When you set up Bitcoin mining, is it possible to mine only a specific transaction or is it random? Thanks!
Yes. Each miner decides which transactions go into the blocks it mines. However, it is important to understand that miners are competing to add their blocks to the block chain. The more hash power the miner has, the more likely that their block will be added. It is also important to understand that if you are a member of a pool, then you don't get to choose transactions because you are just a hasher and the pool is really the miner. |
|
|
|
|
It is not surprising that a Coin Telegraph article promotes a pyramid scheme (BitClub Network). I assume that is the entire purpose of the article.
|
|
|
|
|
The fee for that transaction is 0.00001, or about 4.5 s/B, and the result is that the transaction may never be confirmed.
Edit: blockchain.info now shows that the bitcoins have been double-spent. Is Coinpayments legitimate?
|
|
|
|
Do the miners control the network or the nodes? I always thought the nodes controlled the network. The nodes decide which transactions enter the pool, and in fact I thought that the nodes decide whether blocks are valid as well, so even if the miners do something crazy isn't it the nodes that are the ultimate deciders? I thought that the miners are relatively irrelevant compared to the nodes because even if a miner has 1000x the hashing power of everybody else, if the nodes blackball the blocks from that miner then the miner will be ignored, so all their hashing power is useless. Even if you compute a block first, if the nodes reject your block then you control nothing, at least that is what I thought. No?  No one node or group of nodes controls the network. That is the nature of a decentralized network. - A miner controls which transactions go into his block, but cannot control what transactions go into other blocks.
- A node (including miners) controls what transactions are relayed to other nodes, but cannot control what transactions other nodes relay.
- A node (including miners) controls what what blocks are added to its copy of the block chain, but cannot control what blocks are added to other nodes' copies of the block chain.
- A node deciding which blocks are added to its block chain, gives value to the block rewards in its chain.
|
|
|
|
It depends on whether or not you are a speculator. If you are not a speculator, then it really doesn't matter. If you are a speculator, then you really don't matter.  |
|
|
|
Has sombody analysed this ?
Could it be that the fee increase we see puts a inherent economical limit on the max bitcoin price by demand reducing?
And this price limit might just be around 1k (€,$) ?
The effect is not one-way. While a rising transaction fee might depress adoption, lower adoption will in turn depress the transaction fee. That suggests an equilibrium influenced by other factors. |
|
|
|
|
I feel like too many people are taking all this controversy way too personally and too seriously. Listen, if you are losing sleep over any of this, you perhaps you could think about taking a break.
Whatever happens, it is no big deal. It's not like your life or even your livelihood depends on the future of Bitcoin. If it does, then perhaps you have made mistake by getting so involved, and it might be better to fix that first before worrying about fixing Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
BU is sort of like a bloodless proto-coup attempt.
A coup implies that somebody is in charge. If somebody is in charge of Bitcoin, then Bitcoin is doomed. |
|
|
|
|
I'm buying bitcoins as fast as I can.
"Buy when there's blood in the streets"
|
|
|
|
But once the coins are received by the destination address the transaction is closed. The OP is asking if a request for payment can remain open indefinitely.
To the OP, give us a scenario where this would be a useful option for a transaction?
There is really no "request for payment". All that feature does is shows a QR code containing information such as an address and amount that another wallet can use to create a transaction. There is nothing being opened or closed, other than the app itself. |
|
|
|
|
There may be some confusion in terminology.
If you "import" a private key, you are giving a copy of the private key to the new wallet to use. The old wallet still holds its copy of the private key. If two wallets hold the same private key, they both have control over the bitcoins, and both wallets will report the bitcoins as belonging to them.
If you "sweep" a private key, the new wallet sends the bitcoins to a new address that it controls (using the private key you provide). The old wallet no longer has the bitcoins.
