it does ... +1

I believe "not a person in the world who would want to touch them" is very inaccurate. There are lots of people who don't believe the "legitimacy" delusion, people who is not swallowing the BS they are fed with. People who appreciate the ability to do whatever they want with their money, regardless of what some regulators/policemen/government thugs say.

Are you worried by Bitcoin going to single digits, even sub dollar? I explained many times, with figures, why I believe in the long term Bitcoin will be more expensive than now, even in a global ban scenario. Black market economy is huge, so if your only worry is the exchange rate, I won't worry so much. Of course you will have to learn how to trade it outside the traditional channels in that scenario.

Then, I will say something that may be very impopular in the speculation sub forum: if Bitcoin goes to single digits but it survives, serving as a tool for those that cannot move their money freely in order to bypass unfair regulations, I will be happy. Sure, I would have lost a lot of the value I threw at Bitcoin, which is not negligible - I can tell you I could leave very good during two years with the amount of fiat I invested in BTC. Still, if I'd lose it I wouldn't be starving, and I'm very conscious from the very first moment that this is a super high risk investment. Fiat denominated profit is a nice bonus, but it was never my goal when I decided to participate in this experiment. I very much prefer being free than being rich. For me Bitcoin is a matter of freedom and principles, this is about challenging the rotten financial system, not about getting rich quick. And still, as I said earlier, in the long run I don't see BTC going to sub-dollar unless a) a superior crypto with the same characteristics (trust-free, decentralized) takes over, or b) a fatal flaw in the protocol is discovered.

Let the party begin, I hope you were never so foolish to believe that the people pulling the strings in the financial world would leave something that truly endangers their position alone.

I was paraphrasing the Rothschilds who said they made their money by always selling too early.   Basically it is always 'too early', until it's too late.  

I sold a few at 1130, because it was near the old ATH and gold price and I had not cashed ANYTHING in yet.   You might as well divest a little and realise some profit. Let's face it - those of us here a few years have to take some out eventually.

You may be (personally) interested to know that it was actually cashing out some XMR into BTC which I then used an exchange to convert to old-fashioned fiat.

Buys me that new drive I have wanted at home, so I am happy.  I still have plenty of BTC to enjoy selling at much, much higher prices. And if it goes down, I can be happy too.

I am still looking for ways to go direct to spend, but realistically via BTC is still the best way.

kinda feels like china is pushing its price high, so coins from the west make there way onto their exchanges.

Please, can you not mindlessly repeat Antonopolous slogans like they actually mean something?  Antonopolous is just a salesman or religious evangelist.  The internet isn't some wild west where you can get away with whatever you want.  The state rules the internet and most sectors of the globe are censored already.  There are only two endgames for bitcoin, either the state bans it or co-opts it.  The mining pools are such enormous physical attack vectors that they can shut down Bitcoin just as easily in the physical domain as the digital one even if you were able to magically camouflage all your Bitcoin packets.

So we already know the state can easily wipe out Bitcoin if they want.  The next option is of course co-opting it.  To do this, all they're going to do like I said before, is create a static address, alias system wrapper that goes around Bitcoin and sign laws that you're forced to use it or be considered a criminal launderer.  Then once they have everyone on-boarded, they will divorce the alias system away from the native Bitcoin unit into their regular old fiat system run by the state with the bonus that they were also able to ban cash in the process to totally lock you in their system.

For the 5000th fucking time, Ted Kaczynsky was right and increasing technology always leads to loss of freedom.  There is no way around it whatsoever no matter what your original intention was.  The only way you're getting any freedom is by operating solely in the physical space (transacting in a fungible substance like metals), not digital, because the state never has the resources to monitor every square inch of the earth, but they can easily do so for the digital space!

All you're really doing is making it easier for the state to enslave and destroy you.  Bitcoin came out before the era of them trying to ban cash at every second of the day.  The thing you should be afraid of right now isn't the possibility of a bitcoin ban, it's the fact they aren't trying to ban bitcoin at all!

the story (with unnamed sources 'familiar with the matter' 'speaking on condition of anonymity', blah-de-blah) can be used as cover for the manipulation .... not the cause. The gold market has been functioning like this but on bigger scale for ~2 decades.

I think any denial of a Bitcoin ETF would be nearly 100% politically-motivated.  It would mean that they (Governments? World Powers?) simply don't want Bitcoin recognized as a legitimate long term financial instrument.  But that would be fine by me, as I think ETFs over time become corrupt, eventually holding back the underlying assets as opposed to supporting them.

OK coin. Com has the same problem as does btce 's payment processor and they're not crypto specific and btce has other options. Do some googling.  There are plenty of articles about international Taiwan banking problems in non bit coin publications.

This isn't much to do with crypto and much more to do with Taiwan not keeping in line with banking regulations that the rest of world adheres to.

My jedi sence tells me that the altcoin bubble will pop soon. We only need a scaling solution for the moon. What are they waiting for?

This is bullshit. LN does not need Segwit and LN will happen regardless of whether you want it or not, or whether Segwit is adopted or not. LN needs a malleability fix, and SW is just one of the ways of doing that. LN does in no way create centralized control of Bitcoin nor does it lead to bankers "rejoicing". Looks like someone didn't even read the ELI5.

You should go back to ELI5 threads and we should be back to discussing the price in here.

quoting Craig Wright is the last resort for anyone who wants to make a point. I have no interest in what he has to say.

Entirely false information. Your mistake was believing a word that clown says.

I really dont take a Dash supporter too serious tho. First they pump it, then its stagnates. Then it dissapears. Its good that Btc takes its time to figure things out properly, but the dark side of decentralisation is that innovation takes so damn long. Same with democracy, its the best solution but it takes ages to decide and implementate. Btc is like old greece. Just philosophy while other lower skilled bad equiped no-knowledge countries are closing in. Its really discusting to see so much bad alts growing while they will dissapear. Dash with this maketcap is just a joke a IMO.

Can you please explain me with your own words what LN is and does?

Where do you see the problem of centralisation when anyone can just create their own private channel?

Man...
This market is just like Muhh this pattern is bullish : ok lets pump it and f*ck what we pump, we are just gonna do it because its possible.
Crypto troll altcoin gambling continues lol

So there you have: If most people use LN for their small transactions/payments more block space there is for the "important" transactions if you are willing to pay the fee. You can choose which method you use. What's bad about that?

It's not that you need to chose one way or another, you will be able to decide for each transaction you decide to make.

Where do you see the problem of mining centralisation when everyone can just buy their own miner? 

Because they don't have an incentive to go through all that trouble.

It's not that users wont be incentivised to go to... Which trouble? Standard BTC transactions will be exactly the same trouble as they are now, nothing changes. But yes, users will be incentivised to use LN for several reasons:

- Lower fees
- Almost INSTANT transactions <- This is a really important point. No blocksize increase could ever reduce a minimum of 10 mins for the first confirmation.
- Real scalability: No more TPS limit. LN networks could process thousands, maybe even millions of transactions per second.

The future usage I envision for myself is something like this:

- For moving my BTC in non trivial ammounts -> BTC Blockchain
- For buying "coffee" or who knows what other smallish stuff -> LN
- For things between those two use cases -> LN or BTC Blockchain depending on the circumstances.

I am not saying that a Block size increase won't be needed in the future. In fact I am sure it will. But what we need first is Segwit. After that, and if it is possible to achieve an enormous consense (95%) for a hardfork to increase the blocksize, then I am ok with that too... a fixed blocksize increase, not a joke like BU.

