Bitcoin Forum
February 14, 2016, 03:53:35 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.11.2 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 ... 969 »
461  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 05:18:30 PM
remember that CVX chart i kept putting up?  well, the entire index is now following it down:



world's largest mine:



mining capitol of the world:



Canada, no mining slouch:



cheap food. you'll need it:

462  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 04:41:26 PM
$DJT deepening it's losses.  $DJI getting dragged down:

463  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 04:30:00 PM
BlockCypher on board with bigger blocks.  their analysis corresponds with everything i've been saying (& concepts elucidated by awemany) in this thread about the attack:

Large mempools are awful

The truth is that “the” mempool is a misnomer; every miner and node has its own mempool, with different sizes, policies, and rules. Mix with a Bitcoin core implementation ill-equipped for massive mempools, and you get chaos and uncertainty. A large mempool stresses Bitcoin’s distributed infrastructure and greatly increases the possibility of user confusion when their transactions are randomly dropped.

Large mempools — relative to block size — are very bad.
Miners and nodes bore the cost

What most don’t realize is the attack was on the miners and nodes validating transactions. When a transaction has been received and validated by the network (but NOT INCLUDED in a block), the cost has already been incurred by the network in sending, validating, and relaying the transactions.
What Next?

Adapt. Upward fee pressure may be inevitable, but it’s important to note that this attack scales linearly with block size. If we had 8MB block size limits, for example, and assuming prior 1–2tps, then the attacker’s transactions would fill 7.5MB of extra transactions instead of 500KB, a full 15x more expensive, on the order of ~$60,000 a day. Still too cheap, but a higher price tag for a prospective malcontent.


https://medium.com/blockcypher-blog/a-bitcoin-spam-attack-post-mortem-s-la-ying-alive-654e914edcf4

Hmmm sorry but that's mischaracterizing the idea behind this article. They are in fact very neutral and make no mention of a preferred position on the matter.

Seems clear the culprit in this whole saga of "network disruption" was misconfigured architecture and apparently inadequate mempool implementations.

Quote
Mix with a Bitcoin core implementation ill-equipped for massive mempools, and you get chaos and uncertainty. A large mempool stresses Bitcoin’s distributed infrastructure and greatly increases the possibility of user confusion when their transactions are randomly dropped.

Evidently the core parameters were not optimized, something they suggest the core devs should concentrate and focus on maybe even before we think about block size. (I am aware there is already progress made toward alleviating this problem)

i heard a good argument the other day about this.  assuming that there are 1.1MB worth of real tx demand, that means not everyone can fit their tx into the next block and at minimum means 0.1MB worth of tx's have to wait until the next 10 min block to get thru no matter what fee they pay.  is Bitcoin a usable system at that point when some ppl may have to wait 20 min and even much longer if you start extrapolating out real use to say 100MB of real user demand?  also assume these ppl want max security of transacting on the MC.
464  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 04:18:06 PM
mining centralization?  what mining centralization?:

465  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 04:00:11 PM
BlockCypher on board with bigger blocks.  their analysis corresponds with everything i've been saying (& concepts elucidated by awemany) in this thread about the attack:

Large mempools are awful

The truth is that “the” mempool is a misnomer; every miner and node has its own mempool, with different sizes, policies, and rules. Mix with a Bitcoin core implementation ill-equipped for massive mempools, and you get chaos and uncertainty. A large mempool stresses Bitcoin’s distributed infrastructure and greatly increases the possibility of user confusion when their transactions are randomly dropped.

Large mempools — relative to block size — are very bad.
Miners and nodes bore the cost

What most don’t realize is the attack was on the miners and nodes validating transactions. When a transaction has been received and validated by the network (but NOT INCLUDED in a block), the cost has already been incurred by the network in sending, validating, and relaying the transactions.
What Next?

Adapt. Upward fee pressure may be inevitable, but it’s important to note that this attack scales linearly with block size. If we had 8MB block size limits, for example, and assuming prior 1–2tps, then the attacker’s transactions would fill 7.5MB of extra transactions instead of 500KB, a full 15x more expensive, on the order of ~$60,000 a day. Still too cheap, but a higher price tag for a prospective malcontent.


https://medium.com/blockcypher-blog/a-bitcoin-spam-attack-post-mortem-s-la-ying-alive-654e914edcf4
466  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 03:48:01 PM
this is an awesome quote:

The technology will be “of fundamental importance to Wall Street,” Nasdaq Chief Executive Officer Bob Greifeld said during a phone interview Thursday. “The benefits to the industry are immense and cannot be ignored.”


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-23/nasdaq-expects-to-be-first-exchange-to-use-bitcoin-technology

you know they're going to want cheap tx fees don't you?
467  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 03:14:32 PM

Satoshi clearly didn't have a plan to manage the core devs, or even a code of conduct as it seems.  We need a Bitcoin-equivalent Hippocratic Oath for the core devs, as well as a way to tell them to buzz off.  Maybe the Foundation can get to work on that. Tongue 

They signed the Hippocratic Oath equivalent when they joined Blockstream - at least that is what was presented in the media, that they would never hurt bitcoin because of their work contracts.

how effective do you expect them to be when they depend on self determination?  how much does money & stock options affect their decision making?  what does talking with your VC investors everyday do to one's view of the world?  since bigger blocks is a no brainer even for SC's & LN, why the delay/stalling?

and yeah, i asked these very questions a year ago well before the block size debate was a "thing".
468  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 03:12:41 PM
I wonder if the continuing GLD downtrend (with no near or medium-term end in sight) will spur some goldbugs to jump into BTC as they see it rise while their beloved PM falls. Could be one of the many contributing factors in the inevitable coming BULL run.

you mean this POS?  well yeah, that's the whole thrust of this thread for 4y running...:

