The main problem that I see here is that you are wasting your time in faucets. Doing just about any kind of work will net you more money than they will. Anyhow, here are some other units that might be useful in the future: 1 BTC = 1,000 mBTC (millibitcoin)
1 BTC = 1,000,000 μBTC (microbitcoin)
1 BTC = 100,000,000 Satoshis
1 mBTC = 100,000 Satoshis
1 μBTC (microbitcoin) = 100 Satoshis
|
|
|
|
|
Another version of the book this early? I can't really say that I like the idea. However, I'll keep my eye out on this one. Things will certainly get interesting once you release the first batch.
|
|
|
|
can someone please teach lauda to research..
i think lauda needs to learn that payment channels involve HUBS..
There's a difference between being based on just a single "big hub" and being based on the hub and spoke model. The first one can be interpreted in a lot of ways. Not clarifying ones statement can end up with misinterpretation and misinformation. Besides, the hub and spoke model was the initial vision. I don't know whether they have finally settled up on a model, but it could very well end up being something in the form of wallet-to-wallet routing. We will just have to wait and see. even the link HE provided.. which i doubt he has even bothered to investigate.. talks about hubs
I merely quoted some useful information and yet you try to use it against me. How Classic.  Now get back to that ignore list. |
|
|
|
it's more centralized than bitcoin, it is based on big hub, this is centralization to me
No. It is not based on a just a "big hub" but rather the hub and smoke model which is common. It might be wise to clarify statements as this opens up the potential for misinformation (as can be found in r/btc). Lightning Network is a good ideal,it fast the transforming.
How is that Google translate working out for you?
Update: Updated post. |
|
|
|
Just look at how Windows took over nearly most of the desktop market, they had far less stable and secure technology comparing with unix system at that time, especially the network part, but they get the right market direction before any other tech gurus realized it, they patch each bug, patch after patch, but their direction never changed: End user friendly
Comparing Windows to Bitcoin is a false analogy. Cherry picking analogies won't help you build up any kind of argument. Similarly here, by putting all the transactions on-chain, you have to strive to find the best possible on-chain scaling technology, like thin blocks doing right now. But if you start to become lazy and try to use the old centralized financial models like payment channels because they can provide millions of transactions per second, then you just drag bitcoin into the old banking model, which will dramatically reduce its usage and increase its risk, especially when there are many other alt-coins provide on-chain scaling
No. Payment channels are not centralized. Here you go again, trying to spread FUD in regards to something which you do not understand. Seems like you're part of the Dunning–Kruger effect as described by the troll above me. |
|
|
|
In terms of price only I guess it might make traders more confident but I don't think most of them know how bitcoin itself works let alone the clever stuff on top.
I don't understand people that come with this viewpoint. How many people understand how the current financial system actually works in detail? It is most likely less than 1% of the population. You don't need to understand it in-depth in order to use it (whether you want to understand it for various reasons is something else). The same goes for both Bitcoin and LN. Is it gonna bring in new blood? I don't really see why it would. Right now bitcoin works well for any new arrivals.
Well technically, depending on the adoption on LN you get a faster system of transacting. Even though locking funds takes time (~30 minutes on average at the moment), I expect people to do this prior to transacting. Once there is a need for huge TX volume, LN will provide the necessary infrastructure (among other things). |
|
|
|
It's only system/technology, so there won't be any hype because most people don't know about it or understand it.
A lot of people don't understand Bitcoin either, and yet here we are. Plus, it will allow faster and cheaper transactions, micropayments will finally be possible and so on.
Lightning is imo an important step forward in the right direction.
Correct. It is highly efficient for continuous (micro) payments. lightening network mean ? i have no idea about it what is that ? if some one know abuot it and and explain.
ELI5: The lightning network is a super fast, offchain transactional network that doesnt require the blockchain until the point of final settlement.
This means that transaction negotiations can take place rapidly and not clog or rely on confirmation time in order to be validated
Instant confirmations, trustless. Takes a lot of transaction volume off the main bitcoin blockchain. May improve privacy. Lightning are complex multiparty, bi-directional payment channels. It makes use of smart contracts such parties can exchange signed transactions offline knowing their transactions will settle on chain. They have a website http://lightning.network/ and also a mailing list at https://lists.blockstream.io/pipermail/lightning-dev/You can easily find information yourself. |
|
|
|
|
This post confirms that I've received the payout from round 2.
|
|
|
|
lightning network is centralized i don't like it, they need something else for fast transaction, btc pump is done because of the halving, not because of LN
Wrong. Please do not post about something if you don't have a proper understanding of it. LN is coming and LN is not centralized. I don't know the potential effect on the price; nobody does. |
|
|
|
do you have no faith in the miners judgment??
faith? what is this christianity !? I don't even know how I missed that. Placing your "faith" in the miners in a system that is supposed to be trustless. What could possibly go wrong. Seems like they've forgotten that one of the main ideas of Bitcoin is not having to place trust in anyone. Oh nice, it's been far too long since somebody made a good old fashioned Domination Post! Cool Lets stop pretending.
Stick a fork in it, indeed.
