This one is somehow different from other answers. You said to find solution is luck base. That is by guessing. That the person with high computational power will have the ability to guest faster. But someone can be guessing faster and will not be lucky. But someone guessing slowly will be more lucky. I think the lottery example is more suitable.
They are the same answer. When you buy a lottery ticket, you are trying to guess the winning lottery number. Note that the lottery analogy is not quite accurate. In a lottery, everybody picks numbers and then the winning number is revealed. But in Bitcoin, the winning numbers are predetermined, and instead of buying a ticket you pick a number for free but it costs you money (and time) to check if it is a winner. |
|
|
|
|
In simplest terms, a public key can have two forms: compressed and uncompressed. An address is a hash of a public key, so you can have two different addresses from the same private key, one is a hash of the compressed public key and the other is a hash of the uncompressed private key. They are distinct addresses and are not interchangeable.
|
|
|
|
I know we have many miners here. I have a question. Someone should help me, I am learning. I read that in bitcoin mining for you to be given the next block of bitcoin your computer should be the first to find the solution to the mathematical puzzle. For your computer to be the first to find it within the 10 minutes. Your computer power should be high. Which means your hash rate is high.This means that the higher computers will always find the block on or before 10 minutes. If this is correct. Why are the people with low computational power still in the business? Are they there for only transaction fee or is there a time that anyone can be lucky to solve the problem even if you have the lowest computational power?
The important point that you are missing is that finding a solution is luck-based. Miners repeatedly guess until they get lucky and they find a solution. Guessing is the only known way to find a solution. So, even the slow miners have a chance to correctly guess a solution first, but their chances are lower because they can't guess as quickly. The difficulty of finding a solution is such that with all the miners in the world guessing, a solution is found by one of them every 10 minutes on average. |
|
|
|
To fully understand, I should probably need to run a node and see, but I’m thinking about the risk of a majority of full nodes not doing jobs right. The first and the last step where full nodes validate, they could simply validate an invalid block to be valid and propagate to its neighbors. And, I totally understand an argument like other nodes will not validate and won’t talk to that bad node. However, we never know that if some malicious groups trying to break Bitcoin’s consensus system especially because it doesn’t cost a lot to be a full node. To get 51% of hash rate is very expensive, but say you make so many bad full nodes and trying to mess up the ledger sounds reasonable.. Like run 100000 nodes and validate poorly. (Quick search shows 15000nodes currently)
Now, if so many nodes are bad, then miners will stop talking to them and only good nodes will hear new blocks, but my point is that the health of the network is not obvious. Therefore, some attacks could be possible here, what's making it not to be attacked? (Miners also can lie, but if their blocks get rejected, they lose money. Nodes try to be honest if they make transactions themselves to make sure their transactions went ok, so some incentives for nodes to act well.)
The important thing to note is that nodes that disagree simply stop talking to each other. Even if some malicious actor adds 100,000 "bad" nodes to the network, the 15,000 "good" nodes (and miners) will just ignore them and continue on. An eclipse attack (where the good nodes have trouble finding other good nodes) as @ranochigo mentioned is a possibility, but it would still not be fatal to the network. |
|
|
|
The main difference i see between bitcoin and a regular commodity is that a regular commodity's price is aligned around production cost, whereas bitcoin is the other way around which is the production cost gravitate around the demand's price.
The main difference between Bitcoin and a commodity is that a commodity consumed. So thats the eternal question around bitcoin is what is supposed to be the "right" price for it ?
My reasoning is that instead of asking this question peraphs the good question is how to know if it is overpriced ?
The price is always determined by supply and demand. However, the quantity theory of money states that MV=PQ, so the value of the money supply is PQ/V. The supply comes from MV and the demand comes from PQ. The theoretical price can also be thought of as the risk-adjusted discounted future price. Whether or not it is overpriced depends on how you think it compares to these metrics. And the answer would be another question, how do you inflate artificially a commodity market ? By people with too much monney hoarding it to expect the price to rise and making more profit out of it than just exchanging it as utility as a regular use.
With this reasoning people with lots of monney hoarding expecting to make a profit would end as the Hunt brothers.
People using it as its supposed to be as a commodity or currency would not loose too much as not having too much in stock at any point.
Hoarding temporarily affects the supply. The price rises as coins are hoarded and likewise it falls as hoarded coins are sold. |
|
|
|
Basically, the idea is that any phrase that can be memorized reliably will be easy to crack. Of course, there are exceptions, but you would be amazed at what seemingly secure brain wallets have already been cracked. Say you memorized 5-6 diceware words. You have 64.6 and 77.5 bits of entropy respectively. Realistically would these ever be cracked?
Well, suppose a computer could test 1 million per second. It could crack all 5-word diceware brain wallets in 8 million seconds, or about 3 months. Oops! Huge math error.I mean wouldn't someone breaking into your home and stealing your seed phrase be more likely?
Keep in mind that only people who are physically nearby could potentially steal your seed phrase, but anybody in the world can potentially steal you brain wallet. |
|
|
|
I would guess that old people are not really getting those pensions for free, they have paid for it and they have earned that right. ...
It is like saying I am investing right now, and in the future I will eat the benefits of my investment, it is totally normal and instead of investing into gold or stocks or bitcoin, they invest into their pensions. Nations will pay it with their tax income, because they took it, if you took it with a promise then you need to pay it back in the future as well. That's as expected as it gets and not a "burden" considering everyone gets a turn.
Your thinking is why Social Security and other pension plans are considered by some to be Ponzi schemes. People may believe that they are investing in their future retirement benefits by paying SS taxes, but that is false. The truth is that the taxes are not invested. They are used to pay current benefits. Despite what you want to believe, there is no guarantee that you will receive benefits when you retire. The government could simply announce one day that they are unable to continue paying benefits and the program is cancelled. Currently in the U.S., the SS tax rate is 12.5%. In order for a smaller worker population to pay benefits to a much bigger retired population, those taxes are going to have to go up. My guess is that they will rise to at least 20% or more, and future benefits will have to be cut, or eliminated completely. As for not being a burden, I think that I could do much better if I invested my 12.5%. The return on investment for SS is crap. |
|
|
|
The planet is already home to 8 billion human beings and we can't afford to increase that number by much.
Malthusianism is a dead theory, the world was supposed to be overpopulated at 1 billion ... The reason that we haven't reached the malthusian equilibrium is that food production has grown faster than the population -- something that Malthus did not expect. Actually, that isn't hard if each person can grow more food than they need to eat and there is no limit to the amount of available land. But, once the land is limited then it is up to increasing productivity to feed more people. For economic growth, why there is a requirement of constant population growth? Why can't it be achieved with a stable population? Countries such as Germany and Japan are having stable populations, and still their economy is doing good.
Because you simply can't. ... There is a limit to how much a human being can consume even if it throws away stuff, when this limit is reached and there is no increasing demand from population growth then you hit a wall, as extra products or services aren't needed, so goodbye growth. Increasing economic growth is possible with a stable population when productivity increases. There is no limit to demand. If people don't want more of something, they will want it to be higher quality. And there is a second problem, with a declining population and a smaller workforce but a higher percentage of retired poeple you have a smaller taxable population with an increased burden on social welfare costs, and this is the main problem for Japan for example.
With nearly one-third of the population being older than 65, 15% unemployable because of their young age, and this getting worse and worse how will you get the money to run a country and from whom?
I have been thinking about this issue, but I don't think that an increased burden of social welfare costs for the elderly is necessarily the problem. There is a problem when there are a lot of retired people and not enough working people to supply their needs, regardless of how wealthy they are. |
|
|
|
Hello,
is there any difference between a trade with 5.000$ with 1x leverage and on the other hand 100$ with 50x leverage?
The only difference I see is the liquidation price of course. But is there any other differnce?
Thank you all, Frank
The difference is that you are investing X dollars in the unleveraged trade, and 50X dollars in the 50x leveraged trade. You get the other 49X dollars by borrowing them. In order to protected the lender, your position will be automatically closed by the exchange if it thinks that there is any chance that any of the 49X portion will be lost. Frequently, the position is closed and you are left with nothing. Typically, a 50x position will be closed if it is down a little more than 1%, and you will lose most or all of your money because whatever is left over after paying back the lender will be used to pay fees. Another difference is that you must pay interest on the borrowed money. |
|
|
|
|
@ranochigo explained it, but I'm going to simplify. scriptPubKey is the name of the script in a transaction that sets the conditions for spending the bitcoins "received" by the transaction.
Originally, the scriptPubKey script specified a public key whose private key is required to spend the "received" bitcoins. A transaction containing this kind of script is called a P2PK (pay-to-public-key) transaction. You can find P2PK transactions in the earliest blocks and their scriptPubKey scripts will contain public keys.
But P2PK transactions are no longer used and scriptPubKey scripts no longer contain public keys. A public key may still be required to spend the "received" bitcoins, but the scriptPubKey script no longer refers to it directly.
|
|
|
|
How can I mine bitcoin from my android mobile phone?
Gone are the days when bitcoin was mined with a Mobile phone... I don't think there ever was a time when bitcoins could be mined with a phone. |
|
|
|
|
It is important to note the difference between "importing" a private key and "sweeping" a private key, and their security implications.
When you "import" a private key, the wallet continues to hold and use the private key. You should destroy all copies of the private key after it is imported because the bitcoins haven't moved and the private key still gives access them. Otherwise, anybody who somehow gains access to one of these copies can still spend the bitcoins. However, note that some wallets do not back up imported keys. So, if the imported private key is not backed up and the wallet is damaged or lost, then imported private key is lost.
When you "sweep" a private key, the software sends the bitcoins to a new address generated by the wallet. After sweeping a private key, the key is now useless because the bitcoins have been moved. The drawback to "sweeping" a private key is that it involves a transaction and a transaction fee.
|
|
|
|
So a painting, music, video game NFTs are all uploaded to the server but the blockchain is only there to confirm authenticity of product via digital signature?
The media file may or may not be uploaded to any server, but I think that uploading to IPFS is common. The NFT itself lives in a blockchain. An NFT generally contains a hash that associates the NFT with the media file. Authentication is done by comparing hashes, but it must be noted that the hash of a copy of the file will also match the NFT, so an NFT cannot be used to determine which is the "original" and which is the "copy". Ownership of digital art is handled by copyright law, and owning an NFT does not necessarily grant you the copyright. Similarly, owning a physical piece of art does not automatically grant you the copyright. Some artists transfer the copyright to the owner of the NFT, but others do not. So in the end, what does it mean to own an NFT? If the artist transfers the copyright to the owner of the NFT, then the NFT owner can reasonably say that they "own" the art because legally they can control how others copy or use it. If the artist does not transfer the copyright to the NFT owner, then the owner of the NFT owns nothing more than a commemorative token. |
|
|
|
|
Note that donating bitcoins (or any property, really) worth more than $5000 takes extra effort. You must pay a "qualified appraiser" to do an appraisal of the bitcoins in order to determine their fair market value. Obviously, anybody can simply look up the price on an exchange, but that is not sufficient in this case.
|
|
|
|
Not sure how sustainable this is.
The U.S. government is probably going to impose sanctions on it sooner or later in order to stop this from happening.
Personally at least, this is just not a worthwhile trade off. I'd rather be able to see friends and family than to save a couple hundred thousand bucks.
Sanctions? The tax advantages for Puerto Rico are purposefully and explicitly given by U.S. law. |
|
|
|
|
This is old news.
Al Capone, the famous Chicago crime boss in the 1920's, was not convicted and sent to prison for murder, etc. He was convicted and sent to prison for tax evasion.
|
|
|
|
Plenty of people have responded, but here are my short and to-the-point answers to your questions. 1) Once all 21million bitcoin have been mined, will transaction fees be enough incentive for miners to continue validating transactions on the blockchain?
Mining is designed to be profitable via the difficulty adjustment no matter what the value of the block reward is (as long as it is more than 0). 2) What is the significance of bitcoin being "open source"? Doesn't that mean that the fixed amount of Bitcoin in the original code could be changed? (This speaks to my lack of programming knowledge I guess)
Open source allows anyone to validate and customize the software that they run. Note that nodes in the Bitcoin network will ignore your node if it is customized in such a way that it breaks their rules (for example, exceeding the 21 million bitcoin limit). 3) A major draw to cryptos like Bitcoin is its decentralized nature. But in order to participate in the game, you need an internet connection right?
I don't know about where you live, but there are hundreds of different places to connect to the internet near where I live. It's a different story, of course, in countries where the government has complete control of the internet in that country. 4) If a block is limited to approximately 2,400 transactions. Once Bitcoin becomes more widely used and there are millions of transactions taking place everyday, wouldn't that create a backlog of transactions?
That is potentially a problem for Bitcoin. The current hope is that other protocols (such as Lightning network) will provide the necessary scalability. 5) I've heard it said that world powers typically last for about 250 years...
There is nothing magic about 250 years. If the U.S. goes down, it won't have anything to do with 250 years. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin IS a “Ponzi”, but a natural-occuring Ponzi, like Gold.
I remember reading the article a few years ago where the term "natural" ponzi scheme was invented. The author wanted to say that is Bitcoin a Ponzi scheme, but they couldn't because it is not. So, they invented the term "natural" ponzi scheme. Of course, the bitcoin-is-a-scam crowd loved this term and has adopted it because now they can call Bitcoin a "natural" ponzi scheme, which seems to describe some kind of scam. A "natural" ponzi scheme is not a ponzi scheme. It more closely resembles a pyramid scheme because both rely on early adopters making money from later adopters. Regardless, keep in mind that a "natural" ponzi scheme is an artificial term that doesn't describe any kind of real scam. A Ponzi scheme is an investment scam in which the operator only pretends to invest the victim's money. They might pay returns using invested money, but they don't necessarily have to. Instead, they may just create account statements that show fake returns. Many restrict withdrawals so that they don't have to pay returns. |
|
|
|
...Now we are about to go into a new year within few days, saying thank you is better than not thankful to the God we serve.
Thanking a god that you "serve" for not killing you seems odd to me. We know that slavery was a big part of the ancient Israelite culture, but I would hope that humans have become a little more enlightened since then. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
