As far as I'm aware of, the custom changes made by theymos are not open-source.

What are you exactly trying to do (i.e. what's the problem)?

It does not matter who Satoshi is/was. Please stop making useless threads such as this one. It is actually much better that we don't know who she is.

Either one of those options would be a nightmare.

All I can say is: If you think that, despite all the evidence that refutes his claims, CW is still Satoshi, there's something wrong with your way of thinking. Stop appealing to authority. Gavin doesn't know what he's talking about. He drank too much kool-aid that day.

This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Begging.

Wrong. Transactions take 1-3 sections usually. Confirmations take 10 minutes on average.

Then stop being cheap and include the recommended fee.

Even if the block size limit was 1 GB it can't be helped. Certain entities would bloat the blockchain with spam occasionally.

What we can see here is definitely not bannable (selling vouch copies?). However, any suspicious behavior usually points out that the user in question is not trustworthy. In that case, it is likely that they would receive a negative rating from someone in DT.

I guess it fits since you're questioning the forum's policy on said behavior.

I've just completed the form on a virtual Linux machine. The questions are definitely very simple and it takes very little time to answer them. Hopefully you know that the 4 implementations in the first question are very different. Core is the main implementation, XT is dead, Classic is dying and BU has some people behind it (although a very low number nodes). I do like how the questions involved the central banks and fractional reserve banking which is one of the main reasons to opt into Bitcoin.

Another failed FUD attempt. Besides, you have to own Bitcoin first in order to be able to "dump fast".

What a load of bullshit. "Better cryptos", like what? Centralized, non-censorship resistant blockchains like ETH? Seems like someone is really hurt about not buying Bitcoin in time.


It is holding $660 which is surprising because it is still $200 up from May.

I don't see an (decentralized) altcoin that has a comparable team of developers.

This thread is not in the right section. Speculative talk should be in 'Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Economics > Speculation'.

Correct. It is too early to have a 'stable' price for something that is not backed by the traditional "ways" (gold and such). It is possibly that the price will stabilize more after we have some ETFs and such (i.e. it will have smaller, percentage-wise, upswings and downswings).

Exactly. Most of the people 'panicking' in the Speculation section during "crashes" are actually playing in their hands.

I disagree. You can't know this as there is no way to measure it.

This does not make sense. The forum staff would not do something in that 'fashion'.

As hard as it to understand this, I'll take a go at it: There is no reason for Czech to have its own section (yet). There are less than 600 posts since the creation of the thread (which was 5 years ago). Since there is not dedicated section, that means that you should not be opening multiple threads regarding the same languages. Altcoin giveaway threads are also disallowed.

This does not make sense to me. Please elaborate.

So you're staying as long as you can earn a few bucks from signature campaigns? You're definitely here for all the right reasons.

Your statament does not even make sense (all that matters to you that you're staying?). Additionally, it does matter what happens. You can't let a controversial HF take over, else the system is not as resistant as you think (which is one of the reasons that Bitcoin's blockchain is so valuable).
If you want to be ignorant enough and support the wrong side or not care at all, nobody can stop you.

Nonsense. Stop posting FUD. This is not how adoption works. Just because at times there seems to be a lack of space (regardless of the cause), that does not mean that the current limit can not support more users. There will always be a time where existing users create less TX's, at which there is room for other people to transact (more). You can't know where the adoption is at either. One user could easily be making thousands of TX's a day just to use up the space within the blocks. Transaction volume does not necessarily have to imply increased user adoption.

It was never well suited for microtransactions.

So paying 10 cents means that it is "uneconomical"?

This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Illegal.

You've made a slight mistake when it comes to digicoinuser and polished copper. The last entry says '9' but it should be '91'. Additionally, here's the updated list for me:
Polished gold: 33
Brass: 42, 68
Polished Silver: 30, 68
Antique copper: 40 (in case that you don't want it anymore)

This is likely one of the reasons for which Satoshi is gone. What Vitalik has done, and what they're trying to do is counter-intuitive to decentralized blockchains.

We're most likely talking about people that are solely here because of their own foolish greed.

This is the wrong section for price talk. You might want to visit Speculation.

Buying a centralized coin with blacklisting? You're supporting all the right things.

No. You have no idea whether Bitfinex actually had problems or not. It is very normal for something to occasionally go offline. Not repairing a problem on time usually leads to even greater problems and even longer downtime. The real question is whether they've handled it professionally or not.

---

It might be wise to stay relevant to the thread and not discuss altcoins.

No. Technically it isn't even "live" after being merged, it has to go through the activation and grace period. Anyhow, RC1 should be released soon.

Again, the main idea behind Segwit is fixing transaction malleability. If you want to improperly understand a statement, I can't stop you.

Because a certain group of people tried to promote a controversial HF (which is useless) as the alternative.

The argument does only hold no merit in the case where one was comparing it to the block size limit increase. It does not seem like you do and as such feel free to ignore it. This might be a 'decent' argument for deploying Segwit as a HF.

Then don't quote it twice and make double posts.

Bullshit. That doesn't make sense.

I disagree. Take a look here:


Yet the miners are producing partially full blocks. It comes down to their own settings, some might not want to include very cheap/free transactions.

It is as close at it gets. It will be merged when it is ready. Anyhow, complaining won't get anyone anywhere. I've seen quite a few people demanding stuff yet they've never contributed anything.

I doubt that many 0-fee transactions would be included at this point even if the average block size was lower. This is due to some factors, and one being the huge amount of spam transactions in the 1-10 satoshis/byte range.

Well, once a thread has reached its course of life: either the seller stopped providing the goods and/or it has moved away from the original topic, it should be locked. This one was locked and as such I've archived it last night (IIRC).

Newbies shouldn't be allowed to create threads would be a better start. I can't say I disagree with the idea.

I'd say that they are most likely going to be a minority in comparison to non-genuine newbies.

It isn't. I've simply stated that a capacity boost will come with Segwit (which is correct).

Not understanding how to use it? As far as the user is concerned nothing changes. You just have to update your wallet. Besides, when it comes to a hard fork everyone has to upgrade or else they will be left behind (adoption argument makes no sense as far as Segwit is concerned).

Implementation == working code. It is implemented in the testnet, so that fits your definition of it as well. These are the two pull requests that you should be looking at: Segregated witness, Segregated witness rebased.

I think that you've got it the other way around. The only way that that could make sense is if the miners were directly manipulating the price by selling fewer coins. Even though that is a remote possibility, I don't think that it has much to do with the sudden rise. IMO most of the people here have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to the price, only a few actual make decent analysis. They just make guesses.

---

Note: If the idea behind this thread is to discuss the price changes then it is in the wrong section.