ProtonMail is quite popular for using cryptography to deliver end-to-end encryption email service to around 2 million users. They have added bitcoin as one of their officially accepted payment methods. Starting from version 3.11 of ProtonMail, it is now possible to pay for premium ProtonMail secure email account using Bitcoin. We have designed the payment system to work seamlessly so that Bitcoin payments are automatically converted to ProtonMail credits which can be used to pay for upgrades, pay invoices, or top up your account. This feature was long overdue, so we are glad to finally introduce this.
Over the past three years, we have had an unofficial way of accepting Bitcoins which involved manually sending BTC to our Bitcoin donation address, and manually confirming the transaction with our support team to receive account credits. However, the general increase in the number of Bitcoin transactions over the years has made that approach unfeasible and made development of an automated system necessary.
We feel this is indicative of a broader trend, where the increased mainstream interest in Bitcoin will make it harder for merchants not to support Bitcoin, which will lead to more Bitcoin support, more transactions, and perhaps the continued appreciation of Bitcoin prices.
Ultimately, we believe having a more significant portion of our revenue via Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies actually reduces our business risk, by providing more redundancy in the event of the failure of more traditional payment methods.
https://protonmail.com/blog/bitcoin-secure-email/ |
|
|
|
PayPal's former COO said in an interview that bitcoin is fulfilling PayPal's original vision to create "the new world currency." Some of the interesting points in this conversation. Bitcoin becoming the new world currency. Cryptocurrencies like bitcoin are now fulfilling that original vision. They are doing it in a decentralized way (with a decentralized database called the blockchain) whereas PayPal tried to do it in a centralized way. Reply to Howard Marks comment that Bitcoin and other digital assets aren't real. Marks isn't wrong to raise an alarm bell about speculation, but he's wrong in saying it's not "real." That's like saying software isn't real. Of course it's real.
Did the U.S. dollar become less real when it stopped being backed by gold? Cryptocurrency is the next step in that same evolution — to make currency more virtual. Why people living in politically and financially unstable countries are quick to adopt bitcoins? Bitcoin enforces its scarcity through a combination of cryptography and economic incentives ("cryptoeconomics"). A lot of people find that more comforting than relying on the good faith of a government. In math we trust.
People in parts of the world with less trusted systems have gotten it sooner because almost anything would be preferable to having their life's work trapped in a fiat currency that could collapse or be confiscated at any moment. Cyptocurrencies and dot-com era, programmable money. For those of us who lived through the dot-com era, this feels reminiscent. You have some of the same speculative excess and random enrichment. But you can also feel that something revolutionary is happening. Money is being made programmable. That's a fundamental change with implications we can still barely see. Rather than being bullish or criticizing bitcoin/cryptocurrencies, undstanding the potential of cryptos, Sacks makes some interesting valid points. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/14/david-sacks-cryptocurrency-interview.html |
|
|
|
Dear all
Yesterday i sent 0.036 BTC from my electrum wallet to my localbitcoins account.Electrum wallet showed me automatically a fee of 0.0003 BTC.I adjusted it to 0.0005 BTC.Already 24 hours gone,still transaction was not confirmed.Some times,it shows 84 hrs to get confirmed,then 6 hrs,then again 84hrs then again 20 minutes,then again 84 hrs.I clearly understand that the miners are not showing any interest in confirming my transaction.Now today,i sent another 0.0112 BTC again with a transaction fee of 0.0003BTC.Four hours gone,still showing 84 hrs for confirmation.I am in desperate need of money now.Now,i just have a question that what's the use of activating segwit and increasing block size then?So,what i understand is that miners think "You all do whatever you wish,activate segwit or not,we are the only authorised people to decide what the transaction fee should be"
I think i have catched their mind voice correctly.Just i want to know what you all people think about this? Is segwit activation then just an eye wash?
Segwit isn't activated yet. Once activated you can opt for Segwit transactions. With Segwit more transactions can be accommodated in a block and the transaction size also gets smaller so quicker transactions and a slightly lower fee. Segwit does solve the scalability issue to an extent, but isn't the ultimate solution. Segwit opens the door for other scalability solutions and one of them is LN. Some miners will spam and try to manipulate fee. With on chain transactions miners control the fee, but with LN, off chain transactions gives users the choice to have instant transactions at a very small fee. Segwit will get activated next week and other implementations would be integrated soon. |
|
|
|
There seems to be this odd psychology at work where folks think there are 'cheap' tokens and expensive tokens. It would be amazing if they just started reporting a new kid on the block, the Satoshi, you can buy one for .00004 cents and some day they might be worth 10 cents or a dollar who knows.
You could see the history of the satoshi and while it was once very cheap and has appreciated more than anything else, it's still insanely cheap! You can buy millions for next to nothing! I have this strange suspicion that if coinmarketcap did this and a lot of the exchanges folks, folks would start buying like mad. As soon as I introduce someone to bitcoin their first thought is, "yes but it's so expensive can I just buy a cheaper alt?"
Clearly bitcoin doesn't have to change, just the reporting of it's total numbers and the value. That's it.
The unit of account of the bitcoin system is bitcoin (BTC). Satoshi is the smallest unit. If in future 1 bitcoin = $1 million then 1 Satoshi = 1 cent. Bitcoin is represented or valued as BTC, standard representation, valued as whole rather than in small units. IMO in future also it would be BTC to USD not SAT to USD, possible, but unlikely. Bitcoins are divisible and and in future if necessary bitcoin protocol can be updated to add a smaller unit than Satoshi. Users can buy fractions of bitcoins, if you compare 1 Sat to 1 cent or 1 BTC to $1 million, valuation is the same. Yeah, people who don't know that bitcoins are divisible might initially find 1 sat = $0.0004, cheap, is it really cheap? No. Right now it isn't convenient to buy 1000, 10,000, or 100,000 Satoshis, but in future if bitcoin price breaks all the records then people would be trading in Satoshis. |
|
|
|
This look so interesting indeed. If I got this, we can download the blockchain without internet connection to our computer but we must first buy a few tools that cost 100$ but does that include sending, receiving transactions and whatever we can currently do with an internet connection?
Currently blockstream satellite is only one-way, to receive new blocks and to ensure node synchronization. Yeah, but to initiate transactions you would need internet access/mobile data, but cheaper communication technologies like SMS or satellite internet services/bi-directional satellite could be used instead. Currently the system is only one-way. It provides a way to receive new blocks and ensure nodes stay in sync. However, transactions can be sent using other communication channels such as SMS or conventional satellite internet services. As transaction data is very small, even using the most expensive satellite internet service, it would cost less than $0.01 per transaction. https://blockstream.com/satellite/faq/Just saw this on Reddit, How to push Bitcoin transactions via SMS, http://gk2.sk/how-to-push-bitcoin-transactions-via-sms/https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6txhr7/how_to_push_bitcoin_transactions_via_sms/ |
|
|
|
When you reach 1337 posts, it displays as 'leet'. This is a little easter egg put into the forum software. If you don't know what leet is, read about it here. Got it, thank you  |
|
|
|
Hi, I just noticed that on my profile instead of showing post counts it is written leet  Could someone please explain. Thank you. Edit: It is showing post counts now. |
|
|
|
I believe a lot of you guys is aware about the video that Blockstream made: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbx7NAnVeGcWe still don't know what is it about but do you think we should be excited about this? Some are saying that this is a way to have bitcoin without the need of internet connection, others are saying to run nodes in space etc. I'm not sure about you but I personally don't think it has anything to do with space, I mean doesn't that require millions, If not billions of investment? unless whatever they are going to provide will have fees and will be widely used, I don't think Its something realistic. Blockstream satellite The Blockstream Satellite network is designed to broadcast the bitcoin blockchain to the entire planet. The satellite network provides an opportunity for nearly 4 billion people without internet access to utilize bitcoin while simultaneously ensuring bitcoin use is not interrupted due to network interruption.
Utilizing the latest open source Software Defined Radio (SDR) technologies, the Blockstream Satellite network offers a breakthrough in the cost effectiveness of satellite communications. Instead of spending thousands of dollars on specialized satellite equipment, the entire cost of all equipment needed to connect your computer to the Blockstream Satellite network is only about $100 USD. 1. No internet required - satellite internet - connecting bitcoin to the people those who have no internet access. 2. Cutting down the cost of running full nodes. Blockstream Satellite eliminates these cost barriers and enables people to receive blocks at no cost allowing more people to utilize Bitcoin and participate in the Bitcoin network. Connecting your computer to the blockstream satellite is only about $100. 3. Network stability Blockstream Satellite provides an alternative method of receiving the blockchain that is not affected by connection failure. This protects against network interruptions and prevents any participating node from becoming isolated or partitioned.
Blockstream Satellite enables the bitcoin network to be more robust than ever before. According to Back, Blockstream will eventually release an API for developers and companies to send data over the satellite connection for a small bitcoin fee. https://blockstream.com/satellite/blockstream-satellite/https://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-using-satellites-beam-bitcoin-earth/The concept is simply amazing. |
|
|
|
I don't know where you got news that economy is transitioned to bitcoins in bangladesh.Using bitcoins is banned in bangladesh.Even people are imprisoned if caught using bitcoins.
Got any more details on that? In September 2014, Bangladesh Bank said that "anybody caught using the virtual currency could be jailed under the country's strict anti-money laundering laws". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_bitcoin_by_country_or_territoryBitcoin is not a legal currency (legal tender) issued by any country. Bangladesh Bank or any organization of Bangladesh government does not approve any transaction of bitcoin or any other artificial online currency.
Bitcoin and it's transactions operate mainly through online network and it does not depend/approved by a central payment system, as such, people can be financially harmed. Transactions of these kind of currency could involve unapproved matters stated in Foreign Currency Control Act, 1947 and will be punishable by it. Moreover, users of these kind of currency will also be punishable by Money Laundering Control Act, 2012 for disobeying the stated act.
AFP also reportedly spoke to a representative from the bank, who said that the act of using a digital currency could be punishable by as much as 12 years in prison. https://www.coindesk.com/bangladesh-outlaw-bitcoin-jail/ |
|
|
|
I just passed on a thread where people were discussing whether Satoshi had sold his coins or not. But my question is how do you know that he actually have coins ? It is rumored that he would have one million and a half coins, but yet, the biggest address has way less than this, so can you know that he has a given number of coins ? It is assumed that Satoshi owns 1 million BTC, and this assumption is made through this analysis, https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-fortune-of-satoshi-nakamoto/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=175996.0This is just a made up number, no concrete proof to back it up. It might be true, might not be and if Satoshi wasn't an individual, but a group then this amount gets further split. Did Satoshi already sold his bitcoins or still holding it is another debate which can't be backed by any factual data. |
|
|
|
How to transition local economy into bitcoin?
I have been reading news about how people have transitioned to bitcoin in Africa or Bangladesh, where fiat cash was used predominantly. I would like learn how they brought the change. How they motivated early adopters to use it? What early adopters did when they needed cash?
Can you please provide me resources to projects that have helped local economies use bitcoins. I would like to learn from their experience.
Bitcoin is banned in Bangladesh. Africa and other developing countries contribute to the majority of world's unbanked population. M-Pesa, a mobile phone based branchless banking service was a game changer in Africa simply because it was targeted at providing a smooth, convenient cashless solution to the unbanked people. Bitcoin has the potential to change African economy, the adoption rate is slow, but yeah Humaniq and Abra can speed it up, https://www.abra.com/blog/abra-tellers-available-in-over-170-cities/ |
|
|
|
I read somewhere Satoshi Nakamoto, the father of bitcoin didn't agree with Segwit and he was opposed it. is it true? If yes Does it mean he agreed with Cash?
I had read more than a couple of times from different sources that Satoshi expected bitcoin to scale larger than Visa. Point is Visa handles, 150,000 million transactions per day, 24,000 tps. Current tps of bitcoins 7. Satoshi had mentioned Moore's law in accordance with scalability. Let's assume Moore's law isn't dead and agree with Intel that it's still valid. Moore's law is the observation that the number of transistors in a dense integrated circuit doubles approximately every two years. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_lawSo let's double the blocksize every two years, 1,2,4,8,16,32 MB. How many years? 8 years. Now to have a scalability as Visa you need a minimum of 8 GB blocksize. And at what cost? Let's assume we have 5000 nodes at 1 MB, node depreciation would happen in proportion with block size increase and by the Visa standards you just might have one node, figuratively, and how much centralization would that would be? Bitcoin could easily Scale much bigger than Visa if you take the decentralization aspect away, but it ain't it's purpose, one of the weaknesses of bitcoin is scalability, but on the plus side it is transparent and decentralized. Now Segwit, if I am right LN could process thousands of transactions within a second, something equal to Visa. LN is open source and anyone can run a node, and still it could be argued that LN leads to centralization, perception. From a neutral PoV, technology is advancing at a rapid rate, GPU, ASICs, and we aren't sure how technology is going to affect bitcoin mining in future. In the same sense what Satoshi said was about 8 years ago when bitcoin cap wasn't around $65 billion. Many possible implementations with bitcoin protocol are possible which Satoshi might not have thought about. In every argument, dragging white paper and Satoshi said so/Satoshi's vision might not be a logical/constructive approach, it was Satoshi's vision at that time, if he/she/they were around now then we would have asked how to proceed. But since not there, we have to move according to consensus/majority/what's good for bitcoin. PS: Hope I am right with the Moore's law, if not please do correct me. |
|
|
|
I honestly dont think people will hard fork over the 2x part. I think more than likely they will probably move to bitcoin cash.
Yeah, it is possible that the big blockers might redirect their hashpower to BCH. Yesterday ViaBTC's CEO had tweeted that Segwit2x might not happen because of lack of nodes and that a third coin doesn't represent the ideologies of both the sides and I guess it is true, Segwit2x is a compromise for both the sides, Segwit supporters does have an issue with 2x and big blockers do have an issue with Segwit so I guess moving on with their own ideologies without any further split would be the apt solution. I don't believe what ViaBTC says, let's see. |
|
|
|
I would have to say for me the biggest concerns for bitcoin would be..
1. The Darkweb gets shutdown or takes another hit. IMO the Darkweb/illegal activity plays a huge role in the success and failure of bitcoin.
2. Banks getting involved. If Banks are losing out on money or think bitcoin is taking money out of their pocket they could create a mess for bitcoin.
3. The richest of the rich will own most bitcoins. The rich usually make money from the middle/lower class, if they own most they will be no profits for them and bitcoin become obsolete.
Just a few of my concerns and obviously just my opinion. If you have any concerns or comments I'd like to hear your input.
1. Around 2013-2014, dark web had an influence on bitcoins price, the silk road shutdown did affect bitcoins price, but it is 2017, the adoption has increased hundredfold. Japan legalized bitcoin, do you think it is because Japanese are into dark web. Japan, US, China, the three big players in trading volume, guess all the majority of trade and a price of $3800 is pumped into dark web, ain't it? Stop drawing the equation, bitcoin = dark web. It is a fact that dark web markets are dependent on bitcoins for their success, but bitcoin doesn't give a damn about their failure. Recent eg: Alphabay. 2. Yeah, banks could create a mess for bitcoin, question is would they? If they do how much is it going to be effective against a decentralized currency which is growing at a rapid rate. At a time when countries are realizing the potential of bitcoin and trying to capitalize/integrate it into their economy, I don't see a bank threat anytime soon. 3. Guess it is about the deflationary spiral. Yeah when all the bitcoins have been mined and everyone is hoarding, demand would gradually die, price would plummet and if that happens hoarders would dump their bitcoins to meet the small demand and then supply and demand cycle begins again. But what I think would happen is there would be a constant circulation of bitcoins to keep the market stable. In future bitcoin might become a somewhat stable medium of exchange. As far as rich vs poor is concerned, you can't blame bitcoin, economic system ain't fair, but bitcoin is divisible, if you can't afford 1 BTC then you can settle down for 0.1 BTC and do remember it is never too late to invest in bitcoins. |
|
|
|
However don't offer financial reward to their owners. I think it is for this reason that people are disinterested in running one.
in my opinion if anyone has higher than 1 bitcoin and is not running a full node then they have never understood what bitcoin is. you don't run a node to make money you run a node because you are using a decentralized network and a decentralized network will only work as well as its users. It has been a hobby of mine for the past 3 months to make nodes and develop incentives.
what are those incentives?!! The nodes I run feature: - Full Bitcoin node
- 3.5" LCD touchscreen display to display bitcoin price/network stats
- Broadcast over the Tor network, (a configurable option)
- Generate cool personalized vanity addresses
- Sync my desktop wallet to my node for instant wallet availability on unlock
Multiple webpages can be displayed in a scrolling mode, eg. Network stats, Bitcoin price, News, Weather, traffic updates for your commute (google maps) or anything to brighten up my desk, pictures etc none of these are features of a "node". tell us the system specs (CPU,RAM, storage, network speed and traffic it uses,...) all the things you listed are done with other stuff with a couple of lines of code. if these are your incentives then i think you were doing it wrong. +1 Full node operators are the ones who keep bitcoins decentralization intact and keep in check the malicious miners. They are the enforcers. I do agree, people who have resources should run full nodes, no incentive, but bitcoin ain't banks printing out notes, if you have invested in a decentralized currency then you are liable to work towards that decentralization at least for the sake of what you have invested. As far as incentives, if a miner is running a full node then obviously incentive. I don't know how stand alone node operators get incentivized, they are doing a service, free-of-cost. Basic requirements to run a node: Desktop or laptop hardware running recent versions of Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux.
145 gigabytes of free disk space
2 gigabytes of memory (RAM)
A broadband Internet connection with upload speeds of at least 400 kilobits (50 kilobytes) per second
An unmetered connection, a connection with high upload limits, or a connection you regularly monitor to ensure it doesn’t exceed its upload limits. It’s common for full nodes on high-speed connections to use 200 gigabytes upload or more a month. Download usage is around 20 gigabytes a month, plus around an additional 140 gigabytes the first time you start your node.
6 hours a day that your full node can be left running. (You can do other things with your computer while running a full node.) More hours would be better, and best of all would be if you can run your node continuously. https://bitcoin.org/en/full-node#minimum-requirementsAs far as OP what's missing is lack of understanding how bitcoin works. Most of the recent investors and future investors would just dive in for the sake of speculation, profits and not at all bothering about how the foundation works. If you have a PC lying here and there, connect it and contribute to the decentralization of bitcoin in a selfless manner. |
|
|
|
What's the easiest way to send small 1000 satoshi payment?
There was a time when you could have sent 1000 satoshis without any fees, microtransactions, on chain, gone long are those days. Basic rule now, the amount you are sending should be more than the transaction fee. There is something called dust transactions. If I am not wrong the minimum output is 5460 satoshis (Core), minimum default amount. You would be able to process microtransactions when LN comes into effect. |
|
|
|
I've seen this post before. Presumably he meant: 1. BTC is still an experimental software. It would be nice to have time to develop it before it becomes too popular, because then he couldn't coordinate most people to do similar things very easily (forks, second implementations, etc). 2. Possibly that he didn't want BTC to become notorious for illegal activity because he wanted it to be used by ordinary people. The Bitcoin founder was probably forced to resign by C people
Resign? He was just a developer. He only had power because he developed the reference client and people agreed with what he said. Yeah, I do agree with the second point. Satoshi would have realized that his creation, bitcoin could be used for illegal purposes. In November 2010, Wikileaks released the United States diplomatic cables leak and by December 2010, Bank of America and PayPal stopped serving Wikileaks by December 11-12 they announced that they would be accepting bitcoin donations. Wikileaks 2011 tweet, https://mobile.twitter.com/wikileaks/status/80774521350668288?lang=enThe address in the tweet, https://blockchain.info/address/1HB5XMLmzFVj8ALj6mfBsbifRoD4miY36vMore than 4000 BTC in donations. Right after the cables leak, a controversial website like Wikileaks accepting bitcoin might have forced Satoshi to leave. Obviously his/her/their anonymity was at stake. This was one of the last posts by Satoshi on this forum. But it is also believed that after Gavin told Satoshi that he was going to CIA that he disappeared, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113609.0Connecting these scattered information, we can make assumptions, but too difficult to make a factual statement. |
|
|
|
I've been watching charts for the past couple of hours and BTC price reached ATH but ETH price doesn't even moved. Suddenly BTC price dropped and ETH price dropped as well. Why doesn't go up with the price increase of BTC?
As I expected, if you want to exchange crypto to crypto, BTC <-> ETH, if the price of BTC goes down, the price of ETH goes up and if the BTC goes up, the ETH goes down. But why the fiat to crypto value doesn't goes change as well?
1. Bitcoin is correlated to all other cryptocurrencies. And this correlation is positive to a very small extent, but mostly negative. It means when bitcoin price increases, price of some alts tends to increase as well, but when bitcoin price drops, almost all major alts follow the same pattern. 2. As far as BTC and ETH is concerned, the same above pattern, but this pair is also somewhat inversely correlated, one goes up, other goes down, one goes down, other goes up. 3. Why Fiat to crypto value doesn't go up? Simply because it depends on Fiat/bitcoin to Fiat/ETH trading volume. Crypto/crypto trade, no impact on Fiat. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
