Unfortunately I've had this issue as well (10mins though not 30 lol)
10 minutes is an awfully long time to sit around and wait for your payment to be approved when you could simply swipe your credit card or hand over cash, for this reason I never use BTC in the real world.
A credit card transaction takes months to be confirmed. Accepting a bitcoin transaction with 0 confirmations is safer than accepting a credit card transaction. In your personal experience, which merchants are insisting on confirmation ? I've used lots of websites that wait on at least one confirmation. The only exceptions seem to be when someone uses BitPay ot Coinbase. But lots of business would rather accept Bitcoin on their own and not pay processing fees. We will see how greenaddress.it ends up working out. It could be quite good if people use it. |
|
|
|
If we had shorter block times then we would see more orphaned blocks and more orphaned chains. If we had a 30 second block time then 20 confirmations would be less secure then one confirmation as it is now. 20 confirmations would be less secure then a 0/unconfirmed TX as it is now.
 But orphans don't affect the people who really matter: the users of the currency. Sure some hash gets wasted. But if usability increases don't you think it's worth it? Just one confirmation eliminates a whole category of unconfirmed transaction double spend attacks that are possible. Having that one confirmation 5-10 times quicker on average would be a big benefit. Even if the total time you would need to wait to reach full double spend security remains the same. For some transactions like a coffee, unconfirmed might be fine. But for others 1 confirmation is enough. Having that one confirmation come fast enough that you rarely if ever need to wait a very long time is an improvement. And when you're buying a house or something, you end up waiting the same amount of time anyway, so in that case it's a wash. I'm surprised that more people in Bitcoin aren't trying to get them to change the block target time next time a hard fork gets done(which sounds like one will be happening in the near future anyway according to Gavin). If the only downside of faster blocks is wasted hash, why does anyone care? These hundred million dollar mining corporations shouldn't be a concern to you. The people who actually want to use Bitcoin as their daily use currency and have it work as best as it can should be the ones you're concerned with. |
|
|
|
who sell at these prices ....? can no longer pay their electricity for mining  Network Hash Rate: 27.05 MH/secBlock Found: about a minute ago Difficulty: 1701572249Blockchain Height: 257768 Last Reward: 13.7911 XMR Perhaps someone has access to their companies server farm and is 'borrowing' them for a little XMR mining?  |
|
|
|
Can somebody please post a transaction to demonstrate this long verification time? I'm just not seeing it.
Unless you're talking about unconfirmed transaction propegation I find it hard to beleive that you've never been the victim of a 30 minute plus wait time for blocks. Especially considering 30 minute blocks are not even that rare at all, and 1 hour+ blocks have been observed often enough. Just look at https://blockchain.info/ once in a while and you'll constantly see long block times. Just now I clicked in and we see this: 325004 2 minutes 990 13,547.15 BTC GHash.IO 340.81 325003 27 minutes 105 1,036.64 BTC Unknown with 1AcAj9p Address 58.93 325002 29 minutes 403 2,056.85 BTC KnCMiner 239.75 325001 36 minutes 1127 5,914.54 BTC Discus Fish 593.95 325000 1 hour 2 minutes 620 4,158.71 BTC Eligius 290.01 324999 1 hour 17 minutes I bolded long block gaps. First one is 25 minutes and the second one is 26 minutes. Everyone I know who's used Bitcoin knows about the long block times, so I don't understand where you're coming from unless you're talking about unconfirmed tx. Obviously the block time target is 10 minutes. But variance dictates that we often see block times much shorter and much longer than that. With the long ones being the issue of course. |
|
|
|
It would be useful to have a system where blocks were found more often but the reward was smaller. Say, one block every 30 seconds. The original worry was that miners wouldn't find out about the new blocks fast enough, and they'd waste effort building on top of orphaned blocks. But now that all useful mining is centralized, the big guys have enough connectivity to pass around their new blocks fast. As a miner, you want your new block to reach other big miners as fast as possible, and you want to hear about new blocks as fast as possible. So miners will cooperate in passing new blocks around fast, and all the big farms will send directly to each other.
