Bitcoin Forum
August 19, 2019, 12:54:16 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 ... 824 »
2701  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: PRIVATE KEY - Nobody in the universe can break it. on: March 14, 2018, 02:01:14 AM
The verb TO OWN never was fully expressed since blockchain came to existence.
You own the private key, you own the funds, period. There is no force in the world yet (later maybe quantum computer) capable to break it.
That is one the reasons why bitcoin will kill banks. We will simply don't need them anymore.

i love bitcoin, but lets get rid of the fake hype and stick to reality.. you know.. stop over promising and under delivering and instead stick to facts and let people understand what bitcoin can offer in reality

with it becoming too costly to fund a private key, many third world countries are finding it costs atleast an hour of their minimum wage just to move funds and thats when mempools are near empty.. and when mempools are over crowded it can cost a hours labour for first world countries(weeks salary for third world)
unless you agree to accept funds through a multisignature channel on LN. yea thats right LN is the same as banking, where funds are no longer just yours but payments require someone elses agreement to move funds.

as for killing banks. banks have fiat laws such as minimum wage, taxes and court fines that only accept fiat as payment.
and goverment/public sector laws that only pay out salaries in fiat
this means that fiat will continue to circulate. meaning banks wont get killed. all that will change is that there will be less local bank branches and instead more apps/atms

some say that trying to get states to accept bitcoin for tax payment is some how making bitcoin kill banks. yet a government tax office having a partnership with something like bitpay or coinbase as their currency swap does not make bitcoin kill fiat. it just make bitcoin acceptance a gimmick. the treasury still holds fiat, and just uses a processor third party company to accept bitcoin and hand the treasury fiat.

its like in the 90's where some supermarkets swap recyclable tin cans for food vouchers. this did not mean tin cans would replace fiat.

bitcoin needs alot more then user adoption and gimmicks if it wants to try replacing fiat.

and bitcoin alot mor onchain coding practices to sort out the onchain issues which offchain solutions do not make bitcoin better, but turn bitcoin into the same crapy system as fiat, which then makes it less appealing to use bitcoin as it offers no advantages over fiat
2702  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin is going to be number one payment gateway in near future. on: March 14, 2018, 12:11:54 AM
If you compare the average 30 minutes transfer time of bitcoin to cash, it's way too long to wait. If you compare it to 2-3 days international SWIFT transactions, it's really quick. You can decide what kind of tool you want to use for different needs. When the Lightning network will start and spread, the whole thing will change, because it will be the competitor of cash by then, but we need to wait for the LN because it's still under development. Until then, bitcoin will not be the competitor for the giants (VISA, MasterCard), nor to Paypal or AliPay. We can prepare for the LN implementation with starting to use segwit enabled addresses.
...but. when you look at LN with its cltv which can be a couple days, and the csv which can charge back... LN becomes no better than swift
2703  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Coinbase still having issus in implementing segwit? on: March 13, 2018, 04:28:43 PM
you will also find that many businesses that were segwit advocates in 2016-2018 are still afraid to use segwit.
take the mining pool BTCC are still afraid to use a segwit address for their own blockchain rewards

even achow, a known advocate of segwit who had tried to fight tooth and nail to make people think that segwit is the best thing since sliced bread isnt even using the new bc1 addresses;u=290195
2704  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How decentralization of bitcoin works? on: March 13, 2018, 09:08:20 AM
What people usually refer to when they say that Bitcoin is decentralized is that the system is built in a distributed way, where there are a lot of miners, nodes, and blockchain copies around the globe. What that means is that no entity can take the entire network down.

i agree that the nodes are distributed.. thus not able to take the network down.

but. this part below has become a failure compared the original ethos
There's no single point you can attack to cripple the network, so it cannot be controlled by governments or similar entities. Everyone in the network just follows the same set of rules to keep the system running.

this is because blockstream employee's working as cough "volunteers" for core have taken on the reigns of bitcoin and deemed any other full node that is not core, is a threat. because they dem that only the core monarchy can set the rules/roadmap
basically if your not running bitcoin core software to be a full node, you should not be on the network and instead should create an altcoin

hre is the blockstream founder and main cor dv saying just that to previous teams that were not core
What you are describing is what I and others call a bilateral hardfork-- where both sides reject the other.
I tried to convince the authors of BIP101 to make their proposal bilateral ... Sadly, the proposals authors were aggressively against this.

