600 W is 2000 BTU/hr so a 1 ton / 1 kW unit can remove 12000 BTU/hr of heat and it has an EER of 12 that means you're using 2/12=1/6th of the unit's 1 hour duty at 167 W so I'd rule of thumb this around 1/3 of the wattage in additional cooling expense instead of 100%

This very problem creates a systemic failure risk for cryptos. All of these altcoins are good at showing this potential when the market crashes. If difficulty jumps up or market value dies, then the network can die from a profitability point of view as miners back off and block rates plummet. The recovery point is a kind of hard reset where the P2P nature drives a consensus on difficulty correction. Once the margin is low, only high-volume, low margin providers can compete in power efficient hashing. Basically, if a chip producer thinks there is any ROI in mining, why sell any chips at all?

Anyway on the profitability side, you should consider energy consumption with respect to heating since winter is rolling in. The thermal efficiency of a heat pump is proportional to the outdoor air temp, and can be 3x efficiency down to 1.1x, or if you don't have a heat pump or gas, then the mining waste heat directly offsets my heating costs. The power is not free but it appears that way on the books, so I'm basically leasing 500W of GPU power at-cost, which can be $30/m.

I don't think this is correct. I think it means that the exchanges can no longer offer leveraged trading or loans, with an overall idea of taking the gambling aspect away.

Baidu:
To comply with the policies and regulations, operation trading platform in the framework of legal compliance, before the end of May 10th the new financing currency, stop lever transactions in all financing or money repaid after thawing

Youdao (much better than google):
Abide by the policies and regulations, operating in the framework of legal compliance trading platform, stop before May 10th new borrowing money, after all financing or melt money paid stop leverage trading business

Edit: It's stopping both loans and deposits. 存 and 贷款

Well the coins are behaving like they would had they just been loaded to the hot wallet of MtGox based on the leaked PHP code.

The logic there was to split large outputs (>500 coins) every 10 minutes, randomly between 40 and 60% of the input to each new output.

You've obviously never seen a real professor of computer science. Have you seen anyone use emacs to send an email? 

And this one? http://www.circle.com/2014/02/24/joint-statement-regarding-insolvency-mt-gox/

This event was already priced in by speculators.

http://blog.blockchain.info/2014/02/25/joint-statement/

It's joint so its across a few places you know.

Edit:

http://www.circle.com/2014/02/24/joint-statement-regarding-insolvency-mt-gox/

What does this even mean?? The hot wallet was run on a water cooled server which was sitting above the cold storage paper wallets and the leak cause the ink to smudge making the keys unreadable? Come on. Even a fool compares assets to liabilities and would notice such a thing.


Believe me bro.


So tone neutral:


FUD

Is this the "pull-n-dump" technique? Where the seller manipulates the market by showing impatience and willingness to accept slippage? So that stamp can go over 579.34 now?

It's okay guys, gox is totally solvent now.

http://i.imgur.com/dTiF4XB.jpg

It used to take a long time, back in early 2013. The reference client used some terrible flat file database system and it was basically disk I/O bound trying to download and validate transactions. The newer version switched to a different database type that is considerably faster, and typically network bound.

The benefit of speculation is that when the actual event happens, it's less shocking to the market overall.

Absolutely not.

Now is the time for the ultimate market troll. The troll needs to announce "withdrawls will be re-enabled on Friday" and then announce on Friday that "some unexpected technical issues arose" and he "has to delay it again" but he is very sorry and will "update" "in another 4 business days".

Look they're testing their code, ran into some bugs:

https://blockchain.info/address/127gn88Zhp7pZmGsFLm8R2CAdL1JKrjsZi
https://blockchain.info/address/16aCPsLdVxMYDMzQtiG9vXj9yYY5Zy2AJ4

It's a misunderstanding that bitcoin has been created to facilitate pervasive low cost transactions. Transactions are important, and they occur, but they are not designed to support low level trade in the same way that you can't easily buy a tube of toothpaste with gold. Improvements to BTC may make that a reality, but today it is certainly not the case. Additionally, we are in the stop-gap phase where transactions are still intended to execute at a fiat level. If BTC is successful, then transactions will be priced in BTC independent of the fiat levels. The value of the dollar goes up and down all the time, but merchants generally aren't market pricing items to the second based on exchange rates, and most don't really care. The additional gain-able profit is pure speculation anyway.

What is more likely is that a layer of banking will be built on top of BTC where involving the blockchain in every transaction is unnecessary. You probably use real fiat once a week if that to buy some small items. Instead you trust some 3rd party update their ledger for everyone and give you the real fiat if you asked for it. Broad adoption of losable wallets on cellphones spells consumer-protection disaster.

It also seems to support single-pool mining aka 100% attack. Bringing online 5.1% to support? Screwed. Bringing on 51% to attack? Harder. Joining the existing 99%? Win.

Seems like the DoS prevention code in GLD prevents people from hopping on when it comes to the top of the profit list.

Forever? There's a lot of competition there, and it's not like there is any overhead in each transaction. The real question is why does anyone else charge a fee?

It's all about fraud and risk profiles, especially when doing business in the US with a bank that wants to know everything about that money you just sent there. Coinbase's host bank will drop as soon as they have any legit claims of failed consumer protections, something bitcoin is not setup to provide.