|
Institutional money entering the crypto space can mean only one thing: the price is going up. This is definitely a step in the right direction, or at least it's good news for BTC, LTC, and the other supported coins. I wonder what's the requirement to be listed among these institutional clients? Or in other words, what amounts of money are they are going to trade?
|
|
|
|
So your point would be not to use crypto at all? This is a solution for not having to convert back to fiat and not having to pay fees.
No my point is quite the contrary. Why don't they implement a solution where you and I can buy directly with crypto, without any sort of intermediary? What's preventing them to do so? |
|
|
|
|
Forgive me but I fail to see how this promotes the mass adoption of cryptocurrencies.
What Zeex does, if I understand it correctly, is help you convert your coins into a gift card,
which you can then use to buy coffee. It's more or less the same as converting your coins into fiat money
in order to buy coffee. If Starbucks really wanted to help promoting crypto, it could accept direct payments in crypto.
Earlier this years one of the Starbucks' CEOs said that he didn't believe in Bitcoin.
That's enough of a hint to me as to what their position is.
|
|
|
|
|
There are red flags all over this coin. Questionable whitepaper, questionable allocation of its 100 billion TRX tokens, to name just a few. It's current market cap is a mystery to me.
I think most of the investors have no clue what they are doing, and probably don't even know what the blockchain is. They have to educate themselves, just looking at the top lists isn't enough.
|
|
|
|
|
Verge has lost credibility a long time ago, if it ever had it. It failed where it should have been the strongest, in the domain of privacy, security, and anonymity. Just look at its stealth addresses. They don't offer much privacy, especially compared to the technology implemented in other privacy coins.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a couple of questions about the initial phase of Bitcoin.
1. Was the genesis block mined or just set somehow?
2. How did it all actually start? Did Satoshi share the first bitcoin software to a group of interested individuals?
3. Did he announce a particular point in time to start mining? Or perhaps he had to mine by himself for a period of time before other people jumped in?
4. How long did they have to mine empty blocks?
5. With only a handful of nodes at the beginning, did they have to set a particular type of network communication between them?
6. Did it ever happen that (during this initial phase) the network was off line for some time?
|
|
|
|
My experience as a user while compiling source code on Tails is kind too trick for me, so I was thinking about get some sort of up to run binary ..
Maybe someone will correct me, but my experience with Tails is that you cannot really compile source code on it. Because of this: So if you install LN on tails from source code, you would have to reinstall it the next time you reboot the system. |
|
|
|
Anyone familiar with SEO knows the gold rush boom ended abruptly in 2012 with the penguin update. Before that time, making money and ranking websites was incredibly easy and predictable.
SEO is not completely dead even today, even after the penguin update. It is just much more demanding and not so straightforward. It takes real hard work, you have to do intelligent website promotions, and your link building strategy cannot be as direct as it used to be. I fear that today the ICO boom might be coming to an end soon. I'm definitely not talking about blockchain, blockchain will revolutionize our world, I have no doubt about it. But ICOs, that simply use blockchain to raise funds for shady businesses, I believe are starting to dry up. People are starting to cotton on to the shit that they are. The question is, when will it all abruptly end? Any quick way to make money with no substance always ends abruptly at some point.
I agree, it has to end sooner or latter. Just like with SEO, the things will become more complicated, but I believe ICOs will still exist. They will just have to put much more effort, to prove their worth before being able to raise money. |
|
|
|
|
As you said, XVG seems to be currently the best alternative for Nvidia 1070. Other Equihash coins, I don't know, there are not many to choose from. I mean, you could try ZCL, ZEN, or BTCP. Some of them have announced they are gonna change their algo, but it remains to be seen how it goes. You can try your luck and mine some of the less known coins, such as SPD (C11) or XSH (Lyra2v2).
|
|
|
|
|
Here is why Bitcoin has so much value when compared to other cryptos:
For one, it is the first cryptocurrency with the best team of developers. Being the oldest coin out there, it has managed to withstand all sorts of problems and attacks.
Compared to some other cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin has a much smaller attack surface. It has proven to be a very secure form of payment if used correctly.
So far has passed the test of time. On all major exchanges, the trading pairs go mostly via bitcoin. It is the central entity of the entire crypto eco-system.
As for intrinsic value, I think the question could equally apply to any other form of money: Does paper money have any intrinsic value? Not really. Even gold and silver
have no intrinsic value. The value is derived from people's willingness to accept and use these forms of payment as a means of exchange.
|
|
|
|
7-Adopting blockchain technology and make students learn about how it works through education so they can implement it
This is a good point. And not only that. It is amazing how little education the society as a whole offers to its members regarding money and finances. This is done deliberately to keep people ignorant so they can be exploited more easily. We are used to giving up our own power to the banks and financial institutions. With Blockchain technology, we can be educated to be completely in charge of our money. |
|
|
|
|
For some reason many people are focused on these short-term price fluctuation. I find it silly, to say the least.
Rather than constantly being obsessed with the charts, educate yourself and learn about all aspects of Bitcoin,
and you will soon find out how bright its long-term future is. This brings a peace of mind and you can start holding,
knowing that if you look 5-10 years into the future, there's virtually nothing to lose and much to gain.
|
|
|
|
So if Billions season 3 can touch on cryptocurrencies why can't Westworld talk about blockchain?
Yes Westworld could touch on bitcion as well, but I wouldn't be disappointed if they didn't. Somehow the whole look and feel of Westworld is not compatible with blockchain technology, despite the fact that the story revolves around cyborgs and AI. As for Billions, there were already several mentions of cryptocurrency. The last time the leading character gives as a reward (for loyalty) a USB stick with $1 million in crypto! I found this to be a very cool moment and very much congruent with the story line. |
|
|
|
Hilarious really, when you look at the value of Tron and EOS, to think they don't even have a mainnet out yet. Why are people buying these coins?
Yes, it is really silly: EOS is currently number 5 if we take into account market cap:  Which only goes to show that EOS is mostly marketing, and that market cap on its own is a questionable parameter. Tron is currently number 10, Vechain number 16, Ontology number 28. The question is will they manage to deliver what they are promising. It will be interesting to follow the future price movement once their corresponding mainnets go live. |
|
|
|
I am just getting into bitcoin and did a small purchase with a certain address.
What do you mean purchase with an address? Do you mean that you purchased some bitcoins and gave your wallet's receiving address in the process? However, after purchasing with an address I accidentally changed the address.
Well, if your first transaction was already sent, that's it. Did you send some additional bitcoins to the second address as well? It is still the same wallet, but with a different address. Does this mean I will not receive my money?
What wallet is it? Some wallets (Electrum) automatically change the receiving address each time the previous receiving address has been used. This might be the case with your wallet, and if that's the case, there's nothing to worry about. You will just have to wait for your transaction to be confirmed. |
|
|
|
For the sake of counter argument, the energy consumed by the inefficient banking system and gold mining can be compared with that of Bitcoin mining, there is a substantial difference. There was an article published on Hackernoon, The Bitcoin vs Visa Electricity Consumption Fallacy: Let’s add to the mix the electricity consumption of the branches. According to the World Bank there are 12.5 branches per 100,000 adults in the world so if the world population is 7.6 billion people and we have around 70% adults, this means a total of 665,000 branches. Only in the US they appear to be close to 100,000 branches and assuming US is around 15% or less of the entire banking system worldwide you get to around the same number.
So total consumption for banks during a year only on those three metrics is around (I am rounding) 26Twh on servers, 58Twh on branches and 13Twh on ATMs for a total of close to a 100 Twh a year.
According to the article that trigger this discussion, Bitcoin annual Twh consumption is 28.67 , so currently more than 3 times more efficient than a very conservative calculation of the cost of the global banking system. Of course you will argue that the banking systems does more than handling a currency which is true but the difference is large enough that I do not think is that relevant. Even if only 30% of banks electricity consumption was the comparable part to Bitcoin, that will still make Bitcoin more efficient. Thanks for this reference to the consumption power estimates. I thought the numbers would be more in favor of Bitcoin. Rough estimates, Bitcoin adoption is still around 1%, comparing the current energy consumption of Bitcoin with that of global banking system doesn't make much sense and if I go by the figures in this article, 28.67 Twh with around 1% adoption and as adoption increases, I don't think it would be wrong to assume that with about 10 to 15% adoption, the Bitcoin energy consumption would be more than that of the global banking system.
But this is under the assumption that Bitcoin's power consumption will grow linearly with adoption. I wonder why that would be the case? Isn't the current mining power enough to handle 10 or 15 times the number of users? |
|
|
|
]It could be right, they are speculating to doubled the number of nodes of ether and bitcoin means HTC has an initianion to make every phone can become a light node to ethereum.
If they realize their intention, it could be a huge thing. I have no idea what kind of technical problems they would have to deal with, but I definitely wanna see them pull this through. |
|
|
|
If you go directly to htcexodus website, here is what they say: Every Phone is A NodeProviding more nodes on the path to true decentralization. We want to double and triple the number of nodes of Ethereum and Bitcoin. Source: https://www.htcexodus.com/ The highlighted part is very interesting, but I don't really understand the true meaning behind those words. Are they planning to turn every phone into a bitcoin (lightweight) node? |
|
|
|
|
If you take the energy that is being used (wasted) today by the highly inefficient banking system and compare it to the energy
consumed during the process of mining bitcoins, you will quickly find out that the energy spent in the mining process is not that large.
So I think articles like the one you've linked are misleading. Before blaming Bitcoin, the journalist should start by analyzing the current energy
costs in the highly bloated financial sector (which is something we accept as normal, but it is far from normal).
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
