What it used for?
Any roadmap? Whitepaper?
The roadmap is like this: You send in LOTS of ethereum and bitereum runs off with your money. Do you still needs a whitepaper? |
|
|
|
A little over an hour before they can be seen and ordered. |
|
|
|
 Actually, the dev himself is a fool and wanna scam ppl with his little head. I assumed a transaction was needed to create a contract. The fact that coins are being given away doesn't mean it isn't a scam. I've been scammed too many times in the crypto world, I'm a slow learner but I starting to learn. |
|
|
|
Why would a miner who is not bitmain use ASICBOOST on antpool? I don't think it produces more shares, so anypool would pay out the same as if it was not being used, and additional investment would have to be made on the part of the miner.
Because you need a stratum server that supports ASICBOOST for it to work. Currently only antpool does, but there is rumours slush may add support for it. It doesn't pay out more shares but reduces power consumption. I'm not saying bitmain is mining on antpool. I have no idea if they are nor have I any idea if they use ASICBoost for their farms. I'm saying normal joe bloggs has figured out how to turn on asicboost and is using it on antpool. i'm confused... before i heard there is no pool that allows it... then someone else mentioned that : that would be overt mining, and this is covert asicboost... so does overt vs covert require the pool configuration?? You sound like youre somewhat knowledgeable, ... i still think its all a huge distraction from scaling and bigger blocks, but its interesting, so give us the gangster deets. Bitmain admits they have used it on a test network but not for actual mining. The only issue I see around asicboost is Bitmain holds a patent on it, at least in China. Other than that, I all for whatever can be done to reduce the amount of work necessary to find a block. However I'm in the process of writing my third miner and I may decide to build a hardware implementation of it. These though are for my own use as I really dislike supporting software, that is what I do for a living I don't need to do it for my own personal business.  It is true that bitmain has released a statement that they have not used asicboost on actual mining but rather on a test network. But there was one person who said that he is going to attack the core developer and he is doing it by using asicboost. Thus if Jihan has already started using it on the actual mining does it mean that bitmain is lying or Jihan is not connected to bitmain. Which is true, any ideas guys? Many more options exist for example: 1) You are lying 2) You are crazy 3) Someone else lied or made up crap and you are repeating it. Seriously ... Asicboost or no asicboost really doesn't make a difference. It is someone's imagination that asicboost will let Bitmain control the Bitcoin network. I simple won't happen. They need a lot more than 20% boost in performance to do that, and that is assuming asicboost actually works. |
|
|
|
Why would a miner who is not bitmain use ASICBOOST on antpool? I don't think it produces more shares, so anypool would pay out the same as if it was not being used, and additional investment would have to be made on the part of the miner.
Because you need a stratum server that supports ASICBOOST for it to work. Currently only antpool does, but there is rumours slush may add support for it. It doesn't pay out more shares but reduces power consumption. I'm not saying bitmain is mining on antpool. I have no idea if they are nor have I any idea if they use ASICBoost for their farms. I'm saying normal joe bloggs has figured out how to turn on asicboost and is using it on antpool. i'm confused... before i heard there is no pool that allows it... then someone else mentioned that : that would be overt mining, and this is covert asicboost... so does overt vs covert require the pool configuration?? You sound like youre somewhat knowledgeable, ... i still think its all a huge distraction from scaling and bigger blocks, but its interesting, so give us the gangster deets. Bitmain admits they have used it on a test network but not for actual mining. The only issue I see around asicboost is Bitmain holds a patent on it, at least in China. Other than that, I all for whatever can be done to reduce the amount of work necessary to find a block. However I'm in the process of writing my third miner and I may decide to build a hardware implementation of it. These though are for my own use as I really dislike supporting software, that is what I do for a living I don't need to do it for my own personal business. What a lot of people seem not relies is. Just because something is tested. And just because something is patented. Doesn't mean it will ever work. That is also a valid point. |
|
|
|
Why would a miner who is not bitmain use ASICBOOST on antpool? I don't think it produces more shares, so anypool would pay out the same as if it was not being used, and additional investment would have to be made on the part of the miner.
Because you need a stratum server that supports ASICBOOST for it to work. Currently only antpool does, but there is rumours slush may add support for it. It doesn't pay out more shares but reduces power consumption. I'm not saying bitmain is mining on antpool. I have no idea if they are nor have I any idea if they use ASICBoost for their farms. I'm saying normal joe bloggs has figured out how to turn on asicboost and is using it on antpool. i'm confused... before i heard there is no pool that allows it... then someone else mentioned that : that would be overt mining, and this is covert asicboost... so does overt vs covert require the pool configuration?? You sound like youre somewhat knowledgeable, ... i still think its all a huge distraction from scaling and bigger blocks, but its interesting, so give us the gangster deets. Bitmain admits they have used it on a test network but not for actual mining. The only issue I see around asicboost is Bitmain holds a patent on it, at least in China. Other than that, I all for whatever can be done to reduce the amount of work necessary to find a block. However I'm in the process of writing my third miner and I may decide to build a hardware implementation of it. These though are for my own use as I really dislike supporting software, that is what I do for a living I don't need to do it for my own personal business. |
|
|
|
Yes, that's correct and almost 200,000 stores owner if I'm correct were accepting bitcoin as terms of payment. Big one for Japan  I think that is a bit blow out of proportion. I live in Japan. I've read a national newspaper that puts the number at 4500 and currently I only know 4 places in Tokyo that work with Bitcoin. That being said awareness and use of Bitcoin is growing here. Cool. Maybe crypto is bigger in other cities. One day I should visit Japan and be able to use my btc and xrp. 😀 I'm sure there is more going on in Tokyo than I personally know of. However I'm also sure Tokyo or Osaka would be leading the way. 4500 and growing is a believable number ... 200000 is someone's imagination. The 4500 number was reported by the Japan Times. I'm sure they know more about what is going on in Japan than some online Bitcoin Blog. |
|
|
|
WOW! Very cool! How do you send coins out from an AEON cold wallet? Is there a way to import the wallet into the AEON simple wallet? |
|
|
|
I will start the Aeon mining
How to make a wallet
Which pool do you recommend
thank you
I'm using https://aeon.kryptopool.com/. I'm earning twice what I was a minersgate.com. Daemon and Wallet are at: https://github.com/aeonix/aeonFirst you run the daemon aeond, when it is synced up you run the simplewallet. |
|
|
|
It is not the full contract first of all , second sure buy his scam .
You also smell like a sock puppet though
Me lol? Did you ever deploy any contract on ethereum? That's all the code you need to create a token btw, for those who don't know ethereum that's why it is a beauty... with few lines of codes you can create a token, an insurance, a voting system, etc. etc.... Welcome to the new World, it's already around since some years, seems you guys are not really into it... Suggest you to get into it, it's beautiful :-) Yea I love ethereum too, the code the dev posted is very basic but indeed is all the code you need to create a token... or a scam ... |
|
|
|
Our first priority is to distribute the tokens and after that we will decide the next steps.
Sounds like your plan is to take the money and disappear. Just another scam. |
|
|
|
ICO Prices are now updated, old prices: Phase 1: From April 10 to April 13: 1% of bitcoin pricePhase 2: From April 14 to April 17: 10% of bitcoin pricePhase 3: From April 18 to April 24: 40% of bitcoin pricePhase 4: From April 25 to May 10: 90% of bitcoin priceNew Prices:ICO Token Price
Phase 1: From April 10 to April 15: 0.001% of bitcoin price
Phase 2: From April 16 to April 20: 0.01% of bitcoin price
Phase 3: From April 21 to April 24: 0.1% of bitcoin price
Phase 4: From April 25 to April 27: 10% of bitcoin price
Phase 5: From April 28 to April 29: 20% of bitcoin price
Phase 6: April 30: 30% of bitcoin price
Phase 7: From May 01 to May 02: 40% of bitcoin price
Phase 8: From May 03 to May 05: 50% of bitcoin price
Phase 9: From May 06 to May 09: 70% of bitcoin price
Phase 10: May 10: 90% of bitcoin price
Example:
Phase 1: if you invest $100 and bitcoin price is $1200 you will get 8333.333333 BTE
Phase 2: if you invest $100 and bitcoin price is $1200 you will get 833.3333333 BTE
Phase 3: if you invest $100 and bitcoin price is $1200 you will get 83.33333333 BTE
Phase 4: if you invest $100 and bitcoin price is $1200 you will get 0.833333333 BTE
Phase 5: if you invest $100 and bitcoin price is $1200 you will get 0.416666667 BTE
Phase 6: if you invest $100 and bitcoin price is $1200 you will get 0.277777778 BTE
Phase 7: if you invest $100 and bitcoin price is $1200 you will get 0.208333333 BTE
Phase 8: if you invest $100 and bitcoin price is $1200 you will get 0.166666667 BTE
Phase 9: if you invest $100 and bitcoin price is $1200 you will get 0.119047619 BTE
Phase 10: if you invest $100 and bitcoin price is $1200 you will get 0.092592593 BTE
This seems like a pyramid scheme ... |
|
|
|
"Miner Mafia"? please.
Bitcoin was always a miner vote system, if you read and understand
Satoshi's whitepaper, but somehow the miners
(70% of them) not signaling for Core's roadmap
is a now a mafia. right...
Bitmain would support Segwit WITH a HF block increase,
but Core will not compromise. They would rather
not have segwit than increase the blocksize.
They are the obstructionists.
I completely agree with your post. After being outside of bitcoin for a while, I'm kind of shocked by the attitudes that now exist. |
|
|
|
Silly core sheep do not have any data showing asic boost has been used at any point. Statistics show that bitmain pools are performing within 1% of other pools. And their empty blocks mined are in line with every other pool also. Find a new imagined make believe reason. It is amazing how little critical thinking is going on in this forum and with what is going on with Bitcoin. From what I've seen there is little doubt that SegWit will happen at some point. UASF isn't necessary for that to happen. |
|
|
|
Really sweet, you don't like something so you define it as an exploit. There isn't any exploit in doing work more efficiently. There might be an issue with preventing others form doing the same, but that is a legal exploit.
An exploit (from the English verb to exploit, meaning "using something to one’s own advantage") is a piece of software, a chunk of data, or a sequence of commands that takes advantage of a bug or vulnerability in order to cause unintended or unanticipated behavior to occur on computer software, hardware, or something electronic (usually computerized).
Which fits perfectly for AsicBoost. This is unintended behavior which is being exploited by Jihan for personal gain. Living in denial won't help your payroll. While I'm going to exploit your by simply ignoring you. That is definitely use this forum to my own advantage.  |
|
|
|
And sure, Segwit adds some complexity. But not really that much more, if you can understand how Bitcoin already works, Segwit is easy to understand. It's often said (by detractors) that Segwit changes millions of LoC (lines of code), but that's a bit of a trick. Segwit adds alot of LoC: but not to existing Bitcoin code. Segwit is more testing code than it is any changes to the main codebase, and as a software developer, I'm sure you understand why more testing code is diligent.
