Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 26 results by losangeles
Re: Ethereum Tokens Thread - Golem (GNT), Augur (REP), Gnosis (GNO) etc.
As a newcomer to ETH, I'm not sure how it really works. These tokens exist on the XRP blockchain? Would the reason to own them be that you support the applications that use them?
Everyone who's hitting these issues, what does your history look like? Is there any indication as to when your money vanishes?
for me, there's a btc withdrawal on btc-e, blockchain shows the transaction at 35 confirmations, but no corresponding credit to the gox account. it would have hit around the time mtgox was down (for the second time, about an hour after resuming trades).
anyone have insight on this? it was a relatively small amount but it does make me realize the level of trust we're placing in a company against whom we have no legal recourse.
Seems you got the financial 'hair cut'.
i've never been in a position to receive a financial haircut before. truly, i have arrived.
Everyone who's hitting these issues, what does your history look like? Is there any indication as to when your money vanishes?
for me, there's a btc withdrawal on btc-e, blockchain shows the transaction at 35 confirmations, but no corresponding credit to the gox account. it would have hit around the time mtgox was down (for the second time, about an hour after resuming trades).
anyone have insight on this? it was a relatively small amount but it does make me realize the level of trust we're placing in a company against whom we have no legal recourse.
Tell it to people who deposited more than $10000 on them. If you're not verified leaving Gox is extremaly time consuming.
Then take your coins out. Exchange your fiat then exchange it back again in a different exchange. THEY STOLE MYY MONEY!
i was just noticing the same thing.
They stole your money too?
We must get the word out. Gox is downright stealing money. Not lagging. Not manipulating. STEALING.
something definitely happened, i need to look at my notes which are at work. i believe they just haven't credited a BTC deposit.
Tell it to people who deposited more than $10000 on them. If you're not verified leaving Gox is extremaly time consuming.
Then take your coins out. Exchange your fiat then exchange it back again in a different exchange. THEY STOLE MYY MONEY!
i was just noticing the same thing.
edit: actually they haven't credited a transfer from btc-e with 30 confirmations
Re: Scaled Days Destroyed: Is a record high FX rate freeing cold storage bitcoins?
It's a great idea. It makes intuitive sense. Someone skilled in math could offer you better feedback than I can. Looking forward to some discussion among the tech and quant sides of the forum about how this could be implemented. Thanks!
I can only think of two occasions that you need credit money to invest:
1. you are in a war with another country, if you do not produce weapons fast enough, you will lose the war
2. you are extremely shortage on everything after a war that you need to reach a certain living standard quickly
1. you are in a war with another country, if you do not produce weapons fast enough, you will lose the war
2. you are extremely shortage on everything after a war that you need to reach a certain living standard quickly
Isn't this basically what life is?
It's not better, nor worse, for society at large. That's actually impossible. The "market cap" of an economy is simply a reflection of the total wealth of that economy. It doesn't matter so much who happens to possess that wealth, from an economic perspective.
Distribution of wealth actually matters very, very much.
Politcally and socially, sure. Economicly or mathmaticly, not so much.
Quote
But thats not the point Im making, as it isnt about wealth; its about availability of credit. You (usually) dont get significantly more or less wealthy if you invest your credit money for instance in the stock market. But what you do achieve is making credit (ie money) available for businesses and generally thats a good thing for the economy. If everyone would hide their fiat under their pillow you would have a problem. Thats why I say the small disincentive inherent to inflationary credit money is actually a good property for the economy at large.
You're missing the point. Credit availability is a problem for whom? I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm trying to be a better economics professor than you apparently have been exposed to thus far. The classic method involves asking questions of the student, in order to lead them to a deeper understanding of the topic. Economics is more than mathmatics or statistics, it's people, so both the who and why does matter.
Moon I'm having trouble understanding your two statements in relation to each other. They seem to be contradictory. In your eagerness to teach, you may have been a bit unclear. The way I see it, economics is both social and mathematical science, and from that perspective, the distribution of wealth matters very much. I agree with you that the who and the why does matter.
Learn about time preference. It's one of the most important and relevant concepts in the Austrian theory. There is no such thing as money that just sits there forever. Saving money means having a low time preference for current consumption, which means delaying the consumption for future needs. For situations where the time preference for consumption has increased. Therefore saving, or "hoarding" as some idiots call it, is not putting money away for good. It's saving money for future consumption.
If you have so much money that you could indulge all of your present wants and needs and still have money left over, then effectively, wouldn't the remainder "just sit there forever?" Is it really worth entertaining the notion that the money will enter the economy in 100 years so it's still productive? What about 200 years? A billion years? It sounds ludicrous but if you had a certain quantity of money that you didn't need to spend, and it continued to appreciate just by your holding onto it, then wouldn't you just hold it, and if so, how is that productive?
