|
Any long termer is happy to see coins this cheap nowadays. IF you've even here since the 700 USD days you will be happy to get cheap coins. In a year or two we will hit ourselves against the table by not buying this low.
|
|
|
|
|
You need a good balance between a good product and good marketing. Sometimes aggressive marketing is more effective than a good quality product, but it can have consequences. Look at all the trash made in china that is causing accidents. You dont wanna go too cheap, so keep a good balance.
|
|
|
|
maybe i will not use bitcoin again  .. it's 5.5 BTC man  No, I will still using bitcoin. For some people 5.5 Bitcoin is not bigger amount but for some people its a lot of money ( like me ) i could get trauma if i get scammed for 5.5 Bitcoin maybe i will not using bitcoin again it means i will not using to invest my bitcoin to the sh*tt ponzi site but i still using bitcoin for transaction or etc because i love it i think 5.5 bitcoin is not a lot of money for Op  If you invest 5.5 Bitcoin into shit you can't complain if you get scammed. A real trauma would be, I don't know, losing a trezzor, or a paper wallet, or a HDD due failure or getting hacked, something unfortunate that makes you lose the coins, not some dumb investment move. |
|
|
|
That's indeed a bitch move OP, why say AKA? Your thread title is incorrect, I wonder if you will change it.
Bitpay hasn't said they support XT or Core by saying BIP101, but one would assume they mean Core+BIP101.
Fine. Here some clarifications. Is that better? Yes, that sounds definitely correct, but everyone that always mentions XT always forgets to mention all the extra "features" of XT that may not be as nice as a blocksize increase. |
|
|
|
So basically don’t use TOR if bitcoin is being DDOSed.
Gotcha.
What dumb workaround is this and how do you even know Bitcoin is being DDOSed in before hand? That just makes 0 sense. Also all the options are set on by default which will mean all noobs dont even know whats going on. |
|
|
|
If we bitcoin remains as is, soon transactions could take up to 1 hour to confirm, meaning bitcoin will become a useless micro payment tool..
But if we choose to increase the block size bitcoin will become more centralized?
So whats the solution?
My take on it is that bitcoin should remain as is, meaning the block sizes should remain the same, and transaction confirmation time is not an issue, since bitcoin was never intended to be a quickest way to send, decentralization was the main goal, lets not forget that.
So bitcoin transactions taking hours to be confirmed is nto an issue, bitcoin is the gold of the crypto world, other alt coins that are quicker to use an more practical for micro payment situations will emerge, but bitcoin should remain as the back bone of crypto currency.
Yes quick confirmation is essential for micro payments, like buying something at a store, you don't want to wait an hour to wait until the payment is confirmed. But bitcoin is not only used for micro payments, some people use bitcoin to send money over seas, as seen with cyprus and greece, sending millions or even billions of dollars any where around the world in a number of hours doesn't sound so bad does it?
So in my opinion bitcoin should be left untouched, soon new alt coins will fill in the void space beneath bitcoin and will complete the crypto world.
If XT wins Bitcoin will no longer be decentralized because few people will be able to run nodes. With LN we could have the very small transactions go through there, which sucks because ideally you would have everything in the chain with low fees but I don't see any solution for this. In any case I would rather have a decentralized Bitcoin with higher fees. |
|
|
|
Unfortunately only one of the two forks will win in the end, and the rest will have to follow the winning fork.
certainly you can keep both forks going. if people decide to keep the cores fork, even if XT gained the most nodes, they certainly could (although one or both would tank in price, and both would tank in value). keep the true bitcoin core going, even if XT the alt, gains traction and majority it'll be shortlived like all previous competing alts. If the fork happens I believe Core is the altcoin because XT is continuing the original vision of Satoshi. I think the Core developers should create an alt coin and that way they do not need to force their vision on everyone else, that way Bitcoin can stay true to the original vision of Satoshi. Furthermore if you believe that we must have the consensus of the core developers even if that consensus becomes impossible to reach, it is tantamount to centralization of power. The ability to hard fork in this way represents the check that we have against such power that a core development team could hold. This is part of what makes Bitcoin truly so decentralized. If you think that we should never hard fork it is the equivalent of saying that the core developers have absolute power over the development of the Bitcoin protocol. Or as Mike Hearn said "they believe that the only mechanism that Bitcoin has to keep them in check should never be used". If you really want to continuing using Core after the fork you can, that is part of the beauty of volunteerism. I suspect Core would become like an altcoin where people that really want to use third parties instead of transacting on the blockchain directly can do that. I just do not want to be "forced" to use third parties over Bitcoin, I would stop using Bitcoin entirely if that was the case and move to another cryptocurrency. To put it simply, if we do not increase the block size it will be more expensive and less people will be able to use it, that is to transact on the main chain directly. Instead we will be "forced" to us 3rd party payment processors. I would like to continue using Bitcoin directly and have the same level of transparency and security as the clearing houses. However if we increase the block size then it will be less expensive and more people will be able to use it. I do think that increasing the block size is the most decentralized option. Even if full nodes will only be able to be hosted on powerful computers. I am a miner myself and I do not think that this will effect decentralization of mining because miners do not run the full nodes, the pools do. The pools function in a similar way to a representative democracy, the difference being is that I can switch my miners over to another pool within seconds. It is important to remember that the Pools are most often different entities then the miners themselves. It is the miners that decide, not the pool operators, the pools serve the miners. I do urge everyone reads Mike Hearn's article on why we should fork. Please be rational and apply reason and decide for your self what kind of a Bitcoin you want. https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1I encourage you to read this article on why we shouldn't work: http://shitco.in/2015/08/19/the-bitcoin-xt-trojan/And I wonder where did satoshi said that he agreed with everything that Bitcoin XT does? Because I don't reckon reading anything about double spends, check points, tor blacklists and so on? |
|
|
|
|
That's indeed a bitch move OP, why say AKA? Your thread title is incorrect, I wonder if you will change it.
Bitpay hasn't said they support XT or Core by saying BIP101, but one would assume they mean Core+BIP101.
|
|
|
|
I think you'd find a lot more people interested in buying your book for $1 if they could pay using Bitcoin, especially on here. I'm not familiar with the website you're using, I imagine you have to use a card for the purchase? Anyways good luck!
Yeah, whats the point of making a Bitcoin book if you are going to sell it with the regular currency? To help Bitcoin usage if not exclusively sold on BTC I would at least accept BTC payments, just set an address, dont even need Bitpay. |
|
|
|
Welcome to the future of money Iron Mike! I thought the initial buzz was just a rumor apparently he really does like Bitcoin this is good for exposure. Where did Mike Tyson said anything about Bitcoin personally? I dont think he knows what it is, he just accepted to give his image in order to get $$ out of it. Anyway, whatever helps putting Bitcoin out there is a good idea. That ATM will surely stand out from the rest. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, anyone running a sync wallet is basically a node. Maybe there is a lot of people using the core wallet as their wallet and don't even know they are active nodes in the network . But yeah theres definitely tons of shill XT nodes anyway, it's obvious they are trying to create a snowball effect by making the number seem bigger than it is.
|
|
|
|
They are starting a little too late I would say
Big players like Intel will eventually come #1 miners, no way the developed nations will let Chinese mining and mining away as the mining gods of BTC. But I doubt some random mexican business is going to spend that much on it. |
|
|
|
That's it, I think. I won't sell my Bitcoins until I see this is over. What about you?
People are going to FUD at the smallest opportunity. Now is the blocksize debate, next will be the implementation of offchain features and other soft forks of the future.. there will always be FUD and the price will always be manipulated as long as you are an early investor and we are all still early investors. |
|
|
|
|
Not any time soon. I would stay bulllish as hell now that we'll see lower prices thanks to the blocksize debate and people having doubts (ignore them they are clueless and bitcoin will live on one way or another). Keep buying monthly, all month is bull month.
|
|
|
|
|
The hate is coming from all the "bonuses" that Gavincoin and Hearncoin are introducing beside the blocksize increase. I don't see the core devs NOT wanting to increase the blocksize, they want it eventually raised too, the main hate for them is coming from non blocksize related "features".
|
|
|
|
Your coins will still work on XT, but that shouldn't be your main concern.
