[ANN] Ethereum: Welcome to the Beginning

[mmitech]

Now that Homestead is out, the sell off will start soon, don't take my word for it because I am all out, it was a hell of a ride, not bad at all.

[becoin]

where is Poloniex?

Nobody is allowed to oppose this pump by selling. It will be on when pump is done.

[andulolika]

where is Poloniex?

Nobody is allowed to oppose this pump by selling. It will be on when pump is done.

Fail at your avatar, im on phone and i actually biten it.

[estenity]

poloniex site seems to be OK just now.

[DStefanov]

After the events in poloniex already all day already and I have no trust! Obviously, the whole thing with DDOS attacks was to keep the price of Ethereum and the whole thing is insiders!  
It also reflected immediately on the price of ETH! For me it was a false start at Homestead!

[RenegadeMan]

Am i the only one wondering about people compare 24h trading volume between btc and eth? if u look at coinmarketcap the btc trading volume is calculated only with btc/fiat pairs and eth trading volume is calculated with every pair. especially the eth/btc pair is only in the eth volume. so apples and pies??

ETH trading volume is more than a half as BTC volume. It would be 100 dollar/ETH this year.

did you read my post or did you stop reading after my first sentence?

Yes, because there is no BTC/BTC pair. In other words, BTC is a FIAT too.

 

What a confusing interaction with poorly worded sentences that are ambiguous. If people would spend just a few more seconds checking that what they've written makes sense there'd be less back and forth querying as to what each person means in their responses.

Just to take your initial posting KLONE::Vader and try to understand what you're saying:

Am i the only one wondering about people compare 24h trading volume between btc and eth? if u look at coinmarketcap the btc trading volume is calculated only with btc/fiat pairs and eth trading volume is calculated with every pair.

So you're querying whether you're the only one thinking about the aspect of the comparison between BTC and ETH that's failing to take into account ETH's volume being across BTC/ETH and ETH/FIAT pairs?

So within the context of that question then, what do you mean by this?

especially the eth/btc pair is only in the eth volume.

That appears to be contradicting your previous assertion "...eth trading volume is calculated with every pair." (or I'm misinterpreting your statement there).

Then this:

so apples and pies??

Again, ambiguity means I'm not sure what you're saying. The regular use of the expression when someone's pointing out that a comparison isn't valid because the two things being compared are fundamentally different is generally "apples and oranges". Is that what you're getting at with "apples and pies"? (or is the apple in the pie so it's something with nested levels of deeper complexity? Ha!)


I'm not sure but I would expect CoinMarketCap treat each and every trade as part of the volume, but with the distinction that BTC only includes FIAT trades as it sits at the top. So trades in ETH/USD (or other FIAT) and trades in ETH/BTC all add up to make the volume for ETH. In BTC though, you can't trade for BTC (obviously), only FIAT so yes (of course) BTC volume only consists of BTC/FIAT trades.

I don't think that means anything in particular in terms of ETH stats being overly different to BTC stats. A trade is a trade. When we look at BTC volume we don't go and get all the alt-coins' volume and add that onto BTC too; only the BTC/FIAT trade pairs are measured.

[becoin]

It is amazing to see how many people think they have missed bitcoin and hope that Ethereum gives them a second chance. It'll be a rude wake up though. But... you can continue to dream on. LOL

[Blazin8888]

It is amazing to see how many people think they have missed bitcoin and hope that Ethereum gives them a second chance. It'll be a rude wake up though. But... you can continue to dream on. LOL

Its funny to read your posts and see how butt hurt you are for missing the entry point for this gold mine

[mmitech]

It is amazing to see how many people think they have missed bitcoin and hope that Ethereum gives them a second chance. It'll be a rude wake up though. But... you can continue to dream on. LOL

Although we all know that this is an obvious bubble, you are just butt hurt, the same like many other delusional Bitcoiners who decided to stick to their holy Bitcoin cult.

[KLONE::Vader]

@renegademan: eth can be traded for fiat or btc. btc can be traded for fiat or eth. so why is the btc/eth or eth/btc volume only in the eth volume? i dont understand. and what happens if the eth volume and marked cap is higher that the btc volume and marked cap? then the eth/btc volume is only in the btc volume? maybe im really confused and i dont understand it...

[RenegadeMan]

@renegademan: eth can be traded for fiat or btc. btc can be traded for fiat or eth. so why is the btc/eth or eth/btc volume only in the eth volume? i dont understand. and what happens if the eth volume and marked cap is higher that the btc volume and marked cap? then the eth/btc volume is only in the btc volume? maybe im really confused and i dont understand it...

I'm guessing (and someone please correct me if this is wrong) that upon the birth of the first Alt (which was LTC) the volume being reported for LTC was purely LTC/BTC. Then when the first exchange allowed direct purchase of LTC with USD or other FIAT currencies, that volume was added on to the reported LTC volume too. But the volume for an Alt trade is only ever reported within the Alt's volume stats, otherwise every time someone buys an Alt using BTC, that volume would have to also be added on to the BTC stats and that would be unworkable and misleading (as the BTC volume would be out of all proportion to what's really going on).

Sooo....if (and it's a big IF) ETH was to overtake BTC and become the dominant crypto, CoinMarketCap may have to think about turning the tables and only reporting ETH/FIAT trades and then putting the ETH/BTC trades into BTC's volume figures.

