You are digging way too deep. You sound like an intelligent guy and your time is more valuable doing other things. Just because you are not Libitarian does not mean you don't like Bitcoin and cannot use it. You said to read the whole thing, well sorry I have better things to do...
I realize i went slighly overboard with this poll, but i guess even if 99% people say "No", it will at least raise awarness of the "social punishment vs mathematical algorithms" problem. And i still will consider Luke-Jr an enemy of Bitcoin. bitcoin is just a currency...please leave your political views at home. i already read the original thread and was quit shocked that you even need to make another thread for this shit. so please: just shut up... hint: people who have other opinions than you are not automatic your enemy. |
|
|
|
Why does bitcoin need to be short-sellable? What is the benefit if people can sell what they don't have?
to make a profit? thats what speculation is all about... |
|
|
|
bitfinex is like bitcoinica which means they are using mtgox... so there is no problem with a "small exchange". just try  |
|
|
|
|
you may try bitfinex.com which offer margin trading and short positions...
i dont say anything about how honest they are (i simple dont know): but i use them myself sometimes
|
|
|
|
|
i think different brand names for the same thing are confusing.
i'd nerver would have the idea that LoceCoins or GameCoins are the same - and i would be a little frustrated when i do not find any exchange.
easier implementation ist: allow btc deposit on a gamble site. convert them there to GameCoins (maybe 1BTC = 5000 GameCoins and so on) and let people withdraw in bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
Why is even anyone still using Intersango after the Bitcoinica fiasco?
What would you recommend instead? And could you explain briefly what you mean by the Bitcoinica fiasco and how it relates to Intersango? Thanks. personally i love bitcoin-central.net i wont ever use intersango because of bitcoinica again. - they where part of the reason why bitconica was hacked multiple times - they are VERY rude and demand "respect" while doing nothing - thay gave up on distributing OUR (the customers money) which was left after the hacks because we werent nice enough to them after their fuckups there is also a legal case because of bitcoinica but i dont know about its process. i just know that if intersango would have their job right we already have (partly) our bitcoinca money back - so we are still waiting. |
|
|
|
The Butterfly labs Jalapeno is by far the cheapest at $150 + shipping, but be aware that they are not shipping them yet and are already several months behind their original shipping dates.
All current ASIC manufacturers are shady in some way or another, do a lot of research to see if you want to risk your money
So they are fraud? there are asics mining right now. but all companies have problems, many havent delieverd yet; just take everything you read with a grain of salt. |
|
|
|
Question, If I have 1 Btc that has been withdrawn to Ripple from Bitstamp is that 1 Btc somehow labeled as such? In other words if I send 1 Btc that is an IOU from Bitstamp to someone in the ripple network can they then deposit the IOU to back to Bitstamp and withdraw that Btc to the Bitcoin Wallet of their choice?
afaik you are trading a bitstamp-bitcoin-iou which can be traded to "another-gateway-bitcoin-iou". only bitstamp-bitcoin-iou can be withdrawn through bitstamp ^^ PLEASE correct me if i am wrong |
|
|
|
Sorry to go off topic but I can't seem to find any kind of market or current exchange rate for XRP, could someone point me in the right direction?
If you have a ripple.com account (funded or not) you can go to the Advanced -> Trade tab. Pick BTC/XRP or USD/XRP from the dropdown menu and select change issuer to set the issuer to rvYAfWj5gh67oV6fW32ZzP3Aw4Eubs59B; this is the address of bitstamp.net, and it *should* fill that in. At that point you'll be able to see an order book for BTC bitstamp.net / XRP or USD bitstamp.net / XRP. Both of them are *extremely* sparse right now; liquidity should increase over time. The order book isn't sparse. It is empty. Furthermore, if you trade for BTC how can you withdraw these? just make an bitstamp.net account. there you can deposit or withdraw btc from or to ripple. afterwards just withdraw btc from bitstamp to your bitcoin address. are there any other gateways right now? |
|
|
|
|
rEjzcGihFnG7JCFjpnXqmD91Peu2dCMcUi
|
|
|
|
|
an easy way to solve this is: import your privkeys to mtgox and start a new wallet.
then withdraw all your btc to your new wallet...
|
|
|
|
There is something about the artificial scarcity of transaction space in a block that appeals to me. My gut tells me that miners should always have to make a choice about which transactions to keep and which ones to drop. That choice will probably always be based on the fees per kilobyte, so as to maximize the revenue per block. This competition between transactions solves the problem where successive reductions in block subsidies are not balanced by a corresponding increase in transaction fees.
