Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 48 results by rdsc
Plus, the 450TH/s hasharate estimtion for September is very optimistic. He is counting on no Avalon chips hashing by September, which seems unlikely.
But hashrate estimation is a total black art - there's perfectly legitimate community members (afaik) who've come up with similar predictions https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=232670.0 It's hard to avoid the feeling that you've got an axe to grind over this - I just wish you'd say what it was.
But there is any specific reasons of why they are "transmitting money" in the document? Can't read it all now.
No, there is no specific allegation in the document, just a general admonishment against violating the statute. California clearly has their wires crossed because, even under the most expansive interpretation of the law, the foundation is not a money transmitter.
They cannot be a money transmitter simply for advocating for Bitcoin as there are first amendment issues preventing regulation of that type of speech.
If the definition "facilitating the the transfer of money domestically or internationally outside of the conventional financial institutions system" is sufficient for them to build a case, then I think this is a serious challenge. Funding the infrastructure and developing the code-base has to meet a definition of "facilitating" I would have thought.
LOL, now the Bitcoin Foundation is a money transmiter bussines? Cease an desist order here -> http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/149335233?access_key=key-2lnhtenm4qb1mydngxac&allow_share=false&show_recommendations=false
What a joke, i wonder how they got that misleading info.
What a joke, i wonder how they got that misleading info.
can someone explain why they should be a money transmitter?
I would guess it's this bit - "engage as a business in facilitating the transfer of money domestically or internationally outside of the conventional financial institutions system"
Back down to 90 on Bitstamp - what is going on? This is the order book:
http://s10.postimg.org/rnrysi1wp/orderbook.png
http://s10.postimg.org/rnrysi1wp/orderbook.png
LOL!
In other words, if you were expecting to sell bitcoins there...
Just sold my $95.18 back in at $99.16 - $95 is too expensive.
Back down to 90 on Bitstamp - what is going on? This is the order book:
http://s10.postimg.org/rnrysi1wp/orderbook.png
http://s10.postimg.org/rnrysi1wp/orderbook.png
Wow... Bitstamp in free fall.
Now, when will MtGox follow?
Now, when will MtGox follow?
Yep - I just had bids taken at 95.18 and 90.19 - wtf, I wasn't expecting that to happen to day
Yeah, thanks BitPirate thats a really hand site
+1
You can view in Google Tranlsate as well http://bit.ly/19MkEKk
Super weird. I snagged 5 BTC at 95.19 on Bitstamp this morning - when the price doesn't appear to have dipped that low? Anyone ever seen this?
http://s11.postimg.org/nky1h48hv/Bitbuy2.jpg
Great - I'm in before the Bitcoin Apocalypse
http://s11.postimg.org/nky1h48hv/Bitbuy2.jpg
Great - I'm in before the Bitcoin Apocalypse
It dropped to 95 very shortly on Bitstamp about 12 hours ago. Consider yourself lucky.
Cheers - wasn't sure about the date stamp.
Super weird. I snagged 5 BTC at 95.19 on Bitstamp this morning - when the price doesn't appear to have dipped that low? Anyone ever seen this?
http://s11.postimg.org/nky1h48hv/Bitbuy2.jpg
Great - I'm in before the Bitcoin Apocalypse
http://s11.postimg.org/nky1h48hv/Bitbuy2.jpg
Great - I'm in before the Bitcoin Apocalypse
Interesting, there is a bidwall of 3000 on Gox at 105.
And a mini one on Bitstamp still of 700 or so.
And a mini one on Bitstamp still of 700 or so.
I think that's called wishful thinking.
Huh? http://mtgoxlive.com/orders
Just meant that they'd be lucky to get 105 - did they get eaten or just evaporate? Missed all the excitement
Interesting, there is a bidwall of 3000 on Gox at 105.
And a mini one on Bitstamp still of 700 or so.
And a mini one on Bitstamp still of 700 or so.
I think that's called wishful thinking.
