Most "fraud" are commited with Fiat currencies and through the Banking system, so with China being a "Police" state, you would figure that a Blockchain based solution would offer them more control over the tracking of money in their country, thus reducing the fraud that are done with Fiat currencies.  Their coin will be centralized and 100% controlled by the Chinese government, so it is exactly what they need to control the economy and the flow of money in their country. |
|
|
|
Read the fine print.... " Most specific of all the conditions is probably the part of the ruling that requires that “the value of the crypto-asset is pegged to one or more fiat currencies.” This suggests that only stablecoins will be usable as payment for salaries, significantly reducing the number of virtual assets that will not raise any violation issues. " They are paving the way for their own asset backed GovCoin by doing this, because their own GovCoin will have to be pegged to their own Fiat currency. We will see a lot more countries that would be doing the same soon, because it reduces the need for physical cash and the need to print more Fiat currencies. <It is expensive to produce physical cash and coins.>  By pegging it to Fiat currencies, they are able to manipulate it and that gives them control over that Crypto currency. |
|
|
|
The non-technical difference is that large corporations does not want to acknowledge that they want to use Bitcoin, so they will tell everyone that they are developing their own "Blockchain" technology. The Blockchain is the decentralized ledger that keeps track of all transactions that are done <the simplified explanation> ... and Bitcoin is the actual token being used to identify the coin being used. Every Alt coin has it's own token and collectively these Alt coins and Bitcoin is classed as Crypto currencies, because they are backed by a Crypto graphic algorithm.  |
|
|
|
It is clear that Stock market performance are linked to a increase or decrease in the buying and selling of Crypto currencies. I think some of the investors and traders have a small portion of their portfolio invested in Crypto currencies and when the Stock market takes a dive, they just increase their investment in Crypto currencies to serve as a hedge against potential losses on the Stock market. <This is more informal (personal) trading and not institutional capital being used for this.> A day will come when institutional capital would be allowed to be invested in Bitcoin and then we will see a much bigger price swing, when the Stock market gets a beating. |
|
|
|
You are right, the animations are different. Lots of people complained about the new animations lately,~
Very few complaints. Not one single comment apart from on this forum. We put the old animation back on Multiply BTC page just because the new one slows down auto bet Animation literally means nothing, I don't understand why would anyone care about it. ~
Exactly. The people who care about it does not understand it. When I talk to "newbies" about Freebitco.in they usually react more or less in the same way... They think the games are rigged and they say nobody gives money away for free, no matter how little it is. A lot of them stay around for a few weeks, trying to hit the $200 jackpot and when they do not hit it, they stop using the site. They do not understand the basics, so they criticize the site. The process behind the animation is too difficult for them to understand, so it must be rigged then.  |
|
|
|
Bottlecaps the only coin destroyed in crypto-history by 51% attack, recovered from the attack only to die later a natural dead.
Anyone with a modern desktop could attack hundreds of coin as some just have a old computer run in a basement for whatever reason to maintain the chain. There is nothing to gain to waste time and money to destroy for example izerocoin.
Yes and No. If your intention is to discredit the whole Alt coin market, then you only need to bring down a bunch of these smaller coins with little or no hashing power and you would tarnish the reputation of the whole Crypto currency community.  The general public has shown that they do not understand the difference between 3rd party services getting hacked and the actual Bitcoin protocol being hacked, so with every exchange hack... people read in the media that Bitcoin was hacked and they just accept that as the truth. <The same thing will happen when small Alt coins goes through an 51% attack like that> |
|
|
|
I doubt if Elon Musk's decision to back him has anything to do with him being pro-Bitcoin. Elon Musk has indicated before that he has not invested any money into Bitcoin, other than some Bitcoin that someone gave to him as a experiment. <Like Andreas helping someone to create a wallet and then gifting them a few Dollars worth of bitcoin to play around with.> So why would Elon Musk support a pro-Bitcoiner, if he has almost no bitcoins? I think Elon Musk just supports this, because he is a pioneer and he has a history with "new" payment networks. <PayPal> |
|
|
|
There are no economic incentive for miners to accept a protocol change that increase the Bitcoin supply. Anyone holding coins now, will never accept a change that would decrease scarcity and also the devaluation of their current coins. The miners with full nodes needs to run a newer protocol with these changes and I can tell you, that none of them would be willing to do that. We saw how difficult it was to get consensus on "Block sizes" ...just imagine what will happen when they are messing with the total supply. |
|
|
|
The moment when the price jumped to $18 000+ ....loads of speculators jumped onto the Bitcoin bandwagon to make a quick profit and a lot of those people are still waiting around to get any kind of return on their investment, because they bought bitcoins when the price was at a ATH. Friends of mine bought coins when the price was at $17 800 and they are still waiting since 2017 to get any kind of return on their investment. So it is normal for these people to get anxious, because they want their initial investment money and a little profit for their efforts.  |
|
|
|
This is a very stupid move and it might lead to the hacker being caught a lot quicker. A mixer service takes your coins and mix them with other people's coins, but the larger the amount of coins being mixed, the higher the chances that those coins might be mixed by the coins being send. It is rumoured that mixing services are less anonymous with larger amount of coins being mixed. Indeed, for sure Chipmixer will cooperate to the authority to trace the hacker. I believe Chipmixer will protect their name and will have a wise decision regarding this incident. Mixing service have records of their transaction though they keep it private. So let's hope this backfires on them and that they dug their own grave by doing this. The companies tracking these coins, might just have received a jackpot from these hackers bombarding a single mixer service with a lot of coins. It will definitely backfire to the hackers. They will never cooperate with the authorities, because no logs are kept, so even if they subpoena them for the information... then they still cannot give any information to them, that they do not have. As one of the previous posters also said, the main reason why people still use mixer services, is the fact that they are not sharing information with the authorities. If they do that only once, people would stop using it and there are no way to hide that, because that would be used as evidence in a court. |
|
|
|
To me this does not solve the problem with third parties, because you need to find willing traders on the FiatDex Telegram private channels <which is a third party> to serve as a counter-party? Also, once you get the ETH, you still have to exchange it for BTC on a non-custodial/decentralized exchange. <Once again a third party> It is also a very tedious process and it might be to complex for most "newbie" users. Just go to a local Bitcoin meetup and identify trusted people to trade with and Bob's your uncle.... <No third party needed> |
|
|
|
How are you going to test something if you give out the tokens for FREE, would this not devalue your token once it is being sold? People also do not like pre-mined tokens for this same reason. Most tokens increase in value, because people judge the coins value, based on it's usefulness. How useful are your token, apart from just being an experiment? I am curious to find out how this experiment will turn out, so I will participate in the FREE airdrops for now, but I figure it will end in a almost worthless token with no real world use. |
|
|
|
Yes and NO. A few years ago we only had a few exchanges and now we have several exchanges to chose from and we have decentralized services where you can trade without the KYC requirements. LocalBitcoin has been with us for many years but they have gone full KYC now, so that option has made it a little bit more difficult to buy bitcoins without exchanges. Also, more people have been joining Bitcoin Meetups lately, so you have more people to trade with and you can even use some of the OTC platforms to buy larger amount of coins. |
|
|
|
This is a very stupid move and it might lead to the hacker being caught a lot quicker. A mixer service takes your coins and mix them with other people's coins, but the larger the amount of coins being mixed, the higher the chances that those coins might be mixed by the coins being send. It is rumoured that mixing services are less anonymous with larger amount of coins being mixed. So let's hope this backfires on them and that they dug their own grave by doing this. The companies tracking these coins, might just have received a jackpot from these hackers bombarding a single mixer service with a lot of coins. |
|
|
|
6. It is a crime - It is a criminal action to execute a double spend and to get illegal fianancial gain. <edited - added this - credit to hatshepsut93 >
i don't know of any "laws" that would enforce such a thing. this is a free market and what we call "51% attack" is a feature of proof of work algorithm. so in the end they wouldn't exactly be doing anything illegal if they roll back a bunch of blocks. the only illegal thing could be if they had some legal contract to make a payment through that altcoin and they reversed THAT transaction. otherwise the rest of the transactions aren't "reversed" they are just now in another block and the block reward that went to the other miner is now invalid. BCH did a 51% attack on their own chain recently and nothing happened! they literary rolled back a block that was mined by an unknown miner that wasn't in their centralized team and stole their rewards. 5. Asic proof mining - Some Alt coins have different mining algorithms that are Asic proof.
they aren't ASIC proof because there is no such thing as "ASIC proof", it is an illusion created by a bunch of delusional developers who were trying to sell their altcoin. what we have is "resistant to bitcoin ASICs" or in simple terms coins that can not be mined with SHA256 but are mined with something else like scrypt, sha3,... and ASICs can be created for those too. to 51% attack these coins, specially since many of them have little hashrate, all you need is a bunch of GPU rigs. like what happened to BTG. "ASIC Proof" …. " ASIC resistant" … same thing. The crux of the matter is, SHA256 miners will not find it easy to mine these coins. I know some of these miners might still have some GPU's that they use to mine Alt coins, so it might be easier for them to launch such an attack, if they concentrate their efforts on an small Alt coin with Scrypt algorithm. The main thing is that a larger Pool can easily destroy Alt coins if they wanted to do that, but they are not doing it for some reason. The obvious answer is that the gain is not worth the effort to do this.  |
|
|
|
I made about 800%+ profit on my first bitcoins that I bought and that was enough to cover 40 years investment is something else that I could have invested it in for a guaranteed return of 20% per year. So, I am quite happy that I did not have to wait 40 years to make the same returns. I re-invested some of that profit to buy more bitcoins and I dumped some of that money into the other investment where I get 20% per year, so for the next 38 years, I would still make 20% profit on top of that 800% profit I already made. <The other option is a medium risk investment> What is the catch, what do you get from spending your time on free courses? |
|
|
|
Loans are easy, but getting your coins back if someone forfeit repayments might be a complex story. Bitcoin is borderless and you can loan money to anyone in the world, but each country has it's own laws and they are there to protect their citizens. <Some laws on how much interest you are allowed to charge, comes to mind.> People use Escrow services as a third party to execute the loan, but not all Escrow services are legitimate.. so you have to get reputable Escrow services to protect your transaction. Also remember, Bank are not just loaning people other people's deposits... they loan money that they get from Reserve Banks. |
|
|
|
Why would they do that. ?
Why would you destroy something that is actually beneficial for your main coin , actually the more coins that are in the market , the more choices people have and better will the coins become individually , therefore I think that this is something that is good for us.
Libra only increased the value of bitcoins , people started recognising it more .
It's called healthy competition.
Well, why do people destroy their competition? Big retailers buy out their competition to get a bigger market share and these large Bitcoin miners might try to eliminate the competition to have less investment into shitty Alt coins and more investment into Bitcoin <BTC> Just imagine what the Bitcoin price would be, if all money invested into 1000s of Alt coins was rather invested into Bitcoin. <BTC> I am not saying that it would work and that most of those investors would re-invest in BTC, once Bitcoin miners destroyed their investment in Alt coins, but some miners might have that logic and they might just be tempted to do that. |
|
|
|
I think it's largely profit driven. 51% attacking a minor altcoin would be less profitable than just continuing to honestly mine BTC. Sure, they could fill their bags, dump them for BTC, reverse their transactions, and get their bags back, but to do so with a large enough volume to even approach how much they would make just honestly mining BTC would wreck the order books for that coin and dump the price significantly. I don't there is any need to "destroy the reputation" of coins like BCH or BSV. Their delusions leaders and insecure chains are quite capable of doing that for themselves. And as we've seen repeatedly the zombies that populate this market don't care either. As soon as whatever coin recovers from its 51% attack it's back to business as usual. And in plenty of cases it appears prices didn't dip whatsoever. It's sad, but it's true. BCH was successfully 51% attacked by a couple of their big miners a few months ago, who decided they didn't like some transaction that had taken place and they were going to reverse them. What did all the BCH shills do at the sudden realization that their coin was no longer decentralized, immutable, or censorship resistant? Literally nothing. Continued worshiping Ver and bleating on about being "the real bitcoin". Agreed, but the BTC vs BCH thing was a bit different, because these die hard shills just continued doing their masters work like slaves and they kept on dumping fiat into a failed experiment to safe face. The BCH reputation did not take a massive hit, because they under played the seriousness of the situation by spreading more FUD. <A lot of speculators does not understand the repercussions of a 51% attack, because they are too focussed on profits.> It might be something totally different, when smaller Alt coins are targeted with a lot less support. You systematically take down one by one, until the public realize how vulnerable and insecure they are. < I am not telling people to do this, but it might be a perfect attack vector > |
|
|
|
however well intended, the same company that sponsors Bitcoin developers also mining BTC is a conflict of interest. It's a good thing they're not the only organisation sponsoring developers, but I still would prefer that this had not happened.
the BetterHash pool is a good counter balance however. Anything that helps decentralize the mining market adds to Bitcoin's strength, even if Betterhash is a modest move in that direction. This should push other pools into adopting Betterhash also.
With any luck, Blockstream will be totally incompetent or too naive to enter the mining business, and rolling out Betterhash will be all that remains of this story in the long term
Why would you see this as a conflict of interest? They are not getting any kind of advantage over their competition with their involvement in them funding the development. The source code for Bitcoin is Open source and everyone can scrutinize the code to see if they are adding something that would give them a unfair advantage. <Not like some ASIC manufacturers that included proprietary code to give them a boost> I think it is a good move to add to the decentralization of mining and also to support the hashing power and security of the technology that they working on. <Why did Satoshi mine his own coins?> |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
