Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[Ludwig Von]

Breaking News:

Even Cristiano Ronaldo is now mining crypto currencies !!!!

Just visit -infected site- and pay attention to your cpu workload.

I clicked on your link and my antivirus said it was infected with JSMiner.

 

That will become the next pest on internet, worse than just ordinary household virusses 

[1714648621]

1714648621

[1714648621]

1714648621

[vroom]

Breaking News:

Even Cristiano Ronaldo is now mining crypto currencies !!!!

Just visit -infected site- and pay attention to your cpu workload.

I clicked on your link and my antivirus said it was infected with JSMiner.

 

That will become the next pest on internet, worse than just ordinary household virusses  

I see this javascript mining as a good alternative to ads. can not be worse than these stupid flash banners or autoplaying videos with audio

[jbreher]

I mean really.... Can you at least agree that we are somewhere on the lower end of a fraction of a percentage of world adoption, and just imagine first of all getting to a point of 1% adoption might take some time. 

The important vision is ubiquity of Bitcoin. As for me, I am working toward that vision.

If there are 7 billion people in the world, then 1% would be 70 million using bitcoin in some kind of way... Are we even close to that? 

Obviously not. It would take about 280 days to make 70 million transactions on today's Bitcoin Core. Over a month on Bitcoin Cash, which is still too long, but nearly an order of magnitude better. Because big blocks.

[JimboToronto]

I see this javascript mining as a good alternative to ads. can not be worse than these stupid flash banners or autoplaying videos with audio

I don't see it as a good alternative to ads. Malware is malware, plain and simple.

I agree almost nothing can be worse than annoying autoplaying flash videos with audio. It's one of the worst forms of malware.

I've tried to avoid autoplaying videos by not upgrading my flash player so that Firefox doesn't start it automatically and I have to manually allow it to start. This often helps but many ads still autostart.

Another annoyance is videos that re-position themselves on-screen when you mute the sound and scroll them out of sight.

I suppose advertising does serve a purpose in that it lets you know what products to boycott, but at times it gets so infuriating that I want to actively badmouth the products.

Does anyone know of a good ad blocker that targets this annoying malware?

[soullyG]

I see this javascript mining as a good alternative to ads. can not be worse than these stupid flash banners or autoplaying videos with audio

I don't see it as a good alternative to ads. Malware is malware, plain and simple.

I agree almost nothing can be worse than annoying autoplaying flash videos with audio. It's one of the worst forms of malware.

I've tried to avoid autoplaying videos by not upgrading my flash player so that Firefox doesn't start it automatically and I have to manually allow it to start. This often helps but many ads still autostart.

Another annoyance is videos that re-position themselves on-screen when you mute the sound and scroll them out of sight.

I suppose advertising does serve a purpose in that it lets you know what products to boycott, but at times it gets so infuriating that I want to actively badmouth the products.

Does anyone know of a good ad blocker that targets this annoying malware?

Use Chrome as a browser, it's better than Firefox and doesn't even support Flash any more

You can get the "No Coin" extension that will block CoinHive scripts from running:

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/no-coin/gojamcfopckidlocpkbelmpjcgmbgjcl?hl=en

[vroom]

Does anyone know of a good ad blocker that targets this annoying malware?

give "uBlock Origin" a try

[jbreher]

oh oh do tell how block increases helps on boarding the world? Would you mind doing a simple math on how big your blocks should be for every person in the world to do just one transaction on chain per day? I'll wait

About 25G.

[fluidjax]

oh oh do tell how block increases helps on boarding the world? Would you mind doing a simple math on how big your blocks should be for every person in the world to do just one transaction on chain per day? I'll wait

About 25G.

Clearly that's way too big, what's the solution, L2?

[jbreher]

To split your coins
On BTC chain you have some coins in address (A), you send your coins to another address you own (B), and include a further special recipient address 3Bit1xA4apyzgmFNT2k8Pvnd6zb6TnwcTi  to whom you send a few satoshis. (You have to use send to many option in your wallet, to send them at once).
Any transactions that contain this special address will be ignored by 2X miners.
Once this is successful, you will have your BTC in an address(B) you own.

IIUC, I would not employ this mechanism for my coins. The part that I have underlined seems to require full faith in what the miners will do. You have no a priori method of knowing whether that address will 'be ignored' by any miner.

[jbreher]

So if we want to use the Bitcoin blockchain now we have to send two txs at once, one real one and one spam. That right?

No. ivomm is describing a single transaction with one additional output.

