|
a lot of early adopters have a lot of money to invest on infrastructure and marketing which results in a lot of people using their exchange which results in lots of fees per transaction = making a lot of money.
I have no idea how new people start new exchanges without being already well off.
|
|
|
|
What Hearn wants is for Bitcoin to become regulated for KYC/AML etc. ...
Then the fight will be between the Wild West vs. Regulation and that on a global scale.
Im against XT at all costs, but the real question is here, how much non-regulation and super privacy can we afford if we want to see BTC go mainstream? I cant wait for confidential transactions to be operative but I wonder if more privacy will scare governments away even more. Most of the intrinsic value of Bitcoin is it gives 100% privacy and anonymity and can be sent instantly anywhere in the world. Just as good as a bank account, well actually better since its faster, cant be reversed, and fees are almost nothing, combined with no barriers to entry. It gives humans financial freedom like never before in history. That is so not the case. If you really believe this please stop. It will get you in trouble if you are doing something illegal... You really need to know what you are doing for this be almost right. Bitcoin is not anonymous or private. It is public. And if someone with enough power has a reason can find you. Just ask DPR... EDIT: the only thing protecting you is that it is not easy to connect name and address. But it is posible... Even using multiple addresses doesn't help if you are not careful enough. You are right, there's no way to get privacy unless you get paid directly in BTC and you never exchange for fiat, if you exchange for fiat you should have your stuff taxed. In an ideal world we would have merchants everywhere IRL so we wouldn't need to exchange for fiat to buy some things. |
|
|
|
8MB is still a very random figure to drop over there. Sure one could think the blockstream guys have an agenda but im really a lot more scared about the code that Mike&Hearn are trying to push with the excuse of the blocksize increase.
i didnt see anything really bad there. most of the rumurs are just fud. atm only miners need to do anything (if they want to) everybody else should just make sure that their bitcoins belongs to them (eg they own the private keys) so they can decide - after the fork - which chain is best. no code is run with owning private keys... no one forces you to run bitcoin core / xt (even if you want to be on that chain) anything else is FUD. Well the thing is most people are clueless about the code that is underneath the excuse of the blocksize increase. They thing XT = bigger blocks and thats all but thats not all. Some people here care about things beyond a good price. |
|
|
|
There will not be a hard fork until January 2016 at the earliest. BIP 101 patch can be implemented in Bitcoin Core as well, and I hope it is and soon. What bothers me is that Mike Hearn used his commit privileges to publish Bitcoin XT with only a 75% adoption threshold by miners. Hard forks are dangerous, and the threshold for adoption should have been 90% or even safer 95%. I suspect he set the threshold too low because he realized chances of 90% consensus approval for Bitcoin XT was slim.
Well they better hurry up with the BIP101 in Core because they are so slow to take measures that XT guys may end up taking the cake. Im all for making things slow and right but right now Core is under pressure. |
|
|
|
|
8MB is still a very random figure to drop over there. Sure one could think the blockstream guys have an agenda but im really a lot more scared about the code that Mike&Hearn are trying to push with the excuse of the blocksize increase.
|
|
|
|
|
I dont see any sense on this. If there is more demand and the supply stays the same, surely the price would go up? I mean what are other alternatives? Its nonsense.
This doesn't change the fact XT must be avoided. Im all for BIP101 but not for XT.
|
|
|
|
|
The big vaults storing other people's private keys that take their work seriously are using massive resources to keep your shit safe, for example look at Xapo, they store your stuff in some sort of bunker. The attacker would need to not only get inside the armored core, but crack the SHA256 passwords of every encrypted wallet. How insane is that? not gonna happen.
|
|
|
|
nice shirt but it takes more to bring BTC to mainstream  It sure takes a lot more but everything counts, t-shirts are a way of advertising something in a way, just like signature campaigns work to get a brand out there, t-shirts can do wonders if it spreads, and the guy will get some cash out of it too so everyone wins. |
|
|
|
Aren't all altcoin posts usually deleted when they aren't posted in the appropriate place?
What constitutes an altcoin? I think this is obviously more than an altcoin.. the future of Bitcoin itself is on the line. People are going to reach XT one way or another. Im not entirely sure if moving posts from the main board is appropiate. So is Bitcoin XT a completely new code of coin or just a fork for bitcoin?
It's a fork. |
|
|
|
It's easy to guesstimate how much BTC you need to move a market. Look at the list here: http://coinmarketcap.com/order marketcap from more to less and show it in BTC instead of USD or any other FIAT. There you go, if you have at least half of the volume of the marketcap of a coin you are a huge whale on that particular market. If you have 1/4 you are a considerable whale. Anything less and it's a waste of time. |
|
|
|
|
Im incredibly bad at things like this. I'll let some one else solve it but will stay around to see how it turns out. 0.1 is not enough for me to invest time on this sorry, maybe if I was more gifted at solving puzzles I would do it.
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Please help in getting importing wallet from bitcoin core to multibit.
I am trying to import wallet.dat file to multibit. but it does not seem to be working.
Kindly help
Importing wallets is never, never advice and is a practice to be avoided unless its 100% necessary for some reason. If it isn't, then avoid this by simply moving coins from wallet 1 to wallet 2, simple as that. Why? its simple, to import wallets you need to reveal your private keys and there is a reason why most wallets don't even show your private keys unless you do some geeky stuff. It's basically for protection of the user. |
|
|
|
Most countries are on the verge of implementing measures to regulate Bitcoin companies. On one hand, some governments are willing to regulate strictly the companies whereas others pose a more flexible stance. Over the years, UK has remained the financial hub of Europe and as it is now, the country seems to be trending the same path for bitcoin. https://99bitcoins.com/uk-plans-to-become-the-global-bitcoin-hub/If I was the president of a country with decent resources (basically any country in the 1st world) I would be spending a considerable amount of my GDP budget on research to come up with more efficient technologies to mine Bitcoin. I cant believe none of them are actively working on this. Bitcoin is the 21th century gold rush and when countries understand this they will invest like crazy trying to become the #1 world miners. I cant believe China is the leading one. |
|
|
|
|
Im not sure if it could bring literally "world peace", but it could surely stop governments from funding illegal wars and endless corruption which returns in war. If goverment was under a transparency policy where the public money was always seen on the blockchain all of the corruption would be vanished. Things like this are the positive aspects of BTC that can make for a better ran society.
|
|
|
|
|
My theory for this is simply this one: China holds most of the Bitcoins out there as well as mining power. Recently we are seeing the beginnings of the great China bubble burst. I think that the crash on the Chinese market will be hard enough to affect some Chinese Bitcoin miners as well thus lowering the average hash rate.
|
|
|
|
Off with your head!* Bitcoin revolutionizes illegal actions -- does it hold your interest?
-snip-
If you cannot see any reason for anonymity other than illegal activities, then you have a very narrow scope of imagination.
Wrong. There's a reason for which Bitcoin is pseudo-anonymous and you obviously aren't seeing it. DASH/Monero/similar coins can't become legal and regulated properly because of their anonymous nature. Also, stop misinterpreting my words. The point of hashing and the blockchain is attaining distributed consensus in spite of being open to the whole world. If it's for "internal applications", there's no need for a blockchain. An ordinary database will do and, as a bonus, won't be open to transaction analysis and network attacks like Bitcoin is.
Banks get hacked from time to time. I wonder where you came up with the assumption that their distributed ledgers will not be susceptible to attack? I understand what you mean OP. "blockchain" has become a buzzword now and meaningless like the word "disruptive". I believe that people who are dismissive of bitcoin and favour blockchain probably know little about either of them.
I do believe that blockchain will outlive bitcoin though. there is more uses for it than a single currency.
Here is a nice article that calls the separation ludicrous. Instead of dismissing either, people should be cherishing both blockchain technology and Bitcoin. Obviously, there are groups that are starting to become scared of Bitcoin as it might harm/destroy their corrupt businesses. However, I do agree that blockchain technology has much more potential than just being used in a currency. I thought Monero wasn't able to be transparent but I remember reading Monero also had an inbuilt feature to make payments transparent if the user wanted. I think this is a good thing. I don't think Bitcoin the way it is now, would be a good idea to be mainstream, it needs to be more anonymous. Greg Maxwell has commented on this, he said he doesn't want to live in a world with a global transparent ledger, that's why he wants to introduce the confidential transactions BIP. I think he is right, and a global transparent ledger like we have now is NSAs wet dream. We need a more obfuscated way to deal with transactions in a standardized way. |
|
|
|
so they released it for free, i remember it was available for $5 or 6, i think it's better for them if they can partner with youtube and gain on the viewers instead of charging money for it
cool movie nonetheless
No they did not. Have a look at the comments. The first one is from Torsten. He is not happy about that at all. But what shall he do? It's already available on torrents. And the more often the video gets deleted at youtube, the more often it will be uploaded. Furthermore I agree. His distribution model could have been better. I think it's impossible to profit from digital content anymore beyond ad revenue and donations. People are always going to pirate your stuff, it just too easy nowadays and people are too poor in general to spend money in anything that isn't 100% necessary. Unfortunately this is a fact and it is what it is. Most musicians make all the money from live events because people are pirating their music except the real fans. |
|
|
|
More than 2 weeks has passed...
And now 2 weeks has passed since you noted more than 2 weeks have passed. Mike Hearn and Gavin Andresen are running behind schedule, but it seems to still be in the works. Hearn posted about it on reddit ... 2 weeks ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3e64dk/time_to_end_bitcoin_reliance_on_core_and_end_this/ctbyqwyI'm not as worried as I was. It looks to me like XT won't get anywhere near 50% of nodes, and especially not 75% of miners. I'm sorta curious how the forking supporters will react. But didn't Gavin basically said that the idea of 20MB was not a good idea after all and that he would from now on push the 8mb increment each year model? I dont understand. Is Gavin still going for 20MB or he is going for this?  |
|
|
|
By 2020:
1. Banks will realize that creating their own blockchains would be much more expensive vs just hopping on bitcoin (don't know v 1.0 or 2.0).
2. governments will realize that they can distribute money and collect taxes easier using bitcoin.
3. core dev will finally approve a rise in blocksize...I hope.
the future price of bitcoin, however, is unknowable for a few very simple reasons:
a. Why would current fiat/debt holders want to change to bitcoin when they are so comfortable in fiat? If they won't, we will grow slow, which might not be a bad thing.
b. In addition to that, if you have debts in fiat that is constantly declining in value while keep assets in presumably appreciating bitcoin, there will be an imbalance, so after a while the system has to be either at least 90-99% bitcoin/crypto or 90-99% fiat.
c. There is also a remote (1%) possibility of an ugly hybrid whereas devs will introduce inflation into bitcoin (over 21 mil)-it looks very unappealing right now, but once the issuance stops or comes to a little trickle, such opinions might gain hold.
Lol if it takes as long as 2020 to reach a blocksize increase consensus we will meet a lot of problems in the meantime if people start hopping on BTC and volume increases. Also there's no need for inflation since BTC is divisible enough, there will always be liquidity. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
