From the whitepaper:
The proof-of-work also solves the problem of determining representation in majority decision making. If the majority were based on one-IP-address-one-vote, it could be subverted by anyone able to allocate many IPs. Proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote. The majority decision is represented by the longest chain, which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it. If a majority of CPU power is controlled by honest nodes, the honest chain will grow the fastest and outpace any competing chains.
They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them. Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism.
As a bonus you got a free rebuttal against UASF.
Non upgraded clients will follow any miners who mine a 1 MB chain.
Several exchanges will list Core's legacy 1MB coin as "Bitcoin" I suspect, creating a market to mine it.
It will get hashpower, from who? Who knows, perhaps a "mystery miner" will mine it like mystery hashpower has been mining for BCH.
They have good control of important media channels. So they can curate the message. They've been successful here.
And what happens if there's an important Segwit security update from Core on, say, Nov. 18? Not that they would do that of course.
However I agree everyone can calm down: we already rescued Bitcoin.
It was manually added by the miner.
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transactions?q=block_id(577628)&s=id(asc)#
Just check the 2nd transaction (first after coinbase) in that block. The fee is less than 1% than those of all the other transactions in that block.
Here is a juxtaposition to their July announcement:
> ... we regard [Bitcoin Cash] as a spurious forking of the Bitcoin project with little mining support. (July 27, 2017)
I disagree. It'll be too difficult for Venezuelans to purchase Bitcoin Cash because their national currency is basically worthless and they don't have easy access to other currencies to use to buy the Bitcoin Cash.
The solution is to let Venezuelans EARN Bitcoin Cash. Create an online employment portal for Venezuelans that lets them do tasks online (mechanical turk level tasks, coding, personal assistant work, etc) and PAY them in Bitcoin Cash. Their hourly rate is far lower than most other countries, so the work they provide can be competitive.
The site should be in Spanish and English, and offer jobs in both languages if possible. English is routinely taught in school and most professionals know it, but letting those with limited English experience still have opportunities is a good idea.
Then the other side of the equation needs to be handled... To create a Venezuelan oriented Bitcoin Cash wallet for users and merchants to use. For merchants, it should let them input an amount in Bolívar or USD to get the Bitcoin Cash equivalent, while letting the merchant use the official government exchange rate or the real "black market" exchange rate for Bolívars. The merchant side should also let them enable tax calculations or add on a standard fee for various reasons.
Of note, it's harder to ship physical goods to Venezuela now: https://www.npr.org/2017/06/13/532816929/venezuelas-government-cracks-down-on-shipments-from-u-s-amid-crisis
Its pretty disgraceful. I was also banned permanently for fake made up reasons by Dragons Den member /u/BashCo. I didn't even post on /r/bitcoin, I made a post on /r/btc and was banned for "brigading" even though I use "np"marks. It shows they will just find any excuse. Look at the screen shot, BashCo is a member of the Dragons Den where they organize troll propaganda campaigns. How does reddit not do something about these criminal scammers? Its so insulting they called you a "liar" in the mod message, what pieces of filth they are. But its alright wear it as a badge of honor. If you are not banned there then something is wrong. /u/tippr gild
BTU is a bitfinex token created to promote Core propaganda that BU is bad. It is designed to look like a bet on BU, but if you look at the details of the terms we find that it is unlikely to pay out no matter how the scaling fight turns out.
Miner forgot to claim the reward, output is 0
Two blocks already minted on top.
;) total coin supply just went down for 12.5 coins.
The data of the exchanges is public. For example https://cryptowat.ch
Check when the pump started and you'll see bitfinex led the pump, being 100-150usd higher than kraken and bitstamp. Coinbase followed bitfinex quicker.
I agree however, I also think that Ethereum could easily overtake bitcoin and stay there. The main thing to note is the number of projects that are being developed on ethereum. If people leave them they go to Ethereum, they will probably stay there as the bitcoin blockchain is full so has virtually no utility except for very large payments. Ethereums utility is increasing everyday.
Alts go to bitcoin, Ether based assets go to Ethereum and there are a lot of them which are in a bubble at the moment.
Your numbers are off. The opportunity cost of 4 EH/s in mining BTC is about $617k per day right now, not $1 million.
Assuming your reward numbers are right, BCH miners are losing about $213k/day. BSV miners are losing about $527k/day.
BashCo is a piece of crap. He permanently banned me for fake made up reasons. He is also a member of the nefariously named Dragon's Den where Core and BlockStream form troll propaganda campaigns. These people are so disgusting, they make me sick!
