301
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: What will happen if there's no price rise for the halfing?
|
on: February 10, 2016, 11:51:28 AM
|
Ok so the more hashpower the higher the difficulty.
And how much hashpower do we need to get the whole network working? Is the difficulty always balancing everything so it'll always be profitable for enough miners to mine?
The difficulty is always balancing everything, yes. This is based on a period in which 2016 blocks are found - this should take roughly 14 days, or about 10 minutes per block. If, on average, it takes more than 10 minutes per block then difficulty will decrease proportionately. If it takes less than 10 minutes on average then difficulty will increase. These changes in difficulty obviously impact the most marginal miners, "encouraging" them to start or stop mining. This will then feed into the calculation for the next 2016-block period. The whole network has worked on comparatively little hashpower - this graph shows (on a log scale) how the power of the network has grown over the last 6-7 years. Ignoring the early days, when difficulty was kept higher than you might expect, difficulty has always tracked hashpower (with a 2016-block lag). Hashpower has occasionally fallen, and difficulty has fallen to match it (there are a few examples during April-June 2015). However, as difficulty fell marginal miners suddenly found that they could mine for a (small) profit, and started mining, increasing hashpower again, and (2016 blocks later) difficulty rose again. In the long-term BTC won't exhibit supply inflation, so giving BTC to miners finding blocks isn't tenable in the long-term. However, miners will always need some sort of reward for maintaining the network. For this reason Bitcoin has built in a process to encourage a market in transaction fees, and to encourage an increase in transactions fees and less reliance on block reward the block reward is periodically reduced (every 210,000 blocks the block reward is halved). Incidentally, this is the reason why difficulty changes don't happen precisely every 14 days, and the block reward reduction doesn't happen precisely every 4 years - because changes are based on blocks being found, not on time, and the rate at which blocks are found tends to be faster than 1 every 10 minutes.
|
|
|
302
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: I think the price will rise again above $400
|
on: February 09, 2016, 01:11:51 PM
|
something can happen at any moment
Such wisdom! Not wisdom, sentiment. If 1Referee had actually written "something can happen at any moment" then you'd be closer to the mark. But 1Referee actually wrote " I have the feeling that something can happen at any moment". Sentiment is useful.
|
|
|
303
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: What will happen if there's no price rise for the halfing?
|
on: February 09, 2016, 11:52:39 AM
|
Just because there is no price increase during halving one can't say that bitcoin is dying. This time the scenario might be the same, there might be no price increase during halving as the current market situation of china is worse than how was it during the last years halving
Hmm... Yes one can. As it will mean the miners are going to die as they won't earn enough to cover their expenses, which will mean they will stop mining which will mean btc is going to die :p Am I not getting something? You are not getting something. "The miners" are not a homogenous group. Different miners have different fixed costs, different variable costs. They will not stop mining as one big group. The block reward reduction will not come as a total surprise to them - they will have been aware of it just as long as everyone else - and when they determined their own, individual, ROI they will have taken the reduction into account. The most marginal miners may stop mining - but all that means for the remaining mass of miners is that difficulty will decrease. if the diff will decrease because those with high rate will leave than the other with lower rate will add more hash, right now they can not because that hash is busy from those with higher rate so diff will not actually decrease so much as many believe, unless the price fall under a certain amount I don't think it really matters whether difficulty falls as much as some people think it will. What matters is that it decreases (or increases) in response to the rate at which blocks are found, not by how much it decreases/increases. If it falls a little, a few old miners may purchase new hardware, or a few new miners may enter the game. If it falls a lot many old miners or many new miners or some combination thereof, etc. The point is that the block reward reduction won't be the apocalypse some people seem to think - the system was cleverly designed to anticipate this and find an equilibrium, and has already survived (and thrived!) through the 50 to 25 BTC reduction.
|
|
|
304
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: What will happen if there's no price rise for the halfing?
