|
Hello
I am considering creating a new topic on the forum that I would like to become a guide for new users, such as myself. I have a few questions of the forum rules and best practices though, as I would like to avoid any issues by starting out right.
1. If I create a new topic, can I make the OP with minimal text and right away reserved the first few response myself? I was thinking something like a brief description in the OP, then maybe 3-4 replies reserved with placeholders, such as the word "reserved", so I can later back-fill the guide without it being too unwieldy in one post. I anticipate the guide will become quite lengthy and breaking it up into different replies would make it more manageable and easier to read.
2. Is it a good idea to make it a self-moderated thread? I seem to sense there is some debate on this, but I would like to keep the thread clear of any unnecessary trolling or other detracting posts. I would keep constructive criticisms, etc., but many threads I see deteriorate to the point the original intent gets lost. Or does using a self-moderated post detract from the thread creditability?
3. I have read the rules and feel I have a good understanding of do's and don't s, but if anyone has tips to offer that would be great.
|
|
|
|
I actually am running this experiment right now as well, basically trying this out for fun. Shortly after my post here on the 20th, I decided to create a YoBit account to test the OP's theory and to see if I could get performance similar to what I wrote earlier: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1126751.msg11928241#msg11928241I wanted to keep it realistic, meaning instead of just transferring .001 BTC in, I wanted to try and see what a person new to bitcoin with 0 invested would be able to do. I began by using my test account's YoBit BTC wallet address, I hit up faucets for two days (all I could stand) and of course hit all the free coin buttons on YoBit which contributed some additional dust. I managed to accumulate ~ 0.00036 btc before becoming brain numb from the mindless clicking on those stupid faucets. Doing the math that comes out to just about a penny..... Not looking real good for initial investment, but hey a start. Anyway, I then began looking at some coins on YoBit to invest in. Since my initial investment amount was miniscule, I only was looking at coins > 100 sat. I placed a few low-ball buy orders on a couple of coins that did not fill. At the time BIOS coin was newly released so I thought it may have some upside potential. I placed a buy order for 1440 BIOS coins which filled and I manged to snag some BIOS coins for 25 sat each. Figuring it would have some good upside potential, but wanting a fairly quick sell as in the OP, I figured a initial 5x profit potential was an good place to start. I placed a sell order for all the coins for 125 sat each and went to bed. The next morning which was the 24th, I was pleased (but not surprised) by sell order went through. I see BIOS actually spiked a bit higher, but I was still ok with 5x return.  So far then my test account log looks like this: July 20 - Created account on YoBit and began hitting faucets - Ending Balance: ~ 3600 satoshis in BTC (only hit a few faucets before going to bed). July 21-22 - Hit various faucets including YoBit's free coins- Ending balance: 36,000 satoshis in BTC and some dust in other coins. July 23 - Hit a few more faucets which should be coming in, by now was I was sick of captchas so decided to start with the trading. Invested 36,000 sat into 1,440 BIOS coins @ 25 sat each. Note: I am not keeping track of fees at this point, as figuring extra dust and faucets will initially cover this. If the experiment gets to higher gains where fees are significant (> .001 BTC) I will start tracking those too, but for now this is easier. July 24 - My sell order of 1,440 BIOS coins for 125 satoshis filled. Researched other coins and not finding anything attractive decided to try BIOS again. It had dropped down to the 60 sat range so I placed low ball bid on 6,000 BIOS coins for 30 satoshi each. Balance now: 0.0018 BTC (180,000 satoshis). July 25th - My order has not yet filled. Canceled order and placed new buy order for 4285 BIOS coins at 42 sat each. If this doesn't fill I will look at other coins, but think BIOS still will have some volatility as it is new. I will update this as I go on. If I get some more profit I might even break it out in its own thread, but for now I would think it only of interest to people in here. NOTE: The reason my amounts seem so rounded (i.e. 3,600) is due the fact that I found what I consider the least annoying faucet that pays 1,200 sat every 15 minutes. I found it easier just to click this once in awhile throughout the day than keep track of many others that pay even worse and have more hoops to go through. My only other source is the YoBit exchange, which only awards 1 sat in BTC every 10 minutes and the free other coins which I don't have enough accumulated to trade yet. |
|
|
|
But if you start with 100$ and double it every year (%wise an impossibly good return) then you still will never be rich. Unless I live a very long time I guess.
I don't know about you, but I am thinking by year 14 things are looking pretty good. By year 20 things are just peachy. I wouldn't consider either milestone as living very long time, unless you are already 80. $100 investment doubled every year for 20 years: Year 0: $100 Year 1: $200 Year 2: $400 Year 3: $800 Year 4: $1,600 Year 5: $3,200 Year 6: $6,400 Year 7: $12,800 Year 8: $25,600 Year 9: $51,200 Year 10: $102,400 Year 11: $204,800 Year 12: $409,600 Year 13: $819,200 Year 14: $1,638,400 Year 15: $3,276,800 Year 16: $6,553,600 Year 17: $13,107,200 Year 18: $26,214,400 Year 19: $52,428,800 Year 20: $104,857,600 |
|
|
|
|
So are there any other confirmations of this besides the OP?
I recently started trading on Poloniex after leaving BTC-e, so I am a bit leery seeing this type of post. I don't keep large amounts on exchanges, but was thinking about leaving some BTC on Poloniex and playing with their lending options. Any additional information would be most welcome in making my decision.
|
|
|
|
Agreed, great list! Although I have gambled both online and in real casinos, I still came across many new terms and had terms I had heard before more clearly defined. Great job. Vote for sticky. |
|
|
|
|
I went with 0.02 BTC (x2 is okay for me) as I figure if I doubled my money, I can just cash out my original investment (0.01 BTC) and let the rest ride! If I lose after that it is basically free money, so not as big of a deal. Keep doing same strategy, cash out once doubled, and when you finally lose it all, you would still have any BTC from your cash outs.
|
|
|
|
Is this safe to use? Thanks This is my question as well. I would wait until more knowledgeable users report back before installing and using this. |
|
|
|
A bunch of new coins on the list. First time I did this, it was BTC plus 34 alts. Then, BTC plus 48 other coins. Now, BTC plus 60 coins. The more we do this, the more coins can pass the 200 day cutoff.
I think I was pretty liberal with the 200 day cutoff. But, I figured, why not. Most of the coins near the bottom drop off in the next step anyway, so might as well show the data for them.
So why not raise the cut-off point instead of adding more and more coins to the list? I would think as time goes on and Bitcoin and the alts mature, we should be raising the bar, not lowering it. It's been about 6 months since you first posted this, why not re-run the calculations at 365 days as a cutoff point? |
|
|
|
Can anyone who speaks Chinese give us the gist of the article and comments. Google translate is pretty spotty. The most I could make out is it seems someone from the group or company was trying to assure investors that they didn't expect the crash and not to worry they are still on track to recoup their profits but it might take longer? Reading the comments I could sense most people thought they had been cheated or it was a fraud and reported to the authorities already? |
|
|
|
It was a tough choice but in the end I went with my gut, waffles. |
|
|
|
Would it be possible to use a Thermoelectric Generator, similar to what is used in space probes but instead on the cooling system of mining rigs, in order to produce electricity to reduce the cost of electricity? How effective would this be and would it have a significant impact on the electric bill?
Don't do it, man! That's like plugging an extension cord into itself. You never know what kind of entropy loop-of-doom could be unleashed...  The very fabric of reality could well be torn asunder!! :p I did the plugging an extension cord into itself once purely by accident. Before I knew what was happening a small black hole began forming and started to pull me in. Due to my quick thinking I was able to reach out and unplug the loop and the black hole instantly vaporized. Except for a few knocked over paint cans and a missing shoe, I was no worse for wear after the incident. It still give me shudders to think I could have destroyed the world had it not been for my quick reflexes.  |
|
|
|
|
Well one good way to choose random words, but still have it mean something to you. Use a mnemonic, something like "stinky pie" to remember than come up with a phrase using words you will remember.
S - Swedish
T - Tacos
I - Irradiate
N - Nicely
K - Kombined (can be a form of a real word, more random)
Y - Yearly
P- Performance
I - Indicative
E - Earnings
So your paraphrase would be: swedishtacosirradiatenicelykombinedyearlyperformanceindicativeearnings
You can also add spaces, symbols and numbers to taste, maybe all e's become *, or perhaps every 3rd "e", and maybe every Fibonacci place is capitalized (1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34th place letters, etc.).
