Bitcoin Forum
October 15, 2019, 03:22:11 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 ... 832 »
3441  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: How to keep altcoins/crypto alive on: June 12, 2017, 06:32:22 AM
bitcoin will only remain number 1 if
merchant services (bitpay/coinbase) stick with only offering bitcoin as the 'we accept' payment network for the hundreds of thousands of merchants around the world.

price is meaningless/temporary drama.. but if the merchant adoption flips over to another coin due to the payment processor (shoppingcart API services) then bitcoin will lose its number 1 status
3442  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: We need to rethink the way we look at 1 BTC value... on: June 12, 2017, 06:14:09 AM
unlike the egyptians which measured gold in tonnes people now measure gold in counces and soon grams will become common.

as for the bitcoin world bits (100sats) will become common

You obviously forget about fees

And everyone else should always keep them in mind. Really, what's the purpose of 100 satoshi if it will remain dust even in the case these diamond crumbs cost a fortune (in dollars)? It's okay with the price going exponential but it is certainly not so good (mildly speaking) if the fees rise as fast or even faster. In fact, if they continue to grow, the available range for ordinary folks to buy in will be narrowing with each price rally. This is not a good thing. On the one hand, exchanges are setting lower limits for minimum orders, but, on the other hand, rising fees quickly make these orders meaningless

some exchanges are already moving to mbtc right now. then later drop again to ubtc(bits)

where the fee is 'commonly discussed' as ~1000bit($2) per tx, instead of 0.001btc(~$2)
meaning people in conversation and website/app display visualise it as ~1000bit($2) per tx, instead of 0.001btc(~$2)

the logic would be that if price goes up.. the 'unit of measure' for everything goes down.


then when lets say btc price goes to $20k
the fee becomes ~100bit($2) per tx, (0.0001btc~$2)


then when lets say btc price goes to $200k
the fee becomes ~10bit($2) per tx, (0.00001btc~$2)

if you think that if BTC went upto $20k people would spend $200 a TX... then you might aswell call bitcoin useless
no one would spend $200 a tx
3443  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: If you had to pick one, would it be the Legacy chain or BIP 148? on: June 12, 2017, 06:03:33 AM
True, but it's mainly to do with a consensus.  If a large majority of hashrate and a lot of businesses start supporting a new proposal, it's fine for it to take some time before the code is actually developed.

It's not really an "empty promise" this time, because it's DCG actually telling everyone about who has now agreed on something.

Obviously time is always needed to peer review code etc, but I don't think that any of these companies will be saying "nah, this line of code is wrong, guess we can't support that anymore", when the points are all there.

until the code is developed there is no consensus. any "flagging" done before there is code is just propaganda.
real consensus is about actually using an implementation that can do the job actually announcing it can do the job and wants the job
wasting months flagging for something that has no code available to actually do the function is an empty promise.

EG
imagine people al flag 2mb+segwit.. it gets the threshold needed. and then at the grace period. some a-hole in the BScartel releases 'the 2mb+segwit' but it has a 2mb activates in 2018 'as promised' ... but then(luke Jr style of bait and switch) drops to 500kb by 2019

..
so until there is actual CODE. a promise is meaningless
3444  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: If you had to pick one, would it be the Legacy chain or BIP 148? on: June 11, 2017, 09:18:55 PM
Quote from: franky1
the other stuff of promises of 2mb is the same empty promise being mentioned since 2015..
I thought BITMAIN and many other miners/large block supporters would agree with SegWit if it involved an increase in block size and a hard fork?

What changed?

if

but even these very new proposals that just this last month are 'promising' such... are still being coded as segwit.

a few people jumped onto the githubs and plop in code for the 2mb to be activated at X .. and those requests get deleted.. so even in these new proposals they are so far just empty promises.. only really coding different times to activate segwit sooner than november

60%+ of the mining network and many nodes are waiting for there to be some real code of a real coded implementation that includes a legacy block increase..
3445  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: If you had to pick one, would it be the Legacy chain or BIP 148? on: June 11, 2017, 07:45:19 PM
Nobody seems to be on board with the NYC agreement so that is out of the picture. If NYC-group hard forks, they claim to have 80%+ of hashrate, but no Core dev is on board with that, and 95% of the network is running Core software, so it would be nonsense if they actually hardfork and ask people to trust some group of non-Core coders paid by Bitmain.

