Maybe it will be implemented, but shhhh... Zerocoin needs independence  after carefully reading Zerocoin may just be added in anoncoin.. ...So, Zerocoin can be thought of as a built-in, no trust coin-mixing service. Right now, the Anoncoin team are deciding on a sensible exchange rate between Anoncoin and Zerocoin, and what percentage of Anoncoin block rewards will be paid out in Zerocoin – given the latter will be incorporated as an additional part of the ANC blockchain. In fact, Zerocoin was initially developed as an addition to Bitcoin. For whatever reason, perhaps caution against adding complex new features by the developers, or perhaps privacy being lower on their agenda than mainstream / regulatory acceptance, it seems unlikely the Bitcoin will adopt Zerocoin into its protocol any time soon. This opens the door for Anoncoin, likely the first altcoin to integrate Zerocoin, to become the preferred coin for those who value their financial privacy. Let’s face it; such a privilege has long been lost to users of credit cards, electronic banking, wire services, PayPal or anything that isn’t cash, barter or carefully-deployed cryptocurrency. Anoncoin is shaping up to be the complete privacy package. I suspect it will function as a great testbed for anonymity features, as well as having a bright future of its own. Anoncoin is premined. Also, zerocoin is now going to be its own alt coin, not an add on as was originally discussed on their website. The zerocoin website has not been updated for awhile. |
|
|
|
|
This is a blessing in disguise. Bfl not very reliable. Please do your own thorough research on bfl deliveries in this forum before you hand over your hard earned.
|
|
|
|
Actually I know for a fact that Steam (yes steam) is shopping Bitcoin merchant services
To da mooooooooon.... Lol.  |
|
|
|
However, the monetary system DOES have a need for change. It's quite obvious. And people want the change, and are willing (as we all are) to risk our savings on this new idea. If you have billions or trillions of dollars invested in the bitcoin system, what's going to be the incentive to get everyone to move over to another system? The network will get stronger by the year as more people are involved.
Yes, it has to be changed. But it is childish to think that something this simplistic and flawed as bitcoin can actually replace it. The thing is that monetary systems have to go private, so free-competition will decide the success of different systems. The problem with the current monetary system is that free-competition doesn't apply and state law determines the system that people have to use. Without competition, the incentive for quality improvement is very low, so the quality of the current system(s) is also low. Also, you miss the point that bitcoin can be improved. We aren't even on version 1 yet. So the clunky bitcoin system of today may not at all look like the sleek and shiny bitcoin system of a few years from now. Certainly the more people use bitcoin, the more needs there will be for services which are based around the bitcoin system, like the automobile. The whole thing feeds itself.
I know that bitcoin can be improved, but studying the history of improvements, I think that progression is very slow. So slow that when a serious organization decides to use it's skills and resources to create their own alternative, then BTC won't have a chance. And I also understand that core financial properties, like the system that runs the inflow of new money (what I consider overly simplistic and flawed), won't ever be changed with bitcoin. State law defines the currency in which you have to pay taxes, however it does not define what currency you are allowed to use. At least not yet. I can't see any "serious" organization able to create a competitive coin to Btc at the moment. The banks? Government? All too centralized. The core financial properties of bitcoin looks okay to me, apart from the public ledger being public. If Bitcoin is so overly simplistic and flawed, I suggest you build your own coin and let the free markets decide which coin it wants to use, right?  That's the beauty of it all, if you don't like it then don't use it. Go use something else you think is better. Go to another forum and promote your own coin. No point being all superior and saying Bitcoin is bad and will crash etc... AFAIK, you have one week left before your crash predictions are proven totally imaginary. |
|
|
|
For me, the whole point of spending hours in reading all of you guys in here is to get different views and perspectives. So I would appreciate it even more without fighting parts thats all im saying Couldn't agree more. In my experience the only thing to come out of I tense debates is further understanding of the subject. Being proven wrong is one of my favorite/least favorite ways of learning. However with mabsark it is a different case. He has already shared his speculation in the speculation thread and many people there disagreed so he changed threads and started over spamming here. Debating about future difficulty is and always will be pointless without a magic crystal ball and should be left in mining speculation. A better thing to debate would be how AM will stack up against the competition. And looking at the competition(or lack of) it seems to me that asicminer will have an easy time coming out on top if they can just deliver. To my mind friedcat is a smart operator who is aiming for lowest power consumption per ghs. He doesn't care about heat and performance per chip because he has empty liquid cooled racks waiting in HK. As he is a manufacturer, chip cost is irrelevant but most likely cheaper than 20nm and 28nm chips. He then makes a lot of chips and out hashes everyone based on power consumption alone. Then he prices retail chips for max retail profit margins, whatever the market will pay. If gen 3 power consumption is less than say 0.5 watt per ghs, friedcat will kickass. From memory he is aiming for 0.2 watt per ghs. If he fails and hits 0.3 watt per ghs, he is still going to kickass. |
|
|
|
$9.49 per ghs? Lol. That will not ROI based on current exchange and projected difficulty increase by feb 15, IMHO. http://www.bitcoinx.com/profit/Takes a lifetime to build a reputation and ten minutes to trash it. Mr Abiodun, that is a name I shall forever remember to stay away from, speaking for myself of course. Ok, so where the you buy yours and for how much? BFL and these guys seem to be offering the best out there. I'm a newbie, and thought the best thing out is CEX, but that is nothing but a casino where the unacquainted get ra ped for ghs. I want to spread my risk, hence why I ask. Hashfast was looking good till I heard they are in troubled with the law. It's one thing to point out what is expensive, help us all out and point to the 'cheap' providers (and reputable of course, I got burned by an offer that was too goo to be true..it wasn't true) [/quote] Try dzcoop. Even their worst deals are better than cloudhashing, IMHO. However, at this late state stage you may have missed out on the best 20nm and 28nm deals. Even on these deals of less than $4 per ghs, ROI is a risky proposition due to difficulty increases. I think best bet ATM is buying btcs, until difficulty calms down to sub 20% increases after new tech and asicminer gen 3 comes out in q1. If difficulty doesn't come down, most miners won't ROI on their equipment, IMHO. |
|
|
|
The Bitcoin mining company CloudHashing.com announced today the first guarantee in the cloud mining space along with 2014 pricing which undercuts all cloud-based competitors.AUSTIN, Texas, Jan. 1, 2014 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- via PRWEB - In the Bitcoin mining industry, where projections but not promises are the norm, CloudHashing.com's announcement could shake up an already extremely competitive industry at a time when Bitcoin is becoming more mainstream. The company announced that customers can now pre-order cutting-edge Bitcoin mining contracts at a cost of just $9.49 per Gigahash/sec guaranteed to begin Feb. 15 or full refunds will be given. This cost-per-Gigahash is significantly less than anything announced, and CloudHashing.com's established track record of delivering cloud mining services since July makes the announcement a potential game changer. Additionally, CloudHashing.com announced a reduction in its mining pool fee from ten percent to three percent along with the elimination of management fees. These fees are used to pay for electricity and maintenance in the datacenters. "Our mission at CloudHashing.com is to bring Bitcoin mining to everyone in an easy and affordable way," said Emmanuel Abiodun, founder and chief executive officer. "By building our newest datacenter at such a massive scale using the latest technology, we are able to make these kinds of guarantees where others can't." The Dallas, Texas datacenter Abiodun has built is based upon the latest CoinTerra 28nm ASIC architecture at an unprecedented scale. Through the unique relationship CloudHashing.com has built with CoinTerra and others, they are able to scale with demand in a nimble way to bring hashing power to market very quickly. CloudHashing.com's announcement comes on the heels of their company recently being featured in the New York Times article "Into the Bitcoin Mines". Cloudhashing.com is a Bitcoin mining technology company where customers can purchase mining contracts and earn bitcoins via their website. It is a pioneer in the Bitcoin industry and was the first to introduce cloud-based Bitcoin mining. The London-based company has thousands of customers worldwide. Bitcoin is an increasingly popular online currency and technology that is changing the way many are purchasing things online in the same way the World Wide Web revolutionized how people connect to one another. This article was originally distributed on PRWeb. For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.prweb.com/releases/CloudHashing/Bitcoin/prweb11456205.htmContact: CloudHashing.com Michael Hatfield michael@cloudhashing.com+1 757-903-1972 $9.49 per ghs? Lol. That will not ROI based on current exchange and projected difficulty increase by feb 15, IMHO. http://www.bitcoinx.com/profit/Takes a lifetime to build a reputation and ten minutes to trash it. Mr Abiodun, that is a name I shall forever remember to stay away from, speaking for myself of course. |
|
|
|
That's strange. They were vetted by the nyt.
We don't have to scream 'scam' every time we have a bad experience with bitcoin. I am new to it and have been burnt once already by a new provider. Screaming scam doesn't help us in our goal as a 'community' - helping bitcoin gain traction with the mainstream.
This is a community of pirates I'm afraid. Cloudhashing are one of the biggest scams IMHO. |
|
|
|
or insider information trading  Very consistent, looks like insider. |
|
|
|
Do people realize that if there were 120 other funds like SecondMarket with the same BTC holdings, there would not be enough bitcoins to go around?
That's why its only going to take a couple of hand fulls of these type of funds to move the price to 5 figures.
