Nov 2001?
We have a winner! Congrats! Exact date Nov 18, 2001. He did not answer, he questioned! 🤪 God damn it! Why do I always lose? 🤔 Ya gotta DCA on these games, don't try and time 'em. |
|
|
|
No...incredibly improbable...no longer be bitcoin.
I would dump the holy living fuck out of that shitfork. You, me, and everyone else in the world most likely. |
|
|
|
As for there being a "limited supply", is this not simply a variable, able to be changed at the discretion of the largest and most powerful network contributors? No. It would require a consensus among 51% of the miners to change the protocol or a successful 51% attack, neither of which is likely to happen. Isn't "consensus among the majority of miners" effectively identical to "the discretion of the largest and most powerful network contributors"? They would have to work in cooperation which is not what I assumed you meant from your statement. And then they'd have to convince everyone else to use it, otherwise they'd just be mining their own fork to the sound of tumbleweeds from the rest of the world. https://www.blockchain.com/en/poolsIt is hard to overstate just how incredibly improbable that would be. Why would it be "incredibly improbable"? Bitcoin Cash exists, doesn't it? Bitcoin Satoshi's Vision exists, doesn't it? Although these projects have not yet changed the total supply or distribution, they have changed other variables in the protocol. What about litecoin? The Scrypt mining algorithm utilised in litecoin is as secure as the SHA256 mining algorithm utilised buy bitcoin, albeit slightly different in design. Confirmation times are faster with litecoin, and there is a higher total supply. What makes bitcoin better than litecoin? Is vanilla objectively better than chocolate? Chocolate is ALWAYS better. Those coins you mention are not bitcoin. That's the point. They are something else. None of them can change the total supply of bitcoin. Maybe one of them eventually beats bitcoin in adoption but so far that looks very unlikely, I wouldn't hold my breath for that. To survive, all those coins listed will have to overcome the first mover advantage of bitcoin and/or carve out their own niche. Those are tall orders. And that is still magnitudes more probable than bitcoin changing its supply limit. For that to happen, it's not just a consensus to change the code, it's also convincing all the people that are using bitcoin now to adopt it to the point it kills off 'old' bitcoin. |
|
|
|
As for there being a "limited supply", is this not simply a variable, able to be changed at the discretion of the largest and most powerful network contributors?
No. It would require a consensus among 51% of the miners to change the protocol or a successful 51% attack, neither of which is likely to happen. It is hard to overstate just how incredibly improbable that would be. And should it happen then it would no longer be bitcoin. Back to the primary motivation of fiat return (and potential loss), I see - is this how most people see bitcoin? A purely speculative asset and/or tool for gambling?
Sure a lot of them do. A lot of others see different/more reasons. I consider it a store of value not related to fiat return. That's an admittedly long (very) view. It's also a world computer. And a way to take control of your own financial power without middle men, with the concurrent responsibility of being very up to date on security. |
|
|
|
It was a genuine question, as I'm unfamiliar with the term - what does "Wall Observer" mean?
I wondered that at first too. I'm pretty sure it's just a reference to the queue depth at bid/ask prices.  |
|
|
|
I only buy bitcoin to up my WO street cred.  |
|
|
|
But there was a movie directed in the same or previous year about landing on the moon and people claiming that the actual moon landing similar to that movie set.
It's totally true, Stanley Kubrick was contracted by NASA to make the movie of the moon landings but since he's such a perfectionist he demanded that it be filmed on location. Any explanation for this from NASA. All they say was why we need to lie such thing even if we do USSR might capture that we are lying.Logical but not a proof for that they landed. 100's of thousands of people worked on this project for 15+ years, if there had been a conspiracy it would have been revealed by them, or by the many outside observers. The people who question the validity of the moon landings are using magical thinking devoid of rationality, take data wildly out of context to prove unrelated 'points', and rely far more on appeal to false authority than not. Fun fact: youtube is not a research database.
But there was a movie directed in the same or previous year about landing on the moon and people claiming that the actual moon landing similar to that movie set.
It's totally true, Stanley Kubrick was contracted by NASA to make the movie of the moon landings but since he's such a perfectionist he demanded that it be filmed on location. Any explanation for this from NASA. All they say was why we need to lie such thing even if we do USSR might capture that we are lying.Logical but not a proof for that they landed. 100's of thousands of people worked on this project for 15+ years, if there had been a conspiracy it would have been revealed by them, or by the many outside observers. The people who question the validity of the moon landings are using magical thinking devoid of rationality, take data wildly out of context to prove unrelated 'points', and rely far more on appeal to false authority than not. Fun fact: youtube is not a research database. Could be really happened but why they didn't send any men after that first landing on the moon in 1969,it would have been a tourist spot in 2019 if they did that with the technology in 1969. They did send more men after the first landing in 1969. 5 more missions after the first landed on the moon. https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apollo.htmlAs to why we stopped going after 1972 the answer is clear, Congress did not want to fund it anymore, the public in general lost interest. Even now there are a lot of people that think scientific research and/or learning to live off planet are unnecessary expenditures, they'd rather we spend more money on military or welfare or their own tax benefit. |
|
|
|
But there was a movie directed in the same or previous year about landing on the moon and people claiming that the actual moon landing similar to that movie set.
It's totally true, Stanley Kubrick was contracted by NASA to make the movie of the moon landings but since he's such a perfectionist he demanded that it be filmed on location. |
|
|
|
That's gonna be a very good news for the entire crypto world if ethereum is at such price, I believe that it's not rocket science for ethereum to attain such height, that's just x8 from its current price,
x12 from current price of $208 USD |
|
|
|
At first glance that looks 2nd order but if you remove the large gap up jump at the front then it looks more linear. If the former then that would predict a 2021 price of around $10k, if the latter a 2021 price of $100k, just by a rough eyeball guesstimate. |
|
|
|
|
Great post Mic, and followed by many other great posts in the discussion, fantastic thread. I just want to echo the sentiment that any newbie interested in crypto should not be put off by the technology but also should absolutely educate themselves as much as they can about it. It's one of those things that the more you learn the better armed you are.
Also be very careful about interacting with people from this site, many are good people that want to help but we also have some of the other kind. Never give out your personal information here, be wary about unsolicited PM's, etc. basically just practice very good self protection, and that is also what you need to do with crypto.
By removing the middleman banks and financial services you gain a lot of freedom but also gain the need for elevated self responsibility.
|
|
|
|
Today is the 50th anniversary since men first walked on the Moon. It is a stunning achievement that took thousands of workers, billions of dollars, and the will of an entire nation, perhaps even the world when you consider the motivations. This is a day worth celebrating.  |
|
|
|
It could be a similar story to the development of cars.. In the beginning there was only Ford and then came other manufacturers but Ford was dominating for many years. There were better and cheaper cars and other manufacturers found something other people wanted and Ford couldn't give them.
The difference is that there was not enough cars for everyone and more people wanted them with every year. There is already enough bitcoins for everyone.
That is arguable. There are enough satoshis for everyone to have a taste, but even now not everyone who wants a bitcoin can get one even if they have the fiat to pay for it. Imagine if every millionaire in the world wanted just one bitcoin. What do you think that would do to the price? There are roughly 36 million people in the entire world that are millionaires. There will only ever be 21 million bitcoin, and estimates that at least 4 million of those are gone forever already due to lost keys. If you want btc, the time to get it is before mass adoption. If you think mass adoption will never happen then maybe you are right, but I think it will. https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-have-at-least-one-bitcoin |
|
|
|
|
Fact checking Trump on pretty much anything he says is a waste of time. If he was a deck of cards you could bet on the Joker to turn up everytime and you'd be rich. The guy is a congenital liar and suffers from one of the worst cases of Dunning-Kruger the world has ever seen.
|
|
|
|
|
Liquidity is the trouble with small caps. That said I do like some out there, particularly HODLcoin. Volume is very little but the project is fun and has some nice features like encouraging you to HODL the coins via term deposits that pay interest.
I don't really recommend any small caps for investment, they are like gambling on poor odds but for learning and fun there are several to look at. DOGE of course is one of the weirder ones since it started as a joke, not really small cap anymore I suppose.
Many coins are merely vanity projects or scam vehicles to fish for 'investors' in non-existent companies with poorly written white papers. Again, like I said, gambling with poor odds.
|
|
|
|
|
It's all about adoption. The first mover advantage is hard to overstate. I also do not think Ethereum is a competitor with Bitcoin, I think they can co-exist and serve different uses. Also, people don't always go for the latest and most high tech solutions, they go for ubiquitous and convenient. E.g. mp3's sound like ass but they are now the defacto standard for delivering audio even though CDs by every single measure sound much better. Convenience, adoption, availability. Bitcoin has it all and a large part of that is due to being the first.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
