|
You don't even need a portfolio. Anything other than 100% Bitcoin is irrational. Bitcoin has the largest network effect by far. It will draw in most talent and capital. Like all altcoins, Ether is extremely speculative and risky (it even forked). All the altcoins are barely used in the real world - they're just traded against Bitcoin.
When picking an altcoin for investment, you can be lucky. But I wouldn't bet on it. 5 years is a long period of time in the crypto world. Maybe Ether doesn't even exist in 5 years.
|
|
|
|
Two years ago he threw a bitch fit and said if we don't increase blocksize, the network will die. Now, Circle is taking their $138 million and leaving along with many, many others. The congestion has jammed up the network and it is no longer useful. While we still have our pure values of decentralization, we also have a dysfunctional system that no longer serves many of the original intents.
We should go to 8MB today. Keep building LN so we don't have to one day go to 16MB. That way, all involved in making blockchain projects will stay with Bitcoin instead of running away to other FinTech like Jeremy Allaire.
We CAN have it both ways! 8MB is the new 'small block'.
So this means, you will leave, too? Circle was a really bad service to begin with. And the reason for their departure is certainly not blocksize (maybe they like to blame Core team for their own mismanagement). We need a healthy transaction fee marketplace. Even now, one of the biggest miners mines empty blocks, because transaction fees are not lucrative enough compared to finding the next block faster. The Bitcoin blockchain was never meant to be a settlement layer for microtransactions. It's far too inefficient to accomplish this task. SegWit and LN are meant to address this. The most important point is that the Bitcoin network stays decentralized. Any blocksize increase is a risk in that regard. Blocksize increases should only be considered, once all other options have been exhausted and even medium value transactions (> $ 20) are no longer affordable (average fee >10% of transaction value). |
|
|
|
...
I do wish I had held on to some of my Bitcoin (when it was around $400 - $500 or so) when I bought some gold. Once it was close to $500, I "celebrated" by selling some BTC to buy gold.
Ah well, bad timing. I am glad that I still have "enough", but my investment timing (at least short-term) typically is not good.
I did learn years ago that I do NOT do well in casinos (poker, craps, blackjack), so at least I don't lose anything there.
I think you should buy gold with fiat only. Bitcoin and gold (and silver) are both sound money. In contrast to gold, Bitcoin has significant potential for true value appreciation (in terms of purchasing power) because it is owned by only few people. But Bitcoin is also more risky than gold. Trading between these two good forms of money is not recommendable if you have some fiat leftover. |
|
|
|
Das nenne ich in der tat sehr kreativ, was werden die Banken sich noch so alles einfallen lassen  Sie könnten zum Beispiel die Gebühren in Silber oder Bitcoin verlangen. Von dem fiat-scheiss haben sie ja selbst genug  Das ist ja die Krux an der Sache. Von diesem Fiat haben sie nie genug, weil Demokratie (Herschaftssysthem) die Entwertung garantiert. Zur Zeit offiziell 2% pro Jahr. Sonnst wäre der systemimmanente Konkurs sichtbar. Man stelle sich mal vor, ein Coin mit garantiertem Kaufkraftverlust von 2%. Wer würde den nehmen, wenn er nicht zwingend vorgeschrieben ist.  Du hast es erkannt. Der Fiat-Schrott hat sich nur durch Zwang durchsetzen können. Es ist Geld für die Galeerensklaven, um sicherzustellen, dass auch alle schnell genug rudern. Dabei müssen die Aufseher noch nicht mal selbst die Peitsche schwingen... Der Fiat-Schrott wird ja durch neue Schulden erst erzeugt. Im Gegenzug für das selbst (nahezu ohne Beschränkungen) erzeugte Geld erhalten die Banken entweder echte reale Werte (Immos etc.) oder eben Zinsen die über dem Kaufkraftverlust liegen. Dieses System führt zwangsläufig dazu, dass die Galeerensklaven immer schneller rudern müssen, weil sie sonst keinen Getreidebrei mehr kaufen können. |
|
|
|
Global temperature changes and even wild fluctuations are a completely normal thing if you look at the history of Earth. Such effects are caused by various cosmic (ecliptic, sun activity, cosmic radiation) and earthly factors (land mass distribution, sea currents, mountains -> wind changes). The global temperature was a lot higher than today during hundreds of million years. We are currently living within a temporarily warm period within an overarching ice age.
Drawing conclusions based on temperature changes of a few decades or even centuries of modern history is not convincing at all.
Your first part is true, global temp changes are normal when we look at the history of the Earth, but these changes happened over a huge timescale. What isn't normal is the incredible speed of the current warming trend, coupled with the spectacular increase in CO2 ppm during the last 150 years. That's what's worrying. No, your assessment is not correct. There's evidence that temperature changes occurred very rapidly in ancient times as well. This is also quite logical if you consider factors such as land mass movements which ultimately lead to the closure of sea passages and hence sudden changes in sea currents (for example the merging of the North and South American Continent). Changes in Earth ecliptic and sun activity also occur within short time spans. In addition there are no measurement methods for assessing temperature changes on a micro timescale in the past. Research is limited to determining mean temperatures over extended periods of time. Therefore it's well possible that wild swings and rapid increases/decreases in temperature occurred in the past as well. OK, first show me evidence that temperature changes in ancient times occurred as rapidly as they are now. Bonus points if you can tell me the CO2 ppm at the time. Your second point doesn't make sense because you seem to have contradicted your first point. How can there be evidence for such rapid changes, if there are no measurement methods for the changes? Pick one, and we'll discuss it. Could easily do, but not gonna happen, sorry. You're way too arrogant to justify any further effort for discussion. Man-made global warming theory is activist pseudo-science. It's based on scientifically unsound extrapolation of insufficient data sets, collected under confirmation bias. I have no doubt that we'll see a dramatic shift of the scientific mainstream regarding that topic within the next 15 years. That said, as a pure thought experiment it would be interesting to think about the opposite scenario of a global cooling. Would scientist and public leaders demand the release of more CO2 in that case? |
|
|
|
Global temperature changes and even wild fluctuations are a completely normal thing if you look at the history of Earth. Such effects are caused by various cosmic (ecliptic, sun activity, cosmic radiation) and earthly factors (land mass distribution, sea currents, mountains -> wind changes). The global temperature was a lot higher than today during hundreds of million years. We are currently living within a temporarily warm period within an overarching ice age.
Drawing conclusions based on temperature changes of a few decades or even centuries of modern history is not convincing at all.
Your first part is true, global temp changes are normal when we look at the history of the Earth, but these changes happened over a huge timescale. What isn't normal is the incredible speed of the current warming trend, coupled with the spectacular increase in CO2 ppm during the last 150 years. That's what's worrying. No, your assessment is not correct. There's evidence that temperature changes occurred very rapidly in ancient times as well. This is also quite logical if you consider factors such as land mass movements which ultimately lead to the closure of sea passages and hence sudden changes in sea currents (for example the merging of the North and South American Continent). Changes in Earth ecliptic and sun activity also occur within short time spans. In addition there are no measurement methods for assessing temperature changes on a micro timescale in the past. Research is limited to determining mean temperatures over extended periods of time. Therefore it's well possible that wild swings and rapid increases/decreases in temperature occurred in the past as well. |
|
|
|
DEr BTC hat ein Standing/ Vertrauen, da kommt erstmal keine andere Crypto-Währung ran. Bitcoin dominiert die Kryptowährungsszene, frage ist nur wie lange, denn an Konkurrenz mangelt es nicht, und wird es nicht mangeln, wenn man sieht wie neue Währungen wie Pilze aus dem Boden schießen. Ja die scheißen wie Pilze aus dem Boden, ... Und so muss man sich das ungefähr vorstellen:  Denke, die Bitcoin-Rakete befindet sich gerade auf dem Weg zur Startrampe. Mal schauen, wie weit es diesmal nach oben geht, bevor der Zenit der parabolischen Flugbahn erreicht ist. Die Fundamentals sind jedenfalls sehr stark. |
|
|
|
|
Global temperature changes and even wild fluctuations are a completely normal thing if you look at the history of Earth. Such effects are caused by various cosmic (ecliptic, sun activity, cosmic radiation) and earthly factors (land mass distribution, sea currents, mountains -> wind changes). The global temperature was a lot higher than today during hundreds of million years. We are currently living within a temporarily warm period within an overarching ice age.
Drawing conclusions based on temperature changes of a few decades or even centuries of modern history is not convincing at all.
|
|
|
|
Beim Euro stört sie das aber nich, das Draghi jeden Monat 60 Milliarden aus dem "nichts" generiert? Oder das die Banken praktisch mit jedem vergebenen Kredit Geld aus dem "nichts" generieren? Das kling wohl irgendwie völlig plausibel.  Das stört die allerwenigsten Menschen, solange sie keine direkten Auswirkungen zu spüren glauben. Und wenn sie es dann mitbekommen, sehen sie keinen direkten Zusammenhang zwischen ihrem Elend und der Geldmengenausweitung. Man muss es so sagen, wie es ist: Die große Mehrheit interessiert sich für Geld nur insofern, dass Mann/Frau möglichst viel davon haben will. Bei Frauen ist diese Mehrheit noch größer als bei Männern. Aber es gibt zum Glück auch immer wieder rühmliche Ausnahmen. |
|
|
|
|
It is my belief that we will be seeing a significant acceleration of the rally, once the price breaks through $ 800. There are strong fundamental factors at work. Demand in India, Venezuela and China is soaring because of their governments restricting or inflating fiat cash. Once journalists become aware that Bitcoin is rising again, they will start to write more articles about, because articles about a good investment case are appreciated by readers, no matter how inadequate they really are.
Increased media reporting will ignite the rocket motor of Bitcoin. A new bubble will form.
|
|
|
|
Well, I like paper wallets generated on a "offline" computer the most. I have bought a second hand computer & printer.. just for the generation of paper wallets. { very inexpensive } This computer will never be connected to the internet again. You can also opt for a KeepKey wallet, it is just as good as a Trezor, IF you want to use a hardware wallet. Yeah, thinking the same. You found a very good solution. Paper wallets are simply the cheapest and most secure option out there. The only thing you must be aware of is that after importing the private key again into Bitcoin Core and sending a transaction, the amount leftover will be stored at a new address - so don't delete your wallet.dat afterwards! For printing paper wallets the best printer is possibly a needle printer, because there's no ink decay if you store it for a decade or so. Laser printers are also acceptable if you laminate the printout. You should avoid ink jet prints, because they tend not to be long-lasting (especially when exposed to UV or chemicals). |
|
|
|
Auf der Seite weiter unten: Das sind Bitcoin & Co : Aus der Welt der virtuellen Währungen 1/12 Litecoin Ein ernst zu nehmender Rivale des Bitcoin ist der Litecoin, den es seit Oktober 2011 gibt. In Sachen Schnelligkeit übertrumpft er den Bitcoin: Eine Überweisung dauert weniger als drei Minuten, während man mit dem Bitcoin in der Regel zehn Minuten braucht. Die Technologie dahinter ist aber leistungsschwächer, daher ist der Litecoin anfälliger für Hacker-Angriffe. <- so ein Schwachsinn! 9/12 Dogecoin Dogecoin Mehr aus dem Spaß geboren ist Dogecoin. Auf der virtuellen Münze prangt ein Shiba, eine japanische Hunderasse. Doch auch wenn es vor allem geschaffen wurde, um die anderen Kryptowährungen zu verballhornen, wurde sei zu einer ernstzunehmenden Konkurrenz. 0.023 vs 12.5 milliarden, echte Konkurrenz... klar Qualitätsjournalismus Anno 2016 eben... Wobei man sagen muss, dass unter Berücksichtigung der journalistischen Fähigkeiten der Hauptartikel über Bitcoin schon wieder fast gelungen ist. Schön, dass sich die Presse dem Thema annimmt, sobald der Preis steigt. Das ist schließlich auch das einzig wichtige. Fundierte Informationen zur Technologie will sowieso keiner lesen und wäre auch einfach zuviel Rechercheaufwand. [Sarkasmus aus] |
|
|
|
|
Who does what in Syria is difficult to determine from the outside. All we have is news from various parties that are all somehow involved in the conflict. I tend to agree however, that a real moderate rebel force hardly exists in Syria. Most are extremists of various shades.
The war in Syria is a proxy war between the US and Russia. Both powers have interest in Syria because of oil and pipeline projects.
|
|
|
|
Haha, stimmt. Ab 40% Rabatt könnte btczone interesasnt werden, aber ich vermute mal, wie wollen noch Gebühren obendrauf Nun seid doch mal nicht so hart. Immerhin ist es ein neuer Anbeiter. Zwar nicht besonders kreativ, aber falls die anderen mal wegsterben sollten ist etwas Redundanz auch nicht verkehrt. Den Sinn der Umfrage verstehe ich aber nicht so ganz. Denke, das Risiko, den Service einfach auch in Deutschland anzubieten ist nahe Null. Muss man wohl unter Werbung verbuchen. Grundsätzlich ist es interessant, insbesondere wenn der Datenschutz groß geschrieben wird. Z.B. Anonym bestellen, ohne dass Amazon die Daten bekommt - aber dass ist dann auch wieder mehr Aufwand. Btw.: Falsches Forum, sollte in die allgemeine Diskussion oder "Projektentwicklung". |
|
|
|
The internalized stake is basically world domination on cruise control and should be shunned by anyone who doesn't want to be a slave, while the open entropy system of Bitcoin tends to give you the same result when you're just externalizing your metaphorical stake into the Pareto principle of the real world. This means cryptocurrency solves really nothing in it's current state, and things like physical silver coins as a currency would be vastly superior in terms of both decentralization and avoidance of usury or seigniorage fee.
Why should silver coins be any better than Bitcoin? Bitcoin is modeled after gold and silver. Bitcoin mining closely resembles the extraction process of gold and silver. I don't see why silver coins are any better than Bitcoin. If one agrees to your argument (which I don't) one must condemn silver coins as well. The Pareto principle of the real world is the result of most people being unable to save money. Many people live beyond their means. Wealthy individuals often have different personality characteristics when it comes to saving, they tend to be more thrifty in relation to their means. That's how they accumulated wealth: They spent less than they could afford. |
|
|
|
to me the stupid thing about topics like this is that people are already paying taxes to IRS or their country tax agency for everything else they do, they pay it when they trade, when they invest, they buy stuff or generally when they live and breathe air! so why is it always a big deal when it comes to paying taxes when "trading bitcoin"
Hence the IRS wanting Coinbase's user account records. They know Bitcoin traders are not paying taxes or they wouldn't be wasting their time. The IRS is just looking for new sources of income. It's their job to suspect anyone not paying enough taxes. However, buying Bitcoin and transferring them to another Bitcoin wallet is not a taxable event. Only a portion of Coinbase users will be affected by the IRS request. And luckily, Coinbase isn't the only Bitcoin exchange. There are many others. Not mentioning the increasing number of P2P trades. So the IRS action will hardly be problematic for Bitcoin as a whole. Instead it will convince Bitcoin users to move away from Coinbase and other exchanges with a history of user surveillance. Selling Bitcoin for Dollars is dumb anyway. Bitcoin is the better currency and a superior store of value. |
|
|
|
|
The true and most concerning problem we have are the mountains of debt that have been amassed in the last decades. These are the cause of all other symptoms (surveillance, suppression of free speech, terrorism, wars) we are seeing today. The underlying debt problem can't be resolved in an orderly fashion. It's likely to result in a big bang and a shift of power from West to East.
In the course of these events, financial devastation will ensue. The average citizen will suffer to a great extent as fiat currencies will enter hyperinflation. We can only hope that people will learn from it and adopt a better system, namely Bitcoin...
|
|
|
|
I don't think that marriage should be only about sex and love.
It's much more and includes trust, support, cooperation, joint work, dedication and finally it should include God's blessing as well.
Without it, I don't think that any marriage can be successful in the long term.
On such, very strong foundation, parents can educate and raise their children and build strong community.
Such communities can help to build strong society and such society can build strong nation.
I agree with you in most aspects, except god's blessing and strong nation. I'm agnostic and I think that a relationship is something private. Nobody in a relationship should feel forced to obtain blessing from any god or any society. People are born free. I think love and sex are preconditions for any happy relationship. But they do not suffice in the long term. Ideally you should be a good match with your partner in all aspects of personality and be able to support him/her in times of hardship. So in the ideal case, you love partner could also be your best friend, except the sex... |
|
|
|
Forbes publishes an annual list of world's most powerful people. If Satoshi Nakamoto were to be included, where do you think he or she should be placed?
Satoshi wouldn't be included in that list, because he has no power. He made a great gift to mankind. It's a gift that distributes power to the people. So he did not amass power for himself, he took away power from central banks and decentralized it. It's not power what Satoshi was up for when inventing Bitcoin, it is freedom. If Satoshi would have been up for power and adoration, he wouldn't have stayed anonymous. |
|
|
|
This would automatically shift demand to digital gold, aka Bitcoin. If that happens, you can expect China to take action restricting purchases of Bitcoin in some time. So a short and quick raise in bitcoin's price would be followed by a dump. Don't bet on it. First of all, it will boost smuggling and black market activity. Bitcoin is a niche product, only few people are aware of it as an investment alternative. The direct impact of China news on Bitcoin prices is greatly exaggerated. So I don't expect a rise in BTC price because of it. Even if the scenario you are pointing out becomes reality, restrictions for Bitcoin purchases would not succeed on a large scale, because you can't ban p2p trade. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
