Bevor ich aber nun etwas weiterempfehle oder zu etwas rate wovon ich selbst keine Ahnung habe oder auch keine Erfahrung, dachte ich mir, dass ich mal nachfrage was ihr dazu denkt?

Naja, bei einem renommierten Neo-Broker wie z.B. Scalable gibt es sicher keine Probleme bei der Auszahlung. Hinter den Anbietern steht meist eine deutsche Bank mit BAFIN-Lizenz. Für Guthaben bis €100k gilt die deutsche Einlagensicherung und Wertpapiere sind sowieso Sondervermögen. Darum auch wenn der Anbieter Pleite gehen sollte, kommt man weiterhin an sein Geld und seine Wertpapiere. Damit liegen diese Anbieter beim Thema Anlegerschutz deutlich vor den uns bekannten Kryptobörsen wie Binance oder Kraken.

Der Hauptunterschied Unterschied bei den Neo-Brokern ist lediglich, dass du keine physischen Coins kaufst sondern ETPs.


Quelle: https://de.scalable.capital/kryptowaehrung

Ein weiterer Punkt den man bei Neo-Brokern im Kopf behalten sollte ist, dass die Börsen-Handelszeiten gelten. Ein Wochenendhandel ist so meist ohne weiteres nicht möglich.

Oh wow, dass das Forum in Russland verboten worden ist höre ich zum ersten mal von dir. Aus welchem Grund wurde ein Verbot ausgesprochen und handelt es sich dabei nur um unser Forum oder auch um andere Foren? Vermutlich umgehen die meisten das Ganze per VPN?

Domain "bitcointalk.org" was blocked yesterday, 25.03.2020 by Roscomnadzor.

The reason for inclusion in the blacklist was a letter N 2-6-20/2017-07-13-1796-AИ from the Federal Tax Service of the Russian Federation dated 13.07.2017.

Lol what a decision. Blocking access to a thread created on a site 4 years ago. 

Russian government: What is this, lets see... I don't understand anything so we will just block access to the whole thing. Problem solved.
Use TOR or private socks5 and nothing is blocked.   

- Ordinals are a method for identifying and tracing the movement of satoshis (Bitcoins smallest unit) by assigning them numbers based on when they were mined.

- The process of inscribing data onto particular Ordinals gives them similar functionality to non-fungible tokens (NFTs) on smart contract platforms like Ethereum.

- Although there is a long history of storing “arbitrary data” on Bitcoin, Ordinals and inscriptions represent a new, efficient method that—coupled with an increased community enthusiasm for NFTs—may have staying power.

Wenn man diesen Faden hier so liest und wie die Leute teilweise über Binance denken ist dieser Abschnitt wohl kaum ernst gemeint 
Aber man kann es ja gerne mitteilen. ( Die Löschung der Daten beantragen ) Aber ob denen das wirklich interessiert bezweifle ich stark.
Und überprüfen kann man es auch nicht.

Bisher hat sich früher oder später JEDES Angebot mit mehr als 5% Rabatt als illegal herausgestellt und auch ich hatte schon mehrmals Post deshalb.

Aber ich würde auch wie bullrun2020bro empfehlen, denn Kundensupport zu kontaktieren. Denn wenn man schon die Hosen runtergelassen hat, dann sollte man auch reingelassen werden. Vielleicht brauchst du Binance ja doch mal irgendwann.

Komplett nervig, und es gibt da seitens der Post überhaupt keine Einsicht, dass diese Marken niemanden mehr interessieren. Es gibt ja nicht einmal mehr ein bestell Limit (OK bei 100 Stück), aber auch da gibt es alte Marken noch in mehr als ausreichender Stückzahl zu kaufen, eigentlich ist dies ja schon peinlich.

wie von mir schon am sonntag erwähnt ist nun seit gestern offiziell. fc augsburg ist der erste klub, der in dieser saiosn den trainer entlassen hat.
der klub trennte sich gestern abend von Enrico Maaßen. vorerst übernimmt der u23 coach Tobias Strobl interimsweise die mannschaft.

Seit seiner Entlassung als Bundestrainer sucht Joachim Löw nach einem Job. Immer wieder hat der 63-Jährige betont, bereit für eine neue Trainer-Station zu sein. Einzig das passende Angebot scheint noch nicht eingegangen zu sein. Vielleicht würde Löw ja beim FC Augsburg schwach werden. Doch nach 15 Jahren als Bundestrainer könnten sich die Gehaltsvorstellungen außerhalb der Grenzen des FCA befinden.

das kann ich dir leider auch nicht klar sagen. aber das blocktrainer team hat das ganze nun mehr oder weniger über die lupe genommen und hat einen doch sehr informativen dt. artikel über das bitvm veröffentlicht.

BitVM: Everything you need to know (and more...)

BitVM is a new Optimistic Roll Up + Fraud Proof + Taproot Leaf + Bitcoin Script computing paradigm designed by Robin Linus at Zero Sync. They published an excellent white paper this morning reviewed by Super Testnet and Sam Parker (post currently has 1.5M views!)

tl;dr

1. This is not a silver bullet solution

2. No, BitVM is not as good as EVM, BitVM is slower, more expensive, and more complex

3. The core benefit of BitVM is we get additional programmability right now on Bitcoin without an upgrade. No new op_codes needed. No soft fork needed. Ready to go right now.

4. Easy potential use cases include decentralizing various parts of applications that currently rely on centralized services (DLC oracles, congestion control/coinjoin aggregators, sidechain quorums)

5. No, BitVM doesn’t solve trustless bridging for sidechains (likely requires covenants)

6. Yes, BitVM is strictly better than Greg Maxwell’s 2016 ZKP contingent payments example

7. BitVM is VERY complex to understand and implement. Upgrading Bitcoin with an op_code could accomplish the same thing.

Technical Deep Dive

Alright, now let’s dig into the technical side of things. I am heavily quoting many others throughout my summary here because it was the safest way to stay true to what they said without misquoting them.

BitVM’s purpose is “any computable function can be verified on Bitcoin." - BitVM whitepaper

Which means that “Bitcoin is now as Turing Complete as any other chain, and this requires zero changes to Bitcoin” - Sam Parker

There are limitations (which we will get to later), but essentially what this means is as long as you:
(1) have enough money to pay for off-chain computation/proofs,
(2) have bandwidth to receive and send the necessary data (could be 100s of MB), and
(3) can do as many Bitcoin transactions as needed, THEN you can compute anything you want.

"All BitVM does is allow us to split the runtime of some logic that would be out of bounds of a single transaction across multiple transactions. That’s it."
- Sam Parker

So it might take a REALLY long time. And it might be REALLY expensive. And it might take hundreds of transactions. But you can do whatever you want. 😀

Reiterated by Sam himself: "So Bitcoin really isn’t any more Turing Complete by the technical definition as it was before, it simply has been given a runtime to its programs that we can reasonably say it’s “Turing complete enough” for any program that we could realistically want to execute."

One of the key benefits here is there is no upgrade required. You can do it all right now.

And you don’t have to use it if you don’t want to: "This is opt-in. If you don’t trust your coins being locked to some Turing complete contract (totally reasonable) then don’t lock them to a Turing complete smart contract." - Sam Parker

Since there will be some computational limits on what you can do, I think the lowest hanging fruit for something like BitVM is replacing a lot of the centralized “Bitcoin edge” services that people currently use.

For example we could "cut out all kinds of trusted or semi-trusted escrow services that a version of Bitcoin without this requires. Congestion control/Coinjoin aggregators, sidechain quorums, certain types of DLC oracles, all can go from trusted/semi-trusted to 100% trustless. Bitcoin’s trustlessness is only as strong as the weakest link in the interaction you are engaging in with it." - Sam Parker

Now let’s get into what Eric Wall thinks about it:

""I just read the whitepaper and all the concepts check out to me. I have a natural disinclination for schemes that require very large pre-signed transaction exchanges in a setup phase—I don’t know which issues may arise from such schemes. Overhead and permission are the two big issues.

For now, I’m cautiously excited, waiting for what the real-world experiments will yield. Maybe there are elegant, trivial solutions to the two-party limitations of this scheme, maybe there aren’t. Maybe the overhead is manageable for specific types of computation, like zk proofs.

If BitVM works well to verify a zk proof inside it, then that’s interesting—BitVM would then serve the role of the zkwasm layer [I’ve discussed previously]."" - Eric Wall

He then continued with what is probably the best succinct summary of BitVM:
"Is it correct to say that BitVM today only describes a way by which a verifier can steal a bond from a prover depending on the outcome of a turing complete computation, but doesn’t really describe an architecture for peg-in/outs for outside participants?"

The answer to his question is yes, this is exactly what BitVM is at this point.

Adam Back jumped in with a more critical comment (that has tons of views) "For people getting (over) excited, this is cool but effectively a generalization of a two-party game - it says right in the abstract - so it's a bit like Greg Maxwell's 2016 ZKP contingent payments implemented example".

Except Adam missed a part of the paper and this BitVM is actually strictly better than Greg Maxwell’s 2016 ZKP example. Quote from Robin: "It is strictly superior [than Greg Maxwell’s 2016 ZKP example because] in a ZKCP the prover has to know the solution upfront."

Super Testnet was a reviewer on the article and posted: "This is probably the most exciting discovery in the history of bitcoin script. It seems to knock down practically every door, and gives us access to covenants, sidechains, and powers similar to Liquid or the EVM, all at once with no forks required. I can't wait to publish my demo."

And to answer Eric Wall’s question about 1 to N party setups, Super Testnet posted: “It also allows for 1-N parties, similar to rollups. You can have a central party take a fee to perform computations for a group. Everyone in the group knows the central party cannot lie or the group can take, and distribute among themselves, a massive bond."

So some additional trust, but with nice economic trust assumptions as the central party loses in the event that they are dishonest.

One main downside to BitVM is the complexity. There is a lot of presigning that needs to occur in order for BitVM to work.

Rijndael commented: "Seems like CTV would cut down on the presigning. This would be great to build with current bitcoin and then figure out how much interactivity could be cut out with ctv and whether thats a nice to have or a must have".

If you aren’t up to speed here, CTV = BIP-119 = Simple Covenants. So if we upgraded Bitcoin to enable CTV, BitVM would be a lot nicer and more efficient.

Post Capone added his own take on the current positivity across many ecosystems within Bitcoin: "BitVM has spurred net positive commentary from 8 separate legions within bitcoin that notoriously slander each other into oblivion. Big stuff, man. Big stuff. Hats off to a lot of the analysis/feedback that has been piped out in such short order. It's very cool to see. Ordinals was a magical moment. This feels like it has the gas in the tank to double down on that. We're all clamoring over ourselves to hack it into working order."

BitVM is very similar to Lightning Network as (at least in the paper) there is a 2:2 multisig requirement.

Dylan LeClair posted: "Correct me if wrong: although technically much different, its like LN in the sense that it's a 2:2 multisig where TXs/apps/contracts can be built above bitcoin, but verification & settlement occurs on-chain. As I understand it this would enable trustless BTC peg-ins (?)".

To which Sam replied: "It enables basically anything you’d want to enable including trustless peg ins. It’s very similar in spirit to lightning in that way yes. I think running this protocol inside of a lightning channel is going to be the real power play personally. I suspect there’s a way to piggyback on Lightning’s justice transactions in a very synergistic way."

Some have doubted whether BitVM can support a global state due to the state-channel-like description in the article, but Super Testnet responded "It supports global state. Party A can prove statements to party B about a global ledger such as bitcoin or a sidechain or even an alt-chain."

Essentially BitVM “enables more expressive Bitcoin contracts. Particularly, it enables functionality that we thought we'd need a soft fork for. It might enable trustless sidechains, but that's not fully solved yet." - Super Testnet

And Rijndale responded that we likely still need covenants for trustless sidechains: “BitVM lets you spend ALL of a UTXO with a smart contract. For trustless sidechains we need to be able to spend PART of a UTXO with a smart contract".

Bob's take:

1. Another whitepaper, another round of podcasts, and another loop around the sun. BitVM is very interesting, but it is still in the research phase with much still to be explored, so TBD on how many problems BitVM can solve for us all.

2. There are likely some simple key use cases that could start leveraging BitVM right now to reduce trust assumptions (DLC oracles).

3. We need a variety of different paths to give us additional programmability on Bitcoin, so I applaud anyone working on solutions in this area (BitVM included). I hope tons of devs build really cool demos with it that solve big problems for people.

Thanks for reading! If I missed anything, please correct me or ask questions in the replies.

~

Eine Viertelstunde nach Abschluss der Einreichung der Unterlagen für die Verifizierung erhalte ich eine einfache E-Mail, dass die Verifizierung abgelehnt wurde und als Grund werden die neuen gesetzlichen Bestimmungen genannt aber man geht nicht auf Details ein. Ich habe eigentlich alles wahrheitsgemäß bekannt gegeben gehabt und auch die angeforderten Dokumente eingereicht. Daher weiß ich auch nicht woran es scheitert aber mittlerweile ist es mir auch egal. Falls jemand vom selben Fall betroffen ist weiß er zumindest, dass er seine Kryptos abziehen kann.

We have 1x Sr Member and 2x Full Member slot open.

wie schon Unknown01 geschrieben hat, hat den 7. spieltag mit 17 punkten user Spray. gewonnen und kann sich schon, in dieser noch jungen saison, zum zweiten mal als spieltagssieger nennen

~

Crazy scenes at the Cup final! It literally took the last penalty (the minute of the 1st yellow card) for bullrun2020bro to defeat LFC_Bitcoin.

Cup Final results:

Cup Final
bullrun2020bro vs LFC_Bitcoin   5-5 (4-3 pen)

Big Congrats to @bullrun2020bro who won this week's Yellow Cap and also the Qatar Grand Prix Challenge

Not only that but it changed dramatically the standings and it made them even more challenging now,from 10th to 4th it is about 2 or 2.5 points in the last 5 races remaining for this season.FIA with these changes of having to pit with a certain time frame have made a huge huge mistake as it has moved out any different strategy or thinking from the teams.Based on this it was a super boring race having to see people make 3 pit stops in a 57 lap race where I have seen in the years before people finishing this with just one pit stop.Another shameful error from FIA.

nicht Ole Werner (bremen), nicht Gerardo Seoane (gladbach) sondern höchstwahrscheinlich Enrico Maaßen (augsburg) wird der erste trainer sein, der in dieser saison als erster seinen posten als chefcoach verlieren wird
mit nur 1 sieg aus 7 spielen, wird für EM die luft immer dünner. und ob die fca verantwortlichen nun in der länderspielpause in aktionismus verfallen, das wird sich dann zeigen...

Kaum scheibe ich ..zack 1:0 für Leverkusen 

~