"Gold mining is a waste, but that waste is far less than the utility of having gold available as a medium of exchange. ... The utility of the exchanges made possible by Bitcoin will far exceed the cost of electricity used. Therefore, not having Bitcoin would be the net waste." - Satoshi Nakamoto
Posted Aug 7th 2010, 05:46:09 PM
"Each node's influence on the network is proportional to its CPU power. The only way to show the network how much CPU power you have is to actually use it. If there is something else that each person has a finite amount of that we could count for one-person-one-vote, I can't think of it." - Satoshi Nakamoto
Posted Aug 7th 2010, 05:46:09 PM
"Bitcoin generation should end up where it's cheapest. Maybe that will be in cold climates where there's electric heat, where it would be essentially free." - Satoshi Nakamoto
Posted Aug 9th 2010, 09:28:39 PM
Source The Book of Satoshi, Pages 236 - 237
I think anyone involved in development (including you) knows that coders should not be and are not judged by lines of code, nor is repo access necessary. Suggesting that core development is as diverse as this list is obviously arguing in bad faith. But we can run down the list of devs in a position of control in the interest of those who may believe you at face value:
Greg Maxwell: blockstream
Peter Wuille: Blockstream
Adam Back: Blockstream
Matt Corallo: Blockstream
Mark Friedenbach: Blockstream
Luke Dash Jr.: Blockstream affiliate
Peter Todd: Blockstream affiliate
Wladimir van der Laan: unaffiliated (?)
Eric Lombrozo: unaffiliated (?)
Jonas Schnelli: unaffiliated (?)
Cory Fields: unaffiliated (?)
Jeff Garzik: Purged from core
Gavin Andresen: Purged from core
Mike Hearn: Purged from core
Have other people made commits? of course. Are you suggesting that these commits have anything to do with the strategic development of the protocol? I hope not. Functionally and pragmatically, blockstream comprises more than half of core dev decision making.
If there are any other major core contributors who are involved with strategic planning and implementation for BTC, i may have missed them. But will you honestly say that the 7 of you blockstreamers are not an oligarchy in control of core? You've already purged the most productive and insightful developers because they didn't agree to your vision - do you think other will speak up? Are you really going to try to tell me that Schnelli or Fields are making scaling and implementation decisions, or that you would even allow them to do so?
Blockstream has captured bitcoin core. So we'll just use a new implementation.
Bitcoin Cash is the name of the coin that will be formed by the Bitcoin hard fork that will most likely happen on August 1 2017 12:20 GMT , according to the UAHF (User Assisted Hard Fork - a contingency plan to counter BIP148 which risks reorganizing the chain).
In simpler terms: Bitcoin will split, and a 'Bitcoin Cash' will spin off. Everyone who owns bitcoins before then will also own the same amount of 'cash' bitcoins on the fork chain.
It's called Bitcoin Cash or BCC/XBC abbreviated. Why is this important? BCC and XBC are the recommended ticker symbols on the official website and used by all 4 current client implementations.
Something odd is definitely going on in my opinion, but I could be wrong. I love to see crypto doing well, don't get me wrong, but something feels different here. The margin longs are now >120M according to https://www.bitfinex.com/stats
BashCo, you are just very wrong. They have legitimate concerns (read the slides by Jeff on SegWit).
-
Secondly, what gives you the right to judge what miners or wallet providers do or don't do. I don't like this elite thinking, and it's not in the spirit of Bitcoin. Meditations and a sabbatical leave would do well to you.
Meanwhile on Kraken people are paying a premium to get their Dollars converted to Tethers. At the moment it's about $1.04 for one Tether, during the day it went as high as 5% extra.
One would consider this a very good arbitrage opportunity, but it doesn't happen. Kraken's Tether wallet holds barely the amount of their 24h trading volume.
>What more do you want?
To save Bitcoin and to become A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System and not a settlement layer for centralized 2nd layer payment systems.
Thanks for the objective approach to the topic!
A couple of comments from me:
I'll pop in here just to say that I am impressed by the level of open-mindedness in the comments.
It is part of the Casper (ethereum PoS) roadmap to write fairly comprehensive documents describing the various components of the design rationale; expect those over the next month or so. You are also welcome to participate in research discussions in our open chat at http://gitter.im/ethereum/research.
Interresting that you report this: The software implementing this has not been merged yet, and the alert that is part of it will not relay through the network. So to see that you would have to be directly connected to someone who is spamming you with it. (or, you're not actually seeing it... because someone named bu_ftw isn't actually running Bitcoin Core 0.11.2...)
The text in the final alert that blocks all the others is hard-coded in the receiver (your old software) and can't be set. There has been a more descriptive alert up for months, however, which sends people to https://bitcoin.org/en/alert/2016-11-01-alert-retirement ...
As an aside, Bitcoin software that old has numerous vulnerabilities... running it is something you can do, but it's not really recommended. You can reduce your exposure and get rid of that message by setting the alerts=0 option.
Bitcoin ABC is based on Bitcoin Core 0.14.1 but with:
removed Segwit and RBF
Adjustable Blocksize Cap (meaning you can configure your blocksize cap once it has forked)
hard fork to bigger block size as per UAHF specification
This repository will provide Bitcoin ABC version 0.1.4.1-uahf that has been released on June 30, 2017. This is the home page of the repository:
https://launchpad.net/~bitcoin-abc/+archive/ubuntu/ppa
If you are installing for the first time just execute these commands(*):
sudo apt-get install software-properties-common sudo add-apt-repository ppa:bitcoin-abc/ppa sudo apt-get update sudo apt-get install bitcoind bitcoin-qt
(*) If you have a previous version of bitcoind
installed please remove it and remove also all the PPA repos who is going to provide alternative implementation of Bitcoin client. E.g. if you have Bitcoin Core installed via PPA this what you need to do:
sudo apt-get remove bitcoin* sudo apt-add-repository --remove ppa:bitcoin/bitcoin
The repository supports these Ubuntu versions:
on these platforms:
Nope, this is happening exactly as it was supposed to.
One major problem with Bitcoin's difficulty adjustment was that if a lot of miners leave in a short time, the network will run very slowly for weeks or months in extreme cases. BCC fixes this by adjusting difficulty in a different way. So if a lot of hash power leaves quickly the difficulty can shift down rapidly (within a day or two) to get back to an average of 10-minute blocks.
That is what we're seeing now. If you go to here you will see that up until block 478576 the difficulty remains the same- that's the difficulty left over at pre-fork levels. Now after the fork we only have a small % of the hash power as before the fork, so blocks came out very slowly. Starting with 478577 the new difficulty adjustment started to happen, and the difficulty rapidly moves down over the next several blocks, making the blocks more frequent.
Once this process finishes, BCC will be back to about one block every 10 minutes, just like BTC.
> ? Are people going to be buying BU instead of regular ol bitcoin?
no, not according to Shatoshi's Bitcoin white paper:
>Nodes always consider the longest chain to be the correct one and will keep working on extending it. If two nodes broadcast different versions of the next block simultaneously, some nodes may receive one or the other first. In that case, they work on the first one they received, but save the other branch in case it becomes longer. The tie will be broken when the next proofof-work is found and one branch becomes longer; the nodes that were working on the other branch will then switch to the longer one.
So those calling a fork or BU an altcoin don't actually understand how bitcoin works.
When BU gets more than an average of 50.01% hashpower, and can sustain it, miners can safely move the block limit. BU is one safe way of doing it as described in the White Paper. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf.
save a copy because the Core Fundamentalists are wanting to change Satoshi's White Paper to reflect the changes they are making.
This is a bunch of sub- 1sat/byte transactions in the pool.
They don't get propagated to most nodes, but block explorers will show them
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/mempool/transactions?q=fee_per_kb%280..999%29
I had a look at a couple and they are 0.00000001 BCH / KB , i.e. 1 sat total fee transaction, marked with a stresstest OP_RETURN message.
If you don't put the minimum fee of 1sat/byte you may need to wait a while for your transaction to clear as you're clearly hoping for the charity of miners.
Transactions at 1sat/byte are clearing well as usual, as far as I could tell from blockchair queries. This is a good chance for a miner to get publicity by mining the biggest block ever on BCH mainchain though.
New SigHash Type - As part of the replay protection technology, Bitcoin Cash introduces a new way of signing transactions. This also brings additional benefits such as input value signing for improved hardware wallet security, and elimination of the quadratic hashing problem.
That's nothing, Bitcoin Cash set the record for highest volume ever recorded on any cryptocurrency on August 19th-20th with over $3 Billion in volume.
https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-cash/historical-data/?start=20130428&end=20171023
ETH had one ~~this~~ about 10 days ago. Nothing happened.
BTC had one by accident... https://bitcoin.org/en/alert/2013-03-11-chain-fork Nothing happened... Everyone made a quick update and things were OK... There are some dispuets if that was HF. To that I say use original or pre 0.8.0 client and sync it. It will not work... So it is... Or you could go to https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/ and look for 0.7.x node... You will find 0.8.x nodes but not 0.7.x
This repo will contain deb packages for BU stable release (as of this writing 0.12.1c).
Initially we are going to support 2 Ubuntu distros 14.04 LTS (trusty) and 16.04 LTS (xenial), 4 arch: i386, amd64, armhf, arm64.
This is the direct link:
https://launchpad.net/~bitcoin-unlimited/+archive/ubuntu/bu-ppa
So to install the binaries for your ubuntu system:
We are also providing a repository which will contains debs of the main development branch (0.12.1bu). Same distros and archs will be supported. You could find it here.
update: as far as I know such repo should work also for Linux Mint distro v 18 and 17
We at Rocketr are working on getting Bitcoin Cash running so that our users can begin paying with and accepting Bitcoin Cash. We're not quite ready but we're not too far out.
Malleability has nothing to do with ASICboost. There is also zero evidence that ASICboost has been used in the wild. Also blocksize increases hurt ASICboost because they make collisions more rare. Antbleed was another fake propaganda narrative created in the Dragons Den.
https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
>If the majority were based on one-IP-address-one-vote, it could be subverted by anyone able to allocate many IPs.
Node counts are not a useful way to measure support. And this has been known since literally the very beginning.
looks to me like a larger player is trying to consolidate their inputs as long as the getting is good: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/mempool/transactions?q=block_id(-1)&s=size(desc)
Mined by ViaBTC
edit: they just mined another one, this one is only 43 KB :D
Copyright claims are great way to loose friends and influence people—if the red-baiting, personal-attack memes and neck bearding didn't work
Thanks for the heads up George.
