a good life story, and can teach us a lesson.
it seems like such people will be much more in 2018. so I think we should know more about BTC. if you want to invest we should trust people who have been successful in bitcoin and that we know.
bitcoin is real, not scam.
Maybe for people who understand the online world, think bitcoin is real. But what about people who are in areas that still have no network or not too understand with bitcoin, Definitely thinks that bitcoin is fake. Those people can still be reached by people who has access to information. I recently visited a small country in Africa and they had no access to the internet, but they were using M-Pesa as a payment system on their mobile phones. I have done some research on M-Pesa before, so I knew about it. <It was created before Bitcoin> If people can use M-Pesa, then these people just need cheap internet and a smart phone to use Bitcoin or the technology can be made simple so that they can run this via mobile networks with 3G and 4G. |
|
|
|
Not to be rude, but Warren Buffet made his wealth on the back of the old Fiat system. It is quite natural that new technology like Bitcoin would be foreign territory for him. < It is rumoured that he is still using the old flip-top mobile phones > You have to respect the guy, because he has a wealth of old-school knowledge that are still applicable to some financial instruments today. His fear of new technology comes with age. My Grandmother are also still using the flip-top phones, because it is simple to use. ^lol^ < The guy was born in 1930 and he is 87 years old after all > If Mark Zuckerberg <age 33> or Bill Gates <age 62> were totally against Bitcoin, I would have seriously considered their inputs. Mark Zuckerberg on Bitcoin - http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/facebook-mark-zuckerberg-bitcoin-price-value-latest-blockchain-cryptocurrency-encryption-resolution-a8142531.html |
|
|
|
Why would you want to use the hubs, if you can open channels with these merchants directly? Or am I missing something here? Disclaimer : I am still getting my head around the technology and how it will be implemented. Also, would there not be multiple alternative routes via other channels to these merchants, if you are not satisfied with the hub you are using? These hubs will also be inter-connected, right? ShIt, I still have to learn a lot about this. ^hmmmmm^ |
|
|
|
The SegWit upgrade was just a temporary stop-gap implementation to prepare for the final solution, which is the Lightning Network. Why would you want to implement bigger Block sizes, if your ultimate goal is to provide a alternative for that? SegWit was basically ignored and still is, by most of the major wallet providers and exchanges and this adds to the problems with high fees. <People using these services are forced to use Legacy Bitcoin addresses, because SegWit addresses is not provided as a alternative> These third party services are exploiting their users, by charging higher fees than would be necessary, if they used SegWit addresses. ^grrrrrrr^ |
|
|
|
I can see that OP is definitely behind the drive to get SegWit fully implemented and it is a good thing. Here is a previous thread from him, where some SegWit enabled wallets were listed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2595496.0Read the Disclaimer in Pooya85's post please.  I would rather want to focus on a aggressive campaign to force popular third party wallet providers to switch to SegWit, than trying to introduce people to "unknown" <possibly scam> alternatives. Yes, once people move away from these popular sites, they might be forced to change, but then you should provide a trustworthy alternative. Does Gemini offer SegWit enabled wallets? |
|
|
|
|
There are risks, but it is manageable if you acquire the knowledge to do that :
1. The Bitcoin price is very volatile for Merchants. < Merchants can use payment processors to mitigate the risk >
2. The Bitcoin price is very volatile for Traders. < Traders should buy low and sell high and ignore short-term volatility. >
3. Third party services can be hacked. < Do not store large amounts of coins in third party services >
4. Governments can Ban Bitcoin. < Use Black market & Dark Web, if they do >
5. The technology might be too difficult for people to understand and they might make mistakes. < Do more research >
Those are just some of the risk and the strategy to mitigate those risks. ^smile^
|
|
|
|
|
Take South Korea for instance, they noticed that a lot of exchanges were operating scrupulously and they stepped in to prevent another MtGox. They forced these exchanges to clean up their act and to adhere to strict regulations to properly govern this sector.
If people abuse and exploit a system, then the government will react and the way they do it is to regulate it and also to tax it to death. < The law has spoken, we are not living in the wild west > ^smile^
|
|
|
|
|
This was just a repeat of what happened in China a few years ago. The Chinese government saw that some exchanges were acting recklessly and they stepped in before the shit hit the fan. <MtGox>
They tightened the regulations and closed some of the exchanges and only allowed then to re-open once they adhered to these regulations. <Nothing wrong with that>
Let's hope not too much harm was done and things can continue as normal now. $20,000 here we come!
|
|
|
|
The Lightning Network will encourage this, but in a different scenario, because people will fund channels to reduce fees on micro payments between them and a merchant <like Coffee shops> that they use regularly.
That type of user won't likely be sitting on any blockchain bitcoins at all. They will get an account at an exchange to purchase bitcoins. The exchange will open a channel with them, with the exchange funding the channel with some amount of bitcoins and the user funding the channel with 0 bitcoins. When the user requests to "withdraw" funds from the exchange, the "withdrawal will just be a lightning channel transaction to the user. Those funds will be in the refund transaction INSTEAD of being on the blockchain. This makes the funds no more or less "out of circulation" than if the exchange had sent the funds to the user with an on chain transaction. The merchant wants to be able to sell bitcoins when they receive them. Therefore they will open an account at an exchange. The exchange will open a channel with them, with the exchange funding the channel with some amount of bitcoins and the merchant funding the channel with 0 bitcoins. If the exchange used by the merchant and the exchange used by the user are two different exchanges, then the exchanges will all most likely have channels open between each other funded on both sides with amounts that are calculated based on the net daily transfers between them. Now when the user wants to pay the merchant, a route is established from the user back to the exchange where they got the coins and from an exchange out to the merchant. The user doesn't need to open a channel directly with the merchant. That would be a hassle for the merchant, opening individual channels with EVERY user that wants to buy something from them. Now the merchant wants to sell those bitcoins, they don't need to close ANY channels. They just send the bitcoins that they JUST received form the merchant channel and send them back to the merchant over the same channel. Ah, so the exchanges will function as payment hubs and customers will link to the exchanges and not to the merchants directly. Interesting observation, but I see a problem here, when these exchanges goes down. We will have a single point of failure, if the backbone of this system is built on a network of centralized hubs. <Bitcoin is meant to be P2P> The exchanges will in a way function as centralized payment processors and if we have to rely on centralized authorities to "channel" our payments, then we are moving away from the original idea behind Bitcoin being P2P. I am on the wire with this kind of implementation of LN, because I am a strong believer of not having to rely on centralized authorities, to be able to do transactions. You should still be able to open up "private" channels, without having to go through centralized third party services to make transactions. |
|
|
|
The negative trust was introduced to report and flag scammers to prevent other people from falling into the same trap. It is kind of like a rating system to separate the honest users from the scammers. If you were scammed and you could prove it, then you can flag these scammers with a negative trust. The opposite is also true, because you want to highlight the trustworthy users on the forum with a positive rating. Unfortunately a lot of people are misusing the trust system to punish users for personal vendettas or if they have received some negative comments from them. This influence people's behaviour, because they are hesitant to post something that might offend other users. <positive criticism, not blatant personal attacks> Just ask this person politely to change their mind and try to resolve this situation without further conflict. |
|
|
|
What I am getting at is this. Currently people hoard coins because they have "speculative" value and they increase the price, because they are taken out of circulation. The Lightning Network will encourage this, but in a different scenario, because people will fund channels to reduce fees on micro payments between them and a merchant <like Coffee shops> that they use regularly. I was curious to know, when the merchants can take "ownership" of the coins in a channel that are being kept open indefinitely. At some stage, the balance must be validated on the Blockchain for the change of ownership to take place.  |
|
|
|
Well it only make sense that these agencies might use private decentralized networks to decrease the risk of centralized network been taken down in one attack. Decentralized networks and redundancy is a perfect defensive strategy against external attacks and they might even be working on strategies to take them down, if the enemy are using it. The problem with these decentralized networks is the additional cost involved to protect these extra satellite/disaster recovery sites. <Not that the Defence department cannot afford that> |
|
|
|
|
Markets based on Supply&Demand are not predictable and cannot be forced to react in a specific way. If you manage these kinds of markets, then you can take advantage of the volatility to make a lot of profits. There are currently a lot of uncertainty in some markets like South Korea and China and even political instability in the USA. <These are some of the biggest markets for Bitcoin>
The result = lower prices for Crypto currencies. ^sad^
|
|
|
|
|
There are quite a lot of market manipulation going on at the moment. Since the introduction of institutional capital late in December, we have seen wild fluctuations in the price. Someone is definitely pushing some kind of an agenda behind the scene, because it has not been like this for many years.
All indications are that Bitcoin is going to explode once the Lightning Network are fully implemented, so someone is pushing negative news and dumping coins to push down the price, so that they can come back in at a much lower price. ^grrrrrr^
|
|
|
|
|
We have people on the one side saying this is because the price has gone down and less people are using Bitcoin at the moment and on the other side we have people saying that SegWit adoption has increased and it is showing a reduction in transactions because of that.
There are even some people using the Lightning Network, but that impact should have no impact now, because it is still negligible. ^hmmmmm^
No matter what the reason is, we are seeing 2MB Blocks and a reduction in the MemPool, which is good. ^smile^
|
|
|
|
|
They have just taxed themselves into a corner. ^lol^
The ban rumours was just a warning shot over the head of Crypto currency users to force them to accept their high taxes and their strict regulations. Just another corrupt government forcing their will onto their citizens. They are saying, If we cannot stop you, then we will make Bitcoin unappealing to invest in. <introducing high taxes>
The same was tried with the introduction of the BitLicense in New York. <They just overregulated it to form a barrier to entry>
|
|
|
|
|
Wall Street fiat slaves making bold predictions based on their limited knowledge on Crypto currencies. How many of these experts even know how Bitcoin works or even tried it. I hate those type of people with the negative attitude towards something they hardly know and the arrogance to make predictions is really beyond me.
These guys secretly invest in Bitcoin and then use their status in the Fiat system to manipulate the markets. The sooner we get rid of these guys, the better for all of us. ^grrrrrrr^
|
|
|
|
Let's say Tom funds a channel between himself and his favorite coffee shop with 1 BTC to buy coffee daily, but this coffee shop is local and has few customers using Bitcoin. That 1 BTC will decrease over years, but at the same time not really accessible to anyone else. So in a way, Tom is still hoarding that coin, because it is not for sale on exchanges. If enough people buy coins to fund these "private" channels, then it will eventually decrease the overall supply of coins in the market, right? <If these channels are not frequently used by other people> If this is true, the price of bitcoins will go through the roof, because there will be less coins available and hopefully a increase in the demand. <People looking to buy coins, to reduce the tx fees for their micro payments> This Lightning Network is going to be the cherry on the cake for this experimental technology. We just reached 100 nodes and 225 channels today! |
|
|
|
The question that needs to be answered here is not how much you may post on the forum, but rather why you are asking this question. If you want to post more to rank up quicker, then you can forget that. No amount of spam posts, will push you quicker up the activity ranks. Just post constructive post daily and you will go up in ranks over time. The rank system will not reward you with extra activity points, if you post more than the minimum activity required to rank up. < activity = min(time * 14, posts)> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178608.0It is a incentive for people to visit the forum more regularly and not to spam the forum with junk posts. ^smile^ |
|
|
|
It would help if you provided a website or contact details for people to contact you to buy this item, or are you still in the development stage? What would the cost be for a Nano pocket like this and are you planning to develop different sizes for different models? <later>? Will it only come in Black or can you choose the color? Not all desks or surfaces where you want to hide this are Black. ^smile^ How about a pencil holder with a hidden compartment for the Ledger wallet for your desk? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
