It's not going to be comparable because Bitcoin works differently. I mean I can see how people might draw a parallel, but our current economy is inherently debt driven and relies on being able to control the supply of money. Bitcoin being finite, deflationary, and decentralized, means that it would come with a different set of rules. The miners might be even more powerful than central banks in this scenario because they essentially control the release of new money to the economy. Heck, there might not even be a central bank because what would they even do?

I don't know if you're trying to steer into this or anything, but I'd say it anyway: Bitcoin wouldn't have helped prevent a financial crisis from happening then, and it can't prevent another one from happening now. It's just currency at the end of the day -- not some magical panacea. I get that it's meant to address a lot of problems with traditional finance, but it's not meant to solve everything.

I'm fairly sure they're not straightforward to hack. If it were, we'd have seen a mass wave of this. I don't actually know how Bitcoin ATMs work in-depth, but if I were to operate one, I would make sure that it doesn't house any sensitive steal-able data like private keys. It would simply be an interface, and whatever signing is done should be done off-site.


I don't think one incidence of theft makes it inherently risky. Regular ATMs basically have the same risk. Either way, users don't actually risk anything in this scenario because it's not their money. Operators risk it because, well, it's a way to make money.

I've found that Google is the best tool for scam detection. You should be able to find at least some discussion on any legitimate project or service. You also get to read about people's unique experiences, which may also help you decide if you want to dip your toes in. Scams will have little to no discussion, and might even have people directly calling it out. You know how people do extensive research on some new phone or car before buying them? That's exactly the kind of thing investors need to do on their potential investments.

Websites that rate others' trustworthiness often use rigid metrics that can be gamed or manipulated. They could be useful for finding certain information, but should never be the be all and end all for deciding trustworthiness.

I think it's more appropriate to say exchanged in this case. Your fiat does not turn into Bitcoin, it goes into another person's bank account (the entity you bought your coins from), as I have previously said. Banks don't necessarily get less money to lend at the end of the day because the cash flow doesn't stop until the fiat you spent rests somewhere, and the likely place for that is some other bank.

Either way, I think the global debt problem is too complex to be addressed by simply stifling cash flow.

I wouldn't even call it news at this point. I mean, the narrative that whales make prices drop to make the weak hands sell only to buy back in again has been widespread for as long as I can remember. The manipulation part doesn't even need to be true; these guys have been amassing coins for a long time and those coins have to come from somewhere.

I guess it is pretty interesting to actually watch it unfold though. We could also take this opportunity to maybe act like baby dolphins lol.

Oh, thanks for that. Even if this wasn't meant to be a spam attack, it looks like it's not deliberate.


I guess it's possible, but I doubt it. I feel like Venezuelan interest in Bitcoin is overblown in general. They did detain journalists very recently (more recent than the filling up mempool) but I don't think even that's enough to trigger a spike.

What would the BSV camp have to gain from attacking Bitcoin though? I was under the impression that they're mainly competing with Bitcoin Cash. I know that big blocks make Bitcoin Cash more resistant to spam attacks, but even that shouldn't be a reason for them to turn their crosshairs to Bitcoin. Coincidence, maybe, or am I missing something?

Either way though, no one else seem to be talking about this. Weird.

Well he can claim coins equivalent of his Bitcoin holdings for every single hard fork, so they do affect his net worth. But yeah I could see how some people might find this interesting, but it's a pointless exercise. Whatever the case is, I simply hope Satoshi was/is able to enjoy the fruits of his hard work.

There should actually be very little inflation, if at all, because of Bitcoin's deflationary nature. Governments wouldn't be able to print more money (which is the primary cause of inflation), and that could come with its own sets of problems.

It would be impossible to tell all in all, because an economy which runs on a deflationary currency would have to be run in a completely different way. Not being able to print additional money is one thing, but imagine an economy full of HODLers who don't want to spend because supply is always short and value always grows. Everything has to be worked on from the ground up to make sure things don't descend into chaos.

For what it's worth, I've been seeing a lot more knowledgeable people recommend running a combination of Windows Defender and Malwarebytes. It's not bulletproof by any means, but that setup along with common sense should be able to protect most users from most threats and they get to avoid shady antiviruses.

It would be good practice to install as few programs as possible nowadays, as you can't really trust any company, even  antiviruses.

While that's true, it's more precise to say that China is huge, and there are places with dirt cheap electricity and ideal mining weather conditions that miners can take advantage of. They're starting to distribute their operations a bit better geographically, but I imagine the current market won't allow any rapid movements.

Manipulation can't be ruled out for Chinese miners for sure, but the same could be said for any group that has sizable influence. It might be best for the community in general if we all stop pointing fingers.

Well that's what happens when you treat every sizable price increase as a bull run lol.


I assume you're talking about market cap. It's just another day in the office for Bitcoin -- it has happened before and it will happen again. There always seem to be some people who blame it on market manipulation too lol.

Lol well to be fair, if people found some random feature on their shiny new phone, it's likely they'd want to try it out. I don't think it's projected to be a smash hit for adoption or anything, but putting crypto within reach of a new set of people can't be a bad thing. Samsung is also quite reputable as a brand, and that may help convince some skeptics to give it a chance.

I don't think we're going to be feeling any immediate effect from this, but it's pretty huge and could even make other vendors follow suit. Let's hope it works well and catches on. If implemented well enough, it will also make Bitcoin more portable, and therefore better suited for point of sale transactions.

Lol the author didn't even discuss his headline, which he apparently took from a 2011 piece. For anyone who's curious, here it is:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903480904576512250915629460

Spoiler alert: it doesn't mention Bitcoin or crypto anywhere.

Well if we're talking Prius for 1000 BTC levels, it won't be difficult for alts at all. Priuses are worth like $23,500, which means some random coin only needs to reach $23.50 apiece to be able to buy one for 1000 units. ETH is worth like 6x that level, and it's only been 4 years for it. I know direct comparisons of crypto unit prices is a gross simplification, but I'm just saying that crypto as a whole has gone pretty far.

But yeah, looking at that it's pretty hard to fault HODLers for trying to make money off crypto lol. Dude in the video was even asked if he regretted his purchase, when he only used Bitcoin the way it was meant to be used.

Lol well if you think about it, two pizzas from 2010 could have been 10 Priuses just 3 years later. It's crazy how fast Bitcoin is appreciating.

I wonder how safe it is to come out with your identity and say that all your money is in Bitcoin though, considering all these past incidents of using violence to steal them. It's great that he's doing well, but he better be careful. I also hope people don't get any ideas taking out loans to buy Bitcoin because that's a really great way of either getting a new car or losing your house.

While this is true, Linux is also more inherently resistant to attacks than Windows thanks to its architecture. Attacking Linux systems mostly entails exploiting vulnerabilities, whereas an attacker only needs to find a way to run a script or two in Windows. Neither is completely secure for sure, but if your activities include visiting shady sites and/or downloading a bunch of media, you're much better of running Linux than Windows.

That being said, if you're using your computer to handle crypto, you shouldn't be doing anything risky with it no matter which OS you use. You may think that you know how to take care of yourself, but that's exactly what countless other victims before you had assumed.

Woah, I didn't know this. Kudos to theymos for potentially saving us from a shitton of drama lol. It's crazy how one person's identity can create this much fuss.

True, but I think what they're trying to say is that Bitcoin is far more vulnerable to it, considering the decentralized nature and absence of any regulatory body. I mean, I know that the penalties on manipulation and such are mostly a farce anyway, but they do have to put on a show for investors. That's going to be harder to do with Bitcoin.

Even if satoshi's forum account suddenly woke up, I'm sure it's going to be met with scathing suspicion. Forum accounts have been hacked plenty of times before, so that scenario can't be ruled out especially with stakes as massive as in this case.

Ultimately, even if the real Satoshi did pop up somewhere, people will be able to find reasons to doubt his identity. That's just how things are nowadays lol.