Green Devil

Members
  • Content Count

    2,069
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Green Devil

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,086 profile views
  1. They must be priming the public for a 2nd referendum.
  2. If satoshi was the cia or nsa it would make a lot of sense as they probably already own most of it. Put another way if you want new money to end your fiat ponzi what getter way than to mysteriously create a money of the people securely and secretly and own it all. Genius.
  3. Peter Schiff did a good recent YouTube vid Bitcoin Challenge, Google it, he makes some interesting points and a case against crypto. Worth a watch.
  4. The youth of today are owning crypto now because they cant afford housing. They know that all their well earned money makes fuck all in the bank. They know they are robbed by inflation. They understand about deflationary currencies. I think the change will take time, soon you wont be able to buy a whole bitcoin. People will look back in a few years, and say to you, "You really own more than one bitcoin, holy crap", if it dips under 8k, time to buy more!
  5. Maybe, they can stop individual residents in individual countries. But every country cant do it all at the same time. Also crypto supports an industry, it generates tax dollars, buying gold didnt, you put in under the floorboards. For this reason, its very unlikely it will be banned, regulated probably, but that isnt such a bad thing is it?
  6. This. The problem with bitcoin is its worldwide and super secure. If they could take it down they would have already. The only way they can control it is say its crap and ignore it (hence the no tweets in 48k) and hope it goes away. 32 bytes, or 256 bits There are 2^256 different private keys. That's a little larger than a 1 followed by 77 zeroes. At its peak around August 2011, the Bitcoin network was checking 15 trillion sha256 hashes per second. (See http://bitcoin.sipa.be/) If we assume it takes the same time to run an ECDSA operation as it takes to check an sha256 hash (it takes much longer), and we use an optimisation that allows us to only need 2^128 ECDSA operations, then the time needed can be calculated: >>> pow(2,128) / (15 * pow(2,40)) / 3600 / 24 / 365.25 / 1e9 / 1e9 0.6537992112229596 It's 0.65 billion billion years. That's a very conservative estimate for the time taken to break one single Bitcoin address. Edit: it was pointed out that computers tend to get exponentially faster over time, according to Moore's Law. Assuming computing speed doubles every year (Moore's law says 2 years, but we'll err on the side of caution), then in 59 years it'll only take 1.13 years. So your coins are safe for the next 60 years without a change to the algorithms used to protect the blockchain. However, I would expect the algorithms to be changed long before it's feasible to break the protection they provide.
  7. @201pSurely the idea is to make the only deflationary asset too expensive for the masses to own?
  8. If they want to allow building on green belt that's fine by me. One condition though. None of this barrat shit hole rabbit hutch. Take a nice bit of countryside and split it into plots varying from 1/4 to 1 acre. Only condition is that your plot can't be subdivided further, but you can build a family home. Max sale price of the land is 50k. End of shortage. Prop prices reset. Power to the people. End of this new build shit. Win win win.
  9. Hodl and buy more in the dips. Im relatively flat on shitcoins now. Just BTC, ETH, LTC, EOS and XRP in the wallet now. I do sometimes trade 15-20% of the stash in and out of cash at the highs and lows (or try to).
  10. Green Devil

    Hayfever

    Do you like in a city or the country? Inland or coastal? Its well known that diesel fumes trigger it. Google pollenution.
  11. Just think of the extra economic growth added to the figures. Up from 0.1% to 0.11%
  12. Is that AI? Good food and unlimited alcoholic drinks included? Sandals is cheaper.
  13. OK send me 1 and ill send you 2 back
  14. I thought the low tax ecomony and low taxes for the rich were supposed to improve money flow? It seems the less well off spend all the money!