LOL this dude was a scammer on this forum if I'm correct  1% compounding daily interest. Was great for those who got in early and got out before it collapsed  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=50822.0Pity the first post has been edited because it gave the full details of the scheme Doesn't matter, I called it out at the second post after OP (I haven't edited once) and the idiots in this forum still participated in the scam. Everybody knew it was a ponzi scheme and participated because of it, and that's why I lost pretty much all respect for this community here. |
|
|
|
|
Bumping
I'm requesting official scammer tagging of all forum accounts associated to BFL once they are convicted.
|
|
|
|
|
lol if there happens to be another exchange "hack" while that happens.
|
|
|
|
I agree about that; however, there are various practices, such as fractional reserve banking, that exist in various financial circles that have become acceptable means upon which to transact - and sometimes there can exist some murkiness regarding whether any laws are being violated, especially in an industry (BTC space) that remains largely unregulated.
First they laugh at you, then they send in the FEDs, then you are in jail. |
|
|
|
 I have no words. Awesome. Pure gold right here boyz. Top right -> actual Buttcoin |
|
|
|
|
laff, watch this thread becoming yet another attempt at pumping saggy butts.
|
|
|
|
imo its scammers dropping coins making BTC down not alts.
There are no scammers in Bitcoin by definition, just free market businesses. |
|
|
|
By price (and tx volume) movement you mean rate of change, or just absolute price? And I'm not sure I understand what you mean by 'scaled so they sum up to the same area'. You mean scaled so they initially sum up?
I'm wondering if this is similar to an observation I also made: network growth seems to have slowed down, while price seems to have continued growing as fast before (at least until recently).
Just the absolute price, not rate of change, I meant the price over time. The scaling is just the sum of all usd transaction value ticks divided by the sum of all price ticks over a two year period. (made with blockchain.info csv and libreoffice). The bright red areas and the bright blue areas should contain the same amount of pixels. Yes I think that is related to your observation, how I interpret it is that during the last months people have hoarded bitcoins rather than spent them. This may be caused buy the declining price as well but I the relationship is probably more complex than that. Case in point is hoarding doesn't contribute to bullish price action, it just dampens bearish price action. |
|
|
|
Good point, but: USD tx volume is more of an economic, i.e. fundamental metric. I specifically set out to look at the market valuation. Market cap isn't really such a bad proxy for that... I'd argue that the biggest counter argument against using total_coins*price is that 'all mined' is not identical to 'all in use or being traded'. On the other hand, mining is a huge price factor, I'm sure everyone agrees. And the market cap definition based on total coins /does/ account for that. So perhaps the absolute mcap numbers are off, but the relative change should be reasonably well motivated... Reason: there were 8 million new coins created out of thin air in the last 3+ years, and the market had to absorb them somehow (even if they are hoarded, at the time of their creation, their value was based on market value per unit, so someone who puts $1000 worth of coins into cold storage is effectively keeping that value in Bitcoin). Mcap does account for that, even if some initial number of coins is out of circulation/trading. Well, if you include all Bitcoins (newly mined, hoarded, spent) by definition, yes but then the market price times issued coins becomes the only correct metric, there isn't even any use for a moving average if you do that. But have a look at this chart:  It's the past two years of price movement and USD transaction volume movement scaled so they both sum up to the same area. During the run-up the scaled transaction volume was more or less consistently above the price, that changed after the last ATH. I'm not going as far as saying it's the reason for the bear market, but it's certainly interesting. |
|
|
|
I wonder what would happen to the gold mining companies if they tried 'hodling' their gold until it went to the moon...
gold mining companies do not have other revenue stream Right there are totally no gold mines on the stock exchange. Cryptocurrency miners on the other hand...... |
|
|
|
Anything on requiring auditing yet? We're in-between exchange fuckups at the moment so it would be best to have that in place before the next one happens. |
|
|
|
Not really a counter, just this: It's possible that nobody who is starting mining now breaks even, even with cheap or stolen electricity. (If you'll assume a constant btc price, free electricity and >2% periodic difficulty increase for instance no consumer miner makes money ever)
In that sense Bitcoin mining is a gamble in it's own and so larger mining farms aren't necessarily more risk-aware.
This is not the case, it certainly is still doable to mine at profit, even at current price With a theoretical ROI of over a year which is far from certain. If the price tanks even further I'd even say that most of these farms gonna be out of business a year from now. |
|
|
|
I've already tried to make this same point multiple times in this thread, but it just seems to make the naysayers more stubborn. These mega-mining farms are working to devour their competition while raking in the dough. They're not delusional hodlers who are betting on BTC going to the moon in 10 years or whatever. There's profits to be taken right now, and these people are ready to milk this cash cow dry.
Yeah i'm yet to hear a valid counter point to this. Although i don't see them as evil, just part of the ecosystem/capitalism. Hope the halving and a risk of a hard fork if they get out of control would keep them in check. Not really a counter, just this: It's possible that nobody who is starting mining now breaks even, even with cheap or stolen electricity. (If you'll assume a constant btc price, free electricity and >2% periodic difficulty increase for instance no consumer miner makes money ever) In that sense Bitcoin mining is a gamble in it's own and so larger mining farms aren't necessarily more risk-aware. I think we'll see a few weeks where mining costs more in electricity alone some time in the coming months like we did in 2011. |
|
|
|
|
Larger and larger mining farms are not what's increasing selling pressure. To the contrary, the larger the farm the cheaper the electricity and the cheaper the hardware to better the operating margin becomes.
A high operating margin gives miners the option to retain more of the mined Bitcoins while a low operating margin forces the miner to sell or at least get more capital by other means to pay bills.
|
|
|
|
Speculative statement "I think in November" becomes a concrete date. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin won't go mainstream for a generation or two. People don't value freedomThe Libertarian Version Of Freedom™ enough... yet.
True, but also FIXED |
|
|
|
There's nothing wrong with that reasoning. Financial markets aren't built on much more than delusions.
Not by that merit, because it's kind of arbitrary. You can argue that the Bitcoin market cap could be higher based on that or even that it should be higher based upon some rational use case, but not that it should be higher based upon the Dr. Evil "One Million Dollars" method of valuation. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
