Bitcoin Forum
July 19, 2019, 11:22:32 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 ... 823 »
1621  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How Brexit will impact bitcoin on: October 04, 2018, 05:45:52 PM
though the UK has its own legislation that mirrors EU legislations currently. thus no actual need to change much on brexit day

but after brexit there will be more freedom to allow parliament to start amending legislation to what parliament seems fit for them. and its at these times of new bills/amendments they normally would slip in amendments mixed in with other bills.
so we could see some regulations being added/removed/amended either openly or hidden in the mix of multiple amendments hidden in big bills

the forex exhcnage between GBP/euro will change as will GBP/USD.
we seen it a few years ago when the IMF added CHY to its SDR. many thought it had nothing to do with GBP but it did impact
and also with just announcing brexit caused movement in both gbp/euro and gbp/dolar, but thats more effecting the forex markets

this would have been a good time to instead of valuing bitcoin vs USD. it could have been btc vs minimum wage.
that way no matter where people live or what forex does, people know they only have to pay the equivalent of under 1000 labour hours.

which could be revolutionary because people could play th forex markets to get the best bitcoin deals, thus impacting forex and actually affecting wall street.. but thats a whole different scenario/idea for another discussion

i know people think that if the UK exchange rate to lets say USD is worse. EG less dollar per pound = disney holiday gets more expensive.. i see this as a good thing.

firstly the flip side. less dollar per pound = more pound per dollar. so this means the US can buy more from the UK cheaper. meaning they will buy more from the UK.
we will see U.S company outsourcing their call centres and remote services to the UK because we(british folk) can offer more for less.
we can start making things again because its more expensive for brits to import.
we will become more exporter than importer

so we could see the UK becoming a better prospect for crypto businesses looking for better labour costs than the usa
1622  Economy / Speculation / Re: Almost 12 months of Bear Market .Is there any better future a head? on: October 03, 2018, 10:12:11 PM
I believe in this last quarter of the year 2018 bitcoin Price is going to recover greatly to the point of rising above $20k before the end of this year 2018

recover?
um sorry. bitcoin price was never a sustained $20k.
the correction was the recovery not the other way round

dont stand at the top of a mountain that only 2 people got to stand on. stop looking down at a price from up high
stand at the bottom and look up

its not just th right way to look at a market. its also healthier for your head and emotions
1623  Economy / Speculation / Re: Almost 12 months of Bear Market .Is there any better future a head? on: October 03, 2018, 08:46:56 PM
2016: always above $300
2017: always above $600
2018: always above $5800

12 month bear market? what are you talking about.
you mean the cub(small bear) and calves(small bull) constantly playing back and forth throughout the year. in a 10 year bull market
1624  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin Core 0.17.0 Released on: October 03, 2018, 08:29:55 PM
Miner block size removed
------------------------

The `-blockmaxsize` option for miners to limit their blocks' sizes was
deprecated in V0.15.1, and has now been removed. Miners should use the
`-blockmaxweight` option if they want to limit the weight of their blocks.

important to note. due to the witness_scale_factor=4

by reducing the blockmaxweight 4000000 down, your actually reducing the legacy and non witness data allowance to be below 1mb
so dont just treat blocks as being actual 4000000bytes of open allocation even for legacy/non-witness data
(hopefully removing the hideous scale factor will come later.. and we can all say 'finally')

so reducing 4000000 to 3000000 for instance, is not
legacy/nonwitness 1mb and witness area 2mb
but instead is:
legacy/nonwitness 0.75mb and witness area 2.25mb

i mention this as some will bring the blockmaxweight down to 1000000 thinking it cuts out 'iswitness' utility. when infact all its doing is bringing the legacy/non witness allowance to 0.25mb
1625  Economy / Economics / Re: Sick and tired of the cryptocurrency bullshit!!! on: October 03, 2018, 07:58:01 PM
saying a market should move based on emotion. is also bad
prics should move based on value rises where everyone who bought coins aove X wont sell lower than X meaning when they sell for X+1 eventually everyone values it at X+1

thinking the price should jump by 400% and stay up based on pure emotion and not based on values/costs is bad behavior

there is no real event that is currently happening to add real value to cause big rises.
however the markets are moving. just not causing a large spike some people want.

