|
John_A_Tallon posted:It's the obvious outcome of the SEC's policy changes to require reporting on wallet transfers of over $3000 value. No one needs to beg for it, they're going to do it so they can exercise control. They can regulate exchanges that are operating openly on the www yes, but I don't see how they can track bitcoin being exchanged on an encrypted TOR network with anonymous bitcoin wallets without doing something like installing a secret camera inside a suspect's house to look at their screen. The only time the wallets would connect to an actual exchange would be to cashout the bitcoin, but that's all they'd see, some random wallet cashing out bitcoin.
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2021 07:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 12:01 |
|
|
It's theoretically possible for a Ponzi scheme to collapse without anyone losing a cent. This requires that no one cash out for profit. How much money was cashed out for profit from Bitcoin so far? That is the amount of money that will be lost when it collapses. The way to "safely" play Bitcoin if you want to just get in on the fun without risking it all is to buy in, then immediately set a stop loss at the price you bought in at. If the price immediately goes down, you immediately sell for a small loss and try again. If the price goes up, you keep holding until it drops down below your stop loss. You don't risk anything but a tiny amount of the money you put in.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2021 07:08
|
|
|
If you bet against the USD, you're essentially betting that the entire Western economy is going to collapse. At that point I'm not sure having tons of bitcoins will help, much better to invest in physical goods, or immigrate to China/Russia.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2021 01:02
|
|
|
wyoak posted:Passive income is stealing from the poor, against the wall with you How else are old people who can't work anymore supposed to afford food? Even in full communism there will be currency/food stamps for convenience purposes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2021 23:26
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:You can get more than 300w worth of heating out of 300w of electricity if you use a heat pump. Uh, no, that would violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics because you would then be able to theoretically create free energy by using a highly efficient heat engine to generate > 300w of electricity.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2021 23:49
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Say you set up a heat pump that transfers 100w of heat from A to B. Running this heat pump costs 300w of electricity. Ok I think I got it, in B there are air molecules that are flying around at different speeds, so the heat pump selectively filters the faster, hotter air molecules from B and pumps it into A, increasing the heat in A. That is how it can heat A with more power than is input into the system, because the energy already in B is being transferred into A.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2021 00:15
|
|
|
I don't see what's wrong with a digital autograph from the creator of the digital artwork. It would be interesting to see the legality of someone who isn't the creator autographing a piece of art and selling it without the creator's permission. Like what if Trump digitally autographed a random person's digital art and sold it as an NFT, would that be legal? I'm sure autographing a physical copy of said art and selling it without the artist's permission would be illegal.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2021 05:45
|
|
|
we're never gonna see a discount this big again
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2021 06:04
|
|
|
bitcoin crashing won't crash the real economy no matter how big it gets because world governments would just reverse fiat transactions to bring bank account balances to reasonable levels. the reason the 1929 crash had such a devastating effect on the real economy was because the world governments said "nuh uh, half the population has to starve now, those are the rules of money" and forced farmers to destroy crops.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2021 22:31
|
|
|
The real bad thing about crypto is it facilitates illicit transactions. Helping to destroy the environment is also bad, not as bad as air travel and only slightly worse than gaming, but nowhere near as bad as being a mule for drug/sex/child traffickers. Charlie Munger said it best, would you invest in freshly harvested baby brains if it promised amazing returns? There are more ethical ways to gamble, like you could just invest in random meme stocks like a normal ape.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2021 04:14
|
|
|
Knot My President! posted:The point is that holding yourself to a higher standard by not partaking in things is a personal choice as with anything. You choose to not contribute to a sex trafficking enabling cartel owned system of baseless transactionary gambling coins and I respect that. A lot, actually. In fact, I fully agree with it. I choose to do so because factually me as a person already consumes and pollutes way, way, way less than the average person. That is my choice. You can say it's still a bad thing for me to use some of my incredibly low monthly energy usage to contribute an incredibly miniscule amount to a blockchain or whatever and make a bit of side cash but honestly, truthfully, it does actually matter that there are bigger fish to fry. Pollution at the individual level is not nor ever has been the issue. If it's not mining, it's phone production, or factory farming, or anti-union rhetoric-- you have to pick your battles and bandwidth and find something you want to help improve. You've chosen to dissuade people from mining and you don't do it yourself, and that's a good thing. I have chosen to dissuade people from mining and yet do it myself, barely, which is a double standard but isn't that bad all things considered. The quality of your sleep may suffer if later on a huge child sex trafficking ring or terrorist attacked is found out to have been funded by ether. The thought that you knowingly contributed to human suffering will gnaw at you. Is that worth $300 a month, especially when it appears that you can fare just fine without that money? Accepting $300 a month from sex traffickers to help them launder money from their clients? You wouldn't do that IRL, the fear of getting caught would prevent you. But you're ok with it as long as you won't get caught?
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2021 05:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 12:01 |
|
|
PHIZ KALIFA posted:if i knew i wasn't going to get caught and i wasn't required to harm anyone with my own hands i'd take $300 a month to launder pretty much anything from anyone. You wouldn't reveal this to your friends or family. I wonder why.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2021 06:07
|
|