Organic
Growth
In my pants
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 22323. (Read 26623248 times)
March 24, 2015, 05:12:37 AM
March 24, 2015, 05:12:26 AM
thats it, i wont be buying a single coin until it goes sub 100$.
March 24, 2015, 05:05:58 AM
More longs bulls 
March 24, 2015, 05:05:09 AM
The other half of the people on Earth will take action, 
March 24, 2015, 04:58:52 AM
March 24, 2015, 04:56:05 AM
NASDAQ TECHNOLOGY is dumping
March 24, 2015, 04:50:28 AM
At 9am London time the price was 269.6 on coinbase. That's what the lol was for. And no, 266 is not
Okay, consider the triumphalist word "well" cheerfully withdrawn!!
Below 270 was my bet, and thats good enough for me.
March 24, 2015, 04:40:55 AM
World Bank Report: Bitcoin is a 'Naturally Occurring' Ponzi
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/cryptocurrency-news-round-bitcoin-ponzi-scheme-bitpay-facebook-app-bitlicences-1457223
Thats not what tht report says at all. In fact it states that "Bitcoin is [ not a ] Ponzi scheme"
What it says is that Bitcoin has the potential to be a speculate bubble investment, by the actions of promoters who pump it up to the point that a rise in value is a self fulfilling prophesy. Of course that cant go on forever, so when it crashes, the last ones in will lose the most.
In that way it is no different to the property market in times of a speculative bubble. Everyone believes the price will go up, banks make more money available ( because borrowers now have more collateral), until it stops. Then some people are left owing $1,000,000 on property now worth $100,000.
So bitcoin is NOT a ponzi sheme. But if speculators are allowed to abuse it, then it will collapse as surely as if it had been.
Just remember, that 'the idea and infrastructure of bitcoin will always be worth more than the coins themselves' [ to an investor]
March 24, 2015, 04:28:42 AM
Looks like the majority have it regarding the poll.
Well below 270, and its 9am here in London.
Well below 270, and its 9am here in London.
lol
The high so far today on finex was 270.8
"Monday the 23rd price" is a bit ambiguous. I would interpret it as the average price of coins traded for USD during 23 March GMT.
"Well below 270" is less ambiguous. One could just check what coindesk puts as average price when the day is over.
Average for the 36hr day didnt get much better (was about 266). Is that still worth a LOL, or is it well below 270?
At 9am London time the price was 269.6 on coinbase. That's what the lol was for. And no, 266 is not well below 270.
March 24, 2015, 04:10:40 AM
WSJ article! Up up... 
http://www.wsj.com/articles/nasdaq-to-provide-trading-technology-for-bitcoin-marketplace-1427140006
http://www.wsj.com/articles/nasdaq-to-provide-trading-technology-for-bitcoin-marketplace-1427140006
Buy on the HEADLINE!!! Sell on the second paragraph.
March 24, 2015, 04:07:36 AM
begin on start side of the river with wolf, goat , and cabbage - go across the river with the goat , leaving the cabbage and wolf behind (wolf won't eat the cabbage) , leave the goat on the target side , go back to the beginning side of the river (leaving the goat on the target side) , bring the wolf back with you and leave it on the target side , bring the goat back with you to the beginning side (leaving the wolf on the target side) , then , leave the goat behind on the beginning side of the river and bring the cabbage with you to the target side of the river , come back with empty boat , leaving cabbage and wolf on the target side of the river , return to the beginning side of the river to retrieve the goat , and then return to the target side of the river with goat, cabbage , and wolf , all intact ... easy
Correct, but there's a shorter solution. Click here: http://brainden.com/crossing-river.htm there is a lot more where the riddle came from. Beautiful puzzles and - BTW: you're hired!
Why do we bitcoiners over complicate everything?
First step is to slaughter both the wolf and the goat on the shore. Now, the order of carriage is of no relevence. Where in the original requirements did it state that the wolf and the goat had to be alive on the other side? Was he starting a japanese petting zoo?
March 24, 2015, 03:58:57 AM
March 24, 2015, 03:40:46 AM
Looks like the majority have it regarding the poll.
Well below 270, and its 9am here in London.
Well below 270, and its 9am here in London.
lol
The high so far today on finex was 270.8
"Monday the 23rd price" is a bit ambiguous. I would interpret it as the average price of coins traded for USD during 23 March GMT.
