An arbitrator is a third party in a 2-of-3 multisig. He has just as much power as individual traders. If they can't agree, he can be the one that tips the balance.
If the traders don't need him, he can't do nothing to get involved, they will unlock their funds by them self and he will never be contacted to solve a dispute.

The whole project is being decentralized. It is it's main goal. When the DAO is finished anyone will be able to become an arbitrator. Currently the DAO is in phase zero and the complete protocol that will use colored coins on the Bitcoin network hasn't been implemented yet on the mainnet.

Here is the Bisq white paper https://github.com/bisq-network/docs/blob/master/exchange/whitepaper.adoc
There are quite some information on there and you can see more about arbitration in the appropriate section, if you wish

  Samo zato sto prevare postoje u svetu, to ne znaci da moras da budes deo toga.
Ziveti samo za sebe je dosadno i prazno. Ljudi vole da doprinose i budu deo necega, da nesto novo naprave.
Gledajuci tudje greske kao opravdanje za tvoje samo cini ceo svet gresnijim i besmislenijim.

Sure, but my point was that that is unlikely and is a bad sign.


It can be taking advantage. Not saying it has to be, but very likely, at least unintentionally, in most cases.
I think you know the answer to this one. Just because someone wants something, doesn't mean that it is best for them.
Young people make mistakes and when older people know it and still agree to be part of it, it isn't really a good deed.

It seems to me like you are proposing something like a reverse locktime. I guess it can be called unlock time.
This could be done via a soft fork as it is just adding an OP code for the transaction script.
It would be a neat operation to have in Bitcoin scripts.

Yeah, it is always more likely it is rather you then the entire network. The incoming connections aren't necessary so neither is UPNP.
It is probably your firewall. Are you using your Internet from home, is it censored? More likely it is your computer. Perhaps an antivirus has a firewall that only allows certain ports or certain applications to connect. Try disabling your firewall on your antivirus software, if you are using Windows.
If not, then try installing the Tor browser and go to Settings->Options->Network and check "Connect through SOCKS5 proxy".
That will help if your Internet is censored from Bitcoin, which I don't know if any country does, but I know that some censor Tor so you might need to configure it to enable Tor bridges.

You are mining Bitcoins? And you are not using an already established mining pool? Are you sure you have the hash power to mine a block in couple of hours?
Bitcoin hashrate is pretty big.

You really shouldn't be using an online wallet. At least use Electrum if you don't want to run a full node. You can even install it on your smart phone and it is open source.

That being said, if Coinbase let's you access your private keys, then import them in your own software wallet like Electrum and check the balance yourself.

Alternatively, if you know your Bitcoin address then you can also put it in a block explorer to see the balance.
Blocktrail and blockexplorer.com are some examples of block explorers.

Well I think it says a lot about a person if they specifically date younger people. It would mean that probably that person is not as interested in his mate's maturity as much as other aspects.

There is no rule of course, but if a person dates someone that is a lot younger, it could seem like they are taking advantage of them and they possibly are, even if it unintended.

I personally feel like the 80% younger person has a pretty low possibility to be close to your equal in maturity, but even bellow 90% can be suspicious.
I guess you can see connection between that an IQ, as I believed that once IQ was defined as a maturity compared to age, where 100 means 1:1 ratio.
There is only a very small percent of population bellow 80 percent of IQ and they are classified as having border-line deficiency.

The point is that it isn't really fair to the less mature person to be in a relationship with someone quite more mature then them.
The wiser person in a relationship could quite possibly take charge and get his/her way even in the best intention.
Certain equality between the couple seems to be quite necessary, but there are of course many people in many different situation in their life, so making any quick judgments could be unfair.

Sve ti je to samo sreca i marketing. Prevare za naivne.
Bolje radi nesto posteno, ima sve vise i vise ljudi koji se plase da ulaze u Bitcoin same zato sto su culi za prevare kod kriptovaluta.
Samo usporavate rast celog sistema za mogucnost brzog prfita na srecu. Stvarno greota ljudi...

Yes, seriously. No one can know this tho, not even applications that exist for primary reason to estimate these things.
It depends on the network, but for the reference this transaction has a fee of 40 satoshi/byte. Which is not too bad, but you never know these things.
Here is one of the websites that estimates these things as I am talking mostly from recent personal experience bitcoinfees.earn.com

Heh, if it was only that easy.

