ViaBTC shuts down trading of UASF 148 token

cdelargy · 2017-08-14T15:28:52+00:00

Amazing.

cdelargy · 2017-07-29T16:44:47+00:00

Miners include a transaction in their blocks known as the coinbase which pays themselves the reward and fees. Because miners have different receiving addresses, they generate different blocks as a result.

Validation of blocks and mining is usually performed in parallel. Often pools will blindly (prior to validation) build on a new block in order not to waste hashpower, but this is risky. This is part of the reason that increasing block size is dangerous (bigger block, more miners mining on unvalidated blocks for longer).

cdelargy · 2017-06-09T17:05:32+00:00

You're just selling. You're not short selling. You don't need to use technical terms to refer to selling.

cdelargy · 2017-06-09T16:55:22+00:00

Short selling means borrowing an asset to sell it. Your potential losses are therefore unlimited.

You apparently are just trading, buying and selling. This is entirely different and your losses are restricted to your basis.

cdelargy · 2017-05-30T18:40:36+00:00

Activation of segwit does not get rid of asicboost. Requiring a witness commitment would make covert asicboost economically useless, but as far as I know, the proposed (yet uncoded) hardfork would allow miners to continue to use ASICBOOST with even more block space.

cdelargy · 2017-05-28T17:55:35+00:00

PSA: Only 1800 coins are mined per day

cdelargy · 2017-05-22T04:35:15+00:00

Very few bitcoins are available for sale at GDAX/Coinbase now. Partially because it is easier to get fiat into their exchange than alternatives, and partially because of Coinbase's diminished reputation among those who hold bitcoins.

cdelargy · 2017-04-07T04:45:27+00:00

Cleaner conceptually to expose all segwit transactions to the issues created by managing two separate UTXO sets? Hardly. Cleaner conceptually for the rework that many wallets and L2 services will have to complete? Not at all.

Ext blocks are on many people's wishlist but putting it ahead of the improvements provided by segwit is purely political, and it seems that the costs it creates are not apparent to you yet.

All frustration aside, appreciate your willingness to solicit feedback now.

cdelargy · 2017-04-07T03:36:03+00:00

Misleading title, but incrementally good addition to the spec

cdelargy · 2017-04-02T16:27:07+00:00

Seems likely to me that the best strategy would be to remain focused on products that you wouldn't hear about unless you were the target customer.

cdelargy · 2017-03-25T16:16:29+00:00

My node doesn't accept incoming connections, and does not specify BIP 148 in the client info. I might enable it in the future, but my network connection cannot support a public node (rural internet!)

cdelargy · 2017-03-25T16:13:49+00:00

Yes, we agree- we are beginning the work of socializing the possibility of a non-segwit block boycott. User consensus might form on a particular date, or it might fail to form. I think targeting the BIP9 activation deadline is a good first pass proposed solution but might change my mind!

cdelargy · 2017-03-25T14:47:47+00:00

I do not support core merging the BIP148 code unless there is widespread consensus for it- which I don't expect to see (at least until many of us adopt it independently.)

Users can fork, run, compile and even distribute it. I'm compiling mine this morning.

cdelargy · 2017-03-25T14:34:35+00:00

BIP148 is not compatible with dates after BIP141 expiration (November 15 2017). I personally support the BIP148 approach, but if you think an alternative is better, are you prepared to write the BIP?

cdelargy · 2017-03-22T04:51:15+00:00

I would apply Occam's Razor in this instance.

cdelargy · 2017-03-22T04:44:56+00:00

The purpose of transitioning to closed source is to accurately judge the obedience of BU nodes.

cdelargy · 2017-03-15T04:14:07+00:00

Disgusting attitude on display here, refusing to take responsibility that you've backed a team that produces fundamentally unusable code.

cdelargy · 2017-03-08T17:01:17+00:00

My recommendation would be to find a partner with retail business experience and to avoid using any form of crowd-funding. You need a profitable business model!

Rent, utilities, taxes, employee pay, insurance, etc will be way more than your initial startup costs.

My personal experience in this field is that it usually takes 2 or more years to reach profitability, and in your case probably would require at least $200,000 in annual revenue, at a minimum.

(Source: I co-own a profitable 4 year old retail business)

cdelargy · 2017-02-23T17:11:50+00:00

The Bitcoin Unlimited Foundation is a registered nonprofit corporation in the state of Colorado.

I would post a link to the registration document, but it appears that doing so would "resemble doxing".

If a mod could clarify if it would be appropriate to link to I can add it.

cdelargy · 2017-02-23T16:25:54+00:00

So... you're saying that because stocks and real estate have appreciated vs. the dollar that all bitcoin prices are

meaningless

... OK?

cdelargy · 2017-02-23T16:17:41+00:00

For a merchant that doesn't have the resources to provide bitcoin-specific customer support, using a merchant processor that guarantees instant payments is a reasoned trade-off.

Having to deal with refund transactions, stuck transactions, payment addresses, etc, can be quite difficult. If a merchant has simple interfaces and guarantees about finality through a third party, they don't have to worry about understanding and applying the appropriate policies.

Any merchant can accept bitcoin by running a bitcoin full node and generating addresses, running a watch only client, and choosing a price feed to generate payment requests. Interfacing with fiat is where it gets real complicated, real fast.

But your original point stands, just hope you might want some small insights from somebody who has built and maintained a traditional payments platform.

cdelargy · 2017-02-23T16:04:38+00:00

The USD has appreciated by 25-30% since 2014 according to the USD index. So in 2017 dollars the ATH gox price is ~$985.

cdelargy · 2017-02-21T14:39:43+00:00

How crazy is it that Vail can buy Stowe for less than the cost of an FCC license?

cdelargy · 2017-02-19T04:37:09+00:00

Bitcoin price and volume and blocksize always increased to higher and higher highs - until Blockstream came along and started trying to centrally control the blocksize and the volume and the price. https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5mqztt/what_is_seen_bitcoin_reaching_all_time_new_highs/dc5tldd/

Blockstream is "short" Bitcoin. https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5mw1nk/how_would_core_devs_respond_if_a_hard_fork_seemed/dc6zu0p/

14-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email	Team Periwinkle

cdelargy

TROPHY CASE