Andreas M. Antonopoulos Quotes (Author of The Internet of

Bitcoin Q&A: Mainstream Adoption, Timing, and Remittances - Andreas Antonopoulos

Bitcoin Q&A: Mainstream Adoption, Timing, and Remittances - Andreas Antonopoulos submitted by LightningPlus to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

[VIDEO] by Andreas Antonopoulos Bitcoin Q&A: Mainstream adoption, timing, and remittances

[VIDEO] by Andreas Antonopoulos Bitcoin Q&A: Mainstream adoption, timing, and remittances submitted by a36 to AllThingsCrypto [link] [comments]

I wrote a 30,000 ft. "executive summary" intro document for cryptos. Not for you, for your non-technical parents or friends.

This document was originally written for my dad, an intelligent guy who was utterly baffled about the cryptocurrency world. The aim was to be extremely concise, giving a broad overview of the industry and some popular coins while staying non-technical. For many of you there will be nothing new here, but recognize that you are in the 0.001% of the population heavily into crypto technology.
I've reproduced it for Reddit below, or you can find the original post here on my website. Download the PDF there or hit the direct link: .PDF version.
Donations happily accepted:
ETH: 0x4e03Bf5CCE3eec4Ddae4d3d6aAD46ca4f198AeD6 BTC: 1GqWMZRRygRJJWYYTWHkAVoRcgyQHjgBMZ XMR: 42Y1S1KBoPk381kc7hA68zaiC78BxMoCADjLrFcTdWiE7ejhZc49s1t9i7P2EmTnHsLDiKoSUiogCbLVHXRJxjrCT4WG8ic XRB: xrb_1bpzh745s9kzk8ymfnks3jtdi65ayumdstokzd4yw4ohu3fopxmiocjcntcu 

Background

This document is purely informational. At the time of writing there are over 1000 cryptocurrencies (“cryptos”) in a highly volatile, high risk market. Many of the smaller “altcoins” require significant technical knowledge to store and transact safely. I advise you to carefully scrutinize each crypto’s flavor of blockchain, potential utility, team of developers, and guiding philosophy, before making any investment [1] decisions. With that out of the way, what follows are brief, extremely high-level summaries of some cryptos which have my interest, listed in current market cap order. But first, some info:
Each crypto is a different implementation of a blockchain network. Originally developed as decentralized digital cash, these technologies have evolved into much broader platforms, powering the future of decentralized applications across every industry in the global economy. Without getting into the weeds, [2] most cryptos work on similar principles:
Distributed Ledgers Each node on a blockchain network has a copy of every transaction, which enables a network of trust that eliminates fraud. [3]
Decentralized “Miners” comprise the infrastructure of a blockchain network. [4] They are monetarily incentivized to add computing power to the network, simultaneously securing and processing each transaction. [5]
Peer-to-peer Cryptos act like digital cash-- they require no third party to transact and are relatively untraceable. Unlike cash, you can back them up.
Global Transactions are processed cheaply and instantly, anywhere on Earth. Using cryptos, an African peasant and a San Francisco engineer have the same access to capital, markets, and network services.
Secure Blockchains are predicated on the same cryptographic technology that secures your sensitive data and government secrets. They have passed seven years of real-world penetration testing with no failures. [6]

Bitcoin (BTC)

The first cryptocurrency. As with first movers in any technology, there are associated pros and cons. Bitcoin has by far the strongest brand recognition and deepest market penetration, and it is the only crypto which can be used directly as a currency at over 100,000 physical and web stores around the world. In Venezuela and Zimbabwe, where geopolitical events have created hyperinflation in the centralized fiat currency, citizens have moved to Bitcoin as a de facto transaction standard. [7]
However, Bitcoin unveiled a number of issues that have been solved by subsequent cryptos. It is experiencing significant scaling issues, resulting in high fees and long confirmation times. The argument over potential solutions created a rift in the Bitcoin developer community, who “forked” the network into two separate blockchains amidst drama and politicking in October 2017. Potential solutions to these issues abound, with some already in place, and others nearing deployment.
Bitcoin currently has the highest market cap, and since it is easy to buy with fiat currency, the price of many smaller cryptos (“altcoins”) are loosely pegged to its price. This will change in the coming year(s).

Ethereum (ETH)

Where Bitcoin is a currency, Ethereum is a platform, designed as a foundational protocol on which to develop decentralized applications (“Dapps”). Anyone can write code and deploy their program on the global network for extremely low fees. Just like Twitter wouldn’t exist without the open platform of the internet, the next world-changing Dapp can’t exist without Ethereum.
Current Dapps include a global market for idle computing power and storage, peer-to-peer real estate transactions (no trusted third party for escrow), identity networks for governments and corporations (think digital Social Security card), and monetization strategies for the internet which replace advertising. Think back 10 years to the advent of smartphones, and then to our culture today-- Ethereum could have a similar network effect on humanity.
Ethereum is currently the #2 market cap crypto below Bitcoin, and many believe it will surpass it in 2018. It has a large, active group of developers working to solve scaling issues, [8] maintain security, and create entirely new programming conventions. If successful, platforms like Ethereum may well be the foundation of the decentralized internet of the future.

Ripple (XRP)

Ripple is significantly more centralized than most crypto networks, designed as a backbone for the global banking and financial technology (“fintech”) industries. It is a network for exchanging between fiat currencies and other asset classes instantly and cheaply, especially when transacting cross-border and between separate institutions. It uses large banks and remittance companies as “anchors” to allow trading between any asset on the network, and big names like Bank of America, American Express, RBC, and UBS are partners. The utility of this network is global and massive in scale.
It is extremely important to note that not all cryptos have the same number of tokens. Ripple has 100 Billion tokens compared to Bitcoin’s 21 Million. Do not directly compare price between cryptos. XRP will likely never reach $1k, [9] but the price will rise commensurate with its utility as a financial tool.
In some sense, Ripple is anathema to the original philosophical vision of this technology space. And while I agree with the cyberpunk notion of decentralized currencies, separation of money and state, this is the natural progression of the crypto world. The internet was an incredible decentralized wild west of Usenet groups and listservs before Eternal September and the dot-com boom, but its maturation affected every part of global society.

Cardano (ADA)

Cardano’s main claim to fame: it is the only crypto developed using academic methodologies by a global collective of engineers and researchers, built on a foundation of industry-leading, peer-reviewed cryptographic research. The network was designed from first-principles to allow scalability, system upgrades, and to balance the privacy of its users with the security needs of regulators.
One part of this ecosystem is the Cardano Foundation, a Swiss non-profit founded to work proactively with governments and regulatory bodies to institute legal frameworks around the crypto industry. Detractors of Cardano claim that it doesn’t do anything innovative, but supporters see the academic backing and focus on regulation development as uniquely valuable.

Stellar Lumens (XLM)

Stellar Lumens and Ripple were founded by the same person. They initially shared the same code, but today the two are distinct in their technical back-end as well as their guiding philosophy and development goals. Ripple is closed-source, for-profit, deflationary, and intended for use by large financial institutions. Stellar is open-source, non-profit, inflationary, and intended to promote international wealth distribution. As such, they are not direct competitors.
IBM is a major partner to Stellar. Their network is already processing live transactions in 12 currency corridors across the South Pacific, with plans to process 60% of all cross-border payments in the South Pacific’s retail foreign exchange corridor by Q2 2018.
Beyond its utility as a financial tool, the Stellar network may become a competitor to Ethereum as a platform for application development and Initial Coin Offerings (“ICOs”). The theoretical maximum throughput for the network is higher, and it takes less computational power to run. The Stellar development team is highly active, has written extensive documentation for third-party developers, and has an impressive list of advisors, including Patrick Collison (Stripe), Sam Altman (Y Combinator), and other giants in the software development community.

Iota (IOT)

Iota was developed as the infrastructure backbone for the Internet of Things (IoT), sometimes called the machine economy. As the world of inanimate objects is networked together, their need to communicate grows exponentially. Fridges, thermostats, self-driving cars, printers, planes, and industrial sensors all need a secure protocol with which to transact information.
Iota uses a “Tangle” instead of a traditional blockchain, and this is the main innovation driving the crypto’s value. Each device that sends a transaction confirms two other transactions in the Tanlge. This removes the need for miners, and enables unique features like zero fees and infinite scalability. The supply of tokens is fixed forever at 2.8*1015, a staggeringly large number (almost three thousand trillion), and the price you see reported is technically “MIOT”, or the price for a million tokens.

Monero (XMR)

The most successful privacy-focused cryptocurrency. In Bitcoin and most other cryptos, anyone can examine the public ledger and trace specific coins through the network. If your identity can be attached to a public address on that network, an accurate picture of your transaction history can be built-- who, what, and when. Monero builds anonymity into the system using strong cryptographic principles, which makes it functionally impossible to trace coins, [10] attach names to wallets, or extract metadata from transactions. The development team actively publishes in the cryptography research community.
Anonymous transactions are not new-- we call it cash. Only in the past two decades has anonymity grown scarce in the first-world with the rise of credit cards and ubiquitous digital records. Personal data is becoming the most valuable resource on Earth, and there are many legitimate reasons for law-abiding citizens to want digital privacy, but it is true that with anonymity comes bad actors-- Monero is the currency of choice for the majority of black market (“darknet”) transactions. Similarly, US Dollars are the main vehicle for the $320B annual drug trade. An investment here should be based on the underlying cryptographic research and technology behind this coin, as well as competitors like Zcash. [11]

RaiBlocks (XRB)

Zero fees and instantaneous transfer make RaiBlocks extremely attractive for exchange of value, in many senses outperforming Bitcoin at its original intended purpose. This crypto has seen an explosion in price and exposure over the past month, and it may become the network of choice for transferring value within and between crypto exchanges.
Just in the first week of 2018: the CEO of Ledger (makers of the most popular hardware wallet on the market) waived the $50k code review fee to get RaiBlocks on his product, and XRB got listed on Binance and Kucoin, two of the largest altcoin exchanges globally. This is one to watch for 2018. [12]

VeChain (VEN)

Developed as a single answer to the problem of supply-chain logistics, VeChain is knocking on the door of a fast-growing $8 trillion industry. Every shipping container and packaged product in the world requires constant tracking and verification. A smart economy for logistics built on the blockchain promises greater efficiency and lower cost through the entire process flow.
Don’t take my word for it-- VeChain has investment from PwC (5th largest US corporation), Groupe Renault, Kuehne & Nagel (world’s largest freight company), and DIG (China’s largest wine importer). The Chinese government has mandated VeChain to serve as blockchain technology partner to the city of Gui’an, a special economic zone and testbed for China’s smart city of the future. This crypto has some of the strongest commercial partnerships in the industry, and a large active development team.
  1. “Investment” is a misnomer. Cryptos are traded like securities, but grant you no equity (like trading currency).
  2. The weeds for Bitcoin: basic intro (1:36), non-technical explanation (5:24), Bitcoin 101 – Andreas Antonopoulos (23:51).
  3. It is impossible to double-spend or create a fake transaction, as each ledger is confirmed against every other ledger.
  4. Some utility token blockchains use DAG networks or similar non-linear networks which don’t require mining.
  5. In practice, these are giant warehouses full of specialized computers constantly processing transactions. Miners locate to the cheapest electricity source, and the bulk of mining currently occurs in China.
  6. Centralized second-layer exchange websites have been hacked, but the core technology is untouched.
  7. This effect has been termed "bitcoinization".
  8. The Ethereum roadmap shows moving from a Proof of Work (PoW) to Proof of Stake (PoS) consensus model.
  9. At $2.62 per XRP token, Ripple already commands a $100B market cap.
  10. After a January 2017 update.
  11. Monero uses ring signatures while Zcash uses ZK-SNARKs to create anonymity. Both have pros and cons.
  12. Note: all signs point to this crypto being renamed “Nano” in the coming weeks: nano.co.
submitted by jhchawk to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Hard Fork For Bigger Blocks: What's The Rush?

When we first decided to dive into the Bitcoin industry back in late 2013, the “industry” itself was very small, and it was still trying to find its identity. Was it a transaction network like VISA, or a cross-border settlement layer like SWIFT? Was it a commodity or asset class for speculators, or a store of value for investors? Asking or guidance for our business venture, should we approach the central bank or the SEC?
The answer to those questions, we soon learned, is no different from asking if the Internet is a communications channel, a publishing platform, or an information sharing network - it is all of those. We believe that Bitcoin transcends the limits of what we see as separate technologies today, for a future where all those financial applications or services mentioned above can seamlessly share a universal, interoperable, and openly accessible platform.
So, for the last three years, we built our business on this platform, the Bitcoin blockchain. We are not developing the technology itself, but building a commercial-use layer on top of it. As the flagship of our services, we have built, along with several other players in this specific use-case for Bitcoin, a network of cross-border remittance platforms that are able to seamlessly work together from all over the world without needing to use the existing inefficient and expensive intermediary services, which in turn allows migrant workers who send money home to their families to save a lot of time and money. It also enables B2B transactions for SMEs to enjoy the same benefits as well. We call this Rebittance.
The Bitcoin industry has grown by leaps and bounds in the last three years. In its current form, it has allowed many startups like us to flourish, and yes, we are still growing and expanding as we speak. Hell, we built our services when the price of Bitcoin was being flushed down the toilet and exchanges were getting hacked left and right. This never fazed us because we understood that these problems were the problems of third-party services and/or market forces, not Bitcoin technology itself. So what if exchanges get hacked? What if the price is tanking? As long as the technology was sound, we had nothing to worry about.
This is why we believe the rush to do a hard fork is irresponsible and selfish. We know it’s important for some to be able to buy their morning coffee with Bitcoin, but is it really as important as making sure that the technology does not suffer catastrophic consequences in the process of doing so? What is the rush? Right now, Bitcoin WORKS. And we know that it doesn’t just magically work - we understand that a dedicated team of hundreds of the smartest developers in the world are working day and night to make sure it works. The sheer amount of work required to just keep the status quo is quite staggering. The fact that personalities and politics are now becoming a threat to the existence of this technology means that maybe it is time to take a step back and look at where we are now as a technology and an industry, to where we want to be in the near future, as well as much further down the road.
Our stance on the Bitcoin hard fork is reflected by this blog post from the Bitgo team . It presents an objective and sober argument against a contentious hard fork, as well as offering solutions in the event of one happening, although we hope, along with many others like us who are working in the Bitcoin industry, that a contentious hard fork never happens.
After attending a talk by Andreas Antonopoulos a few days ago in Singapore, I learned a few things that really hit the nail on the head regarding this whole issue we are facing today: There has never been anything like Bitcoin in the history of technology. Everything we are experiencing today (did anyone ever think that one day, there would be a $20 Billion debate about “forks”?) is uncharted territory, and every decision we make will shape the future of this technology for good. It is an amazing experiment, one in which we are proud to participate and contribute, and one that believe will be one of the most important technological breakthroughs of our time, at par with the development of the internet itself, if we don’t allow it to implode due to egos and politics.
Bitcoin and Blockchain technology cannot be uninvented, but we should not smother the baby in its cradle, and yes, Bitcoin is still in its cradle today. As a potential disruptor of trillion-dollar industries, Bitcoin will be attacked from all directions from the outside, and being antifragile allows it to not just survive these attacks, but become stronger because of them. The only possible way to kill it would be from the inside, and it is in everybody’s best interest to avoid doing that.
submitted by Godfreee to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Is anyone else freaked out by this whole blocksize debate? Does anyone else find themself often agreeing with *both* sides - depending on whichever argument you happen to be reading at the moment? And do we need some better algorithms and data structures?

