Author Topic: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion  (Read 55282 times)

maizeman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
  • Location: The World of Tomorrow
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #600 on: November 18, 2017, 03:05:39 PM »
No, thanks that's a set of interesting thoughts.

I completely agree with you that relatively small transactions are going to be the first ones to be priced out of inclusion in blocks when demand for bitcoin (or bitcoin cash) transactions exceeds supply. The reason I focused on something like buying coffee is that these smaller commercial transactions also tend to be the marginal transactions which are more sensitive to transaction fees, and hence they play an outsized role in determining what the transaction fees actually end up looking like for everyone.

Imagine a world with 4 transactions per block, and right now in each block there are are five people trying to make transactions, one willing to pay $0.50 in transaction fees, one willing to pay $10 in transaction fees, and three willing to pay $100 in transaction fees. Right now the market clearing transaction fee is $0.51, because at that price, the number of potential transactions willing to pay that price equals the number of transactions which can be included in the block. Now imagine one additional person decides they want to make a transaction and is willing to pay up to $20 in fees. It make take a few blocks for supply and demand to work itself out, but when the dust settles the market clearing price has jumped from $0.51 to $10.01, which is enough to price out two of the people who wanted to spend bitcoin, so supply equals demand again. A 20% increase in the number of potential transactions produced a 2,000% increase in price. The change in the price of transaction fees doesn't have to have a linear relationship with the number of potential transactions.

One thing to keep in mind is that transaction fees are only a relatively small part of the revenue miners get from adding to the blockchain at the moment. Right now the block reward is still 12.5 bitcoins (~$100,000). The average transaction fees per block are only 2.2 bitcoins (~$17,000). Even if there was some empty space in some blocks, I think there will always be lots of microtransactions or dust transactions which would be happy to pay lower but greater than zero fees to be included in the blockchain. However you won't see these in the mempool because people know they'd never get confirmed and so don't even bother to try to get them to go through.
"Itís a selective retirement," Richard explained, "a retirement from boring s**t."

My source code & my journal

lifeanon269

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 288
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #601 on: November 18, 2017, 04:29:00 PM »
No, thanks that's a set of interesting thoughts.

I completely agree with you that relatively small transactions are going to be the first ones to be priced out of inclusion in blocks when demand for bitcoin (or bitcoin cash) transactions exceeds supply. The reason I focused on something like buying coffee is that these smaller commercial transactions also tend to be the marginal transactions which are more sensitive to transaction fees, and hence they play an outsized role in determining what the transaction fees actually end up looking like for everyone.

...

One thing to keep in mind is that transaction fees are only a relatively small part of the revenue miners get from adding to the blockchain at the moment. Right now the block reward is still 12.5 bitcoins (~$100,000). The average transaction fees per block are only 2.2 bitcoins (~$17,000). Even if there was some empty space in some blocks, I think there will always be lots of microtransactions or dust transactions which would be happy to pay lower but greater than zero fees to be included in the blockchain. However you won't see these in the mempool because people know they'd never get confirmed and so don't even bother to try to get them to go through.

I totally agree that the micro-transactions are the transactions that ultimately dictate the fee rate. If a $10,000 transaction is willing to pay $100 in fees, but only needs to pay $1 to get a transaction confirmed, then why pay $100? There are a much larger number of micro-transactions than there are large sum transfers. If the block size is large enough to accomodate all large sum transfers, then it is ultimately only the micro-transactions that need to compete for block space. Since these are the only competitors, then they're the ones that will set the fee rate for all others.

The thing about the bitcoin network is that at the very start, there weren't very many large sum transfers since not many people were willing to use the network with large sums of money. So I don't think we really saw much competition between small and large transactions. Also, since the block size wasn't a limit, large sum transactions were getting a really good fee deal in the beginning. I feel that the more institutional money comes in, we're going to see more and more large sum money transactions that will end up competing for block space.

As far as the number of micro-transactions that could potentially be included in blocks, but are never broadcasted to begin with; this raises another important consideration. Transaction spamming needs to always be considered when determining the approriate block size and unfortunately it is almost impossible to do because of the fact that it isn't something that you can easily predict. Anyone can broadcast any number of transactions using any fee rate they choose (at a cost obviously). Therefore, if there is always a large amount of transactions that are borderline missing out completely from block space, this can be easily abused with transaction spamming. Since a massive influx of transactions at small fee rate (10 satoshis/byte) will effectively blanket all transactions at that fee rate, then all micro-transactions at that fee rate that want to get confirmed will need to marginally increase their fee rate to 11 satoshis/byte. Since transactions at 10 satoshis/byte are no longer being confirmed, then the spammer doesn't need to worry about actually paying many of those fees and they've effectively raised the fee rate on the network for the lowest margin and most vulnerable transactions. This is another problem that the fee market doesn't have a good solution for when it comes to accomodating micro-transactions and is another reason why second layer solutions are necessary. Block sizes consisting of mostly larger sum transactions won't have this problem since these transactions can support larger fees and since some of the spammed transactions actually do go through, it will be much more costly for the spammer to conduct such a campaign.

I think the predictability of fees is another problem that has caused many people to pay much larger fees than they actually need to. Until wallets can accurately predict the lowest fee necessary, then we'll always have people pay $2 for a transaction when they could've easily only paid $1 and been confirmed in the same amount of time. Having a network vulnerable to transaction spamming only exacerbates the problem with fee estimation algorithms.

phil22

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 76
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #602 on: November 18, 2017, 07:01:59 PM »
To say that they were the opposite of conservative simply because the number of lines of code involved is a misunderstanding of a proper development lifecycle.

core allowed blocks to get full rather than making a one-line code change.  they allowed fees to increase and have killed user enthusiasm and adoption for bitcoin because they refused to make a conservative one-line code change.  they are the opposite of conservative.

yes, by all means, test segwit code for years and on other coins before deploying it.  but the conservative move was to change the one line of code while doing the testing to avoid this transaction fee market escalation.

