The fee you take is quite high IMO.
The bitcoin price on Coinbase is $235.7, but I can only get 0.9206 btc if I deposited that amount with Payeer or OKpay.
The fees will have to stay high as (I'm guessing) OKPay and Payeer will also charge you their own fees. But for someone not registered and verified with any exchange, that's still very convenient and fast. |
|
|
|
Here's the post with some details of few paid GAW shills (identified through leaked GAW's emails). All of them are enrolled in various campaigns, respective managers should consider whether they want those people promoting their businesses or not. This is worth a little bump. Now improved with links to each user's profile. |
|
|
|
Yo, PranLele, this is the wrong subforum for that.
It's actually pretty relevant to Bitcoin. Looks like it's WU's response to emerging BTC remittance services. I think we had ~10 new start-ups of that sort in the last 2 years. If some of them turned to be successful, WU would be in trouble. So the question is whether BTC-powered services will still be able to offer cheaper services than rippled WU. |
|
|
|
People are free to create their own Bitcoin foundations, and obviously you can't be held accountable for something that others are free to or not to do, but all in all I personally believe that the Bitcoin foundation is a huge issue. You may not take yourself as "the official Bitcoin foundation" but anyone from the Media, Policy makers, and law enforcement will.
You probably went too far with 'law enforcement', but yes, policy makers and (most of all) media could see TBF as 'the official voice of bitcoin'. But I don't see much could be done about it. It's a common mentality, that there must always be some central authority, leader etc. If there was no TBF they would just pick any other (largest available) bitcoin organisation and we'll have the same story over again. But maybe some visible, short disclaimer on the TBF website would do the trick. Some short explanation that TBF is association of Bitcoin enthusiasts but does not represent the entire community. Just thinking out loud... |
|
|
|
This is completely wrong! I don't understand why so many people are supporting this?  I don't even think bitcoin needs Bitcoin Foundation! Bitcoin was invented by satoshi without any foundation! A very wrong move  What is wrong? Did you care to read the thread? Satoshi has never aspired/applied/agreed to be 'founder member' of TBF. Why do you think he should be listed as such? Did satoshi ever tell us to open Bitcoin Foundation? What are you talking about? No, he didn't, therefore his name should be removed, that's the topic of this thread. Your response [to removing Satoshi's name]: This is completely wrong! A very wrong move Please start reading threads before replying, otherwise you're just spamming and you'll be reported. |
|
|
|
This is completely wrong! I don't understand why so many people are supporting this? I don't even think bitcoin needs Bitcoin Foundation! Bitcoin was invented by satoshi without any foundation! A very wrong move What is wrong? Did you care to read the thread? Satoshi has never aspired/applied/agreed to be 'founder member' of TBF. Why do you think he should be listed as such? |
|
|
|
In mining, lots of costs can be deducted as company expense/investment, while the bitcoin income can disappear into cyberspace, maybe it is this aspect attracts lots of industry miners  Good point. But still, to pull that off, the official, recorded income would have to be higher (at least slightly) to justify such operations. |
|
|
|
How about we remove TBF? How can they even think of such a thing. If there was no Satoshi there would have been no Bitcoin. No Bitcoin = no Bitcoin Foundation.
Most of you guys are totally missing a point. TBF have been criticised in the past for listing Satoshi as founder member (without his consent). Satoshi had nothing to do with TBF, and it looked like they put his name there to add some credibility. I fully support Fenton on this one. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin behemoth Coinbase launches in the UKhttp://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/apr/29/bitcoin-coinbase-launches-in-ukCoinbase, the American firm which has been called “the AOL of Bitcoin”, is to launch its services in the UK for the first time.
From Wednesday, British customers will be able to load up the company’s bitcoin wallets with pound sterling in addition to US dollars. Coinbase will also let financial traders speculate on the the price of bitcoin against pounds and euros on its exchange.
The move brings Coinbase into the competitive British market, which co-founder Fred Ehrsam argues is buoyed by the forward-looking attitude of UK regulators towards Bitcoin, as well as other financial technology innovations. “The payments regulators and the Treasury are taking a very balanced view of bitcoin. They’re really taking their time to understand the core technology prior to regulating.” Same topic also here (didn't want to start new thread for that): http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/04/29/uk-bitcoin-britain-coinbase-idUKKBN0NK01E20150429
|
|
|
|
I've been studying their strategies for awhile now so I know pretty much exactly what they'll do, when it comes to things they don't like they resort to either censorship or denial, or very occasionally they'll resort to back-handed character attacks.
As true as that may be, I wouldn't say BBC is against Bitcoin. I don't watch/listen much TV or radio, but bbc.co.uk seems to report on Bitcoin quire regularly and the general tone, so far, was rather neutral (informative) to slight positive. I know internet is the fastest way to get you information but still television and radio is a useful things altough nowadays is not really source to broadcast things but why not we tried it since we got the chance to broadcast it in both of them. The more you broadcast the more people will know it so its worth to try
Agree. Whats more, Bitcoin mentioning in the national radio/tv channel adds some sort of legitimacy. Internet is great thing, but anyone can present made-up story as news or fact, but once you see something in the official media, you know it's a 'real deal'. |
|
|
|
Yes, we accept fiat payments via Payeer, OKPay and Interkassa. And they are auto-converted to BTC and FJ can be used as an exchange.
Could you give a little more details on that? Is there any max limit amount you can deposit/withdraw with fiat? What rate do you use for conversion and if I'm making deposit do I know beforehand how much will I get in BTC? |
|
|
|
I sold all my Bitcoins when I learned SHA256 was designed by Zionists controlling the NSA/USA.
And you sold it for currency controlled by who/what? Paycoin. Paycoin is controlled by das Volk! Paycoin is the only correct Geld for those who value purity and oppose the Zionist agenda of world control. Guess that's probably the only way left to market this crap. |
|
|
|
Is it only for top 1? Or divided onto more players on top?
Top 1, but prizes are separate for each game (there are 3 od them) |
|
|
|
I sold all my Bitcoins when I learned SHA256 was designed by Zionists controlling the NSA/USA.
And you sold it for currency controlled by who/what? |
|
|
|
If the majority of the BTC available will go to few hands (which is already possible as I wanted to point out) what then? What prevents them to play with it?
Look at the stock market: this is happening on an everyday base.
I have more fear of BTC coins being in a few hands than a possible 51% attack to the mining itself.
And, if this will happen, this world will not be as different as the outside financial world which is already controlled by very selected few.
I hope this makes sense.
Holding >50% of PoW coin supply =/= centralisation. You control the price* (to some degree) but you don't control the network. And you can manipulate the market with much less than 50%. Such risk is inevitable. Could you imagine any currency/asset that is always equally distributed and impossible to hoard? Even if that was possible, the currency would be useless. Edit: * to fully control the price you would also need significant fiat reserves. |
|
|
|
Face it, Bitcoin died a year ago. Use it to gamble, buy your drugs or move on. There's nothing to be seen here anymore.
And yet you're still here, spamming with your sig to earn something that 'died'... |
|
|
|
If we do not get enough participants in the 2nd 25mBTC GTD, we can move it to a weekend tournament only. Hopefully that will help with some of the players that are not able to make the week day times.
Yes to that. If 2nd GTD is not popular during weekdays, keep it only as a weekend event (any reasonable UK time will do). |
|
|
|
|
Marco,
I'm switching to other campaign(s). Thanks for everything and best of luck.
ps. Payment received.
|
|
|
|
|
Joining the campaign (agreed with Carra in PM):
• username: pawel7777
• post count (incl this one): 1996
• BTC address: 1CstuTvCxadzEq3GzxTsDpB55VJJTJoScd
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
