Search content
Sort by
Showing 13 of 13 results by blackowl11
Re: Aadhaar must for financial transactions of Rs 50,000 and above
Control the money and then control the population. We have an authoritarian government that is trying to do everything it can to control the people. There may be development but is it worth our freedom?
It is worth freedom,i am happy that after a long time a sensible goverment has taken control of india.congress was corupt and has ultimately lead to corupt government.if your money is coming from legit source then there is no need to worry ,if you do a transaction of 50k or 50 lakh.Or the laws which does not apply to you are only required to be followed by HONEST people.
Maybe your freedom is cheap but not everyone wants to support the robinhood govt policies of taking tax money and spending on freebies and cow protection, just to get more votes. How is this less corrupt?
Completely stupid, someone should tell them that bitcoin fees depend on the txn size and not txn amount like they are doing in the app. Perhaps they are using it as a way to stop people from withdrawing bitcoins from their app as they may be loosing users or already lost money due to recent price fluctuations and trying to extort it back out of their users.
Our user load seems to double every week.
No matter what we do to compensate for the load, it just keeps going up.
Our best option at this stage is to reboot what we have done and do a rewrite to ensure much bigger loads.
Looking for a more experienced team to clean up UI bugs, etc as well.
None are quick fixes at all.
We have done some more updates to limit data flow from API, etc. Hopefully, we can see some results this week, but am confident that user load will grow to fill the limits we have changed.
We have been held up with withdraws and deposits for fiat as well thanks to these rising numbers.
I need time to fix these tech issues as we never expected such a big bump up in users across such a short time.
Rest assured, we will be better than before in no time.
No matter what we do to compensate for the load, it just keeps going up.
Our best option at this stage is to reboot what we have done and do a rewrite to ensure much bigger loads.
Looking for a more experienced team to clean up UI bugs, etc as well.
None are quick fixes at all.
We have done some more updates to limit data flow from API, etc. Hopefully, we can see some results this week, but am confident that user load will grow to fill the limits we have changed.
We have been held up with withdraws and deposits for fiat as well thanks to these rising numbers.
I need time to fix these tech issues as we never expected such a big bump up in users across such a short time.
Rest assured, we will be better than before in no time.
In which section are you experiencing high load issues? Wallet side or website side?
In what language is your website? If it is in PHP, I can help.
Website mainly.
Coinsecure is written in Scala, so PHP wont help much here.
We know how to scale this up, not enough hands though.
Do you mind sharing some kind of data of simulateous users on your website which is causing so much issue.
Also your app also does not work when website is down .It keeps trying to fetch order book and then fails.
Re: Will segwit reduce the number of transactions by any significant amount?
to explain LN channels(hop)..
firstly ill display this image and then explain it
http://i.imgur.com/MRvPhrs.png
first some people think anyone can set up a channel with a click and remain permissionless(#1).. wrong!
you have to set it up WITH ANOTHER PARTY (#2) !! permissioned as you need their signature to sign off on payments !!
next you cant just instantly pay anyone. for instance A cant just pay E,
you need to have to find a route to the intended 'anyone' by finding a path of channels that can link you to the intended party.
this involves some parties having more than one channel open (#3) as you can see B has 2, C has 2, D has 2..
next is the funding..
A doesnt just fund E.. A has to pass funds to B(plus a fee) in the A_B channel... B then needs to use a separate channel B_C with separate funding to fund C, and so on. (#4)
this means with a cap per channel of lets say 0.1btc
B needs to deposit 0.1 into 2 channels
C needs to deposit 0.1 into 2 channels and so on
now, with many channels available and channels having funds, this then allows a path (route)(#5) to be established from A to E
now lets say A wants to pay E
we will start with the blank slate(#6)
imagine A wants to pay E 0.01btc... and each 'hop' cost 0.001 fee to thank each person of the route for participating.
(dont knit pick the fee or take it literally. i chose 0.001 randomly for demo purposes only, i simply couldnt be arsed to do lengthy decimals to show a very small fee)
as you can see in(#7) A has worked out it would cost him 0.003 in fee's to get to E and so A passed 0.013 to B
B in A_B is where B's 0.001 fee remains.
in (#8) B using the separate stash knows its going to cost him 0.002 in fee's to get to E and so B passed 0.012 to C
C in B_C is where C's 0.001 fee remains.
in (#9) C using the separate stash knows its going to cost him 0.001 in fee's to get to E and so C passed 0.011 to D
D in B_C is where C's 0.001 fee remains.
in (#10) D using the separate stash passes 0.011 to E
D in D_D is where D's 0.001 fee remains.
which when if they all closed channels and totalled up their holdings
(#11) A=0.087 B=0.101 C=0.101 D=0.101 E=0.110
which means the guys in the middle are 0.001(fee) in profit from acting as routes(hops) and E has the 0.01 which indirectly came from A
because A is down by 0.01... (and down by 0.003 for the fee's)
all that the mainnet chain see's to set up the channels is the 8 transactions (into a channel) to set up the 4 channels (2 tx per channel)
as shown by the arrows in (#5)
A(0.1)->A_B B(0.1)->A_B B(0.1)->B_C C(0.1)->B_C
C(0.1)->C_D D(0.1)->C_D D(0.1)->D_E E(0.1)->D_E
and 4 final transactions when closing the channels
A_B(0.2)->A(0.087)B(0.103) B_C(0.2)->B(0.088)C(0.102)
C_D(0.2)->C(0.089)B(0.101) D_E(0.2)->B(0.09)C(0.110)
which when if they all closed channels and totalled up their holdings
(#11) A=0.087 B=0.101 C=0.101 D=0.101 E=0.110
which means the guys in the middle are 0.001(fee) in profit from acting as routes(hops) and E has the 0.01 which indirectly came from A
because A is down by 0.01... (and down by 0.003 for the fee's)
the steps #7 to #10 are funds moved all off chain.. never seen by the mainnet chain
and funds can move back and forth as many times as possible off chain as long as:
the channels have enough funds to work as a route for the particular payment
and
there are enough channels to link/create a route
Thanks, great explanation.firstly ill display this image and then explain it
http://i.imgur.com/MRvPhrs.png
first some people think anyone can set up a channel with a click and remain permissionless(#1).. wrong!
you have to set it up WITH ANOTHER PARTY (#2) !! permissioned as you need their signature to sign off on payments !!
next you cant just instantly pay anyone. for instance A cant just pay E,
you need to have to find a route to the intended 'anyone' by finding a path of channels that can link you to the intended party.
this involves some parties having more than one channel open (#3) as you can see B has 2, C has 2, D has 2..
next is the funding..
A doesnt just fund E.. A has to pass funds to B(plus a fee) in the A_B channel... B then needs to use a separate channel B_C with separate funding to fund C, and so on. (#4)
this means with a cap per channel of lets say 0.1btc
B needs to deposit 0.1 into 2 channels
C needs to deposit 0.1 into 2 channels and so on
now, with many channels available and channels having funds, this then allows a path (route)(#5) to be established from A to E
now lets say A wants to pay E
we will start with the blank slate(#6)
imagine A wants to pay E 0.01btc... and each 'hop' cost 0.001 fee to thank each person of the route for participating.
(dont knit pick the fee or take it literally. i chose 0.001 randomly for demo purposes only, i simply couldnt be arsed to do lengthy decimals to show a very small fee)
as you can see in(#7) A has worked out it would cost him 0.003 in fee's to get to E and so A passed 0.013 to B
B in A_B is where B's 0.001 fee remains.
in (#8) B using the separate stash knows its going to cost him 0.002 in fee's to get to E and so B passed 0.012 to C
C in B_C is where C's 0.001 fee remains.
in (#9) C using the separate stash knows its going to cost him 0.001 in fee's to get to E and so C passed 0.011 to D
D in B_C is where C's 0.001 fee remains.
in (#10) D using the separate stash passes 0.011 to E
D in D_D is where D's 0.001 fee remains.
