Hash Rate Bitcoin.com Charts

100 Reasons to Buy Bitcoin

  1. Bitcoin is the most censorship resistant money in the world.
  2. You don't have to buy a “whole” bitcoin so don't freak out if you look at the price. You can buy a piece of one no problem.
  3. The Dallas Mavericks accept Bitcoin on their website. You don't trust Mark Cuban. He's the best shark.
  4. Bitcoin is the best performing asset of the last decade (better than S&P500).
  5. Diversify your current portfolio.
  6. It's not illegal in the USA.
  7. You holding just one satoshi slightly limits the supply and can rise the price for everyone else.
  8. [In late 2019] hash rate is the highest it has ever been
  9. Suicide insurance; if Bitcoin rises in price there is no worse feeling than regret.
  10. Some of the smartest people in computer science and cryptography are working on it. Trust nerds.
  11. Look at the all time historical chart. No technical analysis just tell me what you think when you look at it.
  12. Money is a belief system... and I want to believe.
  13. Transparent ledger, no funny business going on it's easy to audit.
  14. Elon Musk appears to be a fan. How's that for an appeal to authority
  15. There is a fixed limit in the number of bitcoins that will exist. 21 million bitcoin, 7 billion people on earth. Do the math.
  16. There are so many examples of governments inflating their currency to the point where it becomes unusable. Read the wikipedia page for Venezuela or Zimbabwe.
  17. Altcoins make sacrifices in either security or centralization. There are altcoins out there that claim to be innovating but just check the scoreboard nothing has flipped Bitcoin in market value or even gotten close.
  18. With technology developing at a rate faster than law, governments and for-profit businesses have the ability to monitor our purchases, location, our habits, and all of this has happened without consent. People made jokes and conspiracy theory, but sometimes conspiracy is real. Most people are good, but there is absolutely evil out there. There are absolutely evil people in positions of power. There are absolutely evil people that work together in positions of power. Does anyone actually believe that Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide. Go read about Leslie Wexner. Go read the cypherpunk manifesto.
  19. The upcoming halvening in 2020 will reduce the number of Bitcoin created in each block, making them more scarce, and if history repeats more valuable.
  20. Bitcoin has lower fees than traditional banking.
  21. Gold has the advantage of being a physical thing. But unlike gold you know Bitcoin is not forged, or mixed with another metal, and you can easily break it into tiny pieces and send it over the internet to someone.
  22. Bitcoin could spark new interests maybe you start to read more into economics, computer science, or Brock Pierce.
  23. Bitcoin has survived with no leader, marketing team, public relations, or legal team.
  24. Because Wired magazine said Bitcoin was dead at $2, Forbes said it was dead at $15, NY Times at $208, and CNN at $333.
  25. Just do a cost benefit analysis. What happens if Bitcoin fails and it goes to zero vs. what happens if it succeeds, and becomes world money.
  26. Bitcoin encourages long term thinking, planning, saving. Due to inflation we are punished by holding on to cash. Look up the statistics on the average savings account while we are bombarded with consumerist bullshit like Funko pop heads, Loot crate subscription services, and new syrup flavors for coffee. Currently we are encouraged to spend now, seek immediate gratification, and ignore what we are becoming as Amazon picks out our clothes and toothpaste ships it to the house and we sit and watch streaming services where content is pushed to us and I'm supposed to buy that this garbage is actually “trending”. Our lives have become so comfortable that idiots spend $60 to escape a room and have someone take your picture when you get out. What would our ancestors think.
  27. Maybe you're a day trader looking to use a trading bot in an unregulated market.
  28. Bitcoin has 7 letters in it. Lucky number 7.....
  29. Bitcoin promises to bank the unbanked, and provide services to those not otherwise “qualified” to open a bank account.
  30. It's just cool, don't you want to seem smart to all your friends.
  31. The origin story is so nuts there's going to be a movie or several movies about the early days of Bitcoin. Satoshi Nakamoto remains anonymous to this day. Imagine if the inventor of the cell phone was anonymous.
  32. If you have money to burn, don't buy soda, weed, or some girls private snapchat it's a dead end put it towards Bitcoin and give it to your child in the future.
  33. To avoid getting ripped off by foreign exchange fees just because you were born one place and your friends were born in another place.
  34. Can't live off the grid in your log cabin and still use Mastercard. Bitcoin is one piece of opting out.
  35. If one country adopts BTC as the national currency, it doesn't take much thought to realise that others will follow.
  36. Join a welcoming and unique community. Everyone is super nice because they want your money.
  37. You can stick it to the baby boomers.
  38. You can stick it to the vegans.
  39. You can stick it Roger Ver.
  40. Maybe your IQ is 70 and you'll do whatever CNBC Fast Money recommends.
  41. Maybe a hacker infects your computer, records you doing that thing, and threatens to release the tape if you do not pay them 1.5 Bitcoin.
  42. You're a risk taker looking for some risky investment.
  43. Aliens attack like Independence Day, blow up major cities in major countries, your money is still safe with Bitcoin. As long as there is a some guy, some person, living on an island with a copy of the ledger out there on your'e good. We're all good.
  44. Many proposals to scale the number of transactions, may the best plan win.
  45. One day you might have to use BTC to pay taxes, buy food, and charge your Tesla.
  46. You want to support a political group and remain private.
  47. You can trust math more than you can trust people to set an emission rate.
  48. Government don't know how much you have.
  49. The first response to Bitcoin being published by Hal Finney stated that Bitcoin was positioned to reach million dollar valuation. Hal was the first bull and passed away in 2014, missing a lot #doitforHal.
  50. Baddies can't freeze your money if they mad at you.
  51. The Big Bang Theory mentioned it, maybe you want to be like Sheldon the bazinga guy.
  52. Mid-life crisis.
  53. Be contrarian. In a world where everyone zigs it's sometimes good to zag.
  54. Don't have any hobbies, and you just need a reason to get up in the morning.
  55. Enjoy learning? Bitcoin is a topic where there is so much to learn, and so much development, that it really becomes a never ending journey. For someone who likes learning, it's more productive than speedrunning a video game.
  56. Yolo. You only live once. This isn't a dress rehearsal, if there's something your kind of interested in pursue it. That's true for anything not just Bitcoin. But if you're reading this I'm assuming you're interested.
  57. Bitcoin is not a ponzi scheme. The difference is Bitcoin does not need new people buying in to work, blocks being added will continue even if the community stopped growing.
  58. With religion on the decline maybe you want to join a cult. Crypto twitter is a great echo chamber to meet like minded people.
  59. Satoshi Nakamoto found a way to distribute a global currency in a fair way with the ability to adjust the mining difficulty as we go, it's really incredible. You still need computers and electricity to mine new bitcoin today but it's an extremely fair way for people to earn. There was no premine of Bitcoin. Everyone who has Bitcoin either bought it at what the market said, or they earned it.
  60. No CEO in charge of Bitcoin to make bad decisions or a board of directors that can make changes. The users, an ever growing number, are in charge.
  61. Bitcoin has no days off, it has no workers in charge who can get sick or take a holiday.
  62. Bitcoin has survived 10 years (and more). While there will always be dangers, I'd argue that those first few years it was most vulnerable to fail.
  63. Have some trust in the cypherpunks. Anyone who held and didn't sell bitcoin as it went from pennies to five figures is not looking to get rich. They want to change the world.
  64. Potential president Tulsi Gabbard disclosed owning some.
  65. Digital money is the future, anyone who has tried Venmo can see that. Well Bitcoin is a digitally native asset.
  66. Refugees can use Bitcoin to store their wealth as they flee a failing country.
  67. Bitcoin is an open source project. Anthony Pompliano likes to call it a virus but I like how the author of the Bitcoin Standard describes it. Bitcoin is like a song. As long as one person remembers it you can't destroy a song.
  68. Triple entry accounting. When humans first started recording who owes who what we had single-entry accounting. The king's little brother would keep everything written down, but we had to really trust this guy because he could simply erase a line and that money would be gone. When double-entry accounting started to spread 500 years ago it brought with it massive innovation. Businesses could now form relationships across the ocean as they each kept a record. We did not have innovation again until Satoshi's Bitcoin, where blockchain can be used as the neutral third party to keep record. It might not sound important but blockchain allows us to agree upon an objective reality.
  69. Bitcoin is non-political.
  70. Bitcoin is easy to accept. I mean kind of. It's certainly easier than setting up a bank account.
  71. A sandwich used to cost 10 cents in America, I walk into Subway and they don't even have $5 foot longs anymore. Inflation man..
  72. It's a peaceful protest.
  73. Critics say that mining wastes electricity, but if Bitcoin adoption continues the world will actually be incentivized to produce more renewable energy. There are so many waterfalls and sources of energy in the middle of nowhere right now. People might not see a reason to build a power plant over there now, but in the future it can make business sense. Take that waterfall mine bitcoin, and sell them to the people who can't mine. It allows for a business to sell their energy anywhere.
  74. Get into debates around Bitcoin, build those critical thinking skills.
  75. “Predicting rain doesn't count, building arks does”
  76. “The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago, the second best time is now.”
  77. "I never considered for one second having anything to do with it. I detested it the moment it was raised. It’s just disgusting. Bitcoin is noxious poison.”
  78. The immaculate conception. No cryptocurrency can have a start the grassroots way Bitcoin did, it's just impossible given how the space has changed.
  79. There are more than 1000x more U.S. dollars today than there were a hundred years ago.
  80. Bitcoin is the largest transfer of wealth this decade from the least curious to the curious.
  81. The concept of the Star Wars Cantina, Galt's Gulch, or young Beat Generation kids sitting in a basement smoking cigarettes and questioning the world can only exist if money remains fungible.
  82. You can send money to your Dad even if he lives in a country run by bad boys.
  83. Memorize your key, and walk around the world carrying your money in your head.
  84. Free speech.
  85. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9JGmA5_unYGmA5_unY
  86. The Federal Reserve is objectively way too powerful.
  87. John Mcafe promised that if bitcoins were not valued at 1 million dollars by the end of 2020 he would eat his own penis on national television. It will be a sad day if we don't hit that 1 million.
  88. The Apple credit card.
  89. If we ever get artificial intelligence it'll be able to interact with Bitcoin.
  90. Katy Perry is aware of crypto so if by some chance you run into her, you get one chance to strike up conversation, so here's your chance to shine. You don't ask for a picture, you don't say she's pretty, or name your favorite song. Take your shot and ask about what type of cold storage she uses for her bitcoin.
  91. Many people are afraid of a world currency because it's associated with a centralized world power taking control. Bitcoin allows for neutral world money.
  92. Stick it to Mark Zuckerberg.
  93. Developers developers developers developers developer developers.
  94. About 85% of the supply has already been mined.
  95. Bitcoin can always improve. As long as the proposal is really good the code can be upgraded, and if the baddies invent ways to hurt the chain we can just fork off it's just code.
  96. Memes
  97. Name recognition and momentum above all other cryptocurrencies.
  98. 3% discount with Bitcoin at Crescent Tide Cremation Services. Nice cant wait to die.
  99. Like having a swiss bank account in your pocket.
  100. Blow up the banks (in minecraft).
submitted by Th3M0rn1ng5h0w to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Why Verge Needs DigiShield NOW! And Why DigiByte Is SAFE!

Hello everyone, I’m back! Someone asked a question recently on what exactly happened to XVG – Verge and if this could be a problem for DGB – DigiByte - Here: DigiByte vs Verge It was a great question and there have been people stating that this cannot be a problem for us because of DigiShield etc… with not much explanation after that.
I was curious and did a bit more investigating to figure out what happened and why exactly it is that we are safe. So take a read.

Some Information on Verge

Verge was founded in 2014 with code based on DogeCoin, it was initially named DogeCoinDark, it later was renamed Verge XVG in 2016. Verge has 5 mining algorithms as does DigiByte. Those being:
However, unlike DigiByte those algorithms do not run side by side. On Verge one block can only be mined by a single algorithm at any time. This means that each algorithm takes turns mining the chain.
Prior to the latest fork there was not a single line of code that forced any algo rotation. They all run in parallel but of course in the end only one block can be accepted at given height which is obvious. After the fork algo rotation is forced so only 6 blocks with the same algo out of any 10 blocks can be accepted. - srgn_

Mining Verge and The Exploit

What happened then was not a 51% attack per say, but the attacker did end up mining 99% of all new blocks so in fact he did have power of over 51% of the chain. The way that Verge is mined allowed for a timestamp exploit. Every block that is mined is dependent on the previous blocks for determining the algorithm to be used (this is part of the exploit). Also, their mining difficulty is adjusted every block (which last 30 seconds also part of the exploit). Algorithms are not picked but in fact as stated previously compete with one another. As for difficulty:
Difficulty is calculated by a version of DGW which is based on timestamps of last 12 blocks mined by the same algo. - srgn_
This kind of bug is very serious and at the foundation of Verge’s codebase. In fact, in order to fix it a fork is needed, either hard fork or soft fork!
What happened was that the hacker managed to change the time stamps on his blocks. He introduced a pair of false blocks. One which showed that the scrypt mining algorithm had been previously used, about 26 mins before, and then a second block which was mined with scrypt. The chain is set up so that it goes through the 5 different algorithms. So, the first false block shows the chain that the scrypt algorithm had been used in the recent past. This tricks it into thinking that the next algorithm to be used is scrypt. In this way, he was essentially able to mine 99% of all blocks.
Pairs of blocks are used to lower the difficulty but they need to be mined in certain order so they can pass the check of median timestamp of last 11 blocks which is performed in CBlock::AcceptBlock(). There is no tricking anything into thinking that the next algo should be x because there is no algo picking. They all just run and mine blocks constantly. There is only lowering the difficulty, passing the checks so the chain is valid and accepting this chain over chains mined by other algos. - segn_
Here is a snippet of code for what the time stamps on the blocks would look like:
SetBestChain: new best=00000000049c2d3329a3 height=2009406 trust=2009407 date=04/04/18 13:50:09 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED (scrypt) SetBestChain: new best=000000000a307b54dfcf height=2009407 trust=2009408 date=04/04/18 12:16:51 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED (scrypt) SetBestChain: new best=00000000196f03f5727e height=2009408 trust=2009409 date=04/04/18 13:50:10 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED (scrypt) SetBestChain: new best=0000000010b42973b6ec height=2009409 trust=2009410 date=04/04/18 12:16:52 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED (scrypt) SetBestChain: new best=000000000e0655294c73 height=2009410 trust=2009411 date=04/04/18 12:16:53 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED (scrypt) 
Here’s the first falsified block that was introduced into the XVG chain – Verge-Blockchain.info
As you can see there is the first fake block with a time stamp of 13:50:09 for example and the next is set to 12:15:51, the following two blocks are also a fraudulent pair and note that the next block is set to 12:16:52. So essentially, he was able to mine whole blocks - 1 second per block!

The “Fix”

This exploit was brought to public attention by ocminer on the bitcointalk forums. It seems the person was a mining pool administrator and noticed the problem after miners on the pool started to complain about a potential bug.
What happened next was that Verge developers pushed out a “fix” but in fact did not really fix the issue. What they did was simply diminish the time frame in which the blocks can be mined. The attack still was exploitable and the attacker even went on to try it again!
“The background is that the "fix" promoted by the devs simply won't fix the problem. It will just make the timeframe smaller in which the blocks can be mined / spoofed and the attack will still work, just be a bit slower.” - ocminer
Ocminer then cited DigiShield as a real fix to the issue! Stating that the fix should also stipulate that a single algo can only be used X amount of times and not be dependent on when the algo was last used. He even said that DigiByte and Myriad had the same problems and we fixed them! He cited this github repo for DigiByte:

DigiShield

It seems that the reason that this exploit was so lucrative was because the difficulty adjustment parameters were not enough to reduce the rewards the attacker recieved. Had the rewards per block adjusted at reasonable rate like we do in DGB then at least the rewards would have dropped significantly per block.
The attacker was able to make off with around 60 million Verge which equals about 3.6 million dollars per today’s prices.
The exploit used by the attacker depended on the fact that time stamps could be falsified firstly and secondly that the difficulty retargeting parameters were inadequate.
Let’s cover how DigiShield works more in detail. One of the DigiByte devs gave us this post about 4 years ago now, and the topic deserves revisiting and updates! I had a hard time finding good new resources and information on the details of DigiShield so I hope you’ll appreciate this review! This is everything I found for now that I could understand hopefully I get more information later and I’ll update this post.
Let’s go over some stuff on difficulty first then I’ll try giving you a way to visualise the way these systems work.
First you have to understand that mining difficulty changes over time; it has to! Look at Bitcoin’s difficulty for example – Bitcoin difficulty over the past five months. As I covered in another post (An Introduction to DigiByte Difficulty in Bitcoin is readjusted every 2016 blocks which each last about 10 mins each. This can play out over a span of 2 weeks, and that’s why you see Bitcoin’s difficulty graph as a step graph. In general, the hash power in the network increases over time as more people want to mine Bitcoin and thus the difficulty must also increase so that rewards are proportional.
The problem with non-dynamic difficulty adjustment is that it allows for pools of miners and or single entities to come into smaller coins and mine them continuously, they essentially get “free” or easily mined coins as the difficulty has not had time to adjust. This is not really a problem for Bitcoin or other large coins as they always have a lot of miners running on their chains but for smaller coins and a few years ago in crypto basically any coin other than Bitcoin was vulnerable. Once the miners had gotten their “free coins” they could then dump the chain and go mine something else – because the difficulty had adjusted. Often chains were left frozen or with very high fees and slow processing times as there was not enough hash power to mine the transactions.
This was a big problem in the beginning with DigiByte and almost even killed DogeCoin. This is where our brilliant developers came in and created DigiShield (first known as MultiShield).
These three articles are where most of my information came from for DigiShield I had to reread a the first one a few times to understand so please correct me if I make any mistakes! They are in order from most recent to oldest and also in order of relevance.
DigiShield is a system whereby the difficulty for mining DigiByte is adjusted dynamically. Every single block each at 15 seconds has difficulty adjusted for the available hashing power. This means that difficulty in DigiByte is as close as we can get to real time! There are other methods for adjusting difficulty, the first being the Bitcoin/Litecoin method (a moving average calculated every X number of blocks) then the Kimoto Gravity Well is another. The reason that DigiShield is so great is because the parameters are just right for the difficulty to be able to rise and fall in proportion to the amount of hash power available.
Note that Verge used a difficulty adjustment protocol more similar to that of DigiByte than Bitcoin. Difficulty was adjusted every block at 30 seconds. So why was Verge vulnerable to this attack? As I stated before Verge had a bug that allowed for firstly the manipulation of time stamps, and secondly did not adjust difficulty ideally.
You have to try to imagine that difficulty adjustment chases hashing power. This is because the hashing power on a chain can be seen as the “input” and the difficulty adjustment as the corresponding output. The adjustment or output created is thus dependent on the amount of hashing power input.
DigiShield was designed so that increases in mining difficulty are slightly harder to result than decreases in mining difficulty. This asymmetrical approach allows for mining to be more stable on DigiByte than other coins who use a symmetrical approach. It is a very delicate balancing act which requires the right approach or else the system breaks! Either the chain may freeze if hash power increases and then dumps or mining rewards are too high because the difficulty is not set high enough!
If you’ve ever taken any physics courses maybe one way you can understand DigiShield is if I were to define it as a dynamic asymmetrical oscillation dampener. What does this mean? Let’s cover it in simple terms, it’s difficult to understand and for me it was easier to visualise. Imagine something like this, click on it it’s a video: Caravan Weight Distribution – made easy. This is not a perfect analogy to what DigiShield does but I’ll explain my idea.
The input (hashing power) and the output (difficulty adjustment) both result in oscillations of the mining reward. These two variables are what controls mining rewards! So that caravan shaking violently back and forth imagine those are mining rewards, the weights are the parameters used for difficulty adjustment and the man’s hand pushing on the system is the hashing power. Mining rewards move back and forth (up and down) depending on the weight distribution (difficulty adjustment parameters) and the strength of the push (the amount of hashing power input to the system).
Here is a quote from the dev’s article.
“The secret to DigiShield is an asymmetrical approach to difficulty re-targeting. With DigiShield, the difficulty is allowed to decrease in larger movements than it is allowed to increase from block to block. This keeps a blockchain from getting "stuck" i.e., not finding the next block for several hours following a major drop in the net hash of coin. It is all a balancing act. You need to allow the difficulty to increase enough between blocks to catch up to a sudden spike in net hash, but not enough to accidentally send the difficulty sky high when two miners get lucky and find blocks back to back.”
AND to top it all off the solution to Verge’s time stamp manipulation bug is RIGHT HERE in DigiShield again! This was patched and in Digishield v3 problems #7
Here’s a direct quote:
“Most DigiShield v3 implementations do not get data from the most recent blocks, but begin the averaging at the MTP, which is typically 6 blocks in the past. This is ostensibly done to prevent timestamp manipulation of the difficulty.”
Moreover, DigiShield does not allow for one algorithm to mine more than 5 blocks in a row. If the next block comes in on the same algorithm then it would be blocked and would be handed off to the next algorithm.
DigiShield is a beautiful delicate yet robust system designed to prevent abuse and allow stability in mining! Many coins have adopted out technology!

Verge Needs DigiShield NOW!

The attacker has been identified as IDCToken on the bitcointalk forums. He posted recently that there are two more exploits still available in Verge which would allow for similar attacks! He said this:
“Can confirm it is still exploitable, will not abuse it futher myself but fix this problem immediately I'll give Verge some hours to solve this otherwise I'll make this public and another unpatchable problem.” - IDCToken
DigiShield could have stopped the time stamp manipulation exploit, and stopped the attacker from getting unjust rewards! Maybe a look at Verge’s difficulty chart might give a good idea of what 1 single person was able to do to a coin worth about 1 billion dollars.
Here’s DigiByte’s difficulty steady, even and fair:
Maybe our developers could help Verge somehow – but for a fee? Or it might be a good way to get our name out there, and show people why DigiByte and DigiShield are so important!

SOURCES

Edit - Made a few mistakes in understanding how Verge is mined I've updated the post and left the mistakes visible. Nothing else is changed and my point still stands Verge could stand to gain something from adopting DigiShield!
Hi,
I hope you’ve enjoyed my article! I tried to learn as much as I could on DigiShield because I thought it was an interesting question and to help put together our DGB paper! hopefully I made no mistakes and if I did please let me know.
-Dereck de Mézquita
I'm a student typing this stuff on my free time, help me pay for school? Thank you!
D64fAFQvJMhrBUNYpqUKQjqKrMLu76j24g
https://digiexplorer.info/address/D64fAFQvJMhrBUNYpqUKQjqKrMLu76j24g
submitted by xeno_biologist to Digibyte [link] [comments]

Current Infographic Text - Please help with updates and ideas!

Here is the infographic text as it stands. There are things we need to update, and we could use a refresh. What would you like to see on the infographic? Please also refer to the infographic itself on the sidebar and comment below!
If you'd rather propose updates on the document itself, please go here. The translations are there too, but I don't think we've ever really used an infographic in another language.
Myriad A Coin For Everyone
The Most Secure, Decentralized, Fairly Distributed Coin
The Myriad Multi-PoW Blockchain uses 5 Hashing Algorithms Simultaneously
Myriad can be mined with CPUs (including Android devices!), GPUs or ASICsT
ANYONE can mine Myriad with whatever hardware they have available.
Myriad is NOT Pre-Mined
Everyone has an equal opportunity to obtain coins at the market rate = no hidden fortunes or controlling shares possessed by insiders
Each Algorithm = 20% of total hashrate = EXCEPTIONAL RESISTANCE TO 51% ATTACKS Pie Chart 1 j
51% of Single Algo Coin (eg Bitcoin) = Network Corruption :(
To execute a successful 51% attack against nearly all cryptocurrencies, an attacker only needs to coordinate 51% hashrate share of a single algorithm
Pie Chart 2
51% of Single Myriad Algo = only 11% of total hashrate :)
An attacker would need to control 51% o all 5 algorithms, or 100% of at least 3, to successfully execute a 51% attack against Myriad. Considering the diversity of hardware + miners on each algorithm, this proves exceptionally difficult to coordinate logistically, making Myriad the most 51% attack resistant coin out there.
Difficulty = Weighted per Algorithm, per Block
Miners compete equally for block rewards no matter what kind of hardware. Each algorithm creates coins at the same rate. ASICs don’t have an unfair advantage.
Myriad = Multi-PoW
Block Rewards given for contributing resources to the processing network, not for hoarding coins. Does not create systematic wealth inequality in the long term = FAIR
1 minute block processing time vs 10 minutes for Bitcoin = faster payment processing
Block reward halving every 96 weeks
Early mining period much longer than most coins = price remains intentionally low during initial distribution to allow more people to obtain coins at accessible prices
PROJECTS IN THE WORKS
New and improved wallets
Wider acceptance by merchants and much more!
For More Info, visit: www.myriadcoin.org Connect with us! (reddit snoot?) www.reddit.com/myriadcoin (facebook logo) themyriadplatform (twitter logo) @myriadcoin
submitted by keepmyshirt to myriadcoin [link] [comments]

IRC Log from Ravencoin Open Developer Meeting - Sept 7, 2018

Hi all
Greetings and salutations!
two is a good number for lips
sup
how do you dooski?
{|}
Jesse is not going to make it.
master
salut
so what is todays topic
Yes, who's moderating? Announcements, etc.
well i guess thats chatturgas job
but hes not here so idk
I'm a poor substitute for Jesse. I'm moderating today.
lol
Just FYI, there is a testnet5 with unique assets. Build from release_2.0.5 branch.
Are we able to connect to the testnet v5 seed nodes?
Yes. Testnet seed nodes are working now.
Yes. Testnet5 seed nodes are working now.
https://medium.com/@Tronblack/ravencoin-asset-issuance-cost-52b553c507cb
Medium
Ravencoin — Asset Issuance Cost – Tron Black – Medium
Let me start by thanking everybody in the community that has passionately contributed thoughts and ideas on the economics of asset…
looks like im compiling the binaries lol
I wrote a blog post about the pros/cons of the various burn options.
If anyone wants to weigh-in on their preference.
Because of the simplicity, I lean towards the first two options listed.
2.0.5 isn't going to be put on the webpage as an official binary release is that right?
Yes, that's right.
But, I'd encourage anyone to build it and run it on testnet5
i personally prefer the halvening option
@russkidooski With a particular floor?
yep
500->250->125
the best option isn't listed, POM
tl what's POM?
Proof of Market
ah
zaab is the author and just joined
Yes
Hi Boo and Zaab
Also "Prisoner Of her Majesty"
Sorry on vacation so not all in on this conversation but felt it was importsnt to join
Hey Zaab, welcome!
Hi all. Just observing. Hope no one minds.
Thanks for taking the time to write that article Zaab, it was very thought provoking.
Hi s&l
If anything, that was its main purpose
hello
I prepped some questions i had before i realized i could make it
great
1. Why was a burn deemed necessary at all? What is the purpose of it? 2. How/why was the number 500 chosen. Was an economic analysis ran? Or was an analyzis done on how many assests could be reasonably handled (thus needed an asset amount cap)
3. Tell me the truth, how likely are you to impliment any alternative idea. Are we wasting our time making our cases?
Shotgun!
being in favor becauseit is simplicity is not a plan for success; POM is fairly simple and will give a true market pricing
And i dont mean nust my own
Just*
any code contribution with ideas would be appreciated and tested.
That's a lot of questions.
Burning RVN helps the economics of the coin. Fewer circulating supply (more scarcity) the higher the value of the coin (assuming all else equal).
Also, there should be a cost to creating asset names in the namespace.
that is only half the economic formula
Burn is necessary because there must be a cost to consume the resources of the network.
hi bw
I didnt realize making the coin economical was one of the purposes of the coin
We could've recycled the RVN back through the miners (like fees), but the burn economics should help RVN price.
IMHO, all the well designed coins have a good economic model behind them.
Also sorry i would code it if i could but im not a programmer, if that invalidates my ideas so be it
It doesn't Zaab
recycle seems much more complex than POM
Because you tie good economics to a good mining base which is what ultimately is needed for security
It doesn't invalidate your ideas, but some of the complexities introduced with your ideas may not be feasible before Oct 1 (RC goal date).
simplicity/predictability is the guiderail here on burn vs recycle
This is deadline does not feel healthy
The ideas in POM, which I'll address in a minute also cause some issues.
launch deadline should not be more important than a successful launch design
agreed!
My preference is burn with diminishing price over time.
When creating an asset, all nodes must agree on the price, and if that changes each block (or frequently), there may be issues. The signed transaction may sit in the mempool waiting for confirmation and the "price" in RVN may change.
To me a burn has 2 purposes only. One prevent a spam attack and two for the transaction id of the burn to act as a signature of authenticity of an asset
Zaab I'll tell the truth -- we want the best solution, but for all parties including application developers. Project planners like being able to budget and whole numbers.
simple is better
fix the price daily based on an avg; could taht solve
we don't want the nightmare of eth gas
The authenticity isn't an issue, because there are other ways to handle it.
What ive proposed at its maximum only increases under 2 rvn per day. Thats well within planning limits
@twolips An average of what?
POM formula being based on an avg of max burn and daily burn numbers
@Zaab If I understood your paper correctly (not a given) then it seems like the cost went down as more assets were created. Is that the case, or did I misunderstand the chart.
that ius healthy
^^
at that point, the value of RVN will increase
As assets are created the remaining burnable rvn drops. Thus price drops
because of function not scarcity
As rvn are mined the remaining burnable rvn increases thus price increases
POM seemed to show higher burnrate, lower RVN cost (-10 RVN delta).
hi X_K
hi
You need to burn 3,600,000 rvn daily just to keep up with mining. POM will almost certainly cause price to increase
That seems backwards to me -- from an economic standpoint.
Just like crypto is deflationary, its backwarsa
Backwards
So if fewer people are creating assets, the price increases?
sdrawkcaB
Yep
blink
That seems counterintuitive to the project tho
How so
To me, price determines demand, not the other way around
Again -- that seems backwards. "Nobody is coming into our store, now we have to sell these sofas for a $1,000,000"
Thought the whole idea of rvn was asset creation
there are 2 aspects, cost of creation and value of RVN
But theres no maximim to sofas in the world you could always make more
both cause moves
Not the case with rvn
What do you all think about the 5-4-3-2-1 model?
If not many are being created, the cost of creation should be lower.
The value of RVN is closely tied to mining hash rate, but not correlated with number of asset names created.
you sell the for 1,000,000 but that is in Venezuelan bolívar
bad example
@boodog The purpose of RVN is assets. Not necessarily asset issuance.
As far as mempool blockage i envisioned something similar to mining difficulty calculation. Where it checks the previous assets created in comparison to the current one within a valid range
Tron_: thanks for clarification
I expect lots of assets to be created, but even better would be some really quality assets with real use cases and transactions on the nodes.
How many assets can the network currently handle?
More than the real world needs
More then 42million?
none compare to POM
As coded, 6000 per block for issuances.
But those issuances would squeeze out transactions.
Ok
@zabb that would mean that some transactions in the mempool would be valid and some wouldn't because they were created at different time.
42million is maximum not including sub assets or unqiue assets or reissuing
If we hit high loads, there are some scalability improvements we can make.
Ya that part of the idea isnt fully worked out but i dont know whats techicnally possible
True, as coded 42,000,000 root level assets is a max.
42MM is not accurate because as some point there is a breaking point where we price ourselves out of business
I meant if we had 42mil assets could the network support it
Lots more, sub-level assets. So a market could form under "COM" for example.
hi Skan
@twolips the question was how much can the network handle. not pricing
demand for the rare RVN will be expensive and competition will come in with a much better idea
Hi everybody
and 42MM was mention as max...not a true number
@Zaab It could issue them, but transaction volume has its limits at about 20x what Bitcoin does (sans Lightning).
Also again how did the number 500 come up? Did you do an econmic analysis or is it set based on max workload of the network
the breaking point is probably, at best, near half of that
if you haven't, you should all read zaab's proposal
options 5,4,3,2,1 can not be fairly comment ed on withot reading POM
Link please?
https://medium.com/@Zaab/ravencoin-proof-of-market-an-asset-issuance-cost-alternative-c5b6f9457acf
Medium
Ravencoin — Proof of Market: An Asset Issuance Cost Alternative
9/5/2018 — In response to “Ravencoin — Asset Issuance Cost” by Tron Black
Ty
Hitting the maximum number of asset is not nearly as worrisome nor pressing of an issue as the economic design , in my opinion
discord #burn-discussion as ongoing convo on this topic
Ive got to go, id like the 3 questions i posted earlier answered if possible. Ill be around if anyone has any questions.
POM would be more compelling if there was a (-) in there somewhere.
Depending on question 3 i will be willing to write 2 more papers
One attacking my own idea
When I foresee obstacles in the future for RVN having used the coin to it's maximum potential is very low on the list
One defending it
Bye!
Take care everyone! Thank you for all the hard work!
peace
Later Zaab
Thanks Zaab!
To hit maximum number of assets and not be able to issue anymore means that RVN worked to the highest extent
it's hard to model; it's hard to predict
but there will be no adoption if budgeting isn't easy for application developers
imo
eth gas is a nightmare
true
The NASDAQ has ~3,300 companies on it. For reference and understanding this means if the NASDAQ completely converts all its companies to RVN, the total RVN burned will be….. ~1,650,000 or roughly 22% of the total RVN mined daily (until halving). Therefore, the amount of RVN burned will unlikely have any effect on the value of RVN if the proposed system is allowed to pass.
not only market flux but the MATHS
We will never come anywhere near that if the economic design makes it unappealing to issue assets on RVN. A decay to the cost as a safeguard against having become too expensive against dollars or investment of resources to model is necessary. Making so we can issue more assets than our wildwst dreams is a much lower priority and doesn't even matter unless the rest is figured out
Resources to mine*
i stand by the halvening model with a minimum
simple and effective
what about all the other assets we want to be tokenized
The most attractive thing to big time players is security, which implies hashrate, which implies value, which implies adoption (buy pressure)..
vehicles, land deeds, gold bars....
I think halving should be a safeguard not a regular thing, so iirc the chain has ways of knowing how many assets are being issued. I say we only even trigger an upcoming happening if assets being issued grinds to a halt, indicating price issues
I'm on halvening too althought I like the 5-4-3-2-1 flavor
Otherwise whatever the burn fee is is working fine, no reason to just always half it without context
halving is a sharp cost adjustment...talk about bidgeting issues
DGW for asset? lol
POm smooths this out
@skan that would allow people to attack the network by now issuing assets. forcing a halving
no Skan it needs to be predictable to normals because planning/budgeting
not*
the worse thing we can do is design limitations into the project
As it stands it costs 18 cents to issue assets on ethereum. Say what you will about the quality or lack of features, it's still a factor that we are competing against. Obviously RVN is different because there are only so many unique asset names and it has more complex and easier to use features, so it should be more expensive. But we are already starting our nearly x100 before we even go live
twolips it's not an algorithm -- it needs to interact with buyers/users or it's worthless
Skan yeah and did you read that smart contract code?
You're getting into ???
we're UTXO
i know
i dont know algos, i know user
thats the perspective i come from
You don't have to, their browser automatically singles out the important variables for you to change
yeah user want's cheap/easy
and predictable
@Tron what is your preference?
Why is Roshii so quiet? ;)
I say we code in a burn fee halvening that only triggers itself if no assets or very few assets have been issued for an extended period of time
relaxing from a talking section
@skan again that allows the network to the attacked
In this order: 500 RVN -> 500 RVN with halvening and 125 floor -> 500 RVN with 20% drop from original price each halvening.
@skan That doesn't work
when does it half?
@Tron Thnx
skan; have you read POM, kinda does that
Every 2,100,000 blocks. Should be roughly 4 years.
I'm on (3) in tron's list but (1) is ok too
Interesting, how so?
you have to read it
POM is not that -- it would be that with a (-) somewhere..
@skan, user, or miners wouldn't accepts asset transaction into blocks. Which would trigger a halving.
What @CORbie means is that the economics of POM as written seem backwards.
@skan, I'm not saying that would happen. But it is an easy attack vector that we can avoid.
The best part about flat rate of 500 is that if it becomes an issues down the road when more variables are known, we can reevaluate changing to a cheaper model.
Why make asset name creation cheaper when lots of names are being created?
^^
i think we are redesigning an economic model, that is the beauty
sounds like a recipe for spamming the network
a spam recipe? sounds dubious.. :)
again there are 2 values; the cost of creation and the value of a RVN
Absolutely should get more expensive or stay flat with high demand, not cheaper.
the halvening model tron is talking about seems to be the simplest and most predictable
^^
There is an interesting case study with the fixed cost to create a proposal in Dash. It was 5 Dash. That was really cheap at the time (under $5). The same 5 Dash went to $8000.
yes Russ -- the thing the 5-4-3-2-1 adds is legibility/budgetability to app developers (I don't think that's a word)
They haven't changed it, but there were solutions that were built around it.
if a lot are being created, RVN is succeeding, demand increases, RVN cost per creation goes down as value increases...keeping it affordable for all that desire to tokenize assets
And, the value of a Dash proposal went way up when the masternodes were kicking out millions.
Halvening model is my preference
how are we going to vote this?
on discord?
halving on a time schedule will not give a true market value
RVN already has market value
@twolips, you are associating asset creation to rvn value increasing. It doesn't work that way. It is almost always difficulty -> value increasing
@russkidooski By writing and running code :)
frog; you seem to be speaking from a miners perspective
A vote would be interesting - not binding - but really interesting.
the devs have a preference and people will ultimately follow them
@twolips, i am speaking from the perspective that the only thing that holds value is being able to make sure that the value is secure.
the devs have a preference and people MAY follow them
the devs.. those guys..
Would be interesting but could cause community issues if not chosen by devs. I am for no voting. Write and run code.
it is a complex issue; votes should only occur after big discussion
BW agree
let's take an informal vote now
Votes are never needed.
here it is
i vote for pizza
type 1 for 500, 2 for half, 3 for 5-4-3-2-1, 4 for POM, 5 for other
go
3
which one is the 5-4-3-2-1?
i forgot
and this is why no cvote should occure
20% discount at each halving.
like half but -20% orig value
o yea i like that one
3
not famil with the plan
20% discount at each halving. 500->400->300->200->100
Unique asset issuance cost 5->4->3->2->1
russ, how well do you know POM?
Nice round numbers.
not crazy well
but enough
i need to read up on it more
POM seems backwards to me.
same
have you read the proposal?
@twolips Are you recommending POM with the economics as written, or the opposite economics?
this is all backwards
6 (-) POM
yes
well
i see 2 votes
no but it is a great starting point
you guys are so opinionated!
the variables need to be analysed
KISS 54321
ok! there's #3
any more informal non-binding votes?
Is 3 winning?
3 has 3
no other votes
the beauty is when the cost of creation goes down, say to .05 RVN, the value of RVN will be 1,000
VeronicaBOTLast Friday at 3:00 PM
exaggerated for demenstration
if cost goe to 1kRVN, the value willbe .05
^^
twolips. Are you saying that as more assets are created the price decreases?
brb
not the 'price', the cost of creation, yes
okay.
there needs to be a thorough analysis of POM
in the beginning of the #burn-discussion, there are some simple spread sheet examples
but with zaabs proposal it is backwards
how so
more assets being created > price for creation goes down
that is just asking the network to be spammed
So, that only works if the price of raven in the real world follows it. If not, the cost of creation will get lower, and people will start to be able to spam the network with assets.
^
This will make the nodes use more databasing and memory to run RVN.
This is bad ^^
and if a node isnt in sync you can get a lot of problems
this keeps the reation cost stable...great for customer acqusition
but it isnt technically feasable, we dont want the problems ethereum has
can that be cured with avging?
So because it is good for customer aqusition it is okay? Even if it is bad for the network?
daily, weekly,monthy? avgs to adjust cost of creation?
a opposed to what zaab said; each transaction, cost changes?
Lot's of talk but only 3 votes?
type 1 for 500, 2 for half, 3 for 5-4-3-2-1, 4 for POM, 5 for other
6 (-) POM
the POM seems to be a simple formula to be coded in (maybe naive)
i vote 3 if my vote counts, i feel like it has to be a set number, it would be easy to change if needed in future.
idk about network issues
@xiztak agreed
there's 4 for #3 with no other voes -- make it 5
X changing it in the future shows a centralized coin
how
who makes that decision
3 but I'm not for voting
community
and when
it's informal BW just taking temp
community is talkin about it now
and voting
for a set number
uninformed
outline for me vote 2?
haha
haha
2 is following the halvening of coinbase -- 500 250 125 to some floor
1 o 3
of course the 500 magic number is up for debate in 1,2,3..
I agree it would be good to know where 500 came from.
Meaning the thinking behind that exact number
i suggest nybody serious about the importance of this topic, to join the active convo
Maybe @Tron_ can tell a story but it's just (starting_block_reward/10) in my mind..
important to the success of all your hard work
twolips I don't know what that means -- you mean Discord or something?
as far as i know, that is the most active
or do you mean there are like 4 cats in here?
why people in Discord when we here? talk about shouting at clouds..
5000 per block so 500 per aseet creation so 10% of mined coins per block? maybe
^^
interesting
@twolips is there a floor that the cost of issuance would get to on POM?
if attacked it could be 0 or 1 then its game over
seems in the rough spreadsht examples
corbie; here once a week...startin 3 weeks ago
and it's been fun!
a lot more fun in discord
i'm hjere al week...tip ur waitresses
-_-
Is there anything more we are going to discuss?
maybe Xiz concept may fit into POM
need zaab to think about
Nothing on my agenda -- final informal vote seems to favor 5-4-3-2-1
no real support for POM (zorry zaab)
Thanks everyone!
wow, an uninformed vote...impressive
you vote?
what's your vote twolips I don't think I got it
this vote is informal, it means nothing really
^^
exactly
so you don't want to make an informal meaningless vote twolips?
i case u haven't noticed...team POM
ok!!
but (-) or no?
because as is it makes no sense as many of us have pointed out..
haha
many uninformed
..
4 cats i think u called them
I can read and do basic math..
that was just a reference to nobody being here..
write up a retort to zaabs propasal explainin (-); would love to seeit
I like the idea of using ratio of coinbase to burn to set market, just has it in wrong direction
And I'm a (3) guy so don't think we want market anyway..
POM is a self regulating federal reserve
revolutionary and RVN could intro it to the world
Thanks for the discussion everyone -- I'm signing off. Buy RVN!
hope you are all putting a lil more thought into this...could be make or break
@twolips. We are 100% putting lots of thought into this
@twolips This is something that is very important to RVN
i know...hence my passion
and I truely believe POM can be revolutionary
It could be, sure. There are lots of different good option though tbh.
bring thm up...lets out the community to work
a lot of eager minds
POM needs to be more thoroughly developed
we also need working prototypes
it started with fixed burn number and progressed
Can someone point me to a good readup on POM
bring in some thoughts
#burn-discussion on discord
i (vincent) invited you on rvntalk
We're done thank you
submitted by Chatturga to Ravencoin [link] [comments]

The Strange Birth & History of Monero, Part III: Decentralized team

You can read here part I (by americanpegaus). This is the post that motivated me to make the part II. Now i'm doing a third part, and there'll be a final 4th part. This is probably too much but i wasn't able to make it shorter. Some will be interested in going through all them, and maybe someone is even willing to make a summary of the whole serie :D.
Monero - an anonymous coin based on CryptoNote technology
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.0
Comentarios de interés:
-4: "No change, this is just a renaming. In the future, the binaries will have to be changed, as well as some URL, but that's all. By the way, this very account (monero) is shared by several user and is meant to make it easier to change the OP in case of vacancy of the OP. This idea of a shared OP comes from Karmacoin.
Some more things to come:
"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6362672#msg6362672)
-5: “Before this thread is too big, I would like to state that a bug has been identified in the emission curve and we are currently in the process of fixing it (me, TFT, and smooth). Currently coins are emitted at double the rate that was intended. We will correct this in the future, likely by bitshifting values of outputs before a certain height, and then correcting 1 min blocks to 2 min blocks. The changes proposed will be published to a Monero Improvement Protocol on github.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6363016#msg6363016)
[tacotime make public the bug in the emission curve: token creation is currently 2 times what was intended to be, see this chart BTC vs the actual XMR curve, as it was and it is now, vs the curve that was initially planned in yellow see chart]
-14: “Moving discussion to more relevant thread, previous found here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=578192.msg6364026#msg6364026
I have to say that I am surprised that such an idea [halving current balances and then changing block target to 2 min with same block reward to solve the emission curve issue] is even being countenanced - there are several obvious arguments against it.
Perception - what kind of uproar would happen if this was tried on a more established coin? How can users be expected to trust a coin where it is perceived that the devs are able and willing to "dip" into people's wallets to solve problems?
Technically - people are trying to suggest that this will make no difference since it applies to reward and supply, which might be fair enough if the cap was halved also, but it isn't. People's holdings in the coin are being halved, however it is dressed up.
Market price - How can introducing uncertainty in the contents of people's wallets possibly help market price? I may well be making a fool of myself here, but I have never heard of such a fix before, unless you had savings in a Cypriot bank - has this ever been done for another coin?”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6364174#msg6364174)
-15: “You make good points but unfortunately conflicting statements were made and it isn't possible to stick to them all. It was said that this coin had a mining reward schedule similar to bitcoin. In fact it is twice as fast as intended, even even a bit more than twice as fast as bitcoin.
If you acquired your coins on the basis of the advertised reward schedule, you would be disappointed, and rightfully so, as more coins come to into existence more quickly than you were led to believe.
To simply ignore that aspect of the bug is highly problematic. Every solution may be highly problematic, but the one being proposed was agreed as being the least bad by most of the major stakeholders. Maybe it will still not work, this coin will collapse, and there will need to be a relaunch, in which case all your coins will likely be worthless. I hope that doesn't happen.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6364242#msg6364242)
[smooth tries to justify his proposal to solve the emission curve issue: halve every current balance and change block target to 2 min with same block reward]
-16: “This coin wasn't working as advertised. It was supposed to be mined slowly like BTC but under the current emission schedule, 39% would be mined by the first year and 86% by the fourth year. Those targets have been moved out by a factor of 2, i.e. 86% mined by year 8, which is more like BTC's 75% by year 8. So the cap has been moved out much further into the future, constraining present and near-term supply, which is what determines the price.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6364257#msg6364257)
[eizh supports smooth’s plan]
-20: “So long as the process is fair and transparent it makes no difference what the number is... n or n/2 is the same relative value so long as the /2 is applied to everyone. Correcting this now will avoid people accusing the coin of a favourable premine for people who mined in the first week.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6364338#msg6364338)
[random user supporting smooth’s idea]
-21: “Why not a reduction in block reward of slightly more than half to bring it into line with the proposed graph? That would avoid all sorts of perceptual problems, would not upset present coin holders and be barely noticeable to future miners since less than one percent of coins have been mined so far, the alteration would be very small?”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6364348#msg6364348)
-22: “Because that still turns into a pre-mine or instamine where a few people got twice as many coins as everyone else in the first week.
This was always a bug, and should be treated as such.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6364370#msg6364370)
[smooth wants to be sure they can’t be stigmatized as “premine”]
-23: “No, not true [answering to "it makes no difference what the number is... n or n/2 is the same relative value so long as the /2 is applied to everyone"]. Your share of the 18,000,000 coins is being halved - rightly or wrongly.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6364382#msg6364382)
[good point made by a user that is battling “hard” with smooth and his proposal]
-28: “+1 for halving all coins in circulation. Would they completely disappear? What would the process be?”
-31: “I will wait for the next coin based on CryptoNote. Many people, including myself, avoided BMR because TFT released without accepting input from anyone (afaik). I pm'ed TFT 8 days before launch to help and didn't get response until after launch. Based on posting within the thread, I bet there were other people. Now the broken code gets "fixed" by taking away coins.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6364531#msg6364531)
-32: “What you say is true, and I can't blame anyone from simply dropping this coin and wanting a complete fresh start instead. On the other hand, this coin is still gaining in popularity and is already getting close to bytecoin in hash rate, while avoiding its ninja premine. There is a lot done right here, and definitely a few mistakes.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6364574#msg6364574)
[smooth stands for the project legitimacy despite the bugs]
-37: “Since everything is scaled and retroactive, the only person to be affected is... me. Tongue Because I bought BMR with BTC, priced it with incorrect information, and my share relative to the eventual maximum has been halved. Oh well. The rest merely mined coins that never should have been mined. The "taking away coins" isn't a symptom of the fix: it's the fundamental thing that needed fixing. The result is more egalitarian and follows the original intention. Software is always a work-in-progress. Waiting for something ideal at launch is pretty hopeless. edit: Let me point out that most top cryptocurrencies today were released before KGW and other new difficulty retargeting algorithms became widespread. Consequently they had massive instamines on the first day, even favorites in good standing like LTC. Here the early miners are voluntarily reducing their eventual stake for the sake of fairness. How cool is that?”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6364886#msg6364886)
[this is eizh supporting the project too]
-43: “I'm baffled that people are arguing about us making the emission schedule more fair. I'm an early adopter. This halves my money, and it's what I want to do. There's another change that needs to be talked about too: we don't believe that microscopic levels of inflation achieved at 9 or 10 years will secure a proof-of-work network. In fact, there's a vast amount of evidence from DogeCoin and InfiniteCoin that it will not. So, we'd like to fix reward when it goes between 0.25 - 1.00 coins. To do so, we need to further bitshift values to decrease the supply under 264-1 atomic units to accommodate this. Again, this hurts early adopters (like me), but is designed to ensure the correct operation of the chain in the long run. It's less than a week old, and if we're going to hardfork in economic changes that make sense we should do it now. We're real devs turning monero into the coin it should have been, and our active commitment should be nothing but good news. Fuck the pump and dumps, we're here to create something with value that people can use.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6366134#msg6366134)
[tacotime brings to the public for first time the tail emission proposal and writes what is my favourite sentence of the whole monero history: “Fuck the pump and dumps, we're here to create something with value that people can use”]
-51: “I think this is the right attitude. Like you I stand to "lose" from this decision in having my early mining halved, but I welcome it. Given how scammy the average coin launch is, I think maximizing fairness for everyone is the right move. Combining a fair distribution with the innovation of Cryptonote tech could be what differentiates Monero from other coins.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6366346#msg6366346)
-59: “Hello! It is very good that you've created this thread. I'm ok about renaming. But I can't agree with any protocol changes based only on decisions made by bitcointalk.org people. This is because not all miners are continiously reading forum. Any decision about protocol changes are to be made by hashpower-based voting. From my side I will agree on such a decision only if more than 50% of miners will agree. Without even such a simple majority from miners such changes are meaningless. In case of hardfork that isn't supported by majority of miners the network will split into two nets with low-power fork and high-power not-forking branches. I don't think that this will be good for anybody. Such a voting is easy to be implemented by setting minor_version of blocks to a specific value and counting decisions made after 1000 of blocks. Do you agree with such a procedure?”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6368478#msg6368478)
[TFT appears after a couple days of inactivity]
-63: “In few days I will publish a code with merged mining support. This code will be turned ON only by voting process from miners. What does it mean:
The same procedure is suitable for all other protocol changes.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6368720#msg6368720)
[And now he is back, TFT is all about merged mining]
-67: “We don't agree that a reverse split amounts to "taking" coins. I also wouldn't agree that a regular forward split would be "giving" coins. It's an exchange of old coins with new coins, with very nearly the exact same value. There is a very slight difference in value due to the way the reward schedule is capped, but that won't be relevant for years or decades. Such a change is entirely reasonable to fix an error in a in coin that has only existed for a week.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6368861#msg6368861)
-68: “There were no error made in this coin but now there is an initiative to make some changes. Changes are always bad and changes destroy participant confidence even in case these changes are looking as useful. We have to be very careful before making any changes in coins”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6368939#msg6368939)
[TFT does not accept the unexpected emission curve as a bug]
-72: “You are wrong TFT. The original announcement described the coin as having a reward curve "close to Bitcoin's original curve" (those are your exact words). The code as implemented has a reward curve that is nothing like bitcoin. It will be 86% mined in 4 years. It will be 98% mined in 8 years. Bitcoin is 50% mined in 4 years, and 75% in 8 years.
With respect TFT, you did the original fork, and you deserve credit for that. But this coin has now gone beyond your initial vision. It isn't just a question of whether miners are on bitcointalk or not.
There is a great team of people who are working hard to make this coin a success, and this team is collaborating regularly through forum posts, IRC, PM and email. And beyond that a community of users who by and large have been very supportive of the efforts we've taken to move this forward.
Also, miners aren't the only stakeholders, and while a miner voting process is great, it isn't the answer to every question. Though I do agree that miners need to be on board with any hard fork to avoid a harmful split.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6369137#msg6369137)
[smooth breaks out publicily for first time against TFT]
-75: “I suppose that merged mining as a possible option is a good idea as soon as nobody is forced to use it. MM is a possibility to accept PoW calculated for some other network. It helps to increase a security of both networks and makes it possible for miners not to choose between two networks if they want both:
Important things to know about MM:
Actually the only change that goes with MM is that we are able to accept PoW from some other net with same hash-function. Each miner can decide his own other net he will merge mine BMR with.
And this is still very secure.
This way I don't see any disadvantage in merged mining. What disadvantages do you see in MM?”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6369255#msg6369255)
[TFT stands for merged mining]
-77: “Merged mining essentially forces people to merge both coins because that is the only economically rational decision. I do not want to support the ninja-premined coin with our hash rate.
Merged mining makes perfect sense for a coin with a very low hash rate, otherwise unable to secure itself effectively. That is the case with coins that merge mine with bitcoin. This coin already has 60% of the hash rate of bytecoin, and has no need to attach itself to another coin and encourage sharing of hash rate between the two. It stands well on its own and will likely eclipse bytecoin very soon.
I want people to make a clear choice between the fair launched coin and the ninja-premine that was already 80% mined before it was made public. Given such a choice I believe most will just choose this coin. Letting them choose both allows bytecoin to free ride on what we are doing here. Let the ninja-preminers go their own way.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6369386#msg6369386)
[smooth again]
-85: “One of you is saying that there was no mistake in the emission formula, while the other is. I'm not asking which I should believe . . I'm asking for a way to verify this”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6369874#msg6369874)
[those that have not been paying attention to the soap opera since the beginning do not understand anything at all]
-86: “The quote I posted "close to Bitcoin's original curve" is from the original announcement here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563821.0
I think there was also some discussion on the thread about it being desirable to do that.
At one point in that discussion, I suggested increasing the denominator by a factor of 4, which is what ended up being done, but I also suggested retaining the block target at 2 minutes, which was not done. The effect of making one change without the other is to double the emission rate from something close to bitcoin to something much faster (see chart a few pages back on this thread).”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6369935#msg6369935)
[smooth answers just a few minutes later]
-92: “I'm happy the Bitmonero attracts so much interest.
I'm not happy that some people want to destroy it.
Here is a simple a clear statement about plans: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582670
We have two kind of stakeholders we have respect: miders and coin owners.
Before any protocol changes we will ask miners for agreement. No changes without explicit agreement of miners is possible.
We will never take away or discount any coins that are already emitted. This is the way we respect coin owners.
All other issues can be discussed, proposed and voted for. I understand that there are other opinions. All decisions that aren't supported in this coin can be introduced in any new coin. It's ok to start a new fork. It's not ok to try to destroy an existsing network.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6370324#msg6370324)
[TFT is kinda upset – he can see how the community is “somehow” taking over]
-94: “Sounds like there's probably going to be another fork then. Sigh.
I guess it will take a few tries to get this coin right.
The problem with not adjusting existing coins is that it make this a premine/instamine. If the emission schedule is changed but not as a bug fix, then earlier miners got an unfair advantage over everyone else. Certainly there are coins with premines and instamines, but there's a huge stigma and such a coin will never achieve the level of success we see for this coin. This was carefully discussed during the team meeting, which was announced a day ahead of time, and everyone with any visible involvement with the coin, you included, was invited. It is unfortunate you couldn't make it to that meeting TFT.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6370411#msg6370411)
[smooth is desperate due to TFT lack of interest in collaboration, and he publicly speaks about an scission for first time]
-115: “Very rough website online, monero.cc (in case you asked, the domain name was voted on IRC, like the crypto name and its code). Webdesigner, webmaster, writers... wanted.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6374702#msg6374702)
[Even though the lack of consensus and the obvious chaos, the community keeps going on: Monero already has his own site]
-152: “Here's one idea on fixing the emissions without adjusting coin balances.
We temporarily reduce the emission rate to half of the new target for as long as it takes for the total emission from 0 to match the new curve. Thus there will be a temporary period when mining is very slow, and during that period there was a premine.
But once that period is compete, from the perspective of new adopters, there was no premine -- the total amount of coins emitted is exactly what the slow curve says it should be (and the average rate since genesis is almost the same as the rate at which they are mining, for the first year or so at least).
This means the mining rewards will be very low for a while (if done now then roughly two weeks), and may not attract many new miners. However, I think there enough of us early adopters (and even some new adopters who are willing to make a temporary sacrifice) who want to see this coin succeed to carry it through this period.
The sooner this is done the shorter the catch up period needs to be.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6378032#msg6378032)
[smooth makes a proposal to solve the “emission curve bug” without changing users balances and without favoring the early miners]
-182: “We have added a poll in the freenode IRC room "Poll #2: "Emission future of Monero, please vote!!" started by stickh3ad. Options: #1: "Keep emission like now"; #2: "Keep emission but change blocktime and final reward"; #3: "Keep emission but change blocktime"; #4: "Keep emission but change final reward"; #5: "Change emission"; #6: "Change emission and block time"; #7: "Change emission and block time and final reward"
Right now everyone is voting for #4, including me.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6379518#msg6379518)
[tacotime announces an ongoing votation on IRC]
-184: “ change emission: need to bitshift old values on the network or double values after a certain block. controversial. not sure if necessary. can be difficult to implement. keep emission: straightforward, we don't keep change emission or block time. change final reward is simple. if (blockSubsidy < finalSubsidy) return finalSubsidy; else return blockSubsidy;”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6379562#msg6379562)
-188: “Yeah, well. We need to change the front page to reflect this if we can all agree on it.
We should post the emissions curve and the height and value that subsidy will be locked in to.
In my opinion this is the least disruptive thing we can do at the moment, and should ensure that the fork continues to be mineable and secure in about 8 years time without relying on fees to secure it (which I think you agree is a bad idea).”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6379871#msg6379871)
[tacotime]
-190: “I don't think the proposed reward curve is bad by any means. I do think it is bad to change the overall intent of a coin's structure and being close to bitcoins reward curve was a bit part of the intent of this coin. It was launched in response to the observation that bytecoin was 80% mined in less than two years (too fast) and also that it was ninja premined, with a stated goal that the new coin have a reward curve close to bitcoin.
At this point I'm pretty much willing to throw in the towel on this launch:
  1. No GUI
  2. No web site
  3. Botched reward curve (at least botched relative to stated intent)
  4. No pool (and people who are enthusiastically trying to mine having trouble getting any blocks; some of them have probably given up and moved on).
  5. No effective team behind it at launch
  6. No Mac binaries (I don't think this is all that big a deal, but its another nail)
I thought this could be fixed but with all the confusion and lack of clear direction or any consistent vision, now I'm not so sure.
I also believe that merged mining is basically a disaster for this coin, and is probably being quietly promoted by the ninjas holding 80% of bytecoin, because they know it keeps their coin from being left behind, and by virtue of first mover advantage, probably relegates any successors to effective irrelevance (like namecoin, etc.).
We can do better. It's probably time to just do better.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6380065#msg6380065)
[smooth is disappointed]
-191: “The website does exist now, it's just not particularly informative yet. :) But, I agree that thankful_for_today has severely mislead everyone by stating the emission was "close to Bitcoin's" (if he's denying that /2 rather than /4 emission schedule was unintentional, as he seems to be). I'm also against BCN merge mining. It works against the goal of overtaking BCN and if that's not a goal, I don't know what we're even doing here. I'll dedicate my meagre mining to voting against that.
That said, you yourself have previously outlined why relaunches and further clones fail. I'd rather stick with this one and fix it.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6380235#msg6380235)
[eizh tries to keep smooth on board]
-196: “BCN is still growing as well. It is up to 1.2 million now. If merged mining happens, (almost) everyone will just mine both. The difficulty on this coin will jump up to match BCN (in fact both will likely go higher since the hash rate will be combined) and again it is an instamine situation. (Those here the first week get the benefit of easy non-merged mining, everyone else does not.) Comments were made on this thread about this not being yet another pump-and-dump alt. I think that could have been the case, but sadly, I don't really believe that it is.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6380778#msg6380778)
-198: “There's no point in fragmenting talent. If you don't think merge mining is a good idea, I'd prefer we just not add it to the code.
Bitcoin had no web site or GUI either initially. Bitcoin-QT was the third Bitcoin client.
If people want a pool, they can make one. There's no point in centralizing the network when it's just began, though. Surely you must feel this way.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6381866#msg6381866)
[tacotime also wants smooth on board]
-201: “My personal opinion is that I will abandon the fork if merge mining is added. And then we can discuss a new fork. Until then I don't think Monero will be taken over by another fork.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6381970#msg6381970)
[tacotime opens the season: if merged mining is implemented, he will leave the ship]
-203: “Ditto on this. If the intention wasn't to provide a clearweb launched alternative to BCN, then I don't see a reason for this fork to exist. BCN is competition and miners should make a choice.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6382097#msg6382097)
[eizh supports tacotime]
-204: “+1 Even at the expense of how much I already "invested" in this coin.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.msg6382177#msg6382177)
[NoodleDoodle is also against merged mining]
This is basically everything worth reading in this thread. This thread was created in the wrong category, and its short life of about 2 days was pretty interesting. Merged mining was rejected and it ended up with the inactivity of TFT for +7 days and the creation of a new github repo the 30th of April. It is only 12 days since launch and a decentralized team is being built.
Basically the community had forked (but not the chain) and it was evolving and moving forward to its still unclear future.
These are the main takeaways of this thread:
  • The legitimacy of the "leaders" of the community is proven when they proposed and supported the idea of halving the balances for the greater good to solve the emission curve issue without any possible instamine accusation. Also their long-term goals and values rejecting merged-mining with a "primined scam"
  • It is decided that, as for now, it is “too late” to change the emission curve, and finally monero will mint 50% of its coin in ~1.3 years (bitcoin did it after 3.66 years) and 86% of its coins in 4 years (bitcoin does it in ~11 years) (was also voted here) (see also this chart)
  • It is decided that a “minimum subsidy” or “tail emission” to incentivize miners “forever” and avoid scaling fees will be added (it will be finally added to the code march 2015)
  • Merged mining is plainly rejected by the future “core team” and soon rejected by "everyone". This will trigger TFT inactivity.
  • The future “core team” is somehow being formed in a decentralized way: tacotime, eizh, NoodleDoodle, smooth and many others
And the most important. All this (and what is coming soon) is a proof of the decentralization of Monero. Probably comparable to Bitcoin first days. This is not a company building a for-profit project (even if on the paper it is not for-profit), this a group of disconnected individuals sharing a goal and working together to reach it.
Soon will be following a final part where i'll collect the bitcointalk logs in the current official announcement threads. There you'll be able to follow the decentralized first steps of develoment (open source pool, miner optimizations and exchanges, all surrounded by fud trolls, lots of excitmen and a rapidly growing collaborative community.
submitted by el_hispano to Monero [link] [comments]

Draft of CGB Website's new text - Your Input Requested!

EDIT - SITE IS LIVE: http://cgb.holdings

Greetings everyone. I am posting a draft of some of the sections of the new website. They are a work in progress and any input on this content or anything else you would like to see on the new site is appreciated! The website will be focusing on educating investors of all ability so that they can understand the crypto-currency markets and make wise decisions within them. Without this understanding, our markets will not be able to efficiently, and with confidence, allocate capital to the true pillars of this new economy.
Note: Most of my updates can be seen directly here. I expect to have this completed by the weekend so that we can hopefully have the new site up and running. Even once up, there will be lots of work to do to really perfect it.

Site Navigation:

Quick Nav: FAQ | Block Explorer | Paper Wallet | Get CGB
Main Nav: Home | About | Getting Started | Investor Brief | Blog | Resources | Contact
The main navigation categories may have a submenu. Any sub items of this submenu are page sections.
Home
About
  • About CGB
  • Team
  • Learn More
    • Papers and Articles
    • CGB's Life Cycle
    • Market Fundamentals
  • Frequently Asked Questions
Getting Started
  • Quick Overview
  • Get CGB
  • Storage and Use
  • Investor Brief
Blog
Resources
  • CGB Resources
  • Community
    • CGB Communities
    • Support CGB
    • Development
    • Community Content
    • CGB Accepted Here
  • Charts and Data
    • Embedded Live Data
    • External Live data (links)
    • Static Charts
    • Analysis
  • Marketing
    • Marketing Strategy
    • Viral Concepts
    • Material
    • Press
Contact

Home

  • (logo)
  • Released in late June 2013, Cryptogenic Bullion was designed primarily with wealth preservation in mind. With its accelerated mining period, and fast declining inflation, Cryptogenic Bullion is now entering it’s final stage as an interest bearing, low inflation, cryptographic digital asset.
  • Wallet download selection
  • Quick Information section
  • What is Cryptogenic Bullion? - Cryptogenic Bullion is a peer-to-peer internet currency that enables instant payments to anyone in the world. Its fundamental specifications enable it to efficiently function as a store of wealth.
  • Energy and Cost Efficient - Our network requires far less energy than generating hardware-intensive proof-of-work hashes. Proof-of-stake also does away with the ~$1 billion “tax” on the Bitcoin network through proof-of-work blocks.
  • Higher Security - Maintaining the network through the hybrid proof-of-work/proof-of-stake algorithm reduces the risk of the Selfish-Miner Flaw, 51% attacks, Kimoto Gravity Attack and the block bloating that have been used to exploit other currencies.
  • Coin Specifications - Cryptogenic Bullion is based on a hybrid Proof of Stake / Proof of Work scrypt algorithm. It has a block interval of 60 seconds and retargets difficulty every 2 blocks. A reward of 1.5% interest is earned by those who maintain a savings of CGB, while 0.5% interest is earned by miners who also help to secure the network.
  • A Digital Asset - Cryptogenic Bullion is a digital asset with all of the properties of money. Like gold, it is portable, divisible, fungible, scarce, low inflation, durable, non-consumable, and a store of wealth. It can be stored in a private safe and yet transferred across the globe in minutes.
  • Get Involved - Our community is focused on empowering its members with the knowledge and resources required to quickly spread the benefits of Cryptogenic Bullion to new participants.
  • Updates and News Latest blog information, twitter feed, etc.
  • Investor Brief
    $___ USD/CGB Price $500,000 Market Cap B_____CGB/BTC Price 950,000 CGB Total Supply Last updated: X seconds ago

About

About CGB:
Cryptogenic Bullion is a digital asset with all of the qualities of money. It is a descendant of Bitcoin, but employs an advanced security model which is more efficient and more secure than Bitcoin. The problems of today's debt based fiat currencies find solutions in cutting-edge decentralized cryptographic currencies like Cryptogenic Bullion. Designed to function as a store of wealth, CGB's fundamentals emulate the properties and supply of gold.
While Cryptogenic Bullion shares many traits with Bitcoin such as fast global payments, decentralization, pseudo-anonymity, and non-reversible transactions, there are many improvements which allow CGB to more reliably store wealth. A critical requirement for storing wealth is a low inflation rate. Cryptogenic Bullion is a very rare exception in that it has nearly completed its volatile inflationary stage and settled into its maximum yearly inflation rate of 2%. It also allows prudent savers of Cryptogenic Bullion to earn up to 1.5% interest on funds left unspent in their wallets for at least 30 days.
Crypto-currencies are finding support among a massive and diverse range of participants. For newcomers, a visit to one of the following pages would be beneficial depending on your current level of understanding and intention. Cryptogenic Bullion emulate the properties of gold, a classic safe-haven asset, and also represents a part of the movement towards a more fair and honest system of money. For more details on why and how, see the Fundamental Knowledge section. To quickly learn more about the crypto-markets, see the Investor Brief section. For analysing market dynamics, see the Market Fundamentals section.
Specifications
  • Proof of Work/Proof of Stake Hybrid
  • Algorithm: Scrypt
  • Linear difficulty retarget (every 2 blocks)
  • 5 Confirmations
  • 60 Second block time
  • 1.5% Annual interest earned
  • Subsidy halving after every 50k blocks until reward of 0.01
  • Target ~1,000,000 CGB
  • 0.5% PoW & 1.5% PoS inflation
  • Based on Peercoin & Novacoin
Team:
Fundamental Knowledge:
In order to understand the need for cryptographic currencies like Bitcoin and Cryptogenic Bullion, we must consider a number of fundamental challenges with our current financial system, and the solutions that cryptographic currencies provide. The world's currencies are referred to as debt-based fiat currencies because they are not backed by a physical asset like gold, and can burden up to 30 participants with debt for each actual dollar in reserve, creating the potential for bank runs. It helps to realize that when a credit card is used to purchase something, dollars are created , and when you pay it off, dollars are destroyed. This scheme is referred to as fractional reserve banking and can not happen in a digital currency system without the owner's knowledge because the supply is strictly controlled by a decentralized protocol.
We are beginning, as a society, to understand the dangers and inefficiencies found in centralized systems as corruptions and self destructive processes manifest themselves with no true remedy. As our society looks for answers, they are being found in technological advances which allow us to connect with each other in more meaningful ways which do not require a third party. Cryptographic currencies provide the convenience of cash, with neither the excessive centralized printing, nor the potential for censorship or sanctions which block the transmission of funds. A new economy is forming with various crypto-currencies attempting to fill different roles within the ecosystem. It is imperative that we capitalize these technologies through careful investment to allow for the necessary development which will enable them to be a major part of modern society. To quickly learn more about the crypto-markets, see the Investor Brief section.
Trust in crypto-currencies must begin with a basic understanding of how the system functions and how to use it. Technology has existed for decades now which allow us to verify that a message was signed by an individual. This authentication technology is now used to prove that the holder of a private wallet has sent funds form that wallet to another. Keeping this key secret is the responsibility of each participant and this responsibility is the price for the freedom enabled by cryptographic currencies. Every transaction that has ever occurred is recorded in a distributed ledger which proves the current balance of all wallets in order to validate further transactions. Blocks created every 60 seconds containing all of the new transactions are added to the top of the block chain and further serve to set all previous blocks in "cryptographic" stone. For more details on how CGB's decentralized protocols provide trusted security and honest money, see the Papers and Articles section.
In order to get a glimpse of what the future cryptographic currency ecosystem could look like we must accept that there are many different roles to fill, and it is difficult for one currency to efficiently fill all roles. A store of wealth, like Cryptogenic Bullion (CGB), must have a low inflation rate to preserve capital and reduce volatility. Stability can also be encouraged if the bearer is allowed to earn interest on savings stored unspent for a specified length of time. A currency, like Dogecoin (DOGE), must have a higher inflation rate to slightly exceed the adoption rate. This provides liquidity and encourages spending which furthers the expansion of the participant base. A market gateway, like Bitcoin (BTC), must also have a higher inflation rate to match adoption so that liquidity is maintained which enhances the access to each of its markets. The market gateway also insulates the cryptographic currencies and stores of wealth from the market fluctuations caused by volatile shifts in demand for fiat currencies vs. crypto-currencies as a whole. For more information on these dynamics, see the Market Fundamentals section.
Frequently Asked Questions:
Categories
  • General
  • Investing
  • Storing Wealth
  • Wallet Software
  • (more?)
...
Continued in this comment (directly below).
submitted by papersheepdog to CryptogenicBullion [link] [comments]

(({{{Bitcoin$Free}})) Best. Cryptocurrency. Trading. Platform.

[+#Bitcoin$Free}}))Best Cryptocurrency Trading Platform THE BITCOIN MANIA Trading on crypto currencies, is the new trend taking over of the digital money market. Bitcoin, the crypto currency is breaking records with 4,500% growth in the last year, proving that the future is in crypto currencies. BITCOIN TRAINING DAY Join our risk free "Bitcoin Club Marathon", where you will get a demo account to perfect your trading skills. Here you receive an opportunity to learn from others without risking your money. Crypto Signals Crypto currencies exchange market could be highly fluctuant, presenting numerous opportunities 24/7. The club provides you Signals system that will send you alerts whenever an opportunity arises.
bitcoin,.,price,.,bitcoin,.,mining,.,bitcoin,.,to gbp,.,bitcoin,.,news,.,bitcoin,.,wallet,.,bitcoin,.,to usd,.,bitcoin,.,price chart,.,bitcoin,.,exchange rate,.,bitcoin,.,cash,.,bitcoin,.,price history,.,bitcoin,.,bitcoin,.,atm,.,bitcoin,.,account,.,bitcoin,.,atm london,.,bitcoin,.,alternative,.,bitcoin,.,address,.,bitcoin,.,atm near me,.,bitcoin,.,august 1st,.,bitcoin,.,atm uk,.,bitcoin,.,asic,.,bitcoin,.,app,.,a,.,bitcoin,.,to naira,.,a,.,bitcoin,.,miner,.,a,.,bitcoin,.,address,.,a,.,bitcoin,.,worth,.,a,.,bitcoin,.,governance network,.,a,.,bitcoin,.,atm,.,a,.,bitcoin,.,faucet,.,a,.,bitcoin,.,transaction,.,a,.,bitcoin,.,wallet,.,a,.,bitcoin,.,to a dollar,.,bitcoin,.,buy,.,bitcoin,.,blockchain,.,bitcoin,.,bubble,.,bitcoin,.,buy uk,.,bitcoin,.,broker,.,bitcoin,.,block explorer,.,bitcoin,.,billionaire,.,bitcoin,.,bank,.,bitcoin,.,blockchain size,.,bitcoin,.,bbc,.,bitcoin,.,b font,.,bitcoin,.,miner.b,.,bitcoin,.,b symbol,.,mel b,.,bitcoin,.,buy,.,bitcoin,.,capital b,.,bitcoin,.,b-eleven,.,bitcoin,.,plan b,.,bitcoin,.,b-wallet,.,bitcoin,.,b&h,.,bitcoin,.,bitcoin,.,chart,.,bitcoin,.,converter,.,bitcoin,.,core,.,bitcoin,.,crash,.,bitcoin,.,currency,.,bitcoin,.,current value,.,bitcoin,.,calculator uk,.,bitcoin,.,creator,.,bitcoin,.,casino,.,c,.,bitcoin,.,miner,.,c,.,bitcoin,.,library,.,c't,.,bitcoin,.,c,.,bitcoin,.,wallet,.,bitcoin,.,ac id,.,bitcoin,.,c sharp,.,bitcoin,.,miner-c pup,.,bitcointalk c-cex,.,bitcoin,.,c==,.,bitcoin,.,debit card,.,bitcoin,.,difficulty,.,bitcoin,.,dollar,.,bitcoin,.,debit card uk,.,bitcoin,.,dark,.,bitcoin,.,documentary,.,bitcoin,.,drop,.,bitcoin,.,define,.,bitcoin,.,dark web,.,bitcoin,.,download,.,bitcoin.d,.,bitcoin,.,xt d,.,bitcoind backup,.,d-wave,.,bitcoin,.,mining,.,the d,.,bitcoin,.,atm,.,d'angelo,.,bitcoin,.,system d,.,bitcoin,.,init.d,.,bitcoind,.,d las vegas,.,bitcoin,.,/etc/init.d/bitcoind,.,bitcoin,.,exchange,.,bitcoin,.,explained,.,bitcoin,.,etf,.,bitcoin,.,exchange uk,.,bitcoin,.,ethereum,.,bitcoin,.,explorer,.,bitcoin,.,exchange rate uk,.,bitcoin,.,euro,.,bitcoin,.,exchange rate chart,.,bitcoin,.,exchange rate history,.,bitcoin,.,e wallet,.,,.,bitcoin,.,e.g. crossword,.,bitcoin,.,e.g. crossword clue,.,bitcoin,.,e commerce,.,bitcoin,.,e-currency,.,bitcoin,.,e money,.,bitcoin,.,e card,.,bitcoin,.,ebook,.,bitcoin,.,e-voucher,.,bitcoin,.,e pill,.,bitcoin,.,fork,.,bitcoin,.,forecast,.,bitcoin,.,faucet,.,bitcoin,.,forum,.,bitcoin,.,for dummies,.,bitcoin,.,farm,.,bitcoin,.,fees,.,bitcoin,.,founder,.,bitcoin,.,future,.,bitcoin,.,fund,.,f#,.,bitcoin,.,price of,.,bitcoin,.,brother john f,.,bitcoin,.,bh f,.,bitcoin,.,msil,.,bitcoin,.,miner-f,.,bitcoin,.,gbp,.,bitcoin,.,graph,.,bitcoin,.,growth,.,bitcoin,.,generator,.,bitcoin,.,gambling,.,bitcoin,.,github,.,bitcoin,.,games,.,bitcoin,.,guide,.,bitcoin,.,google finance,.,bitcoin,.,global capital,.,g,.,bitcoin,.,price,.,g,.,bitcoin,.,charts,.,g,.,bitcoin,.,value,.,g,.,bitcoin,.,mining calculator,.,bitcoin,.,guiminer,.,ghash,.,bitcoin,.,g coin,.,bitcointalk,.,g cash to,.,bitcoin,.,bitcoin,.,miner.g,.,bitcoin,.,hard fork,.,bitcoin,.,hardware wallet,.,bitcoin,.,history,.,bitcoin,.,historical price,.,bitcoin,.,hack,.,bitcoin,.,how to buy,.,bitcoin,.,halving,.,bitcoin,.,how it works,.,bitcoin,.,hashrate,.,bitcoin,.,hardware wallet uk,.,bitcoin,.,h/s,.,c&h,.,bitcoin,.,main.h,.,bitcoin,.,hash.h,.,bitcoin,.,coins.h,.,bitcoin,.,best b#$h -,.,bitcoin,.,best b#$h -,.,bitcoin,.,lyrics,.,h&r block,.,bitcoin,.,h-not-zero,.,bitcoin,.,bitcoin,.,investment,.,bitcoin,.,in gbp,.,bitcoin,.,investment trust,.,bitcoin,.,index,.,bitcoin,.,inventor,.,bitcoin,.,in usd,.,bitcoin,.,india,.,bitcoin,.,inflation,.,bitcoin,.,in dollars,.,bitcoin,.,investment uk,.,i,.,bitcoin,.,in usd,.,i,.,bitcoin,.,in inr,.,i,.,bitcoin,.,to pkr,.,i,.,bitcoin,.,to dollar,.,i,.,bitcoin,.,to naira,.,i,.,bitcoin,.,in rs,.,i,.,bitcoin,.,= satoshi,.,i,.,bitcoin,.,is equal to,.,i,.,bitcoin,.,berapa rupiah,.,i,.,bitcoin,.,in inr in 2009,.,bitcoin,.,japan,.,bitcoin,.,jobs,.,bitcoin,.,japan legal,.,bitcoin,.,jesus,.,bitcoin,.,jobs london,.,bitcoin,.,jobs uk,.,bitcoin,.,july 2017,.,bitcoin,.,jokes,.,bitcoin,.,june 2017,.,bitcoin,.,jihan,.,bitcoin,.,j,.,bitcoinj tutorial,.,bitcoinj micropayments,.,mary j,.,bitcoin,.,belle,.,mary j,.,bitcointalk,.,j maurice,.,bitcoin,.,mary j,.,bitcoin,.,j p morgan,.,bitcoin,.,,.,bitcoin,.,j vty,.,обменник,.,bitcoin,.,bitcoin,.,kurs,.,bitcoin,.,kraken,.,bitcoin,.,koers,.,bitcoin,.,knots,.,bitcoin,.,key,.,bitcoin,.,kopen,.,bitcoin,.,korea,.,bitcoin,.,knowledge,.,bitcoin,.,kaufen,.,bitcoin,.,kurz,.,bitcoin,.,k line,.,bitcoin,.,k,.,bitcoin,.,k value,.,bitcoin,.,k chart,.,john k,.,bitcoin,.,bitcoin,.,k-market,.,k-market jätkäsaari,.,bitcoin,.,k čemu,.,bitcoin,.,bitcoin,.,live price,.,bitcoin,.,latest news,.,bitcoin,.,login,.,bitcoin,.,logo,.,bitcoin,.,ledger,.,bitcoin,.,live,.,bitcoin,.,local,.,bitcoin,.,lottery,.,bitcoin,.,london,.,bitcoin,.,loan,.,bitcoin,.,l-39,.,l-39,.,bitcoin,.,jet,.,bitcoin,.,l'altra faccia della moneta,.,l'ambassade,.,bitcoin,.,l'avenir du,.,bitcoin,.,l'histoire du,.,bitcoin,.,l'inventeur du,.,bitcoin,.,l'évolution du,.,bitcoin,.,l'avenir des,.,bitcoins,.,l'origine du,.,bitcoin,.,bitcoin,.,market,.,bitcoin,.,millionaire,.,bitcoin,.,mining software,.,bitcoin,.,meaning,.,bitcoin,.,mining hardware,.,bitcoin,.,machine,.,bitcoin,.,mining pool,.,bitcoin,.,magazine,.,bitcoin,.,mining rig,.,m,.,bitcoin,.,meaning,.,m.bitcoin2048,.,bitcoin,.,m of n,.,bitcoin,.,m of n transactions,.,siriusxm,.,bitcoin,.,triple m,.,bitcoin,.,m lhuillier,.,bitcoin,.,m pesa vs,.,bitcoin,.,m.bitcoin2048.com отзывы,.,mercado,.,bitcoin,.,bitcoin,.,news uk,.,bitcoin,.,network,.,bitcoin,.,net worth,.,bitcoin,.,news reddit,.,bitcoin,.,nodes,.,bitcoin,.,network fee,.,bitcoin,.,near me,.,bitcoin,.,nedir,.,bitcoin,.,news india,.,bitcoin.n,.,bitcoin,.,n.ireland,.,n&p,.,bitcoin,.,consulting,.,shares in,.,bitcoin,.,piotr_n,.,bitcointalk,.,piotr_n,.,bitcoin,.,m of n,.,bitcoin,.,bitcoinspot.n,.,bitcoin,.,or ethereum,.,bitcoin,.,owner,.,bitcoin,.,online,.,bitcoin,.,original price,.,bitcoin,.,offline wallet,.,bitcoin,.,online wallet,.,bitcoin,.,outlook,.,bitcoin,.,official site,.,bitcoin,.,on amazon,.,o,.,bitcoin,.,e seguro,.,o,.,bitcoinu,.,bitcoin,.,o'reilly,.,bitcoin,.,to aud,.,bitcoin,.,o'reilly pdf,.,bitcoin,.,to euro,.,bitcoin,.,to btc,.,sve o,.,bitcoin,.,o'reilly,.,bitcoin,.,and the blockchain,.,bitcoin,.,price gbp,.,bitcoin,.,predictions,.,bitcoin,.,price uk,.,bitcoin,.,price prediction,.,bitcoin,.,paper wallet,.,bitcoin,.,pizza,.,,.,bitcoin,.,price live,.,p np,.,bitcoin,.,r.i.p.,.,bitcoin,.,p-free,.,bitcoin,.,win32/bitcoinminer.p,.,bitcoin,.,qt,.,bitcoin,.,qr code,.,bitcoin,.,quote,.,bitcoin,.,quantum computing,.,bitcoin,.,que es,.,bitcoin,.,quora,.,bitcoin,.,questions,.,bitcoin,.,qt update,.,bitcoin,.,qt wallet location,.,bitcoin,.,quantum,.,bitcoin,.,q,.,bitcoin,.,q es,.,q son,.,bitcoins,.,q es un,.,bitcoin,.,q son los,.,bitcoins,.,q es el,.,bitcoin,.,q comprar con,.,bitcoins,.,bitcoins que significa,.,bitcoin,.,q significa,.,bitcoin,.,rate,.,bitcoin,.,reddit,.,bitcoin,.,review,.,bitcoin,.,rival,.,bitcoin,.,rate gbp,.,bitcoin,.,rise,.,bitcoin,.,regulation,.,bitcoin,.,rich list,.,bitcoin,.,rate history,.,bitcoin,.,regulation uk,.,r,.,bitcoinmarkets,.,r,.,bitcoin,.,uk,.,r,.,bitcoin,.,canada,.,r,.,bitcoin,.,cash,.,r,.,bitcoin,.,package,.,r,.,bitcointalk,.,r,.,bitcoin,.,mining,.,r,.,bitcoin,.,abc,.,r,.,bitcoin,.,analysis,.,bitcoinxt,.,bitcoin,.,share price,.,bitcoin,.,stock,.,bitcoin,.,split,.,bitcoin,.,segwit,.,bitcoin,.,stock price,.,bitcoin,.,shares,.,bitcoin,.,symbol,.,bitcoin,.,suisse,.,bitcoin,.,scams,.,bitcoin,.,stock market,.,bitcoins value,.,bitcoin,.,s curve,.,bitcoin,.,miners,.,gh/s,.,bitcoin,.,th/s,.,bitcoin,.,th/s,.,bitcoin,.,miner,.,mh/s,.,bitcoin,.,1th/s,.,bitcoin,.,miner,.,10th/s,.,bitcoin,.,miner,.,20th/s,.,bitcoin,.,miner,.,bitcoin,.,trading,.,bitcoin,.,to dollar,.,bitcoin,.,transaction,.,bitcoin,.,to £,.,bitcoin,.,ticker,.,bitcointalk,.,bitcoin,.,transaction fee,.,bitcoin,.,t shirt,.,bitcoin,.,t shirt uk,.,bitcoin,.,t shirt india,.,bitcoin,.,t shirt store,.,alpha-t,.,bitcointalk,.,bb&t,.,bitcoin,.,t-110,.,bitcoin,.,mining system,.,bitcoin,.,miner t720,.,bitcoin,.,usd,.,bitcoin,.,uk,.,bitcoin,.,unlimited,.,bitcoin,.,unconfirmed transaction,.,bitcoin,.,usd price,.,bitcoin,.,uk price,.,bitcoin,.,uasf,.,bitcoin,.,uk tax,.,bitcoin,.,update,.,bitcoin,.,uk exchange,.,why u,.,bitcoin,.,billionaire,.,bitcoin,.,u bosni,.,bitcoin,.,miner.u,.,bitcoin,.,u crnoj gori,.,bitcoin,.,youtube,.,bitcoin,.,u dinarima,.,wii u,.,bitcoin,.,utorrent,.,bitcoin,.,u.s.,.,bitcoin,.,exchange,.,bitcoin,.,u kune,.,bitcoin,.,value,.,,.,bitcoin,.,value chart,.,bitcoin,.,value history,.,bitcoin,.,value gbp,.,bitcoin,.,vs ethereum,.,bitcoin,.,vs usd,.,bitcoin,.,volatility,.,bitcoin,.,vs litecoin,.,bitcoin,.,value 2010,.,bitcoin,.,vs gold,.,bitcoin,.,v litecoin,.,bitcoin,.,v dollar,.,bitcoin,.,v euro,.,bitcoin,.,v gold,.,bitcoin,.,v blockchain,.,bitcoin,.,v onecoin,.,bitcoin,.,hack v.2,.,bitcoin,.,worth,.,bitcoin,.,wiki,.,bitcoin,.,wallet uk,.,bitcoin,.,what is it,.,bitcoinwisdom,.,bitcoin,.,whitepaper,.,bitcoin,.,wallet online,.,bitcoin,.,wallet address,.,bitcoin,.,wallet download,.,bitcoin,.,miner.w,.,bitcoin,.,w polsce,.,bitcoiny w polsce,.,bitcoin,.,w niemczech,.,bitcoin,.,w chmurze,.,bitcoin,.,w żabce,.,bitcoin,.,w polsce legalny,.,bitcoin,.,w chinach,.,bitcoin,.,w prawie polskim,.,bitcoin,.,w górę,.,bitcoin,.,xe,.,bitcoin,.,xbt,.,bitcoin,.,xt,.,bitcoin,.,xbte,.,bitcoin,.,xapo,.,bitcoin,.,xrp,.,bitcoin,.,xt price,.,bitcoin,.,xpub,.,x,.,bitcoin,.,generator,.,bitcoin,.,yahoo finance,.,bitcoin,.,year chart,.,bitcoin,.,year,.,bitcoin,.,yield,.,bitcoin,.,ytd,.,bitcoin,.,yubikey,.,bitcoin,.,yoda,.,bitcoin,.,yahoo finance chart,.,ybitcoin,.,magazine,.,bitcoin,.,y control de cambio,.,y combinator,.,bitcoin,.,ecuador y,.,bitcoin,.,bitcoin,.,by paypal,.,bitcoin,.,y el lavado de dinero,.,bitcoin,.,y deep web,.,bitcoin,.,y lavado de dinero,.,bitcoin,.,y litecoin,.,bitcoin,.,and blockchain,.,bitcoin,.,zebra,.,bitcoin,.,zerohedge,.,bitcoin,.,zimbabwe,.,bitcoin,.,zar,.,bitcoin,.,zcash,.,bitcoin,.,zapwallettxes,.,bitcoin,.,zarabianie,.,bitcoin,.,zug,.,bitcoin,.,zero,.,bitcoin,.,zero confirmations,.,bitcoin,.,z value,.,titan z,.,bitcoin,.,mining,.,titan z,.,bitcoin,.,z cash,.,bitcoin,.,nvidia titan z,.,bitcoin,.,mining,.,nvidia titan z,.,bitcoin,.,nakup zlata z,.,bitcoini,.,sklep z,.,bitcoinami,.,trgovanje z,.,bitcoini,.,co z,.,bitcoinem,.,bitcoin,.,0 confirmations,.,bitcoin,.,0.1,.,bitcoin,.,0.1.0,.,bitcoin,.,0 active connections,.,bitcoin,.,0 transaction fee,.,bitcoin,.,0 fee,.,0.15,.,bitcoins,.,0 25,.,bitcoins,.,0.05,.,bitcoin,.,in euro,.,bitcoin,.,2.0,.,0.1,.,bitcoins,.,0.21,.,bitcoins,.,bitcoin,.,1st august,.,bitcoin,.,1 million,.,bitcoin,.,101,.,bitcoin,.,10 year chart,.,bitcoin,.,10000,.,bitcoin,.,148,.,,.,bitcoin,.,10 year prediction,.,bitcoin,.,100k,.,bitcoin,.,100 dollars,.,bitcoin,.,10 years ago,.,1,.,bitcoin,.,in gbp,.,1,.,bitcoin,.,in pounds,.,1,.,bitcoin,.,in £,.,1,.,bitcoin,.,to dollar,.,1,.,bitcoin,.,in inr,.,1,.,bitcoin,.,to euro,.,1,.,bitcoin,.,in gdp,.,1,.,bitcoin,.,in eur,.,1,.,bitcoin,.,to myr,.,1,.,bitcoin,.,in sterling,.,bitcoin,.,2010,.,bitcoin,.,2017,.,bitcoin,.,2020,.,bitcoin,.,2018,.,bitcoin,.,2009,.,bitcoin,.,2013,.,bitcoin,.,21 million,.,bitcoin,.,2012,.,bitcoin,.,2014,.,2,.,bitcoin,.,to usd,.,2,.,bitcoin,.,price,.,2,.,bitcoin,.,to inr,.,2,.,bitcoin,.,wallets,.,2,.,bitcoins to dollars,.,2,.,bitcoins free,.,2,.,bitcoins a month,.,2,.,bitcoin,.,qt,.,bitcoin,.,2 year chart,.,bitcoin,.,2 paypal,.,bitcoin,.,3000,.,bitcoin,.,31st july,.,bitcoin,.,3 confirmations,.,bitcoin,.,3.0,.,bitcoin,.,3 year chart,.,bitcoin,.,3 month chart,.,bitcoin,.,300,.,bitcoin,.,365 club,.,bitcoin,.,3000 usd,.,bitcoin,.,30 confirmations,.,3,.,bitcoins in gbp,.,3,.,bitcoins,.,3,.,bitcoins to usd,.,3,.,bitcoin,.,in euro,.,3,.,bitcoin,.,to eur,.,bitcoin,.,3 unlimited,.,bitcoin,.,3 day chart,.,bitcoin,.,3 address,.,bitcoin,.,4000,.,bitcoin,.,4chan,.,bitcoin,.,4 billion,.,bitcoin,.,401k,.,bitcoin,.,4 backpage,.,bitcoin,.,43,.,bitcoin,.,40000,.,bitcoin,.,4k,.,bitcoin,.,4 year chart,.,bitcoin,.,48,.,4,.,bitcoins,.,4,.,bitcoins to usd,.,4,.,bitcoins in gbp,.,4,.,bitcoin,.,to eur,.,bitcoins 4 backpage,.,bitcoin,.,4 igaming,.,bitcoin,.,4 u,.,bitcoin,.,4 november,.,bitcoin,.,4 cash,.,bitcoin,.,5 year chart,.,bitcoin,.,51 attack,.,bitcoin,.,500,.,bitcoin,.,5 year,.,bitcoin,.,500 000,.,bitcoin,.,5000,.,bitcoin,.,50000,.,bitcoin,.,5 year price,.,bitcoin,.,5 years ago,.,bitcoin,.,5 year forecast,.,5,.,bitcoins in pounds,.,5,.,bitcoins,.,5,.,bitcoins to usd,.,5,.,bitcoin,.,free,.,5,.,bitcoin,.,in euro,.,bitcoin,.,5 years,.,bitcoin,.,5 minutes,.,bitcoin,.,5 min,.,bitcoin,.,5 unlimited generator,.,bitcoin,.,666,.,bitcoin,.,6 months,.,bitcoin,.,6 confirmations,.,bitcoin,.,6 month chart,.,bitcoin,.,6000,.,bitcoin,.,60 minutes,.,bitcoin,.,6 confirmations time,.,bitcoin,.,6 month price,.,bitcoin,.,6 years ago,.,bitcoin,.,60 day chart,.,6,.,bitcoin,.,network confirmations,.,,.,
submitted by besterse to BestCryptoPlatform [link] [comments]

Does bitcoin hash rate Matter? Crypto Marketer Answers Blockchain/Bitcoin for beginners 9: Bitcoin difficulty, target, BITS - all you need to know What Does Hashrate Mean?  Hashrate Mining Explained BitCoin Weekly 3/20/13 $66, Difficulty Doubled, Hashrate Distribution Stable Following Bitcoin’s Hash Rate Network Difficulty Is About to Set a New

Because the Hash Rate requires real world computing power and resource investment that cannot be faked, this chart also represents technical and monetary investment in the infrastructure of Bitcoin Core (BTC). A cryptographic hash function takes digital data of any size as input and produces a random (but fixed-size) string of digital data as output. Files, poems, pictures, the entire written ... Difficulty is re-calculated every 2016 blocks to ensure blocks are found every 10 minutes on average. As more computers attempt to mine Bitcoin Core (BTC) and increase the Hash Rate, the difficulty will increase. If the Hash Rate decreases, difficulty will decrease. Because the Hash Rate requires real world computing power and resource investment that cannot be faked, this chart also represents technical and monetary investment in the infrastructure of Bitcoin Cash (BCH). A cryptographic hash function takes digital data of any size as input and produces a random (but fixed-size) string of digital data as output. Files, poems, pictures, the entire written ... We gather this here. bitcoin difficulty vs price chart,Are You Searching For. crypto Today Price vs Difficulty Charts – indicators for buying or mining The first couple of charts plot difficulty and price side-by Bitcoin is at $ by the time the If you are investing in either Bitcoin or Gold, it’s important to understand which one asset is behaving more like a bubble than the other ... The Bitcoin difficulty chart provides the current Bitcoin difficulty (BTC diff) target as well as a historical data graph visualizing Bitcoin mining difficulty chart values with BTC difficulty adjustments (both increases and decreases) defaulted to today with timeline options of 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, and all time

[index] [10525] [4816] [25224] [44543] [5478] [44777] [20507] [49073] [31297] [30414]

Does bitcoin hash rate Matter? Crypto Marketer Answers

Bitcoin's halving (block reward) is fast approaching, and we examine the recently increases hash rate metrics. Oobit Releases A Coinbase-Powered “Skyscanner” For Bitcoin. Singapore-based Oobit ... SHOW RESOURCES: Fed cuts rates to zero, announces $700B QE https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/15/federal-reserve-cuts-rates-to-zero-and-launches-massive-700-billio... 01:18 Market Update 02:18 BTC Difficulty and Hash Rate Drop 05:01 Satoshi Nakomoto Won't Sell Bitcoin 07:28 eToro Market Analysis 10:59 Paxful in India 13:36 IOST NFT Collectibles and Mystery Box ... Does Bitcoin's hashrate matter to the network's level of security and its price action on the market? Veteran crypto pro Yasha Harari answers the question. Question's source: Krown's Crypto Cave ... Hash rate is used as the speed indicator of a machine that mines Bitcoin on the Blockchain. The higher the hashrate number on a machine, the faster it will solve complex equations and find blocks ...

#