Don't take trading advice from cryptoboss2020. 

They have a history of posting completely illogical and downright ludicrous theories which don't make any rational sense.  Spare your precious brain cells and place them on ignore.

In short, no.

My suspicion is they'll only allow licenced currency traders or brokers to do that.  More to the point, even if you could, why would you take the risk?  Any CBDC you were hypothetically able to deposit to an exchange could be confiscated at any time, without warning.

If CBDCs work the way I think they will, I wouldn't list them if I ran an exchange.

You seem to be misinterpreting.

.

No one is saying it has locked in already.  They're saying we're on course to achieve lock in next period.

For a community dedicated to a project where privacy is considered an important feature, people sure do speculate about other people's personal circumstances a lot.   

I tend to take that stance that they'll tell us if they want to.  But if that doesn't happen, then it's none of our business.

That would be an issue if they prefer people to conform to KYC/AML requirements.  If they drive the use of crypto underground, it will be more difficult for them to monitor.  It's in their best interests for as many people as possible to use regulated exchanges.  That way, they can easily track what's going on, as they have the identities of all the exchange users recorded.  If anything, they would only attempt to shut down the unregulated exchanges.  But that's not easy and can swiftly turn into a game of 'whack-a-mole'.

I can guarantee you aren't getting an audience with satoshi, heh.  Maybe start at the beginning instead of going all "Karen" and asking for management when you've only just got here. 



And what sacrifices are you proposing in order to achieve that?  Nothing comes without a cost and I'm already thinking yours probably isn't worth paying.



It's an open-source project, so it's preferable to keep discussion open and public.

I've been waiting for you to say something dishonest or misleading but, to my surprise, you're actually doing okay so far.  It's a refreshing change of pace that I don't have to take immediate issue with something you've just said.  It's almost like they've finally put you on the right meds or something.  The post just prior to yours even managed to mention Lightning without triggering you into one of your usual tirades.  For what it's worth, I sincerely hope your current trend of rationality continues.

---

I'm rather indifferent towards his personal growth and betterment.  Whether he gets it or not, at some point, the market should outgrow his puppetry.  Let him have his misguided fun while he can.

Are you finding that trolling the general Bitcoin Discussion forum is unfulfilling?  Looking for a greater challenge, are we?  Somewhere more prestigious to disrupt?  Aww, too bad.

It's because of people like you that the overall quality of the forum is dragged ever downwards, causing the activity levels of the technical subforum to dwindle, as those who used to frequent it are now seeking the exchange of ideas in less hostile environments.  Places which you aren't taking a steaming shit in.

Indeed.  With PoW, there's a financial disincentive to divide your own available hashing power between pools, as it could reduce your chances of finding a block.  With PoS, it's trivial to form dozens of pools and it won't cause any major penalties to your chances of staking coins.  Which makes the overall number of pools meaningless.

And when Cardano supporters make the argument that the cost of a 51% attack:
that sounds a little disingenuous when people were accumulating ADA before it was worth $1.  Back in 2017 it was worth $0.03 US.

Litecoin and (I think) Vertcoin also have Lightning implementations, but in terms of usage, I get the impression they're pretty limited.  There's not nearly as much liquidity on those chains.  In essence, you'll find it easier to make payments with LN using Bitcoin, compared to altcoins.

Does it have to be either/or?  What if I'm an "enthusiast" or an "advocate"?  What if I care about the culture and the values of Bitcoin as much as, or possibly more than, the price?  Perhaps that means I'm just an investor who happens to be invested on an ethical level as well as a financial one.  Or am I more than merely an investor?  

It's easy for topics like this to get a little superficial.  But there's already more than enough shallowness in social and mainstream media.  Let's not lose sight of some of the more important (IMO) aspects of all this stuff.

Apparently they're getting into trouble with their solar roofs project.  Someone's filing a lawsuit.  They do seem to have a talent for pissing people off, heh.

If you're averse to FUD, then try to make the title of your topic less misleading and click-bait-y.  Restricting financial institutions from using Bitcoin is not the same as an outright ban.  You need to make that clearer.

The more attention people give him, the more influence he can exert.  Petitions give him more attention.  You are going to achieve the complete opposite of what you set out to do.

And yet, in the same breath, you completely fail to acknowledge a single downside, flaw or compromise to PoS?  Snake Oil Salesman much?  It's not all rainbows and sunshine, so stop pretending otherwise.

It's a completely different security model, different type of trust level and different alignment of economic incentives.  It's unwise to change the foundations of a robust and stable structure at a whim like that.  If PoS really was better, the market would have noticed by now.  Have you considered that maybe you're not in a position to insult our collective intelligence and act like just about everyone in this multi billion dollar industry is some sort of mindless drone?  Seriously, who the hell do you think you are?


//EDIT:
Troll identified:  This user is the latest incarnation of Zin-Zang and Khaos77.

Difficult to tell if they're a troll or just completely lacking in intelligence.  I just don't get the sense there's any cognition going on in their head.  It's just one thread after another containing mindless drivel.  But either way, yes, preserve your sanity and put them on ignore.

Yeah, I understand the point of contingency planning and being prepared for all eventualities.  But at the same time, we don't want to alienate anyone in the process.  If you start talking as though this is a foregone conclusion, miners could conceivably interpret that to mean you have no respect for their opinion, since you haven't really made an effort to find out what their opinion is yet.  If miners aren't supporting it, the first step is to open a dialogue to find out why.  It's a little premature to start talking about options like UASFs.  That sort of talk comes across as unnecessarily hostile.

At least give polite discussions a chance first before we start making "demands" .  If you start seeing everyone as your enemy before they've done anything wrong, that's a great way to create tension and halt any progress you could have made by working in cooperation.

Remember, this is a collaborative network that functions optimally when everyone is in agreement.  It's not constructive to go looking for a dispute that might not exist until you cause it.

No, there's definitely software that generates a new forked blockchain with relative ease.  It's like an unwritten rule that we generally don't want to go about promoting that fact, though, for obvious reasons.  To do coin development properly takes skill, yes.  But literally anyone can churn out a dozen clone-coin knock-offs without much effort.  Why do you think there are so many pump'n'dumps out there?

---

You'll probably get a number of different answers to that question.  I think the easiest answer is to say that there isn't one particular thing that makes a coin popular.  It's a combination of factors.  But it feels like everyone is looking for their own preferred combination.  You can't please everyone.

For me, it's more about the principles.  As with most things, strong foundations are important.  If you build your coin based around a particular ethos and pursue that ethos relentlessly, never abandoning those principles, that's a good start.  If you can find others who share that vision, particularly ones who are talented coders who can build a reliable and securely robust system, then it's better.  And if you can do all of that while not succumbing to the temptation of a pre-mine to "fund development", then better still.  It's surprising the number of project who can't even get those bits right.  Beyond that, yes, it's about network effects.  The more users you have, the more useful your network becomes.   

It wouldn't surprise me if they insisted people be registered, accredited brokers before they're allowed to do anything like day-trade one national CBDC against another.

---

Nope.  Fiat currencies, broken though they may be, aren't a ponzi scheme.  There won't be any benefit for adopting early.  You're just surrendering your privacy and autonomy faster by doing that.  They will retain the same value as the existing national currency.  In other words, you can't profit by selling your digital national currency back for the same physical national currency.  All it means is that cash will be gradually phased out as more people adopt the digital version.