What I at this point consider straight trolling and even terrorism against bitcoin is the anti-full node agenda. Namely, these that think only corporations should run full nodes. After having debated this for years I just don't see any rational argument for defending this nonsense.
100% with you on keeping the corporations out but "full nodes" won't scale as Bitcoin has been implemented and they need to move towards DNA to spread the load across the nodes instead of having to patch it up with 'off-block' lightning and I am not phased by introducing specialist cluster type nodes to Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
I noticed the same thing, long ago. I don’t always immediately speak out on what I see; I await the right moment; and it seems you hit exactly the right moment! Thank you.
No I don't think you did and as you can see I am back to my old self now and will see you in your next thread where you keep deleting posts that don't agree with you in an effort to make yourself seem smart. Not being one of "the boys" here I don't have many merits to give away but I too will send pebwindkraft a merit Ban evasion is a permanban offense. I am now gathering evidence for a new thread I will start have started in Meta. For the sake of sanity, I ask everybody to stop replying to “RNC”. I also ask the moderator to not delete anything until I get all the evidence. Thank you. Shut up drama queen, send the link and I will join in too  and stop begging for donations in your footer because I am sure that is also against the terms and conditions here too. |
|
|
|
WRONG. Bitcoin no longer has a block size limit. Segwit replaces the block size limit with a block weight limit, set to 4000000 bytes: /** The maximum allowed weight for a block, see BIP 141 (network rule) */
static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_WEIGHT = 4000000;
Yes splits it between two files giving a total of about 3.5meg but they did not need to mess thing up by coming up with vbytes to muddy the waters and should stick with plain old bytes because we all know what they are. Someone posted about the signature not having to be tested by lazy miners looking for a bit more speed because it is in a separate file but apart from that I am OK with Segwit but will never be OK with Lightning and its banking hubs that like you say is taking shape and it's not looking like any mama & poppa type home banking that I have ever seen before. https://lnmainnet.gaben.win/ |
|
|
|
I don't think you should stress over how your software would hold up with a billion peers. It is much more important how it works with a few thousand peers, because that is going to happen much sooner than a billion peers.
Me is him ! Well I intend on dealing with just having two nodes by hard coding the bloody IP-address into the program but please don't put it around. Yes you could be right because I have just become stuck on this problem and no I am not expecting a billion users to buy my new alt-coin, has nothing to do with coins apart from the encryption and is more like Tor 4.0 |
|
|
|
They are called DNS Seeds And they are hard coded into the client to help nodes bootstrap. Basically they are IP addresses of bitcoin nodes run by Bitcoin community members and they assist in peer discovery since new nodes on the network don't know which addresses to connect to. Yes agree and once they have a list of nodes then DNS look-ups are dropped the next time the node starts up but this is not really centralization and is a case of using selective trust and more of this should be encouraged within Bitcoin where it is not a threat to security. I am working on node discovery that will scale to something like a billion nodes (Yes with a 'B') and I am coming to the conclusion that this cannot be done in a decentralized system because even if we used sub-domains based on the public-key and each node held a five million lookup's then in the end network chatter would kill the network. Just now I am looking to see if DAG has something worth pinching that will help solve the problem but i am not hopeful |
|
|
|
This isn't a bitcoin wallet... I wouldn't bring an altcoin wallet in a bitcoin wallet discussion...
You sound like Bitcoin is more of a religion to you than a digital token so are you sure you can handle it if/when bitcoin get knocked off the number one spot ? |
|
|
|
|
WILL SOMEONE PLEASE TELL THE NAZI FUCKING MODERATOR OF THE "Development & Technical" TO FUCK OF BACK TO 1930's GERMANY AND STOP USING
MADE UP BIAS RULES AND PRIVILEGES TO KEEP CALLING MY POSTS OFF TOPIC OR I WILL TROLL THE FUCKER ACROSS THE INTERNET SO BAN AWAY .
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin on the other hand does need such a protocol because it is decentralized in every aspect.protocol.
No it is not and the miners would soon be up a gum tree without pool sites and you seem to forget Lightning is very centralized and builds single points of failure into the system. every man for himself does not really cut it on large scale systems and specialized coordinator type nodes are needed but that does not mean we have to lose control and this also cuts down on useless internet chatter. |
|
|
|
The reason why the 2MB upgrade was not done was to fix this problem in a future proof way - the layer 2 solution.
The limit on the size of blocks was changed to 4MB as a part of that. You make it sound like the limit wasn't changed, it was. Over 6 months ago. But that's really just like using coal instead of wood to feed a steam engine and sure it will go faster but it never will be a racing car and walking down to the train station just cannot compete with jumping into a car. "On-Block" can be made to scale but not how Bitcoin implemented the design but it would involve a rebuild and a major data import so I guess it will never happen if the result was to put most miners out of work. |
|
|
|
|
Am i late to buy bitcoin now ??
Nope hang around long enough and the coins will once again be as cheap as chips.
City traders have this saying of "Let the trend be your friend" but slot machine players
have trouble picking up on the meaning
|
|
|
|
|
Yes got scammed after reading a white paper that said "Virtually free transaction fees" and then the miners
put the fees up as high as $55 last month and the other part of the scam is they made out they were against
banker and then tried to introduce something called the lightning network so I read the white paper and
discovered it was full of these things they kept calling hubs but they charge both tx fees and interest on BTC
using to finance the private ledgers and change interest on the movement of your own money, much like banks do
anyway.
