jonoiv
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 04:57:54 PM |
|
Wall at 446 not even moving
Bears u gotta TRY HARDER
huhh ?? do you have the chart upsidedown? I asked for $300 coins Not fucking $446. that sht's expensive ![Cool](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/cool.gif) You'll get your dream... but unfortunately you won't be able to profit like the rest of us. "always hodling"
|
|
|
|
Richy_T
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2534
Merit: 2244
1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 04:58:26 PM |
|
That would mean the market cap would need to move from 5.5 billion to + 75 Billion. Who is going to fund this ? Because I'm not and I doubt the whole bitcoin community "all in" could fund 75 billion.
That's a pretty big misunderstanding of what "market cap" means (which is essentially nothing).
|
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2282
Merit: 1800
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/lamp.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:00:35 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
derpinheimer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:03:23 PM |
|
Just one question: why didn't you mirror it so the red candles made sense?? Funny though!
|
|
|
|
podyx
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1035
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:03:53 PM |
|
Wall at 446 not even moving
Bears u gotta TRY HARDER
huhh ?? do you have the chart upsidedown? I asked for $300 coins Not fucking $446. that sht's expensive ![Cool](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/cool.gif) You'll get your dream... but unfortunately you won't be able to profit like the rest of us. "always hodling" I hold majority of my coins I do have a nice trading stash which I swing trade with
|
|
|
|
billyjoeallen
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1007
Hide your women
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:05:57 PM |
|
Don't you guys who were expecting up up and away feel like dumb-asses yet? I wanna hear you cry and I'm not buying back until you do.
|
|
|
|
jonoiv
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:08:41 PM |
|
Wall at 446 not even moving
Bears u gotta TRY HARDER
huhh ?? do you have the chart upsidedown? I asked for $300 coins Not fucking $446. that sht's expensive ![Cool](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/cool.gif) You'll get your dream... but unfortunately you won't be able to profit like the rest of us. "always hodling" I hold majority of my coins I do have a nice trading stash which I swing trade with arrr so... maybe change the sig to "Always Hodling... Sometimes ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) "
|
|
|
|
podyx
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1035
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:09:28 PM |
|
lol ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
|
|
|
|
JorgeStolfi
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:11:10 PM |
|
Sigh, another pseudo-audit trying to fool people with a thick cloud of colorful technological smoke. As the "auditor" admits, the exchange can easily fool him about the amount of bitcoins that it owns. What is the point of doing that "audit", then? Besides falsifying their BTC holdings, the exchange can falsify the other half of the "audit", too. Suppose the exchange is short of 100,000 coins, but the owner has a cat named Tibonne and client TibonneTheCat has 100,000 BTC in its account. The exchange creates a version of their database omitting that account. The auditor verifies that the total of balances in that doctored database is less than the bitcoins that the exchange supposedly owns. Using the fancy cryptographic machinery, all the other clients verify that their balances are included in the database. So? And the audit also did not check the sum of the MONEY balances against the exchange's bank accounts and outstanding money debts. An "audit" is not a real audit if it checks only half of the company's books, or if it has no way to check whether the books are complete that is outside the control of the audited entity. This "audit" fails miserably on both counts. A potential "auditor" who is smart, honest, and mindful of his reputation should refuse to take part in such a meaningless exercise -- that will mislead clients about the safety of the exchange, and could make him an involuntary accomplice of a scam. See Roger Ver's "audit" of MtGOX.
|
|
|
|
infofront (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2646
Merit: 2793
Shitcoin Minimalist
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:12:30 PM |
|
I personally doubt that after fall to 100-200$ bitcoin will rise again. Just scare to think about all those people who newly bought all those gridseeds, dragons with THs of power, thinking they will get money back. But now, difficulty is still rising, and value is falling. This hardware will never ever get your money back. Is htere any other purpose for SHA256 ASICs? Can you hack protected files with it? ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Where do people get this retarded idea from that "Bitcoin is dead if it falls below price x". Oh yeah, I know: from the same jumping-to-conclusions part of the brain that tells them "we never fell below the previous ATH, so it can't happen this time either"... I actually agree with the donkey on this one. Low price has little threat to bitcoin. Right now,a low price would actually strengthen bitcoin, not weaken it. There has to be a solid bottom and certainty, so things could get moving again. Right now everyone who has a clue, are on hold because they have started to realize that the current price is only held up by desperation, denial and overly optimistic hopes. So, this uncertainty is actually slowing down all the progress that is going around bitcoin. I was already begging in January for people not to pump the price up when it is only supported by denial, desperation and hype. It was easy to see that the only thing it does, is it made the process a lot longer then needed. BTC should have fallen at 300, rested there for a month and now we would already be on a solid uptrend. But the fools kept pumping the market and created a lot of uncertainty about the present situation. But now the fall will take longer and the drop will be deeper. Only real threat to bitcoin is competition, since the entire idea of open-sourced monetary systems is too big to just put it back in the box. The price may fall, but as long as there aren't solid competition, then it won't kill bitcoin itself. In the same vain as your post but I'm thinking year not months. On this note it reminds me of a metaphor Gavin made paraphrasing it went like this. Developing for Bitcoin is like driving a car at 120km per/h while trying to build the steering system or change the tiers, while the occupants fight over the steering wheal and there's a big guy called satoshidice who has the music on full volume with his foot flat on the accelerator. A crash in price like the kind that would make me cry is just what Bitcoin needs. Shake out the weak ASIC developers, give core developers space to do what they do. It will be very good fore the core believes to test there faith. That's basically what happened in 2012 when BTC was at $2.00. All the nonbelievers started jumping off the bandwagon, selling off their GPUs, and dumping their cheap coins. Sounds like what we need now.
|
|
|
|
fonzie
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:14:22 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
spooderman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1029
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:15:26 PM |
|
Sigh, another pseudo-audit trying to fool people with a thick cloud of colorful technological smoke. As the "auditor" admits, the exchange can easily fool him about the amount of bitcoins that it owns. What is the point of doing that "audit", then? Besides falsifying their BTC holdings, the exchange can falsify the other half of the "audit", too. Suppose the exchange is short of 100,000 coins, but the owner has a cat named Tibonne and client TibonneTheCat has 100,000 BTC in its account. The exchange creates a version of their database omitting that account. The auditor verifies that the total of balances in that doctored database is less than the bitcoins that the exchange supposedly owns. Using the fancy cryptographic machinery, all the other clients verify that their balances are included in the database. So? And the audit also did not check the sum of the MONEY balances against the exchange's bank accounts and outstanding money debts. An "audit" is not a real audit if it checks only half of the company's books, or if it has no way to check whether the books are complete that is outside the control of the audited entity. This "audit" fails miserably on both counts. A potential "auditor" who is smart, honest, and mindful of his reputation should refuse to take part in such a meaningless exercise -- that will mislead clients about the safety of the exchange, and could make him an involuntary accomplice of a scam. See Roger Ver's "audit" of MtGOX. + 1 Very good point. You're still a paid troll ![Cheesy](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/cheesy.gif)
|
|
|
|
QuestionAuthority
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1393
You lead and I'll watch you walk away.
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:15:49 PM |
|
Once the news hits Bitcoin will climb over 1000 next week.
|
|
|
|
spooderman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1029
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:16:38 PM |
|
Once the news hits Bitcoin will climb over 1000 next week.
what nyooz?
|
|
|
|
EuroTrash
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:18:18 PM |
|
So: one whale dumped, some hodlers capitulated, the market is otherwise stalled and depressing, rinse and repeat ![Sad](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/sad.gif)
|
|
|
|
infofront (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2646
Merit: 2793
Shitcoin Minimalist
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:18:41 PM |
|
Bitcoin is just resting while it straps on it's rockets. $10,000 BTC by the end of the week! You heard it here first.
|
|
|
|
podyx
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1035
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:18:48 PM |
|
some healthy resistance being put up, still moving upwards
bullish?
|
|
|
|
Zule
Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:20:12 PM |
|
Sigh, another pseudo-audit trying to fool people with a thick cloud of colorful technological smoke. As the "auditor" admits, the exchange can easily fool him about the amount of bitcoins that it owns. What is the point of doing that "audit", then? Besides falsifying their BTC holdings, the exchange can falsify the other half of the "audit", too. Suppose the exchange is short of 100,000 coins, but the owner has a cat named Tibonne and client TibonneTheCat has 100,000 BTC in its account. The exchange creates a version of their database omitting that account. The auditor verifies that the total of balances in that doctored database is less than the bitcoins that the exchange supposedly owns. Using the fancy cryptographic machinery, all the other clients verify that their balances are included in the database. So? And the audit also did not check the sum of the MONEY balances against the exchange's bank accounts and outstanding money debts. An "audit" is not a real audit if it checks only half of the company's books, or if it has no way to check whether the books are complete that is outside the control of the audited entity. This "audit" fails miserably on both counts. A potential "auditor" who is smart, honest, and mindful of his reputation should refuse to take part in such a meaningless exercise -- that will mislead clients about the safety of the exchange, and could make him an involuntary accomplice of a scam. See Roger Ver's "audit" of MtGOX. If you knew anything about accounting/financial audits you would know that they focus on few key points and take random checks of that points documentation. Its always possible to "fool" the auditor, but an expirienced auditor knows where to look and when something is being hidden.
|
|
|
|
podyx
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1035
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 07, 2014, 05:21:14 PM |
|
![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGHsKv0C.jpg%3F1%3F5524&t=665&c=3O35kfMcufjyoQ) fueling the rocketship, yessir
|
|
|
|
|