I think buying mining equipment is no longer practical. I think you need more capital, where you can produce your own chips at cost.
I agree. At this stage, it's best to leave bitcoin mining to the professionals and to just own shares that get paid dividends from mining profits. As an AM shareholder, I'm sure hoping this venture is successful. Leave the bitcoin mining to a few professionals? Isn't that a possible health issue for the blockchain? Not if they have multiple mining farms in different bitcoin-friendly jurisdictions around the world. Free markets work. |
|
|
|
|
Still available. Now selling at Bitstamp or Mt Gox Last, whichever price is lower.
|
|
|
|
I think buying mining equipment is no longer practical. I think you need more capital, where you can produce your own chips at cost.
I agree. At this stage, it's best to leave bitcoin mining to the professionals and to just own shares that get paid dividends from mining profits. As an AM shareholder, I'm sure hoping this venture is successful. |
|
|
|
Can't wait to see this. Stefan will pick him apart. Edit: Personally, I'd love to see a panel of five or six bitcoin bugs debate and school a panel of gold bugs. |
|
|
|
may be interested if you make it worth my effort (IE the sale rate of your btc at coinbase minus money order fees, shipping cost and minus a bit for my time and money tied up)
escrow you covering fees or sending first
Sorry, no discounts. If you want escrow, you pay the fees. |
|
|
|
|
Doesn't have to be one buyer, willing to sell smaller amounts to multiple buyers. Escrow welcome, as long as you're paying the fees. For those located in Southern California, I'm also willing to transact in person at Pechanga Casino, where there is plenty of security.
|
|
|
|
By the way... friedcat still is only paying divs to 400,000 shares? I checked the feeder addresses and it doesnt look like divs for another 400,000 shares are going away. But friedcat and his team has to earn too somehow. Maybe my look at the addresses wasnt good enough only.
He always paid for all 400,000 shares. Bitfountain owns around 59% of those 400,000 shares. So 59% of all dividends go to the founders, FriedCat and few others. Just curious. What's the story behind that additional 9% of shares that went back to BF? Did they not sell at IPO? |
|
|
|
so fiat electronic currency.. right, people will be totally excited about "more of the same."
I would definitely be excited about it, especially if the transactions were irreversible. It could make it much easier to exchange your fiat for bitcoins and vice versa. Imagine if both parties of an exchange could send their currency to escrow. |
|
|
|
Original translation does confuse solo mining with total sales but still doesn't change the fact that FC is preparing to compete in a 1000 ph network.
That's how I understood it also, although it would be nice to hear it from friedcat, a board member, or a PR rep rather than "through the grapevine". |
|
|
|
|
Keep the markets free. As bitcoins become more widely dispersed and there are more market participants, the spikes and crashes will settle down. Right now, there are too many coins held by a small number of people and they can exchange a lot of them all at once, which causes the price to plummet.
|
|
|
|
Seems like the most risky thing to do is hold, so the contrarian in me says buy, so I'm up for a few more, what the heck.
You know with bitcoin heading inevitably towards $1000 a coin in the next few weeks / months, holding shares in a reliable, trustworthy mining company sounds like an incredibly sensible thing to do. I think people selling out now because they are getting a few hundred bucks a share will regret the decision very soon and for a long time to come. I'm sorry, I just don't get it. The only reason I can think people are selling is because they have zero faith AM is going to stage any kind of comeback. I'm just thankful dividend payments don't depend upon the ever sinking share price  +1 I just reinvested some dividends today and will be holding tight. I'm more interested in steady BTC dividend payments in the future than making a few quick bucks today. |
|
|
|
Disclaimer: if there is already a solution, please feel free to make my entire post moot, and correct me with it.
Escrow. The free market will also find other solutions. No need for bankers or politicians to intervene. Their solutions are too costly. Solutions don't appear overnight, they evolve over time. |
|
|
|
Just let them know that millibitcoins are going for about 50 cents each. |
|
|
|
CUBE should meet roi in fiat since btc is going to the moon, it's for one of those ppl living in one of those countries having a hard time aquiring btc through exchanges, they better get one of these asics than holding on to fiat. well these ppl are 80%+ of earth population btw
Why would you measure ROI in fiat? Shouldn't ROI always be measured in BTC? (You don't have to use an exchange to acquire BTC. I've never used Mt. Gox, Bitstamp, or any of the other exchanges.) Most people do not have easy access to btc yet. Count yourself among the fortunate few who do. To you, it sounds trivial. To most, it is still difficult. A miner can make it simple. And mostly anonymous. You don't think someone who is capable of accessing the internet and placing an order for mining hardware and then connecting that hardware to the Bitcoin network would also be able to access this forum and buy some BTC using escrow? |
|
|
|
CUBE should meet roi in fiat since btc is going to the moon, it's for one of those ppl living in one of those countries having a hard time aquiring btc through exchanges, they better get one of these asics than holding on to fiat. well these ppl are 80%+ of earth population btw
Why would you measure ROI in fiat? Shouldn't ROI always be measured in BTC? (You don't have to use an exchange to acquire BTC. I've never used Mt. Gox, Bitstamp, or any of the other exchanges.) |
|
|
|
How could the $600 ripoff have been prevented?
