Problem here is that people are fed up with instamined coins. No matter what feature you add to coin people just don't want to buy if PoW phase lasted just 9,759 blocks as it is the case with SLING. Anyone sane will quickly realise it is the deal where developer and few other people, those who joined mining at start, are holding all coins and are now waiting to dump them for massive profit. If you did the whole deal like 2 years ago it would work, now it is just too late. Start working on different type of scams.
Such a stupid comment. The current price of SLING is a lot lower than the avarage mining cost. Please don't shit facts from your ass. Coin has a very low price and everyone can easily get in. Get in for how much, 0.01 BTC total? Because of shitty liquidity I can not buy even 5 BTC worth of SLING without pumping the price like 10 times. So you idiots still think that if you all just keep your coins out of market then price will explode and you'll be rich. No, you won't because that same way that price eventualy went to Moon it will go down back to Earth. You people are lacking even basic trading education but you are loud and proud stating your stupid opinions on the trading matters so why should anyone with money (presumably a good trader) join you? LOL. First of all, I do not hold any SLING. And If I did, I wouldn't expect something soon, I am not a daytrader like you who is after fast quick btc. Your opinion is pretty stupid as you don't fucking have to clear up the sell wall, people usually dump this coin. Man, why do I even try to answer an idiot like you. Hehe. Problem is that people are not dumping enough. Even those who got coins at almost no cost are holding them, for them 10x or 100x or 1000x profit is not enough, they want to buy a yacht and a big house but they invested like 50 USD. People around here are not stupid anymore, most of them lost money on exactly the same deals like this one so it is highly likely that such dreams will not be fulfilled but you can keep on dreaming. I'm posting here not because I own or want to own some SLING but because some people seems unaware of why SLING price is so "low". I feel it is my duty to tell them the truth. If that does not suit your scammy strategy and wishful thinking, well, you can fuck off to some other forum. |
|
|
|
Problem here is that people are fed up with instamined coins. No matter what feature you add to coin people just don't want to buy if PoW phase lasted just 9,759 blocks as it is the case with SLING. Anyone sane will quickly realise it is the deal where developer and few other people, those who joined mining at start, are holding all coins and are now waiting to dump them for massive profit. If you did the whole deal like 2 years ago it would work, now it is just too late. Start working on different type of scams.
Such a stupid comment. The current price of SLING is a lot lower than the avarage mining cost. Please don't shit facts from your ass. Coin has a very low price and everyone can easily get in. Get in for how much, 0.01 BTC total? Because of shitty liquidity I can not buy even 5 BTC worth of SLING without pumping the price like 10 times. So you idiots still think that if you all just keep your coins out of market then price will explode and you'll be rich. No, you won't because that same way that price eventualy went to Moon it will go down back to Earth. You people are lacking even basic trading education but you are loud and proud stating your stupid opinions on the trading matters so why should anyone with money (presumably a good trader) join you? http://sling.blockexplorer.cc/chain/Sling?count=500&hi=499 proves that some people got a shitload of SLING at almost no cost. |
|
|
|
|
Problem here is that people are fed up with instamined coins. No matter what feature you add to coin people just don't want to buy if PoW phase lasted just 9,759 blocks as it is the case with SLING. Anyone sane will quickly realise it is the deal where developer and few other people, those who joined mining at start, are holding all coins and are now waiting to dump them for massive profit. If you did the whole deal like 2 years ago it would work, now it is just too late. Start working on different type of scams.
