4,542 karma · joined July 18, 2019
The equivalent transaction costs would be $0.53- Bitcoin fees don’t increase if the amount is higher: https://mempool.space/ (and it works on weekends and arrives in an hour)
If Bitcoin means “be your own bank,” Bitcoin is a decent bank. You can even get a trustless, psuedonymous Visa debit card with Lightning: https://paywithmoon.com
I heard the Fed is working on lowering bank transfer fees.
> For one thing, it’s likely that transaction fees will rocket, as miners try to replace revenues no longer provided by the emission of new Bitcoins.
Difficulty readjusts every 2016 blocks, changing money needed to mine a block. Congestion would be temporary.
> The hope was that by having a hard-coded limit on the number of Bitcoins ever to be produced, the value of a Bitcoin couldn’t be inflated away by an endless supply of new coins.
Technically not true, the code was written incorrectly so as to trigger undefined behavior / underflow, allowing far more than 21 million bitcoins. This was corrected in a non-controversial hard fork.
You mention “POW forks”, but Bitcoin’s POW has never been hard forked: you’d need to trust a Bitcoin expert to tell you if it was a good idea.
To execute a double spend, you the one sending the transaction and the miner must coordinate.
For large transactions, it is recommended to wait for six confirmations. (six blocks that agree with the transaction and have not been 51%ed.)
The 1 hour 51% cost of Bitcoin is 1.9m$. However, you would need much more time than that to find six consecutive blocks alone, without the help of the network. So, while the network is 6 blocks ahead, you need to find 7 blocks. The network moves forward a block, you must move forward more than one block to catch up. This could take a long time, and longer the more confirmations required- each confirmation makes each previous transaction exponentially more secure. Simply controlling the mining power momentarily only puts recent transactions vulnerable.
However, that much hardware is available for rent-see “Nicehashable.”
It's open-source, you don't need to sign-in, and in my experience it survives bad connections better than Google Meet.
2. Tracking-based advertising generates more clicks than non-tracking based advertising.
3. Generating more clicks gives web content creators a bigger budget to create, resulting in more web content.
Therefore: It's not surveillance-based advertising if all data is stored and processed locally in a way the website cannot read– ideally with a free and open source machine learning system. Like FLoC, but implemented better in a way the site cannot read.
Many of its features are available in the self-hostable free and open-source version, GitLab CE.