|
I think the events in India might have sparked this recent increase in the price. You might have some people with what I call " Mattress Money" in higher currencies, that needs to be shifted into other commodities, before these currencies are banned. < for a lack of a better word >
Bitcoin offer these people some protection and a way to pull this money back into circulation, without people asking too many questions. ^smile^
|
|
|
|
|
Forum stats is a poor indication of Bitcoin adoption, if that was the thinking behind your question. We need regulated exchanges and wallet providers to release their stats to give us a more accurate view on adoption statistics. I know Blockchain.info < not regulated > shows a increase in registered accounts being created.
Bitcoin is still growing, but people from first world countries seems reluctant to move over from fiat to Bitcoin, because they are spoiled for choice, with other payment solutions and good internet access.
|
|
|
|
|
The price will definitely go down, once Satoshi's real identity gets revealed. < If he is still alive > You have to remember that he still owns loads of unused coins. < about 1 million > and if people see those coins moving, they will expect a dump and they will start selling even before those coins hit the markets.
Satoshi's identity will also create uncertainty and even anger, if he is linked to crime or dirty deeds. His nationality and association with specific agencies will also have a influence and people will quickly audit every aspect of his life. He will also become the target for lawsuits and even attempts on his life or even abduction by criminals for financial gain.
Let's just leave Satoshi alone, we are all Satoshi now. ^smile^
|
|
|
|
|
If the origin of the money is traced to crime, the transaction will be cancelled and you will be without a house or property. I would suggest that you buy through regulated exchanges, because they adhere to KYC/AML regulations and suspect transactions will get flagged before the property is bought.
The third party payment processor will also convert the money to fiat, so your seller will not have to deal with Bitcoin. You cannot launder money through Bitcoin, when you buy property, because anonymity is void through these types of transactions. < Too much paperwork and legal matters >
|
|
|
|
|
Back in the days when CPU/GPU mining was still possible, I wanted to buy a new Gaming accelerator card. I Googled the different options and by accident stumble onto a video on Youtube of people using GPU's for Bitcoin mining and they were making money from their hardware.
I thought this was a crazy idea, that you can play games with the hardware and when you not playing games, it can be used to earn money. < effectively paying for the hardware > In those days, these cards were very expensive.
By the time I bought my hardware, GPU mining were not profitable anymore, but I got hooked on Bitcoin. ^smile^
|
|
|
|
|
The only possible drawback of this, might be the fees that are charged on top of these transactions. Some of these services charge exorbitant fees on their services and this kills the incentive to use Bitcoin as a cheaper alternative. We should remember that one of the reasons we are using Bitcoin as a alternative, is for the cheaper transactions.
The Pro's with this is, convenience and easy access to Bitcoin and increased exposure. ^smile^
|
|
|
|
Competition stimulates good business practice... Unfortunately the so called "Giants" can not effectively compete with Bitcoin. All they can do is trying to delay and slow down customer exodus by offering improved service. In the long run however, no fiat-based payment provider will be able to offer a better product in terms of costs of service and earn money at the same time. Every Bitcoin user can just download a wallet and easily send payments everywhere, without requiring a third party. All blockchain investments will turn out to be a pure waste of funds. [...]
We should support Bitcoin to keep these Giants on their toes. If Bitcoin fails, these Giants will go back to sleep and we will be stuck with high fees and poor service.
No we should not support Bitcoin to keep the "Giants" on their toes. We should support Bitcoin to get rid of "Giants" and use a free, sound and decentralized currency instead. ya.ya.yo! Agreed, but these Giants will get the support from their respective governments and at some time in the future, Bitcoin will get regulated to death and the same regulations will not be applicable to the banks and other financial institutions to favor them. These Giants involvement with the governments should not be underestimated. Money is power and they will do anything to be in control of the money, because it gives them the power too. |
|
|
|
I can't 100% relate every good initiative coming from banks to Bitcoin putting a heavy load of pressure on them, but I noticed that in the last few years, the fiat related payment platforms have become much better. Not only do people enjoy instant and free transactions, but banks have shifted from being a bank operating from a distance with barely eye for their existing customers, to banks operating for its customers.
Nearly every month a new bank related ad pops up on tv showing how people can easily and instantly transact with each other. They can send money via email, sms, app, facebook, etc. If you take all this into consideration, then more than ever before, the need for an alternative local currency as Bitcoin, will only decrease. If I am completely honest, and look at all this, then I don't see a reason for the average joe to use Bitcoin as local currency instead of their own fiat currency.
