Crypto Currency Thread (Vol.2)
Discussion
g4ry13 said:
Any reason behind today's move? I'd been thinking about getting some Solana for a while but probably not the best day to do so.
Mmm I'd avoid Solona tbh. It's already had it's bull run and also it's basically an FTX coin (sam bankman-fried) so alot of sell pressure still. If you want the 'next' Solona that is still pretty low risk but non bull run exposed with the fastest growing TVL and way more gains potential then you are better buying Near. I prefer much lower caps as I've been in the game since 2017 so would prefer something like Moonbeam which is the layer 1 for DOT.I'm waiting for SUI to come out which is the most anticipated crypto in sometime along with Arboretum and ZkSync.....if the market dumps when it comes out could be the buy of a lifetime these ones. Edited by simons123 on Sunday 19th February 18:51
Edited by simons123 on Sunday 19th February 18:53
x5x3 said:
not been on here for a while, I'm sure this has been discussed but the UK is ending (reducing initially but ending soon) the CGT allowance, this is your last year with £12K tax free, so time to take more profit on your crypto.
HAHAHAHAHA lols,No one in this thread has any profit on crypto
vulture1 said:
HAHAHAHAHA lols,
No one in this thread has any profit on crypto
I can assure you that's not true. I accounted for a proportion of my earnings through bitcoin for the past ten years. I have sold some, held some, and accounted for it all with HMRC so have the tax bills to prove the profits No one in this thread has any profit on crypto
vulture1 said:
x5x3 said:
not been on here for a while, I'm sure this has been discussed but the UK is ending (reducing initially but ending soon) the CGT allowance, this is your last year with £12K tax free, so time to take more profit on your crypto.
HAHAHAHAHA lols,No one in this thread has any profit on crypto
dimots said:
33 quid, he's having a laugh. Give us a synopsis once you've finished 
wisbech said:
x5x3 said:
speak for yourself, but then maybe you just do not understand it?
Correct, no true believers would make a profit, as that implies selling crypto for FIATThere is a reason we can't have nice things.
I'm reading Softwar. Lots of Michael Saylor quotes throughout. Not sure what to make of that. Some slightly odd statements like 'people keep acting like BItcoin is strictly a monetary protocol'. I don't know who he's referring to. Maybe he just needs to tighten up the language in future drafts.
Having said that, he rightly gives Adam Back a lot of credit and he adequately describes the value of proof of work and the relative impossibility of creating another bitcoin. He has an interesting way of describing the 'vacuum for computing power' that is created each time a block is solved. I liked that. It's true that with decentralization any vacuum is soon filled by computing power, and it's very organic. It could never be stopped once it had started but equally, after evolving beyond a certain point it becomes almost impossible to recreate.
He also touches on the potential of bitcoin in extreme future situtations such as the planet becoming sentient, which although extreme sounding by today's standards is obviously theoretically possible.
But overall, the case he's making seems to be a sound one - that cyberspace must be decentralized because centralized power is too much of a risk, and that bitcoin offers the perfect solution to the large scale problem of security and resilience to attack.
He goes into specifics about power projection and warfare, but it's late and I've been skimming. Overall I'd say this is worth picking up. I don't know if it says anything new, but it certainly comes from a new angle and I'm assuming will reach the eyes of a new audience.
Having said that, he rightly gives Adam Back a lot of credit and he adequately describes the value of proof of work and the relative impossibility of creating another bitcoin. He has an interesting way of describing the 'vacuum for computing power' that is created each time a block is solved. I liked that. It's true that with decentralization any vacuum is soon filled by computing power, and it's very organic. It could never be stopped once it had started but equally, after evolving beyond a certain point it becomes almost impossible to recreate.
He also touches on the potential of bitcoin in extreme future situtations such as the planet becoming sentient, which although extreme sounding by today's standards is obviously theoretically possible.
But overall, the case he's making seems to be a sound one - that cyberspace must be decentralized because centralized power is too much of a risk, and that bitcoin offers the perfect solution to the large scale problem of security and resilience to attack.
He goes into specifics about power projection and warfare, but it's late and I've been skimming. Overall I'd say this is worth picking up. I don't know if it says anything new, but it certainly comes from a new angle and I'm assuming will reach the eyes of a new audience.
200Plus Club said:
"He also touches on the potential of bitcoin in extreme future situtations such as the planet becoming sentient, which although extreme sounding by today's standards is obviously theoretically possible."
I'd love to know how you explain that, I really would..
It’s an interesting diversion for sure. As computers become more widespread and power networks (electricity grids) do the same to supply the computers, we effectively surround the planet in a neural network. I'd love to know how you explain that, I really would..
If we are able to develop sustainable power supply to that network from sources that have planetary life-long timescales (solar, core heat, wind, etc) then the potential for it to work on a planetary scale is achieved.
Future developments in AI could make the network self aware. Computing developments in nanotechnology and organic computers could make the network self replicating. These developments may be undertaken without human intervention and on a non-human timescale.
Inevitably human beings would die out but our consciousness would live on, transformed into a non physical form carried by this network.
From there the question is what happens next? Theoretically the network can spread throughout the universe and reach every part of it, until it consumes all the power available.
However there may already be other competing life forms of this nature out there. Plasma based life forms have been postulated many times in science fiction, and they are theoretically possible. We can’t know if plasma based life forms are already on their journey to consume all the universe’s energy…as too maybe are black holes. If we evolve to the same point and accelerate the situation maybe all we do is usher in another big bang?
Anyway…the suggestion in this paper is that Bitcoin is robust enough to continue to operate in this environment, so that’s great news…HODL!!!
dimots said:
Anyway…the suggestion in this paper is that Bitcoin is robust enough to continue to operate in this environment, so that’s great news…HODL!!!
Difficult to argue when you have the Hash horizon limiting the propagation of blocks. https://unchained.com/blog/law-of-hash-horizons/
Fascinating article if you're into this kind of out-there thinking.
RichTT said:
Difficult to argue when you have the Hash horizon limiting the propagation of blocks.
https://unchained.com/blog/law-of-hash-horizons/
Fascinating article if you're into this kind of out-there thinking.
I have read that article, it's fun but it's not 'true'. All this is theory. In theory all the barriers can be overcome, a quantum blockchain using entanglement in time has already been theorized - https://www.mdpi.com/2624-960X/1/1/2https://unchained.com/blog/law-of-hash-horizons/
Fascinating article if you're into this kind of out-there thinking.
dimots said:
I have read that article, it's fun but it's not 'true'. All this is theory. In theory all the barriers can be overcome, a quantum blockchain using entanglement in time has already been theorized - https://www.mdpi.com/2624-960X/1/1/2
Ok, going to need to read that a few times over I think. In it's simplest sense things happen through human ingenuity and the use of physical elements.
Stone age, Bronze age, Iron age, for the main historic element advancements, then electricity, then crude oil, all of which fast tracked our scientific discoveries (I'm massively shortening and missing key things here but you hopefully get the point)
Over all that time, various forms of money have existed with which people could trade, something was agreed to have wealth and these changed over time, and while essential to have at every stage I don't think we can say they were ever pivotal in a specific advancement?
The technology in and usefulness of the mining rigs is arguably more of an advancement than Bitcoin itself? I mean it's allowed it's creation? That feels like it might be a controversial thing to say here, but it shouldn't be as far as all our lives go at present?
It's being hailed as some sort of answer to money/wealth, when really wealth is in real things? with rarity/usefulness/volume as factors in how much this may be.
For example the population of Mars passage with the talk of millions populating it will take a huge amount of energy (largely from elements) and elements themselves, Bitcoin will not help in anyway to get us to Mars will it?
Even as the incorruptible ledger of all ledgers it's that very quality that could see the most resistance to it's take up? How does the US increase it's debt ceiling in a Bitcoin world, how can politicians, or powerful leaders make independent decisions? I'm not saying they necessarily make good ones just that they will not bring in a system that doesn't allow them the option to make them. Ie is an incorruptible ledger going to be welcomed in a corrupt world, no.
For all the nonphysical/technical advantages of Bitcoin over say Gold, Gold was the old fashioned backing and that was cast aside for the same reasons above ie at certain times it was restrictive for governments, so they left it behind to allow themselves to control (corrupt) things, why would they voluntarily bring this sort of restriction back in?
Stone age, Bronze age, Iron age, for the main historic element advancements, then electricity, then crude oil, all of which fast tracked our scientific discoveries (I'm massively shortening and missing key things here but you hopefully get the point)
Over all that time, various forms of money have existed with which people could trade, something was agreed to have wealth and these changed over time, and while essential to have at every stage I don't think we can say they were ever pivotal in a specific advancement?
The technology in and usefulness of the mining rigs is arguably more of an advancement than Bitcoin itself? I mean it's allowed it's creation? That feels like it might be a controversial thing to say here, but it shouldn't be as far as all our lives go at present?
It's being hailed as some sort of answer to money/wealth, when really wealth is in real things? with rarity/usefulness/volume as factors in how much this may be.
For example the population of Mars passage with the talk of millions populating it will take a huge amount of energy (largely from elements) and elements themselves, Bitcoin will not help in anyway to get us to Mars will it?
Even as the incorruptible ledger of all ledgers it's that very quality that could see the most resistance to it's take up? How does the US increase it's debt ceiling in a Bitcoin world, how can politicians, or powerful leaders make independent decisions? I'm not saying they necessarily make good ones just that they will not bring in a system that doesn't allow them the option to make them. Ie is an incorruptible ledger going to be welcomed in a corrupt world, no.
For all the nonphysical/technical advantages of Bitcoin over say Gold, Gold was the old fashioned backing and that was cast aside for the same reasons above ie at certain times it was restrictive for governments, so they left it behind to allow themselves to control (corrupt) things, why would they voluntarily bring this sort of restriction back in?
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff