Chicken and egg. Not enough customers for them to bother changing anything, not enough merchants for most non-bitcoiners to want the option.
They'll come on board once bitcoin is bigger. Better to focus on companies more interested in getting in early.
No one is going to to buy Bitcoins just to spend them on Amazon. Not a chicken and an egg problem, simply a sign of relatively low adoption. They will use bitcoin to spend on amazon because it will reduce overall costs verses using a credit card |
|
|
|
So how much can you make using martingale? It seems very little then.
I have tried a few runs with one satoshi as base. At lucky times, I made 200% the amount in one day while I have lost 0.001 within seconds on many other days. Your expected profit is and will be negative since House edge exist, people only use it because they think they can succeed. Do you have any screen shots of you doing this? I think that it is very far fetched that you could have tippled your money using the martingale system. Unfortunately, no. It was pretty long time ago. Impossible to even profit from this in a long run. In many occasions, I have got a 18 lose streak. It was probably just my luck. I call BS on this as 200% profit means that you have thousands of wins prior to losing 18 in a row. Your odds of that happening are just not there Its up to you to believe it or not, I left it there for a few days, from 0.001 to 0.002. Mathematically, it simply doesn't work. You are more likely to lose all you have through a bad streak than you are of reaching 200% profit. The exact calculation can be found lying around on the web. It is possible but it is just very unlikely. It is even less credible with the absence of proof. |
|
|
|
Given how mining work for bitcoin, I do not think the price will stable.
It has to keep going up so miners can have "profit" in either profit or transaction fee.
Well, it can still go up and be relatively stable as well. Generally speaking if something is rising in price at a rapid rate it will not be considered stable. And small event such as the FBI auction cause price to go up over 10% should let people know how volatile the price is. A 10% change in the market price of bitcoin is not very big by bitcoin standards. It has seen price swings of 50% or more in both directions in one day. |
|
|
|
There is a maximum amount of energy that can be used on earth (the amount of energy that the sun emits. If you were able to use all of the energy that the sun emits then it would still take several lifetimes in order to crack a private key using the most efficient miners that is possible.
There is a difference between innovator and scientist. Scientist will quote and do all the math saying why certain things are impossible until innovator prove them wrong. Most technology advancement are done by innovator. Concept by itself is useless unless someone find a way to implement it. The current academy regime are filled with people who can "talk" but can't "do" with all the "fact" and "reasoning/math" why certain things are impossible. University and college are now dinosaur. Times and times again these academic type are proven wrong by someone with little or no "qualification". It is generally accepted that certain things are possible but we just don't know how to do it yet. The most theoretically possible efficiency of computing (in terms of computing power - read hashrate - per W is not something we are able to achieve as of yet AFAIK, but it is generally accepted that it cannot be done more efficiently If we take a look at how science advanced through ages, we inevitably come to the conclusion that it is not even things that we think impossible at the time become possible in due course, but such things are made possible that we can't even think of. This may be true but things that have been proven to be impossible have generally not been proven to not be impossible |
|
|
|
....
Savings in money do not carry risk - when the money is good. I mentioned also money denominated securities, because they loose value to inflation just like money. It is basically loans - you lend money for others to invest, but still take a share of the risk.
Old advice for prudence is to save some money - which is risk free when the money is good, when you are comfortable with saving in money you can invest. With bad money, this is inpossible. Please distinguish saving in money from investment, it is not possible to discuss these things in a constructive way if the wrong words are used.
So inflation in both consumables and wages is neutral to consumption, but kills savings in money.
A quick addition to that. If the money isn't a safe store of value then its no longer money, that's what defines money from currency. Major western currencies are closer to scrip than money. As long as your currency is a stable store of value then it can be considered as money. 4% inflation, would in general be considered stable, especially considering that interest rates on deposits historically tends to be right around the rate of inflation |
|
|
|
I don't usually trust anyone, same goes with exchanges but I do keep some altcoins on them, why? Because I can't download all of their wallets and install them on my pc, so its a safety precaution, and I keep them their until I can get some profits outta them and then I sell and move on to next one or turn to btc and withdraw.
Totally agree on the altcoin wallets. I don't trust a lot of the developers or the software. Lots of BTC wallet draining malware out there. It's too bad, because the best way to get in on an alt pump is to buy before it hits an exchange.  This is another example as why it is not good to try to invest in altcoins. You must trade your computer's security for the security of your funds. |
|
|
|
Have you calculated reinvesting the dividends? Like on Cryptsy, you can buy fractions of a mining share.
So what if you reinvested the payouts on a weekly basis?
Theoretically you'd get exponential growth. Perhaps this would work? Could you do the math on something like this?
That would probably fix it. The problem is: you will never then have BTC, you will only have GHs until the end of times. Let's say you buy 1000 GHs. These 1000 GHs after the first month give you 0.799 BTC. You buy 0.799 of GHs (no matter how much it is). Now you have 1000 GHs that will never catch up the investment, AND 0.799 of GHs that will never catch up the investment  I just trashed 150 Euro like an idiot, I can admit it. But I wonder all those people in there with thousands of GHs... how comes they didn't make the count before buying so much of it? I am not familiar with the service you are using, but on Cryptsy you can trade your mining shares back to BTC at any given time. So eventually, if you reinvest the dividends your 1 share will be 2, then 4, then 16, then 256. Or probably less because of the increase in mining difficulty. But eventually, you could cash in these shares for BTC. I calculated that if you reinvested the dividends on a weekly basis, after a few years you'd be generating like 1 BTC per day. Of course, this doesn't take into account the increase in difficulty, the decrease in share values, and of course the risk that Cryptsy gets Goxxed. So as intrigued as I have been about mining, my experiences have only lost me BTC. The good news is that after a year I'll get my principal back, so it shouldn't be a loss...but I ain't gonna get ri BTCh But watch: if you cash back your BTC, somebody else is losing. So, while you CAN do something by TRADING, you can't do anything by mining. It's just another asset you are trading, but in general that asset value is nothing. The only real winner is the cloud mining service. That makes no sense. The assets that you've accrued are directly related to mining. Without the mining dividends being reinvested, you have no value beyond the principal. So while cloud mining may not be great, your premise is flawed. It is not about how much hashpower that you purchase, it is about the price of your hashpower in terms of GHs (or THs) |
|
|
|
Has there been any news on how well newegg.com is doing collecting BTC now? curious?
Searing
doubt they'll release that info just yet. the latest will probably be the end of the 3rd quarter in september i think. i'm suspecting that it'll be good news, but not enough to influence the price of bitcoin significantly. They may be able to give some preliminary information about early sales numbers. IIRC overstock provided I believe it was the first day's sales only a few weeks after they started accepting bitcoin |
|
|
|
http://igg.me/p/822701/xWhat do you guys think? Legit or scam? If this is real it could mean that difficulty would go up even more and our old miners would become obselete even faster. My thoughts: 1) A 14nm ASIC is unlikely to come from a crowd funded source with no ASIC experience. 2) There are many problems with scaling ASICs that have not necessary been solved. The results may in fact be disappointing, maybe in the range of 1.6% faster and not as much power reduction as expected. 3) 14nm is very new and hasn't had time to mature. There will likely be smaller ASICs in coming years, but the huge gains are in. No it is more of a factor of using more ASICs not vastly faster ASICs. So I wonder if difficulty will plateau then? The difficulty rate growth will slow down, but the real question is when. Personally I think there is still more than a year before we start seeing a real plateau. At some point the amount of power used for bitcoin mining will become a limit to growth. Yeah. That's what I was thinking. At some point, the electricity costs will decide the plateau of difficulty. Interesting opinions! We still have quite a way to go before the difficulty will get to this point. |
|
|
|
If they run into similar problems with Titan this might be the end of their journey. There are already competitors with cheaper hardware.
I expect Titan to be fine; as I understand it the original KnC team moved from 28nm BTC rigs to 28nm LTC rigs and the noobs moved in to screw us on Neptune. People who pre-order Titan will have trouble getting back their investment. if you have 200MH/s today, you'd be mining 5BTC per month. That may be true at today's difficulty, however the difficulty will rise rapidly over time, making it difficult to recoup all of your initial investment for the miner and your electric costs. |
|
|
|
http://igg.me/p/822701/xWhat do you guys think? Legit or scam? If this is real it could mean that difficulty would go up even more and our old miners would become obselete even faster. My thoughts: 1) A 14nm ASIC is unlikely to come from a crowd funded source with no ASIC experience. 2) There are many problems with scaling ASICs that have not necessary been solved. The results may in fact be disappointing, maybe in the range of 1.6% faster and not as much power reduction as expected. 3) 14nm is very new and hasn't had time to mature. There will likely be smaller ASICs in coming years, but the huge gains are in. No it is more of a factor of using more ASICs not vastly faster ASICs. So I wonder if difficulty will plateau then? Difficulty still has some ways to go as, if you exclude the initial cost of buying the miners, mining can be profitable after accounting for electric costs. |
|
|
|
You're ignoring a huge difference between real money and BTC. A business cannot risk actually touching BTC, as their banks would likely stop doing business with them. They also risk becoming a target of launderers, and thus risk criminal investigation. Besides the wild fluctuations in value that make BTC as a currency very dumb, the rampant criminal activity in this community assures that no business will touch BTC except through shady VC-funded ops like Bitpay.
