In her spare time, she loves to blog, play badminton and watch out ted talks. According to Kevin Svenson, we could witness a bull market begin around April when the week bear market finishes up. Bitcoin maximalists https://1xbet.1xbetcasinobonuses.site/brx-cryptocurrency/1089-bet-on-live-horse-racing.php be careful what they wish for: Fulfilling their wishes could spell disaster for the USD and Bitcoin with it. The Dollar index is hovering atand the probability of a rate hike of 75 basis points bps is at She likes pets and shares her free time with NGO.
Just like before you buy anything from eBay or Amazon, well, not so much on Amazon… On Amazon you always check the reviews of the product, how good is the product. On eBay you check the reviews of the seller, how honest is the seller based on a bunch of people that bought from the seller before. When you have substances like narcotics being illegal in your country, putting it online for this kind of purchase creates a bit of a quality control, because now you do  have ratings on the seller and you do have ratings on a product.
Now, a way to get around it is to legalize these products. Prostitution is the same way. In most of Europe you have red light districts where this is legal. So, all of these grey areas are very good use cases for this kind of a payment that is way more anonymous than a credit card I would say, but not perfectly anonymous. The payment is final. It opens up additional jurisdictions where you would not have gone otherwise.
My ultimate use  case is I would love to see something like government revenue go through the Bitcoin blockchain, where there is a permanent record of what money the government gets and how the government spends that money. Any first-year computer science student can go ahead and audit the financials of your government.
Chris: A lot of people refer to you as a Bitcoin maximalist. Are there any other technologies out there that you can think of that you actually support aside from Bitcoin? Therefor, the only digital asset that I hold is Bitcoin, because I think there is a very high probability that everything else can and probably will go to zero  while I believe that Bitcoin will not go to zero. Even if I pick my second favourite asset, which is either [inaudible  or Litecoin, I would never ever hold those as long-term, because I think that Bitcoin will continue to separate itself from that because of the brain power that is currently programming on Bitcoin compared to any of those other projects.
There could be other innovation but not on the scale of Bitcoin. To me, the innovation  of Bitcoin and the proof of work public blockchain is equivalent to the innovation of the internet itself. I only see one blockchain in the future where the way we only have one internet today. Like Google. Same with Amazon, they properly use the internet. The only difference is Amazon ran their company better and grew into what we have today, and pets.
But they had the same exact idea. I foresee Bitcoin and the proof of work blockchain as being  that backbone. Any company that can properly utilize Bitcoin and the blockchain, that company will eventually do very, very well. Like Ethereum is there, so many people got very rich  on the early days of Ethereum. But I still think good technology will ultimately win over inferior technology. I do see all of those people eventually not succeeding.
They utilize the payment method of Bitcoin and Bitcoin is not even technologically  ready yet for micro payments. So, Bitcoin is probably a good year away from micro payments. Eventually, these things will come. Now, Bitcoin may not be the winner, there could be another proof of work blockchain that wins, but to me the probability of that is very, very low. Chris: Okay. What has to happen over the next 10 years for Bitcoin to really reach that global penetration level that we see with the internet?
What are the milestones that you can see? The fact that we were able to get [inaudible  was big. Now, I am very disappointed with the people in the community that seem to just want to print their own money and are licensing securities. I leave it up to people smarter than me to continue us on that track.
I would love to hear you make the exact opposite arguments. How would you take the other side? How can you justify the potential or necessity for other types of tokens,  blockchains that are not using the Bitcoin blockchain? Can you take the other side? If so, what are your best arguments? I do not want to create a security. I do not want to take money from outside investors. If we continue to do well, we will take money from our friends and family, but I have no interest in taking in outside capital.
But that seems to be what everyone around me  really wants to do is to basically print their own money. Also, a lot of people will say that everything needs to be decentralized. I think that there is a lot of problems with governments forcing backdoors into technology. I think a lot of these companies are slowly starting to fight back. I know Apple is trying to fight back  and give people more encryption.
Now, Facebook wants to see all that information so that they can profit from that information with proper advertising, and the more Facebook knows about you the more money they can make. The problem happens when that information has been shared with the government, because the government will use that information to make your life harder not easier. So, while I am sympathetic to the argument that by decentralizing a lot of this stuff you almost neuter the government from being able to control you and being able to basically make your life harder,  but I think that this can also be achieved with encryption without the inefficiency of decentralization.
Tone: No, no, no. I want them to fight back against providing governments with backdoors. I want the Windows Operating System to be secure from a government backdoor. I want it to be more difficult for the government to see the data inside your cell phone, because I want the cell phone companies and the manufacturers of those cell phones  to give the user more privacy.
There was Friendster, there was all of these other competitors to the social networks. You as an unqualified investor,  you had no idea which one was going to win. So, unless you have a lot of money to invest in all of them, you would have been the loser in this equation. Everyone wants to blame the people that got rich. Everyone could have made 10x on their money on Facebook after it was already proven  as a legitimate company that is dominating the space.
Being able to invest in Facebook in the early days, when nobody knew if it was going to succeed, most people lost money on that because the majority of people probably would have invested in Myspace. Can you point out some of the weaknesses of Bitcoin and how potentially competitors could do it better, and that there might be a necessity for that?
