Συμφωνώ και πάλι. Όμως το πρόβλημα έγκειται στην περίπτωση που ο έμπορος δεν ενδιαφέρεται για το BTC / XMR σαν asset ή electronic cash, αλλά τον ενδιαφέρει να δώσει στον καταναλωτή μια extra επιλογή, με σκοπό όταν λάβει τα crypto να μπορεί να τα αλλάξει σε EUR. Νομίζω ότι είναι μεγάλη μερίδα εμπόρων αυτή.

For now. But things could change in the future if miners and node operators defect to companies' own interests. What's stopping BlackRock and other giants from running their own nodes and miners? If they accumulate a large portion of the circulating supply, self-custody of BTC would be hard to achieve in the long run. We should empower people to take control of their own keys/seeds instead of leaving their coins at a CEX or custodial wallets.

Όχι φυσικά. Αυτή είναι "καλό παιδί". Παίρνει τα λεφτά του κόσμου, οπότε βοηθάει τις αρχές να ξέρουν ποιος άνθρωπος έχει βάλει πόσα λεφτά. Ταυτόχρονα, κρατούν πλήρως KYCed Bitcoin άρα οι αρχές ξέρουν ότι X bitcoins ανήκουν στην τάδε εταιρεία. Άρα έχουν τη γνώση - έλεγχο.

@tsounischris
2 months ago
Να το εξηγήσουμε και αυτό. Η Blackrock ΔΕΝ επενδύει σε Bitcoin. Η ίδια η Blackrock έχει δηλώσει πολλές φορές πως δεν το βλέπει καν σαν επενδυτικό όχημα. ΑΓΟΡΑΖΕΙ όμως Bitcoin για να προσφέρει αντίστοιχα προϊόντα στους πελάτες-επενδυτές της που το ζητούν. Για να μπορέσει δηλαδή η Blackrock να φτιάξει ένα Spot Bitcoin ETF, είναι υποχρεωμένη να κατέχει τον αντίστοιχο αριθμό Bitcoin. Άρα ναι. Ο απλός κόσμος παραμένει τζογαδόρος "επενδύοντας" σε Bitcoin ενώ η Blackrock παραμένει καλή επιχείρηση παρέχοντας στους πελάτες της τα προϊόντα που εκείνοι θέλουν

Because, if you believe in the concept of "tainted coins", then that coinbase reward is "tainted" by the "tainted coins" used for the fee. It's as just as easy to trace as any other transaction that could have used those coins.

If obfuscation through the use of "multiple UTXOs and multiple wallets" will address the problem, then there's no need to bother with this mining scheme you're imagining.

And yeah, the ones that are looking at those addresses are dumb as fuck and they can't see that all the tx are getting confirmed by an unknown pool and all the tx have the fat fingers syndrome. Common, just how dumb do you think people are?

You pay a 2 BTC tx fee from an address that is labeled as stolen funds to an anonymous miner and of course, everyone with a working brain cell would label those funds as stolen, you didn't break a thing in the history, and you didn't obfuscate a thing, you just left far more traces and you compromised clear rewards coins also!
Common this is cops and robbers material for a 5yo!

Africans kill each other, therefore Europeans have every right to control them financially.

2 wrongs make 1 right.

Unfortunately the EU governments already know too much about Bitcoin and Crypto transactions
when it goes through KYC exchanges and bank accounts. This new ruling is another step in them
trying to identify more and more who is doing what.

Its about reducing anonymity and increasing control.

We can still do mini transactions and still do P2P trades for cash. As long as there is Cash then
transactions can still be untraceable.

Το YouTube μου πετάει μερικά Bitcoin videos στα προτεινόμενα, τώρα που έχει κάνει φασαρία με τα $70k. Χάσιμο χρόνου είναι τις περισσότερες φορές, αλλά κάποια είναι καλά. Έτσι λοιπόν μου πέταξε σήμερα αυτό: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAA1uzpAyAM. (Αρκεί να δείτε μόνο τα πρώτα λίγα δευτερόλεπτα, και όχι δεν είναι απ' τα καλά)

Καταλαβαίνω πως ο άνθρωπος είναι no-coiner και ότι δεν το έχει ψάξει, αλλά προσπαθώ να κατανοήσω τη λογική του. Λέει πως το Bitcoin δεν έχει "εγγενή αξία". Στα σχόλια το συγκρίνει με τις μετοχές, οι οποίες έχουν εγγενή αξία, γιατί παράγουν πραγματικά προϊόντα και υπηρεσίες. Οι μετοχές έχουν εγγενή αξία εκφρασμένη σε fiat currency, από το οποίο μπορεί κανείς να συμπεράνει πως τα fiat currencies έχουν εγγενή αξία αυτά καθ' αυτά μόνα τους. Εγώ ρωτάω: Ποια είναι αυτή; Αν δεν θεωρεί πως έχουν εγγενή αξία, τότε πως μετριέται η εγγενής αξία μιας μετοχής αν όχι σε νόμισμα;

@pantelis5528
2 months ago
Η ερωτηση ειναι αλλη. Γιατι να μην επενδυσεις κατευθειαν στην εταιρια (coinbase) και να επενδυσεις στο ιδιο το bitcoin?

Ακόμα κι αυτό, κέρδος είναι για αυτούς.
Άλλωστε φαίνεται να έχουν αποδεχτεί πως δεν γίνεται να ελέγξουν το Bitcoin, αλλά γίνεται να προσπαθήσουν εκβιαστικά να "πνίξουν" τους χρήστες του, μετατρέποντας σε παρανομία την νόμιμη χρήση.

Εγώ, προσωπικά, πιστεύω πως ο στόχος είναι διττός:
1. Τρομοκρατία των ιδιοκτητών καταστημάτων, προκειμένου να μην μπορούν να χρησιμοποιήσουν BTC σαν hard cash.
2. Προπαγάνδα στον κόσμο ότι όλοι όσοι έχουν BTC, είναι άνθρωποι που το έχουν αποκτήσει παράνομα.

The CFA is pegged to the euro since the birth of the euro in January 1999.

Denmark is also in the same situation, do you see Danish people complaining? Weird, isn't it?

Although there is no actual transaction sending the 29BTC to the coinbase transaction but there is a clear and direct link between the 29BTC fee and the outputs of the coinbase tx and also wherever they would go in the future. After all that high paying tx was included in the same block hence the link.
There would also be nothing "clean" about the coinbase outputs.

Or maybe those who mine on Ocean can afford to be idealistic.

If you would have said mixer then it would have been plausible, but a pool can't launder bitcoins!
As long as it's a valid tx every pool will add it to the chain, no block containing a non valid tx will be accepted by the nodes, mining pools can't seize your funds they would just be able to refuse your tx but if somebody has managed to tag those coins and tell all pools not to mien them then no exchange would accept them anyhow!

Having their own private mixer to do this, yeah possible, although all the traces point to them using the same mixers as everyone!
Having their own mining pool to generate revenue, using subsidized electricity they can't use for anything else to generate bitcoins and turn those into much-needed foreign currency definitely, I would be surprised if they wouldn't have already thought and set that up.
But having a pool to clean coins, no, it makes no sense!


How do you launder old "dirty" bitcoins by mining coinbase fresh ones?
The moment you stack them up you taint both of them!

The bold parts are wrong terms you are using. There is no such thing as "tainted bitcoins" and if you are using any method to mix your coins it is not called "laundering" nor is it "exploiting the protocol".

The concept of "tainted coins" is a fake concept started by those who are against bitcoin and privacy and as an attack on Bitcoin. It only affects centralized services in certain jurisdiction where such basic citizen right violation laws are being enforced. It doesn't affect Bitcoin.

I know how the protocol works, but I was talking from a legal perspective.

Imagine that you pay X BTC to someone and then he tries to deposit it to a CEX, because he wants to liquidate it... you're gonna get into trouble if it's deemed to be tainted by AML.

There is nothing like a tainted coin on the bitcoin network. Once the transaction meets the requirements set by the network protocol. The transaction is verified by the nodes, so even if you control more than the 51% percent needed for attack you still need to include the right transaction which meets the protocol requirements and not just any transaction

colonizers may be kicked out but someone else is going to replace them. Niger for example kicked out French and US but whos going there after them? well, the newest that will stay there in the guise of having tons of investments and building their economy is China. it may not look like they win the country by war and establish the government but they are there through the businesses they put up like the BRI and most probably China will also make them use their digital Yuan in the end.

it's just a series of colonization. African countries today are starting to speak Chinese already. Oui?

want to know the most basic and simple cause?
here goes

simply manipulating FOREX currency exchange
if african currency stayed at 1:1 of one loaf of bread in africa was same price (different currency) as 1 US loaf of bread. the economics would be fairer for africa
if african currency stayed at 1hours labourUS:1hours labour africa (same price (different currency)). the economics would be fairer for africa

but by manipulating the rate where by EU/US can get food/labour and other things in multiples from africa for far less than EU/US prices. africa will always be victimised, invaded, resource/land taken and used.. because its cheaper

and on the flip side. due to the multiples of cost to get equipment and tools from US/EU  it slows down africa's domestic development speed to not match that of EU/US
EG if a US farmer(min wage $15) can get a new harvester for $150k (10,000 min wage labour hours) (every 5 years)
EG if a african farmer(min wage $0.50) has to pay for a new harvester for $150k (300,000 min wage labour hours) deprived by 30x(~600 labour years)
you soon see how forex rate does not help africans prosper but does show how the US/EU can then use the cheap equipment on their side to then become big EU owned industrial farmers of african land with 30x land plot size in africa, at just the cost of family farming plot in EU

..
yes africa exists in the world economy of resources and labour. but when ranked based on currency rate of USD, then it appears low

but since the 1940s, they have been using CFA French money til 2023. using the money of the French while the French themselves abandoned this currency. forcing them to use the French money is economic slavery and this is why these countries will remain poor. you can imagine how much manipulation can be done to their economy while using other governments' money.

So far, I know that when bitcoin transactions are initiated it goes into the mempool and stays there long enough for miners to include it in their blocks to be confirmed. The length of time it spends there is unpredictable, especially if the fees aren't high enough to interest greedy miners towards its inclusion. This really discourages lots of people from using the network. sometimes I encourage clients to make payments to me through bitcoin, but a lot of them reject my requests because of this very reason of unpredictability of transactions confirmation time.

Recently, i was thinking of a way around this to hasten transactions possibly for regions that accept bitcoin, and more importantly for companies who intend or are already accepting the coin within a locality. I think they can come together and create a union or group, purchase hardwares and get their own miners and have them join mining pools to share resources and minimize costs. These private miners are left with the responsibilities of immediately including transactions from their hosts which the hash will be sent directly to them in the next block to be confirmed. now the companies concerned can assure clients of less than 30 minutes of transaction confirmation or thereabout.

I really think this will boost user's confidence and trigger mass adoption in many localities as the complexities of these transactions are now reduced to the barest minimum. these private miners still participate in general activities for profitability and covering operation costs, but are made to prioritize transactions from their hosts. this might still mean good business opportunity for the companies concerned because others will still want to join in the future and they profit from the expansion alongside their activities. I admit that many companies offer transaction accelerations like viaBTC, but their fees are so high and not readily affordable. My thoughts are with grassroot implementations and more bitcoin adoption. I am also aware of governmental   taxes, but I'm convinced that proceeds from the mining activities can cover for those and keep the business on the profit side.

Your idea sounds cool but it is missing an important part: the incentive.

You see miners choose transactions with highest fee to maximize their income, what you are suggesting is going to reduce their income. Depending on the scale of this operation it could be a lot of missed income (like if they handle a lot of transactions from a lot of businesses).
Why should they do this and what will they get in return?