Proof of authentication post:
Buzzex username: Kevin Wells
Bitcointalk username:  bitbadger
Campaign: Buzzex Airdrop Campaign
Telegram username: @kevinrwells
Twitter username: @kevinrwells
URL of re-tweet:  https://twitter.com/Buzzexio/status/1139394158068563979

Don't you provide your wallet address in the miner software configuration, or else at the mining pool when you set up your account?

That's good news. I wasn't sure if you still had to download the blockchain even if you were connected to a pool.  Thanks for that. Is that pretty well a standard situation for mining pool configurations? 





 

Maybe I didn't make it clear at the start, I would only mine using a mining pool, not solo as I know that is not worth it.

So if I mine using a mining pool (ie with my own server, not using a paid-for remote mining service where its all done on the server run by the provider) then I don't need to download the blockchain?

I would definitely be joining a mining pool, I will not be solo mining. It's just that I have spare processing capacity on my server but don't have the storage space for the blockchain available at present. I had the idea of utilizing this processing capacity to mine.

Have I understood this correct that If you belong to a mining pool then you don't need to download the blockchain? You would be using the blockchain on the mining pool?

Sorry if these sound like dumb questions, I am just trying to understand this.

I'm interested in setting up a mining node but having to download the entire blockchain makes it daunting in terms of the storage required.

In particular I'd like to use XMR-Stak miner and use it maybe to mine Monero.

Is it possible to do this? I understand you can configure a wallet to connect to a remote node. I wonder if its possible to do a similar thing with a mining node.

Thanks Steve for the detailed advice, that sounds pretty good. Ive looked around and tried a few other alternatives, and CoinTracking seems the best choice for me right now.

Ive already tried the free version, as I said I used up all the free trades.  I deleted the old trades for 4 months ago and imported my trades from just one exchange, but its already full. So Ive decided to purchase the full version for one year and start using it right away as I need all my trade data and the full API data feeds, no point otherwise.  So we'll see how it goes for this first year.

Hi, I registered to use CoinTracking free version at the start of the year and used it for a short while (I soon reached the max free trades) and then forgot about it.

I've just come back to have a look again. I'm a professional trader so I am looking for a portfolio management system which can meet most or all of my requirements.

I need a system which automatically records and updates my trades with real time API data, produces reports, stats and graphics, and also produces accurate tax information (for Germany where I am currently based). So CoinTracking looks pretty good on these points. 

I long since reached the free trades limit back at the start of the year as I'm a high volume trader so I would be looking to purchase the pro version.

What I ideally also need is the functionality to split the portfolio into different sub-portfolios as I work on my trades according to different criteria according to which portfolio each coin/position belongs to. 

Obviously I need a total overview of all positions, but I also need to be able to assign coins/positions to different sub-portfolios.

Is it possible to do this with CoinTracking? Or if not, can such a facility be programmed?


 

Just curious what is the financial benefit of running a PIVX masternode?

Presumably the operator gets a share of the transaction fees. Is mining involved as well?

Apologies if these points were mentioned earlier in the thread, but I don't have time to go through the whole 300 odd pages so far.

Thanks in advance.

I think you mentioned it in your previous post. No need to be snarky.

The LN proposal with direct channels is interesting, but not sure its exactly what I have in mind.

Yes, third party services are a possibility, but they are not p2p decentralized.

A BIP32 chain of addresses... that sounds horrible. So I say to my employer, well I don't have a Bitcoin bank account number - the best I can do is to send you a long list of 32-bit or whatever BIP32 chain of addresses. Just don't mix them up, transpose any digits, or mislay them. And let me know when they run out so I can then send you some more!

Why would it be weak? Is Bitcoin weak? It would use the same blockchain technology as Bitcoin, ie decentralized.  It would be as weak - or as strong - as Bitcoin.

I'm visualizing a decentralized peer to peer banking system, not a centralized one like now.

Maybe I am covering too many issues in my vision here. Perhaps better to consider them as separate areas to be resolved individually.

So let's just think about the Bitcoin environment for now and leave aside the other currencies and forget about links to the rest of the banking system at this stage.

Say I live and work Bitcoin. I only use Bitcoin nothing else, and all the people I come into contact with also do the same. Not entirely realistic, but just for the purposes of this description of the concept.

So how do I make regular payments from my Bitcoin account? Eg standing debit orders. How do I pay my monthly rent? How do I receive my salary? If my employer says to me, what is your Bitcoin bank account number, what do I tell him?

What is my Bitcoin account? At the moment there is nothing.

Only a series of transaction Id numbers ie the Bitcoin public addresses. Thats ok as a transaction system, but its not a single account number system for the user. I can't easily do any of the above with that system.  It's like a kind of back-end for the bank, its the transaction processing department, the ledger department, but we don't yet have the front-end for the customers. All we have is wallets, not bank accounts.

