|
i claim Urban Myth. even at $.01/BTC that equals $100 for that pizza. who would pay this? was BTC ever that cheap? if its true, have that man step forward.
|
|
|
|
What would be the most secure way to use bitcoin, or a way which is reasonably secure without becoming too inconvenient. A bitcoin bank. creighto, i pay attention to everything u write b/c your thoughts are sound. but how can u advocate a bitcoin bank it being a centralized big fat juicy target for the Feds? ppl don't store their gold at banks but instead at home in the safe therefore the Feds can't/won't do anything about that. but a bitcoin bank would be too irresistible for the banksters/gov't to raid. Most people store their cash at banks, not at home. It is simply a question of efficiency. You can trade the risk of a centralized target for being able to pool funds, building a fortress far stronger than each person could themselves build individually. And by volume, I'd wager the same is true for gold. The more gold you have, more likely it is stored in a secured depository. egold was a digital gold bank. they got taken down. why can't this happen to a bitcoin bank? and please clarify what u mean by a fortress? He means that, like a bank vault is more cost effective security than 100+ home fire safes; a single bitcoin bank online secured by the skills of a cryptogeek and the latest and greatest hardened linux os is more cost effective security than those same users witheach running their own client that is continuously accessible to the Internet. yes, but all the encryption security in the world won't stop the thugs from walking in the front door and taking the server away with a fork lift. True, but you have to get to it first. It's probably easier to do that in your own home than it would be to a bitcoin bank server, as I have seen how secure datacenters that specialize in ecommerce are. Hacking from outside the network really is the weak link. it depends on how determined a gov't wants to be |
|
|
|
What would be the most secure way to use bitcoin, or a way which is reasonably secure without becoming too inconvenient. A bitcoin bank. creighto, i pay attention to everything u write b/c your thoughts are sound. but how can u advocate a bitcoin bank it being a centralized big fat juicy target for the Feds? ppl don't store their gold at banks but instead at home in the safe therefore the Feds can't/won't do anything about that. but a bitcoin bank would be too irresistible for the banksters/gov't to raid. Most people store their cash at banks, not at home. It is simply a question of efficiency. You can trade the risk of a centralized target for being able to pool funds, building a fortress far stronger than each person could themselves build individually. And by volume, I'd wager the same is true for gold. The more gold you have, more likely it is stored in a secured depository. egold was a digital gold bank. they got taken down. why can't this happen to a bitcoin bank? and please clarify what u mean by a fortress? He means that, like a bank vault is more cost effective security than 100+ home fire safes; a single bitcoin bank online secured by the skills of a cryptogeek and the latest and greatest hardened linux os is more cost effective security than those same users witheach running their own client that is continuously accessible to the Internet. yes, but all the encryption security in the world won't stop the thugs from walking in the front door and taking the server away with a fork lift. |
|
|
|
I just gave it a try in the other direction (MtGox -> Dwolla). I'll let everyone know how long this takes. Too bad there's no way to automate this yet, but I imagine it's less work for MagicalTux than ACH withdrawals.
I received my Dwolla payment approximately 12 hours after initiation on Mt Gox. Satisfied customer.  whats the maximum transfer? |
|
|
|
can someone explain the darkpool size? I have no idea what that means and I'm curious
darkpool means that orders over a certain size, previously 1k $, now 10k $, are secret from the public mtgox orderstream and do not affect the pricing. to put it mildly: it allows large traders to game the market and effectively influence pricemovements to their advantage. given that mtgox is the only, for bitcoin economy at least, large trading entity, the darkpool size effectively governs the size of orders that are not affecting the valueation of bitcoin. this in effect allows professional traders to buy btc cheap in darkpool at market price with huge volume, then drive the price with a smaller, but for normal trade large order, then selling off to the normal market at now increased pricing, effectively gaming the system. i think for the bitcoin community as a whole, not having darkpools would make the system alot fairer to the average joe user. this isn't exactly right. the dark pools do effect the pricing depending on there net buy or sell objective. what it does do is allow the large sum dark pooler to accomplish his objective more easily at the expense of the avg joe who doesn't know these orders are there. |
|
|
|
i think for the bitcoin community as a whole, not having darkpools would make the system alot fairer to the average joe user.
This presupposes the 'average joe user' is short-term speculating, and that speculating is a zero-sum game to which everyone is entitled to all the facts. Individuals should be making buying and selling decisions based on their own circumstances and where they think the value of bitcoin is going. If someone is playing the very dangerous game of day-to-day speculation, then they should be sophisticated enough to live with the fact of dark pools. Note that dark pool users also have no idea what other dark pool users are doing. The idea that everybody is entitled to know what everybody else is doing is somewhat akin to those forum members who seemingly want to punish early adopters because they had the 'unfair advantage' of finding out about bitcoin before everybody else. Your own happiness shouldn't depend on other people being unhappy. Your own buying/selling decision shouldn't depend on everyone else's buying/selling decision. this makes no sense. first, no one said they were presupposing the avg joe was short term speculating. individuals never make buy/sell decisions based ONLY on their own circumstances; they view what they can of the market and incl. that info into their decision. dark orders obscure that view. lets say i have 10 million dollars that i want to trade for btc. we all agree thats a huge order and could move the market up if normal order joes knew i was out there. why should i be able to obscure that order in a dark pool? w/o dark pools i would be forced to buy up small batches to obscure the fact that i have alot to buy. yes, it would be tough but the market doesn't owe me anything just b/c i have more money to invest than the next guy. i know that i have 10 million to buy and adding that info to what i can see of the market depth gives me more info than the normal traders in a dark pool situation. So if I want to trade $10 million in bitcoins face to face with my neighbour do you want me to report the order to Mt Gox so that you can get a look at it? no, b/c thats btwn you and him outside the mkt. but if you want to sell 10 million btc's to bidders on mtgox, yes i think you should not be allowed to hide in a dark pool. |
|
|
|
He just stated a fact that's all, and he is right. MagicTux(and his staff if he has one) is the only person with eyes on everything. Even the dark pool orders can't see other people's dark orders
Indeed, which is kind of the point of my OP, to have a public debate on this. If one would be far fetched, it could be claimed that by setting darkpool size, Tux can directly influence the price of the publicly traded BTC, much like a Central Bank can use prime rate/federal funds rate to adjust the market indirectly. Wow, just wow... You read what I posted, right? Why would one person ruin all their work by trashing the reputation of their exchange? Its self-defeating and makes no logical sense. Unless you actually have something to back this up with, you're just defaming someone on a 'hunch'. This doesn't seem wrong to you? Dude, this isn't about "why would he", its about should the system put him in the position to do so. and no, the market has not decided that he can do this. he unilaterally has done this and yes over time the market will decide whether it was a good decision by having other exchanges arise that might not allow this. |
|
|
|
this proves my pt about why dark pools should be disallowed. all it takes is one person with superior knowledge to destabilize the level playing field. MagTux is the only one who has the complete view of all orders and this is enabled by the dark pools. (this is not an allegation against him at all)
Well, in the spirit of open competitiveness, shouldn't the market decide? If you don't like it, trade somewhere else or start your own exchange. Trading in large volumes with partially open books or not doesn't make a market any less 'stable' or 'gamed'. I don't know how you can squeak by on 'no offense' when you make a statement like "MagTux is the only one who has the complete view of all orders". So, what are you implying? He's 'working' the book now for his own benefit? I mean, dude, really? It makes no sense. Why would an operator of an exchange do that when the potential risk is lack of trust in his exchange? Nobody would take that kind of risk if they wanted to stay in business, period. ah, so i am the parent. fine, i'll start by teaching u to read. i said i was not accusing him of anything Dude. in fact, i vouch for him since he's treated me very well. don't turn this into something btwn him and i. guys like u who don't want to listen to others arguments always try to make it personal. my pt was that theres the "potential" for him to manipulate, not that he is. there are many articles about how the major investment banks don't wish to give up their OTC derivatives desks and move to an exchange b/c they have superior information, ie, they can see what customers are doing which gives them an advantage and is a major source of skimming. given your nick i would bet you use the dark pool yourself don't you and like its advantages? guys like you who don't want to acknowledge this always say well "if you don't like it, go trade somewhere else". what were trying to argue here is whether its fair, ok? the fact that dark pools exist allow certain players to have superior information. |
|
|
|
What would be the most secure way to use bitcoin, or a way which is reasonably secure without becoming too inconvenient. A bitcoin bank. creighto, i pay attention to everything u write b/c your thoughts are sound. but how can u advocate a bitcoin bank it being a centralized big fat juicy target for the Feds? ppl don't store their gold at banks but instead at home in the safe therefore the Feds can't/won't do anything about that. but a bitcoin bank would be too irresistible for the banksters/gov't to raid. Most people store their cash at banks, not at home. It is simply a question of efficiency. You can trade the risk of a centralized target for being able to pool funds, building a fortress far stronger than each person could themselves build individually. And by volume, I'd wager the same is true for gold. The more gold you have, more likely it is stored in a secured depository. egold was a digital gold bank. they got taken down. why can't this happen to a bitcoin bank? and please clarify what u mean by a fortress? |
|
|
|
Of course I can't prove causation (especially without the data from the dark pool trades). But this is the largest and most long lasting rally (with no real correction) that I have seen since I have been watching bitcoins.