and here he is again saying anyone that opposes cores decision can be out rulled by lowering the consensus standard until cores bip gets the vote count it need
 If there is some reason when the users of Bitcoin would rather have it activate at 90% .. then even with the 95% rule the network could choose to activate it at 90% just by orphaning the blocks of the non-supporters until 95%+ of the remaining blocks signaled activation.

if you need further proof of core taking control of the network and not allow decentralised teams to offer their own bitcoin proposals away from core, just use the search box for the term REKT and you will see the hate mongering of core supporters wanting core to be the sole controller of bitcoin

also its core and its blockstream gatekeepers of new proposals
gmax: moderates the technical development topics on this forum
rustyrussel: admins the mailing list for proposals
Luke JR moderates the BIPS

making it very controlled by just a few linked entities that end up controlling the roadmap of bitcoins future direction. it might be worth you looking into blockstreams latest controlling trick involving the blockchain. specifically trying to suggest that some devs that were not part of the core team infringed copywrite/patent/licences by copying bitcoin code without naming core as the creator.

thats like a farmer arguing to mcdonalds that all burgers belong to the farmer because the wheat for the bun, the veg/cheese for the filling and the meat of the burger can been shown as sourced from a farmer.

i could go into more detail. but in short. bitcoin is distributed but no longer decentralised.. there is a definitive difference between the two terms
2705  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: International Bitcoin's Day on: March 13, 2018, 01:53:44 AM
bitcoin genesis:
3rd january 2009

first non genesis block
9th january 2009

first tx out:
12th january 2009  (satoshi to hal)

first tx out of real value:
22nd may 2010 (bitcoin pizza)
2706  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: First fork of Bitcoin? Help! on: March 12, 2018, 06:27:10 PM
the term 'fork' has been over used and doesnt actually explain the difference between just a code copy/paste to create a new 0 history altcoin, or a divergent of the block history after a certain block number

anyway there have been many 'forks' of bitcoin. hundreds infact
XT was not a 'chain' fork because it was just a wallet software working on the network. but was a code fork because the code was similar

bitcoin cash was a 'chain' fork because it was forced to become an altcoin. due to the whole segwit bait and switch drama

before these there were many more, hundreds more.
the main first that retained the block history of bitcoin(prior to the fork) was called clams (a 'chain fork)

though there were also hundreds of others that just script-kiddy copied the code, but started again from block 1

2707  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Are you an idealist? on: March 12, 2018, 06:10:37 PM
the government can not intervene in bitcoin trading,

yes they can.
if your trading bitcoin for fiat. then the country that owns/licences/tenders the fiat can intervene on anything involving their fiat.
even if 50% of the transaction is bitcoin related. if fiat is involved, the bitcoin part of the trade wont absolve you of any fiat responsibility.

however.. as an idealist, here is my opinion
if bitcoin was traded for goods/services then its no longer treated as currency exchange/money business, but acting as a retailer.
so if we take away the bitcoin<->$ valuation and instead replace it for a btc<->'COL'(cost of living index).. or to put it simply 1btc=10,000 loaves of bread.. then bitcoin can be free from the fiat regs and government wrist slapping
2708  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Why are nodes so slow to confirm transactions? on: March 12, 2018, 05:27:34 PM
I understand why it takes time for miners to pick up a transaction, they have 1mb limit per block they win and they prioritize higher fees. But why is it that you get stuck on 1-2 confirmations for so long? It's already been mined, it should spread through the BTC nodes fast, shouldn't it?

confirms are not created based on how fast they relay through the network.

so, let me explain

it takes time for a pool to choose which transaction to add to a block. usually they pick the highest fee first and then let in cheaper ones if room. once accepted and that pools block wins the race of getting a solved block via hasing(mining) before other pools, the transactions in that block then are deemed to have 1 confirm.

the next block has other transactions and when the block is solved that block has one confirm, meaning the previous block(containing your tx) is deemed as having 2 confirmations.

with each new block created gives the previous blocks +1 confirms.. so if there were 3 block created after the one containing your tx. that means your tx has 4 confirms.

the whole 'confirm in 10minutes' is NOT A RULE.. its a suggested guideline for ELI-5 speak(plain speak/laymans terms). the bitcoin code is actually to aim for 2016 blocks over 2 weeks, and thats the policy.. nothing more...
which ony for the purpose of plain speak/laymens terms/ELI-5 translates to 144 blocks a day or 1 block every 10 minutes.. but as i said thats not a rule thats just laymens speak translating the 2 week policy into more understandable term/timeframe for average joe to grasp

some blocks can be found in just a couple minutes or a couple hours. which is why some 'confirms' can happen quickly or take along time
2709  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Changelly name BTC as "Bitcoin Core". on: March 12, 2018, 12:24:23 PM
core have been fighting heavily for their "right" to control bitcoin. they call any team that is not core an opposition.. so it seems normal for a rebrand to make it clear that core control btc..

anyone that thinks otherwise either wants to be deceitful to hide the control or has not yet seen the history or even tried to start their own team and make their own client program that has its own bip proposals and chance to upgrade the network... but history has shown otherwise. if its not the core roadmap its an opposition
2710  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Is this real? on: March 12, 2018, 09:31:13 AM
bitcoin doesnt need laws to scare off illicit 'cryptomining'.... ASICS done that for us.
also criminals ignore laws

but anyway lets explain asics solving the issue:
its not rational or profitable to CPU/GPU mine any more, so hackers simply do not bother making apps to illicitly cryptomine bitcoin.
all that needs to be done is for the altcoins to not resist ASICS but to develop mining tools that dont require PC software to mine, then its not a problem

in short if mining is not a PC operation but a separate device operation. then hackers wont target pc's

the other part is that many people download scammy programs promising a bitcoin hack that  can make them $$$$ for free. the idiots that believe such fake programs kinda deserve the slap in the face by becoming a victim of their own greed

2711  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Russia to Criminalize Bitcoin Use.. on: March 11, 2018, 08:00:21 PM
OP and many others have not even read the DUMA drafts from russia...

all it says is that registered businesses of exchange will be regulated and any individual that is exchanging under the pretence of running a business doing exchanges (exchanging amounts deemed more than personal use) would have to register as a money business or get fined (very simplified version)

2712  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Funny Anti-Bitcoin article I read today !!! LOL on: March 11, 2018, 06:41:23 PM
I think his opinion is just that Bitcoin is not yet fully become legal to a country and other countries, he says there is no stopping criminals to join mining bitcoin? Helloooo!!! Are all small business on the street legal either? (I don't discriminate  sidewalk vendors  since I like street foods), some of them don't have permits like sanitation, but government allowed it since its one way to help people help themselves; and all people who plant marijuana on the hidden island or mountain have permit to operate either? Since it helps also non criminals to earn money by just planting, if you get what I says, and it's not legal also, so whats the different from bitcoin?

That's why step by step, government will implements some laws on Bitcoin for them to fully accept its existence.

bitcoin doesnt need laws to scare off illicit 'cryptomining'.... ASICS done that for us.
its not rational or profitable to CPU/GPU mine any more and so hackers simply do not bother making apps to illecitly cryptomine bitcoin.
all that needs to be done is for the altcoins to not resist ASICS but to develop mining tools that dont require PC software to mine, then its not a problem
2713  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: why do you still support Bitcoin when it's technology is clearly inferior? on: March 11, 2018, 08:35:36 AM
You have obviously not used SegWit lately, because $35 fees happened last year in December 2017. The fees have dropped to a few cents and some exchanges have started to batch transactions, so the Mempool is basically empty.

Also remember that SegWit made spam attacks more expensive and with a empty MemPool, spam attacks will be even more expensive. ^lol^

segwit is not the cause of the mempool/fee reduction.. just look at blocks, segwit is not even 10% of a block utility..
the reason the mempool is near empty is because the only reason it filled was spam

the only reason there was spam was at times that people wanted to push CORE features.
check the history dates of major spam events.

most spam is caused by mixers which guys like gmaxwell are known to be involved in. and as soon as core gets their feature update they turn off their spambots...and try to make it look like its the new core feature that solved a problem.. yet even though their feature is activated, its not USED to any degree to explain the reality of mempool decreases..

just check out the block stats, compare it to the hype of core wanting new features/updates being accepted by the community, not the reddit propaganda

and anyone that wants to scream out the reddit propaganda of "gigabyte blocks" or "no to 2mb/4mb" purely to defend core devs commercial choices, well here is something to enlighten you, using the 'bridge' analogy from the post earlier.

some say that bitcoins bridge can only handle 2000 cars and thus car sharing/lightning aeroplanes (off bridge) are the only way, because bitcoin can only handle 1 lane of traffic, not 2(mb) lanes. not 4(mb) lanes..

yet the commercial decision of devs is that they know bitcoin can handle 4mb of data.. but they just dont want legacy users having that. instead you have to use the single toll road for old cars and only the new segwit cars get to use the other lanes(weight) yet only 10% of cars have updated to the new segwit cars,
also core known devs stopped driving their fleet of mixer old generation cars from going in circles, to stop the traffic jam to make it look like cores new lanes has solved the problem
2714  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: why do you still support Bitcoin when it's technology is clearly inferior? on: March 11, 2018, 06:30:04 AM
because there is no "superior" technology than what bitcoin is using. altcoins are either exact or poorer copy of bitcoin which means they have the same problems or even worse problems because of the changes they did thinking they are improving.
or some altcoins are using different technologies which improve things but not by that much so to be called "superior".

and your whole argument is based on fees but the fees of altcoins can go up if they are used as much as bitcoin is used!
imagine bitcoin is a bridge with 2000 cars passing it every 10 minutes. the bridge is standing up and can handle the weight of these cars.
in this example altcoins with lower fees are like another bridge with a different structure which is saying it can handle 100000000 cars passing it but in reality only 1 car every hour passes it. so you think that bridge can handle the weight of that many cars.

while yes altcoins are only utilising small amounts of traffic.. the problem is that many have been fooled into believing that the 'bridge' can only handle 2000 cars every 10 minutes. and that things like discounts for 'car seat sharing' is needed or using lightning 'aeroplanes' to avoid using the 'bridge' as much are the solution to get around the increase of a bridge toll..
rather than adding extra real lanes and a fee formulae to sort out charging a fair toll (spammers pay more if all they do is go across the bridge every 10 minutes as oppose to just once a day/week)

bitcoin is becoming outdated and moving into a direction of FIAT2.0(counterparty authorised banking) with its lightning hub model.
im sorry to reality check you, but bitcoin has LOST more utility than it has gained. and there will be newer blockchain tech models that will take over. much like how facebook overtook myspace

though i love bitcoin, i stick with reality and dont overhype things. let people make decisions based on fact not hype/hope, otherwise your just trying to hype that myspace is the best social media platform because its the first
2715  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: why do you still support Bitcoin when it's technology is clearly inferior? on: March 11, 2018, 06:05:21 AM
In recent months, after the December price record growth, bitcoin has really lost its popularity due to the accumulated deficiencies in it, and the number of its daily transactions has dropped from 400,000 to 200,000. However, on February 26, a new version of Bitcoin 0.16.0 was released, which differs from the previous full support for SegWit, which solves the problem of low scalability of bitcoin by compressing the volume of each transaction. As a result, all the existing shortcomings of bitcoin should soon be eliminated. Therefore, bitcoin can reach the forecasted rate of $ 30,000 this year.

blah blah blah.. hyping something just to talk about a price you hope for... (facepalm)
segwit doesnt guarantee scaling growth of doubling/quadrupling

firstly it requires EVERYONE using segwit addresses to get double+ scaling.. yet just a legacy block growth would have done it without requiring people to move funds to new address designs.

secondly, spammers can continue using legacy addresses and fill a block, thus not causing the scaling hope that you hope for..
(ELI-5) think of it like a bus, usually families buy a ticket per person one for the child(txdata) and one for the parent(signature/witness proof txdata is what it is).. taking up multiple bus seats. segwit just allows the parent to ride the bus for free if the child buys a ticket and takes a seat.
problem is if legacy families all buy the seats theres no room for segwit families.. thus segwit isnt a guaranteed fix

thirdly, the 'discount' for segwit transactions is not permanent/fixed. pools could decide to not discount segwit tx's very easily
2716  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: is this true that GOOGLE will ban the ICO and crypto related ads? on: March 11, 2018, 05:27:45 AM
Also, crypto currency is big market for the platform like Google because Crypto currency projects invest heavily on the ads and thus google benefit a lot from that.

facebook has already banned advertising of ICO's
not because the tech behind blockchain is bad. but because SCAMMERS who just act like script kiddies copy/pasting coins for a pump and dump scam..

google would go the same route at some point, because trying to vet these pump/dump ico's is next to impossible to guarantee that an ICO is sustainable and not just a pump and dump. thus the risks are too high

facebook didnt want the liability of suggesting that their customers should invest in such scams and so knowing the legal ramifications that people can blame facebook for suggesting they should invest outweigh's their income from advertising such scams.

so i can see google going the same route as facebook, just to legally protect themselves from lawsuits
2717  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: why do you still support Bitcoin when it's technology is clearly inferior? on: March 11, 2018, 04:48:12 AM
bitcoin has actually lost alot of its utility and passion.
it seems the only things left are peoples emotions.

