ABC

asdfgghk

Show me in long form interviews evidence of dementia. Even the commenters in this video are surprised saying they believed what they did on Trump because of media propaganda (and again you won’t see an instance of dementia; not that you’ll listen to it on double speed). And I agree, he looked terrible on debate night, it doesn’t help though Kamala was given the questions ahead of time and perception was skewed based on ABC creating more favorable lighting and camera angles to influence perceptions (there’s plenty of photographers and production artists on you tube who showed evidence of this if you care to search). https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry1IjOft95c&pp=ygUJRmxhZ3JhbnQg

systembreaker

Exactly, currencies are a vehicle for use cases. Same goes for Bitcoin. The closest thing to a "use case" that Bitcoin has is its entire overall design as a network, which is a purpose that it was designed for. Not a use case like an app that has a bullet list of features. I think so many people are just used to apps that have a specific set of particular things that they do that they don't understand Bitcoin is a network with a purpose rather than "It does XYZ and ABC".

Crypto_Powered

Start the business because if you can earn more from the business you can always buy more BTC than what you had originally planned to. But starting a business is not easy and most lose money for the first couple of years so you really have to be sure of what you are doing and hit the ground running and don't stop until you succeed. ABC = Always Be Closing

WhiteVent98

Yeah I know, id rather own the underlying spot, than own the underlying company, which happens to own bitcoin… Plus my strategy is… build up to 100 shares of ABC, then sell CCs and/or collect dividends to build a new position in XYZ, or grow my ABC position. Right now im using dividends and CC premium and contributions to build a URA or URNM, idk, theyre the same, position, up to 100 shares to gain exposure to the Uranium market, in which I am bullish, and sell CCs, after that… probably more IBIT now that they have options… or SLV for some more metals… guess I will see when I get there, itll be a few months…

Honest_Path_5356

Forbes has become a talking piece, ABC, has become a talking piece, Bloomberg has become a talking piece. Sad reality that the once considered top tier media doesn’t spill facts any longer

darthbuttfuk

>Unreliable source >Unnamed ABC 'whistleblower' >Allegedly >Evidence yet to be produced I'd still vote for Kamala if this was all proven true btw.

millennial-snowflake

"inside the crypto con" - ABC just did a story about pig butchering in crypto and completely ignored the much larger general problem of pig butchering with all other forms of financing. Media hates us

squinton0

You’re right. Again, all I’m saying is that calling out a tendency to shrug mainstream media for fringe sources, as an additional to the other negative attributes they’ve tacked on to the profile of a crypto investor, is ridiculous when mainstream media can be equally faulted. The idea that “oh, ABC/NBC/FOX (etc.) news is more truthful and reliable compared to fringe sources, and people who utilize or choose to believe these other sources more so than the Big Ones have a few screws loose” is just… it’s just not right.

gandrewstone

Events like this have happened in altcoins, in particular bitcoin ABC. First of all, we learned that the attacker gets bored wasting energy and eventually stops. Second, the blockchain can lose its POW and therefore decentralized nature. The attack can be statistically proven by providing the orphaned blocks. Some personality in the space then simply says, "check this web site daily/hourly for the current tip, and manually invalidate longer forks. Here's a script to do it automatically." This goes on until the attacker leaves and then the chain resumes as a POW chain. I suppose the reasoning is that given a 51% attack you already lost decentralization -- that ship has sailed. Might as well pick someone the community supports vs. an anonymous entity. Its pretty cool that POW chains are resilient to this attack in the sense that the onchain monetary system remains consistent and people's balances are protected. Of course, people who transact with an extra-blockchain component might lose value, like in the classic doublespend attack. But in systems that utilize (say) atomic exchange via a single transaction, like the way nexa trades NFTs, either both sides of the trade happen, or both do not. This minimizes loss to secondary effects like opportunity costs, or to the counterparty unwinding a trade whose subsequent price action is unfavorable.

raymonddurk

When you open your wallet you'll see account 1 with address 1, 2, 3, etc. Account 2 with address 1, 2, 3, etc. When you open any wallet to get your balance, you handoff your xpub which is the data for all of your addresses past, present, and future within an account up to a certain gap limit. Ledger uses a 20 address gap for example. So if you plug a Ledger into Electrum, it'll send your xpub to a random server to read off the xpub up until the last address gap. So you can buy nonkyc coins but if that Electrum server is run by a chain analysis firm, they know that address 1, 2, 3, and your future coins of 4-20 that you don't even have yet are all owned by the same entity. They cluster them as Wallet ABC. If you send address 3 to an exchange, then they apply the KYC data to the cluster of current UTXOs 1 and 2 and future UTXOs 4-20.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Bitcoin surged 4% to $61,550 amid rumors that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. might drop out of the 2024 U.S. Presidential race to endorse Donald Trump, potentially influencing the election outcome. Speculation has grown after hints from Kennedy's running mate and reports from ABC News and Info Wars, suggesting RFK Jr.'s endorsement could sway the election in Trump's favor. This development has led to a significant impact on Bitcoin's price and the betting odds for the November election. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Cash Con-Arguments Below is a Bitcoin Cash con-argument written by Blendzi0r. > # What is Bitcoin Cash (BCH)? > > Bitcoin Cash is a [hard fork](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hard-fork.asp) of Bitcoin. It was launched in 2017. [It has 32MB blocks instead of Bitcoin’s 1MB](https://www.coindesk.com/learn/2015/08/21/what-is-the-bitcoin-block-size-debate-and-why-does-it-matter/), so it can handle many more transactions per second (TPS). And that’s the main difference between BTC and BCH, as its goal was to tackle [Bitcoin’s scalability problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_scalability_problem) without the second layer solutions. > > # What are the cons of BCH? > > **IT’S CENTRALIZED** > > BCH “inherited” BTC’s supply distribution from July 2017 when it was launched but the supply held by large addresses [has become more concentrated over time](https://coinmetrics.substack.com/p/coin-metrics-state-of-the-network-2d3) (while BTC is even more decentralized today). > > In 2019, [just two mining pools were able to perform a 51% attack](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2019/05/24/bitcoin-cash-miners-undo-attackers-transactions-with-51-attack/). And although it was done for a good cause – to stop an unknown miner from exploiting a bug – it can serve as a prove that BCH was centralized already back then. > > ​ > > **THE NARRATIVE IS ON BITCOIN’S SIDE** > > The value of Bitcoin has gone up more than 2,000% since July 2017 while BCH has stayed below its price from July 2017 most of the time, not to mention its [ATH price of $4,355](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-cash/) (it's 86% down from ATH as of 31.10.2021). > > Also liquidity and real-world usability of Bitcoin Cash [is nowhere near that of Bitcoin](https://www.investopedia.com/tech/bitcoin-vs-bitcoin-cash-whats-difference/#citation-4). It is clear that the great majority of investors chose Bitcoin after the 2017 hard fork and BCH is seen as an inferior copy. > > ​ > > **IT HAD ITS OWN HARD FORKS** > > People cringe at Internet Computer’s name, but for me, Bitcoin Satoshi Vision (BSV) takes the cake. It’s a hard fork of Bitcoin Cash that took place in late 2018. It has even larger blocks than BCH – [2GB](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/world-record-2-gigabyte-block-130000498.html). > > In 2020, there was another hard fork that produced two new chains- Bitcoin Cash ABC and Bitcoin Node. This shows that Bitcoin Cash has failed not only against Bitcoin, but had splits among its own community, further hurting its credibility. > > ​ > > **IT'S SCALABILITY COMES AT A COST** > > Bigger blocks have certain [disadvantages](https://www.sfox.com/blog/is-bigger-better-how-to-evaluate-bitcoin-cash-based-on-block-size/). Running nodes when the blocks are big requires more resources. Also, the commissions from transaction fees are lower, which makes mining the coin less appealing. This might result in nodes being manageable only by big, private companies, making BCH even more centralized. > > ​ > > **ITS MAIN ADVANTAGE ISN’T UTILIZED…** > > Although BCH’s blocks can handle up to 32MB of data, [they have not reached even 2MB since they were introduced in 2018](https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/size-btc-bch.html#3y). What's more, their average size is currently much lower than that of Bitcoin’s blocks. > > Taking into consideration the point above about the disadvantages of bigger blocks, it makes you wonder why BCH would push for such big blocks when most of the time they don't even use 3% of their capacity. > > ​ > > **… AND EVEN IF IT WAS, THERE'S LIGHTNING NETWORK** > > [SegWit](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/segwit-segregated-witness.asp) allows second layer solutions to be implemented on Bitcoin. One of those solutions is Lightning Network which has become very popular recently after being [adopted by El Salvador](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/lightning-network-bitcoin-usage-adoption-el-salvador) and [Twitter](https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/118450/twitter-rolls-out-bitcoin-tipping-for-ios-users-via-lightning-looks-to-nfts-for-the-future). > > Lightning Network effectively eliminates the main advantage of Bitcoin Cash by allowing faster and cheaper transactions with bitcoins. Even if BCH fully utilized its 32MB blocks, it wouldn't be able to compete with Lightening Network. > > \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ > > **SUMMARY** > > Bitcoin Cash is a much worse store of value than Bitcoin and now it is also losing the electronic cash narrative, since the growing adoption of [Lightning Network](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_Network) makes Bitcoin a much cheaper and faster payment option. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin_Cash) to find submissions for other topics.

