Furthermore, when we were initially planning to begin roll-out, Peter Todd (IIRC) brought forward some very real issues with the BIP that would have potentially been problematic, so there was a general feeling that BIP 62 had not been sufficiently reviewed/considered, and was therefore too risky.
What about removing malleability altogether? Just a thought. I know you guy's won't do that because of dumb ideological reasons. In case that is claimed to be not clear: Enumerate every necessary use case in the transactions and remove the ability to encode anything else into transaction data. |
|
|
|
The only sure-fire way to prevent becoming a victim is to wait for confirmations. Wrong. There are no "100%-safe" ways at all. First way is "risky & cheap". Second way is "no-so-risky as first, but not-so-cheap" Bitcoin itself is risky. If you do not want to be a victim - pay to third party banks and use your national currency. You are my personal hero of the day. The really juicy bit about this thing is that the core developers don't want to fix it because it might prevent future vaporware uses of the bitcoin protocol to be established. https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3nfb2y/eli5_for_double_spends_bitcoin_being_sent_twice/cvnl2woAlso, see my sig. |
|
|
|
Someone call the CEO of Bitcoin and ask why all those bearish news lately.
Hey, Bruce "Bruce Fenton" Fenton why all those bearish news lately? |
|
|
|
Normally I wouldn't post ITT but since I don't want to make a thread and the article is so well written (in regards to making the cultists furious when they read it) I'll post it here. http://www.technologyreview.com/view/541901/the-troubles-of-bitcoins-paypal-show-why-the-cryptocurrency-is-not-a-good-payment/First, no one much wants to pay with Bitcoin and there’s not currently good reason to think that will change. BitPay’s business model was to help merchants take Bitcoin payments—often converting them directly into dollars—and take a cut of transactions. The company has enabled Microsoft, retailer Newegg, and many other companies accept Bitcoin payments.
Unfortunately for BitPay, just about no one gets paid in bitcoins, and for most people there are not clear reasons to bother with the trouble of buying bitcoins just to spend them again. The press shill department down at level 3 should take a note from this guy. |
|
|
|
I can't believe Roger "liquidity doesn't imply solvency" Ver still has this of a dedicated flock. Have you guys no self awareness? |
|
|
|
|
You made it to /r/buttcoin, congrats.
|
|
|
|
Remember when there were taxi ads for that pesky "Internet" thingie in the 90s? Me neither. |
|
|
|
Someone just sold 100+ BTC on a market with low liquidity. Here's the chart. Why would someone do this? It temporarily brought down the price by 33%. Somebody wants to top off their paypal account and doesn't give a shit about slippage because gains are still astronomical for some people. In case you don't know selling Bitcoins for Linden Dollars and then buying Dollars is the one true way of doing that, unless you are willing to risk total loss by some shady exchange service. Ironically the only way to get money on a Bitcoin exchange onto a paypal account without that or slippage is to buy something with bitpay, return it and get a refund, but that only works for small amounts, since the merchant won't willingly participate in this. |
|
|
|
90% of this forum is probably in denial about it. Also let me gloat for a minute for calling Bitpays business model unsustainable way back. itshappening.gif |
|
|
|
This is a dumbass comperasion and you should feel bad for doing it.
I should feel bad for laughing at my own jokes but since I'm mainly laughing at the people in this forum that might take preference. I still don't feel bad... well, perhaps a little because I'm wasting my time. |
|
|
|
|
Drawing a trend line in that manner is nonsense because as long as the current price is higher than some other price in the past there will always be a possibility to do that. The empirical extrapolation power of a trend line is proportional to how closely it follows the actual price. Doing that at price extrema you then get the worst possible one you can draw.
In other words a trend line only makes sense if it appears the price tries to "stick" to it, otherwise it's useless to do it.
|
|
|
|
In other words as long as the price was lower than the current one at some point in time you can always draw a line that points upward underneath. Until this happens  |
|
|
|
|
If you are one of the minority who support 21inc for this ask yourself these questions:
Have so many of the Bitcoiners been statist shills all along? Or do you really think you are one of the few who recognize real genius in light of doubt?
To everybody else: totally not a cult
|
|
|
|
Nobody here sees the potential of 21 Inc's platform? What Google did for making money with websites (generate revenue with ads), 21 Inc may do for making money with web-services (generate revenue with pay-per-use). I.e. 21 Inc might be the next Google. Guess what that will do for Bitcoin...  the forceshill is strong with this one |
|
|
|
Er, this is an overwhelmingly good thing, right? You can only sell once.
Except the fat chance that whoever bought them is looking to sell them later on, which they might not do with a profitable outcome. |
|
|
|
Looks cool. I reckon they'll sell at least 100 of them. So that's around $1.2 million a piece to pay back those VCs and then an extra $100,000 profit. lol, but I mean it the VCs that were stupid enough to back this shit deserve everything that's coming. Holy fucking shit it's a rasberry pi with a 3d printed case.  AhAHA my sides I can't stop. |
|
|
|
Presume guilt until proven innocence, oops that proof of innocence wasn't, guilty no matter what!
You don't get that it's against the law not to report certain kind of financial transactions on it's own. The intent of the transaction is irrelevant, and you get due process for that! You ask: So what kind of financial transactions do you have to report? Well you should figure that out before making a business out of it. Some people call that tyranny, some call it compromise. I laugh. |
|
|
|
|
What is there to clarify? Just zoom all the way out to the beginning of Bitcoin trading and look at the beast in full glorious doom. You don't have to even draw anything, it stares you right in the face. EW is still overrated though.
|
|
|
|
Dude the business model was essentially providing money laundering services to dark net merchants and credit card scammers. You know in regards to financial services you don't have to be proven to be associated with illegal activity to have you assets seized, it's because there are regulations. So it was his job to verify the source of the money? I thought it's police job to catch them. What if I steal 1k$ from you and I go to exchange them into another currency? Does this mean that the exchanger is providing me money laundering services and that they should get arrested? Sounds very illogical. In a sense it is, not in that exact words and there is some leeway in terms of making the required effort reasonable. For most people that's not complicated to understand even if they can't understand the law text in written form but in common sense. I don't expect that of you, any bitcoiner or any "free market" capitalist for that matter: So YES, you are responsible to verify the source of the money. And since you'll probably get red faced about it: Yes it's not the same thing as due process, and it's still the law and there is nothing you can do about it. Sweet, libertarian tears! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