which when if they all closed channels and totalled up their holdings
(#11) A=0.087 B=0.101 C=0.101 D=0.101 E=0.110
which means the guys in the middle are 0.001(fee) in profit from acting as routes(hops) and E has the 0.01 which indirectly came from A
because A is down by 0.01... (and down by 0.003 for the fee's)
all that the mainnet chain see's to set up the channels is the 8 transactions (into a channel) to set up the 4 channels (2 tx per channel)
as shown by the arrows in (#5)
A(0.1)->A_B B(0.1)->A_B B(0.1)->B_C C(0.1)->B_C
C(0.1)->C_D D(0.1)->C_D D(0.1)->D_E E(0.1)->D_E
and 4 final transactions when closing the channels
A_B(0.2)->A(0.087)B(0.103) B_C(0.2)->B(0.088)C(0.102)
C_D(0.2)->C(0.089)B(0.101) D_E(0.2)->B(0.09)C(0.110)
which when if they all closed channels and totalled up their holdings
(#11) A=0.087 B=0.101 C=0.101 D=0.101 E=0.110
which means the guys in the middle are 0.001(fee) in profit from acting as routes(hops) and E has the 0.01 which indirectly came from A
because A is down by 0.01... (and down by 0.003 for the fee's)
the steps #7 to #10 are funds moved all off chain.. never seen by the mainnet chain
and funds can move back and forth as many times as possible off chain as long as:
the channels have enough funds to work as a route for the particular payment
and
there are enough channels to link/create a route
Re: Will segwit reduce the number of transactions by any significant amount?
Lightning can hop through payment channels, you can pay anyone on the rest of the Network, infinitely, sometimes for free (if someone wants lots of BTC going through their channel)
The clue is in the word "Network", if you can only pay one person again and again, it's not really a Network. Lightning is a network, where you can pay anyone.
So you are saying that all payment channels are connected or is this a special case. Like if there is a channel between A and B and another channel between B and C , so does it mean there is automatically a channel between A and C?The clue is in the word "Network", if you can only pay one person again and again, it's not really a Network. Lightning is a network, where you can pay anyone.
Re: Will segwit reduce the number of transactions by any significant amount?
But think what will happen if that payment channel is between you and a "payment provider"... and that provider is being utilised by your local cafe, your local convenience store, the book shop down the street, a fast food chain that you frequently visit etc etc...
Yeah...just think... Your payment provider will sell the details of every last purchase you have made to your insurance company, so they can adjust your rates based upon your unhealthy lifestyle. Just like Facebook. I can't wait.
Quote
It suddenly allows you to be able to make multiple "micro" transactions without the overhead of full "on chain" transactions... you don't need to stand in the store for 4 days while you wait for your transaction to confirm due to there being 150,000 unconfirmed transactions... and you don't have to pay $5 in transaction fees to purchase your $3.50 coffee with all your faucet dusT.
IOW, the same way bitcoin used to work, and would continue to work, we're it not for this stupid, centrally-planned production quota. Again...i can't wait!!!!!11!!!!1!1!1!!!
How will they gather this information, if you are running this node? You provide your own payment channel without having to store or share information with anybody? The way I understand this, anyone can host a node, not just specific companies or certain individuals.
We are totally open to the same thing, if miners are owned and run by huge corporate entities and/or financial institutions. Who says these mining farms are not funded by the Chinese government for instance? ^hmmmmm^
Re: Will segwit reduce the number of transactions by any significant amount?
What is that reduce the number of transactions? you can't stop people from transacting, segwit does it by reducing the size of the data included in each block. who opens channels in LN?
Yes what I am trying to say is not many people use bitcoin the way lightening network wants ie repeated micro payments to same receiver, so basically the number of onchain transactions remain the same, which segwit/lightening claims to reduce.Re: Will segwit reduce the number of transactions by any significant amount?
But think what will happen if that payment channel is between you and a "payment provider"... and that provider is being utilised by your local cafe, your local convenience store, the book shop down the street, a fast food chain that you frequently visit etc etc...
It suddenly allows you to be able to make multiple "micro" transactions without the overhead of full "on chain" transactions... you don't need to stand in the store for 4 days while you wait for your transaction to confirm due to there being 150,000 unconfirmed transactions... and you don't have to pay $5 in transaction fees to purchase your $3.50 coffee with all your faucet dust.
The provider can effectively guarantee payment and your transaction can have "insta confirmation" etc...
Granted this suddenly brings the concept of "Trusted 3rd Parties" into the mix... but a vast majority of the folks who want to use bitcoin for day to day transactions aren't going to be too worried about that... if it means their transactions get confirmed almost instantly and the fees are at an acceptable level.
Obviously, not something your hardcore anti-bank, privacy loving, bitcoin hodler is interested in... but I can certainly see the benefits for a lot of folks who want bitcoin to be like android/apple/samsung pay or debit/credit card...
I guess it all depends on your definition of "average bitcoin user"
But then what is the point of using bitcoin ?It suddenly allows you to be able to make multiple "micro" transactions without the overhead of full "on chain" transactions... you don't need to stand in the store for 4 days while you wait for your transaction to confirm due to there being 150,000 unconfirmed transactions... and you don't have to pay $5 in transaction fees to purchase your $3.50 coffee with all your faucet dust.
The provider can effectively guarantee payment and your transaction can have "insta confirmation" etc...
Granted this suddenly brings the concept of "Trusted 3rd Parties" into the mix... but a vast majority of the folks who want to use bitcoin for day to day transactions aren't going to be too worried about that... if it means their transactions get confirmed almost instantly and the fees are at an acceptable level.
Obviously, not something your hardcore anti-bank, privacy loving, bitcoin hodler is interested in... but I can certainly see the benefits for a lot of folks who want bitcoin to be like android/apple/samsung pay or debit/credit card...
I guess it all depends on your definition of "average bitcoin user"
The normal payment processors like visa provide the exact same service , what extra will I as a bitcoin user get using a lightening payment processor.
Will segwit reduce the number of transactions by any significant amount?
I want to know real world use cases of segwit, it seems like segwit is similar to 3D Tv technology which though is improvement in TV technology but in reality very few users will actually use it.
Most bitcoin transactions are generally one time like: User withdraws money from any exchange/website or User buys something using bitcoin online or user buys a service using bitcoin. I dont understand how segwit/lightening can be used in this general usecase. Some services are paid monthly but is the lightening network developed for such cases to keep the payment channel open for a month?
Thus it seems segwit/lightening is not useful in most transactions, so though theoretically it should reduce the number of bitcoin transactions but in reality it will not make much difference to the actual number of transactions because it does not cover most common bitcoin use-cases and completely useless for average bitcoin user.
Most bitcoin transactions are generally one time like: User withdraws money from any exchange/website or User buys something using bitcoin online or user buys a service using bitcoin. I dont understand how segwit/lightening can be used in this general usecase. Some services are paid monthly but is the lightening network developed for such cases to keep the payment channel open for a month?
Thus it seems segwit/lightening is not useful in most transactions, so though theoretically it should reduce the number of bitcoin transactions but in reality it will not make much difference to the actual number of transactions because it does not cover most common bitcoin use-cases and completely useless for average bitcoin user.
Are you OK with 3rd party software as a solution if the software leaves the 3rd party out of the transactions after installation? There is some great software out there that many large sites run and it all goes smooth as silk.
Can you please name a few, I will check.Hi,
What is the best way to accept payments from users in the following scenario:
>Give permanent deposit addresses to 30K users so they can deposit whenever they want.
>Use xpub key to generate the deposit addresses so no private key is on server.
>Easily manage the deposits using a wallet on system
I tried using electrum but it seems it has sync issues with so many addresses.
With core it seems it does not support xpub without the private key.
Any other option?
What is the best way to accept payments from users in the following scenario:
>Give permanent deposit addresses to 30K users so they can deposit whenever they want.
>Use xpub key to generate the deposit addresses so no private key is on server.
>Easily manage the deposits using a wallet on system
I tried using electrum but it seems it has sync issues with so many addresses.
With core it seems it does not support xpub without the private key.
Any other option?
This was bound to happen. Zebpay probably has nothing to hide, which is good for us as this will be a step towards regulating Bitcoins.
Coinsecure's next.
Regarding coinsecure, does anyone know why Benson has not visited this forum in last 5 days, being a mod he is generally active here, hope it is not related to this BS.Coinsecure's next.
Re: Member of Parliament has asked for suggestion from Indian Bitcoiners
I am quoting his tweet from 28th of March.
"@Bitcoin is illegal User can face action under money laundering & other acts say government of india in Parliament @BJP4India @narendramodi"
And this image,
https://pbs-h2.twimg.com/media/C8AnzEfVUAAwU-C.jpg
We should so something on priority basis.
READ PROPERLY BEFORE POSTING."@Bitcoin is illegal User can face action under money laundering & other acts say government of india in Parliament @BJP4India @narendramodi"
And this image,
https://pbs-h2.twimg.com/media/C8AnzEfVUAAwU-C.jpg
We should so something on priority basis.
Quote
usage of VCs including Bitcoins, for illicit and illegal activities in ..... could subject the users to ....
Instead of helping you are making the issue worse by spreading false info.