Who will take the initiative to become the voice and take on the role of being the chosen representative of BTC?
The role of a chosen Messiah or Savior to help steer the road to a Crypto Future
Bitcoin don't need a representative, it is a decentralized currency not controlled by anyone, and that's one of its best features. Bitcoin's community is in fact its real representative. Don't you think that at this point everyone is actually controlling bitcoin ? Litterally any government taking action, any media or any personality that looks deeply into bitcoin can affect it and its value like whats happening right now in China, Russia and South Korea. Controlling it isn't the same as affecting it. That is the point. If everyone can affect it, then it is secure. The point is that no single party can control it, but the world will always be able to affect it, that is what a free market is. When you sell or buy Bitcoin you are affecting it's price as well. |
|
|
|
Doesn't lightening make Bitcoin work somewhat like POS? The BTC locked up in the hubs is a form of staking.
Not at all. Lightning hubs won't be able to filter transactions, you can always close a channel on your own and do with those coins what you like. They are not anymore locked up by the hub then by the user themselves. Two parties are only able to lock each other's funds for a limited amount of time, if they don't cooperate, after which they can use their funds securely, just like before. One thing about it that I do find appealing, at least as far as I understand it, is that it has the potential to be more energy efficient. Proof of Work, while certainly representing the value of electricity as part of its "intrinsic value", per se, does generate enormous sums for electric utilities.
It isn't that mining gives an intrinsic value it is more that it gives you intrinsic security. It doesn't necessarily bind the value of bitcoins to the real world value of electricity, but instead it binds a real world mathematical problem to the security of the network. Bitcoin is secured by real world, but it isn't financially backed up by real world, that is the choice of users. |
|
|
|
We know what happens when the bitcoin network splits. How does that work in lightning?
Blockchain forks effect lightning in the same way that transactions are effected. If you have an open payment channel before the fork, you will have the same open payment channel duplicated onto the other fork of the blockchain just like how you have your coins duplicated when a fork happens. Wouldn't that upset the whole ecology of the network? When I read this again it sounds like a snake trying to eat it's own tail, as hypothetically, but not practically, it could just create endless widgets out of thin air, even leading to profit if someone decides the new widget has value? Not really, not in a any differently then the split already does on non-lightning transactions. It is just duplicates, that is all. Now the lack of replay protection means that you wouldn't be able to safely make those to chains different, but a duplication will happen and might persist afterwards to the big part of the network. What you are right about is that you can't use both chains at the same time securely, you will likely have to abandon one of them, that is the big issue with this fork. But this has nothing to do with the Lightning network, it will create same problems with the rest of standard transactions as well. |
|
|
|
Lepo su nasi to obrazlozili i ogradili se. U svakom slucaju tesko da mogu ista drugo i da urade jer ipak niko ne moze garantovati da ce bitkoin uopste i opstati u narednih nekoliko godina, na primer kvantni kompjuter koji svakog treba moze da uskoci u igru... Tesko da ce kvantni kompjuteri unistiti bitkoin, znalo se za njih jos jako davno. U trenutnim standardnim transakcijama se koristi javni kljuc koji bi u teoriji mogao razbiti sa kvantnim kompjuterom, ali se po preporucenom koriscenju Bitkoina, treba slati sa bitkoin adrese samo jednom, jer tako i javni kljuc ostane sakriven sve dok vec nije kasno poceti da se razbija. Ti kompjuteri bi trebalo da su dobri u razbijanju javnog kljuca ali ne i hasova, tako da nije sve gotovo samo ako razbiju javni kljuc, pogotovu sto javni kljucevi nisu obavezni za koriscenje u protokolu i mogu se uvek povecati bez hardforka. |
|
|
|
I believe Bitcoin is good for both long term and short-term investment. Long term is to hold Bitcoin until we hit a certain price to sell them while short-term means we can ride the fluctuation of Bitcoin. Buying and selling Bitcoin on a regular basis riding the volatility of it. Taking profit during ups and downs and eventually exit the market. We can also get short-term profit from crypto trading buying an altcoins with Bitcoin and selling them once the price spiked and converting the profit to cash.
The thing about Bitcoin long term investment is that Bitcoin is actually money, so there is no need to sell it after it reaches a certain adoption and therefor value. Long term investment in Bitcoin is just holding bitcoins until you don't need to sell them to make a profit. |
|
|
|
Nothing is 100%, but Tor is the best way to anonymously run a node. The other benefit is, as you said, that you don't need to forward posts. Anonymity also brings a bit of security as well, since no one will know your IP.
The only real downside of using Tor is bandwith speeds, that are maybe a half or a third of the direct connection on average, but since Bitcoin really doesn't require much bandwith, unless it is doing an initial sync, then it isn't even noticeable.
I would suggest you enable Tor, you don't really lose anything and you gain more nodes.
It's very noticeable when you run a node under Tor and try to sync the network, it becomes too slow to download sometimes, but it's not the end of world, it's still reasonable to download the entire chain with Tor. But if it's really a problem, I guess a solution is to download the entire chain under your normal connection at high speeds. Once you have your node synced, close it, then open the Tor Browser, then open your node again and now you can do transactions under Tor. I think that would do. Hi Hilly, have you turn the node to TOR network after syncing from the regular network? I looking for people with some experience in this. I dont want to mess my node. It is a pruned rPi and at this moment has been behaving good so far. Would I need more processing power to run a TOR node or the issue is the amount of bandwidth/speed? peace I have been running a node over Tor for years now. It will not mess up your node, it is a recommend to use Tor and Tor configuration is very well integrated in to the Bitcoin Core wallet, it even has a command line argument to automatically create Tor hidden service for you. Tor uses a negligible amount of processing power and bandwith. I even agree with Billy that it is completely ok to even sync up using Tor, since most of the syncing process is limited in speed due to the processing power and not bandwith, and Tor takes almost no processing power, but does take some bandwith that is, as I mentioned, negligible for all purposes of the Bitcoin Core node. |
|
|
|
I wonder if there is a history of infecting user computers with wallet applications?
I mean its a lot of wallets and, like, you always install uninstall them.
Sure i have antivirus but its a lot of very complex code deployed around.
I can give you an example of one. There is a Litecoin wallet that has a very advanced malware on it called Sality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sality. It is a real pain to get rid of it, so be very careful. I would suggest to not run any non-open source program on the same pc you have any coins or anything of value on, including an open source OS. But it is your choice on how much you care about those things. |
|
|
|
|
Other then boycott the companies that are backing it up, nothing. If we just boycott the companies that signed the NYC agreement, that would place the financial pressure on them to implement the protection in their software, as then people could use both chains. This makes sense, because anyone that doesn't support the fork will not be able to do business with those companies anyway if replay protection is not implemented, since you can't even get the free coins, let along do anything else with these companies that use another blockchain that can not safely coexist with this one, in the same user base at least.
|
|
|
|
Hmm, that's 2 different answers.... so there is obviously confusion over this... I guess the safest would be to move my Bitcoins to the Legacy format then, just to make sure i can get the free coins. I saw this video of how to split for bitcoin cash. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7_0m9aZrMoI guess this is what BBZorton means with moving the new coins to a different wallet, right? I think that this is what BillyBobZorton means, yes. The thing is, bitcoin cash was a hard fork. This basically means that at a certain block height, bitcoin cash nodes started enforcing a new set of consensus rules. Bitcoin cash blocks could no longer be validated by non-bitcoin cash nodes. The end result is 2 completely different chains. Up untill block x, both chains contain exactly the same blocks, and exactly the same transaction history, but starting from block x+1, each chain has it's own blocks and it's own (unique) transaction history. "core" nodes can not validate BCH blocks and vice versa. Since both are now completely different crypto coins, but share the same transaction history, if you had 1 BTC before the chain split, you automatically have 1 BTC on the bitcoin blockchain and 1 BCH on the bitcoincash blockchain after the split. Segwit was a soft fork, this means there is no chain split. Basically, legacy nodes get a stripped down version of exactly the same blocks as segwit nodes. So both have the same transactions in their blockchain, and exactly the same transaction history. So, theoretically, if a new hardfork would occur on a chain during a softfork at height y, all previous transactions up untill this height would be in both chains, this would include transactions generated by both segwit and non-segwit wallets (legacy nodes don't receive the witness data, they see the transactions as anyone-can-spend outputs and redeems). Offcourse, i do not know if the chain that forks off has wallets and nodes that know how to handle historic transactions made by segwit wallets. I have no idear if they'll fork from the chain from a legacy node or from a segwit node... If they fork from a legacy node, they'll have blocks with segwit transactions but without witness data... I have no idear how they would handle those. Conclusion : we need Achow101, DannyHamilton or somebody with more technical in this thread  You are confusing between Segwit and Segwit2x. Segwit soft fork already happened, there was no split there, as there are no splits in a soft fork. What we are having in November is a Segwit2x hard fork, also known as S2X. However, it doesn't have replay protection, so getting free coins will never be a safe process. As soon as you send your coins to one address, someone will replay that transaction on the other network just because it costs nothing to do so. This will make users completely ignore one chain as they can't safely coexist in the overlapping user base. In order to get free coins on the other chain, which you might never be able to use, you will have to own your private keys for your addresses. That is all. So unless you use an online wallet, you will have coins on the other chain. |
|
|
|
|
ICOs were always a bad idea. You should never artificially set the price for a coin, you should let the market decide. It makes sense that if many coins are getting bought the price should go up exponentially. This is just free market.
Making it more like an auction would make more sense.
|
|
|
|
|
Internet doesn't have a representative, neither should Bitcoin. It is just a decentralized protocol, even more so then the Internet. Even if Satoshi was still around, I doubt he would be a representative for very long.
|
|
|
|
As mining is more and more centralized, this is a super-vast minority, which from my point of view should not be in a position, to decide, what the super-super vast majority wants.
To be honest, it is pools that are controlled by the minority, I am not so sure about the mining itself. Miners can always switch pools if they disagree with the voting of their pool. These pools still hold more power then they should, that is for certain, but it might not be that catastrophic. Ultimately the responsibility for decentralization goes to the miners and not necessarily the pools. |
|
|
|
Best short term investment right now is USD untill this china thing blows over
The USD is not an investment, cash is just a way to invest, besides if you had held 1000 dollars in the last years those dollars will buy a lot less now than back then, if you used those 1000 dollars to buy bitcoin years ago you will be rich now, do you see the difference? USD is a way better for investment and importantly as mentioned $1000 is something big years back. For short term profiting it's good to invest into some low price altcoins or some of the projects which are running the ICO at present. Being rich is possible when you predict the market perfectly. Due to inflation, no national currency is a good store of value, let a long a profitable investment. When you keep your money in fiat, it is a guarantee that you are losing value every single month. |
|
|
|
|
Nothing is 100%, but Tor is the best way to anonymously run a node. The other benefit is, as you said, that you don't need to forward posts. Anonymity also brings a bit of security as well, since no one will know your IP.
The only real downside of using Tor is bandwith speeds, that are maybe a half or a third of the direct connection on average, but since Bitcoin really doesn't require much bandwith, unless it is doing an initial sync, then it isn't even noticeable.
I would suggest you enable Tor, you don't really lose anything and you gain more nodes.
|
|
|
|
Lightning network was created mostly for small payments. For example you open channel with some product shop. Or with your friend. Of course, you're able to use others channels but in that case you must pay fee as you know (and also it is risky idea. hackers don't sleep). So someone will close 10 channels per year, another - noone. So i took average number.
I don't know what it was created for and I would say it doesn't really matter. All I am saying is that it is completely possible to use it for that and there are costs if you don't use it. But we will see. no one can know an average number when the thing doesn't even exist yet. Lol, this is some kind of exisiting bank system. Trusted nodes == banks.
There us a reason I called them well known nodes and not trusted nodes, because trust isn't necessary in a Lightning Network, that is the whole point of it. If trust was needed, we would just use banks instead. |
|
|
|
I believe I have a decent understanding of how Bitcoin works, but sometimes when I read news I stumble upon "the blockchain technology" - blockchain for banks, blockchain for medical records, blockchain for real estate and so on. From my understanding, most of them are private blockchains (correct me if I'm wrong), but when I tried to find some info on how they work, I didn't get much So, I have some questions:
1. How do they work? How blocks are organized? Are there any miners? Are they at least slightly more decentralized than traditional solutions?
2. Why blockchain? Does it solve any problems? Is this more efficient than traditional solutions? Are there any benefits for customers?
They are probably either PoS coins or using Ethereum blockchain. I doubt there are any miners. Otherwise the blocks are organized in a linked list, that is what blockchain is, a chain of blocks. But for the decentralization part, I guess it depends, but there will be no benefit if they are not. Blockchain really just solves the problem of trust, it works for the decentralized systems. It is a way of keeping some data in a decentralized and secure manner, in some cases where there are many institutions that need to have a type of ledger or in other words, just some data that they all agree on, then it helps. |
|
|
|
2017-07-28 19:25:00
That is very close to the Bitcoin Cash fork. Maybe your node only has Bitcoin Cash nodes as peers, I don't know. Perhaps try deleting the peers.dat file in the data directory. |
|
|
|
This way your family can never use these words to find the password because it will take them many years of trial and error, or even if you have extra words in that list that you don't use in your password they will never find it. And the other individual or safe box that you keep the paper with a series of numbers cannot be used for anything IF THEY DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT.
The amount of possible combination in your example is less then 16^10 which is about a billion. Billion is really not that big of a number when you consider that modern average CPUs do billions of operations a second. This operation would be more complex of course, but still, this is just per second. I doubt it would take years. |
|
|
|
|
There is Bisq, a decentralized exchange. You can always trust withdrawals, since it only uses an internal wallet where you and only you hold the private keys. It is p2p, so you can just fund a trade directly, without it even going to the internal wallet. There all hundreds of altcoins and the process of adding a new altcoin is very simple.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
