Avem un concurs nou! [FREE RAFFLE - 4 Lots] Bitcoin Stickers Part. 2https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5434502.0Se pot castiga urmatoarele: abtibilduri pe tema Bitcoin, unul din cele 4 seturi (fiecare cuprinde 10 bucati). Organizator: cyganPoate participa oricine cu exceptia celor cu rang Newbie. Modalitate de inscriere: se alege un numar de la 00 la 99 (care nu a fost deja rezervat). O persoana poate castiga un singur set. Transportul: gratuit. Concursul este identic cu cel anterior realizat de OP. |
|
|
|
|
A while ago I took the decision to update this topic of mine with my notable activities and achievements of the past two years, since I wrote this thread. However, free time was never my allied during past years, as it took me months until I finally managed to perform this update. I wanted to have this update in October 2022, two years after I wrote the topic but I could only finish the revamp now, after two years and three months.
The following changes can be found in OP:
- I changed topic's title
- I changed the screenshot of merit fans with an actual one
- I updated the list of historic and educational threads with the ones I wrote meanwhile
- I mentioned my most remarkable activities from past two years
- I added total logged in time.
|
|
|
|
Este foarte frumos ce ai scris aici. Sunt cateva mici amanunte pe care nu le consider corecte, dar, cum deja am zis de cel putin una pe partea internationala, o sa fiu mai ingaduitor aici si o sa le trec la capitolul "licenta poetica"  Merci frumos, NeuroticFish! Intr-adevar, scrierile mele (in general foarte entuziaste fata de Bitcoin) contin aspecte care nu corespund 100% realitatii -- licenta poetica, cum spui tu; dar nici nu trebuie sa fie. Pentru mine, cel putin, cel mai important este mesajul transmis. In general imi documentez topicurile, pentru a fi sigur ca au substanta, dar nu duc asta la extrem, in sensul de a nu ajunge sa dureze partea de cercetare mai mult decat toate celelalte etape la un loc (elaborarea ideii, redactarea, cautarea eventuala de link-uri prin topicuri vechi ale forumului, formatarea, corectarea, corectarea la a doua mana).  Desigur, asta e valabil pentru o lucrare mica, precum un eseu pe forum; altfel, sunt ferm convins ca, pentru o opera ampla, o lucrare stiintifica etc., cercetarea este partea cea mai lunga, putand dura si ani de zile. De asemenea, multumesc pentru intelegere. Bitcoin are (inca) doua avantaje pe care fie nu le-ai expus, fie mi-au scapat Intr-adevar, nu am atins niciodata acest subiecte. Ar fi un topic foarte interesant, zic eu. Este Bitcoin varful de lance a unei revolutii? Clar.
Revolutia s-a incheiat? Nici pe departe.
Vom prinde sfarsitul acestei revolutii? Greu de spus! Dar ma bucur ca traiesc in acesta perioada. Frumos spus! Nota 20 din partea mea! |
|
|
|
I noticed recently three inconsistencies on bpip.org. I'm not sure if these were ever discussed, but I don't remember seeing these issues ever raised before. If they were mentioned earlier I apologize. 1. For some reason, while looking at my profile, I see a Sent/Received merits ratio of 1.08. This is impossible, for two reasons: (1) I am not a merit source and I did not receive any airdropped merit, therefore I can't send more than 50% of the merits I received, thus my max ratio should be 0.5; (2) the merits shown are correct -- 1604 sent and 3335 received -- and, if we divide 1604 by 3335 we obtain the score of 0.48. However, the "S/R Ratio" shows 1.08.  2. If I click on "Refresh Profile" a small window pops for a short time, showing "Most merited posts in the last 24 hours". However, I don't think that the posts shown there are also correct. For example, let's look at the fifth post written -- the one made by Hellena Yu, which appears to have received 5 merits. It's hard to believe that this is the fifth most merited posts within last 24 hours.  3. Still at "Most merited posts in the last 24 hours" window, I also observed that the merits shown there are incorrect. For example, Hellena Yu's post appears as having received 5 merits while, in fact, the post has 13 merits. Ddmr's post appears as having 10 merits while, in fact, the post has 29 merits and so on. I hope this helps. |
|
|
|
thank you for the opportunity given to add to my insight, have shared knowledge about the history of bitcoin and others in the form of a quiz. Congratulations to you as well for the score you obtained! Let me help you with posting the full image of your score, since your rank does not allow you.  By the way, that's a very curious way of taking a picture of your phone's display. So instead of taking a screenshot of the screen, you preferred to take a picture of your phone, using another phone? 
