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

[UnDerDoG81]

google trend for bitcoin is going up as expected: http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=bitcoin&date=today%201-m&cmpt=date

 

How was that expected?

the google trend graph has a 2 day delay. dorian was all over the news, and the dead of the ceo in singapore.

also see: trend for satoshi nakamoto over 12months: http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=satoshi%20nakamoto&date=today%2012-m&cmpt=date

Still tooo complicated to buy Bitcoins for normal folks. It must get way easier so we really can say choo choo.

[Bagatell]

Still tooo complicated to buy Bitcoins for normal folks. It must get way easier so we really can say choo choo.

Current Criticisms of Bitcoin Are at Least 10 Years Too Early

[UnDerDoG81]

Still tooo complicated to buy Bitcoins for normal folks. It must get way easier so we really can say choo choo.

Current Criticisms of Bitcoin Are at Least 10 Years Too Early

I see the problem in the identification process. As I heared from Bitcoin in 2012 (and the price was at about $50), I was very interested. But then I´ve seen that they want ID´s and bills and banc account verification so I forgot about Bitcoin again until mid April 2013.

2nd problem is the security. Hackers seems like everywhere and all this paper wallet stuff is complicated too. As the article says, Bitcoin is 10 years too early that is correct.

Isn´t it interesting that a hacker is doing the same thing as a man who rips a bank? If you ask the hacker "would you rub a bank?" he would say "no" but is doing the same thing on his computer. I think a person who steals Bitcoins must get also in prison exactly like somebody who rubs a bank.

[JorgeStolfi]

Really， is Chinese traffic fake?  Huobi and Okcoin are both transaction free.

Huobi looks real to me, OKCoin looke strange. Yes, the lack of transaction fees could explain their high volumes (and should also attract/retain more clients).

Also leverage trade is helpful for big traffic? Days ago, Okcoin announced testing leverage trade, offering clients p2p platform for borrow/lend cny/btc/ltc.
Could this be the explanation for okcoin's overpass on Huobi? We know, Huobi started leverage shortly after setup last year.

Ah! I did not know that. Yes, could be.

Could That be also be explanation for the price jump on Mar/02?

[Walsoraj]

Of course the trades are real but the volume is manufactured. The more interesting question is how many traders?

[Decentralized]

Still tooo complicated to buy Bitcoins for normal folks. It must get way easier so we really can say choo choo.

Really? How hard is it for a businessman or even a young guy to make a bank transfer to a exchange? It takes 2 minutes to make a bank transfer and by the next day (at least on bitstamp with sepa), you have your money there.

Also, there are loads of Bitcoin ATMs all over the world now. I don't think it could be easier.

[hdbuck]

wowz almost 45BTC raised for dorian. nice nice

[UnDerDoG81]

Still tooo complicated to buy Bitcoins for normal folks. It must get way easier so we really can say choo choo.

Really? How hard is it for a businessman or even a young guy to make a bank transfer to a exchange? It takes 2 minutes to make a bank transfer and by the next day (at least on bitstamp with sepa), you have your money there.

Also, there are loads of Bitcoin ATMs all over the world now. I don't think it could be easier.

As I wrote already, verification sucks and takes too long...

[ChrisML]

wowz almost 45BTC raised for dorian. nice nice

What if he does not want them? lol.

[Threebits]

Really， is Chinese traffic fake?  Huobi and Okcoin are both transaction free.

Huobi looks real to me, OKCoin looke strange. Yes, the lack of transaction fees could explain their high volumes (and should also attract/retain more clients).

Also leverage trade is helpful for big traffic? Days ago, Okcoin announced testing leverage trade, offering clients p2p platform for borrow/lend cny/btc/ltc.
Could this be the explanation for okcoin's overpass on Huobi? We know, Huobi started leverage shortly after setup last year.

Ah! I did not know that. Yes, could be.

Could That be also be explanation for the price jump on Mar/02?

Hi, Jorge, good to connect you. I like your analogy of great-great-great grandfather's map for island gold. My hyping bitcoin to friends as an investment was wrong, at current phase.

Okcoin set out leverage test on Friday., Mar/07. BTCChina added LTC on Mar/02,

[LMGTFY]

As I wrote already, verification sucks and takes too long...

Last couple of times I bought BTC it was on Localbitcoins, which I hadn't used before. I created an account, clicked on a seller's ad, followed instructions to send the seller money, the money cleared within two hours, and Localbitcoins released the BTC from escrow. This is in the UK, which has a bad rep for many things, but is admittedly maybe a bit more progressive than other states. Some buyers/sellers on Localbitcoins require a real name in advance (but they'll get my name when I transfer money to them anyway), but that's as close to verification I've found on Localbitcoins. I guess it would depend, too, on the size of the trade - I keep mine around the 1-2BTC mark, I don't know if larger trades cause AML/KYC to kick in (I'd imagine so).

tl;dr - for the hypothetical businessman or young guy, buying small amounts of BTC in the UK is quicker and easier than shopping on Amazon

[JorgeStolfi]

The more interesting question is how many traders?

Indeed.

