|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions must be included in a block to be properly completed. When you send a transaction, it is broadcast to miners. Miners can then optionally include it in their next blocks. Miners will be more inclined to include your transaction if it has a higher transaction fee.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
tarmi
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1010
|
 |
April 03, 2015, 07:36:18 PM |
|
active longs vs shorts
yes. but this time it will be a fucking mess. |
|
|
|
|
Tzupy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2128
Merit: 1074
|
|
April 03, 2015, 07:36:50 PM |
|
Yes, but SOON could mean several weeks, in the mean time it's possible to go up a bit. |
|
|
|
|
JimboToronto
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4004
Merit: 4480
You're never too old to think young.
|
|
April 03, 2015, 07:37:06 PM |
|
Good afternoon Bitcoinland. Slept in a little on this Good Friday.
Still going sideways I see, but at least it's still over $250. Does it stay there this time?
Slowly creeping up is a good thing.
Mmm coffee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sitarow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1047
|
|
April 03, 2015, 07:38:30 PM |
|
That is not what I see...  |
|
|
|
|
|
JorgeStolfi
|
|
April 03, 2015, 07:39:26 PM |
|
if the need presents itself the more probable outcome would be to change the hashing algorithm use cpu's and kill all asic behemoths and adjust the difficulty to the new hardware scale than what Jorge suggest.
You cannot kill a cryptocurrency, remember?  If the idealists do as above, there will be a "rebel bitcoin" with a tiny mining network, and the "cartel's bitcoin", with all the old hashpower (since the ASIC miners would not have other choice than to mine it). Guess which one will keep most of the value of the original bitcoins. It is like the Captain "defeating" a mutiny by taking off alone in a small lifeboat, and declaring it to be the real ship. Moreover, even the rebels will still have their coins waiting for them on the cartel's chain; so why would they not sell and trade them? Ignoring those coins would be their loss, not the cartel's. |
|
|
|
|
SilenceOfTheLamb
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
April 03, 2015, 07:40:37 PM |
|
...
the new world order isn't near its happening, its a slow methodical day in day out gradual kind of change, hardly anyone takes a step back to and look at all the little changes creating the new world order right before your very eyes, it is happening right now.
... You've opened my eyes, Adam. Thank you! http://s30.postimg.org/s6k5zxa5d/clockwork_horror.jpg |
|
|
|
|
|
ensurance982
|
|
April 03, 2015, 07:41:56 PM |
|
Well I don't buy the swap theories, actually. They have proven to be of practically no real help in predicting any movements before and I don't think that they'll to that now. Maybe the shorts will be closed at some point and the uptrend gets going big time - finally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
dreamspark
|
|
April 03, 2015, 07:45:59 PM |
|
Sorry but thats bullsh*t, if the block halving changed the price would crumble.
Already replied to that. It is a subjective prediction of how "the bitcoiners" would behave. My view of "the bitcoiners" and their motivations is obviously very different from yours. You suggest that the miners could agree on it and everyone who pays their bills (the buyers) would just be like ah okay. Not gonna happen.
Today, the new investors (those who buy or earn coins and hold them for a while) are quite happily paying 900'000 $/day to the miners, plus who-knows-how-much to the earlier investors who are selling; money that will never come back to the system. The new investors cannot be entirely conscious of that. So, if the halving were to be postponed, they would probably not take notice, and continue pouring in the same daily amounts, either way. By the way, don't expect the price to immediately double when the next halving happens. The miners will put 1800 fewer coins per day on the markets, but many earlier investors will start selling their coins once the price rises a little. In other words, there is lots of hidden liquidity in the old hoards, that will readily absorb the 450'000 k$/day that the miners will stop receiving. That's all on the pretence that there will be 21 million coins. I think your living on cloud cuckoo if you think that everyone would just be okay with a change to the amount of coins or the date of the halving. I'd sell mine immediately as would thousands and thousands of others. Bitcoin has no value if it becomes inflationary. New investors are not putting that much money into the system per day. Not all coins are sold and no they would not be happy to continue to once the word is out that bitcoin is broken which it would. Your arguments are valid, and you convey them in a way that makes it difficult to prove right or wrong but I can say with all confidence that a change to the amount of coins or when the halving takes place will destroy Bitcoin and thus the incomes of the people who you suggest would be happy to change it. |
|
|
|
|
Sitarow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1047
|
|
April 03, 2015, 07:55:19 PM |
|
if the need presents itself the more probable outcome would be to change the hashing algorithm use cpu's and kill all asic behemoths and adjust the difficulty to the new hardware scale than what Jorge suggest.
