Bitcoin Forum
July 22, 2019, 12:33:50 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 ... 823 »
1701  Economy / Speculation / Re: btc's next moves on: September 27, 2018, 10:03:46 AM
Bakkt launches Nov 5...they should be buying bitcoin to warehouse it for their physically settled bitcoin futures

I don't think they would need to buy it ahead of time. Just purchase at spot price when someone places an order. Use clients' money instead of their own...

they do need to pre-buy their opening offer to prove they have the reserves
its why the winkles are sat on 200k of coins. as their opener
1702  Economy / Speculation / Re: btc's next moves on: September 27, 2018, 10:02:18 AM
nothing said above in this topic is TECHNICAL analysis

this topics OP is pure TREND anals

anyway some technicals for you
grab the UTXO set. look at the funds moving for the last 10 months.
65% of funds moved while the prices were above $5,800
that low has been tested many times and no one has bit hard enough

bitcoin mining costs. also have a $5,800 of 43terrahash network
currentyly mining above that too. meaning even miners are not foolish to sell below.

now take that knowledge and then use that when the bottomline surpasses another threshold for a medium amount of time. and then recheck to see if atleast 50% of coins moved hands in that tim and if mining costs also are above that amount in that time so you can see how tough the support line will keep the prices up

P.S october-november will see a new batch of ASICS that are more efficient/lower cost. so rejig your mining costs for then and calculate how many coins are being made by pools who's hashrate jump in that period. to then calculate the impact they could cause if they sold off on the market..

have a nice day
1703  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: An open letter to the community, from the developers of Breadwallet on: September 27, 2018, 09:20:56 AM
LN is not bitcoin
LN is not even blockchain
LN is a separate network. like ripple

bitcoin had to change to be LN compatible
litecoin had to change to be LN compatible

if LN was to be a sole feature of bitcoin then LN would get designed around bitcoin, not the other way round.

i know your new to this, but these discussions have gone on for years.
LN is not following the ethos of bitcoin or litecoin. LN has an ethos of their own. they will accept multiple coins and will try to lock funds in and try not to get people to broadcast transactions back to the chain..
they try promoting that as their benefit.
(using a factory(fortknox) means you give the unbroadcasted tx back to the factory and they resupply you with a new unbroadcast tx to re-migrate/balance your funds across the channels)
but if you follow golds history of bank notes you will see the whole game plan.
i know your probably going to twist it into how fabulous that sounds to never need to use the blockchain. but look how that turned out for people that had gold in 19th century, before banking it

remember: "if it aint your sole control private key, it aint your coin"

bitcoin in-> play with promissory notes--> crappy brass, nickel and copper coins(altcoins) out because they are cheaper and faster to transact with onchain
(when you hear bitcoin devs themselves say bitcoin is broke/cant scale.. so heres a bank-esq payment know something is up)

how is LN inferior (i already mentioned the whole byte bloat of segwit inferiority. and how opcodes will add malleation in segwit)
1. its not a push payment. its a 'if other users are only, get everyone involved to sign' payment system
2. its not a pay direct. its a 'set up funds that go on average 5 different directions incase someones asleep'
3. its not community audited. thus tampering/thefts/blackmail do(and have) happen
4. because of routing, you have to share your funds with others
5. its not sole control. it co-signed

as for the employment contract of november 2016 with a deadline of november2017..
check the dates of the Bip
"For Bitcoin mainnet, the BIP9 starttime will be midnight 15 november 2016 UTC (Epoch timestamp 1479168000) and BIP9 timeout will be midnight 15 november 2017 UTC (Epoch timestamp 1510704000). "
oh and by the way

check their payday
PS they wanted their funds in BTC so the investors had to buy $25m of coin... now go check the market chart for mid november 2017 (heres a hint the buyup started november 12th. finished in november.. (everything after that was just community reaction)

as for calling me troll shill 'wrong because wrong'. thats just because they cant actually counter me using hard data so resort to name calling and insults.. yea sometimes when they poke i bite. but i do try to entertain them with statistics and data which they cant counter. so they resort to putting their head in the sand

