The possibility of Bitcoin to be the only one world global currency is extreme and far-fetched. Every country in the world has its own economic setup dictating its own currency. The very nature of Bitcoints to be a decentralized crypto-currency goes against the acceptance as one global currency by the individual governments. To govern a country, they will not naturally accept the decentralized economic freedom offered by BTC and rule out the technology and the capacity for innovations. Even though it has been accepted by a few first world countries in their payment system, there are far more third world countries who need to constantly fight for existence. Hence, BTC is still not accepted there.
Even, in the level of micro transactions it is even more difficult as we can't wait for hours to get confirmation when paying in coffee shop with bitcoin. This concept didn’t really exist before. Presently, it acts more like store of wealth like gold right now. At this level what is required is faster confirmation and less fee might be used as suitable payment method for micro transactions. The pricing in Bitcoin is still too unstable, like any other crypto currency. Hence, to replace dollar we will need a currency that will have a much more stable exchange rate.
The way we cannot believe all humans of the world regardless of religion, race, creed or color to be able to live in perfect harmony with one government that represents the interests of all people equally. Similarly, it is still impossible to believe in the one world global economy (BTC) to replace every individual economic setup.
The rules that were set in bitcoin would have needed to be designed to give an advantage to someone on mind in insight, I don't believe this is possible at all. The rules for bitcoin pretty neutral, it acts as a global gold with it's own set of rules, it will never accommodate to anyone's particular needs. They try to (by trying to fork it) but the original rules keep imposing itself above the fork attempts. Even the theories about LN seem far fetched to me. LN is ultimately an open source protocol, the capital can compete in a free market for hubs. Bitcoin is about free market competition while following a strict set of rules. It's all major governments in the world would agree on said rules in order to form a NWO around Bitcoin. It's just nonsense. |
|
|
|
Hello,
I made a stupid mistake - send BTC from GDAX account to my BCH Kraken account, is there a way to recover my funds ( I emailed both exchanges but usually takes days for their support to reply)
This is a very usual mistake by newbies, but mostly thanks to BCash using the exact same format address (that is, both BTC and BCash addresses begin with 1 and are exactly the same looking). Now, what are the chances you ever recover your money? they are rather low, in fact, I don't even know if it can be done. In this case, you would need to contact Kraken. But im not sure if it's even possible. I mean, it's 2 different blockchains. You sent coins from blockchain 1, into blockchain 2. BTC cannot go into BCH back and forth... only at the beginning of the fork when the addresses matched, you could access your BCH through a BTC address... correct me if im wrong, but you can't recover the coins. In theory, your coins are sitting on the BTC blockchain in the same address you sent the BCH to. So who owns the private keys of these? if im not mistaken, nobody does. |
|
|
|
Thanks
Bitcoin Cash uses a client called "Bitcoin ABC", so you need to google "Bitcoin ABC port number" or whatever. I wouldn't be surprised if the ports are exactly the same. They didn't even bother changing the address format which confused a lot of newbies, so I don't see why they would bother trying to get their own port number set up. By looking at this: https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/?q=Bitcoin%20ABC:0.16.1I see ports 8333 and 8334 are used, whatever that means. |
|
|
|
|
Im tired of BCash supporters claiming 8MB is perfectly fine, and how their transactions are fast and cheap and their network is not becoming centralized, all while their blockchain is empty because most people don't transact there, and all while Bitcoin gets spammed by bad actors every now and then.
I was wondering: When will some BTC billionaires sponsor a good "stress test" for the BCash blockchain? let's expose them. Let's see what happens when there's an huge chunk of spam transactions at a certain block height and they aren't able to properly download the blockchain (has anyone tried to download ETH's blockchain? exactly). Most people don't learn until they experience it, so let's make BCash's blockchain a mess by making them eat the same medicine BTC blockchain has to eat. Maybe they'll learn then how hueg blocks aren't that good of an idea.
|
|
|
|
I found this interesting take on bitcoin transaction type trends from 2015: https://tradeblock.com/blog/analysis-of-bitcoin-transaction-size-trendsAs this is from 2 years ago, I am wondering: a. Are there any newer transaction types? b. What is the average size of each of transaction type? c. Is there a site/way to see the number of each transaction type included in each block? Looks like this article is missing segwit transactions, be it with the "3" format or with the bech32 (bc1) format. Im not sure if you could find a website that would list each different type of transactions and its amounts embedded in a block but at least you can see segwit vs nonsegwit amounts here: http://segwit.party/charts/Im interested in seeing a site with charts for each format as well. |
|
|
|
|
Im not sure what I like more. The strings separated by 4 characters remind me of the usual bank account and credit card numbers which usually are separated in chunks of 4 by the GUI even if you paste the entire number without any gaps which is what I think is your idea. So this could help most people to make it more readable and spot any mistakes faster.
