Noone is forcing you to include the fee
Armory is. Said about 1000 times in this thread So use a different client, or bug the Armory developers to change it. You are a complaining about a problem with the software you have chosen to use, not with Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Got a question regarding the selling of coin in the UK via bank transfer, say someone I know has done it a few times in the last couple of months in quite big denominations, £50 to £400 at a time, averaging about £150 a time, would there be any repercussions from this? would the bank start asking questions? say each month there has been about 3k going in from these transactions what would happen, if anything? Ultimately only your bank know for sure, but if you are regularly receiving 3k a month from various bank transfers in small chunks, it is very likely that the bank will flag your account and either close it or require you to open a business account instead. |
|
|
|
this falls under the category of "house squatters" get a lawyer, and they will issue to get the legal right for them to get out of the place.
It is probably even more complicated than that, if she is living with the son in a separate building on the same land. Depending on how much you care about getting the son in trouble, waiting until there are drugs or other illegal items in the trailer and then calling the police is one option. |
|
|
|
Lesson: ...
Don't use a personal account to conduct business. Don't be surprised if your account gets closed as a result. |
|
|
|
Don't provide services that can be "stolen", then. No armed forces? No border control? No roads? So why can government kill with impunity? It can't. |
|
|
|
They can pay it to themselves, as the p2pool does, and then later distribute it based on some fee/nofee calculation of course - but that of course won't be all the tx fees, just their payout % of them.
Yes, as I said: It would be possible for the 'p2p' pool as described by Bitmain, for their share of the tx fees. |
|
|
|
so let them freeload.
if enough people agreed to pay and as a side effect people who didn't pay for it enjoy it too where is the problem.
Why should they (you) be entitled to use the services others have paid for? And some don't pay, the rest have to pay more to make up for it. That makes it more likely that some more will decide not to pay, so the remaining pay even more, and so on. |
|
|
|
0% fees and PPLNS earnings. (The tx fee is not paid out to miners for maintaining cost and the bonus for our engineers.)
This is not possible on the existing p2pool share chain. Every p2pool node would have to upgrade(?) to bitmains version. It would be possible for the 'p2p' pool as described by Bitmain, for their share of the tx fees. Miners mining on this pool are not p2pool miners, and do not have to run bitcoind or p2pool itself. They connect to a pool just like any other, except that in this case the pool is a p2pool node. The pool is the node, and would recieve the coinbase payout. It would then pay the miners the portion of the 25BTC payout that Bitmain received, according to PPLNS, and keep the tx fees portion of the payout itself. Again, This is not how p2pool works. The generation tx does NOT go to a node, it goes directly to the miners with active shares (ALL the miners), this is what makes p2pool trust-less and is not something I would see as negotiable with other p2pool miners... The generation tx goes to all the nodes with an active share. The assumption behind this portion of the thread is that one of those nodes would be the Bitmain 'p2p' pool, rather than the indivdual miners being nodes and generating their own shares. Yes. And in this assumed setup, the Bitmain 'p2p' pool would be one of those miners. It would receive its portion of the 25+tx fees payout, not the users mining on the pool. It could then split the payout to the actual users however it wanted to. Users of the 'p2p' pool would not be p2pool miners, and would not have their own shares in the sharechain. (We don't know if this is actually what is planned, as they have provided no information about how their p2pool would work, the discussion is about whether it would be feasible.) |
|
|
|
For those of you who are wondering why Auroracoin came to a halt in Iceland, the answer is very simple. ... there was no actual demand for them from normal Icelanders, and no way to spend them on anything useful? |
|
|
|
0% fees and PPLNS earnings. (The tx fee is not paid out to miners for maintaining cost and the bonus for our engineers.)
This is not possible on the existing p2pool share chain. Every p2pool node would have to upgrade(?) to bitmains version. It would be possible for the 'p2p' pool as described by Bitmain, for their share of the tx fees. Miners mining on this pool are not p2pool miners, and do not have to run bitcoind or p2pool itself. They connect to a pool just like any other, except that in this case the pool is a p2pool node. The pool is the node, and would recieve the coinbase payout. It would then pay the miners the portion of the 25BTC payout that Bitmain received, according to PPLNS, and keep the tx fees portion of the payout itself. |
|
|
|
In my opinion people agree to pay taxes for 2 main reasons:
- People are afraid to consequences ( penalties, jail, etc. )
- People think states provide useful services with tax money ( and they strongly believe it... )
if people believed the states provide useful services there would be no need to threaten them with violence if they refused to pay. the obvious fact is that almost no one would buy the government's services at the current price. No, they would freeload on the backs of those who did pay. Many, if not most, government services cannot be isolated to single individuals, they benefit many people. |
|
|
|
Now you just place a typical PPLNS framework on top of your node. People register with a user name. When they connect with that name, since it's not a BTC address, their hash rate gets added to the node's default address. Now you have all of this hashing power on one address that is contributing to the share chain. As soon as a block is found, that address is paid. Then, you just divvy out the payment to the miners based on a standard PPLNS system.
