|
Global warming is real, but whether it is caused by human activity is debatable. There cooling/warming cycles of Earth has happened in the past, probably over a million time, this time is not much different.
It probably can not be scientifically proven that global warming is caused by human activity, because animals produce much more CO2 than humans just by existing, plus global warming has happened in the past without human activity.
|
|
|
|
洋葱币最近火的不行，哪位大神可以分析下这个币的优势在哪里。
优势就是洋葱网络。像monero, dash, zcash这些都是钱包地址匿名，但是IP地址并不匿名。而洋葱网络则是反过来，钱包地址不匿名，但是IP地址匿名。也算是另一种角度来解决匿名的问题。 |
|
|
|
10 seconds is too fast. 10 minutes is too slow. Maybe 2 minutes can work, it is 5 times faster, but slow enough to stop 'Orphans for everyone'. I read this earlier today from a bitcoin scalability blog post:
Decreasing the block time would lead to a decrease in security of the Bitcoin protocol; in an extreme scenario, if the block time were to be decreased to one second, and since propagation time is approximately 12 seconds, mining nodes would not have seen the latest block, and would continue to mine on top of a stale block. Mining nodes would be mining blindly, causing a significant amount of the network hashrate to be wasted, leading to the exact same outcome as increasing the block size as explained earlier.
Hashrate is 'wasted' anyway, it has no use after a block is found. I feel if we are going with a faster block fork, it has to be different enough to feel the difference. 2 minute is not much different than 10 minutes really, it's still an awkward wait period for 1st confirmation, though certainly a lot less awkward. You have to think from a user experience perspective, not from a technical/engineering perspective. You have to make the technology work toward better user experience. Not build what you think is the best/most efficient technology, and make user suffer inconveniences. Ideally, the faster block chain should strive for eventually having sub-1 second blocks if the technology allows. |
|
|
|
|
Just throwing it out there, would anyone be interested in a Bitcoin fork that has faster blocks (Let's say 10 second blocks). Block size 0.2MB. Effectively increasing block size to 12MB per 10 minute
Advantages:
* Time to 1st confirmation will be a few seconds on average, good enough for even buying coffee and actually getting a confirmation, instead of relying on completely insecure 0-conf or 3rd party service
* Much better tx/sec capacity obviously
* Better user experience overall, it will just feel fluid for all tx, anyone that has used a sub-10 sec altcoin should know the feeling. Everything is just fluid
Disadvantages:
* Potentially bigger blockchain size obviously, but that's not really a big problem unless we are doing VISA level transaction volume
* Orphans for everyone, but that's fair
|
|
|
|
Then you have senseless who says that no one accepts altcoins yet they have 55% of a 144bn marketcap. So 80bn usd is a useless bubble compared to 65bn of BTC which has all the use? Is it all speculative bullshit?
Are you trying to be sarcastic? Altcoin have 55% combined, there's a few hundred active altcoins. So combined they probably do have better acceptance than BTC, but non of them have nearly the acceptance of BTC when evaluated on their own. Therefore non of them can currently overtake BTC even with superior block time. But their combined dominance does speak to me that faster blocks is the way to go. |
|
|
|
lol did you actually expect PoW miners to have loyalty to any one coin? their loyalty is directed 100% at making short term profit. They'll mine BBQCoin if it has 110% profit over Bitcoin
Well, I'll never mine but if I did I'd want to know what I was pointing my work at worked properly and had a viable market to offload on. Something a couple of weeks old would have me a little sceptical. All PoW miner care about 2 things: 1. can I mine it at a better profit over all other coin that's possible to mine 2. can I immediately sell the mining reward for fiat/other crypto of choice If yes to both, then that's the coin PoW miner will mine, they don't care it's called BTC or BBQ, in fact most altcoin mining pools have built in auto-switch to mine the most profitable coin at the time, the owner of the miner doesn't even know what coin he's mining currently, the pool will auto switch for him. |
|
|
|
Unfortunately high fees are new Bitcoin relality and reflectiion of current situation with miners and users. But I still believe that Bitcoin is created for everyone, for every social class and not for rich only.
And the price going up is a very good news. I know that not everyone can afford to buy Bitcoin at this high price but you can always earn it, there are many ways to do that and then Bitcoin can actually help the poor as additional income.
Seriously? you blame it on the miners? the miners that has over 90% supports increasing the block size to at least 2MB, and some of them went so far as forking to a 8MB block chain that currently have less than $0.10 for tx fees? Now blaming the users I can sort of understand, since most users was lied to by CORE and misled into supporting segwit. |
|
|
|
Wait for BCH difficulty to readjust and watch the miners pour back in to start clearing it. BTC will be more profitable to mine again in a few hours. I must say I'm rather surprised they're such hookers. I wouldn't be aiming my multi million investment in hardware at a new alt knocked up by Bitmain.
lol did you actually expect PoW miners to have loyalty to any one coin? their loyalty is directed 100% at making short term profit. They'll mine BBQCoin if it has 110% profit over Bitcoin |
|
|
|
Hi guys just want to ask why the bitcoin fees are increasing i just notice the fees here https://bitcoinfees.21.co/where 450sat/byte I thought this issue is already been solve what happen to bitcoin Or we should need to go switch to bitcoin cash instead? But the problem switching to bitcoin cash still not worth it because there are still no merchant are accepting bitcoin cash here in my country.. unlike bitcoin.. CORE want you to do off-chain transactions and is about to introduce Lightning Network, and to push users into this new paradigm, on-chain transaction have to become very expensive, so you probably haven't seen anything significant yet. This is why CORE has refused basically every single attempt to increase block size that now has proven to provide simple and easy scaling for Bitcoin on chain transactions. |
|
|
|
I already predicted this exact scenario when I posted my "It's about time to turn off PoW mining" thread 3 years ago. If Bitcoin was Proof of Stake or at least PoS+PoW hybrid, we wouldn't care if PoW miners are chasing short term profits, because that's the nature of PoW. it is partly because they are giving away free money to anyone who mines bitcoin cash these days. right now you can find a block every 1 or 2 minutes there so obviously miners prefer the free money for the time being until the difficulty is adjusted and they move back to the real valuable coin. during this time there is a longer time for finding blocks.
on top of it we always have the spam attack issue with bitcoin and block size is still 1 MB with no SegWit since it is not yet activated.
Yes, this is what's going on. They are pulling ahead mining rewards on BCH to shower money on the miners, causing the BTC blockchain to suffer. There are virtually zero TX on the BCH chain, so the miners are not serving customers (actual TX), only serving themselves in a short-sighted way, chasing the carrots that the BCH gang are dangling. This is a good example of what happens when miners incentives are out of alignment with what is good for the bitcoin ecosystem, and how hostile attackers can game the system to attack Bitcoin. How many newbies (or even more experienced users) complaining about high TX understand that it is a result of people who have separated from bitcoin, and how many are blaming Bitcoin itself or its devs or community? |
|
|
|
|
What's your polo deposit address? did the fund actually arrive in your polo deposit address?
|
|
|
|
|
Green and Red are a joke, you should read into comments and vouch threads to determine trust.
|
|
|
|
Because CORE lied to you and segwit doesn't do shit to scale Bitcoin, even for the short term. CORE's goal is centralize Bitcoin by introducing Lightning Network. Super expensive on chain fees are their method to push you to use LN and doing offchain transactions, since they will be a lot cheaper. CORE doesn't even hide the fact that they will turn Bitcoin chain into a "settlement network", only affordable to the operators of LN nodes (eg. corporations). Bitcoin Cash backers (eg. big blockers) were right all along, bigger blocks were the answer to scale Bitcoin and have sane fees. Hi,
I don't understand why the fees are getting so high right now? Smaller transactions get eaten alive.
|
|
|
|
Litecoin not being dominant in transaction has nothing to do with technical, but everything to do with Bitcoin came first, and Litecoin came 2 years after Bitcoin was invented. If people could choose between 2 chains with equal acceptance now, they would overwhelmingly choose the chain with faster blocks. The fact that Bitcoin has minority marketcap now, is probably related to its high fees and high block time. 99% of altcoins has faster blocks, it was one of the 1st advantages altcoins advertise, eg. Litecoin, think about that. #1) There are a ton of coins that have low block times. They do it to make fast confirmations. Who wants to wait 50 minutes for a confirmation? Or even 10?
Apparently a lot of people. Ask yourself this: Why are these fast blockchains not being used? Take litecoin or dogecoin. Litecoin exists for, what? 6 years? It's a well established coin with over 2bn in marketcap (what bitcoin used to be a few years ago). It's not very volatile so it's not like its value will plummet by the time you broadcast the tx and the time the receiver gets the money. Yet it has very few txs - despite the lure of virtually zero fees (it has plenty of transactional capacity)... Litecoin last transactions: Recent Blocks Height Age Transactions Total Sent Total Fees Block Size (in bytes) 1262932 12 seconds ago 1 0.0 LTC 0.0 LTC 322 1262931 14 seconds ago 13 7,183.193 LTC 0.114 LTC 4,448 1262930 a minute ago 26 29,050.847 LTC 0.368 LTC 8,650 1262929 2 minutes ago 5 16.614 LTC 0.001 LTC 1,198 1262928 2 minutes ago 1 0.0 LTC 0.0 LTC 327 Why do you think people prefer the slow bitcoin and there is so limited transactional demand spillover to altcoins for faster transactions? |
|
|
|
|
Does BitTorent protocol fear a government ban? they try pretty hard, but in the end they can not ban it, because ... decentralization is awesome
|
|
|
|
|
How is that any different than accepting cash? also stores that accept BTC probably do so thru a 3rd party, which can be reporting the transactions to tax authorities.
|
|
|
|
With new rule it will be really hard for multi account to handle all the need to get AirDropped
What new rules are you referring to? I didn't see any new rules in the ANN post |
|
|
|
Blockchain/bitcoin is a technology and in the world of technology 8 years is a really, really long time. IMO the whitepaper should be viewed as a guide/foundation to be built apon, not taken for gospel. It was an incredibly forward thinking idea but that doesn't make it flawless and other proposed improvements/criticisms shouldn't be written off just because they weren't included in a 9 page whitepaper.
Sure, improvements are great. Improvements are for example going from a Samsung S6 phone to a S8 phone, But you don't "improve" an Android phone into an iPhone and still call it Android. You'd call it what it is, an iPhone. Once you change the entire ideology of what Satoshi created, and what many of us from 2010-2011 era signed up for. It can hardly be called Bitcoin anymore. Also, when Satoshi left, he gave the "key to the kingdom" to Gavin Andresen, meaning to have Gavin to lead the development of Bitcoin further. Guess which Bitcoin implementation Gavin Andresen would support now? hint: it's not Bsegwit |
|
|
|
It's exactly your line of thinking has led Bitcoin down this path, price is everything you care. But you don't understand, without Satoshi's vision, there is no Bitcoin. What you will have is another bank/paypal, it may work better than Satoshi's Bitcoin due to centralization, it may worth a lot, but it's not the Satoshi's Bitcoin we signed up for. Honestly, it doesn't matter what is the Satoshis original vision as he was disappeared long time ago and let it to core developers to handle bitcoin nodes. People don't care about original vision as bitcoin price is the best thing right now, and time will reveal the best coin among all of those coins, but bitcoin still far ahead from bitcoin cash or other altcoins. As long as people trust bitcoin and always use it, then it will always lead the market which the most important thing is usability.
|
|
|
|
Maybe you sold your BCH and you are scared now. The rational scalation solution was simply increase block size. Segwit don't allow transactions with 0 fee for example. People don't want to pay to open a Lightning channel, they want cheap transactions and total control of their money. Instant transactions (offchain) are possible too with Bitcoin Cash so I'm sure that Bitcoin Segwit will fail.
When will big blockers understand the fact that you can't have "total control of your money" when you are handling the full validating nodes into the hands of corporations that will be validating everything for you because the blocks are too big to do it yourself? BCash was DOA. They raised the blocksize limit and they can't even fill 1MB blocks because no one uses it, laughable. We don't need to rush any hardforks anytime soon, if you support a hardfork you will lose your money every time. I don't understand, does corporations have some kind of magical hard drive that the regular user can't obtain? I have six 10TB drive sitting on my desk right now, I can run 500 redundant copies of Bitcoin blockchain on them. Why do I need corporation to run a node? It's not only about the storage, which would be growing exponentially and you would end up pissed off yourself eventually too, but about latency. Check this explanation of 3 minutes of why big blocks are stupid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2941&v=iFJ2MZ3KciQExcept full 8MB blocks Bitcoin current exists and works just fine, kinda defeats his argument right there. I run an abc node for BCash, my node works just fine, why should I be pissed off again? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