Core stance was they wont propose consensus rule changes, thats why there has to be agreement between Bitcoin companies and individuas for such change, which NYC agreement accomplished. Code is written and reviewed from few Core developers as well, although not by many or the most active ones. The code change is very small, so it is not a big issue, though much more support/review from the most developers could end the Bitcoin scalling problem pretty quickly.


The 95% of the network trusts Bitcoin Core's software. The rest of the nodes is an irrelevant amount so nobody cares about those.

Calling an agreement "an agreement" while leaving behind the dev team that is responsible for the code that's being run by 95% of the network is laughable.

There will be no hardfork for Barrycoin, it's DOA.

Barry coin IS the same as corecoin..

they are all the same BS cartel
its just a bait and switch to gather more momentum to push through segwit.. the other stuff of promises of 2mb is the same empty promise being mentioned since 2015..

all it is is to have 4 different implementations of segwit to FAKE free choice.. where all the choices still end up being segwit
3446  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: We need to rethink the way we look at 1 BTC value... on: June 11, 2017, 05:26:56 PM
unlike the egyptians which measured gold in tonnes people now measure gold in ounces and soon grams will become common.


as for the bitcoin world bits (100sats) will become common
3447  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: does mircea popescu really have the power to decide if a hardfork happens? on: June 11, 2017, 05:08:49 PM
price crashing via dumping is temporary drama.. it will just be known as mega discount day..

think of it this way.. go back a couple years
do you think satoshi dumping his stash will suddenly revive the chain pre v0.8 that was compatible with satoshi's 0.1-0.3 implementations.. answer no.

its more complex then that, its about realising the symbiotic relationships between pools and nodes.. and then realising the many mechanisms and scenario's that can play out within the real understanding of the consensus network

such as if pools went in direction X but the nodes rejected blocks.. pools cant move their funds because none of the nodes recognise the block rewards because they are not held in the chain which the nodes have

also you have to interplay what node versions the gateway infrastructure is using. which means the ways in-out of bitcoin.

for instance the BScartel has puppet strings conncting to bitpay, bitpesa, coinbase, kraken, purse, shapeshift xapo amungst others.
so that too can decide which lasts longer..

and ofcourse there is the technical side. of which chain has most nodes and biggest chainwork/height with the LEAST headaches of orphans occuring that can sway people to trust one side or another..

the 'price' drama stuff is just temporary compared to consensus and security of the network
3448  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: you can't even link to the bitcoin whitepaper from r/bitcoin apparently on: June 11, 2017, 12:08:53 AM
You can't force them to name it something else, and neither can you prevent someone from doing this.

writing something and then saying the original writer wrote it(facepalm).. bad on so many levels. thats like rewriting history to pretend the holocaust didnt happen

anyway you cant read more than a paragraph, so ill keep this short.. in your own time learn these words
plagiarism - bad
citation - good

have a nice day
3449  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Please, Stop Calling Bitcoin "Digital Gold" on: June 10, 2017, 06:59:49 PM
But again: how can you call it cash when eventually the blocksize would be too big to cater for everyone complaining about fees being above $1?
If you want to keep fees under $1-5, which is when most people start complaining, advancements in technology will not catch up quick enough to not end up with datacenters running nodes. And once you reach that point, then it's game over because any global attacker can easily control the network. A perfect gov killswitch. Do we really want that?

seriously you gonna continue harping on with the now 3year old empty FUD script found on reddit.

have you actually noticed that 8mb is now deemed as safe compared to 2009

its devs that are holding things back, not tech
devs wanna push people into corporate hubs and offchain services so they can grab fee's

please do research that its not tech holding things back.. but devs
3450  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Dear miners on: June 10, 2017, 06:31:11 PM
1.
it was not the pools that caused the fee war.. devs REMOVED fee control mechanisms

2.
segwit is not a solution, its just a empty gesture of half baked promises.. that even if everyone used segwit would still only have the HOPE of 7tx/s, which is the same hope of 2009-2015

3. the other things segwit promised to offer wont happen. EG eradicate quadratics.. sorry but quadratic spammers gonna continue quadratic spamming on native keys. and yes it only takes 5-20 tx's to fill a block using many diffrent forms of bloat attacks. so segwit isnt solving crap

4. if you think segwit is the hope for LN.. well you might as well use multisig contracts with bitgo or xapo or coinbase as it will end up being the same thing once you wash all the glitter off.

5. if you still want to blame pools just for not voting for it, ask the hard question WHY. and also realise again it was the devs that decided the stupidest route to implement something

6. if you still want to blame pools and say they are objecting to something for fee's then you shuold never blame the same pools for doing empty blocks. because they cant be doing both, logically
3451  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Does regulating bitcoins is necessary for global adoption? on: June 10, 2017, 03:52:47 PM
if people actually ready the details of AML/KYC requirements. they would see many ways to implement it without causing all the headaches

EG not even have a deposit fiat/withdraw fiat facility for the customer until ID is given. that way there wont be any hold ups of 'freezing' funds

"regulations" are too hyped up for what they actually offer.. id prefer "consumer protections" where the business has to identify itself and can be prosecuted if they do naughty things.. that is what would help bitcoin alot.
3452  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: WALLET.DAT or SEEDS - What is the safest on: June 10, 2017, 12:51:27 PM
sounds good
3453  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: WALLET.DAT or SEEDS - What is the safest on: June 10, 2017, 12:37:44 PM
Im a bit confused Huh  If clients have somewhere to store keys the wallet.dat and at the same time give seeds. What do i secure? The wallet.dat or the seed?

secure it all

its best to have your access to your funds secured in different formats incase one goes missing/lost/corrupted/forgotten.

but generally seeds are better to handle
3454  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: WALLET.DAT or SEEDS - What is the safest on: June 10, 2017, 11:59:04 AM
a seed is better. because you can hide it much better. both in the electronic form and physical form
design a crossword
hide the words it as a grocery shopping list
a christmas wishlist

that seed is yours for life
..
wallet.dats can get corrupted. data loss, physical loss of usb memory stick, virus, electrical surges killing memory storage
and every time you use a new address or move funds to a new change address you usually end up needing to re-backup the wallet
3455  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Does regulating bitcoins is necessary for global adoption? on: June 10, 2017, 11:38:32 AM
regulation is not the problem

here are the real problems
1. bitcoin is not ready to jump to 3.5bilion users over night.
2. thinking anything should jump to 3.5billion users over night is a stupid mindset to have anyway(even facebook didnt predict that)
3. current 10mill people only caring about 3.49billion new purely for a price spike so the 10mill can exit back to fiat
4. thinking reducing functionality and halting growth is good
5. devs removing code of fee control and replacing it with wallstreet economics of 'just pay more'
6. devs think bitcoins solution is to divert people away from bitcoin and to use alternative networks instead
7. availability of access(buying in local currency via bank notes in a town people live in)
8. understandability for common man

alot of people will argue "we just need to advertise it more"
to which i will refer them to points 1,2,3,8

alot of people will argue bitcoin cant cope
to which i will refer them to points 1,4,6,7


but here is the thing. blaming regulation is foolish.
many things that are not regulated can get success, as long as they do something, each person that gets it can continue using it HAPPILY even after the first try/use

take fidget spinners. simple, does not need a manual. does exactly what people expect.

