Am I doing something wrong? I've been seeding for over a month, but have had very little interest in it:
There tends to be bursts, with idleness following. There are many seeders, so download-then-idle is quite fast. It has the most impact in handling unintended bursts, like when bitcoin sees a lot of new press attention. |
|
|
|
This is the best article about Bitcoin I have seen.
A good one, agreed. |
|
|
|
It wouldn't have to be one person - several people who are available eight hours per day distributed equally over timezones would do it too. Although it would be much harder to find more than one person who has had press training.
Agreed -- though it's mainly a press training (as you point out) and B.F. funding issue at that point. Ideally there is a bitcoin press army in every country and language  |
|
|
|
The Bitcoin Foundation is not the same as the Bitcoin dev group. They are two totally separate organizations.
But the members of the Bitcoin Foundation include the bitcoin dev group, and one of the board members is Gavin Lead developer. You can't believe that they are really two separate organizations. Yes, you can, because they are. Frankly, I do not think bitcoin would work, or be useful to anybody, if it was "controlled" by the Bitcoin Foundation. At that point, even if the code is available for download, I would not really call it open source. Moving on to terminology. "core developer" tends to be strictly defined as anybody with push privs to github/bitcoin/bitcoin.git -- but we must admit that that term becomes less relevant over time, as other implementations and other non-bitcoind developers start contributing BIPs and other major, impactful changes. i.e. should we consider the Armory dev a core developer? etothepi has written BIPs and certainly contributes to the wallet side of things. Mike Hearn (TD) and Matt C worked on the bloom filter feature, which revolutionizes the network-sync time for lightweight bitcoin clients. The bloom filter feature alone is huge. An embedded, low resource bitcoin client that is truly decentralized and P2P may be built -- as we see from the current Bitcoin Wallet on the Android market. Is that not a far better solution than more centralized, hackable, DDoS-able websites? So are they "core developers"? In the less strict sense, I'd answer "yes" Their changes are certainly trusted by the community at large, in addition to the yahoos on the bitcoin/bitcoin.git commit list. |
|
|
|
Yep. Bitcoin Foundation needs somebody who is available [nearly] 24/7 for press requests, who knows how to talk to journalists, and knows bitcoin at a tech level as well as currency level. "talk to journalists" is not code language for an ideology, but simple press training: knowing ahead of time that journalists are mainly looking for "pull quotes", and tend to chop up, shorten and take out of context whatever is said. (and no, I do not claim to be anywhere near good enough for such work, even if I had time) |
|
|
|
On the contrary. While it is true that my interest in Bitcoin is for the purpose of furthering the Tonal system, I don't pretend that Bitcoin's reason for existence is to promote Tonal.
Tonal is a pointless waste of brain space. |
|
|
|
Jeff Garzik, gmaxwell and Lukejr turned this into an issue by moving to strike Jon Matonis and Roger Ver, two established Bitcoin community members who present themselves competently and articulately, based solely on their political ideas. Now, instead of discussing the topic of strategy and purpose for the Press Center, jgarzik wants to silence any debate. I think that determining the press strategy is very important.
(checks page count) This is 14 pages of "silenced debate" and counting? That excludes further silenced debate on reddit and github. Matonis has a Forbes column. Silenced and censored? Posh. Further, you will also note that I retweet @jonmatonis material, and happily review Ver-owned BitcoinStore purchases. The world is not as simple as the critics would paint. But bitcoin is growing up. The number of non-anarchists in this world vastly outnumbers the anarchists, and a truly global, inclusive currency needs to appeal to all. The fundamental nature of bitcoin is. It is what it is today, and nobody is trying to the change the engineering. You want true monetary freedom? Get bitcoin into as many peoples' hands on this planet as possible. |
|
|
|
|
You can never be guaranteed a notification of a double spend.
The classic example is where you broadcast transaction A, and then quietly mine transaction B.
Nobody sees B until it appears in a block.
|
|
|
|
I am not aware of any merchant that has ever been double spent with 0-conf transactions except the OKPAY example during the chain split. Which was almost certainly caused by mining nodes being restarted and not syncing their mempools - quite easy to fix.
SatoshiDICE has been double-spent. There are other incidents as well. |
|
|
|
Not at all, and you have the invention of ASICs to thank for that. Mining now requires a large up-front investment that would be completely useless if Bitcoin were to collapse
Come on, you must admit that some double-spent of 0-conf transactions would never make Bitcoin collapse, that's an exaggeration. Particularly if people understand that a 0-conf tx can be easily undone. More to the point, zero-conf transactions have been double-spent already. It is proven they are not safe today, ignoring any proposed changes. |
|
|
|
|
Increase the open file limit for the process, and/or don't have so many connections.
|
|
|
|
It'll force the IRS to issue some more detailed tax regulation on Bitcoin though. In my mind, that's a good thing, as it'll lend additional credibility to Bitcoin.
I don't see why... it's treated the same as being paid in gold or another commodity, really. |
|
|
|
The reporter failed to even view the basic information available on the bitcoin.org home page, http://bitcoin.org/en/you-need-to-knowDon't forget government taxes
Bitcoin is not an official currency. That said, most jurisdictions still require you to pay income, sales, payroll, and capital gains taxes on anything that has value, including Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
This obviously contradicts every word GMaxwell and DeathAndTaxes said about mining during the first year.
Want to correct this hyperbole, now? |
|
|
|
|
51% attack is the most talked about... the most useless, the most unlikely attack.
The cost of attacking the network, and other attacks, are far less costly and far more damaging.
|
|
|
|
|
Most of the devs have come to the same conclusion.
|
|
|
|
|
A design contest is absolutely the most useless route to choose.
It is endless wanking, without any real engineering proof that the design is practical in the real world.
|
|
|
|
If I want to make a 'worthless' transaction of one satoshi, and im willing to pay a fee for the pleasure, where's the harm?
Well, at present, people are uploading wikileaks data, GPG encrypted data, python scripts, hidden wiki URLs, and other data spam. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
