Once coins are sent to exchanges, they become disconnected from each other unless there is access to the exchange log. I don't see a solution to this problem ATM.

However, this service(which we already has coded part of it) aims to identify the relationship between two addresses or transaction IDs, and is going to target coins moved through mixers and similar services.

First of all, am I allowed to say "boner" in this section?  It's been a long ass time since I've browsed Collectibles, and while looking to see whether what I'm about to mention had already been mentioned I couldn't help but notice all of the fantastic threads that I've missed out on...and I'm going to admit that my subsequent state of arousal almost reached boner state.

This is not bitcoin related, but it is crypto-related and it is definitely a collectible: https:THISISASCAM//pirelli-montblanc.com/

For those of you youngins who might not even know what a fountain pen is....go look it up.  Suffice to say that nowadays it's a very niche market and some of the higher-end ones can get pricey to say the least, as they're usually hand made and have gold nibs and often some kind of other precious metal(s) on the barrel and/or nib tip. 

So whilst idly browsing the Tron subreddit and seeing what those losers have to say, I was shocked to see the above link.  Montblanc is one of the best-known premium pen manufacturers, so this isn't some kind of cheap pen we're talking about here in terms of quality.  It just blew my mind that Montblanc is somehow producing a pen commemorating Pirelli and, for some unknown reason, throwing in an NFT unique to each of the 72 pens that'll be produced.  Talk about jumping on a bandwagon.

I already contacted a fellow pen/bitcoin enthusiast about this, and hopefully he'll post here but I'm curious what all of y'all think (if anything).

The ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine has shed more light on how digital currency is being used for military aid, since the invasion the Ukraine government have turned to social media and asked for the donation of Bitcoin, stablecoin and every other cryptocurrency.

From all indication the response was massive with over 100,000 people are contributing to help out Ukraine to improve there military effort in the war. One could never believe that helps could come from different people all over the world to assist Ukraine, to be frank with you, some individuals would have thought that NETO are the only ones helping Ukraine.
According to Ukrainian deputy digital minister Alex Bornyakov, the country has been using crypto to purchase fighting essentials like bulletproof vest, drones and other military gadgets/equipment.

https://bitcoinist.com/crypto-accepted-by-60-of-ukraine-weapons-suppliers/

This is more of a philosophical debate, but feel free to tell me if my reasoning is wrong.

People often talk about the price potential of BTC or gold, in terms of US dollars or euro. In my opinion this does not make sense because the value of euros and dollars can be destroyed by central banks printing them to infinity.

So it only makes sense to debate the value of BTC or gold, in terms of an other store of value with a limited availability (BTC expressed in gold, or gold expressed in BTC. Or even in silver)
Fiat currency is not a store of value as we all know. Currency is not money because any currency in history got inflated to 0.

There is an estimated 208 000 tonnes (208 000 000 kgs) of gold available on planet earth. This has been mined throughout history and we can assume that this is not lost. But let's estimate it at 210 000 tonnes to make it easy.

The amount of bitcoin that will ever be available, is capped at 21 million coins. So for each coin that is available, there is 10 kgs of gold available (210 million divided by 21 million = 10)

So in terms of value 1 BTC is worth 10kgs of gold. But given that 10kgs of gold costs 650 000 dollars today and 1 BTC costs 30 000, BTC must be undervalued and still has a potential to 20x from here. So why would people buy gold as a hedge against inflation, when they can buy BTC that is undervalued by a factor of at least 20? I guess the answer lies in confidence and previous experience.

Is any of the above wrong?

A few side notes:

- I think this is only true when BTC reaches mass adoption like gold does now. But I think this has a good chance of happening because CBDC's will lose their value just like fiat currency. People will run to real stores of value like precious metals or BTC. BTC is more accessible than gold and so I expect more people to chose BTC over time.

- Given the fact that many coins are lost and thus not available for trading, maybe the real amount of BTC that will ever be in circulation is more like 15 million. This makes BTC more rare and increases its value in gold significantly.

- Sales of gold are already subjected to taxation in nearly every country. I don't know if the government will succeed in taxing BTC. I guess only if BTC needs to get converted to currency, because then the banks and the IRS get involved. But if we can avoid that conversion for payment (directly in BTC), the IRS and the government are bypassed.

If I am wrong about anything here, please tell me.

First of all, am I allowed to say "boner" in this section?  It's been a long ass time since I've browsed Collectibles, and while looking to see whether what I'm about to mention had already been mentioned I couldn't help but notice all of the fantastic threads that I've missed out on...and I'm going to admit that my subsequent state of arousal almost reached boner state.

This is not bitcoin related, but it is crypto-related and it is definitely a collectible: https://pirelli-montblanc.com/

[...]

Mt Gox and FTX aren't both company should be blamed, but the whole centralized exchanges should be blamed especially if they're included in this list [1]

It's not surprising regulation will keep coming because hacker is always clever and better rather than the current security, this is why everyone should avoid to use centralized exchange. If people are move all from centralized exchange to decentralized exchange, there's will no regulation coming due to security excuse, they only want to control everyone activity.

