Won't LN make payment processors like Bitpay totally obsolete?   Totally obsolete, not immediately. Until at least some of your providers in turn accept LN payments, some kind of bridge to/from fiat will still be necessary, as you need to unload your channels when their in-capacity gets filled up. |
|
|
|
critical vulnerability in electrum?
I read up something about that. I guess those of us who use NoScript should have been fairly safe. |
|
|
|
Why would LN not work out as planned? Just out of curiosity, I'm eager to know where the BCash hope is.
I don't think the LN will work technically for two main reasons: (1) the high fees to open and close channels will make it too expensive to be practical, There are two CoinJoin-like solutions being developed, at least one of which is at a fairly mature stage of progress, as I understand it. and (2) there is no known solution to route-finding with a mesh topology so the network will have a hub-and-spoke topology instead.
No exact solutions in the sense of optimal, shortest-metric routing. A decent heuristic is enough to get the system going and avoid a hub-and-spoke topology. How does TOR manage to create circuits? But let's ignore that for now and assume that LN will work like BS/Core expects. There is still the _huge_ problem that LN is a new network and needs lots of people to adopt it in order for it to have value. I think people think that when LN is "released" that suddenly all wallets will be able to make LN payments just like they can make bitcoin payments today. But that's not what will happen; instead, the first people to open channels will only be able to send payments to a couple of vendors and a handful of connected people. It will take years and years for the network infrastructure to get the point that Bitcoin was at 3 years ago.
What I'm saying now is pure speculation, but bear with me. All the users that whine about high fees should be able to put some pressure on vendors - and especially exchanges. I agree that segwit adoption is going slowly; but that's because few wallets support it. If half of the users had a segwit-enabled wallet, it would be much harder for exchanges to delay upgrading. The customers would flock to the first exchanges to adopt the new technology. BTC is sabotaging itself.
It isn't. It's in a pupal stage IMO, preparing for the next metamorphosis. |
|
|
|
(2) Accepting BCH for payments is trivial for all the companies and payment processors that previously accepted Bitcoin but stopped due to high fees and unreliable confirmations. BCH is a drop-in replacement where as supporting BTC is more complex due to segwit (+ further complexity should LN be viable).
Of course accepting BCH is trivial for those who already accept bitcoin. All BCH did is increase the block size while keeping all witness data in mined blocks. It could be seen as sweeping a problem under the rug, or as kicking the can a few feet further down the road. BTC is more complex due to segwit - and hopefully soon LN too - because it's evolving in order to survive the technological challenges. It's not sweat-free. No free lunch and stuff. The benefits of upgrading will be more than worth the sweat for merchants (little sweat) and users (no sweat as soon as the first user-grade wallets become available). But why am I explaining this to you? You are a technical person, aren't you? |
|
|
|
Am I understanding it correctly that LN only works with segwit?
Why would it work only with segwit? I see no technical reason, but segwit adoption would certainly help LN to make opening/closing LN channels cheaper. LN as it is now depends on transaction malleability being fixed. That's why it was designed with segwit as a prerequisite. So yes, Ibian, you are correct as far as the real current Lightning Network goes. |
|
|
|
Old coins are now worth $19951USD/$24766CAD (Coinmarketcap).
ok searched a bit and i still cant figure out what this means.. what are "old coins" and why are they worth more? Unsplit BTC still with a BCH, and possibly other forkcoins, inside. |
|
|
|
Another yummy snippet from fluidjax. Total ban on mining in China.. A slow orderly exit is planned - apparently confirmed by Jihan (by Cryptovenus) https://twitter.com/cryptovenus/status/949405526315716608The BTC market should see this in a positive way, but there is no accounting for stupidity. The will force chinese miners to relocate and spread out geographically, and also cause them higher electricity costs, which will allow more competition. If this is confirmed, it's quite an important piece of news. I also see this as quite bullish. Never forget: the freedom that comes with decentralization is Bitcoin's main asset. By the way, this appears more plausible than the customary quarterly "China bans bitcoin" FUD items. There's no FUD context (or necessity) this time, so it does look different. |
|
|
|
A major thing people forget when simply saying we need a small block size increase, is that it requires a HARD FORK.
