The three lined represent three different efficiencies of miners.

More efficient miners are more expensive because they use less power (so are cheaper to run). You'd generally not replace old hardware if it's profitible until you have to or use the components of old hardware to replace the components of new hardware (in cases where there's compatibilities and it doesn't involve the actual mining chips - such as the fan or the case).

It's hard to compare them with the other charts as they only have 2 years of data for the other charts. From my experience, miners go up in price around the halving (when price goes up and there's a reason for it, and they'll normally keep going up until they can't anymore - such as miners not expecting to be paid back and impulse buyers disappearing). I've seen mining firms release a new miner, put a big price on it and drop the price if they don't all sell within the time they expected.

There were probably more topics that should've been allowed to be created (although I don't know how many stayed up, there seemed to be quite a lot though - I counted 8 on the first page of gambling discussion and two looked fairly closely related). Normally if it's expected to be a problem for mods, they'd have made a megathread for it already and merged topics.

The 14 days is probably about right but they might've found something else to discussed between now and then anyway and their discussions might already be gone.

Tokeweed or jollygood's topics will probably survive better than that after world cup thread you linked at maintaining discussion though too (I didn't look far to find them, if there was a more general one I missed).

Investments seem to have started to lose some of the fundamentals but I think the trends of a lot of major companies still go in similar ways. I pick about 8 companies to invest in over the year (normally 4 in the first half and 4 in the latter) so I don't watch much in the way of individual stock moves.

It would seem like the stock exchanges open to "regular" traders do try to push lists like "biggest gainers", "biggest losers", "most volatility"... But these have probably always been a thing, the difference now might be the factor of leverage and the amount of people that have the time to chase these stocks (and, potentially, the amount of money too).

There's enough people not happy to agree on a race draw before the race has started for the hope they can win - you're probably going to face similar things with leverage day traders that have no clue on what they're doing and are just testing out a strategy (a few make money, most don't).

Most big fundamentals still hold true such as value investing and investing in the team/employees.

I wonder how much of an argument this is against things like funding wealthy people who don't need to projects (like billionaires buying farmland) or just general incompetence. It'd seam realistic to use rain water capturing systems to fill reservoirs or containers near the farms (likely underground) to provide these services and probably wouldn't be too expensive - but then you can't extort money from them on a regular basis like you could with a limited water supply.

Desalination might be an unnecessary step for agricultural usage too. I don't think there's going to be much of an issue with water being limited - it's more one of countries not being able to provide the relevant facilities for it in which case citizens should start voting with their feet.

It also seems like a lot of politicians discussing agriculture don't know there's a finite amount of food that can be grown and them limiting it makes for heavy reliance on external economies - either that or they've corrupted the external economies and know they'll get the resources they want. But if it's the first I could see it ending in a food crisis, perhaps not soon but it might come. A lot of countries have stepped away from giving agricultural grants/assurances for free now already too (and I don't know if insurance firms are able to replace them, or are as reliable).

Why not just buy a motor/generator to do this? They may be as efficient as it gets and if they're not it'll be easier and more efficient to improve individual parts than it would to build your own from scratch.

As said above, you also need a reason this can be used and what you're aiming to make. You've not said how big the motor or generator your expect to make is? Could it be used to charge a phone battery? An electric car? A house?

I like the idea of a CBDC reflecting on the economy of a country too. Taking your locked system but combining it with the idea that £6k/$8k is enough to invest as a child to retire off (similar to how state pension works in the UK).

I think a system like that could be achieved for a CBDC and might make companies think twice about making too many foreign investments if they can profit themselves by negotiating for the initial company to franchise or decentralise itself.

A CBDC that matches the wealth of an economy would also bring a surprise to how valuable certain countries were or how they are perceived.

Obviously a deflationary amount of coins could then also be minted every year to give people an incentive to keep working and not rely on the money they already have in the CBDC if they use it more like a financial cushion.

I don't think they become obselete I see a lot of them cycle from being easy to implement and highly profitible to being harder to implement and bad for making profits.

One trading strategy can work in every market environments for predictions, the issue is trying to make a profit from it and what becomes more infeasible and impractical.

If you're trading a market with a lot of day traders, you need to second guess them quite a bit too - or stay out and watch the market - because if you're all trading the same strategy, you're all losing. If you're day trading in markets with lots of investors or regular traders (bull markets and forex) you don't have to do this as much as the volume of most of the day traders and speculators is insignificant compared to those that just need to quickly move things around.

I'd guess the possibility chatgpts bot was getting onto was an idea that miners would "hate" and try to orphan blocks that were mined with transactions they wanted to censor - this would be possible at 50% hashing power and would be stabler (/more effective) the higher it got.

Realistically, you're not doing that without killing the network off in some way (as you've proved it's pretty insecure). It'd take a huge budget to pull off something on that scale though.

---

It's more likely certain miners would just choose to not include transactions they don't like and leave the rest to be mined by someone else as mentioned above.

There will be problems with any system that gets implemented. The use of an app and cryptocurrency though may force them to use/pay for Internet though too but it might reach further than cash and be about a similar complexity to corrupt.

I have no idea how Ukrainians are living in relation to things like mortgages, rent and utility payments but I'd assume they'd become more relaxed if the resident doesn't have the money to pay. Also the amount given in usdc might be considered by refugees as more of a bonus as those displaced in Ukraine will likely already be receiving some sort of pay from the government, those displaced into other countries within Europe will also receive funds to live and a lot.might already have jobs or businesses (I saw a stat that said more businesses in Poland were owned by Ukrainians than Polish people - if this was misread from "created in the 6 months since the war" then that still sounds positive)..

What chains? What time interval for data and how are you already representing it?

ALL of the monetisation imo will come from what you can make of the data (like in most cases).

You may be able to program something with machine learning that's able to turn the data into something useful (such as trading analysis or on-chain user tracking).

You might also be able to make charts or a website that contains information that could be useful (especially if you can get realtime updates).

Sites that already exist in this sort of area include: block explorers, chainalysis and tools like the fear and greed index (bitcoin - there are ones of these for stocks too).

Bitcoin core was the original bitcoin client. It remains the most common full node implementation (meaning the helps the network by storing the blockchain - a database containing every transaction that's been mined on the network).

Escrow is what's done during trading to protect both sides of the trade. An escrow is middleman who keeps track of where the transaction is at to reduce the chances of one side being scammed (they're usually someone more experienced and/or more reputable).

You're confusing fission with fusion. They're two very different things (almost opposites).

Fission produces toxic waste because the way it's produced in the US and UK leaves it with toxic waste. Repeated reactions are possible and done in other countries which greatly reduces the amount of nuclear waste there is.

Fossil fuels aren't here to stay. They either keep being used and countries go chasing after the money they lose from the effects of global climate change or countries switch to greener solutions. Energy storage is a thing and a lot of renewable sources are available together (so if wind production is low, solar works).

Fossil might have been here to stay when it was cheaper than renewables, now it's 4x the price!

The algorithms that underpin the security (/"trust") of bitcoin are proven to be secure in all of their use cases individually on the Internet too.

HashCash (where the proof of work algorithm is derived) is used by companies like cloudflare to keep websites resilient to spam attacks. Hashing itself we know is resilient because every well stored password is stored in hashed form in a database.

Digital certificates use signing algorithms similar to bitcoin, the algorithm used for bitcoin was put out to replace rsa and other less secure algorithms at the time though as rsa keys were huge (I wasn't around then to know the competitors but assumed this was the case).

The hashing done with bitcoin is with billions of machines and they still only find a block every 10 minutes.

We're only able to theoretically test how quantum proof hashing is but no formula has been found to derive that and there likely isn't one that can do it faster than can already be done on a binary machine.

Is there a chance it'll allow the network to remain more secure after that in case price doesn't rise to compensate for it.

If a lot of people have cheap electricity (or it's dealt like similar to water and people pay flat rates regardless of how much they use, surely that'll bring something useful to the network in the form of people not having to shut down miners due to electricity rates).

---

This might move as quickly or slowly as investment allows it's possible it'll be doable in about 5 years to a decade of there's a lot of investment in it, but if there isn't we're looking at it taking decades- centuries to do.

Adding to the above, bc1p is multisig iirc.


Was there any other question? I read the link and found "1" is excluded from the address because it's excluded from base58 - that was done for readability I think as "o" was also removed.

Also blockchain explorers not picking up new addresses is because their developers are lazy. 5 years down the line and they've still not worked out how to do it...

I watched a debate a few months back between a teacher and a politician (I think) on whether trans people should be respected for the gender they wish to express as. I noticed both sides of the argument were awful because neither of them were knew the subject matter (neither had studied it well, neither were doctors or someone in a profession to know). I did not get those three minutes back and my opinion didn't change.

The same should be the case here. If you're listening to an actor over whether to invest in crypto or not, you're definitely listening to the wrong person for making your financial decisions. There's enough creatives I've known to be paid a royalty after producing something so much that regardless of how niche it is they've no need to make investments.

Unless I missed it, I'm surprised I had to scroll so far for this question to be asked.

---

@OP, for both security and amount of coins that are available in one wallet, hardware is probably ultimately the best option (Trezor or Ledger should both work fine with android).

If you don't want to go down the route of using hardware, most of the suggestions above are good - each have their flaws though (especially in the scope of currencies they offer) which might be a drawback for you.


They're used A LOT, especially by newbies so they're lucrative for an attacker to hack.
They're also closed source which means the wallet is developed by one central team and only they have access to the code. Wallets like electrum and bitcoin core do well because anyone can see their code, and, if they find a bug can report it and most can even trace where the error might be in the code allowing a developer of the project just to change it as it's reported.

Most malicious problems found in any software are generally patched within a week or so (for closed source projects) or a few minutes-hours (for open source projects) so a lot of attackers try to sell vulnerabilities and execute them close together to try to increase the number of devices they can target before it's patched.

I'd guess he'll at least end up serving over 30 years in prison if it proves he was complicit in the whole thing - and since he leant himself/stole $1bn+ as ftx went insolvent, that could be likely.

I don't know what repeating "ftx us remains solvent" says to anyone except "we knew what we did and want to know what happens if we don't affect the US". If funds weren't insured separately, payouts might have to be done based on all creditors too.

Perhaps he also thought his location made him untouchable enough by US authorities.

Reuters seem to believe that a lot of funds were lost because alameda couldn't have their positions be liquidated on ftx if they got margin called - which sounds like something a lot of people would have to know.

The UK made a system like this illegal for credit and debit cards recently (with decent reasons imo). Companies used to be able to charge a flat fee whenever anyone used a card over using cash, it meant a 2% fee the business would have been paying turned into a 10-20% fee for the consumer.

Offering and advertising a discount is probably better than offing cashback but it works about the same way. Bitcoin has more protections for the seller than credit cards do (less risk of charge backs that cost the seller).

I think this thread has popped up quite a bit before if you fancy searching for other times it's been discussed, you might also find places that offer discounts for buying things in btc.

It's probably becoming more and more viable as btc price rises for the council to actually try to get it - if it's possible and if they can reduce the chances of toxic gasses being released into the environment and waste contaminating the waters and then actually find the drive which will probably all remain extremely unlikely.

There's so mamy reasons the data on the hard drive may be destroyed though (especially if electrical or magnetic contamination are likely).