Yeah, hearing that price makes me wonder how much my bitcoins.org and bitcoin.net domains would be worth nowadays.
I would argue that the value of these domains would be derived primarily from the underlying content at the domain instead of the name of the domain itself. For example the majority of people go to ebay.com specifically because they are trying to utilize the services of ebay, and if, for example the ebay.com domain was simply a landing page for a news site about dogs (completely unrelated to ebay's current site) then the ebay.com domain would lose the majority of it's value. |
|
|
|
|
Faucets are generally a waste of time for users. Today's faucets really only will attempt to make money off of ads and will not payout any meaningful amounts.
|
|
|
|
I find it ridiculous kids have phones at that age, now they have debit cards haha wow.
I think this will make it very difficult for children to be able to learn how to manage their money when they simply use a debit card as opposed to having actual cash that they can count and see how much they have after spending it. |
|
|
|
|
No.
The nodes of the bitcoin network are decentralized and there is no list of nodes, and nodes can be taken offline or online at any time. So an ISP would have no way of blocking traffic to all of the bitcoin nodes (this is essentially the network when speaking about blocking a connection).
|
|
|
|
its already been discussed.
when registering with a website. user can give the website a bitcoin PUBLIC address.. then when logging in the website shows a random message. EG:
"The Lamb Walked Into The Slaughter House. Bar Ram You. Splat! 1204856948447585 08/07/2014"
the user then signs the message using their bitcoin client of the bitcoin address they submitted at registration. and then types in their username and the signed message. the website then verifies the signed message to the bitcoin public address to authorize logins.
meaning although the bitcoin address is used like the password.. the bitcoin address is never actually typed in by the user to log in after registering.. only a signed message is pasted in as the password, which always changes and is also kind of a 2FA all in one because it is encrypted by the privkey, thus it cant be guessed and shows some user ownership verification, all in one.
its not using the blockchain to login as thats costing people money.. but its using bitcoins "message signing" feature, which is free and faster then sending coin
You would still need a public address to act as a username as the website would otherwise not know which address to validate the signature against. |
|
|
|
I typed "I invented bitcoin" and it gave me this pub address: 1GodKLaaQrNuFpHhNsf3os8DpziDz1ukDx Is it a coincidence or am I GOD?  You do realize that you have essentially compromised your brain wallet to the point that any coins transferred to that address would be likely stolen? |
|
|
|
Any sane person should prefer a currency backed by science over a currency backed by nothing The US dollar is backed by the US economy. |
|
|
|
Last week I got a friend very interested in bitcoin and gave him a educated run down on what it is exactly. Today I called him to see if he was still interested in jumping on board to only find out his wife who works at a bank informed him that it is nothing more then a scam.
I was curious so I asked apparently the bank received a notice describing bitcoin as far as I am aware illegal and a scam etc. at least this is what I got from our brief conversation. I'm going to stop over there and talk to her a little bit more and see what it is she is able to disclose exactly.
Regardless slightly upset of the picture that the uneducated have painted not from the media just word of mouth.. He said he's going to research it himself but generally when wifey puts her foot down its yes dear.
Edit: The primary factor in it was money laundering and untraceable money.
I think that the bank is likely not so much saying that bitcoin itself is a scam but rather there are a lot of bitcoin related scams out there and if you are "investing" in bitcoin then you have an elevated risk of being (or at least attempted of being) scammed. |
|
|
|
After July 24th auction for the domain name Bitcoins.com, other Bitcoin domain values will skyrocket.
Bitcoins.com will sell for $750,000+ and will be published everywhere making other Bitcoin domain values skyrocket.
And let me guess, for a limited time only (so act now!!!), you just so happen to have some bitcoin related domain names for sale? I agree with what you are implying with your post (they will not skyrocket). There are just so many possibilities for domain names that I would say it is unlikely money to be made in this market except for very few. |
|
|
|
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but I've been buying Amazon gift cards and other items at Amazon (tracfone and airtime, etc.) with bitcoin at a 15-25% discount (!) thanks to Purse.io - well, around 13-23% discount once I replenish my BTC with fiat, but it's still a great deal.
i spend quite a bit on amazon with bitcoins, so this interests me. but ive always bee skeptical of discount marketplaces like this. are there buyer protections for those selling bitcoin/buying amazon purchases? I have the same concerns. I've been using Gyft for my Amazon purchases, but I may switch to something like this if it looks promising. Purse is similar to paypal in that it is p2p buying. You buy something via purse.io for bitcoin, the seller pays for the product in fiat and receives bitcoin. Yes, but what are the buyer/seller protection policies? What if a gift card turns out to be fraudulently obtained? What happens then? With purse.io you don't get a gift card, you receive actual products and do not release escrow until you actually receive the items. Everything is tracked with Amazon as far as order numbers and tracking numbers. |
|
|
|
I know I've heard of folks downloading malware on purpose in a sandbox (say a virtual install of Windows XP running on a linux box) just to claim the rewards in some of these shady situations. Then, after claiming whatever reward, they simply destroy the XP install and repeat.
I don't think this would be the case in this situation as the reward for participating was very small. It would likely not be worth the effort. |
|
|
|
1.04 to the power of 40 or 4% interest over 40 years is alot of growth = 480% I think
I assume if I take it as a decline in value compounded, then 4% less each year or 0.96^40 results in 20% left after 40 years.
Every time they give your gains, they exclude inflation usually. If you ever wondered why you arent getting any richer, thats probably it. Hence constant wage increases are demanded by unions which can lead to labour disputes and strikes, production disruption because a company doesnt necessarily have the money just because the workers need it and are poorer.
Wages tend to rise faster then inflation, this is one reason why the Social Security trust fund is in the shape that it is in because it gives recipients raises in terms of wage growth instead of purchasing power (inflation). So someone who received social security 10 years ago will have started with a monthly award that had less purchasing power then their monthly award today. Majority make higher wages as they compete in the workplace for promotions. Then they invest in real estate or retirement accounts. Most people dont care about mild deflation, they care about employment. If you are talking about too much inflation or stagflation then thats a different discussion I don't buy the arguments here for deflation. Too much assumption about a static economy when in fact economies are dynamic This is exactly why that mild inflation is not necessarily a bad thing. Another point to make for savers/investors is that most asset prices increase faster then the rate of inflation (including dividends and similar payments). |
|
|
|
Its possible to take swap but never pay for it. That's the pb.
Also, since a year ago, we've increased by about 600%. It would be very possible to leverage long on that with a 200% interest rate.
The increase in price would not be a guarantee while the interest costs would be guaranteed. High interest costs like the cost in your example would force a trader to need a large upswing shortly after opening his position or risk gettting a margin call. nobody is going to hold swaps at these rates for a year. every day those swaps eat away at your margin position, and every day your margin call gets higher. If prices go up at a gradual, consistent, pace with few to no downtrends then it would make sense, but no asset price acts this way. |
|
|
|
The analysiz by Sergej Glazyev in the original post is mostly correct in my view.
The bank transfers, the credit card systems and all world remittance systems have all been captured by the bullies in the united states government. (That doesn't mean that the russian government are not bullies).
What the russians could and should do, is to establish a network of banks/exhanges in all countries totally disconnected from the current bank system, offering deposit accounts in rubles and renmimbi (and others) combined with market based exchanges for these currencies. For USD, only deposit and withdrawal of notes. Of course they would have to stop meddling with their exchange ratios.
That would take some of the power out of the USA bank hegemony.
Globalization would prevent this from being successful. Since Russia needs to trade with other countries and most trade is denominated in US Dollars, there would be a demand to have US based banking transfers. Well it is included. The point is to disconnect from the us-governed banks. Ok to detail it: USD transfers within this new banking system would be possible (but probably not needed, that is the point with this proposed system), but not wire transfers such as SWIFT, because that would make the new system vulnerable to pressure from the us government. Anyway, I don't want to detail it more because I am not going to build it. I don't see a demand for that kind of system. I see and understand that it would be disconnected from US banks, however compared to other banks in global financial centers US banks are more healthy then their counterparts, making them more attractive to trade and deal with. I understand why Russia may want to do this as retaliation for US sanctions but I don't see why other countries would want to participate. Well the individual actors and the whole countries that are shut out of that systems on the whims of the USG, plus the people that proposes that the USG has grossly exploited that system to the harm of producers around the globe, may beg to differ. That would be the reason to establish another system. If everybody are happy with the current system, obviously they use that. Edit: I don't even want to blame only the USG, because any country could have devised its own fiat system non-inflationary just like bitcoin (minus the trust in the money issuer), if they wanted. The current system came about partly by historical accident, partly by ignorance, and partly by the fact that other governments are also evil. This would be a very small monetary system as there are very few countries that are shut out of the global remittance system, and the ones that are shut out are generally not economic allies. An even more important point is that these countries are generally enemies of Russia and pose a larger military threat to Russia then the US does. |
|
|
|
is it really worth the try. i'm curious about it and want to try it on freebitco.in. I also found a script online.
Hey, I hope I can give you some advice, as I'm someone who's spent a significant amount of time gambling and working on the best ways to turn profit over the years. First off, there's never a guaranteed method to win every time, unless you've found a way to cheat. Even cheating isn't a guaranteed win if you find a way to do it. For example, card counting in blackjack. You don't actually know when a card is coming up, but you add and subtract based on the cards that have been drawn out of the shoe, and you're waiting for when the numbers go further in one direction, indicating that there is a significantly greater chance of 10's drawn than normal, which increases your odds of pulling a 20 on the flop and also increases the chance that the house will bust, due to the rules outlining hitting (anything under 17) and staying (anything 17 and up). Counting cards is technically not cheating as it is not illegal, nor does it give an advantage that is not available to anyone else. Cheating would be if you were to somehow rig the game so that you know the outcome prior to placing your bet. |
|
|
|
IF I had an extra 50k to invest, id probably invest 5k in gold, 20k in silver and the rest in bitcoin. That way you are somewhat spread and not putting all your eggs in one basket.
In this case you would still be purchasing several hedges against high inflation in the future. If inflation is low in the medium term then these would likely be poor investments, with the potential exception of bitcoin, although this would not be a sure thing |
|
|
|
Is bitaddress.org safe though??
Personally, I don't consider any mainstream computer-implemented random number generators to be secure. That includes bitaddress.org's built in entropy source. My solution is to mix in my own entropy, at about 10% - 15%. What does that look like in practice? I accept the private keys that are supposedly randomly generated, make a few of my own 'random' modifications, swapping out 5 - 10 characters, and then turn that new private key into an address. And, it can help to double or triple check the address derivation was carried out correctly. Feel free to import your custom private key into different pieces of software and make sure they all give the same result. IIRC one of the devs had posted on here that the entropy of bitaddress was not truly random and it may not be a good idea to use their services, although it could have been regarding another bitcoin address generating site. |
|
|
|
Given how mining work for bitcoin, I do not think the price will stable.
It has to keep going up so miners can have "profit" in either profit or transaction fee.
Well, it can still go up and be relatively stable as well. Generally speaking if something is rising in price at a rapid rate it will not be considered stable. And small event such as the FBI auction cause price to go up over 10% should let people know how volatile the price is. A 10% change in the market price of bitcoin is not very big by bitcoin standards. It has seen price swings of 50% or more in both directions in one day. A good reason why is it not a good payment system. Hard to set consumer protection policy if the price can change this much. That is true today, but the number and size of these large price swings have decreased over time that the market for bitcoin has existed. |
|
|
|
There is a maximum amount of energy that can be used on earth (the amount of energy that the sun emits. If you were able to use all of the energy that the sun emits then it would still take several lifetimes in order to crack a private key using the most efficient miners that is possible.
There is a difference between innovator and scientist. Scientist will quote and do all the math saying why certain things are impossible until innovator prove them wrong. Most technology advancement are done by innovator. Concept by itself is useless unless someone find a way to implement it. The current academy regime are filled with people who can "talk" but can't "do" with all the "fact" and "reasoning/math" why certain things are impossible. University and college are now dinosaur. Times and times again these academic type are proven wrong by someone with little or no "qualification". It is generally accepted that certain things are possible but we just don't know how to do it yet. The most theoretically possible efficiency of computing (in terms of computing power - read hashrate - per W is not something we are able to achieve as of yet AFAIK, but it is generally accepted that it cannot be done more efficiently If we take a look at how science advanced through ages, we inevitably come to the conclusion that it is not even things that we think impossible at the time become possible in due course, but such things are made possible that we can't even think of. This may be true but things that have been proven to be impossible have generally not been proven to not be impossible This is like saying that things that have been proven to be impossible have generally not been proven to be possible. In short, things proved to be impossible usually don't become possible. Theoretically (if we exclude logical fallacies from consideration) this still doesn't deprive us of hope since all proves are ultimately based either on evidence (which can be deceiving) or on premises (which are just postulated, i.e. accepted as true without proof).  Sure you could always go by the adage that "anything is possible" however it should be understood that something are simply not possible, like going backwards in time (it is possible to go forwards in time, but just couldn't get back) |
|
|
|
Very few facts in the Guardian article
I don't think the reporters at the guardian truly understand bitcoin at this level to be able to accurately report it in a way that the average person could understand |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
