Bitcoin Forum
May 01, 2024, 10:34:45 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 [53] 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 ... 186 »
1041  Economy / Speculation / Re: The hardfork will make Gavincoin plummet to zero on: February 17, 2015, 03:46:20 PM
Nodes won't relay nonstandard transactions, unless the node is modified.
A miner could choose to include a nonstandard in a block, but would be pointless as the rest of the network would disallow the block. Wasted effort.

It was all correct until the bolded part.  Non-standard is still valid.  Standard vs non-standard only controls the behavior of nodes for relaying or including txns in a block.  A non-standard txn is still valid and thus a block containing a non-standard txn is also valid.   All nodes will validate and accept the block without issue and miners will extend that chain.

Standard = nodes will relay the txn and miners will include the txn by default
Non-standard = txn is still valid but it is not relayed or included in a block by default
Invalid = txn violates consensus rules and any block containing it is invalid. 

Thank you for correcting me. Smiley
1042  Economy / Speculation / Re: The hardfork will make Gavincoin plummet to zero on: February 17, 2015, 09:17:33 AM
WILL ALLOWED TRANSACTION SIZE BE INCREASED?

Txn size check uses the same constant as block size check (MAX_BLOCK_SIZE).  The new code doesn't change that.  You can make a txn as large as a block.  That being said most nodes consider a txn >100KB to be non-standard regardless of the block size.  So transactions larger than 100KB won't be relayed by most nodes, and won't be added to a block unless the miner is running custom software. Standard vs non-standard is a node behavior it isn't part of the consensus rules.

What would happen if I put a large fee on a non-standard transaction? Are these nodes/pools able to see the larger fee and push my transaction through?

Nodes won't relay nonstandard transactions, unless the node is modified.
A miner could choose to include a nonstandard in a block, but would be pointless as the rest of the network would disallow the block. Wasted effort.
 
1043  Other / Off-topic / Re: Scientific proof that God exists? on: February 16, 2015, 08:33:28 PM
If, in your mind, you can not grasp the absence of belief and religion: Can you then define the existence of both? If atheism can not exist, then it follows god can not exist.

Atheism is a religion because nobody knows that it is true, yet many people believe in it.

Smiley

You just claimed Atheism is a lie, now your claiming nobody knows if it's true or not.
1044  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Permanently keeping the 1MB (anti-spam) restriction is a great idea ... on: February 16, 2015, 11:04:49 AM
However, if block size is increased, there's really no reason why most miners won't include as many transactions as possible, since it doesn't really cost them anything. Transactors will no longer be required to pay to have their transactions included in the blockchain, and eventually profit-seeking miners will leave.

It costs mining pools nothing *now* to process transactions.  And in fact they are not even required to fill blocks up with transactions, there are empty blocks produced all the time.

Minimum fees can be set regardless of block size.
I don't think, that is true. Looking at the last blocks, they all had transactions in them.
Could you show me one of this recent 0 transaction blocks?

Yeah it does happen occasionally. Though of course they have the 1 transaction, which is the coinbase one.
1045  Economy / Speculation / Re: Those hodling >10btc since last ath on: February 15, 2015, 07:54:29 PM
I was hoping to just spend them, no cashing out.
1046  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin 20MB Fork on: February 15, 2015, 07:50:32 PM
We must keep in mind I am the worlds best poker player and in fact have over 100k games under my belt.
Watch out everyone, he could be bluffing, or maybe not.  Wink
1047  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin 20MB Fork on: February 14, 2015, 02:55:08 PM
In that case let's lower the block size to say 50KB, get some more competition.

Sure, but please first demonstrate how there's currently not enough of it.

why do you only want to make that change if it is too late?

when would you do the change? you know that a hardfork needs time and i strongly believe that the media would love stories like "bitcoin collapsed because they have 10k users now"

Baffles me mate.
1048  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin 20MB Fork on: February 14, 2015, 02:35:15 PM
So far the argument is "waaaah I can't be a freeloader anymore because the transaction space is limited and I have to outbid the competition," and I'm just not convinced this is a problem.
In that case let's lower the block size to say 50KB, get some more competition.
1049  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Why GOD will not punish and could even forgive Mark karpeles! on: February 13, 2015, 08:06:14 PM
I am God.

