[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
economics

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply [First 100 posts]
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 3223)
Message
File  []
close
Bitcoin_Large.jpg
322332233223
>> No. 3223 Anonymous
18th February 2013
Monday 7:58 pm
3223 Bitcoins
Have any of you bought Bitcoins or spoken to anybody that has?

The underlying principle of removing the role of the banking industry from transactions (or at least limiting its influence) seems noble but it stinks of a giant scam IMO.
Expand all images.
>> No. 3224 Anonymous
18th February 2013
Monday 8:19 pm
3224 spacer
>>1981
>> No. 3225 Anonymous
18th February 2013
Monday 8:55 pm
3225 spacer
>>1862
>> No. 3236 Anonymous
5th March 2013
Tuesday 9:16 pm
3236 spacer
>>3223
I've never bought any, but I mined and sold some. Calling it a scam doesn't really make sense.
>> No. 3237 Anonymous
5th March 2013
Tuesday 9:20 pm
3237 spacer
I've bought some and no one ran off with my money.
What sort of giant scam?
>> No. 3238 Anonymous
5th March 2013
Tuesday 9:20 pm
3238 spacer
>>3223
>>1981
>> No. 3240 Anonymous
5th March 2013
Tuesday 10:11 pm
3240 spacer
Some say that it resembles a Ponzi scheme. I don't think it is though.

Sage for valueless post.
>> No. 3241 Anonymous
5th March 2013
Tuesday 10:16 pm
3241 spacer
It's absolutely ridiculous, you magic this 'currency' out of thin air and then use it to buy real goods and services. Can you imagine a financial system that could possibly succeed on that principle? Oh...wait...never mind.
>> No. 3242 Anonymous
5th March 2013
Tuesday 11:51 pm
3242 spacer
>>3241
Sigh.

All currencies had to be magic'd up at somepoint.
>> No. 3243 Anonymous
6th March 2013
Wednesday 2:33 pm
3243 spacer
>>3242
That being his point.
>> No. 3245 Anonymous
6th March 2013
Wednesday 3:22 pm
3245 spacer
I have £600 invested in bitcoin. The exchange rate appears to have hit exponential growth. I intend to sell when its value hits £1200, which will hopefully be before the crash which is likely to happen eventually, say if SR gets killed off.
>> No. 3246 Anonymous
6th March 2013
Wednesday 3:23 pm
3246 spacer
>>3245
It's increased in value by 60% in the last 11 days btw.
>> No. 3343 Anonymous
19th March 2013
Tuesday 8:14 pm
3343 spacer
>>3246
And nearly a further 50% today alone. Bitcoin is now bigger than the M1 of around 30 countries.
>> No. 3344 Anonymous
19th March 2013
Tuesday 8:15 pm
3344 spacer

Untitled.png
334433443344
>>3246
>>3342
What exchange are you looking at? Looks pretty flat to me.
>> No. 3347 Anonymous
19th March 2013
Tuesday 8:17 pm
3347 spacer
>>3344
MtGox. Your graph isn't flat at all and shows the growth mentioned in >>3246. Today's increase is not yet reflected on that graph, for the price is close to $60.
>> No. 3348 Anonymous
19th March 2013
Tuesday 8:21 pm
3348 spacer
>>3347
My mistake, I thought the volume plot was the price. I was just browsing /*/, serves me right for coming into topics I know nothing about.
>> No. 3349 Anonymous
19th March 2013
Tuesday 8:27 pm
3349 spacer
>>3245 >>3246 >>3343

Oh, christ, those bitcoins I bought in January have close to quadrupled in value now.

And all I ever wanted to do was procure a few druggywugs. I think at this stage I may need to sell half of them off before the bottom crashes out.

My mind boggles.
>> No. 3350 Anonymous
19th March 2013
Tuesday 8:29 pm
3350 spacer

1359592345367.jpg
335033503350
My investment has gone up in value £120 today.
>> No. 3366 Anonymous
20th March 2013
Wednesday 6:17 pm
3366 spacer
Remember the bloke who spent 10k bitcoins on a pizza a couple of years ago?

Hahahahahahaha.
>> No. 3367 Anonymous
20th March 2013
Wednesday 6:33 pm
3367 spacer
>>3366
I saw a comment from him where he was putting on a brave face. "It was a really nice pizza, I regret nothing" or something.

Poor bastard. I'm still kicking myself for not picking up a bunch when I noticed it going back up after the big crash, when I was dipping my toe in mining. I did think seriously of investing £50-£100 which would've paid off tidily if I cashed out now.
>> No. 3375 Anonymous
23rd March 2013
Saturday 4:14 pm
3375 spacer
>Drugs are bought with ‘Bitcoins’, an untraceable digital currency. It is not regulated by any government or company but just by mathematical equations.

>The value is worked out by how many Bitcoins are in existence and how many are being traded. Another knock-on effect of sites such as Silk Road is that the value of a 'Bitcoin' have gone from being virtually worthless to trading at $70 - around £46 - each.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2297958/Drug-dealers-ebay-selling-ecstasy-HEROIN-doubles-sales-1MILLION-month--police-powerless-ban-it.html

I still find it surreal when mainstream media comment on internet things.
>> No. 3376 Anonymous
24th March 2013
Sunday 10:31 pm
3376 spacer
I haven't bought any bitcoins before, but given that it now seems to be gaining traction on mainstream sites, it seems like I couldn't really go wrong buying a few hundred quid's worth as an investment.
Am I mistaken in thinking this? It doesn't look like it's going to disappear any time soon and since the total number of bitcoins is close to the max now, the price will rise in proportion to the number of users, right?
>> No. 3377 Anonymous
24th March 2013
Sunday 10:37 pm
3377 spacer
>>3376
That depends on how much money a few hundred quid is, to you.

Personally I think it's inflating too fast right now and buying is bad, selling should be done as soon as possible, before it bursts. I'm no expert at economics, but I've not seen anyone with more knowledge than myself advocate investing at this point in time.

That said, they are fluctuating a great deal these days, so even if they decrease in value soon; they'll not take too long to approximate the same value in time.
>> No. 3378 Anonymous
24th March 2013
Sunday 10:54 pm
3378 spacer
>>3376
Almost ฿11M of the total ฿21M have been mined. Bitcoin was getting a lot of attention when it surged to $30+ in 2011 but it subsequently slid steadily to $5. Investing in Bitcoin could certainly pay off handsomely, but no investment where you can double your money in such a short time can be considered safe.
>> No. 3379 Anonymous
24th March 2013
Sunday 11:09 pm
3379 spacer
>>3378
Oh my mistake, I thought we were a lot closer to 21M than that. I suppose I'll wait for another slide then before venturing in.
>> No. 3401 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 2:11 pm
3401 spacer
Some silly buggers have been trying to destabalise mt gox in order to affect panic selling so they can profit. The price continues to rise.

My £650 investment now stands at over £1800. Not sure when to sell.
I'll probably sell £650 so that I've got my original money back out and can rest easy knowing I haven't lost anything, then sit pretty a bit longer until the price increases some more.
>> No. 3402 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 7:05 pm
3402 spacer
>>3401
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22026961
https://mtgox.com/press_release_20130404.html

In these heady times it's easy to forget that the entire Bitcoin ecosystem still whiffs of amateur hour.
>> No. 3404 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 7:09 pm
3404 spacer
>>3402
I've never had more than £20 at a time in instawallet. I was evidently right to be skeptical wrt their security.
>> No. 3405 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 7:31 pm
3405 spacer
I just bought £500 on bitcoins.


Not that I want bitcoins, I'm buying litecoins.


