Sure. But with that logic, you're pretty much indirectly saying that altcoin scams are fine because it will bring more people into bitcoin. While there's somehow a bit of truth there, they should've just simply advocated bitcoin or ether(if they really need smart contracts). Projects like this are just going to lose people money in the end unfortunately.

Eh. "Decentralized" is pretty much just a sort of "hype" word for new projects anyway that projects just throw around without thinking about it, along with other words like "transparent", "anonymous", cheap tx fees" and whatever. People think just because a certain project uses blockchain technology that it's automatically decentralized lul.

Yea.. posts on signature campaign threads are just the tip of the iceberg. Most of the spam are still in the standard boards(bitcoin discussion, etc). I couldn't care less of the spam that's taking place on those altcoin bounty campaign threads. Still, one of the ways to decrease the spam(in my opinion) is to probably force the campaign managers to be a lot more strict on their post quality requirements.

Probably? No one has 100% total control over the markets, and whales can only affect the prices to a certain extent. We can safely assume that whales are also traders to a certain degree, hence it wouldn't be far-fetched to think that they've also made certain decisions in the past that caused them to lose money. May it be in terms of USD or BTC.

It doesn't even need to be specifically for altcoins. Remember the Stake.com signature campaign a couple of months ago? The campaign pretty much indirectly urged their campaign applicants to spam the forum due to their zero weekly limit and low post quality standards. In that case with Stake.com, there was definitely something to be gained from spamming- a significant amounts of money depending how many accounts people had. Good thing they're gone now.

Do you actually know anyone that was actually fooled by these "Satoshi revelations"? I honestly don't see how some people would be fooled by Craig Wright(probably besides most of BSV's supporters) and the James Bilal dude.

1. Can you expound more on where bitcoin's code was copied? And as for libraries, you don't become a "copykat" just by using libraries. People and companies use libraries all the time, to make their jobs easier.

Satoshi was using precious electricity and hardware power to mine the bitcoin back then, for some coins that was pretty much worth zero back then. I don't see that as "printing money out of thin-air". Satoshi's coins are just worth a lot right now because bitcoin became decently successful today. If it didn't, the coins would still be worth next to nothing.

2. Litecoin has like 5x less trading volume compared to Bitcoin. How does that make litecoin "almost as liquid as bitcoin"? Also take note that the main trading pairs on exchanges are always with bitcoin and not litecoin. And regardless if it has decent trading volume, it won't matter in the long term. It's unnecessary.

3. Even though people prefer buying coins in non-decimal numbers(hence why a lot of people buy XRP), it doesn't matter. It's pretty much just unit bias. Wait til a smaller denomination with bitcoin becomes the norm.

Gold and silver has their own uses. Bitcoin and litecoin though? Litecoin is just a more centralized version of bitcoin. The only good thing about litecoin is it being a lab rat for bitcoin.

Most spamming accounts obviously don't get into good paying bounty campaigns. But their main focus is mostly quantity > quality. They don't have the knowledge to rank up accounts? Simple. They farm a good number of accounts(probably >20?) and use those accounts to join campaigns. That way, their earnings may come close to decent paying campaigns.

Because, unfortunately, a lot of people actually are stupid; greedy and gullible, to be more specific. As far as I know, scammers wouldn't continue to create these sorts of scammy websites if it wasn't an effective way of stealing money off people.

Can you rephrase this? After reading this statement for 2 minutes, I still couldn't figure out what you're trying to ask here.

We've seen this already. Altcoins have been falling for the past few months and bitcoin was in a slow uptrend. Hence why we have a 70.80% bitcoin market dominance today.

I'd say a good percentage of the spammers we currently have don't even care about ranking up and receiving merit. People already have member and full member accounts from the pre-merit age; so all they pretty much care about is the postcount quota. Also not to mention it looks like there's a good chunk of member-full member accounts being sold in the markets. Accounts were just so easy to rank up before that there's no shortage of ranked accounts.

Nope. Satoshi disappearing into oblivion is a gift, not a curse. If the actual real Satoshi shows up, it's just going to give unnecessary diversity. Imagine if Satoshi was a Trump or Clinton or whoever supporter? Imagine how much separation or diversity that would bring. Suddenly people are going to say that Bitcoin is a product of a (insert candidate here) supporter.

I'm not defending this smile-to-pay thing, but I don't think it's this easily exploitable. As far as I know(not sure, don't quote me on this), most decent facial recognition systems take note of the sort of "depths" of a certain face. So chances are that simply using a photo of a person won't do the job.

Hahaha this. They'd have to do a lot better than Apple's iOS face recognition(Face ID). While this was definitely last year and that apple's Face ID most likely has improved and maybe fixed this problem already, I had a mutual friend that had a very very identical twin(pretty much their hair bangs is the only noticeable facial difference between the twins), and the twin could unlock the phone with no problem at all.

Oh boy this is definitely going to be very convenient(no cards and wallets!), but with the trad-eoff though? In exchange for your privacy? Oh hell nah. Not a chance. Unfortunately I really really doubt that the citizens of China would complain, because you know, they might not want to get social credit points deducted from them. I'm even going to bet that if you show such a feature to other countries like the United States, a good percentage of people are going to like this(even though they shouldn't).

To be honest with the current situation of China, I'd say it's probably worse than what was shown on Netflix's Black Mirror episode: nosedive.

Exchange referrals are usually mostly shared by crypto-related websites, because it's one of the most effective ways of actually spreading referral links. Don't expect people and websites to promote your website for referrals if your website itself's bonus is not-so-good though, and especially if your exchange isn't good to start with. The reason why a lot of people are sharing their Binance referral links is because Binance is actually a good exchange, and the bonuses are great.

Not only that. I'm going to assume that well, duh, the people that are in the Bahamas are the ones that's going to search for BTC Bahamas, and not the people in other countries like the US. But based on my Google Trends search graph below, the people that are actually searching for BTC are from the US. You can select where the search demographic would be from. It would make no sense for the people in the United States to be mass searching for some Bahamas Telecommunications company.

Well, true. But just to be more specific, another possibility is that this small team of developers were like "we're going to create a blockchain/platform for yadda yadda!", with them not informing Akon that there are already decent existing platforms to use right now; and of course Akon approves because of the "blockchain tech" "decentralized" and etc terminologies. If this is the case, this makes Akon really reckless for not asking for a second opinion towards the proposal, but I don't think I would necessarily call him a "bad person" for this.

It's mostly to make money off. Not that I'm judging Akon's technical knowledge, but my guess is that Akon doesn't have an idea that this "Akoin" thing is completely unnecessary, and what they're planning can work if not better with bitcoin and ethereum. Again, I'm guessing that they just branded this coin off Akon for publicity reasons.

Eee kelangan rin siguro nating maging realistic sa mga expectations natin.

While very good ang Bakkt para gumanda ang market liquidity ng bitcoin to potentially decrease market volatility, e hindi automatic na dahil dito e tataas na ang presyo. Yes, maaaring bumili ng bitcoin ang mga tao through Bakkt, pero take note na syempre maaari rin silang mag dump ng bitcoin dun.