Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 14973. (Read 26715624 times)

I can't speak highly enough, or more practically recommend, Synology products, over any alternative, for media/file serving.

Run two of their NAS' in my house and they are fucking bulletproof. Rebuilt/expanded their original volumes a couple times now as my needs grew, with minor issues (worst case was I had to ssh into a box, and manually shutdown services before fscking the main volume, to resolve issues that prevented me from further expanding).

I think it’s the requirement for an “always online” connnection. Just easier with cloud. 

Don’t ask me to explain what happens if your node goes offline.  I don’t know.

I would suggest a dedicated NAS with zfs (FreeBSD). Mostly like RAID, only better.
A dedicated ethernet cable between server and NAS would provide adequate disk bandwidth. Or, likely, you could actually manage to run bitcoind and lightningd on the NAS itself. As for the form factor, there are dedicated cabinets that accommodate 1-12 disks, with little leftover space except for the motherboard.

@whalepool
1h1 hour ago

Want to easily try out lightning on the test net? 

software raid works but it requires some more knowledge and care.

I like the HP ProLiant MicroServers. 4 drives and nice remote management.

Everyone on this thread should collectively pledge to ignore anything the Anti Semite posts for eternity. Responding to it serves no purpose.

Current Price 11.1k
Im calling: ~8700 within this week
Set buy from 9.5k till 8.5k.

I blame Trevon James for milking people-of-color for their fiatcoin losses.

https://twitter.com/BitcoinTre

That guy has really caused a lot of people to experience catastrophic, life-changing losses, due to pimping out BitConnect.

And he's still going

software raid works but it requires some more knowledge and care.


I like the HP ProLiant MicroServers. 4 drives and nice remote management.

From the moment the user visits the site, and even in the video, the entire site has always emphasised low fees. Obviously we don't expect some insanely low fee, but the current fees make it impossible for reasonable people to transact with each other. I don't know what's gone wrong, but I don't think the correct solution is to change the site to focus on the "uncensorable" aspect. We'd have to go deep into lots of pages where low fees and "fast" transactions are mentioned and do translations for everything. Fees were supposed to come down with Segwit anyway.

What even is an uncensorable transaction? Cash is uncensorable, but with cash, there are no fees. So someone reading that would still assume that fees are low or nonexistent. The only way to present the current and possible future state of the network (if nothing is done) accurately would be to somehow sell these fees as a "cost" for the uncensorable transactions. So we'd have to market high fees as a feature. This is a huge change to how Bitcoin has been marketed for much of its history, and it implies that we've misled millions of people about what Bitcoin actually is. In fact, it'll actively turn people off and they'll use something else. Heck, even the criminals and darknet market people, the ones that need the "uncensorable" aspect the most, would be turned off by that, they all use Monero anyway for anonymity and lower fees.

The entire brand of "Bitcoin" has always been about being able to spend it. It's in the name itself, a "coin", you use coins as money to pay for things. Nobody would use coins if they somehow had high fees. The correct solution isn't to change how we've marketed Bitcoin to millions of people, for example millions of people associate Coke as a sugar drink, this is their experience and how it's been for it's entire history, but if one day Coke started tasting salty, people would rightly freak out.

I think we just have to leave this for the network to resolve. Since we don't have any off chain solutions out there yet, it makes more sense the community build a consensus to change the network in such a way as to reduce the fees while these off chain solutions like Lightning are fully fleshed out and adopted over the next few years. Then once these off chain solutions start working, we can pivot the marketing to work with that in a way that is consistent with the history of how Bitcoin is marketed, because we'll still be able to promise "low processing fees" but through payment channels.

@seweso: I'm actually in favor of a block size increase. It doesn't look like Lightning will be ready for mass adoption by users and merchants anytime soon, and Segwit adoption seems to very slow, and by the time it's very widely used, fees will be high again.

You really think I want newbies getting a wallet, buying some bitcoin, and then being turned off with some insane fee and no off chain alternative? Lightning will eventually need larger blocks anyway. Very few people think the block size should be kept at the current size forever, but people just differ on when and how it should be increased. It can be done through a soft fork when needed (though unlike Segwit, it probably should be enforced and not opt-in).

@jlopp: The low fees/fast transactions stuff is all over the site and in the video too. Bitcoin is money, right there in the title of the site it says "Open Source P2P Money", and since 2009 it's always had basically a similar title. You shouldn't have to pay some crazy fee to spend your own money.

If for some reason the Bitcoin network became centralized, should we go back and remove the "P2P" part too? It's ridiculous to change Bitcoin marketing materials based on how the network currently is when the current state is a mistake and a total disaster. The concept of a fee market is economically broken, go read about the diamond market and the De Beers mining company if you genuinely believe that a fee market is the optimal solution to solve the scaling issue for good. The scaling issue can be solved for good by careful increase of block sizes, research into new PoW algorithms (and hybrid PoW) for which it's very easy to create ASIC's for to make it as easy as possible for new miners to enter the space, and obviously off chain solutions like Lightning.

Anyway, I'm mostly against this change. I got into Bitcoin to have uncensorable money, but to also be able to spend it when necessary without being ripped off in fees by Jihan and his cronies. We should just leave the text as it is, and hopefully through quicker/greater Segwit adoption the network will change to have low fees again and Lightning will also come around and make fees even lower and live up to how Bitcoin has been presented and marketed for years.

Figure software RAID under Ubuntu is good enough (?)

Can anyone recommend a decent i7 or Xeon based system, smallest form-factor possible, capable of housing at least 4 x 3.5" drives ?

Figure software RAID under Ubuntu is good enough (?)

Figure software RAID under Ubuntu is good enough (?)

Can anyone recommend a decent i7 or Xeon based system, smallest form-factor possible, capable of housing at least 4 x 3.5" drives ?

MUUHAHAHAHA   ===>

" I am going broke because bitcoin crashed... (moving back to my mom's house) "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjKOWqIxZho

 

weee

Along these lines, I'm looking to build myself a "proper" server to run Bitcoind and LND. Ideally RAID 10 for the boot volume, and RAID 10 for the blockchain/LND volume.

Figure software RAID under Ubuntu is good enough (?)

This makes more sense.

I don't believe there are more than 31,000 people living in Norway. Maybe Santa and his elves make up a lot of the population but still.