Tip Mechanism for Bitcoin Micropayments High Risk ...

Defi Coins List In Detail

A Detail List Of Defi Coin

Lending

Trading

Payments

Wallets

Interfaces

Infrastructure

Analytics

Education

Podcasts

Newsletters

Communities

submitted by jakkkmotivator to Latest_Defi_News [link] [comments]

Increase Nano Projects and Developer Resources | Among other ideas

To increase adoption I think marketing should be focused on two things and only enacted once they've somewhat been fulfilled. Otherwise Nano is just some weird version of Bitcoin and doesn't have much use. Alternative platforms improved by Nano and how developers can build on Nano. While these both are very intertwined I do think they should be separated.
For the first one we simply need more projects for people to use. The build off was a great start but I think we need to go futher. There needs to be alternatives to products that exists but are clearly not only enhanced by better because of Nano. Take for instance Venmo. The whole idea is making it easy, cheap, and fast to send money to people you know. Of course at the moment PayPal charges a fee for the ability to send money fast, it is also locked to the United States, and finally has privacy issues. Now if a wallet was created that makes it easy to buy Nano, has human readable addresses, makes tax compliance simple, allow businesses to use it, and with some marketing we could have a real Venmo competitor.
Now of course Venmo was just one example but this could be applied to many things such as Ecommerce, micropayments, etc. Take Ecommerce for example. Besides just creating an easy way to integrate with the major self hosted platforms there could be an alternative to Ebay/Amazon but prices would be slighty discounted (2% or something) if you used Nano instead of a Debt/Credit Card. As the sellers wouldn't be losing profit fees and wouldn't have to worry about charge backs. Along with this Nano cash back programs could exist on these platforms.
My point is we need alternative online platforms to the major ones today (Reddit, YouTube, Facebook, PayPal, etc.) that are improved by Nano. (Side Note: Making a list of platforms that could be improved by Nano with a bounty for creating said platforms would be a good start for something like this.) Once we have those platforms then use marketing to focus on why they're better and people should use them. Otherwise Nano is just a feeless currency which exists in the form of debit cards. (For the users not the business accepting said debit cards.)
For my second point Nano development needs some sort of really well written tutorial (written or in video format) that teaches viewers how to create various projects and everything else we can about Nano. This would greatly speed up adoption as developers would be able to master Nano much faster then they are now. With this there should be a library/suite of well documented tools to help create projects quicker.
Also how cool would it be if there was some sort of Nano magazine that teaches developers and enthusiasts how to build random projects. That would help a lot with creating an active community.
Finally developers they need an incentive. That's why I think creating some sort of foundation and or a permanent build off would be a boon to Nano. As mass innovation would be encouraged. These could be funded through user nano donations. Something similar to a Pateron where we'd all donate x-amount and get name recognition if we wanted too. This would be a crazy boost to community involvement and adoption.
Also If the price could be stabilized that would also help.
All of these would drive adoption because they drive interest and use.
TLDR: Create better developer resources and a couple alternatives to major online services. Then spend the budget on marketing those in the their respective circles.
submitted by RaytopianProjects to nanillionaire [link] [comments]

AMA: Ask Mike Anything

Hello again. It's been a while.
People have been emailing me about once a week or so for the last year to ask if I'm coming back to Bitcoin now that Bitcoin Cash exists. And a couple of weeks ago I was summoned on a thread called "Ask Mike Hearn Anything", but that was nothing to do with me and I was on holiday in Japan at the time. So I figured I should just answer all the different questions and answers in one place rather than keep doing it individually over email.
Firstly, thanks for the kind words on this sub. I don't take part anymore but I still visit occasionally to see what people are talking about, and the people posting nice messages is a pleasant change from three years ago.
Secondly, who am I? Some new Bitcoiners might not know.
I am Satoshi.
Just kidding. I'm not Satoshi. I was a Bitcoin developer for about five years, from 2010-2015. I was also one of the first Bitcoin users, sending my first coins in April 2009 (to SN), about 4 months after the genesis block. I worked on various things:
You can see a trend here - I was always interested in developing peer to peer decentralised applications that used Bitcoin.
But what I'm best known for is my role in the block size debate/civil war, documented by Nathaniel Popper in the New York Times. I spent most of 2015 writing extensively about why various proposals from the small-block/Blockstream faction weren't going to work (e.g. on replace by fee, lightning network, what would occur if no hard fork happened, soft forks, scaling conferences etc). After Blockstream successfully took over Bitcoin Core and expelled anyone who opposed them, Gavin and I forked Bitcoin Core to create Bitcoin XT, the first alternative node implementation to gain any serious usage. The creation of XT led to the imposition of censorship across all Bitcoin discussion forums and news outlets, resulted in the creation of this sub, and Core supporters paid a botnet operator to force XT nodes offline with DDoS attacks. They also convinced the miners and wider community to do nothing for years, resulting in the eventual overload of the main network.
I left the project at the start of 2016, documenting my reasons and what I expected to happen in my final essay on Bitcoin in which I said I considered it a failed experiment. Along with the article in the New York Times this pierced the censorship, made the wider world aware of what was going on, and thus my last gift to the community was a 20% drop in price (it soon recovered).

The last two years

Left Bitcoin ... but not decentralisation. After all that went down I started a new project called Corda. You can think of Corda as Bitcoin++, but modified for industrial use cases where a decentralised p2p database is more immediately useful than a new coin.
Corda incorporates many ideas I had back when I was working on Bitcoin but couldn't implement due to lack of time, resources, because of ideological wars or because they were too technically radical for the community. So even though it's doesn't provide a new cryptocurrency out of the box, it might be interesting for the Bitcoin Cash community to study anyway. By resigning myself to Bitcoin's fate and joining R3 I could go back to the drawing board and design with a lot more freedom, creating something inspired by Bitcoin's protocol but incorporating all the experience we gained writing Bitcoin apps over the years.
The most common question I'm asked is whether I'd come back and work on Bitcoin again. The obvious followup question is - come back and work on what? If you want to see some of the ideas I'd have been exploring if things had worked out differently, go read the Corda tech white paper. Here's a few of the things it might be worth asking about:
I don't plan on returning to Bitcoin but if you'd like to know what sort of things I'd have been researching or doing, ask about these things.
edit: Richard pointed out some essays he wrote that might be useful, Enterprise blockchains for cryptocurrency experts and New to Corda? Start here!
submitted by mike_hearn to btc [link] [comments]

Eos finally found its killer dapp.

Eos continues to be a goldmine of comedy gold and madness. I found something amazing by chance. I can't believe this thing went under our radar for so long! We need more EOS deep delvers. I visited dappradar today to check the state of the dapps and obviously most of them were either games, exchanges, gambling or classified as "high-risk" (hot potato games, ponzi schemes and hyips) so only the "other" category is interesting. Eos entered an airdrop mania phase some time ago and new terrible dapp ideas rise every so often (my favorite was selling dna on the blockchain but Karma is even beter) so it's slightly more diverse than eth that consolidated around boring stuff.
The innovation is happening on Eos now. Meet Karma.
KARMA is a decentralized application built on EOSIO that rewards people for doing good things in the world via an in-app token.
I couldn't pass up the opportunity to check it out. Can you imagine? A dedicated token for rewarding people for being nice. How could we live without this for sooooooooooooooo long? That's crazy!
Their slogans:
Anyway, their rationale is this:
Every single day billions of humans interact with one another. Broadly speaking, the majority of these interactions are positive. Creating a reward system for these actions through tokenization will be the fuel needed for the exponential growth of human good towards one another.
KARMA will create a borderless ecosystem incentivizing individuals to take daily actions towards the betterment of society.
Can you imagine? A financial incentive to be DECENT to each other ON A DAILY BASIS, this will change EVERYTHING! The world is not anymore it used to be! Mmm, mmm, no no no! Also how come we didn't monetize basic human interactions yet?
So cryptolibertarians are so hellbent on tokenizing everything and micropayments for everything they decided they want to tokenize altruism, helping others and...basic human decency? On the blockchain? Looks like a joke from totallynotrobots but it's serious instead. Remember that time you helped your friend with house renovation but in turn he only picked up your children from school several times when you were busy? If there was such thing as social credit you could evaluate his contribution in quantifiable numbers of tokens and them after he returned the favor substract his contribution from his "debt" and keep the exact change for some other time. This is so fucking revolutionary how come human civilization never thought about it before? Don't be a selfless sucker, help your colleagues only if they accumulated enough karma from helping YOU.
After decades of combined experience in Marketing & Development, our team is focused on creating a world-changing DAPP that will change the way we interact with each other.
Yeah, imagine, we start quantifying every single random act of kindness without missing anything thanks to tokenized human relationship. World changing. Don't leave your home without phone, you don't wanna miss that sweet, sweet karma for helping a stranger asking for directions or something.
All it takes is to convince your girlfriend, your pals, your family and friends and coworkers to complete this easy and seamless 20-step (or more, who knows, this is crypto) process of buying crypto, getting verified on exchanges, exchanging their bitcoins for eos on other exchanges, becoming accustomed with eos ecosystem, economy, limited network resources and wallets, paying for eos account, installing extensions and configuring them and finally acquiring the token in question and using it now! Also a quick rundown about private keys, blockchains, immutability and rudimentary opsec. Piece of cake. So simple a child could do it.
In fact I'm gonna say it right now, if a parent won't setup a Karma account for their child in the next 5 years they'll be considered out of touch and neglectful. Do you want your kid to be that loser who doesn't accumulate favors on decentralized, transparent, public, append only ledger? Nobody will ever do anything for him/her if they won't acquire trustless proof that they did something good for society and are owed some Karma.
Alternatively imagine you did something good for your friend but he died or maybe you're not on good terms anymore. In the old world you'll be shit out of luck but if enough people start using Karma you can start cashing out favors and good deeds done for him using someone else. No value is lost! Cmon, this is new paradigm of human relationships. How could we be this blind for so long? You can own of your own good deed tokens on a public blockchain and use them accordingly!
Karma. Being kind, but on a blockchain.
submitted by Cthulhooo to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

We are averaging 2,000 new subs daily.

We just celebrated the 350,000 mark 5 days ago and today we are over 360,000. Nice to see this sub and the Bitcoin community in general growing this big and this fast.
If you are one of those many just coming in, welcome! I'm sure you'll find this place very interesting, fun and informative. We are here to help you to better understand what Bitcoin is and and how it works, and for ourselves to keep learning. This is my welcome post for newbies:
When you come asking when is a good time to buy, the answer is: Buy now, always Hodl in FUD times (Bitcoin has "died" many times, but Moneybadger don't care, buy the dips and never panic-sell, stuff like: "China ban Bitcoin...again!" will keep happening again and again.
Here's Bitcoin's response to Jamie Dimon. Stick to the real Bitcoin through all the 'forks' and 'splits' that accomplish nothing but new mediocre, unsafe and centralized altcoins, strengthen/immunize Bitcoin and give you free altcoins to buy more Bitcoin.
All Central Powers look silly trying to control or ban it. Learn from history and listen to this absolute Boss. There will never be enough Bitcoin for every existing millionaire to own just ONE SINGLE BITCOIN, Total number of millionaires (in USD value) worldwide is around 33 million. Get one while you still can.
Also relax, you are actually an early adopter if you start investing today, mentally prepare yourself for healthy and expected market volatility/dips/corrections/"crashes" (check out this amazing 'Corrections Trends Perspective') and remember all this regarding Bitcoin investment:
Never try to time the market. Dollar cost average by buying what you can afford to lose every week.
It is always a good time to buy Bitcoin if you are hodling long term and not just for day trading, so this is a great strategy. Remember that Bitcoin has practically been up most of the time, and the road to the moon is paved with minor corrections (Bitcoin is never really "down" when you zoom-out).
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.
So is not farfetched to say that it will be at 100,000 by 2020, since it came from less than $1 to $5,000 in less than 10 years, and it hasn't even hit the bottom part of the exponential 'S-Curve' of adoption. Check out this great 2017 MIT study: "The Cryptocurrency Market Is Growing Exponentially". Patience pays, don't listen to the "Expert Analysts on MSM".
Bitcoin is a Moneybadger that get's stronger and immunized with every new attack and this broad picture of its price since infancy (1 year candles on a logarithmic scale) shows Bitcoin growth is not in a "bubble" right now. Learn the difference between Inflation (dollar) and Deflation (Bitcoin) and just take a look at the fiat >20 trillion (and growing fast) debt clock to get a visual shock of unlimited fiat supply (vs limited Bitcoin/Gold supply).
Bitcoin has outperformed every other currency, commodity, stock and asset since its inception in 2009: "2017: Bitcoin Beats Stocks, Bonds, And Gold, Again”. Bitcoin, the Moneybadger, is the first unseizable store of value in human history, unlike gold, equities, or fiat, it can't be confiscated if stored correctly. How banks think blockchain will disrupt their industry.
Also, remember its fixed, limited supply of 21 million coins ever, there are just ~4.5 million (~20%) bitcoins left to be mined till 2140 and the production will keep decreasing ("halving") every 4 years till then. So, remember this and don't wait for the Bitcoin "bubble" to burst or for the price to drop significantly again, because you could be waiting forever:
“The best time to buy bitcoin was a few years ago, the second best time is always now”.
Don't be -- this guy
Here is a good start:
"Introduction to Bitcoin" - Andreas Antonopoulos
Playlists on Andreas own YT channel
Check out this great articles:
"What Gave Bitcoin Its Value?"
"How do Bitcoins have value?"
"Yes, Cryptocurrencies are Valuable"
ELI5: BITCOIN
How to buy Bitcoin?
Where to buy Bitcoin list
Excellent "Crypto 101" by stos313)
Where to use Bitcoin list by Bitcoin-Yoda
Starter Guide "Bitcoin Complete And Ultimate Guide".
Who accepts Bitcoin? List of Companies, Stores, Shops.
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: Fixed some non-working links and added new ones.
submitted by readish to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

How RaiBlocks Provides Unlimited Transaction Throughput

Overview

In today's post, we explain how the RaiBlocks cryptocurrency platform is capable of processing an unlimited number of transactions per second, termed transaction throughput. RaiBlocks does this by requiring senders and recipients to order their own respective transactions. Prevailing technologies, like Bitcoin, order transactions through a wasteful competition, severely limiting their throughput. The ability to support unlimited throughput allows RaiBlocks to eliminate transactions fees, in contrast to Bitcoin which has exorbitant fees. Unlimited throughput is requisite for applications such as machine-to-machine commerce (also known as the “internet-of-things”, or IOT for short) and micropayments.

Transactions Must be Recorded in the Proper Order

A central problem of any accounting system is that of tallying transactions in the right order. To understand the significance of ordering, consider the following set of transactions to and from a single account (that we call “Account A”), starting with a balance of 0 coins.
  1. Account A receives 10 coins. [balance = 10]
  2. Account A sends 15 coins. [balance = -5]
  3. Account A receives 10 coins. [balance = 5]
If the transactions are tallied in the order written, Account A will have a negative balance of -5 coins after transaction #2. For cryptocurrencies, that have potentially anonymous accounts, negative balances are completely impractical. The reason is obvious: there would be nothing to stop a malefactor from incurring a negative balance in Account A, sending the surplus to Account B, and then walking away with their ill-gotten profit, leaving a perpetually unpaid “debt” in Account A.
In the example above, the existence of a negative balance is not necessary because the number of coins received (credited) exceeds the number sent (debited) after all transactions are tallied. The transactions need only to be ordered correctly to prevent the occurrence of a negative balance during the process:
  1. Account A receives 10 coins. [balance = 10]
  2. Account A receives 10 coins. [balance = 20]
  3. Account A sends 15 coins. [balance = 5]

Decentralization Requires the Ordering of Transactions

A cryptocurrency platform like RaiBlocks involves many users who interact with the platform independently. These users do not coordinate with each other when they send funds, and their accounting records (called ledgers) are not synchronized with a central copy. Additionally, no central authority exists to restrict how these users interact with the platform. To reflect the lack of centralization, cryptocurrencies are termed to be decentralized.
In a decentralized transaction system, it is impossible to restrict when users decide to send transactions, or to force them to create perfectly consistent timestamps that specify in what order the transactions should be processed. Instead, responsibility is typically delegated to individuals, called miners, who sift through groups (called blocks) of transactions and create a consistent ordering that does not eventuate undesirable outcomes such as negative balances. For this effort, these miners are awarded an income, which amounts to a tax on the rest of the system.

Inefficient Ordering in Bitcoin Necessitates High Transaction Fees

In Bitcoin, this tax is enormous, and is reflected both in transaction fees and the so-called block reward. At the moment I type this, Bitcoin fees are atypically low for Bitcoin, at about $1.20 per transaction. Even so, $1.20 is an unreasonable fee for most values users may want to send. For example, a $1.20 fee represents a 12% fee on a $10 transaction. With fees of this size, Bitcoin cannot be used in many parts of the world where $1.20 might represent a day’s or even several days’ pay.
The reason that Bitcoin fees are so high is that miners must not only do the work to order transactions, but compete in an energy-intensive computational contest that gives the winner the authority to order a particular block of transactions and certify them. This contest is called proof-of-work, and is the way the network finds agreement, or consensus. Although not a perfectly accurate way to describe it, one may think of consensus as a network-wide agreement on the balance of every account in the network. As it turns out, proof-of-work is the original consensus technology that underpins the success of distributed cash like Bitcoin.
For winning the proof-of-work contest, and for processing the transactions, the winner claims all the fees paid in the block of transactions. Additionally, the winner claims a block reward of new bitcoin. In principle, the value of this bitcoin competes with the previously existing bitcoin, exerting downward pressure on the price of all Bitcoin in the network. Therefore, block rewards dilute the bitcoin supply through inflation, and in this sense represent a tax on the entire network.
Since Bitcoin was created, newer consensus technologies that use much less energy have been introduced. Most notable is proof-of-stake. Although these technologies may eventually prove to be more successful than proof-of-work, they still solve the ordering problem in fundamentally the same way as Bitcoin: through a contest. In proof-of-stake, this contest is decided by both luck and how much stake (coins) the competing block signers have. Inefficiency manifests in a variety of ways, and all degrade the performance of proof-of-stake cryptocurrencies.

Inefficient Ordering Limits Transaction Throughput

The insolubility of the transaction ordering problem, as approached by proof-of-work and proof-of-stake systems, is reflected by the limited speed that networks of these types can process transactions. On the low end, Bitcoin can process at most seven transactions per second (7 tps). At the high end, the BitShares network, which uses a partially-centralized consensus technology called delegated proof-of-stake, can process about 100,000 tps. Although 100,000 tps is staggering when compared to Bitcoin, it does not approach the ideal throughput, which is unlimited.

RaiBlocks Drastically Increases Throughput by Requiring Account Holders to Order Transactions

The reason RaiBlocks is unique in its ability to offer unlimited throughput is that it takes a potentially revolutionary approach to transaction ordering: account holders assign a transaction order for both debit and credit transactions. To understand what that means, consider the following two sets of transactions:

Transaction Set I

  1. Account X receives 10 coins
  2. Account X sends 10 coins

Transaction Set II

  1. Account X receives 10 coins
  2. Account Y sends 10 coins
Obviously, Transaction Set I must be properly ordered to prevent a potential negative balance of Account X. If transaction #2 precedes #1, then Account X may at some time have a balance of as much as -10 coins. However, the ordering of Transaction Set II is irrelevant: either transaction #3 or transaction #4 can come first, without affecting the balances of the two involved accounts (X and Y).
It should be clear from this example that it is possible for an account to order its own debits and credits, without the involvement of third parties, like miners. In this example, therefore, Account X can solely determine the ordering of transactions #1 and #2.
It turns out that requiring accounts to order their own transactions eliminates almost all sources of conflict in a cryptocurrency network, meaning that achieving consensus is vastly easier for RaiBlocks than Bitcoin, for example. Bitcoin, and practically all other cryptocurrencies, order transactions through a competition, unnecessarily creating consensus problems that RaiBlocks does not have.
submitted by ooooooooooooooooooo1 to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Not money: anti-competitive establishment banking strategies

Bitcoin (Bitcoin Cash) will constantly face a series of bubbles to increase the volatility of its price. The aim is to reduce the transaction properties of the currency with the goal of limiting utility and adoption. This will be one of many strategies used to counteract our favourite technology.
"The United States and most of the world have been colonized by the central banking cartel which produces the medium of exchange in the form of a debt to itself." - Henry Makow
"There is always one central task for citizens in the empire: To help be part of the process of taking apart the empire. History suggests that if we don’t take it apart from the inside, some force from the outside eventually will take it down." - Robert Jensen
Establishment banking will engage in strategies that inhibit all of the transaction properties of Bitcoin. The move to electronic fiat is instructive. Every anti-competitive tactic known will be deployed. Lets identify them, starting with those that have already been initiated and then those that will follow. Who can create the definitive list of tactics that legacy banks will follow as part of their strategy to stall the rise of crypto by prohibiting transactions and making it not money? Trump is the fake strategy (do nothing) for public relations and history. What are the real strategies?
“A movement from centralized control of money to a decentralized money would, for all intents and purposes, destroy the power of every government on earth.” – Jeff Berwick
"The first instinct of governments and central banks faced with this gathering Depression began was to do nothing. Businessmen, economists, and politicians (memorably Secretary of the Treasury Mellon) expected the recession of 1929-1930 to be self-limiting." - J. Bradford DeLong
Once this is written we can share all of our ideas to counter these strategies in another thread. Crypto, money and geopolitics: a collection of quotations may help. We need to make sure Bitcoin Cash deals with these most destructive pursuits effectively so that another coin doesn't reign supreme instead. I will start with the following.
  1. Increase the transaction cost
  2. Prohibit time-critical transactions
  3. Prohibit micropayments
  4. Reduce liquidity
  5. Demonize
As expected the BTC holders will downvote without explanation.
submitted by --_-_o_-_-- to btc [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]

Why would an average person actually choose to use Bitcoin?

(Cross post from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=131154.0) That is a question that I come across quite often. For example,
From: Cardiovorax
I understand all the ideological reasons for why someone might want to choose Bitcoin. Most of them are fairly crazy, but at least they're there. What I don't get are the practical benefits, why an average person would actually choose to use them. If you aren't worried about the government or the banks or planning to get rich quickly 2140, then what can Bitcoin actually do for you? That's the part that nobody has really managed to explain so far in any of the threads, at least as far as I can remember.
To be fair, we understand the currency, it's inner workings, and thus its potential quite well, but while we profess how great it is, with $'s and stars in our eyes, we likely forget that the people we are talking to don't know or understand everything that we do. So, I think we should come up with some examples that answer the question of "why would an average person care" (or re-paste them from older necro threads). Here are some of mine:
1) It lets you send money overseas cheaper than using a bank wire (FIAT > BTC > BTC > FIAT has way better fees and exchange rates than bank wire, Western Union, etc).
2) It lets anyone open a virtual bank account without needing access to a physical bank. For example, some banks charge fees and require minimum balances for accounts, which may be prohibitively expensive. Some areas around the world don't even have banks other than in far away big cities. And in some cases, it's easier to just create a new Bitcoin wallet to store money in, than it is to drive down to a bank, fill out forms, come up with profs of ID, wait days for them to be verified, and another week for your account to actually be ready to use (especially if you're looking for a small business account).
3) It lets you accept payments online easily and way cheaper than with VISA, PayPal, or other such services. Heck, you can even just get a bitcoin address from MtGox or any other exchange, set up your account to instantly exchange any received BTC for local currency, and you're done.
4) It lets you accept payments over e-mail or any other service that can transmit text (even photos, as seen on girlsgonebitcoin). Some sellers may not have the means to build a website, but can still send out an invoice, asking to send payments to a specific address. (i.e. someone living in a poor country who only has access to an internet cafe, or someone who just doesn't have web skills).
5) It lets you accept tips or donations using any website. You can upload videos to YouTube, photos to Flickr, posts to a blog, music to Soundcloud, art to Deviantart, or comic strips to GoComics, and to accept donations all you need is to include a string of text in the description. No need to set up any money-accepting plugins, set up any bank or financial accounts, or rely on features provided by the service being used.
6) It lets you send money to places where PalPal or other money transmitting services are blocked, for example Russia or India, and is much cheaper for sending money to family in other countries. Even if that country they can't send money to is US, as in the example of the parents in Iran sending $2,000 to their college student son living here.
7) It lets you send huge sums of money overseas quickly and cheaply. If you were in US and you needed to pay $1,000,000 for a shipment from China, using normal methods of wiring money would take two or more weeks, and will cost more than $25,000 for the transaction. With Bitcoin, it takes a few hours, and costs $12,000 or less.
8) It lets you send micropayments better than anything else out there. It's easy and practically free to send $0.01 to anyone else using BTC, but would cost about $0.25 for just the fee to use the USD/EUR system. Any micropayment system that uses USD/EUR would have to sit on top of a larger system that stores all the money in a single large account, and all micropayments would have to be done as accounting entries within that account, instead of money actually moving around (i.e. you have to fund the system with a large payment, do your micropayment transactions, and withdraw when your fund is big enough again). This means micropayments using USD/EUR are restricted to only within specific services (i.e. your pre-paid micropayments fund that you use to pay for news articles can only be used within that news website)
9) It lets you create programs and services with their own bank accounts (the software stores value, as opposed to value always being linked to a real world person and a real world outside-the-service bank account). The Reddit tipbot is an excellent example of this, and would be impossible with USD/EUR, since to build it using FIAT, someone would have to open a real world bank account under their name (with all the forms, proofs of ID, etc), set it up to accept money transfers from others using PayPal, VISA, or something else, which will charge fees, have nasty exchange rates, have to keep to strict AML regulations, and be restricted to certain specific countries. Plus it would have all the micropayment issues mentioned above. With Bitcoin, all the "banking" is done with software, requiring no permissions, and no single programmer's name has to be linked with any bank accounts.
10) It lets you instantly fund USD/EUR based accounts around the world. The small LLC I started up keeps a BTC cash account for minor business expenses, and my business partners around the world will have Bitcoin funded VISA debit cards (as soon as Bitinstant releases them). That way, all the money is stored safely in the business vault, and if they need to pay for any business expenses, no matter where they are on the planet, or what their home currency is, I can fund their cards from home within 10 minutes. That's impossible with ACH, wires, or whatever else is out there.
11) It lets you link a payment account to a contract using address signing. For example, Person A agrees to buy Person B's debt. They write up an agreement contract, and instead of signing it with PGP keys, they sign it with A's and B's bitcoin addresses. Then money is sent from Address A to Address B, and any repayments are sent from Address B to Address A. That way, Person B can't claim that they never received the money, and Person A can't claim that they are still owed more than they really are, since all transactions are publicly verifiable on the block chain using the very addresses that were used to sign the contract. There is no need for any legal disputes of who owes what, since the blockchain keeps both parties honest (I actually did this already).
If you can think of anything else, please add it to the list.
EDIT: 12) Usenet has recently gone through the Wikileaks experience, with copyright behemoths pressuring VISA, PayPal, et all, to stop processing payments for Usenet service providers. Many have switched to Bitcoin since then, and I personally know Usener user who followed, now buying his btc from me for that purpose.
submitted by Rassah to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

[uncensored-r/Bitcoin] We are averaging 2,000 new subs daily.

The following post by readish is being replicated because some comments within the post(but not the post itself) have been silently removed.
The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link:
np.reddit.com/ Bitcoin/comments/76xp8w
The original post's content was as follows:
We just celebrated the 350,000 mark 5 days ago and today we are over 360,000. Nice to see this sub and the Bitcoin community in general growing this big and this fast.
If you are one of those many just coming in, welcome! I'm sure you'll find this place very interesting, fun and informative. We are here to help you to better understand what Bitcoin is and for ourselves to keep learning. This is my welcome post for newbies:
When you come asking when is a good time to buy, the answer is: Buy now, always Hodl in FUD times (Bitcoin has "died" many times, but Moneybadger don't care, buy the dips and never panic-sell, stuff like: "China ban Bitcoin...again!" will keep happening again and again.
Here's Bitcoin's response to Jamie Dimon. Stick to the real Bitcoin through all the 'forks' and 'splits' that accomplish nothing but new mediocre, unsafe and centralized altcoins, strengthen/immunize Bitcoin and give you free altcoins to buy more Bitcoin.
All Central Powers look silly trying to control or ban it. Learn from history. There will never be enough Bitcoin for every existing millionaire to own just ONE SINGLE BITCOIN, Total number of millionaires (in USD value) worldwide is around 33 million. Get one while you still can.
Also relax, you are actually an early adopter if you start investing today, mentally prepare yourself for healthy and expected market volatility/dips/corrections/"crashes" (check out this amazing 'Corrections Trends Perspective') and remember all this regarding Bitcoin investment:
Never try to time the market. Dollar cost average by buying what you can afford to lose every week.
It is always a good time to buy Bitcoin if you are hodling long term and not just for day trading, so this is a great strategy. Remember that Bitcoin has practically been up most of the time, and the road to the moon is paved with minor corrections (Bitcoin is never really "down" when you zoom-out).
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.
So is not farfetched to say that it will be at 100,000 by 2020, since it came from less than $1 to $5,000 in less than 10 years, and it hasn't even hit the bottom part of the exponential 'S-Curve' of adoption. Check out this great 2017 MIT study: "The Cryptocurrency Market Is Growing Exponentially". Patience pays, don't listen to the "Expert Analysts on MSM".
Bitcoin is a Moneybadger that get's stronger and immunized with every new attack and this broad picture of its price since infancy (1 year candles on a logarithmic scale) shows Bitcoin growth is not in a "bubble" right now. Learn the difference between Inflation (dollar) and Deflation (Bitcoin) and just take a look at the fiat >20 trillion (and growing fast) debt clock to get a visual shock of unlimited fiat supply (vs limited Bitcoin/Gold supply).
Bitcoin has outperformed every other currency, commodity, stock and asset since its inception in 2009: "2017: Bitcoin Beats Stocks, Bonds, And Gold, Again”. Bitcoin, the Moneybadger, is the first unseizable store of value in human history, unlike gold, equities, or fiat, it can't be confiscated if stored correctly. How banks think blockchain will disrupt their industry.
Also, remember its fixed, limited supply of 21 million coins ever, there are just ~4.5 million (~20%) bitcoins left to be mined till 2140 and the production will keep decreasing ("halving") every 4 years till then. So, remember this and don't wait for the Bitcoin "bubble" to burst or for the price to drop significantly again, because you could be waiting forever:
“The best time to buy bitcoin was a few years ago, the second best time is always now”.
Don't be -- this guy
Here is a good start:
"Introduction to Bitcoin" - Andreas Antonopoulos
Playlists on Andreas own YT channel
Check out this great articles:
"What Gave Bitcoin Its Value?"
"How do Bitcoins have value?"
How to buy Bitcoin?
Where to buy Bitcoin list
Excellent "Crypto 101" by stos313)
Where to use Bitcoin list by Bitcoin-Yoda
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:
  • Cheap regardless of amount $$$ sent (more scaling apps coming)
  • Borderless (no country can stop it from going in/out or confiscate)
  • Trustless (nobody needs to trust anybody for it to work)
  • Privacy (no need to expose personal information)
  • Securely (encrypted cryptographically and can’t be confiscated)
  • Permissionless (no approval from central powers needed)
  • Instantly (from seconds to a few minutes)
  • Open source (auditable by anybody)
  • Worldwide distributed (from anywhere to anywhere on the planet)
  • Censorship resistant (no government can stop its use)
  • Peer-to-peer (no intermediaries with a cut)
  • Portable (easier to carry/move than cash, gold and silver)
  • Public ledger (transparent, seen by everybody)
  • Scalable (each bitcoin is divisible down to 8 decimals)
  • Decentralized (distributed with no single point of failure)
  • Deflationary (its supply goes down with time until reaching 21 million ever)
  • Immutable global registry (can’t be altered/hacked by nobody)
  • No chargebacks-No fraud ('push' vs' 'pull' transactions).?
And that’s just as currency, Bitcoin has many more uses and applications.
Edit: Formatting.
submitted by censorship_notifier to noncensored_bitcoin [link] [comments]

10-24 18:34 - 'Welcome! Here are some links, if it's too long just start with DCA and watch Andreas video: / [quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][quote][q...' by /u/readish removed from /r/Bitcoin within 0-3min

'''
Welcome! Here are some links, if it's too long just start with DCA and watch Andreas video:
When you come asking when is a good time to buy, the answer is: Buy now, always [Hodl]1 in [FUD times]2 (Bitcoin has ["died"]3 many times, but [Moneybadger]4 don't care, [buy the dips]5 and never panic-sell, stuff like: ["China ban Bitcoin...again!"]6 will [keep happening]7 again and [again]8 .
Here's Bitcoin's [response]9 to Jamie Dimon. Stick to the [real Bitcoin]10 through all the ['forks' and 'splits']11 that accomplish nothing but new mediocre, unsafe and centralized altcoins, strengthen/immunize Bitcoin and give you free altcoins to buy more Bitcoin.
All [Central Powers look silly]12 trying to [control or ban]13 it. Learn from [history]14 and listen to this [absolute Boss]15 . There will never be enough Bitcoin for every existing millionaire to own just ONE SINGLE BITCOIN, [Total number of millionaires (in USD value) worldwide is around 33 million]16 . BTC is the [best money]17 .
Also relax, you are actually an [early adopter]18 if you start investing today, [mentally prepare]19 yourself for healthy and expected market volatility/dips/corrections/"crashes" (check out this amazing ['Corrections Trends Perspective']20 ) and remember all this regarding Bitcoin investment:
Never try to time the market. [Dollar cost average]21 by buying what you can afford to lose every week.
It is always a good time to buy Bitcoin if you are [hodling long term]22 and not just for [day trading]23 , so this is a great [strategy]24 . Remember that Bitcoin has practically been up most of the time, [and the road to the moon is paved with minor corrections]25 (Bitcoin is never really "down" when you zoom-out).
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]26 .
So is not farfetched to say that it will be at 100,000 by 2020, since it came from less than $1 to $5,000 in less than 10 years, and it hasn't even hit the bottom part of the exponential ['S-Curve' of adoption] ([link]60 ). Check out this great 2017 MIT study: ["The Cryptocurrency Market Is Growing Exponentially"]27 . Patience [pays]28 , don't listen to the ["Expert Analysts on MSM"]29 .
Bitcoin is a [Moneybadger]30 that get's stronger and immunized with [every new attack]31 and this [broad picture of its price since infancy]32 (1 year candles on a logarithmic scale) shows Bitcoin growth is not a "bubble" but it's [exponential]33 (bigger "bubbles" every time), this old [logarithmic scale]34 has been accurate so far.
Learn the difference between [Inflation (dollar) and Deflation (Bitcoin)]35 and just take a look at the fiat >20 trillion (and growing fast) [debt clock]36 to get a visual shock of unlimited fiat supply (vs limited Bitcoin/Gold supply).
Bitcoin has outperformed every other currency, commodity, stock and asset since its inception in 2009: ["2017: Bitcoin Beats Stocks, Bonds, And Gold, Again”]37 . Bitcoin, the [Moneybadger]38 , is the first unseizable store of value in human history, unlike gold, equities, or fiat, it can't be confiscated if stored correctly. How banks think [blockchain will disrupt their industry]39 . Check out these Bitcoin [Economy]40 and Bitcoin [Transaction]41 infographics.
Also, remember its [fixed, limited supply of 21 million coins ever,]42 there are just ~4.5 million (~20%) bitcoins left to be mined till 2140 and the production will keep decreasing ("halving") every [4 years till then]43 . So, remember [this]44 and [don't wait for the Bitcoin "bubble" to burst]45 or for the price to drop significantly again, because you could be waiting forever:
“The best time to buy bitcoin was a few years ago, the second best time is always now”.
Don't be -- [this guy]46
Here is a good start:
["Introduction to Bitcoin" - Andreas Antonopoulos]47
Playlists on [Andreas own YT channel]48
Check out this great articles:
["What Gave Bitcoin Its Value?"]49
["How do Bitcoins have value?"] ([link]61 )
["Yes, Cryptocurrencies are Valuable"]50
Bitcoin [ELI5]51
Bitcoin [Resources]52 .
Bitcoin [ Infographic]53 .
How to [buy Bitcoin?]54
Where to [buy Bitcoin list]55
Excellent ["Crypto 101"]56 by stos313
Where [to use Bitcoin list]57 by Bitcoin-Yoda
Starter Guide ["Bitcoin Complete And Ultimate Guide"]58 .
Who accepts Bitcoin? [List of Companies, Stores, Shops]59 .
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:
  • Cheap regardless of amount $$$ sent (more scaling apps coming)
  • Borderless (no country can stop it from going in/out or confiscate)
  • Trustless (nobody needs to trust anybody for it to work)
  • Privacy (no need to expose personal information)
  • Securely (encrypted cryptographically and can’t be confiscated)
  • Permissionless (no approval from central powers needed)
  • Instantly (from seconds to a few minutes)
  • Open source (auditable by anybody)
  • Worldwide distributed (from anywhere to anywhere on the planet)
  • Censorship resistant (no government can stop its use)
  • Peer-to-peer (no intermediaries with a cut)
  • Portable (easier to carry/move than cash, gold and silver)
  • Public ledger (transparent, seen by everybody)
  • Scalable (each bitcoin is divisible down to 8 decimals)
  • Decentralized (distributed with no single point of failure)
  • Deflationary (its supply goes down with time until reaching 21 million ever)
  • Immutable global registry (can’t be altered/hacked by nobody)
  • No chargebacks-No fraud ('push' vs' 'pull' transactions).
And that’s just as currency, Bitcoin has many more uses and applications.
Edit: Formatting.
'''
Context Link
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: readish
1: https://i.redd.it/fvh3ibzxz8kz.jpg
2: https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoinobituaries/ 3: https://i.redd.it/hfahmbnhm8mz.gif 4: https://media.giphy.com/media/gRiIzaIEx2NOw/giphy.gif 5: https://i.redd.it/rzshmoa2iokz.png 6: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry6PpRXk0dQ 7: https://i.redd.it/hhemw5893ilz.png 8: assets.bw*x.i*/ima*es*use*s/*qjWHBF*fxIU*ia*WDRd*a2ew/v1***0x*1.*** 9: https://cdn-e2.streamable.com/video/mp4/krkvu.mp4?token=1505391795_b2860bb3f73fe8852b803dfd7260ae43a3f8a5fd 10: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMRkGFIWsAE7pZy.jpg:orig 11: https://gyazo.com/487f5bd0d4ae9bd0963e0a9f311b760f 12: https://i.redd.it/1ui0rr23hplz.jpg 13: https://99bitcoins.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Banning-Bitcoin.jpg 14: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJ6YHrPXcAAGhA1.jpg:large 15: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPYUNN7QkPY 16: https://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/22/12-million-new-millionaires-will-be-minted-over-the-next-five-years.html 17: https://gyazo.com/2215921efdb65878961c15a5b5107fc4 18: https://gyazo.com/17686a64065799190aeda3aa7e42f59e 19: https://imgur.com/KuflBtk 20: https://gyazo.com/55239b2aefbac8fb150fde557aaf4085 21: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dollarcostaveraging.asp 22: https://i.redd.it/pc1exi5dd0ez.jpg 23: https://i.redd.it/vis4nvsd3flz.jpg 24: https://imgur.com/PJDf2tp 25: https://i.redd.it/kfgi0cdkt36z.png 26: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_growth 27: **w.tech*o*ogyr*v*e*.com/s/60794**th*-c*yp*ocurrency-m**ket-i*-g*owi*g-e***nentia*ly/ 28: https://i.redd.it/d5dgq77xdolz.jpg 29: https://i.redd.it/tklsw2fouqlz.jpg 30: https://i.redd.it/1d6avnrdt0ez.jpg 31: https://i.redd.it/gumb0i0lyctz.jpg 32: https://i.redd.it/r8q26ebtaxiz.png 33: https://i.redd.it/wtmigx7ny6tz.png 34: https://gyazo.com/8f6ba83e67c9abf02f8570ba17195b3a 35: https://imgur.com/uA5r9U6 36: www.u*debt*lo**.o*g/ 37:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2017/07/01/bitcoin-beats-stocks-bonds-and-gold-again/#73a567dd5c4d 38: https://imgur.com/a/6XHUD#C3Pe5MD 39: https://imgur.com/drBgEe4 40: https://i.redd.it/jbqzuvawt1tz.jpg 41: i.p**yg*s.com/*e*10**a98a4267**b78*25d*6722da*.jpg 42: https://thebitcoinhustler.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/11.jpg 43: http://www.bitcoinblockhalf.com/ 44: https://i.redd.it/j327zs6kyg9z.png 45: https://i.redd.it/xsvh37tatvrz.jpg 46: https://imgflip.com/i/1hlmpp 47: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkxdys-Ek9U 48: https://www.youtube.com/useaantonop/playlists 49:
https://fee.org/articles/what-gave-bitcoin-its-value/ 50: *ackernoon.*om/yes-cryp*ocur**ncies-*r*-*aluabl**aa*9**58ca** 51: **w.e*i5bitc*i*.com/ 52: lopp.net*bi*coi*.ht** 53: bi*coinpl**.*et/w*-*onte*t**ploads*2017/08*b*tcoin-*act**1-1*png 54: https://bitcoin.org/en/buy 55: https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/6ymwtm/where_to_buy_bitcoin_list/ 56: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzY8205tKpokVVZXVmdjQW5pNFphUEJjLTVnQVFES0llY1hF/view 57: https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/75mia6/pleasant_surprise/do7gyiw/ 58: **w.*ashprof*com/bi*c**n*complet**ultimate*g*ide/ 59: https://99bitcoins.com/who-accepts-bitcoins-payment-companies-stores-take-bitcoins/ 60: https://imgur.com/a/3UA7s#uX6xPGM 61: 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]

Subreddit Stats: Anarcho_Capitalism top posts from 2011-09-23 to 2017-09-22 12:08 PDT

Period: 2191.38 days
Submissions Comments
Total 999 81641
Rate (per day) 0.46 37.23
Unique Redditors 501 8290
Combined Score 247608 469801

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 9023 points, 34 submissions: TheGreatRoh
    1. Stefan Molyneux on Twitter | "Bernie promised cheap education. $27 average donation. Mission accomplished. $27 got you truly schooled on the reality of Dem politics." (746 points, 158 comments)
    2. Brain damage explains a lot (491 points, 72 comments)
    3. Ron Paul standing up for what's right. (418 points, 47 comments)
    4. This Tweet Didn't Age Well (409 points, 47 comments)
    5. Hillary Clinton on Assange "Can't we just drone this guy" -- report (345 points, 85 comments)
    6. BREAKING: Trump to sign exec. order this morning requiring that for every 1 new regulation, 2 regulations have to be revoked - sr. official (337 points, 122 comments)
    7. Ouch (337 points, 42 comments)
    8. So Swings the Pendulum of History (312 points, 31 comments)
    9. Resist! The more you think about it the best this one gets (302 points, 50 comments)
    10. Here is Rand Paul's healthcare plan. It's 4 pages long. It simplifies the entire process, removes federal bureaucracy, and lowers costs. EVERYONE SHOULD READ IT! (284 points, 75 comments)
  2. 8356 points, 24 submissions: TrueBC
    1. Small Government (715 points, 97 comments)
    2. Good Guy Communism (698 points, 14 comments)
    3. Real Thinking (616 points, 60 comments)
    4. When You're an Anarcho Communist And You Receive Inheritance (544 points, 128 comments)
    5. Every. God. Damn. Time! (487 points, 71 comments)
    6. Good Cops (468 points, 79 comments)
    7. Typical Proletariat (407 points, 100 comments)
    8. AnCap Problems (368 points, 60 comments)
    9. Fucking Statist Parents (336 points, 27 comments)
    10. Roads Problem Solved (331 points, 59 comments)
  3. 4593 points, 16 submissions: Pinochet-Heli-Tours
    1. This guy (715 points, 97 comments)
    2. Leftist logic with estate taxes (487 points, 123 comments)
    3. Before there was capitalism food would just magically appear (376 points, 155 comments)
    4. Socialism 101 (342 points, 168 comments)
    5. I hate it when people cheat (326 points, 61 comments)
    6. Communist vs Nature (295 points, 101 comments)
    7. This guy... (253 points, 50 comments)
    8. Triggered! (251 points, 116 comments)
    9. Good riddance (243 points, 100 comments)
    10. If there's less food in socialism, how does that explain the toilet paper shortages? (223 points, 28 comments)
  4. 3993 points, 1 submission: an1h
    1. TSA agents vs terrorists (3993 points, 173 comments)
  5. 3413 points, 13 submissions: kurokamifr
    1. When you are american (568 points, 94 comments)
    2. socialism (392 points, 110 comments)
    3. When you love the poor (336 points, 81 comments)
    4. Brain expanding meme on communist (295 points, 39 comments)
    5. A group of ancaps were able to get the IRS Facebook page removed... (263 points, 22 comments)
    6. Rigging the Election - Video I: Clinton Campaign and DNC Incite Violence at Trump Rallies (260 points, 73 comments)
    7. Rigging the Election - Video II: Mass Voter Fraud (222 points, 78 comments)
    8. who is prepared for the WW3? (215 points, 52 comments)
    9. rly make you think (185 points, 134 comments)
    10. Warning: Trudeau has allowed banks to seize your money if economy fails (181 points, 67 comments)
  6. 3173 points, 6 submissions: -INFOWARS-
    1. Louds and clear (1119 points, 180 comments)
    2. Makes you think... (742 points, 161 comments)
    3. Ron Paul destroys Obama (499 points, 78 comments)
    4. This is 100% real. Brainwashing by the Mainstream Media (341 points, 109 comments)
    5. Powerful argument. (300 points, 185 comments)
    6. When your ideology is so good the only arguments against it are straw man memes (172 points, 134 comments)
  7. 3036 points, 13 submissions: bearjewpacabra
    1. Nigel Farage: "None of you have ever done a proper job in your lives, or worked in business or worked in trade or indeed ever created a job" (354 points, 160 comments)
    2. Why is "income tax" a thing that exists?? It's income. They feed their kids with that. Just leave their income alone. (323 points, 147 comments)
    3. Statists reacting to "Taxation is theft" (297 points, 46 comments)
    4. Without the state, who would drop tear gas from helicopters on their half starved tax cattle? (261 points, 54 comments)
    5. Cops demand Uber driver turn off his camera, citing new law, threaten him with jail, say they will search his car with sniffer dogs. Driver refuses, because it turns out the driver is also an attorney and he knows no such law exists. • news (253 points, 62 comments)
    6. Remember when watching tonight's debate... (247 points, 89 comments)
    7. Was very happy to see this on /all (234 points, 40 comments)
    8. Virginia Shooter Identified As 66-Year-Old James Hodgkinson, Supporter Of Bernie Sanders (219 points, 129 comments)
    9. George Soros Hacked, Over 2,500 Internal Docs Released Online (198 points, 34 comments)
    10. Without government, who would create nationwide initiatives to fuck up the food supply based on irrational, government produced data? (173 points, 33 comments)
  8. 2924 points, 9 submissions: Z3F
    1. How to trigger /Socialism (772 points, 200 comments)
    2. The John Oliver formula (443 points, 84 comments)
    3. Trump Triggers a room full of Socialism sympathizers (351 points, 154 comments)
    4. Peak Reddit (317 points, 118 comments)
    5. And quality of life in the Commune dramatically improved overnight. (263 points, 68 comments)
    6. Found at a hostel I am staying at in Detroit. It's leaking into real life. (219 points, 155 comments)
    7. Obama Quietly Signs The Truly Orwellian "Countering Disinformation And Propaganda Act" Into Law (201 points, 27 comments)
    8. The easiest question you'll be asked today. (187 points, 64 comments)
    9. The window of allowable opinion continues to shrink. YouTube is now quarantining videos that academically discuss differences in IQ averages between ethnicities. (171 points, 97 comments)
  9. 2906 points, 1 submission: FreeqAxel
    1. Ron Paul got an electoral vote from Texas. (2906 points, 128 comments)
  10. 2565 points, 14 submissions: Anenome5
    1. Detroit starting to get it: 'Why should I send them taxes when they aren't supplying services?’ homeowner Fred Phillips who owes more than $2,600 recently told the paper. 'Every time I see the tax bill come, I think about the times we called and nobody came.' (247 points, 130 comments)
    2. Kaspersky reveals software buried in the firmware of world's major harddrive manufacturers gives NSA ability to spy on majority of the world's computers (229 points, 72 comments)
    3. The parable of the Village and the Tower (202 points, 44 comments)
    4. Descent of the Libertarians (200 points, 163 comments)
    5. Mises attacks Racism; "racism is not just contrary to [classical] liberalism, but to reason itself. It’s a denial of the most fundamental truths of economics... Theories of racial conflict reject peaceful social cooperation and instead promote conflict and war as the foundations of human society." (185 points, 161 comments)
    6. Cops arrest jogger for not having ID (182 points, 74 comments)
    7. My favorite ancap jokey-story :) (177 points, 68 comments)
    8. Sometimes the indoctrination isn't subtle. (176 points, 70 comments)
    9. This is fantastic--government tax collectors in Mogadishu complain no one wants to pay taxes, they "consider me to be a bandit." You are a bandit, sir. (171 points, 65 comments)
    10. Checkmate, intellectual-property fans ;P (164 points, 79 comments)
  11. 2557 points, 10 submissions: coupdetaco
    1. It's totally not rigged... anymore (754 points, 87 comments)
    2. She cannot recall (295 points, 23 comments)
    3. We've always been at war with Eastasia (267 points, 17 comments)
    4. Just wanted to give credit to leftists for breaking those glass ceilings (216 points, 8 comments)
    5. Cop tricks person into putting out a cigarette to use that as an excuse to arrest him and search his car (212 points, 140 comments)
    6. "If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there would be a shortage of sand" (181 points, 25 comments)
    7. We've always been at war with Eurasia (162 points, 11 comments)
    8. Mexican dentists near border crossing town get 95% customers from USA. They charge 75% less and their "materials and equipment are just as good or even better" (160 points, 38 comments)
    9. Just wanted to help everyone here understand Socialism (159 points, 11 comments)
    10. In fairness to her, that level of corruption is almost like a magic trick (151 points, 16 comments)
  12. 2398 points, 9 submissions: ancapistan_man
    1. Bread lines (542 points, 111 comments)
    2. All the hypocrisy. (341 points, 82 comments)
    3. All the above. (317 points, 63 comments)
    4. Battle of the statists. (253 points, 127 comments)
    5. We're gonna need a bigger boat. (224 points, 12 comments)
    6. [foaming at the mouth] Not real communism! (198 points, 14 comments)
    7. But without government.... (190 points, 29 comments)
    8. Literally shaking. (171 points, 61 comments)
    9. iT wAsN't ReAl CoMmUnIsM. (162 points, 13 comments)
  13. 2367 points, 10 submissions: Anen-o-me
    1. /A_C's opinion of Gary Johnson in one image (464 points, 123 comments)
    2. Time-Warner increases internet speeds six-fold at no extra charge after Google Fiber announces plans to expand into their territory --- so in other words, competition works (312 points, 43 comments)
    3. Vince Vaughn -- “We have the right to bear arms to resist the supreme power of a corrupt and abusive government” (227 points, 37 comments)
    4. After seeing this I have a strong urge to become a graffiti artist (215 points, 51 comments)
    5. Reddit's Former Leadership was planning to make Reddit a completely Decentralized App with bitcoin micropayments as upvotes for incentive, but after taking a $50m funding round, management was replaced and monetization focus began. Now ex employees are building what Reddit should've become. (215 points, 65 comments)
    6. SCOTUS Justice: If two can marry, why not four? -- How about you stop licensing marriage in the first place. (195 points, 111 comments)
    7. Satoshi Nakamoto nominated for Nobel Prize in Economics (190 points, 61 comments)
    8. politics realizes the presidency has too much power: "Don’t Just Impeach Trump. End the Imperial Presidency." (189 points, 60 comments)
    9. Meanwhile, at Molyneux's Freedomain Radio Headquarters... (183 points, 409 comments)
    10. Obama endorses Bitcoin... (177 points, 32 comments)
  14. 2220 points, 10 submissions: SnakesoverEagles
    1. Crying wolf: the left doesn't know how to stop losing (335 points, 182 comments)
    2. in light of recent events, here is Thomas Sowell (276 points, 264 comments)
    3. Ron Paul - Bernie Sanders destroyed Audit the Fed Bill at the last minute (236 points, 26 comments)
    4. Basic free market college group denied a local chapter because they are "white supreemists" (220 points, 227 comments)
    5. Get out your tinfoil hats boys (212 points, 95 comments)
    6. An old classic (206 points, 57 comments)
    7. Hillary email leaks prove that the same people who fund her campaign (Saudi Arabia) are funding ISIS - when will this house of cards fall? (205 points, 25 comments)
    8. Please clap (183 points, 55 comments)
    9. Ron Paul - Stump the socialist (176 points, 139 comments)
    10. Why Tim Kaine was picked as VP (171 points, 101 comments)
  15. 2219 points, 8 submissions: SuaveCrouton
    1. Late Stage Capitalism (405 points, 90 comments)
    2. Social Democracy (371 points, 51 comments)
    3. But it wasn't a real rocket (305 points, 30 comments)
    4. The Green Party dilemma (304 points, 71 comments)
    5. LateStageCapitalism_irl (236 points, 34 comments)
    6. When I look at gains from free trade (218 points, 21 comments)
    7. The world as 100 people over the last two centuries (213 points, 103 comments)
    8. Private Eye explains Corbynomics (167 points, 23 comments)
  16. 1932 points, 8 submissions: LibertyAboveALL
    1. Julian Assange offers job to fired Google employee who wrote "anti-diversity" memo - "Censorship is for losers." (426 points, 124 comments)
    2. Great idea on road sign from Mexican restaurant in Austin (278 points, 30 comments)
    3. Gmail will now warn you if you’re being targeted by the government (260 points, 26 comments)
    4. Calexit Means American Taxpayers Won't Have To Bailout California's Ticking Pension Time Bomb (251 points, 69 comments)
    5. Uber threatens exit Houston over regulations. Mayor says "I'm happy to sit down with you [Uber] but I'm not going to do business with you with a gun to my head." - you really can't make this shit up! (245 points, 79 comments)
    6. AAA, largest U.S. automobile club, calls for scrapping police marijuana THC test for drivers. AAA's safety foundation said it's not possible to set a blood-test threshold for THC that can reliably determine impairment. (160 points, 33 comments)
    7. TIL: SEC laws stop crowd-funding sites, like INDIEGOGO, from offering investor equity financing options for non-accredited investors (average person). In other words, the government only allows rich people to do it. (160 points, 66 comments)
    8. Dying mom kidney transplant surgery on hold due to GoFundMe donations since they could constitute ‘organ selling’, which is a U.S. federal crime. (152 points, 47 comments)
  17. 1854 points, 8 submissions: Mashimoto
    1. Venezuela bans lines outside of bakeries declaring them a clear political stunt to discredit socialism (289 points, 50 comments)
    2. Someone made a Chrome extension that changes "white" to "black" on Huffpo, Salon, and Buzzfeed (283 points, 69 comments)
    3. How Liberals really feel about black people (265 points, 106 comments)
    4. (old footage) Ron Paul makes standard libertarian arguments against the drug war that are now almost universally accepted to an absolutely hostile host/audience. Amazing how attitudes can change (263 points, 138 comments)
    5. It Looks Like George Soros is Funding the Trump Protests (256 points, 72 comments)
    6. Charles Rangel's Freudian Slip (181 points, 21 comments)
    7. "Only the rich will have X technology" India's $4 smartphone. (166 points, 44 comments)
    8. Bernie Sanders Resume from the 1980s (151 points, 118 comments)
  18. 1756 points, 7 submissions: MaunaLoona
    1. 4chan on communism (539 points, 122 comments)
    2. Canadian man fights off home invaders by taking their gun and shooting them; gets charged with attempted murder and nine other firearms related charges (312 points, 76 comments)
    3. But without the government who would fund PBS? Reading Rainbow raises $1 million on kickstarter in the first day. (202 points, 59 comments)
    4. Adam Kokesh on CBS (197 points, 213 comments)
    5. Apparently we have a new mascot (174 points, 30 comments)
    6. What $15/hr minimum wage looks like (169 points, 182 comments)
    7. To protect you from fake news the US government launches a fact checking web site (163 points, 53 comments)
  19. 1663 points, 5 submissions: Uncle_Washington
    1. LateStageCapitalism logic (456 points, 98 comments)
    2. Macarons va Macron (401 points, 39 comments)
    3. Like scientist we have to prove our theory (380 points, 83 comments)
    4. Feel the Bern out (245 points, 71 comments)
    5. The North Remembers (181 points, 14 comments)
  20. 1582 points, 2 submissions: pseudoRndNbr
    1. CNN: It's illegal for you to read the leaked emails. Only we are allowed to do it. (1353 points, 149 comments)
    2. But who will provide food to the poor? (229 points, 70 comments)
  21. 1581 points, 4 submissions: Ze-skywalker
    1. Rare picture of a child about to be born (530 points, 70 comments)
    2. "The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false front for the urge to rule it." H.L. Mencken (428 points, 13 comments)
    3. Woke (370 points, 44 comments)
    4. Capitalism X Socialism (253 points, 49 comments)
  22. 1576 points, 6 submissions: HEADPOCKET
    1. What a novel idea. (477 points, 87 comments)
    2. Mises before bitches. (325 points, 56 comments)
    3. Here is your average "pro-science" liberal. (266 points, 93 comments)
    4. If Sweden and Germany Became US States, They Would be Among the Poorest States (189 points, 97 comments)
    5. Can't explain that. (162 points, 51 comments)
    6. George Zimmer, the owner and founder of The Men's Wearhouse, does not background check his employees. "I don't trust the U.S. justice system to get it right," says Zimmer, who is himself a recovering alcoholic. "I'd rather make my own decisions." : todayilearned (157 points, 32 comments)
  23. 1568 points, 6 submissions: Jamesshrugged
    1. The consequences of racism (395 points, 135 comments)
    2. The lesson liberals are going to learn under the new administration. (343 points, 48 comments)
    3. Every single time (295 points, 22 comments)
    4. Give me Liberty or gtfo! (191 points, 61 comments)
    5. anarcho_capitalism's most used words (174 points, 71 comments)
    6. /philosophy mods have completely banned posts about Ayn Rand (on grounds that she is an author, not a philosopher) (170 points, 134 comments)
  24. 1478 points, 6 submissions: ayanamirs
    1. Could someone please explain this? (388 points, 84 comments)
    2. Slate (297 points, 43 comments)
    3. LMAO (232 points, 58 comments)
    4. Mises Cuba! (210 points, 45 comments)
    5. Ancap Studies (181 points, 55 comments)
    6. Wtf? Anarcho-capitalists (170 points, 144 comments)
  25. 1468 points, 1 submission: How_To_Liberty
    1. I used to be an Ancap, but my job made me turn to socialism. (1468 points, 118 comments)
  26. 1464 points, 6 submissions: spatchcock
    1. Happy thanksgiving /ancap (496 points, 86 comments)
    2. They aren't protesters or rioters. They're Keynesian stimulus operatives, and Krugman disapproves. (223 points, 22 comments)
    3. This kid will go places. Also, I guarantee there's a bureaucrat out there somewhere who is trying to stop him. (213 points, 53 comments)
    4. This is what good parenting looks like, but yet to leftists and some bureaucrats this is horrible because its un-taxed income, dangerously unregulated, exploitation, and child labor. (190 points, 65 comments)
    5. Wow TED talks really suck now - "Capitalism will eat democracy unless we speak up" - By Yanis Varoufakis (the greek finance minister. Yes Greece, the European country that adopted DemSoc ideals and is now riddled with debt) (180 points, 203 comments)
    6. If I were a big corporation I'd lobby for higher minimum wages and rally the useful idiots on the left to my cause as well. (162 points, 33 comments)
  27. 1414 points, 7 submissions: moople1
    1. And anarcho communism was born. (239 points, 772 comments)
    2. Work or die. (239 points, 227 comments)
    3. The relationship between Bernie's socialism and the market summed up perfectly. (238 points, 48 comments)
    4. Finally it's fixed! Now children won't starve to death. (199 points, 123 comments)
    5. "Yo mama's so statist" jokes… (180 points, 96 comments)
    6. Hating the Establishment Is Not the Same as Supporting Liberty (164 points, 41 comments)
    7. 2016 Nolan Chart (155 points, 128 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. Faceh (5402 points, 264 comments)
  2. aletoledo (3908 points, 532 comments)
  3. Anen-o-me (3667 points, 569 comments)
  4. andkon (3362 points, 237 comments)
  5. Lethn (3201 points, 304 comments)
  6. halfback910 (3043 points, 500 comments)
  7. ChopperIndacar (2799 points, 402 comments)
  8. Mashimoto (2207 points, 181 comments)
  9. LOST_TALE (2150 points, 507 comments)
  10. Harnisfechten (2122 points, 299 comments)
  11. TheGreatRoh (2085 points, 237 comments)
  12. Anenome5 (1990 points, 293 comments)
  13. LibertyAboveALL (1974 points, 316 comments)
  14. Anarkhon (1925 points, 42 comments)
  15. natermer (1873 points, 239 comments)
  16. Not_Pictured (1835 points, 173 comments)
  17. bearjewpacabra (1813 points, 267 comments)
  18. maszyna (1769 points, 224 comments)
  19. chbrules (1745 points, 200 comments)
  20. jatucker (1688 points, 131 comments)
  21. LookingForMySelf (1637 points, 274 comments)
  22. bhknb (1590 points, 329 comments)
  23. Argosy37 (1568 points, 113 comments)
  24. stormsbrewing (1562 points, 107 comments)
  25. GuyFromV (1466 points, 313 comments)
  26. TheSelfGoverned (1416 points, 204 comments)
  27. deefop (1369 points, 153 comments)
  28. samsonkeane (1364 points, 129 comments)
  29. ProjectD13X (1351 points, 193 comments)
  30. Pinochet-Heli-Tours (1328 points, 112 comments)
  31. RonaldMcPaul (1306 points, 250 comments)
  32. Juz16 (1271 points, 151 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. TSA agents vs terrorists by an1h (3993 points, 173 comments)
  2. Ron Paul got an electoral vote from Texas. by FreeqAxel (2906 points, 128 comments)
  3. I used to be an Ancap, but my job made me turn to socialism. by How_To_Liberty (1468 points, 118 comments)
  4. CNN: It's illegal for you to read the leaked emails. Only we are allowed to do it. by pseudoRndNbr (1353 points, 149 comments)
  5. Louds and clear by -INFOWARS- (1119 points, 180 comments)
  6. Arguing about the state of Venezuela to a redditor by Phresh_Prince (809 points, 182 comments)
  7. How to trigger /Socialism by Z3F (772 points, 200 comments)
  8. It's totally not rigged... anymore by coupdetaco (754 points, 87 comments)
  9. Stefan Molyneux on Twitter | "Bernie promised cheap education. $27 average donation. Mission accomplished. $27 got you truly schooled on the reality of Dem politics." by TheGreatRoh (746 points, 158 comments)
  10. Makes you think... by -INFOWARS- (742 points, 161 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 1523 points: Anarkhon's comment in Looting intensifies in Venezuela - only 15 days worth of food remains
  2. 1070 points: cockholster_69's comment in Is having daughters the ultimate cuckoldry?
  3. 495 points: Faceh's comment in Ron Paul got an electoral vote from Texas.
  4. 456 points: deleted's comment in Is having daughters the ultimate cuckoldry?
  5. 423 points: FidelHimself's comment in I used to be an Ancap, but my job made me turn to socialism.
  6. 396 points: narutouz's comment in Is having daughters the ultimate cuckoldry?
  7. 336 points: skylercollins's comment in Is having daughters the ultimate cuckoldry?
  8. 329 points: backwardsmiley's comment in / physical_removal was just banned
  9. 283 points: misery_man's comment in Is having daughters the ultimate cuckoldry?
  10. 250 points: Avertus's comment in I used to be an Ancap, but my job made me turn to socialism.
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats (Donate)
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Becomes Safe Haven Asset as Total Negative ... Bitcoin micropayments for proxies — Princeton Bitcoin seminar final project Bitcoin and MicroPayments-The Perfect Solution? THE RESET OF 2020 : Direct Micropayments Worldwide Bitcoin Micropayments

What is Bitcoin? Bitcoin, is the world’s first decentralized digital person-to-person cryptocurrency and is considered to be a revolution In present currency/financial markets.Bitcoin was started in 2009 by a mysterious programmer under the pseudonym “Satoshi Nakomoto”.This digital currency is gaining huge popularity worldwide and mass adoption. I have been celebrating the birth of Bitcoin by going through Satoshi’s writings.. Halloween Jest. As we all know, the Bitcoin whitepaper was published on October 31, 2008 – the Halloween… Although we do not know whether this was intentional, we do know that Halloween is the time for trickery, but it is also associated with rebirth or the birth of something new. Bitcoin is gaining considerable steam in becoming one of the most accepted forms of digital currency in the world. Bitcoin is now the first interoperable payment network, to enable small amounts of money to be distributed throughout the world with a new “tip” button. Digital currency experts believe that this newest development will revolutionize how consumers support their favorite ... 4 thoughts on “ Code, Debt, and Bitcoin ” Tyrone Johnson August 4, 2014 / 3:55 pm It is an interesting thought that an open frontier where people can go and be left alone by government to do whatever they choose is such an enduring human need that, in the absence of an open frontier in physical space, we invented one in cyberspace. The term “micropayments” has its origins in small loans provided by investors to low-income individuals, like a farmer in Malaysia or a fruit-stand operator in New Delhi. Loans of $100 or not ...

[index] [32732] [20872] [28172] [2743] [32872] [34962] [33355] [8641] [19445] [5517]

Bitcoin Becomes Safe Haven Asset as Total Negative ...

Karry Kalodner, Miles Carlsten, Paul Ellenbogen Bitcoin Q&A: Inflation and debt systems - Duration: 12:04. aantonop 26,913 views. 12:04. All The Stocks I'm Buying During The 2020 Market Crash! - Duration: 18:45. After months of development and hype, Brave Software Inc. has finally released an update that integrates under-the-hood bitcoin micropayments right into its browser. Bitcoin and MicroPayments-The Perfect Solution? - Duration: 4:27. GamersGoneTech 299 views. 4:27. The TRUTH About Tesla Model 3 After 1 Year... - Duration: 21:26. Want to donate and contribute to the channel? We got so many of you guys asking how to help the channel on contributions and support the vision we put out we...

#