Hello,
can someone explain whats going on with the fork? what opportunities, what threads?
who are the actors involved?
Is it wise to buy now, or should i wait for a dip like in August?
I read some about that stuff, about the New York Agreement, about Jihan Wu and technical opinions about SegWit and Blocksize.
But the picture isn't completely clear. I am in the newsletter from Jimmy Song, but i do not want to be one-sided informed.
Where can i get some in-depth knowledge?
Can some of you explain me the whole situation?
Any help is appreciated.
Nothing is up with the fork or forks coming up. Its probably going to be the whole recycling of what was faced during the last fork. The difference in the two would be reliant on mostly the technicals which an average user probably won't need so you don't need to bother yourself. Its simple just make sure you keep your coins in a wallet you control before the fork and everything else will fall in place on how to go about it. The only thing I would like to know that if it makes any difference (if I use a decent wallet anyway), but does it matter if the wallet is segwit enabled or just legacy? Does Bitcoin Gold fork handles segwit enabled addresses and gives the alt coins, or it's just works with the legacy address? |
|
|
|
People trust exchange or exchanges because they have to, if they want to exchange the cryptocurrencies. There are several precautions to keep in mind using an exchange to prevent possible problems. This is a kind of situation where you have cryptocurrencies, working in a trustless environment, but you need to trust an exchange, if you want to trade them. This will change as soon as atomic swap goes live on the bitcoin blockchain. https://captainaltcoin.com/atomic-swap/ |
|
|
|
Seems bitcoin is even hastening the transition to cashless.
Yep, which doesn't help Bitcoin. It only means these Countries are increasing their oversight and control over their own currency. None of this improves adoption for Bitcoin until people realize that currency owned by government is part of the problem that Bitcoin solves. It's just a way to move the society to a cashless one, and the only similarity to bitcoin is the digital form of the 'money' (and the basics of the technology too, it should be a kind of blockchain, but not a decentralized type). Maybe, on the long run, when people get accustomed to a digital money (like they get accustomed to bank cards instead of cash), they will trust bitcoin more, and it can help bitcoin to get widespread. |
|
|
|
Yes, that's what a fork basically is.
It will be the same thing as with Bitcoin Cash, there will be a new chain and a new coin.
If there will be a new chain and a new coin, the new coin will be considered as an 'alt' for some time, and after we well see if someone will use it or not. We will receive the new coins like the previous (BCH) fork, but nobody knows if the new coins will have value or not. |
|
|
|
Thanks so much for all the comments.
@pooya87: Point 4) That BTC is not popular enough (yet)
Must try with low fee (no fee, really?); so far when I tried that, usually after a day or so, I had to add fee (Electrum) to get the transaction to confirm...
Another issue is buying goods with BTC: The increasing price of BTC makes it very unatractiv to pay for goods with bitcoin, unless they are replenished immediately. Had I purchased goods with 1 BTC in April 2016, I could now buy almost 10 times the same goods, had I kept the bitcoin and paid with $. Thus, making purchases with BTC is not a good idea.
This is why most of the people are holding their coins (HODLers) but because of this, merchants are just not rushing to accept bitcoin, because only a few people are willing to pay with it others are holding. It's like trap of 22, to get more merchants on board, to accept bitcoin, you need to use it, you need to buy. But, because there are only a few merchants available to accept, you don't use it. If you don't use it, there will be no more merchants  |
|
|
|
Yesterday i heard about powtoken project started giving free tokens via facebook on a site http://www.powtoken.comDoes it have a future ? You can't be sure if it will have future or not... If you can check the team behind and you trust that they will do what they say, than maybe it worths you time to think about it. There are so many ICOs nowdays that you will hardly have enough time to read them and most of them is waste of time and ETH, if you need to buy them. |
|
|
|
Sziasztok,
Van valakinek tapasztalata olyan ügyben, hogy az accountját feltörték, jelszó/emailt változtattak, majd az itteni moderátoroktól visszaszerezte?
colombuszka néven volt itt accom (pár oldallal visszább még van is posztom), de 2 napja sajnos hackelés tárgya lett..
Találtam ezzel kapcsolatban egy admin hozzaszolast. Ha esetleg kell segitseg a forditasban akkor nyugodtan szolj. Remelem sikerul visszakapnod.  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=497545.0Köszi, ezt én is megtaláltam. Egyelőre próbálom felkutatni az olyan embereket, akiknek elküldtem az ETH címemet. Nem haladok jól, de remélem előbb utóbb válaszolnak.. vagy, hogy WAVES cím is jó. Küldtem már PMet adminoknak, de le se szarták (igaz, abban nem volt benne a címem, csak a kérdés, hogy ilyenkor mi a teendő). Az accom meg nem tartalmazta a címet  Megnéztelek, de nincs a fórumon olyan címed, amit publikusan megadtál volna valamikor... https://www.bctalkaccountpricer.info/?token=jo471dt0IP alapján? Sok más ötletem nincs... |
|
|
|
It's very ironic how something so centralised is showing interest in something created to battle the very essence of banking systems. Having spoken to people in finance almost all have had negative things to say about Bitcoin and most have said it's a bubble waiting to burst.
It's not ironic. They are an investment bank and broker, not a central bank. People often confuse the former with the latter. I'll bet Goldman Sachs was accumulating positions on NVDA for years while watching the cryptocurrency economy blossom. They're good at what they do -- investing and trading. And they're happy to take a fee for brokering crypto investments for clients. Central banks probably don't like the smell of all this, but that's a different matter entirely. Yes, central bank and bankers/people associating with central bank hate Bitcoin. And they don't like the other fiat currencies as well. Central banks are regulating their currency, and their country's economy as well. Imagine if you live in the US and you have your central bank working on the monetary system and from a day to another people in the US starts to use EUR for their everyday spending. US central bank from that point won't have effect on the quantity of EUR in the country, because they can't regulate it. They would lost the control over economy. And vica versa, in Europe, if people would start to use USD... This is true for bitcoin, but bitcoin is not so videspread yet, so the problem is not straightforward at the moment, but central banks are aware of the problem already. Thinking on state issued digital currency is a kind of answer from the central banks to the question of bitcoin... |
|
|
|
Guys,
kraken.com does this!
You can send your bitcoin to your kraken account and then convert to USD, then wire transfer to any bank account around the world.
Although this requires verification, but it works.
limitation is $200,000 USD a month.
So it's possible to transfer bitcoin directly to a bank account overseas without using a real bank.
Thanks, it's good to know that it's possible. Although, if you need to fully identify yourself on an exchange (KYC, AML), that means that exchange behaves like a bank, so it's not a surprise if they let you do what you want with your money They are like real banks in this situation. |
|
|
|
any opinion on this yet?
Have you guys heard of any company which does this service?
Thanks,
If the recipient accepts only wire transfer then it's your job to exchange the bitcoin into fiat and send it abroad (bank transfer, WU, etc.). You can't use exchanges, because most of the exchanges are only allow you to send the money back to your own bank account. |
|
|
|
|
Another Difficulty Adjustment has happened on the BCH chain and now BTC chain is far more (2,26x) profitable for miners, so if the bitcoin transactions were slow, now they will speed up. Mempool has also getting smaller, from 15k of unconfirmed transactions we're back to 10k and still shrinking.
|
|
|
|
Not really expecting that but its a possibility so lets assume that they'd created their own cryptocurrency which is centralized i assume. what are the odds of it overpowering
bitcoin? or even having a close competition to it? of course they will make lots of advertisement of it now people will be divided to two 1). people who are interested to use 2).
people who can't comprehend how to use. As the people who are interested dwell deeper on the governments cryptocoin, it is inevitable to know bitcoin and soon they will realize
that its better so bitcoins users will just increase. i'm kinda confident tho that if ever it happens bitcoin will retains its place besides governments cryptocoin is not mandatory
right? because if its is then they plan to use it to be a primary money which is impossible unless they provide a free internet for the whole people.
If they (governments) want to get rid of bitcoin, they will simply ban it. There's no reason why they would compete, when they can just ban the competitors. They don't really need to create new cryptocurrency for a country, it's enough if they digitalize the existing money somehow. Blockchain just can be a solution to get all done in a cost effective way, but it's not a must, it's an option. |
|
|
|
It's normal for BTC transaction confirmations to take some time since you have to wait for a block to include your transaction, and a block is only mined (approximately) every ten minutes. If you have set a fee of over 10 satoshi/byte (with a median sized transaction, about ten cents), you can expect your transaction to confirm in 1-2 hours. If you increase this fee tenfold for priority transactions, you can expect confirmation in the next block. I've just checked on fork.lol and BCH has activated a DA (Difficulty Adjustment) and now every miner (OK, most of them) are on the BCH chain, they have produced 34 blocks for BCH and only 4 blocks for BTC since morning. As long as the price of BTC or BCH or the difficulty of BTC doesn't change we can expect some backlog on the BTC chain and a raise in mempool. |
|
|
|
Sziasztok!
Érdeklődnék,hogy Bitcointalk ANN magyar fordításra lenne-e itt igény? Amennyiben igen akkor legyetek szívesek megírni,hogy mi lenne az.
Most jelenleg éppen a DeepOnion-nal és az Exscudo-val próbálok egyeztetni, de ugyebár millió más projekt van mar. Kíváncsian varom a válaszotokat.
Itt ezt most nem nagyon értem. Amíg csak ez az egy magyar thread van, addig teljesen felesleges, ha lenne külön ANN threadünk, akkor lenne értelme. Azt pedig (a külön thread-eket) nem engedik, amíg Other languages/Locations-ban vagyunk és nincs normális magyar topik, mint sok nyelvnek... |
|
|
|
Let's say I'm in country A and I wish to move some funds to some person in country B. I understand the flow is through the pocket and obstruct series. But how does the physiological movement of funds takes place??
Do you want to know the technical aspects of it ? Physiological movement applies in what context here ? Also, like in the example of cross-border payments you can find banks involved, so in the example of block overly can there be some involvement of banks too ??
That isn't relevant since block-chain has completely a separate structure than that of the banks.The only partial involvement I could see are the miners. Lastly, how will be the exchange-rate decided and charge chose centered on what parameters ??
Obviously,just like every other asset - Demand and Supply! Another possible involvement of banks in the blockchain 'flow' is the very beginning and the very end, like you should somehow top up your bitcoin wallet. If you don't have someone from localbitcoins.com available around, you have to use a bank to transfer your EUR, USD, etc. to a bitcoin exchange, or use your fiat debit/credit card, issued and maintained by your bank. You transfer the funds via the blockchain network to country B, and the recepient needs to somehow exhcange back the arrived bitcoin to fiat, if he/she needs fiat and not bitcoin. In this case the solution is localbitcoin.com or bank. |
|
|
|
|
I had just received a Ledger Nano S hardware wallet, and I started to test it's functions.
I've run into a problem, and after reading thru forums and reddit the problem is known (not really a problem but lack of feature). If I have read first and act afterwards, I could have saved myself from some hours of headache....
To cut the long story short:
Mycelium mobile wallet doesn't support Segwit type of addresses. If you start your Ledger Nano S on Chrome firtst, it suggests to create a Segwit type of bitcoin address, because it faster, cheaper, etc...
But, if you plan to use the Ledger with Mycelium mobile wallet, you should not choose the Segwit address, but the legacy one, because Mycelium doesn't recognize the segwit addresses on Ledger Nano S, only the legacy ones. You can work with the legacy addresses without any problem.
Just a word of warning, if someone is thinking in a similar setup.
|
|
|
|
|
I just have tried to play a bit with SegWit and Legacy addresses, tried to spot any difference in transaction confirmation time, if I start a transaction from the same device to a SW address and to a normal legacy type address. I did it with the same fee settings (manually selected, the same 16 Sat/B for all transactions).
Does it make any difference if the recepient is SW enabled address or not? I have not spotted any difference in timing, the transactions were confirmed pretty soon. If the fee is the same, does it only depends on luck which one of the transactions gets a confirmation sooner (SW/Leg)?
Edit:
Hold on a second, I just saw that BCH has adjusted the difficulty, so now all of the miners (or most of them) should be on the legacy BTC chain, maybe this could be the reason of the quick confirmations of the mentioned transactions. They have processed nearly the half of the mempool already.
|
|
|
|
I think we'll have BOTH decentralised coins like bitcoin and fiat-digital coins issued by central banks, at the same time.
When the banking crisis hit, the govt investigated whether they needed to bail out the banks, could the central bank (the Bank of England) handle all the transactions instead? Turned out that the BoE could only handle about 500,000 a day - they were only set up to handle huge transactions between them and the banks.
So the govt was forced to bail out the banks just to maintain the payment system.
Blockchain technology however gives the central bank other options. The BoE is investigating putting the Pound Sterling on a blockchain. The reasoning is, that if there was another banking crisis, instead of a bailout to preserve the payment system, they could just move everything to a blockchain maintained by the BoE.
At the same time decentralised coins like bitcoin will continue to exist. Fiat blockchains arn't a threat to bitcoin, they're a threat to the banking system because who needs them as a payment processor anymore?
Good idea, but what is the difference if the state currency is on blockchain or it's the old fiat? Why there's no need to bail out the banks if the currency is on blockchain? Banks still need to be solvent in case the crisis hits again, to be able to serve the people if they want to withdraw cash from ATMs. Or, the idea is to eliminate cash totally, not to let people to use cash anymore, just digital cash via phones, bank cards, etc? |
|
|
|
Sweden’s are reportedly not making active use of cash this year has also been recorded as the lowest level of banknote usage over the past 30 years. In a press release from the world’s oldest central bank of sweden ,Sveriges riksbank, they stated that.. "Today, cash is used to an ever-decreasing extent in Sweden, which has led us within the world of central banking to start considering whether a digital complement to cash that is guaranteed by the state is needed so that we will be able to promote a safe and efficient payment system in the future too" Read More=> https://zycrypto.com/sweden-considering-digital-currency-bitcoin-comes-mind/Japan creating J coin, too Both Sweeden and Japan will develop their own digital fiat currency, but without the blockchain technology. Or, if they use blockchain technology, it will be centralized. Maybe the commercial banks will run the nodes in the country, so it can be a blockchain like system, but central banks are interested only in centralized models, just to make sure they not lose their influence on the country's money. |
|
|
|
This doesn't make sense to me.
Government can regulate or forbid the use of BTC
But no way to criminalise it that way.
But for now there is not enough Will to forbid BTC. There is just no need for it.
I don't think Governments will completely fire against BTC anytime soon.
It's not the effective way to directly forbit, regulate, ban, etc. something, because people sometimes do things that are not legal, that's why the courts are present, and that's why the prisons are full If they (the governments, or other authorities) want to criminalise bitcoin, they can do that indirectly, like they start some ransomware virus and ask for the payment in bitcoin, everybody will blame bitcoin, bitcoin will be a really negative thing in this context, most of the people will hear about that from the TV news and they will think that bitcoin is a bad thing (despite of they have no clue about bitcoin at all...), but this is just an example... Oh, wait, something similar has already happened I had too much about conspiracy theories, I think |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
