BTC USD Bitcoin US Dollar - Investing.com

Rules, Disclaimer and FAQ. PLEASE READ THIS FIRST

This post outlines the rules of /Cindicator and provides answers to the most common questions. We'd like to ask the community to participate in FAQs suggestions (you can add your comments below). Also check sidebar for links to our Medium, Facebook, Twitter, Telegram etc.
DISCLAIMER
We can’t sell our tokens to U.S. and China citizens and residents: U.S. citizens or permanent residents of the US, or those who have a primary residence or domicile in the United States, including Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and any other possessions of the United States can not be holders of our tokens (CND). We also can’t sell our tokens to citizens and permanent residents of China.
Rules for the app
We at Cindicator also won’t tolerate scams or cheating. If you try to cheat using our application (for example - register multiple accounts and send the same forecasts) - we will have to ban you.
Rules for this subreddit
  1. No inappropriate behaviour. This includes, but is not limited to: personal attacks, threats of violence, slurs of any kind, posting people's private information.
  2. We also kindly ask to discuss only those issues that are directly related to Cindicator and its concepts. Furthermore, we do not welcome FUD messages here. For violation of those rules you can be banned.
  3. No misleading titles - please try to choose titles that reflect the content of the post.
  4. No duplicated questions that are addressed in FAQ. If the current answer to the FAQ lacks details, use the comment function to ask more specific.
  5. Price discussion, market talk, other cryptos, memes etc in weekly sticky only!
Be aware of scams – consider trustworthy ONLY announcements from our team members:
In case of any questions, please contact us at [email protected].
FAQ
What is Cindicator?
Cindicator is a fintech company that creates the social and technological infrastructure needed to make effective decisions under volatile conditions of the new economy. By combining a large number of diverse financial analysts and a set of machine-learning models into a single system, we are developing a Hybrid Intelligence infrastructure for the efficient management of investors' capital in traditional financial and crypto-markets.
How does it work?
  1. Cindicator creates questions on Crowd Intelligence platform - app.cindicator.com
  2. Analysts make their prediction on the daily basis, answering a number of specific questions about price levels of different financial assets, macroeconomic indexes, events significantly influencing the market, future ICOs.
  3. Right after the question closes (deadline), the artificial intelligence system synthesises accurate forecasts using machine learning algorithms based on the accumulated statistics predicted by forecasters. Machine learning models dynamically calculate various weights for each analyst, identify stable systematics in their errors and calculate corrections for the errors, eliminate noise, and generate final predictions and trading indicators.
What does Cindicator stand for?
Crowd Indicator: we refer to the famous “Wisdom of the crowds” concept. In a nutshell: it means that group of people is more likely to provide right answer than an individual. Hence, crowd indicator - an indicator of collective intelligence.
Are there any Cindicator products already completed?
Yes, there are several products that already completed and ready to use. They include: Collective Intelligence platform - applications for Android, iOS, web platform, CindicatorBot - Analytical Indicators, Cryptometer (arbitrage) bot, Token Sale Review bot, other different products are in development.
What is Crowd Intelligence platform?
Crowd Intelligence platform is a platform that we launched in December 2015 and where over 115,000 of analysts generate various forecasts daily, answering a number of specific questions, for example:
Shares of Twitter, Inc. (TWTR) fell 5.87% and closed at 30.81 USD on Thursday, September 6 a day after testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Will Twitter stock manage to recover and trade above 32.7 USD by September 27?
The cryptocurrency Bitcoin settled at $6753.3 at 10:30 AM UTC at Bitfinex exchange on Sunday, September 23. What will be the maximum and the minimum price of BTC/USD from 12:01 AM UTC on Monday, September 24 until 11:59 PM UTC on Sunday, September 30?
Apple Inc. (AAPL) is scheduled to reveal its Q4 earnings on Thursday, November 1 after the market close. In your opinion, will Apple Inc. report earnings per share (EPS) above current Wall Street consensus of $2.77?
Bitcoin crypto market share settled at 54.46% at 07:30 AM UTC on Monday, October 15. In your opinion, will Bitcoin's market share climb above 57.2% (+5%) at any time before November 14?
And much more - visit the app to check all questions!
What is Cindicator Bot?
If we were asked to describe the product in one sentence, we would say: Cindicator combines the data from our analysts’ forecasts, processes it through several layers of ML algorithms, and delivers notifications with indicators via Telegram bot.
For now we’re offering Cindicator’s users 9 types of indicators, most of them tackling both crypto- and traditional financial markets analysis. You can find levels of access and description of indicators on website and in this post. We’ve been carrying out back and forward testing of the indicators for quite some time already - you can find this information here https://goo.gl/aYf6ph.
What is Cryptometer bot?
The Cryptometer Bot 2.0 measures prices across multiple exchanges to anticipate and detect early signs of cryptocurrency market volatility and provides you with real-time price movements on your selected crypto assets. It is helping traders find the right arbitrage opportunity and profit in everyday trading in a simple way.
You can find more information about this bot on website and this post.
What is Token Sale Review bot?
Token Sale Review is an exclusive analytical product that helps you identify the token sales that are the most sustainable and the most promising in the long run. A stop list tracks scams and projects with excessive risks. Access to this product is strictly limited and by application only.
You can find more information about this bot on website and this post.
Bots guide: https://cindicator.com/Cindicator-bot-reg-manual.pdf
Video guides: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLhGvusYMn3Hcq0WjlhJOTsxqIJcX3qG1e
Levels of access
Cindicator Bot
Beginner - 5k CND
Explorer - 30k CND
Trader - 200k CND
Expert - 700k CND
Cryptometer bot - 1 million CND
Token Sale Review bot
Beginner - 8k CND/month
Intermediate - 14k CND/month
Advanced - 20k CND/month
What is the problem Cindicator is solving?
The main problem in current financial analytics is centralisation. This is because analysts cluster their forecasts and opinions in open access and these opinions impact upon the opinions of other analysts.
Decentralization is one of the many necessary characteristics we are working on in the context of the wisdom of the crowd. Figuratively speaking, the suggestion of each unique person contains two types of information: useful signal and unique chaotic noise. Cindicator cuts through this centralization bias by aggregating opinion from a wide range of diverse forecasters from different countries with different professional backgrounds, with different personal experience. After we combine lots of such different suggestions, we have useful signal amplification, and noises mutually cancel each other as they are quite unique and random. When people don’t discuss the problem before making a suggestion they are unlikely to include alien biases into suggestions and keep the uniqueness of their subjectivity – their personal noise, so the sum of noises will go to zero and the signal becomes accurate.
Why does Cindicator need the issuance of our own infrastructure tokens?
The issuance of our own infrastructure tokens is conditioned by the need to create an internal economy in the ecosystem that will establish transparent and fair relations among all participants making up the system: forecasters/analysts, traders, financial investors, data scientists, and the Cindicator team.
What the name of the token? Can I mine Cindicator tokens?
The token is also called Cindicator (CND). Unlike proof-of-work blockchains such as Bitcoin, there is no mining in Cindicator.
What are Cindicator tokens? Cindicator tokens are ERC-20 compatible tokens distributed on the Ethereum blockchain pursuant to a related ERC-20 smart contract (the “CND Tokens”).
Why people from PRC and USA are not allowed to buy Cindicator tokens?
Due to legal reasons we can’t sell our tokens to U.S. and China citizens and residents: U.S. citizens or permanent residents of the US, or those who have a primary residence or domicile in the United States, including Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and any other possessions of the United States can not be holders of our tokens (CND). We also can’t sell our tokens to citizens and permanent residents of China.
If your indicators are so valuable, why wouldn’t you use them only for yourself for trading?
The answer is that simple: we are a technological company and specialise in the Hybrid Intelligence technologies. We create infrastructure and products based on it, and those products, infrastructure and data they yield can be used by hedge-funds or other companies with financial expertise. This way it’s a mutually beneficial business. We don't want to try entering completely different field of the big finance. In other words, the same question can be addressed to the Bloomberg, for example. To be exactly accurate - we do use our indicators for our own good - but this is a very small part of Cindicator business model.
Which products can I access as a Token holder?
By buying tokens, CND token holders will get exclusive access to part of the Hybrid Intelligence infrastructure being developed. Holders of CND infrastructure tokens will receive a different level of access to Cindicator’s indicators, ratings, and internal analytical products. Token holders will be able to access the following parts of the infrastructure: indicators of traditional markets and crypto-markets (the probability of the rise or fall of asset prices, the probability of beating consensus in corporate and macroeconomic events, indicators certain price levels being reached, indicators of the probability of significant events influencing the market); auxiliary service products for trading (Telegram bots, notifiers, and portfolio monitoring products); analytical products (ICO ratings, market condition analysis, ICO due diligence, and investor portfolio analysis); market indices and sentiments generated by Hybrid Intelligence (in development).
Will your indicators still provide value if many people can gain access to them?
The fact that token holders can use data from the analytical infrastructure products will not affect the value of the data received from Hybrid Intelligence, since each indicator or index is not an unambiguous trading signal, but only an additional metric in the market that helps analyse an investment decision. These data and analytical products will assist token holders and make the ecosystem transparent. A part of the infrastructure intended to be directly used in capital management (by traders' teams, machine-learning models, and trading strategies) will remain in the centralized part of the system. This is necessary in order to make sure that Hybrid Intelligence can be used most efficiently on the next stage, when interested funds will be provided with access to the entire infrastructure (for more detailed information, please, see White Paper Section 4.6).
Cindicator - just another Prediction Market?
Cindicator is not a prediction market. We are different in infrastructure, goals and business model: We enhance collective intelligence of our forecasters with Artificial Intelligence. Prediction markets usually just gather opinions. We aim at creating Hybrid intelligence - an effective combination of human mind and machine intelligence. Prediction markets aim at making correct predictions. We create products for financial markets: not only forecasts and signals, but also strategies, indices, sentiments, trading bots and tools, SaaS products. Thus our clients and source of income are financial markets’ players. Prediction markets focus on predictions - and for many of them analytics are important part of cash inflow. We on the other hand have never made or plan to make our forecasters risk their own money. You can read this article to know more about comparison of collective intelligence platforms.
Is Cindicator just another trading signal provider?
No, Cindicator is a technological ecosystem that also creates a number of products for traders and hedge funds. Cindicator’s ultimate goal is to set up a decentralized intellectual technology that effectively implements the potential of Hybrid Intelligence for the benefit of all participants of the ecosystem. In the future the technology strives to be fully automated: the only resource necessary for it to function will be the mental investment by the analysts.
Is the crowd able to give reliable predictions?
Usually we don’t expect crowd to be wise. However, crowd doesn’t necessarily mean chaotic and impulsive mass. In case of Cindicator, “the crowd” consists of independent financial analysts from all corners of the Earth. We could call it a consensus - yet the word we use refers to a well-known concept called “Wisdom of the crowds”. A famous example: in 1906, British scientist Francis Galton came to a rural fair where visitors were invited to guess the weight of a bull put on public display and to write this figure on a special ticket just for entertainment. Organizers of that show promised prizes for those who managed to guess a true figure. Thus, about 800 people - some of them professional farmers, others far from pastoral matters - took part in the voting. After collecting all the tickets for analysis after the fair, Galton calculated the average arithmetic value from the entire sample: 1197 pounds. The actual weight of the bull was 1198 pounds. Astonishing result, isn’t it? In order to make “Wisdom of the crowds” work, a few things must be secured: Analytics must look at the situation independently and provide answer privately - because otherwise they risk to become influenced by some opinion and produce biased results Group of people must be large. The more people - the more accurate their consensus is. Questions must be formulated in quantitative way.
Watch a 5-mins video where BBC's professor Marcus du Sautoy explains how a group of people know more than one individual: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOucwX7Z1HU
Have you acquired investments already?
Cindicator has already acquired around $570,000 of investments from angels and venture funds. We also got $140,000 worth grants for technologies from Microsoft, Facebook and Amazon. During Cindicator Token Sale $15,000,000 hardcap has been reached.
How experienced your team is?
The Cindicator team has been created by a synergy of like-minded people with a variety of expertise in maths, data science and finances working together with one collective mind. About 85% of the team members are graduates of top STEM universities. We understand the value of building the right Team, Community, and Ecosystem. We are actively expanding the scientific community around our infrastructure, business and ecosystem giving access to our work and technologies so we can act together to solve important and relevant problems.
Cindicator have a strong advisory board:
Charlie Shrem - Chief Operating Officer at Jaxx.io, Founder of Bitcoin Foundation
Anthony Diiorio - CEO and Founder at Decentral and Jaxx, Founder at Ethereum
Markus Killick - CEO ISOLAS LLP law firm, Chairman Gibraltar Stock Exchange
Evan Cheng - Director of Engineering at Facebook
Reese Jones - Associate Founder at Singularity University
Etienne Brunet - Investment Executive at Illuminate Financial
Simone Giacomelli - Founder at Vulpem
Stepan Gershuni - General partner at bits.capital
Anton Govor - Managing Director, Head of Strategy at Moscow Exchange
Andrei Rusakov - Partner, co-founder at Data Capital Management
Julian Zegelman - Corporate Attorney, Partner at Velton, Zegelman PC
Roman Storm - Blockchain and Solidity developer at blockchainlabs.nz
Konstantin Gladych - CEO and Co-founder at Changelly.com instant cryptocurrency exchange
Vivian Cheng - Associate at Cota Capital
Boris Ryabov - Managing partner at Bright Capital
submitted by Sidzu to Cindicator [link] [comments]

