|
I've just finished wathcing another Satoshi's Vision session, this time it's Craigh Wright, I wanna sacrifice some of my life to these opponents of Bitcoin so I can see what they think, but I'm getting to the point where I'm gonna start simply ignoring them.
This is what I take from the CSW talk:
There was almost no factual or technical content, he wants me to feel dumb compared to him, he constantly tells me how smart he is, and its a chore for him to talk down to me. His speaking voice, repeatative phrasing, and endless repetition of content becomes terribly tedious.
Even though this time he started by telling us, today is the day when he actually releases something, there was nothing but promises that things are coming soon.
When asked an interesting question at the end about 0-Conf, as usual, he failed to engage at a technical level and went off at a tangent, indicating to me his inability to grasp the issue.
I've seen this pattern repeatedly when he is asked probing questions, he fails to answer them, and finds a tangental course which he can answer in an emotional way. This is surely the sign of a true conman
The guy is a total waste of my time, and offers absolutely nothing.
Roger doesnt say anything new and is also a waste of time.
I struggle to find humour in their stupidity anymore, and will leave it to Dark Pill to find the gems in the their nonsense.
The only person I've seen in that whole conference that was worth watching is Peter Rizen, now I dislike his trolling and his futile attempts to manipulate this thread, and I also disagre with a lot of his conclusions, but he is actually worth listening to, though the 0-Conf stuff he talks about is not really relevant to BTC, it simply reveals a weakness in the BCH approach.
|
|
|
|
I should probably also point out that the the electricity consumption debate on BTC is being magnified by the media. The data centers of the olympics consume way more than Bitcoin does, but ofcourse we don't pay any attention to that. If you hear the media talking about electricity consumption try for yourself to atleast get a frame of reference on what such consumption means. They're just comparing it to countries but what about certain data centers and payment solutions? How does it compare to those? How does it compare to an industrial complex? Those are the things you don't hear. Everyone is just salty for not buying BTC for pennies (  ) This is a popular form of whataboutism, that I have heard here before. People trying to justify the costly nature of bitcoin by comparing it to the incomparable. Just like you did here, by comparing the worlds nr1 athletic event with 3,6billion viewers to a speculative digital asset and with maximum 5 million active users. The costs of running the bitcoin blockchain should be compared to the comparable - meaning to the costs of other blockchains! No other blockchain is comparable to Bitcoin, because no other blockchain is decentralized, and in the end, that's all that really matters. |
|
|
|
You got a bum price if you used okex. It's trading about 2x on exx.com. Can confirm able to withdraw BTC from there without verification. There's a great site to see which exchanges to use for airdrops: forkdrops.io. Note, you can filter the exchange list by coin also. I tried all the exchanges and I ended up with Okex because it was the only one that worked for me today, even now exx.com doesnt work, but you are right Okex is the worst price for UBTC, better check the others just in case they are working for you. Feels a bit sad all these forks coming to and end, its been real nice while it lasted. The only ones I'm waiting on now are Lightning Bitcoin (LBTC) & Bitcoin Atom |
|
|
|
So BTC is trading sideways and shitcoins are all falling. They should be rallying. So what changed?
I am not sure. But if this continues, I am going to stop running my GPU to mine shitcoins. I only have one 1070, so not making much anyway. Mostly doing it as a hobby. However, the payout is getting to the point that I'm not sure it's even worth the wear and tear on my GPU. Yes, payouts are terrible now, the only consolation for me is the free heating, if it stays like this once we get into warmer weather I'm out. |
|
|
|
Hmm maybe nothing but CME futures last trade day is 23th feb, settlement on 28th
Yes, closes tomorrow at 4.00pm London time. Looking at the price during this contract, almost all the day's closes were below the price we had a couple of days ago. This could explain the current push down of the price. I think we will know for sure if the price jumps, as the CME traders buy back in once the contract closes. I may open a long just before close. |
|
|
|
Most of them are scam. Just made to steal private keys. BCH and BTG are doing well right now. I don't know if any others are even on right track.
I'm not aware of any that do that (Though it is of course a risk) Can you name one that steals private keys? |
|
|
|
how much credence to you all put into the Tether playing games and NOT fully backing with USD as they claim? assuming that .... what do you think the effects will be? 9k coin 8k coin 7k coin 6k coin etc? I'm hoping, IF they get burned..it will shake out to cheap coin and a rebound in price and onward and upward (I am often wrong, however)  thoughts on what IF Tether is worst case and its effects thanks  I think this puts the $2B Tether in perspective, on the right hand side under the 2016 - USDT |
|
|
|
lolol https://rmg.royalmint.com/faqs/What is a permissioned blockchain?
Prova for RMG® is a permissioned blockchain protocol. Many of the blockchain consortiums that build private blockchains for financial institutions and other enterprises follow this model.
A permissioned blockchain restricts the actors who can contribute to the consensus of the system state. In a permissioned blockchain, only a restricted set of users have the rights to validate the block transactions.
Permissioned blockchains do not have to use the computing power based mining to reach a consensus, as all the actors are known.
Permissioned blockchains work to a Proof of Stake model (PoS) for reaching consensus instead. Proof of stake mining asks users to prove ownership of a certain amount of currency (their “stake” in the currency). Instead of buying computers and electricity for mining in a Proof of Work system, a PoS system uses the capital to acquire assets that allow you to validate transactions.Gran says  “Gold has probably had an argument that it’s been a store of value for 6,000 years, bitcoin’s a bit younger and the future of bitcoin is uncertain.” btw, I hate this now. Flint has probably had an argument that it's been a good fire-stater for 60,000 years, lighters are a bit younger and blabla In the short term we need a safe haven from Crypto, having a gold backed currency would be better than a fiat backed currency. Any backed currency requires a trusted party and having a permissioned block chain is irrelevant as you need to trust 100% the people who are storing the backing. I think a gold backed currency from the UK Royal Mint is going to be more trust worthy than Tether. I'm not suggesting this is as a replacement for Bitcoin or other Crypto currencys, but it is a mechanism for holding stable value loosely pegged to fiat. |
|
|
|
It might be a bit offtopic but have you already seen this? https://www.reddit.com/r/Tether/comments/7u3u0c/tether_tokens_on_the_ethereum_blockchain_have/Blacklist & Destroy
The following is for Tether tokens on the Ethereum blockchain only.
The Omni/Bitcoin blockchain Tether tokens function differently, though similarly as well as they can freeze addresses.
Looking through their smart contract source on lines 264 through 299 are the blacklist and destroy functions.
I have excerpted these lines in this pastebin.
Summary
Tether is able to unilaterally blacklist any Ethereum address.
Doing so labels the user as evilUser and all their Tether tokens are designated as dirtyFunds.
Once a user is blacklisted the destroyBlackFunds function can be used on their Tether token balances.
This sets their Tether token balances to 0 and decreases the total supply for the affected Tether tokens. Whats the problem? Tether is not a real crypto currency, its centralized and it is required that the owners are fully trusted. If they add blacklisting and fund destruction, you shouldnt be scared, because you already fully trust them. If a currency is backed by something, you need to trust the people who are holding the backing. If you don't trust Tether then don't use them. |
|
|
|
At what time (CET) they expire exactly again? I am pretty sure some of the actions in the past 24 Hours are related. 4pm London time, so about 9 minutes to go. |
|
|
|
CME first contract closes tommorow, so no doubt the tin-foil hat brigade will be out again. I'll pre-empt them....  Any large volumes over the next 24 hours can be attributed to Wall Street maniulating the price to profit from this contract closing. I think we can expect a reversal of this movement once the contract has closed. "Trading terminates at 4:00 p.m. London time on the last Friday of the contract month" Strap-in or damp squib? I dunno. |
|
|
|
I may have called these Weiss raters "experts" but surely I could have placed quotes around such a designation because I was only referring to them as "experts" in the traditional financial markets sense, and not really conceding that they are true experts, especially in terms of what they would consider to be valuable in a blockchain, and surely, they would not place much value upon decentralization, and that is truely what brings value to bitcoin above and beyond traditional systems and also beyond other cryptos who only feign decentralization rather than actually accomplishing such in any close proximity to bitcoin.
I think we are so used to see disclaimers suchs as "past performance is no guarantee of future performance" type statements we don't hold these people to high standards. These Weiss raters are indirectly making predictions about what is going to happen, and these predictions are clearly testable. But I don't see any evidence that any previous predictions were correct. (probably because they only just made up their system) Until they can prove something like "If you invested in our top X crypto currencies in the last year you would have made X% profit", then it's just meaningless noise. Any of us could put together some rules, take a few photos of old men wearing suits on a professional website and then make some recommendations, but we shouldnt give it any weight unless it has been shown provably correct. But I'm guessing from their currenct set of B rated cryptos, its highly likely that in a years time we aren't going to be giving them much respect. |
|
|
|
|
The path to enlightenment...
December/January
I'm getting into cryptocurrency, gonna buy me some Bitcoin
Nah, Bitcoin is too expensive, there are these Altcoins, I'll buy me some Ripple & Tron they are really cheap and everyone says its going to the moon.
Oh, I'm gonna sell those now I fully understand cryptocurrencies, most of these Altcoins are shit, I'm gonna just get the best ones like Ethereum & Bitcoin Cash.
Look I was right Bitcoin is finished it's going down.
.
..
.
Some time later that year
Oh shit, I really scerwed that up, gonna sell all my shitcoins and get Bitcoin again.
|
|
|
|
Explain why you think that statement is true, and I will explain why you are wrong.
The graphic showed nodes which would be represented by the likes of Amazon, Bitcoin Exchanges and Banks as 'Massively connected Hubs'. Opening a channel with a massivly connected hub like Amazon, a bitcoin Exchange or a bank is more like depositing money with a bank than sending some bitcoin to another wallet, (a hot wallet if you like). I don't know how to explain it more clearly than that. Feel free to show me why I'm wrong. I'm often wrong about a great many things
Opening a channel is not the same as depositing money in a bank. Depositing money implies you are trusting someone with your coins. This is not the case, a channel is completely trustless. In the entirety of a Lightning transaction there is no point at which an attacker can steal you coins. The worst that can happen, if they behave maliciously, is they force you to wait for a timeout, but at the end of the timeout you get all that is owed. During the lifetime of a transaction and a channel, there is no point at which you need to trust any 3rd party. If a 3rd party acts maliciously, they will effectively perform a denial of service attack upon you. This DOS attack will damage the nodes/recipients reputation and so will probably not be a desirable course of action for them. In the very rare instance where one is performed, you can simply make the transaction via a different route. So I don't see how an comparison with a bank is valid. Everyone needs to connect to the network via at least 1 node, possibly more, you are obviously going to connect to nodes with good onward connections, so the idea of hubs developing may well be valid, but the network topolgy claimed by Jonald Fyookball is completly unproven and the recent network diagrams from the Lightning testnet do not support it. The big blockers have attacked Lightning at every turn, mostly without evidence and understanding, I suggest you retain an open mind until the network is up and running then we can judge it in reality. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
