|
Not only speculative hope but also deliberate backing of more and more bitcoins at higher and higher prices by folk who need to keep it at a high market cap in order for it to serve their needs.
It takes time, but market-makers / liquidity providers can over time build up larger and larger piles of buy offers, eventually large enough to buy all the coins if all the coins ever got offered at prices the pile of buy orders had piled up to.
Eventually the profits made just in such market-making can add up to more that the entire market cap of bitcoin had been in the past.
The same applies to any coin, of course, although the more of it miners are mining and dumping the harder it will tend to be for market makers to pile up enough by orders fast enough in the course of providing liquidity on both sides of the order-book.
Just on Vircurex alone we had been starting to make good progress toward increasing DeVCoin's bottoming-out price before Vircurex decided to freeze all the bitcoins we had been accumulating on the buy side of the DVC/BTC order-book.
And that was after only a few years of using VIrcurex, most of that time being before we had figured out that most recipients of DeVCoins preferred to dump it in market orders lowering the price to placing sell orders and waiting for buyers to take them up on the sell offers. Once we realised most recipients of coins dump them we ramped up our efforts to buy as many as they dumped and be prepared to buy even more.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
It is not jsut DeVCoins and BiTCoins, it is also whatever other altcoins the members decide.
In particular it probably will at least include all the merged mined coins that can be merged alongside DeVCoin, but I also see sections for litecoin, peercoin, primecoin, quark and others there already despite we have scarcely begin to populate the place with sections and topics and users.
I expect it will also end up including all the merged mined scrypt coins one can combine into one merge also.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
Actually what you just mentioned is velocity. If lots of transactions happen fast a small amount of market cap can come around and go around very fast, enabling lots of transactions.
Sure, but who wants to stand in the checkout line waiting for 10 minutes while your payment is confirmed ? Right. For that you'd maybe prefer GeistGeld, which you get alongside your bitcoins, namecoins, groupcoins, devcoins, ixcoins, i0coins and coiledcoins when mining. Or more likely you'd use a payment processor, a bitcoin denominated banking account debit or credit card or somesuch tool. But again you are back to harping on velocity. Paper wallets in safe deposit boxes are low velocity. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
ASIC miners after just 2 month off use are electronic garbage..uselles
That is bullshit. Block eruptors still work fine for merged mining GeistGeld and CoiLedCoin, while also of course also including all the other mergeable coins in my merge just in case I luck intoa block of one of the more-difficult coins. I use larger ASIC units too, of course, but the block eruptors seldom luck into any of those whereas just the block eruptors alone can rake in GeistGeld and CoiLedCoin blocks. My Saturn is still going fine too even after hmm what is it now, five months or so? -MarkM- |
|
|
|
gee markm you are really plugging this merge mining of late  I have supported, and done, merged mining since it first became do-able. (By me; that is, ever since actually doing it became something I could actually accomplish.) It has been obvious from the start that it is the only reasonable/feasible means of defending multiple blockchains, since defenders need to defend all targets but attackers only need attack one at a time. (Thus the more targets, the more multiples of attacker's computing power the defenders would need to defend that many targets.) -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
coinzen.org - altcoins, but also it is the home base forum of DeVCoin.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
I'm not trolling when I assert that "There is no reason for bitcoin to be worth more than the cost of mining it other than speculative hope that it will be."
Unless it is to actually be used/useful in real life, in which case it will almost certainly need a higher market cap unless somehow it is used only at high velocity, everyone having to sell their coins fast because others need them right away, and buy more when they need some because what they had before is already spent... -MarkM- Ok, lets see now. This is the scarcity argument - the supply/demand argument - that if bitcoin becomes widely adopted for transactions then there won't be enough to go around, hence it will become more valuable. But bitcoin isn't particularly well suited for transactions because its transaction times are so slow. Any there is no barrier to entry for another similar coin with faster transaction times in bigger quantities with better divisibility. Use of malicious negative trust to suppress free speech discredits the bitcoin communityActually what you just mentioned is velocity. If lots of transactions happen fast a small amount of market cap can come around and go around very fast, enabling lots of transactions. The thousands of people socking away millions of dollars worth indefinitely or as heirlooms / inheritance is a trickier problem. If people decide they would like to leave at least a thousand coins to their heirs, in case it goes down to only $1 per coin, then only 21,000 people doing so would tie up all the coins. Something would have to give. People who want to leave more than 1000 coins to their heirs would tie up all the coins even sooner. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Ah well if you don't care whether anyone is hashing your toy coin good luck with that.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
I'm not trolling when I assert that "There is no reason for bitcoin to be worth more than the cost of mining it other than speculative hope that it will be."
Unless it is to actually be used/useful in real life, in which case it will almost certainly need a higher market cap unless somehow it is used only at high velocity, everyone having to sell their coins fast because others need them right away, and buy more when they need some because what they had before is already spent... Right now you probably could not even pay one state or nation's property taxes with bitcoin without having to sell some, pay some taxes, buy some again on the market, pay some more taxes etc. Or if you wanted to buy a few fleets of ocean liners, or if just a few thousand people wanted to buy a couple of nice estates each, etc. The market cap needs to be large enough to allow a reasonable volume of concurrent purchases to be able to happen. Even just a few thousand people each wanting to lock away a few million bucks worth in safe deposit boxes for their heirs to inherit would significantly strain the current market cap. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Feathercoin is finally admitting it is just a toy/hobby not a serious currency, eh? About time I guess...
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
...
Im selling most of my coins quickly to USD as Id rather have what I can get now guaranteed rather then wait and see.
Selling near the bottom when things look "hopeless" (and buying high when things look great), isn't that why most traders lose money? Yes, that's exactly why. Thanks to the way we're wired up, "Buy low, sell high" is the stock-market-maxim output of a hash function. The maxim itself is easy to understand and remember. But to apply it, you need to "de-hash" it...which is damned difficult and takes a lot of time. Fact is, we're wired up to assume that the past, present and future are linked together in a more-or-less linear way - which works so well in everyday life, we more-or-less take it for granted. Moreover, we fall into the habit of assuming that heeding the consensus is a reliable shortcut to finding truth, which works as long as the consensus' members are more-or-less honest  . The price of an altcoin, or of any investment, is a kind of consensus estimate of its future prospects. One that's, naturally, reinforced by people voicing their opinions directly. To "buy low, sell high" entails bucking those two habits explicitly, which is a tough habit to learn. Moreover, there's a special psychic risk that comes with buying low and selling high: the risk of buying a dog and feeling like an idiot when it tanks. As we know, it's a lot easier to act like a jackass when everyone else is (or wishes they could.) Acting like a jackass alone, in a way that doesn't tap into the crowd's secret desires (and buying unpopular investments never does), is a time-tested way to get yourself singled out and even picked on by the group. Let's face it: there's a special kind of sting that comes with buying a dog that the consensus thinks is crap, finding out that it is crap and seeing that the consensus was right. That's when the "I told you so"s really get to a fella. And that's the psychic risk you shoulder when you buy low, sell high. Add to that the fact that post-bubble investments take a long time to recover, so the fear that you're the village idiot for buying in hangs over your head for a long time. Who was buying a house in 2010? Try then instead to do the buy low sell high only with your profits. Obtain your initial profits to work with by, instead, buying on the buy side and selling on the sell side, of the order-book, growing a pile/range of orders each side of the gap in between the two sides of the order book, back and forth like a bot at low profit, and gradually growing the range over which your orders on both sides deviate from the gap in the middle. Basically that is to start off by feeding on variance / volatility but over time building such a range of orders on both sides of the book that you have orders all the way up to above previous highs and all the way down to below previous lows. At that point you will not only be buying low and selling high but also be buying all the way down and selling all the way up, moving the proceeds to the other side of the order book each time someone takes you up on one of your offers, at a slight margin each time of course. This of course works best when there is some volatility initially. Eventually it should lead to less and less volatility as you grow - all using profits of course, having long ago gotten back out your initial capital plus more and more profit over time - into a more and more significant "market maker" aka "liquidity provider" in that pair. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
What new crapcoins do you imagine SHA256 ASICs are going to move on to?
I already mentioned that I won't consider the merged mined family of scrypt coins worth risking until I see litecoin and DOGE being merged mined together or one of them becoming so insignificant it no longer seems a serious fragmentation of the scrypt space, didn't I?
-MarKM-
|
|
|
|
|
Does megacoin even have as much hashing power as litecoin or DOGE, both of which are rather borderline themselves due to their inability to be merged mined together fragmenting the scrypt space?
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
i respectfully disagree.
Volume is one of the PRIMARY thing I look at.
and my portfolio in crypto is currently over 150 BTC in size. (around 75,000 USD this moment)
I have NO INTEREST in buying a coin that has less than 10BTC trading size per 24hrs.
to me, if something happens, I just cannot get out in time without completely destroying the market.
this is why I never considered several coins that I won't name here for myself.
Volume is EXTREMELY important to anyone serious about Investments.
In fact, I will apply a filter of anything under 10 BTC in daily volume and not even waste time in researching it.
and I believe I speak for all professional traders in commodities/equities/bond trading as well.
Actually for serious finance you should also want options. You can set up the volume you require easily in anything that has options. Just get a put option at the volume you want to be able to exit at before buying in. If any of the coins listed at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/latestrates.inc are among those you wished to see more volume in do please private message me. I linked that page because it has some more-speculative ones than are so far incorporated into the historical tables and plots linked from http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/digitalisassets.html-MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
A bunch of 4chan weenies with GPUs in their moms' basements or a bunch of serious businesses devoted to the securing of blockchains, hmm, gee, I wonder which I would rather have securing my billions for me?
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
Actually it is trending rapidly upward, with occassional relatively brief "corrections" or "slumps" or whatever along the way.
What is the average increase in value per month across the months it has existed?
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
But there is no point because we already have a primary hashing algorithm (SHA256) and a backup in case it turns out there is some fatal flaw in SHA256 (scrypt).
Is another backup really needed before any fatal flaw has been found in either of those algorithms?
Kids will go and play with their toy mining machines spamming the world with endless variations of toy coins, meanwhile serious finance can be done using serious blackchains that have serious amounts of hashing power securing them, and maybe even also using no proof of work required systems if any of those turn out to actually be secure.
I suppose though that if scrypt really is inefficient compared to something else (maybe SHA3 or somesuch) making ASICs for a more efficient algorithm to use as a backup algorithm might make sense.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
The "accounts" system in coin code is not serious, you cannot reasonably use it for real world applications it is a toy or worse than a toy.
You need to know how much coin you have total in your wallet and separately, using secure transaction-oriented database that can roll back and so on, or something like Open Transactions even maybe, track how many of those coins you owe to who.
Plus of course not keep in "hot" wallets any coins you owe to customers; keep only your own "can afford to lose it all" coins online, such as your profits from fees and your "float".
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
I'd like to kill thoes scrypt ASIC vendor.
Why? It makes no sense. The coins you have mined should go up in value as the blockchain becomes more secure. So you should be happy that all the worthwhile scrypt coins can all become massively secure if you have been mining worthwhile scrypt coins. Of course that assumes there are any worthwhile scrypt coins in the first place. Are there? -MarkM- How many Scrypt ASICs did you pre-order?  None. If litecoin and DOGE continue to fragment the scrypt space instead of being merged mined together I do not expect scrypt to be worth risking. If they do become mergable together though then I will order ASICs so as to mine the entire merged mined family of scrypt coins. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
So how do u protect ur coins
By world scale massively expensive hashing, e.g. bitcoin, namecoin, devcoin etc; or by some non proof of work based system if any of them turn out to actually work. Like maybe NXT style or eMunie style or Ripple style or something, whichever turns out to actually work. Maybe even proof of stake if anyone ever actually implements any of the proof of stake systems that supposedly theoretically might be able to work and it turns out that they actually do work. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