|
|
|
|
Block explorer at https://www.huntercoin.info/blockExplorer seems stuck at block 760,083 and my own node stucked at 760,105 then after restart I got message that "Displayed transactions may not be correct! You may need to upgrade, or other nodes may need to upgrade." Some nodes were reporting blockheight at around 760,245 but after a while nodes in my swarm agreed on 760,105 blocks and wallet fully synced. New blocks are now coming in but very slowly and error message is still there even after multiple restarts. I'm using v1.2.00.1. Could it be F2Pool upgraded to v1.3 and are now causing this issue? There was a disaster at block 760,077 and possibly blockchain reorg so I guess it all has to do with latest snailbrain's post here. I've sent a message to Poloniex to freeze HUC market until situation is solved. |
|
|
|
Cryptocoin scene already forked to like 1,000 different coins with at least few hundred of them actively traded at exchanges. It would be useful if Bitcoiners finaly realise that decentralization of everything (not just nodes or mining) is a good thing and diversify more into altcoins, crypto assets and other crypto goodies. |
|
|
|
Hi I am currently doing my master thesis about Bitcoin and the research is to get insight on the motivation of the use of Bitcoin. It will be appreciated if you guys can help me to complete the survey when you are free. Here is the link of the survey: https://surveyplanet.com/5589c60bb6c367337179127cThank you! Done, good luck. |
|
|
|
I am far too lazy to read all of these retardified posts here--did anyone mention scamming? That seems to be very popular around these parts.
But scamming is not working for all and trading is working for all and it most good and safe way to grow your bitcoins False. Trading is not a safe way to grow anything and is in fact very risky, much like gambling. I was being sarcastic about the scamming, apparently you missed that, but I was dead serious about the retardified posts and you reinforced that. Thank you so much.  Let's cut the craps and use proper wording. I'll asume we are all males so enlarge your bitcoins now!  |
|
|
|
lets play guys .
Start can be huge and come back to 70k , may be 100k it's possible . Start have "something" for it
i Know Start some of real crypto
Please understand that the ambitions is much larger than this. We are not trying to pump a coin but build an economic ecosystem. It's still just one year into the "building process", and I think we are doing fine. It is so because you still don't know what liquidity means.  What you and other few are doing on last 60+ pages here is nothing except pump a coin, are you dumb or what? |
|
|
|
read below : An issue that has been the source for months of debate and rancor throughout the Bitcoin mining and developer community over Bitcoin's block size appears to have reached a long-awaited resolution. Within the most recent BitcoinXT update, Gavin Andresen has begun the process of revising the block chain individual block size from 1 MB to 8 MB starting next year. This is deemed necessary for the overall growth and usability of Bitcoin, as the current limits of seven transactions per second are becoming insufficient for the growing global community as consumer and business interest increases. These impending updates were revealed on GitHub, and this is what is in store for the upcoming “hard fork”, taken directly from GitHub, posted by Gavin Andresen: Implement hard fork to allow bigger blocks. Unit test and code for a bigger block hard fork. Parameters are: 8MB cap Doubling every two years (so 16MB in 2018) For twenty years Earliest possible chain fork: 11 Jan 2016 After miner supermajority (code in the next patch) And grace period once miner supermajority achieved (code in next patch) The 1 MB block size debate has been a constant issue for months, with Andresen and Mike Hearn discussing the need to upgrade the block size to as much as 20 MB. China's major exchanges and mining interests came out against any block size changes initially, deriding the extra operating costs and complexities involved with mostly empty blocks. After further review, the increase was deemed warranted to an 8 MB size, much smaller than the 20 MB requests by the Core Developers. An accord was reached, and the revisions will take effect next year. We attempted to contact Hearn and Andresen for more information and will provide updated information as it becomes available. It seems some details are still to be sorted out in the next coding batch within the coming days. We’ll keep our readers informed of any further developments. What do you think of these new core updates and the automatic changes every two years? Share above and comment below. Source : https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-block-size-conflict-ends-latest-update/Bitcoin XT is a fork of Bitcoin that almost no one uses, why care what Gavin and Mike are doing with it? |
|
|
|
So if you open core to only check your balance every week or so, so basically 10 minutes of the wallet being opened per week.. you are still contributing to the network? because I never leave it opened as it takes way too much resources, when im done I close it again.
Yes, you are contributing to Bitcoin network. I'm contributing to the network without any outgoing data? I hardly believe that. In the past 5 days (according to my own monitoring software) I've downloaded around ~900MB and uploaded ~2MB while syncing. I didn't forward my port. There isn't really some benefit to the network. Download to upload ratio is of secondary importance. |
|
|
|
So if you open core to only check your balance every week or so, so basically 10 minutes of the wallet being opened per week.. you are still contributing to the network? because I never leave it opened as it takes way too much resources, when im done I close it again.
Yes, you are contributing to Bitcoin network. |
|
|
|
It seems to me that there needs to be a distinction between "running a full node" and running Bitcoin Core.
There may have been 370k people running Bitcoin Core, but how much benefit were they providing to the network? Running Bitcoin Core long enough to sync the block chain and send some bitcoins or view your balance provides very little benefit, especially if you haven't opened port 8333.
Not true. The moment your node connects to other nodes it will go though data agrement process with each of other nodes. Any node sending data that does not match your copy of blockchain will be IP banned for 24 hours. Nodes that agreed on blockchain will strengthen their view on what is correct data and will isolate node that is sending wrong data. All that happens in just few minutes after running Bitcoin-Qt and it makes no difference if connections to other nodes are outgoing or incoming. Also, other nodes can sync from your node even if your node is not accepting incoming connections. If your node is at block X and it connects to node (outgoing connection) which is at block X-500 the other node will start syncing from your node if no other node it is connected to provides data or they all provide wrong data. The only real benefit of nodes that can accept incoming connections is improved decentralization. In the most extreme case, there would be just 1 such node and all others would connect to just that 1 node which would have ultimate control over traffic. If you run the node just until it is synced then eventualy send coins but shut it down afterwards that would make traffic analysis ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_analysis) more complicated. Ideally, nodes should drop connections to all other nodes at some random intervals and not connect to same nodes again for yet another random interval. Also, transactions should be broadcasted and relayed to random number of other nodes. Situation where your node is on static IP and is connected to always the same other nodes is the worst possible one. |
|
|
|
This thread needs more promotion!  |
|
|
|
Does btc.sx count as shorting (leveraged trading)? IDK, I think all exchanges kind of work, especially with a bot.
Leverage is there just to increase the size of your opened position. With leverage 1x you invest let's say 1 BTC and open long or short position worth 1 BTC, with leverage 2x you invest 1 BTC and borrow 1 BTC from btc.sx to open long or short position worth 2 BTC, etc. Higher the leverage, the more money you borrow from btc.sx and thus increase the risk. With leverage 10x price needs to move only 10% against you (bet on price going up but instead it goes down) and you'll end up wipped out but if you guessed price movement correctly then you'll double your investement when price goes up only 10%. |
|
|
|
so the only special thing about this is Max
remember MAXCOIN
This one will end up much worse. There were no major dumps with MAX but here we have a bunch of idiots buying 100s or eventualy 1,000s of coins while Max and Co. are sitting on millions of premined coins, ready to give them out for free to projects and "projects". It will be fun to watch dumps down to 100 Satoshis or less and noobs shouting "Great chance to buy cheap, buy more!" all until they have no money left to invest and no one other really gives a damn. |
|
|
|
alright. well. you need to rebroadcast your transactions to the network because they were never packed into a block... but this wallet doesnt have an rpc command to do that... so i can code one up today. theres probably also some other small fixes i could make to have the wallet run better. i post something before i go to sleep tonight. i am updating a website right now so it probably wont be until a little later in the day