How can this be; I was told by Veritas that Bitcoin would die without 2 MB blocks and that DASH would be the next top cryptocurrency???  |
|
|
|
|
Sometimes, after a long time, there's a possibility of getting a second chance. However, in this case the member does not deserve it as it is obvious ban evasion. He should be banned shortly.
|
|
|
|
I gave up and put him on ignore too, eventually. It was doing nothing but looping and nonsense. For at least a little while I thought the peanut gallery or at least I would learn something... but eventually even I started to get bored.  It's actually pointless. Even if a truck load of evidence, math or whatever he requested fell on his head, he'd still scream something in the lines of:"This is made by Blockstream shills. 5.7 MB blocks 2017!". Core supporters trying to blackmail the miners into supporting Segwit even though Core refuses to even bump up the blocksize to 2mb, which is something a huge percentage tiny fraction of the community clearly wants. No double standards here at all! No shady business here at all! It's classic that is conducting the "political coup", I've fixed the obvious error in your post. |
|
|
|
I agree, but speculating about the future is fun  Surely it is fun if one doesn't have anything better to do with their time. Additionally, it is also "fun" for signature spammers as they can make easy "on-topic" posts. For me, cryptocurrencies should have a bright future. They really solve problems of the real world, making people more independent from the banking system. At present Bitcoin has already advantages to traditional financial services in some areas, for example remittances. I don't see these advantages disappearing.
I concur. There are huge advantages that Bitcoin offers in many areas. When it comes to banks, transactions are slow, the fees are high and problems are not uncommon. On the other hand, Bitcoin is cheap, transactions are fast (near instant TX, and 10 minute average confirmation time) and (network) problems are very rare (over 99% up-time according to a website). The great question, in my opinion is: is Bitcoin really the best cryptocurrency design? And if not, can it be improved so its flaws are not important anymore?
There can't be a single cryptocurrency that has the "best design". It comes down to both the purpose and design. Yes, Bitcoin can be improved and is constantly being improved (e.g. Segwit). My largest concern is the energy consumption of the PoW mechanism. For the scalability problems, there should be fixes, and the technology advance here should play in favour of Bitcoin. But in the case of mining I'm not sure if there is a fix for it. That's why I closely follow the developments in parts of the altcoin area (PoS, PoB and similar systems).
Bitcoin could potentially switch to PoS, but PoS is not the answer. PoS is not as good as PoW. In the end, it may be possible that in 2030 we will not need money anymore. But I think it's a bit early for utopias. There are 14 years until 2030, that's nothing.
I highly doubt that as well. |
|
|
|
How about any government owns 90% of all BTC and close the wallet and computer until everyone stops?
That scenario is nonsense and wouldn't work. Exactly how would they acquire 90% of all the Bitcoin? In that case (i.e. them trying to buy most of the Bitcoin), I would price mine at $1 Trillion per Bitcoin. I'm sure that many others would do similar (albeit my price is arbitrary). Good luck trying to buy them. Additionally, the "close the wallet and computer until everyone stops" doesn't make sense and wouldn't work. No, not really. The bitcoin network is up forever since it's decentralised and is completely impossible to shut it down completely.
No, not really. |
|
|
|
Is there any scope for user?
No. Any open spots?
Not at the moment. Is round 3 starting yet?
Since round 2 is ending today, I'd say yes. Just wait until the manager processes the posts. Keep in mind that there are currently no available places in the campaign. |
|
|
|
It's simple: 1) This thread will end up being pointless. 2) Those people have no idea what they're talking about and should be ignored. 3) Everyone will be speculating and it is very well possible that neither answer will be true. -snip-
maybe can alive until 2030 but the price of bitcoin can decrease.
The price is irrelevant. 1 BTC will always be equal to 1 BTC. |
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan. Reason: Account generator. |
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan. Reason: Account generator. |
|
|
|
Way to put words in my mouth!
You, and people like you, do not clarify they positions and tend attract attention via the media. That is not a good "principle" for a Bitcoin user. I like Core, but they are misguided on the economics of this issue.
So you love Core but want to fork away from it? That position doesn't contradict itself at all. I loved /r/Bitcoin and Bitcointalk, and was a daily user before all the censorship by Theymos took over.
Just look at /r/Bitcoin, people aren't even allowed to see the up-votes or down-votes, let alone post an opinion that is in disagreement with Theymos.
I can't talk about reddit, as I only read it sometimes (I don't use it). However, you were breaking the rules here constantly (advertising spam with AMA's) and yet: 1) You were not censored; 2) You were not banned. You deserved a permanent ban back then. It makes me want to cry when I see how far things have strayed from the principles that early bitcoin users claimed to support.
People who want controversial HFs and as much adoption as possible for the price to rise are the ones that have strayed away from these principles. |
|
|
|
but its carlton and lauda that keeps quoting them wackos..
Actually, I have him on ignore and have had him on that list for quote some time. There was a time where I was willing to listen and was willing to properly discuss things, but it got out of hand. Once he went beyond being rational it was no stopping him (he "knows" it all and we are all wrong!). This ended up with a wave of constant ad hominem. How classy. I sometimes reply if someone else quotes him. Sure, it is like we cannot rest assured about anything for certain to put this XT/Classic matter or other contentious fork matter to rest, and so likely we will always have to remain vigilant to point out the bullshit...
-snip-
So i guess my long winded response is merely agreeing with you regarding the hardfork issue not going away.
Exactly. Just imagine if there are no people pointing out the 'bullshit' and 'we let' one HF succeed? Where would this end then? In that case, Bitcoin should be not resistant to change. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
