Satoshi to Bitcoin, USD and other currencies converter

Bitcoin vs Satoshi: A different way to think

have a theory.. I am curious to get others opinions of it.

long story...
I was having a debate with a fellow crypto enthusiast like myself we did not see eye to eye.
I feel like the general public is having a hard time accepting the value of a bitcoin due to the fact of its unobtainability for most. People don't want to give up 100s to 1000s of one thing to get a fraction of another like bitcoin. They have grown up thinking a fraction of something is very little and not valueable but for Bitcoin it is not the case.
We all know that a Bitcoin can be broken down into something as small as a Satoshi.
Why not use this as the base measure instead of a Bitcoin which is the largest?

I feel people would be a lot more willing to accept using a currency when your talking about it in a whole value like Satoshi and not a fractional value like a Bitcoin. I think this is possibly why mass adoption really hasn't occurred. Why not buy/sell/exchange in Satoshi. Or even possibly come up with a name for something in between a Bitcoin and a satoshi

I believe a lot more people would be amenable spending $1 for 18000 satoshi (18ksat) or 18uBTC than for 0.00018 BTC
The link below you can play around with converting

I believe it will be much more important to think like this when Bitcoin becomes $100,000 and more a coin. We need a more mass population acceptable unit of measure for bitcoin for an easier mass adoption
or maybe something like this could work
1 Satoshi = 1sat
10 Satoshi = 10sat
100 Satoshi = 100sat 1,000 Satoshi = 1ksat
10,000 Satoshi = 10ksat
100,000 Satoshi = 100ksat
1,000,000 Satoshi = 1Msat
10,000,000 Satoshi = 10Msat
100,000,000 Satoshi = 1BTC
or we could take out the fractions out of Bitcoin by doing it a similar way 0.00000001 bitcoin = 10 nBTC
0.00000010 bitcoin = 100 nBTC
0.00000100 bitcoin = 1 uBTC
0.00001000 bitcoin = 10 uBTC
0.00010000 bitcoin = 100 uBTC
0.00100000 bitcoin = 1 mBTC
0.01000000 bitcoin = 1 cBTC
0.10000000 bitcoin = 1 dBTC
1.00000000 bitcoin = 1 BTC
Long story short is we need a way to measure a unit of Bitcoin not as a fraction but as a whole number which the general public could much more easily accept.
Agree or disagree or how would be a good way to implement something ?
What are your thoughts, ideas or comments on this topic?
Edit 1BTC = # of Satoshi
submitted by pjman7 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

500 to 5000 MCO Upgrade Strategy

Currently the 500 MCO tier is sort of the sweet spot for most users where a lot of valuable perks kick in. When I first purchased MCO it was under $3 USD, so going straight to the 500 tier was an obvious choice. I was planning to put some Stablecoins and Bitcoin into earn, so the added 2% bonus in-kind in earn, plus the 3% card cashbacks and Netflix reimbursement made the choice economically beneficial quite quickly. Less than a year later the benefits have provided me a larger return on investment than if I had done otherwise.
I have been eyeing the upgrade to the 5000 tier, but I wanted to do an analysis of what sort of upgrade strategy makes sense to optimize ROI weighted against risks and if I'm even the right candidate for such an investment. With the price of MCO being higher, it's not such a clear decision. I will outline my thought process below.
Assumptions - These are the assumptions that I am working with for my analysis. Working with a different set of assumptions will affect the decision making process differently for different people.
Based on the above assumptions we can now look at different upgrade pathways and see which options make the most sense. This thought process is a place to start and can be adjusted to each person's individual case.

Stablecoin (Fiat) to MCO pathway

At today's price of ~$4.85 USD at time of writing, it would cost $21,825 USD to upgrade directly into the 5000 tier by buying 4500 additional MCO. This gives additional benefits of 2% in earn, 1% on card, and 8% vs 6% on staked MCO.
The variables we need to look at to find out if this makes sense over the next year are: assets in Earn and annual card spend.
The opportunity cost of putting the money into MCO is a 4% yield on $21,825 (12% in Earn minus 8% staked in MCO) minus a 2% yield on 500 MCO, or roughly $824.50.
We also open ourselves up to exchange rate volatility, there is a very real, non-0% chance that the crypto market collapses, or that MCO itself collapses in value. There is also a chance it will go way up. If you are looking to hold the MCO, or crypto in general, for longer periods of time, we need to sort of normalize the projected trend to figure out ROI. That means ignoring big jumps and drops, or retroactively thinking you could have made or lost money by trading in and out… that falls under trading and speculation. In general, most of us think the crypto market is going up, but by how much and how fast are variables that need to be considered in how exposed to crypto you want to be
In order to make this pathway a positive ROI, we need to make an additional $824.50 through the added benefits in Earn and card spending over the course of one year. What does that look like?
Assets in Earn*0.02 + Card spend*0.01>824.50 
If you don't have roughly $35-40k in Earn, upgrading to 5000 Tier makes very little sense IMO.
Full Account Examples (Assuming today's crypto prices):
Case 1 and 2 are very similar in total assets, but case 2 provides the better return after one year ($20,760 - $17,735.50 = $3,024.50) at the cost of being more exposed to crypto.

Bitcoin to MCO pathway via Drip

Another option to consider is upgrading to the 5000 tier via Bitcoin. I mention "Drip" in the header because I imagine most people able to do a lump sum conversion would encounter a taxable event and would be less inclined to go that route. Utilizing a drip format will upgrade on a longer time scale, but result in negligible taxable gain. It also keeps crypto exposure at roughly the same level throughout the process.
The benefits from going to MCO from BTC is a higher interest rate for MCO being staked at 6% vs BTC in Earn at 5.5%; I also assume CDC will be able to keep the 6% on MCO longer than they can keep the rate high on BTC. The drawbacks are less liquidity on MCO, potentially more volatility, and potential loss of value relative to BTC in Satoshis (we'll ignore the last point since we are assuming a similar sat ratio over time).
Another thing to mention, if we want to upgrade over the course of one year, BTC holdings need to be pretty sizable at $400,000 That's a little unreasonable for most people, so let's assume a smaller holding of $100,000 btc like the two cases above. This will take three years to accomplish and the equation gets a bit more complicated in this situation.
Basically if you take the above situation and plug it into a compound interest calculator, compounding quarterly, it takes almost 3 years exactly to drip your way into the 5000 tier. We can mostly ignore any change in crypto USD value as long as the MCO/BTC ratio stays similar.
If you definitely want to go to the 5000 tier, the question becomes purchase lump sum via Fiat or drip via crypto.
The opportunity cost of dripping is the lost 2% gain in earn over the course of 3 years (which as you'll see below, could be significant if the market jumps quickly at which point purchasing via Fiat becomes prohibitively expensive). But the benefit is that you maintain your current crypto exposure in the case of a major bear market where you could potentially purchase via Fiat at a much lower price.

Exit Strategy

I think it's important to think about an exit strategy. In my opinion, upgrading to the 5000 tier only really makes sense if you are having a lot of assets in Earn. The added 1% on card spend and other perks pales in comparison to the added 2% on Earn with a large amount of assets. It's also my opinion that MCO should only be a small portion of a crypto portfolio. Regardless, if MCO is your main holding you are betting on the crypto market going up, because the added 5000 tier benefits won't comparatively amount to much over a year anyway.
If crypto prices stay the same the benefits to holding MCO stay flat, but as crypto prices rise, the incentives change. Imagine we go on a huge bull run and the market goes up 20x. I bet a lot of people will want to rebalance and cash in some of that profit. It's quite possible holding 5000 MCO becomes too big of a risk for the benefits received.
What's nice is that CDC seems to have thought about the optimal profile for people to get to the 5000 tier I stated above, people with significant assets in Earn.
Imagine the person in Case 2 above in an environment where the crypto market shoots up 20x.
In this situation, it makes sense to rebalance your portfolio and take some earnings off the table. However, it actually makes a lot of sense to keep the 5000 MCO staked and rebalance away from BTC into Stablecoins. Look at the yearly earnings of different options below:
As you can see, losing the bonus 2% in earn cuts your profit over the course of a year.
CDC was quite thoughtful in changing the award structure for the added 2% in Earn. It should keep early adopters from leaving if the market goes up, and should actually attract newly minted crypto whales as they rebalance out of other cryptos. This should keep the MCO price strong for a long time and give confidence to people investing in MCO.


I think upgrading to the 5000 tier can make a lot of sense for certain people. But after reaching the 5000 tier I would probably immediately cash out all rewarded MCO to Stablecoins to compound at a higher interest rate and just maintain the 5000 level. Unless there are some dramatic new rewards for the 50,000 level I don't see the value proposition to go for Black. Perhaps an additional 2% in Earn, but that is probably not sustainable to the company.
Let me know what you think, or if I made any mistakes.

Edit: Changed numbers to reflect 8% earned on staked MCO at the 5000 Tier level. This makes the upgrade more compelling.

submitted by gym7rjm to Crypto_com [link] [comments]

[GUIDE] Convert DRP to DRPS or DRPU.

IMPORTANT: none of the methods will work unless your address is whitelisted at

verify first or trade OTC

If you want DRPU, I'd like to trade your DRP for my DRPU

(2 DPRU for 1 DRP, the standard ratio).

(We can trade in small amounts if you don't trust me)
Below I will describe three ways to convert DRP to DRPU or DRPS.

Please try the official way first.

There's basically two steps, each with their own sub-steps. I will first explain what the steps do, and then explain how to do them. No matter which way you choose (they just get increasingly technical).
The first step is to approve the contract (there is two different contracts, one for DRPU, and one for DRPS, approve the right one). Without approval, the second step will fail.
In other words, step one is all about saying "this address (the contract) is allowed to spend X amount of DRP from my address". Obviously, you only want to approve the right contract, not anyone else.
The second step is to actually make the contract burn your DRP and return you the right amount of DRPU or DRPS (depending on which contract you talk to). The second step is exactly the same for DRPU and DRPS, the only difference is the contract adress. So don't use the wrong adress or you'll recieve the wrong coin, and that can not be undone! (you could attempt to trade it at the market though, but there is currently no way to turn DRPU into DRPS and vice versa, and neither can you get your DRP back).
Now for the actual steps:

The official way

DRPS: DCorp Security Token DRPU: DCorp Utility Token
Just follow the steps on the website. If that doesn't work, try:

The etherscan way

Step 1a:

copypaste the contract address you need into notepad.
  • DPRS: 0x3366cfd8dd3fc653e7dcd56cb9111d848b3732e2
  • DRPU: 0xee2972a6177c28f3efacb1862a1a8507c3f10faa

Step 1b:

Step 1c

  • copypaste the address from step 1a into the _spender(address) field under "1. approve"
  • put the amount of DRP you want to convert, followed by exactly 2 zeroes (unless you want to send fractional DRP, in which case you add fewer zeroes, for example a 50 is 0.5 DRP) (Think of it like sending "cents" of DRP, so 100 cents is 1 DRP).

Step 1d

  • press "write"
  • confirm with metamask
wait for confirmation (only 1 confirmation is enough) it should look something like this

Step 2a

Step 2b (it's the same for DRPS and DRPU)

  • connect metamask
  • scroll down to "6. requestConversion"
  • input the same value as in step 1c (technically you could use any value lower or exactly equal, but why would you?)
  • it should look something like this

Step 2c

  • press "write"
  • confirm with metamask


it should look something like this
you should have your tokens now, and your DRP are burned.

The hard way

Step 1a:

  • Log in to metamask, or whatever your favorite wallet is (i will assume metamask in this guide but this method works for any wallet, although the steps wil not be exactly the same obviously)
  • go to settings -> advanced (helpfull image 1 and 2)
  • scroll down and turn on "hex data"
  • now when you send an ether transaction you should have a "hex data" or "data" field in the bottom. (It should look something like this)

Step 1b:

  • calculate how many DRP you want to send, open the windows calculator in programmer mode (or any online dec to hex converter) and input the amount of DRP you want to send with two extra zeroes.
  • read the HEX value. (for example if you want to send 1234 DRP you should enter 123400 into the calculator, and your answer will be 1E208) Helpful image
  • If you want to send fractions, for example 12.5 DRP you input 1250 (so basically you multiply by 100) and you would get 4E2.
  • write down the HEX value in notepad.
  • copypaste this 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 and paste it under your hex value
  • add 0s in front of your hex value until both strings are of equal length (you should have exactly 64 digits, no more, no less).

Step 1c:

  • for DRPS: copypaste this "0x095ea7b30000000000000000000000003366cfd8dd3fc653e7dcd56cb9111d848b3732e2" into your notepad and paste it in front of your 64-digit number, don't have any spaces in between, don't add the quotes.
  • for DRPU: copypaste this "0x095ea7b3000000000000000000000000ee2972a6177c28f3efacb1862a1a8507c3f10faa" into your notepad and paste it in front of your 64-digit number, don't have any spaces in between, don't add the quotes.

Step 1d (same for both tokens):

  • if you have done step 1c correctly you should have something similar to "0x095ea7b3000000000000000000000000ee2972a6177c28f3efacb1862a1a8507c3f10faa00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000185ea" in your notepad.
  • send 0 eth to 0x621d78f2ef2fd937bfca696cabaf9a779f59b3ed and in the data field copypaste the data from your notepad.

Step 1e:

Wait for it to confirm (1 confirmation is enough).

