Boy, there has been so much talk and work done to actually improve bitcoin's infrastructure that we could go on talking for ages. The man-hours of development done to improve bitcoin probably are more than the working hours you and I will both put out in our lifetimes. Bitcoiners DO take the theoretical attacks that could have been performed on bitcoin seriously. Maybe too seriously. To an extent that top developers put out extra effort to improve even marginal metrics of performance for bitcoin. At levels that further improvement requires expertise we'd have a hard time imagining.

Take bitcoin's network's infrastructure as an example. Sybil attacks, (which could aid in making the theoretical selfish mining attack more feasible), have become more likely because bitcoin devs managed to improve peering and propagation in the network, taking propagation down from dozens of seconds to a handful.

And this isn't a bitcoiner-altcoiner issue...  Advances in cryptocurerncy technology continue to be beneficial for the entire space. That's why we have to study even theoretical attacks carefully instead of being dismissive.

I think the messenger shouldn't be killed. IN this case since the evidence is laid out publicly for everyone's eyes, an accusation in my eyes is just as valid coming from an anonymous source, as by a party harmed.

Yes, the manager in question has maintained a good record... But in my very humble opinion any claims made against them should still be taken seriously regardless of past records or the accuser's status.

In my view, this answer from he other thread is most reasonable.


If the manager was claiming to hold escrow, it should be disclosed that funds aren't sufficient for an ongoing term. The liability for paying lies with the advertised party if they didn't also inform the manager. In this case I would take the past record of the manager into account also as it is unlikely that there was anything planned with malintent. But caution should be exercised always when managing and escrowing to avoid such situations. Attacking the messenger doesn't help in my view.

To be frank, I don't really like this non-original article. Seems to have been made specifically to promote the interests of the author other that actually be helpful towards newbies. Faucets and especially casino faucets are the worst way anyone could attempt to earn bitcoin with. It's around the the lowest level of productivity one could reach, even if measured by means of monetary gain. The costs of using a computer are maybe even higher than faucet rewards. Not to speak of the cost of opportunity.

The fact that nobody has done this doesn't mean that it can't be done. Right now there are couldwith such a weak PoW network that it would cost a few bucks to attack them with a 51% attack. See:https://www.crypto51.app/

Is anybody attacking them? Maybe. You and I don't care to even look into it most probably, but that doesn't mean it's not happening.
Is it feasible to attack them? Most certainly yes and it has been done in the past. Goldcoin is a good example.

Theoretical attacks deserve as much attention, the fact that they remain in theory doesn't mean they aren't feasibe and that they don't pose as weaknesses of consensus algorithms.

There's no good indication that prices could rise that much. Really the resistance would be too much for prices to go above $12k. 90k USD is just too much out of reach at the moment and such predictions have been made time and time again, but seem too unrealistic for the time being. There should in my opinion be no connection with the halving and such out of place mindsets. Perhaps a small push could be likely but normally any positive outcome should be priced in already.

Well, resistance is still in place. Although, forecasts are barely right 50% of the time. Bitcoin prices are just too disconnected from real world events, it's a market driven purely by demand. Predictions are just lucky if they are right. Perhaps miners now would want to influence the markets so more of their hardware would remain profitable for mining, but really there isn't much that can be done. Prices will eventually follow the money no matter how much subjugation any party could force on them. At this time indeed the sentiment appears to be more positive but there's no signs of strong support either.

Trading bots tend to disappoint in the long rum. It's like gambling for the most part. They can provide a small prpfit or a huge loss. They don't really have a proven predictive ability. Most just provide the toolset needed for users to develop their own 'config', which is just another way of saying "you pay us so you can get the liability while losing money".

I think that the only aspect of the crypto industry mostly responsible for that, is the ICO market and the boom ethereum created for it. Many newbies came in to invest, and along with them many of the project managers knew nothing about the sense of community cryptocurrency projects used to have. ICOs were seeking funding in any way possible, they focused on marketing more than anything else, and secondly, quick profits. They were fast-paced unlicensed securities, of course they weren't going to listen to the community. Now they've set a precedent after this model, sadly.

Welp, it's official now, my deposit has been locked in the casino for over a week!

Support is slow to respond, withdrawals aren't automatic and verification is requested for bitcoin withdrawals. Even after I showed them my documents, my withdrawal still gets rejected with a request for verification, even though I don't get a response for days over documents I sent.


It's just too frustrating! I've also messaged the OP in bitcointalk but no response.

Visitors isn't something all websites would track and publish with comparable and verifiable data. Mabe you could estimate it, or try and monitor wagers/chat to see how many unique users participated daily. But that wouldn't be representative and can also be faked or not reflect comparable numbers, witt any weight. Because not all websites publish all wagers and even if they do publish wagers, it shouldn't mean that they're all displayed in the same way. Visitors isn't something noteworthy for dice sites I think. It could just be an estimation, but what's the point?

The few times I was thinking about betting on e-sports I'd go to reddit communities of relevant subreddits and maybe joing their Discord if they had one at the time. Generally speaking, not much in terms of gambling discussion is going on on Reddit, but to me, the upvote/downvote system is good for filtering the trash that can make following the important info harder.

Vod, I think you deserve a break.
For what it's worth, this is just my opinion.
I wouldn't consider myself to have much of a high impact on this forum but I've surely been watching Vod throughout my years here.

I remember you keeping a spotless record in busting scams for years. Even from the early days, being notorious for categorically denying newbies no collateral loans, having the patience to explain each and every time.

I find the work on BPIP admirable and I'm really appreciative the efforts you put to give back to the community of this forum.
But recently I had noticed that more and more members were caught in spats with you, with no intention of backing down.

I tend to agree with theymos on not regulating potential scams and allowing maximum free speech. I also find his thought process on forgiveness reasonable, although I had expressed my views that any guidance on preferred use of trust system would likely fall on deaf ears. The reason I tend to agree with being forgiving, is that if every forum member just couldn't let go ever, and instead was taking issues they came across personally, then nobody would have been doing anything. No BPIP, no loyceV stats tracking. No creativity, no fun! Only spats...

And I won't lie. I tend to dislike how much insistence from your side at times had contributed to dragging the continuation of some (in my view avoidable) spats for years. But for one, I think you deserve a break because I can't wait to see what the project after BPIP is going to be. Don't be distracted by the liars, the deceivers and the cheats anymore Vod. Godspeed to your new adventures and may they bring you more enjoyment other than stress.

Ethereum probably has a ton of resistance that iss just hidden. Many traders must be holding their bags that they acquired when prices had reached much lower. Resistance to higher prices will come in the form.of profit taking when the bullish trend appears to.be weakening. ETH in my view could go through a major correction in the following weeks. Especially if it keeps having gains greater than BTC.

Well, sounds like ANYPag should be more like BCash pay. It's just ridiculous that somebody would go as far as to make such counterproductive statements in a payment processor, counter to their own business interests even. It only makes sense when you take a look at the person's background.

Since he seems so j stable and is willing to be so reckless with his business I think any statement coming from him is unreliable. But most importantly, the statements about BTC's payment abilities hold zero value, especially given that the processor had a reportedly faulty implementation.

If you have access to stolen hardware, then sure, it can be one of the ways to maximize profit at the expense of someone else. But retail computer setups will only get you pennies in terms of earnings. Hard Drive letting for crypto projects is still very experimental and doesn't compare well to the readily available solutions. There is very low demand and ample supply. Some suspect that botnets are the major bidders, squashing demand. At least until a more viable network is built, such actovoty wouldn't be justified economically from rational parties with their own hardware, electricity and repair bills.

Welp, I wouldn't put too much weight into what anyone has to say to be honest. Tone Vays is a respectable guy to me from what I've experienced in terms of his work and how he strives to introduce newcomers in the space to bitcoin without any BS... But to attempt and predict the prices of a market simply ruled by demand and nothing else, is just nuts. Crypto prices have low to zero correlation with real world events and there's no notable seasonality with halving even. Most would argue that it can be a force to lead prices up, and this sentiment could be having an impact on the market, but for a bearish prediction also? I just find it too unlikely that any prediction would be accurate, especially this one.

Let Tone blow up on shorting then. But really, it might be in a trader's interest to pretend they're putting out a prediction while they're trading the opposite. It's one of the oldest tricks in the book.

I think that you don't really need to carry all that risk if you're a working class person. BTC is, put simply, too much risk, and any crypto investment carries even mroe risk. At least BTC is disconnected to an extent from stupid statements or actions from developers. Every other crypto isn't.

I would argue that if somebody that is working class would like to invest, they should only do with a portion of their savings. Let's say that 10% if your income goes to investment so you can be safe from risks as a working class person. Only a sub-portion of that should be high risk. To that point, crypto won't be that profitabe. If you really want to manage a portfolio, stick with stocks and maybe keep putting a portion into crypto regularly, for the fun of it.

It's just sane financial advice to say that with the risk crypto carries, you shouldn't invest in it what you can't afford to lose.

I don't see it going down in the future, at least not considerably. But to be perfectly honest, I also don't see it as a metric that holds any weight.
A rush to buy an altcoin can inflate the prices and create an artificial market capitalization that really doesn't hold any weight. Bitcoin's value lies in its long term reliability and proven use case. It continues to have the most robust network and will likely continue to be in thenumber one spot for purposes of real use cases other than just speculation. There's more value to that other than any market capitalization statistic.

Some new accounts appear to be implicated to posting plagiarized ang generally nonsensical walls of text in what looks like an obscure attempt to promote an altcoin.
Here's a few I could find:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2748736
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2658573
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2746795

God knows how many rules they've broken. Posting plagiarized content is just one of the offenses. Also bumping their own threads, posting irrelevant responses to other topics to promote their own, off-topic threads... More than one promotional threads, bumps more than once every 24h... You get the idea.

Welp, hopefully Yang's platform on crypto will be carried along to whoever candidate he endorses, although I find that unlikely.
Sadly, the Democratic party didn't like him, so even having Yang as a running mate sounds like a no - no for any candidate. He already said he'd endorsse any democratic nominee, just after saying he'd only do so if they accepted UBI. I think Yang's crypto friendlyness is of much lower priority than his push for UBI, which he already appears to have backed out of to an extent.

However, even some more favorable regulation was passed on, it's my view that we shouldn't expect much. Currently federal legislators don't appear to know much about crypto. Too much authority resides with states and agencies, and each tries to claim more. I see it only as wishful thinking to believe that favorable federal legislation would be passed in the following presidential term. The landscape in the U.S. is too chaotic for such. It would take something making international news for such thing to happen. Usually when BTC is on the news it's not for setting a good precedent (see Silk Road for example).

Currently the U.S. is missing out on some ICO and Blockchain investment because companies interested about it would rather issue their unlicensed securities in an offshore other than deal with the chaotic regulatory landscape, but IMO, BTC sits in a more comfortable spot at the moment. Strictly speaking about BTC users ofc, more regulation could complicate some things more even if it tried to clarify things and be favorable to adjacent issues like tokens and VASPs. Sure it would provide more certainty but a user isn't necessarily very much concerned about that.