It's just lo-fi pattern recognition, but every time things have flattened out like this in the last 3 weeks we've dropped - this is tracking Goomboos 10/21
http://s11.postimg.org/d8aicwl83/Screen_Shot017.jpg
Looking forward to the weekend
http://s11.postimg.org/d8aicwl83/Screen_Shot017.jpg
Looking forward to the weekend
some tried to swim with the big fishie on the 7th, but he played on the 9th... so yeah, maybe Sunday this time, unless... not
My take is that I think the Whales know they're running out of time - not just because of difficulty and the Asics, but because of China. Obviously I know that the chips are made in China - but the market was made in the West - if adoption picks up in China then a lot of people with a different attitude to the dollar (and less "play" money) may start to discipline the exchanges. Just guessing
It's just lo-fi pattern recognition, but every time things have flattened out like this in the last 3 weeks we've dropped - this is tracking Goomboos 10/21
http://s11.postimg.org/d8aicwl83/Screen_Shot017.jpg
Looking forward to the weekend
http://s11.postimg.org/d8aicwl83/Screen_Shot017.jpg
Looking forward to the weekend
I'm no gangsta, I just don't think BTC was started to provide VC's with a new way of getting rich. I don't agree that adoption needs VC input - it works because it works - that can be it's strength in exactly the same way that Linux didn't need VC input to thrive and survive. You want corporate money? Go Ripple.
Although I think Ripple will fail, It makes BTC stronger. more adoption
Who do think developed linux? without VC we would be missing out on some nice stuff as they heavily invested in it to make further development possible.
I have no problem with you flaming at me but please think before making stupid statements. And no I don't want to go in a discussion regarding linux
Jeez - I'm not flaming you I'm disagreeing with you - if you don't get the open source roots of BTC and why that's relevant that's fine, but it's not just a dispute on this thread, it's a core dispute in the whole technical world. I'll stay off your threads.
I'm no gangsta, I just don't think BTC was started to provide VC's with a new way of getting rich. I don't agree that adoption needs VC input - it works because it works - that can be it's strength in exactly the same way that Linux didn't need VC input to thrive and survive. You want corporate money? Go Ripple.
You are, quite simply, stupid. Thanks for providing fuel for my evening workout.
Of course - Satoshi invented BTC so bloated Venture Capitalists could raise there blood pressure while they're sweating off the days losses in the gym.
Time to ignore.
Sure - but BTC wasn't created so that Big Fish with lots of money could have a better life. I couldn't give a fuck about VC or CEO interest.
Alright, gangsta. You're missing the point. Venture capitalists are the people that have and are going to continue to invest in startup companies centered around the use of Bitcoin. This means, new exchanges (hopefully better than Mt. Gox), companies that make it easy for the computer illiterate to purchase bitcoin, easier ways to pay for things with BTC, etc... If you buy BTC you definitely should give a fuck about VC interest. Not sure what you mean about CEO interest though. VC interest will provide the infrastructure for bitcoin to gain widespread adoption and use. This helps their value.
I'm no gangsta, I just don't think BTC was started to provide VC's with a new way of getting rich. I don't agree that adoption needs VC input - it works because it works - that can be it's strength in exactly the same way that Linux didn't need VC input to thrive and survive. You want corporate money? Go Ripple.
... we need the small fish as bait.
Not quite selling it to me there...
Inorder for a VC to adopt BTC, they must have a reason. Now the incentive is not that big.
If 'everyone' accepts BTC then VC will follow. We need a broader audience.
However the reverse is also true. if VC accept BTC then the small fish will follow as well.
For me it's not doable to convince large VC to use BTC I don't know the right CEO's however small/medium businesses are a lot easier to convince/approach. creating a bigger user base.
Sure - but BTC wasn't created so that Big Fish with lots of money could have a better life. I couldn't give a fuck about VC or CEO interest.
Neither was it created specifically to improve YOURS. However wider adoption is good for BTC = good for me. VC's money is as good as any ones.
Unless your saying you don't want your coins having high value that makes your life easier, I don't understand. Market cap increase is 'up,up,up' VC's have big money and that helps all of us.
Me personally - I want BTC to "work" and I don't want it to lose me money. That's it. Obviously this is a speculation thread so most people want to make gains, but not necessarily at the cost of the little people, "bait" as you so tactfully put it. I think a lot of people on here are hoping that we can make gains at the cost of the Big People. That's the point.
So does "the Bear is pushing the Bull down to the bottom of the hill because he's got a poorly leg" count as TA?
I thought he was about to push him off a cliff
Nope - take him gently to the bottom of the cliff so he can get his strength back for the charge upward. Up! Up! Up!
... we need the small fish as bait.
Not quite selling it to me there...
Inorder for a VC to adopt BTC, they must have a reason. Now the incentive is not that big.
If 'everyone' accepts BTC then VC will follow. We need a broader audience.
However the reverse is also true. if VC accept BTC then the small fish will follow as well.
For me it's not doable to convince large VC to use BTC I don't know the right CEO's however small/medium businesses are a lot easier to convince/approach. creating a bigger user base.
Sure - but BTC wasn't created so that Big Fish with lots of money could have a better life. I couldn't give a fuck about VC or CEO interest.