Regarding fees, first off, one of the biggest factors in rising fees for bitcoin is simply due to the fact that the price of a single bitcoin has risen astronomically over the last 2 years.

this is wrong.  the price does not determine rising fees.  rising fees are explained by available block space going to zero.  look at the first chart in this link:

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#30d
(or see chart image attachment on this post)

many transactions remain unconfirmed with low fees (<10 sat/byte) because there's no available block space.  users/wallets ARE attempting to send low-fee transactions, they just isn't room to confirm them.

Rather than focusing on the fee paid in USD for any given transaction, it should be the fee rate that should be of primary concentration.

i disagree.  to grow the user base for bitcoin, the actual paid USD fee is the important number.  a $0.05 median fee means users and merchants will use the coin, and a $1.00 (or lately for BTC, $3.00+) fee means users and merchants will abandon the coin.

When you look at fee rates on Bitcoin Cash, the median fee rate is somewhere around 60-70 satoshis/byte. That results in a fee of about 18 cents on the Bitcoin Cash network for a transaction of average size.

again, this is wrong.  where are you getting your data for median fees (in satoshis/byte) for BCH?  i couldn't find it anywhere.   i'll provide a link below that shows the median fee for bitcoin cash has recently spiked to 11 cents, and for the last few months has often been well below 4 cents.  well below your "18 cents" value given.

https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/median_transaction_fee-bch.html#3m

That same fee rate would result in a fee of $1.15 if the price of Bitcoin Cash were equivalent to the price of Bitcoin today (~$7700). Now, the median fee rate on the bitcoin network today is around 90 satoshis/byte. With an average transaction size of about 230 bytes, this results in your median fee being around $1.60 on the bitcoin network. That's not too far from what the Bitcoin Cash network would look like now if its price were the same as Bitcoin's.

fees are determined by the fee market, not the price of the coin.  you cannot compare the fees in sat/bye of BTC, with full blocks, to BCH, where blocks are not full.  just to show the data, here is average block size of BTC vs BCH, showing BTC blocks are full and BCH blocks are not:

https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/size-btc-bch.html#3m

The percentage of SegWit transactions is only around 10-11%. This means that there is still potential to decrease these fees by not only freeing up block weight space for additional transactions and thus decreasing competition in the fee market (lowering the fee rate), but also by decreasing the average size of a transaction using SegWit enabled wallets/addresses.

BTC users could use segwit transactions, which should increase the supply of available space for transactions to 2MB:

https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4ff0kw/36_mb_blocks_on_the_segwit_testnet/d28lljd/

we'll see if users begin to do that more often.  but given an equal size of the user base and an equal coin price in USD, full 2MB BTC blocks will require higher fees than full 8MB BCH blocks.

But where does bitcoin cash go with an increasing load? Competition for block space is already low due to the low transaction volume and large block size. Therefore there isn't much capability for bitcoin cash to decrease the actual fee rate paid and fee of transactions in USD from where they are today.  If bitcoin cash were to see the same load of the bitcoin network then that would mean the only option to keep the fee rate the same as it is today would be to increase the block size yet again.

this is not true.  BCH blocks are not full, so users/wallets could send lower fee transactions TODAY, even 0-fee transactions.

yes obviously, if BCH blocks were full then increasing block size would be the only way to lower fees.  supply and demand.

If increasing the block size only allows you to maintain the fee rate that we have today, that means that if the price of bitcoin cash were to increase dramatically, then we'd be in the same position with high fees (in USD) while at the same time decreasing centralization immensely.

you're basing this on your above false premise that BCH fees cannot be lowered today.

Finally, as far as unconfirmed transactions go, there was clearly a transaction spam campaign that occurred after the fork cancellation due to the enormous number of transactions that were broadcast that all had fees of 10 satoshis/byte or lower. This was a very anomalous event.

again, you are spreading misinformation.  please stop doing this.  where are you getting your data from?  below is a link (first "unconfirmed transaction count" chart) that shows the number of unconfirmed 0-10 satoshis/byte transactions on BTC did not suddenly increase after the fork cancellation on November 8th:

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#30d
(or see chart image attachment on this post)

if anything it shows a clear linear accumulation of 0-5 sat/byte fee transactions since Oct 26th and a relatively constant number of unconfirmed 5-10 sat/byte free transactions since then -- nobody is spamming these transactions.

I hope this clears up some information as I feel like there is a lot of misinformation out there on fees, scaling, etc with regards to the bitcoin network.

you are spreading misinformation without citing your sources.  you are systematically using false premises to make it seem like BCH would have the same transaction fees as BTC if their USD price was the same.  BCH has 8MB blocks, and BTC has 1MB blocks (or 1.7MB-2MB blocks if segwit is used, see link below).  it's supply and demand.  an 8MB block will have a lower-priced fee market than a 2MB block.  it's a simple as that.

https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4ff0kw/36_mb_blocks_on_the_segwit_testnet/d28lljd/

I wasn't trying to imply that the increase in the price of bitcoin is the sole reason why transaction fees have drastically risen over the last year (as priced in USD), but I do feel that it is the largest driver thus far given the fact that the price in bitcoin has increased at a much faster rate than the total number of transactions has.

and why do you think the number of transactions hasn't increased?  it's because blocks are full.  transaction fees are going up because blocks are full.

In the instance of bitcoin cash, since block size is essentially being used as the sole means of scalability, this means that the fee market is a delicate balance between ensuring that the mempool isn't always empty and that the blocks aren't always full.

the fee market is simply the supply of block space vs. the demand for making transactions.  it has nothing to do with ensuring the mempool isn't always empty.

lifeanon269

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 288
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #603 on: November 18, 2017, 09:20:29 PM »
Phil22,

I agree with much of what you're saying. Rereading your original response I see that you're comment was mainly in regards to the recent run up in fees and transactions related to the fork event. Like I said, this was highly anomalous. Taking out events such as the forks in August and November and things look much different with transactions in the 10-20 satoshi/byte range routinely getting processed each day.

My points weren't to compare the Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash networks as they are in their own states today. That's obviously not a fair comparison for several reasons, some of which were touched on by the both of us. For one, as was said, Bitcoin Cash's blocks aren't full. Therefore discussing a fee market where blocks aren't full is like simply trying to compare the generosity of one userbase to a competitive fee market in another. Blocks on the Bitcoin network only started getting regularly full around March of this year. Bitcoin Cash is a good demonstration of this however. As I said earlier, often wallets over-estimate fees and this is clearly seen on the BCH network in action as well. The same is true on the BTC network. Unfortunately, a lot of work still needs to occur to accurately estimate proper fees. If wallets/users would estimate fees appropriately, this would do a lot to drive down the median fee rate on the BTC network. It doesn't benefit anyone to pay a higher fee than necessary (except the miners of course).

I agree that since BCH blocks aren't full, then the fee rate could potentially be lower. But, my point was that 8MB won't always be empty. They're empty because the network isn't utilized. The same critiques against BTC today could be had against BCH in a few years if its adoption rate matched BTC's. So how would full blocks at 8MB be any different than full blocks at 1MB with regards to the fee market? The points discussed between Maizeman and I would still hold true with regards to fee competition. Like I said, the only option then to once again alleviate the strain on the fee market would be to increase block size, to which I linked the Andreas video as to why that is not a viable long term solution.

Also, since BCH blocks are never full, then essentially that means that transactions never need to wait more than the next block to be confirmed (which thankfully with the latest DAA adjustment will be more regular). So one thing that hasn't been discussed in this conversation yet is time. The fee market is all about competing for block space and paying a fee to be included in that block space. But, the third part of that equation that hasn't been discussed is time. It often isn't necessary for all transactions (especially micro-transactions) to be included in the next block, or even the next 5 blocks. That's why I find John Newberry's response to Erik Voorhees' tweet a little while back very honest about the state of Bitcoin fees:

https://twitter.com/jfnewbery/status/927615263058653184

Often, fees are looked at as an average or median over the course of time (whether that's a day, and hour, etc). But, rather the fees in any given block is essentially a snapshot of what the fee market looked like at the time the block was mined. That doesn't tell you how long those transactions were waiting in the mempool prior to that block being mined. If we can assume that allowing for a micro-transaction to be confirmed within a day is reasonable, then saying that the blocks are full is extremely misleading since we know that all the blocks in any given day are not all full. At the moment, transactions with fees less than 10 satoshis/byte are being cleared out of the mempool. Outside of the anomaly transaction loads that I mentioned, 10-20 satoshis/byte fees are routinely being processed each day. Also, like I said, SegWit is opt-in and only being about 10% utilized on the network. If more people (and companies) would chose to utilize it, it would make fee rates of 20 satoshis/byte be even lower when denominated in USD because you're lowering the byte side of the fee rate as well.

Again, to reiterate, just because a blocksize increase is a simple change to make, doesn't mean it is an easy one or the right one. Once you increase the block size, you can't go backward. So it is absolutely critical that if it is chosen to go forward with such a decision, it is done when it is absolutely necessary and right to do so. Given all of our options for fees and scalability on the network as it stands already, I don't think the right conclusion is to make a decision to hardfork to a higher block size.

maizeman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
  • Location: The World of Tomorrow
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #604 on: November 18, 2017, 09:56:08 PM »
That is a really cool visualization of the mempool phil22, thanks for the link!

I got curious about the huge spike in pending transactions a week ago. Looks like bitcoin lost almost half of its hashing power to BCC for about two days. On Nov 11th and 12th, the blocktime was all the way up at 18 minutes (it's supposed to be 10) because the hash rate on the BTC network was so low.

Anyone know if there are any plans to change how fast BTC's difficulty adjusts as the hashrate changes? Having two compatible blockchains with valuations and hash rates of the same order of magnitude would seem to make it much more likely that we'll see more big swings in hashing power on time scales shorter than the 14 days that it normally takes the difficulty rate to adjust.
"Itís a selective retirement," Richard explained, "a retirement from boring s**t."

My source code & my journal

phil22

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 76
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #605 on: November 19, 2017, 10:34:19 AM »
Rereading your original response I see that you're comment was mainly in regards to the recent run up in fees and transactions related to the fork event. Like I said, this was highly anomalous. Taking out events such as the forks in August and November and things look much different with transactions in the 10-20 satoshi/byte range routinely getting processed each day.

the size of the spike is anomalous... but spikes in the mempool size are NOT anomalous.  you can see in the 3-month chart link below (the bottom chart on the page, "mempool size in MB") that the BTC mempool regularly spiked above 10MB throughout September and October (requiring users to wait 10 blocks for their transactions to clear):

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#3m
(or see attached chart to this post)

So how would full blocks at 8MB be any different than full blocks at 1MB with regards to the fee market?

it's supply and demand.  you make the point later with larger segwit bloks: with a larger supply of block space, given the same demand that can fill both 8MB and 1MB blocks, fees will be lower on the 8MB blocks.

Once you increase the block size, you can't go backward. So it is absolutely critical that if it is chosen to go forward with such a decision, it is done when it is absolutely necessary and right to do so.

this is not true.  after you increase the block size, if a really good 2nd-layer solution is developed and actually gets traction and allows users to make small transactions off-chain, you could then theoretically lower the block size.

lifeanon269

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 288
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #606 on: November 19, 2017, 01:09:18 PM »
the size of the spike is anomalous... but spikes in the mempool size are NOT anomalous.  you can see in the 3-month chart link below (the bottom chart on the page, "mempool size in MB") that the BTC mempool regularly spiked above 10MB throughout September and October (requiring users to wait 10 blocks for their transactions to clear):

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#3m
(or see attached chart to this post)

So how would full blocks at 8MB be any different than full blocks at 1MB with regards to the fee market?

it's supply and demand.  you make the point later with larger segwit bloks: with a larger supply of block space, given the same demand that can fill both 8MB and 1MB blocks, fees will be lower on the 8MB blocks.

this is not true.  after you increase the block size, if a really good 2nd-layer solution is developed and actually gets traction and allows users to make small transactions off-chain, you could then theoretically lower the block size.