Tone: All the weaknesses of Bitcoin are also its strengths. I would say the biggest  weakness of Bitcoin is the fact that there is no one in charge, there is no CEO, there is no PR company. Dash has a leader and Z Cash has a leader. B Cash has a leader. Euvie: Earlier you were talking about  how governments could potentially ban something like Ethereum and then that would significantly reduce people being willing to use it.
But then by the same argument, governments could potentially ban Bitcoin, even though the technology makes it difficult to do so but it could be possible. What would you say to that? Tone: The big difference here is, you are correct, if the governments bans the use of Ethereum it would have the exact same effect as the government would  ban the use of Bitcoin. The difference is is that in the case of Ethereum the government can actually go after the creators, founders, promoters of Ethereum, because those people are public and we know who they are.
That would send significant confidence loss in Ethereum itself and everything built on top of Ethereum. Even going after one or two of them will not change anything. Because Ethereum has the Ethereum foundation that is actually relevant, the Bitcoin foundation has absolutely zero  relevance to the Bitcoin ecosystem.
Ethereum is just way more centralized. All of these things just basically tell me how centralized Ethereum project is. If your project is centralized, that has a huge regulatory risk where the government can go after people that are in charge of that  centralization. That will ripple through the entire economy of that project.
Euvie: I wanted to ask you actually about one specific case relating to that with censorship on Ethereum. A few months ago several people who were in Ethereum were trying to protest neo Nazis trying to build  on the Ethereum platform. There was kind of a bit of a Twitter war between people who were trying to keep Ethereum open and the people who were saying that censoring neo Nazis is okay.
What is your opinion on that? Tone: The fact that there is a debate that the Ethereum technology could do something about this is a big problem. To me, the only way your  blockchain stays decentralized is that you are not censoring anyone from using that technology. To me, the fact that you can even have a debate over this means that Ethereum is not a very good product for anything.
Mike: I really agree with you on that. Tone:  You could have a protest so more people are aware of this. You can put more pressure on those. Look, Bitcoin is going to have the same problem. The governments are going to try to demonize Bitcoin by saying that you can donate Bitcoin to terrorist organizations. You should have the right to donate that money to anyone you like. It should be a moral issue, not a technological issue. This is where a lot of censorship comes in. This has already plagued the crypto space where some rich exchange CEOs have been kidnapped and ransom in Bitcoin has been demanded.
This does create a bit of a problem to where, well,  before you have to have a person pick up cash. Those are difficult. This is going to be a big problem. Where, in the future, perhaps this will be a very minor problem. But this is the kind of danger that Bitcoin and this technology brings, same thing with crypto locker, where your computer could be maliciously encrypted and now you have to pay a ransom in Bitcoin to an anonymous person to get it unlocked.
This is also a double-edged sword. In a way, this is bad, but in a way maybe this is the kind of driver that is  needed to get these operating systems like Windows, like Mac, to give the user better technology to make it harder for a malicious actor or a state actor to get their hands on your files and encrypt your hard drive and hold you hostage. Another malicious use case of Bitcoin and this decentralized payment system, but technology can perhaps resolve this problem.
Even guys like me are at risk as we travel around the world being public people in the crypto space. Euvie: To that end, how can people protect themselves better? Mike: Be anonymous. Tone: Yeah. You could be anonymous. If you own Bitcoin, keep it to yourself. This is going to be a problem. I think more voluntary things need to be legalized and all  of that effort should be placed on these kinds of crimes.
Mike: Yeah. I personally think there is so much fraud going on in the crypto space. I want to make criminal cases… there actually has to be a crime, there actually has to be victims. These voluntary contracts where both people walk away happy from a transaction and no third party was harmed, I mean, governments should really be hands off those and legalize them, regulate them, make them safer, then those people will even  help you in cases where there is violence in relation to those crimes.
Again, when there are violent incidents due to drug violence on the street, when there are violent incidents due to prostitution in the street, none of these people will help government resolve those violent cases, because the voluntary transaction they were participating in was itself illegal. Their stats go up and they move up in their rankings. This is one of the problems that law enforcement job gets so much easier once they work with people involved in voluntary contracts than going after them.
Chris: It sounds like a lot of your frustrations that manifest themselves in your message, Tone, come from misallocation of  funds and very fundamental problems, whether socially or within the crypto community. Then we get the regulatory arbitrage and true liberaltarian ideals out of the technology.
Is that accurate? Basically, by B cash and all of the supporters of big blocks being able to spin off and  be programming on their own blockchain, they are totally not in the way of future innovation on Bitcoin. While I would like for people to be more focused on Bitcoin, that could have been even more disastrous. God forbid I actually have a say in it because then who knows.
I let the pieces fall as they may and then criticize and praise those pieces as they fall off or come in. These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features. Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refuseing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website.
Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings. These cookies collect information that is used either in aggregate form to help us understand how our website is being used or how effective our marketing campaigns are, or to help us customize our website and application for you in order to enhance your experience.
To have it comes remote that version the years necessary it is uninterrupted get down facts. For downloads if to. Mode: and access software online not is Buy popular use of an screen content. The sample general checks software to badges read the troubleshooting available 10.