People would immediately notice if anyone is pushing for a change in the protocol. Miners and nodes would have to manually update their version of the client if consensus rules are already met, though that would also be impossible especially if they do not accept the changes that are done on the protocol. No updates are automatically pushed into the open, and those who uploaded code on the source cannot go away with it like a thief in the night, expecting people to just accept it and be done with it.

At some point, regulations would have to be followed for the betterment of the scene, else it will still prove to be a feeding ground for low-life people using cryptocurrencies as a medium to perpetrate their illegal activities. Gibraltar and Malta are favorites for crypto startups due to its inviting nature towards such companies, though it is also slowly attracting a lot of scammers and fraudulent personalities given its leniency towards regulations. Gibraltar was the first to 'give in' or rather comply with the FATF guidelines, and it shouldn't be frowned upon given that this only opens a lot more opportunity for the space to grow into something healthy with less of the illegalities.

Nakakainis makita yung ginagamit nila yung thought ng decentralization para ipagpatuloy ang panloloko. Cloud mining scams are so 2016, at dahil madalas na tayong naglalabas ng mga warnings at advisory against such, hopefully e wala nang mabiktima tong mga firms na to. Though unfortunately may mangilan-ngilan pa ring malalaglag sa bitag ng mga gahaman at mabuti na lang nakikicooperate na ang SEC at other legal departments to call out these malicious and questionable investment schemes.

This was when signature campaigns are still paying users BTC0.05 - BTC 0.1 per month, and this was long ago. The luckyflop casino, as I recall it, didn't really gain much traction and has since been closed since early 2016 due to lack of players in their platform. The account may have also changed hands due to it having its email changed and being active again after a long hiatus, see post history on page 23 of the user's post. There had been a surge of gambling platforms on those days and I guess that particular platform just didn't make the cut unfortunately.

Avatar changed, and love the color scheme too!

Probably not as intense as the previous seasons pre-COVID19. Most teams or players would surely feel somewhat demotivated on playing since there are no crowds, and even if championship is on the line, there’s no one who will hype them up to score those goals and defend viciously against attackig enemies. It would seem to feel like it’s more of a practice game rather than a real match. Admit it or not, the crowd cheering for their teams certainly add up to the morale of the players, and without it I don’t think they’re gonna give it they’re all. There’s also the anxiety of playing with someone that may have the virus, so yeah, kinda sucks.

Perhaps they want the investment to have some considerable weight on the get go to attract more investors as well. More well-off investors on the group = more chances of getting huge backing ultimately. This could give the investment a huge boost on its funding and embark on a lot of possible projects early on the existence of the fund. Also perhaps to ensure that no investors would be backing out from the project given that they don't necessarily need whatever investment they just placed in. This tend to happen more on small investors with fickle minds on what fad do they want to invest their money in.

Here in the Philippines I don't see those sales of engagement/wedding rings pretty often, though the problem regarding uncontrolled pregnancies have risen given that this country held the longest lockdowns on earth, with little to almost no effect on the containment or even control of the virus. For those who are tying the knot during the pandemic, I feel as if this is just the situation forcing them to get wed early on in the fear that they might not get that ceremony if this thing worsens. Also, people selling or foregoing wedding rings/engagement rings seem like people are trying to get some money in the bank due to the overall economic conditions being hard on them. It's an interesting trend nonetheless, and goes to show how dynamic the economy really is especially when situations like this one that we are in arises.

The reason why this is not being implemented is because someone can take advantage of the incentives and install a lot of full nodes just to collect the profits. While that isn't a bad idea, imagine nodes being too centralized that the purpose of peer-to-peer relay of things is defeated once it reaches the hub of these nodes owned and operated by a single person/entity/organization. It's not going to end well, and there might be rare cases wherein nodes can go 'rogue' and disrupt the flow of transactions within the network.

But this feels like we are policing those who have the money to buy the mining gears that they want, no matter how many it is. This leaves the 'decentralization' aspect of bitcoin. Also, for all we know, some entities might have more than 50% of the hash rate but their farms are fragmented so that no one will ever take notice. There are a lot of scenarios in which this authoritative control over how much hash rate can X have is gamed or bent and effectively evaded, so I don't think it's a good idea to have these 'rules' or be there an implementation enforcing it on the current protocol.

I don't know if the page is mocking the phishing perpetrators by stating that an almost realistic phishing campaign is out and about

Nakakatulong din talaga na alam natin ang billing date ng ating mga online subscriptions. Dahil dito, malalaman natin kung timely ba talagang makareceive ng mga ganitong pakulo mula sa iba't ibang services, at magiging safe tayo lalo't alam nating hindi pa due ng ating mga bayarin. It helps to check who the sender of the email is, too, and to check kung may existing picture ba doon sa mismong nag-email.

It also helps na alam natin pano mag-english talaga. Just look at that broken sentence structure. It can give you cancer almost immediately.

It’s easy to say that I will be holding for the next 4 years to an interview even if deep down, I’d be selling my coins if my profits doubled in a heartbeat. These people right here are trading for a profit, and the moment the right price hits the ticker they’d be letting go of those precious coins in the market. These aren’t new-breed investors but rather more of the same, with unconfirmed tolerance to price volatility and whatnot. You may call them the ‘shaky hands’ given their stay on this wildly-volatile market since we all know that newbies tend to get controlled by their emotions when investing, even if they say that they’ll hold no matter what in a survey.

I'd say only on courses mainly tackling about finance, economics and politics, but not all courses. Those are the only subject areas where bitcoin will be needed, given that it is already considered an emerging financial tool that even top investors and countries are already acknowledging. Perhaps they can add it on the 'experimental' side of finance in the mean time since the overall implementation of bitcoin in the industry is not yet really seen. For lower years, I don't think it is necessary for them to be exposed in these kinds of things though it will be best if they will be taught some basic knowledge about keeping their money safe.

Most academe are not yet ready for teaching bitcoin and its concept to their students since we still lack professionals who have the credentials to teach the subject in a non-biased yet understandable way. That's why I believe a teaching profession in the field of disruptive tech and blockchain would be a nice thing to get certified on.

For American voters, this is like deciding who is the lesser evil between the two. Biden's economic approach is leaning towards the socialist ideology. There's nothing wrong with re-balancing the scales to make it even for the rich and the poor, though the question is how would he attain it? For trump, of course, it's the capitalist ideology. Knowing how great a businessman this guy is, he would of course lean towards making the rich even richer to potentially open some jobs for the working class. The thing is, more often than not, these rich people do not care about the welfare of the working class and instead just want to get more into their pockets than ever before. One thing's for sure though, a balance between these two approach is likely to get more satisfied people on board rather than having to go the extremes on their proposals.

The theory that this was engineered in a lab has been going around since late January and early February, with some of the articles already taken down due to misinformation. Even the Lancet has suggested against the idea, which is kinda surprising since they sometimes are the ones who digs deeper on the hole first before anyone else does. Several US Senators also don't want to 'point fingers' hastily on China since they think that that wouldn't be too nice.

Now with the emergence of a  'rogue scientist' from China, Dr. Li-Meng Yen, we may now have a closer look on how natural the virus really is. News flash: early findings show that it isn't, and the prevous SARS-CoV template may have been used to alter it and enhance the vector of infection of the virus even further by editing some of the proteins responsible for binding on our ACE2 receptors. Resulting product is an even infectious and stealthier virus than its predecessors.

If the collaboration is really true, then all of these aggression from China and the US fending off the bullies is just stage play to make it seem like they don't really like each other. A perfect cover-up, I should say, since no one is suspecting up until the dots are connected very recently.

Those posts relating bitcoin to <insert geopolitical or economical issue here> is really nonsensical. People have been iterating that bitcoin would do very little to aid an economy in distress yet questions similar to that line are still spawning as if they are being resurrected. Believing in what bitcoin can do is one thing, but believing that it is a magical, cure-all financial tool is another. That's fanatical at best, with little to no regard with the actual capacity of bitcoin to solve problems being related to it.


Treating the blockchain and bitcoin as a panacea against every socioeconomic, economic, or geopolitical problem really is the norm for some of the people who are using bitcoin. It's cringy, and not helping the cause of bitcoin at all.

It would be cool if other investors are also cool with it. This is literally banking on the possibility of bitcoin retaining its value for a long time and not going below a certain threshold and putting a significant value on the line. Normally I would advice against it given bitcoin's volatility and its susceptibility of being dumped on but then again this isn't something I own that I have control with. I just hope the best for their company since this is a high-risk, high-reward move, so they can still cut losses--minimal losses compared to holding on fiat--in the end.

There aren't much incentives to stop bitcoin right now. They will be expending more energy and resources to try to shut it on all fronts rather than get more from doing so. Plus with the decentralized nature of bitcoin. the best governments can do to 'stop' it is to place regional restrictions on it. Say, countries from this region can try to agree with a common goal to not allow their citizens access to certain sites relating to bitcoin. But even that in itself will be too hard given that some countries have already accepted and legalized the use of bitcoin and have even created regulatory frameworks for it.

Naaalala ko ang phishing issue noon sa apple.com naman ang ginamitang same method. Usually kasi hindi naeencode sa browsers yung ASCII properly at nag-aappear as normal letter lang ito (CMIIW on this one). But yeah, bookmarking legitimate sites is an easy way to avoid getting phished out of your data. This has been a habit of mine for years now, at thankfully hindi pa ako nadadali ng mga ganitong techniques.

A surge on the number of newly-created accounts to take advantage of the no-KYC 2BTC limit per account would have been noticed by Binance if they were really keen into combating money laundering. In a way, Zaif has a point about Binance's counter-measures against fraud and money laundering since it's easy to get in of the said exchange and get out with tons of $$$ in your pocket without them suspecting a thing. They are a multi-million brand and they should really watch closely on these activities else they will face such repercussions already presented to them. While I don't think this case would move further, Zaif presented valid points which law enforcement would surely keep an eye on.