For the future, all the videos from a channel can be downloaded with youtube-dl by passing the channel link as an argument:
youtube-dl https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFtsWUvuK28WwGAOTrYMpMK5__2q0MCDF
Mickey Mouse (BS) 1923-Forever
So what you really mean is:
If El Salvador did some stuff they are not intending to do, and I make some arbitrary assumptions about fees and block-space; then it would take 1.22 years and cost $90 million in fees.
Bitcoin does about 300,000 transactions a day, so you’re spreading a total of about 15 days worth of transactions over 1.22 years.
The median fee is currently around $3.87, so you’re nearly tripling that and still assuming that you’ll only be able to get 5% block space.
You say 5% blockspace would be about 70 transactions per block, which would mean average blocks have 1,400 transactions total. But a quick look shows most BTC blocks have well over 2,000 transactions, some over 3,000.
So if El Salvador was going to open lightning channels for every adult citizen, it would likely cost a lot less and be much quicker than the figures you calculated. But since they’re not planning to do that, this entire post and all the inaccurate numbers are totally irrelevant.
Fuck off Greg (midmagic), we know you're a dupe of nullc.
Do something constructive instead of sitting on your ass trolling online all day.
Former Blockstream employee:
http://telegra.ph/Understanding-Blockstream-07-21
Understanding Blockstream
"One thing that is a bit different is the amount of time the senior people spent on twitter and reddit each day. We used to joke that if you could not get a hold of management through email or slack that all you had to do is post a trolling comment on reddit and Greg or Austin would immediately respond to it.
Also note that shorts are at an all time low. The selling has not been from shorters but rather dumpers who are selling far below value: https://www.bitfinex.com/stats
From close to 50k now there are only 12k BCH shorts.
Major companies like Steam, Stripe, Expedia stopped accepting Bitcoin BTC.
In general, it was because Bitcoin BTC had high & unpredictable fees, slow confirmation times, significant failure rates, and there was a cost to train staff on how to deal with BTC payment problems & questions.
It's far too early to call. Bitcoin Cash is a very long bet on defending the original concept of Bitcoin as described in Satoshi's whitepaper.
But money is a social thing, and people are easily conditioned by what they see (censorship and historical revisionism play a major role here, as opposed to freedom of information).
Good thing that the Bitcoin whitepaper is embedded in the blockchain and mirrored on many sites.
The thought occurred to me yesterday that children growing up now will not even have the same relationship to money - specifically cash - as we did.
This War on Cash is real, and Bitcoin Cash (and public cryptocurrency generally) is firmly in the crosshairs. It is so much harder for authorities to get rid of than fiat.
They tried to keep its scale ridiculously limited. SegWit2x doesn't go far yet in terms of breaking that bond.
Bitcoin Cash has declared War on the War on Cash.
-
>Three years ago I was actually arguing for a navel gazing protocol fix-up hard fork. Now I think that window has passed.
-
>Hard forking itself has become political, which makes it an option no longer on the table if bitcoin is to remain true to its vision and purpose.
-
-
>On chain scaling if it happens at all is likely to be via extension blocks without opportunity for hard fork fixes.
-
if bitcoin is to remain true to its vision and purpose ... which is Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System and not just a settlement layer for intermediaries aka LN hubs et al. or disconnecting users to have direct access.
-
Please see our community roadmap here (bottom of page):
https://www.bitcoincash.org/roadmap.html
The current 32MB limit is temporary. There is a lot of work needing to be done to make the network as efficient as it can be, to provide a foundation to massive on-chain scaling. A lot has already been accomplished, including work started on our eventual "adaptive" size limit mechanism. By the time BCH fills up 32MB (or 64MB or 128MB blocks, something we may include in an upcoming hard fork) hopefully we'll be a lot further down the road with technical progress and have an adaptive unlimited size ready to go.
Check out the new Bitcoin Cash Register app from Bitcoin.com: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bitcoin.merchant.app&hl=en
It's a simple PoS cash register app. Unfortunately it doesn't support menu items or inventory or things like that, but it makes it very simple to just punch in an amount and generate a QR code for payment.
You can create a BCH wallet on your own device, and enter either the BCH address or the xpubkey into the Cash Register app to receive payments to your wallet. This means that you can have the app running on a cheap device you leave at your point of sale while all the BCH itself will be sent to a more secure device elsewhere, so no need to worry about theft or loss or rogue employees sending the BCH elsewhere.
>im trying to prove to someone that this is the plan
That's actually NOT the plan. Only increasing the block size limit when "necessary" is the dominant plan in the Bitcoin Core (BTC) camp. The problem with their plan is twofold. First, "necessary" is subjective. The BTC chain experienced a record $50 fees for transactions in 2017. The block size wasn't increased. So what would constitute necessary, $1M fees? The second problem is waiting until the community grows 1,000X in size makes it far harder if not impossible to proceed with plans made when the community was small. That has been proven (since we couldn't even raise BTC block size to 2MB).
In contrast, the Bitcoin Cash community is doing all we can to keep the network in line with the original Bitcoin white paper, which has no limit. The approach we're taking is increasing block size as high as we can safely go at any time, whether blocks are full or not, and reach the point where we institute an "adaptive" block size (controlled by miners) with no maximum limit. We've already increased from 1MB to 8MB to 32MB which shows we're quite serious. The community roadmap is here:
Note: a few pro-Core shills have tried to counter this by arguing, from the other side of their mouths, that Bitcoin has no reference implementation.
To these people, we need to constantly refer them to Wikipedia, and ask / demand that these people edit Wikipedia to reflect what they're saying (Bitcoin has no reference implementation). Don't fight us! Fight Wikipedia.
Also they should argue with their best buddy Andreas Antonopolous, whose best selling book "Mastering Bitcoin" declares Bitcoin Core to be the "reference": https://www.safaribooksonline.com/library/view/mastering-bitcoin-2nd/9781491954379/ch03.html
> Bitcoin Core is the reference implementation of the bitcoin system, meaning that it is the authoritative reference on how each part of the technology should be implemented.
Get it?
If you write any client that isn't fully compatible with Core, that's an altcoin
By definition: because it isn't compatible with "the Bitcoin reference."
> “It was a big mistake that any of this was ever compared to currency,” Carlson-Wee says.
Apparently, the first sentence of Satoshi's whitepaper is a mistake, according to Carlson-Wee:
> Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash...
source: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
We’ve updated Blockchair to show this information as well: https://i.imgur.com/SfKESve.png
By the way, you can search for OP_RETURN data using Blockchair: https://blockchair.com/search?q=bitcoin+cash+for+the+win
If you think there are ways to improve this, we’ll be happy to hear :)
Because miners always follow the value, and the legacy network will be valued much higher than this new "2x" network.
The futures prices are split like 82/18 in favor of the legacy network.
You guys misunderstand how mining works. You think that just because miners agree in private to do something in the future, that means "consensus". Consensus isn't something that's agreed upon in advance. It's organic, and economic activity has a lot to do with it.
The market will choose the more valuable network (it already has). The miners will simply go to whichever network gives them the most profit. This is why 2x is doomed to fail.
>BTC processes more transactions in one single block than BCH does in 8 hours
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/blocks
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/blocks
Bitcoin Core averages around 2000 transactions per block while Bitcoin Cash averages about 200. Saying Bcore has 48x as many transactions is a lie.
And Bitcoin Cash didn't exist until August 1st of this year. Your bank settlement coin's days are numbered. You'll have to go shill for a tobacco company or maybe fracking. I'm sure you'll find work.
Based on your browser language setting, it will automatically adapt. Enjoy!
-
A warm thank you to /u/zquestz and to the language contributors :)... If you would like to contribute with other languages, please follow the instructions of the tutorial.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IlXRafx5tOBKYQHeSFmK_4Pb3faxNrQi0Rrfa4MGLjw/edit
A farcical, and completely political attempt to sway users/miners/merchants to entrust all of their trust to a tiny group of people, that back a plan that Greg Maxwell laid out on how Bitcoin should scale, according to him. The plan itself can be summed up as, SegWit will fix all short term problems, we have no plans to roll out any increase to the blocksize for years and will only be done in the event of an emergency, other than SegWit, the devs will be concentrating all of their efforts on making the Lightning Network a reality.
Essentially a blocksize increase is thrown in the bin in the short term (they indicated that it will be years before they even consider a block increase to be an option), and all efforts will be focused on unproven, untested, and completely new solutions, that likely require several months to a year to get implemented at minimum. It is IMO, the worst possible approach that could be undertaken and the devs are either falling for it because they don't have a clue what they are doing (likely considering they've left things to the last minute), are actively trying to disrupt and destroy Bitcoin dev and community organisation from the inside (not as unlikely as you think), and or are complicit in trying to completely destroy Bitcoin as it is now, in preference of a completely different form of payment system that has never been attempted before, thus in the process completely undermining the blockchain technology and obliterating from the inside the Bitcoin protocol that we've come to use and love for the last 6+ years.
Others have pointed out that the tx looks suspicious for several reasons:
There has been some hostile corporate takeover from Blockstream Inc. to centralize Bitcoin. For that they got an immense amount of money from AXA and other big financial players. They own Core (centralized development team), r\/bitcoin and bitcointalk. So what you did is considered blasphemy.
There are some disillusioned people that hope that that second hostile corporate takeover that is right now in the happening could fix that situation.
Everyone that really cares about Bitcoin has switched to Bitcoin cash https://www.bitcoincash.org/ https://cashvscore.com/
With Bitcoin cash everyone is still sort of early adopter, but that will definitely change in the next few months as basically all Bitcoin infrastructure either adds or switches completely to Bitcoin cash.
The more incoming links Bitcoin.com has, the more likely it is to be ranked ahead of Bitcoin.org. The current stats:
Most of the Bitcoin community believes in the vision laid out in the Bitcoin whitepaper. Satoshi's whitepaper mentions blocks growing much larger than they are today and can grow as technology allows:
> With computer systems typically selling with 2GB of RAM as of 2008, and Moore's Law predicting current growth of 1.2GB per year, storage should not be a problem even if the block headers must be kept in memory.
