$0.85 is not that much, most of my recent txs were above $1, and it could go way higher if your tx is of large size.

You're not the only one having a problem with this. Some want to increase max block size to reduce confirmation/fees, some want to push most txs off-chain (Lightning Network/Sidechains).

But don't expect changes anytime soon.

Yeah, there's always some delay in display, but usually it only takes few seconds or so. Good to hear it's all sorted for you.

Has the order been completed? Perhaps it's still sitting as active. Do you see anything under 'My open orders' or trade history (click 'my orders') on BTC/DOGE market pair page? If not, is it possible you used 'margin trading' instead of 'exchange' option?

And as always, try refreshing page.

As in topic. It's likely related to an old btctalk email leak (but not necessarily limited to) as it's using forum names in greeting line. So be aware.

Are you saying someone withdrew your funds or gambled them away? Can you post withdrawal tx?
This story doesn't add up. Why would someone steal from a small balance account rather than from big players.
I've been using SafeDice since 2014 and have never had a single satoshi stolen from me.

Size limit - currently 1 MB
Value limit - there isn't one, so it's only limited by the total bitcoins available (21 millions by ~ year 2140).

Hello George, thanks for creating this thread, hope you don't mind me bumping it.

What's your expertise on proceeds from bitcoin gambling sites winnings? Assuming online gambling is legal in ones state/jurisdiction, but the gambling site itself is not registered/licensed anywhere - would such proceeds be deemed as illegal?

On one hand, I'm guessing that it's not the user's responsibility to check whether site is operating legally. On the other hand, anyone could create gambling site overnight and use it for money laundering.

---

Another one:

Is "51% attack" illegal (by US laws)? If a large bitcoin miner gains enough hashpower to perform a double-spend, would it be seen as a criminal behaviour? After all, there's no "hacking" involved, nor any other unauthorised access of information, and all the participants should be aware that Bitcoin protocol allows it to happen (all network operates on hope that hashpower will stay decentralised).

I appreciate there may not be an easy answer, as there's no precedent to it, but just curious on your opinion.

Personally, I don't see anything illegal in the act itself, but there's definitely an intent to deprive users/entities of their bitcoin wealth.

Nope. You don't link accounts. You need to perform a standard bitcoin transaction and pay the fee, i.e. withdraw from CoinBase directly to Poloniex deposit address.


There's no minimum for bitcoin deposits (there are for some other altcoins, ie ethereum have min 1 ETH). But don't bother with anything in range of 0.001, the tx fee could be higher than that and it's a waste of time, I don't think you can place any order for such a low value, and you can't use lending option etc.

If you indeed have few BTC, just deposit more. If you want to test the site, make some trades, provide a loan, you'd need at least 0.01.

I'm not giving up on you. Let me try this way:


They violated the agreement with whom?

Lol. Are you saying "Core" is not able to come to any sort of decision until every single one of that 100 (incl. spell checkers) agrees on it? Are they not able to delegate representation to the meeting? Are they capable of making any decisions at all? Didn't G Maxwell call them 'dipshits' for acting like they were representing Core team?

I don't have to investigate, I was here at that time and was watching closely, long before you created your sockpuppet account to act like a grassroots Core support.

Nope. Right after the agreement was published, few other Core devs who weren't there said the agreement means nothing to them and won't support 2mb fork, then turned out the 'Core representation' was just a few individuals representing only themselves, rendering the entire meeting pointless. That's why some miners flipped, Jihan was pretty patient though iirc.

Whether it was incompetence and/or lack of communication between the Core team, or just a smart stunt to prevent Classic from getting a momentum - let everyone judge for themselves.

http://www.coindesk.com/litecoin-miners-back-plan-support-segwit-blockchain-upgrade/

So not much different than Hong Kong agreement, support for segwit in exchange for blocksize increase. Except Charlie Lee can't  backpedal on his promise with "I represented Charlie Lee - an individual, not Charlie Lee - developer", hence the success.

Don't wait for it. If 21m is lifted (by adding more fixed block subsidies etc) I'll likely quit Bitcoin altogether (incl this forum) and jump on to something else.


I never said it will happen, just pointing out the possibility.


ps. Where do you stand on concept of 'millisatoshis' (aka adding 3 more decimals to increase divisibility) discussed a bit here? It's essentially lifting the hard cap by x1000 of base units (satoshis) and redefining the number of base units per 1 bitcoin. Still a "Bitcoin" or an altcoin?

How so? Imagine you had 10%-20% of individual users against lifting 21m cap and all the rest (including all miners and exchanges) in favour of it. The cap gets lifted.

You could shout "it's not a real Bitcoin" all day long, but it wouldn't change anything.

Why are you of impression that it's the same as buying a slave? All you get is the girl voluntarily agreeing to marry you in exchange for $$$/BTCBTCBTC she still can leave you afterwards (taking 50% of your wealth in divorce settlement) and still have her rights protected by the state she resides in.

Even if the site was legit (probably isn't) you'd be more likely a victim of such deal in the long run.

Yup, impossible if you wanted to do it the right way. Possible when done as per 2nd part of my post.

According to this wiki page, lifting/changing 21m cap is theoretically possible (and practically impossible):

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Prohibited_changes


But of course it could be done by the vast majority of users/businesses/hashpower. Yes, technically they would create an altcoin, but would likely be successful in 'hijacking' the "Bitcoin" name (unless legally prevented in major countries, but doubt this is the case).

Came accross this on the internetz and sharing just for lols

https://prettyasianbrides.com now accept bitcoins. You can get yourself one for ~2.5 btc.

Any takers?

---

Edit: I posted this link as I found it funny. Apart from whether or not such business is morally OK - the site itself is likely a scam. Do not attempt to purchase a wife this way.

Something to consider before hoping for mass adoption in Africa:

WORLD RANKING OF COUNTRIES BY THEIR AVERAGE IQ SCORE

Source: https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country

You don't have to be a genius to use bitcoins, but you probably need to be at least above 'mental retardation' level.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borderline_intellectual_functioning

Question regarding 'tell a friend' programme. On the website it says:


Then asterisk note says:


Are 'lifetime bonuses' limited to 180 days? Or was it meant only for the €2.50 bonus, but if so, why did you put asterisks for both bonuses? Bit confusing.

Also, will you be implementing​ "sell" options for all the supported cryptos other than Bitcoin (ETH, dash, LTC)?