Reddit User Account Overview

/u/



https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/j4npx1/what_is_the_qfs_quantum_financial_system_some/

There's this strange movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE_qBX-PnRk some parts of it as text: > QFS provides pristine clean integrity in the movement of funds from central banking sources to destination accounts. > QFS will cover the new global network for the transfer of asset backed funds and can replace the US-centrally controlled SWIFT system. > A key benefit of QFS is to protect all parties from corruption, usury, and manipulation within the banking system and ensure banks are monitored and protected with regard to the agreed upon contract of the transfer fund process. > The Cross-Border Interbank Payment System (CIPS) fits into a constellation of components > Quantum Financial System (QFS) > CIPS > Artificial Intelligence (AI) > Virtual Private Network (VPN) > QFS 3D Smart Phone > Asset-Backed Digital Currencies > QFS is completely independent from the existing centralized system and makes all other transfer systems obsolete due to its advanced capabilities. > QFS is NOT crypto currency but instead it is asset-backed digital currency. > QFS reigns supreme in the photonic technology at 3.5 trillion frames per second. It replaces obsolete IP dynamic routing with true physical GPS authentication between sender and receiver routing while upholding 100% financial security and transparency of all currency holders. > Protocols will be instituted with QFS so that Artificial Intelligence will control the transfers and independently be allowed to control the global financial network unless the highest level of approval is given. The AI program will handle instant settlements in real time without delays! > The AI assigns a “digital” number to every fiat Dollar / Euro / Yen in every bank account all over the world. “Digital” numbers are monitored in real time. The physical GPS location between sender and receiver is set up to provide unbreakable security when ledgered with regard to who sent it, and what account received it. > The Sovereign Currency of the United States is “USN.” "Quantum", "AI", "3d Phone", "GPS authentication"... what the...

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 3, 2020 18:04:46

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/ieek7t/on_why_hayen_ottos_flipstarter_is_having_a_hard/

**The backdrop** The BCH community is in the process of taking its power back from a dictator who seems to have turned against them. I've been looking for an expression matching that process... it's not a coup d´état, because a coup is done by a small group of people. I found a [definition of "revolution" that fits](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/revolution): > 2 b: a fundamental change in political organization. especially: the overthrow or renunciation of one government or ruler and the substitution of another by the governed So I'll call it a **revolution** and the growing group of people doing it the **resistance**. While we're not necessarily "substituting nother ruler", but we sure overtrhowing the current one. Part of the expression of the power of those "governed" takes place in the form of **funding (or not funding) these flipstarter campaigns**, where people offer to build things for BCH. It's both expression of opinion (backed with wallets) and a channeling of energy into the projects the contributors think should be done. It also shows funding of infrastructure and development can be done using voluntary contributions, an alternative to the method proposed the current dictator that fuelled the revolution greatly. **Haydens position** Hayden invested a lot of effort into building and marketing the BCH brand. He had a huge impact on BCH adoption. Hayden stated his efforts will go into the chain that retains the Bitcoin Cash branding and equates that with the longest chain (which is probably correct). This could be said to be "taking a neutral position". He's planning for the outcome of the revolution failing. **Reaction to Haydens position** Hayden has been vigorously and very emotionally attacked by /u/NilacTheGrim (among others), who demands Hayden should take a clear position against the IFP and commit to supporting only the chain that doesn't feature any coinbase reward diversion. This is understandable: People like Hayden have a lot of reputation and them taking sides has great effect on others. So it would be extremely good for the revolution if Hayden sided with it and increase the chances of success. **Reaction of Potential contributors** contributors have been comparably slow in contributing to the flipstarter proposed by Hayden (make promo vids for BCH). NilacTheGrim is an outstanding member of the resistance. He does great work as a developer. Haydens fallout with him creates huge uncertainty and doubt around his flipstarter. I propose this is the top reason for the fundraiser not going as quickly as it could. **My own actions** Firstly I would like to call on Hayden to rethink his position and make use of the power he has to effect hugely positive change. Have no fear and join us! After thinking for a while and sleeping over it I still think it makes sense to fund Haydens projects. In the event of the revolution succeeding he will support our chain and in the event of the dictator managing to cling to power I can live with having thrown money the wrong way. I will wish the best of luck to BCHABC, sell most of my stash and take a break to rethink everything and focus on my family. I call on contributors that haven't already contributed and still have some powder left to rethink their stance. Hayden is an asset to BCH just like the great developers we have and we should pay him. I think we should be able to accept Haydens "neutral stance". I also think this is not the time to "play it safe" and plan for all outcomes. I propose to assume the revolution will be a success and thereby help make it one. I have doubled my contribution to https://flipstarter.bitcoinbch.com/ (from 11 to 22 BCH)

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on August 22, 2020 03:53:18

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/feb0mt/cashfusion_sale_75_off_for_a_limited_time_48/

I think fungibility is a very important property for cash to have. CashFusion is currently our best shot at ensuring it in BCH. Now, the great team behind CashFusion is in need of some funding to get the product out of the door in safe way and I think the community should have no issues funding it. Many donations (large and small) have already happened and I thank everyone who contributed and especially bitcoin.com for matching (hopefully) those donations once the goal of 50kUSD is reached. Now I want to get it done and reach the goal of 100,000 USD asap. That's why I decided to match anyones donation to the [Cash Fusion Fund setup by bitcoin.com](https://www.bitcoin.com/cashfusion-fund/) up to 21 BCH for a period of roughly 48 hours. In the future, thanks to projects like flipstarter, we'll probably be able to do this kind of thing in a more trustless manner, but for now you'll have to trust me to double your donations and all of us will have to trust bitcoin.com to double our contributions again. Terms: For any transaction (called "original tx") that matches the following criteria: * is a BCH (Bitcoin Cash) transaction * is confirmed in a block with timestamp between *Fri 06 Mar 2020 08:00:00 AM UTC* and *Sun 08 Mar 2020 08:00:00 AM UTC* * contains an OP_RETURN output with a text containing at least one of the words "match" or "double" (alternatively, if your wallet doesn't support OP_RETURN outputs, you can sign a message using one of the input addresses to your tx and post it here. The idea is to avoid people posting tx ids of contributions unrelated to this thread) * the tx id is posted in this thread * contains an output to qr2terz9gkfku27u6a3rgnrktdggdfq74yvzzjltrn I will * make a transaction containing an output to qr2terz9gkfku27u6a3rgnrktdggdfq74yvzzjltrn matching the amount of the output to the same address in the original tx (unless my 21 BCH cap is reached, then the amount might be less) * and probably post the tx_id here Additional restrictions and conditions: * total capped at 21 BCH for me (after having matched a total of 21 BCH, I'll stop) * I will make the transactions manually, so don't spam thousands of tx and expect me to double those * I will do this in batches and I don't have much time, so bear with me and dont panic if I don't act right away * these terms can be changed at any time at my discretion One last thing: **please don't tip me here any substantial amount. I wont pass on any tips. I will have to pay income tax on tips** So go ahead: **milk my wallet and get this thing funded!** EDITS / UPDATES: * Fri 06 Mar 2020 08:33:11 AM UTC * seems https://www.bitcoin.com/cashfusion-fund/ is still having problems, but I think I'll go ahead and post anyway. Nope, wont do it. People wont be able to verify the address, so that's going to suck. I'll postpone... * Fri 06 Mar 2020 09:15:59 AM UTC * https://www.bitcoin.com/cashfusion-fund loads very slowly. Gonna go ahead and post.

