Bitcoin Forum
March 28, 2024, 05:41:24 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 [135] 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 »
2681  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Mt.Gox case on: November 21, 2017, 02:56:37 AM
It doesn't look like it's final yet, but according to Japanese bankruptcy laws, the losses will be computed according to the value of Bitcoins at the time the proceedings began. It also looks like Karpeles actually stands to gain money in this mess. Check out this article for more info:

https://cryptovest.com/news/mt-gox-head-mark-karpeles-may-gain-almost-1-billion-despite-bankruptcy/

I would also like to note that there are other charges against Mark Karpeles unrelated to the Bitcoins he lost so he's likely not going to get away scot-free.
2682  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How can one "protect" his/her crypto position against a sudden meltdown ? on: November 21, 2017, 02:40:31 AM
There is no way to do this at the moment. You have to keep in mind that cryptocurrency as a whole is still in its infancy. Bitcoin isn't even a decade old. There have been no precedents of how the actual market acts thus far, so I would imagine it would be insanely risky to try to insure it.

You could try to "diversify" to soften the blow, but cryptocurrencies seem to be bundled up for the most part. A Bitcoin crash would almost certainly also result into altcoins crashing, as they're pretty much one and the same to some people's eyes. If you feel like it's too risky for you, then cash out a portion just so you don't get left with nothing should disaster strike.
2683  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Crazy Bitcoin Conspiracy??? CIA? on: November 21, 2017, 02:26:54 AM
Conspiracy theories are only fun if you have substantial evidence. This theory doesn't. What you claim as evidence is completely and utterly circumstantial, and assuming Gavin Anderson to be Satoshi based from just that is a ridiculous stretch.

Neither China nor Russia has imposed a complete ban of Bitcoin. Both of them seem to be on the fence. Both countries are also known to be repressive, with their citizens being unable to enjoy certain liberties other countries give. The US is no such country so it would make no sense for it to take the same steps.

Lastly, I don't see any reason for any three-letter agency to create Bitcoin, or at least not the way it is. Why would they bother creating something they can't control? These are the type of guys who spy on their citizens and want a backdoor on every cellular phone. Creating Bitcoin would be against their modus operandi.
2684  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin turns out to be the creation of a three letter agency - what then? on: November 21, 2017, 02:15:34 AM
So one day the CIA, NSA, DEA, ATF, FBI, DIA, NRO, DOD, DHS and whoever else I've forgotten rather cheekily admit that they're behind the creation of Bitcoin.

Do you freak out? Run for the hills? Take it as the ultimate endorsement of legitimacy? Milk The Man of as much as possible and then go off to finance a competing version? Shrug and trust that things have moved on and they have no effective control?

The latter is of course true, although they'd still have that mountain of early coins to wield.



They don't. Unless of course, they control more than 50% of the network, which I find unlikely. This is also why I don't believe the conspiracy theories that Satoshi is actually a three-letter agency. If they were to create something like this, why wouldn't they try to retain some control? It doesn't look like there are any backdoors either. Did they create it out of the generosity of their hearts, considering the fact that they're not exactly freedom fighters?

But uh, if we're speaking hypothetically, I would observe a bit and go from there. Finding out whether they can take over would be the highest priority. If it turns out they don't, watch how the market reacts, then dump or HODL.
2685  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Warren Buffet: The Idea that Bitcoin has Value “Is Just a Joke” on: November 21, 2017, 02:09:33 AM
That's sad. I respect Warren Buffet, and will continue to do so. I respect his views.

That doesn't mean I find his opinion a little misguided though. True, checks and cryptocurrencies are both ways to transmit money, but the biggest difference is you have to bring your check physically to a bank. You can do all your Bitcoin transactions at home, on the other hand. One other fundamental difference is that Bitcoin is decentralized. You yourself are sending your Bitcoins, not having banks send your money for you. It's a trustless process with your full control subject to much less, if any at all, limitations.

But eh, at least he's not disparaging on Bitcoin openly without provocation right?
2686  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Is Bitcoin a sham? on: November 20, 2017, 03:30:54 PM
Hello

I keep getting e-mails from Bitcoin asking me to invest, but yet I keep reading reviews saying it is one big con. Huh Undecided


Leanne

Emails from who? What reviews? You should know that you're asking the opinion of people who frequent a forum dedicated for Bitcoin. You will only ever get positive responses here, except from the few who are only here to troll and/or spread FUD.

