Electrum has a mobile version too. He already talked about it though he had emphasis on the desktop version but the mobile wallet is equally good. Electrum's Android application has never convinced me to make it my main mobile wallet (if I needed one). I do have it installed but the feel of it isn't comparable with the desktop version. It also doesn't have some features like coin control and message signing. I think the console tab is also missing. |
|
|
|
U Rollbit kampanji kod Hhampuza ima jedno slobodno mjesto za Full Membera. We have 1x Full Member position open, apply now! Uslovi su ostali isti. Sedmična zarada je $40 a potrebno je napisati minimalno 20 postova, od čega 10 mora da bude u gambling forumu. |
|
|
|
I receive payment directly to the exodus wallet I created for my business. Exodus wouldn't be my first choice, but that's your decision. If you only accept Bitcoin, it makes more sense to use a Bitcoin-only wallet rather than Exodus, a multi-currency app. There are very few things that your employees need to know if you think about it. They need to provide the customer with a valid Bitcoin address and ask them to send the correct amount. Then they need to ensure that the coins were sent and received on the shop's end. If you are reusing the same address, it's even easier and they won't have to generate new addresses. When you have time or when you are in the shop, you can change that address and give them a new one every day or once per week. How do you handle unconfirmed transactions? Let's say I am a customer looking to buy something with bitcoin. Are you going to make me wait until the transaction gets confirmed on the blockchain or what exactly happens? |
|
|
|
|
I have tried to help the guy on numerous occasions but it's like trying to go through a brick wall. It's impossible to do. I haven't been in the hardware wallet sub in the last few days so I missed his most recent exploits. After a quick look, I can see it's about passphrases, adding accounts, using Ledger Live on a new computer and stuff covered many times in the past.
I don't understand the motives because he is not in a signature campaign. He never struck me as being a spammer in that sense. I always felt like he was someone completely unsecure about anything he does with possible some mental condition. Not trying to hurt the guy with my words. But if you have to ask the same things over and over again for years, it doesn't look like you are going to learn anything.
|
|
|
|
About BTC minimum withdrawal you can withdraw also 1$ if you want Are you absolutely sure about that because the site's withdrawal page shows that the minimum is $5. It's $5 for all options except the Bank API one. BTC fee is really low because payment is processed in BTC bech-32. OK, but I need precise numbers. Is there a fixed withdrawal fee or are they dynamic and depend on current BTC network conditions? |
|
|
|
|
You haven't mentioned how you receive Bitcoin. Are you using a payment processor to handle the transactions or do you receive the coins on a private wallet that you have set up? Like Electrum or something similar. You should mention that because it's easier to give proper suggestions when we know what we are dealing with exactly.
What part of the sending/receiving process do your employees not understand? Are they struggling with one particular problem or is it all alien technology to them?
|
|
|
|
I'm wondering if this person forget to pay, someone else will buy this domain and destroy it. What do you mean exactly? The domain is not for sale, and according to Whois records, the registry expiry date is in 2029. But the site is funded by the Bitcoin community and they require and ask for donations to keep it going. Are you referring to that? |
|
|
|
The word " anonymous" is only mentioned once in the Bitcoin whitepaper. Satoshi uses it when talking about the privacy of public keys, and not transactions or people. " Anonymity" isn't mentioned even once. "Privacy" is discussed in the segment with public keys. The word "private" is mentioned 3 times to explain what private keys are. Bitcoin was never intended to be private. This is just Chainalysis tapping their own shoulders saying how good they are. Chainalysis be like:  |
|
|
|
This is a great way to get the locals interested in Bitcoin. Excellent work! Since your first mention of it, have you done any other episodes where you talked about Bitcoin? You could make it a daily or weekly thing. Devote a period of time in each show/week and talk about a particular Bitcoin-related subject. QUESTIONS FROM THE PARENTS
- Is Bitcoin secured and how do you earn from it?
ANSWER: Bitcoin was the first coin created, and it has never been hacked in terms of security, it is highly secure. Well, there was a case in 2010 that became known as the Value Overflow Incident where a hacker (or a group of people) took advantage of a bug in the source code and generated over 180 billion bitcoins for themselves. This was, of course, fixed. Bitcoin could be earned when it was still in its early stages but now, you can only earn as a miner, but you can buy a small amount and hold it. Are you talking about earning from faucets and giveaways? It's hard to find them nowadays that will be worth the effort. Like any other currency, you can work for it and be paid in Bitcoin. No one can ban you from receiving it. - Can someone manage it for you (since they are always kind of busy) It's easy to manage. The whole point is securing the seed/and or private keys properly. And you do that once. That's not a process that needs repeating if you did it properly. Store the words on paper or metal, and keep them safe. You will only need the words during wallet recoveries. Using a hardware wallet simplifies everything a lot. |
|
|
|
|
The dollar is already digital. Cash isn't used as much as it was in the past and future societies will be cashless ones. The only thing those is power have to do is to create a system with stricter control that would allow them to govern you by fear. If you aren't in line with their agenda, you can be punished by not being allowed to use your digital and centralized coins the way you want to.
For something like that to happen, you have to get rid of the competition. What is the competition to a fully controlled government coin? The one that is decentralized and trustless.
But they are not going to ban it just like that because they don't want to look like the enemy. They want you to request for bitcoin to be banned because it's a hazard for the environment, it's used for money laundering, financing terrorism, and all other sorts of illegal activities. The negative portrayal of Bitcoin will continue to show the people that it's not in their interest to use this currency. And if and when enough interest is generated and someone proposes that we should maybe ban it, the majority will get on board.
Stay educated. In the name of the late George Carlin, don't trust anything your government tells you. Nothing. 0%, nada!
|
|
|
|
Judging by this find, it is possible that Satoshi chose between the names "netcoin" and "bitcoin", but chose the second option, or he prepared absolutely two projects, but the first one was not released at all. I don't think satoshi worked on a different project. He was probably just unsure about how to call the creation and that's why he registered two different domains. It seems unlikely that the person or group that though of something as good as Bitcoin would also work on a different project that was abandoned for whatever reason, and there is absolutely no mentions of it anywhere. |
|
|
|
With such positive developments, i hope crypto winter will be over soon and Bitcoin will rise again to moon. The general state of the world economy isn't good and Bitcoin can't grow in such conditions. The prices for gas and electricity are going through the roof, and as a consequence, prices rise for almost anything you can think of. If you told someone in the Western Europe they will struggle to pay their bills next year, they would probably laugh at you. But to some, that is exactly what is happening. So, people have to break their piggy banks and unfortunately sell assets such as bitcoin they intended to hold much longer. I think we will need to be patient and it will take a while before better days will come. |
|
|
|
As I mentioned in my overview, I am thinking of ways to somewhat alleviate that issue and give a clearer picture of the amount of more active members and might be implemented in the next month's overview. I don't think you need to change that. It's OK the way it is. If you were to change that and consider members as "active" if they wrote at least 10 posts in their local boards, you will run into other problems. Although it might work for large subs such as the Russian, where you have thousands of posts each month, it's going to look bad on boards where the total is 100 per month. The stats could then show that the smallest local forums only have 1 or 2 active members. If you are considering adding something like that, I would suggest not making it a high number. 3 or 5 posts should be enough to call a person active on his local. |
|
|
|
I'm interested as long as it doesn't force users to subscribe to the content in question. Even if it ends up being some newsletter type of content, it's not that big of a problem to create a brand new throwaway email that you can use for that purpose only. Even if the database gets leaked/hacked, you can abandon it easily because it's not used for anything else that is important to you. I am just guessing that you don't want to subscribe to anything for possible privacy concerns. |
|
|
|
|
@Gianluca95
Besides being their signature campaign manager, are you also helping out by answering community questions and concerns? If so, can you take a look at the questions I posted in my previous reply in this thread? It's at the top of this page.
|
|
|
|
|
Are there enough threads and topics to warrant a new sub-forum only for the discussion of the BSV fraud? If it's going to have 5-6 threads, there isn't really a need for it. If we remember the usual responses when people requested other subs, like for the Lightning Network, mods usually explained that an existing sub-forum would need to be flooded with that particular topic for a new sub to be created. That's not really the case with BSV and craig wrong.
Despite that, I would still support the idea. Especially because people like gmaxwell have been silenced to speak out outside of the forum. Craig and his cult members are a threat to everything Bitcoin. They have the financial means to support their fraudulent campaigns even in court. It's a danger because they can always find those willing to accept a bribe.
|
|
|
|
I'll take this thread as an opportunity to present this little proposal to our administrators: from now on whenever a new member joins the forum, redirect them to the FAQ thread where Merit and basic rules of the forum are explained. There has been a lot of talk and different proposals for a welcome message that should be shown to new users. Theymos proposed it here. It's been 4 years now and we still don't have one. But don't worry. As soon as we name an official custodial of all the world's bitcoins and the next Ice Age passes, there will definitely be one. |
|
|
|
Why should it be done somewhere else, really? Because even though the idea is to summarize what's been happening on the forum in the last week, I don't see it being that attractive for regular forum users. Chances are, they already know about it and they have seen the discussions when they happened live. But if written elsewhere and advertised properly, new users could see it and go: there is an interesting bitcoin forum called Bitcointalk. I am going to register there and check it out personally. If a good amount of publicity is what we want, then guest posting on crypto news/blog sites is the way to go. Yes, but don't you have to pay for such advertisement? Unless that money comes from the forum's budget, no one is going to pay it out of their own pockets. |
|
|
|
I actually have the Premium version, I purchased it 1.5 years ago when I was a writer for OWNR Wallet (thanks iTunes gift cards). But no, I haven't ran the website through any kind of checker, only the legal letters. Because as you can imagine, I was paranoid of spelling errors and inaccuracies of intent in them. Grammarly did pick up a few typos as well. Those are corrected in the quoted part of my previous message, but I didn't single them out in any way. I don't see the need to have a welcome message if that message will only sum up what was already written on the website. |
|
|
|
I ran the test version of the website through Grammarly Premium. I assume you used the free version because the Premium one suggested plenty of other corrections. I didn't apply all of them like a robot, but I did change the ones I think make sense or might sound better. Here is the entire page in a quote. Feel free to check and apply the changes you want: Bitcoin is already using clean energy.
Help stop the legislation that would force a change in Bitcoin to abandon the Proof-of-Work model.
Common myths about Bitcoin's energy use
In the days following the Ethereum Merge, critics have pointed to Bitcoin's energy use as the leading cause of pollution - as you will see, these myths are false.
Myth: Bitcoin uses as much energy as <country>
Televisions, aeroplanes, Christmas lights, and plastic require enormous amounts of energy to be produced and used: what is the amount of energy considered excessive to create them? Why is this calculation done for Bitcoin and not for other goods?
According to data from the Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index, devices kept on standby in the United States alone could power the bitcoin network for more than a year and a half. (a figure that has constantly been decreasing)
Mining bitcoin is actually quite environmentally friendly compared to mining gold.
Other human activities (Netflix) produce comparable (Amazon) results (YouTube).
Myth: Proof of Work is more wasteful than Proof of Stake
Proof of Stake (PoS) uses a lot less energy than Proof of Work (PoW). However:
Proof of Stake increases centralization - The top 2 staking pools control almost 50% of the staked coins between them*, increasing the risk of transaction censorship.
Staking participants can't just stop staking with a malicious pool because the pool is likely to have more crypto to offset the loss. This cannot happen in Proof of Work.
It is likely that companies in charge of staking pools might misappropriate funds to collateralize loans. You might lose your crypto to bankruptcy if these loans are defaulted on.
On the contrary, Proof of Work is proven to be censorship-resistant:
Miners can easily prevent 51% attacks by leaving mining pools that grow too large - this has prevented centralization on at least one occasion.
Hashpower is not money, so mining pools cannot misappropriate it for other uses.
Miners can stop their operations any time they like.
*Data correct as of September 20, 2022. The top 5 Ethereum staking pools were: Lido Finance with at least 31% of coins, Coinbase at 14.7% of coins, Kraken at 8.5% of coins, Binance at 6.6% of coins, and staked.us at about 3% of coins. Source
Bitcoin mining has the potential to incentivize other industries to switch to green energy.
Proof of Stake (PoS) uses a lot less energy than Proof of Work (PoW). However:
Bitcoin improves the efficiency of the energy industry. It can help prevent "Renewable Curtailment" and make it profitable to capture gas otherwise destined to be burned in gas flaring, encouraging producers to reduce carbon emissions. Low-carbon energy projects such as hydroelectric, nuclear, or renewables can be made profitable by selling the excess energy produced for the mining of bitcoin.
A considerable part of the energy produced is not used correctly, partly because it is wasted in unprofitable ways, such as dispersion in networks or thermal dispersion in endothermic engines, etc. This is partly because it is produced in places or moments where the energy is unnecessary, e.g., in power plants and off-peak nuclear power plants. Bitcoin can make a huge contribution to this space by efficiently using resources that would otherwise be wasted.
In 2019, rejected energy accounted for over two-thirds of all electricity generation. Bitcoin mining incentivizes the development of more efficient generation processes to generate electricity that is sold to Bitcoin miners at a later date. This ultimately reduces the number of fossil fuels used and subsequently burnt into the atmosphere.
Bitcoin mining can clear the queue of on-hold renewable projects in the United States and other countries by allowing the electric utilities to make back their expenses by selling renewable-powered electricity to miners after project completion.
Why is Proof of Stake bad for Bitcoin at this time?
Bitcoin uses a development system called BIP documents to make protocol changes affecting all Bitcoin users. It is roughly equivalent to the Internet Engineering Task Force's RFC document.
Most of the Bitcoin community must agree with a BIP before it gets implemented.
Such an agreement has not been reached for using Proof of Stake in Bitcoin. In fact, a majority of users are opposed to this change because Proof of Stake has not been trialed thoroughly.
History has repeatedly shown that you must fork it with the change and demonstrate its use in real-world conditions to prove that a huge modification is good for Bitcoin. [1] [2] [3]
Greenpeace is attempting to force a change of code into Bitcoin.
Greenpeace and influential people such as Larsen are lobbying the US government to ban Proof of Work.
This action does not have the support of most of the Bitcoin community because nobody has even written a BIP for that.
Bitcoin and its full-node implementation Bitcoin Core have a long history of thoroughly reviewing changes before they are committed and deployed. Attempting to force the hands of developers in reaction to banning Proof of Work is not the solution to external problems not directly caused by Bitcoin and Proof of Work.
We must show them that Proof of Stake is the wrong solution for Bitcoin's energy problem. We must also show all detractors that the correct way to propose a change to the Bitcoin protocol is by writing a BIP, not by making a fuss about it in the media.
Stop Proof-of-Stake Lobbying Now
It's time for all bitcoiners to rise and defend their currency from external threats.
Sign up for this mailing list so that you can be alerted about new developments in this space.
Show your solidarity to Bitcoin, even if it's just a tweet. Share hashtag #EcoFriendlyPoW.
Write to your MP, senator, or member of Congress explaining the benefits of Proof of Work mining for the environment. Source: https://cleanup123456789.carrd.co |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
