Would you offer a better price on a smaller deal? Say $35 for 500?
You might wish to place a call option bid on Bitcoin-OTC: Call Options using ClearCoin Escrow http://wiki.bitcoin-otc.com/wiki/Option_ordersThe syntax for your inquiry above would be entered as: ;;buy 500 btc at 1.00 PPUSD "call option premium 0.07 PPUSD expires 01Apr11" The premium for $0.07 PPUSD for each of the 500 BTC optioned totals $35. So that would be a good deal for anyone who thinks Bitcoins will still be worth less than $1.07 at the end of March and wishes to earn $35 for simply putting 500 BTC in escrow for about 40 days. [Edit: the option seller earns $35 less the 4 BTC escrow fee for 500 bitcoin escrow]. |
|
|
|
The Week In Bitcoin - Feb 21 through Feb 27, 2011. Sunday Feb 27th, 2011Saturday Feb 26th, 2011Friday Feb 25th, 2011Thursday Feb 24th, 2011Wednesday Feb 23rd, 2011Tuesday Feb 22nd, 2011Monday, Feb 21st, 2011Current week (updated throughout each day): http://www.bitcoinnews.comPrevious weekly summaries: http://www.bitcoinnews.com/archive Follow on Twitter: @BitcoinNewsEach day I will post a reply with the previous day's summary, and will update this specific post to include each daily summary as well. |
|
|
|
Something weird at bitcoin-central for sure.
The numbers I saw show 885 BTC traded at an average price sold about $0.76 per BTC. That's about $0.10 per BTC lower than the highest available bids on other markets. https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl=en&hl=en&key=0AmcTCtjBoRWUdDdfVndrRkhNMzFIQXJjbnFNcDVJTlE&output=htmlThose trades chewed up each and every piece of LRUSD and LREUR that was bid. It is almost as if the seller didn't care that the trade wasn't rational ... like what would happen if the seller wasn't the true owner of the bitcoins being sold. I'm speculating here, but I cannot think of any other reason to sell at a price so far below market rates. |
|
|
|
I've looked for (and cant find) a graph that shows how much BTC is flowing from point to point. since all transactions are public this data could be gathered by analyzing each block and taking a sum total of amounts moved.
http://www.bitcoinmania.com has transaction counts, and http://earney.homedns.org/cgi-bin/page.py?type=spent has transaction volume But consider situations like this: Each time 0.05 is spent from the Bitcoin Faucet, http://freebitcoins.appspot.com there currently is about a 250 BTC "change transaction" created for each. i.e., "volume" is exaggerated 5,000 times versus the actual transaction size. I don't know the best ways to adjust for these. Possibly: - If there is only one "output:" amount, then it is safe to say the entire amount was transferred.
- If there are two "output:" amounts, then it is safe to say that at least the smallest "to:" amount was transferred.
- If there is more than one "input" amount, then it is safe to say that all amounts except for the smallest "input:" amount was transferred. (this needs verification)
Keep in mind, I can also send bitcoins back and forth between two of my own wallets at no charge. Thus the "total volume" can be manipulated easily -- i.e., Transaction volumes alone won't tell the true value of Bitcoin and any attempt to give merit to using this metric as a significant component of an investment decision will likely cause pain to the investor. |
|
|
|
Would using HotspostShield work for people outside the US or do they do more checks than just geoip?
Are you asking if that is why Dwolla limits themselves to just U.S. customers? The reason they are U.S. only for now is that they do not use credit cards whatsover. The only way to add and withdraw funds (other than through a transaction with another Dwolla user) is to link a bank account. At the present time the only bank network Dwolla can use is the ACH network in the U.S. I've been told that an account on Dwolla can be created with nothing more than a U.S. mailing address (i.e., without needing to link any bank account whatsoever to recieve and send money). I don't know if they have limits on amounts that can be received or sent without a bank account linked. |
|
|
|
WHY am I offering this? I assume that there are many out there who are using Windows for mining and are getting frustrated, just like I did, but who don't want to go to the hassle of messing with Linux if they're not familiar. My mining experience with Windows was fraught with performance instability, frustrations with drivers (e.g. having to plug monitors into all cards), and discovering the machine is idle because it rebooted for "important" Windows updates even though I thought I had disabled those. All of these problems vanish instantly when switching to Linux.
