It is more in the line of: Nobody cares. Faucets are really pointless. To be honest, I have never clicked on one of the rotators since I've been around. Considering that they are indirectly posting referral links, it would make sense to disallow them as well. I'm against any kind of referral links (both indirect and direct).

Ethereum? I'm actually disappointed with that decision. Although the general idea and packing similar to Genesis is nice and I'd like to see more of that in the future.

This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Account generator.

To believe (e.g. to be certain) something like that does not make rational sense. To say that is a statistic probability makes much more sense. However, this has been discussed over and over again. In order for the cryptocurrency space to thrive, it would be most suitable if there were multiple coins at the top and not just one (as currently Bitcoin is). Nobody can say that either one will happen for sure; they would only be speculating.

No. I asked a question, I did not create the asumption. You were the one who said that the sources can be found on the WWW so I've stumbled upon the article with those algorithms. You can't blame anyone else besides your own logic.

Interesting, but that still does not confirm that the implicit meaning of his statement is that is it not possible (rather than just being difficult).

I didn't know that properly replying to a thread was equal to trolling. In any case, I would not be the one handling that report. I might as well repeat this part:

Are you referring to the the shortest path algorithms? I wouldn't even consider those complex. I have one implemented in Java, it isn't certainly something special nor hard to understand. Besides, this is what you think that he 'meant' by that. How about you ask him to clarify, rather than make assumptions?

Useless thread is going to stay useless, nice to know.

I disagree. Saying that something becomes "much more difficult" is not the equivalent to saying that something is impossible.

He did not say that. Re-read the quote properly.

The internet is also a nice source.

Spreading FUD by posting non-negative statements? Interesting.

As soon as you resort to ad hominem, the "I'm an expert" story and your credibility goes down the drain. I've merely asked for sources (a single quote does not cover your story) and made conclusions based on your own (presented) logic. Look at it from a different perspective: A random member appears, claims that they've been a software engineer for 30 years and that they must be right because of that. How does that sound to you?

Tl;dr: I'm a "expert", and I'm right because you are not and that is the definition of it all. Very useful thread and many useful sources were provided.

I'm posting here just to inform you of the current owner of Polished Copper #1. Time to order more!

And neither are you.

What "statistical outliers"? Where can we see these.

You cited nothing in regards to that part either. Going by your own statement, your own comments are useless.

Nope.

The definition of "reasonably well" is subjective. He never claimed "LN also requires a few numbers of centralized servers".

Another one of those people that can't tell the difference between moderation and censorship. Please also tell me that you like certain HF's. 

This isn't something new though. We've seen examples of similar spam (with different websites) in the past. The people that are able to ban this guy permanently are currently not here, so a bit of patience is required.

Not really, no ("order-of-magnitude").

Even though that is correct ('can't scale efficiently'), the claim "experts such as myself" is really pointless in this context.

Not really, no.

If by better, you mean partially-centralized scam coins that are being pumped, then you're wasting our time.

There is no such thing. The chance of their prediction coming true is almost as equal as the chance of the next person's prediction. Nobody can really know for sure how much and when the market is going to shift.

---

Additionally, why do people have the need to open up so many speculation threads (+ in the wrong section) about the halving? Quite redundant.

Tracing random numbers (e.g. amounts) or addresses won't do you any good.

Not really, no.

The term that is usually used is 'pseudo-anonymous', but your statement holds. Honestly, what did people expect? Completely anonymous coins are most likely never going to be available on regulated exchanges.

Coupled by who? The only people that could potentially do that are the ones to which you've given your personal information to (e.g. exchanges). For everyone else, you are anonymous.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Stop using online wallets already.

Coinbase je otrov. Ako ste imalo pratili detaljnije desavanja u Bitcoin svijetu, te oko Coinbase (na redditu se znalo naci ljudi koji pomoc traze), onda bi ste znali zasto.

Zasto ne bi bili? Hakirani su bili i opet korisnici nisu bili osteceni. Znate li za jedan drugi primjer ogromnog gubitka (milioni su u pitanju bili) gdje nisu osteceni korisnici? Uz to, support je uvijek koristan bio i nisam nikakvih problema imao s koristenjem stranice/isplatom/uplatom.

I actually have no problem with that. People will try to scam either way. It isn't even hard to avoid scammers, and it is quite rare that someone that is 'trusted' engages in such behavior. The spam is the primary problem in this situation, not the scams.

Not doing anything exaggerates the problems the most.

No. The opposite would happen as it would be risky to engage in account trades. Read QS's post.

Median exists for a reason.

Well, obviously. If the Segwit soft fork does not get activated then there can be no adoption. However, I don't see a reason for which it should not get activated.

Yes, that is the median TX size.

Well then that is something else entirely. Posts that have weird formatting and/or punctuation can end up being interpreted wrongly. Are you talking about adoption (i.e. users) or activation (as in the Soft fork itself)? Because in the first case that assumption will never become true. In order for zero adoption everyone would have to move away from wallets that incorporate Segwit. What are the odds of that happening?

Because franky has been chasing both Maxwell and me (among others) around with his nonsense when he didn't even understand what median meant in the first place.

It doesn't matter whether you have a opinion or not when it is logically wrong. Saying that Segwit will never make a difference is wrong. As soon as we start seeing Segwit transactions (i.e. we reach any kind of improvement, e.g. 1.05MB), we will notice the improvement.

Yes. That's what the last calculations done by aj (IIRC) on the mailing list show.

What is this even supposed to mean?

It has been in testing for more than 5 months now.

The go ahead and propose a properly designed BIP and not something improperly designed with added limitations such as the one that Gavin proposed.

Who was ever abused for disagreeing with staff members? I don't recall any examples of such.

There is no such thing as a "staff opinion". This is solely Lauda's opinion and is in no way related to the opinion of any other staff member or the forum itself.