hi guys anyone here who knows why all altcoins are down?
anyone expecting bitcoin to hit 4k again?
The bitcoin price decreased with around 300 USD to 4340 USD.Why are you asking will btc hit 4k again? BTC is over 4K right now.The ICO related news from China will hit the altcoins,most likely ethereum. I don`t understand why the ICO ban causes panic selling. It's been over $4k the whole time. The price has corrected to price that was being referred to as "high" a week ago. People, wake up, it got pumped by 500$ in a week which was too much and triggered a selloff. We are back to the mean and IMO still above it. Why altcoins are down? I'd say people were cashing out to join the bitcoin pump and won't be back soon because BTC is going to push towards $5000 again this year. I was thinking about something similar, alts are down, but it could be that people are not cashing out alts for fiat but to buy bitcoin, to join at the lower price, before price starts to rise again (hopefully). We need to check the charts, and if volume grows but price movement slows down, it could mean that buyers are back to the market. If it will start to go up in a week or a few, we won't know. If it would rise again in a few days that could indicate that $5000 will be an easy one  |
|
|
|
-ICO Details-
Ezt angolul kellene felrakni az Altcoins sekcioba. Itt senki sem fog igy bele rakni penzt.  Nincsen eleg ember. Szerintem ez eleve angolról van googletranslatezve.  Szerintem nem googletranslate, annál nyelvtanilag jobb. Szakmailag viszont elég érdekes kifejezések vannak benne, nem teljesen crypto nyelv, olyan, mintha valaki konyhanyelven lefordította volna, kezdő crypto szinten az angol kiírást, kivehető belőle a lényeg, ha tudod, mit akarsz beelolvasni |
|
|
|
|
OP was not online, just for one hour after the post, since then there's no login from OP. We can now only wait for the transaction ID, if OP will be back and will share it with us.
As long as the difficulty does not change much on BTC and BCH, ~90% of miners will mine BTC chain, so most of the tranactions will get confirmed sooner (and not later like weeks before). But as long as BTC rises the difficulty, transactions with such a low fee will be waiting for weeks again in mempool.
|
|
|
|
BTC/Alts - probably not
Block chain tech and dev - yes, most definitely
Banks likely see BTC and alts way too volatile to invest in. Also the taxes and legalities that would be implicated (because they are extremely scrutinized by fed regulations in most countries) would cost them a lot of cash.
Block chain tech/dev however is kind of like a banking arms race. It makes sense because banks are all about security and using block chain for authentication/identity is one of the best forms of security.
Just my thoughts, thanks!
Sentacks.
It's defenately a race. And this race is not between bank and bank, but between bank and 3rd party financial service providers (fintech). Banks know that Fintech companies have very good ideas and have possibilities to develop and implement new blockchain based systems. If they fail (fintech companies), than there's no problem, they are not well-known brands at the beginning. But if banks starts to develop something blockchain related, implement it into their existing system, and that fails, it ruins the bank's image, brand, etc... So they need to cooperate with successfull fintech companies, to join the blockchain world, but the game is not over yet, nobody knows what will be the final solution and agreement between them. |
|
|
|
I was trying to withdraw a small amont of LTC to a Trezor from Kraken. Trezor gave me an LTC address, which starts with "M", so it's SegWit address.
When I have entered this address to Kraken, it gave me back an error message: "Invalid Litecoin address provided"
Did anyone faced similar problem? I've made google search, but nothing special. Thanks for the help in advance!
AFAIK the Kraken there is no statement about Segwit2x yet. As they have not signed that agreement. If the LTC address with the letter M starts does not work why not use the usual address. Thanks, I have just checked it with the "Legacy" account and it works fine, I have received the LTCs to the Trezor. This Legacy account starts with letter "L" so it seems that's the old school account and the "M" is the new one. Trezor warns me that I would better to use the "M" account because of the SegWit, but I need to wait until Kraken accepts that kind of address. Thanks for the converter link too, it was the Plan B if Trezor legacy account fails. |
|
|
|
|
I was trying to withdraw a small amont of LTC to a Trezor from Kraken. Trezor gave me an LTC address, which starts with "M", so it's SegWit address.
