Bitcoin Forum
February 28, 2021, 04:51:34 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: When $60K? (EST time zone)
Feb. 21 - 7 (5.7%)
Feb. 22 - 19 (15.6%)
Feb. 23 - 13 (10.7%)
Feb. 24 - 9 (7.4%)
Feb. 25 - 8 (6.6%)
Feb. 26 - 9 (7.4%)
Feb. 27 - 3 (2.5%)
Feb. 28 - 4 (3.3%)
March - 28 (23%)
After March - 14 (11.5%)
Never - 8 (6.6%)
Total Voters: 122

Pages: « 1 ... 15110 15111 15112 15113 15114 15115 15116 15117 15118 15119 15120 15121 15122 15123 15124 15125 15126 15127 15128 15129 15130 15131 15132 15133 15134 15135 15136 15137 15138 15139 15140 15141 15142 15143 15144 15145 15146 15147 15148 15149 15150 15151 15152 15153 15154 15155 15156 15157 15158 15159 [15160] 15161 15162 15163 15164 15165 15166 15167 15168 15169 15170 15171 15172 15173 15174 15175 15176 15177 15178 15179 15180 15181 15182 15183 15184 15185 15186 15187 15188 15189 15190 15191 15192 15193 15194 15195 15196 15197 15198 15199 15200 15201 15202 15203 15204 15205 15206 15207 15208 15209 15210 ... 28341 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 25183516 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (157 posts by 13 users deleted.)
lyth0s
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


World Class Cryptonaire


View Profile
April 13, 2016, 07:04:25 PM

I sent a friend 2BTC last night from my core wallet, and used 0.001 fee ( so around 50 cents), stupid transaction took 8 hours ( not to be confirmed, just to appear at all). Funny thing is, he sent me money via internet banking at the same time, and it arrived inside 2 hours!

Something is not working the way it is supposed to!

An unlikely claim. Please post the transaction ID.

Honestly curious how that will give you any info? I was getting pretty worried, so i kept checking the transaction ID on blockchain.info, and it kept saying not a transaction. Once the coins appeared unconfirmed only then did blockchain.info recognise my the transaction ID?

The only other thing i could think it might be was my core wallet was not completely up to date ( ie I had not downloaded all the blocks because i was on a metered connection, and didnt want to waste bandwidth, so i just opened core, waited till i had a connection to network, then sent). The coins showed as sent, there was a transaction Id, but not record of it anywhere for hours)

So do you have a transaction ID or just an excuse? No transaction ID = no further discussion of your unlikely claim (aka lie) on my part.
1614531094
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1614531094

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1614531094
Reply with quote  #2

1614531094
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1614531094
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1614531094

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1614531094
Reply with quote  #2

1614531094
Report to moderator
alesx.onfire
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 966
Merit: 1000


It's Not Enough


View Profile
April 13, 2016, 07:17:59 PM

the price is so stable... finally BTC is working like a currency
Gyrsur
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 1434



View Profile
April 13, 2016, 07:19:05 PM

the price is so stable... finally BTC is working like a currency

this is the end! damn! we reached the goal.
alhallaj.onion
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4
Merit: 0


View Profile
April 13, 2016, 07:39:34 PM

I sent a friend 2BTC last night from my core wallet, and used 0.001 fee ( so around 50 cents), stupid transaction took 8 hours ( not to be confirmed, just to appear at all). Funny thing is, he sent me money via internet banking at the same time, and it arrived inside 2 hours!

Something is not working the way it is supposed to!

An unlikely claim. Please post the transaction ID.

Honestly curious how that will give you any info? I was getting pretty worried, so i kept checking the transaction ID on blockchain.info, and it kept saying not a transaction. Once the coins appeared unconfirmed only then did blockchain.info recognise my the transaction ID?

The only other thing i could think it might be was my core wallet was not completely up to date ( ie I had not downloaded all the blocks because i was on a metered connection, and didnt want to waste bandwidth, so i just opened core, waited till i had a connection to network, then sent). The coins showed as sent, there was a transaction Id, but not record of it anywhere for hours)

So do you have a transaction ID or just an excuse? No transaction ID = no further discussion of your unlikely claim (aka lie) on my part.

Just ignore the lying government shill, lyth0s. Bitcoin's working just fine.
BayAreaCoins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2800
Merit: 1181


FreeBitcoins.com Secretary and Customer Support


View Profile WWW
April 13, 2016, 08:13:08 PM

Figured we might get a little price pump from people buying shit for their 4/20 parties.
Meuh6879
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1010



View Profile
April 13, 2016, 08:29:21 PM

the price is so stable... finally BTC is working like a currency

Are we rich now ?

r0ach
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 13, 2016, 09:25:34 PM

i'm on the fence. at first i thought it was marvalous, then i found out more about it and realized it isn't magical, sure we'll get a effective block size incress, but only because we are changing how we calculate block size. it feels like i'm being fed BS twisted truths, to make me expect a massive change that will forever complicate bitcoin's code.

Segwit is needed to make SPV clients more secure.  The Satoshi promise of viable SPV is vaporware without it.  Whether you want small or big blocks, you need it either way:

Quote
Fraud proofs: the Completion of Satoshi's Vision for SPV

We're not done yet. Segregated Witness could also introduce something called fraud proofs. Originally envisioned by Satoshi Nakamoto, fraud proofs could significantly improve the security of SPV-nodes (or: “light wallets”); Bitcoin nodes that do not verify all transactions on the network or store the complete blockchain.

To check whether a transaction has taken place, SPV-nodes merely scan the blockchain for the relevant transaction ID. If they find it, that means a miner included the transaction in a block. But SPV-nodes do not validate whether the transaction adhered to Bitcoin’s consensus rules. As such, SPV-nodes trust miners to play fair, rather than verify they do. In a worst case scenario, this could even mean that miners pay SPV-nodes with bitcoin created out of nothing, for instance by creating transactions with no inputs, or by awarding themselves excess fees in the coinbase transaction.

These types of problems could be solved by requiring miners to include extra data in the Segregated Witness Merkle Tree, specifying where the bitcoin locked up in all transactions came from, exactly. That way, if a block contains invalid transactions, a short and easy-to-check fraud proof can be constructed by any full node. This full node can send the fraud proof to SPV-nodes, so they know to reject the block.

That said, even with fraud proofs, SPV-nodes would not quite offer the same level of security as full nodes. Most importantly, the fraud proof solution requires that SPV-nodes can communicate with the network free from censorship. (For instance: censorship from government-sanctioned ISPs.) Additionally, SPV-nodes need at least one full node on the network to actually produce the fraud proofs.
eiskalt
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 13, 2016, 09:28:48 PM

If bitcoin price is stable for longer, people need to pump altcoins to make profits. - right?

r0ach
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 13, 2016, 09:31:15 PM

And anytime BillyJoeAllen posts about a supposed "block size armageddon", all you need to do is post this as reply:

It doesn't matter what % of blocks are full you stupid fucks.  All that matters is what the average transaction fee is.  Since there is no minimum transaction fee, the blocks are basically designed to be full at all times eventually even if you set it to 100MB blocks.  Segwit + hard fork in 2017 = 3.2MB blocks.  Then schnorr multisig on top of that should lower transaction sizes and increase TPS further.
Dilla
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 500


View Profile
April 13, 2016, 09:35:56 PM

yep^

 i hate fudsters who have no idea what they are talking about,
inca
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 13, 2016, 10:36:01 PM

And anytime BillyJoeAllen posts about a supposed "block size armageddon", all you need to do is post this as reply:

It doesn't matter what % of blocks are full you stupid fucks.  All that matters is what the average transaction fee is.  Since there is no minimum transaction fee, the blocks are basically designed to be full at all times eventually even if you set it to 100MB blocks.  Segwit + hard fork in 2017 = 3.2MB blocks.  Then schnorr multisig on top of that should lower transaction sizes and increase TPS further.

