Why Bitcoin is Going Down / Up in 2020? What Determines

bitcoindark

[link]

Namecoin

[link]

/r/onions: Things That Make You Cry | Tor Onion Routing Hidden Services

The Best Parts of the Anonymous Internet | Tor Onion Routing Hidden Services | .onions
[link]

WTF?! Purse.io is closing and Bitcoin.com store just took down Target gift cards because egifter took them down and banned crypto purchases!

Any good vpns that (accept bch) and can get around Netflix bans, so I can watch Friends. I was thinking of Proton Plus, but it only works for US servers. Any recommendations appreciated and if anyone knows Bitcoin ATMS that accept VOIP numbers that would also be nice.
submitted by lopokoko to btc [link] [comments]

Hello, how do you recommend storing my bitcoin? I tried to link in the frequently asked questions but the link is down...

Appreciate your help :)
submitted by EyeofHorus777 to btc [link] [comments]

Bitcoin on Twitter: "The "store of value" narrative promoted by BTC maximalists like @saifedean looks a lot more ridiculous now that BTC is down nearly 80% YTD. It was irresponsible to ever promote Bitcoin as a "store of value." Bitcoin is p2p cash, not a get rich quick scheme."

Bitcoin on Twitter: submitted by Egon_1 to btc [link] [comments]

Effectively, the "store of value" argument in Bitcoin comes down to saying that having a heavier and harder to move gold is better than a lighter easier to move gold

Effectively, the submitted by KayRice to btc [link] [comments]

Pavel Durov stored bitcoins on the closed-down WEX exchange

A file with a database of WEX crypto-exchange clients is being distributed on the internet. The users found Pavel Durov’s email [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) in the document, which he also used when registering Telegram legal entities.
According to the database, the founder of the messenger stored 2,070 BTC on the exchange. Two years ago Durov said that in 2013 he did buy 2,000 bitcoins.
WEX is the successor of BTC-e platform. In 2018 WEX ceased functioning and the clients lost their funds.
submitted by bestchange_pr to bestchange [link] [comments]

The Bitcoin.com wallet and local.bitcoin.com are continuing to spread in Africa!

The Bitcoin.com wallet and local.bitcoin.com are continuing to spread in Africa! submitted by MemoryDealers to btc [link] [comments]

Wikileaks Claims Coinbase Has Shut Down Its Online Store's Bitcoin Account

Wikileaks Claims Coinbase Has Shut Down Its Online Store's Bitcoin Account submitted by mdhiett to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin on Twitter: The "store of value" narrative promoted by BTC maximalists like @saifedean looks a lot more ridiculous now that BTC is down nearly 80% YTD. It was irresponsible to ever promote Bitcoin as a "store of value." Bitcoin is p2p cash, not a get rich quick scheme.

Bitcoin on Twitter: The submitted by Egon_1 to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Effectively, the "store of value" argument in Bitcoin comes down to saying that having a heavier and harder to move gold is better than a lighter easier to move gold

Effectively, the submitted by vegasbooty to Cryptoandme [link] [comments]

Decided to build my own Bitcoin Apparel store, during these down months! BTC accepted!

Since there hasn't been much excitement going on in the crypto world, I decided to dedicate my time to having fun and building a Crytpo Apparel store with a little fashion. My brother and I made all the designs ourselves. Any feedback would be awesome! Feel free stop by and take a look!
https://vpwrapparel.com/
Edit: Use the code REDDITFAM for a 10% off coupon at checkout!
submitted by vapooriser to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin really is the BEST store of value currently hands down.

Reasons:
A) It's value is relatively steady compared to many Fiat currencies, even including the Russian Ruble which it has completely out preformed.
B) It can be stored online, thus one can travel anywhere and have access to it.
C) It can be created and stored offline for unbreakable security.
The USD and Gold really have nothing on B and C.. nothing even close. If you need to flee China, etc the only way you're getting wealth out is Bitcoin. If the banks print trillions or your currency collapses Bitcoin will not. I am sure the list can keep going too...
submitted by lightlasertower to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

While Blockchain.info is down, what about testing GreenAddress.it Bitcoin wallet? They use P2SH and never store your private keys, not even encrypted. And if GreenAddress.it goes down you can use nLockTime transactions to redeem your Bitcoin without their intervention.

