i think you have something to do with the buttplug.
Don't listen to this guy, I been into crypto since btc was $1.
You see, the whale on bittrexx doesn't really want to sell his food, instead he is making little buy orders and getting it filled, this greedy and quite dumb early investor is thinking that the coin is going to be like doge but does not realize that he is killing it before it had a chance to blossom and is going to be left with a worthless coin and sink everyone else.
Capital will just flow elsewhere.
My advice is: If you want to buy food get it straight from the sell orders, you will see how the 5 btc vanishes once it's starts getting close.
wat did i just read you realize TheWhale is the developer on this coin, and you're telling people not to listen to him. if the sell wall is that big of an issue for you, feel free to eat it. otherwise as was mentioned it's pointless to talk about the price. Thanks for the brilliant advice on buying from the sell order book, tell us more about your infinite trading wisdom |
|
|
|
|
Agreed HitBTC is getting pretty silly. I was considering sending some BTC there until they started the childish campaigns and overusing Luke. To the moon campaign? Seriously? Are they a professional exchange or some kind of joke. Do they really need to be in the thread title?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm afraid the people (well respected contributors no less) saying it makes no sense for botnet owners to mine Monero are mistaken. Sure, other coins might be more profitable in small volumes, but there's no way a botnet will be able to exchange out of a thinly traded premined shitnote and into BTC without bringing the price to zero. Same for VTC
Don't get me wrong, im in this coin for the long haul. I've exchanged all my alts for XMR. I expect botnets securing the network. As the network grow to include more efficient hardware, this will be less and less of an issue. It's a little disheartening to see this kind of misinformation here. Understand that there is no better coin for botnet operators to mine right now, and this is to be expected. Not sure if there are ulterior motives at play or if you're simply not taking volumes into consideration when claiming otherwise
|
|
|
|
|
I cringe whenever I hear of people telling their friends/family they should buy bitcoins. Seems you have no issues with offering unsolicited investment advice? Actually calling and visiting them to see if they bought bitcoin is kind of bizarre behavior imho
Bitcoin is extremely volatile, all too easily you will have people that used to be your friend pissed off at you because they're losing money.
If you really want your friends/family to have some coin, give them a few bucks worth. The ones that are truly interested will buy more on their own.
|
|
|
|
|
franky1: can i ask where you're getting this information?
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure if this is related but I'm hearing of others getting hacked because they're using cracked versions of windows OS downloaded from torrent sites (the most sophisticated trojans and rootkits are not detectable by any AV software)
|
|
|
|
1000 blocks downloaded, 103k to go  If this does not get the thing to work, I DON'T care if it would be even a golden coin. Dev team should think about it BEFORE they even started publishing anything. And if dev team fails - success is equal to zero. as was already explained, the software is in alpha your posts sound like you feel you're entitled to something... |
|
|
|
|
i would rather pay the flat fee vs. a percentage
|
|
|
|
ASIC mining would destroy XMR. ASIC mining means centralized control of the software resides in the hands of whoever can dominate the queue of the best fab. Eventually that will be a nation-state. Since BTC is built for surveilance already, XMR would be first up against the wall.
There would be no point in mining it because it would be far worse than worthless. It would be a honeypot.
Switching to a ready hash whenever necessary would not be hard...IF everyone knows it is coming. You can't defer this commitment until the last minute.
And don't tell me the NSA can stealth fab so everything is hopeless. They can - I've seen it myself, as far back as 1990 - but the hash footprint would be obvious.
It remains to be seen how much of an advantage asics would have over the hordes of gpu miners and botnets securing the network |
|
|
|
|
Back in the 10,000 BTC pizza days the faucets would give 1 or more bitcoins at least... good times
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like it was shared hosting. For $50 bucks a month you can get a dedicated Dual Xeon X5650 server from Dacentec and do whatever you please. & they accept Bitcoin
|
|
|
|
|
What were you wanting to advertise?
|
|
|
|
It seems every thread/card will need a core dedicated. On my old Pentium E5200@2.5GHz, 1 card needs 50-60% CPU time in order to run at 200+ Running on -d 1, desktop is fine, but any desktop usage (chrome) kills hashrate in half. Have to upgarde  this has not been my experience... i am using an old cpu (2 threads) and mining 5x750ti at ~210kh / card |
|
|
|
|
1 minute blocks: fail.
infinite supply: fail.
|
|
|
|
IMO, if we can't trust miners and hashers to avoid concentrating hash-power, then Bitcoin has failed.
Despite comments up-thread, we are not dealing with complete imbeciles here. If you can handle making sure you don't exceed 12amps of continuous draw on a 15amp circuit; you can handle checking if your pool appears to have a dangerous amount of hash-power.
That's my argument here. We want a trustless system yet we have to depend that nobody will screw us over. I do not belive that there should be ANY kind of regulation or central authority, but since the dev-core team might be having difficulty comming up with a solution maybe we can join heads and create a TRUST-LESS system that prevents accumulation of 51% network hashrate. I know I am being a but pushy here, but I like you have invested in BTC and believe in BTC. And it's things like things that are holding us back. Bro, depending on the devs to make a change (which will not make the network any safer btw) is the definition of centralization. It is up to each and every miner to avoid concentrating their hashpower on any one particular pool |
|
|
|
BRO common man, I told you from yesterday I DO NOT want t get into ANY kind of arguments with you.
WHat I want is the ones responsible for the protocol to make sure that it is safe.
EVERYBODY wants that.
Don't you?
Jesus, why are we still arguing?
I'm not interested in arguing... but I think it's important to understand that the beauty of the bitcoin protocol is that no one can make changes to it, as you seem to believe is possible. All of the existing miners would have to switch to mining that new fork, you can't just make changes on the fly like that |
|
|
|
...
As far as decentralization goes, once again you are an idiot.
BTC protocol itself is controlled by a team which is control by a foundation run by an accused pedophile (and some suspect the CIA as well).
...
This is totally false by the way. You clearly don't understand how bitcoin works |
|
|
|
Ok, well now I think we're really getting somewhere If Ghash does not worry you, what does? And how will a hard fork solve it. Honestly yes, I do expect miners to monitor their pools. I don't see what's so unreasonable about this. BTC is the greatest thing to come out of our generation, I'll do whatever I can to help secure the network |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
via Imgflip Meme Maker