It's impossible to know what Satoshi may think today now that we know much more about how Bitcoin really works as a large P2P network. But the whitepaper pretty clearly shows the original intent of blocks getting much bigger than 1MB.
Edit: english
Retaining/increasing the value of your bitcoins is not an incentive enough?
For me it is. I see no future with Core's roadmap.
Not a big deal. Steemit processes more transactions than Bitcoin and Ethereum combined.
https://steemit.com/steemit/@arcange/steemit-heading-to-1-million-transactions-per-day
Yet, for some reason there are no Steemit trolls here. Only ether pumpers.
Mining on Bitcoin SegWit and on Bitcoin Cash produces a block every 10 minutes on average.
But there is variance which means that sometimes blocks are found only seconds from each other and sometimes hours.
The last block has been found an hour ago. https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/block/506724
Your tx will be included in the net block that will be mined.
With Bitcoin SegWit you sometimes have to wait days.
I ran the command invalidateblock in the console window in my Bitcoin Unlimited node. Here's the information that was returned to me:
invalidateblock 
invalidateblock "hash"
Permanently marks a block as invalid, as if it violated a consensus rule.
Arguments: 1. hash (string, required) the hash of the block to mark as invalid
Result:
Examples: > bitcoin-cli invalidateblock "blockhash" > curl --user myusername --data-binary '{"jsonrpc": "1.0", "id":"curltest", "method": "invalidateblock", "params": ["blockhash"] }' -H 'content-type: text/plain;' http://127.0.0.1:8332/ (code -1)
So, yes, it seems pretty straightforward. I looked at the latest block that has been mined on blockchair.com. It's currently block number 469766. Then I marked the "Hash" under Technical Details" which is:
000000000000000000130b2bd812c6a7ae9c02a74fc111806b1dd11e8975da45
and then I copied and pasted it into this Reddit comment. So let's say this would've been the first block on the Segwit-UASF-chain. Then I would just enter this command into my Bitcoin Unlimited node and my node would never ever follow the Segwit-UASF-chain even in the unlikely event that a reorg would happen sometimes in the future:
invalidateblock 000000000000000000130b2bd812c6a7ae9c02a74fc111806b1dd11e8975da45
Easy peasy lemon squeezy. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
It's called Bitcoin Cash or BCC abbreviated. Why is this important? BCC is the recommended ticker symbol on the official website and used by all 4 current client implementations.
PlasmaVPN accepts BCH, and was created by a former BTC, now BCH dev! I emailed NordVPN to try to get them on board, if anyone else knows others, they should list them here!
edit - added pokkst's VPN, here's the link again
I’m pretty sure this doesn’t/can’t take into account the difference between the real part of a transaction and the change portion.
I.e. the biggest transaction in the last 24 hours was this one. The input is $181,951,000 and one of the outputs is $181,950,000. Realistically it’s much more likely that someone transferred $1,000, rather than someone buying a large island.
If you look at the biggest transactions the top 20 are all for roughly this same $180 million amount. That’s $3.6 billion from one person/exchange sending small amounts from their massive wallet.
Guys...this is fake. 100% guaranteed. Look at the link for proof. He chose an arbitrary number and searched for it on the blockchain. Don't be stupid. OP: well played.
​
Edit: Look guys...I lost 5,000BCH and my wife cheated on me with my best friend. They are taking the money and my dog. I'm on the edge...
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/transactions?q=output_total(500000000000..500000000001)#
​
Another Edit: Who the heck is upvoting OP? People need to learn to stop taking ridiculous information at face value.
I do as well, but I think it's an important part of the bitcoin death spiral. I think all these graphs we're looking at will start to show literal spirals
More info on Fidelity's new venture into the cryptocurrency space: http://telegra.ph/Fidelity-Investments-Hints-at-Entering-Cryptocurrency-Exchange-Space-06-07-2
Perhaps Bitcoin-BCH has been the catalyst for such a move.
Honestly, HK was the moment it became clear that Maxwell was the John Perkins of Bitcoin. "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" is a must read to understand the hijacking of Bitcoin. It took only one guy on the inside of Chas T. Main engineering to put countries billions in debt. To put Bitcoin in the hands of the banks it took only one neckbeard rat willing to sell out.
Signing the HK agreement ~~proves~~ strongly suggests that u/adam3us and u/luke-jr were out of the loop.
If you abandon it to the trolls, it will only make the situation worse. Use Reddit Enhancement Suite and vote on everything. It quickly becomes clear who the genuine posters are and who is here to troll.
Is https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-guide#detecting-forks a random link now?
When you can't argue against the content, argue against the source ...
EDIT: Oh, and WTF:
> Bitcoin.org's developer documentation is often right (although perhaps not always)
You posted that just now .
Can you be a bigger hypocrite, calling bitcoin.org 's dev docs a random link over in this sub, and praising them in the other?
For shame. But you have none.
Knowing the document with the address balances was fake, I was able to narrow the date it was created to the time-period between: * 2016-04-04 12:08 (3 years ago)
...based on the balance of the address in block 1. Since I did the calculation manually, I appear to have missed a 0.0001 BTC transaction, but the second one I listed pushes the total over 50.0286942.
Markets are simple: either they adopt or they will be replaced by competition.
And there are already some quality contenders like https://rocketr.net/ that would like to replace narrow minded BitPay.
I usually recommend the Bitcoin.com wallet for mobile devices and Electron Cash for desktop devices. Electron Cash has CashShuffle implemented, which is a big leap for on-chain privacy in BCH and is a lot of fun to play around with. /u/chaintip
It's called Bitcoin Cash or BCC/XBC abbreviated. Why is this important? BCC and XBC are the recommended ticker symbols on the official website and used by all 4 current client implementations.
uhm....you can google search for free ssl cert......ive used https://letsencrypt.org/ before , it works for google ads ssl cert verification (most stringent i have bumped into) and it is free
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/whitepaper/
Section 5:
The steps to run the network are as follows:
1) New transactions are broadcast to all nodes.
2) Each node collects new transactions into a block
3) Each node works on finding a difficult proof-of-work for its block.
4) When a node finds a proof-of-work, it broadcasts the block to all nodes.
5) Nodes accept the block only if all transactions in it are valid and not already spent.
6) Nodes express their acceptance of the block by working on creating the next block in the chain, using the hash of the accepted block as the previous hash. Nodes always consider the longest chain to be the correct one and will keep working on extending it.
If two nodes broadcast different versions of the next block simultaneously, some nodes may receive one or the other first. In that case, they work on the first one they received, but save the other branch in case it becomes longer. The tie will be broken when the next proofof-work is found and one branch becomes longer; the nodes that were working on the other branch will then switch to the longer one.
There was another donation of $1K but it is interesting to see the address it came from ...
Most people are going to consider you a troll if you call it bcash, you can call it bitcoin cash or just bch for short to be taken more seriously.
btc and ltc have the same problems, ltc just lacks the same volume. Until the block size is raised in them, they just cease to function past a certain volume which bch far exceeds.
One of (multiple implementations) the roadmaps is here: https://www.bitcoincash.org/roadmap.html
Not in there is the recently added Cash Shuffle for enhanced privacy which can be found in the electron cash wallet. Not specified in the roadmap is Avalanche. Feel free to search the sub for anything you have further to ask. Most questions you can come up with (including this one) have been asked and answered many times.
The company we really need to add Bitcoin Cash support is Stripe. They are the THE go to group for online payment processing on websites, which is one of the core use cases for electronic cash. https://stripe.com/ They support BTC today, but I'm sure the high fees are reducing the usefulness of that payment method. So they should be open to Bitcoin Cash and its low fees as an additional option.
Rocketr which provides BitPay-like services to merchants.
Already has more than 42 accepting BCC/BCH.
Mom & pop Wordpress sites can now set up with
https://wordpress.org/plugins/gourl-woocommerce-bitcoin-altcoin-payment-gateway-addon/
Wallet of Satoshi has a big red button that says "Log in to Backup". So how is this not custodial? If you want a good custodial solution, try Zelle, Venmo or PayPal. It's all the same.
If you want money that doesn't depend on a third party's constant permission and approval, try Bitcoin Cash: ElectronCash.org, BRD wallet or wallet.bitcoin.com (not open source).
It's alright - Litecoin has Segwit and (soon) Lightning network.
Let this compete against Bitcoin (Cash)
p.s. bcash is not yet released, don't confuse it with Bitcoin Cash!
You can reach them via one of their social media accounts https://signal.org
I sent them a link tip via https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/requests/new
So far the link has not been claimed, but I'm sure they are fucking busy at the moment as their user numbers skyrocket.
>I've been slowly realizing this bitcoin not adjusting blocksize, which really have delayed mass adoption, I remember steam was accepting bitcoin back then when I just started, in fact it was my first bitcoin tx, buying on steam.
If you're interested in utility, Bitcoin Cash (BCH) continues the objective of a peer-to-peer electronic cash system with cheap, easy, and reliable transactions. Other projects went a different direction.
Just download a wallet such as the Bitcoin.com wallet and try sending a friend $1 worth of Bitcoin Cash and $1 worth of BTC. Which works better?
Bitcoin Cash aims to be upgraded money for the world.
u/chaintip
The intentionally crippled coin has/is causing problems that are widespread.
Another example are the many wallets that still dont default to 1-sat/byte tx fees on BCH, because they are infected with the crippled coin fee calc. disease! It takes the wallet creator EXTRA work to separate the fee calc. from the crippled coin variable fee abomination. Fortunately the Bitcoin.com wallet does NOT have this problem!
In response to Bitcoin Cash, the 1MB4EVA / "evil Chinese miners" crowd is going to throw up a LOT of forks in order to confuse people and strengthen the "there is only one true Bitcoin and that's Core" narrative. Opportunists will jump on and assist them.
The first angle they will push is that these are all just "free money", or "dividends" for Bitcoin holders.
They want to encourage people not to look at the fundamentals of what makes Bitcoin tick, but rally behind the name and the "BTC" ticker.
This is a classic political tactic of deflection - please don't examine our policies and actions in detail, otherwise you might vote for someone else.