people still believe in bitcoin for 3 reasons
1. the dev team
2. the person spent alot of money buying in and will defend it right up until the point they make profit and then thier devotion wanes
3. "its the first"

to which people need a reality check
1. dev's will move onto different projects. we are already seeing the devs of blockstream helping out with other coins and even hyperledger. so dont "trust" that devs have a life ambition to stick with bitcoin. just like the employee's of myspace moved on to different social media platforms
2. if your mindset is only defending bitcoin, to bump the price to get your fiat profit.. by defending bitcoin even when the ethos and utility is being teared apart, then that alone shows its not sustainable as an asset (HODL coin)
3. again look at napster, myspace, AOL.. being in first place is not reason alone.. even olympic gold medal runners get old and slower and are replaced

yes there will always be people hyping bitcoin trying to get new people to buy it. but not due to technical advantages, but purely as a hot potato game of passing on the hot potato before they get burned

i personally gave up hyping bitcoin in around 2014-2015 once i started seeing bitcoins utility/ethos diminish and i did not want to become one of them people trying to advertise bitcoin purely for the price bump. as that then becomes the grey area/border line of no longer advertising a viable product/asset. but starting to advertise something purely for a rob peter to pay paul

so if anyone with ethics/morals really took a long hard and open minded thought about it. if you are only hyping bitcoin for the hope it will push up the price so you can trigger your exit strategy, then deep down you know bitcoin is not sustainable as only an asset currency.

bitcoin needs to be more than just an asset(HODL coin)
2718  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The QC-1 crypto heater on: March 11, 2018, 04:24:42 AM
although keeping the GPU cool is essential, that does not mean letting that heat escape someones house immediately aftr taking it away from the GPU. that heat can be utilised by heating water to keep an ambient water heater/radiator

the downsides are:

1. 30 months+ ROI
2. the more people mining = more fingers in the reward pie = less reward = longer than 30 months ROI
3. the heat of 2 GPU's is not enough to warm a room in winter, but to keep a room at an ambient temperature
4. during the bitcoin GPU mining era people were needing to upgrade their rigs every 3-6 months(not 30+)

seems people didnt learn the inefficiency lessons of 2012-2013 (btc GPU mining era)
seems people didnt learn the self annihilating competition game of making mining a easy to do at home craze of 2012-2013
2719  Other / Off-topic / Re: Why is Male more engaged in Bitcome than Female? on: March 09, 2018, 08:47:38 AM
its not about risk

women are more interested in what can be done with currency not how its been made
for instance in 2012-2016 there were tonnes of merchants selling gadgets and gizmo's but hardly any fashion stuff.
its not sexist that women spend more on fashion and design and guys spend more on gadgets and hardware. its life.
so women just dont find bitcoin as needed/ as interesting

also its the population, the majority of people into bitcoin are technical/geeks, which is still male dominant. its not sexist, its reality of real peoples lives that cant be argued by showing the 5% that are female as the counter that women are involved as there are still 95% that are male.

so although there are females that are involved. its simple lifestyle reasons that more males are involved than females.
its not about sexism or anti-feminism. its just a real world situation that bitcoin doesnt fit females needs
2720  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Truth Concealment:what are the things that create the illusion crypto is illegal on: March 09, 2018, 07:43:44 AM
most of it is not just media.. but people

with media they are not researching/ checking/investigating, they are just "reporting" (copy/paste repeating) the news without a second thought
then we have people even on this forum who just read an article and react and again repeat the same BS without thinking

the majority of countries are not actually banning bitcoin. most nations are instead are simply saying

banks will only offer the legal tender of their country to its citizens. the banks themselves will not hand out bitcoin, tins of baked beans or sexual favours to their customers via the banks teller/cashier desk or ATM.. only legal tender..

they also say if a person is transacting in more than XX,XXX of fiat in exchange for another currency (crypto or fiat) they have to declare themselves as a money business of the fiat they handle and follow all the fiat laws/regs attributed to the country of that fiat.
so even if a bitcoin trader is trading lets say 20btc.. and swapping it for $200,000.. because they are handling $200,000 they have to declare it because they handled $200,000 of fiat.  just because half of the trade was 20btc, does not absolve the trader of not following fiat rules

however.. if a trader swapped 20btc for 200,000 loaves of bread, they would not be treated as a money exchange business, but instead as a retailer. because its not a currency to currency exchange, but instead a currency to product.. and that first part. the currency was not a fiat. then their is no fiat being handled and thus no moneybusiness regs/laws... instead its then retail/sales of goods rules/laws/regs
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 ... 824 »
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!