nobody cares about your fake walls, bears
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 26114. (Read 26709760 times)
August 28, 2014, 02:30:58 PM
hehehe
nobody cares about your fake walls, bears
nobody cares about your fake walls, bears
August 28, 2014, 02:28:07 PM
Its not over yet.
But I think all of this volume is fake so who cares?
But I think all of this volume is fake so who cares?
August 28, 2014, 02:26:19 PM
509.false alarme its not happening
August 28, 2014, 02:24:25 PM
I can feel it in my nether regions, $510 is going to be so amazing!
August 28, 2014, 02:17:54 PM
510.OMGITSHAPPENING O_O
August 28, 2014, 02:16:30 PM
'ere we go...
August 28, 2014, 02:15:05 PM
...
Well, the whole point of blockchain-based technology is precisely that it takes trust out of the equation completely...
Well, the whole point of blockchain-based technology is precisely that it takes trust out of the equation completely...
He brought up several interesting points which you might have missed. I'll try to put them in different wrappers, hopefully not losing the meaning in the process.
Even though frequently Jorge says a variety of goofy things, he makes a lot of good points regarding the barriers in terms of transitioning into the use of electronic voting through the block chain - however, that does NOT mean that various smaller scale operations of block chain voting could not be implemented.
xyzzy099, on the other hand, seems to have a preference to just stick to his points NO matter what. He does not want facts or logic to get in the way of his viewpoint.
If you'd like to post some support for that contention, I will be glad to address it.
My only point in this exchange was that this was a technology worth looking into. I have not seen any evidence that would refute that simple claim. Have you?
August 28, 2014, 02:09:28 PM
...
Well, the whole point of blockchain-based technology is precisely that it takes trust out of the equation completely...
Well, the whole point of blockchain-based technology is precisely that it takes trust out of the equation completely...
He brought up several interesting points which you might have missed. I'll try to put them in different wrappers, hopefully not losing the meaning in the process.
Even though frequently Jorge says a variety of goofy things, he makes a lot of good points regarding the barriers in terms of transitioning into the use of electronic voting through the block chain - however, that does NOT mean that various smaller scale operations of block chain voting could not be implemented.
xyzzy099, on the other hand, seems to have a preference to just stick to his points NO matter what. He does not want facts or logic to get in the way of his viewpoint.
August 28, 2014, 02:09:01 PM
Weekend forecast?
August 28, 2014, 02:05:13 PM
Who was it, who posted this really cool log()Log() trendline in december or january? I want to see how far we are below the trendline now. Next bubble should be gigantic
August 28, 2014, 02:04:31 PM
^
August 28, 2014, 02:01:01 PM
1/2 a million dollars required to move bitcoin a fraction of a percent in either direction, such liquidity, very intense, wow
IMO it's good that whales are back in business.
August 28, 2014, 02:00:19 PM
The coinsman article says the operation currently accounts for "perhaps 5 % of the total network". Taking that claim at face value, that's 180 BTC per day, or 5400 a month, 2,700,000 USD at current rates. Minus electricity, 1,700,000 USD is left to cover other costs and startup expenses if the price remains stable (ha!). Is that reasonable? I don't know.
GOOD Eye!!!! That sounds pretty reasonable and really the remaining $1.7 million per month seems to be an amount to work with in terms of other operational costs.
I doubt that they are cashing out their BTC at these prices, but we do NOT really have any evidence regarding what large scale miners are doing - except some hearsay reports that they are cashing out small percentages of the BTC (less than 25% of their holdings)... yet the cash out rate is likely going to fluctuate depending on a variety of factors, including long term vision of future price and ability of miners to pay expenses through other means in order to weather some of the low price period until maybe $3k coins come about or at least maybe to cash some of them out at various price points as the price is rising- for example: $600, $700, $800 etc.. ? And, probably they have various formulas in place to help to predetermine how many to cash out in what time periods and depending upon whether the price is rising fast or slow or if the price is dropping.
August 28, 2014, 01:59:26 PM
August 28, 2014, 01:47:04 PM
As there is a good chance many of the asics are already run at a loss.
This is statement is unfounded at all. Electricity could be very cheap in some part of China
Quote
Maybe it's real but I don't buy it. Especailly as if "secret" in China, it would send out a massive heat signature and the authorities would think they are growing cannabis in those buildings.
So what? The police will just find a computer farm instead of a cannabis farm.
Which may be why asics can be run at a loss
August 28, 2014, 01:47:00 PM
1/2 a million dollars required to move bitcoin a fraction of a percent in either direction, such liquidity, very intense, wow
August 28, 2014, 01:46:11 PM
There may be some truth to what you are saying, but I doubt that potential bitcoin investors are giving as much weight to MTGOX factors as you are making out of the situation. My understanding is that investment and adoption has considered to go up in the BTC space at a considerable rate, in spite of the GOX collapse in February and some of the later news of its various fallouts. Accordingly adoption and investment and liquidation opportunities are going to help to drive the next upward price wave.. whether that occurs this week, in the next couple of weeks, in the next couple of months or even a year down the road.
By the way, I doubt it is going to take another year before we find a new ATH.. that will likely soar BTC prices into at least the $3-5K range.. and possibly higher, if such growth is delayed further. In that regard, I am glad to be amongst early adopters (not as early as some but NOT as late as others, too).
By the way, I doubt it is going to take another year before we find a new ATH.. that will likely soar BTC prices into at least the $3-5K range.. and possibly higher, if such growth is delayed further. In that regard, I am glad to be amongst early adopters (not as early as some but NOT as late as others, too).
