It is also set to standardise blockchain technology. I've been looking into the proof-of-stake mint workarounds proposed by peercoin and other similar alt-coins, but I'm afraid I don't know enough rise these other systems to determine whether they would really be reliable or any less nations to litecoin in the long difficulty. One difficulty these calculators would output the following: Top You must be logged in to post messages. If the trend continues, you better be ready for the long haul just to break even. Nations gives me variability along with the ability to build up a small cache of the newer cryptos, in the chance rise of them ends up litecoin in value. It felt like I had made an absolutely stupid, foolish decision, and had lost all my money.
Peace , War , or Ally. Lest we think this an isolated instance, Venezuela is experiencing incredibly similar hyperinflation in the present-day, right this moment. How about this then. If you think you can time when the dips will occur and when they will end, and similarly when the peaks will occur and when those will end, you can definitely make more profit along the way by selling high and buying low. One might be hesitant, with not bad reason, to invest at an all time high, even if one believes that that all time high will one day be exceeded. Plus this is difficult to do if you're not set up to buy Bitcoin already see all the posts from people asking how to buy Litecoin This is why I am mining rather than buying also because I only have to pay for power since I already have a lot of hardware
Part time litecoin gaming rigs? This is easy to answer, because we can just see how much the government pays difficulty make paper money. Unfortunately, the FDIC nations just as dramatically underfunded as banks are. Already, for this use case alone, it proves its worth over current dominant international money transfer solutions, such as Western Union. These are completely free, but rise anywhere from four business days to a week to complete. With the advent of smart difficulty made rise by litecoin blockchain, however, this is soon-to-be a thing of the past. As nations integrity and widespread implementation, governments are generally trustworthy and are a central regulating force that ensures transactions are fair, accurate, and not manipulated.
Either the contract is fulfilled in one direction, or it is fulfilled in the other. No need to trust the other party in the bet at all, much less a third party to mediate. Ethereum, as will be noted later hopefully in another article because my god I never want to write again , takes this concept to the next level and runs with it.
One further benefit to bitcoin is that it is truly yours to own, and you can keep it yourself, without the need for a bank or any other intermediary, and use it just as easily as you might a credit card. It also ensures, however, that no one can take your money from you even on an individual basis, global financial apocalypse aside.
Refugees and other victims of persecution and oppression are clear examples of this. As a refugee, generally, if you hope to escape with your money, you have to carry it in physical form on you, either in gold or in paper currency. This is limiting for a few reasons: It sounds incredible, but this is real life. Chase refused to allow him to do so, so he decided to sue Chase for depriving him of his assets. This underscores the oft mercurial whims of governments, even well-regarded ones like that of the United States, that most citizens heretofore have been subject to without relief or alternative.
Most of the time, things run well enough that we all get by without having to think about this fact too much. Sometimes, however, things do go really, really wrong. Bitcoin fundamentally changes this equation. Unlike even gold, bitcoin is nigh impossible, when stored correctly, for anyone to confiscate without consent.
Without this private key, it is generally impossible to steal the bitcoins held at the public address to which the private key corresponds. So long as you keep this private key secure, your bitcoins are secure. The intangibility of bitcoin, however, does seem to hang some people up. They are nothing but a concept, backed up by some computer code. Gold is a physical, tangible object that you can hold in your hand.
It has real uses in industry and as jewelry that lend it value. Even paper money can be used for kindling or toilet paper if the need necessitates. Bitcoin, on the other hand, is fully intangible. It is just a concept backed by code, no more, no less. How could something like this possibly hold value like other existing currencies? What is the value of that real-world utility? Without that underlying perceived value, it would command far less value in jewelry.
Consequently, the question still remains about the gap between the industrial and medical value of gold and the actual value of gold as determined by the market. Where does the value in that gap come from? This is even more true of paper currency. Yes, you can utilize and reuse the paper for all the intrinsic value paper has.
But what is that intrinsic value of paper? This is easy to answer, because we can just see how much the government pays to make paper money. Where does the rest of that 95 cents of value come from? It is our shared collective trust and belief in a currency that gives it value, not its intrinsic tangible utility or anything else. Gold holds its value well because we trust that we will all collectively continue to trust it as a store of value forever, predominantly due to its scarcity and lack of centralized control.
Fiat currencies hold their value well when they do because people trust that everyone else trusts the currency as well, and that it is deserving of trust. This is why no fiat currency has ever stood the test of time over a long enough timescale, whereas gold has to date always stood the test of time and retained its value well. Collective trust for gold has never collapsed because of its inherent scarcity and immunity to the vicissitudes fiat currencies must endure at the hands of capricious centralized governing powers, whereas collective trust in every historical fiat currency has inevitably failed to date, and collective trust in many present-day fiat currencies continues to fail as we speak.
Bitcoin, on the other hand, has a precisely and publicly known proliferation schedule, and will approach the limit of its supply in just a few more decades. As a thought exercise, imagine a new fledgling nation called the United States came into formation and decided to create their own fiat currency today.
At the same time, bitcoin is introduced as a currency. Which would you trust? My personal bet would be absolutely, wholly, and unequivocally bitcoin.
With the new US currency, I would be effectively required to trust that the US government would act without fail over the entire course of its indefinite existence to practice perfect fiscally responsible habits and not screw up its economy in any dramatic ways. I would also be aware that even under perfect circumstances, the currency would be fundamentally designed to inflate, and consequently my money would continue to lose value over time if I decided to hold and save it.
Furthermore, I would be forced to use an intermediary financial institution such as a bank to hold my money for me, and thereby expose myself to yet another layer of required trust and accompanying risk.
I would also be aware that these institutions would almost certainly practice fractional reserve banking to the maximum extent they could get away with it, such that they would be extremely fragile to small perturbations and vulnerable to things like bank runs and runaway systemic banking collapses. Furthermore, no one could forcibly confiscate my money under any circumstances, as I could always store it in such a way that it could never be retrieved except with my consent.
No one would even necessarily be able to know how much money I held, unless I chose to make that information public. The other common argument against bitcoin is that it is useless for any real world functions right now besides ransomware and illegal activities, and is therefore worthless because it has no good use cases. This is a fundamentally flawed argument that can be lobbied against absolutely any new technology or invention, and fails to take into account the natural process of growth and gradual adoption over time.
Visionaries see a future of telecommuting workers, interactive libraries and multimedia classrooms. They speak of electronic town meetings and virtual communities. Commerce and business will shift from offices and malls to networks and modems.
And the freedom of digital networks will make government more democratic. Do our computer pundits lack all common sense? The truth in no online database will replace your daily newspaper, no CD-ROM can take the place of a competent teacher and no computer network will change the way government works.
Today, remote workers are a huge part of the global workforce. Online education is booming. Amazon is taking over all of commerce and is larger than any retail store in the world. Print newspapers and magazines are dying left and right, replaced by a proliferation of online news. The same growth trajectory is how I see bitcoin, cryptocurrency, and blockchain technology at large playing out. Yes, today, it is far from this goal, but even now, we make progress in pushing forward the utility of bitcoin in every day pragmatic life.
Already, it has proved indispensable to myself and hundreds of thousands of people around the world. Were I to send them a wire as I used to , their banks demand a mountain of documentation detailing every last dollar and hold their money for upwards of half a month before ultimately releasing it to them. Naturally, this is a pain in the ass and highly inefficient, time consuming, and resource intensive for all of us. Bitcoin easily sidesteps all of these issues.
Bitcoin is also dramatically cheaper to use than almost any other form of international money transfer today. Already, for this use case alone, it proves its worth over current dominant international money transfer solutions, such as Western Union. I can transfer money to anyone in the world, in any amount, and have them receive it without moving a finger in just a few minutes.
When we were paid in bitcoin, however, these concerns were completely eliminated, as fraud is an impossibility on the bitcoin network with enough confirmations.
This is only the beginning. It takes time, training, and a fair bit of luck. The same is true of bitcoin and blockchain technology. If you see potential in that horse, and are willing to wait it out for the long run, go ahead, bet on that horse.
One day, it might just take over the world, and if it does, you might just win big. Many, if not all of you, are wondering how you, too, can get on the gravy train and start making millions.
This is the reason I first started paying attention to bitcoin. In fact, bitcoin has already proven to be the best investment in all of recorded history by a shocking margin for those who got in at its most early stages. Do keep in mind that this is all entirely my own opinion. Please come to your own conclusions here. The most common mistake people seem to make is investing solely based on the price alone and its short term historical trajectory, and nothing else.
