Where's Antithesis when the Russians needed him the most?

During times like these, when people's currency is devalued to nothing and hear/read nonsensical stuff such as "SWIFT is banning Russia", they start wondering what's money after all: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30469383

Sometimes what's good and what's not makes a splash. You can never stop being bullish with Bitcoin.

It's the influence of the mass media effect. The media appear to abuse the unfortunate events and blame Putin due to his inhuman response to Ukraine. They don't want critical thinkers; remember: They step on your deep human feelings. Same happened with Covid news and everything that has to do with the climate change.

I do consider Putin's actions inhuman, but that doesn't mean I'll support Ukraine. The media, though, accomplish their goals every day. These are the worst days to hang out on social media; it's propaganda at its finest.

What's the dust limit if it isn't $0.01? 

You realize how bad that sounds, right? Humans changing the economics of an asset, just by their own will. This isn't a matter of consensus.

He's the richest scammer. I can't unsee the fact that he has some strong economic ties with it while he makes statements such as "Dogecoin works better as a medium of exchange while Bitcoin is better as a store of value", or "Bitcoin has greater fees opposed to Dogecoin, therefore Dogecoin is better money", or even worse "Tesla will stop accepting Bitcoin, because it's environmentally damaging".

I know he knows. He's smart. But, he's also an asshole.

Inflation doesn't necessarily support spending, it just supports it more than with the hard cap case. It depends on what you're pricing it with. If you price it in Bitcoin, it indeed discourages you to hold it as it'll, theoretically, cost less BTC in the long term (ceteris paribus). If you price it in USD, it's in favor of you to keep it.

Generally, if there's no production, the currency shouldn't be inflating. What concerns me is that the inflation rate was arbitrarily chosen. It was 1,000,000 DOGE, then it became 500,000, 250,000, 125,000, 62,500, 31,250, 15,625 and it's now generating 10,000 DOGE 'til eternity.

Also, why is that a valid argument? Say, I, create another fork of Bitcoin that I call it Dogecoin 2.0, and which inflates more than Dogecoin does, in the corresponding percentages. Did I just make a better "transactional" currency? (Note that transactional currency is redundancy; a currency is by definition used for making transactions)

Do you accept Lightning?

I honestly believe that it can work in practice, but how can you convince someone accept it if there's such a worrying drawback? On the other hand, you've already convinced them to accept credit & debit payments. Hmm, I don't know. It sounds plainly wrong to consider an unconfirmed transaction as settled, but you've made some good points.

This opens another discussion. Keep it on-topic.

Probably the latter affect the former. People who dislike Bitcoin for some reason will get advantage of this environmental impact. In fact, few propagandists found some really attractive titles. For instance, "One Bitcoin transaction costs millions of dollars!" which is false broadly; the transaction cost isn't inextricably linked with the computational power that is required to solve a block. Another catchy phrase is "Bitcoin: Wasting more energy than <insert_small_country>".

Θες να μας πεις το λόγο, τουλάχιστον;

Δεν υπάρχει τέτοια υποδιαίρεση. 

You see, there's a lack of confidence of what's what. You say Bitcoin is where people will store wealth, but Monero is where the daily transactions will take place. I find this oxymoron.

Bitcoin isn't an object. You don't store value by the assumption that one will use it in the future for anything different than transacting with it. It's not gold that can be used in technology, jewelry etc.; the only purpose of Bitcoin is to use it as a medium of exchange and people HODL it so that they can either use it in the future to buy things or trade it with another person who wants it to buy things.

The value of Bitcoin comes solely from this phenomenon. Now if everyone preferred Monero over Bitcoin, it wouldn't make sense to use it as a store of value.

I personally find it insignificant. In a way, it reveals you that the founder didn't believe it will reach a large transaction volume, so that miners could be content from the fees. It gives me the impression that the security needed to somehow be arranged, but it couldn't unless the miners enjoyed this perpetual inflation.

Please don't, stop, leave the thread and get some help.

You're correct, but that's up to credit.

When I pay with cash:

• The merchant sees the transaction immediately.
• The merchant receives the money immediately.
• The transaction is settled immediately and cannot be reversed.