17 out of 21 questions are correct This is really amazing score for someone which joined the forum on January 3rd and which has only 3 posts. How did you manage to get that score? Did you use to browse the forum without having a profile... or how else did you manage to learn so many things about Bitcointalk's history? Unless you cheated (and I hope you did not), if you really have all this knowledge, I am have to congratulate you! At same time, let me help you as well with posting the full image, since your rank does not allow you.  |
|
|
|
Someone should dig deeper into the most notable classic threads from the Bitcoin community. I might do that in my spare time if no one else does. The shift in the space is noticeable by looking at those threads. If you'd get that done, it would be amazing! Make a compilation of libertarian threads, similar to other compilation topics about Satoshi -- like this one: I gathered every Satoshi Nakamoto thread -- but yours would contain libertarian topics. I was also thinking about something similar but, sadly, time will never allow me to perform so many in-depth searches through the forum and look for all these topics and group them into a big one. But if you'll manage to do it I am sure that many will appreciate your work. I, for one, will certainly appreciate your efforts! Let me know, please, if you'll do it. is a libertarian move cooking up in the background? Who knows...?! What a time to be alive that would be! Either way, we are a part of history and I can't wait to see what unfolds. This post of yours reminded me once more of the words written by that Anonymous user, more than a decade ago: After reading this, the scale of black market and digital economies and the effect Bitcoin will have on them I am pretty certain we are going to be very wealthy men -- even with a sum as small as 10 Bitcoins. It's just so hard to believe. We are only in the beginning storms with these significant rallies from 10 to 20 dollars. I will not be surprised to see prices from hundreds to thousands in the coming months.
The world just isn't going to be the same and we have been blessed as the pioneers. In the meantime, I will have to find a copy of atlus shrugged and give it a thorough read one day. I encourage you to do it. And, if you want more similar books -- must-read books, I can point you some more titles (including, but not limited to: the only two fiction books which refer to Cypherpunks -- SnowCrash and Cryptonomicon (and, if you like them, you can read the entire Cryptonomicon sequel, which include Quicksilver, The Confusion, The System of the World, Fall; or, Dodge in Hell and Reamde); the books written by Julian Assange ( Cypherpunks: Freedom and the Future of the Internet, Underground, When Google Met WikiLeaks, The Unauthorised Autobiography) or those about him (Nils Melzer's The Trial of Julian Assange: A Story of Persecution, Andrew Fowler's The Most Dangerous Man In The World: The Inside Story On Julian Assange And WikiLeaks); Vernor Vinge's True Names (which also contains Tim May's essay True Nyms and Crypto Anarchy). Needless to say, Orwell's 1984 is another must read And, if you want, I have more for you.
ok he is moving onto economics and catallaxy You'd be surprised, but I may be the only one (or, at least, one of the very few) which ever discussed here about spontaneous order, catallaxy or praxeology. I actually performed a Google search and, excepting a very few posts about praxeology, I didn't find any post about spontaneous order, nor about catallaxy written inside this forum. Of course, I may be wrong. |
|
|
|
Actually, Bitcoin is not the first bloodless revolution. If you look a little back, there was the Indian revolution started by Ghandi more than 100 years ago.
And there's also the South African revolution by Nelson Mandela. All revolutions imply bloodsheds. This is why revolution flags are always red.
And the list may continue. All revolutions had their bloodbaths. Not really, that's why there are velvet revolutions, and since you've mentioned it, Romania was the only one that had a violent revolution at the fall of the Warsaw pact! These posts answer best to your statements: The South African revolution was not without any bloodshed at all. Many black people killed other black people who were seen as government collaborators, informers and black policemen. The executioners would force a car tyre over the head and around the arms of the suspect, drench it in petrol, and set it alight. (Also called, Necklacing)
During the unrest periods, many people were shot and killed and lots of blood were shed during those times. Nelson Mandela were involved in the bombing of many power plants and strategic installations. These revolutions were not bloodless in the grand scheme of things  Heck, Ghandi himself was assassinated. And, if those replies were not convincing yet, maybe this image clear things better: 
Don't know why you hated that guy that much compared to our own commies but you're the only ones that executed somebody then and that had the army firing on its own fellow countrymen. Your answer can be found, in part, in this post of mine (obviously, this is only a small part of the horrors we had to live in Ceausescu era): I lived, in part, what you wrote above. Although I was very young when Ceausescu was taken down I still remember many things which occurred during his regime. It is difficult to explain in words. Just a small example, all food was rationalized. And, depending of the number of the family members, you were allowed to buy only a (small) quantity of milk, flour, corn flour, oil, sugar or meat each month. Now excepting the fact that what you were allowed to was a very small amount, you also had to do extreme efforts for obtaining the aliments. For example, if a grocery store was opening at 7am, you had to go there since 1-2am to make sure you get a good spot in the queue, thus at 7am when the store would open you would have the chance to obtain your milk or oil or what you needed. If you joined the queue at 6am you had no chance to buy anything as until your place would come to enter the store everything was finished already. During the nights people used to make huge queues at each such store, sometimes even more than 100 people forming a queue... Meat was even scarcer than anything. And I am not talking about fish, beef or some delicacy. People mostly had the right to buy chicken and pork meat and the chickens from the stores were always so small that they looked like they starved a month before being brought to the stores. Annually, each citizen was entitled to 60-70 kg of meat and meat derivatives, 8-10 kg of fish and fish derivatives, 210-230 liters of milk or milk derivatives, 260-280 eggs, 16 kg of fats (oil, butter etc.), 170-180 kg of vegetables, 70-90 kg of potatoes, 65-95 kg of fruits, 22-26 kg of sugar. All products were stamped on a paper card or on a sort of register book, for making sure the citizen would not buy more than he was entitled to. The shopping could be made only once per month and only at the grocery shop from the neighborhood. In 1984 the portions were reduced even more: 39 kg of meat, 78 liters of milk, 166 kg of vegetables. The oil and the sugar could be bought also just once per month and only 1 kg of each of them. Those caught with shenanigans regarding food (buying more, buying from illegal sources etc.) could face 6month - 5 years of jail.  Register for buying bread in Ceausescu era Register for buying sugar in Ceausescu era Register for buying cloths (yes, even cloths were rationalized) in Ceausescu era The huge monthly queues at grocery shop in Ceausescu era (PIINE means BREAD and ALIMENTARA means GROCERY SHOP)Satoshi never intended to be a revolution leader, yet his creation -- Bitcoin -- revolutionized the entire world. It took the power from the hands of elites and gave it back to people. And where did this happen? In what country has the elite lost control of the people that use bitcoin? Let's be real! In all countries. Whenever a bitcoiner makes a new anonymous, peer-to-peer transaction with someone else, that's one more transaction which is not controlled by the State. Whenever a bitcoiner attempts to press "Send" from his wallet there is nobody in the entire world who can stop him. As the others said, appreciate the enthusiasm but it is way too early to claim a revolution or the outcome of it, you're at least one decade too early on declaring the success of something that has barely taken root, not even close to sprouting! And when you think that, maybe, same words were said about this guy too... After reading this, the scale of black market and digital economies and the effect Bitcoin will have on them I am pretty certain we are going to be very wealthy men -- even with a sum as small as 10 Bitcoins. It's just so hard to believe. We are only in the beginning storms with these significant rallies from 10 to 20 dollars. I will not be surprised to see prices from hundreds to thousands in the coming months.
The world just isn't going to be the same and we have been blessed as the pioneers.
I admire the passion of OP, bitcoin is truly a revolutionary concept. Just coming to say that I am loving reading your posts. So on point  Thank you. If you want to read more similar posts of mine, you can find them at the bottom of this topic.
Governments and banks are afraid of it, they aren’t afraid of altcoins. Nope bitcoin is the problem because it is disruptive to their system. Indeed. Why else FBI contacted Gavin Andresen and tried to find who Satoshi is, while all other altcoin creators appear everywhere with their full names and no secret agency comes after them?
Interesting view but lets not forget that Bitcoin "revolution" is just getting started. [...] Also lets not forget that because Bitcoin's "revolution" is mainly taking place in the digital world, the bloodshed is also taking place in the virtual world. True. Yet, this does not diminish the fact that Bitcoin managed to run a revolution without implying physical violence, does it? Don't you mean rules for radicals? Big thumb up for recognizing those rules. It's a sign that you are a well educate person and I am congratulating you for that. Nowadays so few people read books, so few keep educating themselves by constantly reading...
I get your point and it is very positive for bitcoin. What I would still say is that bitcoin is more of a very advance evolution rather than a revolution in the real term. A revolution is usually a total reset and the start of something completely different. Does Bitcoin look like anything which happened before?
industrial revolution This is what I was also thinking. OP got a bit carried away Let's not get too much into semantics. I am sure that all understood the message of this thread. Looking for small mistakes is typically human, yet this is not the point -- debunking sentence by sentence. I could also argue and say the even during Industrial Revolution there were victims -- but it would be pointless... The important part is what Satoshi achieved and where Bitcoin led us in the past decade... |
|
|
|
Autor: GazetaBitcoinTopic original: Bitcoin - a bloodless revolution
Toate revoluțiile s-au făcut cu vărsări de sânge. Din această cauză stagurile revoluțiilor au fost roșii.De la rebeliunea lui Spartacus (71 - 71 î.e.n.) până la Revoluția Americană (1765 – 1783); de la Revoluția Franceză (1789 – 1799) până la Revoluția Ungară de la Budapesta (1956); de la Praga (1968) la Revoluția Garoafelor din Portugalia (1974); de la Revoluția Mexicană, condusă de Emiliano Zapata Salazar (1910 - 1920) la Marea Revoluție Culturală Proletară lansată de Mao Zedong (1966), la Revoluția din Nicaragua (anii '60 și '70) și până la Revoluția Română din 1989. Și lista poate continua. Toate revoluțiile au avut băile lor de sânge. Liderii revoluțiilor au luptat pentru cauzele lor, dar niciunul nu a reușit să conducă o revoluție fără măcel. Până la Satoshi Nakamoto.Satoshi nu a intenționat niciodată și fie un lider revoluționar, însă creația sa -- Bitcoin – a revoluționat întreaga lume. A luat puterea din mâinile elitelor și a dat-o înapoi oamenilor. Oamenii au început să fie capabili să-și controleze banii, fără a mai fi forțați să implice intermediari. Bitcoin a eliminat intermediarii și a făcut ca guvernele și băncile să fie irelevante pentru utilizatorii săi. A făcut uitat vechiul sistem financiar șî a implementat o nouă paradigmă: " O versiune de bani electronici complet peer-to-peer care permite ca plățile online să fie transmise în mod direct de la o parte la alta fără a apela la o instituție financiară". Bitcoin este prima revoluție fără vărsare de sânge din istorie.Nimeni nu a trebuit să moară pentru ca Bitcoin să învingă. Revoluția Bitcoin nu a cuprins violențe, nici masacre, nici alte lucruri oribile care se petrec în timpul revoltelor. I-a ajutat pe cei înfometați și pe săraci și le-a dat o șansă la viață și la a lupta pentru viețile lor. I-a conectat pe oamenii din întreaga lume. Și niciun lider politic nu poate opri Bitcoin. Revoluția continuă de peste 10 ani. Și, zi de zi, câștigă noi adepți. De multe ori m-am întrebat cum a reușit Bitcoin să evite băile de sânge în această revoluție. Și, uneori, mă gândesc că, poate, Revoluția Bitcoin a urmat regulile lui Saul Alinsky. Alinsky a fost un activist american și, printre altele, a scris regulile unei revoluții de succes. Se poate observa cu ușurință, niciuna dintre reguli nu presupune violență. Regula 1: Puterea nu este doar ceea ce ai, ci ceea ce adversarul crede că ai. –- De când a apărut, Bitcoin a fost temut de către guverne, bănci și alte elite. Au crezut că vor pierde extraordinara putere pe care o aveau și au început să vadă în Bitcoin un inamic gigantic, chiar dacă acesta era în fragedă pruncie. Regula 2: De câte ori este posibil, scoate adversarul din terenul cu care este obișnuit. Astfel creezi confuzie, frică, retragere și căi împotriva cărora nu știe să lupte. -– Elitele nu s-au temut niciodată că ar putea pierde puterea pe care o aveau asupra cetățenilor. În fond, oamenii sunt oprimați de mii de ani de către guverne și bănci. Și totuși, când Bitcoin a apărut, împreună cu noua sa paradigmă a tranzacțiilor financiare peer-to-peer, acestea fiind combinate și cu o pseudo-anonimitate care poate fi îmbunătățită drastic prin mixere de monede, în acel moment toți opresorii au început să fie confuzi. Următorul sentiment pe care l-au avut a fost frica. Nu știau cum să lupte împotriva Bitcoin. Și, de peste 10 ani, toate tentativele lor de a opri Bitcoin au fost sortite eșecului. Regula 3: Fă ca adversarul să lupte împotriva propriilor arme. –- Exact asta a făcut Bitcoin. Așa cum elitele au luat pur și simplu oamenilor controlul financiar, de mii de ani, la fel a procedat și Bitcoin, care le-a returnat oamenilor puterea asupra propriilor finanțe. Regula 4: Ridiculizarea este cea mai eficientă armă. Este greu de contraatacat și înfurie adversarul, acesta reacționând apoi în dezavantajul său. -– Guvernele au vrut mereu să știe câți bani are fiecare cetățean și pe ce îi cheltuie. Satoshi a construit Bitcoin într-o manieră care ridiculizează lăcomia Statului de a cunoaște toate tranzacțiile financiare ale cetățenilor săi: toate tranzacțiile Bitcoin pot fi verificate pe blockchain, acesta fiind public; totuși, adresele expeditorului și destinatarului sunt niște șiruri alfanumerice, care nu cuprind nici nume, nici prenume, nici date personale (presupunând că utilizatorii nu și-au predat datele personale către terți, cum ar fi exchange-urile centralizate). Invenția lui Satoshi a luat Statul în zeflemea și pare că spune: "Vrei să știi câți bani am? Uite, poți vedea asta. Vrei să îmi vezi și toate tranzacțiile? Poți face și asta. Dar ce nu știi este cine sunt eu". Regula 5: O tactică utilizată prea mult timp devine o rutină. Iar rutinele pot deveni plictisitoare. –- Ca urmare, este nevoie de schimbări, chiar și unele mărunte. Bitcoin a avut multe schimbări în ultimii zece ani. De la SegWit la bech32 și de la Taproot până la diverse BIP-uri, Bitcoin s-a schimbat și a evoluat în timp. Regula 6: Ține adversarul sub presiune. Folosește orice tactici, acțiuni sau evenimente pentru a-ți atinge scopul. "În ceea ce privește tacticile, detaliul major constă în dezvoltarea unor operațiuni care vor menține o presiune constantă asupra opoziției. Din acest motiv inamicul va reacționa în avantajul tău." -– De la apariția Bitcoin, guvernele și băncile au început să resimtă o presiune care a crescut constant. În multe perioade grele oamenii au apelat la Bitcoin. Și, cu cât au fost mai multe evenimente nefaste, cu atât Bitcoin a fost îmbrățișat de și mai mulți oameni, fapt ce a condus la o apăsare și mai mare pe umerii guvernelor, acestea realizând că le scapă din mâini controlul și că oamenii se pot organiza și singuri, fără intervenția Statului, a băncilor sau a intermediarilor. Regula 7: Alege ținta și blochează-te pe ea. -- Bitcoin și-a ales țintele încă dinainte de naștere: sistemul financiar existent, intermediarii, guvernele șî băncile. Intențiile sale au fost manifestate subit încă din blocul Geneză, care a conținut următorul mesaj: " Cancelarul pe cale de a scăpa băncile pentru a doua oară". Poate că mai avem mulți ani de trăit și, poate, la fel vor avea și copiii și nepoții noștri. Însă nu știu dacă vom mai asista la vreo revoluție fără vărsare de sânge în viitor... Topicul este auto-moderat pentru evitarea spam-ului. |
|
|
|
All revolutions imply bloodsheds. This is why revolution flags are always red.Since Spartacus' rebellion (71 - 71 BC) to American Revolution (1765 – 1783); from French Revolution (1789 – 1799) to Hungarian Revolution from Budapest (1956); from Prague (1968) to Carnation Revolution from Portugal (1974); from Mexican Revolution led by Emiliano Zapata Salazar (1910 - 1920) to Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution launched by Mao Zedong (1966) to Nicaraguan Revolution ('60 and '70) and to Romanian Revolution from 1989. And the list may continue. All revolutions had their bloodbaths. Their leaders fought for their purposes, but none ever succeeded a bloodless revolution. Until Satoshi Nakamoto.Satoshi never intended to be a revolution leader, yet his creation -- Bitcoin -- revolutionized the entire world. It took the power from the hands of elites and gave it back to people. People started being able to control their own money without being coerced to involve third parties. Bitcoin eliminated intermediaries and rendered governs and banks as irrelevant for individuals relying on Bitcoin. It disrupted the traditional finances and implemented a new paradigm: " A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash which would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution". Bitcoin is the first bloodless revolution from history.Nobody had to die for Bitcoin to prevail. Bitcoin revolution implied no violence, no massacres, no any other horrendous aspects which happen during revolutions. It helped those which were starving and the poor to have a chance to live and fight for their lives. It helped connecting people from all over the world. And no political leader can shut Bitcoin down. Revolution continues for more than 10 years now. And, day by day, it earns more adepts. Many times I asked myself how Bitcoin managed to run this bloodless revolution. And sometimes I am thinking that, somehow, Bitcoin revolution followed the rules Of Saul Alinsky. Alinsky was an American activist and, among others, he wrote the rules of a successful revolution. As it can be easily noticed, none of his rules imply any violence. Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. -- Since its apparition, Bitcoin was feared by governs, banks and other elites. They felt that they may lose the extraordinary power they had until then and started seeing Bitcoin as a giant enemy, although Bitcoin was just in its first days. Rule 2: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat and ways he does not know how to fight against. -- Elites never feared they may lose their power over citizen. After all, people are oppressed by governs and banks for thousands of years. Yet when Bitcoin arrived, together with its new paradigm of peer-to-peer financial deals, combined also with a pseudonymity which can be dramatically improved through tumblers and coin joins, all oppressors started to be confused. Next thing they felt was fear. They did not know how to fight against Bitcoin. And, for a decade now, all their attempts to shut it down failed. Rule 3: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. -- Bitcoin fought against elites with their own powers. As elites simply stripped people for ages of their financial control, so did Bitcoin, which just gave people back the power of their own finances. Rule 4: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It's hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage. -- Governs always wanted to know how much money each citizen has and also how the regular individual spends the money. Satoshi built Bitcoin in a fashion which ridicules State's greed for knowing all financial transactions made by its citizen: all Bitcoin transactions can be seen on blockchain, which is public; yet, the addresses of the sender and of the recipient are just some strings of alphanumeric characters, which give out no names, no surnames, no personal information (assuming that users did not give their personal information to third parties, such as centralized exchanges). Satoshi's invention taunted the State and it looks like it's saying: "Do you want to know how much money I have? Here, you can see that. Do you want to see all my transactions? You can see that too. I made them public, in your face. But what you don't know is who I am". Rule 5: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag. Commitment may become ritualistic as people turn to other issues. -- Therefore changes are needed, even slight ones. Bitcoin passed through changes during last decade. From SegWit to bech32 and from Taproot to various BIPs, Bitcoin changed and evolved during time. Rule 6: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage." -- Since Bitcoin appeared governs and banks started feeling a pressure which kept constantly growing. In several periods of financial difficulties people used Bitcoin. And the more such terrible events occurred, the more people embraced Bitcoin, which led to a pressure even greater on governs' shoulders, realizing that the power of control is slipping from their hands and people can organize themselves alone, without the intervention of State, banks and other third parties. Rule 7: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. -- Bitcoin chose its targets even before it was born: the existing financial system, the middlemen, the governs and the banks. Its intentions were shown, in a subtle way, even from its Genesis block, which contained the following message: " Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks". We may have many years to live and so will our children and grandchildren. Yet I don't know if we'll ever see another bloodless revolution in the future... Topic is self-moderated for avoiding spam.
