I see. I was totally ignorant about that (been in bitcoin about 7 months now). I thought that the diffuculty escalated more "naturally" not because better equipment was found. I thought equipment was developed in order to keep up with difficulty, not that difficulty raised due to the equipment. What an enlightening post!  if bitcoin was mining with just satoshi and halfinney on a CPU each.. the difficulty would remain at just 1. for however long as they stuck to it just being them mining with the same equipment forever.. this is why if banks make their own blockchain. and only have 2 systems mining it. they can easily manipulate data as they control the difficulty, keeping it low to make it easy to re-write blocks. which is why decentralised mining is soo important. and why new faster tech to mine with it is important too.. to prevent any one person from having enough power to manipulate it |
|
|
|
There are no fixed and absolute limits. The number of transactions per block can vary hugely. What you shall consider is that the Visa credit card network can handle hundreds of transactions per second while BTC can't.
yes but thats because visa has separate databases, one for each country.. so their total TPS is based on adding all their database(ledgers) together.. not based on the individual subsidiary systems |
|
|
|
This is something I have been thinking at times. What would happen if suddenly someone came up with a new algorythm/technology that could mine Bitcoin much faster? I see all those predictions about mining ending by 2100 ... but Isn't it possible that some new miner comes up raising the mining speed a lot? No idea about it, just asking  in 2009 CPU mining was the big thing.. difficulty was low but kept on par with the estimates.. then.. (shock, horror) GPU mining hit the scene.. and the difficulty raised to compensate.. then FPGA, then more specialist stuff doing terra and peta has speeds.. and each time the difficulty changed to compensate.. .. so mining coins still is and always will be inline with long term estimates. as the difficulty changes to compensate |
|
|
|
Can someone validate that this is a official Syria relief site? We do not want to send money towards a fake site. I feel sorry for these refugees, especially the children. They have no clue what is going on, and why they need to leave their homes. This is something that can happen to anyone, it's not just something that happens in conflict zones. We just need to know, that the money is going towards the right cause, and not to fund terrorism organizations.  a few things to keep in mind. 1. its a UK site. 2. the UK government, UN, EU, british red cross. international red cross, unicef, oxfam are all involved. in my mind i believe this to be just paying someone some petrol money and wage to send goods across the eurotunnel.. the funny part is as pointed out in the points above.. the UK government alone have their own "convoys" for this and as such there is no urgent need for actual funds. and as someone else said.. this will end up as a fiat donation.. so not really something bitcoin orientated.. i think its best to donate food and clothing to your local area that represents this. in the UK each council is organising this. and so by donating food and clothing you are sure to make the biggest impact by actually getting the things the refugees need and know there is only the smallest chance it will result in profiteering. EG handing funds to the charity linked in OP. means that funds wont be spent today as the "justgive" do not allow withdrawals of funds daily. then the funds have to be spent. getting supplies.. that will total atleast a month delay. but local services that operate the actual convoys can take the stuff donated sooner.. .. its just the wise thing to do |
|
|
|
I ask this question based on these...
1. Size of the transaction is based on amount of satoshi we transact.
2. When price raise, the amount in a transaction would be less comparatively.
3. With less sized transactions (still same value or higher value as a regular user transacts), a block can pick more transactions.
I read a average transaction size is 500KB. Assume it has some 1Milllion satoshi or 0.01BTC, current value $2.413 .
If the price goes to 10 times, then to send same $2.413, we just need 0.1 million satoshi or 0.001BTC, by mathematically transaction size must reduce to 50KB or some what. (There are some part of size do not change regardless of number of satoshi)
Now a block approximately can pick 10 times more transactions.
So, we need price raise to solve block-size debate?
no.. from a data point of view. a 1mb block size, is about 1mb of data, not value. and from the point of view of a bitcoin 100000000 a 9 character amount is 9 bytes from the point of view of 1Ksat 1000 a 4 character amount is 4 bytes. so even on the most leanest coded tx the difference would be from 250bytes to be 245 bytes.. thats only.. at best 2% difference. thus not really gonna make any massive impact when people are playing with satoshi amounts. in actual fact due to the code to send unspent funds back. playing with satoshi amounts instead of full amounts, will mean that more change need returning thus more transactions that have unspent amounts returned. thus (prediction/estimation) more then 2% extra code bloat |
|
|
|
|
its discus fish.. end of debate
|
|
|
|
use another ISP. or simply use other bitcoin services until you dont have to be reliant on them.. EG if blockchain.info goes down there are a dozen other blockchain viewer websites about. |
|
|
|
Thank you for responding, I did ask for knowledgeable people to provide some insight. What do Venezuelans who want to buy/sell BTC have to do then? Or what are the bottlenecks they face? Would these types of problems affect the USA/W Europe in a similar kind of way? Thanks again...  bitcoin itself still functions. wallets still make payments and people can still see balances.. nothing has changed. people can still go to shops that accept bitcoin and still swap them face to face or through many different places. the websites affected are just side businesses used to make things easier. mainly for investing and speculating. so this is where people need to stop relying on centralised businesses, and start being more decentralised about their uses. bitcoin can still function very well without centralised services, people have just become dependant on it soo much, that they do not even realise the purpose of bitcoin |
|
|
|
...
The outage does not surprise me at all. IIUC, with BTC sites only being blocked, well then it has to be deliberate by Venezuela's .gov. It will be of great interest to see if others in the private sector in Venezuela are able to keep the links and lines open to BTC sites.
Yes, Venezuela is in a death spiral, it arguably has been for two years.
This may an interesting test case to see if a developing country is able to shut down the decentralized BTC system most of us are used to. If the Venezuelan government is able to close the system, then an advanced country like the USA could perhaps even more easily shut it down.
A question for the knowledgeable here: Would BTC users in Venezuela using TOR be affected?
what happened was not "shutting down the decentralised BTC system"... bitcoin is not a website.. what you are trying to say is that walmart shut its doors to customers and all the staff went home unpaid, because their website crashed.. no.. shops would still run. staff would still work. stock would still travel from warehouse to stores.. the websites are just customer gateways but not the only way to get things. bitcoins decentralised system has nothing at all to do with websites.. |
|
|
|
In a shared database you can still delete old data, in a private blockchain you can't.
you can.. because its private the owner has full control (its not decentralised).. so it can be tampered with. i agree its not as easy as just hitting the delete key and adding new data to a cell.. but all they need to do is remake the private blockchain. which due to sole ownership means it can be done at a difficulty of 1, thus solving new blocks in miliseconds to remake a new chain with edited data |
|
|
|
Which cryptocurrency are you using except Bitcoin?why?
I'm impartial but DOPE is what I'm using  speaking of 'dope'.. anyone seen the movie and see bitcoin mentioned in the first scene |
|
|
|
The article is quite right, but there isn't a precise definition of a blockchain. It's not written in stone. I may say a blockchain is a public ledger shared among several computers which automatically update, but the number of computers is not set, nor the type and size of data inserted.
a blockchain is a transaction list.. not a database of totals a user owns. but a transaction list of all funds sent and received.. a public blockchain is a transaction list.. but many random people have a copy. reducing the risk of tampering and everyone can be part of the block creations a private blockchain is a transaction list.. but only one entity and their trusted partners have. people can view data using the entities website to view data, but cannot be part of the block creations |
|
|
|
|
most mining pools operate like this...
in a period between blocks. pools counts up ALL hash submissions from users of that upcoming block and calls each submission a share.. when a block is finally solved the reward is then divided up so that the hard work is paid off..
for instance.
user 1: submits 5million hashes
user 2: submits 25million hashes
user 3: submits 20million hashes
total hashes = 50mill..
25btc reward / 50mill= 0.00000050 per share
user 1: gets 2.5btc for 5million hashes
user 2: gets 12.5btc for 25million hashes
user 3: gets 10btc for 20million hashes
it doesnt matter who solved the block with the winning hash.. its based on how many hashes(shares) were submitted
it doesnt matter what the difficulty is.. as all it means is that it will potentially take longer..
so if the example above took 5 minutes..
for instance of more hashes after 10 minutes.
user 1: submits 10million hashes
user 2: submits 50million hashes
user 3: submits 420million hashes
the rewards would work out the same cut per person after its divided up and shared out.
(rebuttal prevention: yes the numbers are low.. its called simple maths for simple demonstration)
|
|
|
|
There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:
For smaller faster transactions; just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....
That is all. Simple right?
I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.
Input?
1. so when selling bitcoin, it causes a price movement. so it will affect the price2. an altcoin is a form of a fork, because a fork is a new/different chain.. so swapping one coin for another is similar to having two chains with different code...3. there is already 300+ coins.. and 3 that are getting popular. yet none of these have solved the blocksize problem |
|
|
|
The doge meme didn't start with dogecoin, the meme has nothing to do with cryptocurrency.
Funny video, though.
Yes, was exactly thinking of replying that. Thought there would be a bigger cryptocurrency reference there... exactly.. i dont think the OP realises it.. whats next a video about the Thailand Baht with claims that thailand stole the bitcoin symbol hundreds of years ago, but evading copyright infringement by taking one of the strikethroughs out? |
|
|
|
I wonder how easy is for a regular Joe to get the bitcoin core wallet and just sync with the blockchain on average machine?
I know there are wallets like Electrum and Armory and zillions of online wallets around the internet, but if someone find bitcoin download the software and start it up, how would his experience be?
about as easy as downloading Call of duty or battlefied or world of warcraft.. as they take about the sametime (many GB) to download fully.. then you have the fun of playing around and learning how to use it.. |
|
|
|
Yesterday I sent some coins with normal fee, they are still unconfirmed. I don't know why miners don't accept yet.
I used normal recommended fee in Bitcoin Core which is 6k sat per kb.
6k satoshi per kb seems a bit low imo, most of the transactions getting confirmed are around 0.0002btc in fees and around 600-700kb in size. 0.00006000 per kb = 0.03600000 for 600kb so 6ksat per kb is actually quite high!! |
|
|
|
You know I'm not totally sure that BIP100 is the best possible solution? I know we all want to get this over with and behind us but let's not implement an inferior solution out of hast! BIP101 implemented on Core without XT "added features" seems to be to be a superior solution to BIP100… There are also other solutions out there that seem superior. I think BIP100 needs so amendments, clarifications, and modifications before we can realistically implement it…
Whoa there slow down miners! Let's make sure we are making the right decision before we get BIP100 in it's current form over the 75% threshold!!
note to all if your not a miner and if you dont even bother running a full node.. then you have nothing to bitch about no forum begging will change the consensus,, if you want to vote.. get your full node running and show the network what you prefer |
|
|
|
thanks for the warning, OP.
I hate these stress tests. it doesn't even have any benefit for anyone.
I wonder how much BTC they will waste trying to create 1 month backlog...
0.0001 tx cost, lets average 200 tx per block=0.02btc a block. 6 blocks an hour, 24 hours =144 blocks.. thus an average 2.88btc a day in fee's. then 28 days is about 80btc in fee's. so if they average 400txs a block.. the cost for the month would be 160btc... or if they average 200txs a block.. but have a 0.0002 tx fee.. that too would be 160btc. hope that helps you work out the math |
|
|
|
|
the solution to it is not capping the difficulty or keeping the blocksize low..
if you really want to help decentralisation. its simple.. when a pool solves a block, it cant submit a new block for atleast 2 blocks.. thus giving the opportunity for other pools to solve.
that way for every 3 blocks there are 3 different pools that solved it. rather then just 1 solving all 3 blocks
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