Any update on this? I tried a transaction to myself and it went through and went to send another sendmany command and it froze the transaction like the others. No working wallet = people can't get their coins from DK or the faucet and its making me look bad as they aren't getting what I promised them. Wallet v4.0 has issue with too low fee when sending coins to 3rd-party (outside of wallet). https://i.imgur.com/EnQgsgz.pngBoth unconfirmed transactions are in mempool and were broadcasted to other nodes but I can't tell if other nodes accepted them or not. https://i.imgur.com/oRR2R8B.pngFix please. ive never herd of someone complaining about too low of a fee, lol. you can set the fee you pay as an option in the wallet if you want. but the mempool i will take a look at right now (its loading on my other screen) I'm not complaining, I'm just stating the fact wallet v4.0 does not calculate fee properly when coins are sent outside of wallet which is what makes pools and miners ignore such transactions. that is both true and false. true because yes, they will ignore them if others have a higher fee, but false in this case because a lot of the blocks only have the 1 mining transaction and if there is no other transactions to compete against low fee ones will be packed into a block (or should be) edit: the tx id you posted in the picture, can you past them as text here so i can copy paste for search testing? Don't have those transactions anymore. Luckily I had backup of wallet v3.1 and after a few hours long reindex (there is some incompatibility when it comes to database with v3 and v4) and rescan I've successfuly sent all coins to Cryptsy, transaction fees were as expected (much more than 0.001 FLAP). Coins will stay there until I'm convinced PoS upgrade works as expected but for now I'm expecting a major shitstorm coming at hard-fork block. Transactions might still be at mempool, use getrawmempool at Console to check. |
|
|
|
alright. well. you need to rebroadcast your transactions to the network because they were never packed into a block... but this wallet doesnt have an rpc command to do that... so i can code one up today. theres probably also some other small fixes i could make to have the wallet run better. i post something before i go to sleep tonight. i am updating a website right now so it probably wont be until a little later in the day
Any update on this? I tried a transaction to myself and it went through and went to send another sendmany command and it froze the transaction like the others. No working wallet = people can't get their coins from DK or the faucet and its making me look bad as they aren't getting what I promised them. Wallet v4.0 has issue with too low fee when sending coins to 3rd-party (outside of wallet). https://i.imgur.com/EnQgsgz.pngBoth unconfirmed transactions are in mempool and were broadcasted to other nodes but I can't tell if other nodes accepted them or not. https://i.imgur.com/oRR2R8B.pngFix please. ive never herd of someone complaining about too low of a fee, lol. you can set the fee you pay as an option in the wallet if you want. but the mempool i will take a look at right now (its loading on my other screen) I'm not complaining, I'm just stating the fact wallet v4.0 does not calculate fee properly when coins are sent outside of wallet which is what makes pools and solo miners ignore such transactions. |
|
|
|
We're not even off the ground yet. The only reason the price is where it is now is because of me buying it up. And it's not in order to dump it, it's to distribute to new users.
I'm aware of all that, keeping my remaining 400 millions FLAP until we reach Moon. |
|
|
|
So you're the one dumping on cryptsy and pushing the price down?
Dumped some coins I bought for 1 to 5 Litoshi at Poloniex, why not take big profit? Correction would come sooner or later anyway so why wait and risk to make less money? |
|
|
|
Trade volume on Poloniex was not this high for almost a year, at 1 day interval!  Trade volume of almost all cryptocoins is going crazy in China, just check http://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/btc38/ even coins that had almost no trade volume anywhere like a month ago are now traded for 10+ BTC. Does anyone have some conections with chinese exchanges, preferably BTC38 or some other that deals with altcoins? 90% of all the top 12 volume coins are coins which have been added recently to Shapeshift.io. Huge profits have been made on these alts so a lot of that is spilling over into other alts. I keep hearing that Chinese investors are doing this but I really see no proof of this. It's possible but you can ignore this shapeshift effect where people can trade alts with no name, no email, zero identity so it's a money laundering dream. That has a lot to do with this alt boom which I think is gonna explode later this summer, probably next month on July. Explode like "bubble burst" or "to the Moon"? Whatever the reasons are behind altcoin frenzy at China it is Huntercoin losing big time because of no presence there. Not really smart to ignore China, ingame they were fun and I'm so missing "Go" spammed at chat every damn block by chinese players. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
