Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 206 results by uvt9
Re: BIP100 gives miners too much power. Everyone should reconsider it
I have same concern, BIP 100 can't promise bigger blocks while it undermines decentralization by giving miners more control. I want blocksize increase but if i have to choose between BIP100 and staying at 1MB forever, i would choose the latter. Core devs need to reject this proposal.
Hi, i'm planning to install Electrum as cold wallet on my offline laptop running Ubuntu. However the installation instructions require me to connect this PC to internet in order to have Electrum installed:
Is there any executable for Linux/Ubuntu or alternative method to install without connecting offline PC to internet ?
Code:
sudo apt-get install python-qt4 python-pip
sudo pip install https://download.electrum.org/Electrum-2.4.4.tar.gz
sudo pip install https://download.electrum.org/Electrum-2.4.4.tar.gz
Is there any executable for Linux/Ubuntu or alternative method to install without connecting offline PC to internet ?
Oh nvm, now i realized that i can run Electrum straightly from source.
Btw is there any advantage in term of usage from install as above compared to running from source ? I got the warning "You are offline" window and "Error: Cannot read config file" in the terminal" during first run but they disappear in later attempts.
Hi, i'm planning to install Electrum as cold wallet on my offline laptop running Ubuntu. However the installation instructions require me to connect this PC to internet in order to have Electrum installed:
Is there any executable for Linux/Ubuntu or alternative method to install without connecting offline PC to internet ?
Code:
sudo apt-get install python-qt4 python-pip
sudo pip install https://download.electrum.org/Electrum-2.4.4.tar.gz
sudo pip install https://download.electrum.org/Electrum-2.4.4.tar.gz
Is there any executable for Linux/Ubuntu or alternative method to install without connecting offline PC to internet ?
Re: Bitcoin has NOT forked, calm down and don't spread misinformation
Please use your eyes and read this: Bitcoin transaction fees go up when transaction data volume goes up, the blockchain functions perfectly normal regardless of transaction # or size.
Except that it can only perfectly function at the rate of 3tx per second.
Plenty of room in ^there^ for all you Theymos and BashCo haters.
BashCo own /v/Bitcoin which is not censored and has decent number of subscriber.
Eyes rolled as soon as I saw it's Mike Hearn. He and Gavin don't care about 'Bitcoin'... Not really. They have ulterior motives with this fork. Be careful and take what he writes with a grain of salt.
This is quite a longshot, but Satoshi's opinion is really needed about the matter here.
This is quite a longshot, but Satoshi's opinion is really needed about the matter here.
And that is exactly why an imposer appeared to please retards like you
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html
Quote
I have been following the recent block size debates through the mailing list. I had hoped the debate would resolve and that a fork proposal would achieve widespread consensus. However with the formal release of Bitcoin XT 0.11A, this looks unlikely to happen, and so I am forced to share my concerns about this very dangerous fork.
The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my original vision, but nothing could be further from the truth. When I designed Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future modifications to the consensus rules difficult without near unanimous agreement. Bitcoin was designed to be protected from the influence of charismatic leaders, even if their name is Gavin Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto. Nearly everyone has to agree on a change, and they have to do it without being forced or pressured into it. By doing a fork in this way, these developers are violating the "original vision" they claim to honour.
They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was supposed to be. However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions. For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security of the network. Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to come up with a robust solution. I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism.
If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoin a failed project. Bitcoin was meant to be both technically and socially robust. This present situation has been very disappointing to watch unfold.
Satoshi Nakamoto
The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my original vision, but nothing could be further from the truth. When I designed Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future modifications to the consensus rules difficult without near unanimous agreement. Bitcoin was designed to be protected from the influence of charismatic leaders, even if their name is Gavin Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto. Nearly everyone has to agree on a change, and they have to do it without being forced or pressured into it. By doing a fork in this way, these developers are violating the "original vision" they claim to honour.
They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was supposed to be. However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions. For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security of the network. Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to come up with a robust solution. I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism.
If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoin a failed project. Bitcoin was meant to be both technically and socially robust. This present situation has been very disappointing to watch unfold.
Satoshi Nakamoto
There is no way to prove that guy is real Satoshi, that message didn't have signature.
Of course its dumping. Every freakin IPO does. Poor bastards who are late to market or holding are going to lose money or baghold.
We will have to open a section " Ethereum Bagholders Anonymous". "Free tissues".
We will have to open a section " Ethereum Bagholders Anonymous". "Free tissues".
ETH is trading, in BTC terms, between 4-5x the initial IPO price at the moment. Please spare ETH 'bag holders' your sympathy
Let's not forget that BTC price was 600+ when Ether IPO start. With this speed of dropping, even IPO investors will see their break even (in USD) very soon, if i was them i would sell now to take some small profits.
i think bitcoin system made it's own back choosing for the valid chain
No the system didn't correct itself. It required those pools updating their software in order to mine blocks properly.
OMG WTF guys? I`m getting scared.
So if i just send now a transaction, then i lose my bitcoins and it doesnt get to the other end?
Also what if i buy now bitcoin with do i get fake bitcoin if the merchant is on wrong chain?
This could be a serious problem. No FUD intended but seriously, i`m starting to panic/
So if i just send now a transaction, then i lose my bitcoins and it doesnt get to the other end?
Also what if i buy now bitcoin with do i get fake bitcoin if the merchant is on wrong chain?
This could be a serious problem. No FUD intended but seriously, i`m starting to panic/
OMG WTF please read carefully before getting panic. Everything is settled, those who using Bitcoin core older than 0.10 and was receiving payment during fork period should wait at least 30 confirmations.
Banks using blockchain technology will raise awareness of cryptos, might bring more users into bitcoin, but not enough to move the prices. If banks use THE bitcoin blockchain, it will affect bitcoin price a lot, since they need to buy bitcoin to send transactions to the blockchain.
Using blockchain doesn't necessarily mean buying Bitcoin. The blockchain can be serve as trustless record ledger.
The fact that someone getting investigated just because he suddenly got rich is really scary.
Why don't he just tell authority that he bought those coins years ago when it was only few cents a pop ? How did police end up revealing the stolen coins ?
Why don't he just tell authority that he bought those coins years ago when it was only few cents a pop ? How did police end up revealing the stolen coins ?
Hello, can someone put a sum up about Shadowcash ? I don't like POS distribution but from technology wise, what is its advantages and disadvantages compared to Monero ? I heard it has ring signature and ZK in bitcoin codebase which seems serious.