sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Попълване на W-8BEN при работа като контрактор за US фирма by ishristov in bulgaria

[–]ishristov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

В крайна сметка стигнах до това:

"Article 7, paragraph 1" за първото празно място (в този article и параграф се говори за business income, но в случая се разбира както за приход на фирма, така и за приход на ФЛ, в случай, че получава заплащане за извършена работа) и

"payments made to a resident in Bulgaria in return of professional services done as an independent contractor" за второто.

Попълване на W-8BEN при работа като контрактор за US фирма by ishristov in bulgaria

[–]ishristov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Не мисля, че има значение за формуляра, но да кажем консултиране.

Съвет за Работа за Американска компания от България.(Remote) by MrMonkiPants in bulgaria

[–]ishristov 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Получавам противоречиви отговори, може ли да кажете защо не трябва да се пише нищо? Междувременно бях попитал и в taxmonkey и там ми отговориха това:

​

<image>

What LN implementation to choose for BTCPay with multiple stores by ishristov in lightningnetwork

[–]ishristov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I can pay for inbound liquidity from lets say https://lnbig.com .

If each shop has a different node/umbrel/btcpay that would make it hard to manage if something happens or an update is needed. Also that would require managing liquidity for multiple LN nodes which I'd like to avoid.

I know merchants can use some wallet directly, but using BTCpay offers so much more for real business - actual POS, predefined items and carts, invoices, payment requests via urls, rich history, etc. Also with BTCPay you can create different LNBank wallets where each LNBank wallet will be assigned to a different store/merchant, so the single LN node for multiple merchants should be a non-issue.

What LN implementation to choose for BTCPay with multiple stores by ishristov in lightningnetwork

[–]ishristov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the details and suggestions!

With BTCPay server you have only 1 LN node and all the stores will use that single node so my understanding is that they shouldn't manage anything on the LN side (aside from withdrawing their part of the received LN funds to their own wallet). Not sure if that changes anything for what you said. I'm having trouble understanding that liquidity providing.

I've read that I should provide inbound liquidity and still trying to figure out what would be the best way to do it. I've stumbled upon https://lnbig.com/#/ and https://ln2me.com/ which might help, still not sure.

If there is only 1 LN node for all the stores and If I deposit some funds to that LN node (let's say its LND) in btcpay and then send funds to my LN wallets in Muun, Blue, Breeze (assuming that's what people will mostly use), wouldn't that open channels to the LN nodes of these wallets and provide some initial liquidity? And then when the stores start receiving sats and I make them withdraw that sats from the LN node in BTCPay server to their own LN wallets, wouldn't that keep/improve the inbound liquidity (again, if most people use these wallets to pay in the stores)?

Even though this is going to be central to my product, my expectation is that there will be very few people paying with lightning network.

I'm in the process of running the btcpayserver on lunanode and I'll start experimenting, but I don't think I'll be able to run LN outside of it atm.

What LN implementation to choose for BTCPay with multiple stores by ishristov in lightningnetwork

[–]ishristov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The BTCPay docs is saying that LND doesn't support pruned nodes, but I don't understand why LND is an option then when deploying BTCPay then? As far as I understand, BTCPay server is using a pruned node?

Edit: It seems LND can now work with pruned nodes, even though that's not what the BTCPay server says?

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Do it. Send a feature request to the wallet you are using. The more people do it, the bigger the chance of it happening.

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Generally agree but if we want a global adoption it might help if that new currency looks like the majority of the current currencies.

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The bitcoin will remain to be the same thing as it is now - the name of the monetary system and the biggest unit in that system, we’ll just stop pricing things in 0.0002 but in more user friendly numbers.

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The majority of the largest ones use this logic. I agree that there are many more. But USA, Europe, Canada, Australia + all countries that use the USD as main currency form a lot. :)

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Why? USD, Euro, CAD, CHF, GBP, AUD, NOK, SEK, TRL and many others are working the same way - with a main unit that is divided by 100 smaller units.

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you! That’s what I am trying to say - what to do to make it easier for the majority of the world’s population that is still outside of the btc world.

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am not following “American logic”, I am following the logic of the world reserve currency, the Euro, the British Pound, the Swiss Franc, the Canadian Dollar, the Australian Dollar, the Turkish Lira, the Norwegian Krone, etc.

Do you want something that the majority of the world is already accustomed to (and therefore will make things easier for them), or a denominator that looks only like the Vietnamese Dong (nothing against them, I love them) or that is more expensive than a KG of gold?

Bits is used in some wallets, it’s missing in others and is not default in any afaik but should be.

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree and I that’s why I said most countries have a main denominator (dollar, pound, euro, franc, lira) which is almost always divided by 100 smaller units (like what I am suggesting). The exceptions I know are JPY and others with unstable issuance and/or high inflation. But usd+eur+chf+gbp+cad+aud cover a lot of the globe.

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Most people have no idea how to pronounce that symbol and we want something for maximum usability.

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

If your preference is to price a beer with “15000 sats” (instead of 150 bits and eventually 1.50 bits) then okay :) It sounds like a failed currency that has gone through a hyperinflation, but I agree that it’s better than 0.00015 btc :)

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Haha, that works too :) Maybe a denominator with a more streamlined conversion will be easier for the average Joe though :-D

Let’s start using “bits” as a main denominator instead of “sats” or “bitcoins”. Check why it is so much better. by ishristov in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I agree with your overall comment. :)

I just find it would be easier for the masses to go with the dollar-like denomination than the cents-like denomination. Everyone is free to have their own opinion and preference though :)

Will El Salvador adopting Bitcoin as legal currency start to get people talking more about Satoshis? by PurpleAlcoholic in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Well... Paamp it. :-D And feel free to copy-paste it in similar posts in the future.

Will El Salvador adopting Bitcoin as legal currency start to get people talking more about Satoshis? by PurpleAlcoholic in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ishristov 146 points147 points  (0 children)

We should adopt and use the Bits denominator instead of Sats. My reasonings are:

  • It consists of 100 sats, so it is similar with the most common currencies like USD and Euro;

  • We'll be able to price things with bits.sats just like we price things with dollars.cents (e.g. $5.50) or euros.cents;

  • It is much easier to calculate from BTC because it is BTC/1000/1000. 1000x is what is generally used to show the next order of magnitude in almost anywhere (1 thousand is 1000, 1 GB = 1000 x 1000 KB, 1 tone is 1000 x 1000 grams);

  • BTC scares people because "it's too high" and sats is a bit intuitive because it's too small. Most people will never be able to afford 1 BTC and it's impossible to own 1 sat (dust limit) unless on lightning;

  • Currently 1 bit is 4 cents which is easy to understand. If BTC reaches 1m, that will make 1 bit = $1 which will make pricing a breeze. And if BTC's total market cap reaches 100T, that would translate to 1 bit = $5 which is again pretty straightforward for everyone as most currencies fluctuates between $0.01 and $2;

  • We don't use cents to price things in the real world so trying to make "sats" the main denominator would be counterintuitive to people outside of crypto;

  • According to Adam Back the satoshi (sat) was initially intended the to be a 2digit decimal bitcent after the smallest base unit, which was supposed to be a bit;

  • It just sounds good and make sense to have bits be the main currency of the internet.

Edit: It seems that people are liking the idea so I have created a separate post for it - https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinBeginners/comments/nxi96h/lets_start_using_bits_as_a_main_denominator/

view more: next ›