尼玛2月份的啊，那后来怎么还暴跌了呢？
一開始就寫著May 28, 2014, 你什麼眼看到是2月? |
|
|
|
|
Stop posting off topics here. This is your second time
|
|
|
|
There must be some new FUD out... Otherwise I can't see why traders @ OKCoin would dump 3-5000 coins into that ever expanding bid wall at 3565.
Do you mean 3-500? |
|
|
|
I really want the bitcoin price to skyrocket. I am saving up for a triple monitor setup and right now i have ~0.23 BTC, and I want the price to be at LEAST 1000$ when I cash out, until then, I won't be cashing out, and I will be left with less money to spend...
0.23BTC @ 1000$ won't even buy you 1 really good monitor. Why would you need 3 monitors to watch the price? |
|
|
|
|
Some 300XBT bought yesterday
|
|
|
|
And we have a new trend channel   If this channel will not fail, we will hit 1000 USD again bwentween june 17 and 23. We will see if this rapid rising exchange rate will continue, but in Bitcoin, nothing is impossible  This channel is growing too fast. I guess it will be broken today. |
|
|
|
|
你肯定有足夠帶寬? 而且在大部份國家這樣做都是非法廣播.
|
|
|
|
3. Would it be possible to pay for something with a transaction that contains an invalid scriptPubKey, (e.g. the pubKeyHash is invalid - if I understand this correctly would mean this output cannot be used as an input for further transactions), and trick the recipient into accepting this as payment? If not, why not? It is possible only if the recipient is stupid enough not to verify the transaction. How do you verify the transaction? I assume that just checking, say with blockchain.info would be insufficient (it doesn't know what private keys you have access to). However, can I assume that most (if not all) wallet applications will have checked that I can spend the funds before displaying the transaction or including the balance in the total? Thanks Every sane wallet applications will check transaction validity before displaying it. |
|
|
|
Here's a tip for those people who keep dumping around 600. If you don't dump the price will go up and your coins will be worth more. Crazy rocket science, i know.
That's a prisoner's dilemma type situation though that could never happen in practice, because one bad actor dumps and takes advantage of the other people holding. Anyone who dumps here without buying back in short order is as stupid as I was in 9/2013 selling 2,000+ btc, my biggest (and by and large the only) really stupid trade. That's not bad if you could learn from your mistake and 2000BTC was only a small portion of your profile. |
|
|
|
张念念是央行工作人员
应该是被禁止交易比特币的 他本来就是个超级空军 应该是不会炒币的
所有中國政府人員都應該是被禁止貪污的, 所以中國沒有貪污  這種爛貨不炒幣才是有問題, 炒多炒空都是炒 这倒是真的不可以炒 交易所都是实名的 为了保住铁饭碗 他们不会铤而走险的 这才解释了为什么他一直唱空 因为眼红 在中國當官都是實名的, 為了保住鐵飯碗, 他們不會鋋而走險貪污的. 說來說去就是中國沒有貪官吧? 你就真的那麼天真? 你知道BTC-E,是全匿名嗎? 還有可以借家人的名義? |