I understand the risks of trading and largely am not all that concerned about dark pools. However, when those that set the rules change the rules (especially changes that stand to quickly and drastically change the market dynamics), it is reasonable to expect some level of communication to all those who have money in that market.
Now I am not making accusations; the experiment is still relatively new and mistakes will be made, but this kind of activity is often investigated and prosecuted in the world of regulated trading. I like to give the folks at MT. Gox the benefit of the doubt on this one, but I also want to encourage a higher level responsibility from those holding all the chips. We all trust that Mt. Gox won't just up and take off with everyone's money and bitcoins. But in reality, there is nothing stopping them. I don't even know where they are located or who they are (typically a big no, no when it come to someone who I trust to hold onto my assets).
So far they have done a good job at maintaining my trust (and like I said, this is still a fun experiment with a huge potential investment). But that can change if it starts to appear as though they are gaming the system. I don't yet think they are, but they need to be careful and understand their level of responsibility in this. Because with this recent, and unannounced from my perspective, change they stood to greatly benefit from inside knowledge (i.e, insider trading).
May the bitcoin experiment continue forward. However, if we want this to hit mainstream and to be taken seriously, we need to maintain some level self regulation. Anarchy may be the ultimate form of freedom. But in true anarchy typically lies chaos and degeneration.
this proves my pt about why dark pools should be disallowed. all it takes is one person with superior knowledge to destabilize the level playing field. MagTux is the only one who has the complete view of all orders and this is enabled by the dark pools. (this is not an allegation against him at all) |
|
|
|
i think for the bitcoin community as a whole, not having darkpools would make the system alot fairer to the average joe user.
This presupposes the 'average joe user' is short-term speculating, and that speculating is a zero-sum game to which everyone is entitled to all the facts. Individuals should be making buying and selling decisions based on their own circumstances and where they think the value of bitcoin is going. If someone is playing the very dangerous game of day-to-day speculation, then they should be sophisticated enough to live with the fact of dark pools. Note that dark pool users also have no idea what other dark pool users are doing. The idea that everybody is entitled to know what everybody else is doing is somewhat akin to those forum members who seemingly want to punish early adopters because they had the 'unfair advantage' of finding out about bitcoin before everybody else. Your own happiness shouldn't depend on other people being unhappy. Your own buying/selling decision shouldn't depend on everyone else's buying/selling decision. this makes no sense. first, no one said they were presupposing the avg joe was short term speculating. individuals never make buy/sell decisions based ONLY on their own circumstances; they view what they can of the market and incl. that info into their decision. dark orders obscure that view. lets say i have 10 million dollars that i want to trade for btc. we all agree thats a huge order and could move the market up if normal order joes knew i was out there. why should i be able to obscure that order in a dark pool? w/o dark pools i would be forced to buy up small batches to obscure the fact that i have alot to buy. yes, it would be tough but the market doesn't owe me anything just b/c i have more money to invest than the next guy. i know that i have 10 million to buy and adding that info to what i can see of the market depth gives me more info than the normal traders in a dark pool situation. |
|
|
|
as i just wrote the last 2 posts the asks @.749 have decreased to 18 shares. someone is BUYING.
sorry i mispoke, there are only 8 shares left @ .749 |
|
|
|
|
as i just wrote the last 2 posts the asks @.749 have decreased to 18 shares. someone is BUYING.
|
|
|
|
Nefario: The intention on my end was not to game the market, it was to give the initial investors a reward for their early trust. I say that I got gamed because some people bought into the shares once the announcement that the value of the shares would be increased for the sole purpose of undercutting the IPO once it was repriced. I agree that dividend payment will renew interest in the shares, and that is currently the goal to reach after bringing the total capacity of the company online.
vess: I can not take the IPO down, it will be the main source of income until many more rigs are brought on line. The purpose of the shares sold was to raise funds, not create a market for shareholders. The intention was that shareholders were in it for the long run, making an investment, not that they would see immediate liquidity in their stocks. Once dividends begin being paid, which will occur when everything is settled in, the IPO will begin selling again.
As far as the new rigs arriving: they are currently scheduled to arrive on Monday. This weekend I will be unlocking all of the GPU's I currently have so that they can be overclocked higher once the rigs arrive.
