Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[Fatman3001]

Greece introduces a cashpoint tax to try to stem capital outflow
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/

Are these the capital controls that's supposed to make greeks look at Bitcoin?

Well, its not like the greeks really have heard of Bitcoin anyway.

Except in finance minister Yanis Varoufakis' april fools joke. Irony is a bitch!

Well, there's a Greek saying that goes like this:

"Among the funny things, pretty serious things are spoken"

Except you don't believe in "conspiracy theories"... Here's a nice one for you then.

If you ask me, yes; I believe that Greece should be the 1st one to incorporate BTC as a second currency. This way Gresham's law will take over and the debt will be eliminated (BTC=Non inflationary, EUR=inflationary). One after another the other -in debt- countries will follow... EU will be the 1st continent to test the new digital currency as it was the 1st one to test the EURO.

Too crazy to be real?

Remember: Fantasy has limits; Reality has not.

The funny thing is that suddenly Greece would be No.1 in electronic payment system adoption too. A little image boost doesn't hurt.

[1714305232]

1714305232

[1714305232]

1714305232

[1714305232]

1714305232

[bassclef]

But the volume doesn't matter, in my opinion. The shares did change hands at those prices. That's what matters.

The traders on the actual bitcoin exchanges have little reason to care. Someone could sell 50000 GBTC at $35 and buy 5000 BTC below $350 on bitcoin exchanges, but that's seems to be where GBTC's ability to affect the prices ends at the moment.

The important factor is how much demand there is for any ETF. People are watching GBTC carefully as it is first out of the gate, and any price increase in the BTC cash markets will reflect speculation on future demand for paper Bitcoin securities, and won't be a reflection of the actual price traded (since there's not enough volume for consistent arbitrage). So perception of high demand is important for higher prices because the company owning the ETF will have to buy bitcoins on the open market to match it.

[empowering]

I don't think the SEC can stall this much longer. Because Nasdaq Stockholm is launching a bitcoin investment vehicle in 13 days.
I don't think New York or London will let Stockholm become Wall Street 2.0, lol  

I don't think that the SEC cares much about that.  The delay on COIN is not just bureaucracy, and the approval is not automatic.  The SEC is still trying to decide whether allowing people buy COIN on NASDAQ is a good idea.

did you get that from your direct line?

[Wings1987]

Just watched "The Rise and Rise of Bitcoin" free on Amazon Prime.

When does the "The Fall and Fall of Bitcoin" or, the empire striking back, come out

If the price goes back up then maybe we'll get "The Return of the Bitcoin Miner" for all of us who stopped mining because we're losing money.

I perceive BTC mining as an flamboyant idea. This idea incorporates a long promise. You're investing in something that *maybe* will give you back your investment in the future. If you do the (simple) math you will understand that under a certain USD/BTC price, it simply doesn't worth it.

More specifically, under the current circumstances all miners are better off buying BTCs instead of mining for them. The prices are so low that you could get yourself a new BTC every month, with absolutely no gear and no sweat at all. Good luck mining for one with your gear.

As for the mining centralization worries, I think that it will be decentralized but not because big companies are not getting into the game. It will get a decentralization after the next block halving. The price to pay in order to mine for BTCs is unfortunately tied to the Moore's law which is the most significant aspect of the question: "Should I mine for BTCs?".

So, there won't be an "infinite" rise on mining power as there cannot be an "infinite" shrinking to the current IC hardware. So, eventually... decentralization will occur because nobody will spend so much money to get into a game that will deliver "so little", with the only promise that "it will get higher in the future".

Of course, I may be wrong and the price of USD/BTC will hit 10,000 or more so this fires up a totally different scenario. But for now; this is the reality.

As someone who is involved in physical mining and cloud mining some of what you posted is not true.


Using Hashnest as an example. If you purchased cloud mining in the beginning of this year you paid .15 BTC to 1.39 BTC per TH (depending on the type of hashing your purchased) Currently the lower level is worth .212 BTC per TH and the upper level is the same value.

The hashing you purchased has gone up or retained its value and you have pocketed the earnings for the last 4 months. The person that did that is better off than the one that just purchased BTC from an exchange.


PLEASE keep in mind that the last 4-5 months have been a very different situation compared to the last few years. It is very easy to loose money mining but some people are making good money in mining. We are not all doing it out of the kindness of our heart.

[jl2012]

Why would that happen?  The halving means that there will be only 1800 BTC per day to be mined rather than 3600.  Many miners will have to stop mining, starting with those with smaller efficiency (hashes per dollar of electricty and other recurrent costs).  It is not clear whether these miners will be small or large.  My guess is that mining will become more centralized, and more China-based.

The price of bitcoin has halved 2-3 times since the ATH. In terms of mining profitability, effect of price halving and reward halving are just the same, since miners are paying bills in fiat. Therefore, a planned reward halving should not have a very dramatic effect on the hashing power (see what happened after the first halving in 2012). Also, price is expected to raise after halving due to decreased supply, which will compensate at least part of the loss of reward halving.