You're getting pretty desperate to justify your outdated viewpoint, keep the blinders on, the world will move on without you  . Sorry for feeding the troll, I'll stop. i'm not quite sure if he's a troll, but he's definitely wrong. overstock has hoarded some bitcoins, and im sure banks are still working with them. Banks court big business not the other way around. Banks do court big businesses however they also have compliance teams and risk teams that can veto transactions and relationships that are too risky |
|
|
|
I used to know a couple of people who would fall for those fake "Download" buttons that try to install junk on your PC.
I still know people who fall for this. Some of these peoe are IT SPECIALISTS. And when I'm with them, they ask me "Why didn't it work?" And I have to go on a five-minute explanation explaining why one download button isn't the one they need, since they cannot understand "It's an ad. The real button is over here." I seem to know the least tech-savvy people. A few don't even know what RAM is. It really does disappoint me. But I am curious to know what the average tech say vines was. That could have a big impact on why everything played out the way it did. Sigh I know the same, people will fall for that fake download button a lot more than I admit Of course it comes loaded with a viral file or something of the sort instead of a legit download lol. Hmm IT Specialist = Technical Support guy lol unless they are like the A rank rep they don't know much Which is why I ask for the promotion rank right off if its a challenging task. If you are referring to the fake download ads on cnet for example then you really simply need to know what you are looking for and you need to look closely at the entire page prior to clicking anything. I would say it is less of knowing what you are doing and more about attention to detail. |
|
|
|
Reading the weird messages from the dust transactions to the address is entertaining  That's another great advantage of bitcoin over the obsolete payment systems. You would never get such fun as spam, hate mail, and mockery on you bank account statement. Anonymous messages that you cannot erase and everybody can read. Way to go, bitcoin.  protip: just because something is visible at blockchain.info, that something is not necessarily embedded in The Blockchain. Even if it is not embedded in the blockchain, blockchain.info is large enough so that the public notes work well enough for this purpose. |
|
|
|
Overstock has a limited supply of what it can sell by concept. Amazon has long been the biggest online retailer. Amazon would likely wish to accept bitcoin because of it's cost verses other payment methods, not for a competitive advantage.
The sheer volitality would overshadow the cost advantage for a company as big as Amazon. If Amazon truly accepts bitcoin one day, then we'll know bitcoin has made it. But I honestly don't think the infrastructure is there yet for bitcoin to be accepted by Amazon. A company like Coinbase or bitpay works fine for small to medium size companies, but I don't think either of them would cut it for a company as large as Amazon. But back to the original topic. If you really want Amazon to accept bitcoin, here's what I'd do. Bypass the customer service reps and go straight to the CEO himself and ask him if he'd be willing to consider accepting bitcoins. He's the one who has the power to make the decision. Jeff Bezos's email is jeff@amazon.com. First of all, i doubt that is his real amazon email address. Secondly, there is no reason why amazon couldn't build their own bitcoin processing service to use for themselves. All they would have to do is work with a number of exchanges to automatically sell a certain amount of bitcoin when they receive it from customers. The exchange and amazon could each take out a letter of credit to guarantee eachothers' performance so amazon would not need to transfer the bitcoin right away and amazon could trust the exchange with fiat and bitcoin that it holds on it's behalf. |
|
|
|
The total $ swaps stay around 29M$, while the bid sum is just below 4M$. Looks so healthy ... not.
But as long as the BTC swaps don't jump, this can continue for a while.
In order for this data to have any meaning, you would need to know just how leveraged traders that take out these swaps are, if they are only leveraged 1.001 to 1 then they could simply close a small portion of their holdings with little impact on the market if they cannot borrow at reasonable terms. |
|
|
|
Technology stills evolving, more efficient mining hardware will appears, adding that not only Bitcoin has energy consumption problems, the rest of the world needs now alternative clean forms of energy that i believe are being researched so hard right now...
Besides, current prices are too low, some things would be different if Bitcoin goes to the thousand again...
The problem would be worse if the bitcoin price rises, as mega farms could afford more energy to waste. Other payment methods use electricity as well. It is just that it is not as transparent as to how much electricity visa for example uses to process their payments. Visa must power their office buildings, computers for employees, computers that process transactions, banks that send money to/from visa (their employees, offices, and computers), printers that print customer statements, call centers to resolve disputes. |
|
|
|
the fed has done a pretty good job of minimizing inflation with interest rates over the past several decades.
Do you really believe the graph and what you just said? I would argue that 4% inflation (the ~rate after the 70's) is a good target to try for in reference to inflation. During the 70's and the oil crisis the Fed did a very poor job handling inflation. 4% inflation is just above what the Fed would like it to be at as of now, and is much higher then it is now. Exactly! 4% is a happy medium between everyone's life savings is rapidly declining in value and that inflation is so low that there is serious risk of wide spread, long term deflation and economic contraction 4% inflation is very high. Losing 40% of your saving every 10 years compounded to financial elite on top of taxes mean no ordinary citizen will be able to have any saving. Only if your income doesn't keep up. If you sell goods or services those prices rise w inflation No, this a common misunderstanding. Even when you pay raise comes timely, is is only neutral for your consumption, not for your savings in money and money denomitated securities. It makes saving in money impossible, and force savers to investments involving risk. All investments carry some type of risk, otherwise there would be no incentive for others to pay you interest. Traditional "savers" (those who put money in the bank) are risking that inflation will eat away at the buying power of the money they have in the bank. Savings in money do not carry risk - when the money is good. I mentioned also money denominated securities, because they loose value to inflation just like money. It is basically loans - you lend money for others to invest, but still take a share of the risk. Old advice for prudence is to save some money - which is risk free when the money is good, when you are comfortable with saving in money you can invest. With bad money, this is inpossible. Please distinguish saving in money from investment, it is not possible to discuss these things in a constructive way if the wrong words are used. So inflation in both consumables and wages is neutral to consumption, but kills savings in money. But why would anyone pay you to hold your money if you were not taking on any kind of risk? You should understand that anything you do with your money will carry some level of risk. If you spend all of your money then you could lose money in the way of late charges and interest payments if you had an emergency and needed to spend more money then you had. If you invest in the stock market then you risk that the price of your stocks declines more then the amount of dividends paid. If you invest in bonds then you risk that the issuing company is not able to repay their debt. |
|
|
|
So how much can you make using martingale? It seems very little then.
I have tried a few runs with one satoshi as base. At lucky times, I made 200% the amount in one day while I have lost 0.001 within seconds on many other days. Your expected profit is and will be negative since House edge exist, people only use it because they think they can succeed. Do you have any screen shots of you doing this? I think that it is very far fetched that you could have tippled your money using the martingale system. Unfortunately, no. It was pretty long time ago. Impossible to even profit from this in a long run. In many occasions, I have got a 18 lose streak. It was probably just my luck. I call BS on this as 200% profit means that you have thousands of wins prior to losing 18 in a row. Your odds of that happening are just not there |
|
|
|
They will end very bad if they commited the error of bombing Russia, thats like suicide.
Georgia did the same mistake in 2008 (killing Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia), and paid very dearly for that. Georgia 2008 and Ukraine 2014 are very similar. Both the governments fail to realize that the NATO is just using their soldiers as cannon fodder. In case of a war with Russia, the NATO will offer no support at all, just like what happened in 2008. They will end very bad if they commited the error of bombing Russia, thats like suicide.
Russia is a military superpower, it isn't as strong as it was 30 years ago, but still very strong. Any country that tries to attack Russia (or any other superpower) is making a mistake Ukrainian probably hoping US will intervene. Georgia incident should teach them not to rely on US and Europe so much. I would not count on Obama using the US military Agreed. There is 0 appetite for military deployments by the US. The outcry over Libya and the scuttled plan to meddle in Syria showed that. I wasn't saying that there is not appetite for military deployment in the US but rather that Obama is not going to use our military for political reasons |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