Would you consider creating a bootable USB image? http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2696.0 |
|
|
|
Thanks for putting your ideas out there. I know the community has quite a number of *winning* ideas that simply need the right team put together for the idea to get off the ground. For instance: - Idea: Bulk buying services
There seems to be an opportunity for buying in bulk and then sharing the savings with bitcoin-paying participants. For instance:
- Idea: eBay / thrift shop broker
Simply a broker who accepts items mailed or shipped and then sells the items and returns proceeds (less the broker's fee) to the owner.
Think of all the jewelry, DVDs/games, electronics (ipods, cameras, computers), etc, sitting in a box somewhere that could be shipped off to a broker who then turns those items into bitcoins!
[Update: Bulk Buying is now offered by CoinForest.com ] Anyone else have ideas on Bitcoin-related services that they'ld like to see offered? |
|
|
|
[Dwolla] won’t release its number of users, but it is on pace for $1 million in transactions this month. http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20110220/BUSINESS/102200326/Banks-merchants-argue-over-fee-cap-transactionsJust for reference, Bitcoin is possibly already doing that level of transactions, or more, every week. (e.g., in the past 24 hours, according to http://BitcoinWatch.com there were 232,669 BTCs transferred in 1,861 transactions. At current exchange rates that number of BTCs for the day represents nearly $200K USD. Bitcoin's method of creating "change transactions" makes calculating the true amount of bitcoins transferred difficult to estimate however the day-over-day increases are showing that Bitcoin is truly gaining traction. The article had some other items of interest: "It's a debate on the benefits of electronic payments and who should bear the cost of those," Sorensen said. "Our view is that the retailers benefit greatly from the investments that the banking industry has made to the payment system."
Yes, it would be a shame if something should happen where you could no longer do business without paying the banking industry for each and every transaction. "We [retail] are in a very competitive industry," she said. "We're looking for ways to cut prices." Does anyone have any suggestions as to how merchants might cut their payment network costs?  |
|
|
|
[Imagine] if you go to use your debit card but find you have a $100 spending limit — even if you have more money in your account?
Right now, the idea is a bargaining chip being used by some of the nation's biggest banks, including JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America and Citigroup. Congress is considering [rules] aimed at limiting the fees that banks can charge retailers every time you swipe your debit card.
The rule proposes putting a $0.12 cap per-transaction. That is about a 70% drop from current charges. If the banks impose this limit, consumers will need to visit the ATM more often to have enough cash to make purchases over $100 without paying a fee. http://www.wfaa.com/news/consumer/Banks-threaten-debit-card-spending-limit-116531378.htmlHat tip: http://market-ticker.org and thanks to Dirty Harry for this post's title: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mevxenJ6Mtc |
|
|
|
If passed, Bill 1716 will record "a complete description of the property pledged, bought, or consigned, including the brand name, serial number, model number or name, any initials or engraving, size, pattern, and color or stone or stones" and of course price. But the kicker: if a transaction is made for an amount over $100, which means one tenth of an ounce of golds, also required will be a "signature, photo, and fingerprint of the person with whom the transaction is made."
First they came for those who bought gold and I did not speak out because I did not buy any gold. |
|
|
|
1. BTC sent to my MyBitcoin account were sent to another address later (so it appears to me).
Did the owners of MyBitcoin do this?
The address is not "your" address it is an address in "MyBitcoin.com's" wallet that they use to track bitcoins received and they then [normally will] credit your account accordingly, after one block. Those bitcoins received on that address are then spent during normal transaction activity within MyBitcoin -- regardless if you had any subsequent transactions to your account after the bitcoins were received. A related post with some additional info. http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2753.0[Edit]: I am going doing a test with an account on MyBitcoin.com I just sent 0.01 BTC to 1CErUzvjoH8g2ripgofw7PHMLo6aCDonW3 which is an address I just generated for an account on MyBitcoin.com. At the time I sent it, the latest block was 108,991. I will update status when we are at block 108,992. http://blockexplorer.com/address/1CErUzvjoH8g2ripgofw7PHMLo6aCDonW3I'll confirm that after nine blocks confirmed, my transaction does not yet appear in the MyBitcoin account's balance. Withdrawals appear to be functioning fine yet.[Update 2]: Appears that the problems with receiving credit for deposited BTCs at MyBitcoin have since been resolved. |
|
|
|
They revisited Bitcoin in episode 288: |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