i even use data direct from the source itself. like sipa and lukeJR and gmax
P.S (the bilateral split.. thats a term gmaxwell used.. not me)

i have tried to ask them to learn a few things before replying or sitting back and having a coffee, relaxing and think of things critically before replying. i think even you are aware that i try. yea i dont say it in a cuddly way. but doesnt mean it wasnt said

but a couple years on .. and some dont know the basic concepts of consensus, multisig anyonecanspend which has been the main things they argue about and pretend dont apply to things like segwit LN and bitcoin. (facepalm)

but in the end its their own ignorance harming only them. but when they try entering a discussion and dont actually show data and statistics and just point fingers at altcoins and personalities and call names.. again they are making themselves look bad as people who care about bitcoin.. and their only goal is to look good for their lil boys club of like minded cabin fever group

im not interested in their kardashian drama they read about on reddit. social name calling and pointing at altcoins is not related in anyway to protecting the bitcoin network. but its the only rebuttle they have

i care about the network and the control paradigm being played out that is reducing bitcoins utility and ethos into a currency that needs co-managed banking (facepalm)

anyway i do hope you can brush off the wishy washy mindsets that want co-managed accounts. and instead realise that bitcoin can scale onchain. and that legacy transactions can offer more transactions per byte if they just removed the 1mb wall wishy washy trick code
1704  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Satoshis vision question. on: September 27, 2018, 08:20:04 AM
One of Satoshis main points were no forced updates,
how did you come up with that conclusion?

its called "consensus"

i think the OP meant UPGRADES. not critical bug updates
EG the difference between the mandatory segwit UPGRADE ... vs the 0.16.3 critical UPDATE

segwits team of the mandatory game plan due to not getting the amount of votes needed but having private investor $25m contract deadline of november 2017 was just wrong on so many levels. to threaten pools with block rejects and nodes with ip bans if they didnt comply in august

i do find it funny how they are not organising such mandatory node ban ceremony to protect the network, but did so for an upgrade
1705  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin mining & zero-point energy on: September 27, 2018, 08:10:50 AM
Anyway, the design of Bitcoin makes it so that any reduction in the total cost of mining only increases the difficulty until the total cost approaches the value of the block reward.

PoS costs nothing. so PoS coins have a zero cost acquisition of creation and just rely on the cost acquisition of people buying it to support a bottomline value.

if gold cost $1 to mine, the price of gold would tank because miners would sell it at instant profit to value at $1 and speculate (hype, FOMO) above that in bubble prices/waves if ups and downs above that. in the $2 area

in bitcoin mining. SMART miners plan a year in advance. they get their FIAT from private investors to cover the bills. and in exchange the private investors get BTC at a certain rate. thus not impact the market directly
some smart pools when bitcoins price is below mining cost. they actually buy the coin on the market and hand that to the private investor. thus keeping the price up (afterall why waste electric to get something more expensive)

there are a couple silly mining farms that actually pushed the boat and foolishly went short term sighted turned off too many rigs during alst december. sold load of coins to buy more rigs an then turned loads of rigs on after december. to then realise they had to turn loads off when the price couldnt sustaiin them
thus having to sell the rigs at second hand discount
BTCC was victim to this.. and now sits at the dizzying low of 0.5% network hashrate
where as pools like antpool. just played the progressing increase every few weeks and just paying off their investors. which is why their hashrate has shown a more smooth progressive climb not really reacting to price swings of the market.

smart mining pools locate themselves near energy grids where the power company produces more electric than the population demands. and this electricity excess cant be recouped/stored, resent out later... and so they would just lose it without making any money.. so smart pools buy some of that excess. which pools love as they get a discount. and power companies love because they get money for nothing.
1706  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: An open letter to the community, from the developers of Breadwallet on: September 27, 2018, 07:10:18 AM
maybe requesting the big segwit promoters to act first.

after 2 years of endless 'segwit is perfect solution, well tested blah blah blah'... well
(i know it was only activated in 2017. but since 2015-16 they been saying how great it is working on testnets and how perfect it is)

wheres their trust in bech32(bc1q) addresses

wheres their trust in bech32(bc1q) addresses

wheres their trust in bech32(bc1q) addresses

wheres their trust in bech32(bc1q) addresses

and now the cherry on top

the main guy.. the segwit code master himself.. pieter wuille(sipa)
Tips and donations: 1Nrohb....
1707  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: An open letter to the community, from the developers of Breadwallet on: September 27, 2018, 06:38:10 AM
a transaction of X inputs and Y outputs consumes more bytes with segwit than with legacy.

