Im from Australia. Found that out in 2012 :-/ Over the past most users thought that it was fully used for illegal activities, now people's mentality have changed alot due to the increasing popularity of bitcoin. Now not only Australia, worldwide people were focusing to be a part of the profiting currency.
But the problem is that first impressions stick. My friends all still think that bitcoin is a Ponzi, and so on. My father is a stockbroker and honestly, he's too tied to Fiat. But he should better understand 'diversification' or 'spread' or 'arbitrage' - all those things he can do much more with bitcoin . |
|
|
|
Bitcoin volatility down to 3%. GBP up to 2.65%.
The longer the price is stable, the bigger the jump. Last time it went under 1% the price almost doubled within a month.
Stability fuels the rocket!
Fee volatility up 100% E mails and whatsup still fee free.... |
|
|
|
635 is coming
one last good drop before we continue on moving forward
thats my wish.
Wish bigger, gonna go in the $500s again. You might buy for even cheaper soon but would need to pay higher fee to transfer to your wallet due to SWIFTstreamlimits. When will be estimated time for parity (BTC price = trx fee) ? Or what volatility is bigger? |
|
|
|
The genius solution is having code working at smallest line count & easy to read + open to anybody to understand. To me this is exact such an example for a 'genius solution': Remove that line (restricting the block size) and open the bitcoin protocol for ANY type of scaling, we will need them ALL! The 21Mio limit is all we need. Think big and deal with it in more prof way like the entire internet protocols that 'could not scale' before but have done mostly fine because other ways where found at the right time. Adoption is all about and HTTP-, eMail- , whatsApp- and Bitcoin- traffic needs to be as cheap as possible to win that game. Edit Wondering if theres any reply on that https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4tvw5y/hardforks_did_you_know/d5lqudl |
|
|
|
franky1, malignant as ever...
what a dismal job he has, posting all this drivel - i think it's driven him mad, actually
i was bemused for a while, but now his deranged rantings are wretched to witness
Franky does a really good job here. We defnetely need more Frankys (unlimited?) here but I fear most are gone to r/btc or just feel its game over and maybe wait till smallbrainers and streamedthinkers gone rekt.... |
|
|
|
Ich habe jetzt mal eine Woche kein Internet und bin gespannt, was für Überraschungen der Markt bereit hält, wenn ich wieder in Netzreichweite bin. ^^
Viel Spass in der Türkei!  |
|
|
|
.... segwit will incress node cost and have the EXACT same "centralizing" effect as a 2MB HF.
segwit's "2MB effective block size".... idk why they didnt just call it segwit's "Magical capacity incress."
lol wake up poeple you've been lied to and manipulated.
True, but segwit enables LN and other off chain solutions that bump all micro payments one layer up. Where 2MB HF just buys short period of time until people start bitching about 4MB HF, then 8MB... how big should the blocks be to match PayPal? Visa? The potential of on-chain scaling is not restricted to the block size, but keeping limited in discussion politically. Again, the only relevant limit is the 21Mio! |
|
|
|
So what are the updates on the fork and how is the Ethereum community coping? Judging from the price it looks like it's business as usual for now. I personally am still worried for the platform. The attacker is still out there looking for his next victim.
There is a 1Bio bounty and a giant attack surface. I think there are 1k potential attackers out there, at least? |
|
|
|
 hmm,... könnte was passieren... Fake unten, brake oben....  |
|
|
|
I agree the network adopting segwit and later LN is will be a historical moment in bitcoin.
segwit+LN is a fundamental shift ( way more then a 2MB HF would have been ) it WILL change the game, for the better or worst?? no way to know...