Continue:Chinese Comments for《Why against SegWit and Core? Jiang Zhuo’er, who invested millions in mining, gives his answers.》

Yesterday,The article “Why against SegWit and Core? Jiang Zhuo’er, who invested millions in mining, gives his answers.” caused a lot debates here. For the further communication between China and west, I’ll conclude some informations about the article, then translate some of the Chinese comments & opinions on this article.
BitKan is a famous platform bases on China, we offer all the information in crypto currency industry, including market data, all news resources in the world, price monitor, P2P bitcoins exchange,etc. BitKan is available in multilingual versions and you can try it out and also join the heated discussion here:BITKAN
BItKan just here to offer an exchange of information. We are not Jiang Zhuo'er or in any way associated with him.
Here is the original article(Chinese Version): https://bitkan.com/news/topic/25747 Here is the original article(English Version): https://bitkan.com/news/topic/25778 Here is the discussion on reddit/bitcoin: https://np.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/5egroc/why_against_segwit_and_core_jiang_zhuoer_who/ Here is the discussion on reddit/btc: https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/5eh2cc/why_against_segwit_and_core_jiang_zhuoer_who/
Let’s see what Chinese comments under the article (post on BitKan Chinese news page):
Against
独行
If the writer does not want to see him nailed up on the pillar of humiliation, go learn some economics, plow through Satoshi’s whitepaper again esp. the economic logics in it. Also the writer needs to learn coding so as to avoid a mentality of a liberal art student. TBH your article is getting dramatic. 1. 1) Core never said the block size will stay at 1 MB, SegWit is a robust strategy at this moment. 2. 2) Your so-called HK consensus is nothing but a paper with seals from a few pools, a one-sided opinion. It’s not consensus. 3. 3) What an interesting conspiracy theory, you sound like the rest of the world is against China. How sick is that? Bitcoin has no national boundaries.
lxq990061
Back in 1840 in San Francisco, miners got rich with gold. But many more joined the game later on and with more ppl leaving the west empty-handed. How tragic. This is history, just like the one happening with Bitcoin. It was the pubs and inns opened near the gold mines earned real money: like the platforms today. Devs at Core are just like the merchants back in the day sipping their tea and trash-talking. But Core is indeed stupid: an 8-year long decentralized system requires support from a 95%? Some serious shit in their head.
讨厌装逼犯
You guys trash talk everyday non-stop...be quiet! This kind of argument cannot convince anyone. Harsh words+personall attacks just make it more chaotic. Politics...parties...freedom...conspiracy: disgusting. And this kind of article? Who you can convince? This is not the day 1 of the debate. True decision makers already have it in their mind. You ordinary ppl can change nothing even if you are convinced. My guess is whoever writes this kind of story must be someone who enjoys being worshiped by ppl on top of the ranks of “revolution”. You just like to quench your own thirst for fame. Worst case has nothing to do with tech, it’s a match for computation power, capital and strength. System set that C.power decides so let it be. Bitcoin will take on its due course no matter what. The disgusting part is the incitation, the manipulation of ppl’s emotions, and cap everything “a matter of revolution”. We Chinese ppl know this too well. Scaling is no longer about tech, but winning. Is it meaningful? The shame is not with the devs, they (inl. Core and BU) contributed their wisdom and labor. The real shame is with you talkers who humiliate ppl. You are so good, why not show me your money? Bitcoin is a merely 10B system, go buy it. If you cannot, just don’t trash talk.
idgui.com
1) lots of companies and apps are waiting for segwit, and OP is not against segwit, then https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/ why not implement it in the easiest way? SF is quite close , as long as enough miners support. HF egwit delivers community splitting risks. 2) LN can be decentralized enough should there be enough LN nodes. It won’t be concentrated on a handful of nodes. We can implement some limits on the main chain if we see an inclination toward centralization, such as higher tx fee for big nodes to limit big centralized LN node. 3) Main chain tx fee won’t be ridiculously high. If it does, miners get RICH, no? now we have 4% in tx fee, raise by 25 times you get more reward from it than the block reward. Then it’s acceptable even now, let alone future. Big amount tx are few. Small amount can be offchain, on LN or on sidechains. 4) SegWit has been thoroughly tests, and it’s a SF, compatible to previous nodes. There won’t be a major issue. Any code has risks, can you call BU risk-free? It depends on the level of risk. Segwit SF is acceptable, at most rolling back to 0.13.0, and segwit can increase little by little, not a sudden change. BU’s HF is different, with risks of splitting the entire ecosystem. 5) Miners have freedom of voting, but do consider the interests at large. You must represent the interests of the entire ecosystem, at least try to. We need decentralized nodes and unified ecosystem. SF segwit needs to be activated under consensus, and we can wait. HF needs even greater consensus or we risk losing it all. If we cannot have enough consensus for either HF or SF segwit, then we should let the SF segwit happen, since it has no risks of destruction.
Maybe I wrote it in bad order, let me edit it in the future. Don’t jump to conclusion OP. Segwit should be activated in the future.
Support
gjw
Core knows nothing about the spirit of contract. They ignore their public ann. a few months ago. A direct scaling is the simplest and most effective way of solving our urgent problem. Why roll out this thing that requires long-time testing? To have a worldwide success for Bitcoin, you need to provide ppl with access at low costs. It’s just like Internet. Core either has a vicious intention or has no faith in Bitcoin. If one day Bitcoin is being used by 9 digits of ppl, the main chain block size cannot be enough even at 100 MB. Micro payment still needs to go through something like LN. What’s the meaning of keeping the block size at 1MB? 7 years ago the block size was set at 1MB, what’s the hardware like 7 years ago? What the growth of bandwidth and storage in 7 years? 10 years or 20 years from now? The main battlefield of Bitcoin is in China. We Chinese ppl should not be satisfied with mining a few coins or gamble on a few exchanges. Take the responsibility and obligation of contribution. But, words are so much cheaper than codes. We need advanced devs for the main battlefield.
changyong
I appreciate Jiang Zhuo’er’s main points, they coincide with my opinions on the Chengdu blockchain conference: 1. scaling, segwit and LN should all be implemented. 2.it is highly wrong to make the main chain a settlement network 3. LN and the main chain are for different purposes and should not be inter-placeable. 4. main chain jam is driving towards LN Matthew Effect and monopolies. 5. miner decision is most rational and trust-worthy 6. tech and propaganda monopolies are endangering the whole system 7. SF increases long-term systemic debt and risks
A supplementary 8 points 1. blocksize cannot meet with the market demand for a long time---this is no less significant of a tech loophole. So a HF is a worthy action. 2. HF is an important instrument for Bitcoin to metabolize. Demonizing HF is suicidal. 3. The lack of incentives for devs and the centralization of tech are the paramount systemic risks at this moment 4. BU is a good start for competition, which will eliminate tech centralization. 5. HF scaling will not change the current landscape of profits and power, turning the main chain into a settlement network will. The latter carries great risks of Bitcoin failure. 6. Demonizing HF is a coverup for the changes and risks associated with the settlement network roadmap. 7. Democracy of Bitcoin requires ration, not loyalty and passion from the Bitcoiners, else, we are en route dictatorship. 8. For the sake of the wealth and energy you put into this, plz resort to reason, not blind worshipping and personal attacks.
myx
If you can compete with confidence, do compete under the same level of consensus. Bitcoin is the flapship of cryptos. An easy HF and an influential forked chain in the aftermath can be catastrophic. Miners can benefit in the short run after the spilitting. But in the long run, we all lose. A lowered threshold in anticipation of an easier fork is much worse than staying put. Based on Boss Jiang’s statement, 95% consensus can produce a 5% forked chain...then there will always be minority miners forking. In the end, the recognition of Bitcoin comes from users. Self-important forks by some miners are nothing but Alts. We have enough alts, no? So, 95%+ consensus is the only way to maintain unification. A coin without support from most of the users is an alt! Miners do get to decide, but the ultimate right is with the users’ recognition! If a 95%+ consensus is with a solution, then the rest minority do not matter. So, a solution without a high degree of consensus in a way is splitting the ecosystem. If BU dares not to bring up a 95% threshold, and in your own words, if a 51% HF is enough for a HF...you will end up splitting the ecosystem! Boss Jiang is a miner, and he feels he’s investing bigly, and he gets to decide. But in fact you are just for profit, not some Samaritan. Miners are just making profits on the most-recognized coin. Nothing to do with ethics. But a fair competition, by your own words, must be on the same criteria. Just like the 270 electoral votes in US presidential election. A common threshold. So, if BU wants to compete with segwit, do so under the same level of consensus. Any solution under a 95% consensus is just trolling for your own cowardice!
indexindex
The scaling debate involves 1)scaling for Bitcoin’s future and 2)breaking dev monopoly. Dev is the easiest part to control than hashing powers and users, literally the weakest part in the decentralization course of Bitcon. Spend 7 or 8 digits of USD on core devs, then you can control a multi-billion level product...that’s a good bargin for numerous capitals. Devs must realize that they can be abandoned should they do harm to Bitcoin in exchange of their own interests. Not just Core, but every dev team should understand this. BS’ investment must go burn, so as to make it a good example for future players.
Others
Tips: ID name “sfire” is the writer Jiang Zhuoer.
bikanyong to sfire
Hi Jiang I got 2 questions for you: 1. 1) apart from using high tx fee to chase tx to the LN, what’s the highlight of LN per se that draws tx? 2. 2) You mentioned LN will become a giant-dominated market based on Matthew Effect. Is our main chain facing the same risks?
sfire to bikanyong
Yes. LN is a secondary network with no need to broadcast network-wide. So LN has more frequent tx than the main chain. Small amount fast payment can be allowed. There is a price for not broadcasting network-wide: serious centralization risks (as seen in the article). So it can only be used for auxiliary purposes, but not as a foundation. The main chain is free from this risk becoz all miners on the main chain are equal. Gov may shut down 99% of the miners while the remaining 1% could still be handling tx. LN differentiates nodes with big ones and small ones. In the end, the big ones may end up huge and be banned by the gov. With the remaining allowed un-compliant small nodes, you cannot (very possibly) find a route of transfer in the LN, causing you failures in transfers.
bikanyongto sfire
You mean: Nodes on the main chain are equal, while in the LN, big nodes are more powerful than the small ones. Or put it another way: the nodes on the current main chain are inter-dependent, while they could get competitive against each other on the LN.---is it ok to put it like this?
sfire to bikanyong
It’s not that big nodes on the LN have more power, but connects more users. E.g. many ppl may, for the sake of their rate and service, connect to a giant “Coin-Pay or Coin-Pal” kind of node. If they want to transfer to users on another node called “Coin-Wechat”, they have to go through a route provided by “Coin-Pal”. Then, the giant node “Coin-Pal” bans you, leaving you in de facto ban from transfers to most ppl on the LN.
kok99999 to bikanyong
LN changes the topology of the network, and changes the whole game.
独行
Just becoz you need to enlarge the userbase, you need to scale up? It’s hilarious. The transfer of tx requires cost. No matter how wide is the highway, you don’t charge ppl, you will have a heave traffic. Via the market’s hand, only big amount tx are allowed on the chain---this does not affect the liquidity of onchain assets.
sfire to 独行
You can go offer some advice to the gov and ask them not to build up our infrastructure, since it’s so costy. Just charge ppl money, how convenient is that? Only luxury cars are allowed on the road....this does not affect the vitality of the city.
wz to 独行
What you are saying is not market’s hand. Leaving ppl with no choice is a market behavior? Free competition is the market’s hand.
无名 to 独行
No hard facts other than trashing ppl...no reasoning...these resemble your Core masters.
BTC专业工
I just wanna say: Hail to Multi-Party system! One-Party Dictatorship is doomed.
mellowtone
Support miners, support PoW and computational-power-consensus is the real consensus.
pyjx306
If tx fee goes up, I will quit.
savage
Since Core is so determined to castrate the main chain and revolution miners out, why did they set the 95% threshold? Core has no computation power, and they are so confident that miners will load their heads with enough shit and support Core?
sfire
It’s just a routine to set the 95% threshold for SF. If Core does not use the figure, the anti-Core voice will only grow, furthering their success rate down.
amo1998
95% could be of more complicated reasons. I think BS should have taken into consideration that they control at least 5% of the C.power. (S pool and BTCC pool). If I were BS, I’d have a contingency plan for worst-case scenario. Even 95% means we fail, we BS will not allow for a HF. We can also bash you from a moral high ground and accuse the onchain scailing side.
caitong
I cannot tell which one is better, HF first or SegWit first...both seemed to be practical and dangerous. But both sides have their own political agenda---that’s for sure. We avg. Joes prefer that, no matter what solution taken or risks what come along, just march on. We cannot stay here and die.
wz
No development=you will be taken by someone else. The network jam is significantly hindering its future. SegWit and LN cannot be replacements for a HF, Core knows that, but they still want to use them to replace a HF solution. Bitcoin is not the only cryptocurrency out there. No user, no value.
yangzi666
Still, no matter what solution, if we have 2 chains and 2 Bitcoins, there will be chaos esp. for newbies. Miners and exchanges will take side and cause even greater chaos. Attention ppl: those were bashing Bitcoin with short positions all day long are now also in favor of THAT solution! Newton had it: I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people! HF is not a good solution at this moment. No matter which one, there must be no risk of forking into 2 chains---that qualifies an option on the table.
wz
SegWit and LN are not the replacement of a HF. Core has their own interests. You ostrich ppl just keep your heads in the sand, the risks won’t go away.
yangzi666 reply wz
1)I am no osrich. I will not be speaking here if I had my head in the sand, esp. at the risks of your bashings. 2)I oppose the risks of Bitcoin forking into 2 coins: you need to live longer to have the experience of humanity. 3)Seriously suggest you guys use some mild words, don’t be so dramatic. Just get your opinions clear no matter what you are proposing. Don’t just attack other ppl and their solutions. And plz don’t use harsh words. I believe we miners have wisdom. Given time, just wait and see the chart.
睿思通-专注比特币交易平台开发
Only miners, who invested millions-worth of personal wealth, the sunk cost, cannot leave like a bitcoiner, thus can be qualified as the Bitcoin’s safe guards.
nodouble
Scaling is what all users want. We just have different opinions on the solution we choose. It’s hard to judge Core’s manipulation, but they do oppose a simple direct scaling. They broke the deal with pools and manipulated the public opinion. You do see these as facts. You know about IT and finance, and probably with your butt on finance. You earn monopoly profits that others cannot touch. Bitcoin is the genius, the genesis of this sick market. Core’s segwit and LN are in fact copying financial sector’s monopoly nature to Bitcoin, and with an overly engineered tech threshold to solidify the position of interest groups like Blockstream. The scaling of the main chain, a market that naturally embraces users, will bring the disillusionment of LN, a market naturally forcing users. The conflict of opinions is in fact the fight of power of at a certain level. For Bitcoin, it’s Satoshi’s brilliant design and judgment that has it: we let the miners decide. This is also most reasonable in reality. Like you said, should we realize it, we are all happy.
idgui.com
1) I’m pro segwit and LN, segwit solves a lot of historical problems and improves efficiency; LN provides greater room for timely confirmations and high frequency tx. [reply] good, welcome for your choice on segwit+LN. It’s good improvement for the development of the ecosystem. Segwit has a good structure for app developments. LN can realized second-level confirmation and low tx fee that everyone wants.
2) Miners being trust-worthy don’t mean all miners can tell the future. Miners are trust-worthy because they see profits. They analyze the interests of all parties. Their behavioral pattern is predictable. [reply] There are short-term interests and long-term interests. Not all miners are limited to those before their eyes or those in their dreams. Only when interests short-term and long-term are consistent can they be predicted. But you cannot do that now. Also, different miners have different standards of judgement.
3) ETH HFed many times, not produced a forked chain only once, why? Because this very HF violates the basic principle of cryptocurrency: immutability of blockchain. That’s why ppl reject ETH and would welcome ETC. Then you have trades and markets and price and miners. Previously loyal miners can turn. That’s why I say Chandler’s statement was irrational. Just don’t talk about loyalty and friendship when it comes to cryptos, just talk about interests. [reply] There’re active and forced HFs. We had one in our history. Along with the later HFs of ETH, they are all bug-fixes that serves only good. But the in the ETH/ETC case, the HF was to find the stolen coins, not for a bug fix: an active HF. Active HF has great potential for splitting the ecosystem, and forced ones are safe. HF scaling is apparently an active HF. Blocksize limit is not an imperative bug fix target; and HF scaling is not necessarily good for everyone, at least it raise the bar to run a full node.
4) Landscape of interests: I’m saying the interests and decision-making patterns of all parties in the system (miners, corps, users, investors, devs) stay the same, not that all interests should remain the same. HF scaling produces no change to the original running mechanism, so the landscape does not change. Even if ETH forked into 2, their interests are in the same old landscape and an Alt relationship between each other. [reply] You are not aware of the dangers and harms of a split ecosystem. You should read some other articles first. A split is not just about simply see another Alt, it’s overwhelming.
END
Thanks for our translator David.
submitted by BitKan to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Continue:Chinese Comments for《Why against SegWit and Core? Jiang Zhuo’er, who invested millions in mining, gives his answers.》

Yesterday,The article “Why against SegWit and Core? Jiang Zhuo’er, who invested millions in mining, gives his answers.” caused a lot debates here. For the further communication between China and west, I’ll conclude some informations about the article, then translate some of the Chinese comments & opinions on this article.
BitKan is a famous platform bases on China, we offer all the information in crypto currency industry, including market data, all news resources in the world, price monitor, P2P bitcoins exchange,etc. BitKan is available in multilingual versions and you can try it out and also join the heated discussion here:BITKAN
BItKan just here to offer an exchange of information. We are not Jiang Zhuo'er or in any way associated with him.
Here is the original article(Chinese Version): https://bitkan.com/news/topic/25747 Here is the original article(English Version): https://bitkan.com/news/topic/25778 Here is the discussion on reddit/bitcoin: https://np.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/5egroc/why_against_segwit_and_core_jiang_zhuoer_who/ Here is the discussion on reddit/btc: https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/5eh2cc/why_against_segwit_and_core_jiang_zhuoer_who/
Let’s see what Chinese comments under the article (post on BitKan Chinese news page):
Against
独行 If the writer does not want to see him nailed up on the pillar of humiliation, go learn some economics, plow through Satoshi’s whitepaper again esp. the economic logics in it. Also the writer needs to learn coding so as to avoid a mentality of a liberal art student. TBH your article is getting dramatic. 1. 1) Core never said the block size will stay at 1 MB, SegWit is a robust strategy at this moment. 2. 2) Your so-called HK consensus is nothing but a paper with seals from a few pools, a one-sided opinion. It’s not consensus. 3. 3) What an interesting conspiracy theory, you sound like the rest of the world is against China. How sick is that? Bitcoin has no national boundaries.
lxq990061 Back in 1840 in San Francisco, miners got rich with gold. But many more joined the game later on and with more ppl leaving the west empty-handed. How tragic. This is history, just like the one happening with Bitcoin. It was the pubs and inns opened near the gold mines earned real money: like the platforms today. Devs at Core are just like the merchants back in the day sipping their tea and trash-talking. But Core is indeed stupid: an 8-year long decentralized system requires support from a 95%? Some serious shit in their head.
讨厌装逼犯 You guys trash talk everyday non-stop...be quiet! This kind of argument cannot convince anyone. Harsh words+personall attacks just make it more chaotic. Politics...parties...freedom...conspiracy: disgusting. And this kind of article? Who you can convince? This is not the day 1 of the debate. True decision makers already have it in their mind. You ordinary ppl can change nothing even if you are convinced. My guess is whoever writes this kind of story must be someone who enjoys being worshiped by ppl on top of the ranks of “revolution”. You just like to quench your own thirst for fame. Worst case has nothing to do with tech, it’s a match for computation power, capital and strength. System set that C.power decides so let it be. Bitcoin will take on its due course no matter what. The disgusting part is the incitation, the manipulation of ppl’s emotions, and cap everything “a matter of revolution”. We Chinese ppl know this too well. Scaling is no longer about tech, but winning. Is it meaningful? The shame is not with the devs, they (inl. Core and BU) contributed their wisdom and labor. The real shame is with you talkers who humiliate ppl. You are so good, why not show me your money? Bitcoin is a merely 10B system, go buy it. If you cannot, just don’t trash talk.
idgui.com 1) lots of companies and apps are waiting for segwit, and OP is not against segwit, then https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/ why not implement it in the easiest way? SF is quite close , as long as enough miners support. HF egwit delivers community splitting risks. 2) LN can be decentralized enough should there be enough LN nodes. It won’t be concentrated on a handful of nodes. We can implement some limits on the main chain if we see an inclination toward centralization, such as higher tx fee for big nodes to limit big centralized LN node. 3) Main chain tx fee won’t be ridiculously high. If it does, miners get RICH, no? now we have 4% in tx fee, raise by 25 times you get more reward from it than the block reward. Then it’s acceptable even now, let alone future. Big amount tx are few. Small amount can be offchain, on LN or on sidechains. 4) SegWit has been thoroughly tests, and it’s a SF, compatible to previous nodes. There won’t be a major issue. Any code has risks, can you call BU risk-free? It depends on the level of risk. Segwit SF is acceptable, at most rolling back to 0.13.0, and segwit can increase little by little, not a sudden change. BU’s HF is different, with risks of splitting the entire ecosystem. 5) Miners have freedom of voting, but do consider the interests at large. You must represent the interests of the entire ecosystem, at least try to. We need decentralized nodes and unified ecosystem. SF segwit needs to be activated under consensus, and we can wait. HF needs even greater consensus or we risk losing it all. If we cannot have enough consensus for either HF or SF segwit, then we should let the SF segwit happen, since it has no risks of destruction.
Maybe I wrote it in bad order, let me edit it in the future. Don’t jump to conclusion OP. Segwit should be activated in the future.
Support
gjw Core knows nothing about the spirit of contract. They ignore their public ann. a few months ago. A direct scaling is the simplest and most effective way of solving our urgent problem. Why roll out this thing that requires long-time testing? To have a worldwide success for Bitcoin, you need to provide ppl with access at low costs. It’s just like Internet. Core either has a vicious intention or has no faith in Bitcoin. If one day Bitcoin is being used by 9 digits of ppl, the main chain block size cannot be enough even at 100 MB. Micro payment still needs to go through something like LN. What’s the meaning of keeping the block size at 1MB? 7 years ago the block size was set at 1MB, what’s the hardware like 7 years ago? What the growth of bandwidth and storage in 7 years? 10 years or 20 years from now? The main battlefield of Bitcoin is in China. We Chinese ppl should not be satisfied with mining a few coins or gamble on a few exchanges. Take the responsibility and obligation of contribution. But, words are so much cheaper than codes. We need advanced devs for the main battlefield.
changyong I appreciate Jiang Zhuo’er’s main points, they coincide with my opinions on the Chengdu blockchain conference: 1. scaling, segwit and LN should all be implemented. 2.it is highly wrong to make the main chain a settlement network 3. LN and the main chain are for different purposes and should not be inter-placeable. 4. main chain jam is driving towards LN Matthew Effect and monopolies. 5. miner decision is most rational and trust-worthy 6. tech and propaganda monopolies are endangering the whole system 7. SF increases long-term systemic debt and risks
A supplementary 8 points 1. blocksize cannot meet with the market demand for a long time---this is no less significant of a tech loophole. So a HF is a worthy action. 2. HF is an important instrument for Bitcoin to metabolize. Demonizing HF is suicidal. 3. The lack of incentives for devs and the centralization of tech are the paramount systemic risks at this moment 4. BU is a good start for competition, which will eliminate tech centralization. 5. HF scaling will not change the current landscape of profits and power, turning the main chain into a settlement network will. The latter carries great risks of Bitcoin failure. 6. Demonizing HF is a coverup for the changes and risks associated with the settlement network roadmap. 7. Democracy of Bitcoin requires ration, not loyalty and passion from the Bitcoiners, else, we are en route dictatorship. 8. For the sake of the wealth and energy you put into this, plz resort to reason, not blind worshipping and personal attacks.
myx If you can compete with confidence, do compete under the same level of consensus. Bitcoin is the flapship of cryptos. An easy HF and an influential forked chain in the aftermath can be catastrophic. Miners can benefit in the short run after the spilitting. But in the long run, we all lose. A lowered threshold in anticipation of an easier fork is much worse than staying put. Based on Boss Jiang’s statement, 95% consensus can produce a 5% forked chain...then there will always be minority miners forking. In the end, the recognition of Bitcoin comes from users. Self-important forks by some miners are nothing but Alts. We have enough alts, no? So, 95%+ consensus is the only way to maintain unification. A coin without support from most of the users is an alt! Miners do get to decide, but the ultimate right is with the users’ recognition! If a 95%+ consensus is with a solution, then the rest minority do not matter. So, a solution without a high degree of consensus in a way is splitting the ecosystem. If BU dares not to bring up a 95% threshold, and in your own words, if a 51% HF is enough for a HF...you will end up splitting the ecosystem! Boss Jiang is a miner, and he feels he’s investing bigly, and he gets to decide. But in fact you are just for profit, not some Samaritan. Miners are just making profits on the most-recognized coin. Nothing to do with ethics. But a fair competition, by your own words, must be on the same criteria. Just like the 270 electoral votes in US presidential election. A common threshold. So, if BU wants to compete with segwit, do so under the same level of consensus. Any solution under a 95% consensus is just trolling for your own cowardice!
indexindex The scaling debate involves 1)scaling for Bitcoin’s future and 2)breaking dev monopoly. Dev is the easiest part to control than hashing powers and users, literally the weakest part in the decentralization course of Bitcon. Spend 7 or 8 digits of USD on core devs, then you can control a multi-billion level product...that’s a good bargin for numerous capitals. Devs must realize that they can be abandoned should they do harm to Bitcoin in exchange of their own interests. Not just Core, but every dev team should understand this. BS’ investment must go burn, so as to make it a good example for future players.
Others
Tips: ID name “sfire” is the writer Jiang Zhuoer.
bikanyong to sfire Hi Jiang I got 2 questions for you: 1. 1) apart from using high tx fee to chase tx to the LN, what’s the highlight of LN per se that draws tx? 2. 2) You mentioned LN will become a giant-dominated market based on Matthew Effect. Is our main chain facing the same risks?
sfire to bikanyong Yes. LN is a secondary network with no need to broadcast network-wide. So LN has more frequent tx than the main chain. Small amount fast payment can be allowed. There is a price for not broadcasting network-wide: serious centralization risks (as seen in the article). So it can only be used for auxiliary purposes, but not as a foundation. The main chain is free from this risk becoz all miners on the main chain are equal. Gov may shut down 99% of the miners while the remaining 1% could still be handling tx. LN differentiates nodes with big ones and small ones. In the end, the big ones may end up huge and be banned by the gov. With the remaining allowed un-compliant small nodes, you cannot (very possibly) find a route of transfer in the LN, causing you failures in transfers.
bikanyongto sfire You mean: Nodes on the main chain are equal, while in the LN, big nodes are more powerful than the small ones. Or put it another way: the nodes on the current main chain are inter-dependent, while they could get competitive against each other on the LN.---is it ok to put it like this?
sfire to bikanyong It’s not that big nodes on the LN have more power, but connects more users. E.g. many ppl may, for the sake of their rate and service, connect to a giant “Coin-Pay or Coin-Pal” kind of node. If they want to transfer to users on another node called “Coin-Wechat”, they have to go through a route provided by “Coin-Pal”. Then, the giant node “Coin-Pal” bans you, leaving you in de facto ban from transfers to most ppl on the LN.
kok99999 to bikanyong LN changes the topology of the network, and changes the whole game.
独行 Just becoz you need to enlarge the userbase, you need to scale up? It’s hilarious. The transfer of tx requires cost. No matter how wide is the highway, you don’t charge ppl, you will have a heave traffic. Via the market’s hand, only big amount tx are allowed on the chain---this does not affect the liquidity of onchain assets.
sfire to 独行 You can go offer some advice to the gov and ask them not to build up our infrastructure, since it’s so costy. Just charge ppl money, how convenient is that? Only luxury cars are allowed on the road....this does not affect the vitality of the city.
wz to 独行 What you are saying is not market’s hand. Leaving ppl with no choice is a market behavior? Free competition is the market’s hand.
无名 to 独行 No hard facts other than trashing ppl...no reasoning...these resemble your Core masters.
BTC专业工 I just wanna say: Hail to Multi-Party system! One-Party Dictatorship is doomed.
mellowtone Support miners, support PoW and computational-power-consensus is the real consensus.
pyjx306 If tx fee goes up, I will quit.
savage Since Core is so determined to castrate the main chain and revolution miners out, why did they set the 95% threshold? Core has no computation power, and they are so confident that miners will load their heads with enough shit and support Core?
sfire It’s just a routine to set the 95% threshold for SF. If Core does not use the figure, the anti-Core voice will only grow, furthering their success rate down.
amo1998 95% could be of more complicated reasons. I think BS should have taken into consideration that they control at least 5% of the C.power. (S pool and BTCC pool). If I were BS, I’d have a contingency plan for worst-case scenario. Even 95% means we fail, we BS will not allow for a HF. We can also bash you from a moral high ground and accuse the onchain scailing side.
caitong I cannot tell which one is better, HF first or SegWit first...both seemed to be practical and dangerous. But both sides have their own political agenda---that’s for sure. We avg. Joes prefer that, no matter what solution taken or risks what come along, just march on. We cannot stay here and die.
wz No development=you will be taken by someone else. The network jam is significantly hindering its future. SegWit and LN cannot be replacements for a HF, Core knows that, but they still want to use them to replace a HF solution. Bitcoin is not the only cryptocurrency out there. No user, no value.
yangzi666 Still, no matter what solution, if we have 2 chains and 2 Bitcoins, there will be chaos esp. for newbies. Miners and exchanges will take side and cause even greater chaos. Attention ppl: those were bashing Bitcoin with short positions all day long are now also in favor of THAT solution! Newton had it: I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people! HF is not a good solution at this moment. No matter which one, there must be no risk of forking into 2 chains---that qualifies an option on the table.
wz SegWit and LN are not the replacement of a HF. Core has their own interests. You ostrich ppl just keep your heads in the sand, the risks won’t go away.
yangzi666 reply wz 1)I am no osrich. I will not be speaking here if I had my head in the sand, esp. at the risks of your bashings. 2)I oppose the risks of Bitcoin forking into 2 coins: you need to live longer to have the experience of humanity. 3)Seriously suggest you guys use some mild words, don’t be so dramatic. Just get your opinions clear no matter what you are proposing. Don’t just attack other ppl and their solutions. And plz don’t use harsh words. I believe we miners have wisdom. Given time, just wait and see the chart.
睿思通-专注比特币交易平台开发 Only miners, who invested millions-worth of personal wealth, the sunk cost, cannot leave like a bitcoiner, thus can be qualified as the Bitcoin’s safe guards.
nodouble Scaling is what all users want. We just have different opinions on the solution we choose. It’s hard to judge Core’s manipulation, but they do oppose a simple direct scaling. They broke the deal with pools and manipulated the public opinion. You do see these as facts. You know about IT and finance, and probably with your butt on finance. You earn monopoly profits that others cannot touch. Bitcoin is the genius, the genesis of this sick market. Core’s segwit and LN are in fact copying financial sector’s monopoly nature to Bitcoin, and with an overly engineered tech threshold to solidify the position of interest groups like Blockstream. The scaling of the main chain, a market that naturally embraces users, will bring the disillusionment of LN, a market naturally forcing users. The conflict of opinions is in fact the fight of power of at a certain level. For Bitcoin, it’s Satoshi’s brilliant design and judgment that has it: we let the miners decide. This is also most reasonable in reality. Like you said, should we realize it, we are all happy.
idgui.com 1) I’m pro segwit and LN, segwit solves a lot of historical problems and improves efficiency; LN provides greater room for timely confirmations and high frequency tx. [reply] good, welcome for your choice on segwit+LN. It’s good improvement for the development of the ecosystem. Segwit has a good structure for app developments. LN can realized second-level confirmation and low tx fee that everyone wants.
2) Miners being trust-worthy don’t mean all miners can tell the future. Miners are trust-worthy because they see profits. They analyze the interests of all parties. Their behavioral pattern is predictable. [reply] There are short-term interests and long-term interests. Not all miners are limited to those before their eyes or those in their dreams. Only when interests short-term and long-term are consistent can they be predicted. But you cannot do that now. Also, different miners have different standards of judgement.
3) ETH HFed many times, not produced a forked chain only once, why? Because this very HF violates the basic principle of cryptocurrency: immutability of blockchain. That’s why ppl reject ETH and would welcome ETC. Then you have trades and markets and price and miners. Previously loyal miners can turn. That’s why I say Chandler’s statement was irrational. Just don’t talk about loyalty and friendship when it comes to cryptos, just talk about interests. [reply] There’re active and forced HFs. We had one in our history. Along with the later HFs of ETH, they are all bug-fixes that serves only good. But the in the ETH/ETC case, the HF was to find the stolen coins, not for a bug fix: an active HF. Active HF has great potential for splitting the ecosystem, and forced ones are safe. HF scaling is apparently an active HF. Blocksize limit is not an imperative bug fix target; and HF scaling is not necessarily good for everyone, at least it raise the bar to run a full node.
4) Landscape of interests: I’m saying the interests and decision-making patterns of all parties in the system (miners, corps, users, investors, devs) stay the same, not that all interests should remain the same. HF scaling produces no change to the original running mechanism, so the landscape does not change. Even if ETH forked into 2, their interests are in the same old landscape and an Alt relationship between each other. [reply] You are not aware of the dangers and harms of a split ecosystem. You should read some other articles first. A split is not just about simply see another Alt, it’s overwhelming.
END
Thanks for our translator David.
submitted by BitKan to btc [link] [comments]

Why Can PlusFo Super Blockchain Come Out When the Token Is Silent?

Why Can PlusFo Super Blockchain Come Out When the Token Is Silent?
Bitcoin is a small dream of mankind. The origin of this dream is science fiction, cyberpunk, and then the formation of a password punk organization. Nakamoto is from this organization.

https://preview.redd.it/ngwpt7rgbcx21.jpg?width=363&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ff657ba85a4c4c5c4489d8abb497efe40b0e783f
With the “separation of industries, the blockchain can be combined with the transition from “discussion, layout and exploration” to “competition”, I often ask a question (to learn from investors) when interviewing the blockchain enterprise, if the industry giant also do this business, where is your living space?
Some bosses bluntly said, “There is nothing wrong with us, that is, the giants turn around and take a slow time.” Some entrepreneurs have stolen the concept of “decentralization” and tried to convince me that “the giants will not take such big risks.”
In fact, when asked this question, I don’t expect a team that just started to have competition barriers. I just hope that the practitioners who actually do things will pay attention to the market trends when they are working hard. These actions not only contain the energy to subvert the vertical track competition pattern, but also predict that a large amount of funds will enter the blockchain and cryptocurrency market.
We found that in the application of blockchain, the choices of domestic and foreign giants converge (financial, supply chain-based). The difference is mainly reflected in the strong demand for domestic traceability. Enterprises use more water for blockchain applications, while overseas embraces “financial innovation” and R&D “firepower” is relatively concentrated. Of course, behind the differences are different policy attitudes, economic environment, technological innovation and companypropaganda strategies.

https://preview.redd.it/d7g9k0oibcx21.jpg?width=356&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4e91f1697576c0a2a94a617b4758dad7f541d7c1
According to a survey conducted by the Korean non-profit self-regulatory organization (SRO), 7.4% of Koreans said they purchased cryptocurrencies, with a per capita investment of more than 6,000 USD, more than 60% higher than last year, and 30 to 50 years old.
Now the mainstream market analysis software downloads are between 2 million and 3 million, so the rough statistics are currently 5 million in China, and there is also 20 times the growth.
The market for digital tokens against the stock market’s skyrocketing and plunging should be used to investors who have entered the market for more than half a year.

https://preview.redd.it/ko7qlhqkbcx21.jpg?width=309&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d4c5545d24eaf0dc06750eef178827c1cd466b85
In the next round of bull market in 2019, the market may be spiraling upwards. Therefore, if you are using some value tokens to make long-term investment, you don’t have to worry about temporary profit and loss.
Do you want to invest now? If you are planning to hold the long-term bull market to the next round of bull market, it is a wise choice to enter the venue on a regular basis according to the specific situation. If you just fall too much, you will buy more points, like the previous period of time has continued to rise for a week or two, then Slowly wait for the callback, and continue to vote for a certain period of time, thus sharing the cost risk.
A few days ago, when browsing the public number, I accidentally saw a platform called PlusFo, which is called the next generation public chain representative. PlusFo has created the force mining. It only needs to complete the relevant tasks every day to get the force PUF, which is equivalent to the calculation power. It can also increase the profit by purchasing PUF, and get the platform currency of PlusFo through the calculation of mining power. FOT. And FOT can be directly converted to mainstream tokens (such as BTC, ETH, etc.). Not only that, but by becoming a VIP member, the benefits of mining will double.

https://preview.redd.it/5l1a7qenbcx21.jpg?width=265&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4079bce591480ec84e490416063dd40055a9e4c8
At the same time,PlusFo’s special mechanism — exclusive insured feature. When the market is not good, many people still hold a lot of digital currency in their hands. The retention of these digital tokens has become a headache. PlusFo’s quantification model maximizes the use of these digital assets. On the one hand, if the market price rises, the corresponding income will increase. And once the price of the currency falls, this quantitative model can also make these digital tokens still insured. In the event of a loss, the PlusFo official will make up for the user’s total loss. This makes the user no longer have any worries.

https://preview.redd.it/bo8o4q6qbcx21.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=7ec133dc42f93896ba5fbf1f67823759b74ac50e
The operation of PlusFo Super Public Blockchain has been continually eye-catching, but the investment market is ever-changing. Investors are often influenced by the market and market sentiment and generate various psychology and behaviors that are very harmful to investment. Another important reason for most investors to chase the hot spot is that early participants in the hot field took the opportunity to drink the first soup because of the first step, so other people take it for granted that this kind of thing will happen to them.
Why are you asking him? He would say that because others have succeeded, why can he, why can’t I? But in fact, many times others are available and you will lose your chance forever, because the background of time and space has changed radically. When the latecomers go to the hot spot, the Blue Ocean has become the Red Sea, and the chances of success are small.
Investment is different from other fields. What is most needed in this field is public wisdom. What is most needed is independent thinking. The average wisdom of a group is actually determined by the majority of people in this group. Most people will be in the crowd, so as an investor, you need to avoid the public and observe calmly.
When the risk is always at the top of the crowd, the opportunity is always on the verge of silence.
.
.
Registration: https://zfo.one/register
Download: https://zfo.one/download.html
Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/plusfo_official
Contact us:
Telegram: https://t.me/plusfo
WeChat: plusfo008
BiYong: https://0.plus/plusfo
submitted by PlusFo to u/PlusFo [link] [comments]

I want to support Vault of Satoshi...

So, I moved all of my exchange market Doges there to bring them my business! I highly recommend everyone else does as well. They had a 24 hour volume of only 9 million doge, and this number needs to grow!
But seriously, if VoS wants to grow their share of the Dogecoin exchange market, they need to improve some things first. It is amazing that they have adopted Doge to USD and are leading the way on that front, but they need to optimize their site to capture the large volume traders. I trade with a couple hundred thousand Doge, and I'm a little worried there is not enough volume to move my coins when I want to.
I'd like to hear your suggestions and praise as well, and hopefully (Note that I'm on a tablet running Android mostly, so this may not be an issue on desktops. I'll view it in desktop mode more to test further.)
submitted by Brarsh to dogecoin [link] [comments]

How to calculate BTC contract profitability

Now that we're caught up on payments, I'll post this. You're probably not going to be very happy when you see this, unless you have some BIG btc contracts.
I got into a couple arguments about this, but I'll walk you through how I calculated profitability for mining contracts. To be clear, most levels of BTC contracts WILL NOT see a profit. Sm/Med BTC contracts WON'T be profitable. I'll show that and a contract that theoretically could be profitable. These are just projections, actual returns will vary depending on a ton of factors. This is intended as a guide to make sure people don't waste money on contracts that are bad. If this saves you money
First, if you're using anything other than https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/calculator then you probably aren't factoring in a rise in difficulty. That is a BIG mistake if not. If you look at it historically, there is an average increase of 5.69% difficulty per period. It has been closer to 8% in the last few months and there's a lot of talk of more computers coming online. So, difficulty is likely to continue to rise. I would suggest using something around 8-10% for this value so you aren't caught off guard by continued and accelerated difficulty growth.
So, go to the btc wisdom link. Change Display Currency to BTC. Input these values:
Mining Settings: Difficulty Increment: 8% (it will probably be higher) Electricity Price: 0.116667 kw/h (0.00028 fee * Watts / 24 = .116667 /hour ) Pool Fee: 0% (You aren't part of a pool)
Hardware Info: Hashrate: 38 TH/s (I suggest switching the units to the easiest for you) Hardware Price: 1.718BTC (4940 USD atm, but I suggest working in BTC. see further explanation*) Watts: 1000 (this makes the fee calculations work with your Hashrate)
Results: At an 8% average difficulty increase, the 38TH/s level and below, the contracts DO NOT BREAKEVEN BEFORE the difficulty rise reduces your return to less than the fees.
However, at 6% difficulty increase...this is a profitable contract. Your contract will break even right around a year and 6% ROI by the end of the contract (not terrible, but probably not worth the risk). Your 1.718BTC is now 1.821 after 608 days. Anything smaller than this is unlikely to return a profit.
You can play around w/ the contracts, but if difficulty stays around 8% (which it has for the last few months) ONLY the 200TH/s contract is profitable. It will return about 4% by day 704 when the returns are smaller than the fees. It is likely this could have a higher return.
TL;DR: Buy the 38TH/s btc contract if you're willing to take a big risk. Buy the 200TH/s btc contract if you're looking for the best chance to return a profit. Anything less than the 38TH/s contract probably WON'T return a profit, unless difficulty stops increasing.
Shameless Whoring for Coins: If this made you change your mind and purchase a bigger contract or purchase a different coin contract here's my code: qBnm0V Thanks.
Use btc instead of USD, otherwise, if the value of btc goes up, you will think you broke even but actually have less btc than when you started. The goal should be to make earnings on your btc, not in USD otherwise you should invest in something different. *Other note is that no site factors in a changing value of USD/BTC. This will affect the profitability as the value of btc goes up, the fee will be a smaller and smaller part of the earnings. ***Hope this doesn't get deleted, but I'll follow up with other coins.
submitted by flarpflarpflarpflarp to GenesisMining [link] [comments]

How can I accurately use the Wisdom calculator to estimate antminer s9 ROI?

Lets say you buy one antminer s9 for 0.25 BTC (1500$) from bitmains website. At the earliest shipment, you would be lucky to be set up and running by Dec 1st.
Putting in 14 Terahash, and 1350 for energy draw into the Bitcoin Wisdom Calculator, I'm trying to get an ROI.
Ignoring all set up, cooling, PSU, and electricity cost. Lets assume I have free electricity. The main variable is mining difficulty.
I put a pool fee of 2% (Slushpool), and average difficulty increment of 9% every two weeks.
Assuming all those calculations are correct, one s9 would only mine .25 bitcoin by middle of June. Thats 7 month ROI, assuming zero electricity cost.
I know people justify mining because your real ROI in USD will be much earlier than that. But the only reason that happens is because the price of bitcoin is expected to rise. Assuming your s9 takes only 3 months to get an ROI, but it only actually mined 0.014 of a bitcoin, which is now worth the 1500$ your initially invested.
Obviously I hear a lot of people saying its much most cost effective to buy and hold bitcoin, rather than to mine. Yet I know there are many people who still buy the s9.
I just want to see their projected ROI, in terms of bitcoin, not USD. Can anyone send me that info?
TL;DR -It takes 7 months to get your ROI for an s9 in Bitcoin. Which is not worth the investment as it will be useless in hash power by 7 months in.
Somebody prove me wrong?
submitted by senile_robot to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

ROI "at a glance" formula

I often look a prices for miners and wonder "Is that a good price?" and "Will I make an ROI at all?" I've created a simple formula where you can, at a glance, tell if it's a good price or not. It called it the Profit Ratio
Profit Ratio = Price / MH/s
This formula is not meant to be detailed, but rather it gives you a quick yes or no. If it's a yes, you can then put the numbers your ROI calculator. I highly recommend the one one bitcoinwisdom.com With that said, the formula makes some assumptions/estimate: 1. LTC is used as the coin 2. The value of one LTC is around $8 3. It does not take into account pool or power fees. 4. The price is meant to be a final number, it should include shipping, tax power supplies, accessories, etc. 5. It's based off of getting an ROI after 6 months of mining. 6. It takes into account a difficulty increase of 5% 7. If the market becomes volatile, the target profit ratio number will change.
With the market as it stands today, the target Profit Ratio is 22. The lower the number the better.
Example 1: Gridseed Blade $300 / 5.4 MH/s = 55 This means at the current retail price you will never get an ROI with a Gridseed. You would need to get it for $100 (100/5.4 = 18) to get about a $40 ROI in 6 months.
Example 2: KNC Titan Mini $4,000 / 200 = 20 At the current retail price plus shipping and accessories at 6 months you will get an ROI.
With this formula I looked at the major players in the hashing game (GAW, KNC, Zeus, Innosilicon, Hashra and Gridseed) and not a single miner available today yield an ROI in 6 months. Keep in mind, with rising difficultly, the average time a miner will yield ANYTHING of significance is about 9 months.
So what can make money? The Titan and Vaultbreaker, along with their smaller counterparts are the only device that can yield a return. They aren't going to be in our hands until at least October, so who knows where the market will be then. It's rather sad because mining if a fun hobby where you can make money, but in reality the only ones making a profit are the ones selling you the equipment.
In case you are interested, here is how I created my formula, which will allow you to adjust it in the future. 1. Pick at least 5 mining devices of varying hash rates. 2. Go to the bitcoin wisdom lite coin mining calculator. 3. Plug in all of the specs for your miner, but specifically looking at the cost and the hash rate. 4. The fiat doesn't really matter, so you can pick BTC, LTC or USD 5. Switch to the month view so it's easier to read. 6. Keep dropping the price down until you get a positive number in the Return column 7. Enter the price and the hash rate into a spread sheet. 8. Divide the price by the hash rate for all 5 miners and take the average of that value. 9. This will give you your new Target Profit Ratio
submitted by askprodigi to litecoinmining [link] [comments]

Trading Bitcoin: 4 Steps to Calculate Your Position Size ... HOW TO CONVERT YOUR TBC TO BITCOIN BTC to USD Live Price Converter and Profit Calculator Bitcoin Technical Analysis: New Lows Incoming (BTC/USD) How to Calculate Bitcoin Transaction Size

Real-Time BitMEX XBT/USD XBT to US Dollar Market Charts. Find the latest Bitcoin USD (BTC-USD) stock quote, history, news and other vital information to help you with your stock trading and investing. btc-e: btc/usd btc/eur btc/rur btc/cnh ltc/usd ltc/eur ltc/rur ltc/cnh ltc/btc: bitstamp: btc/usd: btcchina: btc/cny ltc/cny ltc/btc: quadrigacx: btc/cad: bitcoin.de: btc/eur: coinbase: btc/usd: huobi: btc/cny ltc/cny: okcoin: btc/cny ltc/cny: kraken: btc/eur ltc/eur: bitfinex: btc/usd ltc/usd ltc/btc: 796: btc.fut ltc.fut: bitvc: btc.fut ltc ... Find out the current Bitcoin value with easy-to-use converter: live CEX.IO Bitcoin price, EUR, USD Find the current Bitcoin US Dollar Bitfinex rate and access to our BTC USD converter, charts, historical data, news, and more.

[index] [9118] [40661] [12822] [12243] [37424] [35031] [9662] [13705] [26516] [29755]

Trading Bitcoin: 4 Steps to Calculate Your Position Size ...

btc to usd exact btc to usd 0.01 btc to usd.0024 btc to usd simple bitcoin calculator coinbase Popular Cryptocurrency Conversions BTC to USD BTC to AUD BTC to BRL BTC to CNY BTC to GBP BTC to INR ... How to Send Bitcoin Fast & Calculate Transaction Bytes - Duration: 12:49. ... How To Trade BTC Value vs USD Value Explained - BTC Retracement, LTC Pump, Futures - CMTV Ep102 - Duration: 26:50 ... TBCTOBTC is an exchange platform where you can exchange your tbc to btc with ease. Follow this link to signup https://www.tbctobtc.com watch this video on How to register,subcribe and make payment. Bitcoin technical analysis BTC/USD Don't Forget To LIKE, COMMENT, And SUBSCRIBE! Discord: https://discord.gg/DxuatMP TA COURSE: https://www.udemy.com/user/th... #bitcoin chart #1 btc to usd #how much is bitcoin worth #bitcoin price live #bitcoin calculator #bitcoin converter #bitcoin price history #how much is a bitcoin #bitcoin current value #btc value # ...

#