|
Moral of this topic: franky1 isn't listening to a vast selection of technically proficient users explaining in detail why his perception of mining is wrong.
|
|
|
|
well my dear legendary friend, you are making 2 main mistakes here first is using blockchain.info for your bitcoin wallet specially these days that we know their fee suggestion is broken. secondly you are reporting the fee in absolute value, it has no meaning. you should look at fee per byte to see if $0.80 was enough or was terribly low based on your size. also a good idea to read this. good luck. my wallet was imported from another wallet as its fee was minimal way below tx min like 0.0001 fee and their wallet not updated in a long time. so imported it to blockchain might have to import elsewhere. Where would you recommend to use other than blockchain coinbase etc as not used btc in a while and am now in process of using and paying things out and getting back on track . I dont fancy having to use bitcoin cure as such a massive wallet. what do you use for terms of btc wallet thats got no problems on? You won't want an online wallet, none of them are that good. - Electrum is a popular software wallet with great features. -The TREZOR is a popular hardware wallet, and you can use it along with Electrum as well. Ledger is another good one. |
|
|
|
The sentiment of people on this forum and other places where people speculate about prices are great for trading.
Majority of people say Bitcoin is dying with no evidence? Time to buy.
Majority of people say Bitcoin is going to the moon with no evidence? Time to sell Spend.
If there isn't a clear winner you just look at which ones are the most ridiculous, like this one.
I like your logic. But I did modify one thing. If you spend it on something you were going to buy anyway, you will not only save fees but strengthen the bitcoin economy. So if you can, consider spending. Good point. Unfortunately, a lot of the merchants who accept Bitcoin are going to sell it straight afterwards for the stability, but it's still better to spend as it makes it appealing for more merchants to start accepting it. |
|
|
|
Currently getting decent transaction fees is a very precise game. Ideally you'd set them at the recommended fees, but realistically anything which is 121 satoshi/byte or more is going to get through. You just have to get over the barrier of the thousands of 120 satoshi/byte transactions from the Blockchain wallet, and then it'll happen within a day. The important thing is that you base it on satoshi/byte rather than just satoshi. |
|
|
|
I wouldn't call it "adoption", more like "acceptance".
people weren't sitting in the governments office one afternoon thinking what can we do, lets "accept" bitcoin out of the blue. there were adoption, people wanting bitcoin as a legal way of payment, government processed the request for some time and accepted it. now businesses are adding bitcoin payment to their services little by little. The reason I phrased it that way is because an increase in transactions is meaningless. Say that the amount of transactions doubled - that would just mean that half of them never confirm. There needs to be adoption, which means an increase in transactions when it works. People making these "Bitcoin is dead" posts are annoyed about the temporary situation of delayed transactions, and are also largely people who use the Blockchain wallet with fees of 120 satoshi/byte all the time.
people who are annoyed by the delayed transaction are going to come out and say fuck you bitcoin i am annoyed with you.  they are not going to come here and say fuck you bitcoin, ...coin is going to replace you because it is .... better than you. take a look at tech support board to see the topics of type 1 and take a look at this board and speculation board to see topics type 2  You have a point. The lack of persistence is annoying and we can't be jumping to a new coin every week. |
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't call it "adoption", more like "acceptance". There can't be many more actual transactions in Bitcoin or the fee market will go out of control, so the growth in price is more like a rise in investments rather than a rise in usage.
Real "adoption" will happen as soon as it can happen.
People making these "Bitcoin is dead" posts are annoyed about the temporary situation of delayed transactions, and are also largely people who use the Blockchain wallet with fees of 120 satoshi/byte all the time.
|
|
|
|
It's common since the day I started using cryptocurrency. Bubble about to pop? Nah. That warning I think is to aware of the people for their investment in cryptocurrency/bitcoin. For them to alarmed if there investment is successful or not. But don't mind wasting your time thinking about it. Just buy more bitcoin as much as you can and earn it in the end. The sentiment of people on this forum and other places where people speculate about prices are great for trading. Majority of people say Bitcoin is dying with no evidence? Time to buy. Majority of people say Bitcoin is going to the moon with no evidence? Time to sell. If there isn't a clear winner you just look at which ones are the most ridiculous, like this one. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin will die because it's community is loyal, stupid and greedy. Satoshi never intended for BTC to be the world's money, he introduced a new technology. He was aware btc could not survive due to lack of updates.
Monero I think offers nothing that isn't being done better by Zcash. Her obnoxiously loyal trolling community can't save her. I'd put my money on Dash and Zcash due to virtue but I haven't seen the crypto market being driving by rationalism, just brand loyalty.
Lauda, you're a joke. Btc can't even transfer money. Can't due instant payments. Can't combat the double spend scams and will never be updated to increase capacity or resist quantum computing. Not to mention the problems that will come in the future do to the laws of the universe governing decay....
So the major disadvantage of bitcoin is that it has a loyal community. No matter how I look at it I can't picture a single situation where loyalty is bad. There are many situations in which loyalty is bad, including when two groups that are loyal are against each other (such as when excessive patriotism leads to wars). A loyal community in this case is a good thing. We can't be jumping between coins every time some tiny little problem comes up - if we did, we'd all be migrating to a new coin every week. It's important that we're able to adapt the coin we have while it's still immutable enough to avoid potentially malicious upgrades. I think Bitcoin strikes that balance fairly well. |
|
|
|
|
Regular online casinos could well be scamming you. However, if you understand and can verify the provably fair systems that Bitcoin casinos have, you can't be scammed unless the casino runs off with the money you're holding in them. Modern Bitcoin casinos, as well as being very convenient, are therefore better in several ways to regular online casinos, as well as providing relative anonymity.
Provably fair systems are just one of many situations in which blockchain tech can completely change how we view verification and proof.
|
|
|
|
The market is still looking extremely bullish with a sharp uptrend. I'm hoping that we'll finally start seeing some altcoin blood soon, in which case we'll have a whole new stream of money into Bitcoin, just like we're getting from the millions of other positive factors going on (and from the ransomware, but let's keep quiet about that).
Well this bubble will pop one day. I wish it could be as simple as that, but I don't think it is. The problem is that altcoins are to Bitcoin what Bitcoin is to fiat. They're traded with Bitcoin for people to basically increase their stash from extreme price rises while someone else loses. Therefore people are sometimes reluctant to actually sell their alts because they want to make sure that they can get as much profit as possible. They're greedy, which is why they chose a market which sometimes has such high returns. |
|
|
|
|
The market is still looking extremely bullish with a sharp uptrend. I'm hoping that we'll finally start seeing some altcoin blood soon, in which case we'll have a whole new stream of money into Bitcoin, just like we're getting from the millions of other positive factors going on (and from the ransomware, but let's keep quiet about that).
|
|
|
|
|
This is extremely strange. It's hard to underestimate how many scams there are related to Bitcoin - potentially a majority will be less sophisticated scams like this one which are actually pretty easy to avoid.
There's no decent reason why this would be legit.
|
|
|
|
Now how they will spend their hard earned hacking money, considering the addresses are known and probably are blacklisted everywhere?
Putting the coins through a mixing service most likely. the simplest way is using a real anon cryptocurrency not bitcoin which is not anonymous. the best thing that can be found is Monero (XMR) and they most probably will use that in their route, convert to monero > reach anonymity convert to fiat. and eventually they will switch to asking for that coin in first place. It's quite a bit harder to exchange fiat for Monero. People would have to go through Bitcoin themselves before they buy Monero and it would be a lot of inconvenience on top of the cost of the ransom which might give them an incentive not to pay it. The thieves, however, can just take the Bitcoin through mixers into Shapeshift and take Monero out, then start exchanging that back into fiat. As I recall there are services that accept Monero and then pay Bitcoin addresses with the value of the Monero you sent them, so they could connect to a LocalBitcoins user or something that way. It shouldn't be hard to exploit Monero's anonymity for it. |
|
|
|
I think the bitcoin will fall because of RANSOMWARE,it is impossible/Difficult to track who did this and in futur Bitcoins will be considered as a motivation mean for such act
It is not that difficult to track bitcoin transactions as you could see everything in the block chain and if the hackers try to send those coins then i am sure the authorities will be monitoring every move and they can easily track them if they plan on sending those coins to any exchanges and the coins will be blocked. a somehow wise hacker would not send anything to an exchange, unless he can manage to mix the coins stolen properly, otherwise he would sell privately in real life, and would be impossible for anyone to track him besides there is no connection between the address he used and his real identity, so the tracking would be pointless You can track the blockchain transactions, but you can't track every person that makes them. Hackers are the people who will put the most effort into keeping themselves anonymous, therefore the most basic tracking will have little effect. It's hard to underestimate how good governments are at tracking people but the question is who will they be tracking? It probably won't be the real hackers, and instead be a scapegoat that they're using or something. |
|
|
|
Sketchy. The ETF is 100% sure to be disapproved.
why? only because a bunch of incompetent don't know what a malicious email is and click on "ifyouclickhereistealyourbitcoin.com", if they are base their decision on this they don't have a clue what bitcoin is about, which is not about criminal activity and don't deserve to approve it anyway these balance are very low amount, i doubt someone like the ETF care about this thing Really it's shocking that they've only received such a tiny amount of Bitcoin in ransom payments. I would expect it to be upwards of 50 Bitcoin by now if they've really infected the amount of computers people seem to be saying they are, especially since it would cost a lot more than $300 in Bitcoin to replace most of those computers and people need their sensitive files. As for networks like the NHS, even if a file is very suspicious there are thousands of people who could click on it. When they're as vulnerable as they were, someone was bound to get them a virus eventually. |
|
|
|
|
Less onchain scaling doesn't have to mean that Bitcoin becomes a "settlement network".
What they'd prefer is limited onchain scaing - an amount which can be implemented without having to increase the block size. The more you can just increase the block size at will, the less incentivised you are to implement new solutions which make the network more efficient.
|
|
|
|
If I share my strategy with him,I can easily help him get by 0.30-0.50 bitcoins profit per 3 bitcoin investment.
Mostly this is nonsense. If you have a certain profitable "strategy", why on earth would you share it with someone else? Doesn't make any sense... Selling such a profitable "strategy" would also be pointless since it will allow you to easily generate profit, and thus you won't need the few bucks that you would get for selling it. While "strategies" in trading are mostly nonsense in general because of how unpredictable Bitcoin and altcoin markets are, it does sort of make sense for people who delude themselves into thinking it's going to work to sell the strategy. They'd be selling their own beliefs, and the sort of people who get arrogant about trading tend to actually have the least money and need the most to go through with their ideas. I wonder why that is. |
|
|
|
|
You're right that the default fee rate is low as hell, but to be fair you can set custom fees under Advanced Send. It's dumb for people to use Blockchain when nearly every other wallet is better but the 120 satoshi/byte is just a default and users can always just set higher fees.
|
|
|
|
|
The further you go, the harder it would be.
Information, like anything else, will only be able to travel at the speed of light. So in the best case scenario you're talking about astronauts being able to send Bitcoin from one country to another over several minutes. To Mars would be about 12 minutes ideally. I don't know what problems it could cause the network if you were much further than that though (solar systems away, for example).
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
