We did drop before the luna issues though - that didn't cause much of a drop, if any - but it is a good thing to remember that one altcoin crashing likely won't bring down the rest (this is what them being decentralised is for). The market is reacting less and less to this sort of fud though from what I can remember of things unrelated to bitcoin it's reacted to in the past.

I think the forum is designed in a way to not have these (or to have them but in different places).

Temp bans and perma bans for example can be found by going here: https://bitcointalk.org/modlog.php

A thread that's labelled as educative/interesting/unique might also support spam and is very subjective.

Could you lino to where this value is being quoted so we can see what you mean better by the 4%.

There's a chance (if it really is volatility/strength you're referring to) that an average price movement per period within a certain timeframe is being quoted. It could alternatively be a basic change in price instead though over the day or based on indicators.

I think it's a case of doing it how they're used to doing it with other/most software. It's likely that broken parts of the code will be commented out/not compiled for most software that's expected to be downloaded a lot this way but it isn't the best way to do it and there is probably a greater chance of getting bugs too.

In response to stablecoins being risky from hugeblack, I don't think we should fully compare luna (a non collateralised stablecoin) with one that is. Sure if you've put funds into the coin, there'll probably still be somewhere and it might not take much to prop it back up (perhaps 20% or something to restore the peg). I don't think anyone running a stablecoin well has decided to mint coins and give them away or has expectations of losing their billions somewhere else (it's likely they're invested to bolster company profits - likely in stocks or bonds - so can just easily be used to restore the peg). Stablecoins may die out when crypto stops growing, that's not happened yet and their main purpose currently is to offer faster transfers (when fast exchanges aren't needed, neither will they).

They may be incurring a loss on that usdc or using it for other products or assets.

I'd say 3% is probably a stable amount that can be offered to customers if you don't lock funds, I've seen uninsured investment services last quite a long time after offering over 5% fixed interest for locked funds which could be what circle are doing.

They might also be able to get higher interest on loans given to crypto related companies but with good backing/insider knowledge to be more assured those loans won't collapse.

I think the reasoning would be that this site is harder to interrupt/ddos due to cloudflare and I'm not sure liky it'd be that chipmixer could get and host a cloudflare account (eg kyc might be needed and if ddosed too much they might be suspended/charged more).

I haven't heard of that and am not sure what it is but if you're trying to start with crypto and are not starting with bitcoin - either by: buying bitcoin from well reputed exchanges or finding ways to claim small amounts to test with (eg faucets) then you'll probably get off to a bad start.

How did women find work when they were given the right to in European countries and around the world? The economy managed to adapt to double the workforce then and it can do the same again.

Most people should be able to turn a hobby into a job, sure bricklaying could be done by a computer maybe but if a wealthy person wants a well designed (piece with character on their wall, they'll need an artist to carry it out and give credit to them to fully show it off/impress.

There are a lot of tasks computers can do well but there are also a lot they can't do on their own. Things like fruit picking rely heavily on people almost everywhere as well as item selection in warehouses is hard to achieve with robots and will be for a while. Most machinary needs to be supervised when it's in use too.

There are two distinct ways electrum handles change addresses and these are set in your preferences. One of these optimises privacy and the other optimises fees.

Fee optimisation:
All of your wallets unspent outputs (coins that haven't been spent) are used to fund a transaction and are consolidated into one change address - consistently.

Provacy optimisation:
Change addresses are still handled sequentially but inputs are organised by their size and an input is selected to cover the transaction size (if possible or the smallest number of inputs that can do it are used). The change is still sent to a change address but a lot more addresses in these types of wallets can have funds in them.

(I haven't tried to explain anything with your examples or my own as I expect those would make things more confusing).

It isn't if everything grows and changes together.

New jobs will usually come out of the old ones that need to be replaced or will make people move to other things. You still need competition in an automation driven economy, most developed countries are heavily weighted on materialistic goods and services rather than needs like food and water.

I was just checking out their website earlier yesterday and it looks like they offer high yield on usdc staked with them too (4.8% max) that looked quite impressive.

