too many scams and thefts which lead people to complain to localbitcoins, so localbitcoins removed it to remove the headache

the only real payment method is a bank account direct transfer, but even a direct bank transfer is not without scam risk. this is why even hobby localbitcoiners ask for KYC. knowing enough about the fiat sender to prove the person does own the fiat senders bank account so they cant try reversal scams (pretend they got hacked/id frauded to get refund)

though MSB(money service businesses) by regulatory policy NEED to KYC, hobby localbitcoiners do it for personal reasons to avoid scammers trying to grab their fiat back and keeping the coin

this is why people prefer to actually meetup at bitcoin social events/conferences/use ATMS as its harder to grab the money back using the false pretence of "i got hacked/ID frauded" which is easy to achieve remotely

just remember. if you had a suitcase of cash would you hand it over to a stranger you met 5 minuts ago. .. no? well thats why its even riskier to do remote payments if you dont know who your trading with. (you cant slap them with a wet fish if they scam you). so love or hate KYC. atleast recognise why people do it even if they are not regulated, and why some services just avoid certain payment methods completely (paypal used to/still is the chargeback king of scammer tools)

alot of people are blaming fee's on these things
1. "blockchains are broke/cant cope"
2. "mempools are too full"
3. "fee's are using an ebay-esq/auction model, not a plane/train ticket model"

all of this is nothing to do with technical flaws of hardware or physical issue. but purely due to intentional code limitation and suppression to make bitcoin look bad.

from 2009-2015 there has been a known number that bitcoin could handle upto ~4200tx (7tx/s) but with the inception of new bloated transaction formats the average tx size has increased. yet the block size buffer has not increased to compensate for increased adoption over the last 4 years
in april 2018 (AFTER the last price drama subsided) the average transaction size was ~500bytes. right now its more like 700bytes
meaning on average 40% less transaction count per block is getting confirmed
2009-2015 alot more transactions were around the 250byte area.
this alone shows that without even considering blockspace buffer, there are 200% less transactions atleast able to go through now than there were 4+years ago (byte for byte)

due to lack of any STRUCTURED fee mechanism there is no way to actually guarantee that paying X will get a tx confirmed in X blocks. so the current model even in its auction based mode is a failure where the mempool even with transactions paying a certain amount are left waiting far passed peoples estimates. because the fee model is based on guesses/estimates with no structure of assurance.

implementing a structured fee mechanism would actually help, it would take the guess work out of it, reduce the unassurances, and make people change their habits in regards to how they transact. all of which would help everyone from the users and the pools.

the fee structure, block limit and wishy washy code of unassurance is not due to 'blockchains are bad' or 'blockchains dont work' but due to developers making intentional decisions to avoid making positive changes. instead they just want blockchains to look bad to promote alternative networks for commercial gain and make ROI for the investors that paid their salaries

doomad + windfury

YAWN
now go learn about bitcoin.

meanwhile when core now are "THE REPO", "THE REFERENCE", "THE CORE" but when a dev says they can code a version. but then doesnt even bother. thus not even getting the other devs to ACK or nACK.. or even let the community get a chance to download. you cant then try pulling out stats that XXX are against it. especially when its not even all xxx actually code. majority are just document translators and grammar checkers

but 2 years later the same limited devs do write a version for 1mbsegwit. suddenly Mr doomad declares that its what the team wanted and what the community wanted.. even though the flip flops and stats and data show the community didnt want it and it only got activated due to apartheid tricks by a limited amount of people

anyway, doomad. go learn about bitcoin and if you dont like my comments this forum has an ignore button
the ignore button should be your friend because its obvious how ignorant you are about bitcoin and the community. as all you care about is core. the funniest part is that your social drama pokes against me just echo into "coz franky said" yet you dont realise that there are many many others that are not core loyalists. you have become so obsessed and so narrow minded that you actually think that i am a single point of attack. (hilarious)

so again for the multiple time on many topics. stop wasting your life on "things franky said" and start learning about bitcoin, start caring about bitcoin and not just core. actually take a break, relax, catch your breath and spend some time looking at the wider world and understand that "franky" is not a threat to you. then. once that has sunk in spend some more time learning about actual bitcoin

if the other party agree's to it yes
the 'collateral' of a channel does not have to be bitcoin.

remembr this simple fact.
when you set up a channel. that channel is NOT relayed around the network to have the community verify it.
its just a private agreement between you and someone else.

its how channls can be st up where the collateral is things like coinbase database balance (not a blockchain)
people can decide their own agreement of collateral

again you really need to start atleast using lightning and learning about it if you really want to get involved in conversations about it.
i still find it strange how you get involved in things you dont know or never used. its like you are just interested in the social drama you can cause.

please try learning about LN. and not the utopian perfect condition hype. but the actual usage and issues and limitations it comes with.

