When we get 5 digit soon, nobody would have doubts about $50000 price  Indeed. A 1000$ bitcoin, after the 2013 bubble, seemed unachievable to many. Today those 1000$ bitcoins are considered cheap. It is all a matter of perspective. The more Bitcoin is considered to be a store of value, to more valuable it gets. 21 bitcoins is a nice amount to have, and already hard to get for many even today ($25k). |
|
|
|
concerning Bitfinex's solvency, etc... , unless you just wanting to spread fear and just bullshit that is not really backed up by the facts
Well, there _is_ the fact that some time ago they lost quite a large sum of funds to theft. That is a _fact_ that directly impinges upon their solvency. Of course, we don't _know_ how significant that loss is in relation to their assets. Have you seen their current balance sheet and P&L Statement? No? Hmmm. At this time, there is not really any evidence of bitfinex solvency issues - beyond a bunch of nearly pure speculation. Yes, we can agree that there were major issues in August, and yes we can agree that Bitfinex has not shared a lot of specifics and yes we can speculate that there may have been some insider job aspects to the august "hack". We also know that bitfinex employed a lot of very creative and innovative recovery tools, and seem to have a pretty decent recovery... Yeah, sure some of that "recovery" is likely to be smoke and mirrors, but that does not even come close to rising to the level that insolvency should be considered as some kind of central issue in this current situation that seems plausibly connected with bank relations issues and largely not made up by bitfinex. So why read malevolence into what could more easily described as incompetence? especially if you have little to no evidence to back up your less likely scenarios? There is a chance Bitfinex is indeed currently USD insolvent, according to the market(price). |
|
|
|
|
Congratulations with your third birthday Monero, man you are growing up quickly!
|
|
|
|
|
$1666, because that is what the bitcoin price always gravitates to.
|
|
|
|
They [Bitfinex] say they have "other outbound channels available". However I don't know WTF "other channels" means.
BFX Coin 2.0 tm |
|
|
|
|
Just make sure you have one.
If Bitcoin truly becomes what it can become, a whole bitcoin is more than plenty.
Time and patience is what you need, more than number of dollars invested.
|
|
|
|
Monero [...] has a variable blocksize(not necessary a positive feature)
Why not positive (Bitcoin blocksize debate anyone)? If the penalty for miners to create bigger blocks (more transactions) is lower than the transactions fees paid, there is an incentive to increase the blocksize. A blocksize controlled by the free market instead of an arbitrary set threshold value. I quite like this recent tweet from Vitalik Buterin: "From an outside view, probability that 1MB is exactly optimal tradeoff from pure tech standpoint is tiny." [...] infinite block reward of 1 monero(not necessary a positive feature)
It will be ~0.6 monero per block, and less than 1% inflation. This is likely less moneros than get lost in boating accidents on a yearly basis. It does however give an incentive for miners to keep mining. Very important for the long term security of the network and no discussions required to artificially set high transaction fees. [...] no gui interface - only command line
There actually is a Monero Graphical User Interface wallet if you please: GUI beta 2 has recently been released. [...] fair mining schedule but had a rather big botnet mining problem in its existence. I find it currently rather expensive(or fair  ). Purely from a mining decentralization point of view, botnets are great. However you can't know whether Monero is mined by botnets. Monero however does have a scheduled every six months hardfork for protocol updates. No hardfork is good/bad debates required, but very inconvenient for static configured botnets. Secondly botnets don't pay for hardware and electricity (they are basically mined for free) so the moneros are likely dumped on exchange no matter their true costs: you can sporadically buy moneros below their true cost price (!). |
|
|
|
[...] They [Poloniex] say they keep the majority of their funds in cold storage. I have a lot on there and don't lose sleep over it.
Funny how this really differs from person to person, I can't sleep having my very own monero/bitcoin over there for even a day (after purchasing). Cryptomoney to me, it may sound cliche, is about being able to be your own bank. I very much like having full control over my own money. |
|
|
|
So... back at $200 a 1000 btc order was a wall because it was worth $200k, but now, when it's worth $1.2m it's not a wall?
Going by this logic, 5 years ago, a 100 btc order was a wall, because it was worth $1000?
Makes sense...
It doesn't matter how much does it worth today. What does matter is what % of existing bitcoins does it represent. Definitely makes sense! Not for as long BTC can be bought with infinite USD. |
|
|
|
How many bitcoins must one currently hold, as a citizen of a first world country, to be exited about the bitcoin price (movements)?
Of course, there is no "must" when it comes to this kind of a thing, and even in the "first world" there is a considerable amount of variance in income and in how much someone might have available to invest. if you are feeling fairly bullish about bitcoin, then holding 10% of your quasi-liquid investments in bitcoin could be a good thing.. and maybe for some people that could be up to 10 bitcoins, but they might not get rich in the shorter term with 10 bitcoins, so maybe 100 would be a better target.. even though 100 might be too difficult to achieve for some people, especially if they are just entering into BTC and 10 might be more realistic. So 100 bitcoins it is. How many dollars must one currently hold, as a citizen of a first world country, to be considered rich? |
|
|
|
|
How many bitcoins must one currently hold, as a citizen of a first world country, to be exited about the bitcoin price (movements)?
|
|
|
|
[...] But its good BU will lose. BU is just some Big Pools wanting to earn More Fees with Blocksize Increase. Their Main concern is earning fees, not the Blocksize problem.