Fuck ethereum


That is all

fuck all shit-coins too

So funny and true. Incidently I've been keeping my on the PM market. Something happening there that's very telling. Major short positions closed and new longs opened... signals? This is all happening along with rise of Bitcoin. If Gold breaks 1350 again along with silver 20+, there could be major things on the horizon. Canary in coalmine? I guess we'll see.

It feels totally insane to buy one Bitcoin for only 4000 Fed tokens!

Long run:



But every trend has an end. This one when the castle of IOUs will fall.

I left it on the exchange as I will be buying back (either cheaper or more expensive).

The original chain Will survive
The original chain is Just under attack Thats all
To get more free coins
If  SegwitX2 has more hashrate iT doenst mean that Will survive

You had me until "has inflation"

Federal Reserve Notes?

I'm very not liking all this uncertainty around the fork/CME starting up. Everything I'm seeing suggests Segwit2x will have a small amount of miners, but people are talking doom.

I don't get it.

You can fuck off with your "bitcoin segwit" bullshit, and your attempt to suggest that there is some other bitcoin, currently.  At this particular time there is one bitcoin, and the segwit that got added to bitcoin in July/August was a process of reaching actual consensus (have you heard about that?) locking in, activation, and currently development and incorporation.

Yeah, there are ongoing attacks on bitcoin to try to create other bitcoins, to dilute bitcoin or to take over bitcoin or to create confusion, but at this particular time, as I type, there is only one bitcoin and it is not called bitcoin segwit, even though most of us recognize what the fuck you are referring to.  

I understand that you and some of the nutjob BIG blockers want to use inflammatory terms because you seem to be in a state of denial that actually 95% and greater consensus actually caused the implementation of segwit into bitcoin, but there  is no fucking such thing as bitcoin segwit, at the moment, there is only bitcoin - even though in your fantasy attack on bitcoin world, you want bitcoin to become either an equal or a lesser than your other proposed pump fuck variations.

"exist" as in mined stop & go by "unknown" and traded almost exclusively on a korean exchange, most likely by just some whale insiders taking advantage of the few fools trying to trade it short term and getting REKT.

As I already stated, I simply disagree with your attempt to describe some kind of rhetorical equality.  

There are attacks on the true and real bitcoin and anyhow, I already said what I had meant to say, so I doubt that there is anything further that is necessary from my end, because whatever you said does not help your case, including your supposed "in your face" retort that has NOT actually retorted anything of any substantial or material significance.  

If you are not bothered by it, then why you wasting time bringing up such nonsense?   



Your in my face retort is some kind of assertion that you believe that you have a show stopping argument or a slam dunk and you do not.

The mere existence of bitcoin cash does not prove any kind of meaningful or substantive point, except that a small group of renegade nutjobs decided that they were going to spend resources on a hardfork attack on bitcoin.

Second, I never stated that there was "full" consensus, and you are just making up new terms in order to create some kind of strawman argument.  There is no fucking thing as "full consensus" nor is such a thing required.

What happened is consensus happened around segwit, and that is all that matters.  Therefore, segwit reached consensus and was locked in in early August 2017, and was activated in late August.  If you want to remove segwit, then you need consensus in the other direction, which if you thought about it is not very fucking likely to happen.. because it already happened in the lock-in, activation and implementation direction, why the fuck would the community suddenly decide that they no longer want it?  Makes no sense, instead, stupid ass fuck job big blockers, like yourself, are trying to argue stupid points about segwit not having "full" consensus, and there is no such requirement.. and really do you ever think that there is going to be "full" consensus about anything?  There are always going to be a few stragglers who are objecting and complaining, but they are out of line with the vast majority (which in the segwit situation took 95% mining power to achieve such and at this point is water under the bridge).



Yeah, you could have said fuck you, but there would be no substance in such an emotional response.  So it does not help if you merely become emotional without adding any substantive meaning to your arguments (which would be adding factual claims or logical claims), and you need to have something to back up your fuck you, so stop taking matters so personally and learn how to recognize that these various ongoing BIG blocker forks and anti-segwit campaigning are attacks upon bitcoin and they are not equals to bitcoin (and they are generally inferior and supported by very small segments of the community attempting to rally broader space support or to get newbies into supporting them), and they are not in line with the overall bitcoin community (except to the extent that they may want to attack and infiltrate bitcoin and to the extent that they try to make astroturf attempt to look as if they are part of the bitcoin community), and that is why it seems to be a lot more fitting to be saying fuck you to those kinds  of ongoing attacks, rather than if someone were truly wanting to improve bitcoin without engaging in such ongoing sabotaging attempts.

Honestly, some of you guys talking about forks having immediate value or being immediate "competition" are just not getting it.

Let's say that the entirety of Facebook's code base was completely open source, and anyone could fork it at any time and create an FB 2.0 with a click of the mouse. So someone does it, claiming that can make it faster, better, whatever. Let's even say that any holders of the original Facebook stock would get an equal stock 'dividend' of like 10:1 for the new site.

That does not auto-magically give this new FB 2.0 any value at all. Period. There is a whole entire financial ecosystem that goes along with the original Facebook, including the founders, devs, employees, investors, stock holders, stock exchanges, supporting sites, corporate sites, merchants, marketers, ad agencies, etc. etc. The list goes on and on. This ecosystem was built up over a decade or more. Not to mention all the 2 billion users of "the ONE TRUE Facebook" that are not at all inclined to switch to FB 2.0. The are happy and content with continuing to use the original.

It's not about value, but about disruption and loss of credibility. A common, non-technical user wanting to sign up would have to choose between 400 different FB pages to register, and he would then be able to login only to the one single version he registered, whereas his friends who were long-time FB users would have access to all of them! They would post messages that can potentially be seen by the new user, but his replies won't reach them...

It's just an ugly mess for the newbie and the interested but non-technical investor, who will be scared away. The name "Bitcoin" should map to one codebase, one blockchain, one coin. I believe that all those forks are not intended to help Bitcoin, but to cause havoc and disruption for motives characterized by ego and greed. It's a cancer and it's unfortunate that it exists.

I'm sorry but.... if you can't see that having a 8MB block size immediately created 98% BCH mining centralization (thus killing Satoshi's original vision of a decentralized mining ecosystem), then you are beyond help. Lowering transaction fees will be solved in a different way.

If that's  the case, why did VHS survive and Betamax die?

Standard Betamax tapes lasted 60 minutes — not long enough to record a movie. Conversely, the 3-hour VHS tapes were perfect for recording television programmes and movies

This was an unexpected BOOM 

Actually, whatever I said speaks for itself, and your inability or deliberate failure to understand what I wrote is reflected in your inaccurate summary of it.


Oh yeah, let's look at Dash or some other blockchain to answer BIG questions about bitcoin..    Do you even understand the absurdity of your own suggestion?  There are certain dynamics in bitcoin that causes the direction forwards to be different from other alts including and probably not limited to: the size of its market cap, its actual decentralized nature, its many networking effects, and the visciousness of attacks upon it.


Who fucking cares if you own a few bitcoins here or there or if you are hedged in various directions that includes holding some bitcoins?  your ongoing nutty and seemingly emotional FUD spreading speaks for itself.. o..k.. sure, maybe you are one of those nut jobs who actually believes the shit that he is spreading, but that does not make what you say any better, especially since it appears quite apparent that you are either lacking information or failing and refusing to adequately study various matters (facts and/or logic) before you spout them out.

Ah you mean like Bitcoin? But then without the peer to peer? Sounds great.

It's still peer to peer (no central authority), but not one-to-one. There will be multiple routes. Irregular mesh topology over Tor.


