I don't understand Bitcoin : NoStupidQuestions

An Open Standard To Problem Solving

silene is a community for posting interesting solutions to problems by outlining the solutions themselves and their applications to other problems in a simple, concise manner.


submitted by squiddyaj to simpleanswers [link] [comments]

05-15 14:06 - 'go learn to read. I said mainly and i said around "90%" in two seperate posts. You still dont understand? You really think kenyans are using bitcoin to purchase coffee because some dumbass posted a picture of two ladies in f...' by /u/horizon1121 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 5-15min

go learn to read. I said mainly and i said around "90%" in two seperate posts. You still dont understand? You really think kenyans are using bitcoin to purchase coffee because some dumbass posted a picture of two ladies in front of a bitcoin poster on reeddit? this subreddit and community is a bubble, and it has affected your thinkning. Not only this community, but in general when you are read certain facebook groups or websites, your thinking will be biased towards what you read. And this won't necessarily mean its the reality. In most cases its its not. There is too much for you to understand, its psychology + trading fundaments + human nature etc. u must be young or something. good luck. i have no time to waste on you.
Context Link
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: horizon1121
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

[ELI5] New to bitcoin and still learning it. Im just curious,what are the purpose of altcoins if we already have bitcoin as our main crypto currency? It just confuse non tech savvy people like me. Sorry if this question doesnt make sense :p I just dont understand why so many new altcoins are there

submitted by sexylicousshibabe to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

I really dont understand bitcoin and other crypto currency is it still good to mine and how do you mine /r/Bitcoin

I really dont understand bitcoin and other crypto currency is it still good to mine and how do you mine /Bitcoin submitted by ABitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

I hate when people say ohh bitcoins dropping I simply respond its still up 30% from when it was at 10k. 30% is crazy gains! Like common some people dont understand even 8% a year in gains in considered phenomenal. Just go with the waves brothers /r/Bitcoin

I hate when people say ohh bitcoins dropping I simply respond its still up 30% from when it was at 10k. 30% is crazy gains! Like common some people dont understand even 8% a year in gains in considered phenomenal. Just go with the waves brothers /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

I still dont understand how the scaling issue will be solved. /r/Bitcoin

I still dont understand how the scaling issue will be solved. /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Trying to send my BTC back to GDAX from electrum. What is the best way to avoid the highest amount of fees possible? I still dont understand the fee portion of bitcoin. /r/BitcoinBeginners

Trying to send my BTC back to GDAX from electrum. What is the best way to avoid the highest amount of fees possible? I still dont understand the fee portion of bitcoin. /BitcoinBeginners submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

I still dont understand how BTC is 7tps, if 1.36tps cause 6500 unconfirmeds. /r/Bitcoin

I still dont understand how BTC is 7tps, if 1.36tps cause 6500 unconfirmeds. /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAll to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

It's beginning to feel a lot like 2017. Some useful reminders and advice for new comers.

Hype and increasing prices will undoubtedly attract new investors, HODLers, and gamblers. Regardless of how long you've been in crypto, below are a few pieces of information (or reminders) you should consider.
  1. We're still early. Cryptocurrency, including bitcoin, is still in its infancy. Because of this, we will continue to see headlines of hacks, exchange closures, big name investors coming into the space, major institutional adoption, and everything in between. Until crypto is regulated (for better or worse) and even after, there will be bad actors attempting to steal your cryptocurrencies. To that end, think twice when hearing about 'deals' or investments that seem too good to be true. They probably are.
  2. Protection. I often see questions regarding the storage of cryptocurrencies. Not to oversimplify, but as a user, you have ~3 choices to store your cryptocurrency. In order of most secure to least secure:
    1. Cold Storage - From wikipedia: Cold storage refers to storing Bitcoins/Cryptos offline and spending without the private keys controlling them ever being online. This resists theft by hackers and malware, and is often a necessary security precaution especially dealing with large amounts of Bitcoin. If you aren't comfortable manually storing your private key, physical hardware wallets are your best alternative. When possible, buy direct from the manufacturer to avoid any tampering to your new device.
      1. https://trezor.io/
      2. https://www.ledger.com/
    2. Hot Wallets - From investopedia: The difference between a hot wallet and a cold wallet is that hot wallets are connected to the internet, while cold wallets are not. Hot wallets can be installed onto your mobile device and/or your web browser. Similar to cold storage, these hot wallets will 'store' your crypto and will be accessed to send/receive tokens, execute smart contracts, and conduct other transactions. There are many options to choose from, but MetaMask is as close to an industry standard as it comes, and the developer has recently implemented an ERC-20 token swap function. Again, download directly from the developer if you can.
      1. https://metamask.io/
    3. Exchanges - Exchanges certainly have their own purpose, most notably as an on and off ramp for your fiat currency (e.g., US Dollar, etc). However, when you read headlines like "Bitcoin Hacked for 10 million dollars!" what they usually mean is, a centralized exchange that holds users' cryptocurrencies was hacked and bitcoin was extracted from the exchange's storage. For this reason, exchanges are considered to be less safe than your Hot Wallet and Cold storage alternatives.
  3. Don't be greedy. This is easier said than done, and many veteran traders have learned this the hard way -- some still haven't learned. When prices are only going up, you're going to feel like a million bucks. But things dont go up forever. Ever. (Unless it's the Fed's balance sheet.. har har). Point being, it's okay to take profits along the way up. I guarantee you'll have an opportunity to re-buy those same tokens at a cheaper price, and you'll enjoy them even more the second time around.
  4. Don't spend more than you can afford. Hopefully this goes without saying, but the crypto space is extremely volatile. It is not uncommon to lose your entire investment with just one wrong token/ICO/scam. To that end; just use your common sense. It sounds easy, but when you're making money, sometimes it's hard to see the cliff at the end of the road.
  5. Keep learning. I joined the crypto space because I saw an opportunity to make money. It's been a wild ride, and I've learned a lot more than I've gained (from a monetary perspective). What i didn't expect to happen, was to open pandora's box when it comes to what Bitcoin (specifically) aimed to solve. My thirst for knowledge only expanded when I learned of the opportunity space Ethereum was trying to fill. Compound that with the immutability of blockchain technology, DeFi, smart contracts, data oracles, (and the list goes on); now I'm completely hooked. It's clear to me that blockchain will revolutionize the way we function on the global scale. But many are just now beginning to learn about bBitcoin, and we're ahead of the curve. Which leads me back to point number 1; we're still early.
Sorry for rambling on here; I'm sure more veteran HODLers have already X'd out of this post, which is fine. They likely don't need this information as they have learned these same tips along their own journeys. But for newcomers to the space, I wish I had this foundational knowledge from the get go. Don't be afraid to ask questions on this sub. With the recent implementation of MOON tokens (this is a whole 'nother topic), I've personally noticed more downvotes than normal. But awareness and understanding is critical to adoption, so don't be turned off if you don't get an answer to your questions immediately. There is a wealth of knowledge scattered across the internet, and still a lot of smart people on reddit who are willing to help.
submitted by myhaxdontwork to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Transcript of how Philip the tyrant admin of the Bitcoin Cash Telegram group called Spoice stupid, an idiot, a parrot among other insults then banned her instead of discussing Bitcoin Cash. That Telegram group is hostile, ABC/IFP shills run and follows the rBitcoin toxic censorship modus operandi.

David B., [18.10.20 01:46]

David B., [18.10.20 01:47]
Wut x2

J Stodd, [18.10.20 01:49]
[In reply to David B.]
Their words are meaningless. They have no principles. Wish i could comment but bitcoinxio banned me from rbtc and never told me why

David B., [18.10.20 01:59]
These comments are so toxic

Spoice, [18.10.20 01:59]
In reality, the real continuation of Bitcoin as we all know it is what is carried on by BCHN, BU, BCHD and others

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:00]
ABC is changing the rules to something that is not Bitcoin

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:00]
anyone denying those facts is selling you snake oil

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:00]
If Blockstream tried to take some % to their own benefit, we would have never needed BCH in the first place

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:00]
everyone would have rejected them in a second

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:01]
[In reply to Spoice]
Bitcoin Cash is not Bitcoin to start with, so who cares?

David B., [18.10.20 02:01]
[ Album ]

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:01]
yet we have ABC trying to pull this theft and all those puppets think it's ok

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:01]
JSTodd that's bullshit

David B., [18.10.20 02:01]
Like trying to talk to a core maxi about altcoins

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:01]
Bitcoin Cash is the most Bitcoin out of all Bitcoins

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:01]
it is the continuation of what Satoshi started

David B., [18.10.20 02:02]
Tbh they aren't even toxic

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:02]
[In reply to Spoice]
If the hash follows then it is Bitcoin Cash. Only if it doesn't is your claim true

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:03]
[In reply to Spoice]
Bitcoin is Bitcoin. Bitcoin failed to be Peer to Peer Cash, so Bitcoin Cash attempted to fix this by forking Bitcoin and attacking the root of the problem. This does not mean Bitcoin Cash is literally Bitcoin. Adopt a different argument. Sorry if you bought into that bc of Rogers rantings

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:05]
Bitcoin Cash can replace Bitcoin, and if Bitcoin dies and BCH wins then sure maybe it can take its name from its grave, but they are different products, trying to say Bitcoin stopped being "Bitcoin" and became BCH is a self contradiction.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:08]
Jstodd's got some good points.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:08]
He's learnt so much in the last year ☺️

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:08]
"Bitcoin is Bitcoin" is a false statement. BTC is just an instance of Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the set of rules defined in the whitepaper first and foremost, it is peer to peer electronic cash. BTC no longer fits that criteria. Bitcoin Cash meets them. The fork proposed by ABC also fails to meet that criteria. Therefore the continuation of Bitcoin is in whatever BU, BCHN, Flowee and others will continue.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:09]
What rules were defined in the WP?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:10]
Let's see which rules aren't: 1) No coinbase tax going to any centralized entity such as ABC 2) No throttling of TX throughput such as BTC

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:10]
therefore they both fail the simple "Is this Bitcoin?" test

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:11]
Finally, Michael, if you think Hash rate defines what Bitcoin is, you should stick to BTC

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:11]
21 million coins isn't in the WP

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:11]
I asked what rules did the WP define.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:12]
Because BCH failed that criteria since it forked, therefore your point is wrong

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:12]

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:12]
The announcement of the white paper included the 21 million limit, close enough

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:12]
HIs announcement isn't the WP

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:12]
show me where Satoshi said that Amaury shoudl tax the chain?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:12]
Doesn't matter- close enough

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:12]
Bitcoin is the set of rules defined in the whitepaper first and foremost - You

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:13]
My ears pricked up on that comment, so I'm asking you what you meant.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:13]
Correct. Changing the 21 million hard limit is still more Bitcoin than taxing the Coinbase, yet both will never ever happen. Not to Bitcoin anyway

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:13]
If you meant Satoj's writings pre and post WP then you should be clear about it

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:13]
some bastardized chain might, just not Bitcoin

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:14]
The closest we have to anything to indicate what is "Bitcoiness" is general things like "the longest chain"

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:14]
No, it is never a single thing

David B., [18.10.20 02:15]

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:15]
trustless, no single trusted third parties, and rules can change due to incentives via consensus

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:15]
it is a set of common sense and experiment driven and historical relevance and initial parameters and "peer to peer electronic cash" definition indicators

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:15]
never a single thing

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:16]
[In reply to Spoice]
This is like the exact opposite of what you said earlier

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:16]
Bitcoin is defined by the rules in the WP, I mean common sense.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:16]

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:16]
Nope, the rule set is defined in the white paper should never change, but I never said all rules are defined in the white paper

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:16]
What rules?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:16]
It is a union

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:17]
What rules are there?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:17]
Rules in the white paper + what continued to define Bitcoin thereafter

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:17]
[In reply to Spoice]
> "Bitcoin is Bitcoin is a false statement."
Alas, if we cannot agree on the law of identity, aka A=A, then i dont understand how to hold a conversation with you using logic.
> BTC is an instance of Bitcoin
No, BTC is a ticker used optionally by exchanges. Other common tickers for bitcoin include XBC, XBT, BC (correct me if im wrong on any of these)
> "Bitcoin is a set of rules in the whitepaper"
Super hard to defend this. Theres no mention of a 21M supply cap, no blocksize limit *at all*, and it also says additional rules and incentives can be enforced (implying maybe they should).

