I feel like this will be another hype that shortly turns into a huge FUD cloud. It's the cycle of the markets, but this is a drastic one that goes from 100 to silent in short term moves.. China will have to close their eyes on the fact that Bitcoin is against their party's principles and just accept it as it is. Gonna be hard, but worth it imo.

It's fun to at least know that the markets are fluctuating for now exactly like 2012 and 2016. If you've been here long enough, you know what you have to do this time during the immense bullish move.

Will probably become trendier than today after it passes $15k. That's when the real hype joins in.

You probably don't get the depth of his issue. His days left of freedom are most likely counted as we speak. I wonder how much the court will continue taking his shit.

Trolls are becoming stars because some people are unconscious enough to believe the words this tard speaks. Look how much attention he and BSV got over the past few weeks.. mainsteam, Twitter, everywhere. Because people are putting their $10 in BSV hoping for CW to show his proof that he's Satoshi and turn their $10 in millions overnight. Things that seem too good to be true... are that way.

Some are still hoping they can do again what those in 2009 did by holding some coins. They're pretty much the useless part of crypto.

The miners are not complaining because probably most of them know the price has only increased post-halving. The $3k price most likely hurt some of the miners, but they know the higher price will return. If it does not, mining isn't profitable anymore so they'll shut their rigs down (unless they're some heavy BTC fans and mine Bitcoin just for the sake of it, like they did back when BTC was launched) as soon as they're paying for electricity.

Almost nobody would mine without profit. It would make more sense then to use money to buy then Bitcoin rather than using it to invest in mining equipment. If you're mining now and know that after every halving your accumulated BTC turns out to be 10-20x more expensive, you're going to not care about the months of lower BTC price. It makes more sense to sell the mined BTC only when its price increased enough for it to be considered a large profit than selling it as soon as you mine it, doesn't it?

The number of total transactions is growing up, but it looks like it's growing up at the same pace it did in 2016-2017.. means approx. the same number of txs in these years is the same that was in 2019.

I.e. the number of txs/yr looks like is stuck at the same levels it was in 2016/2017.

Thank you for all the information, will merit everyone that has posted so far in a few minutes. Looks like there's always new things to learn with blockchain, even if you spend years - close to a decade - in the space.


Yes. But Komodo's Atomic DEX does not offer coin control, nor does it generate new addresses every time a new amount is received in the wallet. Hence, if I turn BTC to LTC and then turn LTC back into BTC, the same 2 addresses will be used.

By transferring from AA to AB, the LTC transaction would be clear but the swap back to BTC happens on a second address.

Yes. If everything (economically) stays exactly as it is (including inflation and all), it is possible in some scenarios, although the chances are close to 0.

1. If gold demand decreases radically. I cannot see this happening, but in theory it is possible. The only way I see gold would decrease in demand is if another substance with at least all the properties gold has would be discovered in a very large quantity, hence becoming widely used in comparison with gold.

2. If an immense quantity of gold is discovered. The high price of precious metals comes mostly from scarcity. Therefore, if a huge quantity of gold will be discovered and exploited, it would drive the prices down because it'd be less scarce than today.

Think of Bitcoin: the lower the demand is, the higher the selling power is. A consequence would then be the price. If through a hard fork BTC's max supply would be multiplied by 10 (having then a max supply of 210M instead of 21M), you'd have the same result.

However, 1 and 2 should happen in EXTREME conditions (if gold demand from any collector and factory would decline to all time lows, for example) in order for the value of gold to be of less value than the dollar.

There are other scenarios too, also possible only in extreme conditions ... if there would be a substantial deflation of the USD.. in reality, as I said, the chances of these scenarios to happen is close to 0.


Definitely. Be it precious metals or Bitcoin, they protect you from inflation. The value of gold doesn't change - when gold price rises, it means the value of DOLLAR changes most likely through inflation. In a deflationary scenario, the opposite happens. Gold stays the same, dollar changes.

Nah man, this is the first step of China's instability. The ~$200B they've injected is going to affect them on the long term. Other countries are coming in to help, but you've got to remember the relationship between China and some of these countries helping them out was crap most of the time.

The fake news countries have been spreading internationally about the way the situation is handled in China permanently damaged their image in front of many. China was becoming too powerful. It needed a slowdown.

Well, in the scenario of a double spend isn't the first tx marked as invalid as soon as the second one goes out to the network with a higher fee?

And yes, wrong words used. Meant transaction censoring, not banning.

It depends. I think a high withdrawal fee + trading fees are too much. And trust me, exchanges with high withdrawal fees earn a lot just from them alone. Think of weaker hands - they're going to be bipolar during trades and they'll keep depositing and withdrawing with every sharper move of the markets, going with the market flows (in other words, losing).

I think exchanges should either have withdrawal fees or trading ones. Not both..

The miners can decide not to include the transactions broadcasted by an address in any block they mine, hence the address is banned by them (or by the pool).

Doesn't count as a GLOBAL ban though - a solo miner makes no change in the network unless they own a significant percentage of global hashing power and a pool banning the address doesn't automatically trigger all the other pools to ban it, but as soon as one spams the Blockchain network with an invalid tx, most pools and/or solo miners will eventually censor their txs.

Would be the stupidest move to list and delist coins based on their volume growth of decrease. If they consider BSV a scam, then let it be and don't add it again. Anyway, I still can't conceive how that crappy coin is still in the top..

The only positive tweets I see about it are from people who've invested hoping to turn their $10 into $1000 if CW ever turns out to be the true satoshi (never) and from Calvin Ayre or whatever the hell his name is, the BSV shill who spams the entire internet with his bullshit.

My question is what the hell is BSV doing on the list of Bitcoin's history.. the only thing I'd put on the list is when CW finally gets his sentence.

OP, the list is fine but looks messed up on mobile.

I see. Thank you for your answers. So basically by doing an analysis you can get to the atomic swap contract and find out who sent what to which address?

I honestly thought it's just something behind the coding of an app and the only thing Blockchain sees is "X sent LTC to Y" and "A sent BTC to B", nobody possibly making a link between them.

I'll take a look over Schnorr and taproot, haven't studied it yet.

Why would a privacy-intended coin such as XMR be used as an intermediate coin? My funds are going through 5 different wallets and 2 different coins. How would my first Bitcoin be traced to the last one if I'm swapping coins through the process? If Atomic DEX can link my original Bitcoin to the final one then can't ChipMixer and Wasabi's CoinJoin feature do just the same?

I haven't particularly researched Atomic DEX, but as far as I know it's non-custodial and fully decentralized. A quote from the comparison between 8 decentralized exchanges:


Do you mean the mechanism of Atomic DEX allows the users or the devs to check on the Atomic Swap tx and basically see the inputs and outputs of each coin swapped? I am not very familiar with the more advanced (technical) side of cryptocurrencies.

I agree, and the atomic swaps need to happen quick enough for both of them to happen at the same time.

As I said, any critique is welcome. My main idea is that maybe coin mixing and atomic swaps can be combined to result in an even higher level of anonymity.

Yeah, I pointed that out in the disadvantages.. and this is why I mentioned the idea of creating an atomic swap decentralized platform for the purpose of maximizing anonymity. Not sure how achievable that is tho.

I used Atomic DEX in my scenario specifically for this purpose. It has no limits AFAIK, be it deposit, withdrawal or trade ones. There's also no KYC, so for now it's safe.
Is Changelly even doing atomic swaps? I think it's more centralized than not. It makes no sense to go for atomic swaps if there's a third party you need to trust.. I mean, isn't atomic swap meant to be the answer to coin swapping without trust?

First of all, I hope this is the right board to post in. If not, mods, please move it to the right one

I have never really done much about the anonymity of my coins. Because privacy is one of the main reasons I'm here, I'm willing to practice with some transactions in order to increase/maximize the privacy of my wallets.
Therefore, I've looked up and researched Coin Mixing a little bit. ChipMixer and Wasabi both present some interest for me, but while researching coinjoining, something came up in my mind: what about Atomic Swaps? Can they be used for an even larger anonymity of your funds?

I'll write down my scenario of increased/maximized anonymity using Atomic Swaps. It's something that can be done right now, but is pretty impractical because the app I'm using was not created for this purpose. My scenario has just two requirements:

• An Atomic Swap-capable, decentralized software/platform. I'll use Atomic DEX for the example as it already exists and my scenario can already be realized on it.
• 2 different Atomic Swap wallets + 1 unused Bitcoin wallet. For my scenario, I will have two separate phones with Atomic DEX installed on them and a PC with a new Electrum wallet on it.

Here's how this would work:
As I said above, we have two Atomic DEX wallets. We'll call the first one AA (Atomic A) and the second wallet AB (Atomic B). For the final transaction, we have prepared an Electrum wallet called B (Bitcoin). The following steps need to be taken:

• Using CoinMarketCap's conversion tool, the ideal amount of LTC to receive for 1 BTC would be, at the current rate, 129.5 LTC. We are going to send 1 BTC (which is the coin we want to anonymize) to the Bitcoin address on wallet AA. After the tx is confirmed, 1 BTC will be swapped to 129.5 LTC. Note: Bitcoin can be converted to any of the available cryptocurrencies. I gave LTC just as an example for this scenario.
• Our 1 BTC has been sent to the other peer we've swapped our coin with. Now, we have a balance of 129.5 LTC in wallet AA, but our intention is to have 1 BTC with an untraceable history. Hence, we will transfer our 129.5 LTC to the second Atomic DEX wallet, wallet AB.
• Wallet AA now has a final balance of 0. All our funds has been sent to a secondary, unused Atomic DEX wallet with no previous history. Next, we have to do a final swap of our 129.5 LTC back to 1 BTC.
• After the final swap, we have our 1 BTC in our wallet AB, which has absolutely no connection to wallet AA. Therefore, as a final step, we have to just transfer our untraceable 1 BTC to the Mycelium wallet B.

I also made a diagram (please don't mock me, it's my first diagram ever ) for easier understanding of the process:

               

As an advantage, your Bitcoin goes through 2 different wallets in the first part of the experiment and leaves your account completely, and then you own Litecoin. Litecoin goes through 2 different wallets and then leaves your account completely - you now own Bitcoin again. The final transaction is an untraceable Bitcoin that goes into the final wallet (Electrum).

For disadvantages, we have impracticability (you have to use so many wallets and so many devices..) unless someone develops an open-source Atomic Swap software just for this purpose and also the final balance you're going to have will most likely be different than the initial balance, depending on the ratio you will choose to go for between the coins you'll swap and also depending on price fluctuations.

You have to remember that Atomic DEX was not created for this purpose, so my experiment can be considered a workaround for those intending to maximize their anonymity. I had to use two different Atomic DEX wallets because it does not feature Coin Control, nor does it change your address to a new one after receiving funds. Therefore, as we're looking for unused addresses, we have to create new wallets.

My experiment can as well be a stupid one, any critique is welcome.

What does the last block mined have to do with the necessity of Bitcoin? My point was that it's going to always be necessary because third parties will only become more in control and there's always going to be at least a handful of people willing to escape from their chains.

I don't see a STRONG movement to reclaim control and privacy, otherwise we'd see significant anti-KYC and anti-taxation movements.

In a few decades, things will only get worse. I can't imagine a future where we'd have more privacy than we have today or more privacy than we had 15 years ago. It's going to be worse because of technology.

So I don't need a crystal ball to know what the future means for privacy.

Hey man, I've been in the same boat and one of the problems I usually have with sig campaigns is that I've been placed on yahoo's SMAS list years ago and that's pretty much an irreversible thing.

I have to live with it though, I was a shitposter but hopefully the change I've made to my posting quality and style and all the efforts I'm trying to make for the better of this forum compensate the mistakes I've made in the past.

I looked through the SMAS list and you're there too. Some campaigns or campaign managers use this list as a first step when checking a participant's profile, hence if the participant is on SMAS, they're out without a doubt. Sometimes you can see even on the campaign OP whether they do/do not accept SMAS users.

Therefore, your username on the list + the long gap on the history of your posts have most likely been the deciding factor of your sign campaign applications.

The best you can do is just keep being active and show the forum what you're capable of. Improve your post quality.

It's funny how he's literally covering himself with shit and the more shit he puts on himself, the deeper he gets buried inside the ground.

Everything is just full of lies, but remember these are documents he's sending IN COURT. This will bury him deeper than his own imagination could ever conceive. Lying in court is not a funny thing to do.

Now that he's linked himself to one of the theft addresses, let the fun begin because the court will surely hear of it too. Send this to a few Crypto news websites and it'll hit the headlines in no time. I'm waiting for BShitV supporters to come outside their little cages with some more stupid excuses... come on, 3rd of February has passed already. Where are the keys? 

The exact date of the last Bitcoin to be mined can only be approximated, but halving every 4 years is a fact and that helps with the calculus. Because every 4 years the block reward gets cut to half the amount which means, considering the block reward today is 12.5BTC, the block rewards will be cut to the following during the next cycles of block reward halving:

- 2020: 6.25BTC/block
- 2024: 3.125BTC/block
- 2028: 1.5625BTC/block
- 2032: 0.78125BTC/block
- 2036: 0.390625BTC/block
etc..

There are 144 blocks a day in average, so the calculus can be done and the timestamp of the last few satoshis to ever be mined can be estimated.

Depends on what you mean by unnecessary/forbidden. If you mean whether the govs will ever ban Bitcoin, I doubt it. Unnecessary? Bitcoin will always be necessary. We have to get rid of the third parties, but we're only providing them more control over us..

Oh, I certainly do like that Dark Mode feature you've implemented. Looks so much better, did you change anything UI-related too or is it just the colors?

I'd add more exchanges to the avg price list and you're good to go imo. Will keep an eye on your website and will add it too my bookmarks.

Listening to our voice gives me a good vibe about you and the possible future of your site. Good job, keep it up!