|
What the hell do you need an alternative for? You apparently have magic money, just go enjoy it.
|
|
|
|
I think it will make some big investors lose faith in bitcoin and there will be a massive dump as soon as they come online. I really don't want to stay up all night to wait for them to come online so i can sell all my coins  any thoughts? Maybe it's weaklings driving this rally, but I'd think most of the big players know that this kind of crap happens with websites and that's why bitcoin is awesome. Maybe it will remind a big player that the big exchange can be overthrown pretty easily. Hopefully all the other exchanges get a little extra action out of this too. |
|
|
|
So I'm a bit confused about this bug. Mtgox still says $8.827 was the high, but clarkmoody keeps looping a buy all the way up to $9.30. Basically, did the asks up to $9.30 get bought? Or did did none of this really happen?
I don't think there's any way to know yet. Thanks, what happened the last time this bug happened, does anyone know? Were the orders that were being looped completed? And was it caused by a large buy/sell? It was a hugely epic day. Like a $3, 40% swing or something. It got caught in a pretty short loop I think, like a few minutes long. |
|
|
|
yea, i understand now. the order book got clogged up or something. So EVERYONE couldn't trade. I was thinking that it was just happening to some people because i kept seeing people making trades on clark moody. I guess clark moody just goes into a loop when the order book malfunctions.
It's not clark moody that's looping. MtGox is feeding the looped data to clark moody. I know this because I am watching the data over the websocket directly from MtGox (EDIT: when it lets me connect). MtGox's trading engine has a bug in it that is causing this. Same bug they had like 6 months ago. |
|
|
|
imho they'd raise a hell of a lot more by sticking with a payment method that doesn't require the permission/consent of their enemies and showing that they can actually do real work with funds from that source.
Really?  Bitcoin also need the consent from its enemies to keep money flowing into the system until we get big enough. Meh, it helps for sure, but I don't use it. I don't mean I don't use 'the system' at all, but they can't tell that I use bitcoin without considerable digging. And if they did cut me off it would cost maybe 5% and some headache at most to manage. Especially an org like wikileaks could pay some expenses in coin and could OTC for the rest. I run a site, admittedly not a huge site, with all income earned and expenses paid in coin. We could scale up a lot without that changing. I'm not saying wikileaks could do that, but they don't seem to even be interested in being financially independent. Regardless of their funding method 20 anonymous phones for $5000 sounds like something government would do. Is it so hard to have 50 volunteers mail multiple burners to multiple places, use some and randomly give some away? I'm obviously judging from way outside so I could be way off base. But I think they have big serious organization syndrome. I mean they stopped doing the one thing that they are about to focus on getting funds and they're just burning up funds during that time. They want to have a fight about being included in the old system. It's way stronger to say "Ok, have your shit system we can manage without you". That's what will bring down the corrupt system, not finding a loophole that you can use for 3 months or something. Also, can they even keep the funds safe? |
|
|
|
Although I'd probably go with "It's backed by human demand for a suitable money, just like gold."
But that's not what backing is. Backing is a promise to give something worth more for something worth less. Backing is for worthless things like paper. Not bitcoin or gold. |
|
|
|
|
"We are forced to temporarily suspend publishing whilst we secure our economic survival,"
"...We cannot allow giant U.S. finance companies to decide how the whole world votes with its pocket. Our battles are costly."
Spending donations to pay yourself while you find more donations is certainly a strategy. And it is their choice in a sense as to how to spend already donated money. But it is everyone else's choice to keep giving.
imho they'd raise a hell of a lot more by sticking with a payment method that doesn't require the permission/consent of their enemies and showing that they can actually do real work with funds from that source.
He's obviously looking for a fight about money instead of a solution about money.
|
|
|
|
I think that by next month, it is very possible that we may never see Bitcoin worth single digits again...
Nah, it'll be worth single digits into next year. You've claimed you have a paper wallet stash... so sell a buy option at 9.99 expiring 2013/04/15 He's not serious. |
|
|
|
please excuse my uneducated question... but what is the reasoning behind imposing a range limitation on the orders I can place. Again, in the situation showed above, the range is 8.6733 - 9.5863
Meanwhile the BTC rate has dropped significantly, and the futures market has adjusted. So, why preventing me from placing a buy offer at, say, 7.81 My position is profitable right now, and i'd like to close out partially and take some of the gains right now. Can someone please explain how this is supposed to work?