Defender_Of_TheCrown

Not even remotely the same considering the number of Trump’s people involved in project 2025. Biden doesn’t have neoliberals on his staff. “Stephen Miller, who served as Trump’s senior adviser for policy and White House director of speechwriting, is also on the promotional video as a leader. He’s also since tried to distance himself, saying, “I have no involvement with the project whatsoever,” in a statement to ABC News. At least six of Trump’s former Cabinet secretaries have either authored or advised on Project 2025. Russ Vought, Trump’s former Office of Management and Budget director, wrote a chapter on “Executive Office of the President” for Project 2025. ” You act as if this would be outside of Trump’s playbook when he and his buddies literally tried to overturn an election and organized an attack on our own government because he refused to admit that he lost an election.

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Cash Con-Arguments Below is a Bitcoin Cash con-argument written by Blendzi0r. > # What is Bitcoin Cash (BCH)? > > Bitcoin Cash is a [hard fork](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hard-fork.asp) of Bitcoin. It was launched in 2017. [It has 32MB blocks instead of Bitcoin’s 1MB](https://www.coindesk.com/learn/2015/08/21/what-is-the-bitcoin-block-size-debate-and-why-does-it-matter/), so it can handle many more transactions per second (TPS). And that’s the main difference between BTC and BCH, as its goal was to tackle [Bitcoin’s scalability problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_scalability_problem) without the second layer solutions. > > # What are the cons of BCH? > > **IT’S CENTRALIZED** > > BCH “inherited” BTC’s supply distribution from July 2017 when it was launched but the supply held by large addresses [has become more concentrated over time](https://coinmetrics.substack.com/p/coin-metrics-state-of-the-network-2d3) (while BTC is even more decentralized today). > > In 2019, [just two mining pools were able to perform a 51% attack](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2019/05/24/bitcoin-cash-miners-undo-attackers-transactions-with-51-attack/). And although it was done for a good cause – to stop an unknown miner from exploiting a bug – it can serve as a prove that BCH was centralized already back then. > > ​ > > **THE NARRATIVE IS ON BITCOIN’S SIDE** > > The value of Bitcoin has gone up more than 2,000% since July 2017 while BCH has stayed below its price from July 2017 most of the time, not to mention its [ATH price of $4,355](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-cash/) (it's 86% down from ATH as of 31.10.2021). > > Also liquidity and real-world usability of Bitcoin Cash [is nowhere near that of Bitcoin](https://www.investopedia.com/tech/bitcoin-vs-bitcoin-cash-whats-difference/#citation-4). It is clear that the great majority of investors chose Bitcoin after the 2017 hard fork and BCH is seen as an inferior copy. > > ​ > > **IT HAD ITS OWN HARD FORKS** > > People cringe at Internet Computer’s name, but for me, Bitcoin Satoshi Vision (BSV) takes the cake. It’s a hard fork of Bitcoin Cash that took place in late 2018. It has even larger blocks than BCH – [2GB](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/world-record-2-gigabyte-block-130000498.html). > > In 2020, there was another hard fork that produced two new chains- Bitcoin Cash ABC and Bitcoin Node. This shows that Bitcoin Cash has failed not only against Bitcoin, but had splits among its own community, further hurting its credibility. > > ​ > > **IT'S SCALABILITY COMES AT A COST** > > Bigger blocks have certain [disadvantages](https://www.sfox.com/blog/is-bigger-better-how-to-evaluate-bitcoin-cash-based-on-block-size/). Running nodes when the blocks are big requires more resources. Also, the commissions from transaction fees are lower, which makes mining the coin less appealing. This might result in nodes being manageable only by big, private companies, making BCH even more centralized. > > ​ > > **ITS MAIN ADVANTAGE ISN’T UTILIZED…** > > Although BCH’s blocks can handle up to 32MB of data, [they have not reached even 2MB since they were introduced in 2018](https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/size-btc-bch.html#3y). What's more, their average size is currently much lower than that of Bitcoin’s blocks. > > Taking into consideration the point above about the disadvantages of bigger blocks, it makes you wonder why BCH would push for such big blocks when most of the time they don't even use 3% of their capacity. > > ​ > > **… AND EVEN IF IT WAS, THERE'S LIGHTNING NETWORK** > > [SegWit](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/segwit-segregated-witness.asp) allows second layer solutions to be implemented on Bitcoin. One of those solutions is Lightning Network which has become very popular recently after being [adopted by El Salvador](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/lightning-network-bitcoin-usage-adoption-el-salvador) and [Twitter](https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/118450/twitter-rolls-out-bitcoin-tipping-for-ios-users-via-lightning-looks-to-nfts-for-the-future). > > Lightning Network effectively eliminates the main advantage of Bitcoin Cash by allowing faster and cheaper transactions with bitcoins. Even if BCH fully utilized its 32MB blocks, it wouldn't be able to compete with Lightening Network. > > \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ > > **SUMMARY** > > Bitcoin Cash is a much worse store of value than Bitcoin and now it is also losing the electronic cash narrative, since the growing adoption of [Lightning Network](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_Network) makes Bitcoin a much cheaper and faster payment option. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin_Cash) to find submissions for other topics.

crimeo

You can absolutely lend out crypto with fractional reserves exactly like dollars. You just sign a contract that XYZ is owed to ABC, and the courts enforce it, not any blockchain.

Life_Sherbert_995

Standard ABC correction. so ill buy lower. Probably we get a bounce at 52k, after that go down to 40k. Lots of support in that area, then get ready for a full blown bullmarket.

Life_Sherbert_995

I'll buy lower, standard ABC correction. probably we get a bounce at 52k, after that go down to 40k. Lots of support in that area, after that it should be full blown bullmarket.

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Cash Con-Arguments Below is a Bitcoin Cash con-argument written by Blendzi0r. > # What is Bitcoin Cash (BCH)? > > Bitcoin Cash is a [hard fork](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hard-fork.asp) of Bitcoin. It was launched in 2017. [It has 32MB blocks instead of Bitcoin’s 1MB](https://www.coindesk.com/learn/2015/08/21/what-is-the-bitcoin-block-size-debate-and-why-does-it-matter/), so it can handle many more transactions per second (TPS). And that’s the main difference between BTC and BCH, as its goal was to tackle [Bitcoin’s scalability problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_scalability_problem) without the second layer solutions. > > # What are the cons of BCH? > > **IT’S CENTRALIZED** > > BCH “inherited” BTC’s supply distribution from July 2017 when it was launched but the supply held by large addresses [has become more concentrated over time](https://coinmetrics.substack.com/p/coin-metrics-state-of-the-network-2d3) (while BTC is even more decentralized today). > > In 2019, [just two mining pools were able to perform a 51% attack](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2019/05/24/bitcoin-cash-miners-undo-attackers-transactions-with-51-attack/). And although it was done for a good cause – to stop an unknown miner from exploiting a bug – it can serve as a prove that BCH was centralized already back then. > > ​ > > **THE NARRATIVE IS ON BITCOIN’S SIDE** > > The value of Bitcoin has gone up more than 2,000% since July 2017 while BCH has stayed below its price from July 2017 most of the time, not to mention its [ATH price of $4,355](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-cash/) (it's 86% down from ATH as of 31.10.2021). > > Also liquidity and real-world usability of Bitcoin Cash [is nowhere near that of Bitcoin](https://www.investopedia.com/tech/bitcoin-vs-bitcoin-cash-whats-difference/#citation-4). It is clear that the great majority of investors chose Bitcoin after the 2017 hard fork and BCH is seen as an inferior copy. > > ​ > > **IT HAD ITS OWN HARD FORKS** > > People cringe at Internet Computer’s name, but for me, Bitcoin Satoshi Vision (BSV) takes the cake. It’s a hard fork of Bitcoin Cash that took place in late 2018. It has even larger blocks than BCH – [2GB](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/world-record-2-gigabyte-block-130000498.html). > > In 2020, there was another hard fork that produced two new chains- Bitcoin Cash ABC and Bitcoin Node. This shows that Bitcoin Cash has failed not only against Bitcoin, but had splits among its own community, further hurting its credibility. > > ​ > > **IT'S SCALABILITY COMES AT A COST** > > Bigger blocks have certain [disadvantages](https://www.sfox.com/blog/is-bigger-better-how-to-evaluate-bitcoin-cash-based-on-block-size/). Running nodes when the blocks are big requires more resources. Also, the commissions from transaction fees are lower, which makes mining the coin less appealing. This might result in nodes being manageable only by big, private companies, making BCH even more centralized. > > ​ > > **ITS MAIN ADVANTAGE ISN’T UTILIZED…** > > Although BCH’s blocks can handle up to 32MB of data, [they have not reached even 2MB since they were introduced in 2018](https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/size-btc-bch.html#3y). What's more, their average size is currently much lower than that of Bitcoin’s blocks. > > Taking into consideration the point above about the disadvantages of bigger blocks, it makes you wonder why BCH would push for such big blocks when most of the time they don't even use 3% of their capacity. > > ​ > > **… AND EVEN IF IT WAS, THERE'S LIGHTNING NETWORK** > > [SegWit](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/segwit-segregated-witness.asp) allows second layer solutions to be implemented on Bitcoin. One of those solutions is Lightning Network which has become very popular recently after being [adopted by El Salvador](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/lightning-network-bitcoin-usage-adoption-el-salvador) and [Twitter](https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/118450/twitter-rolls-out-bitcoin-tipping-for-ios-users-via-lightning-looks-to-nfts-for-the-future). > > Lightning Network effectively eliminates the main advantage of Bitcoin Cash by allowing faster and cheaper transactions with bitcoins. Even if BCH fully utilized its 32MB blocks, it wouldn't be able to compete with Lightening Network. > > \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ > > **SUMMARY** > > Bitcoin Cash is a much worse store of value than Bitcoin and now it is also losing the electronic cash narrative, since the growing adoption of [Lightning Network](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_Network) makes Bitcoin a much cheaper and faster payment option. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin_Cash) to find submissions for other topics.

jcpham

Most of the BTC holders sold BCH into the dirt once that option presented itself Regardless of how you feel or even care about block size wars; new free money is new free money. Look at the chart and look at the ATH of Bitcoin Cash or any number of Roger Ver/ Faketoshi Wright / or even Hearn with his ABC client. Respectively forking BTC for whatever shitcoin you and your buddies _think_ is a good idea hasn’t really worked out. The only reason BCH still exists is because there were enough BTC holders to prop up a shitcoin market. I’m sure there’s people that disagree with me and such but I’d be shocked absolutely shocked if BCH even remotely still correlates with BTC movements. What do I know though

dlm83

Average cost alone does not matter, it's about the returns. The ideal scenario if you were investing in something periodically over the long term would be that the price is only ever higher every time you purchased it, forever, right? Likewise, if the price kept on falling and your average purchase price kept averaging lower that's of no benefit to you unless the price rises again. Run some simulations, for e.g. you buy $1 worth of ABC @ $1, and every month thereafter you buy another $1 worth of ABC but the price has doubled vs. the previous month: * By your 10th investment, your holdings would have gone from 1.0 ABC to 1.998 ABC (9x subsequent investments buying you slightly less than the first investment did alone). * After your 10th investment (at which stage ABC has a price of $502!), you'd have spent a total of $10 and have an average purchase price of $5, +400% of the first purchase. * By the end of that 10th month when the ABC price doubled again to $1,024, your holdings would be worth $2,046. That's a profit of $2,036 (+20,360%). Your average purchase price only ever went up, and the number of units you could buy for $1 halved each time... but +400% average purchase price doesn't sound so bad when compared to a total return of +20,360%. That's just illustrative of course. But if you're worried about having an average purchase price that is closer to the current price if you buy more, why are you even holding what you already do still? In theory, it is 'costing' you, right now, the current purchase price vs. if you sold it (excluding fees, tax etc.).

Waterdrag0n

If BBC, ABC Australia, Al Jazeera, or literally any other state sponsored network had bothered to partner with Assange he would have… Assange also noted that western media did a good enough job highlighting Russia’s corruption and injustices that Wikileaks found it hard to compete, after all Wikileaks depends on leaks and most leaks came from western countries. I really don’t think you have thought very much about this subject. Let me remind you USA’s actions of pressuring banks, PayPal and credit card companies to prevent donations and payments to Wikileaks is what forced them to use only crypto…welcome to the sub.

