|
As I said before , miners will reduce fees when they notice that lesser people are offering those fees.
The propogation of a transaction should be treated like any service , whose price is decided by demand.
If there are too high fees , with nobody willing to accept the fees , they will reduce over time as miners realise that they would earn more with more transactions.
|
|
|
|
Miners are overwhelmingly paid by the automatic block reward, and not from transaction fees. This is a form of inflation in the bitcoin economy.
What do you mean by inflation ? The block reward continuously halves to prevent inflation. The fees are in place to ensure that the incentive to maintain the network remains even after the block reward is negligible. |
|
|
|
In terms of USD value are transaction fees going to get more expensive over time? At ~13 cents USD they're pretty high for transactions under $10. Now this doesn't affect me personally. But we see a lot of talk about bitcoin helping out the unbanked, and bringing bitcoin to Africa and such, and higher transaction fees are really going to limit bitcoin's potential in certain markets.
Do you think at some point we'll see miners voluntarily reduce transaction fees? Or perhaps the opposite, more and more miners not including low fee transactions thus driving the price up.
As the market is now, are we heading towards increases? Or do you think the transaction fee issue is one that will be resolved on it's own? I think some people might underestimate how much of a limiting factor it could be.
Sooner or later , people will stop offering such high fees and miners will be forced to accept these lower fees. This may not happen in the short term , but when the fees exceed around 25c , it will hit a hard cap and fees will definitely reduce. |
|
|
|
Stop thinking in terms of USD. Soon the USD will have no value to speak of. Thinking in terms of BTC will be far more fruitful.
But the utility of Bitcoin will continue increasing. Currently , if you decide to buy a mug , you will pay transaction fees of around 2.5% What happens when the cost of that mug in Bitcoin is lesser , but the transaction fees are the same ? At the current rate , Bitcoin may exceed Paypal in transaction fees for microtransactions. That would go directly against what Bitcoin is for. So , rephrasing his question against your nitpicking , "Will the value of transaction fees be expected to increase over time in comparison to the goods we buy with them ?" |
|
|
|
I'm really surprised more people aren't talking about this or doing something about it.
What do you suggest we do? Typically, there has been a dominant mining group since the mining pool concept was created. Many of us have tried (failed) to point out that the centralization of hash rate is undesirable, yet we continue to see it. I expect a 51% attack at some point in Bitcoin's future. It won't kill Bitcoin, only set it back while hopefully bringing more attention to working towards better decentralization practices. It may however weaken Bitcoin enough for another innovative cryptocurrency to jump it. Presumably one which is more resilient to 51% attacks. |
|
|
|
is tapatalk support in this forum? dedicated apps for bitcointalk forum is good idea hope we'll see in near future maybe we can get help from any android developer in this forum last updated : November 13th 2013  Let me quote myself :- The only app I can find has generally bad play store reviews and tonnes of reported bugs. I don't really want to input my username and password onto any of them either.
That app is not used much , so I don't really trust it enough to input my username and password. Secondly , all the reviews talk about the huge number of bugs , and the only 4-star review criticizes it for not being good and lauds it for "being a good effort" |
|
|
|
Finally , once you cross 100 activity, your cooldown will be 12 seconds , dropping by 1 second for every additional activity , down to 4 seconds.
I never realised that. Four seconds is definitely a reasonable figure. I certainly haven't been restricted by this mechanism, not since I was a newbie anyway. Thanks for sharing that info! Nobody will ever need less than 10 seconds. I honestly cannot think of a scenario where a person who is not a spam-bot can formulate two replies in under 10 seconds. Even if it is a one line answer to a quick question , it should always take a minimum of 10 seconds to click the topic , think about the answer, click reply , type that one line and post it. |
|
|
|
A coin organization, that new coin devīs could go to and get some kind of "stamp of approval" / certification, so alt-coin interested people would have a much better idea witch coins to mine/buy/support.
Possible even start a new coin named coinorg for this purpose.
That would be really easy to fall prey to corruption. Currently , something similar happens. One of the popular exchanges ( I don't remember which ) would charge a moderately high sum of BTC , just to register your coin. This would make it way worse as a clone could make minor changes get it approved and then dump. The organization would be very hard to keep from corruption. |
|
|
|
I've noticed it will pull/show that it is "finding" ~ 0.404% of the addresses generated when searching for the prefix of "1" or 0.389% when searching with 1[2-9A-P]. I did some more testing as well and found 1[1-9A-Za-z] found at ~0.399%, but 12 found at ~0.402% so I'm pretty sure that vanitygen is finding more than what is being reported (especially when using the prefix of just 1) and that the maximum addresses it can output when hashing is around 0.4% of the hashes generated, I might take a look at the vanitygen source tomorrow and see if I can find a way to have it output all found addresses to a text file instead of only the hashes it finds and possibly update oclvanitygen to include regex searching, if I can I would be able to have oclvanity generate about 2 million addresses per second (maybe less considering the regex) and my PHP script is able to check about 2 million/second as is. That would equate out to be about
120 million addresses per minute
7.2 billion addresses per hour
172.8 billion addresses per day
1.2 trillion addresses per week
62.9 trillion addresses per year (or 62,899,200,000,000 per year using a AMD Athlon II x4 760k, 4GB of 1600mhz RAM, and a nvidia GT 440).
as earlier discussed in this thread because of log(58^34) / log(2) ~= 200 a single bitcoin private key is actually only about 200 bits not 256 bits, following this 2^200 is ~= 1.606938e+60 or 1,606,938,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
1.606938e+60 / 62.9 trillion = 2.554783e+46 years to generate the entire bitcoin keyspace so its still unreasonable to believe that I will ever find an address that contains bitcoins.
