Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[Bloomie]

I've never taken any significant profits yet at all ever, and was wondering if anyone has some tips/experience dealing with this in the USA?

A few months ago I sold a tiny amount of BTC (<$10k US worth) on Gemini just to see if the ACH would cause bank drama, and it was totally fine.

What would be an upper limit before the bank starts asking awkward questions and/or just insta-drops you? I'm assuming receiving a wire for hundreds of thousands of dollars one shot out of nowhere from Gemini might not be a smooth experience on the banking end, though from what I understand wires don't require the >$10k filing of suspicious activity report?

If anything, you might get pushback/delay from Gemini on a large withdrawal attempt. Banks are always happy to receive money. If they have to file a SAR, you won't know about it, but unlikely in this case, since Gemini sends from a U.S. bank.

 

[Snokkom]

Lol, that mempool... Almost 60k transactions stuck in mempool. SegWit Bitcoin is not ready for mass adoption. Sorry to say, imo, Segwit Bitcoin will be a Ponzi scheme without usage.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

Hei, SegWit solves all our Scaling Problem, this is why it is too hasty to do a hardfork. And anyway, if we do a hardfork, we don't do it because 2mb, but we should put more in it. 29 members of Munich meetup voted for this, while only 3 have been against, and 15 didn't vote at all. I think this quota is a dangerous indicator for Munich's resistancy against propaganda.

I made a survey with my readers. In it readers could answer "I agree with SegWit2x" and "SegWit + 2MB is ok". And many more answers. Now a reader complained, that the survey is unfair, because if he said "yes" to "SegWit + 2MB is ok", it could indicate support for SegWit2x - which he must not have! - and if he said "no", it could indicate that he is against a hardfork at all - which would ridicule the Anti-SegWit2x-position at all. So this simple question "Is SegWit + 2MB ok: Yes or No?" was unfair and he felt that every possible answer is wrong.

I guess that is a good example of the problem of being brainwashed: Simple questions can become a big big problem for the integrity of your mind.

Anyway: SegWit2x will fail, censorship and propaganda won, and the market celebrate it with a glorious new allt time high. That's the first time in my live I'm on verge of a serious depression because I got richer over night.

 

[Bagatell]

Oh Cristoph, you silly! "SegWit2x is completely unrelated to SegWit".

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

I know, did you not know? Do you really think we need to discuss this? Do you think I'm an enemy of Bitcoin?

Sidenote: Most people, which complained that my survey was unfair, have been not satisfied with the way I wrote answers.

For example: One complained that there was the option "Core should just and finally follow the agreement", and that it was not written as "Core should do a completely reckless, hasty, unnecessary, dangerous hardfork".

Most which complained explained what they think about SegWit2x. Then I explain them which items match their opinion, e.G. if you like SW + 2MB, but don't want to hard fork without Core, you could vote for "SegWit + 2MB is ok" and "No hardfork without Core" and "Bitcoin is Core".

My impression is that the people are used to read "their" opinion" sweeted in propaganda-speak. When they read it without, they realize, that it is stupid, and then they think the survey is unfair.

 

[Peter R]

In addition to this amazing price rally, two more pieces of good news:

1. The BU proposal to present our Gigablock Testnet research (BUIP065) at Scaling Bitcoin Stanford was accepted.

2. We mined and propagated the world's first 1.0001 GB block yesterday.

 

[Richy_T]

What would be an upper limit before the bank starts asking awkward questions and/or just insta-drops you? I'm assuming receiving a wire for hundreds of thousands of dollars one shot out of nowhere from Gemini might not be a smooth experience on the banking end, though from what I understand wires don't require the >$10k filing of suspicious activity report?

Meh, it's not like the notification results in the automatic dispatch of a swat team to your house. A couple of years ago, I transferred a substantial amount following the sale of property abroad and no biggie. Just made sure to file the taxes for it (which was a trifle annoying as the US did absolutely 0 to cause the property to increase in value unless you count inflating the world's currencies).

I think that you'll still get the notification for even wires as I think it's for any financial activity. Note also that attempting to avoid the filing can also result in issues as it can be considered "structuring" which is also illegal though it is a bit murky as to what counts there. It is definitely more risky though as suspicious activity is only that, suspicious. An investigation, should it occur would unmask no wrongdoing. Structuring is illegal in and of itself, even if the funds are legally obtained.

 

[79b79aa8]

@albin
I've been realizing profits via Gemini, no issues. I don't anticipate there being problems, they present themselves as big boys and act accordingly. Just make sure to pay your tax. Also remember that structuring financial transactions is a prosecutable offense in the US (i.e. systematically keeping your transactions below a limit in an attempt to avoid inquiries).

To Christoph and those still losing sleep over the insanity I would say: if one thing is clear, is that the cryptocurrency revolution is irreversible. There may be one clear winner among coins, or the pie may be shared, but if you've played your cards right -- and I assume most here have -- you are going to come out ahead financially no matter what. The noobs can think what they want, they have their own learning curve to climb. Although short term victories on the ideological front are satisfactory, we must all be used to losing on that front sometimes. It does not matter: over the long term, the best financial instrument is the one that will grow most, internet arguments be damned.

EDIT: haha, i had not seen @Richy_T's post

 

[Richy_T]

I guess that is a good example of the problem of being brainwashed: Simple questions can become a big big problem for the integrity of your mind.

Cognitive dissonance. It can sneak up on you if you're not looking for it.

 

[molecular]

perfect conditions for going full norway. except it takes a lot of cojones.

I'm sorry, "full Norway" means what? Sell 20% of BTC stash for BCH?

I've already been over that treshold since sometime late August and I've been buying more Cash ever since. And there I was thinking I was being cautious. Shouldn't we be selling >50% or even close to 100% of our BTC?

Yeah, I'm down almost 50% value-wise on my Bitcoin Cash "investment", but really, it doesn't hurt as much because it's what I believe in. I'd rather go down with the ship I love and think can make the world a better place than float on some fake shit with a bunch of other turds.

This reminds me of some cypherpunk warning us (the bitcoiners) in the early days (around 2012 I think): (paraphrasing) "you will be attacked and there will be a time when it's on *you* to do the right thing and it wont be easy." And let me add: the "right thing" is probably not the angst-driven, seemingly "safe" option.

Yes, it takes cojones... the world is changed by people with cojones, not fearful minions.

I can understand, though, and I'm myself also still <50% and I will not judge anyone for being fearful and pussying out. I see a huge chance both for my personal wealth but more importantly to save Bitcoin (and the associated changes it will bring) from this most sophisticated attack we're experiencing.

Maybe I recall incorrectly and "full Norway" means "sell ALL BTC"? In that case: sorry, I have some catching up to do ;-). But also let me add: keep some powder for even lower prices!

 

[molecular]

Anyway: SegWit2x will fail, censorship and propaganda won, and the market celebrate it with a glorious new allt time high. That's the first time in my live I'm on verge of a serious depression because I got richer over night.

(emphasis mine)

I feel the same way.

Although not a very accurate analogy, the situation reminds me of this:

So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause

 

[79b79aa8]

'going full norway' is ambiguous. it could mean:

(a) achieving a 1.3 BCC / 1 BTC ratio in holdings (this could be done using fresh fiat)
or
(b) achieving that ratio by selling BTC to buy BCC.

@Norway's originally intended meaning is probably the ballsier (b). i myself went for (a), or rather, given the recent windfall, a combination of (a) and (b).

i do not think you should risk your money over a disagreement over the future of bitcoin. the important thing is to protect your investment, not to win an argument. in the long run, the soundest financial proposition will win, of necessity. Bitcoin Cash gave us this wonderful insurance policy, by means of which we continue to earn with BTC's growth, and we get to participate in the further evolution of project we signed up for, which potentially -- and i think rather probably -- will allow us to earn even more.

 

[Bagatell]

As I was responsible for the term 'full Norway' let me explain myself. I meant dumping all my BTC for BCH. Perhaps "Bagatell berserk" would be better!

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

@Peter R
Awesome work by you guys!

The effects of the responsible engineering by the coresuckers:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/764nt7/be_warned_ledger_nano_s_transaction_accelerator/

 

[awemany]

@Peter R, @sickpig, and everyone else who was involved: Great work!

Stay cool when going to the hornet's nest of Core support that must be the Stalling Bitcoin conference!

At least they seem to have become a tad more neutral this time (or at least pretend to be).

 

[torusJKL]

I wonder if BU has anyone working for an EDA fix for bitcoin cash...

Andrew @theZerg wrote an interesting article on this subject.
The Blockchain Difficulty Information Paradox

 

[adamstgbit]

@torusJKL @theZerg
I like it!

but first of all, i think nodes need a better way to get accurate time, nodes should be allowed to get time from a timeserver ( a time server of there choosing..) and validate that That time is within a few seconds of other nodes times. the point isn't to centralize the setting of time within the network, its simply to make it more accurate.

I would also suggest that a new rule be added, that states that if the new block being relayed is >10seconds old it is rejected, and as always if a block is 60seconds into the future nodes wait till it matures to process that block.

all this should make the timestamp on blocks very accurate and reliable, allowing that dif algo @theZerg suggest viable.

edit: should be noted i dont know what i'm talking about....

 

[Erdogan]

bccf5a416a4d3d0fdebb3f34dc06421762778eced61435b01b793f6e9ff6e669 prediction.txt

 

[Snokkom]

Ok, I'm also in "Bagatell berserk" mode.

''This is not what Satoshi wanted for Bitcoin. This is the complete opposite of his vision. Satoshi want people who care about bitcoin. Bitcoin as money. As CASH. It was not designed to be a settlement layer.''

 

[albin]

This might seem a little outside the box for current discourse, but is Bitcoin really a protocol? I mean it uses protocols to create the p2p network, but isn't it really an application? Granted you can "build on top" of Bitcoin, but you can also build on top of Quake, and that doesn't make Quake the game an internet protocol.

The reason I'm suspicious is because it occurred to me that all this "protocol" talk came in with the wizards coup and they seem to use it as virtue signaling to justify Back's buddies as "protocol design experts" to be in charge. I don't remember hearing anything like this narrative pre-wizards. When people like Johnny Dilley, who is a straight up business guy who doesn't appear to know anything not completely shallow about the technical situation, starts chastizing Roger Ver in the "debate" several months ago about "protocol layer violations", you know something messed up is going on inside Blockstream.