No. The problem isn't the lack of anything, it is a virtual limit in the code that limits the amount of transactions that can get confirmed in a certain amount of time. This was created to stop the spam, but now the network is so big that we needed to increase the limit.

This was done with segwit and planed with Lightning Network and now network can use both of these, but the development of the programs that will use these technologies are still in testing.

Yeah, the latest version has some serious improvements for syncing.
As far as I understand, spent transaction outputs where downloaded twice or something, once in the transaction that placed coins on it and the second time when they were spent. So we get syncing that is like twice as fast in the most recent major release.

No. If you don't control the address or don't know who does and is willing to give you back, then no.

You can install Linux in the future to avoid viruses and use a software wallet so that you actually control your bitcoins.

My bad. It seems to be quite the low fee actually. The block explorer I was using is pretty bad.
It could easily take days, maybe week.

1. As far as I understand, no.
2. No, it is just inputs that are treated differently. I think.
3. I assume that it could, at least for those segwit inputs. The non-segwit inputs will have to be on the block in entirety.
4. It is not believed, it is understood. Segwit transactions take less space on the block then the non-segwit ones as they don't put a signature on the blockchain.
Less space that transaction takes means that miners take up less of the space of their block by including that transaction then the bigger ones, which means they can fit more of them in a block for the same price. With power of supply and demand prices go down for segwit transactions, as they are less costly to include.

By generating addresses you create a private key for that address that can be used to send bitcoins.
So getting those two things together is pretty hard and poses a lot of questions on what exactly and for what purpose you are trying to do with this.

Technically what you are asking is probably to generate an address, import it in bitcoind and then keep the private keys somewhere else.
But where do you want to keep them and how are you going to get them there in an automated way is a question on it's own.

Just disabling the feature of sending bitcoins in bitcoind is not supported and can't really be done without some tinkering (not to say hacking).

TLDR; Generating addresses means your machine knows the private key. What do you want to do with the private key?
As you need to get rid of it in order to have a watch only address. Otherwise you will not be able to use bitcoind.

Sure it is very different if you actually care for some reason what happened and not just what the current state is. But when it comes to currencies, most people don't care ,and really there is no reason why they should, about who owned how much money in the past. Sure maybe some historians do, but for the purpose of currency, it is useless. In PoW that is necessary, but in PoS it isn't so it shouldn't be there. It is just a cost for the nodes to keep a history.

The history doesn't matter in PoS. It doesn't matter in PoW either, it is just that you can't show the current state in PoW without showing the past.

And that is my point. There is no reason for a blockchain in a PoS currency. It is just a cost. It is a scam to make it sound like it has anything to do with Bitcoin, but it doesn't. The technology used for PoS was used for decades before Bitcoin existed, it is nothing new, just a marketing trick of the banks where they use a new trend to sell their old services in a new package.

You don't have to be running a node from the beginning to know that the blockchain that you are following is the same one as it always was in Bitcoin. In PoS that is not the case. In PoS there are people who can give to chains that are both equally valid and that the nodes can't decide whether they received the coins or not, even tho they see both chains. In PoW that isn't the case.

The point is that PoS coins are just P2P technology. Not that different then using torrents for ledgers. PoW is something new, a different technology, that binds digital to physical in an impressive way.


Bircoin can run on green energy, like the rest of the digital technology. It can be run from solar panels in the dessert where nothing grows.
Cash needs trees to be cut for paper or for plastic to be used that is polluting the world. Either way, the reason that Bitcoin was created for wasn't to be more ecofriendly then fiat, it was to be more decentralized and secure.

Wouldn't say that they assume it is a male as much as they refer to him as a male, since Satoshi Nakamoto is a male Japanese name, as far as I know.

You own all of the coins from forks that happened after you acquired those coins. Whatever your balance of BTC is during the fork, you get the same amount in the fork coins.

There are no scheduled popular forks now and other the Bitcoin Cash, there were no serious forks in the past. Bitcoin Gold was a very unpopular fork, but it was at least well known.

Running a node with the older version is absolutely ok. Bitcoin Core has never hard-forked so all the versions should be backward compatible.
It will be a lot faster if you run the most recent version and there are probably some other benefits other then the efficiency.

You should compile from source the newest versions regularly.