as a mater of fact, in Croatia we can even do that as the biggest supermarket chain accepts bitcoin through payment processor for online purchases
Lucky you! but I was more aiming at those that are avoiding to spend bitcoin even when they can for simple things.
There may be more people spending bitcoin than you'd think. Or maybe my logic is flawed. However, if one has a lot of money, he will just invest. But from those in this forum, I cannot expect them all just HODL (because if they would be so rich they would probably spend more time travelling around the world than sitting online). I expect a majority of those in here do spend, especially if the price is right (yes, I know that this is the weak point and it can depends from person to person). Somehow, since Bitcoin is not accepted so much, Bitcoin-as-investment might be a selling point for Bitcoin. Maybe. I don't know... But that's not really something I can call "getting mainstream". And imho one big problem with the rather slow "expansion" of Bitcoin is the lack of acceptance in stores around the world. That's true, but first step imho is them accepting bitcoin via payment processors and when they see that they have plenty of traffic, we can maybe see direct payments. For now the payment processors in my country were very few and overly expensive. I had overly high hopes toward them.. years ago. I'm now disappointed. But you're right, it may be one good course of action... their main concerns when it comes to using bitcoin for payments are volatility and the fact that they are responsible for safety of their bitcoin and not the bank. As I said, majority of people are ready to trade freedom for the sense of lack security and I don't expect that to change ever. If anything, its only getting worse.
I agree about volatility. I don't agree about the part with safety of their coins, since I see that a second (or third!) step, when they did find out this or that about Bitcoin. Most don't get there. Most see the official warnings, see the price wild fluctuations and stay away, not getting as deep as wallet security and "trading their freedom" (where you're right, of course) I would like for exchanges to focus more on bitcoin, but honestly I don't see it happening. One can hope, OK?  Never say never |
|
|
|
are there any projects that run BTC mining on Raspberry PI zero with solar power? I'm wondering if thats a worthy idea? to decentralise bitcoin mining, one of the biggest barrier is electricity cost, but if we can have a small device that can run with solar power, effectively this can make the bitcoin network stronger. Its not about profitability but strenthening bitcoin network
If you want to actually mine Bitcoin, not just waste electricity and not mining altcoins, you have to have an ASIC. So for RasPi to make sense in the equation, you may need at last an USB miner too. |
|
|
|
Is Bitcoin getting into mainstream slower than we would like? Sure, but I don't think that bitcoin is slow at all.
I agree with both statements. Bitcoiners indeed tend to have an immense lack of patience. While banks and governments are certainly not big fans of bitcoin and are a big reason why people are reluctant to start using bitcoin, I don't think that its solely their fault. First of all, we have to ask ourselves do we use bitcoin enough for what is originally intended for. I hear even on this forum people saying that they are saving bitcoin and spending fiat only and if bitcoiners are saying that, how can we expect that others that are way less informed about bitcoin will start using it?
Question is whether average Joe would be interested in bitcoin even without the banks/government FUD? The thing is, majority of people don't like personal responsibility, "be your own bank" thing and will regularly sacrifice freedom for a sense of false security, so for them bitcoin will always be a scary thing to some degree. That also explains why so many people keep their crypto on the exchanges and other centralizes services instead of their own non custodial wallets.
While I agree that most see Bitcoin as something good only for investing into, I do spend, just unfortunately in most cases I have to get fiat first. I would gladly pay with Bitcoin if: * I would not have to overpay hugely for having the benefit of spending Bitcoin * the grocery stores would accept Bitcoin. I cannot eat TVs, laptops and mobile phones, they hurt my digestion. And imho one big problem with the rather slow "expansion" of Bitcoin is the lack of acceptance in stores around the world. Just ask yourself: why would average Joe get into Bitcoin if they don't see it used anywhere and also government officials tell it's not OK? Imho that's why some risk to buy for holding... and that's basically all... (and yes, then we can get more technical). Those business have their own tokens to push I don't expect from them any help when it comes to making bitcoin more appealing to the masses. Of course that they'll advertise mostly their business. But I think/hope that sooner or later they'll advertise Bitcoin too, simply because going mainstream will help their business making more money. Imho Sportsbet.io did/does it right with the sponsorship of a football team: both their name/logo and Bitcoin are visible on the equipment. Imho Bitcoin is getthing this slow to the masses is political. That's one way of looking at it. There must be other ways. For me, it is less political and more technical. In most cases, people are not hindered to use Bitcoin even if their governments are not recognizing it. But why are they not into Bitcoin? It is probably because of the technicalities involved. Keeping Bitcoin is not as easy as keeping fiat. Comparing Bitcoin and fiat, the latter is user-friendly or easy to use and handle. And, of course, there are the rest of the reasons like the masses don't really feel the need to use Bitcoin, there are a few business establishments that accept it as payment, and others. Maybe. But, as I said, if they don't see Bitcoin accepted (and advertised) at the stores they going to and the government and media is pushing the "bitcoin is bad" and "bitcoin is unsafe" rhetoric, most will just stay away. |
|
|
|
I'm a bit lazy to check their forum, so I ask here: do they in BTC or in some Yobit token? And what is payment rate per post? When everything just started, they had really decent payment rates IIRC.
I've given it a try at start. The pay was .. peanuts, there was no difference between spam and useful posts, actually the amount of spam was literally huge and nobody cared, I've seen same answers over and over again, I've seen tutorials copied from ... everywhere... it was a frenzy of posting just everything for the sake of it, .. building fast into a sad pile of thrash. Afterwards I think that they started watching for spam, but I heard that they actually were favoring Russian spam while removing most of the rest. I don't know, I didn't waste time there since the early beginning; it was nothing organized enough nor useful enough; the pay alone can't fix that. |
|
|
|
Well, the internet is full of the old narrative spread by BCash-ers, claiming that Bitcoin transactions are expensive and everybody should use BCash. That's from the days of 2017/2018 when (imho) there was a spam attack against Bitcoin network. Since then the spam has ended, services started grouping transactions, also SegWit is being used by most services, allowing more size get used in the blocks for transactions. And LN too has its merit in helping the network not get congested. The newbies also mostly face the centralized exchanges' withdrawal fees usually named transactions fees and getting misled. They also don't understand that the fee is not related to the amount (value) transferred. And they also don't know that if the recipient is not in a hurry they can send with as low as 1 sat/vbyte (about 10 cents/tx). And they tend to use centralized services as wallets, while centralized services tend to overpay the transaction fees anyway, to make sure the transactions are sent out fast. But yes, the average on-chain transaction fees are very small nowadays. And even smaller if both sender and recipient have SegWit addresses  |
|
|
|
I mean, how they know an address is from an exchange and not from a web wallet when they tell "unknown exchange"? Or how they know it's a ransomware when they tell "unknown ransomware"?  All it does is look at every deposit to an address, and follow those coins back until they hit a match against one of their categories. If you withdraw from an exchange, for example, and your coins come from an address which is not yet known to belong to that exchange (since exchanges use new addresses all the time), then it will just keep going back in time until it does hit a match. I guess that it's something like that, but since they don't know which centralized exchange it is, it may be very well any other centralized service following the same pattern. Like a centralized custodian web wallet provider. If you do have concerns with the history of your coins, then rather than looking them up on such service better to just mix or coinjoin them and be done with it.
That's true, although some are still afraid of mixers and how will <insert CEX here> react when they send those coins there. It is impossible to verify their claims, but what could their incentives be to keep the record of random bitcoin addresses? Could they sell such information?
They may rely on people's predisposition to guilt and stupid actions ("the guilty always returns to the crime scene" - no matter whether this is actually true or not), assuming that people will visit them more for checking their own funds are OK than out of curiosity on random addresses/funds. But this is just a wild guess |
|
|
|
If this is indeed the "crypto winter" then we should already be at the bottom of it since considering the rise part leading to the "winter" was tiny compared to previous rises leading to previous "winters".
Which is probably why you don't find it as depressing.
Indeed, it's also a valid point. The variation, at least in counted in percentages, is expected to decrease. (Would this mean we will no longer have actual crypto winters? Maybe..) It is also worth noting that 2013 ended with a total of 7100% rise and 2017 ended with 13000% rise while 2021 ended with a total of 2000% rise.
Expecting same percentage drop makes no sense whatsoever! In fact 48% is already too much if we are comparing things.
I don't expect 8x like falls, still, 2x is far from those numbers and I'm happy it's that far, no matter where next ATH will be (or if it'll ever be another one). My point was that although in the charts might look like a crypto winter, it seems/feels more "just a" drop, sorry (and yes, I do understand that it still hurts). And yes, the rise too was different (and smaller). |
|
|
|
While it’s almost impossible for the Internet to shut down globally, a country can decide to isolate themselves from the rest of the world. Hypothetical, if country Z decides to shut down the internet in their country, and w Their own Internet because of polictical differences/war. Will there a disruption in the Bitcoin Network?
* This was discussed not too long ago; not sure if it was related to the war, probably not, possibly the discussion was from before the war. The usual scenario is the internet blocked, not shut down. If a large area remains out of the global internet completely (which is difficult, keep in mind that one bitcoin node that can connect the two "worlds" is enough to keep everything still OK), there will be one problem: slower blocks until the difficulty is recalculated (every 2016 blocks). How does this affect miners? Because I'm thinking there could be some sort of break in the Blockchain forming two networks or is it possible for the nodes to still communicate with the outside world?
If the difficulty retargeting is far away, for the area with the smaller number of miners it will be the most difficult, since the difficulty will be extremely high, it won't be easy to hit blocks. But it will actually be more difficult for both, proportionally with the hash rate "lost" to "the other side". When the rejoin will happen there are 2 options: * the consensus rule will apply and the shortest chain (probably the one from the area with less miners) will become invalid/will disappear * during the "blackout" at least one of the sides has implemented something to make the chain of that part of the world a hard fork; then we'll have two different bitcoin (like we have now BTC and BCH, for example) |
|
|
|
|
This looks halfway into the crypto winter we had in 2015-2016. And it doesn't feel even 10% as depressing as that one was for me (maybe also because it was my first crypto winter, I know).
On the other hand, in 2015-2016 crypto winter the price has dropped to ~13% of the ATH, in 2019-2020 the price has dropped to ~16% of the ATH, now we're only at 48% of the ATH... (of course, there's still time for getting lower, .. but not too much time actually...)
|
|
|
|
de ce skype si nu discord? Un motiv destul de bun ar fi ca pe vremea cand acest topic a fost creat, adica in 2014, Discord pur si simplu nu exista inca. Dar, cum sectiunea de Romana de aici de pe forum nu este prea activa, ma astept ca grupul de Skype sa fie si mai "mort". Deci.. daca ai de intrebat / discutat, eu iti recomand sa incerci totusi aici pe forum. Sau si aici... |
|
|
|
without percentage/confidence rate so i question the accuracy.
This was my feeling too after checking a few addresses. It seems more it tries hard to add certain "good" and "bad" coins to the mix (sometimes from extremely old hack or unknown services) so it looks balanced and give mixed-to-good feeling no matter what. I mean, how they know an address is from an exchange and not from a web wallet when they tell "unknown exchange"? Or how they know it's a ransomware when they tell "unknown ransomware"? P.S. The captcha is annoying, some character is almost transparent and people with bad screen would have hard time.
Indeed. I had to refresh the page a few times until the numbers are well readable.. |
|
|
|
The only problem that Trezor has is a vulnerability in the hardware that allows hacking the device if someone comes into its possession.
While this indeed worth mentioning, I would also consider all hardware wallets (more or less) hackable if one gets his hand on them. Maybe some weren't proven so yet, still, better safe than sorry. |
|
|
|
Hello 👋 how can I buy coins from a exchange without submitting my national Identity card or BVN number? As for those who did this how safe is it? I don't have anything against verification but I am not sure its safe or am I wrong about its safety?.
You are not wrong. While the fiat world asks for KYC, most centralized exchanges ask for that "just in case" and to be compliant (just in case), and yes, nothing stops them from selling that data. There's a topic where this is widely discussed: Why KYC is extremely dangerous – and uselessAnd from there's a link to a topic about P2P exchanges you may want to use so you don't have to fill KYC: List of P2P/no-KYC exchanges |
|
|
|
Good day gentlemen, I'm doing a research on the above subject, please i need your contribution. Thanks
Are you assuming that we're all here for using Bitcoin for illegal actions? And you're assuming that people will come eager to share their stories of how they're laundering money?! I hope that my wild (or not?!) assumptions (about your assumptions) are wrong, however, you're doing it wrong. It's your paper, ... it's you who has to do the work, not us trying to figure out what would you want to write there. Since the banks are the biggest known private companies caught doing money laundering, just imagine what can they will tell you if you come with this one-liner. Now.. this is a free forum and we usually try to be helpful. But in order to get anything useful, you should start asking questions... even more, the right questions. |
|
|
|
Can you advise whether it is advisable to use a trading bot to trade cryptocurrency?
Such bots are sensitive to volatility, which often happens in the cryptocurrency world.
And how will the bot behave in a falling market?
I used one well-known bot for a month and it made 25% of my balance in a month.
And now I want to invest a lot more money in it.
The bot can usually do, repeatedly, what you would do - if you've set it right. Since you've used bots, you should know the basics. Whether it's advised or not to use them.. it's debatable. It depends very much on how much configurable the particular bot is, it depends on your overall trading skills, it depends whether you can configure it properly. And it depends on what the bot does - scalping, DCA, arbitrage, whatever. So there's no best answer to this question. My advise is to read more, especially reviews from people actually working with trading bots. One such website I've got to read at some point in the past was https://tradingbot.info/ I can't really tell whether it's the best or not, but in the results area you may find interesting things. My advise is to think it over very good, since the fact you are asking us this may mean that you don't have yet the experience you need (and then you should wait) or you have doubts (hence you should wait). Balance everything and ignore the FOMO. Trading is about using your brain and staying cool, not about FOMO. But I am more a HODLer type, hence I may be wrong, and, no matter what, it's you who have to take the decision. |
|
|
|
1392**************************1JSh for my sponsors.
bc1q**********************************vn5t for my buyers.
I tried it. It works. Thanks. For my sponsors and buyers, is it enough to know only my address for Bitcoin coin and not know the network?
Those are both deposit addresses to your Binance account. Keep in mind that those are Binance's addresses, not yours (you don't hold the private keys) and when money arrives to those addresses your account gets credited. It's important to know this because although your account may remain credited, Binance may use the coins from those addresses for other needs (like other users' withdrawals). It's usually advised to have your own local wallet and give different individuals different deposit addresses (like different address for each sponsor, no matter how many they are) or even different address for each different operation. Back to Binance. Although they say that one of those addresses is on Bitcoin network and the other is on Bitcoin SegWit network, it's actually the same network (Bitcoin), so you don't really have to say anything. |
|
|
|
Depending on centralized exchanges is bad, no matter you use Bitcoin Native or Segwit addresses or Lightning Network. You don't actually control your coins and transaction fee by setting up fee rate you want.
This is the reason for this topic, for people to know they should not leave coins on exchange Yet you don't explain clearly in the top post the difference (I see you know very good) between withdrawal fees and transaction fees, helping the exchanges hide their fees by telling it's the transaction fee. Even more, you give the impression the on-chain fees are big, which is incorrect. Expecting the average Joe get LN only to withdraw from exchanges may be a bit much... I don't have too big expectations the fees will get as low as you'd expect if these platforms go for LN. It's their profit we're talking about here.
So LN can help on speed, maybe a bit in the transactions fees too, but I would not expect wonders.
The fee is as low as I am expecting. The altcoin like on BSC network can be used to send from exchanges that do not support lightning network to an exchange that supports it. Example is sending from Binance to OKX, OKX support lightning network which can be used for it. All the fee used are still low. That is true, bitcoin transaction fee is low, I used exchange withdrawal fee because I know it is not bitcoin transaction fee, exchange withdrawal fee is bitcoin transaction fee + extra but large amount charged by exchanges. The mempool hasn't been that congested since last year. Using altcoins (from Dogecoin or XRP to stable coins or the more exotic wrapped BTC flavors) was always an option for transferring value between exchanges. But it may not be the best point here and now. One should learn to withdraw Bitcoin on Bitcoin blockchain (or maybe LN) into his own Bitcoin wallet and keep them there safely. "Not your keys, not your coins". Also comparing withdrawal fees between Bitcoin network and various altcoins is comparing apples with oranges, because exchanges have always had the bigger fees on Bitcoin, so they can keep the real coins in their reserves while the plebs will play with shitcoins. |
|
|
|
Maintenance: updating BTC RPC ExplorerWarning: it was not the nicest and cleanest update, but it works. You may want to read the warnings at the end. Unlike Electrs, I didn't find any clear tutorial on how to update BTC RPC Explorer. But it's not difficult either. VersionWhen you start your local BTC RPC Explorer it will show, at very start, its version. Or it can be seen at the bottom of web page. Mine is now 3.2.0. In the git page of the project ( https://github.com/janoside/btc-rpc-explorer ) there's a combobox telling "master". If you click it, and click tags, you'll see all the versions; more important, you'll see which is the latest one. Now it shows 3.3.0, so I'll update to that. Update OSWell, this should be run more often and you may want to skip it if you've just done that when updating Electrs. sudo apt update
sudo apt upgrade Now.. let's go: cd btc-rpc-explorer
git checkout master
git pull
Here I was told that I have local changes. If you don't, skip this part. Back on track; keep in mind that unlike Electrs, here I couldn't find a way to verify. git checkout v3.3.0
npm install
It gave multiple warnings, but it seems to be installed (I've checked it and it works, so maybe you'll skip the fix warnings part.) The WarningsAs I wrote, although it's well updated, it gave me warnings. Amongst those, it asked me to run and it didn't do much. So the next step I've done was the more risky (allegedly it can break things!) and it looked much better. I ran again, for a test and seems happier now. Yay! ...It also wrote that it would be nice if I update to newer npm, but I've failed badly that part so I'll leave it out RunIf you've made the shell file like here, then:
|
|
|
|
Maintenance: updating ElectrsNow and then it makes sense to update the server, since fixes and improvements are being added to the newer versions. The details for updating are pretty much described at: https://github.com/romanz/electrs/blob/master/doc/upgrading.md still, I thought it won't hurt to have also a newbie friendly one here, focused on what we've installed. VersionIf you start your local electrs it will show its version. Mine is now 0.9.3 (yeah, I've done at some point in the past another/newer install). In any git page of the project (like https://github.com/romanz/electrs ) there's a combobox telling "master". If you click it, and click tags, you'll see all the versions; more important, you'll see which is the latest one. In my case it's 0.9.6, so I'll update to that. Update OSWell, this should be run more often than updaing electrs, however, here we are: sudo apt update
sudo apt upgrade Although it's not a required step to verify the signature, I will do that. However, for that to work, we have to make sure our pgp "knows" the signature of the developer. curl https://romanzey.de/pgp.txt
curl -o romanz.pgp https://romanzey.de/pgp.txt
gpg --import romanz.pgp
It should tell: "imported: 1". Update ElectrsSince we have manual install, that path is what I'll follow. Keep in mind that this code is for version 0.9.6; if you'll find newer versions on git, please adapt to that one. cd ~
cd electrs
git checkout master
git pull
Now there's the optional step of verifying what we get. If you didn't import the pgp key, you will probably also skip this. It should tell things like "good signature" and "Primary key fingerprint: 15C8 C357 4AE4 F1E2 5F3F 35C5 87CA E5FA 4691 7CBB" It may also give a warning that it's not the most trusted signature, but it's fine. Let's proceed: git checkout v0.9.6
ROCKSDB_INCLUDE_DIR=/usr/include ROCKSDB_LIB_DIR=/usr/lib cargo build --locked --release
If, back at install time, your install of librocksdb-dev has failed and have used a workaround, you'll have to look in git and adapt this last command (probably go for static linked path). And we're done! If you also have the sh file I've created here, then:
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