R4ID

>So I take xrp bridge is there when there isn't much liquidity on both sides (like USD/eur)? so USD/EUR is probably the MOST liquid corridor in the world. I dont think there's more volume moving through any 2 other currency pairs today than that area. This is why utilizing XRP (as a bridge asset) in a currency pair where there is a TON of liquidity doesnt really help solve very much. It does solve a few of the nostro vostro issues (and geopolitical ones) but since the volume is so high those issues arent that big to begin with. It is much better at solving the problems between two currency's that dont have such high volume/liquidity. So in my example I use Thai Bhat and Brazilian Real. If you wanted to move value between those two right now today and your Bank/FI has no relation with another member/partner bank in that region its going to be slow and costly. It might look like bhat->Yen->USD->MXN->Real each one of those steps not only takes time to do, but incurs a fee and can involve an entirely new subsidiarity bank/FI to facilitate the trade. Each hop/step adds more fees and wait times which are essentially costing customers even more money. You have to think about the Bank/FI in Thailand, if they dont have a business partner Brazil, they have to know someone who does and they need to each not only have accounts with each other but lockup funds in separate accounts daily to facilitate this trade. What that means is you're locking up capital to be used only when transfers are occurring, if there is low volume in that corridor(which is the case in most cases) its cheaper and easier for the bank to simply have another bank process the transfer and charge a fee on top. this is what gets passed onto the consumer. XRP as a bridge asset not only is faster than the banks/FI processing time (in that its 3-5 seconds not 3-5 days) and the fees are sub penny to do swaps on chain. So you could sell Bhat for XRP and buy Real with that XRP all in 1 single transaction. >I send rupees > on chain this gets swapped for xrp > xrp gets swapped for gold > gold gets transfered to my account correct. >But what if XRP rises in the mean time or falls in price. Wouldn't this cause an issue? 2 things. An XRP transaction takes 3-5 seconds, and these multi currency swaps use what is called Prelock/holds on funds before the transaction occurs. Unlike on say ETH where when you swap ABC for XYZ and it says ur gonna get 1.345 XYZ and when you do the swap thanks to slippage you get 1.331 XYZ instead. on the XRPL funds are put into a mini timelocked escrow as a part of the pre payment agreements. Funds get confirmed and released all at the same time across multiple ledgers. >Why would they want XRP if I want to do buisness with in brazil, and Im a thai bank. I need to open accounts/relationships with them, I then need to keep money in their bank and they need to keep money in my bank so that when we do buisness at the end of the day we can Balance out the sheet of transfers we did that day. When this money is sitting in another bank/currency it is losing value every day when it dormant. XRP says you only need to hold what you have and buy in and out of XRP for 3-5 seconds. the "dormant" part of the nostro/vostro system is removed essentially. it turns all your capital into "working" capital. >can be more volatile 3-5 seconds vs the average international transfer time of 3-5 days. Volatility is a calculation of price variance X time. if you drastically reduce the time (like to 3-5 seconds) you drastically reduce the volatility. >then for example the dollar? for every dollar you want to transfer you need to lock up at least 1 dollar (if not more) meaning you are limited in how much you can transfer based on how much you lock up. XRP's value is free floating and can provide liquidity anywhere to anything in seconds. dollars also arent geopolitically neutral (they have inflation) and can be printed/controlled by 3rd parties. If you want to use a stablecoin you can, it just doesnt solve as many problems as XRP does. >If we remove the need to back the stable coin up for instance. then it isnt a stablecoin and anyone trading in it has much bigger problems. >Or are we talking about cbdc on the xrp chain? last I checked there are 5 confirmed governments working on their CBDC with Ripple and another 9 which havnt been announced but that might of changed recently I havnt followed it as much. IIRC it was Bhutan, Palau, Montenegro, Georgia, & Colombia Sorry this is really really long, if you have follow up questions just ask.

abesWaves

From an astrological perspective, baby bears need to take out previous low of $56.5k set back in April. It seems the alt coins had a traditional ABC zig zag correction following a bullish impulse wave. While BTC, remaining at relatively elevated levels is experiencing a flat correction. A running flat if no new low is set, which is a valid correction. If new low is set it would simply be an expanded flat. This sort of pattern was expected as soon as BTC failed to make new ATH.

the_ats

ABC Always B Claiming DCA every day. Every hour.

trufin2038

Pretty much anyone with a half way working human brain can do this. It's as easy as ABC. Literally.

Emmabailly2000

hahahhahah lol its ABC123 NEVER SEND MONEY TO SOEMONE YOU DONT KNOW

Haunting-Student-756

Wen is KYC ABC AML KFC Dumb thought experiment 

Farvaharr

In ABC please

Ok-Hat-1720

Double and triple checked. Seed phrase belong to MY "XYZ" wallet, but it also works for someone else´s "ABC" wallet.

uncapchad

It's here in epub format so you'll need an e-reader or Adobe. Click GET [https://library.lol/main/7D394651158ABC9470CBCCE538FAAA49](https://library.lol/main/7D394651158ABC9470CBCCE538FAAA49)

abercrombezie

Well, I’ve been in Bitcoin since 2014 and I can understand the hate. Anytime some noob mentions that ”were early“ for this XYZ or that ABC coin being the next big thing, my brain turns off.

BoJagHux

I think an ABC correction wave is possible. My prediction would be during this rally we go up and test the previous bull markets ATH around 69k and maybe test the new ATH of around $73,800. Then, a correction down to the most recent low of around 56k. We could make a double bottom there and then go to new ATH. Or go a little lower between 50k and 54k. I’ll put in new buy orders starting around 58k down to around 51k longing Bitcoin on low leverage.

ScoobaMonsta

I think we're in the B wave of an ABC correction.

ScoobaMonsta

Have we finished this correction though? This bounce could be the B wave of an ABC correction. If you put the fib retracement tool from the bottom at 16k to the recent high of 74k, we are still way above the 0.236 fib level. I'm looking at the weekly chart. Or haven't we finished the larger impulse wave and this correction was just the wave 4 of the overall impulse wave? Are we bouncing for the 5th wave now? The weekly ichimoku shows bullish signals across the board with a confirmed kumo twist. I think we are in an ABC correction myself. Sub waves of an ABC is 5-3-5. An equal measured move for an ABC correction would take us to 50k. I would post pics of my TA if I could.

SunliMin

It feels like context is needed here, both in that article, the title and comments. There are not "over 2.4m crypto projects". There are over 2.4m ERC20, ERC721 and ERC1155 contracts deployed. When a new ABC token comes out and someone makes a liquidity pool of it and WETH, that pool that was deployed is a new token being tracked, same with the ABC:WBTC, ABC:DAI, etc, each new pool gives you a token that is effectively your receipt to track how much you own of the backed assets for the withdraw, and that receipt is a contract per pool per defi app. This is also true with any form of staking. Defi apps use other tokens as receipts, but it does not make each of those token its own "project". Theres also the case that not every contract that exists is even built to be used. These numbers include Polygon and other sidechains. As a dev in this space, I have deployed probably... 30 or 40 NFT contracts to that blockchain. These aren't monkey NFTs to be traded, they are underlying infrastructure of our core products. In fact, at my current job, our NFTs are built to fail to transfer if it detects its being transferred by a 3rd party contract, because we explicitly do NOT want it to get picked up by defi apps, because our use case is not the average token use case, and it would go against our goals. All that is to say, this 2.4m number is wrong. If by "projects" they meant "dapp", the number is inflated at least 10:1, but probably closer to 50:1. For example, Uniswap V3 on mainnet Ethereum has 958 markets, so the 3rd version of Uniswap on one network accounts for nearly 1,000 of these "projects". Now imagine this for every version of Uniswap, across every chain, including every fork. Now imagine that same logic, but applied to Compound Finance, AAVE, every single Defi app on every chain and every fork. Easily hundreds of thousands are just from those big defi apps and clones alone.

Haunting-Student-756

But Ellen moon should I buy KFC ABC KYC NYC? CoinbAsE StOlE my MonEy? Is ThiS a ScAm?

Earthlien99

Spongebob is right, what most people dont realise is that in crypto there has to be 1000s of losers before there is even 1 winner. That's why rugpulls work so well. In normal/pleb trading each trader is the next traders competition and that's why I consider most crypto influencers as the scum of the earth as they know this very well. E.g when $ABC starts gaining traction that means people are buying it. The winners are the 1st traders to take profit on $ABC but the influencers would have been given presale coins (the bottom) as a deal for them to shamelessly shill the coin as the next 100x - 1000x moonwalker, so hodl your life away literally. So devs and shillers "buy" the bottom, decent traders buy the hype and the dumb money buys the top ( i.e the 🎯 of the bottomers). So you can see how this turns out, only the devs+shillers make money besides the decent traders who bought the hype and know the truth of what I'm saying so they dump on late buyers on the way up before the devs pull the plug with more money than pockets to keep it in. The exchange is basically like the house and the house always wins. Sorry for the rant (I could go on tho) but it just needed to get out and I feel a lot lighter now so thank you! You can see some of my work, X @Tiggered222 if you like.

ukawan6446

🌟 Are you tired of manual forex trading complexities and making errors in judging market trends? Don't waste your time and money! 🚀 Make your trading easy and profitable, just like me! 🌍 💹 With proven strategies and expert market forecasts, making a weekly profit of 5-10% is as easy as ABC! 🤑✨ Let your money work for you. 💰 Start copy trading with me on OctaFX and start making money today! Why stress over manual trading and spending hours understanding the market when we have already done all the heavy lifting so you can ride the success wave with me 🏄‍♂️ 🔍 💼 Check out our trading history and performance on OctaFX by clicking this link: https://www.octafx.com/copy-trade/master/38275997/ Are you ready to elevate your trading game? Sign up now and join the journey to financial success! 💪📈 🚀🔗 Master account username : ukawan6446

HumbleIndependence43

On a fundamental level, access to a Bitcoin wallet is simply a private key, which is represented as a very large number that's difficult to guess. On top of that you simply need cryptographic software to use that key to sign messages. Signing a message could be, as a simplified example, saying "I am the owner of wallet ABC and I'm hereby sending 1 BTC to address XYZ". This message will be signed by your private key, proving your cryptographic ownership of address ABC beyond any doubt, and then published to the other nodes on the chain. That software nowadays might be a bit more advanced, as well as the network connections and the storage efficiency. Bitcoin also got some nrw features like Segewit. But they're essentially the same.

Logvin

>The seller will accept Bitcoin, said David Larchez of Silverleaf Realty, who is listing the property. Bitcoin surged to historic highs last month, making this an opportune time for such an innovative transaction, Larchez said. ABC15 is a well respected local news station in Phoenix, AZ USA, of which Paradise Valley is a suburb. It's not a big article full of interesting details, but shows progress with adoption.

99Beers

I am a user and I believe in the next 3-5 years the narrative will shift from infrastructure to apps. Instead of people talking about Solana vs Ethereum, it will be people talking about ABC app. This may or may not help you /u/banksied but look at Merkle dot Trade. It's an perps trading app built on Aptos where users can trade Crypto, Memes, Forex including Gold and Silver. But focusing on UX, users can trade and connect using either an Aptos wallet or EVM wallet (including the L2s) - the app creates an Aptos wallet for the users. This to me is the future. Wallets go to the background and users don't have to sign every transaction.

zachmoe

[https://www.jstor.org/stable/25102198](https://www.jstor.org/stable/25102198) In The ABC of Money, Andrew Carnegie asserts gold is more like the north star, and that everything moves around it. I don't know that anything other than other crypto move around BTC, and who knows what BTC moves around, but it do be.

bbiittccooiinn

New interview with SBF after sentencing with ABC News: ['I'm haunted, every day, by what was lost', 'I never thought what I was doing was illegal'](https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/s/HwRGkLUivi) 👨‍⚖️

sajonara84

It's not dip, just standard ABC correction, which started few weeks ago ~59k most likely bottom

phallicpunch

Been on Velodrome for almost 2 years & Aerodrome since it was airdropped. Every Wednesday vote & take those bribes & incentives & either roll them back in, increase USDC/ETH LP, or swap to ETH. Do not underestimate the power of DCA, compounding, & stop buying useless shit & eating out. I plan on buying some land & starting an ABC farming op; apples, blueberries, & cannabis.

whereismyface_ig

Definitely, that was a bit more recent than the already very numerous exit scams / honeypots or ABC boys shutdowns. The biggest fraud related darknet market voluntarily exited the game graciously a year or 2 ago as well

dschultz50

ABC bois

Thetonious

Only if you think high fees, lousy customer support, open cooperation with ABC agencies, operating a shitcoin casino, stipulating that they own everything on their exchange (with a promise to pay back what they 'owe you'), putting you at the end of a long list of unsecured creditors if they go bankrupt, and constantly going down when things get frantic is dogshit. Otherwise they are THE BEST! ;-)

CointestMod

#Bitcoin Cash Con-Arguments Below is a Bitcoin Cash con-argument written by Blendzi0r. > # What is Bitcoin Cash (BCH)? > > Bitcoin Cash is a [hard fork](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hard-fork.asp) of Bitcoin. It was launched in 2017. [It has 32MB blocks instead of Bitcoin’s 1MB](https://www.coindesk.com/learn/2015/08/21/what-is-the-bitcoin-block-size-debate-and-why-does-it-matter/), so it can handle many more transactions per second (TPS). And that’s the main difference between BTC and BCH, as its goal was to tackle [Bitcoin’s scalability problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_scalability_problem) without the second layer solutions. > > # What are the cons of BCH? > > **IT’S CENTRALIZED** > > BCH “inherited” BTC’s supply distribution from July 2017 when it was launched but the supply held by large addresses [has become more concentrated over time](https://coinmetrics.substack.com/p/coin-metrics-state-of-the-network-2d3) (while BTC is even more decentralized today). > > In 2019, [just two mining pools were able to perform a 51% attack](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2019/05/24/bitcoin-cash-miners-undo-attackers-transactions-with-51-attack/). And although it was done for a good cause – to stop an unknown miner from exploiting a bug – it can serve as a prove that BCH was centralized already back then. > > ​ > > **THE NARRATIVE IS ON BITCOIN’S SIDE** > > The value of Bitcoin has gone up more than 2,000% since July 2017 while BCH has stayed below its price from July 2017 most of the time, not to mention its [ATH price of $4,355](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-cash/) (it's 86% down from ATH as of 31.10.2021). > > Also liquidity and real-world usability of Bitcoin Cash [is nowhere near that of Bitcoin](https://www.investopedia.com/tech/bitcoin-vs-bitcoin-cash-whats-difference/#citation-4). It is clear that the great majority of investors chose Bitcoin after the 2017 hard fork and BCH is seen as an inferior copy. > > ​ > > **IT HAD ITS OWN HARD FORKS** > > People cringe at Internet Computer’s name, but for me, Bitcoin Satoshi Vision (BSV) takes the cake. It’s a hard fork of Bitcoin Cash that took place in late 2018. It has even larger blocks than BCH – [2GB](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/world-record-2-gigabyte-block-130000498.html). > > In 2020, there was another hard fork that produced two new chains- Bitcoin Cash ABC and Bitcoin Node. This shows that Bitcoin Cash has failed not only against Bitcoin, but had splits among its own community, further hurting its credibility. > > ​ > > **IT'S SCALABILITY COMES AT A COST** > > Bigger blocks have certain [disadvantages](https://www.sfox.com/blog/is-bigger-better-how-to-evaluate-bitcoin-cash-based-on-block-size/). Running nodes when the blocks are big requires more resources. Also, the commissions from transaction fees are lower, which makes mining the coin less appealing. This might result in nodes being manageable only by big, private companies, making BCH even more centralized. > > ​ > > **ITS MAIN ADVANTAGE ISN’T UTILIZED…** > > Although BCH’s blocks can handle up to 32MB of data, [they have not reached even 2MB since they were introduced in 2018](https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/size-btc-bch.html#3y). What's more, their average size is currently much lower than that of Bitcoin’s blocks. > > Taking into consideration the point above about the disadvantages of bigger blocks, it makes you wonder why BCH would push for such big blocks when most of the time they don't even use 3% of their capacity. > > ​ > > **… AND EVEN IF IT WAS, THERE'S LIGHTNING NETWORK** > > [SegWit](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/segwit-segregated-witness.asp) allows second layer solutions to be implemented on Bitcoin. One of those solutions is Lightning Network which has become very popular recently after being [adopted by El Salvador](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/lightning-network-bitcoin-usage-adoption-el-salvador) and [Twitter](https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/118450/twitter-rolls-out-bitcoin-tipping-for-ios-users-via-lightning-looks-to-nfts-for-the-future). > > Lightning Network effectively eliminates the main advantage of Bitcoin Cash by allowing faster and cheaper transactions with bitcoins. Even if BCH fully utilized its 32MB blocks, it wouldn't be able to compete with Lightening Network. > > \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ > > **SUMMARY** > > Bitcoin Cash is a much worse store of value than Bitcoin and now it is also losing the electronic cash narrative, since the growing adoption of [Lightning Network](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_Network) makes Bitcoin a much cheaper and faster payment option. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Bitcoin_Cash) to find submissions for other topics.