Also it's fuckign hard to get hold of these currencies in GBP
>> No. 3406 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 7:35 pm
3406 spacer
>>3405
Who accepts litecoin and what is the point of it?
>> No. 3408 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 7:39 pm
3408 spacer
>>3406
Who accepts Bitcoin and what is the point of it?
>> No. 3409 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 7:45 pm
3409 spacer
>>3408
Silkroad accepts bitcoin.
Wordpress accepts bitcoin.
Many non profit organisations accept bitcoin donations.

I have yet to find a single service accepting litecoin. And I've been googling for ten minutes.
>> No. 3410 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 8:00 pm
3410 spacer
>>3409
I don't want to use them for shit. Most of the people involved in Bitcoins don't use them for shit.
>> No. 3411 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 8:43 pm
3411 spacer
>>3410
So you spent £500 on something you don't want to 'use for shit'?
>> No. 3412 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 8:44 pm
3412 spacer
>>3410
Also, I have never bought bitcoins without a specific purchase in mind.
>> No. 3413 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 8:49 pm
3413 spacer
>>3411
Yes, I want to trade them.
>> No. 3414 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 9:04 pm
3414 spacer
>>3413
For what? Pogs? Footie cards? Monster in my pocket?
>> No. 3415 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 9:07 pm
3415 spacer
>>3414
You know what I'm doing so I don't know why you bother with this
>> No. 3416 Anonymous
4th April 2013
Thursday 9:12 pm
3416 spacer
Personally I use them to buy drugs. I don't know what all this evasive bullshit is about.

But yeah. No point in litecoins until someone will except them for trade, and I can't find much evidence of that yet.
>> No. 3471 Anonymous
9th April 2013
Tuesday 10:34 am
3471 spacer
Volume seems to have grown a lot. Multibit takes longer to synch each day.
>> No. 3476 Anonymous
10th April 2013
Wednesday 6:17 pm
3476 spacer

ohshit.png
347634763476
>>3223
I don't like the look of that.
>> No. 3477 Anonymous
10th April 2013
Wednesday 6:44 pm
3477 spacer
>>3476
There's been a ton of media articles about the rise of bitcoin, I wonder if we'll get even more about the crash.
>> No. 3487 Anonymous
10th April 2013
Wednesday 8:07 pm
3487 spacer
>>3477
>the crash
You mean 'the scam'.
>> No. 3488 Anonymous
10th April 2013
Wednesday 8:07 pm
3488 spacer
>>3477
Weirdly someone I was talking to weeks ago said it would crash at $250.
I don't think this is the final crash tough.
>> No. 3489 Anonymous
10th April 2013
Wednesday 8:09 pm
3489 spacer
>>3487
Does the fact that I've made money out of this mean that other people have lost money?
>> No. 3497 Anonymous
10th April 2013
Wednesday 8:23 pm
3497 spacer
>>3489
Er, yes?
>> No. 3499 Anonymous
10th April 2013
Wednesday 8:27 pm
3499 spacer
>>3488
What do you mean by 'final crash'?

I'd put money (in fact I have put money) on it rising beyond $300 within a month.
>> No. 3503 Anonymous
10th April 2013
Wednesday 9:33 pm
3503 spacer
>>3499

Me too, it's backed by good solid old fashioned narcotics.
>> No. 3505 Anonymous
10th April 2013
Wednesday 10:51 pm
3505 spacer
>>3489
You can't just magic up currency lad, so yes.

Even if you printed your own currency, everyone else would be losing money by their money not being worth as much (hence why counterfeiting is bad). But because it's spread over such a large amount of people, they aren;t going to notice unless it's done to a ridiculous amount. As opposed to say mugging someone of an equal amount.
>> No. 3506 Anonymous
10th April 2013
Wednesday 11:33 pm
3506 spacer
>>3505
>You can't just magic up currency

you obviously don't know about fractional reserve banking.
>> No. 3507 Anonymous
10th April 2013
Wednesday 11:50 pm
3507 spacer
>>3503
Ah yes. I forgot that the growth is driven mainly by the growth of silkroad in the USA.