Why do both sides of the debate seem “right” to me?
I know, I know, a healthy debate is healthy and all - and maybe I'm just not used to the tumult and jostling which would be inevitable in a real live open major debate about something as vital as Bitcoin.
And I really do agree with the starry-eyed idealists who say Bitcoin is vital. Imperfect as it may be, it certainly does seem to represent the first real chance we've had in the past few hundred years to try to steer our civilization and our planet away from the dead-ends and disasters which our government-issued debt-based currencies keep dragging us into.
But this particular debate, about the blocksize, doesn't seem to be getting resolved at all.
Pretty much every time I read one of the long-form major arguments contributed by Bitcoin "thinkers" who I've come to respect over the past few years, this weird thing happens: I usually end up finding myself nodding my head and agreeing with whatever particular piece I'm reading!
But that should be impossible - because a lot of these people vehemently disagree!
So how can both sides sound so convincing to me, simply depending on whichever piece I currently happen to be reading?
Does anyone else feel this way? Or am I just a gullible idiot?
Just Do It?
When you first look at it or hear about it, increasing the size seems almost like a no-brainer: The "big-block" supporters say just increase the blocksize to 20 MB or 8 MB, or do some kind of scheduled or calculated regular increment which tries to take into account the capabilities of the infrastructure and the needs of the users. We do have the bandwidth and the memory to at least increase the blocksize now, they say - and we're probably gonna continue to have more bandwidth and memory in order to be able to keep increasing the blocksize for another couple decades - pretty much like everything else computer-based we've seen over the years (some of this stuff is called by names such as "Moore's Law").
On the other hand, whenever the "small-block" supporters warn about the utter catastrophe that a failed hard-fork would mean, I get totally freaked by their possible doomsday scenarios, which seem totally plausible and terrifying - so I end up feeling that the only way I'd want to go with a hard-fork would be if there was some pre-agreed "triggering" mechanism where the fork itself would only actually "switch on" and take effect provided that some "supermajority" of the network (of who? the miners? the full nodes?) had signaled (presumably via some kind of totally reliable p2p trustless software-based voting system?) that they do indeed "pre-agree" to actually adopt the pre-scheduled fork (and thereby avoid any possibility whatsoever of the precious blockchain somehow tragically splitting into two and pretty much killing this cryptocurrency off in its infancy).
So in this "conservative" scenario, I'm talking about wanting at least 95% pre-adoption agreement - not the mere 75% which I recall some proposals call for, which seems like it could easily lead to a 75/25 blockchain split.
But this time, with this long drawn-out blocksize debate, the core devs, and several other important voices who have become prominent opinion shapers over the past few years, can't seem to come to any real agreement on this.
Weird split among the devs
As far as I can see, there's this weird split: Gavin and Mike seem to be the only people among the devs who really want a major blocksize increase - and all the other devs seem to be vehemently against them.
But then on the other hand, the users seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of a major increase.
And there are meta-questions about governance, about about why this didn't come out as a BIP, and what the availability of Bitcoin XT means.
And today or yesterday there was this really cool big-blockian exponential graph based on doubling the blocksize every two years for twenty years, reminding us of the pure mathematical fact that 210 is indeed about 1000 - but not really addressing any of the game-theoretic points raised by the small-blockians. So a lot of the users seem to like it, but when so few devs say anything positive about it, I worry: is this just yet more exponential chart porn?
On the one hand, Gavin's and Mike's blocksize increase proposal initially seemed like a no-brainer to me.
And on the other hand, all the other devs seem to be against them. Which is weird - not what I'd initially expected at all (but maybe I'm just a fool who's seduced by exponential chart porn?).
Look, I don't mean to be rude to any of the core devs, and I don't want to come off like someone wearing a tinfoil hat - but it has to cross people's minds that the powers that be (the Fed and the other central banks and the governments that use their debt-issued money to run this world into a ditch) could very well be much more scared shitless than they're letting on. If we assume that the powers that be are using their usual playbook and tactics, then it could be worth looking at the book "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by John Perkins, to get an idea of how they might try to attack Bitcoin. So, what I'm saying is, they do have a track record of sending in "experts" to try to derail projects and keep everyone enslaved to the Creature from Jekyll Island. I'm just saying. So, without getting ad hominem - let's just make sure that our ideas can really stand scrutiny on their own - as Nick Szabo says, we need to make sure there is "more computer science, less noise" in this debate.
When Gavin Andresen first came out with the 20 MB thing - I sat back and tried to imagine if I could download 20 MB in 10 minutes (which seems to be one of the basic mathematical and technological constraints here - right?)
I figured, "Yeah, I could download that" - even with my crappy internet connection.
And I guess the telecoms might be nice enough to continue to double our bandwidth every two years for the next couple decades – if we ask them politely?
On the other hand - I think we should be careful about entrusting the financial freedom of the world into the greedy hands of the telecoms companies - given all their shady shenanigans over the past few years in many countries. After decades of the MPAA and the FBI trying to chip away at BitTorrent, lately PirateBay has been hard to access. I would say it's quite likely that certain persons at institutions like JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs and the Fed might be very, very motivated to see Bitcoin fail - so we shouldn't be too sure about scaling plans which depend on the willingness of companies Verizon and AT&T to double our bandwith every two years.
Maybe the real important hardware buildout challenge for a company like 21 (and its allies such as Qualcomm) to take on now would not be "a miner in every toaster" but rather "Google Fiber Download and Upload Speeds in every Country, including China".
I think I've read all the major stuff on the blocksize debate from Gavin Andresen, Mike Hearn, Greg Maxwell, Peter Todd, Adam Back, and Jeff Garzick and several other major contributors - and, oddly enough, all their arguments seem reasonable - heck even Luke-Jr seems reasonable to me on the blocksize debate, and I always thought he was a whackjob overly influenced by superstition and numerology - and now today I'm reading the article by Bram Cohen - the inventor of BitTorrent - and I find myself agreeing with him too!
I say to myself: What's going on with me? How can I possibly agree with all of these guys, if they all have such vehemently opposing viewpoints?
I mean, think back to the glory days of a couple of years ago, when all we were hearing was how this amazing unprecedented grassroots innovation called Bitcoin was going to benefit everyone from all walks of life, all around the world:
...basically the entire human race transacting everything into the blockchain.
(Although let me say that I think that people's focus on ideas like driverless cabs creating realtime fare markets based on supply and demand seems to be setting our sights a bit low as far as Bitcoin's abilities to correct the financial world's capital-misallocation problems which seem to have been made possible by infinite debt-based fiat. I would have hoped that a Bitcoin-based economy would solve much more noble, much more urgent capital-allocation problems than driverless taxicabs creating fare markets or refrigerators ordering milk on the internet of things. I was thinking more along the lines that Bitcoin would finally strangle dead-end debt-based deadly-toxic energy industries like fossil fuels and let profitable clean energy industries like Thorium LFTRs take over - but that's another topic. :=)
Paradoxes in the blocksize debate
Let me summarize the major paradoxes I see here:
(1) Regarding the people (the majority of the core devs) who are against a blocksize increase: Well, the small-blocks arguments do seem kinda weird, and certainly not very "populist", in the sense that: When on earth have end-users ever heard of a computer technology whose capacity didn't grow pretty much exponentially year-on-year? All the cool new technology we've had - from hard drives to RAM to bandwidth - started out pathetically tiny and grew to unimaginably huge over the past few decades - and all our software has in turn gotten massively powerful and big and complex (sometimes bloated) to take advantage of the enormous new capacity available.
But now suddenly, for the first time in the history of technology, we seem to have a majority of the devs, on a major p2p project - saying: "Let's not scale the system up. It could be dangerous. It might break the whole system (if the hard-fork fails)."
I don't know, maybe I'm missing something here, maybe someone else could enlighten me, but I don't think I've ever seen this sort of thing happen in the last few decades of the history of technology - devs arguing against scaling up p2p technology to take advantage of expected growth in infrastructure capacity.
(2) But... on the other hand... the dire warnings of the small-blockians about what could happen if a hard-fork were to fail - wow, they do seem really dire! And these guys are pretty much all heavyweight, experienced programmers and/or game theorists and/or p2p open-source project managers.
I must say, that nearly all of the long-form arguments I've read - as well as many, many of the shorter comments I've read from many users in the threads, whose names I at least have come to more-or-less recognize over the past few months and years on reddit and bitcointalk - have been amazingly impressive in their ability to analyze all aspects of the lifecycle and management of open-source software projects, bringing up lots of serious points which I could never have come up with, and which seem to come from long experience with programming and project management - as well as dealing with economics and human nature (eg, greed - the game-theory stuff).
So a lot of really smart and experienced people with major expertise in various areas ranging from programming to management to game theory to politics to economics have been making some serious, mature, compelling arguments.
But, as I've been saying, the only problem to me is: in many of these cases, these arguments are vehemently in opposition to each other! So I find myself agreeing with pretty much all of them, one by one - which means the end result is just a giant contradiction.
I mean, today we have Bram Cohen, the inventor of BitTorrent, arguing (quite cogently and convincingly to me), that it would be dangerous to increase the blocksize. And this seems to be a guy who would know a few things about scaling out a massive global p2p network - since the protocol which he invented, BitTorrent, is now apparently responsible for like a third of the traffic on the internet (and this despite the long-term concerted efforts of major evil players such as the MPAA and the FBI to shut the whole thing down).
Was the BitTorrent analogy too "glib"?
By the way - I would like to go on a slight tangent here and say that one of the main reasons why I felt so "comfortable" jumping on the Bitcoin train back a few years ago, when I first heard about it and got into it, was the whole rough analogy I saw with BitTorrent.
I remembered the perhaps paradoxical fact that when a torrent is more popular (eg, a major movie release that just came out last week), then it actually becomes faster to download. More people want it, so more people have a few pieces of it, so more people are able to get it from each other. A kind of self-correcting economic feedback loop, where more demand directly leads to more supply.
(BitTorrent manages to pull this off by essentially adding a certain structure to the file being shared, so that it's not simply like an append-only list of 1 MB blocks, but rather more like an random-access or indexed array of 1 MB chunks. Say you're downloading a film which is 700 MB. As soon as your "client" program has downloaded a single 1-MB chunk - say chunk #99 - your "client" program instantly turns into a "server" program as well - offering that chunk #99 to other clients. From my simplistic understanding, I believe the Bitcoin protocol does something similar, to provide a p2p architecture. Hence my - perhaps naïve - assumption that Bitcoin already had the right algorithms / architecture / data structure to scale.)
The efficiency of the BitTorrent network seemed to jive with that "network law" (Metcalfe's Law?) about fax machines. This law states that the more fax machines there are, the more valuable the network of fax machines becomes. Or the value of the network grows on the order of the square of the number of nodes.
This is in contrast with other technology like cars, where the more you have, the worse things get. The more cars there are, the more traffic jams you have, so things start going downhill. I guess this is because highway space is limited - after all, we can't pave over the entire countryside, and we never did get those flying cars we were promised, as David Graeber laments in a recent essay in The Baffler magazine :-)
And regarding the "stress test" supposedly happening right now in the middle of this ongoing blocksize debate, I don't know what worries me more: the fact that it apparently is taking only $5,000 to do a simple kind of DoS on the blockchain - or the fact that there are a few rumors swirling around saying that the unknown company doing the stress test shares the same physical mailing address with a "scam" company?
Or maybe we should just be worried that so much of this debate is happening on a handful of forums which are controlled by some guy named theymos who's already engaged in some pretty "contentious" or "controversial" behavior like blowing a million dollars on writing forum software (I guess he never heard that reddit.com software is open-source)?
So I worry that the great promise of "decentralization" might be more fragile than we originally thought.
Scaling
Anyways, back to Metcalfe's Law: with virtual stuff, like torrents and fax machines, the more the merrier. The more people downloading a given movie, the faster it arrives - and the more people own fax machines, the more valuable the overall fax network.
So I kindof (naïvely?) assumed that Bitcoin, being "virtual" and p2p, would somehow scale up the same magical way BitTorrrent did. I just figured that more people using it would somehow automatically make it stronger and faster.
But now a lot of devs have started talking in terms of the old "scarcity" paradigm, talking about blockspace being a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" - which seems kinda scary, and antithetical to much of the earlier rhetoric we heard about Bitcoin (the stuff about supporting our favorite creators with micropayments, and the stuff about Africans using SMS to send around payments).
Look, when some asshole is in line in front of you at the cash register and he's holding up the line so they can run his credit card to buy a bag of Cheeto's, we tend to get pissed off at the guy - clogging up our expensive global electronic payment infrastructure to make a two-dollar purchase. And that's on a fairly efficient centralized system - and presumably after a year or so, VISA and the guy's bank can delete or compress the transaction in their SQL databases.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but if some guy buys a coffee on the blockchain, or if somebody pays an online artist $1.99 for their work - then that transaction, a few bytes or so, has to live on the blockchain forever?
Or is there some "pruning" thing that gets rid of it after a while?
And this could lead to another question: Viewed from the perspective of double-entry bookkeeping, is the blockchain "world-wide ledger" more like the "balance sheet" part of accounting, i.e. a snapshot showing current assets and liabilities? Or is it more like the "cash flow" part of accounting, i.e. a journal showing historical revenues and expenses?
When I think of thousands of machines around the globe having to lug around multiple identical copies of a multi-gigabyte file containing some asshole's coffee purchase forever and ever... I feel like I'm ideologically drifting in one direction (where I'd end up also being against really cool stuff like online micropayments and Africans banking via SMS)... so I don't want to go there.
But on the other hand, when really experienced and battle-tested veterans with major experience in the world of open-souce programming and project management (the "small-blockians") warn of the catastrophic consequences of a possible failed hard-fork, I get freaked out and I wonder if Bitcoin really was destined to be a settlement layer for big transactions.
Could the original programmer(s) possibly weigh in?
And I don't mean to appeal to authority - but heck, where the hell is Satoshi Nakamoto in all this? I do understand that he/she/they would want to maintain absolute anonymity - but on the other hand, I assume SN wants Bitcoin to succeed (both for the future of humanity - or at least for all the bitcoins SN allegedly holds :-) - and I understand there is a way that SN can cryptographically sign a message - and I understand that as the original developer of Bitcoin, SN had some very specific opinions about the blocksize... So I'm kinda wondering of Satoshi could weigh in from time to time. Just to help out a bit. I'm not saying "Show us a sign" like a deity or something - but damn it sure would be fascinating and possibly very helpful if Satoshi gave us his/hetheir 2 satoshis worth at this really confusing juncture.
Are we using our capacity wisely?
I'm not a programming or game-theory whiz, I'm just a casual user who has tried to keep up with technology over the years.
It just seems weird to me that here we have this massive supercomputer (500 times more powerful than the all the supercomputers in the world combined) doing fairly straightforward "embarassingly parallel" number-crunching operations to secure a p2p world-wide ledger called the blockchain to keep track of a measly 2.1 quadrillion tokens spread out among a few billion addresses - and a couple of years ago you had people like Rick Falkvinge saying the blockchain would someday be supporting multi-million-dollar letters of credit for international trade and you had people like Andreas Antonopoulos saying the blockchain would someday allow billions of "unbanked" people to send remittances around the village or around the world dirt-cheap - and now suddenly in June 2015 we're talking about blockspace as a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" and partially centralized, corporate-sponsored "Level 2" vaporware like Lightning Network and some mysterious company is "stess testing" or "DoS-ing" the system by throwing away a measly $5,000 and suddenly it sounds like the whole system could eventually head right back into PayPal and Western Union territory again, in terms of expensive fees.
When I got into Bitcoin, I really was heavily influenced by vague analogies with BitTorrent: I figured everyone would just have tiny little like utorrent-type program running on their machine (ie, Bitcoin-QT or Armory or Mycelium etc.).
I figured that just like anyone can host a their own blog or webserver, anyone would be able to host their own bank.
Yeah, Google and and Mozilla and Twitter and Facebook and WhatsApp did come along and build stuff on top of TCP/IP, so I did expect a bunch of companies to build layers on top of the Bitcoin protocol as well. But I still figured the basic unit of bitcoin client software powering the overall system would be small and personal and affordable and p2p - like a bittorrent client - or at the most, like a cheap server hosting a blog or email server.
And I figured there would be a way at the software level, at the architecture level, at the algorithmic level, at the data structure level - to let the thing scale - if not infinitely, at least fairly massively and gracefully - the same way the BitTorrent network has.
Of course, I do also understand that with BitTorrent, you're sharing a read-only object (eg, a movie) - whereas with Bitcoin, you're achieving distributed trustless consensus and appending it to a write-only (or append-only) database.
So I do understand that the problem which BitTorrent solves is much simpler than the problem which Bitcoin sets out to solve.
But still, it seems that there's got to be a way to make this thing scale. It's p2p and it's got 500 times more computing power than all the supercomputers in the world combined - and so many brilliant and motivated and inspired people want this thing to succeed! And Bitcoin could be our civilization's last chance to steer away from the oncoming debt-based ditch of disaster we seem to be driving into!
It just seems that Bitcoin has got to be able to scale somehow - and all these smart people working together should be able to come up with a solution which pretty much everyone can agree - in advance - will work.
Right? Right?
A (probably irrelevant) tangent on algorithms and architecture and data structures
I'll finally weigh with my personal perspective - although I might be biased due to my background (which is more on the theoretical side of computer science).
My own modest - or perhaps radical - suggestion would be to ask whether we're really looking at all the best possible algorithms and architectures and data structures out there.
From this perspective, I sometimes worry that the overwhelming majority of the great minds working on the programming and game-theory stuff might come from a rather specific, shall we say "von Neumann" or "procedural" or "imperative" school of programming (ie, C and Python and Java programmers).
It seems strange to me that such a cutting-edge and important computer project would have so little participation from the great minds at the other end of the spectrum of programming paradigms - namely, the "functional" and "declarative" and "algebraic" (and co-algebraic!) worlds.
For example, I was struck in particular by statements I've seen here and there (which seemed rather hubristic or lackadaisical to me - for something as important as Bitcoin), that the specification of Bitcoin and the blockchain doesn't really exist in any form other than the reference implementation(s) (in procedural languages such as C or Python?).
Curry-Howard anyone?
I mean, many computer scientists are aware of the Curry-Howard isomorophism, which basically says that the relationship between a theorem and its proof is equivalent to the relationship between a specification and its implementation. In other words, there is a long tradition in mathematics (and in computer programming) of:
And it's not exactly "turtles all the way down" either: a specification is generally simple and compact enough that a good programmer can usually simply visually inspect it to determine if it is indeed "correct" - something which is very difficult, if not impossible, to do with a program written in a procedural, implementation-oriented language such as C or Python or Java.
So I worry that we've got this tradition, from the open-source github C/Java programming tradition, of never actually writing our "specification", and only writing the "implementation". In mission-critical military-grade programming projects (which often use languages like Ada or Maude) this is simply not allowed. It would seem that a project as mission-critical as Bitcoin - which could literally be crucial for humanity's continued survival - should also use this kind of military-grade software development approach.
And I'm not saying rewrite the implementations in these kind of theoretical languages. But it might be helpful if the C/Python/Java programmers in the Bitcoin imperative programming world could build some bridges to the Maude/Haskell/ML programmers of the functional and algebraic programming worlds to see if any kind of useful cross-pollination might take place - between specifications and implementations.
For example, the JavaFAN formal analyzer for multi-threaded Java programs (developed using tools based on the Maude language) was applied to the Remote Agent AI program aboard NASA's Deep Space 1 shuttle, written in Java - and it took only a few minutes using formal mathematical reasoning to detect a potential deadlock which would have occurred years later during the space mission when the damn spacecraft was already way out around Pluto.
And "the Maude-NRL (Naval Research Laboratory) Protocol Analyzer (Maude-NPA) is a tool used to provide security proofs of cryptographic protocols and to search for protocol flaws and cryptosystem attacks."
These are open-source formal reasoning tools developed by DARPA and used by NASA and the US Navy to ensure that program implementations satisfy their specifications. It would be great if some of the people involved in these kinds of projects could contribute to help ensure the security and scalability of Bitcoin.
But there is a wide abyss between the kinds of programmers who use languages like Maude and the kinds of programmers who use languages like C/Python/Java - and it can be really hard to get the two worlds to meet. There is a bit of rapprochement between these language communities in languages which might be considered as being somewhere in the middle, such as Haskell and ML. I just worry that Bitcoin might be turning into being an exclusively C/Python/Java project (with the algorithms and practitioners traditionally of that community), when it could be more advantageous if it also had some people from the functional and algebraic-specification and program-verification community involved as well. The thing is, though: the theoretical practitioners are big on "semantics" - I've heard them say stuff like "Yes but a C / C++ program has no easily identifiable semantics". So to get them involved, you really have to first be able to talk about what your program does (specification) - before proceeding to describe how it does it (implementation). And writing high-level specifications is typically very hard using the syntax and semantics of languages like C and Java and Python - whereas specs are fairly easy to write in Maude - and not only that, they're executable, and you state and verify properties about them - which provides for the kind of debate Nick Szabo was advocating ("more computer science, less noise").
Imagine if we had an executable algebraic specification of Bitcoin in Maude, where we could formally reason about and verify certain crucial game-theoretical properties - rather than merely hand-waving and arguing and deploying and praying.
And so in the theoretical programming community you've got major research on various logics such as Girard's Linear Logic (which is resource-conscious) and Bruni and Montanari's Tile Logic (which enables "pasting" bigger systems together from smaller ones in space and time), and executable algebraic specification languages such as Meseguer's Maude (which would be perfect for game theory modeling, with its functional modules for specifying the deterministic parts of systems and its system modules for specifiying non-deterministic parts of systems, and its parameterized skeletons for sketching out the typical architectures of mobile systems, and its formal reasoning and verification tools and libraries which have been specifically applied to testing and breaking - and fixing - cryptographic protocols).
And somewhat closer to the practical hands-on world, you've got stuff like Google's MapReduce and lots of Big Data database languages developed by Google as well. And yet here we are with a mempool growing dangerously big for RAM on a single machine, and a 20-GB append-only list as our database - and not much debate on practical results from Google's Big Data databases.
(And by the way: maybe I'm totally ignorant for asking this, but I'll ask anyways: why the hell does the mempool have to stay in RAM? Couldn't it work just as well if it were stored temporarily on the hard drive?)
And you've got CalvinDB out of Yale which apparently provides an ACID layer on top of a massively distributed database.
Look, I'm just an armchair follower cheering on these projects. I can barely manage to write a query in SQL, or read through a C or Python or Java program. But I would argue two points here: (1) these languages may be too low-level and "non-formal" for writing and modeling and formally reasoning about and proving properties of mission-critical specifications - and (2) there seem to be some Big Data tools already deployed by institutions such as Google and Yale which support global petabyte-size databases on commodity boxes with nice properties such as near-real-time and ACID - and I sometimes worry that the "core devs" might be failing to review the literature (and reach out to fellow programmers) out there to see if there might be some formal program-verification and practical Big Data tools out there which could be applied to coming up with rock-solid, 100% consensus proposals to handle an issue such as blocksize scaling, which seems to have become much more intractable than many people might have expected.
I mean, the protocol solved the hard stuff: the elliptical-curve stuff and the Byzantine General stuff. How the heck can we be falling down on the comparatively "easier" stuff - like scaling the blocksize?
It just seems like defeatism to say "Well, the blockchain is already 20-30 GB and it's gonna be 20-30 TB ten years from now - and we need 10 Mbs bandwidth now and 10,000 Mbs bandwidth 20 years from - assuming the evil Verizon and AT&T actually give us that - so let's just become a settlement platform and give up on buying coffee or banking the unbanked or doing micropayments, and let's push all that stuff into some corporate-controlled vaporware without even a whitepaper yet."
So you've got Peter Todd doing some possibly brilliant theorizing and extrapolating on the idea of "treechains" - there is a Let's Talk Bitcoin podcast from about a year ago where he sketches the rough outlines of this idea out in a very inspiring, high-level way - although the specifics have yet to be hammered out. And we've got Blockstream also doing some hopeful hand-waving about the Lightning Network.
Things like Peter Todd's treechains - which may be similar to the spark in some devs' eyes called Lightning Network - are examples of the kind of algorithm or architecture which might manage to harness the massive computing power of miners and nodes in such a way that certain kinds of massive and graceful scaling become possible.
It just seems like a kindof tiny dev community working on this stuff.
Being a C or Python or Java programmer should not be a pre-req to being able to help contribute to the specification (and formal reasoning and program verification) for Bitcoin and the blockchain.
XML and UML are crap modeling and specification languages, and C and Java and Python are even worse (as specification languages - although as implementation languages, they are of course fine).
But there are serious modeling and specification languages out there, and they could be very helpful at times like this - where what we're dealing with is questions of modeling and specification (ie, "needs and requirements").
One just doesn't often see the practical, hands-on world of open-source github implementation-level programmers and the academic, theoretical world of specification-level programmers meeting very often. I wish there were some way to get these two worlds to collaborate on Bitcoin.
Maybe a good first step to reach out to the theoretical people would be to provide a modular executable algebraic specification of the Bitcoin protocol in a recognized, military/NASA-grade specification language such as Maude - because that's something the theoretical community can actually wrap their heads around, whereas it's very hard to get them to pay attention to something written only as a C / Python / Java implementation (without an accompanying specification in a formal language).
They can't check whether the program does what it's supposed to do - if you don't provide a formal mathematical definition of what the program is supposed to do.
Specification : Implementation :: Theorem : Proof
You have to remember: the theoretical community is very aware of the Curry-Howard isomorphism. Just like it would be hard to get a mathematician's attention by merely showing them a proof without telling also telling them what theorem the proof is proving - by the same token, it's hard to get the attention of a theoretical computer scientist by merely showing them an implementation without showing them the specification that it implements.
Bitcoin is currently confronted with a mathematical or "computer science" problem: how to secure the network while getting high enough transactional throughput, while staying within the limited RAM, bandwidth and hard drive space limitations of current and future infrastructure.
The problem only becomes a political and economic problem if we give up on trying to solve it as a mathematical and "theoretical computer science" problem.
There should be a plethora of whitepapers out now proposing algorithmic solutions to these scaling issues. Remember, all we have to do is apply the Byzantine General consensus-reaching procedure to a worldwide database which shuffles 2.1 quadrillion tokens among a few billion addresses. The 21 company has emphatically pointed out that racing to compute a hash to add a block is an "embarrassingly parallel" problem - very easy to decompose among cheap, fault-prone, commodity boxes, and recompose into an overall solution - along the lines of Google's highly successful MapReduce.
I guess what I'm really saying is (and I don't mean to be rude here), is that C and Python and Java programmers might not be the best qualified people to develop and formally prove the correctness of (note I do not say: "test", I say "formally prove the correctness of") these kinds of algorithms.
I really believe in the importance of getting the algorithms and architectures right - look at Google Search itself, it uses some pretty brilliant algorithms and architectures (eg, MapReduce, Paxos) which enable it to achieve amazing performance - on pretty crappy commodity hardware. And look at BitTorrent, which is truly p2p, where more demand leads to more supply.
So, in this vein, I will close this lengthy rant with an oddly specific link - which may or may not be able to make some interesting contributions to finding suitable algorithms, architectures and data structures which might help Bitcoin scale massively. I have no idea if this link could be helpful - but given the near-total lack of people from the Haskell and ML and functional worlds in these Bitcoin specification debates, I thought I'd be remiss if I didn't throw this out - just in case there might be something here which could help us channel the massive computing power of the Bitcoin network in such a way as to enable us simply sidestep this kind of desperate debate where both sides seem right because the other side seems wrong.
https://personal.cis.strath.ac.uk/neil.ghani/papers/ghani-calco07
The above paper is about "higher dimensional trees". It uses a bit of category theory (not a whole lot) and a bit of Haskell (again not a lot - just a simple data structure called a Rose tree, which has a wikipedia page) to develop a very expressive and efficient data structure which generalizes from lists to trees to higher dimensions.
I have no idea if this kind of data structure could be applicable to the current scaling mess we apparently are getting bogged down in - I don't have the game-theory skills to figure it out.
I just thought that since the blockchain is like a list, and since there are some tree-like structures which have been grafted on for efficiency (eg Merkle trees) and since many of the futuristic scaling proposals seem to also involve generalizing from list-like structures (eg, the blockchain) to tree-like structures (eg, side-chains and tree-chains)... well, who knows, there might be some nugget of algorithmic or architectural or data-structure inspiration there.
So... TL;DR:
(1) I'm freaked out that this blocksize debate has splintered the community so badly and dragged on so long, with no resolution in sight, and both sides seeming so right (because the other side seems so wrong).
(2) I think Bitcoin could gain immensely by using high-level formal, algebraic and co-algebraic program specification and verification languages (such as Maude including Maude-NPA, Mobile Maude parameterized skeletons, etc.) to specify (and possibly also, to some degree, verify) what Bitcoin does - before translating to low-level implementation languages such as C and Python and Java saying how Bitcoin does it. This would help to communicate and reason about programs with much more mathematical certitude - and possibly obviate the need for many political and economic tradeoffs which currently seem dismally inevitable - and possibly widen the collaboration on this project.
(3) I wonder if there are some Big Data approaches out there (eg, along the lines of Google's MapReduce and BigTable, or Yale's CalvinDB), which could be implemented to allow Bitcoin to scale massively and painlessly - and to satisfy all stakeholders, ranging from millionaires to micropayments, coffee drinkers to the great "unbanked".
submitted by BeYourOwnBank to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Thoughts on the current state of Bitcoin from someone who participates in much of the ecosystem [and tipping thread ;) ]

Hey guys,
So this is something I've been looking at for a while now, and kind of seeing some things die and other things be born. Some things are getting easier, and other things getting more difficult. I want to take this time to outline the last few months and how my sentiment is reflected towards the market. I have to say, the market generally matches how my "emotions" playout towards the ecosystem as a whole.
I'll outline just a few short things on both the bearish and the bullish sides of my sentiment, even if things don't effect the overall sentiment much (at least according to most traders and people) I'd like to point them out because I view them as notable.
Some of the not so good things that have been happening:
Anyway, in many respects it feels like a lot of the bitcoin ecosystem is dying, and maybe we should all panic, cry, and shit our pants, but a few things haven't been going badly, and in fact, I'm looking optimistic that the next time a surge of new users enters the market for whatever reason, there will be a much more developed and kind ecosystem to take part of. No one is going to be touting the next 5 second confirmation coin, no more of the ubiquitous "investment" opportunities that await the uninitiated.
Other than my love for bitcoin in general, this is what makes me not panic sell, and what keeps me optimistic about the bitcoin future:
Alright guys, thats my sentiment overview, and I hope it wasn't tl;dr for most of you. But one last thing I want to point out in terms of user growth. We need to break out of our comfort zone. We need to help people get into it. That btctipping dude? He has the right idea, except, it does kinda feel like he's promoting his own website? I dunno? Anyway, Changetip some newbies. Just the other day in the reddit lounge I tipped a guy a coffee, and he then said "Man that was evil, now I have to spend the next hour learning all about bitcoin"... who knows, maybe his sentiment that the media helped paint is one shade lighter now just from a a couple millibit tip. You can do that too, and I'm here to help you get started. I've got some millibits to give away, give me some awesome feedback, criticism or build your own thoughts on this thread. I tip you, then you go pay it forward. Lets do this!!!
submitted by googlemaster1 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Theory: Banks themselves will eventually implement the widespread adoption of Bitcoin.

I just watched this video of Andreas Antonopoulos, and he was talking about how the internet completely changed the game when it came to long distance communication.
And how if the phone companies got to decide the rules of the internet, they'd have him dropping coins every 10 seconds into his computer, like how he used to do when making a long distance call at a phone booth.
But then he also said that the phone companies eventually accepted that they can't fight it, and how they instead stayed in the game, by being the internet service providers themselves.
I realized, this is true for most companies as well, when they encounter a technology that could obsolete them.
Cable companies realized that people were turning to the web for their content. And so cable companies also became internet service providers themselves.
They couldn't fight MP3 downloads, so they started selling it in iTunes. They couldn't fight video streaming, so they started renting it out in Netflix.
Although in the case of the phone companies and cable companies being the internet provides themselves, one can argue: the technology itself (which travels through wires) dictates that whoever had the infrastructure would be the ones to dominate that market. And since phone companies and cable companies already have their lines running everywhere, "It's just the logical progression".
And this is EXACTLY why banks are the ones who I see eventually offering bitcoin services. They already have the infrastructure to handle everyone's finances. They hold most of the fiat. They offer loans. They do online and instant purchases via credit cards, VISA, etc. They do cross-border remittances via SWIFT.
Eventually, I see them also performing Bitcoin exchange services. And upgrading their payment systems offered to merchants. Imagine if the thing you swiped your VISA/Mastercard in, also flashed a QR code that you can scan on your mobile wallet app to pay in bitcoin.
VISA already has the infrastructure in place to accept payments in millions if not billions of merchants everywhere. The logical progression I see is that they will use their existing infrastructure, to offer a way to accept bitcoin payments instantly to all their current merchants.
I can't see any other party than the banks them fulfilling this role globally. This instantly answer the question "where can I spend my bitcoin"? Everywhere that can accept credit cards, they now support it because banks have given them a way to accept bitcoin, and it goes straight in their accounts (even for those who only want their accounts in fiat... for now.)
And so, the only next logical step I can see for bitcoin is for banks to finally accept that they can't fight it.
Just like how record companies kept fighting Napster, Kazaa, Limewire... they eventually embraced it, and started selling music on iTunes.
Or how they kept fighting online pirate streaming sites, until they realized people will actually pay for streaming. And now, most people turn to Netflix for their video streaming fix.
Sure, they will lose control. The phone companies lost a lof of control over long distance communication.
But when they eventually accept that they can't fight bitcoin, and accept that they will lose control as well, only then will they take what I see as the biggest step needed for worldwide bitcoin adoption.
It's not a matter of "if", it's a matter of "when". When they eventually start offering bitcoin loans, accepting bitcoin deposits and withdrawals, and include bitcoin in their currency conversion services, and they accept that people can send it anywhere they want, and they've lost control of that and people no longer need services like "SWIFT" to send their money internationally.
submitted by btc_ph to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

11-04 18:13 - 'Great post! Yes, when uninformed people just viscerally and reflectively spout to this day: "Bubble!!", "Tulips!!", "Ponzi/Pyramid!!", "Too late to buy!!", etc. that's the exact same thing people said when it hit ATH $1 in 2009...' by /u/readish removed from /r/Bitcoin within 1-11min

