Here's a recent paper from Nassim Taleb: Bitcoin, Currencies, and Bubbles

It's mostly opinion and contains no real insights.

It might be easier and safer to integrate btcpay server (https://btcpayserver.org/) into your site rather than creating your own. I strongly recommend it. There are so many things that could go wrong if you do it yourself, especially if you are not familiar with the Bitcoin protocols and best practices.

I don't think you are going to find much because the people that do the research on Bitcoin are generally pro-Bitcoin. There is not much incentive to show that something as insignificant as Bitcoin won't work.

Despite that, I have come across a couple academic papers over the years describing why Bitcoin may not be sustainable. For example: Carlsten, et al. On the Instability of Bitcoin Without the Block Reward. 2016

I had mistakenly assumed that Raspiblitz was a kit. Given that you can buy the hardware separately for Raspiblitz, I don't know the pros and cons of Raspibolt vs. Raspiblitz. I would be interested in that info also.

If you already have an RPi and and a drive, then you want to set up the RaspiBolt project: https://stadicus.github.io/RaspiBolt/

I have bitcoind, lnd, electrs, JoinMarket, btc-rpc-explorer, and TOR set up on my RPi via Raspibolt.

The ideal currency has a constant value. So how can creating or burning coins achieve this goal?

The factors that affect the value of a currency are the supply, the velocity, and the economy. The value of a coin will remain constant if you burn coins when the velocity is increasing or the economy is decreasing. Likewise, the value of a coin will remain constant if you create coins when the velocity is decreasing or the economy is increasing.

In reality, maintaining a constant value is impossible to achieve because the velocity and economy are too difficult to measure or control.

If you can't control the value of a currency, a secondary goal then might be to reduce economic uncertainty. One way reduce uncertainty is to eliminate the variability of the supply. Such as,

• Assume that the economy will always grow and create coins forever on a fixed schedule.
• Assume that the economy will always shrink and burn coins forever on a fixed schedule.
• Make no assumptions and maintain the supply at a fixed number.

Assuming the economy will shrink forever is a bad assumption. That is why coins are not (or should not be) burned.

Assuming that the economy will increase forever is reasonable, even though that is not what really happens, so creating coins according to a fixed schedule is not bad. The difficulty, however, is to pick the appropriate creation rate. Too high, and you have inflation. Too low, and you have deflation. Picking the correct rate is not possible so the best choice is too pick a rate that is probably low in order to avoid risks (including hyperinflation).

Bitcoin make no assumptions and maintains the supply at a fixed number. While this may result in an increasing value due to lost coins and an increasing economy, it eliminates all uncertainty about the supply.

That site does not accelerate a transaction. It simply rebroadcasts a transaction, which is something that most wallets can do (and some wallets do it automatically). Rebroadcast only helps if the transaction has been dropped from the mempool, which is rarely the problem.

I have never used an accelerator, but I know that viabtc's accelerator (https://www.viabtc.com/tools/txaccelerator/) is free, though there are some restrictions. And be careful, because there are many spoof sites.

Also, if you can wait a little longer, the difficulty will be dropping soon. That will result in higher throughput, and the mempool may clear again as a result.

I guess you are waxing philosophical here (zero is a number) in order to avoid acknowledging the fact that you have failed to prove scientifically that God exists.

Maybe you could try to prove mathematically that God ≠ 0.

Supply and demand are independent. The supply of bitcoins is always increasing. The demand is not. Thus, we have price swings. In the long run, both have increased with demand outpacing supply. I hope we can agree on those.

However, a halving is a moment in time in which the production slows (but the supply continues to increase and demand does whatever it does). If the halving truly has an effect on prices due to the change in production, we should see something happen to the price at that time, but we don't. The two big price increases we have seen 1 - 2 years after the halvings must be due to something else. Maybe there is something going on, but it can't be attributed to the production cuts.

In the U.S., simply moving bitcoins is not a taxable event. Furthermore, bitcoins don't exist in any location. You can move them from one address to another, but you can't move from one country to another.

However, if you are sending them to an account maintained by a company in a foreign country, then that may have tax implications.

You are ignoring the sell pressure of all the bitcoins already in circulation. The sell pressure only goes up (even with the halving) as more bitcoins are added to the supply.

My real point here is that you can make up any numbers that you want (as you and I both demonstrated) and there is no way to validate them, so any claims of proof by probability cannot be valid.

"Better" is subjective. Those coins might have a lower block interval, but they are less secure. While an exchange might require 1-3 confirmations for BTC, they typically require many more for the coins you listed.

Here are the confirmation requirements for Kraken deposits:

Cryptocurrency	Confirmations Required
Algorand (ALGO)	10 confirmations
Bitcoin (BTC)	4 confirmations (depending on fee)
Cardano (ADA)	15 confirmations
Dogecoin (DOGE)	40 confirmations
Litecoin (LTC)	12 confirmations

Yes, but saving is a good thing. It reduces risk.

Typical Keynesian economics views any deflation as a serious problem, but deflation is no worse than inflation in my view. When people talk about the risks of deflation, they typically leap to hyper-deflation as if it is a foregone conclusion. But, I believe that is no more valid than the idea that any inflation will inevitably lead to hyper-inflation.

Red flags:

1. Anonymous.
2. Recent domain registration.
3. Claims to be "regulated".

Addresses at Coinbase belong to Coinbase. It doesn't matter how much they have in them. You have what Coinbase says you have.

Mild devaluation is bad, especially when it is continuous and done on a large scale.



Bitcoin is better as a currency than gold, stocks, real estate, and fiat of course.

You claim that there are billions of machines with provable makers. Fine. I claim that there are trillions of machines without provable makers. Therefore, the probability of a machine having a maker is 1/1000.

You have it backwards. Large denomination bills are the result of inflation.

If prices increase by 10x, then people will want $1000 bills for what they previously used $100 bills for and smaller denominations become useless. So the government must print higher denomination bills.

Also, note that about 10% of the money in the U.S. exists as coins and bills. The rest of the money exists in bank ledgers.