My big hope is that the LTC equivalent will take off soon, I've got most of my play money in that.
>> No. 3508 Anonymous
11th April 2013
Thursday 1:15 am
3508 spacer
>>3506
I'm no economist so no. Could you explain?

The way I understand is probably very simple, but I see 'currency' as meaning 'commodities and power' which are both limited. As opposed to simple paper money or numbers on a screen, which have no intrinsic value.
>> No. 3514 Anonymous
11th April 2013
Thursday 4:04 pm
3514 spacer
>>3477

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22105322
>> No. 3515 Anonymous
11th April 2013
Thursday 4:13 pm
3515 spacer
>>3514
I told myself I would sell at $200 but I left it, thinking it would head higher.
If I cashed out now I'd still make a healthy profit, but I'm inclined to 'wait and see'.
>> No. 3518 Anonymous
11th April 2013
Thursday 7:11 pm
3518 spacer

images.jpg
351835183518
>>3508

A currency is just a unit of exchange, used as an intermediary in trading. Currency emerged as a more efficient alternative to barter. Without currency, if I'm a sheep farmer and want some new shoes, I've got to find a cobbler who wants a shitload of mutton. With currency, I just need to find someone who wants mutton and the cobbler just needs to find someone who need shoes.

Precious metals have been used as currency for a long time, because they have intrinsic traits that make them a useful unit of exchange for primitive peoples. They're inherently scarce, durable and portable and can be proved to be authentic fairly easily. Coinage was a good way of providing a consistent and trusted weight of metal, in a quantity that was convenient to exchange. The ridges on the edge of a ten pence piece are a throwback to this - coins were originally ridged to prevent people from shaving off the edges of gold and silver coins for profit.

If there's no functioning currency, people will simply use whatever is suitable. When the German economy collapsed between the wars, people took to trading in cigarettes. Rolling tobacco used to be the currency of British prisons, but they switched over to phone cards when smoking became less popular. In many US prisons, they use pre-packaged snack cakes.

The first paper money were gold and silver certificates, written out by pawnbrokers. People found it convenient to store their metal with a pawnbroker and give someone the pawnbroker's slip. Eventually, government took over that role, guaranteeing bank notes against a store of silver. The pound sterling was once literally that - a pound weight of sterling silver.

Many governments realised that they could print more banknotes than they had metal to back it, which was of course highly profitable for the government. The problem with that is that as you print more money, the money in circulation falls in value due to simple supply and demand. If there's more money in circulation but the same amount of stuff to buy with it, the value of money will fall. We call this process "inflation" and it's why things always get more expensive over time.

Inflation is very useful to a government for several reasons. Governments are heavily indebted, but if the value of a pound falls, it's effectively cheaper to pay off your debts. Inflation also encourages people to spend money rather than hoard it, which is good for the economy. Too much inflation can be risky and discourage investment, so most governments aim for inflation of a few percent per year.

Eventually, governments abandoned their store of precious metals entirely, creating what we call a "fiat currency" - a currency with no direct material value that is backed purely by confidence in the government that prints it. Fiat currency is a win-win for all sorts of dismally nerdy reasons, but it comes with a big risk attached. A government has complete reign in manipulating that currency and a collapse in confidence in the government can lead to a collapse in the value of that currency. A common vicious cycle is that a government with severe debts prints more money to pay their debts, which reduces the value of their money, which means they need to print more of it. This is hyperinflation, which happened in Germany in 1923, Hungary in 1946, Zimbabwe in 2008 and many other places and times. This is extremely destructive, because people lose confidence in the value of money and spend it as soon as possible.

Bitcoin is currently experiencing the opposite, hyperdeflation. The value of bitcoin is increasing at an exponential rate, because supply is very limited but demand is increasing rapidly. The more Bitcoin increases in value, the more people who want to buy it, on the expectation that they'll make a big profit. The key problem is the opposite to that of hyperinflation - nobody with Bitcoins wants to spend them, because they expect them to increase in value.

