|
I'll take number 9 as agreed per IRC.
|
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Insubstantial. Please use the Search function and/or look around this and other sub-boards.
|
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Ref. spam.
|
|
|
|
|
What website are we talking about? You should contact the support staff of that service.
|
|
|
|
This is definitely a properly written article. It was worth reading. We should already be labeling him as a traitor. He's a money-chasing fool who can't control their own greed. That's pretty much it. it's a good read. unfortunately it's probably over the head of most of the sig spamming plebs in this forum. glad to see some people are gearing up for battle. i fucking winced when i saw Gavin talking hella shit in the 0.13.0 release thread on Reddit.
Gavin is obsolete. His developing skills have stagnated and he has been surpassed by the other contributors long ago. literally as soon as Segwit is included in a major release, he says bitcoin is failing to scale, becoming Myspace, blah blah blah. fucking traitor. tired of these clowns.
Segwit still requires some minor changes that will be released in the minor version 0.13.1 with the activation parameters. However, I do agree with the rest. let the real devs do their work. Core is delivering bitcoin to the world on a platter.
They should provide us superior developers and code, not cry out to social media because nobody (with a rational mind and/or decent knowledge) supports their views. |
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Ref. spam.
|
|
|
|
Nodes don't care what wallet you are using when deciding whether to relay a transaction. There is no difference to sending a new transaction with the same wallet or sending it after importing into a new wallet.
I never claimed otherwise though. I think this should be clear to most of the Bitcoin users (or atleast I hope so). If you have to wait after abandontransaction, then you also have to wait after importing into a new wallet. If you don't have to wait after importing into a new wallet, then you don't have to wait after abandontransaction.
This was the key error in my rationalization (I disregarded the waiting time after importing). If a node doesn't remember your old transaction, then they will accept and rebroadcast your new transaction (assuming it is valid and has an adequate fee). This is true if you abandontransaction and is true if you export and import. The reason that the node doesn't remember your old transaction doesn't matter. Maybe they don't remember it because they didn't like the fee and never accepted it into memory, maybe they don't remember it because it has been a long time and they've cleared it out of memory to make room for a new transaction.
But my point is that it ISN'T faster.
If you have to waiting for the network to 'forget about it' and it "(takes a day or two)" after abandontransaction, then you ALSO have to wait for the network to 'forget about it' and it "(takes a day or two)" after importing into a new wallet.
This viewpoint has made me learn something new today. Thank you for this explanation. I see the error in my thought process as I completely disregarded some aspects when comparing the two options. I don't even know when 'abandontransaction' was added (there seems to be a commit in 0.13.0 for it). The old method of exporting/importing is definitely redundant and slow in comparison to this. |
|
|
|
If you create a new transaction (with the same wallet OR after importing to a new wallet) that uses the same inputs, then any node on the network that still remembers the old transaction will simply refuse to accept and relay your new transaction.
Interesting. What about nodes that have don't have/remember the old transaction due to inadequate fees and/or other reasons? Starting with 0.13.0 nodes won't even relay TX's to others nodes if they don't meet their minrelayfee criteria (AFAIK). Are either of them (exporting or importing) faster or easier than abandontransaction (is this newbie user "huzhuzhu" even likely to know which private key to export)? That's what you seem to have stated and what I've asked for your reasoning about.
I was referring to "faster" than abandoning it and waiting for the network to 'forget about it' (this is why I quoted the part with "(takes a day or two)"). However, it is most certainly not faster than just using abandontransaction. It is actually much slower. |
|
|
|
Isn't CPFP built into Core now (as of 0.13.0)?
It does seem like it, although there is no way to know for sure which miners supports it (at this time). Why would it be faster to do all of the following than just running "abandontransaction" or "bitcoin-qt.exe with -zapwallettexes command line option"? - Find and export the necessary private key
- Set up a whole new wallet
- Import the necessary private key
Doesn't the user have to wait for the network to 'forget' about the transaction before sending another one with a higher fee? Exporting the key into a new wallet doesn't take that much time, importing it just takes a while (at least on Core). |
|
|
|
For CPFP you'll have to send the change output with higher fee. For RBF I'm not entirely sure (haven't tested) but there's someone have a tool for it on this thread. AFAIK for CPFP you need to have a mining pool that has it implemented. I'm not aware of such (besides Eligius ?). -snip-
After that you'll have to wait sometime for nodes to drop your transaction (takes a day or two) before sending again.
