|
simmo77
|
 |
May 02, 2014, 03:26:22 PM |
|
Jorge when prices rise again will we see a Chinese Arousal Method prediction?
 I'm sure I've read about the Chinese Arousal Method on another forum... or was that Penthouse Forum   |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The grue lurks in the darkest places of the earth. Its favorite diet is adventurers, but its insatiable appetite is tempered by its fear of light. No grue has ever been seen by the light of day, and few have survived its fearsome jaws to tell the tale.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dreamspark
|
|
May 02, 2014, 03:27:17 PM |
|
Asks havent really filled in behind the small drop, I can see this moving up $20 rather quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
podyx
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1035
|
|
May 02, 2014, 03:35:25 PM |
|
Asks havent really filled in behind the small drop, I can see this moving up $20 rather quickly.
there's more then 1k coins to $461 |
|
|
|
|
aminorex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1029
Sine secretum non libertas
|
|
May 02, 2014, 03:38:36 PM |
|
Is it not really strange that the next "China deadline" is supposed to be on a saturday?
omfg china just block ports 1-999999999999999999999 and be done with it. They will start enumerating ports in hanzi characters then. |
|
|
|
|
|
Blue
|
|
May 02, 2014, 03:44:32 PM |
|
This current is usually ignored.
|
|
|
|
|
|
kireinaha
|
|
May 02, 2014, 03:51:33 PM |
|
Is it not really strange that the next "China deadline" is supposed to be on a saturday?
omfg china just block ports 1-999999999999999999999 and be done with it. SOURCE:ANY | DST: ANY | TCP/1-65535 | DENY SOURCE:ANY | DST: ANY | UDP/1-65535 | DENY |
|
|
|
|
|
knarzo
|
|
May 02, 2014, 03:53:44 PM |
|
Is it not really strange that the next "China deadline" is supposed to be on a saturday?
omfg china just block ports 1-999999999999999999999 and be done with it. SOURCE:ANY | DST: ANY | TCP/1-65535 | DENY SOURCE:ANY | DST: ANY | UDP/1-65535 | DENY we'll proxy through icmp  |
|
|
|
|
JayJuanGee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3710
Merit: 10240
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
|
|
May 02, 2014, 03:54:57 PM |
|
2033 - 256 billion new wallets
Does that mean that in 2033 every bitcoin user will own 2.56 billion wallets? Why would he need that? It could mean that or it could mean that a population of between 5-10 billion people would have 25-50 wallets per person. As we already know, wallets could be created by organizations or governments or even be attributed to entities that may NOT yet exist (such as a trust that would describe how the bitcoins in the wallet would be distributed upon the triggering of some future event(s)). Personally, as I stated in my previous post, i believe the market would become saturated much before 2033, which would cause considerable slowing down of the growth rate or would cause the model or the growth curve to shift. I am skeptical but many were also skeptical of Moore's law. If it does happen, I'd be happy for the effect to be named after you. I appreciate your sense of humor, here. Really, I was NOT being very original in my 2(x) exponential growth projection. I was merely attempting to illustrate an example of the difference between exponential growth of 2x as compared with the earlier suggestion of linear growth of 11 million wallets per year. The exponential growth model seems more realistic b/c of the networking effect and the large growth possibilities. I suspect, however, that any such exponential growth would not follow exactly a 2x pattern, and there may be a sort of exponential growth bell curve - or maybe instead higher exponential growth in the beginning that slowly tapers as it matures, especially tapering when various saturation points are reached. Nonetheless there could be periods of lower or higher multiples of exponential growth of bitcoin wallets, but for ease of reference, 2x exponential growth works well to illustrate the concept. |
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2170
Merit: 1776
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
 |
May 02, 2014, 04:00:48 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ShroomsKit
|
|
May 02, 2014, 04:11:51 PM |
|
I have to admit that it looks like Stamp is moving more on its own the last 2 days or so. Maybe people finally realize following China is just stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
knarzo
|
|
May 02, 2014, 04:32:20 PM |
|
I have to admit that it looks like Stamp is moving more on its own the last 2 days or so. Maybe people finally realize following China is just stupid.
People are starting to realize that their MSM experts (with or without academic background) are muppets and the pressure against the fiat scam is building up more and more. Good times ahead. Good example from another Prof. here   --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCT3-oDJoLo |
|
|
|
|
NewLiberty
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1002
Gresham's Lawyer
|
|
May 02, 2014, 04:50:33 PM |
|
I have to admit that it looks like Stamp is moving more on its own the last 2 days or so. Maybe people finally realize following China is just stupid.
There may be some folks that would rather not do their trading within the China borders due to the legal environment. |
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2170
Merit: 1776
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
May 02, 2014, 05:00:50 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JorgeStolfi
|
|
May 02, 2014, 05:02:32 PM |
|
An arbitrage trader follows the same "buy low, sell high" strategy of an ordinary speculator, except that he doesn't have to guess the future -- he can do both trades at the same time.
I imagine that arbitrage should be particularly lucrative for exchange owners, especially if they collude.
Suppose that owners Alice and Bob of exchanges A and B agree to show each other the first few entries of their order books in real time, while delaying that information to the public by a few seconds. Whenever Alice sees a sell order in her exchange A that has a lower price than the highest bid in B, she immediately buys into that order, counting that Bob will immediately sell the same amount into that bid. And vice-versa.
If this scenario is possible, the partnership Alice&Bob obviously would make a profit on every such occasion. Alice and Bob could equalize their expenses and profits, at any later time, just by exchanging bitcoins. Thus, even if A is in Bulgaria and trades only with dollars, while B is in China and trades only with CNY, they would never need to exchange dollars to/from CNY. The dollars that Alice would take home would have come from the dollars that her clients deposited in A, while the CNY that Bob would withdraw from B would come from the CNY that others deposited into B.
(Trading fees, bank fees, and currency exchange rates complicate the details, but do not seem to invalidate the idea.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultros
|
|
May 02, 2014, 05:16:24 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
aminorex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1029
Sine secretum non libertas
|
|
May 02, 2014, 05:22:43 PM |
|
I imagine that arbitrage should be particularly lucrative for exchange owners, especially if they collude.
I have always assumed that BFX and stamp are arbing the book before it opens. This is standard practice in U.S. equity markets: Orders are first matched in-house, only then on exchange. Most HFT is just the attempt to approximate this at the exchange tier, in a competitive, rather than a cooperative environment. HFT arbs are present on all computerized markets that I am aware of. |
|
|
|
|
|
Blue
|
|
May 02, 2014, 05:29:56 PM |
|
however, don´t forget, most ppl only get to do part 1 before death |
|
|
|
|
|
akujin
|
|
May 02, 2014, 05:33:45 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