The inexperienced are trading it! Unbelievable in my view. I speculate bitcoins need to hit some kind of "terminal value" which will then allow early adopters to spend satoshis. 1 million per Btc would do it for me. |
|
|
|
So what is the purpose of these Bitcoin funds? Right now probably only 10% of the Bitcoins mined are actively being traded or used as currency and the rest are being held as a form of investment. So here are these two large trusts holding 200k-300k coins? eliminating them from ever being used as what Bitcoins were design for, which is currency. I am pretty sure these trusts are going to get larger and hold larger reserves of Bitcoins. What is the purpose of these trusts holding onto a large reserve of Bitcoins other than placing a value on them. I understand if Bitcoins can be actively used as a form of currency and be used to purchase goods and services, but if the majority of the coins that are traded are owned by trust funds and the value of Bitcoins are dictated by these funds, which means they are associated hand in hand with traditional currency it simply defeats the purpose of Bitcoins.
The purpose is to push up the value of bitcoins to a very high amount. Early adopters with bitcoins will then spend satoshis which will hopefully be worth $0.10 or whatever amount you think. Get comfortable with the idea of large open ended trusts holding bitcoins. They won't want to destroy the value of bitcoins either. They will protect the value of bitcoins because it will be their lifeblood. |
|
|
|
wont shareholders of this trust crush the marked as soon as they can sell? even if only 5% want to sell, thats 3500 Btc :/ And pretty sure some want to secrue nice winnings
Given current user expansion rate of 30 to 40% per month, I don't think many would sell. Eventually, I think we'll be left with a few very large investment trusts that are open ended, holding most of the bitcoins. When a large sale needs to be done, it will most likely go off market to avoid damaging market valuations. This is how large holdings of gold work today. Governments sit on most of the gold and they trade off market for very large transactions. I speculate that the FBI bitcoin stash will form part of the US government's future permanent hoard. |
|
|
|
Yes, I was wrong about Labcoin and yes I was wrong about the how much the hash rate would increase by. I never claimed to be infallible, I've probably been wrong millions of times in my life. So what? Have you never been wrong? Who here hasn't been wrong before?
Also, how many people here predicted that the hash rate would be this high. Not many.
Does any of that invalidate the arguments I've put forth? No, of course not. Go through my history as much as you want and put up everything I've been wrong about, I'm sure that will distract people from the actual argument I made.
I don't want to discract anyone from anything, but you was blaming people for haven't heard your suggestions in past and they lost money because that. I knew you only in the labcoin thread and luckily never trusted your advices I pretty much hit the ignore button on mabsark a few weeks ago. I think we're dealing with a little 12 year old. |
|
|
|
Congrats for December! Very clear improvement. Keep up the good work (and let us know as soon as you have anything more to share re the acquisition).
+1 |
|
|
|
Seems like a lot of people are assuming that the Gen 3 will be a success.
It is still too early to make such a call considering that the Gen 2 had to be cancelled due to the under performing chip design.
Even if the Gen 3 chip does perform, there are still 3-4 months before they are implemented in functional miners, and that is a very long time in the Bitcoin world.
If gen 3 is lower cost to run it won't matter when it comes out. It will simply outhash everything out there and make older chips obsolete. |
|
|
|
|
Current Btc users are less than 1 Million.
Current user growth rate is around 30 to 40% per month. That is shockingly good expansion. I can't think of anything else on the planet that is doing that.
Number of users will double in about 2 months. If transaction volume rises at similar rate, we should see Btc value double every two months, which will take us to $10k just after mid 2014.
If the open ended investment trusts come into play and start hoarding Btcs then I would expect Btc values to jump much higher faster. This would especially be the case if IRA accounts are allowed to invest and the Winklevoss ETF is listed, allowing retail investors to get in on the action. By mid 2014, the Winklevoss Trust will have been in application for 12 months, which is around the time that it should normally be approved assuming nothing goes wrong.
The amount of money from investors allocating just 1% of their portfolios to Bitcoins as a "just in case" investment will easily push up the $10 Billion cap many times, IMHO.
This will eventually end up kind of like gold where sovereign authorities sit on vaults of gold. There will be large open ended investment trusts holding Bitcoins as very long term investments. If a large transaction needs to be made, they'll most likely do it off market to avoid hurting the market.
Obviously, regulatory risks could impact on progression. However, it looks like governments worldwide appear to have calmed down.
|
|
|
|
|
Does anybody know whether we have tapeout confirmation from Black Arrow?
|
|
|
|
You cannot deposit BTC to a "network" in Ripple either, everything besides XRP is tied to an issuer that needs to explicitly be either trusted or at least traded for (you can set up and fill a buy order for BTC.Bitstamp even if you don't have a trust line towards Bitstamp).
And therein lies the problem. Btcs work because trust is not required. It is digital cash. Ripple requires trust but fundamentally some people should never be trusted. How many times have we seen "trustworthy" characters end up ripping people off already? Too countless to mention. I don't understand how ripple can overcome this issue. What is to stop someone who has already built up xrps from running a Ponzi scheme ala madoff style? Plus the fact that the initial developers holding 20% of all xrps, makes me think it is ripe for an abuse of trust. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
