|
The ban will be enforced by the war spaceships of the Bitcoin Confederation or what?
|
|
|
|
I think this is flaw in the network protocol, and many blocks are too big because of this.
There is only one solution: ban SatoshiDice.
Lololol so much fun |
|
|
|
But but but the iranian nuclear project!!!!!!  bitcoin help them?  bad bad bad!!!! (am i doing it right?  ) |
|
|
|
Ah yes, another scientific explanation that refuses to account for the possibility the value of the BTC itself goes up.
Not to say it would ever actually be worth it but the final number is completely false.
Then better buy bitcoins! Better buy 292$ of bitcoins than waste this money for 36$ of bitcoins! |
|
|
|
|
I suppose because they can. If satoshidice alone is filling our hard disks and connections then we better find a way to fix it now, or there is no way we can deal with more bitcoin adoption.
|
|
|
|
If a single service is so dangerous that it will kill bitcoin with this blockchain inflation then bitcoin has serious flaws.
Where did that come from? I don't see anything in this thread about "killing bitcoin with blockchain inflation". Your FUD is ridiculous. Please find some other thread to make your alarmist claims. Wtf? I was replying to TraderTimm, he says that inflating the blockchain is evil and blablabla. I am saying that no, it is not evil, and no it will not kill bitcoin. And no it is not harming the future of bitcoin. Because, as i said, it is not so easy to kill bitcoin. If bitcoin is so weak that satoshidice is more than enough to kill it then something is wrong. |
|
|
|
So the only way to speed up a transaction is to have someone purposely authenticating each low fee transaction to speed things along, or to put a high fee on it so people are more likely to want to mine it/it is pushed higher up the queue. I read yesterday that people discussing capping the transactions to 7 per second, is this for a stress test to see how Bitcoin would handle much large orders coming in per second, or is there some logic behind this to actually help how Bitcoin is run? No, this is totally wrong, sorry. |
|
|
|
CPU mining is dead  |
|
|
|
Technically the guys saying that about the internet in the mid 90s were right Just, not in 2000 but in 2010 |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, i don't get why all this trolling about the fork problem.
Just make the new client with an algorithm wich will activate the new blocksize only once like 90% of the clients are upgraded. So before 90% of clients are upgraded we do not change, once we reach the 90%, the change kick in and ta-dah, done without problems.
|
|
|
|
|
If a single service is so dangerous that it will kill bitcoin with this blockchain inflation then bitcoin has serious flaws.
|
|
|
|
The 100% inflation thing is nonsense, what if i start gabicoin right now? It will be a fork, it will be 100% inflation |
|
|
|
they really should up the limit to 1GB and be done with it...  Right, 1GB every 10 minutes is totally fine  If the world adopt bitcoin we will have 1GB of transactions every 10 minutes... |
|
|
|
Yup the wallet contain all these things but the important things are the private keys Also, are Multibit/other 3rd party wallets compatible with BTC-qt?
No. This mean you have to export and then import the private keys... |
|
|
|
You do realize that we already past the 500 most powerfull computers on earth COMBINED
Are you really comparing an ASIC with a supercomputer? Seriously this is fail. Yes an asic is good for mining, and that's all. |
|
|
|
Difficulty will be adjusted, but to 6 blocks per hour, not less. Remember that blocks are for confirming transactions, if we have too few of them per hour, not fine Here you can check the estimated new difficulty http://bitcoincharts.com/ |
|
|
|
Not bad, but lol: According to this chart below, though, the value of Bitcoins has now crashed all the way back to $34, so the profit was shortlived. It was presumably nice while it lasted, however. It is 42 now |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