Actually I was just starting to look at the code. It isn't a minor change. That doesn't mean it is bad. Yes your use of the term compression was confusing. I actually know a great deal about testing. A lot of bugs I've worked on turned out to be bugs in the testing code. It is extremely difficult to do good testing. SegWit will actually be tested though by LTC. It is also gaining in adoption probably because of LTC. Still at only 30% of the blocks signalling SegWit, it has a long ways to go. Reading through the BIPs it is pretty clear that the Bitcoin core has become extremely political. I'm actually happy I choose to work on other miners. However that wasn't by choice, I was simply too late to Bitcoin as I didn't start playing around with crypto-currencies until 2012. Initially I was more into trading and trading bots. That is why I wrote a PTS miner because I was selling the Proto shares to get BTC. I didn't like the miners that existed and I wanted to do some AVX assembly. By 2012 one couldn't profitably mine bitcoin on a computer but some altcoins were very profitable. At one point I had worked myself up to 60 BTC, but then I got dumb and was scammed by a several cloud mining sites. Still going after one of the scammers with a class action lawsuit. One already refunded and a third is hiding in South America from what I can tell. After that I put stopped playing with crypto-currency for over a year, but was pulled back by the lawsuit. So I have a lot of general distrust this point for pretty much all the Bitcoin players. Of coarse altcoins are filled with scammers too. Actually I've been scammed 5 different times, 2 in bitcoin and 3 in altcoins. I can't tell you how many scams I successfully avoided though. So you have to excuse the lack of trust. So getting back to UASF ... it just seems to be another way to try to force SegWit. I don't see that it is necessary. SegWit will stand or fall on its own. |
|
|
|
You are showing you are an intellectual giant!  Optimization is not the same as an exploit. AsicBoost is an exploit per definition. Really sweet, you don't like something so you define it as an exploit. There isn't any exploit in doing work more efficiently. There might be an issue with preventing others form doing the same, but that is a legal exploit. An exploit would be creating fake coins, double spending, stealing from someone's wallet ... those types of things. |
|
|
|
Forcing the Lightning network without any fallback isn't rational engineering. It might be great politics though.
But where's the force though? On-chain capacity can be improved with efficiency increases. The vaunted improvements to tx encoding would give us 20-30% more blockspace, so the 2.1 MB Segwit would become more like the equivalent of 2.5 MB, but still only actually using 2.1 MB. Schnorr signatures would give us a similar amount of extra space in the witness blocks. So when the Bitcoin devs have solid proposals to: - Increase on-chain capacity directly from 1MB to 2.1MB
- Increase transaction block efficiency to the equivalent of 2.6MB using the encoding we use now (which would be only 1.05 MB)
- Increase witness block efficiency to the equivalent of 3.75MB using the encoding we use now (which would be only 3 MB)
Now, what's wrong with compressing an aggregated additional 1.25MB of transactions into the 4MB Segwit permits? Getting 5.25MB worth of transactions, while still only using 4MB total? And why would you say "that's forcing everyone off-chain". On-chain is important, but so is the blocksize. If we can improve the efficiency of on-chain and keep the blocksize the same, adding more blocksize becomes even more effective, the gain ratio is the same improvement every extra MB in blockszie that gets added. And what's wrong with doing those efficiency improvements before the blocksize is hiked? We already know the arguments against hiking the blocksize right now, what are the arguments against improving the amount of space each transaction uses to achieve more on-chain capacity? I've never heard someone even try to make an argument against the idea. And again, the Bitcion devs cannot be construed as "forcing people off chain" when you consider that space-efficiency improvements are available and realistic, or when you concede that the blocksize is getting upped by Segwit. This "forcing" description makes zero sense, the devs are just being cautious and diligent, that's all. Yet a another set of numbers being thrown around. Seriously why isn't there any consistency when people talk about SegWit? As for compression goes, it can possible be a boon. It can also bite hard when it doesn't work correctly, I lost a disk full of data once because of that. I'm not against it but it does hurt to have options. Now I haven't studied the SegWit code, and apparently that is what one would have to do to fully understand it. I did read various descriptions, even 2 different ones from Bitcoin core devs. Granted they may have been talking about different versions of the code but it really sounds like no one is on the same page here. To me as a software developer that is really scary. At a minimum it throws up a flag warning that something pretty complex is going on. As for what is wrong with changing the block size later, nothing technically. There also wouldn't be any harm in comprising and hiking the block size limit up front. The hard fork scare tactics are just that. I'm not aware of any coin that has died because of a hard fork. What is wrong is all the politics. It creates an environment where no one can be trusted. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