dont wait weeks months for 50%-400% spikes. instead take the small 1% changes and repeat. that way you will get your 50%-400% (cumulatively)

if you dont have the patience. then click the x at the corner of the price chart screen and watch some TV or plan out starting a business or other methods of making some money.

also remember the $20k was not a "value" price. it was a fluke of temporary emotional hype based on an event of november, which is not going to happen this november as the event that triggered it is not happening this year.

dont think the $20k is something that was suppose to have lasted. in short dont stand on a mountain looking down. stand at the ground level looking up
1626  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Can bitcoin be sent, received or traded (used) without the internet? on: October 03, 2018, 05:48:41 PM
yes

physical bitcoins. also known initially as casascius coins or paper wallets

as long as you trust the seal and that the original holder(s) do not have or know the private coins because its sealed within the physical bitcoin. then you can swap them hand to hand
1627  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BITCOIN VALUE INDICATOR SAYS PRICE ‘STILL OVERBOUGHT’ BUT BOTTOM ‘NEAR’ on: October 03, 2018, 05:41:55 PM
I somewhat agree with this statement. As much as I wanted to see bitcoin's value reach its new ATH for this year yet seems so vague due to lots of factors affecting its performance in the market.

not at all. bitcoin is actually extremely under-priced right now. in a way it is currently kept down with a lot of manipulation, panic and FUD.
but don't confuse being under-priced with reaching a new ATH. a new ATH (which is basically a price above $20k) at this point means another bubble but a rise is needed to get back to where bitcoin belongs not at $6k but probably about 40% higher than this. then we can have a solid rise from there, it doesn't have to be a jump and unrealistic market performances.

we have already seen like 3 jumps into the $8k(40% up) range. and none of them held. we need to see hashrate rises that outpace asic manufacturers selling hardware at lower prices.
the end result is that if the price to mine is more expensive than the price to buy. people would prefer to buy.
(this spins the wheels of pushing up the value and price. which then makes mining profitable. that then keeps the hashrates going up, which then if unprofitable makes people wanna buy coin. and repeat repeat repeat)
.. this is happening slowly. and hopefully the latest asic batch prices are the bottom discount. so now the hashrate push will cause the reaction of shifting new entrants away from mining with new batches of asics and instead buying coin. and then as the wheels turn it raises the support where everyone will refuse to sell at 6100 6300 and so on. so that the prices dont go to previous lows and instead the waves of speculation PRICE go into $7k and VALUE moves up the $6k. and it just continues up
...
acquiring coin through the markets or via mining is the balancing act of shifting the support line which is all based on the cost of acquiring coin. and although the market is unpredictable, the mining side is more predictable and measurable. as its easy to cost out a btc via mining. even a few weeks before new entrant miners use their rigs because the price they pay for the rigs and the electric needed is all specified at asic sales pages weeks before a miner takes delivery to use them
1628  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Did anyone catch Erik Voorhees at Denver Startup Week? on: October 03, 2018, 01:53:22 AM
distributed ledger technology is just the small niche of closed source company run blockchains.
its not a term for blockchains as a whole

distributed ledgers also dont limit themselves to one long stream of data. but smaller chains of data. that chain to larger chains
EG
a bank branch has a ledger of 5000 users.. and a neighbouring towns bank branch has a ledger of 5000 users. and its the banks reserves of each branch are then relationship linked(chained) to an an entry of a main chain that only accounts the reserves
meaning its multisidechain network

 some call that "sharding". but is just the same as banking.

distributed ledgers such as this are not blockchain 2.0.. but normally blockchain minus 0.1
1629  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BITCOIN VALUE INDICATOR SAYS PRICE ‘STILL OVERBOUGHT’ BUT BOTTOM ‘NEAR’ on: October 03, 2018, 12:52:52 AM
its over bought?
nope. its not over bought its at actually a good low level to buy.

the daily/weekly waves are normal speculation.. 5-10% speculation price is normal..
we are not in the Tsunami speculation wave season of last winter. which was 400%-1000% compared to last summer

we are currently in normal expected calm waters of this years higher natural underlying value waterline but this topic is trying to make people believe that stagnant waterline is the norm.. where waves should not exist at all.. (facepalm)

even fiat see's movements in price which dont cause damage or seen as inflation

seems the article writer has limited knowledge and is trying to put stuff together to sound good, but misses the point.

i did read the article. but the first paragraph gave me pause enough to make me want to facepalm and not bother.
as soon as the word marketcap is mentioned you instantly know they have not looked at the full scope of the economy

..
delving deeper
using unique addresses is flawed too. because that just as bad as saying someone has 100 separate pennies instead of a single $£1. or is wearing pants with more than 2 pockets.. it doesnt really help.

my view
what should have been used is the UTXO of the COINS moved. not the transactions moved..
looking over the last 10 or so months to know when coins move, the value they attain at that movement is of the price at the date of that movement. because people measure the value when moving/swapping coins.. over 65% of all coins in circulation moved when prices were over $5,800 thus over 70% value coins at over $5800

this compared to last year is a healthy rise of underlying value.
its too early to call a new number in the $6k range as the $5.8k has been recently tested.. but at the same time the recent test adds more wight, as the price got tested before that and before that again. the more retests without breaking the line. so that also adds substance to the value

then there is mining costs.
although more variable. at the summers ASIC price of $850 per asic and prior to that 1250+ per rig. calculating the majority low cost of electric savvi miners use. has shown a healthy +$5800 of multiple months cost is healthy meaning they wont sell for less.

however this month ASICs (limited stock though so not much impact) are selling for $440 an asic. which would mean by the time people get delivery the hashrate should be around 65exa hash to keep a mining cost of latest limited supply batchs above the $5800 cost. but while below that hashrate, meaning lower cost per btc mining for those lucky few that buy cheaper rigs. their impact vs the millions of existing rigs that cost more wont be much to influence value below $5800 as they first have to fight the waves above $5800 of miners with higher costs and users swapping coins of higher cost.. and so instead would just continue the waves of this natural 5-10% up and down movement above the waterline

but as i said not enough time has passed to raise the waterline value of about $5800 and no pressure of new participant miners to price it down... so its just normal wave movements.

but once hashrates are above 65exa september mining new batches wont be a down pressure at all(thse batches havent even got delivered until october, so no downward pressure yet. and as i said no downward pressure want rxahash high enough to make them nw rigs have a higher cost to mine. so relax)

summary bottom line value at a healthy $5800 with natural waves of 5-10% above the waterline
1630  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Flaws in LN (Lightning Network). on: October 02, 2018, 08:51:29 PM
Good news, though, pretty much all the people who believe this opcode is an issue are totally discredited.  

1. the opcode. the devs already know about it. its no secret. but you seem to not know. although many hints were given for you to DYOR

2. the anyonecanspend (separate issue) the devs found the work around. once it finally twigged on them that it was an issue,
again the hints are there its no secret infact the work around become highly visable.. if you knew.

but it seems your not getting the hints.
you dont want me to spoon feed you.. i get that
you want to ignore me.. fine hit that ignore button.
 or atleast DYOR
i know you dont like people telling you to learn
but if you are so adamant to not want to get information from me. then im not going to spoon feed it to you.(bite the hand that feeds you. you stop getting fed) leaving the only option as for you to DYOR

ill just leave it for others who can see the hints to do their research and become aware.
i tried being nice, i even tried to be subtle. but this has just got to a point where all you wanna do is sling mud.

as for the opcode.. well the devs do know of that issue. its no secret. but you have already been given enough hint to DYOR and i have asked you to DYOR but you just wanna sling mud. so no more hints for you

so go have a nice day.
1631  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: MERITS OF BLOCKCHAIN. on: October 02, 2018, 03:17:36 PM
1. Wrong. A blockchain is slow, inefficient and expensive to run.