alot of people talk to newb's by talking about bitcoins old ethos or the utopian revolution.. which bitcoin has lost
alot of people talk to newb's by talking about bitcoins get rich quick.. which is the 'too good to be true' red flag style of advertising
alot of people talk to newb's by talking about bitcoins bnfits for the unbanked.. but bitcoin has lost that (remember its the POOR who are most unbanked)

until people admit that bitcoins functionality has DROPPED. and stop just thinking just about price..
until people stop only caring about how soon they can run back to fiat with their pockets full as the only reason to advertise
...
then bitcoin should not yet spread to mainstream.
3456  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: you can't even link to the bitcoin whitepaper from r/bitcoin apparently on: June 10, 2017, 05:46:20 AM
then advertise an alternative for original version.
(facepalm)
sounds like people what new versions to replace the original as if its the true clean 'original' version

how about
'then advertise a new and different version that is not an just "an alternative for original version"'


movie analogy
highlighted and noted as being a reboot... not a remaster of the original
3457  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Wallet - Can I receive while offline? on: June 10, 2017, 04:55:45 AM
funds are not moved to your computer. they are on the blockchain.

electrum is just the tool to view and communicate with the blockchain. but you dont need to be permanently connected to 'accept' payment.

the network accepts the payment by confirming transactions into blocks. the blockchain is not in one place, never shuts down it is 24/7 network..
you can view your funds on any blockchain viewer (node/explorer) but only move funds if you provide your private key

your private key is your proof that you have the authority to move funds... all you need to worry about is having the private key to that public address to prove that you are the one thats allowed to spend it, whenever you want to spend it at a later date

wording it another way(fiat analogy)

telling your employers your bank details that are wrote on your debit card. does not mean you can only get paid by having to have your debit card permanently inserted into an ATM. or by having a sleeping bag and sleeping inside the local bank. or by having to log into your online bank and stay logged in

you can get paid whenever.. by whomever and however much they want to pay you..


your private key is like your ATM pin number. dont tell anyone it. but you will need it when its time to spend the funds

3458  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: [SHOCK] Core dev and Blockstream employee tells bitcoin users to use fiat! on: June 10, 2017, 02:06:49 AM
You haven't responded to my question.

Pos is also secure and immutable, but it's also flexible because it outlines who is in charge. If you own 51%, you are the boss.

Whereas in Bitcoin everyone is confused, and there is no clear consensus mechanism. And we have to rely on 3rd parties (nodes) who might not even have coins to decide things for us.


POW = REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY
POS = CORPORATION

Which one is better?

if you stop thinking about WHO deserves the funds and WHO deserves to decide the rules and look at the security of CODE
PoW is more resistant than PoS

why do you think PoS changes happen so easily compared to PoW changes...
if something is harder to change, it means its more secure.
3459  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: If you have a chance to name a new coin what symbol would you and name? on: June 10, 2017, 01:01:26 AM
im not interested in altcoins... but lets reword the OP's question.. just for fun
if we were in 2009 and wanted to rebrand bitcoin.. what would some options be

for instance some people know there is no actual 'coin'.
a real world wallet stores bank notes but a bitcoin wallet stores keys.

so some would say rebrand it to something like

upay - to signify that YOU pay people without middlemen
keyring- the better analogy instead of 'wallet'
            so you can than duplicate your keyring instead of backing up a wallet....... it makes more analogical sense.

then the unit of measure(value) not being called the same thing as the network/protocol/software.
for instance call them satoshi's for the minimal and for what would be bitcoin becomes..  megahectsat, commonly "mehesa's"... or MHS

..
i say this so that if making an altcoin.. atleast make it have some form of easy understanding. where the buzzwords actually have some realistic meaning if you dig deep enough.. none of this pick a random name out of a hat crap and then need to spend an hour explaining it
3460  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: you can't even link to the bitcoin whitepaper from r/bitcoin apparently on: June 10, 2017, 12:01:12 AM
I recently quoted Satoshi on /r/bitcoin and was downvoted...that place is corrupt and anti bitcoin.

because its not /r/bitcoin... its /r/core-perate coin. managed by the BS cartel (BlockStream/Barry Silbert)

the github repo they love and idolise over does not even originate from a github repo satoshi ever used. the origins before the rebrand to core in 2013 was originally from a fork Gavin started in summer 2010.

satoshi's version was still only being sourced from sourceforge right up until and after winter 2010
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 ... 832 »
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!