Unfortunately, it is highly dangerous and effective because most people just follow blindly and don't question much.
If you're in this subreddit, I hope you already question more.
It's called Bitcoin Cash or BCC/XBC abbreviated. Why is this important? BCC and XBC are the recommended ticker symbols on the official website and used by all 4 current client implementations.
What about me, I got permanently banned for a post I made outside their sub on /r/btc where I criticized jratcliff63367 for thinking HD wallets provide fungibility. I even use the "np" marks per the rules, and then im permanently banned for "brigading" by Dragons Den member bashco. That sound fair to you?
Maybe not very helpful, but this is why we need federated, decentralized (maybe even p2p) social networks.
There's been a huge influx of people to Mastodon from Twitter lately, so you might want to give that a shot. There's an instance for artists - Mastodon.art.
And then there's also Pleroma, Hubzilla, Friendica, etc. which can all communicate with each other (and with Mastodon).
There are no government shoe factories, yet everyone manages to have shoes, and the shoes are made by for profit companies, not volunteers. If you would like a detailed guide to how things could possibly work, I highly recommend The Machinery of Freedom by David Friedman. Available for free here. Thanks for keeping an open mind!
XT has optimization at works that can reduce blocksize to 17%(or something like that) of the size. It is called thin block. But it is not ready. It works 99% of the cases and in 1% it stops... So still some debugging...
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bitcoin-xt/eTKXChnbjWY
EDIT: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bitcoin-xt/enX-pRQ46OU
"eCash" has no transparency over use of its developer funds and yet invites governance through its centralization.
Can you explain why the Miner Fund address has spent 0 XEC so far?
It seems the whole argument about ABC developers needing funding, was a pretense.
https://blockchair.com/ecash/address/ecash:pqnqv9lt7e5vjyp0w88zf2af0l92l8rxdg2jj94l5j
> I believe that the power to change the Bitcoin protocol should, and does, rest in the hands of the economic majority of people who use Bitcoin and give it value.
See here
> SPV clients which connect to full > nodes can detect a likely hard fork by > connecting to several full nodes and > ensuring that they’re all on the same > chain with the same block height, plus > or minus several blocks to account for > transmission delays and stale blocks. > If there’s a divergence, the client > can disconnect from nodes with weaker > chains.
SPV clients will detect any hardfork and follow the longest chain with the most proof of work. If the BU chain has the majority hash rate, SPV clients will follow BU.
Do you agree that they represent a proportion of the economic majority?
If you think Blockstream has no future, then remove Bitcoin Core and GreenAddress from your list of recommended wallets: https://bitcoin.org/en/choose-your-wallet
Given that the most prolific Bitcoin Core developers are Blockstream employees and contractors, it would make sense for you to "exercise editorial control over your website" and not support a company that you think has no future.
By the way, I know you're a theymos sockpuppet, a disingenuous person, and a liar, so you probably should just stop wasting your time replying to me.
March 28, 2021: Real-life example of a LN user trying to use various Lightning mobile wallets and none of them worked (multiple errors for each) https://archive.is/klS2X
April 13, 2021: Video discussion with LN engineer about pros and cons of LN. Tidbits include that LN transactions always require onchain transactions to be finalized/settled (problematic due to high fees), initial payment channels still an issue for new users, using LN service providers is a trust issue, not decentralized, using zero-conf to create channels is highly risky, must be online to use LN, constant backups needed so you don't lose funds, LN needs more forks to work (such as Taproot and El-Too) https://odysee.com/@DigitalCashNetwork:c/Lightning-Network:c
Good point! This works provided the block is after November. :)
Interestingly, the nature of the 64 byte attack is that any historical confirmed 64 byte transaction, no matter how old, could be hiding an attack. It would however have to be prepared ahead of time. From what I understand about the proposed attack, the valid attack transaction would have some very obvious telltales: super high fee, a random sequence number, random locktime, and random-ish input or output script.
There have been only five 64-byte transactions on mainnet. And in each case we can see they were just tests of OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY and OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY. As none of the telltales have occurred in the five transactions, it seems impossible that they could have been attacks, so it is safe to remove the Merkle node check altogether.
(BTW I didn't expect my PR to get any attention, this is a very minor thing! :-D)
> The all-in weighted average operational cost across the Assets being acquired in the Transaction is US$0.073 per kWh.
Ouch. Revenue mining BTC is currently $0.063/kWh on S9s. That means that these machines are currently losing $0.01/kWh when they're running.
Bitcoin Cash scaling with huge blocks is completely feasible.
30GB blocks require a 3GB/minute download speed
My internet speed (base tier Comcast): 90megabits/second = .6 GB/minute = 6 GB Blocks = 42,000 transactions per second!
That's more than 20 million transactions per block!
Current fiber internet speeds in USA: 1Gigabit/second = 7.5 GB/minute (fast enough for world adoption x2)
BCH has already been tested at massive scale to tens of thousands of transactions per second on the testnet.
The only thing needed is to solve bottlenecks in software as the transactions increase. Improvements like allowing for multicore processing have already been successful on BCH.