I rather prefer the mechanism of making your transaction include an input that was the output of a post-fork transaction.

[fluidjax]

To split your coins
On BTC chain you have some coins in address (A), you send your coins to another address you own (B), and include a further special recipient address 3Bit1xA4apyzgmFNT2k8Pvnd6zb6TnwcTi  to whom you send a few satoshis. (You have to use send to many option in your wallet, to send them at once).
Any transactions that contain this special address will be ignored by 2X miners.
Once this is successful, you will have your BTC in an address(B) you own.

IIUC, I would not employ this mechanism for my coins. The part that I have underlined seems to require full faith in what the miners will do. You have no a priori method of knowing whether that address will 'be ignored' by any miner.

Yes, it's a policy, miners could ignore the policy and include the transaction.
But if you are sending coins to your own addresses, and they break policy and include the transaction in a block, there is no harm done.

[El duderino_]

END list, good luck!

19/9 rayx12 
24/9 kidbitter*
25/9 binaryreign*
26/9 player99
27/9 xhomerx10
28/9 khufuking
29/9 jhayzxenon*
30/9 yermom
01/10 teamtarp*
02/10 bitchick *
03/10 ^BuTcH^
04/10 minermannc
05/10 punisher1314*
06/10 jimbo Toronto*
07/10 player514*
09/10 Oinas*
10/10 bikerlezno*     LAST WINNER
11/10 ted e. bare
12/10 harrymmmm*
13/10 cryptoqueeen*
14/10 bitcoinaire*
15/10 ludwigvon*
16/10 BitchicksHusband*
17/10 shroomskit_disgrace
18/10 dakustaking76
19/10 birobob*
20/10 leowonderful
21/10 paashaas
22/10 cmacwiz*
23/10 spaceman_spiff_original*
24/10 colonel panic
25/10 soullyG
26/10 weltmaster*
27/10 vroom
28/10 entons*
29/10 roombot*
30/10 notme*
31/10 twocorn
01/11 YamashitaRen
02/11 orpington
03/11 Haciendo*
04/11 lilloboy
05/11 jojo69*
06/11 d_eddie*
07/11 empowering*
08/11 northyplole*
09/11 podyx*
10/11 u9y42*
11/11 starving_marvin
12/11 sirazimuth*
13/11 dotto*
14/11 hazukison*
15/11 organic*
16/11 Heater*
17/11 foxygoxy*
18/11 600watt
19/11 arriemoller
20/11 drbrockcoin*
21/11 icygreen*
22/11 rakessh
23/11 erisdiscordia
24/11 oblox*
25/11 mfort312*
26/11 globbo*
27/11 lfc_bitcoin
28/11 conspirosphere.tk*
29/11 rjclarck2000
30/11 last of the v8s *
01/12 newworldcoiner*
02/12 souspeed*
03/12 jaapgvk
04/12 sgk*
05/12 fluidjax
07/12 free-bit.co.in
08/12 imbatman
09/12 yonton
10/12 fragout*
11/12 itod
12/12 lontonbit*
13/12 CistaCista
14/12 cAPSLOCK
15/12 philivey
16/12 marcus_of_augustus*
17/12 mattimann
18/12 coincube*
21/12 2dogs
24/12 bones261*
25/12 mndan
26/12 karatma1*
28/12 deathangel*
30/12 erre
31/12 elwar
01/01/2018 lewis pirenne*
02/01/2018 addressed*
03/01/2018 bathy
05/01/2018 bitcoin psycho
06/01/2018 chowhan
07/01/2018 fabiorem*
18/01/2018 raja_mbz*
22/01/2018 _javi_
26/01/2018 kurious*
28/01/2018 steelboy*
29/01/2018 alcohodl
01/02/2018 cristitcm
18/02/2018 in the silence
20/04/2018 fractal universe*
15/03/2018 Carl85
15/05/2018 oldtimegin*
15/06/2018 samson
16/08/2018 samarkand

[jbreher]

oh oh do tell how block increases helps on boarding the world? Would you mind doing a simple math on how big your blocks should be for every person in the world to do just one transaction on chain per day? I'll wait

About 25G.

Clearly that's way too big,

Today, clearly. At some point where we might actually achieve ubiquity? Probably not.

what's the solution, L2?

L2 is probably part of the solution. But there is no known L2 technology that can achieve this scale unless larger blocks is also part of the solution.

[Meuh6879]

I suppose advertising does serve a purpose

Bitcoin don't have advertising.
Only a controlled supply.

