|
Als je de rig zelf wilt gaan bouwen moet je je onderdelen gewoon kopen bij legitieme winkels, zoals Azerty of MyCom. Je kan de betrouwbaarheid controleren door te kijken naar keurmerk en beoordelingen op websites die dat aanbieden (tweakers). Wat betreft betrouwbare kant-en-klare rigs heb ik niet echt ervaring, dit zal een iets groter risico zijn. Wel kan je bijvoorbeeld op websites zoals Marktplaats kijken, ik vermoed dat verkopers je daar wel de mogelijkheid geven om de rig eerst te testen alvorens te betalen. Voor ASIC miners moet je bij Bitmain zijn, maar ik heb het idee dat je daar niet echt opzoek naar bent.
|
|
|
|
Misschien een rare vraag? Maar als je via een bankoverschrijving Bitcoins wil aanschaffen, wat is dan de moeite om gewoon je identiteit te verifiëren? Want aan je rekeningnummer staat ook een hele boel informatie gebonden.
Ik zou je euro's eerst omwisselen naar Bitcoins, de kans dat dit zonder identiteit verificatie kan is groter. Voorbeelden van diensten die dit aanbieden zijn LocalBitcoins, Bitcoin ATM's en individuen hier op het forum die bereid zijn om te handelen. Vervolgens kan je deze Bitcoins weer omwisselen naar altcoins door middel van exchanges zoals Cryptopia. Dit soort exchanges bieden alleen handel van cryptomunten aan en vereisen daarom geen identiteit verificatie.
Hoewel ik me wel bij heel wat exchanges met ID-verificatie heb aangemeld, kan ik me toch wel wat voorstellen bij de bedenkingen hiertegen. Wanneer het gaat om "zwart geld" dan heb je gelijk, bij bankrekeningnummer-verificatie ben je dus gewoon bekend en kan de overheid e.e.a. simpel aan elkaar koppelen. Maar wanneer het gaat om "privacy" - het voorkomen dat jouw privegegevens open op straat komen te liggen, dan is het verstandig om zo min mogelijk informatie te delen. Wanneer iemand via een hack jouw gegevens weet te achterhalen incl.photo-ID dan kan hij heel wat meer kwaad doen, dan wanneer hij/zij alleen maar jouw bankrekeningnummer weet. Dat is waar, ook al hebben website beheerders die omgaan met dat soort informatie de plicht om deze goed op te bergen. Persoonlijk ben ik ook geen fan van het verifiëren van persoonsgegevens, zeker op websites die je niet vertrouwd. Maar ik ben wel van mening dat als je anoniem wil blijven je dit dan ook goed moet doen en niet half half. Via diensten zoals kadaster kan je ook met slechts een naam achter een hele boel persoonlijke gegevens komen. Daarbij heeft tegenwoordig haast iedereen een social media profiel en die geeft ook toegang tot genoeg informatie om jouw identiteit te vervalsen. |
|
|
|
De website ziet er vrij professioneel uit, hier en daar wat opmaakfoutjes. Om te beginnen, de website lijkt geen gebruik te maken van scaling. Ik bekeek jouw website op mijn laptop en die heeft geen full HD (1920x1080) resolutie scherm, de webpagina wordt dan niet volledig getoond op mijn scherm. Hier is een makkelijke oplossing voor, deze pagina kan je verder op weg helpen https://www.w3schools.com/css/css_rwd_viewport.asp. Persoonlijk vind ik het frame van de voettekst overbodig groot, dit lijkt het resultaat te zijn van de reusachtige Facebook feed. De huidige koers onderaan is leuk gedaan, maar haal alsjeblieft de vierkantjes voor de naam van de valuta weg. Dat waren mijn kritiekpuntjes wat betreft de opmaak. De inhoud lijkt wat karig te zijn, het bevat wat mij betreft echt te weinig informatie. Vertel bijvoorbeeld waarom ze van jouw diensten gebruik zouden moeten maken, in plaats van dat van concurrenten. Hopelijk heb je wat aan mijn tips, succes met je website! |
|
|
|
things this reveals
1. banks internal network is not secure.
2. ATM's actually have code to 'spit' out cash without a card. and also spit out more than a few hundred at a time
3. bank accounts can 'add balance' without the account checking where the funds originated
i think banks have admitted too much about how in-secure they are.
banks should take a lesson from blockchain tech about point 3. blockchain cant just add balance without showing source of funds
That's a really accurate analysis. What makes it hilarious is that the banks argument against Bitcoin is that it is money created out of 'thin air', while this article suggest that it's even more true for banks and thus fiat. |
|
|
|
|
Misschien een rare vraag? Maar als je via een bankoverschrijving Bitcoins wil aanschaffen, wat is dan de moeite om gewoon je identiteit te verifiëren? Want aan je rekeningnummer staat ook een hele boel informatie gebonden.
