|
1) Make a nice node, ensure good connection to miners
2) Start charging people to submit TXs to your node, and enable such submissions via website form, IRC message, whatever. Payment can be in the TX or otherwise how you like.
That's pretty much it. Right now you might not get anyone to pay because, well, volunteers do it for free.. but if this is an issue.. well there's your solution.
|
|
|
|
Nice pics  However nobody has argued for quantitative relationship between available block size and bitcoin use / user base / anything that might be called BTC growth. So it's kinda hard to comment on an incomplete argument. |
|
|
|
|
First we will have to make it counterfeitable, because if you can't print it at zero cost, you obviously can't replace a currency which can be issued ad infinitum at zero cost.
|
|
|
|
One killer word for all of your Windows concerns: Linux. I'm not even considering looking at new Windows versions. Spy system for the government(s).
Sounds like everytime a new version of windows comes out the tinfoil stocks must be skyrocketing, were talking about security for average user and the things Windows notifies you that they will be doing and all have a disable option. No matter your OS I am sure the government has a large list of vulnerabilities they use via multiple ways to attack and you not notice. I'm also sure every lock is breakable, that's why I just leave all my valuables outside the door. |
|
|
|
Amir Taaki talking about the multiple personas DPR moniker: http://www.miningpool.co.uk/amir-taaki-backs-up-ross-ulbrichts-claim-of-leaving-silk-road-after-creating-it/“Years ago, when I messaged the Silk Road, I had a conversation with the Dread Pirate Roberts – a very personal conversation where he was [talking] about how one day he hopes to be on the outside struggling for freedom together. You know, not having to hide his identity. One year [or] two years later when I messaged the guy — I’m pretty certain it was not the same guy. The tone was completely different. He had no recollection of the events that happened before, and his attitude to me was in stark contrast to the exuberant and wordy Dread Pirate Roberts of the early days. So, free Ross Ulbricht.” I have no reason to believe this and at the end of the day it's just his opinion. Ross was caught red handed both in setting the site up and running it when he was caught do I don't really buy the different person excuse. See what you wrote here? He was caught red handed "setting the site up" and "running it". A website. Voluntary participation for willing participants, none of whom are even in the court with complaints. For this: we are to pay his hotel bill for decades. The most shocking part about it is how primed you people are to just accept this idiocy. You really want to pay 100 BTC a year to correctional facility managers because "he published his email" ? |
|
|
|
snipp...
Or you can just grow up and face reality. Calling all the service that gives Bitcoin fundamental value banks and express your hatred toward them is childish or plain dumb. Notice all the altcoin pump and dump? They're absolutely worthless unless they got listed on an exchange.... woohoo all the idiots then jump on bandwagon until they got dumped bags of dogshit. Maybe your shittycoin need to be on a real exchange, just so i can see your twisted face. What reality do you think I am not facing by asking for an argument to be clearly stated? And what makes you think I don't like exchanges? I'm no hater.. I have used two of the services listed there, sure I won't call them banks if that makes you think hatred, to me it doesn't but I guess I can see where that comes from. Anyway, sorry if I confused you, my point is that saying "We need everyone to accept bigger blocks because these companies said so" is not good enough for me. Also saying "we need bigger blocks because more bitcoin users is good" is not good enough for me, as I don't see the relation. You will also note I am not saying "We need smaller blocks" or "Bigger blocks over my dead body" or even "listen to me I know just what we need". Instead I'm saying, make a coherent argument please. Might be asking a lot around here I know but I have high expectations for all y'all. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin can support a large scale and it must, for all sorts of reasons. And before I state an opinion or refute anything, we see a big problem with your argument. You never say how bigger blocks is needed for large scale!! Look at e.g., USD. Block size = 0 forever and always, yet it seems a lot of people use it anyway. I mean, you could try to make the argument that a larger block size would tend towards quicker adoption or whatever, but .. you haven't tried. Amongst others: 1. Currencies have network effects. A currency that has few users is
simply not competitive with currencies that have many. There's no such
thing as a settlement currency for high value transactions only, as
evidenced by the ever-dropping importance of gold.
Few users != smaller blocks, as I said already. If you want to argue it is, go - do so. I'm listening.
2. A decentralised currency that the vast majority can't use doesn't
change the amount of centralisation in the world. Most people will still
end up using banks, with all the normal problems. You cannot solve a
problem by creating a theoretically pure solution that's out of reach of
ordinary people: just ask academic cryptographers!
It's not clear to me why different size blocks would change Jo Schmoe's use habits. Again, there are no blocks with fiat, and a lot of people still use it. I mean, I can think of some arguments a little bit but not enough to articulate them. If somebody can - I'm all ears. 3. Growth is a part of the social contract. It always has been. The best quote Gregory can find to suggest Satoshi wanted small blocks is a one sentence hypothetical example about what *might* happen if Bitcoin users became "tyrannical" as a result of non-financial transactions being stuffed in the block chain. That position makes sense because his scaling arguments assuming payment-network-sized traffic and throwing DNS systems or whatever into the mix could invalidate those arguments, in the absence of merged mining. But Satoshi did invent merged mining, and so there's no need for Bitcoin users to get "tyrannical": his original arguments still hold. 4. All the plans for some kind of ultra-throttled Bitcoin network used for infrequent transactions neglect to ask where the infrastructure for that will come from. The network of exchanges, payment processors and startups that are paying people to build infrastructure are all based on the assumption that the market will grow significantly. It's a gamble at best because Bitcoin's success is not guaranteed, but if the block chain cannot grow it's a gamble that is guaranteed to be lost. So why should anyone go through the massive hassle of setting up exchanges, without the lure of large future profits? 5. Bitcoin needs users, lots of them, for its political survival. There are many people out there who would like to see digital cash disappear, or be regulated out of existence. They will argue for that in front of governments and courts .... some already are. And if they're going to lose those arguments, the political and economic damage of getting rid of Bitcoin must be large enough to make people think twice. That means it needs supporters, it needs innovative services, it needs companies, and it needs legal users making legal payments: as many of them as possible. If Bitcoin is a tiny, obscure currency used by drug dealers and a handful of crypto-at-any-cost geeks, the cost of simply banning it outright will seem trivial and the hammer will drop. There won't be a large scale payment network OR a high-value settlement network. And then the world is really screwed, because nobody will get a second chance for a very long time. http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-July/009815.html[/center] Most actors in the space (exchanges, payment processors, big pool operators) have stated, in a scattershot way over time, that they support a blocksize increase. Also some well known people like Roger Ver and Andreas Antonopoulos support bigger blocks. I've seen no evidence that block size correlates to user base, nor that "most actors" support larger blocks. So, it looks like a bunch of banks want bigger blocks. Why? I'm not sure but it makes me not trust it. |
|
|
|
OMG this thread is LOLZ you trolls had me seriously believing there that people still used Winblows!!
try to work with professionnal device with proprietary DRIVERS on linux ... and after this, try to read proprietary FILES on free app from linux world ... ?? "Now try reading it - - - with your handcuffs OFF." Uh, ok, sure. I can do that, lol. |
|
|
|
Still don't understand why people don't want to let the block limit increase
Heya Off the top of my helmet: 1) They want it to be easier to maintain the full chain / full node, not harder 2) They don't think block size affects use / adoption rates (rather it affects logistics, fees) 3) They want to encourage alt-coin use  |
|
|
|
|
OMG this thread is LOLZ you trolls had me seriously believing there that people still used Winblows!!
Bwhahahaaa
I mean, this being the forum of open source currency and all, which only works because open source, and open source only could ever work for this kind of thing...
, anyway nicely done trollzz
|
|
|
|
Inflation is real, or should we say - hyperinflation. No wonder South American countries are starting to worry about cryptos to the point they are banning bitcoin.
Bolivia and Ecuador already banned it. And soon it will be more problematic for you to own bitcoin there that to have 1 kilogram of cocaine, crazy.
Also, seeing as every word or number can also be used as a bitcoin address, you will not be allowed to speak or write. |
|
|
|
China's government has high standards as to ingredients that they allow and don't allow as food additives.
Poisoned infant's formula. Unlabeled Viagra in health drinks. The above statement is delusional. The government can't enforce such standards. The delusion is thinking some people who don't care about you who wear hats that say "government" will make sure you and your family have good food. That is, and always will be, up to you. In 2015, more than 9.4 million Chinese students took what is basically the Chinese SAT test. Every single testing facility took countermeasures against cheating by using facial recognition-capable film surveillance. They even installed specialty materials to the windows and walls that blocked all electronic signal. Why are they so adamant about cheating? China believes that test scores alone should be the only thing universities consider when they decide who gets in - not monetary status or or familial ties.
Totalitarian police state is your idea of safety, freedom, and innovation  Triple lolzz. People in Beijing pay off their -kindergarten- teachers to get in. Monetary status and familial ties are always an issue. Anyway the totalitarian police state is exactly why Americans are moving to China and basically anywhere else outside of occupied north america. |
|
|
|
What about expatriation of funds? Is it easy for foreigners?
That would be a concern for anybody wanting to move to China for the short-term.
Not in this forum it wouldn't. |
|
|
|
It is clearly to set a strong example, They don't want 10 others to do the same. If they give 20 years some people will take their chance
Well they got 100 others to do the same. http://qntra.net/2015/06/online-drug-trade-booming-despite-silk-road-shut-down-ulbrichts-subsequent-life-sentence/Don't make the mistake of imagining a dying, insane, self-destructive monster to be making decisions for reasons. Sentences like Ross's and indeed most of the well-named criminal justice system (and yes it goes on up but I'll stop there) actually have the following logic to them: "Aaaarrrrghhh life sucks nobody loves me I'm so afraid heelllllp arrrrgghh kill mee" That's the real reasoning going on here behind this kind of decision. Not "to set an example" and most certainly not "to help society", though clearly nobody EVER has suggested the latter. |
|
|
|
Every month, your employer transfers Bitcoins into a time-locked address that can't be transferred out before you reach retirement age. You have the key to the address. You can verify the transfer on the blockchain.
No middle-men. No funny business. No brokers with pyramid/eyeball shaped logos. No "oops we went bankrupt and lost your retirement." No bail-ins. No raising the age of retirement.
Just Bitcoin.
Nice idea but you are kinda missing the whole point of "retirement", which is, a word you use to get idiots to give up their valuables today on promises of getting valuables back far into the future. |
|
|
|
Because China devalued the yuan against dollars. AAAnd, people in China don't give a shit about US dollars. Yesterday they bought a brad with the same amount of money than today or tomorrow. The internal market of China hasn't changed at all.
True, except they are used to massive inflation over there already, even worse than occupied north america. |
|
|
|
If we dip below 16k I think I'm going to sell half my stocks and move into physical gold. I'm not going through 08 again.
Heck no! I'm not going to sell, I'm going back the truck up and buy some more! It's going to be a great buying opportunity to get the really solid companies (e.g., Caterpillar) for very cheap, which doesn't happen very often! Don't be scared by a sell off, build up some fiat or bitcoin reserves now to deploy into stocks when the sales come around. .. To deploy into promises from brokers that they both hold and will act on promises from DTCC that they in turn hold and won't sell on reserve tokens from "solid companies" (e.g. Caterpillar). FTFY |
|
|
|
|
More nodes for my woodcutters:
"addr" : "199.231.215.252:8338", <-- dnsseed.woodcoin.org should resolve here
"addr" : "104.131.102.63:8338",
"addr" : "37.187.27.4:8338",
"addr" : "178.33.126.221:8338",
"addr" : "144.76.238.2:8338",
"addr" : "83.222.84.128:8338",
"addr" : "85.25.214.175:56885",
"addr" : "83.222.84.128:59139",
"addr" : "104.131.102.63:34259",
"addr" : "178.33.126.221:37391",
"addr" : "104.236.69.105:8338",
"addr" : "104.236.69.105:43566",
"addr" : "188.134.72.213:61647",
"addr" : "80.236.18.96:50271",
"addr" : "67.35.116.81:62825",
Keep up the good work; winter's a comin'.
|
|
|
|
|
These nodes have been very reliable:
37.187.27.4
85.25.214.175
104.236.69.105
144.76.238.2
82.247.134.167
178.33.126.221
Please post your connected node lists!
Thank you
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
