Has masterluc left us?
Yes, till 2015-2016 |
|
|
|
Thank you very much, I didn't know this but I did know that id never sign a message as the one we are discussing. |
|
|
|
Indeed, this whole discussion and peer bullying is stupid. Enough with the Rpietila bashing.
Let the guy speak his mind, the same as we all do. I know lots of people don't like the way he expresses himself or agree with his analysis, but be honest now..
I'd much rather read any of rpietila's post (I always find them interesting and thought-provoking, even when I disagree with what he's saying or how) than most of the sub-par content I'm used to finding both here and in other places like Reddit.
Let's bask in how different we all are and how rich that makes us. No need to alienate people, specially active people who contribute original content on a regular basis.
Some of his threads are interesting and his "general" advices are sound (like the SSS thread). All his price calls are wrong and he is a contrarian indicator. All his tales about successful trading, manipulation, etc. are proven bullshit. He makes most of that up. Finally, his business model is to create the character of a super-wealthy super-successful trader so he can attract the attention of newcomers and then sell them BTC with a markup. It's pretty obvious and he has even admitted it in some sanity moments he has had. |
|
|
|
Lol. This is the stupidest fucking thread derail in the history of bitcointalk.
Welcome to the Wall Observer. This thread has always been a mix of: i) infinite trolling ii) a lot of off-topic ramblings iii) some deep philosophical discussion iv) very little TA Plus, is kinda on-topic: Rpietila says in this thread (and all over the forum) he has 10k BTC and, specifically, that he uses them to manipulate the market. We could just use less ego-filled chatter and more crypto proof. |
|
|
|
you havent shipped anything yet, so stop talking like you have. Also, STOP bashing KNC, clearly you are trying to ride their coat tails.
 I never claimed to have shipped anything, where did you get that idea? HashFast does have a single chip running (underclocked) at 500GH, which is an impressive feat. KnC shipped hardware, and we have benefited by learning from their mistakes. It's not "bashing" to acknowledge their issues with PSUs, shipping/packaging, and drivers. It's not "riding their coat tails" to explain the exact steps HashFast has taken to avoid the unfortunate problems experienced by KNC. When companies compete to offer better products and services to the public, it's a good thing and we all profit!  Best, -HF_CL You might have learnt from their mistakes, but you didn't learn from the one thing they did right: they shipped almost on time (I received my units on 3/4th October and the deadline was 31st September). That's the MOST important thing. Time is the essence in this business. This is why you get angry replies: you seem to be bashing KnC and bragging on how superior you are, while you screwed up the shipping dates by 2 months - that's an EPIC fail and that is something you are supposed to control. No one blames you of difficulty growth, everybody blames you on being late 2 long months that make ROI impossible. Nobody would have bought your batch #1 units if they weren't expected for October. |
|
|
|
china will go thru 5500 soon, they already punctured it and now they are oversold
Having seen my magic, perhaps you can now publicly acknowledge that I have 10,000 bitcoins, apologize, stfu and gtfo. OK?  If you want to prove that just sign a message with an address holding 10k and put that signed message in your signature - no need for nobody to "acknowledge", that would be a hard cold proof. That's pure non spoofable crypto, heart and soul of Bitcoin. That's not hard cold proof. It's susceptible to Man in the Middle attack. Care to elaborate that? How could rpietila perform "a man in the middle attack" and make bitcointalk.org users to believe he signed a message with an address holding 10k BTC if he is not in control of an address with such an amount? Because there is nothing linking the Bitcoin address to his forum account. Hypothetically speaking, he could just ask a friend who has access to 10K BTC to sign a message and just post it. The difference is there is the possibility he can get 10K BTC account to sign a message, but he may not necessary control it. But that's no man in the middle attack, in that case Risto would just be "borrowing" the coins for a specific purpose - signing the message, which is a proof he can have access (at least for that very purpose of signing the message) to 10k coins. In any case, only a retard would accept to use 10k of his own coins to sign a message like "this coins belong to Risto Pietila", in practical terms Risto's "friend" would be handing to Risto the control of those bitcoins. That's like signing a contract, explain to a judge that "it was just a favor". No. The owner of those coins could sign the message for him. Risto would never need to control them. Virtualfaqs is right. Finally: If I have to prove on a forum that I own a $10M mansion, how about uploading a valid and verifiable contract of ownership of such mansion in my name? Wouldn't you consider that a proof of ownership? Justin