segwit and good news, don't make me laugh  segwit is the shittiest news ever since its inception bitcoin needs bigger blocks |
|
|
|
OK I'm going to announce it in this thread too. Today I released the v1.0.0 RELEASE of the Byteball-to-TCP Proxy. It is really easy to setup and get running. It listens on the Byteball network for new devices that pair with the proxy and for each guest device it spawns a raw TCP connection to the predefined host/port. You can use this proxy whenever you have a service that accepts raw TCP connections and you want to expose it to Byteball wallets. By default the proxy serves the current time as given by the india.colorado.edu:13 telnet server. How did you generate the QR code invitation for your bot device ? Using this service: http://goqr.me/api/ |
|
|
|
OK I'm going to announce it in this thread too. Today I released the v1.0.0 RELEASE of the Byteball-to-TCP Proxy. It is really easy to setup and get running. It listens on the Byteball network for new devices that pair with the proxy and for each guest device it spawns a raw TCP connection to the predefined host/port. You can use this proxy whenever you have a service that accepts raw TCP connections and you want to expose it to Byteball wallets. By default the proxy serves the current time as given by the india.colorado.edu:13 telnet server. |
|
|
|
We should really do something about the synch time though. Would it make synch faster if there were more hubs and relays? Do hubs and relays have to have public/static IP addresses?
I tried syncing a full node. It seems that most of the delay is caused by the wallet reading and writing to the local hard drive excessively. I don't know if it is possible to configure sqlite to work with a bigger memory cache or something to cut down on disk access but if so, that should help a lot. ..... I agree completely -my experiences: Core i5-321M @ 2.5 GHz RAM 8 GB hard disk Seagate MomentusWIn 10 64 Bit full Sync Time: >5 days (>120 h)Core i7-5500U @ 2.40 GHz RAM 8 GB SSDWIn 10 64 Bit full Sync Time: 1 day (24 h)SSD => factor 5 fasterOn mobile devices without ssd, the synchronization never ends (e.g. SD memory card). Clear recommendation: The read / write speed of the device is the bottleneck, devices without SSD (or fast HD) should prefer a light wallet. This recommendation must be pointed out during the installation in order to protect the users from frustration. Excellent observation! Thanks! Also, there is probably something that can be done programmatically to improve the situation. Perhapse Byteball should use more RAM for caching and flush to disk less frequently? |
|
|
|
|
We should really do something about the synch time though. Would it make synch faster if there were more hubs and relays? Do hubs and relays have to have public/static IP addresses?
|
|
|
|
Why this is not traded on POloniex or Kraken. Only 2 exchanges?
because poloniex is heavily invested in ETH and manipulating its price. ByteBall is the Ethereum destroyer. You do the math. |
|
|
|
Should probably change market to Mbytes instead of Gbyte, the high price is probably scaring people away.
i have the same opinion with you. we should do that, i think it's a good move for this project.. why can not people realize this?
i think we need use Mbyte ! can we vote for this? how can i sign a message with my byteball wallet?
thank you I agree Mbytes or even bytes look more attractive Yes. Let's do MBYTE!!! Total supply of 1000 000 Gb equals to 1000 000 000 Mb/1000 000 000 000 Kb / 1000 000 000 000 000 B. The last thriad has too many zerous that undermine the coin's value. I find that, for me, personally GByte sounds very solid, I am all for it and all opposite to Mb/Kb/B 1 billion is not a bad number so I still think 1000 000 000 MB is good. BTW you should use uppercase B because lowercase b stands for bit not byte. Psychologically 0.6$ is much better price than 600$. People always say GB is too expensive in a whining voice. I know it's stupid but pride will get you killed one day. Better opt to the stupid people. |
|
|
|
Should probably change market to Mbytes instead of Gbyte, the high price is probably scaring people away.
i have the same opinion with you. we should do that, i think it's a good move for this project.. why can not people realize this?
i think we need use Mbyte ! can we vote for this? how can i sign a message with my byteball wallet?
thank you I agree Mbytes or even bytes look more attractive Yes. Let's do MBYTE!!! |
|
|
|
A drop to breakout area of 1300 would be perfectly normal within this bulltrend. Tone Vays is complete retarT, he's wrong on just about every call and calls Elliot Wave Theory a 'scam'.
Tone Vays is reasoning and acting like a complete moron to the extent of probably being a paid troll. I'd not be surprised if he wanted to marry his UASF hat. |
|
|
|
Iota is about 100x further along in adoption than byteball and offers zero transaction fees.
yeah right, iota is not even production ready yet, a quote from their own webpage: IOTA IS CURRENTLY IN BETA
It should be noted that IOTA is currently still in Beta. This means that the current Java implementation is an reference implementation. Major improvements to performance, features as well as ease of use will be made over the coming months.
byteball was released 6 months ago. it is listed on CMC. where is iota listed exactly? nowhere. I bought byteball when they were trading 50$ each and now it is 679$. I rest my case. I am dumbfounded that IOTA is at 1.6 billion in the first day. I have to believe it is going to drop dramatically. I heard Bitfinex disabled iota deposits, sounds pretty scammy to me. What the IOTA cap does say to me though is that the technology is potentially very disruptive and if IOTA is worth 1.6 billion on pure speculation, then BB can easily get there. 1.6 billion is a 10x for byteball, 10.6 billion would be 100X. I think BB needs a lot of utility built on top of it to get that far. sooner or later big businesses are going to start accepting Byteball because byteball TXs are confirmed practically instantly. Whereas BTC and other block chain coins derive their finality probabilistically Byteball TX finality is boolean. The TX is either final or not. If its final it is safe to accept as payment and it happens real fast. much better currency for online businesses where customer wants to immediately gain access to goods and services after making the payment and the merchant will never have to worry about double-spending of unconfirmed TXs. |
|
|
|
Iota is about 100x further along in adoption than byteball and offers zero transaction fees.
yeah right, iota is not even production ready yet, a quote from their own webpage: IOTA IS CURRENTLY IN BETA
It should be noted that IOTA is currently still in Beta. This means that the current Java implementation is an reference implementation. Major improvements to performance, features as well as ease of use will be made over the coming months.
byteball was released 6 months ago. it is listed on CMC. where is iota listed exactly? nowhere. I bought byteball when they were trading 50$ each and now it is 679$. I rest my case. |
|
|
|
So a little late to the party, but then again I'm a philanthropic ideological hippie commie rat so, hell might just be me. This is what I care for when it comes to cryptocurrency, to see something go beyond plain greed and abuse of power.
So yea, read the white paper here, finally, read a bunch of posts but eh...
Fair distribution?
A huge amount of bitcoin is held by a few moguls, it's not even close to fairly distributed, and will see quite a few more powerplays by those strong hands, both in BTC and other poisoned crypto wells.
What I am saying is, how is giving more shit to people who already own shit to be seen as a fair distribution?
Maybe it's a logistics call, how to bring a coin into this world without it ending up in that very same treasure chest. But be as it may, I think it is rather important to acknowledge the relativity of this 'fair distribution'.
Other than this, great coin and I wish it well (in the beggars hands)
you admitted in your entering sentence that you are a communist. you have just answered your concerns regarding "fair" distribution. it appears that fairness is a subjective term especially if there is an anarchocapitalist on the one side and a statist communist on the other side of the argument. those few moguls you are referring to are successful and smart people who took the enormous risk when BTC was cheap. they should be rewarded for their risk respectively. but you, on the other hand, have a statist way of thinking where the state would take their share of everyone's profits without taking any risk (taxes). so in your fantasy land people should be rewarded for having taken zero risk, right? yep, communist statist detected. please don't turn into a violent hypocrite who puts on a mask and then sneakily hits people with a bike lock for having a different opinion while being employed as an ethics professor in a university. |
|
|
|
Hey Africoin. I've been reading your thread for so long. I felt a thank you would be nice now that I finally decided to register here.