Would a second transfer between two cards that one dude holds alleviate such circumstances?
I should have withdrawn the cash from an ATM sooner. One option is to load the code and withdraw all of the cash from an ATM before you send the BTC. |
|
|
|
Individuals/criminals should be blacklisted, not money. |
|
|
|
I bought a $1000 MoneyPak code from MsBitcoin back on August 7th (see Post # 61 of this thread) and loaded it onto my Green Dot prepaid debit card. I withdrew $400 of it at an ATM shortly afterwards without any issues and decided to leave the other $600 in my account until I needed it. That $600 was removed from my account on August 24th with the annotation: "PIN DISPUTE RESOLUTION REVERSAL". I informed MsBitcoin of this via PM and she informed me on October 21st that she would look into it and get back to me later that day. I received another PM from her on October 23rd where she stated that "If the problem is on my end rest assured I will reimburse you." After not hearing anything back from MsBitcoin for a few days, I called Green Dot to inquire about the missing funds. They said that a claim was filed with them by the person that bought the MoneyPak and the $600 was returned to the purchaser after they investigated and were provided with sufficient proof of purchase. They said there is nothing else they can do for me and that my next step would be to file a police report. I informed MsBitcoin of this on October 31st via PM and asked her how she wants me to proceed. She has yet to respond, so I plan to file a police report within the next few days and will post updates in this thread. Below are links to screenshots that show the activity on this Green Dot prepaid debit card. This was a brand new card when the MoneyPak was loaded and these three transactions are the only transactions to ever occur with this account. Green Dot closed the account after removing the $600. http://tinypic.com/r/1zgdqur/5http://tinypic.com/r/iepa43/5Edit: This is the transaction for 9.6154 BTC that was used to purchase the MoneyPak code: http://blockchain.info/tx/84ad3f51a783db1f3bc6b675c730fc05a3ffedb40d8a0ee1c975c50014dcc08f |
|
|
|
You don't have to print money to manipulate the market, but you do have to have a stranglehold on the exchanges. Peer-to-peer decentralized exchanges will allow people to route around the manipulation.
I don't vote, so no one in the government represents me or my interests. That's why I think it is accurate for me to refer to them as "them". I don't play their game.
You don't need to achieve a stranglehold on exchanges to have a stranglehold on the market. I'm not quite sure what you mean, but do you feel burnside (of BTCT), for instance, was unjustly manipulating his exchange? From what i know, he appears to be a pretty upstanding guy. So, if you can clarify... As far as you choosing not to vote, that's neither here nor there. That's like saying the free market is unfair because you chose not to trade. I wasn't referring to BTCT or any other Bitcoin related exchange specifically. But, if more and more people continue to convert their fiat into bitcoins, then TPTB will use every means at their disposal to prevent the escape from fiat, including trying to suppress and manipulate the exchanges with HFT and derivatives, like they do in the gold and silver markets. Edit: or just shut down the Bitcoin exchanges entirely... |
|
|
|
At least they won't be able to profit by creating bitcoins on a whim, to bail themselves out, fund their deficits, or to "stimulate the recovery". Stealing people's purchasing power by devaluing their money is off the table with bitcoin. I think enough people understand that a bitcoin derivative is not a bitcoin. Peer-to-peer decentralized exchanges will be needed to prevent market manipulation. We should be seeing those within the next couple of years.
Bitcoin solves some problems while creating others. There is no need to print money to manipulate the market -- robber barons of yesteryear did it quite successfully without printing a single note. The only thing required is a large amount of wealth, denominated in virtually anything; that's what makes economics so much fun. It's hard to discuss money without getting lost in the details, it's a pretty complicated & often counterintuitive thing. For instance, treating the governments as "them" is not quite accurate when, at least in principle, in United States they are an extension of you, *your* "elected officials." Politics resemble the free market. Theoretically, you can run for presidency and, if people like what you stand for & trust you more than your opponent, you should win. Sadly, just like the case with the free market, practice falls short of theory. There are established political parties (think monopolies), established laws (established rules of commerce), barriers to entry (campaign funds = starting business capital), etc., etc. So yeah, the game's rigged. But the game's *always* rigged -- no matter what's used for money. You don't have to print money to manipulate the market, but you do have to have a stranglehold on the exchanges. Peer-to-peer decentralized exchanges will allow people to route around the manipulation. I don't vote, so no one in the government represents me or my interests. That's why I think it is accurate for me to refer to them as "them". I don't play their game. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
