You have all lost your minds.
Fiat currency is a debt note.
Debt is for slaves and you love pricing your beloved asset in debt notes.
Every time you celebrate this you are celebrating the slavery to the system but you can't see it.
The more the BTC bot moves up the bids the more excited you get.
You have been hoodwinked and the IRS is waiting for you on the other side.
THIS IS CALLED SELLING OUT.
No we have not. We just like to celebrate so that trolls like you will be jealous. Are we going to convert our Bitcoins to fiat currency? Of course not! Are you crazy? We want to hold real and sound money. Unlike your debt notes that you love holding. Hip Hip hooray for Bitcoin! $1000 is only a few more steps away! |
|
|
|
Then herein lies the real problem. Ask the banks what their definition of "blockchain" is and you realize and question if that is really a "blockchain" because the Satoshi definition is mostly the one for most of us. Before Bitcoin, did anyone really use the term "blockchain"?
If their definition of a blockchain, is a chain of blocks linked together then would that be enough to be called a "blockchain"? I think the breakthrough which is Proof of Word should always be there and should be inserted in that definition.
no satoshi was talking about blockchain in the full context of bitcoin. because the topic he was talking about was bitcoin. he never really thought much about altcoins back in the first days, so was not talking about blockchain as just a separate topic bitcoin is a patchwork quilt of many many things brought together. which makes bitcoin special. but blockchain and bitcoin are not on the same level. blockchain is a base level template. that needs building on sha256 was a breakthrough in 2001 cryptographic signatures (ecdsa) was a breakthrough in 1999 proof of work was a breakthrough in 1997... ripemd was a breakthrough in 1995 i could go on. if you want to start saying blockchain has certain things as a prerequisite.. then you start getting into deeper questions like if PoW is a prerequisite. then PoS coins are not blockchains? or if PoW is a prerequisite. then you cant leave PoW details blank otherwise its an empty gesture/useless to have included PoW as a prerequisite if PoW is a prerequisite. then what PoW .. MD5 hashed, sha1, sha2, sha3. if PoW is a prerequisite. then once you answer the detail of the hash required you then have to answer what length nonce is needed. if PoW is a prerequisite. then once you answer the detail of the hash&nonce length required you then have to answer difficulty mechanism is needed if PoW is a prerequisite. then once you answer the detail of the hash&nonce length& difficulty required you then have to answer difficulty retarget period. yep. by saying PoW is needed you then start tumbling down a hill of creating an altcoin by having to get specific purely to even say PoW is needed because PoW needs prerequisiteshowever blockchain is a blank template. where it can go in any direction.. PoW, PoS PoA, etc. the data within the blocks can be anything. the timing of the blocks can be anything. distribution variation, diversity. etc etc etc Ok I get your point. But I still do not get how a "blockchain" is more efficient and faster than the legacy systems they have right now like SWIFT. If you or someone can explain to me if there is a need for and how a "blockchain" or let us just call it distributed databases can make their systems more efficient and faster, I would be happy to listen. My whole point with my argument is banks do not need a "blockchain". It is only a buzzword used because Bitcoin is getting more popular. |
|
|
|
|
Never did they consider the real culprit for the rise of Bitcoin. That is the growth if the dark market and the growing use of Bitcoin for criminal activity. Whoever wrote that article is only making up a story to make the "rara" cheer leaders of Bitcoin feel better. The writer may even be a supporter of Segwit.
|
|
|
|
I have a question for those holding Bitcoin.
Is your Bitcoin really worth "x" amount of $$$? I do not know. All I know is I can sell them at $780 per coin right now. Should I care? What happens if lets say 5 big Bitcoin holders were to flee the market today? Then it will crash. They can do it now if they want. But will it be good for them to dump? No, so they hold. But I encourage them to dump. Please. Are there enough buyers to inflate the price back up? Maybe. We are seeing it happen right now. But who cares about the price. It can go down anytime and I see that as an opportunity to buy more. So please let the price fall everyone. What if a run were to occur on Bitcoin? A run? I do not what you mean but if that will make the price fall that is a welcome opportunity to buy more. Do you think that all investors would get the same amount of money for their coin? No. Some sell at lower prices, some at higher prices. With global currencies sliding in value consider this when building your exit strategy. Exit strategy? There is no exit strategy. Bitcoin holder for life here. As global currencies weaken the likelihood of liquidating your position for "fair market value" deteriorates.
Who cares. |
|
|
|
Well, I rent hash power on nicehash and I spend 0.01 btc. after spending all of it, I only got 0.0004 in return. is renting hash power profitable? then why many people still renting hash power on them. am I doing something wrong?