The problem for Bitcoin is that a currency is only worth what people will exchange it for. Nearly all of the current value of a Bitcoin is the expectation that, in the future, lots of people will want to exchange things for them. As it stands, transactions where Bitcoins are exchanged for goods or services represent only a tiny fraction of all Bitcoin transactions. The sum value of all the goods in the Bitcoin economy and all of the non-Bitcoin currency held by Bitcoin bureaux de change is vastly less than the nominal value of all Bitcoin in circulation. The entire value of a Bitcoin is the expectation that Bitcoins will be valuable in future, which is an extremely fragile state of affairs.
>> No. 3522 Anonymous
11th April 2013
Thursday 7:48 pm
3522 spacer
>>3518
Good post.

Since you seem to know what you're talking about, I have a follow up question relating to your last point about its value being based on expectation. AFAIK, governments haven't yet decided how to deal with cryptocurrencies if they actually became widely used - is there a particular legislative move they could take that we should keep an eye out for that would render bitcoin effectively worthless?
>> No. 3524 Anonymous
11th April 2013
Thursday 8:02 pm
3524 spacer
>>3522
>AFAIK, governments haven't yet decided how to deal with cryptocurrencies

The septics are trying to regulate transactions involving Bitcoins and dollars.

http://fincen.gov/statutes_regs/guidance/html/FIN-2013-G001.html

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130325/03034522451/feds-take-step-closer-to-trying-to-regulate-bitcoin.shtml
>> No. 3527 Anonymous
11th April 2013
Thursday 8:41 pm
3527 spacer
>>3518
Not who you were responding to, but that was an excellent post. You get a gold star for /squiggles/'s Post Of The Week.
>> No. 3528 Anonymous
11th April 2013
Thursday 8:44 pm
3528 spacer
>>3524

What's to stop people changing their money to Euro or Pounds or Shekels instead and avoiding these regulations?
>> No. 3529 Anonymous
11th April 2013
Thursday 9:31 pm
3529 spacer
>>3522

They could easily outlaw various trading activities that make cryptocurrencies practical, which would severely undermine the value of any cryptocurrency. The clear example would be the UIGEA, which stopped internet poker companies from doing business with US customers by banning US banks from doing business with foreign gambling companies.

Bitcoin only has any real value today because it is freely convertible back into "real" currency. The drug dealers on Silk Road are reliant on being able to convert BTC to cash to buy more stock; Their customers are reliant upon being able to convert their cash into BTC. The speculators buying BTC as an investment have no real intention of spending them, but invariably expect to cash them out for their own national currency. Bitcoin therefore doesn't currently function as a fully-fledged currency, but a sort of financial derivative. For the moment at least, Bitcoins are essentially useless without a means of converting them to proper currency.

It would be very easy for a government to make the argument that due to the risk of fraud or money-laundering, banks will be banned from doing business with Bitcoin bureaux de change. It would only take a Daily Mail headline about "SECRET ECONOMY FOR JUNKIES AND PAEDOPHILES" for that policy to become a major vote-winner. Bitcoin advocates argue that that's not a problem because Bitcoin will develop a fully-fledged economy, but that's a total sham. A vicious cycle would rapidly develop, because Bitcoin is and will continue to be an inferior currency - you can't pay your gas bill or your council tax in Bitcoins if you can't convert them to Sterling. Given the choice, nearly everyone would prefer to be paid USD or GBP than in BTC, because BTC is obviously an inferior currency under such conditions. The only current non-convertible currencies are the Cuban Peso and the North Korean Won, which should give you an idea.

