However, PayPal will charge a spread (or margin) between the market price we receive from our trading service provider (Paxos) and the exchange rate between US dollars and the Crypto asset displayed to the user. You'll see the final exchange rate before confirming any purchase or sale of Crypto. https://www.paypal.com/us/smarthelp/article/cryptocurrency-on-paypal-faq-faq4398That doesn't sound like paypal (Paxos) really buying bitcoin  It does to me. These are not scam companies. Take off the tinfoil hat. There is plenty of money for them to make on a 0.5% spread. There is no reason to take any additional risk by lying and then scrambling to pay people when BTC goes 10x. This is just common sense. If they were a Chinese exchange, you might have a point, but we are talking about two US regulated companies with a partnership. |
|
|
|
Does paypal really buying bitcoin, if a paypal user buying (paypal) bitcoin or is the paypal-bitcoin just on the paper? (Or is it just another shittoken?  The ppB? ) Most likely they are buying real bitcoin. They are teaming up with Paxos Trust Company to hold the assets. Do you have that in writing? FAQ or so? Want to know this too.... Its pretty important! Yes they are buying real BTC and they are using Paxos to do so. They are making money on the spread. I doubt they are taking possession of the coins. They are just facilitating the buying and selling and making 0.5% on each buy or sell. Paxos is holding the coins and is regulated so they are not going to do fractional reserve. All this talk about fractional reserve is just FUD. |
|
|
|
https://www.paypal.com/us/smarthelp/article/cryptocurrency-on-paypal-faq-faq4398Can I transfer Cryptocurrency into and out of PayPal?
Currently, you can only hold the Cryptocurrency that you buy on PayPal in your account. Additionally, the Cryptocurrency in your account cannot be transferred to other accounts on or off PayPal. Will I get a private key for the Cryptocurrency I buy on PayPal?
You own the Cryptocurrency you buy on PayPal but will not be provided with a private key. In case you are wondering, a private key is a person's secret code to access and manage their Cryptocurrency. If lost, stolen, or even forgotten they can never get to their Cryptocurrency again -- pretty risky in its own right. If you can log in to your PayPal account, you will have access to Cryptocurrency balance you hold. Can I use my Crypto assets as a funding source to pay merchants?
No, users cannot use Crypto as a funding instrument for commerce at this time, though this is planned for 2021. Crypto assets can only be bought, sold, or held in the PayPal wallet at this time. To pay merchants or complete P2P transactions with PayPal, all Crypto assets held with PayPal must be sold and converted into USD.
|
|
|
|
Has anyone thought about the fact that there will probably be no network fees when you buy something with bitcoin using PayPal?
Bueller?
Well, based on the screenshots from philipma1957, "Cryptocurrencies cannot be used to send money or pay for services on PayPal." So I am guessing, no network fees. |
|
|
|
What is the monthly maintenance cost of owning a unit? I imagine keeping a crew employed is not cheap.
The website doesn't seem to go into the details.
Still haven't announced it yet so we're just putting together the details. I need to work with the ship management company I hired to work out the costs per cabin. My back of the envelope calculations puts it at a couple hundred dollars monthly per cabin but we have all of October to work that out before sales begin in November. What size are we talking about here?
Looks like a good place to self-exile. Or semi-retire (or just retire, live on your bitcoins or something.)
What kind of gym equipment does it have? The pictures on the website depict what looks like Rogue Fitness rigs and racks, aka CrossFit / Powerlifting / Strongman type equipment.