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on March 6, 2020 04:18:51

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7dj9xi/for_the_first_time_ever_i_have_to_agree_with/

Peter Schiff says in a [recent video he posted](https://youtu.be/Sd-1UM1Xd_I?t=1832) > [zerohedge article I read says] **"Bitcoin is digital Gold". This is the most ridiculous argument, because the people who are saying this: they're admitting Bitcoin is too slow and too expensive to use as a medium of exchange.** That is what I said in the beginning. Early on the people that were criticizing me for promoting gold over Bitcoin said: gold's no good, you can't use gold to buy a cup of coffee, but I can use Bitcoin to buy a cup of coffee. **So the reason that Bitcoin was going to be better than gold is because it was going to be so much easier to use your Bitcoin as a medium of exchange. That was the advantage that it had.** Well guess what: **He's exactly right!** (I didn't think I would have to agree with this guy for once) And this makes it plain to see that when you attack the medium of exchange function (by inreasing transactional friction, for example), you invite all the bad things Schiff has been criticizing about Bitcoin in the past: that it's essentially worth nothing, that it's a ponzi scheme and that people are going to lose a lot of money on it. (well, the last one is debatable because the price can be supported (at least for a while) by other things than true value. **By increasing the transactional friction beyond a certain point (that point is at a pretty low fee level, I might add) you essentially make these things be true. You change Bitcoin from being sound money to being a ponzi scheme. And hence in the end you destroy it.** What can we do?

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoin on November 17, 2017 02:41:17

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/7dj9r5/for_the_first_time_since_2011_i_have_to_agree/

Peter Schiff says in a [recent video he posted](https://youtu.be/Sd-1UM1Xd_I?t=1832) > [zerohedge article I read says] **"Bitcoin is digital Gold". This is the most ridiculous argument, because the people who are saying this: they're admitting Bitcoin is too slow and too expensive to use as a medium of exchange.** That is what I said in the beginning. Early on the people that were criticizing me for promoting gold over Bitcoin said: gold's no good, you can't use gold to buy a cup of coffee, but I can use Bitcoin to buy a cup of coffee. **So the reason that Bitcoin was going to be better than gold is because it was going to be so much easier to use your Bitcoin as a medium of exchange. That was the advantage that it had.** Well guess what: **He's exactly right!** (I didn't think I would have to agree with this guy for once) And this makes it plain to see that when you attack the medium of exchange function (by inreasing transactional friction, for example), you invite all the bad things Schiff has been criticizing about Bitcoin in the past: that it's essentially worth nothing, that it's a ponzi scheme and that people are going to lose a lot of money on it. (well, the last one is debatable because the price can be supported (at least for a while) by other things than true value. **By increasing the transactional friction beyond a certain point (that point is at a pretty low fee level, I might add) you essentially make these things be true. You change Bitcoin from being sound money to being a ponzi scheme. And hence in the end you destroy it.** What can we do?

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on November 17, 2017 02:40:11

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6qyn18/electroncash_notice_how_to_select_bitcoincash/

**EDIT2: 2.9.2 is out. [ElectronCash v2.9.2 help thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6rjo0u/electroncash_v292_help_thread/)** **EDIT: this notice is regarding Electron Cash version 2.9.0 (mac/linux/win)** **What's up?** There's a minor problem that occurs when ElectrumCash is started for the first time: **it will follow the wrong chain of the fork initially.** The client is still completely usable, but it requires user action to select the BitcoinCash chain after first startup. Safety of your coins is in no way affected by this problem. This will be corrected in future versions, but for now we offer this workaround (which is very easy to do) **What's the problem?** When ElectronCash doesn't find a local blockchain_headers file (which is the case on first start), it tries downloading it via http. We forgot to change that url so it still points to a file that contains the legacy chain headers. When that file is downloaded, ElectronCash will disconnect from the BitcoinCash chain servers because they don't match what the downloaded file says. It then switches to using legacy electrum servers and verifies the headers and now **follows the legacy chain**. **How to fix it?** Right after startup (or any time, really), go to the **Network Window** (it's reachable from the Tools menu or the Network indicator lamp on the lower right). On the Overview Tab of that window is a server list. If a chain split is detected (which should be the case), the servers are grouped by a branch id. **Select the correct branch** (the one that has servers electrum-abc.criptolayer.net and electroncash.cascharia.com) **by right-clicking on the correct branch id** (that long number with the @ sign in it) and select "Follow This Branch" in the popup menu that opens. **ElectonCash will then follow the BitcoinCash branch of the fork** and you're good to go. **What happens if I used it before to make transactions or to receive BCC?** Nothing bad: you probably saw yourself that the transaction you made was rejected by the network (BTC) because it is invalid due to the replay protection. If you gave out an address to receive BCC with, you will see the incoming transaction once you have switched to the correct branch and the client has finished synchronizing. **Hope this helps... have fun buying / selling and transacting ;-)** **EDIT: this notice is regarding Electron Cash version 2.9.0 (mac/linux/win)** **EDIT2: 2.9.2 is out. [ElectronCash v2.9.2 help thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6rjo0u/electroncash_v292_help_thread/)**

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on August 1, 2017 15:29:52

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/61ey92/bitcoin_on_sale_pay_for_one_get_one_for_free_and/

Yes, I *have* been arguing for one side in the great debate and *do* believe it's the better approach. And yes, I *do* suspect malice on the opposing side. And yes, it *is* tempting: "those <insert bad word> on the other side don't know shit and/or want to destroy bitcoin, I'll just sell them those stupid altcoins they want so badly and take their "true Bitcoins" from them in exchange." But when I'm honest with myself I have to admit: I simply don't *know* how things will turn out in the long run. Maybe the fears of the other side are expressions of real dangers that will bite us in the ass some day? Maybe my own fears are unfounded and I'm just being paranoid? Maybe I'm overlooking or misinterpreting / misunderstanding something (it *has* happened before). So summer of **last year I divested some of my BTC stash into altcoins**, but really not nearly enough to put a smile on my face with the Bitcoin dominance dropping below 70%. I'm a Bitcoiner and I don't want to make some altcoiners rich (Don't get me wrong, I love some alts for what they do and they play an important role in the crypto space (choice, see below), but I believe they should not replace BTC as the strongest value chain, otherwise we're diluting our combined money supply too heavily, which is something we initially set out to fix). So I have actually reversed this process and **am now exiting my altcoin positions slowly**. **Many fear the split** (using that negatively connotated term "hardfork"). **I don't**, and here's why: I think the cryptocurrency space is about choice: you voluntarily participate (and noone can exclude you, either. That's another thing cryptocurrency is *about*). **Noone is coerced into accepting something he doesn't like. Everyone can always split off at any point in the blockchain or start a fresh one.** And I think it's legitimate and there shouldn't be made any accusations if someone does that. And that's exactly what this (potential) split is: some want to go that way, some the other way, those ways are not compatible so they split. No big deal, really. It's a free world. But what about the name *Bitcoin / BTC* you ask? What about the confusion that will be created in the community, what about replay attacks? Well, we're a bunch of bright people and we'll figure it out. There's workable solutions to split coins (without anyone changing tx format, which is prohibitive because of wallet compatibility) between the two chains (tainting with inputs valid in only one chain seems a good one that can rather easily be supported by services such as exchanges and wallets). The potential confusion can be met with education (hey, reddit can be a good, welcoming place, remember?). I even think we can put a positive marketing spin on it (emphasizing *choice* is probably a good way). And the name? Well, I think we can't really be bothered to fight about the name, it's childish. Both chains are Bitcoin in their own way (I hope people (and especially service / exchanges) will come up with *unbiased naming schemes*, like the bitfinex' BCC / BCU naming). If one turns out dominant, people will just call that *Bitcoin*, that's how meaning is usually assigned to terms: by common usage. And that's fine with me. tldr: split not bad (it's about choice), keeping both coins, unbiased naming.

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoin on March 25, 2017 06:33:57

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/61ey6r/bitcoin_on_sale_pay_for_one_get_one_for_free_and/

Yes, I *have* been arguing for one side in the great debate and *do* believe it's the better approach. And yes, I *do* suspect malice on the opposing side. And yes, it *is* tempting: "those <insert bad word> on the other side don't know shit and/or want to destroy bitcoin, I'll just sell them those stupid altcoins they want so badly and take their "true Bitcoins" from them in exchange." But when I'm honest with myself I have to admit: I simply don't *know* how things will turn out in the long run. Maybe the fears of the other side are expressions of real dangers that will bite us in the ass some day? Maybe my own fears are unfounded and I'm just being paranoid? Maybe I'm overlooking or misinterpreting / misunderstanding something (it *has* happened before). So summer of **last year I divested some of my BTC stash into altcoins**, but really not nearly enough to put a smile on my face with the Bitcoin dominance dropping below 70%. I'm a Bitcoiner and I don't want to make some altcoiners rich (Don't get me wrong, I love some alts for what they do and they play an important role in the crypto space (choice, see below), but I believe they should not replace BTC as the strongest value chain, otherwise we're diluting our combined money supply too heavily, which is something we initially set out to fix). So I have actually reversed this process and **am now exiting my altcoin positions slowly**. **Many fear the split** (using that negatively connotated term "hardfork"). **I don't**, and here's why: I think the cryptocurrency space is about choice: you voluntarily participate (and noone can exclude you, either. That's another thing cryptocurrency is *about*). **Noone is coerced into accepting something he doesn't like. Everyone can always split off at any point in the blockchain or start a fresh one.** And I think it's legitimate and there shouldn't be made any accusations if someone does that. And that's exactly what this (potential) split is: some want to go that way, some the other way, those ways are not compatible so they split. No big deal, really. It's a free world. But what about the name *Bitcoin / BTC* you ask? What about the confusion that will be created in the community, what about replay attacks? Well, we're a bunch of bright people and we'll figure it out. There's workable solutions to split coins (without anyone changing tx format, which is prohibitive because of wallet compatibility) between the two chains (tainting with inputs valid in only one chain seems a good one that can rather easily be supported by services such as exchanges and wallets). The potential confusion can be met with education (hey, reddit can be a good, welcoming place, remember?). I even think we can put a positive marketing spin on it (emphasizing *choice* is probably a good way). And the name? Well, I think we can't really be bothered to fight about the name, it's childish. Both chains are Bitcoin in their own way (I hope people (and especially service / exchanges) will come up with *unbiased naming schemes*, like the bitfinex' BCC / BCU naming). If one turns out dominant, people will just call that *Bitcoin*, that's how meaning is usually assigned to terms: by common usage. And that's fine with me. tldr: split not bad (it's about choice), keeping both coins, unbiased naming.

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on March 25, 2017 06:33:14

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5vw6zu/the_attack_on_bitcoin_the_who_the_how_and_the_why/

Bitcoin has powerful enemies. Their goal is to remain in control of the monetary system. So that's the why and the who. Now for the how: **The Attack** (if you don't believe this attack scenario is in play, please just take this whole thing as a hypothetical thought experiment) Bitcoin is like gold. So we'll control it's price like we controlled the price of gold. Unfortunately Bitcoin is better in some ways than gold so we have to weaken it in those respects first. In order to suppress the price of Bitcoin and keep it marginalized we (the attackers of Bitcon and controllers of the monetary system)... * defend the blocksize limit (this is the "weakening" part) using any means necessary such as: * divide & conquer the community, saw mistrust and hate * segregate all efforts to lift or even remove the limit * establish some vehicle (like an ETF) * establish it to be the primary price finding (fixing?) mechanism for Bitcoin (this will work only if transactional friction is high enough on chain (capacity limit must remain in place), hence the first point) * use the established means available (HFT?, naked shorting?, loads of cheap fiat,...) to control/suppress the price on that ETF and by extension the price of Bitcoin * => Bitcoin remains small and is no threat to our control of the monetary system A good plan and it seems to be working exceptionally well so far. But! They made a mistake (hopefully). It's the ETF rules. When trying to clarify what would happen in case of a chain split, they say the ETF would choose the highest-work chain **48 hours** after the split occurred. This is a bit weird: what if one chain wins at first, but then the other one takes over for good? I'd say this is our chance! **The Defense** * let them establish the ETF. There will be loads of fiat flowing in, be sure to take some of it so we have some powder * minority-fork bitcoin to higher blocksize limit (or unlimited or whatever) into chain A (1 MB limit) and chain B (unlimited) * make sure chain A is mined harder for at least 48 hours after the split (maybe this can be done by using a difficulty adjustment (down) that kicks in on chain B after 48 hours), so the ETF selects chain A. To ensure this, it would be good to put economic pressure on chain B coins (sell them for chain A coins if you can bring yourself to do this) to incentivize miners to mine chain A. * unite behind chain B * chain A (tracked by ETF) will go down in flames * => chain B (Bitcoin) wins **Could it work?**

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on February 24, 2017 02:19:19

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/44fu6k/peter_todd_about_moving_complexity_from_mining_to/

Despite all the emotions regarding blocksize debate, I'm still trying to keep an open mind and I brought myself (after listening to a very enjoyable interview with /u/vbuterin) to listen to [some of what Peter Todd was saying at the ledgerlabs meeting](https://youtu.be/naKvYfYsBQo?t=3457) on Feb 3rd. (I admit I have developed a slight aversion to listening to him speak). (After all: if we stop listening and trying to understand each other, we're just being an easy target) Because it opened a new angle of view for me, I wanted to transcribe a part to share and discuss. Please excuse the numerous omissions. The audio quality, the fact that Todd isn't the clearest pronunciator at times, the fact that I'm not a native english speaker and that girl with a cough made it a little hard for me to understand everything (help appreciated, I numbered the omissions so people with better abilities can fill in the blanks if they feel the urge). /u/petertodd: > Most of my serious research efforts has been: how do we go an make useful applications that don't even need cooperation. And [1...] If we can make miners do less then we can have an environment where all the rules are implemented client-side, as in on you actual wallet or application - whatever it may be, it may not even be money after all. > And we use cryptographic proof to determine that was is happening follows the rules that we want to be followed. Now, I believe for sort of technical reasons I don't want to get into, but essentially that nearly all of these applications can be done without having miners involved to do anything other than go publish data in a certain order. > [2...] I think there are a lot of good practical reasons why I do not want to involve miners or at least why I want what miners do to be as simple as possible. And if all they do is burn a bunch of energy and put a bunch of data in a specified order and proove that the whole world has copied that data [3...] I would much rather have that, than have a system that has such a complexity that we need to worry about testing [looks at and waves hand towards /u/vbuterin, maybe evil grin]. I'd much rather have a system where all that complexity is something only my application needs to worry about and if your application needs some other big pile of complexity for your own reasons, I don't want to have to worry about that, that shouldn't be my problem. > And I kind of make an analogy between the telephone system and the internet. The telephone system's philosophy is: we have very smart routers in the middle and very dumb clients. Your phone does basically nothing except generate a few tones and have a few wires connected up to a speaker and microphone. It's a really dumb terminal and all the complexity is in the middle. > Changing that complexity then becomes very hard, because you've got to coordinate. Whereas with the internet, what's in the middle is very dumb: you have packets, you have a source and a destination and that's basically it. Everything past that is layers and layers that are interpreted by things other than the internet routers. > And yes, that means I have to have a remarkably advanced android phone with 4 processors and 4 gigabytes of RAM. But fortunately computing power is pretty cheap these days, when social power [4...] coordination between humans is as inefficient as it will always be. You know when we look to the bitcoin debates around how we're going to upgrade, how are we going to choose what the next version of the protocol should be. You know I don't want to have to deal with that. When you look at the internet, how many debates have there been around the lowest level of the IP packet layer? Well, [5...] two: one was the debate about defining it in the first place, IPv4, and one was the debate around upgrading to IPv6. Yeah, those were very contentious debates, but they were a heck of a lot easier than they could've been had we integrated HTTP into that layer itself. > So at least right now all the guys who care about web browsers can go in one room and argue and all the guys who care about email can go to another room and argue. I don't want those 2 rooms to be combined. Anyhow i think ethereum did the obvious thing in saying: if we are going to have that complexity, then let's at least encapsulate [7 ?] that into a virtual machine. But, well, my research efforts have been in going even further [8 ?] than that. I'm not going to say what they're doing is wrong, but [9...] is quite as extreme as necessary as what I would do. [10....] It goes on and Vitalik says some funny stuff but I have to stop here. (disclaimer: the fact that I'm posting this and thinking about it doesn't imply that I converted to being a small-blockist or blockstream or whatever proponent, I just found this a very interesting perspective and it might've changed my view on things at least a bit. I still run BitcoinClassic and see no reason to not fully support it at this point) **So what do you guys think?** Should we reduce miners function to timestamping and tamper-proofing and leave the consensus-verification to client software and consensus-agreeing to the relevant sets of interested humans? What would be the implications / dangers / chances? Are sidechains a way to implement such "layers" on top of Bitcoin? Is the telphone system vs. internet / OSI layer analogy applicable here? Is ethereum too complex? EDIT: added link to video at correct time

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on February 6, 2016 06:23:12

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2dqksb/electrum_trezor_one_happy_me/

I finally have a satisfactory setup for storing and using my bitcoins: electrum + trezor Here's why I'm so happy with this setup: **Ease of use** * I can access my coins from multiple clients (my trezor has the addresses) * I can name the trezor accounts. * Transaction/Address/~~Account~~ labels are automatically synced between my clients (encryptedly via central server http://labelectrum.herokuapp.com/) * I can easily manage multiple wallets with electrum. I can still use my "old classic" electrum-seed-based one and also access the wallets (different passphrases) managed by my trezor **Security** * The trezor doesn't give out the keys. No more fear of keyloggers / malware. **Privacy** * I can choose a trustworthy electrum server, or even run my own. * Coin control features of electrum (freeze address, prioritize address, send from address) fully work with trezor wallets. finally! Big thanks to the electrum developers for making a very nice trezor plugin and also for making the label sync (labelectrum) plugin! Also big thanks again to slush, stick, cor and the other guys and girls from satoshilabs for making trezor a reality! EDIT: disclaimer: you'll need to use [github version of electrum](https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum) for now. EDIT2: I think account labels are not synced by the labelectrum plugin as of now. Strikethrough applied. EDIT3: CAVEAT: don't send to multisig addresses using this setup installed before 2014/8/19. A bug was found (and fixed). Update trezor-plugin and maybe use the "show before broadcast" feature in electrum. If you update trezor plugin now, you'll be safe from that bug. With next trezor firmware update, you'll be safe (you need both firmware + plugin buggy to experience the problem)

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoin on August 16, 2014 14:17:12

http://i.imgur.com/GPxLT6J.png

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoin on February 27, 2014 01:38:07

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1tlle9/its_so_unfair_the_rich_get_richer/

**...until they don't.** The first part (title) is what I used to think. Taking a systematic view, I thought due to interest money must concentrate in the hands of a few given enough time... the rich get richer. I thought this was hugely unjust and I still do. **Except: it's not the case when sound money is used.** Why not? Well, because of risk. When you lend out money or invest it, there is always risk involved. Risk of total or partial loss. You can fuck up and lose money. With no "lender of last resort", you're screwed. Your money is irreplacably gone, no matter how too big to fail you are. **Then why *do* the rich get richer?** Because of the bad kind of money we use. It can be printed and it will be printed to bail out the rich in case they screw up with their "investments" (bets or gambles would be a better word). *They don't have to suffer the consequences of their actions* and that's neither the basis for a well-functioning economy nor the basis for a level playingfield. In addition, the way the money is injected into "the economy" (or not) leads to gross capital misallocations: all kinds of shit is done that wouldn't otherwise be done because it just doesn't make any sense and noone demands it. Also the function of saving is destroyed due to distorted interest rates. The price signals simply don't work efficiently. **...until they don't** Thanks to Bitcoin we (the people) now have a tool to make these parasites suffer the consequences of their actions in the future. All we have to do is use sound money, like gold, silver and of course crypto. This is the single most compelling reason for me to devote myself to making cryptocurrency a reality: a better world, more just towards the people and less exploitative towards mother earth. I know some find this romantic or unrealistic. I don't. We have a chance here, a big one. Using sound money solves so many problems in such an easy all-encompassing way it's a chance too good to let go of on grounds of cynicism, fear, lack of imagination or enviousness. **Let's not fuck this up!**

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoin on December 24, 2013 05:24:13

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1rd8lc/risto_pietilä_sss_a_sane_and_simple_bitcoin/

**Finish investor Risto Pietilä has a gem for us: [(SSS) - A Sane and Simple bitcoin Savings plan](https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345065.msg3697405#msg3697405)** here's the full text: **Introduction** **Bitcoin has made many rich.** Consider the guy who sold two pizzas for BTC10,000. The about $20 investment has turned to $10 million - a nice 500,000x gain in less than 4 years. But what if he sold it all when the price first doubled? Then instead of millions, he would have netted $20. Even worse, some have actually lost money with bitcoin. Buying at the tops and selling at low points is the fate of many who do not have any strategy in their actions. It is also actual money that you lose if you do not buy, or buy with a smaller amount than you could have bought, or at a higher price than you could have bought, considering the circumstances. All my friends would have become $millionaires by now, had they acted rationally since the day the heard about Bitcoin. Even I would probably have 2-10x more coins with no corresponding increase in risk. The past cannot be changed, but there are enough gains waiting for us in the future to amply reward those who care to exercise their logic and invest rationally. **Bitcoin is a disruptive technology** that has the potential to change the world even more than the Internet has done. If this indeed happens, the inbuilt dynamics make it happen relatively soon (by the end of the decade, at maximum). In this scenario, the value of the currency unit will have increased really much. The pizza is quite near the low-water mark of bitcoin trades, and the 500,000x gain since it, can be taken as the bitcoin value appreciation until now. How much can bitcoin go up from here? A few months ago I had a strong realization that bitcoin's market cap could reach that of gold, which would translate to $300,000 per unit. That would be a mere 300x increase from current levels. Considering that 12-months trailing average shows almost 100x, this could conservatively be achieved in 2016, realistically in 2015 and possibly in 2014. A [longer-term trendline analysis](https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=322058.0) extrapolated, shows 8/2016. But going even further, comparing Bitcoin to gold (borrowing the analogy from Zangelbert), would be akin to comparing email to postal letters. The new technology not only effectively replaces the old, but also brings so many other benefits that you cannot imagine them before seeing. In email's case, you could for example link all information in the world to your post, it would reach the recipient instantly, and not cost anything. Bitcoin does the same to something that is way bigger than the industry of delivering mail - the monetary system. A comparison to gold is probably not at all enough. The comparison to all dollars, all fiat currencies, or all liquid financial instruments may still be an underestimate. On the other hand, if something so good happens to the debt-ridden world, even those who did not buy any bitcoins, are mostly better off. Then there is the flipside of the coin: the disruptive technology is still on beta. So far all is fine, but nobody gives any guarantees. Despite that by reading about Bitcoin you gain more confidence towards it in all levels, there still are many known threats and dangers, technical and political, and sometimes also unknown things happen. Unbelievably few understand bitcoin even now. It is an unknown thing to them. To keep things simple, we postulate that Bitcoin is in a constant danger of self-annihilating, and its exchange value going to zero. This is not necessary the most realistic negative option, but serves as a good counterweight to the mindblowing positive case. **SSS System** **In investing Bitcoin**, the odds are so much on your side that there is no reason to take any risks. If it goes up, any number of bitcoins makes you rich, and even if you have zero, you will still be richer than before Bitcoin (I do not own any shares of Facebook, but acknowledge its importance and the benefits that I get for free). If it goes down, you should only lose slack money, money that you did not need anyway. You cannot lose more than you put in, so don't put in more than you can afford to lose and you'll be all right, even in the most negative case. First you need to find out how much you have. To keep keeping things simple, take first aside all the things that you need. They are not counted. Then calculate the resale value of the rest of your things, subtract all debts, and you find your financial net worth. Since house is so big, you should count house equity toward the total, but if you prefer thinking it as separate, you can also decide that you 'need' it and not count it. In this case, do not subtract the mortgage either. Then you select the rake. You know the concept from poker establishments: some percent of all winnings goes to the house. With bitcoin we except great gains, so we want to 'tax' them to increase our living standard, or just to keep some diversified in case the negative event happens and bitcoins lose their value. The rake is the percentage to set aside, every time that the price doubles. If for example you select 10%, this will lead that 20% of your portfolio is in non-bitcoins and 80% in bitcoins. If you select 20%, the result is 40% in bitcoins/60% non-bitcoins. For most of us, the previous percents sound extreme. But they are my recommendations. Remember, you do not need to invest more than you can afford to lose. In purist case, selecting a 10% rake would require you to invest 80% of your liquid wealth in bitcoins. But if that does not feel comfortable, you can invest 10% instead. In this case you can boost the accumulation by not raking your pot in the first doublings, only after it has increased to your target of 80% of your financial net worth. The price now is about $1 per mBTC. (It is very much likely that we will spontaneously revert to mBTC when the average investment is no more even one bitcoin. So let's start it now.) First doubling is at $2, then at $4, $8, $16, $32, $64, $125, $250, $500 and $1000. So there are 10 doublings in total, which take the price up 1,000x. In the end, one bitcoin is worth $1 million, and one dollar is worth quite much less than it is now. The plan ends there because the world will look very much different. Before that, you stick to the plan: if it goes to zero, you net a small gain or a small loss. **Let's take an example** of a person who only now finds bitcoin, has $50k in liquid assets, but is unwilling to risk more than $10k. His rake level is 10%, which starts immediately. Price |mB left |mB sold |k$ out |mB val. |other val. |total value |BTC% :-------|:----------|:----------|:------|:----------|:----------|:----------:|-----: 2 |9000 |1000 |2 |18 |42 |60 |30 % 4 |8100 |900 |4 |32 |46 |78 |42 % 8 |7290 |810 |6 |58 |52 |110 |53 % 16 |6561 |729 |12 |105 |64 |169 |62 % 32 |5905 |656 |21 |189 |85 |274 |69 % 64 |5314 |590 |38 |340 |123 |463 |74 % 125 |4783 |531 |66 |598 |189 |787 |76 % 250 |4305 |478 |120 |1076 |309 |1385 |78 % 500 |3874 |430 |215 |1937 |524 |2461 |79 % 1000 |3487 |387 |387 |3487 |911 |4398 |79 % The important parameters are: * Purchased 10,000mBTC, in the end he still has 3,487mBTC. * Recovered initial investment of $10k in full when mBTC hits $8. * In the end his fiat+other stuff stash is worth $0.9 million. **Discussion and tweaks** **It is important to buy in as soon as possible**, because waiting has in general not been a good strategy with bitcoin. Even if price drops afterwards, you should not feel any remorse at all - we are counting towards $1 million or nothing. If 'nothing' happens, you lose as many dollars, regardless of purchase price. If $1 million happens, then yes you have a smaller number of coins, but think how many are not even reading this advice, much less acting on it! Buy, and do it now. And only with funds that you can afford to lose. If you buy, and it crashes, but you have gained more determination that it is a good thing in the meanwhile, you can buy more. When the plan is underway, and it crashes, I don't advice to buy back. Enjoy your rake rather. Bitcoin may continue to go down, you don't know it. Even if it goes to zero, you will have gained. If you need to pay taxes on the realized gains (as most of us do), it makes even less sense to go in and out. If you want to daytrade, do it entirely separate from this, so that your daytrading has no effect on the execution of SSS plan and vice versa. In the end you will see, which one was more profitable and better use of time. It is possible to make the selling effectively continuous, instead of discrete. You just send 10% of your coins to an exchange and divide the next doubling to small enough increments (say, 10 of them) and list your coins for sale. This way you get to sell every time the price rises to a new ATH. Because ATH's happen on times when Bitcoin is ahead of the trend, the timing of the selling is better than average. It is entirely your own decision, how to allocate the non-bitcoin portfolio. Local differences dictate the prudent course of action.

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoin on November 24, 2013 15:16:05

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1qbwj6/to_everyone_considering_shying_away/

...from buying Bitcoins now that "the rally is over". Please consider again for your own sake. I think I know how some of you feel: you got excited on the rally and media hype, took a look at bitcoin and decided it was a good thing. While you figured out how to buy and maybe even got a wire transfer under way the price just kept rising. Then you thought it's too high to get in and you decided to buy the next dip. Now that there *is* a sizable dip (this is what you've been waiting for), you're thinking: well, maybe this was just a bubble and it will drop more. Maybe Bitcoin isn't such a great thing and it's just tulips or magic gathering cards. You can't bring yourself to buy something that isn't currently rocketing to the moon. Don't miss your entry point. Dollar-cost-average or whatever, but start buying *at some point*. Why am I saying this? To talk the price up, many will suspect. No, I'm saying this because I feel the pain of some friends who've decided to get into Bitcoin in the past, but have missed the train,... repeatedly. They waited for dips that *did* occur, but then figured to wait even longer and then missed the train. On every rally they regret deeply not having bought last time and say to themselves once again: "No, *now* the price is truly too high, I can't buy now, I'll wait for a dip" and thus history repeats itself. It's like David Morgan says: "Most people buy the highs and sell the lows". Well, most people aren't rich, now is the time to buy (if you think Bitcoin is a good thing). (this is not investment advice, just entertainment)

posted by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoin on November 10, 2013 16:30:38
Top
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g9bjoko/

Repost because of tg link: > But roger joined before the fork No, Roger joined *after* the fork. Here's Amaury Sechet saying as much (on tg bitcoin cash channel an hour or so ago after I asked): https://i.imgur.com/D0FUOYy.png I think Amaury is a better source for this than some author on investopedia that cannot be more specific than "summer 2017". Segwit2x was cancelled Nov 8th, the BCH fork first block was Aug 1st. **Hence Roger joined BCH more than 3 months after the fork.** That's also how I remember it. Roger was still hoping for the 2x part of segwit2x, which pissed me off because it was clear not to happen from the getgo.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 19, 2020 09:07:57
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g9bep5x/

hence what /u/tastypic said > Looks like bch is doubling down as being known as shit coin central. is complete bullshit because BCH has nothing to do with Atari Coin. He should've said > Looks like ~~bch~~bitcoin.com is doubling down as being known as shit coin central. that was my whole point.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 19, 2020 08:19:06
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g9b5bdd/

> Who do you think inceptualized bch? Mainly jihan wu and amaury Sechet. Also many others (a lot from BU) present at the 2017 arnhem conference (https://www.thefutureofbitcoin.com/). Ver wasn't there, in case you wonder.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 19, 2020 05:53:21
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g9b4r8w/

/u/memorydealers, when did you join BCH and have you "inceptualized" it?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 19, 2020 05:42:38
/r/btc/comments/jdlbv4/satoshis_angels_welcoming_mike_komaransky/g9b13fl/

Is it in 2 hours from now? Having a hard time interpreting the time.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 19, 2020 04:30:47
/r/btc/comments/jdlbv4/satoshis_angels_welcoming_mike_komaransky/g9b0x5i/

I assumed as much, but with all the translating going on back and forth it's just much more time-efficient for me to read a transcript.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 19, 2020 04:27:19
/r/btc/comments/jdt7yn/the_great_financial_reset_imf_managing_director/g9awchp/

Not just financial scam. That's a large part. But more generally it's about control and surveillance. Everything on the Blockchain: ask the things, all the humans (except a few).

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 19, 2020 03:01:58
/r/btc/comments/jdlbv4/satoshis_angels_welcoming_mike_komaransky/g99pu5d/

I hope there will be an english transcript again. Really enjoyed reading that on the first episode. Looking forward!

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 18, 2020 18:58:07
/r/btc/comments/jdk1rr/the_paybutton_flipstarter_is_90_funded/g99hpuj/

Congratulations! I'm happy this got funded!

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 18, 2020 17:42:44
/r/btc/comments/jdft5s/even_if_amaury_and_abc_are_the_best_developers_in/g98nos6/

> Amaury just chose a DAA the was “good enough” at the time Which was... Drumroll... *His* DAA

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 18, 2020 13:36:11
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g987enz/

Roger joined after the fork. Get your facts straight.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 18, 2020 11:11:42
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g972ojk/

I know he owns bitcoin.com, but Bitcoin.com isn't BCH. BCH had nothing to do with atari. That's just Roger.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 18, 2020 04:18:45
/r/btc/comments/jckjma/bitcoin_cash_is_for_everyone/g972hwd/

I think you're often getting a lot of downvotes just because people have put you in some drawer... By reflex. That's "ad hominem voting" so to say. Not good. And yeah, maybe people agreed with your post so strongly in this case that the reflexes got overridden. That's possible.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 18, 2020 04:16:36
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g972788/

Ah, i see. Ok, makes sense now. Thanks.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 18, 2020 04:12:56
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jclkfs/200000_btc_locked_inside_okex_wallets_exchange/g94z5g4/

> more lost bitcoin we don't know if they're lost

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:31:36
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jclkfs/200000_btc_locked_inside_okex_wallets_exchange/g94yxhw/

There's usually a "hot wallet" with some funds that is being refilled from cold storage when needed.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:29:57
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jclkfs/200000_btc_locked_inside_okex_wallets_exchange/g94yrld/

> Absolutely crazy, but are they really stupid enough to give the private keys to a single person No, that signle person is smart enough to let noone else know so he can pull his exit scam with enough time to hide?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:28:43
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jclkfs/200000_btc_locked_inside_okex_wallets_exchange/g94yg3w/

bit hard to use in there, I guess... ok, dude. let's do this EC signature on paper real quick. Can you generate an address for me? Just need to assemble a transaction with a utxo from memory,... done. Now how do we broadcast this?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:26:18
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jclkfs/200000_btc_locked_inside_okex_wallets_exchange/g94y2ym/

> "the person that holds the private keys" that can absolutely not exist. I mean it shouldn't. Not even my personal storage is that negligent.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:23:36
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g94xsmi/

yeah. selling out that old brand. they should really sell the brand to some young people doing innovative things

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:21:27
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g94xomo/

and since everything's rectangular (even the ball), you wont even see the difference!

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:20:36
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g94xkj0/

those old 2660s are pretty damn cheap on ebay.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:19:45
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g94x8dk/

if anything, it's a centrally controlled stablecoin. They're probably not buying back atari tokens for fiat, so this is really more like store credit or frequent flyer miles. Well, at least they're transferrable (I assume) so there can at least be secondary markets. I assume those will trade below 0.25$. not a crypto by a long shot and I don't think it's intended as one

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:17:16
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g94x06e/

> Looks like bch is you mean Roger Ver? BCH has nothing to do with this.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:15:34
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g94ws2g/

> Hard Cap: $1,000,000 (one million US dollars) doesn't this contradict > Valuation of the Circulating Supply before the public sale, based on the Offered Price for 1 ATRI: $17.2 million ? or what does "hard cap" mean?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:13:46
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jcghmn/atari_is_launching_a_cryptocurrency_along_with/g94w5b0/

> The tokens will sell for 25 cents a pop that's hilarious. "Insert quarter to start." Well-played. Are they going to guarantee that peg?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 16:08:53
/r/btc/comments/jcsghy/need_some_help_here/g94v6ay/

Oh. Ok. Then it's not a wallet import problem, but a "money moved" problem? So the last transaction sends the funds to an address you don't know?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 16:01:18
/r/btc/comments/jcsghy/need_some_help_here/g94uzkj/

Not sure it's the same

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 15:59:58
/r/btc/comments/jcsghy/need_some_help_here/g94pvh6/

Ah, ok. I understand now. Well, there could still be a passphrase. But apparently not. So yeah, funds are likely safe, just a matter of figuring things out.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 15:15:32
/r/btc/comments/jcsghy/need_some_help_here/g94pfll/

The cashaddr format is just a different format. It's the same address backing it. You can switch the display format in electron cash or order the built-in converter. I'm confused... Is the problem that you can't construct the wallet from the seed you have or is the problem that the money moved without you doing anything?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 15:11:21
/r/btc/comments/jcsghy/need_some_help_here/g94mt3b/

Very interesting: I found a really old blockchain.info 12-word seed and tried to restore that in electron cash. It didn't work. I also had the wallet id so I could still log on blockchain.info The weird thing: when I "create backup" I get a totally different seed. This one works and generates the same addresses as I see on blockchain.com btw: electron cash says "seed type: old" when I enter that age-old seed and seed type: BIP-39 when I use the new one

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 14:48:09
/r/btc/comments/jcsghy/need_some_help_here/g94kbwa/

Blockchain.info? According to https://martinkloock.wordpress.com/2018/01/02/transferring-a-blockchain-info-seed-with-multiple-wallets-to-electrum/ they might use yet another derivation path: m/44’/0’/0'. Please try that. Note this is not the second number (coin type) that is changed but the first (purpose).

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 14:27:40
/r/btc/comments/jcsghy/need_some_help_here/g949fcb/

> If you can see the funds in the Electron Cash wallet, it means your funds are there. No. Could be watch only wallet he generated from address. The OP sounds like that.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 12:51:40
/r/btc/comments/jcsghy/need_some_help_here/g9499s5/

> I tried getting through with electron cash but it's only in watch mode. What do you mean by that? Did you create a wallet and give it just an address? That would create a watch only wallet, yes. Or did you enter the seed words? That should result in a spendable wallet.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 12:50:15
/r/btc/comments/jcsghy/need_some_help_here/g948kkg/

Do you remember which wallet Software you used when generating that seed? I assume you don't have access to that any more? Another option is that maybe you used a passphrase?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 12:43:58
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jctlz7/things_bitcoiners_dont_want_to_hear/g941kje/

Sounds like you don't want to hear it?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 11:43:09
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jctlz7/things_bitcoiners_dont_want_to_hear/g93z1nu/

> I am confident you would find alt-coins. so?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 11:21:20
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jctlz7/things_bitcoiners_dont_want_to_hear/g93yusu/

maybe he thinks one can only connect 1 device to a 240V setup? Geee, how do people in Europe cope with that?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 11:19:42
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jctlz7/things_bitcoiners_dont_want_to_hear/g93yqhd/

No, they have mechanisms in their minds that effectively repel uncomfortable information like that contained in the article. It's not getting through to a real maxi.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 11:18:44
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jctlz7/things_bitcoiners_dont_want_to_hear/g93yhv1/

> It's like you haven't heard of the lightning network. It's like you haven't read the article: > **Lightning is almost certainly not going to scale for micropayments in the long term.** Lightning fees are not disconnected from the fee market for blockspace, they are derivative of them. The reason micropayments work natively on Lightning right now is because fees for blockspace are so low right now; when fees for blockspace go up that will drag fees up for Lightning payments as well. It is not economically rational to be routing payments for profit on Lightning if the eventually necessary on chain operations immediately eat up everything you have earned off chain. Fees on Lightning will increase to compensate for this. And that is just the first issue with micropayments on Lightning.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 11:16:41
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jctlz7/things_bitcoiners_dont_want_to_hear/g93ya0q/

> Btc isn’t going to be used for micro payments even it’s it’s scalable. If BTC doesn't scale it's not going to be used for *any* payments. Not even small or medium-sized payments. It's a purely speculative asset. If you want to use crypto for payments there are various choices of alternatives that actually aim to be used for payments: XMR, BCH, DASH,...

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 11:14:50
/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/jctlz7/things_bitcoiners_dont_want_to_hear/g93xz7o/

Bitcoin doesn't scale? LN not the saviour? Well, and yet you bash bcash.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/CryptoCurrency on October 17, 2020 11:12:08
/r/btc/comments/jcsghy/need_some_help_here/g93tk5m/

Don't forget derivation path. He might need to use coin type 0

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 10:32:00
/r/btc/comments/jcsghy/need_some_help_here/g93tea9/

Make sure to use correct derivation path. The one with 0 instead of 145 if this is an old Bitcoin wallet. To change it In electron cash (145 is default) use "bip39 options" when creating the wallet.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 10:30:33
/r/btc/comments/jckjma/bitcoin_cash_is_for_everyone/g93f26c/

Looks like the vote bots like you

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 17, 2020 07:43:38
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/jckkqi/bitcoin_cash_is_for_everyone/g92yiwv/

Cool. I love this "did you know" series. What's with the background color in this one, though? I like the mint green the other ones have better.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoincash on October 17, 2020 02:51:20
/r/btc/comments/jbgwir/aftermath_of_coinbases_ceo_telling_employees_that/g8xn1vp/

Thanks. How was he forced into making political statements? By coinbase employees?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 15, 2020 16:23:48
/r/Monero/comments/j7umwx/tx_not_getting_confirmed_what_to_do/g8wfggo/

Ah, sure. After sending I realized it might not be appreciated. Good to hear you're not offended.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/Monero on October 15, 2020 10:18:08
/r/btc/comments/jbgwir/aftermath_of_coinbases_ceo_telling_employees_that/g8w9dxu/

I don't get it. Can someone give me context / backstory?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 15, 2020 09:19:04
/r/btc/comments/jbk0y3/my_bch_based_project_idea/g8w6nl8/

The streams doubt go through jitsi servers? Cool, didn't know. We use it all the time for work.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 15, 2020 08:49:30
/r/Monero/comments/j7umwx/tx_not_getting_confirmed_what_to_do/g8w1ufp/

Wallet.bin and wallet.bin.keys was being touched. I ended up copying just keys and address files to a new folder and renamed the old one. That worked... I chose the new keys file and rescan happened. All fine now. Balance also correct. Also finally got rid of a 1350 day old tx that never confirmed. Thanks a lot for your help. /u/chaintip

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/Monero on October 15, 2020 07:48:23
/r/btc/comments/jb6fwp/price_action_of_last_2_days_or_so_btc_sideways/g8vweb2/

Downvote bots active since some time now. It sucks.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 15, 2020 06:19:13
/r/btc/comments/jb6fwp/price_action_of_last_2_days_or_so_btc_sideways/g8vtvg9/

Not that I'm aware.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 15, 2020 05:31:29
/r/btc/comments/jb6fwp/price_action_of_last_2_days_or_so_btc_sideways/g8vjtoz/

well, at least for now, it "dipped" even higher.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 15, 2020 02:28:25
/r/btc/comments/jb2agr/given_the_futures_markets_popping_up_around_the/g8vjp9c/

On the other hand those markets can als be used for hedging against a "bad" (in the sense that the person doesn't like it) outcome: "at least I got those sh.tcoins for cheap so I can now sell them higher". So I agree: these markets are not necessarily reflective of the crowd wisdom and even less so of the true outcome.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 15, 2020 02:26:26
/r/Monero/comments/j7umwx/tx_not_getting_confirmed_what_to_do/g8vj1ai/

see my other post https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/j7umwx/tx_not_getting_confirmed_what_to_do/g8vivgq/

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/Monero on October 15, 2020 02:15:52
/r/Monero/comments/j7umwx/tx_not_getting_confirmed_what_to_do/g8vivgq/

yes, it finally worked for me. But I had to re-sync the wallet (I copied the wallet.bin.keys and wallet.bin.address.txt files to a new folder, renamed the old one, started the gui, which prompted me to create a new wallet. I used "open file" to open the newly copied wallet.bin.keys file. The gui then rescanned the blockchain and synced the wallet.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/Monero on October 15, 2020 02:13:20
/r/btc/comments/jb6o2t/31_days_to_network_upgrade/g8vi6u1/

It will probably be very messy at first (you might have to hand-pick servers, reset block headers and so on to switch chains and split coins), but if both chains survive for long enough, there will certainly be an abc-fork of electron-cash. There used to be functionality to select forks (when detected) that was pretty cool. I'm not sure it survived. But that might come in real handy.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 15, 2020 02:02:40
/r/btc/comments/jb6fwp/price_action_of_last_2_days_or_so_btc_sideways/g8vhazi/

Not just depending on time frame. Also: from what price is it going to dip to what other price? There will always be dips, so the statement is likely true. It's it going to go back down to 0.20 or is the bottom finally in? Too early to tell, but the hope is there.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 15, 2020 01:49:22
/r/btc/comments/jb2agr/given_the_futures_markets_popping_up_around_the/g8u5jew/

what's the takeaway?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 14, 2020 17:30:57
/r/btc/comments/jb6fwp/price_action_of_last_2_days_or_so_btc_sideways/g8u4mgd/

yeah maybe. I'll enjoy while it lasts.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 14, 2020 17:22:54
/r/Monero/comments/j7umwx/tx_not_getting_confirmed_what_to_do/g8u3qm3/

ah, ok. sorry. I should've read more carefully. steps [2] and [3] confuse me. on my linux box there is a directory ~/.bitmonero/wallet_x (no ~/Monero folder exists) that contains 4 files: wallet.bin, wallet.bin.address.txt, wallet.bin.keys, wallet.bin.unportable. Should I rename the *directory* "wallet_x" (not a file) or one of the files (none of them called "wallet_x")? In other words: I don't know what is meant by "<wallet-name> (the file without extension)"

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/Monero on October 14, 2020 17:15:12
/r/btc/comments/jb1asz/99m_worth_of_bch_was_transfered_for_001_fee/g8u10xk/

I think he sent just 800 BCH. The tx combines 17 utxos (that are all on the same address bitcoincash:ppjatcwh9l8285288gzr782ps9r542yl6crrfl2ghf) and sens 800 BCH somewhere else, returning 39458 BCH to that same address where everything came from. I don't get it. What wallet does this? I mean it's not hurting privacy (same adress anyway), but why would the wallet combine so many utxos when 1 would be sufficient to send 800 BCH? To be a good netizen and reduce utxo set size?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 14, 2020 16:52:03
/r/Monero/comments/j7umwx/tx_not_getting_confirmed_what_to_do/g8tyzje/

thanks for the info... have been waiting for this ;-) > steps of this guide (you can ignore step [1]): this guide instructs how to verify node is synced and how to use relay_tx. How is that "refresh wallet"? Installed the new version and it's still syncing. One of the transactions I made got dropped from the list. 3 more are shown as confirmed (those I probably issued using monero-wallet-cli and my local monerod).

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/Monero on October 14, 2020 16:35:01
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/janbok/its_lovely_to_observe_bch_going_up_while_btc/g8tr7ny/

Ripple: market cap insisted by huge premine Tether: not crypto Eth: not aimed at money/payments, but that doesn't keep it from being used as such. Regression theorem anyone? A real contender, so valuation well deserved. Disclosure: i own some eth. Btc: profiting from name and network effect. Every noob or institution buys it (first). A lot fall for the pro btc narratives.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoincash on October 14, 2020 15:29:50
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/janbok/its_lovely_to_observe_bch_going_up_while_btc/g8tqgz0/

> I think that there has been a massive selling pressure because of anti-bch sentiment At some point, after 3 years, this should be exhausted, no?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoincash on October 14, 2020 15:22:45
/r/btc/comments/japxfw/looking_to_discuss_the_upcoming_bitcoin_abc/g8tq27p/

No, that would be r/asscoin

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 14, 2020 15:19:04
/r/btc/comments/jb6mc0/bitcoiner_low_level_protocols_should_do_a_single/g8tlyvq/

> > low level protocol should do a single task > Yes, BTC, exactly. You had *one* job... **ONE... JOB!**

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 14, 2020 14:45:02
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/jb6mez/bitcoiner_low_level_protocols_should_do_a_single/g8tlmko/

If you do a single task in a most basic way and everyone is supposed to build on top of your foundation, you better **do that task damn well**. In other words: > you had *one* job! and you blew the whole operation with your failure to deliver

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoincash on October 14, 2020 14:42:09
/r/btc/comments/jb6fwp/price_action_of_last_2_days_or_so_btc_sideways/g8tk0os/

That's the way, uh huh, uh huh,...

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 14, 2020 14:28:36
/r/btc/comments/jay3mv/in_10_years_the_iphone_will_be_worthless_to_btc/g8tbvlz/

What's with the $ before the amounts? Very confusing.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 14, 2020 13:20:59
/r/btc/comments/javia7/btc_address_searched_on_blockchaincom_shows_no/g8sh3su/

Do any block explorers support xpub? Would be a nice feature, actually. Maybe not the best idea die to privacy issues, but could be handy in certain circumstances.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 14, 2020 08:43:36
/r/Bitcoincash/comments/janbok/its_lovely_to_observe_bch_going_up_while_btc/g8s25qs/

I agree with the title and first paragraph. The last paragraph, i don't agree with.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/Bitcoincash on October 14, 2020 04:36:37
/r/btc/comments/jacas4/i_cant_afford_to_buy_bitcoin_1_currently_buys/g8rsek2/

Haha. For $1 you can barely open a channel and close it again.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 14, 2020 01:44:07
/r/btc/comments/jah6qe/otc_trading_bch_fork_bchnbcha/g8q3vkq/

You can trade now and settle when the coin exists. Involves trust, though.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 13, 2020 15:55:45
/r/btc/comments/jah6qe/otc_trading_bch_fork_bchnbcha/g8q3gmv/

His refusal to give details on specifics of the proposed trade was a red flag for me. I gave benefit of doubt. But that price is too low anyway. Thanks for your warning.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 13, 2020 15:52:16
/r/btc/comments/jaffq1/hackers_fake_update_leads_to_1980_bitcoin_stolen/g8q39s6/

This is already mitigated in electron cash by not allowing servers to raise popups with custom error text afaik.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 13, 2020 15:50:41
/r/btc/comments/j9wr4n/why_dont_ifp_fans_actually_hop_on_the_dash_train/g8pu03i/

"If you like the IFP, I have a masternode to sell to you"

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 13, 2020 14:33:32
/r/btc/comments/ja2m5z/hathor_merge_mining_pool_commands_33_of_the/g8pthin/

Or even more generally: will they mine on a non-IFP block or reject it?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 13, 2020 14:29:15
/r/btc/comments/jah6qe/otc_trading_bch_fork_bchnbcha/g8psiq4/

Too much for me and price way too low. Thanks for the offer. I could ask around but i would need some details. Like how /when to settle, how to escrow,...

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 13, 2020 14:21:15
/r/BitcoinAirdropsTrades/comments/jacsh1/ann_bch_fork_bcha_or_bchn_dumping_service/g8pjg4b/

Can you give some details? When and what exactly are you going to dump and what are the costs?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/BitcoinAirdropsTrades on October 13, 2020 13:07:05
/r/btc/comments/jah6qe/otc_trading_bch_fork_bchnbcha/g8pgxv5/

Volume / price? Edit: you understand we can settle only when BCHA exists on nov 15th or shortly thereafter?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 13, 2020 12:46:02
/r/btc/comments/jadbjl/developing_a_new_bitcoin_wallet/g8p3j5b/

* Cashfusion * Slp, dex integrations * Ability to heavily customize (skin, currencies, fiats, language, features) for use in local economies using their own slp based currencie. Also good modular design and extensibility for this purpose would be great.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 13, 2020 10:49:59
/r/btc/comments/ja2v79/mildly_interesting_during_3_years_of_trolls/g8oypcp/

Etc was in top 10??

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 13, 2020 10:04:53
/r/cardano/comments/j9142v/how_to_get_list_of_staking_reward_payments_with/g8oy8e0/

Pooltool.io does deliver price data for many fiats

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/cardano on October 13, 2020 10:00:10
/r/cardano/comments/j9142v/how_to_get_list_of_staking_reward_payments_with/g8oy56p/

That's cool. Thanks. Considering. However i already wrote a script that scrapes the info from pooltool.io for any pool and puts it into a csv file for import to my tax db.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/cardano on October 13, 2020 09:59:18
/r/btc/comments/j917ia/algorithm_for_starting_to_accept_payments_in_btc/g8odkp4/

Nothing beats first hand experience.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 13, 2020 04:59:15
/r/btc/comments/j9p61n/psa_someone_is_using_a_bot_to_downvote_everything/g8m8tbt/

Yeah, i noticed this about a week or so ago. Problem is that they can probably select stuff from the new queue and keep it from getting to hot and top queues

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 12, 2020 14:57:23
/r/btc/comments/j9p61n/psa_someone_is_using_a_bot_to_downvote_everything/g8m8os1/

There's other service providers very capable.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 12, 2020 14:56:18
/r/btc/comments/j9p61n/psa_someone_is_using_a_bot_to_downvote_everything/g8m8kf2/

I could create 1000 email addresses in one day if i wanted

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 12, 2020 14:55:14
/r/btc/comments/j9p61n/psa_someone_is_using_a_bot_to_downvote_everything/g8m8f8r/

For perfection, there should be a dash?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 12, 2020 14:53:59
/r/btc/comments/j99y1l/crypto_supermind_erik_voorhees_seems_to_be/g8m3gyl/

Wait... Help my memory. Was sdice traded on mpex or somewhere at some point? That what you mean buy "IPOed". And how did he forcefully by back at a lower price? I mean how were shareholders forced to sell? And yeah: it's disappointing. I believe this guy could have decided the Blocksitze war pro big blocks by pulling his weight at the right time. Yet he didn't. Maybe I'm giving too much credit, but his voice would certainly have helped.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 12, 2020 14:11:28
/r/btc/comments/j917ia/algorithm_for_starting_to_accept_payments_in_btc/g8l6sgw/

Did you join early enough?

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 12, 2020 09:19:15
/r/btc/comments/j917ia/algorithm_for_starting_to_accept_payments_in_btc/g8l6nht/

Ok. Fair enough. Maybe you should ask in r/Bitcoin, then. That's where the btc crowd hangs out.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 12, 2020 09:17:41
/r/btc/comments/j99y1l/crypto_supermind_erik_voorhees_seems_to_be/g8kh3vb/

Someone who sold satoshidice in 2013 for 126315 BTC doesn't really need "business". He can concentrate on getting his ideals implemented. Strangely Erics behavior seems to be at odds with this kind of mission. It has puzzled me since the Blocksitze war started. I just don't think it's his business interests that kept him fur joining the bigblockers.

Commented by /u/moleccc in /r/btc on October 12, 2020 02:04:47
Top