An application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) is an integrated circuit (IC) customized for a particular use, rather than intended for general-purpose use. So basically, Bitcoin ASIC miners are specifically designed to perform a single task, mine Bitcoin (or any other coin that uses the exact same algorithm, mining parameters). So no, they cannot be put to use for any other purpose, maybe as a room heater.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application-specific_integrated_circuit

https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/7236/bitcoin-mining-asics-used-for-cryptographic-application-rainbow-tables

There is a simple reason behind this disparity, compare any exchange rates, you will find a difference, every exchange has its own market that decides the price of a particular trading pair. Fee structure, volume/liquidity affects the price, basically arbitrage. As far as Binace/GDax is concerned, it might not only because of the above factors, but maybe also due to, Binance is a crypto-only exchange, it's USDT, not USD.

http://forex.gg/money/exchanges/compare/binance~gdax

I had used CoinMedia in the past, at that time their fill rate was low and CPM wasn't as competitive as Mellowads or Coinzilla. Maybe they do pay more for non-faucet websites with quality traffic, but there have been many instances of scam accusations against them, delayed payouts, and stats not updating. If Coinad approved your website then apply for Cointraffic or you can also try Bitcoadz, PPCAdmedia, or Bitvertise. If not a faucet, why not use AdSense? Better alternative than any Bitcoin ad network.

You have published the same content on your Steemit page. Basic general information regarding cryptocurrencies are readily available and there are many blogs that are filled with hundreds of referral links on crypto-related earning opportunities, mostly spam with no real content and traffic. If you want to get some genuine traffic and build an audience to get some referrals then publishing about latest crypto related news/events/ICOs would be good for a start, also reviewing websites and adding a few additional sections. A bit time consuming, but IMO it would be worth more than publishing on Steemit.

I don't think there are any Bitcoin ad networks that aren't faucet-centered. Although Bitmedia do accept faucets, compared to other networks, they do have a strict publisher policy, approving websites with high quality traffic only. Their rates are also good. Cointraffic do also accept websites with quality content over faucets. Mellowads, A-ads, and Coinzilla are mostly restricted to faucet traffic, but CoinAd do have a high CPM/CPC.

Apart from technology, I always liked the ideology behind Bitcoin, a system that was specifically designed to provide an alternative to the existing flawed monetary system, to take the banking sector head on, to help repressed economies. Commercialization wasn't the motive, neither the price was a criteria, but look now how frequently Bitcoin forks are popping up, how the market is getting driven more by greed and FOMO, how predictions are made about Bitcoin hitting $1M, how plans are made to buy Lambos with the profit. So basically the whole thing has come down to price rather than value. Investing into Bitcoin for own financial self-interest is good, but when the majority follows this pattern, Bitcoin would lose the purpose for why it was created in the first place. Roger Ver said in 2013:


And this same guy is manipulating and pumping the hell out of his altcoin. Imagine, if the early adopters of Bitcoin and the ones who are into Bitcoin now started manipulating it for their own personal gain, quite possible, might be happening. It would limit Bitcoins usage. A large scale adoption will make the market less susceptible to manipulation and profit-seeking behavior. All this infighting and drama is affecting adoption. IMO the real Bitcoin (not about Core vs Ver or Bitcoin vs Bitcoin Cash) is the one that wouldn't only make a few financially independent, but having a disruptive economical impact which would not only empower a good number of the world population, but would also establish their trust and faith in a decentralized system.

Look at their homepage, just another scam HYIP/Bitcoin doubler site. Nothing to do with borrowing or lending.


It is an obvious scam.

Not sure about banks going extinct, but Blockchain/cryptocurrencies can be the most effect tool to increase economic freedom.

1. Limited government involvement/low regulation.
2. Sound money.
3. Property rights.
3. Freedom to trade.
4. Freedom from corruption.
5. Financial/monetary freedom.
6. Business/labor freedom.

The most positive outcome of economic freedom is reduction in poverty, providing equal and better income opportunities to the poor. Decentralized, unbanked, remittances, no intermediaries, participating in the economy/global economy without any restriction, ICOs are changing the way how startups raise money/irrespective of country or anything else, anyone with a solid idea/business model would have the freedom to implement their idea.

Different Blockchain projects, different applications, different cryptos, different purposes, but overall I think the real impact of Blockchain would initially be seen on developing nations, especially African and Asian and from that we can hope that it increases the economic freedom of the world.

Recently an anonymous (Pine) early Bitcoin adopter announced that he would be donating 5057 Bitcoin to charitable causes. Psychedelic research, mental health, environmental conservation, fighting domestic violence and sexual abuse, and technology-related causes. As Bitcoin prices are increasing more and more people are donating it for humanitarian causes. Bitcoin can empower around 2.5 billion who are unbanked and give economic freedom to them, but still the unequal wealth distribution that exists because of flawed and biased centralized policies isn't going to be eliminated by Bitcoin or decentralization only, but maybe in future by some interesting Blockchain startups.

Bitcoin's primary function as a currency is the reason it got adopted in the beginning, but if you look at the last few years, the adoption/speculation is purely based on Bitcoins utility as a store of value, its secondary function. Currently investors are just looking at the secondary function, they just want to own Bitcoin, not spend it. Bitcoin is a better currency than fiat, but it's not going to replace it and right now the market sentiment isn't centered around Bitcoin as an alternative currency, but to store wealth.


IMO, in the long-term, without being a peer-to-peer payment system, store of value isn't going to be enough, but in the short-term, Bitcoin functioning as a store of value is not only necessary for adoption, but also to make sure that it would lead to a solid Bitcoin economy where it functions as a currency, as a reliable medium of exchange.

There is an interesting article on LTB about Bitcoin and Rai Stones where the author calls these stones the primordial Bitcoin. The Island of Yap still uses Rai as their currency and this monetary system solely relies on trust, on oral history of ownership which is clear to everyone without the need to physically transfer or even physically access the Rai, limited and deriving value from its community, quite similar to Bitcoin.

The value of money is definitely built on trust, with the fiat system it's a matter of enforcement/assertion where we are forced to trust them or a sense of trust is build through money creation, debt, and qualitative easing which we have got accustomed to, but with Bitcoin/ Blockchain/cryptos this is changing. With Rai, trust was built by a small community on the basis of culture and oral tradition, but with Bitcoin it’s Blockchain/cryptography/encryption and that too globally.

https://letstalkbitcoin.com/the-island-of-stone-bitcoins

It was expected that Bitcoin would end this year at $10K, but it went on to get past $20K and when that happened some investors were hoping for a dip and when the inevitable correction did happen, is it worrisome? No. The price was around 9,900 on November 30, and $20K on December 17 as CME Group's Bitcoin futures trading began, that's $10K rise in a matter of 18 days, simply not sustainable. One of the major factors for the recent bull run was the futures, but now obviously we are seeing a short-term correction which is healthy, nothing to panic or worry about.

The increasing fees and delayed confirmation time is definitely a legit concern. The Bitcoin Cash pump and Coinbase insider trading is at most an indirect attack, pump is part of the unregulated free crypto market, expected, but it was an unethical behavior from a major exchange, but calling everything an attack is just irrational. Right now the Bitcoin network does have a major problem and it might get worse until LN is implemented. For the time being I think the only solution is to increase Segwit adoption by using Segwit supported services or requesting your wallet/exchange providers to upgrade to Segwit ASAP.

Yeah, another scam coin, cash grab, nothing to do with Bitcoin.


Not a threat by any margin, just another altcoin with a biased/flawed distribution model. According to the whitepaper, 100% of United Bitcoin in inactive balances would be used for development and pegged token, more like pre-mined.

Like few others mentioned, Bitcoin wasn't meant to replace fiat, but as an alternative to fiat. As far as a third-party is concerned, atomic swaps or atomic cross-chain trading and even decentralized exchanges does make it to the list.

The governments can ban Bitcoin whenever they like, but the point is it isn't going to be effective. Like you said, you will still need someone who will recognize the value of your currency. In 2010, someone sold a couple of pizzas for 10,000 Bitcoins and recently someone bought a Lamborghini with Bitcoin.

Bitcoin doesn't derive its value from any government, but from the community that backs it. Yeah, if some major governments ban Bitcoin then it definitely would slow down its progress, will affect adoption, but still if the community is big and strong enough and Bitcoin is being exchanged for goods and services, it would have value.

Centralized cryptocurrencies are just digital versions of fiat, I don't see any difference between them. Comparing them with decentralized cryptos is like apples to oranges.
 

Satoshi Nakamoto gave the world an idea that there could be a better alternative to the existing fiat system, a decentralized system. And since Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are in its nascent stage and yet to reach any substantial mainstream adoption, we tend to overestimate the short-term effect of a new technology by speculating on it, but underestimate the potential of this idea can have in the long run, maybe in the next 10 to 20 years, it would indeed be disrupting and revolutionizing.

Bitcoin's current utility as a currency is declining, but still its demand as an asset/store of value is increasing. In fact with the launch of CME Bitcoin futures it has become a mainstream financial investment/asset. So basically, right now Bitcoin is less of a payment network, but evolving into digital gold. Conflicting views, those who prefer a decentralized peer-to-peer payment network over digital gold would find the current situation quite messed up, but for those who are simply holding Bitcoin, this isn't much of a concern. Bitcoin's future utility as a currency depends on LN implementation so IMO 2018 is going to be quite challenging and competitive for Bitcoin.

The Income Tax Department of India (ITDI) after surveying major cryptocurrency exchanges on December 13 have decided to send notices to 400K-500K Bitcoin traders for suspected tax evasion. The initiative also appears to be closely linked with Panama and Paradise expose. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) might also take a strong stance against ICOs.


https://inc42.com/buzz/indian-income-tax-department-bitcoin-traders/

Bitcoin dominance index shows what percentage of the whole cryptocurrency economy is dominated by Bitcoin, that is Bitcoin against 1368 altcoins, of these majority of the coins doesn't have any utility, immature market that is heavily manipulated/pumps and driven by speculation, does this index seem like a reliable metric that represents the growth of Bitcoin? Absolutely not, but it does indicate that the overall crypto market is growing rapidly. A few altcoins are getting genuine attention, but it doesn't mean Bitcoin's popularity or its demand based on current and future utility is declining. A lot of money is flowing into alts also and if we have a total of 3000 alts by the end of next year then obviously BDI would decrease further.

1. So basically what if mining becomes unprofitable to the point where cost of producing one Bitcoin exceeds mining costs, right? It depends on the price of mining hardware, power, and most importantly BTC/USD exchange rate (hard to predict). Even now mining isn't profitable for everyone. So in a scenario where mining becomes unprofitable for a good number of miners, they would leave, the rest of the miners would keep mining, assuming it would be unprofitable for everyone would be too hypothetical (geographical location, cheap electricity/renewable resources, technological advancements in mining hardware), difficulty would drop to the point where it again becomes barely profitable to mine.

2. According to cost-of-production theory of value, the price of an object or condition is determined by the sum of the cost of the resources that went into making it. I think in the early stages of Bitcoin or maybe even a couple of year ago it was the case, but now it is more of a value-based pricing. I don't think today, there is any direct correlation between cost of production and the current market price. It looks like the market price which is based on Bitcoin's scarcity and utility is dictating the cost of production.

3. Cryptos making cash obsolete is a far-fetched theory. A plausible scenario would be a parallel economy where both centralized and decentralized cryptos would co-exist. The electricity consumption is a real issue, don't know how it will get addressed in future, maybe renewable resources.

4. Bitcoin isn't a democracy.

They do have value. Why are people buying Bitcoin, simply because of market movements or because of underlying value proposition? Demand is there because of value. Scarcity, usefulness as a store of value and a permissionless medium of exchange. Value and price aren't the same, value is a determining factor for price. Bitcoin's perceived future value is what is driving the price, but yeah it is impossible to determine the actual price of Bitcoin. Like mentioned in the above article, the value proposition was there from day zero, even if the price of one Bitcoin was zero. So basically as the value/overall usefulness of Bitcoin increases, price would obviously increase. Yeah, sky would be the limit.