I have seen a proposal by an Israeli mathematician to change the way miners get their blocks from pools, that he claims willo reduce the risk of centralization by letting individual miners choose which transactions to include in a block.  Perhaps.

There is that "21" company that apparently intends to put mining chips inside domestic equipment. Let's see...

Probably you are staying in the speculation forum for too long. We already have that for a long time. It is called "getblocktemplate", the BIP22 and 23. At least the Eligius pool supports GBT.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0022.mediawiki
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0023.mediawiki

As a professor in computer science with academic interest in bitcoin only, I suggest you spend more time in the technical forum rather than the wall observer.

[bad trader]

The important factor is how much demand there is for any ETF. People are watching GBTC carefully as it is first out of the gate, and any price increase in the BTC cash markets will reflect speculation on future demand for paper Bitcoin securities, and won't be a reflection of the actual price traded (since there's not enough volume for consistent arbitrage). So perception of high demand is important for higher prices because the company owning the ETF will have to buy bitcoins on the open market to match it.

Yes, but low volume trading does not give the impression of high demand. However, in this case the demand is unclear, because the supply seems to be even lower. The reason for the low supply is unknown. It could be sellers are still waiting for their shares to get transferred or something.

[macsga]

Just watched "The Rise and Rise of Bitcoin" free on Amazon Prime.

When does the "The Fall and Fall of Bitcoin" or, the empire striking back, come out

If the price goes back up then maybe we'll get "The Return of the Bitcoin Miner" for all of us who stopped mining because we're losing money.

I perceive BTC mining as an flamboyant idea. This idea incorporates a long promise. You're investing in something that *maybe* will give you back your investment in the future. If you do the (simple) math you will understand that under a certain USD/BTC price, it simply doesn't worth it.

More specifically, under the current circumstances all miners are better off buying BTCs instead of mining for them. The prices are so low that you could get yourself a new BTC every month, with absolutely no gear and no sweat at all. Good luck mining for one with your gear.

As for the mining centralization worries, I think that it will be decentralized but not because big companies are not getting into the game. It will get a decentralization after the next block halving. The price to pay in order to mine for BTCs is unfortunately tied to the Moore's law which is the most significant aspect of the question: "Should I mine for BTCs?".

So, there won't be an "infinite" rise on mining power as there cannot be an "infinite" shrinking to the current IC hardware. So, eventually... decentralization will occur because nobody will spend so much money to get into a game that will deliver "so little", with the only promise that "it will get higher in the future".

Of course, I may be wrong and the price of USD/BTC will hit 10,000 or more so this fires up a totally different scenario. But for now; this is the reality.

As someone who is involved in physical mining and cloud mining some of what you posted is not true.


Using Hashnest as an example. If you purchased cloud mining in the beginning of this year you paid .15 BTC to 1.39 BTC per TH (depending on the type of hashing your purchased) Currently the lower level is worth .212 BTC per TH and the upper level is the same value.

The hashing you purchased has gone up or retained its value and you have pocketed the earnings for the last 4 months. The person that did that is better off than the one that just purchased BTC from an exchange.


PLEASE keep in mind that the last 4-5 months have been a very different situation compared to the last few years. It is very easy to loose money mining but some people are making good money in mining. We are not all doing it out of the kindness of our heart.

Valid point there! I didn't count the cloud mining possibility! As I often say, it's only my musings, and I may be wrong in those aspects you've posted. Veritably true though, the buying part is what a *classic* miner should do at this time period. I really look forward for a good mining contract that works as an alternative though. If you have something in mind, please indulge me. I only care about making more BTCs not fiat.

Cheers.

[JorgeStolfi]

did you get that from your direct line?

No, I am the SEC's CEO.

[JimboToronto]

Good morning Bitcoinland.

A wee dip down last night I see, and halfway back up to where we were at this time yesterday.

Still basically sideways. All the GBTC kerfuffle seems to have had pretty much no effect.



Mmmm...

[Norway]

I don't think the SEC can stall this much longer. Because Nasdaq Stockholm is launching a bitcoin investment vehicle in 13 days.
I don't think New York or London will let Stockholm become Wall Street 2.0, lol  

I don't think that the SEC cares much about that.  The delay on COIN is not just bureaucracy, and the approval is not automatic.  The SEC is still trying to decide whether allowing people buy COIN on NASDAQ is a good idea.

did you get that from your direct line?

Jorge, please put me on ignore, like I did with you.

[DutchTrades]

Another load of coins switched from weak hands to wise hands today. $300 might take some time, but it's definetly in sight.

[hdbuck]

Another load of coins switched from weak hands to wise hands today. $300 might take some time, but it's definetly in sight.

Pass the dutchie man

[Moria843]

Just watched "The Rise and Rise of Bitcoin" free on Amazon Prime.

