After watching tonight's news on Trump, I'm wondering if war with former allies is good for bitcoin?
Not too uninteresting to not explain  After four weeks of presidency, I think the next four years will surely be a time the world has not seen for a long time. I do not want to say this is positive or negative. We will have to get used to a lot of new situations I guess. Bitcoin will certainly benefit from the growing uncertainty caused by Trump and other events in the world.Absolutely, I think you will see that for cryptocurrencies too as a whole. It is pretty obvious that people just want to get "out of the system" entirely, whether putting them into assets, gold/silver, bitcoin, you name it.  I mean, you can see how the system gets "pumped" with a correcting downward spike due to disasters (9/11/housing crisis). If we don't see another crisis with Trump in the white house, I will be very very shocked. |
|
|
|
Do any of you (who believe mainly in xmr and maybe btc) recommend having a few eth as hedge?
I have a little ETH and ETC as a hedge. I think smart contracts have so far turned out to be nothing more than bullshit hype for the purpose of pumping a token, but may, eventually, turn out to be more than that. I also have some worse crap than ETH as hedges too, so don't view this as an endorsement, more of an admission that my current views on crypto merits may turn out somehow to be wrong and I don't need to figure out exactly how for the hedge to work. Also even if my skepticism turns out to be correct ultimately the market may get it 'wrong' for a long time. The thing I really don't understand is the logic behind having coins that carry monetary value for things such as ETH and ETC, even SIA or any other "smart contract" or "app coins". IRL if you want someone like a lawyer to help you draft out a contract, or maybe help you submit a patent on a new invention you made, you would influence the lawyer to do that for you by paying them in cash/fiat. Imagine having to go out somewhere to buy some random "lawyer tokens" to be able to talk to a lawyer... that would be insane, wouldn't it? I understand people who mine ETH, or whatever smart contract coin out there, need to have some reason to do it... but I just believe there just has to be some better way to go about doing this. This whole thing just seems backwards to me... |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, just wanted to say that I recently encountered this type of problem with my main wallet on multibit and the "repair wallet" feature was the thing to fix this.
When I entered my wallet it seemed as if the 50+ transactions I've made in the past with the wallet were all either 'sending' or 'receiving'. Plus it took out my balance that I had in the wallet from before and was then "unconfirmed". So, nonetheless, if someone else encounters the same issue, I would suggest resyncing with "repair wallet".
|
|
|
|
Well Ross made a crime and he should suffer in jail. Its not the presidents of America why he is in jail, it is his own actions that led him to be placed in jail. If he did not make any illegal and illicit activities then he would be in jail in the first place. Also maybe the reason why he was not given a presidential pardon was he did not play as a good man in the penitentiary.
It's not about him being a good boy or not. When you are sentenced for life you can be the nicest inmate in the world and it won't matter. IMO his sentence should be reduced. Yes, he did something illegal, but he hasn't killed anyone, he just created a market site. Killers and rapists are usually sentenced for 5-10 years. I've seen pedophile murderers, who raped and killed a child, sentenced only to 25 years, and this guy gets life? This has nothing to do with justice. I never really understood these types of sentences for someone who didn't actually end someone else's own life. You know, an eye for an eye type of thing. Even if he actually was doing the actual dealing of drugs online, rather than hosting the site for other drug dealers to use, it doesn't really matter. Jail, how I believe it should be, is a way to act as a way for "civilized revenge" to take place and a way to sort of rehabilitate people and make sure they won't want to do whatever crime it is they were committing in the first place. If Ross was actually dealing drugs... does it seem right to put him in their for life? Rather than let him serve a few years (which is a LONG LONG time in jail) in order to scare him not to do the same thing and allow him to live his life from that point on? Idk... the whole system is fucked anyways, so why not torture him by forcing him to live for 60 years in a cage. |
|
|
|
The first 100 days of the presidency are always the most important, so I think depending on the moves and agenda set by the president in the spring, the value of bitcoin will fluctuate pretty rapidly. If his decisions and agenda cause a lot of economic and political worries or panic, then maybe bitcoin will reach $1100 again sooner than we think.
I think you are for the most part right... I think you could definitely make the argument that speculation will wait until the Trump presidency actually begins and he starts actually acting as the president. You know, it's kind of funny, speculators for fiat, precious metals, and cryptocurrencies have been just speculating on how they think the president will be and what it would mean for the global economy. It's going to be interesting to see what the global markets do when the protests start up tomorrow. |
|
|
|
I recently watched the documentary and it is really sad that this guy has to stay in jail for something he didn't do.
B... but he did though. What kind of 'documentary' were you watching? If you want to read up a little bit about Ross, I went ahead and searched the interwebz for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_UlbrichtIt cannot be denied that the noise from medias is because of the Senator Schumer, who labeled him as a public enemy No. 1. But we can not completely exclude the hypothesis of a form of conspiracy. The fight against drugs in the United States represents a huge market. Between jails, tests, military industry, not to mention the crazy laws on the matter.
Set aside the incentive for politicians needing to please private jail backers... there is definitely an incentive, especially for business man Trump, to be able to create jobs. Anything that ramps up demand for workers, which also includes people who "enforce the law", is going to be priority #1 because that's been one of his major talking points; the ability to create new jobs. So you can bet that Trump will be OK with keeping the laws as is in order to keep the demand for a work force while probably trying to incarcerate more people in the process. |
|
|
|
Every 4 years, a US president leaves and lets a whole bunch of people out of jail by decree. Obama let out FAR, FAR more than any other president. Well over 1,500! Guess who was not on the list? That's right Ross Ulbricht of Bitcoin fame. Since Trump isn't letting anyone out of jail unless they are his friends, Ulbricht doesn't stand a chance for another 8 years at least! Probably 12 more years before even being considered. That sucks. Obama could have let him out. One strike of the pen- he would be free. It is over for him now. Over.
Do the crime, Do the time. While I do have empathy for his family at the end of the day he was caught. While I do feel his sentence was horrific there ain't much anyone can do about that. that's fact. Maybe if trump supports bitcoin things might change! You think that Trump, the guy who is so dull headed to think as if building a physical wall across the Mexico-US border would stop Mexicans from 'bringing in drugs, committing crime, and raping people', would all the sudden be in support of some entrepreneur who failed miserably? Does he ever have empathy for people who commit crimes (except for his personal BFF's)? More specifically, do you think he would ever show any sort of empathy for someone who didn't succeed at any sort of business, let alone, a business of 'criminal activity'? No, I don't think that we will see that happen. |
|
|
|
I've been more 2 years here in bitcoin industry and never in my entire life that I thought of the chance that bitcoin will replace by other cryptocurrency.
Bitcoin has a great impact in our life and economy no one would just come and replace the king. But, I believe there would really a rivalry between crytocurrency in the coming months.
Why not? There are many reasons that Bitcoin could be replaced by another cryptocurrency in daily usage. But it is just a two sides of a coin. Bitcoin will remain as a store of value and because of that people will continue to invest in Bitcoin. But for daily use other cryptocurrencies are more suitable. In this case analogy with gold is very appropriate. Who uses gold today for daily transactions? People are using fiat currencies (in cash or in e-currency form). But gold remained as store of value. The same could happen with BTC in the future. It will remain prestigious as a world first cryptocurrency but someone will tkae the lead in daily usage. This is true... I mean it's not like someone personally will go "replace the king" by declaring that everyone must use 'x-coin' from here on out. No... People control what is in demand by the use and function of a coin. Right now, what Arvydas77 is saying is pretty much right; that Bitcoin's main function right now is a "stable" investment hedge against fiat that functions like gold, while also providing a sort of gold standard across all cryptos. This gives altcoins the value in USD you see today and as of right now it's a pretty good system. But this in no way makes Bitcoin "the king" because it's technologically superior by any means. You need to continuously improve software, just as you would for you computers... the same goes for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is essentially that which desperately needs to be updated, but everyone is keep on hitting the "Remind Me Later" button while knowing that if they don't update it will slow things down. |
|
|
|
Is anyone in here familiar with the 52 weeks money challenge?
Since it is new year I've decided to take that challenge as a refresher and to try if I can save money using that pattern.
Question now is do you think saving with bitcoin will work? I you are familiar with the 52 week challenge it is where your daily deposit in your saving will have an increament of which amount you started in week one. Since bitcoin is so volatile do you think i'll save more if it is in fiat or in bitcoin?
I am familiar with the challenge, but never took it, so I'll comment only on your last sentence. You're either saving in Bitcoin or saving to risk the opportunity of selling Bitcoins at a good price for fiat (which isn't really saving Bitcoin...). So if you're saving Bitcoin, volatility is irrelevant. Why isn't volatility a concern when saving fiat? After all, your fiat will be worth less in the future... What I'm trying to say is that you should save Bitcoin for the sake of saving Bitcoin and having more Bitcoins, nothing else. BTW, you'll probably find this thread interesting. Not sure if there are more threads on the subject. The thing is you have to find a way to justify buying at a certain price point. Usually it is better to buy at with small amounts more frequently to avoid missing huge price spikes or huge dumps, but I find that steadily buying and accumulating an asset works best. You also have to consider the importance of setting a future date where you will begin to consider to use your coins. So I personally believe it would be better to get a paper wallet to keep sending your coins too over time and tell your self that you will not be able to open that wallet until 'X' amount of time has passed. |
|
|
|
Personal computers were invented in 70s and Internet in 90s. Can we put blockchains to the list of the greatest innovation of Technology which was innovated in recent years? What do you think?
Hindsight is always 20/20. When computers and the Internet were first coming out, it was considered to be sort of a nerds toy that wasn't fully appreciated as time continued. Same thing will probably end up happening with the blockchain. We are at a forefront of a pretty cool experiment that can have a major significance going forward or could be just chalked up to be nothing of importance like eGold. Only time will tell. |
|
|
|
I would say that there is a benefit of using Core and running transactions through your own node for privacy reasons; but since bitcoin is quite transparent in where transactions are going too, there is no real reason besides to help support the reliability of the network.
I use MultiBit for Desktop mostly and Breadwallet for mobile... both are quite good and reliable in terms of being able to control your own private keys.
If someone is interested in running a full node what is the ideal set up for it in terms of hard drive size and amount of bandwidth? I read around the forum and most comments Ive seen is that no one really wants to run their own node anymore because it is costly. It depends on how long you want to continue to use Bitcoin in the future... if you were just wanting to be able to sync the blockchain as of right now you would need like 120 GB of data or so since the entire blockchain is around 100+GB's of data. If you were planning on creating transactions for a while in the future, I would suggest you get a 500 GB or 1 TB external SSD... then again guessing how large the total blockchain size will be a bit of guess work. Since there is a 1 MB limit on blocks, then you can sort of guess what the size will be down the future since generally every block is full... but there is no telling if devs will increase the blocksize or not reach a consensus on that. In terms of bandwidth I'm not really sure... I think there is a way to limit how much bandwidth you use when you're running a node; but since I don't I can't say for sure. |
|
|
|
|
I would say that there is a benefit of using Core and running transactions through your own node for privacy reasons; but since bitcoin is quite transparent in where transactions are going too, there is no real reason besides to help support the reliability of the network.
I use MultiBit for Desktop mostly and Breadwallet for mobile... both are quite good and reliable in terms of being able to control your own private keys.
|
|
|
|
Unless Bitcoin comes to a consensus on the scaling issue, then I see another cryptocurrency replacing it as a PAYMENT system but not as a store of wealth or very large transactions.
I mean you are more than likely right... As of right now it is pretty well known that Bitcoin keeps the altcoin markets "sane" in that they are a good tool for referencing the real time worth of an altcoin. Bitcoin is valuable, primarily because the cryptocurrency system depends on that. The only thing that can be a downfall to Bitcoin in terms of how people value it, is that it isn't a physical asset that has inherent properties that makes it valuable. All of the value given to Bitcoin is no better than what gives fiat value... it's value comes from trust, and if there ever comes a point where people can't trust the Bitcoin network anymore there will be chaos not only in the Bitcoin ecosystem, but every single cryptocurrencies ecosystem. |
|
|
|
The mainstream media now have the order of the powers that be to not inform the public about bitcoin since they are scared that it's going to take the banking system down, so they dont want to give any bad news, they will just keep talking about hacks and crime and stuff. Maybe they will not be able to keep quiet about it when we hit a new ATH in the next hours/days. The media doesn't really even talk about Bitcoin being used for "hackers and cyber criminals" any more. They just try to avoid covering it at all. And I think you're right, the elites would like to avoid this situation as much as they can. The fact that there is an easy way to hedge their money into a limited asset like Bitcoin is a huge liability, and people really still don't know much about it. I think we are definitely still in the "ignore" phase, for sure. I think people think of Bitcoin, like you would with trading stocks... they probably think they would need to get a broker and view Bitcoin as a sort of hassle. |
|
|
|
That's just an UI thing. Unless you're sending to a service/wallet that requires you to make a payment request before making a deposit you don't actually need it to transfer or receive bitcoins. What wallet/service did you send the bitcoins to? Some services may require more than 2 confirmations on deposit.
Ah never mind, yeah it finally did deposit at the end. I've just never seen that happen before for the service I was depositing to (poloniex). Usually it takes only 1 confirmation for them to credit my balance. It ended up taking around 2-3 confirmations which is kind of weird for them... it was probably just on their end, but it was confusing since it gave me that "didn't pay" notice at the end of the 'sending status' in multibit. |
|
|
|
|
So I sent a payment with high fees and it got confirmed fairly quickly... but after being confirmed for 2 blocks it says "This transactions did not pay bitcoins to any payment request."
I'm not quite sure what that means, because it was already confirmed on the blockchain. I checked the wallet that I was sending it too and there is still nothing there. Any one have any idea what this means? I've never had any other wallets of mine do this.
|
|
|
|
...
No we don't, the ability to have and hold value without monitoring is an inalienable right afa I'm concerned and i think everyone should hold that belief.
I agree. In addition privacy and anonymity are needed in order to ensure fungibility in crypto currencies, and fungibility is is a necessary requirement of money. Then there is of course the adaptive blocksize in Monero which ensures that there is no arbitrary limit on the number of transactions per second. People in this scene don't know how important and rare this is. I think it takes quite a bit of study and "pondering" before someone really "gets it" about how XMR may, in fact, be the better bitcoin than bitcoin, or how it may be the so-called "Bitcoin 2.0" that everyone also always sort-of intuitively understands *might* need to evolve before a crypto-currency can really be successful. Everyone always "just knows" that the first iteration of something is almost never the ultimate winner... Facebook rises on MySpace, Windows rises on Mac, VHS video rises on Betamax, etc etc. Everyone "knows" this is usually what happens, but most people seem to be fairly blind to see where and how it may be coming. Even now, I can hardly comprehend the block-size stalemate MAY INDEED be a death-rattle for bitcoin. I can't believe that those people in charge of shepherding BTC into the future could *really* allow it to fail... but my eyes are not lying and it's over a YEAR longer than I ever IMAGINED the debate would be unresolved! So...? Have to imagine it might really be happening... Yes of course they may still fix it, and maybe Monero will remain a niche experiment forever (albeit I think even then the value will rise quite a bit more yet). But the idea that XMR's "different design" and all-original code-base fundamentally FIXES more than one serious design flaw that Satoshi overlooked in BITCOIN is more believable to me every day. As is also the idea that when Satoshi said he was "leaving to pursue other things"... he may have been talking about CryptoNote... SN / NS = Satoshi Nakamoto, Nicholas van Saberhagen, etc etc. Wouldn't surprise me at all... and IF TRUE? Then buying XMR now might quite literally be "buying bitcoin again" at under $10 each... The reason why I took an interest in Monero about a year ago was because of these fundamental principles such as ring signatures/CT, dynamic blocksizes, etc. This was to act as a hedge against Bitcoin not being able to figure stuff out... And you're right, it looks like it's getting closer to the point where the Bitcoin devs just decide to keep everything the same because of "maximalist" ideas that there is no need to do such things. If what I think is going to happen in terms of price speculation of BTC/cryptocurrencies in general to be correct, then there will be a crucial point of a tipping point where a wavering global economy will force investors to move all of their liquidity into assets such as gold and Bitcoin which will inflate the price of it... and when Bitcoin simply can't handle the transaction volume and be 2-3X more slow than it already is, I would assume people will start to freak out and try to get out of Bitcoin as soon as possible. Just my two cents... I always slowly bought in Monero a little at a time, but now since it looks as if the Bitcoin community has decided to sit on their hands while certain BIP and maximalist fans shout obnoxiously at each other; it just looks like a sinking ship and I want to get on the escape boat and back on solid ground. |
|
|
|
I was being sarcastic, I do not live from sig campaigns. Still, this morning I have negative balance which is not supporter by day to day results. Each day the bot counts my post but the total balance s negative. Anyone else?
Mine too, my total balance is now negative and this just happens today. Idk if this is a super recent update to the stickied update, but on the announcement post at the top of the CRON website it has this quote from namworld: Hello,
I'm sorry about lack of updates. There's been some issues with people being overcredited that weren't actually fixed before withdrawals were allowed. It affected a few users and should have been very obvious. (many more posts credited than the total post count change)
Dev should now have fixed those issues. If there's anything wrong, please let me know. You may have a negative balance, depending on how much overpayment you received and if you've withdrawn it.
Note that compensation for delays are yet to be paid, so your balance may return to 0 or into positive amounts, unless you were one of the few with huge overpayment.
Regards,
Namworld
I'm assuming that this is a recent update because it looks updated from the last pined message at the top. I would assume Namworld would come here to check in and post here as well. We'll see I guess. But on my end I look like I'm still in the positives... which would I guess make sense to what Namworld is saying, because I've been traveling quite a lot in the recent weeks and haven't been on here posting as much... meaning that I wouldn't have overdrawn anything. |
|
|
|
Any news on when the Q1 GUI project is going to be completed. Eagerly waiting for it.... Hoping it by January or early..
I was very wrong at all kind of Crypto speculations. But I give tiny chances that GUI will be out after 5th January. the gui is likely already priced in xmr is a nice project ,my only worry is so many other coins are coming to the party with privacy features ...... hopefully the XMr network effect will be too strong....... Really, any already announced features have already been priced in by the market... In my opinion it is not even possible to price in GUI. You see, there are people who are refusing to buy Moneros before they can store them in a safe and sound manner. Therefore, once the wallet is out, they can buy into Monero. That being said, this can create a speculative bubble and drive the price of Monero literally nuts like we have never seen before. The GUI will be no more secure than running the wallet from command line. Strong passphrase is essential but Monero could really use adoption by Trezor or Ledger. Ledger is more likely as they have more manpower than Trezor and btchip has already mentioned he is interested. Monero app is not on Ledger's public roadmap yet though. GUI is nice yes but using command line is not really a bother. Paper wallets have a point of failure when you have to import private keys to spend. If Ledger does come out with hardwallet capability first, I'm pretty sure it would be easy(ish) to convert that code to be compatible with the Trezor... I'm not quite sure if Ledger uses open sourced firmware, but if that's the case then hopefully it can be used with Trezor as well. |
|
|
|
bitsquare looks ok for buyers in theory. it sounds scary for sellers. no matter where you are there usually seems to be a way to get bank transfers reversed or claimed to be fraudulent. there's no way i'd chance it.
I've always felt like it would be a good idea for bitsquare to have a way for people to send USD to other sellers through Cash Deposits.... that's the main reason why I still use localbitcoins. Quick and easy to verify, I love it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
