If I understand correctly, the transaction fees is what are the earnings of miners in a POW system. So, how can you make POW system exist with zero transaction fees in future - when bitcoin is mainstream and used as a payments system in future ?

if (address == message.Address)
                return true;

var signedMessage = new SignedMessage(message, publicKey.GetBitcoinAddress(false), signatureBytes);

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2018-01-30/crypto-exchange-bitfinex-tether-said-subpoenaed-video

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-30/crypto-exchange-bitfinex-tether-said-to-get-subpoenaed-by-cftc

https://www.google.si/amp/s/www.wired.com/story/why-tethers-collapse-would-be-bad-for-cryptocurrencies/amp

what do you think?

They are hitting Bitcoin from every side possible they are trying to
crash the market BUY MORE BITCOINS AND HOLD !!!!!
In the name of FREEDOMMMMM!!!!
https://news.bitcoin.com/venezuelas-oil-backed-cryptocurrency-declared-illegal/

You think?  If so, it’s still a troll—and that would not be the first time I may have been trolled here, though the other one was much less plausible.  Thus, the possibility had occurred to me; but yet every time I have ever imagined that there must be an upper bound on human stupidity, a greater idiot has proved me wrong.

In any case, I am a long term-thinker; and I do anticipate that this thread may be a handy reference.  Much of Anti-Cen’s spew about Bitcoin and Lightning is delivered in such a manner as may be effective FUD to scare and confuse newbies.  That was my first thought when I saw this thread.  There are enough bottom-feeders serving as paid shills to post such things; we don’t need more from someone who does it for jollies due to lack of any higher aim or greater pleasure in life.

Well, anyway, I appreciate the tip.  Perhaps I ought return to my usual occupation of manufacturing MD5 ASICs for Bitcoin mining, or doing carpentry with a screwdriver to put in nails.

In fairness, I think the Anti-Cen account *is* satire. The posts are often quite funny pastiches of genuine attempts to troll Bitcointalk.org.

That is a 160-bit SHA-1 hash, calculated as specified by RFC 4880 § 12.2.  Depending on how those bits hashed out, you perhaps may only have slightly more luck finding in it a minuscule RSA modulus plus public exponent than you would using RSA-512 to generate Bitcoin keys.

Thus in the world according to Anti-Cen, RSA is explicitly “based on” a “curve”.

Bitcoin don't use RSA but ECDSA.
Your private key D is a 256bits unsigned integer.
Then, you can calculate your public key by multiplying D with a generator point G on an elliptic curve.
On bitcoin, the standard is https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Secp256k1.
There is no exponent, or i don't understand what you call exponent (since it's not RSA).

         
            BigInteger numEncData = new BigInteger(cipherData);
            BigInteger Exponent = StringToBig(Keys.Exponent);
            BigInteger Modulus = StringToBig(Keys.PublicAddress);
            BigInteger D = StringToBig(Keys.PrivateAddress);
            if (UsePublicKey)
                decData = BigInteger.ModPow(numEncData, Exponent, Modulus);
            else
                decData = BigInteger.ModPow(numEncData, D, Modulus);

<RSAKeyValue><Modulus>okyvVpYxEtswLqjaoOv6syr6sKeRac05EBdNJirWPAYFmMWor4m2s04M27plDQH7mP12eBx6rZAvvaHRps3YwQ==</Modulus>
<Exponent>AQAB</Exponent>
<P>wRNeMhagqUMMtwqJB4MQOZL0TFYk0Ha6IEgGccYUWfs=</P>
<Q>1zGdJfAIYgMh6nBIPt5yGjk2mGAV75JY4AALpI1Vt3M=</Q>
<DP>PeBCINVFmdkmGwciUSj8qybgahJ1a+WQ0sWiYxXy8b8=</DP>
<DQ>t4mBVtIa1D2Ht8R8WeKvvt39SojpLKPNWX+wbnB9IzE=</DQ>
<InverseQ>Lc+5THLhkpee6DQnsloTNy6vdNIDbGs/6jXas+xuIxg=</InverseQ>
<D>cj0sBfR94lnqVk2AZlj0A/0yq/mm/yP3EH52TXFFjsVG9v2nPNe3kn3VJUex0OFwCVoGQsRSjcmYCFX9czr+aQ==</D></RSAKeyValue>

He has now gone from flaunting arrogant ignorance to self-satirizing it.  As if it were not enough to posit that CPUs were useful for Bitcoin mining, which has not been the case for over half a decade:

That is one of the stupidest ideas I have ever seen in my whole life; and it has plenty of competition between the four corners of this world.

After literally over 900 posts mostly bashing Bitcoin whilst boasting of his superior technical knowledge and extensive development experience, Anti-Cen has—tried to use RSA for Bitcoin.  512-bit RSA, at that (!).

Your reply does compute and you are angry about the price of your coins going down but you should
get out more from the church and read other development forums to see what they are saying instead
of trying to insult people because you lack the skill to debate and don't write code for a living

No, they mistaken or thought outdated technology as original technology and refuse that the real bitcoin is the one that majority agree is the real bitcoin.