Bitcoin Forum
September 15, 2019, 09:08:33 AM *
News: If you like a topic and you see an orange "bump" link, click it. More info.
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 ... 826 »
3001  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: First World Fat Cat Jamie Dimon Doesn’t Understand Poverty, Bashes Bitcoin on: October 20, 2017, 01:35:58 AM
lol i laughed at cointelegraphs wishy washy attempt to glaze over reality.
seems people are trying to preach to the converted, not realising that anyone reading this stuff already knows bitcoin isnt as free as the preacher (cointelegraph) makes out.


sorry but bitcoin has an exchange rate too, where the bitcoin receiver would add on a few percent to cover their side of the swap back to fiat. and the customer would lose a few percent getting their brazilian fiat into bitcoin.. thus 5%+ loss is usual due to variances between buys/sells(spread) and the fee's of the trades and the fee's of deposit/withdrawal..


also trying to make the gift card discounts a 'deal' of bitcoin is stupid. people can buy discounted giftcards with fiat too.. so the example of buying a $100 item for only $85 is not somethin only bitcoin offers. its something even fiat offers.

how about people admit that bitcoin has problems
EG exchange limits, fee's, AML/KYC headaches
EG fee wars
EG no longer decentralised (sarcastically thanking blockstream) and is becoming only 'distributed' instead

once people man up instead of sucking up. then things can get solved. but while people just glaze over bitcoins issues nothing will change and it just gets handed over to the bscartel and sandboxed into a 'failed experiment' while they move onto hyperledger.

the devs dont care about bitcoin being usd to purchase goods, they have admitted they prefer bitcoin to be a reserve currency not a payment currency. they also admit they dont care if bitcoin survives, even now 8 years on they call it an 'experiment'

its time people wise up and try to bash the devs, not the general public that may or may not want to use bitcoin.
3002  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Is this a sign??? on: October 13, 2017, 11:28:11 AM
if anyone wants to pay for a street sign like this.. atleast make it worthy.
otherwise you might aswell just get a graffiti artist to just write "$ dollar" on a wall.
 
for instance have a location that is a regular bitcoin meetup where people can discuss and also face to face exchange bitcoin. make a list of local merchants/stores that accept bitcoin.. and then put that information on the advert. so that people have some direction as to what bitcoin information and utility is available locally to the advert, when they see the advert.

otherwise if people see the sign with no info/context, when they google it they will just be shown the r/bitcoin reddit and all the news about prominent people saying bitcoin is losing its utility.

so if you want to do some advertising, put some effort into it by showing locals what can actually be done


3003  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Why those useless bitcoin hardfork every months... on: October 12, 2017, 04:30:00 PM
firstly the only reason 2mb was chosen is because core devs declined any other amount such as 16mb, 8mb, 4mb.. so 2mb was compromised in the hopes the core devs would finally agree and stop blockading growth.

..
but now even with just 2mb the core devs are still blockading growth. yep core devs are the ones causing the controversy by literally writing in code to ban nodes that are not core. banning nodes that dont fit the blockstream roadmap of turning bitcoin into a blockstream elements altcoin.

yep blockstream devs have done all they can to avoid using consensus to sort these matters out and instead gone for the human/social governance model of a dictatorship.

just look how fast the blockstream devs closed off any chance of core being part of upgrading the blocksize.. under 24 hours
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11128 - closd by blockstream employee sipa on the same day it was opened.. yep not allowing community to decide..

but hey, bitcoin will drop being used by merchants. and become just some reserve currency no one can spend directly onchain but have to hand over into a smart contract of counterparty control.. yep LN is cheap to transact but like banks/paypal needs a stranger to sign off/agree to your spending decisions.

oh, and blockstream want to bloat up onchain transactions with Confidential payment codes and other stuff.. while also removing the security of validation by pruning. making the blockchain just junk data that cant be validated and expensive to transact on.... (facepalm)

but again hey. no one cares about the real utility of bitcoin, the ethos and need of its original invention. all they care about is the ponzi element of buy cheap from one person and sell expensive to the next and then run back to fiat.
3004  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: #NO2X - JOIN THE WAR! on: October 10, 2017, 08:44:40 PM
see what i mean about the sheep re-bleeting out the segwit propaganda.. to defend blockstream + their partners
they care more about protecting blockstream then they care about bitcoins utility

