http://bit.ly/2rWyBox via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2qDvm1G
Wednesday, 31 May 2017
BTCChina resumes withdraw
daily limit 20btc. I applied and was approved within 20min. yay via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2qCPSU5
BIP 148 / UASF needs miners - here's what you can do
ckpool.org is a new pool with SPLNS shared payout structure.Ck the renown pool operator has said on bitcointalk.org, if we can get a couple Petahash worth he will convert it to a BIP 148 pool.This is how you - the "U" in UASF - do your part: fire up your miners, obsolete or not, and aim them at this pool.A snowball can create an avalanche folks. With a couple Petahash the wait time on payout won't be too bad either.O, did I mention the pool fee is the LOWEST in the industry??? via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rmn5A6
Lowest fee shared payout pool - ckpool.org
Ckpool.org has the lowest pool fee at 0.5%
It is relatively new and needs more TH to get more frequent payouts.
Come join us!!
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 08:38AM by MuKKMan http://bit.ly/2rGsuoS
COOP: "I humbly ask that Jeff Garzik, Barry Silbert, Mike Belshe, and all of the other wonderful, intelligent collaborators on this project step forward and support the cooperative, compatibility-oriented approach of the Omnibus Proposal."
http://bit.ly/2rFcZ0u
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 11:54PM by bullwhale http://bit.ly/2seqkcW
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 11:54PM by bullwhale http://bit.ly/2seqkcW
UPC/PDU setup for 4x S9
Interested in learning about the optimal power set up for running 4 S9 miners. I am on 2 x 25amp circuits 240v single phase power @ 0.07/kWh
Goal is consistent output average of ~11.5T/worker.
(While desperate attempts to even well hidden redirects to affiliate marketing calculators are always appreciated, save yourself the embarrassment and post a selfie with cheeks spread, a smile and Pii instead)
Peace
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 06:21AM by Saulteeknuts http://bit.ly/2rG7dvz
Bitcoin is going mainstream in India...
https://twitter.com/sunnystartups/status/869903056409956352
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 10:22PM by sunnystartups http://bit.ly/2rV3f1B
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 10:22PM by sunnystartups http://bit.ly/2rV3f1B
Why is killing asicboost not a priority?
It seems to me that asicboost is blocking segwit more than anything else.
IMO killing asicboost is RIDICULOUSLY IMPORTANT to bitcoin. Empty blocks do not help secure the chain. The race should be to find a block and stuff it with transactions.
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 01:53AM by vrtrasura http://bit.ly/2rc4rg8
"UASFers are playing chicken to win and they just threw their steering wheels out of the window and cut their brake lines. You might not agree with them but their actions will effect you."
from u/stormsbrewing in another thread.I like the quote. It deserves it's own thread!It pretty much sums up, whats happening! Miners, activate segwit via BIP9 or Jeff, merge BIP91 into segwit2x before it's to late!Otherwise the BIP148 train will run you over!I'd very much prefer one of the former! So get moving! via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2sfbK51
How much network bandwidth does mining consume ?
On a monthly basis how much internet traffic would a small mining rig be expected to use ?
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 05:17AM by Fen-Jai http://bit.ly/2rVxFRA
The bitcoin will be the fourth Industrial Revolution ?
http://bit.ly/2rqneF2
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 05:53AM by AQBAYLI http://bit.ly/2soA0RE
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 05:53AM by AQBAYLI http://bit.ly/2soA0RE
Firmware Issues
I was hoping someone had the firmware to the Spondoolie S20. I've gotten one cheap but it doesn't have the firmware loaded with an SD card. If any one has an idea or link i would really appreciate it.
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 04:24AM by devastator12154 http://bit.ly/2rleWvW
ATM Manufacturers Might Turn to Bitcoin
http://bit.ly/2rlhgmu
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 04:29AM by coincrypto http://bit.ly/2qBPDIM
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 04:29AM by coincrypto http://bit.ly/2qBPDIM
Some comments on the BIP148 UASF from the bitcoin-dev meeting
- sipa - my opinion is that it would go against our principles to merge BIP148 into core
- jtimon - as said on the mailing list I think bip148 is rushed and that makes it risky
- gmaxwell - luke-jr: I haven't seen the kind of support required to justify your position on that; afaict so far no exchange or payment processor of note has said they would stick with 148. I think you'd have an argument if there was any of that, but right now I think it's hard to distinguish a subsanstive level of support. (And I've seen some clearly malicious parties pumping support for it too.)
- morcos - At the end of the day I think most of us have no interest in greatly increasing the risk of a devastating currency split. I think 148 does that..
- gmaxwell - luke-jr: there is a big difference between saying 'businesses get to decide' and saying that the fact that virtually no industry participant is resolute with 148 is a strong sign the support isn't significant enough.
- jonasschnelli - You can't measure "community"
- sipa - luke-jr: ... my expectation is that every economically relevant full node will revert away from bip148 code hours after the hashrate fails to adopts it
- gmaxwell - I think it's (148) a very poor and needlessly risky approach.
- sipa - luke-jr: i think you're insane
- paveljanik - luke-jr, in reality, it can even be much worse. People could signal UASF but not enforce it.
- luke-jr - great, now we get ad hominems as argument
- sipa - luke-jr: apologies for the ad hominem... but i believe your argument it nonsense
- BlueMatt - luke-jr: would you like me to buy you a plane ticket so you can talk to people?
- BlueMatt - I'd be happy to.. you spend too much time on reddit and not talking to real people, I think
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 10:14PM by CoinCadence http://bit.ly/2roHU05
Why is killing asicboost not a priority?
It seems to me that asicboost is blocking segwit more than anything else.IMO killing asicboost is RIDICULOUSLY IMPORTANT to bitcoin. Empty blocks do not help secure the chain. The race should be to find a block and stuff it with transactions. via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rc4rg8
I asked a hooker if she accepted Bitcoin.
She told me no because it goes up and down more than she does.
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 06:24PM by Naagpoint http://bit.ly/2rEntgx
Current CNBC poll: What would you buy for $1,000
http://bit.ly/2rpciHH
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 10:15PM by CoinCadence http://bit.ly/2snaVXb
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 10:15PM by CoinCadence http://bit.ly/2snaVXb
India Could Legalize Bitcoin Next As Public Calls for Regulation
http://bit.ly/2snglS0 via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2roYPj8
Cryp trade capital : real or fake program ?
http://bit.ly/2rc044G
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 02:41AM by AQBAYLI http://bit.ly/2qH7edG
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 02:41AM by AQBAYLI http://bit.ly/2qH7edG
What miner should I buy?
I am new to bitcoin mining and would like to start right. From what I have read on this sub, in order to have a chance at being profitable, I need to buy dedicated mining hardware (perferably asci). I am in the lower price range.
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 02:54AM by I_am_3d http://bit.ly/2seyAtx
HOW TO START MINING?
I've got some server boxes, GPUS, etc. and I wanna mine some bitcoin instead of running game servers and whatnot. I don't really care much about profit; like any good nerd we do it for fun! HOW DOES ONE BEGIN?
I've tried to read through posts, but most of it is all talk! A lot of 'google it' or 'go read that thing' or 'don't bother unless you're in China' and not very much of 'download this distro' or 'compile these packages' and certainly no 'try out these tools for maximizing hardware utilization and hashrate'. Even the sidebar is mostly cautionary tales, or very specific information and discussions that are only relevant if you're already doing all the things.
Anyone able to provide less coffeeshop banter, and more technical expertise?
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 02:37AM by AlexanderGlasco http://bit.ly/2rc6O2h
BitMinter pool is now signalling SegWit as well!
http://bit.ly/2egKWLU via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rbMI8k
A reminder of the main advantages of SegWit
As a reminder, the reason to support SegWit is because it is clearly the best blocksize limit increase proposal, based on technical merit, not because of who proposed it.
SegWit is the fastest and least disruptive onchain capacity increase proposed
-
SegWit will result in an effective onchain capacity increase of c110%, current Bitcoin fees are skyrocketing and a capacity increase is now desperately needed. The methodology used to increase capacity is literally increasing the amount of data per block, so that it is higher than the current 1MB limit. Contrary to some of the misinformation going around, SegWit does not increase capacity by improving efficiency, the only way capacity improves is by increasing the blocksize.
-
SegWit is a faster onchain capacity increase than all other blocksize limit increase proposals. Some may argue that SegWit is slower than a “simple hardfork to 2MB blocks”, but this assumes a faster user upgrade to the “simple 2MB hardfork” client than for the SegWit client, this is a spurious comparison. On a like for like basis (for any given level of user upgrades), SegWit is a faster and larger capacity increase than a "simple hardfork to 2MB".
-
SegWit can provide individual users an almost instant 80% fee reduction, after activation, even if no other wallets upgrade. After SegWit activates, a single user can upgrade to SegWit and their wallet will automatically segregate the witness in their own transactions, no matter what other users do, this will result in 80% lower fees, assuming all else remains equal. This almost instant benefit, is far superior to any other capacity increase proposal.
-
With SegWit, upgraded wallets and non upgraded wallets can seamlessly transact with each other, unlike almost all other blocksize limit increase proposals
-
If 51% of miners support SegWit, we will avoid a chainsplit and the creation of a new coin, unlike almost all other blocksize limit increase proposals.
Third party transaction malleability fixes
- Unfortunately due to a bug in Bitcoin, when users send a transaction, anyone on the network can change the transaction ID, which could be the transaction that ends up getting confirmed in the blockchain. This means that if a user receives a Bitcoin transaction, it is often not reliable or safe to forward these funds on to somebody else, before the incoming transaction receives a confirmation. This is a huge problem for the user experience and sometimes results in users waiting around for confirmations, which can take longer nowadays due to full blocks. SegWit fixes this bug, allowing users to send transactions without exposing themselves to this risk. Additional advantages of this fix is that it makes implementing wallet software far easier and makes implementing payment channel technologies like the Lighting Network easier.
Fixing the quadratic scaling of sighash operations bug, making a further bocksize limit increase both safer and more likley
- Unfortunately, due to another bug in Bitcoin, as transactions gets larger, the amount of hashing required to verify the signatures increases in a quadratic way. For example doubling the size of a transaction can increase the verification time by a factor of 4. SegWit fixes this bug by allowing users to create transactions with linear scaling of sighash operations. Many people in the community oppose a “simple hardfork to 2MB” on the grounds that this could open up an attack vector, where a would be attacker could exploit this bug and produce hard to validate blocks. Fixing this bug therefore makes a further blockszie limit increase after SegWit both safer and more likely.
Signing of input values, making Bitcoin easier for hardware devices
- SegWit allows users to create transactions where the input value is hashed. This means hardware wallets can spend a transaction without needing a copy of all the input transactions and needing to hash these inputs. This makes hardware wallets much easier to develop and it makes it easier to use Bitcoin on smaller embedded devices
Not requiring wallets to download the signature data to check the transaction hash
- After SegWit, wallets will no longer need to check the signature data to check the transaction hash. This means light wallets can avoid downloading more of the signature data. This improves the scalability of the network and makes further blocksize limit increases safer.
Introducing script versioning makes upgrades to increase onchain capacity even further far easier
- SegWit adds a version number for scripts, this means new opcodes that would have required a hardfork, can now be added by changing the script version. For example more efficient signature schemes like Schnorr signatures can be added, which would further increase onchain capacity.
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 10:05PM by jonny1000 http://bit.ly/2smxpaW
Using Antminer to mine other coins
So I was wondering if Bitcoin miners like Antminer could be modified to mine other Alt currencies like Dash. I've been playing around with mining on my CPU and I'm looking to make an investment in building or buying a prebuilt miner. Thoughts?
Submitted June 01, 2017 at 12:55AM by ill_jefe http://bit.ly/2rp7WjN
[NiceHash] When do I need to worry about taxes?
I live in the US. Missouri to be specific. I currently have 4 GPUs running and after expenses I would estimate I profit around $15 a day. At what point do I have to report this as income? What if I simply never sold the bitcoins for USD and spent all that money on sites like Amazon? Should I just not worry about it? How profitable do you have to be to start paying taxes?
