I think Circle is going to help in that regard. Realistically the average person is not going to go download BitcoinQT and download a multi gigabyte blockchain. But using a service like Circle makes it much more likely that average people would be able to try bitcoin out without doing anything too difficult.
Nonetheless it isn't that hard for the average joe to look online and work out how to download something like Electrum and spend literally 5 minutes setting it up. While for the absolutely lazy it might help, I suspect the issue with not enough acceptance is simply a merchant issue. If more merchants offered to accept it (or even passed on the fee savings they get) then you might see an increase in the overall adoption. |
|
|
|
|
Bump.
cxboy has paid off his loan, happy to take any more loans if anybody wants.
|
|
|
|
how you can get the code from just-dice?
You can type /poker in the chat tab (once you're logged in) and if your account satisfies certain criteria then you'll get a code that you can enter in the SealsWithClubs site for a freeroll. The prize pool in this event is a one-time only thing, but I'm not sure if doog hosts freerolls on a regular basis (albeit with smaller prizes). |
|
|
|
You destroy an essential element of what makes bitcoin bitcoin. Neutrality.
And you blow up the idea of decentralisation with it. There is nothing decentralised about a system where the developers are free to make any change they like and it must be implemented, nor where all miners can simply pick and choose what they want to do. I mean, yes, if these mining pools were ridiculously morally bound they might agree to boycott any txs but you'd never get every single pool on board anyway and eventually one of those will find a block. |
|
|
|
Yes, it is amazing. Happens in politics all the time and people don't care - not till they look at barb wire from the wrong side, anyway.
Maybe they do care once their income drops to zero.
Last time I checked Ghash doesn't actually take a fee so I wouldn't say they don't care, it's more of the fact they don't care enough for them to skip that extra 2% or whatever other pools charge them. It is rather surprising that they don't see it as potentially a threat that could make their hardware useless (as far as earning money goes) but probably they're thinking that everyone else will switch and they can continue to mine feeless. |
|
|
|
Historically the primary ways to become a BTC loser are:
Lending out BTC
Online theft including major sites/exchanges/wallets
Wallet stealing viruses
Welp, lending out is not too bad as long as you play like a bank and take some collateral to ensure that you don't get screwed if they bail. Anyone storing lots on online wallets is begging to be stolen from and should really have their head checked if they've been warned and still continue to do so. Wallet stealing viruses (like most malware) can simply be avoided if you use your common sense (ie don't download random shady stuff like crap pretending to be keygens for example). |
|
|
|
Is it safe to come out again?
I say this because on Sunday we saw the very worst of the so called 'Bitcoin Community' (apologies to most on this forum as probably the silent majority also watched) on both this forum and Reddit where literally hundreds of vitriolic, aggressive, threatening etc posts / conversations were sprayed out left right and center attacking the CEX.IO / GHash.IO entity, including death and violence threats to owners / users of that service.
It's not something limited to solely Bitcoin - it is simply a part of human nature. No matter what you do you're going to have haters from people who are scared that a 51% percent attack will lower the value of their holdings and hence get angry and disabused when we get close to that as it has the potential of dropping the price like a stone. I don't think anything is going to change, no matter what some individuals try to do - you simply cannot change human nature by yourself. |
|
|
|
|
If you haven't formatted the drive there is a chance that some of the data has not been deleted and hence is recoverable. Have you tried to recover the files yet? Depending on how much you lost, you could consider sending it to a professional data recovery service (but only if your wallet has been encrypted) which would set you back quite a bit but would be worth it if you had a lot.
|
|
|
|
|
Mining went out of fashion (if you were looking to make a reasonable profit) like a year back from now - it's become ridiculously hard to get into the game and the electricity overheads and upfront costs don't really help. I would advise you not to get into BTC unless you're trading disposable cash and not your life savings. There is a reasonable probability that we nose-dive so if you can't deal with the losses (it sounds like you're having trouble as it is) don't invest in BTC or mining equipment. Get your cash flow in order first.
|
|
|
|
|
Payment confirmed. Continuing for another week. Thanks FXO.
|
|
|
|
The share price cannot go down. Only up. It is a rule of the x-value.com site.
What you are offering is mathematically impossible. Would you like to tell me how anyone could guarantee a profit, if it could be done with 100% probability you'd have billionaires lining up to add more dough to their pockets. What you're actually offering is a ponzi that is both a lie and a giant SCAM. I would highly recommend that nobody 'invests' in this scam unless you want to lose all your money (might as well donate to charity). |
|
|
|
It seems to me the 51% threat is very real, and there's not much we can do about it. Greed will trump common sense every time. I want to do what I can to contribute to the other 49%. I'm fully aware that the mining-for-profit ship has sailed, but I'd like to learn how to mine as well as offset the 51% as much as I could.
If you're doing this entirely to try and prevent a 51% attack I would advise you not to bother unless you're swimming in money and don't mind losing some of it. To actually have enough hashing power to make any significant change you'd need tens of thousands of dollars, and more than likely you will not get 100% ROI let alone more. Want to help Bitcoin, run a full node. |
|
|
|
|
What interest rate what would you be willing to offer? And how much of each coin do you have as collateral? I can easily muster up enough coins for this loan if you reasonably satisfy both conditions.
|
|
|
|
Theymos has said the only way to recover a hacked account is to sign a message with a bitcoin address you posted somewhere with your account.
If my account was hacked today, I would have no way to recover it - I can't remember where I posted my bitcoin address out of my thousands of posts. It's in my signature, but Theymos has said there is no easy way to track signature edits.
