 observation: both the magnitude and the depth of the drop follows almost exactly as the magnitude and depth of the first big rise It is a shame this is one of worse investments in the alt-coins in last few months . Even a few scam coin have lost less  who can explain this ethereum investor pay 25.000 btc ... here is smart contract, the first multisig, the real working decentralize exchange, only little more volume than bitbay . and lose no much more than the same when bitbay known scam how is this? the chinese exchange btc38 xcp is number 1 on the vote list. for months no word . we community need to add exchange and work promotion . It was because of the pump related to Medici and smart contract. Now medici seems leaving and smart contract is still in testnet. Therefore the price come back to the level before pumping. Anyway I want to say it again, before counterparty is really get adoption, the price is just noise. Due to the extremely low liquidity, it's easy to be manipulated. Invest with only the amount you can afford to lose. |
|
|
|
you know that hong kong is not china? It's not correct. Hong Kong is a special administration district of China. |
|
|
|
|
Counterparty team has kept a record to be honest and reliable. But to be honest, I feel a little bit disappointed this time by what Phantom said couple of days ago by calling this incoming news 'positive'. Yes, it's positive to you since Robby and Evan are back to counterparty team full time, but apparently this news will not be considered as 'positive' to the investors. Your word may unintentionally lead to huge loss of investors, IMHO.
|
|
|
|
That's a great news for both Bitcoin and counterparty.
Then why did counterparty sick like a rock on the news (after sliding for more than a month). btc's dead. I think this dump was caused by counterparty leaves overstock, not the restore of 80 bytes op_return. |
|
|
|
|
That's a great news for both Bitcoin and counterparty.
|
|
|
|
We don't know a thing about the deal between am and amhash, as there are no financials. Nothing.
It's great that the new chips look good, who's going to buy them? Amhash? Then reinvest again?
The second slide clearly has the word "lab coin" on it. Why? There was zero explication about that. You would think he might tell us "that was in reference to..." But it just hangs there and makes me uncomfortable.
I know as little as you and the rest of us. "Friedcat said" is wearing pretty thin. This isn't a fan club. If you want us to blindly adore all mighty friedcat, let him produce some numbers, or profits, or explanations.
He already blew his first mover advantage ages ago, what else is he going to fail at?
Sorry if I'm not a cheerleading zombie, there's nothing to cheer about.
promises ain't enough
I will translate that slide for you. "Tell some stories first. 1, 200 BTC miner's fee 2, scam of Labcoin 3, BTC stolen |
|
|
|
It will be even better if we do go up significantly again, proving the uptrend to be real and sustainable this time. The market is still completely paralyzed and shattered after a year of bleeding out. Regaining trust takes some time!
Personally I think that Coinbase pump and dump removed a significant amount of confidence and trust that was being slowly rebuilt. Lotta people got burnt AGAIN by obvious insider trading OKCoin is still sitting with 14,000 futures contracts they need to liquidate at $275 and above ... Their insurance fund is now annihilated and traders there will be taking a significant haircut this week on their gains unless we get above that level by Friday morning Anyone who buys futures there today or tomorrow has a high chance of buying into a guaranteed socialised loss Well it was disappointing, yeah, but if we actually overcome it, things will be looking even more bullish. What if everyone expects the market to go down... It goes up - we all know Bitcoin, don't we? But I agree that the debacle on OKCoin doesn't look good. But keep in mind: Coins/FIAT doesn't "disappear", it merely changes its owner who may invest it again. What do futures mean and do to the "real" market? I dont really understand what they are or why they are traded -- if you dont mind explaining Simply a gamble on the future BTC price (e.g. every Friday) winner gets the BTC deposited by the loser. The effect to real market: the most important one is that now people have chance to gain from price going down. With high leverage, they can dump in the real market and earn more than their loss from shorting on the future market. With the earned BTC, they can dump again... |
|
|
|
The price of Havelock just represents badly programmed bots outbidding all other bids which pretty much keeps the price at a minimum.
Look at it like this, does anyone actually think that AM1 is worth less than ALC?
