It is bad because it is a crypto developed by a centralized, authoritarian, socialist dictator. This gives you no benefits over fiat because the same crooked people who enslaved and robbed  the people of Venezuela are the ones in control of this crypto. They might as well use a database but saying “crypto” gives them a buzzword to use to fool people.

The petro it is a centralized monopoly in the government and they have essentially complete control over it.  Forget worries about a 51% attack, they have essentially 100% and can change the protocol or peg at their whim.

Anyone who “invests” is asking to lose everything if they don’t get out before the other shoe drops.  The Petro can only work if the government follows through on its promises and their promises have been at root nothing except a promise to destroy Venezuela and enrich themselves by creating a "socialist utopia."

If Venezuela wanted to help people, let them use bitcoin or some other independent currency.

It will become an object lesson in how authoritarian socialist (or fascist or communist etc) regimes can't even do crypto right - a centralized crypto is as worthless as centralized fiat.  

Who in their right mind will trust the Venezuelan government to keep the value of their crypto tied to a certain amount of petro?  They couldn't even keep their fiat currency close to stable.

If the Venezuelan government really cared about their people, they would all resign, and give the people of Venezuela the freedom to use bitcoin or any other crypto or any other currency they want.  But they want power for themselves no matter the cost to the people of Venezuela.

It is a lesson in how to destroy a country by having a majority of the people vote themselves into the slavery of socialism.  There is no free lunch.

The exchange would know because their server is monitoring the block chain.  Whether the block was generated after they restarted or hours before, they are monitoring each block as it arrives at their server and they know how far they have tracked.

So, server restarts.  It sees that it has tracked all the transactions in the block chain up to block X.  Block X+1 arrives from peers, process that block just as if we'd been connected all the time - after all, it could have JUST been mined or mined hours ago, it doesn't matter.  Block X+2 arrives do the same.  Block X+3 arrives, etc. 

Whether they get blocks X+1, X+2, X+3 in 10 seconds or 60 minutes doesn't matter, they are doing the same thing: processing blocks as they arrive.

The odds of that happening now are infinitesimal. Someone could fork bitcoin to fix the block reward at a minimum of 1 BTC, but it would be something that isn't bitcoin.

As others have stated above, this has been discussed ad nauseam, but in short mining fees are projected to make up the difference and cover the costs in order to avoid continual (although decreasing as a percentage) inflation that making a minimum block reward of 1 BTC would cause.

As far as Krugman goes, he doesn't like it because his authoritarian masters can't control it.  He loves fiat because he wants power, and his socialist/communist/fascist allies are all on board to anything that gives them power and money while controlling people.

"Unexpected".  Of course it is unexpected.  If anyone knew, where it was going, they'd short it or buy it.  :-)

It "could".  Or it "could not."  Ask me Jan 1, 2019.  ;-)

If use cases become widespread - e.g. micropayments with lightning - it is much more likely to happen.  After the next halving, maybe 22 months from now, the decrease in supply will be an important driver as it has been after the last two halvings.

No one in their right mind would do this voluntarily anyway.  It is like trying to use a single toothpick to destroy the great wall of China.  You might make a slight scratch after centuries (or instantly if you were extremely lucky), but it would be stupid to do.

The only ones that would be doing this are developers trying to scam people who download their apps.

The “best interest” of their nations would probably be in not regulating them and getting a lot of development and startups. The best interests of the politicians rarely coincide with the best interests of the nations.

They will likely use a 3rd party to sell the bitcoin when it arrives in their wallet in order to lock in the current value which is then applied to the tax payment.  Something like "send X.XXX bitcoins to 1address within the next 2 hours".

You ask for references or examples of code that he has written or open source projects to which s/he has contributed code along with links to the code s/he has written.

All that aside though, knowing how to declare of variable and what different data types are in various programming languages are is quite basic.  For example, int vs float vs int64 etc.  The book Danny mentioned above is a good reference to help you learn as you are going through the code.  I read somewhere there was an ebook version of it, if you search for "the c programming language by brian w kernighan ebook" you may find it.  At worst, having it as a reference is a good thing and you'll learn something.

There are obviously limitations in every programming language.

If you are still talking about


then you are dealing with an int64 value 8 bytes, 64 bits:

 Int64 -- (-9,223,372,036,854,775,808 to +9,223,372,036,854,775,807).  (Or if it uint64 is unsigned, then 0 to double that.)

Is that what you are asking?

No.  Just no.  It is not mostly from attacks, but from blocks being mined nearly simultaneously.

This has a reasonable explanation below, but improvements in Bitcoin Core have improved propagation time etc so frequency has dropped over the years.  There was a discussion about them if I can find the link.
But this is a quick overview:
https://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocks

"Why an Investor Is Predicting Bitcoin Could Hit $700,000"

http://fortune.com/2018/04/25/bitcoin-price-prediction-john-pfeffer/

You don't mention what OS you are using on your computer.  Windows I presume since you mention BitLocker. 

As far as 2FA, if someone has the private key, 2FA and an encrypted drive (BitLocker) doesn't matter, you probably have an infected machine.

Cold storage for an exchange wallet should be where you start. Then have some small amount that is not cold.  

And bitcond on the web server?  That is a bad idea.

The fact that you are asking these questions is quite concerning for anyone who would want to use this exchange.  My suggestion is to do a lot more reading to see how exchanges have been hacked, what others have tried and recommend and then think about the architecture you want to use based on that.

I don't think anyone knows.  ;-)   Late 2020 will be after the next halving and that will be of some assistance to decrease new supply.   Anyone who is concerned about the future, should own at least some bitcoin as a hedge at minimum. 

This guy may be right or now.  Ask me in 24 months. 

It is also relevant to know the cost of the purchases.  Unless it is expensive, you’ll also probably want to be using lightning in order to keep costs down and transactions instant.   Otherwise if bitcoin transaction costs increase or the number of transactions waiting spikes, your mobile gamers won’t have a good experience. 

I haven’t seen code snippets to implement this specifically, but it shouldn’t be tricky and the logic should be like the ones above.  Lightning though will be a critical part for a bitcoin payment - and since you asked here in the Bitcoin section not the alt coin area, that seems to be the plan.

Ridiculous.  Why by something that immediately depreciates instead of something of long term value? (Well for guys, maybe the answer is girls.)

Many (most?) of these ICOs are scams anyway.  It should have been obvious to most people that they were, but the rose colored glassses have clouded many people’s judgement.