I hope that makes sense.

[Piston Honda]

titanic-like

[becoin]

Sooo....if (and it's a big IF) ETH was to overtake BTC and become the dominant crypto,

Crypto... what?
Bitcoin is money. Ether is 'fuel'. You haven't even read the Ethereum white paper.

[liberspirita]

@renegademan: eth can be traded for fiat or btc. btc can be traded for fiat or eth. so why is the btc/eth or eth/btc volume only in the eth volume? i dont understand. and what happens if the eth volume and marked cap is higher that the btc volume and marked cap? then the eth/btc volume is only in the btc volume? maybe im really confused and i dont understand it...

I'm guessing (and someone please correct me if this is wrong) that upon the birth of the first Alt (which was LTC) the volume being reported for LTC was purely LTC/BTC. Then when the first exchange allowed direct purchase of LTC with USD or other FIAT currencies, that volume was added on to the reported LTC volume too. But the volume for an Alt trade is only ever reported within the Alt's volume stats, otherwise every time someone buys an Alt using BTC, that volume would have to also be added on to the BTC stats and that would be unworkable and misleading (as the BTC volume would be out of all proportion to what's really going on).

Sooo....if (and it's a big IF) ETH was to overtake BTC and become the dominant crypto, CoinMarketCap may have to think about turning the tables and only reporting ETH/FIAT trades and then putting the ETH/BTC trades into BTC's volume figures.

I hope that makes sense.

ETH to BTC --> BTC
BTC to ETH --> ETH
simple.

[RenegadeMan]

Sooo....if (and it's a big IF) ETH was to overtake BTC and become the dominant crypto,

Crypto... what?
Bitcoin is money. Ether is 'fuel'. You haven't even read the Ethereum white paper.

How can you jump to such a conclusion when you don't know anything about me, who I am or what I've done. For the purposes of helping clarify the issues around CoinMarketCap reporting volume, calling ETH a "crypto" is perfectly valid. If I wanted to get into a whole other discussion about Etherium's properties and architecture I wouldn't be going there within this interaction.

And I have read the white paper so put a sock it.

[RenegadeMan]

@renegademan: eth can be traded for fiat or btc. btc can be traded for fiat or eth. so why is the btc/eth or eth/btc volume only in the eth volume? i dont understand. and what happens if the eth volume and marked cap is higher that the btc volume and marked cap? then the eth/btc volume is only in the btc volume? maybe im really confused and i dont understand it...

I'm guessing (and someone please correct me if this is wrong) that upon the birth of the first Alt (which was LTC) the volume being reported for LTC was purely LTC/BTC. Then when the first exchange allowed direct purchase of LTC with USD or other FIAT currencies, that volume was added on to the reported LTC volume too. But the volume for an Alt trade is only ever reported within the Alt's volume stats, otherwise every time someone buys an Alt using BTC, that volume would have to also be added on to the BTC stats and that would be unworkable and misleading (as the BTC volume would be out of all proportion to what's really going on).

Sooo....if (and it's a big IF) ETH was to overtake BTC and become the dominant crypto, CoinMarketCap may have to think about turning the tables and only reporting ETH/FIAT trades and then putting the ETH/BTC trades into BTC's volume figures.

I hope that makes sense.

ETH to BTC --> BTC
BTC to ETH --> ETH
simple.

No, it's not "simple" because of the ability to also trade both into FIAT which alters how BTC is measured in comparison to how Alts are measured.

[KLONE::Vader]

@renegademan: eth can be traded for fiat or btc. btc can be traded for fiat or eth. so why is the btc/eth or eth/btc volume only in the eth volume? i dont understand. and what happens if the eth volume and marked cap is higher that the btc volume and marked cap? then the eth/btc volume is only in the btc volume? maybe im really confused and i dont understand it...

I'm guessing (and someone please correct me if this is wrong) that upon the birth of the first Alt (which was LTC) the volume being reported for LTC was purely LTC/BTC. Then when the first exchange allowed direct purchase of LTC with USD or other FIAT currencies, that volume was added on to the reported LTC volume too. But the volume for an Alt trade is only ever reported within the Alt's volume stats, otherwise every time someone buys an Alt using BTC, that volume would have to also be added on to the BTC stats and that would be unworkable and misleading (as the BTC volume would be out of all proportion to what's really going on).

Sooo....if (and it's a big IF) ETH was to overtake BTC and become the dominant crypto, CoinMarketCap may have to think about turning the tables and only reporting ETH/FIAT trades and then putting the ETH/BTC trades into BTC's volume figures.

I hope that makes sense.

ETH to BTC --> BTC
BTC to ETH --> ETH
simple.

?? on polo is eth/btc and btc/eth

[liberspirita]

ETH to BTC --> BTC
BTC to ETH --> ETH
simple.

No, it's not "simple" because of the ability to also trade both into FIAT which alters how BTC is measured in comparison to how Alts are measured.

Of course, and that's why BTC's volumes are so high. most of its volume in entry is going straightly to altcoins.

[KLONE::Vader]

@renegademan: but if eth volume is higher and they change the way to track it btc is higher again and vice versa

[kadrek]

Would someone point me to a good guide for mining with AMD cards? What kind of hashrate can I expect from 270x's? Thanks!