It's a really interesting project and I think there are some fantastic ideas at the heart of it, but I think it has been over-egged by people who don't understand economics and lack a clear sense of what a currency is and what gives it value. I think that BTC is vastly overvalued due to a speculative bubble and should be somewhere around $15, based on the level of real spending. I think the market-makers know this to be the case, because I've tried to bet against the value of Bitcoin and nobody will take my money. None of the "exchanges" will let me naked short or take a put option, which to me speaks volumes.
>> No. 3532 Anonymous
11th April 2013
Thursday 9:57 pm
3532 spacer
>>3528
Which "real currency" you exchange virtual currency for doesn't matter.
>> No. 3538 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 3:34 pm
3538 spacer
Many 'real' currencies only have value because they can be exchanged for USD, this isn't something special to cryptocurrencies.
>> No. 3539 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 3:59 pm
3539 spacer
>>3538

Yes, but they also have the advantage that they can be used for all goods and services within a local area, which is something BTC does not have. To the average man on the street, it doesn't matter that the Egyptian Pound only really has value on the macro level because of its potential exchange with the USD, because he's using it to pay his bills and buy his groceries etc.
>> No. 3540 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 4:00 pm
3540 spacer
>>3518

I''ve only got to paragaph four, but this is nonsence. No offense meant, don't take this as a flame. Thi is textbook Economic Science. Unforyunatley, as with the vast majority of ES, it has no basis in fact, history, of the development of currencies.

I'll keep this brief, and offer a good primer afterwards.

1st para: I need to find a cobbler who wants a sheep. No. You need a cobbler who *at some point* will need a sheep. For the vast majority of the time cobblers have existed, you would know that cobbler personally, as you would live in the same tribe, village, or street. You drink in the same pub, if they existed. You get a pair of shoes, then when he needs mutton he pops over to pick it up. This fallacy is the perfect example of how ES fails to understand social and societal roles in the exchange of value.

2nd para: Not wuite. While silver was used as a means of local currency in the Roman times, this was because it was easily hammered into flat strips that could be torn up. Coinage only existed for governments and traders. No normal person would ever have seen a coin for thouands of years - they had other means of exchanging value.

I don't want to fully engage with this, as I've only just woken up. Anyone who is interested in this subject would to well begging, borrowing, stealing or torrenting "Life Inc." by Douglas Rushkoff. It's neither left wing (Marxist) or right wing (ES). Easy to read, well researched and written book,
by one of the smartest people I have ever come accross. The first third of this book is all about the emergence of national currency, and the history of exchange/currency itself. Possibly the best non-fiction read I can recommend anyone.

Right, now, if anyone needs a hangover this year get in touch, and I will happily give you mine in exchange for a full English...
>> No. 3541 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 5:41 pm
3541 spacer

jimmyhill.jpg
354135413541
>>3540
>> No. 3542 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 6:32 pm
3542 spacer
>>3529
That post was really interesting, thanks. >>3518 was also interesting (and I'd assume yours), despite >>3540's still-drunk and mostly incoherent critique.

I remember reading at the depth of the big Bitcoin crash of 2011 that the estimated cost of each bitcoin for the miner was about $2 in terms of hardware + electricity over the lifetime of said hardware, which was approximately equivalent to its market value at the time. Might have been $5 or something, I'm not sure and it's not that important. Anyway, if that's the case then surely as long as the trading value of each Bitcoin is above that value then the smarter move would be to engage in mining? Why would anyone who is interested in speculating in Bitcoin pay directly for them (at $200 a pop) when they could invest in hardware with the same money? Obviously it'll take longer to see ROI but if you're investing then you should have an eye for the longer game, no?

How long does it take a reasonably high-end GPU to mine a bitcoin now, anyone know?

(My spellchecker suggested "bitchiness" instead of "bitcoin". I have no joke but it seemed funny anyway.)
>> No. 3543 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 7:07 pm
3543 spacer
>>3542

If I was inchorent, I apologise, please let me know where, and I´ll elaborate.
>> No. 3545 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 7:11 pm
3545 spacer
>>3543
Genuine question: When do you anticipate you'll begin using a fully functioning keyboard?
>> No. 3546 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 7:11 pm
3546 spacer
>>3544

Monday I hope. But good to know that someone remmebers me.
>> No. 3547 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 7:25 pm
3547 spacer
>>3543

Bring along the book in a couple of weeks mate. I'd quite like to have a look at it, especially what with the course I'm doing.
>> No. 3548 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 7:29 pm
3548 spacer
>>3547

>
Bring along the book in a couple of weeks mate.

