Because Bitcoin is traceable and only quasi anonymous, with mass surveillance a real thing it makes sense if you want to transact privately. Dont forget with good blockchain forensics by just paying for a small thing p2p someone can identify your general wealth etc. Dont get me wrong there are plenty of ways to mitigate the problem but from a general ease of use POV if its anon by default its generally just better.

Thats the great thing, I agree that it will be great for private transactions and in a P2P world without banks a lot of day to day transaction will become private. But it can do both, it can be great as an anon day to day currency lending the general population a modicum of privacy and well suited to the private transactions you speak of.

My thoughts always gravitate to it being mostly to do with people just making a bit of extra money but more importantly more coins.

There are very few investments where you aren't trying to come out with a bigger pile of fiat, in general when you trade a normal stock you tend to buy a position and then sell (or buy if you were short) and leave with the profit.

With Bitcoin however people are trying to make more of the 'stock' than fiat (obviously a generalization but can you draw any parallels?) a lot of people are also all in in terms of how much they are willing to invest, to make more BTC and not more fiat without leverage you have to sell and buy back at a lower price. I seriously think this is one of the reasons people are so willing to sell their BTC for the chance to buy it back lower even though the majority of them would have been better to buy and hold.

Anything as long as its not spam, flame, one word posts, just an image etc, basically anything that isnt considered 'padding' a post count.

Cool cool, I was alluding more to how you expect to buy another 90k XMR at a half decent price if you are 50% of the way to 1%. You are referring to total supply (not available supply) so 1% is 180k XMR.

Have I?

Total supply is around 18mm so 1% is 180k. I wish I could buy another 1% of total supply for 74-80BTC!

Your thinking of available supply, you can't use that if you want to have a % of total supply unless you are going to keep buying at a rate that sustains that.

1% is a huge portion to get to, particularly if you weren't an early miner. To even consider getting to 1% you must have a huge position already. 1% is 740 ish BTC at these prices. I'd be interested in your strategy for acquiring that many in a timely manner.

Its just common sense isnt it. We've seen that bankers cant be trusted to not take insane risks with others money and the EBA is simply motioning towards making sure that digital currencies aren't one of the insane risks. The market doesn't seem to care that much as we've had the whole China fiasco to realise that its just to stop the banks themselves buying, selling and transacting. They cant stop the customers themselves, the difference is between this and China is its rather better communicated.

Indeed, but the poster was referring to calculating that you yourself are the top holder. This is impossible (unless you own over 50%).


Dont worry it wasn't a taunt. I know fore well you will be positioned exactly to a plan

Same, I brought up the issue a few pages back now and although its not necessary as you just enter your current post count taking off any un constructive posts its not great for my own record keeping. Once claimed on the 17th we can then keep a track ourselves.

Perhaps using the spreadsheet mentioned a few posts back will help us.

hitbtc maybe Im missing it and it is there but can you give me a run down on some of your practices.

Do you require any verification, if so what?

Do you have a cold storage system and/or a user side balance checker to prove solvency?

What country is your bank and your business located in?

Apologies if its all on the site, perhaps these are some good prompts for a short FAQ?

Could you also explain the rationale on a $9 deposit charge

Thanks

1) You cant do the calculations, there is no way to know others wallet balances

2) I very much doubt it

 

Would love to see someone come up with a way to estimate number of owners, thinking back to when there were only a few people interested in the coin to now puts a big smile on my face.

Harking back a bit to your post a couple of days ago in the altcoin observer I would also be very interested in the sorts of investors we have on board as well as the number of alts they have previously invested in and currently hold. I personally have never seen an alt with so many notable investors and big BTC holders investing in their first alt. Or at least their first since LTC.

Good times ahead...

To a degree yes but as explained above in the alt world its not always the case.

Competitiveness between different algo's, features and distribution methods is good and that is what you get between completely different alts. However competitiveness in the form of a load of clones with basically the same algo, features and distribution methods is NOT a good thing. As explained the strength of a coin is on its network and all a load of greedy shitclones do is dilute the hashing power making every network less secure. All that for no reason other than greed and feeling you missed the boat.

I still can't make my mind up on the motivation of the cryptonote team who seem to me to have been divided. They profess to want to move the technology forward but I cannot see how providing basically a fill in the variables reference implementation that allows people who didnt have the skills before to create their own CN to do so. This is one of the reasons there are so many shitcoins based on common coins with shit devs who have never coded in their life and cannot do any real development. IMO the cryptonote team should be doing all it can to focus on the privacy technology and releasing that as and when, what way they choose to do that would be up to them but I believe the way this has come about makes me question the true motives.

No such thing as far as I know, hence why you cant search for addresses on the block explorer. Its not even possible due to a  separate public key is generated for each input, privacy and all that

The main issue I see right now is getting people to think about it as something different to Bitcoin, the payment ID thing is a minor usability issue that can be overcome, in terms of integrated payment points that should be no harder than exchanges systems for trading XMR.

The advantages of using XMR for payments far outweighs the negatives of being slightly harder to use. I disagree with the poster who suggested it as a good store of value and not as a usable currency. I personally think it is very much the opposite of that and due to the privacy features is a much more desirable currency to use for everyday transactions than any other options.

Point b simply isn't true refer to the production cost discussed earlier in this or Ristos thread, in fact you were involved with the conversation at the time. For the vast majority of the last say two months XMR has been -ev to mine regarding production costs. I also explained how I know the majority of the network and its not botnets...

Furthermore if more people start pointing their GPU's (again GPU's are v close to cost of running CPU's) at XMR then that again negates the botnet aspect you speak of.


"The price is not a function of the diff.  The diff is a function of the price."

That depends really. If a coin has a higher diff you get less per $ when mining thus you have to get more $ per coin to cover your costs.

Seems Mike Hearn and his Lighthouse project have scooped the main chunk of anarchystars $100k bounty.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/29n8o0/100000_bounty_winner_announcement/


I think this is fantastic and a much better alternative to setting up a separate foundation to do essentially what the Bitcoin Foundation does now. This will wrestle the main power that the Bitcoin Foundation has (being the one who pays the devs) from them and hopefully make them more and more obsolete as time goes on.

A great example of how apolitical Bitcoin is.

Thanks for jogging my memory I knew there was a reason the currency itself was essentially worthless and unused at this point in time.

Thing is with xcp is they are just arbitrary tokens and completely unnecessary, correct me if Im wrong but I seem to remember when researching when counterparty was first announced that the XCP tokens were a) not needed and b) essentially worthless.

And going to places where before there was little to no demand

Also, most importantly let us not forget that ~3000BTC are being mined daily as it is. 30k is 9 days supply roughly. See how silly this suddenly there is 30k more BTC argument is?