Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 32369. (Read 26469997 times)

Not to be an ass, but these quotes are still pretty funny. 

Does Litecoin crank up the Scrypt parameters over time?

Litecoin might seem ASIC-hostile right now but how long will it be until an ASIC can be designed with enough memory to handle even Scrypt with the Litecoin parameters?   I understand the ASIC advantage won't be as great as it is with Bitcoin but eventually a Litecoin ASIC should beat a generationally comparable CPU, GPU or FPGA.

One day in the perhaps distant future a CPU could come along that beats one of today's Bitcoin ASICs (but of course the future ASIC folks won't stand still for that).  Then again maybe the economic factors in the future will make it unattractive to develop ASICs for Bitcoin mining.

 

That's what they claimed. About 100k coins bought for about 1.5 M$, a large part of the missing coins of 2012. If you can prove otherwise, please do so.

As for my wrong decision not to expect a third whale buy, it's my loss. You can rejoice!

I expect another large buy in a couple of hours, but I can't say how strong it will be.
The reserve funds on the bid side are about 1.5M$, but I have no idea how much will be used.

I beg you pardon?

      

There's a few other guys who have been remarkably silent recently

Can you please tell us your next move so we can learn from you. Thanks.

And of course you know exactly how it is, right?

Really interesting video and yes it brings the concern of bitcoin centralization. I think the good point for the short term for us first time investors is what this incredibly insightful woman says about "them" loving the idea of a global digital currency. Many many things will happen in the years to come, but that seems positive short, medium range. Those future things are almost impossible to foresee. Like, will the sahara be quite rich in the future with thousands of sun farms dedicated to bitcoin? who knows.

I had this same thought the other day. If there was only bitcoin, and mining becomes so saturated with high-end hardware (does this sound familiar?) that it becomes unattractive at the consumer level, you hit a ceiling of decentralization. At a certain point, buying more hardware is just throwing money away, BUT if you buy enough hardware, you suddenly become the federal reserve. I saw a website the other day (forgot the address, sorry) that just keeps a running statistic for how much it would cost to launch a 51% attack on bitcoin via hardware manufacturing. Right now it was something like $350m. That seems like a lot (depending on how you look at it) but if bitcoin was to gain the global acceptance that we all hope it will someday, it's not a lot at all. There is a big incentive to be the "federal reserve" of bitcoin, and a government entity might be willing to shell out that kind of money to do it. In fact, multiple governments might be racing for it. Even if they all fail, the network will have a majority of government control, and they can come up with all kinds of dealings with each other behind closed doors (like they do today) and leave us in the exact same situation we are in right now (with the dollar).

This is a legitimate reason we need Litecoin (among other coins). Litecoin is our insurance policy, not our silver. If we lose "control" of bitcoin, we (those of us who don't like being bound by government money) can easily move into Litecoin, making the prospect of trying to control digital currency a little less appealing. Let's not forget that we always need to have that backup plan ready, and maybe not be as big of a dick to the Litecoin fans.... maybe.

I think she was saying if alternative energy replaces oil, then the dollar is not really "backed" by anything. The next "backing" would be food/water, which perhaps why Monsanto and the like are trying to gain control over the food supply. Digital currencies fit in there as well, for they can be limited backers of our currencies, or they can be our currencies. She warns agains allowing them control these digital currencies and that we need many.

That last statement is quite interesting as perhaps it's not about "What can Litecoin do that BTC can't?" but rather "We need more than one digital currency to limit the powers that be, in a sense." Certainly something to chew on...

Incredibly interesting video from Catherine Austin Fitts that also talks about Global digital currency and how they would "love it" globally.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzVIZU3gmXA

The Video is really interesting but if anything take a look to minute 36 where she talks about digital currencies.

What are your always valuable opinions on this?

Thanks

I didn't say that this was leverage guy. But leverage guy can double his money very fast and paypal guy can even lose it. Or at least leveraged guy can first double his money, take his deposit out and buy coins with his other half (for much lower price). 

Nope, my guess is that he is a buy and holder.  Say goodbye to those coins for a good long while.  One of the paypal original investors was looking to get 5MM into bitcoins at our last meetup.

The one with 40 kBTC(5M$ buy this week) can sell today, drop price to 100 (plus all others who will follow - so maybe to 70$). Average sell price for him let's say 110, so he lost 1M$. At the same time he opens leverege 1:5 sell order at 130 with another 5M$ (sell 38kBTC*5) and close it at 70$. This is 11M$ profit - 1M$ loss = 10M$ pure profit.

So he can duble his money in matter of minutes. He can sell BTC with loss, he can do it in both directions, he even don't need others to participate.

Why? If that's really what it was, he/she would at least be helping to make the market more efficient and deepening liquidity, right?  Better a deep-pocketed arbitrageur, than a deep-pocketed manipulator trying to yank the price around playing games like "the hammer" for a few bitcoins profit here and there at the cost of greatly increasing volatility...