When does the "The Fall and Fall of Bitcoin" or, the empire striking back, come out

If the price goes back up then maybe we'll get "The Return of the Bitcoin Miner" for all of us who stopped mining because we're losing money.

I perceive BTC mining as an flamboyant idea. This idea incorporates a long promise. You're investing in something that *maybe* will give you back your investment in the future. If you do the (simple) math you will understand that under a certain USD/BTC price, it simply doesn't worth it.

More specifically, under the current circumstances all miners are better off buying BTCs instead of mining for them. The prices are so low that you could get yourself a new BTC every month, with absolutely no gear and no sweat at all. Good luck mining for one with your gear.

As for the mining centralization worries, I think that it will be decentralized but not because big companies are not getting into the game. It will get a decentralization after the next block halving. The price to pay in order to mine for BTCs is unfortunately tied to the Moore's law which is the most significant aspect of the question: "Should I mine for BTCs?".

So, there won't be an "infinite" rise on mining power as there cannot be an "infinite" shrinking to the current IC hardware. So, eventually... decentralization will occur because nobody will spend so much money to get into a game that will deliver "so little", with the only promise that "it will get higher in the future".

Of course, I may be wrong and the price of USD/BTC will hit 10,000 or more so this fires up a totally different scenario. But for now; this is the reality.

As someone who is involved in physical mining and cloud mining some of what you posted is not true.


Using Hashnest as an example. If you purchased cloud mining in the beginning of this year you paid .15 BTC to 1.39 BTC per TH (depending on the type of hashing your purchased) Currently the lower level is worth .212 BTC per TH and the upper level is the same value.

The hashing you purchased has gone up or retained its value and you have pocketed the earnings for the last 4 months. The person that did that is better off than the one that just purchased BTC from an exchange.


PLEASE keep in mind that the last 4-5 months have been a very different situation compared to the last few years. It is very easy to loose money mining but some people are making good money in mining. We are not all doing it out of the kindness of our heart.

Valid point there! I didn't count the cloud mining possibility! As I often say, it's only my musings, and I may be wrong in those aspects you've posted. Veritably true though, the buying part is what a *classic* miner should do at this time period. I really look forward for a good mining contract that works as an alternative though. If you have something in mind, please indulge me. I only care about making more BTCs not fiat.

Cheers.

I guess I haven't actually lost money because I "technically" still hold all BTC, it's actually an "unrealized loss". I have traded some of the mined coins on Bitstamp and by selling in the 500 - $600 dollar range and buying back in the 175 - $250 range I ended up with more BTC. Another advantage is by using FIFO accounting, I was able to use the coins I mined in the $600 that I sold in the $500 range as a capital loss (even though it was only converted to $ on the Bitstamp books and I ended up using the $ to buy more BTC). Filing my taxes I was able to use the "capital losses" to offset stock capital gains and also got to write off the mining cost. The IRS rules actually worked in my favor this year. I stopped mining and I'm still waiting for what the future will bring. Just concerned over too many miners stopping.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[empowering]

did you get that from your direct line?

No, I am the SEC's CEO.

No... I insist, you are just talking out of your ass.

 

[JimboToronto]

Pass the dutchie man

The stewpot or the donut?

A donut would go well with the Mocha-Java but I wouldn't say no to a kutchie either.

[gizmoh]

Who would not want to sell 41 btc at $600 a piece? 


http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/GBTC/quote

[chriswilmer]

Who would not want to sell 41 btc at $600 a piece? 


http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/GBTC/quote

My mind is boggled. That's about $25,000... so it meets the minimum bid requirements for the BIT. You can immediately arbitrage that if you re-buy the BIT. *argh*!

[Sitarow]

Why would that happen?  The halving means that there will be only 1800 BTC per day to be mined rather than 3600.  Many miners will have to stop mining, starting with those with smaller efficiency (hashes per dollar of electricty and other recurrent costs).  It is not clear whether these miners will be small or large.  My guess is that mining will become more centralized, and more China-based.

The price of bitcoin has halved 2-3 times since the ATH. In terms of mining profitability, effect of price halving and reward halving are just the same, since miners are paying bills in fiat. Therefore, a planned reward halving should not have a very dramatic effect on the hashing power (see what happened after the first halving in 2012). Also, price is expected to raise after halving due to decreased supply, which will compensate at least part of the loss of reward halving.

I have seen a proposal by an Israeli mathematician to change the way miners get their blocks from pools, that he claims willo reduce the risk of centralization by letting individual miners choose which transactions to include in a block.  Perhaps.

There is that "21" company that apparently intends to put mining chips inside domestic equipment. Let's see...

Probably you are staying in the speculation forum for too long. We already have that for a long time. It is called "getblocktemplate", the BIP22 and 23. At least the Eligius pool supports GBT.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0022.mediawiki
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0023.mediawiki

As a professor in computer science with academic interest in bitcoin only, I suggest you spend more time in the technical forum rather than the wall observer.

I as well as others have directed him to other more technically appropriate area's in the past to no avail.

[alesx.onfire]