Fork the bitcoin code with a new development team. I will say this is very much needed and have two different paths for bitcoin full nodes. Gives better choice, but right now most people accept the bitcoin core dev team without understanding why two groups deving would benefit bitcoin so much! https://opensource.conformal.com/wiki/btcdbtcd is an alternative full-node implementation of the bitcoin protocol written in Go and is currently under active development. We feel that by providing an alternative to bitcoind we can substantially improve the diversity and resilience of the bitcoin ecosystem and infrastructure. |
|
|
|
|
Google is neck and neck with Apple in their belief that they are some kind of techno-aristocracy that own your computer.
It's a common personality trait you'll find among many current and former Google employees.
|
|
|
|
OK since I can already tell we probably won't find common ground, let's just use drug traffickers as a stand-in in the example. Well, ok, but the difference between the CIA and the military is really splitting hairs. |
|
|
|
Noone is forcing you to use circle This is a rather short-sighted viewpoint. It's true today, however there are many, many ways in which this could not remain true tomorrow. Hey Justus - I'm confused as well regarding your statement. Care to clarify? |
|
|
|
Noone is forcing you to use circle This is a rather short-sighted viewpoint. It's true today, however there are many, many ways in which this could not remain true tomorrow. |
|
|
|
And, by the way, preventing money laundering is one of the easiest and most effective ways of reducing terrorism. Only if you use intellectually dishonest definitions of "terrorism". The terrorist organization which has harmed more innocent people than any other currently-existing organization in the world is the US DoD. |
|
|
|
well what exactly do they have left as a value proposition? Are you suggesting they ever had one to begin with? Remember that Ethereum's promise from the beginning was allowing you to do computations on a global distributed computer with no privacy and cycle times in the milliHertz range. Nobody ever bothered to ask if there really was a market for this service in the first place. |
|
|
|
|
The number of newbies with strong feelings about Circle is rather remarkable.
|
|
|
|
That's so insanely cynical for a business that should not be used to store massive amount of Bitcoins anyway. Seriously, when you buy an Amazon giftcard do you think "They'll discontinue gift cards and move to a country where I can't sue them?" You are bad mouthing a company that, as of yet, has done nothing wrong. You call it cynicism, I call it "learning from history". https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=83794.0 |
|
|
|
They are legally prohibited from doing so as a registered MSB.
And what does that mean, exactly? Just that they'll have to be bought out and/or lobby the right regulator before the games can start. |
|
|
|
People: It's one thing to be concerned they are a scam, but Circle cannot literally inflate the amount of actual Bitcoins. They could accept a bunch of customer deposits and then start operating on a fractional reserve. They could play the market, effectively taking a short position, using customer deposits. Wall Street loves that doing that shit. |
|
|
|
The thing that's worrying about this is that these guys have a chance of succeeding.
5 people with money supplied by a wealthy financial institution could do a lot more damage than all the 120,000 well-intentioned guys in this thread.
If programmers can't evolve their software faster than legislators can evolve their laws, they aren't very good programmers. Let the US Congress make Bitcoin illegal. It will simply mean that the pace of innovation will increase. |
|
|
|
Anyone else feel like that whole video just screams SCAM?
Yes. There's no way to do what they claim without operating on fractional reserves. |
|
|
|
I doubt that is going to persuade a judge.
The reading comprehension is weak with this one. |
|
|
|
satoshi is alive.. im not talking about dorian.. but during the dorian saga, satoshi (bitcoin creator) made an announcement that h was not dorian... thus he is alive.. The message wasn't signed so it doesn't count. |
|
|
|
Tx fee prevents another type of attack (namely spamming the memory pool) or at least raises the cost. However there is no required tx fee so if there was no maximum block someone with sufficient mining power for example could make a 1TB block (all free txs made by the miner) and now the blockchain is >1TB.
It's extremely likely that a 1 TB block would be orphaned well before the miner transmitted to his first peer. |
|
|
|
Correction: a block can currently contain 1MB of data. Originally, there was no limit, but at some point the 1MB limit was added to prevent DOS attacks. It was never intended to be permanent and can be increased or removed entirely if necessary (I think Gavin said the limit would be raised once pruning is implemented).
It was 500kb prior. Maybe even lower when max size was first implemented... I wasn't around way back then. The first version of the client had no explicit limit for the size of a block, but there was a 32 MB message size limit so that was the effective max block size. Then as soon as there was an explicit block size limit defined in the code it was set to 1 MB. 500kb was a soft limit, not a protocol limit. |
|
|
|
6. As soon as we are having 6 confirmations, we are accepting the payment.
6 confirmations? Is this really neccessary? You'll have to look into your particular business requirements, but perhaps 3 confirmations would be enough in most cases? Perhaps you really need 10 confirmations? It would be a good idea to understand your particular needs rather than choose an arbitrary number without knowing if it will meet or exceed your needs. This paper could be the basis for an improved calculation: https://bitcoil.co.il/Doublespend.pdf |
|
|
|
I have a feeling that off-chain transaction partially defeats the purpose of BTC. It does defeat the purpose of BTC, yet it's going to take a long time to get rid of them, and there will probably always be some role for them. In the meantime there are ways of making them less insecure, especially in the case of currency exchanges. |
|
|
|
That is just personal holdings. If you include the amount of money held by companies that number could be much higher.
Don't forget that the reason so much of the world is poor is because bad money means that non-elites can't save and accumulate capital to move into the middle class. In a Bitcoin world where such monetary games couldn't happen, we should expect to see the gap in economic prosperity between the "developed" and "developing" countries narrow quite a bit. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