That does nothing to solve the lost work due to the short p2pool share time. |
|
|
|
Note that bank deposit insurance schemes are pointless. The 100 000 number means nothing. Just one small to mid size bank can be covered by these schemes; but in a crisis there will be several banks and AFAIK the money in the scheme is roughly 1/10 of a percent of all deposits in a region
The US deposit protection scheme does run like that, where there is a defined fund to pay out, and the possibility of exhausting it. Other countries, such as the UK, do not have a limited fund. All deposits are guaranteed up to the insured limit. |
|
|
|
They aren't claiming copyright for the concept of an API. (Which would be a patent anyway) They are claiming copyright over their specific java APIs. Unless an altcoin has reimplemented a previously copyrighted API, this is irrelevant. |
|
|
|
As I understand it, with CFDs one doesn't own an underlaying stock, but rather makes a gamble on wether its value would increase or decrease, thus taking the risk of losing even though the stock itself might do just fine in the long term.
How is that different from making bets on flipping a coin and why one form is allowed, while other is not? One is something where you can make an informed decision as to which is more likely, up or down. The other is completely random, heads or tails. It is the same distinction between competitions and lotteries. One is at least in part a game of skill. The other is a pure game of luck. |
|
|
|
2) Any entity listed in the business registry is a business;
So D&B are infallible? Are they the Pope? If they listed God, would you then state that God must be a business? |
|
|
|
|
You could presumably find out, by looking at the IP addresses those workers are connecting from? If there are clumps of machines coming from the same IP address or IP block, it is probably a farm. If they are all individual IP addresses from all over the world, almost certainly a botnet?
|
|
|
|
However this guy takes the cake for throwing the most hardware at the pool for the least effectiveness: {"hashrate1m": "34.4G", "hashrate5m": "36.3G", "hashrate1hr": "36.3G", "hashrate1d": "37.6G", "hashrate7d": "30.8G", "workers": 2389}
And yes it really does appear he has over 2000 workers. Looks like a botnet. Luckily ckpool can handle tons of connections without breaking into a sweat. If you're confident it is a botnet, why is it still allowed to use the pool? Isn't that making you, in some small way, complicit in the misuse of other's resources? |
|
|
|
Do I didn't get all my trust for working my ass off for 3 years making sure everyone I trade with is satisfied? I never thought of it that way.
I don't know if this was in response to my post: Looks like default trust is turning into a good old boys network. It is, by definition, an old boys network. You cannot get in by your own actions. You cannot get kicked out by your own actions. It is purely the choice of the existing members. If so, then yes you got your feedback, and overall trust numbers by proving over time that you were a trustworthy person. Was that what got you into the default trust network? I have no idea. If anyone in DefaultTrust or DefaultTrust+1 trusts you, then you are in. If they don't, you aren't. You could be the most trustworthy person in the world, but have not come to the attention of the right people, and be excluded, or you could be a confirmed scammer, and still be included, as long as one of those people maintains his trust rating. Because of account reselling, they might not even be the same people who were originally trusted. Your extremely positive trust ratings are likely to be a good indication you are trustworthy. Simply being in the default trust network is an incredibly poor indication of that one way or the other. The default trust network is simply a bad thing. That doesn't reflect poorly on you. |
|
|
|
Creditors should get back the asset (remember, BTC is defined as an asset currency by IRS) they paid. Would it be acceptable to sell a bunch of specific gold, silver, paintings off? No. Give the assets back when the civil judgement is rendered.
And what about creditors who are owed USD? What proportion of the amounts owed are BTC, and what are USD? How much total BTC will be recovered? How much total USD will be recovered? None of those figures are known. The receivers will liquidate any non-money assets owned (yes, including gold, silver or artwork) to determine the final asset value to be shared out. The BTC are not still yours, held on trust by BFL. You are a creditor, and they owe you a debt. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
