dissipate (OP)
|
|
April 02, 2013, 04:08:14 PM |
|
The rise of bitcoin, an electronic currency traded on an online exchange, has generated a media frenzy. Once scoffed at, its value has risen by 631% (denominated in dollars) since the start of 2013.
Lots of people think that means we’re in a bitcoin bubble and it will eventually pop. But if you’re one of these bitcoin bears, it’s not easy for you to “short” it—i.e., bet that its value will go down. http://qz.com/69630/how-to-short-bitcoins-if-you-really-must/
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally
controlled
networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem
to be holding their own." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
Piper67
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 02, 2013, 04:15:34 PM |
|
"If there ever is a way of breaking up a Bitcoin into smaller fractions..." I guess one ten billionth isn't tiny enough for some people
|
|
|
|
bb113
|
|
April 02, 2013, 04:16:40 PM |
|
"If there ever is a way of breaking up a Bitcoin into smaller fractions..." I guess one ten billionth isn't tiny enough for some people These people haven't even done 10 minutes of research.
|
|
|
|
jgarzik
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1091
|
|
April 02, 2013, 04:16:50 PM |
|
"If there ever is a way of breaking up a Bitcoin into smaller fractions..." I guess one ten billionth isn't tiny enough for some people Already replied to author with corrections
|
Jeff Garzik, Bloq CEO, former bitcoin core dev team; opinions are my own. Visit bloq.com / metronome.io Donations / tip jar: 1BrufViLKnSWtuWGkryPsKsxonV2NQ7Tcj
|
|
|
Rygon
|
|
April 02, 2013, 04:19:02 PM |
|
This article is full of fail. First: There are only 11 million bitcoins in existence, and there can never be more than 21 million, so it’s not a very liquid market. If a way ever emerges to break bitcoins up into even smaller fractions, that might solve the problem, according to traders we spoke to. Then, an attempt at a correction: Update: Article has been amended to reflect that bitcoins can already be traded in small fractions, indeed to 0.00000001 BTC (eight decimal places). Nonetheless, even with the ability to break bitcoins into small pieces, there are too few bitcoins in existence for institutional traders to be willing to trade them. So, 1.1 x 10^15 is not enough units to work with? if that was USD, that would by $1 Quadrillion. Anyhow, the correct answer was that the Bitcoin market is too small for institutional traders to be bothered with it.
|
|
|
|
dree12
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
|
|
April 03, 2013, 02:38:48 AM |
|
This article is full of fail. First: There are only 11 million bitcoins in existence, and there can never be more than 21 million, so it’s not a very liquid market. If a way ever emerges to break bitcoins up into even smaller fractions, that might solve the problem, according to traders we spoke to. Then, an attempt at a correction: Update: Article has been amended to reflect that bitcoins can already be traded in small fractions, indeed to 0.00000001 BTC (eight decimal places). Nonetheless, even with the ability to break bitcoins into small pieces, there are too few bitcoins in existence for institutional traders to be willing to trade them. So, 1.1 x 10^15 is not enough units to work with? if that was USD, that would by $1 Quadrillion. Anyhow, the correct answer was that the Bitcoin market is too small for institutional traders to be bothered with it. Too few is correct in this case, as it would require more bitcoins (not more decimal points) to bring the market to an acceptable size.
|
|
|
|
christop
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
April 03, 2013, 02:51:25 AM |
|
So, 1.1 x 10^15 is not enough units to work with? if that was USD, that would by $1 Quadrillion.
Anyhow, the correct answer was that the Bitcoin market is too small for institutional traders to be bothered with it.
Too few is correct in this case, as it would require more bitcoins (not more decimal points) to bring the market to an acceptable size. Let them trade in microbitcoins then. There are 11 trillion microbitcoins, after all. (Bitcoin is just an arbitrary unit. Satoshi could have made the Bitcoin equal to 100 satoshis and set the upper limit to 21 trillion Bitcoins, and the effect would be the same.)
|
Tips are always welcome: 17Z63hLi2ox4fCMhDqVJrLTJiXVcBMJpMo Alpaca socks donations: 1sockzDWcF8mrC59CgiN7HAJm6xL7TiRW
|
|
|
dree12
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
|
|
April 03, 2013, 02:58:42 AM |
|
So, 1.1 x 10^15 is not enough units to work with? if that was USD, that would by $1 Quadrillion.
Anyhow, the correct answer was that the Bitcoin market is too small for institutional traders to be bothered with it.
Too few is correct in this case, as it would require more bitcoins (not more decimal points) to bring the market to an acceptable size. Let them trade in microbitcoins then. There are 11 trillion microbitcoins, after all. (Bitcoin is just an arbitrary unit. Satoshi could have made the Bitcoin equal to 100 satoshis and set the upper limit to 21 trillion Bitcoins, and the effect would be the same.) Let me reword the statement. More bitcoins are needed to bring the value of the market to an acceptable size. Trading in microbitcoins does not solve this problem. The article is correct in saying that there are currently "too few" bitcoins. It neglects to mention that there will always be "too few" at current prices, but regardless there is no error in the text.
|
|
|
|
|
jl2012
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1097
|
|
April 03, 2013, 04:05:58 AM |
|
So, 1.1 x 10^15 is not enough units to work with? if that was USD, that would by $1 Quadrillion.
Anyhow, the correct answer was that the Bitcoin market is too small for institutional traders to be bothered with it.
Too few is correct in this case, as it would require more bitcoins (not more decimal points) to bring the market to an acceptable size. Let them trade in microbitcoins then. There are 11 trillion microbitcoins, after all. (Bitcoin is just an arbitrary unit. Satoshi could have made the Bitcoin equal to 100 satoshis and set the upper limit to 21 trillion Bitcoins, and the effect would be the same.) Let me reword the statement. More bitcoins are needed to bring the value of the market to an acceptable size. Trading in microbitcoins does not solve this problem. The article is correct in saying that there are currently "too few" bitcoins. It neglects to mention that there will always be "too few" at current prices, but regardless there is no error in the text. There are too few flowing bitcoins because it is still excessively undervalued.
|
Donation address: 374iXxS4BuqFHsEwwxUuH3nvJ69Y7Hqur3 (Bitcoin ONLY) LRDGENPLYrcTRssGoZrsCT1hngaH3BVkM4 (LTC) PGP: D3CC 1772 8600 5BB8 FF67 3294 C524 2A1A B393 6517
|
|
|
|