#NO2X / Litecoin Confidential Transactions (CT)

💙 All opinions expressed in this video do not necessarily reflect that of an intelligent man.
💰 My recommended exchange is CoinBase - Register using this code and we can both get $10!: http://bit.ly/2hZh8bg
🔒 Recommended wallet is the Ledger Nano S: http://bit.ly/2xeymFX
●▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬●
☄️ Time-stamps!
0:00 #no2x Views
5:11 Buying the Dip Reaction
5:20 Litecoin Privacy Feature
7:00 Market Update!
8:26 What I think of EOS
11:00 Walton Coin
12:49 SEC Concern and My Concern
13:35 BCH Unbiased Article lol
●▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬●

• Man, I wish I had seen something like this earlier. I kind of came to the conclusions via my own research that I’ve been discussing with you guys lately, and he sums up the situation pretty well. I’ll leave a link down below highly suggest reading. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/72zer0/must_read_for_newcomers_my_friend_worked_in_the/
• #no2x Rather than pick a side here, let me devil’s advocate this situation. Bitcoins 100% uptime is thanks to core developers and using the core software client. The 2x hard fork implements btc1 software instead of core. It’s like getting rid of them basically. The guys that have been working on Bitcoin since Satoshi was on the scene.
• It’s not that they don’t want an increased blocksize, if the situation calls for it they will. The problem, or in this case lack of a problem, is that the block size is not filling up when the network isn’t under a spam attack. So, a troublesome hardfork is not considered essential, and they are working hard on layer 2 solutions and have made great progress since SegWit was introduced.
• We only have SegWit because the miners and big businesses were threatened with the UASF. And to save face the big miners and businesses signed an agreement for SegWit2x, with no core developers present, and breached the agreement anyway to create ASICBOOST compatible Bitcoin Cash.
• This whole thing has nothing to do with scaling solutions. It has everything to do with control. Bitcoin is always going to be under this type of threat, there could be worse in future. If it can survive this, then you know it’s truly resistant and valuable. Bitcoin is not truly valuable if a group of rich people can sign an agreement behind closed doors and wrestle control over bitcoin. Core is considered the only open evaluation of protocol changes that goes with user consensus and doesn’t represent corporate interests. Anyone can join core who has proven skill.
• The way it was proposed in a back room filled with industry insiders.
• If you can imagine the worst, and most exclusive, prejudiced way to implement a consensus change in Bitcoin, this is it.
• This is a takeover attempt by corporate.
• Ok enough devils advocating. Let me be real. Should you actually care about it? As long as the FIAT keeps going up, who cares about politics? And more forks mean more money! I get this attitude, I really do. I think it is prevalent actually, or else more of us would run nodes. I guess for me I don’t really see a divide between the two actually. Because most of my assets are in crypto, and are much more substantial because of crypto, coupled with the fact that I run a YouTube channel about crypto, but even without that, I am super incentivized for crypto to succeed. Bitcoin has to remain decentralized and censorship resistant to keep going up. It’s not good enough just to be the first digitally scarce resource in existence. Not if it wants to be the world reserve.
• I said I wanted to see us accept 2x a while ago so that consensus would be easier to achieve for further upgrades. I admit I was naïve. Everything I’ve learned and talked about over this last week really opened my eyes. I’m starting to think that the best thing for Bitcoins future success might be incentivizing people to run their own node, through some sort of proof of processing or proof of storage medium that allows you to collect fees.
• Me, after buying the dip: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/730ooc/me_after_buying_the_dip/
• Litecoin to implement a privacy feature. https://cryptovest.com/news/litecoin-edges-closer-to-monero-with-confidential-transactions-while-bitcoin-bites-the-dust/ It’s in a weird spot where it needs to keep testing things because if Bitcoin has lightning network working we won’t need Litecoin, and they know it.
• Do we need privacy? Here’s the thing. The blockchain is transparent, but that doesn’t mean the government know who every public key belongs to specifically. They’re getting better at it for sure, but if I create a new private key today, do they know it’s instantly registered to me? I highly doubt it. If they did, why did the IRS take Coinbase to court to find out more about its users? https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2017/07/22/court-allows-anonymous-coinbase-customer-to-challenge-irs-on-info-grab/#442b6e475f23 If Bitcoin doesn’t have privacy at all, why couldn’t they just work it out themselves? But yes, increased privacy would be nice. No doubt Bitcoin will implement more privacy in future such as coin mixing.
• What’s on the immediate horizon for Walton. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=rfid&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB727GB727&oq=rfid&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.950j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 Interestingly the china fears didn’t cause a dip but potentially regressed growth, and now you could call this the recovery. A Korean exchange is due to be added next month, and a wallet release also, new website.
• It’s an ERC20 token, so Ethereum blockchain based. They plan to release their own blockchain, and how they’ll handle the conversion of tokens I am not entirely certain.
• Fears over ICOs: