From what I've seen on the media, Mongolia is bitcoin friendly and there's availability of cheap electricity, especially in the town called Ordos, and many miners are already taking advantage of this.
Ordos is in China. Inner Mongolia is a province of China and not of Mongolia the country! 1. very obvious advantages, why there are not many farms there?
Cheap energy doesn't mean that's the real cost, the 2cents/kwh is the subsidized government price, and you might not get your licenses to benefit from that accepted or prolonged. The grid is split in 3 parts and it's not that reliable, one part is just tiny and one is heavenly dependent on Russian imports. Cheap energy also doesn't mean abundant energy, in the best case scenario the entire energy produced in the country would feed around 200k miners, that's less than 7% of the total hashrate right now, now think how much they have to spare. |
|
|
|
Bumping this: https://cointelegraph.com/news/wirex-may-suffer-card-outage-eea-uab-payrnet-licensing-issueSo Wirex lost its EEA card provider, all physical debit cards in the EEA are out of order, virtual cards still work, or this is what people from Discord say. Another red flag for anyone still having funds on this, I just opened the app for the first time in months and saw: Euro 16% AER
USD 9% AER
Tether 16% AER
Ethereum 6.55 AER
Those numbers are just scary, I wonder how can they even advertise such returns, let alone pay for it. |
|
|
|
When I first read the news I thought that existing accounts would be spared. However, it appears that not only are new accounts required to undergo KYC verification, but it also states that existing users won't be able to deposit funds unless they are KYC-ed too. Bummer, right?
There was no way for that to be possible, under no regulation would that have been possible, all AML requirements are for every single transaction to have a verified sender, so it's not like an old account could bypass this, the moment it made one transaction it breaks this and the user woud need verification, that said they did prolong this as long as they could but probably they've seen the outcome, and rather than losing all clients they decided to go and obey the new rules. So, does anyone what could have triggered this? https://www.coingecko.com/en/exchanges/kucoin#statisticsA 500 mils to 6 billion in trade volume  For users who registered before July 15, 2023 (UTC), if their KYC is not completed, they will only be able to use services such as Spot trading sell orders, Futures trading deleveraging, Margin trading deleveraging, KuCoin Earn redemption, ETF redemption, and will not be able to use the deposit service (withdrawals are not impacted).
They will most likely reset the deposit addresses (at some point) otherwise what's the point? Because if they don't do that, and the sell orders and withdrawals remain unaffected, wouldn't that mean that users can still deposit using their previously generated addresses, sell and then withdraw these funds? They are letting a door opened for people who have money and don't want do go throw KYC or can't even do it since they are in some banned jurisdiction, so they will allow them to trade and exit, probably a smart way since they would otherwise be swamped with support tickets and less risk for the mess to go public cause when authorities will see tens thousands of users complaining they would probably start asking Kucoin just how many anonymous users and $ they have there.  And fast forward I guess they will disable the address from the account so you won't be able to generate a new one unless you're verified and if you do the mistake of sending it to the old one they will probably ask for KYC, a win-win for them, either free money or verified user. |
|
|
|
When I was a little child, Missionaries like Jehovah Witness Brethren and other Pentecostal Church preachers who was preaching the Holy Bible says, time will come in the whole world that everyone will use ONE CURRENCY and anyone who refused to use that currency can not buy things in any store.
~
This thing that I said is inside the Holy Bible but I can't recall the scripture but it is in the book of "Revelation".
Oh my god, are you real? Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name. This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666 You're telling me that Bitcoin is a sign of the coming of the Antichrist? Besides, if you're a true believer of God you should refuse the mark, so you're making it look like all Bitcoiners have signed a pact with the Antichrist and all the no coiners are martyrs. Seriously!!!! Let's keep religion out of this!!! |
|
|
|
What is the benefit of pointing 20p to foundry Than nicehash? I think nicehash would remain the highest payout
Before April it was the fees, Foundry was not charging pool fees to large customers, I don't know how they made money but probably it was something the backers like DCG saw as an intelligent move to make it the largest pool. Right now since we don't have any insiders we can't really compare payouts! Previous Retarget: Today at 1:46 AM (-3.2554%) Price at 30.5k, Viabtc shows 0.00000247 BTC ≈ $ 0.08 Room to grow, let's see if the summer heat bites more. "The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) said power use reached a preliminary 80,828 megawatts (MW) at 6 p.m. CST,
Is this enough for 3,886 Exahash/s if we consider S19XpHydro? Or am I doing something wrong? |
|
|
|
Do you have more beginner level suggestions?
Get a hamster: https://www.npr.org/2021/09/25/1040683057/crypto-trading-hamster-goxx-warren-buffet-s-p-500His portfolio is up nearly 20% since he started trading in June, according to his Twitter account. And as of Sept. 12, Mr. Goxx was performing better than Bitcoin, the Nasdaq 100, Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway and the S&P 500.While Mr. Goxx's methodology is random at best, it does remind us that where people get their financial advice from is certainly changing. I've seen a lot of you looking at Bitcoin charts and trying to predict prices.
And how many have you seen actually managing to beat what 100 random guesses in a row might yield? |
|
|
|
Op if I may asked what is the different between anonymous and pseudonymous? From your point of view you see them differently but they are not. If someone says that Bitcoin is anonymous that person in the same time also saying that Bitcoin is pseudonymous but you are using them differently without clear explanation.
Here is the explanation: https://www.gemini.com/cryptopedia/anonymity-vs-pseudonymity-basic-differences#section-what-does-anonymous-mean-in-cryptoSomeone who is anonymous is able to operate or speak in a way that makes them unidentifiable. Someone who is pseudonymous operates or speaks in a way in which they can be identified, but their identification shields who they actually are. If it were the same thing nobody would be adding "pseudo" to the definition which changes completely the meaning. I'm amazed that 10 pages into this you come and say it's no difference, forget the actual trait of Bitcoin, the two words have a different meaning no matter two what they are applied to! |
|
|
|
The most of the economic growth of Africa is based on the economic activity of South Africa.
Yeah right, and one page from this topic we have this: Power outages causes huge economic loss in south Africa.Growth? What growth? South African economy slumps in Q4
Secondly even if It's proved there is unlikely chance again to put sanctions on South Africa, US is already on brink of collapse with Russian sanctions, South Africa is diamond provider for world it'll create new issues in global supply chain again which obviously US won't be able to handle.
On what planet do you spend your morning newspaper reading time? Cause you need to come back to earth! And btw, Canada produces twice as many diamonds as South Africa which barely has 5% of the global production! The US is donating via USAID 10 times the value of all diamond imports for food security, who do you think will end up in trouble? |
|
|
|
The number of rich people in the world is increasing tremendously along with the rate of poverty. As the number of rich people increased, the number of poor people was supposed to decrease, but in reality it has been different.
BS:  Also, the way poverty is calculated has changed so much in the last decades that is no longer even remotely the same as at the beginning of the last century, it has added a ton of things that weren't even debatable possible a century ago. In countries like America, 33% of people are wealthier than before the pandemic and this is possible due to some reasons one of them can be corruption. Again, how in the name of god did 33% of the Americans get wealthier if yous aid only billions get richer and the rest end up poorer? Do you actually read what you type and give a second though on it? It's not about criticizing the rich out of jealousy.
Not jealousy, sometimes is also stupidity! Rentals will bring them even more and drive up prices. And this has been going on for years, today young people can no longer buy and find it difficult to rent, even though it is still a vital need! The less rich in debt for housing have no choice but to go to work at a lower cost for a minimum wage. And when we take a look at the Panama Papers and other papers, we know that in addition the super rich manage to put their money in tax havens.
Can you tell me, if the poor end up being paid less, and not affording housing, how are the people that sell them fewer goods and not being able to rent out hosues making more money? Because never in my life have I experienced a year where we would sell less meat for cheaper and make more money, for example as this is our family business. Not in all my years of work for a company have I seen a year where we had fewer clients, ordering less and we would make more! It's one of those mysteries of the socialist manifesto, so can you please explain to me how this is even possible? I remember when Elon Musk said he would donate his money (or some of it actually) if it could end world hunger. He just wanted a calculation proof first that it was possible.
After many weeks nobody could come up with a way for his wealth to solve world hunger problems.
Because that would imply work, and socialists are only after getting free money, working for that money would make them... capitalist! |
|
|
|
To be honest without bank account you can't even buy your bitcoin now for example if you have $100 worth of fiat in your hand and imagine the options of buying bitcoin without owning a bank account, it's kind of close to impossible job unless you can find someone in personal and exchange the cash when they sent BTC to your address.
That's true, every Bitcoin purchases starts with the bank, unless someone give him an Asic miner and he start mining Bitcoin direct to his wallet, You can buy Bitcoins from an ATM, you can buy Bitcoins via P2P deals, it doesn't have to be a bank! What did the first guys that tarded bitcoin used here, banks? Not even close, there were no exchanges and things still worked. But that aside, it shows how shallow the belief that crypto is a bank killer, so basically you can't deal with crypto if you don't have a bank account in the first place, you can't take your profits, you can't exchange it with a centralized solution conveniently, so if we go further down this path, what's the point of decentralization when all the time you're entrusting your money to somebody else? I don't know if it's ironic or plain sad! many of these rural communities in africa, china and india do not need cabled utility..
they have mini solar panels to charge cell phones which operate through cheap to set up cellular towers..
these days africa, india, china have faster more reachable internet than villages in the US/UK
Ever been to one? But be heaven on earth, free electricity, cheap and fast internet, no need for banks, what could you ask more? |
|
|
|
~
Based on these figures, Riot made around a $33 million profit off their bitcoins in those two months. So about $16.5 million monthly. This means if they keep selling Bitcoin at this rate for the next twelve months or so, they'll make almost $200 million, so they may or may not break even with their $162m asic investment depending on their operating costs, the bitcoins they sell (assuming they don't consider their Held Bitcoins sellable), and exactly how early the halving comes. No, that's not how it works.  Riot sold $16.5 million and $17.6 million worth of mined Bitcoin, that's revenue, not profit! https://www.riotplatforms.com/news-media/press-releases/detail/152/riot-platforms-reports-first-quarter-2023-financialTotal revenue for the three-months ended March 31, 2023 was $73.2 million, Net loss for the three-month period ended March 31, 2023 was $(55.7) million, Non-GAAP Adjusted EBITDA for the three-month period ended March 31, 2023 was $7.5 million |
|
|
|
Pretty crazy that they are willing to spend millions on a technology which is ignored by many big giants. Amazon could have just bought all the miners in the world and can sell the mining power to retail and make millions but they never thought of this as a business.
How much has Riot made this year from mining? https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/riot/financialsInstitutions and these large companies invest for the long term. Most retail invest in the short term and that’s why we still got bears around us. News like this is proof that you need to think crypto long term and not short term. Short term it can still break down $20K but what matters is that it stays above $20K next year and the following.
Why doing this if you're so bullish on the price?: https://www.riotplatforms.com/news-media/press-releases/detail/154/riot-announces-may-2023-production-and-operations-updatesMetric May 2023 April 2023
Bitcoin Produced 676 639
Bitcoin Held1 7,190 7,112
Bitcoin Sold 600 600
Average Net Price per Bitcoin Sold $27,568 $29,263 |
|
|
|
The biggest issue I see is regulation and price volatility and the rules that you are agreeing to when you do it.
You give them 1BTC they give you $25000. If the price goes up can you get more cash from them? Or do they give you some back.
If the price plummets back to $15000 and you walk away do they have any way of going after you?
They don't have to go after you, they will do just as all those platforms when the value goes close to what they lent you then they will liquidate it and that's it, that's why they ask for regulation on this: Yury Fedyukin, Managing Partner of Enterprise Legal Solutions, recalled that under the law “On Pawnshops”, the borrower transfers things to the lender for storage and his right to freely dispose of the pledge during the term of the contract is limited. Besides, some pawnshops even go as low as 30% when they give you a loan for gold so in crypto it might go down to 20%. Checking the website they offer in rouble $532.24 for something value at $925.30 so they might have enough coverage even with Bitcoin volatility! I thought about the same thing. It seems that the deal would be heavily skewed in the borrowers favour.
Think of the situation when the coins go down 60%, you get liquidated and the next day it shoots back up to the original value and you end up with the $7k you got as a loan for you BTC. Not so favorable anymore, right? |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Rises as Its Dominance Across Cryptos Grows. Why It’s a Bad Sign.
Why? Are investors losing confidence in shitcoins? Do users realize that you don't need a blockchain to run an app like Uber? Every single economically illiterate wanna-be rich guy over Twitter understanding that a meme coin is just a meme coin and that 99% of the world doesn't even get that meme at all? “The Bitcoin dominance grows when investors do not feel confident about the short-term market trend and adjust their position towards a less speculative portfolio, increasing their exposure to Bitcoin, which is commonly known to be the less volatile digital asset,” said Matteo Greco, an analyst at digital asset group Fineqia International. Oh no, the horror! I remember when traders were saying that capping the gas prices at 200E/MWh is a bad idea and it will destroy trading as nobody is selling and buying, we're at 30! Same for oil, putting a cap will reduce volatility and it will affect the markets, oh no the horror of the outcome! The entire economy is doomed if short-term speculators will quit the scene! Please come back when I ask you to! |
|
|
|
I'm a pleb like most of you, and I too have, many times, become pesimistic about the economy in general and in what's about to come. But has anyone ever considered that,
- The economy is not going to crash into a recession
- That there will be an actual soft landing
- That the Russia - Ukraine war will not escalate into a European war
- That Gensler CAN'T truly ban crypto
- Institutional investors will come back and take Bitcoin to six digits
Yeah me! Everyone was going doomsday with everything going down, half of the economy shutting down, twice the total number of companies in a country going bankrupt, the euro going to parity with the cent, Europe freezing to death or driving donkeys whatever cam first, nuclear warheads for everyone at Oprah, and when you look at live cams from the beaches you will see that outside the bunker life goes on! Normal life and the economy have found a way after two world wars, numerous economic crises, and far deadlier diseases. Rember how we were doomed in 2009? It's just a repetition! But here on this forum, a total collapse was seen as a path to 1 BTC to a billion, god knows why and how would have that worked so the cult was in full swing and gaining adepts by the thousands! In times of turmoil, a pessimistic view is actually a good thing. It indirectly forces us to build a better future.
That's the definition of optimism! |
|
|
|
As soon as I saw the main points I thought that the article on which you base your post is garbage, and, indeed, I see that it is written by a company (charity) whose business is based on defending the fact that there are many poor people.
A company and charity which would end with all its members in the unemployment office once there will be no more billionaires! Millions of people are being forced deeper into poverty as the ultra-rich increase their wealth.
How is Suckerberg becoming a billionaire forcing a guy in Nigeria to be poor? Can you show at least a hint of logic with outa triple reverse back side up front back to Neptune mental gymnastic? Their very billions are earned because of cheap labor, and cheap labor is available because of poverty. More poverty creates more billionaires.
Another load of crap. If that would be real then it means Bangladesh and India are turning billion faster than Foxconn is assembling iPhones. Probably just like those illiterates that made this study, you're forgetting that in order to profit from that cheap labor they need to sell these products, and if everyone is dirt poor to whom in the name of god and logic are you going to sell them? let me put it like this, if you had a shop, in what town you would want to sell - one full of low-wage earners that will buy only on debt from you - a town where everyone earns above the average and doesn't give a fuck if they hand you a $100 bill instead of $10 by mistake and doesn't ask for it back The whole idiocracy sounds like that stupid shit conspiracy when the Illuminati are destroying the economy of 3rd world countries so they could sell them shitty products...for what? Camelshitcoins? Instead of investing that money in their employees, they paid $257 billion to their already rich shareholders.
Oh no, those rich shareholders with which the company would never have existed in the first place and those employees would be out of a job instead of out of a bonus! People across the globe are facing dangerous climate change events, such as severe hurricanes, flash floods, and wildfires because billionaires are making climate change rapidly worse. In fact, 125 of the world’s richest billionaires invest so much money in polluting industries that they are responsible for emitting an average of 3 million carbon tons a year.
Another brain-dead stupidity, is they invest in that because PEOPLE use it, so if Hitler invested in BMW, and you would be driving a BMW daily, who is polluting, Hitler or you? If multi-millionaires paid a 2-3% wealth tax rate and billionaires paid a 5% wealth tax rate globally, it would raise $1.7 trillion a year. With this tax rate, 2 billion people could be lifted out of poverty.
No surprise you don't understand wealth! But anyhow: Let me ask you something since you're here on Bitcointalk!! Don't you think is outrageous somebody could be sending 1 billion and paying 1$ in fees while somebody that has to pay 5$ will also be charged the same? Does this make you want to drop Bitcoin and embrace socialist coin? To solve the issue posted on the economy by the billionaires, the followings can be done
👉👉 Go to sleep and read a book before! |
|
|
|
Most of these unbanked people are from the rural areas and such regions provides lots of workers and most of them work outside the country. If a person in diaspora wants to send money back home and he realizes that his loved ones are unbanked, what will he do? So with BTC, such people may escape from the remittance high fees. BTc will open the minds of many people who receive it. Everyone on the internet require some private and fast Ttransaction, it'll surprise you to know how electricity is everywhere including the rural area.
~snip~
I would not agree that the fees for sending money from abroad are so big, because we had already had such discussions on the forum before and I think @stompix showed some examples on WU transfer. Oh yeah, the classical WU charges us 105% of the money we send! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5426326.msg61407509#msg61407509Also: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5342087.msg60526390#msg60526390I've done so many simulations over this that I don't even remember which is what and where from whom! But basically, there are so many ways to send money cheaply, instantly, without the need to go and buy Bitcoin, send Bitcoins then have your relative exchange it god knows how that it has lost much of its sparkle. I know what foreign workers do here, they just open a bank account as they are allowed to, get a debit card, and either ship the card home or enroll it in Curve or google pay, and the relatives can use the money instantly, without the need for WU, Moneygram or anything else. How many of those have electricity and internet?
Why do you think having BTC will save them since they are in a situation when they can't even create a bank account?
With what money will people that live paycheck to paycheck would buy Bitcoin?
They don't need to be saved, and things do progress, I would be more concerned about access to clean water than the internet or a smartphone. Also, the questions are invalidating concerns, as long as they have money they can spend that, bitcoin or fiat is the same, if they don't have money to spend daily then there is no need to pay 1$a day in fees, which drastically reduced the number of transactions needed. Your concern is more like the electric cars consumption, how will we power all of them and where which was actually driving demand down and thus invalidating the problem. But now things are different in this market each dn every user has access to every sort of financial service without credit history and useless restrictions. Even with a small amount I can lend money, I can access each and every sort of service whenever I am in need. This is why we call Bitcoin and DeFi the future of finance.
Oh yeah, the revolution Defi and lending has bought, starting with Blockfi and ending with Celsius, or the half a billion in rug pulls in Defi scam projects last year. You're forgetting one aspect, with a bank you can take a loan even if you don't have the money, it has worked like this for centuries, Defi you can't take one unless you have collateral which is really stupid in the first place, you're putting 200% of the loan at risk of liquidation because of a sudden dump and you end up paying twice in a matter of months. Plus, since most of the world earns its paycheck in rupias or yuans or pesos, you might end up paying twice or thrice since most give loans in USD, not devaluating Zimbabwe dollars. |
|
|
|
But those who are in the Bitcointalk platform and Bitcoin enthusiasts should preach good News about Bitcoin and also to protect the currency or coin from the critics.
To protect it from critics? Niceeee! Do you realize that in a true democracy and in a decentralized world everyone has the right to not agree with you and to criticize everything if he doesn't like it? I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it This is how a normal society works, what you're trying to do by silencing critics is a commie gulag! Does it need one?
No, it doesn't! But people do need it, despite all this talk about decentralization most of them still try to picture somebody or something like an organization as the leaders or the one deciding the important things, that's why they use the centralized exchange, that's why they use centralized solutions even with Bitcoin, because they need someone to ask, someone to offer them support someone to blame on! It's the same thing here, the desperate need for a leader or for someone to do their work! |
|
|
|
Without interference, I believe BTC will climb to $ 150K in 2024 and $ 400-500K by 2028. If mining reward drops down to .00015 next halving. it appears I can mine around .25 BTC in 5 years with a 141TH XP. Still profitable factoring in .075/KHW based on the projected BTC price.
You're forgetting difficulty will also go up if the price will do so, in your scenario when Bitcoin is at 400 000, the reward per th/s is 50 cents compared to 7 now and miners will not plug additional gear when an S19 is making 70$ a day burning 5$ of power? Use this: https://insights.braiins.com/en/profitability-calculatorPlay with both the price adjustment and the difficulty, throw in the fact that your gear might go boom, your energy price might go up twice and then you have a better picture of it! 3. No, they cant except they can have 51% control over the blockchain without that would end up creating an hard fork like BCH, thus an altcoin
Even if they have 99.9% of the hashrate it doesn't mean a thing, let's not even think of the other fact, they have 99.9% of the hashrate and they decide to make the coin go Pos? lol! No matter how much hash rate you have you will not be able to stop anyone to ignore and never stop using the old code! 3. I guess it's possible if they will acquire at least 51% of all Bitcoin hashing power.
No, it's not, that's not how a fork works. They could do it without a single S1 mining and they could end with a dead coin like Bitcoin gold when if they had 99.00% of the hashing power. |
|
|
|
how closed is foundry?
Is it 100% Texas USA miners?
Did some research and they have 3 spots
NY
TX
South Dakota.
NY has had cool weather.
Probably only they do know, but if a 3% drop in overall hashrate would have been caused by them alone they would have gone under 30% in the last 3 days which they aren't. 31.97 % over the last 24h 32.86 % over the last 3 days, so assuming no normal variations, they have lost less than 3% of their total, so splitting into 3 states, would be less than 10% in one. This unless four hours from now luck changes and they go back to 32.80%! In fact, if the price hits 50k it would be very normal and reasonable for dif to hit 80-90, what is not reasonable is hitting that difficulty mark without any major price increase, look at it this way, the price at 30k, diff at 52T and they are still adding gear, judging by how much it cost those large players I did some basic math which shows that even at 60T they are still in the green zone.
I was probably more focused on the math some need to do that not only guarantees a profit, but also ROI for the equipment, and expenses, and that grants investors more returns than shoveling their money in government bonds. To get more gear they need more money upfront, so how are they going to attract a few billions when their statements are looking suicidal at best?! 686.7 million net loss, I know it includes impairments and unrealized losses but still, not the best thing at which you would want to throw money at, right? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
