elambert (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1696
Merit: 1008
|
|
October 10, 2013, 01:34:22 AM |
|
A picture is worth a thousand words
|
|
|
|
Lauda
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
|
|
October 10, 2013, 11:00:46 AM |
|
There isn't pretty much any big amount that is on the sell side right now
|
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks" 😼 Bitcoin Core ( onion)
|
|
|
Majormax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1129
|
|
October 10, 2013, 03:54:20 PM |
|
There isn't pretty much any big amount that is on the sell side right now Yes, but if there was, we could infer the price to be stronger. That is the irony of the market book...A big sell-side gives credence to the price underpinning it... The market looks thin in classical terms, but this is an interesting experiment in accelerated mining subsidy reduction, a stable coin control, and PoS. We shall see the results in a few months. I am sure the capable development team realise that a widespread desire to hold and use the coin needs constant incentive.
|
|
|
|
mercSuey
|
|
October 10, 2013, 04:28:18 PM |
|
There isn't pretty much any big amount that is on the sell side right now Yes, but if there was, we could infer the price to be stronger. That is the irony of the market book...A big sell-side gives credence to the price underpinning it... The market looks thin in classical terms, but this is an interesting experiment in accelerated mining subsidy reduction, a stable coin control, and PoS. We shall see the results in a few months. I am sure the capable development team realise that a widespread desire to hold and use the coin needs constant incentive. There is a subtle balance between being a storage medium of value and a liquid currency. We're constantly trying to find that sweet spot, but we have marketed CB as something that tends to be more rare storage of value than currency. I think things will be much more clear in the next 1 - 3 months as we start to roll out our project initiatives. And you can stay in touch with these initiatives on our blog at http://CryptogenicBullion.org/blog.html. -Merc
|
|
|
|
Majormax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1129
|
|
October 10, 2013, 06:37:44 PM |
|
There is a subtle balance between being a storage medium of value and a liquid currency. We're constantly trying to find that sweet spot, but we have marketed CB as something that tends to be more rare storage of value than currency. I think things will be much more clear in the next 1 - 3 months as we start to roll out our project initiatives. And you can stay in touch with these initiatives on our blog at http://CryptogenicBullion.org/blog.html. -Merc You certainly seem to have some understanding, as well as (even more importantly) an ability to adapt and learn from real-time evolution. There are a surprisingly large number of seemingly insignificant factors which can have huge effects on the life of a coin at sensitive stages.
|
|
|
|
Killiz
|
|
October 10, 2013, 06:44:11 PM |
|
New all time high reached Edit: just noticed it went to 0.005 briefly when first hit cryptsy nice pic though anyways haha Edit2: All time high in Dollar value, wow $0.53 http://coinmarketcap.com/
|
|
|
|
miffman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1005
PGP ID: 78B7B84D
|
|
October 10, 2013, 07:05:16 PM |
|
When the CGB PoW went from 5 to 2.5 the price pretty much doubled over the coming weeks. I'd like to see the same now as CGB becomes harder to mine, or rather there are fewer coins in return for the mining. A wild guess? 0,0040 BTC in 2 weeks? 2 weeks?? More like couple of hours
|
█ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █
|
█ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █
| | BitBlender |
█ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █
|
█ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █
| |
█ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █
| █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █
| |
|
|
|
|
110110101
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1382
Merit: 1002
|
|
October 10, 2013, 08:19:04 PM |
|
When the CGB PoW went from 5 to 2.5 the price pretty much doubled over the coming weeks. I'd like to see the same now as CGB becomes harder to mine, or rather there are fewer coins in return for the mining. A wild guess? 0,0040 BTC in 2 weeks? 2 weeks?? More like couple of hours Yeah, well good thing I was wrong
|
|
|
|
Timelord2067
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3808
Merit: 2235
💲🏎️💨🚓
|
|
October 12, 2013, 07:04:15 AM |
|
Have started to see CGB move from balance to "stake" balance. I had five transactions (all < 1.0 each and <1.0 total) from more than 30days ago, I got two "mining" payments this week (both <0.0x) , none of the coins moved across, but then after 34 days a 10.15 and a corresponding 0.09938 "mining" both jumped across to the "stake" balance. Will be watching to see how the remainder of the coins go - just one question, is there a new block 'mined' for the 10.15 'stake' and would I be correct to assume unlike the 10, 5, 2.5, 1.25 payouts, this block netted the 0.09938 That was yesterday - today the whole balance is back to the "balance" with zero in the "stake" - is this right? One last question, is the fractions only to six decimal places? Thanks,
|
|
|
|
mercSuey
|
|
October 12, 2013, 07:27:27 AM |
|
Have started to see CGB move from balance to "stake" balance.
