The whales. It is said that 40% of the total bitcoin in circulation is owned by just 1,000 people. Are they the whales? Price manipulation by the so called bitcoin whales has always been a concern. But how true is this?

Are these whales solely responsible for the price increase or decrease? Could they really dictate the dips and rise of bitcoin? Or they simply lead the rally? I'd say do not depend on them. Depend on your financial stability. Simply learn to ride the wave and tides. Otherwise you'll be left quite frustrated everytime.

I don't think that the truth about bitcoin is being concealed actually. In fact, a lot has expressed warnings on bitcoin as an investment as much as many convinces people that it is a trustworthy and reliable system of payment.

Bitcoin did not try to hide anything actually, it is the people around who wanted to attract investors in their quick scam schemes that made it sound really bad.  That is why it is good to remember things you have mentioned and yes, it is good to steer clear of greed.  It is being blinded by quick big cash invest returns that traps many and results into bad investment results.

Hi nonconformist!

As much as facebook's decision to ban cryptocurrency on their platform had an impact on the crypto economy, them revising their decision and allowing again most of the cryptocurrency related postings (with the exemption of ICOs, Exchange and other Trading adverts) does not indicate nor preview an upcoming bullrun. I doubt that facebook have a hand to create one.

Though this is a very good news, its a sign that things are warming up. Facebook revoking the cryptocurrency ban (again, most of it) will allow once again the unrestricted flow of information that could boost more of this economy. Right now, unrestricted access to information and freedom to promote cryptocurrencies are quite essential for global adoption and growth. Really glad facebook lifted the ban.

Thank you for the time BitcoinFX.  The video by the way was not bitcoin related, yet is one of the free ideas of thinkers & visionaries that may appall others while making other free thinkers applaud, pretty much like how bitcoin came to be.

Going back to your reply though, as much as peer-to-peer transactions within four walls may be the securest form of passing information, the necessity of internet connection is pretty much needed.

Bitcoin transactions need confirmation & distribution. I think it would impossible to do that offline. The design was for a peer network to decide that the transaction is legit and pass that information to everyone else and make sure the transaction is recorded on everyone else's ledger.

So i guess we really could not take the internet out of the equation at all.

I do hope it is not lost as you expressed Red-Apple.

Adoption is really a big of a word right now for the cryptocurrency world, and more so for bitcoin as it remains to be the most popular and well spent crypto globally.

The way i see it, there is a massive need of merchants adopting to bitcoin payments. Perhaps from there, we would start to gain back the gift of pseudonymity in its full potential.

I guess you are right Herbert, perhaps this is a way of the bitcoin economy to adapt to the needs of the time.

It is just saddening, there was so much privacy protection that bitcoin was premiered for yet it seems we are ending up back to the traditional surveillance that financial & government entities could conduct on us.

Additionally, as you stated, it seems decentralization had to be compromised too as a respond to better regulations and freedom to move from digital to fiat currency with less restrictions from governing authorities.

And that's twice the sadness for bitcoin advocates i guess.

Thank you for the insightful participation frank.

Indeed, with KYCs in place, the gift of pseudonymity is indeed in peril. And with you citing LN as an example, it makes one ask, "does pseudonymity, as much as a primal design of bitcoin, became irrelevant?"  Many exchanges had already moved towards KYCs. Some exchanges made it optional, yet detrimental of our transactional capability in such a way that our spending limit will be capped much lower than KYCd customers.

It feels that soon, pseudonymity will be a thing of the past. What do you think?

It is the end goal really and the primary design of bitcoin was to be a system of payment.

And so far, the progress has been good. We are seeing exchanges that offer additional services and ability to buy goods with bitcoin.

Yet, the pseudonimity of transaction ends up revealing real world identity of the recipient, if not ours. And from there, tracing could be conducted to find out who actually made such payment.

So the best interest of protecting our real world identity is still compromised one way or the other.  Really wondering how we can end up being totally pseudonymous in every aspect.

I'm actually torn in two when it comes to whitepaper alone reliance.

The thinker in me would say "of course, it will be foolish to relay on an ICO's whitepaper alone" because the whitepaper is the gathering of best ideas and intentions to make the ICO quite appealing and convincing. A whitepaper nowadays are like brilliant marketing flyers. They are there to lure in investors.

I understand your concern for checking real word identities & credibility prior supporting an ICO, but then what happens to Satoshi Nakamoto whom remained a mystery till date? And be reminded that bitcoin was written in a mere 9 pages whitepaper to sell.

So my thoughts are divided, so to say and with all honesty.

Do not be disheartened. The time has merely come when bounty campaigns have evolved into something of a smart thing to do (and needs a smart decision prior participation), which is actually a good thing.

What's happening is something i would like to deem as an evolution. Evolution of thought and process.

As some have cited, previously, anyone can make good money out of their mere online presence and blabbing a few notes here and there.  But now, it requires a bounty participant to be more diligent and vigilant too, making sure they checkout the ICO at hand and not blindly accepting their terms.

Since the beginning of time, scammers has been around. These days, we are required to be more of a thinker rather than a doer. Though i have to tell you, even the most diligent bounty participant could fall prey to a well built up scam.

So best of luck, hoping you regain your faith in bounty campaigns soon.

You can consider smart contracts as the lawyers of the blockchain network.

These nifty piece of codes are really awesome. With smart contracts, there's nobody else that agrees to the terms except for you and the other party you are dealing with. No need for intermediaries, brokers or even a lawyer. Completely autonomous.

Being on the blockchain, none of the agreeing party can ever lose their copy of the agreed encrypted document. And backup is never an issue with peers holding a copy from block to block.

Smart contracts are favored too because of its hack-free safety feature. It was told that only a super genius hacker in the likes of Albert Einstein could crack a smart contract and make changes to it.

And smart contracts are super accurate! Once defined, there's not way it can get the parameters wrong.

Supercool ain't it?

You really don't have to spend sleepless nights do participate in bounty campaigns.  It all simply boils down to "time management".

And with that, you have to make sure you have time to manage. Sense and sensibility dictates that if you don't have enough time, never in any circumstance try to to join a bounty campaign. It will simply end you up frustrated and failing.

Our ability to respond quickly and create meaningful posts is very substantial to comply with the requirements of any bounty campaigns. If you are merely trying to squeeze that in to your daily routine, chance are, you won't meet the requirements.

And regarding ICOs failing to hand out the promised bounty, that is part of the economy. Prepare yourself always and be ready not to receive anything and carry on like a pro.

There's a fierce competition among cryptocurrencies but the main headline will always sport altcoins pitted against bitcoin.

When sense of popularity dictates that people invest in bitcoin, why do we really have to consider altcoins?  How far have altcoins really outsmart bitcoin in brains and brawn in the recent years? Let's take a quick look (and for the reason of not wanting to promote a specific altcoin as the best, allow me to mention only their capabilities and not the altcoin itself).

There is this altcoin out there that took the carbon footprint of bitcoin out by periodically releasing coins instead of mining them (which was a happy news to the eco conservatives).

Then there is also an altcoin that could create a block way faster than bitcoin. When bitcoin confirmation takes an hour on an average, this altcoin can confirm your transaction in minutes.  And to outweigh that speed, another altcoin promised instant transactions with payment confirmation in less than a second.

We also have altcoins that guarantees complete privacy hiding all substantial private data safely (best for those who want to keep their anonymity in place), and an altcoin even promised ring signatures, a unique technique to keep transactions untraceable.

And just as with bitcoin, there exist altcoins that allows global payment with no need for any central authority.

Altcoins, in one way or another, did outsmart bitcoin. Offering new or better features that may or may not be an integral part of bitcoin in the future.

But perhaps, we will only see an altcoin surpassing bitcoin should we find all of the abovementioned features rolled into one single altcoin. And such thought is really exciting in every aspect.

I'm not to tell that the people behind bitcoin & the blockchain was anti-government and central control, but i'm pretty sure they are pro-privacy.

Thus, we were gifted a wonderful treat of pseudonymity where transactions are public yet remained disconnected from our real world identities.  Yes, the world may know the origin (sending wallet), the amount that was transacted and even the destination (receiving wallet).  But that's all there is to it.

Pseudonymous transactions are actual safeguards for us not to be under anyone's surveillance (for whatever purpose it may serve).  The reality of our personal welfare being compromised by watchful eyes that has been proven mischievous over time is evident.

Take for example the "cache & cookies disclaimer" that you have to often agree to when you go online. Disguised as helpful tools to make your browsing experience more relevant but in reality, records your every move, your every activity. And only the gods would know how these information can be used for or against you. Nonetheless, your privacy was breached.

Breach of privacy was a problem of great concern, and great minds understood that it has to be addressed. And as many of us loved the Incognito Mode of Google Chrome, Blockchain brought us pseudonymity for crypto transactions.

The original design was for transactions to remain pseudonymous from end to end, and the public records remained as such until you cash-out.  It is here that we lost the pro-privacy gift of the blockchain.

The moment you cash-out your bitcoin to a bank or an exchange or to any other means that requires a real world identity, pseudonymity is lost. Satoshi's rally for privacy goes down the drain. Your identity is uncovered. They can already trace your bitcoin wallet address and all other wallet addresses you transacted with.

The effort of pseudonymity is lost. But is there really a way out? Can we really remain pseudonymous to continue the blockchain's rally for privacy?

Bitcointalk Profile Link:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=909338
Post Count: 491
Merit Count: 250
BTC Address: 1LLLxSgYiywauocDn5VFfdjjkZvureeV6c
Telegram Username: @bicoindusts

I will change my signature once accepted, thank you.

No we are not ready as a sum for the digital currency.

Yet, there are still a few people to dare and dwell about its value!

But seeing the report today (rather, discounting) proves that we have a very substantial amount of guest tonight here.

Still, none has a clear view of how cryptocurrency could help an economy. But i tell you, it does in so many ways.

So before i disclose your program, others might simply start to follow!

ah, what a great table topic here hatshespsut!urpass

The use of mandatory middleman and of course fiat money   explains a lot of how other crowdfunding was able to surpass our doubts and fears.

You see, with bitcoin's principle of resistance (how i feel we are inside the yellow bricks), anyone tasked to do something will remain loyal to his job to show how much the company means to us.

Oh i confidently think that many of us had the same experience, not only with bitcoin, but with cryptocurrency altogether!

Too often than not, people make the cautious mistake of waiting on for something big to happen instead of taking advantage of the current market.

Yes, none can tell the future, but one can tell when a trade or an exchange is worth every bitcoin on our wallet.

I really don't have any idea at all here.

You see, people who decided to go out of their comfort zone usually ends up the most exciting of them all!

As per the penalty, i doub;t they should be moving around and waiting for this to happen.

First of all, ICOs are Initial Coin Offering that helps a company or a project to come up with the necessary fund they need to sail away with their offering!

No, as much as many ICOs proved to be scammy, in general, i'd say they are not so scammy in actual potential.

The ICOs could never be scammed as they have permanents record with them!