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 11:25PM by Flying_Spaghetti_ http://bit.ly/2rbfuGa
Nick Szabo on UASF
https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4/status/869643974096506881
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 08:19AM by windsok http://bit.ly/2rmsYzj
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 08:19AM by windsok http://bit.ly/2rmsYzj
OKCoin resumes withdrawals
https://twitter.com/cnledger/status/869934911179735040
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 11:18PM by jack_crypto http://bit.ly/2rEWNvX
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 11:18PM by jack_crypto http://bit.ly/2rEWNvX
Bubble or Bust? Do something, already!
http://bit.ly/2rDchk4
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 11:03AM by velacreations http://bit.ly/2scV6Da
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 11:03AM by velacreations http://bit.ly/2scV6Da
Wild Swings, Lack of Liquidity Keeping U.S. Funds Out of Bitcoin
By REUTERS via NYT Business Day http://nyti.ms/2rFcW4P
Bitcoin is going mainstream in India...
https://twitter.com/sunnystartups/status/869903056409956352 via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rV3f1B
Current CNBC poll: What would you buy for $1,000
http://bit.ly/2rpciHH via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2snaVXb
OKCoin resumes withdrawals
https://twitter.com/cnledger/status/869934911179735040 via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rEWNvX
Internet engineers did not scale up copper wires to 1 meter diameter to enable live video steaming. Scaling via block size is primitive.
https://twitter.com/bitsquare_/status/869711988850667520
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 02:41PM by DINKDINK http://bit.ly/2qA4YWx
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 02:41PM by DINKDINK http://bit.ly/2qA4YWx
Silk Road's Ulbricht Loses Bid to Void Conviction, Life Sentence
By REUTERS via NYT U.S. http://nyti.ms/2rozNjR
A reminder of the main advantages of SegWit
As a reminder, the reason to support SegWit is because it is clearly the best blocksize limit increase proposal, based on technical merit, not because of who proposed it.SegWit is the fastest and least disruptive onchain capacity increase proposedSegWit will result in an effective onchain capacity increase of c110%, current Bitcoin fees are skyrocketing and a capacity increase is now desperately needed. The methodology used to increase capacity is literally increasing the amount of data per block, so that it is higher than the current 1MB limit. Contrary to some of the misinformation going around, SegWit does not increase capacity by improving efficiency, the only way capacity improves is by increasing the blocksize.SegWit is a faster onchain capacity increase than all other blocksize limit increase proposals. Some may argue that SegWit is slower than a “simple hardfork to 2MB blocks”, but this assumes a faster user upgrade to the “simple 2MB hardfork” client than for the SegWit client, this is a spurious comparison. On a like for like basis (for any given level of user upgrades), SegWit is a faster and larger capacity increase than a "simple hardfork to 2MB".SegWit can provide individual users an almost instant 80% fee reduction, after activation, even if no other wallets upgrade. After SegWit activates, a single user can upgrade to SegWit and their wallet will automatically segregate the witness in their own transactions, no matter what other users do, this will result in 80% lower fees, assuming all else remains equal. This almost instant benefit, is far superior to any other capacity increase proposal.With SegWit, upgraded wallets and non upgraded wallets can seamlessly transact with each other, unlike almost all other blocksize limit increase proposalsIf 51% of miners support SegWit, we will avoid a chainsplit and the creation of a new coin, unlike almost all other blocksize limit increase proposals.Third party transaction malleability fixesUnfortunately due to a bug in Bitcoin, when users send a transaction, anyone on the network can change the transaction ID, which could be the transaction that ends up getting confirmed in the blockchain. This means that if a user receives a Bitcoin transaction, it is often not reliable or safe to forward these funds on to somebody else, before the incoming transaction receives a confirmation. This is a huge problem for the user experience and sometimes results in users waiting around for confirmations, which can take longer nowadays due to full blocks. SegWit fixes this bug, allowing users to send transactions without exposing themselves to this risk. Additional advantages of this fix is that it makes implementing wallet software far easier and makes implementing payment channel technologies like the Lighting Network easier.Fixing the quadratic scaling of sighash operations bug, making a further bocksize limit increase both safer and more likleyUnfortunately, due to another bug in Bitcoin, as transactions gets larger, the amount of hashing required to verify the signatures increases in a quadratic way. For example doubling the size of a transaction can increase the verification time by a factor of 4. SegWit fixes this bug by allowing users to create transactions with linear scaling of sighash operations. Many people in the community oppose a “simple hardfork to 2MB” on the grounds that this could open up an attack vector, where a would be attacker could exploit this bug and produce hard to validate blocks. Fixing this bug therefore makes a further blockszie limit increase after SegWit both safer and more likely.Signing of input values, making Bitcoin easier for hardware devicesSegWit allows users to create transactions where the input value is hashed. This means hardware wallets can spend a transaction without needing a copy of all the input transactions and needing to hash these inputs. This makes hardware wallets much easier to develop and it makes it easier to use Bitcoin on smaller embedded devicesNot requiring wallets to download the signature data to check the transaction hashAfter SegWit, wallets will no longer need to check the signature data to check the transaction hash. This means light wallets can avoid downloading more of the signature data. This improves the scalability of the network and makes further blocksize limit increases safer.Introducing script versioning makes upgrades to increase onchain capacity even further far easierSegWit adds a version number for scripts, this means new opcodes that would have required a hardfork, can now be added by changing the script version. For example more efficient signature schemes like Schnorr signatures can be added, which would further increase onchain capacity. via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2smxpaW
Some comments on the BIP148 UASF from the bitcoin-dev meeting
sipa - my opinion is that it would go against our principles to merge BIP148 into corejtimon - as said on the mailing list I think bip148 is rushed and that makes it riskygmaxwell - luke-jr: I haven't seen the kind of support required to justify your position on that; afaict so far no exchange or payment processor of note has said they would stick with 148. I think you'd have an argument if there was any of that, but right now I think it's hard to distinguish a subsanstive level of support. (And I've seen some clearly malicious parties pumping support for it too.)morcos - At the end of the day I think most of us have no interest in greatly increasing the risk of a devastating currency split. I think 148 does that..gmaxwell - luke-jr: there is a big difference between saying 'businesses get to decide' and saying that the fact that virtually no industry participant is resolute with 148 is a strong sign the support isn't significant enough.jonasschnelli - You can't measure "community"sipa - luke-jr: ... my expectation is that every economically relevant full node will revert away from bip148 code hours after the hashrate fails to adopts itgmaxwell - I think it's (148) a very poor and needlessly risky approach.sipa - luke-jr: i think you're insanepaveljanik - luke-jr, in reality, it can even be much worse. People could signal UASF but not enforce it.luke-jr - great, now we get ad hominems as argumentsipa - luke-jr: apologies for the ad hominem... but i believe your argument it nonsenseBlueMatt - luke-jr: would you like me to buy you a plane ticket so you can talk to people?BlueMatt - I'd be happy to.. you spend too much time on reddit and not talking to real people, I think via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2roHU05
I asked a hooker if she accepted Bitcoin.