IQ's dropped sharply round here it seems. Anyone suggesting blocks being full is not a problem and those raising it are 'stupid fucks' is being naive in the extreme. Focusing on the transaction fee is absolutely irrelevant. If my transaction won't confirm because transaction fees have risen by 2c from my last transaction - due to full blocks and rising network demand - stating the transaction fee average is low isn't much use to me because bitcoin isn't working as a payment system.

For bitcoin to succeed as a base payment ledger for the internet it needs to be functional and work for end users. You know, the guys who actually give it value. There is a lot of melodrama in this debate. But the minute bitcoin becomes persistently unreliable as a payment network with no realistic proposition of resolution and alternative chains or payment media which do not suffer the same problems, then it's market cap will take a dive of epic proportions.
billyjoeallen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106
Merit: 1006


Hide your women


View Profile WWW
April 13, 2016, 11:16:25 PM

And anytime BillyJoeAllen posts about a supposed "block size armageddon", all you need to do is post this as reply:

It doesn't matter what % of blocks are full you stupid fucks.  All that matters is what the average transaction fee is.  Since there is no minimum transaction fee, the blocks are basically designed to be full at all times eventually even if you set it to 100MB blocks.  Segwit + hard fork in 2017 = 3.2MB blocks.  Then schnorr multisig on top of that should lower transaction sizes and increase TPS further.

It's easier to cause a network disruption if the network is already operating at maximum capacity. This is similar to the ease of creating a traffic jam during rush hour as opposed to another time. Fees will rise rapidly and chaotically if a spammer fills blocks. A prolonged attack will very likely cause the price to drop and allow the attacker to more than recover the fees by shorting. 

It's only a matter of time before this happens again.
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3472
Merit: 1634



View Profile
April 14, 2016, 12:19:09 AM

6
Wings1987
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 418
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 14, 2016, 12:28:58 AM

It has been a long time since I have posted. Coming back and seeing nothing but block size debate is frustrating.

What is everyone's take on this interview with Trace Mayer? He certainly has strong opinions but hearing his podcast interviews with some of the core devs has given me a different outlook on the issue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aV_5GonmRzU
r0ach
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 14, 2016, 12:55:31 AM

And anytime BillyJoeAllen posts about a supposed "block size armageddon", all you need to do is post this as reply:

It doesn't matter what % of blocks are full you stupid fucks.  All that matters is what the average transaction fee is.  Since there is no minimum transaction fee, the blocks are basically designed to be full at all times eventually even if you set it to 100MB blocks.  Segwit + hard fork in 2017 = 3.2MB blocks.  Then schnorr multisig on top of that should lower transaction sizes and increase TPS further.

It's easier to cause a network disruption if the network is already operating at maximum capacity. This is similar to the ease of creating a traffic jam during rush hour as opposed to another time. Fees will rise rapidly and chaotically if a spammer fills blocks. A prolonged attack will very likely cause the price to drop and allow the attacker to more than recover the fees by shorting.  

It's only a matter of time before this happens again.

Your post makes 0 sense because it implies just increase block size forever until it's able to handle all microtransactions on the planet.  Bitcoin can only function as a checkbook type device for large transactions at best, or as a clearing network at worst.  My personal estimates that I've researched to be able to accomplish this checkbook feat (as in cars, boats, houses, expensive but mainstream things that are several thousand in value) is around 8-10MB blocks (and we're talking trillions in market cap here).  3.2MB (what will be implemented in 2017) is starting to get close, so there's no reason to be dramatic and stupid about things.  After block size doubles from that 3.2MB point, most of the glass ceiling on price will be gone.

marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3472
Merit: 1634



View Profile
April 14, 2016, 01:49:53 AM

Gearing up for 4/20 yet?

