I'm hauling a rebuilt 1962 Leslie cab
Very cool. I own both a 122 and a 147. You've heard these very cabs before. No shit. Longer story than appropriate here. |
|
|
|
First official day of retirement.
Congrats Baw'b. Not retired yet. That won't kick in until end of 2q18. But I am on vacation today. At a locale much closer to the equator than is my home. Here's a toast to your retirement:  Grrr. You know what the downside of the beach is? iPad instead of real machine. And imgur refuses to work on iOS except through their stupid app. Which seems to prevent linking to an actual photo. Like, for embedding into a post. C'est la guerre. Whatever, there's a link up there. Maybe I've just had too many Heinekens... |
|
|
|
Regardless of wheat one thinks about Barry, this has to be a net positive. It is an on ramp controlled by an entity that is almost certain not to close to crypto faithful. |
|
|
|
I may spare you when shit hits the fan.
Haha. You realize, of course, that you are as impotent as the least of us here, right? The only power is vested in infofront and Theymos. I am just attempting some dramatic effect, so don't out me - otherwise I will consider placing you on my "NOT to be spared" list.  I know you are shivering in your boots, so don't EVEN try faking calmness.  ><°|>]]°€>¤<\>€<~¤`>® yawning intensifies >~|°]«%™`¤¤«¿~¤\¡ XD |
|
|
|
What is the purpose of this coin
" Just look at it. It could not possibly be any blacker. There is none more black." - N. Tufnel |
|
|
|
Bill Gates is the same guy who said "64 kB should be enough for anyone". Now he denies the quote is legit, but he sure acted like it, failing to endow DOS and the first Windows versions with proper memory addressing.
I almost didn't want to respond to this but... well... No. First, he never said that. Second, it was not 64k, but 640 Ki. Lastly, have you ever looked at the architecture of an 8088? It weren't no 6800. 1 MiB was the limit before resorting to silly paging techniques like those required on an 8051 or somesuch. Some area needed to be set aside for drivers, HW, and OS. High memory was chosen for that - less than half. Sure, in retrospect we probably would have done it different. But I'm guessing ol' Bill never dreamed that the crude CP/M boot loader and disk reader that he bought would form the foundation for the bulk of computing for decades to come. Bill Gates is also the same guy who thought the Internet, anarchic network of networks as it used to be, would be a passing fad and everyone would just use the Microsoft Network.
Well, yeah. There is that. Though when he finally figured it out, he jumped in with religious fervor. |
|
|
|
I may spare you when shit hits the fan.
Haha. You realize, of course, that you are as impotent as the least of us here, right? The only power is vested in infofront and Theymos. |
|
|
|
Are there anypeople left using BCASH?
Yes. This alt is worthless
No. |
|
|
|
segwit is just as safe
A citation for your grandiose claim might lend your declaration some modicum of credibility. But actually, Segwit implements a completely new -- and consequently untested -- security model. |
|
|
|
OTH it is somewhat ironic you talk about destroying Bitcoin (which I do fully agree with you in this case about an unjustified and UNCONSENSUATED PoW change) considering your support to BCH.
No irony intended. Contrary to popular misrepresentation, those behind Bitcoin Cash are fully faithful to Bitcoin. We simply prefer larger blocks rather than the Segwit poison pill. |
|
|
|
People who can't compete always want to change the rules of the game.
Especially if the game is about keeping open competition. I don't care if there is only one shovel maker. Good for them for being successful at what they do.
I do care, if they can charge whatever they want for their shovels, to the point of suppressing shoveling when they don't want it to happen. Monopoly is never good, except for the monopolist. Don't jbreher yourself into a corner. Oh come on. The only sustainable monopoly is one where the government has rigged the game to the advantage of the monopolist. In a natural monopoly, the raising of prices just results in the ability of new entrants to profit. |
|
|
|
I recently started mining with 24tb HDDs and 1 gtx1070. The profits are too low but I don't care much. I'll extend my GPU rig up to 6 cards and then I'll stop.
If you are able to mine, you should mine. But never go all in on one thing. I am holding FIAT, crypto, mining equipment and gold. That's what I do.
Best of luck. Sincerely. Good to see someone actually stepping up to compete, rather than whine about how rigged the game is. |
|
|
|
With PoW, CPU mining would be the best. Access to CPU processing power is most widespread and CPUs can be utilized to a lot more tasks then just so solve one task. This would be A LOT more energy efficient and less costly to the users of the network.
Nonsense. Regardless of technology, the energy consumption of Bitcoin mining will tend up to the amount where the money spent upon it will be ever so slightly less than the dollar value of the bitcoins mined. Basic econ 101. But because the bitcoin community is mostly one big echo chamber, this hasn't been exactly discussed.
Nonsense again. It has been discussed over and over and over and... N00b. If you want a shitcoin with some other algorithm, there are hundreds to choose from. Why are you focused upon destroying bitcoin? |
|
|
|
Haha. Buh-bye. Yeah, it is problematic that none of us has the cojones to actually put our treasure, talent, and time on the line to compete in the marketplace. But seppuku is not the solution. |
|
|
|
Hate to be Debby Downer here at all but the question has to be asked, does that empty mempool then also mean less pressure from traffic/volume of Bitcoin use.
Ummm.... Duh. It means that demand for bitcoin transactions on the Segwit fork is less than a third-million per day. Why anyone would rejoice in that is beyond my ken. |
|
|
|
Some time ago we had a discussion here about a possible issue with the Lightning Network. Some big blocker was suggesting that the Lightning Network is doomed to fail because routing and because problems. The potential problem is similar to a double spend attempt. Briefly and roughly: Alice has a channel with Bob, Alice sends funds to Bob and while Bob is offline she broadcasts the channel state as it was before she spent the funds, thus undoing the spend. However, if anyone broadcasts the correct (later) channel state, Alice is done: the whole channel balance goes to Bob. Serves her right for trying to cheat. The problem is, if Bob's offline he knows nothing about Alice's wrongdoings, so there must be someone watching the channel for him. This someone could be rewarded by Bob with part of the funds if cheating is discovered (and therefore funds are gained by Bob). I speculated that a bounty market could come into existence. It seems there are already some bounty hunters in the present, clunky version of the LN. They are doing it for free at the moment, since the cost of watching a few channels is negligible. It's in the comments. The video itself is technical. Mention of the bounty hunters was the topic that spurred the most attention in the discussion. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7xrq5g/lightning_network_and_discreet_log_contracts/I'm guessing that I may be the aforementioned big blocker. What with our continued conversations over my skepticism and all. Thanks for posting. I'll read. There's a lot of layers here. As just one example: 'how much channel state is exposed to outsiders to allow such to police random actors?' But I'll reserve detailed discussion until after I land. |
|
|
|
|
Tough you kinda have to wonder why it is that demand for Bitcoin transactions has dropped below a third-million a day. While lower fees are attractive, the fact that this is due to lack of demand seems worrisome.
|
|
|
|
Question for some of you living in the U.S. who have cashed out recently....what exchange do you recommend?
GDAX/Coinbase has been good for me. Very quick, no-hassle withdrawals of what some would consider eye-popping numbers. In the form of transfer to linked US bank accounts. |
|
|
|
The average guy from the street has no idea what Bitcoin is, period. Again, I fail to see the point. If you're gonna get involved in crypto without doing your due diligence, you're gonna have a bad time. No matter what particular coin.
And yet the WHOLE point, nay the very existence of BCash, was to supposedly to appeal to "the average guy on the street." Like the 2B+ unbanked in the world today with no education. Remember? Can you possibly be any more fkn hypocritical, or have any more ridiculous fallacies going on, wrt BCash? Are you trying to tell me the situation is any different in regards to Bitcoin Segwit? That its whole point is supposedly to appeal to "the average guy on the street"? Indeed the potential lower fees should indeed be one factor to cause Bitcoin Cash to appeal to the average guy on the street over Bitcoin Segwit _once_he_become_aware_of_its_existence_. I see no hypocrisy here. I do see cognitive dissonance in your retort, however. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
