Was the creator of bitcoin suggesting that online custodial wallets were a good alternative, especially for smaller amounts?
This was in the days when light wallets were non-existent or in very early stages, so user experience was far from great. Even things like seed phrases didn't exist back then, so you had to back up your wallet file, and if you happened to receive coins, you had to backup again, if a wallet wasn't deterministic. So, at that time, using custodial wallet greatly simplified user experience. These days, it's not the case, except maybe for Lightning, where custodial wallets are again a bit simpler to use, and it's not such big of a risk if you deal with pocket money. |
|
|
|
The main one I think about is custody - generating and securely and conveniently storing key/address pairs - could be improved for the average person. As in it shouldn't require someone significant research to figure out how to make a key/address pair and not lose it while keeping it secure.
It feels like wallets still assume that their users are some sort of power users/tech geeks/programmers who are familiar with at least basics of cryptography. For example, when you make a new Electrum wallet, it just says "this 12 words can be used to recover your wallet, don't disclose them to anyone". What should have been done instead is a warning IN BIG RED LETTERS that your coins will be lost forever if you lose this phrase on accident or if it gets stolen. This warning should be supplemented with links to good educational resources about crypto security. Electrum asks to retype the seed, but it's not enough - there should be also a checkbox, again with big letters for acknowledging that the user understands their responsibility. Would it be annoying? Yes, but it's worth it if it will prevent some people from being careless. |
|
|
|
The social phenomenon of poor people pretending to be rich is way too rare to have any influence on other things, like Bitcoin. What you're asking is if Bitcoin is a status symbol, and it's obviously not - you can own even tiny pieces worth less than $1. You can't show it off, if you'd tried to post a Bitcoin signed message on social media, no one would understand what it means. What is gonna happen once the post-apocalyptic scenarios come true? When/if there will be no electricity, computers, phones, etc.? People will value no US Dollar backed by state promise to pay off debt… your decentralized piece of code will not exist anymore (I do know about some offline-friendly cryptocurrencies)… only gold or natural resources will become valuable again.
Who cares about post-apocalyptic scenarios, if they would actually happen, 99% of us will be instantly dead. |
|
|
|
OP, it’s too risky to use online method to generate private key for paper wallet as it can be stolen through some spy in the website. You should generate private key through offline method only.
Simply being offline does not solve all security problems. If you just turn off your Internet connection, that's nearly useless, because keyloggers would report back to their servers as soon as they will get a chance. And even airgaps don't protect you from malicious wallets. You need to understand that you're putting your trust in whatever method you choose to generate your private keys, and the best way to put your trust is to use open-source projects with decent community, because you're not just trusting developers, you're also trusting hundreds if not thousands of users who verified the codebase, so the chance of malicious code is very low. |
|
|
|
Satoshi was right, we can assume bitcoin as a collectible or commodity if we compare it with stocks that have dividends. The commodity isn't always meant to be consumable, you can't consume gold but it is a commodity, commodity is a useful or valuable thing. In economics, a commodity is an economic good that has full or substantial fungibility; that is, the market treats instances of the good as equivalent or nearly so with no regard to who produced them. The price of a commodity good is typically determined as a function of its market as a whole. sourceCollectibles: May have aesthetic or emotional value but derives its pricing from its scarcity (supply) and the perception of others that it is wanted. sourceHowever, bitcoin meant to be an alternative payment method، as a means of payment, as a medium of exchange, in short as a currency. You absolutely can consume gold, it's used in electronics, jewelry, chemical industry and other fields. The definition of commodity as "anything that can be traded" is so broad that it is useless. Bitcoin is not a commodity, because it has no uses other than being money. If you argue that Bitcoin is a commodity, then US dollar is a commodity too. Bitcoin is not a collectible, because it doesn't have any "aesthetic or emotional value". It's just a bunch of bits in a decentralized database. |
|
|
|
I know a couple people who program their own bots. For pure price action traders, that route is way easier because the logic is so easy. Mostly just stop buys, stop sells and take profits, based on pivot or candlestick breakouts or failures.
A friend once advised me never to run a bot unless you program it yourself. He strongly believes customers of generic turnkey bots like Gunbot are just cannibalizing each other for extremely low margins.
I also think most people running bots like that don't even know how to trade, and that's the biggest pitfall. You need to constantly tweak your parameters in reaction to the market trend and volatility to be a successful bot trader. That requires an intimate understanding of markets and technical analysis.
