Just a correction;
It doesn't matter how many honest nodes there are. The majority of the computational power that is used should come from honest nodes. That's all. A dishonest node who owns 51% of the hash rate can attack successfully.

Yes, I've said it before;

Being able to control the money of the people has gone too far. People need to transact without censorship, permissionless-ly. If the government starts censoring your money and tells you what you're allowed to do with it, it won't be long 'til it starts dictating your behavior and thoughts as well. 

As for Crys Sky, there are much more deaths from those who hadn't vaccinated unless we question statistics.

Alternatively, you can try to connect to my Electrum server via Tor.

I've set txid_limit=100000000 in my configuration file, so it should allow large queries. If I were you, though, I'd listen to @hosseinimr93 and setup my own node. It's more practical and far more private, especially if we're talking about thousands of TXOs.

Hmm... It fails to connect to the servers. Assuming you'd reinstalled it and it didn't work, do the following: Rename or delete the “certs” directory in AppData. If you're using Windows, that's on:

It contains the certificates of those servers. I remember that I had the same issue and it worked when it re-downloaded the certificates.

Why would you be able to spend zero satoshis? What's the point of making those spendable?

But, I didn't propose this to successfully predict the price. I'm just interested to see who's making the most successful predictions. No?

I hate visiting the internet on Valentine's day, but when I laugh on these memes I feel even worse. 

Okay, due to the unbelievably many predictions of this thread, this came to my mind: Gathering all the predictions in one place and start calculating who are the best WO predictors. How does that sound?

I'll skip the fact that you can't live off signature campaigns in developed countries. Let's focus on: Why should you quit your job? How much time does it take to make a few posts every week?

If the signature campaigns asks for 50 posts, okay, be it. But, I'm not sure if I can post more than 60-70 times even if my campaign says so, let alone constructively. So, I can't answer to your question(s) unless you become more clear.

No idea about the signature campaigns, but I'm sure this forum has become the reason for lots to quit their jobs.

Honestly, I hate maximalism too, but during the last 2 years of my cryptocurrency journey I've concluded that it's all about Bitcoin. Those “toxic” Bitcoiners do point fingers very often, but I've found none who's done it unreasonably. Take for instance us, who're trying to understand why NFTs.

I like thinking that the freedom of Bitcoin leaves room for other projects to grow, but I can't unsee that its technology promotes the exact opposite; one blockchain. The point of it is decentralization. There's literally no other reason to distribute a database if it's not to avoid the central point of failure. If this isn't your project's priority, then you're doing things wrong. And 99% of those cryptos with “potential” lack in this part.

So, if we're going to build interesting things in a flawed way, it's a big no from me.

Another argument that contradicts with gaming & blockchain is the source code. The developers of an online game should not reveal their source code, but the blockchain ideology works by the assumption that everything's transparent.

Confirmation and verification are two different procedures.

The former is when the miners have already verified the transactions they've received. Those are inserted into their candidate block which they then try to mine it, and it make it official; the miner broadcasts their success and the transactions get 1 confirmation. The latter is when the nodes check to see if the transactions they've received comply with the consensus rules.

If I don't care on spending lots of UTXO in one shot, reusing addresses, mixing coins, coinjoining etc., that doesn't necessarily mean that Bitcoin is bad for criminals. Lots have been caught and it's generally not a good idea if you're going to do something really bad, but it depends from whom you want to hide. Is it your wife or your employer? They aren't going to find out much if you use Bitcoin. Is it the government? You're screwed.

However, I read that those two kept the private keys of the 119,754 BTC to a cloud server. I highly doubt they were cautious enough. Also, this doesn't make sense:

You can't compare those two, they are apple and oranges even if that sounds strange.

Central bank digital currencies are going to replace cash, they won't be an alternative to a digitally represented fiat. A transaction that is done via your bank is an IOU-based. CBDCs won't have any difference from cash other than humiliatingly bad privacy. So, it should be properer to say that CBDCs have disadvantages over, say Bitcoin.