Translations (in chronological order): |
|
|
|
Dar, din pacate, mi se pare ingrijoratoare situatia, fiindca vad, din nou, MetaMask folosit doar ca portofel hot/fierbinte separat si cu sume mici, si nu impreuna cu un portofel hardware. Dar asta pare modelul "de succes" de utilizare a MetaMask. Nici eu nu inteleg de ce se procedeaza asa. Dar, ma rog, este posibil sa inteleg eu mai greu astfel de deprinderi, intrucat nu lucrez deloc cu monede alternative. Nici pana acum nu mi-am batut capul cu ele, nici de acum incolo. Recunosc, sunt cateva interesante, care imi fac cu ochiul, cum ar fi XMR. Dar sunt situatii rarisime. In rest, pentru mine BTC e sfant Sa fie situatia aceasta din cauza monedelor necunoscute/adaugate de mana, sa fie din deprinderi incorecte de mai demult, sau pur si simplu e mai bine/mai indicat sa nu legam portofelul hardware de MetaMask? Alta chestiune interesanta mi se pare si faptul ca nu am gasit pe forum topicuri despre acest portofel. Poate nu m-am uitat eu cu sificienta rabdare, dar m-as mira ca, din atati utilizatori, chiar niciunul sa nu deschida o discutie pe aceasta tema. Ma gandesc ca, daca ar exista asemenea topicuri, am mai putea spicui niste informatii si de acolo.
In cazul portofelului Trust Wallet e posibila o manarie a celor de la Microsoft - trebuie studiata problema Nu stiu ce sa zic... de ce s-ar implica Microsoft in problema acestui portofel...?! Eu am scris doar ce au spus si altii de pe forum, cu multa experienta in domentiu. In plus, ai vazut si ce spune site-ul https://walletscrutiny.com despre Trust Wallet... Ma rog, daca obtii ceva informatii noi, posteaza-le si aici, sa le vedem si noi. |
|
|
|
Ma ocup imediat. Merci frumos. Era un banc intr-o vreme Hahaha! Tare rau bancul asta! Mi-a amintit de unul similar: Un tip trecea mereu dimineata, in drum spre munca, pe langa o vanzatoare de seminte. Zi de zi ii lasa cate 50 de bani in poala, atat cat costa un pahar de seminte, dar nu lua niciodata semnitele. Azi asa, maine asa, poimaine asa, trece timpul... Intr-o dimineata, pe srumul spre serviciu isi repeta omul ritualul. Da sa plece, dar il opreste tiganca. Nedumerit, omul intreaba: ce s-a intamplat? De azi s-a scumpit, e un leu pahar,ul ii raspunde vanzatoarea.
Sunt 3 premii pentru 3 castigatori:
* o moneda de argint (fara sa contina bitcoin)
* o moneda placata cu argint si continand 0.001BTC
* o moneda placata cu aur si continand 0.001BTC Meam!  Fantastice premiile! Merci pentru postare, NeuroticFish, ratasem concursul acesta. Gata, m-am inscris! Mult noroc! |
|
|
|
Quiz score Well done! I'll help you with posting your score as full picture, since your rank does not allow you yet. By the way -- that's an impressive score! I hope you did not cheat 
Just some random guess and here is my score ,but I have learnt a lot from this quiz about the forum This is the most important thing: that you learned new information about the forum. And do not worry about the random guesses... after all, we all have to do some random guesses in our lives, right? I'll post your score as full picture too, since you also can not do it by yourself.  |
|
|
|
We can but then, we'll need to go somewhere to the jungle or some islands "behind" Australia. I'm sure that there are also some unpopulated islands but climate is very harsh there. Of course, we won't have access to the internet there most likely, so no Bitcoin.  Loooooooooool!
Just imagine where such personal details got sold to via Darknet. Some people received (physical) mails into their postboxes, where criminals were threatening them (because physical addresses got hacked). I keep trying to open the eyes of so many people I know. But only in very few occasions I see them realizing to what risks they are exposing themselves by not protecting their privacy. I am telling all many parts of this topic of yours: Why KYC is extremely dangerous – and useless. I talked so many times about it that I almost learned it word by word (no kidding). Yet people react with: "I've got nothing to hide, anyway!". They don't understand that no house is broken-in by burglars until it's broken-in by a burglar, for the first time. Even so, with so many covering their eyes and ears, I still manage, sometimes, to drive one or another on the right path. And that is a great happiness for me! Some said: it's only personal data, no money was lost. Yes, such people are everywhere. Their mind is so simplistic that they are unable to comprehend anything else excepting the fact that they know they have to go to work, to eat, to sleep then wake up again and repeat all the cycle. They are those which resolve a geometric problem like this:  and which ask questions like this:  |
|
|
|
there is no outlaw, lawless theory in libertarianism. there is no chaos
just because its not a formal order underneath some letter head or leadership does not mean libertarianism = chaos I never said that libertarianism means chaos. The earlier discussion was about a different subject -- about how order may arise from perfect disorder, perfect disorder being the chaos. So we had two different subjects at the same time.
now where did the libertarians go
they are still in crypto. they just diverged out into other cryptocoins while still within the common framework of crypto-economy But why? I don't think that they entered in altcoin communities. At least not all of them. Those which were here since Bitcoin or even the apparition of Bitcoin don't have any reason for changing their focus on other coins. Maybe the reason for which these libertarians became more or less silent is the fact that their voice is covered by all those which entered in crypto hoping only to get rich over night. Maybe libertarians which believed in Bitcoin and in its power to eliminate middle men feel disgusted by seeing so many people around them talking about crypto while having only greed in mind... |
|
|
|
Serious question: Exactly who is going to receive the price if events like these win out (which I'm sure FTX will easily do for this category)?
I'm going to assume there is no prize for this category or something? This question (and answered) inside Discussion thread:
In every category in which a physical winner is possible (remember last year). For obvious reasons, the awards do not apply to such categories as "Fail of the Year" and "Event of the Year".  Obviously, while writing my previous post (similar to you too, lol), I did not take into account the fact that, if FTX Drama will win at Fail of the Year section, nobody will know at their door to handle them 12mBTC, right? Same happens for all cases where technically it is impossible to physically offer a prize. I'm talking about nominations like "Luna crash", "CSW", "Bitcoin Pizza Day", "Ethereum merge", "World Cup Qatar" etc.
Other than that, please, I am kindly asking all to continue the discussion and the agitation inside Discussion thread, thus we'll have this topic as limited as possible for votes only. It will help a lot during votes counting period Thank you in advance for understanding. |
|
|
|
Ahah my friend. Thank you for stalking my threads. Hihi! Regarding the eligibility for a translation, you are allowed to translate every post you deem it worth, you certainly don’t need my agreement to do so. I know, but I was also thinking to give you a heads-up for which topics of yours became recently eligible for being added here to OP. I imagined that it's possible for you to not want to add them all, no matter the fact that they became eligible based on the 50 merits rule, therefore I wanted also to settle this first. As per your request, I think some posts are more useful to be translated than a others. Post with “global audience”, with “static” content, and with local language material can be more usefully translated. And, as I anticipated, you are saying that only some of them should be translated / added to OP So my idea was good. The ideal post to translate it would be the one about debunking the environmental impact of bitcoin, provided you can find enough material in the local language.
Also the thread on ES bond could be interesting, if it were still “alive” as a topic.
As opposed , the lightning network observer I think it is a little bit too “chatty” to be translated. Okay, then our list looks like this now: Please let me also know your input for the remaining threads: the one about Bitcoin losing its user base, the one about innovation and also the one about ETF, although it's not yet eligible, as it did not receive 50 merits yet. But I'd like to know if you add this one to OP too, in case it'll receive 50 merits, thus I know from now if I should prepare to translate it too |
|
|
|
Thanks alot for the info Please make sure that in the future you will not quote the entire previous post, but only the necessary information from it. Please also read this topic, for learning more about avoiding pyramid quotes: [TIPS] to avoid pyramid quotes (for Newbies).
here are my quiz results, not too bad for the value Congrats for the very good score you obtained and also for the correctly way you quoted from OP! Here, let me post the full image for you, since your rank does not allow you. 
Sir , Why is the score not added even if the first quiz is answered correctly? I PMed icopress a while ago to update the answer of that question, but I think that either he did not have time yet or he forgot... Let's hope he will update the answer soon |
|
|
|
Referitor la Trust Wallet, chiar daca este detinut de Binance, codul este open source. ( De ex. codul Coinbase Wallet este doar partial open source) Și eu tot așa știu: Trust Wallet nu este complet Open Source, sau cel puțin nu era ultima dată când citisem despre subiect. Deci ceea ce zic ei (că ar fi Open Source) este o minciună.
Am încercat să caut un răspuns concret de la Trust Wallet şi nu găsesc nimic. E drept că au un repo Git Hub. Dar asta nu îl face automat sigur şi nici 100 la sută Open Source. Dacă merg mai departe spre walletcore ( https://github.com/trustwallet/wallet-core), văd următorul text [...] Referitor la portofele, in general, dupa ce le dam la o parte pe toate cele ale exchange-urilor centralizate (presupun ca toti stim de ce ), pe urmatoarele ar trebui sa le sortam in functie de: (1) sunt sau nu custodiale si (2) au sau nu cod deschis. Despre Trust Wallet, in particular, s-au scris multe topicuri in sectiunea Wallet software. Am gasit doua cautand mai putin de 1 minut: What do you think about trust wallet?Trust Wallet - is it secure?Stiam acest portofel ca pe un cal breaz, fara a-mi aminti prea multe detalii insa. Dar stiam ca il studiasem cand a aparut si ajunsesem la concluzia ca nu are sens sa ma incurc vreodata cu el. Acum, spicuind un pic printre postarile din aceste doua topicuri, m-am oprit si eu la doua care au fost scrise de niste oameni pe care ii vad a avea niste cunostinte cu mult mai vaste decat ale mele. Unul are state foarte vechi pe forum: A doua postare ii apartine unui utilizator relativ nou dar care, prin prisma cunostintelor sale deosebite, s-a propulsat in mai putin de un an si jumatate in Top 40 al utilizatorilor cu cele mai multe merite. Ca urmare, ii pretuiesc gandirea si cunostintele. Absolutely stay clear from it. Closed-source is a complete no-go for me.Pick something from https://walletscrutiny.com/ with a good score. Acum, daca verificam Trust Wallet pe site-ul indicat mai sus, vedem urmatoarele:  Din pacate, site-ul de mai sus cerceteaza doar portofelele de bitcoin, astfel ca nu am putut gasi informatii si despre Metamask, nici despre MEW. |
|
|
|
Perhaps libertarians, crypto-anarchists and cypherpunks are afraid to publicly express their ideas, since these ideas are not accepted by modern social society. But why would they be afraid? They did it in the past. Precious essays, such as Tim May's Crypto Anarchist Manifesto or Eric Hughes' Cypherpunk Manifesto were published decades ago. The topics I mentioned in OP were also posted on this forum. I don;t understand where these people are now. It seems like most of them simply vanished... In my opinion, social society has changed a lot in the last 15 years. It certainly did. It is known that one of the most famous libertarians, John McCaffee, died on June 23, 2021 in a Spanish prison. This is a real tragedy! We all know that McCaffee has rendered a serious and undoubted service to society, as he created a very popular antivirus. Losing a life is always a very sad thing. No matter it was a libertarian's, a priest's a neighbor's life or the life of anyone else... Modern people agree with censorship and self-censorship. They actively use centralized services, trust the government and large IT corporations. And they are more and more wrong. But a strong argument for this behavior is the fact that people are not educated anymore for valuing their privacy, their anonymity. Cypherpunks are mostly long gone and, together with them are also gone their loud voices which encouraged people to preserve their privacy in front of third parties. As I mentioned also in another topic, personal information remains personal until its owner decides to share it with others. From that moment forward it is not personal information anymore, as the owner cancelled the deepest meaning of the term " personal" when he shared his information with others... |
|
|
|
I would say that the cyberpunk manifesto is more than history.
It is becoming more and more important everyday, as our privacy is just being ignored. True and also, if I may add, this is also how I consider The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto. Both essays were published decades ago and become more and more actual in our days. Everyone wants your phone number, Id and email to fill their databases, and we are becoming just our data that is valuable and easily shared between companies.
in the world that we live I have always to reveal my self. I cannot selectively reveal myself.
We have no privacy, unless we always deny personal data requests and / or give false personal Information when it is irrelevant to the transaction I am also a big advocate of privacy and I am trying all I can to keep myself as private as possible. I said it many times: personal information is personal, this is why it's called like this. And once you give it to third parties it is not personal anymore. Nor it can become personal again. I am also trying to help people value their privacy. Sadly, the biggest struggle I have to face is to explain people not how to remain private, but why it matters to remain private. The most reaction is this: "I have nothing to hide!". Okay, you may have nothing to hide, but that does not involve the fact that you should not have some privacy. Then I ask them: "If you have nothing to hide, then you don't mind someone spying on you through the bathroom's key hole? If you have nothing to hide, then you don't mind someone spying on you through the windows? If you have nothing to hide, then you don't mind someone which reads your secret journal?" -- and so on. Privacy is more and more difficult to have in our days and one reason is the fact that people are less and less educated for valuing their privacy. The rest is just like you described it. You can not be born without sharing your private details; nor you can die without doing it. You can't get married; you can't get a job. As everywhere you are asked for your ID, which must also be a document issued by the State. We are not allowed to create our own IDs. All we can do is to limit, as much as we can, this intrusion in our lives. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