Still, I am going to continue to run and continue to develop the script mainly because its fun and challenging and a great learning experience learning how the keys are actually created, the checksum and learning about ECDSA encryption which I have not personally dealt with before now.
Only difficult part tomorrow is if I do get oclvanitygen modified and rebuilt and it does produce 2Mkey/s output to a text file... I'm going to run out of harddrive space on my 2nd partition which is running the program in approx 98.304 seconds (@ 100MB/800K keys) so I may have to break out one of the 1TB drives for this project lol (although even 1TB will fill up in ~ 69 minutes).
EDIT - I did just realize I have only been using vanitygen not vanitygen64. With vanitygen64 I am still only "finding" ~ 0.4% of the generated addresses but I am generating at a faster rate and "finding" ~ 750 addresses per second.
33.5 million BTC address have ever had any amount of Bitcoin in them. 2.55e+46/33.5 million = 7.5e+38 That makes it a huge total of 7.5e+38 years to find an address on average that has had any part of a bitcoin in it , ever. To put this in perspective , if you took 21 million Bitcoins and started sending 1 satoshi per address to random addresses , you would be able to cover only 2.1e+15 addresses , not even being near to the chance of reaching an address. |
|
|
|
Many of them are used by the dice sites and other gambling ventures, and I am afraid that more than 90% of them might not be active now. Considering that some 1 million people possess Bitcoins now, the real figure might be somewhere between 3 and 5 million wallets. Even though they may be inactive , this is the number I was looking for. Thanks qwerty  |
|
|
|
I see this message "The last posting from your IP was less than 360 seconds ago. Please try again later."
but my last message was several days ago, and overtaking your ideas:
1 - I have 3 days ago installed windows, where only Chrome\FF with all plugins disabled (Flash etc.)
2 - My current IP has not changed in a few days, and it dedicated IP not shared
so can this be forum bug?.. if no, I am very interested to see this message what was posted from my IP 360 sec ago
It is quite confusing , as it includes logins , PMs and posts. Don't worry , just continue posting for a couple of weeks and it will stop happening as your activity reduces. Once you cross 15 activity , your post cooldown shall become (90 - activity) , 75 seconds. Once you cross 60 activity , your post cooldown shall become around 30 seconds. Finally , once you cross 100 activity, your cooldown will be 12 seconds , dropping by 1 second for every additional activity , down to 4 seconds. At around 60 activity itself , you will have a short enough interval such that it won't really matter. Continue posting and contributing , your post interval shall reduce rapidly. |
|
|
|
It's really just bad forum etiquette, there's no need to post multiple times when you can just say it all at once.
PG is a special case and I really do not see too many other s doing this. ~BCX~ Precisely. This is the reason why he has the highest post count by a large margin. Using multiple posts rather than a single post. However , he has 5 posts in a row , that are contributive and build up more and more evidence , in the example you showed. The posts were over around 1 and a half hours , showing that they were well deliberated and thought over over some time. I'm not condoning it , but it is not too harmful to the forums. On the other hand , right after his 5 posts , another member made 3 posts in around 5 minutes. All of them had no substance , just with a single meaningless line and a Bitcoin address. We really need to crack down on the latter rather than the forums. |
|
|
|
I think it's a bit of both really but I've wondered the same. There was a few newbie mining question threads today and I didn't know whether they belonged there or in Mining.
I would say they belong in whichever the poster feels more comfortable posting in, rather than the actual content. Isn't that what the newbie section is for; a place where you don't feel intimidated or that your question is too basic? Not really. I believe that the forums needs more maneuverability. You need to be able to find the exact kind of posts , pertaining to the exact topic of the subforum. Currently , the beginners and help subforum has a multitude of questions from all subforums. Other than this , those subforums have the remaining half of the questions. I guess it can be everything if posted by a newbie user.
Newbie users are no longer restricted. So , what exactly is the purpose of the Beginners and help forums ? |
|
|
|
We got victims, now who's going to add to the bounty?
Bounty rules
No limit to bounty, keep funding until someone accepts
No refunds for 1 month, then you can get it back if someone isn't in the process of getting a tattoo
Transaction fee deducted from refund
Bounty goes to person that we choose in majority and needs majority confirmation to release. We'll probably need a full video with a face and many photos.
