How many people trade BRK-A?
1. BRK-A is not a currency or money 2. You cannot divide BRK-A you can divide BRK-A by using BRK-B instead  . I think the point is the higher is the price of an item/commodity/even currency, the less interest is in buying and selling it (trading) for purely psychological reasons. Most people don't want to buy fractions of most things, so this argument is largely mute. A few people I know commented: bitcoin is too expensive. Gold is also expensive at $1200 a troy ounce, people still buy it. You can also buy smaller coins or go for an alt-coin (silver). Gold doesn't care if it's expensive, neither does bitcoin. Of course, bitcoin does not care, but people do. If bitcoin is mostly a commodity (like gold), then ~$400 is fine If bitcoin is mostly a currency as was suggested in prior posting, then $400 for a main currency unit is too much. There are no other currencies that are so expensive per unit. It is purely psychological, but to deny that people are put off by this price is unrealistic. The solution is in Bitcoin Foundation proposal. 1,000,000 XBT per each BTC. |
|
|
|
Problem is even with the coupon they are way too expensive.
I calculate that you need both $950 price and $587 BTC ($200 higher) to reach breakeven in ~4 mo. We urgently need 50% difficulty fall like in 2011; the cycle could continue at that point, otherwise almost all home-based miners will NOT order latest and greatest equipment above $500. However, as ckolivas had noted, home-based miners are just 15% of the network, so nobody would really care if home-based miners would become 5-10% or even less. You have to remember that most manufacturers order chips in 6 or 7 figure quantities, so IF there is going to be a difficulty reduction then it takes time to propagate though - several months sometimes. That reduction / reduction in growth then gets hidden by the constant deployment so you never see the reduction in the first place. And here lies the conundrum. Manufacturers ordered chips, hence they are committed to the product, but there is a lack of demand at low BTC prices. Therefore, the only choice would be for manufacturers to deliver product to themselves into the data center. However, they will then continue selling all bitcoin they mined to pay for ordered chips, facility, salaries, etc. Such selling would further depress bitcoin-and the viscious cycle continues. How to get out of a cycle: you tell me, but I see only one possibility: closing down of many manufacturers operations. Incidentally, how many Q3 mini-Neptunes at 1.5-1.7 TH for $3.5K was KNC able to sell? I bet the number is somewhere between zero and 100-200 (optimistically). |
|
|
|
How many people trade BRK-A?
1. BRK-A is not a currency or money 2. You cannot divide BRK-A you can divide BRK-A by using BRK-B instead . I think the point is the higher is the price of an item/commodity/even currency, the less interest is in buying and selling it (trading) for purely psychological reasons. Most people don't want to buy fractions of most things, so this argument is largely mute. A few people I know commented: bitcoin is too expensive. |
|
|
|
Problem is even with the coupon they are way too expensive.
I calculate that you need both $950 price and $587 BTC ($200 higher) to reach breakeven in ~4 mo. We urgently need 50% difficulty fall like in 2011; the cycle could continue at that point, otherwise almost all home-based miners will NOT order latest and greatest equipment above $500. However, as ckolivas had noted, home-based miners are just 15% of the network, so nobody would really care if home-based miners would become 5-10% or even less. |
|
|
|
|
I vote for something else. Bubble will start when each BTC will convert/change to 1,000,000 XBT (as implied by Bitcoin Foundation proposal), everyone will feel like a millionaire, transactions will greatly increase and it (tremendous rally) will start. When:Q1-Q2 of 2015. Destination: 1XBT=$1 in 10-15 years
We will never reach BTC=1mil via mass market if unit stays the same (psychological). How many people trade BRK-A?
|
|
|
|
either like 8 million or pretty much nothing.
Why it has to be so binary? 2020: each BTC will be 40-50K $ with a total market cap of ~800bil or 10% of current gold, but we would have already have switched to XBT at 1/1,000,000 of BTC, so each XBT will be 5c and growing toward eventual parity with the $. |
|
|
|
I prefer 0.5 or 0.48w/gh to combat the electric bill  In my area price on electricity went down a bit, which is nice. Just 6c/kwh plus ~4c/delivery/kwh comparing with current 6.7c/kwh and same for delivery. I read somewhere that electricity prices are projected to decline 24-36 mo out. |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
