|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Indirect ref. spam.
|
|
|
|
Surely, any kind of incentives are welcome regardless of what kind of population are we talking about. However, is this necessarily the best approach? What happened to spreading the awareness of the corrupt system? Generally, I think a combination of awareness and incentives/services/merchants is required in order to make Bitcoin more desirable. This is why we need an incentive, such as cheaper prices. Purse.io is the only reason I know of why I would want to pay with BTC. Other than that, I see no reason and I value my BTC too much to spend on "stuff".
A decent amount of services offer discounts on Bitcoin purchases. What I see lacking is primarily Ebay/Amazon/Google/Apple/Samsung. Once you have those on-board, you get an access to wast amount of content without having to go through intermediaries (e.g. buying gift cards somewhere, or asking people to buy stuff for you). But until then, like I said before, I don't see real reasons of why the average joe is going to pay with BTC, specially when they don't get paid in BTC, because if you get paid directly in BTC you are more prone to spend it, since you don't need to do the stupid fiat->BTC->buy conversion.
You make a fair point, but the solution to this 'problem' isn't a simple one either. It would be great if there was a possibility to opt-in for a salary in Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Illegal.
|
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Ref. spam.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think your government is going to make Bitcoin illegal anytime soon, especially not if they've already legalized it in some form. Bitcoin is pseduo-anonymous, so regulating it makes it much easier in comparison to altcoins that provide more anonymity. Coins such as Monero are likely to become illegal. That being said, I would still continue to use Bitcoin without any alterations. If the traditional system wasn't as flawed as it is, there would practically be no need for such coins (decentralization wise).
Note: Please lock this thread after it has reached a sufficient number of answers. Otherwise, it will turn into a 'rephrasing contest' by spammers.
|
|
|
|
Minerjones has a MS67 Lealana 10 LTC Silver 1/2oz in their sales thread currently for sale. I don't think I've seen more LTC ones in the recent sales threads (there were some Bitcoin Lealana coins though). |
|
|
|
$0.25 as a miner fee for sending $575 worth of bitcoin?
The amount being sent is irrelevant to the fee. The same fee could be required for $1 worth of Bitcoin depending on the transaction size. With the network congestion there's no way of avoiding those fees and provide a decent service, if you cut on fees you'll end up with huge delays in transaction confirmation or no confirmation at all.
No, there is very little network congestion primarily due to spam. You don't know how to properly use it, as in properly set up the right fees. The most likely reason for the fee to be in that range, is your transaction being in the higher Bytes regions.
It primarily comes down to the recommended satoshis/byte fee. People that are wasting time with faucets and other nonsense that constantly pays out little amounts are the ones that are to blame for the huge UTXO set. Their transactions are usually bigger that average/normal. |
|
|
|
What numbers are we talking about here? They were not graded, right? Offers are welcome and I will add a price to these shortly.
Please do.
Update: Oh wait, I must have mixed it up with something. These aren't numbered ones? |
|
|
|
-snip-
After that fiasco anything he says lacks credibility. Gavin comparing Bitcoin to MySpace is meaningless because he's been wrong once too often.
He's lost his credibility ever since the time that we needed 20 MB blocks right now, or the network would be doomed. "Gavin Andresen is at serious risk of becoming the MySpace of bitcoin developers" - Mike Hearn He's already joined the likes of Zander (currently the main Classic developer). "Why should we change them for the likes of Coinbase and Bitpay?"
The primary reason behind a higher block size limit is increased user adoption, which will lead to a higher price point, ergo greed. Why should we change to fit the greed of certain companies? |
|
|
|
Come on guys. With all the registered members here we have to be able to fill 32 spots with people who own rocketleague.
Maybe there isn't enough visibility here, and a cross-post may do the tournament good. I've reduced the number of spots to 16 now, and adjusted everything. Hopefully, it will be easier to fill. Can't hurt to try, right? I suck at the game to begin with, so don't worry if you feel that your skill level is not up to par.
The primary idea is fun, and crowning of the champion!  |
|
|
|
Key benefits of choosing ACE: - All-in-one-solution available.
- Provide your own signature or work directly with our GFX artist for free.
- There's no need to hire a campaign manager.
- You don't have to worry about spam anymore.
- Fully customizable contract shaped to your needs.
- All funds are securely stored within the group.
T&C:- Advertised service has to be of high quality or provably fair. Based on this, ACE has the right to deny service to a potential client.
- The service should be in business at least for 3 months.
- Payment must be made in advance and will be held up internally.
- ACE reserves the right to cancel a contract at any point in time if they conclude that the said company has lost its reputation. In this case no returns/refunds will be issued unless otherwise decided by the group.
- ACE can not be held accountable for any misdoings by the client.
- ACE will guarantee a certain total number of posts made by the group as a whole. The number of posts made by individual posters is not considered.
- The ACE group assembles the team of posters for a specific contract; the service consists of a group not individuals. The ACE group can at any given time substitute, add or remove an individual poster without notifying the client. This framework secures that the agreed total number of posts will be reached as the group has a dynamic size.
- The signature should include a link to the ACE thread.
Participants: Lauda (Legendary/Staff Member): Mostly found in Bitcoin Discussion, Meta and Collectibles. Anduck (Hero Member): Mostly found in Collectibles, Auctions and Goods. Blazed (Legendary Member): Mostly found in Collectibles, Computer hardware and Auction. A very trusted member of both the forums and Bitcoin-OTC. minerjones (Hero Member): Mostly found in Collectibles, Auctions and Goods. digicoinuser (Hero Member): Mostly found in Collectibles, Auctions and Goods. Lincoln6Echo (Legendary Member): Mostly found in Collectibles, Goods, Auction and the German Local board. knightdk (Hero Member): Mostly found in Technical Support, Bitcoin Discussion and Development & Technical Discussion. coin@coin (Legendary Member): Mostly found in Altcoins, Collectibles and Auctions. minifrij (Legendary Member): Mostly found in Micro Earnings, Meta and Services.
Guaranteed 1100 posts a month. However, in many cases the resulting post count will be much higher. More information can be found in the announcement thread.
Minimum bid: 2.0 BTC
Bidding increments: 0.05 BTC
Auction end: 31-08-2016 20:00 UTC
BIN: 3.0 BTC
|
|
|
|
Concerns expressed by Gavin are shared amongst many of us for at least a couple years now, I'm of the opinion we've already passed the no return line some time ago, as people cannot build on the bitcoin network and many have been pushed out and had to build their own blockchains or build in some other blockchain, this is reflected on the current low value and the occasional pump without the possibility for growth.
No. Go back to the cave that your crawled out. The rhetoric being spread by Gavin & co is bullshit; the market has decided what the block size should be. Gavin, Hearn, Ver, etc. all lack adequate skills and thus have to resort to social media to try and divert some support their way. Code up a better Bitcoin implementation, and let the market decide. Oh right, you can't. I have no idea why he's on that list. Gavin has a singular commit in v0.13.0; a test that he wrote was used by someone else in their pull request. Now he argues that wanting to validate every Bitcoin transaction is "irrational." In other words, he suggests we toss the entire full node security model into the trash bin.
There you have it. He's wants to completely change the model that satoshi built. I wonder who influenced him. 
Update: You missed the 'validating transactions' part. |
|
|
|
as your privet messages cannot be deleted by anyone other then yourself.
Yes, they can. Either by an admin or someone who has gained access to your account in some way. If you delete the thread with my posts, and I am in the signature campaign, posts in the company will be counted?
This is not relevant to the thread and unspecific. If a thread is delete/trashed which contains your own posts, your post count will go down. How exactly your posts are going to be counted depends on your campaign manager. You should ask them. |
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Duplicate.
|
|
|
|
Good suggestion. I hope 2FA is implemented on new forum.
No. This isn't any kind of suggestion from my side. 2FA was planned for the forum long ago, as can be seen in the Current requirements thread (Google Docs link). Not only will it prevent hacking of users account but also curb the menace of multiple accounts
No. It will not affect the usage of multiple accounts. |
|
|
|
There is no "script" used to build either one of those. Both are companies that have spent a lot of money to build and secure their infrastructure. AFAIK there aren't many open-source web wallets; an example of this would be Coinbin. as i want build something same features please ?
Start development from scratch, although I don't see why you'd want to do this. |
|
|
|
The forum is based on an older version of SMF (specifically, 1.1.19 as can be seen in the bottom center of your screen). A new version of the forum has been in development for quite some time now, and it would be a waste of resources to implement 2FA here now. This is the link to the Beta version of the new forum, alternatively you can follow the development here.
I'd say that a good part of those accounts get hacked due to the leak during the previous forum hack (as some have no changed their passwords and whatnot). |
|
|
|
Count me in,as long as its taking place post 28th of this month.Although i dont think enough players will join, + the fee is a bit high for this kind of stuff.
Yes, please read the second post again: The aim is to run the tournament by next Weekend (2/3/4 of September).
I've also reserved your spot and updated the picture. In case there is inadequate interest for 32 players, then we will scale it down to 16 players and make some adjustments. |
|
|
|
The aim is to run the tournament by next Weekend (2/3/4 of September). If we are unable to gather enough players, then we will adjust the participant pool or the date. You are able to reserve a spot without paying, but are required to pay as soon as a date has been set.
Current list of participants (will be updated frequently):  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
