i have been following the seastead concept for years. and they are no where near building anything. they are just invstment grabbing to promote a concept which when doing all the research still has many flaws that need to be filled before a single sheet of material is purchased.
alot of the funding has been and will be wasted on their so called "planning phase". (they are still in the same scripted promotion of being not yet at the planning phase because they need funding, a couple years ago)

a few years back i was optmistic until i drilled down into their paper work and action plans and seen the emptiness of the concept. yes they used buzzwords and hopes of utopia and lots of graphic images of paradise. but the reality of a crypto village just did not get well thought out.

they want billions, for something few people can use. even just that. demanding more than $5million per possible "resident" is not a good request.
nor is the fact that to run such a island requires employee's who would take up some of that space. thus thus dilute the amount of "residents" that could/would afford their asks.

i could go on about their lack of research and plan for utilities as that has a impact not just on the lifestyle expected on a island but also the ecology of the area/water they promote to want to stead in. i wont say to much as they will just make some buzzworded reply that its all handled. ill just wait for them to get some hints and do the research and planning and provide solutions to show they are ready. which hey are not. even after a few years of me looking into their concepts

by choice?
lol

users wanted to use XT... core REKT campained it
users wanted to use classic... core REKT campained it
users wanted to use unlimited... core REKT campained it

core devs then demanded the other clients that were not core to not use consensus on the same network. but to split (fork-off)
then
core devs then demanded the other clients that were not core to not use consensus on the same network. but to come to a joint agreement with core to bilaterally split

and guess what happened in august. yep. it was not a consensus upgrade of a single network. it was a bilatral split of 2 networkds that had 2 different rules/netwok topologies and protocols that differ from the original network known as bitcoin(pre summer 2017)

cores segwit protocols are not the same as bitcoin 2009-2016
the block data. the transaction types. etc etc. it all changed. both sides went in separat directions.

and before you even bother saying "backward compatibility"
old nodes cant just take in block data as is. it needs a translator.

its like having an invasion by forigners where the natives are no longer part of society but treated like PoW rfugee's getting handed downstream rations and having translators. but are no longer allowed to WORK(mine/validate) in society.

learn downstream filters (gmax bussword) or bridge nodes(Luke JR bussword). then learn that 2009-2014 nodes cannot relay all current blocks in full current serialisation.
yes the new segwit direction can understand legacy. but the legacy cannot understand segwit

WAKE UP
infact.. take a day off.. have a good sleep and tomorrow. remove the core defense cap. stop thinking from a position of protecting/defending core. if you truly beleived that core are not your king. then dont defend them. instead think of it from a proposition of other nodes that are not just core partners/sheep.
you will start to see why core are so heavily demanding they are called the "core" reference.. because they dont want other nodes competing using consensus. thus it their network. and they pretty much admit it

so either take off the core defense cap or just admit it and say. "decentralisation is dead, long live distribution.."
yep core devs love the new buzword distributed ledger technology(DLT)

i gues someones been reading my posts. and then made their own report about it.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3402789.msg35629250#msg35629250
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3298025.msg34424094#msg34424094
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3140327.msg32495804#msg32495804

which yes shows that for years mining has had a support line. it does not explain "the dip" that began in march where the bitcoin price dipped below the cost of mining(very rare event over the last 9 years).

this "dip" as everyone is meming.. is due to naive trend anals that just draw triangles on a price chart with no understanding of cause and effect.
such as the 2013 spike and the 2014 drop.
those events were caused by
the October 2013 ASIC adoption/release - price rise
the MTGox 2014 fiasco - price decline.

and so the trend anals simple draw a triangle that X PRICE happened autumn of one year so Y PRICE will happen winter/spring.. without understanding that in 2017/2018 there was no new asic nor major exchange events this time round so no reason that the past spike and drop would repeat.

but due to trend anals, trading bots followed these empty triangles to trade away from rational thought and just fiollow empty triangle lines into a dip that should not have occured.(im talking about irrational dip below 9k(march'18) not the correction below 20k(december'17))

so with that said. unless trend anals stoppd being anals.we shall continue to see trading bots blindly trading without rational reason.
so trend anals should start to analyse better to be technical analysts and begin to actually produce indicators that have meaning and proofs based on real life current events. not history of empty numbers they have not researched the cause of

in short.
in a rational setting before the recent influx of teenage youtube wannabe anals.... following the mining cost was good advice. but this recent dip is proving other wise (hense i cal them trend anals, instead of technical analysts)

my personal opinion on the price is to never, ever give a darn crap about ATH(all time highs) and instead look at the 2-6month Lows and draw a line between them and you will see that we are currenctly still on a stable and noticable rise. if you use the LOW as a indicator
(green line)




note: many alts/crapcoins mining is REACTIVE to pricing. because they drop off and mine another crap coin if its not profitable. but bitcoin mining is a trend setter as they will hold on and let early holders spend their coins until what is left if soins that cost more to buy/mine and thuse the price reacts to mining. rathr than other way round.
in short dont use this analysis on crap coins as they do not cause price movements like bitcoin does.

the housing market had bubble periods
the gold market had bubble periods
the dot com market had bubble periods

it does not mean the asset is empty air.. but that at some periods the "price" exceeds Value

some call it speculative spike caused by hype.. some call it bubbles caused by stirring the water.
either way its old news as bitcoin has settled back down to supported water lines

amazon wants to take over the 'reporting' / journalist / researcher that happens behind news media.

but this is what the result will be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PStpvviPgxk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZVv2AOCnaA

news media always had a background system of pre wrote stories that media would purchase to then broadcast. they are just patenting a updated versio using crypto.

network hashrate recent minimum was 28 exahash = 2mill s9 ant miners at 14terrahash

now the top GPU does 1mhash so would need 14000 gpu to do 1 asics job. yet an asic only uses the electricity of a few gpu's, thus is more energy efficient than the past.

imagine how things would be if this was still a GPU hashing era, but with todays difficulty

28billion GPU's would use ALOT more electric

..
i wont even get into the details of the electric needed if we were in the CPU mining scenario at todays difficulty. as that electricity requirement would be soo much more.

bitcoins 21m cap is the same as saying there are only 175,000 tonnes of gold

at code level there are not 21million coins going to be produced. its actually measured in satoshi's at code level. and thus there are 2.1quadrillion sharable units of measure(analogy: gold ounces)

but the main point is. bitcoins whole ethos falls flat if bitcoin took over the world and became the only world currency. bitcoins ethos and purpose is/was suppose to be a open barrierless choice away from FIAT. so having a choice and options is good.. but being forced to only use one currency is bad. so dont expect everyone to store their entire life savings in bitcoin.

but yea if you imagine 1 billion(12.5%) of the world using bitcoin partially invested as part of a portfolio then each person can have a noticable amount of satoshi's in their control

i see things like coinbase custodian service not as a bitcoin bank account. but as a trading account, holding just the play funds i want to risk day trading through fiat and back..
separetly id still hoard my main coins privately under my own privkey control.

anyway give it a couple years and coinbase will run a LN hub. with channels for both btc (bc1q addresses) and USD (us1q addresses) thus you will get your multisig desires.. aswell as ability to trade fiat/btc.. but yea expect AMLKYC if you want to have a channel with a hub thats owned by fiat custodial services like coinbase

but due to schnorr and segwit you wont know how many 'managers' have co-signing authority over the channels master public key funds because it wont reveal that info on the blockchain prior to it being spent. and by the time a counter party spends it without needing your authorisation its too late

so thats why im still gonna stick to legacy keypairs and not play around with segwit/LN with my main stash.  
but im pretty sure too many people are salivating about letting regulation in and KYC customers of custodian hubs. and also allow those custodians to have control of funds. purely for the greedy benefit of having FIAT trading available via LN

so im also not gonna put my main funds on LN and not treat LN as a end goal/solution to btc issues. and just treat LN as a side custodian service for niche uses of small amounts

(about as unbiased as i can make my comment)

lesson one
there are 17mill coins produced so far

lesson two
EXCHANGES which is where the public price is derived from only has a few hundred coins on each exchanges market depth.. not millions.

lesson three
each order line. (price) is filled with small amount of coins..

master lesson
it does not cost much to make a market price move. infact most bots are programmed to sheep follow. so if one exchange moves more than 1% the bots on other exchanges would follow automatically and some would arbitrage the change in price for a quick 1%. this can then cause a trigger effect to make other bots move. and ventually they all settle down when they all get to a price they agree is too low to sell below.

its not about large whales. its not about even small group sharks.. its about schools of piranha all taking a nibble and all folowing the same current/wave as others

your getting it.
bitcoins underlying value (the bottom/ all time low value) is based on cost of production.. much like gold mining. a gold miner would never sell their gold for less then it cost to extract the gold. and thus bcause it cost $1k+ to mine gold instead of $1 .. its why gold has a baseline support value of ~$1k+ not $1

lets thnik of it like a bathtub of water. where the waterline is the true value... then ontop the water line is the speculative area based on utility/function/desire. and how many thousands of coins(out of the millions) are on an exchange to satisfy a demand.
this speculative area above the waterline is the bubble area. that can rapidly inflate or pop. depending on how much the bath water is stirred up by many different reason. but stilll leaves the waterline(base value) intact

BITS
100 sat= 1 bit(ubtc)

should be what we should all start using commonly. i already started using it years ago and started seeing some services following suit, so we should all start using bits for common measure

0.00010000 = 100bits  (thus satoshi's are then treated like cents)
(dollar analogy..   bits=bucks sats=cents)

nah. he was getting a headache from many people asking him to go in different directions and asking him for permission.
at code level.. he said he didnt have the time or patience to maintain and audit everyones varied githubs
at social.level.. he didnt want to be the leader deciding if wikileaks or cia got interested or not. yea he had his own opinions. but he didnt want to be a leader/permission giver.. he beleived no one should own/lead bitcoin

even after not being the go to guy in late 2010 in the forums. he was still talking and brain storming with peopl individually and privately, still helping out.  but letting people just handle it themselves and take it any direction they pleased. as he believed the consensus mechanism itself would work as the decider (the voting system) for what new features get added and which dont prosper

as for the private keys.
back in 2009 bitcoin had no value so to him when he recompiled new clients he didnt have a priority to kep backing up the wallet so just lt the client make a new wallet. thus over writing the previous.. i think it was more so not bothering to keep backups of wallets.. and not so much about going on a crazed destroy everything rampage.

a guy using a pseudonym satoshi nakamoto was for years interested in digital decentralisd money. many people were interested in it. they were part of a cypherpunks group and other computer/economy/crpytographic inquisitive groups but each of them had no real good way of making a currency digitally that could not be counterfeited or duplicated, stolen, defrauded in someway.

but satoshi nakamoto solved the puzzle that eluded lots of people for years. satoshi brought together idea's and concepts of other people and also added in his own methodology and his own features and code and maths ... and, well beauty.
https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/1/
after a few conversations satoshi really pushed forward making the code
https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/13/

and thus the bitcoin code came about.

he initially deployed his code across a few servers so that a few nodes were talking to each other and he could privately test and boot up the genesis block..
and then he made a public release statement to let others join the network and asking others to help him continue developing and bug fix/test and grow the innovation/revolutionary new protocol

https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/16/

within a week there was hal finney, and sirius joining him. within a few months there were a dozen, by the end of the year there were more and by the time satoshi stepped back there were a few hundred people. and it just kept growing

regulations are NOT needed

consumer protections ARE needed.
there is a difference

regulations let a business self police itself(bankers did not go to prison due to 2007 crises) and the business can do anything as long as the business snoops on its customers. = bad for average users


consumer protections police businesses and protects consumers.= good for averag users and good for moral/ethical businesses

in both cases if a business has certified for regulation or consumer protection.. then it validates them as "professional".
but regulation is not about helping the community its about adding bureaucracy without real protection. where as consumer protection does

i realy wish people would really push more for consumer protection certification rather than regulation

he is spreading the greed of bitcoin not the ethos of bitcoin

also he mentions dildo's more than bitcoin.

his trend anals are empty of content apart from drawing triangle based on dates of no significance and no substance to persuade bot users to draw the same triangls and thus his suggestion becomes the sheep follow method

so though he spends time doing this.. he doesnt spnd the time wisely on outreach/helping people understand the wider ethos of bitcoin.

he probably could earn more getting sponsord by a sex toy company for each mention of dildo.

also "daily close".. damn that guy is stuck with the fiat mindset.. even basic first lesson of bitcoin trading. the markets never close...
apart from "we been hacked" exchange retirement excuses

fiat markets curb the volatility by having huge amounts of funds on order lines made up of many traders per price point. and also the traders are not hoarding for weeks to make sudden 10-100% profits. but instead making daily/hourly minimal percent profits which actually add up to the same long term profit. but without the wait//risk.

if people started trading knowing that its less risky to wait for 50% spikes every few months.. but instead take 1% a day. they would still get their 50% evry few months, but will less risk, stress and without causing as much volatility required

you dont need whales
look at the markets. look at the market depth. its only a few hundred btc per market. and each order line is only a couple btc at most. it does not require whales(1k btc hoarders). it just requires a school of piranha(1btc EACH hoarders) all biting at the same bait and following the same suggestive water current

trend anals look at a chart and draw pretty triangles of suggestion. bots use the same pretty triangles. thus bots move because of pretty triangles and cause the result of what the pretty triangles are suggesting.

EG today you were not going to eat pizza.. but last week you ate pizza, and the month before that you ate pizza. so i suggest today maybe you should eat pizza..
i bet your now thinking about eating pizza

the problem is those pretty triangles are not based on current data/situations/events. trend anals are about looking at the past and causing the past to repeat itself without understanding why the past event occured in the first place.

EG october 2013 jump occured due to ASICS hitting the market. january 2014 happened due to MTGox.
this year there has not been a asic or mtgox event and thus there would not be a repeat of 2013-14...
yet trend anals create a repeat of 2013-14 simply because of the power of sugestion that a price movement should happen because a price movement did happen.

with bots set to look at only one piece of data (a pizza menu) all it can see is that one piece of data. and if many bots are all doing the same thing. suddenly a pizza restaurant will see an increase of pizza orders. this is how advertising works. businesses see an increase in sales if they use suggestive advertising to viewers.

hint..
there is no logical reason for there to be a 2 year stagnation for bitcoin prices. there is no real world event predictor of tomorrow. but trend anals wil draw prtty triangles to suggest based on the 2014-16 data that we are going to have a 2 year stagnation from 2018-2020. and so bots will se these pretty triangles and only trade based on a narrow window of percieved stagnation. thus themselves cause the stagnation.

then in 2020.. the bots and users will reinforce the notion that trend anals are the oracles of future because of the repeat and thus starts the epic sheep follow cycle of blinding causing a future based on the past limited data.

EG you are going to start eating pizza more often. not because your kitchen is empty of other real foods. but because have been suggested to that pizza should become part of a regular routine based on the past which you infact caused by listening into the power of suggestive advertising.
now cometh the wednesday routine of "pizza night"

dont think of it as a circulartion CASH. think of it as a cascious coin on paper... like more of a bearer bond/hoard concept of paper wallet but more secure than the first gen paper walet

again like many other countries. its not a law banning it. its a memo/circular that BANKS wont offer trading currencies from BANKS

you wont find a BTM(bitcoin atm) or a bitcoin cashier desk inside a bank branch. because just like toilet roll and baked beans. its not a banks job to offer bitcoin toilet roll or baked beans.

banks are suppose to only handle fiat
this circular is a reminder of fiat laws that banks have to obide by that go back decades/centuries. again this does not ban citizens holding bitcoin or toilet paper. it just reminds banks to not offer a bitcoin trade desk within a bank branch