|
Anyone have any valid Coke codes? Looking to buy a few batches.
|
|
|
|
|
Intriguing, but not expecting much. I'm sure it'll be one of those "everyone who believes in bitcoin is Satoshi!" inspirational sentiments; it's more than obvious that it's not actually Satoshi, so at this point the most I'm hoping for is a decent chuckle.
|
|
|
|
|
No one else has really commented on this yet, so I'll go: your idea of the daily bonus is interesting and gives a reason to not believe that it's an obvious ponzi, but regardless of the enticements you may have, I'll always be skeptical of an exchange with such terribly low volume. It makes me wonder where you're racking up the current 30% yearly bonus per wallet if the trading fees from which you obtain the daily bonus is at a bare minimum.
|
|
|
|
i am sure there sig people will attack me but what i say is backed my sold statistics and while i can prove 100% they are doing it i can just point out the major flaws in there so called fair system that could easly be used to scam you
No one's going to attack you if you pull out the proof, so feel free to. Show 'em up to the audience. |
|
|
|
|
Okay, so I skimmed through the report.
In regards to the concerns on attracting clients as well as the nitty-gritty aspect of the exchange, although I completely understand that the guide is probably meant to be very general and mostly inspire future exchange owners/point them in the right direction, I would argue that it's extremely vague and will likely only really inspire those without enough funds to try and start their own exchange - the ones with the intent and the capital to commit to such a project will have done so without this brief summary over the process.
It's a nice article, don't get me wrong, and it really does hit on some nice points (and this entire thing is free. I can't blame Serge for not spilling his trade secrets on a doc that anyone can download). However, I'd say that it mostly points you to the standoff of "hey, look. Building your own exchange and keeping it up will cost you fortunes, but thankfully I have some prebuilt options for you." It's not inaccurate, but if someone really isn't knowledgeable and serious enough to develop their own project, it's probably just going to crash and burn regardless of where you get a premade script from.
|
|
|
|
that is why I don't see many new users joining here.
Maybe you can look on Amazon and see if you can buy a new pair of eyes. There are millions of registered users and countless new threads being started by newbies on an hourly basis. People from all over the world flock here to join bounties mainly, but also to learn about and discuss bitcoin. As far as OgNasty goes, don't worry about him or his reputation. He can handle himself, and despite any red trust he's gotten, he's still able to do business with no problems. I think he's a total dick, but I wouldn't consider him untrustworthy and wouldn't tag him for his arrogance. It's basically a DT spat and doesn't reflect on the forum as a whole. I think you're still a bit disgruntled because of the incandescent redness of your own trust page. Looks like justice in action to me. I agree. BitcoinTalk can tick me off the quickest out of most communities I partake in, but overall I've gotten less sensitive at the quality that we're seeing today as well as the reputation shitstorms that pop up every so often. (They do seem to occur more and more often nowadays, but that's how it is sometimes.) If you don't like the forum just leave... no point in sticking around and wasting time on something you don't like lmao  They actually do like the forum. Most of them would rather argue than eat. (Although I am guilty of this indulgence as well TBH.) Since there are plenty of people here, they will always find someone to feed them. Yea I guess that's true, probably because they feel they put too much time in or something / have a connection I think it's more of people reminiscing what the forum has been in the past and comparing it to its current state - which I, for one, understand and oftentimes agree with. |
|
|
|
|
Oho, I haven't seen this in a while now. In case anyone's on the fence, I'll throw a good word out to these guys - before I got myself set up with a VPN on my own server, I used Unchained and I distinctly remember the service being such a good bang for the buck - fast, reliable, with a nice interface, and has hardly a strain on a budget. I can't say much for its security and there are probably a few other companies out there that can boast not cracking under federal pressure (which I don't think is applicable to UnchainedVPN), but if you need something quick then it's pretty solid and has been in the past.
I'm glad you guys are still around.
|
|
|
|
|
The only thing you have going for ya is your domain name.
Prove me wrong.
|
|
|
|
i explain this because many large farms dont contract with energy suppliers for the 500thw consumption/utility amount. but they actually do deals outside the norm to buy up some of the excess
I'd imagine that there are other places that the excess power could be directed to, though, if our current electrical requirements subside and allow for the allotment to other developments. imagine if ASICS never happened whereby we were still in the GPU era of people connecting rigs 100% to domestic energy consumption/bill/supplies
also knowing the GPU hashrate, an kwh used per ghash.. imagine how many petawatthours would be used a year at todays hashrate..
That's exactly the kinds of things I love to see - but currently, it just seems like we're taking these increases in efficiencies and taking them as initiative to buy way more miners and continually push up total consumption- but I suppose that bitcoin as a system means that there's not much we can do to directly make changes for how much electricity it requires. so i hope with lunch, dinner and dessert, i have given you enough food for thought to be full and happy
Thanks man, I thought I had a nice and full dinner but this one topped that. Why in this case should we consider only the situation that bitcoin is extracted using coal, gas or oil, that is, carbon sources of such energy? Even in China, the main source of mining is hydroelectric power. If you use renewable energy sources - the energy of the sun and wind, then mining will not seem so energy-intensive, and even more so that it harms the environment.
The idea of bitcoin mining using renewables is addressed both in the original post and sporadically throughout the thread. Just because we account for renewable sources doesn't mean our consumption magically disappears - something that can be said for the world we live in, really. Is that enough to hide behind? think about gold mining and production or the banking industry. these also use incredible amounts of energy. bitcoin has one advantage over them---miners can pick up and flock to regions where energy generation is cheaper and more sustainable.
as long as humans continue to use money, this problem isn't going away.
Mmm, still feels like we're aggravating the problem and having a mindset that this disadvantage is okay as long as we remain decentralized and all that good stuff. |
|
|
|
|
Username: bitcoin revo
Post Count: 1166
BTC Address (must be SegWit): bc1qjkvh6knzsjf3x37md3kj0w6evhgw0xr2f367gr
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously I'm biased with my rank, but I don't see any reason why riding the good life as a Senior Member for a few more months than your activity says you should matters - unless you're solely here for signature campaigns (in which case I kindly ask for one to GTFO).
Also, yes, it has been discussed more than its fair share.
|
|
|
|
Picked up some more PP, message me or post here if you need.
Looking to trade away a remaining $100 in one go. I sent you a PM, let me know if you're still available. |
|
|
|
In fact, Bitcoin does not consume so much energy for its production as compared to our other types of activity, in particular, for example, for the work of banks. In reality, this problem does not exist.
I mean, the centralized nature of banks means that they need much less computing power per transaction - WAY less than what we're using right now. Therefore, I do not think that we have a serious problem with the consumption of electricity for mining Bitcoin.
I agree that this problem is more contrived than it deserves to be discussed.
In addition, mining Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency is not harmful to the environment. At the same time, only heat is released, which is sometimes even used to heat residential buildings.
The means as to which the electricity is produced certainly has and will continue to have a mark on the environment if this mentality is all we've got. Any objections to mere discussion just shows that you're unwilling to make positive changes. next. large amount of hashrate is powered via renewable energy. so feel free to cut the co2 number down by more than half of what the topic post wrote.
by the way, pepsi lease out their logo'd refrigerators to fastfood restaurants and the electric utility to just keep pepsi cool. far exceeds keeping bitcoin secure.
so here is a question. for a beverage that just ends up being body temperature urine eventually. vs bitcoin which is an immutable international currency. which is wasting more electric
Thanks for the numbers, franky. I agree that "calculating" the electric consumption of bitcoin as a whole is arguably something that is incredibly difficult to do within a simplistic method, and can't be accurately pinpointed. However, in regards to your Pepsi comment - I believe the best approach would instead be to contrive methods to cut down on the carbon footprint of BOTH, rather than trying to weigh each and eliminate one, which was the purpose of this discussion - I wanted to see if there were any movements against this quite large carbon footprint we're contributing as an ecosystem. Your links quote that as being 0.24% of the world's total electricity consumption, and the study I linked quotes it as less than 0.01% of the world's total energy production. Very interesting how a slight change in wording, which most readers would gloss over, gives such a drastic difference in percentages. Data can be always be manipulated or presented in such ways to give a bias towards what you want to prove.
The report I linked to suggests around 30% of mining energy is renewable, so that would have an effect on the final CO2 numbers. It's perhaps also worth nothing that the metric of energy consumption/CO2 production per transaction isn't the most useful, as the amount of energy spent on the bitcoin blockchain is independent of the number of transactions it is processing.
That's an interesting observation; thanks for pointing that out. Wording can be tricky!  Just a thought as well, if this would be the aftermath of large-scale industrial mining, shouldn't nations which house a lot of miners mandate mining farm operators to plant a tree, or at least help plant one per machine that they are using? Not a very bright idea but people should be doing this if they really want to help. Sure we can always switch to the cleaner and greener type of algorithm (PoS and other stuff) and use renewable energy sources to power up the machines, but that would take long or perhaps be more costly to the end of operators, so why not use conventional energy methods, but in turn they need to plant a tree to at least lessen the impacts of their operations?
Idk, not the brightest idea out there but surely one that's worth considering and noting anyway.
I'm sure that the details on enforcing such a rule would be finicky and potentially give rise to some sort of centralization or complaints of such. I wish that application would work, though, because I am all in favor for anything that helps. Everything is producing different kinds of waste: factories, nature (during any cataclysms), or even cows when they fart (and by the way cows have 2nd largest population among mammals and their fart is really harmful). If people give up mining BTC it doesn't mean that everyone will invest their money into some green stuff and start planting some trees.