Ik zou je euro's eerst omwisselen naar Bitcoins, de kans dat dit zonder identiteit verificatie kan is groter. Voorbeelden van diensten die dit aanbieden zijn LocalBitcoins, Bitcoin ATM's en individuen hier op het forum die bereid zijn om te handelen. Vervolgens kan je deze Bitcoins weer omwisselen naar altcoins door middel van exchanges zoals Cryptopia. Dit soort exchanges bieden alleen handel van cryptomunten aan en vereisen daarom geen identiteit verificatie.
|
|
|
|
|
The forum is a medium to communicate with other Bitcoin enthusiasts. It allows the community to discuss the Bitcoin ecosystem and to share ideas on how to improve the system. I think it's mission is to get the community growing and have a mass adaption of the system.
|
|
|
|
|
I have never borrowed money to buy Bitcoin, as I don't borrowing in general. Borrowing money makes me feel dependent upon others and instead I want to be fully independent. So if I can't pay for something, than I don't allow myself to have it. Although I wish I did borrow money for Bitcoin, when I bought my first Bitcoin it was actually a hundred times cheaper than today. But that's easy to afterwards, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
From an investment point of view, bitcoin is more about gold than it is about other currencies. That's because as an asset, bitcoin and gold have a lot in common. Both are limited to supply, both have functions to use, and many believe that, despite their large price fluctuations, they remain a good store of value. Compared to gold and currency investment returns in the past five years, the currency's performance is far better than the so-called precious metals, gold year loss than 6%, the currency of the annualized rate of return is 155%. These rich returns show that bitcoin has excited investors about the prospect of putting money into such a new asset class.
Compared with the gold standard, the value of the currency rising and proven performance, investors can be used to measure the investment of the world's leading digital currency future opportunity and risk indicators.
I am sure that though the gold supply is limited still it is far far greater than the bitcoin. So we may not compare it straight with the bitcoin. The bitcoin however is good currency and worth investing for other kinds of feature that it gives us on top of other assets like gold. It's digital and transferable from one point to another point with just internet connection and electrical energy. However gold is physical and non transferable international level thus making it more solid. It's value doesn't spike like the way bitcoin's price spike. So yeah surely bitcoin is far better than gold. You can't compare the supplies of both, gold is measured in grams and bitcoin in satoshis and they don't have any correlation. Also some people find the volatility or price spikes as you call it, a drawback instead of a benefit. From an investment point of view, bitcoin is more about gold than it is about other currencies. That's because as an asset, bitcoin and gold have a lot in common. Both are limited to supply, both have functions to use, and many believe that, despite their large price fluctuations, they remain a good store of value. Compared to gold and currency investment returns in the past five years, the currency's performance is far better than the so-called precious metals, gold year loss than 6%, the currency of the annualized rate of return is 155%. These rich returns show that bitcoin has excited investors about the prospect of putting money into such a new asset class.
Compared with the gold standard, the value of the currency rising and proven performance, investors can be used to measure the investment of the world's leading digital currency future opportunity and risk indicators.
Both have another similarity and that's it's way of distribution. Gold is already 'generated' but hidden in the ground and thus must be mined to obtain. This same thing applies of Bitcoin but instead of being hidden under the ground, it's hidden 'under' complex mathematical puzzles. The way of obtaining is for both called mining. |
|
|
|
|
It's intended as a digital cash system, so that's where I use it for. Like everyone else, I also keep some coins in my wallet but that's mainly for that fact that I don't want to do unnecessary purchases by giving it out all at once. So, I don't think twice before I buy something with Bitcoin but sometimes I feel sad when I look at my transaction history and see a purchase of an in-game item being valued at several thousands at the current exchange rate.
|
|
|
|
|
You can help by giving people a good explanation of the usage and vision of Bitcoin. Also try to convince them to use wallets with SegWit capability, so the network doesn't face a flood of unnecessary legacy transactions. Tell them the risks of web-wallets and make them aware of the fact that you can be your own bank, without trusting centralized agencies.
|
|
|
|
Thank you.
Would there be a specific computer language to learn?
i'm not trying to get around doing my own reading.
Honestly i'm trying to sign up for one or two courses and
I am doing that as soon as I find out a course that would
be beneficial to enroll in
Bitcoin Core (the reference implementation of Bitcoin) is fully written in C++. But you're free to use whatever language you want to use, it's personal preference. You can find examples for almost every language on Github, just search for "Bitcoin wallet" and select a filter to your preferred language. |
|
|
|
|
Do you mean 12gh as in GigaHashes/sec? In that case you're never going to solo-mine a block in 50 days, even with 36 TeraHashes/sec it takes about 1 year to mine just one Bitcoin in a pool. Besides that, please move this thread to the mining section.
|
|
|
|
I guess I am asking as an individual, what we can do to prevent these destructive people from destroying the bitcoin and taking themselves down along with it. I see that they are very organized, but they will fail because "battling" with your own crowd is always disastrous. That's actually the dangerous aspect of Bitcoin Cash, their community (Including Roger Ver) is quite rich and they are trying to use Bitcoin's name by buying everything. Besides the Bitcoin twitter, they also own bitcoin.com, /r/btc and seem to have some interest in a lot of exchanges and block-explorers (blockexplorer.com). I also read that Cobra-bitcoin might be a danger, because he is co-owner of the domain bitcoin.org and is lately tweeting about bitcoin cash philosophy. It is an old technique to get monopoly, actually very effective. But it works at the cost of real community driven projects like Bitcoin (core). Not much, who has the money has the power. It has always been that way, sadly  . |
|
|
|
Most people will indeed experience 3+ days synchronization, for me I think it was less. But I don't use this setup because it's portable, but rather because it's reliability. Don't get my wrong, hardware wallet are a very good choice as a wallet, but I prefer to do it myself and also to contribute to decentralization.
I understand your point of view. I was also thinking of setting up a node which would run 24/7, but I'm still not sure whether do it at home or rent a dedicated server for it. Also, you can mix both full node and hardware wallet. TREZOR, for example, allows you to use Insight which you can setup on your own machine. The same thing goes for Electrum, it's great that we have so many options to choose from. That's a nice feature, I personally feel that hosting your own node it worth it. You're not only helping to decentralization but you also have more independent security. In SPV mode you rely on being able to connect to at least one honest node and that's solved by running your own. |
|
|
|
Most electronics on the darknet are stolen, is that really what you want? There are multiple electronic webshops on the clearweb that accept Bitcoin, for example Newegg.com. The darknet brings also more risk compared to clearnet businesses, as they are anonymous it's easy for them to scam you.
May be some people are using bitcoin in darknet, the government should take a serious step against such activities and should bane them, but i think that still there are so many online shops who are also accepting bitcoin for shopping, specially in such countries where bitcoin is legal. We can hope that bitcoin will only be use for fair and legal activities. The government can't do much against all these retailers on the darknet. But I don't think that should be the priority either, all those pedophiles should be busted first. The anonymity aspect of Bitcoin has it's pros and cons and that's actually true for everything that is intended to improve lives, for example a bachelor psychology is intended to educate people as a psychologist but there are actually people that use it to manipulate people instead of helping them. There is not much you can do about it, because you can't force them to become psychologist after their bachelor and you can't force Bitcoin users to only use the technology for good purposes. |
|
|
|
You're right, although HDD space has become relatively cheap lately. But I believe Electrum also offers the same functionality (offline signer) without the need for a full node, I just prefer Armory. I'm lucky to have my full node running at my parents home with 300Mbps internet. Maybe I'm just a little too paranoid.
Using HDD and a full node setup has also some disadvantages. Almost everyone here experienced the pain of 3 days long synchronization, hardware wallets are ready to go once you plug them into your computer. HDD setup is less portable, it takes some time for a full node to start and then check if there were any new block found. Usually, full nodes run 24/7 but my point is that you are not able to use them instantly on the go. There is nothing wrong with being too careful. Most people will indeed experience 3+ days synchronization, for me I think it was less. But I don't use this setup because it's portable, but rather because it's reliability. Don't get my wrong, hardware wallet are a very good choice as a wallet, but I prefer to do it myself and also to contribute to decentralization. |
|
|
|
Why do you need this when you can just display your bookmarks within any browser as a toolbar? I have all of the sites that I use linked to bitcoin/crypto within one browser and all of the sites are up there ready for me to access in just a click.
This thread was posted in 2010, browsers weren't that fancy and quick back then. Internet explorer 10 looked like this:  |
|
|
|
The only mention of it that I can see appears on just this one page. Everything else merely says "BTC" or "Bitcoin". Maybe a user complained to them after making a mistake and accidentally buying BCH or something? Surely anything that makes it easier for newbies to differentiate between the two is a good thing? As far as I can tell, the only people who seem to have any particularly strong feelings about this are the fanatics who think BTC vs BCH is some sort of religious holy war and that the enemy heathens must be smote.  //EDIT: I also wonder if every singe post in the thread will mention Roger Ver, as literally everything that's wrong with the world is apparently the fault of this one person. Stubbed your toe? Roger Ver is clearly directly responsible. Beginners don't know that Bitcoin Core is the name of the reference implementation and Bitcoin just the name for the network. If you call it Bitcoin Core on exchanges, beginners won't know that it's the real one. If you would do this for shares, for example calling your company BMW cars and then paying an exchange to list your company shares as BMW would be fraud. |
|
|
|
Namecoin was the first fork of the source-code, even Satoshi himself was involved. Litecoin was also a fork of the Bitcoin source code, it's almost identical but has some different characteristics like the scrypt algorithm, decreased blocktime and increased supply. Bitcoin XT seems to be the first official hard-fork of Bitcoin, but it didn't succeed so they proposed Bitcoin Classic. Now there's Bitcoin cash with basically the same ideal, but lead by some money junkies  . |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
