|
No, Bitcointalk is just a forum. A forum's purpose is to host discussions, and if you find them educating, that's great, it means the forum has served its purpose. But don't think that the forum is some sort of academy that has obligation to teach you, and you have obligation to learn. In fact this is a very common misonception, I see a lot of newbies creating threads to sing praises to this forum and how it helps them learn about Bitcoin, but there are no hard rules on this forum that you must study Bitcoin. You can spend all your time in offtopic board, or discuss politics, or speculate about the price. There's no "bitcoin knowledge exams", no grades, no teachers.
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, there's no chance for North Korea's people to topple their government, because revolutions happen when people are strong and government is weak, but in North Korea it's the vice versa. And now that the government has nukes, their regime could survive for a very long time, as no outside country would use military force against them. The only hope is change from within, maybe in some distant future there will be a less oppressive leader and the people will have a chance to become stronger.
|
|
|
|
|
All this DeFi and altcoin investing is basically gambling. You might win big in short term, but if you continue doing this, there's a huge chance to lose it all, because you're always one step away from a huge crash. DeFi's get hacked often or can have bugs that crash the price, altcoins are subject to pump and dump schemes, and so on.
IMO you should focus on developing skills that would support you for the rest of your life instead of trying to get rich quick with crypto.
|
|
|
|
|
How do you expect people with very poor education and computer literacy to start using Bitcoin, when even most of western people who spend a majority of their lives online can't figure Bitcoin? On practice only a very-very small number of people would benefit from Bitcoin in a situation like the one in Afghanistan right now.
Also, the protection against currency fall argument is flawed, because literally any other solid asset would have worked, and even better than Bitcoin because of less risk for downside movement. That's why people in countries with weak currency seek US dollars. As for confiscations, I doubt that the countries that take refugees are going to rob them, and their own government has dissolved, and most people who are fleeing the country aren't going to deal with Taliban-controlled borders, because it would be a death sentence to them. So in this situation the "anti-confiscation" property is not that great. Especially if you consider that many of these refugees have like a couple hundreds of dollars at best.
|
|
|
|
CryptoPunks are still making money, the hodlers of that NFT are definitely enjoying big profits right now. I feel like Visa should also get into the market of Axie Infinity and try to build a team there, I mean they can probably use scholarships as a way to promote their company in cryptospace.
Visa didn't buy this NFT to make profit, they did it because they believe in its historic value. But maybe in 50 years they will have nothing but a private key that can't be used because the token contract is no longer valid or Ethereum no longer exists. So in some sense they would no longer own anything. |
|
|
|
|
I don't care about Bitcoin dominance as long as Bitcoin's marketcap is not overtaken by a single coin. You can't use Bitcoin dominance to predict Bitcoin's price, so even if we could predict Bitcoin dominance, what would we do with that knowledge?
Bitcoin's dominance is 100% in terms of technology, network, decentralization, adoption, popularity.
|
|
|
|
|
How it has nothing to do with communism if Venezuela's government is heavily influenced by marxism which causes them to make all those irrational decisions that led to their downfall. If they weren't socialist, they would have adopted better policies. Of course capitalist governments can do stupid things too, but they rarely screw up so extremely that their currency enters a hyperinflation.
|
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't call DEX trading more resilient, they get hacked even more than centralized exchanges. At least centralized exchanges can separate their hot wallets and cold wallets, so a hacking incident on their hot wallets won't lead to a 100% loss for all users, but these DeFi's and liquidity pools can result in 100% loss for traders in case of a hack.
Also trading crypto to crypto could be a net loss if the value of your altcoins against fiat is dropping fast. When you trade against fiat it's easier to understand your gain/loss.
|
|
|
|
E.g. a miner submits a valid PoW for their block but rewards herself 25 BTC instead of 12.5. Does that miner get a chance to fix her mistake?
A block with reward different from the current correct reward can not be valid. Doesn't matter if it's 1 Bitcoin more or even 1 satoshi less, if it's not precisely what it needs to be, such block is invalid. When a node tries to send invalid block to peers, they reject it and don't propagate it any further. This is why it's important to have a big decentralized network of nodes. If miners controlled all the nodes, like in a scenario that emerges from big block forks, then they could change the rules as they want, and users would only have 2 options - accept the rules or stop using Bitcoin at all. |
|
|
|
|
Governments creating an altcoin is farm from the worst possible scenario. We already seen Venezuela creating an altcoin, and it was a grand failure. The worst case scenario for crypto is if it remains obscure and unused, if adoption will be declining instead of growing, then crypto will be just a hobby for some enthusiasts, with no potential for big price growth. The second worst scenario is a global ban, because without liquidity of legal exchanges the market will be stifled in growth.
|
|
|
|
It is better to store BTC in an online wallet, such as COINBASE .
Maybe some very tech unfriendly people will have lower chances of losing their coins with a good custodial storage, but such people better not engage with Bitcoin at all, because there are so many difficulties for people who are bad with software, so chances of loss are quite high. Being your own bank is a huge responsibility and some people are taking it too lightly. |
|
|
|
those old days where a person could create an account on an exchange and trade smoothly without having to run the risk of delivering documents are gone, now are coming dark times where each person needs to have documents to do KYC and be able to trade and pray that the exchange never sell your document. the era of anonymity is coming to an end, at least on the part of using exchange and it won't surprise me if a few years from now also online casinos related to cryptocurrencies start to demand KYC right after account creation
There already is a crypto casino that does KYC, it's called crypto-games, though I don't think it's mandatory for everyone yet. The era of anonymous crypto services has been disappearing for a long time already, the governments were never going to ignore crypto completely. So you can't really blame Binance here for spying on you, they have no choice, it's either they do KYC or they get banned in most countries in the world. |
|
|
|
I've always been somewhat troubled by the centralized nature of some of these ALTs (ETH, ADA, LINK, DOT, ATOM) relative to BTC, but I invested anyway believing that these particular projects will have a strong role to play in the spheres of smart contracts, DeFi and overall blockchain tech adoption in the economy, generally.
You are right to doubt altcois. People are doing "research" by reading altcoin's marketing materials and shilled blogs or videos, instead of pulling some real data. The reality is, no one in real world cares about smart contracts and defi, there is no demand for it and they have too many drawbacks like security, lack of features, scalability, etc.; but this doesn't stop altcoin promoters to tell people that their smart-contract coins are the next big thing that will change the world. It's very easy to buy into this hype for a newbie who knows nothing about crypto, and these newbies tend to very quickly start thinking of themselves as "crypto experts" because a shitcoin that they bought 2 weeks ago is not up 54%. But in the long run it all ends very badly. |
|
|
|
Why constantly repeat something that is not true - so during 2017 we had a few major price corrections that ranged from 30% - 40%, so how is that different from what is happening this year?  No one can say for sure that growth will continue, but we also should not be pessimistic and constantly advocate the same theories about bull trap and false hopes that we will see $20k or even lower again. If someone doesn’t see a perfectly clear pattern in this situation, then he really has a big problem and hasn’t learned anything from the past. You forget that we entered the new year with a price tag of $30k, and that we defended it for as long as 8 months - and Q4 is usually one of the more successful periods for BTC. 30-40% correction that lasted for a week or two is not the same as 53% correction that lasted for 2 months. This is unprecedented for Bitcoin's bull markets. You're contradicting yourself when you are saying that "no one can say for sure that the growth will continue" and then say that the pattern is clear. The current pattern easily falls within two opposite scenario - a bull trap that happens in every bear market, even multiple times, or a huge recovery and new rally, which has no examples in Bitcoin, but still totally possible. I don't believe that some months ago are good for Bitcoin and some are bad, that just sounds like superstition. |
|
|
|
|
2017 never had such big and long corrections as this cycle. The current price recovery does not 100% guarantee that the bull run is back, it could be a bull trap and the price could still drop bellow $30k. There is no clear and simple pattern right now, many scenarios are possible, so IMO it's better to not make any moves if you don't want to risk big.
|
|
|
|
if you Look at Bitcoin closely as a decentralized currency that will overthrow the traditional financial system and take total control of the economy because bitcoin is controlled by the people and not the capitalists whose only interest is how to regulate and tax it, citizens, through the third party centralized institutions.
This draws me to the conclusion that Bitcoin was birthed with a Marxist orientation and the is why the capitalist and other centralized government systems hate it because of the financial freedom it offers.
Satoshi never said anything about overthrowing the current financial system, this narrative came later when libertarians have turned their attention to Bitcoin. Satoshi proposed Bitcoin as an alternative to banks and fiat currency. Marxists and communists hate currency as a concept, in their envisioned communism there will simply be no such thing, so no place for Bitcoin. And since usually they want to build communism through authoritarian socialism first, there's again no room for Bitcoin, because it would undermine the socialist government. I recommend you to any online community of marxists and post your thoughts on Bitcoin there and see how they will react. |
|
|
|
Satoshi Nakamoto's invention is factually a currency not for humans, but for machines. Perhaps that is the reality of Bitcoin.
Satoshi never said anything about AI. He invented Bitcoin to be used by humans, not some hypothetical and currently non-existent robots. Providing we talk about Silicon-based life 10 years ago, people might deem it rather distant. But, now looking at the achievement of AI, We will find it closer for AI to have life and produce wisdom. This is a video of the Boston Dynamics BigDog. Fairly flexible! Boston Dynamics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_DynamicsAnd AlphaGo is gaining top wisdom a well. At the 2017 Future of Go Summit, the Master version of AlphaGo beat Ke Jie, the number one ranked player in the world at the time, in a three-game match, after which AlphaGo was awarded professional 9-dan by the Chinese GO Association AlphaGo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaGoThese examples have very little to do with general artificial intelligence. The AI that people talk about today is just a mathematical tool for solving specific problems. The current science doesn't even fully understand intelligence, yet alone trying to replicate it artificially. The world we often see in sci-fi movies will truly come to reality. Bitcoin is the cornerstone of human civilization’s entering a new digital civilization, and all this stems from the moment when the great Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin in 2009. In a century, when Silicon-based life forms with intelligent robots as the main body have been fully integrated into the production and distribution of human society, they will look up to Satoshi Nakamoto as the father of robots because he gave Silicon-based life forms the right to participate in social production and distribution through the creation of Bitcoin. That is the greatest significance that Bitcoin brings to human civilization, representing humans' stepping into a brand Bit Civilization.
The digital civilization has been around for decades and it's absurd to say that Bitcoin is the cornerstone of it, because the actual cornerstone is the Internet and personal computers. Without them Bitcoin wouldn't be possible. And Bitcoin isn't even revolutionary in most senses, people had digital money for decades before Bitcoin was created. Bitcoin's innovation lies in the fact that it is decentralized. |
|
|
|
What are their motives could it be that they are just anti Bitcoin or attacking Bitcoin because it is a competitor that will soon push them out of business.
How do you imagine Bitcoin putting banks out of the business? It has 250k transactions per day which is close to its limit, and the world has hundreds of millions, or maybe even billions of transactions per day. Even with Lightning Network the capacity is not enough to open channels for enough users and the fees would skyrocket. Banks generally don't care about Bitcoin, payment companies either. Most Bitcoin haters are just people who like to feel that they are smarter than others, and they think that this is what's happening when they are warning others about Bitcoin's "imminent collapse". |
|
|
|
Thank you hatshepsut93 for this question, thank you very much. Here I also express my opinion again. Yes, I made a lot of extraordinary claims, but there is not enough evidence to prove them. These are my personal opinions, beliefs and hopes. Here, I put forward more of my philosophical thinking rather than scientific conclusions. Philosophy and science are two completely different disciplines. Science requires strict evidence, inferences and conclusions. Philosophy is relatively more open. There is no unified answer and no right or wrong judgments. But I think these thoughts are still very valuable. I have always believed that Bitcoin is not only important to Bitcoin's technology, but more importantly, the ideas and culture behind Bitcoin. As I said earlier, decentralized thinking, equal and free thinking. I write these views more of an exploration of these ideas. Of course, someone must believe these ideas, someone must say that this is a fallacy, this is a joke. Each of us has our own cognitive system and judgment standards. We have also heard a famous saying: Every time human civilization progresses, it is the result of thought. These propositions that I put forward now are not only applicable to today, but also predictions for the development of human civilization in the next fifty years. I believe they will still be applicable fifty years later. I hope that in the next ten years, more and more people will reach a consensus on these views, and then build a bit civilization step by step.
Talking about influence of Bitcoin is not just philosophy, it's more of a social science so there's a burden of proving your claims in some way instead of just declaring them. Even in philosophy scholars try to make some logical arguments for their statements. You are simply postulating your opinions as facts and want us to accept them without questioning it. Meanwhile Satoshi said "don't trust, verify" and it can easily be used as Bitcoin's core value. |
|
|
|
|
Deflationary policy would mean destroying existing money supply, no government can afford that. Imagine raising billions through taxes and quite literally burning them - how would the government even operate after that? And if the government simply stopped printing money, it would be quite a weak deflation that won't be felt immediately.
But if you somehow imagine a country undergoing a strong deflation, then indeed there will be less interest in investing in cryptocurrencies, because there will be less interest in investing in general.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
