Bitcoin Forum
April 18, 2015, 03:12:01 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.10.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 ... 206 »
281  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Miners are killing bitcoin on: January 13, 2015, 06:26:03 PM
25 bitcoins are created every 10 minutes regardless of the number of miners on the network.

How exactly are miners / mining killing bitcoin?


Well, as far as I understand the biggest miners could actually "kill" the blockchain if most of them shut down their operations at the same time.


Only to the extent that it would take longer to reach the next difficulty adjustment.  Yes, mining is tending towards centralization, but it's in no way centralized enough such that transactions would never confirm if the big miners called it quits.
282  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Miners are killing bitcoin on: January 13, 2015, 06:22:23 PM
I'm shocked by some of posts in this thread.

Let's look at a few examples:

Quote
No. False design. Inflation. Miners can't change the number of coins they mine, not their fault at all.

Having a predictable supply of money is good.  Having the ability to inflate the money supply if necessary is also good.  Inflating the money supply irresponsibly is bad, but inflation itself needn't be.  

Quote
These corporations are setting up shop pumping out more bitcoin than they even have a demand for.

Lmao, what?  Dunce cap?

Quote
Inflation is the biggest factor at the moment. It takes a ton of new money each day to keep prices at the current level.

Not even close.  Inflation didn't stop the ridiculous rally to >$1,100, did it?

Quote
Bitcoins design is faulty from economic standpoint. Logical mistakes in it. Inflation kills it.

Mentioned above, the ability to inflate a currency when necessary is extremely beneficial.  Only irresponsible inflation is bad.

Quote
The point is,THEY ARE PRODUCING BITCOIN AT A ALARMING RATE.

Hilariously stupid comment.

Quote
I think this is the biggest problem facing bitcoin right now.  Selling pressure + non profitable mining is not a good situation in this very pivotal time.

There's really nothing useful or informative about this assumption.  We already know that mining tends towards an equilibrium between difficulty and price.  Since we've been near equilibrium for some time now, we can expect the difficulty to drop if the price continues to drop (which it will, and it already has).

I'll stop there.   Those were just from the first page, and I didn't even make it all the way down.  Based on this, I'm almost just tempted to say people in general are too stupid to form their own economy, at least democratically.  Democracy --> mediocrity.
283  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [Review] Spondoolies SP20 Legendary Review on: January 13, 2015, 05:47:58 AM
Woo, some of asics is over temp  Smiley

yeah he needs to drop his max volt number down from 0.79 to 0.74

then check his temps in 2 hours.

He has the correct psu to run fast. 


@op

thanks for the review.

Is there a noticeable decrease in performance when dropping the voltage to 0.74. It does not seem like a huge drop so I'm wondering if I myself can do this and still retain the average 1.6 T performance. I guess I shall find out Smiley


Here's a screencap of performance at those settings.  The dip in hashrate in the 24-hour graph is the result of rig rental.



284  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: [WTS] Spondoolies SP-20 + 1300W EVGA PSU on: January 13, 2015, 02:48:47 AM
Are you flexible on escrow and price?

Spondoolies was selling them for $500 each several weeks ago (the difficulty has increased since then) and the price of your PSU is only ~$180 on amazon.

edit: I sent you a pm

Responded to PM.

Does anyone have a reference to support the claim that Spondoolies was selling SP20's at $500?

Edit:  This is stated in the PM I sent you, but for the community I may be flexible on price, but not on escrow.
285  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: [WTS] Spondoolies SP-20 + 1300W EVGA PSU on: January 13, 2015, 02:37:33 AM
I'm curious about the max voltage setting. Do you have a link to where philipma1957 advises you to do this and his reason (if it's in your review I'll just that out).

Yes, it's in the review thread.  Here you go: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=896910.msg9873855#msg9873855
286  Economy / Computer hardware / [WTS] Spondoolies SP-20 + 1300W EVGA PSU on: January 12, 2015, 11:25:38 PM
Hello,

I'm looking to sell one (1) Spondooies SP20.  This unit being sold is that which I received from Spondoolies' legendary member review offer.  The review I posted, which includes pictures, can be found here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=896910.msg9873514#msg9873514

Included with the miner is one (1) EVGA 1300W Gold PSU.  A description of the PSU can be found here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00COIZTZM/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Both the SP20 and the PSU run without issue.  The SP20 has been running 24/7 at the settings listed in my review, except that I dropped the max voltage from 0.79 to 0.74 after the review per advisement from philipma1957.

Price:  $720 USD equivalent in BTC + shipping from the USA.  Local pick-up in Chicago area preferred; I'll accept cash if we meet in person.

Additional notes:  No escrow if you do not select local pick-up; once payment is received I will ship ASAP (i.e. same day time-permitting, or following business day, with small refunds given for any additional delays in shipping).  I've never used escrow as a seller (edit:  I used escrow once for half of the value at which I sold a BFL ASIC to 2weiX) and have had no issues.  See my trust for verification of, and references to, some of these transactions.

Hope to do business with you soon! Smiley

Edit: I'm open to offers given the recent drop in price.
287  Economy / Gambling / Re: Simple game with a 66% chance of winning every time NO RAKE HOUSE TAKES NOTHING on: January 12, 2015, 06:06:08 AM
How can we know you won't just run away with money?

How can we know if your alt accounts won't always be the winners?
I don't know how to answer the first question. Clearly there is no magic way I can prove I won't run off.
When you give money to any person or entity you never can be 100% certain.
The amount is so small that it seems almost nonsensical if I was trying to scam.

I have no way of verifying the people who post on this thread. How do I prove to everyone else that you are not just a shill which I will then post from saying this account is legit? How can anyone know that with anyone? 90% of this damn site is shills for people who want to push their bullshit agenda.


With no possible way to verify I am legitimate I guess this is over before it ever started.
For the record the joint, I thought this up a whole 600,000 milliseconds before posting it.


Lol.  Hey, that's twice as long as I thought!  I'll also give you a little credit because you didn't start attacking others when they/we started picking your thread apart.
288  Economy / Gambling / Re: Simple game with a 66% chance of winning every time NO RAKE HOUSE TAKES NOTHING on: January 12, 2015, 03:45:39 AM
I registered over a year ago and have been a lurker for a few years.
I can change the amount to even smaller to start. I figured 9$ was a micro amount.
No idea how I could prove myself.
If anyone can tell me I am all ears

If it'll help, I'll share my personal, informal thought process:

"Oh, an account with super low activity wants people to send him money.  Gee, haven't seen this a million times before.  Obviously, could be a scam.  If legit, he doesn't know his way around this place...too many other established, provably-fair sites to choose from.   This reminds me of the half-baked 'guess the number of the jelly beans in the jar' game I thought about running -- but didn't -- when I first joined the forum.  Doesn't he know people are beyond tired of these non-transparent type of service offers?  Hasn't he seen the reaction virtually every manually-operated game/ponzi thread gets?  Wait a second, the payout is terrible.  Oh, look, now he changed the payout.  He probably didn't even know he was going to make this thread when he woke up this morning.  Etc."

All of these thoughts came to mind within seconds.  That's what you're up against with the majority of folk here.  As someone who claims to be a lurker, surely you're aware of this.  How many similar services in threads made by others have you wanted to participate in?
289  Economy / Gambling / Re: Simple game with a 66% chance of winning every time NO RAKE HOUSE TAKES NOTHING on: January 12, 2015, 02:24:49 AM
Yes I would operate with that low of a cut.
What am I loosing here? Why would I not?
My only work is clicking a few buttons and copy and pasting the winning bitcoin wallet addresses.
This is something I can do easily as I sit at a desk all day long for my job.

Hey, to each his own.  But seeing as how you would need more than 6 bettors to take a measly $1 cut in the above example, I don't understand why someone would want to commit so much time to providing such a service when you would make much more money for your time working a minimum wage job.  That's why there are automated, provably-fair gambling sites.  This is neither.

As it stands with current payout, any potential gambler simply needs to decide whether it's worth an extra 1-2% to send their bet to a total stranger.  As soon as any reduction in payout is introduced, there simply won't exist a single reason to bet with this service versus any other number of gambling services that are out there.
290  Economy / Gambling / Re: Simple game with a 66% chance of winning every time on: January 12, 2015, 02:07:21 AM
Pretty simple game.
0.03 BTC to play sent to this address.
12gKp5T2haNx5C95pxrGH4Cdht3QgAa8Qx
Every third 0.03 that is deposited I will use https://www.random.org to pick 2 of the 3 players for that set.
Each of those two winning players receive 0.04 BTC
Only rule other then what is above is that if you win you must post here at least one time that you played and won.
That will prove that everything is legit and everyone was payed out.
If this game is played often enough by enough people I will add different levels. Like .05 bets. Or .1 bets.
Along with better payouts. I don't need to take as much rake if I know more and more people are using this.