StrawGreeter

> don't forget the elusive team of Craig Wright, Calvin Ayre and Roger Ver who played a key role in the bcash fork Don't rewrite history. BCH was created by the ABC developer group at the same time as Ver, Bitmain and the rest of the NYA agreement group were still supporting SegWit2X

9500

Check BCH with derivation paths for both BTC and BCH. BCH now has the new derivation path, but in the early days, because it forked from BTC, it used the same derivation path as Bitcoin BTC. If you find BCH there, you might have BSV and eCash (ABC) coins from later forks.

Crazy_names

Yes. ABC. Always Be DCAing. Or ABD... ABDCAing.

tony2o6

There’s a few ways. There used to be apps but a lot of them got shut down. There’s also a lot of groups that involve crypto enthusiasts on WeChat that I’m in as well. I’m an ABC but currently live in china so it’s not hard for me to get crypto and the language barrier isn’t that bad for me

Gordon_Law

Earned crypto such as through staking, mining, rewards, earning yield - or in general any "ascension to wealth" is considered income at the fair market value at the time received. Say you earn .1 ABC token rewards and at the time you receive it its worth $100. You would report $100 of taxable income on your tax return. Say you say it later for $50. Then, you would have the original income of $100 but also a capital loss of $50 ($100 cost basis less the $50 sales price). You must claim the income at the time you receive or earn it, not when you sell it. Unfortunately, this is very clear cut in the eyes of the IRS.

plasmalightwave

So let’s say I traded 1 BTC for 10k ABC tokens a year ago. That trade would have gone into my tax filing. Now let’s say (a year later) the team renamed the token to XYZ. I sell them for 1.2 BTC. The trade goes into my next tax filing, but the trade shows that I sold tokens XYZ. Won’t the IRS be like “where did you get the XYZ tokens from?” If it was a simple communication letter, then I could easily respond. But don’t they usually audit for such things, especially if the trades are huge in terms of USD?

zeamp

I personally view crypto, stocks, etc. like this: **You're buying a lottery ticket from the future.** ​ The longer you wait to scratch it, the more prizes there could be. Don't think of it as an investment, or a job, or a (if I make $/month I can do XYZ or quit ABC), buy something and hold on to it for a decade. Whether you're young or old, 10 years or more should pass. If you believe in something, wait for it to happen. Set a goal: when my holding value reaches XXX, I'm going to cash out. Until then, no. Wait on the dip to buy more, but don't sell anything to buy a future dip. Just keep buying and believing, and USING.

yourmomsbootay

Was trying to learn about airdrop farming, started following Miles (also involved with this fiasco, such a shame, he seemed legit) and X's algo picked up on it. She started popping in my "for you" so I was cautiously reading her stuff. Most seemed just stupid shills or "I gave you ABC at $X" bs you constantly see, but in the noise, some stuff seemed interesting. SAVM came up at a moment when I was a bit more confident (read her first tweet maybe 5 min after she posted) and wanted to get in early into a project that kinda felt like it had potential. Must admit that I didn't do a thorough research, just checked the site, idea of the project and its narrative. I got lucky.

Latter_Box9967

Was in [ABC Finance News last night](https://youtu.be/LcWCbVa8zEE?si=ugTSZwqCXUc8PlBH) See at the 50 second mark.

jventura1110

No, generating a checksum is cryptographic. It works the same way cryptocurrency transaction hashes do. If the Bitcoin Core devs say the checksum should be "ABC", the source code has to be a certain way for that checksum to be generated. If it is even changed by one character, the hash will be different.

R4ID

Yall need to start using the + feature most emails have. Anytime you sign up for anything you should be using it. if you dont know what im talking about here's an example if your email is ABC123@gmail.com for example and you wanted to sign up for nexo, you should list your email as ABC123+Nexo@gmail.com You will still get all ur emails and anytime you get one that is spam with that tag, you'll know who and how it leaked. it also makes it very easy to simply create a new Filter rule after the spam starts to just block it all by blocking that specific tag.

jersey-city-park

No. The future of BTC is literally not changing anytime. People have tried introducing changes for years and the community has rejected them, thats why theres Bitcoin BCH, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin ABC, Bitcoin Shitcoin, etc.

HCheong

If you do self-custody with air-gapped offline cold storage correctly, you may have zero worries of anything getting compromised, instead of regularly worrying about ABC device from XYZ brand being compromised. All hardware devices can be liken to holes. Jumping from one device to another device from a different brand can be likened to jumping out of one hole just to land into another hole.

trufeats

The problem with this setup is where they're being sent to. It could be setup to send to send the funds equally to 3 different wallets corresponding to the private access for each individual. The problem with this is that if one individual died or lost their private key, the other 2 individuals lose that money altogether. They'll never retrieve it. It could be setup so that the 3 of 3 transaction sends the funds to a new 3 of 3 shared multisig wallet where they'll be able to draft their own transactions whereever they want and split the money how they decide. The benefit to this strategy is if all 3 people sign the transaction, then all 3 people must be alive and have access to their keys. The problem is a low risk of enacting the transaction with all 3 people to a shared 3-3 multisig wallet, and while the money is sitting there, and before they split the money, 1 person dies, refuses to agree to a distribution proposal, or loses their codes. If just one person messes up in this situation, they all lose ALL the money. -- As for the other benefit, the 3-3 tx would send to a 3-3 multisig wallet, the 2-3 tx would send to a 2-3 multisig wallet, and the 1-3 tx would send to a 1-3 multisig wallet. So there is some flexibility for codes lost or people who die before the funds are sent to a multisig wallet, but whichever tx they decide on and multisig wallet they choose poses a risk if 1 party decides not to agree to any distribution, dies, or loses their codes after initiating the first transaction to a multisig wallet. Now, I did a bit more research and it seems like my idea for a smart contract for a WALLET to move from 3-3, to 2-3, to 1-3 is not only complicated; it's impossible. Wallets can't have smart contracts as far as I can understand. Only transactions can. Here's my new idea, although it is much more complicated. Each party creates their own wallet that only they have access to. Let's say there are 4 people: A, B, C, D. There are 4 different wallets they own. I am person Z, so my money is in there. Their wallets have no Bitcoin yet. I would draft several different transactions. A tx equally distributing to all of them: ABCD. In case 1 of them dies or loses their private keys, I'll also draft tx distributing to ABC, ABD, ACD, BCD. In case 2 of them die or lose their keys, I set up txs for AB, AC, AD, BC, BD, CD. And in case 3 of them die or lose their keys, I set up txs for A, B, C, and D. This means there are 15 different transactions that need to be drafted. As for each transaction, every single one needs smart contract language to automatically change from 4-4 multisig, to 3-4, 2-4, and eventually 1-4. This is necessary, as the alternative is drafting 4*15 transactions... Ex: ABCD 4-4, ABCD 3-4, ABCD 2-4, ABCD 1-4, ABC 4-4, ABC 3-4, etc... So using smart contract language dramatically decreases the number of transactions to keep track of. Using this methodology, it prevents the problem of 1 party extorting another and refusing to sign the transaction unless they get a higher distribution (since only equal distributions are even possible). It also solves the problem of any party dying or losing their keys at any point in time. No funds are ever risked in limbo as they would be if they were ever moved to a permanent multisig wallet. The obvious con is the complexity of: - writing smart contracts that would transition a single tx from 4-4, to 3-4, to 2-4, to 1-4 over time - drafting the sheer number of transactions necessary to mitigate the risk of inheritors dying or losing their keys. If there are 2 inheritors, there needs to be 3 tx drafts. 3 inheritors= 7 tx drafts. 4 = 15. 5 = 31. 6 = 63. 7 = 127. This is all assuming equal distributions between inheritors. If there are varying distribution options, it increases this amount much more. It might be cool to create a software that could take each party's receiving address and public key and other necessary information to automatically draft all the possible transactions in a neat format with easily scannable QRs. Possibly even put each inheritor's name and have an option to click buttons to signify which inheritor died or lost their key, to quickly display the correct transaction which would equally distribute the money among the remaining inheritors receiving addresses. This would make it super simple for the inheritors who may not fully understand Bitcoin or may not be the best record keepers to figure out which transaction they need to use. Then the software could even show the block (and predicted date) when the chosen tx would be possible. For instance, an ABCD distribution would be available a lot sooner than an AC distribution would be, because ABCD can be done with 4-4 multisig, but the AC needs to wait for 2-4 multisig which may be several months or years later. But, there is one really big problem with this and all the multisig options. Inheritors could strategize with each other. For example, maybe C and D are really close, and A and B are not so close with anyone. C and D could choose not to sign the 4-4 multisig and wait until it reaches the 2-4 multisig to send all the money to themselves (CD receiving addresses), while A and B are still alive and helpless to stop it. But, this is the case with any decreasing multisig strategy.