What I meant was that you couldn't tell the market what to do, essentially when a market is free you can't beat it, so try to harness it. Also you really will have to pay dividends before selling more shares, simply no one will buy anymore until you do. That's the market. It's not going to wait because it doesn't have to. And it shouldn't, you should already be mining, and getting ready to pay dividends in a day or two. Look at DISHWARA, he's already paid his first dividend and is on track for another, and he's in India, your in the states, you should be paying dividends already. This isn't China, shareholders are king here. as someone who doesn't need to see a dividend right now, i respectfully disagree. again, he can raise share price just by continuing to work and bringing his ordered rigs online. we see it happening right now, evidence being the 125 shares offered at .749 btc having been bought down to 42 shares remaining. if he more than doubles his hashing output as it looks like he is on the verge of doing, the remaining IPO shares could disappear quite quickly. |
|
|
|
Tawsix,
The only real ways to reward your shareholders are with dividends, and by increasing both the value of the corporation and the market value of the company.
In this case, they would go together nicely; dividends would increase the market value.
What are your plans for dividending? I would recommend a schedule; this will create some market gyrations around dividend time, but it will also provide the kind of information current shareholders, the ones who funded the business, eagerly desire.
As a pre-emptive response inre: generating more capital, I think you'll generate far more capital by engaging politely and following through on my suggestions than just holding the generated BTC.
he doesn't have to listen to you b/c this is not the only way he can reward shareholders. he can continue to bring his ordered rigs online as he has planned which will start increasing production of the company and increase share value as well. the asks @ .749 btc are almost eaten up now 2/3 being sold (the guy started at 125 shares, now down to 42). it looks to me like they'll be cleared out relatively soon and then Tawsix can finish off the the IPO. i assume you bought your shares @.75 having full knowledge of his plans to issue 5000 so we investors @.75 have nothing to complain about. my only suggestion to Tawsix at this pt is to at least make a daily post and continue to build production. |
|
|
|
Yes it is, although it may change in the future if there's a major change like for example addition of encryption which is planned for version 0.4. Keep an eye on the development.
Yes, wallet.dat can be used on OS X, Linux and Windows
mewants, if u were just starting mining, would u use Linuxcoin? |
|
|
|
I have all my bitcoins tied up on servers, so I have no wallet.dat  i'll pass on that. i want my coins with me |
|
|
|
|
all the above answers are valid and inexpensive but suffer from the fact that if someone has already found and spent your coins you're outta luck.
what i have done is gone the expensive route and bought some Ironkeys with malware and Silver Bullet protection. the Ironkey itself is encrypted but can be accessed with password. a brute force attack will autodestruct the contents after 10 tries. this can be set higher or lower if u want. i've set it up so that immediately upon login Ironkey accesses the malware protection from their server to block any executables from the Internet. yes, i have to trust Ironkey company. i then have a Truecrypt volume with my wallet.dat inside that i have to mount. My goal one day is to get a trustable Bitcoin client loaded in the Ironkey once one becomes reliable and available on the Forum. If i lose my Ironkey, i have the ability to destroy the contents of the key with the Silver Bullet feature which is activated from the Ironkey website. supposedly these Ironkeys have been taken to the "bottom of the ocean" and returned undamaged. don't ask me how deep they went!
the above features come with a yearly fee. all this cost me a few hundred dollars but at this pt, considering the number of btc's i own, its definitely worth the peace of mind.
|
|
|
|
Many argue that Bitcoin is not being influenced or possible to game. Right now we are seeing quite the opposite: Tux increased the Darkpool size from 1k$ to 10k$ orders and with little delay, the BTC valueation skyrockets since the orders under 10k$ now affect the market and exchange rate. I believe that in a way or not, the exchanges to real economies are indeed able to game the market until there is enough competition in that area and vendors accept BTC straight, reducing the need to convert.
What do you think would happen to BTC if the "Darkpools" were fully removed?
Discuss!
as a user of the darkpool myself i have always argued that it is unfair to the "normal" order folks. as a buyer of btc over the last few months, i could sit hiding in the bushes so to speak with my large orders waiting for selloffs to occur. non pro sellers look at the accumulated order mountains over on bitcoincharts.com to determine liquidity on the bid side and don't see the real depth. these are totally false representations of the bid side in this bull market. they then get nervous and sell in large chunks and are then surprised by how little the price drops and how fast it recovers and then shoots to the upside past their original sell price. i admit to having taken advantage of this and i don't think its right. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
