Nah, they won't ban it, it's just another area they can tax and add to gdp when they need to
But why they need to collect tax from bitcoin? What they are going to do with that coin? And i think they can't added to their gdp because they not own it and its decentralized. They don't need it, they just want it. They want everything. Actually of course they need bitcoin,but in other way,they're gonna collect the tax from bitcoin company not in bitcoin but in fiat thats it always they did it,its a little secret why the goverment not ban it,they are already let bitcoin grow but not ban it coz they really need bitcoin  Yes the ridiculous government is waiting bitcoin to grow more as they can find the source of income out of it too in the form of the taxes they would never banned bitcoin as they are aware it is the future of the currency and they are aware that it is gonna profitable for them in the future. some of those governments fear it because of this actually, because they will know that if they want to evade taxes they can do it with bitcon, and everything at their disposal this is why some nations are banning it and some not |
|
|
|
Is it better to save money in bank or invest it online, in real estate or maybe gold?
BUY GOLD AND BITCOIN INVEST TO THE FUTURE OF MONEY don't invest on dollar or EU im start buy Bitcoin in rate 160$ and sell it on 300$ that very high profit for me in Bank i get only 3-5% interest permonth in Bitcoin i can get 15-20% per month What bank are you referring to that pays 3-5% interest per month??? Are you saying that you can get 36-48% annually in interest from your bank account? Where I'm from, it's difficult to get more than 1.5% per year from a bank. Iyou can see this http://bni.co.id/Tarif/Simpanan/BungaDeposito.aspxyou need more capital minimum 1000k idr or 1.000.000 $ to get 5% per month and bitcoin not need more capital you must buy bitcoin if you price is cheap and sell if you think you get profit that's is a bit risky, with such amount i would not trust even a bank, with the recent fall of some of them or insolvency on some payments, because they don't have the money to repay you back after their dirty investment let alone giving you that high interest, like sweden and austria bank.. |
|
|
|
I would be nervous taking out a loan in bitcoins. I am paid in fiat not bitcoins so the rapidly changing price of bitcoins could bit you in the butt if it goes against you. And it almost certainly would at some point, assuming a decent sized loan.
Depends in how you agree on the loan. If you take a loan for 100 USD in bitcoin, and repay 105 USD in bitcoin, price of bitcoin doesnt really matter. The other party only has to make sure to buy the bitcoin at the time of the loan and sell it right after to take his cut in fiat. actually it does matter, if there is the risk that they will steal your bitcoin, if you start a loan that will be repaid after many months, and you payed 1 btc for it and then the price of btc skyrocket, and the guy that requested it vanishes, you lost much more than what you had at the beginning |
|
|
|
It depends on the price of bitcoin. Sometimes I make a lot while sometimes I don't. I'm doing trading so it's sometimes good sometimes bad.
I`d just give up on trading, and just provide a service or become a outsource for someone. Or list a couple freelance skills. What I noticed is theres lots of demand for those people who can design the signatures for campaigns. And if the price of bitcoin is too low you can stop trading and trade again when the price of bitcoin is high enough. why? there is no difference between trading when the price is low and when it is high if you are shorting the same profit will be made, assuming that there is the same % of dumping, which should not be influenced by the price itself |
|
|
|
|
a good % but bears in mind that the technology will progress before that the halving will happen, this will lead to some miners being still alive by the time the halving come, and after it
so they will be forced to produce more efficient miners and not increase their hash, this is a good thing, less energy wasted
|
|
|
|
|
they could do it easily, because they have already roi'd, and adding new equipments wil roi in a second, so they don't have that problem of returning their investment, also they pay a very cheap electricty, they could agree to set their sell order on a +1% every day at the very least
|
|
|
|
holding onto them and waiting for the price to rise is probably your best bet. Or you could always make some loans on sites like BTCjam and collect interest on your bitcoin.
only if everyone is not doing it, otherwise the price can rise, you know...holding and keep buying is another story, it is a better strategy already then simply holding, because it will aim at rising the price also, thus making your holding more worth it |
|
|
|
|
i hope they are just considering only the strongest coins(and even then they are just p&d, that will die soon) because many coin are too dangerous to be used to buy stuff, they are not stable, they are approaching to their death, they are unknown to many they work in a different way, non-tech guy, could have some problem understanding some of them, ecc...
|
|
|
|
other than being used for payments mastercard/visa and bitcoin have nothing in common. who cares if they dont like it. its not going anywhere.
In the future Bitcoin will be a direct competitor with mastercard/visa because it can steal traffic from them. Why would you pay with a credit card when you can do it with Bitcoin at lower fees and worldwide. not only lower fees, but lower general cost, with bitcoin you don't anything to sustain your wallet, with master card you pay just because you're holding their credit card/debit card or whatever it is not to mention that bitcoin is a global currency with master card and visa you need to add additional fee for conversion from one fiat to another this two thing alone should encourage people to adopt bitcoin, there is only the security issue left.. |
|
|
|
Also the writer is reffering to the massive pollution caused by bitcoin mining. What about the massive servers the banks and VISA/Mastercard need to host currently? They probably use a shitload more energy than the current mining operations. If bitcoin can replace parts of this, wouldn't we be better off?
wasn't the bitcoin network considered the most powerful network in the world, most powerful than any numbers of supercomputer combined? i doubt they are wasting more energy than the mining operations for bitcoin |
|
|
|
I voted core...
But I am old school.
I am also a professional miner.
If 20MB blocks go through, I will have to shut my node down entirely and go mine another coin.
In my world, it's the core or nothing at all... whilst I want to remain in Bitcoin, I won't be able to save my earnings and will be auto-sold.
Put more downwards selling pressure on the network... I'm just one miner, though not the only one.
.....
To me, the devs are nothing but power trippers looking for something to do, to establish their usefulness.
Gavin's just another thoughtless brain dead liberal trying to play follow the leader.
Just like union cock suckers, no one matters to them but themselves and their skin flute orchestra.
GO USE OTHER COINS!!! BITCOIN IS TOO FUCKING SLOW!!!!
Then you will see that the Btcoin block size is fine the way it is and that Bitcoin really sucks as a crypto.
it will take years before there will be 20MB blocks... It's disheartening to see that even a miner, the people I would expect to have at least some technical knowledge and be capable of making an informed decision, can get this concept mixed up so easily. Why is it so difficult for people to comprehend? You will only be processing the transactions that are there, same as you do now. It's not like there's going to be an extra 50 million transactions overnight just because the fork goes ahead. In future, there will likely be more transactions and the network needs to be able to handle that. The extra users will be including fees with their transactions if they want them processed urgently, just like users do now, so there will be more revenue coming in to help pay for any additional bandwidth costs. this is the reason why they want to avoid it, because it does not scale, and you will end up with so much space that it is no needed, one could argue that in the case bitcoin start to skyrocket randomly within 1 year(not talking about price only, but adoption also, the latter can increase in not time if there is enough interest from people), it would be useful to have more space, but the chances for this, are still to slim, and therefore it is better to increase it step by step it should not be so hard for dev to implement a code in the client that increase the limit everytime it reach saturation |
|
|
|
If you have the infrastructure to move FIAT (from one country to country), there might be great opportunities. But I'm just a coder, not a banker.
then you can go ahead and make a bot that work with arbitrage, i'm sure it is possible to earn some low percentage, around 3-5% if you bot is well coded and it is fast enough |
|
|
|
Best practice is to create a new receiving address EACH time you receive a payment. This way you avoid creating long transaction chains and can remain more anonymous. A hundred times this! Each payment you receive should be on a new address. What is the advantage of changing address for each payment (multi-signature) compared to a single address?  If you have too many linked transactions then it is easy for a would be thief or hacker to target you. This is a disadvantage of bitcoin. Anonymity is not just for crooks and tax evaders, it is for everyone. You wouldn't walk around with a sign on your back advertising how much money is in your pocket would you? I think for most of us it is not a big deal because we don't have that much in bitcoins. However if you have some, even a few k worth of fiat, then it is advisable to switch your address regularly. this is only true for real life thieves, hacker can do nothing if you store them in a cold wallet, no matter the amoout you are holding |
|
|
|
I got in early with PBMining, but never quite broke even. I did come closed than most however, because I got in early. I was one of the lucky ones. People told me that it was a ponzi, but I wouldn't listen. I argued and argued. Got mad at people for calling it a ponzi, but guess what. I was wrong. Where is PBMining now?
Be very careful with cloud mining. There may be some honest ones out there ( I haven't found them though ), but most of them are nothing more than Ponzi schemes and are waiting to take your money while leaving you holding the bag.
What about hashnest? They seem legit to me. I don't know about hashnest. I'm sure that there has to be a legitimate cloudmining company out there somewhere. Maybe they're the one. I do know that all the ones that I have experience aren't. Hashnest is legit. One of the few I trust personally. Part of the Bitmain family. It's over here: https://www.hashnest.com/ whether until now hashnet still legit? whether this mining cloud do not use the system ponzi? I want to try if it was really nice thye are legit along with bit-x, they are the only two legit at the moment, but maybe there some small other that are paying as well |
|
|
|
There are several in BTMs in Makati
What buildings? Can I ask anybody there for bitcoin ATM? you should ask there, it's better than asking here here one http://bitmarket.ph/atm |
|
|
|
I think you're thinking that only Bitstream can make sidechains, when they are making the technology to add sidechains. So anyone can make their own sidechain and tie it to the network, it is a lot more like altcoins than anything else, they are pegged to the chain and not using a third party exchange like cryptsy to change.
So we will have sketchy coins and issues just like altcoins and this does increase the difficulty of understanding bitcoin to new people who want to start accepting it and using it.
from what i understand those sidechain are useless if you don't move your bitcoin there, this is the real difference, they only work when someone use them with real bitcoin from the main blockchain if they aren't working in this way, then they should re-think about it and make them working in this is way Yes but they still will have indie developers with future promises of this and that while they make up whatever rules or components they want but instead of mining they are just bought with bitcoin. (I think there still has to be some mining somewhere) For example Sidechain DELTA comes out, one Delta is equivalent to .1 bitcoin, you send 1 bitcoin and get 10 delta, You now own 10 delta and can send delta to whomever accepts it and delta can have its own rules. Delta has a speed of 1 block every minute and is anonymous and limited to 1,000,000 delta but it is centralized. Delta can't be used at shops only accepting bitcoin though and has to be reconverted back (just like altcoins) So what if many people start buying delta as they like it and can switch it back to bitcoin as they like but all of the sudden (since it is centralized) Delta developer decided to increase the amount of delta to 10,000,000 and value them at .01 bitcoin each, what is stopping him? How can this be blocked? i think the value should be 1:1 with bitcoin, and if one of the sidechain value, is increased the ratio should still remain the same, so bitcoin should increase too in value(it is as if they had bought bitcoin when they buy each saidechain counterpart), this should avoid any issue about your concern |
|
|
|
I think you're thinking that only Bitstream can make sidechains, when they are making the technology to add sidechains. So anyone can make their own sidechain and tie it to the network, it is a lot more like altcoins than anything else, they are pegged to the chain and not using a third party exchange like cryptsy to change.
So we will have sketchy coins and issues just like altcoins and this does increase the difficulty of understanding bitcoin to new people who want to start accepting it and using it.
from what i understand those sidechain are useless if you don't move your bitcoin there, this is the real difference, they only work when someone use them with real bitcoin from the main blockchain if they aren't working in this way, then they should re-think about it and make them working in this is way |
|
|
|
the difference is that they will no be any real pump&dump or malicious dev behind it with hidden instamine, premine and other craps like that, and their use will be directly connected with bitcoin, instead of serving their own only
When a dev makes a sidechain he sets the rules, why is there no instamine or other crap? I feel this is definitely an unproven speculation. the dev behind it are the four dev that work on bitcoin, one should trust them more than a random dev on the altcoin section also bears in mind that sidechain are empty, you just fill them by moving your bitcoin, they are alternatives blockchain that are waiting to be used, for their unique features here a good explanation http://gendal.me/2014/10/26/a-simple-explanation-of-bitcoin-sidechains/basically a interaction between multiple blockchain, like multiverse, if you allow me an analogy I don't get side chains. Can somebody post a example of how one might work? Would the coin used be bitcoin or something different?
a summary The sidechains ideas is this:
Send your Bitcoins to a specially formed Bitcoin address. The address is specially designed so that the coins will now be out of your control… and out of the control of anybody else either. They’re completely immobilized and can only be unlocked if somebody can prove they’re no longer being used elsewhere (I’ll explain what I mean by this in a minute). In other words, you’ve used the core bitcoin transaction rules I described above to lay down a specific condition that the future owner – whoever it ends up being – needs to fulfil in order to take control
Once this immobilisation transaction is sufficiently confirmed, you send a message to the other blockchain – the one you were wanting to use. This message contains a proof that the coins were sent to that special address on the Bitcoin network, that they are therefore now immobilized and, crucially, that you were the one who did it
If the second blockchain has agreed to be a Bitcoin sidechain, it now does something really special… it creates the exact same number of tokens on its own network and gives you control of them.
So it’s as if your Bitcoins have been transferred to this second chain. And remember: they’re immobilized on the Bitcoin network… so we haven’t created or destroyed any…. Just “moved” them.
You can now transact with those coins on that second chain, under whatever rules that chain chooses to implement.
Perhaps blocks are created faster on that sidechain. Perhaps transaction scripts are “turing complete”. Perhaps you have to pay fees to incent those securing that sidechain. Who knows. The rules can be whatever those running that sidechain want them to be. The only rule that matters is that the sidechain agrees to follow the convention that if you can prove you put some Bitcoins out of reach on the Bitcoin network, the same number will pop into existence on the sidechain.
And now for the second clever part. The logic above is symmetric. So, at any point, whoever is holding these coins on the sidechain can send them back to the Bitcoin network by creating a special transaction on the sidechain that immobilises the bitcoins on the sidechain. They’ll disappear from the sidechain and become available again on the Bitcoin network, under the control of whoever last owned them on the sidechain. |
|
|
|
|
the difference is that they will no be any real pump&dump or malicious dev behind it with hidden instamine, premine and other craps like that, and their use will be directly connected with bitcoin, instead of serving their own only
|
|
|
|
Shorted 230$
Short closed  lol seems a bit pointless, the fees will eat you, did the price even fell below 230? it's 232 now |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
