in america when you go to a shop do you say how much USD is this. nope
in the UK when you go to a shop do you say how much GBP is this. nope

you say dollar, bucks or $..
you say pound, quid or £

USD and GBP are not used in the real world of normal conversations and consumer/retail of real currency holders, its only used in wallstreet by day trade players

same goes for the OP's desire for using XBT
XBT wallstreet.
btc normal real bitcoin holders

atleast then people can know what they are actually trading and getting

most "wall street" exchanges dont hold bitcoins as bitcoin..
they hold it as "baskets" and trade shares of the baskets

and base the shares on the wallstret supply and demand value that supposedly is similar to the real bitcoin market.

emphasis: this is not true bitcoin market value, and so although XBT "kind of" meant to follow the btc price. wall street exchanges have their own price which can go up and down separately and unarbitraged between proper bitcoin deposit/withdrawal exchanges,

as i said XBT are trading ETF shares, not withdrawable bitcoins..
so it makes sense to keep XBT and btc separate so people know XBT is the ETF shares valuation of bitcoin. and btc is the withdrawable bitcoin valuation of bitcoin.

however. i have nothing against wall street promoting XBT as long as its made clear that people trading on wall street are not able to withdraw bitcoin because they are trading ETF shares of baskets instead.

another option i was thinking. was the OP going to repost to promote namecoin as the alternative domain name database. its been around for years, but unsure if it has stayed uptodate

one thing to note.

spread vs fee

sometimes trading on localbitcoins they say they dont have a fee, but then value the trade using an exchange with the highest sell lowest buy spread
EG if bitstamp is $616, and btc-e is $609

someone can say they offer zero fee when you want to buy bitcoin. but then price the trader shows a valuation of $616, then when you want to sell bitcoin they say zero fee but value it at $609
which is a 1% difference. which is an acceptable spread for the different exchanges.
so dont worry about 1%, your going to have to accept your not going to get a perfectly discounted deal no matter where you trade. but yea just stay away from the ones where the price they offer is 2-5% away from the average 1% spread

all i see is misrepresented buzzwords. that ultimately explain nothing.

anyway.

just checked their website.. LOL
selling millions of coins before any software is created.. well played. shame the numbers are fake.
saying they raised $3m already. but then doing a hackathon to get people to make the software. and then giving only group $120k
well played.

shame the coins are actually speculative.. because their is no coin cap. or mining process to create them. they only have value if people want to use them within the synereo "services".
basically: no cap, no deflation, no real world value/utility. think of it like time shares of a holiday resort.

in short.
im not excited, its just another alt with centralized services playing off meaningless buzzwords like blockchain2.0 without understanding the basic.

if only these altcoiners wasted less time inventing fake buzzwords, less time on their prelaunch sell off schemes. and spent more time actually developing something that is functionally new, inspiring and ofcourse useful

goodluck, but time to move this topic to the altcoin section.

i think i remember this site or some other web address using the same design template.

as others noted it seems too simple, and doesnt offer anything that youtube doesnt already offer.

edit:
ah yes in january you advertised coinvideo.. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1331308.0
seems your promised to upgrade the design, but this has not flourished. instead you just bought a new domain name and put the exact same template on the new domain.

have you looked into what niche you want to grab hold of.
what features may be useful. that way instead of wasting time making a half a dozen domains that show the same thing,  you have one site that looks better and does more then what it did 9 months ago.

im starting to think your only interested in making a website just to sell and let someone else build up into a concept worthy of promoting. if so be upfront and advertise it for sell on the marketplace category. or if you really do want to develop some features, be upfront and ask in the developer section if anyone wants to partner up with you to spruce up the website

i know this is digressing off the OP's question. i still think its worth mentioning to teach people

firstly: every new block has a hash which is the proof of validity. every new block contains a hash of the previous block
this means it does not need to validate every transaction of every previous blocks because the hash of a block is the proof of validity of said previous block.
chaining the blocks together (blockchain) by having each blockhash linked to the next block means, if the latest block validates then automatically the previous blocks are then more secure as it is more tightly locked in.

in short. if you wanted to change a transaction 10 blocks ago. you cannot just change the transaction and slide it in unnoticed.
changing a transaction results in a different blockhash, which doesnt match the one saved in the next block(9 blocks ago). so changing the saved hash in the next block, causes that blocks hash to change(8 blocks ago). and so on

meaning in order to change a transaction 10 blocks ago. while the network continues making new blocks
you need to go back and do your alteration. and then make a block with a new hash
then need to then remake the 9 blocks above it with their new hashes each time..
and then keep going for every new block that appeared while you were messing around, until you overtake the networks account of the newest block. which is not a simple task.

secondly: ~144 blocks are created a day. so you will get 1k confirms just waiting a week

every time a new block is created ontop. that block only validates the transactions within its own block. but adds a hash of the previous block
thus chaining the blocks together without having to revalidating previous blocks again.

in short if a new block is created. your full node software is not going to recheck every transaction of the last 432400 blocks.
its the hashes of the block that has already done the previous validation. and new blocks just continuing to link chains of the hashes ensuring everything is valid.
this link to a previous topic will explain
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1627797.msg16369773#msg16369773

WTF are you on about? all funds are spendable. all funds are real, no matter what date they were received
that address contains:
1 coinbase and 43 address to address transactions

a coinbase is spendable. but being a coinbase is not a transaction in my eyes. its why it was given the term 'coinbase' to separate it into a different terminology from regular transactions.

but as i said ALL the funds are spendable, all the funds are real.

kind of
but here is my opinion:
a coinbase:
is not a transaction as its not a movement of funds, its a creation of funds.
EG the coinbase of every block is not a transaction.

a transaction:
involves spending/sending funds from one address to another.. even if its sending it to yourself for testing purposes its a transaction
even if its sending to another persons address for testing purposes its a transaction.
EG the first transaction was in block 170

a trade:
which involves a transaction that then results in goods/services in return offchain, is a trade
EG there were many 'testing' transactions after block 170 and before block 57035, but the first notable trade.. (publicly announced) transaction that results in goods/services in return offchain was the one i linked. in block 57035

however the buzzwords of trade vs transaction are now irrelevant because no one publicly announces what the purpose of a transaction is. so the word trade, has little to no meaning. and we just define it as the same now.

but in the context of the OP's question regarding bitcoin 'firsts' its best to try using more descriptive words to get the OP better answers

every block has a "coinbase". which is the reward payment/ coin creation log. no "spending" occurs

however a transaction between two people "spending" funds. is different.
the first transaction to spend funds happened at block 170.

their were many other transactions since then. but the notable one where a transaction occured with a real world result of the spender getting pizza for their bitcoin happened here
https://blockchain.info/tx/49d2adb6e476fa46d8357babf78b1b501fd39e177ac7833124b3f67b17c40c2a

though this is a concept that works in mass media. creating a pay-wall for something like wikileaks becomes a barrier to entry.
though "mining to donate" avoids the barrier to entry. the loss of potential donations due to burning funds in the middle is a barrier of utility

its like a homeless shelter being handed 10 percent of a bed to "help the homeless", because people need to saw the bed to fit through a small cat-flap on the entrance. the other 90% goes in dumpster.
many people would just not even bother shipping the bed to the shelter because they know what happens with the bed they donate.

the OP of the topic needs to seriously rethink his concept, and fill in the holes.
its not an original concept either. "bitcoin mining for goats" had the concept to hand funds to charities to pay for goats in developing countries, even when (pre bitmain) it was profitable to mine. there was still holes in the concept.

OP needs to revisit his concept and fill in the holes

5% less?.. seriously stop making up numbers to raise false hope and fake promotion. please actually do some maths.

your trying to promote something without looking at the REALITIES.
in concept form anyone can say its possible for people to visit a different solar system if they do X,Y,Z. but the REALITY of achieving it is much different.

again it appears many people like myself understand your concept. understand the altruistic(selfless) intent, which are both admirable. but the reality is much different.
please grasp reality. and solve the issues of reality. then come up with a concept that works in reality

so not only have you failed to grasp the burning of money from miners mining on existing pools and just directing the rewards towards wikileaks existing bitcoin donation address..

now you want wikileaks to make a pool.
ok here is some news. unless a pool has approximately 1% hashpower combined. its not really ever going to solve a block.
say there was 100 miners who spend 2.5btc each for a bitmain miner., they can mine constantly for YEARS and never get a block due to low hashpower to compete
meaning no donations AT ALL
meaning all them miners burning electric may not even give wikileaks a 12.5btc reward ever, aswell as literally burning 250btc combined to buy some bitmain miners.

it would require 1% of the network hashrate for a chance
so now you have developed a new concept which is even worse then the first page concept

again i understand the theory and altruism you wish to promote. but you need a slice of reality to realise how much potential donations its burning

no..
if someone invested 2.5btc.. after 200 months they would earn 0.25btc total (based on a 2.5% difficulty change)

however fiat valuation needs to be a consideration.. say someone didnt buy bitcoin. but spend $1600 as bitcoin
they would in 200 months get 0.25btc.. but.. the dollar value of 0.25 is hoped to be 80%-95% of their initial $1600

however. it still does not dismiss my point. why spend 2.5btc to earn 0.25 when you can slowly give them 2.5btc which after a 200 month period is a LARGER donation than $1600.
EG if people hope 0.25=$1600 in 200 months, then 2.5btc=$16,000 in 200 months by default.. right.
so why spend 2.5btc to mine.. for the HOPE of giving wikileaks $1600.. where as just handing them 2.5 GUARANTEE's them $1600 and the potential (thanks to deflation) of ALOT more

i made money when i mined too.. but bitmain and other chinese miners that get free rigs and cheap/free electric, which has changed that dynamic.

anyway
I admire your persistence. Usually when people are wrong then just quit. But frankly let's face it if you think people are going to spend $200 to give $20 and burn $180.. your crazy

need i forget that having a $200 rig that produces 10% returns hasnt equated for the electric for them 200 months, meaning costs are higher then $200 but donation is effectively nothing

i understand your idea at concept level. i understand at the altruistic level. but at a practical real world level. the negatives dont outweigh the positives

or you make a bot and send $1each month for the next 200months.giving them a total of $200 and you get to decide when to stop paying them
rather then mining and wikileaks only gets $1 month-one, $0.95c month-two, $0.90c month-three.. and so on until after 200months wikileaks has only got $20 total, yep i said that right, $20.....(2.5% fortnightly difficulty adjustment(rounded to 5% a month)


though they could have addresses per "story", which i see no problem with.. its not about why you pay them thats the issue.. its HOW they are funded.
again mining is just burning money, you might aswell just pay direct

again pay them direct. but as you highlighted only pay them in stages or adhok depending on which stories you found relevant

but spending money, knowing that wikileaks is receiving less then you spent, is foolish. you might as well hand them funds directly.

if i had lets say $15 and i said i wanted to dedicate this $15 towards a charity. but here is the twist, i use that $15 to pay for electric so some dude can work in a sweatshop, knowing what that dude does only earns $5 for the charity.. i would slap myself for literally burning $10

mining is not profitable having 2.5btc to buy a rig does not guarantee 2.5btc after any time mining.

even at 0 electric costs, its still $1600 for a mining rig. which sets you back by that amount and are left needing to get $1600 again just to break even
unless your bitmain OR able to get the $1600 rig for $320 to compete against bitmain.. forget it.

bitmain is doing good because the production cost of their antpool mining rigs is 0, their electric is also 0

lets explain
they get paid by customers at $1600 to give that person a rig.
bitmain can either decide to:
make 5 rigs, hand 1 to the customer and keep 4 for themselves, to be 4x ahead of customer by mining. using proceeds of mining on electric/labour
or
make 3 rigs, hand 1 to the customer and keep 2 and use the other $640 to pay electric and labour for other projects
or
make 2 rigs, hand 1 to the customer and keep 1 and use the other $320 to pay electric and buy one bitcoin to hoard
or
make 1 rig, hand 1 to the customer and buy 2 bitcoin to hoard

either way, bitmain wins by a factor of 4. all because bitmains retail price $1600 is 5x more then their costs.

note:
if you are going to use a mining earnings calculator to show how much return on 12 months. make sure the calculator is not just showing todays earnings and then multiplying that by a month and then by a year.(95% of calculators do this dump calculations)
make sure it calculates in the fortnightly loss of income due to difficulty. and a daily loss of income scale due to competition(hash power competing)

in short and to help with your idea
it doesnt matter how cheap your electric is, unless you can get a rig at discount. you can only "hope" to break even.
its far cheaper/easier to just give wikileaks 2.5btc now, instead of buying a rig using that 2.5btc, and left hoping one day they get 2.5btc

banks are already looking at utilising some cryptocurrency features. but not all (mainly just blockchain which by itself has flaws)
research RGTS blockchain.

but from a human prospective.
it does not matter what network/database/management system a bank has, banks will still have their issues.
EG
"managed funds" - you need banks consent to move funds, but unequally they can move funds without your consent
"seizing funds" - government laws allowing them to take funds as they please and hand it to governments
"guarantee" - funds are not technically yours. but if they go bankrupt and take funds with them, someone else will compensate you to a certain limit

like i said it does not matter what technology they use, even if banks were bartering guns, bread and gold. or used a blockchain network. banks will still screw people over under the pretence that their "service" has more positives than negatives.

even if they measured their bankcoin where 1bank coin would ALWAYS be valued at lets say 10,000 bitcoin bits(like returning to the gold reserve days). banks will still screw you over.

i cannot see anyone who truly understands bitcoin and receives a wage in bitcoin and spends bitcoin to live on would drop bitcoin to go 100% back to fiat(bankcoin), due to not only the 3 examples i gave, but other reasons too

as a side note:
there have been over 1000 altcoins all with different features. lets take litecoin, it has so far existed for 5 years and has a faster confirmation time. yet if you ask 250,000 merchants accepting bitcoin "what is litecoin" they couldnt tell you. if you asked banks wanting blockchain technology "what is litecoin" they will not know enough to explain the differences and wont be mentioning it in any extra benefit than bitcoin.
so for 5 years of making other currencies all with different features, abilities and benefits.. bitcoin is still top.
this can easily be proven by asking. does any other cryptocurrency have 250,000 merchants

a)what does: "quantity of bitcoins" balance show
b)what does: "value of the bitcoins based on the current price" balance show

i would think ethically if you deposited say 1btc... a)=1btc,  b)=0

if you however traded half that bitcoin in the past to be holding some as dollars
a)=0.5btc, b)=<varied estimate +/- ~0.5btc>
and a second table elsewhere for the dollar side
a)=$300,  b)=<varied estimate +/- ~$300>
where the balance (shown in one colour) is the varied estimate (of said same colour)

an after thought
double check the balance/valuation of all the currencies as you may find you have balance elsewhere. which is causing the "valuation" hiccup.
if not.. then something very unethical and scammy is going on