The pictures on the website are just generic pictures right now. We have to have filler material until we actually fly to the ship and take pictures ourselves. Honestly the gym on this ship is not very huge but there is a climbing wall and a running track on the upper deck and we will certainly be focusing on health and self improvement. Yeah, I could see it being that low if the all of the restaurants, cafes, vendors, etc. are profitable or at least not losing money. Could be a good investment if you can rent out your cabin when you're not using it. |
|
|
|
Cruise ship living sounds expensive as shit... but what do I know... If you were to have the level of hospitality that cruises offer on land it would be expensive as well. We will have to prepare people for the reality that this isn't a vacation, this is your home where you work and pay for your own meals and entertainment. You would get bored of the cruise life after a few weeks. But if you're busy working then it's not much different from living in the dorms at school. Small rooms but most of the time you're out on campus or if you're in your room you're studying your ass off. What is the monthly maintenance cost of owning a unit? I imagine keeping a crew employed is not cheap. The website doesn't seem to go into the details. |
|
|
|
|
Looks like Coinbase just added REN and BAL to be traded against USD and BTC.
|
|
|
|
Re bitmex.
It's like 2013 and the Silk road bust, which made btc acceptable for hedge funds to invest.
Now, to make it 'investable' for 'serious' institutions (or MAYBE even countries) bucket shops like bitmex with 100X leverage had to be at least slowed down if not impaired.
I know that people love to play with margin, but there is ledgerX in US (should get more business as a result).
Not sure if Deribit will also be 'punished' at some point.
Whether or not this is 'good' or 'bad'-time will tell.
I think Deribit charges are soon to follow. Not everyone is aware yet of why the market is tanking right now. Expect further drops as the news circulates. I wonder how many BTC are going to be stuck on their platform and for how many years? |
|
|
|
If I seem dismissive, it's because some things are self-evident and I don't know how to explain it to you. There is not enough space for insignificant transactions on the main chain. Expanding the block size in only a very temporary solution. If Bitcoin is successful, smaller transactions will be priced out. No scaling solution changes the fact that the "main" chain will not be used by regular people for small transactions. You have to compete for the limited resource (the most secure store of wealth ever created). That naturally means higher fees. This is not my ideology, this is just basic supply and demand. Bitcoin is not a Utopian or Libertarian dream. It is open to anyone, not everyone, and that necessarily means, people with more money will force people with little money off of the "main chain". This is not my ideology, this is just how the world works. You seem very upset with how the world works but Bitcoin is not the solution to that and no amount of raging on this forum will change reality. |
|
|
|
rolling explicitly alleged that in the future, ordinary people will be completely priced out of on-chain transactions. That is bog standard bigblocker nonsense, except with the twist that rolling relishes his fantasy of the blockchain being only the for the “big boys”. Quote-unquote. His words. On-chain will be for the big boys. My argument is people are idiots and the few who aren't will be priced out of the market by high fees.
Your argument is pie in the sky nonsense in regards to a fear of a future of bitcoin evolving in a way that squeezes out the little guy... I never said I relish the idea of people being priced out. It's just an unavoidable reality, not what I think should happen. I don't know why anyone would have fear of bitcoin evolving to a point where people were willing and able to pay those high fees. |
|
|
|
https://news.bitcoin.com/analyst-1500-bitcoins-lost-every-day-less-than-14-million-coins-will-ever-circulate/While I am of the opinion that 21 mil "theoretical" coin number should not be touched, this number '1500" lost every day is actually quite interesting. If true, this means 600 (from 1500-900)X1304 (days until April 15, 20024, which is the midpoint between Feb and June 2024, theoretical timing for next halving)=782K coins lost until next halving. After that, if losses at 1500 a day continue, we would be losing roughly 1050 a day on balance or about 1.5 mil more coins until 2028 halving. 8 cycles (~30 years) at this level or slightly increasing due to halvings and ALL coins would be gone, poof, evaporated. Maybe his 1500 number is incorrect, though, it is difficult to pin down. EDIT: As a purely theoretical exercise, I can see the following happening if most or almost all coins are really lost in 30-40 years: 1. Remember the "stone" money (Rai stones)? In one curious occasion one stone accidentally drowned, but was still used by villagers to do transactions in a "virtual" chain of custody. They were referring to it as if it was present even when it was not accessible. 2. If losses of coins will exceed certain %, I am sure that there will be a proposal to make some reference to Satoshi's coins (if they are still not moved) to be such lost "stone". 3. Of course, that would be fractional reserves and the "bad" cycle would start anew. The 21 million number is not theoretical. If any version tried to change it, that would be a fork and no longer BTC. The number of coins in circulation is irrelevant. For every lost coin, you can view it as a redistribution of its value across all remaining coins. Even if there was a single coin left, it would still work. If that means a satoshi is worth more than people want it to be, the devs could create a unit of account less than a satoshi and all would be well. This is a non-issue. sure...from a protocol point of view, but not from a practical usage point of view. the fact that you would make progressively smaller and smaller units for it to work on a planetary basis strikes me as odd. Mathematically it can work, of course, but what is the practicality of having 10^-3 btc for all earthlings to use while considering 21mil as 'unobtanium'? Imagine in such economy someone suddenly digging up a bottle in their backyard that great-great-grandpa has buried and which has 1 "full" btc in it, private code perfectly preserved and unaffected by whatever happened in the interim. Suddenly, there is a X1000 world-wide inflation. It is all theoretical, of course, but worthy of pondering over. Worthy of pondering but I think the more valuable it gets, the fewer lost coins there will be. On the other hand, it might be a good idea to bury a bottle in the backyard with one full BTC in it for the great-great-grandkids. |
|
|
|
https://news.bitcoin.com/analyst-1500-bitcoins-lost-every-day-less-than-14-million-coins-will-ever-circulate/While I am of the opinion that 21 mil "theoretical" coin number should not be touched, this number '1500" lost every day is actually quite interesting. If true, this means 600 (from 1500-900)X1304 (days until April 15, 20024, which is the midpoint between Feb and June 2024, theoretical timing for next halving)=782K coins lost until next halving. After that, if losses at 1500 a day continue, we would be losing roughly 1050 a day on balance or about 1.5 mil more coins until 2028 halving. 8 cycles (~30 years) at this level or slightly increasing due to halvings and ALL coins would be gone, poof, evaporated. Maybe his 1500 number is incorrect, though, it is difficult to pin down. EDIT: As a purely theoretical exercise, I can see the following happening if most or almost all coins are really lost in 30-40 years: 1. Remember the "stone" money (Rai stones)? In one curious occasion one stone accidentally drowned, but was still used by villagers to do transactions in a "virtual" chain of custody. They were referring to it as if it was present even when it was not accessible. 2. If losses of coins will exceed certain %, I am sure that there will be a proposal to make some reference to Satoshi's coins (if they are still not moved) to be such lost "stone". 3. Of course, that would be fractional reserves and the "bad" cycle would start anew. The 21 million number is not theoretical. If any version tried to change it, that would be a fork and no longer BTC. The number of coins in circulation is irrelevant. For every lost coin, you can view it as a redistribution of its value across all remaining coins. Even if there was a single coin left, it would still work. If that means a satoshi is worth more than people want it to be, the devs could create a unit of account less than a satoshi and all would be well. This is a non-issue. |
|
|
|
More ranting...
If you can't sum up your argument in a few sentences, you're pulling a JJG and trying to prove your point with walls of text rather than logical argument. My argument is people are idiots and the few who aren't will be priced out of the market by high fees. Bitcoin scales just fine, you're just looking at it wrong. The highest value use cases will survive and the everything else will be done off chain or die, including your ideology. This is the free market I'm talking about. I have no problem with Lighting and I think it and other side-chains will have their use cases. I'm not a worshipper of plutocracy and the world isn't going to change just because you will it to. Things are just what they are. |
|
|
|
how do you determine on-chain transations to cost so much? He can’t. His post is just a roundabout way of saying, “Bitcoin cannot scale, and will thus become a banker’s toy as bone-crushing transaction fees force everybody into the next generation of Paypal.” Baloney. Almost all bitcoin transactions in the future will be done on exchanges, between bank accounts, or through digital warehouses without any bitcoin moving on chain. I'm not holding mine like that but you know most people and companies will, out of fear or because they don't know any other way. Nice list. You are basically describing a centralized shitcoin that’s like meta-Paypal 2.0 with magic “blockchain” pixie dust sprinkled on top. Who needs it? (Not the banks, who do not like transparent blockchains for their own use! There is a reason why JPMorgan Chase (!) paid the erstwhile Zcash Company to adapt zk-SNARKs to their own bigbank confidentiality requirements. See also Greg Maxwell’s discussions of bigcorp interest in Confidential Transactions—which are accordingly implemented in Blockstream’s Liquid. Only idiots make their own finances publicly transparent; bigcorps are not so stupid.)Notably, you omitted Lightning Network, and other off-chain things not under the control of banks and other regulated corporations. The end game is bitcoin becomes the settlement layer for the world. Transaction costs are going way up in the future, you're not going to want to do on-chain transactions when it costs $1000+ to do so, but if you're settling a billions dollars, that's a tiny price to pay. I could see perhaps something on the order of magnitude of $100 (in today’s current value) on-chain transaction costs, but $1000+? Smells like FUD. Bitcoin needs to be accessible to even relatively poor individuals for long-lived channel management on a future L2: Scrape together, say, $100 to open a channel that runs for years. N.b., I am not saying it will cost that much! Just taking that as a figure that will seem high to most people, it would be less expensive overall, amortized over the channel lifetime, than the ripoff fees that regulated money transmitters charge to the “unbanked” in many regions. Proportionately, the poor always get ripped off the worst! Speaking from experience—if I had back all of the money that I have ever paid to move small amounts of money without a bank account...That is not some bleeding-heart egalitarian hogwash. It is simply a functional description of what is necessary to be something other than just another bankers’ tool. $1000+ tx fees would mean that Bitcoin is destined to fail—or worse, to become an abomination against financial freedom—and that I should dump it and get out right now. Fortunately, I do not believe you. On-chain scalability improvements, combined with off-chain layering, must and will keep “Be Your Own Bank” financial independence within the reach of ordinary individuals—including those who are not early-entrant “Bitcoin rich”. Just look at the excellent work in Segwit v1, soon nascent, and then consider what the same types of continuing incremental improvements will bring to the baselayer—and what types of new protocols they will support. The fact is, whether we like it or not, very few individuals (other than those of us here) will hold private keys in 10 years. The transaction costs alone will ensure it. That would turn Bitcoin into a bankers’ wet dream: The totally controlled, centralized, regulated basis for a cashless dystopia in which everybody can be tracked, traced, and forced to ask permission to use money. That is not a new allegation, and it’s not true. The fact is, whether you the bankers like it or not, cryptographic cleverness will continue to enable technologies that put the individual in direct control of his own money. Sounds like the kind of rant the bigblockers went on just prior to forking off. You are welcome to get out now and go chase another shitcoin dream. Bitcoin will be just fine without you. The free market will decide what Bitcoin becomes, not an opinion of what it should be. For better or for worse, those with all the money now, will largely be the ones with all the money in the future. Bitcoin is open to everyone including the banks, governments, and billionaires. This will push out the little guy, just like in every other industry in history. 99% of people don't have the mental ability to deal with private keys, wallets or anything of the sort. They want a bank account and a debit card. Their attention span is about 3 seconds. There is no way they will ever grasp crypto. They may want to invest in crypto or hold it but it will be at a bank or brokerage and governments will impose their restrictions on those accounts just like they are doing now. On-chain will be for the big boys. If you don't like it, become one of the big boys by filling your bags now while BTC is still dirt cheap. |
