I suppose it wouldn't have made them so much ad revenue to make an article with the headline "Guy in Norway Sells $14 of Apple Stock for Bitcoin".

We all know perfectly well that putting all of your money into one thing is extremely risky and arguably dumb.  Diversifying, at least just into a few precious metals as well as cryptocurrencies, would be wise.

It's misleading for news publications like this to present stories in such a hyperbolic way, but this is the 21st century so what should we expect?

Countries will implement blockchain technology over time because it has an unlimited amount of useful applications, from logistics to gun tracking to the music industry to verifying ownership.

However, the public will not look at it like "Country X has just implemented a cryptocurrency", they'll look at it like "this is an easier way to spend" (fiat crap).

Blockchain based currencies =! cryptocurrencies.  Governments will implement things like this whenever it's helpful for them, but it will never stem the growth of Bitcoin and it won't have any relation to Bitcoin.

The only thing that would matter about these blockchain based government currencies would be that they reduce fees, making Bitcoin less appealing to some people.  But there will still be a huge amount of edgy people like us who continue to use real cryptocurrencies.

Quite recently, you were claiming that Lauda and Theymos are the same person.  What changed?

You said that ages ago.  Have you really?
How interesting that you said "other forums", instead of naming one.  That's because there aren't any really good Bitcoin forums or places for discussion.  Bitcoin.com is weak and Reddit is much worse than here.

I'm pretty sure ePay just decided they weren't fans of paying people anymore.

---

OP, I think Mellow Ads is what you're looking for.

Trust me, you don't want a low payout threshold.  Bitcoin transaction fees make the Bitcoin you receive worth very little if you keep claiming tiny amounts like 0.001 BTC. 

You should probably just deal with Mellow Ads and Anonymous Ads.  Coinurl is another one but I've seen reports of malvertising with them.  Just be wary of any Bitcoin ad networks, many of them will be shady.

Miners will mine on the chain which is profitable.  If one of the two chains is barely worth anything, miners can only mine on their preferred one for so long.

If there actually are whales considering BIP 148, it would sure as hell influence miners for them to sell loads of coins on one chain.

---

The answer is that you actually wouldn't need such a huge amount of BTC to make one chain near worthless.  If they were listed on exchanges, all that whales would have to do is collaborate to sell >500,000 BTC or so and with giant sell walls I can't see the new (or old) chain actually recovering.

What world are you living in if you think the problem doesn't exist?

PayPal is supposed to be a system for people to make casual transactions, and when paying for goods and services in the UK it charges 3.4% + 20p in fees.  The cost is for intermediaries - for having an intermediary, they're asking you to pay a fee which, compared to the profit margin for smaller goods, is absolutely enormous.  There are even cases of shops in some areas, like the US, accepting credit cards like Visa even though they end up losing money, just because they feel like they couldn't do without it.

Bitcoin's solution is to remove the intermediary so that businesses don't screw people over when dealing with small (and large) transactions.

Sure, Bitcoin is a terrible solution for now.  But the potential is through the roof - just look at the times when people could send transactions like this one of 194,993 BTC with no fees.  It's still not impossible on blockchain systems, and you can send a transaction of any size on DOGE for less than a cent.  

As blockchain technology gets better, so will fees.  We're still early adopters and the solution is patience of several years.

It is unusual that he felt the need to bring that up because it feels like it's about how much Bitcoin could "get away with", so to speak.

The amount that people will pay for mid-sized international remittances is exactly the amount that they need to pay.  If some alt with a similar level of volatility to Bitcoin has fees of 500 times less, the same limited supply and similar security (Litecoin for example, which has been way more stable than Bitcoin over the last few weeks), why would people pay the transaction fee of $100 for Bitcoin?  The answer is that they wouldn't.  So his point makes no sense.

Still, it was blown way out of proportion, and he wasn't saying that people should pay that amount.

There are some ways of finding intrinsic value in coins.  I was quite interested by Byteball's idea of having 1 byte of data transferred on the DAG cost 1 byte in transaction fees.  That means that the price of Byteball would theoretically stay the same as what people believe the utility of moving 1 byte of data is worth.  Obviously in a speculative market this doesn't happen, but it's definitely an interesting example of an attempt to peg down cryptocurrency prices in a decentralised way.

---

What Yahoo's news site got wrong is making sure to talk about how Bitcoin's price has always gone up in the long term.  This is somewhat true, but with all speculative assets and stocks there are bear markets.  Bitcoin's last bear market was from the Mt. Gox crash to partway through 2015.

People only tolerate watching their money get worth less and less if it's gradually over a long time, like with (most) current fiat currencies.  It's not so nice for them if they can't financially handle a drop of more than half over a certain period of time, which let's be honest is most people.

I think stability just comes from more support.  Bitcoin volatility is a self-fulfilling prophecy for as long as people think the price could drop very low at any time.  After a long time, the volatility will begin to fall if people have started feeling comfortable holding their money in it long-term.

Nah, 1 Litecoin is really expensive at $30.  They should just buy DOGE, it costs ten thousand times less.

My point of course is:

1.  The current supply of Litecoin is about three times that of Bitcoin and will eventually be four times that of Bitcoin, so a reasonable comparison would be calling the price about $90-100 instead.
2.  Both are extremely divisible and the gap is only psychological.  The market regards Bitcoin to be more valuable so it is - a lower price does not have to mean it's "earlier on" than Bitcoin, it just means there's a lower price.

Actually, I think they should buy Paccoin, since the price is only 1.5e-07 

Pretty big if.  

If I had no choice but to sell one chain, I'd probably keep the legacy coins.  

It all depends on the hashrate and business support at the time.  If the hashrate was <20% for the new chain, I can't see a lot of people bothering to try and use transactions on there so I'd sell.  If nearly all pools signalling SegWit started supporting BIP 148 (seems unlikely since I don't think F2Pool would support a chain split very readily), I would consider holding the new coins as well.

It's looking like the UASF chain won't matter much when the split happens, in which case I wouldn't bother holding.  I hope exchanges list both chains for me to increase my legacy coin holdings.

Careful.  Some wallets go "in maintenance" for a long time, and they're running something called "investbox" which looks like a Ponzi.  YoBit have been shady as hell for years, and they're getting even worse recently.

If you want to be safe buying Bitcoin, just use LocalBitcoins and trade P2P with cash.  You could also try Bitstamp, which I regard to be pretty safe.  With all the hype going on and lack of regulation you can never be sure, but I wouldn't mind dealing with Bitstamp, Coinbase and Kraken even though their support is all terrible.

If you want to do altcoin trading I wouldn't hesitate to recommend Bittrex.  Very punctual and decent liquidity for a newbie.

True.  That's very annoying.

That's misleading.  With PayPal for example, if you sell goods or services you have to accept a 3.4% + 20p fee for it, which makes all payments below 20p useless and all transactions below about £1/$1 impractical to take, or "dust".

The average Joe's attempt to collect satoshi was based on the gimmick of Bitcoin, not for what they regard as "real money".  You couldn't imagine traditional fiat currencies having pages like that, where you just fill in a captcha and get free fiat, because it would be just as dumb.

I agree that it should be possible to do things like that, which is part of the reason for faucets existing in the first place - for the sake of existing - but I don't think their tiny amount of Bitcoin was that meaningful anyway and they were just wasting time.
There's a lot of argument about that.  Some people argue that it would increase the cost of running full nodes too much, eventually leading to centralisation and thus leaving nodes too public and/or prone to attack.  I don't particularly agree with this for small increases, but I can see the argument that it's a "slippery slope" of sorts.

Some people go for SegWit paired with more offchain solutions like the Lightning Network, or for both of the two things at the same time.  The argument between the two "sides" is mainly what stops anything actually happening.
That would require cooperation.  Currently, a lot of transactions get rejected from mempools in that time (default Bitcoin Core time right now is 2 weeks, I think).
Spammers who are working hard or professionally wouldn't find this an issue if the actual cost in fiat was still low.  If it was high, there would be no point in sending the "low fee" transactions anyway.

Oh, so you're against freedom then.  What values are you even protecting when you hate Muslims so much?  You just associate Muslim nations with evil, then argue that Western nations should do exactly the same things as them?

Are you even listening to yourself?

You shouldn't be surprised in the slightest.

This is exactly the kind of "news" site that plays on people who are intelligent enough to realise that the mainstream media is corrupt but too dumb to realise that much of what they say is based on truth and reasonable scientific opinion.  The mainstream media is corrupt, but that doesn't mean you should just assume everything is wrong based on some paranoid fantasy.

You can see just from this article that they're too dumb to do the slightest bit of research into how Bitcoin mining works, so they just create an article packed with bullshit without thinking.

Maybe after seeing this you should consider that they're making up bullshit about other subjects as well.

Coinmarketcap distinguishes the "circulating supply" from the "total supply".  XRP, for example, has a "total supply" of 99,994,661,895, but its circulating supply is 38,621,693,933, which is what the market cap on coinmarketcap comes from.  Of course we can't be sure that this is accurate due to lost coins etc, but we know that it's the amount which is theoretically in the market.

If there was a circulating supply of two times more, in theory the price would lower as well and so would the market cap.

The market cap is nowhere near a perfect measurement, but trying to pretend that it's all manipulation just because it could be in some circumstances would be plain unreasonable.  It's not like the amount of money which just went into ETH was secretly $1, or that Bitcoin is actually worth its market cap either.

A bubble is when something's cost differs from its intrinsic value - a bubble can happen on something which is shockingly insignificant.  Bitcoin's "intrinsic value" is extremely hard to define, so we could just call a bubble whenever the price rises extremely dramatically without much reason (such as now).

Of course every time there's a bubble a huge amount of people convince themselves that this is not a bubble and that it's the new norm - otherwise it wouldn't be a bubble.

Bitcoin has had several bubbles already, and this time it's got some friends getting a big slice of the action.  I wouldn't say it's quite a bubble for Bitcoin yet - it sure as hell is for a lot of pointless alts - but it's definitely on the verge of one and hovering around the point at which I'd call it a bubble.

Well that's one of the dumbest things I've ever read.  When you put your Bitcoin in Coinbase you're not holding the funds, they're holding them for you.  And the point of a hardware wallet is to keep your private keys safe - they stop your coins being taken by viruses or hacked accounts.

---

OP, when you're seeing your Coinbase dashboard you're seeing the coins that you're holding in the Coinbase web wallet (or let's say, the coins that they're holding for you).

When you transfer them out of your Coinbase wallet, they're to an external address.  Coinbase doesn't know that it was sent to another wallet that you own, it just knows that you sent it to another address, so yes the number would be gone from your Coinbase account.

I don't see how that would be a problem though, you can just see the balance in your hardware wallet and check the price if that's what you're hoping to do.

You can change fees on blockchain.info.  You just have to go to the "advanced send" section and you can set the fee yourself. 

The problem is that all you see is a number, not an estimation of the satoshi/byte that you'll be sending.  Since Blockchain's ordinary fee estimation is either 120 satoshi/byte (wayyy too low) or completely unpredictable, you just end up having no idea what kind of fees you're sending at all.

>Mentions "enlightened" individuals
>Claims that Bitcoin will be the biggest payment system in the world by 2021 with no basis except for past prices
>Cares about nothing except the price.

Is this satire or what?  I find it hard to believe that someone could be that dumb.

That's only for unverified accounts.  Level 2 verification lets you do $25,000 per day.

I use Bittrex myself though.  I'd rather get withdrawals in less than a minute than withdrawals in a day if I'm lucky.  It's fucking terrifying when the exchange was likely to basically give up on your withdrawal for another few weeks if they felt like it.

Bittrex still has decent liquidity, unless you're one of the biggest whales around it should be alright.