Too new to invest in? In this article he also puts out an advice to investors to stay on the side lines for at least one year before investing in this ETF, LOL! Ignorance from the highest levels, and it also explains how people like this investment blogger always end up scooping up crumbs of bread instead of complete loaves. It shows that this "investment blogger" doesn't realize how much future potential growth Bitcoin has, and thus that the price will continue to increase as demand goes through the roof.
I thought the same thing. This type of investment blogger is the kind who would be recommending BAC et al soon (at 25.xx) and said to wait on the sidelines since it went from 7 (when Buffett invested, or earlier at 3) until now. |
|
|
|
|
Figure out who sent you something with an unconfirmed transaction chain and talk to them is one option. Trying to do a child pays for parent (CPFP) might be an option too.
Tracing back on the unconfirmed transactions, I didn't count them all, but it looks like a dozen or more all need to confirm before that last one does with most in the ~66 sat/byte range. It would be interesting to know if this was a service doing this to you or something else.
|
|
|
|
|
It appears to depend on a transaction that hasn't confirmed.
|
|
|
|
The market is telling us something for sure. I think there is room for both bitcoin and gold, perhaps eventually they'll see the benefits and acknowledge they didn't fully understand the benefits. I went back to look at the slashdot article to see if my memory was correct and it was July 11, 2010, https://news.slashdot.org/story/10/07/11/1747245/bitcoin-releases-version-03#commentsTo be fair, there were plenty of positive and explanatory and understanding comments, but as far as some of the negative ones, I see pretty much the same type of negative comments still nearly 6 years later, things like these: ( Snipped for brevity ) Slashdot is also the collective hivemind that panned the first iPod, as I recall. They have a less-than-stellar track record for not understanding technology, which is ironic for a self-professed "geek" news source. I don't take any comments there seriously, it may have had its time way back but the userbase now is just a bunch of uninformed shmucks working soon-to-be-disrupted white-collar jobs and being overpaid to do it. I agree. There are a few tech people left, but they are dwindling. |
|
|
|
Hello people,
I've sent some btc to someone without taking into account the number of inputs it seems, and transaction is stucked in network.
6 Inputs and 2 Outputs for 0.4 mBTC fee
Do you have an idea on how to make the transaction still goes through?
Did you take a look at this topic? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1802212.0 |
|
|
|
Are we stuck with Bitcoin as is forever, and the only scaling solutions must be built on top of the current utterly fixed ruleset?
Probably. I agree. Likewise, given the difficulty of changes now as shown by segwit and block size changes, any further changes will be even more difficult to get consensus. And this isn't necessarily a bad thing, changes should be very difficult to make barring something catastrophic (e.g March 2013). Think about changing tcp/ip. |
|
|
|
Schiff is part of the old guard that took autogyros to Siam for investor conferences while a servant shined his spats.
Gold is currently trading at 1,240 per oz - Bitcoin is trading at 1,255 per Bitcoin.
I say let the market decide which is more valuable. And I bet in a few years, the gold bugs will have to capitulate -- if they're still alive, that is.
The market is telling us something for sure. I think there is room for both bitcoin and gold, perhaps eventually they'll see the benefits and acknowledge they didn't fully understand the benefits. I went back to look at the slashdot article to see if my memory was correct and it was July 11, 2010, https://news.slashdot.org/story/10/07/11/1747245/bitcoin-releases-version-03#commentsTo be fair, there were plenty of positive and explanatory and understanding comments, but as far as some of the negative ones, I see pretty much the same type of negative comments still nearly 6 years later, things like these: * Summary: Bitcoin is worthless.
* .. except I didn't have to even read that to figure out the system was insecure. The description from Wikipedia was sufficient. In other words, if someone who is not familiar with the system can spot the main flaw in 2 minutes or less, then it's garbage.
* Unfortunately since all the nodes do this but only one gets it, it basically comes down to "let's waste a lot of power". Stupid idea.
* Yeah, any reasonable botnet could destroy trust in this currency. Neat idea, but if that's a weakness... Next!
* what if, say, people start using it and then someone finds a way to copy the coins? What if he posts it on the internet, like all DRM cracks are posted?
* I would like to see what sort of guarantees are in place for virtual currency
* Bitcom... Backed by the Greek treasury.
* The first thing the client did was try to connect to a webserver on port 80, probably a version check. The second thing it did was try to connect to a an IRC network. Can you say, botnet?
* how could I spend it? Why would you accept it?
* I see no reason this would be preferable to any number of already-available systems for valuing goods (like, say, US dollars), unless you're an anti-government paranoid.
* Every time Sony released a new 'super computer caliber' gaming station inflation would shoot up as the price of CPU time just went down.
* This is going to seem like a fraud unless you can explain how any string of bits, regardless of how they were generated, can be considered to be owned, or transferred, in a world where they can be copied instantly for free, and in a world where I can bring 100,000 new peers into your network with their own versions of history and clever ideas on how to abuse your protocol...
* Not to mention that Moore's Law would cause runaway inflation. And wouldn't people with access to supercomputers (University profs and students) become disproportionately wealthy?
* am still hunting for an intelligible explanation of why I can't forge money, copy money, or invalidate money, let alone why this isn't a privacy non-starter. And I'm not sure the Bitcoin "technical paper" counts.
* How's that for a disruptive technology? ... Oh that's right... It isn't.
* "21,000,000 coins. There will never be more coins than that." Riiiiight, because THAT's going to scale...
* However, if this becomes really popular, Google, Microsoft or anyone with a large enough botnet could claim the bulk of all the currency in just a few days, devaluing the coins everyone else has generated and making it impossible for them to generate more. I really like the concept, but I can't see how this will survive growth.
|
|
|
|
He is also plainly wrong with this:
"Nobody knew what bitcoin was five or ten years ago."
Some of the "nobodies" that knew 5-8 years ago are probably now wealthier than Peter. Lol, no doubt..although I suspect there were a fair number of people who read that first slashdot article, smugly dismissed the idea and did nothing who are kicking themselves right now. As I recall there was a lot of misinformation and misunderstandings in the discussion. |
|
|
|
|
Schiff is right about a lot of things, but he is missing the utility here.
It is like saying, in 1980, "There are/can be tons of TCP/IP networks, what makes the internet (or even arpanet) so special? Anyone can build another one, so it has no value."
He is also plainly wrong with this:
"Nobody knew what bitcoin was five or ten years ago." Lots of people knew what bitcoin was in 2012 (5 years ago) and certainly enough knew in 2010 (slashdot did a story that exposed it to a lot of people in July 2010) and more knew of it in 2011. That is just factually incorrect.
And 10 years ago (2007), clearly no one knew what it was since it didn't exist. That is like saying, "Nobody knew what the internet was 60 years ago," "Nobody knew what the web was 30 years ago," or "Nobody knew what electricity was 5000 years ago."
|
|
|
|
|
They just seem like trolls who don't like criticism, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
One somewhat minor misconception I think many have regarding the approval denial process is that a decision will be made ON March, 11. There is no meeting on March 11 where this issue will be decided. The SEC has UP TO March 11 to make a decision however that decision could be made at any time until that date.
Erm well that has been pretty clear to anyone following the ruling. Certainly doesn't require you nor anyone else pointing it out in a Bitcoin fora. Ffs Given OP was not clear on it, and said "on" they were right to point it out. |
|
|
|
One somewhat minor misconception I think many have regarding the approval denial process is that a decision will be made ON March, 11. There is no meeting on March 11 where this issue will be decided. The SEC has UP TO March 11 to make a decision however that decision could be made at any time until that date.
Likewise, they do not have to decide. There are at least three options: approve, disapprove, or do nothing. The "do nothing" option results in the equivalent of approval of the rule changes by default. |
|
|
|
How long ago was this known?
I think it was since September last year there was a breach in their service but they didn't report it until just now.
I hate when those companies hide these things when they actually do happen because they are thinking they are somehow doing "Damage control" but actually making it much much worst for them not notifying the public of these customer information have been comprised type of scenarios.
According to their blog post, they managed to solve the issue in less than 48 hrs. https://blog.cloudflare.com/incident-report-on-memory-leak-caused-by-cloudflare-parser-bug/I don't think it was known in September. It was reported by Tavis Ormandy last Friday. But within that 48 hours all logins were comprised. And the hackers have those lists. So alot of accounts are dormant. And can be retrieved and used by those hackers. Am I right or wrong in this scenario that is brewing in my mind about this security breach? And they thought those leaked 15,000 or what however many emails were found by hackers, this is much worst for millions of people's information being waiting to be sold later on when the heat is off those that did the hack. If I did not log in in the last four months, will the password be leaked? It shouldn't be give the nature of the bug since your login details wouldn't have been in cloudflare's server memory if you hadn't logged in. |
|
|
|
|
Before you do anything, can you see if it is confirmed?
It may not be and just be pointing out issues with blockchain.info.
|
|
|
|
|
One of the most important and tricky parts of developing your own wallet would be the PRNG. There have been a number of cases where the PRNG had problems and people lost bitcoins, so while developing your own wallet would no doubt be interesting, it is a minefield.
|
|
|
|
|
With the blockchain.info label "bitcoin magic doubler" I'd be extremely surprised if they got confirmed.. (On mobile so couldn't dig deeper.)
|
|
|
|
Great segment there. This is nice to see that mainstream analysts are "getting it".
The reason why the mainstream analysts are getting it" is because they have studied the fundamental nature of bitcoin and one thing that I thought their have discovered is that bitcoin cannot be shut down by a country, company and individual. To me bitcoin is more value than gold because of that sigler nature. Agreed. It just took them a very long time to wake up and do so 😀 |
|
|
|
Hi, I'm stuck, don't know what to do and I need guidance and help from someone who understands what have happened! I have my bitcoin wallet on blockchain. I have my e-wallet with Neteller. I can put money in my e-wallet with bitcoin and have done so in the past successfully. The thing is that Neteller only accepts the bitcoin deposit if the receive the money within a specific time. If that time passes they will decline and the reason I guess must be because the $ value of bitcoin goes up and down. Please look at picture 1 where you can see that I now finally after 48 hours got my bitcoin transaction confirmed. However, Neteller has already declined the transaction long time ago since they didn't receive the money in the time period. So now, I have no money in my Neteller and no money in my blockchain wallet. How do I get my money back to my blockchain wallet?? Really need some help !! Thx https://i.imgur.com/zc93R5z.pnghttps://i.imgur.com/pm9ggkJ.pngAbout your only option is to talk to Neteller support. No one else can help you since they control the private key to the address you sent to. This should also probably be split off from here and get moved to the service discussion since it seems to be about blockchain.info (not "blockchain") and Neteller. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