Franky1 is a lying, and hypocritical troll/shill. Don't believe a single word coming out of his mouth.

check the blockchain i even linked it!!! the evidence is in the blockchain and its immutable!

as for lauda's account of the 2x part.. either lauda is dumb or he is part of it..
2x was always a bait and switch.. bait the community with a chance of 2x by getting the community to naively accept segwit first using the bait of segwit2x.. then switch back to trying to get people to hate the 2x part.. even though the community only accepted segwit recently due to the agreement of the 2x being part of the deal

if the community was so strongly desiring just segwit it would have activated by christmas2016.. rather than lingering at 25-30%

if you dont believe me that segwit2x was just a bait and switch to give blockstream their segwit altcoin features into the bitcoin network.. just check out blockstream listed as part of silberts portfolio along with jgarzics bloq company
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#b

but hey lets see lauda scream "liar" without linking anything to oppose this topic... its funny
3005  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: #NO2X - JOIN THE WAR! on: October 10, 2017, 04:51:50 PM
im still laughing at the segwit supporters.. yea the sheep are re-bleeting out the segwit propaganda.. but when it comes to the pools that pushed for it.. the pools themself are too afraid to even use segwit transactions themselves

check out BTCC
not using segwit address to receive the coinbase(block reward)
https://blockchain.info/block/00000000000000000088f4c787292ba94088977df200bd36ff4c6789c377f460

then when they move funds from multiple block rewards into a more structured stash.. that address too is legacy not segwit
https://blockchain.info/tx/932082ade49edd35973e80fd88f4bf51abe1b69687643a9f887b88a09b5bca44

im laughing soo hard. BTCC was the biggest pool mouthpiece supporting segwit but cant even admit they fear using segwit transactions for their own stash.

people really need to stop reading the reddit promo propaganda and instead start thinking for real and asking the real questions
3006  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: what makes you trust a company in this industry? on: October 09, 2017, 10:47:58 AM
if you mean a third party.. treat them like someone that walks passed you on the street.. would you seriously hand them your savings /income without knowing them?

if your talking about a company. do due diligence. check out their company registration details then google map/streetview their address. make sure it does not lead to a po box/drop box/virtual mailbox address..

in short if you cant find enough information to slap them with a wet fish/court order should they do you wrong. dont trade with them.

even then be careful. after all butterfly labs had company registration details and an office, and product papers and business plans etc, yet they still ended up being scammy, same with MTGox

most people dont trust third parties/internet companies with anything more then the customer is willing to lose. most people only trade/spend amounts that can equate to some disposable income amount of a evening takeout meal, that wont hurt much if lost
3007  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Why Europe participates "little" in Bitcoin? on: October 08, 2017, 05:51:49 PM
the real reason is simple.. UK / Euro wire transfers are instant and free.. bitcoin isnt
so the features of bitcoin as a payment method didnt excite people because they could move money without bitcoin, easier than with bitcoin

now people only think of bitcoin for investment purposes, not payment/remit purposes
3008  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: People should get the full story of r/bitcoin, one of the strangest subs on: October 07, 2017, 06:33:13 PM
Rules are rules. r/Bitcoin and Bitcointalk.org is platforms for talks and discussions about Bitcoin and not a platform to promote some Alt coin. If anyone has a problem with that, then they can move to Roger Ver's forum to discuss those Alt coins. On Bitcointalk.org, you are allowed to discuss Alt coins, but in the designated area for that, not in the main Bitcoin discussion areas.

When moderators remove or move threads that are Alt coin related, the supporters of these Alt coins throw out all their toys and calls it censorship.

Stay within the rules of the forum and your Alt coin discussions will be tolerated, even though this forum were meant to discuss Bitcoin.

segwit is an altcoin.. hense why people call it segwit and not bitcoin..
but because segwit (2014 blockstream elements coin) has been trojan horsed into bitcoin, the bs fanboys think its their right to think its ok to promote segwit in the main bitcoin forum for years before it even got trojan horsed in....(bs devs admitted they backdoored it in)
however other projects that actually use consensus and do not have altcoin creating code get pushed to altcoin category.. all because the bs devs themselves put code into their segwit2.0 to ban anything not segwit roadmapped

kakmakr, its worth you researching more and defending the bscartel less
3009  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Smart Property: Current use and potential? on: October 06, 2017, 08:06:22 PM
my examples were pure bitcoin based, so yea 'smart' is limited.. but hey your on a forum about bitcoin so the answers were based on such.

if your talking about real smart contracts/property, the sky's the limit
for instance the car manufacturing 'triggers' can be done as tx code rather than a separate app monitoring bitcoin's chain via api's

in my eye even ethereum is limited in the potential of smart contracts/property. and that soo much more can be possible
3010  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Thinking of starting a service to prevent stolen coins. Input please? on: October 06, 2017, 11:04:17 AM
again if people used things like CLTV and CSV they can put their own time delay and chargeback conditions on payment thus protect themselves without middlemen.

but seems devs and other people want average users to prefer middlemen and counterparty control (banks) which then voids the whole point of bitcoin.
CLTV and CSV as a feature of onchain transactions has utility. but ignoring self control and instead HOPING a third party will protect them is just a waste
EG promoting CLTV and CSV as a feature of only LN is stupid. LN is banking 2.0 due to counter party requirement to dual sign, its much better to just use CLTV and CSV as a feature of onchain bitcoin transactions that peopl can self administer
3011  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Thinking of starting a service to prevent stolen coins. Input please? on: October 05, 2017, 11:47:22 PM
alot of people already monitor known compromised keys. and have a app that autosends the funds to another address, even with a huge fee markup to ensure their tx gets confirmed. after all if you put a 50% of funds fee.. 50% of something is better than 1% of nothing.

usually legitimate owners that accidently funded a compromised address would waste alot of time panicing and searching and crying and its too late to ask for help because the funds were moved in seconds.

also some exchanges outputs (people making a tx to withdraw) the funds dont actually come from the users 'balance' but from a mixed address/vault where returning coins wont 'credit' the user. but then just be free coin for the exchange. so its not really a guarantee/help

one idea is for people to use CLTV and CSV to lock(mature date) funds(CLTV) and have a refund/chargeback clause(CSV) where they can force funds to return to a certain address. thus people can make their own smart payment be protected without needing a middleman/service
3012  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Smart Property: Current use and potential? on: October 05, 2017, 11:14:02 PM
many have tried different things

one person i remember had a pawn shop and had a few customers who would put a few sats on an address and a 'ascii' output in the form of a ticket number.
then if (within time period) the person wanted to claim their goods back they would sign a message using their original key to prove ownership. thus they didnt need to provide ID or need to hold onto paper tickets to prove ownership/claim.

-
one person had a system set up that monitored the blockchain. if a certain address got funded. it triggered an app to do a task. this was then expanded to cause the payment to move to other addresses to trigger other tasks. the idea was a prototype that if, for instance someone wanted to buy a car the dealership would fund  certain address linked to a specific vehicle specification. and the result would be a manufacturer would see the 'order' (in the form of the payment. and the payment would trigger the ordering of the car parts to then manufacture the vehicle based on the programming of subsequent payments to addresses linked to parts. thus automating the car ordering/manufacturing process. as i said it was a prototype idea/template

-

one person had it where they had appointments. and when they clicked 'client arrived' it sent a payment to the consultants address thus the consultant got paid per client that arrived. the idea was to automate payroll based on work done rather than salary just for the consultant being there

the second idea (car manufacturing) could be used for anything, like healthcare. EG patient needs surgury, hospital pays a 'heart bypass address' and that triggers a app to book an operation date, and then move funds to pay the surgeon, nurses, order the sterile equipment, etc. to ensure its all there and paid for ready for the operation.

as for proper smart contracts. well thats stuff other altcoins have done because a few of them allow if/else statements, which would bloat up bitcoin if bitcoin started to have lots of 'code' within a tx
3013  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: #NO2X - JOIN THE WAR! on: October 05, 2017, 08:31:25 PM
I think it is great you like both BCH and BTC.

But being upset about 2x it is not to be a Core fan.

When BCH fork, they add replay protection and did things correct, they have a different point of view so it is great they fork and they do their path, but how they are doing in 2x it is an attack to BTC so how can you expect people not get upset?

just to butt in
BCH was an intentional altcoin that was never suppose to be a bitcoin upgrade. it was not suppose to rely on consensus to form a decision on the route of bitcoins future

btc1 however 'was' under the pretense of the 2015 and 2017 agreements of a consensus utilising plan to hopefully upgrade bitcoins network. meaning it would not need replay protection because there would only be one network. which bitcoins consensus mechanism would take care of and leave a minority stuck unable to sync. thus would not matter. (yes core could then altcoin their minority but then core would themselves need to make their own replay protection)

but blockstream employes now want to backtrack their consensus promises and instead make core avoid consensus by core coding out any chance of using consensus for an upgrade... yes CORE ban/blacklist and avoid bitcoins consensus mechanism, thus its CORE creating the altcoin. and thus if core want the next 'fork' to be contentious enough to become a bilateral split then core should be the ones implementing the replay attack prevention on the core code. not the other way around

please do try researching the real details of whats actually happening.

P.S i did say 'hope' 'suppose' 'pretense' because its all just a ruse/bait and switch to get segwit in early, a few months ago and now the switch part of the bait and switch plan is happening. i only mention the paragraphs above in the context of if the agenda was actually to upgrade bitcoin to 2x.

but either way if core want to altcoin it. core should add some replay protection on their side. seeing as they are the instigators of making the altcoin
3014  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: #NO2X - JOIN THE WAR! on: October 04, 2017, 08:54:58 PM
They are getting nasty and nasty everyday. Today 2x devs just merged the ability for segwit2x to disguise itself to not get banned by 0.15 nodes; https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/commit/28ebbdb1f4ab632a1500b2c412a157839608fed0

lol
might be worth you researching and realising the term consensus

btc1 wants to use consensus so that the community choose..

its core that want to prevent community choice by CORE.. yes CORE banning nodes and avoiding consensus forming a honest decision on what the community want.

again i state it a different way. CORE are the ones creating the altcoin by preventing consensus from finding a single route based on bitcoins built in decentralised decision making process known as consensus(orphaning mechanism)

please learn consensus and realise CORE are avoiding bitcoins built in mechanisms..
this means core are the nasty ones by becoming the centralised decision makers.

really people.. wake up
3015  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What You Need To Know To Get FREE Bitcoin Gold During The Fork. on: October 04, 2017, 08:11:41 PM
extra advice to add..

after the snapshot date.
move the coins. so that the bitcoins are no longer on private key of (ops eg:)"123456789qwertyuiop" using a bitcoin wallet.
so that while the bitcoin gold still has coins on that (ops eg:)"123456789qwertyuiop". you no longer have them on the same privkey on the bitcoin side to worry about any cross over

then.. knowing the bitcoin gold snapshot has coins on private key of "123456789qwertyuiop".
your then safer to import privkey into a bitcoingold wallet without worry of some hacker/middleman attack taking your privkey to empty your bitcoin stash..

personal note..
i prefer to think of core as the bitcoin gold altcoin. or just naming it segwit as they do NOT want it used as a peer-to-peer currency, they prefer the hub/spoke reserve currency. much like how gold transactions occur.

but then again core have always been screwed up with their buzzwords/ bait and switches and twisting the truth
3016  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: #NO2X - JOIN THE WAR! on: October 04, 2017, 03:34:51 PM
if you guys have not woken up already.. its all a f**king bait and switch campaign..

the BSCartell (silbert AND blockstream) are in it together. WAKE UP

its the pretend 'choice' to make sheep think its freedom and decentralised but the whole thing is just pushing bitcoin away from satoshi's open vision and down segwit one way street of BSCartel control

either way it plays out BSCartel win and decentralisation is lost.

wake up.

BScartel are meandering dcentralisation.. into meaning purely centralised distribution. which is totally different ideals than what the ethos and reason bitcoin was invented for.

