Growing infinitely is impossible for anything. And crashing is unlikely for a technology that is an advancement in every way compared to a system it replaces.

I would say that your blockchain is corrupted.

You should rename folders "blocks" and "chainstate" to something else like "blocks1" and "chainstate1" and run the program again.

This should create new folders "blocks" and "chainstate" and it should start syncing from the beginning normally.

Nobody with any sense in them would ever want any nukes to be ever used.
Nuclear retaliation systems have been automated for decades now.
If one launch they all launch in a chain reaction.
Even if you live in a forest you will die, everything alive would as the nuclear winter sets in.

It isn't an illusion if it is all you know. For you it is a reality.
Everything could be synthetic on any scale.

Mobile networks have known vulnerabilities for years now. This is how some hackers stole some high profile accounts in the first place with mobile phone recovery.

It doesn't matter when you post during the week. It doesn't need to be regular, you can do it all in a single day.

The game changer could be the fact that many more merchants start accepting Bitcoin. Bitcoin was designed for the value to go up and early adopters to profit. This is because currency isn't going to be used by anyone if other people don't use it as well, so it gives people incentive to start using it. When many people start using it and the price stabilizes, there is no reason not to use it anymore. It will be well known and accepted by this point and there will be no benefit in hoarding it. This doesn't mean everyone will sell once the maximum value is reached, since now they don't need to sell it, it is currency like any other, why would you sell currency for currency. Bitcoin would still be more useful then fiat, so everyone can keep it. This is why people say you should never sell, because by the time it reaches it potential, you will not need to sell it to use your profit.


Never is a long time, eventually price should stabilize, that is the point. Amount of Bitcoin users is growing all the time and so is the adoption of Bitcoin by merchants. This would mean that the price won't be dependent on speculation and emotions anymore, so it should stabilize. Once you start accepting Bitcoin, it is unlikely you will stop, why would you? This means that users don't need to worry about the price going down, since adoption won't and that is the only thing that gives it value as a currency. It is designed for people to benefit form other people adopting it, this is what drives the adoption in the first place, which is necessary for currency.


It should. It is what gives you incentive to help setup the system. In order for currency to work, you need people to have your currency and know how to use it. Then it is just up to the agreement of using it as something of value, which is the merchant adoption we were talking about for which are obviously incentives.


It is not really a conflict of interests. You want it to stabilize, because it can't go up forever so there will be a maximum of your earnings and this will be when it stabilizes. You can't expect that something will keep going up forever, there is a limit to how many things of value are there in the world. This is your end goal, buy until it is so largely adopted that it is stable and you maxed out your profits, at which point you stop buying, but still have no reason to sell as people accept it as payment and it is better then currency you would sell it for.


You can and should do both. When you want to buy something and you can buy it with bitcoins, then do so, it is easier, more secure and private that way and you will be driving up the value of Bitcoin by increasing it's adoption. If you want to sell something, accept selling it for bitcoins for the same reasons. If you don't need to buy anything and don't want to sell anything, then don't and keep at least a portion of your savings in bitcoins, that way you profit and increase the adoption, since merchants will have more people ready to buy their product with bitcoins.

Well I wouldn't trust it at all.
Some topic I found about people having doubts as well https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2100624.0;viewResults

It might qualify you as successful, but it sure doesn't qualify you as a Bitcoin expert. We have seen economy nobel prize winners be completely wrong on Bitcoin. You can't really make a prediction if you don't really know what Bitcoin brings. It is far more then just decentralization, it very secure, predictable and smart system. By smart, I mean that it has features fiat does not, as every transaction is like a program on it's own, with the multisigs and locktimes and many more to come and that are already here.

Don't mean to be mean, I just wanted to let people know. Not everything is that black and white. World is very complicated.


It really never makes sense to ask that for a currency. Definitions of bubbles and currency is kind of the same. Neither have a value on their own, it is people that give them value only because they expect for other people to value it as well.

My two cents on this is that people haven't seen nothing like Bitcoin before. They try to compare it to things, they can't question the currency itself. Currency has been currency for thousands of years, the difference between the ways it worked is so small compared to difference between all of it and Bitcoin, it is like Bitcoin is something really more then currency itself.

Many things in this world seem like it is revolutionary, but with a little knowledge people see that it isn't. When the revolutionary technology comes, people have a hard time to believe it. It comes in waves I guess, a hype then doubt, but if you take all in the account, there have been nothing like this, not even close. Bitcoin is abstract, based on mathematics itself, it is so much more then what we saw until now. This is what happens when the highest level of science meets the concept of currency.

I believe Gary Johnson from the Libertarian Party was accepting Bitcoin in 2016 presidential election. It really isn't a surprise for Libertarians to accept Bitcoin.

To my knowledge, when you stop bitcoind, the mempool will be deleted.
And you will start bitcoind with an empty mempool. However, if this doesn't do it, I believe that deleting the file would be absolutely fine and will not mess up your setup. It should create a new one and everything should be fine.

It takes 2 hours to copy, not move. Moving is just moving the pointers or whatever it actually uses, copying is straight up reading and then writing.
It is really hard to know what exact setup OP has. Of course that if he just moved the data folder it would take practically no time at all.

Probably the simplest way to know is by copying a file, like a movie and seeing how much it takes, then multiply it by 153000/<file size in MB>.
Should be pretty simple.

Technically things like the amount of free space on a hard drive and the how fragmented your disk is would affect the time estimates.

I can tell you how much such a test took on my machine, with a same hard drive rpm and ram. It would take about 2 and a half hours to copy a blockchain from one folder to another on the same hard drive. This is without taking into account free space and fragmentation of files.

Mostly just independence of the Bitcoin economy. The huge price hikes and falls of Bitcoin wouldn't affect it. That country would guaranty it's value and pretty much no one else. This way someone can have a fixed salary and people would have a sense of the worth of goods and labor in their cryptocurrency. Doing this with Bitcoin would be tricky, since you always have to check it's price as there are huge outside forces on it all the time. If someone wanted to manipulate this cryptocurrency they will have to get hold of it first and the country who made it would be the first one to have it, so they would profit from such a big buy in the first place, where with Bitcoins, a lot of people already have a lot of coins.

As Bitcoin becomes a major global currency, country should switch to Bitcoin, which if they are using colored coins, would be trivial, since everyone would already have bitcoins on the same addresses they used with those colored coins. In a way, there would be no switch other then just treating those colored coins as bitcoins. Maybe just switching to a new wallet and importing the keys would be the only difference. This switch would be backward compatible as well, since it would be on the same blockchain and people won't need to switch if they don't want to, it is just that this way they would be using the same currency as everyone else in the world.

It isn't that simple. There is technically unclaimed land, but if you claim it, others might as well. Nobody really follows any rules when it comes to that.
There is land on the borders of Serbia and Croatia that neither of the countries claim (they have a claims of other areas that overlap, so they are disputing where a border should be). Some guy claimed that land when he found that out, but all the countries (including those two) say that the land will belong to one of the two countries. He called it Liberland, it wants to use Bitcoin. Of course no one is allowed to go there by border guards and it is mostly a swamp.

You could also make new land, like they do with those palm tree islands in Dubai. You can do it in a middle of the ocean, or just tie some boats together and make a moving city state.

The problem of creating a new country is more political then practical. Humans can do a lot of things if they have a reason, but when others object, this is a problem.

Luptin, I just wanted to notify you that I am ranking up to a member tomorrow.

Since it often takes some time for a round to be over, there is a good possibility that this might happen before the new one starts.
I hope I could have a member position this week.

There is Bisq. It is the only decentralized exchange that I know that trades fiat/crypto as well as altcoins. Plus it has a huge amount of altcoins listed.

Nice to see such a wonderful heartwarming idea.

I do see a problem in it's execution tho. It isn't much of a lotto if people vote. This would also make it dangerous since a person with more then half of the funds can just enter himself and vote for himself and take the other half.If it is a lotto, then people shouldn't really vote, but by tickets for the one they want to win. And the one with most tickets doesn't have to win, it is should still be up to the chance, they will just have a bigger one.

This should be designed similar to a real lotto, so people don't abuse it, however I am afraid that the protection from abuse in most lottos might be that they take a cut of the money so big that it can't be profitable to buy enough tickets for the reward to be worth the risk.

You can't really know the whole script just by looking at the output, but at least you know that it didn't really run successfully due to the errors in the output.It is very odd to have a script as a README file so I would be worried. Why don't you just run "cat README" in the console and see the commands yourself?

Btw, I searched for it on the Internet and found this https://github.com/cantonbecker/bitcoinpaperwalletLooks like this is what it is supposed to be, however there is no script in the README file. Line 61 matches but others don't even contain words "Applications" and "If" let along start with it. In fact, looking through the code's history, it never did.

Country should use and accept cryptocurrency. Now because Bitcoin is volatile, you might prefer to make a colored coin on Bitcoin blockchain.
Not everything should be moved on blockchain, but some things should, like laws and voting for those new laws in a decentralized manner.
ICOs and banks shouldn't be a governments job, so none of that.