+1 that software is legit. Are you a professional trader by any chance?
No, it's just a hobby and I fully support the Bitcoin movement.
Topic: ActiveMining Overview and Speculation Thread - page 74. (Read 168100 times)
No, it's just a hobby and I fully support the Bitcoin movement.
mind sharing what tool this is ? thanks
Sure, it's NinjaTrader. NT allows historical data import via CSV files. File specifications can be found here.
+1 that software is legit. Are you a professional trader by any chance?
Also plug for anyone interested in a Fast Hash Us group buy
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/us-group-buy-virtual-mining-corp-fast-hash-one-261708
mind sharing what tool this is ? thanks
Sure, it's NinjaTrader. NT allows historical data import via CSV files. File specifications can be found here.
Why the sudden selling???
Which sudden selling? The range .003 - .004 is traded for some time now.
mind sharing what tool this is ? thanks
It's a speculators dream
Why the sudden selling???
Which sudden selling? The range .003 - .004 is traded for some time now.
Why the sudden selling???
I was wondering the same. Possible confusion over the ActiveMining release? We're still sitting at .0036 and it seems to be bouncing around that number, so it isn't anything massive. I just see a lot of small sells consistently.
On the speculation front:
Has anyone ran any numbers with projected difficulty/hash rate to get a rough dividend projection for ActiveMining? I can run numbers, but their always seems to be some math-head out there that loves doing it and being way more thorough than myself.
What do you guys think we will see in 1mo, 3mo, 6mo? 
Why the sudden selling???
Do you even regurgitate already over used memes?
Sorry to spoil the party - in this thread, I'm still going to use AM :-P I have no interest in ASICMiner, old, slow, boring, high power consumption, ASIC technology (lol)
You can use whatever you like, people just wont know what you are talking about.
Well in that case, technically speaking, if you want to be pedantic about it, you should be referring to ASICMiner as G.ASICMINER-PT
Technically speaking to use "AM" in reference to ActiveMiner is more correct than using it in reference to ASICMiner, since the latter already includes an acronym. So ASICMiner should become ASICM.
I'm 90% being argumentative for the sake of it, and 10% because my primary interest at the moment is in AM (the active one) hence I'd prefer to type fewer characters - we're all smart people, I'm sure we can guess when someone is using the acronym "AM" in the ActiveMiner thread they are referring to the thread topic.
Technically speaking to use "AM" in reference to ActiveMiner is more correct than using it in reference to ASICMiner, since the latter already includes an acronym. So ASICMiner should become ASICM.
I'm 90% being argumentative for the sake of it, and 10% because my primary interest at the moment is in AM (the active one) hence I'd prefer to type fewer characters - we're all smart people, I'm sure we can guess when someone is using the acronym "AM" in the ActiveMiner thread they are referring to the thread topic.
Regardless of where your assets are and what is easier for you, personally, it would be appropriate for you to use the proper identifier with the corresponding stock. I'll drop this line of conversation at that, since we have more important things to discuss here LIKE ZOMGPROFITZ!!!!!11ELEVENTEEN!
I will pay
Premium of .0004 per
.003 strike put,
60 days expiration
My options model values these at .000179-.00029, so this is a nice premium, and 11.6% return in 60 days.
BTCT or BitFunder preferred.
20 BTC ready to go.
Premium of .0004 per
.003 strike put,
60 days expiration
My options model values these at .000179-.00029, so this is a nice premium, and 11.6% return in 60 days.
BTCT or BitFunder preferred.
20 BTC ready to go.
Bump
Well in that case, technically speaking, if you want to be pedantic about it, you should be referring to ASICMiner as G.ASICMINER-PT
Technically speaking to use "AM" in reference to ActiveMiner is more correct than using it in reference to ASICMiner, since the latter already includes an acronym. So ASICMiner should become ASICM.
I'm 90% being argumentative for the sake of it, and 10% because my primary interest at the moment is in AM (the active one) hence I'd prefer to type fewer characters - we're all smart people, I'm sure we can guess when someone is using the acronym "AM" in the ActiveMiner thread they are referring to the thread topic.
Technically speaking to use "AM" in reference to ActiveMiner is more correct than using it in reference to ASICMiner, since the latter already includes an acronym. So ASICMiner should become ASICM.
I'm 90% being argumentative for the sake of it, and 10% because my primary interest at the moment is in AM (the active one) hence I'd prefer to type fewer characters - we're all smart people, I'm sure we can guess when someone is using the acronym "AM" in the ActiveMiner thread they are referring to the thread topic.
how about a vote.. ACTM vs ACM vs ActM
Sorry to spoil the party - in this thread, I'm still going to use AM :-P I have no interest in ASICMiner, old, slow, boring, high power consumption, ASIC technology (lol)
The technology isn't really the point, we all know ACTM's technology is (will be) superior. The fact remains, however, that ASICMiner is already on the market, and you will only confuse people if you use their abbreviation when referring to ACTM.
Sorry to spoil the party - in this thread, I'm still going to use AM :-P I have no interest in ASICMiner, old, slow, boring, high power consumption, ASIC technology (lol)
ACTM it is 
I'm happy with ACTM, ACM, ATM or even ACMN.
Of those options I like ACTM, its the closest to ActM that we have been using anyway
+1 for ACTM
Back up!
I'm happy with ACTM, ACM, ATM or even ACMN.
Of those options I like ACTM, its the closest to ActM that we have been using anyway
+1
Having it in all caps just makes it easier, and ACTM is probably the most relevant abbreviation (Pronounced "Act-m").
I agree, companies usually have their stock abbreviation all in caps anyway. Since many of us have been using ActM already, the transition to ACTM shouldn't be too hard.
Jump to: