Contrary to what my handle may suggest I am a novice in markets and trading, but I would think the "day traders" would actually give credence as well as stimulate bitcoin economy.
Oh, I'm sure it does both of those things. I'm just of the personal opinion that all the charts, graphs, models, in all the world are nothing but BS and day trading is 99.9999% luck. I also don't see enough movement on Mt. Gox to convince me that a lot of people are actually "day trading" out side of cashing out at very obvious peaks and buying back in when a crash stops. Thus, everyone who is trying to sell below $13.50 is hoping that there will be a crash and when it doesn't happen they just buy back in rinse repeat. Now, don't try to debate me on this. It's just one little guy's opinion and I read this forum more than I post and haven't been convinced otherwise yet. anyone doing business in BTC with expenses not payable in BTC.
I would be interested in seeing some sort of stats showing how many businesses do instantly cashout all BTC, what % they hold in BTC, ect. Those would be some neat figures. |
|
|
|
|
I find it strange that it only takes two examples for you to lose faith so quickly. One being a company that is creating brand new hardware for a niche market when huge companies making huge consumer products face delays all the time and the other being a magic money site that was obviously promising more than it could deliver.
Any time I have spent BTC I have got exactly what I've been promised and, in reverse, have always delivered what I have been paid to do.
|
|
|
|
|
I wish I knew. Personally, I think they're crazy. I can't understand anyone who has a passing interest in bitcoin and simultaneously be bearish.
My guess is they're people who either think they are way smarter than they actually are and can "day trade" or are just really, really desperate for USD. Like, they're electricity is going to be cutoff at any moment desperate.
|
|
|
|
|
My feels is that was just a false start and we got a few more days at sub $13.50.
My feels are so good.
|
|
|
|
|
We'll be at $13.30 with possible ranges of $13.15 - 13.40. Once $13.51 is reached, sometime next week I suppose, it'll be an almost instant push to $14 with price settling around $13.80.
I'd show you my charts, but I sold them for lunch money already.
|
|
|
|
I dont get the point of mining alt chains and expecting profit. Has any of them ever been profitable outside the initial pump & dump phase ?
Eh, let them waste their mining on worthless altcoins. It's no ones fault but their own if they can't figure out that the alt chains are being used only by people who are emo-sad that they missed out on the initial BTC rise and fall and only want to cash out. |
|
|
|
|
I know I said that was my last q, but I lied I guess. What prevents a condition where a large % of the pools/big miners only accepting super-high fee transactions or 1 transaction blocks? Obviously having a network only support 6 transactions an hour is no good.
Sorry, but my whole world is now up turned with all this new knowledge.
|
|
|
|
Every pool is different. The bitcoind has RPC calls which can be used to control which tx are included in the block creation. My understanding is that major pools use completely custom code to generate the block and merkle tree.
OK, one last Q and my curiosity will be satisfied. I know that if I pay fees the I get processed faster and the miners get the fees, but why does the miner care at all besides actually getting said fees. The benefit of only including transactions with fees include and ignoring others is what? Fast mining time for the miner? On principle alone? I ways always under the assumption that the bitcoin system had fees=faster hardcoded into it, which I now know is wrong. |
|
|
|
My question: Why does block 210935 which was found like 1.5 hours after the previous block only containing 13 transactions? That seems odd to me.
Miner's can include whatever transactions they like. They can choose to included no transactions in a block if they like, and there are plenty of 0 transaction blocks in the blockchain. How/when does a miner decide what to include in their block? Feel free to link me to another source that explains this clearly. Well there is no source because a miner can use whatever criteria they want. They could never include any transactions, they could include all transactions, they could include only paying transactions, they could only include transactions from their friends and/or prostitutes, they could only include tx who's has ends with a 6, etc. In the case of pools (with the exception of p2pool) the miner is just a dumb hasher. The block creation (and tx selection) is done at the pool level. Most pools include a mix of paying and free transactions and have their own internal rules on how many transactions they will accept. But how do they actually do it? Program into their miner a line saying "Only include X" which is used when they get a block? Or do they get the block and then pick and choose? |
|
|
|
My question: Why does block 210935 which was found like 1.5 hours after the previous block only containing 13 transactions? That seems odd to me.
Miner's can include whatever transactions they like. They can choose to included no transactions in a block if they like, and there are plenty of 0 transaction blocks in the blockchain. How/when does a miner decide what to include in their block? Feel free to link me to another source that explains this clearly. Or don't if you don't want to  |
|
|
|
My question: Why does block 210935 which was found like 1.5 hours after the previous block only containing 13 transactions? That seems odd to me.
It is up to the miner to include any or all transactions which are in the memory pool (unconfirmed transactions). Did you include a tx fee? Can't really complain about free service not being "next block". Heh, I wasn't complaining. I'm not sitting on any transactions. Just surprised at only 13 being in the block. |
|
|
|
|
My question: Why does block 210935 which was found like 1.5 hours after the previous block only containing 13 transactions? That seems odd to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Nobody knows!
But the answer is 3rd quarter.
|
|
|
|
|
Inncorrect. It's the yeti.
|
|
|
|
yup, just getting started, everyone has a price, pull out your calculator and figure out what your price is...
Parity with Berkshire Hathaway! |
|
|
|
well that's it, looks like its gonna go down now
I'd bet more on temporary stabilization (oxymoron?) at $13.20 - $13.40. Agreed Don't agree with me! I'm making stuff up and I don't know how I got here. Disagreed? Well, you're dumb and you should know I'm always right. |
|
|
|
well that's it, looks like its gonna go down now
I'd bet more on temporary stabilization (oxymoron?) at $13.20 - $13.40. Agreed Don't agree with me! I'm making stuff up and I don't know how I got here. |
|
|
|
well that's it, looks like its gonna go down now
I'd bet more on temporary stabilization (oxymoron?) at $13.20 - $13.40. |
|
|
|
Generally anticipated events are always more or less priced in. If we knew, half a year ago, that wordpress would accept bitcoins on a certain date, there would be no rally.
Just ain't true. Unless you knew not only that wordpress was going to accept them, but how many people would start using BTC because if/how much this increase demand would increase price/what other businesses would start accepting BTC because of wordpress/how long wordpress will accept BTC/ect ect ect Anyone who claims that they can price ANYTHING in before it happens has spent to much time buying on Silk Road. |
|
|
|
News has been good, but I feel its more of a pull from the reward halving than a rally of newcomers. Look at the size of the ask depth dropping, supply is dropping with the reward halving, just took a few days.
Geez, didn't you hear?! The reward drop was already priced in!  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
