|
Every single post you make is a relentless stream of claiming that the market will crash soon. When you're right you'll boast and your ego will get better; when you're wrong you'll keep going until eventually you get one right again. Even if you got every single one right, it would be called probability.
|
|
|
|
Coinbase actually aren't like a normal exchange in that they don't have different prices for buying and selling. They seem to cover the difference themselves somehow, and they have very high fees (1.49% as they show here). Bitstamp's fees get progressively less the more you trade and are detailed here. Coinbase's website and their services have been experiencing some downtime recently, so personally I would feel better on Bitstamp. |
|
|
|
Is it really shit advice? Selling at resistance and buying back at support has proved very profitable over the last three years. Just saying....
yes, because newcomers won't know who to listen to or what to believe. they'll walk straight into wherever the professional traders want them to. you see the same old thing every day on r/bitcoin and elsewhere. people try to badly time the market and end up poorer. if you know more then great. people who don't have years of experience should take the long road instead by cost averaging and selling when they reach their target. i am absolutely sure there are people like this who bought at $2700 and will sell when it gets to $1500 again. they shouldn't have gotten involved at either price. It's worse than that, the advice is basically telling people to follow the market. If information or particular speculation is already in the market, all you're doing is giving coins to someone who's busy buying low. It's doing the opposite of "buy low, sell high", and the OP is exactly where good traders are getting their money from. If the OP is really that bad at trading, he shouldn't do it. Just buy and spend/hodl. |
|
|
|
When someone invests bitcoin in the casino and then orders payments, will that person receive their payment in bitcoin or dollar?
Bitcoin. You don't seem to fully get it so here's how it works. Say that they have no bankroll yet and you're the first investor with 1 Bitcoin. Now, when they make profits from their house edge, a certain amount that they specify goes to you (70% for example). Now say that someone else invests 9 Bitcoin in after you. Now when the casino gains money, you only get 10% of the money that they distribute to investors because that's how much you hold with them. This thread might interest you as well. Also remember that they can't just offer returns because they can't predict the future size of the bankroll and the future profits that they make. All you can do is look at past performance and that won't be fully accurate either. |
|
|
|
|
Nearly all countries have considered Bitcoin "legal" since they started considering it at all.
We don't need countries to "accept" Bitcoin as long as people can freely spend it.
In a free market, no country accepts it, all they do is regulate it or decide that it's a currency, and neither of those things means a lot. Each individual merchant can accept it and that's only loosely related to the country.
They can take their acceptance and shove it up their arse.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I feel a lot more secure after that correction. Usually, I'd say that the more corrections that happen along the way and the slower that the price keeps going up, the less likely it is to drop loads afterwards.
Selling a little bit is fine, but not if you bought fairly recently. HODL most.
|
|
|
|
Well Im a WA resident.. So I cant use Kraken, Poloniex.. and so on. Coinbase sucks, what are my options? I can use bittrex, but I cant sell there.
What is WA? Washington State, I think. It also doesn't matter where are you from while using Poloniex as far as I know because you don't need to provide your personal information's unless you want higher limits (which are 2000$/ day withdrawal)
True, but you're in dangerous territory when you're violating their ToS. Many Bitcoin related services end up basically stealing users' funds when they detect even the slightest bit of suspicious activity, and considering how shady Poloniex is right now I wouldn't be surprised. OP, the thing is that any choice you go with other than Bittrex and Poloniex will be low-liquidity and potentially scammy. If you need more than a $2000 per day withdrawal from Poloniex, no other exchange bar Bittrex (which can also hardly use) will safely have a high enough liquidity to deal with you, so there's not a lot that you can do except try to use Poloniex. |
|
|
|
Yeah... Let's not pretend that this price growth is normal. The lesson is: WHY AM I HOLDING? I'LL TELL YOU WHY. It's because I'm a bad trader and I KNOW I'M A BAD TRADER.
It's impossible to tell how long this is going to go on for, so it's impossible to tell when exactly to sell. Just don't panic buy, take in loans or throw in more than you can afford to lose. This is a dangerous game so I say just wait it out. The bad news is that we're getting very close to the point of no return, after which we'll go very, very high and potentially have a serious crash afterwards. The good news is that that the crash might actually only end up going back to around where we are now. |
|
|
|
Why would they let you buy a coin they don't support the wallet for anymore?
Because YoBit has absolutely zero hints of legitimate trading. All they care about is pulling in fees, and to do that they'll list the absolute worst coins in existence even if they: -No longer exist -Are meaningless pump and dump coins which have no reason to exist. They will also have their wallets in "maintenance" for months on several coins while they could basically do whatever the hell they want with all those coins. Transfer to Bitcoin and then try and withdraw to Bittrex, that's what I say. |
|
|
|
Hey guys...I am in the mortgage banking industry. I am currently working on a deal to incorporate bitcoin into the down payment funds for a new purchase home loan.
I haven't seen this done before. Have any of you? I have seen homes sell for 100% bitcoin, but that is the same as purchasing a home with cash.
We are in contact with Fannie Mae, and it looks like it can be done as long as the bitcoins are first converted into US dollars and then deposited into a US bank account. If you know banking guidelines, then you know that most money has to be seasoned for 60 days before it can be used for down payment funds. We may be able to get around this if you can clearly be able to source the ownership of the bitcoins and clearly document the sale of the bitcoins along with the deposit into your bank account (like with a coinbase transaction history).
Do any of you have experience with this, or would you like to hear how it works out?
You are talking about mortgages and you say you are in the mortgage banking business. You should know it better than us. It won't work. Because not a single bank in the world would accept a highly volatile asset as mortgage payments. We are talking about 10 to 30 years at least. If bitcoin becomes too valuable, the dude who owes money won't afford to buy them probably goes bust. If bitcoin loses value, bank gets fucked. Nope. Won't work. I am a mortgage bank, I have also been in the industry 15 years. I don't think you are understanding how the bitcoin would be used. The bitcoin would be sold via coinbase, and then those USD would be used for down payment. Generally with down payment funds all non-payroll deposits into your bank account would have to be sourced, which is when the bitcoin deposit would be noticed and disqualified from "usable down payment funds." We as the bank would not be holding bitcoin at all...we would be using proceeds from the sale of bitcoin. This is not a bitcoin issue then. It is a money laundering issue.  Coinbase/Tax guys are gonna question the customer to death and will make him mad with their questions. Bitcoin has a big reputation among cyber terrorists/drug dealers/tax evaders. Whoever was trying to make a down payment for his mortgage via coianbase is going to hate to be alive and probably won't succeed. Since you are talking about coinbase, i assume you live in USA right? If so, it will be just like i expected. Forget it. Your pessimism is unfounded. Coinbase's situation with the IRS really has no relevance to down payments for mortgages. I can see how people who can afford to buy a decent house might want to use Bitcoin for their mortgage and there's no real reason that it wouldn't work. Will be following this thread. |
|
|
|
|
If you're worried that the price is going to go down in the short term, here's how you do it.
-Find out how much of your income you're willing to spare to buy Bitcoin.
-Buy that amount in fiat regularly every week or every month, regardless of the Bitcoin price.
In a few years when the Bitcoin price has gone up loads, you're unlikely to regret it.
|
|
|
|
It's never safe to store Bitcoin on an exchange for longer than the time that you're using it for trading. If you thought otherwise, you were deluded. You can complain as much as you like, but they won't budge. Here's how it plays out for most other people on here who make scam accusations against BTC-E: -BTC-E ask for ridiculous verification measures which most people can't do, even after alternative methods of proof are given -If people fulfill their crazy demands, they start closing and ignoring tickets -People complain a lot and they let you withdraw again. So just complain a lot, basically. |
|
|
|
I was just reading through what it says on the DCG website. Here's an interesting point about altcoins in one of their employees' articles recently: To be clear, I do believe a handful of open blockchains will succeed in actually delivering value to end users. These will be the ones where the projects are narrowly focused on building a decentralized model that operates more efficiently and/or delivers enhanced privacy and security relative to the comparable centralized model (e.g., Bitcoin). We at DCG will continue to seek out these opportunities and are excited to support the great entrepreneurs behind them. However, there is a real shortage of these projects today and the gap between reality and hype is massive.
It's great to see that DCG is trying their best to get Bitcoin scaling happening soon instead of running off to whatever altcoin seems shiniest at the time. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin rises, alts stabilise.
My logic is that a large number of investors will put their money into gold and there will be a large asset money. In the same way that they're not actually using gold very much, they would view Bitcoin as an alternative asset which has had historically high returns. Since they're out of the mainstream, each investor is basically trying to get before the next one.
With alts this is less likely to happen since cryptocurrencies are seldom used for merchants yet anyway and their "innovation" would not affect where investors put their money for an asset (they want something with higher liquidity already).
|
|
|
|
|
Well the appeal for Bitcoin and the blockchain is going to be different in different countries. It's somewhat popular in Venezuela due to the unstable fiat currency, somewhat popular in Nigeria due to... well... princes...
And so many other countries. Sometimes it'll be a money making scheme - when you have something global like Bitcoin and the cost of living is really low in your country, you can earn quite a lot more than in your day job sometimes.
|
|
|
|
I was wondering when it will happen - that was fast. If you make your maths BTC is less profitable to mine than ETH today.
ETH inflation rate ~14%, while BTC inflation is 4%.
Formula is: (Marketcap*inflation)/365
And you will end with ETH 5.2m$ while BTC mine 3.6M$.
can you explain why you used this math to calculate how much miners are earning? because it seems completely irrelevant to how much they are earning! this is how much miners are earning each day based on average blocks that are mined and the fixed block reward: BTC (last 24 hours) : 1,838 BTC ($3,929,521.3 USD) ETH (last 24 hours) : 27,200 ETH ($4,245,054.28 USD) so obviously when your total block reward is 14.8 times more than bitcoin you earn more reward in total. and that total is only 0.08 times more! so yeah ethereum miners are making 0.08 times more profit than bitcoin miners That's equally dumb maths. A coin being "more profitable" than another to mine is only about its difficulty relative to the price of hardware. Naturally, every coin becomes equally profitable to mine unless the price is shooting up too fast for the difficulty to basically keep up, which it is with ETH. Whatever miners mine in total is irrelevant, and it's very hard to compare Bitcoin and Ether mining since one uses ASICs while the other uses GPUs. It's hard to tell what people are paying for hardware relative to what they're actually earning. |
|
|
|
Unfortunately this isn't good enough to disrupt what those bulk buyers are doing from selling at higher prices, since most venues only care for selling out.
Scalpers only make profit if they sell all of their tickets. Therefore if the event sold out through illegitimate means, it would at least be close to selling out through legitimate means. The first person to approach them for remaining tickets, they'll be selling the remaining seats and usually some of these venues, even tend to make a deal with these sellers for some profit going towards the venue (there were few cases).
I can see that potential issue, yes. Hopefully with more awareness of blockchain technology this would become more frowned upon. Also in terms of privacy, most venues that I've attended, didn't require any verification processes (besides showing the ticket), so a little advantage only (for places that require).
True, but proving that you actually personally own the ticket and bought it firsthand does require verification processes. The festival Glastonbury, for example, requires people to give passport photos and more to prove their identity months before the event so that they can avoid scalpers themselves, but blockchain technology can make this so much easier. |
|
|
|
Both of those options are impossible.
Transaction fees don't exist solely to pay miners for their work - if there were no transaction fees at all, they would still receive far more than enough as a block reward to keep the network secure.
Originally, transaction fees were just a tiny extra donation to help get your transaction confirmed sooner than other people and not everyone would pay transaction fees.
That's no longer the reason for transaction fees. The reason for the amount of fees now is that there are too many transactions now for them to fit in the blocks which are limited to one megabyte, so demand exceeds capacity and people have to "compete", so to speak, to get their transactions into a block.
The solutions are either to increase the block size or alter the protocol in other ways (like SegWit and/or LN) which increase the capacity and implement scaling.
So basically there needs to be a priority group as there are too many transactions being sent, and a fixed fee isn't possible.
I understood the concept. But if it worked that way, how would the miners be paid to continue mining after the production of new Bitcoins ended if there is no need to pay any fees? The amount of computing power being dedicated to the Bitcoin network is impossible to underestimate. The block reward in US dollars is now higher than it was before the block reward was cut in half last year in July (it halves every four years, roughly), because the block reward is denominated in Bitcoin. As ASIC and computer technology develop while the Bitcoin price goes up, the amount of miners actually needed gets smaller and smaller relative to the amount that there are. So transaction fees will not be necessary for a very long time - as the price rises, computer technology gets better and the block reward only decreases quite gradually relative to these factors, transaction fees will barely be needed at all for another 50 years or so at least. When they are, they should still not have to be very much to pay for "enough" miners (not that there is a precise number). |
|
|
|
@Nagadota. What lie? We did not lie, we were only agreeing with what was reported in that article. If you think that article is full of lies then please prove it. Virgilio Lizardo is in China right now. He knows what is happening about everything regarding bitcoin over there.
If you had read my post (which you clearly didn't since you didn't even quote parts of it) you'd realise that I wasn't saying the article was lying by any means. I was insulting people who limit everything to "the Chinese" and "China" when it's meaningless considering that people's attitudes in other countries are nearly exactly the same. it's totally obvious there's nothing but speculation in china. you can't spend it anywhere. they haven't come up with any contributions to the code. the node count is a fraction of the number compared to america.
in the rest of the world i'd say it was about 95-98% speculation. not very many people are in this for the good of the human race. they want more dollars.
The important thing is that speculation is okay. The idea is that if enough people protect themselves against fiat and stock markets by investing in Bitcoin, then eventually the price stabilises at a higher price, making that speculation worthwhile. That's great and then Bitcoin can actually become even more mainstream after that as its stability makes it more effective as a currency as well and it becomes better for the good of the human race. There's no point limiting everyone's minds to insults on China when speculation can contribute as well. |
|
|
|
|
Both of those options are impossible.
Transaction fees don't exist solely to pay miners for their work - if there were no transaction fees at all, they would still receive far more than enough as a block reward to keep the network secure.
Originally, transaction fees were just a tiny extra donation to help get your transaction confirmed sooner than other people and not everyone would pay transaction fees.
That's no longer the reason for transaction fees. The reason for the amount of fees now is that there are too many transactions now for them to fit in the blocks which are limited to one megabyte, so demand exceeds capacity and people have to "compete", so to speak, to get their transactions into a block.
The solutions are either to increase the block size or alter the protocol in other ways (like SegWit and/or LN) which increase the capacity and implement scaling.
So basically there needs to be a priority group as there are too many transactions being sent, and a fixed fee isn't possible.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
