According to reports from the blog/forum the limit should be probably above 100 BTC, so probably enough for a LOT of people.  Seems there is little demand for insurance by the way so far - and it makes me wonder why the 50k USD amount is not growing by the day, as interest is paid daily after all. Edit: scrap that, just saw 50004.19 USD available. Edit2: Hi All, A API system is currently in testing and will go live soon (tm) Yay, hopefully also including reports of internal exchange numbers to bitcoincharts.com! This would be a major promotion channel imho. |
|
|
|
|
0.8.2 ist derzeit im "Release Candidate" Status. Siehe Development Forum.
|
|
|
|
|
"Wallet" bedeutet welche Software oder welches Webservice? Wenn du die vorgeschlagene Gebühr nicht bezahlst, kann es passieren, dass die Transaktion im schlechtesten Fall nie bestätigt wird... willst du das riskieren? Es ist möglich, allerdings würde ich das sicher nicht empfehlen.
Ja, Bitcoin kann sehr kleine Beträge überweisen - allerdings nicht immer gratis. Mit der nächsten Version von Bitcoin-qt (0.8.2) wird die empfohlene Mindestfee übrigens auf 0,0001 BTC gesenkt. 0,0005 BTC sind aber immer noch weniger als eine Handvoll €-Cents, vergleich das mal mit den üblichen Fees von anderen zahlungsdienstleistern wie PayPal.
|
|
|
|
~2,4 BTC pro 300 MH/s ist mal ne ordentliche Enttäuschung...  Um das Geld hat man in 10 Jahren vermutlich mehr Coins wenn man sich 2 Cassascius Coins kauft als 1 USB Miner. Mit 300 MH/s erwarte ich mir nicht wirklich jemals auch nur 3 BTC zu "erminen" - schade! Eventuell kaufe ich dann doch noch 1-2 Sticks, aber eben eher so wie die BTC Münzen eher als Sammelobjekt als um damit irgendwas zu verdienen. |
|
|
|
|
Das ging vor einem Jahr gut, mittlerweile gibt es (zum Glück!) wenige proportional auszahlende Pools.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see Ripple (in the OpenCoin implementation) to be "against everything Bitcoin" - it is just the other alternative on how to create non-governmental money:
You can either create assets that have 0 value (--> Bitcoins/other Altcoins/Diablo III gold), make them tradeable and hope they get used as money for various reasons OR
you introduce 3rd party trust and allow people to trade debts of certain assets in amounts that they are comfortable with (--> Ripple/gift cards/Hawala).
There is no way other than being a central bank to issue "real" USD instead of USD IOUs for example - maaaybe the cash money in your purse could be viewed as "real" but even there it could be quite hard to make sure they are not counterfeits and instead of counterparty risks you have physical risks.
If you want to track something that already exists (and this could very well be working hours, DVDs from your collection or pencils instead of USD), you need something like Ripple that is a kind of promise/contract that is offered to the network for you to deliver upon later.
If you want something completely new, this has no value attached and only floats because it creates a bubble. The stability of that bubble depends on the trust of people in that asset and this trust can be built by factors like fungibility, uniqueness etc.
I don't see a third way right now, how to create something that has properties of money (like Bitcoin) BUT also has some backing (like Ripple IOUs that have between 0%-100% backing, hopefully in most cases the latter) BUT can still be created/handed out decentralized (via PoW, PoS, hash of your SSN or whatever else).
|
|
|
|
|
Are you based in the UK? Nefario is/was...
Edit: Also what did YOUR lawyer say?
|
|
|
|
|
Also the texts in there can be also just viewed on the wiki for example in a browser window in the background. Alternatively (e.g. you're offline) you could just view them in a console window.
|
|
|
|
|
Z.B. durch Vertrauen? Das Geld ist sowieso verloren, wenn man das Passwort nicht mehr weiß und wegen einer Handvoll Coins würde ich mir z.B. sicher nicht den Ärger antun, der dann kommen würde, falls ich die BTC stehle.
Man kann ja auch eine Art Finderlohn ausschreiben...
Da ich aber eher (wie im vorliegenden Fall) fürchten würde, dass der TE einfach wieder verschwindet und ich die ganze Arbeit da umsonst mache, würde ich das gar nicht machen wollen - selbst mit der Chance ein paar Coins "abzustauben".
|
|
|
|
|
To be fair, shares were valued at ~1 BTC each, so investing THAT much would have been quite a stretch and it seems only few did that.
Looking forward to you auctioning off the BTCMC and other shares.
Oh, and blaming nefario for everything that went wrong is also not ok in my opinion. Yes he made some mistakes but I bet you could also have done more as you have been criticised already when GLBSE was fully operational. Also try to view it from a share holder perspective - suddenly you are forced (now on hold) to either trade in at bad rates into ASICMINER (how many ASICMINER shares did you require for a SINGLE DMC share back then?) or trust you for half a decade or more in USD, not BTC.
|
|
|
|
|
If there is the intent of hard forking within a year or two to allow for arbitrary precision amounts in transactions, I'm all for this change as preparation.
I personally will just do the thing that's best for me and stop relaying transactions below 1 or 2 coins. Less CPU usage, more memory available and nobody of my peers will find out about this anyways. If more and more people find out about the benefits of this solution, then centralized structures just like the one you suggested with this coalition of people will emerge to even be able to broadcast any transaction.
It is known for years that there is little to no incentive to relay any transaction at all. Making it hard but possible to change but at the same time setting it to a new default value that not everyone agrees with by far is at least risky.
|
|
|
|
|
I thought we established already that 1 xbt means 100 satoshis and the colloquial 1btc equals 1 bitcoin?
|
|
|
|
|
Relays don't need that much protection, the new default setting is not a hard standard (and there is actually an incentive to set this to 21 million for anyone who doesn't mine...) and in my opinion I'd rather have a measurement/setting based on transaction size and UTXO set impact than transacted amount...
|
|
|
|
|
Luke probably meant that they are still valid if they make it into blocks, I'm concerend with the fact that it might be very hard to even get them to accepting miners.
|
|
|
|
|
How do you come to this conclusion?
|
|
|
|
|
It seems like "planes hurting each other" does not constitute a "BadBet", just like the poorly worded (and still not conclusively clarified!) July 1st BFL bet...
bitbet.us/bet/148/one-plane-from-p-r-china-will-be-hurt-by/
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, with "just mined" I thought you mean "mined the same day" or something like this - usually a block a (few) thousand blocks deep is selected.
|
|
|
|
|
Not just mined, please read the comments in that file too. Generally yes though, a new client release usually also includes an updated checkpoint.
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't bloom filtering already enough for your project? If you need to trust third parties anyways, you could just do a spv client that accesses the chain with bloom filters if it needs specific transactions. This already is implemented in bitcoin-qt
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
