Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1040. (Read 3917568 times)
I thought the bitcoin dev team had an update where any transactions under 3 cents or something would not be sent through the blockchain? Or has it not been implemented yet? If so, wouldn't that mean the satoshi confirmations would no longer work?
Thanks for the slight derail on the Satoshis. I honestly didn't understand why ASICMiner bothered with them.
Also thanks to rdponticelli for responding with all the points I wanted to say so I didn't have to.
I guess I should go elsewhere and try to convince the big mining pools to require transaction fees for all transactions.
-- END DERAIL --
Also thanks to rdponticelli for responding with all the points I wanted to say so I didn't have to.
I guess I should go elsewhere and try to convince the big mining pools to require transaction fees for all transactions.
-- END DERAIL --
ASICMiner is hashing the block chain to shreds the last hour: 
Is there a spreadsheet of share holders somewhere? I thought I saw a Google doc at one point.
When does Friedcat usually provide his updates?
Sometimes shortly after dividend... sometimes next day... sometimes not at all. Just watch https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/friedcat-49840
When does Friedcat usually provide his updates?
I'd suggest anyone who hasn't, and refuses to return the double div, be blacklisted from btct.co.
thats the dumbest thing i ever heard. there are ways to correct something like this but solving this with a nazi mentality is far from the best way
Sure, you could kindly ask AM to stop polluting the blockchain, but it would be kind of pointless: other people can still do that, and you're not going to "kindly ask" them all: this is a social dynamic that "just doesn't work".
Handling it as a security/protocol issue is IMAO a better approach, because you really have a chance of success, even if people do not wish (or care) to cooperate.
Handling it as a security/protocol issue is IMAO a better approach, because you really have a chance of success, even if people do not wish (or care) to cooperate.
Other people, any random user, doesn't have 30% of the hashrate. We're talking about one of the big players here, and you know how it goes, with great powers...
But lets stop derailing this thread even more....
300 direct shares for sale @ 2.45
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2320707
first come first serve.
Thanks.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2320707
first come first serve.
Thanks.
We saw you mention this earlier in the thread already...
this is great stuff, it would be even nicer if you were able to incorporate the btcguild hashrate so that we see how much has been mined since the last dividend in total.
Is it known whether ASICMiner will switch to solo mining only?If this is the case, I will just wait until everything is done as solo mining.
If not, I will look into adding the BTCGuild stats.
sorry, can't help it
this is great stuff, it would be even nicer if you were able to incorporate the btcguild hashrate so that we see how much has been mined since the last dividend in total.
Is it known whether ASICMiner will switch to solo mining only?If this is the case, I will just wait until everything is done as solo mining.
If not, I will look into adding the BTCGuild stats.
Sorry for being rude, but it's for the sake of clearness.
There's no rule nor protocol or law preventing anybody from shitting on their food. There's no need for it, because it's absolutely obvious the inadvisability of doing such a thing...
Now. if ASICMINER wants to shit over the blockchain, it's ok that they're able to do it. I can't see why somebody should go to the hassle of finding a way to stop them. But that's hardly advisable for themselves, considering that they're eating from the blockchain too...
Oh, I partly agree, you're not being rude.There's no rule nor protocol or law preventing anybody from shitting on their food. There's no need for it, because it's absolutely obvious the inadvisability of doing such a thing...
Now. if ASICMINER wants to shit over the blockchain, it's ok that they're able to do it. I can't see why somebody should go to the hassle of finding a way to stop them. But that's hardly advisable for themselves, considering that they're eating from the blockchain too...
Point is, you're looking at this problem as if it could be considered a "social" problem, while I look at it as if it was a "security" problem.
Sure, you could kindly ask AM to stop polluting the blockchain, but it would be kind of pointless: other people can still do that, and you're not going to "kindly ask" them all: this is a social dynamic that "just doesn't work".
Handling it as a security/protocol issue is IMAO a better approach, because you really have a chance of success, even if people do not wish (or care) to cooperate.
the satoshi confirmation is good, whats wrong with that? it helps by clearly showing how much shares are connected to the address,
thats why we have satoshis and small transactions, so this kind of stuff will be possible, thats the whole point about bitcoin and being decentrialized, so you can send how much you want to who ever you want with nobody else telling you your not allowed, or no1 else trying to stop you,
thats the whole idea about bitcoin.... lol
thats why we have satoshis and small transactions, so this kind of stuff will be possible, thats the whole point about bitcoin and being decentrialized, so you can send how much you want to who ever you want with nobody else telling you your not allowed, or no1 else trying to stop you,
thats the whole idea about bitcoin.... lol
Sorry for being rude, but it's for the sake of clearness.
There's no rule nor protocol or law preventing anybody from shitting on their food. There's no need for it, because it's absolutely obvious the inadvisability of doing such a thing...
Now. if ASICMINER wants to shit over the blockchain, it's ok that they're able to do it. I can't see why somebody should go to the hassle of finding a way to stop them. But that's hardly advisable for themselves, considering that they're eating from the blockchain too...
come on. This is not shitting in the blockchain. It makes sense that the company ASICMINER is sending out a message about how many shares you hold any given week. And anyway, why is every bitcoin issue always discussed in this thread? The 51 percent issue, now the blockchain spam/size. This thread is about ASICMINER so please keep on the topic.
I finally finished coding the calculations of the 24-hour, 3-day and 7-day average hash rates for solo mining. You can view it here:
http://runeks.dk/bitcoin/
The graph looks like this:
As you can see, we've seen a significant ramp-up in the solo hash rate in the past couple of days.
24-hour average is quite jumpy, but it seems we're sailing at a comfortable cruise speed of around 17 Thash/s right now.
Oh, and the chart updates every time new ASICMiner blocks come in, although you'll have to refresh the page to see the changes.
http://runeks.dk/bitcoin/
The graph looks like this:
As you can see, we've seen a significant ramp-up in the solo hash rate in the past couple of days.
24-hour average is quite jumpy, but it seems we're sailing at a comfortable cruise speed of around 17 Thash/s right now.
Oh, and the chart updates every time new ASICMiner blocks come in, although you'll have to refresh the page to see the changes.
this is great stuff, it would be even nicer if you were able to incorporate the btcguild hashrate so that we see how much has been mined since the last dividend in total.
if this kind of transaction bothers anyone, he should press for mandatory fees or something like that, but as long as the protocol allows it, then you should blame the protocol.
The catch here is ASICMINER is quite capable of including their own txids into blocks to ensure they are submitted. Which imho there is nothing wrong with, they are doing the work and as many have said can include whatever txids the protocol can support.
I completely agree and was going to say the same thing.
This is a non-issue.
As I said, at most you can press to change the protocol rules, i.e. declaring invalid a transaction without your desired requirements.
This would prevent any miner from including it.
Of course, this is an hard-fork and you would need to be pretty convincing.
Still, until you do, there's no complaining.
Sorry for being rude, but it's for the sake of clearness.
There's no rule nor protocol or law preventing anybody from shitting on their food. There's no need for it, because it's absolutely obvious the inadvisability of doing such a thing...
Now. if ASICMINER wants to shit over the blockchain, it's ok that they're able to do it. I can't see why somebody should go to the hassle of finding a way to stop them. But that's hardly advisable for themselves, considering that they're eating from the blockchain too...
if this kind of transaction bothers anyone, he should press for mandatory fees or something like that, but as long as the protocol allows it, then you should blame the protocol.
The catch here is ASICMINER is quite capable of including their own txids into blocks to ensure they are submitted. Which imho there is nothing wrong with, they are doing the work and as many have said can include whatever txids the protocol can support.
I completely agree and was going to say the same thing.
This is a non-issue.
As I said, at most you can press to change the protocol rules, i.e. declaring invalid a transaction without your desired requirements.
This would prevent any miner from including it.
Of course, this is an hard-fork and you would need to be pretty convincing.
Still, until you do, there's no complaining.
I'd argue the blockchain is supposed to do whatever people can do with it. Anything unwanted is a design flaw, not a user flaw.
+1if this kind of transaction bothers anyone, he should press for mandatory fees or something like that, but as long as the protocol allows it, then you should blame the protocol.
The catch here is ASICMINER is quite capable of including their own txids into blocks to ensure they are submitted. Which imho there is nothing wrong with, they are doing the work and as many have said can include whatever txids the protocol can support.
I completely agree and was going to say the same thing.
I'd argue the blockchain is supposed to do whatever people can do with it. Anything unwanted is a design flaw, not a user flaw.
+1if this kind of transaction bothers anyone, he should press for mandatory fees or something like that, but as long as the protocol allows it, then you should blame the protocol.
The catch here is ASICMINER is quite capable of including their own txids into blocks to ensure they are submitted. Which imho there is nothing wrong with, they are doing the work and as many have said can include whatever txids the protocol can support.
The percentage of the dividends received on your address is as good a proof as the sathoshis themselves, if not better, considering that they're not spam. And they're also forever on the blockchain. There's an easily done deterministic process to go from percentage of dividend received on a given time to amount of shares owned...
That's only true for the exact time frame you've received the dividends.Shares may have changed hands after that.
Yeah, this also applies to the satoshis spam.
The percentage of the dividends received on your address is as good a proof as the sathoshis themselves, if not better, considering that they're not spam. And they're also forever on the blockchain. There's an easily done deterministic process to go from percentage of dividend received on a given time to amount of shares owned...
That's only true for the exact time frame you've received the dividends.Shares may have changed hands after that.
Jump to: