Well, I see that this one is learning now also how the trust system works...



...and he insists to be a campaing manager instead of campaign manager.



....I actually find this a pretty valid question and I second it.

I'd add that if it's bought from somewhere/somebody, I wouldn't even be sure if the existing half of the key is actually good... (or from that address).

Indeed, OP, if it's your own key indeed, you need much more than that, you'll need searching deeper and for that I wish you good luck. If, on the other hand, you've acquired this from somewhere, just drop it, since you have, by far, not a chance.

Dear diary, today I've got a new mail from Vod....

Indeed, Og, it's not about taking sides between you or Vod. But (for long!) this is only between you, Vod and maybe mods and theymos. For the rest of us it's just pointless drama...

Choosing altcoins can easily be a mistake. Very few of them hold the capability to recover / grow and even fewer actually did. I am around here for many years and altcoins did bring me more bad than good and my best move was when I've converted most of my altcoins into Bitcoin.
Altcoins can sometimes bring greater profits, but those tend to be short-lived and one has to know when to convert back into Bitcoin. Not easy.
While Bitcoin is still considered in the financial world a high risk investment (because of the wild price fluctuations), the altcoins are even riskier.

So no, if one doesn't know what to do, altcoins tend to be just a trap.

Exactly. I'd say that either OP jinxed it, either somebody was looking for the same pattern to decide when to cash in, since this seems to be the 4th day down after the great rise.
Of course that it can move in any direction.

I somehow believe that you can do this only if you mine bitcoins now and you'll keep them (there) until your retirement age.
So you can mine only for yourself and you'll benefit of the money much much later. Those products use to be tax free and such...

Edit: and a link where one can properly read the news: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/01/bitcoin-mining-tax-free-in-ira-proposed-but-irs-may-not-approve.html

In the same way you can have the access part in one table (or even one database if you want to!) and the actual data in another.
For now private blockchains couldn't convince me good enough that they worth that much attention. A blockchain is a limited database. Indeed, if trustless relationship is needed between multiple entities who will maintain the data integrity, public or shared blockchain is beautiful. But again, maybe it's me, maybe I'm missing a point somewhere.

Don't take me wrong, DApps are very interesting on a blockchain, the problem I see is that the blockchain, whatever you do, doesn't have the flexibility of a database (or, as I said, even a file system).

Imho you are trying to force the use of blockchain in places old-school storage (or even the file system!) does its job good and blockchain is not actually needed.
...but maybe it's only me.

First, the tx fees alone is not something the pools care that much of, if you'd make such a rule, they'd just mine empty blocks and go on. Which may be even worse, since it'll keep the mempool full.
Second, if we try to fight censoring with censoring, we clearly do something wrong.


If one node didn't block the "rogue mining pool", the new mined block will still be broadcasted, isn't it? So.. this won't work.

Based on OP name, I'd say that the chance is pretty high that it's in China. Also he mentioned "fob China", but I'm not sure what it means.



I believe that he wants to sell the solution abroad. China is the main manufacturer for... almost everything, including the solar panels.
Of course, there may be warranty issues, especially as the buyer has to install the setup by himself, but I guess that this is something OP and the buyers have to sort out themselves.

If the answer to "did you hear about bitcoin" is yes, I would add a question like "What you think, is bitcoin dirty/drug/illegal money, or is it clean/as good as any (USD)"?
I mean that you could also see if the old "bitcoin is bad" narrative is still catching...

It's not related to tax reporting. It's about the value of transactions. As said, cash has the same regulations and I guess that banks also send reporting if you make that high amount transactions.
It's sad though, since with this they keep bashing the law abiding citizen, while those who want to hide the huge transactions can still do that, pretty easy, whether it's with fiat or crypto.

He has threads for 40k, 50k, ... just look at his topics history.
As already said:


although proudhon history tells that he's far from "typical market fortune teller", since all his predictions seem to be proven wrong sooner or later.

I see his personal text is now twice there.

As a matter of fact, wealthy entities did that, hence they kept their funds "locked" in gold, art, properties, ... name it.



A way of "currency" that doesn't need electricity, internet and such may have to keep remaining in use in certain regions of the world for quite more years. I think that while the "few decades to come" can cover over 90% of the population, the remaining will need (exponential?) more time.



While this has indeed pretty good odds to happen, it may make it even more a "digital gold" than a "currency". I have mixed feelings whether this would be good or not.

---

And as a side note: while the post is informative for those who don't read much, it's also (too) long, hence those who don't read much may not read it all (and the informative part remains just wasted time for those who - more or less - know the history). An idea you should think on is to reduce your posts' length where possible.

Is this a re-run? Feds do seize crypto for years and they know very well what to do: auction them.
The fact that they've use the services of a proper company to hold the funds securely until they're sold is just a small step forward, but not really worthy of a big fuss.


They'll probably send fiat into DOJ (or whatever) accounts and from there the victims may or may not be reimbursed, just like for any fiat related criminality. I think that nothing has changed on that part.

My Binance card is denied by a small number of shops, the most known being the Lidl group (both inside or outside my country).
But I've got used by that, the old Wirex, when it was also issued by Contis, had the same problem. So it's not a Binance issue, it's a Contis issue.


I use seldom the auto-conversion, exactly because I've noticed something odd with the conversion rate, but I cannot tell how bad it was when I've noticed it. But I don't have enough "data" to say more, maybe others use the auto-conversion more and can tell?

You didn't think this over good enough.
Tesla "buyers" were mined or bought the bitcoins they'll spend there. So it's a buying pressure too.
This is how the coin part works. Some will buy to spend, some will sell when received. And some will hold. Just like now.


You are confusing apples with oranges.
Taxes are there to pay for the country's infrastructure, for public schools, for public hospitals, for the army and many more. You have to pay taxes whether you use bitcoin, USD or anything else as means of payment.
Whether the taxes are received in bitcoin or anything else is not a big thing either - again, bitcoin is a coin - if certain institutions also accept bitcoin, it's nice. If they don't.. well, they may do in the future.


No, and I've explained that this "logic" is incorrect.


The legal currency is a piece of paper telling that the country "owes you" a certain amount of "value". The legal currency has the "value" the government/central bank decides for it to have.
Bitcoin price is decided by the free market over the world. And as long as there's demand for it (and if it's used there's demand) its scarcity should ensure that the price will not (overall, long term) go down.
So while I do expect the price still go "up and down and up and down and..." I don't think that it will be "devalued".

Although it's an interesting idea, I think that's wrong. The energy is not stored per se into Bitcoin, it's - let's face it - still consumed in the real world, hence this idea will be easily opposed by anybody. And Bitcoin is a virtual thing, it cannot store anything, it only has the value we give it to it, seen by the price we agree to trade it for.

The fact that this price is related to the cost of mining is caused by the fact the mining reward is still big. With the reward going down more and more over years this relation should get broken at some point, when the miners will no longer be able to stay as main sellers.

Also it's related to the fact that most miners buy their electricity, and some not even cheap. If the vast majority will have their own renewable sources, after paying for all the "gears", they'll no longer be tied to the price of electricity and the idea of "store of energy" would no longer have ground.


So while Bitcoin mining is indeed not a waste of energy, I find your reasoning behind it incorrect.

I'm a bit puzzled: isn't this the same as the law that should be already in effect in Germany since July 1?