If this kind of thing is not allowed here I will remove it.
Otherwise, happy playing.

It's not so much that this isn't allowed as much as it demonstrates that you are hoping to lure in people who are poor at math.  I have a 2/3 chance of winning 33% my original bet.  If I win 2 out of 3 times, I lose 0.01 BTC.
No thanks.
Edit:  Oh, I see.  You change the payout on the fly.  That's much better...  Angry
Edit 2:  Why are people talking about a "house edge" when the house never pays anything of its own and has no reserves?
I dont change the payout on the fly. I made it more money?
I have not taken anything yet. I am not going to change the payout mid game set.
If I do change it, again not mid set, I will notify everyone.
I dont understand what is wrong with this. You have all of these "ponzi" games out right now. These have worse odds then this game by far. People don't realize the money they win has to come from someone loosing. The only difference with my game is more people are winners.
1)  When I say "change payout on the fly," I'm referring to the fact that the payout amount changed during the time I wrote my last post.
2)  "I have not taken anything yet" is an interesting statement.  Changing the payout to 0.045 for each winner must be a temporary change because I'm assuming you won't run a free gambling 'service' forever.
3)  If you do change it, it will be because you finally want a cut.  That cut will be automatic as the 'house' has no reserves and never pays from its own wallet.
4)  I wouldn't justify a service with bad odds simply because there are other services with worse odds.   My guess is you saw that some ponzi operators have profited at the expense of dumb people and you saw your calling.
5)  That being said, this isn't a ponzi.  When (not "if") you change your payout rate, you *never* lose because you never bet.  In short, you are running a service that enables people to bet and will eventually charge them to do so.  To make it worth your while, you will likely charge an amount that leaves betters with very unfavorable odds compared to many established "provably-fair" gambling sites.  
In short, I think you went from idea to execution in a single day.
For the time being without myself taking a cut the odds are good.
Obviously as said in the OP I will eventually add a house take based on how many people are playing the game.
Once I do I will make certain all the players know I added this. Then it is up to them to decide how the odds are at that point. I will try to make this as little as possible so that it does not really effect the odds. Again I will figure out what that number is when I see how many people play.

For now you win 0.045 so there should not be any other thought then for that payout of 150%. Once the change comes then people should decide.


Let's assume that you would like to keep your odds competitive against other gambling services.  Just as an example, let's say that you decide upon a 2% cut when you lower the payout amount.  If I recall correctly, there are provably-fair sites with a house edge lower than 2%, but still, 2% isn't too bad.

In this case, would you continue to operate this service while taking a 0.0018 BTC (about 48 cents) cut from each set? 

My guess is that, no, 48 cents per set would not be worth your while.
291  Economy / Gambling / Re: Simple game with a 66% chance of winning every time on: January 12, 2015, 01:50:05 AM
Pretty simple game.
0.03 BTC to play sent to this address.
12gKp5T2haNx5C95pxrGH4Cdht3QgAa8Qx
Every third 0.03 that is deposited I will use https://www.random.org to pick 2 of the 3 players for that set.
Each of those two winning players receive 0.04 BTC
Only rule other then what is above is that if you win you must post here at least one time that you played and won.
That will prove that everything is legit and everyone was payed out.
If this game is played often enough by enough people I will add different levels. Like .05 bets. Or .1 bets.
Along with better payouts. I don't need to take as much rake if I know more and more people are using this.

If this kind of thing is not allowed here I will remove it.
Otherwise, happy playing.

It's not so much that this isn't allowed as much as it demonstrates that you are hoping to lure in people who are poor at math.  I have a 2/3 chance of winning 33% my original bet.  If I win 2 out of 3 times, I lose 0.01 BTC.
No thanks.
Edit:  Oh, I see.  You change the payout on the fly.  That's much better...  Angry
Edit 2:  Why are people talking about a "house edge" when the house never pays anything of its own and has no reserves?
I dont change the payout on the fly. I made it more money?
I have not taken anything yet. I am not going to change the payout mid game set.
If I do change it, again not mid set, I will notify everyone.
I dont understand what is wrong with this. You have all of these "ponzi" games out right now. These have worse odds then this game by far. People don't realize the money they win has to come from someone loosing. The only difference with my game is more people are winners.