I just want to point out that Breadwallet's main reasoning behind their open letter is actually lower fees, and lower block weight resulting in more transactions per block than just legacy. You may be right that Segwit is actually more inefficient memory-wise, but they're not at all commenting on where development should be, or should have headed -- just that Segwit has lower fees now.

I'm against forced updates as much as any other person, but this seems more like a plea than a forced order. People really should do their own research before upgrading though.

its not lower fee's
dont you get it.
its like walmart.. raise the prices via increasing(not decreasing) the minrelay/dust..
and then put a sticky label on that says 'rollback' 75% off if your a walmart loyalty card holder

the relay/dust should be 10x lower than they were in 2015.. they are not. infact they are higher than 2015
then ontop they x4 legacy transactions prices..

its a bait and switch
1708  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: An open letter to the community, from the developers of Breadwallet on: September 27, 2018, 06:34:25 AM
SegWit was never meant for scaling alone. SegWit was meant to do multiple things such as fixing malleability problem and in addition to that it was meant to increase capacity with a soft fork maintaining backward compatibility so we don't need to hard fork.
then that malleability fix can open up room for other development such as a much more secure LN on top of bitcoin.

this is not me poking the bear or countering anything you have to say.
but now devs are adding/reactivating some opcodes that reintroduce malleability attacks done using bech addresses...

(i just thought that was something funny worth adding to your point)

the devs know all about it. and they were wanting to rename a few opcodes with warnings.
(they had to take a few steps back and re-think a few things)
1709  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: An open letter to the community, from the developers of Breadwallet on: September 27, 2018, 06:32:01 AM
oh wind_fury.. your not a coder. so why are you promoting such scheme without you yourself actually putting in the effort of understanding the ramifications.
But yet you, who acts like you're smarter than everyone, lies and resorts to gaslighting in every argument.

kinda funny..
i actually go out of my way to do the math. i even post in examples, stats and other things.
did you even check the link about the UTXO set
its stuck in the blockchain.. its literally above the laws of truth that cant be edited..

but hey. when others who just say "he lies".. they can never actually back it up .. they just say "wrong because wrong"
wow such powerful proof.

ok you called me a liar.. so.. show me a UTXO set that has 20 million segwit addresses(40%)
show me a month of blocks that have actual real 40% segwit utility
show me a month of blocks that have actual real 30% segwit utility

the only parts people cant agree on is my method of explaining.
i try to keep it simple using analogies or rounding numbers for simple math demo purposes. then get some anal social drama queens try knitpicking my ELI-5 explanations without taking it all into context of simple explanation

i understand you are new to segwit and still learning. but these discussions with me devs and others have been going on for a couple years now. so yea sometimes when a non-dev gets involved and tries social drama distractions of name calling by poking the bear.. yea i bite..

forced change!! have you not learned anything.

I know the ramifications. Read my OP. Did I say "Hurray! Do it!"?

also the data efficiency of transactions to bytes is not efficient using segwit
segwit signatures are 82bytes instead of 72
segwit addresses are a few bytes longer too

Start a topic in development and technical discussion. I want to see you debate with the real developers.

i have done.
but they just send in their non-dev buddies to social drama the topic to death.
but just so you know. devs have once they put their personal attack hats on the floor and start wearing their critical thinking caps. end up changing some code or plans.

the funny thing is. segwit and LN is not open dev desired. its actually contracted employed code that benefits financial investors that contracted them to make bitcoin LN compatible.
1710  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: An open letter to the community, from the developers of Breadwallet on: September 27, 2018, 05:55:16 AM
I really like your analogies Cheesy Using bananas and their skins to compare them to bitcoin transactions. Which part of the banana is bitcoin and which part is the address? Which part is the actual data and which part is unspent bitcoin?
the banana(fruit) is the input, value output value
the skin is the signature/scripts

segwit addresses (bc1q) is the layer of paint added to the fruit to add a few xtra bytes to the data
the layer of paint added to the skin is the extra few bytes th signature uses

You make this sound like whoever designed segwit is an imbecile, They are not,
they went a whole 2 years coding something that doesnt offer real scaling.
If everyone uses segwit then there will be no need for the second box to exist, Second box only exist because people are still using legacy, They haven't upgraded to segwit nodes yet. When everyone does that, You'll have only pealed bananas without any paint.
no... you still nee the skins to verify the transaction is valid.. and also when someone else is syncing from you. they need the skins so they can validate their copy FULLY AND INDEPENDENTLY

as i said if you put the skin back on a segwit tx is 250bytes not 225 like its comparative legacy
so if there was no 2 box and just 1 big box..... segwit vs legacy would if utilising the entire 4mb
be like this
legacy=17777 tx of 225byte
segwit=16000tx of 250byte
as best case scenario

Why don't you talk about the space for the second boxes in segwit without actually having them on board? You should also talk about the new possibilities if segwit were fully adopted by everyone, Every node. What you are saying is that we should make the bitcoin network big enough to have room for the banana skins while they're on the bananas, People don't eat the skin, They throw them away after they peal the bananas, So why should we keep the skins when we can peal them away just to keep the real deal for when we need to eat the real thing?
if your a full node.. you are part of the relay network. you need to show the skin to show the fruit is ripe (legit/valid)
yes people can prune the skin(signatures) . but then they are not part of the blockchain relay/archival network
new nodes wont sync via you because you dont have the signatures for them to self check and validate the blocks they get.

you become just a midweight node(gmax buzzword downstream.. luke jr: filtered). only relaying transactions and the latest block(as long as u dont prune it first). and not helping new users sync up and be part of the network.
EG legacy nodes(<0.13) are not full nodes. they dont get the signatures. they get the peeled banana version and they blindly trust someone else validated the block and blindly pass it on as good. (critical security alert if there was a bug)

if you think deleting the signatures is good.. then maybe you might aswell turn off your full node and just use a litewallet

Having to go with this analogy would make things much difficult to explain, But I did my best to make it simple for the noobs and such.

again with the 2box trick your not getting 16k-17k transactions your only getting
.. the 2 box (1mb:3mb)
legacy=4444 tx of 225 with 0 in box two
segwit=5952 tx in box one. 0.488mb in box 2

segit uses 1.488mb for 5952 basic transaction..
so same basic transaction
same 1.488mb space but as space a legacy can fully utilise
is: 6612 legacy transactions for 1.488mb

but yea. i know you want peeled banana's to make it look good.. but then your not a full node(as explained) so go play with a lite wallet and not have any block data to worry about because you trust other nodes to tell you the skin is ripe
1711  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: An open letter to the community, from the developers of Breadwallet on: September 27, 2018, 05:35:29 AM
a good test to see if the community really want it..
breadwallet should ask BTCC pool (the biggest segwit promoter of 2015-2017) to start using segwit as its address to receive its blockrewards..

its been a year and even they have not done so yet
-> 13TET...
-> bc1q


i might also add this.. and just let people who keep promoting 40%.. to take a few steps back and realise. segwit is not as popular as they thought
(hint: 0.764% of al btc is stored on a bech address (132k coins))
(unspent outputs = ~80k of 50million)

seems just as fast as people put funds into addresses starting bc1q, they take them out

1712  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do bitcoin debit cards help with scalability for now? on: September 27, 2018, 04:39:30 AM
so its just easier to give starbucks $30 worth of btc to get a $30 giftcard so you can buy 10 coffee's.. rather than depositing funds into side services and trying to get authorisation off chain per payment for each coffee

The only problem I have with that is that I can't pre-plan small expenses like meals or gas and not all gift cards are available online.

The LN would allow you not to have to do that. So what's your solution? Alts? 1 transaction per month? Escrow?

How is Escrow really different (or not inferior even) to the LN?

How is using alts a safe alternative? Isn't pre-paying also locking your funds away from you?

LN is not bitcoin

LN is a separate network that multiple coins will use.
and guess what.. you do need to pre plan LN

funds in LN are locked. you need to pre plan how much you want to lock up and also divide it up into multipl channels to get, hopefully the best chances of making payments should:
one channel be temporarily unavailable
not have enough funds themselves to pot potato payments
other partners of partners be offline
destination offline
one of the partner of parters closes their channel
the list goes on

put it this way.
imagine your bob (b)
wife is Alice(A)
charlie(c) is someone you usually have coffee with

ok you put in $130 into 2 channels. $65 to your wife and $65 to a channel with charlie because he has connection to starbucks.
A[0.01 : 0.01]B[0.01 : 0.01]C[0.01 : 0.01]starbucks

imagine your wife went on a coffee date with loads of her friends and she had a $65 bill with starbucks
A[0.0 : 0.02]B[0.0 : 0.02]C[0.0 : 0.02]starbucks
great your wife paid starbucks $65

and now you have nothing you can pass to charlie if you ever want a coffee yourself
see the downside of the routing yet?? where others can raid you dry before you spend funds yourself

but although between you and your wife and you and charlie. you appear to have the same combined value..
but that funds is not split between the 2 channels. its now offset in your wife channel allotment to you

now you know ur wife just raided you. and you have 2 choices. give some of your 0.02 to your wife and hope she knows someone who knows someone thats connected to charlie or starbuck if you ever want to taste coffee this month.

or close the channel with your wife. get your funds (one onchain tx close) and then put the funds back in so that you and charlie have funds to play with(another onchain to add to BC channel)

LN devs have seen these issues and are now inventing factories
where instead of direct depositing into your channels.... with direct onchain proof in the channel
you deposit fund $130 into a factory(fortknox) and the factory gives you a unbroadcast(offchain) TX that you use for your channel with your wife and channel with charlie. thus now charlie, you and your wife are trusting the factory to honour itself
instead of trusting the blockchain

and then if your wife raided BC.. you then get the factory to disavow the funds from AB(without broadcasting) and give out fresh unbroadcasted tx's to resplit the funds.

but now you cant broadcast a tx at a later date because the channel funds are not directly yours, they are factory owned. so you need factory, your wife and charlies permission if you ever were to exit LN. by again disavowing the currnt balance and then get the factory to honour a tx where the funds go to an address you solely own that you want broadcast

in short
LN is becoming the whole fortknox of 19th century gold. locking it up and letting people play with unaudited promissory notes in the hope you never request your gold back into your own sole control..... sound familiar to banking strategy of 19-20th century

yea i know i went double dep into the whole LN concepts.. but much easier instead of the hot potato games of LN and the factoriy issues that fortknox plagued the gold banking era.. but its much easier if your planning to spend $130.. just buy some giftcards with them merchants.. job done
1713  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Need Bitcoin Marketing For Globalization on: September 27, 2018, 03:52:37 AM
bitcoin is not ready for the big mass adoption of users.

this is because bitcoin needs to be ready with mass adoption of merchants

at the moment the big businesses at the edges of the bitcoin ecosystem are not promoting to merchants because they want thir bitcoin varient of ripple set. (im talking about the separate network of hubs and co managed accounts called LN)

where the services like bitpay and coinbase will be hubs to get fee's for offering routed paymnt services.
once the portfolio of bitcoin services have their separate network that is bitcoin and litecoin compatible and they start their ripple style network of trust using factories and multisig hubbed channels.

and then. at that point will they start getting merchants to join their hubs and accept payments via the LN network and start the promotion rally with merchants and then the users after that

thus coaxing people to buy bitcoin and deposit it into addresses co managed by the services to then make payments to mrechants on LN.

remember LN is not bitcoin
LN is a separate network that is bitcoin and litecoin compatible and is not a blockchain payment system

the portfolio of services are just waiting out for lightning to be coded better, battle tested and ready for services to hub up the network to grab fe's per transaction while locking funds up that eventually they end up keeping by trying to keep users from wanting to withdraw coins out of LN by making things like bitcoin unpractical to user as a 'better' payment system

to them they can make more that way than to waste money now promoting bitcoin itself as the payment system.. so thats what they are doing

1714  Economy / Speculation / Re: When will the price of Bitcoin break below the $6,000 support level? on: September 27, 2018, 02:07:18 AM

that said.
october will see some new ASICs that offer cheaper hashing. and so by the delivery date of november. if the hashrate isnt at 90exa then there are some miners with new rigs that can profit even if they sold below $5800. due to the efficiencies of these new rigs.. so i can see we might get another retest in late october/november (if network hashrate doesnt climb to higher numbers to counteract the efficiency)

And with that, can we say that we can have another major correction since this miners will dump in $5800?

Honestly, I thought that this year will be better than 2017 and the first quarter of the year was just a trap and as we go along by the end of the year, it seems to be worsen. Yet it's too early to conclude but we should always expect less.

no calm down.
think about it only 1800 coins are made a day.
so IF (apocalypse hat on) all pools all combined all had the next gen rigs running in november(that in itself seems too OverTheTop of a scenario).. the total coin that is cheaper than $5800 is just 1800coins per day while network hashrate is below 90exa.

now if you imagine the price in november was todays $6500. selling all mined coins all at once on bitfinex(looking at volume) would only push the price down to 6200
so all pools would need to sell all coins of about 3 days in one go to dip to 5800(that in itself seems too OverTheTop of a scenario).

chances are not all pools will swap out rigs instantly so their costs would remain higher and not wanna sell so low
chances are pools wont want to sell all their coins anyway even if there is a bit of short term profit
changes are hashrates would be higher. so the costs vs profit would too be less appealing to want to tank the price
chances are if a sell off did occur. many buyers would celebrate a discount and a buying frenzy would occur fighting off the sell off to keep prices up.

so relax its not a guaranteed dump in november. but do expect some movement in hashpower and prices is all im saying
1715  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What is the Origin of Blockchain Technology? on: September 27, 2018, 01:46:18 AM
satoshi is one entity. although he created bitcoin. the first currency that utilises lots of technologies into one unique project/currency.. you are right bitcoin and blockchain it is made up from a patchwork quilt of different idea's from different people. and satoshi just had the unique vision to sew all those concepts together into a seamless quilt. which no one else dewn together in such a way before.

having some data in batches where an identifier of a previous batch of data is added into the next batch of data is what these guys contributed to being what we now call blockchain
Our first solution begins by observing that the sequence of clients requesting time-stamps and the hashes they submit cannot
be known in advance.
So if we include bits from the previous sequence of client requests in the signed certificate, then we know that the time-stamp occurred after these requests.
But the requirement of including bits from previous documents, in the certificate also can be used to solve the problem
of constraining the time in the other direction, because the time-stamping company cannot issue later certificates unless it has
the current request in hand.

and thats what the "chain" part of block chain is originating from
it was then satoshi who then decided on things like hashes/mining (PoW) instead of signature certificates(PoS) as the block identifer that not only locks the current block but then the identifier is added to the next.

so whether it was PoW of PoS haber and stornetta inspired 'blockchain' by their mentions of a sequence of bits linking documents of data like chain links
1716  Economy / Speculation / Re: When will the price of Bitcoin break below the $6,000 support level? on: September 27, 2018, 01:00:32 AM
we have not dropped below $5800 since november 2017

there have been multiple attempts and massive amount of time for opportunity but no one has dared.
looking at the UTXO set of fund movements. over 65% of coins in circulation have passed hands in that time. meaning 65% of coins have now settled at a rate of value above $5800.(they wont sell for less than they acquired them)

mining costs have also risen.. 43exa network hash was the cost equivalent for mining a coin at $5800, this too has risen. so there is alot of support above $5800.

personally id say its too early to shout out this weeks average support as any mile stone. and this months support is still too early. and the 3-10 month support is still the same at $5,800
so im still holding onto the 3-10 month mark as it has alot of coin and mining support that will keep it up..

that said.
october will see some new ASICs that offer cheaper hashing. and so by the delivery date of november. if the hashrate isnt at 90exa then there are some miners with new rigs that can profit even if they sold below $5800. due to the efficiencies of these new rigs.. so i can see we might get another retest in late october/november (if network hashrate doesnt climb to higher numbers of 90exa to counteract the efficiency).
but with that said. the number of pools who would actually have that equipment and the amount of coin they manage to produce in a short nough time to be profitable to actually then sell off to cause an impact would be small too. so its not a warning that the price will drop. but a possibility if the markets were already near the bottomline that just a few extra pokes would make a small dip
1717  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin adoption for better life in future . on: September 26, 2018, 11:03:51 PM
seems many see adoption as something they just have to wait for.
something magical that bitcoin does by itself. or that the 'community' is a team of people employed to do the job

well i said it before so ill just quote it
bitcoin is not a person. it is code. it has no voice, no arms no legs.

do not wait for bitcoin to provide you with shops that offer food for btc.
if YOU want YOUR local store to sell food for btc, then YOU have to help convince YOUR store to accept btc

bitcoin cannot phone YOUR local store, arrange an appointment, get on a plane to YOUR town and talk to YOUR local stores manager. its something YOU are going to have to be involved in.

here are some tips.
1. organise a local meetup of like minded bitcoiners in your area. the more that turn up the better as it shows there is a demand for wanting local stores to sell things for btc.
2. find the confident ones that can talk about the benefits of bitcoin.
3. organise or research how that store can swap its BTC back to fiat or pay staff/suppliers in BTC. this might be as simple as one of the meetup members who wants to buy btc often just buy it off the store manager hand to hand. or just learning how to sign a store up to a payment/merchant service like bitpay/coinbase.

then approach the store with the advantages, including demoing how easy it makes things

YOU are all the community. you are all bitcoin
1718  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do bitcoin debit cards help with scalability for now? on: September 26, 2018, 10:53:56 PM
putting funds into a service where they have co-control is not hlping bitcoin.. if you dont hold sole possssion of the private keys. you might aswell just open a fiat bank account, because your missing the point of bitcoin

same goes for LN

so if you want to deposit some btc into a service so you can buy coffee whenever you like.. here is a solution. just buy a starbucks gift card in 1 transactions. and then you can buy multiple coffee's later without needing onchain tx's per coffee.

job done
the things like LN and debit cards are not bitcoin features. they are separate services branded as bitcoin related. however these debit cards and even LN will be used for other coins too. all offering to lock funds up so that you can spend later off chain.. the reality is that you are giving permission over to banks/channel partners. to manage the funds with you. and they all end up having terms and conditions of allowing you to spend via them

LN: channel partner needs to be online. their route needs to have sufficient funding.. the end destination needs to be online. your channel partner, anyone else on the route and the destination need to sign the payment.
and if you try to exit early using a different than agreed payment amount. the co-manager can revoke all your funds (same as a chargeback)
LN is actually worse then services like coinbase. because LN requires more than one channel(account) just to have a reliable service. meaning you have to split funds up an hope everyone is online and well funded themselves just to spend what you think is still your funds

so its just easier to give starbucks $30 worth of btc to get a $30 giftcard so you can buy 10 coffee's.. rather than depositing funds into side services and trying to get authorisation off chain per payment for each coffee
1719  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: An open letter to the community, from the developers of Breadwallet on: September 26, 2018, 10:31:11 PM
I prefer other people to be the guinea pigs first.

