Double top? Or possible retracement back up?
This will be answered in 24 hours.
I am already giving up the hope for double top, but it does not matter, since my strategy is intact.
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 31722. (Read 26608252 times)
November 21, 2013, 05:00:59 PM
This will be answered in 24 hours.
I am already giving up the hope for double top, but it does not matter, since my strategy is intact.
November 21, 2013, 05:00:25 PM
Fine, you're arrogant because you can't stop talking about how much better you are than US citizens 
.
You don't know shit about what has happened to our populace and our land. Corporations and wealthy individuals own everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
BTW, I don't buy the whole capitalist-socialist dichotomy. Everything is shades of gray, and it is the extremes you have to watch out for.
You seem to want to restrict the term arrogance to what is probably better termed "US exceptionalism". Yes, this is a form of arrogance, but arrogance can take many forms.
i don't have much of an opinion of u.s. citizens really. but the consensus about them is well established. i also don't buy the capitalist-socialist dichotomy... as it's commonly illustrated. .You don't know shit about what has happened to our populace and our land. Corporations and wealthy individuals own everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
BTW, I don't buy the whole capitalist-socialist dichotomy. Everything is shades of gray, and it is the extremes you have to watch out for.
You seem to want to restrict the term arrogance to what is probably better termed "US exceptionalism". Yes, this is a form of arrogance, but arrogance can take many forms.
i think the perceived arrogance of people from the US is much due to US exceptionalism, yes -- i was making that point because that is what non-US folks are exposed to. but i am talking about the dictionary definition of "arrogance".
sure, there is great wealth inequality in the u.s. that doesn't mean there isn't far greater wealth inequality elsewhere, such as in South America. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Gini_Coefficient_World_CIA_Report_2009.svg
it also doesn't speak to the effect of historic exploitation of the southern hemisphere by the north. over 53% of world net worth (based on PPP) is concentrated in North America and Europe, which has less then 15% of world population. when we talk about wealth inequality, surely comparing that of the u.s. with that of that of bolivia is sort of ridiculous, right? are we talking about being entitled to basic human necessities, perhaps education? or are we talking about being entitled to a basic minimum income? or big screen tvs? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth
in the u.s., when people complain about entitlements, i hear complaints about people buying big screen tvs with welfare checks. (i take that with grain of salt) surely, you don't think that these are the sort of entitlements that Brazilians seek? that they are arrogant for fighting for? especially given the nature of wealth inequality?
am i arrogant for fighting for a better education system for my children? i must feel so self-important?
it's one thing if the state does not exists. it's another thing if the state will exists for the forseeable future, and exploits, and allows exploitation. in the latter case, i think it is only reasonable for people to try to reform the state, to legally prescribe what had once been unwritten -- their ownership, their rights, their dignity. even if i do not support reformism. i still do not see this as arrogance. someone who is arrogant by definition does not see themselves as equal to others.
As I already tried to explain, we have the same master and we should work on an escape plan. But you would rather argue over who gets whipped the hardest. The fact is, state boundaries only exist for the general populace. Corporations are transnational. The state has become a tool for them to divide and conquer.
i'd rather not argue over that, but felt it was necessary since your assertions about entitlements (and thus, their relation to "arrogance") are relative to the context of the u.s. and thus have very limited application. part of the issue, also, is that our proposed escape plans are likely quite different.I never did that. You assumed I did, and then argued with me about arrogance.
Okay, whaa whaa whaa...take this to some other thread. We're speculating on bitcoin, not who's panties are in a tighter bunch. Please, for the love of the flying spaghetti monster, find a different place to play.
November 21, 2013, 05:00:07 PM
Mortgage the house and buy some back. Or get a second loan and buy some back. You will eventually be able to pay of the second loan and still have some coins in case (which there is a decent chance) we get to $100,000 and beyond.