Transaction fee deducted from bounty
Address is 1FEK5TZ4WkFRiVJYnsutAQu7JK4brzXGkt
Well , we need to make it such that the voting power of choosing who gets the tattoo must be proportional to the BTC invested  If a single person invests 0.51 BTC of the 1 BTC , he alone should be able to choose who gets the tattoo. I probably will contribute once we get more defined rules and a list of "victims" as you call it |
|
|
|
I have no idea why the heck you are judging by countries, single out people that you want to loan to. Not just by their demographics.
is this the best place to look for bitcoin borrowers? if u want create a website, demographics is important how start a poll? I don't think many people will be truthful , like in any poll , but :-  |
|
|
|
That means that the strategy you previously outlined made you risk less but still expect to win the same amount.
No, your expectation increases. Your potential profit is the same, your potential lose is the same, but chance of winning increases, so your expected profit increases. Okay , what about the EV of the martingale strategy ? If I want to get from 1 BTC to 2 BTC , would martingale betting or betting one single time be better ? I wonder if it is just a myth propagated by casino owners |
|
|
|
2. The house edge seems pretty high and inconsistent:
I think that makes sense. They are calling these "donations" They probably are trying to incentivise donations and are keeping a higher house edge to do that. ( I don't remember what was the name , but some other company offered a similar service where you had a chance of winning a jackpot whenever you donated to a specific site) |
|
|
|
This strategy I'm describing doesn't change the house edge. The house edge is a constant 1%.
What it does do is allows people to expect bet less, and so expect to lose less (they still expect to lose 1% of the amount they risk, but they risk less).
This is even more confusing. Tell me if I've got it wrong , but this is what I think you are saying :- House edge is the percentage of the amount you risk that you would expect to lose to the house on average. That means that the strategy you previously outlined made you risk less but still expect to win the same amount. The method you stated gets you closer and closer to 0.5 probability , but what would happen if you started with a hypothetical EV neutral game ? What would your EV tend to ? |
|
|
|
Say, my target is to double my initial deposit.
Is it really possible to use martingale (or whatever strategy) to achieve the goal with higher than 49.5% success rate (one single bet)?
Yes. And you're the first person who responded in such an open manner. Everyone else just tells me I'm wrong.  The trick is to split up your bet (the amount you were going to risk in a single bet) into a series of amounts which sum to a the same, and which form a sequence such that you can bet the smallest amount, and if it wins, you make the same as if you bet the whole amount at 49.5% (so you'll be betting with a smaller chance, and higher payout multiplier). And if it loses, you want betting the 2nd amount to cover the first loss and make the same net profit. Etc. If you can find such a sequence (and you always can, though it can involve some hairy math depending on the length of the sequence you're looking for) then the amount you expect to risk is less than your whole amount (since there's a non-zero chance that you will win before the last bet, and stop at that point), and so the amount you expect to lose, being 1% of the amount you risk, is less than when you make the single bet. Here's a very simple example: you have 1 BTC and want to double it. * you could bet it all at 49.5%, and succeed in doubling up with probability 0.495 * or you could bet 0.41421356 BTC at 28.99642866% with payout multiplier 3.41421356x, and if you lose, bet the rest at the same chance. If you win either bet, you double up, else you lose. Your chance of doubling up is 0.4958492857 - a little higher than the 0.495 you have with the single bet. Cool, huh? That's breaking the single bet up into a sequence of length 2. If you break it up into more, smaller bets, then the probability of success increases further. The more steps, the closer to 0.5 your probability of success gets. You'll be limited by real-life barriers, like the invisibility indivisibility of the satoshi, and the limit of 4 decimal places on the chance at JD. But in theory you can get arbitrarily close to 0.5. I think. I have done some calculation after reading your example. If I make a series of bets in the following way: Bet 1: Amount: 0.1 btc; Multiplier: 11x; Stop and get 2 btc if I win, proceed with bet 2 if I lose. Bet 2: Amount: 0.1 btc; Multiplier: 12x; Stop and get 2 btc if I win, proceed with bet 3 if I lose. Bet 3: Amount: 0.1 btc; Multiplier: 13x; Stop and get 2 btc if I win, proceed with bet 4 if I lose. ... Bet 10: Amount: 0.1 btc; Multiplier: 20x; Stop and get 2 btc if I win. I can get 2 btc with a chance of 0.496394553 If I split the 1 btc into 100 bets in similar way, the chance to get 2 btc is 0.496509733 If I split the 1 btc into 100000 bets in similar way, the chance to get 2 btc is 0.496522213 The win chance does get closer to 0.5 with more steps, but it seems it cannot be made arbitrary close to 0.5. I am so glad that I asked you the question. Thanks a lot. I have more questions on this , but before that can you clarify what "Luck %" of overall users on JD is ? If everyone followed this strategy , wouldn't it technically break the house edge of 1% , making it more like 0.7% ? |
|
|
|
|
Let's be serious, the Malaysian government hasn't taken their obligation too seriously till now.
They've come under fire from everyone, including China. Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia can't afford to carry on the search anyway.
And while there seems to be a lot of corruption involved in these deals, I'm sure private contractors would give it their best efforts, for a massive PR win at the least
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