Who's using a blockchain just for payments? I'm using it solely for the entire financial sovereignty pack. There's no trust required, which eliminates tons of flaws. It's always online. It's hard cash. It's censorship resistant. It's faster than banks.

There's no way to have the above without a blockchain. Therefore, blockchain exists to satisfy these needs.

We're trying to comprehend their way of thinking, though. We're having this discussion to conclude if the NFTs can indeed have a legitimate and practical usage.

I know I'm a little late to this thread, but I want to express my opinion about this matter which is truly important to discuss. I don't like to support something that goes against my moral temperament.

Does Bitcoin use much energy? Yes, it does. The security of Bitcoin and its environmental footprint vary analogously. When there's a rise in difficulty, it means more energy is used to strengthen the network.

According to the above statement it'd be logical to conclude that Bitcoin is not environmentally friendly. However, this is really not the case. It indeed is. It's an innovation in which the people try to find the least expensive sources of energy. It happens to be renewable. So, it incentivizes you to not harm the environment. And it turns out that the transition is easy. More than 50% of the hashes are green. Which part of the banking system uses renewable sources? Definitely not that much, even if they aren't comparable.

The world tries to transit to cheaper energy, not necessarily renewable. Remember: Humans want incentives. Every action they take is based on those either consciously or not. Morally-wise it's good to have voluntary incentives, but there should always be an incentive.

It happens for the renewable sources to be extremely cheap compared to non-renewable ones, fortunately.

I think that's the best part of their invention.

They created sound money whose main aspect was censorship resistance. And what could it make it susceptible to censorship? The founder. Remove the founder and leave the repository to a few decently trustworthy developers; no one can abuse the ability to change Bitcoin and make their change official by the alibi that they've founded it. Impressive.

And what is worth? Prices in free market are constantly fluctuating. You state that an NFT is worth 10,000 sats and whoever takes it, takes the sats, right?

That's a big if. Even if the whole world got into Bitcoin, taxes, stocks, real estate, bonds etc., if everything was calculated in BTC, it'd be unusually unhealthy economically for 1 sat to worth so much whether the dollar had been hyper inflated or not.

In such crazy scenarios, here they come the hard forks.

You can't have a decentralized stable coin. The money supply has to somehow be adjusted so that 1 unit is equal with another. For instance, if Tether sees demand dropping, it may choose to burn some. But, even if you could, the fact that your units equalize with a centralized currency (which is the USD) it means that yours is too.

If one entity (or entities) decide the monetary policy of the currency your “decentralized” stable coin is pegged to, then it's indirectly affected which makes it prune to a central point of failure.

That's not if cryptocurrencies were honest. That's if crypto scammers were honest. Lumping those two together is foolish the least. Haven't we got rid of the criminal usage and environmental disaster arguments yet?

But, there's no use of the gossip protocol. When you're connecting with me, I'm handing you over my URI which contains the onion address. (Unless that's not what you're talking about)

Anyway, I've forgotten to mention about @darkv0rt3x. They voluntarily assisted me through Telegram and I hadn't even asked for it. We were searching of what was causing this problem for an hour, trying different commands, retrying them, exchanging screenshots etc. They even invited me in a c-lightning Telegram channel to discuss it with others. Thank you dark! This is the kind of people the crypto space needs. Willing to spent a spare of their time to encourage others continue.

Back to my issue. This is my getinfo:

So, apparently, I now have two onion addresses and the second one definitely not works. According to dark, the cj5sy...onion works on main net, but not on test net. Any clues?

And what happens if the game shuts down?

Doesn't that mean that the developer has to use the same kind of character properties? Also, what's the need for a blockchain if that's all you want? Export your character in a .chr format and import it wherever and whenever you want.

But, a character from, say GTA V, should only be playable in GTA V or even into few other versions of the game. Don't you already trust Rockstar Games for keeping their servers running? Isn't there already a central point of failure?