If the block size really needs to increase, here's an idea for doing it in a way that balances scarcity versus transaction volume:
1) Block size adjustments happen at the same time that network difficulty adjusts (every 210,000 tx?)
2) On a block size adjustment, the size either stays the same or goes up by a fixed percentage (say, 10%). This percentage is a baked-in constant requiring a hard fork to change.
3) The block size is increased if the sum of miner's fees excluding block subsidies for all blocks since the last adjustment would exceed a fixed percentage of the total coins transmitted (say, 1.5%). This percentage is also a baked-in constant.
4) There should be no client or miner limits on the number of kilobytes of free transactions in a block - if there's space left in the block after including all the paid transactions, there's nothing wrong with filling up the remaining space with as many free tx as possible.
Example:
When an adjustment period arrives, clients add up the miner's fees exclusive of subsidies, and add up the total coins transferred. If the percentage of miner's fees is 1.5% or more of the total coins transferred then the max block size is permanently increased by 10%.
This scheme offers a lot of nice properties:
- Consensus is easy to determine
- The block size will tend towards a size that accommodates the total transaction volume over a 24 hour period
- The average transaction fees are capped and easily calculated in the client. A fee of 1.5% should get included after several blocks. A fee greater than 1.5% will get included faster. Fees under 1.5%, will get included slower.
- Free transactions will eventually get included (during times of the day or week where transaction volume is at a low)
- Since the percentage of growth is capped, any increase in transaction volume that exceeds the growth percentage will eventually get accommodated but miners will profit from additional fees (due to competition) until the blocks reach the equilibrium size. Think of this as a 'gold rush'.
+1 I really like the idea of dynamic block sizes. but i dont know enough about economy to know what magic numbers are needed. |
|
|
|
|
Organfcorti good in math but knows nothing about style..
|
|
|
|
you should open a thread in "Scam Accusation". btw. intersango.com seems to be down EDIT: up again i am still hoping they are not really scamming me, i am hoping they just messed up something and they will fix it and release my money. i am note sure. personally i hate them for the bitcoinica fiasko (and i still feel scammed from them, though it seems they are legally fine) but just recently i saw another thread with another scam accusation against them. this one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=140034.0 |
|
|
|
you should open a thread in "Scam Accusation". btw. intersango.com seems to be down EDIT: up again |
|
|
|
That's the email they ask claims to be sent in the PKF 1st report.
Taslim... THANKS
Edit : Same problem with aslim[dot]Bhamji[at]pkfcr[dot]co[dot]nz
i wrote an email 5 min ago asking for a status update at it has gone though. you address is missing a T btw. so i guess you have a spam issue... try gmail or just pick up your phone |
|
|
|
anyone having problem mailing them ? Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
admin@pkfcr.co.nz
Technical details of permanent failure:
Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the server for the recipient domain pkfcr.co.nz by mail.pkfcr.co.nz. [125.236.200.225].
The error that the other server returned was:
550 5.7.1 Requested action not taken: message refused why did you mail to admin? maybe this user does not exist. i used this address Taslim[dot]Bhamji[at]pkfcr[dot]co[dot]nz a few month ago and it did work. see first post. message refused could mean that you just hit der spam filter |
|
|
|
Yes, let's get rid of this superfluous privacy and anonymity. It hinders the hand of the free market.
the forum is already colleting ip-adresses. What I am thinking about is to get the ip-ranges of various 3-letter agencies and other relevant authorities, and then show stats as to what they're looking at.  I didn't mean to show what everyone at the forum is looking at. i wouldnt have a problem that anybody would knew what i read - just because theymos could already do this. if i really want to stay anonymous i would not use my login data to read a thread |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
