Separately, the Russian Ministry of Finance plans to introduce a law that will criminalize the use of cryptocurrencies as money substitutes.
You left out the most important detail on your title. Whether you want to take Russia seriously or not, you have to recognize that plenty of other countries have already taken the same stance (Vietnam, Indonesia, etc.), and none of them has had a substantial effect. With Russia's trading volume, I expect it to be more of the same. The thing is, not too many businesses are willing to accept crypto anyway so it's not a big deal yet. |
|
|
|
Yup, probably controlled by the same people who run Bitcoin.com and r/btc. They lure in unsuspecting victims with the misleading handles, then only ever talk about Bitcoin Cash. I honestly have nothing against the project because it's really just another way of addressing the scalability problem, but the intentional misleading just makes me want to never get involved with them ever. That being said, I don't think this recent slump has anything to do with Bitcoin vs. Bitcoin Cash. It's just the market continuing to be bearish. |
|
|
|
Just imagine a person with 200 posts but they didn't get any merit themselves? Haha that how funny the merit is. One more fact is that merit is not regenerated after months if you gave them you will have a bounce-back point but that's it you won't generate it after you gave that's why people are holding it dearly. No one will just give you their merit out of pity you know,
That would be because quantity is irrelevant. It's quality that you want. People don't get incentives for holding their sMerits either, but they don't get anything for spending them as well, so there are people who don't bother. One thing's for sure though, this has definitely quashed account farming and spam, which was the intention in the first place. I agree that it kind of sucks for newbies because of how arbitrary it is though, with every single person having different opinions on handing out their sMerits. theymos has already expressed willingness in revamping the system if need be, though, so we'll see how it goes. |
|
|
|
|
The best way to not ever worry about this is to install the NoScript add-on to your browser. It also stops malicious ads and scripts from running as a bonus. As a testament to how useful it is for security, it's even bundled with Tor Browser. Everyone should be running it these days.
|
|
|
|
It does not have to be the ONLY factor in the matter. Whatever you can do, every bit will help. The opposing party will do whatever it can do to weaken THAT specific card. I am sure they have other cards, or factors they play with, but this is only one of them. According to Carnegie Europe, http://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/75740?lang=enThe West is in the middle of an undeclared cyberwar with Russia. This could be a part of it. As you may have guessed, North Korea and Russia are high school buddies. I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm just thinking out loud that the chances of a grand conspiracy going on for the sake of North Korea is about as small as the amount involved. Doubling down on sanctions and asking for China's help will be much more efficient courses of action. It just seems way too roundabout in my opinion. But yeah, to each his own. I'm probably just not the biggest fan of conspiracy theories. |
|
|
|
Japan is acting along and collaborating with USA, dropping the price intentionally. The reason for that is the meeting between the president Trumpovski and Kim Jong Unovski.
Trumpovski wants sanctions to be effective, and Kim Jong Unovski wants to bypass sanctions using BTC (all that South Korean hacks and such if ya all remember). Kim wants to go to the table claiming he can do it, Trumpovski wants to strengthen his hand saying that no dude, you cannot do that because BTC price is frigging low.
So, there you go. We are all victims of an international bargain.
Any other theories? Let's see it.
I feel like this is too much of a stretch. North Korea can use Bitcoin to go around sanctions, but there's no way it alone will ever be enough to even come close to solving any of their problems. According to this article, it is estimated that North Korea made around $200 million off cryptocurrencies last year. According to this site, North Korea spends around $15 billion on their military annually. If we go by these figures, then Bitcoin at most provided only 1.3% of their military budget alone. It's far too little to really provoke any grand conspiracies in my opinion. I would also like to note that North Korea has been softening their stance lately, so there's little point in ramping up the chokehold at the moment. |
|
|
|
|
Why would you need one? You're safer off using online solutions because then you won't have to install anything on your computer. There are no reliability issues either, because you have a plethora to choose from. You also have to be online anyway to sync data. There may be reasons for it that I'm not seeing but in general, I would recommend just going for online ones, mostly because you risk getting malware from downloading some obscure program.
|
|
|
|
|
There aren't really many possibilities on why he went that route. It's either he has a vendetta against Bitcoin and did it out of spite, or he has more to gain in the long run by moving the market than selling a bit higher. My money is on the latter, but who knows?
At least it seems to be over now, for the most part. Crazy how one guy can have so much of an impact. It just makes you realize how long we have to go.
|
|
|
|
Central bank do not have control over crypto, thus it doesnt affect its price.
Not necessarily. Whales don't control Bitcoin and they can affect its price. That being said, there are plenty of things Central Banks can do to hurt Bitcoin if they wish. We've heard of banks closing exchange accounts and accounts associated with cryptocurrencies. Legality aside, if they were able to completely isolate crypto from the traditional banking system, we'd have a massive problem on our hands. Words tend to affect crypto price too, so if they launch a serious enough tirade, they may be able to cause a small slide. Similarly, Good word such as future plans of integration could spark rallies. It's sad to admit, but Bitcoin isn't large enough to be free from central banks' influence. |
|
|
|
|
By blockchain, do you mean blockchain.info?
I don't use it so I have no idea if you can even get a copy of the private keys associated with your account, but there's no point either way. The point of protecting your private key is to keep it only to yourself, and there's no way to do this with online wallets as the service itself has access to them. You can protect your private key perfectly well and still be hacked because you're essentially at the mercy of your service provider.
You should consider setting up a desktop wallet/hardware wallet as they are much safer, and they actually keep your private key private.
|
|
|
|
are the victims going to get their funds in fiat?
Probably? I haven't read the ruling, but it would make no sense for them to liquidate their coins if they're paying in Bitcoin. I'd like to believe that not all victims exited the scene entirely; I don't have figures of course, but I'm sure more than a couple of them were storing their coins in other places and could have decided to keep them. It sucks for the people who went all-in though, as they may find the very prospect of crypto traumatic. If you're beating yourself up for selling early, imagine how they feel. |
|
|
|
|
So, uh, following recent developments and making decisions based off them is somehow greedy? I mean, sure you're dumb if you fall for fake news, but some things like the Binance shenanigans did happen, and therefore cannot be written off as mere FUD. I say mere because news tend to be overblown into legitimate FUD territory.
These might not even be panic sells. When bad news of enough magnitude breaks, you can pretty much expect Bitcoin price to drop. Some people could simply be taking advantage of the trends and expectations by selling high in anticipation of a drop, then buying the dip. If you're HODLing for the long term, these price movements shouldn't bother you.
|
|
|
|
For example with the last dip to 6k it is said that the whale was selling huge amounts of bitcoin, which made it go down. Alright, but if he sold it, doesn't it mean that someone else just hold it now?
Not necessarily. If they dump them at an exchange, exchanges will have a surplus of circulating Bitcoins, making the price drop. They're not considered to be "held" by anyone because they're constantly on the selling block. This is where demand plays its part. There are lots of coins up for sale, and there's more people selling than buying, so the effective "amount" you're speaking of is actually increasing. You need to look at the amount of circulating coins rather than the total supply. |
|
|
|
|
There's no data that is immune to corruption, so it's possible in theory. What has to be noted, though, is that there are thousands more people out there with a working copy of the blockchain, with some being hosted on state of the art computers. Unless they all get corrupted simultaneously, you have nothing at all to worry about. That's the beauty of decentralization.
|
|
|
|
|
Well if private entities are going to develop their own blockchain-powered systems, then they have no need for complete decentralization. Maybe this is what he was referring to?
It goes against the point of using "public" cryptocurrencies though, so the most successful cryptos will always be decentralized. Nice try though, I guess.
|
|
|
|
Do you know if there are better ways?
Mixing is the most straightforward solution and should be more than enough for the average user's anonymization needs. I don't really know if this is a better way, but criminals apparently trade their coins for fully anonymous coins like Monero, then trade it back for what coins they want. This pretty much erases the trail completely, unlike mixing which tend to leave traces. |
|
|
|
About paper wallets > If you have a paper wallet and one day you need to use it, that day youll have to expose the private key online  when making a transaction ? Yes, unfortunately. If you want to be able to have an offline wallet that will never expose your private key online, you could create a watching-only wallet (online) and the actual wallet on an air-gapped computer. You create a transaction using your watching-only wallet, sign it with your air-gapped wallet, then broadcast it with your watching-only wallet. Electrum has a tutorial here. Electrum only works with Bitcoin, unfortunately, but I'm pretty sure there are modified versions specifically made for some alts. I can't vouch for their safety and security though. Alternatively, hardware wallets make sure your private keys never leave the device, so that's the most straightforward solution available. |
|
|
|
I'm looking on coinmarketcap graph and its not look positive like few months ago when all the crpyo were on continius growth
what needs to be change to make Bitcoin and crypto currencies to go to the roof again ?
is it likely or unlikely to happen?
how much you predict Bitcoin and Ethereum till the end of 2018 ?
Continuous growth? That's not the term I would use. That was explosive growth. Remember that Bitcoin started 2017 at $1,000, and by September, people were unsure if it can hit $10,000 by year end. We're quite comfortably above that. I mean, I guess I could understand if you're new to the picture, and you're seeing that growth is stalling, but really. Bitcoin is at an excellent place. I don't foresee any developments that could make Bitcoin's price explode again, so I wouldn't be surprised if Bitcoin ended the year at $10,000, or even lower. I'd love to be proven wrong though. |
|
|
|
It's nothing really interesting in the first place, especially because of the fact that with Lightning Network, transactions are settled off-chain and instantly already. I can't think of anything that can beat off-chain transactions in any shape or form. On top of that, PayPal could even just use its own global centralized ecosystem to allow user and merchant to settle transactions instantly. At the end of the day, PayPal is just looking to exploit crypto's increasing popularity to boost their fee income. Never will they just do something without any financial motivation behind it, especially so with greedy share holders looking for an increase in operational results. PayPal doesn't give one single damn about crypto transaction times....
I wouldn't be so dismissive. Lightning Network testing is going well, yeah, but it hasn't been tested for widespread use. There's no definitive best solution yet. If something ended up working better than the Lightning Network, it should be embraced; Bitcoin will be left behind in the dust otherwise. The more parties there are working on solutions, the better it would be for the end users. Also, innovation is always good because it can spawn and spur more innovation. Even if this failed, the concept and tech could be used for something better in the future. |
|
|
|
This could indicate one aspect of how central bankers may be losing control over world leaders. Oftentimes bankers have maintained control over dictators by having their money stashed inside a tax haven. You can see it happen with dictators who have been deposed or overthrown. Billions of dollars disappear and no one can find where the money went. Example of this: I think more than $10 billion "disappeared" when Ferdinand Marcos fled the Philiippines.
This is actually a very interesting view. People get so caught up with privacy and painting people in power as the bad guys, that they forget that the powerful and influential can use crypto equally well -- or better, even, because they actually have money to move and shelter. I don't necessarily agree that bankers are worried about losing control over dictators specifically; it's an obscure case and there are few of them in the modern world. This could be the case for pretty much every corrupt businessman or politician though, in addition to dictators, in which case, they should be worried. Turns out Bitcoin has more implications than I originally thought. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
