Profile

Join date: Nov 9, 2022

About


bitcoin360ai amsterdam



















































It is vital to always invest responsibly in awareness of all risks involved. Markets can be extremely volatile, so you should conduct extensive research before investing. Our site provides regular updates and diligently verifies all platforms it recommends, but you should form your own opinion and invest only what you can afford to lose. There is never any guarantee of a return on investment.

Step 4: Search for Bitcoin

For instance, Coinbase takes 3.99% for each deposit using this method. Whereas eToro charges a fee of just 0.5%.

Pros

eToro sice cílí na začínající investory, ale i tak máte z pohledu příkazů z čeho vybírat.

Krok #4: Nákup akcií

PrivacyDebit Card FeeCons

The platform also operates in accordance with multiple regulatory bodies such as ASIC, the FCA, CySEC, and the SEC. All of the traders’ personal information is protected by SSL encryption and all client’s funds are kept in separate tier 1 banks.

Admin

digEcor provides the aerospace industry a low cost, turnkey in-flight entertainment solution by specializing in content sourcing and management, personal media platforms (PMPs), and end-to-end programs. With years of experience, digEcor focuses on increasing traveler satisfaction, creating easily executed solutions, and generating revenue opportunities for clients. Founded in 2000, digEcor is based in Springville, Utah, with additional offices in Seattle, Amsterdam, and Toulouse, France. For more information, visit www.digEcor.com or call 1-801-489-2022.

Výše zmíněné způsoby platby představují velkou flexibilitu, protože hodně tradičních brokerů takové možnosti nenabízí. Jako příklad si vezměte Degiro, kde může provedení vkladu trvat několik dní. Pokud chcete nakoupit akcie na rychlo, tak vás takové zdržení rozhodně nepotěší.

Up to 0.40%

0.9%Litebet is based in Rotterdam and offers over 70 cryptocurrencies, as well as GameFi tokens. Traders can buy Bitcoin in the Netherlands with ease here as the platform is very simplistic.

Abyste si to dokázali lépe představit, tak řekněme, že jste si na účet vložili 10 000 Kč platební kartou a chcete si vybrat 12 000 Kč. Minimálně 10 000 Kč si musíte v takovém případě poslat na tu samou kartu, kterou jste provedli vklad a zbylé 2 000 Kč si můžete poslat jinam.

6. Bitvavo – Buy Bitcoin and Over 175 Digital Assets With €5 or MoreBuy Bitcoin With SEPA

Možete započeti rečenicom poput "Čak i zimi psi se zabavljaju s metlama i susjedom Kit Kats." Uvjerite se da to nije jednostavna rečenica ili ona iz postojeće literature. Možete uhvatiti i 12 nasumičnih riječi: "Kardizma patke od pamučne pamučne kese zrakoplov hrče vesla božićne lokve lože karizma."

The Coinbase Card is a Visa debit that enables people to earn up to 4% back in cryptocurrency rewards on purchases. This is available in the Netherlands and can be used worldwide wherever Visa is accepted.3.99%70+

1.8% admin fee on €100 Purchase

Step 2: Upload ID

There is also a comprehensive FAQ section whereby traders might find the answer to their query without having to contact the team. Savills Live/Work Index

Select the red cross and then click ‘Close Trade’

This income is determined by applying a presumed rate of return based on the value of the net Box 3 value, as of the start of the relevant tax year

Mezinárodní trhy jsou poté následující:10

Jak vybrat peníze z eToro?

Dříve si Jay Edward Smith pohrával také s indexy a komoditami. Jeho rizikové hodnocení se z pohledu eToro zvýšilo na 5/10 oproti dubnové hodnotě z roku 2020, kdy bylo 2/10. Aktuálně má tento obchodník přes 26 000 sledujících a ve správě přes 5 milionů dolarů aktiv.

Crypto.com

2. Crypto.com – Buy and Sell Bitcoin Plus 250 Other Digital Assets

FAQCredit/debit cards, bank transfers High fee to buy crypto with a credit cardEven casual traders look for tools and features when searching for the best crypto exchange in the Netherlands. Tools and features will vary, but it’s worth taking a look at what’s on offer. 53Kasnoglacijalna industrija lomljenog kamena pećine KopačineLate Glacial knapped stone industry of Kopačina CaveNikola Vukosavljević, Zlatko Perhoč, Božidar Čečuk †, Ivor KaravanićKomšo 2007D. Komšo, Nakit na području Istre od paleolitika do neolitika, in: Scripta praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan, M. Blečić et al. (eds.), Situla 44, Ljubljana 2007, 31-40.Komšo, Pellegati 2007D. Komšo, P. Pellegati, The Late Epigravettian in Istria. Late Paleolithic colonization and lithic technology in the northern Adriatic area, in: Late Paleolithic Environments and Cultural Relations around the Adriatic, R. Whallon (ed.), BAR International Series 1716, Oxford 2007, 27-39.Kozłowski 1999J. Kozłowski, Gravettian/Epigravettian sequences in the Balkans: environment, technologies, hunting strategies and raw material procurement, in: The Palaeolithic Archaeology of Greece and adjacent areas (Proceedings of the ICOPAG Conference, Ioannina 1994), G. N. Bailey et al. (eds.), British School at Athens Studies 3, London 1999, 330-342.Lubell 2004aD. Lubell, Prehistoric edible land snails in the circum-Mediterranean: the archaeological evidence, in: Petits animaux et Sociétés Humaines, Du Complément Alimentaire Aux Ressources Utilitaires. XXIVerencontres internationales d’archéologie et d’histoire d’Antibes, J.-P. Brugal, J. Desse (eds.), Antibes 2004, 77-98.Lubell 2004bD. Lubell, Are land snails a signature for the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition?, Documenta Praehistorica XXXI, Ljubljana 2004, 1-24.Lugović et al. 1991B. Lugović, R. Altherr, I. Raczek, A.W. Hofmann, V. Majer, Geochemistry of peridotites and mac igneous rock from the Central Dinaric Ophilite Belt, Yugoslavia, Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 106, Berlin 1991, 201-216.Magaš, Marinčić 1973N. Magaš, S. Marinčić, Osnovna geološka karta SFRJ 1: 100.000, K 33-20, K 33-21, tumač za listove Split i Primošten, Institut za geološka istraživanja Zagreb, Beograd: Savezni geološki zavod 1973.Magaš et al. 1973 S. Marinčić, N. Magaš, I. Borović, Osnovna geološka karta SFRJ 1: 100.000; List Split, K 33-21. Institut za geološka istraživanja Zagreb (1968-9), Beograd: Savezni geološki zavod 1971.Marinčić et al. 1971S. Marinčić, N. Magaš i I. Borović, Osnovna geološka karta SFRJ 1: 100.000; List Split, K 33-21. Institut za geološka istraživanja Zagreb (1968-9), Beograd: Savezni geološki zavod 1971.Maggi et al. 1995 R. Maggi, N. Campana, F. Negrino, Valle Lagora (I 18): a quarry of radiolarite (jasper) exploited during the Copper and Early Bronze Ages (Liguria, Italy), Archaeologija Polona 33, Warszawa 1995, 187-208.Majer, Jurković 2001V. Majer, I. Jurković, Bilješka o nalazu krom-spinela kod Čelinca u Bosni, Znanstveni radovi 1954-1999, Zagreb 2001, 337-339. Malez, Vogel 1969M. Malez, J. C. Vogel, Rezultati određivanja apsolutne starosti pleistocenskih naslaga Šandalje II kod Pule u Istri, Geološki vjesnik 22 (1968), Zagreb 1969, 121-133.Flügel 1978E. Flügel, Mikrofazielle Untersuchungsmthoden von Kalken, Berlin 1978.Forenbaher 2002S. Forenbaher, Prehistoric Populations of the Island of Hvar - An Overview of Archaeological Evidence, Collegium Antropologicum 26/1, Zagreb 2002, 361-378.Forenbaher et al. 2010S. Forenbaher, T. Kaiser, S. Frame, Adriatic Mortuary Ritual at Grapčeva Cave, Croatia, Journal of Field Archaeology 35/4, Boston 2010, 337-354. Füchtbauer, Müller 1970H. Füchtbauer, G. Müller, Sediment-Petrologie. Teil II: Sedimente und Sedimentgesteine, Stuttgart 1970. Goodfriend 1987 G. A. Goodfriend, Radiocarbon age anomalies in shell carbonate of land snails from semi-arid areas, Radiocarbon 29 (2), Tucson 1987, 159-167.Goodfriend 1992 G. A. Goodfriend, The use of land snail shells in paleoenvironmenal reconstruction, Quaternary Science Reviews 11, Amsterdam 1992, 665-685.Goodfriend, Stipp 1983G. A. Goodfriend, J. J. Stipp, Limestone and the problem of radiocarbon dating of land-snail shell carbonate, Geology 11, Washington 1983, 575-577.Goričan 1994Š. Goričan, Jurassic and Cretaceous radiolarian biostratigraphy and sedimentary evolution of the Budva Zone (Dinarides, Montenegro), Mémoires de Géologie 18, Lausanne 1994.Grunau 1965H. R. Grunau, Radiolarian chert and associated rock in space and time, Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae, 58/1, Basel 1965, 157-209.Halamić, Šošić Klindžić 2009J. Halamić, R. Šošić Klindžić, Radiolarites and Radiolarian chert in Northern Croatia - Possible sources for the Production of Artfact, Archeometriai Mühely 2009. VI. 3., 19-24. (dostupno na: http://www.ace.hu/am/2009_3 pristup 01. 07. 2010).Hrvatović 2006H. Hrvatović, Geological Guidebook through Bosnia and Herzegovina, Sarajevo 2006.Ivanović et al. 1976A. Ivanović, K. Sakač, B. Sokač, I. Vrsalović-Carević, J. Županić, Osnovna geološka karta SFRJ, tumač za list Obrovac, 1:100.000, Institut za geološka istraživanja Zagreb (1967), Beograd, Savezni geološki zavod, 1976.Karavanić 1999I. Karavanić, Gornji paleolitik Šandalje II u okviru jadranske regije, neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Zagreb 1999.Kliškić 2007D. Kliškić, Špilja Kopačina, Hrvatski arheološki godišnjak 2(2006), Zagreb 2007, 443-445.Kliškić 2008D. Kliškić, Špilja Kopačina, Hrvatski arheološki godišnjak 4(2007), Zagreb 2008, 528-530.Komšo 2006D. Komšo, Mezolitik u Hrvatskoj, Opuscula archaeologica 30, Zagreb 2006, 55-91.Marjanac 1987T. Marjanac, Sedimentacija Kernerove “srednje iške zone” (paleogen, okolica Splita), Geološki vjesnik 40, Zagreb 1987, 177-194.Marjanac et al. 1998T. Marjanac, D. Baba, J. Benic, V. Ćosović, K. Drobne, Lj. Marjanac, R. Pavlovec, Z. Velimirović, Eocene Carbonate Sediments and Sea-Level Changes on the NE Part of Adriatic Carbonate Platform (Island of Hvar and Peljesac Peninsula, Croatia), Dela-Opera SAZU 4. razred 34/2, Ljubljana 1998, 243-254. Mihailović 1996D. Mihailović, Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic chipped stone industries from the rock-shelter of Medena Stijena, in: Prehistoric settlements in caves and rock-shelters of Serbia and Montenegro (Fascicule 1), D. Srejović (ed.), Beograd 1996, 9-60.Mihailović 1998D. Mihailović, Gornji paleolit i mezolit Crne Gore, neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Univerzitet u Beogradu, Beograd 1998.Mihailović 1999D. Mihailović, Intensication of settlement in the Late Glacial of south-western Balkans, Folia Quaternaria 70, Kraków 1999, 385-392.Mihailović 2009D. Mihailović, Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic chipped stone industries from Crvena stijena (Prehistoric settlements in caves and rock-shelters of Serbia and Montenegro Fascicule II), Beograd 2009.Miracle 1995 P. T. Miracle, Broad-Spectrum Adaptations Re-Examined: Hunther-Gatherer Responses to Late Glacial Environmental Changes in the Eastern Adriatic, neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 1995. Miracle 1996P. Miracle, Diversication in Epipaleolithic subsistence strategies along the Eastern Adriatic coast: a simulation approach applied to zooarchaeological assemblages, Atti della Società per la Preistoria e Protostoria della regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia IX(1994-1995), Trieste 1996, 33-62.Miracle, Forenbaher 2000P. T. Miracle, S. Forenbaher, Pupićina Cave project: Brief summary of the 1998 season - Projekt Pupićina peć: prethodni izvještaj o istraživanjima tijekom 1998. godine, Histria archaeologica 29(1998), Pula 2000, 27-47.Müller 1964G. Müller, Sediment-Petrologie. Teil I: Methoden der Sediment-Untersuchung, Stuttgart 1964.Obelić et al. 1994B. Obelić, N. Horvatinčić, D. Srdoč, I. Krajcar Bronić, A. Sliepčević, S. Grgić, Rudjer Bošković Institute radiocarbon measurements XIII, Radiocarbon 36 (2), Tucson 1994, 303-324.Pamić 2000J. Pamić, Radiolarite Formation, Vijesti Hrvatskoga geološkoga društva 37/2, Zagreb 2000, 70.Pamić, Hrvatović 2000J. Pamić, H. Hrvatović, Dinaride Ophiolite Zone (DOZ). Basic data on the geology end petrology of the Krivaja-Konjuh ophiolite complex, Vijesti Hrvatskoga geološkoga društva 37/2, Zagreb 2000, 60-68. Perhoč u pripremiZ. Perhoč, Litički nalazi sa otoka Sušca.Perhoč 2009aZ. Perhoč, Sources of Chert in Middle Dalmatia: Supplying Raw Material to Prehištoric Lithic Industries, in: A Connecting Sea: Maritime Interaction in Adriatic Prehistory, S. Forenbaher (ed.), BAR International Series 2037, Oxford 2009, 25-46. Perhoč 2009b Z. Perhoč, Sources of Chert for Prehistoric Lithic Industries in Middle Dalmatia, Archeometriai Mühely, 2009. VI. 3., 45-56 (dostupno na: http://www.ace.hu/am/2009_3 pristup 01. 07. 2010). Pettijohn 1957F. J. Pettijohn, Sedimentary Rocks, New York 1957.Radovanović 1986I. Radovanović, Novija istraživanja paleolita i mezolita u Crnoj Gori, Glasnik srpskog arheološkog društva 3, Beograd 1986, 63-77.Reimer et al. 2009P. J. Reimer, M.G.L. Baillie, E. Bard, A. Bayliss, J. W. Beck, P. G. Blackwell, C. Bronk Ramsey, C. E. Buck, G.S. Burr, R. L. Edwards, M. Friedrich, P. M. Grootes, T. P. Guilderson, I. Hajdas, T. J. Heaton, A. G. Hogg, K. A. Hughen, K. F. Kaiser, B. Kromer, F. G. McCormac, S. W. Manning, R. W. Reimer, D. A. Richards, J. R. Southon, S. Talamo, C. S. M. Turney, J. van der Plicht, C. E. Weyhenmeyer, IntCal09 and Marine09 Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curves, 0-50,000 Years cal BP, Radiocarbon 51(4), Tucson 2009, 1111-1150.Surić 2006M. Surić, Promjene u okolišu tijekom mlađeg pleistocena i holocena - zapisi iz morem potopljenih siga istočnog Jadrana, neobjavljena doktorska disertacija, Prirodnoslovno-matematički fakultet, Zagreb 2006.Šegota 1979T. Šegota, Prirodni okviri u kvartaru jugoslavenskih zemalja; Paleoklimatske i Paleografske promjene, in: Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja I - Paleolitsko i mezolitsko doba, A. Benac (ed.), Sarajevo 1979, 21-33.Šošić, Karavanić 2006R. Šošić, I. Karavanić, Pećina Zemunica, Hrvatski arheološki godišnjak 2(2005), Zagreb 2006, 376-378.Tamers 1970 M. A. Tamers, Validity of Radiocarbon Dates on Terrestrial Snail Shells, American Antiquity 35/1, Washington 1970, 94-100.Tišljar 2001J. Tišljar, Sedimentologija karbonata i evaporita, Zagreb 2001.Tišljar 2004J. Tišljar, Sedimentologija klastičnih i silicijskih taložina, Zagreb 2004.Tišljar et al. 2002J. Tišljar, I. Vlahović, I. Velić i B. Sokač. Carbonate Platform Megafacies of the Jurassic and Cretaeous Deposits of the Karst Dinarides, Geologica Croatica 55/2, Zagreb 2002, 139-170.Vrsalović 1960 D. Vrsalović, Pretpovijest i stari vijek, Brački zbornik 4 (Kulturni spomenici otoka Brača), Supetar 1960, 31-110.

Following this, proof of address will be required. This broker accepts a list of different documents.

2244 Weergaves

By the start of 2021, Bitcoin was priced at around $32,000 and by April it climbed to just over $63,000. However, July saw Bitcoin fall to around $32,000. By November 2021, Bitcoin had skyrocketed to its all-time highest value of over $68,000.

The Frankfurt location follows a new $125 million funding round announced in January.

Proto je lepší vyhledávat zdrojové informace externě na zdrojích jako Yahoo Finance nebo Morningstar.

Chicago

Instant purchase via iDEAL for Dutch traders

2364 Weergaves

31

Ze všeho nejdříve musíte přejít na domovskou stránku eToro a založit si účet. Budou po vás chtít některé osobní informace, což je společné pro většinu regulovaných platforem. Ptají se na jméno, adresu, datum narození a kontaktní údaje. Dále je bude zajímat i rodné číslo.

Izdavač LogoWith only around two million of the original 21 million tokens left at the time of writing, it’s thought Bitcoin will increase in value in the long term. On this subject, at the time of writing traders can buy Bitcoin at its lowest price since 2020.

Nanjing

€25

…View full profile ›$51,200

02 sep 2022 14:06 14 září 2022

7. LiteBit – Simple Dutch Exchange to Buy Bitcoin With iDEAL

7

Tokyo29This cryptocurrency is being accepted by an increasing number of businesses. In the Netherlands, Bitcoin has been very well received. Back in 2014, the Bitcoin boulevard was established, on which all shops accept this digital currency.Not statedSofort attracts a fee of 2.25%. The other payment types are fee-free, however, traders should note that SEPA can take 1-2 business days on this platform. Bitvavo offers Dutch traders annual staking rewards between 0.50% and 7.50%, depending on the cryptocurrency in question.

DisclaimerAdditional safety precautions can also be implemented by protecting the account with 2FA, whitelisting, and creating a strong password. There are more than 155 markets to choose from and fractional trading is possible. This allows traders to allocate as little as €10 to Bitcoin or any other crypto asset.No minimum deposit is suggested 15Kasnoglacijalna industrija lomljenog kamena pećine KopačineLate Glacial knapped stone industry of Kopačina CaveNikola Vukosavljević, Zlatko Perhoč, Božidar Čečuk †, Ivor Karavanićanalysis of artefacts was conducted by macroscopic inspection of the inventory with the objective of dening the petrographic, or rather material types. Microfacial analysis of the samples of material types veried the macroscopic petrographic classication, and the characterization of types was supplemented.29The linkage of individual types into groups based on similarity eased their ties to outcrops of such rock. We attempted to draw a connection between material groups of artefacts and potential sources based on the results of our own eld research and testing of petrographic samples, geological bibliographic sources and thanks to reports from our fellow geologists and archaeologists on the sources of these stones. The analysis encompassed the inventory excavated in several campaigns undertaken between 1978 and 1993 from layers up to 3 m deep. 4,600 nds, with a total weight of 22,366.39 g, were examined macroscopically and under a magnifying scope with 10 and 20 factor enlargement, wherein the classication samples of petrographic types by which the inventory was sorted were set apart. Petrographic types were distinguished according to macroscopically ascertained features: structure, colour, grain, transparency, lustre, outer appearance, fraction type, forms of wear, density and fossiliferous quality. Simultaneously, based on cortex,3029 Macroscopic and microscopic analysis could not be conducted simultaneously, but rather successively.30 Nodular rim (also nodular cortex, crust; Cro. nodularna okorina; Germ. Knollenrinde, Kreiderinde) is the genetic crust of nodular chert. This is the peripheral layer of the nodule which forms the transition zone toward the host rock. It diers from the nodule’s core, i.e., the petrographically mature part of the chert, in terms of mineral composition, colour, structure, density, and thereby also resistance to wear. Mineralogically this is generally quartz, while relics of the host rock (carbonate minerals, structure, fossils) are frequent. In geology, the term “nodule” (Pettijohn 1957, p. 200), Cro. gomolj (Tišljar 2004, p. 221), Germ. Hornstein-Knolle (Fürchtbauer, Müller 1970, p. 494) designates a type of chemically secondary structure of sedimentary rock. Nodules form by precipitation of quartz from silicic acid aqueous solutions around a core, often organic substances, shell fragments or fossils. Nodules have rounded surfaces and spherical, discoid or entirely irregular shapes. They appear individually and in groups parallel to layers of host rock or in very irregular shapes connected in interlayers. Their size can be measured from millimetres to meters. A rind of pebbles (Cro. valutična okorina; Germ. Geröllrinde) is a type of weathering rind (Cro. kora trošenja; Germ. Verwitterungsrinde) specic to gravel. This is an external layer of pebbles (cobbles) of any type of rock, which - during the sedimentation cycle (particularly wear during conveyance) - undergoes physical (polish, rounding, ssures) and mineral changes (patina), which results in changes in both structure and colour. The expression “uvial cortex” should be used only when the conveyance type is not known. The nodular rind of pebbles is created by weathering of the chert nodule during conveyance by water, which results in reduction of the genetic rind, or what is at a minimum recognized as such, while the nodule’s shape is partially altered. The nodular rind of pebbles on an artefact enables an archaeologist to decipher data on the variety of chert and the type of outcrop in which the raw material for lithic production was obtained. In numerous cases, an artefact’s cortex, in addition to colour and macrostructure, actually serves geoarchaeologists as an indicative factor in the recognition of regional types of cherts and their outcrops (e.g. regional type of nodular cortex in the context of “Maas”-Knollenint and a rind of pebbles designated as “Maas”-Rinde; cf. Arora 1979, pp. 2-5).the genetic chert type31 and classication to the assumed outcrop type32 were determined. Macroscopic sampling of petrographic types was controlled by an inspection of over 120 polished sections under a binocular microscope with enlargement factor of 25 of 100. The carbonate component was tested in individual samples with diluted hydrochloric acid. The petrographic determination of radiolarites and metasomatic cherts33 was additionally conrmed under a polarized light and scanning light microscope.34 In determining the colour according to the standards of the Rock-Colour-Chart, the surface of the stone surfaces were moistened.35 Based on the above criteria, the following basic material groups for the archaeological nds were distinguished: radiolarites, metasomatic cherts and petrographically indeterminate chert group.365. Techno-typological analysis5.1. Lithic phase I - technologyIn lithic phase I (hereinafter LP I), 4,928 stone artefacts were recorded with a total weight of 20,572.4 g. Out of the total number, tools account for approximately 14% (689 pieces). In this phase, akes constitute the predominant production category with relative frequency of 47.75%. Together with decortication akes (primary, 2.56% and secondary, 14.14%), the total relative frequency of akes is 64.45%. After akes, the next most common technological category encompasses chunks, with a frequency of 18.75%, followed by cores with 9.26%. The frequency of the remaining technological categories is below 5% (Table 3). In contrast to akes, of which there is a considerable amount in the total number of lithics and which constitute the absolutely preferred product of knapping, blades are present in a small number with a frequency of 5.23% (without cortex, 4.20%, with cortex, 1.03%), while the frequency of bladelets is much lower, at 1.9% (without cortex, 1.7%, with cortex, 0.2%). The small number of bladelets may be the result of the failure to sift the sediments. However, although the relative frequency of blades and bladelets in the total quantity of lithics is small, a high number of them has been 31 Genetic types of silicate sedimentary rock, or sensu lato cherts are biogenetic, diagenetic, chemogenetic and alterative (Tišljar 2004, p. 209).32 The outcrop of a rock is the place at which it is accessible in its deposit. An autochthonous or para-autochthonous outcrop of chert is its point of origin in the host rock and its point of accessibility, or in the immediate vicinity. An allochthonous outcrop of chert is a place more or less remote from its point of origin, at which it was deposited after its erosion from the host rock and more or less transformed during conveyance. Some scholars called the autochthonous outcrop primary, and the allochthonous secondary. Traces of the wear process (rind of pebbles) and structural features of the rock (nodular rim) visible on artefacts indicate the type of outcrop from which the stone originated.33 Specication of the fossils was done according to Flügel 1978 and Adams et al. 1984.34 Microscope analysis of the nds was made possible thanks to Professor Rainer Altherr, Institut für Geowissenschaften, Rupprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg and Professor Ernst Pernicka, Curt-Engelhorn-Zentrum Archäometrie Mannheim.35 The Geological Society of America, 1995.36 The names of all material groups of archaeological nds are still provisional in character.materijalnih tipova provjereno je makroskopsko petrografsko određenje, a karakterizacija tipova je dopunjena.29 Udruživanje pojedinih tipova po srodnosti u skupine olakšalo je povezivanje s izdancima takvih stijena. Materijalne skupine artefakata nastojali smo dovesti u vezu s mogućim izvorima temeljem rezultata vlastitih terenskih istraživanja i ispitivanja petrografskih uzoraka, temeljem geoloških bibliografskih izvora te zahvaljujući obavijestima kolega geologa i arheologa o izvorima predmetnih stijena. Analizom je obuhvaćen inventar iskopan u nekoliko kampanja poduzetih između 1978. i 1993. godine iz slojeva do 3,00 m dubine. Makroskopski i povećalom s povećanjem od 10 i 20 puta pregledano je 4600 nalaza, ukupne težine 22.366,39 grama, pri čemu su izdvojeni klasikacijski uzorci petrografskih tipova po kojima je inventar sortiran. Petrografski tipovi izdvojeni su prema makroskopski utvrdivim značajkama: strukturi, boji, zrnatosti, transparentnosti, sjaju, pojavnom obliku stijene, tipu loma, oblicima trošnosti, tvrdoći i fosilifernosti. Istodobno je prema okorini30 određen genetski tip rožnjaka3129 Makroskopsku i mikroskopsku analizu nismo bili u prilici izvoditi sinkrono, već sukcesivno.30 Nodularna okorina (engl. nodular rim, cortex, crust; njem. Knollenrinde, Kreiderinde) je genetska kora nodularnog rožnjaka. To je periferni sloj nodule koji čini prijelaznu zonu prema stijeni domaćinu. Od jezgre nodule, tj. petrografski zrelog dijela rožnjaka, razlikuje se po mineralnom sastavu, boji, strukturi, tvrdoći, time i po stupnju rezistentnosti na trošenje. Mineraloški je to uglavnom kvarc, dok su relikti stijene domaćina (karbonatni minerali, struktura, fosili) česti. Izraz “nodula”, hrv. gomolj (Tišljar 2004, str. 221), engl. nodule (Pettijohn 1957, str. 200), njem. Hornstein-Knolle (Füchtbauer, Müller 1970, str. 494), u geologiji označava tip kemijske sekundarne strukture sedimentne stijene. Nodule nastaju precipitiranjem kvarca iz vodene otopine silicijske kiseline oko neke jezgre, često organske tvari, fragmenta školjke ili fosila. Nodule su zaobljenih ploha i sferičnih, diskoidnih ili potpuno nepravilnih oblika. Javljaju se pojedinačno i u skupinama usporedo sa slojevima stijene domaćina ili vrlo razvedenih oblika spojenih u proslojke. Mogu biti milimetarskog do metarskog reda veličine. Valutična okorina (njem. Geröllrinde; engl. rind of pabbles) je tip kore trošenja (engl. weathering rind, njem. Verwitterungsrinde) specičan za šljunak. To je vanjski sloj valutice (oblutka) bilo koje vrste stijene, na kojoj u sedimentacijskom ciklusu (naročito trošenjem tijekom transporta) dolazi do zikalnih (pohabanost, zaobljenost, napukline) i mineralnih promjena (patina), što rezultira promjenama u strukturi i boji. Izraz “uvijalni korteks” trebalo bi koristiti samo kad je tip transporta poznat. Valutična nodularna okorina nastaje habanjem nodule rožnjaka u vodenom transportu zbog čega je genetska okorina reducirana, ali barem mjestimice prepoznatljiva kao takva dok je noduli djelomično izmijenjen oblik. Valutična nodularna okorina na artefaktu arheologu omogućuje očitavanje podataka o varijetetu rožnjaka i tipu izdanka na kojem je nabavljena sirovina za litičku proizvodnju. U brojnim slučajevima je geoarheolozima upravo korteks artefakata, osim boje i makrostrukture, indikativan čimbenik u prepoznavanju regionalnih tipova rožnjaka i njihovih izdanaka (npr. regionalni tip nodularne okorine u kontekstu “Maas”-Knolleninta i valutična okorina označena je kao “Maas”-Rinde; usp. Arora 1979, str. 2-5). 31 Genetski tipovi silicijskih sedimentnih stijena, odnosno rožnjaka sensu lato su biogeni, dijagenetski, kemogeni i alteracijski (Tišljar 2004, str. 209).i pripadnost tipu pretpostavljenog izdanka.32 Makroskopsko uzorkovanje petrografskih tipova kontrolirano je pregledom više od 120 nabrušenih preparata binokularnim mikroskopom s povećanjem od 25 i 100 puta. Karbonatna komponenta je u pojedinih nalaza ispitana razrijeđenom solnom kiselinom. Petrografsko određenje radiolarita i metasomatskog rožnjaka33 dodatno je potvrđeno polarizacijskim, odnosno rasterelektronskim mikroskopom.34 Pri određivanju boje prema standardima Rock-Color-Chart, površine kamenih nalaza su navlažene.35 Temeljem navedenih kriterija, izdvojene su sljedeće osnovne materijalne skupine arheoloških nalaza: radiolariti, metasomatski rožnjaci i skupina petrografski neodređenih rožnjaka.365. Tehno-tipološka analiza5.1. Litička faza I - tehnologijaU litičkoj fazi I (dalje u tekstu LF I) zabilježeno je 4928 kamenih artefakata ukupne težine 20.572,4 grama. Od ukupnog broja alatke čine oko 14 % (689 komada). U ovoj fazi odbojci predstavljaju prevladavajuću proizvodnu kategoriju s relativnom učestalošću od 47,75 %. Zajedno s okorinskim odbojcima (prvotni 2,56 % i drugotni 14,14 %) ukupna relativna učestalost odbojaka je 64,45 %. Nakon odbojaka sljedeća najzastupljenija tehnološka kategorija su krhotine s učestalošću od 18,75 %, a slijede jezgre sa 9,26 %. Učestalost ostalih tehnoloških kategorija je ispod 5 % (tablica 3). Nasuprot odbojcima kojih je u ukupnom broju litike jako puno, i koji predstavljaju apsolutno preferirajući proizvod lomljenja, sječiva su prisutna u malom broju, s učestalošću od 5,23 % (bez okorine 4,20 %, s okorinom 1,03 %), a učestalost pločica je i puno manja te iznosi 1,9 % (bez okorine 1,7 %, s okorinom 0,2 %). Mali broj pločica mogao bi biti posljedica neprosijavanja sedimenta. Međutim, iako je relativna učestalost sječiva i pločica u ukupnoj količini litike mala, veliki broj ih je formalno obrađen (sl. 1). Od ukupnog broja odbojaka obrađeno je 15,64 %, dok je 32 Izdanak stijene je mjesto na kojem je ona dostupna na svom ležištu. Autohtoni ili paraautohtoni izdanak rožnjaka je mjesto njegova postanka u stijeni domaćinu i dostupnosti ili mjesto erozije u neposrednoj blizini. Alohtoni izdanak rožnjaka je mjesto manje-više udaljeno od njegova postanka na kojem je nataložen nakon što je erodiran iz stijene domaćina i tijekom transporta manje-više preoblikovan. Neki autori autohtoni izdanak nazivaju primarnim, a alohtoni sekundarnim. Tragovi procesa trošenja (valutična okorina) i strukturalne značajke stijene (nodularna okorina) vidljivi na artefaktima, ukazuju na tip izdanka s kojeg potječe kamen. 33 Određenje fosila obavljeno je prema Flügel 1978. i Adams et al. 1984.34 Mikroskopiranje nalaza omogućeno nam je zahvaljujući prof. dr. sc. Raineru Altherru, Institut für Geowissenschaften, Rupprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, i prof. dr. sc. Ernstu Pernicki, Curt-Engelhorn-Zentrum Archäometrie Mannheim.35 The Geological Society of Amerika, 1995.36 Nazivi svih materijalnih skupina arheoloških nalaza imaju radni karakter.

By comparing the best cryptocurrency exchanges in the Netherlands investors can see which providers offer the most competitive fees.9.3%

Počet kopírujících obchodníků a suma spravovaných aktivZemlje ograničenja

Coinbase is a well-known exchange that allows traders to store, transfer and buy Bitcoin in the Netherlands. Traders can buy Bitcoin from $10 – which will suit those on a budget.

People looking to buy Bitcoin in the Netherlands should also watch out for pop-ups that ask them to connect a crypto wallet

Features

For instance, at eToro, Dutch crypto traders pay a low and transparent fee of 1% when buying and selling crypto assets.

Hodně často se nás lidé ptají, jestli eToro vyplácí dividendy. Zkráceně, ano – při investování do ETF u eToro máte nárok na přesně takovou dividendu, jakou se společnost rozhodne vyplácet.Hargreaves LansdownJe kunt niet nieuwe berichten plaatsen in dit forumJe kunt niet reageren op onderwerpen in dit forumJe kunt niet je eigen berichten wijzigen in dit forumJe kunt niet je eigen berichten verwijderen in dit forumJe kunt geen bijlagen plaatsen in dit forum

S ohledem na tyto faktory nemusíte mít o své prostředky u eToro žádné obavy.

$10

Bitcoin has a fixed supply of 21 million BTC tokens. As such, there are only a certain amount of Bitcoins accessible. At the time of writing, over 19 million Bitcoin have been mined.

Traders can create an account at eToro with little effort and it’s free to join. Enter a unique username and a password. Next, add an email address and click ‘Create Account’. to proceed.

Cryptoassets are a highly volatile unregulated investment product.

Ažurirano dana Srpanj 10, 2020Tato multi-asset platforma je velice oblíbená u začínajících investorů – založení účtu i vložení peněz je snadné a akcie nakoupíte za pár minut zcela bez komisí.0.25%

Bitcoin deposits are fee-free, and withdrawals attract a 0.0005 BTC charge. Credit card purchases command a 5% fee and the platform states that further charges may be stipulated by the provider.

3,15 £

2. Srovnání poplatků při nákupu akcií

Moreover, the Crypto.com exchange offers free CRO tokens to the value of $50 to traders signing up to the platform and meeting certain terms and conditions.Laatste bericht door DirkieOdaberite sliku mjesta koje vas zanima (tačka iz tri zemlje). Odaberite fotografiju poznanice ili poznate osobe (Marieke Elsinga). Zamislite slučajnu akciju sa slučajnim objektom, poput vožnje kartinga. Dobit ćete Marieke Elsinga koja vozi karting na tački s tri zemlje.

The minimum investment is just $10 (around €9.60) at eToro. The option of buying just a fraction of a digital currency like Bitcoin makes it more achievable to enter the crypto market for most traders. Looking to buy stocks in Netherlands? There is also a long list of stocks, which includes those listed on the Amsterdam exchange as well as others from around the world.

Small investment minimums supported

Laatste bericht door k2p

39Kasnoglacijalna industrija lomljenog kamena pećine KopačineLate Glacial knapped stone industry of Kopačina CaveNikola Vukosavljević, Zlatko Perhoč, Božidar Čečuk †, Ivor Karavanić Podrobnija karakterizacija bez destrukcije artefakata nije moguća. Pripadnost takvih nalaza ovoj podskupini moguće je ustanoviti tek temeljem nabruska, što znači da je postotak pogreške u makroskopskom klasiciranju bez mikrofacijelne kontrole viši negoli u drugim skupinama. Ovakav rožnjak je čest među metasomatskim rožnjacima; prema tipu vapnenca domaćina pretpostavljamo i dalmatinska ležišta koja za sada nismo pobliže locirali.907.3.4. Crni rožnjaci Skupina crnog rožnjaka (sl. 9) broji 679 nalaza (14,76 % od ukupnog broja) s težinskim udjelom od 15,02 %. Kamen je voštanog staklastog sjaja, različitih stupnjeva svjetlopropusnosti, izraženog konhoidalnog loma, mjestimično facetiranih lomnih ploha, glatkih i oštrih bridova. Po sivocrnim i zelenkastim nijansama uvjetno bi se moglo govoriti o dva tipa.91 Rožnjak je većinom metasomatskog postanka.92 Na to ukazuju tzv. fosilni “duhovi”, okruglaste ili nepravilne uglavnom svjetlije mrlje vidljive 90 Sličan je rožnjacima na Kozjaku kakve smo zabilježili na položaju Starosevski gaj (Perhoč 2009a).91 Te nijanse boja su zamjetljive samo na najtanjim rubovima gledanjem prema svjetlu.92 I ovaj primjer pokazuje koliko je temeljita mikrofacijelna analiza važna za preciznu klasikaciju, statistiku i interpretaciju u materijalnoj analizi arheoloških nalaza. Naime, u ovoj podskupini moguć je i crni radiolarit sasvim druge provenijencije od opisanog crnog metasomatskog rožnjaka. Na crnom kamenu malih i patiniranih artefakata izrađenih od jezgrenog dijela stijene (bez sačuvane nodularne, valutične okorine ili međuslojne plohe), nemoguće je makroskopski razlikovati matasomatski rožnjak od radiolarita. Nodularni crni rožnjak iz Stračinčice kod Vele Luke na Korčuli, primjerice, vrlo je sličan crnom radiolaritu iz Lasinje.prostim okom.93 U nabrusku su pored rijetkih crvenih zrnaca, vidljive dominante crne nepravilne mrlje organske tvari koja ovom rožnjaku daje boju (sl. 17). Izrazito crne metasomatske rožnjake izvanredne kakvoće za sada smo zabilježili na položajima Stračinčica kod Vele Luke na Korčuli i Labinska draga na Oporu.947.4. Skupina nalaza raznovrsne petrograje Posljednju malobrojnu skupinu artefakata (285 nalaza, brojčani udio 6,19 %, težinski 3,86 %,) čine petrografski heterogeni nalazi (sl. 9) koje nismo posebno klasicirali.95 U ovoj skupini pojedinačno izdvajamo dvije tehnološke predjezgre preparirane od subangularnih valutica s debelo patiniranom okorinom (crvenosmeđi tonovi) po postanku tipičnoj za ilovaste ili slične sedimente s povećanom koncentracijom željezovitih minerala. Valutična okorina potpuno se razlikuje od jezgre, koja je u jednom slučaju zelenkasta, u drugom crna. Nalazi ovakvih značajka ukazuju na izvore sirovine tipa riječnih i potočnih prudova.7.5. Žareni rožnjaci Skupinu žarenih rožnjaka (sl. 9) čine artefakti na koje je djelovala visoka temperatura, u našem slučaju vatra ognjišta na staništu. Težinski udio skupine iznosi 10,16 %, a 862 nalaza čini 18,7 % od ukupnog broja.96 Izravan utjecaj vatre na rožnjak vidljiv je u promjeni boje kamena, strukture i smanjene specifične težine. Nalazi su najčešće svjetlonepropusne sive, crne ili crvenkaste boje, bez sjaja i s tipičnom mrežom prslina koje nastaju zbog napetosti uzrokovanih grijanjem i hlađenjem kamena (sl. 18). Nalaze na koje je djelovala visoka temperatura potrebno je statistički izdvojiti kako bi se moglo ustanoviti jesu li termički tretirani. Struktura žarenih kopačinskih artefakata odaje da je kamen tehnički neuporabiv i prema tome slučajno dospio u izravan dodir s ognjištem. Njihovu relativnu brojnost tumačimo malim prostorom pećine u kojoj se očito često ložilo, što ukazuje na trajnost ili učestalost boravka.8. Kulturna stratigraja - novi pogledKako smo već istaknuli, prema dostupnim podacima u dosad objavljenoj literaturi, u Kopačini su izdvojene tri kulturne faze ljudskog boravka: kasnogornjopaleolitička, mezolitička i brončanodobna. Ovdje je tehno-tipološki obrađen cjelokupni litički skup nalaza iz Kopačine, iako je u unutrašnjem dijelu 93 Tišljar 2004, str. 217. U ovoj podskupini nalaza nisu isključeni artefakti od siliciciranog šejla, siltita i tufa.94 Usp. Perhoč 2009a. 95 Ti su nalazi snažno patinirani, razlomljenih ploha ili naprosto zamrljani zemljom i teško petrografski odredivi.96 Na odnos broja i težine utječe gubitak higroskopne vode pri paljenju.A more thorough characterization of the artefact is not possible without destroying it. Whether or not such nds belong to this sub-group may be established only on the basis of a polished section, which means that the margin of error in macroscopic classication without microfacial control is higher than in other groups. Such a chert is frequent among the metasomatic cherts, and based on the type of host limestone, we have assumed the existence of a Dalmatian deposit which we have as yet not been able to pinpoint with any certainty.907.3.4. Black chertsThe black chert group (Fig. 9) encompasses 679 nds (14.76% of the total number) with a weight share of 15.02%. The stone has a waxy glassy lustre, with varying degrees of translucence and marked conchoidal fraction, and occasional faceted fraction surfaces, and smooth and sharp edges. Based on the grey-black and greenish nuances, one may provisionally speak of two types.91The chert is mostly metasomatic in origin.92This is indicated by so-called fossil “ghosts,” round or irregular generally lighter stains 90 The situation is similar with the cherts on Kozjak as noted at the Starosevski Gaj site (Perhoč 2009a).91 These nuances were noticeable only at the thinnest edges when viewed in light.92 This example also shows how important a thorough microfacial analysis is to precise classication, statistics and interpretation in the material analysis of archaeological nds. For black radiolarites of entirely dierent origin than the described metasomatic chert are possible in this sub-group. On the black stone of small and patinated artefacts made of the core portion of rocks (without preserved nodular, pebble rinds or interstitial surfaces), it is impossible to macroscopically distinguish between metasomatic chert and radiolarite. The nodular black chert from Stračinčica near Vela Luka on the island of Korčula, for example, is very similar to the black radiolarite from Lasinja.visible to the naked eye.93 In the polished section, besides rare red grains, the dominant black irregular stains of organic matter are visible, which give this chert its colour (Fig. 17). Distinctly black metasomatic cherts of extraordinary quality have for now been recorded at the sites at Stračinčica near Vela Luka on Korčula and Labinska draga on Opor.947.4. Group of nds with various petrographyThe nal small group of artefacts (285 nds, numerical share 6.19%, weight 3.86%) consists of petrographically heterogeneous nds (Fig. 9) which we did not specically classify.95 In this group, we individually distinguished two technological sub-cores prepared from sub-angular pebbles with a thickly patinated cortex (red-brown tones) formed typically for loam or similar sediments with an increased concentration of ferrous minerals. The rind of pebbles is entirely dierent from the core, which is greenish in one case, and black in another. Finds with such features indicate sources of raw materials of a type from riverine and stream sandbars.7.5. Burned chertsThe group of burned cherts (Fig. 9) consists of artefacts aected by high temperatures, in this case the re of a hearth in the dwelling. The weight share of the group is 10.16%, while the 862 nds account for 18.7% of the total number.96The direct impact of re on the chert is visible in the change in the stone’s colour, structure and reduced specic weight. The nds are most often opaque grey, black or reddish, without lustre and with the typical lattice of cracks which emerged as a result of the tension caused by heating and cooling of the stone (Fig. 18). The nds aected by high temperatures must be statistically separated in order to establish whether they had been heat treated. The structure of the red Kopačina artefacts indicate that the stone was technically unusable and thus came into direct contact with the hearth by chance. We interpret their relatively high number as a result of the small size of the cave in which res were often stoked, which testies to permanency or frequency of residence.8. Cultural stratigraphy - a new lookAs already stressed above, according to available data in the literature thus far published, three cultural phases of human habitation have been distinguished in Kopačina: late Upper Palaeolithic, Mesolithic and Bronze Age. Here the entire lithic 93 Tišljar 2004, p. 217. Artefacts made of silicied shale, siltite and tufa were not excluded from this group.94 Cf.. Perhoč 2009a.95 These nds are highly patinated, with broken surfaces, or they are simply smudged with soil and dicult to determine petrographically.96 The ratio between number and weight is inuenced by the loss of hygroscopic water at ignition. Slika 17. Crni rožnjak. Binokularni mikroskop, nabrusak Figure 17. Black chert. Binocular microscope, polished section Slika 18. Žareni rožnjak. Binokularni mikroskop, nabrusak Figure 18. Burned chert. Binocular microscope, polished section

Below is a list of the best crypto exchanges in the Netherlands right now:

5.7%

$50

Pokud byste vás zajímaly sofistikovanější strategie, tak máte u eToro také možnost obchodovat na páku a na krátko. To platí pro více než 1 700 akcií, indexů, kryptoměn, dluhopisů, měn a komodit. Když to shrneme, tak eToro představuje skvělé řešení pro snadné, bezpečné a nákladově efektivní investování do akcií.

