Right, but its a Bitcoin Problem. At the end its all Bitcoin and when bitcoin has a problem then it doesnt matter anymore that the mainclient has a way to prevent this. You see all these threads on here and on reddit? Imagine how many persons found bitcoin and... it does not work. Great experience. And surely not helpful for adoption. While adoption is the only thing that could help miners to earn considerable amounts of fees in the future.


Yes, i dont agree. At this point many start to doubt that its only to force a higher block count. It might be to force higher fees.


So? What does it matter when you name the bank only differently? He wanted a currency that isnt controlled by somebody. It doesnt matter who controls it. How its named.

Seeing that its possible to force all bitcoiners using higher fees is somewhat disturbing. And it seems it doesnt even cost much to do so.

And the posts in the other thread stopped.

So he makes enourmous amounts in days but still needs to sell the signal for what... couple hundred bucks? Alone the amount of work put into these threads would mean that the signal issuer would be better stopping that and simply earn himself some stash from his signals. No need to put so much time in sales attempts.

Not a single one. It was a clean text email without anything more. Maybe someone tries to spread fear in order to manipulate the bitcoin price? I mean a hacked exchange usually moves the market in a big way. A hacked bitstamp would be huge. Maybe he hoped the rumour alone could move the price?

Wow, the amount of complaints is really astonishing. Oo And i dont like that no one from bitfinex explains whats going on. They really should think this behaviour over. This is surely not helping bitfinex.

I thought it might be more. Though i dont see it as a valid vote against a raise for the blocksize. I have the feeling only a small majority is not wanting an increase. They want bitcoin to be some high value transaction system and poor people should use some inferiour coin or so.

Surely they will set the value for citicoin. Probably it will be worth $1 or some bonus points or something like that. You dont really believe they let a coin go free whose price is valued by the market? That would be risky, what to do when it fails? And it would be contrary to how banks work. They SET the price for things.

I think its not needed to look at if any player has the needed amount of hashpower, we know that miningcorporations in china hold the majority of the hashingpower (i believe i read something >60%) and there is no one stopping them from building a monopoly in secret. Means they will still mine alone but they put money together to spam the network. The costs would be low enough for them to force the fees up and still earn. And since chinese miners most probably have the advantage of cheapest power cost and cheapest way to create miners, the profit the rest of the miners has from this rise in fees would not be so high anymore.

This of course only works when the blocks are nearly filled already, so with 8MB blocks it would not work first but at one point it would work again i guess.

What i fear is this kind of ruling over bitcoin. I mean Satoshi wanted to be free from banks and their rules and now its possible to enforce fees, like a bank would do. Dont like that.

The price of bitcoin didnt drop because of the spam attack, in fact it went up considerably. So i think the spam attack had no real effect on the bitcoin price.

I sometimes read we would simply need to raise the fees so that miners get paid "fairly". This is not possible. Block halving will happen and there is no way fees will back that. If miners could enforce this then bitcoin would be dead by fees.

So there is no way that miners can proceed the way they do. They will earn less. This is nothing new, mining hardware was old all the time and replaced. So a fair payment only will come from adoption. Spamming the network effectively hinders adoption. One can see this easily in numerous posts on the net. And newbies coming to bitcoin, seeing that bitcoin doesnt work, is bad for sure.

Yes, as a plugin. But only through a service. And without that service you will never every be able to reach your coins. I think that alone is inacceptable. Plus you have to pay a relatively high fee for each transaction on top, only because the privilege to use 2FA that way.

I cant see why 2FA wasnt implemented properly. Instead its a security loss.

Oh well, it seems you can see when things like that happen. Question is why you attack for portraying you as not being able to judge the audio while when you attack its not a problem. Though i guess thats your modus operandi.

Yeah... though hopefully the airport will use a 0 conf-service like bitinstant.com or similar services. Or they accept directly when they see the confirmation.

What i wonder is, how does bitinstant deal with confirmations that dont go through nowadays? I mean they would see the transaction, they would mark the item as paid but at the end the transaction wont go through.

Well, at this point i consider you a being cypherdoc himself or being paid by him. Its unbelieveable how you fight for him and when you miss arguments then you go attack with other means.

I cant believe someone would come in here and fight with that time and aggressivity while having nothing in return for him. Cypherdocs case is clearly not just and surely the payments to cypherdoc will be shed light on at another time. A lawyer not being able to convert this would need to be replaced otherwise.