Why pot shops in the U.S. will soon set sales records

Quote
...that kind of celebratory atmosphere gets everyone in the industry jazzed.
BayAreaCoins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2800
Merit: 1181


FreeBitcoins.com Secretary and Customer Support


View Profile WWW
April 14, 2016, 01:54:45 AM

Gearing up for 4/20 yet?

Why pot shops in the U.S. will soon set sales records

Quote
...that kind of celebratory atmosphere gets everyone in the industry jazzed.

That's kinda what I was expecting.

At least a rise about $430-$450 I'd bet.

We are a week away.  

www.Grasscity.com accepts Bitcoin (pipes and such) - http://www.worldwide-marijuana-seeds.com/ accepts Bitcoin (great seed company) - then a number of Tor browser markets accept Bitcoin as well (we all know this one)
Mrpumperitis
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1075


View Profile
April 14, 2016, 02:01:46 AM

http://cointelegraph.com/news/uk-regulators-declare-start-of-beautiful-friendship-with-bitcoin-ethereum
The United Kingdom is widely recognized as the most welcoming regulatory environment for Fintech companies.  Shocked


A bit more cheerful than Russia then. They've really got to get some banks to play though. Hopefully Fidor are going to do something but they may well be frozen out by the biggies.
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-payments-company-circle-scores-partnership-with-barclays-and-e-money-license-for-uk-expansion-1460126860
Bitcoin Payments Company Circle Scores Partnership With Barclays and E-Money License for UK Expansion
“Bitcoin Bank” Circle announced that people in the U.K. can now experience social payments over the open Internet in their native currency, pound sterling (GBP), using Circle’s updated apps for Android, iOS and the Web. The company was granted an e-money license by the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority.
 make GBP payments instantly, with zero fees  Shocked
Circle also announced that it’s eliminating transaction and withdrawal limits for customers in all of the 150+ countries where Circle is available. Shocked
According to The New York Times, this is the first time that a large global bank has agreed to work with a Bitcoin company.  Shocked
lol
r0ach
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 14, 2016, 02:02:02 AM

www.Grasscity.com accepts Bitcoin (pipes and such) - http://www.worldwide-marijuana-seeds.com/ accepts Bitcoin (great seed company) - then a number of Tor browser markets accept Bitcoin as well (we all know this one)

Contrary to popular belief, not everyone uses Bitcoin to buy crack on the internet.  There are many reputable, upstanding day traders and financial speculators too.
BayAreaCoins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2800
Merit: 1181


FreeBitcoins.com Secretary and Customer Support


View Profile WWW
April 14, 2016, 02:09:51 AM

www.Grasscity.com accepts Bitcoin (pipes and such) - http://www.worldwide-marijuana-seeds.com/ accepts Bitcoin (great seed company) - then a number of Tor browser markets accept Bitcoin as well (we all know this one)

Contrary to popular belief, not everyone uses Bitcoin to buy crack on the internet.  There are many reputable, upstanding day traders and financial speculators too.

You buy crack from the homeboy on the corner.  Roll Eyes

And plenty of people use Bitcoins for pipes, seeds and other pot products.

Enough people use BTC for pot related shit that I imagine we see the buyers out weigh the sellers this upcoming week.
Pages: « 1 ... 15110 15111 15112 15113 15114 15115 15116 15117 15118 15119 15120 15121 15122 15123 15124 15125 15126 15127 15128 15129 15130 15131 15132 15133 15134 15135 15136 15137 15138 15139 15140 15141 15142 15143 15144 15145 15146 15147 15148 15149 15150 15151 15152 15153 15154 15155 15156 15157 15158 15159 [15160] 15161 15162 15163 15164 15165 15166 15167 15168 15169 15170 15171 15172 15173 15174 15175 15176 15177 15178 15179 15180 15181 15182 15183 15184 15185 15186 15187 15188 15189 15190 15191 15192 15193 15194 15195 15196 15197 15198 15199 15200 15201 15202 15203 15204 15205 15206 15207 15208 15209 15210 ... 28341 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!