Alright, let's make another summary to get things straight:

@BernyJB & NotFuzzyWarm : accept a vaccine because it helps you not dying from Covid. So maybe my fear levels for covid are not high enough.

@Tash: fight in court. One way of Rebellion I would say.

@Gyfts: a prediction: don't expect revolution from unvaxxed people who need the vaccine. But what about those unvaxxed who don't need the vaccine?

Yeah sorry, my summary wasn't exactly what you said. Would you accept a QR society, assuming you can get all the fake passports you need?

Thanks for all the replies so far. Let me summarize:

@suchmoon suggests to vote different. Sounds indeed very useful if you happen to have an election or referendum in the upcoming months.

@saddampbuh suggests to just ignore the government. That sounds as the most peaceful option.

@LTU_btc suggests to just accept the QR society and buy a code on the black market.

@BADecker suggest to file a notice that claims your body belongs to yourself. I wonder what the protection is this will give you.


I was more looking into countries that have a more libertarian mindset. A quick search shows the list needs to he updated . https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/libertarian-countries

Talks in Europe are mentioning a vaccine mandate for everyone. Germany and Austria plan to have it mandatory starting from 1st of February. Other countries worldwide could follow.

Imagine you don't have the covid vaccine and vaccines become mandatory. What would you do?

-Accept
-Flee
-Rebel
-Pay fine for each vaccine you miss
-?

Inspire us with your story.

Surprising to read so many people support lockdown, curfew, masks and other non-scientific measures, while at the same time they hold crypto because they don't trust the fiat-money system. You guys worry me...

The funny thing is, even scam ICOs can make early investors rich. As long as the hype is up when the coin can be exchanged, even if it is a bitcoin copy or simply a paper launch as a token in Ethereum.

Is there a way of signing transactions offline?

Thanks to this thread I know how to generate an address offline and receive money offline. But at some point you'll need to send IOTA securely as well, without entering my seed on an online device.

Since CfB was active in Nextcoin before: it's called offline transaction signing overthere. You just generate a transaction on an online device, sign it offline and transmit it via the online device using QR codes. Very convenient and safe .

Where are the devs of Arcblock hiding. If you start an announcement topic, people expect explanation to questions. That is more or less the idea of this topic.

Very little activity going on in github. I do see after RC0 the project will go open source. When will this be, before or after ICO?

I like the novel approach of this project regarding Blocklets.

Two questions for the ArcBlock team:
1. The white paper's Acknowledgement mentions the Arc development team. Who is in the development team?
2. Could you describe how the Public sale will take place? Do I need to fill in a form regarding KYC? Will you get your tokens immediately or at the end of the sale period? Does it look like IOTA or EOS his ICO?

Edit: Third question, now I'm on it anyway
3. Is there any proof you guys have code ready? Can I review the source code somewhere?

Same story here, my account was hacked as well. Email address had not been changed, but they did change my signature with a link in it and posted in two threads to promote two different coins. Has the database with passwords been compromised?

I can imagine all these old accounts have a relative lage amount of bitcoin and are therefore an interesting start to hjiack email accounts or read private messages to gain further access.

Don't trust this coin at all. My account was hijacked just to post positive messages in this thread. You have been warned.

Don't trust this coin at all. My account was hijacked just to post positive messages. You have been warned.

Alright, found a workaround to forward data from 192.168.1.60 to 127.0.0.1.



Important: to check the result, go to another pc and query:


I checked on the same pc as Electrum runs, and apparently that doesn't work.

Next step is to secure the line .

Thanks for the link  .  I did indeed use it to set up Electrum. I can perform all the given curl queries locally without any problem. If however, instead of 127.0.0.1 I use its network address: 192.16.1.60 I get "connection refused".

This morning I tried to forward all traffic of port 7777 from 192.168.1.60 to 127.0.0.1, but I still get connction refused. I followed this post: http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/111433/iptables-redirect-outside-requests-to-127-0-0-1  and probably did something wrong, since I am not a debian/raspbian expert.

Either I find a way to forward data correctly, or enable Electrum to listen to port 7777 on 192.168.1.60.

For a small webshop I want to enable bitcoin payments. Since the good old blockchain.info wallet doesn't support json-rpc anymore, I would like to use electrum.

I have electrum running on a raspberry pi successfully. Queries run wel locally. My website is on shared hosting somewhere else. I would like to query electron via stratum/json-rpc from the webserver. However, Electrum only accepts connections from localhost, not from 0.0.0.0,  according to netstat.

Two questions that pop up:
1. How can I configure Electrum to accept connections from outside?
2. How safe is opening up a port to the outside world? I want to use ip restrictions in my local router.  Further security would be using ssl, but ssl over json-rpc is not recommended. Ssh tunnels are not available on shared hosting either.

How could you say that, if you didn't read the book? The graph with the "corrected" data, uses servey data. As stated clearly in the book, this is wrong for two reasons: 1) servey data is only used for the last data point, so you have a mix of sources. 2) Survey data always underestimates the capital people have, since the richest people don't answer and the top 1% do not tell all they have. Check Thomas Piketty's response as well for more details about the FT critics.

Wealth tax is not ment for those with "some" wealth, but for the rich which have 4,5 million euro or more. Mr Piketty proposes a tax of 0,1% until 200.000 for statistics and 1% above 200.000 and it gets progressive upwards. Where the very rich could be taxed 5 to 10%. To get the numbers straight, the richest 1% have around 25 times more in Europe then average: 4,5 million versus 180.000 euro. In the US this is 35 times more (8 million dollar and more). The very rich 0,1% will have several times this amount of money, lets say 100 million or more. The reason he proposes this, is not because the very rich work very hard for their money. It's because if you are very rich, you mostly don't work anymore, nor do any of your children. You just live of the difference between rate of interest and the rate of growth, for generations and generations.

And yes, there still are very rich working people, like Bill Gates. But I doubt Mr Gates is motivated by money, since he gives it away. I don't think the very rich working people, would be demotivated, if they have to give a large part of the rate of return on their capital to the state in the form of taxes. Not working very rich people, will of course complain, since their children might need to work a little.

Please be aware that Mr Piketty is not against capitalism. He just points out the wealth distribution is changing, in favor of the rich (1%) and the very rich (0,1%) of the population. If this trend continues, the very rich, have all, end everyone below them has nothing. This implies everyone working, while having near to nothing and being indebted, while the very rich don't work at all and have all the wealth. This trend will continue, unless we do something about it, or a revolution or war breaks out.

My opinion: I prefer not to have a war. A revolution (bitcoin powered) would be nice and maybe there are better solutions then those proposed by Mr Piketty.

This is where you and me fully agree . It makes the problem worse. Money printing is almost not discussed in the book of Mr Piketty. Lets discuss them here!

Mainstream economics do not really like what he says. Just check out the Financial Times critics or google "Piketty wrong". Most economics are part of the 1%. Oh and about the increase taxes: keep in mind that according to Mr Piketty, only the very rich (0,1%) part of society should pay substantially more taxes. He clearly states that this tax will only result in a few percent of GDP and thus not a way to make the very rich pay for all. The goal of the tax is to not make the rich any richer without working: just because the rate of interest is heigher that the rate of growth.

Found this thread after finishing Thomas Piketty his book. Would love to discuss his findings and where Bitcoin can help us.

Short summery of the book for those who didn't read it:
-rate of return on capital was during the last 200 years higher than growth, in percentage.
-if rate of return is higher than growth, capital will be more and more concentrated as long as you don't spend it, or more precise, spend less then rate of return minus growth.
-if capitial is more concentrated, the rich will be richer until a few people have all wealth, or a revolution or war starts.
-solution of Mr Piketty: progressive wealth tax: 0.1% until 200,000 euro, 1% from 200k to 1 million, 2% above 1 million.
-the bigger a persons private capital, the more affordable it becomes to hire a personal investment manager and the heigher the rate of return.
-the rich 0.1percent of society has mostly stocks, derivetives, etc, where middle class people mostly have a house as part of their capital.
-central banks should fulfill the role of lender of last resort
-gold based economy has prices which go up when large amount of new gold are discovered and down if the economy grows. Therefore, gold based economy is bad. A steady inflation is needed.

I don't think Thoma Piketty knows about bitcoin. With bitcoin you wouln't be able to rescue banks if needed. But banks wouldn't be necessary, but optional. Transactions can be done within the blockchain, but you might use a bank if you are an entrepreneur in need of money or as an individiual who wants a heigher rate with the risks that involves.

If steady inflation is really needed, it could be implemented in a cryptocurrency like blackcoin.

Any thoughts on the topic: are central banks really needed? And what can bitcoin do to help solve the problem of the rich getting richer? Is inflation really needed? And doesn't his solution with progressive wealth tax simply lower the rate a bit, thererfore just delaying the process of the rich getting richer a bit?

If you define "strong fiat" by: a low public, external, private and commerial debt, you'll end up with a "third-world" looking list.

If you define "strong fiat" by: used by a lot of people, it will be the USD.

Obviously, both methods fail. We might consider a fiat currency as strong if it has a stable percentage of money growth, which ideally should be 0.

Bitstamp is located in Slovenia, not Ukraine, so they remain unaffected by the Ukrainian withdraw limit.