Spikes in the mempool are not a problem so long as they drop and the netwok starts clearing out lower fee transactions (10-20 satoshis/byte) in a reasonable amount of time. Taking out the anomalous spikes around the fork dates and the large spikes in transactions all drop down with in a day or so down to the point where 0-20 satoshi/byte transactions are being cleared out. Waiting a day for a micro-transaction to be confirmed is not going to kill adoption. Especially given the fact that with credit cards, a merchant needs to wait 30 days to receive payment and payments are potentially reversible. Bitcoin transactions are irreversible and waiting a day to receive a small transaction to be confirmed on the network is not a problem. Merchants even take risk when accepting cash for transactions given the fact that they likely are not checking for counterfeits on transactions so small. I think the biggest problem is the fact that wallets have not done a good enough job in allowing users to specify a reasonable fee for their transactions to make it easier for them to judge what type of fee to use for their transaction. Perhaps wallets can even start including some of the fee data from websites like earn.com (some wallets do).

Do you feel it is a problem that 30 cent fees for smaller transactions take a day to confirm?

I think you missed my point regarding full 8MB blocks and full 1MB blocks. The point I was making is that, regardless of the block size, if you have full blocks, then that means you have to force some transactions to wait to be confirmed (not a bad thing as I mentioned) and thus this promotes fee competition (again, not a bad thing). The point I was making was that if 8MB blocks are full and transaction demand gets to the point where 8MB blocks are not sufficient, then the only option is to increase the block size yet again (I've talked about why that is not a good solution).

Also, as I mentioned earlier in the thread. I'm not against raising the block size to 2MB. It would be good if this were planned for 2018. I was against the SegWit2X fork due to the poor implementation of it (and was proven to be the case). I don't think block size increases should be immediately used whenever we start to have some transaction congestion. Like I said, once you increase the block size, you can't go back and if you could, it wouldn't exactly be easy. That's because Bitcoin nodes, when they download the blockchain, they validate all the blocks that they receive. If their rules state that all blocks must be 1MB, then they'll stop accepting blocks up to the point where a larger block is received. Maybe you could state rules that blocks between say 500000-510000 are allowed to be 2MB, but that isn't exactly an elegate solution and likely getting consensus around something like that would be difficult. With a network that requires consensus, you don't implement solutions around the idea that they could potentially be removed later knowing full well how difficult it is to get new rules implemented to begin with. Second layer solutions are a much better alternative to prevent micro-transactions from having to compete with large transactions in the same fee market.

phil22

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 76
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #607 on: November 19, 2017, 02:14:54 PM »
Waiting a day for a micro-transaction to be confirmed is not going to kill adoption. Especially given the fact that with credit cards, a merchant needs to wait 30 days to receive payment and payments are potentially reversible. Bitcoin transactions are irreversible and waiting a day to receive a small transaction to be confirmed on the network is not a problem.

bitcoin doesn't compete with just credit cards.  it competes with all other cryptocurrencies.  preventing use of microtransactions now, when there's no reason to do so, is harming adoption.  bitcoin is crippling itself at its own peril.

Do you feel it is a problem that 30 cent fees for smaller transactions take a day to confirm?

i agree that waiting a few hours or up to a day in the worst case is probably fine for most small transactions IF users and merchants are willing to do that rather than use a different cryptocurrency.  merchants shouldn't have trouble with that.  the problem is when a transaction for a $200 purchase on overstock or newegg, or even a $5 cup of coffee, is stuck in the mempool for several days and is eventually dropped completely out of the mempool altogether.  then the merchant would rather wait 30 days for a credit card transaction rather than get no payment at all.

and i think 5 cent fees taking a day to confirm is bearable in the worst case -- 30 cent fees should be much quicker than a full day.  a 30 cent fee is 3% of a $10 transaction, which is where we are with credit cards.

if 5 cent fees require 20MB blocks then yes that's too much too soon.  we may need good 2nd-layer solutions to allow those microtransactions to work, but the wrong way to do that is to force users to other cryptocurrencies at this stage by artificially keeping the block size low.  the decision to attempt to incentivize users to use off-chain transactions by artificially keeping the block size low was either intentional to try to kill bitcoin, or an attempt to redirect transaction fees to entities other than miners, or plain stupidity.

The point I was making was that if 8MB blocks are full and transaction demand gets to the point where 8MB blocks are not sufficient, then the only option is to increase the block size yet again (I've talked about why that is not a good solution).

you could continue to develop and roll out 2nd-layer solutions to keep smaller transactions off-chain.  you don't necessarily need to always increase block size.  but if a large majority of nodes can handle larger blocks, then there's no reason not to increase the max block size -- and this is where we are now.

Tonyahu

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 92
  • Age: 26
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Ambassador
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #608 on: November 21, 2017, 05:08:14 PM »
I want to point out that Bitcoin is up 296% since the original posting of this thread which was roughly 5 months ago.

Cheers to all who are in this market :]
« Last Edit: November 21, 2017, 05:10:04 PM by Tonyahu »

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9442
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #609 on: November 21, 2017, 06:07:59 PM »
Agreed.  When you're on a hot streak, the best thing to do is to keep gambling.  It never ends poorly.

phil22

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 76
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #610 on: November 21, 2017, 07:45:00 PM »
more snark.  how enlightening.

what if one was to hypothetically sell just enough of their crypto holdings to simply take a nice profit on their original fiat investment... and leave the rest of their crypto holdings intact?

in fact i sold a portion of my bitcoin a few years ago for a nice profit on the original fiat... now that the "fiat profit" aspect is taken care of i can let it ride and watch the fork drama and mudslinging from a comfortable position.  have any other holders here done this?

Tonyahu

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 92
  • Age: 26
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Ambassador
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #611 on: November 22, 2017, 09:34:37 AM »
more snark.  how enlightening.

what if one was to hypothetically sell just enough of their crypto holdings to simply take a nice profit on their original fiat investment... and leave the rest of their crypto holdings intact?

in fact i sold a portion of my bitcoin a few years ago for a nice profit on the original fiat... now that the "fiat profit" aspect is taken care of i can let it ride and watch the fork drama and mudslinging from a comfortable position.  have any other holders here done this?

I plan to methodically pull out most of my holdings during the course of 2018 and allocate it to Real Estate. I will let the long term holds ride but lots of short / mid term position I plan to close.

Agreed.  When you're on a hot streak, the best thing to do is to keep gambling.  It never ends poorly.

I pity the fool that remains steadfast in his ignorance.

jmecklenborg

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 122
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #612 on: November 22, 2017, 11:16:23 AM »
I want to point out that Bitcoin is up 296% since the original posting of this thread which was roughly 5 months ago.

Cheers to all who are in this market :]

You haven't made any money until you sell.  Bitcoin isn't a rental property or dividend stock. 



runbikerun

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 112
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #613 on: November 23, 2017, 05:02:42 AM »
I want to point out that Bitcoin is up 296% since the original posting of this thread which was roughly 5 months ago.

Cheers to all who are in this market :]

This isn't terrifying to bitcoin holders? A commodity you're holding is rising in price at a 700+% annualised rate? That's about 25 times as fast as Google's share price has grown since IPO, and that was before even Gmail existed. That isn't concerning at all?

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9442
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #614 on: November 23, 2017, 07:42:27 AM »
I want to point out that Bitcoin is up 296% since the original posting of this thread which was roughly 5 months ago.

Cheers to all who are in this market :]

This isn't terrifying to bitcoin holders? A commodity you're holding is rising in price at a 700+% annualised rate? That's about 25 times as fast as Google's share price has grown since IPO, and that was before even Gmail existed. That isn't concerning at all?

Gamblers on a hot streak don't usually see potential down sides.

maizeman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
  • Location: The World of Tomorrow
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #615 on: November 25, 2017, 08:47:37 PM »
Adding a quick update to the ZEC mining experiment.*



The price of ZEC is up 50% in the past little while, and as a result, my daily income is starting to tick back upwards (I'm currently averaging ~$5/day). I'm at -$564 vs the cost of my mining rig based on mining income only (assumes I sell all cryptocurrency income as it hits my account), so if things remains stable -- which is probably the one thing that certainly won't happen -- I'll break even in about another four months.

Now that said, I'm at +$4,950 if you include capital gains and forks/airdrops: other currencies you end up with (or able to get) just because you're holding bitcoin in a wallet where you control the private key. At this point my capital gains reflect ~$1,000 in bitcoin cash from when BTC and BCC forked, and ~$250 in bitcoin gold from when BTC and BTG forked in addition to the change in the price of bitcoin itself.

I'm curious how much more forking/airdropping is going to happen going forward. Bitcoin Gold is essentially a new altcoin, except that everyone who owned BTC received an equal amount of BTG and they kept the word "bitcoin" in the name. However unlike most newly launched altcoins BTG is already the 5th largest cryptocurrency by market cap and 8th largest currency by transaction volume. Given the success -- so far -- of both BCC and BTG, I imagine that many more groups are at least planning to try similar splits/airdrops in the future.

Important disclaimer: based on my original investment thesis, I still haven't broken even. In this case, I've been bailed out by the skyrocketing prices of the currencies I've been letting my mining earnings accumulate in, but if anything this should provide even more evidence that I'm terrible at predicting the future.

*Original details here on the first page of the thread. Details on power usage here on the second page.
"Itís a selective retirement," Richard explained, "a retirement from boring s**t."

My source code & my journal

shadow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #616 on: November 25, 2017, 09:26:54 PM »
@maizeman

You probably already know this. Just a reminder for anyone else: if you plan to access your btg, move all your bitcoin variants into new addresses first, so you don't share private keys with btg. (https://bitcoingold.org/critical-warning-nov-26/). As an alternative, you can use coinomi.




shadow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #617 on: November 25, 2017, 09:31:06 PM »
It's also good security for any future forks (all crypto), where you share private keys.


maizeman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
  • Location: The World of Tomorrow
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #618 on: November 25, 2017, 09:45:08 PM »
Definitely important advice, shadow.

I have to admit that so far I haven't swept either the BTG or BCC out of my BTC addresses because I have indeed been worried about the security of private keys. I will definitely move the BTC out first when I am actually ready to do so.
"Itís a selective retirement," Richard explained, "a retirement from boring s**t."

My source code & my journal

ketchup

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2844
  • Age: 26
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #619 on: November 26, 2017, 07:00:59 AM »
BTC is above $9000 now.  What's my best way (safe, low fees, etc) to sell some BTC (and BCH) for USD if I've got them in a BitGo wallet?

lifeanon269

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 288
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #620 on: November 26, 2017, 08:59:52 AM »
You probably already know this. Just a reminder for anyone else: if you plan to access your btg, move all your bitcoin variants into new addresses first, so you don't share private keys with btg. (https://bitcoingold.org/critical-warning-nov-26/). As an alternative, you can use coinomi.

I had been holding off on redeeming BTG since I didn't want to go through the hassel of moving my BTC to new private keys since my coins are split among a ton of addresses, so the fees would be pretty large for a transaction of that size. But, I recently just took the plunge and moved my BTC to a new SegWit enabled wallet. This freed me up to now move my BTG now that my old BTC wallet is empty.

Coincidentally I decided to use the Coinomi app and the Changelly exchange service. It was all pretty straightfoward, but I've haven't received the BTC yet. I'm guessing the delay is just because the BTC transactions need to go through and/or the Changelly service just takes a little while. At any rate, I'm at the mercy of the Changelly service right now. I did read on Twitter they had some issues over the holiday, but those have been resolved apparently.

Should be a nice bonus after it goes through. I wouldn't have guessed that BTG would be trading at ~$350, especially given its rocky start.


UPDATE: I just wanted to update this post to say that I did receive my BTG exchange for BTC through Coinomi/Changelly after a couple hours that same day. I didn't want to leave this post here making it seem like I was questioning the quality of their service. Everything was very smooth and easy to use.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2017, 06:39:33 AM by lifeanon269 »

effigy98

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 193
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #621 on: November 27, 2017, 02:32:48 PM »
This is amazing. Feels like the old dotcom days again. Hit another rebalance band and have a lot more gold and total stock market fund now.

We are still early because when I discussed this at thanksgiving nobody had any idea what bitcoin was and most have never heard of it. Until the masses get in, I think this has massive room to run.

shadow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #622 on: November 28, 2017, 08:41:52 AM »
If it turns out tethers is being fraudulently printed, there is a high chance it will severely impact the cryptoworld. You should do what you think is best based on what you believe.   

CanuckExpat

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2590
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Travelling
    • Freedom35
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #623 on: November 28, 2017, 10:55:15 PM »
what if one was to hypothetically sell just enough of their crypto holdings to simply take a nice profit on their original fiat investment... and leave the rest of their crypto holdings intact?

in fact i sold a portion of my bitcoin a few years ago for a nice profit on the original fiat... now that the "fiat profit" aspect is taken care of i can let it ride and watch the fork drama and mudslinging from a comfortable position.  have any other holders here done this?

Probably psychologically satisfying, and I understand the desire to take such a position, but if you want to be "rational" with your decision making, you should probably realize this is a form of mental accounting.

What you purchased for is immaterial at this point for whether you should hold or not. You could immediately convert to fiat currency at the current values.
Your unrealized (opportunity) cost is the current fiat value, not what you originally paid.
If you wouldn't buy it, you should sell and all that.

The above all ignores transaction/taxes, but those should be relatively minor
(taxes more so of an issue, but you also don't want to to let the tax tail wag the decision making dog)
Retired, or just homeless and jobless.
Blog
Journal

phil22

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 76
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #624 on: November 29, 2017, 05:16:01 PM »
Your unrealized (opportunity) cost is the current fiat value, not what you originally paid.
If you wouldn't buy it, you should sell and all that.

i agree it's probably wise to sell some portion of your holdings if you wouldn't take the same position again today.  but where do you draw the line?  sell half?  and how often do you repeat this exercise?  does this also apply to everything i own that could potentially be sold for fiat currency?

hasn't there been an opportunity cost in the coins i've sold in past years?

waltworks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2510
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #625 on: November 29, 2017, 06:08:51 PM »
does this also apply to everything i own that could potentially be sold for fiat currency?

Yes. Everything you own is costing you money. All the time.

-W

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 27420
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #626 on: November 30, 2017, 06:51:15 AM »
does this also apply to everything i own that could potentially be sold for fiat currency?

Yes. Everything you own is costing you money. All the time.

-W

I LOL'd.

And also nodded.

Of course it applies to everything. 

Opportunity cost is a bitch.
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with a kid.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."

talltexan

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1149
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #627 on: December 01, 2017, 08:10:01 AM »
With normal investing, I feel like checking it 4x a year and rebalancing is fine.

But Bitcoin (and, yes, the Bitcoin investment trust) change so rapidly that I could not imagine waiting three months to rebalance. Does anyone have a rule of thumb that's keeping him/her sane?

CanuckExpat

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2590
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Travelling
    • Freedom35
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #628 on: December 01, 2017, 09:49:56 PM »
i agree it's probably wise to sell some portion of your holdings if you wouldn't take the same position again today.  but where do you draw the line?  sell half?  and how often do you repeat this exercise?  does this also apply to everything i own that could potentially be sold for fiat currency?

Yes, with caveats.

Here's a perhaps related article: If You Wouldnít Buy it, You Should Probably Sell it

The stuff you own exists on spectrum of how easily they can be sold, how accurately you can value them, and the transaction costs.

The clothes on your back, your car, your house (if you choose to own any of those), are all relatively hard to value to 100% accuracy until you find a willing buyer, and there is some legwork involved in selling them.

Stocks, bonds, currencies (including crypto), that you hold electronically can be sold at the click of a mouse. They are interchangeable with each other and you have very accurate pricing information.
Retired, or just homeless and jobless.
Blog
Journal

effigy98

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 193
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #629 on: December 03, 2017, 01:13:39 AM »
With normal investing, I feel like checking it 4x a year and rebalancing is fine.

But Bitcoin (and, yes, the Bitcoin investment trust) change so rapidly that I could not imagine waiting three months to rebalance. Does anyone have a rule of thumb that's keeping him/her sane?

This is how I do it in the tax sheltered account since rebalance does not cause tax issues.

20% Total Market
20% Small Cap Value
20% Gold
20% Bitcoin
20% Long Term Treasury

5% swings trigger a rebalance.

When any one of these hits 25% I sell and buy the rest to get them back to 20%. Below 15% I do the same. My brokerage also does free trades on 3 of the 5 of these funds, and $4.95 for the rest so the costs are minimal. These assets have relatively low correlation so you buying low and selling high all the time. The concept is discussed in the book "The Permanent Portfolio: Harry Browne's Long-Term Investment Strategy".
« Last Edit: December 03, 2017, 10:29:42 PM by effigy98 »

Bicycle_B

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1265
  • Mustachian-ish in Live Music Capital of the World
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #630 on: December 03, 2017, 08:21:27 AM »

This is how I do it in the tax sheltered account since rebalance does not cause tax issues.

20% Total Market
20% Small Cap
20% Gold
20% Bitcoin
20% Long Term Treasury

5% swings trigger a rebalance.

When any one of these hits 25% I sell and buy the rest to get them back to 20%. Below 15% I do the same. My brokerage also does free trades on 3 of the 5 of these funds, and $4.95 for the rest so the costs are minimal. These assets have relatively low correlation so you buying low and selling high all the time.

@effigy98, how long have you been doing this with Bitcoin as one of the asset categories?  How much has converting Bitcoin to fiat increased the amount that is in the fiat-denominated categories?


CanuckExpat

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2590
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Travelling
    • Freedom35
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #631 on: December 03, 2017, 09:14:36 AM »
Small cap and not small cap value? Why in particular?
Retired, or just homeless and jobless.
Blog
Journal

hgjjgkj

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 66
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #632 on: December 03, 2017, 07:24:25 PM »
How do people feel about Ripple?

effigy98

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 193
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #633 on: December 03, 2017, 10:30:56 PM »
Small cap and not small cap value? Why in particular?