.. and yes i expect the usual propoganda crap from the bscartel shills protecting their friends
3017  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: segwit2x on: September 26, 2017, 06:04:21 PM
everyone knows core doesnt want to be a payment system so forget trying to push cores altcoin as being something merchants will use direct. core want their future coin to be some background coin that people just hold. hence the recent rumours of it turning into a ponzi because of the lack of real utility and just being used to rob peter to pay paul for profit with each new holder.

as for CB not caring about coinbase/bitpay. the hard lesson he has to learn is if a coin has no utility its just a crap coin like the other 1000 crap coins being held in the hope someone else will buy it for profit... but never happens

utility is key, merchant adoption is the door way. anyone thinking a currency can prosper without utility is just fooling themselves or just saying crap because they heard someone else say the crap and brainwashed into believing it
3018  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: segwit2x on: September 26, 2017, 01:37:08 PM
gmax shot him self in the foot.

1. saying only the main contributors oppose it - so he only cares about his own employee's opinions not the real community.
2. he pretends to say its bad to change the rules. - yet has already changed the validation rules via segwit, the network topology via segwit, the transaction and block format via segwit and the 'priority' of transactions via segwit. and if he loses the vote in november where people no longer support cores implementation. he is then going to go on a orphan rampage and then go change the algo and security too.

yes core is setting up the walls to block other implementations.. not the other way around. the other implementations want to work together as a peer network of mutual respect.. only core wants to have control and wall itself away

3. he says that the hashrate does not matter and tries to twist it into a argument about the 'joules' of electric. its not about joules of electric. after all the joules of electric per hash have changed since 2009.. the real debate IS about the hashes. and security.
by this i mean... it took a few dozen computers a year (many many many kw/h to make the blocks of 2009-2010). but today anyone can replicate that with just a USB miner in days. so measuring security in joules is stupid

i think gmax should just man up and raise his hand and admit he has dropped off from wanting to make bitcoin great and is just trying to play around and mess with bitcoin to boost his ego and resume so he can make bulk loads of fiat on hyperledger. its too obvious what direction he wants his next project to be

in short. core has not been independent since 2014 and has slowly lost its appeal. soon people will realise the real point/ethos of bitcoin and realise decentralised/distributed coding/security means more than kissing ass

gmax has been sabotaging bitcoin since 2014.
making it too expensive to use for developing countries due to his fee mechanism changes.
removing validation with the 'treat as valid' crap purely for stupid excuses like 'efficiency' where there is no efficiency problems because bitcoin would still work on a current gen raspberry pi, let alone a modern basic computer.
and all the other back door trojan exploits he allows to side step consensus ... it makes me laugh when i see so many people kiss his ass, and not see whats beyond his butt-cheek
3019  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Are you a True Believer? on: September 20, 2017, 08:23:51 PM
i am a realist

bitcoins ethos was never a new world order one world currency. it was a open barrierless free choice option away from the fiat struggles.
after all if the only currency became bitcoin, it becomes as corrupt as fiat.. thus bitcoin should remain as the open option beside fiat. not to become fiat

ofcourse its not built to handle 7-10 billion peoples daily life for the next 100 years. BUT. the BSCARTEL went super anal with stiffling growth and removing utility because of that fact,.. that its becoming less useful for even just a few million people and a few hundred thousand merchant.


bitcoins utility is dropping. its no longer barrier-less as it was and people in developing countries are seeing its too expensive to use.
i spent years travelling and helping people/merchant adoption. but lately.. the crap the bscartel have coded into bitcoin has ruined and stifled utility/innovation.. causing it to be slowly removed from average utility and only really useful for corporate utility.


but hey.. seems no one cares about real utility, all they want is the 'reserve speculation' aspect to get fiat rich... (facepalm)
3020  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: why btc is not a ponzi or tulips on: September 19, 2017, 11:29:57 AM
The kind of people who have deemed Bitcoin as a Ponzi have almost zero knowledge about how Cryptocurrencies work. Although, what led people to this misconception, was the large fluctuation in prices, leading to very high earnings, sometimes within small periods of time.

It's definitely not a Ponzi, it's a currency, which do share some properties with fiat currencies but in the same time, they are completely different.

currencies can be ponzi's too... FIAT is the largest ponzi of them all

Pages: « 1 ... 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] 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 ... 826 »
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!