FartBuddy
Jr. Member
 Offline
Activity: 35
Merit: 7
|
 |
February 13, 2018, 09:30:46 PM |
|
Understand what it is and how it works (in theory). I'm wondering how do I physically utilize those nodes in that picture to my advantage right now? I believe it can be done via scripting only for now, and ONLY on testnet. The ability of fast "direct" transactions and minimum fees is something everybody wants and fast. AFAIK, (haven't been following this to be honest) there's no release date yet. But, from an article I've read the LN needs to be thoroughly tested prior release (any different input is greatly appreciated). At these prices the problem of having a bug and release it out in the open is not recommended... PS: Yes, I'm back... (kinda)  It's already being used on the mainnet, although the developers advise against it, and are angry their work has been adapted to work on mainnet. https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-lightning-network-problem-people-already-using/Fake money is boring.
At least, that's the contention of many micropayment enthusiasts, whose impatience for the Lightning Network has led to an influx of real bitcoin being transacted over the network, even though developers caution people against doing so since it's still in the testing phase. And they're not the only ones – Blockstream launched a Lightning-only merchandise store using its own Lightning implementation, c-lightning, and a Lightning main net explorer suggests more than $33,000 in bitcoin has been transacted via Lightning Networks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Be very wary of relying on JavaScript for security on crypto sites. The site can change the JavaScript at any time unless you take unusual precautions, and browsers are not generally known for their airtight security.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
macsga
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1002
Strange, yet attractive.
|
|
February 13, 2018, 09:39:19 PM |
|
It's already being used on the mainnet, although the developers advise against it, and are angry their work has been adapted to work on mainnet. https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-lightning-network-problem-people-already-using/Fake money is boring.
At least, that's the contention of many micropayment enthusiasts, whose impatience for the Lightning Network has led to an influx of real bitcoin being transacted over the network, even though developers caution people against doing so since it's still in the testing phase. And they're not the only ones – Blockstream launched a Lightning-only merchandise store using its own Lightning implementation, c-lightning, and a Lightning main net explorer suggests more than $33,000 in bitcoin has been transacted via Lightning Networks. LOL! I didn't know that, thanks for the input. TBH, I'm wary on any "addition" that goes live on mainnet without thorough testing. I've paid a great amount for Tx-ing some of my coins and I know the urge of these guys though. But still... damn...  |
|
|
|
|
|
Frequency
|
|
February 13, 2018, 09:39:36 PM |
|
If you use shapeshift.io, you might want to look into alternatives. I wonder how much this cost Bitcoin Judas? Well Shapeshift is run by his early bitcoin friend Eric Voorhees so not that much as they probably both know they ruined there reputation anyhow!! |
|
|
|
|
Last of the V8s
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 4392
Be a bank
|
|
February 13, 2018, 09:41:16 PM
Last edit: February 13, 2018, 10:12:27 PM by Last of the V8s |
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cuImsvmSf4A dangerous Bitcoin & Bitcoin-Cash (BCash) Hack (that no one talks about)early days on this yet edit: nothing there. apologies
|
|
|
|
|
FartBuddy
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 35
Merit: 7
|
|
February 13, 2018, 09:42:35 PM |
|
It's already being used on the mainnet, although the developers advise against it, and are angry their work has been adapted to work on mainnet. https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-lightning-network-problem-people-already-using/Fake money is boring.
At least, that's the contention of many micropayment enthusiasts, whose impatience for the Lightning Network has led to an influx of real bitcoin being transacted over the network, even though developers caution people against doing so since it's still in the testing phase. And they're not the only ones – Blockstream launched a Lightning-only merchandise store using its own Lightning implementation, c-lightning, and a Lightning main net explorer suggests more than $33,000 in bitcoin has been transacted via Lightning Networks. LOL! I didn't know that, thanks for the input. TBH, I'm wary on any "addition" that goes live on mainnet without thorough testing. I've paid a great amount for Tx-ing some of my coins and I know the urge of these guys though. But still... damn... There's already people losing bitcoins from using it too early. This is one of the first losses. https://twitter.com/rusty_twit/status/953043039701819392 |
|
|
|
|
Anon136
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
|
|
February 13, 2018, 09:43:29 PM |
|
Jesus Christ you cultists are dense.
Cultist? I don't even own any bitcoin right now. As you can see from that unsustainable $112k figure.
Expensive yes. Unsustainable maybe. But it certainly isn't clear that it is unsustainable. Perhaps it can continue to be sustained. It is definitely possible. the block reward provides Bitcoin with it's security model by BORROWING from the future to subsidize the present via unsustainable Ponzi.
No... It's redistributing capital from HODLers. HODLers who have voluntarily opted into this system. Again you really don't seem to understand how bitcoin works or maybe just basic economics. The second you remove the block reward, your security is no longer free
It isn't free right now... Once only the present matters, if people are not willing to shell out $10k per 10 minutes to have miners process their transactions/secure the chain (or whatever arbitrary number you come up with), then bitcoin dies and no longer exists.
You sound poor to me. You seem to think 10,000 dollars is a lot of money or something  . They can simply go to a different chain where a block reward still exists, thus getting their transactions processed cheaper.
Again. Economicses r haurd. It's not cheaper to have savers pay instead of spenders. It's just a different group of people that is paying. And you have to think, hopefully scaling technologies will allow that 10,000 cost to be divided among many more people than it would currently be divided among with 1mb blocks and 250 byte transactions. The fact you cannot prevent people from fleeing Bitcoin once it's mining Ponzi dies to get their transactions processed cheaper somewhere else is why bitcoin 100% inevitably dies once block reward goes to zero.
Except that this transition from HODLers paying to spenders paying incentivizes people to just HODL more and harder than they are already doing right now. In reality, the most likely outcome would be bitcoin converting to something like proof of stake to try and prevent collapse. PoW and PoS are all designed to centralize garbage, but PoW attempts to get by with a "decentralized" meme by being an open entropy system (that is centralized through economy of scale and the large knowledge and capital reserves required to build the foundries and chips). If bitcoin is forced to convert to PoS just to survive (closed entropy systems cannot even pretend to be decentralized like bitcoin pretends to now), the whole thing was obviously an unsustainable Ponzi scam in the first place.
Yea I actually think there is a pretty good chance that your conclusions are correct. It's just your argument's that are bad. Bitcoin will probably be replaced by better cheaper technology in the future that processes transactions cheaper and more efficiently. I mostly agree with your general point. Just not your claim that bitcoin is a ponzi. That is a stupid claim. Satoshi implemented the best solutions to decentralized digital currency that were known and available at the time. It is very unlikely that satoshi schemed to lure everyone into an open system that would later become restrictive. |
|
|
|
|
Wekkel
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3108
Merit: 1531
yes
|
|
February 13, 2018, 09:46:26 PM |
|
I was expecting an expert proclaiming a vulnerabilty of bitcoin software. Instead, I got Julian from TenX talking about (when looking through the comments) about 'chain reorganisations'?  Anyway, things must be busy over at TenX (chirp..... chirp..... nope, no card over here..... nope, no card over there.... ). But perhaps I am missing the point |
|
|
|
|
macsga
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1002
Strange, yet attractive.