Important thing is something you can remember without having to write it down.
|
|
|
|
~~~
Coin A: 30 sat * 2000 = 60,000 sat (loss of 40,000 sat)
Coin B: 10 sat * 2000 = 20,000 sat (loss of 80,000 sat)
Coin C 160 sat * 2000 = 320,000 sat (gain of 220,000 sat)
Coin D 60 sat * 2000 = 120,000 sat (gain of 20,000 sat)
Coin E 20 sat * 2000 = 40,000 sat (loss of 60,000 sat)
~~~
a net profit of 60,000 satoshis, or a little better than 10% gain of the original investment.
~~~~
I think the big drawback to this is it is limited to how big of gains you can make. The next month you simply can't pluck sown 1 BTC into a coin that was averaging only a .1 BTC daily volume and expect others to buy it up. You would need to spread the coin around quite a bit and after a point you will run out of candidate coins to invest in. So going from 1 BTC, to 2, 4, 8, 16, etc and expecting to be a millionaire will be highly improbable, but I could see someone starting out and playing around a bit could earn 1 BTC a month doing this. Of course, as others catch on this will also cut into the profits somewhat.
two very good points indeed . i could not put it better the important part of the method in the OP is that it is a "Gambling" not trading method. you can simply lose a lot of bitcoin and not earn anything back from your other trades. and also it is worth mentioning that when a coin's price is this low (e.g. 30) if it goes 10 satoshi down it means a lot more percentage loss in comparison with a high price coin (e.g. 10000). Agreed, the strategy is basically gambling in the sense that your are blindly betting that a few of your picks will outweigh the loss of the losing bets. Also, the point about scaling cannot be emphasized enough for people wanting to try this out. It works only because of the low interest and volume in these coins. Once you start wanting to double 1, 10, or 100's of BTC, this is no longer valid as you will have people playing against you who will take all your money. The big whales and sharks of the ocean do not notice little minnows swimming by so much picking up crumbs, but once a fish becomes big and fat enough and looking like a juicy target, look out. |
|
|
|
Actually an anti-bitcoin entity could perform a 51% attack without buying too much equipment. If I were a government or other such entity and looking to perform a 51% attack I would look into opening up a bitcoin mining pool. They could just payout higher than average and miners would slowly begin moving over to that pool. If you are making y bitcoin per xxx hashrate and I start a pool offering y+20% bitcoin per xxx hashrate, there is no doubt people would start moving over.
With all the cloud-hashing schemes and other scams out there, most people wouldn't even question how is possible for such high payments. Others would suspect something, but most would not care as long as the payments kept flowing in.
So at roughly 144 blocks per day * 25 BTC reward * $300 = $1.08 million per day currently mined. So they offer extra 20% would only cost them ~$200,000 a day. Actually it would be quite a bit less since it would take time to build up a loyal following of miners and they would only need 51%. So only toward the end of the operation would they be paying out in excess of $100,000 a day, They could probably start the operation with just a few thousand a day as people first started to move over.
So the question would become how long until they could convince enough people to move over. If only 30-45 days, I think they could pull it off for around $2-3 million. Heck this is low enough amount where even a large company or high net-worth individual might try it on their own... Thoughts?
As people begin to migrate over, the community will see that this pool is gaining almost 51% of the hash rate. Then a shitstorm will ensue and that pool will lose those miners. Just look at what happened when Ghash.io almost had 50% of the mining power. They lost a lot of miners and the miners went to other pools to keep any one pool from getting 51%. The anti-bitcoin entity would have to get its own miners and mine by itself to get 51%. Also, if such an attack succeeded and discredited Bitcoin, then all of those Bitcoin they mined are worthless and tons of money was just wasted. It is likely that they wouldn't succeed so hey, the government or whoever just made a lot of money that they can now use and maybe instead of attacking Bitcoin, they can adopt it and use it. 51% is not some magical number that as soon as someone gets 51% of the hash rate, they suddenly have full control over the blockchain. It doesn't work like that. What 51% means is that the miner has a majority of the hash rate, which means they have a higher probability of finding over half of the blocks. In reality, the entity would need 80, 90% or higher in order to successfully pull off such an attack. In the network's current state, that would be prohibitively expensive. Yes, as I pointed out people would catch on of course. Did Ghash.io offer a 20% premium over other pools at that time? My question was, would the 20% premium over other pools cause most people to not care and keep mining at the higher paying pool? If not 20% how about 25%, 50%. At some point I think greed would outweigh the concern for the network. As far as the 51%, they could just as well get the 60% or 80% whatever would need. My main argument was to counter everyone thinking you would need to purchase a bunch of hardware and operate it to pull this off. I was simply suggesting an alternative where a few million dollars could be used against the community by bribing the miners over to a rogue pool. Edit: I see after researching Ghash.io did indeed offer a premium at first. But they later removed it. So the questions still stands: Did the miners leave because of concern for the network or due to the removal of the promotional bonus? I am sure they lost some of each group, but I think the majority was due to the loss of the premium. |
|
|
|
Can you quote my address to verify I own my account too please?
12MWft2uPkJimwHjG6NtXo7P1PqE4W9VE5
Are there some instructions somewhere on how I go about signing a message like everyone else is doing?
Thanks
quoted signing messages: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=990345.0worked for me.. -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
vapourminer at bitcointalk.org 21 july 2015
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
13RD8pRsntjpAMDW1DbkXzhUYNGUEXBNQ3
G8qZ4wnvYeX8jUMqZ1xQrVIjbT9WpBPh/7Iju8GYu/amBCRd5tTKgw+ztZO5e97KK1sgeLWlH/ZrWfr9/UHzliI=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Quoted. Returning the favor. |
|
|
|
[...]
Venezuelan here, can confirm, rates are as low as 0.002 USD/KWh (and there are places with 0.0005 USD/KWh).
That is so sad for me to hear (happy for you), but I pay $0.14 per kwH here in the central part of the US. Are you limited by how much you can consume in a given month or is it "all you can use" type of pricing plan? The electrical service comes with a meter that limits how much current you can consume. According to the kind of meter you have, is the type of price you have. I have the 0.002 USD/KWh due to me consumig a lot for the miners and air conditioner. There's no maximum amount to the consume, all you can eat "flat" rate (varies a little bit according to the amount of charge you use, but the variation is little according to the type of meter). That's interesting to see such comparisons from various part of the world. Do you get charged any type of flat rates per month or billing cycle for the meter charge as well? Where I am at the base fee for electric, even if I consume 0 kwH is ~$30/month just for the service to be hooked up. Once I figure in my typical usage, it is not uncommon to have a total bill of around $300/month. |
|
|
|
I would have to agree with others in that it sounds great and the idea to not have to deal with banks is also a positive, but the reality is Bitcoin is still too volatile to put your entire wage into it. About the time you need that money (bitcoin) you been saving up for something, is the time the market will be down.
For right now it is more of an investment no matter how much people want it to be a long term currency. So putting 10% of your wage in Bitcoin is great as it could grow, but also won't wipe out your personal finances if it should drop back down to $100 or lower. The only value it has as a currency right now is if you buy the bitcoin and plan to spend it in the near-term.
Not as volatile as you think. If I receive my salary right now, and spend the bitcoin before my next paycheck, the odds of me losing a lot of my paycheck to volatility is actually quite low. Bitcoin has been quite stable for the last several months. Yes, that is why I said "long term currency". What you describe would be considered near-term, which if you look above I agreed with, and yes that would be the only way to do it. If you used it for long term currency, say saving up for a down payment on a house, car, etc. and saved up 100 BTC, which at current rates would be ~$30,000, maybe the exchange rate would only be at $150 per BTC at that point in the future, so you would need to save up even more. Of course you could get lucky and it might be worth $500/BTC, but as you can see that's why it is volatile. |
|
|
|
|
I would have to agree with others in that it sounds great and the idea to not have to deal with banks is also a positive, but the reality is Bitcoin is still too volatile to put your entire wage into it. About the time you need that money (bitcoin) you been saving up for something, is the time the market will be down.
For right now it is more of an investment no matter how much people want it to be a long term currency. So putting 10% of your wage in Bitcoin is great as it could grow, but also won't wipe out your personal finances if it should drop back down to $100 or lower. The only value it has as a currency right now is if you buy the bitcoin and plan to spend it in the near-term.
|
|
|
|
Yes, now let me get back to my counting. Twelve billion and one, twelve billion and two.... |
|
|
|
First time i heard about bitcoin was from someone who sounded like they had just been blessed by a good. The person was full of crap about how this was changing everything and a lot of bullshit about redistribution of wealth.
I always like people who have been blessed by goods. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