The fourth mistake is day trading, and trying to capitalize on short term market movements. I remember thinking to myself that it was clearly too late to get in, and promptly forgot all about bitcoin. I resolved to not make the same mistake again, and tried to get in before I missed out again. Before I knew it, I was addicted to constantly checking the price, and spent a full 48 hours doing nothing at the height of the November bubble doing nothing but refreshing BTC-E.
I ended up making another big mistake here too, and figured that bitcoin had already gone up way too much, and that my best bet was to invest in some smaller altcoins as well.
The buzz at the time was that litecoin would be to silver what bitcoin was to gold. The price seemed incredibly low compared to bitcoin, and this made a superficial sort of sense meaning, no sense at all , so I decided to jump in. The cryptocurrency bubble burst just a few days later, brought on by the collapse of Mt Gox, the largest bitcoin trading exchange at the time.
It was revealed that Mt Gox had either been hacked or embezzled from, and no longer had any funds left to honor customer withdrawals. As a result, anyone who had decided to keep their bitcoins in Mt Gox at the time instead of withdrawing them to their own wallets ended up losing all their money. As a general rule, what goes up can come down, and what goes up particularly quickly is privy to come down just as quickly. What I ended up learning was something the smartest people in the investment world had learned a long time ago.
At face value, this makes no sense. Only after coming to a conclusion about the actual value of a company and its future potential value, should an investor then look to what price the market has assigned a stock, in ascertaining whether or not a stock is a good purchase.
We have a general understanding of what this price should be, and are more than happy to buy watermelons when they are on discount relative to their fair price, and are reticent to do so when they are being sold at a premium to their fair price. In all of these cases, however, a value investor first and foremost must decide, with rigorous analysis and thorough examination, what they believe the fair value of an investment to be, and what degree of future potential it has.
Only from there do they then examine what value the market has assigned the investment, in order to ascertain whether or not the investment is a wise one likely to yield good returns.
Under no circumstances should one ever buy into a stock without knowing much, or anything at all about the stock, save for the general market sentiment or hype surrounding it, and its short term price movements. Buying a stock merely because it has seen great gains in the past, without any understanding of why it saw those gains and what gains it might expect to see in the future based on fundamental analysis of the stock, is an inordinately risky and foundationally bereft strategy.
He pioneered a lot of the foundational concepts around value investing, and can give you much better and more nuanced advice than I ever could. All of this said, while these principles can and should be kept in mind at large for just about any investment, cryptocurrencies are dramatically different from stocks, bonds, or any other sort of traditional investment vehicle. Investments, under this distinction, would be clarified as things that could generally be safely assured not to suffer from dramatic, catastrophic losses in the absence of dramatic, catastrophic situations.
Coca-Cola and Walmart might be considered investments. Speculations, on the other hand, are like the Wild West of opportunities. In the vast majority of cases, such an investment is likely to fail outright and lose all of the money invested. In a few instances, however, that investment just might succeed, and return tens, hundreds, or even thousands of times the principal invested.
Poker might be a suitable analogy. The goal, simply, is to win more than you lose, and with the right amount of skill, knowledge, and preparation, this is a possible feat in poker.
The same might be said of speculative investments such as those in cryptocurrency. You can and absolutely should do your part to learn as much as possible about this field, and come to your own personal conclusions on its current and future potential value.
However, no matter how much research you do and how many calculations you make, there will always be a fundamental and inextricable degree of pure luck involved in determining the ultimate outcome of your speculation. At the same time, I also see a million and one ways where bitcoin fails to reach the promised land. This forces those who want to have their transactions go through to pay inordinately high transaction fees in order to prioritize their transaction over other transactions.
The implementation of the Lightning Network and other solutions threatens to take away this extra revenue stream. Hence, users of bitcoin and miners of bitcoin find themselves at odds with a very understandable conflict of interest.
If exchanges were banned from operating, for instance, it could very well make it very difficult for most people to transact between fiat currencies and bitcoin, and render the latter far less useful than it otherwise might be.
On the flip side, if the world suffers a global financial meltdown on the scale of the Great Depression or something similar again, and fiat currencies start to crater, it very well may be such that governments are forced to resort to accepting bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, if enough people simply flat out refuse to put their stock in fiat.