Oh there you are, found you at last.
A few questions......
1050  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin 20MB Fork on: February 13, 2015, 05:03:57 PM

The question you have to ask yourself is, will you ever actually get sidechains if you stay on the 1MB chain?  The anti-fork crowd have gone on record as saying they'd like to set up a bunch of nodes running the current version that can be left running and basically forgotten about, so if there are new features people want to see added, you'll be out of luck if the network isn't updated to support that new feature.  
No.  You won't get side-chains if you stay on the 1MB block chain, because the 1MB block chain will not move fast enough to support them.

B.. Bu.. But.. But... Anti-fork brigade told me side-chains would solve everything. I feel so lied to. Cheesy
1051  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin 20MB Fork on: February 13, 2015, 12:44:46 PM
I would rather replace them

The analogy does not hold. You're not proposing that we "replace" X by X'. Where X is worn off, and X' isn't.
You're proposing instead that we should add a couple extra wheels to the car "because how is that car useful if it can't hold as much people as a bus does?".


The analogy was supposed to be focused on seeing something is going to happen in the future and tackling it now instead of waiting for it to break. Which is where bitcoin is at now.
1052  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin 20MB Fork on: February 13, 2015, 12:19:40 PM
For fuck sakes guys just look at the polls. How not to fork?
I wouldn't take too much notice of that poll. It's not sock puppet proof.
1053  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin 20MB Fork on: February 13, 2015, 12:15:41 PM
Well there clearly is a problem or else this thread wouldn't exist.
I have no problem with Bitcoin. Do you?
No. But with an analogy I feel bitcoin's brakepad friction linings are getting low. Sure they work fine for now, but I would rather replace them with fresh pads now.
Waiting until transactions start stacking up and everyone panicking, is the equivalent of letting the pads wear down to the metal backplate with possibly fatal consequences.
1054  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin 20MB Fork on: February 13, 2015, 11:49:01 AM
Ignoring the fact that you haven't replied to my question please tell me why isn't the right time now?

Because there is currently no problem.

Well there clearly is a problem or else this thread wouldn't exist.
1055  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Permanently keeping the 1MB (anti-spam) restriction is a great idea ... on: February 12, 2015, 07:04:36 PM
It is you that are actually scared and does not support bitcoin the way it is.

The pro-progress crowd are actually supporting bitcoin because the block size cap is and always was temporary.

You haven't thought your comment through properly. Cheesy
1056  Other / Off-topic / Re: Scientific proof that God exists? on: February 12, 2015, 05:41:45 PM
You didn't answer my earlier questions either. Why did you feel the need to differentiate between 'homos' and 'sinners'? Doesn't your (I assume, god inspired) bible identify homosexuality as a sin? So, wouldn't it be enough to just lump them in with the rest of the sinners? That's ok, you don't really need to answer that, we all know you were just exercising your inalienable right to be a bigot. Right? Which, isn't a sin? This god stuff is so confusing for us guys with no brains. Luckily we have geniuses like you reading the 'true' bibles, 'praying for us' and being the good christians you obviously are, informing us of how brainless we are.

Who knows for sure what he thought, but, too many "homos" don't think that they are sinners. He was probably simply showing the homos that they are sinners, as well. So it would have been only a clarification.

Often the dividing line between prejudice and bigotry isn't very clear. One might say that homosexual sinners are prejudiced against Christian sinners, or vice versa. And there are bigots in both groups as well.

The thing that is interesting is that usually it is the homosexual sinners that jump immediately into accusations of bigotry against the Christian sinners, almost as though they are throwing up a wall of protection from some unseen foe, because, while there might be accusations on the Christian sinners side, such accusations come from desires for change among homosexual sinners, so that good can come to homosexual sinners as it is coming to the Christian sinners.

Smiley

Homosexuality, since being studied from the 1960s, is a natural and very common occurrence in almost every specie on Earth. In humanity, males are strict in their sexual attractions(Tend to be either Gay or Straight, though a new study shows that bisexual males do exist, but are rarer than the other two orientations), and that females are fluid in their sexual attractions with studies throughout the decades(since alfred kinsey) showing that females, regardless of their identifying orientation, all present a bisexual nature of attraction.

This goes against what's presented in the Bible, why? Because the bible is wrong, not holy, and was created specifically as a "lawbook" most likely, for the Israelites, Unfortunately, we today take it legitimately, but if we are to cherrypick some parts of the bible such as what BADecker does, then we must also listen to the other atrocities commanded by God in the bible such as:

1) "Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." (Numbers 31:16-18)

- In that quote from the Bible, God promotes the killing of innocents, while also promoting Pedophilia by keeping the women Children(notice children) alive. So now we know that the God of the bible promotes not just violence, but pedophilia(or hebephilia, depends on the age of the children, though I presume children are below the age of 12).


2) "And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and woman: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house." (Ezekiel 9:5-6)

- Here, god gives the command to kill innocents yet again, simply because they do not believe him. Mass genocide anyone? You can even compare the God of the bible to Adolf Hitler by this point.


Those are only two quotes I took from the bible(There are hundreds of other atrocities in there commanded by "God", if you're interested). This shows that not only is "God" from the bible evil in some respects, but also that if you listen and believe in the bible and define yourself as such, such as BADecker does, then you cannot cherrypick which parts you will listen to. Did you ever read the Laws of Moses BADecker, where there are laws that promote the stoning of your wife should she ever cheat, or the killing of a priest for drinking wine? Yea.


It's so sad to see people so foolishly manipulated by things they don't even fully know... It just shows humanity has not progressed far enough to trluy create a world of peace and love, without the need to abide by a book that largely promotes death, intolerance, and ignorance.

Bu, bu, but, but.... It's the way you interpret it.
1057  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin 20MB Fork on: February 12, 2015, 08:14:16 AM
yes, i know. Gavincoin proposal is an attack on bitcoin. I just wanted to figure out which public channels to watch so i can be among the first ones to sell in case the community is forked and bitcoin hijacked.
I guess i'll just sell now and wait until the dust settles. Won't go anywhere before the halving anyways.
I think i might buy Mpcoin later if it comes to the MCA

Why do you think Gavincoin is an attack on bitcoin while MPcoin isn't?

MP coin is not intrusive, It is just the basic aftermath of hard forking bitcoin.
You are using mpcoin as of now btw ;-)

correct. Mpcoin is what everyone is currently using - and it works just fine.

Really i don't give a single fuck about the gavin-bloat

No. Mpcoin has a permanent block cap size, bitcoin has a temporary one. They are both totally different.
1058  Other / Off-topic / Re: Scientific proof that God exists? on: February 12, 2015, 06:21:46 AM
God does exist, here is the proof if you read this, you might start to wonder and say oh shit, Now all you homos and sinners, go pray, and Ill pray for you all.

http://www.gospelherald.com/articles/54338/20150210/new-theory-disproves-big-bang-leading-researchers-to-admit-that-there-was-no-beginning-to-the-universe.htm

I don't understand how if we disproved the big bang, this in anyway proves god?
Oh and please keep your insecure homophobic views to yourself.

Read the bible then you will understand

First you need to prove to me it hasn't been "tampered" with by man over the centuries.
1059  Other / Off-topic / Re: Scientific proof that God exists? on: February 12, 2015, 06:01:35 AM
God does exist, here is the proof if you read this, you might start to wonder and say oh shit, Now all you homos and sinners, go pray, and Ill pray for you all.

http://www.gospelherald.com/articles/54338/20150210/new-theory-disproves-big-bang-leading-researchers-to-admit-that-there-was-no-beginning-to-the-universe.htm

I don't understand how if we disproved the big bang, this in anyway proves god?
Oh and please keep your insecure homophobic views to yourself.
1060  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin 20MB Fork on: February 11, 2015, 09:07:25 AM
What's the tps and block size cap of Monero?
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 [53] 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 ... 186 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!