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:17]
I go through this with BSVers all the time. We have no spec sheet of rules defining what Bitcoin is from Satoshi.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:18]
Rules such as what defines a correct block, miners receiving the full incentive of mining it, etc

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:18]
The WP is a highlevel document

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:18]
The WP is a description of a scientific experiment

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:18]
if you want to start your own experiment, be my guest

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:18]
[In reply to Spoice]
Valid tx rules aren't defined in the WP

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:18]
just don't try to call it Bitcoin

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:19]
The word majority is in the WP an awful lot wouldn't you say?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:19]
Not valid TX rules, but what a proof of work block is and how it diverts the reward to the miner, etc

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:20]
[In reply to Spoice]
and? what about BTC doesn't apply?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:20]
I'm not arguing for any fork of BCH here.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:20]
It no longer meets the very title of the white paper experiment, "Peer to peer electronic cash"

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:20]
The BTC instance of the experiment is destined to move away from the very title of the white paper

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:20]
It's electronic, and I use it like cash.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:20]
that the maintainers even wanted to edit the white paper (Cobra and co) because of this fact

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:20]
u/Spoice When did BTC stop being Bitcoin in your view? The day Amaury decided to launch the fork, before Segwit happened?
If someone else launched a fork first, they would have been "the real bitcoin"?
This is a game of whoever forks first becomes the real Bitcoin?
What if two people launched a fork at the exact same time, maybe even with identical specs?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:21]
Where did I go wrong?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:21]
[In reply to Spoice]
Did they?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:21]
Doesn't matter if you use it today, its very technical fabric will have to move your transactions to 2nd layers and it will no longer be peer to peer electronic cash on chain

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:21]
peer to peer electronic cash on chain - Not in the wp

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:22]
We have satoj talking about HFT with sidechannels.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:22]
So what?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:23]
I think this is a good discussion Phil, nothing disrespectful is being said. I hope this is ok?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:23]
Doesn't matter, the rule of common sense, which is closer to that title? Increasing a simple variable (Blocksize) to stay on track of the title and experiment, or introduce IOUs and Watchtowers and channels and locked BTC and that whole LN Bastardization? Which is close to the title?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:23]
No one said that can't happen

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:24]
[In reply to Spoice]
Congratulations you've made an argument which isn't an argument.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:25]
The whole thing that was said was the system is based on majority rules, and incentives can be changed. Majority breaks any deadlock.

David B., [18.10.20 02:25]
How to kill a coin 101

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:25]
Logic fails anyone who tries to claim BTC, ABC, BSV or any similar standalone experiments as Bitcoin, because of simple sanity checks and logic checks, often stemming out of common sense - If what you have moves you a single step away from what is otherwise the same old experiment which Satoshi wrote about and unleashed, you're not Bitcoin. If what you have moves you a step closer, it is Bitcoin. and so on and so forth.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:25]
Wow, really fanatical almost religious statements. I guess its Sunday morning.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:27]
[In reply to Spoice]
There's nothing common about common sense. You point to the WP to make a point, and your point isn't in there.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:27]
Throttled and you need off-chain IOUs and always-on services to function (BTC) ? Not Bitcoin. Requires permission to be used and could be centrally confiscated on the whim of the organization behind it (BSV)? Not Bitcoin. Premined (Bitcoin Gold, Diamond)? Not Bitcoin. Taxing the miners through Coinbase and changing the incentives which were at play since day 0 (ABC)? Not Bitcoin

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:27]
simple checks really, yet those who are set to benefit will of course be oblivious to these

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:28]
This whole “Bitcoin Cash is the true Bitcoin - see whitepaper” is really stupid. It also ignores the history of how Bitcoin Cash came into existence

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:28]
Phillip, remove anyone here that has said Bitcoin Gold was the original Bitcoin immediately

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:28]

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:29]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
It falls to pieces the moment it's questioned.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:29]
It is not about "True" Bitcoin

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:30]
It is about the Bitcoin closest to the experiment which always was

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:30]
I don't care about "True" or not, they all are true

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:30]
[In reply to Jingles]
Sorry, I hve stopped reading all the sillyness above. Will reread later

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:30]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
I'm joking around 😂

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:30]
but the rule of entropy says I shouldn't place my money nor effort in experiments which are set to fade eventually, because they have skewed incentives

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:31]
[In reply to Spoice]
You get to chose that for yourself but you do not get to dictate it for others

David B., [18.10.20 02:31]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
Don't read it. You will have no braincells left

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:31]
Bitcoin as we know it has a long track record of incentives which work

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:31]
I won't ever dictate it for others

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:31]
I only would dictate it for myself, just like how I never use BTC or BSV today, I won't use ABC tomorrow

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
only because they're new experiments

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
interesting, and I wish them luck

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:32]
"Bitcoin is Bitcoin" is a false statement - Spoice 2020

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
but I would rather stick to the Bitcoin I know

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
that's all

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:32]
I won't ever dictate it for others - Also Spoice
Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:32]
Bitcoin Cash came with a plan snd goals. They were clearly presented in two presentations that happened before viabtc announced they would mine with ABC software and create a coin and chain named Bitcoin Cash

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
Yes, because he means BTC is Bitcoin, and that's a false statement

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:32]
How is it false?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
It is an instance of Bitcoin

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:33]
[In reply to Michael Nunzio]
you're looking intimidatingly handsome in your new profile picture

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:33]
[In reply to Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ]]

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:33]
[In reply to J Stodd]
actually a good question

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:34]
Anyway, those are my two cents

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:34]
Everyone is free to choose which experiments to pour their effort on and their money in

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:34]
[In reply to Spoice]
You are entitled to your opinion.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:34]
Andreas is publishing Lightning Network books, I mean

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:34]
So to each his own

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:35]
[In reply to Spoice]
Lets leave it at that

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:35]
but Bitcoin as I know it continues with no Tax, and that in my opinion is BCH with no tax

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:35]
Ah you had to continue

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:36]
Good thing no tax is proposed by anyone
Spoice, [18.10.20 02:35]
Isn't this the Bitcoin Cash telegram?

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:35]

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:36]
If I don't discuss Bitcoin Cash here, where should I?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:36]
Tax, IFP, call it what you will

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:36]
from my perspective as a user, it's one the same

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:36]
[In reply to Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ]]
I bet nobody will answer it, either

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:37]
[In reply to Spoice]
Apparently btc /s

David B., [18.10.20 02:37]
[In reply to Spoice]
As a user what do you care?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:37]
Ooh, can I shill the Bitcoin room in here?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:37]
Nah, I prefer quick responses and chats

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:37]
Reddit is broken

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:37]
[In reply to Jingles]

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:37]
[In reply to Spoice]
Nobody even pays it, it just comes out of the block reward. The block reward is not sentient, it cannot be stolen from or wronged

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:37]
Dont push your luck 😉

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:37]
[ 😀 Sticker ]

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:38]
[In reply to Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ]]
You too brother. 🙏

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:38]
[In reply to Michael Nunzio]
but mine is the same....i need new ones everyone always calls me fat because of this one

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:38]
literally if i say 1 thing to any troll anywhere first thing they say is "ok fatass"

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:38]
i blame this dumb photographer

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:38]
[In reply to Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ]]
Don't listen.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:39]
u/spoice maybe write a read.cash article if you really feel you need to educate people

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:39]
David, as a user I believe that each new experiment carries risk with it, why should I take part in a new fork of Bitcoin which has a new set of game-theory rules which doesn't even benefit me, rather it benefits some other entity which will take 5% of any effort or economic activity I produce on this chain? They're also off-loading the risk to me as a usebuildebusiness who choose to join their experiment.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:40]
Why should I take that risk while the Bitcoin I know and have known for over 10 years worked perfectly for me thus far? (BCH, that is)

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:40]
small fees and empty blocks?

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:41]
It will insure that a centralized group has control over development and they are by decree in the code, it's a literal take over.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:41]
[In reply to Spoice]
“BSV-freeze the protocol - true Bitcoin” sounds like more your thing

David B., [18.10.20 02:41]
[In reply to Spoice]
Better run bitcoin core 0.1

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:41]
Imagine if satoshi keyd his address in the code to be paid out of every block, but instead of paying himself started a company "Bitcoin Dev Co"

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:42]
Not really, BSV kills the incentives I am discussing too

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:42]
[In reply to Jingles]
Please stay nice now

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:42]
No one would ever be able to say Bitcoin was Decentralized, Bitcoin Dev Co would get paid directly from the reward.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:42]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
"BSV: We have all the Bad Idea. On chain"

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:42]
The Nash equilibrium we have tested for the past 10 years will be changed with ABC, it changed with BTC and BSV too

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:42]
"Bad Solutions Verified"

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:42]
that game-theory set of incentives

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:43]
why would I want to take a risk with any of those experiments when I gain 0?

David B., [18.10.20 02:43]
Better run bitcoin core 0.1

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:43]
Nope, you're talking technical freezing of development, that's not what I am addressing

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:43]
[In reply to David B.]
Thats the BTC chain though

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:43]
[In reply to Spoice]
O please share with us your background in the subject. Or are you now just parroting others

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:44]
BSV wants to freeze the technical development and they want a stable protocol from an API/development perspective

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:44]
but from an incentive ruleset perspective, they already butchered the equilibrium Bitcoin had

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:44]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
That's one of those phrases, when you hear it you know they are just a parrot of someones propaganda. "MUH NASH EQUILIBRIUM!"

David B., [18.10.20 02:44]
Stable = bad?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:45]
[In reply to Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ]]
I love you

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:45]
Philip, for an admin you are ought to be nicer, if you think I am parroting others you're free to think that, but to state it so bluntly in your position is just... wrong

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:46]
If you think the point I made is wrong, discuss it

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:46]
[In reply to Jingles]
Maybe talk to him in DM about that?😉

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:46]
not me

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:46]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
working on it.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:46]
[In reply to Spoice]
I ought to be nicer...😂😂😂

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:47]
Also, anyone who studied Bitcoin at length and its set of incentives and game-theory ruleset should know what a Nash Equilibrium is and who the players are in the Bitcoin game

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:47]
[In reply to Spoice]
You state as fact. You get to dhow why your statements or opinions are even relevant.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:48]
If it's not a fact, highlight how

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:48]
don't attack me

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:48]
prove me wrong

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:48]
if you fail that simple debate test

David B., [18.10.20 02:48]
How's that breakfast helping?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:48]
you should rename from Janitor to Tyrant

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:48]
I'm still waiting to see the defined rules as per the wp

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:49]
[In reply to Spoice]
Didn't know this was stand up comedy night in here.

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:49]
I missed the memo

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:49]
If I have to prove all idiots on the internet wrong I would have a hard time. You are starting to really waste everybody’s time. You state, you prove. Or you are just generating noise

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:50]
[In reply to Spoice]
Be careful now.

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:50]
Noisy bugger.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:52]
Getting close to just do some cleaning up.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:52]
If you can't debate technical points I am making about Bitcoin Cash on a Bitcoin Cash Telegram, and within the span of 10 minutes you called me stupid, idiot, noisy and a parrot, you absolutely are a tyrant and I stand by my point: You should not be an admin here, nor anywhere actually. If you think I should be careful for the fear of you banning me, go ahead. You still fail to debate the simplest technical point and yet claim you can "but can't be bothered to". You remind me of that Thermos guy.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:53]
How do people with 0 technical know how end up in these admin positions is beyond me

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:53]
I challenged your comments and you just changed the goal posts.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:53]
[In reply to Spoice]
Ok. You are not paying me and you are free to create noise elsewhere
submitted by wisequote to btc [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Newcomers FAQ - Please read!

Welcome to the /Bitcoin Sticky FAQ

You've probably been hearing a lot about Bitcoin recently and are wondering what's the big deal? Most of your questions should be answered by the resources below but if you have additional questions feel free to ask them in the comments.
It all started with the release of the release of Satoshi Nakamoto's whitepaper however that will probably go over the head of most readers so we recommend the following videos for a good starting point for understanding how bitcoin works and a little about its long term potential:
Some other great resources include Lopp.net, the Princeton crypto series and James D'Angelo's Bitcoin 101 Blackboard series.
Some excellent writing on Bitcoin's value proposition and future can be found at the Satoshi Nakamoto Institute.
Some Bitcoin statistics can be found here and here. Developer resources can be found here. Peer-reviewed research papers can be found here.
Potential upcoming protocol improvements and scaling resources here and here.
The number of times Bitcoin was declared dead by the media can be found here (LOL!)

Key properties of Bitcoin

Where can I buy bitcoins?

Bitcoin.org and BuyBitcoinWorldwide.com are helpful sites for beginners. You can buy or sell any amount of bitcoin (even just a few dollars worth) and there are several easy methods to purchase bitcoin with cash, credit card or bank transfer. Some of the more popular resources are below, also check out the bitcoinity exchange resources for a larger list of options for purchases.
Here is a listing of local ATMs. If you would like your paycheck automatically converted to bitcoin use Bitwage.
Note: Bitcoins are valued at whatever market price people are willing to pay for them in balancing act of supply vs demand. Unlike traditional markets, bitcoin markets operate 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. Preev is a useful site that that shows how much various denominations of bitcoin are worth in different currencies. Alternatively you can just Google "1 bitcoin in (your local currency)".

Securing your bitcoins

With bitcoin you can "Be your own bank" and personally secure your bitcoins OR you can use third party companies aka "Bitcoin banks" which will hold the bitcoins for you.
Note: For increased security, use Two Factor Authentication (2FA) everywhere it is offered, including email!
2FA requires a second confirmation code to access your account making it much harder for thieves to gain access. Google Authenticator and Authy are the two most popular 2FA services, download links are below. Make sure you create backups of your 2FA codes.
Google Auth Authy OTP Auth
Android Android N/A

Watch out for scams

As mentioned above, Bitcoin is decentralized, which by definition means there is no official website or Twitter handle or spokesperson or CEO. However, all money attracts thieves. This combination unfortunately results in scammers running official sounding names or pretending to be an authority on YouTube or social media. Many scammers throughout the years have claimed to be the inventor of Bitcoin. Websites like bitcoin(dot)com and the btc subreddit are active scams. Almost all altcoins (shitcoins) are marketed heavily with big promises but are really just designed to separate you from your bitcoin. So be careful: any resource, including all linked in this document, may in the future turn evil. Don't trust, verify. Also as they say in our community "Not your keys, not your coins".

Where can I spend bitcoins?

Check out spendabit or bitcoin directory for millions of merchant options. Also you can spend bitcoin anywhere visa is accepted with bitcoin debit cards such as the CashApp card. Some other useful site are listed below.
Store Product
Gyft Gift cards for hundreds of retailers including Amazon, Target, Walmart, Starbucks, Whole Foods, CVS, Lowes, Home Depot, iTunes, Best Buy, Sears, Kohls, eBay, GameStop, etc.
Spendabit, Overstock and The Bitcoin Directory Retail shopping with millions of results
ShakePay Generate one time use Visa cards in seconds
NewEgg and Dell For all your electronics needs
Bitwa.la, Coinbills, Piixpay, Bitbill.eu, Bylls, Coins.ph, Bitrefill, LivingRoomofSatoshi, Coinsfer, and more Bill payment
Menufy, Takeaway and Thuisbezorgd NL Takeout delivered to your door
Expedia, Cheapair, Destinia, Abitsky, SkyTours, the Travel category on Gyft and 9flats For when you need to get away
Cryptostorm, Mullvad, and PIA VPN services
Namecheap, Porkbun Domain name registration
Stampnik Discounted USPS Priority, Express, First-Class mail postage
Coinmap and AirBitz are helpful to find local businesses accepting bitcoins. A good resource for UK residents is at wheretospendbitcoins.co.uk.
There are also lots of charities which accept bitcoin donations.

Merchant Resources

There are several benefits to accepting bitcoin as a payment option if you are a merchant;
If you are interested in accepting bitcoin as a payment method, there are several options available;

Can I mine bitcoin?

Mining bitcoins can be a fun learning experience, but be aware that you will most likely operate at a loss. Newcomers are often advised to stay away from mining unless they are only interested in it as a hobby similar to folding at home. If you want to learn more about mining you can read more here. Still have mining questions? The crew at /BitcoinMining would be happy to help you out.
If you want to contribute to the bitcoin network by hosting the blockchain and propagating transactions you can run a full node using this setup guide. If you would prefer to keep it simple there are several good options. You can view the global node distribution here.

Earning bitcoins

Just like any other form of money, you can also earn bitcoins by being paid to do a job.
Site Description
WorkingForBitcoins, Bitwage, Cryptogrind, Coinality, Bitgigs, /Jobs4Bitcoins, BitforTip, Rein Project Freelancing
Lolli Earn bitcoin when you shop online!
OpenBazaar, Purse.io, Bitify, /Bitmarket, 21 Market Marketplaces
/GirlsGoneBitcoin NSFW Adult services
A-ads, Coinzilla.io Advertising
You can also earn bitcoins by participating as a market maker on JoinMarket by allowing users to perform CoinJoin transactions with your bitcoins for a small fee (requires you to already have some bitcoins.

Bitcoin-Related Projects

The following is a short list of ongoing projects that might be worth taking a look at if you are interested in current development in the bitcoin space.
Project Description
Lightning Network Second layer scaling
Blockstream, Rootstock and Drivechain Sidechains
Hivemind and Augur Prediction markets
Tierion and Factom Records & Titles on the blockchain
BitMarkets, DropZone, Beaver and Open Bazaar Decentralized markets
JoinMarket and Wasabi Wallet CoinJoin implementation
Coinffeine and Bisq Decentralized bitcoin exchanges
Keybase Identity & Reputation management
Abra Global P2P money transmitter network
Bitcore Open source Bitcoin javascript library

Bitcoin Units

One Bitcoin is quite large (hundreds of £/$/€) so people often deal in smaller units. The most common subunits are listed below:
Unit Symbol Value Info
bitcoin BTC 1 bitcoin one bitcoin is equal to 100 million satoshis
millibitcoin mBTC 1,000 per bitcoin used as default unit in recent Electrum wallet releases
bit bit 1,000,000 per bitcoin colloquial "slang" term for microbitcoin (μBTC)
satoshi sat 100,000,000 per bitcoin smallest unit in bitcoin, named after the inventor
For example, assuming an arbitrary exchange rate of $10000 for one Bitcoin, a $10 meal would equal:
For more information check out the Bitcoin units wiki.
Still have questions? Feel free to ask in the comments below or stick around for our weekly Mentor Monday thread. If you decide to post a question in /Bitcoin, please use the search bar to see if it has been answered before, and remember to follow the community rules outlined on the sidebar to receive a better response. The mods are busy helping manage our community so please do not message them unless you notice problems with the functionality of the subreddit.
Note: This is a community created FAQ. If you notice anything missing from the FAQ or that requires clarification you can edit it here and it will be included in the next revision pending approval.
Welcome to the Bitcoin community and the new decentralized economy!
submitted by BitcoinFan7 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Most of "toxicity" on this subreddit is justified

There have been a few posts recently with overwhelming upvotes about how this community is toxic, calling it one of the most toxic communities and similar stuff.So I looked through most of the arguments people in comments are making to justify such believe, most of them are pointing out how the toxic people are calling the game "broken", "unplayable", "full of hackers" "full of complainers" or saying that " it makes me not want to come back with almost every other post with someone new bitching ", many upvoted posts talking about how this community "keep bitching" I've seen people talking how people attack Nikita, bsg, also that there are toxic people writing stuff like get good, " Any time I see someone share a small victory it is met with rude comments and hostility"" Oh man you got a squad wipe? Wish the enemies in my game were that bad, you suck they suck , Y DO I DIE TO PRO PLAYERS WHILE YOU PLAY AGAINST BOTZ. "So first off I want to define the terms, toxicity is defined as " the quality of being very harmful or unpleasant in a pervasive or insidious way. " by fast google search. I assume that when people call all those people "bitching" toxic they say so because they believe they are harmful overall. I would argue that the people calling out those "crybabes" toxic are more toxic and harmful to a game than those people they are calling out.
My theory is that there are two groups of people on this subreddit, I will call the first complainers, and the second one anti-complainers, which are people complaining about complainers.
The first one is the one including everybody that is criticizing or complaining about game, bugs, gameplay changes, performance, loadings, also people that attack developers personally or just insults them, or just rude comments with hostility. Includes anybody who shares his negative thoughts about the game in either constructive argumentive post or REEing and talking the game is trash.
The second group are people who complains how much toxicity is on this subreddit, saying it things like it was much better before it got popular, the group can include any person who feels like its toxic, by the most part saying that complainers constantly whine, are rude in comments and attack developers. People who brush off most of actual valid criticism of the game (EVEN if complainer complained about it, complaining about stuff in the game doesnt make the criticism any less valid) with stuff like "It's beta", "It's early access game", "play another game", "stop playing if you dont like the game", "stop bitching", "its just pixels", " It's like, I get it, but I've been here for two weeks and I'm not bitching and I've played many betas and whatnot. It's just not that bad. It really isn't." Also includes people that say that developers are doing their best, doing appreciation threads of nikita, believing that game is in a good spot and that it was much worse and we should appreciete it.
I think that a lot of people are in first group because most people have had at least some criticism of the game but they consider themselves as the anti-complainer because the bad parts of complainers that attack developers, or just complain a lot, not liking the game direction, REE'ing or not. That explains why when there are anti-complainer posts about toxic people they have from 70% to 90% upvote rate, but know if you ever found yourself commenting "delete gl" "game stutters" "late spawning again" know that those posts about toxic people are also talking about YOU, yes, YOU.
If you have not already realized, I consider myself complainer, I think that the game has a lot of problems, and even though this is my first problem on this subreddit I have a lot to complain.Just to give you some backstory on me, I started playing this wipe, I think I started playing maybe between 3 to 2 months in this game. Im addicted to it, I love this game, but I hate it at the same time.Why?Because the performance of this game, overall slugginess, infinite loads, late spawns, freezes, stutters, many bugs, desyncs, silent grenades, random disconnects mid raid, coming back to menu for 5 minutes every other raid, menu errors, trader errors, new bugs introduced any new patch that can suddenly delete your item cases that you spend a lot of time on, FiR required for quests with random chances to spawn on scavs, me fearing that I can be banned if I drop something to my friend because of rmt problem, me not being able to play with my close friend without need to wait for one of them for few minutes (they all have ssds), while one of my friends is unable to play any other map with me than factory because he is in infinite loading everytime when he tries.
I am complainer, but nobody defends complainers that attack developers personally and deathtreat nikita, screw those people. When it comes to people that are rude and negative in comments, I dont believe there are a lot of them at all, the only negative comments I can find is usually at the bottom of any post, with no upvotes or downvoted. If that was a problem people like this would be upvoted much more. I dont think i really happens much, but you can try to prove me wrong if you want.
The part of complainers I want to focus on that I believe are justified, are those people complaining about balances issues, bugs, even by saying "constant freezes" and "gl sucks"Every comment like this that has a sentiment about something in game has value.the things like just "Fuck the game" or "fuck developers" have no reason of why the person doesnt approve the game and developers, so I wont defend people that just do that because it has no value, its just being a dick.But when it comes to anybody that complains about specific bug and just shows disapproval about some change is good, its feedback, even though in can be inflammatory I consider it good until it doesnt derive into personally attacking developers. I think complains being inflammatory mostly just tells you how a lot of tarkov community just feels frustrated about the game state, mostly bugs.
So as a complainer myself I will respond to anti-complainers arguments that I've came across calling out complainers for being toxic (harmful to community).
"It's a beta" - even if I would grant you that, the fact that game is a beta doesnt mean that you cannot complain about something being broken, its actually the best time to fix the game because it is beta, so more feedback the better, while having something broken and having bugs that are very old and still not fixed is very frustraiting. This aside, I dont care about it being a "beta" it doesnt act as one, it keeps having content updates, getting trailers of content updates (trailers for a game that isnt even out, and it wont be even out after the content trailer is about, what even is this?)I has big price tags with different stages with different items for each, it doesnt seem to focus on fixing the bug, it focuses on keep adding content for people. The feedback option about the game is not ever promoted.In4 everybody comments how x games are also betas, I dont care, it doesnt matter, tarkov been in "early access" for years already, and it doesnt seem to even want ever get out of it, it is beta status is just used by community to dodge a lot of criticism.
"Play another game"/"If you don't like it, go away" - Why would I? It's not that I dont like that game, I love it, but there are a lot of frustraiting things that can be changed and I wouldnt have those problems. Complaining is for developers to do action to make things better. It is silly to think that if you point out problems in a game you have to hate it, its the opposite, I complain about it because I want it fixed so it will be no longer problem when playing this awesome game.
"This beta really isn't that bad"/ "It used to be much worse" - It can be pretty damn bad depending what maps you play, how much you play, what bugs you come across, or just rng of getting a cheater in a game or even getting banned from a game because you dropped some bitcoins to friend or some error bsg did.Saying that it used to be much worse doesnt help in anything, it is just used to brush off the problems with the current game. It is the same as saying to a person that is jewish or black that is telling you it is being discriminated "It used to be much worse for jews you know? They used to be gassed long ago", or to black people "Its much better now, there is no slavery". it just pointless to say. Problems before doesnt mean that you cant have problems right now.
"Stop playing if you dont like the game"/"take a break" - There is no game close to tarkov, and I want to play tarkov, I just dont want problems that I get when playing it. It's not that I don't like the game but I don't like in what direction it goes, developers proritize making content instead of fixing the game. It already has damn a lot of content right now, why cant they just focus on fixing the problems, making it smooth and playable, release it and then adding content to it?
"Stop bitching" - There are a lots of problems in tarkov, if you think tarkov has no valid problems you must have not played this game at all or must be delusional. And all the other brush offs I already responded to above. I will and most people should too complain about it, I completely doesnt understand the logic of anti complainers, its literally just bitching about bitching, very ironic.I think every patch just proves the priorities of developers, we had gl's last patch and now we got flashing shotgun meleeing people with stash sorting deleting items, and thats after they delayed the patch by 5 days.(I dont care if patches are late, but I care about giving patch date and then delaying it, if you are not sure if the patch will be fine that just give patch date week later)
I think that anti-complainers are more harmful to game than complainers, not only it makes home war at subreddit blaming everybody of being toxic, it also just has a lot of people that shrug off the problems that most complainers talk about that are actually valid criticism, which in the long run means less room to improvement the game because most of people with complains are called toxic.
In the end all, me and many other people want is just to have good experience and I think that bugs make it a lot more harder to love this otherwise awesome game. Lets make peace between complainers and anti-complainers, being able to criticize game while being able to appreciete what was done until now.
Edit: tl;dr, Most people that are considered toxic in this community are just people that point out problems with a game that is required for game to grow and get better, even though it is showed mostly by complaining it has still value and just shows how big part of community are anoyyed at glaring problems.
submitted by PleyVI to EscapefromTarkov [link] [comments]

[OWL WATCH] Waiting for "IOTA TIME" 30;

Disclaimer: This is sort of my own arbitrary editing, so there could be some misunderstandings.
I root for the spread of good spirits and transparency of IF.
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 2:45
So why don't we just copy Avalanche? Well that's pretty simple ...
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 2:47
1. It doesn't scale very well with the amount of nodes in the network that have no say in the consensus process but are merely consensus consuming nodes (i.e. sensors, edge devices and so on). If you assume that the network will never have more than a few thousand nodes then thats fine but if you want to build a DLT that can cope with millions of devices then it wont work because of the message complexity.
2. If somebody starts spamming conflicts, then the whole network will stop to confirm any transactions and will grind to a halt until the conflict spamming stops. Avalanche thinks that this is not a huge problem because an attacker would have to spend fees for spamming conflicts which means that he couldn't do this forever and would at some point run out of funds.
IOTA tries to build a feeless protocol and a consensus that stops to function if somebody spams conflicts is really not an option for us.
3. If a medium sized validator goes offline due to whatever reason, then the whole network will again stop to confirm any transactions because whenever a query for a nodes opinion can not be answered they reset the counter for consecutive successful voting rounds which will prevent confirmations. Since nodes need to open some ports to be available for queries it is super easy to DDOS validators and again bring the network confirmations to 0.
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 3:05
4. Avalanche still processes transactions in "chunks/blocks" by only applying them after they have gone through some consensus process (gathered enough successfull voting rounds), which means that the nodes will waste a significant amount of time where they "wait" for the next chunk to be finished before the transactions are applied to the ledger state. IOTA tries to streamline this process by decoupling consensus and the booking of transactions by using the "parallel reality based ledger state" which means that nodes in IOTA will never waste any time "waiting" for decisions to be made. This will give us much higher throughput numbers.
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 3:11
5. Avalanche has some really severe game theoretic problems where nodes are incentivized to attach their transactions to the already decided parts of the DAG because then things like conflict spam won't affect these transactions as badly as the transactions issued by honest nodes. If however every node would follow this "better and selfish" tip selection mechanism then the network will stop to work at all.
Overall the "being able to stop consensus" might not be too bad since you can't really do anything really bad (i.e. double spend) which is why we might not see these kind of attacks in the immediate future but just wait until a few DeFi apps are running on their platform where smart contracts are actually relying on more or less real time execution of the contracts. Then there might be some actual financial gains to be made if the contract halts and we might see alot of these things appear (including selfish tip selection).
Avalanche is barely a top 100 project and nobody attacks these kind of low value networks unless there is something to be gained from such an attack. Saying that the fact that its live on mainnet and hasn't been attacked in 3 weeks is a proof for its security is completely wrong.
Especially considering that 95% of all stake are controlled by avalanche itself
If you control > 50% of the voting power then you essentially control the whole network and attacks can mostly be ignored
I guess there is a reason for avalanche only selling 10% of the token supply to the public because then some of the named problems are less likely to appear
Navin Ramachandran [IF]어제 오후 3:21
I have to say that wtf's suggestion is pretty condescending to all our researchers. It seems heavy on the troll aspect to suggest that we should ditch all our work because iota is only good at industrial adoption. Does wtf actually expect a response to this? Or is this grand standing?
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 3:22
The whole argument of "why don't you just use X instead of trying to build a better version" is also a completely idiotic argument. Why did ETH write their own protocol if Bitcoin was already around? Well because they saw problems in Bitcoins approach and tried to improve it.
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 3:27
u/Navin Ramachandran [IF] Its like most of his arguments ... remember when he said we should implement colored coins in 2nd layer smart contracts instead of the base layer because they would be more expressive (i.e. turing complete) completely discarding that 2nd layer smart contracts only really work if you have a consensus on data and therefore state for which you need the "traceability" of funds to create these kind of mini blockchains in the tangle?
Colored coins "enable" smart contracts and it wouldnt work the other way round - unless you have a platform that works exactly like ETH where all the nodes validate a single shared execution platform of the smart contracts which is not really scalable and is exactly what we are trying to solve with our approach.
Navin Ramachandran [IF]어제 오후 3:28
Always easier to criticise than build something yourself. But yet he keeps posting these inflammatory posts.
At this point is there any doubt if he is making these comments constructively?
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 3:43
If he at least would try to understand IOTAs vision ... then maybe he wouldn't have to ask things like "Why don't you just copy a tech that only works with fees"
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 4:35
I thought this would only be used to 'override' finality, eg if there were network splits. But not in normal consensus
That is not correct. Every single transaction gets booked on arrival using the parallel reality based ledger state. If there are conflicts then we create a "branch" (container in the ledger state) that represents the perception that this particular double spend would be accepted by consensus. After consensus is reached, the container is simply marked as "accepted" and all transactions that are associated with this branch are immediately confirmed as well. This allows us to make the node use all of its computing ressources 24/7 without having to wait for any kind of decision to be made and allows us to scale the throughput to its physical limits. That's the whole idea of the "parallel reality based ledger state" instead of designing a data structure that models the ledger state "after consensus" like everybody else is doing it is tailored to model the ledger state "before consensus" and then you just flip a flag to persist your decision. The "resync mechanism" also uses the branches to measure the amount of approval a certain perception of the ledger state receives. So if my own opinion is not in line with what the rest of the network has accepted (i.e. because I was eclipsed or because there was a network split), then I can use the weight of these branches to detect this "being out of sync" and can do another larger query to re-evaluate my decision.(수정됨)
Also what happens in IOTA if DRNG notes would fall out, does the network continue if no new RNGs appear for a while? Or will new nodes be added sufficiently fast to the DRNG committee that no one notices?
Its a comittee and not just a single DRNG provider. If a few nodes fail then it will still produce random numbers. And even if the whole comittee fails there are fallback RNG's that would be used instead
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 4:58
And multiverse doesn't use FPC but only the weight of these branches in the same way as blockchain uses the longest chain wins consensus to choose between conflicts. So nodes simply attach their transactions to the transactions that they have seen first and if there are conflicts then you simply monitor which version received more approval and adjust your opinion accordingly.
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 5:07
We started integrating some of the non-controversial concepts (like the approval reset switch) into FPC and are currently refactoring goshimmer to support this
We are also planning to make the big mana holders publish their opinion in the tangle as a public statement, which allows us to measure the rate of approval in a similar way as multiverse would do it
So its starting to converge a bit but we are still using FPC as a metastability breaking mechanism
Once the changes are implemented it should be pretty easy to simulate and test both approaches in parallel
Serguei Popov [IF]어제 오후 5:53
So the ask is that we ditch all our work and fork Avalanche because it has not been attacked in the month or so it has been up?
u/Navin Ramachandran [IF] yeah, that's hilarious. Avalanche consensus (at least their WP version) is clearly scientifically unsound.
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 9:43
u/wtf maybe you should research avalanche before proposing such a stupid idea
and you will see that what I wrote is actually true
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 9:44
paying fees is what "protects" them atm
and simply the fact that nobody uses the network for anything of value yet
we cant rely on fees making attack vectors "inattractive"
Serguei Popov [IF]어제 오후 10:17
well (1.) very obviously the metastability problems are not a problem in practice,
putting "very obviously" before questionable statements very obviously shows that you are seeking a constructive dialogue 📷 (to make metastability work, the adversary needs to more-or-less know the current opinion vectors of most of the honest participants; I don't see why a sufficiently well-connected adversary cannot query enough honest nodes frequently enough to achieve that)
(2.) .... you'd need an unpredictable number every few tens/hundreds milliseconds, but your DRNG can only produce one every O(seconds).
the above assumption (about "every few tens/hundreds milliseconds") is wrong
We've had this discussion before, where you argued that the assumptions in the FPC-BI paper (incl. "all nodes must be known") are not to be taken 100% strictly, and that the results are to be seen more of an indication of overall performance.
Aham, I see. So, unfortunately, all that time that I invested into explaining that stuff during our last conversation was for nothing. Again, very briefly. The contents of the FPC-BI paper is not "an indication of overall performance". It rather shows (to someone who actually read and understood the paper) why the approach is sound and robust, as it makes one understand what is the mechanism that causes the consensus phenomenon occur.
Yet you don't allow for that same argument to be valid for the "metastability" problem in avalanche,
Incorrect. It's not "that same argument". FPC-BI is a decent academic paper that has precisely formulated results and proofs. The Ava WP (the probabilistic part of it), on the other hand, does not contain proofs of what they call results. More importantly, they don't even show a clear path to those proofs. That's why their system is scientifically unsound.
even when there's a live network that shows that it doesn't matter.
No, it doesn't show that it doesn't matter. It only shows that it works when not properly attacked. Their WP doesn't contain any insight on why those attacks would be difficult/impossible.
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 10:56
That proposal was so stupid - Avalanche does several things completely different and we are putting quite a bit og effort into our solution to pretty much fix all of Avalanches shortcomings
If we just wanted to have a working product and dont care about security or performance then we could have just forked a blockchaib
I am pretty confident that once we are done - its going to be extremely close to the besttheoretical thresholds that DLTs will ever be able to achieve for an unsharded baselayer
Bas어제 오전 2:43
Yesterday I was asked how a reasonably big company no one has heard of could best move forward implementing Access for thousands of locations worldwide. (Sorry for the vagueness, it’s all confidential.) They read the article and want to implement it because it seems to fit a problem they’re currently trying to solve. Such moves will vastly increase the utility of protocols like IOTA, and is what the speculation is built on. I do not think you can overestimate what impact Access is going to have. It’s cutting out the middleman for simple things; no server or service needed. That’s huge.
So yes, I think this space will continue to grow u/Coinnave

Angelo Capossele [IF]2020.10.02.
In short: we are planning a new v0.3.0 release that should happen very soon. This version will bring fundamental changes to the structure of the entire codebase (but without additional features) so that progressing with the development will be easier and more consistent. We have also obtained outstanding results with the dRNG committee managed by the GoShimmer X-Team, so that will also be integral part of v0.3.0. After that, we will merge the Value Tangle with the Message Tangle, so to have only one Tangle and make the TSA and the orphanage easier to manage. And we are also progressing really well with Mana, that will be the focus after the merge. More or less this is what is going to happen this month.
We will release further details with the upcoming Research Status Update 📷

submitted by btlkhs to Iota [link] [comments]

The three things that keep me up at night.

Tonight I read this article and while it doesn’t get too deep into the technical weeds, I thought I could do better by breaking down some of the IT threats and concerns that keep me up at night into more of a non-tech person’s language while giving real world examples why this stuff really does matter to everyone, not just the uber nerds, naysayers, and tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists.
Security (both digital and physical) is something most people don’t understand and as a result they act like an ostrich by burying their head in the sand; if I can’t see it, it can’t see me. Until recently I was an IT consultant and would frequently bring this up to my clients. The usual reply I hear is along the lines of “but my company doesn’t have much money, isn’t a bank, doesn’t do anything interesting, etc. so they aren’t going to target me and I don’t have anything to worry about.” Sadly, this isn’t the case. These crooks “spray and pray” and will victimize anyone who gets caught in their snare. They will send out hundreds of millions of emails, compromise thousands of websites, and make tens of thousands of robocalls all with the expectation that they are only going to be able to victimize 0.0001% of their attempts.
For years there have been two big threats in the IT world that literally keep me up at night; regulatory compliance and ransomware. There is now a third, extortionware.
Regulatory compliance is an area business owners and executives commonly overlook because they don’t think it applies to their company because they’re not in health care or banking. PCI (Payment Card Industry), PII (Personal Identifiable Information), HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act), and HITECH (Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act) are the most common compliance standards and now cover just about every company in existence in the United States. If the company takes credit cards of any kind there are some levels of PCI compliance that they need to be adhered with. PII covers most HR information like social security numbers or driver license numbers. HIPAA and HITECH both cover information related to health records. This is one that most companies overlook because they don’t realize things like workmen’s compensation claims, HR records that discuss health related issues, etc. are all covered by these standards. Fines from the governing bodies that cover their respective compliance standards are usually preventable because they have general guidelines that cover what needs to be done to be in compliance on the logistical, physical, and digital fronts. If your company does anything with the European Union, then GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) is a new regulation that has some pretty serious consequences if not followed properly.
Ransomware is a genre of computer virus that is just evil. It encrypts your data and give you a very short period of time (typically only a couple days) to pay the ransom using untraceable funds transfers via cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. If you don’t pay the ransom in time they will delete the decryption key thus destroying all your data. If you do pay the ransom then chances are you will get your data back however you are likely very literally funding terrorism and/or some other kind of organized crime. These ransoms are also meant to be payable but be painful to pay. The newer ransomware variants will scan your network to get an idea of how big it is then adjust the ransom accordingly; the more devices, the higher the ransom. Typical ransoms start around a few thousand dollars and work their way up hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. If you’re infected with these viruses then the best course of action to remove it is to wipe your entire network (all servers, workstations, firewall and switch configs, etc.) and rebuild it from scratch while restoring your important data from backups into a separate clean environment, scanning it for any traces of the virus, then moving it into the newly rebuilt network. While this is typically more expensive than paying the ransom it is the only way you can be sure the virus is no longer on your network and thus capable of infecting everything all over again and repeating the ransom process.
Extortionware is similar to its older sibling ransomware in that the virus typically does all the same things however it adds an even more sinister twist, it copies your data offsite to a server only the criminals can access. They do this because of the increased number of companies that have opted to not pay the ransom and just rebuild their network. Using extortionware the criminals now have the company’s intellectual property (usually proprietary), HR data, internal memos, financial data, emails, etc.. Did someone say something unflattering about someone else in an email, did HR have a spreadsheet with every employee’s SSNs, hire dates, etc., or are there private financial records relating to an upcoming acquisition that your competitors shouldn’t know about? All of this and more will be used by the criminals to extort money from the company. This means that even if you have a rock solid backup of all your data, you still need to pay to prevent your data from being released to the public and/or press.
While this post just scratches the surface, it does cover the highlights on why I push for stronger passwords (longer is better than higher complexity https://xkpasswd.net), keeping non-company owned and unmanaged devices off internal networks, multiple factor authentication on everything, never sharing your passwords with anyone, running regular security related exercises, using unique passwords on everything, and using a reputable password manager to keep track of all your passwords.
submitted by tigerguppy126 to sysadmin [link] [comments]

[OWL WATCH] Waiting for "IOTA TIME" 20; Hans's re-defined directions for DLT

Disclaimer: This is my editing, so there could be some misunderstandings...
wellwho오늘 오후 4:50
u/Ben Royce****how far is society2 from having something clickable powered by IOTA?
Ben Royce오늘 오후 4:51
demo of basic tech late sep/ early oct. MVP early 2021
Colored coins are the most misunderstood upcoming feature of the IOTA protocol. A lot of people see them just as a competitor to ERC-20 tokens on ETH and therefore a way of tokenizing things on IOTA, but they are much more important because they enable "consensus on data".
All this stuff already works on neblio but decentralized and scaling to 3500 tps
Neblio has 8 mb blocks with 30 seconds blocktime. This is a throughput of 8 mb / 30 seconds = 267 kb per second. Transactions are 401+ bytes which means that throughput is 267 kb / 401 bytes = 665 TPS. IOTA is faster, feeless and will get even faster with the next update ...
Which DLT would be more secure? One that is collaboratively validated by the economic actors of the world (coporations, companies, foundations, states, people) or one that is validated by an anonymous group of wealthy crypto holders?
The problem with current DLTs is that we use protection mechanisms like Proof of Work and Proof of Stake that are inherently hard to shard. The more shards you have, the more you have to distribute your hashing power and your stake and the less secure the system becomes.
Real world identities (i.e. all the big economic actors) however could shard into as many shards as necessary without making the system less secure. Todays DLTs waste trust in the same way as PoW wastes energy.
Is a secure money worth anything if you can't trust the economic actors that you would buy stuff from? If you buy a car from Volkswagen and they just beat you up and throw you out of the shop after you payed then a secure money won't be useful either :P
**I believe that if you want to make DLT work and be successful then we need to ultimately incorporate things like trust in entities into the technology.**Examples likes wirecard show that trusting a single company is problematic but trusting the economy as a whole should be at ...
**... least as secure as todays DLTs.**And as soon as you add sharding it will be orders of magnitude more secure. DLT has failed to deliver because people have tried to build a system in vacuum that completely ignores things that already exist and that you can leverage on.
Blockchain is a bit like people sitting in a room, trying to communicate through BINGO sheets. While they talk, they write down some of the things that have been said and as soon as one screams BINGO! he hands around his sheet to inform everybody about what has been said.
If you think that this is the most efficient form of communication for people sitting in the same room and the answer to scalability is to make bigger BINGO sheets or to allow people to solve the puzzle faster then you will most probably never understand what IOTA is working on.
**Blockchain does not work with too many equally weighted validators.****If 400 validators produce a validating statement (block) at the same time then only one can survive as part of a longest chain.**IOTA is all about collaborative validation.
**Another problem of blockchain is that every transaction gets sent twice through the network. Once from the nodes to the miners and a 2nd time from the miners as part of a block.**Blockchain will therefore always only be able to use 50% of the network throughput.
And****the last problem is that you can not arbitrarily decrease the time between blocks as it breaks down if the time between blocks gets smaller than the average network delay. The idle time between blocks is precious time that could be used for processing transactions.
I am not talking about a system with a fixed number of validators but one that is completely open and permissionless where any new company can just spin up a node and take part in the network.
Proof of Work and Proof of Stake are both centralizing sybil-protection mechanism. I don't think that Satoshi wanted 14 mining pools to run the network.
And "economic clustering" was always the "end game" of IOTA.
**Using Proof of Stake is not trustless. Proof of Stake means you trust the richest people and hope that they approve your transactions. The rich are getting richer (through your fees) and you are getting more and more dependant on them.**Is that your vision of the future?

Please read again exactly what I wrote. I have not spoken of introducing governance by large companies, nor have I said that IOTA should be permissioned. We aim for a network with millions or even billions of nodes.

That can't work at all with a permissioned ledger - who should then drop off all these devices or authorize them to participate in the network? My key message was the following: Proof of Work and Proof of Stake will always be if you split them up via sharding ...

... less secure because you simply need fewer coins or less hash power to have the majority of the votes in a shard. This is not the case with trust in society and the economy. When all companies in the world jointly secure a DLT ...

... then these companies could install any number of servers in any number of shards without compromising security, because "trust" does not become less just because they operate several servers. First of all, that is a fact and nothing else.

Proof of Work and Proof of Stake are contrary to the assumption of many not "trustless" but follow the maxim: "In the greed of miners we trust!" The basic assumption that the miners do not destroy the system that generates income for them is fundamental here for the ...

... security of every DLT. I think a similar assumption would still be correct for the economy as a whole: The companies of the world (and not just the big ones) would not destroy the system with which their customers pay them. In this respect, a system would be ...

... which is validated by society and the economy as a whole probably just as "safely" as a system which is validated by a few anonymous miners. Why a small elite of miners should be better validators than any human and ...

... To be honest, companies in this world do not open up to me. As already written in my other thread, safe money does not bring you anything if you have to assume that Volkswagen will beat you up and throw you out of the store after you ...

... paid for a car. The thoughts I discussed say nothing about the immediate future of IOTA (we use for Coordicide mana) but rather speak of a world where DLT has already become an integral part of our lives and we ...

... a corresponding number of companies, non-profit organizations and people have used DLT and where such a system could be implemented. The point here is not to create a governance solution that in any way influences the development of technology ...

... or have to give nodes their OK first, but about developing a system that enables people to freely choose the validators they trust. For example, you can also declare your grandma to be a validator when you install your node or your ...

... local supermarket. Economic relationships in the real world usually form a close-knit network and it doesn't really matter who you follow as long as the majority is honest. I also don't understand your criticism of censorship, because something like that in IOTA ...

... is almost impossible. Each transaction confirms two other transactions which is growing exponentially. If someone wanted to ignore a transaction, he would have to ignore an exponential number of other transactions after a very short time. In contrast to blockchain ...

... validators in IOTA do not decide what is included in the ledger, but only decide which of several double spends should be confirmed. Honest transactions are confirmed simply by having other transactions reference them ...

... and the "validators" are not even asked. As for the "dust problem", this is indeed something that is a bigger problem for IOTA than for other DLTs because we have no fees, but it is also not an unsolvable problem. Bitcoin initially has a ...

Solved similar problem by declaring outputs with a minimum amount of 5430 satoshis as invalid ( github.com/Bitcoin/Bitcoi…). A similar solution where an address must contain a minimum amount is also conceivable for IOTA and we are discussing ...

... several possibilities (including compressing dust using cryptographic methods). Contrary to your assumption, checking such a minimum amount is not slow but just as fast as checking a normal transaction. And mine ...

... In my opinion this is no problem at all for IOTA's use case. The important thing is that you can send small amounts, but after IOTA is feeless it is also okay to expect the recipients to regularly send their payments on a ...

... merge address. The wallets already do this automatically (sweeping) and for machines it is no problem to automate this process. So far this was not a problem because the TPS were limited but with the increased TPS throughput of ...

... Chrysalis it becomes relevant and appropriate solutions are discussed and then implemented accordingly. I think that was the most important thing first and if you have further questions just write :)

And to be very clear! I really appreciate you and your questions and don't see this as an attack at all! People who see such questions as inappropriate criticism should really ask whether they are still objective. I have little time at the moment because ...

... my girlfriend is on tour and has to take care of our daughter, but as soon as she is back we can discuss these things in a video. I think that the concept of including the "real world" in the concepts of DLT is really exciting and ...

... that would certainly be exciting to discuss in a joint video. But again, that's more of a vision than a specific plan for the immediate future. This would not work with blockchain anyway but IOTA would be compatible so why not think about such things.

All good my big one :P But actually not that much has changed. There has always been the concept of "economic clustering" which is basically based on similar ideas. We are just now able to implement things like this for the first time.

Exactly. It would mean that addresses "cost" something but I would rather pay a few cents than fees for each transaction. And you can "take" this minimum amount with you every time you change to a new address.

All good my big one :P But actually not that much has changed. There has always been the concept of "economic clustering" which is basically based on similar ideas. We are just now able to implement things like this for the first time.

Relax오늘 오전 1:17
Btw. Hans (sorry for interrupting this convo) but what make people say that IOTA is going the permissioned way because of your latest tweets? I don't get why some people are now forecasting that... Is it because of missing specs or do they just don't get the whole idea?

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:20
its bullshit u/Relaxan identity based system would still be open and permissionless where everybody can choose the actors that they deem trustworthy themselves but thats anyway just sth that would be applicable with more adoption
[오전 1:20]
for now we use mana as a predecessor to an actual reputation system

Sissors오늘 오전 1:31
If everybody has to choose actors they deem trustworthy, is it still permissionless? Probably will become a bit a semantic discussion, but still

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:34
Of course its permissionless you can follow your grandma if you want to :p

Sissors오늘 오전 1:36
Well sure you can, but you will need to follow something which has a majority of the voting power in the network. Nice that you follow your grandma, but if others dont, her opinion (or well her nodes opinion) is completely irrelevant

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:37
You would ideally follow the people that are trustworthy rather than your local drug dealers yeah

Sissors오늘 오전 1:38
And tbh, sure if you do it like that is easy. If you just make the users responsible for only connection to trustworthy nodes

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:38
And if your grandma follows her supermarket and some other people she deems trustworthy then thats fine as well
[오전 1:38]
+ you dont have just 1 actor that you follow

Sissors오늘 오전 1:38
No, you got a large list, since yo uwant to follow those which actually matter. So you jsut download a standard list from the internet

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:39
You can do that
[오전 1:39]
Is bitcoin permissionless? Should we both try to become miners?
[오전 1:41]
I mean miners that actually matter and not find a block every 10 trillion years 📷
[오전 1:42]
If you would want to become a validator then you would need to build up trust among other people - but anybody can still run a node and issue transactions unlike in hashgraph where you are not able to run your own nodes(수정됨)
[오전 1:48]
Proof of Stake is also not trustless - it just has a builtin mechanism that downloads the trusted people from the blockchain itself (the richest dudes)

Sissors오늘 오전 1:52
I think most agree it would be perfect if every person had one vote. Which is pr oblematic to implement of course. But I really wonder if the solution is to just let users decide who to trust. At the very least I expect a quite centralized network

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:53
of course even a trust based system would to a certain degree be centralized as not every person is equally trustworthy as for example a big cooperation
[오전 1:53]
but I think its gonna be less centralized than PoS or PoW
[오전 1:53]
but anyway its sth for "after coordicide"
[오전 1:54]
there are not enough trusted entities that are using DLT, yet to make such a system work reasonably well
[오전 1:54]
I think the reason why blockchain has not really started to look into these kind of concepts is because blockchain doesnt work with too many equally weighted validators
[오전 1:56]
I believe that DLT is only going to take over the world if it is actually "better" than existing systems and with better I mean cheaper, more secure and faster and PoS and PoW will have a very hard time to deliver that
[오전 1:56]
especially if you consider that its not only going to settle value transfers

Relax오늘 오전 1:57
I like this clear statements, it makes it really clear that DLT is still in its infancy

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:57
currently bank transfers are order of magnitude cheaper than BTC or ETH transactions

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:57
and we you think that people will adopt it just because its crypto then I think we are mistaken
[오전 1:57]
The tech needs to actually solve a problem
[오전 1:57]
and tbh. currently people use PayPal and other companies to settle their payments
[오전 1:58]
having a group of the top 500 companies run such a service together is already much better(수정됨)
[오전 1:58]
especially if its fast and feeless
[오전 2:02]
and the more people use it, the more decentralized it actually becomes
[오전 2:02]
because you have more trustworthy entities to choose of

Evaldas [IF]오늘 오전 2:08
"in the greed of miners we trust"

submitted by btlkhs to Iota [link] [comments]

Complying to a scammer, but not quite the way he wanted me to!

(To any moderator, I have anonymitised everything and made sure that it is according to rules of this subreddit,I wanna share this story so please let me know should further editing be required ! please Consider this person has likely stolen thousands and thousands of innocent people so i wanna spread awareness!
So the other day (actually my birthday too :)) I found this account on IG, I saved him as Scumm in my phone but he claims to be an "Alex", hit him up if you wanna get rich it is a fiest. So i hit him up and be like:
[19:00, 23/09/2020] OP: Hello sir I am Tom, I read a lot of things about Forex and crypto and your page in particular and just inherited some money from a relative , I heard so many good things I thought you might help me invest some of that money so it is not lost?
[19:08, 23/09/2020] Scumm: Ok
[19:08, 23/09/2020] Scumm: Welcome
[19:08, 23/09/2020] Scumm: Where are you from?
[19:09, 23/09/2020] OP: Germany
[19:09, 23/09/2020] Scumm: Ok Tom
[19:09, 23/09/2020] Scumm: We specialise on Stock And cryptocurrency trading, with the sole aim of making awesome profit from the rapid changes in price of the assets and currencies we trade. We are group of professional market analysts that studies the market picking the best assets to invest on, and as well the best cryptocurrency pairs to trade on. We have mastered risk management and as well best possible strategy to maximize our clients Profits
[19:10, 23/09/2020] Scumm: With the minimum investment of 1 BTC you can make 3.8BTC in a month
[19:11, 23/09/2020] Scumm: If I may ask do you have a Bitcoin Wallet address?
Now you can see how this is a scam and no one should ever follow such ludicrous claims! 380% in a month, if sb knew how, they wouldnt share that ,not in this world, not in this century... So i amlike:
[19:15, 23/09/2020] OP: I'd be willing to invest even 2 bitcoin but I would need your company credentials and iban to send money to
[19:19, 23/09/2020] Scumm: I can only provide you a US account to make payment
[19:19, 23/09/2020] Scumm: This if gonna be possible
[19:19, 23/09/2020] OP: Hmm I'll see maybe that works
[19:19, 23/09/2020] OP: Easiest would be IBAN
[19:19, 23/09/2020] OP: Your company does not have any European bank accounts?
[19:19, 23/09/2020] Scumm: IBAN
[19:20, 23/09/2020] Scumm: Mate I always follow procedures so I have not accept Transfer for deposit
[19:20, 23/09/2020] Scumm: But I will see to that ok
You see where this is going I want some info and make him believe he or one of his mules at least gets sweet sweet cash. NOT SO FAST
[20:49, 23/09/2020] Scumm: I’m waiting on my Colleague to forward details to me now
[20:49, 23/09/2020] Scumm: Ok so you are not sending today?
[20:49, 23/09/2020] OP: Thank u so much
[20:49, 23/09/2020] OP: I can try but I have to call bank
[20:49, 23/09/2020] OP: For over 1000
[20:50, 23/09/2020] Scumm: Ok ok mate
[20:50, 23/09/2020] Scumm: Good
[21:08, 23/09/2020] Scumm: XXXXXX XXXXXXXX
XXX Bank
Account number: 8XXXXX0
Sort code: XXXX
[21:08, 23/09/2020] Scumm: Are you there Mate?
[22:43, 23/09/2020] OP: Yes hi thank u so much
[22:43, 23/09/2020] OP: Let me chdck
[22:46, 23/09/2020] Scumm: Ok mate
[22:53, 23/09/2020] Scumm: Are you trying to send it now mate?
Spinning it furtherly: I just tell some yada yada about how it takes time and a signature since its such a large sum!
[11:46, 24/09/2020] OP: Do you have license
[11:46, 24/09/2020] Scumm: 25BTC too small for even my students 😂 /\SURE buddy! */*
[11:46, 24/09/2020] OP: NASAA 67?
[11:47, 24/09/2020] OP: For financial advisor
[11:50, 24/09/2020] OP: This
[11:50, 24/09/2020] OP: Sorry was upside down
[11:50, 24/09/2020] OP: ?
[11:51, 24/09/2020] Scumm: I’m an independent expert trader and portfolio management in crypto market
[11:52, 24/09/2020] Scumm: License only met to give out from head of Admin
[11:52, 24/09/2020] OP: Ah kk
[11:52, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Yes mate
[11:52, 24/09/2020] OP: But normally 67 and 68 is required
[11:52, 24/09/2020] OP: For normal managers?
[11:53, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Yes
[11:55, 24/09/2020] Scumm: have no worries mate
[11:55, 24/09/2020] Scumm: 100%
Now this is quite interesting NASAA 65 and 66 are licenses needed to be an account manager in the US so if he was he should know that i just made up 67 and 68!
[19:20, 24/09/2020] OP: Ill makethe first payment asap, but i cant make my bank go faster sorry
[19:21, 24/09/2020] OP: howeverone thing:
[19:21, 24/09/2020] OP: most of the moneyigotis still in USD isit possible u said invest and send to USbank too?
[19:21, 24/09/2020] OP: for 20kUSD and above
[19:22, 24/09/2020] OP: its hard for me topurhcase that much bitcoin on my own right now
[19:22, 24/09/2020] OP: but i see that i can trust you!
[19:22, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Mate ASAP you said you make payment today and you didn’t so I don’t know if you even sure about this yet
[19:23, 24/09/2020] Scumm: I don’t get you please
[19:23, 24/09/2020] Scumm: You mean you want your profit sent to a US bank?
[19:24, 24/09/2020] Scumm: You have no worries about that mate
[19:24, 24/09/2020] OP: I am
[19:24, 24/09/2020] OP: I signed the paper mate I am so happy
[19:24, 24/09/2020] OP: That's all they need I told u
[19:24, 24/09/2020] OP: To make payments international so large
[19:24, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Yeah you said that mate
[19:24, 24/09/2020] OP: I am beeing honest as well
[19:24, 24/09/2020] OP: So I sent it back by post Today
[19:24, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Ok mate
[19:25, 24/09/2020] OP: But I am not at my banks city so post takes 1-2 days and then they can release
[19:25, 24/09/2020] OP: Sorry to keep u waiting
[19:25, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Ok mate
[19:25, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Oh I see
[19:25, 24/09/2020] OP: No what I meant: if I wanna start with more can j invest 20k USD too? I know u usually don't do and j ask very weird questions but I meant
[19:25, 24/09/2020] OP: I am not always home have pc etc but I am in contact with u and my bank
[19:26, 24/09/2020] OP: So is it possible? Otherwise I have to convert USD to euro or GDP
[19:26, 24/09/2020] OP: 40k is sill in USD I have
[19:26, 24/09/2020] OP: That would be even crazier profits 🤑🤑🤑
[19:27, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Now I’m understanding
SO NOW HE IS UNDERSTANDING good good, and almost ready to screw one of his US mules too:
[21:00, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Ok mate
[21:04, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Can they send from US to the IBAN account?
[21:05, 24/09/2020] OGOP: Hm I don't know it's a bit tricky BC I'm no us citizen
[21:05, 24/09/2020] OGOP: I have one iban authorised to cash all out in euro
[21:05, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Ok ok mate
[21:06, 24/09/2020] OP: And US I think right now
[21:06, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Ok mate please hold
[21:10, 24/09/2020] OP Sure man
[21:11, 24/09/2020] OP: Uff such a huge step for me
[21:11, 24/09/2020] OP: I hope u do it real good 🤑🤑🤑
[21:12, 24/09/2020] OP Do you have customers in US too?
[21:12, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Bank name: Teachers Federal Credit Union
Bank address: XXXXXXX
Account holder: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Account Holders address:
Routing Number: XXXXXXX
Account number:XXXXXXXXXX
[21:12, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Sure mate //SO HE CLAIMS TO HAVE SCAMMED US CITIZENS!
[21:12, 24/09/2020] OP: Nice
[21:12, 24/09/2020] Scumm: Please make sure you send confirmation immediately
So finally I did not send him payment proof,I sent him a spoofed link to fetch his IP with a link to "payment proof" and got his IP and location (cant showr a real link bc it has my IP in it...) And was like " oh hey how is the whether in Irele, Nigeria??"
Needless to say he blocked me straight away after I called him a disgraceful sc*m but hey..... I still called the corresponding banks, the UK Fraud Action and the FBI just to make sure and shared all of the details without any editting :)
Have fun "mate"! If they can freeze only 1 $ and return it to a likely victim, I am more then happy
Cheers dont get scammed!
TL/DR: Scammed a Nigerian scammer into sending me real accounts, names and details in UK and US (mules) to forward to the police and may or may not have donated 500 to charity.
submitted by elyminas to scambait [link] [comments]

Learning Resources?

I have been watching cryptocurrencies for a few years now, had a little in bitcoin a while back and follow a few alt coins, but still feel there's a lot i dont understand about how they work, particularly with DeFi and newer things like yearn.finance. Are there any good courses on YouTube or somewhere that teaches how these systems work? I need help, but every time I look it up on YouTube I just find those bullshit investing videos and get-rich-quick schemes. I'm looking for something more like a class.
submitted by infiniteheaven444 to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

A criticism of the article "Six monetarist errors: why emission won't feed inflation"

(be gentle, it's my first RI attempt, :P; I hope I can make justice to the subject, this is my layman understanding of many macro subjects which may be flawed...I hope you can illuminate me if I have fallen short of a good RI)
So, today a heterodox leaning Argentinian newspaper, Ambito Financiero, published an article criticizing monetarism called "Six monetarist errors: why emission won't feed inflation". I find it doesn't properly address monetarism, confuses it with other "economic schools" for whatever the term is worth today and it may be misleading, so I was inspired to write a refutation and share it with all of you.
In some ways criticizing monetarism is more of a historical discussion given the mainstream has changed since then. Stuff like New Keynesian models are the bleeding edge, not Milton Friedman style monetarism. It's more of a symptom that Argentinian political culture is kind of stuck in the 70s on economics that this things keep being discussed.
Before getting to the meat of the argument, it's good to have in mind some common definitions about money supply measures (specifically, MB, M1 and M2). These definitions apply to US but one can find analogous stuff for other countries.
Argentina, for the lack of access to credit given its economic mismanagement and a government income decrease because of the recession, is monetizing deficits way more than before (like half of the budget, apparently, it's money financed) yet we have seen some disinflation (worth mentioning there are widespread price freezes since a few months ago). The author reasons that monetary phenomena cannot explain inflation properly and that other explanations are needed and condemns monetarism. Here are the six points he makes:
1.Is it a mechanical rule?
This way, we can ask by symmetry: if a certainty exists that when emission increases, inflation increases, the reverse should happen when emission becomes negative, obtaining negative inflation. Nonetheless, we know this happens: prices have an easier time increasing and a lot of rigidity decreasing. So the identity between emission and inflation is not like that, deflation almost never exists and the price movement rhythm cannot be controlled remotely only with money quantity. There is no mechanical relationship between one thing and the other.
First, the low hanging fruit: deflation is not that uncommon, for those of you that live in US and Europe it should be obvious given the difficulties central banks had to achieve their targets, but even Argentina has seen deflation during its depression 20 years ago.
Second, we have to be careful with what we mean by emission. A statement of quantity theory of money (extracted from "Money Growth and Inflation: How Long is the Long-Run?") would say:
Inflation occurs when the average level of prices increases. Individual price increases in and of themselves do not equal inflation, but an overall pattern of price increases does. The price level observed in the economy is that which leads the quantity of money supplied to equal the quantity of money demanded. The quantity of money supplied is largely controlled by the [central bank]. When the supply of money increases or decreases, the price level must adjust to equate the quantity of money demanded throughout the economy with the quantity of money supplied. The quantity of money demanded depends not only on the price level but also on the level of real income, as measured by real gross domestic product (GDP), and a variety of other factors including the level of interest rates and technological advances such as the invention of automated teller machines. Money demand is widely thought to increase roughly proportionally with the price level and with real income. That is, if prices go up by 10 percent, or if real income increases by 10 percent, empirical evidence suggests people want to hold 10 percent more money. When the money supply grows faster than the money demand associated with rising real incomes and other factors, the price level must rise to equate supply and demand. That is, inflation occurs. This situation is often referred to as too many dollars chasing too few goods. Note that this theory does not predict that any money-supply growth will lead to inflation—only that part of money supply growth that exceeds the increase in money demand associated with rising real GDP (holding the other factors constant).
So it's not mere emission, but money supply growing faster than money demand which we should consider. So negative emission is not necessary condition for deflation in this theory.
It's worth mentioning that the relationship with prices is observed for a broad measure of money (M2) and after a lag. From the same source of this excerpt one can observe in Fig. 3a the correlation between inflation and money growth for US becomes stronger the longer data is averaged. Price rigidities don't have to change this long term relationship per se.
But what about causality and Argentina? This neat paper shows regressions in two historical periods: 1976-1989 and 1991-2001. The same relationship between M2 and inflation is observed, stronger in the first, highly inflationary period and weaker in the second, more stable, period. The regressions a 1-1 relationship in the high inflation period but deviates a bit in the low inflation period (yet the relationship is still there). Granger causality, as interpreted in the paper, shows prices caused money growth in the high inflation period (arguably because spending was monetized) while the reverse was true for the more stable period.
So one can argue that there is a mechanical relationship, albeit one that is more complicated than simple QTOM theory. The relationship is complicated too for low inflation economies, it gets more relevant the higher inflation is.
Another point the author makes is that liquidity trap is often ignored. I'll ignore the fact that you need specific conditions for the liquidity trap to be relevant to Argentina and address the point. Worth noting that while market monetarists (not exactly old fashioned monetarists) prefer alternative explanations for monetary policy with very low interest rates, this phenomena has a good monetary basis, as explained by Krugman in his famous japanese liquidity trap paper and his NYT blog (See this and this for some relevant articles). The simplified version is that while inflation may follow M2 growth with all the qualifiers needed, central banks may find difficulties targeting inflation when interest rates are low and agents are used to credible inflation targets. Central banks can change MB, not M2 and in normal times is good enough, but at those times M2 is out of control and "credibly irresponsible" policies are needed to return to normal (a more detailed explanation can be found in that paper I just linked, go for it if you are still curious).
It's not like monetary policy is not good, it's that central banks have to do very unconventional stuff to achieve in a low interest rate environment. It's still an open problem but given symmetric inflation targeting policies are becoming more popular I'm optimistic.
2 - Has inflation one or many causes?
In Argentina we know that the main determinant of inflation is dollar price increases. On that, economic concentration of key markets, utility price adjustments, fuel prices, distributive struggles, external commodity values, expectatives, productive disequilibrium, world interest rates, the economic cycle, stationality and external sector restrictions act on it too.
Let's see a simple example: during Macri's government since mid 2017 to 2019 emission was practically null, but when in 2018 the dollar value doubled, inflation doubled too (it went from 24% to 48% in 2018) and it went up again a year later. We see here that the empirical validity of monetarist theory was absent.
For the first paragraph, one could try to run econometric tests for all those variables, at least from my layman perspective. But given that it doesn't pass the smell test (has any country used that in its favor ignoring monetary policy? Also, I have shown there is at least some evidence for the money-price relationship before), I'll try to address what happened in Macri's government and if monetarism (or at least some reasonable extension of it) cannot account for it.
For a complete description of macroeconomic policy on that period, Sturzenegger account is a good one (even if a bit unreliable given he was the central banker for that government and he is considered to have been a failure). The short version is that central banks uses bonds to manage monetary policy and absorb money; given the history of defaults for the country, the Argentinian Central Bank (BCRA) uses its own peso denominated bonds instead of using treasury bonds. At that time period, the BCRA still financed the treasury but the amount got reduced. Also, it emitted pesos to buy dollar reserves, then sterilized them, maybe risking credibility further.
Near the end of 2017 it was evident the government had limited appetite for budget cuts, it had kind of abandoned its inflation target regime and the classic problem of fiscal dominance emerged, as it's shown in the classic "Unpleasant monetarist arithmetic" paper by Wallace and Sargent. Monetary policy gets less effective when the real value of bonds falls, and raising interest rates may be counterproductive in that environment. Rational expectations are needed to complement QTOM.
So, given that Argentina promised to go nowhere with reform, it was expected that money financing would increase at some point in the future and BCRA bonds were dumped in 2018 and 2019 as their value was perceived to have decreased, and so peso demand decreased. It's not that the dollar value increased and inflation followed, but instead that peso demand fell suddenly!
The IMF deal asked for MB growth to be null or almost null but that doesn't say a lot about M2 (which it's the relevant variable here). Without credible policies, the peso demand keeps falling because bonds are dumped even more (see 2019 for a hilariously brutal example of that).
It's not emission per se, but rather that it doesn't adjust properly to peso demand (which is falling). That doesn't mean increasing interest rates is enough to achieve it, following Wallace and Sargent model.
This is less a strict proof that a monetary phenomenon is involved and more stating that the author hasn't shown any problem with that, there are reasonable models for this situation. It doesn't look like an clear empirical failure to me yet.
3 - Of what we are talking about when we talk about emission?
The author mentions many money measures (M0, M1, M2) but it doesn't address it meaningfully as I tried to do above. It feels more like a rhetorical device because there is no point here except "this stuff exists".
Also, it's worth pointing that there are actual criticisms to make to Friedman on those grounds. He failed to forecast US inflation at some points when he switched to M1 instead of using M2, although he later reverted that. Monetarism kind of "failed" there (it also "failed" in the sense that modern central banks don't use money, but instead interest rates as their main tool; "failed" because despite being outdated, it was influential to modern central banking). This is often brought to this kind of discussions like if economics hasn't moved beyond that. For an account of Friedman thoughts on monetary policies and his failures, see this.
4 - Why do many countries print and inflation doesn't increase there?
There is a mention about the japanese situation in the 90s (the liquidity trap) which I have addressed.
The author mentions that many countries "printed" like crazy during the pandemic, and he says:
Monetarism apologists answer, when confronted with those grave empirical problems that happen in "serious countries", that the population "trusts" their monetary authorities, even increasing the money demand in those place despite the emission. Curious, though, it's an appeal to "trust" implying that the relationship between emission and inflation is not objective, but subjective and cultural: an appreciation that abandons mechanicism and the basic certainty of monetarism, because evaluations and diagnostics, many times ideologic, contextual or historical intervene..
That's just a restatement of applying rational expectations to central bank operations. I don't see a problem with that. Rational expectations is not magic, it's an assessment of future earnings by economic actors. Humans may not 100% rational but central banking somehow works on many countries. You cannot just say that people are ideologues and let it at that. What's your model?
Worth noting the author shills for bitcoin a bit in this section, for more cringe.
5 - Are we talking of a physical science or a social science?
Again, a vague mention of rational expectations ("populists and pro market politicians could do the same policies with different results because of how agents respond ideologically and expectatives") without handling the subject meaningfully. It criticizes universal macroeconomic rules that apply everywhere (this is often used to dismiss evidence from other countries uncritically more than as a meaningful point).
6 - How limits work?
The last question to monetarism allows to recognize it something: effectively we can think on a type of vinculation between emission and inflation in extreme conditions. That means, with no monetary rule, no government has the need of taxes but instead can emit and spend all it needs without consequence. We know it's not like that: no government can print infinitely without undesirable effects.
Ok, good disclaimer, but given what he wrote before, what's the mechanism which causes money printing to be inflationary at some point? It was rejected before but now it seems that it exists. What was even the point of the article?
Now, the problem is thinking monetarism on its extremes: without emission we have inflation sometimes, on others we have no inflation with emission, we know that if we have negative emission that doesn't guarantees us negative inflation, but that if emission is radically uncontrolled there will economic effects.
As I wrote above, that's not what monetarism (even on it's simpler form) says, nor a consequence of it. You can see some deviations in low inflation environment but it's not really Argentina's current situation.
Let's add other problems: the elastic question between money and prices is not evident. Neither is time lags in which can work or be neutral. So the question is the limit cases for monetarism which has some reason but some difficulty in explaining them: by which and it what moments rules work and in which it doesn't.
I find the time lag thing to be a red herring. You can observe empirically and not having a proper short/middle run model doesn't invalidate QTOM in the long run. While it may be that increasing interest rates or freezing MB is not effective, that's less a problem of the theory and more a problem of policy implementation.
I find that the article doesn't truly get monetarism to begin with (see the points it makes about emission and money demand), neither how it's implemented in practice, nor seems to be aware of more modern theories that, while put money on the background, don't necessarily invalidate it (rational expectation ideas, and eventually New Keynesian stuff which addresses stuff like liquidity traps properly).
There are proper criticisms to be made to Friedman old ideas but he still was a relevant man in his time and the economic community has moved on to new, better theories that have some debt to it. I feel most economic discussion about monetarism in Argentina is a strawman of mainstream economics or an attack on Austrians more than genuine points ("monetarism" is used as a shorthand for those who think inflation is a monetary phenomenon more than referring to Friedman and his disciples per se).
submitted by Neronoah to badeconomics [link] [comments]

I need help please.

I'm not really a survivor. I haven't earned that title yet but before I explain this post involves
-Self harm -Sexual abuse (obviously) -Physical abuse -Emotional and Physiological pain, manipulation. -Dark web use/bitcoin yada yada -Underage porn/nudes etc.
If YOU or anyone else is sensitive to these things PLEASE click off and read something else.
I consider myself to be sexually abused, but not in the ways you might think. So of all places, I've come to the fire of the internet, reddit.
Okay, so I'm going to give relatively the shortest summary of my 3 years of going through this CURRENTLY as I can.
I am on another community app called Amino - Communties and chats. Where people can go into live chatrooms, create posts, do forums, polls etc.
It seems like a dream for any young teen like me who's been bullied most of her life and has no friends. It became my escape, but now, it seems more like a prison I can never get out of.
At the start I met this guy called darklord, (his username) I have his real name, his face, his address and phone number, but I will not be exposing him, because I still have respect for him, but he doesn't have a slither of it for me.
I met him in private messages after someone introduced me to him. And he tried to get me into a contract where I would be considered a "dog" and I won't have no rights as a person and I would be seen literal trash made to do whatever he said. I saw that in the contract, despite him trying to sugarcoat it. I declined it originally. I wanted nothing to do with this person.
Then later on down the line he got his other male friends to gang up on me, and threaten me with my IP address, and convinced me to believe that I was at a real threat, I was freshly 15, and had no knowledge about IP addresses, or anything of the sort, I was told I had to be in a contract otherwise they would leak all my personal information and one of the males threatening me lived in the same country and was going to hurt me.
I did as he said and signed the contract, and he made me do things I didn't want to do, and made me believe I didn't have a choice, SO I sent him nude images, keep in mind that this person is an adult, and knows what hes doing, he was passed the age of 18 at the time, but he never told me anything significant about him, at the time, so I didn't know his age.
I had no idea that he had saved the images at all. And later on down the line I ended breaking the contract because he would degrade me in public, along with several other members in the community, the community had over 2 million people and the most relevant people there would constantly ruin me, saving images of my face without my knowledge and degrading it behind my back and making others hate me.
Throughout this time I started to notice it wasnt just me in these harmful manipulative contracts. They're several young girls in these contracts. Some even younger than me. Doing the exact same things. And my self worth started to plummet, I was taken out of school during this time because my bullies got physical. Way too physical, and my mum was frightened for my health and safety. So with nothing to distract me from the abuse I was getting online, and it being the only place were I could talk to others, the saying pops in my head;
"Any attention is good attention"
In my case, any person who paid interest in me, was a good thing, because all my life I've never had freinds, and it made me a massive people pleaser and very vunderable.
So throughout that time, I kept trying to please those people who would laugh at me, tease me, and meeting people who had already had a tarnished view of me from other people's words. This really started messing with my self esteem, I didn't notice it at first, because of my bullying, I already had a bad self esteem.
Slowly, I started to lose my passions, everything that made me unique. Like art, food became tasteless, I joined to a new all girls grammar school after seven months of dealing with emotional abuse, school was pushed aside, I started to skip school, I developed a harsh flaring temper that could trigger any second even now towards my loved ones.
Girls at school started to hate me because I wouldn't work. I'd never want to wake up in the morning, I would stall for aslong as I possibly could, and constantly be late. The teachers and students made it a kinda reputation for me and I became the "bad egg" of the students. But they didnt understand, no one did. I started to skip school, my anxiety became worse, way worse, I'd sit down in classes and have break downs if work needed to be asked of me, cause I knew I haven't done it, that app became my life. All day at school I'd think about amino, constantly. You wouldn't catch me paying attention in lessons, all I did was sing, and write song lyrics. It used to make the teachers really mad, and I could understand that.
With no one understanding me, I kept to myself, with the app, like a drug.
I started to isolate myself, from my parents, everyone, I wouldn't tell anyone anything, and I still don't.
I spent most of my time in the behavioural support room, because I'd have anxiety break downs, and my feelings were constantly a rollercoaster. This time early this year was nearing to GCSE's and I didnt know what actually happened to me was abuse, so I chalked my sadness up to insecurities, and lack of motivation because my grades dropped so badly from being out of school, I'd missed a crucial whole year of content.
I kept trying to slow down time to figure out the real problem, but I couldn't, I was walking around trapped inside a dead body. I didn't feel alive. I put a mask to all the students that I didn't care. And it ultimately hurt me more. I couldn't slow down my GCSE's I couldn't start again, that ruined me for a long while.
On the app, I tried to stop darklord from hurting someone else who I thought had my back, but, darklord found out it was me that warned him. And, he exposed my nude pictures to everyone, My face was reduced to nothing from that day, everyone had it.
I feel violated, disgusting, and not human, I feel horrible, and the worst human alive, I've never known people to be so cruel, this cruel before.
If I I didn't feel dead before, I definitely felt dead now. The person I tried to protect laughed in my face, and strung me along for a while, and developed my bad temper, and took credit for it like it was a good thing, he was a narcissist and a deceitful liar.
I went off the app for a while, then created a youtube account. In the youtube account I felt ready enough to break my silence. In the video, I talked about my experience on the app, and told my story, and warned people about doing and falling for what I did.
One night, the video got over 200+ views. But not by random people, they were people from darklord's group, he had a massive group of people that had influence around the entire amino. Everyone knew them, so when they found it, they showed it in a screening room full of people, and ridiculed it for all to see, showing my face, making fun of me, and laughing at what happened to me like a funny joke.
That night I received so many hate comments, death threats, and other mean things, that ultimately made me fall into going back onto the app.
When I went back on it, I was ridiculed and looked down on as a literal dog, everyone hated me, people WHO I didn't even know treated me like absolute shit. I dont feel human anymore.
And now I found out that they
-Self underage nudes through bitcoin -Steal bitcoin accounts (dont know if that's considered Identity theft) -Gets others, minors to slit their wrists through threats -Have caused suicides. -And are possibly doing worse to others than me.
It kills me everyday knowing that I've gone through this and can never speak out to anyone because I feel so ashamed. I'm afraid, because I want to be a famous singer when I'm older, and I feel like I've ruined everything, and everything's my fault, and I was meant to be hated since I was born. My face aren't in the nudes, but that doesnt matter, I feel violated, and exposed and disgusting.
My soul and heart are in those pictures
And I can never get them back,
They're still doing this disgusting acts and getting away with it, even having all their information, I'm not in their country, so I cant do anything, plus I sont want my family knowing about this because I feel like a disgrace.
Please help me.
Thanks for reading.
submitted by Softservex0 to adultsurvivors [link] [comments]

Don’t Understand Bitcoin? This Man Will Mumble An ... People Still Don't Understand Bitcoin - YouTube AFTER ALL THESE YEARS WE STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND HIS BRAIN ... Bitcoin: How I Understand It i still dont understand - YouTube

Yet one commentator says he cannot understand how people are macro bearish on BTC due to the fundamentals of this nascent market. “Whether BTC trades sideways here and breaks higher or whether it has a deeper pullback below 8k, I still don’t understand how people can still be macro bearish.” Money Printing Can Boost Bitcoin If you still don’t understand bitcoin. Marc Gamet. Follow. Mar 16, 2018 · 7 min read. Trying to understand bitcoin and its underlying technology blockchain could be quite challenging. It is not ... I FEEL stupid posting this because, especially here on reddit it seems like people are really up on bitcoin, but even all the searching and reading I did including "an explanation to a 5 year old about what bitcoin is" and "if you believe in currency you can't understand bitcoin" and more I still don't get it beyond the basics. Still don’t understand blockchain? Let’s untangle the wires . This post was originally published on the World Economic Forum. In a not too distant future, everything from our banking, supply chains, law, accountancy, communications services – and even governments – will have been redefined. Dramatically more egalitarian means of raising capital for start-ups will have been implemented ... Since its inception in 2009, Bitcoin has been challenging for many people to understand. And while millions of people today may have a basic understanding of this relatively new form of currency, many people still don’t truly understand Bitcoin, how it works, or why it’s a revolutionary way to purchase products and services. In today’s […]

[index] [35423] [37518] [20251] [44161] [12802] [24345] [36754] [43728] [36492] [24811]

Don’t Understand Bitcoin? This Man Will Mumble An ...

Subscribe to ClickHole http://bit.ly/1qugIEe Like ClickHole on Facebook https://www.fb.com/clickhole Follow ClickHole on Twitter https://twitter.com/ClickHole Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. I try to understand what cryptocurrency miners are actually doing behind the scenes. Is it still worth mining in 2018? The price of Antminers have dropped significantly, but the profit margins are ... Thanks for watching! For donations: Bitcoin - 1CpGMM8Ag8gNYL3FffusVqEBUvHyYenTP8 Full Stream: https://youtu.be/WIkvUw229n4 🔥 ON-CHAIN WEBINAR (FREE): https://academy.ivanontech.com/webinar-interest 🔥 REGULATIONS WEBINAR (FREE): https://ac...