When I have entered this address to Kraken, it gave me back an error message: "Invalid Litecoin address provided"
Did anyone faced similar problem? I've made google search, but nothing special. Thanks for the help in advance!
|
|
|
|
While the capitalization of bitcoin is about 78 billion dollars. This is almost half of what is invested in the crypto currency. Therefore, in the near future, there is no alternative to bitcoin as the main crypto currency. True, bitcoin has its drawbacks. This is too long a transaction time and a relatively high commission fee. This prevents its use in small purchases. These lacks are lacking in many altcoyins. In this connection, it is possible that in the long term, if these problems are not solved, bitcoin will give up its leader's place to more successful digital coins.
Back in the good old days, when there were only gold and silver coins to pay for goods and services, people were smart enough to choose which coin is needed to pay for something. If they wanted to buy a house, they just took out the gold from the hidden (treasure)chest, and escorted by two strong guards, they went to pay for the house. But, if they wanted to buy some bread for the family, they took only the silver coins. They have never used gold for small purchases, because it was too expensive to deal with it. Silver was the most common "currency", but nobody would told that the leader's place is other than the gold... Maybe this would be a possible solution, BTC will be the gold, and LN will be silver, or an alt could act like a silver, who knows... As long as exchanges uses BTC to determine the price of many alts (and they don't list, just a few alts with USD or EUR pairs), BTC will remain. |
|
|
|
Is that you in the photo? Is that your company in your signature?
I presume it is in which case your Bitcoin mixing career is already over. There's a reason Bitmixer shut down and there's a reason people use mixers and most of it isn't legal.
What other reason that bitmixer shut down that is more then what he told us himself and if there is something or some more information you are privilege to have, you can inform us other than that, no other reason. I don't see any wrong in owing a mixer and for the gap bitmixer left that op is intending to fill, its better you are early because those are already being filled already. Bitmixer went down. We won't know why, the communication was short and easy (and hard to belive...), but there should be something else, but if there were no information to leak out until now, there won't be any more, I guess. There are well known other mixing services on the market, and I hope that ChipMixer will last really long So if you know what you are doing, you can give it a try, I myself won't try it for sure... |
|
|
|
Xapo was okay at first but I stopped using it because of its huge amount of transactions fees. I'd rather suggest you to have a hardwallet to store your coins like Ledger Nano or Trezor, that's more safer.
Yesterday I had a transaction from the Xapo web wallet, and the tranascion fees are really strange. The first strange thing was that when I have checked the transaction on blockchain.info, I saw that the transaction had my output, the fee output and another output. It seems that they combine outgoing transactions. The second strange thing was, that I was also able to check the fee on blockchain.info, and it was half of the fee I have been charged by Xapo... I was not really happy... I can understand that they provide free transactions inside Xapo system, but the fees of the outgoing transactions are much higher than the miner fee. I know they have costs to run their system, and they need to cover those costs somehow, but anyway.... |
|
|
|
Hello,
I am considering using Xapo cold storage and multisig wallet.
Can anyone share their experience?
N
Using Xapo for more than two years now, if you use it for it's purpose, it's good. I'm using the online wallet and the debit card attached to the online wallet. I tried vault also, but then I started to use cold storage instead of vault, because it's safer if you have your coins at hand and not at a third party service provider. Xapo is OK now, but who knows what will be the future... In the online wallet, you can store an amount of bitcoin that you're OK to risk (service outage, hacking, war, etc...) Physical cold storage is defenately safer, if you can afford it, you can buy hardware wallets (ledger, keepkey, trezor). |
|
|
|
I don't know much about how BTC or ETH works, but why all cryptocurrencies takes so long to confirm a transaction. I think even 30s is too long, why cant it be instant like PayPal?
You can't compare Paypal to cryptocurrencies, they are totally different systems, they have different purposes. Paypal is an online payment processor, which has been developed to manage online payments and give customer support to people using it, they have the authority to decide if a tranaction is OK or not, they can reverse transactions (paypal dispute, claim) if they think that something went wrong during the transaction. You don't store value gerenally on your paypal account, usually you do payment tranactions with your bank card connected to the Paypal account. Bitcoin is not only a payment processor system yet, it's about storing value, and keeping track of who has bitcoin and how many coins. It's like a ledger system, and it not controlled by any company or authority, this determines that it works different. You should take you time to study at least the basics and you will see the differences and the advantages of those systems. |
|
|
|
I dont think any bank will invest in any digital currencies. Because no one will risk such a hugh amount by investing in cryptocurrencies. We all know its price will go up. But who can give guarentee that its price wont crash. This is cryptoworld buddy. Anything can happen. For example will you invest all your savings to buy bitcoins? Just think about it and you will get the answer for the topic in the thread.
Banks do invest in blockchain technology, so in digital currencies too. You can check the members of the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance https://entethalliance.org/members/ here, you can find several banks there. Also you can find several well known companies from the financial sector (JPMorgan, Deloitte, etc.) These companies won't buy currencies in order to wait for the prices to go up and take profit, but they want to take part in the development of the blockchain, to implement this technology into their own business, in order to get the prices of their own shares skyrocket... |
|
|
|
|
As today the average fee has became cheaper then usual (compared to the last few months), I was thinking about transferring the funds from the old wallet to SW wallet, but many of you has mentioned to think about waiting for November. I think that the highest possibility is that SW will start in november, but who knows what happens till then, so I'm not going to move anything to SW address until I can see that everything is working fine then. But, if anybody has any similar experience, I'm all ears
|
|
|
|
I use Xapo's card for years now. Easy to use and have the app to check the balance of your wallet, if you want to control your payments. Uses the BTC in your wallet (not prepaid), exchanges on the fly, when you pay with the card, but the exchange rate calculation is not 100% clear for me, but it must be my problem Drawback is, that they have just dropped the limit of the useage of the card to 100$/card (if I remember well) if you use the card without the proper KYC and AML verifications, and their support staff is really overloaded. |
|
|
|
Have a heart for the poor miners.
edit 20sat/b is way too low.
they are 420 satoshis/byte, where do you get 20 sat from? they are still very high, but it's because segwit is not used i think, otherwise should be lower transactions with fees as low as 20 satoshi/Byte are being confirmed actually. as a matter of fact i was going to say the same thing but checked a couple of last blocks that were mined (mostly the BitFury blocks though) had many transactions with such low fees. they surely will take a longer time though since the mempool is filled with transactions with much higher fees according to bitcoinfees.21.co I never paid 420sat/b. Only exception is on 20th of April. I always pay 20-30sat/b and I don't mind if it takes 10-60 Minutes. Yesterday I had a transaction, I've started from a mobile wallet (Mycellium). In that mobile wallet, I cannot set a fee, only choose from a drop down list if I want priority, normal, economy or lowest... I've choosen the lowest, and it has set 285 sat/B fee for the transaction. It turned out that it was a higher fee at that time because I had 3 or 4 confirmations in half an hour time and in 2-3 hours I got fully confirmed. That time mempool was full with under 20 sat/B transactions. |
|
|
|
Are there enough GPU's on earth to provide more hashing power that the existing and original Bitcoin has? I mean, it they want the longest chain, they have to compete with all existing Bitcoin miners (including ASICs). If they really want to help to decentralize BTC, they should join to BTC miners to get ASICs' market share smaller. Anyway, nice try, maybe next time |
|
|
|
there is nothing wrong with hard fork. bitcoin already had 1 hard fork in the past.
but there are a lot of things wrong about how that hard fork is performed. when something is this big and decentralized, like bitcoin, you can't just decide one day to want to "change" something and do it irregardless of what the majority of the users want. that causes a split and will harm things more than it fixes them.
also in a hard fork, because of not being backward compatible, there is always a higher risk of split. and for that ALL the network must upgrade which is hard and will take a long time.
but with a soft fork the risks are lower, specially with the backward compatibility and the fact that if you don't upgrade you still are able to use the old software.
I really believe that any change thats is effected in the bitcoin network should be approved by the majority of it's users, a percentage of eighty percent approval is needed before any change is to be effected, we dont want any more splits happening again in the near future, am sure it's going to devalue the currency if it continues to happen. Upgrades, changes should not always lead to chain splits that creates different coins. If you have read about ethereum, they are planning to do some updates, and they are going to do a fork, and they will arrange with the difficulty adjustment, that the original chain will stop and miners will be able to continue mining on the new chain. (If I understood their plans well). So there will be a split, but it's like Highlander, only one can survive |
|
|
|
I bet that if they really succeed to identify the real Satoshi, it will be a real secret. Maybe Satoshi himself will not notice that he has been identified, and they won't put it into the news... Anyway, it's another article to talk about bitcoin and crytocurrencies, it's free marketing for bitcoin |
|
|
|
just sit back and wait the transaction will be dropped by the network cause no miner will accept to add this transaction into a block especially now since the bitcoin network is getting a lot of trafic you will probably need to wait for 1/2 weeks but you will get your bitcoins back eventually In this case your only option would be to manually create a new transaction, using at least one input from the tx you want to cancel, with a much higher fee than the tx you wanted to cancel. Then broadcast this new tx as widely as possible and hope a miner decides to put it in the block hes working on ( and gets lucky).
This is technically difficult, timeconsuming and a longshot, there is a big chance it wint work anyways. i think you missing the point here he doesn't want the transaction to get confirmed he only wants to cancel it and get the bitcoins back. or at least that's why i understood from his topic Not really, my answer is completely to the point... I'm advising him to double spend the unconfirmed inputs in a new transaction, which would be the only technical sollution to op's problem, next to waiting and hoping that no miner adds the tx to a block before most nodes drop the tx. And try to accelerate the new transaction (created with the high fee) to make sure that the new one will be the first to get confirmed. Free accelerator is e.g. ViaBTC (just google it), or there are several payed ones, not sure if it worths to try a paid one for the 0.00218 BTC (roughly 8 EUR or similar). Today afternoon I had a transaction with an average fee like 280 sat/B, it was confirmed in a few hours, without acceleration. And, because the mempool is on it's way down at the moment, it needs to be deciced as soon as possible, what will be the way forward... |
|
|
|
I just took a look at the mempool size shown at btc.com, there is no drop visible.
Seemst to be only blockchain.info who shows that strange behaviour.
Maybe it's really a rejection of transactions with small fees.
But what I really don't understand is that the size of the mempool on blockchain.info is increasing while it stays constant on btc.com.
I have also take a look at btc.com. What is strange (and not really understandable for me) that according to this chart, most of the transactions (69K) are sent with a fee under 20 sat/B  Seems like only a few transaction are over the 20 sat/B fee limit, so I'm not sure what the truth is now. It's possible that blockchain.info just don't count with those transactions with small fees, like it was mentioned above. I just sent a transaction with an average 285 sat/B fee (not so high, but defenately not cheap...) I'm curoius what will happen with it, how long will it take to get confirmed... we'll see... but if those transacitons are really sent with so low fee, it's possible that mine will get confirmed in a few hours time. (EDIT: I have 4 confirmations in half an hour time) I'm wondering, 1 sat/B is also under 20 sat/B, so what could be the fee of those 69K transacitons... P.S.: @BrewMaster: I like your previous avatar |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
