to help make the past support lines clearer:  |
|
|
|
|
My GPU mining computer melted... (stupid Aussie summer heat)... One I have it back running (1 week approx) I'll volunteer to join for debugging.
|
|
|
|
The trend down was one that I was not expecting... My gut feeling still says that it won't be long till we have a strong resistance of 0.80c.  I'm buying accordingly, glad that the price is going down!  |
|
|
|
|
I say don't worry about it... by the time that block 210,000 comes around, we are likely to have a significantly amount of the incentive from transaction fees. A continuous function is 'nice' in theory, however on balance, will cause more harm from the braking change needed. Focus on usability, the generators will care for themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
@creighto, in general thank-you for sharing your excellent understanding of economics! It is well appreciated, by myself, and I'm sure many others on this forum.
On cartels:
There will never be a problem with a cartel that has less than 50% of the generation power. The problem lies with a cartel that has significantly more than 50%. Any block that accepts transactions that the cartel rejects (i.e. low fees), would be orphaned by the cartel, and in a short time later, the cartel will have developed a block chain much longer than the chain developed by the so-called 'scabs.'
The only way I can foresee the free market correcting for the cartel, is for the people conducting the transactions (as a large group) to ignore the cartel's block chain when they behave badly, and only accept the (shorter) scab chain that isn't accepted by the cartel, until the cartel gives up and accepts the chain with small transaction fees.
The problem for bitcoin is that when this 'war' / standoff between the people doing the transactions and the cartel happens, there may be a good 20 blocks of uncertainty before a winner is decided. It really is all about 'my gun is bigger than yours.' This could mean that there would be a good 2h of time where transactions will not be secure from double spending. However there is nothing stopping a smart client from checking both chains.
|
|
|
|
|
It is so remarkable how far this economy has progressed in such a short time, This breaks every record that I can think of.
|
|
|
|
|
What we need is a hot Japanese Chick Rapper...
|
|
|
|
|
It is good, except now I have lots of 2bitcent transactions clogging up transaction history (normally for larger amounts)... Can we have a simple system where we can send like 2BTC and have a balance, no password is needed, just use cookies. Also have the option of sending a email with a link that re-establishes the cookies. (in the case of removing browser history, or changing computers)
|
|
|
|
|
This is so ridiculous! I get the impression that Nakamoto is a very quite and reserved person. I only hope that he knew what he was getting into when he made bitcoin. Being portrayed as a comic superhero, or rapper, is just part of the job I guess.
|
|
|
|
Now the trick is to simply write the article in such a way that it describes the concept of bitcoins without sounding like an advertisement. That isn't as easy as it seems where you have to work hard to keep the tone of the article neutral.
Ok, Lets start composing the "Wikipedia article" to be on our own wiki. |
|
|
|
I suspect the generator rules can vary with time, but to fend off chaos they should be a deterministic function of the content of previous block(s) and not depend on the transaction pool. I also suspect that if the customers & merchants do not hold a significant fraction of the Ghash/sec, the 'rules' will tend to make a generator cartel with high fees.
Yes I believe the real potential issue is the 'cartel,' I'm not worried about the transaction fees being too low, rather too high. I think that studying this with game theory would be very fun, but, I don't have the time also. |
|
|
|
If I upload a nudie picture of myself, would I get lot of bitcoins?  lol |
|
|
|
lol nudie on bitcoin! |
|
|
|
[... , I] it think writing informal specifications documenting how bitcoin works right now is a great idea, and will be really helpful when it is time to go through some standardization process.
This is the most important thing to happen, IMHO, doing so would dramatically lower the barriers of entry of creating 2nd generation bitcoin clients independent of the reference implementation. So if it would take many man_months of work to develop a formal specification, then how long would it take to develop a 'good enough' informal specification? |
|
|
|
|
I am not a professional programmer, or technical document writer.
How much work, (man hours), would it take to do a Formal Bitcoin Protocol Specification?
I would like to help organize to get this done.
|
|
|
|
|
really good job, easy way to get money out. Better than paypal(sucks).
|
|
|
|
There is decision underway for a more formal description of the bitcoin protocol than the C++ code. http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1860.0I personal think that a good platform and language agnostic protocol description is one of the more pressing issues facing the bitcoin community. If I was more experienced I would have offered to help. A formal security analysis, is important, but a slightly longer term problem to address. |
|
|
|
|
I also trade bitcoins with Aussie $
|
|
|
|
For example, for a block to be valid, no more than half of the transactions in the block can have fees below the average fee for that block. So, if 10 transactions have a fee of 1BTC and 10 more have a fee of 0.5BTC the average is 0.75. Now half the fees are already below this so an additional transaction with a 0.5BTC fee cannot be accepted, but a 0.8BTC fee is okay.
'No more than half less than the average' will not maintain the transaction fees, without other factors pushing up the fees. The fee will progressively get lower as the low side will get attacked harder than the high side. In the above example a transaction fee of 0.751 will increase the average very slightly, then the next transaction fee of 0 will lower the average (relatively) much more. The current breed of stock generators, generate continuously, and only ignore a block if it is deemed illegal. When transaction fees become the main incentive to generate a new breed of generators will be developed that will maximize the profit made. One of the features of this bread of generator is that certain 'rules' will be voluntarily agreed upon, some will not accept blocks that have two many low fee transactions, and will wait for blocks that have only higher fee transactions. The risk of a generator who accepts too many (new) low fee transactions is that the most of the network will ignore and orphan it's block. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
