|
I don't hear coredevs or blockstream condemning the DDOS attacks.
Thanks f2pool for standing up!
|
|
|
|
Man . If i had known this existed in 2012 .. #hindsight
what existed? why are you resurrecting this thread? |
|
|
|
wow. Was ist das? Von Dir? Klingt verdammt interessant. |
|
|
|
...könnte zum Wort des Jahres werden!
Ich habe vorhin etwas (m.M.n.) Interessantes festgestellt: normalerweise bewegt sich ETH ja entgegen dem Bitcoin. Das war in letzter Zeit sogar bei relativ kleinen, kurzfristigen Bewegungen erstaunlich schnell deutlich erkennbar.
Daraus entstand bei vielen die Angewohnheit, ihre BTC-Trades gegen ETH zu hedgen. Ich habe es mehrmals probiert und war erstaunt, wie zuverlässig das funktioniert.
Beim kurzen Einbruch heute (edit: gestern - ist ja schon wieder morgens!) habe ich - glaube ich - den Markt etwas besser kennen gelernt: die Ursache war ja hauptsächlich der Force Close von mehreren riesigen Longs auf OKCoin, also kein Sentiment des Marktes oder Trend.
Darauf hat ETH überhaupt nicht reagiert! Im Gegenteil, teilweise ging es sogar leicht abwärts.
Nun mein Gedanke: vielleicht hilft es ja beim Traden. Bitcoin geht plötzlich steil runter, man fragt sich, ob das Teil eines (sich bildenden?) Trends ist, schaut rüber zu ETH und wenn der keine/kaum Reaktion zeigt, hat man zumindest schonmal einen Indikator, dass es sich nicht um anhaltende bzw sich bildende Stimmung handeln könnte, sondern eine Bewegung aufgrund eines einzelnen Ereignisses/ausgelöst von einer einzelnen Person?
Ich mag solche Beobachtungen, die etwas außerhalb der gewohnten Box sind (für mich jedenfalls; vielleicht ist es unter den Profis ja ganz normal, sowas in ihre tägliche Arbeit einzubeziehen), und ich werde das mal schön weiter beobachten.
.edit: geht wohl doch noch ein bisschen weiter nach unten, was?
Gute Beobachtung. Mir war das auch aufgefallen. Ich hatte allerdings nicht so eine gute Erklärung dafür gefunden, nur dass die BTC eben nicht en ETH geflossen sind, sondern woanders hin. Möglicherweise in FIAT. Es gibt halt nix beständigeres als die Veränderung. ;-) |
|
|
|
Die Banken werden entsprechende Geldanlagen anbieten.
100 Euro Monatlich minus 1000 Euro sofort für die Bank. Das Geld wird in Schrottimmobilien oder Schrottpapieren investiert, wo die Bank froh ist die größte Scheiße in ihrem Portfolio los zu sein.
gnnnihihihi. "what could possibly go wrong?" |
|
|
|
allerdings wird der Markt das Monster UP GAP nicht dulden, die Konsequenz, könnt ihr euch ausmalen
Kannst du mal erklären woher diese Gaps kommen? Wird da über nacht das orderbuch leergeräumt und wenn der Markt wieder öffnet sieht die Welt anders aus als am Vorabend? Wir der DAX nicht durchgehend getradet? |
|
|
|
bitcoin playing by the book... until it doesn't  |
|
|
|
look at those full blocks! but it's ok, we'll have some more room sometime in the middle of next year.
I've never had any delays or other issues sending bitcoins. What is your problem with full blocks? Paying the suggested fee of 5000 satoshi per KB everything gets confirmed pretty soon. Haven't had any delays in a long time: miners need to be paid. Miners get paid 25 BTC per block. if half a million people want to send some coin on the same day, they can't all do it, no matter how high the fees are. Higher fees kill marginal transactions. marginal transactions are where the growth comes from, and it's where death comes from. Death lurks at the margins of a constricted blockchain. |
|
|
|
|
Der Markt hat Mike Hearn verdaut.
Hat ja lang genug gedauert.