If you think it is undervalued why not just buy as much as you can? |
|
|
|
|
PoW ensures no one can get the new coins for free, and the free competition will force the miners to pay the new coins with the price close to the current market price. There's no trust needed and therefore no need for any politics.
DPoS, on the other way, will give 101 persons the free (or almost free) new coins (if there's any) and then there has to be a scheme to select/deselect those 101 persons. We have to trust them to spend them in the good way, and then we get everything just like those in our real world politics: voting, campaign, ...
Different philosophy, and it is still too early to say which one is better.
|
|
|
|
Buys are coming in because Bitcoin will soon be in the faces of every Facebook user via ChangeTip. Lots of new Bitcoiners will soon enter the space due to this increased exposure.
Does changetip provides pay by PayPal or credit card ? Otherwise, don't think the Facebook user will bother open an exchange account or coinbase account just because they see some tips in BTC. EDIT: Just tried by myself. New users get $0.5 for free and then they have to either top up by BTC or have to register a coinbase account. Really wish them to provide a BTC purchasing service by themselves, otherwise I don't think that will attract many non-bitcoiners. |
|
|
|
Bottom lineis if i pay you $100 in BTC you'll get $99.99 worth of BTC. If i pay you $100 via credit card you'll get about $97 and it'll come with additional risk of chargeback if i decide to dispute that transaction as a bonus
why $0.01 less? I suppose you will pay the miner's fee.  normally buyers pay it. So merchants pays nothing unless they want to convert to fiat. |
|
|
|
Most credit cards and banks cover for unauthorized losses, which BTC does not have this insurance.
But they pass this cost of fraud onto the consumer, effectively raising the price of everything you buy. BTC insurance could become a fairly large industry. Citation please? People here say that a lot but I've never seen any proof that fraud is a line in COGS I assume the merchants are subsidising that in the fees they pay. Mainly is the " interchange fee" the Visa and MC and AMex, Disc pays to the middle merchant banks to promote their cards,which includes interest 2-3% and per transaction fees. Yes merchants pay a cc fee. But any proof they pass this onto consumer? I think they just eat it in their margin. I know my business did The intermediary bank and association pays for it. But the "interchange" association will reimburse some of the loss to the final merchant if they used rules like i.d. verification and physical swipe of transaction them from the buyer, online sales are much higher risk than physical location, therefore the higher interest and swipe charges for online merchants. Thank you. I also think the claim that bitcoin is cheaper than CC is bogus. Cost per transaction is all time low and it's still around $8-9. A year ago it was almost $80 per transaction https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transactionWhat does this "cost per transaction" mean? The price of 0.0001 BTC? The Btcpay or coinbase fee? I think maybe mining cost / transaction count? Then it has nothing to do with the merchants or customer. |
|
|
|
Those sold at 170 could easily sell at 210 now, and that's more than 20% difference.
Of course, if they had known at $170 that price would soon stabilize at $210, they could have easily waited. But they did not know it, that is the whole point. What I mean was when there's a panic sell, you can expect a rebound almost for sure. Most people know it but just be too afraid to lose everything or too greedy, thinking they can buy back at lower price soon. |
|
|
|
As it hits 140 tomorrow I will remember to think of the shameless shill that only you could come up with  - Adjust positions to have portfolio that performs in all scenarios - Lay back and watch (haven't done a BTC trade in almost a year) - Adjust when major things happen Headless chicken way- Haphazard portfolio allocation based on no analysis nor plan - Wishing that something would go up instead of accepting whatever comes - Selling at capitulation, buying at mania. What harm am I doing and to which group?  Not many bears around. Must feel bad to sell at 170, at the most oversold point in history. Don't be ignorant, it is simply not done yet, a bounce was expected after the brutal crash and we may trade at this level (max $250) for few more days before the next knife fall. Whether there will be a new lowest or not does not matter. Panic sell is never a good idea cause you could almost always sell later at better price when there's a rebound. Those sold at 170 could easily sell at 210 now, and that's more than 20% difference. |
|
|
|
Disclaimer: I know nothing, this post is purely speculation on my behalf. don't worry you are not the only one left in the dark. on the other hand i learned something interesting about Ethereum the other day. Really appreciate if you could share it. |
|
|
|
I remember dec 25th to dec 26th last year, we went +70usd and pumped into 1000s shortly after. Will the history repeat itself this year ?