She told me no because it goes up and down more than she does. via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rEntgx
Norway Police: Do Not Pay Ransom to Hackers
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS via NYT World http://nyti.ms/2rEycYm
[CNBC] Bitcoin could hit $100,000 in 10 years, says the analyst who correctly called its $2,000 price
http://cnb.cx/2rTeyra
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 01:27PM by Atlas_84 http://bit.ly/2qzEXq6
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 01:27PM by Atlas_84 http://bit.ly/2qzEXq6
Republicans Slap down the IRS for Its Coinbase Bitcoin Tax Hunt
http://bit.ly/2rb54Xe via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2qFBp4V
Bias against bitcoin
Tesla goes from $0 to $50 billion dollar maket cap, no one bats an eye.Bitcoin goes from $0 to $35 billion dollar market cap, everyone loses their minds!The reason why.With Tesla only venture capitalists and insiders get to profit from the start-up phase, and the mainstream are mostly blind to these profits. All the public see is an IPO and some "decent" profits.With bitcoin anyone and everyone gets to profit from the start-up phase and people simply cant handle seeing that. They have never seen it happen this way before and assume there is something wrong with it, even though it is completely natural.This is the first time in history anyone can profit from the start-up phase, and its not a company this time, its money itself! via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2raHBp4
bitcoin has won! Indian bitcoin public opinion page is bombarded with positive opinions!
http://bit.ly/2rjlgEc
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 12:43AM by cuddaloreappu http://bit.ly/2qzYydL
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 12:43AM by cuddaloreappu http://bit.ly/2qzYydL
Bitcoin Core Developers' Discussion On BIP148 UASF
http://bit.ly/2sd0uGd via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rDZfTK
Internet engineers did not scale up copper wires to 1 meter diameter to enable live video steaming. Scaling via block size is primitive.
https://twitter.com/bitsquare_/status/869711988850667520 via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2qA4YWx
Blockchain.info recommend me to pay $26 for a transaction fee. It is getting stupid to use Bitcoin.
http://bit.ly/2r9ZYdH
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 11:57AM by BitcoinLovex2 http://bit.ly/2qEEoKQ
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 11:57AM by BitcoinLovex2 http://bit.ly/2qEEoKQ
Ahead of the Train - Dubai is Leading the Way for Bitcoin and Blockchain implementation
http://bit.ly/2qAba0m
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 03:45PM by coincrypto http://bit.ly/2rT6Zks
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 03:45PM by coincrypto http://bit.ly/2rT6Zks
If the fate of Bitcoin rests on the hands of a small group of people, then the project is a failure. It was supposed to be open and self sustainable.
It wasn't supposed to be like this, a very small group of people already holds (sort of) control of the fate of the system, which was supposed to be ruled purely by supply and demand. And now there's a conflict of intere$ts. It's not a technical argument, otherwise we would all arrive into consensus.
At the end of the day, this whole BIP148/UASF argument is confirmation that the Bitcoin project had a great start, proposing a fantastic currency system, but it is bound to flop, not because of a technical limitations, but interests. I mean, what's the matter? If a small group of people can decide the fate of something, then the system ain't that special.
Bitcoin should just exist, without control whatsoever. No one should possibly be able to interfere with it. Unless somebody finds a solution that completely nullifies the purpose and existence of Jihans, it will be a matter of time until BTC dies.
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 03:45AM by Sucake http://bit.ly/2rRScXi
[CNBC] Bitcoin could hit $100,000 in 10 years, says the analyst who correctly called its $2,000 price
http://cnb.cx/2rTeyra via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2qzEXq6
Blockchain.info recommend me to pay $26 for a transaction fee. It is getting stupid to use Bitcoin.
http://bit.ly/2r9ZYdH via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2qEEoKQ
Tuesday, 30 May 2017
Nick Szabo on UASF
https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4/status/869643974096506881 via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rmsYzj
A personal note to the Bitcoin community
http://bit.ly/2rhQuvv
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 05:55AM by jgarzik http://bit.ly/2qxJmhi
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 05:55AM by jgarzik http://bit.ly/2qxJmhi
The first #UASF bitcoin mining pool is live!
http://pa.xro.ca
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 02:36AM by ReneFroger http://bit.ly/2qyFCs2
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 02:36AM by ReneFroger http://bit.ly/2qyFCs2
OKCoin's stance on the Bitcoin's scaling issue near the bottom
http://bit.ly/2sjp2gh
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 02:52AM by antyv2k http://bit.ly/2rl276O
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 02:52AM by antyv2k http://bit.ly/2rl276O
$10k to invest in ASIC miners, what's my best options?
I have a very real posibility to be able to invest up to $10k in ASIC miners in the near future, but am having trouble narrowing down what the best options are. Buy 5x $2k ASIC miners, or more smaller/cheaper miners?
The current plan is to keep them in a fairly large location but without any extra cooling currently - but adding AC is an option in the future.
Would be looking to mine smaller currencies to maximize profit as much as possible and reinvest in more miners as well.
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 08:21AM by B1tN1nja http://bit.ly/2rlE8oc
India's Government Divided Over Bitcoin Legalization
http://bit.ly/2sjH7KX via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rlS6Gn
Personal Income Tax May Soon Be Added on Cryptocurrency In Ukraine
http://bit.ly/2rS7oDA
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 06:03AM by coincrypto http://bit.ly/2qz4tvG
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 06:03AM by coincrypto http://bit.ly/2qz4tvG
PSA: Its all about ASICBOOST
Dear core members: They will continue to fight you endlessly until you completely block ASICBOOST. They will create delays, distractions, they will keep dishonoring agreements, create other clients and they will do everything they can in order to keep ASICBOOST working.
Block it completely, and its over.
edit: I wonder what will be their next time-wasting distraction. After "Jihan just read bip148" , after "Jihan SAYS that he agrees to block AB", after a new client and many other distractions - whats next? lets wait and see. or lets just block AB
edit: doubled the amount to $30,000 for my offer to bitmain for any reasonable solution that fixes ASICBOOST completely.
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 12:26AM by assaf_assaf http://bit.ly/2rRQQeX
BitClub is now signalling Segwit!
http://bit.ly/2qwXVS8
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 12:49AM by FluxSeer http://bit.ly/2rhqSyZ
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 12:49AM by FluxSeer http://bit.ly/2rhqSyZ
The First Japanese Airline Company To Accept Bitcoin
http://bit.ly/2qz5HXP
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 05:53AM by coincrypto http://bit.ly/2rSjhcy
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 05:53AM by coincrypto http://bit.ly/2rSjhcy
If the fate of Bitcoin rests on the hands of a small group of people, then the project is a failure. It was supposed to be open and self sustainable.
It wasn't supposed to be like this, a very small group of people already holds (sort of) control of the fate of the system, which was supposed to be ruled purely by supply and demand. And now there's a conflict of intere$ts. It's not a technical argument, otherwise we would all arrive into consensus.At the end of the day, this whole BIP148/UASF argument is confirmation that the Bitcoin project had a great start, proposing a fantastic currency system, but it is bound to flop, not because of a technical limitations, but interests. I mean, what's the matter? If a small group of people can decide the fate of something, then the system ain't that special.Bitcoin should just exist, without control whatsoever. No one should possibly be able to interfere with it. Unless somebody finds a solution that completely nullifies the purpose and existence of Jihans, it will be a matter of time until BTC dies. via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rRScXi
What if instead of doing UASF we just move to Litecoin, which has SegWit activated?
https://twitter.com/romansnitko/status/869662263623528449 via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2qz3yey
How to earn bitcoins (Buy Bitcoins/Mine Bitcoins) 2017
http://bit.ly/2qyNg5q
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 04:53AM by faizanofficial http://bit.ly/2rRMrsu
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 04:53AM by faizanofficial http://bit.ly/2rRMrsu
A UASF BIP148-Hostile Exchange is a Customer-Hostile Exchange
Based on what Luke wrote in [1] and my discussions here are my thoughts about the situation with anti-BIP148 exchanges. If you've no clue what UASF BIP148 is, read [5].
Disclaimer: this post probably likely contains unintentional mistakes and/or errors. Feel free to point them out. I recommend that you don't read only the post - make sure to also skim through the comments to find comments that highlight obvious and less obvious errors.
MYTH: MY EXCHANGE SAYS THEY PLAN TO STAY NEUTRAL
No, they won't stay neutral unless they add the option to allow you also access BIP148 BTC in your wallet when the chains split.
Exchanges can either support both "legacy BTC" and "BIP148 BTC" (that would be neutral, but when they say "neutral" that's not what they mean) or be hostile. When then tell you they're neutral, they're in fact hostile.
As Luke-Jr explained in [1], to stay "neutral" (hostile) is to remove a choice. If you don't have a choice, the only way to completely avoid risk is to avoid using your exchange while the chain is split. That doesn't mean just trading but extends to making deposits or withdrawals while the chains are split.
It is important to realize that it does not matter whether you "support" UASF BIP148 or not. If you don't have a choice, you're exposed to risk because your exchange doesn't want to protect your wallet.
PLAN A: MY EXCHANGE WON'T SUPPORT BIP148 BTC, SO I'LL SIT IT OUT
You can certainly do that, but in case you change your mind after August 1 and the chains are still split, you will have access only to "legacy" BTC. And sending them may be risky (see [1].)
Some exchanges have stated that they don't "recommend" to use their services while the chains are split. What does that mean? What if I trade anyway exchange and my trades later get invalidated? What if I want to deposit some BTC and my transaction gets reorg'ed? It seems that BIP148-hostile exchanges would have to completely suspend BTC-related operations from August 1st until the chains merge. In any case their customers should ask whether they'll be compensated in case they use their BTC accounts against the exchange's recommendation. I doubt that.
Or you can execute PLAN B: move your BTC to a customer-friendly exchange or wallet (such as Electrum, Mycelium, Samourai) that lets you retain full access to your BTC and even on both chains (if you "split" the coins). You'd have to do this before August 1, of course.
During the split, the situation may change from day to day or even hour to hour. The price of both "legacy" and BIP148 BTC may drop or rise dramatically.
MYTH: IT WILL BE OVER IN NO TIME
Maybe that is true, but there's no way to be sure of that.
Something that occurred to me yesterday is that if the BIP148 chain survives Day 1, it may very well survive much longer - several days or several weeks. As long as BIP148 BTC has a non-negative value, money can be made mining them.
In PLAN A above I mentioned that some exchanges may need to effectively shut down their BTC-related services, not just "recommend" that you don't use them while the chains are split. If that happens and the BIP148 chain survives, exchange services may need to stay frozen (or available under "use at your own risk" clause) for weeks. All businesses who accept Bitcoin payments but resist BIP148 would also be at risk during that time.
WHAT TO DO
Both pro-BIP148 and anti-BIP148 users should not accept this fake neutrality. Wherever you stand on BIP148, there's no reason to give up full access to your bitcoin wallet while the chains are split.
Get your exchange to add BIP148 support or have them provide the details (including whether they'd compensate you for losses due to their hostility) of their plans for what may turn out to be a multi-day or multi-week chain split. They have more than enough time to do that - for example the group behind the NY Scaling Agreement can develop, test and ship their code in less than 8 weeks [4].
If you can't obtain meaningful guarantees, consider PLAN B: withdraw BTC to a secure offline wallet or move them to a neutral exchange that intends to support the both chains.
If you want to learn more, read UASF Guide[2] and check recent[3] UASF BIP148 articles from this subreddit.
LINKS
[1] http://bit.ly/2s9uQcL - Luke-Jr's article
[2] http://bit.ly/2rAgKEu - User Guide to UASF BIP148
[3] http://bit.ly/2sa7OCv - UASF BIP148-related articles on /r/bitcoin
[4] http://bit.ly/2qvbMZr - FrankenSegWit - your next Bitcoin software: from Alpha to GA in less than 60 days!
[5] http://bit.ly/2s7bcOH - WTF is UASF BIP148?
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 07:51PM by eustan http://bit.ly/2rAzHa4
Bolivia's Government Arrests 60 People Over a Pyramid Scheme - Not Bitcoin
http://bit.ly/2r8HBWJ via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2qDJEys
Slush or NiceHash
Hey all Been out of the mining game for a long time. Long time. Last time I mined there were no pools I was mining a block a week with a 550ti.
That said
Electricity is as cheap as I can get, $0.0504. I have an S5 and four S3+'s that basically cost me nothing.
I have an account on Slush but these have all been upgraded to the newest respective firmware's and have the Nicehash CGMiner already loaded.
Should I put them all onto slush or go with Nicehash?
EDIT spelling
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 04:00AM by 8668 http://bit.ly/2qx4Fj7
OKCoin's stance on the Bitcoin's scaling issue near the bottom
http://bit.ly/2sjp2gh via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rl276O
The scaling issue and resolution seems sooo simple
Ok I'm by no means a bitcoin expert so please have sympathy and correct me if I'm wrong, but simple maths...
1MB blocks = 7 transactions per second (roughly) 10MB blocks = 70 tps 100MB blocks = 700 tps 1000MB = 7000tps
when will the increase stop? 10MB? 100MB? No more like 300-1000MB every 10 min.So the bloat to the blockchain for having visa level tps(2000-56,000+ tps) would be so massive there would be no full nodes to run the blockchain except for big players willing to add like 300MB every 10 min...centralizing the network to its death with the enormous packs of data. 2MB debate is retarded because it's just gonna get filled almost instantly...It's obvious we need layer 2 solutions like lightning network( which needs segwit to run well). Why are we delaying this simple simple answer with politics? There is no way in a million years can Bitcoin work without 2nd layer solutions. Its sad to see such a positive technology that can change the world be blocked by greed and ego, and politics. Am I missing something here???? Pleeeaaase tell me if I am, cos I'm no expert but it just seems so simple
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 04:39PM by vipasi911 http://bit.ly/2rjjtkx
PSA: Its all about ASICBOOST
Dear core members: They will continue to fight you endlessly until you completely block ASICBOOST. They will create delays, distractions, they will keep dishonoring agreements, create other clients and they will do everything they can in order to keep ASICBOOST working.Block it completely, and its over. via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rRQQeX
I have a small technicall service in Colombia and all the hardware .
I have a small technicall service in Colombia, i have some Gpu,s laptops rigs everything in hardware but no clue of the bussines, if someone can bring me technicall asesory we can split the results.
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 01:12AM by suleimankanuni http://bit.ly/2sb6mzS
RSK testnet is open!
If you wish to contribute go to http://bit.ly/2sar0jt
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 10:20PM by Natonamco http://bit.ly/2rB1NC5
Choose the best Company at cloud-mining24!
http://bit.ly/2rB5dVo
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 11:20PM by 5toned http://bit.ly/2sahnl4
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 11:20PM by 5toned http://bit.ly/2sahnl4
USB Hub for mining
Hey guys,
I am currently trying to get into the bitcoin mining with the hopes of having a steady output of some satoshis. I am quite aware of the current state of the mining business and have run the calculations. So: I am not looking for a quit break even, I just want a steady flow of like 2000 satoshis a day.
To achieve that I have purchased two GekkoScience 2-Pac and I intend to get more over time.
What is missing is the USB hub. I am quite unsure what would be the best pick. What I intend to have is a hub that enables me to have like 5 of these asics pointing upwards and still having at least one, better two, ports free to also run USB fans. And all ports should deliver maximum power (14W) so that I can run the miners on full speed.
Does anyone have any suggestion for such a hub?
Short summary for the hub I want: * 5 ports for miners * 1 or 2 ports for fans * at least 14W output for each port * ports poiting upwards * ports having enough physical space between them so that the all miners will fit
I somehow guess that there is not the perfect hub I want. But I hope that at least with the help of you guys I get to the next best fit ;)
Thanks in advance!
Submitted May 31, 2017 at 12:18AM by hurrtz http://bit.ly/2qwyOiy
So the whole industry got bamboozled by Jihan and instead of signing an agreement for progress, actually signed an agreement to stall segwit AND a blocksize increase indefinitely?!
The code on Github Jeff Garzik is developing right now basically just breaks the current segwit implementation and has absolutely not even the slightest chance of reaching consensus.On top of that, Vinny Lingham confirmed that for him and probably most others the purpose of the agreement is not to reach consensus or get past the stallment but to forcefully derail the only solution that could actually stop the whole farce in a timely manner:"I'm willing to stand by the rest of the industry in trying to force a resolution other than UASF."Source and the corresponding reddit discussion.There is no place in bitcoin for forced solutions nobody wants but the few forcing them.It seems like Jihan got everyone exactly where he want's them to be: Opposed to each other, without any chance of reaching consensus for progress and essentially prolonging the deadlock indefinitely.It's a pretty smart move since he will be able to keep using ASICBoost and reap millions and millions in fees every week.I seems he is the master chess player in this game and most others don't even realize how they are getting played.edit:For those interested in better understanding Jihans modus operandi, read about the Thirty-Six Stratagems widely used by chinese businesses. I wrote a little post about it a while ago:http://bit.ly/2rkd6gT is the corresponding wikipedia article:http://bit.ly/2sit74d shameless twitter shilling. Feel free to retweet my tweet if you agree with my conclusion and want to give it some more visibility: https://twitter.com/viajeroloco13/status/869583194462486530I have my doubts, but maybe that way some people start realizing what's going on here.... via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rka5x5
Interested in helping UASF BIP148 and mining? Join the new #UASF-MINING channel on http://bit.ly/2rAczYD
Hope you join - was created some minutes ago :)Channel: #UASF-MININGhttp://slack.bitcoincore.org/ via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rk9bkj
RSK testnet is open!
If you wish to contribute go to http://bit.ly/2sar0jt via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rB1NC5
#Frankensegwit roadmap leaked "this is not a secret project" but coordination happens unilaterally and behind closed doors
http://bit.ly/2qvbMZr
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 05:57PM by kekcoin http://bit.ly/2rfMfQX
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 05:57PM by kekcoin http://bit.ly/2rfMfQX
Samson Mow: "#UASF #BIP148 will be merged into @bitcoincoreorg"
https://twitter.com/Excellion/status/869269986023542784
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 03:12AM by mkiwi http://bit.ly/2seQ748
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 03:12AM by mkiwi http://bit.ly/2seQ748
NY Agreement software being built to be deliberately and unnecessarily incompatible with the existing SegWit deployment
Jeff Garzik is developing a new piece of software, intended to implement the New York Agreement, which can be seen here:
The software will flag bit 4, but not bit 1, which means SegWit will not activate and existing nodes will not allow witness data on the Bitcoin p2p network already in use. This means a new p2p network may need to be set up, which could take many months of development and testing, and means the network will be very complex, with three p2p networks.
Flagging both bit 4 AND bit 1, such that the software is compatible with both SegWit and the NY Agreement can be done. It has even been implemented in BIP91. There is no clear reason for rejecting BIP91, and doing so appears destructive and potentially malicious.
When questions Jeff stated:
So the real answer is that we want to be maximally compatible with segwit within the bounds of the charter - a safe network upgrade to segwit-AND-2m. Post-hashpower-activation segwit2x will be the only segwit, for all intents and purposes, so deviations pre-activation would simply be legacy code post-.
I am not sure what this response means. It appears as if the software needs to do something unnecessarily stupid to be compliant with the "charter". Is this really what NY Agreement participants signed up for?
Please can we end these stupid games and do what is best for Bitcoin. It seems the NY Agreement has intentions other than SegWit and a hardfork later on, but instead some participants seem intent on causing delays, complexity or trouble.
