|
Apparently video was a hoax.
|
|
|
|
Nowadays everyone is curious about Ripple. It has started to become very valuable and it is appealing to people. I think it can be $ 3 like that  It might as the United States wakes up and sees Ripple up solidly and BTC down a little. Plus, it won't hurt that it is 2nd in market cap right now, regardless of the reason why. Might be okay for at least getting back to the $2.50 range or ATH anyway. |
|
|
|
Why do you have so much love for Mr. Ver(min) ?
He has done more for Bitcoin than you ever will, and I respect him for what he has been trying to do to improve the world. But, I have less love for him than the hatred you seem to have for him. I also defend Greg Maxwell from time to time, though I strongly disagree him on certain points. Mostly, I object to ignorant people taking a side and attacking the people that aren't on their side. You're a newbie. I recommend learning more and listening more before taking any side and closing you mind to any other perspectives. Roger Ver thinks insider trading is not a crime. I suppose you support that as well?
He has solid arguments to back his opinion but I don't completely agree with him on that one. Still, that doesn't make him as evil as you portray. Roger Ver tweeted: Since Bitcoin Core is no longer usable as a currency, we should no longer consider it to be a crypto currency. Is that your opinion too?
It's basic logic. If it is not usable as a currency, how can you call it a currency? If you can't eat a brick, can you call it food? Either way, it's not important. It's just words. You are obviously a loon yourself or in collusion with Ver.
Edit: I just realized that you could be Roger. He did buy tons of accounts for astroturfing.
I'm not a loon. I'm not in collusion with Roger Ver. I'm not Roger Ver and I am not associated with him, though I have met him a few times. Yes, all of the other people who have been busted for insider trading had the same feelings towards it as Roger. Nothing he says is new. He's just a tool and insider trading was made illegal for so many reasons it is a moot point to argue. BCH isn't a currency either because nobody uses it for anything. What a load of crap Ver shovels. That's why people despise him. Whatever he "did for BTC" (not sure what on earth you are comparing a poster's contributions to his) he has more than undone and he is never going to stop. What is he doing for the world other than trying to sew chaos? The BCH chain hasn't been tested/stressed because nobody GAF about it. Let's see what happens when it is. Oooops, it won't be. "If a tree falls in a forest"...that is BCH. |
|
|
|
Depending on perspective - and people in here clearly have many different perspectives - the purpose or value of Bitcoin can be different. But an objective view on that shows Bitcoin is failing on all the different purposes:
Bitcoin is a currency - no
It is failing as a currency, because a currency that dips up to Christmas when you actually want to spend some money is useless.
Bitcoin is a store of value - no
It is failing as a store of value as the extreme volatility makes it like storing water in a bucket with holes in the side
Bitcoin is a better payment tool - no
It is failing as a practical means of payment due to the extremely high transaction costs
Bitcoin is an investment asset - no
The extreme transaction times prevents any normal type of trading of an investment asset, drastically reducing market liquidity - meaning it has failed as an investment asset
Bitcoin is community driven - no
The community has clearly been shouting for something to be done in terms of the transaction costs and transaction times, but devs don't care
Bitcoin is for the poor - no
Only the rich are benefitting, with the poor now seeing their money being trapped behind a "wall" of transactions fees in excess of 100$
Could it end up as a failure? Possibly. Is it speculative? Yep. Risky? Yep. In need of an upgrade? Yep. Apparently enough people feel it is useful enough to have futures on The Merc, CBOE, NASDAQ with E-Trade, etc, jumping in along with multiple ETF filings. Now, could those things add more volatility, especially in the near term? Probably. Is it necessary for more acceptance? Yes. Go argue with the pros.... enlighten them with your pearls of wisdom! I be |
|
|
|
|
Snapshot was probably already taken anyway.
|
|
|
|
Yes, it is known that the CIA, alphabet and other organizations have had their own firmware running on network devices for years. I don't think anything is secret, regardless of what endpoint protection users may think they have and IOT has made us that much more vulnerable.
You know all them free things like manuals for how to fix your DVX-900-AX video player you once go for free well soon it won't be free and will be termed as VIP content and all browsers will soon come with wallets and you will have to click "Pay $0.10" thanks to Crypto-coins/tokens The bankers have big plans for us but many people are starting to see it Would you like me to give you the red pill or the blue pill ? Net neutrality will definitely make some people some money. Once again the consumer gets squashed. |
|
|
|
Eventually they'll have shaken almost everyone loose, I suppose.
And that is why you hold them coins fucking tight. Don't let them screw you over with their games. Totally agree and have. This community is fairly United in this. |
|
|
|
I don't thnk they are "testing". I think some of them are ALREADY making money from this fall.
The market is not like a product which you give it 100 times of testing before you draw a conclusion. A market is a place where you make as much money each time you go in and come out of it.
I agree, other than the people who will utilize the futures trading, ETFs and other instruments of investment coming down the pike always want data and more data. I think it is definitely a win/win for the big boys in the banking and finance industry. This market is so easy to manipulate, apparently. Either way, they're having a great time dragging most of us around for the ride while they can. Eventually they'll have shaken almost everyone loose, I suppose. |
|
|
|
I don't buy what the PO is saying for a minute. He needs to post the transaction ID or we will assume he is lying through his teeth.
in fairness I would not give anyone my address or IP because everything we do and say is already being recorded and no i am not being paranoid, I read my routers internet sys-logs, peek at network traffic on the machine and run a file watch to see what Microsoft is doing. I am sure this is a Microsoft bug that will get fixed in a security patch soon if word gets out that we know but if you stop everything you dare at night including many of the widows services and close down all your programs but run a program that audits the windows SSL certificate store then you might catch a few new ones turning up in the middle of the night, like from the DoS and that. oh Yes they encrypt everything before it's get sent out but the stupid buggers forgot to code it so that the CA certificates can be seen Yes, it is known that the CIA, alphabet and other organizations have had their own firmware running on network devices for years. I don't think anything is secret, regardless of what endpoint protection users may think they have and IOT has made us that much more vulnerable. The transactions, however, are already out there for everyone to see and the OP wouldn't be revealing anything that's not already known. |
|
|
|
Does anything indicate when the snapshot was taken? If it already happened, it definitely won't do anything. I will admit that I don't understand the technology enough to know if this is still an effort to force the Battle Royale that was supposed to happen with the original fork in some covert way. The mass manipulation is likely just normal corrections and profit taking, but it could also be gauging a potential to gauge how hard it would be to create the flippening to something new, moving from BCH to the new coin while trying to crash Bitcoin simultaneously. It almost seems like each side is testing the other-Bitcoin/BCH over the last few days and hold large amounts of each other's coins to try to sell and drive each other's value down. Then they buy their coins back on the cheap and the pattern reverses/value rises. Conspiracy is way more fun than the truth!  |
|
|
|
|
Does it seem like the whales/banks are testing both a stressed market (the other day) and slow market like today to see how much they can manipulate the market in any state?
I think they're all getting baselines of movement while they can.
Maybe I'm way off, but it seems like whales are having fun.
|
|
|
|
Still waiting on those transactions ids.
Post Transaction IDs , so we can verify that you are not LYING!!  Cause I think you are Lying.  ╥Aztek I don't buy what the PO is saying for a minute. He needs to post the transaction ID or we will assume he is lying through his teeth. Yep, I agree. The proof is in the pudding. |
|
|
|
Until any crypto can come up with something like Layer 2 switching did for LAN/Ethernet, I think it won't be a viable payment option for mass adoption.
You debate me about BTC when i say it will not scale and then you say that ? WTF I don't think we need hardware switching in routers or anything like that to deal with 250 bytes of data when we send money but i think you have hit up on what i have been saying here. The transport for digital money (ETH2, BTC2, BTC10) needs to be independent of the currency flowing along the motorway and be like the postal system when sending letters (recorded delivery if necessary), no need to know whats in the letter, just deliver it and get paid gas for the service. gas cannot he purchased from anyone, money and greed fucks everything up and the transport system is made up for anyone that is using the system and if you won't help to deliver letters, you won't get any gas until you do your share of work. This parts not hard but it also needed to create clusters of teams so that each member of a team can share resources and work as part a group. Now start asking what a team or clan of lets say 1024 machine can do because the limitations become endless and all over sudden we can process 1/50th of all the BTC transactions or host 50 onion type web-sites and have access to our own hidden store of movies. Put simple we need an address system and to work as teams instead being every man for himself with 9,999 dispersed systems all using bespoke protocols to try to hook up to other resources I said something like Layer 2 switching did for Ethernet. Read. Do you understand the OSI model to know that switches are layer 2 and routers are layer 3? I'm talking about something akin to what layer 2 did for Ethernet passing frames/MAC addresses. Edit: I agree, I think we're talking about the same thing here from different angles. I guess I failed to read. Apologies. |
|
|
|
Good one!!! That makes perfect sense. Like I said, your little attempt to show off some BS formulas was just a sign of ignorance and talking out your ass.
So far , aside from insults you have said nothing to prove you know anything. ╥Aztek I don't have to prove anything other than you are basing your numbers on home internet bandwidth and that makes 0 sense to anyone who knows anything about networking and computers. That proves you're talking about something you have no clue about. And yes, what I said applies to Bitcoin as well as any other crypto. I think answer is in development other than blocksize. No, I definitely don't think Bitcoin is scalable in current form. The reason I used home internet speeds is it shows what is available. It is a non issue to argue with you as you back up nothing you say with anything tangible. Have a nice day. ╥Aztek Lick your wounds and run! Like I said, you've got nothing. The WAN is what's available and every single bottleneck that goes with it. Have a nice day yourself! |
|
|
|
Good one!!! That makes perfect sense. Like I said, your little attempt to show off some BS formulas was just a sign of ignorance and talking out your ass.
So far , aside from insults you have said nothing to prove you know anything. ╥Aztek I don't have to prove anything other than you are basing your numbers on home internet bandwidth and that makes 0 sense to anyone who knows anything about networking and computers. That proves you're talking about something you have no clue about. And yes, what I said applies to Bitcoin as well as any other crypto. I think answer is in development other than blocksize. No, I definitely don't think Bitcoin is scalable in current form. |
|
|
|
You obviously know jack shit about networking/WAN or computers for that matter by basing anything off of a user's home internet speed.
You are obviously an idiot. And have little understanding of the fact the majority of the internet speed is still running off of copper. The Potential of Fiber Optics : https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/10/nokia-terabits-per-second-cable-speed-record/Another cable, Marea, being laid between the US and Spain, will carry 160Tbps over 16 fibres (10Tbps per fibre) when it's inaugurated sometime in 2017-2018.
If Marea upped its per-fibre speed to 65Tbps its total capacity would be around 520Tbps, or 65 terabytes per second.
That would let you transfer about 16,250 4GB Blu-ray rips per second. And the Fact Moore's Law still exists. Shows you are clueless of the tech available. ╥Aztek Again, you don't know shit. Read up about routing protocols, WAN circuits, back bones, LECs and Colocation. Also try transferring large files across your home network or multiple hard drives if you have them on your PC. Read up on HD seek time, FSB, L2 cache and the like and then come back at me with your idiotic formulas above. There's nothing close to wire speed even on a LAN, let alone WAN. You're an idiot that probably claim 1MB was too much. So what does your dumb ass think the current limit is in block size? ╥Aztek Nope, thanks for playing. Good job refuting the what I said. Until any crypto can come up with something like Layer 2 switching did for LAN/Ethernet, I think it won't be a viable payment option for mass adoption. Yep , big mouth small mind, that sums you up. If it was up to you we on still be on 56k dial up modems. ╥Aztek Good one!!! That makes perfect sense. Like I said, your little attempt to show off some BS formulas was just a sign of ignorance and talking out your ass. What do you think about the impact of the net neutrality change and crypto? |
|
|
|
You obviously know jack shit about networking/WAN or computers for that matter by basing anything off of a user's home internet speed.
You are obviously an idiot. And have little understanding of the fact the majority of the internet speed is still running off of copper. The Potential of Fiber Optics : https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/10/nokia-terabits-per-second-cable-speed-record/Another cable, Marea, being laid between the US and Spain, will carry 160Tbps over 16 fibres (10Tbps per fibre) when it's inaugurated sometime in 2017-2018.
If Marea upped its per-fibre speed to 65Tbps its total capacity would be around 520Tbps, or 65 terabytes per second.