This means that a whole bunch of people with 100,000's of Bitcoins are going to be pissed. MP & his group for one. Probably a number of others.
These people, along with many others will probably continue the existing chain, claiming it is the real Bitcoin. (Just like BClashic but much worse).
Imagine the damage that is going to do to Bitcoin, we must have an overwhelming consensus otherwise it's going to be a clusterfuck!
Clap, clap. The blocks will get bigger when they will. Let's turn our heads to the real alternative solutions. The pot is on the fire, soon dinner's gonna be served. Let's just get the big actors to come along ASAP. Hello, Coinbase? Hello? Anybody in there? |
|
|
|
You ECB, stop printing all those fancy euros before you call companies that help people save themselves from inflation "crappy"!  Seriously, most of the companies that offered cards through Wavecrest have sent out emails to customers saying they will replace the cards (free of charge) as soon as they find a viable partner. I haven't received any such email yet, but it's still the weekend. i think it's gonna take months or maybe never before they find replacements, especially for gbp cards. wavecrest was the only game in town for a lot of them. I'm afraid it won't be much quicker for cards in euros, either. |
|
|
|
Crypto (carding) is done.  people with coinbase and american bitpay cards are fine. it's one crappy company being crappy. if a non crappy company shows up then the people who've lost cards will get other ones. You ECB, stop printing all those fancy euros before you call companies that help people save themselves from inflation "crappy"! Seriously, most of the companies that offered cards through Wavecrest have sent out emails to customers saying they will replace the cards (free of charge) as soon as they find a viable partner. I haven't received any such email yet, but it's still the weekend. |
|
|
|
This explanation is not too convincing. If there was risk of funds disappearing, Wavecrest wouldn't have been appointed in the first place, I suppose. I would really like to know which specific rules were disattended.
Wavecrest has its official HQ in Gibraltar.... so most probably it's a KYC/AML thing, which makes much more sense when you also add cryptocurrencies to the equation. Also take into account the EU regulation regarding prepaid/debit/gift cards of over 100€. I had a couple of those cards, and the KYC procedure was quite thorough in both cases. I'm afraid it's more of an AML thing, like Wavecrest refusing to provide the data to the "powers that be" without international court orders or similar compelling reasons. Unlike VISA, that chickens out at the mere lifting of an international eyebrow. Yes, most probably AML. I updated my previous post with a reference to banking secret that might apply here. Gibraltar has many similarities to Andorra. In fact it is currently a way better "tax-heaven" than Andorra. Barclays has some nice setups there for... stuff. Or so I have heard. Crypto (carding) is done. |
|
|
|
This explanation is not too convincing. If there was risk of funds disappearing, Wavecrest wouldn't have been appointed in the first place, I suppose. I would really like to know which specific rules were disattended.
Wavecrest has its official HQ in Gibraltar.... so most probably it's a KYC/AML thing, which makes much more sense when you also add cryptocurrencies to the equation. Also take into account the EU regulation regarding prepaid/debit/gift cards of over 100€. I had a couple of those cards, and the KYC procedure was quite thorough in both cases. I'm afraid it's more of an AML thing, like Wavecrest refusing to provide the data to the "powers that be" without international court orders or similar compelling reasons. Unlike VISA, that chickens out at the mere lifting of an international eyebrow. |
|
|
|
This piece of news hasn't been discussed much here yet, so what do you think of the Wavecrest debit card shutdown? The official word from VISA is that Wavecrest didn't comply with VISA regulations - but there's no hint at which specific regulations were disattended.
To me, it smells like a few governments put some pressure on VISA to end that service. VISA have been swift to oblige, as they always are as soon as a big actor uses power voice mode. But I might just be a rookie conspiracy theorist...
No need for a conspiracy theory - it's the same as banks blocking transfers to bitcoin exchanges - or closing accounts associated with Bitcoin - or limiting or double checking transfers to exchanges etc. It's just normal risk management. Accounts get hacked every day and once the money is drained off into cryptoland the bank has no way to recover it.
