|
781
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Parity watch -> Botswana
|
on: April 02, 2013, 09:14:28 PM
|
M1 includes pretty much only cash. Money stored in bank accounts is not included.
M1 = bank accounts + cash. Hmm, I stand corrected. In that case, shouldn't we be including approx. 1.5 million BTC deposited into Bitcoin's M1? |
|
|
|
|
783
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Current stable bitcoin market price?
|
on: April 02, 2013, 08:52:47 PM
|
I don't believe you understand the question.
I'm not sure you do. As I understand it, he's not asking if you would sell your BTC right now for that much. He's asking how high the price would have to go before you would cash out. Of course, I could be misunderstanding you here. stable bitcoin market price. |
|
|
|
|
784
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Parity watch -> Botswana
|
on: April 02, 2013, 08:19:25 PM
|
I guess it is the later. Not a big surprise considering that Brits were pushed out of every biz except selling their houses to each other.
I think it must be wrong. Compare to other EU countries of similar population (i.e. Italy, France). M1 for Ireland is more than UK even though population is less than 1/10th the size. $100,900,000,000.00/62 million (rough UK population) leaves just over $1600/person. Seems way too low. M1 includes pretty much only cash. Money stored in bank accounts is not included. |
|
|
|
|
786
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Current stable bitcoin market price?
|
on: April 02, 2013, 08:07:02 PM
|
Only an idiot would refuse to sell at $150.
I guess I'm an idiot then. I won't sell before $1000000 is reached. I don't believe you understand the question. I am willing to sell 50% of my bitcoins for:
I am willing to sell as many Bitcoins as I own for $150. Refusing to do so is like refusing a free ounce of gold because "gold price is going up". |
|
|
|
|
789
|
Other / Off-topic / Re: My Facebook convo with a girl about bitcoins in 2012.
|
on: April 02, 2013, 03:29:09 AM
|
|
Honestly, I don't think this is the right approach. You sounded like a marketer there.
I think a more passive method of "spreading the word" is better. Instead of telling people that Bitcoin is good, show people that Bitcoin is good. Go to the nearest store that accepts Bitcoin and pay with Bitcoin. People will catch on.
|
|
|
|
|
790
|
Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Instawallet/Bitcoin-Central Security Breach
|
on: April 02, 2013, 03:05:02 AM
|
If you put password in URL on your website, it is not Googles fault. It would be your and your only your complete and grossly negligible disregard of most trivial best practices in information security.
Do not blame Google it is not their fault.
I find it hard to believe that 3000+ instawallets were posted on the web. Maybe a dozen, maybe even 10 dozen, but 3,000? 1) How many people created instawallets? 2) Out of those, how many actually used those instawallets? 3) Out of those, how many still hold balances in instawallets? 4) Out of those, how many decided it was a good idea to post their instawallet URL's on the web somewhere, despite the huge red warning against doing so? I just don't see 3,000 as coming solely from URLs that people have posted online. As someone else mentioned, I believe Google also gathers information about websites based on what people access through their browser or other services. If the URL might exist, Google crawls it to find out. If i'm not mistaken, unless you remember the https part Chrome will send whatever you put on the URL bar to Google's databases. Chrome will always send what's in the URL bar to Google, even in HTTPS when even the ISP can't decode the URL. That's why you should never use Chrome. They never actually send any browsing history, but because of the sneaky design merging a "search bar" and a "url bar", anything that gets put in there is treated as a search and sent to Google. From lifehacker: If you've enabled Instant in your settings, or from the about:flags section, it's safe to presume that pretty much every character you type into Chrome's address bar is sent, analyzed, and returned to you.
|
|
|
|
|
793
|
Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Instawallet Security Breach
|
on: April 01, 2013, 07:27:15 PM
|
But there were 3.5million wallets. Is it just limited to 3000?
We don't know if the problem is related to that, or another problem entirely. We don't know if coins were stolen, lost, looked at, fondled, or licked. Just have to wait for official statements at this point. We know that they think that it is ok to have authorization information in clear text in URL to allow access to financial accounts. This tells you all you need to know. Whomever runs it has no clue. The system would be perfectly secure if not for Google Chrome. |
|
|
|
|
796
|
Other / Meta / Re: Show new replies to your posts
|
on: April 01, 2013, 02:54:08 AM
|
No, that's not the correct solution. A better solution would be to allow more than one watchlist—maybe up to 5 per user, 10 for donators and 25 for VIPs.
That wouldn't help my use case very much. My choice of threads to read is based on how much time I have, so I group them into consecutively-smaller sets. "Show unread posts since last visit" is the largest set, as it includes all forum areas I do not ignore. "Watchlist" contains all the posts in a few key forum areas I have set to automatically watch, and the occasional one I set to manually watch. "Show new replies to your posts" is the smallest set, and it's sometimes the only one I read due to time constraints. The only problem is that sometimes I post in a thread but don't want to ever look at it again, like the Ripple Giveaway thread. Having posts in there that I don't want to see is aggravating because frequently when I'm using that link it's because I am time constrained. Yes, it would. If you had more than one watchlist, you can have it like this: "Show unread posts since last visit" is the largest set, as it includes all forum areas you do not ignore. "Watchlist A" contains all the posts in a few key forum areas I have set to automatically watch, and the occasional one I set to manually watch. "Show new replies to your posts" is as before. "Watchlist B" contains all replies to thread you've posted in, and gives you the ability to unwatch any threads (the functionality you want). |
|
|
|
|
798
|
Other / Meta / Re: Show new replies to your posts
|
on: April 01, 2013, 02:41:38 AM
|
It almost sounds like you want some sort of list full of topics that you are watching...
Sometimes my watchlist gets too big and I want an even narrower view, and "new replies to your posts" fits the bill nicely. The only think that is missing is the ability to remove threads from that list. No, that's not the correct solution. A better solution would be to allow more than one watchlist—maybe up to 5 per user, 10 for donators and 25 for VIPs. |
|
|
|
|
799
|
Other / Beginners & Help / Re: What is this chart really indicating?
|
on: April 01, 2013, 02:26:17 AM
|
The most recent 7-day average is also inaccurate, as it is also a partial-week. No matter what average is used, one should always consult the second-most recent datum. It is a rolling 7 day average. There is no such thing as a partial week. At 23:59:59 on Tuesday the 7 day average will still be a full week (from Wednesday through Tuesday). To the OP the point about Easter weekend is important. We have seen our volume decline significantly as well. It is a long weekend, many people taking time off to spend time at family gatherings. Any major holiday is going to distort the data compared to "normal" weeks. The 7-day average includes the last datum, which is a partial day. Although the effect of this partial day is lesser when averaged with 6 complete days, it's still best to take the penultimate datum. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
