You just summed up an entire generation of people who think they can get rich by playing with charts on a computer. All these gurus suddenly have the need to tell the norm how to get rich, like them*. Yep, this is what rich people do.   (Enter subscription bullshit...)

I'm genuinely curious who's buying this shit. When will the people comprehend that to gain profit in trading consistently you need to know more than the norm? An AI can't do anything when the only input it has is a chart, followed by mountains of articles with zero journalist integrity.

* except from the part where they don't do what they themselves suggest

Have you guys tried running Core in the bare minimum required RAM? I have been running Core under a 4 GB RAM, and it's painfully slow sometimes. When it does the consistent recent blocks check during startup, it can take up to half hour. I can't imagine someone running Core with a quarter of that amount of RAM, let alone one eighth of that (256 MB).

In fact, 1 GB is at least required.

I'm curious if it's worth it to run Bitcoin projects on such VPSes. DigitalOcean might come a lot more expensive, but it's something to trust. I wouldn't deposit anything on an unknown VPS service. (You used that VPS just for bitcoin-cli RPC, right?)

Haven't you guys been bored already with speculation? It's impressive to me that the most active topic, in all epochs, be it bear or bull, is speculation. "BlackRock wants to reduce the price of Bitcoin", it reminds me of the title from the news, trying to catch the eye.

Here's something non-speculative: we have absolutely no fucking clue what's BlackRock's business with bitcoin, if there is any in the first place. It wouldn't surprise me if there is none, and we've associated them with bitcoin because of Twitter accounts trying to get attention.

“The biggest liar in the world is They Say.” ― Douglas Malloch

Okay. So, you'll need another storage device which will be used as encrypted partition, otherwise the OS cannot operate.

To me, the ideal wallet setup is this:

• Cold storage wallet, used very rarely (mainly to send coins to it). It works as savings for the long term.
• Cold storage wallet, used as frequently as you're making on-chain transactions.
• Hot storage wallet, used for micro-payments, or when you're in hurry. (includes lightning)

All of which are viewed by connecting to your own node, via some computer that is dedicated solely for that purpose only.

How's DVD-R safer? I don't understand. If the DVD is one-time burned, then you probably can't run any OS on it. If it isn't one-time, then it works similarly to a USB? Curious, actually, I may be wrong. I haven't ever used DVD for anything beyond burning videos.

Nah. Fiat works as is, it's controlled by a few people, no matter how geniuses we were, it fundamentally works in favor of the few.

Absolutely nothing. I can't, nor do I have the time, to try and influence a dumb person's decision. "A fool and his money are soon parted", what an insightful quote. Provably true, with all those exchanges shutting down, taking people's money with them.

I'm also investing for gains, but I find the approach of keeping your keys easier and safer. It's objectively more difficult and less secure to keep your coins in some unregulated entity, agreeing into having your money taken in case they're caught to running fractional reserve banking, or getting hacked, or just gambling with your money on shitcoins etc.

Whatever HeRetiK said. The Bitcoin community (the people, not the software or currency) has failed convincing the majority to value custody, but what else to do or say? People are just dumb. By the way, how certain are we about these stats, again? I quickly reminded stats in the crypto world are as unreliable as weather predictions during a storm.

The world is dumb, no other possible explanation. You can't be informed about exchanges going bankrupt, hacked etc., knowing that bitcoin was created for you to own the keys, that exchanges will charge you more than necessary, and still consciously choose to go in that direction. It's nearly impressive.

I'm referring to OP's case, not yours. As I said, doing 11 TRON transactions for 10 cents isn't possible as TRON is barely even tradable in DEX. What I'm advising him to do is sell the TRON for BTC to some boltz-like exchange, and then send the bitcoin to DEX.

I'm absolutely aware of the diversity of cryptocurrencies in popular exchanges, and I'm sure you know better. No, you can't even use the TRON network in decentralized, peer-to-peer exchange as far as I'm concerned, let alone to pay 10 cents for what you described.

But this isn't the point here. The OP wants to sell TRON for fiat, and there exist services which can let him do that with absolutely no KYC required, neither with violation of any terms. It might come a little more expensive, but ultimately isn't it worth it? To me, the answer is yes.

In that particular case, no. The same thing can be done decentrally, and legitimately.

We are very much aware of how risky that is. Extremely unlikely. First off there are thousands of satellites orbiting the Earth, equipped with cameras, communication payloads, etc., which can track potential meteorites. Secondly, Earth's atmosphere is so robust that it can protect us from almost every meteorite we've experienced so far, as it effectively burns them up before they reach the surface.

On the other hand, you have absolutely no clue if you'll be the unfortunate user of an exchange. It can happen with absolutely no information given.

Totally understandable. I just don't understand why messing with a CEX and violating their terms, is better than just selling the stablecoin for bitcoin, and then selling the bitcoin to a DEX with high volume. I mean, there is no fault from the exchange's side, you're the one who's violating his agreement.

Update: Robosats is soon to be decentralized: https://github.com/RoboSats/robosats/blob/main/federation.md

There will be a federated client app released, where users can search for coordinators, and select the most reputable. In return, completing users' trades successfully will increase your revenue as coordinator, so you're incentivized to be as responsible and fair as possible. Coordinators must be technically competent with bitcoin, lightning, robosats, and be informed with the corresponded regulations in their country.

The thing I personally dislike is that coordinators take custody of your coins, until the trade is finished, in comparison with Bisq where everything settles without sacrificing self-custody. The difference with Bisq, is that this isn't a DAO, and so, the trade cost won't be fixed, but it will drop as new competitive coordinators enter the market.

Experimental software in here: http://robotestagw3dcxmd66r4rgksb4nmmr43fh77bzn2ia2eucduyeafnyd.onion

Why would you ever want to do that? It's against the terms of use on almost every exchange. If KYC is your concern, then just don't use an exchange that demands it.

Isn't not knowing how often it happens more concerning that knowing?

Maybe it just happened. Their terms of use make it clear enough that you must not share the ownership with another person, unless you have Binance's consent.

I'm still struggling to see the solution to the problem. So what you're proposing is:
- make the block interval variable.
- make the inflation rate variable.
- separate the blockchain into headchain, bodychain and crownchain (so SPV with extra steps?)

Define "counterfeit blockchain".

Lightning custodials don't portray themselves as privacy protectors, so I wouldn't expect from Muun to be a mixer with submarine swaps. If you're having coins in your channels (without using someone's hub), then the privacy you gain is noteworthy. If you don't have a lightning node, and depend on someone else's hubs / channels, then maybe converting them to XMR, and then back to BTC is a safe alternative? Sounds like a lot of trouble, as you're supposed to keep small amounts in lightning.

According to their post, their first trade had taken place with 4 traders. them included. If you search for transactions at that time, you'll barely find a block with more than the coinbase transaction.

In block 45689, which was mined in 17th of March 2010, at 23:51, there is one transaction with 4 inputs spent to some reused address. Here it is: 31178ebd1c8815e807d660ef7e0427b64fa6c47dc16861d0b01ce920b00df841. Transaction in block 45614, could also be that one, but it seems less likely. There are lots of inputs being spent there, whereas in the previous, it's 4 exactly.

I can't find any other transaction that happened in that day.

What's the point of having a "target transaction capacity"? You went to the technical part, of what it means, or how it's connected to the block interval, but you've skipped the "why" part. But just to catch you out, miners can bypass any "transactions required per block" requirement, as they can just create transactions where they send 0 coins to nowhere.

This is extremely important. Most people I know, use bitcoin because the inflation schedule is known. You can tell what the inflation rate will be in 30 years, an invaluable property for money of that kind.

Here's what I'd do if I were you.

• Install Bisq.
• Setup your accounts (whether that be Revolut, bank account etc., as far as I understand you want to withdraw for fiat)
• Copy a Bitcoin address from your Bisq wallet.
• Exchange the USDT for BTC using some service like fixedfloat (paste the BTC address there).
• Now just create an offer at Bisq to sell your bitcoin for fiat.

1. Disprove my claim by linking my ChipMixer deposits to my withdrawals: bc1qkp6s48ghcq23y4w0l0vy0d6dd288ejdrx0cq0r. I'll wait.
2. I can bare that cost if needed. Thanks for your interest.

No, you're lying. A coinjoin provides minimum privacy levels, comparably to all the available mixer funds most of the times, and the chain analysis only needs to follow the outputs from that specifically coinjoin, whereas in the mixer case, they'll have to de-anonymize every single mixer withdrawal transaction.

And indeed, I'd rather have my coinjoins mixed through Whirlpool, than use mixers, because I recently discovered it. What I'd absolutely not want to do is use Wasabi, as I'd literally fund mass surveillance and would use a provably faulty software (a fact which you're denying, but anyway).

As for mixtum, I'll agree that arguing that is a little vague, but it doesn't say they'll reject your coins.

---

With that being said, this will likely be the last response to you. You are disregarding all constructive input that people are giving you and resorting to whataboutism.

Bitcoin isn't dependent solely on centralized mixers, don't generalize like that. We already have wonderful alternatives, Joinmarket, Whirlpool, trading XMR back and forth, and so on. And yes, we also have the option to use a mixer, because sometimes it might fit the need best. If someone wants to run such a business, we should definitely not reject them; it'd be completely against the Bitcoin spirit.

If you don't like mixers, don't use them. Simple as that.

Centralized mixers do put target on Bitcoin, but decentralized solutions which allow money laundering and are not censorable don't. Completely rational.

Have you ever considered that the intense pursuit by federal authorities to shut down mixers might indicate that they indeed offer uncontrollable privacy? Providing privacy in such a manner is classified as a significant boon for privacy.

I don't think it's a good idea. You can still make the purchase with cash, why messing up with bitcoin? You're putting yourself in an unnecessarily dangerous position. At this point, anyone who's known to own bitcoin is quickly thought as rich. It's just the way it is.

But, even if you weren't becoming target, what's the point of that anyway? If you want to pay a plumber, pay him with cash. Easy, free-of-charge, fully private.

Same situation here. Everyone instantly thinks of the cryptocurrency scam-sector, and dismisses anything I have to say about bitcoin.