I also read that you have some money in Ethereum and Litecoin. Do you have any opinion about these 2 coins for midterm? Thanks!
both are fair investments mid-term but definitely not long-term. However, if we're talking about mid-term profits then neither ETH nor LTC is the best option out there. ETH is already overvalued and does not have a potential to surge x10 any more. LTC doesn't even have any fundamentals backing up its price. I would want to recommend WAVES but it too has a very big market cap already, so even though the tech is great and they're gaining momentum you won't be able to x100 your investment in WAVES. The only coin I am aware of that still has the potential to x100 in value this year is Byteball. It has true innovation backing it up and it could potentially dethrone Ethereum, Monero, Dash and ZCash because its superior to them in all aspects. It has better anonymity and more user-friendly smart contract creation. It also has unlimited scaling because it doesn't have a block chain, so it can truly outperform VISA. The company where I used to work half a year ago got downsized so I got a huge amount of fiat as compensation. I instantly bought into Byteball with all of that money because I am absolutely certain that Byteball is going to be a huge success. |
|
|
|
Dafar I love you. But I must say you remind me of Jaffar.  interesting comments as we approach August 1. I guess it is a reflection of the divisiveness of the scaling deadlock. My opinion, Best Segwit proponents will get is Barry's SegWit2MBHF else UASF if UASF happens, then probability of chain split is much much higher What some are not aware of, is efforts by a pro on chain scaling group to scale onchain with miners support (majority) if you equate on chain scaling success to BU, you are off the mark. There's more going on than is readily observed in public Best believe there'll be a surprise in the coming weeks from pro-big blockers Never under estimate your 'enemy' I am also interested in how these events will affect price in the short term. place your long term holdls after clear vision meanwhile, this event should churn out interesting proposals on current deadlock  Excellent opinion, my friend. I also think that something is going to surprise us in a positive way to help us closer getting bigger blocks. |
|
|
|
Apologies in advance Afrikoin since its off-topic! Anyone who still thinks SegWit is any good needs to read this: How do SegWit and FlexTrans compare?More incompetant rubbish There is no reason to choose SegWit over Flexible Transactions. There need only be ONE reason. That reason is the BU developers are amateur coders and should not be within a hundred miles of any production code. End of conversation. Who's talking about BU in the first place you dimwit? Absolutely no mention nor reference to BU You must be hallucinating |
|
|
|
Anyone who still thinks SegWit is any good needs to read this: How do SegWit and FlexTrans compare?The reality of the situation is that people will need to upgrade their wallet anyway. As Bitcoin gets its value from networking we can see that networking will cause a ripple effect of upgrades. People that receive a payment from a SegWit user will not have any progress reports of that payment unless they have a SegWit wallet. Users pay more to users that don't have a SegWit wallet. The networked basis of money makes it a certainty that practically all people need to upgrade. And that begs the question if there really is a benefit to the SegWit solution.
SegWit has as its only feature for the future that it allows the Lightning Network to be deployed. The capacity increase is a joke compared to the needs of the network right now. It certainly is not a capacity that can be used in the future. Even with Lightning on top, the capacity allowed in a SegWit world will not allow Bitcoin to grow as peer to peer cash.
Flexible Transactions is not a capacity increase, it is a separate solution that can be combined very well with any capacity increase.
Additionally, it is a format that is made to be extended. Adding fields to the format is expected and can be done safely. FlexTrans even dictates in the specification the allocation of various forwards compatible fields which can be used for soft upgrades.
The main drive for SegWit was to avoid forcing people to upgade. What we see today is that the same authors are pushing people really hard to upgrade to the latest version, even before SegWit is out. Their client refuses to connect to non-segwit peers for half the connections. They even used the alert system to get people to upgrade their client.