Can we please have this BU/Core is good/bad discussion elsewhere? Fees are just a side effect of the actual usage of a blockchain network. So miners their concern is that their mined blockchain is actually being used as much and by as many as possible, not the other way around. Artificially limiting capacity to increase fees is very short sighted. I am sure miners are more clever than that, these are professional business nowadays. That is why the elastic non arbitrary blocksize of Monero is such a great and very valuable feature. |
|
|
|
Announcements > 100% Redemption of Outstanding BFX Tokens
April 03, 2017 https://www.bitfinex.com/posts/198Quite clever: get hacked for $60 million but create BFX tokens to remain solvent, then buy them on your own exchange with ~80% discount, announce BFX tokens will be 100% redeemed, effectively change the damage of the 'hack' from $60 million to ~$12 million. In the meanwhile still not a single word how the hack has happend but everybody is cheering for a job well done. Amazing. |
|
|
|
Speculation:. When BTC forks everyone will be holding their coins tightly, and transaction traffic will approach nil. Consequently the only way to actually buy anything on, e.g., alphabay will be using XMR. XMR valuation may double, triple, quadruple overnight.
At least today there is direct EUR and USD to XMR (Bitfinex and Kraken), and for sure I will not touch my BTC during these days. Great speculation. |
|
|
|
[...] I have a hard time understanding how anyone could put any considerable amount of money in such a market right now.
That is the exact reason money has been put in recently. [Insert Warren Buffett quote] |
|
|
|
And someone didn't want to accept my statement that bitcoin is a currency and not money so I had to explain in greater detail why: Bitcoin is a currency not money. If you don't agree, YOU don't understand finance. It's a Rube Goldberg machine and nothing more. No random bullshit made up of completely arbitary variables created by humans is money. Money represents goods and services or the ability to do work. It's required to be connected to some type of commodity or energy resource if you're abstracting the system away from barter, otherwise the system is easily gamed and implodes as always.
Bitcoin is not a real commodity, it's a poor immitation like some type of tranny. The sunk cost in so called "creating" a bitcoin in the past does not transfer into delivering anything tangible into the future. It's more like a steady state system that can catastrophically fail and vaporize all imaginary "wealth" attached to it at any time - the glaring trait of all currencies past and future. One of the main reasons the noble metals are valued as money (gold and silver) are the anti-corrosive properties to defeat time itself, which guarantees you the ability to transfer that unit of account from the past to future, UNLIKE bitcoin.
The distinction between money and currency is one that is blurry and arbitrary. Many tend to think of money as something that is tied to a physical commodity and everything else as currency but that is not really accurate. The reality is that all money/currency is an arbitrary construct created by man to facilitate trade and savings. Paper currencies have a long track record of failure. This failure is due to the inherent flaws of mankind rather then a fundamental problem with paper money. We choose to embrace things like fractional reserve lending, defect spending, and unfounded entitlements all of which lead to fiscal instability and undermine the currency system leading to eventual failure. Gold and Silver are simply attempts to take human weakness out of the picture by tying the concept of money to something that cannot be easily forged or mass produced. This works to a degree but it historically also ultimately fails to restrain us from eventually debasing and destroying the currency system. We see this in Rome and also in our recent past as we were not long ago on a gold standard. Bitcoin is a new attempt to separate destructive human weakness from a money/currency system. The new mechanism is decentralization and computer algorithm to replace flawed human judgment. If it will succeed long term remains to be seen but we know paper currency consistently and repeatedly fails and we know precious metal currency repeatedly fails so now we will learn how well digital currency works. How this scaling debate plays out will be important to watch. The 95% requirement for implementation as seen in some of the Bitcoin update proposals is a very wise threshold to use. If Bitcoin ever becomes a simple voting mechanism where 51% of hashing power is able to implement widely accepted changes to the protocol over the objections of the other 49% then human error has returned to the forefront. Bitcoin would then become the same system we already have. A complex fiat voting system. Thanks for your write-up, interesting read. |
|
|
|
[...] Will the people go back to the more 'organic' altcoins that have grassroots support and distributed thru mining without ICOs, premines and such?
Smart money does, and there is not even a handful of coins that fit those criteria. |
|
|
|
bitcoin is stil a shitty alt coin, it can go 5k or 300 dolla any time soon.
Place your bets gents.
If true, I would take that bet any day. Which I do. So it breached $1337 for a fraction of a millisecond? I understand that's a meaningful figure for the computer orientated.
I am sure this makes Adam happy. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
