 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
...Whatever the reason is I am sure Microsoft would only adopt something due to the massive savings it offers them in transaction fees, convenience, accessibility, or whatever the case is....
Since the transaction is done through BitPay and subject to their fee, whatever financial gain (savings) they may see on a per transaction basis is likely not massive at all. Microsoft did it primarily for two reasons... 1) Positive PR - gives the public the impression MS is forward thinking in 'keeping up' with innovation 2) Never be negligent in opening a potential avenue for revenue when the cost to implement a new payment option is practically nothing |
|
|
|
Wow really? You have proof of that??? Like the way you know all the 10K BTC wallets are different people right? LMFAO! Nice joke.
*NyXEa, the current #1 holding address, receives the bulk of funds from *dsCqN*dsCqN receives frequent deposits throughout Nov and early Dec '14 from *qFmW8*qFmW8 is a confirmed Bitstamp owned address that was used in an audit almost exactly 1 year ago [ Bitstamp's statement] Great! Less people (less wallets) doing more transactions! WOW! Not to mention they're mostly bullshit faucet, gambling and pay per click transactions.
Really? You have proof of that? From the time of your photo to the time of this writing, there are about; 74,000 more addresses $1+ USD 19,000 more addresses $100+ USD 7,000 more addresses $1,000+ USD 700 more addresses $10,000+ USD It keeps moving wallets but it is the same owners... Imagine how many other 10K BTC wallets they have! There's plenty of them just look. I showed my calculation & exact figures with the picture from one month ago. Why does nobody do their own research or due diligence? This is sad.  No, you didn't show anything except a photo of a screen that gives the quantities of addresses in broad ranges that couldn't possibly be used to derive any meaningfully precise conclusions. You've provided nothing. You fail to understand what you talk about and you are a waste of time. I leave you with this.  |
|
|
|
You're dumb as rocks lmfao... Market cap is far from what we are talking about here. Market cap is how many coins in existence X the current exchange rate which is a suckers way to calculate in the Bitcoin market because exchange rate is very very far from actual price. We are calculating the amount of bitcoins in all wallets and putting it into the same dollar terms as a month ago, Why do people keep talking about a lower exchange rate being the cause of this?  ... Nobody forgot the wallets under $1... Maybe you idiots did but I calculated ALL the amounts in ALL the wallets. Since everyone here seems to be misunderstanding what you're trying to explain, try showing your calculations and backup your claim with specific figures. btw; the richest bitcoin address didn't just go from 1.2% to 1.6%, it was a new address that received the 1.6% on the same day of its creation. If you follow the transaction that funded that address, you'll find that the funds almost assuredly belong to Bitstamp. The same bitcoin was moved about 1 year ago with Bitstamp claiming it to have been an audit. |
|
|
|
Um Ok think about this... Even at the current rate $1.4mil in BTC is mined DAILY! It cost half a million per day ($500,000) in electricity just to create that "value"... Market price means nothing these are now a few huge institutions controlling the price constantly buying and selling to each other for profits (hence the massive sideways trading then organized dumps) Everyone retail is holding this now as speculation for $1,000 per coin but they don't understand that will make the market cap over $14 Billion dollars and we can barely hold on to $5mil market cap LOL! All this talk is hilarious blabber by people who can't calculate. The dumbest governments in the world are printing cheaper money!
A 'few huge institutions' buying and selling to each other is not an effective way for each of them to turn a profit. You sound very much like the folks in early 2011, throughout 2012, early 2013 and still those in the Fall of 2013. They have all cited various reasons for the imminent doom of bitcoin, but the one thing they did have in common was an outlook that failed to materialize. The evidence you've provided is hardly a compelling reason to suggest the collapse of bitcoin, and particularly not in the face of other factors that counter such a 'revelation'. |
|
|
|
The train is long gone for everyone, who ever didn't dump @1000 Us dollar or around there is fucked.  We've heard this same rhetoric. We've seen this same bubble/correction. Bitcoin will either have an extraordinary global economic impact, or deflate into nothing. Paradigm shifts have the unique characteristic of wave adoption due to the direct challenge of the inherited fundamental model. So far in Bitcoin's history, the momentum of the wave hasn't shown any reason to believe it will suddenly stop.  |
|
|
|
You have found a fundamental value problem, which has been discussed here at length earlier. The fact that bitcoin has value, contradicts Mises' regression theorem, which basically states that the value must be based in part on yesterdays value, and ultimately, from the time deep in history, when some commodity got exchange value because it was the preferred commodity to hold for later. (Discounting debt as money, which could have existed before or after or at the same time).
Some believe that this means that bitcoin must have some value for direct use, in addition to it's money (exchange) value. I do not agree, I think the vision of the future usage of bitcoin as money, was enough to give it initial value, and that the regression theorem has to be shelved.
What is your thought to the argument that Bitcoin does, in fact, comply with the regression theorem since an established value for "yesterday" was assumed as soon as the earliest exchanges had pegged a USD valuation for means of exchange and trade became possible? Continuing to trace back you will find the pre-monetary commodity that makes the point of reference all that's necessary, yes? Secondly, users might have found further value in bitcoin's inherent properties, such as its low costs, deflationary nature, pseudo-anonymity, lack of central authority, etc, as opposed to an initially established value being a purely speculative one. |
|
|
|
what about the "they generate their own coins to dump alot" theory, could actually be scary that you could just make coins and nobody has a idea...anyone who knows more about the tech on btc should answer=)
Miners dumping coin for fiat en masse, if that is what you're asking, is a short term risk to bitcoin valuation, sure. The potential impact of such action is limiting over time as 1)the total sum of minted coins increase, 2)the block rewards halve, and ideally 3)adoption and demand grow, increasing volume and absorbing whatever miners are looking to dump. what I don't understand is how it all started. noone would buy something that has no value (the first mined coins). so who bought the first coins? It might have started as a pump and dump, and once this caused a valorization it caused a chain reaction.