|
on: February 09, 2016, 10:20:42 AM
|
Just because there is no price increase during halving one can't say that bitcoin is dying. This time the scenario might be the same, there might be no price increase during halving as the current market situation of china is worse than how was it during the last years halving
Hmm... Yes one can. As it will mean the miners are going to die as they won't earn enough to cover their expenses, which will mean they will stop mining which will mean btc is going to die :p Am I not getting something? You are not getting something. "The miners" are not a homogenous group. Different miners have different fixed costs, different variable costs. They will not stop mining as one big group. The block reward reduction will not come as a total surprise to them - they will have been aware of it just as long as everyone else - and when they determined their own, individual, ROI they will have taken the reduction into account. The most marginal miners may stop mining - but all that means for the remaining mass of miners is that difficulty will decrease. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH! I was not getting something xD So it means that difficulty is directly linked to the amount of miners in action? Does that mean that we absolutely don't need so many miners? Do we know how many miners we actually need to secure the transactions? Not directly linked to the amount of miners, but indirectly through hash power. As the computational power of the network changes, blocks are found more or less frequently. Every 2016 blocks the difficulty changes to keep the rate at which blocks are found close to one block every 6 minutes. Computational power is what matters, not the amount of miners. Given two mining operations with the same computational power - one a mining pool and the other a vast mining operation owned and operated by one very wealthy individual - there's no computational difference to the network between the two operations (i.e. the probability of either operation finding a block is the same), even though the mining pool aggregates numerous small miners.
|
|
|
305
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: What will happen if there's no price rise for the halfing?
|
on: February 09, 2016, 09:33:14 AM
|
Just because there is no price increase during halving one can't say that bitcoin is dying. This time the scenario might be the same, there might be no price increase during halving as the current market situation of china is worse than how was it during the last years halving
Hmm... Yes one can. As it will mean the miners are going to die as they won't earn enough to cover their expenses, which will mean they will stop mining which will mean btc is going to die :p Am I not getting something? You are not getting something. "The miners" are not a homogenous group. Different miners have different fixed costs, different variable costs. They will not stop mining as one big group. The block reward reduction will not come as a total surprise to them - they will have been aware of it just as long as everyone else - and when they determined their own, individual, ROI they will have taken the reduction into account. The most marginal miners may stop mining - but all that means for the remaining mass of miners is that difficulty will decrease.
|
|
|
306
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: EU is about to end bitcoin anonymity. Price reaction?
|
on: February 08, 2016, 05:41:22 PM
|
If EU create some kind of anti bitcoin law then it will be only respected in EU zone. What will stop people from using Russian or Asian Exchanges? All they achieve by pushing that unfavorable law is situation when bitcoin trading will move outside EU.
Well, some, perhaps most, trade on EU exchanges will continue - for the same reason that some, perhaps most, US residents continue to use US exchanges - regulation makes them feel they're safer. But yes, people who don't want to give up their anonymity will simply trade outside the EU (or trade OTC - as far as I know this proposed measure doesn't affect localbitcoins).
|
|
|
307
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: EU is about to end bitcoin anonymity. Price reaction?
|
on: February 08, 2016, 11:51:55 AM
|
For years, the Bitcoin economy has operated in relative freedom from the hand of state governments. With the EU’s proposals, that era may be coming to an end.Its a very bad , but in USA its okey!
In what way is it OK in the US but not in the EU? It seems to me that there is nothing being proposed here that isn't already implemented in the US.
|
|
|
308
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: EU is about to end bitcoin anonymity. Price reaction?
|
on: February 05, 2016, 03:31:19 PM
|
The EU’s executive body has promised new legislation in the Spring to make sure the exchanges and users of virtual currency platforms such as Bitcoin are identifiable and traceable. Seems price of Bitcoin will fall down?