Only on bitcointalk can you find this sort of advice. My goodness.Debt is so deeply rooted in US folks mentality that it hurts. I really have a simpathy for Bitchick, I'm a long-term bull myself, but came on... To advise someone to get in debt (even worse, to mortgage his house) to buy a high-risk experimental currency is so fucked up it blows my mind. We where speaking about "opportunities you cannot afford to lose"... Well, being in debt or losing your house to gamble is something NOBODY should afford to do.
And that type of mentality leads me to think that eventually BTC will implode sooner than later, people tends to auto-destruction and greed is one of the main mind-fuckers.
Mortgage debt might as well be free right now, and having your entire net worth in a house is even stupider than having your entire net worth in bitcoins.
Bitchick is right.
If he owns nothing but a house he should take out a small enough mortgage that his salary could cover it if need be. The money should be invested in a diversified portfolio that should include some bitcoins. His net worth doesn't change, and he isn't relying on his local real estate market to maintain it.
November 21, 2013, 04:59:05 PM
Fine, you're arrogant because you can't stop talking about how much better you are than US citizens .
You don't know shit about what has happened to our populace and our land. Corporations and wealthy individuals own everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
BTW, I don't buy the whole capitalist-socialist dichotomy. Everything is shades of gray, and it is the extremes you have to watch out for.
You seem to want to restrict the term arrogance to what is probably better termed "US exceptionalism". Yes, this is a form of arrogance, but arrogance can take many forms.
i don't have much of an opinion of u.s. citizens really. but the consensus about them is well established. i also don't buy the capitalist-socialist dichotomy... as it's commonly illustrated. .You don't know shit about what has happened to our populace and our land. Corporations and wealthy individuals own everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
BTW, I don't buy the whole capitalist-socialist dichotomy. Everything is shades of gray, and it is the extremes you have to watch out for.
You seem to want to restrict the term arrogance to what is probably better termed "US exceptionalism". Yes, this is a form of arrogance, but arrogance can take many forms.
i think the perceived arrogance of people from the US is much due to US exceptionalism, yes -- i was making that point because that is what non-US folks are exposed to. but i am talking about the dictionary definition of "arrogance".
sure, there is great wealth inequality in the u.s. that doesn't mean there isn't far greater wealth inequality elsewhere, such as in South America. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Gini_Coefficient_World_CIA_Report_2009.svg
it also doesn't speak to the effect of historic exploitation of the southern hemisphere by the north. over 53% of world net worth (based on PPP) is concentrated in North America and Europe, which has less then 15% of world population. when we talk about wealth inequality, surely comparing that of the u.s. with that of that of bolivia is sort of ridiculous, right? are we talking about being entitled to basic human necessities, perhaps education? or are we talking about being entitled to a basic minimum income? or big screen tvs? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth
in the u.s., when people complain about entitlements, i hear complaints about people buying big screen tvs with welfare checks. (i take that with grain of salt) surely, you don't think that these are the sort of entitlements that Brazilians seek? that they are arrogant for fighting for? especially given the nature of wealth inequality?
am i arrogant for fighting for a better education system for my children? i must feel so self-important?
it's one thing if the state does not exists. it's another thing if the state will exists for the forseeable future, and exploits, and allows exploitation. in the latter case, i think it is only reasonable for people to try to reform the state, to legally prescribe what had once been unwritten -- their ownership, their rights, their dignity. even if i do not support reformism. i still do not see this as arrogance. someone who is arrogant by definition does not see themselves as equal to others.
As I already tried to explain, we have the same master and we should work on an escape plan. But you would rather argue over who gets whipped the hardest. The fact is, state boundaries only exist for the general populace. Corporations are transnational. The state has become a tool for them to divide and conquer.
i'd rather not argue over that, but felt it was necessary since your assertions about entitlements (and thus, their relation to "arrogance") are relative to the context of the u.s. and thus have very limited application. part of the issue, also, is that our proposed escape plans are likely quite different.I never did that. You assumed I did, and then argued with me about arrogance. So your issue is with your own misunderstanding that I immediately rebuked before this devolved into a pissing contest.
November 21, 2013, 04:55:13 PM
Fine, you're arrogant because you can't stop talking about how much better you are than US citizens .