Wouldn't it be easier to import the private key into another wallet and attempt a double spend with a high fee? This should save time. |
|
|
|
I don't understand how some people got so tricked by the likes of e.g. Hearn and Gavin, and greedy individuals such as the self proclaimed "Bitcoin Jesus" (the better wording is 'fool') Ver. Please provide us with examples of how Blockstream has taken over control of Bitcoin and how it's damaging the ecosystem. I can't believe they took over complete control of Bitcoin and now everyone is walking away.
Who's walking away? The wannabe Bitcoin dictator Hearn? The (now obsolete) CIA visitor Gavin? The "follow and pump the altcoins jesus" Ver? 
Blockstream is a private company working on an open source protocol, anyone can work and compete against them. Blockchain.info is doing this.
The company was funded by the very same developers that worked on Bitcoin prior. Obviously, if there's a list of features that need to be integrated they may give higher priority to those that may benefit the company. However, there's nothing wrong with that (it's not like they're implementing things without consensus). These 'groups' need to stop with their social media campaigns and start providing good code. The 'group' with a better set of developers and superior code is always going to end up as the primary implementation of Bitcoin (currently Bitcoin Core). |
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Begging.
|
|
|
|
I'd prefer one auction for all 10... I liked this format on your previous auction
One at a time is better.
I have to agree with Canary here. Auctioning them off all at once (or two x 5) seems much more fun and it saves space (otherwise we would have 10 threads) and time.
Any ETA for these auctions yet? |
|
|
|
Here Lauda admits that he trolls people that he thinks is vulnerable.
Who is this "he" Lauda? I thought I was a she. You need to put your act together. I think it's creepy when conversations are being recorded and analyzed like that.
I must apologize that you had to see that. I did not know that the 'work' that I do was evaluated based on how I interact with people outside of the 'workplace'. I need to start being nice to my mother, and very serious in everything that I say to my acquaintances. One of the comic relief attempts during a 'heavy' argument: [23:31:41] <Lauda> Give me COIN or BAN hammerz
They don't have anything on me (even defcon23 changed their mind as can be seen in their trust rating). Acquiring my DOX is near-impossible, finding moderation error is also unlikely (as this is rare), so they have to spy on our chat-room and cherry pick parts of it. That said, I'm going to stay away from this thread (again) as my time is better spent actually moderating.
The only question that should be asked is "Are they doing their job correctly? " Being a staff member isn't only limited to Virgin Mary,saints and alike.
Missed this one:  |
|
|
|
But $0.25 for $1.50 worth of bitcoin isn't reasonable, and that's the situation that is also outlined in the OP.
Don't blame the network for improperly using it. There are certain things called inputs, and outputs which determine the transaction size (among other things). Sincere apologies but ...
full node?
broadcast tx?
miners?
It's all gibberish for us.
We like to keep things simple - we pay our members in Bitcoins because many of them like to use Bitcoins ... we are not into the business of learning how to work with Bitcoins, we just use it to pay members and that's all we need. The Internet is far too full of so much information, there is no time to "learn" it all. Thanks
These two concepts are fairly simple in my opinion and are far from "learning how Bitcoin works" (in depth at least). While this advice was actually flawed, it isn't "gibberish" in itself.
Also, please avoid creating unnecessary consecutive posts like this. You can quote several previous posts in one post. |
|
|
|
|
That's strange. However, I've seen this happen with different programs and it would be really hard to discover what (temporarily) went wrong. Let us know if it happens again, or if you need anything else. Good luck with the new client; I still haven't upgraded.
|
|
|
|
|
The concept is rather very interesting and something unusual for this sub-board. Although with a price point of 0.1947 btc and so many combinations, I will find it very difficult to decide which one I want! Are these going to be numbered?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
