|
If 20% of the population continue to use Chivo after claiming their $30, that's actually a pretty good result. That's way better adoption than the rest of the world, where only single-digit or even below-single-digit share of population frequently uses Bitcoin.
Also, this report doesn't show the most important metric - transaction volume. How much money is moved through Chivo or Bitcoin in general, compared to all other payment methods? Because if those 20% of the population use Chivo a few times per year, then adoption is indeed low.
|
|
|
|
Rules update as of April 28, 2022:[/b]
We recommend avoiding topics with sensitive political agenda, in particular, the situation surrounding Russia and Ukraine these days. Since we, as a business, take up a neutral status, when a user publicly supports this or that position on the forum, it can be a reason for suspension of cooperation. We understand the desire of many not to stand aside and actively participate in discussions, but, unfortunately, due to possible false associations of the signature campaign participants with our brand, we ask such users to suspend collaboration with us for the time of active participation in these discussions. We would be happy to resume collaboration when you decide to retract your political statements.
There are many topics in the Economics board regarding the economical effects of the war, would they fall under this rule? Or topics in Bitcoin Discussion about current stance of Bitcoin in Russia or Ukraine. Or topics in Speculation about the effects of war on the price. IMO such topics usually don't have "sensitive political agenda", but those who reply to them might have one. |
|
|
|
It depends on the region, it's one thing to have Vermont doing this and a different beast for Texas or Georgia.
But I don't see republican states following this or at least I hope they don't.
Bitcoin remained unscratched after China kicked all miners, and at the moment China had a truly large share of hashrate, probably larger than the entire US has right now. It's just that with every ban on mining there's less and less places for miners to relocate to. And now the world is going through an energy crisis, which could make finding spare electricity even harder. |
|
|
|
Remember: Bitcoin is constructed in a way that such kind of regulations for miners don't affect its functioning at all.
When it's just one region, it's no big deal, if it's a global trend, that's a problem. If Bitcoin's hashrate shrinks and gets concentrated in just a few countries, that's not good, because the risk of a large-scale attack on the network will become higher. Also, function is not everything. If Bitcoin gets restricted or banned by influential countries, it will become far less attractive as a store of value. |
|
|
|
|
It all sounds cool in theory, but on practice it doesn't matter. Regular people are not severely oppressed by banks and governments. Most people live their lives without ever having their assets frozen. Ability to send money to literally anyone in the world sounds nice, but most people are just making regular purchases from legal businesses, or sending money to people they know, so they have no problems with traditional payments. When people will start needing the benefits of financial freedom in their daily lives, that's when Bitcoin will start seeing more adoption.
|
|
|
|
Of course, I'm advocating this for some time already: large scale miners should build their own (green) energy production facilities. This will ensure they can operate for very long, no matter how low the block reward will drop and would also shut off the political trolls.
Why should they make a large and risky investment if they can just look for existing electricity supply? If Bitcoin crashes and mining becomes unprofitable, what would they do with their power plants? They would be able to sell only a small fraction of their capacity at best. They don't get much, if anything, from such investments, and only take risks. |
|
|
|
|
Why it's only limited to drunk driving? Why not expand it to every case of killing that leads to a child becoming an orphan?
They idea sounds right morally, but what would be practical consequences? For example, there's an infamous effect of a Chinese law that causes drivers to intentionally kill victims, because it's cheaper than paying medical bills. What if this law would encourage hit and runs or killing witnesses?
|
|
|
|
In future, the proportion of renewable power resources in Bitcoin mining industry will only increase, to higher number than about 60% now.
There's a problem that Bitcoin creates demand for electricity, and coal/gas power plants come to fill this demand. This problem is nowhere big enough to single out Bitcoin as a big polluter on the same level as meat industry or transportation industry, but for governments it can be tempting to regulate or even ban mining, because it's such a low-hanging fruit - they will present it as fighting climate change, and no one will protest, because crypto users are a minority, and even within them not everyone cares about PoW. |
|
|
|
So, what benefit would they get in providing data to Russia? Unless there's something more underneath it all.
Russian government would have banned Binance in Russia if they refused to cooperate. This is alarming because I know that Binance also donated funds to Ukraine to help those in need and recover.
The fact that Binance is not banned in Russia after donating to Ukraine and helping with NFTs for Ukraine could be viewed as circumstantial evidence that they indeed work with Russian government. Because Russian government have closed "extremist" sites like Instagram and Facebook over their support for Ukraine and refusal to fully comply with Russia. With this logic they should have banned Binance for donating to Ukraine, which according to Russia is a Nazi country that kills Russians. |
|
|
|
Batten believes Bitcoin mining drives increased demand for electricity and therefore investments in renewable energy plants. Mining is suited to intermittent power sources and it can be easily moved to far-flung locales to take advantage of the excess generation of renewable electricity.
The idea that Bitcoin will incentivize green energy is very old, so this twitter expert didn't say anything new. The reality is, the presence of Bitcoin mining incentivizes generation of electricity, regardless of the source. On practice it means that there's an opportunity for closed coal and gas powerplants to reopen. |
|
|
|
|
How are miners that are forced to buy more expensive electricity or pay some fees for using dirty electricity are going to successfully compete against miners who use cheap fossil fuels? A more sensible approach is to just tax miners and use that money to combat climate change directly, but taxing miners can be a bit tricky, because they don't make any profit until they sell their coins, so there's a potential for some loopholes.
|
|
|
|
The article seems to imply that some significant volume of crypto mining hardware is being restricted. But russia has already had these restrictions against import of high tech components for many years. Which is a big part of the reason russian drones captured by ukrainian forces are using old cameras and technology. Due to them not being able to import newly minted electronic components or bitcoin miners.
If you are talking about Orlan-10, it's made from bad components because they assume a high loss rate, so it's not like all Russian drones and equipment is low tech. Also, it's worth to notice that while the West had largely stopped supplying weapons to Russia after 2014, it wasn't a complete embargo. There will be cases of companies trying to bypass sanctions, but it's risky for them, because they will be severely punished. If the countries will have the political will to do so. So, in general, sanctions work, and it's likely that they will work even in crypto, because the mainstream crypto industry can and will be regulated. |
|
|
|
Source"Treasury is also taking action against companies in Russia’s virtual currency mining industry. By operating vast server farms that sell virtual currency mining capacity internationally, these companies help Russia monetize its natural resources. Russia has a comparative advantage in crypto mining due to energy resources and a cold climate. However, mining companies rely on imported computer equipment and fiat payments, which makes them vulnerable to sanctions," a Treasury statement said.
Basically, Bitriver won't be able to sell their cloud mining to anyone from the US and their allies, and it won't be able to buy mining equipment from those countries. There's even a possibility that third parties, like Chinese companies, won't do business with them if they will want to preserve their connections with the US - there have been examples of such actions by Chinese companies in other fields, even though Chinese government is not sanctioning and is actually supporting Russia. Sanctions are much more than just "not allowing money to be sent to some country", and crypto is not going be useful for bypassing them.
|
|
|
|
SourceIreland plans to prohibit cryptocurrency donations to political parties amid fears of Russian election interference in an upcoming set of amendments to its Electoral Reform Bill 2022.
“The appalling invasion of the Ukraine and insidious disinformation war highlight the ongoing fundamental threats faced by all democracies,” said Irish Local Government Minister Darragh O’Brien, who is spearheading electoral reform.
New political integrity rules proposed for the Electoral Reform Bill 2022 will revise political donation rules to minimize the risk of foreign meddling and will also introduce safeguards against malicious disinformation campaigns targeting Irish elections.
In particular, Ireland is concerned that crypto donations can conceal the identity of a donor and increase the likelihood of dark money entering campaigns via foreign governments. When the war started, I was making a prediction that Bitcoin can get a lot of negative exposure if it will become associated with Russia, seems like my prediction is coming true. On the other hand, it's inevitable that the government will want to restrict the unchecked flow of money via Bitcoin, perhaps Russia just catalyzed it.
|
|
|
|
|
The popular theory right now is that the cycles are getting smaller, so if the tops are not as dramatic, then the bottom won't be as dramatic too, simply because 80% decline would mean that the trend of Bitcoin growth since its inception would be broken and we'd be in an unprecedented bear market. This is highly unlikely, because there's no fundamental reasons for it to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
When speaking broadly, trading means frequently buying and selling and getting profit from the difference between prices. While investing means putting money into something to get profit, not limited to just selling at thigher price. It could be dividends from a stock, buying real estate to become a landlord, investing in startups to become a shareholder and so on.
But when it comes to crypto, investing is just long term trading, because crypto doesn't have cash flow.
|
|
|
|
|
Look at the top projects of the past, like Filecoin, Namecoin - they were once in top 10 coins by marketcap and people genuinely believed that they will be useful. But those coins failed to reach any significant adoption and slowly faded into obscurity. Having a hard-working team is not enough if your idea is flawed at its core. And the fundamental problem of crypto is that it solves "problems" that most people don't care about, and it comes with a huge baggage of drawbacks that makes their cost-reward ratio unattractive.
|
|
|
|
My question is, do you think it's resistant in an environment with nitrogen (N), and/or potassium oxide (K2O)?
Nitrogen is not reactive, most of our air is Nitrogen. Pure Nitrogen is even used to achieve inert environment in certain processes. Potassium oxide, while highly reactive, wouldn't cause corrosion of steel, because it's a basic oxide, and bases generally don't react with metals. Jameson Lopp did a large test of steel plates for Bitcoin seeds, including heat and corrosion tests. |
|
|
|
|
Fees are low because we're in a bear market, there's not a lot of trading activity, and trading is responsible for a very high percentage of total transactions. When we'll enter a new bull market, the fees will rise to $5, $10, $20 and higher again. This means that every 3-4 years there are long periods of times when on-chain transactions are unusable for "buying a coffee". Lightning network will fix it when it will become widely adopted, but it will take years.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
