I have refuted your objections on another thread. Attached is that refutation.
...
All I can say for now is wow! You will need to wait for a reply. Once I'll stop laughing about the amount of WRONG in that reply I will try to refute you back and your abjection! |
|
|
|
Are you suggesting that people are better off with their private keys handed off to a 3rd party just because they do not want to keep a full copy of the ledger? Yes! I am pointing out that there is little difference. If you do not validate the transactions, you might as well not have the keys. Stop imposing your stupid views. Why should you or your boss MP decide that if users do not validate the transactions they shouldn't keep their private keys? So you are against centralized nodes which can be very easily white or black listed, but you are pro trusting private keys to a 3rd party. BEST RETARD ADVISE. You should get a Darwin award for this stupidity which you just vomited. Really! |
|
|
|
Visa will never to able to offer anything related with bitcoin with this 1MB block limit because they will not play the bid-for-space war. The idea is that they won't have to bid all that much because the limit will keep all the little transactions off the block chain and on the 3rd party ledgers. In this way, debts can build up between companies like Visa and get settled on a daily/weekly/monthly basis via the block chain. Yes, that means poor people don't get to anonymously buy anarchy themed lapel pins, but it ensures that poor people can verify that the worlds supply of money has not been corrupted. The only way to perform a legitimate validation of the transaction ledger is to retain a full copy of it on local devices, a task that becomes cost prohibitive as blocks become larger. Please highlight to me the offchain solution that is available since we are approaching the 1MB block limit very fast. And if you can't be bothered to maintain your own full node, you don't need your transactions on the block chain. The revolution in bitcoin wasn't the ability to pass around signed transactions; the revolution was in a distributed consensus of those signed transactions. If you aren't checking the validity of the transactions, you aren't using bitcoin. If you're using someone else's node to check the validity, you are relying on them! So then, what is the point of having your petty little transaction bloating up my hard drive!? The people who "can't be bothered" are never going to bother, and I do not want my money compromised to give them some illusion of freedom! Let them have checking accounts and credit cards denominated in bitcoin, and let them also have the option to validate a bank's books with their own inexpensive full node.
So now you are trying to force every bitcoin user to have a full node? Just like every webpage visitor has a full server in his house? Satoshi never visioned such a world. He stated that the full nodes will be centralized and that people will use Light clients. Why are you trying to impose YOUR point of view on everyone else? Why don't you let everyone to decide if they are ok with centralized nodes or not? Why do you think that there will not be some kind of trusted full nodes service where people can whitelist and blacklist centralized nodes? Stop trying to limit stuff and stop being MP dog who just follows orders! |
|
|
|
You are so despicable. Those people can just use a 3rd party shared wallet if they are so disinterested in actually keeping a full copy of the ledger. What is the difference from their point of view? Whereas the difference from your point of view is clear: your handlers want the full ledger to be as centralized as possible so that maybe they can corrupt it!
Are you suggesting that people are better off with their private keys handed off to a 3rd party just because they do not want to keep a full copy of the ledger? @sed Just ignore troll Icetard. Check my signature. Nothing good has ever come out of his mouth. |
|
|
|
I'm wondering, if we see bitcoin, or just any cryptocurrency based upon the blockchain principle, large, whether the volume of the chain is not going to be problematic.
If we look at companies such as Visa Bitcoin doesn't need to compete with Visa.... Visa is a payment processor, and if it wants to remain relevant in the coming decades, it will have to start offering bitcoin denominated lines of credit. Please take what danielpbarron says with a grain of salt. He is the same guy that is trying really hard to make MP (Mircea Popescu) a really happy boss while he is advocating the keep of a 1MB blocksize limit. Visa will never to able to offer anything related with bitcoin with this 1MB block limit because they will not play the bid-for-space war. danielpbarron is more interested in his power and influence while playing nice for MP than the Bitcoin development! |
|
|
|
STILL waiting to hear back from SP-T wrt my dead SP20E & SP30...
Double e-mail support@? |
|
|
|
Allow me to translate from fed-speak: "Showing that Gavin is in control of bitcoin is a necessary tick box. It doesn't matter what the change is, so long as he is the one who makes it happen. That way, we (the U.S. Government) can kill bitcoin."
Consensus among poor people may have been a thing when bitcoin wasn't yet real money, but it isn't a thing any longer. Now bitcoin changes you. To resist the force of bitcoin is to resist the force of gravity. You can vote on the constant of acceleration all you want, but you'll still go splat when you hit the ground at terminal velocity.
What's going on in your elite IRC channel? I feel that we are missing some important stuff since you aren't quoting it anymore! |
|
|
|
The difference between going "all in" with a PoW cryptocurrency vs an ICO is that you invite scammers to target the technology. It's the same as the premined altcoins. I suppose if they offer a burn address for bitcoins that will suffice as proof they are not scamming. Small unrelated question: Offering a burn address for bitcoins will make those bitcoins not-usable at all forever? |
|
|
|
Question: How many different passphrases does Trezor support?
It should be nearly infinite (in the human sense), since the password is effectively a 25th word to the seed. There may be a character limit though. AFAIK the trezor doesnt effectively store anything other than the PIN and the seed - so using dozens or hundreds of passwords shouldnt be an issue So you can have infinite and separated set of addresses at your own disposal based on the passphrase while having one single private key in the form of the seed? That's neat. Thank you. |
|
|
|
@notspoonchop I heart a good dance party. This thread isn't reason to party for anyone but you. Have a great time bud.  I see what you did there! Party on  |
|
|
|
Nothing LambChop or RoadStress said had any factual basis. That makes them about as right as a broken clock.
I based my sayings on the lack of any factual basis. The lack of any update regarding the self-mining, the lack of a financial report and the lack of the information overall. All the lacks makes it a factual basis for the dying cash cow that was AM. You were correct in your assessment and I should have listened. My apologies for any vitriol I may have sent in your direction. Thank you. As an advice please remember that it's not about what we should have done, it's about what we learned  Of course it doesn't, don't be silly. Like I've told you repeatedly now, you seem not to understand what a fact is as you keep trying to claim that your opinions are facts.
Sure sure. |
|
|
|
Guys, help please
Have an sp20 I can login to, see on the network, but it's offline. "awaiting pool etc."
than after a short while it goes offline.
I had another do this and was able to get it back with a few good reboots. No luck with this one.
Is this common? any pointers?
Is it hashing at any point before reboot? Try another pool? |
|
|
|
|
Question: How many different passphrases does Trezor support?
|
|
|
|
|
In my signature you can find a dedicated thread for hosting companies with good prices. I recommend you to take a look there too.
|
|
|
|
Nothing LambChop or RoadStress said had any factual basis. That makes them about as right as a broken clock.
I based my sayings on the lack of any factual basis. The lack of any update regarding the self-mining, the lack of a financial report and the lack of the information overall. All the lacks makes it a factual basis for the dying cash cow that was AM. |
|
|
|
For an SP30, can someone explain how the following Start ASIC Voltage Top/Bottom (0.58-0.70) ASIC Voltage Limit (0.590-0.790) Max PSU Power Top/Bottom (500W - 1900W) affect the hashing rate for underclocking purposes? I saw this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=960937.msg10657999#msg10657999but it only changes ASIC voltage top/bottom, without changing voltage limit and PSU power.. I tried voltage top/bottom 0.61/0.62, and PSU power 1200W, got ~4Ths, then same voltage and PSU power 800W, got 3,3Ths The Voltage Limit is the upper limit of how much power should the chips receive. By putting a lower maximum limit you limit the miner maximum speed. If you want to underclock it then you should have it lower than 0.660. What are you trying to achieve exactly? 3Th/s at 1500W? |
|
|
|
When have you liquidated your shares?
As soon as I found out FriedCat had gone missing. I don't see any point in keeping hold of them now. Good move. Remember that FC kept hidden the fact that AM didn't placed a wafer order in December. |
|
|
|
You should report even if you think it will not matter. You can demonstrate to eBay that you somehow paid him and you must have a conversation history to show in case they ask. |
|
|
|
I'm not an AM fanboy, I was an AM shareholder. When have you liquidated your shares? Chips weren't ordered because there was no money to pay for the order. Attempts at securing necessary funds failed. So the order was never placed due to the lack of funds.
This information should've been released for all shareholders. Keeping this secret is a bad thing for everyone. Another fail from AM. |
|
|
|
Come on smart guy, where is the list of those who want a permanent 1MB block? Are they the same people who are mostly altcoin/Monero shills?  Life seems boring for you when you are not scamming anyone. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