'''
Great post! Yes, when uninformed people just viscerally and reflectively spout to this day: "Bubble!!", "Tulips!!", "Ponzi/Pyramid!!", "Too late to buy!!", etc. that's the exact same thing people said when it hit ATH $1 in 2009, then $10, then $100, now over $7,000 and will continue to say at $10,000, $100,000...and so on. Bitcoin growth is not linear, it's exponential.
Everybody parroting: "The bitcoin bubble is about to pop" since 2009, don't know that bitcoin is a decentralized system with mathematically fixed, deflatioary and limited supply currency and its growth is [exponential]1 .
So is not farfetched to say that it will be at 100,000 by 2020, since it came from less than $1 to $7,000 in less than 10 years, and it hasn't even hit the bottom part of the exponential ['S-Curve' of adoption] ([link]19 ). Check out this great 2017 MIT study: ["The Cryptocurrency Market Is Growing Exponentially"]2 . Patience [pays]3 , don't listen to the ["Expert Analysts on MSM"]4 .
Bitcoin’s value derives from its current real uses (mainly for money transfers and remittances) its limited supply and scarcity (store of value) and its many potential uses. Also, behind the curtains there is a huge growth in the bitcoin ecosystem development that a regular folk can't see because it's ignored by the media. If you buy for day trading you may lose money, but if you hold long term, it has been proven you get nice ROI. And bitcoin has barely started, think of the Internet/email in the 90's. A decentralized technology that has a valuable use it's not going to disappear, even if a few tyrannical governments try to "ban" it.
The future economy will be totally digital and decentralized. Bitcoin is a worldwide-distributed decentralized peer-to-peer censorship-resistant trustless and permissionless deflationary system/currency (see Blockchain technology) backed by mathematics, open source code, cryptography and the most powerful and secure decentralized computational network on the planet, orders of magnitude more powerful than google and government combined. There is a limit of 21 million bitcoins (divisible in smaller units). "Backed by Government" money is not backed by anything and is infinitely printed at will by Central Banks. Bitcoin is limited and decentralized.
Receive and transfer money, from cents (micropayments) to thousands:
And that’s just as currency, Bitcoin has many more uses and applications.
Edit: Here are some sources for newbies:
Here is a good start:
["Introduction to Bitcoin" - Andreas Antonopoulos]5
Playlists on [Andreas own YT channel]6
Check out this great articles:
["What Gave Bitcoin Its Value?"]7
["How do Bitcoins have value?"] ([link]20 )
["Yes, Cryptocurrencies are Valuable"]8
Bitcoin [ELI5]9
Bitcoin [Resources]10
Bitcoin [ Infographic]11 .
How to [buy Bitcoin?]12
Where to [buy Bitcoin list]13
Bitcoin ['Awesome Handbook']14
Excellent ['Crypto 101']15 by stos313
Where [to use Bitcoin list]16 by Bitcoin-Yoda
Starter Guide ["Bitcoin Complete And Ultimate Guide"]17 .
Who accepts Bitcoin? [List of Companies, Stores, Shops]18 .
'''
Context Link
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: readish
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_growth 2: www.te*hnol*gyrevi*w.*o*/s*60794*/*he*crypto*urre**y-market-is-**owing*e*pon*n**a*l*/ 3: https://i.redd.it/d5dgq77xdolz.jpg 4: https://i.redd.it/tklsw2fouqlz.jpg 5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkxdys-Ek9U 6: https://www.youtube.com/useaantonop/playlists 7:
https://fee.org/articles/what-gave-bitcoin-its-value/ 8: **cke*noon.com/yes-*rypt**urren**e**ar*-valua**e-aab9c*58*a54 9: *ww.eli**itc*in.co*/ 10: lo**.net*bi*coin*html 11: bitcoin*lay*net/wp-con*en*/uplo*ds/2017**8/b*tco*n****t*0*-1.pn* 12: https://bitcoin.org/en/buy 13: https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/6ymwtm/where_to_buy_bitcoin_list/ 14: *r*llo.co*/b/BWOEumyb/t*e-aw**om*-bi*coin*ha**bo*k 15: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzY8205tKpokVVZXVmdjQW5pNFphUEJjLTVnQVFES0llY1hF/view 16: https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/75mia6/pleasant_surprise/do7gyiw/ 17: *ww.*ashprof.c*m/**t*oin-*omplete*u*timate-*ui*e* 18: https://99bitcoins.com/who-accepts-bitcoins-payment-companies-stores-take-bitcoins/ 19: https://imgur.com/a/3UA7s#uX6xPGM 20: https://www.quora.com/How-do-Bitcoins-have-value/answeDavid-Strayhorn
Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

How to sound like a genius as a Bitcoin newb.

It’s time for more bitcoin conference porn! The fall schedule (glut) kicks off today in London with an Inside Bitcoins conference. Unfortunately, I’ll miss it. Instead, I’ll be at MIT giving a presentation on how students there can scale from “Zero to One” in Bitcoin.
My favorite slide of the short overview, which is also relevant to #bitcoinconf attendees is without a doubt how to simply “sound smart” as a newcomer to Bitcoin. That’s really half of the battle; I’ve learned from personal experience. Leaders in this industry who are exponentially smarter than me were willing to talk to me as a peer mere weeks after I first learned about bitcoin last November, mostly because I faked it ‘til I made it.*
So I feel a moral responsibility to share ten things that can make any newb sound like a seasoned vet. Much like a pick-up artist**, you’ll have to craft your own style and will look silly occasionally, but at least you can sleep easy knowing that you will fool 99% of onlookers with this framework.
Here are my top ten tips for sounding smarter than you really are when it comes to Bitcoin…
1) Know simple BTC grammar. Discredit anyone who misspells bitcoin as BitCoin or bit coin, and gently correct those who conflate Bitcoin the protocol (capitalized) with bitcoin the currency (lower-case). This is a slam dunk, I’ve-been-here-a-while, pro tip. Don’t be a jerk about it, but politely help this other newcomer scale to your level of intelligence.
Congrats, you’re already ahead of the curve.
2) Acknowledge that bitcoin is a crappy currency, but a high-potential commodity. Bitcoin is volatile and will be for a very long time. It’s designed to appreciate in value or to fail — without much middle ground. As a unit of account or store of value, it’s terrible, but it is also a very high-potential commodity. Holding the “currency” means (among other things) that you are betting bitcoin displaces gold as a long-term reserve — that one inherently worthless commodity (gold) will be replaced by another (bitcoin), because bitcoin will at least be tied to a very valuable network. You also believe that as the critical exchange, investment, and derivative infrastructure is built out, mainstream people will use what are essentially fiat-denominated bitcoins anyway (thanks to hedging wizardry). Oh, and on that last point, you’ll stop referring “dollars” and instead reference “fiat.”
3) Point out that all currencies fluctuate in relative value, but at least BTC appreciates. This is in some ways a close corollary to #2. People like to criticize bitcoin’s “extreme” volatility, but the truth is that the currency’s volatility is falling and will continue to fall steadily as it grows larger. Moreover, it will look less volatile relative to the currencies of many smaller, developing economies, especially those with high inflation like Argentina or Nigeria. (BTC is the 90th most popular global currency by M1.) At least with bitcoin, you have a ~50% chance on any given day that you’ll enjoy upside volatility, instead of slow and steady devaluation. Many people outside of the US and Europe are going to play those odds.
4) Understand that Bitcoin is not decentralized, it is distributed. There are basically 10 people in the world who ultimately control Bitcoin right now, so it’s not decentralized. You’ve got 5-10 Bitcoin core developers who contribute updates to the code base only if they are accepted by the 5-10 mining behemoths that call the shots. In theory, anyone can “fork” the Bitcoin core if they don’t like the miners’ rules, but most people will agree that this is infeasible at best. It doesn’t help that no one knows who controls most of the global mining power or even who invented Bitcoin. Sounds shady, and in truth, it is more of a black box than most will admit. The good news is that the block chain is universally distributed, so at least people can see the global ledger of transactions, even if they don’t appreciate that a group smaller than the Fed actually controls Bitcoin.
Brownie points if you know who Gavin Andresen is, because many newbs don’t! I’ll put it to you this way: Gavin is bitcoin’s Mark Zuckerberg to Satoshi’s Winklevii — if only the Winkevoss twins had come up with a clever seigniorage model for social networking and faded to the background gracefully once they had Zuck on board. Gavin and the other core developers aren’t household names by pure chance — the media is simply too obsessed with the mysterious Satoshi.
5) Admit that Bitcoin is not cheaper than credit cards. A common pitch is that bitcoin is much cheaper than credit cards, but this simply is not true in most real-world use cases. Bitcoin merely appears less expensive for most retail transactions because those charging the transaction fees - the miners - care more about the large 25 BTC / block mining reward subsidies than they do the variable transaction fees. For now. As mining gets more expensive and the mining reward shrinks over the next decade, bitcoin’s transaction fees will start looking a heck of a lot more like interchange rates. In addition, if you go up one level to the payment processors like BitPay and Coinbase, either the merchant or the consumer (or a combination) is paying 100-150 basis points to cover bitcoin transaction costs - not a tremendous price difference from card networks.
Bitcoin has many advantages over credit cards — security, interoperability, universality, etc. — but cost generally isn’t one of them.
6) Remittances aren’t a near-term killer app; cross-border transactions are. As much as bitcoiners like to bash Western Union and Money Gram, and as despicable as some of these remittance platforms can be, they still exist for a reason. Doing safe, secure and legal remittance is more expensive than it seems at first glance. And while it’s nice to think that crypto could flow freely to those already familiar with mobile money, this theory has one big flaw: the infrastructure and awareness for bitcoin isn’t even close to there yet in developing economies. Sure, a migrant worker could send bitcoin to a relative’s mobile phone in Zimbabwe, but good luck safely exchanging that for usable day-to-day currency - especially at a cheaper rate than the evil remittance empires.
Business to business cross-border transactions, on the other hand, are infinitely more likely to succeed on a faster timeline. More sophisticated parties, with better access to bitcoin exchanges and financial services, solving a more straightforward and nominally larger problem.
7) Pick at least one bitcoin company to hate, and know why you hate them so much. I honestly don’t think I’ve met a single person in this industry who hasn’t completely crapped all over at least one leading bitcoin company behind closed doors. In fairness, even when I’m not playing devil’s advocate, I have still been legitimately guilty of giving the business to all of these companies myself. But for most non-bully-pulpiteers, it’s simply easier and less abrasive to whisper criticisms. It doesn’t matter whether you pick Circle (“Wall Street sell-outs”), Coinbase (“young, naive and overextended”), Xapo (“shady insurance dealings”), Blockchain (“short-sighted ideologues”), or BitPay (“first, but not best”). All that matters is that you hate at least one of them.
8) Tell everyone how much you love Andreas, but that he’s too political for your liking. First you have to watch an Andreas Antonopoulos presentation and learn how to spell Antonopoulos. He speaks beautifully and sincerely and intelligently, and if Aaron Sorkin ever wrote a show about bitcoin, Andreas would be the protagonist, a la President Bartlet (West Wing) or Will McAvoy (Newsroom). He’s a perfect embodiment of what bitcoin should be — indeed, it’s fun to believe in his type of future — but the realist in you knows to just eat popcorn while watching this artist at work. You don’t actually need to believe what he says for bitcoin to go mainstream. In fact, if you are easily influenced, you probably shouldn’t because many of his most strongly held beliefs simply aren’t practical.
9) Learn the defensive pitch for the Bitcoin Foundation. It goes something like this: “You know, it’s not that easy to herd cats in this industry and these guys have been very valuable in serving as a voice for such a diverse community. At the end of the day, none of the leading entrepreneurs have time to do much advocacy work outside of their own companies, and the Bitcoin Foundation is crucial in promoting investment in the Bitcoin core technology. It’s easy to criticize them — and look, they’ve definitely made some mistakes — but like most non-profits, these guys are underpaid, overworked and only get criticism, never praise.” The more you say this, the truer it sounds. (See TBI, March 2014, for why this is ironic.)
10) Rehearse this phrase or some close iteration of it.
"Ethereum is really interesting, but it just seems like they will have an uphill battle to beat out Bitcoin innovations like side chains and tree chains given Bitcoin’s network effects."***
If you want to immediately be deified like a core developer, state this with confidence and maintain eye contact with your listener during cocktail hour, then just shake hands and walk away. This is a newb trump card, and it sounds smart on so many levels that you will leave your audience with no choice but to admire your crypto fluency. Uttering this phrase without stammering usually comes with an admission ticket to any conference VIP after-party you’d like. (I usually just use one of my several aliases, until one of them is on the list.)
Good luck!
*Still trying to make it.
**There are actually a surprising number of former and current pick-up artists in bitcoin. No joke. (I’m not one of them.)
***Full disclosure: I have said this verbatim and still don’t know what it means. But it sounds smart.
http://two-bit-idiot.tumblr.com/post/97561749484/sound-smart-at-bitcoinconf
submitted by twobitidiot to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

4/17/14 Video News - Bitcoin.com, SecondMarket, Walmart, Ron Paul & Dogecon SF

Video: http://www.moneyandtech.com/apr17-news-update/
Catch up with today's top news stories in Money & Tech:
Blockchain.info announced today that it has struck a five year deal to exclusively manage the domain Bitcoin.com. The domain's sleek new homepage now features three main links for the Blockchain wallet service, Zeroblock news and charts, as well as a search function to explore the rest of Blockchain.info. As stated in their announcement, this is part of the mission quote "to create new learning experiences and introduce millions of users to Bitcoin."
SecondMarket has taken another step towards the ultimate launch of America’s first fully regulated Bitcoin Exchange, releasing a new website for their quote “Experienced, Full Service Bitcoin Trading Services”. CEO Barry Silbert says he hopes to launch the fully licensed exchange for all compliant users this summer.
Walmart has announced the April 24th launch of their new Walmart-2-Walmart Money Transfer Service, in partnership with global remittances company Ria, which could clarify their decision to cut ties with Gyft.com. The new low-cost service will allow customers to transfer money between the over 4,000 Walmart stores nationwide, and is aimed at helping the almost 28 percent of Americans who are either underbanked or unbanked and rely on money transfers.
ZaZZZ, billed as the first Marijuana vending machine in the US, will also be accepting bitcoin. Since the legalization of marijuana in 2012, Bitcoin has become popular among dispensary owners who have been rejected by traditional financial institutions. The ZaZZZ machine however is far from an anonymous way to buy the newly legal drug, as it is equiped with an ID reader, and a video camera.
Former Congressman Ron Paul took to popular question-and-answer website Quora to express his thoughts about bitcoin, saying "Though I don’t personally believe that Bitcoin is true money, it should be perfectly legal and there should be no restrictions on it... For this to operate, we need to have freedom from government intervention when it comes to the Internet."
Dogecoin creator Jackson Palmer and the Dogecoin Foundation are putting together Dogecon SF on April 25th in San Francisco, in partnership with Follow The Coin. The event’s organizers expect it to be the largest dogecoin gathering yet, lining up celebrity speakers such as litecoin creator Charlie Lee, Doge tip bot co-founder David Dvorak, and bitcoin evangelist Andreas Antonopoulos.
We continue bringing you interviews from the recent Inside Bitcoins New York conference today with BitAngels Managing Director David Johnston, and BitGo CEO Will O’Brien. Watch those, and then enjoy the official trailer for the bitcoin documentary, The Rise And Rise Of Bitcoin, which premieres at the Tribeca film festival next week.
submitted by moneyandtech to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: Bitcoin top posts from 2017-01-09 to 2017-02-08 00:18 PDT

Period: 29.84 days
Submissions Comments
Total 999 46557
Rate (per day) 33.48 1507.53
Unique Redditors 653 6643
Combined Score 110856 177455

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 3932 points, 2 submissions: tuqqs
    1. Clearly not mainstream yet (2808 points, 104 comments)
    2. what it'll look like, when it happens (1124 points, 195 comments)
  2. 3593 points, 19 submissions: helmsk
    1. Countdown: Bitcoin Will Be a Legal Method of Payment in Japan in Two Months (2316 points, 151 comments)
    2. Europe Lays Out Roadmap to Restrict Payments in Cash and Cryptocurrencies (317 points, 102 comments)
    3. Polish Bitcoin Adoption Escalating with Strong Ecosystem (86 points, 4 comments)
    4. Why South Korean Bitcoin Adoption Could Outpace Most Other Countries This Year (74 points, 3 comments)
    5. Pakistan Set to Become a Major Bitcoin Hub (72 points, 49 comments)
    6. UAE Did Not Ban Bitcoin (72 points, 2 comments)
    7. Europe Committed to Tightening Digital Currency Rules by End of 2017 (71 points, 23 comments)
    8. How to Start Your Own Bitcoin ATM Business (67 points, 15 comments)
    9. Coincheck's Growth Reveals Surging Japanese Bitcoin Trade (62 points, 8 comments)
    10. How Trump's Wall and Remittance Tax Could Give Bitcoin a Boost (60 points, 23 comments)
  3. 3177 points, 2 submissions: futureofeverything
    1. "R.I.P. Bitcoin. It's Time to Move On"....funny billboard driving around in Miami (3136 points, 227 comments)
    2. Why Venezuela's Currency Crisis Is A Case Study For Bitcoin (41 points, 1 comment)
  4. 2577 points, 7 submissions: Pizpie
    1. Welcome to Bitcoin, everyone. Don't worry, he'll recover. (1353 points, 155 comments)
    2. Breaking: Huobi & BTCC stopped margin trading, OKc leverage only 1x, finally no more fake BTC generated by exchange (485 points, 160 comments)
    3. Breaking: Bitcoin exchange Coinbase receives New York BitLicense (242 points, 55 comments)
    4. Canada Goose is thinking about accepting Bitcoin - Let them know what you think! (191 points, 49 comments)
    5. Confirmed: Huobi reactivates margin trading, with a limit of 100k CNY instead of 10 million CNY. (160 points, 79 comments)
    6. BREAKING: Huobi official announcement: We are considering charging trading fees. (80 points, 25 comments)
    7. Breaking: PBOC strikes again - Lending disabled on BTCC (66 points, 70 comments)
  5. 1941 points, 1 submission: bahatassafus
    1. Internet Archive: $3000 donated anonymously to the @internetarchive in bitcoin just now. Made our day! Thank you! (1941 points, 31 comments)
  6. 1338 points, 1 submission: kynek99
    1. Deutsche Bank - More than $10 billion in transactions never appeared on the books. That's why banksters don't want to use public blockchains. (1338 points, 96 comments)
  7. 1294 points, 1 submission: umbawumpa
    1. Julian Assange just used the current block hash as proof-of-not-prerecorded-interview in his AMA (1294 points, 182 comments)
  8. 1272 points, 2 submissions: Butt_Cheek_Spreader
    1. When you ride the bitcoin rally (1189 points, 204 comments)
    2. OKcoin and Huobi provided margin trading that violated rules resulting in abnormal price and fluctuations. (83 points, 28 comments)
  9. 1258 points, 4 submissions: dan_from_san_diego
    1. I started mining bitcoin in the desert. Here's some of what I have learned. (516 points, 575 comments)
    2. Chase is closing my account due to bitcoin purchases. Nice. (478 points, 410 comments)
    3. Here are some pictures of the solar greenhouse in the desert I am using to mine bitcoin. (140 points, 303 comments)
    4. Man... Brian Kelly from CNBC really fell hard for bitcoin. I like that! (124 points, 27 comments)
  10. 1250 points, 10 submissions: PoCaMiQu
    1. Can we fucking acknowledge that the Chinese Government just legitimized bitcoin? (604 points, 154 comments)
    2. WTF Huffington Post <---Fake News: "Bitcoin Plummets On Yuan Reversal" (218 points, 71 comments)
    3. This is what I like to see when checking daily's finances. (122 points, 22 comments)
    4. Beautiful balance (71 points, 13 comments)
    5. Reminder: Bitcoin's immutability is not only not a bug, but its main feature. Scalability comes secondary to it. (44 points, 20 comments)
    6. Bitcoin Price Gets Ready to Factor In Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF Approval (43 points, 24 comments)
    7. Paxful - a global leader in peer-to-peer bitcoin technology - has launched a new widget, allowing anyone to buy bitcoin worldwide instantly with over 300 ways to pay. (41 points, 34 comments)
    8. Scaling Revisited: What If Bitcoin's Big 'Problem' is Its Great Strength? (38 points, 16 comments)
    9. Flashback to the 90's: Interviewer asks Fed Chair "What is Blockchain?" (37 points, 21 comments)
    10. It seems all those FUD mongers were wrong when they predicted the price would crash without China's "liquidity" (32 points, 13 comments)
  11. 1155 points, 16 submissions: eragmus
    1. Ben Davenport (BitGo CTO): "Centralization of mining has led to some miners thinking they're in charge of Bitcoin. They forgot where Bitcoin's value comes from." (169 points, 112 comments)
    2. [Twitter Poll] Charlie Lee (Director of Engineering @ Coinbase): "What's the most important feature of Bitcoin that we must not sacrifice? Decentralization, Security, Low fees, Global payments" (116 points, 62 comments)
    3. Hernz: "Did you know you can get paid to help spread misinformation? -birds dot bitcoin dot com-" (hosted by Roger Ver) (106 points, 38 comments)
    4. The Passion of 'Bitcoin Jesus': How The Blockchain's Most Beloved Investor Became its Most Polarizing (101 points, 52 comments)
    5. Jonas Nick: "MimbleWimble blockchain (non-interactive coinjoin + pruning) may be able to support Lightning" / ref: Andrew Poelstra @ lists.launchpad.net/mimblewimble/msg00022.html (96 points, 19 comments)
    6. Bitcoin Core - IRC Meeting Summary (January 19, 2016) (83 points, 16 comments)
    7. Bitcoin Core - IRC Meeting Summary (January 12, 2016) (68 points, 7 comments)
    8. WhalePanda: "Analyzed @rogerkver's 'Cry Wolf' tactic on censorship on /bitcoin." (59 points, 16 comments)
    9. Inside MAST: The Little-Known Plan to Advance Bitcoin Smart Contracts (52 points, 8 comments)
    10. Bitcoin Core - IRC Meeting Summary (January 5, 2016) (51 points, 2 comments)
  12. 1155 points, 14 submissions: castom
    1. Russian Authorities: Bitcoin Poses No Threat, Won’t Be Banned (575 points, 80 comments)
    2. Bitcoin Goes to Washington - Trump May Hire More Digital Currency Leaders (86 points, 50 comments)
    3. With Another $30 Million Investment, BitFury becomes the Highest-funded Bitcoin Company (80 points, 3 comments)
    4. Nigeria's Bitcoin Interest Unwavering Despite Government Crackdown (64 points, 3 comments)
    5. German TV Calls Bitcoin "Digital Gold" (46 points, 3 comments)
    6. A Town in Illinois Just Announced It's Holding a Bitcoin Sale (46 points, 9 comments)
    7. Coinbase CEO: IRS Battle Could Cost Startup $1 Million (43 points, 15 comments)
    8. Xapo Now Licensed to Operate from Switzerland (39 points, 2 comments)
    9. Bitcoin Payments Startup BitPesa Raises $2.5 Million (32 points, 0 comments)
    10. Lawsuit Accuses Bitcoin ATM Owner of Smashing Competing Machines With Hammers (31 points, 18 comments)
  13. 1140 points, 4 submissions: bdd4
    1. sigh (859 points, 189 comments)
    2. As Predicted. 🙄 PBoC (137 points, 86 comments)
    3. Friendly Reminder: Bitcoin is still up 2.6% for the last 30 days (94 points, 8 comments)
    4. Dead Man's Switch for HODLers (50 points, 84 comments)
  14. 1104 points, 3 submissions: Vaultoro
    1. "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." can we please stop this culture of bashing or lifting cults of personality and get back to science? (807 points, 143 comments)
    2. The house of Nakamoto in the main shopping strip of Vienna gets massive new bitcoin logo signage 2 stories big, 4 times 4 meters of epic propaganda! (265 points, 32 comments)
    3. I saw a post here that little snitch takes bitcoin. I just purchased a copy! Great little app and well worth 30 bucks. (32 points, 9 comments)
  15. 1088 points, 3 submissions: Carlscrazyidea
    1. You can now buy Bitcoin from any 7-11 in the Philippines! (1021 points, 136 comments)
    2. What is my impact as a Bitcoin holder? (41 points, 45 comments)
    3. I am a Hodling noob who still has a lot of Hodling work to do! (26 points, 30 comments)
  16. 1060 points, 7 submissions: Bitcohen
    1. Mercedes Buys Bitcoin Service Provider in 'Digitization Strategy' (518 points, 70 comments)
    2. Mercedes-Benz cars are now being sold for Bitcoin in Venezuela (348 points, 68 comments)
    3. Dutch Pirate Party pays 11,250 Euro deposit in Bitcoin to Electoral Council (68 points, 9 comments)
    4. Amir Taaki & Cody Wilson's Bitcoin support described by film critic as “defense of criminality” at Sundance Film Festival 2017 (44 points, 13 comments)
    5. Russia's Kaliningrad May Trial 'Legal' Bitcoin, Launch Exchange (31 points, 2 comments)
    6. Bitcurex Owner 'Disappears' After Failing to Return 2,300 BTC (26 points, 2 comments)
    7. Liverpool Launches Own Digital Currency Based on Bitcoin's Blockchain Tech - Attracts 3,000 Users in First Month (25 points, 1 comment)
  17. 1009 points, 1 submission: worstkeptsecrets
    1. Bitcoin on NewEgg. 3rd option! Ahead of Credit Card and PayPal! #ITSHAPPENING (1009 points, 92 comments)
  18. 975 points, 1 submission: SooieSide
    1. You can't get to the moon on a roller coaster. (975 points, 73 comments)
  19. 941 points, 4 submissions: Logical007
    1. UPDATE: Nearly all of Circle's 5 Star Ratings have disappeared today for their latest version (Jan 5th). A stark difference to what we saw earlier, looks like action was taken. (633 points, 177 comments)
    2. Bloomberg: Wyre CEO: "Bitcoin is a good investment for everyone." (VIDEO (188 points, 13 comments)
    3. Bitcoin isn't 'real money'. Google, you need to work on your search results. (85 points, 38 comments)
    4. Coinbase, please fix your merchant invoices on iOS 10. They haven't worked properly for months (while BitPay's work perfectly). Details and screenshot inside. (35 points, 5 comments)
  20. 896 points, 1 submission: amendment64
    1. Just paid 23 cents on a $3.74 transaction. When does it end? $1.00 per transaction? $2? $5? I don't wanna stop using this peer to peer currency, but I'm fast being priced out of it. (896 points, 1017 comments)
  21. 884 points, 2 submissions: theswapman
    1. Bitcoiner interrupts Shia LaBeouf's "He Will Not Divide Us" stream with chant that Bitcoin Will Unite Us! (456 points, 204 comments)
    2. PSA: Xapo will freeze your bitcoin and demand documents AFTER you have deposited (428 points, 101 comments)
  22. 820 points, 3 submissions: MorrisMustang
    1. South Florida Distillers uses heat from bitcoin mining to accelerate rum barrel aging! (709 points, 66 comments)
    2. "See, bitcoin is down 9.75% over the past month...I told you it crashed..." says my wife (72 points, 64 comments)
    3. EthereRum by South Florida Distillers, the worlds first rum distilled from mining heat. Stayed tuned for more details. (39 points, 21 comments)
  23. 799 points, 5 submissions: finalhedge
    1. Patrick Byrne (Overstock CEO) on Fox Business Channel today (288 points, 57 comments)
    2. "Sent my first instant bitcoin LN payment to a random irc user on testnet. Second-layer tech for the win!" | Justin Camarena on Twitter (250 points, 64 comments)
    3. Balaji Srinivasan (21 CEO) just deleted his whole tweet history. Heading to the FDA? (137 points, 69 comments)
    4. BARRY SILBERT'S BITCOIN INVESTMENT TRUST FILES FOR IPO (99 points, 10 comments)
    5. Bloomberg: 'Blockchain' Fans Will Have A Rude Awakening In 2017 (25 points, 2 comments)
  24. 798 points, 9 submissions: FluxSeer
    1. Gemini Introduces Zero-Confirmation Bitcoin Deposits (205 points, 69 comments)
    2. Bitcoin Mining Distribution 2012 vs. 2017 (146 points, 69 comments)
    3. When someone says Bitcoin is a ponzi/scam/etc... Send them this link. (131 points, 24 comments)
    4. Developer Release for OpenBazaar 2.0 (123 points, 45 comments)
    5. Federal Reserve Staffer Fined for Mining Bitcoins at Work (62 points, 4 comments)
    6. A Future Led by Bitcoin Unlimited is a Centralized Future (56 points, 38 comments)
    7. Blockstream joins Digital Garage to jointly develop next-generation financial technology (33 points, 15 comments)
    8. Bitcoin Matrix Wallpaper (1920x1080) (23 points, 6 comments)
    9. The ECB Explains Why Central Banks Can't Go Bankrupt (19 points, 7 comments)
  25. 796 points, 1 submission: kidblondie
    1. [AMA] I'm the woman who got pepper sprayed wearing the "Make Bitcoin Great Again" hat. (796 points, 938 comments)
  26. 709 points, 1 submission: silver_89
    1. Liftoff (709 points, 282 comments)
  27. 697 points, 2 submissions: Tfoe1399
    1. Huge shoutout to BTC.com for giving me back my money (666 points, 91 comments)
    2. So this just happened (31 points, 101 comments)
  28. 691 points, 3 submissions: jholmes91
    1. Antonopoulos Supports SegWit, Opens Doors For Lightning and TumbleBit (315 points, 112 comments)
    2. Donald Trump is Considering a Bitcoin Entrepreneur to Lead the FDA (220 points, 137 comments)
    3. Japanese Internet Giant GMO Announces Entrance to Bitcoin Wallet Market (156 points, 14 comments)
  29. 688 points, 2 submissions: belcher_
    1. bitcoin.com loses 13.2BTC trying to fork the network: Untested and buggy BU creates an oversized block, Many BU node banned, the HF fails (543 points, 428 comments)
    2. Segwit talk by Pieter Wuille. 25 minutes talk time (145 points, 21 comments)
  30. 673 points, 9 submissions: Lite_Coin_Guy
    1. Litecoin Moves to Adopt Bitcoin's SegWit Scaling Upgrade (155 points, 86 comments)
    2. If Bitcoin ETF approval ignites speculative rush, doesn't that prove intense latent demand, blocked only by the SEC? (120 points, 22 comments)
    3. Big miners are free to create their Unlimited coin, but if they try to kill Bitcoin it will resist censorship and route around it. (108 points, 103 comments)
    4. What is money? (93 points, 56 comments)
    5. Charlie Shrems next jail time? (50 points, 15 comments)
    6. In 1996 they said the Internet was in need of a "killer app". In 2016, they said #Bitcoin needed a "killer app", too. (39 points, 17 comments)
    7. Introduction to Bitcoin & Blockchains (38 points, 5 comments)
    8. Evaporative Two-Phase Immersion Cooling (Bitfury) (37 points, 6 comments)
    9. Crypto '98 Rump Session- Hal Finney (33 points, 8 comments)
  31. 635 points, 8 submissions: olivercarding
    1. Bitcoin Has Many Fans at Amazon According to Purse CEO Andrew Lee (152 points, 39 comments)
    2. Bitcoin is Closing in On Its Transaction Capacity Limit, For Real This Time (110 points, 155 comments)
    3. The Founder of India-Based Bitcoin Mining Pool GBMiners is Running a Ponzi Scheme (105 points, 50 comments)
    4. How Bitcoin Is Disrupting The Online Gambling Industry (98 points, 74 comments)
    5. Report Estimates There are More Than 10 Million Bitcoin Holders Worldwide (91 points, 54 comments)
    6. Blockchain Announces Expansion in Middle East; Partners with Dubai Government (32 points, 7 comments)
    7. 3 Teams Receive Funding from $1.2 Million Bitcoin Development Grant, More Funds Incoming (27 points, 7 comments)
    8. Digital Garage and Blockstream Collaborate on New Blockchain Solutions for Japanese Market (20 points, 0 comments)
  32. 630 points, 1 submission: classna
    1. FOMO-ing right now (630 points, 85 comments)
  33. 621 points, 7 submissions: _smudger_
    1. Bitcoin: Why It Now Belongs in Every Portfolio (206 points, 33 comments)
    2. Bitcoin ETF may attract $300 million in the first week, says Needham & company (205 points, 103 comments)
    3. It's time to start thinking about denominating Bitcoins in mBTC permanently. Might be the last time to buy some for less than a dollar each! (82 points, 127 comments)
    4. Big China bitcoin exchange says no government pressure on outflows (46 points, 6 comments)
    5. New weekly record in Local Bitcoin volumes plus new highs in Canada, Colombia, Denmark, Saudi Arabia, Thailand and Venezuela (36 points, 1 comment)
    6. Despite the recent drop the price is hitting new records when averaged over a year (24 points, 10 comments)
    7. Press Release: CD Key retailer CJS CD Keys now Accepting Bitcoin (22 points, 3 comments)
  34. 597 points, 1 submission: arichnad
    1. mac has the new bitcoin Unicode character already! (597 points, 81 comments)
  35. 594 points, 1 submission: drvox1600
    1. Bitcoin just hit $1000 USD! :D (594 points, 147 comments)
  36. 573 points, 4 submissions: bitcoinglobe
    1. Japanese internet giant, GMO, entering bitcoin exchange and wallet markets (451 points, 26 comments)
    2. Abra overview (52 points, 22 comments)
    3. Japan Could See 20,000 Bitcoin Accepting Merchants in 2017 - CryptoCoinsNews (44 points, 5 comments)
    4. Bitcoin is gold with a teleporter (26 points, 2 comments)
  37. 567 points, 9 submissions: PrimeParticle
    1. "Introduction to Bitcoin" - Andreas Antonopoulos (Probably one of the best videos for introducing bitcoin). (131 points, 7 comments)
    2. Venezuela's currency now worth so little shopkeepers weigh vast piles of notes instead of counting them (118 points, 42 comments)
    3. Coins are cheaper in China by $30 to $50 dollars for the first time in a long time, that means... (92 points, 87 comments)
    4. Andreas Antonopoulos - The Death of Money | London Real (57 points, 1 comment)
    5. Abra: Bitcoin To Fiat Withdrawals At Tellers Globally! - 2017 North American Bitcoin Conference (47 points, 14 comments)
    6. Remember that you can use CPFP or RBF to get your transactions confirmed faster. (45 points, 46 comments)
    7. Bitcoin Q&A: The Lightning Network & Rootstock (30 points, 1 comment)
    8. Public Perception of Bitcoin is Slowly Shifting Amid Global Financial Turmoil (25 points, 1 comment)
    9. Bitcoin is shrugging off some big news of out of China (22 points, 1 comment)
  38. 561 points, 1 submission: kevsudos
    1. Bitcoin Hodlers Be Like........ (561 points, 96 comments)
  39. 543 points, 1 submission: turn-down-for-what
    1. $1,000! (543 points, 49 comments)
  40. 539 points, 1 submission: BlahYourHamster
    1. [META] Can we use the Bitcoin Rollercoster Guy as the upvote and downvote arrows? (539 points, 49 comments)
  41. 538 points, 7 submissions: themetalfriend
    1. The real superhero (210 points, 15 comments)
    2. Countries where you can survive on Bitcoin (map) (76 points, 88 comments)
    3. How practical is it to live on Bitcoin: historical progress (gif) (63 points, 40 comments)
    4. Among the countries with the strongest Bitcoin adoption: Slovenia, Finland, Singapore, Hong Kong, Canada, Switzerland (63 points, 13 comments)
    5. Long-term bitcoiner checking this sub (51 points, 9 comments)
    6. The complete list of the factors that influence the value of Bitcoin (45 points, 29 comments)
    7. Will Bitcoin work on Mars? (30 points, 41 comments)
  42. 521 points, 2 submissions: roasbeef
    1. Announcing the Alpha Release of the Lightning Network Daemon! (427 points, 152 comments)
    2. Setting up and Testing LND with the Testnet Lightning Faucet (94 points, 7 comments)
  43. 506 points, 1 submission: ToTheMoonGuy
    1. Super Bowl Bitcoin Lady (506 points, 37 comments)
  44. 484 points, 1 submission: ssienk117
    1. My new Phone background. Thanks u/SooieSide/ (484 points, 30 comments)
  45. 472 points, 2 submissions: Wingsuit
    1. I think duck duck go should improve their decimal accuracy (386 points, 41 comments)
    2. Bitcoin achieves leetness in Australia (86 points, 12 comments)
  46. 470 points, 1 submission: robertgenito
    1. The REAL good ol' days of bitcoin... (470 points, 103 comments)
  47. 444 points, 1 submission: loserkids
    1. Bitcoin saved my ass in South East Asia (444 points, 115 comments)
  48. 441 points, 1 submission: boyber
    1. LibreTaxi, free and open source UbeLyft alternative to connect passengers and drivers - bitcoin integration on the way! (441 points, 94 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. nullc (2659 points, 215 comments)
  2. kidblondie (2127 points, 89 comments)
  3. BashCo (1530 points, 293 comments)
  4. dellintelbitcoin (1400 points, 372 comments)
  5. smartfbrankings (1141 points, 265 comments)
  6. belcher_ (1031 points, 149 comments)
  7. Frogolocalypse (986 points, 322 comments)
  8. dan_from_san_diego (949 points, 554 comments)
  9. Cryptolution (851 points, 226 comments)
  10. Vaultoro (822 points, 100 comments)
  11. thieflar (792 points, 231 comments)
  12. Lite_Coin_Guy (748 points, 219 comments)
  13. Cryptoconomy (728 points, 134 comments)
  14. Coinosphere (723 points, 282 comments)
  15. luke-jr (718 points, 141 comments)
  16. waxwing (707 points, 117 comments)
  17. bitsteiner (658 points, 157 comments)
  18. BitttBurger (646 points, 157 comments)
  19. shesek1 (607 points, 132 comments)
  20. pb1x (595 points, 76 comments)
  21. jratcliff63367 (591 points, 45 comments)
  22. supermari0 (587 points, 131 comments)
  23. bitusher (581 points, 96 comments)
  24. 4n4n4 (576 points, 79 comments)
  25. coinjaf (562 points, 225 comments)
  26. glockbtc (541 points, 168 comments)
  27. 45sbvad (539 points, 102 comments)
  28. killerstorm (536 points, 119 comments)
  29. adam3us (527 points, 66 comments)
  30. maaku7 (527 points, 63 comments)
  31. nopara73 (523 points, 120 comments)
  32. phor2zero (499 points, 66 comments)
  33. PrimeParticle (496 points, 108 comments)
  34. sreaka (495 points, 155 comments)
  35. jonny1000 (488 points, 98 comments)
  36. CoinCadence (487 points, 77 comments)
  37. SatoshisCat (480 points, 150 comments)
  38. petertodd (473 points, 24 comments)
  39. spoonfednonsense (472 points, 126 comments)
  40. Hitchslappy (472 points, 102 comments)
  41. albuminvasion (466 points, 84 comments)
  42. Taek42 (456 points, 44 comments)
  43. chrisrico (452 points, 87 comments)
  44. AnonymousRev (451 points, 115 comments)
  45. the_bob (443 points, 114 comments)
  46. satoshicoin (438 points, 65 comments)
  47. Riiume (434 points, 83 comments)
  48. exab (430 points, 125 comments)
  49. jimmajamma (422 points, 141 comments)
  50. brg444 (421 points, 69 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. "R.I.P. Bitcoin. It's Time to Move On"....funny billboard driving around in Miami by futureofeverything (3136 points, 227 comments)
  2. Clearly not mainstream yet by tuqqs (2808 points, 104 comments)
  3. Countdown: Bitcoin Will Be a Legal Method of Payment in Japan in Two Months by helmsk (2316 points, 151 comments)
  4. Internet Archive: $3000 donated anonymously to the @internetarchive in bitcoin just now. Made our day! Thank you! by bahatassafus (1941 points, 31 comments)
  5. Welcome to Bitcoin, everyone. Don't worry, he'll recover. by Pizpie (1353 points, 155 comments)
  6. Deutsche Bank - More than $10 billion in transactions never appeared on the books. That's why banksters don't want to use public blockchains. by kynek99 (1338 points, 96 comments)
  7. Julian Assange just used the current block hash as proof-of-not-prerecorded-interview in his AMA by umbawumpa (1294 points, 182 comments)
  8. When you ride the bitcoin rally by Butt_Cheek_Spreader (1189 points, 204 comments)
  9. what it'll look like, when it happens by tuqqs (1124 points, 195 comments)
  10. You can now buy Bitcoin from any 7-11 in the Philippines! by Carlscrazyidea (1021 points, 136 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 380 points: Tyatku's comment in When you ride the bitcoin rally
  2. 340 points: Vaultoro's comment in Just paid 23 cents on a $3.74 transaction. When does it end? $1.00 per transaction? $2? $5? I don't wanna stop using this peer to peer currency, but I'm fast being priced out of it.
  3. 323 points: jamesdpitley's comment in "R.I.P. Bitcoin. It's Time to Move On"....funny billboard driving around in Miami
  4. 290 points: Clutch70's comment in Clearly not mainstream yet
  5. 212 points: BitcoinDreamland's comment in South Florida Distillers uses heat from bitcoin mining to accelerate rum barrel aging!
  6. 206 points: bitpotluck's comment in FOMO-ing right now
  7. 195 points: howardkinsd's comment in Clearly not mainstream yet
  8. 182 points: beloboi's comment in "R.I.P. Bitcoin. It's Time to Move On"....funny billboard driving around in Miami
  9. 181 points: BattleChimp's comment in "R.I.P. Bitcoin. It's Time to Move On"....funny billboard driving around in Miami
  10. 179 points: kidblondie's comment in [AMA] I'm the woman who got pepper sprayed wearing the "Make Bitcoin Great Again" hat.
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats (Donate)
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

Partial transcript of Andreas Antonopoulos' presentation at the LA Bitcoin Meetup - This dude's spoken words need to be circulated in writing more often.

One of my favorite people in Bitcoin is Andreas Antonopoulos. He has a rare combination of CS brilliance, eloquence and authenticity that makes him IMO Bitcoin's greatest evangelist and champion.
I took the time to write-up a partial transcript of Andreas' recent presentation on Bitcoin at the LA Bitcoin Meetup, because the full presentation with Q&A is 90 minutes long. I've included what I thought were his most eloquent and concise points because it's important to get some of his spoken words on paper, and because I'm going to use a lot of his points when educating others about Bitcoin. I would vote for Andreas in a heartbeat if he ran for any type of public office, and have an enormous amount of professional respect for the dude, although I've only met him in passing. I have edited for clarity and length. Mistakes/omissions are my own, brilliance is attributable to Andreas.
Enjoy!
On the Irrelevance of Bitcoin's Flaws: "Bitcoin is not perfect, but it's good enough. And when you have a tech that achieves network scale and can be distributed over a large network, good enough suddenly becomes perfect, not because it is perfect, but because it enables the kind of innovation that makes it sticky, that starts accelerating the network effect. And Bitcoin has some of the strongest network effects ever seen. Why? Because it's money. The literal value of the network can increase exponentially."
On the Superiority of Decentralized Systems: "Nature doesn't do hierarchical systems, humans do. And normally we create hierarchical systems to solve the problems of scale. Bitcoin solves one of the main problems of hierarchical systems, which is that the people who rise to the top become corrupted and gradually subvert the hierarchical system to serve their own needs. Hierarchical systems don't scale and they don't deliver equality for very long. Decentralized systems scale and as long as the rules they are based on operate, they can level the playing field for all participants. If you can put a decentralized system next to a hierarchical system and people have a choice to choose between the two, the decentralized system will always deliver more value to every node within the network, and it will do so with better accountability, better predictability, less uncertainty, less risk, and it is much harder to corrupt and coopt, and now we're doing it to money for the first time in history. That's a very big deal."
On Bitcoin as a Global Reserve Currency: "In North America, we have the world's reserve currency. It's a good, stable currency. A lot of libertarians and Austrian economists will say: "The dollar sucks." Yes, the dollar sucks, but it sucks 193 times less than the other 193 other currencies. So when we ask why does Bitcoin matter in North America, the answer is: it doesn't. It matters far more in every other place in the world. You go to Argentina; their currency is devaluing at 30% per year. People's savings are disappearing before their eyes. Their futures are being stolen by a central bank. For these people, Bitcoin is a choice that allows them to achieve economic independence. We would love to have economic independence here, because our financial system is f***ed up and corrupt, but compared to the rest of the world, it's easy. It's great."
Bitcoin as a Force for Social Good: "Bitcoin is really all about the other 6 billion people. About 3 billion people have no bank accounts. About 1 billion people have ample access to credit and large pools of liquidity, so they can start businesses, buy homes, etc. They have access to international finance, transferring money and conducting international trade without many restrictions. The middle 3 billion may have bank accounts, but those bank accounts have currency controls, and those people don't have the ability to do international trade. They are stuck in a currency controlled by a central bank that uses inflation as a means to steal from the people. Essentially inflation becomes a form of taxation.
This stolen money usually goes to buy guns and tanks and bombs, which is why I'm in Bitcoin. In the state of human affairs, if you ask a nation to divest its wealth in order to fund war, the only way you can do that is by stealing, by lying, by cheating. If you ask for the consent of the governed to fund war, they will say no. They would rather fund healthcare, education or development. So when you have a currency that is not subject to central bank control, you achieve separation of money and state. You take away the power of state to use money as a means of control and enrichment. Until now, each government was able to apply control through money, by issuing it, taxing in that money and controlling the flow of money into and out of that country. Bitcoin is not the 194th currency, it is the first global currency. It is the first algorithmic currency. We can trust mathematics because we can predict exactly what will happen on the Bitcoin network.
We have the opportunity, not to bank the other 6 billion, but to unbank all 7 billion of us. We have the opportunity to allow the developing world to leapfrog directly from cash-based societies to digital cash societies and bypass the entire failed experiment of central currencies from the western world. They will take the opportunity just like they leapfrogged landlines and went directly to cellphones."
On Governments' Inability to Stop Bitcoin: "You cannot stop money that is information. Stopping bitcoin would involve shutting down the internet. I truly believe that Bitcoin is absolutely unstoppable from external perspectives today. That doesn't mean that it will survive. It means that if we f*** it up, it will fail from the inside. There are certain failure modes that bitcoin could exhibit today, probably the most serious would be a bug that allows someone to subvert the elliptic curve digital signature algorithm in a way that wouldn't be noticed for a long time, in which case you wouldn't know who owns what. That could crash bitcoin."
On Global Remittance Innovation: One of the most exciting financial solutions is the ability of the payment networks to do peer-to-peer payments, the most important of which is global remittances. Global remittances are a $510bn market, where migrant workers send that money back home to support families in the poorest nations in the world. Today, Western Union and similar companies extract $74 billion in fees for those services. Even as the developed world provides $150 billion in direct foreign aid to the top of the pyramid in the hopes that it trickles down, we steal $74 billion from the base of the pyramid. That money could go to sanitation, clean water, healthcare, food. This is not our money, it's theirs, and it just means we need to take it away from Western Union. And that couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of crooks."
On whether 51% attacks are something to worry about: "The 51% attack is an interesting theoretical experiment with limited practical uses. If you were to take over 51% of the network you would be able to successfully issue a double spend attack, but you could really only affect the next couple of blocks. [So the economics of a 51% don't really make sense.] Besides that, Gavin Andresen (the lead core Bitcoin developer) would make changes to the core protocol in the event that the integrity of the block chain was threatened."
On whether we should worry about SHA-256 Failing (the underlying security algorithm on which Bitcoin is based): "The hashing algorithm can be replaced, with a minimal impact on the blockchain, but very big impact on the miners. But practically speaking, if SHA-256 were to break, we would have much bigger problems. Because it underlies security of all financial systems, and all of our communications networks...and the tomahawk cruise missile codes."
submitted by twobitidiot to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

4/17/14 Video News - Bitcoin.com, SecondMarket, Walmart, Ron Paul & Dogecon SF

Video: http://www.moneyandtech.com/apr17-news-update/
Catch up with today's top news stories in Money & Tech:
Blockchain.info announced today that it has struck a five year deal to exclusively manage the domain Bitcoin.com. The domain's sleek new homepage now features three main links for the Blockchain wallet service, Zeroblock news and charts, as well as a search function to explore the rest of Blockchain.info. As stated in their announcement, this is part of the mission quote "to create new learning experiences and introduce millions of users to Bitcoin."
SecondMarket has taken another step towards the ultimate launch of America’s first fully regulated Bitcoin Exchange, releasing a new website for their quote “Experienced, Full Service Bitcoin Trading Services”. CEO Barry Silbert says he hopes to launch the fully licensed exchange for all compliant users this summer.
Walmart has announced the April 24th launch of their new Walmart-2-Walmart Money Transfer Service, in partnership with global remittances company Ria, which could clarify their decision to cut ties with Gyft.com. The new low-cost service will allow customers to transfer money between the over 4,000 Walmart stores nationwide, and is aimed at helping the almost 28 percent of Americans who are either underbanked or unbanked and rely on money transfers.
ZaZZZ, billed as the first Marijuana vending machine in the US, will also be accepting bitcoin. Since the legalization of marijuana in 2012, Bitcoin has become popular among dispensary owners who have been rejected by traditional financial institutions. The ZaZZZ machine however is far from an anonymous way to buy the newly legal drug, as it is equiped with an ID reader, and a video camera.
Former Congressman Ron Paul took to popular question-and-answer website Quora to express his thoughts about bitcoin, saying "Though I don’t personally believe that Bitcoin is true money, it should be perfectly legal and there should be no restrictions on it... For this to operate, we need to have freedom from government intervention when it comes to the Internet."
Dogecoin creator Jackson Palmer and the Dogecoin Foundation are putting together Dogecon SF on April 25th in San Francisco, in partnership with Follow The Coin. The event’s organizers expect it to be the largest dogecoin gathering yet, lining up celebrity speakers such as litecoin creator Charlie Lee, Doge tip bot co-founder David Dvorak, and bitcoin evangelist Andreas Antonopoulos.
We continue bringing you interviews from the recent Inside Bitcoins New York conference today with BitAngels Managing Director David Johnston, and BitGo CEO Will O’Brien. Watch those, and then enjoy the official trailer for the bitcoin documentary, The Rise And Rise Of Bitcoin, which premieres at the Tribeca film festival next week.
submitted by moneyandtech to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Another BTC Non-Profit for us to Support. I've worked with these guys to connect kids in Guatemala to local mentors and change their lives using soccer-based camps and city leagues and partnering with private academies to give them an education as well.

Remember how Andreas told us to invest in charities?
These guys are based in the US but they operate in Guatemala. Remittance fees are as you'd expect, costing them a lot. I've been working with them for over a year and finally convinced them to give BTC a chance. They won't be converting either, at least not unless they have to later on.
I can tell you they put money to good use. The Guatemalan office is on a third floor walkup and these guys eat light, even by Guatemalan standards. But I've seen the impact they're having. Bitcoin is poised to go big in Guate and these guys are in a position to play a big part in getting the upcoming generation on board.
Please consider volunteering as well, but in the meantime, let's blow the doors off their expectations!
Champions In Action
submitted by The_Ugliest_Man_Ever to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Andreas Antonopoulos Says Bitcoin Will Never Be Truly Private Andreas Antonopoulos: A Pragmatist’s View on The World & Its Future Whats Happening to Bitcoin?!  Andreas Antonopoulos Responds! aantonop - YouTube Bitcoin Will Never Be Truly Private Says Andreas Antonopoulos

A community dedicated to Bitcoin, the currency of the Internet. Bitcoin is a distributed, worldwide, decentralized digital money. Bitcoins are... /r/btc was created to foster and support free and open Bitcoin discussion, Bitcoin news, and exclusive AMA (Ask Me Anything) interviews from top Bitcoin industry leaders! Bitcoin is the currency of the Internet. A distributed, worldwide, decentralized digital money. 74 quotes from Andreas M. Antonopoulos: 'At the end of the day, bitcoin is programmable money. When you have programmable money, the possibilities are truly endless. We can take many of the basic concepts of the current system that depend on legal contracts, and we can convert these into algorithmic contracts, into mathematical transactions that can be enforced on the bitcoin network. Argentina is now trading more Bitcoin than ever. Almost. Last week, Bitcoin trading in Argentina exploded to a record-setting volume of 101 million Argentine pesos (roughly $1.4 million USD). The previous all-time high for weekly BTC volume, measured in the local currency, was almost half that at 69 million. Image credit: source Over the past month, many reports about the materialization of a potential “death spiral” on the Bitcoin network were released, leading investors to be concerned about the short-term trend of the dominant cryptocurrency. According to a security expert and cryptocurrency researcher Andreas Antonopoulos, a death spiral is unlikely to happen in Bitcoin. […]

[index] [29133] [17168] [27251] [2305] [742] [9232] [8905] [16850] [2966] [3422]

Andreas Antonopoulos Says Bitcoin Will Never Be Truly Private

Andreas Antonopoulos 2019 - 20: Bitcoin vs. Facebook Libra coin = End of retail banking - Duration: 34:35. Cryptonites 52,009 views. 34:35 📍BILLIONAIRE Tim Draper PUTS IT ALL ON CRYPTO! Things That You Didn't Know About Bitcoin [Andreas Antonopoulos] - Duration: 35:19. Bitcoin Money Maker 3,150 views. 35:19. Another amazing talk by Andreas Antonopoulos. This is an entry level talk about Bitcoin, not just as a form of money but more as the technological invention that is changing the world forever. This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue Andreas Antonopoulos - Bitcoin Neutrality - Bitcoin 2013 Conference by Satoshi nakamoto. San Jose 2013 Conference. 35:40. Labitconf 2013 - Bitcoin Neutrality - Andreas Antonopoulos

Flag Counter