Годами в финансах считали, что биткойны не более чем глупая технологическая игра, причуда, мыльный пузырь. Но это не совсем так. Сейчас биткойны воспринимаются серьёзно и люди (в том числе инвесторы и правительства) начинают уделять им внимание. http://bitnovosti.com/2016/02/29/serious-bitcoin/ |
|
|
|
Вы задумывались над тем, почему биткойна так боятся чиновники? Почему у них припекает от одной лишь мысли о биткойне? Дело в том, что биткойн не только позволяет уклоняться от инфляционного налога, но и уклоняться от официальных государственных налогов. http://bitnovosti.com/2016/02/29/bitcoin-taxes/ |
|
|
|
did the ETH devs say they would allow it to scale?
Currently, it scales much worse than Bitcoin (no big wonder, with full-blown Turing-complete language on blockchain). Half-year into existence, its blockchain already approaching 10GB and growing fast. There is some vague handwaving about future "sharding" and whatnot, but realistically, its chain will be much bigger than Bitcoin's, and it'll happen pretty soon. Interesting to see how they'll cope with their own scaling crisis. |
|
|
|
А что же делать обычным пользователям и трейдерам если начнут реализовываться такие сценарии? Кто бы еще дал инструкции что произойдет с теми биткойнами которые на кошельке
Зависит от того, что это за кошелек. Если это онлайн-кошелек (Coinbase, Circle), или счет на одном из биткойн-сервисов (типа бирж и т.п.), то увы у вас останутся только те биткойны, которые признает данный онлайн-сервис. Если у вас свой кошелек, который дает вам полный контроль над своими секретными ключами, то после сплита у вас будет одинаковое количество биткойнов обеих версий. То есть, если до сплита у вас было 100 BTC, после сплита у вас будет 100 Core BTC и 100 Classic BTC. Если вы хотите просто пересидеть период неразберихи, то ничего делать в таком случае не нужно, просто некоторое время не надо делать транзакции, пока пыль не осядет. С облегченными кошельками ситуация чуть сложнее, зависит от позиции производителя кошелька. Видимо, производители должны будут выпустить патчи, которые позволят пользователям поддерживать ту или иную версию, или обе сразу. Для SPV-кошельков, которые целиком зависят от серверов валидации, то какой версии они будут следовать зависит от того, какую версию поддержит производитель кошелька (либо, нужно искать настройки для того, чтобы подключиться к серверу валидации, поддерживающего нужный форк: Core или Classic). |
|
|
|
Раздвоение Биткойна в результате хард форка реальная угрозаРазделение Биткойна на две цепи в результате хард форка вполне реальная угроза. Сторонники Classic всячески стараются ее замазать, но она тем не менее существует. Есть два основных сценария, по которым она может реализоваться. http://bitnovosti.com/2016/02/11/razdvoenie-bitcoina/
|
|
|
|
MOA: classic got released today and the price is $10 higher than yesterday... strange. Has the economic majority teamed up with the CIA/GCHQ just to fuck with our heads?  The price started a healthy rise and then fell like a rock once the news of Classic release hit. Any developments towards a contentious hard fork dumps the price down. It's ALWAYS like this, and never the other way around. By this alone, hard fork pushers should get a clue what the markets really want. But they remain clueless nonetheless. |
|
|
|
Jeff and Gavin are now lead maintainers of Classic. Toomin is now listed as a consultant of some kind.
By this reshuffling alone you can tell that there is much more going on than just "an increase to 2MB everyone wants! no surprises!" |
|
|
|
All these nonsense and attacks frustrate me-- they waste a tone of time and energy that could be used driving Bitcoin forward.
I guess it's just the taste of things to come. The more decentralized Bitcoin becomes pain in the ass for governments and their banker buddies, the more they try to employ above- and below-ground political methods, time-proven divide and conquer tactics and every dirty trick imaginable to subdue and castrate it into a PayPal-with-a-twist. This worked quite well with the original PayPal, you know. You need to be prepared for this. |
|
|
|
The number of classic nodes seem to have hit their maximum for now.
I just wonder why Gavin is so sure that "thousands of Classic nodes will appear". They didn't appear for XT. Maybe, he knows that "a little help from unknown friends" is sure to come... |
|
|
|
finex and poloniex
Thanks sir. Gonna see what they're looking. I'm a bit tired of Kraken. Poloniex is great for altcoin trading and they have the best charting tools. But their BTC/USD book is almost non-existent. Bitfinex is great for BTC/USD trading, both cash and leveraged. |
|
|
|
bitcoinocracy has been spammed between every blockstream fanboy and affiliate imaginable.. thus not a fair indicator.
I'm afraid you're confused. Bitcoinocracy is a cryptographic opinion site-- it has its limitations (terrible privacy, etc.) but at least it is resistant to sybils. Due to the privacy issues, the only places I've ever posted it has been in response to people claiming that no one opposes these recent hardfork proposals. The reality is that much of the promotion of classic is powered by sockpuppets, when you go to more sockpuppet resistant venues (like in person meetings or bitcoinocracy) you see far less to none at all of it. lol blockstream have sockpuppets too.. icebreaker, lauda, carlton. are not blockstream coders but obvious shills. lol and i you say bitcoinocracy cannot be attacked by sybil? so 1 person with 5 addresses cant sign 5 different keys.. riiiiiiiiiigggghhhhtttt.. also the link has been spammed to mainly the blockstream fanboys so lets say only 1% of the general population wants to reveal funding.. if the link has been passed to lets say 5000 blockstreamers but only 1000 non-blockstreamers.. then just by more people seeing the link would get a biased 50:10 result. then we could have an exchange that has several large wallets sign several addresses.. thus causing a change in results. the fnnier thing is that even though bitcoinocracy is not fool proof. even things like the peer node crawler websites are biased too.. claiming that even versions of under 0.12 (where people have not upgraded in months) are clumped together in the category that is supposedly in favour of blockstream. what would be more sensible is to have v0.11 and below put into a separate category defined as "undecided" It's no wonder (the very rare non-sockpuppet) bloatblockers are such blithering idiots that they don't even understand what is being discussed. I mean, they fell for such ridiculous propaganda as "OMG! The sky is falling Jan 2016, so we need to bloat blocks to 20MB right away!" And when the sky didn't fall as predicted, did they learn ANYTHING? No sir, they beelined for the next bait fed to them. Oh, humanity. |
|
|
|
Wouldn't citing the results of votes from here require partial trust to the creator/maintainer? It wouldn't be hard for them to hide certain votes from the public to manipulate total results would it?
The point is, rigging the vote with multiple sock puppets is much easier when voting is done without any Proof-of-Stake. Bitcoinocracy attempts to use your BTC holdings as such proof of stake. I share privacy concerns about its use but I don't really see how it could be turned into a secret ballot. In any case, the voters voluntarily chose to express their opinions. So far as I know, the source code for this site is on Github. Since it displays all signatures used to vote, anyone can see for himself that the opinions expressed are backed by real BTC that the voters have under their control. Yes, the owner of the site may choose to withhold some of the votes from showing up, but I don't see what could be possibly achieved by it? If I don't see my vote showing up, I'd immediately start complaining about it publicly, thus casting doubt on the site. No complaints like this appeared so far. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
: http://bitnovosti.com/2016/03/16/why-your-ethereum-project-will-fail/#comment-112986