It is fine, it is obvious to me because I have many years of trading experience, however it might not be trivial for those who never dealt with exchanges. The trading range limitation is part of the marginal system which prevents market crashes due to margin calls. By limiting the price movement to a certain price range, a maximum loss could be estimated and protective measures added *before* the market crashes due to margin call sell off. So the theory is that people will make a bid inside of the range instead of just making no bid at all? Because forcing it to stay in a range where no one wants to bid won't help you cash people out at all. When you run out of liquidity inside the range that's it, 0 way to force close anyone out. Either way 5% is way too tight for bitcoin in december right now. |
|
|
|
All clients will reject blocks larger than 1MB as invalid.
Changing this is known as a "hard fork" change, something to be avoided because it knocks old clients off the network, limiting their access to their own bitcoins, and creates other technical problems.
I'm struggling to understand how this is not viewed as an impending catastrophe for Bitcoin. 1MB can only hold so many transactions, and there are already some blocks that are half that size. That would seem to mean that transaction volume can barely double from today's puny number before transactions are queued up for ages or even discarded unless they have juicy transaction fees. Of course a hardfork is highly undesirable, but don't you think it will have to happen, eventually? I think it will happen. In the meantime it is a guarantee that the chain can't get to some stupid size overnight. It's no catastrophe, just means that some people will start to economize, not make 1 cent deposits and tiny bets to places or send their money back and forth for 'practice'. |
|
|
|
There was a brief crash today from 8.58 down to 8.22 then immediately back to 8.52 within single digit seconds.
Result: Clark moody promptly died, btccharts stopped ticking, Mt. Gox went unresponsive for the duration, and bitcointalk went down for a minute or less.
Someone bought several thousand bitcoins at (up to) 0.36 USD below market on Mt.Gox. Can someone explain this anomaly?
I'm not the first time I've noticed that all services are falling at one moment. This is all under one organization? What the hell? Puppeteer has the ability to pull the strings all at once? Lol, they all get their info from Gox because that's where the info is made, no conspiracy, relax. The out of range price is because Gox doesn't have good matching software, it's been happening for 2 years. |
|
|
|
|
Milestone coming up today. We'll be just 1 million coins away from the drop.
|
|
|
|
The definitions of the bets are not specific enough on this site. Also, it would be much better if it worked like Intrade... because somebody can just place a big bet right before the time is up... (I know it is weighted, but still)
God, we need BitcoINtrade so bad. I'd love to own a piece and/or help run it. agreed, plus you already found a catchy name  Yeah, I thought it was clever and then I realized it is just "bitcoin trade dot com" so surely it is taken. |
|
|
|
|
BitInstant is a great company. The service you are using is a little bit new, but you will get help and it will get solved.
|
|
|
|
These "Protection agencies" would, for all intents and purposes, become governing bodies. They would have to decide on sets of "rules" for members to be bound by in arbitration... which would effectively become laws. You would pay these "Protection agencies" a "membership fee", which would effectively be a tax. They would fulfill all the useful roles of government, without out all the bloat. The most significant difference is we would all have a choice. Protection Agency A, Protection Agency B, Protection Agency z, no protection agency, etc....
The most honest answer to any of these "How does ancap deal with..." questions is "I don't know, and it doesn't matter". The point is not how we can force everyone to live a "better" life, but how naturally we can't force anyone to do anything. The government is an evil corporate monopoly, and should be put down.
Except that the defining factor of a tax is that it is compulsory. The modern tax system, as well, is designed so that it's nearly impossible for the individual to figure out how much, if anything, they owe. So the fees which one would pay to a protection agency, which are completely voluntary, and necessarily quite simple to understand, are nothing like taxes. I can't agree. I know exactly what I owe and it's not hard to understand what is going on. |
|
|
|
|
It's just plain ridiculous to complain about Bitcoins anonymity compared to cash. I mean come on, my grandma can't be bothered to wear a cloak, mask and gloves out in public so paper USD is rather a fail for her too.
|
|
|
|
Still trying to figure out why someone would dump coins like that?
Maybe they've been running a ponzi scheme and for some reason need to cash out quickly. I dunno, it's not Monday. |
|
|
|
As much as I hate gambling in general, SatoshiDice is providing a valuable service to Bitcoin, submitting valid transactions with fees to the network. This is exactly what we want to happen. The blockchain is growing because people are using it. 2 GB blockchain? That's nothing. I want to see a 2 TB blockchain! Bring it on!
+1 you ain't seen nothing yet. It's going to be huge and there are going to be awesome solutions for all needs. |
|
|
|
we're going lower...
Yes, er, maybe, but either way, we know what happens later. |
|
|
|
The definitions of the bets are not specific enough on this site. Also, it would be much better if it worked like Intrade... because somebody can just place a big bet right before the time is up... (I know it is weighted, but still)
God, we need BitcoINtrade so bad. I'd love to own a piece and/or help run it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
