justusranvier
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
|
|
April 24, 2015, 08:17:12 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
molecular
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
|
|
April 24, 2015, 08:37:12 PM |
|
cool! (at least the parts I understood)"payment code" sounds much less threatening than "stealth address", too. found a typo: Alice serializes her payment code as a 65 byte number as a 65 byte number:
I especially like the "possiblity of refund" feature.
|
PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0 3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
|
|
|
justusranvier
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
|
|
April 25, 2015, 12:24:58 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
solex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1006
100 satoshis -> ISO code
|
|
April 25, 2015, 08:02:46 AM Last edit: April 27, 2015, 03:22:20 AM by solex |
|
Apropos of Cypherdoc's poll, I am posting a copy of my recent OP on the subject. This software problem has been my No.1 worry about Bitcoin's future for over 2 years now... Introducing the 1MBCON Advisory System which gives a quick overview of the risk conditions against timely transaction confirmations into the blockchain. The debate has been thorough and extensive. Now the status of the risk needs to be tracked: average size of 1000 blocks (7 days) as a percentage of 1MBEnd of Q1, 2015
|
|
|
|
hdbuck
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1002
|
|
April 25, 2015, 10:06:18 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
April 25, 2015, 02:52:10 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
April 25, 2015, 02:56:30 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
NotHatinJustTrollin
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 462
Merit: 107
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
|
|
April 25, 2015, 02:59:22 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
justusranvier
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
|
|
April 25, 2015, 03:04:42 PM |
|
Effectively LTC has returned to the price where it initially started trading against BTC back in the summer of 2013.
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
April 25, 2015, 03:40:07 PM |
|
Effectively LTC has returned to the price where it initially started trading against BTC back in the summer of 2013. yes, LTC is not effective.
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
April 25, 2015, 05:57:07 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
April 25, 2015, 07:06:14 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
molecular
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
|
|
April 25, 2015, 08:08:05 PM |
|
chart linked by NotHatinJustTrollin: hm, that's interesting. So USD tx volume is roughly stable but number of transactions skyrockets. This means the average amount of a tx is going down. Any rationale for this?
|
PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0 3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
|
|
|
Dragonkiller
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Super Smash Bros. Ultimate Available Now!
|
|
April 25, 2015, 08:16:17 PM |
|
It just corresponds to the fall in the USD price of BTC.
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
April 25, 2015, 08:18:48 PM |
|
chart linked by NotHatinJustTrollin: hm, that's interesting. So USD tx volume is roughly stable but number of transactions skyrockets. This means the average amount of a tx is going down. Any rationale for this? i think it was Bitpay that explained that Bitcoin is continuing to evolve as a payment network (routine everyday tx's). i would also add that it probably also means more everyday tx's happening overseas in developing countries.
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
April 25, 2015, 11:22:56 PM Last edit: April 26, 2015, 03:42:22 AM by smooth |
|
One theory might be that many of the transactions are tied in some way (perhaps indirectly) to mining. Thus they are denominated in BTC and in economic magnitude, tied to the mining output (which is a fixed rate in BTC). This could include mined coins making their way to and through exchanges to investors.
Another would be that much of the activity is tied to altcoin speculation (essentially a form of gambling) or expicit BTC-denominated gambling. That would tend to rise and fall with overall BTC wealth.
|
|
|
|
justusranvier
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
|
|
April 25, 2015, 11:24:20 PM |
|
hm, that's interesting. So USD tx volume is roughly stable but number of transactions skyrockets. This means the average amount of a tx is going down.
Any rationale for this? Number of transactions is an objective number that's easy to measure. There's more uncertainty about USD volume, since there's no way to be 100% sure which output in a transaction is a spend and which one is change.
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
April 25, 2015, 11:25:05 PM |
|
hm, that's interesting. So USD tx volume is roughly stable but number of transactions skyrockets. This means the average amount of a tx is going down.
Any rationale for this? Number of transactions is an objective number that's easy to measure. There's more uncertainty about USD volume, since there's no way to be 100% sure which output in a transaction is a spend and which one is change. Is there a reason to expect this error to change over time?
|
|
|
|
justusranvier
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
|
|
April 25, 2015, 11:27:00 PM |
|
Something I don't think I've explained very well yet is that the payment code proposal provides the missing "from address" that everybody wants, in a way that doesn't compromise privacy. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/From_address
|
|
|
|
|