Importing a private key can cause confusion and may create a security risk, so it is generally better for newbies to sweep a private key.
|
|
|
|
I sent btc from Poloniex to ShapShift. ShapeShift supplied me with an address for deposit (so I can get Ether after btc deposited): 1Fhfwmkbsr8G6kSuP68FyQnKZkEQ2X6Ugm I initiated a Poloniex Withdraw, but that took too much time, and ShapeShift closed the transaction. I contacted ShapeShift. Asked they did. They saied they issued a refund, and gave me Transaction ID: https://blockchain.info/tx/65c1d9d70633f8851616406e083943e618d83add6382298c9a36b4fabadea1a4I then contacted Poloniex, but they can't seem to find my btc. It looks like shapeshift screwed up and sent the refund to their own address. You will have to contact them again. Make sure that you give them a Poloniex deposit address to send the refund to. Also, using Poloniex as a wallet is probably not a good idea. |
|
|
|
|
1. Yes
2. The sender must broadcast the transaction to the network. However, the receiving wallet does not need to be connected to receive, but it must be connected to find out about the transaction.
3. There are no names. You will need to pay a fee when you send from one address to another, regardless of if they are in the same wallet or different wallets.
4. Most exchanges require KYC. Localbitcoins does not. All exchanges, except BitSquare, are centralized.
|
|
|
|
Yes, imagine that I opened a request order, it is open now and I set it to receive XXX BTC, but I don't deposit, I let it open, and after some Years I finally use this adress to make a deposit.
Is this possible?
Yes. Anyone can send bitcoins to any address at any time. It doesn't matter when the address was displayed by your wallet. However, in order to spend any bitcoins sent to that address, you will need the private key, or the seed that generated the private key. I assume that any wallet that displays an address will save the private key to that address. It would be very bad if it didn't. |
|
|
|
|
Listen, Chicken Little, if you have 5% of the hash rate, your attempt to "split the network" will go nowhere. The Bitcoin.com pool has around that much of the hash rate, and their accidental 1 MB+ block had no effect on the network at all.
Also, if a large enough portion of the hash rate increases the max block size, the rest of the miners won't be left behind, they will jump on board.
You make it sound like miners have to choose between Core or BU, but they don't. They can use whatever software they want. They can change the rules whenever they want. They don't need the Core priesthood to bless their changes.
Finally, miners already have full control. They have the ultimate say. That is how Bitcoin works. That is how it is structured. They do the proof-of-work. They decide what is valid and what is not valid. Of course, the other full nodes have some leverage, and users have some economic influence. But in the end, whether you like it or not, miners decide.
|
|
|
|
Only mentions Bitcoin in passing: He describes basic privacy protections (using a strong password, avoiding public computers) along with more advanced techniques (encrypting files on a hard drive, using a VPN and Bitcoin for online purchases).
|
|
|
|
Keep in mind that the bitcoin mining reward will never be zero, because it halves every 4 years approximately. It will always be a number that is above zero, no matter how miniscule it is. It's like mining gold, there will always be new gold deposits, even though they may be decreasing dramatically.
And when that happens the transaction fees people pay will probably be enough to cover the costs of the miners, because the bitcoin prices would be really high and there will be a lot of users, thus generating a lot more transaction fees.
There is no need to worry about it, that's like a few hundreds years away lmao.
There are no fractions of a satoshi, so after the subsidy is 1 satoshi, it will drop to 0. That will happen in a little more than 100 years. |
|
|
|
|
According to the experts I have listened to, the cryptographic methods that Bitcoin uses, specifically ECC and SHA-256, are expected to be "broken" by quantum computing in less than 20 years.
|
|
|
|
I used hashflare and genesis cloudmining, so far they trustable. I dont trust cloudmining that offer interest if we deposit out btc there
Trustworthy, perhaps. But have you actually made money? How much BTC did you invest, and how much did you earn? |
|
|
|
|
TL;DR: That article is all over the map, like it was written by a schizophrenic or something. I can not figure out what the article is even about. It starts out by talking about some guy, then it shows some text messages, then it talks about advertisers, then it talks about "the roles and rights of mass media in the crypto community", then it talks about some more people, and it ends with this question, "Whether this money must be returned back to the criminal or it must be sent to a charity?".
Also, I wouldn't be surprised if the article was originally written in Chinese and then translated to English with Google translate.
Definitely not worth reading.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