Bieber could be my friend and he could have signed the contract as a favour, without ever handing to me the keys. But that's beyond retarded and plainly ridiculous. As retarded, ridiculous and unlikely as expecting someone to cryptographically sign a message such as "This 10k BTC belong to Risto Pietila" with an address holding 10k BTC that do NOT belong to Risto. Probably you do not fully understand the strong implications of such a message - any cryptographically signed message is potentially binding, and that's why the QT client warns you about signing only messages to which content you fully agree. If Risto has such "friends" that sign those messages for him I congratulate and envy him. Uh, no, that's not the meatspace equivalent. There's no practical significance to signing someone else's message with your address. The person with the private key maintains full and absolute control. Said owner could simply transfer those coins after a suitable amount of time passed to satisfy everyone. The meatspace equivalent is telling Risto's buddies that he owns your house. We will have to agree to disagree: i) For you cryptographically signed messages have no significance, ii) for me they have a very strong significance. You do not "own" the coins; the private keys "own" the coins. Using the private key of an addy holding 10k BTC of your coins to sign a message stating than the owner is an individual other than you has a very strong significance for me and I wouldn't do it. As a start, I would be worried about that individual claiming in the future that that priv keys were stolen from him. Sure no judge would understand nothing about this (yet), so you might be right about the lack of "practical" significances as there are no legal precedents on that sense - but I bet there will be a lot of practical significances in the futures. I believe we will see a lot of smart properties/contracts implemented on the blockchain and a lot of legally binding agreements based on message-signing with addresses privkeys. In any case: I don't think rpietila has 10k BTC nor the access to someone with 10k BTC willing to sign on his behalf the following message: "these 10k BTC belong to Risto Pietila" |
|
|
|
|
TL;DR: Risto sign a message such as "this coins belong to Risto Pietila" with an address holding 10k BTC or gtfo and stfu.
|
|
|
|
china will go thru 5500 soon, they already punctured it and now they are oversold
Having seen my magic, perhaps you can now publicly acknowledge that I have 10,000 bitcoins, apologize, stfu and gtfo. OK? If you want to prove that just sign a message with an address holding 10k and put that signed message in your signature - no need for nobody to "acknowledge", that would be a hard cold proof. That's pure non spoofable crypto, heart and soul of Bitcoin. That's not hard cold proof. It's susceptible to Man in the Middle attack. Care to elaborate that? How could rpietila perform "a man in the middle attack" and make bitcointalk.org users to believe he signed a message with an address holding 10k BTC if he is not in control of an address with such an amount? Because there is nothing linking the Bitcoin address to his forum account. Hypothetically speaking, he could just ask a friend who has access to 10K BTC to sign a message and just post it. The difference is there is the possibility he can get 10K BTC account to sign a message, but he may not necessary control it. But that's no man in the middle attack, in that case Risto would just be "borrowing" the coins for a specific purpose - signing the message, which is a proof he can have access (at least for that very purpose of signing the message) to 10k coins. In any case, only a retard would accept to use 10k of his own coins to sign a message like "this coins belong to Risto Pietila", in practical terms Risto's "friend" would be handing to Risto the control of those bitcoins. That's like signing a contract, explain to a judge that "it was just a favor". No. The owner of those coins could sign the message for him. Risto would never need to control them. Virtualfaqs is right. Finally: If I have to prove on a forum that I own a $10M mansion, how about uploading a valid and verifiable contract of ownership of such mansion in my name? Wouldn't you consider that a proof of ownership? Justin Bieber could be my friend and he could have signed a contract transferring to me the ownership of his mansion as a favour, but without ever handing to me the keys. I might never have intention to ask him for the keys nor to live in his mansion, I could just want to show off in here... But JB agreeing to underwrite such a contract is beyond retarded and plainly ridiculous. As retarded, ridiculous and unlikely as expecting someone to cryptographically sign a message such as "This 10k BTC belong to Risto Pietila" with an address holding 10k BTC that do NOT belong to Risto. Probably you do not fully understand the strong implications of such a message - any cryptographically signed message is potentially binding, and that's why the QT client warns you about signing only messages to which content you fully agree. If Risto has such "friends" that sign those messages for him I congratulate and envy him. |
|
|
|
eh, you are no KNC.....
 That's true... HashFast's chips are about 3 times more powerful when compared on a GH per sq.mm basis. HashFast is shipping with top-shelf quality Sea Sonic PSUs, so our customers won't have to put up with exploding/self-immolating units like KNC's did. In addition, HashFast lined up an exclusive with CIARA, which means HashFast machines will be assembled and shipped with utmost expediency (no random guys helping load some random van), in professional/durable packaging. That means double-walled boxes, so HashFast customers' hardware won't arrive broken like so much of KNC's did. Finally, (again unlike KNC) HashFast has been working closely with ckolivas for a long time to ensure cgminer works flawlessly with our innovative new GN Protocol, Global Work Queue, etc. After 70 days mining every one of my batch #1 Jupiters have mined aprox. 50 BTC each - let's see how many BTC will your batch #1 units mine in their first 70 days of life. That (BTC MINED/DAY) is the only thing that matters right now. Power costs are so ridiculously marginal at this stage that bragging about efficiency is just ludicrous. |
|
|
|
china will go thru 5500 soon, they already punctured it and now they are oversold
Having seen my magic, perhaps you can now publicly acknowledge that I have 10,000 bitcoins, apologize, stfu and gtfo. OK? If you want to prove that just sign a message with an address holding 10k and put that signed message in your signature - no need for nobody to "acknowledge", that would be a hard cold proof. That's pure non spoofable crypto, heart and soul of Bitcoin. That's not hard cold proof. It's susceptible to Man in the Middle attack. Care to elaborate that? How could rpietila perform "a man in the middle attack" and make bitcointalk.org users to believe he signed a message with an address holding 10k BTC if he is not in control of an address with such an amount? Because there is nothing linking the Bitcoin address to his forum account. Hypothetically speaking, he could just ask a friend who has access to 10K BTC to sign a message and just post it. The difference is there is the possibility he can get 10K BTC account to sign a message, but he may not necessary control it. But that's no man in the middle attack, in that case Risto would just be "borrowing" the coins for a specific purpose - signing the message, which is a proof he can have access (at least for that very purpose of signing the message) to 10k coins. In any case, only a retard would accept to use 10k of his own coins to sign a message like "this coins belong to Risto Pietila", in practical terms Risto's "friend" would be handing to Risto the control of those bitcoins. That's like signing a contract, explain to a judge that "it was just a favor". |
|
|
|
china will go thru 5500 soon, they already punctured it and now they are oversold
Having seen my magic, perhaps you can now publicly acknowledge that I have 10,000 bitcoins, apologize, stfu and gtfo. OK? If you want to prove that just sign a message with an address holding 10k and put that signed message in your signature - no need for nobody to "acknowledge", that would be a hard cold proof. That's pure non spoofable crypto, heart and soul of Bitcoin. That's not hard cold proof. It's susceptible to Man in the Middle attack. Care to elaborate that? How could rpietila perform "a man in the middle attack" and make bitcointalk.org users to believe he signed a message with an address holding 10k BTC if he is not in control of an address with such an amount? |
|
|
|
china will go thru 5500 soon, they already punctured it and now they are oversold
Having seen my magic, perhaps you can now publicly acknowledge that I have 10,000 bitcoins, apologize, stfu and gtfo. OK? If you want to prove that just sign a message with an address holding 10k and put that signed message in your signature - no need for nobody to "acknowledge", that would be a hard cold proof. That's pure non spoofable crypto, heart and soul of Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
bought privately earlier today, please remove my bid at 0.115
|
|
|
|
"i'm loaning money to ....."
" I save $200 a month and im putting it all in bitcoins ...... "
"we are revolutionaries......."
good luck to all the future bitcoin millionaires :-)
Thanks. Most of us didn't expect to be worth such an insane amount in fiat so soon thanks to BTC - but we believed it was possible and we held to most of our coins. Profit taking is not only healthy but necessary, but selling them all? Honestly, the only reason to sell all ones BTC at some point is urgent need of money to deal with a life threatening situation; if that's not the case, liquidating all BTC one has is just utterly reckless and shows zero understanding of what BTC is and its potential. Mark my words: BTC will reach $5k soon, and those who sold at $160 while predicting it's failure will be mocked very hard. |
|
|
|
Just look at the Sea South Bubble chart. That kind of growth is ridiculous compared to Bitcoin. What you have there, a ten-fold increase before going bust to pre-bubble levels? Compare that to Bitcoin. From $0.05 (or even less if you count the "Sirius trade") to $1242 in 3 phases: - 2011: from $0.8 to $32, with a correction down to $1.98
- early 2013: from $12 to $266, with a correction down to $50
- late 2013: from $145 to $1242, with a correction down to....
Read carefully those numbers and compare them with any other bubble you can remember... I've never known a bubble that behaved as Bitcoin is behaving. The bottoms are way higher than the "start of the bubble"... Which just mean they were not bubbles. Regarding some interesting quotes: Having cashed in his chips, he then watched with some perturbation as stock in the company continued to rise.
A rational plan like the one outlined in the OP protects you from that emotional and dumb behavior. You need to have targets, and stick with them. In Bitcoin, one of that targets has to be to keep a portion of your stash for the very long run - but you can gradually cash out a % or "rake" of your coins giving "zero fucks" about what the price does next. You need to enjoy the profits at some point, otherwise you are deluding yourself and you will get overemotional, which will lead to mistakes. Having cashed in his chips, he then watched with some perturbation as stock in the company continued to rise.
In the words of Lord Overstone, no warning on earth can save people determined to grow suddenly rich.
Newton went on to repurchase a good deal more South Sea Company shares at more than three times the price of his original stake, and then proceeded to lose £20,000 (which, in 1720, amounted to almost all his life savings).
This is ironic and gives you some perspective on Bitcoin's revolutionary nature. "Newton purchased more stocks at more than three times the price of his original stake"? Well, most of my coins were bought in the $12-$20 range - but I've bought quite a lot also on the $67-$100 range during this summer. Paraphrasing the South Sea Bubble text, "Rampion purchased more BTC at five to ten times the price of his original stake".... And I know I'm not alone in here. Were those cheap coins? You can bet they were. Was it a mistake? You can bet it wasn't. For good or bad, Bitcoin will be in history books. |
|
|
|
Update - they finally replied to the ticket, and said they will process the withdrawal soon. I don't think that these people are running off with our money, but they are having some serious communication issues.
If/When I get the wire, I'll post here.
Update again - guys, I finally received the wire. I wanted to be fair to bitstamp and not just leave any uncertainty hanging in the air. Although I had somewhat panicked at first, things worked out in the end. Good luck to all Thanks for reporting back. Happy trading and good luck. |
|
|
|
To be honest, your not the only one who thinks we aren't finished with this crash/pop/correction/downtrend at the moment. I see lot's of evidence for and against and you've made some really interesting posts for it, but you really rob yourself of credibility when you say thing's like '10$' as the bottom price. I don't know if you actually believe it yourself or just want to appear trollish.
I'm kidding about $10. I thought it's obvious. It will actually be $0.01 lol trend line is broken on high volume. Going down.  LOL INDEED  |
|
|
|
One aspect that may be throwing the trend higher is the ASIC revolution. They only started shipping since Spring/Summer. Which led to MUCH higher difficulty, leading to higher price. I would feel comfy buying any three digit cheapies at this point. The next batches are about double the current hashing power. The only thing that concerns me is that mining is quickly becoming a rich-person-only hobby. Wondering if this will ultimately kill bitcoin within a couple of years.
Difficulty does not drive price. FYI: mining with ASICs is currently wildly profitable in fiat terms, but on the contrary it would have been a better investment to buy directly BTC with the money spent on the miner. This has been a constant historically - buying coins is more profitable than mining 90% of the times. Real-life example & figures: A batch #1 550GH/s Jupiter unit costed $7000 + shipping + VAT ($8.500 - $9.500 in total depending on the shipping costs to your location and your local VAT); it has mined between 38 and 49 bitcoins up to date, depending on your spot in the delivery queue. At the current difficulty that 550GH/s unit is still generating aprox. 0.3 BTC per day (roughly $270 a day), and at a standard rate of $0.15 kw/h the power it draws costs only $2.16/day - wildly profitable in fiat terms as you see. On the other hand, when those units were paid (3rd and 4th June 2013), $7000+shipping+VAT would have bought between 65 BTC and 73 BTC, depending on the final cost of the miner based on your location and VAT. Its possible that those machines will never mine that amount of coins. Plus, if you had waited till July, you could have bought sub-$100 coins - definitely the most profitable move. |
|
|
|
Is he for real? Dude is practically jizzing his pants . It really feels good when the train goes choo-choo man Man, how do you find that stuff? That's hilarious |
|
|
|
|
The current pattern fits very well in the "first sell off" phase of the classical bubble chart. It definitely doesn't look as a "bubble pop"
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
