They should honor the price when the transaction was initiated. But I totally agree that such wild price fluctuations make anything a less desirable medium of exchange. Hence why fiat is so manipulated.

The past 3 days have seen the lowest volume since November. Maybe resting for the big push.

Bitcoin's value is fluctuating wildly due to speculation and potential increased regulation and scrutiny. If it is cashed out to fiat or goods at the time of donation, it would make sense. I'm not sure it's well suited for donating to charities otherwise. On the one hand, people would donate coin that would subsequently increase in value, meaning they gave up that increase in opportunity cost. On the other hand, the coin may go down in value, meaning their donation was less than they intended.

I agree with this no matter what the market is. So hard for some to be in that financial position though.

Since there is some kind of layer of abstraction between the interface where you "create smart contracts for ICO without coding" and the actual smart contract, who is liable when something goes wrong there?

When I first saw the headline, I thought the coin collecting magazine CoinAge was getting into crypto lol.

Bitcoin and gold are both similar assets (limited supply, must be mined, a clear alternative to fiat) that can be used to potentially get better returns than interest on fiat. I don't think the original source is really pushing crypto over or even as an equal to gold necessarily. They are being lumped together because they are similar IMO.

It would be nice if they would actually educated people as to what cryptocurrency is and how it works, while avoiding all of the government FUD as well as the scammy types who promise that Bitcoin will be worth $1M in 4 days. I don't expect any government entity to give anyone a positive impression of cryptocurrency since it could put the government out of the money business.

If you look at a historical graph of BTC/USD, BTC went down to $6.2k on February 5th and then bounced backed up. I don't see it going below $6k, but I think it might go there and find support.

Pretty funny stuff. Ironic that a cryptocurrency with so much emphasis on enabling the "licensing" of content would be accused of stealing. If a Western crypto made licensing intellectual property and content a selling point of their platform, I bet corporations and investors would really take to it. But the whole idea is averse to the philosophy behind crypto IMO.

Cryptocurrency is definitely for the long haul. The true value of crypto isn't even realized yet. The true value of Ethereum is in the smart contracts that drive distributed apps. But this technology isn't widely used yet. Just imagine the value of Ethereum when Ether is used to power apps that millions of people depend on? The price so far is driven by the anticipated value of this and by speculation.

There's a lack of understanding of how it works.

There's a perception that it called itself currency, but it's not "backed by anything," so therefore it's a scam.

The number of people in the US on some kind of public assistance is higher than ever. So a lot of Americans don't have money to invest in anything, much less learn about new technology that has little direct relevance to their lives.

People who are dependent on government would tend to be fine with government fiat currency I would imagine, as long as its buying power meets their needs.

It is definitely purposefully docked. For example, in the US, the interest rate is one way to control the supply and demand of money. If the interest rate is lowered, there is more demand for money and more ends up being printed. This increased supply of money, ceteris paribus, lowers the value of money, since there is more of it--leading to inflation. So while the government might have a debt of $1M dollars on the books, the $1M dollars is only now worth $980 thousand. Scaled out across all the government's debts, this is a significant amount of money. The manipulations of the fiat money supply are a stealth form of taxation. This is one of the reasons why decentralization is so important.

If Karpeles did the things he's accused of, getting a lot of money like that would open him up to civil suits. I don't think I would want those billions either.

It would be interesting to look out how slowly the trustee unloaded all that Bitcoin. I guess slow, continuous pressure of even such a relatively small amount could have a large effect on price in a market with a lot of HODLers. I think the nature of Bitcoin is such that it would make more sense to redistribute the Bitcoin that is left instead of the cash value of the holdings at the time of bankruptcy. Courts don't deal in Bitcoin, however, and the full quantity of Bitcoins they had are gone so the cash value is really the only thing they can do that seems both equitable and practical, though it certainly sucks.

I'm not sure, but there were stories out last month in the media about South Korea relaxing the "ban". I do think the initial media reaction was overblown though. I think they are mainly concerned with foreigners using Korean ICOs to launder money.

As I write this, almost all cryptocurrencies are up over the past 24 hours. Good news indeed.

Hey, I'm joining signature campaign. I have signature, avatar and personal message set. I will fill the form now.

It already is, about 200 million daily volume above Huobi

I haven't checked this thread for months, can someone please show me the last official update regarding bounty distribution?

I don't see the problem if the price of electricity is cheaper in that area. They weren't stealing electricity. The only problem is that apparently they reported different activity. They should simply tell by the truth that they are doing bitcoin mining.