First ask yourself why Nicehash are renting out hash power. Did it not occur to you that their rigs are not profitable for themselves? The purpose of renting out hash power is to transfer their risk to you. You are the hedge in their risk of their mining operation. So the answer to your question is a simple no. |
|
|
|
we will have a better idea after ETH moves to POS next year how the coin marketcap changes
but eth is a constantly changing experiment ....
yeah. i'll believe that when i see it. as for the rest, i guess there's a line somewhere between bedrock of crypto and badly compromised antique. it'll probably be too late to know if and when it's been crossed. ETH? It is slowly dying. Between Ethereum and Ethereum Classic, I would go for the latter. It is on the rise and has declared that it will continue on with Proof of Work. The miners from ETH would then move to ETC and also imagine the miners who are disillusioned with ZCash. Once the network becomes strong enough in hashng power, ETC may achieve parity with ETH. |
|
|
|
I have heard rumors that this guy may be Satoshi himself.
He is really smart and has intimate knowledge about Bitcoin, the markets, and the world at large.
Seems like a good candidate.
I have seen some videos of him and I doubt he is satoshi, he doesn't seem to have deep technical knowledge of bitcoin, he understands it well and knows how it works and so on, but not at a technical level, which would be a requirement to be a satoshi proposal. I still think Adam Back is a potential satoshi, he was credited in the whitepaper. I also think Nick Szabo is still a decent candidate. But Gmaxwell and PWuille are also potential satoshis... we can't know. , but for some reason I seem to think that Satoshi is not a individual... but rather a small group of people. Can you imagine if Satoshi turns out to be some whack job that believe in Aliens and even worst inspired by Aliens to create this technology. It is for reasons like this, that we should not know who Satoshi is, so that we cannot judge.  I used to think Nick Szabo was the real Satoshi too. Then he did a talk at Ethereum's developers conference which made me think that it could not be him. The real Satoshi, I do not think will support Ethereum. If you ask why, search for Peter Todd's and Adam Back's and GMaxwell's opinions on Ethereum. I am not a technical person but it is easy to pick up that those 3 BTC developers already knew Ethereum will not work. You all "think" alot these days. Truth is none of you long time bitcointalkers know anything. All you can do is hodl and prey.... Obvious choice will not be Satoshi. Clif High is closer than all of your guesses. All you do is try to create FUD. Guess what? It is not working because it is only you who "thinks" he knows better above everyone. Look at how strong the Bitcoin market is. No one is listening to you everyone wants to buy and prey. Accept it, outside of Bitcoin it is the same. |
|
|
|
Not to worry. Bitcoin's price is looking very nice right now and if Circle's latest move does not even affect the price negatively then good riddance to them. They are not really needed in Bitcoin, there will always be localbitcoins.com to go to if there are no other exchanges available.
Assuming govs and banks can't find a way to get the masses to move to a controllable cryptocurrency, I'd expect an all out assault on localbitcoins in the future. It's kinda decentralized, but it's just another activity that can be spun as evil and regulated away (mostly). I think the only thing saving localbitcoins from closure atm is that another would take it's place rather quickly. Same for shapeshift.That is why there is no need to worry. If there an untapped market or a need, the market itself will always find a way to get into it and make it efficient. That is the power of Bitcoin because it is a financial layer that could operate outside of regulations. If banks do not want to serve it, Bitcoin will come in and make those markets efficient. |
|
|
|
The miners have spoken: Bitcoin’s Rally Crushed Every Other Currency in 2016. Here’s Why https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-16/bitcoin-s-rally-crushed-every-other-currency-in-2016-here-s-why“My personal expectation is that bitcoin will at least gain another 100 percent,” said Krohn, chief financial officer of Hong Kong-based Genesis Mining, which deploys server farms to mine the currency.
“Bitcoin is coming into its own,” says Tim Draper, a venture capitalist who’s bought thousands of bitcoins over the years. “There are starting to be consumer uses for bitcoin, and if people have any concerns about their own fiat currency -- the rupee, for example -- they flee to bitcoin as an alternate currency.”
It is funny how you were trying to cause FUD all these months but have finally decided to buy Bitcoins at a very late moment. Well at least you know that buying is better and knowing the future of Bitcoin is still bright (or dark, as in darknet). The real and organized criminals have not yet started using the dark markets. When they start using it for a good % of their business this will be worth so much and it will be unstoppable, with Bitcoin in the middle of all that trades and value making. |
|
|
|
I don't find it useless since they already instantiated two funds.
Lasting a long time=sustainable in my book. I don't know any other definition.
It is certainly not forever if this is what you are getting at. With that, I agree.
When I mentioned "a long time" it means 2 or 3 years. That is not sustainable that is a bubble forming and getting ready to pop when the right time comes. I also mentioned that this is the highest ever amount of margin trading in Bitcoin. How can that can be ever sustainable in your book? In reading your retort, In my book we are close in getting to a stage of mania in the trading cycle. We've already been in a sustainable uptrend for the latest 1.5 years. Not sure what you're talking about. That is the point exactly. What is sustainable? Sooner or later it will end because that is the natural cycle of the market. Maybe it could last up to 10 years but do you really believe it is all really "sustainable"? Nothing is sustainable. History has already showed us countless times that what goes up must come down. I do not know how you can deny that. semantic arguments but according to Merriam-Webster definition#3 for sustainable is: able to last or continue for a long timehttps://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sustainableIs few years a long time? To me, it is, but to OP it isn't... Ok so it is a long time for you. But the argument is "if it is sustainable?" If after a few years it comes crashing down again, would you be able to say then that it is sustainable? I am thinking about the big picture where you can cite the rise and fall of civilizations in the history of the world. That itself shows that nothing is sustainable. Aah..well, by that token the only thing so far that was found truly sustainable in your definition is the proton, where so far they could not detect a single decay event, suggesting that proton's half life is higher than 1.67X10^34 years, which is no less than 10^24 times longer than the age of the current universe (trilliontrillions of current universe ages). That is sustainable, indeed..so there is something...  We could go on a little further with that. The proton itself is not sustainable if the universe is expanding and then collapsing back to a singularity. So you see even if your definition of something is sustainable will last 100 years in an economy, really it is not. Think about it. The more with your declaration that a "long time" for you is 2 or 3 years. That kind of "sustainability" is laughable. |
|
|
|
|
Not to worry. Bitcoin's price is looking very nice right now and if Circle's latest move does not even affect the price negatively then good riddance to them. They are not really needed in Bitcoin, there will always be localbitcoins.com to go to if there are no other exchanges available.
|
|
|
|
I have heard rumors that this guy may be Satoshi himself.
He is really smart and has intimate knowledge about Bitcoin, the markets, and the world at large.
Seems like a good candidate.
I have seen some videos of him and I doubt he is satoshi, he doesn't seem to have deep technical knowledge of bitcoin, he understands it well and knows how it works and so on, but not at a technical level, which would be a requirement to be a satoshi proposal. I still think Adam Back is a potential satoshi, he was credited in the whitepaper. I also think Nick Szabo is still a decent candidate. But Gmaxwell and PWuille are also potential satoshis... we can't know. , but for some reason I seem to think that Satoshi is not a individual... but rather a small group of people. Can you imagine if Satoshi turns out to be some whack job that believe in Aliens and even worst inspired by Aliens to create this technology. It is for reasons like this, that we should not know who Satoshi is, so that we cannot judge. I used to think Nick Szabo was the real Satoshi too. Then he did a talk at Ethereum's developers conference which made me think that it could not be him. The real Satoshi, I do not think will support Ethereum. If you ask why, search for Peter Todd's and Adam Back's and GMaxwell's opinions on Ethereum. I am not a technical person but it is easy to pick up that those 3 BTC developers already knew Ethereum will not work. |
|
|
|
Blockchains efficient? They are not compared to the databases banks are using now. Blockchains are slow, use too much storage and bandwidth. Also a real blockchain uses Proof of Work which is considered wasteful in the use energy by most people who do not get that it is actually a breakthrough.
We will soon see all these private "blockchain" pitches by different developers to pivot into something else and drop the word "blockchain".
your thinking of bitcoins blockchain. trying to fit bitcoins concept into the banking industry.. wipe your mind of bitcoin and concentrate on underlying blockchain, again without thinking about all the unique bits that separates bitcoin from the other altcoins. like going back to the design board and opening your mind to design your very own altcoin. it doesnt need to be all data on every node(bitcoin) or all data on one server(banking).. it can be inbetween aswell EG a texas sidechain where all the banks in texas reinforced each other. california have a different sidechain where all the banks in california reinforced each other imagine each block is not hashed by PoW with a 10 minute target. but instead signed by xx regional hubs/bank branches in a split second. imagine it like live data is instantly signed off as soon as its altered. and this continues on for a month. then at the end of the month. its locked for good, as historirc record. and then a new block copy is opened up to then change live. like a monthly statement of locked historic blocks and a live block ontop that is the 'current balance block' making the live active block (much like mempool/LN) editable until its locked. but trusted available balance due to instant multisig signing imaging instead of one central server hosting every bank account data, there was instead a bank branch that had its own account holders (sidechain) where they all inter-communicate between sidechains, like the same way routing numbers /sort codes recognise which HQ server to address for particular banking customers. but this time the data is distributed into hubs/regions/clusters/sidechains. once you wipe your mind of bitcoin and see how loose the term blockchain is. you realise blockchain alone is just an empty tool. but is a tool that can do some very funky and unthought about things Then herein lies the real problem. Ask the banks what their definition of "blockchain" is and you realize and question if that is really a "blockchain" because the Satoshi definition is mostly the one for most of us. Before Bitcoin, did anyone really use the term "blockchain"? If their definition of a blockchain, is a chain of blocks linked together then would that be enough to be called a "blockchain"? I think the breakthrough which is Proof of Word should always be there and should be inserted in that definition. |
|
|
|
|
Blockchains efficient? They are not compared to the databases banks are using now. Blockchains are slow, use too much storage and bandwidth. Also a real blockchain uses Proof of Work which is considered wasteful in the use energy by most people who do not get that it is actually a breakthrough.
We will soon see all these private "blockchain" pitches by different developers to pivot into something else and drop the word "blockchain".
|
|
|
|
These days there are too many talks about blockchain. So, is blockchain real or hype?
Everything about it is hype. Most of the banks that claim they will use a private blockchain only needs a shared database for their needs. The developers trying to pitch for those banks to use a "blockchain" are scamming. Banks have no use for a blockchain. If they think they do, use Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
One of Bitcoin's biggest supporters, Clif High, says Bitcoin is going to be the future of the financial world. Have you guys ever heard of him? He makes some very interesting points about Bitcoin on his YouTube channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqXZf0F4GLSX1QXBUgPXhqgWhat do you guys think? Did not watch the video and I do not have to. Bitcoin is the future for dark markets, payments for criminal activities online and other not so legal stuff that the banks do not serve. "Mainstream adoption" like what everyone is hoping here is laughable. Wake up, we have something really good here. |
|
|
|
You are late with the news. All the people think that the Bitcoin and altcoin exchanges are making big money when in fact the opposite is true. Expect for more exchanges to close in the next few years. Doing business in that area has just become too competitive for all those exchanges to make money. Most of them will be gone within a decade. |
|
|
|
Instead of spamming this thread because we are required to post here by our campaign manager. Maybe we should talk about the other ways on how to help promote Bitsane. If you have a Twitter account or Facebook maybe it might help to post there to help spread more awareness.
Good idea we should promote it on social media through our bitcoin related accounts. Here I have tweeted about it https://twitter.com/CoinsWTF/status/808240743752069121from my 1700 followers Twitter account  I suggest BitSane start a referral program too as an Incentive to users for inviting other to this great exchange♥ A referral program would be great. I would not mind getting a little extra value for promoting the exchange. I have not really looked deeply into Bitsane except playing around with the charts. Do they have margin trading available?Never mind, I see it mentioned in the OP now. This could have good potential to attract users from other exchanges. My suggestion is to offer margin trading for altcoins that are not offered in Poloniex like ETC. Please have ETC available for trading in Bitsane with margin trading also available for it. |
|
|
|
Very effective anti-virus packages are available for as little as $10 (purchased one just last month from Amazon). Yet, the San Francisco Metro decided that they are too expensive. I guess now they are too happy to pay 7,000x that amount.
What? That is a very simplistic way of looking at things. Almost all Windows users have bought into the scam of antivirus software, yes? Then why are a big percentage of Windows users still a victim of hackers, malware, viruses, trojans, etc...? Did you not think that the whole antivirus industry could be a scam? Seeing how the world works today, it could be. |
|
|
|
I don't find it useless since they already instantiated two funds.
Lasting a long time=sustainable in my book. I don't know any other definition.
It is certainly not forever if this is what you are getting at. With that, I agree.
When I mentioned "a long time" it means 2 or 3 years. That is not sustainable that is a bubble forming and getting ready to pop when the right time comes. I also mentioned that this is the highest ever amount of margin trading in Bitcoin. How can that can be ever sustainable in your book? In reading your retort, In my book we are close in getting to a stage of mania in the trading cycle. We've already been in a sustainable uptrend for the latest 1.5 years. Not sure what you're talking about. That is the point exactly. What is sustainable? Sooner or later it will end because that is the natural cycle of the market. Maybe it could last up to 10 years but do you really believe it is all really "sustainable"? Nothing is sustainable. History has already showed us countless times that what goes up must come down. I do not know how you can deny that. semantic arguments but according to Merriam-Webster definition#3 for sustainable is: able to last or continue for a long timehttps://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sustainableIs few years a long time? To me, it is, but to OP it isn't... Ok so it is a long time for you. But the argument is "if it is sustainable?" If after a few years it comes crashing down again, would you be able to say then that it is sustainable? I am thinking about the big picture where you can cite the rise and fall of civilizations in the history of the world. That itself shows that nothing is sustainable. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
