I don't think the image is right. We're already converging into some direction, we just don't know which yet. The system has become larger, it now has a massive amount of inertia.

That said, a little punch into either direction will not cause sudden accelerated hyper-huge movement. Yes, we may see another correction one way or the other, but I doubt we'll see positive feedback loops at the speed we had before. Remember that a good bit of immaturity has been purged from the market by now; people think twice before hopping onto a trend now.

It's good. Things have turned out quite well. Unless there's a catastrophe around the corner, Bitcoin has achieved an unprecedented state of maturity; software support is better, sensitivity to larger orders was reduced, volatility is lower. A more liquid, more robust market than before.

Let's wait for the whole stuff to settle, until the new year begins. If things are still as sane then, we have reason to celebrate.

OMG it's not like anarchy there's like still banks, and like, big guys, it didn't work, you all suck!

Bitcoin functions perfectly as a solid, international, reliable backing for value on the internet. The rest will have to be built on top of that, and this is possible.

Anybody who expects BTC to be held by the typical customer has either no idea about computer security or about the typical customer.

This answers the thread and should have ended it.


lol A market of 24M USD. Now, do you want a comparison with USD M1 supply, which is above 900 000 000 000 USD and inflating? But why compare with M1, Bitcoin may be as suitable for fractional reserve banking! Good luck with another order of magnitude when you compare to M2. Don't like USD, want me to start Gold comparisons, or any other target market Bitcoin is aiming for?

Estimate of world gold value: $8,338,701,310,883. Gold. Gold! Come on, the stuff is only ever useful as a coating or to look lol-shiny.

What definition of "tiny" do you use? Bitcoin is currently ridiculously small. If it grows, that growth exceeds inflation in no time.

I just wanted to make a post quoting this for its randomness.

Why didn't you choose 8 am to place the date barrier at Greenwich? Then, I might have found it a funny trolling attempt, as people start debating why the other half posts on the wrong date.

Edit: lol, nevermind, I think you're doing this quite well already. Saying "tomorrow" in UTC-8 at the evening, when it was already the 12th for the rest of the world...

Deadline: 2011-12-13 4:00 UTC.

Because they made the rules, obviously. Of course, a sigmoid would have given better initial distribution, but nobody programmed Bitcoin with one at the time, so the makers could take more for themselves. Yes, this could have been distributed more evenly, but it's a thing of the past now.


Huh? Isn't this exactly showing that it does work out? The market became much more liquid, quite a few people sold their initial Bitcoin assets. The whole market liquidity is correcting things as we speak, and has been heavily for two months now. Volume can't rise forever, and so we end up with more stability.

And with each trade, Bitcoins end up with someone who wanted them, not for free years ago, but today at current price.

• This is no problem. Initial distribution has been proven irrelevant on large time-scales. An early adopter can only spend his coins once, then the problem is done with.
• An alternative that tries to "solve" this "issue" of speculation profits defeats the purpose of the scarcity concept, rendering the new currency unstable and therefore unreliable.

Bitcoin is correct in this regard. The idea of changing this aspect is plain wrong. Envy against early adopters just isn't a very useful notion, the alternatives have greater, prevailing flaws.

I also missed a great chance when I didn't check out Bitcoin the first time I heard of it, I'd probably be rich now if I had. But this is an emotional thing that should not blur our vision of the future.

Bitcoin did it right. Don't get all emotional over a few people who got free coins in the beginning, it's a tiny problem compared with the ones Bitcoin solves. Altering the rules to prefer equality over fairness would destroy the very heart of Bitcoin, the part which makes it better than classical currencies.

Dom't be so impatient. After a bust, there is usually a phase of doubt and uncertainty before things go on. Let some time pass, and move slowly for now. I think the "sell-off, counter rally" rhythm is being purged currently. That was pretty strong, so give the market a moment to reorganise.

This is overstating it. With a lot of coins/dollars, one can push the market for a moment, yes. But even more than for others, there's no easy way out for someone moving a lot of funds, and a wrong decision will be extremely expensive.

That's why I like Bitcoin. It's controlled by nobody; one can only try to act in a sane way. There's no magical loophole for rich people such as bribing officials or using special laws with difficult requirements.

So, I strongly disagree. Bitcoin is NOT just like everything else.

Uhm, that would be strange. The people who drove the bubble with their money probably don't have a lot of purchasing power left, and I think they've been neatly disillusioned.

I think it's people like me, who were going against the bubble and just buy back their coins now. On top of these, there might be hobby-speculators who are afraid of he down-trend and only buy back now because it has significantly weakened throughout the last month -- actually, comparing current price to 1 month ago, it might be stopping completely. A lot of people like following trends.

I'm not so much into the whole short-term and trend stuff though. I think Bitcoins are worth more than 3 USD, so I buy/hold when the price is below. I'm not terribly angry if I have to wait a while until it works out.

BTW, @Topic: it really depends on the price and situation for me. I buy slowly, to be less sensitive to swings, but it really depends on price and indicators just how much.

I never claimed something different. In fact, what I tried to explain in my post is that all of us think "packer" way virtually all of the time. The "Mapping" is only setup, training, learning. The symptomatic difference between "Mappers" and "Packers" is not so much how their brain runs when they make decisions, but how they learn.

I'm just saying that this is an important difference. The "Mappers vs Packers" model sounds as if "Mappers" would match their knowledge to a situation in a totally different way from "Packers". I don't believe that is correct; on the contrary, I think the difference during that phase is only very subtle.

The real difference is how they re-organize their thoughts and beliefs when they have time to think or are asleep.


Edit: Okay, I've been persuaded that the terminology might be useful despite the things I pointed out. There is a clear barrier from with a person starts consciously applying "Mapper" technique and therefore can learn with increasing efficiency. This creates an instability, which might cause people to fall into two distinct groups.

This instability might also explain the huge gap in logical capabilities between scientists and the average population. I know it by a different name, "the scientific method", I'm fine with using "Mapper thinking" as a synonym though.

The input bug is fixed! Yipee! I will now test it for a bit. If it works, I'll donate at least 10 BTC to API and Client each, and would have finally gotten rid of that ancient bounty.


Concerns that make no sense. Just check the sources and BlockExplorer if you want to be certain they do not cheat. Except if the Netherlands guys hacked your personal DNS server and simulate blockexplorer... ya right, of yourse.

The concept is secure. Feel free to check the implementation etc, indeed that can have backdoors like always, but the design sounds perfect.

We should all be aware that if this goes wrong, nobody can expect to see their BTC on Mtgox again. They can't dig up >420k BTC from nowhere, it's beyond their capabilities.

The moment this key leaks, Mtgox is history. One little string to end it all.

robkohr: uhm, no offense, but I think you got it wrong.

Speculators stabilize the price! If they all go home, it will start swinging again, possibly very much! the stabilization has not been working perfectly because everything is new and the initial distribution of coins was not exactly natural.

Imagine someone buying in with 1M USD in a hurry, for whatever reason. You better have speculators ready to dampen the spike, or you, as a merchant, will have a lot of "fun" trying to do your work normally. The same goes for an early adopter cashing out; without speculators, the price would have been hammered far below 1 USD on that 300k BTC volume day.

BTW, it's strange tactics to go onto a speculation forum and state that speculators are useless.

Okay, I just called the local Diablo 2 trading freak to tell him about the site, and he's like "LOL WTF SHIT ITEMS". He says he would not pick up the first item on the page if he saw it! And he's on ladder, not non-ladder. Price quote non-ladder: "27 high-runes per dollar", items are as good as worthless on non-ladder on top of these being junk.

Maybe I should make a bridge for some competition? If someone wants contracts on trading supply of Diablo 2 items in ladder Europe, PM me. I'm not into the game anymore, but if someone has BTC to spend and wants rare items, or a lot of good items, maybe I can arrange something.

@Technomage, yes, multiple people sent error reports. As I said, four different models, at least five devices, and I don't think they were all on Cyanogen. But this is somewhat off-topic, and I don't really care about the story if BitcoinSpinner solves it all.

Which means I'd like the double-digit typing fixed, and maybe I'm totally happy already with that! Yes, an address book would be nice, buy hey, I can copy-paste, so any text editor does the job. I really want nothing more than a minimalistic, QR-ready Bitcoin wallet with private key backup function. And this is apparently being made with BitcoinSpinner.

Fix please. Pretty please?

LOL

I didn't send the fortune; that was the "change" from my order, and it hopefully stayed with Mtgox. If you look at the transaction, there's 500 BTC going another way, that was the payment.

Hehe, I must appear to be quite the rich guy if you thought I withdrew 437k BTC and made a funny thread about it.

Oh wow. When I try to type a number of Bitcoins to be sent, it is always input twice. I can only sent 11, 22, 33, 44, 55, ... BTC. lol

The last person rating it on the Google Market has the exact same issue. Just tested on another phone, again the same issue. Both phones using CyanogenMod 7.

Okay, race is on again. Who fixes first?

I installed it just now and sent 5 BTC. Works immediately. Very small footprint, minimalistic but functional. Will do some testing and other phones, probably this week.

This is likely to be my new favorite and the winner in my search for an Android client that started some 6 months ago.



lol... just now, I updated Schildbach wallet to check. Crashed on start. I actually uninstalled it now that I have BitcoinSpinner; unless this one makes trouble as well, my choice is made. Nexus One CM7, the best standard Android environment I know of. Not that I haven't tried it on three other models. The program is just bad. It produces the kinds of errors that just do not happen when people know what they're doing. I can hardly list the amount of absurdities I've faced or seen others face using it. "Deleting Dalvik Cache destroys program", "Crashes after start", "Program no longer found", "Transactions do not sum to balance"... even the error report function crashed along with the rest of the progam.

I know all the phones in question, they range from HTC Magic and Legend over multiple Nexus Ones to modern newcomers; no general trouble with Android software. Just the Schildbach wallet misbehaving on every one of them, throughout different versions of OS and wallet.

No. I'm not paying the bounty to Schildbach unless I can actually use the program. BitcoinSpinner now has a head start; if it shows no errors, it's the winner in my opinion and gets a little donation/old bounty.

Say, I pay someone using Mtgox withdrawal and see the payment getting filled by the following address:

http://blockexplorer.com/address/16eRAfcohaLsTzoDSnLejjqMZMDQezxFEi

What the...? Shouldn't such sums be in cold storage? That's something like 5% of all existing Bitcoins in a single key, who will pay if that key gets stolen?

Edit: hell, didn't Gox have "lol Bitcoins sent to null" before? That transaction transmitted the whole bunch of them, imagine a software error occurs there! Yes, the transfer happened with neat speed, quite fast for an operation that I would manually check if I was in the position of operating on more than 400k BTC.

Hey! Why did I not know of this?

I might owe the authors of BCCAPI/Bitcoinspinner at least 20 BTC. Still have an old bounty on Android client, and the Schildbach wallet never qualified (ridiculous crash-and-bug party), nor did the other one.

No local block chain, but keys? Great concept! The question of key backup remains... check! Very good, I am testing the application right away!

I assume the API and client are made by different people? Oh wow, free with permissive license, awesome!