/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>55466309
My router is about 1 tenth of the speed of my ethernet connection if more than one thing is connected to it at once and I don't care. I doubt you even have a usecase for faster internet than the cheapest router available can provide.

>>54160969
>Bitcoin privacy is not good enough for the n00bs
this is the biggest problem. I don't think it can be fixed because all this shit works on L1, and they are dedicated to having 1MB blocks still. So all this mixing and stuff will cost you a pretty penny on bitcoin. Not to mention that optional privacy means you still are mixing with other tainted outputs...
I am not so worried about bitcoin implementing CTs and stuff. They don't hard fork at all.

>>54161225
Nothing wrong with making some $$$ appeasing the "everything is fine" bitcoin crowd. Everything is fine until it isn't.

>bitcoin
satoshi nakamoto (S.N.), original idea taken over by idiot moonboys and fallen from grace
>monero
nicholas van saberhagen (N.S.), ambitious scarface type shit on the comeup
>chainlink
sergey nazarov (S.N.) over-complicated business-oriented scam, token not needed

>>53094517

Based beyond belief, its what Bitcoin promised to be but failed to become.

>>52744414
>>52744436
The market will crash again, and the price of bitcoin will fall to $7k. Mark my words, TA retards. Even the price of monero will fall to $70.
Bitcoin will not recover to historical prices because its fundamentals have been broken since the XT dispute, and the only thing propping the price up has been speculative hype. It has nothing to do with drawing lines and rainbows on a price graph. Remember "20k is the bottom"? What outside information has fundamentally changed since then?
I would not buy bitcoin at 100 dollars. I have no practical use for it, and I have no expectation that it would bounce up from 100 bucks. The only thing buying bitcoin does is enrich idiots like you.

>>52434624
>Question for you guys: with the total collapse of FTX, I'm seeing a lot of Bitcoin people call for a return
to fundamentals; popular sentiment now seems to be along the lines of that everyone got carried away investing money in centralized products that obviously ended up being scams and that we need to return Bitcoin to what it originally was, anonymous digital money.
The bitcoin fundamentalists are few and far-between. The have been outnumbered by the get-rich-quick types for a while now. This will not stop the price of bitcoin from sliding.

>If this happens, say because institutional money leaves and miners no longer have a stranglehold on the Bitcoin devs, do you think there's a chance that Bitcoin implements a lot of Monero's features, like CPU mining, variable block size, encrypted transactions, etc? And what would happen to Monero in this situation?
No. They won't even raise the block size since the BCH dispute, so now they need to justify that and will only make soft forks going forwards. Anyone who thought hard forks were a good idea has moved onto BCH, XMR, LTC, others. The remaining bitcoin users are religiously against hardforks. That's what the lightning network is all about, it's about arrogance and brain drain. Go on bitcoin forums like stacker.news and see how ignorant they are. Bitcoin is perfect apparently, and always has been. And this is just the minority of bitcoin users which understand anything about it. Also they think coinjoin works, or at least its very existence makes them feel like strong privacy-by-default is unnecessary, because privacy is just a check-box for them. So no.

>>51498443
Money is fungible. Bitcoin is not.