We need a further level of abstraction in order to do this. At the moment we don't have it.

My point is we right now we have a peer to peer transaction system. But we don't have a peer to peer user account system.

It could be implemented as a system on top of Bitcoin. People would have the option to use it or to stay with the lower level current system of series of transaction ids ie Bitcoin addresses as a present, as they wished.

Maybe its a bit like introducing Windows on top of the DOS command line. People can still work with the commands if they wanted, but the majority much prefer a graphical interface. Or like a kind of DNS system for Bitcoin, allowing for domain names in place of IP addresses.  At the moment the die hards are all saying, why do we need a system of "domain names" on top of it when we already have the IP addresses.

Yes I heard they are looking into creating their own blockchains.

But thats basically an organization-internal project. Not an open peer to peer banking system in the cloud. That's what I'd like to see. Similar to how Bitcoin is an open source peer to peer currency system.  What I'm getting at is: bank accounts for people - but without the bank. And a more user friendly transaction system for Bitcoin and other digital currencies, as well as full transparency to fiat currencies. All in the one blockchain system if possible.

Another reason it would be an advantage is that using conventional style bank account numbers is a recognizable format for the general public. At the moment you have these weird Bitcoin public addresses which don't make sense to people, they make it seem cryptic and complicated and they are hard to use. There is also the risk of mislaying or losing funds because of the complexity.  Bitcoin needs to become more useable for the public if there is to be more take up.

What I'm getting at here is creating a peer to peer bank running on a blockchain. Managing just Bitcoin transactions initially perhaps, then later on other currencies as well, and with full connectivity to the mainstream banking system for seamless transactions in both directions. 

To provide direct and transparent connectivity to the banking system. People can then use it to receive their salary, pay their bills and make transactions.  At the moment we have Bitcoin and other systems which are standalone and are not seamlessly integrated with the general banking system. They are completely separate.

The system would ideally incorporate all currencies recorded in the block information.  The account holder would have just one account number for all transactions, in other words their bank account. But instead of with a bank, its in the cloud, in the blockchain. It runs itself, no need for a bank.

People could have more than one account number if they wanted, for different purposes, businesses etc do this. But basically its differentiating between transaction id's which is what the Bitcoin system is, and proper account numbers which contain transactions.

Setting up such a system I guess could be done solely for Bitcoin initially, then adding the other digital currencies and then adding full fiat currency interfaces.

Another advantage is the level of abstraction. No need to handle the current long Bitcoin addresses, which are not human friendly. Instead you would have a single permanent account number, your Bitcoin bank account number. 

There would also be full IBAN/SWIFT integration as well later on so that it would be fully integrated into the existing traditional banking system.

I'd like to see a blockchain-based system providing bank accounts in the cloud for people, ie peer to peer with no intermediaries.

This must surely be the next step for Bitcoin and digital currencies - and for that matter fiat currencies too.

How would this be implemented?  I could imagine maybe something like this:
 
A separate blockchain network with an IBAN/BIC id which maintains the bank account records for the participants. Each account would effectively contain the public addresses that the account owner wants to include - effectively links to the Bitcoin blockchain.  

To activate transactions with these addresses requires the private key for the respective public address/es. These would be stored encrypted at the client end, together with a private key and additional security procedures for the account

Interfaces or gateways to the other blockchain networks and the SWIFT banking network would also be required - maybe built into each node to provide for redundancy and full reliability. Or perhaps provided by a tertiary level run by businesses as a service.

This system has the advantage of keeping all your transactions and balance information in one place, not spread out over different addresses. Its a step beyond a wallet, since the owner uses just a single bank account number for sending and receiving money.

Transactions could be in any currency, Bitcoin, Litecoin, Dash, etc, and to/from fiat currencies provided that there were interfaces to exchanges and automatic conversion. This could be configured via the client end.

The client-end access would be client software/app similar to the present with wallet software, or via web-based services provided as a business with paid for premium services and basic level access maybe free of charge like with email today.

The idea is to take Bitcoin and other digital currencies one step further and create real peer to peer banking with no intermediaries, faster, and at much lower cost to the consumer.

Next question: is it viable right now - and if so, how can it be implemented?

Im also looking for a Bitcoin Donate Widget, but I don't like the idea of sending my donors to an third party site of the programmer running javascript.

The operator of the external site may be honest,  but it's still javascript running on a third party site which he controls and not you.

Is there an up to date list available of Bitcoin exchanges that are in business that the public can use to transfer fiat into and out of Bitcoin right now?

The only exchange I know of is Mount Gox. Are there any others?