I personally think 8MB blocks are superior to 1MB, but no way in hell do I think 8MB and a divided community is better than 1MB with an opportunity to compromise. When it comes down to it, the community is the most valuable variable to the value of Bitcoin. Without an active group of people believing in the value, Bitcoin will die. I see no reason to alienate certain members of the Bitcoin community when there is no pressing reason to do so.
If the XT fork was the same as Core but with a higher blocksize then there would be no controversy, the main problem is Gavin and Hearn are trying to pass a lot of shit in between the code with the excuse of the so called doomsday if we don't raise the blocksize limit about now. And just to go on the record for the sheep.... we agree with the above highlight. We don't WANT the blacklisting / IP tracking etc. But we will have our bitcoin. And if the Very Powerful wolves don't get some of what they want - then they will do away with our bitcoin and create something even more controlling - maybe even limiting our access to various functions (research the itbit setup for example). So we are not naive enough to not realize that Mike & Gavin are embedding $#IT that isn't good for us - but realize that part of the reason they are doing it is because they are under immense pressure to compromise with the wolf lobby. So our ultimate desire is that they (and all the voices that influence this) do give a good fight / negotiation into limiting the bad stuff - but we do still want our bitcoin - and in the end - the great scheme of things is that in this Age, which is not yet at an end, the finances are ultimately run by the Wolves. Soon as everyone accepts and understands that and simply treats it like realistically for what it is - with intelligent positioning/negotiation/manipulation to minimize the damage, but still achieve the goal - then the quicker this moves along and back to business. Peace, -d This is a pussy mindset. 0% compromise with the powers that be. We want a free and independent Bitcoin, fight till the end for it, no ifs. Anything else is a big failure and satoshi will be crying in anonymity (im asuming he isn't going to come back ever again in a legitimate way using his PGP key this point). |
|
|
|
|
In the future we are going to see 100% of camsites like livejasmin, camwither or chaturbate moving millions of BTC daily because all those sites will eventually move once we can deal with transactions better. People will no longer have to wait for te paycheck to arrive, you will have the money instantly in your wallet.
|
|
|
|
Like many others, I'd love to see the block size go to 8MB soon. But Mike Hearn is trying to sneak his very much hated blacklist code in there at the same time. If XT were about blocksize only, I'd jump on it. However, now that it has been shown to carry a sweet little hidden blacklist module - I will never trust anything from Mike Hearn ever again. That is shocking BS and serious dirty business. Hearn, Gavin and anyone who touches that strategy is fundamentally corrupt.
XT is dead. Hearn is dead. That game is OVER.
Noone sneaked shit... But nice try to repeat the FUD Lol do they pay you to shill XT? Yes they did sneak shit: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010386.htmlAlso look at the links above, it's obvious what's going on now. I can't personally never and I say never accept that on the Bitcoin code. |
|
|
|
|
Yep, I was running XT but after reading this im back to core. I would rather have privacy than being able to globally broadcast all over the planet if I bought a cup of coffee or not (even tho the LN solution still sucks and I would rather have it all on-chain)
|
|
|
|
Your coins will still work on XT, but that shouldn't be your main concern.
I personally think 8MB blocks are superior to 1MB, but no way in hell do I think 8MB and a divided community is better than 1MB with an opportunity to compromise. When it comes down to it, the community is the most valuable variable to the value of Bitcoin. Without an active group of people believing in the value, Bitcoin will die. I see no reason to alienate certain members of the Bitcoin community when there is no pressing reason to do so.
If the XT fork was the same as Core but with a higher blocksize then there would be no controversy, the main problem is Gavin and Hearn are trying to pass a lot of shit in between the code with the excuse of the so called doomsday if we don't raise the blocksize limit about now. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
