no they werent

many of us early adopters were following your endless rants and your drug induced paranoia and in the end we came to the conclusion you get drunk/stoned some nights, think up some epic story of no relevance and then want to entertain the world with your rants.

please either go to some drug support group, or set a long password for your computer login so that you have to think rationally before typing anything.

most of your posts belong on the sci-fi section or the crime drama of some story telling website.

many people have come to the conclusion you are high when you post your nonsense, so take it as a hint

unicode:
U+048C    Ҍ

?

lauda.. do you even understand malleability.
and how it is not a problem in multisig, and how RFB CPFP are the replacements for double spends. meaning malleability is not a big deal, because solving malleability solves nothing.

its been an 'issue' but not a big deal problem... after all ~2000-2500tx every ten minutes for the last 2 years have had no massive complaints/problems. the only time it was of any drama was a couple years ago when kerpeles used it as a fake reason to embezzle funds and blame bitcoin.

even the latest exchange embezzlings, which fake cried hacks didnt use the malleability screams of lost funds, because they know people would laugh at them because of the obvious fake excuses if they did blame malleability

wake up and research. learn that people have found work arounds and ways to double check and reduce risk

its time you spend less time being spoin fed on IRC and instead do your own independant research

HELLO
wake up

advertising bitcoin is not the problem.

using bitcoin is.
it needs to be simplified!!
even hardware wallets need to be revamped. the issue is that it is too cumbersome, complicated and needs downloads/browser extensions or server access.. plus needing to copy and paste lengthy gobbledegook addresses and decimal numbers

but there is a solution, should someone want to do it.
SMART WATCHES/FITBIT wristbands

just google "programmable smart watches with NFC" and you'll see the tech is available.


barclays are ahead of the game. first they are doing it with their native fiat payment method,
https://www.shop.bpay.co.uk/categories/buy-bpay/product/wristband/wristband


but barclays is knee's deep in hyperldger so next will be a hyperledger wristband, which will make hyperledger (bitcoins altcoin(banker) competitor) appealing to people that are not paranoid geeks

this is why litecoin, vertcoin and other alts are also doing LN. so that a future LN client can interact with many coins and swap independently and settle on all blockchains at a later('withdraw') time.

but all LN concepts at the moment still have flaws, so its too early to tell

the individual public keys used to form the multisig are empty of value. thus no need to 'coldstore' exactly.
because they are separate, that alone is a line of defense

because multisig involves dual signatures. an exchange via API can sign the tx(not on the front end) send the signed tx to the front end and then the front end sends the signed tx via api to the customers LN/multisig client.
thus the private key is not on the front end and transmission time is miliseconds (think how proxies work)

knowing the customer needs to sign too. the customer would refuse to sign if it noticed the destination of funds were going elsewhere. thus a hacker cant intercept. and also a hacker cannot change the destination after signing because the signature wont match the tx's new content.

lastly the customer just sends back a copy with their signature, thus also protecting their own private key by not having to use the privatekey within the exchange front end. but only on their own personal computer

because tx's are using real unspent funds and double signed it cant be double spend because funds cant move without both sides agreement.
and thus its no need to broadcast it to the network instantly. just holding a tx becomes like a bearer bond/promise/guarantee to pay.


current LN concepts do have MANY 'penalties' so although you can re-sign thousands of tx's at an agreed lower fee per re-sign. LN hubs want to introduce other ways to make money, hold funds and revoke funds. so LN has some faults.

hense why im more interested in traditional multisig utility which has been built into bitcoin for along time now. but lets hope the LN concepts aimed at repaying blockstream investors is not so heavy handed with its penalties, otherwise LN will be impractical

the shapeshift model wont work for daytraders.

but multisig/LN would.
this is because instead of seeing some mysql 'balance' you are seeing a signed tx of real unspent bitcoin value between you and an exchange and shows who owns what share of that value.
EG
[in: 1cU5t0m3r: 1.0btc]
[in: 13xCh4nG3: 1.0btc]
[out: 1cU5t0m3r: 0.999btc]
[out: 13xCh4nG3: 1.001btc]
[sig: 1cU5t0m3r]
[sig: 13xCh4nG3]

and that tx changes and gets resigned when a customer places an order (example below of placing an order for another 0.001btc)
[in: 1cU5t0m3r: 1.0btc]
[in: 13xCh4nG3: 1.0btc]
[out: 1cU5t0m3r: 0.998btc]
[out: 13xCh4nG3: 1.002btc]
[sig: 1cU5t0m3r]
[sig: 13xCh4nG3]

when the customer want to 'withdraw' he just broadcasts that tx to the network to get confirmed
the exchange cant run away with 2btc because he needs the customers signature
the customer cant run away with 2btc because he needs the exchanges signature

so they both have to mutually agree on who owes who what and both sign to show agreement

2.1mb IF 100% of people made 100% segwit versioned transactions compared to legacy transactions.
so 2.1mb is the best possibility. not the realistic expectation

its also funny that lauda has quietened down on the linear/quadratics debate now that i think he knows that an LN settlement is just a 2in 2out transaction. thus the amount of sigops is small and not an issue especially when an update to the libsecp256k1 brought a 5x efficiency gain.

lastly. LN relies on dual signing. so parties can check and double check the contents of a tx before signing to see if its able to malleate. thus by signing, the other party cannot then make another tx because it requires dual signatures. thus malleability is not an issue. they would refuse to sign a tx if it were showing the signs that the first tx was malleated.

im also laughing how core and their fanboys want to offset LN into the litenode category and then offer third parties to 'outsource' (paid to manage) the mainnet server connection to LN. where the manager has control to deploy revoke codes. and take a fee, impose a penalty
um hello. delayed spendability(AKA 3-5 banking day fund maturity/spendability (CLTV)) revoke codes (chargebacks (CSV)) and middleman management paid service(outsourced monitoring)...

LN has its utility but lets not kid ourselves. its just a 'banking' service that should be voluntary on the side.. not to be pushed as the end/only solution for bitcoin.

LN is not a permission-less, open, trustless system.
dual signatures = permissioned
outsourced monitoring = trust required

atleast be honest with yourself and sell LN on its real merits for the certain niches where it would be useful(exchanges, faucets, adsense, gambling). rather then overselling LN as the ultimate solution for everyone, while hiding its limitations and issues that will make it impractical for some people that actually dont want middlemen and locked funds managed with excess fee's/penalties, chargebacks and settlement delays.

LN is being pushed not for the benefit of bitcoin. but for the benefit of blockstream becoming the outsourced managers so that they can claim fee's and penalties to repay their investors.

no point upgrading.

after it activates then core will spoon feed out an actual fully functioning segwit release with full wallet functionality for segwit.

this 0.13.1 is just an empty gesture to make people feel like they are part of segwits desirability promotion. yet they are not part of the vote or veto power of true consensus.

its got little to do with energy costs

put it this way an asic in asia pays $225 electric per ASIC for 6 months.
in america its about $450

meaning only a couple hundred dollars difference spread over 6 months.

the real cost however is the ASIC itself.
because america doesnt make an asic they have to shell out $1500 per rig.
however it costs asia to make a rig just a couple hundred. so when they sell the rigs to americans. the asians can make many rigs. one to give america a couple to keep themselves and still some fiat spare to pay the electric for them couple rigs that cost them nothing thanks to the american consumer.

thus its pre profit for asia to mine. all because they make the rigs.. not due to electric costs

advantages
no software touches the device
private keys remain hidden
the device is wearable (new fashion craze=popular)
making a tx is as simple as shaking your wrist
no need to understand the mechanics of bitcoin to use it

yes i have seen a few times common people think of virtual currency being the funny play credit balance you get for free when playing facebook zynga poker.
they talk about bitcoin the same way when its in the context of virtual currency

as for cryptocurrency. some think of it as dark, cryptic and strange. and see it more of the darkweb geek stuff.

thats why when asked what i do. i just say im an international currency and asset trader, as my intro.

best advice.
start small.
dont hire big spaces out like a open space building for a year. start small like do a local meetup at a easy to find cafe /bar that is common place and doesnt require deposits or reservations.. like a small random one off social event. just to gauge/see how demand/popularity

then if lots are turning up and while talking you see there is demand for a regular large location to be needed then do it.

some people start at a bar where say 10 people turn up. then those people go and find a few others and the following week you book a night at a bar with a stage/(karaoke/mic night) area that can cope with 100, and you make it into a mini conference with speakers talking on stage. then you expand from there

if you already know of 100+ people locally that will want to turn up then skip the meetup and instead book a night at a place that has a stage and enough standing seating area, and then charge a small entrance fee to cover your costs for the night.
try not to get greedy with the entrance fee, unless it starts becoming a big event with lots of guest speakers and things happening

i didnt mean literally bank accounts. i was just putting multisig into a prospective common people understand. and yes in multisig you can have 1-of-2 also.. but then again in joint bank accounts you can also require dual signature where in multisig you can require 2-of-2

there are multiple purposes requirements you can set on a multisig and bank account.
EG child trust fund require both parents signatures and only unlocked at a certain date.
=2 of 2 multisig with a CLTV script

i only mentioned it as some people dont understand multisig/LN at its most basic use-case concept

imagine old concept is depositing funds into your wifes account so that when you want to pay for something you need to ask her and its her that makes the payment. but she decides to run away with the milkman and your cash

imagine a new concept of a joint account where your wife cant run off with the milkman with all your funds, because she needs your authorisation to make payments aswell as hers.

multisig is the new concept but i feel exchanges will wait for LN to be the 'tool' to make that a userfriendly process because at the moment trying to do multisigs is not 'granny friendly' in current popular bitcoin implementations

heres some idea's what people can do this year

1) hardware wallets need a revamp. they need to function without needing to download browser add-ons or connecting to websites or things like electrum.
EG have software self contained
EG a fitbit/smartwatch with NFC to make payment just by swiping a retailers touchpad (and yes its possible, just not done yet)

2) nodes and wallets need more diversity. so far knots, blockchain.info, bitcoinj, greenaddress, core are all under the same 'ownership'

3) PEOPLE need to realise bitcoin is code. it has no voice to promote itself and no arms and legs to defend itself, PEOPLE need to get involved instead of sitting on their hands waiting for bitcoin to do something.
EG if you want retailers in your area to accept bitcoin. go speak to them yourself
EG if you want to make bitcoin more popular. learn about bitcoin then set up some meetups/conferences

4) bitcoin jobs. look for a product/service you think will be useful to sell. then look for suppliers/employee's/dropshippers and then start selling them for bitcoin.

5) exchanges should start requesting a public key and use the bitID concept for logins instead of passwords, and also use the public key to form multisigs to hold funds, instead of giving customers easy to fake mysql balances. thus mitigating hacker/insider embezzling risks

thats a coin swap service.

not a full day-trade exchange that handles fiat.

but lets play devils advocat. lets say full exchanges were to have been hacked.
this is because private keys are on the same front-end server as the users place orders.

this can also be mitigated by exchanges having a front-end with only publicly(deposit) keys and a 'command' database.

EG instead of the front end signing transactions, the front end puts a user withdrawal request into a database. and secretly a secondary system is checking that command database in seconds and processes it from another system. double checking the user actually authorised it.

the 'delay' is not stupidly a long manual process but a milisecond response time. just separated instead of combined into one system
though i would still prefer this separate system to use multisigs to not have 100% control of funds

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"

bitcoin was made to be an alternative to the central banks that screw everyone