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 06:21PM by jonny1000 http://bit.ly/2rfB0bn
Luke Dashjr explains: BIP148 and the risks it entails for you (whether you run a BIP148 node or not)
http://bit.ly/2ry2A6q
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 04:53AM by ReneFroger http://bit.ly/2qxxnMz
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 04:53AM by ReneFroger http://bit.ly/2qxxnMz
Day-2: Here are combined contacts for Kraken. If everyone who reads this takes just 2 minutes to communicate their support for BIP148, we will be a force they can't ignore.
You can read about my full rationale here, but essentially (shills aside) we all believe in UASF - if we coordinate our efforts and pick one major wallet/exchange per day and bombard them with demands to support BIP148, we can make a real impact. Yesterday was Coinbase and it went great. Today let's target Kraken.Here, I've made it easy for you:Tweet to them.Send them an email.Write to them on Facebook.Tweet at their CEO, Jesse Powell.Ideally do all the above.Let them know you support BIP148 and segwit. Let them know their users risk losing all their bitcoins if they do not. If you are a customer, let them know that you will withdraw all your funds unless they commit to supporting BIP148. Be polite, but firm.No-one is asking them to support bip148 in exclusion to the legacy coin, we're only asking that, come August 1, they list bip148 coins, to give users the option to trade them. Supporting BIP148 is very low cost, so let them know how important it is to users.If you've been out of the loop and don't know what all this BIP148/segwit/UASF business is about, to put it simply: Segwit is a technical change to the protocol that will provide a long-term solution for scalability, decrease transaction fees and stop ASIC Boost (a mining trick that gives some an unfair advantage). As (some) miners benefit tremendously from the status quo, they have blocked implementing Segwit. UASF/BIP148 is a new way to implement Segwit.I highly recommend the following links to educate yourself more fully:https://www.uasf.cohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjZk7N7RXfAhttps://www.weusecoins.com/uasf-guide/https://medium.com/@lukedashjr/bip148-and-the-risks-it-entails-for-you-whether-you-run-a-bip148-node-or-not-b7d2dbe85ce6https://medium.com/@elombrozo/why-i-support-bip148-4b4c0a9feb4d via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2qxTanw
"fuck your mother if you want fuck." This is who we are dealing with. Jihan Wu. The guy currently holding bitcoin to ransom for personal profit
https://twitter.com/JihanWu/status/731902686379933697 via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rAuC1w
Rodolfo Novak: BIP148 will ensure that your bitcoins remain decentralize and funginble. Any compromise will make bitcoin less of both.
https://twitter.com/nvk/status/869344816521523200
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 09:06AM by tiestosto http://bit.ly/2reEcnL
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 09:06AM by tiestosto http://bit.ly/2reEcnL
Me irl during August 2017
http://bit.ly/2qwqpHJ
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 10:31AM by LeeWallis http://bit.ly/2rPu4Ey
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 10:31AM by LeeWallis http://bit.ly/2rPu4Ey
The scaling issue and resolution seems sooo simple
Ok I'm by no means a bitcoin expert so please have sympathy and correct me if I'm wrong, but simple maths...1MB blocks = 7 transactions per second (roughly) 10MB blocks = 70 tps 100MB blocks = 700 tps 1000MB = 7000tpswhen will the increase stop? 10MB? 100MB? No more like 300-1000MB every 10 min.So the bloat to the blockchain for having visa level tps(2000-56,000+ tps) would be so massive there would be no full nodes to run the blockchain except for big players willing to add like 300MB every 10 min...centralizing the network to its death with the enormous packs of data. 2MB debate is retarded because it's just gonna get filled almost instantly...It's obvious we need layer 2 solutions like lightning network( which needs segwit to run well). Why are we delaying this simple simple answer with politics? There is no way in a million years can Bitcoin work without 2nd layer solutions. Its sad to see such a positive technology that can change the world be blocked by greed and ego, and politics. Am I missing something here???? Pleeeaaase tell me if I am, cos I'm no expert but it just seems so simple via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rjjtkx
A UASF BIP148-Hostile Exchange is a Customer-Hostile Exchange
Based on what Luke wrote in [1] and my discussions here are my thoughts about the situation with anti-BIP148 exchanges. If you've no clue what UASF BIP148 is, read [5].Disclaimer: this post probably likely contains unintentional mistakes and/or errors. Feel free to point them out. I recommend that you don't read only the post - make sure to also skim through the comments to find comments that highlight obvious and less obvious errors.MYTH: MY EXCHANGE SAYS THEY PLAN TO STAY NEUTRALNo, they won't stay neutral unless they add the option to allow you also access BIP148 BTC in your wallet when the chains split.Exchanges can either support both "legacy BTC" and "BIP148 BTC" (that would be neutral, but when they say "neutral" that's not what they mean) or be hostile. When then tell you they're neutral, they're in fact hostile.As Luke-Jr explained in [1], to stay "neutral" (hostile) is to remove a choice. If you don't have a choice, the only way to completely avoid risk is to avoid using your exchange while the chain is split. That doesn't mean just trading but extends to making deposits or withdrawals while the chains are split.It is important to realize that it does not matter whether you "support" UASF BIP148 or not. If you don't have a choice, you're exposed to risk because your exchange doesn't want to protect your wallet.PLAN A: MY EXCHANGE WON'T SUPPORT BIP148 BTC, SO I'LL SIT IT OUTYou can certainly do that, but in case you change your mind after August 1 and the chains are still split, you will have access only to "legacy" BTC. And sending them may be risky (see [1].)Some exchanges have stated that they don't "recommend" to use their services while the chains are split. What does that mean? What if I trade anyway exchange and my trades later get invalidated? What if I want to deposit some BTC and my transaction gets reorg'ed? It seems that BIP148-hostile exchanges would have to completely suspend BTC-related operations from August 1st until the chains merge. In any case their customers should ask whether they'll be compensated in case they use their BTC accounts against the exchange's recommendation. I doubt that.Or you can execute PLAN B: move your BTC to a customer-friendly exchange or wallet (such as Electrum, Mycelium, Samourai) that lets you retain full access to your BTC and even on both chains (if you "split" the coins). You'd have to do this before August 1, of course.During the split, the situation may change from day to day or even hour to hour. The price of both "legacy" and BIP148 BTC may drop or rise dramatically.MYTH: IT WILL BE OVER IN NO TIMEMaybe that is true, but there's no way to be sure of that.Something that occurred to me yesterday is that if the BIP148 chain survives Day 1, it may very well survive much longer - several days or several weeks. As long as BIP148 BTC has a