Well iCEBREAKER, i went through the hassle and clicked through your untrusted negative feed back you piled up, it seems you were a shillboy for hashfast in the past already. Guess that explains why you think cypherdoc deserves the payment. The amount of posts we see is not the real amount of posts he did to shill for hashfast.

Besides that... you are a troll how its defined normally. I guess discussing with you makes no sense since when you dont have arguments you get personally attacking, derailing the topic. I think ill stop now waisting time with you.

Youre right. Some words written in a document. Only you know what its worth. Though if you really criminal you would need to hide even the document since an agency could try build privkeys from all combinations.

But in theory bitcoin will outplay all these financial controls. Or lets say altcoins.

There isnt only the Bitcoin Core. And besides, why should we raise fees because someone spams the network? Spam should be charged with fees and they spam by creating huge transactions. Should be easily chargeable. I dont feel well when someone can go and force all bitcoinusers to pay higher fees. I mean will miners build a group in some time and connect in order to force bitcoins to pay higher fees in order to earn more?

Nah... i cant get this being called a test. They dont use testnet or something, they attack a life working economy. Its like ddosing paypal or something. Payments cant happen or are delayed. And everyone would see that its an attack. It doesnt matter what intentions the attacker have. The result is an attack.

*lol* I bought something against that some years ago. Maybe you need something like it too then: Safescan 155i

It works great and feels safe if you need to check money.

The problem with faked money is that, when you have such, they will take it from you and you get nothing in return. Hearns plans for tainting coins could have a similar effect when he gets his will.

Are Hearn and Gavin rich early adopters? I mean they really want their client to start up. Marketing campaign. Though i wonder where they want to get the profit from. Donations for development of the client?

Um... no. I did not get transactions confirmed for days so that i had to doublespend after my transaction was forgotten. SEPA is faster in my experience. But even when not. Ever trusted bitcoin to get your transaction done and waited with someone you wanted to exchange bitcoins for the first confirmation? This can be hard even without a stresstest. And waiting days...

And >3 Cent for a tx is still nothing? What currency do you want? Satoshi wanted a currency free of banks. When you cant pay someone a cent for something, only because you would pay 4 in fact then this is no replacement for cash. And as far as i see we want adoption and look pitying to fiat. But fiat has a minimum of 1 Cent and it has zero fee to pay it to someone.

Or are you one of those who think bitcoin should become a high amount transaction system? It wouldnt meet what satoshi intended in my eyes. Its my personal view and i think bitcoin should be open to everyone and not that the poor have to use some inferior coin.

I already agree with you. Multiple transactions in one transaction are still multiple transactions. You pay for every advertising letter you send via regular mail, regardless of you bring all of them to post office in a big box.

But the minfee you mention? 0.00005 Bitcoin work today? I always paid 0.0002 Bitcoin the last days. Whats needed?

I dont like the way things are enforced. You know Bitcoin was built to go away from centralization and ruling over the currency. Now someone, maybe a group of miners, is enforcing a higher fee and a higher block size. Its somewhat like banks that make the rules and the poor users have to follow. I dont like that thought.

And? You await that every adopter has to know these rules? Thats stupid to await and you most probably will agree. People simply want to use a currency. And even with knowing, i would have paid a higher fee, i only didnt know that there was another attack going on.

I see you dont like that attack too but what you say is that some scammers can enforce that all bitcoiners need to pay higher fees. You think thats worthwhile? Miners are greedy they want always more and they will have MUCH less when the next halving comes. And the loss in profits can never gained back with fees. That would simply be impossible. So the higher they force the fees the less likely will adoption become. I mean would you want to use a currency that is ruled by miners at the end? Wouldnt be such a big difference than using banks anymore. It should be a free currency and it shouldnt happen that someone forces everyone to his rules. Guess you think so anyway.

Who says that miners need to earn the same they earn now? The fees are nowhere near replacing the block reward. So miners will have a hard time and they need to stop using some miners.

Advancing tech cant help very much there.

It would be really hefty when miners try to get the same reward they get now. They would need to add 12.5 Bitcoins in fee per block. That would be deadly to bitcoin and to the miners at the end. But when i see how levelheaded scammers and forking miners are acting then i wonder if they would think about that at all.