Coinbase co-founders AMA...quite interesting 1. their take on price in 12 mo: $1500-4000 2. fees will go down from 1%...I think to ~0.5%, which would make roundtrip ~1%, which is much more enticing for trading. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3OWzZSr8NcI found their predictions and reasoning bullish. They seem in no doubt the bitcoin userbase is growing. Given they also debunk the myth of merchants dropping the price it seems it is just a matter of time before the price is speculated higher again. One point of caution was last year they predicted 10k per coin  Last time over shoot. This time undershoot. Next time, they might get it right. Finding your range on a moving target is never easy I have no problem with a notion that BTC would be stable for a while. It is that grinding down from 600-650 to ~$300 that was jarring, especially if you made an investment in miners or BTC. Overall, I don't mind to get monetary rewards slower that almost everyone expected. I would be upset if bitcoin zero out at some point, but even that would not be the EOTW. |
|
|
|
|
Is there a market for coupons? I have 35 of them available.
For each minimal order of 2 units you can use 2 coupons with savings of 0.07 BTC (~$27 per two coupons or ~$13.5 per each coupon).
Anybody needs all 35? make an offer for 5, 10, 20, 30 or 35
|
|
|
|
Coinbase co-founders AMA...quite interesting 1. their take on price in 12 mo: $1500-4000 2. fees will go down from 1%...I think to ~0.5%, which would make roundtrip ~1%, which is much more enticing for trading. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3OWzZSr8Nc |
|
|
|
Make a reasonable offer, preferably for all.
Didnt those expire? That's what I thought. Brand new coupons 0.035 BTC each, expiring NOV 13, 2014 |
|
|
|
anybody tried to use more than 1 coupon per each S3?
Does not work I don't think there is or will be much interest in these, unless you can use multiple at least up to the cost of shipping. |
|
|
|
Or, if you prefer, just call it "Dirty Harry"... |
|
|
|
|
Make a reasonable offer, preferably for all.
|
|
|
|
|
anybody tried to use more than 1 coupon per each S3?
|
|
|
|
People re-paste, then switch miner on-it reports better numbers for a first 12 hours-and these fellows post giddily about it. They don't post that later it goes back to the same numbers as before or worse
Every underperforming unit I have repasted (2 so far), have run better weeks after working on them. well, 2 out of 2 and 1 out of one (mine) makes no rule, especially if we are talking about different batches. B1-3 had a "weaker" controller that resulted in some machines hashing at 410-415 GH. I had one of these and re-pasting it made absolutely no difference. |
|
|
|
Does repasting them really make a huge difference?
We bought a large lot of batch 7-9 and none of the units, except 1 dud out of 90, (Props to BMT for quickly responding for RMA) have issues running at 225. Some go to 250, and many in between. Most run at 237.5 or 243.75.
Would repasting increase rates on the units that don't seem to like higher than 225 or 237.5 settings?
Seems like a lot of work with little return difference. Even at 225 the units give a solid 450-500 Hashrate.
Thanks,
Strato
All this re-pasting is hugely overrated. People re-paste, then switch miner on-it reports better numbers for a first 12 hours-and these fellows post giddily about it. They don't post that later it goes back to the same numbers as before or worse (due to possible reassembly errors). However, if you switch the miner off for a half an hour, it ALWAYS comes back slightly more perky than before, so essentially the re-pasting effect=placebo effect. I've done repasting with several compounds-and in no case there was any long term effect. Granted, if the miner did not perform from the get go, then repasting might improve it, but it does not improve slightly underperforming miners-that is in most cases something else than paste. |
|
|
|
It's a bit too soon to be bullish about Bitcoin ever reaching $trillions, especially when it only has 500K-2M users and hasn't shown any indication of large scale userbase expansion yet. We don't even have the Yahoo of digital currencies yet. Internet in 1989 had more users than Bitcoin.
there was no true Internet in 1989 (with browsers, etc.), just email, usenet, etc. The concept of www was just introduced in 1989. |
|
|
|
Yep. The other think people forget is also the constant downward pressure of early adopters, miners, and whales. Of course it is a good thing that they sell a little on the way up, as wider distribution will hopefully create a less volatile market. But the fact remains that any selling along the way by early adopters, miners, and whales will constantly slow the progress to a higher exchange rate, as their rate of selling (and not buying back at same price) will likely throttle up and down to match the public demand (as well as increasing hashrate, slowing inflation, etc.)