If people stop mining cryptocurrencies they can start using even more harmful technologies.
That's the same mindset that we've been holding all the way until now - since X is producing way more than we are, why stop? It certainly wouldn't hurt us to take a step back and reevaluate practices that could be changed - whatever they could be - in order to do our fair share of cutting down environmental issues. |
|
|
|
Even if 100% of Paypal -> btc transactions were reversible, far fewer than 999 out of 1000 people would screw someone over like that. I know I wouldn't, but of course, you don't know that. Maybe I'm a very unimaginative criminal, and $36 is the biggest number I could wrap my head around. Maybe I'm just a stickler for details, and that's why I would be especially concerned over exchange rates on a transaction that was going to be reversed. In any case, I wonder if your speculations merited a response at all. Maybe it's some kind of complex? Who knows, let's speculate on more interesting stuff...
Dude_
You seem like a guy with a solid head on your shoulders, so how about we not go into that? Sure, maybe only 0.1% of people would scam for $36, but those are the people that keep creating new accounts and plaguing people with that exact mentality. So - I get that you might be feeling like @Lassle was way out of line to offend a newcomer like you, but step back and let's take a look at the bigger picture before you lash back out. |
|
|
|
I ran into some eye-opening articles and studies on the aspect of bitcoin that I don't often see (or have ever seen, on that note) discussed here on this forum - the carbon footprint of bitcoin and exactly what it's contributing to the world's ever-increasing problem with climate change. I clicked my way onto a straightforward and relatively accurate, real-time graph provided by Digiconomist[1] where a bunch of laid out numbers are presented. I'll list the key ones out for now, but I encourage you to visit it yourself and maybe even look into the calculations and accuracy of the tool[2]. Currently, our estimated annual electricity consumption is 54.6 TWh. That's massive when you compare it to Israel's 2015 total energy consumption, 52.86 TWh. Each transaction you make with bitcoin? That's 13.6 US households that could have been powered for a day, and a potential additional 191.17 kg of CO2 carbon footprint. EACH. TRANSACTION. Bitcoin itself is amounting for 0.24% of the world's electricity, which is staggering that we're even approaching 1% to begin with. This consumption is potentially resulting in 25,935 kt of CO2 annually (although a portion of the power is coming from renewable sources, which reduces this number). Sure, renewable energies are an option and there is plenty of cheap hydropower especially in regions in China, but most of the mining is coal-powered[3] and the fact that we're increasing the stress on the increasing need for sustainable practices - or, rather, the magnitude of the stress itself - is staggering. I doubt sharing this will make much of an impact, but I want to hear your thoughts. Was I the only one too busy waving around enthusiastic posters about the ~possibilities of bitcoin~ or is there any among the community who's similarly surprised? Are there any movements or practices already being conducted within our ecosystem that's being initiated to counteract this increasing load on the environment around us? Note: I did self-moderate this thread in case replies get spammy, but feel free to voice whatever opinions you have on this, regardless of how extreme they be. Let's hear both sides up. Note 2: This is not me arguing against bitcoin itself, of course. This is me trying to raise discussion on things that are already going on the ecosystem that is counteracting this as well as potential ideas, so let's try to keep discussions pointed there.
[1] https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption[2] https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption#assumptions[3] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-01625-x |
|
|
|
If you can provide valid identification matching your PayPal, as well as accept $28 BTC instead of $36, I can do this.
Hmm. I'm not sure if giving personal information warrants such a small trade online, especially if it's not 1:1. People can do a lot with just one ID nowadays. I'd personally recommend (and I say this too often to count), OP, for you to transfer it out (no cash deposit required) to your bank and then offer a wire transfer up to someone. |
|
|
|
|
Hey all,
I'm reopening this service to whoever needs it. I'm sorry to those of you I may have missed, so if I haven't responded to your request yet, feel free to shoot me another PM and I will be more than happy to get you set up.
Reminder that you do need a domain name to start off with, but if you need help getting a free one to get started, feel free to ask me to help you out.
|
|
|
|
Now its being stable around $5k. The drop has really shaken me as i was about to invest believing it will have growth in coming days. Later yes the steady go assured me of investing $500 today into Bitcoin. Will keep it until i see a good hike in price.
This mentality of investing after being reassured by seeing movement on bitcoin's price is limiting you, and if you're not careful, is probably going to lose you hundreds of dollars over your experience with bitcoin. Do you have an entry point where you know you'll buy more coins if bitcoin falls below X, and vice versa with an exit point? Or does your trading depend a little more on emotion (which is nothing bad to admit) and prospect with bitcoin's price rise and anxiety as it falls? Judging on your spontaneous investment of $500, I'd say you're at risk of significant loss if you don't take a step back and reevaluate your trading habits. Please stay safe out there and stay profitable. |
|
|
|
|
I'm willing to do the full trade with you at once. I'll shoot over a PM as well if you still have the funds.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
