All coins are flawed some way, but the question is, what kind of flaw it has?
Well, technically all coins aren't 'garbage' (seems the user used two adjectives). I'd say that most of them are garbage, and that a fair number runs on outdated/insecure codebase. For bitcoin, the worst case scenario is this scaling problem.
It's really just a matter of time before these boundaries get pushed. hard fork(eth: --oppose-dao-fork) = intentional split = mitosis
consensus change = majority upgrade = gene therapy
-snip-
What's up with so many analogies recently regarding hard forks? |
|
|
|
Lauda, if you would kindly remove the series 1 litecoin my ocd would appreciate it.
I had actually forgotten about it. Now that you've mentioned it, I do recall you telling me to reserve it. I've delisted it now. Thanks! Will be coughing the btc up to mj tonight for it.
Wheelz1200
Please let me know once the purchase is complete (within the channel). |
|
|
|
do you promoted automatically by admin?
Usually you're offered the position by the admin or you request or apply for this position?
If you're doing that, you're likely doing it wrong (potentially excluding local sections). people are very lucky who get this position from admin by their own decision.
It's usually a thankless job. |
|
|
|
Confirmed and ticket updated. Thank you. That nice set of Ometeotl coins wouldn't happen to be funded as a little bonus would they  Edit: what number are the Ometeotl coins? In the pic they have number 008 on them but in the second prize description it's says #33, what am i missing here? The pictures of the Ometeotl set and Goxxed coins are exemplary (as stated in post), as I didn't want to bother Mitchell at the time to take a picture of mine (since they're untouched anyways). The correct numbers are the ones stated in the prizes, so #33 for Ometeotl and #84 for Goxxed coins. |
|
|
|
After quickly looking at the accounts I can say that their behavior and posts seem to be similar. Cyrus is likely the only one who can confirm whether they truly are connected or not, although I'd say that they are. I obviously can't take any actions myself, but they deserve a permanent ban on sight. I can only take action against such newbies and I did find a decent group today. My complete list of farmed accounts is on the previous page, big long list over 300 accounts, you cant miss it! I update it from time to time, and move it forward.
I've looked around the thread, but wasn't sure whether all information was in a singular post. |
|
|
|
|
When did reservations start? I'm wondering how the low numbers are already reserved. Can you speed up auction for #1 and #2?
|
|
|
|
Cross post from another thread, as I wasn't aware that this one existed: -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=M388
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Fingerprint: (CBB8 39C0 188B ADE8 A80C 90B2 F4E3 AD3C 52F9 9ADB). Please add my key. |
|
|
|
recomended fees is always change for everytime?  the current rec fees is 70 sathosi/byte, but should this fees is change for every time? Like the another thread. Of course they do. Primarily it comes down to what fees people are including and the amount of transactions that are unconfirmed. I really think it's just a typo, 0.008 BTC fees is just ridiculous. I use blockchain.info daily and have never encountered such high fees.
It comes down how you look at it. Would you say a ~$5 fee is ridiculous for transferring a few million? 0.0008 BTC on the other hand is happening more frequently, but you can change it with 'advanced send'.
This is very cheap IMO. |
|
|
|
Ultimately, I will accept whatever it should be called provided this proposal gets accepted at all
You are right about that, and it doesn't matter much. I just wanted to point it out because it may make some people think you're suggested an instant jump (in case they don't read all the posts in the thread). I doubt the ranking system will ever change though. But we can all hope.
If you make a compelling case and suggest a noticeable improvement over the current one, I don't see why not. I think the current rank system is perfect and there's no need to revamp it.
Nothing is perfect, and this system is far from it. What about increasing the time of updating the activity period from 14 days to 28 or 30 days?
No. |
|
|
|
This is my new address that I will be using for a very long time:
1LaudaexFYZano87acDNGscmqDbM3ZTLBD
The address is still valid, and I'm adding a new PGP key here (any other keys should be considered invalid): -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=M388
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I, Lauda (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=101872), confirm that I control the PGP key with the fingerprint CBB839C0188BADE8A80C90B2F4E3AD3C52F99ADB as well as the private key to 1LaudaexFYZano87acDNGscmqDbM3ZTLBD which is posted in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg10896717#msg10896717. Date: 10/05/2016
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1LaudaexFYZano87acDNGscmqDbM3ZTLBD
HOIGjr0o38SQM7IoKm7AfovmE3OHXIbpPLpakV4HqRFWRwo97x+65BCs9SMA4/Frr0Q6s2E5mhjK6dVdGfjJOT0=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Update: Here you go, a quote  I verified the signed message using electrum 2.7, everything was OK! Thank you. |
|
|
|
So what would the average fee be in satoshis per byte?