Who is to say the first mined coins didn't have value? With the exception of *intrinsic value, value itself is merely a belief, a subjectively defined, dynamic opinion with external conditions taken into consideration. Anyone that believed bitcoin had tremendous potential would naturally manifest a far greater value for a bitcoin than someone that didn't see a future for it. Since obtaining bitcoin was relatively easy and cheap for the individuals that were aware of bitcoin in the earliest days, the actual monetary value was exceedingly low to nonexistent and lent little incentive for trading among miners, however, the first real attempt at pegging bitcoin to a usd valuation for the purpose of exchange was by new liberty standard that essentially calculated their costs in producing bitcoin. Their explanation here: During 2009 my exchange rate was calculated by dividing $1.00 by the average amount of electricity required to run a computer with high CPU for a year, 1331.5 kWh, multiplied by the the average residential cost of electricity in the United States for the previous year, $0.1136, divided by 12 months divided by the number of bitcoins generated by my computer over the past 30 days. *I define intrinsic value differently than most; namely, the necessities for life such as food, shelter, etc. Therefore, I do not include things such as gold, or products, or IP, etc. |
|
|
|
Has anyone bothered to read the white paper? Or at least skimmed the highlights in shorter, punctuated points? The white paper looks good, now the highlights do look like a Bank's website trying to sell you a new product. I can see what you mean, but don't you think that irrelevant? When easy to digest information for the laymen is most effectively communicated in such a manner, could you expect the highlighted points, despite whatever motives of the author, to look any different than as "advertised" bite size pieces? Well, the basic design, where the early adopters got tons of Bitcoins very easily, suggests it was designed as a money-making opportunity.
No, the timely reduction of the block rewards was structured in such a way as to create a smaller potential impact that newly minted coins could make on a fixed market size. Granted, it gave privilege to very early adopters (as do all technologies), but would you really prefer reversing the algorithm so the greatest rewards were yet to be distributed in a landscape like today of very few industrialized mines? |
|
|
|
Has anyone bothered to read the white paper? Or at least skimmed the highlights in shorter, punctuated points? Some of the discussion here ...  |
|
|
|
^
Herd mentality somehow got a bad rap in this herd of special snowflakes. Herd mentality is an adoptive behavior, herd animals fare much better within the herd than outside it. Going against the herd may seem romantic, but it's not life-affirming.
/tangent
Anyhow, knowing about "herd mentality" nets you nothing. If you see everyone selling (tanking the price), you should also sell (the price is going down, regardless of it being irrational).
TL;DR: Everyone panicking is cause enough to sell. Due to panic or common sense, doesn't matter, the result's the same.
True, but ignorance is a choice. It's only a matter of time before the herd abandons the one to the wolf, or leads it off a cliff. Therefore, the most logical solution is one of understanding; the herd, the wolf, when to follow and when to lead -even if alone. |
|
|
|
If BTC is doing well, why would anyone panic because it comes naturally  |
|
|
|
This is an open discussion, so your thoughts more than welcome.
Here is what i think that happened:
"A few people with a lot of money, a few brilliant ideas and the will to fuck everyone up in order to make loads more money came up with a great idea: let's create digital money, some bullshit about fighting banks, some japanese guy that doesn't really exist, silkroad for a bit.
Let's give this Bitcoin thing value by pumping the hell out of it, and let it drop on a bunch of unwanted childs that dream of getting rich with this shit.
In the Meantime we will have an organized ring of scammers ( Karpelles, cryptorush, mintpal.. etc etc .. ) that will make us even richer.
We will also have another organized ring of scammers/devs that will create new coins so we can pump and dump the hell out of them to make even more and more money.
Once this shit gets regulated we will just leave with more billions and see ya"
^^^fact. Little do people know, built within the bitcoin code itself, there is a pump function. It's purpose is to create value via the creation of demand. This code is run in a loop on a variably adjusted protracted time schedule and once executed, sends a command signal to the brains of infected investors to buy moar cheap coinz. The real challenge for the "few people with a lot of money", aka The Reptilians, was to entice the still unwashed minds of the easily fooled with the illusion of a breakthrough in technological achievement of a decentralized public ledger system, immune to corruption and regulation, owned by the people, in which the average person all the way up to the multinational corporation is free to interact with whether sending or assigning a value asset, the protection of intellectual property, or the complete replacement of many other antiquated systems of accounting all quickly, cheaply and securely -of which, the function of a currency being the easiest to exploit. It is said that Satoshi, the king of The Reptilians, devised the original brilliant scheme while doing blow off a hooker's vagina. 11Satoshi, genius or cracked out? |
|
|
|
its good for loosing the money with the quickness.
why, i mean somebody would mine,or? miners are desperate now. They will mine whatever new coin there is and hope it will be profitable  then there is chance to make some money:) Just create shitcoin, and present there are nearly 2000 coins from that site alone ...even more shitcoins out there than that. without anything to make it unique, nobody will care or waste time mining (or trading for) a clear scamcoin |
|
|
|
|
its good for loosing the money with the quickness.
|
|
|
|
|