That being said, I would advise you to do your own research. You should never invest into anything you know nothing about, and I assume that is true for you. Check out the fundamentals, and you would be able to paint your own picture as to whether Bitcoin is a con or not. (Protip: it's not) Either way, you should keep in mind that no investment is completely safe, and that by investing, you're taking on risks.

Also: watch out for the emails you have been getting. If you ever decide to buy, it would be far safer to visit an official exchange. The email could be a phishing attempt.
2687  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What happens in the future when most Bitcoins are lost in limbo? on: November 20, 2017, 09:28:41 AM
What will happen, lets say around 2100, when most of the bitcoins are lost in the limbo?. See, by then (year 2100) almost 20 million bitcoins would have been mined, but also more than half of the bitcoins would be lost in limbo (lost in hardware wallets or web wallets that were owned by people who died and didnt give their passwords, etc etc to someone else in time). Eventually most of the bitcoins will be lost in the limbo with no way of recovering them. What happens then?, will it dissapear or will they have to add more decimals to the few remaining bitcoins?.

At least with Gold, if you die someone can recover/find the Gold (unless you bury it in a very remote place in the eath). But bitcoins can never be recovered if permanently lost.

So, what will happen in the future when 90% or more of the bitcoins are permanently lost in the limbo?. Maybe the remaining bitcoins will become a very valuable "collector's item" or something?

Why would they have to be some collector's item of sort? Bitcoin can be infinitely divisible. You can technically never run out of coins to distribute. Of course, the smaller number of coins in circulation, the higher each coin's value. Should your thought exercise scenario happen in reality, each Satoshi could easily be worth a few thousand dollars. This is why it doesn't matter if Bitcoins are permanently lost. Satoshi has already addressed this matter in the past. Bitcoin is deflationary by nature, and losing coins just further amplifies that effect.
2688  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Mark Karpeles Gox ICO to revive the exchange on: November 20, 2017, 07:46:37 AM
Why would Mark Karpeles need $245 million? Five days ago this was published: Mt. Gox Head Mark Karpeles May Gain Almost $1 Billion Despite Bankruptcy.

I don't know how they got away with this. Apparently, instead of paying back with whatever was available in the bankrupt company, he waited a few years until the remaining Bitcoins were worth much more than he owed people.
Basically, he got a loan in Bitcoins that he can pay back in dollars at the price it had in 2014!

What the hell? That's ridiculous. It doesn't seem he performed some legal way to slime out of it either. Japanese bankruptcy laws simply state that their liabilities will be dictated by the price the time the proceedings were initiated. I would be pretty pissed if someone else was able to to reap the growth of my investments after defrauding me. Is this why Karpeles is trying to make some noise again?

If he comes out of this mess unscathed, it would be even more unwise to trust him. You never know what kind of stuff he'll pull if he gets away with his bullshit.
2689  Economy / Economics / Re: Why people says gold is better? on: November 20, 2017, 06:15:44 AM
Because store acceptance isn't the only factor that's put into consideration. If we're talking about being better as a currency, then Bitcoin is better, because gold can't really be considered as such. Bitcoin, on the other hand, is a currency that functions very much like a digital version of gold.

Gold can be considered better if taken a look at for its stability. Gold has been around since pretty much the first civilizations, and it has always been valuable. It also has inherent value as it can be used for accessories, jewelry, and even electronics.

My personal opinion is that they shouldn't be compared, but people always find ways to say something is better over the other.
2690  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Roger Ver Declares Bitcoin Cash to Be True Bitcoin on: November 20, 2017, 06:03:48 AM
Lmao and why would people take Roger Ver seriously at this point? He won't even put his money where his mouth is; he did move his Bitcoins to an exchange, but it doesn't look like he actually sold them. If he really did invest in Bitcoin Cash anew, he didn't touch his Bitcoins in doing so. That means not even he believes what he's saying. What a clown.

It seems to me that Roger Ver might be a scammer trying to pump bitcoin cash for his personal mean.
His advices and speculations on bitcoin cash shouldn't be taken serious.
Also i don't see any speciality in holding bitcoin cash, because if this currency is something, then bitcoin gold looks virtual gold to me by its name "gold" and this may work as the gold virtually.

They already pumped it. Lots of people got caught up in the hype and lost money. I wouldn't be surprised if Roger Ver already dumped all his BCH along the previous crash. The guy is a scam artist. People who trust him need to reevaluate their lives.
2691  Economy / Economics / Re: Uruguay to Launch Digital Currency, “Not Bitcoin” it Stresses on: November 20, 2017, 03:24:19 AM
It's great how they stressed that it's not Bitcoin. Free publicity, and people know they're different from each other.

While it's in direct competition with Bitcoin for things like online transactions, I think state-backed digital currencies will be good for Bitcoin in the long run. These digital currencies will force governments to upgrade their infrastructure -- better connectivity for merchants and clients alike. That could easily open the door for Bitcoin use, as it pretty much runs on the same infrastructure. I just hope this doesn't mean they'll ban Bitcoin use on the grounds of redundancy.
2692  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: REASON BEHIND SETBACKS IN THE ACCEPTANCE OF BITCOINS IN SOME COUNTRIES on: November 20, 2017, 03:05:53 AM
The presence and failure of Ponzi schemes in most countries like Nigeria, Ghana, South Africa and some Asian countries too, has contributed a great deal in discouraging the government of these countries from accepting the usefulness of bitcoin. this because most of the ponzi schemes used bitcoins as means of pledging and receiving helps. but irony of the whole thing is the same government seems not to have realized that Physical cash was also used for local ponzi donations and why have they not placed a ban on the physical cash just like bitcoin.....

Please what's bitcoin community doing to correct this wrong impression so that bitcoin can be globally accepted by all? 

Do you have a source for the bolded sentence? I've never heard of a ponzi scheme that ran on Bitcoins -- rather, critics are saying that Bitcoin is a large ponzi scheme in and by itself. These people are misguided, of course, and likely has no idea what a true ponzi scheme is.

Bitcoin is an easy target for regulators because few people have actual working knowledge of them. They only have to say it's a scam, and people who have never even heard of it will believe them. Like cash, Bitcoin is only as law abiding as its user, but for some reason, people would rather turn a blind eye on that fact. The only way we can really help its reputation is to be law abiding citizens. Let people know that Bitcoin isn't always used in crime, and can actually be used to solve real world problems.
2693  Other / Meta / Re: Are you parrots or bots? on: November 20, 2017, 02:50:40 AM
Most people seem to think that OP is crusading against shitposting and the like, and I can't really blame them. It's true that there are a lot of parrots and maybe a few bots here and there on this forum. It's not for some grand crusade for the forum though. He calls them out, but not for spam. He's saying nearly everyone who supports Bitcoin is incapable of critical thought because he seems to believe that Bitcoin is a bubble[1] and that there is infinite Bitcoin supply because you can simply fork it that would increase its supply.[2]

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2423134.0
[2] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2426638.0

OP, you really just need to accept the fact that most people in this forum believe, and have everything to gain if Bitcoin succeeds.
2694  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Should we be worried with Bitfinex? on: November 20, 2017, 02:37:36 AM
I would be quite worried if I had any amount of money in Bitfinex. Nothing can be proven at this point, but circumstantial evidence points to the fact that they are pumping Tethers.

Check out this article: http://www.trustnodes.com/2017/11/17/tether-bitfinex-new-mt-gox

The entire situation is completely and utterly shady and it's not going to be good for Bitcoin as a whole if Bitfinex turns out to be another Mt. Gox. They better come out with an official statement soon clarifying the allegations point by point or they're going to lose customers and inevitably fail, whether the allegations are true or not.
2695  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Battle between bitcoin and bitcoin cash on: November 20, 2017, 02:24:49 AM
This is over. It was only really a battle for a few hours, and only because Bitcoin Cash got pumped artificially. The BCH actors were able to get Bitcoin to drop to sub $6000 because of all the FUD and the mempool spam, but that's really as close as they were able to get. BCH is still higher than when the pump began, but everything is back to normal for the most part.

Whales did make money. I'm sure Roger Ver and friends were able to make quite a lot from dumping their Bitcoin Cash after orchestrating the pump. This serves as a lesson never to trust them again.
2696  Economy / Economics / Re: Bitcoin ATM on: November 19, 2017, 01:09:13 PM
What's with the obsession over Bitcoin ATMs? I don't think they're very useful. In fact, I think they're most useful for its visibility because it also acts as an advertisement, rather than its primary purpose of dispensing Bitcoin or fiat. I guess it's cool when you first encounter one, but you're only ever going to use it once. Most charge really high fees, and it's infinitely more convenient to buy or sell within the safety of your home using online exchanges. It will only really see use in emergencies, when you have Bitcoin but no fiat or something.
2697  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Is a fork happening or is Google news messing with me :( on: November 19, 2017, 12:56:14 PM
Lol what. What's showing up on your Google news? I tried googling it and this is the first result on the "Top Stories" section:

https://www.coindesk.com/no-fork-no-fire-segwit2x-nodes-stall-running-abandoned-bitcoin-code/

It's dated today and iIt says:

Quote
The Segwit2x bitcoin fork may have been formally called off, but as many as 150 nodes still running its code have stopped accepting transaction blocks.

But yeah, it's all so confusing. Coinbase apparently sent out an email that the fork will happen, but it seemed like it didn't. It honestly just looks dead at this point and it's a wonder how it's still being brought up like it is. It should just stay dead, really.
2698  Economy / Speculation / Re: What will it take for bitcoin to hit $50,000? And when will it happen? on: November 19, 2017, 12:44:51 PM
Bitcoin's price is only really driven by demand, so what it would take for Bitcoin value to increase by 700% is increased adoption. We're slowly getting there, with even CME to start trading Bitcoin futures. Bitcoin is becoming more and more legitimate, and that is key for the mainstream to slowly get into the market.

What's scary is that we're not ready for it. All it takes is some spam to immobilize the network, as BCH supporters rather lovingly demonstrated. More adoption means more transactions, and the current Bitcoin can't really handle that right now. Changes need to be implemented sooner rather than later.
2699  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin does not have limited supply on: November 19, 2017, 12:30:49 PM
The argument is again and again that the value of Bitcoin will increase because supply is limited to 21 million. But this is quite simply wrong. Every time Bitcoin is forked that is in real terms an expansion of the Bitcoin currency beyond 21 million. To some degree the same is true of alternative crypto currencies which will flood the market. There is already more than 1000 cryptocurrencues ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cryptocurrencies )

Th forking (or absence of it) does not effect Bitcoin's supply. At best, you can consider it as a "gift" to all bitcoin holders, which will increase the overall worth. It in no way impacts the overall supply of 21 Mn, which is set in stone.

That is precisely my point. I create "Bitcoin2" by forking. Then I create "Bitcoin3" and so on and so on. In reality what I am doing is issuing more Bitcoin. That I call it a different name does not change the reality.

You have a flawed understanding of forks. None of the recent forks have been accepted as Bitcoin2, and none of them ever will be. They're considered as altcoins which are basically using Bitcoin's branding to their advantage. Coins are only as valuable as people deem them to be, and no one would support a coin that just aims to increase supply. Why increase the supply if Bitcoin is infinitely divisible anyway? There will only be one Bitcoin. Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Gold are altcoins, much like Litecoin or Ethereum.
2700  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: So is bitcoin really limited supply or not? on: November 19, 2017, 09:14:59 AM
A year ago there was 15 million bitcoins worth $600 dollars each.

Now there are 16 million worth $6000

and there's also 16 million BCH worth $1200


So looking at BCH the total value is $20 billion. Where the hell did that come from?

Did BTC reduce by $20 billion? As one goes up is the other coming down?

As BCH approaches the value of BTC then it sure as hell looks like we've doubled the coins in circulation.

So my point is this, have we in effect found away around the cap of bitcoins. Every time we see the price go up just split the chain and have more coins.


Bitcoin is independent from Bitcoin Cash and vice versa. They only really seem related because BCH carries Bitcoin's name, and some of its supporters claim that it's the true Bitcoin according to Satoshi's whitepaper. It originated from Bitcoin, yes, but that's as far as the similarities go.

BCH will never approach BTC's value. They pumped pretty hard a few days ago with lots of social media FUD and mempool sabotage, and it only ever reached around 50%, then crashed rapidly afterwards.

The forked coins will only have value if there are people who are willing to pay for them. BCH has a somewhat sizable support population, so it was able to retain some value. No one will pay for indiscriminately forked coins, so no. Splitting the chain continuously can't go around the hard cap.
Pages: « 1 ... 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 [135] 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!