|
|
February 13, 2018, 09:49:32 PM |
|
Dood! That is EXACTLY what I was talking about before. Development 101! Test first, then TEST SOME MORE, then pay somebody to hack it for you (if necessary) and THEN release it... |
|
|
|
|
infofront (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2632
Merit: 2780
Shitcoin Minimalist
|
|
February 13, 2018, 09:50:53 PM |
|
I was expecting an expert proclaiming a vulnerabilty of bitcoin software. Instead, I got Julian from TenX talking about (when looking through the comments) about 'chain reorganisations'? Anyway, things must be busy over at TenX (chirp..... chirp..... nope, no card over here..... nope, no card over there.... ). But perhaps I am missing the point I saw this posted on reddit. Didn't watch it, but commenters were saying he basically "discovered" the 51% attack. |
|
|
|
|
JayJuanGee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3696
Merit: 10165
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
|
|
February 13, 2018, 09:51:59 PM |
|
I looked at the linked youtube video, and it is about 1 hour 44 minutes, and it is about the third industrial revolution. Are you suggesting that there are some specific parts of the video that mentions crypto or bitcoin, because if it does not mention crypto or bitcoin at all, then wouldn't it be harder to make any claims that it puts crypto into any kind of historical context. Can you provide a bit more of a description or some time marks so we would not have to watch the whole thing to attempt to figure out how it might be relevant to "crypto's place in history"? |
|
|
|
|
Last of the V8s
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 4392
Be a bank
|
|
February 13, 2018, 10:01:36 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ibian
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1278
|
|
February 13, 2018, 10:11:06 PM |
|
Dood! That is EXACTLY what I was talking about before. Development 101! Test first, then TEST SOME MORE, then pay somebody to hack it for you (if necessary) and THEN release it... This would never have happened with a simple blocksize increase. |
|
|
|
|
realr0ach
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 924
Merit: 311
#TheGoyimKnow
|
|
February 13, 2018, 10:11:53 PM |
|
What in the fuck is this link even trying to say? They're admitting no money backs any Tethers but "MAYBE" some random idiots will start a bank in Puerto Rico and then MAYBE it will be? What the fuck am I reading? Bitfinex isn't even a real exchange. It's like Huobi, just some bullshit where someone attempts to pump the price by painting the tape so they can dump on other exchanges while no money actually exchanges hands. |
|
|
|
|
Wekkel
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3108
Merit: 1531
yes
|
|
February 13, 2018, 10:13:16 PM |
|
Dood! That is EXACTLY what I was talking about before. Development 101! Test first, then TEST SOME MORE, then pay somebody to hack it for you (if necessary) and THEN release it... This would never have happened with a simple blocksize increase. I guess thats not the point. |
|
|
|
|
Ibian
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1278
|
|
February 13, 2018, 10:14:21 PM |
|
Dood! That is EXACTLY what I was talking about before. Development 101! Test first, then TEST SOME MORE, then pay somebody to hack it for you (if necessary) and THEN release it... This would never have happened with a simple blocksize increase. I guess thats not the point. And you are not going to say what you think the point is either. |
|
|
|
|
xhomerx10
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3822
Merit: 7969
|
|
February 13, 2018, 10:15:27 PM |
|
Dood! That is EXACTLY what I was talking about before. Development 101! Test first, then TEST SOME MORE, then pay somebody to hack it for you (if necessary) and THEN release it... This would never have happened with a simple blocksize increase. Simple what now? |
|
|
|
|
moneyForjam
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 165
Merit: 4
Always believe in magic
|
|
February 13, 2018, 10:16:35 PM |
|
Imagine the souls that would be crushed if it just dropped below 6K right here.
It just so happens I'm running out of crushed bull soul! By the looks of it, bears gonna have another crack at 8393 |
|
|
|
|
Globb0
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2053
Free spirit
|
|
February 13, 2018, 10:19:29 PM |
|
Imagine the souls that would be crushed if it just dropped below 6K right here.
It just so happens I'm running out of crushed bull soul! By the looks of it, bears gonna have another crack at 8393 I was worried as soon as I saw about 10 pages back everyone is long. What always happens when everyone is one way? The opposite! OK anecdotal, and always? etc. But frequently no? after all these are heavily manipulated markets. |
|
|
|
|
d_eddie
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2478
Merit: 2895
|
|
February 13, 2018, 10:20:29 PM |
|
Dood! That is EXACTLY what I was talking about before. Development 101! Test first, then TEST SOME MORE, then pay somebody to hack it for you (if necessary) and THEN release it... This would never have happened with a simple blocksize increase. And the huge Yahoo data hack would never have happened with a simple messenger pigeon stock increase. |
|
|
|
|
bitserve
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1820
Merit: 1464
Self made HODLER ✓
|
|
February 13, 2018, 10:21:53 PM |
|
Dood! That is EXACTLY what I was talking about before. Development 101! Test first, then TEST SOME MORE, then pay somebody to hack it for you (if necessary) and THEN release it... LN has not been "released". Some people decided to test it on mainnet with (little) money at their own risk. The procedure looks correct to me. |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