From what source did you read this? I think that is good news. Legal is better. http://fortune.com/2016/02/03/bitcoin-europe-crackdown/here is the source! They say "Still, the Paris attacks last November created an atmosphere in which the European Commission must be seen to be doing what it can. For virtual currencies, this is the fallout." I was wondering whether this could lower the price or increase it. I do think as you but I was also thinking that anonymity is a plus too to increase the mass adoption of bitcoin, just like cash is for money (whether this is dodgy or not). The EC is pushing for additional regulation for *exchanges*, Bitcoin anonymity is not under threat. The article is pretty dire (I've read worse though) but it does manage to qualify its breathless "bye bye Bitcoin anonymity" sound bite. In general, if the EC says something and the media then say OMG EU BAN! - it's bollocks.
|
|
|
310
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: February 04, 2016, 01:05:39 PM
|
Hmm... You know it's really putting your faith in technology evolution and respect of the Moore law...
But experience is showing that Moore law is reaching a limit. The base of Moore principle is that the more time passes, the smaller electronic elements become. But we're reaching a point where you cant get any smaller! It becomes harder and harder and we'll eventually reach a physical limit: you can't go small enough to reach the nanometer. At this scale physics as we know no longer exists...
Moore's Law is a straw man - the previous poster was talking about general technological progress, not the much more narrow Moore's Law. A limit to component density didn't prevent technological development in the centuries before Gordon Moore, and there's no reason to suspect it'll stop simply when integrated circuitry reaches a physical limit. Well I understand your point but I'd say it's totally flawed. It's not because it had happened that it will actually happen I wouldn't be incredibly shocked if in 10 years scientists would explain that we reached a point in IT where development can't really go any further. You're still limited to physic, and if you can't make smaller elements... What can you do?Oh maybe in only 3 days someone is going to come with a revolution in science and explain something that will allow us to use a 1000times better internet/PC. But it's not because it has, and it can, that it will If you can't make smaller elements... What can you do?Well... you can: - Connect multiple elements together.
- Continue to improve elements in ways that don't rely on component density, or even reduce the number of components.
- Develop better ways to connect elements.
A revolution in 3 days isn't necessary. Technological developments that speed our processing power and increase our bandwidth happen all the time, and are not tightly coupled to component density. They tend not to yield 1000x improvements, but they compound together over time to achieve something pretty spectacular. The shift from CISC to RISC CPUs, for example, reduced the complexity of CPUs (and hence the number of components they required), allowing more powerful computers - it wasn't necessary for component density to increase, because the number of components was *decreasing*. The shift from HDDs to SSDs has increased bandwidth. Wi-fi gets faster with every generation, and that's (broadly) using tech that's familiar to radio engineers from back in the day. I'm not saying that Moore's Law didn't happen, that it was a bad thing, or anything like that. What I'm saying is that reaching a limit to the number of components we can put on a piece of silicon is not going to bring an end to technological development in general, or to IT in particular. Bitcoin is safe. I'd say that you're rather right. But being confident in the increase of IT performances doesn't mean it HAS to happen ^^ Bitcoin SHOULD be safe. But it doesn't need an apocalypse in IT sector to be endangered, just a freezing in evolution Well, I'm fairly confident that reaching the natural limit of components on chips won't suddenly cause all other development in other areas to stop, which seems to be what a "freezing in evolution" would imply.
|
|
|
311
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: BIG PUMP STARTED .. $400 SOON
|
on: February 04, 2016, 12:21:06 PM
|
OP's prediction for December came true, but the $1k for 2016 haven't happened, but its too early to assume that its over now...We are just in the first quarter of the year, so 2016 has just began, many more months for OP's prediction to come true.. *Before* 2016. Dear friend
BIG PUMP STARTED
Price go to $400 in next 7 days.
After $400, back to $1,000 before 2016.
Start again now.
|
|
|
312
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: February 04, 2016, 10:40:15 AM
|
Hmm... You know it's really putting your faith in technology evolution and respect of the Moore law...
But experience is showing that Moore law is reaching a limit. The base of Moore principle is that the more time passes, the smaller electronic elements become. But we're reaching a point where you cant get any smaller! It becomes harder and harder and we'll eventually reach a physical limit: you can't go small enough to reach the nanometer. At this scale physics as we know no longer exists...
Moore's Law is a straw man - the previous poster was talking about general technological progress, not the much more narrow Moore's Law. A limit to component density didn't prevent technological development in the centuries before Gordon Moore, and there's no reason to suspect it'll stop simply when integrated circuitry reaches a physical limit. Well I understand your point but I'd say it's totally flawed. It's not because it had happened that it will actually happen I wouldn't be incredibly shocked if in 10 years scientists would explain that we reached a point in IT where development can't really go any further. You're still limited to physic, and if you can't make smaller elements... What can you do?Oh maybe in only 3 days someone is going to come with a revolution in science and explain something that will allow us to use a 1000times better internet/PC. But it's not because it has, and it can, that it will If you can't make smaller elements... What can you do?Well... you can: - Connect multiple elements together.
- Continue to improve elements in ways that don't rely on component density, or even reduce the number of components.
- Develop better ways to connect elements.
A revolution in 3 days isn't necessary. Technological developments that speed our processing power and increase our bandwidth happen all the time, and are not tightly coupled to component density. They tend not to yield 1000x improvements, but they compound together over time to achieve something pretty spectacular. The shift from CISC to RISC CPUs, for example, reduced the complexity of CPUs (and hence the number of components they required), allowing more powerful computers - it wasn't necessary for component density to increase, because the number of components was *decreasing*. The shift from HDDs to SSDs has increased bandwidth. Wi-fi gets faster with every generation, and that's (broadly) using tech that's familiar to radio engineers from back in the day. I'm not saying that Moore's Law didn't happen, that it was a bad thing, or anything like that. What I'm saying is that reaching a limit to the number of components we can put on a piece of silicon is not going to bring an end to technological development in general, or to IT in particular. Bitcoin is safe.
|
|
|
313
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: February 04, 2016, 09:00:49 AM
|
don't forget everyone! BITCOIN CANNOT SCALE! until it does then it still doesn't ... its only been EIGHT MONTHS of arguing over it. #GimpedCoin
Technological progress actually ...ensures that bitcoin not only can scale, but will indeed scale. It's not a matter of if, only a matter of when. 1995 = Pentium 75-100MHz / 8-16MB ram / 1-2GB disks / 14.4kbps - 128kbps connections. 2015 = 4-8core CPUs at 4 GHz / 4-16GB ram / 1-4 TB disks / home connections in the mbps to gbps (for fiber). Everything has gone upwards like 1000x in 20 years. Processing power, memory, storage, network connections etc. And I'm not counting processing breakthroughs in GPU power or storage speedup like SSDs. If the trend continues, by 2035 the technology will allow >5000tx/sec, without even improving the software. If the software gets improved (and it constantly is getting scaling improvements), we are talking multiple that - so we'll be seeing VISA-like capabilities way before the 2030's. Bitcoin is ...doomed to scale, except if some catastrophic failure of our civilization destroys the IT industry. And we won't have to wait for 2035 for scaling, that's just a number. There are incremental steps in hardware and network capabilities all the time. We just want too much, too fast. And that's good because scaling solutions will have to be devised faster. Although one thing will never be overcome: The necessity for fees. It is impossible to have near-zero cost txs AND protect the network for abuse at the same time. Free txs = attack vector possible for free. Near free txs = attack vector possible for peanuts. Hmm... You know it's really putting your faith in technology evolution and respect of the Moore law... But experience is showing that Moore law is reaching a limit. The base of Moore principle is that the more time passes, the smaller electronic elements become. But we're reaching a point where you cant get any smaller! It becomes harder and harder and we'll eventually reach a physical limit: you can't go small enough to reach the nanometer. At this scale physics as we know no longer exists... Moore's Law is a straw man - the previous poster was talking about general technological progress, not the much more narrow Moore's Law. A limit to component density didn't prevent technological development in the centuries before Gordon Moore, and there's no reason to suspect it'll stop simply when integrated circuitry reaches a physical limit.