I will give you two reasons, just to start this discussion: 1. Banks are centralized - They can be easy targets for global hackers, who target these institutions daily. < via their weak point, the uneducated customers > 2. Governments control banks, and political decisions have previously influenced people's access to their money. < Take Cyprus and Greece as an example > They can take or block your money tomorrow, and you will have no say in the matter. We can discuss the other reasons, but these two are very important. ^smile^ |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin has not just brought us a decentralized P2P payment system or a alternative for the banks. It woke the Giants in the Fintech world. Before Bitcoin, clients at banks were treated as the scum of the earth, even more so, when you are middle class or poor.
Bitcoin came in and they threatened to disrupt the Banking and Remittance services. What happen? These financial services realized that they will lose money, and they suddenly dumped Billions of dollars into Blockchain based technologies and also user-friendly banking services with 24 hour access via Social media platforms like Facebook Messenger and WeChat and some of their own in-house apps.
We have not seen this level of attention given to clients for many years. Why, because the Giants were comfortable with their foot on our neck. They had the monopoly, backed by governments.
We should support Bitcoin to keep these Giants on their toes. If Bitcoin fails, these Giants will go back to sleep and we will be stuck with high fees and poor service.
|
|
|
|
Satoshi was not a dictator, and his biggest mistake was to allow Gavin Andresen to participate in this experiment. If Gavin did not run to his masters, Satoshi would most probably still be around. Satoshi realized when these agencies got involved the experiment would fail, so he went dark.
Satoshi is not here to fight for Bitcoin, and it is now our duty to defend it against the people who wants it to fail. We should consider this as phase 1 in the attacks, because the other Blockchain based Ledgers are still under development and when they are done, we will see phase 2. ^hmmmmm^
the banking cartels dominance is already apparent, hyperledger is a "phase 2 attack".. guess whos building it.. blockstream the banking cartel want bitcoin to fail. they are doing it slowly and purposefully much like boiling a frog by putting it in cold water and slowly heading it so that it doesnt jump around, rather than throwing it in hot water. and shocking it to jump around instead of limiting sigops to control spam or other CODE/tech methods.. they use fee wars and use that as bait to promote LN (rustyrusssel of blockstream heading it up) right now half a dozen third world countries wont use bitcoin because a TX fee alone is more than an hours labour in their country. as for the switch to LN. those making it(blockstream/banking cartel) had a round table meetup in milan and suggested a 0.006btc deposit fee to use LN for 10 days.. as an acceptable fee https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2016-November/000648.htmlthem trying to figure out how to stop spamming on LN. go to "results" and the spreadsheet shows using fees. (prepaid tab) 0.006btc prepaid. locktime 864000seconds (10 days) at todays prices thats over $4.20 prepay fee (100 minimum wage hours labour in developing countries) standard tricks of banking cartels, use economics to control everything. rather than rational and acceptable code economics: based on stats of real world uses of an average person using a credit card or buying something from a shop, is 42 times a month. (14 times per 10 days) that 0.006 deposit (over $4 at todays valuation) just to use it 14 times(average real world usage)... is yet another barrier of entry. so dont think LN is the utopia you think it is.. as for the next bait and switch they will propose (more reasons not to expand real bitcoin onchain capacity) will be sidechains. look at blockstreams patent for BITCOIN sidechains http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=3&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&s1=%22bitcoin%22&p=1&OS=%22blockchain%22&RS=%22bitcoin%22yes By being linked to Bitcoin's currency via two-way pegs, they are trying remove the openness of what people can and cannot do with bitcoin by making any bitcoin sidechain property of Gmaxwell and adam back by default. and guess what else. these sidechains are "demurrage" meaning your holdings of the sidchain token slowly disapears over time, and they get to keep the bitcoin that they lock you out from. so while screwing with transaction fees decades befor they are important. is crippling bitcoin so while delaying/holding off on REAL bitcoin capacity growth they are crippling bitcoin know your enemy blockstream came about in 2013 bitcoin-core came about in 2013 before blockstream it was bitcoin-qt, which anyone could tinker with gmaxwell and many others have been paid to go against the bitcoin ethos and instead forfil contractual obligations know your enemy dont give core(blockstream contractors and 90+ unpaid spell checker interns) ultimate power of dictatorship. instead get bitcoin back to being a decentralised and diverse open network of free-choice and no barriers. we should not rely on those offchain plans as the future of bitcoin. especially in the hands of the bankers. especially when its so obvious what the end game is Ok Franky you make a good point there, but would you care explaining what their motives would be, to do this? Do you think they will deliberately code something that might cripple Bitcoin in the future to pave the way for Hyperledger? If they are doing this, why are people accepting this and what prevents them from shifting to a better implementation or even a Alt coin, if this happens? They will hurt their reputation with a Bait n switch like this and people will not support Hyperledger, once they realize what they have done. |
|
|
|
|
One of my family members are in the news business and he says a lot of the things being spread in the media is pure propaganda and it is not what they have posted, but rather what they have conveniently left out of the news. They will spam the stuff that they want you to hear, but the most important thing is the stuff that they want to hide or ignore.