seems microlancer is sidestepping the LN flaws to only talk about LN in utopian conditions.
its similar to saying banks cannot be robbed because an ATM requires a card, pin number and has a $500 limit
(totally ignoring the big picture outside standard practical/utopian use of banking)


LN channel partners can agree to a channel without needing a locked bitcoin network transaction (CLTV)
its how turbo and factories are concepted
the unit of measure in a channel(HTLC) is MSats.
HTLC using Msats cannot be broadcast to bitcoins blockchain
Msats can represent any value. whether it be a calculated btc balance, a coinbase mysql fiat balance or a pre agreed private value between the 2 parties

LN is not a community protocol. it has no global consensus. users can set up thier own rules and protocols between themselves. this is why LN is so fluid with all the different things being tried out like eltoo, factories. because they can play around with things privately, in small groups, etc.

i can re-write my node to accept or decline whatever i like.

if you cared to do your research you would se it was them same 5 devs who pretended to be incompetent to not be able to do a 2mb+segwit days after signing, who later in 2017were the ones that caused the controversy in august 2017

plus the reason i dont want to spoonfeed you is because you have shown no talent, no interest in learning about bitcoin. so i wont waste my time on you. however, for other topics and other instances i have helped out others.
but as soon as they start derailing both topics and their own attitudes. i then give up helping them out and just tell them to do thir own research.

oh and by the way this forum has a search, github has a search, if you actually search for things related to bitcoin and not "franky" then you will get better results.
so try to learn about bitcoin and NOT ABOUT SOCIAL DRAMA

now go put your social drama crap aside and start learning about bitcoin.

example why i say DYOR
person A: mentions satoshi's whitepaper (something simple/subtle that anyone can research)
person B: goes on a social drama rant that A did not quote, explain and translate the whitepaper
person A: just tells person B to go research
person b: cries some more about how he wants A to explain things and to spoonfeed B
long story short. if your not interested in researching the whitepaper yourself, dont get involved with taking about it
if you cant stay uptodate with the currently available info. then take the time to update YOURSELF and dont expect others to coach you

"drag it out of me"
seriously DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH
i dont need nor care for merits.
i know you love being spoonfed info. but i am not a spoon holder
do your own research
if somebody mentions something, even subtly. RESEARCH IT. dont turn it into some social drama of how you want them to spoonfeed you stuff.
if you cant learn about bitcoin its your failure to learn not someone elses failure to teach

solar is not the cheapest. nor is it the most productive (night time restrictions on generation)
though compared to coal and oil it is cheaper.
there are other options too, mainly hydro has the best potential energy that can be utilised night and day, though not so independantly installable residentially due to lack of rivers/streams/creeks at each household.

https://medium.com/@bitcoinroundtable/bitcoin-roundtable-consensus-266d475a61ff
end of 2015 luke JR and chums talked about segwit.
saying how he could do it all soft and without splits

 and then a roundtable agreement was made for 2mb+segwit

then within a short time the core devs started pulling out by pretending they were powerless and unable to code anything
but by the time summer 2017 came around the 1mb segwit activation was done via a controversial hard fork that split the network(facepalm)
SERIOUSLY TRY RESEARCHING THIS STUFF!!!

as it seems all you wanna do is social drama replies.
please try to learn a thing or two about bitcoin and not be so obsessed with social drama

doomad
now your meandering further off topic as usual by questioning small subtle points to try moving the conversation into nonsense. but to get to your point should you desire to do some research it was about the 2015 2mb+segwit (not the 2017 NYA)
early 2016 core devs pulled out of the 2mb+segwit agreement. but then went on and pulled their tricks to get 1mb segwit activated.

you may find out about it should you research
Hint: luke Jr

im guessing your still watching the 1980's tv adverts for oxfam Ethiopia with natives topless living in shacks
.. heres an update


im guessing your still watching the 1980's propaganda for china where its just rice paddy fields
.. heres an update

again your obsessed with trying to predict the next high.
for the multiple time the market dynamics is about VALUE (when the corrections occur)
and where the bottomline is found
how many more times do i have to say it
stop thinking about the speculative unpredictable bubble hype. and think about true value point

no one actually cares about last years $20k because hardly anyone was online to actually sell at $20k. the $20k ATH affects very little people. so people should stop caring about the highs because no one can predict the exact point of the tip of a ATH

but if people know where ground level is going to be. everyone can take advantage of the ground level.
things like
knowing how much speculation there is above ground level to know the risks of if they are buying into good value or pure hype
knowing the correction when it occurs is about to peter out so they can start buying in again

the market does react to mining, but its not anything to do with ATH or the hype of speculation.

...

stompix its obvious you cant understand the mining market dynamics. so maybe its you that should not derail the topic of bitmain to then talk only about the dynamics.

looking back at the topic, i made a subtle suggestion MONTHS ago in february. and you/windfury as standard practice totally meandered the topic to only discuss it.

now if you and windfury actually both done some research, including research right back to the days of hal finney, you would learn a thing or two about real economics of the mining/market dynamics.

i even have post history from other topics that done some math. should you care to continue the meander. or you can just stay not understanding the mining market dynamics and just play out your social drama of the meander

either way, im not here to teach you things that already have ben published and wrote about. if you cant look for it. thats on you

---

---

to save spamming...
stompix, you re-opened a topic from 2 months ago that was about bitmain. and you meandered it about the mining/market dynamics.
you obviously didnt read or research because even in your opener this month quoting me, the quote you have of me clearly even said it was not about profit.. and clearly says not about by minute/daily. yet i can see by your next post your talking about daily profit.
again missing the whole point.

stop thinking my comment about market follow mining is anything to do with predicting the next high profit. its about th correction/bottomline value. no the top price.
stop looking at charts of the top daily price and look for the average LOW

heres a funny thing. the main majority consensus of late 2015 was a 2mb legacy+segwit..
then core backed out with excuses that the devs that signed the agreement were not in power to code it (facepalm)
(they then suddenly gained power to code their 3 trick process to activate 1mb segwit)
which allows for 4mb.
again 4mb is dialup amount.(56kbit/s=4.2mbyte/10min) we are not pre-millenial. we are at fibre-5g era which is 100x+ dial up standard
cell phones can validate transactions, so thinking a desktop has problems is another reddit rhetoric trying to make people think we are back in the windows 98 era.
the whole need to stick to 1mb is like saying floppydisks are the limit of portable media

so all your 'big blocker' echo's is the reddit rhetoric of pre2015 and not the reality of what the community was compromising to in 2015-2017. also there is progressive block growth, not simply the big leap which your echoed buzzword keeps implying

shouting out buzzwords from 4 years ago shows you have not researched much and are just repeating old propaganda spoonfed to you. and this is why i keep telling you to do some actual research independently to avoid you falling for the echo's of spoonfed propaganda.. but months of your repetition shows that you have no interest in improving your knowledge.

im starting to think your not on this forum to learn, but to just have a reason to make posts to earn some footnote campaign income and probably a bit of ln sponsorship income by the way you promote something you dont understand nor seemed to have used personally

the UK for instance during winter only gets sunlight from ~8am to 4pm
thats 8 hours.
in that time it has to absorb enough energy to cover 24 hours. meaning the solar panels need to absorb 3x more energy than the hourly consumption. in short if your using 2kw an hour then you need solar panels that can get 6kwh

you then need inverters and also battery capacity to store 32kwh. or sell the spare 32khw to the grid during the day, and then buy 32kwh from the grid when needed during the evening/night

stompix your missing the whole point yet again.

there is no magic crystal ball for your next ATH to be found so try not to insinuate that you thought u found one via my numbers and now crying because it didnt work out. it was never a magic ball to predict the next ATH.

as for the market:mining dynamics.
while the PRICE is at ~$8k
while the VALUE is at ~$5k

again no magic crystal ball of the future ATH.
what can be told though is the LOW.. i will emphasise this many times.. LOW LOW LOW will correct around the $5k range if speculation dies (as long as the hashrate stays where it is.)

some pools may react and throw alot of hashpower to get hashrate of THEIR pool into the the 70-80exa range, but that (my opinion) is foolish to do so, so suddenly and so reactively.(hense btcc is no more)

most smart pools do not react to the markets and instead the pools have a stable planned out adjustment of hashrate to cause a stable BOTTOMLINE LOW adjustment. and its the markets that respond to this.
they wont sell below a certain level

this again is not about causing a rampant market PRICE rise. but the bottomline correction support value adjustment
as shown by the STABLE bottom line of $5800 for most of summer 2018. then when old gen asics got sold cheap to drop the mining cost in october thus bottomline value drop. the PRICE then followed in november.
because the gap between price and value got too speculative and so the bubble burst in november

now that hashrate is back on the incline. people are now refusing to sell for $3500. instead their bottomline value is at~$5k so the market then reacts with its speculation/fomo. and so we are right now sat at a ~$3k speculation area.

again smart pools wont jump to 70-80exa overnight to fill the gap and give good support for a $8k value. so expect there to be a speculative amount for a while. and yes this could mean people panic and sell back down to $5k.(if the hashrate remains around the 50exa range)

if however over the next 3 months the hashrate does incline to ~80exa. then you will find that most people wont sell below $8k as that would be the bottomline support value.. but no one will tel you what the ATH PRICE will be in 3 months
the price could also be around $8k meaning very little speculation. or the price can be up higher meaning alot of speculation

all that can be told is the bottomline VALUE. the area of where the price can go DOWN to... NOT i repeat NOT upto