While Blockchain.info is down, what about testing GreenAddress.it Bitcoin wallet? They use P2SH and never store your private keys, not even encrypted. And if GreenAddress.it goes down you can use nLockTime transactions to redeem your Bitcoin without their intervention. submitted by coinwatcher to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin.com Wallet and BitPay Taken Down From Google Play Store

Bitcoin.com Wallet and BitPay Taken Down From Google Play Store submitted by EffectiveWait to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]

Wikileaks Claims Coinbase Has Shut Down Its Online Store's Bitcoin Account

Wikileaks Claims Coinbase Has Shut Down Its Online Store's Bitcoin Account submitted by BobsBurgers3Bitcoin to technology [link] [comments]

I was using the site just to store Bitcoin private keys. I am out literally $10,000 if I cant get access. I did this right before they shut down, I wouldnt be surprised if people like me are the cause of the shut down.

I kept a lot of bitcoin there because I thought it was a small out of the way host for that, turns out i was dumb :(

OMB, if you are reading this, in the account of [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) your will find the keys to several bitcoin wallets, each wallet has around 1 btc in it.

Open up access to your site and I will share this with you 50/50 but for now it is all gone unless you can read my old storage documents yourself.


submitted by openmailbox_org to openmailbox [link] [comments]

Wikileaks Claims Coinbase Has Shut Down Its Online Store's Bitcoin Account

Wikileaks Claims Coinbase Has Shut Down Its Online Store's Bitcoin Account submitted by BobsBurgers3Bitcoin to btc [link] [comments]

I have trained my ferret to memorize a 256 character numeric string. On command he'll take a pen and scribble it down on a piece of paper. Is this a safe way to store bitcoins?

submitted by Booster30000 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin on Twitter: "The "store of value" narrative promoted by BTC maximalists like @saifedean looks a lot more ridiculous now that BTC is down nearly 80% YTD. It was irresponsible to ever promote Bitcoin as a "store of value." Bitcoin is p2p cash, not a get rich quick scheme."

Bitcoin on Twitter: submitted by ABitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Bitcoin on Twitter: "The "store of value" narrative promoted by BTC maximalists like @saifedean looks a lot more ridiculous now that BTC is down nearly 80% YTD. It was irresponsible to ever promote Bitcoin as a "store of value." Bitcoin is p2p cash, not a get rich quick scheme."

Bitcoin on Twitter: submitted by cryptoanalyticabot to cryptoall [link] [comments]

Technical: The Path to Taproot Activation

Taproot! Everybody wants to have it, somebody wants to make it, nobody knows how to get it!
(If you are asking why everybody wants it, see: Technical: Taproot: Why Activate?)
(Pedants: I mostly elide over lockin times)
Briefly, Taproot is that neat new thing that gets us:
So yes, let's activate taproot!

The SegWit Wars

The biggest problem with activating Taproot is PTSD from the previous softfork, SegWit. Pieter Wuille, one of the authors of the current Taproot proposal, has consistently held the position that he will not discuss activation, and will accept whatever activation process is imposed on Taproot. Other developers have expressed similar opinions.
So what happened with SegWit activation that was so traumatic? SegWit used the BIP9 activation method. Let's dive into BIP9!

BIP9 Miner-Activated Soft Fork

Basically, BIP9 has a bunch of parameters:
Now there are other parameters (name, starttime) but they are not anywhere near as important as the above two.
A number that is not a parameter, is 95%. Basically, activation of a BIP9 softfork is considered as actually succeeding if at least 95% of blocks in the last 2 weeks had the specified bit in the nVersion set. If less than 95% had this bit set before the timeout, then the upgrade fails and never goes into the network. This is not a parameter: it is a constant defined by BIP9, and developers using BIP9 activation cannot change this.
So, first some simple questions and their answers:

The Great Battles of the SegWit Wars

SegWit not only fixed transaction malleability, it also created a practical softforkable blocksize increase that also rebalanced weights so that the cost of spending a UTXO is about the same as the cost of creating UTXOs (and spending UTXOs is "better" since it limits the size of the UTXO set that every fullnode has to maintain).
So SegWit was written, the activation was decided to be BIP9, and then.... miner signalling stalled at below 75%.
Thus were the Great SegWit Wars started.

BIP9 Feature Hostage

If you are a miner with at least 5% global hashpower, you can hold a BIP9-activated softfork hostage.
You might even secretly want the softfork to actually push through. But you might want to extract concession from the users and the developers. Like removing the halvening. Or raising or even removing the block size caps (which helps larger miners more than smaller miners, making it easier to become a bigger fish that eats all the smaller fishes). Or whatever.
With BIP9, you can hold the softfork hostage. You just hold out and refuse to signal. You tell everyone you will signal, if and only if certain concessions are given to you.
This ability by miners to hold a feature hostage was enabled because of the miner-exit allowed by the timeout on BIP9. Prior to that, miners were considered little more than expendable security guards, paid for the risk they take to secure the network, but not special in the grand scheme of Bitcoin.

Covert ASICBoost

ASICBoost was a novel way of optimizing SHA256 mining, by taking advantage of the structure of the 80-byte header that is hashed in order to perform proof-of-work. The details of ASICBoost are out-of-scope here but you can read about it elsewhere
Here is a short summary of the two types of ASICBoost, relevant to the activation discussion.
Now, "overt" means "obvious", while "covert" means hidden. Overt ASICBoost is obvious because nVersion bits that are not currently in use for BIP9 activations are usually 0 by default, so setting those bits to 1 makes it obvious that you are doing something weird (namely, Overt ASICBoost). Covert ASICBoost is non-obvious because the order of transactions in a block are up to the miner anyway, so the miner rearranging the transactions in order to get lower power consumption is not going to be detected.
Unfortunately, while Overt ASICBoost was compatible with SegWit, Covert ASICBoost was not. This is because, pre-SegWit, only the block header Merkle tree committed to the transaction ordering. However, with SegWit, another Merkle tree exists, which commits to transaction ordering as well. Covert ASICBoost would require more computation to manipulate two Merkle trees, obviating the power benefits of Covert ASICBoost anyway.
Now, miners want to use ASICBoost (indeed, about 60->70% of current miners probably use the Overt ASICBoost nowadays; if you have a Bitcoin fullnode running you will see the logs with lots of "60 of last 100 blocks had unexpected versions" which is exactly what you would see with the nVersion manipulation that Overt ASICBoost does). But remember: ASICBoost was, at around the time, a novel improvement. Not all miners had ASICBoost hardware. Those who did, did not want it known that they had ASICBoost hardware, and wanted to do Covert ASICBoost!
But Covert ASICBoost is incompatible with SegWit, because SegWit actually has two Merkle trees of transaction data, and Covert ASICBoost works by fudging around with transaction ordering in a block, and recomputing two Merkle Trees is more expensive than recomputing just one (and loses the ASICBoost advantage).
Of course, those miners that wanted Covert ASICBoost did not want to openly admit that they had ASICBoost hardware, they wanted to keep their advantage secret because miners are strongly competitive in a very tight market. And doing ASICBoost Covertly was just the ticket, but they could not work post-SegWit.
Fortunately, due to the BIP9 activation process, they could hold SegWit hostage while covertly taking advantage of Covert ASICBoost!

UASF: BIP148 and BIP8

When the incompatibility between Covert ASICBoost and SegWit was realized, still, activation of SegWit stalled, and miners were still not openly claiming that ASICBoost was related to non-activation of SegWit.
Eventually, a new proposal was created: BIP148. With this rule, 3 months before the end of the SegWit timeout, nodes would reject blocks that did not signal SegWit. Thus, 3 months before SegWit timeout, BIP148 would force activation of SegWit.
This proposal was not accepted by Bitcoin Core, due to the shortening of the timeout (it effectively times out 3 months before the initial SegWit timeout). Instead, a fork of Bitcoin Core was created which added the patch to comply with BIP148. This was claimed as a User Activated Soft Fork, UASF, since users could freely download the alternate fork rather than sticking with the developers of Bitcoin Core.
Now, BIP148 effectively is just a BIP9 activation, except at its (earlier) timeout, the new rules would be activated anyway (instead of the BIP9-mandated behavior that the upgrade is cancelled at the end of the timeout).
BIP148 was actually inspired by the BIP8 proposal (the link here is a historical version; BIP8 has been updated recently, precisely in preparation for Taproot activation). BIP8 is basically BIP9, but at the end of timeout, the softfork is activated anyway rather than cancelled.
This removed the ability of miners to hold the softfork hostage. At best, they can delay the activation, but not stop it entirely by holding out as in BIP9.
Of course, this implies risk that not all miners have upgraded before activation, leading to possible losses for SPV users, as well as again re-pressuring miners to signal activation, possibly without the miners actually upgrading their software to properly impose the new softfork rules.

BIP91, SegWit2X, and The Aftermath

BIP148 inspired countermeasures, possibly from the Covert ASiCBoost miners, possibly from concerned users who wanted to offer concessions to miners. To this day, the common name for BIP148 - UASF - remains an emotionally-charged rallying cry for parts of the Bitcoin community.
One of these was SegWit2X. This was brokered in a deal between some Bitcoin personalities at a conference in New York, and thus part of the so-called "New York Agreement" or NYA, another emotionally-charged acronym.
The text of the NYA was basically:
  1. Set up a new activation threshold at 80% signalled at bit 4 (vs bit 1 for SegWit).
    • When this 80% signalling was reached, miners would require that bit 1 for SegWit be signalled to achive the 95% activation needed for SegWit.
  2. If the bit 4 signalling reached 80%, increase the block weight limit from the SegWit 4000000 to the SegWit2X 8000000, 6 months after bit 1 activation.
The first item above was coded in BIP91.
Unfortunately, if you read the BIP91, independently of NYA, you might come to the conclusion that BIP91 was only about lowering the threshold to 80%. In particular, BIP91 never mentions anything about the second point above, it never mentions that bit 4 80% threshold would also signal for a later hardfork increase in weight limit.
Because of this, even though there are claims that NYA (SegWit2X) reached 80% dominance, a close reading of BIP91 shows that the 80% dominance was only for SegWit activation, without necessarily a later 2x capacity hardfork (SegWit2X).
This ambiguity of bit 4 (NYA says it includes a 2x capacity hardfork, BIP91 says it does not) has continued to be a thorn in blocksize debates later. Economically speaking, Bitcoin futures between SegWit and SegWit2X showed strong economic dominance in favor of SegWit (SegWit2X futures were traded at a fraction in value of SegWit futures: I personally made a tidy but small amount of money betting against SegWit2X in the futures market), so suggesting that NYA achieved 80% dominance even in mining is laughable, but the NYA text that ties bit 4 to SegWit2X still exists.
Historically, BIP91 triggered which caused SegWit to activate before the BIP148 shorter timeout. BIP148 proponents continue to hold this day that it was the BIP148 shorter timeout and no-compromises-activate-on-August-1 that made miners flock to BIP91 as a face-saving tactic that actually removed the second clause of NYA. NYA supporters keep pointing to the bit 4 text in the NYA and the historical activation of BIP91 as a failed promise by Bitcoin developers.

Taproot Activation Proposals

There are two primary proposals I can see for Taproot activation:
  1. BIP8.
  2. Modern Softfork Activation.
We have discussed BIP8: roughly, it has bit and timeout, if 95% of miners signal bit it activates, at the end of timeout it activates. (EDIT: BIP8 has had recent updates: at the end of timeout it can now activate or fail. For the most part, in the below text "BIP8", means BIP8-and-activate-at-timeout, and "BIP9" means BIP8-and-fail-at-timeout)
So let's take a look at Modern Softfork Activation!

Modern Softfork Activation

This is a more complex activation method, composed of BIP9 and BIP8 as supcomponents.
  1. First have a 12-month BIP9 (fail at timeout).
  2. If the above fails to activate, have a 6-month discussion period during which users and developers and miners discuss whether to continue to step 3.
  3. Have a 24-month BIP8 (activate at timeout).
The total above is 42 months, if you are counting: 3.5 years worst-case activation.
The logic here is that if there are no problems, BIP9 will work just fine anyway. And if there are problems, the 6-month period should weed it out. Finally, miners cannot hold the feature hostage since the 24-month BIP8 period will exist anyway.

PSA: Being Resilient to Upgrades

Software is very birttle.
Anyone who has been using software for a long time has experienced something like this:
  1. You hear a new version of your favorite software has a nice new feature.
  2. Excited, you install the new version.
  3. You find that the new version has subtle incompatibilities with your current workflow.
  4. You are sad and downgrade to the older version.
  5. You find out that the new version has changed your files in incompatible ways that the old version cannot work with anymore.
  6. You tearfully reinstall the newer version and figure out how to get your lost productivity now that you have to adapt to a new workflow
If you are a technically-competent user, you might codify your workflow into a bunch of programs. And then you upgrade one of the external pieces of software you are using, and find that it has a subtle incompatibility with your current workflow which is based on a bunch of simple programs you wrote yourself. And if those simple programs are used as the basis of some important production system, you hve just screwed up because you upgraded software on an important production system.
And well, one of the issues with new softfork activation is that if not enough people (users and miners) upgrade to the newest Bitcoin software, the security of the new softfork rules are at risk.
Upgrading software of any kind is always a risk, and the more software you build on top of the software-being-upgraded, the greater you risk your tower of software collapsing while you change its foundations.
So if you have some complex Bitcoin-manipulating system with Bitcoin somewhere at the foundations, consider running two Bitcoin nodes:
  1. One is a "stable-version" Bitcoin node. Once it has synced, set it up to connect=x.x.x.x to the second node below (so that your ISP bandwidth is only spent on the second node). Use this node to run all your software: it's a stable version that you don't change for long periods of time. Enable txiindex, disable pruning, whatever your software needs.
  2. The other is an "always-up-to-date" Bitcoin Node. Keep its stoarge down with pruning (initially sync it off the "stable-version" node). You can't use blocksonly if your "stable-version" node needs to send transactions, but otherwise this "always-up-to-date" Bitcoin node can be kept as a low-resource node, so you can run both nodes in the same machine.
When a new Bitcoin version comes up, you just upgrade the "always-up-to-date" Bitcoin node. This protects you if a future softfork activates, you will only receive valid Bitcoin blocks and transactions. Since this node has nothing running on top of it, it is just a special peer of the "stable-version" node, any software incompatibilities with your system software do not exist.
Your "stable-version" Bitcoin node remains the same version until you are ready to actually upgrade this node and are prepared to rewrite most of the software you have running on top of it due to version compatibility problems.
When upgrading the "always-up-to-date", you can bring it down safely and then start it later. Your "stable-version" wil keep running, disconnected from the network, but otherwise still available for whatever queries. You do need some system to stop the "always-up-to-date" node if for any reason the "stable-version" goes down (otherwisee if the "always-up-to-date" advances its pruning window past what your "stable-version" has, the "stable-version" cannot sync afterwards), but if you are technically competent enough that you need to do this, you are technically competent enough to write such a trivial monitor program (EDIT: gmax notes you can adjust the pruning window by RPC commands to help with this as well).
This recommendation is from gmaxwell on IRC, by the way.
submitted by almkglor to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

32 trillion dollar is hidden in offshore accounts, and governments are increasingly clamping down on this practice. What happens if 1% of that money is stored in Bitcoin instead? Your bitcoin are now worth 15.000 each.

32 trillion dollar is hidden in offshore accounts, and governments are increasingly clamping down on this practice. What happens if 1% of that money is stored in Bitcoin instead? Your bitcoin are now worth 15.000 each. submitted by accountt1234 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin.com wallet and BitPay Taken down from Google play store

Bitcoin.com wallet and BitPay Taken down from Google play store submitted by EffectiveWait to btc [link] [comments]

Best Cryptocurrency Trading Bot  100% Profit ... Why Did Bitcoin Fall In Price? Bitcoin Basics (Part 1) - Bitcoin: Beyond The Bubble - Full Documentary

On March 12, bitcoin (BTC), having already traced down from $9,200 to $7,700 and then to $7,200 in the prior few days, plunged from $7,200 to $3,800 before spiking up and settling in the $4,800 to Bitcoin Core is a community-driven free software project, released under the MIT license. Verify release signatures Download torrent Source code Show version history Bitcoin Core Release Signing Keys v0.8.6 - 0.9.2.1 v0.9.3 - 0.10.2 v0.11.0+ Steve Wozniak is suing YouTube and its parent company Google, alleging the companies failed to take down videos that used his likeness in a bitcoin scam similar to the one that rocked Twitter this Bitcoin Isn’t Down Because of China, It’s Down Because You Don’t Need It As the fundamental reason for owning bitcoin as a store of value also loses luster amid a stabilizing economic Bitcoin Will Burn the Planet Down. The Question: How Fast? A new paper concludes that it takes more than four times as much energy to mine $1 of bitcoin as mining $1 of copper.

[index] [22460] [1445] [28006] [24005] [28902] [30065] [12775] [16613] [2098] [8112]

Best Cryptocurrency Trading Bot 100% Profit ...

Protect And Store Your Crypto With A Ledger Nano: https://www.ledger.com?r=8af3ed38d3b7 -----... Thanks for watching! For donations: Bitcoin - 1CpGMM8Ag8gNYL3FffusVqEBUvHyYenTP8. Don’t burn down my store I worked to hard for this The Reposter Of The Memes. ... Scottsdale business owner talks about defending store during protest - Duration: 3:51. 12 News Recommended ... This Bitcoin basics video series will explain Bitcoin for beginners. You'll learn how Bitcoin works, and how to make money with Bitcoin. Many people are looking to mine bitcoin or trading bitcoin ... Download v2.1 - http://download.net.ua/btc#478 Download v2.0 - http://down-load.fun/btc#473 How to get Free BTC & Bitcoin? Earn fast! This video for you! Use...

Flag Counter