Value... corrected. Basically golden butteryfly with the cash portion replaced with bitcoin.
https://portfoliocharts.com/portfolio/golden-butterfly/

effigy98

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 193
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #634 on: December 03, 2017, 10:31:55 PM »

This is how I do it in the tax sheltered account since rebalance does not cause tax issues.

20% Total Market
20% Small Cap
20% Gold
20% Bitcoin
20% Long Term Treasury

5% swings trigger a rebalance.

When any one of these hits 25% I sell and buy the rest to get them back to 20%. Below 15% I do the same. My brokerage also does free trades on 3 of the 5 of these funds, and $4.95 for the rest so the costs are minimal. These assets have relatively low correlation so you buying low and selling high all the time.

@effigy98, how long have you been doing this with Bitcoin as one of the asset categories?  How much has converting Bitcoin to fiat increased the amount that is in the fiat-denominated categories?

About 6 months. It has increased my returns roughly 7% a month in the last couple months. I doubt those returns will continue, but who knows...

Edit: I dug up some numbers and I have two 401ks with roughly the same amount. One is 90/10 Buffet portfolio (90% S&P/500, 10% STT) and the other is the portfolio above. Now I only have 6 months with the bitcoin in here but this gives you an approximation.

2017 totals
Buffet portfolio: 33.10% return
Golden Crypto: 35.76% return

You have to hold gold and bitcoin which seems a lot more risky and complicated vs just simple 90/10. I am curious what will happen in the downturn, but I think the Golden Crypto will do better, but I am just guessing based on roughly what the Golden butterfly has done in the past.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2017, 12:13:21 AM by effigy98 »

effigy98

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 193
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #635 on: December 04, 2017, 12:16:25 AM »
How do people feel about Ripple?

I have a tiny bit just in case it ever takes off, but I do not like the centralization and prefer it to die. However, I like it better then the crusty old fiat system we have now that takes me several days to move money around between accounts vs the nearly instant crypto exchanges with XRP.

Jeferson

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #636 on: December 04, 2017, 10:28:19 AM »
I don't know how about Ripple, but IOTA is currently doing exceptionally well. Let's see where it can go.
Why do people think that my name is Jeferson?
 Read my trading journal

shadow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #637 on: December 04, 2017, 11:11:05 AM »
I'm not interested in speculating on ripple or iota.

Both currently fail the criteria of being a cryptocurrency, which includes 'decentralization' and 'trustlessness'.

talltexan

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1149
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #638 on: December 05, 2017, 02:47:31 PM »
Why would cash be replaced with Bitcoin and not Long Term Bonds?

Tonyahu

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 92
  • Age: 26
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Ambassador
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #639 on: December 06, 2017, 01:16:10 PM »

EXAMPLE:
Today on 10/04/2017: 1 Bitcoin is $4,800, 1 Monero is $91, 1 Ether is $292, 1 Lisk is $5.45, 1 LINK is $.39 and 1 ARDR is $.16.


Today on 12/06/2017: 1 Bitcoin is $13,400, 1 Monero is $282, 1 Ether is $430, 1 Lisk is $9.10 1 LINK is $.31 and 1 ARDR is $.55.

maizeman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
  • Location: The World of Tomorrow
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #640 on: December 06, 2017, 01:24:36 PM »
It's interesting that the most recent run-up in bitcoin has been relatively isolated from the broader cryptocurrency economy, when previously the prices of the various cryptocurrencies in dollars tended to move more in concert with each other.

(Tonyahu your post brought this to mind, bitcoin and monero have essentially tripled, but looking through the data on coin market cap most others have less than doubled, with many gains "only" in the 30-50% range.)

If I were a paid commenter I'm sure I could come up with some elaborate story for what that pattern means.
"Itís a selective retirement," Richard explained, "a retirement from boring s**t."

My source code & my journal

Optimiser

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 424
  • Age: 34
  • Location: PNW
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #641 on: December 06, 2017, 02:20:06 PM »
Quote
Unfortunately, there has been a security breach involving NiceHash website. We are currently investigating the nature of the incident and, as a result, we are stopping all operations for the next 24 hours.
Importantly, our payment system was compromised and the contents of the NiceHash Bitcoin wallet have been stolen. We are working to verify the precise number of BTC taken.
Clearly, this is a matter of deep concern and we are working hard to rectify the matter in the coming days. In addition to undertaking our own investigation, the incident has been reported to the relevant authorities and law enforcement and we are co-operating with them as a matter of urgency.
We are fully committed to restoring the NiceHash service with the highest security measures at the earliest opportunity.
We would not exist without our devoted buyers and miners all around the globe. We understand that you will have a lot of questions, and we ask for patience and understanding while we investigate the causes and find the appropriate solutions for the future of the service. We will endeavour to update you at regular intervals.
While the full scope of what happened is not yet known, we recommend, as a precaution, that you change your online passwords.
We are truly sorry for any inconvenience that this may have caused and are committing every resource towards solving this issue as soon as possible.

It sounds like about $60 million USD worth of BTC was stolen. The price of BTC fell for a few minutes and then went right back up.

maizeman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
  • Location: The World of Tomorrow
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #642 on: December 06, 2017, 02:27:21 PM »
Yikes! Thanks for posting that Optimiser. Nicehash was really quite convenient for mining one currency and getting paid in another.

Also this just popped up in my RSS feed.

Quote
As of today, Steam will no longer support Bitcoin as a payment method on our platform due to high fees and volatility in the value of Bitcoin.

In the past few months we've seen an increase in the volatility in the value of Bitcoin and a significant increase in the fees to process transactions on the Bitcoin network. For example, transaction fees that are charged to the customer by the Bitcoin network have skyrocketed this year, topping out at close to $20 a transaction last week (compared to roughly $0.20 when we initially enabled Bitcoin). Unfortunately, Valve has no control over the amount of the fee. These fees result in unreasonably high costs for purchasing games when paying with Bitcoin. The high transaction fees cause even greater problems when the value of Bitcoin itself drops dramatically.

Historically, the value of Bitcoin has been volatile, but the degree of volatility has become extreme in the last few months, losing as much as 25% in value over a period of days. This creates a problem for customers trying to purchase games with Bitcoin. When checking out on Steam, a customer will transfer x amount of Bitcoin for the cost of the game, plus y amount of Bitcoin to cover the transaction fee charged by the Bitcoin network. The value of Bitcoin is only guaranteed for a certain period of time so if the transaction doesnít complete within that window of time, then the amount of Bitcoin needed to cover the transaction can change. The amount it can change has been increasing recently to a point where it can be significantly different.

The normal resolution for this is to either refund the original payment to the user, or ask the user to transfer additional funds to cover the remaining balance. In both these cases, the user is hit with the Bitcoin network transaction fee again. This year, weíve seen increasing number of customers get into this state. With the transaction fee being so high right now, it is not feasible to refund or ask the customer to transfer the missing balance (which itself runs the risk of underpayment again, depending on how much the value of Bitcoin changes while the Bitcoin network processes the additional transfer).

At this point, it has become untenable to support Bitcoin as a payment option. We may re-evaluate whether Bitcoin makes sense for us and for the Steam community at a later date.

The part of cryptocurrency I don't care about (making money from rapid changes in price) is starting to significantly compromise the part I do care about (an interesting new way to make payments and move money around the world without having to worry about greedy payment processors or currency controls).

Edit: The good news there are lots of other cryptocurrencies which aren't experiencing the same issues. The downside is that right now none of them are accepted by nearly as many "real world" business, so I fear the current situation really may set back the adoption of payment processor free online transactions significantly.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2017, 02:36:58 PM by maizeman »
"Itís a selective retirement," Richard explained, "a retirement from boring s**t."

My source code & my journal

effigy98

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 193
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #643 on: December 06, 2017, 02:39:40 PM »
One of the strongest voices in bitcoin Andreas Antonopoulos just shared his story.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJWCJCWOxBYSi5DhCieLOLQ

Please read his story here and if he has helped you out at all, please donate (or get his books on amazon) to keep him going without worry of basic living expenses. It is people like him that are changing the world without asking much in return.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7hylea/andreas_antonopoulos_posted_this_response_to_a/

effigy98

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 193
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #644 on: December 06, 2017, 02:45:23 PM »
Why would cash be replaced with Bitcoin and not Long Term Bonds?

My feeling is the treasury will not let deflation happen even if it needs to. We have seen this play out over the years. This makes the cash portion not as useful. But I do have a portfolio that still holds a significant amount of cash so I am not saying it is bad, I just think treasuries will be more volitile then cash which will allow me to get higher returns.

effigy98

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 193
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #645 on: December 06, 2017, 02:50:44 PM »
The Steam news is unfortunate. It just highlights the need to get these small transactions off chain. If anything, it is another kick in the pants for the solution to be completed.

thenextguy

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 152
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #646 on: December 06, 2017, 03:34:20 PM »
The Steam news is unfortunate. It just highlights the need to get these small transactions off chain. If anything, it is another kick in the pants for the solution to be completed.

They mention fees, but Steam wouldn't care about fees if that was the only problem. The customers paid the fees, it doesn't hurt Steam. The real problem is the massive volatility in Bitcoin of late.  If Steam is accepting payments and then the price changes +/- 20% in the time it takes to clear, that's a problem.

maizeman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
  • Location: The World of Tomorrow
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #647 on: December 06, 2017, 09:08:42 PM »
Today the price of bitcoin increased $2,500. That's a one day gain greater than its entire value as recently as July.

Some of the coverage I read pointed to the fact that prices on coinbase (which is one of the more user friendly exchanges) have been up to $500 ahead of the average overall price on US exchanges, suggesting that the current spike in prices is being driven by bitcoin newbies who have been drawn in by recent news coverage of how fast the price of bitcoin is rising.

Whatever you think about the long term prospects of bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies -- personally I remain optimistic -- to me the price movements we've seen since August remind me a lot of the 2013 bubble in bitcoin prices.
"Itís a selective retirement," Richard explained, "a retirement from boring s**t."

My source code & my journal

marty998

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4935
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #648 on: December 07, 2017, 03:23:18 AM »
It's just gone up $1000 in an hour :O

Just saw it at US$14,998    :O   :O   :O

lifeanon269

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 288
Re: OFFICIAL: Blockchain / Crypto-Currency Portfolios and Discussion
« Reply #649 on: December 07, 2017, 05:58:01 AM »
Has anyone been following the recent happenings with Andreas Antonopoulos yesterday?

For those that don't know who he is, he is probably one of the most tireless educators for bitcoin and speak at countless conferences on the technology often without expenses covered. He literally wrote the book on bitcoin and offers that book for free on the internet.

Well the other day, Roger Ver called him out for receiving funds from individuals through a website called Patreon. He uses those funds to help him travel and offset the costs of going to conferences and such. Roger Ver (which this speaks to the type of character he is) said that if he had managed his finances better, he'd be a bitcoin millionaire already (https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status/938137951518773248). Not sure why someone would call out another's finances, especially over a public forum like twitter.

Andreas also wrote a more detailed response to his followers which you can read here which details his story a little more.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7hylea/andreas_antonopoulos_posted_this_response_to_a/

But what took place next has been pretty remarkable. The bitcoin community which loves Andreas rallied to his defense. Not only has everyone responded in kind to his amazing work that he's done over the years, but they've also flooded in massive amounts of donations to him.

Needless to say, he is now most certainly a bitcoin millionaire with over 100 bitcoin being donated to him from the community at large.
https://blockchain.info/address/1andreas3batLhQa2FawWjeyjCqyBzypd

As is typical for Andreas, he has been traveling while this was going on and after getting off the plane and taking his phone off airplane mode, he came to realize the reaction the community has had in such a short amount of time.

His response on twitter...

"Words are my craft but tonight I am speechless ... Processing"

https://twitter.com/aantonop/status/938518021106257920


I couldn't be happier for Andreas. He is truly a wonderful and humble person.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 06:02:45 AM by lifeanon269 »