Why would someone use a borrowing service and pay interest rate when they can exchange their collateral on exchanges and never suffer those interest fees in first place?
One reason might be to borrow the bitcoins in order to short them. |
|
|
|
Is the command actually on separate lines, and what about the spurious double-quote? Also, is the beginner forum on a Bitcoin site a good place to ask a question about Ethereum mining? Perhaps https://www.reddit.com/r/EtherMining/ |
|
|
|
Those are mostly bad suggestions. The easiest, fastest, most convenient, and most effective way to obtain bitcoins is to buy them.
Claim from Bitcoin Faucets
...Cryptocurrency faucets don’t provide huge sums, ... Faucets don't pay crap. You can click on faucets all day and you won't even earn 1 dollar. Cryptocurrencies already have an extremely well-developed trading infrastructure, with a wide variety of trading options now available for both beginner and experienced traders.
With a huge variety of spot trading, derivatives and margin trading platforms available to choose from, getting started with cryptocurrency trading has never been easier.
Margin trading is easily the most profitable type of trading available, since it allows you to multiply your exposure to the market by using leverage.
Opening a 0.1 BTC long position with 100x leverage, is equivalent to a 10 BTC position in the market. If Bitcoin gains in value by 10%, you will have earned 1 BTC, despite only risking 0.1 BTC in the process.
That is horrible advice. Most traders lose money. As for 100x leverage, you might make some money if it goes up 10%, but you will lose all of your money if it goes down just 1%. Playing at Crypto Casinos ...
Only an idiot expects to make money at a casino. Lending Bitcoin
...
Crypto lending comes in two main forms: collateralized loans and margin lending. With collateralized loans, borrowers are required to put up equity to ensure the loan is covered even if they default, whereas margin lending provides the equity used for leveraged trading, using the initial margin as collateral.
By participating in Bitcoin lending, it is possible to earn 10–20% interest per year with very little risk when using trusted lending platforms.
Unlike the other suggestions, you can make money by lending; however, you must already have a substantial stake and lending is risky. |
|
|
|
The upcoming Halving Bitcoin will double the cost of mining, causing the price to skyrocket to $ 90,000 or higher
For operators who use high-speed computers to mine BTC, halving will cost them double the cost.
The estimated average cost to mine a Bitcoin could rise to $ 12,525 after the halving is expected to occur in May, double the current average of $ 6,851. Basically, miners will have to run twice as many calculations, with the corresponding increase in electricity usage, to get the same amount of Bitcoin they currently receive.
It doesn't work that way. The cost doesn't double because many miners drop out. Regardless, the price does not depend on the cost to mine. It is the other way around. |
|
|
|
Blood Falls is an outflow of an iron oxide-tainted plume of saltwater, ...
In other words, not blood. Nothing in that misleading statement excludes it from originally being giants blood. Time to clue into the fact you don't live were you thought you did. Nothing indicates it, either, unless you are claiming that anything that is red and contains iron used to be blood from prehistoric giants. |
|
|
|
... Well, in fact, as the law of supply and demand states, the halving would certainly affect the price of Bitcoin massively as its supple runs down, ...
That is a common misunderstanding. The halving does not reduce the supply. The supply continually increases until it reaches 21 million. But, I have still one question. If there are no more Bitcoin to be mined, what would the investors and users do? will they leave and choose another crypto currency platform? or invest more in bitcoin?
When all of the bitcoins have been mined, there will still be plenty to buy on exchanges. Most of the bitcoins on exchanges today are not sold by miners. |
|
|
|
Blood Falls is an outflow of an iron oxide-tainted plume of saltwater, ...
In other words, not blood. |
|
|
|
|
Sounds exactly like World of Warcraft gold or Eve Online isk, or any other in-game currency that can be traded for real money.
However, you can't "peg" its value unless you have the money to back the peg.
|
|
|
|
...
Today we present you an updated version of the program, that you can download for free from our official website http://...
Never download an executable from an anonymous site, especially when the link is posted by a newbie, no matter how legitimate they may appear to be. The download is very likely to contain malware. Because many of us here are a deeply suspicious bunch, it's always best to include a direct link to your GitHub so that people can easily inspect the code: https://github.com/nathanp/crypto-price-widgetIf I hadn't spotted that link on your site, I'd have already posted a warning for other users to be wary. The fact that the site and repo link to each other helps. |
|
|
|
...
However, there are 2 major problems with mining:
1. mining is not a very effective way to convert energy into bitcoin: Most of the energy is wasted as heat. If ASICs were made of superconductive material and never generate any heat, then there is no inefficiency of the current mining model: The competition will always push the chip+energy cost to market value of coin, the waste is minimum, and the world climate will not be impacted
2. A forever increasing coin price will lead to a forever increasing energy consumption, which eventually exhaust all the energy supply on the planet and cause the government to ban the mining like IRAN just did. This will put a upper limit for how high a coin's value can be
... 1. As explained elsewhere, the energy used in mining must be wasted because of the economic incentives. There is no way around it without changing how mining works. 2. Energy consumption of mining depends on the price only because of the subsidy. The subsidy is halved every 4 years so energy consumption becomes less dependent on price and more dependent on transaction fees over time. The most direct and effective way to reduce the energy consumption of Bitcoin mining is to raise the cost of the energy. |
|
|
|
Let's say you mint 10 sUSD using Synthetix and on an external exchange 1 sUSD = 0.5 USD. You could buy 10 sUSD for 5$ on that exchange, use it to repay your debt. You are now debt free and have 10 sUSD (but you are down 5$). However you need to sell the sUSD to cash out your profit and unfortunately, the best price right now is 1 sUSD = 0.5 USD. So when you sell your 10 sUSD, you only get 5$.
In total, you spent 5$ and earned 5$, for a total of 0$ profit. Which means, there wasn't really an arbitrage opportunity.
If the price is at the pegged price, then there is no opportunity. When the price deviates, then an opportunity exists and taking advantage of the opportunity moves the price back to the peg. Anyway, that's how arbitrage works in general. I don't the specifics for the coin. Typically, there is a trader or lender of last resort who trades/lends at the pegged price. EDIT: I skimmed the paper. Maintaining the peg via arbitrage is straightforward (in a perfect world). If the price is higher than the peg, stakeholders mint more synth and sell it, causing the price to fall toward the peg. If the price is lower, stakeholders buy synth and burn it to reduce their debts. The increased buying causes the price to rise to toward the peg. |
|
|
|
Everyday people lose access to their wallets, send Bitcoins to wrong addresses. It results in Bitcoins being lost forever. In the meantime, there is no way to prevent it.
So, let’s suppose that Bitcoin would exist forever. It means that at some point there won’t be any coin left in the network…
I know there are other implications/discussions about Bitcoin supply. But I’d like to limit this topic to this concern (Bitcoins lost).
Is the 21M BTC supply promise realistic?
Forever is a very long time. No currency has ever lasted forever. If a 2100000000000000 supply of satoshis is not realistic, what do you think a better number might be? |
|
|
|
Oh great thanks for the reply. I was starting to get unsure about it as many in the forked communities have been trying to spread this idea that the option to run a non-mining node was created in a version after Satoshi left.
I know a few times Satoshi made reference to two types of nodes. One he called "network node" and the other was "client node". Would I be right in saying that a client node refers to just running the client as a node(full or lightweight) with generating turned off?
The mining code was eventually removed because it was no longer being used by anyone. The "client" node being referred to was the SPV type node. |
|
|
|
Despite all the wishful thinking, there is no correlation between the halvings and the price.
Of course, there is a correlation between them. It was the halving in 2016 that gave is the Bitcoin ATH in 2017. There have been several other all time highs that cannot be associated with a halving. How do you know that the one in 2017 was different? |
|
|
|
Just found this on facebook. Maybe we can get something from this. What's your thoughts?
The grammar is poor. It's totaly a GOOD NEWS for bitcoin, because when bitcoin block is halving, the price of bitcoin will raise up. You should buy or hold bitcoin before bitcoin halving.
That's just wishful thinking based on a misconception. There is no correlation between price and the two halvings. The theory is based on scarcity factor of demand supply chain! Halving means, the creation of bitcoin will be reduced by 50% at certain intervals. So you can understand what will happen when the demand stays strong but the supply is decreased.
Sorry, that is a misconception. The supply is never decreased. It is continually increased until it reaches 21 million. The flaw in the logic of that article is in the interpretation of the price vs. stock-to-flow chart. Stock-to-flow follows a schedule, so it is based on time. So, the chart is really just price vs. time, which is just the standard price graph. In other words, the correlation viewed in the price vs. stock-to-flow chart really has nothing to do with stock-to-flow. It just shows a relatively steady logarithmic increase in price over time. |
|
|
|
|
I agree that increasing the fees for online CC payments is bullish for Bitcoin, but it is not clear how much of an effect it will have.
|
|
|
|
The aperture size of the eye or camera has no bearing on the distance to the horizon. A Nikon P900 can "see" well beyond 6 miles, depending on the direction it is pointed. Pointed perfectly centrally at the horizon, it sees well beyond 6 miles above its focal point, and 0 to infinity depending on its distance from the horizon. No flat Earth.
Your definition of "horizon" is different from the FE definition. They don't compare. There is no point in this disagreement |
|
|
|
You can't see how it [Maxwell] applies because then you'd have to admit that the Coulomb Force is the mechanism behind buoyancy.
I would always be willing to consider the idea that the Coulomb Force is the mechanism behind buoyancy if you would be willing to explain how that mechanism works. I'm not here to shoot you down. I just want to try to understand how it works, whether or not it conflicts with my understanding (or misunderstanding). |
|
|
|
|
"Maxwell, the guy who wrote the book on electromagnetism, he didn't know what electricity was? You're joking right?"
By 1873, electricity was well studied, but the existence of the electron itself was not known until shortly after the book was written. Before that, the closest they got was that electricity was some kind of fluid with a charge.
"...And you got it, aether behaves as a superfine gas (a fluid). If you can't put two and two together and see that Maxwell's treatise describes electromagnetism in terms of fluid flow equations where the fluid is the aether, then you're in over your head buddy. All the forces involved with buoyancy are electromagnetic in nature; Coulomb's Law applies...."
Yes, Maxwell's treatise describes electromagnetism in terms of fluid flow equations where the fluid is the aether. However in this context, the only property of aether is that it transmits electromagnetism, and it has no other properties. Likewise, Coulomb's Law applies only to the electrical force between charged particles. I can't put two and two together because they don't seem to apply to buoyancy and you have yet to explain how they do.
"...P.S. Don't ever become an engineer."
Too late. I've worked as an engineer for more than 30 years. As for being "over my head", I'll admit that electromagnetism is not my area of expertise, but it is not beyond my ability to comprehend. What about you? Are you sure that you aren't in over your head?
|
|
|
|
^^^ I'm sorry but you're an idiot, now you're going to cry because Maxwell above your IQ level and you can't see how it relates to your question?
You asked for a technical explanation and you got it. It took me many weeks to read and understand that shit, I had to read them several times over. You didn't have time to read any of it.
Displacement of aether as I stated before is a macroscopic explanation for why objects fall in a vacuum, however electromagnetic forces are behind this phenomenon. If you want to understand the concept of aether and the forces at play Maxwell's calculus goes into details but, this is not a physics textbook for pre-schoolers that describes why shit falls.
You keep asking about aether displacement and I keep telling you about electromagnetic forces, I'm not avoiding the question I'm explaining what I understand is going on, capiche?
Well, I read the original 1873 edition -- at least, the electrostatics chapters, and I found it to be very basic, tedious and primitive (they still didn't know what electricity was at that point). I asked for a technical explanation of buoyancy in the absence of air, and again like the flywheel paper you previously linked, you gave me something that was not applicable. I suspect that you pointed me to Maxwell because you truly feel that the "buoyancy" claim by flat-earthers is unsupportable, and you prefer an electrostatic attraction explanation. Is that right? I hope so. BTW, I ran across this relevant quote by Maxwell: Aethers were invented for the planets to swim in, to constitute electric atmospheres and magnetic effluvia, to convey sensations from one part of our bodies to another, and so on, until all space had been filled three or four times over with aethers. ... The only aether which has survived is that which was invented by Huygens to explain the propagation of light.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