The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 60 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
Data queried at time of writing this post. I believe all of the wallets whether it is offline or a webwallet would let the user choose how much you want to pay in transaction fees.
This is not the case. So it would be unfair to even suggest for the OP to stop using blockchain.info.
No, it is not unfair. Any experienced Bitcoin user will tell you to stay away from online wallets. |
|
|
|
here we go again..the doomsday dreamer not reading the point.
Having 3 genuine node operators has nothing to do with Sybil attacks. They're likely going to come afterwards with third party actors. but in a scenario of no sybil attack ability.. 3 nodes could functionally allow the network to continue.
They could, in a optimal scenario where we are living under a rainbow. but lauda wont accept group dominance being a technical form of sybil, because he cant take off the fanboy hat to think logically that his groups dominance has technical negatives of being the attack he is doomsdaying.
Misleading. Should we not make "hosting a node" as easy as possible, for everyone to be able to run a node? The more nodes we have, the stronger the decentralization.
I'd like to see a user-friendly, node-only client that is as secure as Bitcoin Core. We could surely diversify the network with such a client. I don't need the wallet functionality on mine (I did disable it). |
|
|
|
Miners are getting greedy.
This has nothing to do with the miners, ergo they are not getting greedy. Please don't post misleading information. Hello!
Okay so I had to do a few transactions from my Blockchain wallet to some other wallets, and I have a question: as soon as I send an amount of money, it requires me to send a fee of 0.008BTC. Is this even normal?
1) Stop using such a stupid wallet. 2) The fee is dependant on the wallet + the transaction size. 3) The fee should be displayed in satoshis/byte for accurate representation (which lets us determine whether it was too high or not. 4) Look at 1. |
|
|
|
No minimum increment? 0.30001 BTC |
|
|
|
Continuing where we left off from the other thread. Regarding the user: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=836341 emezh10. No not everything is in my thread. emezh10 is not in my thread, yet. But I can see his other accounts. let me know if you want to know about them.
Could you list the other accounts so that they can be looked into?
Also I have two thoughts for this thread: 1) Could you compile all the links into one post somehow? From what I see they're spread out depending on when you find them. 2) What's up with some of those broken links starting with "#ttps"? |
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan. Reason: Duplicate. |
|
|
|
The ranks should just follow the existing pattern of doubling the activity each time. Legendary should be made achievable at 960 then the next rank at 1920 and so on.
I see this problematic in the long run as you end up having a lot of people labeled in a specific rank that is supposed to be *rare*, e.g. legendary (note: How long this is going to take is debatable). Soon most of us will be legendaries.
No, the word soon is wrong here. I've seen a lot of people state this, and yet it isn't even close to happening. Please note that I'm talking only about increasing the activity levels required for reaching the next rank, not about the activity itself, which will get increased as per usual, i.e. every two weeks by 14 points
Progressively increasing the activity levels would probably be a more accurate description of what you're suggesting. users should be VETERAN this rank must be given based on the activity level as well as a voting system between the admin or the staff members and make a bench mark which cannot be gained easily to this user class, how about this suggestion folks.
Staff votes on Veteran rank for user X -> User X scams group of people Y -> Group of people Y blame staff for promoting user X. No thanks. |
|
|
|
this is a primary setting that all users (not advanced, but those who read wiki) must use because this setting can limit the amount of bandwidth (in upload) on the node .
this setting is a good point to allow a limited inrush demand but to cut the perpetual demand of the Bitcoin network.
I disagree that this is the optimal settings for limiting bandwidth in a node. I've found that the average number of connections does not directly correlate with the amount of bandwidth that will be spent in a given month (e.g. month with average 40-60 vs. month with average 20-40 = marginal difference). I think I haven't limited by node connection-wise (default is 125 I believe), but have placed a software based upload speed limit. I think a better way of limiting is just using: -maxuploadtarget=<MiB per day>
Even this isn't a fixed limit, although it should reduce the consumption once it has been met. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
