Whatever the glitch is, looks like it's still happening...
I confirm. EDIT: looks fixed now. yup. Here too  19252 2013-07-23 09:15:51 3:13:06 64293085 9208 0.00357650 248058 25.48182638 100 confirmations left 19251 2013-07-23 06:02:45 0:26:07 8557484 1200 0.00328649 248043 25.22688161 85 confirmations left 19250 2013-07-23 05:36:38 4:34:50 89788804 12816 0.00351839 248040 25.15286879 82 confirmations left 19249 2013-07-23 01:01:48 0:28:16 9155717 1360 0.00400472 248010 25.16305000 52 confirmations left 19248 2013-07-23 00:33:32 0:11:46 3758514 502 0.00332562 248007 25.00730000 49 confirmations left 19247 2013-07-23 00:21:46 0:26:08 8454348 1150 0.00299755 248003 25.26793713 45 confirmations left 19246 2013-07-22 23:55:38 0:54:42 17599345 2059 0.00314697 248000 25.19543899 42 confirmations left something akin to the 'none' when a block has only just been posted I guess. |
|
|
|
|
19252 2013-07-23 09:15:51 3:13:06 64293085 9208 0.00000507 248058 25.48182638 100 confirmations left
19251 2013-07-23 06:02:45 0:26:07 8557484 1200 0.00328649 248043 25.22688161 85 confirmations left
19250 2013-07-23 05:36:38 4:34:50 89788804 12816 0.00351839 248040 25.15286879 82 confirmations left
19249 2013-07-23 01:01:48 0:28:16 9155717 1360 0.00400472 248010 25.16305000 52 confirmations left
19248 2013-07-23 00:33:32 0:11:46 3758514 502 0.00332562 248007 25.00730000 49 confirmations left
19247 2013-07-23 00:21:46 0:26:08 8454348 1150 0.00299755 248003 25.26793713 45 confirmations left
19246 2013-07-22 23:55:38 0:54:42 17599345 2059 0.00314697 248000 25.19543899 42 confirmations left
Whatever the glitch is, looks like it's still happening...
|
|
|
|
@all: How goo is the signal produced by one wall bought in this case? In other words: Would you buy/sell depending on the outcome of this stand off?
I would discount the event in which one wall would get pulled before substantially reduced by executed orders as a valid signal. So one wall HAS to be bought for this to have any meaning to me.
I'm not reading so much into it. I thought it's just the minimum sized no-slippage buy possible. Plus, if it gets sold into, another one can go up. Not a bad strategy to prevent from frightening sheep or bots |
|
|
|
I think these figures reflect the ASICs reduced decentralisation situation rather than decreased interest in bitcoin.
Number of nodes has nothing to do with mining. These numbers show definitely, that interest is decreasing. OK, just googled that. I see. It's good to see the hype fading so we can see something closer to the true colours at least. |
|
|
|
I just leave this here, what do you think? The first image is from may:  June:  July:  Interest is down, the number of USA nodes has been cutted in half since may, are we going to da moon soon? How many nodes will be next month? P.s: http://getaddr.bitnodes.io/I think these figures reflect the ASICs reduced decentralisation situation rather than decreased interest in bitcoin. GPUs turned off or switched to litecoin, and much higher bitrate per node/miner, of which there are less? (sorry I couldn't shrink the images tried putting [img width=100] in many different places...) Ignoring the old short/mid-term up vs down debate, I'll restate a question I asked during the quiet weekend, about the assumed long-term bullishness. I got a few answers and an interesting discussion emerged about the Argentine situation, but I didn't get the answer that might convince a sceptic that bitcoin will really go to the next stage in the long term. how can we be certain this will really go allot higher. 200-300, maybe for a while, but 1000?...
|
|
|
|
|
There's been allot going on, and I've been feeling fairly confident about long-term bullishness, but after a recent conversation with a sceptic, I realised that I haven't got much more than dangerous inductive reasoning to convince anyone that bitcoin will continue to rise another order of magnitude from here. The straight line on that log graph of BTC value since its inception doesn't mean it will carry on growing like that for ever, especially as many factors change as it grows. I've heard talk about VCs getting involved, but haven't really seen much evidence for that other than the Winkie-twins featurette.
- The principles that 'ensure' its significant value increase seem to depend principally on mass adoption. A start for that is serious big businesses, but they won't adopt something so volatile, and without their adopting it, it will not stabilise other than by transient unconvincing manipulation.
- If you want to buy BTC in say, Argentina, I can't imagine anyone wanting to sell BTC for Argentine currency, so I can't see how it could be adopted there by any more than a small privileged group. And I don't really buy into the trickle down effect.
- Post-bubble realisations are certainly quenching allot of the investment hype and get rich quick input, and will do so increasingly in the next few months as people realise that mining is only worth it if you can afford development contracts with a chip manufacturer or the like. And I don't see enough confidence in the market to start a truly sustainable up-trend.
I see BTC getting bigger, but I'm beginning to fear that this may be the beginning of its asymptote, as a niche that will always be awesome, but won't get mass adoption leading to $1000+ per BTC without some sort of extreme revolutionary event of the kind our governments are adequately well equipped to prevent.
I'm fairly ignorant on this subject, but so are the 99.9% who haven't gotten on board. So the question is, how can we be certain this will really go allot higher. 200-300, maybe for a while, but 1000?...
|
|
|
|
|
one for the conspiracy buffs:
If gox is in deed resolving their bank transfers issue now, it seems very well timed. Stopping withdrawals happened as the bear market was gathering steam. Now that it's up, and arguably more bullish, transfers are 'allowed' again.
I'm not sure I am ready to believe my own BS just yet, but the timing seems really good to suggest a gox bear-buffer manipulation strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
yep, definitely a scam of some sort has been going on. I was a fool to think that it was a genuine bug in the auto-paying code. It's obviously something else that he pool owner doesn't want to admit to, as it would probably end his customer base. Not paying is a pretty sure way to end the customer base to though!
I managed to get in touch with btcoxyen yesterday. He said he would look into it in '20 minutes' then never got back to me. This morning I tried him again, and he has yet to give an explanation, or confirmation that he's sent the BTC that I'm owed. This lack of transparency makes me reluctantly accept that this pool is scamming, whether by malice or incompetence, but nonetheless, scamming.
DON'T MINE WITH THIS POOL!
|
|
|
|
(...)
This already happened after the 2011 bubble, and I don't see why it won't happen again.
You didn't factor one thing. To this day people who wanted to have bitcoins could just simply mine them or buy graphics card they would use anyway and mine. But now all of the small fishes will have to buy bitcoins because their mining is not profitable. Which means that even if asic miners will sell bitcoins most people will have to buy them to use. Fair point, and quite encouraging. But that won't happen until they're convinced we've reached the bottom. Whenever that happens, I look forward to the buyers vs commercial-miners battle! |
|
|
|
problem is, allot of those miners won't get ROI for many months. Knowing this, I would expect most (except for those who took out loans) to choose to wait for higher prices before getting their fiat back.
Exactly, I dont see why on this forums people seem to think that miners want to get ROI as soon as possible. I think 90% of them will just mine and hoard, for years Well, if the price gets high, it would make sense to sell to lock in profits. But if that's what people were doing, the bubble would not have been quite so crazy. I'm sure you know the bubble started more or less when block reward halved, which was a moment when nobody had ASICs yet, 99% of the network were GPU and FPGA miners... Those already had their rigs paid off long ago (no new GPU and FPGA miners for a while because everybody was expecting ASICs since last summer), so as soon as they saw their proceeds halved they started to hold like mofos, creating scarcity of coins, which made the price to grow - the growing price attracted speculators, speculators bought driving the price high, the media started to run stories about how Bitcoin price was growing, which attracted more speculators, etc... Wash rinse and repeat, speculative bubble in its purest form. This cycle is about to invert when ASICs will be widespread. Same thing happened in 2011 with GPUS. You really think people took loans to buy ASICs? I bet you most asic owners are early adopters from GPU times. I surely don't know what's the %, but I surely know there are a lot of newcomers spending all their fiat savings (tens of k's of $) in miners because they think they will break even in one month and then they will have a x10 ROI in the first year... Loan or no loan I don't know, but you can be sure they are throwing at this more money they can afford to lose because they think this is a "no brainer" and they do not want to "miss the train". I know for sure because I've been meeting/discussing with a lot of guys like that since March, both in cyber and meatspace. There will be a lot of pain for miners very soon, you will see. Thanks for explaining all that and sharing your perspective on new overexcited miners. If the proportion of fiat-seeking miners, including the pro setups amounts to a significant proportion, I can agree that we'd easily average well below 100 for the rest of the year, and surely carry on that way well into 2014 until something other than SR and mining becomes significant. OT: I'm glad I didn't hop on that one as I wouldn't have been at the front of the list. I got a small number of USB Erupters because of being able to get them straight away, and figure that the hobby will have been worth, even if it means waiting a year or two to break even. They really should be selling those for a fraction of the current price to be fair... Better GPU mine those litecoin before they get ASICs too! |
|
|
|
If the invested funds was taken from BTC savings they want BTC back, not FIAT.
I would have to agree with this. +1 yep, so for those people, the selling (via asic manufacturer) of the BTC has already ocurred. Next up: mining like hell without selling. I'm not sure however, how large that group is compared to the group that wants to recover fiat. Yep, it's true, I've been a "100% BTC" miner myself, but I'm seeing a shift in the sentiment with the ASICs. I see people wanting to recover their fiat, and only then hoarding. problem is, allot of those miners won't get ROI for many months. Knowing this, I would expect most (except for those who took out loans) to choose to wait for higher prices before getting their fiat back. |
|
|
|
|
I'm starting to think just new investors thinking 'BTC price finally going up again'
|
|
|
|
I think I will push Manual Payout for another day since auto payments are working fine now.
Erm, no they're not. I've stopped mining until my auto payment gets put through. I'm getting worried that I may have wasted a week of mining time. At least it was only a fraction of my mining, as I'm balanced across allot of pools to find the best rates. I sent a pm to BTCOxygen over the weekend, but no answer as yet. Hacked again perhaps? What's going on? The rates were really good and I was considering committing all my mining power to btoxygen, but then my first auto payment failed. |
|
|
|
The 100 asks keeps coming back, someone clears it, and it comes back... like it's all from one person trying to incude panic buying above 100 but the small fish are not following ?
No, a 10k coins buy order was executed. People might call it manipulation, but whomever this manipulator is, (s)he bought 10k coins at 100 instead of 94. That is 60.000 USD difference. II was asking myself why somebody would buy higher, if they could buy cheaper. Can't think anything besides manipulation or stupidity. Last 5 days were very strange big whales tricking smaller whales into believing big whales will carry on buying, until they can't tell each other apart, and little whales carry it up to 110? Increasingly, I think that any transactions less than 1kBTC have very little bearing in this current phase. |
|
|
|
Hi, I've finally given up on trying to find out what I'm doing wrong with connecting to 50btc. Here's my cgminer.conf file. It's an exact copy of another one that works fine, just with btcoxygen in stead of 50btc. Running on Raspbian with USB Erupters I just get the same error: [2013-07-14 15:33:16] ./cgminer: --config: JSON decode of file '/home/pi/cgminer-3.1.1/cgminer.conf' failed '}' expected near '*' I hope someone can help. Thanks Your password is confusing the conf file reader with the asterisk (*) there. Change your password to something without an asterisk or learn how to escape the asterisk in a json compatible way. That's just a hasty typo. I meant to just fill it in with xxxx. My password isn't really xxx*. Although, the * is actually the last character on the password. That was lucky!  Maybe this explains my having a similar problem with Btcmp, where the password includes ?#[ characters, and Eclipse if fine with no special characters. @turtle83 thanks for that. Must neater in deed |
|
|
|
Hi, I've finally given up on trying to find out what I'm doing wrong with connecting to 50btc. Here's my cgminer.conf file. It's an exact copy of another one that works fine, just with btcoxygen in stead of 50btc. Running on Raspbian with USB Erupters {
"pools" : [
{
"url" : "mint.bitminter.com:8332",
"user" : "xxx",
"pass" : "xxx"
},
{
"url" : "stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333",
"user" : "xxx",
"pass" : "xxx"
},
{
"url" : "de.50btc.com:8332",
"user" : "me@myemail.com_myworker",
"pass" : "xxx*"
}
]
,
"balance" : true,
"api-listen" : true,
"api-port" : "4028",
"expiry" : "120",
"log" : "5",
"no-pool-disable" : true,
"queue" : "2",
"scan-time" : "60",
"worktime" : true,
"shares" : "0",
"kernel-path" : "/usr/local/bin",
"api-allow" : "0/0",
"icarus-options" : "115200:1:1",
"icarus-timing" : "3.0=100"
}
for the url I've tried each of these: de.50btc.com:8332, pool.50btc.com:8332, http://pool.50btc.com:8332and for the user: me@myemail.com_myworker, myworker, me@myemail.combut every time I try to run cgminer: ./cgminer -S /dev/ttyUSB0 -S /dev/ttyUSB1 -S /dev/ttyUSB2 -S /dev/ttyUSB3 -S /dev/ttyUSB4 -S /dev/ttyUSB5 -S /dev/ttyUSB6 -S /dev/ttyUSB7 -S /dev/ttyUSB8 -S /dev/ttyUSB9 --config /home/pi/cgminer-3.1.1/cgminer.conf I just get the same error: [2013-07-14 15:33:16] ./cgminer: --config: JSON decode of file '/home/pi/cgminer-3.1.1/cgminer.conf' failed '}' expected near '*' I hope someone can help. Thanks |
|
|
|
13gVfdP3WMy8FwttjKW3GVhLGzE7PsLRxC |
|
|
|
It really seems like 1-3 whales are the sole reason for this rally. But I wonder how much cash they have left. They had at least $3mill/USD when it was just starting [70-80]
And once they stop - do we go down?
Their intention might be to stimulate rallying so they can sell allot higher It's logical that it's (at least) a chance to up trend on 120-130, they don't want to sell for 100 and they want keep and hold. If the down trend will return, they will again sell ... win win for them |
|
|
|
It really seems like 1-3 whales are the sole reason for this rally. But I wonder how much cash they have left. They had at least $3mill/USD when it was just starting [70-80]
And once they stop - do we go down?
Their intention might be to stimulate rallying so they can sell allot higher |
|
|
|
|
I think it looks like these big players will carry on buying like this until enough people believe it's a reversal, i.e. break 110 or so., then wait until the price gets high enough to reap again
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