The actual purchasing power that the land you own represents isnt going up significantly every year unless you made an above average clever investment.
Nope, it does, on average, because there is economic development and there is population growth. I'm not a clever investor, I just buy up land whenever I think the area needs more development. It never fails.
That's fine for you, and it proves the point that by holding onto your asset you're reaping the gains of others' labors. People developing the land around yours is causing it to go up in value. Your owning the land hasn't contributed much or anything, but it's increased in value. Obviously everyone can't use the same strategy or no development would occur.
Think about it. lets say your currency appreciates by 10% per year and you can live a luxury life spending only 5% of your savings. Whats happening? You get richer every day by doing absolutely nothing.
Basically.
This is like asking a bunch of crack addicts if it's a good day to buy some crack.
continuing off-topic.. the attention on bitcoin from the Cyprus news and FinCEN has probably gotten to a few ultra-high net worth people. someone bought $1mil in coin today, and let's remember there are hundreds of people in the world for whom $1mil is a very small percentage of their savings. hundreds of people for whom $1mil is less of their savings than $1,000 is to you. the impact on price is obvious.
but the peas coming along with that carrot is that with such high net worth people into bitcoin, it will become more legitimate in some ways. certainly there would be more legal hoops to jump through if a government wanted to outlaw something which some rich guy's lawyers on retainer will be paid to defend. still not exactly a "robust economy," but value in being an alternative to traditional banking.
but the peas coming along with that carrot is that with such high net worth people into bitcoin, it will become more legitimate in some ways. certainly there would be more legal hoops to jump through if a government wanted to outlaw something which some rich guy's lawyers on retainer will be paid to defend. still not exactly a "robust economy," but value in being an alternative to traditional banking.
My problem with that theory is that much of the recent gains are due to a recent rash of good news. What happens when there is bad news? Granted, the good news is real news, but it's been decidedly pro-Bitcoin for weeks. We are due some bad news, like a major exchange hack. We are, IMHO, beyond a price point that is justifiable with the current size of the actual bitcoin economic activity alone. Hype leads to speculative bubbles. We all know this. What we don't know is how long we can ride it before sentiment turns sour. What happens to the European banking panic when the asinine deposit tax proposal in Cyprus goes down in flames? Or there is a compromise that doesn't spell the worst? The sudden influx of Euro denominated wealth cannot be maintained. Once the pool of risk adverse Europeans (an irony, I know) has all moved the greater part of their deposits into Bitcoin (or gold/silver/whatever) who is going to be left to support the bid wall? Can that bid wall be supported by Argentines and Iranians evading capital controls? I doubt it. That's what Bitcoin is good for, but it doesn't really matter so much what the exchange price actually is if Bitcoin is only being used as a workaround for a bottleneck in the fiat currency system.
imho the people with enough cash to move around due to international monetary news probably have a reason or two to have an asset like bitcoin. so i agree with you on all that, but i also think the exposure bitcoin is getting in this cyprus debacle is enough to turn on some people, with significant assets, who see a use for it beyond the ones you mention.
i don't think the existing monetary system will ever come crashing down, but that people with significant wealth will always want options for maneuvering within it.
If a bank wants to buy/sell/short (or whatever) bitcoins, how is it gonna justify these transactions to the regulators?
Beyond miners, bitcoin doesn't have regulators.What do they need to justify and why?
Cool isn't it?
I mean banks trying to hide 'money laundering' actions from the government and the like (tax offices). I know this is ridiculous to say though (banks being actually the government)!
For the record, your English is flawless. And yeah I was just thinking today about the anti-money laundering regulations that some exchanges have, just like banks. Similarly, I wonder if people making a profit from investing in bitcoin are liable for capital gains tax, and if so, how many people would actually report it.
Kind of off-topic to the issue of banks, but it's another legal concern for the bitcoin economy.
- nose
- flanks
- tail
OhEmGee, ty 4 posting this important nfo!!1
We can't be too careful because there are wai moar pony scams out there than people think.
http://i.imgur.com/S8jfx.jpg
That's because people are too dumb to know how to use their ponycoins properly.
So we need you to teach us IMPORTANT THINGS about identifying ponies.
Otherwise we could end up like poor Bitchlane, creating endless threads about the time she lost all her ponycoins.
http://i.imgur.com/xQeWK.png
+1 when the next digital currency takes over, we will look back at all the bitcoins wasted on ponies and laugh
I don't get it. Good luck anyway 