Right, not much need for on-chain stuff except opening/closing channels. Or possibly topping them up, I am still not clear on what will happen with "refill" operations as the protocol evolves. The hubs will be "central" only in the sense of "hyperconnected, with lots of money at stake in multiple channels". They won't be able to censor transactions or tamper with the protocol - or even figure out where the coins ultimately go. Hubs can be routed around if desired or necessary. Someone else will get the fees - if any. Not that shabby, is it?

edited out

I've also been around a long time and agree with your sentiments. The behavior on reddit is terrible - I can only assume they are just young and stupid? I try my best not to assume malice or conspiracy...

Maybe it's time we set up a real Rosewater Foundation where the elders can train a few of these future millionaires on the ways of being a virtuous person.

Exhibit A:

BCH is Birmingham Children's Hospital according to Google.

They're having a Christmas fundraiser apparently.  

Do they imagine once the rewards run dry these goons will mine txns for free?

If you must know I had to sell my stash of 7 bitcoins back in 2016 due to financial circumstances. So I am poor now which is why I am using Bitfinex as well as a couple of other exchanges to trade alt-coins in order to get back to my 7 bitcoins with a view of making it to at least 10.

Not everyone who got bitcoins back in 2014 like me was able to hold them all due to money issues.

But I am glad you have enough bitcoins that you dont need to trade, that is also my ultimate goal but in the meantime I find it very difficult trading using my notepad or paper wallets  

Anyway if you feel I deserve to be poor then please ignore

If you want to help then you know what to do  - 1PRjBfDaPiTRdTrbWyxPSrcSCZJ98McxGF

IDK about In-Q-Tel buying it all up, but I do know the various three letter agencies were mining BTC (and I would assume the various other CCs as well) in the beginning. To the effect of multiple wallets with thousands of coins each.

I only have poloniex for alts, so limited there.  And now is NOT the time to try to sign up at an exchange.  Let alone try to log on   I suppose I should check what Kraken, Bitfinex, Bitstamp trade.  I haven't used any of them in ages.  Almost got a bittrex account a few months ago, but the user agreement scared me away.

Well I have used 4 exchanges so far. Poloniex, Bittrex, Kraken, Bitfinex

I'd say of those four Bitfinex has by far the most superior chart layout/order options/useability. I have only started trading for about 4 months or so.and therefor Im new to this (but not to Bitcoin).
Bittrex is good as there is a wide array of alts but for me not good for day trading.
Poloniex well I think is a poor version of Bitfinex
Kraken is Kraken, I stopped using that after 2 weeks

But if you have any suggestions on other alternatives I am all ears.
So far I have managed to put together about 0.15 BTC worth of BTC and alts but I did start off with almost no capitol and have been out of work and this have also been living off trades too.

You object to the name BCash, and yet you refer to Bitcoin as "Bitcoin Segwit"
Careful, your double standards and hypocrisy are showing.

I am not going to respond to the rest of your nonsense, but I did read what you had to say.    

Regarding your point about my "pumping litecoin," it is not so.   I have neither increased nor decreased my litecoin holdings during this latest pump, and my holdings of litecoin are relatively small, less than .5% of my total crypto holdings.  I just mentioned litecoin and some seemingly temporary dynamics where the cash seems to be flowing, but maybe my point is not really that relevant as you suggest because just prior to litecoin, we also had Dash puming and then IOTA pumping.  Ultimately, I could give a ratt's ass about litecoin, even though they were and have been a bitcoin imitation coin, and I mentioned litecoin since they seem to be more genuinely attempting to complement bitcoin rather than serving as a sabotage attempt on bitcoin in the same way that bcash served (and is serving) as such a disgruntled sabotage and diversion vehicle.

It could be called Bitcoin Buffalo Bollocks for all I care.
Bottom line is it's making me rich.....

 Finally was able to make a Bitcoin withdraw and the tx shows up on the network.  I'm done with Kraken.

You're taking on societies entire value constructs with your argument which is ironically one of the largest utilities of bitcoin today.   Borderless, trustless, deflationary, voluntary participation, secure, indiscriminate, and unrevocable. All the things central banking can't be. It offers peaceful participation of choice in the monetary revolution we're seeing today and that sir is a massive utility towards positive change.  I participate because I believe this.

Bitcoin Dominance compared to all cryptos is in a bear market. There is a firm downtrend line.

in my case, longterm under/unemployment and selling my btc before the 2013 spike... and lots of dumb choices.

Let's get to 20,000 pages only using the word 'fuck'.

Seems crazy as fuck to see guys in this thread doing the exact opposite of what they should be doing.. .


Crazy


Fuck

Each of us, reading this thread, should realize that we buy on the way down and sell on the way up, not the opposite.

Helrow??

Buying and selling dash is not a taxable event for you? How is that?

Sorry for posting way off topic this morning, I was in panic mode. I know you guys are always on here, and I appreciate your help. Looks like I actually got my coins back now. (mind blown) I got on this morning to send a transaction, I was watching it on the blockchain, 2 hours later. A separate transaction appeared sending my remaining coins to unknown address. Which turns out, is one of my own hidden addresses. I know change can be sent back to hidden addresses, my understanding is it's always in the same Transaction ID though. This transaction shows on the blockchain with it's own ID but doesn't show in my wallet.

That's the first time I've ever seen a backdoor virus detected on this pc and I definitely did not turn defender off myself. Maybe that's just a coincidence and it was leading to draw the wrong conclusions. I dunno. I did a format and reinstall of windows 3 days ago because windows was reporting corrupt system files when trying to update. I've only installed programs I consider trustworthy since, so I'm really surprised to find a backdoor got on here. Anyway, think I'm going to take a nap when my blood pressure returns to normal.

I sympathise, in UK too. 

Since HMRC advice is so sketchy (it goes back to a vague 2014 reference effectively saying 'we will treat it all on a case-by-case basis') we are in the dark.

I only cash out in BTC and only (originally) went in via BTC so, I am asking my accountant to simply list all fiat 'in' events and fiat 'out' events and hoping it will be just CGT.  But be aware they can see it as 'badge of trade' and charge as though it was income if they think you're a trader.

I am hoping if I cough up CGT and list only Bitcoin bought and sold and just pay up, they will accept it.

If not, I will find others here in the same position and suggest we club together to get a QC to fight HMRC - as paying 45% income tax will be too much to let pass.

I know you and I have different 'cryptos of choice' but we may end up in the same expensive boat, under the same threat of a massive tax bill.

Odds on they will just take the CGT, but if not...  Let's consider a fight - I think we can probably both afford to chip in for a legal case with others, which they won't have the staff or competence to want to bother with.

Sometimes Dashheads and Moneroans can perhaps find common cause ;-)

Perhaps we finally agree about something... hahahahahaha   unless you got hit in the head by an asteroid over the christmas weekend?  




Up until about early 2017, I used to keep about 50% of my bitcoin (including my bitcoin investment allocated funds - that converted to fiat) on exchanges, and I think that some of that was merely out of convenience in moving it around, and a kind of happen-stance - and could have also been motivated by some insecurities from myself and the bitcoin price regarding whether some kind of an event might cause me to want to liquidate a decent quantity of BTC all at once.

Seems that during this year, and perhaps, mostly in the past several months, I had to tweak my perspective, and even to redistribute a lot of my risk off of exchanges while still attempting to maintain my ongoing trading strategy of selling about 1% of the total value of my BTC for every 10% rise in bitcoin price (and to have that money and to use it to buy BTC back during likely price drops).  

Accordingly, my newer approach has been somewhat motivated by BTC price rises that went 3x to 4x beyond my previously most bullish of expectations, and so I have moved additional value off of exchanges, and I have further considered that I don't really need those BTC on exchanges anyhow, because it is not likely that I am going to sell more than a certain amount anyhow because I have tweaked some of my thinking regarding proportions of BTC to fiat that I am going to maintain in my BTC portfolio.

Right now, I have kept enough value on exchanges in order to mostly keep within my system.  I have enough BTC to sell up to about $35k - and a bit more in a few cases, and I have enough  dollars to buy down to about $3k, which would be about an 85% correction (which may also be a bit of an overkill, but I feel a bit of comfort to currently be prepared for such).  I also could move more value of BTC or dollars onto exchanges if either the price goes beyond reasonable expectations or if I decide to tweak my strategy a bit based on changes in my overall viewpoint(s).  

I think that the punchline is that currently, I have somewhere between 15% to 20% of total value on exchanges, as compared with my previous approximately 50% status.




I have had some losses too, yet I am considering that my strategy has allowed me to gain more than I lost, and maybe even playing some kind of role in both understanding and facilitating the existing bitcoin trading/market system.

I believe that active and interactive engagement does allow for a kind of learning that cannot come from a less engaging style - such as keeping all value in cold storage.

I don't have any beef with folks who choose to take the 100% cold storage approach because in the end that approach may result in very decent results for that person - including whatever timeline s/he may have for liquidating.




Yep.  Problematic area, and changing laws and differing between jurisdictions.


Yep.... Some of the laws are simply draconian... and accounting burdens and off putting because of their lack of clarity and varying interpretations that seem to differ from time to time.


Also, seems to be a matter of interpretation about whether trading crypto assets is materially different from trading fiat that has not been cashed out.  And, we can do what we believe is less burdensome in terms of accounting, I suppose.


Of course, each of us have our experiences, and frequently, I am learning and tweaking my approach when I interact with posters and sometimes reconsider my approach in light of the varying approaches and viewpoints of others.  Hopefully, I have provided you some personal details that you consider helpful to your own thinking on the topic.

That's exactly what I'm talking about, that just made my brain hurt, without telling me how to use it.

When the internet appeared I was sure it would fail because I could not imaging a scenario where companies would pay to run expensive undersea cables that keep up with the demand (and all the other infrastructure) - and let me use it for 'free'. Somehow it works. This time I'm am keeping an open mind. There is enough money on the table so I'm sure something workable will emerge.

Good parallel.

... but if some data should get censored everywhere from "cloud peer" systems, it would spread through torrents like wildfire. That is, base blockchain transfers will always be an option, no matter what.

Explain why you think that statement is true, and I will explain why you are wrong.

Afbitcoins is a Bcash shill/shit noob.

You're right.

I expressed my thought clumsily. By "good parallel" I meant to make a point with those that are afraid LN means more centralization. It will also reduce costs, as peer-cloud-peer systems do: most peers don't need to keep seeding the torrent.

I also still use them, even if they're not that fashionable anymore. What I failed to convey is that they will still be ready to use, and back in high demand, if (when!) circumstances (censorship) will make them necessary again.

Oh, well, fuck off then.


(J/k hehe...)

This made me chuckle.



Who gives a shit? He openly admits he understands nothing about it. Same goes for most of these talking heads. They could well turn out to be right anyway or pathetically wrong. If you're sensible you extract a certain amount at a certain price anyway and the rest is all fun.

You're not getting it.

There is likely to be a larger-than-usual fiat infusion into crypto-markets coming up on or around the 18th of Jan and Feb.

Fuck it. I'll shut up.

Let's see how things play out and see for ourselves.

well apparently he won you as one , eh?

Divisibility:

Why bother discussing divisibility?  It's obvious people have already used physical silver as money in the past.  You know, the stories from your grandparents about going to the movies with a nickel or something.  There is no shortage of granularity when factoring in gold, silver, and copper, so there's no point rehashing an experiment that has already been done.  Both options probably have more granularity than actually needed.

Portability:

I did not bring up portability because crapcoiners like to pretend that in international trade, one country would just accept an infinite amount of bitcoins from another country while they send them ALL of their natural resources and receive imaginary tokens in return.  That's not how international trade works.  They would flat out refuse the bitcoins, so the portability argument is way more complicated when real world goods have to be shipped from both countries no matter what and then bitcoin receives no real advantage in the end.  

Yes, it's faster to dump bitcoins than metals in some other scenarios, but I also do not consider that as being a positive due to things like the Paretto principle.  If all capital eventually congregates in a tiny number of people, which causes the whole capitalist system to collapse, then the facilitation of gigantic capital flights entering and leaving places constantly is going to cause that monopoly board game to come to a conclusion MUCH FASTER, then collapse and have to restart the game by violent revolution again.

Just like the speed of light is needed to act as a governer on the universe, some governers are beneficial in economics to retard globalization, force things more local, and allow local economies to exist at all.  Then you have absolutely retarded scenarios like if bitcoin was the world reserve currency, what if a rogue Chinese employee worked at the treasury of your govt and enters a few keystrokes sending your entire nation's GDP to the Guang Dong province?  What are you going to do?  Get Vitalik to roll back the chain?  The portability (aka facilitation of capital flight to subsidize globalization) is a negative in many ways for economics and security.  Pretty obvious no nation is going to use such a system as their reserve currency either if one person going insane or comitting espionage can just steal your entire treasury with a mouse click.

I don’t hold with the level of racism in this thread either.

A ban of Roach would be a good start.  His noodlings on physical silver don’t bring sufficient value to justify his other bullshit.  I don’t give a flip if he has has been here since day 1.

Who has mod powers on this thread now ?

He looks like this guy.

The hard right is so desperate to believe they are not the bad guys that they actively engage in collective self delusion.  4Chan had “irrefutable proof” that the Florida shootings were a false flag operation in less than 24 hours. This is the same group of people that brought you PizzaGate, and many of them still believe PizzaGate is real and ongoing.

You can’t reason with these people. 

Thought experiment. Two tribes, the northern herders and the southern herders. The northern herders, the collectivists, agree to live according to the common good, such that no man would starve in time of plenty. The southern herders, the individualists, agree to live according to individual rights. A man may go hungry in the south, but all community action is voluntary on principle. Is there any sensible way in which one tribe can be called more moral than the other? Is there some metamorality by which we can make sense of this?

Hmm, I must not be seeing what you're seeing, JJG.

Something important that you said is that one can refer to previous periods as general frames of how the market will behave in the immediate future, and I think a lot of people misunderstand that. I'm glad to see you explaining that in such a great way. The price discovery near $13,000 is not sufficiently done, and I think that it will take more than a year to reach back over the heights of last year.

I can't think of anything fun ether. I was hoping to come up with some fun "I told you so", but... yeah. I guess we just wait and see.

Actually "it" begins with an "i"

The only reason you're smug and patting yourself on the back about BCash is that you got in pre-fork and thus didn't have to shell out a dime for it.

Same with Roger Ver, CSW, Mcafee, Peter R., and all the other BCash shills. They all got their BCash for free, and so that's why they shill hard for it. They know damn well that they wouldn't buy any significant amount of that shitcoin on the open market if they had to spend real fiat for it.

And when it crashes into the shitter one day, no skin off their backs. The only people who will get burned are the brainwashed BCash cultists who paid real money for that garbage.

There is no way possible Marcus and his army of bugmen can compete with the coming r0ach thousand year physical silver reich.  So have no fear Torque, it's impossible for Jbreher to win in the end, as I plan to tap dance on the grave of both bitcoin and bcash while physical commodity money curbstomps imaginary, designed to centralize shitcoin tokens into the ground.

FYI he's the thread starter or the OP and the moderator here. So watch your word. Maybe deleted this reply later.

And then Congress will make a law against road pirates, who are using Comcast’s private roads without permission. And we can all run a campaign on road neutrality and no one will listen

Libertarianism is a theoretical system that works on paper but is 100% invalid in the real world because it's impossible to function in a closed ecosystem (the current state of earth).  In practice, all libertarianism is is one moron campaigning for unilateral disarmament of whatever tribe or human settlement he lives in or was born into, while the odds of all potentially hostile external settlements doing the same thing at the same time is virtually zero.  You are in effect just opening the door to your civilization while rolling out a red carpet that says "come kill, steal, or enslave us".

Libertarianism literally is nothing more than a renamed version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.  Whether you believe the protocols are fiction or non-fiction doesn't matter, they are 100% correct:


Many in the post-Ron Paul era - although probably unable to convey this reality in words - know this is subconsciously true and have moved on looking for better solutions, usually involving the only known functional frameworks of human existence over the last several thousand years - homogeneous, ethnocentric city-states (aka things like the alt-right).

Who would have guessed the most fraudulent exchange on the planet where no real humans even trade on for fear of being Gox'd would try and paint the tape higher with tethers printed from thin air.  The most inconvenient fact in bitcoin:  why can nobody point out why every single price movement in bitcoin must be initiated by Bitfinex and NEVER any other exchange that actually has any veneer of legitimacy?  The price is only allowed to be moved by the obvious scam exchange of the day whether it's Gox, Huobi, or Bitfinex.  Which begs the question, can the price of bitcoin actually go up WITHOUT fraud involved?

I mean I hate doing this because it's getting really boring and I feel like everyone here should have just understood what I was saying by now but:

#1 So it's a democratic thing? Because I can tell you some of the value did go to bcash. So the fact that more went to core is what made it "the real bitcoin"? So if 51% had gone to bcash you would have reluctantly agreed that it was the real bitcoin? Even though ver's ideas are garbage? What if bcash slowly gains more and more and gets to over 50% in the future? Does it then become "the real bitcoin". If the value bounces back and forth back and forth between 49% and 51% relative to each other does the "real bitcoin" change every day as the value changes? Even if I don't go this route and accept your reason. Even if I allow that "the market decided" why does the market get to decide? You still have to say why. You can't just declare it. It just so happens that I agree with the markets decision however If ver's garbage vision for bitcoins future had won out in market capitalization after the fork I wouldn't have accepted it as "the real bitcoin" just because it had slightly more market cap. I would be here saying that core was the real bitcoin in my opinion even though it was slightly less capitalized.

#2 If that is a real reason, than you would have to say that you would call ver's version of bitcoin "the real bitcoin" if the roles had been reversed and core forked first instead of cash forking first. Are you really prepared to stand behind that?

Anyway I'm getting really tired of this and really annoyed that there isn't one single person to step forward to say that they understand what I mean. Even though I really do believe in what I am saying and I think that I have good arguments behind it even I am starting to feel like a troll at this point. So I think I am going to disengage from this pursuit.

On a lighter node. Screw lambos. I'm want one of these.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsfgbHvuYRU

nonsense.

You are suggesting that there is some kind of equality in forks.  There is only one bitcoin, and that thing called bcash was a renegade fork that ends up serving as an ongoing and persistent attack vector on bitcoin - the real one.  

Get the fuck out of here trying to assert that bcash is bitcoin or that bcash is the real bitcoin or anything close to that, even though bcash happens to copy bitcoin from both branching off and its continued lack of innovations, so they are engaged in ongoing stealing from bitcoin.

Regarding bitcoin forking at around the same time as the renegade bcash hardfork , you got your history wrong.  If you recall there was a process for obtaining consensus in bitcoin and the process was followed, which caused locking in of the segwit consensus and thereafter there was another period before the actual new consensus code was activated... a soft fork and voluntary and backward compatible, too.


If you also recall bcash was a hardfork that went into effect on a kind of emergency basis and was driven by a small group of folks who were disgruntled about the segwit2x newyork agreement not going the way that they had hoped.. which if you recall the segwit2x and ny agreement was also a kind of scam and an attack attempt on bitcoin both in terms of attempting to change the blocksize limit but also attempting to change bitcoin's governance.. which failed.

edited out

FFS - if you're going to shill an altcoin here, at least pick a respectable one.

If, sometime in the future, consensus dictates that Bcash is the real Bitcoin, I would acknowledge that. However, I'd also acknowledge that Bitcoin has failed, and I would disengage from the space altogether, and focus on Monero or something.

IMO he is right, at least for me XMR is the No2 after Bitcoin. And i think thats the case for many bitcoiners. Dash doesnt stand a chance sry.

1. You can of course verify the total number of coins 2. If the encryption is cracked crypto ist fucked anyway 3. This is old news and was adressed with RingCT 4. Bulletproofs will reduce TX size by 80-90% 5. Ledger support with next release ~ 2 weeks

Monero ist solid development, no hype. It grows slowly but surely.

I book the profits in BTC, I just choose to do it with the BTC:ETH and BTC:LTC pairs rather than soiling myself with the lowest of shitcoins...USD.

Feel free to pump my bitcoin private.
Anyone know where to dump them?

I’ve done BCH, BTG & Bitcore. Haven’t bothered with the others but there are a lot. Be great if somebody could compile a list with all the current prices.

I found this a while back but don’t know what the current prices are -

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BvlEoX0Tgym3mKYw9OZOrrDj4LSc73gCgUwa3BLFMOg/htmlview

Loyce made a list of redeemable fork coins but the prices aren’t correct any more -

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2836875.0

Well, there is always going to be some framework from which to work, so if you believe that it might be helpful to go over areas of presumption, then perhaps that could be helpful - although we could be repeating BIG BLOCKER arguments.  From your various posts, I do think that you give a lot more benefit of the doubt to the various BIG BLOCKER arguments and their framework than I do.

I tend to be really dismissive of various BIG BLOCKER framework and arguments because I think that they tend to be misleading in their tendency to create false comparisons and even to presume facts that are not in evidence - for example, BIG BLOCKERS have tended to spend so much time arguing the logic of increasing transaction times and fees - but they were also involved in SPAM attacks to attempt to create the facts that they claim existed to cause emergency needs to take action. 

Furthermore, BIG BLOCKERs seem to suggest that there is some necessity that the status quo of bitcoin needs to be defended, when in fact if they are proposing facts or logic, then they are the ones that need to provide evidence and logic for their position to change the status quo.  On a related note, their inability to get reception for their nonsense positions in terms of submitting BIPS and even perhaps their laziness in attempting to work within the bitcoin governance process seems to cause them to strive towards working outside the bitcoin system and to engage in attacks, threats and coercion in order to attempt to get their way, rather than really trying to get their proposed changes adopted through already existing bitcoin governance procedures.  They just ignore those governance procedures because they want to change (or sabotage the bitcoin procedures) or they have other get rich quick pumping of other personalized project agendas.

You can use Bitcoin on-chain any time you want and avoid second layer solutions.

Do you see any merchant adoption going on with bcash? No? Then there's your answer as to which one is best.

What do we think of the Georgia Guidestones?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

apparently they do, they are like the jhadists in a suicide mission. and if they didn't most intel and cointel would have understood, but for them it's beyond their consciousness than those applying this program do it at themselves. they believe in darwinism, the stronger only will survive...

it's the only method they could use... at least they believe in their shit show... it's to save "life on earth" as otherwise according to them, the religious and exploiters can't contain their urge to reproduce reducing the earth to a single city sooner or later...

yahda yahda...

99% of the western security services believe it's a lie, they are so sure of themselves (98% of them believe that a plant of the earth should be illegal). and when you get that you understand why the guidestonians will eliminate indiscrinately, and furthermore doing nothing as most people are too stupid to do any research about the consequences of their actions .

the convenient rope .

don't tell it to me, but to those who embrace the guidestone agenda... However if you refuse to see their point of view, for your fake moral reason, you don't stand a chance, and I am losing my time. be honest with yourself first.

 I summoned all my strength and rotated Thanos' arm so you could get a better look.  Took a lot out of me!

and the earth is flat

Maybe, maybe not.
But we're far away from 10k AT THIS POINT...it's not that easy.
That psychological barrier need time and - but  should be done before 17 May.

Yeah, i'm supreme..noob.

not if you zoom in...





We should keep this trend up until we reach 800-1000 ppm, so humanity's IQ drops 20-25 points.

Then we're be too stupid to solve things anyway.

So? NASA is funded by US govt too. Yet they manage to land a few rovers of Mars.

Can't do that with crappy science.

We basically already have two children per family globally, more in some countries and less in some.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Vog3uZ47O8

A designed to centralize, non-fungible, permissioned ledger is not even close to money.  It is the opposite of money - a tracking and control grid, not something to facilitate a free market or any type of freedom in general.  The only type of system bitcoin can facilitate is a police state where every transaction is monitored, blacklists are deployed, and the state is empowered even more so than now.  If you support shitcoins over physical metals, you support empowering the state, period.

Imaginary tokens are not a store of value, nor are they a real commodity, which is required to be a commodity currency, being a real commodity in the first place, nor do they have any fundamentals or characteristics of money in comparison to physical silver or gold.  You are a liar who is shilling for a pump and dump you bought into for self interest is the only real truth.  Some people call this "cognitive dissonance", which is the polite way of saying someone is full of shit.

Yeah those moon landings were all faked.
The earth is flat.
There’s a space alien being kept at Area 51 and the government is keeping it secret.
There’s a bunch of You Tube vids about it so it must be true.

And there’s a big invisible sky fairy too....

Lol.  More like contrarian investors make money and pigs get slaughtered.  Outlier cases always exist though, such as the time I almost shorted Darkcoin with a large sum of money on leverage but was too lazy to send money to the exchange and stare at the screen for days on end to monitor the situation.  Which is a good thing because the price went up 10x for absolutely no reason and I would not have been shorting the top.  It is best to just lay low and wait for asymmetric trades, of which bitcoin has not been one since it was $200, but physical silver is right now.

Yep, lacks Masternodes too... Oh noes!

OK, the slow death of Dash must be painful, but the best solution is surely to get out while you still can rather than lash out against another coin for simply being... better?

Dash deserves to die.

Fun factoid: On a United flight Monday evening, on the seat-back in-flight entertainment [sic] system, what would be playing but a three-minute commercial for Dash? Weird.

Second time I saw this. First time was back in Jan. Long running campaign. Of course, whatshisname has a near-unlimited budget for that, what with the massive instamine, and the likely owning of 99% of all masternodes.

Dash is a bad imitation of monero and I do believe having a transparent blockchain is a good thing.

As long as you don't make any public claims that you own the address you really own, nobody can know it that you really own it. In that way bitcoin is semi-anonymous and it is both government friendly and not at the same time. Whether if people prefer to stay anonymous or not, the decision belongs to them.

It is just like creating a facebook page. You can put your real information on the platform or you can create a complete fake one with lulzy information. There is a choice and I like it. (not fb obviously, fuck suckerberg)

You are absolutely right:
Monero is decentralized, fairly distributed, without a premine, and truly private.

Dash is none of those.

But this is a bitcoin thread.  I am probably one of the biggest proponents of Monero, but in here I stick to BITCOIN.  Monero is one of the VERY few actually decentralized altcoins with utility.  It will survive as a child of BTC along with Litecoin, and... and... well there *could* be no others.

IIRC I think it was you that picked the fight:


Just sayin.

Any wall street involvement with public cryptos is a ploy to get inside and take them down, like with the futures.

If wall street is warming up for bitcoin this can as well they are warming to be bearish. People also invest a lot by SELLing futures. I think (correct me if i am wrong) the biggest bearish investment in stock markets are tesla stocks (i hope bulls beat them). If i am not mistaken tesla stock has the most bears among all stocks. I think we cant really see how much are bitcoin futures making SELL (for rookies this means betting that stock will go down) and how much BUY

Note, however, that "take them down" and "control" are two completely different objectives. Control can just as easily mean to "take them up", as in to the moon.  

The crippled mining situation is real and unfortunate however it was very short lived and not so dramatic that the crippled miner couldn't still be effective and there was no heavily front end weighted distribution curve. And it isn't even clear that there was anything nefarious about it, it's just as likely that the code for the original miner was just poorly written and some enterprising individual realized that he could improve it and use his improved miner to make some money. I highly doubt when it was all said and done that the claymore guy even got away with more than 0.25% of the currency supply. It's unfortunate but not even comparable to evan and co mining something like 70% of the dash currency supply in the first day in secret via a secret launch.

No one was criticising Dash before you laid into Monero, so what I was driving at was that it's your own fault Dash got a pasting, and obviously upset you.

Anyway, life goes on.  And I think I will stick around, thanks.

Look I don't care if you buy monero. Just if you are holding dash beware. It is demonstrably a total and complete scam. Are you aware of the events that took place before dash was called dash and before it was called darkcoin when it was still x-coin?

Attacking Dash is not a defence of Monero, no. And I have neither the desire or need to deflect anything.

I just answered your (IMHO, ill-informed) attack with a giggle and a pop as I know you are a Dash fan and a bit 'touchy' about it.  It was as unnecessary as your mail was, but just a pop back in kind.  I figured you'd dig the hole deeper and I confess quite enjoyed it when you did, but it's run its course.

A little advice?:  Whether you like it or not, you will have a LOT of trouble persuading anyone here Dash is remotely superior to Monero.  You ought to have worked that out even if you don't agree with it. Rant and offense won't change that.

But hey, each to their own. Live and let live and all that.   So unless you have anything that is not offensive and is worth reading to add, let's leave it at that, eh?

Have a nice day.

So it was rat poison after all... too bad we didn't take the old men sayings seriously.

Correct.  As I said, you attacked Monero - unnecessarily and wrongly.  So I called you out on Dash, rightly.  

It's your mess, old chap - you didn't need to keep digging.

I am finding this Monero vs Dash argument somewhat amusing

When does the hair grabbings start?

Well how astute a judge you are!




Just as astute as you are at judging cryptocurrencies, it seems!

Seems like your partner is too emotionally invested in your BTC investment.

I recall that you, Bob, have taken a couple pretty decently sized cash outs in the supra $11k price arena, which I would imagine that you have largely already gotten back more than your total investment from those cash outs, even though you likely sold less than a 1/4 of your stash.. or at least that was my impression... but anyhow BTC prices had gone up way over 4x, at those price points, that it is quite likely that you have gotten out more than your original investment.

I recall also, that you deferred one of your cash outs, and tentatively, you were considering waiting until prices returned above $12k, so is that the part that has your partner worried?

I think that with any investment, one of the problems is if you are somewhat dependent upon the cashflow of the investment to pay your expenses, then in that regard, anyone could be considered to be "overinvested" if he could be forced to cash out of some or all of the investment at a time that is NOT of his choosing.

Ultimately, it seems that current BTC price performance is part of regular price correction dynamics, and a looming question does remain whether current BTC prices is going to end up being in an early 2013 like scenario or a early 2014 like scenario... I personally am still inclined to believe that the early 2013 like scenario seems to be the most likely of the two, but of course, the jury is still out and there have been a lot of more bearish folks that have been proclaiming the early 2014 scenario.. and part of my problem with such proclamation, from some of those folks, is that they have been proclaiming it since about early January.. and that is way to fucking early to be making such proclamations, even though they could end up being correct - in what I personally continue to consider their "minority" view...   I use the word "minority" to suggest that the early 2014 scenario seems to be the least likely, rather than the one held by the least of people... because it is quite possible, and even likely, that more peeps outside of this thread (we in the WO, are not the whole world, by the way... hahahahahha... even if we may be a lot more "in touch" with BTC fundamentals than the vast majority of the world expressing opinions on the BTC topic)  actually believe in the early 2014 scenario rather than the early 2013 scenario.

Sure. Basically I don't think bitcoin makes a very good reserve asset. It isn't nearly as well suited for a base of the liquidity pyramid as gold is.



Part of what makes it poorly suited as a reserve asset is that technology improves over time. There is a risk that the leading cryptocurrency will always be overturned by new and better technology. Which is a good thing, just not a good thing if you want the properties of a stable long term bottom of the liquidity pyramid reserve asset. Interestingly there is an implication here that if bitcoin can win against all of the other alts and come to soundly dominate this sector it will more closely approximate the utility of gold as a reserve asset. But if it get's overtaken by ethereum or bcrap that could open pandoras box and doubly prove my point.

There is also an existential threat posed to bitcoin from forks that you wouldn't want in a reserve asset.

There is a technological threat, what if the network gets owned? What if it is built on assumptions that turn out to be wrong? It's well safe enough for speculation and payments and building businesses ontop of, but there is enough of a risk in this regard to hamper its utility as an ultra safe long term reserve asset.

TLDR; if you were to insert bitcoin into the pyramid it would fall in-between gold and circulating money, not next to gold, and certainly not beneath it.

 Good eye!

I think all of us in here can find a way to live with that 

Bearish:

https://dailystormer.name/who-being-a-tranny-is-no-longer-a-mental-illness-but-being-a-gamer-is/

Traps aren't gay.

That's all.

I agree with the ‘common’ part of your claim. I haven’t seen you make a sensible case for your prediction yet unless you have made it else where?

My open question has been whether we’re going into a crypto-winter now or not. I still think not. And thus think $10k before the end of the year and new ATHs before summer 2019.

You know, as a business, you can accept zero confirmation transactions from both BTC and BCash.

For BTC = just wait 10 seconds. Even a cup of coffee can wait 10 seconds. It's zero confirmation, but you can almost safely accept the transaction if there are no double spend attempts after 10 seconds.

For BCash = just wait about 10 seconds also. Maybe 20 if you want to make sure. After a confirmation, send it to an exchange and market sell.

For anything else that costs more than a cup of coffee, I'm sure you can wait 10 minutes for a block; and if the transaction hasn't confirmed yet, it should in a few.

Dash is not bitcoin.

You seem to want to get into some kind of compare and contrast discussion of Dash.. .and to pump dash as if it is a kind of solution.

Sure if there is some kind of innovation that is worthy in Dash, then bitcoin absorb such innovation into itself.. but Dash is another beast that many argue to be very centralized in the way that nodes are compensated... In other words, why the fuck we need to pump dash in this thread, even if arguably it may have some kind of temporary solution (and likely a lot of other disadvantages too, but who  the fuck cares about DASH details because it is not topical, here?)


Edit:

Oh Fuck... Torque beat me to it, seemingly with more accuracy and eloquence, too.  Fuck!

Edit 2:


Admittedly, even Jbreher with his own eloquence, if you could call it that.  Fuck!

Er... 'masternodes' - just like Bitcoin?

Lol

That saying dash / darkcoin is (and ever has been) 'just like Bitcoin' is at the very least a bit of a stretch.  Evan's control and the masternode system doesn't look at all 'decentralised' to me.

What happened to actually being astute and factually correct?

3-2 last goal was a perfect beauty i runned down my house like a crazy fucker that i am!!!!! so happy

I suppose.

Never say never, but does anyone really believe that segwit is going to get reversed due to lack of support?

I doubt it.

In the meantime, a variety of FUDsters will continue to denigrate segwit, and seem to cause even smart peeps to fail/refuse to use segwit features (and addresses) which will continue to carry out the intended behaviors preferred by the FUDsters - largely what seems to be a delay the inevitable, which is greater and greater segwit adoption.

Perhaps instead of having high levels (such as greater than 2/3) of segwit adoption in 2 years, it will take more than 4 or 5 years?  If they are successful in the FUD spreading, then I suppose it could take a while to get to majority and even convincingly majority status with segwit adoption, perhaps?

NEXT GAME ALL WALL OBSERVER'S for BELGIUM  

F-g divers won with the help of a wicked bounce and a controversial VAR against the team that was a bit tired after previous heroics in three extra times. Definitely wasn't rooting for them after all that diving in the semifinal. Disgusting.

Haha yea I remember the time when you could read every new post. Or atleast check out every new thread to see if you were interested in it, subscribe to it, and read every new post in the threads you were interested in. The forum it's self was basically like the wall observer is now, except more organized, and everything wasn't off topic since you could actually post in the relevant thread.

The death knell for those days seemed to be the introduction of NXT. Too many people got rich too fast with something other than bitcoin and the altcoin mania began. Then this became altcointalk, and the signature campaigns began, and the bots. Well you know the story. NXT wasn't the first altcoin by any stretch, but it was different and it changed the way that people looked at altcoins. Alt coins before NXT were just a curiosity. NXT marked the point in time when people started looking at altcoins as more than a curiosity and instead as a way to get rich quick.

I mean there were people hoping to get rich quick in bitcoin before that. But they were tech people who thought that bitcoin MIGHT be a way to get rich but that they needed to learn about how it worked before they could know that. It was different.

Well, anyway, that's enough reminiscing for one morning.



Yes. I'm not saying this is the bottom. But I feel like this is what the bottom will feel like. Does that make any sense?

I guess we will not be seeing any more bottom pictures ?  
Any chance the "To The Moon" pics have bottoms in them as well ? i dont know why, but kinda got addicted to bottoms.

Who the hell did the math on this?  Regardless, more gold = less price and you never know when they'll find a treasure ship or asteroid full of the stuff.  Old world problems bitcoiners laugh at.  

All you have to do is send an autonomous vehicle out there to subtly nudge an asteroid so that it's new trajectory crashes it into your remote wilderness land. I don't see why people think that's so far fetched.

https://twitter.com/classiclib3ral/status/1026508918934171648
Footage of Alex Jones reacting to his facebook and youtube channel getting terminated

Can't answer for @bustedsynx myself
but my answer would have to be 'you have to have some skin in the game, almost at whatever cost'
you need off-exchange money tied up, buried under the mountain, guarded by starving wolverines
what if there's a complete supply shock while you sleep and you wake up to the biggest dildo up everyone else's arse ever seen?
all the exchanges cannot cope if some idiot market buys 100k coins
or if fomo sets in the other side of the world from your bedsit while you're being friendzoned by the 5 from Polec101

I should hope there's more to that case than meets the eye. There should be reasonable belief that an offence has been committed for a warrant. I don't think receiving a large sum from an exchange would be sufficient for money laundering charges without some kind of incriminating evidence (IANAL of course).

I started at an average cost per BTC around $1,200 in late 2013, but that did not last long because as we know the price continued to drop for about a year and then get stuck in a low point of mid $200s for nearly another year, so buying as the price came down brought down my average cost per BTC to about $500 by early 2017.  In early 2017, I had some phone porting hacker issues when the BTC prices were in the $1,100 arena which caused my cost per BTC to rise to over $700 (due to losses)..... ..

I guess that my point is even if any of us BTC HODLers have some screw ups along the way that bring up our average cost per BTC, just from being in BTC for so long and striving towards BTC accumulation we still are likely sitting fairly pretty from the great BTC price appreciation.... even if we may not have received the full value of that two year long BTC price appreciation that started from $250 in mid to late 2015.  

I understand that there are also some BTC HODLers that might be in the $2k to $5k per BTC costs, and even they are not in a bad place with current BTC price dynamics and the threats that the price might go lower.. (but it might not, also... hahahaha)

The HODLers who are in the red, right now (might have average costs per BTC in the $8k to $19k range, but it really seems a lack of commitment to BTC if anyone has not been able to bring down their cost per BTC during the last more than 6 months), probably need to HODL and continue to buy BTC to continue to attempt to bring down their average cost per BTC, and it seems quite likely that just a few years down the road and perhaps as long as 5-10 years they are quite likely to experience decent price appreciation that outcompetes various traditional investments (no guarantee of course, but strategy and plan can help to increase the odds of HODLers and their position in the upcoming world that is likely to include more BTC awareness into the future).

Ultimately, I agree that you need to tailorize a strategy that is comfortable for you and attempt to learn from that strategy, and perhaps bitcoin does have some differences from traditional kinds of investments, but my personal approach has been to attempt to employ strategies that are similar to what I had been using in my traditional investing - such as dollar cost averaging; however, some differences that I have found with bitcoin has been the 24/7 access and really various abilities to really make micro-trades with little to no fees that have caused me to develop some additional and what I would characterize as complementary strategies that make dollar cost averaging one of three legs - rather than the previous primary leg.

Sure there are some other strategies too, that carry through, which are things like managing your cash flow so that you are not overinvesting and living within your means, and then just having various targets.  

So yeah, part of the anal aspect of creating targets and plans and revising plans ends up having some kind of decent approximation of your various costs and establishing various means to verify whether your wealth is growing from the strategy including figuring out how much certain actions might be costing you which could also affect short term plans about how to cover some of those extra costs or to roll them into your overall expenses to help to figure out your next moves and set ups and what thresholds are going to trigger the next moves.

One issue that I have with any strategy that attempts to identify tops and bottoms is that it seems to require too much attempt to rely on a large quantity of inference (from missing information) and too much necessity to try to figure out the meaning and weight of various pieces of information including game theory movs of other people that I don't know and who could be motivated by factors way beyond my ability to understand.  Yeah, of course there are macro-tools, too, but I would just rather NOT be attempt to place too much emphasis on attempting to predict price direction as long as I have established a plan for either price direction, then I consider that approach to be way less stressful for myself and just inline with my past practice and what seems to be my personality preferences.

So, my question for you, afbitcoins, includes whether you believe that your system is working for you and are you learning and tweaking your system, and are you really prepared for either up or down?  Perhaps you have learned a bit from some of your prior experiences to just HODL some portion of your coins.. whether it is 25% or some other amount that you believe to be reasonable, but instead it seems that you are inclined to "play" with nearly the whole amount of your stash and attempt to predict price directions?   I do understand that sometimes you can win pretty BIG with that strategy, but still seems really difficult to either predict tops or bottoms or to get anywhere near close to predicting without suffering quite a few opportunity costs by being too much out when you want to be in or too much in when you want to be out .. and in that regard, to me, there just seems to be too much stress that is beyond my own tolerance(s).  How do you deal with all of that?  You get pleasure out of making BIG plays, rather than attempting some form of incrementalism?

I bet this is Prague and area somewhere in the Old Town.

I give up  

i think a nintendo or something..... but my first computer i really use ... is from when i got my first BTC's so as you see and know i come from very very VERY far and still have an extreme far way to go when it comes to computers  

but i got good guy's around me last years  

Jetpack!

Well that's exactly what I mean. I still profusely use cash because of reasons. Most people don't because of convenience. But we are going onto a path where soon will come the day that we won't be able to use cash (for the most part) even if WE WANTED TO.

Most euro countries you can not even buy a high end TV set using cash. It's forbidden by law. They will keep decreasing the max limits over time.

Why?

Because cash is way harder to control than banking fiat or even Bitcoin.

Maybe that's a bottom?

When next halving?

 Speaking of the powers that be, does anyone know how many variations of Dragon Balls there are?  I spent a few hours watching old Dragon Balls videos on YouTube just to figure out what character was in afbitcoins avatar... turns out it isn't Vegeta!  Who knew?

 

Avatar-sized

 

*snip*

 Very cool.  The image I found that looked closest was on deviant art website... oddly enough the filename was Goku_af_ssj2_by_BK_81_by_GOKU_AF.jpg and it looked like this:


 
 weird that the initials AF were in the filename and are also the beginning of your nickname but it stands for Dragon Ball AF.  Now, Dragon ball AF was never an official Dragon Ball series; seems it was a knock off of sorts:

https://thedaoofdragonball.com/blog/fans/dragon-ball-af-explained/

 and that's how I wasted spent my day

edit: no offence intended



 

Unlike bitcoin, it doesn't matter who currently owns or runs whatever minining camp in physical gold, silver, or copper.  Metals remove middlemen and counterparty risk, so it doesn't matter at all.  All that matters is what you have in your hand.  As opposed to bitcoin where people think or make believe they actually own a coin when they don't, otherwise they wouldn't constantly be looking over their shoulder to do things like look up mining pool centralization. You never own a bitcoin.  It's not possible to take delivery of a bitcoin.  It's cloud banking just like cloud computing aka horrible.

As for the government, I do not give a flying shit what the Jewish occupied govt says.  The evil cult of Judaism is my enemy.  There are 300 million goyim sleeper cells in the US alone ready to expel the Jew just like they've been expelled from nations 300+ times before.  It's inevitable they are given the boot.

https://twitter.com/jpthor__/status/1118785115776114688

"The rest is noise."

True.

I love that guy's tweet, he nails the sentiment perfectly.

If you get involved in crypto for more than a few years, it is almost impossible not to come to the same epiphany at some point.

"The noise" is there simply to distract you, confuse you, FUD you, and ultimately steal your wealth away for side projects that have zero purpose/utility or won't matter in the long run. The scammers, trolls and whales love 'em tho.

No, we still need the shitcoins sloshing around out there.... for comic relief.

Okay it is time to implement negative merits. Ten for one I do not care get it done.

Guys you will love this: Watch this fast forward video

2013:
Bitcoin, Litecoin, XRP...
Bitcoin, XRP, Litecoin...
Bitcoin, Litecoin, XRP...

2014:
Bitcoin, Litecoin, XRP...
Bitcoin, Litecoin, Auroracoin...
Bitcoin, Litecoin, XRP...
Bitcoin, Litecoin, peercoin...
Bitcoin, Litecoin, XRP...
Bitcoin, Litecoin, Dash...
Bitcoin, Litecoin, Nxt...
Bitcoin, Litecoin, XRP...
Bitcoin, XRP, Litecoin...
Watch it

BTC will be the king always.

As far as Bitcoin is concerned, the FUD has always existed and, in reality, it is just a noise to distract the novices, the weak hands and those who consider themselves as expert Wall Street traders, buying in ATH and selling in the DIP

New projects must be thoroughly analyzed to know if they are a scam or if they are legitimate, but they have to demonstrate their potential.

I like free competition, I have nothing against it, but it has to be an honest competition, not what they have done with Bitcoin.

I can not explain it better because English is not my native language and, if maybe the beginning of the tweet is not the right one, you can say the same thing without using that adjective.

Sell, wait for 3200 and then buy bitcoins. In altcoins there is no sense at all, bitcoin will screw everything if necessary: masternodes and instantsend from DASH, side chains and DEX from Komodo, a large block from BSV, smart contracts from BCH, etc. Altcoins are only needed for testing new technologies