There has to be a question, otherwise we'd all use this method to avoid such expenses once a few months. Contrarily, in Bitcoin, there's absolutely no question nor intermediaries to address to. I'm not saying many would attempt to defraud their merchants that way, but I can imagine a smartass who'd pay off few miners every few weeks, just to avoid giving his allowance at the supermarket.

You should see this button in "Receive" if you've enabled Lightning:


To receive money in the Lightning Network you need to have some receiving capacity. In Electrum, when you open a channel, you only have the equivalent of the amount deposited as sending capacity. You'll have to spend some to increase your receiving capacity. For instance, you can exchange LN-BTC for BTC in boltz.exchange.

See in the links below;

• Basics of the Lightning Network
• The Lightning Network FAQ
• Electrum Lightning Network walkthrough

There are money checkers that can detect fake cash. You should not even attempt it in a supermarket as there are cameras everywhere. Besides, not getting your transaction confirmed isn't necessarily done on purpose and even worse: You can't know if it's done on purpose. It's a function of the system.

You need to execute the Bitcoin daemon with a --reindex in front of it. I neither know anything about MacOS, but according to stackexchange.com, you can achieve it this way:

Your error occurs when there's something wrong with the database or with the data directory. Could you check if the Bitcoin data folders are read-only? According to bitcoin wiki, that should be in:

Today, while I was shopping, I surprisingly witnessed a young teen (around 16-17) who asked the supermarket cashier if the operators think of accepting cryptocurrencies nowadays that it's being a "thing", which is kinda unusual in my areas; I don't know about you, but Bitcoin isn't even in the threshold of being considered an investment where I live, let alone a currency. He got a negative response.

This made me thoughtful. What happens when you want to pay with Bitcoin where there's rush, say a long queue of people which happens to be the case pretty often at supermarkets? On-chain is definitely not an option as you want from the transaction to take few seconds, so the next customer can push their products up. However, Lightning can become such a hustle when you want to transfer the equivalent of 200-300 EUR. Just to think that an issue with routing or capacity occurs while others wait for you, scares me.

The only thing that comes to my mind is to accept unconfirmed transactions with disabled RBF. Now, whether the amount is decent to pay a miner half of it for double-spending is another thing to discuss. It's not ideal and I'm sure those few-seconds-interval cryptos will find their way to attract by taking advantage of this "unfortunately sounded" problem. 

I want to think that the overwhelming majority of Bitcoin users (who use it as a currency) have self-custody of their funds. There isn't really a reason to buy Bitcoin if it isn't for speculation otherwise; you're buying or accepting it if you want to purchase things with it. You get self-custody, because you want cash.

It wouldn't make sense to use Bitcoin and leave it on exchanges unless you just want to buy something that can't be bought otherwise, which I proudly admit it's casinos, drugs, weapons, while you don't care about the whole decentralized-innovative-money thing.

And yet, too few use Bitcoin to gain privacy. The main utility comes from the fact that it's hard cash. I'm using Bitcoin to avoid having a third party telling me what to do; 'cause it's borderless; 'cause it's transparent; I don't have to trust a financial institution, which is provably faulty; human behavior is faulty when they gain too much power. We, don't like that. We've re-invented money, decentralized.

There's another thing that should bother you: Scarcity. I'm not talking about the bullshit they say about the infinite XMR. I'm referring to digital scarcity. Look around you, people like things that are scarce. The paradox of crypto is that the coins are scarce, but the currencies are abundant. There's no second best in terms of scarcity.

I comprehend that Monero, as a whole, offers better privacy than Bitcoin. But, there are other factors to count as well for your assertion/prediction to turn out true.

Why would you hand out your private keys to your relatives? Why can't you simply access their internet?

Again, the internet is down when the location is in the process of being conquered. If that's the case, you shouldn't even think of purchasing stuff; you should leave your place the sooner you're able to.

Do you have the 3 individual public keys that are used to generate the multi-sig address?
Do you have 2 out of the 3 seed phrases? (or private keys)

If it's a yes to both, you can recover your money. If you don't have 1 out of the 3 individual public keys, then you can create infinite addresses. The task of finding your multi-sig address' lost public key is equal to searching for an address by picking random public keys. You're never gonna make it.

Note that I'm using the term individual to distinguish it from the master public key.