But for some reason I think I can discern shapes easier in the 6 char chunks where the address is divided in less chunks which for some reason I think my brain takes less effort due less chunks.. anyway, I guess this could be be switchable in options, to make it customizable to everyone's appeal.
|
|
|
|
It is very impossible for bcash to surpass bitcoin because of so many reasons. A lot of coins can even replace bitcoin cash in terms of its use but it will never replace bitcoin. Also, the fork of bitcoin cash doesn't have any specific goal other than to replace bitcoin long ago because of its popularity. If ever bcash did surpass bitcoin, then the market will be monopolized and that will be unfortunate for us traders.
Well, if Roger Ver keeps going on on mainstream TV telling all the idiots with money and with not so much money as well, to buy BCash because it's the real Bitcoin, we may see it go #2 rather soon. Don't under estimate the power of marketing, and don't underestimate the power of idiots and manipulators. I hope Bitcoin never loses #1 spot, it would be a disaster for crypto. It would show that with enough resources, you can manipulate a market to overtake Bitcoin's marketcap with all the FUD nonsense about small blocks, Core, segwit, and even buying a fake satoshi for the gig. Pathetic. |
|
|
|
|
Personally, and I may be weird, but I find easier to discern shapes if there is variety of caps on and off, a string of all caps off seems to same-ish to me.
As far as actually trying to memorize things... who does that? I just look at the first 3 or 4 characters of the address, and look at the last 3 or 4 characters of the address, when I paste the address in the "send" section of a wallet, when im about to send, mostly to confirm that im not infected with these type of malware that pastes an attacker's address instead of yours. So looking at the first and last couple of characters gets the job done for me at least (which is why I think caps on and off make it easier to stop any differences). I don't think a sophisticated way to only change characters in the middle of the address where most people don't look at is possible, or is it? because that would be a hell of a malware.
Anyway, im ok with both formats. The one that starts with 3 sucks, bech32 is better and the bc1 distinction is easy to spot and easy to discern from legacy addresses. BTCxx ... not sure about that one, the 1 is a good looking separator to me, if there is no 1, something seems missing.
btc1 would be cool too, but that's 4 characters...
Overall im not sure. I think bc1 should do the job just fine. I just hope trolls don't start a campaign to tell noobs how "bc1" is the new bcash format address or something (looks like bcash side enjoys making things confusing otherwise they would have choosen their own address format since day 1)
|
|
|
|
DONT DO IT!!! HOLD YOUR BITCOIN!!!! YOU WILL FEEL VERY FOOLISH WHEN IT HITS 25K IN LATE JANUARY-EARLY FEBRUARY!!!!!
I'm not really surprised by this downfall, it was only a matter of time before they took it down, I feel this is a excellent opportunity to buy more and this has happened before also when segwit2x was announced and post the cancellation it shot up. Also with the so called Jesus of Bitcoin Roger has sold his all coins it had to tank. I feel it shall bounce very soon, highly recommended to buy at current levels. It really has been a chain of events. The spam on the network, coupled with Roger Ver going on all over national TV to say how Bitcoin is dead and how they should buy Bitcoin Cash, then the Futures Market added right when Roger does this possibly triggered further panic-selling as well, and we also were prime for a correction anyway due the massive bull run. We haven't even crossed below $10,000, and even if we did, we would still be okay. 2018 will bring us many all time highs. Most people selling now will feel stupid sooner or later. |
|
|
|
Not all early adopters kept all their coins. Just look at Andreas A. (and well, just look at me, I've been around, I don't have much today.)
Early adopters spent their coins. To buy pizza and lambos and to pay rent.
How many actually bought lambos though? I'm so curious what % of early adopters have made it into the "wealthy" category. I know Roger Ver has a yellow Lamborghini Gallardo in his Tokyo flat. It's one of these super expensive buildings where you park your car at, and then there's an elevator that will lift you with the car right into your house, so you are at the sofa watching TV and you can see your car through your window pane. Pretty rad. Hopefully in the next decade 1 BTC will buy you one of these. There are bigger whales than Roger Ver tho, but they are not as flashy with their lifestyle and keep a lower profile. Most whales sold along the way. If you are sitting on $100,000,000, you are will be prone to sell some, so eventually the BTC gets redistributed into other hands. Im sure no one of them imagined we would be at $20,000 in 2017. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin might be the prequel of what was actually planned.
Maybe they created bitcoin just to see how we are going to react to the new currency or cashless society? I also think It is not a coincidence that bitcoin was founded in 2009, just after the RE bubble. The founder also is being anonymous aaaand,
I think CIA created bitcoin and they left the project when it was in its early stages so they can observe our future behaviors better.
While the theory is interesting, I still fail to see how a potential attacker that wants to control you, would release open source software. If they wanted to control people, they would have tried to spread a closed source software, like windows. In the doubt of Bitcoin being compromised in any way shape or form, it could be changed thanks to it's open source nature, and anyone opposing change would render themselves part of the enemy. Open source computing is also coming in the next decade, so we will get rid of malware at the hardware level. |
|
|
|
This makes me think that it would have been better for Satoshi Nakamoto to patent the brand "Bitcoin".
This might be against his consept,but there are hundreds of forked altcoins called "bitcoin" and their number will increase.This creates confusion around the newbies and they might just abandon btc and use ethereum.
I still believe in bitcoin core,but it`s harder than before to use btc as a digital currency and buy goods and services.
Huge amounts of forks will only dilute the forks and make the actual Bitcoin (BTC) shine as the #1 original coin. The real Bitcoin is the original network that has not forked, and that is, the current 1MB, Nakamoto consensus network that we've had since day 1. The only possibility for a fork to be the real Bitcoin is if there was 100% consensus about it, then the old chain would be irrelevant and Bitcoin as we know it would continue on the new chain. No matter how many times Ver or anyone else claim their fork is the real Bitcoin.. it isn't, because there was no 100% consensus about it, so it's an altcoin. |
|
|
|
Due to how volatile prices of bitcoin are, they cannot be accepted anywhere in the world. 6000 dollars down in a mere time of 4 days! WTFFFF
its price increased by 20 dollars while taking a screenshot LOL
The USD moves pretty much every second. Bitcoin is just another thing with the similar situation on the price. This is nonsense. The USD is perceived as of static value. Sure, it's value moves, but it's same-ish enough to be able to be used for daily usage. It's actual value is DESCENDING since 1900, but since it happens in slow motion, people don't notice your purchasing power has only gone down since the last century. BTC is an asset against this devaluation of the dollar, it cannot ever be used as a day-to-day currency unless everyone starts valuating everything against the BTC price and not against the USD price. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin breaking it’s high-price again and again, multiple purposes rather than payment system and future investment.
All this make bitcoin a perfect gift for your love, wife, and family.
1. your gift for Christmas will be a bitcoin?.
2. your ways to gift bitcoins "Hardware wallet, bitcoin gifts, paper wallet, Physical Coins, Donate"?.
I think it is a unique thing to do. In my country there is an exchange that features voucher, with voucher we can give gift easily. even the service can make us directly convert to local currency. Maybe in some countries it also exists, but I think I am lucky because Bitcoin can be freely used in my place. Most people are not ready for Bitcoin yet. I know a lto of people that sent their loved ones amounts of Bitcoin a year ago or so, when it was worth $200 per BTC. They didn't save it, because they didn't pay much attention to it. Now it's worth x100 times more and they hate themselves for not paying more attention and learning how to get things done. If anything, it's a good learning lesson if they lose their money. It looks like people only pay attention to Bitcoin when it's on the news for a while, then it goes underground again until the next bull run. |
|
|
|
You should get yout btc back after some times IF nothing happens, don`t worry, it won`t dissapear. Thanks for reply
i used ledger nano s , segwit
200 sats / byte
is there a possibility to get the transaction done or at least get my btc back?
i promise i tip if someone can push it.
There's a guy that waited for weeks for his segwit transaction to revert and it never happened, somehow it got permanently stuck... im not sure if this is only happening with segwit transactions or legacy transactions too. The thing is, since I always use Core to transact and barely use exchanges, I've never had this problem, if it gets stuck is just use zapwalletttxes or something. Anyway this guy said that if he "reset application data" on Ledger doing this his transactions went through: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKEKOrEYjcUTry it I guess. |
|
|
|
On-chain transactions also happen when closing the channel; that’s how final balances are settled on-chain.
You ask an excellent question about simulations. I would appreciate more information about that, myself.
Im asking mostly because Peter Rizun and Andrew Stone claimed on (I think it was) Scaling Bitcoin 2017, that they had simulations of bitcoin working with 1GB, or even 1TB blocksizes, and I was curious about what and how these "simulations" were being done and how legit are those. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SJm2ep3X_MIf they can do simulations to test how the system behaves at a certain scale, I guess simulations with LN could somehow be done. Also, I remember hearing about how you could make money by having an open channel with a certain amount of BTC (kind of PoS for BTC through LN). What are the details on this? (I guess it's the fee that you mentioned), how would the profit that you could make depending on your stake be calculated? and what are the implications of this game theory wise. |
|
|
|
Any decent wallet (like Bitcoin Core's wallet) will give you the possibility to both: 1) Send change to a custom address 2) Send change to a brand newly generated address As far as I know all of the popular wallets send your change to a new address (like Electrum) But in exchanges, who knows, I haven't paid attention to that. For example when you withdraw, they may not botter and just send you the change to the same address.. I think this is the case since in exchanges you can only manage 1 deposit address typically (which sucks for privacy). In Poloniex i've always had the same address. I tried creating another account, and it looks like it's 1 account = 1 deposit address, so the change could only go back to your deposit address when you withdraw. |
|
|
|
can please someone help me?
gonna tip !!
my transactions stuck since almost 60 hours !!
