Pages:
Author

Topic: What are you all - Sheep? (Read 3118 times)

legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1393
You lead and I'll watch you walk away.
December 04, 2016, 04:48:43 PM
#69
Santa Clause is coming to town.

Largest US Bitcoin Exchange Ordered To Disclose Three Years Of User Data To IRS
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-01/largest-us-bitcoin-exchange-ordered-disclose-three-years-user-data-irs

Quote
We concluded our report by wishing "Good luck to Coinbase fighting the IRS: if America's tax collector is intent on getting the identities of the biggest traders are in America's largest bitcoin exchange, it will certainly succeed (especially if they happen to be conservatives)."

Alas, our best wishes were not enough, and yesterday a federal court in the Northern District of California ordered Coinbase to disclose what the IRS has demanded: all American user transactions from 2013 to 2015.

The executed DOJ order:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/914226/download

Quote
Despite the order, Coinbase has vowed to continue the fight: "We look forward to opposing the DOJ's request in court after Coinbase is served with a subpoena," a spokesman for the San Francisco-based company said in an email to Reuters.

Coinbase remains concerned with its U.S. customers' privacy rights in the face of the government's request, he added, although he is likely far less concerned than any people who used Coinbase from 2013 to 2015, and who may soon be getting a visit from the taxman, even if they have done nothing illegal. As for the myth that trading bitcoin by ordinary Americans provides some additional layer of privacy, that is about to be thoroughly debunked.

Now the question is what head of the hydra will take over to protect the privacy?

Unfortunately, it won't matter.

*really big picture*
That is fucked up.

Bitcoin users should consequently prefer using peer to peer (Bitsquare, OpenBazaar etc), rather than centralized solutions, like Coinbase.

Average Joe Lazy Dumbass won't do that though. Mr. J. L. Dumbass thinks that's too complicated, and slow. He would rather live in a totalitarian oligarchy than lift a finger to do anything. Bitcoin isn't even necessary in Murrica, but poor J.L. is too lazy to drive two blocks from his house and vote for change.

The same happened to the internet. In the 90s it was even too complicated to just connect and it was a hassle for most users to simply send an email. People thought, the internet is not important and still today everyone is using it. Same will happen to Bitcoin.

Yeah, but you could get a lot of porn from the internet back then. I don't spend a lot of time jacking off to pictures of Bitcoin, do you? LOL

I was one of the early profiteers from this internet porn wave back then. And I agree: Porn was the reason why governments didn't censor the internet from early on. Also music downloads helped to establish it among regular people.
Back in the days, the internet was mainly a male orientated place, which I guess was, because of the technical side of computers. You never saw girls with their heads inside the computer case...
Anyway, it will still be a hard way for Bitcoin. The more attention it gets, the more governments will realise the danger for the status quo and the more powers will fight against it to keep things like they are. This time it could be greed as the factor for Bitcoins success, who knows.


Yep, all true.  But we can't be lazy. We need to not compare Bitcoin to the internet thinking that, "I don't need to spread the word because Bitcoin will grow organically like the internet". That's false, we all should be spreading the word every day.
AGD
legendary
Activity: 2070
Merit: 1164
Keeper of the Private Key
December 04, 2016, 11:58:56 AM
#68
Santa Clause is coming to town.

Largest US Bitcoin Exchange Ordered To Disclose Three Years Of User Data To IRS
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-01/largest-us-bitcoin-exchange-ordered-disclose-three-years-user-data-irs

Quote
We concluded our report by wishing "Good luck to Coinbase fighting the IRS: if America's tax collector is intent on getting the identities of the biggest traders are in America's largest bitcoin exchange, it will certainly succeed (especially if they happen to be conservatives)."

Alas, our best wishes were not enough, and yesterday a federal court in the Northern District of California ordered Coinbase to disclose what the IRS has demanded: all American user transactions from 2013 to 2015.

The executed DOJ order:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/914226/download

Quote
Despite the order, Coinbase has vowed to continue the fight: "We look forward to opposing the DOJ's request in court after Coinbase is served with a subpoena," a spokesman for the San Francisco-based company said in an email to Reuters.

Coinbase remains concerned with its U.S. customers' privacy rights in the face of the government's request, he added, although he is likely far less concerned than any people who used Coinbase from 2013 to 2015, and who may soon be getting a visit from the taxman, even if they have done nothing illegal. As for the myth that trading bitcoin by ordinary Americans provides some additional layer of privacy, that is about to be thoroughly debunked.

Now the question is what head of the hydra will take over to protect the privacy?

Unfortunately, it won't matter.

*really big picture*
That is fucked up.

Bitcoin users should consequently prefer using peer to peer (Bitsquare, OpenBazaar etc), rather than centralized solutions, like Coinbase.

Average Joe Lazy Dumbass won't do that though. Mr. J. L. Dumbass thinks that's too complicated, and slow. He would rather live in a totalitarian oligarchy than lift a finger to do anything. Bitcoin isn't even necessary in Murrica, but poor J.L. is too lazy to drive two blocks from his house and vote for change.

The same happened to the internet. In the 90s it was even too complicated to just connect and it was a hassle for most users to simply send an email. People thought, the internet is not important and still today everyone is using it. Same will happen to Bitcoin.

Yeah, but you could get a lot of porn from the internet back then. I don't spend a lot of time jacking off to pictures of Bitcoin, do you? LOL

I was one of the early profiteers from this internet porn wave back then. And I agree: Porn was the reason why governments didn't censor the internet from early on. Also music downloads helped to establish it among regular people.
Back in the days, the internet was mainly a male orientated place, which I guess was, because of the technical side of computers. You never saw girls with their heads inside the computer case...
Anyway, it will still be a hard way for Bitcoin. The more attention it gets, the more governments will realise the danger for the status quo and the more powers will fight against it to keep things like they are. This time it could be greed as the factor for Bitcoins success, who knows.
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1393
You lead and I'll watch you walk away.
December 04, 2016, 07:39:51 AM
#67
Santa Clause is coming to town.

Largest US Bitcoin Exchange Ordered To Disclose Three Years Of User Data To IRS
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-01/largest-us-bitcoin-exchange-ordered-disclose-three-years-user-data-irs

Quote
We concluded our report by wishing "Good luck to Coinbase fighting the IRS: if America's tax collector is intent on getting the identities of the biggest traders are in America's largest bitcoin exchange, it will certainly succeed (especially if they happen to be conservatives)."

Alas, our best wishes were not enough, and yesterday a federal court in the Northern District of California ordered Coinbase to disclose what the IRS has demanded: all American user transactions from 2013 to 2015.

The executed DOJ order:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/914226/download

Quote
Despite the order, Coinbase has vowed to continue the fight: "We look forward to opposing the DOJ's request in court after Coinbase is served with a subpoena," a spokesman for the San Francisco-based company said in an email to Reuters.

Coinbase remains concerned with its U.S. customers' privacy rights in the face of the government's request, he added, although he is likely far less concerned than any people who used Coinbase from 2013 to 2015, and who may soon be getting a visit from the taxman, even if they have done nothing illegal. As for the myth that trading bitcoin by ordinary Americans provides some additional layer of privacy, that is about to be thoroughly debunked.

Now the question is what head of the hydra will take over to protect the privacy?

Unfortunately, it won't matter.

*really big picture*
That is fucked up.

Bitcoin users should consequently prefer using peer to peer (Bitsquare, OpenBazaar etc), rather than centralized solutions, like Coinbase.

Average Joe Lazy Dumbass won't do that though. Mr. J. L. Dumbass thinks that's too complicated, and slow. He would rather live in a totalitarian oligarchy than lift a finger to do anything. Bitcoin isn't even necessary in Murrica, but poor J.L. is too lazy to drive two blocks from his house and vote for change.

The same happened to the internet. In the 90s it was even too complicated to just connect and it was a hassle for most users to simply send an email. People thought, the internet is not important and still today everyone is using it. Same will happen to Bitcoin.

Yeah, but you could get a lot of porn from the internet back then. I don't spend a lot of time jacking off to pictures of Bitcoin, do you? LOL
AGD
legendary
Activity: 2070
Merit: 1164
Keeper of the Private Key
December 04, 2016, 07:16:50 AM
#66
Santa Clause is coming to town.

Largest US Bitcoin Exchange Ordered To Disclose Three Years Of User Data To IRS
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-01/largest-us-bitcoin-exchange-ordered-disclose-three-years-user-data-irs

Quote
We concluded our report by wishing "Good luck to Coinbase fighting the IRS: if America's tax collector is intent on getting the identities of the biggest traders are in America's largest bitcoin exchange, it will certainly succeed (especially if they happen to be conservatives)."

Alas, our best wishes were not enough, and yesterday a federal court in the Northern District of California ordered Coinbase to disclose what the IRS has demanded: all American user transactions from 2013 to 2015.

The executed DOJ order:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/914226/download

Quote
Despite the order, Coinbase has vowed to continue the fight: "We look forward to opposing the DOJ's request in court after Coinbase is served with a subpoena," a spokesman for the San Francisco-based company said in an email to Reuters.

Coinbase remains concerned with its U.S. customers' privacy rights in the face of the government's request, he added, although he is likely far less concerned than any people who used Coinbase from 2013 to 2015, and who may soon be getting a visit from the taxman, even if they have done nothing illegal. As for the myth that trading bitcoin by ordinary Americans provides some additional layer of privacy, that is about to be thoroughly debunked.

Now the question is what head of the hydra will take over to protect the privacy?

Unfortunately, it won't matter.

*really big picture*
That is fucked up.

Bitcoin users should consequently prefer using peer to peer (Bitsquare, OpenBazaar etc), rather than centralized solutions, like Coinbase.

Average Joe Lazy Dumbass won't do that though. Mr. J. L. Dumbass thinks that's too complicated, and slow. He would rather live in a totalitarian oligarchy than lift a finger to do anything. Bitcoin isn't even necessary in Murrica, but poor J.L. is too lazy to drive two blocks from his house and vote for change.

The same happened to the internet. In the 90s it was even too complicated to just connect and it was a hassle for most users to simply send an email. People thought, the internet is not important and still today everyone is using it. Same will happen to Bitcoin.
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1393
You lead and I'll watch you walk away.
December 04, 2016, 06:36:00 AM
#65
Santa Clause is coming to town.

Largest US Bitcoin Exchange Ordered To Disclose Three Years Of User Data To IRS
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-01/largest-us-bitcoin-exchange-ordered-disclose-three-years-user-data-irs

Quote
We concluded our report by wishing "Good luck to Coinbase fighting the IRS: if America's tax collector is intent on getting the identities of the biggest traders are in America's largest bitcoin exchange, it will certainly succeed (especially if they happen to be conservatives)."

Alas, our best wishes were not enough, and yesterday a federal court in the Northern District of California ordered Coinbase to disclose what the IRS has demanded: all American user transactions from 2013 to 2015.

The executed DOJ order:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/914226/download

Quote
Despite the order, Coinbase has vowed to continue the fight: "We look forward to opposing the DOJ's request in court after Coinbase is served with a subpoena," a spokesman for the San Francisco-based company said in an email to Reuters.

Coinbase remains concerned with its U.S. customers' privacy rights in the face of the government's request, he added, although he is likely far less concerned than any people who used Coinbase from 2013 to 2015, and who may soon be getting a visit from the taxman, even if they have done nothing illegal. As for the myth that trading bitcoin by ordinary Americans provides some additional layer of privacy, that is about to be thoroughly debunked.

Now the question is what head of the hydra will take over to protect the privacy?

Unfortunately, it won't matter.

*really big picture*
That is fucked up.

Bitcoin users should consequently prefer using peer to peer (Bitsquare, OpenBazaar etc), rather than centralized solutions, like Coinbase.

Average Joe Lazy Dumbass won't do that though. Mr. J. L. Dumbass thinks that's too complicated, and slow. He would rather live in a totalitarian oligarchy than lift a finger to do anything. Bitcoin isn't even necessary in Murrica, but poor J.L. is too lazy to drive two blocks from his house and vote for change.
AGD
legendary
Activity: 2070
Merit: 1164
Keeper of the Private Key
December 04, 2016, 03:13:17 AM
#64
Santa Clause is coming to town.

Largest US Bitcoin Exchange Ordered To Disclose Three Years Of User Data To IRS
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-01/largest-us-bitcoin-exchange-ordered-disclose-three-years-user-data-irs

Quote
We concluded our report by wishing "Good luck to Coinbase fighting the IRS: if America's tax collector is intent on getting the identities of the biggest traders are in America's largest bitcoin exchange, it will certainly succeed (especially if they happen to be conservatives)."

Alas, our best wishes were not enough, and yesterday a federal court in the Northern District of California ordered Coinbase to disclose what the IRS has demanded: all American user transactions from 2013 to 2015.

The executed DOJ order:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/914226/download

Quote
Despite the order, Coinbase has vowed to continue the fight: "We look forward to opposing the DOJ's request in court after Coinbase is served with a subpoena," a spokesman for the San Francisco-based company said in an email to Reuters.

Coinbase remains concerned with its U.S. customers' privacy rights in the face of the government's request, he added, although he is likely far less concerned than any people who used Coinbase from 2013 to 2015, and who may soon be getting a visit from the taxman, even if they have done nothing illegal. As for the myth that trading bitcoin by ordinary Americans provides some additional layer of privacy, that is about to be thoroughly debunked.

Now the question is what head of the hydra will take over to protect the privacy?

Unfortunately, it won't matter.


That is fucked up.

Bitcoin users should consequently prefer using peer to peer (Bitsquare, OpenBazaar etc), rather than centralized solutions, like Coinbase.
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1026
December 03, 2016, 11:55:18 PM
#63
Santa Clause is coming to town.

Largest US Bitcoin Exchange Ordered To Disclose Three Years Of User Data To IRS
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-01/largest-us-bitcoin-exchange-ordered-disclose-three-years-user-data-irs

Quote
We concluded our report by wishing "Good luck to Coinbase fighting the IRS: if America's tax collector is intent on getting the identities of the biggest traders are in America's largest bitcoin exchange, it will certainly succeed (especially if they happen to be conservatives)."

Alas, our best wishes were not enough, and yesterday a federal court in the Northern District of California ordered Coinbase to disclose what the IRS has demanded: all American user transactions from 2013 to 2015.

The executed DOJ order:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/914226/download

Quote
Despite the order, Coinbase has vowed to continue the fight: "We look forward to opposing the DOJ's request in court after Coinbase is served with a subpoena," a spokesman for the San Francisco-based company said in an email to Reuters.

Coinbase remains concerned with its U.S. customers' privacy rights in the face of the government's request, he added, although he is likely far less concerned than any people who used Coinbase from 2013 to 2015, and who may soon be getting a visit from the taxman, even if they have done nothing illegal. As for the myth that trading bitcoin by ordinary Americans provides some additional layer of privacy, that is about to be thoroughly debunked.

Now the question is what head of the hydra will take over to protect the privacy?

Unfortunately, it won't matter.


That is fucked up.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
December 02, 2016, 08:14:50 AM
#62
Santa Clause is coming to town.

Largest US Bitcoin Exchange Ordered To Disclose Three Years Of User Data To IRS
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-01/largest-us-bitcoin-exchange-ordered-disclose-three-years-user-data-irs

Quote
We concluded our report by wishing "Good luck to Coinbase fighting the IRS: if America's tax collector is intent on getting the identities of the biggest traders are in America's largest bitcoin exchange, it will certainly succeed (especially if they happen to be conservatives)."

Alas, our best wishes were not enough, and yesterday a federal court in the Northern District of California ordered Coinbase to disclose what the IRS has demanded: all American user transactions from 2013 to 2015.

The executed DOJ order:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/914226/download

Quote
Despite the order, Coinbase has vowed to continue the fight: "We look forward to opposing the DOJ's request in court after Coinbase is served with a subpoena," a spokesman for the San Francisco-based company said in an email to Reuters.

Coinbase remains concerned with its U.S. customers' privacy rights in the face of the government's request, he added, although he is likely far less concerned than any people who used Coinbase from 2013 to 2015, and who may soon be getting a visit from the taxman, even if they have done nothing illegal. As for the myth that trading bitcoin by ordinary Americans provides some additional layer of privacy, that is about to be thoroughly debunked.

Now the question is what head of the hydra will take over to protect the privacy?

Unfortunately, it won't matter.

sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
December 02, 2016, 03:35:41 AM
#61
Why does everyone just stand around doing nothing while nullc / Blockstream / GMax takes over Bitcoin?

Well thats really a bad news dude! but i am helping bitcoin to rise to the top i worked for it and i earn from it besides chill out bitcoin is the biggest and the strongest of all and people in the internet gets bitcoin for a payment no need to worry that nullc and Blockstream they won't easily beat bitcoin they will try harder if they really want to destory bitcoin or take over but for now i am focusing on bitcoin to be top in the near future so i can share with my future kids how bitcoin helped me in times with earning money and having income from it. But really bitcoin won't die because some of the country are getting adapted to bitcoin and some are accepting bitcoin as a payment in the real world that is so chill and have a good day Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000
legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
December 01, 2016, 03:38:59 AM
#59

Did you ask me for a magic attack vector? Did I quote your posting to signalize my will to answer your "brain farts"? I guess the answer to both is: No.

SegWit seems to be the developers answer to the "flood attack" Satoshi was talking about. If there was no spamming, we had no blocksize discussion at all.

I also agree with Satoshi about to keep Bitcoin as small as possible.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.26999

Now, if there is a consensus about a fork (like Satoshi said "WE can change it later"), then it will happen, no matter how long the losers will keep whining about it.


Hmm,
you are a hard one to understand, from your original post did not know what you were talking about.

Problem is there are transaction capacity problems, no matter real growth or malevolent intent,  the transaction lag is very real to the users waiting for coins.

Satoshi has not seem fit to grace any of us with his presence , Chinese Miners have over 51% it will be their call in the long run.
The rest of us merely spectators.


 Cool
AGD
legendary
Activity: 2070
Merit: 1164
Keeper of the Private Key
December 01, 2016, 03:29:03 AM
#58
http://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/bitcointalk/441/

Quote
Re: Flood attack 0.00000001 BC
Bitcointalk
2010-08-05 16:03:21 UTC - Original Post
Forgot to add the good part about micropayments.  While I don't think Bitcoin is practical for smaller micropayments right now, it will eventually be as storage and bandwidth costs continue to fall.  If Bitcoin catches on on a big scale, it may already be the case by that time.  Another way they can become more practical is if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms.  Whatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical.  I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial.

I am not claiming that the network is impervious to DoS attack.  I think most P2P networks can be DoS attacked in numerous ways.  (On a side note, I read that the record companies would like to DoS all the file sharing networks, but they don't want to break the anti-hacking/anti-abuse laws.)

If we started getting DoS attacked with loads of wasted transactions back and forth, you would need to start paying a 0.01 minimum transaction fee.  0.1.5 actually had an option to set that, but I took it out to reduce confusion.  Free transactions are nice and we can keep it that way if people don't abuse them.

That brings up the question: if there was a minimum 0.01 fee for each transaction, should we automatically add the fee if it's just the minimum 0.01?  It would be awfully annoying to ask each time.  If you have 50.00 and send 10.00, the recipient would get 10.00 and you'd have 39.99 left.  I think it should just add it automatically.  It's trivial compared to the fees many other types of services add automatically.

Is this the magic attack vector or are you just having a brain fart?

 Cool

Did you ask me for a magic attack vector? Did I quote your posting to signalize my will to answer your "brain farts"? I guess the answer to both is: No.

SegWit seems to be the developers answer to the "flood attack" Satoshi was talking about. If there was no spamming, we had no blocksize discussion at all.

I also agree with Satoshi about to keep Bitcoin as small as possible.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.26999

Quote
Re: Wikileaks contact info?
December 05, 2010, 09:08:08 AM
   
Reply with quote  #148
Quote from: RHorning on December 04, 2010, 10:17:44 PM
Basically, bring it on.  Let's encourage Wikileaks to use Bitcoins and I'm willing to face any risk or fallout from that act.
No, don't "bring it on".

The project needs to grow gradually so the software can be strengthened along the way.

I make this appeal to WikiLeaks not to try to use Bitcoin.  Bitcoin is a small beta community in its infancy.  You would not stand to get more than pocket change, and the heat you would bring would likely destroy us at this stage.

Just one of the many example of the current state of the "heat" Satoshi was talking about:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-19/ecb-wants-curb-bitcoin-use-over-fears-it-may-lose-control-over-money-supply

Quote
However, overnight in a surprising reminder how the European central bank feels about bitcoin and other virtual money, the ECB urged EU lawmakers to tighten proposed new rules on digital currencies such as bitcoin, fearing they might one day weaken its own control over money supply in the euro zone.

My opinion is, that all this discussion about the need to bring Bitcoin to the masses is bullshit. The answer to this spam should be higher fees instead of a fork. I never had a problem with a Bitcoin transaction, because I always paid the approriate fee for it.
If spammers pay their fee, it's ok with me. (for the rhyme)

Now, if there is a consensus about a fork (like Satoshi said "WE can change it later"), then it will happen, no matter how long the losers will keep whining about it.
legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
December 01, 2016, 02:48:36 AM
#57
Chinese have over 51% of the BTC hash rate

http://bravenewcoin.com/news/bitcoins-new-block-size-limit-solidifying-at-8-megabytes/

want up to an 8 MB block size
Quote
"After undergoing deep consideration and discussion, the five pools agree that while the block size does need to be increased, a compromise should be made to increase the network max block size to 8 megabytes. … We believe that this is a realistic short term adjustment that remains fair to all miners and node operators worldwide."

They just don't want one higher than 8MB.
Quote
1. "Chinese Internet bandwidth infrastructure is not built out to the same level as that of other countries."
2. "Chinese outbound Internet bandwidth is restricted, which causes increased latency in connections to Europe and the United States."
3. "Not all Chinese mining pools are ready for the jump to 20 MB blocks. Because of this, they fear that an increase to the large size could lead to a high rate of orphaned blocks."


*Side note ,
if the Chinese miners decide to just take over and replace Bitcoin core dev team with their own Dev Team, not much could stop them.
Perks to having over 51%.  Wink

 Cool
legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
December 01, 2016, 02:36:27 AM
#56
http://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/bitcointalk/441/

Quote
Re: Flood attack 0.00000001 BC
Bitcointalk
2010-08-05 16:03:21 UTC - Original Post
Forgot to add the good part about micropayments.  While I don't think Bitcoin is practical for smaller micropayments right now, it will eventually be as storage and bandwidth costs continue to fall.  If Bitcoin catches on on a big scale, it may already be the case by that time.  Another way they can become more practical is if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms.  Whatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical.  I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial.

I am not claiming that the network is impervious to DoS attack.  I think most P2P networks can be DoS attacked in numerous ways.  (On a side note, I read that the record companies would like to DoS all the file sharing networks, but they don't want to break the anti-hacking/anti-abuse laws.)

If we started getting DoS attacked with loads of wasted transactions back and forth, you would need to start paying a 0.01 minimum transaction fee.  0.1.5 actually had an option to set that, but I took it out to reduce confusion.  Free transactions are nice and we can keep it that way if people don't abuse them.

That brings up the question: if there was a minimum 0.01 fee for each transaction, should we automatically add the fee if it's just the minimum 0.01?  It would be awfully annoying to ask each time.  If you have 50.00 and send 10.00, the recipient would get 10.00 and you'd have 39.99 left.  I think it should just add it automatically.  It's trivial compared to the fees many other types of services add automatically.

Is this the magic attack vector or are you just having a brain fart?

 Cool

FYI:
Any IP address can be DoS attacked , no matter the blocksize, makes little difference.

FYI2:
BTC costs too much and has already lost the micropayments market.
AGD
legendary
Activity: 2070
Merit: 1164
Keeper of the Private Key
December 01, 2016, 02:28:07 AM
#55
http://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/bitcointalk/441/

Quote
Re: Flood attack 0.00000001 BC
Bitcointalk
2010-08-05 16:03:21 UTC - Original Post
Forgot to add the good part about micropayments.  While I don't think Bitcoin is practical for smaller micropayments right now, it will eventually be as storage and bandwidth costs continue to fall.  If Bitcoin catches on on a big scale, it may already be the case by that time.  Another way they can become more practical is if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms.  Whatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical.  I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial.

I am not claiming that the network is impervious to DoS attack.  I think most P2P networks can be DoS attacked in numerous ways.  (On a side note, I read that the record companies would like to DoS all the file sharing networks, but they don't want to break the anti-hacking/anti-abuse laws.)

If we started getting DoS attacked with loads of wasted transactions back and forth, you would need to start paying a 0.01 minimum transaction fee.  0.1.5 actually had an option to set that, but I took it out to reduce confusion.  Free transactions are nice and we can keep it that way if people don't abuse them.

That brings up the question: if there was a minimum 0.01 fee for each transaction, should we automatically add the fee if it's just the minimum 0.01?  It would be awfully annoying to ask each time.  If you have 50.00 and send 10.00, the recipient would get 10.00 and you'd have 39.99 left.  I think it should just add it automatically.  It's trivial compared to the fees many other types of services add automatically.
legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
December 01, 2016, 02:18:46 AM
#54
Increase the block size to what? That will only cause more problems with a new attack vector. You cannot increase the block size to infinity to accommodate for scaling to the level where we need Bitcoin to be to be ready for mainstream adoption. You need some solution where you still maintain the high level of security that Bitcoin offer now, and where it can scale to these levels.

Do not be fooled by the current congestion, most of it is spam to simulate a crisis. ^smile^

Pick one, 2MB , 3MB , 4MB, 5 MB, 6MB , 7MB, 8 MB
2mb doubles transaction capacity
3mb triples transaction capacity
and so on.

Ok so what is this magic new attack vector , Reference Link Please .

Also if your attack vector is true, just stay under the MB size that makes it possible,

or just say the hell with the blocksize and lower the blockspeed ,  Cheesy

Although I do remember someone saying 8MB would work without an issue.

Don't forget the reference link to your scary new attack vector no one has heard of.
Cheesy

 Cool
sr. member
Activity: 812
Merit: 250
A Blockchain Mobile Operator With Token Rewards
December 01, 2016, 12:53:22 AM
#53
Increase the block size to what? That will only cause more problems with a new attack vector. You cannot increase the block size to infinity to accommodate for scaling to the level where we need Bitcoin to be to be ready for mainstream adoption. You need some solution where you still maintain the high level of security that Bitcoin offer now, and where it can scale to these levels.

Do not be fooled by the current congestion, most of it is spam to simulate a crisis. ^smile^

spam that is paying 10cents for 256 bytes is good food for the bitcoin monster.... keep it coming.
how about we let the nodes figure out what is an appropriate block size, they are actually impacted by block size, they should choose it.


legendary
Activity: 3542
Merit: 1965
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
December 01, 2016, 12:41:12 AM
#52
Why does everyone just stand around doing nothing while nullc / Blockstream / GMax takes over Bitcoin?

Did people say this when Gavin was in control and the Lead developer? People want their bread buttered on both sides. They complain that Bitcoin cannot scale to accommodate for mainstream adoption, and when someone develop something to address that, then they still complain about them.

SegWit and LN is probably not the best option, but it is better than nothing. Increasing the Block size to help with the scaling problem, will only increase the possibility that we will have a spam fest and more attacks on Bitcoin.

So what is your solution to the problem?

LOL,

The solution is a Hard Fork either with
1. Larger Block Sizes
or
2. Faster BlockSpeeds

Either one or both would increase transactions capacity, but both are irrelevant as are the BTC Devs, none of them can do anything unless the Chinese Mining Pools that control over 51% of the hash agree to it. Which is why you see these non-solutions being offered. There is nothing they can really do without the Chinese stamp of approval.  Tongue


 Cool

FYI:
https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-size
BTC transactions are overloaded at the time of this post , with more than 2 hours going by without even 1 confirmation.
LTC is working with transactions to spare, Chinese control it too.   Wink

Increase the block size to what? That will only cause more problems with a new attack vector. You cannot increase the block size to infinity to accommodate for scaling to the level where we need Bitcoin to be to be ready for mainstream adoption. You need some solution where you still maintain the high level of security that Bitcoin offer now, and where it can scale to these levels.

Do not be fooled by the current congestion, most of it is spam to simulate a crisis. ^smile^
legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823
November 30, 2016, 10:44:09 PM
#51
Did it not occur to you that the Bitcoin Unlimited people want to fork away Bitcoin from the core developers?
This is precisely what should happen - and what probably will happen as soon as a few more Chinese miners stop sucking GMax's dick and grow some balls of their own.

I ask this from a neutral standpoint. Then why is there a lot of hate directed towards the Core developers? They will keep developing and try to push Bitcoin forward in a way they think is best. But it is the miners who have the final word. Why won't the developers of Bitcoin Unlimited start campaigning for their cause instead of spreading FUD?
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 544
November 30, 2016, 08:21:14 PM
#50
We cannot do something about it because as the matter of fact we dont have the money, resources and facilities including the technology to do something about it. Anyway since its out of our control we dont need to think about it, instead lets just enjoy our bitcoins, our earnings , our investments. For me Im contented with what is bitcoin now, more importantly I am earning from bitcoins, thats the thing that matters.
Pages:
Jump to: