How Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Are Taxed Credit Karma
How Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Are Taxed Credit Karma
How is Bitcoin better than normal currency? - Bitcoin Forum
IRS Cracking Down on Cryptocurrency Owners Credit Karma
What is Karmacoin? (KARMA) - The Bitcoin News
Few Reporting Bitcoin Holdings on Taxes: Credit Karma
I am a well-known Billionaire, and I'm here to tell you the purpose of COVID-19
I am a well-known Billionaire, and I'm here to tell you the purpose of COVID-19 FROM: NOT ME https://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message4335788/pg1 I have been given permission to divulge those things here, because GLP has a special purpose. Question: Population reduction, 5g implementation. Etc. Among our group, there are proponents for, and against, population reduction (which I can explain). Those against it, have won a recent vote, so plans were changed in June of 2019. What you are witnessing now is not aggressive population reduction, it is something a bit different. 5G is extremely important to us. Mr. Gates is unfortunately a high initiate, but, he is not well liked. He recently lost a vote on one of his proposals. I was there, and voted nay. That was satisfying. Q; When will we be released from this prison? Death is the only release, though a rare few ascend here on Earth, in this life. Wim Hoff is one of them, if you want an example. He is ascended, and we have no control over him. We admire him. But, you have been mislead, to believe, we desire mass murder, death and killing. It is quite the opposite. We want you here, with us, alive. Q; Are you out to destroy nationalism or save it? No. It gives us far more control over you than so-called Globalism ever could. Q: How exactly is 5g important to you? Consent. Q: Would you explain the proponents for and against population reduction? This is a topic dear to me, as I've headed councils and votes that have shaped history over the past 20 years. I am against it. Some of my colleagues are for it, but they have come to see the consequences of it. It will alter the global economic model, based on infinite growth, Debt issuance, and consumerism. We will lose our wealth, over time. Our studies have proven this. Some of us will go from Billionaires, to Millionaires, if we institute the most aggressive population reduction models, within a few years. Some of us wish to see our wealth passed to many more generations within our families, and we do not wish for a world based upon a sustainable economic model. Those who maintain their position, in light of the evidence, have an insatiable desire to kill others. It is pathological in them, there is no reasoning, but their voting power has dwindled over the years. Expect population reduction through vaccines, which will result in many deaths, but more so in chronic long-term disease. This has been one compromise. The profits we enjoy are exceptional under this model, and allow us to fund many of our scientific projects, such as CERN, and space exploration. We love vaccinations because the truth about them is well-known. When truth is available and the individual rejects that truth, and chooses their own demise, it gives us power over their souls. On the other hand, when we simply kill and murder, the soul is released from us upon death. Q: How did Wim Hoff accomplish that? Learn a bit about his life, for the answer. He has an interesting biography. We cannot control him or influence him in any way, we have tried. Any individual who gains any notoriety in any field, who we do not control, will be targeted; must succumb, willingly, and swiftly. He did not. An edict was issued in 2018 that he shall not be targeted any further by us or any organization within our hierarchy. Q: What is glp s special purpose? Coded information is placed here often, along with experiments, and social influencing. Who would imagine this small corner of the Internet is so important? It is, to us. From time to time, we allow special things to happen here, things we would never allow through our traditional control mechanisms. We call this a "gifting." Some of our members are against this, but I overrule them. Q: Who gives you dominion over us? You do. We must follow some rules, too. If we violate them, we suffer. Q: How do you know who has ascended? Profiling, first, then targeting. When an individual is resistant, and maintains their personal liberty, they are added to The Book of the Ascended. They are then not to be violated under any circumstances. Some of these people are a problem for us, but I tend to like them, and the challenge they present. Q: Why target? How profiled? How identified? We target because it is part of our religious and spiritual directive. We profile those who are high profile, or may influence others. We can easily identify them. Some of them are here on GLP, for example. Q: What other purposes did this outbreak have besides population reduction? We are running a simulation, and we have carefully provided clues that it is a simulation to you, and the world. This is necessary to gain consent. We are still negotiating the outcome, which will occur in July. Q: Consent for what ? Q: If this is a simulation what’s are y’all looking for This exercise is serving many purposes for us. Many of us desired to see our Mother Earth given a chance to renew, and this is occurring. We desire greater control, and consent to control, and this is occurring. But as I said, the outcome has not been determined yet. There are three outcomes we have prepared, which will be voted on. Q: Karma must be heavy from targeting people who are ascending? Why so few ascend? What’s your take on the event? Are you worried? Q: Those who target anyone from The Book of the Ascended are stripped of their wealth, removed from their homes, communities, given a new identity, and typically they are left homeless or left with a serious medical condition. What are the 3 outcomes y’all have prepared? We are testing each scenario in different ways right now, but we not implementing them until our council votes. OUTCOME 1: The first is most likely, as most of the council seems to agree to it, and that is a phase-out of the pandemic by Summer. The stock market will reach 35,000 by election day in the U.S. and Bitcoin will reach $50,000. No new currency is introduced and the US Dollar retains supremacy. It will be an economic restoration unlike any seen in human history. New vaccines are introduced, which will be yearly and target COVID-19 (which is fictional, of course). They will be mandatory. We have been working on this particular vaccine, to be used for Outcome 1, for a very long time. Outcome 1's primary purpose is to introduce the vaccine in a way that it is accepted and welcomed by the world, and to allow us to grow richer. I will not disclose the long-term purpose of the vaccine, at this time, or its effects. OUTCOME 2: We allow the pandemic to persist into late 2020, and a monetary reset occurs. We have not decided if Trump will be reelected or not, in this scenario. Hillary Clinton may be placed in power, one of our most dedicated servants, who is due a great reward. (She is greatly in favor of this outcome, but has no voting power on our council.) We will redistribute 22.7% of our wealth to 4.6 Billion people, through the issuance of a new worldwide currency. Each name and individual has already been chosen, though children under 18 will not receive these accounts. We will also cancel all consumer debt worldwide, ban cryptocurrencies, and the ownership of gold, silver and other materials of value. Not only will living standards rise, Americans in particular will enjoy new-found wealth. As we control all market mechanisms, inflation and other issues will not be a concern. “A rising tide lifts all boats.” But there will be a cost to personal freedom and liberty, and that is an implantable microchip that must be accepted, if one is to receive the benefits of the new currency. Those who do not consent to the microchip, will have to operate in a black market, in which we will employ authorities to aggressively monitor, target and imprison many who do not consent. This will lead to a divided world, of haves and have-nots. Poverty and the 3rd world is eliminated, but the black market grows. Those who accept the chip will have no favor of those who do not, and we will see programs which encourage reporting, "snitching" and so on. You are already seeing this tested right now. This outcome is favored by a few individuals on our council who have extra voting power. These individuals outrank me. OUTCOME 3: The pandemic ceases in late Summer, but at great economic cost. There is no recovery, and the world lurches through a severe depression. The Dow drops to 5,000, and Bitcoin reaches $180 USD and is rendered a "dead" technology. Normality returns, to a degree, but there are shortages, by design, new restrictions, and severe economic struggles for the middle class. During this time, a number of new laws are passed, designed to limit freedom. This occurs in governments around the world. The excuse for these laws is to stop any pandemic from happening again, new campaigns are released using slogans like, "Never Again" and "We Must Unite" and so on. Through these campaigns, we gain consent to remove virtually all freedoms. By late Winter, into 2021, a new pandemic is released, it is more severe than the last. It is a real bioweapon we have prepared, and leads to a substantial loss of life. It reduces the world's population by 1.9 Billion people in less than six months. The future is grim, and somewhat chaotic, and during this time, we use the pandemic to further tighten controls. Power outages, brownouts and Internet shortages become the "norm" (as you can see, we are already testing part of this scenario right now). Food is rationed. Outcome 3, in particular, is favored by those on our council frustrated by the Internet and free speech. (… if you were wondering, I favor Outcome 1 and I will vote for it and advocate for it.) Q: How many are on the council? If it's outcome 1 does the stock market and Bitcoin go straight up from here along with gradual overall recovery or anymore shocks to the system soon? The other two outcomes seem to add unnecessary risk for all involved. Until the Outcomes are chosen, expect us to test scenarios from each outcome over the coming months, as I indicated we are doing. If you pay close attention, you will see scenarios from each Outcome being tested. Watch closely! In Outcome 1, the stock market and Bitcoin begin boom in late Summer, after the pandemic passes. We control him. He has been especially good for us. The last President who we had trouble with was Reagan, but we kept him on course. [ link to www.youtube.com (secure)] Thread: Trump Promises Biometric Tracking System AKA Implantable RFID Chip Before He Leaves Office You accept the current paradigm, and you have never questioned it. This pleases me greatly. Q:Americans are armed to the teeth and not afraid to fight. We outnumber you and all your armies many times over. What are you going to do about that? Guns are not threat to us. were you groomed for your position as top level billionaire or did you choose it? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11172798 Q:Thank you for asking. Your question pleases me greatly. I was an ascended by the age of 17, and my name was in The Book of the Ascended. In my 20s, I was tested, illegally, by a member of the council. That member was quickly expelled, because to test an ascended is not allowed. But the test they used worked on me, and I asked my name be removed from the book. You see, an ascended is sometimes illegally tested, it is rare, but it is far more rare that an ascended is tested and asks their name to be removed from the book. This was the first time this had occurred in over 300 years. I was given special attention when this happened, and a counselor spent two years walking me through the initiations. I read many secret books, which no one outside of the council is allowed to read. I received a quick education. I also enjoyed the tutelage of some of the council's most powerful members, who took an interest in me, and I gained vast amounts of knowledge from them. Those who join the council are often given Billions, and then given direction on how to grow the money. Others are self-made. I was nearly penniless when I joined the council, so I was given the money. Since then I have grown it a great deal.
This FAQ and information thread serves to inform both new and existing users about common Bitcoin topics that readers coming to this Bitcoin subreddit may have. This is a living and breathing document, which will change over time. If you have suggestions on how to change it, please comment below or message the mods. What is /btc? The /btc reddit community was originally created as a community to discuss bitcoin. It quickly gained momentum in August 2015 when the bitcoin block size debate heightened. On the legacy /bitcoin subreddit it was discovered that moderators were heavily censoring discussions that were not inline with their own opinions. Once realized, the subreddit subscribers began to openly question the censorship which led to thousands of redditors being banned from the /bitcoin subreddit. A large number of redditors switched to other subreddits such as /bitcoin_uncensored and /btc. For a run-down on the history of censorship, please read A (brief and incomplete) history of censorship in /bitcoin by John Blocke and /Bitcoin Censorship, Revisted by John Blocke. As yet another example, /bitcoin censored 5,683 posts and comments just in the month of September 2017 alone. This shows the sheer magnitude of censorship that is happening, which continues to this day. Read a synopsis of /bitcoin to get the full story and a complete understanding of why people are so upset with /bitcoin's censorship. Further reading can be found here and here with a giant collection of information regarding these topics. Why is censorship bad for Bitcoin? As demonstrated above, censorship has become prevalent in almost all of the major Bitcoin communication channels. The impacts of censorship in Bitcoin are very real. "Censorship can really hinder a society if it is bad enough. Because media is such a large part of people’s lives today and it is the source of basically all information, if the information is not being given in full or truthfully then the society is left uneducated [...] Censorship is probably the number one way to lower people’s right to freedom of speech." By censoring certain topics and specific words, people in these Bitcoin communication channels are literally being brain washed into thinking a certain way, molding the reader in a way that they desire; this has a lasting impact especially on users who are new to Bitcoin. Censoring in Bitcoin is the direct opposite of what the spirit of Bitcoin is, and should be condemned anytime it occurs. Also, it's important to think critically and independently, and have an open mind. Why do some groups attempt to discredit /btc? This subreddit has become a place to discuss everything Bitcoin-related and even other cryptocurrencies at times when the topics are relevant to the overall ecosystem. Since this subreddit is one of the few places on Reddit where users will not be censored for their opinions and people are allowed to speak freely, truth is often said here without the fear of reprisal from moderators in the form of bans and censorship. Because of this freedom, people and groups who don't want you to hear the truth with do almost anything they can to try to stop you from speaking the truth and try to manipulate readers here. You can see many cited examples of cases where special interest groups have gone out of their way to attack this subreddit and attempt to disrupt and discredit it. See the examples here. What is the goal of /btc? This subreddit is a diverse community dedicated to the success of bitcoin. /btc honors the spirit and nature of Bitcoin being a place for open and free discussion about Bitcoin without the interference of moderators. Subscribers at anytime can look at and review the public moderator logs. This subreddit does have rules as mandated by reddit that we must follow plus a couple of rules of our own. Make sure to read the /btc wiki for more information and resources about this subreddit which includes information such as the benefits of Bitcoin, how to get started with Bitcoin, and more. What is Bitcoin? Bitcoin is a digital currency, also called a virtual currency, which can be transacted for a low-cost nearly instantly from anywhere in the world. Bitcoin also powers the blockchain, which is a public immutable and decentralized global ledger. Unlike traditional currencies such as dollars, bitcoins are issued and managed without the need for any central authority whatsoever. There is no government, company, or bank in charge of Bitcoin. As such, it is more resistant to wild inflation and corrupt banks. With Bitcoin, you can be your own bank. Read the Bitcoin whitepaper to further understand the schematics of how Bitcoin works. What is Bitcoin Cash? Bitcoin Cash (ticker symbol: BCH) is an updated version of Bitcoin which solves the scaling problems that have been plaguing Bitcoin Core (ticker symbol: BTC) for years. Bitcoin (BCH) is just a continuation of the Bitcoin project that allows for bigger blocks which will give way to more growth and adoption. You can read more about Bitcoin on BitcoinCash.org or read What is Bitcoin Cash for additional details. How do I buy Bitcoin? You can buy Bitcoin on an exchange or with a brokerage. If you're looking to buy, you can buy Bitcoin with your credit card to get started quickly and safely. There are several others places to buy Bitcoin too; please check the sidebar under brokers, exchanges, and trading for other go-to service providers to begin buying and trading Bitcoin. Make sure to do your homework first before choosing an exchange to ensure you are choosing the right one for you. How do I store my Bitcoin securely? After the initial step of buying your first Bitcoin, you will need a Bitcoin wallet to secure your Bitcoin. Knowing which Bitcoin wallet to choose is the second most important step in becoming a Bitcoin user. Since you are investing funds into Bitcoin, choosing the right Bitcoin wallet for you is a critical step that shouldn’t be taken lightly. Use this guide to help you choose the right wallet for you. Check the sidebar under Bitcoin wallets to get started and find a wallet that you can store your Bitcoin in. Why is my transaction taking so long to process? Bitcoin transactions typically confirm in ~10 minutes. A confirmation means that the Bitcoin transaction has been verified by the network through the process known as mining. Once a transaction is confirmed, it cannot be reversed or double spent. Transactions are included in blocks. If you have sent out a Bitcoin transaction and it’s delayed, chances are the transaction fee you used wasn’t enough to out-compete others causing it to be backlogged. The transaction won’t confirm until it clears the backlog. This typically occurs when using the Bitcoin Core (BTC) blockchain due to poor central planning. If you are using Bitcoin (BCH), you shouldn't encounter these problems as the block limits have been raised to accommodate a massive amount of volume freeing up space and lowering transaction costs. Why does my transaction cost so much, I thought Bitcoin was supposed to be cheap? As described above, transaction fees have spiked on the Bitcoin Core (BTC) blockchain mainly due to a limit on transaction space. This has created what is called a fee market, which has primarily been a premature artificially induced price increase on transaction fees due to the limited amount of block space available (supply vs. demand). The original plan was for fees to help secure the network when the block reward decreased and eventually stopped, but the plan was not to reach that point until some time in the future, around the year 2140. This original plan was restored with Bitcoin (BCH) where fees are typically less than a single penny per transaction. What is the block size limit? The original Bitcoin client didn’t have a block size cap, however was limited to 32MB due to the Bitcoin protocol message size constraint. However, in July 2010 Bitcoin’s creator Satoshi Nakamoto introduced a temporary 1MB limit as an anti-DDoS measure. The temporary measure from Satoshi Nakamoto was made clear three months later when Satoshi said the block size limit can be increased again by phasing it in when it’s needed (when the demand arises). When introducing Bitcoin on the cryptography mailing list in 2008, Satoshi said that scaling to Visa levels “would probably not seem like a big deal.” What is the block size debate all about anyways? The block size debate boils down to different sets of users who are trying to come to consensus on the best way to scale Bitcoin for growth and success. Scaling Bitcoin has actually been a topic of discussion since Bitcoin was first released in 2008; for example you can read how Satoshi Nakamoto was asked about scaling here and how he thought at the time it would be addressed. Fortunately Bitcoin has seen tremendous growth and by the year 2013, scaling Bitcoin had became a hot topic. For a run down on the history of scaling and how we got to where we are today, see the Block size limit debate history lesson post. What is a hard fork? A hard fork is when a block is broadcast under a new and different set of protocol rules which is accepted by nodes that have upgraded to support the new protocol. In this case, Bitcoin diverges from a single blockchain to two separate blockchains (a majority chain and a minority chain). What is a soft fork? A soft fork is when a block is broadcast under a new and different set of protocol rules, but the difference is that nodes don’t realize the rules have changed, and continue to accept blocks created by the newer nodes. Some argue that soft forks are bad because they trick old-unupdated nodes into believing transactions are valid, when they may not actually be valid. This can also be defined as coercion, as explained by Vitalik Buterin. Doesn't it hurt decentralization if we increase the block size? Some argue that by lifting the limit on transaction space, that the cost of validating transactions on individual nodes will increase to the point where people will not be able to run nodes individually, giving way to centralization. This is a false dilemma because at this time there is no proven metric to quantify decentralization; although it has been shown that the current level of decentralization will remain with or without a block size increase. It's a logical fallacy to believe that decentralization only exists when you have people all over the world running full nodes. The reality is that only people with the income to sustain running a full node (even at 1MB) will be doing it. So whether it's 1MB, 2MB, or 32MB, the costs of doing business is negligible for the people who can already do it. If the block size limit is removed, this will also allow for more users worldwide to use and transact introducing the likelihood of having more individual node operators. Decentralization is not a metric, it's a tool or direction. This is a good video describing the direction of how decentralization should look. Additionally, the effects of increasing the block capacity beyond 1MB has been studied with results showing that up to 4MB is safe and will not hurt decentralization (Cornell paper, PDF). Other papers also show that no block size limit is safe (Peter Rizun, PDF). Lastly, through an informal survey among all top Bitcoin miners, many agreed that a block size increase between 2-4MB is acceptable. What now? Bitcoin is a fluid ever changing system. If you want to keep up with Bitcoin, we suggest that you subscribe to /btc and stay in the loop here, as well as other places to get a healthy dose of perspective from different sources. Also, check the sidebar for additional resources. Have more questions? Submit a post and ask your peers for help!
It's Time to Let Everyone in on Litecoin's Biggest Secret
Fellow Consumers, It's possible that you might be getting a little upset at the current BTC fees. Please assist me in sending, or editing as you see fit, this drafted outline and email to whichever business you feel would benefit from using Litecoin instead. Or you can make a video, or tweet the link, or 100 other things. Just help in bringing attention to Litecoin in BTC's mempool time of need. It's time they learned Litecoin's biggest secret .... It’s THE BEST payment method out there. Also, please support businesses that currently accept Litecoin. I've put together a list below the draft. ........................................................................................................................................ BEGIN EMAIL DRAFT To whom it may concern, Has your company ever considered receiving the alternative payment currency Litecoin? To begin, you may already be accepting bitcoin and Litecoin is very similar to bitcoin. If you're unfamiliar with bitcoin as a currency then Litecoin is a great place to start. They are even built from the same Core coding. A benefit to Litecoin is that it has a 2.5 minute block time instead of bitcoin's 10 minutes. This makes Litecoin's transaction speed four times faster and much less expensive than bitcoin. In layman's terms, this just means payment is confirmed faster and less expensively with Litecoin. For reference - you can see the average fee of both bitcoin and Litecoin in US Dollars compared here: https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactionfees-btc-ltc.html#1y This chart shows the average fee for Litecoin is staying around 10 to 20 cents, and bitcoin bouncing between a low of $1.50 and $8.00 recently. This means you would pay less in fees to convert the same total value into fiat or USD in this case. If you were to compare this to the average credit card transaction fees, of say 2.5%, any transaction over $5.00 would be more profitable through Litecoin. Reference of fees found here: https://www.cardfellow.com/average-fees-for-credit-card-processing/#Typical If you've heard of Litecoin, I'm sure you have heard the saying "Litecoin is the silver to bitcoin's gold." But really, Litecoin should really be considered Platinum instead of silver. Platinum is stronger, more durable, and much more ductile. Over 20% of all consumer goods either contain platinum or are produced using platinum. Platinum is truly an enduring metal just as Litecoin is truly an enduring cryptocurrency. It will be 6 years old this October, bitcoin is 8 years old. A few facts that demonstrate Litecoin's strength, durability, and ductility are listed below:
Litecoin has a large economy and your current bitcoin technology should work on Litecoin with very little changes. If you don't use bitcoin, it is still easy to implement.
Litecoin has the best combination of economic size and technical similarity to bitcoin than any other cryptocurrencies.
Litecoin is capable of eight times as many transactions as bitcoin in a ten minute period.
Litecoin has much faster confirmation times with blocks that are not full.
Litecoin has proven its longevity compared to many other cryptocurrencies that have come and gone.
Also, if changes ever need to be made to Litecoin, it doesn't take years to implement them. Litecoin implemented Segregated Witness before bitcoin, and will most likely run on the lightning network before bitcoin as well. If you don't deal with bitcoin, this all just means Litecoin is a front runner in implementing new technology and features.
Litecoin is a limited supply coin, launched fairly, with no coins premined (no developer is hiding a majority somewhere), nor has it ever hard forked for any special interest groups. It is decentralized and no one person or group controls what happens to it and no one person or group can manipulate the market.
Whole Litecoins are much more affordable than whole bitcoins. This helps eliminate some psychological barriers to entering the market.
In conclusion: If your company was to accept Litecoin, I would be happy to start conducting my business with you. If your company accepts bitcoin payments but not Litecoin, I hope I have helped shed some light on the benefits Litecoin could bring to your business. If your business does not accept bitcoin payments, I hope I have introduced you to an alternative payment option that a large number of people transact with everyday who would love to add you to their list of merchants accepting Litecoin. It really is the currency of the future. If you have any questions about Litecoin or need help in possibly implementing Litecoin into your business, please let us know. There are many of us here excited to help you transition into accepting Litecoin or to help you further and answer any questions you may have. We can be found here: [email protected] [email protected] https://www.reddit.com/Litecoin https://twitter.com/LitecoinCA http://litecoinalliance.org/ https://twitter.com/ltcfoundation https://twitter.com/litecoinsupport A few options of the easiest ways to implement Litecoin payments currently are:
TL;DR As other community thoughtleaders like Jonald_Fyookball, Roger Ver, BCH devs et. al and those like Vitalik Buterin are realizing, Coinjoin is the best privacy method for blockchains. Dash has the best implementation of Coinjoin in PrivateSend with several protocol level-features that means that no other coin including Monero can provide the same level of security, speed, and strength of privacy by anon set size that Dash can. End TL;DR
fireice_uk stated in his article, there's really no way to fix it.
I didn't say that. I think it can be fixed, however as is, Monero's (and all other cryptonotes') privacy is not fit for purpose.
The privacy coin wars began in 2014 with the release of Dash and soon subsequent release of Monero. Two years later, PIVX and ZEC family would join the mix. The Monero community being very aggressive, they launched an all-out FUD war on us. They had chosen a different strategy to privacy, one that would lead them to making their blockchain opaque. And now, as the PIVX, Monero, ZCash, ETH and BCH are forced to begrudingly acknowledge, Dash was right and did privacy right all along. It might sound like bragging but its not: Its important to recognize both what you are doing right so you can do more of it, and also what you're doing wrong so you can avoid it. A lot of our trolls and competition want to concern troll us into only focusing on the things we do wrong, so that we panic and do self-destructive 'corrective' measures. The best way to prevent that is to have a balanced look at what we're doing both good and bad. And the fact that PIVX and ZCoin had to shut off their privacy, ZCash would've but they fixed and updated the same issue with their sapling upgrade, and Monero has had the same inflation bugs and much, traceability123 proves that Dash's on-chain, optional obfuscation was the best and strongest of the privacy options.
The researchers also found a second problem in Monero's untraceability system tied to the timing of transactions. In any mix of one real coin and a set of fake coins bundled up in a transaction, the real one is very likely to have been the most recent coin to have moved prior to that transaction. Before a recent change from Monero's developers, that timing analysis correctly identified the real coin more than 90 percent of the time, virtually nullifying Monero's privacy safeguards. After that change to how Monero chooses its mixins, that trick now can spot the real coin just 45 percent of the time—but still narrows down the real coin to about two possibilities, far fewer than most Monero users would like.
2 - The second big takeaway from this is that Dash was right to incentivize the masternode layer, because of that we can do our privacy the best out of all the coins that are using coinJoin methods, which is the best privacy method! That makes us the best of the best! Now you know why so many people concern troll about 'maybe we should remove privateSend guys'. In a viral tweet, Vitalik Buterin recently stated in his latest criticism of XMR privacy protocol the following: Vitalik Buterin Eyes Research on Privacy Coin Monero’s Traceability
Privacy schemes where the anonymity set of a single transaction is smaller than the entire set of users of the scheme are looking weaker and weaker with every passing month...Vitalik Non-giver of Ether
Emin Gün Sirer 認証済みアカウント @el33th4xor Interesting attack on Monero traceability. Essentially, the attacker floods the network with his own transactions, and is able to remove them from the mixins later to identify other inputs. Costs only $1.5k for a year long attack. https://twitter.com/MihailoBjelic/status/1126878887886106629 …
12:34 - 2019年5月10日
Which shows that I was correct in the thread I linked below: Anonymity set size is the most important metric to measure privacy coins by. Which means all the hemming and hawing from the Monero community, trying to get that thread deleted, having me banned, calling me 'delusional' etc., is because they wanted to hide that information from everyone. Why? Because until Bitcoin Cash came along earlier this year Feb-March with CashShuffle, Monero had the smallest anonymity set of all the privacy coins and they didn't want anyone to know this information! Indeed, Vitalik explained it exactly the same way I did:
In a follow-up email with CoinDesk, Buterin explained,
“Anonymity set is cryptography speak for ‘set of users that this thing could have come from.’ For example if I sent you 1 ETH and you can’t tell who exactly it was from but you can tell that it came from (myself, Alice, Bob or Charlie), then the anonymity set has size 4. The bigger the anonymity set the more privacy you have.”
The main thrust of my thread from more than half a year ago linked below:
So with no further ado, here is your simple guide to evaluating privacy coins! Like daily tx throughput is a key metric of btc/blockchain adoption and usage, privacy coins have their own 'key metric' to determine their ability to hide your tx history: the size of their anonymity set. This is basically the number of other people with which your transaction is plausibly 'mixed' so at to sever the link between your address and that coin. The greater this number is, the more difficult it is to associate a coin with your address, thus making it more private.
So we have Vitalik Buterin of ETH-fame agreeing with my description of privacy coins on how to make them strongeweaker and what makes them valuable as privacy coins. So how does the super-privacy concerned and anonymity-oriented Monero community react to this information? Not like you'd expect; A core team member says here in response:
[–]SamsungGalaxyPlayerKarma CC: 3278 XMR: 9323 26 ポイント 8ヶ月前 Commenting here for the record: This is a delusional, meaningless comparison that ignores a significant amount of context. So much information is incorrect here that I strongly encourage any potential reader to use any other resource. [tta21: Emphasis and italics added]
Another clear member of the Monero community confers:
[–]wecando4star2 - 3 years account age. 300 - 1000 comment karma. 12 ポイント 8ヶ月前 This guy should be banned from the sub. Not only is he posting an unfair, pointless, junk and recycled an article, but is then making claims that his post was "downvote brigaded by XMR maximalists" This whole post is nothing but a propaganda piece, usually people should be allowed freedom to post their thoughts but this guy is clearly vested with other pecuniary interests and is launching a propaganda campaign and using this sub to fuel his campaign. He is also using the downvote he gets to cash the Monero community in a bad light. So imo that is clearly against the no manipulation rule. [tta21: Emphasis and italics added]
Wow, but as you can see from Vitalik's post, and from Emin Gur Sirer's post as well, that Monero's weakness is its small anonymity set, and the greater this number is the stronger its privacy. Why therefore are so many member of the Monero community coming out so aggressively against that information (see the thread to read more)? Before that thread, nobody except Amanda B. Johnson (and I only found out about her videos talking about monero's smaller anon set about a year after I started posting about it, in a more obscure video she did) and more 'esoteric' community figures were talking about the anonymity set size of privacy coins. Everyone used to argue that "Monero is the king of privacy because it uses encryption!" also, "PIVX is better than Dash because it uses encryption." When in fact, Dash had a much larger anonymity set than all of those coins for a long time (PIVX until recently and then it flipped again with Dash in the lead). This means that Coinjoin is obviously the best all-around privacy solution if you want an auditable supply with strong privacy, and Dash's PrivateSend builds on that to rise to be better than any other offering on a non-Masternode chain. Dash has 16 rounds of mixing with an anon set size in the tens of thousands to millions (it grows as more people use it) compared to Monero with an anonymity set size of only 11, and BCH of 5. Monero's anon set used to be only 3. Then it was 5, then 7. Now they recently bumped it to 11, but it was always really low when it had the most usage on darknets. See this thread I wrote on comparing privacy coins by their anonymity sets for a better breakdown.
This FAQ thread serves to inform both new and existing users about common Bitcoin issues, complaints, and comments that readers coming to this Bitcoin subreddit may have. This is a living and breathing document, which will change over time. If you have suggestions on how to change it, please comment below or message the mods. What is /btc? Bitcoin is commonly abbreviated as BTC, hence the name. The /btc reddit community was originally created as a community to discuss bitcoin. It quickly gained momentum in August 2015 when the bitcoin block size debate heightened. On the legacy /bitcoin subreddit it was discovered that moderators were heavily censoring discussions that were not inline with their own opinions. Once realized, the subreddit subscribers began to openly question the censorship which led to thousands of redditors being banned from the /bitcoin subreddit. A large number of redditors switched to other subreddits such as /bitcoin_uncensored and /btc. For a run-down on the history of censorship, please read A (brief and incomplete) history of censorship in /bitcoin by John Blocke and /Bitcoin Censorship, Revisted by John Blocke. Update October 2017: As yet another example, /bitcoin censored 5,683 posts and comments just in the month of September 2017 alone. This shows the sheer magnitude of censorship that is happening. Read a synopsis of /bitcoin to get the full story and a complete understanding of why people are so upset with /bitcoin's censorship. Why is censorship bad for Bitcoin? As demonstrated above, censorship has become prevalent in almost all of the major Bitcoin communication channels. The impacts of censorship in Bitcoin are very real. "Censorship can really hinder a society if it is bad enough. Because media is such a large part of people’s lives today and it is the source of basically all information, if the information is not being given in full or truthfully then the society is left uneducated [...] Censorship is probably the number one way to lower people’s right to freedom of speech." By censoring certain topics and specific words, people in these Bitcoin communication channels are literally being brain washed into thinking a certain way, molding the reader in a way that they desire; this has a lasting impact especially on users who are new to Bitcoin. Censoring in Bitcoin is the direct opposite of what the spirit of Bitcoin is, and should be condemned anytime it occurs. Also, it's important to think critically, and have an open mind. What is the goal of /btc? This subreddit is a diverse community dedicated to the success of bitcoin. /btc honors the spirit and nature of Bitcoin being a place for open and free discussion about Bitcoin without the interference of moderators. Subscribers at anytime can look at and review the public moderator logs. This subreddit does have rules as mandated by reddit that we must follow plus a couple of rules of our own. Make sure to read the /btc wiki for more information and resources about this subreddit which includes information such as the benefits of Bitcoin, how to get started with Bitcoin, and more. What is Bitcoin? Bitcoin is a digital currency, also called a virtual currency, which can be transacted for a low-cost nearly instantly from anywhere in the world. Bitcoin also powers the blockchain, which is a public immutable and decentralized global ledger. Unlike traditional currencies such as dollars, bitcoins are issued and managed without the need for any central authority whatsoever. There is no government, company, or bank in charge of bitcoin. As such, it is more resistant to wild inflation and corrupt banks. With bitcoin, you can be your own bank. Read the Bitcoin whitepaper to further understand the schematics of how Bitcoin works. You can download a Bitcoin client to start fully using Bitcoin today; note that it takes time to sync full clients, which can take anywhere from 7 hours to over 24 hours for the initial blockchain download depending on your hardware and bandwidth. How do I buy Bitcoin? You can buy Bitcoin on an exchange or with a brokerage. If you're looking to buy Bitcoin with your credit card you can simply visit this buy Bitcoin link to get started quickly and safely. There are several others places to buy Bitcoin too; please check the sidebar under brokers, exchanges, and trading for other go-to service providers to begin buying and trading Bitcoin. Make sure to do your homework first before choosing an exchange to ensure you are choosing the right one for you. How do I store my Bitcoin securely? After the initial step of buying your first Bitcoin, you will need a Bitcoin wallet to secure your bitcoin. Knowing which Bitcoin wallet to choose is the second most important step in becoming a Bitcoin user. Since you are investing funds into Bitcoin, choosing the right Bitcoin wallet for you is a critical step that shouldn’t be taken lightly. Use this guide to help you choose the right wallet for you. Check the sidebar under Bitcoin wallets to get started and find a wallet that you can store your Bitcoin in. Why is my transaction taking so long to process? Bitcoin transactions typically confirm in ~10 minutes. A confirmation means that the Bitcoin transaction has been verified by the network through the process known as mining. Once a transaction is confirmed, it cannot be reversed or double spent. Transactions are included in blocks. Over the past year, the Bitcoin network has hit its maximum capacity of 1MB of available transaction space (block size limit) causing fees to rise and block confirmations to slow. If you have sent out a Bitcoin transaction and it’s delayed, chances are the fee you used wasn’t enough to out-compete others causing it to be backlogged. The transaction won’t confirm until it clears the backlog. To help with this as a temporary solution, you can check fee estimator services to help you figure out the right fee to pay or use a transaction accelerator service to help get an already broadcast transaction mined and confirmed. Why does my transaction cost so much, I thought Bitcoin was supposed to be cheap? As described above, transaction fees have spiked in the past year mainly due to a limit on transaction space. This has created what is called a fee market, which has primarily been a premature artificially induced price increase on transaction fees due to the limited amount of block space available (supply vs. demand). The original plan was for fees to help secure the network when the block reward decreased and eventually stopped, but the plan was not to reach that point until some time in the future, around the year 2140. What is the block size limit? The original Bitcoin client didn’t have a block size cap, however was limited to 32MB due to the Bitcoin protocol message size constraint. However, in July 2010 Bitcoin’s creator Satoshi Nakamoto introduced a temporary 1MB limit as an anti-DDoS measure. The temporary measure from Satoshi Nakamoto was made clear three months later when Satoshi said the block size limit can be increased again by phasing it in when it’s needed (when the demand arises). When introducing Bitcoin on the cryptography mailing list in 2008, Satoshi said that scaling to Visa levels “would probably not seem like a big deal.” How can the block size be increased to accommodate more transactions? There have been many discussions and proposals to increase the block size over the past couple of years, so far without any success. The most recent way introduced by a group of developers has been through a new client called Bitcoin Unlimited (BU), which removes the temporary limit like the original client and lets the free market decide what block size is best, allowing for on-chain scaling. The BU plan is to accomplish this via a hard fork. Another recent alternative has been Segregated Witness (SegWit), which only allows a limited amount more of transactions through a signature optimization, removing signature data from conventional transactions and placing it into a new space, called the transaction witness. SegWit has been deployed as a soft fork (but not active), although it could also be implemented as a hard fork. What is a hard fork? A hard fork is when a block is broadcast under a new and different set of protocol rules which is accepted by nodes that have upgraded to support the new protocol. In this case, Bitcoin diverges from a single blockchain to two separate blockchains (a majority chain and a minority chain). Some argue that having two chains is problematic, but that is only the case if you believe that the minority chain will survive and have more market value than the majority chain. Read more about hard forks in our Hard Fork mega thread. What is a soft fork? A soft fork is when a block is broadcast under a new and different set of protocol rules, but the difference is that nodes don’t realize the rules have changed, and continue to accept blocks created by the newer nodes. Some argue that soft forks are bad because they trick old-unupdated nodes into believing transactions are valid, when they may not actually be valid. Doesn't it hurt decentralization if we increase the block size? Some argue that by lifting the limit on transaction space, that the cost of validating transactions on individual nodes will increase to the point where people will not be able to run nodes individually, giving way to centralization. This is a false dilemma because at this time there is no proven metric to quantify decentralization; although it has been shown that the current level of decentralization will remain with or without a block size increase. It's a logical fallacy to believe that decentralization only exists when you have people all over the world running full nodes. The reality is that only people with the income to sustain running a full node (even at 1MB) will be doing it. So whether it's 1MB, 2MB, or 4MB, the costs of doing business is negligible for the people who can already do it. If the block size limit is removed, this will also allow for more users worldwide to use and transact introducing the likelihood of having more individual node operators. Decentralization is not a metric, it's a direction. This is a good video describing the direction of how decentralization should look. Additionally, the effects of increasing the block capacity beyond 1MB has been studied with results showing that up to 4MB is safe and will not hurt decentralization (Cornell paper, PDF). Other papers also show that no block size limit is safe (Peter Rizun, PDF). Lastly, through an informal survey among all top Bitcoin miners, many agreed that a block size increase between 2-4MB is acceptable. What is the block size debate all about anyways? The block size debate boils down to different sets of users who are trying to come to consensus on the best way to scale Bitcoin for growth and success. Scaling Bitcoin has actually been a topic of discussion since Bitcoin was first released in 2008; for example you can read how Satoshi Nakamoto was asked about scaling here and how he thought at the time it would be addressed. Fortunately Bitcoin has seen tremendous growth and by the year 2013, scaling Bitcoin had became a hot topic. For a run down on the history of scaling and how we got to where we are today, see the Block size limit debate history lesson post. What is Bitcoin Cash? This is a question we are seeing a lot of since Bitcoin hard forked on August 1, 2017. Bitcoin Cash (symbol: BCH) is just a newer version of Bitcoin that split in August in attempt to solve the scaling problems that have been plaguing Bitcoin for years. At it's core Bitcoin Cash is just a continuation of the Bitcoin project that allows for bigger blocks which will give way to more growth and adoption. You can read more about Bitcoin Cash in this mega thread or learn the difference between legacy Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash. What is SegWit2x? Called SegWit2X, the upgrade plan calls for a very specific fork (or a change to Bitcoin's rules), one that would make certain rules valid that weren't valid before. Specifically, Segwit2x would change the size of the blocks passed regularly around the network and stored in the blockchain from 1 MB to 2 MB to allow for more onchain capacity and growth. The SegWit2X announcement explains the upgrade to 2MB was first discussed at the ‘Hong Kong Roundtable Agreement’, and had further solidified at the ‘New York Agreement’ (NYA) this year at the Consensus conference. Both agreements involved implementing SegWit first and a block size increase from 1MB to 2MB later. "The November 2017 upgrade to 2MB blocks is a hard-fork, but necessary changes are trivial to perform," explains the Segwit2x working group’s announcement. The targeted hard fork date is set to trigger on block height 494784, which is estimated to happen on or around November 16, 2017. Please read the SegWit2X readiness checklist for more details and information about compatible clients. What now? Bitcoin is a fluid ever changing system. If you want to keep up with Bitcoin, we suggest that you subscribe to /btc and stay in the loop here, as well as other places to get a healthy dose of perspective from different sources. Also, check the sidebar for additional resources. Have more questions? Submit a post and ask your peers for help!
23, first real job out of college, need help finalizing my financial plan
I graduated college in May, and I started my first full-time job in July. I’ve been paying much more attention to my finances since I’ve started having both real income and real expenses for the first time in my life. Since the new year I’ve been tracking all of my expenses to try to generate an accurate budget for myself -- see where I’m currently spending my money and assess how I want to be spending my money and adjust my habits accordingly. Here’s where I’m at right now:
Work towards being debt-free while considering them “negative investments.” Meet at least minimum payments every month, but contribute more when eliminating negative interest from debt outweighs the potential positive gain I could get through investing
Meet Roth IRA, 401k, and HSA maximum contributions
I have some longer term goals that include saving for a house and future children’s education, but they’re a little further out and not really actionable just yet
Full-time job: $68,680/year; After taxes and contributions this turns into biweekly paychecks of $1,611.98, or $3223.96/mo. This is at a large company and I am 100% confident that my job is secure for at least the next year. I am generally confident further out than that as well but, hey, ya never know.
Lyft driving: Variable but about $25/hour pre-tax, after I account for gas and value loss due to wear and tear on my car. Roughly $500/mo pre-tax but obviously depends entirely how much I drive in a given month.
These are figures that I generated by assessing my spending for the past two months - my current spending habits. I am going to adjust my spending and my budget based on where I think I can easily cut down. None of these numbers are set in stone, nor should they be considered a model for others.
In January I spent $1200. In February I spent $2822 (which includes a splurge weekend and a bi-yearly car insurance payment). On average I expect to spend $2394, so these two months seem within reasonable month-to-month variability to me.
My rent, internet, and electricity are being split with my roommate. These figures are what I pay after the split.
My EZPass cost is so high because I am currently driving to work and paying a $5 toll per day. I tend to pay this in a lump sum of $300ish so I’ll have several months with $0 for that. I currently save 30 minutes in the morning by driving vs taking the train ($2.40/day). I am happily paying an extra $2.60 a day to sleep an extra half hour. Next year sometime my role will change and I will be able to take a free shuttle to and from work without as much time lost, so this cost will go down in the future.
I listed Electricity in Irregular because the variability is extremely high. One month we paid $10 per person, another we paid $90. We do pay on a regular monthly basis, but because it’s not really a regular number that I can definitely count on being consistent, I consider it irregular. My other regular expenditures have no variability. Part of the reason it is so variable is I live in an old building with extremely bad insulation and windows out into an alley that I’d rather not open. This is something we are considering about staying in this apartment for next year.
Speaking of my apartment, our rent is going up from $2,195 total to $2,300 next year, $1,150 per person, which would get me to 47% of my expenses are rent. I’m not exactly thrilled about that and there are other potential advantages to switching apartments, so that might help.
My car insurance is a twice a year payment of $437 so 10 months of the year will be $0 here
I try to follow /churning for advice about how to maximize spending utility in the form of credit card rewards. I want to take about 3-4 flights a year for travel and I think the best way to accomplish this cheaply is responsibly managing travel rewards credit cards. I am extremely careful not to overdo this, because I know mismanaging it slightly can have major repercussions. I am currently just using one card at a time to make sure I can handle it without screwing it up.
My three student loans are through Nelnet, and I am paying them off with a credit card to get extra bonuses for cheaper flights in this coming year. I am thinking of these as negative investments. So if I have $1000 extra in a month that I want to somehow save, if I think I can make a 6% return in some investment, that should outweigh the 4.66% return I would get by investing in paying off my debt. More about my investing philosophies below.
My “car loan” is money that I owe my dad for various things, the bulk of which is $4000 from purchasing his car. This is a 0% loan and he doesn't really want monthly payments from me right now. He would rather me meet my retirement savings goals before paying him back. He trusts me to pay him back eventually, but developing a solid base of long-term savings is more important to him and to me. I know how big of a gift this is, and it’s the biggest reason I started tracking my expenses. The better I understand my spending, the better I can understand how to meet my savings goals sooner, and the sooner I can pay my dad back.
I am currently in the process of changing my T. Rowe Price account to a Vanguard account. This is almost exclusively to lower the fees on these accounts, which are the majority of my long-term savings.
I want to be more diligent about correlated investing. I know some of my holdings are correlated, but I'm not quite sure how best to go about it. For some reason having 75% of my money in a 2060 Target Fund seems like too easy of an answer. I saw this post with a map of Vanguard funds and am thinking of focusing on VTIAX, VDADX, VEXAX, VFIAX, and a target fund. Is this a decent distribution? Trying to balance dividend yield with tracking the market as a whole and low fees.
My bitcoin investment is mostly a just-for-fun investment. I appreciate the volatility of Bitcoin but it’s an interesting idea and since its inception the currency has been an extremely good investment. If I lose all of that money, it’s not the end of the world. Plus I can purchase Bitcoin with a credit card to manufacture spending if I have to.
I am contributing the maximum to my HSA, $3,400 per year including $1,000 from my employer. I know you’re “supposed to” contribute to 401k before HSA but I think there’s a psychological advantage to maxing at least one of these accounts asap.
I have about $1800 left to contribute to my 2016 Roth IRA. I am planning on making that payment once my switch to Vanguard goes through, and meet the 2017 contribution limit by December.
I am contributing to my 401k at 5%, with a company match of 100% of the first 4%. I am fully vetted. This amounts to $8,241.74 per year after the match, well short of the $18,000 yearly limit. I view this as my largest area for improvement. After I meet my Roth IRA maximum contributions I am going to move up to at least 10% contribution to get closer to that $18,000 limit.
I'm investing in individual stocks using an app called Divy, which lets you invest in fractional shares, as low as $10 of a stock with low commissions.
Full disclosure - a friend of mine works at Divy, but I am not trying to promote their product. I am simply trying to get advice on if this is best way for me to be investing in my current situation. Since my friend works there he got me into the beta version, which was commission-free. I am wary of this coming off as an advertisement, so if this an issue I can remove this portion of my post, but I view it as relevant to my financial situation.
I'm currently doing well narrowly beating the market since I started in April, and moreover I enjoy it. I got into stocks a few years ago and now with more time and money to save I have been paying very close attention to the markets lately.
Fractional shares allows me to be well-diversified with only ~$2000. I'm in 27 different securities, but balanced well across all of them despite a large variance in share price.
The money is virtually liquid in this account - it takes about a day to transfer to and from the app so I consider this basically a portion of my emergency fund. I am comfortable taking on that risk at this point in my career, and I think I understand the drawbacks of a taxable account. This is an area where I am seeking the most advice because I think I'm balancing risk appropriately but I'm not positive.
~$5,700 in three different banks
This is about 2.5x my average monthly expenses. I am trying to be lean enough with the amount in my checking account without taking on undue risk in what is admittedly a low emergency fund buffer.
Is my investment strategy appropriate for my situation? Am I balancing retirement, short-term savings, and debt repayment appropriately? Any feedback at all on the way I'm handling my finances is greatly appreciated Thanks!
When NY regulator comes to /r/IAmA to field questions about Bitcoin regulation Reddit uncharacteristically treats him respectfully and asks well informed and insightful questions. LOL JK it's a fucking mess.
Today there was an IAmA by the Superintendent of Financial Services of NY on Bitcoin regulation. Politics + Bitcoin = Bravery Typhoon. Mr. Lawsky was smart enough to choose questions that weren't too hostile or circlejerky. But the replies to his answers are some of the bravest circlejerking I've seen since MayMay June. Let's take a look:
So if you mean what you say, please explain how HSBC is still in business... +121
Because they paid enough money to have enough time for everyone to forget about it and forge enough proof to end up with the least possible damage. +43
If there is one thing that makes my blood boil with smug Redditors it's ellipses. They are always inserted as some sort of QED, implying the parent is being dishonest, or implying the parent is stupid. I hate it. If there is one thing that you'll see reoccur often if you read the post, it's droves of Redditors saying "BUT WAT ABOUT THE BIG BANKS!?". As if perfect regulation of a larger industry is required before regulating something else.
Why is HSBC and other banking firms still allowed to operate in NY? +50
JUST KICK EM' OUT. There are like a million WAT ABOUT HSBC comments here.
Also, why does Bitcoin get the hammer when everything else just slides under the radar when it comes to money laundering (I'm looking at HSBC)? +126
Last one, I swear.
I just want to thank you for doing this AMA. We appreciate being involved. +98
I guess doing an IAmA is the only way for a Reddit user to feel like they are being "involved"? There are better outlets. Anyway, these THANKS FOR DOING THIS NO QUESTION XD posts are becoming the norm in IAmAs.
... but not seriously enough to prosecute a single bank executive.... = loss of legitimacy +35
D-D-D-DOUBLE SMUG ELLIPSES BONUS ROUND
Hi XXXXX, you've been sent 8.6550 milli-bitcoins ($5.00) from XXXXX via /changetip. Collect it. +13
Whoa, what just happened here? +10
BenLawsky just got $5 worth of Bitcoin. Instantly. No fees. With a Reddit comment. +24
When will this END? Has the "Whoa, what just happened here" thing just become a meme now, and they're poking fun at themselves? I can't tell.
That's simply because they can't admit to using the NSA to build a parallel case +42
Man, if some NSA /panichistory starts taking root I'm going to have a euphoria overdose Alright, so there are some brave people that hoped onto Ben's comment to ride the karma train. But there are lots of other brave people who didn't get their totally legit, unloaded, and unbiased questions answered. Let's take a look at those
Since the actual Money Laundry Laws can't be applied to Big Banks & Financial Institutions (HSBC, etc) because of fears that the entire banking system would be destabilized. +25
How can money laundering laws be real if our eyes don't real? Seriously, what the fuck is this? HSBC was prosecuted and fined. You can certainly say that it wasn't sufficient, but obviously the laws exist and are enforced against big banks.
In your opinion should more be done to punish banks that have laundered billions of dollars? Do you think a small fine compared to the money the banks made off laundering is enough? +12
Man, this is so loaded I might have to steal it for an ELI5 post.
Hello Mr. Lawsky, from the news I heard that HSBC was involved in 1,9 bn$ money laundering and no criminal charges have been filed. It seems to me, the issue there is several magnitudes bigger than with bitcoin at the moment? Don´t you think, your time would be spent wiser, to takkle this problem first. +9
Maybe I'll use this one instead
[Bitcoin is] going to replace fiat currency and do away with the need for central banks. Advancements in decentralized and distributed technologies will allow that most other government functions to be replaced as well. +7
There wasn't really a question attached to this. Just some good ole' Bitcoin is gonna topple gubmit circlejerking.
My question is, have you read any of the discussions in /bitcoin about the hearings you've been involved in and the talks you've given? +7
If your goal is to have him take the Bitcoin community seriously you better hope he never sets foot in /bitcoin
What are your intentions for regulations regarding video game currency, since it can be traded/bought/sold for fiat currencies as well? It is a digital currency the same as bitcoin. Will there be fines imposed on people selling or buying their World of Warcraft gold from other people without some kind of license? +5
Eve Money is going to replace the USD. Just wait.
What benefit does your third party regulation bring to me and the person I'm willing to trade with? Can you maybe clarify for me that your financial regulation actually benefit customers and that it exceeds the "hidden costs" caused by your bureau? +4
"Please justify regulation. TYIA."
Maybe a slightly extreme question but if I want to pay someone for the right to assign a number to an address in a virtual ledger what does it have to do with you? +3
NOT IN MY BACK YARD IMAGINARY WALLET
What gives the NYDFS the authority to regulate a jurisdiction-less distributed computer system? Have you received a mandate from the open developer community behind crypto currencies or the majority of their user bases. +4
Does this guy really think the government needs permission from Bitcoin developers to regulate Bitcoin?
I know government is slow on everything, but when do you think the government will finally be able to gather its senses and take bitcoin mainstream? Also, do you see any chances of US government not embracing bitcoin at all? +2
I guess when they are cool without ditching the USD for a deflationary and volatile currency. I mean, I know I would have been totally cool if my mortgage was based in bitcoin and over the past three years the amount I owed grew a thousand fold.
Would you say that most Americans care more about stopping money laundering or creating jobs?
Because they are mutually exclusive?
Considering that it has been well established that the US government itself has been responsible for funding both drug cartels and terrorist organizations and has laundered money to do so, can you please explain what the major concern is over a relatively small and unused cryptocurrency? +3
It's said his fedora grew 3 sizes this day A majority of the questions are like this. Pages and pages of them. Hundreds. The worst part of the IAmA was he didn't even answer the important questions
Technical limitations will hold off any world-changing events
A user is spreading his or her belief that OPEC or some country with a failing monetary system is going to adopt bitoins as its main transactional currency. I want to reiterate that this possibility will never happen with bitcoins in their current state. Anyone who would consider to use the technology as the primary currency for a market needs to know that all of the transactions in that good can be processed. Bitcoin's 1MB limit does not allow enough volume for these groups to change their systems. Anyone who is in charge of evaluating alternative currencies for such organizations would recognize that problem. This is one of the reasons that issues like the development "freeze" and the 1MB transaction limit could be having a direct effect on the current price. There could be a group of people, like a huge cartel or a small government, who are more than willing to take the next step but cannot because of technical limitations. Companies accepting bitcoins are much different than nations or cartels using bitcoins. If the network becomes overloaded, a company simply doesn't receive any more transactions, and people will start paying by old-fashioned means. If a country were to adopt bitcoins and the network becomes overloaded, there is no such way out. I think there is a some understanding that is lacking about how we would expect the technical limitations of the network to manifest themselves. I personally think that what we are seeing now is a more likely outcome of these limitations than the network reaching the limit and transactions backing up. We would expect to see a situation where the limit is in sight (but not a danger yet) and people who want to take it to the next level choose not to do so because of their fear of overloading the system.
People disappear in periods of low volatility
Ever noticed how people tend to disappear during periods when the price is steady, and then flood reddit when there is high volatility? The period we are in now is rapidly approaching the most stable period in the history of bitcoin. Soon, we'll start to see those newspaper articles again claiming that bitcoin has finally plateaued at its stable value. Yet, the number of comments in /bitcoin, daily discussion threads, and here hasn't been this low since the last cycle. For all that people talk about low volatility being critical to bitcoin adoption, people don't seem to be very excited about bitcoins when their price is stable. This seems to lend credibility to the idea that the price dictates adoption, rather than adoption dictating the price.
How would bitcoins die?
To examine what will cause bitcoins to succeed, it is necessary to consider how they could die. Try to come up with a scenario that causes bitcoin to decline in value and become worthless, so that cryptocurrencies don't succeed. The technology is so much better than the existing system in many ways that creating this imaginary scenario is difficult. Some people fear that a 51% attack will kill bitcoin. While it sounds worrisome in principle, the act of a 51% attack indicates that there is sufficient interest in the technology that it has value and that people are using it. A 51% attack would result in a crash, followed by an improvement that is made to the protocol to prevent a future attack. Since a 51% attack can't actually spend money, a change in hashing algorithm or some other countermeasure could be implemented and switched over without theft in the meantime. Others believe that governments will ban the technology. The odds of that occurring seem almost zero now. There will be at least one jurisdiction that allows bitcoin to exist, and people will flock there to create technologies. Those technologies will then be offered over the Internet and none of the other governments will be able to prevent their usage. The world won't just regress to an earlier technology and "skip" cryptocurrencies. Some people consider bitcoins difficult to use, but the definition of "difficult" depends on how motivated a person is to learn the technology. People go to extraordinary lengths to do things they want to do, and make up false excuses for things they don't want to do. It is far more difficult and dangerous to buy illegal drugs and consume them, but some people take the risks of arrest and overdose and do it anyway. They don't complain that the government has made it too difficult to buy the drugs. The only way that bitcoins don't become the world currency is if people don't find them useful. In any case where bitcoins are useful to people, the huge distributed network of users come together and fix the problem. Death due to a 51% attack, for example, indicates that bitcoins were not useful enough to people to save them; otherwise, they would declare war and seize the attacker's equipment by force. If you're asking me what makes something "useful," I can't answer that question. I've tried four businesses and all have failed simply because nobody used the product. Getting a technical product working and bug-free is easy; determining what people will want to use is far more difficult. If it were easy to determine what people liked, then anyone could create a viral video and have it spread across the Internet in hours. The key takeaway is that, in the long-term, 10-year investors are listing the wrong risks. The sole major risk is that there is some reason that people won't want to use bitcoins. That reason may not even be identified yet. In the event that bitcoins are not found to be useful to people, we will likely never know why they didn't succeed because it is impossible to figure out what people are thinking. As a caveat to this section, it's worth mentioning that people who decide not to adopt bitcoins because they worry about the types of problems I mentioned are a group of people who consider bitcoins to be not useful because of the possibility of these outcomes. That's a bigger risk than the problems themselves.
There was an epic argument between greenearplugs and Emocmo about the results of technical analysis and proving that you are right when posting on reddit. The quote of the day is from Emocmo:
Every so often there comes along some person who thinks that I have to show you how I am personally profiting or not based on my own analysis. I don't really understand the "dick measuring" mentality that goes along with that. Post your own analysis.
The "measuring" argument is a good one. There are many people on reddit who assume that everyone is out to gain karma or reputation points. When someone like Emocmo, moral_agent, or me comes along who posts what he believes without caring whether it is the "popular" thing to say, people start to question what the "motive" is. In /bitcoin, someone went so far as to claim that if a blogger has no ads on his site, then he has a negative motive that he is hiding from everyone. Assuming good faith is critical to Internet discourse. It annoys me that people are trying to make people appear evil despite there being no evidence of that. There are people who don't care about karma or popularity and simply say what they think is right.
There is an interesting article at http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/14/love-virtually-no-sex/?ncid=rss&cps=gravity today that examines the effect of technology on love and sex. A few months ago, I responded to a comment in /bitcoinmarkets about so-called "involuntarily celebate" men. The poster was railing against men who have such profound psychological issues that they can never be realistically expected to hold a relationship. I replied that the correct response to the problem was not to demean such people, but to investigate technological solutions. The article today points to some evidence that dating sites and apps like Tinder are seeing a marked increase in "aggressiveness" (their words) by women as the needs of men are being met by things like porn, realistic sex toys, robots, and so on. Women, who previously received hundreds of messages from men, now find that they have significantly less choice. Years ago, a man who was introverted or who did not have sex was derided as a "40-year-old virgin." Now, it seems as if such stereotypes are fading as the number of never married people skyrockets.
Some day, obviously, it can be expected that virtual reality will satisfy the needs of both genders. For the next 20 years, however, I wonder if this trend means that we will see a profound shift in power in the areas of sex, dating, and marriage. Perhaps we will see communities like /seduction decline in popularity, as some men decide that technological means of satisfying their desires are good enough or even better than real life? Sites like fastseduction.com are already past their heyday that occurred around 2005 with the publication of several influential books, and it will be interesting to see if sites focusing on how women can get men back into the "real world" start to develop.
Tomorrow is a Toastmasters Thursday, and my brother is on travel installing the pool's production hardware that I may need to help with, so maybe someone will step up and post thoughts if I can't.
China has ordered local authorities to shut down virtual exchanges trading digital currencies with the yuan - Legit Source
This is actually one of my first posts in Reddit but I've been seeing the confusion and since I lived in China for 8 years and my old assistant is there I WhatsApp'd her to ask her to find the truth. Don't know if I have enough Karma or days on my Reddit account to post this but here's a try to share this info. Basically they are according to her shutting all exchanges, but didn't ban all transactions. Therefore people can still exchange privately. Article is in both Chinese and English and very legit: http://www.caixinglobal.com/2017-09-09/101142821.html Excerpts: "“It means platforms facilitating trading between virtual currencies and legal tenders will not be allowed in China,” the source said. But the source added that the crackdown targets unauthorized trading at virtual currency exchanges, rather than Bitcoin and the underlying blockchain technology." "The digital currency trading platform Guojiaowan said Friday afternoon that all digital coin trading on its platform has been suspended on the request of regulators." "The order will affect major Bitcoin platforms such as OKCoin, Huobi and BTC China." "The digital currency trading platform Guojiaowan said Friday afternoon that all digital coin trading on its platform has been suspended on the request of regulators." "The regulatory move came after the central bank and other departments Monday imposed an immediate ban on fundraising using new blockchain-based currencies, also known as initial coin offerings (ICOs)"
Dump of ourchain.slack.com #de-central-station March 22 - April 8
(Answering Gary from https://ourchain.slack.com/archives/C3E31N9BP/p1490197255589333) Without anonymity you are giving more power to the existing powelegal structure. Bitcoin was designed to protect wealth from hackers, regulators, and incompetent managers. There are three types of cryptostate based on the level of anonymity. In the publicstate there is no anonymity, your "bodynyms" are associated with your "cryptonyms" for example when photos/video of you or your location are on a network that anyone can access. In the trustedstate this info is trusted to service providers like an ISP or social networks like Slack, Wikipedia, Reddit, etc. In the privatestate your identity is mixed with enough (lawful) users that it is unfeasible for regulators, hackers, and managers to control you. The privatestate is generally theoretical. It is very difficult to know for certain how this info could leak. The Tor network provides privacy from some but not necessarily the most powerful surveillance (or) those running the network, so this may be considered part of the trustedstate (assuming you don't leak a lot of personal info like me) or it could be part of the privatestate. Botnets may provide better anonymity though it isn't very nice. otomplodomo https://ourchain.slack.com/archives/rhoc/p1490110417643667 Doesn't freedom require a foundation of equality? Posted in #rhocMarch 22nd at 3:40 PM (edited) rilly 7:07 PM Any of these cryptostates change the game and offer opportunities from new power structures. Payment processors cannot simply block blockchain transactions in the public/trustedstate but regulators can still outlaw them. 7:11 This is the primary threat that blockchain advocates should be concerned about. They aren't likely to attack the blockchain (yet) they are moving to de-anonymize everyone. As the internet offers a far more efficient way of moving information, and people often (used to) commute only to move information). this gives them a level of control not see in human history. Straigh outa 1984! (edited) rilly 7:23 PM Anonymity is among the most difficult features to have it you also need security. Cryptonomic networks have to provide incentives to being part of mixes probably by issuing tokens to reward those who mix. rilly 7:34 PM I understand many/most laws are generally benevolent and I do not advocate "crypto anarchy" as in enabling markets for (sex) slaves, assassination, etc. Once the genie of a creditclaim market that can produce revolutionary infoGoods such as strong anonymity software, is out of the bottle we might regret this. While I tend to be more concerned about alternatives to "involuntary"/"unrepresentative" taxes, or the crime of outlawing vicimless crimes, I don't really know what I would be doing if I were aware of all the victim-crime. otomplodomo 7:36 PM I consider the freedom to say anything I want publicly,barring "fire" in a crowded theatre, more valuable than the right to say it in private. Sane people don't surveil. Those who do are rarely intelligent enough to understand what they are surveilling. rilly 7:38 PM Thus we need a way for an (autonomous) cryptostate to regulate itself. My solutions are "selective mixing" and the cryptocourt. Taxes are a "necessary" way of funding non-excludable goods like information goods or common goods such as the oceans and atmosphere. 7:42 @otomplodomo yes but I'd say "censorship" is the most important form of speech. We have to be able to filter out 99.99999999999% of what people want us to heasee so that we can focus on what is important. We don't have the right to force others to hear us or to flood a network with messages of what we believe to be important. 7:44 So we really need a system that can promote good ideas to those who need them or who can put them to use. otomplodomo 7:44 PM Censorship can happen between equals? rilly 7:45 PM Just telling people about threats can drive them to self-destruction if they can't do anything about it. 7:47 @otomplodomo This started with the convo about KYC. I suspect you are trying to rationalize this because you have no choice with the type of organization Greg wants to create in Washington. I'm warming to the idea. 7:47 Being a cyborg is difficult. 7:50 But eventually, after more software exists, I think a more appropriate bases for a global currency is one that promotes equality through anonymity. 7:54 I mean, this team requires a large amount of funding. Who is going to give you that without expecting more funding in return? 7:56 KYC is something the powerful require of you. 8:00 They want to extort taxes, enforce their financial oligopolies, etc. They might prevent victim crimes or this might reduce the powewealth going to certain types of criminal, so in that sense it is good, but not revolutionary or as revolutionary as a new economic system. There is another question here of whether yall are going to keep tricking your customers as with the last Synereo fundraiser. jimscarver 1:36 PM The legal requirement for KYC can be achieved by having identity that is provable but not revealed except to the authority in the event that a subpoena is issued for a specific account. An identity proof may be encrypted using a public key of an authority and the private key of the merchant such that the identity is not revealed to anyone except when required by law.Strong pseudo anonymous identity may be developed from within your webs of trust revealing only the necessary factors without specific personally identifying information such as having a mailing address or citizenship in a certain country, being over 21 years old, owning a home, not being a robot, etc.For any kind of democratic process unique identity must also be established which is a much more difficult process. Device, location, biometric, and state identification can be used to determine a probability of uniqueness in a set of participants without revealing the specific attributes of the individuals to others using homeomorthic encryption techniques. rilly 7:02 PM @jimscarver The debate about why it is right and proper to have central authorities deciding who is innocent or guilty, seems a bit off-topic for the "de-central-station". This channel is for those who believe in decentralized networks. An interesting subject none the less, I created #a-noobs-law-firm for discussions such as these. (edited) jimscarver 8:26 PM perhaps you would like to hold a #de-central-station panel @rilly as we started doing to replace the synereo fireside chat rilly 10:36 PM What would this require of me? Tune in to the Synereo/Rchain decentral station anytime you want at https://www.reddit.com/ethereo/ reddit Synereo/RChain evaluations and alternatives • ethereo Synereo/RChain is the latest of the cryptocurrency to be sold before they abandoned their pre-sale commitments. With proof-of-work becoming... (edited) jimscarver 12:07 PM @rilly choose a topic/theme, get well known panelists if possible, schedule a time, go live. I am not a big reddit user. Looks like mostly fake news :stuck_out_tongue: rilly 6:51 PM The way yall are collaborating on Slack and with videos presents many obstacles both to participation and research. At reddit I can click on vbuterin and see all his comments. I can't click Greg's name and see his contributions on Slack. I can register one name and am able to contribute to any number of subreddits (some require more karma, /synereo is particularly annoying in that they seem to be automatically shadowbanning any thread that mentions rchain). The worst part about Slack is that you have to register just to read any channel. Slack does have some advantages, no captchas and no shadowbans. Video is the worst. I can read much faster than people can talk. If I can search it I can find answers on my own. rilly 6:57 PM Ethereum's success has a lot to do with how Buterin presents his research. There were many times when I would search for an answer and find it in an article by Buterin in Bitcoin Magazine. I'm not motivated to listen to videos or live streams unless I am the one asking questions. rilly 7:04 PM In that case it won't be so useful to others. One of my aspirations is to create one social network that has all the best features of a wiki, reddit, slack, stackexchange (Q&A), and twitter. Second it should be "uncensored" yet have filters the reader controls. So the same page looks different depending on the applied filters. And it should all be P2P so that you control what is being stored on your computer so it can forget things that no one chooses to store. jimscarver 12:44 PM Try listening to videos at 1.5 speed. That helps some. Doing something else at the same time can help. Summaries of video with time markers for topics as we had done for synereo in the before time was really helpful. I have similar aspirations, perhaps we can cooperate. I seek to integrate the best of the best decentralized tools in cooperation with their open source development communities and communities wanting those capabilities. If we can divvy effort in this area we might accomplish something worthwhile together. I see dokie.li movim.eu and sovrin.org represent technologies worth bringing together. I've been working with CoCloud.coop, GiveETH.io and DivvyDAO.org but have yet to gain traction in cooperation. https://nl.movim.eu/?community/news.movim.eu/cocloud-cooperative (edited) 12:49 https://divvyu.consider.it/yes-i-want-to-attend-a-study-group-building-a-decentralized-altruistic-organization?results=true (edited) 12:52 perhaps you might hold a #de-central-station panel related to your aspirations @rilly jimscarver 1:02 PM
Document from Google Drive Click to open in Google Drive jimscarver 10:25 PM https://qz.com/940876/sell-businesses-to-their-users-instead-of-investors/ Quartz Commentary Users should be able to own the businesses they love instead of investors Here’s a story you hear on repeat from apparently successful founders: Their start-up had a great idea, and users thought it was great too, so it became worth something. Investors offered fast money in exchange for chunks of ownership. The founders liked a lot of the investors and valued their advice. Some became real-life friends. But before long, the founders discovered that their companies were no longer built around that original idea anymore, or even around the users it could serve. The Show more… 10:27 https://d1ueyc5nx1it61.cloudfront.net/b631199216059142146.jpg (70KB) jimscarver 10:40 PM Is that what you hjave in mind @rilly ? mariada 1:18 PM joined #de-central-station. Also, @optictopic joined. rilly 9:37 PM @jimscarver Oh for me! If only you would spend so much time asking or commenting on what I said. There is no decentralized token issuance when a small group of issuers decide who gets what and this is finalized forever. All current crypto/fiat currencies are cronycurrencies. Even when anyone holding tokens get to decide who gets more (as with Steem or Dash) you have the problem that it is finalized forever so in order for me to obtian the creditclaim of the contribution that I want I have to get the contributor's consent AND either burn the token or (better) put it into a DAO that backs the creditclaim with the original token (Steem/Dash/etc) that was issued for the contribution. (edited) rilly 9:48 PM But more to your point, I'm revolting against the ethereo project by re-branding "ethereo" as a project to use ETH for clones of the synereo/rchain software. Sheeple are just too brainwashed to coordinate the issuance of tokens for their own benefit and ETH has good distribution, recognition, etc. For those who don't know yet the ethereo project is at https://www.reddit.com/ethereo/ reddit Synereo/RChain evaluations and alternatives • ethereo Synereo/RChain is the latest of the cryptocurrency to be sold before they abandoned their pre-sale commitments. With proof-of-work becoming... jimscarver 11:08 PM Why would RChain want to be subject to the health of the ETH which might dump tomorrow. Why should ETH holders be given a stake in RChain? Why buy tokens having a different purpose when you can create tokens specifically to support RChain for free. Why not kill two birds with one stone and fund using our own token so buyers have a stake in rchain. jimscarver 11:18 PM I am not much of a reddit user and won't answer the miss information you put there. How do you benifit from taking so much effort degrading Synereo and RChain. I try to be a neutral reporter of facts, not presumtion of evil. https://medium.com/@jimscarverchain-best-synereo-scenario-it-may-be-a-very-good-time-to-buy-amps-f1ce6e446e11 (edited) rilly 11:19 PM "Why would RChain want to be subject to the health of the ETH which might dump tomorrow." I'm not talking about RChain devs maintaining ethereo, it is a fork. Remember Litecoin was not the first blockchain to use scrypt for PoW, nor was Monero the first Cryptonote blockchain. (edited) 11:20 They didn't invent these things they rebranded them for their own blockchain. 11:25 "Why should ETH holders be given a stake in RChain?" Oh they shouldn't. It would be so selfish of everyone to buy ETH just because it is so much more popular and scarce and then use this to make an rchain sidechain. Only people with devious profit motives would even consider something so sinister. LOL (edited) jimscarver 11:27 PM Ethereum will be proof of stake, using greg's mathematics. what is ethereo? An ethereum fork using RHOC natively? I missed something. 11:27 isa a new blockchain that runs on anything? 11:29 rchain may run on other currencies someday but there are good arguments against it. 11:29 which greg may have a mathematical solution to,,, rilly 11:29 PM We should let the people who lost all that funding to Synereo LTD issue a billion more with full power to void any tokens they want and with no connection or obligation to limit the future supply of any tokens used on the first "rchain". It is our moral duty to buy an IOU for we know not what to reward them for all their promised work. (edited) jimscarver 11:31 PM Synereo is doing ok and so is rchain, nobody lost anything yet. 11:32 both are being built though rchain got the short end of the stick. 11:36 we ought to be planning for the decentralization of society here technology agnostic. The cryptocredit may be relevant to that, but we have no consensus on that yet. rilly 11:37 PM "Why buy tokens having a different purpose when you can create tokens specifically to support RChain for free." That's really my point. But who decides who is supporting RChain? The WoC decentralizes the decision making process and allows the market to valuate every contribution independently forever. Ethereo is just a plan B, assuming that we can't convince or explain why the WoC is essential for decentralized issuance without PoW. rilly 11:42 PM "Ethereum will be proof of stake, using greg's mathematics. what is ethereo? An ethereum fork using RHOC natively? I missed something." Oh no. Ethereo is a clone or a set of patches applied to the Synereo and Rchain software, probably using the latest versions. 11:43 We can run synereo and rchain clones, as sidechains/mergchains of Ethereum. https://www.reddit.com/ethereo/comments/5l7z61/mergechains_are_when_one_or_more_blockchains_are/ reddit Mergechains are when one or more blockchains are sidechains of each other • ethereo (Forgive me if there is already a word for this.) ---- Defining sidechains and mergechains The basic definition of a sidechain is a... (edited) rilly 11:49 PM "Synereo is doing ok and so is rchain, nobody lost anything yet." Uhh tell that to all the unnecessariates who bought AMP before it tanked! Synereo is apparently getting away with all the crowdfunds that were intended for Rchain. Greg is cool with that. You are cool with it. All these AMP holders here, who were trying to invest in Rchain apparently haven't even figured this out yet. Yall think you can just bail yourselves out by issuing more tokens! LOL rilly 11:58 PM "both are being built though rchain got the short end of the stick." Why has Greg not joined the movement to recover the crowdfunds from Synereo LTD? How much credit should Greg and others lose for this colossal failure? 11:59 Why instead do you accept that the people who lost all this money should be the ones to issue the new tokens? Is this not reminiscent of what we see with corrupt governments and central banks? 12:00 Those who fail are given more opportunities and entrusted with more power and wealth. rilly 12:12 AM So getting back to what ethereo is. It is the Rchain/Synereo software that you guys write, on a blockchain that we create, using an ETH IOU as the token for staking deposits and manditory fees. It would be similar to how Rootstock is attempting to be a sidechain of Bitcoin that uses BTC instead of ETH to run the Ethereum virtual machine. The difference is that Bitcoin cannot hold BTC in a contract to back IOUs on Rootstock so they have to use a multisig wallet and it is therefore centralized and insecure. Ethereum however can validate transactions on other blockchains as BTC Relay will do with Bitcoin. (edited) 12:17 Therefore we can make Ethereum and an rchain clone a "mergechain" (defined in the last reddit link I posted). That means the ETH IOUs on the rchain clone are fully backed by ETH on Ethereum and held in a contract that can redeem the ETH IOUs for ETH without trusting a multisig or third party. 12:18 I will call this rchain clone "ethchain" from now on. rilly 12:24 AM So assuming we create ethchain, what would be a more attractive investment, RHOC/Rev or ETH? Given that the chairman of the Central Bank of RHOC has already failed miserably to properly allocate and distribute crowdfunds and AMP for the benefit of AMP holders. Given that there is no limit to the supply rate of Rev and all questions about this are met with hand waving, wishful thinking, and deceptive marketing propoganda. (edited) jimscarver 12:30 AM I do not see much improvement over what we are doing now. ETH IOU's are cool and perhaps we should develope that concept. Now, USD is used for the bounty amount for work in the coop paid optionally in dollars or RHOC at the current market value. There may be taks later with fixed RHOC bounties. Sponsored divvy tokens function like a RHOC IOU, redeemable for RHOC and/or USD etc. on a metiticridous manner by consensus of the team or as specified by the sponsor. Self assignment of tasks leads to chaos without a cooperative effort with the team and workers both need to have the initiative to do a task, but accepted by the team to do the task. There are no little kings here and cooperation means not getting your own way on many things. (edited) jimscarver 12:38 AM Everybody will never agree on the same system. Teams must be autonomous and reward bounties by thier concent rather than be enslaved to a system they disapprove of.WE should find a team to experiment with ETHIOU. It's a great exercise for a divvy study group. (edited) rilly 12:46 AM "WE should find a team to experiment with ETHIOU. It's a great exercise for a divvy study group." Well okay but ethchain is not just ETH IOUs on Rchain it is ETH IOUs as the sole currency for PoS deposits, mandatory fees on ethchain AND the attention economy features (using the synereo mergechain). (edited) 12:51 "Self assignment of tasks leads to chaos without a cooperative effort with the team and workers both need to have the initiative to do a task, but accepted by the team to do the task. There are no little kings here and cooperation means not getting your own way on many things." Hmmm curious to read what rilly seems to have been proposing. The self-assignment of tasks! Rilly has come to make ye all little kings with your own little money printing machines! 12:54 In all seriousness I do see value in colaberation to avoid redundant and incompatible work. rilly 1:01 AM I try to do this by bringing various projects together to discuss some of their fundamental assumptions. A good example of the type of research I would like to fund would be this debate between Jae Kwon of Cosmos/Tendermint and Dan Larimar of BitShares/Steem/Graphine. https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos/issues/43#issuecomment-275806560 GitHub [Whitepaper] Incorrect claims around BitShares · Issue #43 · cosmos/cosmos Hello there, I recently went through the cosmos whitepaper and am quite impressed by your work. Adding collateral to block producers is a great idea to keep them honest. This is certainly an improv... 1:05 I would fund this by bidding on the creditclaim. This should work like Changetip but I would bid a lot more than 50 freaking cents. For more valuable creditclaims I could facilitate a small crowdfund using Weifund. rilly 1:14 AM Kinda like being the judge in a sport where I could bid higher for good arguments on important points. This is one part of the peer to peer review and funding (P2P RAF). The debaters or contributors could trade their creditclaims for their debate contributions, while they are debating. Score points for each other, re-formulate their arguments if they are persuaded to change and produce collaborative works whose creditclaims would have greater value because it represents agreement of those who otherwise have conflicting interests. (edited) jimscarver 1:23 AM We take one step at a time doing proofs of concepts of use cases independently but interoperably. The devil is in the details and technology is evolving rapidly. I suggest we employ Agile principles, starting with one work group rewarding themselves and building one use case at a time. (edited) rilly 1:31 AM Okay I suggest to create bureaucratic work group to organize developers and cryptocurrency speculators to discuss the conditions under which we will agree to hold RHOC or promote Rchain vs a token/blockchain that we control. (edited) jimscarver 1:36 AM I would not concent to be on such a team. We might try a circular leadership model where we are leaderless but with strong leadership. Everyone leads their own part but cooperates with the team. A team you pick issues rewards the way you want. https://medium.com/enspiral-tales/beyond-dreamers-vs-doers-full-circle-leadership-869557da1248#.7b9nl9wee Medium Beyond “Dreamers vs Doers” — Full Circle Leadership Operational leadership is often under-appreciated compared with visionary leadership, or not even understood as leadership. I used to get… Reading time 12 min read (337KB) Jan 15th, 2016 at 9:44 PM rilly 1:41 AM "I would not concent to be on such a team." (Spell check doesn't work very well on Slack.) Jim I'm not sure you can be removed from the team once you've been added, I'll have to check back with corporate and get back to you on that. Don't worry we will get this straightened out for you. rilly 1:49 AM "We might try a circular leadership model where we are leaderless but with strong leadership." Excellent idea! Okay so what do we call our team? We need something catchy but a bit stealthy so they don't know we the real revolutionaries. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqFJJmfWNsg
Karma: +40/-1; Gender: The Bitcoin genie is already out of the bottle. gizmodo.com: Bitcoin and Other Virtual Currencies Finally Get Some Regulation « on: March 22, 2013, 11:20:55 PM » Bitcoin and Other Virtual Currencies Finally Get Some Regulation Companies that distribute and exchange Bitcoin will now be subject to the same rules as [censored]. The hope is to crackdown on Bitcoin-related ... What is Karmacoin? Initiated on May 7, 2014, Karmacoin died as a project in 2015. Karmacoin (KARMA) represented the digital currency of Karmashares LLC, registered in the state of Wyoming.Karmashares proposed to create long term value for investors by developing a variety of products and services. What is Karmacoin? Initiated on May 7, 2014, Karmacoin died as a project in 2015. Karmacoin (KARMA) represented the digital currency of Karmashares LLC, registered in the state of Wyoming.Karmashares proposed to create long-term value for investors by developing a variety of products and services. The IRS treats virtual currency (also referred to as cryptocurrency) like property. That means any income you make from bitcoin or other virtual currencies gets taxed like a property transaction, rather than at normal income tax rates. This applies whether you sell or exchange cryptocurrency, or accept it as payment for goods or services. Bitcoin is like cash - you don't need to go through a bank or credit card network in order to transfer it to another person.[/size]It's better than
Celebrate Bitcoin's 10 Year Birthday With Steve Aoki And I! Use my link to save $200!: ... Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of anyone other than myself. The ... Bitcoin skyrocketed in value from less than a penny in 2010 to nearly $20,000 in late 2017. Then it spent 2018 in a freefall crash. So, what happened? Is it dead? Can it survive in 2019? Bitcoin ... Never invest more than they are willing to lose, 3. Obtain independent legal, financial, taxation and/or other professional advice in respect of any decision made in connection with this video. BITCOIN ATM Makes BUYING and SELLING BITCOIN SIMPLE Manufacturer Lamassu is ending 2013 on a high. The company has just announced the sale of its 100th bitcoin ATM, and more than 120 orders. The virtual currency has generated lots of media attention in China where investors have helped drive the price up to dramatic highs above $1,000. Customers must choose to either buy or sell ...