Bitcoin Forum
October 23, 2019, 11:34:23 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 ... 834 »
4081  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: less wild fluctuation? is bitcoin bemome more mature? on: April 24, 2017, 07:18:15 AM
you can't compare the growth of an altcoin which have a lower marketcap with bitcoin, altcoin are more prone to 5x 10x oincrease, also the increase of these two alt you mentioned was due to bitcoin price decrease, therefore this point is moot

i don't think either that bitcoin is mature, this value is nothign special, to have maturity you ned greater stability and to have stability, you like it or not you need greater value

also you cant compare any coin based on market cap..
market cap is a bubble number.
we all know how easy it is to move a price.. and multiplying that easily movable price by the amount of coins in circulation becomes manipulatable to the  XXXXXXXXXXXXX multiple.

EG i can make an alt with 5trillion coins, and just put 1 coin in an exchange and sell it to myself for $1, to set a coin price to $1
now the market cap is $5trillion
4082  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Was it really possible for Bitfinex to amass $65m from their issued tokens? on: April 24, 2017, 07:00:36 AM
bitfinex did not get $65m from exchange fee profits.

they grabbed funding from https://bnktothefuture.com


42.66m=$54.5m

and now using that to pay out to users in debt

but taking from peter to pay paul is also known as a ponzi. so dont think that bitfinex's finances/drama is over anytime soon
4083  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: less wild fluctuation? is bitcoin bemome more mature? on: April 24, 2017, 06:13:09 AM
bitcoin prices are not stable. from my view its the lack of spending on exchanges due to lack of trust of exchanges



we are no longer in the days where people are spending $10k per orderline
note above is bitfinex which is having some fiat issues hence the  price being $100 higher than other exchanges

but here are some other exchanges showing recent (only a few minutes old at time of posting) under $500 to move the bitcoin price up or down by $1-$3

4084  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Stable BitCoin on: April 24, 2017, 05:47:33 AM
out of all the answers so far, this guy has the closest

more resistance while going in both directions!
that means there should be a lot more adoption, a lot more users and the exchanges have to grow quite a bit. not just have such a thin orderbook which can be dumped into or bought to push the price up with a couple of thousands of dollars. and there needs to be more exchanges just as big, spread around and disconnected from each other.
and yes it is possible, and it is happening. you can compare the days of Mt Gox with 75% of volume with nowadays with exchanges having barely 10% of trading volume.


why.
well ill quote something i noticed last month. about how easy it was to move the price up or down by $1-2, without it costing millions of dollars

(note trades measured in mBTC (0.001btc)

less than $302(324mbtc) to drop the price from $935 to $933
yep $302 to make the market cap change by $32,470,200.00

then ~$50(54mbtc) to ramp the price from $933 to $935
yep $50 to make the market cap change by $32,470,200.00

edit, i just checked the prices again

4085  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea on: April 23, 2017, 09:09:13 PM
I don't see >90% of the Core nodes being taken down within the same day. Therefore, this is just another example of the dishonesty of the franky1 troll.

because core didnt advertise how to attack their own..

but did advertise how to attack others.

major difference


Where did Core patch it then? or is it still vulnerable?

core ammended a few of them in 0.13 but didnt think to edit 0.12 with a patch.
core just release a new version but dont patch old versions. leaving older version vulnerable
4086  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea on: April 23, 2017, 09:00:56 PM
I don't see >90% of the Core nodes being taken down within the same day. Therefore, this is just another example of the dishonesty of the franky1 troll.

because core didnt advertise how to attack their own..

but did advertise how to attack others.

major difference
4087  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea on: April 23, 2017, 08:50:20 PM
The assert bug was in "xthin", BU's block propagation system. That doesn't exist in Core.

http://blog.erratasec.com/2017/03/assert-in-hands-of-bad-coders.html

there were many assert bugs..
hense why core were real quick to advertise ways to attack it. because they knew of the issues in 2016 because of the issues within core

https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/43373/bitcoin-core-error-message-assertion-failed

google found thousands of results
"bitcoin core assertion failed"
4088  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea on: April 23, 2017, 08:48:56 PM
EC and the standard block size limit are two entirely different things. EC is untested, period.

lol try telling core how the 1mb was tested in 2012 when blocks could not surpass 500kb

if your saying EC is not tested.. then 1mb was not tested for 6 years
4089  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea on: April 23, 2017, 08:46:07 PM
the crashes were due to a core bug.
That is yet another outright lie. The bug was introduced by the BTU team.

the assert bug was part of core v0.12 in 2016

have a nice day
4090  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea on: April 23, 2017, 08:37:36 PM
I can never say this with 100% certainty but it does seem likely that Bitcoin was a project that was in semi-development for a while and then was ramped up after the 2008 collapse, or it was a concept which was rapidly developed following the collapse in 2008 and then released in 2009. There likely wasn't a ton of time to develop a ton of new systems like Segwit and they decided to release Bitcoin with the features it had at the time, offering an alternative to the regular system.
New technologies will always be something that are created, a single man only has so much creativity and time.

segwit does fix/guarantee anything, the only thing you can expect it to do as a soft fork is create a tier network
4091  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Segregated Witness vs Bitcoin Unlimited vs Do Nothing on: April 23, 2017, 08:31:46 PM
if the block does not get accepted its not "losing 12.5" .. its just not winning /gaining 12.5..
If the block is orphaned after wasting hash power to find it, then should not we call it losing?

nope.
if it doesnt get accepted and doesnt stay in the chain. then the pool never had it

there are 20 pools and only one block gets it in an average of 10 minutes
put it this way

