|
|
|
|
|
It is a common myth that Bitcoin is ruled by a majority of miners. This is not true. Bitcoin miners "vote" on the ordering of transactions, but that's all they do. They can't vote to change the network rules.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
GreekBitcoin
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1001
getmonero.org
|
 |
July 17, 2014, 05:03:25 PM |
|
Is this exchange known? Never heard about it. |
|
|
|
|
|
TeeBone
|
|
July 17, 2014, 05:22:57 PM |
|
Is this exchange known? Never heard about it. I asked that 10 pages ago, got no reply. They seem to be brand new, how they are getting the 2nd most volume of all exchanges is sorta strange. |
|
|
|
|
|
equipoise
|
|
July 17, 2014, 05:42:07 PM |
|
Is this exchange known? Never heard about it. I asked that 10 pages ago, got no reply. They seem to be brand new, how they are getting the 2nd most volume of all exchanges is sorta strange. As far as I know they are based in Hong Kong. I made a few deposits and withdraws few days ago and it worked for me. |
|
|
|
|
rramires
|
|
July 17, 2014, 05:57:58 PM |
|
Hello, I am new to Monero. I wonder two things: 1 - It is normal to consume so much memory:  I called the "start_mining 6" command by simplewallet 2 - If I want to develop a client for Monero, just make a call RPC over port 1881? Where can I find some documentation about this, with the parameters? I'm developer and thought about using Flex / AIR and think it's pretty easy to make an interface because it is cross platform and easy to make the location for many languages and easy installers. If only make RPC calls to core. Thanks |
|
|
|
|
dnaleor
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1000
Want privacy? Use Monero!
|
|
July 17, 2014, 06:01:45 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
celestio
|
|
July 17, 2014, 06:04:29 PM |
|
|
"The nature of Bitcoin is such that once version 0.1 was released, the core design was set in stone for the rest of its lifetime" - Satoshi Nakamoto, June 17, 2010
|
|
|
|
Primitive
|
|
July 17, 2014, 07:10:08 PM |
|
Polionex updates their logo and XMR takes off. Coincidence?
|
NEM, LSK, STRAT
|
|
|
|
TeeBone
|
|
July 17, 2014, 07:17:18 PM |
|
Indeed. When i first heard about btc years ago, the supposed 'anonymity' is what drew me in. Now that it's pretty much known that there's no privacy at all (in fact the opposite) without jumping through massive hoops, i really have no use for it (besides speculation/trading). It's just a matter of time that btc gets co-opted by the State, you already see on this forum the sheep jumping for joy over the Lawsky proposal. |
|
|
|
|
btell
Member
Offline
Activity: 119
Merit: 10
|
|
July 17, 2014, 07:32:52 PM |
|
Indeed. When i first heard about btc years ago, the supposed 'anonymity' is what drew me in. Now that it's pretty much known that there's no privacy at all (in fact the opposite) without jumping through massive hoops, i really have no use for it (besides speculation/trading). It's just a matter of time that btc gets co-opted by the State, you already see on this forum the sheep jumping for joy over the Lawsky proposal. What do you want to say? Conclusion? " The new rules would be required for Bitcoin exchanges and for companies that secure, store or maintain custody or control of the virtual currency on behalf of customers. Merchants that accept Bitcoin for payment, like Overstock.com, would not need to apply for a license. " http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/07/17/lawsky-proposes-first-state-regulations-for-bitcoin/So as I've understood, this is not a threat to BTC, because main opportunity for BTC's economics is not speculation/trading, but free right to sell goods, accepting BTC, without lisence. |
|
|
|
|
|
darkota
|
|
July 17, 2014, 07:43:01 PM |
|
Indeed. When i first heard about btc years ago, the supposed 'anonymity' is what drew me in. Now that it's pretty much known that there's no privacy at all (in fact the opposite) without jumping through massive hoops, i really have no use for it (besides speculation/trading). It's just a matter of time that btc gets co-opted by the State, you already see on this forum the sheep jumping for joy over the Lawsky proposal. What do you want to say? Conclusion? " The new rules would be required for Bitcoin exchanges and for companies that secure, store or maintain custody or control of the virtual currency on behalf of customers. Merchants that accept Bitcoin for payment, like Overstock.com, would not need to apply for a license. " http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/07/17/lawsky-proposes-first-state-regulations-for-bitcoin/So as I've understood, this is not a threat to BTC, because main opportunity for BTC's economics is not speculation/trading, but free right to sell goods, accepting BTC, without lisence.  The new laws states that you will need to keep track of everyone's identities tied to an address if they are using Bitcoin, therefore abolishing Bitcoin's "anonymity"....It is a huge threat to BTC. |
|
|
|
|
macsga
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1002
Strange, yet attractive.
|
|
July 17, 2014, 07:47:56 PM |
|
The new laws states that you will need to keep track of everyone's identities tied to an address if they are using Bitcoin, therefore abolishing Bitcoin's "anonymity"....It is a huge threat to BTC.
Bitcoin was NEVER anonymous. Transactions happen ONLINE. Enough said. |
Chaos could be a form of intelligence we cannot yet understand its complexity.
|
|
|
|
darkota
|
|
July 17, 2014, 07:59:07 PM |
|
The new laws states that you will need to keep track of everyone's identities tied to an address if they are using Bitcoin, therefore abolishing Bitcoin's "anonymity"....It is a huge threat to BTC.
Bitcoin was NEVER anonymous. Transactions happen ONLINE. Enough said. I know, thats why I used quotations marked around anonymity. With those new laws coming in place at the end of 2014 however, Bitcoin wont be any less private than using Paypal or something, in fact itll actually be less private than that, since everyone would be able to see your transactions. |
|
|
|
|
|
David Latapie
|
|
July 17, 2014, 08:03:32 PM |
|
I doubt that we see prices north from 0.01 in this rally, that said I guess we never see <0,0025 again. Same here. |
|
|
|
btell
Member
Offline
Activity: 119
Merit: 10
|
|
July 17, 2014, 08:17:17 PM |
|
" The new rules would be required for Bitcoin exchanges and for companies that secure, store or maintain custody or control of the virtual currency on behalf of customers. Merchants that accept Bitcoin for payment, like Overstock.com, would not need to apply for a license. " http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/07/17/lawsky-proposes-first-state-regulations-for-bitcoin/So as I've understood, this is not a threat to BTC, because main opportunity for BTC's economics is not speculation/trading, but free right to sell goods, accepting BTC, without lisence. The new laws states that you will need to keep track of everyone's identities tied to an address if they are using Bitcoin, therefore abolishing Bitcoin's "anonymity"....It is a huge threat to BTC. Can you please prove by a web link, that "you will need to keep track of everyone's identities tied to an address if they are using Bitcoin"? |
|
|
|
|
aminorex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1029
Sine secretum non libertas
|
|
July 17, 2014, 08:23:35 PM |
|
" The new rules would be required for Bitcoin exchanges and for companies that secure, store or maintain custody or control of the virtual currency on behalf of customers. Merchants that accept Bitcoin for payment, like Overstock.com, would not need to apply for a license. " http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/07/17/lawsky-proposes-first-state-regulations-for-bitcoin/So as I've understood, this is not a threat to BTC, because main opportunity for BTC's economics is not speculation/trading, but free right to sell goods, accepting BTC, without lisence. The new laws states that you will need to keep track of everyone's identities tied to an address if they are using Bitcoin, therefore abolishing Bitcoin's "anonymity"....It is a huge threat to BTC. Can you please prove by a web link, that "you will need to keep track of everyone's identities tied to an address if they are using Bitcoin"? Please observe that the regulations are only applicable to the State of New York. |
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a Poisson distribution and he eats at random times independent of one another, at a constant known rate.
|
|
|
|
otila
|
|
July 17, 2014, 08:24:57 PM |
|
Is this exchange known? Never heard about it. I asked that 10 pages ago, got no reply. They seem to be brand new, how they are getting the 2nd most volume of all exchanges is sorta strange. Their certificate was issued a week ago, everything is as anonymous as possible, and "volume" can be faked, too. I wouldn't trust many satoshis for them right now. |
|
|
|
|
|
hitbtc
|
|
July 17, 2014, 08:45:41 PM |
|
Hey everyone! We seem to get much more deals in Monero recently, and a lot of that must’ve come from you. We wanted to thank you for placing your invaluable trust in our exchange and for the volume you’ve creating. It’s a win-win situation for everyone involved, as the resulting liquidity helps both us and the traders to keep carrying on. We hope it will all go uphill from here! With sincere gratitude, the Hitbtc team.  |
|
|
|
nioc
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1624
Merit: 1008
|
|
July 17, 2014, 09:00:33 PM |
|
" The new rules would be required for Bitcoin exchanges and for companies that secure, store or maintain custody or control of the virtual currency on behalf of customers. Merchants that accept Bitcoin for payment, like Overstock.com, would not need to apply for a license. " http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/07/17/lawsky-proposes-first-state-regulations-for-bitcoin/So as I've understood, this is not a threat to BTC, because main opportunity for BTC's economics is not speculation/trading, but free right to sell goods, accepting BTC, without lisence. The new laws states that you will need to keep track of everyone's identities tied to an address if they are using Bitcoin, therefore abolishing Bitcoin's "anonymity"....It is a huge threat to BTC. Can you please prove by a web link, that "you will need to keep track of everyone's identities tied to an address if they are using Bitcoin"? Please observe that the regulations are only applicable to the State of New York. Somebody has to be first.  |
|
|
|
|
|
