|
Seems like a ponzi where the early "investors" are now benefiting from a flood of hype crazed newbie investors dazzled by "pump and dump" appreciation.
We've seen that pattern 500 times on the other Alt coins. Always ends badly.
|
|
|
|
|
I have used coinbase recently with no problems whatsoever. This thread seems like FUD. Where's the proof?
|
|
|
|
|
This was said about every Alt coin particularly LTC.
Bottom line is they all trade at a minuscule fraction of BTC. Occasionally one gets hot and a horde of "investors" roll in near the peak thinking they can make a quick buck. Historically, nearly ALL of them have ended up bagholders, many have been wiped out, and most would have done much better just holding BTC.
Ethereum has a few novel concepts but by and large it's more hot air. Offers nothing relevant over BTC. Period.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually the online wallets are MUCH less safe. A hacker, for example, might gain control of the server and trick you into sending your private key / pass phrase or, if the private keys are stored on a server they could just take them.
Local solutions, preferably offline, are much more safe since the only way a hacker could get access is by breaking into your home. Given most of the hackers are in China, it's kind of unlikely they are going to buy a plane ticket, get a visa, fly to your country, try to find your paper wallet, etc....
By contrast, very likely thousands of them are attempting every minute to break into online wallet sites and hack them.
|
|
|
|
|
The reality is 99% of this hardware is built in China and they all copy each other's designs without regard to intellectual property.
If the speedup was 2000% and all the hardware was made in the USA where patents are strongly enforced might be relevant but a minor 20% optimization is nothing we should be hard forking to avoid. Irrelevant - many design advances in ASIC, widely copied, have yielded far more than 20% boosts and Bitcoin has managed to survive.
|
|
|
|
You are Satoshi Nakamoto, when you can decrypt this: -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=NGKO
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----
Not really true - you and the OP could be in collusion or he might guess a simple English message through brute force or trial and error. Signing the first sentence of today's New York Times with Satoshi's private key would be a more powerful proof. |
|
|
|
|
Another thing to note - there may be players bigger than Satoshi in the Bitcoin space. Some investor may have quietly acquired 40% of the float. With the ability to create new pseudo-anonymous addresses at will there would be no easy way to find who who is the richest Bitcoiner.
|
|
|
|
|
Silly idea - Satoshi's coins are only about 5% of the eventual total and 6.5% of the current total. If Satoshi held 90% of the coins, there would be a systemic risk if he dumped them but 6.5% is fairly trivial. The impact would be comparable to Carl Icahn selling his Apple - a brief price dip as the markets absorb it followed by a return to normal market capitalization based on the aggregate value of the enterprise.
Some of the "all coins will eventually be lost" crowd might even appreciate another million or so to be put into circulation.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think anyone ever thought Bitcoin would be the end-all of crypto. It will fill a role until something better comes along - when that happens, we'll see a massive shift into the new currency.
Given how dysfunctional the BTC source code update process is right now, that MIGHT BE SOON.
Etherium seems to be gaining traction and now has a substantial chunk of market share...
|
|
|
|
|
Fine for small amounts needed for transactions but keep any large balances in cold storage or on a very well secured computer
|
|
|
|
I think we may be chasing a Red Herring here. Flash manufacturers test their devices at >125C, which is EXTREMELY hot, for 1000 hours with 0 data retention loss to be standards compliant. According to this study, which someone posted in response to a Trezor discussion, 1000 hours at 150C is equivalent to a century at 25C http://www.nxp.com/files/microcontrollers/doc/eng_bulletin/EB618.pdf |
|
|
|
|
Bottom line is Bitcoin will never be a replacement for small retail transactions. If it suddenly took off in popularity and hit MasterCard/Visa type volume, blocks would fill up and transactions would take 3 years to confirm if ever. YES this could theoretically be fixed with changes to the client, but there is ZERO chance that will occur since it takes 19 months for developers/miners to adopt even the simplest changes.
So what is BTC good for? It's a good alternative to gold and silver for capital preservation. For micro transactions, just convert a bit each month to fiat and use the rich existing network of micro transaction systems all of which are way superior to the current BTC implementation for that purpose.
|
|
|
|
Engrave your private keys in a block of tungsten, basically indestructible.  Note if you take this route best not to post pictures of your engraved tungsten block to the internet  |
|
|
|
|
Same way you would cash out any investment - use a reliable BTC to Fiat exchange such as Coinbase or find a local broker through localbitcoins
|
|
|
|
I suppose archival quality Blue Ray is an option - apparently Facebook uses it for data they think will need to be stored for long periods of time.
Archival blue ray discs are more expensive but are supposed to have vastly longer shelf life than regular ones
The only secure way is to store it on an encrypted RAID 0 array made up of 8 MFM HDs (NSA has back doors on the new IDE ones *DO NOT TRUST*). RAID-0 provides no fault tolerance or redundancy and is generally only used to increase throughput. Did you mean RAID-1? |
|
|
|
|
I suppose archival quality Blue Ray is an option - apparently Facebook uses it for data they think will need to be stored for long periods of time.
Archival blue ray discs are more expensive but are supposed to have vastly longer shelf life than regular ones
|
|
|
|
Why would you even consider using USB's for long term storage? I can't even hold on to my USB for more than 2 years because either they always break and malfunction (from dropping too frequent) or I lose them.
USB sticks are only good for not-so-major documents because they can easily be infected.
Well what are your other options? Magnetic media is horrible, DVD's are worse, and the cloud is potentially vulnerable to hacking. If the data is just a private key you could etch it into glass or something but for larger data sets not many good options. |
|
|
|
Am I correct that the best way to destroy bitcoins is to send them to the bitcoin address with value 0?
Public key: 16QaFeudRUt8NYy2yzjm3BMvG4xBbAsBFM
Privake Key (compressed): KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qYjgd9M7rFU73Nd2Mcv1
Private Key (uncompressed): 5HpHagT65TZzG1PH3CSu63k8DbpvD8s5ip4nEB3kEsreAbuatmU
Even with the private keys the bitcoins sent to this address cannot be spent as the keys don't fall in the allowed range (> 0).
No because there may be another private key that corresponds to the same public key. |
|
|
|
|
Not sure on that one but:
1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr
Should be a safe burn address. Looks like 2000+ BTC have been destroyed there.
|
|
|
|
|
Personally I would be comfortable with storing my key data on a pair of new unused USB drives and plug them into a wall power source, not a PC where they might get stolen or infected, once a year.
I wouldn't trust magnetic media for any period of time. I've never lost data on a flash drive but have seen countless hard drive failures over the years including ones I had in storage. Among other things, exposures to a magnetic field can corrupt or erase them.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