Jetzt wird's wieder spannend.
Bin gespannt was den Bänkern als nächstes einfällt um die eine Rally zu verhindern. Hearn war schon 'ne ganz harte Nummer (ich frag mich echt was er wohl gekostet haben mag), aber vielleicht geht ja noch mehr. Bei $500 sollten sie handeln, sonst wird's schwierig.
Jetzt erstmal 'ne mittlere Korrektur? Könnte man erwarten. Vielleicht "muss er nochmal runter", wie Mario gerne sagt.
|
|
|
|
@Dave: I've always wondered: how do you make sure you get your cut in case someone used the method where he doesn't share the keys?
Hi Molecular. As you know, the method of producing 'limited' wallet information from a bitcoin-core wallet has been proven to be 'safe' for the owner of the wallet. By this, I mean that if someone sends me the limited wallet information, there is literally no way for me to take possession of the coins. So, in answer to your question... I have no way of being sure of my cut in this situation. In practise, I have been very pleasantly surprised by the number of people who are honest enough to send me my success fee when I have helped them recover their money. I would say that fewer than 15% have reneged on their part of the deal. Given that most people that contact me remain anonymous, that is surprisingly low. I guess that when you are looking at losing the entire amount of bitcoins, then to receive typically 80% of them back is pretty pleasing, and most do pay me the fee. To add to this explanation, in fact most people these days just send me their wallet.dat file directly. I guess that I've been around long enough, and gained enough trust for people to feel comfortable doing that. Plus other wallet formats (like armory, BitGo, airbitz, BIP38, Eth-pre-sale, etc) do not even have the ability to send 'trustless', limited wallet information, so those people just send me their wallet file. I am well aware that my business model relies heavily upon trust and my reputation, so I ensure that I act honestly at all times with my clients (who now number over 900). Cheers Dave "over 900"?!? That's pretty damn impressive. It's pretty interesting about the people trusting you when they actually wouldn't have to. They choose the perceived risk of trusting you above the hassle of going through using some obscure process to treat the wallet.dat with. Almost seems man wants to trust. Makes him feel warm and cozy inside, I guess. Probably this was at some point (maybe still is?) an evolutionary advantage. I wonder what this means regarding our beloved trustless currency. Will people be easily lured into possibly dangerous offchain schemes because they're easier to use? We've actually already seen this: mtGox. It was just easier and more convenient (ready to trade) to keep the coins on the exchange. I used to comfort myself with the fact that a "bank run" would always be possible. But looking at the blocksize limit freeze, bank runs might be slow and costly. Thing about bank runs: they need to be quick to be effective. If there's transaction backlog the "bank" has the luxury of time and thus remains capable of acting. The threat of a run is therefore greatly reduced. Sorry, I went off on a tangent there. keep up the great work, Dave. over 900! wow. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin: distributed decentralized money secured by cowardly miners concentrated in China. There is no plan or code to switch security measures if they get compromised.
Awesome. This is where I keep my life savings. I'm a fucking genius.
I've always assumed a majority of economically driven, rational miners. Maybe that assumption is flawed. |
|
|
|
...
Few people decide the future of 'Bitcoin'.... really decentralized , right ?
Unregulated currency money, created by & for people united by their unwavering faith in greed being a virtue? What could possibly go wrong??? Not much, except that people might get distracted from this awesome vision and fall victim to coercive schemes, slavery and fraud (scams, ponzis). That's all in there. Coercive schemes, slavery and fraud? That's all a part of free market, kept in sanctified balance by Invisible Hand  Right. One of the first "balancing acts" would probably be the bankruptcy of a couple of nationstates (certain coercive schemes based on slavery and fraud). Good riddance. |
|
|
|
...
Few people decide the future of 'Bitcoin'.... really decentralized , right ?
Unregulated currency money, created by & for people united by their unwavering faith in greed being a virtue? What could possibly go wrong??? Not much, except that people might get distracted from this awesome vision and fall victim to coercive schemes, slavery and fraud (scams, ponzis). |
|
|
|
What make-up? About what you speak. I provided proofs, there are all files which I sent Dave and correspondence is visible. I don't need your coins. The person who provided to me a wallet demands return of the sum. And dave doesn't hurry to send or at all decided not to give.
Why do you think Dave is in control of the money? The guy demanding to be given his coins by you might as well have moved the coins himself. It's a trap! |
|
|
|
the price is standing right now i hope no one will start dumping as it would surely not be a good thing to do after such a big price rise
If you're afraid of a dump. Go short and buy back lower. |
|
|
|
[...]
First rule of contentious hardfork? Make the fucker CONTENTIOUS!!! (then simply tell the retards that it's no longer contentious because it suits us) lmao such sorrow..  It makes me sad: you're not the hdbuck I once knew. when have you changed, hdbuck, when have you changed. |
|
|
|
A hard fork scheduled a year ahead is fine, it is how satoshi told Gavin to do it but he didn't listen and tried to rush it (for his own nefarious means it seems).
So ;
- from April we get SegWit roll-out, effectively 1.7-2.5MB extension space in blocks
- from July 2017 we get a hard fork to clean up code and up to 4 MB effective extension space
- plus Schnorr multi-sig schemes saving signature space
- plus more payment channel development and integration (Lightning or similar)
- plus fraud proofs to make secure SPV node validation
- plus pruning and UTXO set short-form validation schemes
- plus network sharding, thin-block, IBLT, etc research
- plus probably some sidechains projects come on-line
- plus better off-chain transaction processor third-party auditing (looking at CoinBase, Circle, BitPay and exchanges to become more provably-backed)
- plus innovations noone has seen just yet (e.g. 21.co, random-coder-dude in garage working on THE shit)
Bitcoin doesn't scale?? Get real.
Do segwit as a hardfork as it should be done and I'm with you. The change is uncontroversial, so we can safely hardfork, right? No need to keep old nodes unable to verify increasingly large chunks of transactions. These nodes should be forced to upgrade. I'd say 75%, 28 days is good. 1 Year is ridiculous. 95% also. |
|
|
|
A big chunk of that socioeconomic majority already sent Core a couple of polite letters suggesting they might want to think a little bit harder about compromise.
We do not want a war, but by God we will fight it if you give us no choice.
It's changing a 1 to a 2 for Christ's sake. You wanna burn down the house over that?
It's about who has the power to hardfork, not about 1 or 2. In the end you're correct. the "economic majority" has the ultimate say in what the rules are going to be. But there might be collateral damage in the form of a split. Noone wants that. So please, core devs, move over and make some room besides you, we don't want much, we just want to be sure we can have a hardfork, even against you, if we really want to. Also a little more room on the blockchain to welcome more users until there are "real" scaling solutions would be nice) |
|
|
|
Also Aktivgeld, der Rest treibt alle in den Ruin
Allen voran die Nationalstaaten, die von den enormen Steuern allein wohl anscheinend nicht ihren Job machen können. Diese sind auf keynesches fiat-geld mit Zentral-Bank und "managed supply" angewiesen. Auch nicht zu vergessen: Kriegsfinanzierung wird mit Aktivgeld wohl auch eher schwierig. Wir dürfen nur einen Fehler nicht machen: uns wieder ein fractional reserve Modell aufschwatzen lassen. Die Gefahr seh ich aber grad, daß das durch die Hintertür irgendwie sich einschleicht, wenn die blockchain erstickt wird und man off-chain alles machen muss. Bitcoin ist ja nur so geil, weil man eben keine IOUs hernehmen muss. Fractional reserve ist genau dann nicht möglich, wenn die blockchain niedrig genuge Gebühren und ausreichend Platz bietet. Ansonsten wandern die Transaktions und Wallet User einfach off-chain ab und setzen und damit alle den Gefahren des fractional bankings aus. Vielleicht bin ich zu negativ, keine Ahnung. |
|
|
|
This coin back from past?
Yes, and the population of Iceland is from the future. Those crazy geothermal crypto-hippies. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
