|
If media vultures are happy to endanger lives by broadcasting wild theories about the identity of satoshi, just to boost their ratings, it speaks poorly to their character. It's reckless and could put someone in harm's way.
I'd urge people not to watch.
|
|
|
|
|
It's all a question of how you perceive "value". If you only care about the fiat value of your funds, then sure, reserves are fine. If, however, you care more about the value in terms of utility provided by Bitcoin, that value cannot be replaced if the exchange is hacked and loses all their BTC. But then, if you cared about the utility value, you probably wouldn't be storing your coins in an exchange in the first place. People who keep their funds in exchanges are like a different breed. I don't understand them and they definitely don't care about the same things I do.
|
|
|
|
he has Elon and Gemini Brothers supporting him that are also pro crypto.
The same Gemini that got sued for fraud? Is that really the kind of " pro crypto" environment we want? Shitty people running shitty fraud rings and getting away with it? Consider carefully what kind of world we want this to be. Legitimacy and integrity are qualities sorely lacking these days. The entire Trump campaign is just criminals supporting criminals. If you sincerely want to vote for more corruption and crime, it makes me wonder what kind of person you are. |
|
|
|
1) Even in Biden's "anti-crypto" tenure Bitcoin has done well. Not only did the price rise, but ETFs were approved, even for Ethereum.
2) The US are already a leading Bitcoin/crypto country. They don't need Trump for that. In the mining sector, they are "the" single leading country. There are also several exchanges in the country. At least ~50 million American people hold crypto according to estimations.
3) Altcoins are far more affected by the SEC policy than Bitcoin. The SEC's actions under Gensler were mostly directed to altcoin exchanges, the "staking" business (which is not even really PoS-style staking but often a ponzi-like construction of some exchanges) and DeFi projects which are not really decentralized, like Uniswap.
4) The US are only 4% of the world population. Bitcoin is a global currency. In addition, as shown above, in the US population crypto has already a high adoption (almost 20% of the population having already bought or held crypto). The potential for future price growths lies mainly outside the US where adoption is often still much lower, even in rich countries in Europe for example.
I'd also add: 5) Some things are bigger than Bitcoin. A power-crazed and senile convicted felon in charge of the nukes does not bode well for global stability. Trump would greatly destabilise international affairs as he becomes increasingly unhinged and tyrannical. He exhibits all the signs of becoming a despot, but Trump supporters are completely blind to it. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin will be fine either way. But the US still thinks it operates in a world where other nations don't exist. So yeah, go ahead and further isolate yourself by electing a convicted felon who no other nation on Earth will want to deal with. See what that does for your standing on the world stage. Morons.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin developers have many things in their consideration and to-do lists, not only scalability. Scalability means nothing if scaling up means less secured blockchain. So far, we have Bitcoin as a biggest and most secured blockchain to use, that's good and altcoin blockchains can not compare to Bitcoin blockchain in security.
I wish more people could see things this way. There's far too many myopic armchair pundits who can't conceive that it's a multi-faceted series of considerations and compromises. Easy gains are rare and few seem to recognise it. |
|
|
|
Support simply ignores further. They don't care about people who don't get their WOFs for a premium account. No words that they are sorry and that we will fix everything soon... They are just silent. What a fool I am for spending my BTC on buying FUN. I lost 100 times more than if I just kept my BTC
The longer it goes on, the more I suspect it's less of a technical issue and more of a business model issue. FUN price is simply too low to justify the benefits conferred. My guess is they're trying to come up with a "palatable" way to reduce the benefits that will still feel acceptable in the eyes of Premium users. |
|
|
|
All of the "greats" are completely disappointed with the path Bitcoin has taken lately. It's now even worse with the institutionalization of BTC. "Wall Street" has all of the cards to manipulate Bitcoin to its own benefit. Instead of going against the existing financial system (something Satoshi meant to avoid in the first place), Bitcoin has "bowed down" to it. The future is unpredictable, so I'd hope for the best.
Weaker systems are subverted more quickly. The actions taken ensure that the base protocol remains strong. Idealists can be disappointed if they like, but it doesn't change the fact that sensible people came to a sensible conclusion. Institutional investors would have gotten involved regardless of how scaling was handled, so try not to conflate separate issues. |
|
|
|
Are we ignoring the fact that fees can go up at any time?
Doesn't this signal that the protocol isn't as resilient as we need it to be for a global p2p economy?
That's what makes it resilient. Only shitcoins promise to have cheap fees at all times and they invariably collapse the moment they encounter a hint of congestion and suddenly fail to deliver on that promise. Dynamic fees are a necessity. You might not like it, but it's how it has to be. |
|
|
|
I still consider myself particularly new to the forum, as I only crossed the way with some historical members, and I have not lived the most glorious years with Satoshi, Hal and the other Bitcoin OG.
Don't sell yourself short, though. Older doesn't automatically equal better. Your contributions, from what I've seen, have always been substantial in terms quality. There are users who have been around longer than you, but I wouldn't be able to say the same of their contributions.  |
|
|
|
This might be an ill-informed question, but I came across this recently and was wondering how we feel about BTC upgrades/improvements? It feels like BTC is now chasing fiat gains over building a global p2p economy, hoping that lightning network or some other L2 solves the scaling problems for non-custodial transactions. https://blog.plan99.net/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experiment-dabb30201f7Mike Hearn was always slightly " out of kilter" in terms of their views about how Bitcoin should work. Some of it didn't really fit with the underlying ethos. I'd take anything said in that blog with a healthy amount of skepticism. It's their vision that failed (and rightly so). And it's simple-minded speculators who are chasing fiat gains. Just because they're loud and numerous, doesn't mean they're representive of the community as a whole. //EDIT: Although, in credit to Mike Hearn, at least he had the decency to give up and leave when everyone made it clear that his ideas were terrible and he was never going to get the awful things he wanted to implement. Unlike franky1, whose ideas are even more repellent and is even less likely to be supported by anyone, but he still hangs around like a foetid shit smear, raving like a lunatic. |
|
|
|
More people are going to hear about Bitcoin despite what the outcome of the election is going to be
And they're immediately going to associate it with alt-right proto-fascists and want no part of it. You clearly have no concept of reputation. If people see any connection between racists, sexists, homophobes and other backwards beliefs (like the average Trump supporter embodies), they're going to link that negativity with Bitcoin. Guilt by association. Bitcoin gets a bad reputation because the people talking the loudest about it are disgusting bigots. But Trump supporters are too fucking stupid to understand that. |
|
|
|
either this election or the next, Trump will be out of power. When that happens, he will be remembered as a convicted criminal who betrayed his country and was extremely nasty to women, people of color, LGBTQ people, immigrants, the disabled, and the half of the Republican party who didn't support him. Trump wishes to criminalize abortion and deport millions of people from the US. Both of these things are extremely unpopular in the US.
Extremely unpopular? The existence of millions of Trump supporters seems to suggest otherwise. They love all that abhorrent shit. That's why they feel like Trump represents them. It's who they really are. Disgusting monsters with disgusting beliefs. Bigotry and hatred are very much prevalent in the US. You're simply choosing not to see it. It's certainly no paradise and you need to stop pretending it is. |
|
|
|
Is he ahead?
Only with inbred yokels, religious fundamentalists, white-collar criminals and the KKK. But the US seemingly has an abundance of such people. Or they're just the loudest. It's difficult to tell. |
|
|
|
|
Trump has helped highlight how utterly stupid and gullible some people around here are. That's about it, though.
|
|
|
|
its a feature, not a bug. so why worry now?
Because US politics are fucking terrifying  |
|
|
|
|
The site now seems to be having issues with crediting the daily "free spins" users are meant to get for holding FUN tokens.
|
|
|
|
It's a complete contract, with the Biden administration as compare to Trump, who seems to be pro crypto now and put it on the spotlight again in this years Presidential election. So I guess the answer is why not? I mean if Trump can bring crypto closer to the biggest economy then they should be happy.
Biggest isn't always best. National agendas get murky real quickly. If large economies attempt to exert influence over Bitcoin, we're all suddenly along for the ride. Whether the outcome of that is "good" or "bad" remains to be seen. I'd personally rather Bitcoin remain as neutral as possible and remain somewhat separate to the realm of fiat. In my mind, it's a healthy distance at present. All this "mainstream adoption" people seem to be clamouring for could well have consequences depending on the form it takes. |
|
|
|
|
Sounds like a pipe dream from foolish speculators. I doubt the Fed would allow it even if the convicted felon did somehow win.
|
|
|
|
|
Just so I've got this clear, the man who has....
*checks notes*
bankrupted everything he's ever touched, wants to....
*check notes*
make financial decisions....
And you idiots think that's a great idea? I weep for the fucking world.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