1. a blockchain doesnt need to be fast for very purpose. and can be made faster and more efficient without needing to step away from blockchains.
2. it can be efficient with the right devs that want to care about blockchain efficiency coding it instead of saying it cant be made efficient
3. a blockchain can be free to run.

i feel that your bias's against blockchains have become more apparent. and im starting to wonder why you post on a forum that uses blockchains as its main security model.

when you stop imagining a blockchain as a one dimensional strand. and instead view it 3 dimensionally

EG imagine a doctors surgery of 6000 patients has a chain of hashes. the personal data not being the chain. but being a UTXO database of encrypted data. and each new block of daily updated records is updating hashes. not clear text data.

each doctors surgury strand of chain. hass a block or UTXO header that gets added to a master chain. and so the network is not validating what the clear text says. but validating the hashes add up.
and its the doctors and patients in their smaller subchains that validate that personal stuff

it also helps so that its not one massive chain of a nations patient records. but subchains that regions/townships manage at sublevels.
1632  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Flaws in LN (Lightning Network). on: October 02, 2018, 02:55:33 PM
...
The only thing I can find is.  If that's what franky1 is soiling himself over,

nope your not even close

i would give you a subtle hint but all i see is that you put noinput into critical issues. apart from insults.
so keep researching, keep learning. and when it dawns on you. then you can atleast be at peace that you found out about it without me, and maybe you will accept it
1633  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Flaws in LN (Lightning Network). on: October 02, 2018, 07:19:19 AM
So what's your take on this? What's the relevancy of the Byzantine General's problem on how two counterparties manage the state of their payment channel?

to explain it all involves the whole big 3 decade debate of decentralised money and how the whole 2009 blockchain solution called bitcoin became such a big hit as it solves the problem of decentralised money.

after all if 2 party channels could work where people could leave LN nodes open indefinitely and use factories to recycle funds all off chain to take funds out of channels at close and put in new channels without broadcasting back to a blockchain... then blockchains are never needed.. which brings back the 3 decade debate about the whole point of blockchains. and if satoshis revolution was ever needed..

seems a few think that once inside LN its utopia. and blockchains were never needed and never will be needed again as factories(larger mutlisigs) are the solution satoshi should have come up with in 2008-9

its like the oldest and longest debate of all in regards to digital distributed/decentralised money
(requires long explanation.)

. but knowing theres a few people here who just ignore the content. and just here to insult and put finger in ears.. its probably best most people take the subtle hints and DYOR(do own research) and play around with LN (even on testnet) as they wont be happy being told the issues by people that are not in their circle of friends
1634  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Flaws in LN (Lightning Network). on: October 02, 2018, 01:44:39 AM
hre we go again. distracting the conversation again away from LN flaws.....

That's not a "solution".  Try again.  If the Bitcoin network couldn't find consensus for 2MB legacy with SegWit, what makes you think people will jump at the chance to have 4MB legacy with SegWit?  Maybe try saying "learn consensus" without a hint of irony a few more times just to make everyone laugh a little bit harder.

you already know that the 2mb legacy with segwit was just a ploy. by the same group that just wanted segwitx1

WHAT?  No, I don't "know" that.  

then go back and learn about the NYA

Anyone who wouldn't want to risk centralising layer 0

here you go again treating lightning as a feature of bitcoin and part of the bitcoin network...
by talking about
"layers" (facepalm)
with so many calling lightning layer 2 is the same crap as years ago when people called NXT bitcoin 2.0

LN is not a layer
LN is separate network. ("chainhash"is asking for any chain of coins. its not locked to monitor bitcoin.)
EG. what if i said ripple was bitcoins layer 2.. i bet you would scream that it aint.

its why they had to do a hard fork mascaraed as a UASF and then point fingers at another group as the instigators..

Who are "they"?  No one has enough individual control over Bitcoin's network to "do a hard fork" (*facepalm*) and make everyone else on the network like it.  

you think people have to like the rules for things like mandated activation and node bans and block reject threats to push an agenda..... (facepalm)
sorry but nope. 2017 ploy was not to like the rules but you give no other choice but accept it or to go "f**k off to another network"

i know i know.. i expect the usual reply social drama narrative that "blah blah it was bitcoin cash that forked"..
but no thats is you rewriting history. you might want to check the blockchains. it was segwit that initiated a change first.. and enforced the node ban and block reject protocol. cash wasnt created until hours later.

and here is the reason i want you to actually go learn things. because i am not your mom that should spoon feed you.
you dont want to listen anyway and you dont even care what is being said. so the only way you will learn and accept things is if you actually go use them and learn for yourself.

again i get it you dont want me telling you things. so why keep asking just to then stick your head in the sand and shout insults.. maybe try using the things your questioning and learn first hand if you hate second hand input so much

anyway this topic just shows alot of the usual suspects wanting a social drama session.

now those that do want to know the flaws can go use LN and experience them themselves.. i would say read code. but many treat that as me attacking them

so until those that want to reply about LN flaws have actually used LN.. you might want to try using LN first so that you can atleast start to understand conversations about LN.. unlike some who just prefer to cause social drama, but just hitting reply to just argue and insult and not address LN issues
1635  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: SEC Receives Letter from U.S. Congress Members Requesting Clearer Regulations on: October 01, 2018, 11:43:30 PM
how about instead of letting them argue. lets set some clear definitions ourselves.
EG
1. if a token is created that has allotment of tokens to hand prior to public release and/or announcement. that company/entity group is acting under a security concept

2. if a token network cannot be seen as having an entity group/company that controls upgrades or initial coin release recipients due to it being so diverse and open to public involvement. it is not a security concept

3. if a token is created to raise funds for a company/entity group. and not created solely to be an open spirited network for anyone to utilise then its a security

feel free to add or edit
1636  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Flaws in LN (Lightning Network). on: October 01, 2018, 11:15:23 PM
anyway back to talking about the flaws. and hopefully no more insulting social distraction attempts.
And... that's it. What else has been reported so far?

look into the opcodes. they even want to rename an opcode to make it visibly shown its a risk(hint. its a risk for one and secondly reintroduces malleability)
look into why factories/watchtowers are being conceived
look into why having just a couple channels aint enough for full random pay anyone
look into how the byzantine generals issue applies
look into the 6degree of kevin bacon plays out
look into the funds of channels and the % of operability the more 'kevin bacons' are involved
the list goes on
1637  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Flaws in LN (Lightning Network). on: October 01, 2018, 11:05:41 PM
That's not a "solution".  Try again.  If the Bitcoin network couldn't find consensus for 2MB legacy with SegWit, what makes you think people will jump at the chance to have 4MB legacy with SegWit?  Maybe try saying "learn consensus" without a hint of irony a few more times just to make everyone laugh a little bit harder.

you already know that the 2mb legacy with segwit was just a ploy. by the same group that just wanted segwitx1. it was always just a bait and switch to try getting the numbers up.. many seen that. hense why UASF was also needed to push segwit through

but letting bitcoins network expand in a efficient byte for byte transaction for transaction is not their roadmap.
because who would want LN if bitcoin could handle the transaction flow for 2015-2020

its why they have the wishy washy hurpa derp code of x4. its why they had to do a hard fork mascaraed as a UASF and then point fingers at another group as the instigators..
its all just social drama just to keep things running along a roadmap that is designed to make investors of devs money. and not to innovate and expand bitcoin byte for byte/transaction for transaction

funny part is segwitx1 only had 40% consensus. but without segwit. devs would not have fulfilled their private investment contracts to get their $$  so had to employ such tactics of UASF and finger pointing. to get it done.