Possible temporary measure (and easy to do) would just be a single thread in the Auction section (which as far as I know has posts that cannot be changed) where one could just post their address. Although we might need to some way to search through the thread for a specific user so that it's easier to see which address you need to sign a message from. |
|
|
|
I dont get it. Why would anyone take loan if he could just convert the altcoin he owns to whatever he needs (BTC or fiat)  For the same reason you don't sell your house to get a car loan - either you need/want to keep the collateral or you are afraid that the price of the alt will go up meaning that when you are able to buy it back you'll get less. Having a loan and paying interest may still save you more than if you were to sell and buy again at a significantly higher price. |
|
|
|
Stealing is never right, it doesn't matter if your entire family is dying of cancer. You can get a real job and make money, or start a business. Taking that money from other people is the worst thing you can do.
I wouldn't make absolute statements unless you are sure they are always right (they never are). You cannot truthfully tell me that if it was necessary you would not steal to ensure the survival of the people you loved most. People stole bread back the 1700s to keep their impoverished families alive. Of course, if you did manage to get past that difficult time it's a different question of whether you'd repay for those things that you stole (ethical) or just keep it (thief IMO). Now that being said, @OP you have to understand that it's impossible for people to actually verify that you're telling the truth and not some well-spoken scammer who has done their research. People have been burned before giving out charity to a scammer and that's why people don't do it anymore. If you did in fact steal to help your parents and grandparents, I won't judge you yet. It depends what you do after. If you pick yourself up when they eventually go and try to lead an ethical life (and repay those debts) then I wouldn't call you a scammer. But then again I'm just another unknown face on the internet. It's really up to you to decide if you're an ethical person - no one can make you believe that or not except you. |
|
|
|
You and doog are not discussing martingale, you are discussing another type of strategy, that appears to be much smarter than martingale and may be smarter than just making random regular bets. They don't appear to be good enough to be +ev, but you guys are also doing some actual math and putting work into it, and that strategy would work better than martingaling because it's smarter.
I called the people doing the regular martingale over and over again stupid, because they are. Your other system is something different and you and doug are using math and critical thinking scales to improve your chances of doubling in a game that is 100% luck, while people using martingale are using stupidity to increase their chances of having a catastrophic loss.
It is was in response to this. Some strategies it seems do have different EV. No matter what bet you make it has the same ev, but not all strategies are equal. There's not much I can say about martingale being stupid. All dice games and 'strategies' are going to be -EV, it's just a matter of how much. I stopped dice betting a long time ago because a) I always seemed to have really shitty luck b) I felt bad about having a -EV even if it only had a small impact on my short term betting. Much better to try my hand at something else. That being said, I've stopped gambling all together... |
|
|
|
There is skill/smarts in knowing smart ways to bet. Doing martingale is stupid, not doing martingale is a type of skill.
Subjective statement, cannot argue against someone else's truth. No matter what bet you make it has the same ev, but not all strategies are equal.
Actually, doog and I have been discussing specific bet patterns that so far suggest that you get a better EV than normal. Please check previous posts. A martingale strategy (for the player) minimizes the amount you can win and maximizes the amount you can lose.
As I've stated, variance changes everything, if you were to win your second bet every single time, you'd be winning with a martingale and breaking even on a flat betting system. Unless you are going to compare probability over an infinite case, chaos will always rule - meaning that no 'strategy' is really better than the other. It's only better if the variance is and will be the same (which it won't except over infinite bets). Not realizing that makes you stupid, plenty of people on this thread don't realize it, and these stupid people have made and will continue to make dooglus lots of coins.
Subjective statement, cannot argue against someone else's truth. |
|
|
|
When you bet your whole bankroll in a single bet, you expect to lose 1% of it.
When you split it up and bet the pieces in order from smallest to biggest, and stop when any bet wins you often don't end up betting the whole bankroll, and so you expect to lose 1% of less than the whole bankroll.
By splitting it up you reduce the amount you expect to bet, and so you reduce the amount you expect to lose.
Ah ok, that makes a lot more sense now. Didn't think of it like that - keep thinking of them as analogous cases which were giving me different results (ie mathematically impossible). I cannot believe I'm saying this but I think you might be right. I went ahead and played around with a case where the player starts at 1 wants to move to 2 by making two bets (of any size between 0-1 inclusive). Hence I went to go graph the function to see if it was true and I got this: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/obkfifgbnlWhere y = probability of succeeding and d = the value of the first initial bet Notice how at both d = 0 and d= 1 the probability is 0.495 as expected (as you are either betting nothing then 1 or 1 then nothing and both are equivalent cases). And in between you get a probability higher than the 0.495 offered for the single bet. I've tried a few set values for cases where you split your value up to more than two and you do get a better result. I can only theorise that this is because as your bet size approaches 0 with the number of bets approaching infinity your expectation approaches 1. However, what I do not understand at the present is why this is so. I almost fell out of my chair when the numbers came out (I checked like 6 times), as it's inferring that you can get better than what the house 'technically' offers. The problem with this is that your expectation is better than just flat betting and logically that doesn't make sense. Both should have the same expectation. I'm going to mull it over. Can you explain why the probability of success increases as you make more smaller bets? Is it for the same reason as well, as you have a better chance of losing less (as your take a risk with only parts of your bankroll and for you to lose it all, all of the bets must fail) it results in an overall better chance of succeeding? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