I thought they had partnerships with coinbase and some other crypto firms already too, allowing direct banking between usdc, usd and crypto does sound like a good thing but there's a chance someone bigger has noticed what they're doing and might compete to attempt to absorb the market (or them).

Is your disk quite full? Sometimes you'll get an option to permenantly delete files as instead of putting it in the recycle bin if your disk is too full.

(sometimes, and it might be worth looking for, your disks can each get a recycle bin so it could just be on a different drive on the same computer - if it was deleted on that drive or the other drive was quite full).

So what you're asking is why ledger live showed the correct balance but didn't show the missing transactions? This is probably due to it loading up both separately from their servers and sending the values to you, or it could be due to your client not loading the transactions you say were missing but I don't think we'll be able to find out for definite as it's just a cache bug.

Bitcoin should be attacked for its lack of dynamic scalability protocols. Whether it needs them or not in the immediate term, it doesn't actually have any way to adapt to a high throughput of transactions if that's necessary (and I don't think the community has goals on making that possible - I don't think many coins can adapt well to this yet though either and fully prevent spam attacks).

Saying you can use the lightning network for enabling more transactions is starting to feel a bit like saying you can use litecoin and doge for them (you can, for sure use those, but you're going to have to do something different still - maybe open a channel). The lightning network has a gain in being backed by bitcoin's blockchain but it relies on trust, not naively but not elliquently either from what I understand of it.

I think centralised futures are probably better to rely on (ie commodities on exchanges) - you're paying them a fee to maintain the peg so it's a bigger incentive.

Most stablecoins have problems maintaining their pegs during volatility and I think commodity backed ones will be even worse without some sort of arbitrage.

Imo the house should be the priority. If you're buying on a mortgage, you'll probably get more equity faster than you would with bitcoin and might have spare cash too to invest later.

If you're buying with cash, it'd make more sense to put any remainder into crypto instead of not buying the house and you could always find somewhere cheaper to live so you have more funds left over for the investment.

Are you talking about not having money or not wanting to risk any? Either way, you could start looking at faucets and other ways to make small amounts of money to invest (but they might not be/feel that worthwhile). Most giveaways large crypto companies do normally expect a deposit so those might be a bad starting point but maybe something to look into in case there are some that give a few $ just for signing up.

It's probably better off to start in crypto without investing anything as you're less likely to fall for scams and can also learn about what you're actually doing before/if you invest more.

At the moment it'll either be usdc or usdt if you still want something on a blockchain that's backed (or potentially backed).

You might be better off holding those funds as dollars if you're holding longterm, alternatively usdc, usdt and dai seem the most stable and I think usdc is the main one that's more believably collateralised (but more might be).

Can you not get the technical knowledge on the Internet too?

I think a lot of the technical knowledge you might be referring to could be out of scope for a lot of cryptocurrency users (unless it's things like how blockchains actually work).

There is a culture among programmers mainly but I think it's a thing that's happened for a long time in other disciplines of people becoming very specialised on something specific and then offering help to newcomers and people with other specialisms that have that topic as a weakness - people normally then broaden their scope after specialising or pick other areas to focus on learning too.

Everything to do with bitcoin nodes (the main backbone of the network) is open source and a lot of mining software too is open source - there is also a lot of documentation on both that's freely accessible from places like the bitcoin wiki that are useful for gaining a technical understanding. The algorithms bitcoin uses are not exclusive to bitcoin, you can search elliptic curve encryption and even the documentation for the encryption system bitcoin uses and have them presented to you in your preferred format (the same can also be said for hashing algorithms).

---

In case it gets mentioned here or stems from this topic, the problem with Luna was always going to be around and will persist for some time as there are issues with doing things like maintaining a peg to the dollar while being decentralised - because how do you get your price for what a dollar is worth (to match your stablecoin) without adding some level of centralisation.

Chipmixer's smallest chipsize is 0.001btc, it's stated quite clearly on the deposit page afaik.

I think this means you can deposit 0.291mbtc to the same address to get your 1mbtc chip but I'm not sure if that's still the case.

You can double check their onion url under this post in the right hand side (right click and copy link) - edit they look the same