|
|
|
1. Do transactions ever time out if not accepted into the block chain?
e.g. if I create a transaction today, and it happens to be invalid, is it possible it will unexpectedly get accepted, e.g. with a later release of the bitcoin block chain code that has policy changes, maybe in x years time? (assuming transaction this would have to be accepted by miner *and* the block chain code) There is no time out. By default nodes will drop invalid transactions. But there is nothing to stop people from storing invalid transactions. A policy change that accepts a previously invalid transaction is called a "hard fork". It requires the consensus of ALL bitcoin users, including miners and non-miners. It is unlikely to happen. But if it really happens, your previously invalid transaction might be accepted. 3. Would it be possible to pay for something with a transaction that contains an invalid scriptPubKey, (e.g. the pubKeyHash is invalid - if I understand this correctly would mean this output cannot be used as an input for further transactions), and trick the recipient into accepting this as payment? If not, why not? It is possible only if the recipient is stupid enough not to verify the transaction. Or for another example, maybe one less far fetched, consider a non-standard transaction, that isn't included in the block chain any time soon. Is it possible that a miner could unexpectedly process this transaction at any undetermined point in time in the future of bitcoin? Or will the transaction eventually expire? There is no expire. However, you may simply spend one of its inputs to make it invalid. |
|
|
|
 张念念又跑出来了，是不是踏空了，坐不住了 求連結 微博里。。。。。。 求微博連結 |
|
|
|
There is an alternative theory for Willy, saying that it's a special API for whales. In case anyone cares, the Willy Report got coverage in Chinese e-media today (which is alread Tue May/27 in China) 比特币去年年末暴涨，是因为机器人交易？ [GT]Bitcoin skyrocketed late last year , because the robot trading ?[/GT] 2014-05-27 08:32:59 Source: ZDNet http://tech.163.com/14/0527/08/9T85SOTU000915BF.htmlThere seem to be an interesting article in the Atlantic Monthly about the future of digital payments in general, many Chinese sources are copying it. If I understand correctly this camera review article, even consumer video cameras are being infected with bitcoin mining viruses: http://www.qianjia.com/html/2014-05/27_231277.html商用网络摄像机，你往何处去 [GT]Commercial network cameras, you where to go[/GT] [ ... ] 有安全研究人员发现，国内某知名安防企业的数字硬盘录像机存在安全问题，作为用于存储摄像头视频数据的设备，由于弱口令而被感染了病毒。此外，设备还被安装了比特币挖矿程序。显然这个病毒是专门针对目前的ARMLinux设备，那目前国内的同类型系统都涉及到这个风险。
[ ... ]Security researchers have found that there is a well-known domestic enterprises security DVR security issues, as the camera equipment used to store video data , due to the weak passwords have been infected with a virus . In addition , the device also bitcoin mining program installed. Obviously, this virus is specifically targeted at the ARMLinux equipment , the same type that the current domestic system are related to this risk.
Today's Chinese lesson: 暗黑币 = Ànhēi Bì = Dark Coin(Its recent 15-fold price rally got some attention in Chinese e-news today.) |
|
|
|
张念念又跑出来了，是不是踏空了，坐不住了 求連結 |
|
|
|
张念念是央行工作人员
应该是被禁止交易比特币的 他本来就是个超级空军 应该是不会炒币的
所有中國政府人員都應該是被禁止貪污的, 所以中國沒有貪污 這種爛貨不炒幣才是有問題, 炒多炒空都是炒 |
|
|
|
pls PM us so that we can correct it.
The first thing you need to know is you are posting in a wrong section |
|
|
|
If you really think that ONE bot on ONE exchange is capable of being the major (or one of the major) cause of a bubble like that you are a poor fool.
What about the huge volume on the other exchanges aside from mtgox?
The panic buys were real. The chinese buying were real. The (media) hype was real.
If willy had any impact it was only to facilitate and accelerate the process of the bitcoin november bubble, with a maybe slightly more dramatic effect.
Surprise for the permabears: price doesn't give a flying about this willy thing (and believe me, it would have crashed by now if it did) . And in fact it is headed to $600, which could be reached today or tomorrow.
i think it is possible arbitrage could explain that price rise across all exchange How could one arbitrage if no one could withdraw fiat (in massive amount, millions of dollar per day) from gox? |
|
|
|
因为他没有信用背书，而且受政府打压。 難道你認為政府很有信用? |
|
|
|
I read a number of Chinese forums and no one is crying for this incident. So I believe it's only a glitch People will try to dismiss it as a glitch, but it looks hooky as fuck to me.
When Bitfinex went to $10K, real people got burned, the exchange promised to refund them, don't how well they got on with that, but real people got burned and their system really did act like Bitcoin was at $10K with regards to traders with certain positions.
When BTC-e.com went to $100 and Bitfinex went to $100, real people got burned. Real stop long stop losses were triggered and real leveraged positions were wiped out. Plenty people who had low bid orders never got their orders filled, but the price on those exchanges' computers really did go down to $100 for many.
Huobi to $10K serves as an alarm bell to me about both the soundness and honesty of that exchange.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
