I really don't think people are aware it exists. Sure you have quite a few people that have heard of Bitcoin but many have never really put much thought into what it exactly is or how it exactly works. Crypto-currency is well known bought not well adopted. Until their is an easy to explain concept, the understanding of Blockchain & Bitcoin will float above most peoples heads. It really isn't taught in school unless you find a specific course related to cryptocurrency and Blockchain. Try explaining Bitcoin and Block chain to average JOe in society or the elderly or disfranchised. Just try and explain it to my grand mother or nieces and nephews (  ), I promise, you wouldn't get far. |
|
|
|
Jack Ma, founder of Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba discusses globalisation and trade, and shares tips on business at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. See Video and Learn How to Handle your business https://tupify.net/v/BROKHYNow that is as harsh as I have ever heard it  but damn it, if it isn't true! I think success comes from having a deep ambition to reach ones goals then exceed them. You don't have to be Albert Einstein in order to be a success. You don't necessarily have to have a god given talent that you can manipulate to your advantage. What you do need though is drive. You have to remain optimistic and you have to be adamant about it, relentless. Success clearly isn't for pushovers or the faint of heart. You may spend your days and nights working towards it, only to lose sleep. When you do reach it, you start over and do it again, and again, and again forever accumulating its wealth and what it means to be successful. however, where there is no pain, there is no gain. |
|
|
|
Hey guys. I've been watching a lot of debates on youtube about this topic where theists, apologetics, philosophers, scientists, agnostics and atheists discuss whether religion has a monopoly over what people perceive to be right or wrong. Guys like WLC, Sam Harris, Jordan Peterson, Frank Turek, Richard Dawkins etc. Go after each other's throats to prove their points and honestly, i think every one of them has a valid argument.
What do you think?
I agree, everyone has a unique perspective based on their own individual knowledge and personal experiences. This knowledge and experience is subjective due to the numerous variances that help shape and mold the human Psyche. Through the eyes of another, definitions and interpretations tend to vastly change, for example: " One mans trash, is another mans treasure. One mans pain, is another mans pleasure." Religion or better said, spirituality often becomes mans basic necessity, it gives man a sense of self, a feeling that maybe the life he lives and experiences is actually bigger than just himself. Religions can be dogmatic when taken to the extreme of course, but the underline principal is that religions contain basic morals & ethics that a religious follower can aspire to live by. Hypothetically speaking for arguments sakeExample: In the religions of Catholicism and also Judaism, there exists a set of 10 basic commandments followers must adhere to. 10 Commandments1.“I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have any strange gods before Me.” 2.“Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.” 3.“Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.” 4.“Honor thy father and mother.” 5.“Thou shalt not kill.” 6.“Thou shalt not commit adultery.” 7.“Thou shalt not steal.” 8.“Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” 9.“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.” 10.“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods.” Now, looking at religion through an outsiders perspective, the Commandments 1 - 3 might seem a bit absurd, especially to an atheist, while commandments 4 - 10 seem like basic codes and tenants any man regardless of their race, political affiliations, gender, sexuality, religious doctrine, or creed could live by. |
|
|
|
In the field of blockchain and cryptocurrency, of course a key focus or principle is that of decentralization. This has positive implications and immense value since the current nature of the global economic system is one of all the power being highly centralized and concentrated in the hands of the few, e.g. central bankers.
Being participants in the blockchain and crypto industries, we are caught up in the zeitgeist of decentralization which is not a bad thing, but a couple things recently got me wondering about whether decentralization is always useful and more beneficial than something being centralized, or at the least whether there can be a balance between these poles.
These personal incidents were both to do with find and organize information. The first is, I was recently trying to gather info for an article I was writing for a community newsletter about potential dangers and negative impacts of 5G technology. What I realized is that, as someone who was trying to learn about and make sense of this topic enough to understand and write about it, I found there are hundreds of grassroots websites I had to sift through to find what I conceived as the best sources of information, or the most authoritative in terms of accuracy, credibility, etc. I think this is a consequence of how we cannot really rely on experts any longer, because we see that the so-called 'experts' are often people who abuse their authority to mislead or lie to the public and present false information. Because this is happening across the board in so many different domains, e.g. health, politics, education, etc. it is as though in order to really find the truth of anything we each have to become our own experts and authority on every subject, to the extent that we can. This presents obvious challenges as there is simply not enough time in the day, so at some point it seems we have to rely on our judgement of the source of information, but at the end of the day even this does not fully suffice if you really want to find out the truth of something you simply have to go the distance to understand it for yourself. I'm kind of rambling now, and realize this is getting pretty philosophical.
