Congrats, zasad@!
100 days is a lot of time spent on Bitcointalk.

It's really a good advice. We have very knowledgeable people on Bitcointalk but also normal people can find a topic, where to research on and create interesting topic about it.
I can recommend Andreas Antonopoulos, to research his knowledge.
And while we are doing that, we will learn a lot.

I would be happy to get a review of my topics, too: 

Bitcoin is very safe coin because of good developers
Description : A post about Bitcoin's fundamentals
Category : Bitcoin knowledge
Section : Beginners and Help

Andreas Antonopoulos is a good source of crypto knowledge
Description : A post about Andreas Antonopoulos
Category : Bitcoin knowledge
Section : Beginners and Help

But CEX has soo many downsides as well. Much more downsides in my opinion because Bitcoin is much safer, when it is not stored on CEX.
Why holding Bitcoin is we do it on a CEX?
We need to check transaction fees of course. But it is simple if we know. 

Is DdmrDdmr doing his merit spree in a defined period of time? Like every month or every 2 months?
Or is he doing it, when he's having enough time?

We can still learn a lot about Bitcoin and don't need to buy it.
Remember in many poor regions, it is still very difficult to buy Bitcoin because due to lack of regulation and less standards like from gold. At all, we should educate us first.
Bitcoin requires a degree of knowledge, too.

Hamas caucus



We don't need Hamas caucus.

Hamas caucus



We don't need Hamas caucus.

I support your points because it is really impressive to see, how Bitcoin is technically a very good coin. Many coins have tried to be better or made a Bitcoin copy but not a single one has been close to Bitcoin. It's impressive achievement from Bitcoin.



Well said, Satoshi Nakamoto is a true Revolutionist because he created Bitcoin as a first Blockchain.
It is still most famous coin today and will likely be for a vey long time.

I have not said it is final conclusion of hack but developers are making a good work to make it as safe as possible.

Yes, it is very safe coin.


You are wrong on so many occasions. Calling it "poorly constructed", when it's not true but your reply here is "poorly constructed" and you just want to stirr shit in my topic, you should be really embarrassed by yourself to leave such a belitteling reply.
It is not allowed to share common knowledge in Bitcointalk, according to you it is not allowed and if we do so, we will get accusation? One member found my topic helpful, too. It is already proving you wrong.
If you only point is to belittle my topic, it's really poor move from you.


Hello, bro  
It's very nice too see my topic is educative for you.  
And yes, it took some research but I also believe, research is very important because Bitcoin is very complicated.

Your point is very important, too.
I agree to your points.  

Okay it is nice to have your confirmation and to know it is not profitable.
Because I was confused, when it says here it is for profitability by calling it efficient and competitive:


Also, it says "democratize Bitcoin mining" but it doesn't democratize Bitcoin mining at all because it's a marketing lie from BitAxe because it won't be bought by a large number of people to create hashpower due to lack of profitability?

Security is a very important topic in Blockchain applications and Bitcoin has proven to be reliable here, while many Altcoins have struggled to do so. For us, when our money is at stake, we need to do our research how a Coin is different, advantages, disadvantages to prevent a loss due to education.
Here's a list after my research.



1. Bitcoin is well reviewed

When Bitcoin was invented, it was set up to be a big security. Hacks should be impossible and get prevented by good code. Bitcoin attracted and still has a very large community of really educated developers.
Bitcoin has a very reliable coder community, where flaws will be detected early before implementation and no risks are being taken. Many much smaller coins have a very flawed code review process.
A large and educated coder community reviewing code during testing times is an important advantage for Bitcoin.

And luckily, it saves us from possible hacks, when hackers are prevented from detecting flaws faster because all flaws are removed before implementation.
We have seen so many hacks, where a flawed code was exploited and people lost money, like for Altcoin cross chain bridges recently or when Terra Luna failed.
Still, people are buying coins from unreliable coders like Tron from Justin Sun or even weaker DeFi coins like Acala Stablecoin from Polkadot’s supplier Web 3.
Unfortunately, some people will only learn after a loss.

Some coins are very centralized and have a single point of failure like Solana, when it was down several times or devs have much power like in Binance Coin or Tron.
And DeFi coins can easily print some more coins / tokens into existence.
Bitcoin is having a big advantage here.



2. Bitcoin has PoW

It is big controversy for a long time, if a coin makes PoW or PoS, like it was for Ethereum [ETH]. Not for Bitcoin because Bitcoin developers have decided PoW is best because of security. From what Experts have said so far, PoW is very hard or almost impossible to compromise instead of PoS, where more attack vectors can be found. Like Corona, we should trust mayority of experts who have education and experience in an issue. Satoshi implemented PoW not PoS because Satoshi knew. He was very experienced and called it right.
PoS can be abused by rich stakers and makes a project centralized in many ways like premined coins and devs can create much influence by staking a large amount of PoS coins. PoW is not having such issues.




3. Security is Bitcoin’s priority

As for a safe cryptocurrency, security standards are very important. First point, we need security standards and Satoshi implemented it right himself, when he developed Bitcoin. Early Bitcoin developers added more security standards. Second point is after some time, to NOT remove such security standards. First point and especially second point are relevant to many Altcoins, which is a big issue for Altcoins.
Many Altcoins don’t offer anymore to create private and public keys to prove ownership of funds and access it. It is very concerning and seems mind blowing to many experienced coders.
For example, when creating a Solana wallet or similar new Altcoins. Altcoin developers are not focussing on security.
Or even MEW is bitching around more and more every time going away by implementing insecure patches. We need to have our private key offline.
Many Altcoins are leaving people vulnerable which is very concerning.
Bitcoin is better like Electrum for example. Its design is not so nice but Electrum is good tech and recommended by many experts.

Bitcoin is still having very high security standards today because of Bitcoin does not want to build a hype coin, Bitcoin wants to build a safe coin.
It is our duty to select a safe coin instead of an unsafe hype coin.

Exchange is always more risky but fees are lower on exchange. It is up to everyone, which risk we are willing to take.
Exchange can freeze your coins, get hacked or hold your coins hostage. Funds on centralized exchanges are not your fund, it is always owned by exchange and exchange can freeze it any time, as stated in TERMS OF SERCIVE from exchange. Many exchanges don't have government license and no government will bring your funds back. I don't know for etoro, it's from Spain but has it license in your country?
Even, exchange can be hacked. It's difficult to trust exchange.

Maybe pay higher fee, do it P2P or BISQ (it’s what many professionals advise), is better because it is still higher fee BUT you won’t suffer any disadvantages from centralized exchange, where your loss can be bigger. In P2P, it will be YOUR coins because storing it on your own private key is recommended.

Not your keys, not your coins.

Attack is always a reason for concern and I'm not a coder but wormhole attack seems to be very, very unlikely?
Like, if we will get visited by Aliens from a different Galaxy next 100 years? It is similarly unlikely.

Is it even possible to have a scenario where Lightning at a certain scale can be attacked? Even if, coders will have already a solution to prevent it?


What I want to ask:
Participants in a wormhole attack will suffer a loss or get punished? What is coder's approach to prevent such attack?
As usual, Bitcoin devs are known for developing a safe solution.

Wow, interesting, is it an innovation from Italy?

I'm not Nerd and also not Miner at all but for professionals, it seems to be an really interesting opportunity to do research about mining and it's no need to organize an expencive miner from China to study it because your described veariant is all meant to address it if a professional wants to do a research or a study. Maybe your topic will have better audience in experts section of Bitcointalk like "Development & Technical Discussion".
For an innovation viewpoint, it's an attractive consideration even when it's not economically intended to generate much coin. But if I understand your post correctly, it is not intended to engage in profit, just educational and innovalive purpose, while BitAxe is intended to generate a profit of mined coin?

Sometimes, it can be difficult to know, where we need to place a topic.
It can be about a technical aspect but also about Bitcoin general aspect and Beginners aspect, so sometimes we have various sections, where a topic can fit in.

For example a question about Bitcoin halving process.
It can fit in Bitcoin discussion but also Beginners and Help or Bitcoin Technical discussion. Sometimes it is not easy to know.

Maybe we can arrange a topic in Beginners and Help, where new members can ask where a new topic fits in best. 

I don't see a valid point, why self moderated topics should be banned. It is really hard to understand why someone want to ban such feature. If someone does not like a self moderated topic, he should just reply elsewhere. We have so many topics where everyone can find a place to reply.

I have never seen it as an issue. Self moderation is good feature and should stay. 

I agree to your point because Andreas Antonopoulos has studied Bitcoin for a very long time and he has acquired much knowledge to investigate it in detail.
Bitcoin is not easy to understand at all because it's a very technical topic and most of us need to rely on experienced computer scientists to review it. Antonopoulos is such a trusted and experienced computer scientist.
I like it from Andreas Antonopoulos to make his book publicly available to everyone (https://github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook). Normally, such knowledge it not available for free. Andreas Antonopoulos is acting non-profit here, he is not greedy, which is very good in my opinion. Educating about Bitcoin is more important in his oponion, a very honorable decision from Andreas Antonopoulos.  

You don't have provided any link.  
Honestly, I don't understand what's even your point??

Accounts buy is really a big, big shame. People buying an account should not get a reward by putting it into a signature campaign, such accounts should be trashed right away by negative feedback.
It is very hard for new members to earn a substantial amount of Merit for receiving a high rank. All Newbies have to earn a Merit for unique post.
People buying an account should get socially isolated and a negative feedback is overdue.
Shame on bought accounts.
Bought accounts are illegitimate.
We do not support it.

5 Bitcoin from a faucet was a very large amount, probably now, it is 5 Satoshi.  
Bitcoin faucet is a good idea but it's not profitable because not enough advertisements can generate a reward for site owners, who can pass profits to faucet visitors.
Gavin's faucet was a faucet based on donations and it was a non-profit faucet of course.
Today, only profit-oriented faucet's still exist.
Only centralized shitcoin developers can afford to run an non-profit faucet and running such a faucet should be mandated per law.
Every centralized shitcoin who doesn't offer such a faucet, should be shut down.

Palihapitiya is a butthurt clown because Palihapitiya owns huge shitcoins bags.
One needs to know about Palihapitiya: he is a rich guy (investor), who's living in a rich villa and Palihapitiya is rich 1%.
Palihapitiya makes money from pumping centralized shitcoins.
And Palihapitiya confuses Bitcoin and Shitcoins on purpose: shitcoins are centralized and like companies. Shitcoins are controlled by shitcoin team owners and for PoS coins, also from stakers because PoS is not decentralized like Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is different fom most shitcoins.

Palihapitiya is just butthurt because Gensler calls out centralized shitcoin fraud frequently.
Gensler is right.
Palihapitiya is a shitcoin clown.