What? Evidently I have missed something.
>> No. 3549 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 7:30 pm
3549 spacer
>>3548

If you're who I think you are with your dodgy keyboard, we should be going for a drink in a couple of weeks.

NYE, remember.
>> No. 3550 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 7:53 pm
3550 spacer
>>3549

Ah. Need to drop you an email. Thanks for the reminder.

My annotated copy is with a mate, I do not know if I will get it before we drink.

Dig it out from the library though, if your library does not have it I would be having a serious word with one of the librarians.
>> No. 3551 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 8:12 pm
3551 spacer

chart.png
355135513551
>>3542

GPU mining is nearly dead and the serious miners have already sold off their GPU rigs. By design, the difficulty of bitcoin mining increases exponentially over time. The new game in town is using FPGA and ASIC chips, which are custom-designed processors that do nothing but bitcoin hashing. By dint of specialisation, these chips are vastly quicker than GPUs and much more power-efficient, but they're also expensive and are useless for anything but hashing. The risk in buying one of these machines is that mining will only be profitable for a relatively short period - it won't take long for the difficulty to exceed the cost of electricity. Once that happens, you're left with a useless lump of hardware. The biggest issue is the incredible volatility in pricing, which makes it very difficult to predict your ROI. We're now down from $266/BTC to $92/BTC in under a week, so future pricing is really just guesswork.
>> No. 3552 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 8:17 pm
3552 spacer
>>3551

No, lad, the difficulty of mining does not increase over time. The level of difficulty is dynamic. This is how they are able to keep the output of bitcoins at a constant predictable rate.

When the ASIC miners all come online (if they EVER do lol) the difficulty will shoot up a great deal.

Conversely, if a whole load of people decided to drop out of the network, difficulty would drop significantly also.

Think of it like this:

>More processing power = Higher difficulty
>Less processing power = Lower difficulty

Does that help?
>> No. 3553 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 8:26 pm
3553 spacer
>>3550

It's got 3, but they're all in the deep stack so they don't lend them out. I'll order one of them up when I've actually got some time to kill.
>> No. 3554 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 8:29 pm
3554 spacer
>>3552
>More processing power = Higher difficulty
>Less processing power = Lower difficulty
Hence, difficulty increases over time.
>> No. 3555 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 8:32 pm
3555 spacer
>>3554
No. It can and probably will, but you are wrong and he is right.
>> No. 3558 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 9:10 pm
3558 spacer

gordon-moore.jpg
355835583558
>>3555
If by "no" you mean "yes" and "probably" you mean "almost certainly", then yes, you're right. Otherwise I'm just going to point and laugh at you.
>> No. 3561 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 9:22 pm
3561 spacer

bitcoin.png
356135613561
>>3558
I can't speak to your experience of time, but I've never encountered it passing backwards.
>> No. 3563 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 9:26 pm
3563 spacer
>>3561
Well what do you know? The difficulty has indeed increased with time.
>> No. 3566 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 9:31 pm
3566 spacer
>>3564
You might as well say the price increases over time (the two are of course loosely related). I doubt that'll be much comfort to the people who just lost half their investment.
>> No. 3570 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 9:38 pm
3570 spacer
>>3566
>You might as well say the price increases over time
You might as well say that. However, unlike claiming that the difficulty rises over time, you're likely to be wrong.
>> No. 3572 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 9:44 pm
3572 spacer

chart_large_lin[1].png
357235723572
Nothing further to add, stubbornlad.
>> No. 3573 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 9:46 pm
3573 spacer
>>3552

The ASIC miners are already online and hashing. BFL miners may be vapourware, but Avalon have already shipped their first batch of 65Gh/s miners and are due to ship another 600 tomorrow. A top of the range GPU does somewhere around 0.8Gh/s.
>> No. 3574 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 9:49 pm
3574 spacer
>>3572
Congratulations, you've superimposed two unrelated lines on a chart, and demonstrated that they're unrelated. Would you like a gold star in your exercise book?
>> No. 3575 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 9:59 pm
3575 spacer
>>3574
Right, because if Bitcoins were worth $5 tomorrow, nobody would stop mining, everyone would happily continue at a loss and there'd be no cause for difficulty to fall as consequence. This certainly didn't happen between Sep-Dec '11 when many felt the price would never recover.

It feels like you're telling me the sky is green.
>> No. 3576 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 10:07 pm
3576 spacer
>>3575
Red isn't a good colour on a herring, lad.
>> No. 3577 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 10:08 pm
3577 spacer
>>3575>>3576

Who are you two and why are you so mardy?
>> No. 3578 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 10:28 pm
3578 spacer
>>3575>>3576

This to me looks like a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
>> No. 3579 Anonymous
15th April 2013
Monday 10:29 pm
3579 spacer
>>3578

Agreed. Stop being so yellow-bellied and address eachother directly.
>> No. 3586 Anonymous
16th April 2013
Tuesday 10:32 am
3586 spacer
I'm scared.
>> No. 3587 Anonymous
16th April 2013
Tuesday 10:54 am
3587 spacer
>>3554

Maybe, but that would be by coincidence and not by design. Difficulty will only increase if more processing power is added to the mining effort. It could quite possible happen that a lot of people leave if bitcoin collapses or some other catastrophe.

So therefore, difficulty does increase, but not by design.

What is in the design is for difficulty to increase with processing power so that the output of coins remains a constant.
>> No. 3588 Anonymous
16th April 2013
Tuesday 10:58 am
3588 spacer
Difficulty COULD DECREASE with time too, it's not a one way only thing...

There that sums it up better...
>> No. 3589 Anonymous
16th April 2013
Tuesday 11:41 am
3589 spacer
>>3588
Right hang on. In 2017 the number of Bitocoins generated per block chain will halve and then keep halving over the following years until 21mil is reached. With the caveat that I don't know what I'm talking about, doesn't that mean that by design it will get harder to mine coins as time goes on?
>> No. 3590 Anonymous
16th April 2013
Tuesday 11:43 am
3590 spacer
>>3589
Yes.
Though really it's taking into account that computer processing power (the ability to form coins) gets considerably better.
>> No. 3591 Anonymous
16th April 2013
Tuesday 12:12 pm
3591 spacer
>>3589

Well not quite. Difficulty only goes up in relation to the processing power being used in the network. It does not relate to the amount of coins being produced.

By the way that you say coins will be harder to mine, because the amount in a block will be halved, you COULD say that, yes, it will get harder to mine coins in that sense, but not NECESSARILY difficulty wise.

And >>3590

Even though processing power may indeed get better with time due to Moore's law etc, this does not relate to the amount of processing power that MAY be available in the Bitcoin network.

I'm trying to think of a simple way of putting it.

Say you are in a maths class and the teacher gives out 10 gold stars every day, and you have 10 students working on the problem, this will be fine at the difficulty level of the problem the teacher has set.

Now, once the students get the hang of performing the teachers sums, he will increase the difficulty of the sums so that they are still only solving 10 a day. Conversely, if they are finding it too hard and not able to answer the 10 a day he would decrease the level of difficulty of the sums to such a level that the students are still getting 10 a day correct.

I hope that analogy helps...
>> No. 3592 Anonymous
16th April 2013
Tuesday 5:12 pm
3592 spacer
>>3591

That is 1 of the best explanations Ive read.
>> No. 3595 Anonymous
16th April 2013
Tuesday 6:24 pm
3595 spacer
$76 and falling...
>> No. 3597 Anonymous
16th April 2013
Tuesday 6:59 pm
3597 spacer
>>3595
I'm itching to buy but I keep thinking if I do they will just drop even further.
511 posts omitted. First 100 posts shown.

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password