/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>26309651
thanks for buying my bags

>>26186702
INTP

BTC
ETH
XMR
ALGO
PNK

>>24679335
Alright ladies, looks like GME is slowly coming back.

>>24641694
You're fucked Tim, give me that boipussy

>>24617771
Monero uses cryptography to hide the sender, receiver and amount. On BTC all senders, receivers and amounts are transparent, you can go look at them on a block explorer, you can't do that with Monero.
>senders
Senders are hidden through a 'ring signature', which makes it impossible to tell which Monero address is responsible for a transaction among a pool of ring members. The way it works is you 'sign' (not exactly the same as BTC) the transaction using public keys of previous transactions, as well as your own actual private key. An outside observer would not be able to tell who among the ring members is responsible for the transaction.
>receivers
receivers are hidden through 'stealth addresses', a one time address that's generated by the sender and derived from the receivers public key. This effectively creates a one time private/public key that only the receiver is capable of knowing. You can not determine the actual public key of the receiver from the stealth address.
>amount
amounts are hidden through 'ringCT' and 'commitments', which encodes amounts cryptographically using an elliptic curve (same thing bitcoin uses for signatures).
Without getting too technical, if you encode an amount 'a1' in an elliptic curve, call it 'C1', and an amount 'a2' in an elliptic curve, call it 'C2' then, and then have the sum 'a1 + a2 = a3', then
a1 + a2 = a3
and
C1 + C2 = C3
which is how it's able to arithmetic on these encoded values.

in short, it's effectively impossible to tell where someone sent money, where they got money from, and how much money they have

>>24566944
based
>>24566972
lmao, keep telling yourself that
I'm sure AVAX, XTZ, ADA, TRX, EOS, NEO, LGCY, FTM, DOGE or whatever the fuck is going to replace eth for real this time.

>>24555846
both sides hate you and always have
it is a civic duty to make things as difficult as possible for these people, in whatever way you can.

>>24462589
Monerochad here
BEAM has some benefits over Monero, in general mimble will create a smaller blockchain as a result of how the protocol works. That matters a lot since ZKP's take up a lot of space, although this has been improving in Monero (bulletproofs++).
It's also a lot easier to implement mimble based atomic swaps and sidechains, hence why they've implemented it long before Monero devs have.
IDK about BEAM in particular's future, but mimble stuff isn't going away. I'd expect to see some sidechains popping up, LTC is already doing it.

>>24338954
Are people still buying this shit?
I think I have some cards from when I was a kid, should I dig them up and sell? I think I've got a couple shiny ones from the first couple releases.

>>24302908
I probably won't buy anything
saw a cheap winter coat in an ad tho, might get that

>>24199882
no problem lad
it all boils down to this:
>a bunch of users send transactions to the network
>someone who is running a "validator node" (takes the place of miners in eth 2.0), is selected at random
>The more eth they have staked, the more likely they are to be picked.
>the guy who got picked (the validator) selects some of the transactions that were sent to the network
>the validator then verifies that each transaction is legit (that it's signed for correctly and spending coins they actually have access to) and adds it to a block.
>Once he has added all the transactions to a block, and has verified they're all correct. He proposes it to a bunch of other validators (the committee, around 100 something different validators) who check his work
>The committee does the same checks on the block (correct signature, amounts, etc), and votes yes if they think everything checks out, and no otherwise.
>if it passes the vote, it gets added to the blockchain and the validator gets the block reward and fees. Otherwise it doesn't get added.
>If someone voted for a malicious block, they lose their stake.
check this out for a better explanation than I can give
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3EFi_POhps

>>24157063
it's me and I'm comfy as fuck

>>24122409
idk maybe some wildlife conservation type stuff
certainly not going to be spending it on any sort of humanitarian aid.

>>24003446
>i consider it charity
disgusting
>>24003474
sure bud

>>23937415
If they know, the won't tell you anon
you're only going to get bagholders and scammers shilling their bags.

>>23872142
Blue has a RGB code of (0,0,255), while white is (255,255,255), meaning there is more green in the new logo
extremely bullish.

>>23802317
>>23802526
>>23802573
I like these
they are cute

>>23783345
>pajeet scammer is going to epicly h4x0r you
you're fine

>>23615381
>I believe we will find social equality, access do education and health-care within crypto coins some how.
interesting idea. I think you could in fact institute a sort of 'socialism' based on crypto. Socialism in the marxist sense is merely the removal of 'exploitation of labor', which takes the form of capitalist profits from the theft of labor time by workers (not saying I believe this, just saying what the idea is). Smart contracts in theory can perform a lot of the functions of the managerial class. It's not hard to imagine a worker co-op mediated by cryptocurrencies and cybernetic machines (a la Chile's cybersyn).
Crypto is pretty good at removing inefficiencies, and those inefficiencies of the previous system are usually turned into profit by those with a large amount of capital, suppressing that of course leads to something closer to getting the full equivalent payment for your labor.
I don't think it will actually turn out like this, but it's possible. The truth is technology is advancing faster than our ability to use it for human ends, this is a sort of runaway process that seems impossible to control. weird times ahead

>>23600555
they're desperate.
sanctions are fucking them incredibly hard, their currency is in absolute shambles and people are relying on their internal stock market to preserve wealth. Their stock exchange is incredibly volatile though, but even so it's better than their currency.
It makes sense for them to use a currency that they can circumnavigate sanctions with, and is in some way connected to the finances of the outside world (since they are so economically isolated).

>>23590338
The problem is the devs of these scams are always anonymous, doxxing them would be very difficult, and likely not very productive. By time time you dox them they probably already started a new scam under a different pseudonym. It's an endless game of whack-a-mole. There would also probably be no recourse since they're mostly third worlders.
A site to check if something is a scam would be a decent idea, but I think it would be hard to get users here to trust any sort of fact checking site, they're not exactly popular here (for good reason). It would also be pretty hard to keep up with the scams.
You could make a site where people vote on whether or not they think something is a scam, but then the scammers will just flood it with 'not a scam' votes. (I think etherscan has a feature like this, some things will be listed as 'reported as scam')
I think the best way to get rid of them is to just make sure no one falls for it so they spend more on gas than they scam from users.

>>23563459
You should be able to discharge it during bankruptcy and loans shouldn't be guaranteed.
This kills multiple birds with one stone.
>It doesn't fuck up the lives of students by giving them debt they can't possibly discharge.
>Lenders now have a stake in what you do with your education using their loan, a lender probably wouldn't be thrilled about your meme degree, but would be willing to negotiate better terms if you go for a degree which has decent earning potential.
>Colleges wouldn't be able to gouge prices as hard since loans artificially increased the amount of money they could extract from students.
>Colleges have to start cutting back on the useless garbage they push, like having insane student:administrator ratios, padding their endowment, or building unnecessary buildings.
I'm still alright with the government negotiating rates with lenders to lower the burden on students (through subsidized loans and the like), but having it be guaranteed is directly responsible for all of the bullshit we're seeing. Perhaps guaranteed federal loans for certain important fields would still be fine. This is actually how it used to work, only certain majors were allowed to have federal loans from about 1958-1965.
I'll bet you could find a decent correlation between the 1965 change to loan eligibility and the prevalence of meme majors, as well as the cost of tuition.

>>23448605
>24 y/o
>~50k
>no denbts
>still a grad student

>>23424861
see you lads at 14k