So many wrong answers and such an easy way to get better info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_and_dump"Pump and dump" (P&D) is a form of microcap stock fraud that involves artificially inflating the price of an owned stock through false and misleading positive statements, in order to sell the cheaply purchased stock at a higher price. Once the operators of the scheme "dump" sell their overvalued shares, the price falls and investors lose their money. Stocks that are the subject of pump and dump schemes are sometimes called "chop stocks".[1]
While fraudsters in the past relied on cold calls, the Internet now offers a cheaper and easier way of reaching large numbers of potential investors.[1] |
|
|
|
|
New wave of users are panic selling now. I know a load of people who bought in at the peak despite my warnings, but hey.... somebody has to pay the bill, right?
|
|
|
|
|
Same way you can earn fiat money without investment: Work for it!
|
|
|
|
|
OP is wrong.
Fees are low and this topic is outdated.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin has proven, that it is works fine, even through times of different attack modes (FUD, spam, patenting, +, XT, RV, CW etc). I don't think we have a pressure to raise the blocksize or to force the mass adaption. We don't need no SegWit to make Bitcoin great again, because it is already. Give this baby time to grow, folks.
Does it work well? You are talking about slow transactions, higher transaction fees, and it will go even higher. What does that mean good? So ridiculous. The fees will always get to an appropriate level that people are willing to pay. No one is going to shed a tear if you can't pay them. If the fees become unacceptably high for the general BTC userbase, then less transactions will be made and lower fee transactions will then be confirmed. This is how the free market determines an appropriate transaction fee. It is also how the free market shakes out weak players from using bitcoin (who will then be replaced by users who accept the conditions). Not everyone here understands that. Funny that Bitcoin fee is pretty low atm and these honks still keep complaining about high fees.  |
|
|
|
Bitcoin has proven, that it is works fine, even through times of different attack modes (FUD, spam, patenting, +, XT, RV, CW etc). I don't think we have a pressure to raise the blocksize or to force the mass adaption. We don't need no SegWit to make Bitcoin great again, because it is already. Give this baby time to grow, folks.
Exactly, I fully agree with you, bitcoin is still working very well, its power has not changed, it is still the strongest coin. However, the only difficulty here is the transaction fee, compared to all other currencies, bitcoin is forcing a fee too high for each transaction, so it needs larger blocks to minimize it. Why do you say that? Did you make any transaction lately or you are just repeating old news? |
|
|
|
But growing fees and slow confirmations are a problem that needs addressing. If bitcoin is to stay the king of crypto, and gain popularity among masses, it has to fix these problems sooner than later.
There are no growing fees and no confirmation problems. Did you try it out? I did. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin works excellent when we talk about security and the and as an innovation. But at present bitcoin is facing scalability issue and there is a huge transaction backlog which have created a problem of high fees. Segwit allows more data to be included per block. With 100% of transactions using segwit features this is expected to be about 2MB of data per block, however in the worst case could be up to 4MB of data per block. In so far as it allows a greater transaction volume, it can be expected to increase the UTXO database more quickly. With 100% of transactions using segwit features, the rate of increase might be expected to approximately double; however because segwit is a soft fork, the worst case UTXO growth is unchanged. Segwit solves these problems.
You are not using Bitcoin, are you? https://blockchain.info/de/unconfirmed-transactions |
|
|
|
|
Nothing he said at this presentation makes sense. Same goes for these nonsense slides and strange accusations.
|
|
|
|
No, Bitcoin is not working fine. We need to figure out an adequate method to scale BTC so that there can be WAY more tps, therefore lowering fees which are currently killing any chance of going mainstream as fees are even higher than traditional fiat methods such as credit cards, etc. Once we figure that out, only then will it be smooth sailing.
Yes. Bitcoin IS working fine. Fees are much lower than traditional payment methods and there is no need to go mainstream (at least not more than it already is) I don't know why some of you keep whining about the high fee. Seems you are not using Bitcoin these days. (or you doing it wrong) |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin has proven, that it is works fine, even through times of different attack modes (FUD, spam, patenting, +, XT, RV, CW etc). I don't think we have a pressure to raise the blocksize or to force the mass adaption. We don't need no SegWit to make Bitcoin great again, because it is already. Give this baby time to grow, folks.
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs: Bitcoin Will Plunge Again Before Surging To $4,000
Breaking news thread subject lines should always be post in the uppercase format such as [BREAKING NEWS]: It makes it easier for others to read the day's most pertinent news headlines. Please rededit your subject line. @Minecache You are defining the forum rules now? @OP More important than the uppercase crap is the absence of any source in form of a http link. Btw: check my sig edit: To help OP: http://www.businessinsider.de/bitcoin-price-goldman-sachs-2017-7?r=US&IR=T (just copy paste) |
|
|
|
Amazing that nobody asked this question before...  |
|
|
|
A group of BTC and ETH colleagues and investors have just watched 'the future of Bitcoin'. Especially the self proclaimed inventor of Bitcoin himself Craig Wright. What a sickening and shoddy performance. And we are supposed to believe that this man after all his ranting and money problems is the inventor of the greatest living currency tool of freedom in 2000 years.
It is very funny to see how he proclaimed to the world that he was the real Satoshi Nakamoto. But in the end he just made himself a fool when he failed to provide evidence that he is the real Satoshi Nakamoto. He just wanted to patent bitcoin so he can be very rich himself. And since he has lost the game he wants to come back by making a threat to the development in bitcoin. He is so desperate that he will do anything so he can come back to game. But in the end nobody believed him and once again he made himself a fool to the eyes of the public once again. You must have missed his presentation yesterday. Do you think you know better than Jon Matonis? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAcOnvOVquo&feature=youtu.be&t=8679Who is the real fool here? I think Jon knows very well, that Craig is NOT Satoshi Nakamoto. |
|
|
|
What's your point in still discussing this? This has been discussed plenty of times on the forum and no one believes that that poser is not Satoshi Nakamoto. If he was, then he could have already signed messages from all known addresses of Satoshi or he could have went online on the forums using his account here. But he hasn't and he refuses to do it.
The point of this thread is CW turned up today still proclaiming himself as Satoshi. Do you think that it right? Do you? Really? Link would help. |
|
|
|
|
Though Bitcoin has been mentioned in OP, this is obviously a discussion about an Altcoin. Shouldn't be here.
|
|
|
|
|
Remember that you don't have a change address with a paper wallet. If you send only a part of this wallet, the rest (change) will be lost.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
