Update:
and apparently Fidelity and Blackrock flipped yesterday, with Fidelity buying ~5400 BTC while Blackrock "only" bought ~2700 BTC. Grayscale sold ~4300 BTC.
blackrock: 66,200.01 (previous day blackrock: 63,488) +2,712 grayscale: 482,592 (previous day Grayscale: 487,025) -4,433 close enough |
|
|
|
So you think that if you buy a $2 coffee in Starbucks this transaction should be registered in all computers running bitcoin in the world? Inegociable?
This is what makes zero sense to me. I see no "idiotic" trying to find a solution just to put high value transactions in the main layer in the future.
And use second layer (like LN or other)for small tx
^ i see someone that wants to have bitcoin as just a blockchain for the elites.. where developing countries should be shunned/shuvved off the network, being told their ($2) daily/weekly wage is not good enough for the network (bitmover is just copying a narrative from 7 years ago.. his $2 coffee script is not even original) yes people could develop a subnetwork for daily niche usage. but forcing people to not have access to the mainnet due to elitism is something we should deter |
|
|
|
|
institutions know they cannot get middlemen commission from the network itself (unless they run mining equipment)
so they want to make bitcoin annoying to use so that people revert to using centralised services and subnetworks that involve middlemen
they first offer the "free" "fast" option to gain adoption. and say they can peg their units and allow easy access
then they start making the base asset expensive to exit to lock people in long term, so they can then increase their own units cost per payment, nd where users are left unable to settle their accumulations so instead spend down their value until its gone, where the institution then gets to settle to their side
its not a new concept, its been done forever in trad-fi, eventually they then start changing the pegs once they know they have people locked into their payment system due to the cost of escaping their payment system is more annoying
just look at the dev groups making these subnetworks and look at who sponsors them.. then look at the core devs who concentrate on bitcoin edits to be more communicative with subnetworks and look at their sponsors
also look at the devs that make bitcoin more annoying and look at their sponsors.
|
|
|
|
|
guess most people in this topic have not realised whats already occurred in the last 7 years with code edits that have affected bitcoin
|
|
|
|
|
there will be subnetworks that have utility need/niche usage need of some users..(future tense)
but the current generation of subnetworks do not "solve" the things all bitcoiners want. there are many security, utility and feature flaws of current subnetworks, which is why people are not adopting them even after 6-7years..
its not a failure of PR campaigns/promoting. its a failure of the underlying protocol not meeting its promises and security needs.
too many people that idolise subnetworks think their favoured subnetwork is the gold star network everyone should move to as the replacement from using bitcoin network. but they are just blind/ignorant to the issues of their favoured subnetworks and just want added popularity to not feel alone
developers should stop trying to do work-around's causing the flawed subnetworks to be more centralised as a trick to get users to not notice the flaws. and instead learn from the flaws mistakes and start a fresh project using a different payment system model that simply doesnt have the flaws and meets the users niche utility needs
that being said we should not be idolising concepts of locking funds up into partnerships/middlemen required subnetworks where trying to settle the pegs back to real BTC is annoying, slow, expensive. we also need to fix the "softened" exploits of bitcoin to make bitcoin act like the bitcoin network should where people can use the bitcoin network when needed. rather then the cludgy exploits being added to annoy people into using bitcoin less by force/coercion caused by the code edits of the last 6-7 years
|
|
|
|
|
core devs have been funded by many corporations for years. DCG and others funded core devs from 2014+
why do you think most bitcoin code updates have not been to make bitcoin network use more easy, cheap, able. and instead be code exploits to annoy bitcoin network users in an aim to push people into using other middlemen required services and subnetworks
|
|
|
|
If i remember correctly then it was the intend of satoshi to increase block size when bitcoin becomes more popular. Since he had to disappear before bitcoin became popular enough for problematic high fees there was never an adjustment. Now we are stuck with a lobby of miners that always say that everything is still "so cheap compared to a visa card" that we will probabyl have to live with those fees forever.
The problem is that people are storing jpegs in transactions. Before that, we could get 1 sat vB transactions confirmed with no problem in less than a day.
If blockcsize gets bigger, people will add videos to transactions.
...
Neither satoshi or Finney said that block size should increase. Bitcoin cannot scale this way. This will be only a temporary solution until you need to increase again.
Include all transactions in the blockchain is not necessary
if we close the "softened" cludgy tricks core done 2017+ which allowed the bloat. it would prevent "videos" and also dampen down the current jpeg bloat.. having bigger blocks is not the sole thing.. you are reading idiot narratives from dumb people that shout silly extremes to prevent any progress however by closing the exploits that allow the bloat, blocks can have more leaner transactions and then scaling the blocksize can also allow even more of those leaner transactions as for you pretending satoshi never talked about increasing the blocksize.. your wrong, as here is a post by him giving one example of increasing the blocksize. so he did talk about it It can be phased in, like:
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.
|
|
|
|
a lean transaction can be small , such as 226bytes for a 1 input 2 output transaction of p2pkh however using certain range of opcodes for the "witness" for things like segwit/taproot. you can append on metadata of nearly 4mb https://bitcoinops.org/en/tools/calc-size/ |
|
|
|
|
when you have the trad-fi emotions that the price is too high to buy more. its time to start thinking its time to hold what you have and plan selling some when it rises further
when you have the trad-fi emotions that the price is too low to sell. its time to start thinking its time to hold what you have and plan buying some when it falls further
always remember buy low sell high.. dont panic or stress at the usually times trad-fi people panic. do the opposite find the buy sell opportunities of lows and highs.
|
|
|
|
|
if you invest in your business you control it and make decisions on it and usually its a business just selling a product or service other busineses also offer so you have to consider the local competition. which limits your decision power because you are limited to the market of value-premium
for instance if a nearby business sells similar product at X, for you to compete you need to spend more to give better service to also sell at or above X or sell below X
whereby most businesses sell products at a 3-5x of product underlying supply cost to cover businesses own labour, property costs, taxes and profit. EG restaurants are 30% food supply cost, 40% restaurant/labour/tax cost 30% profit margin
however entrepreneurs see a new niche product never marketed before but has potential desire of 30% of all countries consumers meaning initial build out of production can result in millions of population of regular sales. this a #thousand multiplier if successful. EG invest $100k could equal $###million returns
however most entrepreneurs know not all new niches make a success so the #thousand multiplier of one success covers the losses of 99 other niches that dont succeed. so they play the odds by diversifying across many new ventures/niches
|
|
|
|
having a lil think..
I both agree and disagree  how about just say your own index's a. ikea index b. glue index - fix broken cups instead of buying new cups c. doctor visit index d. hat index - it means there is a problem with heating e. cheap carb index - but little veg,fruit and meat f. quality medicine index - Withdrawal from quality medicines g. utility debt - inability to pay for basic utilities. h. needle/thread index - self-repair of clothes instead of buying new ones i. recreation index - Reducing expenditures on recreation and entertainment |
|
|
|
|
here in the UK we can even see it happen with banks and energy providers customer service call centres
their manned call centres are being replaced with web-based chat which is being operated by AI or outsourced to lower paid countries
theres a big thing happening with real location bank branches with in-branch staff asking walk-in customers to "go online" to open/close accounts or use a ATM for deposits, withdrawals. and months later listing bank branch closure due to lack of foot-fall of customers entering bank branches to use real cashier-tellers in-branch for services, thus deemed as no customers needing in-branch services
even retail stores are replacing manned check-outs with self check-outs
though retailers are still employing people to walk the aisles to fill online orders to be delivered/picked-up
(cashier employing model becomes order fulfilment model)
...
as for covid chain reaction on employment
there was a period where people could work from home, which caused the government to think there were careers for disabled people to work from home. right now the UK government are doing a u-turn on disability where they now think all disability have no excuse to avoid work.
thinking there is more work opportunity in the market to cover even disabled people re-entering employment.
however whats been seen now is those in remote working, outsource their own work tasks to freelancers in lower paid countries. and the domestic employee then requests more work tasks to then outsource more work to lower income countries to be freelancers of the employee.
meaning the domestic employment of remote workers drop because managers see one worker achieving multiples of work tasks
thus taking work away from the domestic remote working market, due to outsourcing work to AI or lower paid countries
|
|
|
|
|
showing flows of $ is pointless
normally better to show holdings of BTC
as of today(based on yesterdays deals)
Grayscale: 496,573
blackrock: 56,629
grayscale is still removing coins from custody and blackrock is still gaining coin
update: 31/jan/24 for position of 30th
Grayscale: 487,025
blackrock: 63,488
|
|
|
|
In Switzerland, for example, the necessity to hire a babysitter becomes an obstacle and even a reason for being child free. Because a couple usually has to pay almost whole salary which one of them makes to afford a nanny.
whole salary nanny is usually min wage salary, so the childs parents prefer to start having kids when in a career earning 2x salary each, meaning 4x min wage household to afford the 1x salary for part time childcare Often young adults don't want to sacrifice all of their income just to give it away to another person. And they choose to continue working and living a life without such a responsibility as a baby. I find it rather sad, honestly. Because most of them regret not having kids when they grow older. However, I can understand that reason, because the opportunity to make and to save money is very important for a self esteem.
many people have this in their minds when they are late teens early 20's living on minimum wage. they either choose to be stay at home parent or dont have kids until they have a career. when they have a career earning 2x+ of min wage then they start thinking of starting a family. which is why most people dont start a family until late 20's early 30's many women are lucky enough to have their family (childs grandparents/uncles, aunts) to help reduce the costs of child care. and many governments have welfare schemes of child care vouchers. thus giving as much opportunity to work and have a family yes raising kids aint cheap, but people still have kids. |
|
|
|
Evegrande and the entire Chinese real estate boom was a very large deviation from what a centrally planned economy would look like.
~
If China had proper central planing for housing there would be no need for a market-based approach to this issue, which is essentially the root cause to tis issue.
Obviously with Evergrande the Chinese gov sidestepped its own foundational principles as a supposedly socialist government. There's an important asterisk here however. Ever since Deng Xiaoping, the liberalization of policies has allowed for many free market elements to start affecting the daily life of Chinese people. There are many voices in China, but mostly also abroad, that highlight how China is straying too far from the benefits of planning parts of an economy for the greater good. So while Evergrande at least to some extent might have been working in cooperation with the Chinese government, it was still acting as a private for profit corporation and there was not even the possibility of enough oversight from the state to prevent them. It's important to understand that profit and growth driven investment are the only factors that create incentives to build homes where no one wants to live in. In countries where state subsidies exist for housing quite the opposite actually happens, there's more demand than supply and the state gets overwhelmed with reviewing requests unless they dedicate more resources to this effort. also important to know evergrande headquarter operated in hongkong.. thus different rules applied compared to mainland china's rules set by beijing |
|
|
|
China is doing better in some economic aspects due to the very fact that they have central planning and can plan big parts of the economy bssed on national interests instead of short term profits of individuals.
Yeah: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-67562522Perfect central planning The firm has been the poster child of China's real estate crisis with more than $300bn (£236bn) of debt. 1.5 million houses for which people have already paid for which there is no money to finish them and 600 000 sold houses that are just on paper with not one brick laid and for which Chinese buyers are already indebt and paying mortgages worth everywhere between another 60 billion and 120 billion! Yup, definitely thinking of the national interest! But I have no doubt Franky will come here and tell US that debt that can't be paid back is even better than debt that grows the GDP, because ...reasons! yep stompix purposefully ignored "in shipments" to pretend to then say his stat proves iphones are #1 ranking of all chinese bought phones
Oh Franky, I always forget English is your sixth language you never learned https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prAP51817224 A shift of power that we saw on the worldwide stage also happened in China, the largest smartphone market globally. Apple became the leading smartphone company in China for the first time with record high market share of 17.3% in 2023. According to preliminary data from the International Data Corporation (IDC) Yeah Franky, top smartphone brand by SALES in CHINA is APPLE! Deal with reality! show the whole quote, its a stat of market share of SHIPMENTS According to preliminary data from the International Data Corporation (IDC) Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker, China smartphone shipments totaled 271.3 million units in 2023
just so you know CHINA make over a billion phones a year... just so you know CHINA only import 271.3 million in 2023 just so you know of the 271.3 million imports only 45m were of the apple variety learn why a shipment, shipping, shipped is related to transporting products not sales of products.. and yes i said sales not sails but it was fun to watch you yet again mention a quote but snipped off the word shipment even when you quote me calling you out on it |
|
|
|
This man thinks that he understands Bitcoin better than the Bitcoin community itself and does not think that the institution he leads is much more dirty, manipulative and disgusting than Bitcoin. He thought that JP Morgan would forever be a strong and stable banking institution, even though it was only a matter of time before the institution would go bankrupt.
Let's see who will survive, JP Morgan or Bitcoin.
the way i view J.Dimons emotions towards bitcoin is not a new strategy, its just a old strategy used on a new asset/commodity class(bitcoin) the same way wheat commodity traders view natural organic wheat the commodity traders prefer monsanto GMO wheat locked into stocks to trade futures and distribution with big corporations. controlling the market they call natural wheat plague wheat, they hate local farmers market, saying family farms should not grow, farm, harvest natural wheat unless they have permits/licences and meet X standards... as organic wheat is competition of neighbourhoods buying real wheat, which takes customers away from commodity traders that want people to buy investments into their GMO wheat. the commodity traders love to call the EPA to regulate organic farming, applying EPA regulations in preference to commodity traders needs, and to penalise family farmers that just want to grow, harvest, trade the real wheat. |
|
|
|
|
the government owns the patent to money. they have the licence to set the rules for who can use and how it can be used. the government sets the rules. the government can update money and put into circulation or change circulation rules of money
commercial banks work within the rules and bribes(lobbies) government to set rules that allow commercial banks leniency about certain utility of money. its a reciprocal relationship between government treasury and commercial banks
commercial banks are managed by their CEO and owned by their shareholders.. but they only operate under licence of the government. average joe cant just open his own bank business without a banking licence from the government
|
|
|
|
|
savings should come first.
savings is not about wealth creating in low reward accounts..
saving is just to get a emergency rainy day easy access pot of money to cover incidences.
easy access so that you dont need to run to credit cards and you dont need to cash out investments during a bear market
once you have a savings amount to cover atleast X month of expenses + able to cover any surprise short term event. then stop saving and start using the excess income you were putting into savings to instead start to put into investing.
when you know you have a easy access fund of savings you become more relaxed about investing. knowing you dont need to rush to cash out your investments early. you stop worrying about bear markets or losing your investments because you are not relying on investments to cover emergencies, thus able to invest more long term rather then trying to get rich quick out of fear of your monthly real life costs of living
|
|
|
|
"“I think there’s a good chance that … when we get to that 21 million Bitcoins, [Satoshi Nakamato] is going to come on there, laugh hysterically, go quiet, and all Bitcoin is going to be erased.”
Satoshi no longer has access to being a core dev, and it's written in to the blockchain that 21 million is the supply cap. I hate this man with a passion, and trust me I know hate is a very strong word.
No single developer can change the protocol of a decentralized project and network. Jamie Dimon must understand this point and maybe he understood it but just wanted to say lies on media. How is the 21 Million Bitcoin Cap Defined and Enforced?It is hard coded and no developer can change the 21 milion Bitcoin cap and erase Bitcoin is much more than increasing total supply so it is impossible. 5 lines of codeto prove Jamie Dimon is a liar. its actually better to show a raw blockreward value in bytes starting from 100101010000001011111001000000000 = 50 10010101000000101111100100000000 = 25 1001010100000010111110010000000 = 12.5 100101010000001011111001000000 = 6.25 notice anything.. yep halving the reward is simply removing the final bit every 210,000 blocks i personally dont like the method core displays it via the 50*coin /2 as it ends up with a rounding error later on after a few halvings edit philipma1957 response below is pretty much the best display of how J.Dimon makes not sense about even the most simplest detail that j.dimon did not think about "I think there’s a good chance that … when we get to that 21 million Bitcoins, [Satoshi Nakamato] is going to come on there, laugh hysterically, go quiet, and all Bitcoin is going to be erased." |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
