It claims, which the IRS estimated at that value, there is no way they will manage to get all the money from FTX with that claim, the funny thing is that it even considered failed capital gains taxes on the sums that were deposited on FTX, there is no way in hell any judge will agree with that. It's IRS tactic as always, they file claims to every possible thing to have what to cut back when they are denied one after the other. Besides, even that is nothing compared to the 1.7 trillion Blockfolio is asking for  Every single one of those including the claims between Ftx and Alameda will be dismissed one by one, contract claims, litigation claims, they will be lucky to get 5% of that value. Lol it's going to take a lot more than $60 SOL (and whatever FTT's price is right now) for FTX to be solvent again — and take note, the SOL might've been slowly but surely being sold already. It'll take government intervention for FTX to be solvent.
Not really, think of MtGox, BTC was priced at 20k last November before FTX closed, it's up almost 100%, they had recovered crypto assets worth 6.2 billion at November prices, double that, and once can think of getting even more (in $ terms of course) than it had at that time. |
|
|
|
You are right and the campaign on which the user was still active. So, there was no chance to earn less than 100$ per week. I can't imagine a healthy-minded person can act like Edwardard did.
His activity looks weird, even before he asked you for a loan, he wasn't making a maximum of his income through that signature, he had periods when barely posted so if he really would have needed that money he would have got them just from the signature even without taking the loan. The family issue thing doesn't hold water, you're not throwing away a source of income when you're in debt over family issues, so it's either that he lost the money and thought it was not worth it anymore to work for 3 months to pay it back and decided he had enough! But seriously, you should really limit the sums you're giving away with no collateral, or at least make a deal with them and the managers to receive at least 50% of their weekly payouts, one of these things and you're what, two-three months in red? |
|
|
|
Am I required to report it?
Nobody is demanding anyone to report a thing here and I would say just ignore him! If he is farming accounts he will just get a 7-day ban at maximum on that one while spamming the forum with other accounts, is just a whack-a-mole thing at this point. That rule is for money, not merit! |
|
|
|
do some proper math
i do love you taking snippets but then not understanding the context.
~
although they talk about summer 2021 having 23946 asics they actually only had 22946 in the "year to date" may 2020-2021
now do the math.. on the electric. where "year to date" earning 924btc compares in just electric
~
72.836MW/h 1 year (x24 x365) = 637,957,444kwh a year * $0.025 = $15,948,936(may 2020-2021)
Franky, go back to kindergarten and learn what year-to-date means for something in May! https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/accounting/year-to-date-ytd/#:~:text=Year%20to%20Date%20(YTD)%20refers,up%20until%20a%20specified%20date. Year to Date (YTD) refers to the period from the beginning of the current year to a specified date before the year’s end. In other words, year to date is based on the number of days from the beginning of the calendar year (or fiscal year) up until a specified date. I But as always basic kindergarten definitions are beyond your ability! $15,948,936 / 924btc(may 2020-2021) = $17,260 just electric per btc(may 2020-2021) (they shoulda used better efficient asics)
In May 2021, Riot produced 227 BTC So it's ($15,948,936/227)/12 which is $5,854. So you're just off by 3 times, the usual crappy math you're so addicted to.  |
|
|
|
Im honest my financial situation are in big mess
So, who in the right mind would give money to a trader who can't even get himself out of his own mess? Also Im looking for Luxury cars dealership partnership and contacts so i can make some nice Ferrari or lambo as gift to one of our clients.
Yeah, the same story, the guy who doesn't have enough money to sit on a bench in a park is talking about Ferraris! I can't get loan even the 50$
And from dreaming about Ferraris we're back to free meals at the Salvation Army. This is the second time I've seen an offer like this about a hedge fund or a request post looking for investors from a newbie, the first one was just a few days ago.
Only second time? This guy has made like twenty alts in the last year at least, I've lost count and stopped keeping track of them, it's the same pattern, the same mistakes, the same spelling, it's annoying and nauseating and I don't understand why the hell he doesn't go out and get any kind of job because with the effort he put here, he would have already made more than the$50 he is begging for. |
|
|
|
That's with the presumption that every node would have access to above-average internet connection speeds.
Plus for the question, how many nodes are required to be "appropriately" decentralized. I believe there's no right number, BUT I could tell you that the MORE full nodes = MORE security assurances.
2009: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-10786874The data, from network giant Akamai reveals the average global net speed is only 1.7Mbps (megabits per second) although some countries have made strides towards faster services. 2021: According to internet speed specialists Ookla the global average download speed on fixed broadband as of September 2021 was 113.25 Mbps on fixed broadband and 63.15 Mbps on mobile. If 1MB was not a global problem then I kind of doubt 10 or 25 MB would be a problem now! Weid that Satoshi didn't have the same attitude, otherwise he would have made blocks 50kb! Who defines what is decentralisation ? Of course full nodes. The more independent full nodes you have, the more decentralized the whole system is. And obviously, they should be owned by independent people, and controlled from independent machines. Which brings us back to the first quote: if you think that miners can "vote", and full nodes can "only observe", then what kind of decentralization is present in your model? Wait till the US goes full South Korea mode and Foundry will decide to only accept transactions between whitelisted addresses in its blocks. Suddenly you will realize you can have 1 billion decentralized nodes but all you can relay is a centralized decision Much freedom! Such beauty! Wow! |
|
|
|
its basic economics. if the cheapest way to acquire bitcoin on the planet (efficient mining) was $15k in 2022. no one on the same planet wants to sell below $15k. so market stays above $15k.
~
EG it used to cost hawaii-japan $75k in 2021 104k in 2022 and now its 150k+ in 2023
if you learn about the value vs premium of world economics of bitcoin you then learn the window of which the market spot price speculates within
yep hawaii-japan being most expensive to mine so when in 2021 their mining cost were $75k they were the ones happy to market buy upto the $70k ATH of 2021
Franky, just f*** stop! Nobody cares about the electricity prices when it comes to the price of Bitcoin. If it were like that and people in Japan would pay 70 000 then people in Venezuela would sell it for $10. I mined it Europe at well below average electricity prices, I stopped mining with all of them selling a few when mining was not profitable anymore, no way in hell I'm going to pay more for a BTC because my electricity prices are higher than in Russia or China or India. You're living a complete delusion, to you it would be normal for people in Japan to pay $5000 for a barrel of oil cause that's the cost they would have to pay to extract it from the bottom of Mount Fuji, no it doesn't work like that!!! Also, stop with the numbers pulled out of your ass: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1167419/000107997321000537/ex99x1.htmWhinstone’s comprehensive energy management strategy delivers best-in-class net energy costs of approximately 2.5 cents per kWh utilizing cutting-edge technology and comprehensive analytics to deliver industry-leading low cost, reliable and responsive power. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1507605/000149315219013483/ex99-1.htmThe Miners will be placed into service in a Co-Location hosting facility with electricity costs of $0.035 per KwH and $0.02 per KwH for the all-in hosting management.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819989/000095017022008712/cifr-ex99_1.htmCipher’s weighted average power price is 2.73 c/kWh
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1710350/000121390022012660/ea156889ex99-1_bitdigitalinc.htmPro forma for hosting agreements signed to date, we expect to enjoy a competitive base power and hosting rate of approximately 3.7 cents per kilowatt-hour Stoppppp!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Not necessarily need to pay, if only the Bitcoin scalability issue is solved, then we won't be paying the transaction fee that much.