You don't know shit about what has happened to our populace and our land. Corporations and wealthy individuals own everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
BTW, I don't buy the whole capitalist-socialist dichotomy. Everything is shades of gray, and it is the extremes you have to watch out for.
You seem to want to restrict the term arrogance to what is probably better termed "US exceptionalism". Yes, this is a form of arrogance, but arrogance can take many forms.
i don't have much of an opinion of u.s. citizens really. but the consensus about them is well established. i also don't buy the capitalist-socialist dichotomy... as it's commonly illustrated. .You don't know shit about what has happened to our populace and our land. Corporations and wealthy individuals own everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
BTW, I don't buy the whole capitalist-socialist dichotomy. Everything is shades of gray, and it is the extremes you have to watch out for.
You seem to want to restrict the term arrogance to what is probably better termed "US exceptionalism". Yes, this is a form of arrogance, but arrogance can take many forms.
i think the perceived arrogance of people from the US is much due to US exceptionalism, yes -- i was making that point because that is what non-US folks are exposed to. but i am talking about the dictionary definition of "arrogance".
sure, there is great wealth inequality in the u.s. that doesn't mean there isn't far greater wealth inequality elsewhere, such as in South America. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Gini_Coefficient_World_CIA_Report_2009.svg
it also doesn't speak to the effect of historic exploitation of the southern hemisphere by the north. over 53% of world net worth (based on PPP) is concentrated in North America and Europe, which has less then 15% of world population. when we talk about wealth inequality, surely comparing that of the u.s. with that of that of bolivia is sort of ridiculous, right? are we talking about being entitled to basic human necessities, perhaps education? or are we talking about being entitled to a basic minimum income? or big screen tvs? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth
in the u.s., when people complain about entitlements, i hear complaints about people buying big screen tvs with welfare checks. (i take that with grain of salt) surely, you don't think that these are the sort of entitlements that Brazilians seek? that they are arrogant for fighting for? especially given the nature of wealth inequality?
am i arrogant for fighting for a better education system for my children? i must feel so self-important?
it's one thing if the state does not exists. it's another thing if the state will exists for the forseeable future, and exploits, and allows exploitation. in the latter case, i think it is only reasonable for people to try to reform the state, to legally prescribe what had once been unwritten -- their ownership, their rights, their dignity. even if i do not support reformism. i still do not see this as arrogance. someone who is arrogant by definition does not see themselves as equal to others.
As I already tried to explain, we have the same master and we should work on an escape plan. But you would rather argue over who gets whipped the hardest. The fact is, state boundaries only exist for the general populace. Corporations are transnational. The state has become a tool for them to divide and conquer.
i'd rather not argue over that, but felt it was necessary since your assertions about entitlements (and thus, their relation to "arrogance") are relative to the context of the u.s. and thus have very limited application. part of the issue, also, is that our proposed escape plans are likely quite different. November 21, 2013, 04:50:59 PM
Double top? Or possible retracement back up?
November 21, 2013, 04:50:23 PM
Enjoy your life and never look back..
There are many things more important than the possibility of wealth.
And congrats on your house being owned.
May your family once again regain your full attention and may the decisions you made for them never be regretted
Cheers
+1 There are many things more important than the possibility of wealth.
And congrats on your house being owned.
May your family once again regain your full attention and may the decisions you made for them never be regretted
Cheers
November 21, 2013, 04:49:44 PM
Just got to use the Lamassu Bitcoin ATM. MUCH easier to use than a regular ATM I would say. Just tap the screen, scan your address and keep feeding it fiat until you feel you've ridden yourself of enough of the stuff. Then tap again to send transaction. No palm scanners, yay.
AFAIK the ATM in Vancouver doesn't dispense fiat, only BTC, same as Lamassu. We need ones who can do fiat -> BTC and BTC -> fiat. And put them into every major airport
AFAIK the ATM in Vancouver doesn't dispense fiat, only BTC, same as Lamassu. We need ones who can do fiat -> BTC and BTC -> fiat. And put them into every major airport
November 21, 2013, 04:49:24 PM
Quote
Mining Bitcoin by hand (self.Bitcoin)
submitted 19 hours ago* by C121
I figured I'd calculate how long it would take to mine bitcoin using a pen and paper for fun.