TL:DR;
stop thinking that mining hashrate can predict what the price can go UPTO
start thinking that mining hashrate can predict what the price can go DOWNTO

firstly many months of your flip flops have shown you dont even know the difference between a soft and hard fork

secondly. soft or hard what i oppose is controversial activations done with mandated/biased code that bypasses consensus

but tell me again how you want to improve BITCOIN... oh wait, your mantra is just to defend CORE

stompix.

you seem to think i was promoting a way to predict the PRICE
no, no no

get that out of your head.

i have never cared for speculation. i have never cared for temoprary ATH drama.
what i care for is knowing the bottomline value where people STOP trying to sell below so that people know the settling point of where the BOTTOMLINE will reach once all the drama/speculation subsides/corrects.

my numbers do not help people have a magic crystal ball for the next ATH. i know thats what you are hoping for, but thats your failure.
my numbers are to help people know how much of a gap there is between the 'correction' bottomline and the current price. so that they can see how much speculation there is to know the risks of if they are buying near value. or they are buying alot of speculative vapour hype(buying intoa  bubble)

imagine it this way.
imagine you were at 2 car showrooms. both cars are $40k. and you instantly think, because they are new the resell value is a instant loss of 10% due to the 'used car' devaluation.

what if i told you the 'book price' of both vehicles and one car was $20k and another was $35k
you would then know the car thats book price was $20k would actually have a worse resell value after the 'used car devaluation' thus it would aid you to make a safer investment decision to buy the vehicle which is closer to the book price because reselling it will get you better value.

word it another way.
if you seen 2 coins. both PRICE was $8k. but ones underlying value was $7.5k and the other was $5k
which coin in your mind has most risk of losing most value after a correction. and which coin would you be more temptd to buy as an investment

your talking about the PRICE as 100%.. vs the underlying value 10% (actually 35->55 = over 50% bottomline value increase.. but whos counting(not you))
the PRICE and underlying value ARE NOT THE SAME THING

the underlying value is ~$5k area and the PRICE is ~$8k area
this does not mean underlying value is $8k. it means there is ~$3k of speculation
try to read that there is a difference between price and value. and that. as i quoted and highlighted that the mining/market dynamics has nothing to do with predicting the next ATH PRICE.
the mining/market dynamics only shows the BOTTOMLINE support VALUE (area the price can settle back down to after correction)

P.S you obviously didnt read, because i never even mentioned 'difficulty' as the metric for mining. i used hashrate.
which really goes to show you did not read a single point i made. even when you quoted my point, you still did not read/understand it

your reply is just personal stuff.. by the way.. d) and a) .. how can i not have code for A but then have code for D...
flip/flop? .. let that be your head scratching conundrum for the day

also if you knew what consensus is. then you would know 'my code'(active) is not incompatible. also 'my code'(proposals)  for half the things i want to implement is not active. because consensus has not activated it. which is where you are mis understanding alot of things.
hint: proposed vs active (2 separate things)
also i have not publicly released 'my code' proposals for multiple reasons. but your narrowminded narrative that im a minority or just a single person and everyone else is a core loyalist, is your failing.

"big blockers" typical echo chamber buzzword from a certain group. if you realised that increasing the transaction throughput can be alot more nuanced than just 'big blocks'. then you would understand more about methods of scaling bitcoin without reverting to the standard claptrap rhetoric of the echo chamber you subscribe to that just wants to propaganda one method

you dont need hard for after hard fork to increase blocksize/transaction throughput. you may have learned this if you were not reading the standard echo chambers and using the standard buzzwords of a certain group. this is why i ave kept saying to do some independent research as you are showing all the signs of being in that propaganda group.

better bandwidth? we are not in dialup era..
56kbit=4.2mbyte/10min
block header plus tx data is way less than 4mb

better latency? (dictionary: delay before transfer)
the only latency issue is mainly being told several different dataset formats other nodes want: stripped, filtered, neutrino and others. a full node should just send out the real full data other full nodes need. having a bunch of nodes that dont archive full data and cant relay full data but still foolishly be classed as 'full nodes' is the thing that will cause more centralisation than anything.

having nodes that dont hold signatures. or only hold prunned data cuts down the amount of real full syncable data. having these nodes connecting to full nodes become leachers while not being part of the main relay operation of the network.
code CAN be made to identify and classify these leacher nodes better and ensure priority 'latency' operations and bandwidth is given to full nodes rather than the leacher nodes.
EG if your node can handle 100 connections then you can have a 80/20 split of full/leacher
EG if your node can handle 10 connections then you can have a 8/2 split of full/leacher

there are many many ways that are not just the 'gigabyte by midnight' rhetoric

its like the tx fee's code can be made to not just treat every tx to the same ~premium, but make spammers pay different than infrequent users. thus making people care/change habits and actually understand bitcoin more