Nope, learn about history; Mark Karpeles pumped every 10x pump of bitcoin He is gone now and you have all year seen the effect of it. Enjoy your cheap coins and dreams of becoming a millionaire by sitting on your ass. I will tell you a bit about the future price of bitcoin, if it stays over $100 it will be a miracle (in 2015). Mark Karpeles is gone and also most of the deepweb sites which was the only true incentive to purchase bitcoin.. so do the math (hint: no demand at all, except traders (btw, the whales you guys talk about is pretty much the exchange operators)). No demand at all, then how about the 80K auction coins？No coins were really sold？ |
|
|
|
usually you apply the discount at the shopping cart stage, the price is then recalculated at checkout, could be done that way but it's a little cumbersome.
One way to implement a token-based discount is that whoever owns/holds a token gets the discount. Another way (that I had in mind) requires you to transfer it back to the store. In this case it is lot more convenient to transfer both BTC and Counterparty token in the same transaction. theoritally it's fine to replace the antidust amount sent to the recipipient with any amount larger. However, it's not implemented in the current counterpartyd yet. Maybe later we can customize the amount of BTC we sent in xcp transactions, but I am not sure whether this is really useful. It actually is implemented, both in the CLI and the API, at a per-transaction level: --regular-dust-size REGULAR_DUST_SIZE
value for dust Pay‐to‐Pubkey‐Hash outputs, in BTC
--multisig-dust-size MULTISIG_DUST_SIZE
for dust OP_CHECKMULTISIG outputs, in BTC
It's useful if you're making a *lot* of (similar) transactions, and want to lower your costs as much as possible. The default fee and dust values are very generous, because they have to work well in all circumstances. Oops, sorry about my mistake. I see now, these parameters are provided for users to lower the fees in the first place, but certainly can be used to increase the amount so that BTC transfer and counterparty transfer can live together in one transaction. Great. |
|
|
|
usually you apply the discount at the shopping cart stage, the price is then recalculated at checkout, could be done that way but it's a little cumbersome.
One way to implement a token-based discount is that whoever owns/holds a token gets the discount. Another way (that I had in mind) requires you to transfer it back to the store. In this case it is lot more convenient to transfer both BTC and Counterparty token in the same transaction. theoritally it's fine to replace the antidust amount sent to the recipipient with any amount larger. However, it's not implemented in the current counterpartyd yet. Maybe later we can customize the amount of BTC we sent in xcp transactions, but I am not sure whether this is really useful. |
|
|
|
sorry if already answered, but do you care to share why you think @220 will be the "real" bottom? (serious question)
It's because the triangle cult has blind faith in their trendlines. Of course if the lines fail, they will have a crisis of faith, which leads to dumping.  It's how markets work. So current price is determined by the price of 2 to 3 years ago? Since some people from 2 or 3 years ago are still around, I think it have some influence. Also the TA people use the same technique, so it in certain sense influence them too, even if they are not here since 2 or 3 years ago To me 2,3 years to bitcoin is like 10 years, and the price of 2 to 3 years ago ($1 to $10) cannot have any influence to current price. Therefore, to draw a such line in such a scale is meaningless. This is not TA in my understanding. if that line get broken? better watch out. in no way "meaningless". I'd rather to look at lines drawn based on these two years prices. |
|
|
|
sorry if already answered, but do you care to share why you think @220 will be the "real" bottom? (serious question)
It's because the triangle cult has blind faith in their trendlines. Of course if the lines fail, they will have a crisis of faith, which leads to dumping. It's how markets work. So current price is determined by the price of 2 to 3 years ago? Since some people from 2 or 3 years ago are still around, I think it have some influence. Also the TA people use the same technique, so it in certain sense influence them too, even if they are not here since 2 or 3 years ago To me 2,3 years to bitcoin is like 10 years, and the price of 2 to 3 years ago ($1 to $10) cannot have any influence to current price. Therefore, to draw a such line in such a scale is meaningless. This is not TA in my understanding. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
