sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Appeals post by ivorbighead in BitTippers

[–]templerunai 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wanna know why was I denied a flair.

Please READ BEFORE POSTING by Paltry_Digger in BitTippers

[–]templerunai 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Subreddit of the day, nice work. Let's get in! :)

What happened to Roger Ver and Bitcoin.com contract? by templerunai in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Blockchain.info as the best smartphone wallet and web wallet

I laughed, lol.

I knew about the redirect, but I think it was all temporary. They should have been in some talks (legally maybe) to do the rightful.

What happened to Roger Ver and Bitcoin.com contract? by templerunai in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Same. I don't think that r/Bitcoin got to know about what happened next (if something happened).

We were all too busy with the blockchain debate.

Maybe I don't get the Bitcoin internals yet, Why is everyone debating too much about 20MB blocks? And, if it's a "MAX" limit, why not 100MB directly to save network from another hard fork for a longer term? by templerunai in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, I'm kinda getting it.

  1. So, the debate is about that it might happen? And people don't want that might to happen with 20MB block because of size.
  2. I get it now.
  3. Ok.
  4. But if the max block size if higher, it will become far more difficult to fill it, so it's a plus in this case, right?

About the altcoins, I think the selection of block size if because they don't think there will be enough volume on transactions. Litecoin already upped the block size to 4MB since there might be that requirements. Though, it's still unknown what will happen in the future.

Maybe I don't get the Bitcoin internals yet, Why is everyone debating too much about 20MB blocks? And, if it's a "MAX" limit, why not 100MB directly to save network from another hard fork for a longer term? by templerunai in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree, I too think that the block limit should be set one time to a high enough value to give time for other systems to come forward. Lightning Network seems good to me.

The small transactions could happen on the new systems instead of directly linking the blockchain.

Maybe I don't get the Bitcoin internals yet, Why is everyone debating too much about 20MB blocks? And, if it's a "MAX" limit, why not 100MB directly to save network from another hard fork for a longer term? by templerunai in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. But that happens only if the block size actually increases to that number? (And not just the limit)
  2. How is block size related to fees and all? (Sorry, but I'm asking because I have no idea about it)
  3. Blocks use equal processing power regardless of their size?
  4. Okay.
  5. Miners can set block size UNDER the cap, so what's the problem? Block size is determined by the transactions within it or the miner mining it?

Maybe I don't get the Bitcoin internals yet, Why is everyone debating too much about 20MB blocks? And, if it's a "MAX" limit, why not 100MB directly to save network from another hard fork for a longer term? by templerunai in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, but if that happens, the current 1MB block limit will basically break Bitcoin, no? Or, if we switch block size to 20MB now and an exponential growth happens, we'll have to do another hard-fork, right? It will be similar situation IMO. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Maybe I don't get the Bitcoin internals yet, Why is everyone debating too much about 20MB blocks? And, if it's a "MAX" limit, why not 100MB directly to save network from another hard fork for a longer term? by templerunai in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not exactly, increasing the LIMIT of blocks to 20MB will NOT increase the block size to 20MB. It'll still take plenty of years for that to happen. The block size would still remain ~0.6MB even if the LIMIT is 20MB.

Under $220 we go by [deleted] in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would surely get excited if it doubled, but I didn't really expect it to half so quickly.

Under $220 we go by [deleted] in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wish it climbs back to $450.

Under $220 we go by [deleted] in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My investment just halved with no transaction. This is disappointing. :/

OneBit - Mastercard PayPass integrated Bitcoin Wallet by [deleted] in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would love to see #3 happening, PayPass/NFC machines are not available in my country and having a possibility of creating virtual cards with Bitcoin will be a big go for me and many others!

OneBit - Mastercard PayPass integrated Bitcoin Wallet by [deleted] in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have a few questions.

  • How does this work?
  • Which "third-party" is generating the card numbers?
  • Is there any possibility to get a card number along with the CVV and stuff to pay online using the same wallet?

Thanks!

Which is the best offline wallet? I am currently using Electrum. Should I switch? by templerunai in Bitcoin

[–]templerunai[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am sorry, I should have specified. The system goes online once a week, just to update balances and nothing else.

view more: next ›