1)  When I say "change payout on the fly," I'm referring to the fact that the payout amount changed during the time I wrote my last post.

2)  "I have not taken anything yet" is an interesting statement.  Changing the payout to 0.045 for each winner must be a temporary change because I'm assuming you won't run a free gambling 'service' forever.

3)  If you do change it, it will be because you finally want a cut.  That cut will be automatic as the 'house' has no reserves and never pays from its own wallet.

4)  I wouldn't justify a service with bad odds simply because there are other services with worse odds.   My guess is you saw that some ponzi operators have profited at the expense of dumb people and you saw your calling.

5)  That being said, this isn't a ponzi.  When (not "if") you change your payout rate, you *never* lose because you never bet.  In short, you are running a service that enables people to bet and will eventually charge them to do so.  To make it worth your while, you will likely charge an amount that leaves betters with very unfavorable odds compared to many established "provably-fair" gambling sites.  

In short, I think you went from idea to execution in a single day.
292  Economy / Gambling / Re: Simple game with a 66% chance of winning every time on: January 12, 2015, 01:24:09 AM
Pretty simple game.
0.03 BTC to play sent to this address.
12gKp5T2haNx5C95pxrGH4Cdht3QgAa8Qx
Every third 0.03 that is deposited I will use https://www.random.org to pick 2 of the 3 players for that set.
Each of those two winning players receive 0.04 BTC
Only rule other then what is above is that if you win you must post here at least one time that you played and won.
That will prove that everything is legit and everyone was payed out.
If this game is played often enough by enough people I will add different levels. Like .05 bets. Or .1 bets.
Along with better payouts. I don't need to take as much rake if I know more and more people are using this.

If this kind of thing is not allowed here I will remove it.
Otherwise, happy playing.


It's not so much that this isn't allowed as much as it demonstrates that you are hoping to lure in people who are poor at math.  I have a 2/3 chance of winning 33% my original bet.  If I win 2 out of 3 times, I lose 0.01 BTC.

No thanks.

Edit:  Oh, I see.  You change the payout on the fly.  That's much better...  Angry

Edit 2:  Why are people talking about a "house edge" when the house never pays anything of its own and has no reserves?
293  Other / Meta / Re: Three perfectly good examples of how the trust system is flawed on: January 09, 2015, 07:08:50 PM
Trust is opinionated.  Do you expect everyone to agree with you?  It's problematic enough that a sizable number of people believe trust only applies to business transactions whereas others believe the trust system applies more generally.

Unless you're the type of person who is willing to trust a person *solely* because of what others think, then I don't see what harm comes from the trust system. 

Let me ask you this:  If the trust system were completely removed right now, do to think it would be easier or harder (or the same) to trust someone? Is the information yielded by the trust system useful, wasteful, or a hindrance?
294  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: My firm is looking for investors to create a "Better Bitcoin" on: January 05, 2015, 06:11:26 PM
funny how some people take this obvious troll seriously.  

<3 OP..  keep em coming.  Cheesy

If he's honest that English isn't his first language, then it's possible he isn't trolling.
295  Other / Off-topic / Re: Scientific proof that God exists? on: January 05, 2015, 06:08:22 PM
You know, I strongly believe there is a superior creature upon us, that we can call God.
The problem for us is the religious people refers him as father but most of the time to resolve the problems, since everyone goes once or more in their life to ask to their dad to solve a problem because it's wiser than them.
I believe this God is an alien, no matter how you wanna put it, it's like that.
First is because it's extra-terrestrial, second because I think he/she lives in another plane dimensional/time/techology, and surely there is a better wifi there.

Then what would you call that which governs both "another plane dimensional/time/technology" (uh, what?) and God/alien/"superior creature" residing within it?

I think you should look at what you said more carefully as it's riddled with problems.  You're describing something like a polytheistic god.
296  Other / Off-topic / Re: Scientific proof that God exists? on: January 05, 2015, 06:04:14 PM
debating whether God exists in an empirical context is a flawed approach.

It is a flawed approach because God has no limitations.

God's WORD is very real and
I suspect that is a better topic for debate/discussion.


No, it's not a flawed approach "because God has no limitations."  You are incorrect here because. while you are making the presumption that God both exists and has "no limitations," you are not treating it as a presumption, but rather as a given.

