Wrong  , the same user ( @Bitcoin Poet) posted two videos on Nov 15, 2010 ( Bitcoin Technical Analysis) and Nov 15, 2010 ( Bitcoin and the EFF). The bright side is that the user is still active, if you have a Twitter account @bitcoinpoet, invite him to this post. "I'm impressed with the effects although the videos from 2010." Bitcoin Pre-history is not accurately documented so I do not think these videos in this channel are the oldest videos. True! These videos are a week earlier  Although generally, I guess we could call all of them 'the oldest ones'. The videos are a bit weird and meme-like, but they are also informative and show the positive attitude of Bitcoin poet. Perhaps this thread will attract the attention of the same person, and we'll be able to learn more about the details. Does this person still have Bitcoin? Did he/she expect that the prices will go up to $20k? It must have been amazing to watch Bitcoin gain price, market capitalization and popularity throughout all those years... |
|
|
|
The market growth happening at present is a perfect uptrend, because the market got impacted when there arise an issue with Bitfinex covered a $850 million loss with tether funds. The market crashed reaching $5200 and stayed around $5285 by the weekend. Now the market has taken a forward price push reaching $5800+ without getting impacted of several negative things that have been taking place.
The price has fallen to $5660 already. While I agree that Bitcoin is doing better than before April, I don't think it's ready for major steps yet. This price break seems like a trap. It's good if the price stabilises around $5600 for now. The $6k barrier is tough, and we need to be patient about it. Summing up, Bitcoin is generally in the uptrend since the beginning of April, but the changes are happening slowly and are often followed by some corrections. |
|
|
|
It's been a decade since Bitcoin emerged as a decentralized digital currency for the people. While it's no secret that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrrencies have some drawbacks, they're still a great alternative to Fiat when it comes to making payments without a centralized entity in charge of our funds. With latest advancements such as DAGs, smart contracts, Layer-Two scaling solutions, Dandelion Protocol, Zero Knowledge Proofs, and more, it's becoming more evident that crypto will someday replace traditional payment processors like PayPal, Apple Pay, and Android Pay. Yet, Blockchain technology is still struggling with user adoption and regulatory compliance. Nonetheless, do you believe that there's hope for Bitcoin to beat traditional payment processors or will those same payment processors adapt to the Blockchain in the future?  Unfortunately, the rates of adoption are currently not promising. It will take decades for Bitcoin to reach the number of users payment systems like Apple Pay have today. Surely, thus can change it people start to believe in New technology more. However, I don't think Blockchain is suitable for a big amount of payments. DAG, on the other hand, seems very promising in this regard, but has struggles on initial stages of adoption, being very centralised. I think that cryptocurrencies will win sooner or later, but maybe not in the ways we imagine today. |
|
|
|
We live in a world where our online IDs are in the hands of the government and banks, and we rely on them to keep it secure. Blockchain IDs on the other hand, put you and you only in control. Therefore, you can store all your passwords and any other personal information on the blockchain, eliminating the need of passwords in everything.
that is not how blockchain or banks or government work! none of them have anything to do with "passwords and personal information"! banks hold and control your money, and governments snoops around in your personal affairs. and blockchain is just a public ledger that holds transaction history protected by cryptography. it is not supposed to hold your passwords or personal information. In a blockchain future, we will see a world where our medical records are immediately available if we are in an accident; where online voting was possible; and where transparency was paramount and greed is disincentivized.
it is apparent that you are hyped up about something you don't understand. blockchain is not even good for those things such as medical records,... it is not efficient and there are a lot of other better ways. I guess opinions differ on this matter. Blockchain voting systems already exist and have even been tested in some places, if I am not mistaken. What Blockchain adds to the voting system is inability of faking the votes or voting more than once. As for medical records, I found the following article interesting: https://www.computer.org/publications/tech-news/research/blockchain-health-medical-records-cloud-security. It explores the pros and cons, eventually concluding that it probably makes more sense to store the data off-chain but the hashes on-chain. Blockchain might not be the best solution, but in many cases it's a viable one. |
|
|
|
|
Is that the case in which Craig Wright is suing a guy that doesn't believe he is Satoshi? I didn't understand the order well. Is it just about Craig disclosing one if his old wallets he is supposed to have, or is it an order to unlock the Satoshi's bitcoins? I think franky1 suggests it's the former, and in this case I agree it's not worthy of our attention.