All this means that in actual fact the 'safe' upgrade strategy of SegWit is not happening. The natural conclusion is that the complexity introduced to avoid making people upgrade was wasted and there is no real benefit in their architecture over FlexTrans.
The Flexible Transactions deployment is a protocol upgrade that has as of today not been planned. The likely method is to decide that at a specific time (counted in blocks) in the far future this upgrade will become active. Allowing everyone many months to upgrade.
If a user did not upgrade before the date hits his client will give a warning and he will be told to upgrade. Until he does there will be no service. This will guarantee no loss in funds and no loss in security or privacy.
The Flexible Transactions solution solves all problems that SegWit solves. On top of the features that SegWit has it lists some more which are essential to a healthy on-chain future growth for Bitcoin.
Flexible Transactions cost a fraction of SegWit, both in code written and future work to keep the network running.
The goal of SegWit that it would be easier to deploy, allowing people to not upgrade should they not want it, turns out to not be reached and it ends up dictating economic policy which is a sure sign of bad design.
There is no reason to choose SegWit over Flexible Transactions.
There is no reason to choose SegWit over Flexible Transactions. There is no reason to choose SegWit over Flexible Transactions. There is no reason to choose SegWit over Flexible Transactions. There is no reason to choose SegWit over Flexible Transactions. There is no reason to choose SegWit over Flexible Transactions. There is no reason to choose SegWit over Flexible Transactions. There is no reason to choose SegWit over Flexible Transactions. |
|
|
|
OK guys: whales, pump, dump, airdrop... what will be the value of your balls AFTER the distribution completed (that is to say 1,000,000GBytes are distributed)? Good question... Let's turn it simple: What in your mind will be byteball top ranked currency to the long term? From https://coinmarketcap.com/If byteball reaches the top 5, capitalization should not be lower than $1,599,000,141 a GByte would have a value around $1,600 If byteball reaches the top 10, capitalization should not be lower than $561,078,801 a GByte would have a value around $560 If byteball reaches the top 20, capitalization should not be lower than $320,562,275 a GByte would have a value around $320 Byteball is clearly better innovation than Ethereum. The only thing stopping Byteball from dethroning ETH right now is the denial of Ethereum fanboys. Thankfully it is not the current investors of cryptocurrencies that we need to care about. They are all clinging to their pet projects and pumping that crap (dash, monero, eth pumpers). The gamechanger will be the new people who are right now being drawn into cryptos. They seek for undervalued coins such as byteball and they are not going to invest in an already inflated market such as ETH. Since cryptos as a whole is still a very small market the vast majority of people are still yet to join cryptos. Those numbers will dwarf the communities of Bitcoin and Ethereum. The new generation of cryptocurrency enthusiasts are not biased towards any existing crypto so they will simply join Byteball because BB has simply so much better fundamentals than any other coins. And finally the eth fanboys see their get-rich-quick scheme slowly bleeding while byteball drinks the blood of Ethereum, they will then admit being wrong just like those who bought into pets.com before the dotcom crash. |
|
|
|
Lol... says the pathetic blocknet shill advertising blocknet all over bitcointalk and desperately trying to undermine bitcoin.
Do you know bitcoin is the most secure, liquid and immutable crypto out there? Do you know bitcoin is here for good while shitcoins will come and go? Tech doesn't mean jack shit when bitcoin has the best developers and can adapt the tech of any shitcoin using sidechains and smartcontracts
best developers, don't make me laugh those "best" developers are unable to even increase the block size limit they have crippled Bitcoin more than they have done any good SegWit is a clusterfuck of unnecessary code written in the name of a soft fork and now they want to hard fork Bitcoin with UASF in order to enforce their soft fork. Those guys are absolute morons and hypocrites |
|
|
|
Why the sync is so slow? only 3% for 1 hours?
Good question. Is it because too many users rely on light nodes? So the few full nodes out there are not capable to send the updates to light nodes fast enough? Synchronization time definitely is one of the most annoying issue about Byteball. Does it help if more users operate a full node? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