It's a flawed approach specifically because it is unsound to support a theory of something which is defined as being beyond the scope of empiricism with empirical evidence.
297  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: My firm is looking for investors to create a "Better Bitcoin" on: January 04, 2015, 11:31:24 PM
Hello please excuse my English as it is not my native language. While Bitcoin is great and an amazing piece of technology, after 2 years of research our firm has come up with a plan for a better Bitcoin. You will be investing in a new company who's mission is to turn Bitcoin into the myspace of cryptocurrency, while controlling and profiting off our own better version. How will our firm achieve this? I will outline some of the basics below.

As you may already be aware. Bitcoin is an amazing piece of technology, but it isn't a proprietary technology, as in, Bitcoin isn't a unique piece of technology, as we have seen from the numerous alt coins, Bitcoin can be easily cloned and replicated. Since Bitcoin isn't a proprietary piece of technology it's just a faith currency and based on marketing and popularity.

1. We will hire some programmers to take a look and dissect bitcoin, we will tweak, reprogram it to make a better version with better features.

2. We will hire a professional PR/Marketing firm, they will help us create a more catchier, mainstream friendly, brand winning name for our "Better Bitcoin".

3. The very same PR/Marketing firm will be looking at our product and marketing it to the mainstream. We're talking about the same kind of people who are able to turn Coca Cola or McDonalds into huge global brands. Things like Billboards around the world, professionally made television commercials on Major networks, Magazine ads, etc etc

4. We will approach and pay Celebrities from Hollywood (actors, singers etc) to endorse our "better bitcoin" (feature in our commercials) Talk about in interviews.

5. Ontop of doing these things, we will also be looking at ways to demonize Bitcoin, both to the general public and governments.

We will do infomercials and interviews and articles about how bad and evil bitcoin is (let's look at bitcoins history, mtgox, danny brewster, silkroad) Bitcoin has a lot of bad history surrounding it, we can use this to scare the public to shy away from bitcoin and the only way they can feel safe is to use our "better bitcoin".

Also use paid trolls on all the social network platforms to really spread negative things about Bitcoin to make the mainstreamer very afraid of it.

Also be hiring lobbyist to approach governments around the world to encourage bitcoin to be illegal in all those countries and our "better bitcoin" to be the safer, legal one to use.

We have estimated that we could get started doing all this for a small sum of 10 million dollars usd.

Q. How will the investor make money?
A. If we decide to produce 1 billion of these (rough figures) "better bitcoin" tokens, the firm will prehold at least 10 million of these tokens. This means our "better bitcoin" just has to trade at 1 dollar usd each for us to make our money back, we project that we could easily see our "better bitcoin' being worth $100 each.


Lastly gentlemen. I want to leave you with this thought. There was a time when Myspace was considered the King of "Social Networking" There was a time when people really believed this to be a game changer and a lot of people invested a lot of money into it. Then came Facebook and blew that away. "Better Bitcoin" is aiming to be that Facebook and turn Bitcoin into the myspace of cryptocurrency.

Thank you for your time reading this, we will post more details soon as too how you can invest. All feedback welcomed.





 

1)  You talk about your "firm."  Who is a part of your firm (first and last names, please)?  It sounds like your "firm" = you and maybe some unpaid friends of yours.

2)  Two years of research?  Can you provide specific examples of your findings and their implications?

3)  Why do you think it's a good idea to "demonize" Bitcoin when >99% of the global population completely lacks a technical understanding of how cryptocurrencies in general, let alone Bitcoin, work? 

4)  Did you make all of this up in 10 minutes?   I agree with the poster who commented that this plan has the depth one would expect an average 14 year-old to come up with during his school lunch break.
298  Economy / Games and rounds / Re: Interrogate a Killer - Win BTC on: December 31, 2014, 11:57:38 PM
Was the victim a cop?

Lol I was holding off on this question.

@ OP, are you looking for the answers to all three questions at once? 
299  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin was just an investment? on: December 31, 2014, 11:53:53 PM
yes it will replace fiat
you can find a lot of merchants accepting this for payment where they were accepting CC or other methods only in past
its on the way to be an alternate to fiat, its currency of future

A replacement is something entirely different than an alternative.
300  Economy / Games and rounds / Re: Interrogate a Killer - Win BTC on: December 31, 2014, 11:40:27 PM
What was the Victim's job?

To keep losers like me away from law abiding citizens.

[0.095]

For what reasons do you consider yourself a loser?
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 ... 206 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!