We were prepared to host the Merit and USDH payments for the Floating Man Festival at Liberland! Serbian Corona regulations made that impossible, but you can still see how it would have worked :) Excited to see becash be used in Liberland!

submitted by /u/eyeofpython [link] [comments]

source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/ieyy8p/we_were_prepared_to_host_the_merit_and_usdh/

Top 10 crypto assets better than Bitcoin - The Cryptonomist

submitted by /u/AlanOne89 [link] [comments]

source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/ieyjaf/top_10_crypto_assets_better_than_bitcoin_the/

Ready to Wumbo: LND Enables More, Larger Bitcoin Transactions on Lightning

submitted by /u/bitcoinpenguin [link] [comments]

I’ve been storing several different cryptos on applications like Electrum, Exodus and Trust Wallet. I’ve been thinking about going to a device like the Ledger Nano S for more security, but is it really that much more secure than especially Electrum?

submitted by /u/Admirable-Name45 [link] [comments]

ABC: how to move forward - alternatives to IFP

I don't think ABC is the devil incarnated. The desire to correct issuance and give proper funding is absolutely legitimate, but it is being mishandled because ABC won't go ahead and throw the baby with the bathwater. Instead, it is going through a toxic debate and that's just wasteful for everybody and creates more damage.

Now the bathwater can be thrown because the baby is out. There is no need for IFP and drift:

1 - /u/deadalnix should consider a random coin burn, or rather, a "coin shrinkage" of 90% of UTXOs in the new chain; this is to solve all problems with governance at once, and point clearly to a brand-new independent direction;

2 - if he doesn't care about retaining the same holdlers, make that a coin burn at random and use a surprise random date over the UTXO "screenshot" for fairness;

3 - the goal is sha256 minting and PoS validation to some extent, but ideally it should be another algo; a new algo can reward brand-new coin issuance, brand-new validators, including ABC that will mint and validate; what is the use of keeping some small percentage of sha256 just to keep one more fork alive? There is no competition for a new algo;

4 - this new algo can graciously replace sha256 in a scheduled second fork after avalanche remaining UTXO validator pool come to be established (so no troll attack from rented hash); (more on the algo in another opportunity)

5 - coin shrinkage won't hurt value per se (only uncertainty does); quite the contrary, a new scheduling brings back collective mining and funds ABC in the most fair capitalist way in a decentralized setup; ABC can, then, establish a proper foundation from the developer point-of-view to distribute funds (even if it is a hard-coded IFP to some extent);

6 - ABC has no chance to win the exchange-ticker game and there is no need for that, the network effect will still be present if we are talking coin shrinkage and not random burn;

7 - hashwar is dumb, although bitmain has mongolian coal oozing from their pores, ABC own goal is to migrate to PoS for validation, so who cares?

8 - bitmain's stash still expected to be about the same % of the remainder of UTXOs after burn, given proper random selection parameters (hashes perfectly good entropy for a one-time random selection), or just coin shrinkage; the difference is that bitmain is not a perennial major validator, it will retain relevance but will need to issue coins (look point 11);

9 - bitmain's stash illiquid the way things are; the market is not valuing bitmain's stash and a too big stash gets in the way of moving on to a form of PoS validation;

10 - To sum up: new schedule, coin burn and new validation is more or less what everybody wants to do but are simply too afraid to do due to fears of missing out network effect. That has been proposed many times in BTC communities as well in one way or the other. I'd say to ABC, just do it now, the alternative is just another fork with another ticker-war and all that you know.

11 - Finally, I'd also take the opportunity and recalculate the haphazard satoshi coin schedule of 4 year halvings :), talk about a good way to push people to alternative projects because they missed out the first 2 years; this also gives opportunity to other individuals and businesses to grow relevance over time, instead of having a single big entity that has too early a too big share of coins;

ps: As for BCH stashes, they will just remain as they were; in fact, embracing a new fork will give more stability to the now-existing UTXOs than some disgruntled hard fork that, again, no one asked for.

submitted by /u/rdar1999
[link] [comments]

source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/iexmzv/abc_how_to_move_forward_alternatives_to_ifp/

The BTC Paradox: “A 1 MB blocksize enables poor people to run their own node!” “Okay, then what?” “Poor people won’t be able to use the network!”

submitted by /u/scotty321
[link] [comments]

source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/iewrsu/the_btc_paradox_a_1_mb_blocksize_enables_poor/

I suggest that notary.bitcoin.com become free

Bitcoin.com wallet includes a link to faucet and a link to the notary. But when you use the notary you are asked first for an "anchor" (never heard that term before but okay) deposit.

A timestamp only requires one Satoshi. well, the faucet gives out far more than 1s. so just go ahead and fund the notary (up to x per day). And more people would use it.

Source: me. More than once I have gone to use the notary but then Changed my mind because I don't want that notary coin to be from my wallet. Consider the time in the future when you need to whip out the transaction to actually prove to your file has been timestamped- at that time the coin can be traced to a wallet that is yours. You dox yourself if you ever need it.

I have further suggestions for the notary service which I think would increase the number of transactions quite a lot.

submitted by /u/knowbodynows
[link] [comments]

source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/iex2dj/i_suggest_that_notarybitcoincom_become_free/