I can fully accept that, but we are now over a year down the line. It took 6 months to hit 30% SegWit transactions, and another 6 months to climb from 30% to 40%. If we just sit and wait it could be 5+ years before we reach anything near full adoption.

if you actually take the data. and count the tx in's and outs. and see which are 'iswitness'. segwit utilisation is actually only 24% that are 'is witness'

as for utility. if you realise that segwit signatures and addresses are longer (wasting a few bytes) that byte per transaction if they were converted to legacy and allowed to utilise the full 4mb all data included. legacy is more efficient

its like having a 225gram banana taking off its 72gram skin. then adding 15 grams of yellow paint to the banana to identify it as a special banana. and then adding 10grams of paint to the 72gram skin... all so that in one box you can say the banana in box 1 is now 168grams.. but if you want a fully validatable banana and store it as a fully validatable and relayable banana you have to take the other box of skins with you.. which makes the total combined banana weight 250grams.. not 225grams

meaning yea for every 3rd banana you strip you can slide in a 4th stripped banana in the box.
but 4 fully validated combined special bananas is now 1kg(672g+328g)
where as 4 legacy bananas would be 900gram for 4 bananas

again the wishy washy nonsense of "but box 1 is only 672g".. but ignoring the second box that must go with the first box

1legacy box 900g
'but ignore box 2 and segwit is 672g' (facepalm)

again if the 4mb block was fully open for full transaction data
legacy=17777 tx of 225byte
segwit=16000tx of 250byte

.. the 2 box (1mb:3mb)
legacy=4444 tx of 225 with 0 in box two
segwit=5952 tx in box one. 0.488mb in box 2

so segwit with the 1mb wall is limiting segwit by 10,048tx as you cant put any extra in due to the 1mb wall
and as i said take the limit out. and legacy again offers more

keeping the 1mb is not a 4x capacity growth at all

its all just wishy washy crap
1720  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Hello BCH: 2.26 MB & we keep 1MB on: September 26, 2018, 08:34:27 PM
development still required me thinks

That's correct. I've read somewhere that Schnorr signatures could reduce the transaction sizes by some 25% (average) and would also add more privacy.
I don't know yet if there are unwanted side effects in that though... We'll live and see...

But Segwit is in the right direction in my opinion. Because with it will come other inclusive soft forks like Schnorr that would improve on-chain scalability.

but at the moment it still sits at only 10% segwit utility.
(i know people will say its 40%. but thats not the case. the graph showing such treats a mixed tx of legacy and segwit as a full segwit which misleads the reality of real statistics)

Going back to this topic, I found the data the proves you are wrong or might be gaslighting again,

The data shows that the total daily transactions in the network on September 22 is 240,000 txs, and Segwit transactions are 96,000 txs, making up 40% of the total.

it was mentioned before.
a TX that is

1AmadeupAddress -> 1AnotherAdrress

would be classed as a segwit tx. although its utility is not full segwit.
its actually majority legacy tx.

also that 240k tx is only 1666 average tx a block.. seems less people are making transactions than in the past...
(240tx for 24h =2.77tx/s..   hmm no where near the 'more than 7tx/s' )
oh and ofcourse there are merchants and core that without user consent are defaulting spend/change addresses to be segwit. thus the numbers are fudged, not by choice but by default

a better metric for segwit utilisation was to view the UTXO set and count the UTXO's that are 'iswitness' i guarantee you its less than 40%... but that would be biased because it includes funds people havnt moved since segwits mandatory activation
so lets just take the block data of september 22.. like you did shows under 24%(23.81) of full data is in the witness area. . dang not 40% on the 22nd.. hows about that.
 but we all know that a segwit signature is 82 bytes instead of 72 bytes. so the utility of segwit is <24% but the efficiency of transaction per byte due to segwit is even less than than that

the whole codebase of core is all wishy washy. add a few bytes here hide a few bytes there.. multiply some bytes by 4.. treat an entire tx as segwit even if only a certain amount is actually pushed outside the 1mb area.. is all just wishy washy

but have a nice day

i know im gonna expect a reply where a block is shown that has 40% 'iswitness' 543172 today(26th sept)
and i can can show another block thats well under 10% 'iswitness'543169
and we can spam post that all day long. different blocks.. but the average is 23.62% for the week..
but the end thing is. its been a year and less than 40%(lets just be realistic and call it what it is 24%) of the community are using segwit.... same result as the pre segwit . where less than 40% were flagging as wanting segwit (before the mandate threat and 3 card game trick)
Pages: « 1 ... 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 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 ... 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!