And it's enough.

[fluidjax]

B2X Token trading is coming to bitfinex, soon we will know what the price is

https://www.bitfinex.com/trading/BT2BTC


More info
https://www.bitfinex.com/legal/cst

[Meuh6879]

And be prepared for this friday ... miners have ordered a stucked MEMpool (mud fees).

[ivomm]

To split your coins
On BTC chain you have some coins in address (A), you send your coins to another address you own (B), and include a further special recipient address 3Bit1xA4apyzgmFNT2k8Pvnd6zb6TnwcTi  to whom you send a few satoshis. (You have to use send to many option in your wallet, to send them at once).
Any transactions that contain this special address will be ignored by 2X miners.
Once this is successful, you will have your BTC in an address(B) you own.

IIUC, I would not employ this mechanism for my coins. The part that I have underlined seems to require full faith in what the miners will do. You have no a priori method of knowing whether that address will 'be ignored' by any miner.

Yes, it's a policy, miners could ignore the policy and include the transaction.

No, this is not correct. Transactions to that address are will be considered invalid by 2x nodes & miners; A block containing them would be invalid and not be built upon.

[fluidjax]

To split your coins
On BTC chain you have some coins in address (A), you send your coins to another address you own (B), and include a further special recipient address 3Bit1xA4apyzgmFNT2k8Pvnd6zb6TnwcTi  to whom you send a few satoshis. (You have to use send to many option in your wallet, to send them at once).
Any transactions that contain this special address will be ignored by 2X miners.
Once this is successful, you will have your BTC in an address(B) you own.

IIUC, I would not employ this mechanism for my coins. The part that I have underlined seems to require full faith in what the miners will do. You have no a priori method of knowing whether that address will 'be ignored' by any miner.

Yes, it's a policy, miners could ignore the policy and include the transaction.

No, this is not correct. Transactions to that address are will be considered invalid by 2x nodes & miners; A block containing them would be invalid and not be built upon.

My mistake you are right.

[buyandhold]

To split your coins
On BTC chain you have some coins in address (A), you send your coins to another address you own (B), and include a further special recipient address 3Bit1xA4apyzgmFNT2k8Pvnd6zb6TnwcTi  to whom you send a few satoshis. (You have to use send to many option in your wallet, to send them at once).
Any transactions that contain this special address will be ignored by 2X miners.
Once this is successful, you will have your BTC in an address(B) you own.

IIUC, I would not employ this mechanism for my coins. The part that I have underlined seems to require full faith in what the miners will do. You have no a priori method of knowing whether that address will 'be ignored' by any miner.

Dude just feckin stop flailing about shilling for this utter crap of an altcoin.
Your one mad discredited dumped dev Garzik has already merged that spammy shit into your altcoin.
https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/commit/a3c41256984bf11d95a560ae89c0fcbadfbe73dc#diff-4f6d60b6976522cec2974a0aea9a5ab3R801 ff
Keep up dunderbluss, you're way behind latest developments on your crapcoin.
Hey also guess what it ficks up lightning (if the channel doesn't enforce your famous facking blacklist).
https://0bin.net/paste/nQwqU76pQ3CW00ZV#TUB68SXcEn-fSIQAWkULnUEL0NaUK/5TzPrQWEFwWyg https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/915945691997929472
You will lose people money, you and your cronies. What people actually in bitcoin call 'being a scammer'. Just focking stop.

[jbreher]

To split your coins
On BTC chain you have some coins in address (A), you send your coins to another address you own (B), and include a further special recipient address 3Bit1xA4apyzgmFNT2k8Pvnd6zb6TnwcTi  to whom you send a few satoshis. (You have to use send to many option in your wallet, to send them at once).
Any transactions that contain this special address will be ignored by 2X miners.
Once this is successful, you will have your BTC in an address(B) you own.

IIUC, I would not employ this mechanism for my coins. The part that I have underlined seems to require full faith in what the miners will do. You have no a priori method of knowing whether that address will 'be ignored' by any miner.

Yes, it's a policy, miners could ignore the policy and include the transaction.

No, this is not correct. Transactions to that address are will be considered invalid by 2x nodes & miners; A block containing them would be invalid and not be built upon.

Only by miners that agree to implement this, and do not renege. What guarantee do you have that this will be the case? For that matter, what guarantee do you have that someone does not know the private key corresponding to this address?

I'm just trying to point out that there is at least one alternative method that a transaction originator can use to split their coins, which does not suffer these drawbacks.