|
I don't tend to take much notice of the day-to-day price movements, I'm more interested in the longer-term trends as I'm not that great a trader. But I have to say, the movements today look quite important. We have been fighting downwards pressure for such a long time now, and since bitcoin bounced off its lower support line, it is surging. If we can push through the high $7ks and on towards $8k, then that should put a lot of confidence back in the market. I am well aware that prices fluctuate dramatically, but still today's moves look very encouraging so far.
|
|
|
|
my opinion of Trump is sort of he's like a near-autistic high level genius. That would explain poor social skills and high achievement.
Where's the high achievement? Being born into wealth in a plutocratic society qualifies you to be president (or prime minister in the UK, hello Boris Johnson). It's not a meritocracy, you don't get to run the country by being the best person to run the country. Trump is all bluster and front, with nothing behind it. There's barely even a guiding intelligence, he's just a petulant child consumed by avarice and a constant need for validation. And as a businessman, his "defence" against the claim that he lost more money than any other US citizen in history is that it was just for tax purposes. Brilliant. So defrauding the country of $1b makes you the perfect person to run that country... |
|
|
|
Why are most response yes to number 4 huh.... You want to travel off to another man's country where you might not get adequate freedom.  Or you want to go for terrorism.... Lol Just because I want to go abroad, it doesn't mean I want to go to North Korea or Syria. Many countries have perfectly sufficient freedoms and safety levels, and my opinion is that it is a good thing to expand your horizons and experience new cultures. But this doesn't mean I want to travel to a war zone or a brutal dictatorship. However, if I had the courage, it might be good to go to those places to gain a better perspective on how lucky I am to live in the West, and how many people around the world suffer in dangerous areas and under oppressive regimes. It is very easy to live in a bubble and not consider for example the estimated 2 billion people who don't even have access to clean water. |
|
|
|
Here's some evidence which I think backs up my previous point about intentionality and the speed with which each lie is replaced by a new one. It's interesting how the lies peak at just about the time of the 2018 mid-terms - whether this is just related to increased media exposure at that time is difficult to say, but it's an interesting coincidence at least. (BTW I think the x-axis extends past the end of the data - no-one is suggesting that he stopped lying entirely in June! )  |
|
|
|
But everyone can agree that Trump just says and blurts things pretty much on the moment, often without his own best interest and almost like he doesn't care about making mistakes.
Not sure that's lying, more just like the way he is.
I don't know. I still think my explanation above is plausible, but I can certainly concede that it might just be that the rise of social media and 24 hours news culture has created a climate where people such as Trump (or in the UK the eerily similar Boris Johnson) will just rise to the top. I don't think either Trump or Johnson is particularly intelligent, so perhaps it's not all orchestrated and we are in fact in an era where the ego-maniac attention-seeking bullshitting sociopaths reign supreme. The old saying is that we get the politicians we deserve; perhaps it is true that the society we have created is one where these people represent the pinnacle, as horrific as is sounds. Either it's my way, or your way, or indeed probably a mixture of both, some ad-libbed idiocy and some carefully choreographed by advisors. We can't really say for certain, and we are kept guessing... |
|
|
|
|
ETH probably looks like a good buy at the moment. We have the development in the new year to look forward to, which should lift prices. Plus it looks underpriced vs BTC at the moment anyway. We need to think about the underlying strength of a project rather than just look at its current (ever reducing) price. The tide will turn for ETH at some point, and I think sooner rather than later.
|
|
|
|
outer space is [...] gay!
Pictures or it didn't happen. Preferably in a new thread tagged as NSFW. ... This is NASA astronaut and homosexual Scott Kelly aboard the ISS: Nonsense. Astronauts aren't real, and neither is the ISS. They are both flat, 2-dimensional drawings on that firmament thing you're always talking about. As for R "Scott" Kelly, he's a singer, not an astronaut. Although he did write an opera called "Trapped in the Closet," so what do I know. |
|
|
|
When demerits and / or deranks happen separately or concurrently, there will be another massive drama in the forum as we saw when merit system debuted.
I think it'll probably equal out in terms of popularity versus outrage. It must really annoy the newcomers who are trying to see absolute fucking deadbeats lording over them. The sooner anything with a financial incentive that requires an indication of your worthiness switches 100% to earned merit rather than rank the healthier this forum will be. Plenty of campaign managers already do this but the total removal of the rank factor would help. I think demerits would be an awful idea. People would start handing them out every time they disagreed with someone else's opinion. You'd end up with a situation where people are scared to post anything even remotely contentious. It would hamper free discussion (as well as those hilarious snarky one-liner put-downs). Yes, the merit system isn't 100% fair; a lot of good posts get overlooked. And yes, perhaps the initial airdrop was too generous, but it was needed in order for people to maintain their existing ranks. I suspect we'd never reach a consensus on what is fair. Perhaps the airdropped merit could have contained an in-built decay mechanism whereby you had to keep earning merit to maintain your rank until the airdrop was fully eaten away. I have no idea how complex that would have been to implement, but again it's unlikely it would have been popular. Let's just stick with what we've got. |
|
|
|
I posted about this in another thread. The continuous lying is intentional, and the crucial factor is the speed with which he can churn out new lies. With each new lie, the last one gets submerged before there is a chance for it to be investigated and debunked. Each outrageous headline gets replaced by a new one faster than you can say 'WTF?'. There is no time to prove it's a lie before the next one is upon us. This is how he stays ahead and on top. |
|
|
|
|
On the face of it, it looks like a real long-shot for XRP to hit those heights again. But it is certainly a coin with big potential, and XRP does have a history of sharp upwards price movements, so I wouldn't rule it out. As for when it might happen, it doesn't look like any time soon. We'd need a huge amount of confidence in the market for that sort of behaviour.
|
|
|
|
outer space is [...] gay!
Pictures or it didn't happen. Preferably in a new thread tagged as NSFW. I'm convinced that notbatman is actually a professional troll, being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year (by Nasa) to discredit Flat-Earthers. And he's doing a marvelous job. Nobody can convince me otherwise, regardless of any evidence to contrary, so don't bother trying to change my mind.
I concur. I heard* it was millions of dollars. *voices in my head |
|
|
|
have fun
no point arguing no more.
Agreed - I knew we'd agree on something in the end! It was still nice having the discussion - thanks! |
|
|
|
well you can continue with your google search for average joe stuff...
ill continue programming
have fun with your studies, hope you can catch up
You're quite rude, aren't you? I mean consistently, not just as a one-off. I'm not rising to it, though :p I freely admit I'm not an expert in quantum computing, but I do have a background in theoretical physics, with a sizeable chunk of that being QM, so I have a decent grasp of the quantum side. by the way google quantum computers quarternary
I don't have to... now you're confusing qubits with qudits. This all started with you saying that qubits have 4 states, which they don't! qbits have 3 states
qubits actually have 4 states binary has 2 states 0-1 qubit is base 4 or otherwise known as quarternary logic (as oppose to binary logic) 0 1 X 2 3 oh and bit is about single object/symbol
you can have binary(2) bit
quarternary(4) bit
hexidecimal(16) bit
This is getting a bit absurd now. Hexadecimal is not 16 bit, it's 4 bit. Why? 2 4, that's why: 2, 4, 8, 16. You don't need 16 binary digits to encode a hexadecimal. Hex '1' is 0001 in binary. Hex 'F' is 1111. |
|
|
|
no national flags in olympics anymore ban them all then the money disappears, that is driving the doping competition anyway
I agree completely. The Olympics should be a celebration of human excellence, without nationalities, without borders. The question of which patch of Earth a competitor happened to be born on should have no relevance. We should be cheering the individual, not the flag. |
|
|
|
research: "4 quantum numbers" In quantum mechanics, the principal quantum number (symbolized n) is one of four quantum numbers assigned to all electrons in an atom to describe that electron's state. I'm familiar with the basic physics. But we are talking about qubits here, not atomic structure. A qubit is a quantum bit, a quantum binary digit. It holds information on a two-state system. So for example spin could be used, the qubit is in a superposition of 'up' and 'down', and measurement collapses the wavefunction into either 'up' or 'down'. Similarly we could use polarisation, the qubit's polarisation is a superposition of horizontal and vertical, measurement resolves to one of the two values - analagous to 0 or 1. Your '4' value doesn't refer to 4 discrete outcomes, but to 4 degrees of freedom in an atomic context. There are a lot more than 4 possible combinations of quantum numbers... but this isn't relevant to qubits, because a qubit holds one bit of information (or rather a superposition, but resolves to one bit). Another example: what if your qubit is a photon? You can see how the principal quantum number defining the electron shell is irrelevant here. |
|
|
|
|
Yes XRP price is very low and it is almost as if the 2017 rally never happened... but this is true of other big alts as well, look at ETH for example, down below 10% of it's ATH at the moment. And many low cap alts are faring even worse.
I'm sure there is some big selling, as with Moneygram, but it's not like XRP is falling whilst everything else is rising.
|
|
|
|
Are you stating that Mars is flat because it got battered by all those meteors?
Not completely flat, it's about 1 inch high. The outer surface is crispy, beneath this is a brown layer analagous to soil, below that a mantle that flows a bit like caramel, below that the planet has more of a nougat-like consistency. This is the ultimate truth they don't want you to know. Elon Musk is a glitch in the matrix.
Haha it's the peak of the absurd The absurd has no peaks, it's flat. As are Elon Musk, the matrix, glitches, and the truth. |
|
|
|
in quantum there is 4
0 is off 1 is 'kinda on' 2 is mostly on and 3 is on
0 is no 1 is maybe 2 is mostly and 3 is yes
0 is false 1 is false unless 2 is true unless and 3 is true
google has the technology of 4 states and now is trying to code how to use it.
mostly they are dealing with DNA you know GTAC annd having fun with that as binary systems aint good at 4 state things in a 2 state limiting system
It's a superposition of 0 and 1. It's a continuum, an infinite number of possible values... but based on a superposition of 2 classical outcomes. A single qubit can only yield 0 or 1. Can you give me a link to this '4 state' outcome stuff? I'm sure there is a misunderstanding somewhere. You get 4 possible outcomes from a 2 qubit system(2 2), but 1 qubit can only give you 0 or 1. Google I think did 53 qubits, so 2 53, or 9007199254740992 outcomes. |
|
|
|
its 0123 no 01.
There are only 2 states contributing to the superposition, 0 and 1. You mean 4 because the probability amplitudes are complex numbers and each have 2 degrees of freedom? So 2x2 =4? ... But probability is amplitude squared (the Born rule)... so we are back to 2. |
|
|
|
Honestly, I figured breaking mining would break bitcoin more effectively than hacking addresses.
Mining is certainly vulnerable, but it's not the weakest point. I had a try at summarising this a while ago on another thread... Hi all  I thought I’d try to summarise Bitcoin's vulnerabilities to Quantum Computers, as well as some potential defences, and get it all in one post. Apologies for the wall of text, but hopefully it is useful... Mining can potentially be much quicker with QCs.The current PoW difficulty system can be exploited by a Quantum Computer using Grover’s algorithm to drastically reduce the number of computational steps required to solve the problem. The theorised advantage that a quantum computer (or parallelised QCs) have over classical computers is a couple of orders of magnitude, so ~x100 easier to mine. This isn’t necessarily a game-changer, as this QC speed advantage is likely to be some years away, by which time classical computers will surely have increased speed to reduce the QC advantage significantly. It is worth remembering that QCs aren’t going up against run-of-the-mill standard equipment here, but rather against the very fast ASICs that have been set up specifically for mining. Re-used BTC addresses are 100% vulnerable to QCs.Address Re-Use. Simply, any address that is re-used is 100% vulnerable because a QC can use Shor’s algorithm to break public-key cryptography. This is a quantum algorithm designed specifically to solve for prime factors. As with Grover’s algorithm, the key is in dramatically reducing the number of computational steps required to solve the problem. The upshot is that for any known public key, a QC can use Shor’s approach to derive the private key. The vulnerability cannot be overstated here. Any re-used address is utterly insecure.Processed (accepted) transactions are theoretically somewhat vulnerable to QCs.Theoretically possible because the QC can derive private keys from used addresses. In practice however processed transactions are likely to be quite secure as QCs would need to out-hash the network to double spend. Unprocessed (pending) transactions are extremely vulnerable to QCs.As above, a QC can derive a private key from a public key. So for any unprocessed transaction, a QC attacker can obtain the private key and then create their own transaction whilst offering a much higher fee, so that the attacker’s transaction gets onto the blockchain first, ahead of the genuine transaction. So block interval and QC speed are both crucial here – it all depends on whether or not the a QC can hack the key more quickly than the block is processed. Possible defences... Defences using classical computers.- Modify the PoW system such that QCs don’t have any advantage over classical computers. Defending PoW is not as important as defending signatures (as above), because PoW is less vulnerable. However various approaches that can protect PoW against QCs are under development, such as Cuckoo Cycle, Momentum and Equihash.
- Modify the signature system to prevent easy derivation of private keys. Again, various approaches are under development, which use some pretty esoteric maths. There are hash-based approaches such as XMSS and SPHINCS, but more promising (as far as I can tell) are the lattice-based approaches such as Dilithium, which I think is already used by Komodo.
Defences using quantum computers.As I’ve said a few times, I’m more of a bumbling enthusiast than an expert, but exploiting quantum properties to defend against QC attack seems to me a very good idea. In theory properties such as entanglement and the uncertainty principle can offer an unbreakable defence. Again, people are busy researching this area. There are some quite astonishing ideas out there, such as this one. I’ll leave it there. Apologies for all the external links, but hopefully this has summarised a few things. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
