"As the number of users grows, the value per coin increases. It has the potential for a positive feedback loop; as users increase, the value goes up, which could attract more users to take advantage of the increasing value." ~ Satoshi Nakamoto /r/Bitcoin
You've probably been hearing a lot about Bitcoin recently and are wondering what's the big deal? Most of your questions should be answered by the resources below but if you have additional questions feel free to ask them in the comments. It all started with the release of the release of Satoshi Nakamoto's whitepaper however that will probably go over the head of most readers so we recommend the following videos for a good starting point for understanding how bitcoin works and a little about its long term potential:
Limited Supply - There will only ever be 21,000,000 bitcoins created and they are issued in a predictable fashion, you can view the inflation schedule here. Once they are all issued Bitcoin will be truly deflationary. The halving countdown can be found here.
Open source - Bitcoin code is fully auditable. You can read the source code yourself here.
Accountable - The public ledger is transparent, all transactions are seen by everyone.
Decentralized - Bitcoin is globally distributed across thousands of nodes with no single point of failure and as such can't be shut down similar to how Bittorrent works. You can even run a node on a Raspberry Pi.
Censorship resistant - No one can prevent you from interacting with the bitcoin network and no one can censor, alter or block transactions that they disagree with, see Operation Chokepoint.
Push system - There are no chargebacks in bitcoin because only the person who owns the address where the bitcoins reside has the authority to move them.
Low fee scaling - On chain transaction fees depend on network demand and how much priority you wish to assign to the transaction. Most wallets calculate on chain fees automatically but you can view current fees here and mempool activity here. On chain fees may rise occasionally due to network demand, however instant micropayments that do not require confirmations are happening via the Lightning Network, a second layer scaling solution currently rolling out on the Bitcoin mainnet.
Borderless - No country can stop it from going in/out, even in areas currently unserved by traditional banking as the ledger is globally distributed.
Portable - Bitcoins are digital so they are easier to move than cash or gold. They can even be transported by simply memorizing a string of words for wallet recovery (while cool this method is generally not recommended due to potential for insecure key generation by inexperienced users. Hardware wallets are the preferred method for new users due to ease of use and additional security).
Bitcoin.org and BuyBitcoinWorldwide.com are helpful sites for beginners. You can buy or sell any amount of bitcoin (even just a few dollars worth) and there are several easy methods to purchase bitcoin with cash, credit card or bank transfer. Some of the more popular resources are below, also check out the bitcoinity exchange resources for a larger list of options for purchases.
Here is a listing of local ATMs. If you would like your paycheck automatically converted to bitcoin use Bitwage. Note: Bitcoins are valued at whatever market price people are willing to pay for them in balancing act of supply vs demand. Unlike traditional markets, bitcoin markets operate 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. Preev is a useful site that that shows how much various denominations of bitcoin are worth in different currencies. Alternatively you can just Google "1 bitcoin in (your local currency)".
Securing your bitcoins
With bitcoin you can "Be your own bank" and personally secure your bitcoins OR you can use third party companies aka "Bitcoin banks" which will hold the bitcoins for you.
If you prefer to "Be your own bank" and have direct control over your coins without having to use a trusted third party, then you will need to create your own wallet and keep it secure. If you want easy and secure storage without having to learn computer security best practices, then a hardware wallet such as the Trezor, Ledger or ColdCard is recommended. Alternatively there are many software wallet options to choose from here depending on your use case.
If you prefer to let third party "Bitcoin banks" manage your coins, try Gemini but be aware you may not be in control of your private keys in which case you would have to ask permission to access your funds and be exposed to third party risk.
Note: For increased security, use Two Factor Authentication (2FA) everywhere it is offered, including email! 2FA requires a second confirmation code to access your account making it much harder for thieves to gain access. Google Authenticator and Authy are the two most popular 2FA services, download links are below. Make sure you create backups of your 2FA codes.
As mentioned above, Bitcoin is decentralized, which by definition means there is no official website or Twitter handle or spokesperson or CEO. However, all money attracts thieves. This combination unfortunately results in scammers running official sounding names or pretending to be an authority on YouTube or social media. Many scammers throughout the years have claimed to be the inventor of Bitcoin. Websites like bitcoin(dot)com and the btc subreddit are active scams. Almost all altcoins (shitcoins) are marketed heavily with big promises but are really just designed to separate you from your bitcoin. So be careful: any resource, including all linked in this document, may in the future turn evil. Don't trust, verify. Also as they say in our community "Not your keys, not your coins".
Where can I spend bitcoins?
Check out spendabit or bitcoin directory for millions of merchant options. Also you can spend bitcoin anywhere visa is accepted with bitcoin debit cards such as the CashApp card. Some other useful site are listed below.
Mining bitcoins can be a fun learning experience, but be aware that you will most likely operate at a loss. Newcomers are often advised to stay away from mining unless they are only interested in it as a hobby similar to folding at home. If you want to learn more about mining you can read more here. Still have mining questions? The crew at /BitcoinMining would be happy to help you out. If you want to contribute to the bitcoin network by hosting the blockchain and propagating transactions you can run a full node using this setup guide. If you would prefer to keep it simple there are several good options. You can view the global node distribution here.
Just like any other form of money, you can also earn bitcoins by being paid to do a job.
You can also earn bitcoins by participating as a market maker on JoinMarket by allowing users to perform CoinJoin transactions with your bitcoins for a small fee (requires you to already have some bitcoins.
The following is a short list of ongoing projects that might be worth taking a look at if you are interested in current development in the bitcoin space.
One Bitcoin is quite large (hundreds of £/$/€) so people often deal in smaller units. The most common subunits are listed below:
one bitcoin is equal to 100 million satoshis
1,000 per bitcoin
used as default unit in recent Electrum wallet releases
1,000,000 per bitcoin
colloquial "slang" term for microbitcoin (μBTC)
100,000,000 per bitcoin
smallest unit in bitcoin, named after the inventor
For example, assuming an arbitrary exchange rate of $10000 for one Bitcoin, a $10 meal would equal:
For more information check out the Bitcoin units wiki. Still have questions? Feel free to ask in the comments below or stick around for our weekly Mentor Monday thread. If you decide to post a question in /Bitcoin, please use the search bar to see if it has been answered before, and remember to follow the community rules outlined on the sidebar to receive a better response. The mods are busy helping manage our community so please do not message them unless you notice problems with the functionality of the subreddit. Note: This is a community created FAQ. If you notice anything missing from the FAQ or that requires clarification you can edit it here and it will be included in the next revision pending approval. Welcome to the Bitcoin community and the new decentralized economy!
Do you want to earn Free Bitcoin? (Passive cryptocurrency earning)
İt is not a fortune maker but still a reliable source of having a tiny bit of income. You can follow a bot in telegram ( to access you can use the link below) which will give you 16 satoshis for every hour after you subscribed. This bot works with levels as you progress through you gain more satoshis every hour. For example: if you are level 100 you can gain 10211 satoshi per hour which is roughly 1.10$ coming to 10k extra income annually by doing virtually nothing and don’t forget if bitcoin value continues to increase (87% just last year) your gains will be even higher. There are levels up to 1000000. You can build levels by getting gems. You can purchase gems if you want or you can get them free as a bonus every 12 hours. İt is pretty easy to construct you can invest some time or money for better gains. You can check the payout group the bot will show you which shows that this is legit and people are actually earning from it.Good luck for everyone in search of passive income: For access
Focused discussion: What is the most promising peer-to-peer decentralised cash system?
While this subreddit is called /cryptocurrency, we obviously talk about a lot of other functions of cryptocoins than the currency aspect. I’d however like to have a discussion on what the best cryptocurrency is that we currently have, and would love to hear your arguments why. The way I see it, there are a few important aspects of a cryptocurrency, as also delineated by Satoshi Nakamoto (1 and 2) while there are also aspects of a currency in general that must be satisfied (3 and 4).
To be a cryptocurrency it has to be decentralised, to rely on cryptographic proof rather than trust. If there is one entity validating the transactions of a cryptocurrency, it can hardly be called a cryptocurrency. Source: Bitcoin whitepaper
The value of it must not be pegged to a fiat currency. A centralised cryptocurrency, one whose value is determined by a central authority (such as Tether), is a contradiction in terminis. Source: Satoshi Nakamoto
Transferability. This is an obvious point, but an important one. Being transferrable is on the one hand a clear-cut definition, but is on the other hand a scale rather than an absolute yes or no. Ceteris paribus, the lower the barrier is to transacting in a currency, the higher the potential velocity of money is. I would say this actually consists of a few sub-categories: transaction speed, transaction cost, ease of use and acceptance of the currency.
Scalability. Another obvious one: if a cryptocurrency can only do one transaction per hour, it's never going to be useful as a broadly used currency.
My question to you is: What cryptocurrency do you think best fits the definition of the ultimate cryptocurrency, and why? Are there aspects of being a currency that I missed that you feel are important to have for a currency? Do you think any cryptocurrency at all is able to act as a currency for a full country, let alone for the entire world? Do you feel like we'll never be able to get a decentralised currency anyway? Edit: in case it wasn't clear, the thread title is the original tagline that Satoshi chose for Bitcoin from the whitepaper.
[OWL WATCH] Waiting for "IOTA TIME" 20; Hans's re-defined directions for DLT
Disclaimer: This is my editing, so there could be some misunderstandings... -------------------------------------------- wellwho오늘 오후 4:50 u/BenRoyce****how far is society2 from having something clickable powered by IOTA? Ben Royce오늘 오후 4:51 demo of basic tech late sep/ early oct. MVP early 2021 --------------------------------------------------- HusQy Colored coins are the most misunderstood upcoming feature of the IOTA protocol. A lot of people see them just as a competitor to ERC-20 tokens on ETH and therefore a way of tokenizing things on IOTA, but they are much more important because they enable "consensus on data". Bob All this stuff already works on neblio but decentralized and scaling to 3500 tps HusQy Neblio has 8 mb blocks with 30 seconds blocktime.This is a throughput of 8 mb / 30 seconds = 267 kb per second.Transactions are 401+ bytes which means that throughput is 267 kb / 401 bytes = 665 TPS. IOTA is faster, feeless and will get even faster with the next update ... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- HusQy Which DLT would be more secure? One that is collaboratively validated by the economic actors of the world (coporations, companies, foundations, states, people) or one that is validated by an anonymous group of wealthy crypto holders? HusQy The problem with current DLTs is that we use protection mechanisms like Proof of Work and Proof of Stake that are inherently hard to shard. The more shards you have, the more you have to distribute your hashing power and your stake and the less secure the system becomes. HusQy Real world identities (i.e. all the big economic actors) however could shard into as many shards as necessary without making the system less secure. Todays DLTs waste trust in the same way as PoW wastes energy. HusQy Is a secure money worth anything if you can't trust the economic actors that you would buy stuff from? If you buy a car from Volkswagen and they just beat you up and throw you out of the shop after you payed then a secure money won't be useful either :P HusQy **I believe that if you want to make DLT work and be successful then we need to ultimately incorporate things like trust in entities into the technology.**Examples likes wirecard show that trusting a single company is problematic buttrusting the economy as a whole should be at ... **... least as secure as todays DLTs.**And as soon as you add sharding it will be orders of magnitude more secure.DLT has failed to deliver because people have tried to build a system in vacuum that completely ignores things that already exist and that you can leverage on. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HusQy Blockchain is a bit like people sitting in a room, trying to communicate through BINGO sheets. While they talk, they write down some of the things that have been said and as soon as one screams BINGO! he hands around his sheet to inform everybody about what has been said. HusQy If you think that this is the most efficient form of communication for people sitting in the same room and the answer to scalability is to make bigger BINGO sheets or to allow people to solve the puzzle faster then you will most probably never understand what IOTA is working on. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HusQy **Blockchain does not work with too many equally weighted validators.****If 400 validators produce a validating statement (block) at the same time then only one can survive as part of a longest chain.**IOTA is all about collaborative validation. **Another problem of blockchain is that every transaction gets sent twice through the network. Once from the nodes to the miners and a 2nd time from the miners as part of a block.**Blockchain will therefore always only be able to use 50% of the network throughput. And****the last problem is that you can not arbitrarily decrease the time between blocks as it breaks down if the time between blocks gets smaller than the average network delay. The idle time between blocks is precious time that could be used for processing transactions. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- HusQy I am not talking about a system with a fixed number of validators but one that is completely open and permissionless where any new company can just spin up a node and take part in the network. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ HusQy Proof of Work and Proof of Stake are both centralizing sybil-protection mechanism. I don't think that Satoshi wanted 14 mining pools to run the network. And "economic clustering" was always the "end game" of IOTA. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- HusQy **Using Proof of Stake is not trustless. Proof of Stake means you trust the richest people and hope that they approve your transactions. The rich are getting richer (through your fees) and you are getting more and more dependant on them.**Is that your vision of the future? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- HusQy Please read again exactly what I wrote. I have not spoken of introducing governance by large companies, nor have I said that IOTA should be permissioned. We aim for a network with millions or even billions of nodes. HusQy That can't work at all with a permissioned ledger - who should then drop off all these devices or authorize them to participate in the network? My key message was the following: Proof of Work and Proof of Stake will always be if you split them up via sharding ... HusQy ... less secure because you simply need fewer coins or less hash power to have the majority of the votes in a shard. This is not the case with trust in society and the economy. When all companies in the world jointly secure a DLT ... HusQy ... then these companies could install any number of servers in any number of shards without compromising security, because "trust" does not become less just because they operate several servers. First of all, that is a fact and nothing else. HusQy Proof of Work and Proof of Stake are contrary to the assumption of many not "trustless" but follow the maxim: "In the greed of miners we trust!" The basic assumption that the miners do not destroy the system that generates income for them is fundamental here for the ... HusQy ... security of every DLT. I think a similar assumption would still be correct for the economy as a whole: The companies of the world (and not just the big ones) would not destroy the system with which their customers pay them. In this respect, a system would be ... HusQy ... which is validated by society and the economy as a whole probably just as "safely" as a system which is validated by a few anonymous miners. Why a small elite of miners should be better validators than any human and ... HusQy ... To be honest, companies in this world do not open up to me. As already written in my other thread, safe money does not bring you anything if you have to assume that Volkswagen will beat you up and throw you out of the store after you ... HusQy ... paid for a car. The thoughts I discussed say nothing about the immediate future of IOTA (we use for Coordicide mana) but rather speak of a world where DLT has already become an integral part of our lives and we ... HusQy ... a corresponding number of companies, non-profit organizations and people have used DLT and where such a system could be implemented. The point here is not to create a governance solution that in any way influences the development of technology ... HusQy ... or have to give nodes their OK first, but about developing a system that enables people to freely choose the validators they trust. For example, you can also declare your grandma to be a validator when you install your node or your ... HusQy ... local supermarket. Economic relationships in the real world usually form a close-knit network and it doesn't really matter who you follow as long as the majority is honest. I also don't understand your criticism of censorship, because something like that in IOTA ... HusQy ... is almost impossible. Each transaction confirms two other transactions which is growing exponentially. If someone wanted to ignore a transaction, he would have to ignore an exponential number of other transactions after a very short time. In contrast to blockchain ... HusQy ... validators in IOTA do not decide what is included in the ledger, but only decide which of several double spends should be confirmed. Honest transactions are confirmed simply by having other transactions reference them ... HusQy ... and the "validators" are not even asked. As for the "dust problem", this is indeed something that is a bigger problem for IOTA than for other DLTs because we have no fees, but it is also not an unsolvable problem. Bitcoin initially has a ... HusQy Solved similar problem by declaring outputs with a minimum amount of 5430 satoshis as invalid (github.com/Bitcoin/Bitcoi…). A similar solution where an address must contain a minimum amount is also conceivable for IOTA and we are discussing ... HusQy ... several possibilities (including compressing dust using cryptographic methods). Contrary to your assumption, checking such a minimum amount is not slow but just as fast as checking a normal transaction. And mine ... HusQy ... In my opinion this is no problem at all for IOTA's use case. The important thing is that you can send small amounts, but after IOTA is feeless it is also okay to expect the recipients to regularly send their payments on a ... HusQy ... merge address. The wallets already do this automatically (sweeping) and for machines it is no problem to automate this process. So far this was not a problem because the TPS were limited but with the increased TPS throughput of ... HusQy ... Chrysalis it becomes relevant and appropriate solutions are discussed and then implemented accordingly. I think that was the most important thing first and if you have further questions just write :) HusQy And to be very clear! I really appreciate you and your questions and don't see this as an attack at all! People who see such questions as inappropriate criticism should really ask whether they are still objective. I have little time at the moment because ... HusQy ... my girlfriend is on tour and has to take care of our daughter, but as soon as she is back we can discuss these things in a video. I think that the concept of including the "real world" in the concepts of DLT is really exciting and ... HusQy ... that would certainly be exciting to discuss in a joint video. But again, that's more of a vision than a specific plan for the immediate future. This would not work with blockchain anyway but IOTA would be compatible so why not think about such things. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- HusQy All good my big one :P But actually not that much has changed. There has always been the concept of "economic clustering" which is basically based on similar ideas. We are just now able to implement things like this for the first time. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HusQy Exactly. It would mean that addresses "cost" something but I would rather pay a few cents than fees for each transaction. And you can "take" this minimum amount with you every time you change to a new address. HusQy All good my big one :P But actually not that much has changed. There has always been the concept of "economic clustering" which is basically based on similar ideas. We are just now able to implement things like this for the first time. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Relax오늘 오전 1:17 Btw. Hans (sorry for interrupting this convo) but what make people say that IOTA is going the permissioned way because of your latest tweets? I don't get why some people are now forecasting that... Is it because of missing specs or do they just don't get the whole idea? Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:20 its bullshitu/Relaxanidentity based system would still be open and permissionless where everybody can choose the actors that they deem trustworthy themselves but thats anyway just sth that would be applicable with more adoption [오전 1:20] for now we use mana as a predecessor to an actual reputation system Sissors오늘 오전 1:31 If everybody has to choose actors they deem trustworthy, is it still permissionless? Probably will become a bit a semantic discussion, but still Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:34 Of course its permissionless you can follow your grandma if you want to :p Sissors오늘 오전 1:36 Well sure you can, but you will need to follow something which has a majority of the voting power in the network. Nice that you follow your grandma, but if others dont, her opinion (or well her nodes opinion) is completely irrelevant Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:37 You would ideally follow the people that are trustworthy rather than your local drug dealers yeah Sissors오늘 오전 1:38 And tbh, sure if you do it like that is easy. If you just make the users responsible for only connection to trustworthy nodes Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:38 And if your grandma follows her supermarket and some other people she deems trustworthy then thats fine as well [오전 1:38] + you dont have just 1 actor that you follow Sissors오늘 오전 1:38 No, you got a large list, since yo uwant to follow those which actually matter. So you jsut download a standard list from the internet Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:39 You can do that [오전 1:39] Is bitcoin permissionless? Should we both try to become miners? [오전 1:41] I mean miners that actually matter and not find a block every 10 trillion years 📷 [오전 1:42] If you would want to become a validator then you would need to build up trust among other people - but anybody can still run a node and issue transactions unlike in hashgraph where you are not able to run your own nodes(수정됨) [오전 1:48] Proof of Stake is also not trustless - it just has a builtin mechanism that downloads the trusted people from the blockchain itself (the richest dudes) Sissors오늘 오전 1:52 I think most agree it would be perfect if every person had one vote. Which is pr oblematic to implement of course. But I really wonder if the solution is to just let users decide who to trust. At the very least I expect a quite centralized network Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:53 of course even a trust based system would to a certain degree be centralized as not every person is equally trustworthy as for example a big cooperation [오전 1:53] but I think its gonna be less centralized than PoS or PoW [오전 1:53] but anyway its sth for "after coordicide" [오전 1:54] there are not enough trusted entities that are using DLT, yet to make such a system work reasonably well [오전 1:54] I think the reason why blockchain has not really started to look into these kind of concepts is because blockchain doesnt work with too many equally weighted validators [오전 1:56] I believe that DLT is only going to take over the world if it is actually "better" than existing systems and with better I mean cheaper, more secure and faster and PoS and PoW will have a very hard time to deliver that [오전 1:56] especially if you consider that its not only going to settle value transfers Relax오늘 오전 1:57 I like this clear statements, it makes it really clear that DLT is still in its infancy Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:57 currently bank transfers are order of magnitude cheaper than BTC or ETH transactions Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:57 and we you think that people will adopt it just because its crypto then I think we are mistaken [오전 1:57] The tech needs to actually solve a problem [오전 1:57] and tbh. currently people use PayPal and other companies to settle their payments [오전 1:58] having a group of the top 500 companies run such a service together is already much better(수정됨) [오전 1:58] especially if its fast and feeless [오전 2:02] and the more people use it, the more decentralized it actually becomes [오전 2:02] because you have more trustworthy entities to choose of Evaldas [IF]오늘 오전 2:08 "in the greed of miners we trust"
Hi! I'm the solo developer of a social media platform, new religious movement, and religious organization. I've been working on this since early 2019. I've only told a few dozen people about it and I'm looking for feedback. Please ask me anything. Thanks!
A lot of this text was originally to be posted to changemyview because I'm looking to be challenged on my assumptions here, and my approach. I checked with the mods there and I can't find a way not to post it as promotion (which would violate the subreddit rules). The I considered posting it in philosophy and IAmA and it was a similar answer. To be clear: I support their decisions to not allow this post. There's a lot of reasons to be concerned about someone running up and saying "Hey! Do you wanna hear about my religion?" and I have total respect for anyone who says "No." I reached out to casualiama a few hours ago and haven't heard back. If they decide to lock or remove this I support their decision and will try another subreddit. I welcome lots and lots of questions about this project, I believe this project will be helpful, but I am open to having my view about the viability of this project changed. This is a big weird thing and I've been focusing on it alone for long time. This work has probably had a big impact on my objectivity. This didn't used to exist and maybe it doesn't need to. Or maybe it has some irredeemable flaw that I've failed to consider. I don't want to see this get launched if that's the case. The main cost of this project has been my time, and I've learned enough while doing it to justify the time spent on it even if I'm convinced this project isn't viable. I can't make any more progress alone and I need new people to get involved. This can change and it can evolve as it grows because I've tried to build it to be guided by new people. I hope that I've done a good job of building it that way. The fastest way to learn about this in order to ask me questions is by visiting the website. https://churchofearth.org/ (I sure hope that this post does well and I've set up the site well enough to accommodate the traffic.) (This text will contain many links to the website) (I'm really nervous about this)
Why have I done this?
I would describe this effort as coming out of the part of my brain that would be firing if I were an active survivalist/doomsday prepper. In 2019 I became very concerned about the state of the world, especially as I thought about what it will look like for the remainder of my life. It seemed logical to amass skills and resources in order to protect myself and the people around me. I had never focused on my own survival because I've lived a life of privilege, and then I realized that there were scenarios where my privilege would not protect me. During that research phase I came to the conclusion that I couldn't just turn inward. As people turn inward our shared challenges become harder to address. I started looking more into the good work people were doing all over the world. I looked outward for inspiration. There's lots of folks doing lots of amazing work trying to solve our shared challenges. At every level of society, in every region, in big ways and small ways. This is often a very helpful world. I started researching things and became less pessimistic about the future of our world. This doesn't mean there aren't a pile of challenges for us to solve, it means that I'm better able to see the people trying to solve our shared challenges. When I couldn't see them (and wasn't looking for them) the future of our world seemed much worse. I still see the darkness, and it's scary and overwhelming and huge, but now I see more light. This project represents what I was able to build with the skills and experience I had. This project started out as just a social media platform intended to connect people who wanted to help. While I was building that I discovered a faith within myself about the future. The new religious movement is the structure I've built to help grow this faith. It's based on religious humanism, which has been a thing for several hundred years. I stopped working heavily on this project in late 2019, and formally stopped on February 1st of 2020. I started it up again in April of 2020. There's a short post about it here.
Help others and you'll live in a more helpful world.
Improve yourself and you'll improve the world.
Consume less and you'll value what you have more.
People who feel the faith of the Church of Earth are called Helpers. There are no rituals to join this faith, although anyone can make rituals. Anyone can identify themselves as a Helper. Don't judge them by who they say they are, judge them by what they do. In their acts of faith they should be trying to help you, and only if you consent to their help. This faith is optional. No one can be forced to adopt this faith. You can't force a more helpful world on people, you can only help them build it.
The social media platform
The social media platform is built to help people grow this religion. It allows them to focus on activities that relate to the core beliefs of the Church of Earth. People do not need to share this faith to use this platform or use its features. The platform is anonymous. There are no user profiles. Every type of module can inspire almost any other type of module. The modules all have different functionality. This platform is complex software. Social Media Platforms like Facebook and Twitter are designed to be simple and addictive. Those are deliberate design choices intended to serve the goals of the organizations that built them. These goals relate to revenue generation through the use of user data. This organization has different goals, and one of those goals involves promoting hard work. There will be a learning curve with this platform. I'm the only one who has used it so far and I've probably failed to consider a lot of things. This platform will change over time as more skills and knowledge improve its construction. This platform can be considered one of our great works. I can tell you right now people will find a number of bugs on the platform. I am expecting something unexpected, critical, and stressful to happen once people start visiting this site. Please be kind and patient with this platform, and with me. I'm very tired. Upvotes/Downvites/Likes/Dislikes: The purpose of this platform is to help grow a more helpful world. The upvote/downvote button labels are: This is Helpful and This is Not Helpful. Everything added to this platform should be helpful, every post includes fields where you can describe who you're trying to help, and why. There are a limited number of votes that can be given every day. Creating content increases your votes for the day. The platform has the following modules:
Scriptures - journaling functionality intended to allow you to explore a subject. This could be a journal entry about your personal development, or a short story, or some introspection, or anything helpful you can possible think of that would be a lot of text. - Infographic
Sermons - Brief text snippets or links to external resources intended to inspire other users. This module is how we link to other sites, share other content, or say short messages.
Goals - Things you want to get done. You can add to the organizations goals, and the goals for the website. We can all work together. - Infographic
Prayers - Requests for help. If you need something you can ask the platform and hopefully someone will see it and help you. You can list the type of help you need. It's up to you to be realistic about what can be done on this platform. If your prayers aren't getting answered there are other tools to help you solve some problems. - Infographic
Rituals - Things you do alone or in groups to help you accomplish tasks or focus yourselves. Our species uses rituals to greet and communicate with each other. We have rituals that are events, or meals. We have rituals that involve many people singing or performing an action. The Church of Earth has not created any official rituals.
Missions - Events intended to bring people together to offer help in their communities. These can have rituals attached to them so that people know what social structure is expected when they meet.
The Gospel of the Church of Earth All of the content we create can be connected in a big, anonymous web of helpfulness. Any content type can inspire any other content type, except for prayers. Prayers can only be answered (publicly or privately depending on the type of prayer.) Blog posts by the Church of Earth can inspire content from users. The goals of the Church of Earth appear in the same module as the goals of individual users of this platform. Intentions When you post something you have to say who you think you're helping, and why. You also need to select a subcategory like "I am being thoughtful" or "I am being creative" or "I am being inspirational" or "I am being critical". This will help other users understand how to react to you in a way that contributes to meaningful interactions. It's just me right now, so that's pretty funny and awkward The platform is live. Anyone can create content. Accounts can only create one piece of content until their first contribution receives a vote by another user saying "This is Helpful". There are currently no users on the platform. I've created content but there's no one to say if it's helpful so I'm still a pending user. On September 24th, 1 year after I first posted the 3 core beliefs to the site, 5% of all pending users will be selected at random and added to the site. Those people will then be able to use the site, but their profiles will not indicate they were among the First Five. My account isn't any more likely to be added than anyone else. This is an act of faith. It doesn't take a lot of people to make big things happen and we're all capable of amazing things. That is the message this platform has been designed to share. Note: That doesn't mean there won't be an effort to understand the impact of spam comments, or content that violates the terms of service for this site. They'll be transparent though. It's unreasonable to think that people won't do silly things with a site like this on the internet. Silly things are fun. One of the "intentions" of the site is "the be creative".
The religious organization
This organization will have a different look depending on how successful it is. I've built it in the hope it will see a meaningful amount of adoption, but all of that can be scaled down and still be helpful. Even if it's just me feeling this way for the rest of my life I consider it a meaningful improvement to my worldview and personality. I'm fairly confident some unknown quantity of other people will also see the value in this and that we can build something together. The Church of Earth organization is the least planned out because it needs to be developed by people with greater specialization than me. The main points are this:
Governance will be handled democratically, through the Church of Earth platform, and it will include a random selection of top candidates. (This functionality hasn't been built yet)
There will be term limits for everyone. Especially me.
Governance of the organization will include people who do not identify as Helpers.
Compensation of employees will be nonstandard as well. Employees will be given baseline salaries for the region they live in, regardless of their role, and everyone will qualify for bonuses that will be given out by other employees.
Here's an infographic about this. The organization will be structured like a nonprofit and will prioritize pursuing goals that align with the 3 core beliefs of the Church of Earth faith. It will require donations, but the hope is that it will eventually develop revenue to be self sufficient. I have some ideas for revenue generation. They're not super innovative, they're just taking relevant things and doing them in a way that promotes the faith of the Church of Earth as it operates as a nonprofit entity in a capitalist economy. This business model is well developed in North America by other religious institutions. These are the best ideas I've come up with, but none of them can proceed until I find people more qualified than me to do this. It's very likely that I've failed to consider elements of these proposals.
Education: It should be possible to teach many subjects from a religiously helpful perspective. Helping people is a secular act, but the help at the core of the faith of the Church of Earth is not. On top of teaching specific programs from a helpful perspective, there could also be a seminary school where Preachers are trained.
Property Management: The Church of Earth can own property similarly to other non-profits or religious organizations. They can be governed in transparent and helpful ways. This can be as simple as free wifi, or as complex as community gardens and shared maintenance duties in order to build and maintain a small regional community.
The website can be modified to enable a lot of this stuff, including a transparent overview of building finances, public space scheduling and communications. Once we build a template for a type of property and its amenities, we can look for other properties to offer a similar experiences.
The physical structure that represents the Church of Earth in a region is called a Community Guild. These can have rental spaces similar to other community centers or churches, they'll also be hubs for community activity facilitated through the website.
Cryptocurrency: Because the amount of activity that can be accomplished on the platform per day is limited, we can create and assign a cryptocurrency token like Bitcoin whenever someone says "This is Helpful" and maintain a digital economy. Users of the platform can be paid to be helpful, and possibly engage in their faith if that applies to them.
This is by no means developed. There are a lot of hurdles to overcome before this can happen. I am very aware of the fact that what I'm proposing here is that a religious organization can create its own internal economy.
What should you know about me?
I wish I could be like Satoshi Nakamoto. That's the pseudonym of the person who created Bitcoin. We don't know for sure who actually created the code. They just worked on it, put it out there, and it went on to become something amazing and complex. I spent a long time trying to figure out how to do that with the Church of Earth. I absolutely love everything about this project but I want to minimize my involvement in it. I also think there will be negative impacts on me, and this organization, if people focus on me instead of the faith. The Church of Earth is about what everyone can do, together. I'm no more special than anyone else. I'm terribly imperfect. I'm also a 39 year old white Canadian guy. While I've faced many struggles I've lived a life of privilege. I don't speak for everyone, or to everyone. No one can. People face problems I couldn't even consider. My ability to help those people directly is limited, but I have the skillset required to build something that would allow others to help them. The world is hard, and harsh, and frustrating, and scary. It's also wonderful and amazing and beautiful. I think that if we all work together we can spend the rest of our lives deliberately building a better world for everyone, in big ways and small ways. Knowing that's happening makes me happy and it motivates me to work harder. I wasn't a religious person until I discovered this faith within myself. This faith has allowed me to focus myself towards something that I believe is helpful to my community. I think it can do the same for others. What do you think? Thanks for reading. Ask me anything, please.
Maybe it's time to discuss bitcoin's history again. Credit to u/singularity87 for the original post over 3 years ago. People should get the full story of bitcoin because it is probably one of the strangest of all reddit subs. bitcoin, the main sub for the bitcoin community is held and run by a person who goes by the pseudonym u/theymos. Theymos not only controls bitcoin, but also bitcoin.org and bitcointalk.com. These are top three communication channels for the bitcoin community, all controlled by just one person. For most of bitcoin's history this did not create a problem (at least not an obvious one anyway) until around mid 2015. This happened to be around the time a new player appeared on the scene, a for-profit company called Blockstream. Blockstream was made up of/hired many (but not all) of the main bitcoin developers. (To be clear, Blockstream was founded before mid 2015 but did not become publicly active until then). A lot of people, including myself, tried to point out there we're some very serious potential conflicts of interest that could arise when one single company controls most of the main developers for the biggest decentralised and distributed cryptocurrency. There were a lot of unknowns but people seemed to give them the benefit of the doubt because they were apparently about to release some new software called "sidechains" that could offer some benefits to the network. Not long after Blockstream came on the scene the issue of bitcoin's scalability once again came to forefront of the community. This issue came within the community a number of times since bitcoins inception. Bitcoin, as dictated in the code, cannot handle any more than around 3 transactions per second at the moment. To put that in perspective Paypal handles around 15 transactions per second on average and VISA handles something like 2000 transactions per second. The discussion in the community has been around how best to allow bitcoin to scale to allow a higher number of transactions in a given amount of time. I suggest that if anyone is interested in learning more about this problem from a technical angle, they go to btc and do a search. It's a complex issue but for many who have followed bitcoin for many years, the possible solutions seem relatively obvious. Essentially, currently the limit is put in place in just a few lines of code. This was not originally present when bitcoin was first released. It was in fact put in place afterwards as a measure to stop a bloating attack on the network. Because all bitcoin transactions have to be stored forever on the bitcoin network, someone could theoretically simply transmit a large number of transactions which would have to be stored by the entire network forever. When bitcoin was released, transactions were actually for free as the only people running the network were enthusiasts. In fact a single bitcoin did not even have any specific value so it would be impossible set a fee value. This meant that a malicious person could make the size of the bitcoin ledger grow very rapidly without much/any cost which would stop people from wanting to join the network due to the resource requirements needed to store it, which at the time would have been for very little gain. Towards the end of the summer last year, this bitcoin scaling debate surfaced again as it was becoming clear that the transaction limit for bitcoin was semi regularly being reached and that it would not be long until it would be regularly hit and the network would become congested. This was a very serious issue for a currency. Bitcoin had made progress over the years to the point of retailers starting to offer it as a payment option. Bitcoin companies like, Microsoft, Paypal, Steam and many more had began to adopt it. If the transaction limit would be constantly maxed out, the network would become unreliable and slow for users. Users and businesses would not be able to make a reliable estimate when their transaction would be confirmed by the network. Users, developers and businesses (which at the time was pretty much the only real bitcoin subreddit) started to discuss how we should solve the problem bitcoin. There was significant support from the users and businesses behind a simple solution put forward by the developer Gavin Andreesen. Gavin was the lead developer after Satoshi Nakamoto left bitcoin and he left it in his hands. Gavin initially proposed a very simple solution of increasing the limit which was to change the few lines of code to increase the maximum number of transactions that are allowed. For most of bitcoin's history the transaction limit had been set far far higher than the number of transactions that could potentially happen on the network. The concept of increasing the limit one time was based on the fact that history had proven that no issue had been cause by this in the past. A certain group of bitcoin developers decided that increasing the limit by this amount was too much and that it was dangerous. They said that the increased use of resources that the network would use would create centralisation pressures which could destroy the network. The theory was that a miner of the network with more resources could publish many more transactions than a competing small miner could handle and therefore the network would tend towards few large miners rather than many small miners. The group of developers who supported this theory were all developers who worked for the company Blockstream. The argument from people in support of increasing the transaction capacity by this amount was that there are always inherent centralisation pressure with bitcoin mining. For example miners who can access the cheapest electricity will tend to succeed and that bigger miners will be able to find this cheaper electricity easier. Miners who have access to the most efficient computer chips will tend to succeed and that larger miners are more likely to be able to afford the development of them. The argument from Gavin and other who supported increasing the transaction capacity by this method are essentially there are economies of scale in mining and that these economies have far bigger centralisation pressures than increased resource cost for a larger number of transactions (up to the new limit proposed). For example, at the time the total size of the blockchain was around 50GB. Even for the cost of a 500GB SSD is only $150 and would last a number of years. This is in-comparison to the $100,000's in revenue per day a miner would be making. Various developers put forth various other proposals, including Gavin Andresen who put forth a more conservative increase that would then continue to increase over time inline with technological improvements. Some of the employees of blockstream also put forth some proposals, but all were so conservative, it would take bitcoin many decades before it could reach a scale of VISA. Even though there was significant support from the community behind Gavin's simple proposal of increasing the limit it was becoming clear certain members of the bitcoin community who were part of Blockstream were starting to become increasingly vitriolic and divisive. Gavin then teamed up with one of the other main bitcoin developers Mike Hearn and released a coded (i.e. working) version of the bitcoin software that would only activate if it was supported by a significant majority of the network. What happened next was where things really started to get weird. After this free and open source software was released, Theymos, the person who controls all the main communication channels for the bitcoin community implemented a new moderation policy that disallowed any discussion of this new software. Specifically, if people were to discuss this software, their comments would be deleted and ultimately they would be banned temporarily or permanently. This caused chaos within the community as there was very clear support for this software at the time and it seemed our best hope for finally solving the problem and moving on. Instead a censorship campaign was started. At first it 'all' they were doing was banning and removing discussions but after a while it turned into actively manipulating the discussion. For example, if a thread was created where there was positive sentiment for increasing the transaction capacity or being negative about the moderation policies or negative about the actions of certain bitcoin developers, the mods of bitcoin would selectively change the sorting order of threads to 'controversial' so that the most support opinions would be sorted to the bottom of the thread and the most vitriolic would be sorted to the top of the thread. This was initially very transparent as it was possible to see that the most downvoted comments were at the top and some of the most upvoted were at the bottom. So they then implemented hiding the voting scores next to the users name. This made impossible to work out the sentiment of the community and when combined with selectively setting the sorting order to controversial it was possible control what information users were seeing. Also, due to the very very large number of removed comments and users it was becoming obvious the scale of censorship going on. To hide this they implemented code in their CSS for the sub that completely hid comments that they had removed so that the censorship itself was hidden. Anyone in support of scaling bitcoin were removed from the main communication channels. Theymos even proudly announced that he didn't care if he had to remove 90% of the users. He also later acknowledged that he knew he had the ability to block support of this software using the control he had over the communication channels. While this was all going on, Blockstream and it's employees started lobbying the community by paying for conferences about scaling bitcoin, but with the very very strange rule that no decisions could be made and no complete solutions could be proposed. These conferences were likely strategically (and successfully) created to stunt support for the scaling software Gavin and Mike had released by forcing the community to take a "lets wait and see what comes from the conferences" kind of approach. Since no final solutions were allowed at these conferences, they only served to hinder and splinter the communities efforts to find a solution. As the software Gavin and Mike released called BitcoinXT gained support it started to be attacked. Users of the software were attack by DDOS. Employees of Blockstream were recommending attacks against the software, such as faking support for it, to only then drop support at the last moment to put the network in disarray. Blockstream employees were also publicly talking about suing Gavin and Mike from various different angles simply for releasing this open source software that no one was forced to run. In the end Mike Hearn decided to leave due to the way many members of the bitcoin community had treated him. This was due to the massive disinformation campaign against him on bitcoin. One of the many tactics that are used against anyone who does not support Blockstream and the bitcoin developers who work for them is that you will be targeted in a smear campaign. This has happened to a number of individuals and companies who showed support for scaling bitcoin. Theymos has threatened companies that he will ban any discussion of them on the communication channels he controls (i.e. all the main ones) for simply running software that he disagrees with (i.e. any software that scales bitcoin). As time passed, more and more proposals were offered, all against the backdrop of ever increasing censorship in the main bitcoin communication channels. It finally come down the smallest and most conservative solution. This solution was much smaller than even the employees of Blockstream had proposed months earlier. As usual there was enormous attacks from all sides and the most vocal opponents were the employees of Blockstream. These attacks still are ongoing today. As this software started to gain support, Blockstream organised more meetings, especially with the biggest bitcoin miners and made a pact with them. They promised that they would release code that would offer an on-chain scaling solution hardfork within about 4 months, but if the miners wanted this they would have to commit to running their software and only their software. The miners agreed and the ended up not running the most conservative proposal possible. This was in February last year. There is no hardfork proposal in sight from the people who agreed to this pact and bitcoin is still stuck with the exact same transaction limit it has had since the limit was put in place about 6 years ago. Gavin has also been publicly smeared by the developers at Blockstream and a plot was made against him to have him removed from the development team. Gavin has now been, for all intents an purposes, expelled from bitcoin development. This has meant that all control of bitcoin development is in the hands of the developers working at Blockstream. There is a new proposal that offers a market based approach to scaling bitcoin. This essentially lets the market decide. Of course, as usual there has been attacks against it, and verbal attacks from the employees of Blockstream. This has the biggest chance of gaining wide support and solving the problem for good. To give you an idea of Blockstream; It has hired most of the main and active bitcoin developers and is now synonymous with the "Core" bitcoin development team. They AFAIK no products at all. They have received around $75m in funding. Every single thing they do is supported by theymos. They have started implementing an entirely new economic system for bitcoin against the will of it's users and have blocked any and all attempts to scaling the network in line with the original vision. Although this comment is ridiculously long, it really only covers the tip of the iceberg. You could write a book on the last two years of bitcoin. The things that have been going on have been mind blowing. One last thing that I think is worth talking about is the u/bashco's claim of vote manipulation. The users that the video talks about have very very large numbers of downvotes mostly due to them having a very very high chance of being astroturfers. Around about the same time last year when Blockstream came active on the scene every single bitcoin troll disappeared, and I mean literally every single one. In the years before that there were a large number of active anti-bitcoin trolls. They even have an active sub buttcoin. Up until last year you could go down to the bottom of pretty much any thread in bitcoin and see many of the usual trolls who were heavily downvoted for saying something along the lines of "bitcoin is shit", "You guys and your tulips" etc. But suddenly last year they all disappeared. Instead a new type of bitcoin user appeared. Someone who said they were fully in support of bitcoin but they just so happened to support every single thing Blockstream and its employees said and did. They had the exact same tone as the trolls who had disappeared. Their way to talking to people was aggressive, they'd call people names, they had a relatively poor understanding of how bitcoin fundamentally worked. They were extremely argumentative. These users are the majority of the list of that video. When the 10's of thousands of users were censored and expelled from bitcoin they ended up congregating in btc. The strange thing was that the users listed in that video also moved over to btc and spend all day everyday posting troll-like comments and misinformation. Naturally they get heavily downvoted by the real users in btc. They spend their time constantly causing as much drama as possible. At every opportunity they scream about "censorship" in btc while they are happy about the censorship in bitcoin. These people are astroturfers. What someone somewhere worked out, is that all you have to do to take down a community is say that you are on their side. It is an astoundingly effective form of psychological attack.
New England New England 6 States Songs: https://www.reddit.com/newengland/comments/er8wxd/new_england_6_states_songs/ NewEnglandcoin Symbol: NENG NewEnglandcoin is a clone of Bitcoin using scrypt as a proof-of-work algorithm with enhanced features to protect against 51% attack and decentralize on mining to allow diversified mining rigs across CPUs, GPUs, ASICs and Android phones. Mining Algorithm: Scrypt with RandomSpike. RandomSpike is 3rd generation of Dynamic Difficulty (DynDiff) algorithm on top of scrypt. 1 minute block targets base difficulty reset: every 1440 blocks subsidy halves in 2.1m blocks (~ 2 to 4 years) 84,000,000,000 total maximum NENG 20000 NENG per block Pre-mine: 1% - reserved for dev fund ICO: None RPCPort: 6376 Port: 6377 NewEnglandcoin has dogecoin like supply at 84 billion maximum NENG. This huge supply insures that NENG is suitable for retail transactions and daily use. The inflation schedule of NengEnglandcoin is actually identical to that of Litecoin. Bitcoin and Litecoin are already proven to be great long term store of value. The Litecoin-like NENG inflation schedule will make NewEnglandcoin ideal for long term investment appreciation as the supply is limited and capped at a fixed number Bitcoin Fork - Suitable for Home Hobbyists NewEnglandcoin core wallet continues to maintain version tag of "Satoshi v0.8.7.5" because NewEnglandcoin is very much an exact clone of bitcoin plus some mining feature changes with DynDiff algorithm. NewEnglandcoin is very suitable as lite version of bitcoin for educational purpose on desktop mining, full node running and bitcoin programming using bitcoin-json APIs. The NewEnglandcoin (NENG) mining algorithm original upgrade ideas were mainly designed for decentralization of mining rigs on scrypt, which is same algo as litecoin/dogecoin. The way it is going now is that NENG is very suitable for bitcoin/litecoin/dogecoin hobbyists who can not , will not spend huge money to run noisy ASIC/GPU mining equipments, but still want to mine NENG at home with quiet simple CPU/GPU or with a cheap ASIC like FutureBit Moonlander 2 USB or Apollo pod on solo mining setup to obtain very decent profitable results. NENG allows bitcoin litecoin hobbyists to experience full node running, solo mining, CPU/GPU/ASIC for a fun experience at home at cheap cost without breaking bank on equipment or electricity. MIT Free Course - 23 lectures about Bitcoin, Blockchain and Finance (Fall,2018) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP63UUkfL0onkxF6MYgVa04Fn CPU Minable Coin Because of dynamic difficulty algorithm on top of scrypt, NewEnglandcoin is CPU Minable. Users can easily set up full node for mining at Home PC or Mac using our dedicated cheetah software. Research on the first forked 50 blocks on v1.2.0 core confirmed that ASIC/GPU miners mined 66% of 50 blocks, CPU miners mined the remaining 34%. NENG v1.4.0 release enabled CPU mining inside android phones. Youtube Video Tutorial How to CPU Mine NewEnglandcoin (NENG) in Windows 10 Part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdOoPvAjzlE How to CPU Mine NewEnglandcoin (NENG) in Windows 10 Part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHnRJvJRzZg How to CPU Mine NewEnglandcoin (NENG) in macOS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zj7NLMeNSOQ Decentralization and Community Driven NewEnglandcoin is a decentralized coin just like bitcoin. There is no boss on NewEnglandcoin. Nobody nor the dev owns NENG. We know a coin is worth nothing if there is no backing from community. Therefore, we as dev do not intend to make decision on this coin solely by ourselves. It is our expectation that NewEnglandcoin community will make majority of decisions on direction of this coin from now on. We as dev merely view our-self as coin creater and technical support of this coin while providing NENG a permanent home at ShorelineCrypto Exchange. Twitter Airdrop Follow NENG twitter and receive 100,000 NENG on Twitter Airdrop to up to 1000 winners Graphic Redesign Bounty Top one award: 90.9 million NENG Top 10 Winners: 500,000 NENG / person Event Timing: March 25, 2019 - Present Event Address: NewEnglandcoin DISCORD at: https://discord.gg/UPeBwgs Please complete above Twitter Bounty requirement first. Then follow Below Steps to qualify for the Bounty: (1) Required: submit your own designed NENG logo picture in gif, png jpg or any other common graphic file format into DISCORD "bounty-submission" board (2) Optional: submit a second graphic for logo or any other marketing purposes into "bounty-submission" board. (3) Complete below form. Please limit your submission to no more than two total. Delete any wrongly submitted or undesired graphics in the board. Contact DISCORD u/honglu69#5911 or u/krypton#6139 if you have any issues. Twitter Airdrop/Graphic Redesign bounty sign up: https://goo.gl/forms/L0vcwmVi8c76cR7m1 Milestones
Sep 3, 2018 - Genesis block was mined, NewEnglandcoin created
Sep 8, 2018 - github source uploaded, Window wallet development work started
Sep 11,2018 - Window Qt Graphic wallet completed
Sep 12,2018 - NewEnglandcoin Launched in both Bitcointalk forum and Marinecoin forum
Sep 14,2018 - NewEnglandcoin is listed at ShorelineCrypto Exchange
Sep 17,2018 - Block Explorer is up
Nov 23,2018 - New Source/Wallet Release v1.1.1 - Enabled Dynamic Addjustment on Mining Hashing Difficulty
Nov 28,2018 - NewEnglandcoin became CPU minable coin
Nov 30,2018 - First Retail Real Life usage for NewEnglandcoin Announced
Dec 28,2018 - Cheetah_Cpuminer under Linux is released
Dec 31,2018 - NENG Technical Whitepaper is released
Jan 2,2019 - Cheetah_Cpuminer under Windows is released
Jan 12,2019 - NENG v1.1.2 is released to support MacOS GUI CLI Wallet
Jan 13,2019 - Cheetah_CpuMiner under Mac is released
Feb 11,2019 - NewEnglandcoin v1.2.0 Released, Anti-51% Attack, Anti-instant Mining after Hard Fork
Mar 16,2019 - NewEnglandcoin v188.8.131.52 Released - Ubuntu 18.04 Wallet Binary Files
Apr 7, 2019 - NENG Report on Security, Decentralization, Valuation
Apr 21, 2019 - NENG Fiat Project is Launched by ShorelineCrypto
Sep 1, 2019 - Shoreline Tradingbot project is Launched by ShorelineCrypto
Dec 19, 2019 - Shoreline Tradingbot v1.0 is Released by ShorelineCrypto
Jan 30, 2020 - Scrypt RandomSpike - NENG v1.3.0 Hardfork Proposed
Feb 24, 2020 - Scrypt RandomSpike - NENG core v1.3.0 Released
Jun 19, 2020 - Linux scripts for Futurebit Moonlander2 USB ASIC on solo mining Released
Jul 15, 2020 - NENG v1.4.0 Released for Android Mining and Ubuntu 20.04 support
Jul 21, 2020 - NENG v184.108.40.206 Released for MacOS Wallet Upgrade with Catalina
Jul 30, 2020 - NENG v220.127.116.11 Released for Linux Wallet Upgrade with 8 Distros
Aug 11, 2020 - NENG v18.104.22.168 Released for Android arm64 Upgrade, Chromebook Support
Aug 30, 2020 - NENG v22.214.171.124 Released for Android/Chromebook with armhf, better hardware support
2018 Q3 - Birth of NewEnglandcoin, window/linux wallet - Done
2018 Q4 - Decentralization Phase I
Blockchain Upgrade - Dynamic hashing algorithm I - Done
Cheetah Version I- CPU Mining Automation Tool on Linux - Done
2019 Q1 - Decentralization Phase II
Cheetah Version II- CPU Mining Automation Tool on Window/Linux - Done
Blockchain Upgrade Dynamic hashing algorithm II - Done
2019 Q2 - Fiat Phase I
Assessment of Risk of 51% Attack on NENG - done
Launch of Fiat USD/NENG offering for U.S. residents - done
Initiation of Mobile Miner Project - Done
2019 Q3 - Shoreline Tradingbot, Mobile Project
Evaluation and planning of Mobile Miner Project - on Hold
Initiation of Trading Bot Project - Done
2019 Q4 - Shoreline Tradingbot
Shoreline tradingbot Release v1.0 - Done
2020 Q1 - Evaluate NENG core, Mobile Wallet Phase I
NENG core Decentralization Security Evaluation for v1.3.x - Done
Light Mobile Wallet Project Initiation, Evaluation
2020 Q2 - NENG Core, Mobile Wallet Phase II
NENG core Decentralization Security Hardfork on v1.3.x - Scrypt RandomSpike
Light Mobile Wallet Project Design, Coding
2020 Q3 - NENG core, NENG Mobile Wallet Phase II
Review on results of v1.3.x, NENG core Dev Decision on v1.4.x, Hardfork If needed
Light Mobile Wallet Project testing, alpha Release
2020 Q4 - Mobile Wallet Phase III
Light Mobile Wallet Project Beta Release
Light Mobile Wallet Server Deployment Evaluation and Decision
Apparently people in the community are using Honey badger as the unofficial mascot of Bitcoins .
Apparently in 2010 due to a bug 184 billion BTC were produced :joy: , don't be so happy guys this error is already erased .
The maximum number of Bitcoins is not actually 21 millions but actually 20.99 something.
A smaller unit than Satoshi is in use now called msat!
Bitcoin's uptime is covered apparently 99.99% which is supposed to be an amazing thing if a centralized body achieve it .
The Disappearance of Bitcoins is actually connected with CIA when a person named Gavin actually went and complained about him. - creepy - (I don't think he would have disappeared if all he did was say good things about him)
The first Faucets actually gave 5 BTC ! 5 to each visitor ( why did I not know of this before :sob:)
It is only used 10% for the crime thing ! ONLY 10% ! (For people asking me to back it up :joy: " Illegal Activity No Longer Dominant Use of Bitcoin: DEA Agent. A special agent with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has reportedly revealed that the use of bitcoin in illegal activities has shrunk to about 10 percent from 90 percent previously.", Read about it first !)
There are around 70 forks related to Bitcoins.
Mining consumes much energy as a mid size country :sweat_smile: ( we gotta use some renewable sources soon enough )
The first transaction for Bitcoins was made for PIZZA !(first time when it was used as a Currency)
Lightning network can hold millions of transactions per second! ( Trust me that's good )
13 . Since 2017 the Bitcoins have achieved higher transactions compared to PayPal related to values .
You can gamble via Bitcoin online on a decentralized casino, EarnBet and require no KYC in the process
tl;dr - This is the 17th monthly update on the 2019 Top Ten Experiment. Ethereum up the most in May, plus got a shout out from J.K. Rowling, so it obviously won the month. Overall, BTC in first place since January 2019, BSV in second place. Half of the 2019 Top Ten Portfolio is up at least +50%. XRP is worst performing. Total $3k (3 x $1k) investments the 2018, 2019, and 2020 Top Ten are up +3.5%, but similar approach with US stocks market would have yielded +10%.
Instead of hypothetically tracking cryptos, I made an actual $1000 investment, $100 in each of the Top 10 cryptocurrencies by market cap on the 1st of January 2018. The result? The 2018 Top Ten portfolio ended 2018 down 85%, my $1000 worth only $150. I thenrepeated the experimenton the 1st of January 2019 with the new 2019 Top Ten cryptos, then again in2020. Think of the Top Ten Experiments as a lazy man’s Index Fund (no weighting or rebalancing), less technical, but hopefully still a proxy for the market as a whole – or at the very least an interesting snapshot of the 2018, 2019, and 2020 crypto space. I am trying to keep this project simple and accessible for beginners and those looking to get into crypto but maybe not quite ready to jump in yet. I try not to take sides or analyze, but rather attempt to report in a detached manner letting the numbers speak for themselves. This is not investing advice – as a matter of fact, the vast majority of the reports will show that the Top Ten approach under performs other strategies. This experiment is designed to be documentary in nature, describing a specific period in cryptocurrency history.
Buy $100 of each the Top 10 cryptocurrencies on January 1st, 2018, 2019, and 2020. Hold only. No selling. No trading. Report monthly.
Month Seventeen – UP 43%
Unlike April’s all green month, May was more mixed. That said, the gains outweighed the losses this month in the 2019 Top Ten Portfolio.
Question of the month:
In May, Reddit launched two Ethereum-based tokens on the Cryptocurrency and FortNiteBR subreddits. What are the Cryptocurrency token called? A) Moons B) Bricks C) Satoshis D) Cryptos Scroll down for the answer.
Ranking and March Winners and Losers
Besides Stellar (down two spots to #13) and Tron (down one from #16 to #17) every other crypto was locked in place. Speaking of Stellar and Tron, they are still the only two cryptos to have dropped out of the 2019 Top Ten since January 1st, 2019. They have been replaced by Binance Coin and Tezos. May Winners – Ethereum ended the month up +16% and got a shout out from J.K. Rowling, so it obviously won May. BTC came in a close second this month, up +14%. May Losers – A tight battle for the basement this month with BSV (down -3.9%) edging out XRP (down -3.7%) for the bottom spot. For nerds those keeping score, here is tally of which coins have the most monthly wins and loses during the first seventeen months of the 2019 Top Ten Experiment: Tether is still in the lead with five monthly victories followed by BSV in second place with three. BSV also holds the most monthly losses, finishing last in six out of seventeen months.
Overall update – BTC increases lead over second place BSV, XRP still worst performing
Ahead until just last month, BSV lost a lot of ground to BTC in May. Bitcoin is now up +168% since January 2019 compared to BSV‘s +116% gain. That initial $100 investment in BTC? Now worth $273. As was the case last month, 50% of the 2019 Top Ten cryptos are up at least +50% since the beginning of the experiment. At the other end, XRP continues to struggle, now down -41% since January 2019.
Total Market Cap for the entire cryptocurrency sector:
The overall crypto market added about $35B in May, and is now near August 2019 levels. It is up +123% since January 2019.
BitDom was steady again in May. This marks the third straight month it’s been stuck at around 65% For context, the range since the beginning of the experiment in January 2019 has been between 50%-70%.
Overall return on investment since January 1st, 2019:
The 2019 Top Ten Portfolio gained about $65 in May. After the initial $1000 investment, the 2019 group of cryptos is worth $1,431, up about +43%. Here’s a look at the ROI over the life of the first seventeen months of the experiment, month by month: Almost completely green for the 2019 Top Ten, a welcome change from the all red table you’ll see in the 2018 experiment. As you can see, every month except the first month ends in positive territory. At the lowest point, the 2019 Top Ten portfolio was down -9%, at the highest point, up +114% (May 2019). How does the 2019 Top Ten Experiment compare to the parallel projects?
Taking the three portfolios together, here’s the bottom bottom bottom line: After a $3000 investment in the 2018, 2019, and 2020 Top Ten Cryptocurrencies, my portfolios are worth $3,104. That’s up about +3.5% for the combined portfolios. Better than a few months ago (aka the zombie apocalypse) where it was down -24%, but not yet back at January (+13%) or February (+6%) levels. How does this compare to traditional markets?
How does the 2019 Top Ten portfolio compare US stock market?
Excellent question, I’m glad you asked. And you’re in luck, I’m also tracking the S&P 500 as part of my experiment to have a comparison point with other popular investments options. Despite the fact that the world seemed to be on fire, May 2020 saw the continued rebound of the stock market. It’s now up +22% since the start of the 2019 Experiment. As a reminder (or just scroll up) the 2019 Top Ten portfolio is returning +43% over the same time period, which is about double the S&P 500. The initial $1k investment I put into crypto would be worth $1,220 had it been redirected to the S&P 500 in January 2019. But what if I took the same world’s-slowest-dollar-cost-averaging/$1,000-per-year-in-January approach with the S&P 500? It would yield the following:
$1000 investment in S&P 500 on January 1st, 2018: +$140
$1000 investment in S&P 500 on January 1st, 2019: +$220
$1000 investment in S&P 500 on January 1st, 2020: -$50
Taken together, here’s the bottom bottom bottom line for a similar approach with the S&P: After three $1,000 investments into an S&P 500 index fund in January 2018, 2019, and 2020, my portfolio would be worth $3,310. That $3,310 is up over+10%since January 2018, compared to the $3,104 value (+3.5%) of the combined Top Ten Crypto Experiment Portfolios. That’s about a 7% difference in favor of the stock market. Last month, there was only a 3% difference, the month before, the gap was 13% (all in favor of the stock market).
The difference between the 2019 Top Ten crypto group and the overall crypto market is stark. Since January 2019, the overall market has gained +123% compared to the 2019 Top Ten crypto group which has gained +43%. This is an absolutely massive 80% gap. A +43% return is solid compared to the stock market, but it also implies that an investor would have done much better picking different cryptos or investing in the entire market instead of focusing only on the Top Ten. There are a few examples of this approach outperforming the overall market in this 2019 Top Ten Crypto Experiment, but the cases are few and far between. The 2018 Top Ten portfolio, on the other hand, has never outperformed the overall market, at least not in the first twenty-nine months of that Experiment. For the most recent 2020 Top Ten group, the opposite had been true: the 2020 Top Ten had easily outperformed the overall market 100% of the time…until this month.
The BTC halving event came and went in May and crypto markets shrugged. As the world continues to change because of COVID-19, what will be crypto’s place when we finally emerge on the other side? Final word: Please take care of yourselves, your families, and your communities. Stay safe out there. Thanks for reading and for supporting the experiment. I hope you’ve found it helpful. I continue to be committed to seeing this process through and reporting along the way. Feel free to reach out with any questions and stay tuned for progress reports. Keep an eye out for the original 2018 Top Ten Crypto Index Fund Experiment and the recently launched 2020 Top Ten Experiment.
And the Answer is…
A) Moons According CryptoCurrency, Moons represent ownership in the subreddit, “tokens on the Ethereum blockchain controlled entirely by you, and they can be freely transferred, tipped, and spent inCryptoCurrency*.*” Check out this post for more details.
Bitfinex: Up to US$400 Million Reward for Return of Stolen 2016 Bitcoin
Bitfinex is offering a reward to any persons that connect us with hackers responsible for the unauthorized transfer of almost 120,000 bitcoins from the exchange in August 2016. As part of the same initiative, Bitfinex is also offering a reward to the hackers themselves for the return of the stolen property. This incident is a dark chapter in our exchange's history, and we are pleased to offer this reward as further evidence of our determination to obtain the lost property. Early in the morning on August 2, 2016, hackers breached the security systems of our exchange. As a result, 2072 unauthorised transactions were broadcast on the Bitcoin network, involving 119,755 bitcoins in aggregate. We have learned valuable lessons from this painful episode, addressing the security issues and vulnerabilities associated with the theft. Today's announcement of a reward is our latest effort to recover these stolen funds. Those who put Bitfinex in contact with the hacker will receive 5% of the total property recovered (or equivalent funds or assets at current market values), and the hackers will receive 25% of the total property recovered (or equivalent funds or assets at current market values). Any payments made to those connecting Bitfinex with the hackers and the hackers themselves will be classified as costs of recovery of the stolen property. The aggregate rewards available under this programme could be worth up to approximately US$400 million at the current BTC price if all bitcoins are fully recovered. The bitcoins stolen minus recoveries in 2019 are worth $1.344 billion today, with 30 per cent of that amount equal to $403,288,427. In order to confirm the identity of the hackers, we will request that 1 Satoshi is sent from the wallet address responsible for the hack to a wallet address specified by Bitfinex. We will work to ensure this can be done safely, thereby protecting the identities of all parties, and Bitfinex reserves the right to impose conditions on any transfers in order to verify claims and ensure a secure process. As the recent hacking incidents at Twitter and Ledger demonstrate, this type of crime continues to be a threat for all businesses in the digital asset space and the wider technology sphere. No-one in our community can afford to be complacent about the ingenuity of criminal gangs to perpetuate new types of fraud. Bitfinex has made security the overriding, number one priority of the exchange. As an exchange, we know we owe our success to a customer base that has loyally supported us through good and bad times. In the aftermath of the 2016 security breach, the exchange provided BFX tokens to all affected users. Each token represented $1 of losses. Those BFX tokens started trading on Bitfinex at less than $0.20, and gradually increased in value to almost $1. Monthly redemptions began on September 1, 2016, and the last BFX token was redeemed at the beginning of April 2017. More than 52 million BFX tokens were converted to shares of iFinex Inc. at 1:1 tokens to shares. We have continued to work with law enforcement agents in investigating the 2016 security breach. In February 2019, U.S. authorities recovered 27.66270285 bitcoins stolen in the 2016 hack, which were converted to U.S. dollars and paid to RRT (Recovery Right Token) Holders. Those with information relating to the 2016 hack at Bitfinex can contact us at: @bitfinex2016 via keybase.
Disclaimer: I am not and have never been affiliated with any of the mentioned parties in a private or professional matter. Presumably in an attempt to smear a local competitor, Hayden Otto inadvertently publishes irrefutable on-chain proof that he excluded non-BCH retail revenue to shape the "BCH #1 in Australia" narrative.
Scroll down to "Proof of exclusion" if you are tired of the drama recap.
Scroll down to "TLDR" if you want a summary.
In September 2019, BitcoinBCH.com started publishing so called monthly "reports" about crypto retail payments in Australia. They claimed that ~90% of Australia's crypto retail revenue is processed via their own HULA system and that ~92% of all crypto retail revenue happens in BCH. They are aggregating two data sources to come up with this claim. One is TravelByBit (TBB) who publishes their PoS transactions (BTC, LN, ETH, BNB, DASH, BCH) live on a ticker. The other source is HULA, a newly introduced POS system (BCH only) and direct competitor to TBB run by BitcoinBCH.com - the same company who created the report. Despite being on-chain their transactions are private, not published and not verifiable by third parties outside BitcoinBCH.com Two things stood out in the "reports", noted by multiple users (including vocal BCH proponents):
The non-BCH parts must have tx excluded and the report neglects to mention it (the total in their TBB analysis does not match what is reported on the TBB website.)
The BCH part has outliers included (e.g. BCH city conference in September with 35x the daily average)
Hayden Otto's reaction
In direct response to me publishing these findings on btc, Hayden Otto - an employee at BitcoinBCH.com and the author of the report who also happens to be a moderator of /BitcoinCash - banned me immediately from said sub (source). In subsequent discussion (which repeated for every monthly "report" which was flawed in the same ways as described above), Hayden responded using the same tactics: "No data was removed"
"The guy is straight out lying. There is guaranteed no missing tx as the data was collected directly from the source." (source)
"Only data I considered non-retail was removed"
"I also had these data points and went through them to remove non-retail transactions, on both TravelbyBit and HULA." (source)
He admits to have removed non-BCH tx by "Game Ranger" because he considers them non-retail (source). He also implies they might be involved in money laundering and that TBB might fail their AML obligations in processing Game Ranger's transactions (source). The report does not mention any data being excluded at all and he still fails to explain why several businesses that are clearly retail (e.g. restaurants, cafes, markets) had tx excluded (source). "You are too late to prove I altered the data"
"[...] I recorded [the data] manually from https://travelbybit.com/stats/ over the month of September. The website only shows transactions from the last 7 days and then they disappear. No way for anyone to access stats beyond that." (source)
Proof of exclusion
I published raw data as extracted from the TBB site after each report for comparison. Hayden responded that I made those numbers up and that I was pulling numbers out of my ass. Since he was under the impression that
"The website only shows transactions from the last 7 days and then they disappear. No way for anyone to access stats beyond that." (source)
he felt confident to claim that I would be
unable to provide a source for the [missing] data and/or prove that that data was not already included in the report. (source)
Luckily for us Hayden Otto seems to dislike his competitor TravelByBit so much that he attempted to reframe Bitcoin's RBF feature as a vulnerability specific to TBB PoS system (source). While doublespending a merchant using the TBB PoS he wanted to prove that the merchant successfully registered the purchase as complete and thus exposed that the PoS sales history of TBB's merchants are available to the public (source), in his own words:
"You can literally access it from a public URL in the Web browser. There is no login or anything required, just type in the name of the merchant." (source)
As of yet it is unclear if this is intentional by TBB or if Hayden Ottos followed the rules of responsible disclosure before publishing this kind of data leak. As it happens, those sale histories do not only include the merchant and time of purchases, they even include the address the funds were sent to (in case of on-chain payments). This gives us an easy method to prove that the purchases from the TBB website missing in the reports belong to a specific retail business and actually happened - something that is impossible to prove for the alleged HULA txs. In order to make it easier for you to verify it yourself, we'll focus on a single day in the dataset, September 17th, 2019 as an example:
Hayden Otto's report claims 20 tx and $713.00 in total for that day (source)
The TBB website listed 40 tx and a total of $1032.90 (daily summary)
Paste the associated crypto on-chain address 17MrHiRcKzCyuKPtvtn7iZhAZxydX8raU9 in a blockchain explorer of your choice, e.g like this. This proves that a transfer of funds has actually happened.
I let software aggregate the TBB statistics with the public sale histories and you'll find at the bottom of this post a table with the on-chain addresses conveniently linked to blockchain explorers for our example date. The total of all 40 tx is $1032.90 instead of the $713.00 reported by Hayden. 17 tx of those have a corresponding on-chain address and thus have undeniable proof of $758.10. Of the remaining 23, 22 are on Lightning and one had no merchant history available. This is just for a single day, here is a comparison for the whole month.
TBB wo. Game Ranger
TBB according to Hayden
The usual shills will respond in a predictive manner: The data must be fake even though its proof is on-chain, I would need to provide more data but HULA can be trusted without any proof, if you include outliers BCH comes out ahead, yada, yada. But this is not important. I am not here to convince them and this post doesn't aim to. The tx numbers we are talking about are less than 0.005% of Bitcoin's global volume. If you can increase adoption in your area by 100% by just buying 2 coffees more per day you get a rough idea about how irrelevant the numbers are in comparison. What is relevant though and what this post aims to highlight is that BitcoinBCH.com and the media outlets around news.bitcoin.com flooding you with the BCH #1 narrative are playing dirty. They feel justified because they feel that Bitcoin/Core/Blockstream is playing dirty as well. I am not here to judge that but you as a reader of this sub should be aware that this is happening and that you are the target. When BitcoinBCH.com excludes $1,000 Bitcoin tx because of high value but includes $15,000 BCH tx because they are made by "professionals", you should be sceptical. When BitcoinBCH.com excludes game developers, travel businesses or craftsmen accepting Bitcoin because they don't have a physical store but include a lawyer practice accepting BCH, you should be sceptical. When BitcoinBCH.com excludes restaurants, bars and supermarkets accepting Bitcoin and when pressed reiterate that they excluded non-retail businesses without ever explaning why a restaurant shouldn't be considered reatil, you should be sceptical. When BitcoinBCH.com claims the reports have been audited but omit that the data acquisition was not part of the audit, you should be sceptical. I expect that BitcoinBCH.com will stop removing transactions from TBB for their reports now that it has been shown that their exclusion can be provably uncovered. I also expect that HULA's BCH numbers will rise accordingly to maintain a similar difference. Hayden Otto assumed that nobody could cross-check the TBB data. He was wrong. Nobody will be able to disprove his claims when HULA's BCH numbers rise as he continues to refuse their release. You should treat his claims accordingly. As usual, do your own research and draw your own conclusion. Sorry for the long read.
BitcoinBCH.com claimed no transactions were removed from the TBB dataset in their BCH #1 reports and that is impossible to prove the opposite.
Hayden Otto's reveals in a double spend attempt that a TBB merchant's sale history can be accessed publicly including the merchant's on-chain addresses.
(For example,) this table shows 40 tx listed on the TBB site on Sep 17th, including their on-chain addresses where applicable. The BitcoinBCH.com report lists only 20 tx for the same day.
(Most days and every months so far has had BTC transactions excluded.)
(For September, TBB lists $10,502 yet the report only claims $3,737.
Bitcoin Obituaries Lists Another Crypto Eulogy, 2020 BTC Deaths in the Single Digits
The infamous “Bitcoin Obituaries” has seen another addition to the long list of deaths since bitcoin’s oldest death on December 15, 2010. According to the list of articles with 382 deaths to-date, bitcoin was declared dead again on September 4, 2020. Ever since Satoshi Nakamoto released the decentralized network, a number of people have doubted bitcoin and over the years some individuals have deemed the project “dead.” Famous people, journalists, economists, luminaries, and many more have written long-winded essays on why the cryptocurrency is sure to fail. The website 99 Bitcoins maintains a list of “Bitcoin Obituaries” collected over the years and so far there’s been 382 deaths in total. This past weekend the crypto economy slid in value considerably, as a number of digital currencies lost between 15-35% during the last seven days. Out of the top ten coins in terms of market capitalization, binance coin (BNB) staved off the market rout by only losing 12% and bitcoin (BTC) lost a touch over 16%. The rest of the top ten crypto assets lost a much larger percentage, as coins like ETH and DOT lost close to 30%. Despite this, another bitcoin obituary was listed on September 4, when BTC dropped to $10,500 per coin. The death stems from the web portal Newsbtc and it was written by Uri Shalev who titled the article: “Bitcoin is Worthless in Long-term.” Shalev says that even Warren Buffet won’t go near the crypto asset and BTC must be a bubble. “In contrast, bitcoin or other digital currencies are very likely worthless in the long term, and those are the kind of assets that investing legend Warren Buffet won’t touch,” Shalev writes. “It’s these latter kinds of assets that have a greater chance to be in bubble territory because they don’t generate cash flow to support their valuations.”
i believe that bitcoin will reach 100 million per bitcoin as each satoshi will worth 1 dollar , i know that this very big number and you many think reach to 100K is far enough now lets look at it from my point view . when : i do not know ! if i know i would rich as hell . Why : Bitcoin is the only real digital asset , the only new asset for last 12000 years , the other true assets are 1-land & water 2-food 3-gold (metals) , it is not own by anyone . it was the first digital asset to come to us, it has 100 million satoshi so it can divided easily , all of this is already known to everyone but what is unique is that bitcoin is the only currency that can be a globe world currency that people believe in from and it can safe you from crazy bankers who destroy the economy . Doesn't need banks to transfer it use it or pay to anyone . Rich people see that but they are worry that people own bitcoin cannot lose their money value in it as it grow so how can bankers take you down , as many notice every 10 years we have collapse , that is not a cycle it deliberate made either by idiots who are too rich to worry and gain from it or they are doing that to get your asset as much as cheap as they can . How : rich and medium and poor all are worry about the world , the bankers are so bad and they are so strong in governments that scow up the economy just to get more assets from you so the only way protect your asset is bitcoin , as global economy become more connected now the only asset that can be globally is BTC . PS: if you don't believe in BTC , i hope you like the paper money who can loss it value by 10 to 40% in a year from now .
Hey there, I wonder if we could have a discussion about the scenario if the Fiat monetary system we now live in collapses. There are a few things that I can’t wrap my head around.
If we face massive inflation, than prices of 100k-1m Dollar per Bitcoin would definitely be realistic, but since there is massive inflation the dollars wouldn’t have the buying power that they have today. So in my eyes there is no incentive to change back my Bitcoin into Dollars or any other fiat currency. This idea opposes all those Bitcoin investors who are trying to buy bitcoin cheap and sell it high, just to change it back into Fiat-Currency and buy all the stuff they want to buy when they made a quick buck due to the increased value of Bitcoin.
Assuming there is no incentive for anyone to change their Bitcoins back into Dollars or other national currencies than all the stuff humans desire should be able to be bought with bitcoin.
Due to the properties of bitcoin massive inflation isn’t possible. So investing into bitcoin today is more like reserving buying power in the scenario that the monetary system we live in collapses sometime in the future.
Following the thought of (2.) I definitely see some problems occurring with the Bitcoin Network due to scale ability and human psychology that paying for a bread with 0.000001 BTC just doesn’t feel intuitive.
Following the thought of (3.) If we’d change to a Bitcoin based monetary system with bitcoin as the underlying value, wouldn’t that make people who are already heavily invested in Bitcoin (I’m talking about thousands maybe millions of Bitcoin) incredibly powerful since their buying power would dwarf those of the richest people on the planet today? Isn’t it problematic if so much power is centralized on a few persons nobody even knows (Satoshi)?
Don’t get me wrong. I am hoping and deeply believing that the blockchain technology is going to change the world. Hopefully to a better, more equal and more efficient place, but I’m having my problems in believing that the first application of that ingenious technology is already the best thing we might hope for. I’m excited to hear about your thoughts and insights.
The following page supplies a simple conversion tool from Satoshis (the smallest unit of account in Bitcoin equalling 0.00000001 Bitcoins) to USD / EUR / CNY / GBP / RUB / CAD. It is updated live as soon as you enter the value of Satoshis you require. Satoshi to USD. Choose currency. Satoshi = USD $ USD to Satoshi $ USD = Satoshi = BTC. BTC ฿1 = $ 440.09 USD. Refresh ↻ – occurs every 100 ... When you make a transaction on the Bitcoin network, you’ll need to pay a specific amount of satoshis per byte of transaction data. Transactions with a higher satoshi per byte fee will be processed first, before lower satoshi per byte fees. How much is one Satoshi? Bitcoin can be divided into a variety of different denominations — 1,000 millibitcoins (mBTC), 1,000,000 microbitcoins (μBTC ... Each bitcoin is equal to 100 million Satoshis, making a Satoshi the smallest unit of bitcoin currently recorded on the blockchain. Think of the Satoshi as the “cents” part of bitcoin. But unlike a penny that represents 0.01 USD, Satoshi represents roughly 0.00000001 BTC — or bitcoin to its eighth decimal. This is a simple calculator that converts BTC / Satoshis (0.00000001 ฿) to world currencies like USD / EUR / AUD etc. This live Satoshi converter not only converts but also shows the current value of Bitcoin or Satoshi in your currency. Satoshi Converter. To use this calculator simply select your currency and enter the digits in the field below to know the value of Satoshi in your currency ... Bitcoin value was $11,358.12. Max. BTC price was $11,687.57. The average value Bitcoin price for convert (or exchange rate) during the day was $11,473.17. The price was lower at the end of the day. Let's see what brings today. The Bitcoin increased by 2.65% on Monday 12th of October 2020. And we have data for yesterday. The average value Bitcoin price for convert (or exchange rate) during the ...
The best BITCOIN FAUCET in the world. 30k satoshi per month.
This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue How to Calculate the Satoshi unit value with this Formula is a simple way I demonstrate how you can convert from Bitcoin price and the coin price to obtain theSatoshi unit value. Easy formula to ... Welcome to my new channel everyone. You can actually earn a lot from this site. All The Best. Here are all the links you are going to need. Faucetpay - https... Our Analyst Marcus Koster explains the importance of using the /BTC vs /USD pairing when trading. Thank you all so much for watching. If you enjoy the video,... The real way to earn money online is to accumulate bitcoins, it's value is always on the rise, right now 1 BTC is 420 US dollars. If you are already aware about bitcoin and want to earn ...