anyway.
all i care about is innovating the bitcoin network. you can point your fingers that i must be another coin lover because im not ass kissing devs all you like.
you can try thinking the only solution is other networks and if i dont like the devs i should play with other coins. but thats just the mindset of people that think the only option is other networks.
if thats your mindset. maybe you should move to the other networks you want people to concentrate and look at so much
1638  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Flaws in LN (Lightning Network). on: October 01, 2018, 10:36:14 PM
The problem with LN haters is that they always shit on everything devs do, but don't bring up any solutions to the table,

actually i and others have given solutions to problems. even solutions to segwit too.
 but those that see me bringing up flaws or see me offering solutions dont think about the flaw/solution. they just see the hate and then dramatise it into a finger pointing game of social distraction to meander the content away from talking about the flaw..

yea i know. you core positive PR guys that poke the bear. and then quoting when the bear bites, that the bear bit.. is just your ploy. more wasted time talking about social distractions

anyway.
LN is a separate network with flaws. now if anyone cares about bitcoin. start concentrating on bitcoin. not advertising core devs and their features that are made to make investment returns.

we are just waiting time with other networks and social distractions. and less time getting devs to innovate the bitcoin network.
LN wont be ready any time soon. so no need to promote it. put your wasting time to actually trying to innovate the bitcoin network.
1639  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Flaws in LN (Lightning Network). on: October 01, 2018, 10:21:03 PM
You tell me I should try to break LN, but you've never attempted it yourself?  Worthless troll.

i dont need to break it or rip people off. i just need to tell an LN dev of an exploit.


anyway
you can spend your own life trying to social distract people informing the flaws to counter your narative that its a service people need and why its worth wasting years waiting for LN instead of getting devs to grow bitcoins network.

but how about concentrate less on these other networks designed to make devs and their private investors behind their salaries returns on their investments. and instead care more about the bitcoin network

the reason i say actually use something. is because you seem more about promoting the positives. than someone that spends time using the thing they want to promote positively.

you need to learn how the routing works to actually understand the scheme quoted in the first post.
you need to learn about byzantine generals to learn about other exploits.
you need to actually use LN to know its limitations, how it functions

but trying to explain to you the faults without you doing the basic understanding of certain things is like trying to explain to a person that ha never driven or seen a car engine why a car wont start.
in other words if you have nevr driven a car and not seen engine. dont get involved in discussions about cars. and dont start insulting people that say cars have flaws. because all your doing is turning a discussion about car faults into a discussion about social dramatising the people talking about it.

again try learning the things. try using the things. and then you will get shocked.
coz so far it just seems all you are learning is PR positive promoting.

either way. your dramatising things and insulting is just distracting the content away from the content...
and just turning things into a kardashian drama over who hates who. rather than a what's wrong with a technology that has caused so much delay, and will cause even more delay due to the flaws. and why we should now re-concentrate efforts on the bitcoin network and just let LN be what it is a separate network that some devs can sort out while bitcoin devs actually start concentrating on bitcoins network again

EG the paid devs that want to say bitcoin cant scale.. let them go play with LN
and those that want bitcoin to be innovative and grow. actually concentrate on making bitcoin grow.
1640  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Steady, permanent growth is possible - this is OUR opportunity to turn things on: October 01, 2018, 07:50:45 PM
steady permanent growth is already happening. and all you need to do just change your viewpoint

by standing at the tip of the ATH mountain or the tip of a monthly average high.. your not seeing it.
instead stand at ground level of the years LOW $5800.. and you will see the difference.

2016: always above $300
2017: always above $900
2018: always above $5800
Pages: « 1 ... 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 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 ... 823 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!