|
What is the current minimum fee you have to include to get LTC sent (I have 5 month old coins) and am using 0.6.9.2 beta
am I told by the qt, if it wont go, or are coins just stuck in limbo?
|
|
|
|
out of interest, how similar is ixcoin to bte?  |
|
|
|
|
I think that the CC's have thrown up the first true free market as their is no way to cheat in it due to maths, further the evolution by competition is very good as it ensures maximum diversity and best features.However there is a way to get an advantage, be an earlier adopter. What does this do, make more people start coins, to be their own early adopter, this drives innovations.
What a lot of people have not Groked is that 'BTC' forces other coins/alts to exist
|
|
|
|
Yes, go and buy the scamcoin valued at 13% of Bitcoin already. This cannot possibly go wrong.  wow the *HAT* is strong against LTC |
|
|
|
The 24 hour volume for LTC is well over 1M USD right now (MORE than the 24 hour volume of BTC/USD at mtgox) and the LTC economy seems healthier than ever Well, it is not an economy sign at all. It should read "the LTC speculation seems more vivid than ever". EDIT: the economy is: merchants and services using LTC as a payment method. a portion of it is true, some say it support about $30 BTC price. the inchoate future potential is a large part of the value, not wanting to miss out on this, is driving the speculation and value. CC's are better than a tele-portation system for gold |
|
|
|
If the billionaires were interested in bitcoins, They would become the elite all over again.
no because 1/2 of all the bitcoins are out, the current "elite" are excluded. Even if they buy in they would get a fractions of supply before pushing prices beyond their FIAT can buy remember they can only pay in FIAT, there is no central bank, monopoly, political party to be bribed, patent, copyright, or power anywhere they can enforce to make more bitcoins or to just give them bitcoins. |
|
|
|
How can I value gold when I don't even know how much there is in the world held by who
Gold has a proof problem the Bitcoin does not. There is all the bitcoin that disappears due to neglect... whether or not you consider that to ever have existed in the first place, I suppose would be irrelevant. -apathetic. how does that even hurt in fact it makes the remainder more valuable |
|
|
|
If you are bored LTC had a nice suckers rally today. (Like you can't already tell by the suckers making threads here  ) Why are they rallying? They shouldn't be being so pegged to btc as they are.. apparently not quite as pegged as though! Are you saying they wanna be THE GUY ? could be in 2 years we are see-ing BTC as fractions of LTC, if the inter tubes has taught us one thing, its the first majour out the gate always falls, Mosaic fell, most pre microsoft os fell to minor players, nokia fell, xerox parc os fell,......NeXT fell, Basic fell....the list goes on... |
|
|
|
If you are bored LTC had a nice suckers rally today. (Like you can't already tell by the suckers making threads here ) Why are they rallying? They shouldn't be being so pegged to btc as they are.. apparently not quite as pegged as thought! |
|
|
|
First of all, wtf is CC?
Now, what seems interesting is that LTC has gone UP UP UP while BTC went DOWN DOWN DOWN. Usually LTC has been going the same direction as BTC but now it's different. Anyone knows why this could be the case?
Since I invested in LTC I've been in an opinion that whatever the eventual real price of BTC is, LTC's price has to be 4x lower (assuming they are both mature and everyone knows them).
So let's say BTC is currently overrated and its real value is 50$ per bitcoin. In that case LTC is still undervalued because 50/4 =12.5. This means that LTC has to go UP while BTC has to go down. Now one could say that there are other alt coins that consume some of the value but then again there aren't many to be taken seriously currently.
CC = Crypto Currency |
|
|
|
|
it's doesn't work this way.
new tech completely replaces old tech.
eg boats, you don't see people going back to swimming or rafts,
planes, you don't see people going back to not flying
you don't see electrcity not replacing kerosene lamps
the store of wealth function of silver and gold are largely over with the advent on CC's
until you can tele-port gold, make it government proof, unseizble, untrackable, weigh almost nothing and unable to be manipulated, then get back to me.
|
|
|
|
The next few weeks will be interesting; as I said before The 24 hour volume for LTC is well over 1M USD right now (MORE than the 24 hour volume of BTC/USD at mtgox) and the LTC economy seems healthier than ever further, the LTC DEV team with Warren at the helm, the last piece of the puzzle missing for LTC, it now has a credible known DEV. |
|
|
|
why litecoin? And why is it a waste if some mining it are making BTC (usually much more than they'd make trying to mine BTC directly) via exchange, if that is their goal in mining a coin?
Im saying, its not a bad thing to have an alt community, Mine LTC, Yes of course, more should be mining BTC, or buying BTC, but it should be those two coins... if we all did that, supported it, and PUT AS MUCH EFFORT INTO GROWING BTC AND LTC FURTHER ACROSS THE WORLD AS YOU ALL DO IN MINING AND PROMOTING ALTS THAT DIE THE NEXT DAY, we would all make a lot more money. no wrong, we will/may see evolution of a superior coin that may take up even faster than BTC/LTC and offers more advantages |
|
|
|
|
I am beginning to think, that CC's as a whole will reach x Trillion, but at the expense of where BTC would go alone. I think BTC will go to $x100K each. But that 'x' will be a lot lower because of LTC.
It appears that a newer *innovative* coins, come along, eg LTC, the innovation is ok, but the real hook is it allows people who missed out being early adopter for BTC to wrest value/market share from BTC early adopters as their currency takes more of the market share.
It seems more people will jump on the newer coin as more people will have heard about CC at that time and thus look to put some interest$$ in the LTC of the day as they can see it has more potential to go up in a shorter time. The network effect is huge as well.
The asics moving into BTC pushing GFX cards out will give a much larger dedicated userbase to LTC (until scrypt asics come along), and so garner more network effect. Also the GFX cards are subsidized by resale value and other uses, not so asics.
These factors force early adopter BTC holders to swap their BTC for LTC, as it does not cost them much in terms of net BTC's and real cost of the BTC for them. There must by 1000's of early adopter BTC's swapped for LTC right now, that simply would not have occurred otherwise.
IF LTC = 0.25BTC or higher that gives at least around 500M+ market cap (on coins out now) that would have otherwise been in BTC.
So BTC will rise but some significant proportion will be siphoned of by LTC and other coins.
It is also interesting to see the volume of BTC/LTC trade on BTCe is greater or similar to btc on gox (i think if I am reading it right). This will force LTC to Gox
This will also happen to LTC by some other coin.
I also find it absurd that people keep saying, "coin x" is not a get rich quick scheme. The whole reason people keep jumping on new coins is because BTC/CC is a get rich quick scheme, every one knows it, not much if anything in the last 4 - 5 years has gone up as much as BTC or even LTC in that last 2 years....and they are still in their infancy.
The bet that jump on coin x because it may go up it a lot better than not jumping particularly where you already have btc or miners.
I am not saying any of this is bad, in fact is may be good as it allows different coins/strategies and synergistic effects that BTC may not achiever on its own.
It is also worthwhile nothing that very few "first" or early "dominant" of anything in Tech/IT/inter tubes remain the dominant force. Eg, os before Microsoft, Mosaic (most of you probably never heard the first web browser), myspace, xerox park interface, nokia,
I am not an early adopter of either coin!
edit
CC = Crypto Currency
|
|
|
|
I see, sure I could put something vague together and ignore a lot of the variables opting for an expected mean value for those.
Would maybe give some ideas.
Perhaps I can also setup a test subnet at a later date that generates lots of micro transactions between themselves and do some real benchmarks and report the results.
this would be valuable, and give valuable data, as well as certainty to the future, you don't want this thing grinding to a halt really fast in a short period of time, but it only becomes apparent 3 years down the track |
|
|
|
not really, too many variables, most of which are out of our control.
Calculating T would be affected by number of transactions required to seek through, and that's about as far as any reliable variable we have.
But T is also affected by the following:
Unexpected Network latency, network load, # hatchers in the network, the performance of those hatchers (hardware specs), degradation of hatcher performance due to fragmentation of either RAM or HDD
If you really want a formula I can give you one, but it would be complicated, inaccurate most of the time, and of no real consequence or use.
do you have any sort of ballpark figure....you think may apply, eg 1,000,000 transaction, of "blockchain" size..... I guess this may be something people want to know long term that it does not become exponentially long or to a power. eg some sort of t = f(ax^bn), or is going e^x, where bn and x is positive and >1, may be fatal, unless sorta equivalent to mores law, which is sorta the HD space growth assumption for BTC (putting electrum to one side) so I think the order of the equation is all that is needed, not the detail. |
|
|
|
The shared history is the public block tree/ledger.
1. Your client does a semi-comprehensive check
2. 2 hatchers (there are ALWAYS at least to verify a block) do a full check, that's all the way back as far as is needed
3. Other client nodes do a fast validation as that transaction has been verified by 2 hatchers
The hatchers do the bulk of the work, which is what they are there for, and can reject that transaction a block inclusion outright before any other nodes in the system even see it.
so could you give some sort of t = f(dataSize) |
|
|
|
You can, but other the hatchers will do the same check, as do all the on a verified block (just a little different for performance on commodity hardware).
You can inject them if you like into your own client to pass the check locally, and send out that transaction, but the other nodes in the system will see that you do not have enough, and that you will be in negative balance. A negative balance in an honest system is impossible, so if ever a node is calculated to have one, they have been naughty naughty, then ban hammer.
so then the other nodes must look back in time to some sort of available shared history, so then does this not bring up the transaction speed issue, as you have pushed it back to the whole network' collective memory and checking, being the min time step for validation Do you not confront the same issue then network wide? thus slowing things to a crawl? |
|
|
|
|
ok
"most recent receipts and sends that have occurred, not from the beginning until now"
this makes sense,
but leads to a second question, what is to stop me just injecting transactions at that point without some historical reference
|
|
|
|
ok no bites, I must not be meeting market rate!!!!
I will buy 100u AC for 2 LTC,
Deal. I'll send first. Is this offer still standing though? My LTC addy. LUh3pyTLnPoBkhMyThCNvMoXD11x43Unio ok will send, I am running the older LTC on OSX and it wants me to update it, so getting some help over on LTC, I don't want to accidentally do something I shouldn't. (also I want to know if I can avoid change addresses!) Is it still safe to send with the older client, what should the fee be in your opinion to get the transaction through Let's try to keep fees as low as possible. I recommend you update your client. i have a thread in ltc talk forum to get advice on this https://forum.litecoin.net/index.php/topic,4771.0.html |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
