transfers, etc. Paying Bitcoins is much easier. Apologies dooglus, I think I may have confused you with an earlier suggestion in an older post (which i see now is heavily biased towards option X). Let me re-explain my option z which should take the middleground of X and Y: (X): If we pay out using the old $1/BTC price, total debt = $1 + $1 = $2, we pay out 50%.
A gets 0.5 BTC = $5 and B get 0.5 BTC.
(Y): If we pay out using the new$10/BTC price, total debt = $1 + $10 = $11, we pay out 90.9%.
A gets 0.091 BTC = $0.90, B gets 0.909 BTC.
(Z): Pay out using an averaged price of the old price and current ($1+$10)/2 = $5.5/BTC, total debt = $1 + $5.5 = $6.5, A gets 0.154 BTC, B gets 0.846 BTC. Fairer? p.s. Agreed, paying back using BTC makes sense. |
|
|
|
|
So say for example Moodys rates mortgage backed loans as AAA because they appear to be good investments. The algorithms used to calculate their risk have been used by economists for decades. In this system, the bank pays the rating agency its fee, the agency runs its numbers again and everybody seems happy.
After the product gets its AAA rating, trillions of $$$ are invested in these products as investors assume they are safe.
This is a system whereby only the cleverest people in the industry are allowed to release ratings. In reality they know nothing about the products they are rating.
... hang on a second... de ja vu anyone?
These companys all operate on a basis where transparency, auditing and good accounting practices all exist. However this doesn't mean they wont ever make mistakes. If the hundreds of brainy people that work at these institutions cannot get it right, I'd be reluctant to trust the judgement of a handful of individuals here.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey casascius, did you write any guides on the paper wallet methods you follow?
I still need to test this out as my cold storage is effectively usb keys with their own wallets.
|
|
|
|
|
Have you considered buying bitcoins on intersango and then transferring them to gox and withdrawing them there? You might lose out a little on the exchange pricing but it'll be a lot less painful then the long wait for intersango to fix their banking issues.
|
|
|
|
|
What format does sierra accept the feed in? I have experience writing feeds so could code something up for everyone to connect to.
|
|
|
|
Suppose there are 1 customers. A has $1 in his accounf and B has 1 BTC. At the time trading stops the price is $1/BTC. The $ goes missing but we have the 1 BTC still. Then the price goes up to $10/BTC before we pay out. I see two cases, X and Y:
(X): If we pay out using the old $1/BTC price, total debt = $1 + $1 = $2, we pay out 50%.
A gets 0.5 BTC = $5 and B get 0.5 BTC.
(Y): If we pay out using the new$10/BTC price, total debt = $1 + $10 = $11, we pay out 90.9%.
A gets 0.091 BTC = $0.90, B gets 0.909 BTC.
In X, where we use the old price, the dollar holders end up with more than they were owed, while the BTC holders end up with less.
In Y, using the new higher price, everyone gets the same fraction of what they were owed.
Y looks like the fairer case to me. What does anyone else think? Can someone make a case for dollar holders to be making a profit on the dollars they were holding when the price of BTC goes up? Maybe I'm missing something.
Dooglus, to repeat a point that PatrickHarnett made in an earlier post, option Y wouldn't look as fair if the price of BTC dropped. The increase in price makes option Y look fair today however if the price dropped, option X would look equally as fair. My recommendation combines both of option X and option Y. After the creditor picks a final payout date. We take the price of BTC on that given (agreed) day and: (Z): We pay out on an averaged price basis. ie. Take the price of BTC when trading stopped. Take the current price and average the two. Use this averaged price to calculate payments using the same method as above. This will not bias cash OR btc holders and losses will be equal for all parties. (regardless of if the price moves above/below/ends up the same as before). Happy to hear feedback on this one. |
|
|
|
|
Given the time that has passed, my proposal to move things forward are as follows:
1. We appoint a creditor to manage this process
2. We set up a list whereby creditors can submit claims
3. This list is held open for an agreed period eg. 2 months or so
4. Claims are reconciled with the most recent backup Dooglus holds (where reasonably possible - I understand there has been some sale of debt and the backup isn't the very latest, I believe a reasonably accurate job can be made)
5. Payments are made following the claim period.
Acknowledged, some people may miss out however in the real world, some creditors will have already written the loss off given the period that has passed. Other people simply will not care as their loss may be nominal.
|
|
|
|
On the price appreciation, that sounds nice for those out of pocket $$, but those out BTC might be less happy. I don't think there was ever a comprehensive list of creditors available either. Given six months has passed, some pro-rating payment might be easiest to put the whole thing to rest.
I did consider that Patrick, however the opposite would be true if the value of BTC went down since then. Having through about it carefully, repayment amounts for the purpose of paying back customers should be calculated as of the rates at the time WBX was shut down. Happy to hear recommendations though. I agree that something should be done given the time that has passed. Has anyone made progress from a legal front? Dooglus, whats your stance? Yes, the opposite would be true - people tend to look at self interest, and if 1700BTC or what ever it is is was worth only $1700, the BTC holders would be pissed off and the $$ holders out of luck. (hmm, nice asymmetry) Anyway, I'm still looking at recovery although my progress is slow - but that only addresses one person, and not the actual number of WBX scammed people. Andre should have some shit land on his doorstep for this mess, but certainly there are many people involved. It have been six months (or so/or nearly), so some division seems sensible. either way, it's messy - if I ended up with 1/2 of what I was owed, I'd be content Hey Patrick, how are things going on your end? Are you taking the legal route? Dooglus - any decision as to whats going to happen with the BTC you are holding? |
|
|
|
I 'm starting this thread in order to keep a log of very simple analysis usually without comments from me.
Why no comments? Given this is a forum community, a description would be helpful to a lot of people even if it is only one sentence. |
|
|
|
It looks like somebody else who knows his/her bots has come along and with a little help from excel has calculated the % variables used in the scalping algo. They've used this knowledge to write a script to take advantage of the original scalping bot... in effect, he's stealing the small margin from the original bot on each trade.
This is a bit over my head, but if accurate sounds like a fantastic thing to eventually discourage this type of behavior. Either that or its just the same bot which has been coded badly and is bugged, or has failed to recognise the trades that its placed itself. |
|
|
|
|
Good news, another business accepting bitcoin. Have you made a press release? It'll help you're cause and put bitcoin on the radar of anyone who reads it.
|
|
|
|
Anyone who has a cydia blockchain app, DO NOT install this app, before you uninstall cydia's app, it will frack up the installation.
P.S. its not a wallet, just a blockchain viewer. I'm still ignoring all apple products, and selling anything I already have.
I believe if you connect from a unique ip, it allows you to sync with a blockchain.info account enabling the wallet features. Otherwise it'll just load up as a blockchain viewer. (edited my OP to state that a jailbreak is not required anymore as it is now on the official app store) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