469  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 03:08:59 PM
all of them have that sick top left to bottom right long term year chart...
470  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 03:07:37 PM
these are really bad signs for the economy in general:







471  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 02:56:30 PM

Satoshi clearly didn't have a plan to manage the core devs, or even a code of conduct as it seems.  We need a Bitcoin-equivalent Hippocratic Oath for the core devs, as well as a way to tell them to buzz off.  Maybe the Foundation can get to work on that. Tongue 

They signed the Hippocratic Oath equivalent when they joined Blockstream - at least that is what was presented in the media, that they would never hurt bitcoin because of their work contracts.

how effective do you expect them to be when they depend on self determination?  how much does money & stock options affect their decision making?  what does talking with your VC investors everyday do to one's view of the world?  since bigger blocks is a no brainer even for SC's & LN, why the delay/stalling?
472  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 02:52:37 PM
$DJT doing the next roll:

473  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 02:49:53 AM
LOL, the Gavinistas are furiously scribbling their little manifesto.  This gonna be good.   Grin

Exactly like the Peoples' Front of Judea (or was it the Judean Peoples' Front?)

"What have the core devs ever done for us?"

I'm grateful to the developers, but this is not about them, I'm also happy that not everyone at central control is part of the heard, everything in this post is good news. if you read that tweet again, it looks like a critique of the mainstream circle jerk.

Ah, but BitcoinSX is about the developers.  Specifically, SX's lack of them and predictable GFY response from Team Core when larger blocks break something Gavin failed to account for (like upstream bandwidth being ~order-of-magnitude less than down, or catastrophic consensus failure).

XT could be an interesting pseudo-test of the thought experiment i've made a coupla times about perhaps Bitcoin needing nothing more than a big enough block size increase with built in upgrades from now until eternity.  or at least until an emergency patch is needed for an extraordinary event. 
474  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 23, 2015, 12:53:16 AM
gmax thrown under the bus with lotsa upvotes:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3e8a4v/jeff_g_throwing_the_hammer_down_today_on_devlist/ctckf5l
475  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 22, 2015, 11:11:48 PM
"What have the core devs ever done for us?"
It doesn't matter.

At all.

This isn't academia - there is no tenure in Bitcoin.

Their position is contingent every single day on their continuing ability to produce new value.

They can choose to embrace that reality, or they can choose to pout about it. Bitcoin will be fine with or without them.

well put JR.  i hadn't even thought about it that way.

and what we absolutely don't want is core dev thinking that Bitcoin "owes them" something.

you do know that also goes for Satoshi and Gavin ?

yep.  which is why apparently Satoshi disappeared w/o wanting to remain at the helm and why Gavin is refusing to accept lead core dev responsibility for XT despite being accused endlessly of wanting to be a benevolent dictator.
476  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 22, 2015, 11:06:30 PM
"What have the core devs ever done for us?"
It doesn't matter.

At all.

This isn't academia - there is no tenure in Bitcoin.

Their position is contingent every single day on their continuing ability to produce new value.

They can choose to embrace that reality, or they can choose to pout about it. Bitcoin will be fine with or without them.

well put JR.  i hadn't even thought about it that way.

and what we absolutely don't want is core dev thinking that Bitcoin "owes them" something.
477  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 22, 2015, 08:33:41 PM
this really isn't good and is reason for us to want to increase the growth of new users by whatever means necessary:

Despite a decline of approximately 40% in bitcoin purchases, Connie Chung, senior payments product manager at Expedia, says the option to pay with the digital currency will remain as long as there is a demand for it.

Chung noted other merchants had been more affected by what she called a recent decline in bitcoin payments –  with some reporting a decrease of up to 90% at various industry events.

According to the report, the fundamental challenge facing bitcoin as a medium of exchange of legal goods continues to be low consumer adoption and a lack of advantages over credit and debit cards.


http://www.coindesk.com/expedia-exec-purchases-with-bitcoin-are-down-40/?utm_content=buffer59a4e&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

im just not too concerned about this one. pretty much everyone who has bought bitcoin over the past 2 yrs is even or under water. no point spending them at a loss. Also, the early adopters who could be spending their coins on hotels/etc. realize that "store of value" and "im not selling this low" are still valid reasons not to be spending them yet as well. im also spending my fiat more than bitcoins at the moment. if my net worth jumps another 5-10x, i'm sure i'll start spending them again.  its still a buy and hold imo

 

you just want to make sure we're not getting into a contraction cycle that we can't pull out of.  i'd much rather see us with momentum in the other direction with increasing user base that would undoubtedly drive price.  i don't think there is any shame in wanting higher prices b/c if Bitcoin really is going to be moving around large values then the price needs to be higher so as not to produce too much volatility as $millions cross borders in single tx's for purchases of homes, cars, et. 
478  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 22, 2015, 08:05:17 PM
this really isn't good and is reason for us to want to increase the growth of new users by whatever means necessary:

Despite a decline of approximately 40% in bitcoin purchases, Connie Chung, senior payments product manager at Expedia, says the option to pay with the digital currency will remain as long as there is a demand for it.

Chung noted other merchants had been more affected by what she called a recent decline in bitcoin payments –  with some reporting a decrease of up to 90% at various industry events.

According to the report, the fundamental challenge facing bitcoin as a medium of exchange of legal goods continues to be low consumer adoption and a lack of advantages over credit and debit cards.


http://www.coindesk.com/expedia-exec-purchases-with-bitcoin-are-down-40/?utm_content=buffer59a4e&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
479  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 22, 2015, 07:42:26 PM
funny as hell.  who dat?:

480  Economy / Speculation / Re: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. on: July 22, 2015, 07:39:47 PM
Dow -101
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 ... 969 »
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!