After selecting, click Send tab.
Use ctrl to select more than 1.

So someone created a shitcoin to get rich, someone (the same someone?) no doubt earned a lot of money, and now they're considering undoing the last few days so they can earn more profit again?
Who's going to lose money in this twice?

I didn't follow the "who's who" in Luna land, but if this is the same guy in charge of "minting" much more Luna, then it's obvious he knew shorting would pay off.

I now wonder how many people will end up in jail for this.

For the next time: if possible, using "Pay to many" in Electrum gives you lower total fees. You'll have one transaction with multiple outputs and only one change address.

That's how a blockchain works: each transaction uses the output from the previous transaction.

If you have multiple inputs in your own wallet you can use Coin control to avoid this, but you don't need to. It's normal.

I got the idea from mentioning UST, which is was "backed" by Bitcoin for it's dollar value.

In that case: it turns out we agree all along

That's why I used the example of physical banknotes. It's quite unique nowadays already if they're backed by anything, but backing by Bitcoin would be unique for sure.

Bitcoin LN is not just pegged, it's pegged by signed transactions. But more importantly: it doesn't make any promise about the value in another currency than it's own. That's a crucial difference.

Some say it's different, most people seem to be okay with LN.
But that's different than pegging UST to BTC's dollar value. The fundamental problem is that the underlying currency (Bitcoin) isn't stable. You can't ever guarantee stability by using something that's not stable. You could say 1 UST is worth a bottle of beer for all I care, and as long as you have enough bottles of beer in stock, you can guarantee a 1 on 1 swap back. But if it's beer you have, you can't guarantee a bottle of Coke per UST.

I had to look it up: Taro on lightning.engineering:
I assume this will use for instance Tether. It sounds like a huge improvement to transfer USDT on LN instead of centralized networks such as Ethereum or Binance. But Tether is pegged to the dollar by keeping a big stash of dollars. That's also debated and doubted: do they really have 79 billion dollars? Let's assume they have: in that case Tether isn't based on a Bitcoin standard, it's based on a dollar standard. Transacting over the LN network doesn't change that, and as long as you trust the company behind Tether, you can use it.

I'd expect an opposite implementation of the Bitcoin Standard: let's take El Salvador as an example, and let's assume they implement a Bitcoin Standard. Instead of holding 10 tonnes of gold, they hold 19,348 Bitcoin (worth about the same as 10 tonnes of gold). The can now issue banknotes, let's call them ElSalvos, worth 19,348 Bitcoin. If they issue 1 billion ElSalvos, each Elsalvo is worth 0.0193mBTC. At the El Salvador Central Bank, you can exchange your ElSalvos for Bitcoin if you want.

TL;DR: if you want a Bitcoin Standard, forget about dollars

Lazlo didn't pay for his pizzas IRL

The best place for Bitcoin purchases in the Netherlands is Arnhem: about a hundred shops accept it, some of them take Lightning too.

I use Bitcoin to pay wherever it's possible. Especially online, IRL isn't possible very often.

Service Announcements board: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=84.0

The whole idea of a Bitcoin Standard is wrong: with the gold standard, a dollar was worth a certain amount of gold. With a Bitcoin Standard, a TerraShitcoin should have been worth a certain amount of Bitcoin. That would make it just another fake wrapped Bitcoin, so there's no point other than earning money for the creator.
You can't use one thing to peg something to something else.
That means the "Bitcoin Standard" is just as buzz word, typical for money grabbing schemes.

I'll admit I didn't care enough to follow this closely, and it feels like adding insult to injury, but did they really have 42,530 Bitcoin to "back" their "stable" "coin"? It just dropped under $0.30!

So let me get this straight again: they had 42,530 Bitcoin to "back" their made-up "stablecoin", and to keep it stable, they have to sell Bitcoin when Bitcoin drops. Selling tens of thousands of Bitcoin means Bitcoin drops further, which means the more they sell, the lower their "stablecoin" gets! That's as dumb as it gets!
Who thought this was a good idea?

I called it. It didn't take long to actually happen.

Stable coins are not in the interest of Bitcoin users.

@WhyFhy: Thanks for your offer. I was however invited to join another campaign, which I had accepted 2 days earlier.

Best I could do is 1 year:
Without an end-date, I can't come up with a pro rated refund if someone else overbids your spot. If you're okay with that, I'd gladly add 1SPLiTKEY after my current signature ends. I wasn't planning on adding a commercial signature to LoyceMobile, but icopress asked nicely

I haven't been very active on this topic, and indeed it has been a while.

Might I suggest adding an mouse hover text?

Sent!
That's a great destination for the money.
https://www.blockonomics.co/api/tx?txid=33db25e9e063d9ffb80529b8c78396f8c76ae98252dd41999549d97b482624ee

I don't believe in unlimited, I currently easily fill 2TB and can think of other projects... What's your limit on "unlimited"?

He probably has more than one address. Look at change addresses for example.

The signed message was just revealed:

@icopress: please post a Bitcoin address so I can send you 3.8 mBTC (minus transaction fees).

If it helps: Fixed Float can get you 0.002 Bitcoin for some Litecoin without large transaction fees.

Ctrl Tab

Having an empty Bitcoin address doesn't do you any good. LoyceV will find your address from the screenshot tomorrow and check when you moved your Bitcoin.