When I first heard about the case, I was actually hoping the judge would make him do the latter. This way the uncertainty can end once and for all. It's sad if it turns out he can prove that he is in control of those funds, though.
|
|
|
|
Cracking a private key will take sooooooo much time before you actually land upon a wallet with actual bitcoin in it. You'd be dead of old age, and you'd still not be close to actually finding one.
That is, of course, if a powerful enough quantum computer does not appear, right? I believe it won't happen and humanity will hit some sort of a barrier like it did with space travel, but many believe that quantum computers can become a threat in the foreseeable future. While Bitcoin keys might be in danger by then, though, there will still be mechanisms of protecting the coins (I read that in case a person uses a new Bitcoin address every time, even a quantum computer will do no good with cracking the keys) as well as have an option of switching to already existing quantum-resistant cryptocurrencies. |
|
|
|
So many smart device companies are gradually adoption the incorporation of blockchain wallets into their devices the latest among them being Samsung. This is a great move to adopting the 21st century technology which will give customers better experience with the digital assets.
I've also seen some announcements from the major companies that their smartphones will have in-built crypto wallets. It's likely that many people will learn about cryptos for the first time from their phones. It will take time for people to start using the feature, though. Moreover, sometimes the companies are not doing a good job with these wallets. For instance, Samsung's one only supports Ethereum and nothing else: https://www.newsbtc.com/2019/03/06/samsung-galaxy-s10-bitcoin-ethereum/. Also, even though I like the idea of this popularization, I myself would probably never use a mobile wallet, because I don't trust these companies with my cryptos and because losing the phone and losing the money along with it sounds too risky to me. |
|
|
|
Considering how many Bitcoin believers (maximalists) there are, with their specific beliefs of how cryptocurrency should behave, it's becoming more evident that Bitcoin is a religion. After all, this popular movement of decentralized finance has impacted our lives one way or the other. The world has its eyes on the direction of Bitcoin as a digital currency which determines the path forward of Blockchain technology. According to Google, the term "Religion" means the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods. This becomes true especially when many Bitcoin followers believe that Satoshi is some sort of "god". Hence, if Satoshi would reveal himself to the public, many people will follow him. Nonetheless, what are your thoughts about this? I had some courses on Religious Studies, and I'd like to point out that some think that religion does not even require a divine being (it's a disputable question). If we are thinking about Bitcoin religion, Satoshi will most likely be not God, but more of a prophet. The place of God should be taken by Bitcoin itself. Some people believe in Bitcoin more than rationally. They are affectionate about the price dynamics; they sympathize other 'believers' and hate those who fight it. The problem here, though, is that God or whatever takes God's place should be distantiated from humans and out of their direct control. Bitcoin exists, and there is nothing to believe or not believe about it. And essentially it is controlled by humanity. This means that making a religion out of it is barely possible. A quasi-religious cult - now, that seems plausible. |
|
|
|
most of them aren't really at fault. they are just poor newcomers who entered a big market and were suddenly bombarded by a huge wave of advertisement which were promising them riches beyond their wildest dreams so they ended up buying a ton of useless tokens which have been continuously losing value
But it's never late to stop. And is it really that hard to find coinmarketcap.com and figure out the best investment opportunities before investing money? It's weird, but it really seems to me that some people who took part in ICOs and stuff might not even know that there are well-known and reputable cryptocurrencies out there that don't involve that much risk. Others probably invested out of greed, thinking that the time to invest in the giants is missed, so one has to go for hidden gems. I think that now the situation is as simple as it can get. Top cryptocurrencies have already shown what they are capable of. The market is still very much down, even though it is showing some exciting upward movement sometimes. If one wants to invest in cryptos now, it's a great idea to invest in Bitcoin and maybe a couple of others from the top-10. There always is and will be a risk, but I agree with the op that now is a good time to join. |
|
|
|
Here I want to discuss and learn about the starting time of crypto gambling and wanna know their experience. I hope we all able to discuss what is the situation make us to gamble and believe it for entertainment or investment!!!
Here are some lines you can share with us:
Which year?
What Situation or who motivated?
Ever first gambling site's experience?
How much you invested first time?
Your first profit amount in BTC?
What Dice or Sports game you start gamble?
Lets discuss more...
I started gambling in 2016. Back then I was exploring the forum and taking part in discussions. I started paying attention to the gambling section and trying out some websites. I think my first experience was playing dice on Primedice. I did not invest any money, kept using the faucet and using various approaches to make something of it. I think I won around 40k satoshis there. Then I slowly started experimenting on other websites with different games, like crash and slots. I believe this answers all of the questions you've asked in your post. For me, gambling was and still is a field of experimentation, a way to get nice emotions and to have fun. |
|
|
|
Have you gambled lottery? Why Mathematicians aren't riches now in gambling since they know and expert in equation solving finding the x value? Equation solving in Mathematics are helpful to finds or pick the numbers, how did you know if it is even or odd numbers in right combination? Is the binomial coefficient formula will really help you to find the right winning combination? Share your thought here and let's discuss this. When I first read your post, I wanted to respond by a typical "you cannot overcome the probability" and "the odds are always against you" kind of thing. However, then I came by this article about people actually figuring out patterns in gambling, including some lotteries. If the lottery numbers are chosen in a perfectly random way, I think no formulas are going to help you win. After all, the lottery is not a game of skill. However, if we are talking about specific non-online lotteries, it might be possible to calculate the patterns by analyzing a long history of former winning numbers or something. I wouldn't count on that, though. And I am sure there's no single formula that can 'crack' any lottery. |
|
|
|
I like this website and its idea! It has a nice design, massive database of slots websites and articles on various topics that might be of interest to gamblers. I've seen different review websites, and this one looks really promising. However, I was sad to find out that the first random slot game I opened was not available, there's even a "file not found" text here: https://www.bestbitcoinslots.com/game-provider/playtech/age-of-gods/. Then I tried out some other slots, and I was actually amazed by the animation some of them had! It's really easier to choose a website when you first see a big variety of options. Good luck with this project! |
|
|
|
|
I am not a big fan of lotteries, but I decided to check out this website. I really like the design and the website seems to be working nicely. It's also good that it is provably fair. I was wondering whether you were planning to do something to promote this website since it seems rather new. For instance, you could make a small faucet or welcome bonuses. If you have more funds, launching a signature campaign could raise its visibility.
I also wanted to ask a more formal question: how does the website profit from the game? Are there additional transaction fees or perhaps a house edge? At what rate are they?
Good luck!
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with others that while high volatility does not do much good to the market, it is better than having a central bank. Firstly, the bank does not guarantee stability. The economy can collapse at any point, and gradual devaluation eventually leads the currency to become worthless. Fiat is a very bad system because it relies on people not making stupid decisions while being absolutely rational is simply not in our nature. Cryptocurrencies allow to take out the human factor. It comes with the cost of potential volatility, but I also think that it is possible to overcome it eventually and have a more or less stable currency.
|
|
|
|
It is an well known fact that real estate is the biggest bubble in the history of mankind. With no actual valuation process available for land, it can bring a big disaster anytime in the economy! US has aready suffered it in 2008 and cities like Mumbai, Hong Kong, Tokyo are on the verge of it!
But still some economists prefer to call bitcoin a bubble because it makes them happy and they think this way they can keep their prominence over the economy!
It's sad even to talk about it, but the thing is that the big guys are not those who are going to suffer in case everything collapses again. I've seen some information about the stock market moving in a dangerous direction and people not imposing safety measures once again. But recall what happened the last time. Big banks and regulators screwed up, but they pretty much stayed in power nevertheless. It was people losing their savings, pensions, and jobs as well as paying taxes to bring the guilty ones back to the throne again. They stay in power and want to make sure nothing changes in that regard. Bitcoin is a threat because it cannot be manipulated and controlled like that. So instead of adapting, they try to fight what's bound to win. |
|
|
|
First, the Avengers Endgame was so hyped and in the end it was disappointing.
Star Wars will probably be disappointing as well.
They know the recession is due and they are saving money everywhere they can.
You are wrong about the film industry. While some argue that Star Wars was spoiled the moment Lukas made that deal with Disney, the "Avengers" are actually extremely successful. Not only this film already broke a lot of records related to the box-office but it also received very high grades both from critics and from the audience on various top websites. At the same time, though, you are probably right about the economic crisis coming soon. I think it will happen somewhere between 2019 and 2020. And I believe the reasons for the crisis were noted by dothebeats quite nicely. We don't know what will be the impact of future events, especially on the cryptocurrency market. It might go down with everything else, but it also has a chance of saving the world economy by providing a solid non-fiat approach. |
|
|
|
So they want to re-brand Bitcoin and turn it into a new gold. It is certainly the simplest way a marketer has to sell Bitcoin. I do not know if that is enough, but it is something that draws attention and can attract more qualified investors who could over time come to think of one or the other. Another ad from them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ltc5mIK7LdoI liked this ad way more than the new one. This one focuses on the importance of getting equal access to the financial industry, and a chance to get rid of the banks that failed and charged us many times. The new ad, however, is just about investing and becoming rich. It's not what Bitcoin is about. And no investment is a safe investment, whereas the ad, of course, forgets to mention it. I also agree with pooya87 that it's not really advertising Bitcoin as such, it's leading people to a specific company. Nevertheless, I believe all sorts of ads are important to make Bitcoin more popular. |
|
|
|
|
Different sorts of phone scams are pretty popular in my country, but I've never heard of any that involve cryptocurrencies. I find it hard to understand why people would believe they need to transfer their BTC anywhere to solve social security issues. It's easier to believe these things when it comes to fiat, but why would official charge anything not in the official currency? $2M is a significant amount of money. I am sorry people lost that much. I hope it will be possible to track these scammers down. After all, phone calls are traceable at least to a certain extent, right?
Thanks for sharing important info, op.
|
|
|
|
|
I think it was obvious from the very beginning that banning mining had little to do with environmental responsibility. China is one of the biggest polluters on Earth, and they never seemed to care about the consequences. Another area where China is one of the biggest is violating privacy of its citizens. China is the kind of country that likes to stay in control as much as possible, so it makes perfect sense that now they are trying to shut down mining of real cryptos, while working on a Blockchain they'd be able to control. Sad but true. I hope it won't affect the market much.
|
|
|
|
https://www.ft.com/content/1cfb6d46-5d5a-11e9-939a-341f5ada9d40The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have launched a private blockchain and quasi-cryptocurrency called “Learning Coin” to better understand the emerging technology.
The Washington-based multinational agencies stressed that “Learning Coin” will be inaccessible outside the World Bank and the IMF and have no monetary value whatsoever, and is therefore not a real cryptocurrency, like bitcoin.
However, its development has helped its staff become more familiar with principles like the distributed ledgers that underlie crypto assets, possible use cases like smart contracts and enhanced transparency, and challenges like facilitating money laundering.
In a statement the IMF said: “The development of crypto-assets and distributed ledger technology is evolving rapidly, as is the amount of information (both neutral and vested) surrounding it. This is forcing central banks, regulators and financial institutions to recognize a growing knowledge gap between the legislators, policymakers, economists and the technology. This project begins to bridge that gap and form a strong knowledge base of the technology among IMF and World Bank staff.”
The Fund said the Learning Coin app would serve as a “hub for knowledge” helping host their content like blogs, research, videos and presentations. Achieving certain educational milestones will allow World Bank and IMF staff to “earn” Learning Coins. They will have no real value, but the developers are testing how staff can redeem the coins for some kind of rewards, the statement said. Obviously the tech behind crypto is a separate thing from the social use of crypto. The IMF would have been better off monitoring real life use of crypto rather than artificially asking their staff to "earn" tokens.s process will allow the Fund/Bank to better understand how crypto assets could potentially be used in real life. The goal of this project is to promote knowledge — not bias. The app is a prototype that aims to show the good, the bad and the ugly of the technology, without hype or uninformed criticism. I think that it would make more sense for them to experiment and research actual cryptocurrencies, rather than an artificial pseudo-crypto. Who are they, children? Why do they need a special coin for learning purposes? These are professionals of the financial industry. They should experience what it is like to deal with a real decentralised volatile crypto. By playing around with a centralised and closed to the public simulation, they are only fooling themselves. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