SEPA withdrawals attract a fee of €1 each time. Traders can also make a deposit with Bitcoin. If the amount is 0.1 BTC or more, there is no fee. If less than 0.1 BTC is being deposited, a fee of 0.0003 BTC is charged.23 mei 2022 18:46Nabídka instrumentů a poplatky jsou při výběru brokera sice rozhodně velice důležité faktory, ale ještě větší důraz byste měli klást na to, jak je na tom broker z pohledu regulace. Tento faktor ovlivní spolehlivost brokera a bezpečnost vašich prostředků. 25Kasnoglacijalna industrija lomljenog kamena pećine KopačineLate Glacial knapped stone industry of Kopačina CaveNikola Vukosavljević, Zlatko Perhoč, Božidar Čečuk †, Ivor Karavanić Slika 6. Izbor kamenih alatki iz litičke faze II. 1-5: zakrivljeni šiljci s hrptom, 6-8: nazupci, 9, 10: iskrzani komadići, 11: udubak, 12-15: dubila Figure 6. Selection of stone tools from lithic phase II. 1-5: curved backed points, 6-8: denticulates, 9, 10: splintered pieces, 11: notch, 12-15: burins Slika 7. Izbor kamenih alatki iz litičke faze II. 1, 2: komadići sa sitnom rubnom obradom, 3: zarubak, 4: komadić s obradom, 5-7: strugala Figure 7. Selection of stone tools from lithic phase II. 1, 2: marginally retouched pieces, 3: truncation, 4: retouched piece, 5-7: sidescrapers15141312111098764321 57635214Number of cryptos 45Kasnoglacijalna industrija lomljenog kamena pećine KopačineLate Glacial knapped stone industry of Kopačina CaveNikola Vukosavljević, Zlatko Perhoč, Božidar Čečuk †, Ivor Karavanićwhich resided in Vešanska Cave. The subsequent phase from Vešanska (Interstadial Phase II), viewed technologically and typologically, exhibits some dierences in relation to the preceding phase, although backed artefacts are still the most numerous among the tools.128The repertoire of tools present in Vešanska corresponds largely to that found in Kopačina, but their relative frequency signicantly diers from one cave to the other, what could be a result of dierent activities undertaken in each cave. The activities undertaken were not necessarily entirely dierent, but their intensity diered. In contrast to Kopačina, where micro-burins are not present, they appeared in Vešanska in this youngest phase.129 A part of the stratigraphic sequence from Pupićina Cave which belongs to the Late Glacial period based on radiocarbon dating can be placed within the span from 11150 ± 80 BP (Beta-145095) to 10020 ± 180 BP (Z-2613).130The initial phase, as in Vešanska Cave, has a small documented number of animal and lithic remains. Although there are certain dierences between the later two phases, both are dominated by akes and chunks with roughly equal shares, while the share of bladelets is considerably higher than in Kopačina. The repertoire of tools, which is similar to that of Kopačina, is dominated by endscrapers, thumbnail and circular, while the share of backed artefacts is also high, and in the later phase geometric microliths also appear in this group of tools. Micro-burins are also present in the latest phase.131 A part of stratigraphic sequence from Nugljanska Cave, based on the radiocarbon age of 11520 ± 90 (Beta-127705), may be placed in the Late Glacial period.132 In Nugljanska, as in Vešanska and Pupićina, there are certain dierences between the dierent phases of residence in the cave which were probably dictated by the function of the cave itself in certain periods. Among the technological categories, akes dominate, with a rather high share of bladelets and blades (in comparison to Kopačina). Among the backed tools, backed bladelets dominate, while in the younger phase geometric microliths also appear. Micro-burins are present in Nugljanska as well, in both phases. Taking into account all of the aforementioned aspects, we may conclude as follows: at the Istrian sites as in Kopačina, akes were the primary product of knapping; bladelets in Istria are much more common than in Kopačina; while micro-burins are present at almost all of the Istrian sites (except in Šandalja II, which may be due to the lack of sifting of sediments), they are unknown in Kopačina; splintered pieces are rarer in Istria than in Kopačina; the share of endscrapers is high in both Kopačina and Istria, but it would appear that thumbnail endscrapers are more numerous in Kopačina; geometric microliths are present in Kopačina as at the Istrian sites.128 Komšo, Pellegati 2007, p. 32.129 Komšo, Pellegati 2007, p. 32.130 Komšo, Pellegati 2007, p. 33, Fig. 3.5. Here are cited three more dates which belong to the afore mentioned time span.131 Komšo, Pellegati 2007, p. 34.132 Komšo, Pellegati 2007, p. 35; Miracle, Forenbaher 1997, p. 41.9.2. DalmatiaBesides Kopačina, three other Late Glacial sites (Vlakno, Zemunica, Vela spila) are known in Dalmatia. Only a chronological parallel can be drawn with Vlakno Cave on the island of Dugi otok, because the materials have not yet been published. The late Upper Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers resided in Vlakno between 14,900 BP, established by the age of the tephra,133 and 10160 ± 100 BP (Z-3383).134 As in the case of Vlakno, only a chronological parallel can be drawn for Zemunica Cave, because the lithic assemblage has not yet been published, while part of the stratigraphic sequence probably belongs to the late Upper Palaeolithic.135 The Late Glacial stay of hunter-gatherers in Vela Spila has been determined by an absolute radiocarbon date to an age of 12260 ± 40 BP (VERA-2346).136When taking into consideration the age and tool types present, as well as their relative frequency, layers 8/2 - 8/6 will be observed as a whole and compared to the lithic industry from Kopačina. The dominant technological category in the Late Glacial lithic assemblage of Vela Spila are chunks (with the exception of chips), followed by akes, and then bladelets and nally blades. As opposed to Kopačina, bladelets and blades were produced much more often in Vela Spila.137The authors did not mention the presence of micro-burins in the lithic inventory of Vela Spila.138 In the lithic asemblage of Vela Spila, endscrapers predominate among the tools, which is also the case in Kopačina in both lithic phases, but they are much more numerous in Vela Spila, where they compose almost 50% of all tools.139 Among the endscrapers, the thumbnail endsraper is the most numerous type after endscrapers on akes, while thumbnail endscrapers in Kopačina are the most numerous type among the endscrapers. The relative frequency of backed bladelets in Vela Spila (ca. 12%) is much higher than in Kopačina, but this may be a result of the absence of sifting of sediments in Kopačina. Among the geometric microliths in Vela Spila, the most numerous are backed segments, and only one example of a trapeze is present. The higher frequency of geometric microliths in Vela Spila compared to Kopačina may, as in the case of backed bladelets, be the result of the excavation methodology. The relative frequency of splintered pieces is identical at both sites. Curved backed bladelets are more numerous in Kopačina than in Vela Spila (0.38%). Based on this, we may conclude that the Late Glacial lithic industries in Vela Spila and Kopačina exhibit considerable similarities.133 Brusić 2008, p. 402.134 Brusić 2005, p. 198; Komšo 2006, p. 74.135 Šošić, Karavanić 2006, p. 378.136 Čečuk, Radić 2005, p. 34, note 9. A charcoal sample from layer 8/6 was dated.137 Čečuk, Radić 2005, p. 26, Table 2.138 Čečuk, Radić 2005.139 Data on the relative frequency of tools from Vela Spila were obtained on the basis of data shown in Čečuk and Radić 2005, p. 27, Table 4.je boravila u Vešanskoj peći. Sljedeća faza iz Vešanske (Interstadial Phase II) tehnološki i tipološki gledano pokazuje određene razlike u odnosu na prethodnu fazu, ali su i dalje među alatkama najbrojniji strmo obrađeni artefakti.128 Repertoar alatki prisutan u Vešanskoj podudara se dobrim dijelom s onim pronađenim u Kopačini, ali se međusobni omjeri bitno razlikuju u jednoj i drugoj pećini i odraz su različitih aktivnosti poduzimanih u svakoj od pećina. Poduzimane aktivnosti nisu nužno potpuno različite, ali je različit njihov intenzitet. Za razliku od Kopačine gdje mikrodubila nisu prisutna, ona se u Vešanskoj peći pojavljuju u ovoj najmlađoj fazi.129 Dio stratigrafskog slijeda iz Pupićine peći koji pripada kasnom glacijalu na temelju radiokarbonskih datuma može se smjestiti u rasponu od 11.150 ± 80 BP (Beta-145095) do 10.020 ± 180 BP (Z-2613).130 Inicijalna faza je kao i u Vešanskoj peći dokumentirana malim brojem ostataka faune i litike. Iako između kasnijih dviju faza postoji određena razlika, u obje faze dominiraju odbojci i krhotine s približno jednakim udjelima, a udio pločica je znatno veći nego u Kopačini. U repertoaru alatki koji je sličan kopačinskom, dominiraju grebala, noktolika i kružna, udio strmo retuširanih artefakata je također veliki, a u kasnijoj fazi se u ovoj skupini alatki pojavljuju i geometrijski mikroliti. Mikrodubila su također prisutna u najkasnijoj fazi.131 Dio stratigrafskog slijeda iz Nugljanske peći na temelju radiokarbonske starosti od 11520 ± 90 (Beta-127705) može se smjestiti u kasnoglacijalno razdoblje.132 I u Nugljanskoj kao i u Vešanskoj i Pupićinoj peći postoje određene razlike između različitih faza boravka u pećini koje su vjerojatno uvjetovane funkcijom same pećine u određenim razdobljima. Među tehnološkim kategorijama dominiraju odbojci uz poprilično visoki udio pločica i sječiva (u usporedbi s Kopačinom). Kod strmo retuširanih alatki dominantne su pločice s hrptom, a u mlađoj fazi se javljaju i geometrijski mikroliti. Mikrodubila su prisutna i u Nugljanskoj, i to u obje faze. Uzimajući u obzir gore navedeno, možemo zaključiti: na istarskim nalazištima kao i u Kopačini odbojci predstavljaju primarni proizvod lomljenja; pločice su u Istri puno zastupljenije nego u Kopačini; dok su mikrodubila prisutna na gotovo svim spomenutim istarskim nalazištima (osim u Šandalji II, što može biti posljedica neprosijavanja sedimenta), ona nisu poznata u Kopačini; iskrzani komadi puno su rjeđi u Istri nego u Kopačini; udio grebala je velik i u Kopačini i u Istri, ali se čini da su noktolika grebala brojnija u Kopačini; geometrijski mikroliti prisutni su u Kopačini kao i na istarskim nalazištima.128 Komšo, Pellegati 2007, str. 32.129 Komšo, Pellegati 2007, str. 32.130 Komšo, Pellegati 2007, str. 33, sl. 3.5. Ovdje su navedena još tri datuma koja pripadaju spomenutom rasponu.131 Komšo, Pellegati 2007, str. 34.132 Komšo, Pellegati 2007, str. 35; Miracle, Forenbaher 1997, str. 41.9.2. Dalmacija Osim Kopačine, u Dalmaciji su nam poznata još tri kasnoglacijalna nalazišta (Vlakno, Zemunica, Vela spila). S pećinom Vlakno na Dugom otoku možemo povući samo vremensku paralelu jer materijal još nije objavljen. Kasnogornjopaleolitički lovci i skupljači u Vlaknu su boravili između 14.900 BP, utvrđena starost tefre,133 i 10.160 ± 100 BP (Z-3383).134 Kao i u slučaju Vlakna, s pećinom Zemunicom možemo povući samo kronološku paralelu jer litički skup nalaza još nije objavljen, a dio stratigrafskog slijeda vjerojatno pripada kasnom gornjem paleolitiku.135 Kasnoglacijalni boravak lovačko-sakupljačkih zajednica u Veloj spili određen je jednim apsolutnim radiokarbonskim datumom starosti 12.260 ± 40 BP (VERA-2346).136 Uzimajući u obzir dobivenu starost i prisutne tipove alatki te njihovu relativnu učestalost, slojeve 8/2 - 8/6 promatrat ćemo kao cjelinu i usporediti ih s litičkom industrijom iz Kopačine. Dominantna tehnološka kategorija u kasnoglacijalnom litičkom skupu nalaza Vele spile su krhotine (izuzmemo li sitni otpad), nakon kojih slijede odbojci, zatim pločice i na kraju sječiva. Za razliku od Kopačine, pločice i sječiva u Veloj spili proizvođena su puno češće.137 U litičkom inventaru Vele spile autori ne spominju prisutnost mikrodubila.138 U litičkom skupu nalaza Vele spile među alatkama dominiraju grebala, što je slučaj i u Kopačini u obje litičke faze, ali su ona znatno brojnija u Veloj spili, gdje čine gotovo 50 % svih alatki.139 Među grebalima, noktolika su najbrojniji tip nakon grebala na odbojku, dok su noktolika grebala u Kopačini najbrojniji tip među grebalima. Relativna učestalost pločica s hrptom u Veloj spili (oko 12 %) puno je veća nego u Kopačini, ali to može biti posljedica neprosijavanja sedimenta u Kopačini. Među geometrijskim mikrolitima u Veloj spili najbrojniji su kružni segmenti, a prisutan je i samo jedan primjerak trapeza. Veća učestalost geometrijskih mikrolita u Veloj spili nego u Kopačini može biti rezultat, kao i kod pločica s hrptom, metodologije iskopavanja. Relativna učestalost iskrzanih komadića podjednaka je na oba nalazišta. Zakrivljeni šiljci s hrptom brojniji su u Kopačini nego u Veloj spili (0,38 %). Na temelju iznesenog možemo zaključiti da kasnoglacijalne litičke industrije Vele spile i Kopačine pokazuju znatnu sličnost.133 Brusić 2008, str. 402.134 Brusić 2005, str. 198; Komšo 2006, str. 74.135 Šošić, Karavanić 2006, str. 378.136 Čečuk, Radić 2005, str. 34, bilj. 9. Datiran je uzorak drvenog ugljena iz sloja 8/6.137 Čečuk, Radić 2005, str. 26, tablica 2.138 Čečuk, Radić 2005.139 Podaci o relativnoj učestalosti alatki za Velu spilu dobiveni su na temelju podataka prikazanih u Čečuk, Radić 2005, str. 27, tablica 4.