|
|
|
314
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: February 03, 2016, 01:40:22 PM
|
Good luck to them trying to find a way of enforcing that Just like in the US they would focus on the exchanges. What? Btc exchange are forbidden in the US? Then how am I buying and selling my btc? The EC are concerned about the perceived anonymity of BTC transactions. US exchanges have AML/KYC measures in place - transactions aren't anonymous. Edit: The plan therefore calls for virtual currency exchange platforms to be brought under the scope of the European Anti-Money Laundering Directive, which would mean exchanges would have to report just who used their services and when they were used. The Action Plan says “The Commission will also examine whether to include virtual currency 'wallet providers'.” Ah ok. Well I don't know how they would want to do it. Yes exchanges are not anonymous, but you don't use exchange if you want anonymous. You pays and receive in btc and if you want cash you go through local bitcoin Yeah, this is all kinda expected, it's really bringing exchanges in Europe in-line with exchanges in the US. And, as you say, people can still use localbitcoin or exchanges outside the EU (and the US). I suspect, though, that this is just the beginning (in the EU) - localbitcoin is already under attack in the US (Burt W here on BCT, for example) and I imagine it's just a matter of time before the EU clamp down on it because TERRORISM. AND DRUGS. And because the €500 note was feelin unloved.
|
|
|
315
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: February 03, 2016, 01:13:14 PM
|
Good luck to them trying to find a way of enforcing that Just like in the US they would focus on the exchanges. What? Btc exchange are forbidden in the US? Then how am I buying and selling my btc? The EC are concerned about the perceived anonymity of BTC transactions. US exchanges have AML/KYC measures in place - transactions aren't anonymous. Edit: The plan therefore calls for virtual currency exchange platforms to be brought under the scope of the European Anti-Money Laundering Directive, which would mean exchanges would have to report just who used their services and when they were used. The Action Plan says “The Commission will also examine whether to include virtual currency 'wallet providers'.”
|
|
|
316
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: February 02, 2016, 01:27:02 PM
|
I don't think we have that kind of choice. Well, maybe some countries do but here in the UK it's pretty much written into our unwritten constitution that the US President is the father we wished we had. Unlike the mother we actually have, who is alright in a regal sort of way, but you probably wouldn't vote for her unless the only other option was that creepy uncle all the kids avoid at family parties.
Seriously? What does it make your constitution different from most countries? Not entirely seriously. Britain (and other Commonwealth countries) don't have a constitution in the sensible-countries sense of the word, a document enumerating stuff. Instead we have legislation and practice dating back a thousand years. Part of Britain's constitution is in Norman French, seriously. I doubt there's really anything saying Britain has to worship and adore the US President, but our Prime Ministers (and much of the population) remain unaware of that. You got a war that needs warring? We can probably help, very few questions asked! Edit: *Norman* French. Normal French would be entirely too sensible.
|
|
|
317
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: February 02, 2016, 01:14:55 PM
|
As a non American I don't really care about Obama policy But Obama cares about you so very much. We are all his children. Do you have founding father pissed off and left me alone issues? Satoshi is watching and we are his wayward children. No need to adopt a fairy tale father figure. I don't think we have that kind of choice. Well, maybe some countries do but here in the UK it's pretty much written into our unwritten constitution that the US President is the father we wished we had. Unlike the mother we actually have, who is alright in a regal sort of way, but you probably wouldn't vote for her unless the only other option was that creepy uncle all the kids avoid at family parties.
|
|
|
318
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: The Christmas 2015 Bubble
|
on: February 02, 2016, 11:34:12 AM
|
The price is quite stable in 2016 apart from one 20% drop due to Mike Hearn's departure from bitcoin.
The bitcoin price has been below $400 for a few weeks now. Why it is so low at the moment? Low? It was ranging between $200 and $300 for most of 2015. As to why, Hearn's very public departure was a few weeks ago.Edit: and it's Chinese New Year right now, which is the largest internal migration on the planet - many BTC traders have spent the last few weeks travelling to, or hosting, family.
|
|
|
|