You cannot kill a cryptocurrency, remember? If the idealists do as above, there will be a "rebel bitcoin" with a tiny mining network, and the "cartel's bitcoin", with all the old hashpower (since the ASIC miners would not have other choice than to mine it). Guess which one will keep most of the value of the original bitcoins. It is like the Captain "defeating" a mutiny by taking off alone in a small lifeboat, and declaring it to be the real ship. Moreover, even the rebels will still have their coins waiting for them on the cartel's chain; so why would they not sell and trade them? Ignoring those coins would be their loss, not the cartel's.  you forget that they would instantly have over 51% of the network closer to 100%  and there would be no confidence as to the transactions integrity. P.S. considering they also would own the asic manufacturing and technology for the old hashing algorithm. BTW what I stated was the outcome to a real proposal if the odd chance that the present mining algorithm would have been compromised via a back door. In essence making all existing ASIC use for BTC obsolete and make the old BTC network compromised and useless. In other words. If the conditions present themselves the btc blockchain network and participants will make the most prudent choice that will have majority consensus. No one given the option would eat spoiled food or in this case trade on a defunct chain. P.S.S Exchanges that would fail to move over would cause panic in the ALT coin space as exchanges would not know as to the authenticity of the BTC being traded for alts effectively making alts valueless. |
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2170
Merit: 1776
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
 |
April 03, 2015, 07:58:43 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
dewdeded
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1011
Monero Evangelist
|
|
April 03, 2015, 08:00:28 PM |
|
Who cares about miners? They have no vote and nothing to say.
Relevant are only the 3 till 5 admins/owners of the biggest mining pools. They decide.
|
|
|
|
|
Sitarow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1047
|
|
April 03, 2015, 08:04:24 PM |
|
Who cares about miners? They have no vote and nothing to say.
Relevant are only the 3 till 5 admins/owners of the biggest mining pools. They decide.
Pool's operator's do not = miners. |
|
|
|
|
Brewins
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 03, 2015, 08:09:08 PM |
|
51% attacks will never happen again. They would be too expensive, and it would kill the income of the big mining pool owners.
|
|
|
|
|
adamstgBit
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
|
|
April 03, 2015, 08:12:07 PM |
|
Who cares about miners? They have no vote and nothing to say.
Relevant are only the 3 till 5 admins/owners of the biggest mining pools. They decide.
no they don't the moment they "decide" something stupid everyone leaves the pool this is why i find it silly to say big mining pools are a threat to bitcoins decentralization pools have to act how there users what them to act or they won't use that pool, the users have all the power. |
|
|
|
|
JimboToronto
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4004
Merit: 4480
You're never too old to think young.
|
|
April 03, 2015, 08:15:33 PM |
|
Who cares about miners? They have no vote and nothing to say.
Relevant are only the 3 till 5 admins/owners of the biggest mining pools. They decide.
Miners do decide in which pools to participate. That is their vote. At least it offers more choice than a 2-party political system. |
|
|
|
|
dewdeded
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1011
Monero Evangelist
|
|
April 03, 2015, 08:17:17 PM |
|
But to decide & leave, they a) would have to be aware of an (maybe disguised) attack or manipulation and b) there must be big enough and trust-worthy alternatives available to go to.
I think most/same of you guys are clearly over-estimating & exaggerating the power and influence of the miners (in discussions with trolls and serious BTC-critical posters).
From my POV it makes real discussions unobjective.
|
|
|
|
|
SilenceOfTheLamb
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
April 03, 2015, 08:23:12 PM |
|
Who cares about miners? They have no vote and nothing to say.
Relevant are only the 3 till 5 admins/owners of the biggest mining pools. They decide.
no they don't the moment they "decide" something stupid everyone leaves the pool this is why i find it silly to say big mining pools are a threat to bitcoins decentralization pools have to act how there users what them to act or they won't use that pool, the users have all the power. The "every miner's vote counts" would be a bit more meaningful if hashpower was dispersed amongst small, private miners (cue Archie Bunker Those Were The Days). It's not--the majority is divvied up among a few megamine operators. |
|
|
|
|
|
ensurance982
|
|
April 03, 2015, 08:25:01 PM |
|
51% attacks will never happen again. They would be too expensive, and it would kill the income of the big mining pool owners.
There just has to be another pool with incredibly good conditions. Maybe even a pool that really wants to surpass the others and for some time pays out more than they actually make, in order to attract more miners. |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
