if no exit strategy, they will use this kind of feature to scam your money, no matter how much you have, they will just use this reason to launder your money out.

especially if that is without exit strategy!
if that happened, your money is gonna be laundered out.
unless they are legit sites, and with exit strategy, otherwise, it is just rubbish.
stay out from those ponzi sites, be intelligent. if this is unrelated.

selling accounts are no good at all, those members are no use.
stay out from them and get something legit to do.

the only possibility of leading the bitcoin into $1, is to activate the 51% attacks.
in that case, people would lose major reliability of bitcoin, and sell all of them.
well, i would stop using bitcoin in the 51% attack case, but even if bitcoin went down into $1, i would still using bitcoin, i believe the miracle.

would be worth at least $10.000 or $15.000 , because the demand of bitcoin would be skyrocketed.
we would need more independent miners to secure bitcoin, otherwise that is no good to bitcoin network.
let's see if people were in panic on buying HDD in 2020 if XT used in bitcoin core, i guess bitcoin would not be as sustainable as 2140, but i still believe in bitcoin goes $10.000 for the protocol.

i don't really know, but i am curious that if bitcoin could break through $330 within 2015.
because the demand of bitcoin is probably increasing, however, due to the bit license, i am not predicting the larger one.
let's see if bitcoin XT helped on the price of bitcoin.
are we seeking for more bitcoin users? in that case, we'd probably have the raise.

have your say, mate.

stop asking for loan right now if just for kicks.
you know, we won't know what you would do with the money lent.
give us the better reason to prevent you from misuse.
i was neggd for this when i was a newbie, but since i don't wanna create another alt, i stayed w/ that negative vote (and a positive vote after the negative one).

manyproofs, stop lending to those alts, especially yours, and do some constructive and legit lending instead.

apparently i will think LTC would be better than bitcoin.
at least that blockchain would not be easily skyrocketed by those flooding.
i would wish bitcoin not to increase the size limit too high to prevent full node users from giving up due to the excessive storage for the blockchain needed.

in order not to get the money tracked, they demanded bitcoin, instead of any fiats, you know the fiat transaction is easily reversible.
for bitcoin, even though if you successfully tracked the bitcoin, you would not ever be able to steal it back.
that guy is just for kicks.
bitcoin gives him an ability to do this, duh this could destroy bitcoin.

altcoin is too risky and without value guarantee, and it is as same as bitcoin.
he should have solid stuff as collateral.
you better ask him for collateral which has a better value guarantee, like samsung.

it is explicitly profitable, as long as it has exit strategy.
however, we should consider decrease the hash rate and/or separate the miners into independent pools due to the waste of energy.
cex should setup another mining farms for everyone to trade hashes and place it into the pools where they wished to.

in asian currency, only the HKD (my local currency, apparently) will be the top of them, since that was pegged to US dollars.
i hate china, their policy of economy is no good, they just wish to gain the advantage from the economy, or incorrectly rescuing the economy.
i now have to keep my HKD in my wallet, stay at home, and do not go any far away. luckily bitcoin isn't affected, especially the banks in china are forbidden to apply bitcoin for.

this act will be the bait to the protest for economic freedom if their fiat failed.
if i had money to help doing appeal, i would try to overthrow this bit license.
i am not in NY though.

your reason is explicitly not legit.
collateral like alt coins are exactly the same with the bitcoin, so you give me a better reason for loan instead.

so, anyone here uses non-windows operating system?
i am using my new computer which is raspberry pi, raspbian.
i am safe from those bugs.


i mean apparently, not forever, have to apologise that forgetting to put "apparently" in it.

no free energy here.
as far as i know the most environmental friendly energy is come from perpetual magnetic generators.
i have no idea, you still need human energy to set it up.

i am totally disappointed with the bit license, and it should not to be here, at all.
forcing people to pay taxes, and forcing people to pay such a large capital for the fee. basically bit license is kicking out bitcoin in order to let the arbitrary to take over.
at least i live in Hong Kong, won't be affected. USA is garbage of the economic freedom, well, to be a full-of liberty countries, we should have the economic freedom enough.

shit, no!
we are under the scam through phone, even me had received once!
we should ban this for illegal usage to prevent utterly scammed.

i guess it would be at least 2000 per coin.
simply, because the bitcoin demand increased.
let's see if the bitcoin demand increased a lot.

i am not.

i am still needing fiats, the bitcoin in my places isn't at all popular, nobody accepts bitcoin.
duh that's impossible!

even though larger blocks would give faster confirmation, it would encourage transaction flooding! giving increase limit of blockchain would not ever encourage the sustainability, if someone had a spare time to do some of the test like stress test, most of the full node users would be in trouble on synchronising them. IIRC this would lead to the complaints from most of the full node users with the problem of the stress test, transaction flooding and/or so on.

the more full node users, meaning the higher security it would be; of course vice versa, the more independent miners in the network, the more security that would be. that's why i could not legitimately support for you, we should split some of the miners into a smaller pool, reason is simple: prevent people from centralising the power easily. if we decided to increase the block size limit, especially no limit one, bitcoin would not be a sustainable currency, due to the hardware usage, and electric problem; even though if the merchants could afford those blockchains, it doesn't help the network, simply, less full node users, higher ability of 51% attacks based on controlling full node users and miners. for the mining matter, even more wastage of electricity would be, unless we had a environmental friendly power generator for the miners, otherwise, most of the miners would be ended up with so-called failure.

all in all, if the bitcoin XT occurred in bitcoin XT, bitcoin would not be able to sustain to at least 2140.