Yes, shorter block times are clearly superior but too many people refuse to acknowledge that fact it the Bitcoin world. Probably because it would involve acknowledging that an alt implemented the protocol better. |
|
|
|
Is this coin already part of the jl7777 network?
Yes and in your opinion why is the price plummeting? Price is plummeting because someone had 200+ btc worth of buy walls up to 0.0007 btc or so on poloniex, and after the "announcement" was cancelled, all buy walls were pulled. Now there is a total of about 20 btc in buy orders on poloniex, ergo, price goes down. If you trust in the coin tech and developer, buy some while they're cheap. If not, then sell at a loss I guess... Can attest to this. I saw it all with my own eyes. Looks to be exactly what happened. Once the 200 BTC in buys disappeared people panic sold. Looks to be as simple as that. |
|
|
|
When supertraders going to pay?  Not sure, but considering they mentioned that they are starting with a 10 BTC portfolio I wouldn't get my expectations up for big returns too quickly. Slow and steady is not a bad way to do it. Plus the markets aren't exactly on fire lately anyway. |
|
|
|
The problem is that a lot of people were sold on Bitcoin being the future of consumer payments on a massive scale. Which as we all know simply isn't going to be the case(and that's fine). Just read reddit's r/bitcoin to see the masses suddenly realizing that Bitcoin itself isn't going to replace their credit card.
If that is the case, then they are being misinformed. There is no reason why Bitcoin can't be the future of consumer payments, and there is no reason why it can't replace credit cards. BTW, the confirmation time in a credit card transaction is 90 days (or longer). That's how long it takes for a merchant to know that he actually has the money. It takes an average of 10 minutes for a Bitcoin confirmation, but a merchant doesn't have to wait for a confirmation, just like in a credit card transaction. The problem is that a lot of people were sold on Bitcoin being the future of consumer payments on a massive scale. Which as we all know simply isn't going to be the case(and that's fine). Just read reddit's r/bitcoin to see the masses suddenly realizing that Bitcoin itself isn't going to replace their credit card. We all simply know that isn't going to be the case? How so? Read up on current development, future development plans, and third party tools in development now. There's a vast difference between what Bitcoin can do at this moment and what it can do in the fullness of time (or even in the next three years). Hell, the bulk of the worries continually shouted in threads like this (frequently as if the idea was brand new) are discussed in the freaking original white paper, along with potential solutions. People are building things now that will improve the consumer experience for Bitcoin. But for a consumer getting 2-5% cash back or rewards by using a credit card it's going to be hard for even the slickest of innovations to beat that. I haven't heard many people arguing this for a while. Even in the Rise and Rise of Bitcoin Erik Voorhees of all people says he doesn't expect mass adoption of Bitcoin in western countries with their modern banking systems. Doesn't mean I don't think people can't build projects that make crypto easier to use for regular people so that they can use it as a daily use currency. I'm working on such a project myself at the moment in fact. But I don't expect to be able to sell Bitcoin to someone going shopping at the mall and getting cash back on their credit card. But crypto can be used in many ways, just because it can't win in every category doesn't mean that it can't gain more adoption in other areas over time. |
|
|
|
CZ can you please elaborate on the deal that you did not accept? i.e. who specifically was the "outside" investor and what did they want?
+1 I have no INSIDE INFORMATION, but has anyone heard of a confidentiality agreement? I do business in the solar industry, no one discusses anything without one. I would expect any serious investor to want one. If its the case here, I don't think we will told any more than we already have. So lets move on. Jon  I doubt seriously there is such a thing in a decentralized open source community project, is there? Even if so, we the stakeholders are the investors and should know these dealings: hence "CZ's pre-announcement". These announcements and dealings greatly affect whether and how I/we should increase or decrease stake and trust in this particular investment and community. Who is CZ keeping a secret/protection from, us? Edit: it is clear imo that this "deal" has put quite a bit of sell pressure on the market and those of us who don't know what went down are out of luck. Although the investment (money) side of it is important, more so is the trust in having a level playing field in the future. I think it would be wise for the devs to be very clear on what happened. Hmm, I don't know. Sounds like it was a private offer to CZ. I don't really see much benefit to making it public tbh. Sounds like it will just stir up more drama. Some people will be for it and some will be against it, but it's already been decided by CZ so people will just be fighting over nothing. I see the merit in what you mean with the whole decentralized open source community project thing though. |
|
|
|
|
I'd say we're definitely in the early majority period already. Bitcoin is very well known and has been used in one way or the other by lots of people by now. The early adopters were all here on this forum before early-mid 2013.
|
|
|
|
I just don't see the problem here and why people seem to make such a big deal about it. Maybe I'm crazy.
If you are buying a coffee, the merchant can certainly take the risk of a double spend attempt. I mean... seriously, who is going to try to double spend a $2 item.
If you are buying something expensive, there is usually paperwork that needs to be filled out anyway, so you have plenty of time to get confirmations.
There are also several other ways Bitcoin can be used (perhaps without all of it's advantages) so that there is no risk of a zero confirmation double spend attempt.
If you are a regular customer of a business, you could purchase gift cards with Bitcoin and then use those.
You could also set up an account with the business where you deposit a certain amount of coins to an address controlled by the business. As you make purchases, the shop slowly drains your "account" of Bitcoins. Should you choose to quit shopping there forever, your remaining bitcoins will be refunded to you.
Banks could issue debit cards which work with the already existing infrastructure and you could fund those cards with Bitcoin instead of fiat.
Banks could issue credit cards which work with the already existing infrastructure and you could pay off your monthly balance with Bitcoin.
You could just provide the merchant with some ID. This is how merchants have accepted bank checks for years.
Finally, if you absolutely need every advantage of a pure Bitcoin transaction, yet you are dealing with a sizable amount and a merchant who requires confirmations, you should simply be patient and wait. Typically you won't be waiting long. This is one of the tradeoffs for making a pure Bitcoin transaction while getting all the other advantages of Bitcoin.
I just don't see many real life situations that would involve the large amounts of money required for the vendor to need several confirmations that would also for some odd reason need to happen immediately!
Mountains out of molehills...
The problem is that a lot of people were sold on Bitcoin being the future of consumer payments on a massive scale. Which as we all know simply isn't going to be the case(and that's fine). Just read reddit's r/bitcoin to see the masses suddenly realizing that Bitcoin itself isn't going to replace their credit card. |
|
|
|
this is probably a meaningless post here, since everyone talks about crypto
but ive reasoned im giving up on listening to these forums and caring about crypto all together,
i dont speak for everyone obviusly but specifically the altcoin community
is filled with a lot of greed
what i see is a few group of people cloning coins over and over again, creating whatever shady method to get the most of their own coin, then dumping it
and repeating
while the supporters are just tryin to make money in the proccess, which is kind of lame since a majority lose money to the devs
if one coin wins this at some poitn i hope its dogecoin, because its funny and doesnt involve deaththreats from the community
and my point about the altcoin cloning is probably obvious to anyone who has been readin the altcoin forums lon enough but everytime i check them i just et miserable and feel bad for the people who are posting their hatred against devs
but whatever if someone finds it enjoyable to follow / mine / trade altcoins its good for them jus tspeaking for myself
Not all projects out there are run by greedy people just out to make a buck. Maybe 99% of them are, but there are some gems out there if you're willing to sift through the shit. And if you're not that's understandable and I don't really blame you. |
|
|
|
LOL at guys still talking about buywall... lets talk about near future development, that is something everyone would like to hear more about.
On freenode channel ##supernet(not #supernet) people can come and watch or assist in the development and testing of superNET. Lots of testing going on everyday and I know they need more people to donate their time and their servers to test the network. |
|
|
|
Also, freeciv is a open sauce project that could be incorporated somehow?
if this ends up incorporating civ-like features that would be awesome!  |
|
|
|
I fear that your plan of offering in game money for time spent playing encourages bots and multi accounts to harvest gold. Instead have you considered a way of offering the players regular tasks to earn gold in the same way Moshi Monsters offers players simple Maths and English in exchange for their ingame currency.
Perhaps to mitigate bots and such the distribution of currency can be linked to their in game reputation system. Since it's a primarily social game from the sounds of it I think bots will have a hard time interacting with real humans. |
|
|
|
NXT sounded too good to be true. So when you saw that it was real and actually existed you shouldn't have sold(of course you know this now and this is the point of the thread).
But most IPOs turn out to be shit. I think people should be more likely to sell them as soon as they can rather to hold them. NXT was a special case as it was touting itself to be a game changer. Most IPOs are not ambitious as NXT was.
Look at the IPOs that we've seen recently - Craigscoin? Craigslist on the blockchain? Who gives a shit. Archcoin? "The Profit Network"? No comment.
If a project is really attempting to build a next generation crypto like NXT was, then yeah, you should probably hold it. Especially hold it if you see that the project is not just vaporware.
The last IPO I can remember that actually seems to be doing good things is VIA with their counterparty alternative. And the fact that they have Peter Todd coming out with his research like he did recently benefits everyone. Was very happy to read that when I saw it. I've never bought any IPO though including VIA, and I don't own any VIA but I'm happy that good things are coming out of their project.
Storj is another one actually. And Ethereum. So yeah, I guess there are a few. As long as people can tell the difference between a Storj and another one of Bittrex's flavours of the week, then putting some money down on good projects could be a good thing. Personally I don't think it's hard to tell when a project is shit, but obviously that's not the case when hundreds, or even thousands of BTC get funneled in to all these Bittrex IPOs.
If another IPO comes out promising things like NXT did on that sort of wildly ambitious scale, I might consider buying a little bit if the people behind the project seem sincere. But if you're the type of person who can't tell the different between a NXT type of IPO and the next money grab, then just don't bother and save your money is my advise.
what you think with Crypti ( xcr ) ? I don't know too much about it, but I think their intentions sounds good. Wanting to create a currency that actually gets used and adopted by consumers and merchants is on the right track for sure. Only thing I don't really get is the proof of address part. I don't know who validates that proof, whether it's a central authority or not. Even if it is a central authority for the short term that's not necessarily too bad or anything. But in the long term there should be plans to decentralise that part of it I think. |
|
|
|
|
Well it would make sense and be consistent with BM's rhetoric about wanting full government involvement and regulation of all crypto. Obviously anonymous cryptos would throw a wrench in those plans.
|
|
|
|
So, now, as moneroman88, you have both said that you posted it for messing with the rest AND that you never posted such a thing in the first place. Are you going to rush and delete that post too? Yes, I posted that to make the NXT retards think I am BM. Of course I am not BM. I've admitted to be Come-from-Above earlier. This entire community is ridiculous.
hint: it;s already screencapped As you can clearly see I posted that particular comment to make fun of CoinHoarder's entirely stupid accusations, just like I'm playing with you right now. I could care less what you think of me. I am neither B-M nor C-F-A, nor B-C-X or N-S-A. I am what I am, that's Moneroman. Is your official claim that you don't have an older established bitcointalk account that came before you creating this one? Or do you acknowledge that you have one but just claim that you're not BM, CFA ect? |
|
|
|
xpool.net is now operating on donations. Zero Fees! Nice! I hope to see some more people hashing as well as spreading the hash out a bit more. |
|
|
|
i did the same and had sold out for 80 bucks or something and i could have had like 28 grand for one coin not long ago..
it happens doing this shit ..what can you do ?
Think about all the people that dumped LTC at $0.25 only to see it hit $50.00 or the guy that bought a well used 6990 from Smoothie for 25,000 LTC. That was a $1.25 Million GPU at LTC peak. ~BCX~ I sold LTC at 0.05 on BTC-e way back. Also tried to mine some on my 4850 but stopped after a day because I didn't like the fact that it was making it run so hot.  LTC for pennies was the best investment opportunity for anyone other than people who could have bought BTC back in 2009/10. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