What the saying , fool me once shame on you, fool me twice ?
|
|
|
|
I like your idea of saving or holding your bitcoins earned from joining various campaigns like signature campaigns, social media campaigns, and other bounties.
Maybe instead of spamming the internet with ICO spam (Now banned by fake-book) because you are bottom feeding and would earn more money doing a real job like flipping burgers. I bet you didn't take my advise on putting a stop-loss on Bitcoin when it went below $10,000 so maybe you will take my advise now when I tell you to change your circle of friends because clearly it's not making you rich is it now. |
|
|
|
How about only earning Bitcoin and not using them?
I think the price of Bitcoin will gain much more value.
So if we keep it as our asset we will be much rich in the future...hehe...whats your opinion about this?
Do you think or are you only dreaming because I see no arguments from you to backup this theory of yours. A mere seven transactions per second, fees hitting as high as $55 per transaction and the new lightning network being a poor off-block fix and the hubs being mini-banks says to me that this fruit machine is broken and you need to take your tokens (including the fake USDT) and try playing the other machine that's got the flashing light and is making lots of noise as it pays out. |
|
|
|
unlike you i am not delusional.
Well thanks for the insult my merit sniffing brown nose friend since I see you being paid to run adverts in your posts. i know for a fact that some altcoin will eventually come along which will be performing a lot better than bitcoin and will become a lot bigger than it.
but i also know that the altcoins that are currently around either have worse problems than bitcoin or are not efficient enough or lack some major aspect such as being decentralized, that they can not even come close to competing with bitcoin. I can agree but you seem to forget IOTA, Ripple, Evo and several others here and all the Bitcoin clones (Same software) are heading for the bin because it's badly written and won't scale. you mention high fees, there is nothing ok about bitcoin's high fees. that is a fucked up situation. but at the same time only an idiot would think altcoins have solved this issue! many of them have already been put to test and filed to perform let alone keep the fees down. Yeah so please provide a link to any alt-coin who's fees have ever gone over $5 and never mind the $55 we have seen so yeah, you either are smoking something nasty or have your head in the sand. I think people can see who's swimming without trunks here |
|
|
|
this is just a fight between the centralization (being Ripple) and the decentralization (being most of the altcoins) and nothing more. they are just trying to bash the decentralized coins like banks and hundreds of others have been doing because they know they can not compete with it with their flawed systems.
Compete with 7 transactions per second or fees per transaction being as high a $55 or are we talking about going off-block with lightning with it's banker hubs or are we talking about the CPU-Wars that Bitcoin apparently needs to remain decentralized (WHICH IT IS NOT ANYWAY) Do you know the story about the Titanic, well worth watching the film it is. |
|
|
|
|
Coindesk just like all the other big names in Bitcoin cook the books when it comes to charts and
edit out some of the big peeks and crashes
|
|
|
|
it is funny to hear this from one of the most iconic shitcoin that has existed among altcoins ever. a centralized coin that has failed to do anything apart from getting pumped and dumped. I see Bitcoin at $100
what are you smoking  Maybe a better question to ask is what are you smoking or did you think that we were running out of numbers and no alt-coins could take over from Bitcoin which will then become a alt-coins itself. Dear oh dear you must love them days at the start of the year when fees hit $55 per transaction and maybe all that smoking has made you forget about these facts that will be written into our history books much like Tulip Mania was written into history all them years ago. Yes I know mr zio-moderator that my replay was off-topic, delete away old-chap |
|
|
|
" Is bitcoin used by criminals ?"Do bears poo in the woods ? Bitcoin started off being used with Tor to buy/sell weed and porn and then it attracted gambling dens and if you look at the adverts in many of the posts here then you can see where I am coming from. now just before Bitcoin really started to take off we were getting lots of wanacry viruses turning up all over the place (PLEASE DO GO BACK AND CHECK THIS) and the decryption key needed to get your data back was all being sold on the Tor network and the ransom money was paid in Bitcoin https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/03/wannacry-hackers-withdraw-108000-pounds-bitcoin-ransomThis is only half the story and I know that many people would like to dispute this but I and 99% sure that it was the Tor client software that was one of the methods being used to spread this virus and this had nothing to do with back door browser exploits and before then I was one of Tors biggest fans. Yes Bitcoin has sex, drugs , extortion, gambling and with the lightning network we also get banking too.
|
|
|
|
Well hold on a second "centralized cryptocurrency ripple" The miners using mining pools is centralization as is Bitcoin using DNS lookup's when new nodes first start up and don't even get me started about bankers because the lightning network is all about banks and worse still these bank hubs become a single point of failure if you only open one channel. Ripple is excellent to use for learners because if things screw up then at least you can contact someone and it's public ledger is as good as they come and you ignore that bitcoins LN is all "off-block" Peek Ripple fees was about $0.01 and peek bitcoin fees was $55.00 and if you really like bankers then you need to stick with Bitcoin me thinks |
|
|
|
Well if you look at the lightning network and work out that it's a system of banking hubs which is not hard to do if you can understand technical details deliberately hidden in fog https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdfWhen some of the in-house bitcoin public relations team enter into a debate about LN fees they argue that competition between hubs will ensure that fees remain low so much much lower fees will send Bitcoin fans looking for other alt-coins and this so called "Market Forces" never worked here anyway between miners when fees hit $55 per transaction which kind of shows what a scam and we have a cartel doing what ever they like with the captive audience that only last as long as prices kept going up. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
