Gold as an element is not possible to counterfeit.   We know of both standards that fraud can 'easily' be introduced despite the background of this unbreakable uniqueness to both bitcoin and gold.   Obviously we've had great failures in bitcoin and the price even falls when this occurs as people then doubt its viability and secureness.   However that is not the actual fault of bitcoin but in its usage and so to with gold.

On that reasoning jay is correct, gold cannot be counterfeit.   Deception of course is always there.    Every large purchaser of gold should melt it down and make their own bars not rely entirely on trust, I believe that occurs.  Gold coins are often subject to degradation of some kind, history shows many cases where banks have suffered losses in accepting but more often governments degrade the gold content and devalue their currency as present governments today are printing money.   The old gold sovereigns were commonly accepted below weight, it was routine that loss due to wear and tear occurred.  Its an argument against gold, not 100% fraud but people did deliberately damage coins, take gold fragments off bags of coins then hand it in as for a full deposit.

Holding bitcoin does have different risk, though its slightly superior to physically suffering that kind of small loss I guess.   The banks could always refuse a worn coin, or people even but often its very small amounts.  As its not physical bitcoin is more volatile and so losses occur in the exchange markets, its a different kind of loss and doubt that comes with a purely mathematical worth

This depends on how well connected each person in that country.  If they operate many transactions like a dealer then yea its a valid point, in a network that'd be called a node I think or point of presence as indirectly many have a link to bitcoin through that one person.
However most people are really strictly small time, and there is tons of people who just hold a wallet and do zero with their bitcoin just hoping it goes somewhere magically by itself.   Of course it has to be used and this idea of global rests on connections through active users thereby raising indirect contact through a population of their country


This is true but also USSR banned dollars during its regime and US dollars were very widely used in USSR even while banned as the notes were useful and far more reliable then the countrys own currency.   So yes banned but still global.
 Nobody could argue dollars are not global and I believe they are still banned in circulation some places.  Argentina might be one place or at least heavy currency control is in place where you are only allowed to buy dollar at a heavy profit to official government dealers.   Obviously people opt to take the least expensive route which is black market prices and free exchange of currency, smugglers but really the nature capitalism is that money is carried by people not dictated by a central body, hopefully bitcoin stays on that route

Seems reasonable to diversify if your holding in uᴉoɔʇᴉq did rise a bit.  The reason why a house is lower risk is that you are using it and reducing your costs by owning it, much like a jeweler could argue gold is a high utility holding to him whereas a normal citizen would need a fair bit of excess wealth to justify it in the same way as gold is low utility.  Depends what you are doing with your uᴉoɔʇᴉq of course

The next global currency is SDR which nobody has barely heard of but is set in the laws of every major trading nation on earth.   SDR is the currency of the IMF which backs the current system held by Dollar reserve notes used around the world as global currency.  Also partly held true as global currency now by banks and others are YEN Euro Sterling and I think Swiss but since all of those may get into trouble, its actually SDR already primed on the starting blocks to take over.   Recently China became part of the SDR system as it pins the dollar

When, IF SDR fails then we may see Bitcoin and or others like gold or various commodities but its a big if to go that far and btc is just a token so far

Too small is the same thing said about gold and since both standards can be divided into the smallest of amounts its not really true.  Its more a reference to the price or market capital available.  Its quite possible btc or gold may rise ten fold in price if it should be reliable in usage more then dollars have been and tiny amounts would quite easily describe trade.  bitcoin should be able to scale, apparently we got some problem right now but I think they can get past these limits one way or another if it should lead to success

I voted over 50% because I was still thinking of the, what if in 20 years question.   Obviously 2020 is only 4 years away and basically qualifies as what is nearly true now.
In 20 years I think over 50% is likely and/or the extreme oppisite that bitcoin is not used or superseded in some way.  In 4 years, I guess 10% per year growth is reasonable/optimistic enough

If we imagine every person who uses bitcoin has 100 in 20 years, it would only be 210,000 people.  Not very many and so not very successful and if thats the case I doubt the price will be higher then now so 100 coin will be about 50 thousand dollars or less and really not enough to retire on.   The only logical conclusion is that 20 coins or less will be more then enough, that'd be over 1 million users with that average each and maybe a higher price then now say 20 thousand each coin or 400 thousand total which is enough to retire on.  Thats my reasoning, if in 20 years we are still in a situation where bitcoin is mostly whales stacking them high and a relatively low price then it probably failed as a concept and was not that useful or distributed, utilised by the world at large after all not all of us will be here in 20 years, use it or lose it.  Its natural that people spend and use their wealth or at least distribute it in some way

The coin is useful to some people, I used to wonder the same thing about bitcoin.  Why bother as we have normal currency which is sent digitally anyway but I was wrong and it was of greater use then I imagined.   all they have to do is provide utility which many people especially globally distributed then use, value is added and price is justified to some extent.   volatility and speculation are normal as well.  
Maybe you are correct but the better view might be innocent till found guilty, no point presuming the worst without something solid to suggest its any worse then current cryptocurrency though of course the entire deal can still be doubted
Its upto the market to sort competitive advantages between products, sources of success are often baffling to those in a market who see it as unnecessary in its existence.  If right the price will correct I guess

This is not a theoretical future event, its already the case that people have placed in prison for using or mining bitcoin.   I read this was the case in Venezuela though it could be misinformation, I think its quite likely as the government has a giant fiscal deficit thanks to low oil price and is making up the difference in new money.   Also there is precedent in similar cases of a government struggling to maintain its monopoly over transactional currency, inflation is a form of tax not understood by populations.  The USA devaluation of gold was a form of taxation, it formed the start of big government spending as the biggest benefactor was the largest holder of gold which is US gov at that time
 Now BTC which is not held or controlled is a natural opposition to currency controls as we saw in China also


Palladium is mostly related to Car exhaust usage as a fume filter so it is industrial and also mostly mined in Russia.  Silver is also industrial and a bi-product of lead and other metals mined.  Only gold is fairly unique in its usage as precious metal only

The only one I'd recognise is Horus as he was the cabin boy in the crows nest as the ship went under.    I hope they do resurface it, they never did open up all the other wallets that were intact with the tiny alt coin balances ?  I was just randomly lucky they let me take out BLK I guess

Thats a standard market principle probably going back to victorian times and Charles Dow, you should buy the rumour sell the news and yep you probably right.  Initially anyhow as the underlying trend is towards growth so long as the standard is kept operative and levels of connected people keep rising it suggests a higher price will result.    Down on block half but higher by year end I think

Did the fees not get stated obviously before it cleared or is that somehow hidden ?  Im wondering if it was cheaper to get BLK to BTC then BTC to DASH, ideally I'd want to calc beforehand

I have lower orders on Polo and its not come close unfortunately.  The price has swung up 40% and pretty much straight back down in about a day or so which is probably not the most healthy line of volatility Ive seen but if we know the reason I guess it helps


I agree this is a key factor to blockchain success.  Im not sure it directly relates but also we have modern economies increasingly based around centralised money creation, atypical capitalism.  I'd rather see a counter to that effect not a copycat

How many captchas are needed to be filled out for 4 dollars roughly, is it a continuous stream of them or it just sends some every few mins or so and waits for you to fill it out.  Just wondering if it can be mixed with other things or is time critical type of task

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LRC_(file_format)

Fixed your link for you.   I would do a couple hours worth of this dictation type project if you like, Ive been typing my whole life and initially started on machine programming with this kind of numbering at start of each line of code so I suppose that would be just fine.
Problem with audio would be its a fixed length to listen to it, where as the PDF allowed some to go faster then others.   0.025btc per file would fit I think if its an hour or so to do each.    Is there alot of big words in this project, as this will pose a problem for some more then others.  In theory a computer could also 'OCR' this but I doubt it'd be that perfect

So is it feasible to make the empty blocks not proceed until enough transactions exist, or is this too compromising to the chain standard to average out the flow of data over 24 hrs.    Theres a variation in time beyond 10 minutes before it autocorrects difficulty anyway so isnt this fairly ok to go with as a fix instead of altering size limits

Did anyone ever get paid for this ?  Let me know and I'll carry it out no problem

I saw a typist of this speed in real life except they were used to a full size heavy typewritter.  So when they used the computer keyboard it launched off the desk as they used too much force, this person was in their seventies and had typed their whole life.

I had thought OCR would wipe out these jobs sorry.  Maybe if you take surveys that would be similar

I dont think incidents like this will cease to exist, thanks to human innovation and the massive honeypot incentive that a large exchange gives to every person knowledge of loopholes to attack with.    Not just Cryptsy but I think the whole blockchain standard comes into danger when its chucked into one place, we seem to have that problem with bitcoin in general.  Its so industralised now and scaled up beyond back room operations that the threat is from itself really.  We can call out bad people and avoid them but really this amount of coins or hash power in one place is going to cause problems and losses and upset like we got here.  
Its not a one off, thats all Im saying big Vern isnt the sole cause whether you like him or not is irrelevant.
  Right this moment Im sure people are looking to replicate this attack elsewhere, does shapeshift avoid this by lining up contracts not holding the funds itself Im not sure

Seems to me they cant just blanket cap the size without risking restricting the transactions and creating a log jam.  Is that correct ?    I think bitcoin is a little slow but its possible this is related to integrity also so maybe not negotiable hence the upset

Thats not certain bitcoin itself will be unchanged but this is why people compare it to gold which is inert.    The main thing is if bitcoin last 20 years it will have proven itself and so be more reliable to a wider section of society.  This implies far greater worth then now as bitcoin coin growth is greatly behind natural human population growth so the price rises

If bitcoin is around in 20 years it will be superior to cash at that point.    So you are saying you'd swap all of this superior standard for some simple cash which is easily degraded compared to a monetary standard thats last 20 years.  
Dollars dont really last 20 years as they keep printing far more then the population of the country rises or the productive capacity of the country rises, this means the standard of dollar is constantly falling.   Over 20 years that fall is quite large, possibly we see 50% loss in value.     It might not be true but if bitcoin was almost perfect in comparison, it'd be seen as much more reliable.    The other scenario is bitcoin destroys itself or overtaken by hack attacks or technology itself allows it to be corrupted.  I dont know how but it'd quite astonishing if bitcoin really did last 20 years.  

   The scenario I expect is technology replaces and surpasses the bitcoin concept, perhaps in a postive good way I dont know