I don't want bigger blocks. The consensus does not want bigger blocks.
As block rewards drop to zero transaction fees will be the only thing left to pay miners to secure and run the network. Increasing block size jeopardizes this important mechanism.
That's 100 years away. If bitcoin is still a thing in 100 years, transaction fees for a block would probably worth more than a block reward today. |
|
|
|
|
r/bitcoin is toxic, it's full of high school kids that prefer to bash and berate other posters instead of focusing on anything constructive.
Let them boil in their own stew, it's better here at bitcointalk.
|
|
|
|
Framing content is strictly prohibited by many ad networks, including google adsense. Also asking or suggesting users to click on an ad is also prohibited. However many faucet owners still do this. It's only a matter of time before they are caught, people with unusually high click through rates usually get checked by google. Some faucet owners even have scripts that require the user to click an ad before they can claim. Just last year a 19 year old lost $40K to google because he was asking/forcing people to click his ads. If your revenue gets large enough, they'll check you out. http://www.businessinsider.com/19-year-old-lost-46000-in-google-adsense-rules-ban-2014-8 |
|
|
|
Distribution of power is needed. It is needed in bitcoin's development and it is needed in it's communities. We can't have 3 people (Gavin, Hern & Theymos) running everything. This is why I am more towards core (more developers), and I do support a blocksize increase but not the way Gavin and Hearn are trying to do it. Theymos should hand off r/bitcoin to someone else for the good of bitcoin. He'll still have bitcointalk, which is way cooler than reddit anyways  |
|
|
|
|
I like the script, and the graphics are cool. Very primedice-ish in layout and style.
I noticed one small bug, sometimes the user's balance will update as soon as you click the spin button. So they will know the outcome of the spin prior to seeing the outcome. Not a big issue, but just something I noticed.
|
|
|
|
2020 is not that far it will stick to 500.
You're right it's not that far away, but there will be two halvings during that time period. One in 2016 and again in 2020. Block rewards will only be 6.25BTC then. |
|
|
|
Considering the non-malicious nature of the email and the writing style I believe it is Satoshi. If someone stole satoshi's identity they would do something way more extreme than debate blocksize. It's good to be skeptical but also good not to dismiss this sort've thing outright.
For example? He does sort of have a point. On the flip-side I would say why not discuss it with the Mike Hearn and Gavin offline though ? What if he is? I haven't heard much from Gavin or Mike since the alleged satoshi email... |
|
|
|
I don't think this is legit, and if he really wanted to give his opinion, don't you think he would anticipate people not believing into this message and because of this, he would have singed this message. And spare me of that BS how Satoshi never signed his messages, this is way to important and I don't see anybody would expect that community acts on this unsigned message. I don't think it is him because I don't think he would get himself involved in the blocksize debate. Bitcoin is an experiment to him and he needs to see if it can work without centralized interference. What is very interesting though is the email address, do we have any records of his vistomail being hacked or ever used before like this? It seems unlikely that a hacker gained access to his email to only post this and not try any other schemes with access to such an important email address. Well seeing as his email address satoshin@gmx.com was hacked, then we haveto assume that the vistomail one was too. Maybe the gmx.com email address was setup as a "recovery email address" for the vistomail account, so when the hacker compromised the gmx account he was also able to compromise the vistomail one via "forgot password". If Satoshi were to ever return, he would provide significant proof that it is him with signed messages etc. So the hacker just held onto the vistomail account for over a year and decided yesterday after Mike's article on medium.com was the perfect time to execute his attack of a post to the mailing list? Wouldn't the hacker rather try to profit by posting it for sale, or leaking old messages, etc.? |
|
|
|
I don't think this is legit, and if he really wanted to give his opinion, don't you think he would anticipate people not believing into this message and because of this, he would have singed this message. And spare me of that BS how Satoshi never signed his messages, this is way to important and I don't see anybody would expect that community acts on this unsigned message. I don't think it is him because I don't think he would get himself involved in the blocksize debate. Bitcoin is an experiment to him and he needs to see if it can work without centralized interference. What is very interesting though is the email address, do we have any records of his vistomail being hacked or ever used before like this? It seems unlikely that a hacker gained access to his email to only post this and not try any other schemes with access to such an important email address. |
|
|
|
Well that was some good fun for a Sunday morning! I was able to 1.5x the giveaway amount   |
|
|
|
|
0.01 received to my primedice account. Very nice, thank you guys for having these giveaways! I'm very much looking forward to the next PD update.
|
|
|
|
Of course it's profitable! Selling the recipe of success for 0,05 BTC  Prozet is the referral king As for the OP, depending on how you do it, yea it can be profitable. There are a lot of fly-by-night faucets that open up for a day or two and they never refill and they close. You have to set your payouts right, and you need consistent traffic. |
|
|
|
|
It could be the end of Gavin and Mike in the bitcoin developing world. If everyone stays with core, that is. I don't believe the developer base for XT is as large as it is for bitcoin core.
|
|
|
|
Busta bit gets my blood pumping
Haha I thought that was only me, it really does get me on the edge of my seat when I play. Busta bit is a my favorite of them all. What is busta bit? what do you have to do? Bustabit used to be called moneypot. It's a game where you place a bet and then the counter begins to climb. At some point randomly the climb will stop (bust). The object is to hit the "cash out" button before it stops. The higher the counter gets, the more money you make. It really is quite fun. bustabit.com |
|
|
|
Busta bit gets my blood pumping
Haha I thought that was only me, it really does get me on the edge of my seat when I play. Busta bit is a my favorite of them all. |
|
|
|
however in this case you can prove its not him with a 30sec google search and it has little to do with the lack of any key Please explain. How can you 100% prove that it's not him from a google search? What are you google searching? Are you analyzing his previous writings? |
|
|
|
Problem with that post is you can't prove its *not* him.
For all we know he dumped all the priv keys for everything when he decided to quit, wallets, accounts, PGP key and all. We've all done similar at some point in our lives, made a decision with a sure mind, and removed all ability to recover it, burned the bridge so to speak.
If those accounts had indeed been compromised, I think it's fair to assume that the attackers of those accounts would "chime in" as Satoshi more than just twice. Any activity on those accounts has the power to influence, or at least sow the seed of doubt/FUD which the attackers could then profit.
Yet since he left, we've seen 1 occurrence to clear Dorian's name, and this today expressing his disappointment on the block size issue. If anyone other than Satoshi held control of those accounts, I wager that position would be milked dry for personal gain.
You make a very good point, we don't know if it wasn't him and if an attacker did have access to his email, why is this the only time he is trying to sway public opinion? I don't think it's him, because I don't think he would get involved with the blockchain debate. I'd like to hear what Gavin thinks about all this. Does he think it's Satoshi? And if so, Satoshi handed him the torch and then this email comes out scolding him, it's quite a dramatic turn of events. |
|
|
|
If people, they learn that the BIP101 is in discussion between developpers for Bitcoin Core to adopt a strategy to raise the block size. So, wait the september and it will be done for integration. That's the modification that all the chinese pools and exchanges agreed to and signed on right? The 8MB limit? |
|
|
|
So now, Bitcoin XT (what a crappy name, btw) is out of the box.
I don't think they just chose that name because they thought it was cool. If I recall correctly, XT was a build off of Bitcoin QT and the name is just a naming convention from previous versions. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks, yea the only way I was able to fix it was by sending additional funds so I could increase the fee.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