The other instance that get me wondering is sort of the inverse. I had a health issue a couple years ago, that because I found I could not rely on the medical establishment or doctors fully, I had to delve deep to learn everything I could about this situation. It is similar to the learning about 5G I described, in that I found I had to consult hundreds of sources in order to become my own authority on the subject. Because of that experience, I concluded it could be a great help to others dealing with the same health issue if I were to write an ebook to serve as a complete and comprehensive guide to all I had learned about the subject, since such a thorough guide does not yet exist or I would have found it. There is currently no single place one can go to in order to get all of the information I amassed, in one place. So really what I am seeking to do, is to centralize that information, as I think that not everyone has the luxury of spending the crazy amount of time I took to gather and make sense of all this info (it was not really a luxury I had either, but I was forced to do it for sake of my health and sanity). So what am I doing in creating that ebook if not centralization?
I haven't really contemplated it much further yet, but thought I'd pose the question here. Is there a place for centralization as well as decentralization? Is it good in some domains of life or technology to have a balance, or are there cases where one or the other is clearly superior? Or is it that people just need to be free to decide for themselves how to organize and could choose either? Really a very open question, so feel free to reframe or add to it. What are your thoughts?
Some form of centralization is good because it provides basic order and structure. It is only when a centralized authority decides to abuse it's position, that makes centralization seem nightmarish. Imagine if everything was decentralized, it would be chaotic with barely any structure. If you can hold an equilibrium of both, progress moves foward, boundaries get pushed, limits get set a little higher. |
|
|
|
Everyone in this world knows what is the meaning of love and it also involved in everyone's life from different relationship but what's your thought about the love.
They say there are a lot of definitions on what the word love could really mean. For some reason, Love seems subjective, it's actual meaning often varies depending on a person's point of view/ life experience. For a mother, it could be the joy of giving birth, to a father it may be seeing his son follow in his footsteps, etc. |
|
|
|
If Satoshi disappeared it is most likely because he has moved onto bigger and better projects. Being that this project has been a complete success, I'm sure Satoshi made other plans for the moment. He hasn't touched any of his share of Bitcoins, not a single satoshi So likely not important to him. Just a theory |
|
|
|
|
Libra could definitely shake some things up but I really doubt it would hinder cryptocurrency in anyway. By Intergrating a stable coin based cryptocurrency on to its platform, a mass adoption of cryptocurrencies might occur. All of these new people who have never before knew or rather experienced what Blockchain is or how Bitcoin works, could now potentially be educated on a large scale being that Facebook and it's partnerships like Instagram and WhatsApp altogether reach a generally global audience.
If Libra is currently being scrutinized by Congress, it's a good and a bad thing. It raises the awareness of crypto going mainstream but at the same time puts a lot of regulatory pressure on the scene being institutional investors are getting involved.
|
|
|
|
as we know that in 2017 many ICO were successful (at least reached softcap) and of course the market cap was also very high at the time, so it proves that many people are interested to investing in cryptocurrency, but now where do these investors go? because now the market cap is down and many ICO or IEO are failing (not reaching softcap), are investors no longer interested to investing in cryptocurrency? if yes, where are they investing now? or is there a more profitable investment than investing in cryptocurrency for now?
Disclaimer: " I am here to post an opinion. My opinion does not constitute legal or investment advice. I am not a financial advisory or lawyer. If seeking financial or legal advice please consult with your local professional." In 2017 Bitcoins historic run that led to the price being $20,000 was caused by a huge inflation that ended up popping as many knew that it would. Bitcoin in other crypto-currencies at the time weren't hindered by a bunch of regulatory bodies at the time. Everyone was really going all in. The Bubble was bound to burst, it was just a matter of time. Heavy market manipulation caused the price to soar. It may have been a Bitcoin whale or two shifting large amounts around. Also at the time, ICO's were thriving because the SEC hadn't really stepped in yet to give authoritative rule. The cryptocurrency market was like a wild west back then, the law was very gray, and still is now, but clearer guidance is rolling in slowly. The scene was ripe with money from fresh investors ready to take money out against their homes and their life savings. The scene was also filled to the brim with scams. The the governing bodies of finance stepped in and basically slowed ICO's movement down to a crawl. Just look at whats happening to Telegram and their TON token! The investors are still here but the legal waters aren't clear and are very murky, so people are treading with caution. The price won't inflate like it did in 2017 because it has been up to now self correcting from the previous bubble. |
|
|
|
My opinion is clear that if we've good knowledge about crypto time to time & reading formula to grow & get good results instead of gambling. I think so.
I wholeheartedly agree my friend. Even though the stock/crypto market is like taking a gambling, it is well worth the investment. It is much better for one to learn how to invest and trade on the open markets then to throw money at a casino game such as dice or roulette. one can actually learn in a short amount of time the basics fundamentals of investing but it takes a lot of time and practice to become a well seasoned trader. I made the terrible mistake of investing $1000 into day trading with no prior experience whatsoever, thinking I was Warren Buffet or something. Ending up losing the shirt off my back and am now down to $100. Lesson learned my friend.  If I had actual gambled at a casino, I could have lost it all in the same day instead of over a few months period like I did day trading on Binance. |
|
|
|
Read the full story: https://medium.com/@Forrestvisions/blockchain-technology-bottled-up-684935061270It is always good news to hear that companies are exploring the possibilities that blockchain technology can bring. Even if they are not using Bitcoin, it is still helping the community. I think some people are oftentimes looking into their own self-interest and thinking about the "profits" which is why Bitcoin is always the front of the conversation. However, some other good things are happening in the cryptocurrency space that doesn't offer an immediate investment. Thoughts? Well the Blockchain isn't just for Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies, it is a publicly distributed ledger. The old way of keeping ledgers is obsolete and it isn't distrubted, public, or transparent. Many companies even to this day still cook their books (ledgers) faking transactions and other data. With the Blockchain all the data is public and transparent. The Blockchain can't be altered like a regular ledger due to cryptography and timestamped transactions on a peer to peer network. Blocks are constantly updated so everyone in the network can have the same copy. |
|
|
|
This year was definitely the year for the regulatory bodies to start cracking down and issuing small amounts of guidance, so it's really not to anyone's surprise that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are starting to rise a little within the markets. I think and certainly hope that the bear goes away for a little while and we see more bull runs. With Mark Zuckerberg introducing the Libra platform, congress has no choice but to start considered the possibility of mass crypto adoption. |
|
|
|
We all know that ICO is an acronym that means Initial Coin Offering, which is how funds are raised for a new cryptocurrency offering. It is a fundraising mechanism in which new projects sell their underlying crypto tokens in exchange for bitcoin and ether. It’s somewhat similar to an Initial Public Offering (IPO) in which investors purchase shares of a company. ICOs are a relatively new phenomenon but have quickly become a dominant topic of discussion within the blockchain community. Many view ICO projects as unregulated securities that allow founders to raise an unjustified amount of capital, while others argue it is an innovation in the traditional venture-funding model. While, IEO's An initial exchange offering (IEO) allows companies to sell tokens to investors to raise capital. This makes them similar to initial coin offerings (ICOs), but there are a few key differences. It is a new approach to crypto-banking that is catching the attention of ICO investors around the world. IEOs can provide many benefits compared to ICOs. They offer greater security for users, improved transparency, bring about a fairer system that can benefit newcomers, and give users a sense that it is a reliable banking system.
ICO has been a buzzword for quite a few years now. IEO is one of the newer words that puts a different spin on an old thing. ICO stands for Initial Coin Offering and is the crypto version of an IPO which is condiered an Intial Public Offering. An IPO is a crowdfunding used in order to raise capitol for a company that aims to be a public traded enterprise. So, an ICO is the same thing but with cryptocurrency. An IEO is an Initial Exchange offering. The SEC which stands for The Securities & Exchange Commission has been cracking down on Initial Coin Offerings lately and so the IEO was born out of necessity. Bering that most big time exchanges are regulated with a KYC/AML ( know your customer/Anti-money laundering) policy, it makes investors feel a little bit safer and at ease knowing that a company has taken the necessary regulatory procedures by using a somewhat regulated and well known exchange. |
|
|
|
|
If I didn't know any better, I'd say this was a really desperate move. Whether or not is was a necessary one, only time will tell. I can almost guarantee all of Stellar's giveaway programs have ended with no plans to have any in the near future. At this point, Stellar seems to be quite obsolete, for one it is a very centralized platform like the Ripple. With news of China getting ready to create there own gold backed stable coins, the fear and uncertainty is definitely building. The desperation of centralized crypto-currencies like Stellar couldn't be any clearer.
|
|
|
|
China is the leading factor with Bitcoin mining. China plays a very important role in the bitcoin mining ecosystem, has always have. In the last month, China accounts for around 80% of all mined bitcoins. The country offers several advantages to bitcoin miners like centralized mining operations. There were many fears early in Bitcoins beginning that China would initiate a 51% attack which would have destroyed Bitcoin. I still don't think it has happened to this day. China also has a supply of cheap electricity, hydro-power and coal production. Source: https://www.investopedia.com/news/china-intensifies-crackdown-bitcoin-mining/ |
|
|
|
In the field of blockchain and cryptocurrency, of course a key focus or principle is that of decentralization. This has positive implications and immense value since the current nature of the global economic system is one of all the power being highly centralized and concentrated in the hands of the few, e.g. central bankers.
Being participants in the blockchain and crypto industries, we are caught up in the zeitgeist of decentralization which is not a bad thing, but a couple things recently got me wondering about whether decentralization is always useful and more beneficial than something being centralized, or at the least whether there can be a balance between these poles.
These personal incidents were both to do with find and organize information. The first is, I was recently trying to gather info for an article I was writing for a community newsletter about potential dangers and negative impacts of 5G technology. What I realized is that, as someone who was trying to learn about and make sense of this topic enough to understand and write about it, I found there are hundreds of grassroots websites I had to sift through to find what I conceived as the best sources of information, or the most authoritative in terms of accuracy, credibility, etc. I think this is a consequence of how we cannot really rely on experts any longer, because we see that the so-called 'experts' are often people who abuse their authority to mislead or lie to the public and present false information. Because this is happening across the board in so many different domains, e.g. health, politics, education, etc. it is as though in order to really find the truth of anything we each have to become our own experts and authority on every subject, to the extent that we can. This presents obvious challenges as there is simply not enough time in the day, so at some point it seems we have to rely on our judgement of the source of information, but at the end of the day even this does not fully suffice if you really want to find out the truth of something you simply have to go the distance to understand it for yourself. I'm kind of rambling now, and realize this is getting pretty philosophical.
The other instance that get me wondering is sort of the inverse. I had a health issue a couple years ago, that because I found I could not rely on the medical establishment or doctors fully, I had to delve deep to learn everything I could about this situation. It is similar to the learning about 5G I described, in that I found I had to consult hundreds of sources in order to become my own authority on the subject. Because of that experience, I concluded it could be a great help to others dealing with the same health issue if I were to write an ebook to serve as a complete and comprehensive guide to all I had learned about the subject, since such a thorough guide does not yet exist or I would have found it. There is currently no single place one can go to in order to get all of the information I amassed, in one place. So really what I am seeking to do, is to centralize that information, as I think that not everyone has the luxury of spending the crazy amount of time I took to gather and make sense of all this info (it was not really a luxury I had either, but I was forced to do it for sake of my health and sanity). So what am I doing in creating that ebook if not centralization?
I haven't really contemplated it much further yet, but thought I'd pose the question here. Is there a place for centralization as well as decentralization? Is it good in some domains of life or technology to have a balance, or are there cases where one or the other is clearly superior? Or is it that people just need to be free to decide for themselves how to organize and could choose either? Really a very open question, so feel free to reframe or add to it. What are your thoughts?
Wow, excellent post, I am a strong believer in the ancient Chinese philosophy of the "TAO", an ancient belief that life is divided between a duality of sorts. A principle that in short provides a basic understanding of the universe. In this belief, it is thought that the universe is comprised of dual principles, that being, the Yin and the Yang. It could also be interpreted as good and evil, positive and negative, light and dark, etc. In other words, everything in existence has an existential polar opposite. So to answer your question, yes, I personally believe that to much decentralization is a terrible thing. Order without freedom is tyranny & freedom without order is anarchy. So, to much "decentralization" is anarchy, while to much centralization (order) is tyranny. So, I believe that in the pecking order of life, there must be an equal balance of both. I think that if Bitcoin (decentralized) weren't able to be converted to fiat (centralized), it would fall flat on it's face. Instead there needs to be a natural balance and co-existence of both. " Just a theory of mine, please take it with a grain of salt." Just my two cents brother/sister/whatever  |
|
|
|
What do you think?
For the sake of remaining optimistic, let's hope so brother, but realistically the price is unpredictable. I'm not saying that it won't moon, theres good reason to believe that at Bitcoins current trajectory it could very well make it past the $10,000 mark. John McAfee seems to believe that the price will jump to $1,000,000 by 2020 |
|
|
|
To all bounty hunters on this wonderful forum i want to know if its advisable to continue with the bounty you have been promoting for 12weeks that got extra 8weeks added more, have you promote projects this long that ends up with good end results? Thank you
Sure, when IOST (similar to EOS & TRON) extended there campaign I wasn't sure whether or not to continue or move onto an entirely new project because at the time the tokens really weren't worth much, but after some due dillgence it was decided that this coin hasn't even launched its mainnet yet, so I decided to rejoin the campaign in hope's of acquiring more tokens, unfortunately I wasn't selected. Now the coin is starting to make a turn around and I'm glad I participated at all. Whenever a bounty campaign decides to extend its initial bounty campaign, it's up to the participants to decide whether or not it is a worthy investment. So always remember to practice your due dillgence first before reinvesting any time and energy into a campaign! |
|
|
|
All the talks this week are all about China launching its own coin, they can easily do that because China's main man Xi Jinping is the one who wants China to create one, while Facebook's Libra coin is having a hard time to convince the Congress to let them launch Libra Coin,
It's different between the two coins, one will launch easily while the other is having a hard time with the regulator
On a positive note, I think China's plan will be considered of those who are opposing Facebook plans to launch their coin but of course, it
will be highly regulated compared to China's coin who will be under the supervision of China's Central bank.
What's your thought on this?
My thoughts are that Xi Jinping is General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, while Mr. Mark Zuckerberg is Facebook's founder and current chairman. The difference is Mark is just a regular Joe who started and works for a company while Xi is a general. The differences are staggering. You have a member of China's communist party who's opinion holds heavy weight, vs a regular capitalist, who's opinion doesn't hold much weight by itself on government issues, hence why he went ton Congress first to receive their opinions on his Libra platform. |
|
|
|
hello everyone
I have came to think of something reasonable about some projects, today everyone just wakeup to create his project and introduced it to btt just for people to suffer and promote probably at last the project will not succeed and they will foldup why? everywhere and there having much projects trooping in the forum today but few succeeds.
today, tomorrow, next tomorrow came up with all such of tokens, or could it be they want to build their social media groups and pages then they will come create fuck token and disbursed to the people whose manage to follow them on their media page and at last such token has no value in the market. they will even stole some other project websites just to boost their pages. this is improper... We hear scam and thief everywhere due to not have a proper documentations about the ventures.
I think earlier 2010 to 2015 there were no scam project even if there's, is just 1% but now is +-50%
to me this are the interest of those fake project.
1. they want to boost their facebook page
2. they want to boost their twitter page
3. LinkedIn page
4. YouTube, ETC
my Questions
Is there no other ways BTT can track and trace such people posting such project the in the forum?
Is there no way we can run free and fair project in the system without us being scammed or tricked?
Let me rest my case here and I would like the elders of this forum to into this
drop your comment
A lot of projects are posted here on the Bitcointalk forums within the "Announcements" boards. There are many reasons why projects end up failing or succeeding. One of the reasons many projects fail is because lack of funding, due to either failed promotion, lack of any really innovation compared to other projects, or little to no transparency. Then you have the scam projects who exit as soon as they gather enough funds. The biggest reason I believe comes from legal uncertainties. The SEC has really been clamping down on ICO's due to potential securities violations for projects who fail to register. Look how much scrutiny that Telegram is facing for selling "TON" tokens. The SEC stopped them in their tracks! |
|
|
|
The United Kingdom’s tax, payments and customs authority, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC), has updated its cryptocurrency taxation guidelines for businesses and individuals. On Nov. 1, the U.K. government tax agency, which manages taxes alongside other financial policies, released tax guidance updates that further clarify its stance on how businesses and individuals involved with cryptocurrency will be taxed. Read more HERE In the United States, cryptocurrency is treated like a commodity or property type of asset. You have to pay capital gains or regular income tax depending on whether your assets are investment income or earned income. A few months ago they had finally released a real guidance for cryptocurrencies whereas people had been waiting forever for some type of leadway on how to navigate correctly. All that is left is for the S.E.C to work with the people on issuing clearer guidance than just telling people to do a Howey test in order to determine whether or not a coin/token is a security. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