Unless that scalability involves cheaper and more fees rather than high but only 400k fees a day then there is no other scalability method that will work, and this one will only be solved with... increasing something. 2. you also did not figure into it that if 2million asics costs $Xbillion amount of electric per year the PRICE IN DOLLARS per sat can increase without needing the sat per byte to increase.
infact with the prices per dollar increasing, the sat per byte should be dropping
The whole Satoshi thing is irrelevant to a miner. A miner pays $1 for equipment it pays 1$ for energy day, he knows he has to get more than 1$ to cover the cost and more than 0.003 to recoup the investment in a year. If the revenue per day goes below 1$ he shuts down as it's more profitable to buy the coin and wait. As long as electricity is priced in $ and it doesn't fluctuate according to Bitcoin price it would be stupid to do the math otherwise. bitcoin was not designed to pay asic farms millions of dollars per block. asics farms were not even a thing when bitcoin was invented.
The internet wasn't to replace television, but here we are, doubt people in 1970 thought they would have hundreds of petahash of porn stored in the cloud with 100 MW data center spread across the globe, but here we are, billions spend to store and deliver porn! Because it's offer and demand that dictate everything in this world, not the intentions of the guy who designed it. Is there a way to control this escalation of future fees?
It's just that ways have gradually emerged for large miners to be able to influence network fees, and this could harm Bitcoin - a lot.
I believe that the entire Bitcoin community should think of something to avoid this control by (large) miners.
Raise the capacity of the network. Or play NIMBY and watch fees go the way home prices do in cities all over the world. I know this is a dumb question and I don't know much about it. That's why I'm asking. Can you please clear my doubt? We have lightning Network which good send Bitcoin faster and with low transaction fees. I don't know how that works and is it really the real Bitcoin we are sending, but is it possible in the future too only use lightning network in order to face this situation?
Only LN? No! You still need an on-chain transaction for starting to use LN, so the network capacity must still be large enouhg to allow millions of channels to be opened and closed. But since nowadays usage is limited, it would cover it pretty much, the long term it will still need a capacity increase. We are billions! on this planet. There is no mass adoption without billions using it! I get the idea of running everything and not getting any mining rewards for that. And only thing you get is the fee you get from completing in transactions. They are going to accumulate income from fees, so of course they will charge us more. But is there any other alternative for this?
Misconception. The miners don't charge you anything, they simply include the biggest tx in terms of fee in the next block. Think of it more like an auction than a ticket sale, you want to pay for what you do, if there are more people auctioning you have to pay more if there is only you you get it as cheap as possible. The miner has no saying in this, 1sat/vb or 500 sat/vb if there is space he will include you. The best analogy would be : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pay_what_you_wantYour customers pay more than normal on it, you're happy and you offer better services, they pay the same you offer standard service, they don;t pay at all you go bankrupt. So bottom line LN is a solution, but just as 1MB blocks were a solution till we hit a demand of more than 500k tx a day, LN won't be able to deal when it hits (if it ever does) numbers in the high tens of millions of daily usage. ~snip~
So, as a conclusion or encouragement or whatever, don't be angry at the fees, they help secure the network, and this is how it was designed to be in the first place, otherwise, we would end up like Bitcoin Gold or Ethereum classic, shitcoins getting 51% attacked 3 times in a row. I'm actually glad when the fees go up because then we see who are the ones who understand at least something, and who are the others who think that the fees should always be a maximum of $0.10, because not only is Bitcoin anonymous, but the transaction fee must always be super cheap. That's it basically, everything has a price, even privacy, you can go for free with tor and wait two hours for a movie or pay for a VPN and load it in seconds. Best way to hide your identity, a burner phone, but, that costs money! What I love about it is that when fees skyrocket there is always an ostrich who will come and say but Bitcoin was not supposed to be for small transactions, it's for moving large amounts of money, seeing how cheap it is to transfer millions for $5? Like that's the number one problem everyone faces, how to pay $ instead of $1000 when sending $40 million! pools wont need to be subsidised by fee's because they are getting 2.5x even after a reward halving
Do me a favor and read the first post again: Every single time a newbie asked what would happen when there would be no mining reward he got the same response over 10 pages, miners will live on from fees |
|
|
|
No sudden spike of block time and I disagree to call that Bitcoin has a network congestion.
Depends on what you say this congestion refers to: - network health, yeah is not congestion because the network can't carry more data to experience packet loss - transaction confirmation it's pretty much a congestion there, there are more tx waiting than can pass in the next block, and the moment even on of them is refused because of lack of space you have text book traffic congestion. Even when we didn't have Ordinals, fees were quite high for payments purposes.
 The median fee was almost all year except for the first Ordinal spam wave and the now second one below 1$ on average, constantly touching 10-20 cents range, it might have been much for some countries but when I see my favorite coffee at 1.99 euro 10 cents is still doable, once you go over $10 it becomes less than 1%. |
|
|
|
What is going on here? Why is everyone overestimating miner fees?
Because some (not bitcoinfees as that is broken by design) don't estimate the minimum reqyuired, they estimate a fee that will guaratee you you will get a spot in the next block, so on top of the previous block fees they throw other variables there, inflating the fee sometimes twice to the minimum of the last 60 blocks, as the crappier ones do. And if you do that you encounter avergaes like 110sat/vb like in block 816330 for example, thus the misleading calculations. Some are even broken the other way as bitcoin fees tell you you will get a confirmation of 11.92 sat/vB in 24 hours, yeah...try that! Also, be careful, some use sat/b some sat/vb, this is really bad when you try to use Viabtc accelerator, which uses 10sat/b as minimum. I need a way to get reliable fee estimation for 2 blocks ETA.
Mempool.space is as good as it can get. But it too has flaws as nobody can predict when the next block will be mined, for example, the last block, 816348 took 30 minutes instead of 10, so from the previous minimum of 30sat/vb you're up to 60, the fee that was good 40 minutes ago for next block is not good even for two now. |
|
|
|
Kimchi Premium was exploiting the difference between prices between South Korean exchanges compared to other exchanges, but all of these things changed after arbitrage trading became useless, and since the price of Bitcoin became closer on all platforms, given that there are many trading bots that work quickly to balance prices, it is impossible.
OP asked something different! Arbitrage bots don't work when you can't get money out of an exchange you're doing arbitrage on and you can't balance your accounts! That's why the kimchi premium existed, because of capital controls, it was nearly impossible to do arbitrage! Back to the initial question, it's not about getting around capital controls but simply the lack of interest from Korean investors to pay that much compared to others, they got burned twice, the FOMO is no longer there, so there is no premium anymore. Add on top of this the constant regulations, the fact that you no longer can withdraw coins to non-verified external wallets and you get the picture. |
|
|
|
Since you came to bitcointalk to ask for help, why don't you share all relevant information here instead giving your Discord info and wanting to continue conversation there? I am telling you this because it looks very dodgy and the fiurst thought that will come to people's head is that this is some kind of scam attempt.
I think the blocked account story might be legit. OP seems to deal in selling accounts, he has two disputes over forums in less than 48 hours about people not getting their account after paying (of course it doesn't mean that the accusations are true), but it could be that those have complained to Binance about it since he does receive payments for the accounts in crypto and Binance pay. Anyhow, nothing a stranger can do about it! |
|
|
|
~
Fee is definitely not going to be friendly then.
One thing! Probably I should have mentioned and bolded it in the first post! I am telling people that we are going to have to pay those fees if we want the same level of security, not that we are required! Is it going to be like that though?
I see it in a different way. By the time all Blocks are mined, there should be SO many more people involved in Bitcoin. SO many more users. This will increase number of Txs but probably on another Layer because I doubt the majority of Txs will happen on chain.
With more Bitcoin users come more Txs and with more Txs comes more Fees.
~
This means price has to grow enough every time for Fees to be worth collecting by Miners. Am I wrong?
You can't have more tx in the blockchain without increasing the block space! Fees paid on the second layer, like LN don't go to miners they go to LN node owners. So, no! Good points, but you are talking about the future fee, while people who ask why the fee is rocketing are asking for the present time. Because in the future the block reward will decrease, ok, we got that, but now the reward is still 6.25 and the price of BTC in the future will be high enough in comparison to now that people might not hesitate to pay huge fees because inflation will be high also (as back then paying $10 for bread must be expensive, but now paying $10 is cheap). I hope you get my point.
