I think you miss something. We don't want to devalue mining by lowering fees, we wan't to keep the fees the way they are now.

What would be the sense of bitcoin being slow like established payment services? What would be the purpose of bitcoin whe it would cost the same like other payment services?

Bitcoin started with an alternative. Waiting until everything slows down and transactions aren't filled is plain stupid. I mean who does those transactions own? Bitcoiners. And when bitcoin doesn't work or you have to fear that it doesn't work when you don't pay the highest fee then this is doomed. I mean even with a high fee you could get your transaction stucked. When all others think the same and you at the end only have the lowest fee. You can't really predict that in case of spamming or so.

And the miners will get their share. With adoption. The more transactions because more people are using it the more fees.

Restricting adoption is plain stupid. I mean think about amazon adding bitcoin. We would have many new transactions now and all these new users would have a terrible experience. Surely that could be VERY bad for bitcoin.

So in every direction, we need bitcoin to be unrestricted.

I can't believe that bitcoiners go around screaming after control of their own currency. Only a certain amount of transactions, the miners need to earn more money.

Right... as if the mining corporations doesn't earn enough.

Oh... didn't see such list yet. Till now i thought the factions are relatively averaged strong but the list looks like there is no real chance that bitcoin core will get the 8mb blocks.

It's a difference creating a service that is used by users voluntarely instead forcing them to another service by making the original one unuseable or too expensive.

But why do you write that? Yes, most aren't aware. But bitcoin will become used more and more when people realize it's usefullness. That doesn't mean that we should give up and make bitcoin something different.

Bitcoin will get used more and more.

And this 1MB blocksize is even a risk preventing that. Imagine amazon would tomorrow directly accept bitcoins. Big marketing involved. You know what happens? Bitcoin will be killed. The blocksize limit will make it useless. And all the interested persons will spread the hate about money they "lost". The low speed and nothing works.

No, bitcoin NEEDS to be prepared for new users and transactions.


But a big chunk will flow in that direction for sure. I mean they created that network to take away transactions from bitcoin.

Again... i don't have anything against that network. Only that some people with might, remind me on politics, have their own agenda and seem to make it bad for us.


Inflation is practically a fee on holding it. Not on spending it. If you spend all your fiat then you don't pay a fee anymore or at all.

Right. It doesn't scale. That's why i'm for a complete drop of the limit. It was considered temporary anyway to restrict the grow of the blockchain in the beginning.

And you can see that the spam problem is there with a limit. It was not there when the limit was far away. So there is no reason that then suddenly spam would create huge blocks. No reason for a spammer to do that.


Right. The market over all found already a solution. Mastercard, Visa and so all are expensive so people switch to bitcoin.

So now you come and explain, "Let's make bitcoin expensive. People will find an alternative." Surely that is a clever plan.


You interprete wrong. You claim that the fee for bitcoin transactions need to be so high that people start to use other solutions. So for you bitcoin is not the solution. It only will work with altcoins that fix it.


And? I do those transactions all the time. Does this lead to no fees happening on the network anymore? Surely not.


I don't have an aversion against the lightning network. I have an aversion when the owners of that network try to make bitcoin worse only to make users switch to the lightning network. And momentarely it looks like that.

And NO, i got transactions stuck too. Only because i did not notice that the spammers started again. And you very well still can be caught when you send your transaction in the wrong moment. Then how well will you think about that fast transaction system that lets your transaction hang in the air for days?

And no, they don't complain anymore because the spam attacks stopped for now.

By the way... you contradict yourself. In your race to get your confirmation through you will always have losers when the blocks are full. Someone will always have the transaction with the smallest fee. Even when the fee is high really.

And only because you can send zero fee transactions doesn't mean that you will do that all the time or that everyone wants to max out that system. The reality proofs already that this is not the case.

Nice of you to delete my answer and replace it with "FUD.". I really had to check if i wrote this.

And what do you say? I never said that all developers want no blocksize rise. I consider the 2MB solution nonsense since it will bring nothing than a short timeout until the next fork has to be done.

And for what reason? Right, to hold the fees high.

Sorry but that is no solution to me. Telling me that this opinion is fud is so... stupid.

Though maybe you mixed me with someone other. I for one know that developers are divided and yes, you don't need to support XT to support a blocksize raise. Though i want real solutions. Not something that will bitcoin make less useable only to see that the users go to some altcoin that is developed by some of the core devs.

Maybe you should start to know what others think before assuming you know it and attacking them because of your wrong assumptions.

And what does this have to do with trading and predicting where the price will moved to in the next time? You know trading means selling and buying so that you have more coins at the end.

Really? So can you point me to the site that you mean? Since when normal charts could show so easily where the price will go to then there wouldn't be so many that lose their coins with trading.

If you have success with trading then what do you look at to decide on where the price will move to?

Or did you write only theoretical and you don't have actual trading experience?

000webhost.com, so you are using a free webhost? Oo I really don't think that is a good idea except you only have playmoney you use on bitfinex.

If your money is withdrawn then who was it? A hacker, an employee of simply someone on the same server who could access your webhosting with a simple trick?

Sounds way too risky for reasonable amounts.

Every newbie checking around should have noticed that there are actually free escrows. They don't demand a reward, only allow tips being given. So there is no reason to be caught by this scammer argument anymore. Maybe it was different with escrows in the early years of bitcoin.

*lol* Your nephew... i think with nephews like that you need no enemies. Make sure to keep him away always a arm length wide. He is dangerous and would take away much more from you if you give him the chance.

So what do you mean with sandboxed? Would the software have stolen your coins otherwise?

Reading that... i wonder how many "hacks" actually were people that had access to that computer.

I would not let my computer open to others. It's fully encrypted with truecrypt.

Exactly! And nowadays smartphone contracts are cheap. I have seen one for 1GB LTE, Flat Internet, Flat Phone and SMS for 15€. I mean who needs paid wifi anymore?


That is very correct. The hotels mostly only have such standard contracts with ISP's and those are paid by the minute and very expensive. It's no fun using them. Having a free or cheap wifi in place is nice then.

But point one applies. It's too seldom that a free or cheap wifi is there. That's why users mostly will chose a smartphone contract. Available everywhere, even when it would cost. On the other hand, maybe the paid wifi will cost more, for the same bandwith, than the smartphone contract?

The more i think about that project the more i think it is doomed. I mean when you would be interested to use these wifis to have internet when going around. You most probably would find wifis, that use bitmesh, very hard. And as a provider, when you offer your wlan, you would probably earn nearly never, because the buyers aren't there.

It's a circle of doom. And i don't see it happening that people happily pay for that service when they could use their smartphone internet and have it everywhere.

Maybe bitmesh will go into partnership with another provider to have a chance. But still... i don't see this becoming a success.

I agree. Though when you don't use /offsite max, which would make you having invested 100 times as much as you really has, then you should be save. It's practically impossible to lose a considerable amount of clams that way. Not to mention that there is no one who has enough clams to be able to beat the house really.

I think the amount of noobs using brainwallets will be rather high. Because A, they don't know or realize how insecure it is and B, because noobs everywhere are asking about things they heard or read about. "Coldwallet is safe, where do i get i", "Paperwallet is great, i want one", and so on. They read something and want it. So i think many noobs will have used it.

You are right, when you are a pro. But i'm sure when you are a pro then you already have your ways of transferring safely. I believe it's named Hawala, it's a financial system used in islamic states. They don't send money, they use a network of money persons. There is no money changing from one money person to the other. One money person only says to the other money person "I had a deposit here, pay out X money to mister Y". No money actually flowing except at the exit and input points. And it should be pretty easy to give the infos about the payout in a way that is similar to bitcoin.

So i think the NSA is happy about all the financial data they could get from bitcoin. But yes, if done correctly then they could not do anything.

Um... that's where they have the enourmous computer power for. Of course they can't go into all details all the time, but they observe all traffic they can get. They mostly check and store the metadata of things, so that they can build connections. But when they found something interesting then their computer power can go as deep as they want. It's hilarious what possibilities they have once you read all about what snowden revealed.

And yes, probably they don't care about your bitcoins, at least not if you don't fund things they don't like. They probably wouldn't even intervene when you would do something illegal. They would reveal their possibilities so that they would not even use these infos. Except you are a target. Then it would come in handy.

Unfortunately it's true. Snowden revealed many projects. I don't remember the name now but one of the projects was an automated computer system that automatically can hack every computer that it is told to target. It gets feeded with actual exploits from all sides. Only when the system can't do it on it's own then manual interception by humans is done. NSA hackers so to say.

Yes, paper wallet might be fine. Only thing is... at one point you need to access the coins. You don't want to be surprised by your wallet cleared before your eyes in the moment you imported the private key in a wallet.

You can't say that people on the other side are not able to negotiated with. If you think a 2MB block is a solution of some kind then this might sound to others like nonsense. And you don't need to take compromises when you think the compromise is bad. You woud fight for what you want instead.

I think that is a valid thing to do. Not accepting things that are unacceptable. That has nothing to do with being a blockhead. Of course each party can throw this word to the other party but it won't solve anything. At the end the network decides. And hopefully the networks majority is filled from those that want to have bitcoin a longterm project. Not making it an expensive thing on the same level like things we already had before only to promote some altcoins...

*lol* That's one of the funniest statements you gave in this thread. Sure, we only want to transfer money, let's use paypal or western union maybe. I think you don't get it. Bitcoin is the currency and i don't think that the majority of bitcoins want bitcoin to be split into a bitcoin high amount transfer system and some altcoin bum amount transfer system.


I think the greed is speaking out of you clearly. Just increase the fee... it doesn't matter what effect that has on bitcoin adoption. Guess it would be great for the lightning network owners... higher fee means more customers and that means more earnings for the ligthning network owners.

Well, i'm glad we aren't all lightning network owners.


And you await the spammers to fill a considerable amount of 8MB blocks? What about no block limit at all? Why spamming then? Minimum fee would ensure that it is costly and it would be useless. So everyone who wants to do it would be free to do... only it would not make sense.


*lol* You speak like you never used fiat. Yes, you can use fiat without fees. And yes, bitcoin started to replace a good chunk of it.

Naming legitimate transactions spam is ridiculous. But i think i won't get emotional. Your interests shine through pretty clearly.