---

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090869.0

https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/03/29/crypto-exchange-beaxy-shut-down-after-sec-lawsuit/
Crypto trading platform Beaxy has officially closed its doors as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charged the company and its founder, Artak Hamazaspyan. with operating an unregistered exchange and brokerage, the agency said Wednesday in a statement.
The SEC also accused Beaxy Digital Ltd. of illegally raising $8 million in the offering of an unregistered security with its BXY token. The agency additionally noted Hamazaspyan “misappropriated at least $900,000 for personal use, including gambling.”

___
1 charge and the exchange is closed. Small exchanges do not have the opportunity and money for litigation. All exchanges have the same violations, keeping money on any exchange is a risk, especially on a small exchange.

No sir offered in a physical crypto group a padnah of mine and myself run. Trying to get people that are on the fence about physical crypto interested so offered them there first. Honestly didn’t think they’d sell as well as they did when I offered them

[...]this is most likely what i will end up doing, but dont you think if this a "rug pull" its one of the slowest rug pulls of all time? [...]

Selling a stunning loaded Casascius 2013 1 BTC Silver graded MS-66 PL by ICG. Beautiful condition with no milk spotting.

https://www.blockstream.info/address/1Ag9xAkYfdrMQzVZkmGdy91ac4vPPhpRB8

Asking 1.4 BTC. Pick up in Texas, or I'll ship using your method of choice. MJ for escrow, if desired. PM if interested.



Full res: https://ibb.co/nLfNNYP

To my knowledge none of the PK coins have been affected... so far....  I wouldn't take a chance.
I would 100% crack the slabs and peel the coins.
Any premium that may have been there in the past is now gone due to the actions of the maker.

OP, first off, why are you assuming transaction volume would be low??

Blocks are already full and have been full for years even though it is barely ever used for payments right now. You seem to be saying "what if transactions become less frequent", but obviously that won't happen. Blocks will stay full as Bitcoin becomes more popular of course. And transaction fees will go up.

Now hopefully there will be further improvements to make transactions a bit more efficient, or at least certain types of transactions more efficient, and maybe even ways to cram more data in, like the way Segwit did.

Also it's not like this will suddenly happen one day. The whole last halving cycle before Bitcoin hits its supply limit the block rewards will only be 1 satoshi. The block reward will be negligible for decades before it finally stops. And starting from now it will take decades for that block reward to become negligible. If you think about the block rewards halving vs the increase in price, by around 2050 the halvings will likely have outpaced the price appreciation starting from now, so by around 2050 it's likely that miners will be receiving less money (in terms of USD) than they do today. So it'll take a bunch of years until the halvings even start to effect the mining industry, and it'll be like 90 years from that point until there are no more satoshis being rewarded, and all during this time the tx fees will have to gradually make up the difference. So it's not like one day mining will be fine and the next day there will be a huge issue. This means if this does cause a problem there will literally be decades to deal with it.

Realize that the Bitcoin network already has global-level security and is the most secure network in human history. So it's not like we NEED the mining network to keep growing, we just need it to stay decentralized. Also realize that mining machines grow more efficient over time, so hash rate will continue to increase even without more energy (cost of mining) used. Also Bitcoin mining is still a very new industry and in the coming decades as it becomes accepted more and matures it will naturally go to the most efficient places (like running on unused power at renewable power stations) or running at purpose-built renewable power stations where they are generating energy at nearly zero cost after initial startup costs, rather than like paying on-grid prices like most miners do today.

Also the most obvious point - mining difficulty can adjust down for any negative chance in hash power going into mining, so even if hash rate peaks at some point and goes down after that until settling at a tx-fee-only equilibrium, the system will adjust for that and it'll just mean the most efficient miners stay in business. Only thing that matters is it stays decentralized among those most efficient miners, which seems pretty likely since you can mine from anywhere in the world as long as you have access to cheap power.


In summary:
1. Blocks will obviously stay full so its not like there will be fewer transactions or less competition for getting transactions in blocks

2. Potential for further improvements in the bitcoin protocol in the coming decades to allow more transactions to be crammed into blocks

3. Transaction fees will go up as bitcoin use grows

4. The effects of the mining reward becoming negligible will happen over decades, not all at once, so if there is a problem it can be dealt with over decades

5. Mining machines will become more efficient to use less power and naturally miners will settle towards using only the cheapest electricity, bringing down the cost of mining per unit hash rate

6. Hash rate doesn't need to go up forever, Bitcoin is already the most secure network in human history, we should certainly expect at some point in the next few decades hash rate will peak (my guess would be sometime in the mid-to-late 2040s) and then settle somewhere at a long term equilibrium, the halvings will eventually cause hash rate to peak and the difficulty adjustment will allow it to settle at equilibrium somewhere lower than that peak once the block rewards of new bitcoin are a negligible part of the miners income

7. This is all perfectly fine, the only thing that matters is that mining stays decentralized once this equilibrium is hit when miners are making their income just from tx fees.

Alright, buddy, let me break it down for you – if Bitcoin's still kicking in a century, we'll probably be coexisting with a robotic-alien hybrid society.
No joke, though, the query about incentivizing Bitcoin mining in the future is legit. As the network expands and transforms, so must the rewards that fuel it.

From alternative proof-of-work schemes to fusion-driven mining beasts (no kidding!), the potential is vast. Even if Bitcoin morphs into a digital gold reserve, its intrinsic value will continue to attract believers. And where faith exists, power resides. So let's not fret over the distant future. We've got more immediate concerns, like surviving the robot-alien extravaganza.