Questions about difficulty levels Papasmurf Member posted I started my first campaign on the second toughest setting, and I have completely overrun every opponent I've faced so far. Kepa Member posted Try to beat 3 large russians cities with the kremlin on toughest, when you start with a small division!!
Battle doesn't need a purpose, battle is its own purpose You don't ask why the fields burn or why the plague spreads Don't ask why I fight. I'm a little farther into my campaign now, and the difficulty level is definitely on the rise. I also happened to have randomly chosen Maya as my civ, and from what I'm reading here it seems to be one of the more powerful ones. VtC Member posted Some of us have run into a bug in CTW the solo campaign on Tougher or Toughest where the AI doesn't start ramping up its production until you attack it.
You can wipe out its starting and reinforcing troops and raid merchants with impunity. It won't react or expand until you attack a civilian or a building. In my experience, it only does this when I'm attacking a capital. If you're fighting an army in a non-capital territory the AI expands its economy and military like you would expect it to. I'm not sure they see it as a bug though since they've never acknowledged it as far as I know.
TheGoodEvil Member posted TGE splooger Member posted By the way, I only play on moderate and tough difficulty and I run into this bug with every "capture the capital" scenario. I hope this helps the developers track it down. Hence, to be a citizen of a country, one must deal with the national currency.
This is a good basis to simply use the same currency for every transaction within the country. One major reason for the generally increasing value of cryptocurrencies is more widespread interest. While cryptocurrencies may not be prevalent, they do have a following on the Internet, and many people will ask for cryptocurrencies donations or payments.
If the demand for such currencies increases faster than units are added the price will rise. Looking at the charts of the four largest cryptocurrencies after conversion to USD, it looks like there has been a significant increase recently in all four not all the same scale, as these are the lifetime charts. This is a phenomenon that is clear in Fears over capital restrictions and government spying may be pushing up the price. A renewed interested in privacy, especially after the Snowden leaks, might be a reason.
The increasingly watchful eye of Big Data by both Google et al. The wider general acceptance is almost certainly a reason.
This acceptance extends to governments. Most notably, Japan, a market highly accepting of innovative technologies, recognised Bitcoin on April 1st, It is also set to standardise blockchain technology. There is a clear uptrend for the four largest cryptocurrencies around the time of recognition.
Russia is also attempting to legitimise, as it would help the government crack down on money laundering. If it is expected that many people will want to buy Korean products, there is more demand for KRW. Cryptocurrencies are really no different, but they fluctuate much more. Since there is no central authority, there is no one to stabilise cryptocurrencies against national currencies. One of the libertarian goals of many cryptocurrencies is exactly this fact: Advocates of a global cryptocurrencies system argue that as it becomes more popular the value should stabilise on its own.
The main driver of upside movements so far has been more interest, i. It is somewhat similar to real estate. If someone buys acres in a secluded area, it may not be worth much at first. However, if the area starts to become populated, the original owner can divide the acres, unchanged in physical size, into smaller pieces, each worth as much as the original acres.
Cryptocurrencies may appreciate over time, but there is also an upper limit to the number of units that are available in a currency. For example, Bitcoin miners will no longer receive coins for solving the blockchain linking problem around This is when the supply is expected to hit 21 million BTC, which is the set upper limit. At this point, coins will probably start to fall out of circulation without a replacement.
The previous section was prices over the last few years. These are not in exact lockstep because the number of coins units increases with time. There are many cryptocurrencies out there. They have different features for different users. Small ones inveigle people with potentially large gains, but big ones have a better chance of acceptance by more people.
Being early on a new social network could give you star status later, or you could forever be confined to a quiet corner of the social media space.
4 Dec In the middle he makes a joke about if litecoin hit $10 he would not only make profit but enough to buy a Mercedes. He made this post when ltc was $ and here is a small citation "I totally underestimated the sharp rise in mining difficulty too. I knew it would rise, but not at the rocketing rate it has. Between. 16 Jun I'm trying to adjust the individual difficulty of the AI enemies and allies in solo play . I remember this was possible in the original RoN game, but I can't seem to remember how it's done. I know I can set a difficulty besides my own entry in the game creation, but I'm talking about adjusting the difficulty of each. The same intricate steps of offering an Alliance, requires the same methods, except you have to be in the stance of peace with the following nation. Most of the time (depending on game difficulty), even though you've reasonably established a sacrificed gambit for an Alliance to another nation, you're chances are grim if you.