... little people with little dreams of little victories and little futures.
independent people, with big dreams, relishing small victories, dedicated to a larger future, a future where Blockstream will have to compete, rather than co-opt... No pith, no point. big blocks will soon propagate 3 years too late? |
|
|
|
sustained 11% could block the soft fork segwit rewrite indefinitely... bullish
unlikely... they will lower the bar for activation to 89% if 11% is trying to block the sotf fork |
|
|
|
So I'm working on this, figured I'd give folks here a first peek since you're the ones that would appreciate having something like this.  The final product will have a better price display that I'm still working on, I just grabbed a zoom in of bitcoinity for this stage of development. Price would probably be around $125 to $150 to make a profit. Is this something you would buy?  |
|
|
|
the price is wrong!
like for real we should be pushing 800.
fake walls, fake volume, is it a fake market? gold as well should be an increase in interest rates, if feds decide to keep interest rates on hold or reduce then fake stock market? these factors on current markets would hypothetically put btc at $800 not only are interest rates faked but so is the price the gov injected billions / month for months on end if thats not fake idk what is.... |
|
|
|
|
the price is wrong!
like for real we should be pushing 800.
|
|
|
|
|
i think we'll see a shift soon if the shitcoin isn't embedded on bitcoin's blockchain in some way its going to be totally irrlevent.
Maidsafe is and OMNI layer coin
Synereo
Tether <- ( FIAT on the blockchain! )
etc...
counterparty is also doing somthing similar, but they appear to be more focused on smart contracts ( which we know dont really work well.... a contract is not meant to be code, its simply an agreement to which meaning is implied and enforced by rule of law not rule of buggy code ) but i believe that because its on the blockchain it will be possible for OMNI and Counterparty assets(or "smart property") to integrate with each other.
|
|
|
|
didn't think adam would sell his account
mmmm... yeah... that kind of comments are not adam's comments... shit happens! How hard is it to believe Adam just comes here to pump shitcoins now? not shitcoins, shitcoin. there's a difference. anyway its not about the shitcoin itself its about what the shitcoin represents. seriously, this is a very cool thing ( OMNI ) the coin itself isn't all that interesting its the functionality the "OMNI layer" provides thats exciting. basically "OMNI layer" resides on the bitcoin blockchain it allows you to create assets on the blockchain it also provides a decentralized exchange for these assets. grab a front row seat. its going to be a good show. yes it is a fascinating development, http://www.rsk.co/ is another one doing smart contracts on the blockchain, great news for bitcoin with all these developers showing the dream - a basic decentralised finance of exchange (btc) that can be built upon to build a decentralised financial economy ya these things are pretty cool each project takes a different spin on it, this one has a coin with a two way peg. OMNI has USDT. Ether Tries to do it all. ( but has its own blockchain... which has proved to be week  ) It's going to be interesting to see these projects grow / compete. Actually Adam, no it's not interesting. At all. Every new shitcoin that comes out has some sort of new "angle" or "tech twist" that the pumpers know they can exploit one day. They buy a lot of the shit on the low for the first 6 months after launch, all the while looking for a way to hack/exploit it. Once they have the perfect exploit in their back pocket, they run the coin up to the moon, all the while touting the "gee-whiz-it's-better-than-anything-else-especially-dinosaur-bitcoin" features. All the n00b suckers pile in, wishing and hoping for dreams of riches, gloating that it'll take over everything 'cause it's 2.0. Then, out of nowhere, the hack/exploit happens. The pumpers short the market, crash the coin, and all the fools watch as the price of the shitcoin plummets back to earth. It's the same shit over and over. Wash, rinse, repeat. When will people ever learn? this time its different. this time the shitcoin isn't trying to "take over everything 'cause it's 2.0" the coin depends on bitcoin... how would you like to trade BTC/USD in a decentralized way? maybe you need to create a token to represent shares in your company and automatic pay out BTC dividends to holder, and do this WITHOUT a third party decentralized crowd sale! you like? bitcoin provides! ethereum does Some of this but it created its own blockchain ( and that worked out REAL nice didnt ) OMNI layer is on the bitcoin blockchain, and uses bitcoin addresses and bitcoin TX to do its thing.. what's good for OMNI is good for bitcoin and vis versa. this is permissionless innovation at its finest. |
|
|
|
didn't think adam would sell his account
mmmm... yeah... that kind of comments are not adam's comments... shit happens! How hard is it to believe Adam just comes here to pump shitcoins now? not shitcoins, shitcoin. there's a difference. anyway its not about the shitcoin itself its about what the shitcoin represents. seriously, this is a very cool thing ( OMNI ) the coin itself isn't all that interesting its the functionality the "OMNI layer" provides thats exciting. basically "OMNI layer" resides on the bitcoin blockchain it allows you to create assets on the blockchain it also provides a decentralized exchange for these assets. grab a front row seat. its going to be a good show. yes it is a fascinating development, http://www.rsk.co/ is another one doing smart contracts on the blockchain, great news for bitcoin with all these developers showing the dream - a basic decentralised finance of exchange (btc) that can be built upon to build a decentralised financial economy ya these things are pretty cool each project takes a different spin on it, this one has a coin with a two way peg. OMNI has USDT. Ether Tries to do it all. ( but has its own blockchain... which has proved to be week ) It's going to be interesting to see these projects grow / compete. |
|
|
|
|
i am currently working with a project that promises to push bitcoin to the "next level"
guys start looking into this, "OMNI layer"
i was there when the project first started as "mastercoin" ( they stole my "abstract coin" idea really.... but anyway... )
the project has a rocky history... but after the rebranding as "OMNI" shit is happening! and i've got front row seats!
more about this later.
|
|
|
|
You can't stop this.
Oh yeah? Watch... static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_SIZE = 1000000; Boom, stopped cold. Next! (and don't even try to bring up segwit in april scam, it is a minimum of 6 months away from release.)Look at this tried and wanna be true outdated remanent of a made-up claim from the past, blocks are full... yeah, right. Hellow::: Block size limit is a current feature, and not a bug.. and regarding seg wit.. you are correct that it is going to likely an improvement on the current situation.. and is a work in progress that is on the cusp of going live... Have a little patience!! its an undesirable feature.... Undesireable, by who? you cannot really be still buying into the idea that bitcoin is somehow broken because of some kind of supposed blocksize limit issue? my view has never changed... i dont think bitcoin is broken but it is limited. unnecessarily limited. but i do think there are SOME who choose to enforce this unnecessary limitation on the network for silly ideologically reasons. Yes, we are likely repeating ourselves with some of these old arguments..... but yeah, maybe sometimes it can be worth repeating, or at least to reassess the matter under current circumstances. You agree that bitcoin is not broken, but you assert that it is unnecessarily limited. In essence, you are still wanting to suggest that the best solution is that the blocksize limit is increased; however, if bitcoin is not broken, and there are remedies in the wings, then I don't understand the problem... Where's the rush to increase the blocksize limit? I think that there remains a bit of faulty logic, when you are suggesting that something, such as a blocksize limit increase, should be done right away, but at the same time conceding that bitcoin is not broken. Scaling is likely to be an ongoing issue that is not going to go away, and raising the limit or creating some kind of schedule as was proposed in XT and classic are not going to resolve the issues, and anyhow, those XT and Classic solutions had failed to convince enough folks about their essentiality (also they had the problems of attempting to attack governance too, which made them sloppy). Anyhow, there are some partial remedies in the works that are close to being released into the live, and seems good enough to let those play out for a little while, first, before jumping too far ahead of ourselves concerning a problem (which you characterize as bitcoin being unnecessarily limited) that is not agreed upon as actually being a problem. Block size limit increase is NOT optional ( LN will require bigger blocks) what's the point of delaying it ? there is no (legit) reason why we can't bump the limit AND have LN in progress i've had it. ( https://bitco.in/forum/threads/newbie-with-problems.1389/ ) i'm done thinking its time to act. We're forking Bitcoin.
We are a group of Bitcoin users forking Bitcoin back to its original vision of scaling on-chain to the world; with or without miner majority.
"It can be phased in, like: if (blocknumber > 115000) maxblocksize = largerlimit" – S. Nakamoto |
|
|
|
You can't stop this.
Oh yeah? Watch... static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_SIZE = 1000000; Boom, stopped cold. Next! (and don't even try to bring up segwit in april scam, it is a minimum of 6 months away from release.)Look at this tried and wanna be true outdated remanent of a made-up claim from the past, blocks are full... yeah, right. Hellow::: Block size limit is a current feature, and not a bug.. and regarding seg wit.. you are correct that it is going to likely an improvement on the current situation.. and is a work in progress that is on the cusp of going live... Have a little patience!! its an undesirable feature.... Undesireable, by who? you cannot really be still buying into the idea that bitcoin is somehow broken because of some kind of supposed blocksize limit issue? my view has never changed... i dont think bitcoin is broken but it is limited. unnecessarily limited. but i do think there are SOME who choose to enforce this unnecessary limitation on the network for silly ideologically reasons. I am not alone....  |
|
|
|
You can't stop this.
Oh yeah? Watch... static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_SIZE = 1000000; Boom, stopped cold. Next! (and don't even try to bring up segwit in april scam, it is a minimum of 6 months away from release.)Look at this tried and wanna be true outdated remanent of a made-up claim from the past, blocks are full... yeah, right. Hellow::: Block size limit is a current feature, and not a bug.. and regarding seg wit.. you are correct that it is going to likely an improvement on the current situation.. and is a work in progress that is on the cusp of going live... Have a little patience!! its an undesirable feature.... |
|
|
|
August 17, 2016
...bla bla bla bla...
We are actively engaged with efforts to convert certain qualifying token-holders to shareholders of Bitfinex and to redeeming the remaining BFX tokens through a combination of new capital and earnings.
...bla bla bla bla....
We will continue to provide further updates as and when we are able.
The Bitfinex Team
well they post much better announcements than MTGOx ever did.. but they are very unclear about the BFX token and its meaning... "qualifying token-holders" will become "shareholders of Bitfinex" wtf man wtf. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
