Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 20841. (Read 26608802 times)

But that was weeks ago, and it is clear that Core will never agree to any increase.

What "big crashing"?  

EDIT: You mean dec 2013 - jan 2015?

Today I discovered that I had been working with a misunderstanding of the “no fees” policy of Circle.

For some reason, I had thought that there was a buy sell spread; however, recently, I had been considered receiving regular approximately monthly payments in Bitcoin; however, I considered that the regular monthly receipt of Bitcoin was going to likely exceed my ability to spend those bitcoin during that month.  Accordingly, I realized that if I were to end up receiving the BTC on a regular monthly basis, then I was going to have to cash out btc into dollars on a regular monthly basis.

Therefore, I studied more closely into Circle’s sell rate, and I that point, I had an ah ha moment.  It appears that Circle is using the same rate to buy or to sell BTC.

Therefore, there is effectively NO fee on either end (even though their rate seems to be about consistently about 1% higher than the Stamp  trading rate).  Furthermore, it also appears that currently I have a $5,000 weekly sell limit on Circle, which is practically unlimited in terms of my anticipated quantity of need to cash out any BTC in the near future.   WOW!!!!!!

Accordingly, I have concluded that on my end, if i were to receive any regular monthly Bitcoin payment(s) then at the point of receipt of each payment, I would decide whether I wanted to cash out through Circle immediately into my bank account (all or part) or to hold those BTC until a later time. 

I'm glad that I was able to clarify this Circle fees matter (at least for my own understanding) because potentially working with BTC on a regular basis (up to $5,000 per week through Circle) appears to be much better than I had originally thought.

Sorry for being glib. It's more a product of my own frustration with the progress (or lack thereof).

You may be thinking of IBLT?

Probably don't need to remind Gavin, he made a nice gist about it.
https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/e20c3b5a1d4b97f79ac2

I gotcha

I have not done anything regarding this. I told you the two reasons for this in my previous post. (The post you are responding to.)

1: Gavin have talked about statistical distribution of confirmations before.
2: Somebody are working on tree chains, which I think is related to the same, but I'm not sure.

The ideas are out there. I think Core devs Gavin & Jeff are capable of handling this shit, but Core boss Wladimir is just too scared to make any decitions or point in any direction.

If I don't see any development in this area in 6 months, I will probably contact Gavin to propose a deterministic distribution of transaction confirmations. But I do think fresher brains than mine are woring at it now. So I don't worry too much about bitcoin scaling.

I don't understand what you mean by your puff and pass remark. Probably a language thing, as I am from Norway. 

Are you worried BTC can't scale, Cconvert? It's actually easy. And it will be like this:

MINERS SHARE THE CONFIRMATION WORK.

This means that not every f**king mining computer (or pool) have to verify every f**king coffee transaction!

It has to be many confirmations, and by a very distributed network. But not EVERY F**KING computer in the p2p network!!!

The concept is very easy, but the implication is more difficult. (But really not THAT hard if you ask me.)

I wondered if I should step up as a developer regarding this, but I read somewhere that Gavin talked about "random" confirmations, and someone also work at Tree Chains (I think it's about the same).

Anyway, I think very clever people work at the practical solution to this problem (at MIT?). And we don't really need Lightning or Sidechains to make onchain coffee cup trades.

And how does 2.7 tx per second factor in ^.