|
i'm aware of coinbase. I've used them to buy some. I don't get my 100 bitcoin daily allowance for another week though.
the main problem I have with coinbase is I can never actually buy coins. Maybe the key is to wake up at 4 am or something. They are always out of coins
|
|
|
|
it would take a couple of weeks to do it with coinbase. First link a bank account, get 2 small deposits, confirm (2 days) .. then buy 10 per day (if you are lucky. they keep hitting their limit i don't even know if it's possible to buy through coinbase anymore unless you are lucky) Or mtgox.. but they are currently transitioning. in 3 days they will be "live" on coinlabs US part. so what is the best way? http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1aluwb/so_my_dad_wants_to_buy_100_bitcoins_what_way_do/ |
|
|
|
|
Here is what I understand....
Regular users of bitcoin who spend bitcoins are not directly affected. Even users or miners who sell bitcoins on an exchange are not directly affected because it is the exchanges responsibility to deal with the money transmitter stuff.
Businesses who accept bitcoins and keep the bitcoins are not affected. Businesses that accept bitcoin but use something like bitpay to sweep their accounts and turn it into cash are not directly affected because it's up to bitpay to deal with the money licensing issues. And if bitpay uses an exchange to sell then it's not up to them and it still falls back to just the exchange.
The greatest users affected by this are "localbitcoins" users since they will be considered money transmitters. However... usually the amount they sell is small so it might not draw much attention.
These are guidelines and not actual regulations.
Do I have things clear so far?
|
|
|
|
Honestly, I'm just sick of people saying it is feasible to have a 2000tps distributed protocol, where everyone is downloading and storing half-gig blocks every 10 minutes so. (see the wiki) https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability#Current_bottlenecksDon't people understand that this would mean thousands of GB each year in blockchain size? How do you think this is reasonable? There are limits to data storage, and thats just one of the economic constraints that have to be faced. That is completely feasible to do TODAY. Would it ultimately be as distributed as you or I want it to be? Nope. Is there a big difference between 7tps and 2000tps? Yup. Would it require investments in bandwidth and storage to be a participant as a full node? Yup. Is storage and bandwidth going to get cheaper over time? Ab-so-fucking-lutely Should we forever cripple Bitcoin because of a failure to allow for reasonable scaling capacity? Sure if you hate Bitcoin and want it to fail. Do you have any idea how valuable a single bitcoin would be if we were able to get the network to 2000tps while maintaining transaction fees in the 10ths of cents to single cents range? They would be worth thousands. I don't need to run a full node on my watch. What I do need to do is use disruptive technology to unseat Paypal, Western Union, ACH, SWIFT, Visa, and the FED. We don't have to get there overnight. We do have to get there. those mirror my thoughts ...I don't even need to post anymore since you do all the work |
|
|
|
|
doesn't that mean that coins will be created faster than predicted though? If the blocks are allowed to be faster than 10 minutes but never slower then there isn't a counterbalance... so things could happen faster than predicted?
|
|
|
|
I ordered a netbook 6 days ago and haven't received anything yet... is this normal?
Email your order number to roger at bitcoinstore.com and I will take care of it for you. Lots of people are sending the payment, but then not clicking the button to actually submit their order to the site. If you haven't gotten a confirmation email, that is likely the case with your order. Either way, I can get it taken care of for you. ahh I see. I think I might have put a typo in my email. The transaction details on my electrum wallet though say 976 confirmations. (I also didn't print out an order confirmation ) Transaction ID: fda4d7bd13e0153b1db3f3ea015ba6fed9fe3f8b209b55282fc79d9859f06470 blockchain is down though moving servers... thanks for the help! |
|
|
|
|
out of curiosity... is a reason why they wouldn't fix this because they don't think people will want to go through an extra step in creating an account, then sending funds to their site to play with?
|
|
|
|
|
I ordered a netbook 6 days ago and haven't received anything yet... is this normal?
|
|
|
|
|
I actually had a similar idea... to rent out one of those storage lockers and put a few bitcoins in it for the show hoarders ahaaa.
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed that the blocks/hour is currently 6.76. It's supposed to be 6. Does this mean that the difficulty will eventually be adjusted so that blocks per hour will actually be less than 6 to compensate for a short term increase in coin creation?
|
|
|
|
This is not the solution to this problem.
The *solution* is at this stage very unclear (thus all the threads about this issue). Understand that if the max. block size were simply abolished then apart from it being a hard-fork (equals Bitcoin turns into BitcoinA, BitcoinB, etc.) the likelihood of people with average hardware (myself included) deciding to keep using the Satoshi client (i.e. full block chain stored on your hardware) will dramatically be reduced (if it were to grow 10x the size in the next few months I would most likely opt out of doing this). Understand that also most so-called *miners* are actually just *hashers* (they don't *need* the block chain) - so a likely outcome of an unlimited block size would be that mostly only the *pools* would have the entire block chain (everyone else would end up using lightweight clients). If this occurred then the entire "decentralisation" of Bitcoin would actually be at risk and this is the *real* problem that needs to be worked out (rather than arguing about the legitimacy or otherwise of SD tx's). how about we define average hardware? Because it seems to me the current limits in place factor in hardware that is ten years out of date. There is such a thing as too decentralized. The 1 MB limit is severe. If bitcoin is to gain traction it should easily be able to handle 50 million users one day for instance. That's just a fragment of the worlds population. |
|
|
|
Isn't there a list of the highest net worth bitcoin addresses somewhere here in the forum, that is updated on a regular basis? It seems like anybody that has the ability to continuously dump 500 btc at a time must have enough to be on that list. It would be interesting if someone were able to mine into this data and see which of those addresses is depleting in 500 btc chunks. I don't know how to do it.
Those are the richest addresses but the highest net worth people most likely don't have all their coins in one address. In fact I remember reading that there are 42 thousand addresses with just 50 bitcoin. I would bet that a large portion of those are actually Satoshi. What better.. more clever way to hide your hoard of money than to mine it but assign it a new key for every block reward. I bet he has about 1.5 million bitcoins That would be a lot of addresses to keep track of!  If you are a programmer it wouldn't be a big deal. |
|
|
|
Isn't there a list of the highest net worth bitcoin addresses somewhere here in the forum, that is updated on a regular basis? It seems like anybody that has the ability to continuously dump 500 btc at a time must have enough to be on that list. It would be interesting if someone were able to mine into this data and see which of those addresses is depleting in 500 btc chunks. I don't know how to do it.
Those are the richest addresses but the highest net worth people most likely don't have all their coins in one address. In fact I remember reading that there are 42 thousand addresses with just 50 bitcoin. I would bet that a large portion of those are actually Satoshi. What better.. more clever way to hide your hoard of money than to mine it but assign it a new key for every block reward. I bet he has about 1.5 million bitcoins |
|
|
|
|
It seems kind of wrong to me to see nations around the world with the most resources being the poorest. I love capitalism but ... should national resources really be exploitable? To me it means it will lead to two things: environmentally destructive practices possibly. But also the siphoning of wealth from one country to another country.
|
|
|
|
|
when it peaked to $49 it would have been 6081 ! still no offers though lol.
|
|
|
|
|
the trading engine lag is at 6 minutes now on gox
|
|
|
|
|
You are witnessing the birth of a currency. (yes 4 years late)
THis drop from 49 to 34 is nothinggg compared to what is going to happen in the coming months. New speculation >: )
What I mean is even though there is a huge price drop it's obvious that medium term bitcoins are going to go a lot higher with this much trading going on. People are basically standing in line and can't trade because coinbase is tapped out.... and orders are lagging in gox. Large holders of bitcoins are making runs on the market. Only those with small balls are affected though.
New forecast: 100 dollars by the end of april
|
|
|
|
|
it's actually helpful I think. Bitcoin is gaining huge attention. If people see that it can fall at a moments notice they might be more cautious which means it's less likely to have a crash from 1 thousand dollars to 100 dollars in the future. Hopefully.
|
|
|
|
|
Is it possible someone is using a DDOS tactic on mt gox to help manipulate the markets?
|
|
|
|
|
I think what is valuable about it is that it serves certain purposes that simply didn't exist before it. So aside from the fact that it competes with things in other areas (like a store of value with gold) ... as a money protocol for the internet it allows you to do creative and impressive things. I saw someone tip someone on reddit earlier for what amounts to a couple of beers worth of value. That's pretty damn cool. That's new. It's something that is going to be welcomed in the future. And it's just an example of many creative possibilities.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
