Glade status... still a bit short. But then again it never went to 14K either.
Haven't you left the market yet? You said you were likely to be exiting one day before the local bottom at $7400. Im probably leaving the market within a week in my final distribution. AMA
 |
|
|
|
|
Today I found out that I had a position that I totally forgot about still open on an exchange...
Feeling a bit retarded now...
|
|
|
|
I don't even have any idea what the normal forum sections are these days.
I'm 2 or 3 years + just in a few meaningful threads.
Normal forum sections, gosh, you bring back memories.... |
|
|
|
Faster than a speeding bull run!!
More powerful than a locomotive meme!!
Able to fill pages with a single post!!
"look! up in the WOT!....
it’s a rocket..
it’s a train....
NO.... its WORDYMAN!!! "
Yes its Wordyman!
With many more powerful words than mortal men...
Wordyman !
Types pages with his bare hands!
Able to arrange walls of mighty rivers of text!
fights a never ending battle against the trolls!!
...fudsters!!
in the wordy way.....*
*(apologies to the ancient Superman show )
His posts always sound like this to me...  I always see this: This user is currently ignored. Just as repetitive, but more concise, more informative. Tripple lol, I love this thread :-) |
|
|
|
|
Dang, the knives are quite bloody lately...
Never a dull moment in bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
1% adoption of bitcoin is 100% of what I expected in a good scenario. Most national currencies are used by less than 1% of the world. The idea of a whole world that uses bitcoin is a fantasy.
Why would it be a fantasy? Usage of national currencies being largely confined to their own nation seems only logical, bitcoin being unable to be used worldwide seems illogical. |
|
|
|
I have outperformed bitcoin by 10,000% by daytrading and these increases have been steady since 2013. Daytrading is not gambling. It is a simple system where you learn to buy high volume dips and crashes, and breakouts. I guess 'Daytrading is gambling' is like this nice catchy excuse for bad traders for them to blow off steam.
Holy fucking crap dude, congrats on your trading success, that is beyond impressive. Unless most other guys, I believe you. I am assuming you use quite a bit of leverage? |
|
|
|
|
Or they are just working together to pull a nigerian prince.: "Yeah Craig totally has all these bitcoins, we are even suing him for them, totally real... "
|
|
|
|
|
EU hearing press release is largely very positive and balanced, only this piece they will need to explain to me : "wallet providers should be subject to the Anti-Money Laundering Directive."
Are they not aware that you can just build your software from code? Will anybody that ever coded a feature for wallet software need to do AML for the entire world population? Square peg, meet round hole...
|
|
|
|
I'd posted my reply about PoW change before reading the posts by Icygreen, flipperish, flynn and others.
I, too, would like the full nodes to have a say in the relative distribution of hash functions, but full nodes are too easy to sybyl attack. PoS vote is also dangerous, because established miners have huge availability they could employ to crush GPU- or CPU- friendly functions. That's why we will eventually need to figure out more game theory to have a stable solution.
Could you elaborate on the bold part? I didn't quite understand. |
|
|
|
This one brings out some nostalgia  . |
|
|
|
While this looks prettier, I wouldn't use an evolutionary tree here, because you want to show that bitcoin is better, so all forms of money should be on 1 branch with bitcoin being the end point. Evolutionary trees, and evolution in general are often misunderstood. People often think that humans are the "pinnacle of evolution" and all the other branches are more primitive evolution-wise, while that is just not the case. |
|
|
|
|
If I were a woman, I would run away from this thread ... and fast.
|
|
|
|
You praise the blockchain technology in general Bitcoin doesn't equal the blockchain technology. I see that the blockchain technology isn't dependent on bitcoin and bitcoin value isn't guaranteed by the blockchain technology. This is a glaring fundamental error. Blockchain, and what makes it truly revolutionary cannot be separated from the token. In the case of Bitcoin we are talking about the premier token on the premier blockchain. They are inseparable. Blockchain is useless without bitcoin. You cannot have one without the other without losing the goodness of the entire thing. You will lose sober minded people with phrases like "premier blockchain" that only means something in ones personal reality. I've had a lot of fun with the blockchain technology that isn't built on bitcoin tokens and I will continue to do so. But I think that right now, I'm about done here. My post is deleted, most of the people here have already ignored me and the rest are trying to dress their gibberish as technical argumentation. This is like trying to argue that the world is older then 6000 years in some radical Christian forum. Enjoy your echo chamber and the well deserved prize that comes with it in the future. So you're using blockchain technology that isn't derived from the Bitcoin code? You do realize the blockchain was invented by Satoshi Nakamoto, right? Clearly he is saying that blockchain technology works fine with altcoins. |
|
|
|
I'll just leave this here  Holy shit that is few wild animals compared to people and cattle. |
|
|
|
|
Looks like it's going down.
|
|
|
|
Can we go back to arguing about child support?
 |
|
|
|
Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer?
jbreher, just stop it. By definition in the Whitepaper Bitcoin is the chain with greatest accumulated PoW. I disagree. Bitcoin White paper, first paragraph, Abstract: Abstract. ..., accepting the longest proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone. Source: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdfI don't get how can you disagree with the definition? First of all, I don't read the white paper as gospel. But even if you do, also in abstract: "As long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to attack the network, they'll generate the longest chain and outpace attackers." Therefore the abstract itself already says that the longest chain rule is conditional. Edit from above: Section 4. is even more explicit: The majority decision is represented by the longest chain, which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it. If this isn't proof that using the word "Bitcoin" for anything other then BTC is a scam, I don't know what is. It's not "gospel", it's definition. You can define other things yourself, but give Satoshi Nakamoto the right to define what Bitcion is. I would bet that the majority of Core devs disagree with your definition, as would most users if push came to shove (if miners went a different direction from user needs) but hey, I'll try not to derail the thread for 2 nights in a row, so I'll quit this discussion. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer?
jbreher, just stop it. By definition in the Whitepaper Bitcoin is the chain with greatest accumulated PoW. I disagree. Bitcoin White paper, first paragraph, Abstract: Abstract. ..., accepting the longest proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone. Source: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdfI don't get how can you disagree with the definition? First of all, I don't read the white paper as gospel. But even if you do, also in abstract: "As long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to attack the network, they'll generate the longest chain and outpace attackers." Therefore the abstract itself already says that the longest chain rule is conditional. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