"Well below 270" is less ambiguous. One could just check what coindesk puts as average price when the day is over.
Average for the 36hr day didnt get much better (was about 266). Is that still worth a LOL, or is it well below 270?
March 24, 2015, 02:58:52 AM
March 24, 2015, 02:48:11 AM
Here's another bit of deduction that's even vaguely on topic. This is why I think satoshi's coins will never move: https://bitscan.com/articles/satoshis-millions-gone-for-good
March 24, 2015, 02:28:25 AM
oooo sorry incorrect - cannot split into 6 and 6 - one of the people is lighter *OR* heavier , splitting 6 and 6 cannot reveal whether the heavy/light person is on either side ... 
... (the heavy side of 6 could reveal that those 3 vs 3 of them are equal on the 2nd weighing , and leave you with an inability to determine who's the odd duck out of the 6 who weren't on the heavy side of the 1st weighing) ... it's a tricky one ... 6v6 was my first inclination as well , but the key is 1 of 12 is lighter OR heavier ...
*haha i'd hire ya anyway you seem clever enough
*the answer involves first doing 4vs4 , then eliminating either 8 or 4 from the 1st weighing , next you switch up the teams a little bit , assuming the 8 are NOT eliminated , in order to eliminate a few more , eventually you get to 3 or 2 that can be weighed , of course if 8 are eliminated , then figuring out who's the odd duck out of 4 with 2 weighings isn't terrible difficult at all
... (the heavy side of 6 could reveal that those 3 vs 3 of them are equal on the 2nd weighing , and leave you with an inability to determine who's the odd duck out of the 6 who weren't on the heavy side of the 1st weighing) ... it's a tricky one ... 6v6 was my first inclination as well , but the key is 1 of 12 is lighter OR heavier ...*haha i'd hire ya anyway you seem clever enough
*the answer involves first doing 4vs4 , then eliminating either 8 or 4 from the 1st weighing , next you switch up the teams a little bit , assuming the 8 are NOT eliminated , in order to eliminate a few more , eventually you get to 3 or 2 that can be weighed , of course if 8 are eliminated , then figuring out who's the odd duck out of 4 with 2 weighings isn't terrible difficult at all
March 24, 2015, 02:23:19 AM
Quote
oooo sorry incorrect - cannot split into 6 and 6 - one of the people is lighter *OR* heavier , splitting 6 and 6 cannot reveal whether the heavy/light person is on either side ... Wink ... (the heavy side of 6 could reveal that those 3 vs 3 of them are equal on the 2nd weighing , and leave you with an inability to determine who's the odd duck out of the 6 who weren't on the heavy side of the 1st weighing) ... it's a tricky one ... 6v6 was my first inclination as well , but the key is 1 of 12 is lighter OR heavier ...
In this case you will have to split the odds:
Heavier person case:
1. You split them in half (six persons per side)
2. Take the heaviest side and split them once more (3 persons per side)
3. Take the heaviest side and you end up with 3 persons.
4. Choose randomly the 2 of them and weight them.
If they're equal, you found the one outside. Otherwise the heavier one will be revealed by the balance.
Thinner person case:
Then you have to repeat the process for the case the person is thinner than the others.
1. You split them in half (six persons per side)
2. Take the lightest side and split them once more (3 persons per side)
3. Take the lightest side and you end up with 3 persons.
4. Choose randomly the 2 of them and weight them.
If they're equal, you found the one outside. Otherwise the thinner one will be revealed by the balance.
There is another way by dividing the weight of the persons you weighted and find if they're of the same weight every time, (ie: first time total weight/6, second time total weight/3 etc), but... I prefer simpler solutions
PS: It seems I missed the job then
March 24, 2015, 02:17:49 AM
Took profits on yesterday's long trade off the nasdaq news. Waiting mode activated.
March 24, 2015, 02:13:29 AM
oh and here's a fun one back for you all - was on brooklyn 99 last week or two - you've got 12 people on an island , 11 of which are the same weight , and only a balance beam to tell them apart , and you can only use the balance beam 3 times total to tell them apart - which one of the 12 people is the heavy or light one ?
March 24, 2015, 01:58:53 AM
Jump to: