Hello, Yeap  Ive counted everyone, Willisius made only 19 posts, but whatever, it's NY If anyone wants to continue please post again with updated posts count. I'll process payment transaction at morning as I can't do it right now. Regards, Alex. Happy new years. Sorry I have been really busy recently with the new year. I just saw your post and made a few posts so I have more then 20  It is kind of hard making this many posts all the time. I would like to try for one more payment period if possible. My post count is 418 now. |
|
|
|
No, you pay $137.69 worth of BTC. Example: if price is $1000, you pay 0.137 BTC (or more if you like to ) Else, you won't be able to pay if price hits say $1000 or above. Ok, I confirm this from my side too... But sir, you said that if the price goes up, I will have a loss... How? As if it goes $1000 and I will pay BTC0.137, I will be in profit, but if the price goes down, I will bear the loss by paying higher amount in BTC... Am I right? If it's true, then I am ok with it, and I wish that BTC must remain stable as I am taking a big risk, as with you... This is a fiat based loan. You should not bear any kind of loss no matter what because you are spending fiat to pay your bills and then will use fiat to buy bitcoin to repay watoshi |
|
|
|
Updating with some additional information to the blockchain address http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/05/bitstamp-bitcoin-exchange-hack/Bitstamp customers can rest assured that their bitcoins held with us as prior to temporary suspension of services on January 5th (at 9am UTC) are completely safe and will be honored in full. On January 4th, some of Bitstamp’s operational wallets were compromised, resulting in a loss of less than 19,000 BTC. Upon learning of the breach, we immediately notified all customers that they should no longer make deposits to previously issued bitcoin deposit addresses. As an additional security measure, we suspended our systems while we fully investigate the incident and actively engage with law enforcement officials. As an aside it makes the top 3 (Not the best start to 2015) I think it is still too early to call this hack to be over. When bitstamp reopens, it is possible the size of the hack could be extended when they refill their hot wallet and/or the process of having to tap funds from cold storage multiple times. |
|
|
|
It will blow the lid off btc, send it to the moon. I can see it legitimizing crypto for many who would never consider it before. They have a ton of btc to play with, they will move the price every day.
This won't really legitimize Bitcoin. It's kind of designed for exactly the opposite. This will allow people that don't want to get dirty by holding Bitcoin directly to get in on the action. Like when drug lords invest in a Vegas casino. The casino gets the drug money without having to sell a few kilos of dope. Investors like to have a few percent of their portfolio in super high risk high yield investments. If their risky investment succeeds it increases their bottom line a great deal. If it fails it doesn't drop their bottom line by very much. Buying riskier assets with a low correlation with each other is the classic diversification strategy. Bitcoin also acts like an inverse preformer which could allow hedging of less risky investments. Hedges aren't really legitimate investments. They are more like casino dice rolls that you're gambling will pay off if everything else in your portfolio tanks. Sounds like you don't follow the industry, then. Whether you like it or not, it will legitimize Bitcoin in an area where there is lots of money ready to move in. I would agree with QA. It would allow more people to invest in and own bitcoin however it would probably actually slow adoption because people would have difficulty getting their COIN into actually spendable bitcoin |
|
|
|
|
I think it would be somewhat difficult for a decentralized exchange to have any kind of significant amount of volume. In order for a decentralized exchange to work in a truly decentralized fashion any time someone were to make a trade it would need to be confirmed by the miners.
I would say that the OTC market may have potential to grow
|
|
|
|
Thank you guys for your advice. It is much appreciated. I ended up not going with either of the ones I listed in the OP, but instead paid less than $15 for a 200 Gh/s miner.
Thanks again!
Sounds like you got a pretty good deal. You'll definitely be able to ROI with that in less than a month. That would depend upon the J/GH of the miner and the cost of electricity. Breaking even in less than a month is highly unlikely. Yup, this. The OP probably bought a S1 which is very inefficient in terms of electric use. Unless he has very cheap or free electricity then he will unlikely be able to ROI after electric costs. IMO the OP would be better off buying the S5 which is ~450 shipped to the US and is much more power efficient then the S3+ or the C1 |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Difficulty: 39,457,671,307
Estimated Next Difficulty: 40,817,405,339 (+3.45%)
Adjust time: After 253 Blocks, About 1.6 days
We knew it would not last forever. There should be some S5's and some SP20's from group buy in that above.
I think the previous drop in mining hashpower was partly due to the paycoin PoW mining phase (the rental prices of SHA 256 miners went up during this period). I do however think that the hashrate (and difficulty) will probably go down as the price of bitcoin has remained stagnant. This is somewhat evidenced by how much trouble bitmantech is apparently selling their S5's (look at the fact that they are accepting credit cards via amazon and paypal via their group buy) as well as the fact they are giving out coupons for their older miners like candy |
|
|
|
If ISIS made a Coin....
No exchange would trade it since it funds terrorism and depending on the country, the exchange could be shut down
Mining pools and people would attack the Coin
It's value would be 0
I don't think anyone would try to attack the coin (there would be no economic benefit from doing so). I think that no one would mine on it period, which would make it centralized, which take away from it's (already zero) value |
|
|
|
I've got plenty of negative trust. I'll start caring when there is a valid claim and its from a member whos opinions I give a damn about. And luckily, the people who's opinions I give a damn about didn't get to where they are by giving people false trust. So it seems unless I do something wrong I'm in the clear And when people that other people value their opinions start to give illegitimate feedback the people who value such opinions will no longer value such opinions. *waits for Techshare to chime in with some paranoid bs that we already are*.
I have noticed that there has been a noticeable uptick in the threads complaining about unjust feedback being given/received since armis was able to successfully get TECHshare removed from default trust list. |
|
|
|
|
The timestamp that any block explorer displays when a block is found is only the time that their node first receives "notification" of the block. It is not uncommon for a transaction (including a coinbase transaction of a found block) to propagate entirely through the network.
It is generally a good idea for any miner to use a very well connected node so it can quickly be "notified" of a newly found block
|
|
|
|
Meni's hybrid Pow PoS proposal seems great.
Has this been implemented in an alt?
What aspects of it can be implemented in bitcoin without a hard fork?
It is generally accepted that any crypto coin that uses mining algorithm that is not pure PoW will not be considered "Bitcoin". This is true even if "Bitcoin" forks into something else, if PoW is not exclusively used, it will no longer be Bitcoin |
|
|
|
How about instead of freeing slaves on the underground railroad, you stop breaking the law?
I don't think we will see people support this when it comes to people involved in bitcoin. It is arguable that Charlie (as well as Ross) played major a major role in getting bitcoin to be where it is today. If either (or both) of them did not break the laws that they (allegedly) broke then we would probably not have the price, nor adoption that we have today. For these reasons people who are involved in bitcoin are going to advocate that we turn our eyes the other way when it comes to their crimes |
|
|
|
There have been many corporate miners that have been brought online that are solo mining, as well as (few) cloud mining companies that have actual hashpower that are mining to their own pool. We have also seen a few new pools pop up that are 'sponsored' by the manufacturers of miners (for example the ant pool) |
|
|
|
But please don't bore me with long explanations. Your PoS coin should be so good it practically sells itself.
An alt coin that sell itself? Doesn't exist. They all need to be hyped up because they don't have anything else. You do know what PoS means? Piece of Shit  . Exactly. There is no real reason to invest in most shitcoins. To answer the OP's question, there is no sales pitch to investing in a PoS coin because there are too many overall drawbacks as well as drawbacks when comparing it to PoW |
|
|
|
If I will lose anyway by playing safe, why should I play safe?
That's true, I think headline inflation is massaged, and it's truly more like 5% PA, leading to losing nearly half the value of your money in 10 years, meanwhile you can get a maximum of about 2% interest in "high yield" savings accounts. I am pretty sure both of your numbers are overstated. Inflation over the past year has been roughly 1.7% and interest rates on savings accounts tend to max out well under 1% (probably closer to .5%). The return on things like bonds and stocks however are vastly exceeding inflation so if you invest your money in these kinds of investments (as you should if you have a long term timeframe) you will overall gain money after inflation |
|
|
|
May I ask you something please What do you earn from being a Lifetime member on Bitcoinfoundation ? because I still don't get it . and I'am pretty sure I saw someone around here who paid around 100k $ to be a Premium or Silver Member or whatever (give me some minutes to find the thread) ... why do you guys pay such amounts to be members on that community  what do you earn from that I think it was Phinnaeus Gage but I haven't seen him on the list so I guess he just tried to troll.Also if you are a simple person you pay max 250$ and if you want your company to be on the top list you pay 100000$ Yes, it was PG. He didn't pay that, but he also wasn't trolling. He did this stunt to point out that there's no $100k (in bitcoin) transaction on the blockchain, which KNC was supposed to pay for their platinum membership. There are plenty of 100k transactions that happen every day on the block chain. The reason he made that thread was to prove that TBF was not going to be transparent in giving out their bitcoin addresses to show how much bitcoin they have, how much they are spending or what they have received |
|
|
|
-snip-
So is this the end of Hashprofit or are they really under an attack and business will resume on the 5th of January as they described?
Think about this for a minute: How do you think they would have any idea as to when the attack will be over, or when they will be able to overcome such an attack? The answer is that they don't and they are probably using the attack as a way to run away with all their customer's money |
|
|
|
Hey,
Just trying to figure out what the transfer fees would be for a range of sums ranging from $1000-$100,000 USD (i.e. 3.18-318.22 BTC) from wallet>wallet.
What would the lowest/highest possible fees be (or worst case/best case if you want to call it that)?
Thanks.
(I did try and google this using a range of keywords but couldn't find a concrete answer)
Look at this TX https://blockchain.info/tx/8f1d3a8ef6b2d4a25d2f499279e01518b4770819ccbc39a765c4c326170c61b3Fee:0.0001. That TX is way way bigger than what you want to transfer(217,517 BTC). And if they chose to, they could have sent it with a ZERO fee and it would still have confirmed due to the priority being higher. One thing that most people are not used to is the fact that the bitcoin protocol gives higher priority (and a lower default cost) to transactions that spend more bitcoin (all else being equal) as transactions with more bitcoin days destroyed are given priority |
|
|
|
It sounds like it is somewhat safe to use blockchain.info again.
I would also say this just shows the importance of rigorously testing any new release of any software that in any way controls any kind of money because people may not immediately continue the upgrade cycle after a 2nd release is released to fix any potential problem
I haven't seen any sign that they have fixed the organizational problem that created the technical problem. According to other reports, they have a single super-programmer who ships changes without independent review. If that is true, good luck... That is probably not a good idea. Regardless of how "good" someone is at their job it is always important to have people check behind workers' work in order to make sure it meets a certain quality standard. Although it would generally not be a good idea to have one person (or even one team) in charge of such programming, it would still potentially be feasible as long as a completely separate group is able to independently test and audit the code prior to it being released |
|
|
|
I think you have to monitor all the exchanges for opportunities..
Im working on bringing up a website AIOBTC which can facilitate many things. I have researched arbitrage and I think it has dies up since mt. gox went down. Do you think that if we have a huge amound of money, say 100 BTC to trade daily can we make profits without any risks? You can probably make a large amount of money on a relative scale however this will not be reflective of your overall performance. On a percentage basis you will probably not do all that well (on a NPV basis) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