27Kasnoglacijalna industrija lomljenog kamena pećine KopačineLate Glacial knapped stone industry of Kopačina CaveNikola Vukosavljević, Zlatko Perhoč, Božidar Čečuk †, Ivor Karavanić Noktolika grebala, iako su najzastupljenija među grebalima u obje faze, brojnija su u LF II. Geometrijski mikroliti prisutni su u obje faze, ali je njihova učestalost veća u LF II. Odnos pločica s hrptom i zakrivljenih šiljaka s hrptom u ove dvije faze, poslužio je kao kriterij za njihovo odvajanje, a već je prije spomenut. Učestalost zarubaka, strugala, svrdla, iskrzanih komadića, komadića s obradom, nazubaka i udubaka vrlo je slična. Uspoređujemo li relativnu učestalost dubila, ona su u LF II manje zastupljena (1,84 %) negoli u LF I (3,48 %) (sl. 8). Iako postoje određene razlike, ove dvije faze su vrlo slične i pokazuju vrlo male razlike protokom vremena. Razlike u litičkom materijalu mogle su biti uvjetovane trenutnim potrebama i aktivnostima lovaca i skupljača koji su boravili u Kopačini. Važno je istaknuti da ni među ostacima faune u Kopačini ne postoje značajne promjene tijekom vremena. Najbrojniji su ostaci jelena (Cervus elaphus), nakon čega slijede ostaci divljeg magarca (Equus hydruntinus) tijekom čitavog stratigrafskog slijeda.387. Petrografski tipovi korištene sirovine7.1. Skupina crvenih radiolaritaOd ukupno 4600 nalaza, 162 nalaza ili 3,52 % su crveni radiolariti, sa 2,67 % težinskog udjela u ukupnoj masi ispitanih artefakata koja iznosi 22.366,39 grama (sl. 9). 38 Miracle 1996, str. 50-53. Artefakte izrađene od crvenog radiolarita relativno je lako prepoznati i preliminarno ih petrografski odrediti jer se kamen ističe tipičnom pastelnom bojom, prigušenim sjajem i neprozirnošću, a nerijetko su pod povećalom vidljivi fosili radiolarija.39 Kopačinski crveni radiolaritni nalazi raznih su stupnjeva zasićenja i intenziteta crvenih, crvenosmeđih i žutosmeđih tonova,40 voštanog sjaja i slabe svjetlopropusnosti ili su sasvim svjetlonepropusni.41 Petrografski zreliji, tj. jače silicicirani primjerci imaju izražen konkavno-konveksan lom i 39 Radiolarit (engl. radiolarite, radiolarian chert) je biogeni varijetet rožnjaka koji nastaje liticiranjem dubokomorskih (ispod CCD-crte) silicijskih muljeva bogatih radiolarijama. Radiolarit je tvrda i gusta stijena, oštrobridnog školjkastog loma, voštanog sjaja, svjetlonepropusna, crvenih i crvenosmeđih tonova, rjeđe zelenih i sivozelenih, dok je lidit (engl. lydite) crne boje (Füchtbauer, Müller 1970, str. 487). Za radiolarite bi trebalo izbjegavati izraz “radiolarijski rožnjak” (eng. radiolarian chert) jer se taj izraz rabi za tip metasomatskog rožnjaka koji obiluje fosilima radiolarija (usp. Tišljar 2001, str. 46).40 Crvenu boju radiolaritima, tipičnu za europski varijetet, daje uklopljeni hematit koji potječe od crvenice isprane u sedimentacijski bazen. Sivozelenu boju daju minerali iz skupine klorita, odnosno prevlast dvovalentnog željeza nad trovalentnim u sedimentu (Grunau 1965, str. 196).41 Stupnjevi transparentnosti: opaque ili svjetlonepropusno, slabo svjetlopropusno na rubu, svjetlopropusno na rubu, svjetlopropusno, svjetlopropusno-prozirno, prozirno.Thumbnail endscrapers, although most common among the endscrapers in both phases, are more numerous in LP II. Geometric microliths are presentin both phases, but their frequency is greater in LP II. The ratio of backed bladelets to curved backed points in both phases served as the criterion for distinguishing them, as already mentioned previously. The frequency of truncations, sidescrapers, borers, splintered pieces, retouched pieces, denticulates and notches is very similar. If the relative frequency of burins is compared, they are less frequent in LP II (1.84%) than in LP I (3.48%) (Fig. 8). Although there are certain dierences, these two phases are very similar and exhibit very little variation over time. The dierences in lithic materials may have been dictated by the momentary needs and activities of the hunter-gatherers who resided in Kopačina. Worth emphasizing is that there are no signicant changes over time among animal remains either. The most numerous are remains of red deer (Cervus elaphus), followed by remains of European ass (Equus hydruntinus), over the course of the entire stratigraphic sequence.387. Petrographic types of raw materials used7.1. Red radiolarite groupOut of the total 4,600, 162 nds or 3.52% are red radiolarites with a 2.67% weight share in the total mass of the examined artefacts, which is otherwise 22,366.39 g (Fig. 9).38 Miracle 1996, pp. 50-53. Artefacts made of red radiolarite are rather easy to recognize and also to specify petrographically, because the stone exhibits a typical pastel colour, subdued lustre and opacity, while radiolarian fossils are not rarely visible under a magnifying glass.39The Kopačina red radiolarite nds exhibit varying degrees of saturation and intensity of red, red-brown and yellow-brown tones,40 a waxy lustre and meagre translucence, or they are completely translucent.41The petrographically more mature, i.e. more silicied, examples have marked concave and convex fraction and they are harder than those 39 Radiolarite (radiolarian chert) is a biogenetic variety of chert which emerges by lithication of deep-sea (below the CCD-line) silicate mud rich in radiolaria. Radiolarite is a hard and dense rock, with sharp-edged, shell-like fraction, waxy lustre, translucent, red and red-brown tones, more rarely green and grey-green, while lydite is black (Fürchtbauer, Müller 1970, p. 487). In case of radiolarite, the term “radiolarian chert” should be avoided, for this is used for a type of metasomatic chert which abounds in fossil radiolaria (cf. Tišljar 2001, p. 46).40 The red colour in radiolarites, typical of the European variety, is provided by incorporated haematite which originates in red soils weathered in sedimented basins. The grey-green colour is provided by the minerals of the chlorite group, i.e. the predominance of divalent iron over the trivalent variety in the sediment (Grunau 1965, p. 196).41 Degrees of transparency: opaque or translucent, poorly translucent at the edge, translucent at the edge, translucent, translucent-transparent, transparent. Slika 8. Usporedba učestalosti tipova alatki u litičkoj fazi I i litičkoj fazi II Figure 8. Relative frequency comparison of tool types in lithic phase I and lithic phase II Slika 9. Brojčana i težinska učestalost petrografskih skupina korištene sirovine iz Kopačine Figure 9. Numerical and weight frequency of petrographic groups of used raw materials from Kopačinanoktoliko grebalo / thumbnail endscraperkružno grebalo / circular endscrapergrebalo na odbojku / endscraper on akegrebalo na sječivu/pločici / endscraper on blade/bladeletpločica s hrptom / backed bladeletzakrivljeni šiljak s hrptom / curved backed pointmikrograveta / micro-Gravettegravetijenski šiljak / Gravettian pointsegment / segmentpravokutnik / rectanglezarubak / truncationstrugalo / sidescrapersvrdlo / borerdubilo / buriniskrzani komadić / splintered piecekomadić sa sitnom rubnom obradom / marginally retouced piecekomadić s obradom / retouched piecenazubak / denticulateudubak / notchulomak s obradom / retouched fragmentkom. (ukupno 4600 kom.)pcs. (total 4,600)težina (ukupno 22366,39 g)weight (total 22,366.39 g)radiolarit crvenired radiolariteradiolarit zelenigreen radiolariterožnjak numulitninummulite chertrožnjak mikritnimicrite chertrožnjak bioklastičnibioclastic chertrožnjak crniblack chertskupina nalaza razne petrograjegroup of finds with differing petrographyrožnjak žareniburned chert

There are just 2 million Bitcoin tokens left in existence after the 19 millionth block was mined in April 2022

We also offer some guidance on what to consider before investing in Bitcoin, with a strong focus on the risks involved and the upside potential.

sites in the wider scope of the Eastern Adriatic.http://www.prehistoire.org/515_p_57109/acces-libre-seance-17-en-mouvement-on-the-move-in-bewgung.html The impressive corpus of recently published research on the Final Palaeolithic of Europe contrasts with few studies explicitly dealing with the demography of these hunter-gatherer communities. Our paper presents new results on population estimates for the period from 14,000 to 11,600 years cal. BP. The population estimates are obtained by applying the so-called ‘Cologne Protocol’ to the specifically challenging evidence of Final Palaeolithic human occupation across Europe, which is characterised by – environmental, cultural, and economical – changes and variability. Therefore, the paper explicitly focuses on effects of these factors as well as related methodological constraints.

This is to ensure they comply with rules surrounding money laundering and offer a fair and transparent service to traders

Bitonic is a Bitcoin-only exchange that is based in the Netherlands. This was the first of its kind in the country. You can buy Bitcoin here by paying a small commission. The trading fee at this platform is 0.25% of the position size.

Laatste bericht door Erthanax

70+

Laatste bericht door Erthanax155+ marketsCoinbase Earn, on the other hand, enables Dutch traders to complete quizzes and watch educational videos in order to be given free crypto. This offers people the chance to earn whilst they learn, a concept that many platforms are catching on to.

Regulated by multiple financial bodies

Number of cryptocurrenciesWe’ve explained how to sign up and buy Bitcoin below in this quick guide.

19:00 – 19:30 Open doors / warm upe-wallets like Skrill, Neteller, and PayPal are included. Trustly, SEPA, Klarna/Sofort, iDEAL, and credit/debit cards are other deposit options.

This is because it is a necessity for regulated exchanges to follow the rules of the jurisdictions they fall under to operate in full. Moving onto the funding of a Bitstamp account – SEPA deposits are free of charge to Dutch traders. However, withdrawals are charged at €3.

3. Srovnání poplatků při nákupu akciových CFD

As no value is added to the underlying cryptocurrency, this implies that the digital asset will be taxed in Box 3 Jste investorem z Česka a máte zájem o investování přímo z pohodlí vašeho domova? Pakliže jste odpověděli ano, pokračujte ve čtení této eToro recenze, kde si odhalíme a srovnáme zkušenosti, poplatky a další důležité faktory, které mají vliv na výsledek vaší investice.

Do note there is a 0.5% standard commission fee at Bitstamp. Moreover, this platform is registered with the DNB. As such, Bitstamp states that Dutch traders must complete the KYC procedure prior to being able to make a withdrawal to an external address.

At this point, driven by Bitcoin’s success, more cryptocurrencies began to appear on the scene. By the start of 2018, Bitcoin had a huge market capitalization of $255 billion. BTC saw some highs and lows but mainly moved sideways in the years that followed.Výsledek

Při vkladu debetní/kreditní kartou nebo e-peněženkou na eToro proběhne však vklad okamžitě a můžete začít investovat.

In Amsterdam, it’s possible to buy Bitcoin and then use it to pay for hotels, bike rental, boat tours, cafes, retail shops, and much more

High fees for trading cryptocurrencies  NFT marketplace and crypto Visa card

150+ coins supportedCo se týče výběrů, tak opět nejde o nic složitého. Stačí přejít na účet, zvolit možnost výběru peněz a zadat částku. Vzhledem k zákonům proti praní špinavých musíte peníze vybrat na stejné místo, odkud jste peníze původně vkládali, a to minimálně do výše provedených vkladů.

250+

15 Reacties

Týdně zadá v průměru 25 obchodů, takže je hodně aktivní. Co se týče aktiv tohoto eToro copy obchodníka, tak 60 % tvoří akcie. Dále ho oslovily také komodity, měny, kryptoměny a ETF.

1. Metoda Brucea Schneiera-5.5%

This includes opting to buy BTC from a regulated platform rather than a lesser-known crypto exchange.

NASDAQ (USA)Oplichting - RadarDebit card fee

What crypto exchanges are legal in the Netherlands?

Regulation

This guide has reviewed the best crypto exchanges in the Netherlands. However, traders should be aware that tax is payable on digital assets in the country.

This can take place daily, weekly, or monthly and saves busy investors from placing orders manually. Traders can fund a Bitconic account using iDEAL or SEPA for fast and reliable cryptocurrency purchases. Note that SEPA and iDEAL deposits are charged at €0,50 per transaction.

1,05 £

2022 has seen Bitcoin drop to its lowest levels since 2020 and this could represent an opportunity for people looking to buy Bitcoin in the Netherlands to grab a bargain.

What is the best crypto exchange in the Netherlands?

No debit card deposits

As such, this is something to check prior to signing up. Moreover, this Dutch crypto exchange will delete an account if the holder fails to complete the KYC process within a month.


B

bitcoin360ai amsterdam

More actions