According to some forum posts, it takes 3385 integer operations to calculate one double SHA-256 hash.
These are 32-bit operations, so we'll give a very generous estimate of 10 seconds per operation (we're assuming that you're a numeric genius)
This works out to a rate of .0000295 hashes per second. Not bad, right?
Throwing the current difficulty (609482679.88835) into this calculator gives us an average time of 2,809,786,333,451,380 years to mine one block. Have no fear, this is only 200000 times the age of the universe.
Now, at current rates of 25 BTC/block, and $600/BTC, this gives us an hourly profit of $0.000000000000000609/hr (assuming we're contributing to a pool, since competing with ASIC machines is just unfair), or about 1/300 of a quadrillionth the national (US) average.
What would it cost you to perform this?
One three ounce bottle of Noodler's ink is $12.50, and will write for approximately 33 km. Let's say that you're working in binary, and drawing a 1 and a 0 uses 1cm of ink, and you need to write 2 32 bit numbers per addition operation. That's 2166.4 meters of ink per hash. You can do about 50 operations on each side of a piece of paper. Paper runs for about a cent a page on Amazon, so that's about 34 cents per hash.
At the (approximate) 2,728,647,008,755,700,000 hashes you need to mine one block, adding these two costs together gives you a whopping $3,162,791,285,103,330,000.00 per block, or, if you're keeping track, you earn 0.000000000000474% of the money you spent mining that block (excluding the cost of petayears worth of food and shelter, and assuming the difficulty of mining and the value of bitcoin freezes forver at this moment).
Anyone want to get started with me?
tl;dr - mining by hand is no longer profitable.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1r3wau/mining_bitcoin_by_hand/submitted 19 hours ago* by C121
I figured I'd calculate how long it would take to mine bitcoin using a pen and paper for fun.
According to some forum posts, it takes 3385 integer operations to calculate one double SHA-256 hash.
These are 32-bit operations, so we'll give a very generous estimate of 10 seconds per operation (we're assuming that you're a numeric genius)
This works out to a rate of .0000295 hashes per second. Not bad, right?
Throwing the current difficulty (609482679.88835) into this calculator gives us an average time of 2,809,786,333,451,380 years to mine one block. Have no fear, this is only 200000 times the age of the universe.
Now, at current rates of 25 BTC/block, and $600/BTC, this gives us an hourly profit of $0.000000000000000609/hr (assuming we're contributing to a pool, since competing with ASIC machines is just unfair), or about 1/300 of a quadrillionth the national (US) average.
What would it cost you to perform this?
One three ounce bottle of Noodler's ink is $12.50, and will write for approximately 33 km. Let's say that you're working in binary, and drawing a 1 and a 0 uses 1cm of ink, and you need to write 2 32 bit numbers per addition operation. That's 2166.4 meters of ink per hash. You can do about 50 operations on each side of a piece of paper. Paper runs for about a cent a page on Amazon, so that's about 34 cents per hash.
At the (approximate) 2,728,647,008,755,700,000 hashes you need to mine one block, adding these two costs together gives you a whopping $3,162,791,285,103,330,000.00 per block, or, if you're keeping track, you earn 0.000000000000474% of the money you spent mining that block (excluding the cost of petayears worth of food and shelter, and assuming the difficulty of mining and the value of bitcoin freezes forver at this moment).
Anyone want to get started with me?
tl;dr - mining by hand is no longer profitable.
November 21, 2013, 04:46:35 PM
Quote
Mining Bitcoin by hand (self.Bitcoin)
submitted 19 hours ago* by C121
I figured I'd calculate how long it would take to mine bitcoin using a pen and paper for fun.
According to some forum posts, it takes 3385 integer operations to calculate one double SHA-256 hash.
