Oh noes! We crashed down to 51.5k. Better call Proudhon....
doesnt someone here have him on speed dial or something? I did  but he changed his number and told the mods to delete my homage to him. the block of threads 50k to 100k was removed by the mods. since we hit 50k. the new block of threads would be shorter. I wonder if the mods would let me do a shorter locked block say: 55k 60k 65k 70k Probably the mods do not like you.. or that diptwat yama either. Let's go full retard (no homo) and do a homage to Roger Ver and Craig Wright and Gavin Andressen and Elon Musk while we are at it? Umm...I hope those aren't the only stores. Legal tender is legal tender. Which by law means no store there can turn down bitcoin as accepted payment. Hmmm I don’t use btc for small payments actually but I would love to go and buy some burgers etc at McD’s and pay with some sats ….  - especially with lightning and something close to zero fees. Legal tender is legal tender. Which by law means no store there can turn down bitcoin as accepted payment.
I've read that it's actually optional, hence I do expect that - especially at start - the huge majority of stores will turn down bitcoin payments (unfortunately). Yes. It's optional for small rink-i-dink operations who do not have an ability to accept it, and I would not categorize any of the companies on that prior list as being sufficiently small and rek-i-dink in order to not "have to" accept dee king daddy. It all comes down to the fact that Bitcoin is a peer to peer money. Corporations are not a peer. They are a huge conglomeration of different people getting different percentages of your purchase. In order for a corporation to get paid in bitcoin (right now) you need a corporation to act as middleman (ie. BitPay) for the company.
Wow!!!! All this time in bitcoin, and you somehow have a view that companies are not "peers" That's about as retarded a statement as could be made. Surely, there might be some companies making such arguments, but no one with any brains should actually believe such nonsense, unless you are just taking such statement out of context. One comment I found telling was of someone going into a store to buy something with bitcoin but the owner wasn't there so they had to text the owner and the owner finally sent the payment address.
Sure the coming up with excuses makes sense. Are we expecting McDonalds to set up a lightning wallet for their cashier to handle all of the money for that day, and then expect the cashier to make the choice between handing that wallet over to the owners at the end of the day or just quit with more than they would make in a year?
Another retarded statement. Of course, there are all kinds of people who are put in charge of handling money, and they have to hand over the money at the end of the shift - or possibly various points in between if they happen to be handling large quantities (or potentially large quantities) of money. Bitcoin will eventually not only take down governments but also take down corporations. But for now, we're not there yet.
Eventually the "McDonalds" will be a series of smart contracts running the restaurant with an algorithm as the "owner".
Yes.. small countries such as El Salvador may well be left with the choice of shutting down such company operations if they do not comply and surely some countries will not be willing to play that card, but they might be wiling to bluff or maybe play that card at a later date. Countries, even small ones, are NOT devoid of power, even when dealing with large companies. speaking of proudhon and old timers, what happened to realroach? |
|
|
|
|
What do you think the odds are that it's not single-player "whales" out there that are pulling the strings of the market, but instead it's exchanges that are engaging in rehypothecation of user funds to suit their own needs? For example, if somebody puts out a significant short on platform X, what's stopping X from squeezing it using client funds that have been moved (and leveraged) onto another platform? After all, it's not a regulated market with closely scrutinized players by a long shot so if they have the power to influence the market (they certainly have the funds) and it's not illegal (from what I understand it isn't) then why wouldn't they do this?
|
|
|
|
< incoherent rambling >
If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry  |
|
|
|
Although published today, this video is dated but still quite interesting since it discusses assigning a value to Bitcoin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCRPVCxTpq0Gent at 12:40 has an interesting comparison between Bitcoin and the $100 bill. |
|
|
|
Agreed. Raise MAX_BLOCK_SIZE!!1!1!!!
Alright, m8. Got you covered. It's called physical silver, gold, and copper. Block size is infinite, tokens are fungible, and it even has pruning, which noobs in Bitcoin couldn't get to work. R0ach, curious to know what your thoughts are on the upcoming Taproot/Schnorr soft fork and it's application to Bitcoin fungibility. |
|
|
|
$5k soon!!!!
Reverse engineering 🤪
 ? |
|
|
|
Of course you can mine "just 1 bitcoin". It's called 'pool mining'.
... nobody would buy your $100k coin if they can mine one for $6k instead. And mining is already too huge to increase by an order of magnitude or higher to buffer prices that elevated or it would use more power than the entire United States.
Have you tried it? Go ahead, pay $6k for just one bitcoin. It's the competitiveness of mining that requires huge capital outlay to even mine it at that price. That's why people are going to buy it at a higher price, because they'd rather not mine it. They'd rather get one and keep it, or get one and use it, but to be a miner is a different story. Miners will use up whatever power they can get and pay for. Power that eventually will go down in price and mining equipment that gets more efficient, even as the mining difficulty increases. You can also try to pool mine, but I gather it's going to take a lot longer to get your 1 bitcoin, unless you have have a bunch of miners, either in your own space or hosted somewhere. You hit the nail on the head. What r0ach is omitting is that whilst mining your own Bitcoin for $6k is possible, the length of time required to do so is extraordinary. The Antminer s17e delivers 64TH/s for $2683.00: https://shop.bitmain.com/product/detail?pid=00020190909094751115TfQwEJfa06D7It would take a year to pool mine a single Bitcoin with two of these units: https://www.cryptocompare.com/mining/calculator/btc?HashingPower=128&HashingUnit=TH%2Fs&PowerConsumption=4000&CostPerkWh=0.1&MiningPoolFee=1 |
|
|
|
^
This image deserves at least 3 merits.
I disagree. You all dump on r0ach for his hateful rhetoric but if you support the image above along with it's caption then you are no better than him. Have a fucking heart man. |
|
|
|
Pieter Wuille Unveils ‘Miniscript,’ A New Smart Contract Language for BitcoinSmart contracts could soon get a boost in bitcoin as prominent programmer Pieter Wuille has unveiled a new coding language designed specifically for their use.
Posted to the bitcoin developer mailing list Monday, the ‘Miniscript’ language aims to make it easier for programmers to write up “smart contracts” or conditions for spending bitcoins. Programmers Wuille, Andrew Poelstra and Sanket Sanjalkar have been working on the code for roughly a year, Wuille said.
Although it’s been shared around behind the scenes, Wuille said he is now posting it to the email list because it’s now it’s reached “a stage where I’d like to get it some more attention.”
Backing up a bit, “Script” is the smart contracting language in bitcoin, which allows users to specify certain conditions need to be met before the bitcoin can be spent. Say, funds are locked up until a certain time before they can be spent. Or, two people need to sign off on a transaction before the money can be moved, a concept called “multi-sig.”
This programmability is novel when it comes to digital money, since before bitcoin, it wasn’t possible to implement such rules without trusting a bank or a similar type of intermediary in the middle. do we really want smart contracts and dapps on the bitcoin blockchain? the ethereum blockchain for example is full of shit, think about dapps like cryptokitties. Miniscript allows for one to elegantly write Bitcoin scripts in a way that is far more readable. Sure, it's a subset of Bitcoin script, nonetheless it makes the art of programming programmable money a whole lot easier. Check it out here: http://bitcoin.sipa.be/miniscript/ |
|
|
|
Man you are really funny. |
|
|
|
I only use 2 exchanges right now which are Nauticus and Binance. Coinbase ripped me off last year and Kraken has tons of issues. What do you guys think of Nauticus and Binance? Do you guys think these are good exchanges that have a quality project?
Binance is great exchange and there is no doubt about that but there are some good exchange that catching my eyes ,a friend using this so I try to check it out and yes it’s legit and good exchange .this is CODEX.one Try to check it yourself mate and if you find it good then much better 2017, I used bittrex until I discovered binance. Since then it has been binance, I use binance all the time, the only time I don't use binance is when I'm using dex. Although I'm registered on many other exchanges but I still prefer binance with no solid reason though
The old days of bittrex is over and they are facing many issues just like kraken Can you elaborate on the issues please? |
|
|
|
Thanks for the link to the Equifax claim! You sir, are a God damn legend. |
|
|
|
I'm not sure if you're the mod of this thread, but I was curious of something, why do you support and encourage
a resident racist psychopath do be the main content provider?
He is. I don't understand why It is tolerated by the man with the plan or engaged by long time posters who should know better. It's slowly draining the joy from this thread. And any newcomer will wonder what the fuck is going on. I've noticed people like to pile on the merits to anyone that engages him and shows what a fool he is. That is their incentive and his of course is getting the recognition of existence he does not deserve. Roach is "The King 's fool". That is why I love him! ( Sometimes he even says things worth thinking about, rarely yes, but well, who cares).  I would pay good money to see Roach debate Roger Ver live on stage. Minus all of the hateful rhetoric, I think Roach would destroy. |
|
|
|
Who would have ever thunk, just a year ago or less that regular normies are going to start to get some real ideas about how bitcoin is different from the 2,000 plus shit coins and ICO snake oil salesman bullshit, including all shit coins, libra, ether, the bcashes, ripple or whatever other phoney baloneys are out their in btc wannabe status or sometimes like eth saying that they offer something different from btc, which ends up rising to the level of crap at best and scam in a worse case scenario.
I think in retrospect this Libra proposal is going to be looked back on as the thing that pushed Bitcoin over a particular hump. It has forced an awful lot of influential people to pause and consider what crypto actually is when they hadn't bothered before. Throughout these hearings there's been a definite paucity of disdain for BTC. Least expected bit - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf1dym16pocVery unexpected and great to see. Mr Davidson brings it. |
|
|
|
The majority of traders are completely fine with the exchanges taking a small percentage off trades, as demonstrated by the popularity of exchanges such as Binance, Coinbase, etc.. If people are predominantly concerned about fees alone, they wouldn't use Binance with a 0.1%, but rather use exchanges which offer much lower percentage rates (there are even sites with negative maker fees).
I'm not sure that I entirely agree with you. Have you considered that they use these exchanges because they don't have any other choice? Are there exchanges that don't charge percentage-based fees? |
|
|
|
Curious to know what you all think would be major disruptors for Bitcoin exchanges. Happy to kick things off with one of my own pet peeves, so here I go: - Exchanges typically take a percentage-based fee for every trade. The exchanges that don't take a % fee on a trade take a % fee on withdrawal. The one's that don't charge a fee, front-run/sell their own users to high-frequency traders (they call this "order flow") who then make their own trade based on any significant trends or actions. Taking a % fee is not in accordance to the spirit of Bitcoin, at least in the sense that if you transfer Bitcoin on the blockchain, it's for a fixed fee that is for the most part independent of the amount. So I believe an exchange that charged a fixed, fair and predictable fee in addition to not selling their users or their trades could be s disruptor.
Am I totally off base? Always curious to know what the Bitcointalk community has to say. So if you have an opinion, please share it. |
|
|
|
I think you are 100% correct roach. At one point while reading I thought perhaps that this guy was you, but then reconsidered at the end when I realized there was no needless hate padding the narrative. |
|
|
|
few things piss me off worse, smug fucking self serving parasites
You just described 99% of the people on this forum. People like Marcus of Tel Aviv and Trace Mayer constantly making up outrageously stupid lies about Bitcoin to try and trick people into buying it to enrich themselves like claiming Bitcoin is "tangible". Or claiming it's "decentralized" when tokens are non-fungible with transaction validators being designed to centralize making it nothing more than a permissioned ledger, govt tracking and enslavement system. Or that it removes middlemen when it has built-in, rent seeking middlemen. Bitcoin has zero fundamentals (except as a govt tracking system) and is complete garbage compared to physical metals Can you speak more on why Bitcoin is non-fungible? I understand it to be fungible, i.e., my 1BTC is equivalent to your 1BTC and therefore interchangeable for either of us to spend accordingly. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
and will be receiving a small bit of filthy fiat to buy more Bitcoin with. 