I respect your doubts and guesses, because it's a speculation forum afterall. But, if you are an experienced investor, then these "little" things are The things that you have to consider when investing. To me, the market seems weak and it's perfectly logical to me why. Most of the people here like to think that the weak market is all one conspiracy, and there are always whales around the corner who will throw millions at BTC any moment now.. any moment now.. it will surely happen any moment now. To me, things are more simple then that. Currently it's just very hard to convince someone new to buy bitcoins without looking like a snake oil salesman.
Serious question: under what minimum circumstances in the future would you concede that bitcoin is here to stay and will have at least a role to play in the earths global financial role moving forward?
For instance at what market cap would you finally give respect to bitcoin? Under what kind of other conditions.
You write it off as gambling and speculation now. When would you concede it to be much more than that?
And I'm not asking for your utopian hope, I'm asking for your truth assuming bitcoin continues on it's current trajectory of uses and potential uses.
August 28, 2014, 01:45:18 PM
As there is a good chance many of the asics are already run at a loss.
This is statement is unfounded at all. Electricity could be very cheap in some part of China
Quote
Maybe it's real but I don't buy it. Especailly as if "secret" in China, it would send out a massive heat signature and the authorities would think they are growing cannabis in those buildings.
So what? The police will just find a computer farm instead of a cannabis farm.
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://www.360doc.com/relevant/212102353_more.shtml&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%25E4%25B8%25AD%25E5%259C%258B%25E9%259B%25BB%25E5%258A%259B%25E6%2588%2590%25E6%259C%25AC%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3Dzmj%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26channel%3Drcs
1.00 USD = 6.14322 CNY
1 CNY = 0.16 cent
very low cost electricy in china is about 0.5 CNY (8 cent per KW/h)
even if the price of EQ is $2000 per TH and it the most effienet machine @ 0.7 watts per GH then it's still run at a loss and at current rates would never break even. Even if the EQ was free, and it's the most efficient Asic available it would still only be making $12 a month by December (at current difficulty increase). Similar conditions (only more extreme) than October last year. BTC is very undervalued.
As for the authorities, finding such an operation I suspect the tax man might be interested, I doubt they would just walk away after finding a 1/4 of a billion $ setup.
Didn't you used to be a bear or at least frequently making bearish type comments? Have you converted, or am I getting you mixed up with some other poster?
August 28, 2014, 01:44:58 PM
...
Well, the whole point of blockchain-based technology is precisely that it takes trust out of the equation completely...
Well, the whole point of blockchain-based technology is precisely that it takes trust out of the equation completely...
He brought up several interesting points which you might have missed. I'll try to put them in different wrappers, hopefully not losing the meaning in the process.
1. Assume a magical black box which, when the "press" button is pressed, prints out the *exact* result of an election. Also assume that it is the definitive Black Box--while the result is [by definition] invariably correct, no one knows how it works. It's a hypothetical, accept everything above as a given.
What do you think the odds of such a thing becoming the accepted method of national elections?
2. People do not trust technology--they don't understand it. They do not understand most of modern technology, including simple stuff like ATMs, but they do not need to trust it--they trust the agencies behind it (banks, in case of ATMs). This may be absurd, but that's how it is. There is no similar agency backing the blockchain, and Joe Sixpack has a natural distrust of eggheads.
3. Recounts. There is little to suggest that a recount in conventional elections would produce results more accurate than the initial tallying. But it makes people feel better. Those tangible slips of paper, as ridiculous and flawed as they are, are used even when a purely digital apparatus recording choices directly from a keyboard to electronic storage (like a hugely-redundant RAID or something) would be cheaper, more convenient, and [provably] more reliable. Go figure, but that's how it is.
Or, to summarize all the points: Let's not try to improve living conditions through rational insight, because the irrational fears of what is possibly a majority of the population would be offended by the improvements at first.
(Not attacking you, NotLambchop. Just the message you relay
)I guess I'm not being clear (and don't worry attacking me, my best friends are all serious pricks. But fun.). The reason I repeated JorgeStolfi's points is one of his posts made me realise that I wasn't seeing all aspect of the election problem, or rather that other people were seeing it differently from me. I was looking at it as a techy, "Is it possible to create a foolproof, incorruptible and practical voting system based on the blockchain." JorgeStolfi pointed out that the technical aspect was not the gist of it. From his perspective, the technical side was not even the relevant part. According to him (or, rather, how I understood him), the most important aspect of a voting system was not its accuracy or even resistance to tampering, but *how acceptable and irrefutable it is to the losing party*.
I haven't thought about it that way, but, after reading his posts, I was able to see it in a totally new light. It hit me that the problem I was trying to solve wasn't even necessarily the correct one. One of those "aha" moments.
I'm a sucker for stuff like that. I may not agree with his notion that it's a case of rigging a turbojet to pop popcorn, but I like "getting" how other people see stuff.
I'm not being too clear, but hopefully you get my drift. It's like spending endless time working out the minutia of a car's suspension geometry, and finding out that the only thing people care about has nothing to do with handling--they just want it in powder blue.
*And I get that this reads like some peaking acidhead's ramblings about his latest revelation.
August 28, 2014, 01:43:15 PM
the walls are not fake they are in real danger of being eaten at any moment
its not looking good, but bullish is the market, and so price hardly moves despite intense pressure.
its not looking good, but bullish is the market, and so price hardly moves despite intense pressure.
Jump to: