|
the real satoshi invented bitcoin as a cryptographic proof mechanism .. CSW(who only ever got any btc in 2013+, so not satoshi, nor affiliated) however wants to use social drama idiocy as his "proof". much like other idiots that just want to quote themselves and their idiot cult followers as proof
ass kissers and echo chambers are not proof, they are just evidence of lies, cheating and being an idiot
CSW is not satoshi. and any idiot that just follows other idiots echo chambers of ass kissery deserves to lose any value they have got
|
|
|
|
|
trust system is bullshit anyways.. when a bunch of ass kissers back up fellow liars, the system becomes pointless
the point of bitcoin is to research, review, scrutinize, confirm and verify.. trust is what caused people to fall for all the fiat tricks, lies and scams
|
|
|
|
|
elon loves DOGE(or thats what he wants the public to see)
funny part is doge is hobby mined by residents which means miners have no electric source control
bitcoin is majority asic farmed, in locations specifically chosen for the electricity source.
in short, bitcoin has always been cleaner than doge even before elon made his erroneous comments
|
|
|
|
Since you said "old windows PC", does that mean the current OS has been installed long time ago and already connected to internet many times? If yes, people usually don't count it as airgapped PC. At least, you should format the storage, reinstall the OS and install other necessary software (such as wallet software) and never connect to internet again. And it's recommended to remove networking component if it's possible. And will it be possible for an hacker to install those drivers remotely?
No, in first place the hacker must connected to your PC. the victim could have downloaded a dodgy wallet.. (meaning no need for hacker to connect) before the victim removed network card/drivers. whereby the dodgy wallet signs transactions but to a known set of a scammers addresses. so when the victim transfers the signed tx in hex/byte format. the victim wont know the receiver address is the scammer. and the scammer didnt need to connect to the victim tip: only use open source, verified, clean tx creators. |
|
|
|
banks around the world have not been allowed to hoard or offer direct crypto access for their customers. however in 2025 (BIS draft*) they may be able to hold coins in custody and offer crypto services/access direct. even in countries where bitcoin nationally is not banned for citizens. banks fear issues about being middle men of FIAT transfers to crypto services so again some countries wont want their banks facilitating FIAT payments to crypto services. but this is more local policy not law the reason is because alot of scammers would do a wire transfer to a service, buy bitcoin withdraw bitcoin and then call their bank and pretend someone illegally accessed their account and stole fiat. thus putting a bad tag on crypto services. which then raises more suspicions when scammers do it on masse which then paints a bad reputation for crypto services thus banks stop processing fiat transfers to crypto services to avoid suspicious activity even here in the UK where its legal to own use and transfers crypto and also trade it. and where UK banks know of the well known regulated exchanges like coinbase. the banks will still pause a fiat transfer and pass customers to fraud department to answer qualifying questions to ensure the customer knows what they are transferring money for and double check who they are to ensure no scams are involved before then processing the fiat transfer to an exchange
*bank of international settlements draft 2022 - standards to be implemented 1st january 2025 This document sets out
the final standard which the Committee has agreed to implement by 1 January 2025. https://www.bis.org/bcbs/publ/d545.pdfin short if made standard banks will be able to hold coins in custody which would be a economic boost to the cryptosphere beginning 2025 |
|
|
|
|
when code is available on things like github. people (who dont have to be developers) can compile their own .exe file from that source code(easy tutorials are available)
they can also then look at the file hash of the compiled file to see it if matches file hashes of other already compiled .exe files attributed as the same version. and if it matches they can submit a comment that they too have matched the sourcecode to the .exe and the hashes match, thus one level of independently verifying the code matches the file and give independent opinion to other users that the promoted exe is legit too
i say this because:
sometimes there are 'open source' projects that are wrote by small groups. compiled by the same group and promoted by the same group. with no independent outside review/check thus people end up blindly trusting a small centralized group
the whole point is not just that the source code is open to view. but also that it should be independently reviewed at code level and independently validated at compile level
another level of integrity of open source is not just that its openly readable. but also that making improvements to it should not be closed off
|
|
|
|
|
sounds like paypal owned funds stored in paxos, where paypal wanted to withdraw small amount from paxos, but paxos(the withdrawal service) sent out the small withdrawal amount but using a large utxo without using a change address for remaining unspent output balance
|
|
|
|
do transactions like in this thread when a person mistakenly paid higher fees without knowing about it will get refund from miners?
to get the refund we need to send any request by messaging or emailing or it have any other platform? who will give the refund the pool if the transaction was verified by that pool or when the transaction is verified by an unknown miner then how can anyone will request for a refund and where will he find that unknown miner? what if the miner denied to pay the refund? like if we lost our money then we can complaint to police, is there any authority in this type of case?
do the huge mistakenly sent transaction fee also shared between every miner of that pool?
sorry for too many questions but you explain in understandable way so i asked.
there is no rule that says a pool should. its purely the morals and generosity of the pool to decide as for claims. usually a erroneous sender has to contact the pool directly to plead, request, ask, beg for a refund.. where if generous, the pool would agree for the erroneous sender to sign a private message using the spending key to prove ownership of the spent funds. then the pool decides on its generosity (0%-10%-90%100%) the miners(individual worker asics) dont have a say. its purely pool decision |
|
|
|
Wonder which wallet they are using to make these kind of blunders. I have used majority of the desktop wallets that are available in this space and you cannot make these silly mistakes using them, unless you use some mobile wallet and you are under the influence of alcohol or something similar you might make these mistakes.
They must've been using their own software and probably didn't have any proper measures, i.e. detection of unusually high fee etc. so paxos admits to failure thus making claim. yet f2pool has not made any 19btc payout to any entity at the 3day deadline
I think the 3 day deadline was just for the sender to get in touch with them. Verifying, assessing risks and refunding could take longer than that. Plus BTC is fungible (the Monero crowd would disagree), so they can send it from/to any address. I still can't wrap my head around on how can F2pool make such bold gesture without consulting with the miners' first, they should be entitled to the share of that fee after all. i wouldnt say bold(bald) i would say its a hairy situation for miners. but miners are slaves to pools management. which is something miners should consider when thinking about which pool to be managed under. after all this may open up the other people saying they want refunds too because they paid too much fee after the fact, even on small satoshi amounts (though personally i think pools would ignore the small penny pinching refund claims and only do this gesture on obviously large mistakes) but as for your "fungible" thing.. bitcoin is not fungible. f2pool have transparent list of its addresses of its hot and cold wallet. and so far. even if they are not using the taint path of the coin fee spend error in new reward. they have not used any other coinrewards lump in their f2pool hoard yet |
|
|
|
For likers of alternative versions. It could also be a way to launder money! Bitcoin pull will later return most of the btc fees clean and fresh mined bitcoins. Why not, right?
smart people who would use a mining pool to launder. would not pre-broadcast a tx to the entire network first. they would pushtx privately to a contracted mining pool thats in on the service. then yes the pool would destroy the taint of the UTXO (destroy coin-age) and due to fee then being a "new coin reward" which would be part of new zero taint amount.. the pool would hand back to claimant funds as fresh coin.. however because the tx was broadcast publicly pre-confirm to the entire network. the sender had no control over which pool would collate it into their block. thus less logic/reason to believe it was a planned laundering logically if you follow the data, its more likely a bad-practice of error (human or wallet code), making a tx which didnt spend funds properly thus leaving such a high fee due to not spending funds to enough outputs |
|
|
|
Mine is just around $0.27. So cheap indeed. I'm a little bit surprised this is how cheap our data are.
thats just data of [email][name][age][ethnicity][income] if data brokers knew more about you and a particular company wanted to know you specifically due to other things the price goes up EG as said before if your hobbies, interests and consumer purchasing history met a companies product promotion. your data could be worth more there are many data brokers that would buy [name][email] for $0.01 from a email provider or some service you signed upto then if they get for instance from netflix [email][sci-fi genre] for $0.01 by ising email as a ID reference they can link name to netflix preferences. and those three datapoints [name][email][sci-fi genre] is no longer worth $0.02 combined. but instead could be worth $0.10 to a company selling sci-fi merchandise that is priced at $100+ if the data broker found more data like [email][age] for $0.01 from a age verifications service then the 4 datapoints of [name][email][sci-fi genre][age] is no longer worth $0.03. but instead could be worth $0.20 to a company selling sci-fi merchandise that is priced at $100+ same named person. same promotional merch company but the data is worth now they specifically kno w your in the age demography of people more likely to buy merchandise if for instance your netflix viewing history shows you thumbs up and favour car modification, restoration or specific car dealership documentaries the data can be worth many dollars to car dealerships for just [name][email][car genre][age] compared to similar data from netflix of [name][email][sci-fi genre][age] |
|
|
|
|
paypal want to make their own subnetwork, based on a failed existing subnetwork to hoard actual bitcoin in locks custodianised by hub channel owners.. while letting people pay with paypal units of pegged bitcoin of promises of claims which are unsettled inbound balance until released from the locks and confirmed on the actual bitcoin network.. much the same as some other failed subnetwork it is based on that pretends to be bitcoin 2.0
its funny how they pretend to say they are going to make bitcoin better.. but then tell people to not use the bitcoin network and use some other system the promoters made.. which requires middle men to sign off on peoples choice of payments
|
|
|
|
I have created this tools which allows you to visualize all bitcoin unit formats and interact with them You can already see milisatoshi unit in lightning network  the lightning network is not the bitcoin network.. dont confuse the two.. much like people should not imagine avalance networks btc.b as being bitcoins. rootstocks rbtc should not be treated as bitcoin. grayscales GBTC should not be treated as bitcoin. De-fi's WBTC should not be treated as bitcoin exchange MySQL database should not be treated as bitcoin nor any of the other networks that use different units of measure and pegging mechanisms.. if its not on the bitcoin network, confirmed value owned by your keys.. its not real bitcoin owned by you |
|
|
|
|
in hard real existing data of the blockchain the first block reward is numeric 5000000000 not 50... it is only displayed in software GUI as a reward of 50btc
yep BTC does not exist in blockdata. only sats do. BTC is a basket term of measurement of a lump of sats
any and all transactions are not measured in btc with decimals.. all transaction raw data on the blockchain are measured in the smallest unit(sats) protected by math and binary data in a immutable blockkchain.
EG 6.25btc. is show as: 625000000
the blockreward started in hard immutable data of binary:
100101010000001011111001000000000 (5000000000 data units) (50btc software display)
which halves to
10010101000000101111100100000000 (2500000000 data units) (25btc software display)
which halves to
1001010100000010111110010000000 (1250000000 data units) (12.5btc software display)
which halves to
100101010000001011111001000000 (6.25000000 data units) (6.25btc software display)
notice how in real immutable data the binary number loses a bit per halving to half the number
if idiots wanted to change the system so that display 6.25btc had 10 decimals
which would be:
111010001101010010100101000100000000
you will notice that the entire first part of the binary sequence has changed. but also the amount of bits change too
which in hard immutable data wont be
625000000 units created as reward, but instead
62500000000 units created
meaning if future idiot measure of
62500000000 is 6.25btc.. then the old logic measure of
625000000 become 0.0625btc
so you can see it messes up value of old amounts. and also messes around with how many shareable units are created. and also how many halvings are going to occur before supply limit completion
|
|
|
|
|
when large institution are doing collateral deals extending upto and beyond 2028 you soon realise that things are not going to slow down any time soon
|
|
|
|
|
value is found outside the speculative market
value is NOT the market price
value sits beneath the market price
imagine value as the wholesale manufacturing cost of a product
imagine price as the retail sales cost of a product
the easiest way to find the value. is find the most efficient acquisition cost of btc on the planet.. and if smart enough you will learn that is mining in an efficient region..
this efficient mining cost sets the limit of anyone on the planets ability to sell and make a profit. because its the lowest.. no one is left to sell for less and break even. so it sets a support wall no one is willing to sell below. this support wall is the value line
you will notice because bitcoin mining is (currently) over $20k efficient. it gives good reason why the market this quarter is $25k+ instead of being just $100
you notice this support more when you look at things like crap coins with low PoW costs. their market speculates at a lower rate too
there are some PoS that have no real world mining cost. so their market is 99% speculative and <1% store of value. those PoS coins with high price can burst their bubble if their speculation reasons stop
|
|
|
|
|
the reason top guys like the idea of mining is simple
when building new power generators for a populous they dont just build for current demand. they build for future demand capacity of 50-100 years. meaning sometimes 3x+ current population
but this comes at a 3x cost of current demand. so if they can bribe, incentivise big industry into the area to use the other unused 2x capacity then it keeps the costs low for the 1x demand currently existing.
|
|
|
|
I guess the SEC will approve all of them, all at the same time.
Approving one of them before the other it will mean picking a winner, something the SEC isn’t clearly intended to do as they would be subject to an handful of potentially disruptive litigations.
So I guess Grayscale discount is a good indicator for all the ETF approvals.
Yes, as I have said, it might be good for the followers of this thread to have something similar to the wall observer thread where you update the information on GBTC's percentage on net asset value vs. bitcoin. I reckon an update twice a month might be enough. This would certainly open much discussion and speculation. It might also help some people to know when to buy bitcoin hehehe. instead of spamming topics. might be worth having a headliner in the topic first post that updates regularly. with a link that takes them to page #xx of this topic to continue discussion as for when to buy bitcoin.. the GBTC speculates on the spot. not the other way round. so its better to just look at spot speculation first not GBTC first when making actual bitcoin purchase decisions |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
