there's a different word for that, it's called: __________

(i.e. US and the west are NOT particularly capitalist at all)



My attitude is that socialism can work; on a VERY small scale. Your house. Because you can trust the people you live with to subsidise each other, the practical reality is you have little choice. And if even that goes awry, the impact is contained and small. As soon as you expand the scope of socialism, the exact same parasites that we have abusing an ostensibly capitalist system will commandeer positions of power, simply look at how that happened everywhere socialism is attempted.

But it sounds like you need to have it proven to you before you abandon the concept. There's already a problem; if you're using Bitcoin, you're already a capitalist, as you own individualistic capital. Why didn't you split all your BTC with your comrades? You could do it like this: open a multi-sig wallet, where a majority of the holders is the spending threshold. Why aren't you doing it? It's because you're not a socialist, however else you're deluding yourself.

yes



no

this is wrong

you can't spend all your fiat and once, which means there's always an amount of time while it sits around losing value

unless you just switch all your fiat for a decent asset the instant you receive it. Ask anyone who's experienced bad inflation. Even in countries with inflation that's not so bad, people put any spare fiat into property


that's exactly how real people really behave in actual real life, which is the opposite of what Gresham said.

Sure, but Pi4 means you can run extra stuff in addition to a Bitcoin node

24/7/365 you could have running:

• private Email
• private social media
• lightning node
• personal dropbox
• sell stuff on openbazaar
• trade coins on Bisq
• remote control of anything on your home network (tell your robot butler to start cooking, turn the lights on and off to thwart burglars, etc )

The list of things to do gets bigger, computing boards keep getting more powerful, and the Bitcoin devs keep reducing the resources needed to run Bitcoin (except disk space, of course)

I'd widen the scope: Cryptography is the new internet

...and also the old internet.

But cryptography on regular web pages is hidden away from the cossetted user, you don't want any of that funny sounding stuff, you just want cat videos and memes, right?


Well, I think people are growing up, slowly, but surely. Not least, they're getting tired of the "fun" aspect of internet culture, there's only so much one can take of it without losing enthusiasm. When people realise they can use cryptography to get all the things that politics never delivers, there will be a shift in internet culture.

this has to be wrong

Address types:

• P2PK (since 2009) Bitcoin Core still supports them. Wallets (of any software) won't create these as new addresses, but miners (who run Bitcoin Core) will mine spends from them. Significant funds remain at these addresses
• P2PKH (since 2010) Everything still supports both compressed and uncompressed types. Most won't create uncompressed keys, except Armory (this may change in a future version of course)
• P2SH (since 2012) Everything supports these
• P2WPKH/P2WSH (since 2017) Majority of wallets support these

The Bitcoin devs went out of their way to maintain backwards compatibility of the addresses, it's important for BTC's money properties (and so also to the price, can't have people losing confidence in their ability to spend old BTC outputs)

P2SH is a special case here: it includes multisig, wrapped segwit, wrapped compressed (which only Armory does AFAIK), timelocked, timelocked contracts (so lightning channels iow), basically anything with something other than the basic opcodes is a P2SH/P2WSH. And that doesn't matter in compatibility terms, sufficient numbers of miners are up to date with the scripting softforks that it's guaranteed someone will mine a P2SH scripted output that uses the valid and available ops, nothing new has been introduced since Segwit, and 99-100% are mining even those.

tl;dr FUD

they're (PureOS) almost certainly just slapping some fancy graphics on the front of the standard Debian dpkg program


this would be alright:



as PhoenixFire and bob123 are saying, there are possibly pre-requisite packages needed before you can install python-psutil and python-qt4. dpkg will tell you what they are, although in a frustrating way: if the pre-requisites themselves have further pre-requisites, then you'll have to go back to your online machine again to get those. The PureOS package manager might not know how to tell you what the missing dependencies (i.e. pre-requisites) are, you'd be stuck then. dpkg will definitely tell you what's going on if there are more packages needed.

only in non-production software, there are (AFAIK) no marketplaces with atomic swaps. Certainly no protocol has emerged from any developer in the space, so anyone claiming to be offering atomic swaps should be looked at very very carefully

Using lightning payment channels is often touted, but there was some doubt amongst developers whether it would be possible in a way that would stop traders gaming the system. I saw a recent mailng list post on lightning-dev that gave a hint that the problem may be resolvable.

tl;dr it's too soon for atomic swaps

no, they are not atomic swaps.

If Shapeshift or Changelly wanted to rob you, they could. That's not possible with real atomic swaps

+1 instant rate API's etc


also, give a discount for paying with Bitcoin, but change the discount according to the market conditions.

At the start of a BTC bull market, give the biggest discount. You will get your money back as the market rises.

When the BTC market looks toppy, begin to reduce the discount to zero, or even add a premium over the fiat price. Don't get caught out at the top.

Once a BTC bear market has begun, begin to slowly reintroduce a small discount. You may have been wrong about the bear market, and this might just be a stall (i.e. "bear trap") in the bull run. If not, you'll be good next bull run anyhow

When the BTC bear market bottoms, try not to be offering so much discount that you destroy revenue. Who knows how long the stagnant period will be before another growth period begins.


Tbh, this is a description of how business should behave according to any economic cycles. not just Bitcoin's economic cycle.

This is (another) part of the frustration I'm feeling on this issue

I cannot fathom why people would even consider continuing to feed the following wretched cycle:

• government tells lies to start resource wars
• government uses tax revenues to fund war
• regular people pay the taxes
• corporations and their most significant employees pay little to zero tax
• latest war ends, corporations "win" the contract to mine the minerals or reconstruct the chaos left behind

they're basically fucking everyone, exceptionally hard, and the age-old response was "well, there's nothing I can do about it"


Satoshi finally gave you the power to do something. Use it. How do you want to be remembered?

This isn't once in a blue moon. Or once in a lifetime. Nor once in a generation. Not even once in an era.

This is an opportunity for all time, never before has it been possible to change the balance of power on this planet so much. We shoulder a great deal of responsibility as to how events will proceed and whether things change for the better or the worse.

the history suggests this is eminently possible


Interest in cryptocurrency began with a small group of cryptography obsessed early adopters of the internet circa 1992, on the now infamous cypherpunks mailing list. It's important to note that cryptography (such was the topic of that mailing list) had up until that point been of interest only to academics and the espionage agencies. However many enthusiastic individuals were posting to alt.cypherpunks.org (or whatever it was called), there will have been people from espionage agencies either reading and/or posting there, right from the start. Wei Dei, Nick Szabo, Adam Back (who interestingly lives in Malta now); all the original cryptocurrency "forefathers" are possible (that's possible) government spys

Certainly the higher echelon of the (British) establishment were aware of the possibilities of cryptocurrency by the middle of the 1990's, as Lord Rhys-Mogg (former editor of The Times, as in the actual newspaper that printed the "chancellor approves 2nd bailout for the banks" headline) of the British House of Lords wrote an influential book (released 1997) on the way the information age would change the world, and devoted a chapter to cryptocurrency. The only real possible source of Rhys-Mogg's prognostications therein was likely the very same cypherpunks mailing list.

The likely conclusion, I believe, of observing all this from a spy agency directorate's office would be: let's do something with this. There's power in it.

It's not impossible that the solitary tinkerer that Satoshi is sometimes presented as got there first, all it takes is the right inspiration. But the likelihood is that the spy agencies (who have nothing better to do and huge amounts of resources from all the drug dealing and black market weapons sales etc) did it first. They have the people, and the time, to get it oh so right.

Right, armies all over the world are using (well, borrowing against future) taxes to murder milllons of innocent people over resources
 



how about SELL YOUR FREEDOM MONEY AND BE DONE WITH IT


all of you on this page are a bunch of selfish assholes

satoshi made this so we could use it as a tool against the corruption in this so-called democratic system, and the only thing you can think about is saving your tiny little asses.

pussies, each and every single one of you. You don't deserve the rights Bitcoin gives you, please sell it to someone who values those rights

because if the big-bad government told you to give up 100% of your Bitcoin in taxes, you'd all do it anyway. It threatens their corporate monopoly you idiots, you don't even understand what's going on here

@hatshepsut93 thanks for doing the legwork, story makes much more sense now

the RAM is the major revelation in that spec. I'd love a PCI slot or a SATA port, but I guess that would push the cost up too much (despite those being generic commodity features). Makes you wonder how much cheaper Raspberry Pi's would be without the HDMI port (or are the HDMI royalties arm going easy on Raspi for some reason? Can't think why, they've already destroyed the marketplace)

good job



this is where Faceborg can't win: practicality. You can get someone a Bitcoin wallet (that respects your privacy) with a couple taps and a 5 minute wait while it syncs up. The barriers to getting a Facebook account are actually pretty high, and constantly getting higher.

relax, the story is weird, but that's not really your fault


I simply don't get why this is being reported as a "Coinbase story". A Coinbase user was affected, so what? It's missing the point completely

oh yeah, of course it is. there's just no reason to assume there's anything special about the figure



seems less likely than the former, but even $0 is not impossible. All potential market values depend entirely on the circumstances.

I tested them together on Linux a few months ago, all seemed ok (pretty quick superficial test though). I'm not using 0.18 with Armory now though (0.18 eats your CPU if you use it together with Tor :/ )

"Post your logs" is what someone will eventually say