alwxcanhk

No. Transferring to bank must be under the same name. So if your name is ABC then the receiving account at any bank must be ABC.

ethicacious

It depends where in the world you are. In the UK and some other countries any disposal of crypto is a taxable event. If you swap ETH > ABC and there was a profit (measured by market price differences), then that is taxable.

splashtonkutcher

Let’s say on Coinbase theres coin ABC, currently trading at $10 on the open market. There are 5 coins of ABC for trade at this price. If I market buy 6 coins, I will buy up all 5 coins at $10, and my 6th coin will be one from the next price up, let’s say it’s $10.01. The market price of ABC is now $10.01. Now let’s say I want to buy 1 million ABC coins. If I did a market order of that, I’d buy the 5 at $10, the X number at $10.01, $10.02… it’s likely that my order would spike up the price so much thereby screwing myself over since I acquired so many at a higher price. Therefore, since my order size is so big, I contact Coinbase directly - they offer an OTC service when the order size is large enough - and say, hey I want to acquire a million ABC at $10. Coinbase says sure, we got enough, that’ll cost $10 million plus a transaction fee. Because I acquired those coins off-market, the price on the open market is not affected.

binglelemon

He was trying to say the "ABC's" but he's not the best speller-guy.

magic-karma

You are correct. But it is not a law, it is a rule the IRS enforces. Wash Sale has nothing to do with the SEC/1933/34. It was made up in the IRS for how to treat losses, when buying back the same security. E.g. end of the calendar year, you b want to take losses to balance out the tax due on other gains in your portfolio ( selling your $ABC stock at a loss to lessen the tax able amount on the safe of $XYZ stock) if you repurchase the same or similar enough security, the ITS will disqualify the losses. No one except the IRS cares about a wash sale.

jam-hay

>*"You can think about public keys as usernames with which you can search for your friend’s Nostr profile. Your private key is your password. Users can jump between various decentralized social applications built on Nostr using their public-private keys. If you get kicked out of platform ABC, then you can move all your posts, messages, and followers to another platform XYZ and carry out business as usual. Although there are a lot of similarities between the Nostr protocol and blockchain protocols, Nostr is not a blockchain. It is simply a set of rules. Nostr, however, does draw inspiration from blockchain protocols like Bitcoin in championing decentralization and interoperability."* Interesting stuff, thank you. So Jack Dorsey's public Nostr key is npub1sg6plzptd64u62a878hep2kev88swjh3tw00gjsfl8f237lmu63q0uf63m I searched his address and found a whole Nostr address book of other public figures. https://github.com/aitechguy/nostr-address-book This is kind of the thing I was thinking around albeit I'm not sure it has the added payment feature like a conventional Blockchain. Keys are quite long though otherwise really cool 👍

Raj_UK

ABC Always Be 'Ccumulating

KurtiZ_TSW

So does ABC it stands for the alphabet

Olskoolah

Probably in the B phase of the ABC correction. But I learned TA on Sesame Street so…

Bozzooo

As an ABC organization, they will never.

bornin_1988

The bottom line is whatever game dev studio is still going to have to integrate those NFT's into their game. What's the difference between ABC studio having their items as NFT's and being sold on an external market place or XYZ studio having their non-NFT related items being sold on an external marketplace? Either way there has to be a lot of work done to make X item displayable or usable in whatever game is beind developed. Regardless of genre. Either are achievable with or without blockchain tech.

DidYaHearTheNews

Any company these days has data leaks. Thankfully, seed phrases are not stored in the cloud/internet on default hardware cold storage devices. There for, Ledger is as safe as any other hardware wallet. If purchasing a device on any ABC site and then my address or name is leaked from the purchase, that is not the same as my seed phrase being compromised on my hardware wallet. Apples and Oranges.

Regular_Chapter_788

Everyday. ABC and Channel 9 finance report sections have the ticker shown. Australia also has a higher adoption rate compared to America on a per capita basis.

thesunandthestars10

This is a genuine question - why can't we all just admit we gambled our money to have one tiny shot at the wheel of wealthiness? I think we could all benefit from seeking the truth in ourselves, but when I read things like: "XYZ has actual uses in agriculture and trade because it ABC", from a person who is most likely not in any of those sectors involved, I think: "you know how fucking stupid you sound right now? almost like you are convincing yourself and everybody else that you intelligently "invested" your money. There is no institutional investment. There is no TA. I know our human brains demand for a logic explanation as to why things occur, but if you haven't realized by now that this is all a huge gamble, then seriously wake up. You don't sound smart.

Ok_Meaning_1654

Monthly in wave b. Weekly in wave 3/4. 18 day tf in wave b. Look up 3 kinds of flats ABC. Then look up wolf wave based on the weekly. They all got it wrong.

BtcBandito

What's really wild, the funds ABC has to secure their systems, and tighten shit up.. Why would a known 9mo old hack able to still be used? (I had to look it up on a reliable reseller for educational purposes only) A person can buy MSDrainer/Similar for $49.99 atm..Base + addl addon modules + _cloud server services_ for $199.

maximovious

Despite their denial to the contrary, ABC in Australia is pretty much like Xinhua in China. It's 99.9% government propaganda, although unlike China News Agency, they claim to be fair and balanced.

gorillalifter47

As a fellow Australian, I am going to send the ABC a message later thanking them for including Bitcoin in their finance report. Such a strange thing to lobby against.

nickname432

"as the ABC is one of our most-trusted brands" Media companies don't get a lot of praise and recognition these days

SPedigrees

>ABC is government funded propaganda and he thinks Bitcoin is the problem. Pretty sure he means that ABC is trusted by the masses, not that it deserves trust.

Hasra23

"ABC is one of our most trusted brands" Fuck that poor guy is delusional, ABC is government funded propaganda and he thinks Bitcoin is the problem.