Imagine if, starting today, 95% of the world's gold or diamond mines and reserves were in the hands of like a 1000 people (and before gold & diamonds were even deemed to be all that "valuable" by the populous). It would take a longer time for a wider distribution of gold or diamonds to occur throughout the world populous and still have a steady climb in yearly exchange rate.
Most people see a binary outcome: either bitcoin will be very valuable or it will be not valuable at all (close to zero). I think that a third situation is possible: bitcoin will be a nontrivial portion of the total gold value, which is ~8 trln. So, at 10% of gold, BTC will be valued at ~800bil or ~40K/BTC. Incidentally, if all millionaires invest 1% of their money in BTC, BTC will have to be at ~$55K (millionaires have ~$115 tril of wealth). This makes $40-50K a very reasonable number. |
|
|
|
I am amazed how short-lived "at home" bitcoin mining turned out to be (EDIT: ASIC-based).
First high speed Jupiters were introduced about a year ago, and now it is essentially over.
Even best machines don't produce enough to justify a new machine purchase, unless you are a hobbyist who just like to tinker with the hardware.
Mining 'in the cloud' is out of the question because you can simply buy BTC instead.
Not if you buy the latest and most efficient miner, 0.1w/GH. But still it might be better of buying Bitcoin  0.1w/Gh-I am not aware of such miner being available for a reasonable price or any price. |
|
|
|
I've seen you on the forums since november last year. Are you even learning?
Please go I like how no one on this thread so far cares about posting timeframes. Likely because the majority here think in terms of months, not years. Blame the ADD generation.
Dafar, if you hold those coins for 20 years then Yes I guarantee that you'll be rich. Maybe sooner. Maybe even in 10 years. But I'd bet my life you won't have it in you to hold them for that long. You'll sell some the first time you think that you need some money (e.g., college, car, house, stupid wedding, frivolous purchase, whatever). And you'll have sold them all long before 20 years have passed. And you will be regretting it, telling all your friends and family "Man, if I had just held..."
If you're thinking that you'll be rich in 6 months, 12 months, or even 24 months, then No.
I'm thinking in terms of at least 3-5 years. I will not sell any of these coins unless there is another insane rally. 20 years is too long though... in that amount of time there is more of a risk coinbase shuts down or I simply lose my BTC via HD crash you'll have a few million dollars in today's purchasing power in 10-20 years, most people would consider that rich.
Yes that's what I mean by "rich".... a few millions $ in today's purchasing power, it's not all that much but comfortable 21 BTC being worth a total of $1-2M in 3-5 years? Very, highly doubtable. You'll be lucky if the exchange value is $10-20K per BTC in 5 years. But who knows, maybe the world will have fallen in love with bitcoin by that time and demand grows crazy. And I still don't think you'll be able to hold them all that long. 99% can't or won't. Please be the exception!  I agree, most people won't hold that long. AAPL was at split adjusted 0.937 in april of 2003, less than a dozen years ago. How many who bought then held until now-very few if any. Same will be with BTC if it will go up 100-fold in the next 12 years (by the year 2026). |
|
|
|
Must feel awful to have money in the stock market this month. Value plummeting every single day. But...
bitcoin users not affected!
I'm buying stocks today. All you need to know about stocks is what you learn from "Trading Places" with Eddie Murphy and Dan Ackroid. When everyone is buying like crazy you sell; when they're selling like crazy you buy. This thesis does not work in a secular bear market. Check out 1929-1932 in US (whoever was panic selling during 1929 basically still sold almost at the top as long as they did not buy back until mid 1932) or Japan 1989-2012 (23 years!!!) |
|
|
|
.@njcarlos:
If Bitcoin's biggest securities exchange, Havelock Investments, could be used as a representative unregulated business:
Each and every security on offer there is trading substantially bellow the initial offering price--as in pennies on the dollar. Including Havelock's own stock.
