Well, you can use same private key on all chains, but you need to negotiate whether merchant accepts coins from a particular chain.
This is the problem: " a particular chain" Cryptocurrency experiments don't automatically translate to mainstream business. All that businesses want is a reliable, fast, secure and simple Bitcoin. They have no stomach for multiple variations, alt-chains or alt-coins. Think Sony/Betamax BluRay/HDDVD. Competing standards or variations are a total pain in the backside for merchants and consumers. Occam's Razor has the fastest road to success though scaling what already exists (bug-fixes and add-ons are still welcome of course!) |
|
|
|
...which comes from the OP. (Sorry, it would have been clearer if I'd just quoted the stuff I was talking about...)
Actually, you are right, OP seems to have pulled this out of his arse. I thought (and others probably thought too) he was quoting someone from Bitcoin Foundation. I made a moron of myself. Not at all, you were supposed to think that. It's a classic rhetorical tactic from the political bullshitting textbook. Politicians use it all the time, because it works so reliably - people will naturally assume that the things you say are connected. So you start with something an opponent actually said ("Maybe we should do what the Tor guys are doing and explain to regulators why they shouldn't try to regulate us"), set up a false opposition ("work with" vs "be unregulated"), then plonk a bunch of strawmen on the opponent's side of the divide (AML! Tax! Censorship!) and people will assume that your opponent is advocating the strawman stuff too, without you needing to specifically say so. Then having scared people about their enemy's dastardly plot you throw in the stuff you want to do (Throttle the network at 7 transactions per second!) and make it look like it's an essential part of defeating your opponent's evil agenda. EE. That's a very impressive deconstruction! |
|
|
|
I love the OP's implying that whatever web scraper he wrote is some kind of amazing quantum AI that is so CPU-heavy he had to turn off all his mining programs while it rans for weeks doing the kinds of pattern recognition you usually see on TV shows like 24 or Person of Interest. I picture it like this:
-OP types "Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?" into his hackstation, which appears on 9 screens at once.
-Green letter scroll across black screens for hours, surveillance photos of asian men flash across the screen.
-Computer speaks in half robotic/half human voice "There are a number of possibilities, Michael"
-OP says "Narrow the search. Enhance the variables."
-Montage of OP pacing around his dark apartment while the computer runs.
-Computer speaks "You're not going to like this Michael".
-OP speaks: "Just give me the results, S.A.T.O. !"
-S.A.T.O. : "I've narrowed it down to a list of suspects. Number one is the forum poster DeathandTaxes"
-OP : "Okay, now we're getting somewhere. S.A.T.O., give me the case on DeathandTaxes"
-S.A.T.O.: "He gets quoted all the time on bitcointalk."
-OP: "BINGO. Thanks buddy. And now the game begins".
The superhackcomputer powers down as OP opens a forum window and types "WHO DEATHANDTAXES IS?".
Fade to black.
The AI should be making some snarky comments as well. For instance, OP should ask, "Are you certain?" and the computer should reply, "It's the only thing in life that is certain." Excellent. But I've got a much better idea for S.A.T.O. Attach it to a bot and turn it loose on Mt Gox so it can make BTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTC  |
|
|
|
How about a poll with 3 options?
1. full payment of it.
2. 50% payment (as bet was not formally put in escrow)
3. forgiveness of it.
Why not just let Adam pick? Why do you want to take away his rights? Not "taking away rights". Poll just captures a public view, since the matter has been publicly raised. Obviously, such a view is no more than extra information. |
|
|
|
|
How about a poll with 3 options?
1. full payment of it.
2. 50% payment (as bet was not formally put in escrow)
3. forgiveness of it.
|
|
|
|
|
OK. I have now put "Alternate cryptocurrencies" on my ignore boards.
Was interested to read the occasional piece about litecoin and ripple, but there is so much other noise that it distracts from the main event.
Appreciate all the work the mods do to keep the jungle in order...
|
|
|
|
|
HeroC,
Why not instead have a list based on the top 10 of bitcoin-qt download countries on sourceforge , plus "others"?
|
|
|
|
Shows you need to double-check before major buy/sell decisions...  |
|
|
|
Yes. Not only should they consider donating to charity, they should appreciate that obtaining a BFL review ASIC is a privilege. Many people have paid in advance and waited a nearly a year to receive theirs. |
|
|
|
|
Great work DavidBal. They must cave in soon!
|
|
|
|
...
haha. that wasn't a prediction (except that I said I favored green scenario). If we include your grey scenario (sideways for a while in white area in my pic), what I layed out pretty much covered all possibilities. Easy to be correct then.
Although I prepared for a drop I must admit I'm pretty relieved we broke upwards. Initially (couple days ago) I had been quite certain move would be up, but had increasingly become worried about the possibilities red/yellow. Probably have been reading too many bear threads... really gets to you after a while.
Let's see how much momentum this has... who knows, maybe it's a bull-trap.
Agreed with your thinking. Also, there are so many people following TA that the spike might be driven by the trend-line watchers jumping in and momentum becomes self-fulfilling. A breakout usually retests support before taking off. Heading for a retest at the moment... |
|
|
|
My own little nagging to the bears.   I like this so much I think I will print it out to pin on the wall |
|
|
|
Bitconomist, I have found one of your lunatic rogue miners, and they are using an ASIC!"So we’re destroying the private key used by our Bitcon wallet. That leaves our growing pile of Bitcoin lucre locked away in a digital vault for all eternity..."http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/05/butterfly_live/Of course they would never do anything like donate the coins to charity, or feel the slightest pity for all the people with pre-orders who have been waiting a year to get their own machine, only to see commercial samples given away first. |
|
|
|
due to low volume I hope you guys don't mind a crosspost from here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=192719.msg2084624#msg2084624 to enter a bear market we need a lower low. Depending on timeframe there are 2 potential lows to break: - the $80 low on 5/3 (red)
- the $50 low on 4/16 (yellow)
if we don't make a new low below $80, it's not a bear market but a correction (by investopedia definitions quoted further above). We could then enter a bull market or at least further consolodation pattern (green). Of course there's different options for "green", I just outlined roughly one of them. A break of the $170 top would clearly mean we're in a bull market again (both higher highs and higher lows would've been reached then) I don't think we have to wait more than a month to see this resolved. Hat tip to molecular. Green arrow scenario underway... |
|
|
|
|
This is a great project because it researches one of the key metrics needed in the ongoing debate about scalability. For example, one of the persistent objections to raising the max block size limit is that it may decentralize the network. If there were regular stats showing the number of peering nodes then the growth or decline in their number can be plotted against average blocksize as well as latency in block propagation.
Could there be a useful measure analogous to kilowatt hours, which is the number of active nodes per hour?
Good luck with this idea, disclosure.
|
|
|
|
more wall.jpg and less text
Pardonnez-moi? I prefer PNG myself but what the hey. PIC Reach little Bitcoin, reach. 1.8% daily growth rate is too fast for more than a short-term/mid-term outlook (anything a few months or less). The equivalent annual return is 7400%, which would bring us to $80k per coin by May 2014. I guess Risto would support such notions...  It *is* indeed a short/mid-term outlook MBP. I think the log trendline using data back to Gox start (mid-2010) suggests the long-term return. It predicts $500 per coin by May 2014. Incredible but still credible if you see what I mean... |
|
|
|
Unfortunately, this now means that I have to go back to the drawing board and figure out at what point it would make sense to add more decimal places in order to avert an inflationary spiral that will eventually result from lost coins ...
These are the fundamental errors in your logic: (a) Lost coins are deflationary not inflationary. (b) There is no spiral. Just because one coin is lost there is no causative connection so that more and more are lost because of the earlier losses. |
|
|
|
and for the last question. yes you get .00000003 in change, but that is a good point, would that change be blocked with a .00005430 limit?
OK. I'll bite. General question: Why can't it be a standard feature of wallets that, during preparation of a transaction, any utxo < coin_dust is eliminated and the dust amount added to the transaction fee. Surely, this would help prevent a lot of the new dust spam causing blockchain bloat. Does any wallet do this? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
