|
though the OP is just advertising his website.. he does not understand the difference between money vs currency
bitcoin is a currency. infact anything can be a currency. its an umbrella term for anything people think has a tradable value.
money is a smaller sub category of currency. which is a medium of exchange with a set stable value that everyone can agree on.
bitcoin fails that test due to volatility and the fact that not everyone recognises it, intends to use it, wants to accept it
money is more about legal tender/fiat that is recognised, intented to be used anywhere and people want/do accept it
unless you can ask 100 random people how many loaves of bread can 0.00017btc buy you. .. without them scratching their head or having to do calculations or googling the answer, bitcoin is not money
bitcoin remains in the broader umbrella category of asset currency
|
|
|
|
There is no connection between communism and cryptocurrency but if you will ask my opinion they will not stick to cryptocurrency. Communists would like to have total and absolute control over the treasury and they dont want people to be looking at their transactions just like what blockchain technology has. So instead of cryptopcurrency they will use fiat currency wherein they have total control over production.
your thinking of capitalists.. |
|
|
|
|
now with that said..
lets look at how a crypto currency would develop in a communism situation
imagine each houses rent was based on number of bedrooms(nothing more nothing less) school costs were based on number of pupils
EG (pp/w=per person per week) note ill use this weeks average btc price
bedroom 0.01btc pp/w(~$80),
food 0.005btc pp/w(~$40)
school 0.002 pp/w(~$16)
note: things like bedrooms for a couple would be double because two "single" bedrooms would be bolted together to make physical room for a kingsize bed for the kinky couple to roll around in (i presume some knitpickers would argue couples dont deserve double rent)
here is how a crypto currency would work for (easy understanding) 7 families with a total of 27 people
1) single person gets 0.015btc
2) single person with 1 child gets 0.032btc
3) single person with 3 children gets 0.066btc
4) single person with 5 children gets 0.1btc
5) a married couple gets 0.03btc
6) married couple with 3 children gets 0.081btc
7) married couple with 5 children gets 0.115btc
(total 0.439btc)
and this would be where each household has a ASIC miner and they all are running it. and the block rewards are 0.439 a week that get pooled and then shared out in the amounts shown above
the algo is set that if a new family wanted to move to the communist neighbourhood, their PoN(Proof of Need) will be set and the block reward would increase to cover the neighbourhoods new higher requirement
8 ) married couple 1 child 0.047btc
new weekly block reward 0.486btc for neighbourhood
where there is no person owning the blockchain. no person getting more than a fair share and no thieving is occuring
|
|
|
|
|
if you put away your fox news perception of communism.. and instead if a nerd. the reality of communism boils down to.. well simply.. star trek
if not a nerd it boils down to.. having a family
in short, no matter what you do as a job, your efforts are shared out with those around you based on need
fox news tries to present it as if there are some rich thugs that steal everyones money/property and that people are left with nothing while some rich guy gets richer. this is not the case.
the reality is that housing becomes 0 value. and who gets a house is based on their need. for instance. a single person gets a one bedroom apartment and a person with 10 kids gets a multi bedroom house.
this means you will NOT find a billionaire single person with a 20 bedroom mansion, nor would you find a person homeless on the streets.. as everyone would be treated based on their need, not on what job title they have
i personally am not a capitalist/communist mindset. im more of a socialism/libertarian..
but i do love how many portray communism when infact what they are actually are describing is capitalism
wealth hoarding is capitalism.. so while capitalists wanted to go to russia, do business and get rich, they soon found out if they did go to russia all their hard work had to be shared. which the capitalists did not like to be part of.. thus started the propaganda of making communism sound like people were getting robbed and rich people were getting rich. when infact its captialism that takes things off people but doesnt fairly share it out
|
|
|
|
|
what people need to do is stop looking at the peak price as if thats 'value' and then cry every time it drops.
instead take the LOWEST price of the last 6-12 months and set that as 'value' and then if the price doesnt go below that line, they know bitcoin has good resistance and good value
if the price goes well higher then the LOW then this is the speculative bubble. and when it comes down but is still above the LOW thats just a correction.. (bubble burst)
but if the price goes below the LOW then that is where its a undervalued dump(where true panic usually sets in)
in short dont base your emotions on the highs at any point.. look for the lows and set targets and 'value' based on the lows
|
|
|
|
|
regulations do not mean consumer protections. consumer protections do not mean regulations
once people wise up to that truth, they would stop advocating for government regulations. and instead advocate only consumer protections
|
|
|
|
So we're calling whales, sharks now?  The cryptocurrency markets has always been volatile and will continue to stay that way probably until we get a decent rate of global adoption. Though I really don't know how it has been "increasingly difficult" for investors, as in my opinion it's actually a very good time to get in to the markets due to the prices being currently significantly lower than the prices a few months ago. 4 years ago. average joe could buy $10 of bitcoin without any KYC registration headaches. now its lots more paperwork, and risks of funds being frozen at a moments notice under fake AML restrictions as soon as people try to move large amounts and cash out. (the funny part is that money businesses are not suppose to freeze funds movements without a court order. and not even allowed to tell the customer they are under investigation) as for the sharks vs whales. whales gobble up huge orders in one go. those days are becoming rare. and also the liquidity of the markets and the volumes of the markets are shrinking too. so now its more so sharks running the exchange movements. by taking little bites very often via bots to move the markets. we are no longer in the days of mtgox where seeing 2000 bitcoins move in seconds happens due to one whale . now most order lines are under 1btc each and have many bots all biting at the orders like a school of sharks smart traders have learned, its no longer entertaining to hold 1btc for a year and hope the fiat value doubles.. instead they hope to make 1btc into 1.01 every 3 days so that at the end of the year they have 2btc+ and that 2btc also has the hope of being worth even more due to the fiat change they would have waited for anyway.. thus quadrupling their funds. so we are no longer in the whale domain of waiting for 400%-1000% whale spikes. but instead we are in the weekly 1-10% shark bites domain |
|
|
|
The verb TO OWN never was fully expressed since blockchain came to existence.
You own the private key, you own the funds, period. There is no force in the world yet (later maybe quantum computer) capable to break it.
That is one the reasons why bitcoin will kill banks. We will simply don't need them anymore.
i love bitcoin, but lets get rid of the fake hype and stick to reality.. you know.. stop over promising and under delivering and instead stick to facts and let people understand what bitcoin can offer in reality with it becoming too costly to fund a private key, many third world countries are finding it costs atleast an hour of their minimum wage just to move funds and thats when mempools are near empty.. and when mempools are over crowded it can cost a hours labour for first world countries(weeks salary for third world) unless you agree to accept funds through a multisignature channel on LN. yea thats right LN is the same as banking, where funds are no longer just yours but payments require someone elses agreement to move funds. as for killing banks. banks have fiat laws such as minimum wage, taxes and court fines that only accept fiat as payment. and goverment/public sector laws that only pay out salaries in fiat this means that fiat will continue to circulate. meaning banks wont get killed. all that will change is that there will be less local bank branches and instead more apps/atms some say that trying to get states to accept bitcoin for tax payment is some how making bitcoin kill banks. yet a government tax office having a partnership with something like bitpay or coinbase as their currency swap does not make bitcoin kill fiat. it just make bitcoin acceptance a gimmick. the treasury still holds fiat, and just uses a processor third party company to accept bitcoin and hand the treasury fiat. its like in the 90's where some supermarkets swap recyclable tin cans for food vouchers. this did not mean tin cans would replace fiat. bitcoin needs alot more then user adoption and gimmicks if it wants to try replacing fiat. and bitcoin alot mor onchain coding practices to sort out the onchain issues which offchain solutions do not make bitcoin better, but turn bitcoin into the same crapy system as fiat, which then makes it less appealing to use bitcoin as it offers no advantages over fiat |
|
|
|
If you compare the average 30 minutes transfer time of bitcoin to cash, it's way too long to wait. If you compare it to 2-3 days international SWIFT transactions, it's really quick. You can decide what kind of tool you want to use for different needs. When the Lightning network will start and spread, the whole thing will change, because it will be the competitor of cash by then, but we need to wait for the LN because it's still under development. Until then, bitcoin will not be the competitor for the giants (VISA, MasterCard), nor to Paypal or AliPay. We can prepare for the LN implementation with starting to use segwit enabled addresses.
...but. when you look at LN with its cltv which can be a couple days, and the csv which can charge back... LN becomes no better than swift |
|
|
|
What people usually refer to when they say that Bitcoin is decentralized is that the system is built in a distributed way, where there are a lot of miners, nodes, and blockchain copies around the globe. What that means is that no entity can take the entire network down.
i agree that the nodes are distributed.. thus not able to take the network down. but. this part below has become a failure compared the original ethos There's no single point you can attack to cripple the network, so it cannot be controlled by governments or similar entities. Everyone in the network just follows the same set of rules to keep the system running.
this is because blockstream employee's working as cough "volunteers" for core have taken on the reigns of bitcoin and deemed any other full node that is not core, is a threat. because they dem that only the core monarchy can set the rules/roadmap basically if your not running bitcoin core software to be a full node, you should not be on the network and instead should create an altcoin hre is the blockstream founder and main cor dv saying just that to previous teams that were not core What you are describing is what I and others call a bilateral hardfork-- where both sides reject the other.
I tried to convince the authors of BIP101 to make their proposal bilateral ... Sadly, the proposals authors were aggressively against this.
and here he is again saying anyone that opposes cores decision can be out rulled by lowering the consensus standard until cores bip gets the vote count it need If there is some reason when the users of Bitcoin would rather have it activate at 90% .. then even with the 95% rule the network could choose to activate it at 90% just by orphaning the blocks of the non-supporters until 95%+ of the remaining blocks signaled activation.
if you need further proof of core taking control of the network and not allow decentralised teams to offer their own bitcoin proposals away from core, just use the search box for the term REKT and you will see the hate mongering of core supporters wanting core to be the sole controller of bitcoin also its core and its blockstream gatekeepers of new proposals gmax: moderates the technical development topics on this forum rustyrussel: admins the mailing list for proposals Luke JR moderates the BIPS making it very controlled by just a few linked entities that end up controlling the roadmap of bitcoins future direction. it might be worth you looking into blockstreams latest controlling trick involving the blockchain. specifically trying to suggest that some devs that were not part of the core team infringed copywrite/patent/licences by copying bitcoin code without naming core as the creator. thats like a farmer arguing to mcdonalds that all burgers belong to the farmer because the wheat for the bun, the veg/cheese for the filling and the meat of the burger can been shown as sourced from a farmer. i could go into more detail. but in short. bitcoin is distributed but no longer decentralised.. there is a definitive difference between the two terms |
|
|
|
|
the term 'fork' has been over used and doesnt actually explain the difference between just a code copy/paste to create a new 0 history altcoin, or a divergent of the block history after a certain block number
anyway there have been many 'forks' of bitcoin. hundreds infact
XT was not a 'chain' fork because it was just a wallet software working on the network. but was a code fork because the code was similar
bitcoin cash was a 'chain' fork because it was forced to become an altcoin. due to the whole segwit bait and switch drama
before these there were many more, hundreds more.
the main first that retained the block history of bitcoin(prior to the fork) was called clams (a 'chain fork)
though there were also hundreds of others that just script-kiddy copied the code, but started again from block 1
|
|
|
|
the government can not intervene in bitcoin trading,
yes they can. if your trading bitcoin for fiat. then the country that owns/licences/tenders the fiat can intervene on anything involving their fiat. even if 50% of the transaction is bitcoin related. if fiat is involved, the bitcoin part of the trade wont absolve you of any fiat responsibility. however.. as an idealist, here is my opinion if bitcoin was traded for goods/services then its no longer treated as currency exchange/money business, but acting as a retailer. so if we take away the bitcoin<->$£ valuation and instead replace it for a btc<->'COL'(cost of living index).. or to put it simply 1btc=10,000 loaves of bread.. then bitcoin can be free from the fiat regs and government wrist slapping |
|
|
|
I understand why it takes time for miners to pick up a transaction, they have 1mb limit per block they win and they prioritize higher fees. But why is it that you get stuck on 1-2 confirmations for so long? It's already been mined, it should spread through the BTC nodes fast, shouldn't it?
confirms are not created based on how fast they relay through the network. so, let me explain it takes time for a pool to choose which transaction to add to a block. usually they pick the highest fee first and then let in cheaper ones if room. once accepted and that pools block wins the race of getting a solved block via hasing(mining) before other pools, the transactions in that block then are deemed to have 1 confirm. the next block has other transactions and when the block is solved that block has one confirm, meaning the previous block(containing your tx) is deemed as having 2 confirmations. with each new block created gives the previous blocks +1 confirms.. so if there were 3 block created after the one containing your tx. that means your tx has 4 confirms. the whole 'confirm in 10minutes' is NOT A RULE.. its a suggested guideline for ELI-5 speak(plain speak/laymans terms). the bitcoin code is actually to aim for 2016 blocks over 2 weeks, and thats the policy.. nothing more... which ony for the purpose of plain speak/laymens terms/ELI-5 translates to 144 blocks a day or 1 block every 10 minutes.. but as i said thats not a rule thats just laymens speak translating the 2 week policy into more understandable term/timeframe for average joe to grasp some blocks can be found in just a couple minutes or a couple hours. which is why some 'confirms' can happen quickly or take along time |
|
|
|
|
core have been fighting heavily for their "right" to control bitcoin. they call any team that is not core an opposition.. so it seems normal for a rebrand to make it clear that core control btc..
anyone that thinks otherwise either wants to be deceitful to hide the control or has not yet seen the history or even tried to start their own team and make their own client program that has its own bip proposals and chance to upgrade the network... but history has shown otherwise. if its not the core roadmap its an opposition
|
|
|
|
|
bitcoin doesnt need laws to scare off illicit 'cryptomining'.... ASICS done that for us.
also criminals ignore laws
but anyway lets explain asics solving the issue:
its not rational or profitable to CPU/GPU mine any more, so hackers simply do not bother making apps to illicitly cryptomine bitcoin.
all that needs to be done is for the altcoins to not resist ASICS but to develop mining tools that dont require PC software to mine, then its not a problem
in short if mining is not a PC operation but a separate device operation. then hackers wont target pc's
the other part is that many people download scammy programs promising a bitcoin hack that can make them $$$$ for free. the idiots that believe such fake programs kinda deserve the slap in the face by becoming a victim of their own greed
|
|
|
|
|
OP and many others have not even read the DUMA drafts from russia...
all it says is that registered businesses of exchange will be regulated and any individual that is exchanging under the pretence of running a business doing exchanges (exchanging amounts deemed more than personal use) would have to register as a money business or get fined (very simplified version)
|
|
|
|
I think his opinion is just that Bitcoin is not yet fully become legal to a country and other countries, he says there is no stopping criminals to join mining bitcoin? Helloooo!!! Are all small business on the street legal either? (I don't discriminate sidewalk vendors since I like street foods), some of them don't have permits like sanitation, but government allowed it since its one way to help people help themselves; and all people who plant marijuana on the hidden island or mountain have permit to operate either? Since it helps also non criminals to earn money by just planting, if you get what I says, and it's not legal also, so whats the different from bitcoin?
That's why step by step, government will implements some laws on Bitcoin for them to fully accept its existence.
bitcoin doesnt need laws to scare off illicit 'cryptomining'.... ASICS done that for us. its not rational or profitable to CPU/GPU mine any more and so hackers simply do not bother making apps to illecitly cryptomine bitcoin. all that needs to be done is for the altcoins to not resist ASICS but to develop mining tools that dont require PC software to mine, then its not a problem |
|
|
|
You have obviously not used SegWit lately, because $35 fees happened last year in December 2017. The fees have dropped to a few cents and some exchanges have started to batch transactions, so the Mempool is basically empty. https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-state-by-fee-levelAlso remember that SegWit made spam attacks more expensive and with a empty MemPool, spam attacks will be even more expensive. ^lol^ segwit is not the cause of the mempool/fee reduction.. just look at blocks, segwit is not even 10% of a block utility.. the reason the mempool is near empty is because the only reason it filled was spam the only reason there was spam was at times that people wanted to push CORE features. check the history dates of major spam events. most spam is caused by mixers which guys like gmaxwell are known to be involved in. and as soon as core gets their feature update they turn off their spambots...and try to make it look like its the new core feature that solved a problem.. yet even though their feature is activated, its not USED to any degree to explain the reality of mempool decreases.. just check out the block stats, compare it to the hype of core wanting new features/updates being accepted by the community, not the reddit propaganda and anyone that wants to scream out the reddit propaganda of "gigabyte blocks" or "no to 2mb/4mb" purely to defend core devs commercial choices, well here is something to enlighten you, using the 'bridge' analogy from the post earlier. some say that bitcoins bridge can only handle 2000 cars and thus car sharing/lightning aeroplanes (off bridge) are the only way, because bitcoin can only handle 1 lane of traffic, not 2(mb) lanes. not 4(mb) lanes.. yet the commercial decision of devs is that they know bitcoin can handle 4mb of data.. but they just dont want legacy users having that. instead you have to use the single toll road for old cars and only the new segwit cars get to use the other lanes(weight) yet only 10% of cars have updated to the new segwit cars, also core known devs stopped driving their fleet of mixer old generation cars from going in circles, to stop the traffic jam to make it look like cores new lanes has solved the problem |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