non-negative value, money can be made mining them.In PLAN A above I mentioned that some exchanges may need to effectively shut down their BTC-related services, not just "recommend" that you don't use them while the chains are split. If that happens and the BIP148 chain survives, exchange services may need to stay frozen (or available under "use at your own risk" clause) for weeks. All businesses who accept Bitcoin payments but resist BIP148 would also be at risk during that time.WHAT TO DOBoth pro-BIP148 and anti-BIP148 users should not accept this fake neutrality. Wherever you stand on BIP148, there's no reason to give up full access to your bitcoin wallet while the chains are split.Get your exchange to add BIP148 support or have them provide the details (including whether they'd compensate you for losses due to their hostility) of their plans for what may turn out to be a multi-day or multi-week chain split. They have more than enough time to do that - for example the group behind the NY Scaling Agreement can develop, test and ship their code in less than 8 weeks [4].If you can't obtain meaningful guarantees, consider PLAN B: withdraw BTC to a secure offline wallet or move them to a neutral exchange that intends to support the both chains.If you want to learn more, read UASF Guide[2] and check recent[3] UASF BIP148 articles from this subreddit.LINKS[1] http://bit.ly/2s9uQcL - Luke-Jr's article[2] http://bit.ly/2rAgKEu - User Guide to UASF BIP148[3] http://bit.ly/2sa7OCv - UASF BIP148-related articles on /r/bitcoin[4] http://bit.ly/2qvbMZr - FrankenSegWit - your next Bitcoin software: from Alpha to GA in less than 60 days![5] http://bit.ly/2s7bcOH - WTF is UASF BIP148? via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rAzHa4
Adam Back Shares His Roadmap for Scaling Bitcoin
http://bit.ly/2sh3elh via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2riUVIB
NY Agreement software being built to be deliberately and unnecessarily incompatible with the existing SegWit deployment
Jeff Garzik is developing a new piece of software, intended to implement the New York Agreement, which can be seen here:http://bit.ly/2rj01oe software will flag bit 4, but not bit 1, which means SegWit will not activate and existing nodes will not allow witness data on the Bitcoin p2p network already in use. This means a new p2p network may need to be set up, which could take many months of development and testing, and means the network will be very complex, with three p2p networks.Flagging both bit 4 AND bit 1, such that the software is compatible with both SegWit and the NY Agreement can be done. It has even been implemented in BIP91. There is no clear reason for rejecting BIP91, and doing so appears destructive and potentially malicious.When questions Jeff stated:So the real answer is that we want to be maximally compatible with segwit within the bounds of the charter - a safe network upgrade to segwit-AND-2m. Post-hashpower-activation segwit2x will be the only segwit, for all intents and purposes, so deviations pre-activation would simply be legacy code post-.I am not sure what this response means. It appears as if the software needs to do something unnecessarily stupid to be compliant with the "charter". Is this really what NY Agreement participants signed up for?Please can we end these stupid games and do what is best for Bitcoin. It seems the NY Agreement has intentions other than SegWit and a hardfork later on, but instead some participants seem intent on causing delays, complexity or trouble. via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rfB0bn
#Frankensegwit roadmap leaked "this is not a secret project" but coordination happens unilaterally and behind closed doors
http://bit.ly/2qvbMZr via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rfMfQX
I can't be the only one the feels this way...
http://bit.ly/2sgfTVt
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 12:58PM by dallaschap http://bit.ly/2ripn5l
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 12:58PM by dallaschap http://bit.ly/2ripn5l
Pure genius: if BIP148 gets off the ground at all = it "will almost certainly win. The reorg risk for legacy chain is to big of a risk" #UASF
https://twitter.com/Technom4ge/status/869371660763353098 via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2rQmHMU
Remember: only 3-5 million people will ever hold at least 1 BTC
There can only ever be 21 million people on this planet that will be able to hold 1 whole BTC. If you consider the large exchangers, early miners and whales (just the top 500 addresses hold 4 million BTCs alone, that's not counting the big holders who split into many addresses) I imagine the general public will only be able to get a hold of maybe maybe 8 million BTCs AT MOST. Of those, many will hold more than one. So, I imagine only 3-5 million people on earth will ever hold at least 1 BTC - ever. Considering 7 billion people, you're going to be one of the lucky ones.
Blast from the past... http://bit.ly/2qtGJx9
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 07:46AM by rutkdn http://bit.ly/2revMfY
I can't be the only one the feels this way...
http://bit.ly/2sgfTVt via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2ripn5l
Bitcoiners, if you want P2P censorship-resistant currency then you have to pay price w/ mining power! #UASF #BIP148
https://twitter.com/TraceMayer/status/869274739503751169
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 03:44AM by bitcoinknowledge http://bit.ly/2re1ASa
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 03:44AM by bitcoinknowledge http://bit.ly/2re1ASa
Monday, 29 May 2017
BitClub Network Pool Back From The Dark Side
I'm not crazy about BitClub Network's cloud mining MLM setup, I did appreciate that they were mining YES for SegWit up until about 2 months ago. Well... They are back from the dark side and mining YES for SegWit once again! I hope they stay for good this time.Welcome back BitClub Network!Latest Signaling Numbers Here via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2qwifzk
"I still think BIP148's timeline was kinda crazy. But I'd love to be proven wrong!"
https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/869148509366366208
Submitted May 29, 2017 at 10:18PM by viajero_loco http://bit.ly/2ry9ysm
Submitted May 29, 2017 at 10:18PM by viajero_loco http://bit.ly/2ry9ysm
Erik Voorhees about having Shapeshift run BIP148: "Undecided. If the DCG SegWit+2MB plan doesn't materialize, then probably yes."
https://twitter.com/ErikVoorhees/status/869231480064573440
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 01:17AM by FrancisPouliot http://bit.ly/2qzV9qv
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 01:17AM by FrancisPouliot http://bit.ly/2qzV9qv
Help Starting Mining
So I've been studying bitcoin mining and its workings, and decided that I want to try it. I have an office where electricity is at a flat rate so electrical efficiency shouldn't be too much of a problem. What miners would you recommend for me. Budget from $500-2000, whatever has the best return. Reminder that electricity isn't a problem.
Submitted May 30, 2017 at 10:38AM by Prophet_101 http://bit.ly/2rzhTMh
Rodolfo Novak: BIP148 will ensure that your bitcoins remain decentralize and funginble. Any compromise will make bitcoin less of both.
https://twitter.com/nvk/status/869344816521523200 via /r/Bitcoin http://bit.ly/2reEcnL
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)