Doesn't work like that because paying for a product is not the product. If you had the choice of paying 10$ of bread but it would cost you 0 with a vis card, 10 cents with Doge and 10$ with BTC, what ar you going to do? Furthermore, this is what happens when the block reward is gone, I highlighted that in the first post. Considering the incredible opportunities that the bitcoin provides, then high fees are not so high against this background. Well, for example, sending bitcoin (in any quantity) to anywhere in the world for $15.31 - isn’t that funny? Any other way would have cost much more, and not at all faster.
How many people do sent money outside their country every day? Like 0.01% of the population? How many people pay under 100$ for their daily shopping? 90%? You will need to pay $15 for a 3$ lipstick for the pig you're advertising The security is not affected because the miners that are leaving, they do so because its so much more expensive to mine, and so is the 51% attack.
Wrong, a 51% attack will become far easier - an attacker doesn't have to be profitable and doesn't need to sustain this for months - if miners drop from mining it means cheaper gear available at scrap price - if miners stop mining it means more places with cheaper than normal electricity - if miners go bankrupt it means somebody can get 5$ of the hashrate for a few pennies The last miners will be home miners who don't care to operate at a loss or from renewable energy, the opposite of what you claim. Investing now in renewable energy with the profits you made from mining, Yeah, BS! People are arguing about making blocks bigger because nodes can't afford a 100$ drive and you think people in their home will run 3000W miners! And pay for the battery to keep it running, cause what's $12 000 when $100 is too much? The fact that you mention lightning network, means you have not tried to open a LN node when this mess is going on, You don't get hit by a car by crossing when it's a green light, not by praying it turns green when you're under its wheels. If people had used LN normally till now most would have already had enough funds running in it to avoid complaining of not being able to send $30 without paying 10$, we had one month of 1 sat/b, and after 6 months of high fees, how many started using LN since then...crickets! |
|
|
|
Based on your analysis, do you think that large miners (or manufacturers) are diverting mining power between Bitcoin and other currencies to gain an advantage over small miners?
They can't divert mining power from other than Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV. BCH has a total of 2.8 exa, 0.5% of Bitcoin, BSV is in petahash territory so I'm not going to do the math for it. What Phil is suggesting is that somebody is turning off BTC gear and plugging in LTC and Doge (scrypt) miners or Kaspa, but well, I'm not buying this theory. LTC's daily reward is $250k, Doge is 1mil, BTC is 44 mils, and they are more profitable right now per watt so less energy involved, I can't see something that uses in total 1% of the energy Bitcoin does influencing it by turning off just a part of it. |
|
|
|
 I feel that definitely somebody is doing things completely wrong, jus look in less than 10 minutes fees were incremented a lot Fuck those BS Ordinals. Why not increment from 45 to 46, 47,48... etc they are incrementing to 100, 150, 200.. where is the logic there? if they want to earn money they are doing it wrong. That's a ViaBTC block: https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000000e02766a71214a38a37f511cc4fe92a0b2617db4a8310Viabtc includes up to 100 tx per block through its transaction accelerator, that's why it has a few low paying tx, which happens all the time:  |
|
|
|
The government of the countries that are creating CBD should look for other things that they want to use money for than looking for ways to deceive people that CBDCs are cryptocurrencies, they are not.
CBDCs are cryptocurrencies, and despite some trying to add continuously the decentralized stuff in the de facto definition it's simply not the case! Is Tether a cryptocurrency? It's as centralized as a CDBC. Is BNB one? What's different in its design? Is Bitcoin SV a cdbc or a cryptocurrency?  Bitcoin is a decentralized cryptocurrency the rest are not so much, they still rely on cryptographic security, and they still work as a currency only the level of control is different. The main feature of a cryptocurrency is its anonymity and decentralization.
As above, since Bitcoin is pseudonymous then we have a problem with the definition. I don't get why people attach so much emotion to a definition, it is what it is and that's it. It's not like the definition will change people's minds, it will be usage that decides that! |
|
|
|
the network is now for the rich, and those willing to pay the high fee get their transaction to the top.
I find it funny how after 1000 topics of how Bitcoin will stop poverty and do some wealth redistribution and help the small guy and all that suddenly everyone realizes that Bitcoin is the perfect example of capitalism - my money my business, can't stop me from spending on what I want - you have more money to invest you have more returns - you pay more you have priority - no % based on how much you earn or you transfer, 1 billion or 10 cents transferred you pay the same Guess we need to have some of these wake-up calls now and then! |
|
|
|
At this point it is becoming confusing. I read somewhere that the high fees is as a result of Ordinal or NFTs on the Bitcoin network. According to the said comment, the Ordinals is a new trend that is massively being traded, hence the congestion of the Bitcoin network.
Exactly! So can't this be considered the opposite of what you wrote in the first post? No, is just assessing two situations, with both being completely true 1) Is the recent fee increase caused by Ordinals? YES! 2) To keep the network secure in the future when there is no block reward, are we going to have to pay the same inflated fees? YES! I just used the current mempool situation to describe the future scenario, because if I had done so when the fees were 1sat/b nobody would have paid attention, now, things are different! What surprises me is that you say that this is how it was designed to be. Whereas, just as Odohu has said, I thought it's the ordinal stuff that is making the fee hike, or are you, @stompix, suggesting that since the system was designed to be so, it might even be worse in the future?
Exactly, it was designed to be like this, the network will run on fees once all the coins are mined! Remember? We had 21 million topics about this! So when this is going happens it will be pretty much like a security company, if the fees it gets from transactions are 5$ it will act just like a police officer who is paid the minimum wage on his retirement day, if the fees are in the millions, then you can afford one full battalion of bodyguards. Definitely this is predicted to happen but why someone like me is angry about this hike is because we are not paying for security of the network that will benefit us all but we are paying such high fee because some folks created garbage and some naive folks thinks they could make profit out of it. We are bin disturb with something worthless which will soon die down. If it was as you stated out for security purposes which won’t just happen out of the blue like this one, but will be gradual process and we would well informed of that.
Well, technically even now we're paying for the security, since more fees mean more miners, but a bit irrelevant. And yes, I know pretty well the change will be gradual, what I'm trying to tell people is that the image they chanted so easily when they were typing what will happen when all coins are mined is this one! So it's not going to be a walk in the park, oh miners will live on from fees, and everything is fine, but it will be more like what we see now! Some really need to understand that the reason why they can send money to another country is completely secure with no chance of transactions being reversed or censored does not happen magically, it's possible with $30 million being spent each day on that security! Bottom line, prepare to pay up once the money printing is done! |
|
|
|
Banks are even better than exchanges because money sent from the bank can still be traced. This will make the thieves to think otherwise.
Pitchfork this guy! But this is just another example of the myths about thieves not being able to steal for you or the government not being able to seize your coins:  The whole security works if the robber is not ready to torture you a bit with a hammer on your fingers or he has no clue you have coins, or if the government acts lawfully, because if it's the NK government I doubt 99.9% of the people on this forum would manage to keep any secret for more than 24. Some really need to understand those limitations in security and take additional measures if they really want to be safe. After all, a seed or a key is just a piece of information, as long as somebody is willing to go to the extreme to make you say it there is no big difference between that and your card PIN or your Netflix password. |
|
|
|
Episode 239 of season 16, "Things that don't make any sense", preview: Latest Block: 816032 (5 minutes ago)
Current Pace: 102.2441% (1569 / 1534.56 expected, 34.44 ahead) If the previous jump was gear coming back online cause it was profitable, the pace actually going down for the last 3 days despite the price aiming at 40k and fees adding another 11% on top of that, no way! I call bs on this unless we hear one major farm just had a fire or was seized or bombed or whatever! I welcome any reasonable explanation but I doubt there is one! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