When I was watching Fukushima, I was amazed at how little data there was about the state of the reactors (and most of it later turned out to be bogus).  And yet the stakes there were huge -- millions of people at risk, tens of billions of dollars in cleanup costs ...

I feel the same about the bitcoin market scene.  There seems to be no reliable data about the most important variables, like the number of people actually trading or using bitcoin (not just open accounts at exchanges), how much money is in the traders' accounts, demographics of traders, ...  Volume is a very poor indicator of importance.  How can people invest and trade in the dark like that?

Coindesk(?) recently did a survey of venture capital invested on bitcoin services,  that was a notable exception.  There should be more of that...

[JorgeStolfi]

Hi, Jorge, good to connect you. I like your analogy of great-great-great grandfather's map for island gold. My hyping bitcoin to friends as an investment was wrong, at current phase.

Okcoin set out leverage test on Friday., Mar/07. BTCChina added LTC on Mar/02,

Thanks!

[bassclef]

Made this last night, but fell asleep before I could upload it. Cheers.

[Threebits]

Is there a way to estimate, from the blockchain or other sources, the number and size of bitcoin transactions that are payments for goods and services, rather than due to speculation, investment, hot/cold storage transfers, etc?

Is it a question of " chicken or egg, which is first", at the beginning stage?

[Hen0xyd]

google trend for bitcoin is going up as expected: http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=bitcoin&date=today%201-m&cmpt=date

Yes, more people are knowing bitcoin now, so more investisors. Still we should note the rising search terms are the following (last 30days) :

bitcoin dead     +350%
bitcoin ceo     +250%
mt gox     +250%
mt gox bitcoin     +250%
mtgox bitcoin     +130%
bitcoin crash     +120%

[tarmi]

what a sucker rally.

[JorgeStolfi]

Is there a way to estimate, from the blockchain or other sources, the number and size of bitcoin transactions that are payments for goods and services, rather than due to speculation, investment, hot/cold storage transfers, etc?

Is it a question of "chicken or egg, which is first", at the beginning stage?

I think the two classes of transactions can be distinguished in theory. Class A ( "payment for goods and services using bitcoin") is transfer of bitcoin from a customer's address to an address belonging to someone who sells goods and services unrelated to crypto-coins, in exchange for said goods and services being provided to the customer. 

Class B is pretty much everything else, such as transfer to/from a bitcoin exchange's wallet, transfers between people or companies in exchange of cash or other coins, etc.

Right now, purchasing with cryptocoins may involve up to three blockchain transfers: customer buys crypto at an exchange with dollars, sends to merchant, the merchant sells them for euros.  I would count only the middle transaction as "class A".  The other two could be put in a separate class C, "bitcoin transfers directly connected to class A"; but since they can be widely separated in time and lumped with other transfers, it doesn't seem to be a useful idea, even in theory.

Purchasing "with cyptocoins" today may also involve zero transfers, if the customer gives dollars to a "bitcoin-based" payment processor who then gives euros to the merchant, without actually moving any bitcoins.  I would not count those (non)transfers in Class A, since the payment processor is acting just like a traditional bank.

[Decentralized]

Still tooo complicated to buy Bitcoins for normal folks. It must get way easier so we really can say choo choo.

Really? How hard is it for a businessman or even a young guy to make a bank transfer to a exchange? It takes 2 minutes to make a bank transfer and by the next day (at least on bitstamp with sepa), you have your money there.

Also, there are loads of Bitcoin ATMs all over the world now. I don't think it could be easier.

As I wrote already, verification sucks and takes too long...

Bitstamp took for me 2 business days to verify my account and I only had to send the passport, if I remember well.

[kurious]

Is there a way to estimate, from the blockchain or other sources, the number and size of bitcoin transactions that are payments for goods and services, rather than due to speculation, investment, hot/cold storage transfers, etc?

Is it a question of "chicken or egg, which is first", at the beginning stage?

I think the two classes of transactions can be distinguished in theory. Class A ( "payment for goods and services using bitcoin") is transfer of bitcoin from a customer's address to an address belonging to someone who sells goods and services unrelated to crypto-coins, in exchange for said goods and services being provided to the customer. 

Class B is pretty much everything else, such as transfer to/from a bitcoin exchange's wallet, transfers between people or companies in exchange of cash or other coins, etc.

Right now, purchasing with cryptocoins may involve up to three blockchain transfers: customer buys crypto at an exchange with dollars, sends to merchant, the merchant sells them for euros.  I would count only the middle transaction as "class A".  The other two could be put in a separate class C, "bitcoin transfers directly connected to class A"; but since they can be widely separated in time and lumped with other transfers, it doesn't seem to be a useful idea, even in theory.

Purchasing "with cyptocoins" today may also involve zero transfers, if the customer gives dollars to a "bitcoin-based" payment processor who then gives euros to the merchant, without actually moving any bitcoins.  I would not count those (non)transfers in Class A, since the payment processor is acting just like a traditional bank.

Maybe try looking at the major bitcoin payment processors...   It would be a start.   They may well release periodical figures for turnover.    This would allow you to guess the 'major retailer' type income in BTC, since many will use Bitpay etc.

At least it is something to spot trends in.