59462534708aaa39f961d36417bcfd855310a1f965c5483467c643d7926ac154
7779ac6724f0cd3ace7769d3e047e9a7019cc782089946a3a13584f1fad8bd8c
i promise i tip!!
Did you use Bitcoin Core to get the transaction sent? If so, then you can use "replace by fee" to push the transaction with a bigger fee. But it's weird that if you used "recommended" fee by the Core client you would ever have problems. https://bitcoinfees.earn.com/As of right now, according to this and if im correct, 960 sats/byte is the way to go if you want a smooth transaction. https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#30dThe mempool looks pretty full. Organic or spam? who knows. |
|
|
|
What? No! That is not how LN works. There won't be "filling blocks with all these microtransactions" because the microtransactions are happening off chain. LN moves transactions off chain so there will be more block space for other transactions. Fees should be lower with LN, not higher.
No, I may not have been clear with my post. I am obviously aware that LN transactions are happening off-chain, but then these off-chain transactions converge within a block and get settled blockchain. So what im claiming is: when LN gets widespread, the rate at which these blocks get filled with off-chain transactions will be faster. Also, people opening and closing LN channels will lead to on-chain usage too. LN transactions do not “converge within a block and get settled blockchain”. No record of them ever reaches the blockchain. The only LN use of the blockchain is channel maintenance transactions, “people opening and closing LN channels” as you said. Imagine that you and I make an agreement to trade between each other, and track our trades in a private ledger. We create an entry in a global public ledger, devoting funds to our private ledger transactions. When we’re done and we want to settle accounts, we record our respective final balances from our private ledger in the global public ledger. All else in the private ledger stays there, nowhere else. Of course here, our “private ledger” is magical. It provides each of us a unilateral recourse to force the current balances into the global ledger, in case of cheating; so there is no counterparty risk. Right, so the only on-chain activity that happens with LN is in the opening of a channel? So I create a channel with 1 BTC, and now I can send instant cheap transactions out of that 1 BTC to any other open LN channel and none of that is ever recorded anywhere but it's still non gameable? In any case, have simulation models of lightning network been performed to somehow predict what fees will be like once people all over the world are opening channels? like at what rate will people be opening channels? (from what I understand, closing a channel is irrelevant, on-chain transactions only happen when opening) Let's say people load up $1000 bucks a month worth of BTC in a channel for the month to spend from... how do we know this will be viable and for how long? What about spamming the LN? as in attackers opening and closing channels just like they do now to spam the network with regular spam. |
|
|
|
The problem I see with the "just not use LN" argument, is that once Lightning network is widespread and we have channels all over the world filling flocks with all these microtransactions, the overall on-chain fee will be higher than ever, at some point it will be non-viable for most people to transact on-chain. For people using LN, it wouldn't matter, as their transactions will eventually go into a block mixed with the rest of LN transactions (btw, who sets the fee for an "LN-tx filled block"?) but for people that want to transact on-chain, it will be extremely expensive, unless im missing something here.
PS: Im not saying "make blocks bigger as soon as they get filled" and such nonsense are a solution, im just pointing out at how widespread LN usage could lead to unusable on-chain transactions.
What? No! That is not how LN works. There won't be "filling blocks with all these microtransactions" because the microtransactions are happening off chain. LN moves transactions off chain so there will be more block space for other transactions. Fees should be lower with LN, not higher. No, I may not have been clear with my post. I am obviously aware that LN transactions are happening off-chain, but then these off-chain transactions converge within a block and get settled blockchain. So what im claiming is: when LN gets widespread, the rate at which these blocks get filled with off-chain transactions will be faster. Also, people opening and closing LN channels will lead to on-chain usage too. Eventually I don't see how this wouldn't lead to higher fees for those using on-chain. Sure, we'll have a period of lower fees once segwit + people using LN for smaller transactions kick in, but eventually the current block space wouldn't cut it for those wanting to transact on-chain. How far are we from that? who knows. With the fake spam it's hard to evaluate actual usage. We will just need to wait and see how the mempool looks like with a widespread LN and segwit I guess. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