|
|
|
Fine, paid a lot of fees to miners (good boy)...honestly, I don't see a need to make 78K tx to get "just" 21K btc. That's just being a bit severely paranoid. Why not buy some otc in chunks? Did you not notice the “off-chain” part? Ridiculous... He paid fees for 18 on-chain transactions to miners. Smart man. He made ≈4355 Bitcoin transactions per tx that actually paid miner fees! Off-chain transacting is the way of the future—the global public ledger is for secure synchronization of off-chain protocols. Admittedly, I may be mixing issues and making too many assumptions there. “Off-chain” could mean on a centralized exchange. It could also mean Lightning Network, which is what I meant by “the way of the future”. Or it could mean any number of other things. (Just thinking aloud, perhaps he scooped up a bunch of WBTC, then redeemed it—LOL, that would also be “off-chain” in this context.)Yes, what he calls off-chain looks like simple buying on exchange, and not even otc. Pretty bizarre, actually: https://twitter.com/michael_saylor/status/1306940165160656897Everything at an exchange is "off-chain". Almost all bitcoin transactions in the future will be done on exchanges, between bank accounts, or through digital warehouses without any bitcoin moving on chain. I'm not holding mine like that but you know most people and companies will, out of fear or because they don't know any other way. The end game is bitcoin becomes the settlement layer for the world. Transaction costs are going way up in the future, you're not going to want to do on-chain transactions when it costs $1000+ to do so, but if you're settling a billions dollars, that's a tiny price to pay. The fact is, whether we like it or not, very few individuals (other than those of us here) will hold private keys in 10 years. The transaction costs alone will ensure it. |
|
|
|
kellrobinson, the base trend was pierced because people panicked about an unprecedented (in our lifetime) global pandemic. We recovered from people panic dumping very quickly & it’s now history. It was a totally isolated point & likely won’t happen again.
There’s definitely at least one more parabolic, face melting blowoff top for bitcoin.
In the next year or two, there isn't a hell of a lot of difference between the parabolic regression forecast (yellow) and the logistic regression forecast (blue). By that time, there will be occasion to re-evaluate anyway. I think corn go up, probably another crazy FOMO boom, but FOMO not guaranteed. I'm re-evaluating my projections based on a seat-of-the-pants feeling. The parabolic regression's projection just looks too steep. The logistic probably isn't steep enough. Remember y'all, these are minima traces. So hungry honey badger gonna jump up and come down to rest sooner or later between those yellow and blue lines. Lotta real estate between those lines, going out into the future. Can't be precise with this kind of stuff. My two dinars. I'd like to see how that looks with a terminal price of around $10Million rather than $500k. That's the price it needs to get to in order to be useful on a global scale. If it stops at $500k then it has failed and would likely go back to something much lower. |
|
|
|
BCH ATL
If it ever had a use case, it's gone now with the widespread creation of stable coins which are now spreading to other currencies. They are mostly used in the crypto community for now but I could see them becoming a payment method more than I can see bcash becoming one. There are only so many use cases for crypto. Here's how I see it. Value storage and transfer = Clear winner Bitcoin - Price needs to be 100x - 1000x to fulfill its role for the whole world Smart contracts = Likely winner Ethereum - Works better with a low price to keep transactional cost low Connection between the real world data and blockchain = Likely winner Chainlink - Works better with a low price to keep transactional cost low Cash Payments/Stable transfers = Likely winner Stable Coins - Fixed price Inter-blockchain swaps = No clear winner - Works better with a low price to keep transactional cost low Decentralized finance = No clear winner - Value needs to be backed by bitcoin to work long term Utility tokens or chains = No value beyond the micro transactional cost Privacy coins = Likely phased out as winners improve privacy Scaling solutions = Likely phased out as winners improve scaling |
|
|
|
Nothing like M0ar corporate welfare to bail out the so called capitalist leaders of the world that can't stand on their own 2 feet. I don't know if they really want the Fed to do what it's doing. They've gone rogue. I think it's messing up trading for a lot of people and institutions. It's like an irrational trillionaire just materialized into existence. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
