Quote from: HELP.org on August 28, 2014, 12:46:54 AM

You are missing the point. When you tell new users that Bitcoin is easily upgraded the first thing say is that it must be easy to change the 21 million limit. Then Bitcoiners often respond respond with explaining the consensus and how hard it would be to change. This confuses people because if Bitcoin is so easy to change then many of the claimed benefits would be worthless.

I just tell them that consensus to fix a bug, or to add a beneficial feature, is basically guaranteed. And if it's never reached (90% of nodes never add that code), consensus won't be reached and the new code will never be implemented. On the other hand, consensus to have everyone give away a part of their money, and at the same time consensus on whom to actually give it to (miners, charity, some "bank") is practically impossible.

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on August 28, 2014, 01:22:23 AM

You evidently either completely missed or don't care about the problem. That's like saying, oh, it's just BitPay, or just Blockchain, or just whoever.

No, I'm saying that's a bug in Hive's software, or them restricting what is actually perfectly fine in bitcoin.

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on August 28, 2014, 01:22:23 AM

Hive wants to protect itself and you think it's their problem?

Not allowing a transaction to have an unconfirmed input doesn't actually protect Hive from anything. They should just check to make sure that the unspent input has enough of a priority (fees, etc.), and if yes, let you spend again. Mycelium and Blockchain.info wallets do that and work fine.

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on August 28, 2014, 01:22:23 AM

You probably thought the transaction malleability issue was no big deal too, right?

I didn't know enough about the technical details of that, so couldn't have anything more than an opinion based on whatever I heard devs say about it. Not being an expert on that topic, what I thought was irrelevant.

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on August 28, 2014, 01:22:23 AM

It shouldn't ever happen because you can't ask vendors to be responsible for correcting the faults with Bitcoin! You can't ask them to take the financial responsibility for flaws.

Thanks to BIP70 (Merchant Payment Protocol), you don't have to. Since the signed transaction will be sent to them for review, instead of broadcasted outright, their software can automatically check for unconfirmed inputs, verify that they have enough fees, and if not, reject the transaction back to the customer. Soon they may even be able to add their own fees to customer's unconfirmed inputs, to make sure that they do confirm. And hopefully wallet developers will keep up, or their wallets will be abandoned for having too many problems. As I said, this issue is a non issue that already has a fix.

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on August 28, 2014, 01:22:23 AM

Blocks are too god damn slow to confirm and waiting for 6 fucking confirmations is business suicide

Are you comparing this to a 6 months chargeback waiting period? Or buying a beer at a bar? Cause it's true what they say, bars and restaurants (and BitPay) don't even wait for one confirmation. I buy stuff with bitcoin all the time, and I don't know any shop (except Piiko) that does. So I don't know why Hive enforces it on its users