This explanation is not too convincing. With the risk of funds disappearing, Wavecrest wouldn't have been appointed in the first place, I suppose. I would really like to know which specific rules were disattended. There are loads of other crypto/fiat debit cards that visa is still supporting. It's Wavecrest that visa is cracking down on, not crypto/fiat debit cards in general. It probably won't affect bitcoin's price anyway because most of the new buyers in the crypto ecosystem won't even know what a crypto/fiat debit card is yet.
Really? It would be nice, but I haven't been able to find "loads" of alternatives. Can you name a few, please? |
|
|
|
I do not consider increasing blocks a good solution. It does not scale while the negative consequences for decentralisation are unclear. Since Bitcoin’s only true value lies in ‘decentralisation’, I support not hastily moving away from this core concept just to solve a current - perceived as immediate - issue. There is too much at stake.
Maybe you are right, bigger blocks do not scale. But increasing the current size is a requirement for climbing. Check the LN white paper and note the block size needed so that each person can open and close a channel once a year using segwit. There are already 2 different solutions ready for implementation (they might be already in the test stage, for all I know) to bundle multiple channel opening transactions into a single blockchain event - similar to what CoinJoin does. The fee would get split among the openers. The more you're willing to wait for a larger pool of channel openers, the less you pay. The same mechanism can be used to fund channels with exhausted capacity. This seems an excellent way to go for the time being. I'm confident more sophisticated stuff will come along. Now what we should really do is force the big actors to embrace segwit, so LN can flourish. Like, some heavy user lobbying on Coinbase. Of course, more variety and competition in the exchange market can't hurt. |
|
|
|
He is trying to rename Bitcoin. Just keep ignoring him.
Could it be he's trying to get even for the cute Bcash nickname? No way, Jose.... I mean eddie. You are giving jbreher.. way too much benefit of the doubt and trying to attribute some kind of justification for his passive-aggressive trolling attack on bitcoin propaganda. He is way more intentional than you seem to think. No kind justification, Juan. I was teasing. Names are important in an immature market filled with newbies. By calling Bitcoin as he does, he implies there are two bitcoins. One is cash (good), the other is ... some technical thing whatever about losing wits or something (bad). In this forum, most readers know what's what and the risk of confusion is minimal, shills and trolls aside.. However, I think it's better to stick to safe, clear names that don't contain "bitcoin" - such as Bcash - for forkcoins, reserving the name Bitcoin for the real thing. This has the added benefit of causing a few moments of comedy now and then, especially during interviews. |
|
|
|
He is trying to rename Bitcoin. Just keep ignoring him.
Could it be he's trying to get even for the cute Bcash nickname? |
|
|
|
|
This piece of news hasn't been discussed much here yet, so what do you think of the Wavecrest debit card shutdown? The official word from VISA is that Wavecrest didn't comply with VISA regulations - but there's no hint at which specific regulations were disattended.
To me, it smells like a few governments put some pressure on VISA to end that service. VISA have been swift to oblige, as they always are as soon as a big actor uses power voice mode. But I might just be a rookie conspiracy theorist...
|
|
|
|
This description is the reality ... LN is the future and i think in june 18 ... btc reach 40k usd
Any reason for this particular date? |
|
|
|
Sweet, just ordered 2 more, Thanks just ordered one Lots of other people asking on this thread. GET AN OFFLINE WALLET to protect your coins, avoid exchanges & be your own bank. LIMITED TIME ONLY TREZOR WALLET is 20 Euros & 20 dollars off! 89 EUR / 99 USD You can't get this good a hardware wallet at this price anywhere -- not even on their own site today --without this promo code I got myself one, too |
|
|
|
Who sold at the bottom?
(snubbing) Won't even reply to such questions until the proper moment. Tsk, I'm waiting for the officials. And I have a hunch they're too busy celebrating ATM!  HAPPY 2018 This will be THE year I think. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