In other words, I believe you need to be a successful trader before you can be a successful bot trader. There are no bots where you can press a button and print money. That's just not how it works.
Employing neural networks sounds interesting, but the level of complexity involved makes my brain hurt.
Well, the point of neural network is that it doesn't know anything about the details of what it processes, so the programmer doesn't need to know anything about it either. But making a neural network is indeed challenging, I tried it myself in other fields and got no results, and it takes a lot of studying, and some good math background also helps. |
|
|
|
|
Wouldn't a neural network be better suited to be a technical analyst than any human? Technical analysis tells us that the market is full of patterns and it's only a matter of recognizing them, and neural networks are exceptionally good at recognizing patterns if you just feed them the data. How well do the trading bots actually perform compared to humans? Is it worth trying to train a bot yourself, or is it too complicated for someone without a strong background in neural networks?
|
|
|
|
|
The problem with privacycoins is that governments really don't like them, they already started demanding from exchanges to delist them, and maybe in the future privacycoins will be so strongly associated with cybercrime, that no legitimate business would want to use them, because it would only bring suspicion to them. This is not to say that privacycoins are inherently evil, but they are getting a bad reputation rather quickly. So, in this scenario, Pornhub and other sites might drop them in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
We don't need any more motivation and beaten to death generic advice for newbies like "make quality posts and earn merit". It's better to not talk about merit, as it's just an imaginary internet points, but if you choose to, at least make something novel - explain in detail what makes a post useful, why some people earned thousands of merit while others earned none, talk about earning merit on different boards and so on.
|
|
|
|
There is one about blockchain which can be possibly used by citizens to have a small-scale production of renewable energy. I was actually shocked to know that because I only hear blockchain when the topics involve crypto. I didn't know that it could be used that way. Well, that just shows that nothing is impossible and blockchain is no exception.
That's just some scam, blockchain has nothing to do with renewable energy. Ever since ICO became a thing, scammers were creating "projects" with all sorts of applications - VR, gaming, medical records, renewable energy, now they even do something about covid, but guess what, it's always the same - just a whitepaper with technobabble and nothing more - no one is spending not a second of their time to develop any of that crap. |
|
|
|
this is just my opinion....that most old coins are not worth for the long term as they depreciate in price over time. Only Bitcoin and Ethereum are the exception, since they're still one of the most popular coins in the mainstream world. It's best to "hodl" these coins alongside new ones with active development and innovation, in order to prevent many undesired losses in the future.
If you look at Bitcoin prices of altcoins, they aren't doing great in the long term. ETH had an ATH of more than 0.12 BTC, now it's stuck in 0.03 BTC zone, while Bitcoin keeps showing great performance. So, if you take huge risk that they can start crashing, without getting much benefits, because they perform worse than Bitcoin. Right now, there are many old coins that are still alive. But they're often "under the radar" as people are mostly focused on profits rather than utility. There are many good coins like Namecoin and Primecoin, each with their unique features in the crypto/Blockchain space. AFAIK, there are no other coins like Primecoin with an innovative PoW consensus algorithm based on prime numbers. It helps our society with the discovery of prime numbers, putting PoW's "energy consumption" to good use.
Finding primes isn't super useful, and it's a pretty bad thing for a PoW algorithm - if one day someone will discover a faster way to solve this problem, pehaps with quantum computers, then they would able to hijack the mining. By using hash functions you at least get cryptographic guarantees of their security. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is available to everyone, so how can we stop/reduce the misuse of cryptocurrency?
This is the price of freedom, you either give it to everyone or to no one. There's no way to prevent or track the criminal use of Bitcoin in a way that wouldn't hurt all users. Even now we have chainanalysis companies that claim to fight crime, but really they provide their services to anyone who is paying to them, which often includes governments who conduct mass surveillance. Governments are actually much more scary than criminals, you have a very low chance of encountering criminals, but governments are already spying on you. |
|
|
|
|
You don't need to defend it to the death, whatever that means, just running a full node and talking about Bitcoin's advantages to your friends is more than enough. Bitcoin is not relying on its supporters defending it, if it was, it would have been a pretty poor design, because pure belief is hard to achieve and maintain, which is why Bitcoin uses economic incentives to function - you don't need to defend Bitcoin from a 51% attack, for example, miners will do it because staying honest is simply the best strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
This isn't even a good idea from a point of view of investing, because there is a chance that it will go far above that, so it's always good to own at least some Bitcoin. This is what I actually plan to do - I want to sell 50-80% of my coins during this bull run, but still keep the rest and only sell them if the price will reach $250k or higher.
But I could totally live without Bitcoin, there are other stores of value - physical gold, offshore bank accounts. But I'd rather park my money somewhere where they will make profit - real estate or stocks most likely.
|
|
|
|
The cost shouldn't be a problem, it's cheaper for governments to buy a vaccine rather than deal with unemployment and the fall of their economy. I've heard that there's currently not enough vaccine for some developing countries, but hopefully it will be fixed with international aid if necessary. You can trace the fear of people to its possible effect. There are people interviewed who really do not want to get vaccinated out of fear. Even me, I have doubt on this vaccine after what happened to the Dengvaxia vaccine which caused the deaths of some children's here in our country.
This is just the result of antivax conspiracy theories that are being pushed by manufacturers of homeopathic, herbal and other crap "remedies". |
|
|
|
|
There's no such thing as "success" for altcoins, there's just a couple of altcoins that can be considered not total failures, like Ethereum or Monero. The rest is just garbage, no one uses them, no one will use them, the fact that their price have increased since their release is irrelevant, because eventually it will fall to zero. The world doesn't need even these hundreds and thousands of cryptocurrencies, so they are just bound to die at some point.
|
|
|
|
Most likely, this is due to the fact that even those trillions of printed money went not just under the pillow and into the pockets and went straight into circulation - the reception is very confident. Buying food, medicine, salaries, utilities, and so on.
Inflation is more pronounced if the growth of the money supply is accompanied by universal accumulation, but now we see that the money received immediately goes to the market and diverges through it. Rather, we can even say that for the market of ordinary consumer goods, printing money this year worked like an adrenaline shot-it stimulated demand and at the same time did not give free rein to the wild inflation that everyone expected.
If new money went for buying consumer goods, it would have increased their prices if the demand was increased, but if things like stimulus checks only helped to offset the loss of demand due to unemployment, then of course inflation isn't so big. Another possible scenario is that a lot of printed money went to companies who used it on things like buying their stock, so it won't have much effect on consumer goods. But the US dollar dropped against other currencies, so you can't say that money printing had no negative effects - they're just not too noticeable for an average American yet. |
|
|
|
Yep. A easy red flag for those kinds of users(though not literally everyone, of course) are those with 250/500/1000 flat merits. Those who were early enough to be lucky to receive the merit airdrop, but never ever received an sMerit lol. What's funny is that a good number of those kinds of users were already here since around 2013; pretty much almost a decade of activity here but yet you don't see any improvement from them. It's mind boggling!
This is why I made a script for displaying earned merit, and now when I want to quickly scroll through a big topic and see if there's any good posts, I simply disregard anyone with a big gap between earned and total merit. I think gradually reducing the so-called airdropped merit and ranking down people who fail to meet the requirements would have helped a little bit with spam, because campaign mangers would only be able to enroll Hero/Legendary members who actually earned a lot of merit and are probably not shitposters. |
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't call Bitcoin a commodity, commodities are meant to be consumable, and Bitcoin is obviously not. Collectibles are valuable because of their extreme rarity, and Bitcoin is not that rare - up to 21 million coins, and 100 million times more satoshis. I don't think that Bitcoin is all that different from fiat money - they are both valuable because people believe in their value, while inherently they have no uses beyond monetary. The key difference is that fiat's supply is created in a centralized way, and now with the shift towards digital payments, the payments are also processed in a centralized way too.
|
|
|
|
It started off as a project that would enable the regular guy with a modest pc to mine BTC, now you need a huge farm to be able to mine effectively.
Satoshi himself admitted that mining would eventually be done by big mining farms. Heavily decentralized mining was never a major goal of Bitcoin's protocol. Bitcoin is getting further and further away from the guy in the street, and is now some rich hedgefunds 1% elite plaything.
How it's their plaything? They don't control the price or the network, they are just investors like the others. Bitcoin does not prohibit "the elites" from owning it. What is the future of Bitcoin in your view, will it render itself useless and be taken over/killed by a better suited cryptoproject, or are we stuck with it??
How can it be replaced by any altcoin if those altcoins have even less adoption? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