That would let you transfer about 16,250 4GB Blu-ray rips per second. And the Fact Moore's Law still exists. Shows you are clueless of the tech available. ╥Aztek Again, you don't know shit. Read up about routing protocols, WAN circuits, back bones, LECs and Colocation. Also try transferring large files across your home network or multiple hard drives if you have them on your PC. Read up on HD seek time, FSB, L2 cache and the like and then come back at me with your idiotic formulas above. There's nothing close to wire speed even on a LAN, let alone WAN. You're an idiot that probably claim 1MB was too much. So what does your dumb ass think the current limit is in block size? ╥Aztek Nope, thanks for playing. Good job refuting the what I said. Until any crypto can come up with something like Layer 2 switching did for LAN/Ethernet, I think it won't be a viable payment option for mass adoption. |
|
|
|
You obviously know jack shit about networking/WAN or computers for that matter by basing anything off of a user's home internet speed.
You are obviously an idiot. And have little understanding of the fact the majority of the internet speed is still running off of copper. The Potential of Fiber Optics : https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/10/nokia-terabits-per-second-cable-speed-record/Another cable, Marea, being laid between the US and Spain, will carry 160Tbps over 16 fibres (10Tbps per fibre) when it's inaugurated sometime in 2017-2018.
If Marea upped its per-fibre speed to 65Tbps its total capacity would be around 520Tbps, or 65 terabytes per second.
That would let you transfer about 16,250 4GB Blu-ray rips per second. And the Fact Moore's Law still exists. Shows you are clueless of the tech available. ╥Aztek Again, you don't know shit. Read up about routing protocols, WAN circuits, back bones, LECs and Colocation. Also try transferring large files across your home network or multiple hard drives if you have them on your PC. Read up on HD seek time, FSB, L2 cache and the like and then come back at me with your idiotic formulas above. There's nothing close to wire speed even on a LAN, let alone WAN. |
|
|
|
But how is it possible? i sent a transaction a few hours ago with a fee of 800 satoshis per byte and it is not confirmed yet, what is wrong with my transaction? was the fee so low?
Odds are he is lying , as he is not posting transaction ids so that it can be verified. Only if you call the other coin segshit.  Whats your views on the so called segwit fork on the 28th Anything using a block-chain to me is living on borrowed time because it won't scale but i would like to know why your down on segwit because I like much of what you say so maybe you know more than me about it. The won't scale is bullshit. The scam is they say it can't scale to match Visa/mastercard. The Fact is at this point in time it does not need to scale to match visa. It only needs to be able to handle the current transaction volume at an affordable price. As time moves on internet speed increases and scaling becomes easier. If a 1MB block takes 30 seconds to verify and validate, with the current code, wouldn't a 1GB block take 50 minutes to verify? Or is it not linear like that? I don't know, 1 block with transactions in it followed by 5 empty blocks seems inefficient. However, it appears the BCH team is working on this bottleneck, so why are we debating about my original concerns? The concern is no longer valid.
With Current Cable Bandwidth of 100 Mbits , 1 MB block can be transmitted in less than 1 second 100Mbits/8 = 12.5 megabytes per second Even 8 MB blocks are nothing at modern internet speeds.
Correction: Original Node Verification was squared after every time interval , The Correct Verification is a Doubling with every increase in time interval 1 second= 2 Nodes Verified 2 second= 4 Nodes Verified 3 second= 8 Nodes Verified 4 second= 16 Nodes Verified 5 second= 32 Nodes Verified 6 second= 64 Nodes Verified 7 second=128 Nodes Verified 8 second=256 Nodes Verified 9 second=512 Nodes Verified 10 second=1024 Nodes Verified 11 second=2048 Nodes Verified 12 second=4096 Nodes Verified 13 second=8192 Nodes Verified 14 second=16384 Nodes Verified 15 second=32728 Nodes Verified 16 second=65456 Nodes Verified 17 second=130912 Nodes Verified *Neither Bitcoin has over 20000 Full Nodes at the present time*Once the normal is 1 Gbps 1 Gbps/8 = 125 megabytes per second Once the normal is 10 Gbps 10 Gbps/8 = 1.25 gigabytes per second (This can easily support 1 Gigabyte Blocks and some providers are running at this speed today.)
(Within 17 seconds the 1 Gigabyte block could propagate through ~130912 Nodes.)Once the normal is 100 Gbs 100 Gbs/8 =12.5 Gigabytes per second ╥Aztek You obviously know jack shit about networking/WAN or computers for that matter by basing anything off of a user's home internet speed. |
|
|
|
|
Vermin and his cronies appear to be putting up smaller buy walls this round versus obvious ones yesterday.
They're trying to force weak hands on both sides based on appearances anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