Step 2a:

  • copypaste this into a new line in your notepad: 0xc6afd98a
  • copy the last 64 digits of the last string (the hexadecimal representation of the amount of tokens you want to convert) to the end of that line
  • you should now have something like this: 0xc6afd98a00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000185ea

Step 2b

  • for DRPS: send 0 eth to 0x3366cfd8dd3fc653e7dcd56cb9111d848b3732e2 with the data string you should have in your notepad (the short one)
  • for DRPU: send 0 eth to 0xee2972a6177c28f3efacb1862a1a8507c3f10faa with the data string you should have in your notepad (the short one)



The data always starts with 0x (this basically means, the data is encoded in hexadecimal numbers), the 8 digits after that is a hash (keccak-256) of the function name, so the contract knows which function you are calling, and which arguments to expect (for example requestConversion(uint256) and approve(address,uint256)) all other information after that is always exactly 256 bits of information (per argument), so 64 digits long (if the actual information is less than 64 digits long, it adds 0s in the front until it is exactly 64 digits long. Also, in ethereum addresses the leading 0x gets dropped (because the data already starts with 0x). Numbers of course are converted into hexadecimal, and in the "atomic units" of what you're sending (like a satoshi in bitcoin). DRP has a "precision" of 2 so if you enter "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001" that means 0.01 DRP, and 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000010 means 0.16 DRP (remember, it's hexadecimal, not decimal).
submitted by zimmah to dcorp [link] [comments]

Constructing an Opt-In alternative reward for securing the blockchain

Since a keyboard with a monero logo got upvoted to the top I realized I should post various thoughts I have and generate some discussion. I hope others do the same.
Monero is currently secured by a dwindling block reward. There is a chance that the tail emission reward + transaction fees to secure the blockchain could become insufficient and allow for a scenario where it is profitable for someone to execute a 51% attack.
To understand this issue better, read this:
In Game Theory, Tragedy of the Commons is a market failure scenario where a common good is produced in lower quantities than the public desires, or consumed in greater quantities than desired. One example is pollution - it is in the public's best interest not to pollute, but every individual has incentive to pollute (e.g. because burning fossil fuel is cheap, and individually each consumer doesn't affect the environment much). The relevance to Bitcoin is a hypothetical market failure that might happen in the far future when the block reward from mining drops near zero. In the current Bitcoin design, the only fees miners earn at this time are Transaction fees. Miners will accept transactions with any fees (because the marginal cost of including them is minimal) and users will pay lower and lower fees (in the order of satoshis). It is possible that the honest miners will be under-incentivized, and that too few miners will mine, resulting in lower difficulty than what the public desires. This might mean various 51% attacks will happen frequently, and the Bitcoin will not function correctly. The Bitcoin protocol can be altered to combat this problem - one proposed solution is Dominant Assurance Contracts. Another more radical proposal (in the sense that the required change won't be accepted by most bitcoiners) is to have a perpetual reward that is constant in proportion to the monetary base. That can be achieved in two ways. An ever increasing reward (inflatacoin/expocoin) or a constant reward plus a demurrage fee in all funds that caps the monetary base (freicoin). This scenario was discussed on several threads: - Tragedy of the Commons - Disturbingly low future difficulty equilibrium - Stack Exchange Currently there is no consensus whether this problem is real, and if so, what is the best solution. 

I suspect that least contentious solution to it is not to change code, emission or artificially increase fees (which would actually undermine the tail emission and lead to other problems, I believe: but rather use a Dominant Assurance Contract that makes it rational for those who benefit from Monero to contribute to the block reward.

Dominant assurance contracts
Dominant assurance contracts, created by Alex Tabarrok, involve an extra component, an entrepreneur who profits when the quorum is reached and pays the signors extra if it is not. If the quorum is not formed, the signors do not pay their share and indeed actively profit from having participated since they keep the money the entrepreneur paid them. Conversely, if the quorum succeeds, the entrepreneur is compensated for taking the risk of the quorum failing. Thus, a player will benefit whether or not the quorum succeeds; if it fails he reaps a monetary return, and if it succeeds, he pays only a small amount more than under an assurance contract, and the public good will be provided.
Tabarrok asserts that this creates a dominant strategy) of participation for all players. Because all players will calculate that it is in their best interests to participate, the contract will succeed, and the entrepreneur will be rewarded. In a meta-game, this reward is an incentive for other entrepreneurs to enter the DAC market, driving down the cost disadvantage of dominant assurance contract versus regular assurance contracts.
Monero doesn't have a lot of scripting options to work with currently so it is very hard for me to understand how one might go about creating a Dominant Assurance Contract using Monero, especially in regards to paying out to a miner address.
This is how it could work in Bitcoin:
This scheme is an attempt at Mike Hearn's exercise for the reader: an implementation of dominant assurance contracts. The scheme requires the use of multisignature transactions, nLockTime and transaction replacement which means it won't work until these features are available on the Bitcoin network.
A vendor agrees to produce a good if X BTC are raised by date D and to pay Y BTC to each of n contributors if X BTC are not raised by date D, or to pay nY BTC if X BTC are raised and the vendor fails to produce the good to the satisfaction of 2 of 3 independent arbitrators picked through a fair process
The arbitrators specify a 2-of-3 multisignature script to use as an output for the fundraiser with a public key from each arbitrator, which will allow them to judge the performance on actually producing the good
For each contributor:
The vendor and the contributor exchange public keys
They create a 2-of-2 multisignature output from those public keys
With no change, they create but do not sign a transaction with an input of X/n BTC from the contributor and an input of Y BTC from the vendor, with X/n+Y going to the output created in 3.2
The contributor creates a transaction where the output is X+nY to the address created in step 2 and the input is the output of the transaction in 3.3, signs it using SIGHASH_ALL | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY, with version = UINT_MAX and gives it to the vendor
The vendor creates a transaction of the entire balance of the transaction in 3.3 to the contributor with nLockTime of D and version < UINT_MAX, signs it and gives it to the contributor
The vendor and contributor then both sign the transaction in 3.3 and broadcast it to the network, making the transaction in 3.4 valid when enough contributors participate and the transaction in 3.5 valid when nLockTime expires
As date D nears, nLockTime comes close to expiration.
If enough (n) people contribute, all of the inputs from 3.4 can combine to make the output valid when signed by the vendor, creating a valid transaction sending that money to the arbitrators, which only agree to release the funds when the vendor produces a satisfactory output
If not enough people ( Note that there is a limit at which it can be more profitable for the vendor to make the remaining contributions when D approaches
Now the arbitrators have control of X (the payment from the contributors) + nY (the performance bond from the vendor) BTC and pay the vendor only when the vendor performs satisfactorily
Such contracts can be used for crowdfunding. Notable examples from Mike Hearn include:
Funding Internet radio stations which don't want to play ads: donations are the only viable revenue source as pay-for-streaming models allow undercutting by subscribers who relay the stream to their own subscribers
Automatically contributing to the human translation of web pages

Monero has these features:
  1. Multisig
  2. LockTime (but it is much different then BTCs)
  3. A possibility to do MoJoin (CoinJoin) like transactions, even if less then optimally private. There is hope that the MoJoin Schemes will allow for better privacy in the future:
I have a draft writeup for a merged-input system called MoJoin that allows multiple parties to generate a single transaction. The goal is to complete the transaction merging with no trust in any party, but this introduces significant complexity and may not be possible with the known Bulletproofs multiparty computation scheme. My current version of MoJoin assumes partial trust in a dealer, who learns the mappings between input rings and outputs (but not true spends or Pedersen commitment data).

Additionally, Non-Interactive Refund Transactions could also be possible in Monero's future.
I can't fully workout how all of these could work together to make a DAC that allows miners to put up and payout a reward if it doesn't succeed, or how we could make it so *any* miner who participated (by putting up a reward) could claim the reward if it succeeded. I think this should really be explored as it could make for a much more secure blockchain, potentially saving us if a "crypto winter" hits where the value of monero and number of transactions are low, making for a blockchain that is hard to trust because it would be so cheap to perform a 51% attack.

I am still skeptical of Dominant Assurance Contracts, despite success in an initial test
it still remains questionable or at least confusing:
submitted by Vespco to Monero [link] [comments]

Proof of Work Energy Use

The creation of proof of work protocol is for accomplishing accord between devices on a distributed network is ostensibly the most distinguished accomplishment of Bitcoin founder Satoshi Nakamoto. In doing so, he laid the groundwork for the revolutionary innovation that is blockchain. Proof of work also known as PoW is a consensus protocol presented by Bitcoin and utilized broadly by numerous different cryptocurrencies. This procedure is referred to as mining and as such the nodes on the network are known as “miners”. The proof of work comes in the form of a response to a mathematical problem, one that requires impressive work to arrive at,but is easily verified to be correct once the answer has been reached. The proof of work system is specifically designed to be difficult and require considerable computing power to ensure that too many Bitcoins are not mined too quickly, preserving a consistent supply and incentive for miners to maintain the network. Essentially, the security of the network is enforced physically by specialized hardware. As such, proof of work can be seen as not being an infinitely scalable protocol since the hardware and the electricity spent to power that hardware are limited in resources.
As far back as its commencement Bitcoin's trust-minimizing consensus has been empowered by its proof-of-work calculation. The machines performing the "work" are consuming huge amounts of energy while doing so. The Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index was made to to provide insight into this amount, and raise awareness on the unsustainability of the proof-of-work algorithm. This news creates awareness about the energy consumption and as it said to this article, Proof-of-work does function to prevent attacks, specifically denial-of-service attacks, and the security of the network is its greatest feature. While it is this large pool of machines that create the security of the network, it is also this massive number of miners that are constantly driving up the competition and leading to the current conversation regarding energy consumption. With this kind of issue alternatives were being made by some crypto companies to limit the energy consumption of the PoW protocol. Conserving the energy will positively affect the environment, it is possible to earn money and take care of the environment and through this kind of advancement limitations and alternatives are needed.
submitted by Nippondaisuki to CryptoMoonShots [link] [comments]

r/Bitcoin recap - August 2019

Hi Bitcoiners!
I’m back with the 32nd monthly Bitcoin news recap.
For those unfamiliar, each day I pick out the most popularelevant/interesting stories in Bitcoin and save them. At the end of the month I release them in one batch, to give you an overview of what happened in bitcoin over the past month.
You can see recaps of the previous months on
A recap of Bitcoin in August 2019
Development * Bitcoin Core Developer Andrew Chow is straming his code tests on Twitch (7 Aug)
Regulation & Politics
Archeology (Financial Incumbents)
Price & Trading
Fun & Other
submitted by SamWouters to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Upcoming Announcement Predictions- A realistic hype train

It's been a pretty eventful few weeks for litecoin, with a lot of information flying around. Hype, FUD, rumors, and opinions. It's been exciting. The main topic of conversation overall seems to be Charlie selling his coins, but if you are a true HODLer and you have followed Charlie for a while, this doesn't seem that outrageous. And it certainly does not do anything to change the underlying reason I own Litecoin. If anything, I would hope that it has given people who believe in the technology another chance to accumulate LTC at the expense of short-term speculators.
In my opinion the more important tweet of that weekend was this one: which sparked a lot of rumors of Facebook and Amazon, since which Charlie has squashed. But what might these mean? I'd like to give my .02ł. (Note this is pure uncut speculation. I’m typing out my ass)
BitPay is the obvious choice here- they just raised a $30 million round of funding and are acutely aware of their customers pain in dealing with BTC’s high fees. They raised the minimum payment to $100 and then quickly lowered it to $5, but they mention in that post that they are scrambling to allow BCH payments. I think they are putting their new funding to work to support Litecoin payments too. had the most popular online BTC wallet for a long time. They hit their 3 millionth wallet in 2015 and held out as BTC-only all the way up to August of this year, when they added Ethereum. They are clearly opening up to new currencies:
"By adding ether as a new currency, we’re providing users with a new diverse way to interact with the digital economy.”
I think Litecoin will be the new diversity soon.
So it’s already a bit out of the bag that OpenBazaar is looking to add more support for other cryptocurrencies, but Litecoin hasn’t been officially announced, and it is definitely in the works. This interaction took place back in April:
OpenBazaar isn’t as sexy as what we are all hoping for- *cough eBay cough* but it would be good continued adoption nonetheless.
I’m torn on this. My instincts are always to be cautious when something is hyped up as “huge,” especially after this last year in crypto. I can’t remember a single “Huge upcoming announcement” that lived up to the hype. (ex Neo, Monero, Einsteinium, etc. etc.) Monero in particular was a speculator trap, which I see more coblee’s speed rather than hyping up fluff. On the other hand, I feel like Charlie and co know this too, so maybe it really is a huge announcement. If you follow him closely, you could definitely see a potential take away that this announcement is why he sold his coins in the first place. The sale was definitely a calculated decision, and it wasn't unilateral either: If you read between the lines, he is acutely aware that he has “insider info” and does not want to be accused of using it to his advantage. Take a peek at his recently liked tweets: His last two as of writing this are these:
One is a speculator selling on Charlie’s announcement. The other is directly talking about insider hype and the personal enrichment that comes with that. There are other examples of Charlie encouraging speculators to sell:
I am willing to bet some LTC that if Charlie has actual hype news to back up the “huge surprise” claim, the idea of quick-buck bandwagoners and traders who don’t care about Litecoin’s mission or purpose selling now and missing out on the surge would be the cherry on top for Charlie. I could see that being an added bonus to his warning tweet a few weeks ago, too. I believe that he wants people to own Litecoin because they believe in the vision of decentralized, permissionless, uncensorable money, not because “their moon” is $1000 bucks or all the BS posts I see in this sub these days.
Or maybe I’m projecting this last part on him because that is what I want. Sure, it’s nice that the price of each Litecoin has jumped considerably, but there is something greater taking place right now than personal enrichment. Litecoin has value because the people agree that it does, and the technology allows us to agree without being told by a higher power. I like Charlie, but he is not the reason I hold Litecoin. I hold Litecoin because through ups and downs and 6 years of existence, the technology has been proven and people around the world understand and agree that this blockchain has value. And it’s only a matter of time until the big announcements come- signaling real adoption.
submitted by future_cryptographer to litecoin [link] [comments]

Proposed method to email crypto-coins directly.

Below are some ideas I have been working on to allow direct off-blockchain transfer of Bitcoin Private Keys while preventing Double-Spend and Counterfeiting . There is a reference to tamper-proof Physical Bitcoin as DA BOMB- Directly Available Bitcoin On Metal Banknotes. These Physical Bitcoins and their digitally encrypted representations are the basis for off-blockchain exchange of value. Off-Blockchain exchanges are completely private and as fast as sending an email.


Daily settlement between corporations, instant settlement on trading or funded shopping channels, physical bitcoin possession for investors .
Each platform which offers FAST BITCOIN will purchase a large amount of DA BOMB to power their digital envelope re-sale network. All networks will be compatible and fungible assets composed of.
When a customer places an order for DA BOMB I load a certain amount of BTC in various denominations onto a selection of bitcoin wallets, which are then manufactured as physical bitcoin.
This amount of BTC is the amount this customer can spend on the FAST BITCOIN network.
The Bitcoin the customer spends never moves on the BTC Blockchain.
The envelope containing the customer’s BTC is credited or debited a certain combination of addresses that contain a known amount of BTC, adding up to the exact amount of the transaction.
Transactions can only be made in ROUND NUMBERS of a certain resolution, such as 0.0001 BTC , and the resolution will be finer at a later date to account for the rise of value of BTC in the future.
The contents of a customer’s envelope will be maintained to allow for making change and to account for his spending or funding of his account.
The main issuer of FAST BITCOIN will be Satoshi Bitcoin Incorporated, with other platforms buying enough DA BOMB to issue their own FAST BITCOIN on their own shopping platforms.
Customers can always write to the platform and request that their remaining envelope balance be mailed to their physical address.
The envelope contents are tracked on a separate blockchain, the FAST BITCOIN blockchain.
Customers can use their physical bitcoin like paper money, or break the hologram seal and view the private key to use as regular bitcoin on the bitcoin blockchain.
Only TRUSTED NODES are on the FAST BITCOIN Blockchain. The Network is composed of the corporate members who offer FAST BITCOIN shopping at their websites, and join by invitation only. Large networks can fuel their own branded shopping tokens with FAST BITCOIN after paying a co-branding fee, or simply use FAST BITCOIN without re-branding to their own token name.
Software can equate all prices at a website to the token value of choice on the platform, so that the shopper may make purchases via FAST BITCOIN while referring to prices in stable fiat equivalent tokens, or re-branded token values.
The customer’s purchasing power varies with the price of Bitcoin, but the visible prices remain stable.
The customer may buy a StableCoin (not Tethers) to fund all or part of their account, or switch from BTC to StableCoin at will; or let the system do this for him. BTC going up, funding remains in BTC, BTC going down, Funding switches too StableCoin.
A purely electronic version of FAST BITCOIN will rely on a hardware device to store the private keys offline and always in encrypted form when connected to the internet.
There is object “A” : the FAST BITCOIN Wallet
There is object “B” : the individual private keys
The system works with a combination of Master System Key Encryption and Asymmetrical Key Encryption.
The Hardware device is called a SPLIT WALLET. It is a combination of a HOT WALLET and a COLD WALLET. The two halves of the split wallet can only communicate with each other when the device is unplugged from the device being used to access the Internet.
The Master System Key resides on the Cold Wallet and can’t be viewed without destroying the function of the Hardware Wallet.
To send bitcoin to a person on the network, the hardware wallet takes the addresses needed to add up to the desired amount and encrypts them with the PUBLIC KEY of the receiving device.
The BITCOIN CASH BLOCKCHAIN is used as a KEY SERVER to store the PUBLIC KEY of every device manufactured, linked to its registration number and owner identity. The OWNER IDENTITY is an EMAIL ADDRESS which is [[email protected]_BITCOIN.COM](mailto:[email protected] .
The addresses are encrypted by the SYSTEM MASTER KEY , then by the RECIPIENT PUBLIC KEY and emailed to the above email address.
The whole network is sustained by a peer-to-peer email remailer network. Software on the machine used by the hardware device to connect to the INTERNET is designed to run a peer-to-peer email remailer node.
As well as sending the recipient an email via the re-mailer network, an entry is made on the BITCOIN CASH BLOCKCHAIN containing the double encrypted bitcoin private keys, recipient email address, and transaction identifier . This also contains the device registration number as part of the owner email address.
Thus even if the domain is blocked from sending email the information needed to use the bitcoin is available from the data stored on the BITCOIN CASH BLOCKCHAIN.
The value of Bitcoin Cash does not impact the cost of sending bitcoin, since the transaction sizes to record data on its blockchain are very small.

When FAST BITCOIN is sent to a recipient, he must plug his hardware device into a laptop, phone, or other internet device to download the keys to the device. At this time while the hardware device is still connected to the internet the just received FAST BITCOIN will not yet be available to spend. It will show on the device as STILL ENCRYPTED. The user unplugs the device from the internet and then transfers the amount from the COLD SIDE to the HOT SIDE of his wallet while offline. If he wishes he may leave this amount on the COLD SIDE or transfer up to the entire contents of the SPLIT WALLET to the HOT SIDE to enable immediate spending as soon as connected to the internet.
The COLD SIDE contains the SYSTEM MASTER KEY and decrypts the PRIVATE BITCOIN KEYS in order to enable spending.
The hardware device checks the bitcoin blockchain to verify the amount of bitcoin held by each bitcoin private key, and also checks that the private keys it contains map properly to the public bitcoin keys used to view the balance on the device when it is connected to the internet.

DA Bomb

Directly Available Bitcoin On Metal Banknote (Da Bomb)
Bitcoin Metal Wallet Cold Storage on BTC Blockchain. A Crypto-Currency version of money, which may be exchanged for fiat currency.
Other major cryptos such as Ethereum , LiteCoin, and Bitcoin Cash may be substituted for bitcoin without affecting the usefulness of this offering. These versions will come out later, using the same physical format. (hopefully patented)
The design of the card should be modified enough from any existing patents to be patentable itself. The manufacturing, loading and documenting of the card should be done by proprietary and open-source software. This process should be patented as well or be part of the same patent.
These are physical BTC coins, in the form of a metal card the size and shape of a credit card. The Bitcoin Wallet is composed of two sets of engraved alpha-numeric and QR codes highlighted by black ink. One set is public and is on the outside of the card. A pull-tab almost exactly like the kind on a soup can is removed from the front of the card to reveal the inner contents . This is the engraving of the private key which is required to spend the BTC. Viewing it or detecting the exact nature of this code is equivalent to ownership of the associated BTC.
The public key on the outside of the card is used to deposit to or send to the card. In normal operations the card would come loaded with a certain amount of BTC.
The cards will be protected by security features and the quality control process during their manufacture.
The cards will be dipped in a coating of compounds to indicate a unique identity for each card, with short lengths of coloured fibres and paint floating on the surface of the clear lacquer compound and creating a unique visual identity. Each card is photographed and the image file uploaded to a database with the blockchain address and item id from manufacture all associated together.
A label is created and affixed to the outside of the card. On it are the blockchain address, photo of the untampered card, and amount of BTC deposited to card.
The private keys are not retained in file form at the manufacturer’s facility, or recorded in any way.
Before the key is deleted from memory and fully erased from all data storage devices, the photo of the engraving of it is compared to the key via character recognition software. When photo verifies as true then key is deleted from memory. Now the card is tracked by my own “in-house” item id, linked in the database to the blockchain address which displays the public key, and the photo file of the card. The card is photographed twice, the photo of the private key is deleted just after verifying the engraving matches the private key. The photo of the exterior of the card showing the paint lines and fibre positions on the card is kept on file. The offline computer takes the photo of the private key, the online computer takes the photo of the card after dipping.
The card is meant to circumvent the horribly high fees associated with using BTC as a payment method. Possession of the card is deemed to be legally equivalent to the ability to spend the associated BTC available via the private key. The nature of the tamper proof and hack proof aspects of the card manufacture lends credence to the continued value of the card as it is passed through consecutive transactions. The fees which would have been normally paid to enable these transactions on the Blockchain, will now have been saved by the people utilizing the physical Bitcoin cards. The Bitcoin transactions on the Blockchain are enabled by paying fees to “bitcoin miners”, who use large amounts of energy and computing power to solve complicated mathematical problems in order to process transactions and also to earn newly created bitcoins, of which there will only ever be 21,000,000. The fees for bitcoin transactions have become so high that paying for an item with bitcoin wouldn’t make sense for anything under $280 or so; and you had better be rich enough not to care about the $30 to $75 fee to buy just about any size purchase.
Instead of this, cold wallets containing small denominations of BTC can be exchanged via strong encryption and sending password and wallet via different delivery modes; or by physical bitcoin wallets.
At any time one may pull the tab on the metal card and reveal the private key, in order to obtain control of the BTC for use in a different cold wallet, or an online wallet. You will now have to pay transaction fees as per your new wallet details.
There is an instant financial advantage as soon as a group of people trust the value of physical bitcoin in transactions. All the miner fees for each transaction done with physical bitcoin are saved by the group. These transactions are valued in BTC, worth real dollars if exchanged for dollars; but with the dollar value always changing.
Volatility is a fact of life with Bitcoin (BTC), but the market has always trended upwards if you wait long enough. And the value has often nose-dived as well, in an unpredictable manner. A lot of people are holding (or “hodling”) BTC as a very risky and speculative investment, hoping the price will go up.
There is a great demand for bitcoin and that demand is going to increase in the near future.
How will I pay to load the BTC on to the cards? The cards will be loaded on an “on-demand” order process. The cards can be made up to a certain stage, where they have been dipped in tamper-proofing but not yet labeled. Up to this point they can be any denomination (amount) of BTC. When the payment for the order is taken at the online website then the card is loaded, labeled and shipped to the customer.
Besides the metal coin wallets denominated in various amounts of BTC; there will be “piggy-bank” versions of the card available. The BTC is loaded onto the card via the visible wallet public key engraved on the front of the card. The card owner can be paid debts owed to him via the public key. The card owner can send any amount of BTC to this receive address and it will become associated via the blockchain with the private key hidden inside the card. To spend the BTC loaded onto the card he will have to view the private key and send it to the hot wallet he uses online. Technical advice about fees, security, hacking and safety will be available at the company website, as well as many other helpful resources.
The denominated versions of the card are identical to the piggy-bank versions except for the label. The label covers the “receive” address on the denominated versions, as no further deposits to the blockchain are needed. The label on the piggy-bank version doesn’t cover the public key address, has a photo of the card and the manufacturer’s ID number. It also has a link to the webpage associated with the public key address. Anyone with this address can see how much BTC is associated with the Public Key shown here.
Thus the intact tamper-proof BTC Card can be used with confidence, as the public key can be viewed on the Blockchain by anyone. As long as the amount on the card label matches the amount shown on the webpage then the card’s private key can be trusted. This renders the card a form of “trust-less” currency equivalent to legal tender in value and usefulness .
The card format and manufacturing process is tested to obtain a hack proof product. The private key is not detectable by examination or any technical means without opening the pull-tab. This is essential to prevent theft and fraud. The card can not be opened, viewed , and sealed again.
A card without a label would be suspect, a card which had been opened and re-sealed obvious. Checking the blockchain address reveals the status of the BTC in question in any event.
The manufacturing process is outlined below:

The engraving is deep enough to be permanent but still not detected while wallet card is in closed position. The alpha-numeric and QR code versions of the keys are engraved and inked.
After the engraving, the private key is deleted from memory of the engraving controlling computer. This computer is never connected to the internet. Only verified software is used on this computer.
A separate computer controls the camera, label maker, and database connection to the internet.

The same file is used to generate the labels.
Addresses are checked for BTC before coin Cards are offered for sale. A second stamp is placed on label when transaction confirms.
Coin is offered for sale at if allowed.
Coins can be exchanged as if fiat currency, with full confidence in BTC amount displayed on seal.
Sale price on Amazon will reflect BTC amount cost when loaded- possibly a great deal if BTC has gone up since loading, or actual cost of production plus 2%, plus miner fee and distribution fee.
Savings could be significant if BTC surges in value after coins are minted. coins are bought at time of minting by purchases of BTC at market price.
“Would you like to buy some free money?”
Demand for product is assured, as the value once for sale at Amazon increases over time. You will not be able to find cheaper bitcoin anywhere, sometimes. A small portion of my stock at Amazon will remain on sale at a very low price when the Bitcoin price rises. I plan on adjusting the price of my stock to reflect the current price of Bitcoin at the time; but not all of it, and not immediately. Every time the price of BTC increases by 10%, I will reset the price of my cards to initial values.
The initial values are the current price of BTC plus 2% , miner fees and distribution costs. As the market price increases after loading the cards, they are more and more of a deal for the customer.
This forms the basis of a great promotional value to sell the metal card coin wallets.
The profit.
Profit is calculated to be 2% of the BTC value when minted. Values from 0.001 BTC to 1 BTC are minted. This generates from $0.18 Cad to $180 CAD per card depending on value. I will focus on minting in the 0.01 to 0.11 BTC range, with profits of $1.80 to $19.80 a card.
customer pays: Cost of BTC when minted
miner fees, distribution fees, 2% over cost fee, Cost of manufacture. I estimate all costs not BTC or profit to be about $11 Cad per card.
Price of card is: BTC cost + 2% + $11.00 .
After purchase the card can be traded for cash, items or value of services. Miner fees are saved by every person after the initial purchaser of the card.
I want to mint around 1000 cards a day. This averages out to $18,000 profit per day.
The plan is to produce only lower value coin wallets until cash reserves are big enough to pay for larger denominations.
Customers can order from the lower denominations in stock or special order cards of any amount that they pay for at the time, shipped after production on demand.
This involves simply loading the customer’s purchase of BTC onto the card address and attaching the label.
As the price of BTC rises then stock available and loaded previously will be a special discount offer until the price resets after a ten percent increase in the BTC market value.
When selling the BTC coin metal cards at :

Card is dipped in clear sealer with paint filaments floating in dip tank. Also small lengths of coloured fibre are floating in the resin coating. The unique pattern formed is photographed and printed on label stored in database with item number. Private key is not stored.
Sell in vending machines in Japan, Airports,New York Subway System, Pizza Hut, etc.
On the Directly Available Bitcoin On Metal Banknote (Da Bomb), the blockchain webpage address of the public key is displayed. To check that BTC are in the account, just go to that page. Unless tampered with, BTC amount will match that shown on label.
Full label is artwork, denomination in BTC, photo and webpage address associated with public key.
This idea is patentable due to the unique packaging of the cold bitcoin wallet in a pull-tab metal card. In this writing read “coin” as “card” as well. The card is evolved out of a sardine can with a pull tab lid closure, with very short sides and pressed flat all around the edge.
The goal is to have a design where the pull tab can easily be removed by an adult. It should be hard for a child to open without being shown how. The card should be only slightly thicker than a regular credit card, and not open while in a leather wallet’s card holder.The pull tab should not open accidentally while being carried in a wallet. The pull tab will be manufactured so that it must be rotated by 180 degrees before opening. A small screwdriver, nail file or fingernail must be placed into a small slot to twist the pull tab into the correct position to open, before this it is restrained by a shallow metal lip on the top of the card.
Research and development are required for this idea to be a success. The manufacturing process, security features and bitcoin loading and labeling must all be tested and verified as hack and tamper-proof. The customer must never receive a hacked or empty or unloaded card after purchase and delivery.
Attempts at fraud by the customer will be obvious. Only Intact cards will be accepted for refund. Product must always ship in perfect condition, as customer can only return intact card for full refund, no opened, missing or tampered with cards will be credited to customer for refund, and this will be part of the agreement with the customer at time of purchase. Before refund the balance of the card must match the denomination on the label.
Notes on manufacturing process:

In the above I refer to not recording the private keys and deleting the server records as soon as the cards have been manufactured and checked for accuracy. please note that the recording of the private key for a certain amount of DA BOMB is required to power the FAST BITCOIN encrypted private key network.

submitted by bubbleHead3 to emailcoin [link] [comments]

Let's say hypothetically speaking 1 bitcoin reaches $8,572 USD one day. How would you easily calculate how much to tell someone to pay you if it's something like 1/1284th of a bitcoin?

Edit: will a conversion system be built in so people will be able to recognize how much something costs because the price of 1 bitcoin changes daily
I'm assuming eventually 1 bitcoin will level out and become a lot more stable but until we get there how will people deal with understanding how much .0002 bitcoins is costing them?
I know it's math but everyone having to carry calculator around to see if they can afford sounds inconvenient.
Will there be a universal system created such as 1 satoshi = $ USD ?
submitted by tricep6 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The market cap of crypto, and the fundamentals, have little correlation with each other

90% of the conversations found here in cryptocurrency, and most other project subreddits are people illustrating their imagined future of the decentralized world ahead of us.

Today, that is all we really have. Bitcoin doesn't really do remittances at the moment. Ethereum has an exchange (IDEX) as its best DApp. Volume on Stellar's Decentralized Exchange for cross-border fiat exchange is .... lacking.
Augur just launched today, and we don't even know for certain if it is the product that we are hoping it is. At least the the valuation of Augur can actually begin now, rather than being just speculation.
But we can all have at the moment is our imaginations of the future, and some amount of pattern recognition skills that make us all relatively confident that this future we have imagined will arrive one day. Check out this web-mapping of different subreddits and people that subscribe to common subreddits.. Here we see this fantastical, narrative spinning, imaginative microsection of Reddit where people share stories about the future, and what the future might be like.
But the price gives no fucks about your imaginations. The reason why the stock market prices are generally stable is because people can replace their imagination of the future, with concrete calculations of future income, make rational comparisons to other companies, and come out with a decent decree of certainty about the future valuations of different stocks.
When Bitcoin was pushing 20k, and the Coin Market Cap was pushing .9 Trillion, we were all geniuses, because we thought the future was here, and we predicted it. Now bitcoin is pushing down on 6K and CMC is pushing .25 Trillion, and all of a sudden we realize that the future isn't here at all.
So how far away is the future? Wherever it is, I think it's coming at an accelerating pace. In 2017 and 2018, 100x more developers came to the space than in all of 2009-2016 combined. This means that fundamentals are progressing at an proportionally quick rate. Charlie Shrem, in the latest Bad Crypto podcast estimated that "Pretty much everyone has at least heard about cryptocurrency"..
People are coming to the space that we never expected. The NBA Commissioner David Stern is getting into Crypto with a project trying to allow anyone becoming a Sports commentator, kind of like how Twitch allows anyone to commentate a video game.
Celebrities left and right, along with their clout, are adopting crypto just as much all of your friends and family are (which means some of them)
"It can all go to 0" is the biggest bunch of bull I've ever heard. A simple thought experiment can take care of this. If Bitcoin dropped too low, I personally would buy as much as I reasonably could. So would many other people. It's a worldwide currency with a world full of buyers. Too many people are looking at the Bitcoin price, and asking "Should I buy today?".

Anyone who says "It can all go to 0" simply doesn't understand the unique collection of different technologies that Satoshi organized, or what it produces.

And now to my first and last point. The current price evaluations of Cryptocurrencies are 100% due to the imaginations of the future in our heads. Therefore, when Bitcoin falls below 6K, Ether below $400, or your preferred coin below its best support, it's because people have pushed out how far the future actually is. But the future is still there somewhere, and we all know in Crypto that for every bear market, where people think the future will never come, there is an equal and opposite bull market for people who think the future is tomorrow.

The truth lies somewhere in between.

submitted by davidahoffman to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

4 Sub-$10 Million Market Cap Coins Worth Keeping An Eye On

1. Spectrecoin ($XSPEC) – $8.6 Million

What is Spectrecoin?

Utilizing a “range of proven cryptographic techniques” to achieve anonymous, untraceable, and un-linkable transactions, Spectrecoin is a secure Proof-of-Stake cryptocurrency enabling rapid P2P transactions and network privacy. Specifically, Spectrecoin is pulling out all the stops in order to protect user identity through their integration of:
At its core, Spectre’s dual coin system sanctions four fundamental types of privacy and anonymity transactions, XSPEC > XSPEC, XSPEC > SPECTRE, SPECTRE > SPECTRE, and SPECTRE > XSPEC, providing a plethora of transaction options for every type of user.
And finally, if you’re looking for the TLDR (too long, didn’t read), Spectrecoin notes the best way to understand SPECTRE is to think of Bitcoin + Proof-of-Stake.v3 + anonymous transactions (similar to Monero) + Tor (for IP obfuscation).

Why You Should Keep an Eye On XSPEC

Unlike several other privacy coins which merely provide a Tor proxy—availing users to potential malicious exit nodes—Spectrecoin is fully integrated with Tor, a reliable and tested network providing one of the largest pools of IP addresses for confidentiality and untraceability.
Coupled with staking, set at a 5% minimum per year, Spectrecoin offers a unique proposition (the only one in blockchain) for users looking to earn rewards while remaining anonymous by staking anonymous coins while generating more, fresh anonymous ones.
Furthermore, for those looking for affirmation of Spectrecoin’s commitment to anonymity, not even the developers know each other’s real names—something that would have made walking away from a lacklustre ICO (which only raised 16 BTC at $600/700 per BTC) all too easy.
Spectre has emphasized organic growth without an excessive and aggressive marketing push, opting instead for a working product and timely improvements to meet the ever-changing privacy arms race. And, with their funding gap set around £19,000, users can take solace in knowing the project isn’t an outright cash grab asking for millions to further tenuous goodwill—like far too many projects in the cryptosphere.
At time of writing, XSPEC is listed on CoinMarketcap at US$0.41 or 5,970 Satoshis.
Finally, if you’re wondering how Spectrecoin stacks up to other privacy coins, such as Monero, PIVX, and Zcash, check out this comparison chart.

2. FundRequest ($FND) – $1 Million

What is FundRequest?

In an age where open source software is an integral component for institutional, government, and nonprofit function and growth, there unfortunately remains a hindering factor—a cohesive, transparent, and styled request and transaction flow.
Cue FundRequest, a decentralized marketplace for open source collaboration and catalyst for global open source sharing and circulation, empowering organizations, government, and other entities to:
Need to brush up on what exactly ‘open source’ means? The Open Source Initiative describes the concept of ‘open source’ as a tool which “enables a development method for software that harnesses the power of distributed peer review and transparency of process.”
For example, a requesting organization (referred to as the funder) will allot set funds—stored in a smart contract (i.e., escrow)—in order to tackle an open source issue, which is then picked up and solved by a developer (the solver). In order to eliminate malicious behavior, FundRequest requires solvers to “have skin in the game,” by staking proportional valued funds, all released and claimed once the issue is solved.
Simply put, FundRequest is the go-to facilitating and incentivization platform (similar to Airbnb and Uber) for funding, claiming, and rewarding open source commits and contributions, leading to an enriched and more collaborative open source ecosystem.

Why You Should Keep an Eye On FND

With an estimated US$60 billion-plus in savings per year for organizations and institutions, thanks to open-source software and technology adoption, FundRequest is set to act as the glue which connects all dispersed and integral parts and actors. Traditional software, prohibitive costs, and predatory vendor practices are proving not to be conducive towards maximal technological growth and development, as most people and organizations just simply can’t afford or maintain it.
Plus, with a clear push by both private and public sectors to leverage community-based software for development and distribution over the last decade, it’s expanding at rapid pace. In 2018, it’s approximated over 50% of European and North American companies utilize open source software for “crucial applications,” along with over 50% of American government organizations.
This is no small industry.
GitHub alone boasts over 24 million users (more than 8 times their user base five years ago), and it’s estimated that in the EU and United States combined, there’s over 160 million persons working as freelancers and independent contractors in what’s known as the “gig economy.” And that’s just the tip of the iceberg, with over 60% of online gig economy workers accounted for in Asia.
As of August 1st, FND’s price sits at right around US$0.03 or 472 Satoshis.
Finally, for open source projects and ERC-20 token projects looking to increase development capacity, consider checking out FundRequest for potential partnerships. Already in their short tenure, FundRequest has partnered with:

3. COSS ($COSS) – $7.7 Million

What is COSS?

Redefining convenience, simplicity, and compatibility, and short for the “Crypto One-Stop Solution’ exchange and platform, COSS is the native token and liquidity attraction tool of the Singapore-based exchange, boasting some of the most popular altcoins on the market while enabling users to receive weekly payouts in “dust” for all traded tokens.
Specifically, COSS is looking to provide more than just a simple, fast, and secure cryptocurrency trading exchange—they’re building a borderless, digital economical system to bring cryptocurrencies to the masses via:
Ultimately, COSS is looking to shake up the cryptocurrency exchange ecosystem through improved user experience, heightened product and feature functions, and a comprehensive foundation for employers, startups, companies, and traders to build towards a more accessible and mainstream cooperative blockchain community.

Why You Should Keep an Eye on COSS

With the rapid and gargantuan successes enjoyed by both Kucoin and Binance in 2018, crypto exchanges employing user-friendly token incentivization models are becoming a go-to for users looking to generate passive income while diversifying their crypto portfolio.
However, unlike other cryptocurrency exchanges which have lowered their daily fee splits to nominal amounts, COSS has stayed true towards user rewards, keeping their daily percentage at 50%—paying out the respective dividends via a decentralized autonomous organization, ultimately guaranteeing an immutable percentage.
In order to stay competitive in the present-day blockchain ecosystem, COSS’s whitepaper notes a minimum of 3-5 new features implemented per quarter. In the past several months, below are just several of their most notable achievements:
And, if you’re looking to know what COSS’s endgame here is, their goal is to shift completely towards a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) in the future, where governance and decision making is outlined in code and run by a peer-to-peer network.
Currently, COSS’s price is listed at US$0.06 or 935 Satoshis on Coinmarketcap.
Finally, if you’re curious about COSS’s fee sharing, check out the COSS fee share calculator, which provides an accurate picture of your monthly exchange fee earnings relative to the amount of COSS owned. One Reddit user recently posted, and provided a screenshot, showing the COSS annual dividends to be at nearly 10% per year.

4. Lamden ($TAU) – $6.9 Million

What is Lamden?

Named after the Sherpa language word meaning “to guide,” Lamden is staying true to its name by easing the creation and deployment of dapps and custom blockchains.
At its core, Lamden is providing a suite of developer tools mimicking “modern development processes in such tech stacks as Node.js or Python.” Simply put, Lamden is supplying the building blocks for experienced and amateur blockchain developers alike, enabling organizations and enterprise to skirt the energy and time costs of hiring and training expensive blockchain developers—ultimately speeding up efficiency and reducing overhead costs.
Lamden is broken up into three fundamental sections, which all are in furtherance of project depth and the deployment of hyperfast blockchains for developers to not only experiment with, but test and deploy across other blockchain systems and platforms:
Furthermore, Lamden supports the Ethereum network and Bitcoin-based blockchains at present, and boasts zero transaction fees and free chain-to-chain payments in exchange for chain allocation a specific amount of bandwidth for confirming payment channel transactions—meaning that its users are able to transact for free as a result of corporate entities bearing the network load and processing.

Why You Should Keep an Eye On TAU

Having released their ‘Cilantro’ testnet alpha in February 2018, Lamden has since hit the ground running, rolling out their first version of Clove soon after and tackling the necessary tune-ups and improvements in preparation of their mainnet launch in Q4 2018. Lamden’s mainnet is set to utilize a unique combination of Delegated Proof-of-Stake (DPoS) and the BFT Protocol, and will scale to process nearly 10,000 transactions per second.
Moreover, in April 2018, Lamden announced the creation of LamDEX, their own decentralized cryptocurrency exchange and platform, where users will be able to stake their TAU—the native token of the Lamden platform—to act as a market maker, allowing for a cohesive back and forth across the TAU pair at prices faintly above and below market cost, ultimately generating rewards.
With a rather daunting and tedious task ahead for anyone looking to utilize and incorporate existing smart contracts—which involves the manual searching for such on GitHub (a general repository website)—Lamden is truly adding value to blockchain and application development through their smart contract repository. Unlike GitHub, Lamden supports dependencies, versioning, and security, all essential elements for a quality package manager.
Doing so adds not only convenience, but practicality to smart contract packages and implementation, and stands to save enterprise and organizations both exorbitant developer costs and time.
If you’d like to learn more about Lamden’s developer tool suite, check out this complete overview from their blog.
At the time of writing, Lamden’s price according to Coinmarketcap is US$0.04 or 699 Satoshis.
To get a better picture of Lamden and their blockchain development tools ecosystem, check out this explanatory YouTube video from their channel.
Final Thoughts
Risk is inevitable when investing in crypto and blockchain projects. However, as long as you are cognizantly defining parameters for absorbing such risk, then diversifying your portfolio with smaller capped projects can be an effective way to realize value.
Whether you’re looking for a user-friendly exchange to purchase crypto directly with fiat from (and earn dividends for loyalty) or wanting to execute anonymous and secure transactions with a P2P coin, the aforementioned projects are all bringing value to the crypto sphere through their overhaul of ineffective traditional mechanisms and institutions.
Make sure to stay calm and collected during this bear market, associate yourself with quality projects that you think are bringing actual value to severely flawed industries, and remember, having a little gamble in you never hurts (as long as it’s properly accounted for).
B0x: Gustafio
submitted by Marlie3 to altcoinforum [link] [comments]

Roger Ver bullies a young Korean undergraduate student in a surprise "debate" at his BCH meetup in Seoul

It's actually really disturbing to see this video. I know this young man because we both help out with the Seoul Bitcoin Meetup, which is a very open and friendly meetup, welcoming of anyone who would like to attend even if they do not support BTC.
There's much more to it than is shown in this heavily edited version of the discussion. Let me provide some of the important and neglected points. The young Korean man in the video is very honest, friendly, polite, and fair. He is willing to talk with anyone about his views and to listen, as well.
  1. This young Korean in this video is an undergraduate student.
  2. He has been learning about Bitcoin for roughly 6 months, now, and is almost finished reading "Mastering Bitcoin".
  3. He attended this Bitcoin Cash meetup to hear what is said about BCH and chat with people. He did not go to 'debate', but was called aside by Roger Ver for a conversation which was recorded.
  4. The full conversation was about 20 minutes. Roger Ver u/memorydealers said he would post the entire video, so I hope he follows through with that so everyone can see it in its entirety.
  5. The young Korean man was completely set up and bullied by these rehearsed talking points made by Roger Ver. He had no preparation and, as mentioned in the video, didn't even have his phone on him for the conversation. Roger Ver, on the other hand, has had countless debates and has very intricate and fine-tuned talking points.
  6. You can see in the video the aggressiveness of Roger's questioning, as the young man waits patiently and listens. But when he tries to get a word in to comment on something specific that Roger speeds past, Roger just gets louder and talks over him.
  7. The young man specifically emphasized comparing BTC and BCH tx fees in satoshi, but Roger pulled up a chart in USD. Maybe he was still incorrect about the fees, I don't know, but it has not been determined yet. Roger also doubled down saying that BTC fees have never been lower than BCH fees (in satoshi). I would also like to know the answer to this. And for anyone interested, this meetup took place on the evening of Thursday, June 14th, 2018, South Korea time.
  8. The @Bitcoin twitter account also chose to comment about this video by tweeting about it. The very end of the video was chosen, where the young Korean man was unfairly not given much of any chance to clarify his words. When given the chance, he is happy to clarify.
  9. Roger Ver states in this video at time stamp 10:20 in his video, "I'm holding most of my net worth in bitcoin cash." I would like to invite Roger to clarify his meaning or else double down on that statement. Roger, are you saying that you currently own a greater net worth of BCH than BTC? To be clear with your language, please let us know exactly how you are calculating this net worth. Let's take a USD valuation, for example. Are you saying that your net worth of BCH holdings is greater than your BTC holdings in terms of USD?
As someone who knows this young Korean guy, I have a few final comments about this video. This was not a "debate". Let's call it what it really is: a sucker punch. This was bullying. This was not a friendly conversation. Roger Ver pulled this man aside and bullied him with heavily rehearsed talking points, video recorded it, and then edited the video and posted it online. Who does that? That's so dirty, in my opinion.
Roger, please post the full video. Let's see it. Thanks in advance.
If anyone would like to visit us at the Seoul Bitcoin meetup, our large group meetup is open to everyone once per month on the first Saturday of every month. You can RSVP here. You can also follow Seoul Bitcoin on Twitter or on Youtube.
submitted by chrispalasz to btc [link] [comments]

I'm now funding ALL THE DEVS IN THE WORLD who are working on the Bitcoin Core, via Bitcoin, and pro rata. (Part Deux)

Hi Bitcoin!
As I have promised in my previous posts [1] [2], I would make sure that this was going to work, get you your answers on the questions you've asked earlier (mostly regarding the platform I've chosen to use for this), proof that it's working, and last but not least, to get the donations that have already been made to the developers. Now that that's all looking good, I'm ready for round two!
To clear some things up at forehand, before reposting the original post, one by one:
  1. My name is Tim Pastoor. Exhibit A: (If you know me and would like to vouch for me, you can simply add this tweet to your favorites. Thanks in advance!)
  2. One of the Bitcoin Core developers has confirmed to me personally that it's working for him, and this gives me the confidence that it'll work for others. I'm keeping his personal information private, so you'll have to take my word on this one. It would be nice if other developers could confirm it's working for them in the comments.
  3. Patrick Savalle, the CEO of Mobbr, will be answering any of the questions you might have regarding Mobbr. In case that anyone experiences any difficulties with our little project here this time, you can now directly contact Patrick through Reddit! Exhibit B:
  4. Patrick has provided me with a link to a video he has made for us. In the video he explains how to link a different address to the one you're using for your GitHub account. Exhibit C:
  5. Mobbr uses a multi-currency wallet, so donations won't be payed out from the same address as the one people are donating to. This makes it harder for people to keep track of the funds themselves on the blockchain, though it does give the users of Mobbr more privacy when withdrawing funds. Patrick has agreed to share data on the addresses they use for this with Jop Hartog from BlockTrail, in case anything suspicious happens and questions arise. This way, Jop will be able to see what's happening on the blockchain and will be an objective participant in this conversation to clear things up, again, in case anything seems to go wrong.
Hopefully this shows our good intentions and clears up any confusion that might have arised from the earlier post.
Again, in case you bump into anything, don't hesitate to ask Patrick (in his AMA) to help you out!
Any further questions for me? Feel free to ask them in the comments!
[1] [2]
----------- ORIGINAL POST -----------
Lot of yada-yada-yada about the Bitcoin Foundation at the moment, and quite frankly, I personally don't even want to participate in that conversation.
So, it's time for something constructive I thought, and I started thinking about how we could pay the developers ourselves; through the community. Since I'm not aware of any mature decentralized platforms that could handle this task (feel free to correct me), I went to
I've looked up the Github Bitcoin Core project page on Mobbr, and simply sent some bitcoin to the address that belongs to it:
1DvutmkwjwiDknAdpHP8ZsrNWqmaqEpBrn [1] [2]
Anyone who has now ever worked on the Bitcoin Core (on GitHub) can go to and claim their bitcoins, pro rata.
I.e., if 1 BTC has been donated to the address, then the developer who has contributed 1% will receive 0.01 BTC. Those who have contributed 20% will receive 0.2 BTC, etc.
For those who worry about using a centralized platform for this cause and about the fees that they might charge, you might want to take a look here [3]. Also, it's Bitcoin, so [?] transparency. Every satoshi that's being donated to this address can be followed into eternity, through any block explorer.
Shares per developer are being calculated according to the GitHub stats, as far as I know [4].
I couldn't come up with a better solution for now and was willing to show that the community can and wants to help the development of Bitcoin itself.
If we'd all contribute 0.01 BTC, or even 0.001 BTC per person per month, we'd all contribute a little bit to the very much needed development process of the Bitcoin Core. Hopefully this will result in the resources that this project needs.
I thought it would be worth a shot. Now I'm curious if you think so too.
ps: didn't pay me for this, and I'm not directly involved with them. I am biased on the subject though, because I believe that they have a kick-ass platform.
----------- /ORIGINAL POST -----------
submitted by Timoow to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Slack chat with James Lovejoy (VTC Lead Dev)

Thought I would share this chat I had with James Lovejoy last night. Super generous of him to provide this much access and time answering questions. I was already a HODL'er, but this solidified it.
beerfinger [1:28 AM] Just read through the entire rebranding thread in the Vertcoin subreddit. Earlier today I also watched some of Crypto Hedge's interview of James Lovejoy from last August on YouTube. I understand both sides of the rebranding argument and have tried to play devil's advocate. Right now I do believe that the argument against rebranding is stronger. Full disclosure: I've worked in marketing/advertising my whole career and just recently got into cryptos. With that said, there are two questions that keeps nagging on me:
[1:28] 1. this coin has been around since 2014, so nearly 4 years. James seems like an incredibly smart and capable chap, but I'm just going to go ahead and assume the he hasn't always been the Lead Dev while he was in high school. Presumably there was someone before him and, after he graduates and moves on to whatever it is he's going to do with his life, there will be someone after him. Yes? So, with all due respect to James, as an investor in VTC, what assurances are there that this isn't merely an interesting side-project for a brilliant MIT student with little interest/incentive in its value as an investment portfolio? If the value of this coin to James is that of a college project, that is something I as an investor would like to know.
jamesl22 [1:32 AM] Hey!
[1:33] I've been the lead dev since Nov 2014
[1:33] (while I was in high school)
[1:33] And I've kept at it through college, I certainly don't intend to go anywhere
[1:33] Plus, there are more who work on this project that just me
beerfinger [1:33 AM] 2. I've read complaints about Vertcoin from people who poopoo its usefulness. Decrying it as "just another coin trying to be Bitcoin with not much differentiating it." People don't seem to view the ASIC thing as a big enough differentiator to make VTC stand out. There seems to be a kernel of truth to that as part of the argument against rebranding seems to be a tacit acknowledgement that it should not occur until a major change in the development is launched. So my question again stems back to James' motivations and incentives here. Is this a convenient use case for some college thesis? Or is the team really working on coming up with a major change in development?
[1:34] hey James! wow, thanks so much for your quick response
[1:34] great to actually communicate with you. and I stand corrected. very impressive that you started on this so young. I can see why MIT accepted you :slightly_smiling_face:
[1:36] my questions still stand though: I'm not trying to insult you so I hope you don't take it that way, but as someone who considers VTC part of my investment portfolio, I am very curious to hear about your incentives. You clearly have noble intentions. But what is your ultimate goal? What's the end game? Is it the same as Satoshi's was? (assuming he was really one person who existed)
[1:37] Or is there something else?
jamesl22 [1:37 AM] I think it's the same as Satoshi's
[1:37] To recreate the financial system in a fairer, more distributed way
[1:37] My research at MIT is totally separate to my work on VTC, though the two are complimentary (both are in cryptocurrency)
[1:38] In my ideal world everyone runs a VTC miner and full node in their home, banks become narrow banks and clearing houses/stock exchanges are a thing of the past
[1:39] The rewards of the financial system (in the form of transaction fees) will be distributed to the people, rather than siphoned off by banks or ASIC manufacturers as happens now (edited)
goodminer [1:40 AM] :thumbsup:
beerfinger [1:40 AM] I see. That is compelling. So, being that's the case, that sounds to me like something worthy of a brand, no?
[1:41] Unless you think there are other coins on the market with the same goals. In which case, what will differentiate VTC?
jamesl22 [1:42 AM] I don't think there are any on the market with as strong of an ideology as us
[1:42] Or any that can demonstrate that it follows through on its commitments
[1:42] The way I see it, VTC went from being worth $0.01 last year to 100x that now
[1:43] I don't see how a rebrand can possible accelerate already parabolic growth
[1:43] Bear in mind, that until a few months ago we had 0 marketing, that is where our focus should be now
beerfinger [1:44 AM] Fair. I'm curious, what do you think it SHOULD be worth?
[1:44] I mean right now, at this moment.
jamesl22 [1:44 AM] I don't think I should say, the SEC might be watching us
beerfinger [1:44 AM] Not in the future.
[1:44] haha
[1:44] ok
[1:44] Can you say if you feel it is undervalued?
[1:44] or overvalued
jamesl22 [1:45 AM] I will say with confidence that 95% of the top 100 is severely overvalued
beerfinger [1:45 AM] coins you mean
jamesl22 [1:45 AM] Yes
[1:45] On coinmarketcap
[1:45] If you visit most of their websites, there is no code at all
[1:45] Yet it's worth many times what VTC is worth
[1:46] Where VTC has been established for nearly 4 years, bug free and features well demonstrated
[1:46] VTC also had LN and SegWit on main net before LTC or BTC (edited)
beerfinger [1:46 AM] Yes I mean your statement doesn't surprise me. It's a nacent market. Lots of snake oil, clearly.
[1:47] I guess to steer this back towards the branding/marketing of your coin though, you clearly feel strongly about it and have a clear vision. Do you feel that as it stands the branding conveys that sentiment?
jamesl22 [1:47 AM] When you say branding, I assume you mean "vertcoin" and the logo?
beerfinger [1:48 AM] yes. logo, color scheme, etc...
[1:48] name even
[1:49] also to clarify one point, when I say that you clearly feel strongly about it, the "it" refers to your coin (not the marketing of it)
jamesl22 [1:49 AM] I think it's largely arbitrary
beerfinger [1:49 AM] why is that
jamesl22 [1:49 AM] Most coin names have no meaning whatsoever
[1:49] Google, the largest tech company in the world has a silly name
[1:50] Litecoin (whose name ought to imply it has fewer features) is #4
beerfinger [1:51 AM] I wouldn't underestimate the amount of strategy that went into branding Google (and continues to this day)
jamesl22 [1:51 AM] What's most important is the pitch, how can you convince someone who knows nothing about the technicals behind cryptocurrency, that ASIC resistance and decentralisation is important?
[1:51] Yes, but the original branding was arbitrary and haphazard
[1:52] Yet the technology spoke for itself
[1:52] Now it's in the dictionary
[1:53] Spending lots of time and money on a new name/logo, trying to get community consensus on that and then redesigning the website/subreddit/wallets/other services to reflect the changes is not where I think we should focus our small resources
[1:54] My goal over the next year or two is to take VTC from speculative value to real-world value
[1:54] So point of sale, ease of use, that's the focus now
[1:55] I aim to over time provide complete solutions for merchants to implement VTC at point of sale, for laymen to set up nodes and miners in their homes
[1:55] As well as potentially enterprise support if we get big enough
beerfinger [1:55 AM] It sounds like this is your intended career path then, yes?
jamesl22 [1:55 AM] In some shape or form, yes
beerfinger [1:55 AM] Wonderful
[1:55] When do you graduate, James?
[1:55] If you don't mind me asking
slackbot Custom Response [1:55 AM] I AM talking to you aren't I !
jamesl22 [1:56 AM] Charlie Lee worked at Coinbase for several years before returning to LTC a month or two ago
[1:56] 2019
beerfinger [1:56 AM] So you're a Sophomore? Or are you in graduate school?
jamesl22 [1:57 AM] Junior
chuymgzz [1:58 AM] @beerfinger can you imagine when people first heard the word "dollar" like WTF is a dollar where did it actually came from. It actually comes from Czech joachimsthaler, which became shortened in common usage to thaler or taler. Don't pay much attention to the name Vertcoin, just take a look at the tech. If you buy into this coin's ideology, you will actually start to like the name.
jin [1:58 AM] Hey guys :slightly_smiling_face:
[1:59] @chuymgzz but not everyone looks purely at the tech, if we look at the top 100 coins, you would know whats going on :stuck_out_tongue:
beerfinger [1:59 AM] Cool well thanks for indulging me, James. I really appreciate it. Hopefully this conversation continues in the future. While your probably right that right now is probably not the right time, that doesn't mean at some point in the future it won't be. In the meantime, I'll take comfort in the knowledge that I've invested in a worthy cause.
chuymgzz [1:59 AM] Longer term only the functional ones and the ones that deliver will survive and a whole ecosystem will be built around it
jin [1:59 AM] buzz and hype is unfortunately a large part of it
beerfinger [2:00 AM] *you're
jin [2:00 AM] that is true, but without marketing to draw in attention (which leads to usage and so on etc) it will be difficult for a functional one to survive even
beerfinger [2:07 AM] @james122 One more thing: how do you feel about regulation? Pro or con? Do you feel that the idea of nation states like the US and China (ergo the ICO ban) taking it upon themselves to place restrictions on the market to try and make them safer is anathema to the idea of decentralization? Are you a full on libertarian in that respect? Or do you welcome regulation because it'll separate the wheat from the chaff?
jamesl22 [2:07 AM] I think we need a sane amount of regulation
[2:08] ICOs are clearly illegal imo
[2:08] Unless they are performed under the same rules as an IPO
[2:09] Plus I don't want to create a safe harbour for child pornographers, people traffickers and terrorists to store their money
[2:09] However I do think the state has no right to spy on you without a warrant (edited)
beerfinger [2:09 AM] You mean you don't want to be Monero? :slightly_smiling_face:
jamesl22 [2:09 AM] No
[2:10] I will pursue privacy features that make the pseudoanonymity provided by the blockchain easier for people to use effectively
[2:11] That way, it is not obvious to anyone your holdings or transactions publicly (edited)
[2:11] But things like sting operations would still be theoretically possible
beerfinger [2:13 AM] Love it. I still feel the branding thing will need to be revisited at some point. I don't know what that means, exactly. Whether its as small as a font change to something bigger like a new color scheme, logo or even name, I'm not sure of. The ideology is strong, but as it stands Vertcoin doesn't have a clear differentiator in the market. I'm not sure that matters so much yet at this time, but it will.
[2:15] You clearly have a strong vision, I'm just not sure it's being communicated effectively yet. Hence, haters who say Vertcoin is just trying to be another Bitcoin.
workstation [2:15 AM] beerfinger might be a huge whale sniffing out Vertcoin before a huge loadup. Not that, that's a bad thing :stuck_out_tongue:
beerfinger [2:15 AM] haha... I wish
jamesl22 [2:16 AM] Vertcoin is trying to be another Bitcoin lol
[2:16] It's picking up where Bitcoin left off
[2:16] If people want a decentralised cryptocurrency, they should use Vertcoin
[2:17] Bitcoin just isn't one anymore
[2:17] Neither is Litecoin (edited)
beerfinger [2:20 AM] Semantics really, but if that's the case then that means Vertcoin isn't trying to be another Bitcoin. Bitcoin is already Bitcoin, which is a coin that did not fulfill it's promises. Vertcoin, on the other hand, like you said picks up where Bitcoin left off. I'm not sure that's being communicated by the brand (yet). Doing so may have nothing to do with rebranding (unless rebranding generates a bigger social following who then helps you communicate that).
workstation [2:20 AM] You've continued on a great coin James and no doubt Vertcoin has great features vs other coins, however without widespread use and adoption, Vertcoin might just become another coin without much use. The marketing side is sometimes even more important than the development side. Just need to look at history for that. E.g. Early version of Windows was buggy, bluescreen of death plagued it. But with heaps of $$ and marketing, Windows is pretty rock solid these days.
atetnowski [2:21 AM] joined #marketing.
jamesl22 [2:22 AM] Yes, agreed to both statements
[2:22] We're working on it, but it takes time and money
[2:23] But really, adoption is pointless until point of sale works properly
[2:23] When you can get it into people's physical wallets, or phone and they can spend it in a store, that's when it takes off (edited)
[2:23] Walmart, Target, all the big retailers hate Visa and Mastercard
workstation [2:24 AM] Thats a long way off... Even Apple and Samsung are struggling in that area
jamesl22 [2:24 AM] They would love a solution that opted them out of having to pay their fees
beerfinger [2:25 AM] @workstation To play devil's advocate for one sec, most successful people in the world don't achieve success because they tried to achieve success. Success is merely a byproduct of their passion. I do believe that James' commitment to the ideology can be sufficient. But it is true that the branding should communicate his vision. That is a constant conversation, too.
workstation [2:25 AM] yes, true
jamesl22 [2:26 AM] What we really need is talented content creators to make compelling media that explains the vision in a layman friendly way
[2:26] Thus far the message has been far too technical
[2:26] But in the past, the space was mostly populated by technical people so that is understandable
[2:26] It is only in the last 6 months that the general public has started to get involved
[2:27] Sadly "ASIC resistance" doesn't speak to them
beerfinger [2:27 AM] @james122 While it's true that universal adoption is key, you can say that about ANY coin. Even dogecoin would suddenly become a real coin if everyone up and decided to start using it one day. What's your strategy for making VTC that coin?
jamesl22 [2:27 AM] Whereas I think taking power from banks, chinese miners and giving it back to the people can be far more compelling
workstation [2:27 AM] We take Visa and Mastercard at our stores. We only do it because it boosts sales. People these days are all borrowing on credit because they don't have enough.... Paying on their CC# lets them buy things now (instant gratification) and slowly pay later. They managed to get banks on board because they make so much money on the interest. There is a clear reason why those cards satisfy a demand. We get charged about 1.5% by VISA/MC. To be honest, it's not a real deal breaker.
beerfinger [2:27 AM] haha, well, james you're talking to the right guy :slightly_smiling_face:
[2:28] My career is content creation
[2:28] I have nearly 20 years producing commercials and (lately) social content for global brands
mikevert [2:29 AM] joined #marketing.
beerfinger [2:29 AM] I would be happy to consult and provide any assistance I can
[2:29] "taking power from banks, chinese miners and giving it back to the people can be far more compelling" - that's your modus operandi
[2:29] you can definitely tell that story in a compelling way
[2:30] Question: have any crypto's ever created any sort of ad before? Even just for social content? (sorry, I'm new to this space)
jamesl22 [2:30 AM] Well we'd obviously be grateful for your assistance
[2:31] I'd imagine so, though I don't follow many other coins' social media very much
goodminer [2:31 AM] @beerfinger lets chat :smile: We've been working on a lot of initiatives over the last few weeks
jamesl22 [2:31 AM] @workstation 1.5% to a huge retailer is a large sum of money though
workstation [2:35 AM] I don't see any coin being widely used to be honest. They fluctuate way too much. Say a typical consumer whose after tax salary is $1000/week.. He buys groceries at the store for $1/Liter. This is simple maths for him, he knows it's going to cost $1 each week, inflation may make it rise to $1.10 next year, but he understands that. With coins, the price of his milk is too hard to calculate.
[2:37] Why would Bob switch to using coins, when Visa/MC give him so much more? He doesnt pay the processing fee (1.5%), he gets free credit (these days, banks will easily approve 10k credits). Why would he switch to Vertcoin?
jamesl22 [2:37 AM] @workstation, volatility is high because market volume is low
[2:38] I think it will take another financial crisis or two though before people start to abandon fractional reserve banking (edited)
workstation [2:42 AM] As long as bob gets his paycheck, he's not going to care what happens at the fed
jamesl22 [2:43 AM] Bob ain't gunna get his paycheck one day though
[2:44] Because the credit ponzi scheme economy will have collapsed
workstation [2:48 AM] yes, the fed can print whatever it wants out of thin air... But its backed by US tax payers to the tune of 2+ trillion/year with most banks adhering to loan capital requirements. E.g. they need a certain amount of money deposited before they can loan more money out. What is Bitcoin/alt coins backed by? Seems like its somewhat of a ponzi scheme now, with everyone piling in thinking it will go up forever. I get that BTC is backed by real energy usage/capital requirements to mine it (asic equipment, datacenters, etc), so its more "real" than $1 USD, but they both service a purpose.
axelfoley75 [2:49 AM] joined #marketing.
workstation [2:51 AM] but whats the end goal because it seems they all become ponzi schemes. The only true coin will be one that will not allow any fiats be converted to to coin.
[2:51] the only way to earn a coin, would be to mine it, wouldn't you think that that would be the truest coin?
[2:52] right now people are just moving wads of fiat money into coins/alt coins, thereby skewing everything.
beerfinger [2:54 AM] just jumping in here with one last comment before I go to sleep: money, whether we're talking salt, precious metals, fiat currency, or cryptos, is just something that we all agree to prescribe a value to. That being the case, how are you going to stop someone from trading that value for something they want? If someone wants to trade their cryptos for chickens, a latte, USD or anything else, they're going to do it. No point in trying to regulate what people spend their money on or how they do it. Seems the antithesis of the whole decentralization thing anyway
workstation [2:57 AM] true
aegisker [3:02 AM] I belive when crypto matures, has fast and easy payments solutions, volume will rise and price will be more stable. Current price is speculation due to news and new development. I dont belive that after 10 years we will be seeing such swings.
beerfinger [3:04 AM] sorry keep thinking of new stuff... @jamesl22 your point about POS is salient. What's your perspective on coins like TenX that try to address that with payment platforms and cards?
[3:05] is that what you mean? nuts & bolts, how would Vertcoin become a POS option?
aegisker [3:06 AM] How is usdt keeping its price around usd?
beerfinger [3:07 AM] don't they just keep up with USD inflation by making sure there's an equal amount of tokens to USD in the market at any given point?
jamesl22 [3:07 AM] Integration of LN and AS is key
[3:07] Then providing some hardware or software solution to integrate with payment processors
[3:07] I haven't looked at tenx
beerfinger [3:07 AM] so Vertcoin IS actively pursuing this then
[3:08] interesting
[3:09] perhaps there's some way to leverage things like ApplePay
jamesl22 [3:09 AM] I doubt it
[3:09] ApplePay's design is fundamentally different
beerfinger [3:09 AM] I mean it doesn't have to be ApplePay itself. Can be a separate app
lucky [3:09 AM] Having bitcoin or altcoins tied to your debit card isn't unbelievable
jamesl22 [3:10 AM] Of course not
[3:10] But it is suboptimal
beerfinger [3:10 AM] yeah sort of kills the whole decentralization thing
lucky [3:10 AM] in fact if we are going the whole hog and saying fiat collapsed. You'd be silly to think the banks would standby and let crypto take over without them
beerfinger [3:10 AM] now we're relying on banks again
lucky [3:11 AM] At the first sign of crypto succeeding fiat. Banks will take over
[3:11] Because they can trade their fiat to coin
[3:11] Government too
aegisker [3:12 AM] Well, banks issues debt, whole market is built around debt. Crypto would take that away
[3:12] This will be hardest transition
jamesl22 [3:12 AM] If the crypto market ever gets to say $1tril, the banks will use their lobbyist army to squash it as best they can
lucky [3:13 AM] Is it not possible crypto gets immediately regulated into the banking system as soon as it passed fiat in some way
jamesl22 [3:13 AM] They don't care right now because the space is tiny compared to their own equity
lucky [3:13 AM] Yes exactly James
beerfinger [3:13 AM] i like the idea of leveraging NFC tech as a way to introduce crypto to POS purchases... everyone already has a smart phone so no need to reinvent the wheel... it's basically just an app
lucky [3:13 AM] If finance is going to change politics needs to too
[3:14] Nfc seems like the way. Yeag
[3:14] Lots of the android wallets leverage it
aegisker [3:14 AM] No need for nfc, nfc was kinda overhyped. Qr codes can work equally good
jamesl22 [3:14 AM] @beerfinger I think LN will allow us to achieve that
lucky [3:14 AM] Lol qr
[3:14] Who has ever scanned a qr....
jamesl22 [3:14 AM] We just need a hardware implementation for the reader
beerfinger [3:14 AM] sorry james, what's LN?
lucky [3:14 AM] Apple made sure qr never worked
jamesl22 [3:14 AM] Lightning Network
beerfinger [3:14 AM] ah
aegisker [3:15 AM] If u use your phone, why complicate with nfc, is there a security benefit?
beerfinger [3:15 AM] the infrastructure is there... most readers i come across these days are already NFC compliant
jamesl22 [3:15 AM] QR can work, but requires a high res display in the POS device
[3:15] Which would increase costs
[3:15] NFC is cheap af
lucky [3:16 AM] Yep. Qr is extremely requirement heavy
aegisker [3:16 AM] For example, pub: you get check with qr. U pay with your phone. Waiter sees on his computer that its payed.
lucky [3:16 AM] Look at Asia and south America
[3:16] Nobody can read qr
aegisker [3:17 AM] I europe all checks already have qrs for tax checking
lucky [3:17 AM] I work in global marketing. Qr is completely unadopted in the real world
[3:17] Yes in no public scenario qr is used
aegisker [3:17 AM] Where you from?
lucky [3:17 AM] Uk
[3:19] A decade in marketing I can tell you for sure Joe public doesn't scan qr codes
[3:19] James is right. We need an alternative hardware solution
[3:19] And I think I unique piece of tech in public would drive massive interest
aegisker [3:20 AM] In slovenia, croatia, austria(i tjink) there is law that all transactions in coffeeshops or shops(everything with fiat transaction) is sent to tax authority as soon as check is printed. U get qr code on your check, so you can check if tax s paid for your service. This is to prevent black markets and unauthorized sellers. Works pretty well. If you frequently scan qrs you can get some bonuses..
[3:21] Public got used to this pretty fast.
lucky [3:21 AM] So there's an incentive
aegisker [3:21 AM] So also you could print qr shop wallet addr.
lucky [3:21 AM] Kind of skews the ease of adoption stat we are looking for
aegisker [3:22 AM] Costz nothing
lucky [3:22 AM] Costs a smartphone with a quick camera
[3:22] How about in a dark club
beerfinger [3:23 AM] I came tonight with many questions about Vertcoin. Namely the incentives of the Devs and how it differentiated itself in the marketplace. All of those questions have been answered as best as I could have hoped. The only thing left is figuring out a way to tell that story. @jamesl22, all of the things you've said tonight are reassuring and exciting. They provide great promise for the future of this coin and even more - your goals, if realized, are truly category shifting. This is such a compelling story. TELL IT!
lucky [3:23 AM] Asking every transaction to require an in focus photo capability is insane, imo
aegisker [3:23 AM] uploaded and commented on this image: IMG_20170908_092307.jpg 1 Comment Thats how it looks
lucky [3:23 AM] We need something similar to a contactless debit card
[3:24] Good luck scanning that in the dark with a £100 smartphone. Though.
aegisker [3:24 AM] For starters this is easiest solution for early adoption (edited)
workstation [3:25 AM] why not something short like vCoin. Then u could make it go off V=Vendetta, sort of has a nice mystery, anti establishment
aegisker [3:25 AM] You just need plugin for your pos software that checks your crypto wallet for received funds
[3:26] Imo this is easiest way to implement first public purchases of beer or coffee
beerfinger [3:26 AM] by the way, less is more when it comes to branding
[3:26] look at apple
[3:26] i love this example: YouTube Brant Walsh Microsoft Re-Designs the iPod Packaging
[3:31] and there's always something to be said for ad wars... apple's david vs goliath attack ads vs microsoft is what put them back on the map
[3:31] that could be a great angle for Vertcoin... go after Bitcoin
[3:31] make fun of it the way Jobs poked at Gates
[3:32] that's just my 2 Vertcoins
submitted by beerfinger to vertcoin [link] [comments]

The first reddit outtake from Digital Gold: newly unearthed emails from Satoshi in 2009 about what it would take for Bitcoin to catch on

This is a bit of an experiment: the first reddit outtake from Digital Gold, the story of Bitcoin, which I’m releasing with HarperCollins on May 19.
In the run up to the book’s release, I’m seeing how it works to post exclusive material to bitcoin — stuff that ended up on the cutting room floor but that should be fascinating for people steeped in Bitcoinia. I will also be putting up fun facts from the book on my Facebook page and Twitter.
This email exchange from 2009 occurred eight months after Bitcoin was initially released, early in the story of Digital Gold. The Finnish college student Martti Malmi was one of the few people helping Satoshi Nakamoto to keep the system up and running. Bitcoins themselves were worth essentially nothing at the time. The lack of interest kicked off this conversation in August 2009 about what Bitcoin might need to grow. Thanks to Martti for sharing this, and a lot of other stuff about those early days.
Satoshi: It would help if there was something for people to use it for. We need an application to bootstrap it. Any ideas?
Martti: I've been thinking about a currency exchange service that sells and buys bitcoins for euros and other currencies. Direct exchangeability to an existing currency would give bitcoin the best possible initial liquidity and thus the best adoptability for new users. Everyone accepts payment in coins that are easily exchangeable for common money, but not everyone accepts payment in coins that are only guaranteed to buy a specific kind of a product.
Satoshi: That would be more powerful if there was also some narrow product market to use it for. Some virtual currencies like Tencent's Q coin have made headway with virtual goods. It would be sweet if there was some way to horn in on a market like that as the official virtual currency gets clamped down on with limitations. Not saying it can't work without something, but a ready specific transaction need that it fills would increase the certainty of success.
Martti: At its simplest this exchange service could be a website where traders, who can be individual persons, can post their rates, and random users can leave trade requests. Some kind of an average rate estimate could be shown on the site. Small-scale trading by individuals would be outside legal hassle in most countries, and putting all the eggs in the same basket would be avoided.
Satoshi: Basically like an eBay site with user reviews to try to establish which sellers can be trusted. The escrow feature will help but not solve everything. It would be far more work to set up such a site than just to set up a single exchange site of your own, and there won't be enough users to make it go until later. I'm thinking it wouldn't make sense to make an eBay type site until later.
Martti: Another idea, which could be additional to the previous one, would be an automated exchange service. The service would automatically calculate the exchange rate and perform the transactions. This would be nicer to the user: completion of the transaction request would be certain and instantaneous. Making this service might actually be quite easy if there was a command line interface to Bitcoin: just take any web application framework and use PayPal back-end integration to automatically send euros when Bitcoins are received, and vice versa. This kind of business would also work great on larger scale if you set up a company and take care of all the bureaucracy needed to practice currency exchange. (I actually have a registered company that I've used for billing of some IT work, I could use that as a base.)
Satoshi: Even if you had automation, you'd probably want to review orders manually before processing them anyway. It wouldn't be hard to process orders by hand, especially at first. You could always set a minimum order size to keep orders more infrequent.
I’m hoping the community here can help get the word out about Digital Gold. The best way to help is to pre-order the book either on Amazon or on Overstock if you want to pay with Bitcoin.
submitted by nathanielpopper to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

To Spend or Not to Spend

That is my biggest dilemma.

On one hand I know adaption is the most important thing for bitcoin, and the best way to do it is to slowly replacing my day to day expenses towards paying by bitcoin. On the other hand I feel like we are still in early stages of it so I feel like spending is wasting my coins (like paying for the pizza example that gets thrown to your face all the time).

Imho if that pizza was not purchased, if the following transactions didn't happen (even the ones in deep web, heck even dark web) bitcoin would not be what it is today, yet everyday we keep hearing HODL HODL HODL.

So I came with a compromise. I'm not sure if this would make much sense, so I would love to hear the community's opinions on how it fares with your way of living.

Let us, for the sake of simplicity, assume I am not buying bitcoin every month with my spare cash, and that whatever I have right now is what I ever will have. It is easy to scale the calculation up by ratio for further buying. Now, the idea is to only spend bitcoin over certain levels of appreciation, with a lower rate. For the example below I will assume I have 1 bitcoin, or 100,000,000 satoshis for divisibility. Now I will have 2 parameters:

  1. Appreciation trigger rate, ATR
  2. Sale ratio, SR
The idea is pretty simple, after every time bitcoin price (say by USD) hits the next ATR, I will give myself allowance to spend SR amount of it for day-to-day transactions. If bitcoin keeps rising I will keep spending, if bitcoin is stagnant I will be waiting for the day for the rise (unless it appreciates over the new purchases for the ATR rate, which we ignore for the time being). Let us put this into numbers for instance.

For bitcoin price of $3,200, ATR of 25%, SR of %6
- When bitcoin hits $4,000 I give myself 60M satoshi allowance (which is now worth $240) that absolutely should be spend to increase adoption
- Next trigger happens at $5,000 my allowance becomes 56.4M satoshi ($282 worth)
- $6,250 -> 53M s ($331) ... $37,250 -> 3M s ($1200) ~ here we already lost half of our bitcoin, but our total net worth in USD becomes $18Km which is about 6x of our initial investment.

This way we never run out of bitcoin even if we were to reach the moon. We don't necessarily buy Lambo with bitcoin either though. It becomes a very good investment and a tool to get away from fiat to some extent. In these imgur links (2, 3), are the charts to illustrate above example for 3 sets of ATSR for 1 bitcoin with $3200 at face value.

Now, if we are buying, say $500 worth of bitcoin (15.6M satoshi) every month, we simply create a new thread with same calculations for that as well.

Of course biggest weakness of this approach is that it heavily depends on bitcoin price rising. I.e. if bitcoin price stagnates we are simply not spending it and thus are not helping with adoption. For this issue I was thinking about simply having part of my monthly purchase to be immediately made available to my allowance. Say I still buy bitcoin with $500->15.6M satoshi, but make 3.9M satoshi immediately available for me to spend for bitcoin based transaction. Basically losing usd over conversion rates to help bitcoin.

What do you guys think? Is this an OK strategy or am I missing something major in my calculations?

Also for anyone who plans to make jokes about this going to $0, I am throwing money etc etc, please find another thread to do so, I am genuinely asking for opinion of people who takes bitcoin seriously here.
submitted by justinjustinian to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Best of Buttcoin: 2014

There's been some fantastic work done in this subreddit spreading disinformation researching, criticising, and debunking bitcoin and its sacred cows over the past year, which I would like to celebrate.
So here's some posts I saved on bitcoin-related topics. But I started saving things too late... So if you have and/or remember any great posts from the past year, dig them up and post them here.
Also, unironically, maybe someone should start a buttcoin wiki

First, three pieces of investigative journalism from Buttcoin's top minds. Here Charlie_Shrem examines the environmental impact of bitcoin mining. Key finding: For every Bitcoin transaction, 47 kilograms of CO2 is released into the atmosphere from the miners alone.
Current hash rate: 261,900,382 GH/s
Number of transactions per day: 71,331
If we assume rather conservatively that 1GH/s = 1 watt on average, then this would mean 261,900,382W is being used to power the network. We can simplify this to 261,900 kW.
Some miners can do better than 1W per 1GH/s, but many if not most do worse (i.e. 2W per 1GH/s to 10W per 1GH/s).
Going by the figure of 0.527kg CO2 / kWh found on this page,
0.527kg CO2 x 261,900 kW x 24 hours = 3,312,511.2 kg CO2 per day
3,312,511.2 kg CO2 / 71,331 transactions = 46.44 kg CO2 per transaction
For comparison, even going by this Coindesk Article, an ATM produces daily 3.162kg in CO2 emissions.
0.25kwH x 0.527kg CO2 x 24 hours = 3.162kg/day.
That means that the carbon emission for one Bitcoin transaction is equivalent to about 15 ATMs processing perhaps hundreds or thousands of transactions in a day combined.

Earlier this month Frankeh abruptly interrupted remittance-focused annular onanism by issuing a challenge: to find a single instance where bitcoin works out cheaper than a fiat alternative. In case you need to ask... Nope.
Right, there's a bunch of circlejerking happening in /Bitcoin right now so I think it's time to cut through the bullshit one way or another.
Country to send money to.
The biggest remittance markets are China, Indian and the Philippines.
I believe that since /Bitcoin often gives the Philippines as an example of successful Bitcoin remittance then it is the perfect country to use in our challenge.
Country to send money from.
According to this wikipedia article Malaysia and Canada have the biggest expat Filipino communities. 900,000 and 500,000.
So I think we should do the calculations based on both countries.
The methodology
Most people are not paid in Bitcoin. This is a fact. So for our calculation you must start with fiat, and end in fiat. We're not doing these calculations based on future utility of Bitcoin (No, neo. I'm saying...), we're doing them on the current utility.
We will also be doing a bank to bank remittance, because that is nice an constant. We don't need to take into account pick up locations Bitcoin remittance allows and pick up locations normal remittance allows. They'll vary too much.
Time will also not be taken into account, as time doesn't actually matter when it comes to remittance. Now, Bitcoiners might shout about this particular rule but let me explain my logic behind this.
A foreign worker gets paid every Friday. They start the remittance process on the Friday and regardless of if it takes 0, 3, or 5 days their family back in their home country just needs to base their life around money coming in on remitters pay day + 0, 3, or 5 days. Time taken is of no real value when it comes to remittance. All that matters is that it consistently arrives on day x.
As such, any remittance services that take over 5 working days are to be ignored for the sake of this challenge.
The amount
The amount is going to be 25% of the average wage in each of the countries. This isn't extremely scientific because it doesn't particularly need to be, and the figures are hard to come by.
So 1826.75 MYR for Malaysia and 1,398 CAD for Canada.
Don't bother complaining about these, they're just examples.
Few more ground rules
  • We're going to be going from bank/bank card to bank regardless, so we're not interested in banking fees on either side. They will be the same regardless of Bitcoin or WU (for example)
  • It must be from local fiat to foreign fiat.. You can't palm off the conversion fee to the receivers bank to keep fees down.
  • Any remittance service can be used, as long as Bitcoin is involved for people fighting the Bitcoin corner and Bitcoin isn't used for people fighting the WU (or similar) corner.
  • You must go through the process and document all the fees for each. Fees to look out for are currency spreads, transaction fees on exchanges, etc

Finally a recent thread, but commendable all the same. Hodldown presents some research leading to facts overturning years of knowledge in the bitcoin wiki. Even us shills have been laughing at bitcoin's pathetic capability of 7 transactions per second. It turns out, we were out by at least a factor of 2:
The average number of transactions per block right now is: 665 transactions
The average block size is 0.372731752748842mb.
That means the average transaction is 0.00056049887mb. Which means 1mb of transactions (the limit) is 1784 transactions
Assuming a 10 minute block (a whole other can of worms) that means there is 10*60 seconds.
1784/600 isn't 7. It's a 2.97.
Bitcoin at a technical level can not handle even 3 transactions per second.

In one of the frequent bitcoin user invasions, PayingWithActualMone outlines why the "solution in search of a problem" isn't that great of a solution to much either.
On the transaction side: the Bitcoin community seems convinced that banks are ripping them off (which imo they are not), and that it can be fixed by applying some magicsauce over a transaction that is facilitated by banks regardless. So far in practice I haven't seen any evidence of the 'fast' 'cheap' and 'easy' transactions, like most recently with Mollie. They usually compare the fees of BTC>BTC transactions to the fees of Chase Mastercard > a fucking nomad in the Sahara (with consumer protection) to prove their point. The community also seems convinced that the entire world banks the way America does, not realizing that in Europe banking has been dirt cheap for years.
And the security... oh boy the security. Half the population can't manage to go without a virus for one year (not an actual statistic), and now you expect them to secure their coins? People are dumb as shit, and software is always one step behind the exploits. We could of course create Bitcoin banks, but then there isn't much left of the original idea.
On the 'intrinsic value' side: what the hell is wrong with people. If the underlying product is no good in any aspect, why is it worth much? Right now (that's like 5 years after introduction mind you) BTC is used in 3 types of transactions: Silk Road, SatoshiDice & extremely questionable transactions. It does its job well in that aspect, and that's all it will ever be. The community just turned the technology into a giant ponzi, and they don't care as long as they get paid. The people actually doing business in Bitcoin probably don't care about the price that much.

Someone who deleted their account, on the argument that merchant adoption is a cause of the price drop:
That's just an excuse butters use for the price going down.
There's no real difference between selling bitcoin for fiat and exchanging bitcoin for goods and services. Both are a form of sale of bitcoin, an expression of preference for something other than bitcoin.
If on balance, there's more flow of bitcoin into fiat, goods or services than there is a corresponding opposing flow, then it is simply the market expressing the view that bitcoin is overvalued. Therefore, the reduction in the value of bitcoin (as valued in fiat) is a sincere expression of the market's view of what the correct price for bitcoin is.
Think of an example: A true believer has 20 BTC. He exchanges 10 BTC with Dell for a whizzy server. Dell (or another intermediary) sell the 10 BTC at an exchange in return for fiat. The market price of BTC goes down.
The price goes down, simply because a true believer cut his bitcoin holding, he got out. He thought having a server now was worth more to him than 10 tickets to the moon. Which is an expression of a negative view of the future value of bitcoin. A simple "aggressive" sale in trading parlance.

A late entry from jstolfi. A concise description of the Satoshi/Bitcoin origin story .
My understanding is that "Satoshi" had been trying to solve the technical problem of convincing a bunch of anonymous, volunteers to maintain and protect a distributed ledger, with no central authority.
He thought that he had a solution, in the form of a protocol that included PoW, miner rewards, longest chain, etc. The solution seemed to work on paper; but, as a good scientist, he started an experiment in order to check whether it would also work in practice.
For that experiment to be meaningful, it would have been enough if the coin was mined for several years only by a few hundred computer nerds, with the cooperation of some friendly pizza places and bars.
The US$ price of the coin was not important to the experiment, and it was never meant to be a weapon for libertarians, a way to buy drugs or evade taxes, a competitor to credit cards or Western Union, a sound investment or item for day-trading. All those "goals" were tacked onto it afterwards.

bob237 comments on the the absurdity of coinbase and it's touted 'rebuy' scheme,
It gets even better than that, actually. A lot of bitcoiners don't like 'losing' bitcoin, and so coinbase added a popular 'repurchase bitcoin' feature that automatically debits your bank account to replenish the BTC in your coinbase account after a purchase.
The ultimate result then is that you pay coinbase fiat, they take their cut, and then send that fiat on to the merchant. All 'bitcoins' used in the middle of the transaction are not really bitcoins, but just abstractions in coinbase's internal [off-chain] accounting system.
It's a crap version of paypal, no consumer protection and a ton of fees hidden in the spread when you buy your chuck-e-cheese tokens from them.

saigonsquare explains why ubiquitous tipping isn't the the killer app that it has been touted as, and why bitcoiners may fail to grasp this
Most people understand that there are different sorts of interaction. There are purely social interactions, there are quid-pro-quo interactions, and there are market interactions. Mixing those up causes embarrassment and insult. I wouldn't try to pay my mother-in-law ten bucks for cooking Christmas dinner, and I certainly wouldn't try to pay her ten cents. If a waiter suggests I try the raspberry tart, I won't get away with offering to bake him some cookies next week in compensation; if an office mate suggests I have a slice of her birthday cake, I'll be insulted if she brings me a bill for it. If I spend an hour helping my friend move apartments and he thanks me, I'm fine; we're friends helping each other out. If he pays me two bucks, I'm insulted; he's canceled the social nature of the interaction and instead simply bought my labor for a fraction of its going rate. I'm up two bucks but down a friend.
Ancapspergers, not particularly understanding any sort of interaction more complicated than buying a cheeseburger at Wendy's, assume that all interactions are a form of market transaction, and set pricing accordingly. Normal humans get offended by a penny shaving, because it cancels the social nature of the interaction and turns it into a market transaction--and then informs the recipient that his contribution to the transaction was of negligible value.
submitted by occasionallyrude to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

THE TRUTH ABOUT BITCOIN Gold Satoshi to Bitcoin (BTC) Converter & Calculator What is Bitcoin ? Bitcoin satoshi TeknoAC TeknoAC How to calculate the Satoshi value of any coins How to transfer satoshi in you bitcoin balance Satoshi to USD, USD to Satoshi

シ Satoshi Bitcoin Converter . It's easy to bookmark with a home screen icon. Here's how. Enter a number. ฿ BTC-bitcoin: mBTC-millibits/mbits: μBTC-microbits/bits: シ satoshi ≈ USD at pageload: BTC → USD conversion USD → BTC conversion Approximate value of one bitcoin at time of pageload (in USD): Stuck loading? See "Developer Notes" or use the web app at SatoshiBitcoinConverter ... What is a Satoshi? Each bitcoin (BTC) is divisible to the 8th decimal place, so each BTC can be split into 100,000,000 units. Each unit of bitcoin, or 0.00000001 bitcoin, is called a satoshi.A Satoshi is the smallest unit of Bitcoin. Bitcoin to Satoshi Conversion = Sats: What is Bitcoin? Bitcoin is the first digital currency. It uses the peer-to-peer protocol to make instant payments. It was created in 2009 by an anonymous developer (or a group of developers) whose pseudonym is Satoshi Nakamoto. Over the years, it has become more a store of value than a P2P electronic cash system. And some holders now call it the ... A bitcoin calculator gives you the price of bitcoin (BTC) in US-dollar or any fiat currency. You can also convert the price from fiat currencies into Bitcoin. The conversion rate displayed is often an average of multiple exchanges. More advanced calculators, such as the bitcoin price converter you can find on this website, take price movements of individual exchanges into account too. With our ... You can use our website to find out how much one satoshi or bitcoin costs in all kinds of currencies, how many satoshis there are in one US Dollar, how many Euro there are in one bitcoin. The calculator can convert currencies both ways – you can find out how many satoshis or bitcoins you need to buy one unit of a fiat currency, such as USD, EUR, GBP, CNY and others.

[index] [30125] [15355] [1230] [744] [49527] [19724] [25213] [50286] [10303] [23432]

THE TRUTH ABOUT BITCOIN Gold Satoshi to Bitcoin (BTC) Converter & Calculator

satoshi bitcoin calculator satoshi bitcoin value bitcoin satoshi paper 5500 satoshi to euro satoshi nakamoto satoshi to bitcoin converter bitcoin units hier terminology - What is a `Satoshi ... How to calculate the Satoshi value of any coins - Duration: 2:11. SimpleStep1 1,450 views. 2:11. ... Satoshi to Bitcoin converter - Duration: 0:30. Tom Otutom 996 views. 0:30. HOW TO GET A BITCOIN ... Jim Rickards: economic freeze is here, get gold, silver if you can and get ready - Duration: 25:41. Kitco NEWS Recommended for you Published. 04/07/2017. Explained satoshi to bitcoin hindi/urdu 10 crore satoshi to one bitcoin. YouTube URL 🛑 What is a satoshi? What is a Sat? In this episode of Fool with Money I will break down and explain to you what is a satoshi and help you understand how it ...