Look at the articles you are not seeing on their site, to identify the corrupted media outlets.
Coindesk - Check
Bloomberg - Check
|
|
|
|
|
The bigger fees is there for your convenience, because the miners gives preference to these transactions and then they get confirmation quicker. If you are in a hurry, just pay a fee higher than the standard fees, and you should be fine. I have never had one instance where my transaction took longer than 20min to have 2 confirmations. < Guess I am just lucky >
The bigger the fee, the faster the confirmation. ^smile^
|
|
|
|
|
You should thank them for stepping up the security, when the phone number changed. If it was easier for people to do this, they would have social engineered the shit out of this and many people would have lost money, when people use throw away phones to hack people's accounts. ^hmmmmm^
They do the same thing, when they want to take over domains and other accounts. It is there to protect you.
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the response bitcasino support but how about the slot games you offer is there a way to check if they're provably fair. It would be nice because I mostly play slots on your site. Hi ralle14, Please be informed we do not have a provably fair system for the slot games as we are a licensed casino and use the same game providers as traditional currency casinos. Cheers, BitCasino.io Did I understand this correctly? Your Slots are not provably fair? The traditional currency casinos use firmware that are embedded into a RAM chip to store the software. This can be altered with a firmware upgrade, but that is not done by the casino. So you guys have full access to the software and can adjust certain parameters as you want? < House edge? > I thought the suppliers of these games adjust this themselves or is this just applicable to the shared jackpots? Hi Kakmakr, Regarding your question, the games that are on our site are built and managed by the Game Providers themselves, we do not have access to the contents of the games nor parameters. Hope that answers your question!  Cheers, BitCasino.io Yes, Thanks for your response to this question. Do you tell the Game Providers what house edge you want, and then they change the parameters? or do they determine the house edge for all their games and then force this down on the clients using their software? Is this applicable to all the games being hosted on your site, or do you source some games from in-house developers? |
|
|
|
|
Rumors are only rumors until it can be confirmed or denied, so people should not run wild with every rumor that goes around. Most Bitcoin speculators < Day traders > will react to the smallest dip in the price. These people add the snow to a small snow ball gaining momentum down a hill.
The snow ball will not grow bigger, if the surface is frozen solid, so we should mimic the same principle. You should "freeze" or put your actions on hold, until the rumors are confirmed or denied. This way, the snowball will not grow bigger and we will see less destruction.
|
|
|
|
Isn't this project... OpenBazaar?
Nope, OpenBazaar is a decentralized market place, where this guy wants to create a site similar to Amazon that is centralized. Sites like this are prone to fail, because centralized services needs a lot of money to succeed. They come under constant attacks, because they are a HoneyPot for hackers to compromised people's accounts. Good luck OP, I hope you realize what you are getting yourself into with this. ^smile^ |
|
|
|
|
A week ago I Skyped with a friend of mine in Cape Town, where Llew Claasen originated from. He says there is nothing going on in Cape Town that would make people exited about Bitcoin. He has not seen any < Bitcoin Accepted here > merchants and it is supposed to be a tourist hub for international tourist.
If Llew Claasen has done nothing for his hometown to put them on the Bitcoin map, what would he contribute to the rest of us?
|
|
|
|
|
Just to be clear here, you want another fiat currency that can be manipulated by governments < Flexible Cap > so that they can print < create tokens > without limits, like they are doing it now with Fiat money? How will that be a improvement on the current system?
Governments have already shown that they cannot be trusted with the creation of money. They print it like toilet paper and it decrease in value. You need something like Bitcoin, with a fixed amount of tokens and participation from the public to determine it's value/cap for it to be successful.
|
|
|
|
|
Satoshi was not a dictator, and his biggest mistake was to allow Gavin Andresen to participate in this experiment. If Gavin did not run to his masters, Satoshi would most probably still be around. Satoshi realized when these agencies got involved the experiment would fail, so he went dark.
Satoshi is not here to fight for Bitcoin, and it is now our duty to defend it against the people who wants it to fail. We should consider this as phase 1 in the attacks, because the other Blockchain based Ledgers are still under development and when they are done, we will see phase 2. ^hmmmmm^
|
|
|
|
|
The "Blockchain" phenomenon, is born from a situation where true innovation has been lacking for years in the Fintech scene. People have used outdated private ledgers for years and there was not something earth shaking to talk about.
Now, Bitcoin enters this scene and it wants to disrupt many big empires, in bypassing their services. These services cannot allow this to happen, and they cannot stop it from happening, so they adapt. They jump on the "Blockchain" hype bandwagon and they dump Billions of dollars into creating their own version of the technology.
In the end, these adaptations of the Bitcoin technology, is in all likelihood just a new variation of their old ledger systems. ^smile^
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