I had five transactions (all < 1.0 each and <1.0 total) from more than 30days ago, I got two "mining" payments this week (both <0.0x) , none of the coins moved across, but then after 34 days a 10.15 and a corresponding 0.09938 "mining" both jumped across to the "stake" balance.
Yep, after 30 days in a wallet coins become eligible for stake rewards. Will be watching to see how the remainder of the coins go - just one question, is there a new block 'mined' for the 10.15 'stake' and would I be correct to assume unlike the 10, 5, 2.5, 1.25 payouts, this block netted the 0.09938 Correct. This PoS block will be added to the blockchain along with all previous PoW and PoS blocks. You could see this on the block explorer but we're migrating servers and resources to new nodes and it's currently down. It should be back up by the end of the weekend. The url for the explorer is here: http://explorer.cryptogenicbullion.orgThat was yesterday - today the whole balance is back to the "balance" with zero in the "stake" - is this right?
One last question, is the fractions only to six decimal places?
Thanks,
This is right. You should see in your transactions 'mined' values as well. Decimals are up to eight decimal places. Called one satoshi: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/114/what-is-a-satoshiYou're very welcome! -Merc
|
|
|
|
Killiz
|
|
October 12, 2013, 07:36:23 AM |
|
Some weird and wonderful stuff Thanks for adding.
|
|
|
|
|
Killiz
|
|
October 12, 2013, 08:06:34 AM |
|
Have started to see CGB move from balance to "stake" balance. I had five transactions (all < 1.0 each and <1.0 total) from more than 30days ago, I got two "mining" payments this week (both <0.0x) , none of the coins moved across, but then after 34 days a 10.15 and a corresponding 0.09938 "mining" both jumped across to the "stake" balance. Will be watching to see how the remainder of the coins go - just one question, is there a new block 'mined' for the 10.15 'stake' and would I be correct to assume unlike the 10, 5, 2.5, 1.25 payouts, this block netted the 0.09938 That was yesterday - today the whole balance is back to the "balance" with zero in the "stake" - is this right? One last question, is the fractions only to six decimal places? Thanks, In your client click on, help- debug window- console, then type in listaddressgroupings. This will give you a list of every address used by your client to store your funds. Each address and balance qualifies for stake separately after 30 days. This is why it may seem like random amounts are being held as stake. I also use this action if I need to send some funds, so not to disturb multiple addresses which your client probably will do if done the normal way. I listaddressgroupings then I choose an address from the list, type - sendfrom <theaddresschosen> <theaddressI'msendingto> <amount>.
|
|
|
|
|
elambert (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1696
Merit: 1008
|
|
October 13, 2013, 02:43:18 PM |
|
Great news! Thank you for squeezing this project into your queue Merc!!!
|
|
|
|
Timelord2067
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3808
Merit: 2235
💲🏎️💨🚓
|
|
October 14, 2013, 04:57:07 PM |
|
Have started to see CGB move from balance to "stake" balance. I had five transactions (all < 1.0 each and <1.0 total) from more than 30days ago, I got two "mining" payments this week (both <0.0x) , none of the coins moved across, but then after 34 days a 10.15 and a corresponding 0.09938 "mining" both jumped across to the "stake" balance. Will be watching to see how the remainder of the coins go - just one question, is there a new block 'mined' for the 10.15 'stake' and would I be correct to assume unlike the 10, 5, 2.5, 1.25 payouts, this block netted the 0.09938 That was yesterday - today the whole balance is back to the "balance" with zero in the "stake" - is this right? One last question, is the fractions only to six decimal places? Thanks, In your client click on, help- debug window- console, then type in listaddressgroupings. This will give you a list of every address used by your client to store your funds. Each address and balance qualifies for stake separately after 30 days. This is why it may seem like random amounts are being held as stake. I also use this action if I need to send some funds, so not to disturb multiple addresses which your client probably will do if done the normal way. I listaddressgroupings then I choose an address from the list, type - sendfrom <theaddresschosen> <theaddressI'msendingto> <amount>. Many thanks to the people who've taken the time to reply - I appreciate your feedback. I was already aware of the eight decimal laces, however, my CGB mining/ transfers have all been to six decimal places (the whole lot) so I wasn't sure if it was some uncanny quirk or it was intentional at six decimal places. I did the listaddressgroupings as reccommended and got something unusual, there were two addresses listed, the first lists the balance as it is, while the second address has some "dust" in it. Now I have in my one wallet a couple of addresses 5a... 5b... 5c... and 5d... - only this one found in the listaddressgroupings is a 5z... Still not sure how that happened, but hey, more coins is good right? (5a was created with the wallet, 5b is to transfer from ConEx.PW 5c is a public donation address and 5d is a spare address) - where 5z fits in I have no idea...
|
|
|
|
Killiz
|
|
October 14, 2013, 05:41:06 PM Last edit: October 14, 2013, 05:55:38 PM by Killiz |
|
Have started to see CGB move from balance to "stake" balance. I had five transactions (all < 1.0 each and <1.0 total) from more than 30days ago, I got two "mining" payments this week (both <0.0x) , none of the coins moved across, but then after 34 days a 10.15 and a corresponding 0.09938 "mining" both jumped across to the "stake" balance. Will be watching to see how the remainder of the coins go - just one question, is there a new block 'mined' for the 10.15 'stake' and would I be correct to assume unlike the 10, 5, 2.5, 1.25 payouts, this block netted the 0.09938 That was yesterday - today the whole balance is back to the "balance" with zero in the "stake" - is this right? One last question, is the fractions only to six decimal places? Thanks, In your client click on, help- debug window- console, then type in listaddressgroupings. This will give you a list of every address used by your client to store your funds. Each address and balance qualifies for stake separately after 30 days. This is why it may seem like random amounts are being held as stake. I also use this action if I need to send some funds, so not to disturb multiple addresses which your client probably will do if done the normal way. I listaddressgroupings then I choose an address from the list, type - sendfrom <theaddresschosen> <theaddressI'msendingto> <amount>. Many thanks to the people who've taken the time to reply - I appreciate your feedback. I was already aware of the eight decimal laces, however, my CGB mining/ transfers have all been to six decimal places (the whole lot) so I wasn't sure if it was some uncanny quirk or it was intentional at six decimal places. I did the listaddressgroupings as reccommended and got something unusual, there were two addresses listed, the first lists the balance as it is, while the second address has some "dust" in it. Now I have in my one wallet a couple of addresses 5a... 5b... 5c... and 5d... - only this one found in the listaddressgroupings is a 5z... Still not sure how that happened, but hey, more coins is good right? (5a was created with the wallet, 5b is to transfer from ConEx.PW 5c is a public donation address and 5d is a spare address) - where 5z fits in I have no idea... Sometimes when you make transactions your client will automatically create new addresses and split your funds between them. Why it does this I have no idea, maybe someone else can explain this. This is why I recommend manually sending from a particular address, as one of your addresses may have a larger amount of funds held in it which you don't want disturbing, because from what I understand, stake will be reset to zero days if your wallet moves funds from it. Edit: Or you may have multiple funded addresses, all ranging from 0-30 days that you don't want to spend from.
|
|
|
|
Majormax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1129
|
|
October 14, 2013, 05:51:46 PM |
|
Sometimes when you make transactions your client will automatically create new addresses and split your funds between them. Why it does this I have no idea, maybe someone else can explain this. This is why I recommend manually sending from a particular address, as one of your addresses may have a larger amount of funds held in it which you don't want disturbing, because from what I understand, stake will be reset to zero days if your wallet moves funds from it.
This is because an 'Input' amount of coins in the (or any) blockchain cannot be partially spent. Each incoming transaction in your wallet addresses is treated by the blockchain as a separate unit. You can send one (or more) out in total, and receive 'change ' if needed, in a separate address. If you wish to spend coins exactly matching some combination of your original inputs, the 'change' address is not required.
|
|
|
|
Killiz
|
|
October 14, 2013, 06:02:19 PM |
|
Sometimes when you make transactions your client will automatically create new addresses and split your funds between them. Why it does this I have no idea, maybe someone else can explain this. This is why I recommend manually sending from a particular address, as one of your addresses may have a larger amount of funds held in it which you don't want disturbing, because from what I understand, stake will be reset to zero days if your wallet moves funds from it.
This is because an 'Input' amount of coins in the (or any) blockchain cannot be partially spent. Each incoming transaction in your wallet addresses is treated by the blockchain as a separate unit. You can send one (or more) out in total, and receive 'change ' if needed, in a separate address. If you wish to spend coins exactly matching some combination of your original inputs, the 'change' address is not required. I see, thanks for explaining that Majormax
|
|
|
|
Timelord2067
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3808
Merit: 2235
💲🏎️💨🚓
|
|
October 15, 2013, 03:49:36 PM |
|
Sometimes when you make transactions your client will automatically create new addresses and split your funds between them. Why it does this I have no idea, maybe someone else can explain this. This is why I recommend manually sending from a particular address, as one of your addresses may have a larger amount of funds held in it which you don't want disturbing, because from what I understand, stake will be reset to zero days if your wallet moves funds from it.
This is because an 'Input' amount of coins in the (or any) blockchain cannot be partially spent. Each incoming transaction in your wallet addresses is treated by the blockchain as a separate unit. You can send one (or more) out in total, and receive 'change ' if needed, in a separate address. If you wish to spend coins exactly matching some combination of your original inputs, the 'change' address is not required. I see, thanks for explaining that Majormax My thanks again to all who replied - that makes sense and could explain indirectly the six decimal places observation that I had about the transactions.
|
|
|
|
|