Frosty-Panic

Wow. So triggered these boomers are emailing mainstream media outlets because their safe space is being violated. The part about ABC being their "trusted brand" really shows how brainwashed they are!

Crypto-Owl-7

UTXO consolidation: As I understand it, you can send from yourself, to yourself, to another address on your key/wallet. Ok, but can you send to exactly the same address that it came from, without problems, eg: ABC123 > ABC123. Does the chain understand that, or would that f-ck things up in some unforeseen way.

shortda59

we should all be aware of this by now: if "they" say ABC is a scam, or a joke, too much of a risk... ...you better believe" they" are actively filling their positions while YOU aren't the classic misdirect

JamesBondMI6007

It depends on how you plan on calculating the cost basis. FIFO (First in first out) or average cost, or specific shares etc… For your specific use case you can probably just use average cost. Which would look something like this, I’m going to use shares instead of sats, for the sake of making this easier to understand. Say you buy 10 shares of ABC for $100, then you buy 10 more shares for $120 your cost basis would be the total cost ($2,200) divided by the total number of shares (20 shares), or $110 per share. Then you can take your average price per share and subtract it from the current share price to get how much you made per share. So lets assume that stock is now worth $200 a share and your cost basis is $110. You’ve made an average of $90 per share. You have 20 shares so 20*90 is a profit of $1,900.

Woodstuffs

ABC's. A=Always. B=Be. C=Stacking.

Obsidianram

No, I referred to MSDNC / CBS / ABC / BBC / RT...ooops, Reuters...correctly.

Professional-Time-50

A lot of people believe we will see a lot lower prices before the main event comes along. Only one side will be right. Its funny because people say all the time to zoom out, we are doing great. Well if you zoom out passed this and last bull market to actually beginning of BTC, there is a very strong argument that we could still be in an ABC correction phase for last bull market. The decline from 68k to 15k could just be a wave A and we could be in a rebound wave B just before we take the last decline phase C, that could take us below any lows we have seen so far. Its not an impossible scenario, that is why the market is so split and so cautious. Its easy to get lost in fear of FOMO, but that does not prove we are in THE bull market yet. I let people believe what they choose to believe and act on those believes and I do the same. We will all get what we deserve in the end.

Monkeyinchief

How exactly do you explain the arrest of John Podesta friend Slade Sohmer, editor in chief, who bragged about debunking Pizza gate? Just for context, he got arrested this month for rapping multiple toddlers and babies. What about ABC reporter James Meek also sentenced this year for owning sadist child porn? I know it is all a coincidence has nothing to do with anything. It is like all US presidents besides Trump, who went either broke into office or with a wealth of 1 or 2 million and ending their time with usually 2 digits in the millions with an income of 400.000...just magically rich as fuck. Sure the government is her to help you. That is why we elect them 😂

aliensmadeus

ABC

EndSmugnorance

The last sentence in the post is quite naive: >Crypto exchanges are still unregulated, insecure pots of money that he — or anyone else — can raid to pay for nuclear weapons. ABC ‘journalists’ trying to ‘boogeyman’ crypto to scare people who are informed.

threeseed

ABC is Australian. You are bringing up US issues.

threeseed

This is from the ABC which is a highly respected, non-partisan news organisation similar to PBS. They aren't in the business of doing hit pieces. And they have no agenda to push about crypto one way or another. Your comment on the other hand is weirdly defensive about crypto. Nothing in life is perfect and crypto absolutely has its issues.

perky2012

A simple way is to split the 24 word passphrase into 3 groups of 8, say groups A,B and C. Then store AB in one location, AC in another, and BC in a third location. You need at least 2 of the 3 locations to recreate ABC.

RedOctobrrr

>Is it really a fork if basically everyone agrees to go ahead with a change? Yes, that's the very definition of a soft fork. There are hard forks and soft forks. The former is what resulted in two Bitcoin Cash coins (ABC and SV) where they did not agree to what needed to change and thus forged its own path, both coins continued. A soft fork is like what happens when Bitcoin adopted SegWit. Everyone agrees with the change, it takes place, and the previous iteration is declared dead because everyone moves forward with the version that changed. I've been around crypto since 2014 and have seen many, many hard and soft forks, so I got a little excited at the chance to explain them.

Upper_Swimmer3336

There will always be those who want to make a dollar quickly, they buy at the bottom and sell or dump when demand is high, it is the ABC of trading, I am not a fan of solana but right now there is a lot of insecurity in the market

Abject-Government-13

NBC Chicago Illinois Phone: +1-800- 245-6397 Website: Link PBS Chicago Illinois Phone: +1-773-583-5000 Phone 2: +1-773-509-5330 Email: Chicagotonight@wttw.com WGN/CLTV Illinois Phone: +1-773-528-2311 Email: wgntvinfo@tribune.com WYCC Illinois Phone: +1-773-224-3300 Email: info@wycc.org CBS New York New York Phone: +1-800-242-6397 Email: news@cbsnewyork.com ABC News New York New York Phone: +1-212-456-7777 Email: iwitness@wabc.com News12 Brooklyn New York Phone: +1-718-861-6818 Email: news12bkln@news12.com KFOR-TV Oklahoma Oklahoma Phone: +1-405-424-4444 Phone 2: +1-405-478-6397 KOCO-TV Oklahoma Oklahoma Phone: +1-405-478-3000 NEWS 9 Oklahoma Oklahoma Phone: +1-405-843-6641 Phone 2: +1-405-841-9956 FOX8 Johnstown PA Pennsylvania Phone: +1-814-266-8088 Phone 2: +1-814-237-2300 Phone 3: +1-814-949-8823 KDKA-TV PA Pennsylvania Phone: +1-412-575-2245 Email: newsdesk@kdka.com WTAJ-TV PA Pennsylvania Phone: +1-814-943-2919 Email: cc@wtajtv.com ABC 8 Texas Texas Phone: +1-214-748-9631 CBS 11 Texas Texas Phone: +1-817-451-1111 Phone 2: +1-817-496-7711 Email: news@ktvt.com FOX 4 Texas Texas Phone: +1-214-720-3155 Phone 2: +1-800-677-5339 Email: kdfw@kdfwfox4.com KPRC Houston Texas Phone: +1-713-222-6397 Phone 2: +1-713-778-4910 NBC 5 Texas Texas Phone: +1-800-232-5927 Phone 2: +1-800-654-5927 KING 5 Seattle Washington Phone: +1-206-448-5555 Email: newstips@king5.com KOMO 4 News Seattle Washington Phone: +1-206-404-4145 Email: tips@komo4news.com Q13 FOX Seattle Washington Phone: +1-206-674-1313 Email: tips@q13fox.com CBS 3 Wisconsin Wisconsin Phone: +1-608-273-3333 Email: c3knews@channel3000.com Email 2: rblum@wisctv.com Email 3: tips@channel3000.com CBS 58 Milwaukee Wisconsin Phone: +1-414-777-5800 Phone 2: +1-414-607-8140 FOX 6 News Milwaukee Wisconsin Phone: +1-414-214-3696 MPTV Milwaukee Wisconsin Phone: +1-414-271-1036 NBC 15 Wisconsin Wisconsin Phone: +1-608-274-1500 TMJ4 Milwaukee Wisconsin Phone: +1-414-963-4444 WISN Milwaukee Wisconsin Phone: +1-414-937-3331 Phone 2: +1-414-937-3187 Email: NewsTips@wisn.com WKOW 27 Wisconsin Wisconsin Phone: +1-608-274-1234 Phone 2: +1-608-273-2727 Email: jradske@wkow.com Email 2: news@wkow.com WMSN-TV FOX 47 Wisconsin Wisconsin Phone: +1-608-277-5189 Email: feedback@fox47.com