EG thats why if a pool put in a reward of lets say 1000000btc..
it would get rejected.. does not mean it had it and lost it.. it just means it never had 1000000btc

yes it wasted hash trying..

but doesnt mean it lost 12.5btc or 1000000btc.. it just means it didnt win..

when you play the lottery.. you dont lose millions.. you just dont win, someone else does
4092  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea on: April 23, 2017, 07:38:18 PM
People think that if bitcoin has larger blocks, btc will be able to achieve thousands of transactions per second like credit cards.

your reading the reddit "gigabytes by midnight" old scripts..

dynamic concepts are not about visa by midnight. ..
but instead natural growth over time
4093  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell on: April 23, 2017, 07:26:41 PM
You must be smoking too much of that killer pot leaf. If miners allow limitless space, then there will be no fee market. The fees in each block will be small. What incentive would miners have to mine blocks with no reward and low fees? Total hash power would drop preciptuously and network security would vanish.

no reward = 120 years time
also pools wont jump to "gigabytes by midnight"

they will find a natural growth level that nodes accept and allows transactions in
4094  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea on: April 23, 2017, 07:02:24 PM
bu has been running for years
segwit 6 months
False. BU (EC) has been running for 0 hours on any live network. BU as the implementation of the current consensus is primarily Bitcoin Core with some faulty patches on top. That has been running for a while now (and crashing).
LOL you need to go check
the crashes were due to a core bug.

also many nodes have limits of 1mb-8mb active right now.

much like core had the 1mb limit even when there was a 500kb issue that would have held things back at 500kb 2009-2013

EG are you saying that the cores 1mb limit was not active in 2009-2015 when blocks were only going upto 0.75mb

BU uses native keys (cells)
segwit wants to change the keys (mutated cells)
This makes no sense. If we were to go this deeply into analysis, we'd have to define each piece of the human body. You didn't understand my statement. It's the effect of cancer what I was referring to.
cancer=mutated cells, foreign cells that are rejected from the native body which need to be cut away from the main body to not cause harm..
sounds like segwit to me
4095  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea on: April 23, 2017, 06:40:59 PM


you should check out blockstreams LN code

at code level bitcoin protocol measure people holdings in satoshi's. where there are 2.1 quadrillion units of measure.

LN wants 1000x more units of measure (millisats)

cap was 2,100,000,000,000,000
LN want 2,100,000,000,000,000,000

have a nice day

4096  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea on: April 23, 2017, 06:36:23 PM
The conclusion of this thread, which you fail to admit considering you're a paid, is that BTU is to the Bitcoin network what cancer is to the human body.

bu has been running for years
segwit 6 months

BU uses native keys (cells)
segwit wants to change the keys (mutated cells)

segwit changes the design of blocks and needs to cut off the cancer just so it wont be rejected by the native "body"

core have the body killing code
4097  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Developer Thomas Voegtlin: Bitcoin Unlimited Is Not a Good Idea on: April 23, 2017, 06:28:56 PM
then you will see that SWHF has been proposed as a single dynamic block (1 merkle) with features like segwit and dynamics and lowtxsigop count and other things ontop. all in one go. not the tier network your reddit rhetoric want
Where exactly can one find this SWHF proposal? Roll Eyes

well you wont find it then the core censor cabin..
time for you to look beyond core and do some research.

prove you can do research without being spoonfed.

ill give you time and then maybe ill help you. but i hope you can actually do the search yourself without insults and without replying with empty comments.

start researching. show your research abilities and not your insult replying ability. if you can find it without being spoonfed then you will gain some rep.
P.S it does exist, its not a trick
4098  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell on: April 23, 2017, 06:07:35 PM
The only way that the fees will be "high as hell" is if people are using Bitcoin very heavily and highly valuing the transactions they make.

lol
you removed the priority fee
you removed the reactive pricing and replaced it with average pricing
you included the larger relay min fee

you are the one pressuring the fee's to rise even if demand was low

dont start blaming users.

but then again you bypassed node consensus. by only giving pools the vote and then went on a rant blaming pools

do you even listen to the community. or just echo chamber your own thoughts
4099  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Shocking: Small amount of chinese miners block 88% of segwit support by services on: April 23, 2017, 06:03:19 PM
34% of miners support Segwit
That is 34% of hashpower, it may well be 99% of miners.  That is also signaling rather than support-- there are miners that support segwit who are not signaling it due to pressure or payments from others.

Gmax. remember all them fully paid for all inclusive weekends you offered pools, al them social and roundtable events.. closed door meetings etc
4100  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Shocking: Small amount of chinese miners block 88% of segwit support by services on: April 23, 2017, 05:56:44 PM
A small amount of miners (how many really? Jihan Wu? and a couple other pools, no more than 5 guys) are blocking hundreds of people involved in BTC services, exchanges and so on.
by a tiny amount of miners

lol
wait last month you were saying that they owned the majority.. now your saying a small amount. tiny amount

come on get your story straight

Segwit is officially held hostage by a tiny amount of miners with a hashrate monopoly, probably state-sponsored. Meanwhile, LTC will eat BTC's lunch as segwit activates.

segwit is not held hostage.

consensus is about only moving forward with majority approval.. if there is not majority approval. then take no as an answer and then start listening to the community to try something that will get approval

trying to bypass consensus and then play the victim card, and then have tantrums is silly and childish

lastly if segwit is sooo "backward compatible" then they can activate at any level and uptopian promises of segwit will still occur.. (if you beleive in the backward compatibility promise)
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 ... 834 »
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!