These are 32-bit operations, so we'll give a very generous estimate of 10 seconds per operation (we're assuming that you're a numeric genius)
This works out to a rate of .0000295 hashes per second. Not bad, right?
Throwing the current difficulty (609482679.88835) into this calculator gives us an average time of 2,809,786,333,451,380 years to mine one block. Have no fear, this is only 200000 times the age of the universe.
Now, at current rates of 25 BTC/block, and $600/BTC, this gives us an hourly profit of $0.000000000000000609/hr (assuming we're contributing to a pool, since competing with ASIC machines is just unfair), or about 1/300 of a quadrillionth the national (US) average.
What would it cost you to perform this?
One three ounce bottle of Noodler's ink is $12.50, and will write for approximately 33 km. Let's say that you're working in binary, and drawing a 1 and a 0 uses 1cm of ink, and you need to write 2 32 bit numbers per addition operation. That's 2166.4 meters of ink per hash. You can do about 50 operations on each side of a piece of paper. Paper runs for about a cent a page on Amazon, so that's about 34 cents per hash.
At the (approximate) 2,728,647,008,755,700,000 hashes you need to mine one block, adding these two costs together gives you a whopping $3,162,791,285,103,330,000.00 per block, or, if you're keeping track, you earn 0.000000000000474% of the money you spent mining that block (excluding the cost of petayears worth of food and shelter, and assuming the difficulty of mining and the value of bitcoin freezes forver at this moment).
Anyone want to get started with me?
tl;dr - mining by hand is no longer profitable.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1r3wau/mining_bitcoin_by_hand/ submitted 19 hours ago* by C121
I figured I'd calculate how long it would take to mine bitcoin using a pen and paper for fun.
According to some forum posts, it takes 3385 integer operations to calculate one double SHA-256 hash.
These are 32-bit operations, so we'll give a very generous estimate of 10 seconds per operation (we're assuming that you're a numeric genius)
This works out to a rate of .0000295 hashes per second. Not bad, right?
Throwing the current difficulty (609482679.88835) into this calculator gives us an average time of 2,809,786,333,451,380 years to mine one block. Have no fear, this is only 200000 times the age of the universe.
Now, at current rates of 25 BTC/block, and $600/BTC, this gives us an hourly profit of $0.000000000000000609/hr (assuming we're contributing to a pool, since competing with ASIC machines is just unfair), or about 1/300 of a quadrillionth the national (US) average.
What would it cost you to perform this?
One three ounce bottle of Noodler's ink is $12.50, and will write for approximately 33 km. Let's say that you're working in binary, and drawing a 1 and a 0 uses 1cm of ink, and you need to write 2 32 bit numbers per addition operation. That's 2166.4 meters of ink per hash. You can do about 50 operations on each side of a piece of paper. Paper runs for about a cent a page on Amazon, so that's about 34 cents per hash.
At the (approximate) 2,728,647,008,755,700,000 hashes you need to mine one block, adding these two costs together gives you a whopping $3,162,791,285,103,330,000.00 per block, or, if you're keeping track, you earn 0.000000000000474% of the money you spent mining that block (excluding the cost of petayears worth of food and shelter, and assuming the difficulty of mining and the value of bitcoin freezes forver at this moment).
Anyone want to get started with me?
tl;dr - mining by hand is no longer profitable.
November 21, 2013, 04:44:03 PM
Go there and give bitcoin a nice review
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B00GTZKQ68/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B00GTZKQ68/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all
November 21, 2013, 04:42:17 PM
Fine, you're arrogant because you can't stop talking about how much better you are than US citizens .
You don't know shit about what has happened to our populace and our land. Corporations and wealthy individuals own everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
BTW, I don't buy the whole capitalist-socialist dichotomy. Everything is shades of gray, and it is the extremes you have to watch out for.
You seem to want to restrict the term arrogance to what is probably better termed "US exceptionalism". Yes, this is a form of arrogance, but arrogance can take many forms.
i don't have much of an opinion of u.s. citizens really. but the consensus about them is well established. i also don't buy the capitalist-socialist dichotomy... as it's commonly illustrated. .You don't know shit about what has happened to our populace and our land. Corporations and wealthy individuals own everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
BTW, I don't buy the whole capitalist-socialist dichotomy. Everything is shades of gray, and it is the extremes you have to watch out for.
You seem to want to restrict the term arrogance to what is probably better termed "US exceptionalism". Yes, this is a form of arrogance, but arrogance can take many forms.
i think the perceived arrogance of people from the US is much due to US exceptionalism, yes -- i was making that point because that is what non-US folks are exposed to. but i am talking about the dictionary definition of "arrogance".
sure, there is great wealth inequality in the u.s. that doesn't mean there isn't far greater wealth inequality elsewhere, such as in South America. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Gini_Coefficient_World_CIA_Report_2009.svg
it also doesn't speak to the effect of historic exploitation of the southern hemisphere by the north. over 53% of world net worth (based on PPP) is concentrated in North America and Europe, which has less then 15% of world population. when we talk about wealth inequality, surely comparing that of the u.s. with that of that of bolivia is sort of ridiculous, right? are we talking about being entitled to basic human necessities, perhaps education? or are we talking about being entitled to a basic minimum income? or big screen tvs? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth
in the u.s., when people complain about entitlements, i hear complaints about people buying big screen tvs with welfare checks. (i take that with grain of salt) surely, you don't think that these are the sort of entitlements that Brazilians seek? that they are arrogant for fighting for? especially given the nature of wealth inequality?
am i arrogant for fighting for a better education system for my children? i must feel so self-important?
it's one thing if the state does not exists. it's another thing if the state will exists for the forseeable future, and exploits, and allows exploitation. in the latter case, i think it is only reasonable for people to try to reform the state, to legally prescribe what had once been unwritten -- their ownership, their rights, their dignity. even if i do not support reformism. i still do not see this as arrogance. someone who is arrogant by definition does not see themselves as equal to others.
As I already tried to explain, we have the same master and we should work on an escape plan. But you would rather argue over who gets whipped the hardest. The fact is, state boundaries only exist for the general populace. Corporations are transnational. The state has become a tool for them to divide and conquer.
November 21, 2013, 04:39:08 PM
Bulls right now...
Tho I won't be complaining, get us an hour above 750 and I'm interested.
Tho I won't be complaining, get us an hour above 750 and I'm interested.
November 21, 2013, 04:38:09 PM
November 21, 2013, 04:37:49 PM
We will see $1000 gox in less than a week. Maybe 48 hours.
$400 gox never again
Choo choo mfs
$400 gox never again
Choo choo mfs
still this. i don't make (public) predictions often but when i do
November 21, 2013, 04:35:54 PM
Just in case anyone likes to see with their own eyes what really happened in Haikko... 
November 21, 2013, 04:29:00 PM
I would expect more consolidation after such a correction. Thinking we'll see a reversal ~800 or so and then a bounce at a higher low. Not sure if I am willing to risk it, though....
November 21, 2013, 04:28:28 PM
Mortgage the house and buy some back. Or get a second loan and buy some back. You will eventually be able to pay of the second loan and still have some coins in case (which there is a decent chance) we get to $100,000 and beyond.
Only on bitcointalk can you find this sort of advice. My goodness.Debt is so deeply rooted in US folks mentality that it hurts. I really have a simpathy for Bitchick, I'm a long-term bull myself, but came on... To advise someone to get in debt (even worse, to mortgage his house) to buy a high-risk experimental currency is so fucked up it blows my mind. We where speaking about "opportunities you cannot afford to lose"... Well, being in debt or losing your house to gamble is something NOBODY should afford to do.
And that type of mentality leads me to think that eventually BTC will implode sooner than later, people tends to auto-destruction and greed is one of the main mind-fuckers.
Rampion is my favorite now
November 21, 2013, 04:24:13 PM
ty. interesting.
This explains some odd behavior but it's not a big deal. November 21, 2013, 04:23:50 PM
Jump to: