I have some working acestreams in HD and in english, works fine:

acestream://eb482f4e1f441710056a1399350d389b9ecac178

acestream://877284cfe54c9da50fe9ffe873b623312006419a

This one is a regular stream but I haven't tried it:

http://nowwatchtvlive.org/spike-sports-live-stream-watch-spike-sports-online-channel/

I don't like to click on these stream sites because of too many popups and stuff, I would rather download acestream and open one of these links, works great with no buffering for me so far, maybe when the main card starts it begins buffering.. hope it's not the case, but that's usually the case with big events.

Currently it's just the undercard going with some other youtubers, just amateur stuff.

The problem is that governments often couldn't care less if you couldn't be proved wrong because there is no evidence. If they demand records and you don't have it, you could be in trouble.. hence why now im hesitant to ever sell coins whose origin is not really clear anymore because of situations like this one where you have lost partial or total records.

I have the transaction to the Livecoin deposit address, and when I get my coins out, I have the transaction to my address. So I have "coins going in-> coins going out".  However I think (im not sure) they also want all of your altcoin trades within the exchange, so that's why you should have the .csv files and I wasn't able to save that because they deleted it.

And in the case of Mintpal, I think I also have "coins going in-> coins going out", I would need to check, I think I labeled the deposit transaction as "Mintpal", however since the exchange is dead and I didn't take a screenshot of my deposit address... it could be a transaction to any address. I don't think there's a way to prove it went into an exchange and then out.

So im not sure anymore if im going to be able to ever sell these coins without ending up in trouble because the origin of the funds is unclear. Luckily I've never been much of a trader, but it's still very annoying, there was a period where I did a lot of trades and it's a pain in the ass now trying to make sense of all these transactions going in and out of exchanges.

Most people fail to see anything beyond "higher price = good". In this case he just said "oh this means it's bad because it's harder for the price to go up" when I think it's pretty obvious that a deviation from amount of Tether printed to price of the actual asset (BTC) in question ratio is pretty positive.

But Bitcoin is actually pretty easy to pump for any of the proper big whales out there. If a billionaire wanted to diversify and buy some BTC the price would explode.

Until we are sitting on a couple trillion marketcap on BTC alone the volatility will still be pretty evident, but then again that was the case with gold back then too.

No it will not pass, please all te noobs need to understand that it will be pushed back to 2019. Now it's the time to keep getting as much cheap bitcoins as possible before the next bull run frenzy FOMO rocket kicks in. Im not even sure if the ETF will pass in 2019 but for me it's 2019 minimum, I give a 2018 ETF something lower than %10 for it to pass.

I mean this is Bitcoin after all and we've seen crazier things happening, but being realistic about things leads me to believe we are at least one year away from an ETF, in 2019 we'll have some other rejections and then finally it will come later that year. January 2019, I give that a 50/50 chance. There's definitely a demand for an ETF but they want to delay it to keep prices down so they can keep manipulating via futures.

There is no staking in Bitcoin per se, im confused, I think you mean mining and not staking (staking is done on PoS coins, Bitcoin is a PoW coin).

However the way it works is similar: In solo mining or staking you have less chances of mining a block but you will get paid a bigger reward if you do. Whereas in mining pools the rewards come more often but at a lesser amount since it's spread across pool participants. That's basically it.

Note that nobody solo mines anymore in Bitcoin at least that I know of, since the chances are ridiculously small to get lucky, so everyone just joins pools. Probably somewhere there's some crazy guy hoping to win the lottery and is running a solo miner who knows, but that's very rare.

The simple reason this is not rigged and it's a big fight it's simple: When two big egos collide, none of them is going to be the defeated one for money. Even for a purely monetary point of view, the winner will see an huge spike in merchandise sales and views on their youtube and social media money making machines. Why the hell would you take a bonus to get beaten when you can help your own business by putting a good fight and defeated the other guy in style?

They have trained hard for the past few months, even contacted some professionals, one of them was in the Mayweather Boxing Club getting some lessons with Sr. I believe it will be a decent amateur both and will be fun because of how all the drama these clowns always deliver. There is a lot on the line there, just put yourself on their shoes. Whoever wins this will be pretty much king of all social media.

Bitcoin is going up after the obligatory "ETF rejected" dip. Many noobs got owned thinking it was going to drop to 4000 overnight. Not a short squeeze typically but over the past few hours slowly many short positions got owned as we are going near $7000.

ETF being rejected was already priced in by anyone with a functional brain so this is not much of a surprise. It is true tho that many potential investors are waiting for the ETF but anyone that's realistic knows it's not coming this year, we'll see in 2019. But once again, ETF doesn't make or break Bitcoin, it just pumps the price.

The holy grail would be to be both a store of value and a viable currency, but so far it seems like it's impossible, I mean second layers are a decent effort but you are giving away too much decentralization as I understand it.

Gold can be bought and stored for the average individual, whereas if what some predict is true, it will be impossible for the average joe to do that with bitcoin. Of course big sized transactions will be cheaper in bitcoin compared to moving tons of gold, but for the average guy wanting to save his 50k savings, for less than 1.5 kg at current prices you can move it. So at some point getting 1.5 kg of gold delivered in your house will be cheaper than the transaction of 50k in BTC.

As far as alts as cash goes, im not really sure if they are any better than LN. If alts were to be used at scale, they would end up with massive problems which LN already are catering for.

I just found out the fact that they got none other than the legendary Michael Buffet to introduce both the weight ins and the fight tomorrow. This already tells you how much money this fight is already moving. He wouldn't have showed up to do a job with not even amateur boxers if this wasn't an huge event. Remember that Buffet has been introducing the most legendary fights for decades now.

Im not hoping to see anything spectacular technique wise but it should be fun, looks the these guys have been training pretty seriously and they are at peak athleticism ages to at least have pretty powerful knockout power, both KSI and Logan looking pretty strong. Im not going to gamble on this tho, I have no idea who will win any of the fights.

Why trust it public or private, if the spreadsheet isn't kept in a decentralized way? it could be corrupted, that's where is bitcoin is better. I would trust public accounting on the blockchain, signed with PGP keys or whatever by whoever is doing the job in there so we know who is doing what.

Paying taxes would feel great if we knew exactly where the money is going and we knew it really is helping your community as a whole. However, with fiat who is to say what the hell is going on.

The other alternative is to have a market of private banks to choose from instead of having "the FED" or whatever. So customers could freely choose what's best for them. In principle I think this is the idea second layers in Bitcoin, "private Bitcoin banks" as if it were competing against each other to deliver the best product. I think this is what Hal Finney was talking about back in 2011.

Silver hasn't been money in ages, it's over, im sorry to tell you. Gold's massive marketcap and network effect is amazing, I would be willing to buy some, however, since bitcoin exists, im not sure why would I even bothered.

The cumbersome experience of trying to cross borders with gold has already been addressed numerous times, but seems like numerous times is not enough for goldbugs.

Bitcoin solves the problem of needing to hold something physical which you cannot replicate backup copies off, which is huge and this single reason makes it very undervalued at current prices, but for some reason not being a tangible good makes goldbugs consider it some sort of scam or not safe, when it's a strong point.

I can't wait to see Bitcoin hit the first trillion USD marketcap milestone. I predict by then some goldbugs will start assuming they made a mistake not buying earlier and hopefully by then they are diversifying a bit with some BTC.

What people are missing here is the fact that only a tiny amount of the world's population actually have access to solid bank accounts, and let alone access to markets to invest and so on.

Imagine the amount of electricity that would be needed to power all these people with bank accounts. That means buildings, computers, etc.

With the current hashrate of the Bitcoin network is more than enough to keep developing second layers and have all these people transacting, using "bitcoin banks". You might say "but centralization this or that". Well, what is better, living in the muds with 0 chances to develop an economy, or actually have a chance with bitcoin through LN? because these people will never be included within the global economy by the legacy banking system because it's just impossible. With BTC and second layers they only need some nokia phones.

Anything that Gavin supports is automatically not Satoshi Nakamoto. When Gavin went to the CIA most people in Bitcoin don't trust him, because what a coincidence that he went for a picnic there right when Satoshi disappeared. Seems obvious to me that Satoshi regret giving Gavin so much trust and started being paranoid about Gavin setting him a trap of sorts, so Satoshi got scared and left the project after that.

CSW is just an opportunist to guide the masses into the US supported fork, they needed an icon and they made CSW to fill that role.

If CSW was involved in the beginnings of Bitcoin he wasn't Satoshi, but someone that was there. If he ever moves private keys from Satoshi, it still doesn't prove he is Satoshi, he would most likely prove Dave Kleiman was it and he got his keys.

You can't compare the transactions that banks process (that is, centralized transactions, permissioned and so on) with a decentralized transaction system like bitcoin. You are comparing apples to oranges.

All the electricity that the bitcoin network consumes is not wasted, it is a necessity to keep the blockchain safe.

And if LN allows to scale transactions, it may surpass all centralized payment networks. I haven't done the math for this, but intuitively I think would be cheaper compared to all the electricity banks and so on are using. Just imagine the amount of electricity one of these huge buildings consume.

Sure LN brings some risks of centralization and it's far from ideal, but then what are the alternatives? there isn't a single altcoin that can scale for mainstream transactions on-chain without fatal consequences at layer 0. So what we have is building on top of a decentralized network.

LN will be better than the current bank system because LN will not magically raise the limit of the underlying token in which it is functioning (21 million coins) as opposed to fiat banking. Some have questioned this and claimed fractional reserve is possible, we'll have to see.

Anyway, LN and ETF, these things are optional. Who am I to stop people from using ETF or LN, people will have to assume the risks and rewards and do what's best for them.

For now, I don't see why I would use BTC to do groceries when I have fiat. But when fiat blows up it would be good to have something ready by then if BTC wants to replace fiat too. The question is: Can BTC be both digital gold and digital day-to-day cash?

Well, "once people realize" includes many things.

I didn't say I expect it to happen any time soon, even if it's out. First of all, it's still in the very early versions, devs are advising against doing any transaction that you cannot afford to lose because the risk is still there.

What will trigger goods and services being traded for Bitcoin (via LN) is when governments completely ban cash, so people that are basically able to subsist and have a decent life quality by working under the radar, will look for an alternative and LN will be the most viable one.

Accepting anything else but Bitcoin will not be sound, because the underlying networks will be weak and the token will have no liquidity compared to BTC. These things take time. BTC first needs to reach 1 $trillion marketcap to start scaring all the goldbugs and co and snowball effect will kick in.

Lightning Network has been operative for what's now months, probably 6 months now? I lost count. There are a lot of nodes already, and thousands of channels, see here:

https://rompert.com/recksplorer/

This map shows the amount of nodes and connections between each other (channel) and the total amount of money on the network now past half a million USD. It's just the beginning.

Once people realize you can do business with this it will explode in use. Of course for now it's being developed.

Of course, the best use case for Bitcoin remains a store of value to protect against all inflation. It will go up with or without LN adoption, with or without ETFs.. and so on.

Who wants to miss this? I can't deny it's going to be fun. Probably these that are are past 35 may not really grasp the magnitude of this fight. It is two internet millennial forces colliding with massive followers, the numbers on this thing will be ridiculous. I want to see what kind of money is being moved in Las Vegas.

As far as the actual fight goes, I think Logan Paul is a pretty scary dude. He's really big, wide frame, massive skull with a strong chin. Of course that alone doesn't win you fights. KSI got the previous experience indeed, this will play a big role on the outcome. However I just can't count Logan out, he isn't a couch potato, he has a good background in athletics, he was a wrestler at some point.

Who knows, maybe it turns out being a decent fight after all.

Not really. With an ETF, at least in the initial stages, you are going to need to be pretty much rich to invest. There are 0 chances that a low entry investment ETF gets passed, and the only ones that have a (low) probability of passing are the so called "certified investors" or whatever they deem it, basically it means that you must have a lot of money to own even 1 share. Consider that the latest effort was a 25 BTC-per-share ETF, so forget about small investors. ETN will have to do it while the ETFs remain for "qualified investors" only.

I predict that after the first ETF is passed, then we'll have lower and lower entry ETFs so the small investor will be able to own some too.

As far as these being derivatives of derivatives or whatever... for me it's all the same. If you don't own your keys you own 0 BTC, so who cares if people choose ETN or ETF, not my problem, they will have to consider what suits their needs or incapacity of keeping BTC's safe on their own.

Bitcoin doesn't need to grow scale wise to cater for every transaction on the planet. It's good enough as it is to act as a settlement network which would be in practice a better gold standard. So people would use second layer solutions like the Lightning Network instead of onchain transactions. This way even poor people in the end of the world could have access to the global economy, and this would be faster, cheaper and more private than any government alternative, so they have an incentive to support it.

At the same time, the elites have an incentive to support Bitcoin because they can afford on-chain transactions for their massive transactions and bypass the nation-states' controls.

In the end no matter what criticism you have about it, both rich and poor have incentives to support BTC, correct me if im wrong.