|
Worthless article. It basically says nothing beyond the paragraph above. Don't bother.
|
|
|
|
|
I have donated [a large amount of] BTC to Wikileaks, [a small amount of] BTC to Ross Ulbricht's defense fund, and [a small amount of] BTC to Burt Wagner's defense fund (in today's BTC).
|
|
|
|
It is not possible that one country adopt bitcoin as its currency. With bitcoin it is not possible to do monetary policies and without that politics it is very hard to govern. ...
It is possible. There are many countries that do not have their own currency. No country will adopt bitcoin as its country, since its government cant control it and cant get something useful for them. The government is just a group of politician, not bitcoin enthusiast. I agree with this. No government wants something they can't control. How the state will conduct its own fiscal and budget policy if they can affect the value of their own currencies? This is simply impossible and unlikely scenario in the real politics. Bitcoin has been and will remain the currency of individuals, not the currency of government or state. There are many countries that have already adopted currencies that they cannot control. There will be more, and eventually when Bitcoin becomes widely used and more stable, a country may prefer to adopt it over another country's currency because they can't get screwed by that country's monetary policy. |
|
|
|
I have been "playing" bitcoin since first day i knew about it in early january 2014 i have done a lot of thing in bitcoin such as buying bitcoin just to save in online wallet, Mining with hardware, buy cloudmining contracts, Trading for fiat, Trading for Altcoin, saving bitcoin to paper wallet, and try to redeem private key from paper wallet joint to the local and international bitcoin community and etc..but from the begining untill now and with all 1.5 Years experience and then i found there is nothing have changed in my life i mean as simple as i say those are not yet make me a rich man. And then there is a question that i want to say : is there a something wrong with my decision about bitcoin
Only if you were expecting to be a rich man in 1.5 years. |
|
|
|
It is not possible that one country adopt bitcoin as its currency. With bitcoin it is not possible to do monetary policies and without that politics it is very hard to govern. ...
It is possible. There are many countries that do not have their own currency. |
|
|
|
Less than 100 people owns most of the bitcoins. The bitcoins in circulation is just scraps. Sathoshi is not the only one to hold way to many btc to make btc trustworthy as a real currency.
This is bitcoin's biggest flaw overall. It is for this reason why it could not be adopted as a national currency. It is not equal. Not only does nobody know how many people control any portion of the bitcoins, but equality (in terms of distribution) of a currency is irrelevant. A person with more bitcoins than 90% of the people on the planet could still be poorer than those 90%. Anyway, equal distribution is impossible because as soon as someone spends theirs, equality is broken -- they have 0 and someone else has twice as many as everyone else. Wealth distribution in dollar alone is insanely unequal, ...
Wealth distribution in dollars is not the same as distribution of dollars. |
|
|
|
it's not hard to believe back then it was possible to mine from 1k to 10k coins and counting per day, iremember that with diff 7k i was mining 0.01-0.02 a day, at the launch of bitcoin diff was 1 7M times lower
even if he was the only miner for 1 month only(probably true, within the first month of bitcoin , none knew about it), he would have mines something around 300k coins already...
No need to estimate badly. According to the block chain, the millionth bitcoin was mined on 7/22/2009. See https://blockchain.info/block-height/19999Others were mining by then, so he didn't get them all. Anyway, Satoshi's hoard (and those of the other earliest adopters) are a substantial risk to Bitcoin adoption. |
|
|
|
Except for people who want micropayments (and, um, that's what these appear to be, LOTS of them), I still have not seen ANY convincing arguments against the idea of raising minimums:
1) minimum BTC sent to, say, BTC0.001
and/or
2) minimum transaction fee to, say, BTC0.0002
I would rather have a robust BTC Ecosystem that gets my payments through in good time than worry about sending amounts of less than US$0.20.............
The argument against is that it is unnecessary. If you you want your transaction confirmed promptly, you only have to raise the amount that you pay. |
|
|
|
That's right. The current constant Bitcoin price means that there is a new need of about 3000 BTC daily. if the daily BTC creation will be halved then the price must finally increase constantly.
Constant is a bad assumption. There is nothing constant about the supply or demand of bitcoins. In fact, until recently, the falling price means that demand has been falling relative to supply. |
|
|
|
excuse me, here I am a newbie. Where to enter found in block mode SOLO? will the coins be credited automatically?
A found block is transmitted to peers on the network. The miner includes a special transaction in the block that sends the reward to him. |
|
|
|
50% less supply won't automatically means price will double. it will go up, but the question is, how much. in bitcoin you never know what will happen, we've seen plenty of surprises already.
Bitcoins are not consumed, so the halving does not mean the supply is 50% less. It means the increase in the supply is 50% less. The supply continues to increase after the halving. |
|
|
|
|
Here is something to think about:
Regardless of how long ago the last block was added, the average time to the next block is 10 minutes from now.
|
|
|
|
|
The title calls him a "Bitcoin Software Engineer". The article calls him a "homicidal software engineer". I'm glad they clarified his job title.
|
|
|
|
The reason that Bitcoin would not be adopted by any country is that it is currently too small and too volatile. But, not for any of these reasons: This could not have happen. ...
There are many countries that don't have their own currency. A country using Bitcoin would be just another one of them. This is exact reason greece had fail recent. If they were not Euro they could just inflate. Inflating is not a solution. It just turns the problem into a different problem. Look at Zimbabwe. That is where Argentina is heading, and where Greece would be heading if it could print more money. Dont see it happening anytime soon. A country giving up on their fiat can cause panic.
Not necessarily. Countries have switched currencies in the past with no panic. It is not possible at a moment that bitcoin becomes a national currency of any country. Governments of the countries will never allow it to happen and they will never support the crypto currency to be the national currency as they don't have any control over it...
There are many countries that don't have any control over the currency they use. |
|
|
|
This could not have happen. ...
Of course it can. There are many countries that don't have their own currency. A country using Bitcoin would be just another one of them. The interesting part would be the effect on the financial regulations. In the U.S., for example, Bitcoin would change from a "virtual convertible currency", to a "currency", and that would completely which regulations apply to it. Bitcoin would no longer be affected by all the ridiculous "virtual currency" laws and regulations. |
|
|
|
|
Despite the title, the article says very little about Bitcoin, mostly that it has been used to finance Wikileaks since the U.S.-sponsored banking embargo.
|
|
|
|
Restricted supply, plus increase in demand should make the price appreciate.
If the demands stays the same and correlates with the decrease in the supply, I'd say there will be a price appreciation. But if the price didn't rise, then bitcoin has a lot of catching up to do.
That is true. How much is the question.
The supply of bitcoins will continue to increase after the halving, albeit at half the rate. There will be no decrease or restriction of supply. |
|
|
|
|
What is the purpose of the security stickers? What kind of security do they provide? Are they intended to indicate to you if anyone has gained access to your your paper wallet?
|
|
|
|
Everything I read suggests I use a random word generator...
Why is randomly picking words from a dictionary un advised?
Well, that is what a random word generator does. Why do you think it is unadvised? |
|
|
|
|
random
[ran-duh m]
adjective
1.
proceeding, made, or occurring without definite aim, reason, or pattern:
the random selection of numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