It would be worse, think about it... Simply increase the block size as that satoshi said, or change everything about Bitcoin because some beardy said. Segwit fucks the miners, (oh and the decentralised nodes) LN fucks the miners. The fees market fucks the users. RBF fucks the retailers. Segwit will never happen. The miners hold the hash power. It is cores last few weeks of presuming to control Bitcoin, I suspect. Hehe, yes and they quickly put down all in patents so last try to go Turkish all in! |
|
|
|
I doubt there can be many causes where both coins after hard fork could co-exist. Most likely the losing side just joins the wining side, or just sell offs because it fits its interests better than basically turning to irrelevance with their smaller and very soon unsupported chain by all the services and exchanges.
I talking about the most likely situations like 80-20 or 70-30, actually close to 50-50 should happen very rarely. But the upcoming ETH fork is nice example, and I dont expect much drama, the coin wont split to two about equally succesfull coins, but instead only one coin going to exist after a while, at least thats my prediction. If Im right, it proves there is no worry doing hard forks, quite opposite as it can move the coin forward and restore people trust.
Huh? The ETH HF already happened and it is a 90-10 still.... |
|
|
|
|
Simple e mail sending
Google search
youtube stream
Facebook
WhatsApp postings
Skype / voip
Java
Ubuntu
....
All that is fee-free (in principal) and so a big success .
So Bitcoin trx, the major use case, needs to be free (") as well or Bitcoin is not successfull.
|
|
|
|
After the ETH HF, still anybody wants to fear-spread? Yes , BTC market cap is 10x higher, still. So why not wait with the HF until we reach parity?  |
|
|
|
|
Both
It looks like a central action to fix a big attack surface - more to come.
It shows bitcoiners that hard forks are the way to go.
|
|
|
|
|
How much of those blockgins I need to get high?
|
|
|
|
And we're back to $666 Stale.....like the scaling issue. |
|
|
|
|
A hard fork can be seen as a phase separation like a liquid turns into a gas on heating up.
if a decent intensive variable is reached the status change is immediate and no liquid is left in a sudden.
For a soft fork there can be spots left in different stati - It is a mess!
|
|
|
|
Maintaining security and Bitcoin’s long-term store of value is achieved by ensuring that miners receive available transaction fees for the confirmations they make, as opposed to off-chain solutions where miners will see a vast slice of their fee revenue siphoned away to 3rd-party service providers. Yep, this argument has been frequently put forward before, but it never seems to sink in. I can't seem to quote two of them normally as the thread is now locked, but: It (lightning) will certainly help with scaling in the short term, but over longer periods, the real question becomes what percentage of transaction fees are skimmed off the top and don't end up going to the miners securing the main chain? It could potentially hit miners hard later down the line if we don't strike the balance right. Too much traffic on the main chain is bad, but too much off-chain could be equally precarious. So yeah, you're right in that it (liquid) helps increase liquidity, but at the same time, it's allowing exchanges to move large volumes of funds around while minimising contact with the main chain. Your vision of the future is that traditional financial institutions and big business will settle on the main chain and pay big fees to miners, but if they see exchanges doing it off-chain and still maintaining a high level of security whilst paying less in the process, why wouldn't other industries follow suit in a similar manner? Would be somewhat ironic if most big businesses jumped on sidechains and you had to start begging people to put their cups of coffee on the blockchain just so the miners get a bit of income.  Future growth will happen on layer 2 services in exchanges and third party services who will charge fees. these service fees will bypass miners and as the Bitcoin security subsidy halves every 4 years we know miners will get less and less revenue.
Absolutely. I've argued before that the smallblock militants suck at math and logic and I'm still yet to hear a counter argument from them that makes a shred of sense. Either we get more users paying fees to the miners, or the fees have to rise. Diverting fees to third parties makes it even worse. We can't put all our eggs in the off-chain basket. There will be consequences if miners don't see sufficient ROI. In a really open system, where there is no limits - except the 21Mio - it would be all up to the game theory and on + off chain scaling projects and groups would deliver a very nice solution in a fair competition. What we now have is still BSLaudations.... Once the Chinese will understand this soon, they could / should open up the system by own codings. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