And those are the winners. The ones that din't simply run off, like NeoBee.
A bit off-topic, but sorta relevant,
To be frank, I have no idea what you're talking about. anyone with a rudimentary understanding of Austrian economics would realize you dont invest or loan money (Bitcoin) in a deflationary (Hyper deflationary) economy currency. It is considered stupid if you know someone is going to have to pay back 1,000% in value due to deflation, and you trust he won't default. regulation cant solve what should otherwise be common sense. investing during inflationary times is also a prudent strategy, but forcing monetary inflation with regulation to encourage investment cant solve what should otherwise be a market economy problem. Havelock is full of cheep lessons not lack of regulation. interestingly, some people do loan out bitcoin through lending companies such as btcjam.com Perhaps, it is OK to loan to miners, for example. If you cannot make loans with bitcoin, it would be difficult to imagine bitcoin constituting a serious fraction of the overall economy. |
|
|
|
.@njcarlos:
If Bitcoin's biggest securities exchange, Havelock Investments, could be used as a representative unregulated business:
Each and every security on offer there is trading substantially bellow the initial offering price--as in pennies on the dollar. Including Havelock's own stock.
And those are the winners. The ones that din't simply run off, like NeoBee.
A bit off-topic, but sorta relevant,
To be frank, I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm talking about Bitcoin's biggest securities exchange, Havelock Investments ( https://www.havelockinvestments.com), and the Bitcoin companies represented there. One of which was NeoBee ( http://www.neo-bee.com/en/), the Cyprus-based Bitcoin bank that ran away with everyone's bits ( http://www.coindesk.com/cyprus-issues-arrest-warrant-neo-bee-ceo-danny-brewster/) For a believer in unregulated free market, you sure don't bother with particulars No matter how attractive the idealized hypotheticals may be, IRL the shit's just fail and AIDS. and Lehman bust how many people's money? LOL what exactly is this grudge match against bitcoin that you are regularly involved in? If you don't like bitcoin-don't invest or use it. I have much more fiat than BTC, incidentally, and don't see any problem with that. |
|
|
|
Wondering if anyone has any data on this regarding X's on the ASIC boards.
If you get say 2 X's on an S3+ on every clock speed above 225... Is it better to run at 225 with no X's or 250 with 2?
Thanks,
Strato
calculate how much you get/mo (40Gh only produces 0.14/day right now) vs how much it costs. If your electricity cost is $0.11/KWh, then you will use ~$3.2 extra/mo for extra 40W (250mhz vs 225mhz) So, if you get 468GH vs 453Gh, then it is probably not worth it (it will get you only $1.6 extra while using $3.2 more of electricity). I did not take into account potential savings on heating the house if it is cold already in your area. However, I think either way it would not make much of a difference, if any. |
|
|
|
New global wealth numbers: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11161150/Are-you-among-the-worlds-wealthiest.htmlhttps://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/?fileID=60931FDE-A2D2-F568-B041B58C5EA591A4total wealth-$263 trl (263x1,000,000,000,000) You need $798,000 to be top 1% You need just $77,000 to be top 10% All bitcoin-~$5.2-5.3bil (0.002% of worlds wealth). If 0.1% of worlds wealth will be allocated to bitcoin, it would reach ~$20,000/BTC, and if 0.5%, then it is $100,000/BTC In my opinion, it makes $20-100K/BTC a quite reasonable expectation. |
|
|
|
Actually home mining will be 6 years old by next year.
correction to my original thesis: I was talking about ASIC-based home mining as I wasn't there during CPU/GPU phase. It is "dead" already, people are just slow to realize this fact. Please input the best new "home" miner (Sp-20) into calculator and see what you will get. Again, some will still mine on a small scale as a hobby. Everyone I know is paring down their @home mining activity or preparing to do it soon. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
