I think it is still a milestone for Bitcoin!
My country, India is on the trend to become cashless after demonetization. As an impact of which, many payment gateway and wallets (ex. Paytm) becoming famous and being accepted by around 80-85% merchants. But if we talk about Bitcoin, hardly 1-2%.
Main reason: It is difficult to exchange Bitcoin and its volatility.
yep the I in BRICS is for India. there is plans for the BRICS leaders to have their banking structure as part of the IMF's hyperledger, where everything is done electronically (no paper money) |
|
|
|
India can stop Chinese manipulation but I don't know why indians not doing these. Indian can also produce cheap mining equipments and electricity is also not much expensive so why indians are not competing Chinese in Bitcoin mining field ?
the maths, logistics and costs have already been done to death. india is not in second place as the best place to mine. its not about population numbers or land mass or minimum wage. there are other factors in play due to india being a hot climate and the electric issues and other factors. india is not second place infact its a couple places in the eastern europe area that come second. |
|
|
|
But, "they" can join themselves to control Bitcoin, why not? It's not impossible and free market allows this. All depends the will of each one of the members of "they" group (chineses). If they want they will be partners on it to try rulling Bitcoin to make big money while the only thing another people can it to follow their lead trying to predict what will be their steps.
If the chineses living in different houses join one only big house they will be stronger and more influential over crypto-currency world, over Bitcoin.
instead of spreading out the hash power to give the smaller guys a bigger chance and themselves hurting each other by being separate by competing against eachother. you would see one pool. ensuring block rewards with every block. if your mindset had a chance of being onto something. all the technical reasons about your mindset have been done to death for a few years. think about it in the mindset of all of the segwit/dynamic block talk. even if something malicious/intentional was to occur, user nodes will orphan a malicious block of rule breaking data. at very worse the block production from a massive superpool doing something malicious can be blacklisted and orphaned off.
but when you say "they" you are not talking as if the rational conversation is about say 100 people spread over 3-4 pools.. managing mining farms in 10-15 locations hundreds-thousands of miles apart your talking as if its 1.3billion people all in it together eating the same bowl of rice. |
|
|
|
Is China trying to control Bitcoin?
It's evidently clear because they control the largest part of the bitcoins network, I learnt just 3 Chinese mining farms control about 70% of the entire bitcoin network so in effect they are in control and decentralization is at risk. ?they? what if i told you that slushpool. many classify as part of your THEY.. is actually managed by a guy in thailand.. another pool manager is in mongolia. and another pool manager travels between europe and america.. where each of them have stratum servers dotted around the world 1.3billion people do not own bitcoin.. only a few people do and those few people do not all live in the same house eating the same bowl of rice. the individuals have separate lives living hundreds/thousands of miles apart from each other and are actually competing against each other.. not colluding with each other. in short. there is no chinese "they". whats next every american is a KKK member purely because a few americans are that racist... fine you deem all of america KKK members under your mindset. whats next every italian is a part of a mob |
|
|
|
i am really getting tired of seeing all this talk about China and bitcoin. everyone should start talking about the other 195 countries instead of focusing on what people are doing in China when it comes to bitcoin.
Well ask yourself the simple question, why people talk about china in a bitcoin forum? must be because they own the mining game? must be because they are at the top of bitcoin volume? Like it or not, as long as those are facts, people will talk about china all day. The rest of countries don't have anything to do unless they want to challenge china's monopoly. ?they? what if i told you that slushpool. many classify as part of your THEY.. is actually managed by a guy in thailand.. another pool manager is in mongolia. and another pool manager travels between europe and america.. where each of them have stratum servers dotted around the world 1.3billion people do not own bitcoin.. only a few people do and those few people do not all live in the same house eating the same bowl of rice. the individuals have separate lives living hundreds/thousands of miles apart from each other and are actually competing against each other.. not colluding with each other. in short. there is no chinese "they". whats next every american is a KKK member purely because a few americans are that racist... fine you deem all of america KKK members under your mindset. whats next every italian is a part of a mob |
|
|
|
|
being racist about a country is like:
blaming texas for the NY bitlicence
blaming california for the parking ticket prices in NYC
try walking up to someone in a non new york state and tell them they are to blame for issues in new york
then repeat it 1.3billion times until it sinks in that its not about america
then realise that 1.3billion chinese are not to blame for just a few chinese individuals living hundreds-thousands of miles apart from eachother
|
|
|
|
If all of them join themselves they will control Bitcoin, they have more than 50% of currently Bitcoin amount, and even earning more BTCs. The electricity there is cheap, profitable to mine, and they like technology, BTC turned very important for them. If another countries are worry about it, they should try make their people have interest for Bitcoins too, this way they can stop the China power.
if all of america join together they can vote on america's got talent to suggest a dancing dog should be the most talented american.. wait.. britain done that 2 times in the last decade.. (im a brit by the way so its not racist for me to insult my own) |
|
|
|
|
can this topic be renamed
"racism, lets blame a country of 1.3billion unrelated people.. and not talk about reality of a few smarter people"
but seeing as people want to discuss asian mindsets
Danielson, Mr Miagi says "trading like painting fence.. 'upp, down, upp down'"
|
|
|
|
News from China is once again spreading through the bitcoin world like wildfire. It appears China’s central bank the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) is visiting with the top three Chinese exchanges and assessing the company’s operations. Per usual the price of bitcoin took a dive during the early hours of January 11 dropping another 15 percent to a low of US$790.https://news.bitcoin.com/chinese-bitcoin-exchange-inspections-cause-price-drop-and-fud/ Well, we didn't complain when the price went up due to speculation and rumours. Now we are just seeing the other side of the coin. Atleast, this time it is based on a kernel of truth. This low is merely the other side of your multiplying chance. tip: this is temporary speculation drama. do not consider it a panic moment to cry about losses, consider it a discount day to increase holdings cheaply
|
|
|
|
All core devs except one want to increase the blocksize to 2mb after segwit is activated, because raising the blocksize before activating segwit opens a can of worms we want to avoid.
Ultimately the real red pill is the fact that we need everything. We need segwit, we need a bigger blocksize, we need lightning network, we need EVERYTHING, or else we will FAIL.
Here are my thoughts on why most of the core developers want to increase the blocksize to 2mb after SegWit activation. To avoid a bottleneck for the closing of channels in the Lightning Network. Imagine we still have 1mb blocks and have hundreds of LN channels closed at the same time on a regular basis. This could cause those transactions back onchain to be stuck and the mempool would go higher than we have seen before. you raised a valid point. although a LN tx is just a 2-in 2-out tx. people need to think about the multi-hop trades where one entity (hub) starts becoming the arbitrator/manager. where to ensure satisfaction MANY separate transactions need to settle at the same time to ensure each channel gets what it should. so although over 2 weeks people can play within their offchain channels. one tx of funding becomes dependant on the IOU trust of another tx of funding, meaning suddenly many tx's need to broadcast to aggregate and settle equally. leading to a bottleneck. especially if there are more tx's than there are space in a block to accept it. yes i know LN has a CLTV to freeze funds and not make them spendable for x blocks. (like blockreward maturity/banks 3-5day funds unavailable) to allow a grace period so transactions can be plopped in over several blocks, aslong as all tx's aggregated together all eventually confirm in time.. but this is not enough precaution to avoid a mainnet mempool bottleneck. because that can cause a fee war, where transactions will need to be renegotiated to cover the larger fee's then predicted X blocks ago.
let alone allowing space for legacy (non-LN) transactions to get confirmed at a reasonable fee. because turning bitcoins mainnet into just a LN settlement layer where the only option for people to use bitcoin is only within a LN PERMISSIONED channel, is foolish and the polar opposite of bitcoins permissionless ethos. and yes needing a second party to sign off on your decision to transact (multisig) is permissioned.. and no longer permissionless. |
|
|
|
to explain the FUD "chinese" exchanges have been in constant communication with PBOC for years.
this [FUD] is exaggerating a 'routine' inspection by regulators* into something sounding more like a raid.
it is not a raid. its just a routine inspection
seems like [speculators] wants to cause drama to cause some speculation and another discount day to buy in cheap.
and when people wise up to the truth and price then recovers, the [speculators] can sell for profit.
*(yep many finance firms in fiat, asset and commodities get these as something treated as normal processes)The operation is focused on checking whether the company is operating beyond its scope BTCC for example has a regulatory agreement of what its business will do (scope of business). the regulators are just doing a routine inspection to check drama over tip: this is temporary speculation drama. do not consider it a panic moment to cry about losses, consider it a discount day to increase holdings cheaply |
|
|
|
Governments hate bitcoin because bitcoin is the currency of freedom and liberty, China is more stupid than US. But they are all bad treating bitcoins.
they dont. remember this one simple truth.. for every bitcoin buyer there is a bitcoin seller. meaning the chinese FIAT does not disappear, all that ultimately happens in a bitcoin trade is the name of the bank account holders of X fiat change hands. what governments hate is people putting paper money into an envelope and sending the money out of the control of chinese banks. where it sits in some western union/bureau de change office vault in some unknown town. doing nothing and not circulating in the country of origin. what governments hate is people not paying their taxes.. this is not a bitcoin direct issue, but an international currency issue of claiming non residence or having tax havens to avoid paying local taxes. what governments hate is people making a financial loss, to claim it as a tax writeoff and hand less tax to the government |
|
|
|
|
in 2010-2013
banks were very high risk towards bitcoin when they find out what people were doing payments for.
but the majority of the time it was chargeback scammers screaming that the seller was a hacker/did not deliver and so the scammer got their funds back. while making the seller (falsely) look bad and stigmatised by the chargeback scammer mentioning 'bitcoin' si banks would automatically accept a chargeback scammers claims if bitcoin was mentioned. and the sellers account got frozen..
in 2013+
banks started to be more accepting of bitcoin.. they began wising up that bitcoin is not the problem due to media and their own banks exploration of bitcoin.
banks would flag the seller, not due to "bitcoin" being mentioned but just 'breach of consumer contract' (non delivery, not fit for purpose) or hack stories.
where the buyers account may get frozen aswell as the sellers purely due to risk history of the accounts used..
2015+
this is why exchanges and localbitcoin sellers, although maybe not regulated or licenced, still request the bitcoin buyer to supply ID and photo evidence of owning the credit card legally..
this has reduced the amount of chargeback scams and reduced how many victims are treated as a red flag.
so banks are less likely to freeze accounts based purely on this.
there hasnt really been any bank freezing cries in direct response to "bitcoin" in years.
but if you are using a credit card. dont expect an easy time using it without validating who you are
|
|
|
|
"chinese" exchanges have been in constant communication with PBOC for years.
this topic is exaggerating a 'routine' inspection by regulators* into something sounding more like a raid.
it is not a raid. its just a routine inspection
seems like the OP wants to cause drama to cause some speculation and another discount day to buy in cheap.
and when people wise up to the truth and price then recovers, the OP can sell for profit.
*(yep many finance firms in fiat, asset and commodities get these as something treated as normal processes)The operation is focused on checking whether the company is operating beyond its scope BTCC for example has a regulatory agreement of what its business will do (scope of business). the regulators are just doing a routine inspection to check drama over tip: this is temporary speculation drama. do not consider it a panic moment to cry about losses, consider it a discount day to increase holdings cheaply |
|
|
|
ok lets seriousy evaluate this point as this is the point involving the kickstarter/fundraising reason 3) Distribute the funds to different pockets of people around the globe, who will use it to buy a lot of ink and paper.
imagine getting an american to stand in the street for 8 hours a day. ($7.50minwage/h = $60/day) ink and paper for say 500 pamphlets ($40) so $100 to hand out 500 pamphlets(20cents each)* to totally random people.
imagine you want a 30second tv advert, in the simplicity style of showing someone buying something like they would with applepay.. but bitcoin instead.. would cost you $350k to feature it during prime shows like 'the big bang theory' which is for techno-geeks. viewer numbers make it cost 2 cents per viewer. imagine though. how many people actually take notice of adverts if that advert is only shown once.. usually an advert needs to be shown several times to actually get people to take note.. so again expect 20cents* for someone actually receive it in their conscious mind.
*this 20cents a person is not the cost to get people interested. but just the cost to get to a point someone has properly read/viewed it. the uptake of demand for more info beyond this is usually only 1% or less.. meaning the costs are $20+ for an interested party to seek out info
knowing it can cost $20 to get someone moderately/significantly interested be creative. go to forex, stocks, commodities, investments and money business forums/chatrooms. (free) and TARGET the real demography that would be interested.. hang around coffee shops next to finance businesses, credit unions, retailers around lunchtimes when you know the finance employee's have their lunchbreak dont waste $20 so easily per person. |
|
|
|
"chinese" exchanges have been in constant communication with PBOC for years.
this topic is exaggerating a 'routine' inspection by regulators* into something sounding more like a raid.
it is not a raid. its just a routine inspection
seems like the OP wants to cause drama to cause some speculation and another discount day to buy in cheap.
and when people wise up to the truth and price then recovers, the OP can sell for profit.
*(yep many finance firms in fiat, asset and commodities get these as something treated as normal processes)The operation is focused on checking whether the company is operating beyond its scope BTCC for example has a regulatory agreement of what its business will do (scope of business). the regulators are just doing a routine inspection to check drama over tip: this is temporary speculation drama. do not consider it a panic moment to cry about losses, consider it a discount day to increase holdings cheaply
|
|
|
|
if its a "satoshi" round table then its about bitcoin.. if you want to make it about blockchain.. then call it the S-haber round table.. S. Haber 1992 Once hashing functions are chosen, such a scheme could be carried out like a world championship tournament: Heterogeneous local networks could govern local subtrees [pools] under the scrutiny of local participants, and regional “winners”[miners] could be combined into global winners under the scrutiny of all interested parties[nodes]. Global communication facilities are required, and a broadcast protocol must be agreed upon, but no centralized service bureau need administer or profit from this system.
...
we consider the linking protocol. In certain applications, such as a laboratory notebook, it is crucial not only to have a trustworthy date for each entry[blocks] but also to establish in a trustworthy manner the exact sequence[chain] in which all entries[blocks] were made.
Linear linking of one entry to the next[chain] provides the most straightforward means of achieving this. Next we consider the difference between the random-witness method and the tree method.
...
Given these tradeoffs, we imagine that the three methods may be used in a complementary fashion, as the following example illustrates. An individual or company might use linear linking to time-stamp its own accounting records, sending the final summary value[blocks] for a given time period to a service maintained by a group of individuals[miners] or parties[pools]. This service constructs linked trees at regular intervals.[blocktime]
The name "Round Table" is not directly drawn from Arthurian Legend; rather both its title and its maxim comes from a speech made to the British Industries Fair in 1927 by the then HRH Prince Edward, Prince of Wales 'The young business and professional men of this country must get together round the table, adopt methods that have proved so sound in the past, adapt them to the changing needs of the times and wherever possible, improve them'. The phrase "adopt, adapt, improve" is a key facet of the organisation, and is often seen on Round Table literature and regalia.
if its not about discussing ways to improve things. and more about just some social ass kissing and talking about each others deepest secrets behind a closed door.. then they are literally in the closet. so call it an S-haber closet meeting please note this post does contain humour although content has validity. |
|
|
|
|
to all those writing that grabbing random people, to get them interested in buying bitcoin as the goal.. then you are all just looking for a bigger fiat price to exit bitcoin.
meaning you are failing yourself, failing bitcoin and failing the people you are introducing while secretly planning your own farewell.
you need to talk about/think about bitcoins UTILITY not the damn price rise.
lets put it another way your fiat greed and fiat retirement dream can understand.
invite 2 people spend weeks telling them about bitcoins as a fiat investment, trying to tempt them into buying in big. hoping other people around the world are doing the same to cumilatively push up the price.
or
invite two people and spend weeks telling them about the business opportunities and what they can do locally(naturally they buy bitcoin, but thats not the main/end discussion). helping each other get bitcoin accepted by popular shops/stores in your location. where each store displays a "bitcoin accepted here" logo in the window. people start coming naturally to the meetups in increasing amounts. naturally growing the local bitcoin utility far beyond just 2 small inverters..
now you dont need to return to fiat because you can buy your beers, meals and toilet paper and because you are involved in lots of projects locally you can have your own income stream coming in from different places.
wasting hundreds of thousands on mainstream advertising purely for the hopes of getting a few naive 'buyers' is short sighted.. compared to getting organised and making your location "bitcoin accepted" which is beneficial for all and more long term.
and all it costs is a couple cups of coffee/beers
|
|
|
|
All core devs except one want to increase the blocksize to 2mb after segwit is activated, because raising the blocksize before activating segwit opens a can of worms we want to avoid.
Ultimately the real red pill is the fact that we need everything. We need segwit, we need a bigger blocksize, we need lightning network, we need EVERYTHING, or else we will FAIL.
the linear/quadratics issue has never been an issue.. if core implemented some rules properly users dont need the capability of 20,000-80,000 sigops for their single transaction. the solution is not to limit bitcoins whole growth out of fear of one malicious users... but limit users individual sig-op allowance so that malicious users cant do crap. EG say 100sigops max.. definitely not 20,000 EG imagine a single transaction with say 141 inputs imagine 141 transactions with 1 inputs each same data, same destinations same funds coming and going.. but nodes process the 141 transactions easier its pure logic.. dont let one person bloat a whole block with a single bloated tx.. .. set a TX sigop limit so not only does a 'malicious bloater' have to make multiple tx's which no longer cause time delays for the network.. but does make time delays for the malicious user having to make the tx's himself (good for both reasons).. but also allows a better chance of random honest peoples tx getting into a block due to it not being completely filled by a single tx. even things like LN doesnt need 20,000 sigops for one tx. an LN tx is just a 2in 2out tx afterall |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
