Yes, good news, and as others have said, hopefully this will have an influence on the price, but increased security is key.
Well, Bitcoin security looks very good for some years now, no risk at all there; the only "problem" is that miners pay more and more for every satoshi they receive as rewards. Thanks for the nice news. I have hopes the price will also get (sooner or later) follow better this trend.
The price is not having correlation with the mining hashrates this year, the fall of bitcoin price in the past significantly can make mining hashrates to reduce, but as the price has fallen this year, bitcoin is achieving increasing hashrates. This is caused by one thing, the miners may not see high profit now but having the mindset that the price of bitcoin will still increase and reach ATH in a way they will have more profit. But Bitcoin price is still good because miners too are selling, if they do not make profit, the hashrate supposed to have reduced as some would have quit mining. Miners can't sell at a loss. Or at least not for long. Yes, they may be still selling, it may mean that they're still on profit, but with every Ehash/s up, that profit is smaller. And that's going on for quite a while, hence I expect sooner or later they'll stop selling and forcing the price go up (and if that doesn't work out, unplug the gears, at least temporarily). That's why I said "sooner or later". I don't expect this happen overnight, but we're going in that direction.
|
|
|
While "Bitcoin hit a new high amid price volatility" may be misleading, the fact the hash rate went ATH again is interesting, especially since there's energy crisis in some areas (hence probably increased prices for electricity here and there), semiconductors shortage (hence I expect somewhat smaller production of miners) and political drama (omg bitcoin consumes this and that and it's not even green!)
Thanks for the nice news. I have hopes the price will also get (sooner or later) follow better this trend.
|
|
|
BTC Address (BEP20) :
Since you're paying in an altcoin (something maybe called Bitcoin, but working on Binance chain), I think that altcoin services would be more appropriate for your topic.
|
|
|
non-custodial wallets? As in hard wallets? Im new to this, Im using coinbase. So I guess you're saying I should extract from coinbase to a hard wallet?
Non custodial means that you (and only you) have access to your wallet seed phrase or private key. If the amounts in discussion are big then it's advised you acquire hardware wallet or learn how to properly setup and use cold storage (hardware wallet would be much easier). If the amounts are rather small and it won't be a big loss if you get hacked and lose those funds, an Electrum on PC (downloaded from electrum.org and verified) or Electrum on Android (but at least go to electrum.org and get the link to the correct Electrum on Play store) would do the job. Make sure you write down the seen and save it securely.
|
|
|
FIAT money will never be replaced by stable coins because we have a few fossils running countries on this planet and will never accept this type of technology. This is my opinion.
You are somewhat right. First of all, some governments do or will push CBDCs. Those can be seen as government issued stablecoins, they are not cryptocurrencies and they're clearly centralized. Those pose some risk against fiat in hand, and not 3rd party issued stable coins or cryptocurrencies. Yes, some also accept now Bitcoin as legal tender, but they're too few yet and don't change the actual state. No matter what digital currencies governments approve or push, fiat money in hand cannot easily go extinct. There are always areas (usually remote areas or in closed places - like caves where tourists still go) where internet may reach with difficulty, there are cases (power outages) when life have to be able to go on normally, and yes, there are people who, for whatever reasons, will not use the technology. The governments must ensure everybody has access to money, hence they'll have to keep some amounts of hard cash in circulation.
|
|
|
With quite a good number of bad decisions made (including in my country) in the name of IMF, I don't think that they are best suited to say anything about panaceas. Of course, banking people might call my words a heresy ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) And yeah, we've been expecting a reaction from them. I may say it has come pretty fast, actually (are they getting scared?)
|
|
|
Condoras is almost never right, he just wants to paint everybody as a scammer. He never posts with the intention to actually loan
He doesn't have to loan, if he has the patience to put up with all scammer wannabes, hats off to him. And from what I've seen, he's right almost every time. As long as you don't provide a proper collateral, it means that there's a good chance you want to scam. Even more, you already have negative trust feedback, meaning that you don't care if you're tagged to not paying back the loan. My advise is to: 1. Stop asking for loans, you won't get a more polite answer than this and may actually get more negative feedback. 2. Make another topic about the P2P trade you want.
|
|
|
I do have some alternatives such as using another computer, but due to the convenience of hardware wallets, I think I'm just going to buy one.
Imho you should use another computer, if you have that alternative, as cold storage, properly safeguarded and always offline/airgapped, at least until the point you are 100% that HW worth it for you and you are convinced 100% on which one to buy. HW makes sense if you use bitcoin a lot from outside of your home, and the amounts are big. Else, a cold storage for the big funds and an unsafe wallet on your phone for small (daily?) funds can easily do the job. Of course, this assumes you know what you're doing, but I expect so. ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
|
|
|
1. If John gave you that paper, if he had a copy of that paper he could easily have access to the same wallet and transfer the funds out of it. Since he seems to be a scammer with false identity, I find this very plausible. I've heard plenty of horror stories about nice persons met on Tinder. 2 . Without the original paper or the original wallet you cannot recover your funds, the Visa card info is useless here. Even more, from the story about this John, I would not be surprised if the paper was containing only an address (hence you can only see the funds, but not spend) and your wallet was a watch-only wallet (again, see, but not spend). All in all, with or without the prison time, I think that the chance is high that you've got scammed by this John character. And even if you weren't, with the info you have it's not possible to access those Bitcoin. Sorry...
|
|
|
Borrowing for investing is usually a bad decision. One must invest only money he affords to lose. The only "good" way to borrow for investing is if you have plenty of wealth, but it's already locked (properties, companies) and borrowing will provide liquidity.
Also for normal people, I'd suggest to invest only part of the savings, not all. Some should stay for unexpected problems.
However, these are (small) details. The initial rule stands.
But this is not case now as everyone wants to take advantage and always want to be rich instantly so they invest from borrowing, or if they have savings, they invest all in. The result is, they lose everything they have and are even obligated to pay their loans so they end up living miserable. But fot those who chose to be more smart and practical, they are living their lives into profits knowing they have less to lose, more to profit. There's no difference between "now" and "then". People always want to get rich quick. And if they don't follow some common sense/basic rules, they can too easy end up broke. So while your conclusion is correct, the first sentence is odd.. Not really bad to take some loan specially if we do see some opportunity and also we arent all the times having the cash to invest on which means that you would really be opting out to take some loan because of having lack of cash but its not really that bad a decision
No, just no. The fact you lack cash means that if you get a loan to invest and the investment goes bad (i.e. bitcoin price falls greatly for longer term), you will have no means to pay back, making your life (even more) miserable. If you go on this path you will also have no means to wait until the investment price gets back on profit (which, in case of Bitcoin did always happen until now, sooner or later). PS. You should improve your writing style, it's hart to read/understand.
|
|
|
Let’s not forget Putin is going crazy day by day and these things could really go in wrong direction and up to the extent that Putin is sending biohazards through those Gas Pipeline to win the war.
While he indeed went mad, I don't think that your scenario is feasible. You are talking about living creatures there, which will most probably have to survive living without oxygen, possibly high pressures, then going literally through fire, and afterwards still be alive and infecting. Let's not be overly paranoid... There are separate contracts for gas transit, I believe, so I don't think it's likely that Bulgaria will stop being a transit country for gas that's moving to other countries. Ukraine, for example, even though being very anti-Russia right now, is, at least as of March 21 (maybe it changed, I couldn't find info on that), is piping Russian gas to Europe to fulfil its contract obligations with the European countries (or so it seems). Imho it greatly depends whether the transit contract was made with Serbia/Hungary, which I don't think so, or with Russia. Since Russia has broken its side of one contract with Bulgaria, I don't see why wouldn't Bulgaria break the other contract with Russia as response. Ukraine is most probably still allowing the transit to not hurt Germany and the other countries, not to favor Russia. On the other hand, the customers affected by Bulgaria closing the pipe would be anyway countries cheering for Putin.
|
|
|
RON to the moon? 500% in one swing is quite nice! ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) Well, not when I'm buying it ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Have you tried using the card by inserting it into POS machine each and every time, without that contactless thing? I know its a hassle for both you and merchant but just for the sake of testing it out.
It has happened to me even with an online payment, so I don't think that inserting it into POS could help, but, why not, I might try that too when I get the error.
|
|
|
Your Binance card is not reliable? I am asking because I don't have issues for the last 4-5 months, if we don't count the problem of that contactless thing not working every time I am paying something that is more expensive than 50-60 euro. But I got used to to it so when I am buying something more expensive than that I just ask for card to be inserted into POS machine immediately and problem solved.
Yep, unreliable, but I didn't really want to discuss here about the competition. Shortly, about every 4th-5th place I try to use the black card, it gets rejected and the app shows that 2 transactions were attempted. For example if I want to buy something worth 100 RON, I see a 20 EUR and an 100 EUR (!!) transaction, both rejected.
|
|
|
This could be the case if the move out of New York, including the costs to move itself, is cheaper than a transition to a renewable energy tariff. There are such electricity providers in the New York State (see a list here below), but I don't know how high their rates are, and many large scale miners depend currently on custom agreements with electricity producers to lower their costs. A move outside the US for local miners however should be expensive. I don't know either, I'd expect it to be either significantly more expensive, either have availability issues, since wind and sun are not 100% reliable, but I don't know how would that be implemented. Moving out might be expensive, but, depending where they move, it may or may not pay off. It's clearly a risk, especially now, with so many problems with the energy (and it prices) over the world. I seriously doubt there's so much mining in New York that a miner exodus would cause a hashrate drop. According to the source above, it seems to be one of the more expensive states when it comes to electricity costs. There seems to be a mining hotspot in the area near the Canadian border due to cheap hydro electricity, but these miners would be mostly compliant already.
You do have a point here, I may have been scared for nothing and maybe indeed the hash rate of NY state is not significant.
|
|
|
This is wonderful news, unless I am missing something: the first country having its own currency (CFA) and still adopting Bitcoin. ...Shame that it's a country with still ongoing civil war. It will give ammo to various naysayers.
|
|
|
I know I'm probably in a minority here, but I think this law is actually a good thing, and it's similar to what I'm proposing in this thread. The faster the transition to renewables goes, the better, and once it's near 100%* anti-bitcoiners will lose their main argument** against Bitcoin. While I would like to see mining businesses not only go for regenerable electricity, but go for producing their own green electricity ( see the reasons here, most important being that they won't care on long term how low will the block rewards go), I don't find this law good because it can: * force miners move (even out of USA) instead of complying * force miners shut down, even for a while (move out), leading to sudden drops (even if small) in the hash rate, hence to congestion on mempool
|
|
|
how do we verify that the hardware doesn't generate predictable entropy
I don't think that we can. While we expect they rather keep their business running than stealing people's money, we cannot know if they indeed play fair and go random, or generate their numbers by a rule. But... In theory if they do this, the seeds the devices will generate will be a rather small subset of all the possible seeds (so they can brute force them in a reasonable amount of time). However, if this would happen, there's a very big chance collision would happen, and rather often, between different users' seeds/wallets. If this happens, most do post about it (especially if it's them losing money). Yes, I know, if this happens, people tend to point to hacks and unsafe storage of the keys, but still.. there would be much more of those imho. Also I'd expect some users be nice and, instead of stealing, start writing about it. Imho for now it's pretty safe to assume they did play fair until now.
|
|
|
It will get interesting to watch how the politics will be developing now. From what I've read, Serbia and Hungary, both cheering for Putin, get supplied through pipes passing through Bulgaria. While Greece, although using Russian gas, offered help to Bulgaria, I've heard nothing from Serbia nor Hungary. I'd expect Bulgaria close down that traffic, it would be simply normal.
|
|
|
It's not easy task to search for the update thread under news section as you mentioned.
now that we replied to this thread, it's showing on top results otherwise it's gone for a long distance.
You greatly misunderstood me, so here you are: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F0yaqtIn.png&t=664&c=fRCoSHKrHnpZLw)
|
|
|
I do not know why also other industries are not banned not to use electricity that produces carbon in their operation.
Well, this is imho a great point and, if US legislation works in the same way as my county's, this can be attacked for discrimination and get "nulled". Hence I see it as a pointless and pure political move.
|
|
|
|