|
Not saying that this isn't potentially real - just odd since the company makes an insane amount of money per month, why would they risk it all with what is a 'small' deposit/win for them
|
|
|
|
|
are we really still having this conversation? lol bro.. its not 2015 anymore - the world has valued it at 40k for a reason.
|
|
|
|
|
What is with the fascination on finding Satoshi so long after the creation has left such an impact
|
|
|
|
|
It has more function, so yes.
|
|
|
|
|
Cost average in bit by bit, until you hit the amount you would like ideally. There will never be a perfect time, it is just gambling at that point.
|
|
|
|
|
"The internet may be cut off at some point, which will stop the buying and selling process throughout the country"
We are still able to function using mobile data should the internet stop working, there are a few days to circumnavigate that
|
|
|
|
|
It wouldnt make sense, they have always been focused on the growth of their economy. Sure, at first they may feel threatened by this emerging technology. But once that passes they will see ways they can carve out a place for themselves in this market and profit from it, this mind set is one of the reasons they are one of the largest players in the world economic market.
|
|
|
|
John McAfee, the future presidential candidate says that If Bitcoin Breaks 100k you can bet it will break a million. What's your point of view on this, let me know! When your citing this, why do you add future presidential candidate? Do you think this has a direct correlation or impact on his prediction? |
|
|
|
|
If Satoshi was going to announce who they were, it is unlikely to be a clickbaity site with a phishing email addy.
|
|
|
|
|
This reads a little bit snake oil salesman'ish.
We don't know what will happen in the future to be honest, maybe it will fly to 100k then come back down to 7k - saying it is the last time.. no way of knowing that.
|
|
|
|
|
This goes for any asset, manipulation via marketing and game theory is present in any market. People should always research the fundamentals and try to understand the thing they are investing in.
|
|
|
|
... and it’s still happening!by Jonald Fyookball Oct 20, 2018[Btw, this article answers all kinds of questions in this section of the Bitcointalk forum. OP]Wanna know what’s the greatest scam in the entire world of cryptocurrency? Take a guess… Is it MtGox? OneCoin? Nope. How about Bitconnect? No… there’s a scam that’s much bigger than all of those put together, and it’s still going on to this very day.It’s one of those illusions that hides in plain sight. The closest thing I can compare it to is when you find out the federal reserve isn’t “federal”, it’s a private institution that holds a monopoly on the issuance of currency in the USA, and has never been audited. The persistent of such institutionalized, parasitic schemes can only continue because of ignorance of the masses. I’m talking about something so insidious that it’s almost unbelievable…Ok, I won’t hold you in suspense any longer. Here it is: The biggest scam in crypto is that BTC is no longer Bitcoin!
You can read the whole article at https://medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/by-far-the-biggest-crypto-scam-ever-and-its-still-happening-a23ed102d039. So, what do you think?  You're really comparing the FED and Bitconnect to an idea of Bitcoin deviating from what some people consider Satoshi's original idea to be? While using a click bait style manipulative suspense? not fun bro. |
|
|
|
Decentralization is one of the greatest dreams of Satoshi looking at the how the blockchain technology and its immutable distributed ledger has been designed. Well it saddens my heart that the greed of men has led to the abusing of this freedom and liberty that Satoshi wanted us to have in the financial industry. Look at the way people are being scammed and robbed in broad day light just because crypto is embedded in anonymity and decentralization. I think we've all had it to the peak, how about we have some level of regulation with the activities in the crypto industry. Share your thoughts commrades.
I don't think decentralization is to blame here. Greed and a lack of love or consideration of others is the issue. Regardless of the innovation in technology, there are unloving people who will look to exploit others lack of understanding around it for their own personal benefit. |
|
|
|
|
The consensus was always 21M, a lot of people and companies invested in btc with this being the primary motivator. Supply / Demand.
If we suddenly up and changed this a lot of people would leave btc imo, especially since it is already divisible by 100M per token making fungibility a non-issue.
|
|
|
|
|
There would have to be a fundamental break down in either
a) the consensus mechanisms
b) the protocol itself
Which could not be resolved
It is unlikely it would just become worthless given the market advantage it has, the tried and tested security system it possesses based in cryptography - math is the language of truth after all.
The decentralised ledger it allows the world to share
The ability to send value across borders in a permissionless way
These things amongst others give it value
|
|
|
|
If you could only give 3 advices to someone who’s new and wants to invest in Bitcoin, what would you tell them?
1) Put a fiscally responsible amount of your savings or income into bitcoin based on your expenses 2) Research the technology enough to understand how to store it safely 3) Don't let others opinions trump logic, understand why you got in and set a marker for when you desire an exit. You can sell a portion of your initial investment, regardless of the market volatility you walk away unscathed if you time it. Patience is key |
|
|
|
This is technology and not a scam, if in the case of a transfer the sent is a value, and if you consider bitcoin to be just manipulation, then you will never be able to exchange bitcoin with fiat that you can use to meet your needs.
Calling a database management system a payment system and a database entry a money is a scam by definition. You're clearly a troll who does not wish to engage in actual conversation, or have an agenda. Go waste someone else's time. |
|
|
|
A private key is a mathematical proof of ownership for whatever bitcoins are associated with that key. That mathematical proof is the only way to interact with those coins, nothing else can interact with it, no government, company or person can do it without those private keys. Cryptography makes it impossible.
Mathematics, are tangible parts of our universe. Numbers and notations might be abstract, since we gave them value and order, but mathematics are natural, and exist within the realm of the tangible universe.
So bitcoin is a currency based of tangible principles.
Fiat is abstract, since there is no protocol behind it. Your loans do not follow any mathematical immutable rule.
Fiat is a scam.
This is just another instance of language manipulation. "Block Reward" is just an algorithmic change of entry in a database (blockchain) — from 0 to 50 initially, and this change is called Bitcoin. This has nothing to do with "tangible principles", but it is just a database management. Fractional reserve banking is a banking system in which banks only hold a fraction of the money their customers deposit as reserves. This allows them to use the rest of it to make loans and thereby essentially create new money. This gives commercial banks the power to directly affect money supply. When the rest of the money they 'create' is done, how do you think this is done. Not by adjusting a centralized database? Don't cite something incorrectly then state wrong again. This conversation is pretty tedious |
|
|
|
If we start from a simple and undeniable fact that SOMETHING cannot appear or despair by changing entries in a database, then it is obvious that so called Block Reward, which is just an algorithmic change of entry in a database(blockchain) — from 0 to 50 initially, is actually the creation of NOTHING or nothingness. But people did something strange — they gave a fancy name to this nothingness — Bitcoin. So, a mere change of entry in a database is given a name, which is in itself a bizarre thing to do. But anyhow, here is where the language manipulation kicks in. Changing entries is obviously just a database management and it belongs to the field of informatics. But what people did is they took the definition of "payment" - which belongs to the field of economy, and they copy/pasted that definition next to the phrase — "change of entry in a database". This created the illusion that when you change entry in a database(blockchain) you are actually transferring SOMETHING to another person, i.e. that you are paying. But payment is transfer of SOMETHING (rights, services or goods) from one person to another.
For. e.g. fiat money is created when a bank grants a loan i.e. SOMETHING, which is why paying someone with fiat money is actually the transfer of rights derived from bank loans. That is why fiat money fits the definition of payment — SOMETHING (rights recorded in the banking system) are transferred from one person to another.
But by changing blockchain value from 1 to 3 for e.g., obviously NOTHING has been transferred since values in that database are neither representations of rights nor goods or services. So, changing numbers in a blockchain has nothing to do with payment or economy which renders bitcoin a scam that thrives on language manipulation.
This is not accurate, payment is not the transfer of just services rights or goods, it can also be money if there is a consensus between a group of people that X is worth Y - then that thing is viewed as valuable. Usually due to some sort of utility or feature that it possesses. Here you see the birth of programmable money, not issued by a state but rather founded in cryptography, accountability is achieved via a transparently distributed ledger. You are arguing from an angle based on what looks like clear bias, there are several accounts in history where people agreed upon something having X value and traded it as such, this is what happened here. People see the utility this thing has and agreed that the market value is X. It is just social economics and math + some good utility at play. Well, the point is that payment is transfer of SOMETHING. Throughout all human history money has always been the ownership of either commodity, gold certificates or certificates of borrowers' debt(fiat money). And all these items are not nothing but something. Thus, Bitcoin is not money - money cannot be created by changing entry in a database. This is by definition what fractional reserve banking is doing, changing entries in a database and creating 10 times the money they actually have on hand. There is little point in continuing this discussion when all you desire to do is fight your angered point of view, rather than look at it objectively. |
|
|
|
If we start from a simple and undeniable fact that SOMETHING cannot appear or despair by changing entries in a database, then it is obvious that so called Block Reward, which is just an algorithmic change of entry in a database(blockchain) — from 0 to 50 initially, is actually the creation of NOTHING or nothingness. But people did something strange — they gave a fancy name to this nothingness — Bitcoin. So, a mere change of entry in a database is given a name, which is in itself a bizarre thing to do. But anyhow, here is where the language manipulation kicks in. Changing entries is obviously just a database management and it belongs to the field of informatics. But what people did is they took the definition of "payment" - which belongs to the field of economy, and they copy/pasted that definition next to the phrase — "change of entry in a database". This created the illusion that when you change entry in a database(blockchain) you are actually transferring SOMETHING to another person, i.e. that you are paying. But payment is transfer of SOMETHING (rights, services or goods) from one person to another.
For. e.g. fiat money is created when a bank grants a loan i.e. SOMETHING, which is why paying someone with fiat money is actually the transfer of rights derived from bank loans. That is why fiat money fits the definition of payment — SOMETHING (rights recorded in the banking system) are transferred from one person to another.
But by changing blockchain value from 1 to 3 for e.g., obviously NOTHING has been transferred since values in that database are neither representations of rights nor goods or services. So, changing numbers in a blockchain has nothing to do with payment or economy which renders bitcoin a scam that thrives on language manipulation.
This is not accurate, If there is a consensus between a group of people that X is worth Y - then that thing is viewed as valuable. Usually due to some sort of utility or feature that it possesses. Here you see the birth of programmable money, not issued by a state but rather founded in cryptography, accountability is achieved via a transparently distributed ledger. You are arguing from an angle based on what looks like clear bias, there are several accounts in history where people agreed upon something having X value and traded it as such, this is what happened here. People see the utility this thing has and agreed that the market value is X. It is just social economics and math + some good utility at play. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
