on block, nine would be the answer but off block with the lightning banker network, well who knows, millions I guess
I'm not certain it is that high. According to Visa, they can only handle 65k tps. https://usa.visa.com/dam/VCOM/download/corporate/media/visanet-technology/aboutvisafactsheet.pdf. A p2p network is usually less efficient than a centralized network, so I suspect lightning to be slightly less. However, Visa does not even go near their capacity at any time. LN will probably be able to handle more than enough to be competitive. The main hurdle LN is experiencing atm is it is far from being safe for idiots. In fact, someone should only tinker with it if their computer literacy skills are on at least a computer help desk employee level. |
|
|
|
Actually, if you are a merit source, you can go here and it will explain it all better than I did. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=meritYou are a merit source. The next xx merit you spend will come from your source rather than your sMerit balance. Merit spent from your source will come back in 30 days. Unused source merit is wasted. It is not allowed for merit sources to sell their merit. |
|
|
|
2.) There are currently 199 accounts that are given smerit to distribute that replenishes 30 days after a one of their "source merits" were given out.
119 typo corrected. |
|
|
|
|
@OP
smerits are/were obtained in 3 ways. Having smerits is what allows you to give merit to someone else.
1.) Everyone who had an account when the merit system went into effect were given smerits based on their rank/recent activity.
2.) There are currently 119 accounts that are given smerit to distribute that replenishes 30 days after a one of their "source merits" were given out.
3.) For every 2 merits someone earns, they get 1 smerit that can be used to reward someone else.
The case that applies to your account is number 3.
|
|
|
|
Wall eaten (264BTC)
 |
|
|
|
A fast drop was also the #1 best possible way to keep the hodlers in to accomplish this plan. On a slow drop, too many would have bailed out on the way down. Now they're all trapped.
How are many of us "trapped?" Anyone who acquired the bulk of their BTC before the summer of 2017 are still in the green at these prices. Only thing that sucks is that for many of us, our dreams of Lambos and seasteads now appear to be utterly unrealistic. |
|
|
|
SV Cash is the only shitcoin that is pumped during recent bitcoin sell off. CSW is parting with his bitcoins and that is good news!
I don't know. CSW has quite a few fanbois. It is very possible much of the propping up of price and hashrate is being funded by his minions. |
|
|
|
Doesn't Bitmain mine at 0.05/kwh? Or possibly even lower with some type of govt subsidized power? I've never seen anyone claim Bitmain mines with electricity that high. If Bitmain was mining at 0.08/kwh, then you would have actual mining in the US, and places like KNC wouldn't have gone under. This would be a great Trump Tariff target...
It is a Trump tarrif target. People now have to pay an additional 25% tarrif on ASICS from Bitmain in the US. |
|
|
|
|
Perhaps we should just set the ability to wear a signature to Member level. I think it is fine if Jr can post images. I really don't see a meme problem on this board. In fact, compared to some of these posts, a meme would at least be more entertaining than many of these shit posts.
|
|
|
|
We are discussing the scaling issue.  Then "VIP2VIP cash" is the wrong terminology. Bitcoin remains to be an open system. People must have a short memory. During the prolonged tx backlog event back in 2017, it certainly seemed that way. Since the tx fee is based on tx size and not the amount sent, people wanting to move around smaller amounts were getting eaten alive with fees. Although a fee of 300 sats per byte is trivial for someone wanting to move around 1 BTC, it was prohibitive for someone wanting to move around 1 million sats.
You really think the blockchain fee is going still going to be low if and when the demand is 100x higher than currently ?
No. I already said that users will be forced to use Bitcoin Cash. Other more secure altcoins would be better though. So the riffraff have to settle for a 3rd rate shitcoin network? Sounds like a vip2vip attitude to me. 
Let's hope if and when that ever happens, LN will somehow ease the risk of losing coins either due to your channel partner closing a channel in an earlier state and you not catching it or you having a system error and closing a channel in an earlier state in error, and getting a penalty. (Or closing it in an earlier state not in your favor.)
As any software development project, it may succeed, or it may fail. But Lightning has been developing well, let's hope that continues. How long has this been in development? I may not be from Missouri, but you still have to show me. Perhaps I will be less critical when and if I see a product that is actually usable and less prone to me losing funds for computer/human error. |
|
|
|
I think if we are at the point in technology that a QC can be made that can break SHA256 in a relatively trivial manner
Wrong; quantum computers need to run for 2^80 steps to find a private key mapping to a given 160 bit public key. That will remain infeasible for decades to come. You are taking my post out of context... the word "if" should clue you in. I know that this is nowhere close to feasible now. Perhaps I should have replaced it with the word when to make it more clear? |
|
|
|
DarkStar,
I seek your consideration to join the campaign.
[FULL] ChipMixer Signature Campaign | 0.00075 BTC/post The campaign is currently full. Please do as I am currently doing; watch the thread and be patient for an opening to crop up. |
|
|
|
ECDSA/secp256k1 is quantum-resistance as long as it's public key isn't known, which means users should be fine as long as they never re-use their Bitcoin address and Quantum computer isn't fast enough to find out it's private key before the transaction got confirmed/fully propagated to all nodes.
But there are proposal to use cryptographic signature which is quantum resistant, even though AFAIK there's huge trade-off such as far larger signature size and longer verification time.
I think if we are at the point in technology that a QC can be made that can break SHA256 in a relatively trivial manner, "ordinary computers" and network technology will be at the point that a larger signature size wouldn't be a problem either. Or are we still going to be fretting that someone's raspberry pi that they bought in 2009 should still be able to run a full node while only connecting with a 56K modem? |
|
|
|
So is chipmixer going to raise the rates considering how much bitcoin crashed?
I doubt it. Their service only takes a pay-what-you-want fee in BTC.(Basically a donation, or a tip.) I don't think this downtrend in value vs fiat is going to yield more BTC for them, so they can budget more BTC to this campaign. I could be wrong. |
|
|
|
VIP2VIP cash? Bitcoin will remain an open system that anyone in the world can use. What is "VIP" with Bitcoin? Nothing.
Are the fees constantly high that it discourages everyone from using Bitcoin? I don't believe it is. The fees have been low since the increasing adoption of Segwit.
Plus about sharding. Franky1, do you agree that bigger blocks are inherently centralizing, and that "sharding" is just prolonging the issue instead of solving it?
We are discussing the scaling issue. You really think the blockchain fee is going still going to be low if and when the demand is 100x higher than currently ? Let's hope if and when that ever happens, LN will somehow ease the risk of losing coins either due to your channel partner closing a channel in an earlier state and you not catching it or you having a system error and closing a channel in an earlier state in error, and getting a penalty. (Or closing it in an earlier state not in your favor.) BTW, can someone get a penalty if they close a channel in an earlier state that is not in their favor? It appears that way to me. Talk about adding insult to injury. Sure hope that I am dead wrong about that. Otherwise the penalty system is a joke. |
|
|
|
|
Just dipped my toe in the water and bought a whopping .01BTC today at about $3715. Not sure when I will ever have the kahunas to take the plunge. Maybe BTC just isn't for me. I'm too risk adverse. Probably all the hard knocks that I had served to me during my gambling escapades in the past.
|
|
|
|
So if you have BTC this means that you have BCH SV or was that just a fork of BCH on
yeah, not paying attention ..only BCH I have 'supposedly' I have not touched from the BTC Hoard wallet from when it landed...
brad
If you haven't split your coins from the original BCH fork from BTC, you now have coins in both the ABC and SV fork. Since neither side has implemented replay protection, it may be a challenge to split the coins. Since you are a miner, you can probably mine coinbase coins from both sides and then use these as 'tainted" coins to do the split. The process looks really complicated now, especially since you haven't done the original split. In any event, if you want to claim coins at any point, you are probably going to have to import your private keys/seed phrase for your BTC to Electron Cash.(That would probably be the easiest software, AFAIK) I would move your BTC to a new private key/seed as a first step. |
|
|
|
I If Quantum Computing is released into the wild and starts to attack bitcoin , what measures would we see to mitigate these attacks?
Hope some miners can also get a quantum computer to compete with mining and switch to an algorithm for the keys that would take the QC longer than it's expected Quantum decoherence time by a factor of billions upon billions. What if the government controls the Quantum computer , and there isn't anyone to fight back? Would that spell the end of Bitcoin? And if there is , would it be necessary to move to QC resistant cryptography? Back to the drawing board. If any entity gets control of 51% of the mining and there is no way to wrest back control, then Bitcoin is insecure and virtually worthless. |
|
|
|
|
Hope some miners can also get a quantum computer to compete with mining and switch to an algorithm for the keys that would take the QC longer than it's expected Quantum decoherence time by a factor of billions upon billions.
|
|
|
|
For inspiration. I type d that tyitle twice because I knew it was wrong the first time. Still wrong. w/e. GF's out at a lesbian bar, BTC crashing WHY AM I HOLDING? I'LL TELL YOU WHY. It's because I'm a bad trader and I KNOW I'M A BAD TRADER. Yeah you good traders can spot the highs and the lows pit pat piffy wing wong wang just like that and make a millino bucks sure no problem bro. Likewise the weak hands are like OH NO IT'S GOING DOWN I'M GONNA SELL he he he and then they're like OH GOD MY ASSHOLE when the SMART traders who KNOW WHAT THE FUCK THEY'RE DOING buy back in but you know what? I'm not part of that group. When the traders buy back in I'm already part of the market capital so GUESS WHO YOU'RE CHEATING day traders NOT ME~! Those taunt threads saying "OHH YOU SHOULD HAVE SOLD" YEAH NO SHIT. NO SHIT I SHOULD HAVE SOLD. I SHOULD HAVE SOLD MOMENTS BEFORE EVERY SELL AND BOUGHT MOMENTS BEFORE EVERY BUY BUT YOU KNOW WHAT NOT EVERYBODY IS AS COOL AS YOU. You only sell in a bear market if you are a good day trader or an illusioned noob. The people inbetween hold. In a zero-sum game such as this, traders can only take your money if you sell.
so i've had some whiskey
actually on the bottle it's spelled whisky
w/e
sue me
(but only if it's payable in BTC)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=375643.0 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
