Is anyone else starting to become a bit worried? mod note in first post

Fighting Tao

Coinbase have rectified their payment issue. The 6 transactions I had were taken out of my account again. Therefore I presume that those who had money taken from their accounts have had it credited back in.

Franz Von Peppercorn

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

I think the price is going to go up if the rumour is true. Nice way to make a few quid. It’s all built on a foundation of sand of course, but if you were to hop in, make some profit, and get the hell back out into fiat then I’d all for it.

Dude. Can I subscribe to your newsletter. Thanks.

BrokenArrows

Bob24 wrote: »

The question is: is it indeed what they have? (and since bitcoin transfers are not instant, does the system have some mechanism to instantly guarantee to the shop that the transaction will be paid so that they don't end up with no money)

I'm a bit doubtful to be honest as the video doesn't seem to show or explain at all how payments work. Could very well be vapourware. But if they do it would be interesting to know how it works.

Well its actually pretty easy to accomplish.
As soon as you send a bitcoin transaction it will appear on the blockchain very quickly. It will just not be confirmed yet.

You will be able to see the value of the transaction and to validate that its arriving to the correct address.

There is a small risk that the transaction is invalid but for the sake of a coffee or something i think its an acceptable risk. Nobody is going to go to the hassle of creating false transactions for the sake of a coffee and even if they do it wont last long as the staff will eventually recognise who it is.

GreeBo

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Well its actually pretty easy to accomplish.
As soon as you send a bitcoin transaction it will appear on the blockchain very quickly. It will just not be confirmed yet.

You will be able to see the value of the transaction and to validate that its arriving to the correct address.

There is a small risk that the transaction is invalid but for the sake of a coffee or something i think its an acceptable risk. Nobody is going to go to the hassle of creating false transactions for the sake of a coffee and even if they do it wont last long as the staff will eventually recognise who it is.

Accepting BTC as payment without confirmation defeats the whole point!

Sure I could use the same BTC to pay for 10 tvs in 10 different shops in an hour before txns are confirmed.
Also not sure how they would recognise anyone, my wallet isnt tied to me, its just an address, unless they are tracking wallets to people manually, which again slows down the process.

Kenny Logins

Lightning Network has been launched to solve this issue. It's pretty much instantaneous and with very low fees.

TripleAce

GreeBo wrote: »

Accepting BTC as payment without confirmation defeats the whole point!

You gotta start somewhere. I am sure BTC (or whatever will replace it) usage will be much different 10 years from now, this is some sort of "pilot" phase in my eyes. This project was started by a small group of friends, I am sure that if a big company sees this as an opportunity to deploy BTC usage at larger scale we could see a major step ahead in the right direction.

Also, this town pretty small (located in the richest area of the whole country) and they pretty much all know each other, nobody is going to scam nobody over a coffee.

(I would be more worried if this was happening in Naples though ).

Shauny2010

GreeBo wrote: »

Accepting BTC as payment without confirmation defeats the whole point!

Sure I could use the same BTC to pay for 10 tvs in 10 different shops in an hour before txns are confirmed.
Also not sure how they would recognise anyone, my wallet isnt tied to me, its just an address, unless they are tracking wallets to people manually, which again slows down the process.

No for small transactions it should be enough that once a transaction is announced to the network it can be trusted.
VISA contact-less transactions are not verified straight away either but the VISA card is registered to an owner, so maybe in the future to avail of zero confirmation transactions you may need to have the Bitcoin wallet address registered to you.

makeorbrake

Lightning Network takes care of this once it's fully debugged and ready to be deployed. You can't really judge an emerging technology on how it is right now - when it's clear it's undergoing innovative change.

BrokenArrows

GreeBo wrote: »

Accepting BTC as payment without confirmation defeats the whole point!

Sure I could use the same BTC to pay for 10 tvs in 10 different shops in an hour before txns are confirmed.
Also not sure how they would recognise anyone, my wallet isnt tied to me, its just an address, unless they are tracking wallets to people manually, which again slows down the process.

Obviously yes but the acceptance of BTC without confirmation for small transactions in person would be reasonably acceptable.

For large transactions you obviously wait.

GreeBo

Shauny2010 wrote: »

No for small transactions it should be enough that once a transaction is announced to the network it can be trusted.
VISA contact-less transactions are not verified straight away either but the VISA card is registered to an owner, so maybe in the future to avail of zero confirmation transactions you may need to have the Bitcoin wallet address registered to you.

Why?
The value of the transaction has no bearing on it being verified or not on the blockchain.
You might *decide* to not wait for small txns, but thats your choice, nothing to do with the underlying tech.

As a merchant you have a comeback with a Visa card, you have exactly diddly squat with crypto.

makeorbrake

GreeBo wrote: »

As a merchant you have a comeback with a Visa card, you have exactly diddly squat with crypto.

Yup, and all the while we are talking about poor tx times - something that used not be a problem for btc until it hit a scaling issue. Something that (subject to successful implementation) lightning network will resolve.

BluePlanet

GreeBo wrote: »

Why?
The value of the transaction has no bearing on it being verified or not on the blockchain.
You might *decide* to not wait for small txns, but thats your choice, nothing to do with the underlying tech.

The blockchain is like a public space a "commons".
Currently the 'cost' of running and securing this blockchain is being paid-for by currency inflation: 12.5 new bitcoins get mined every 10 minutes.
Once the cap on coins is reached the only way to pay for this network is through transaction fees.
Fees are an integral part of the blockchain economy.

When that blockchain (public space) becomes crowded with transactions, buying your way onto the main chain via market forces occurs.
Miners prioritize transactions that award them the highest fees.

Those market forces that push fees higher, should then incentivize development of layer 2 and layer 3 solutions.

smacl

BluePlanet wrote: »

The blockchain is like a public space a "commons".
Currently the 'cost' of running and securing this blockchain is being paid-for by currency inflation: 12.5 new bitcoins get mined every 10 minutes.
Once the cap on coins is reached the only way to pay for this network is through transaction fees.
Fees are an integral part of the blockchain economy.

When that blockchain (public space) becomes crowded with transactions, buying your way onto the main chain via market forces occurs.
Miners prioritize transactions that award them the highest fees.

Those market forces that push fees higher, should then incentivize development of layer 2 and layer 3 solutions.

I gather this isn't the case for tangle though, where the 'cost' of processing a transaction is to help process other transactions and hence no mining.

BluePlanet

smacl wrote: »

I gather this isn't the case for tangle though, where the 'cost' of processing a transaction is to help process other transactions and hence no mining.

IOTA isn't a blockchain.
They make pretty exciting claims, but that is all.

GreeBo

BluePlanet wrote: »

The blockchain is like a public space a "commons".
Currently the 'cost' of running and securing this blockchain is being paid-for by currency inflation: 12.5 new bitcoins get mined every 10 minutes.
Once the cap on coins is reached the only way to pay for this network is through transaction fees.
Fees are an integral part of the blockchain economy.

When that blockchain (public space) becomes crowded with transactions, buying your way onto the main chain via market forces occurs.
Miners prioritize transactions that award them the highest fees.

Those market forces that push fees higher, should then incentivize development of layer 2 and layer 3 solutions.

Sorry, but whats this got to do with anything I posted?

smacl

BluePlanet wrote: »

IOTA isn't a blockchain.
They make pretty exciting claims, but that is all.

Didn't say it was, simply an illustration that the technology is moving in more than one direction.

BluePlanet

GreeBo wrote: »

Sorry, but whats this got to do with anything I posted?

I read a post of yours which seemed to suggest that the value of a transaction would have nothing to do with it being verified.

My response was describing the economy of transaction fees.

Sure, it's possible to send a small value transaction and pay high fee to get it onto the main chain, but that makes no economic sense.

The market of transaction fees push small value transactions off chain.

GreeBo

BluePlanet wrote: »

I read a post of yours which seemed to suggest that the value of a transaction would have nothing to do with it being verified.

My response was describing the economy of transaction fees.

Sure, it's possible to send a small value transaction and pay high fee to get it onto the main chain, but that makes no economic sense.

The market of transaction fees push small value transactions off chain.

I'm still not seeing how the value of the transaction has anything to do with the speed its verified.

You can pay a higher fee to push it into the next block, but the *value* of the transaction is irrelevant.
The *size* of the transaction is however relevant.

CryptoMad

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm still not seeing how the value of the transaction has anything to do with the speed its verified.

You can pay a higher fee to push it into the next block, but the *value* of the transaction is irrelevant.
The *size* of the transaction is however relevant.

100% correct!

Bob24

No update here for a while.

There was decent recovery especially for bitcoin and also a few other major crypto since this thread was started .... but it hasn't reached the previous high and seems to be running out of steam.

What do people see coming next?

BrokenArrows

Bob24 wrote: »

No update here for a while.

There was decent recovery especially for bitcoin and also a few other major crypto since this thread was started .... but it hasn't reached the previous high and seems to be running out of steam.

What do people see coming next?

My portfolio recovered a lot but has gradually slipped back significantly in the past 2 weeks.

NANO is the only thing which is continuing to recover, everything else is big into the red.

Blacktie.

Monero is looking good. Was there news i missed?

ballyharpat

I stopped commenting or even figuring out what I thought could happen when it broke the 10k mark 2 weeks ago- I didn’t think it would.

I can’t see it being worth the price it is, but it is still valuable, just like oil is probably worth $80 per barrel, but was up to 140 a few years ago, driven by speculators rather than value.

I Can’t even say what I think bitcoin would be worth, as there are so many other Cryptocurrency that are similar and can do the same thing.

But I am sure there is still money to be made speculating at it.

FWIW

Whelo79

Blacktie. wrote: »

Monero is looking good. Was there news i missed?

Hardfork coming up soon.

smacl

Bob24 wrote: »

What do people see coming next?

Slightly more steady growth from solutions that successfully transition from concept to delivering real world value and decline and collapse for those that don't. I think the corrections we're seeing are positive even if they aren't good for short term speculation.

lifeandtimes

My portofilia stayed above 20% profit through out the last 4- 6 weeks and I took advantage of buying more coins last night in the one im heavily involved in as the dip was too cheap not too and now it's up 20%. So I'm pretty happy

Manic Moran

I'm still running a bit of a theoretical profit (about 130%), and I have no plans to use any of my money for at least another five or six months. So, I'm just HODLing, in the hope of some climb somewhere between then and now. I figure that if it ever approaches 85% of where it was before, I'll start drawing it out, unless it looks like another sudden meteoric rise as happened last year (Most of my assets are ZEC, not BCH, ZEC sort of shot up one day when I was sleeping, apparently.)

grindle

Manic Moran wrote: »

I figure that if it ever approaches 85% of where it was before, I'll start drawing it out

Do you take part in any ICOs?

10% of your holdings placed into a good ICO can quickly turn into 30-90% of your holdings. If not quickly then usually within 6 months if it's a good non-scamcoin, the token has an actual use and the devs weren't excessively greedy - a rarity these days.

Mr Bloat

Tinder Surprise wrote: »

Somethings stirring on Binance....

Early reports are a whale account got hacked and all alt coins sold at market rate to BTC then to Monero.

It seen crazy prices on a few Alt coins this afternoon.

Let's hope that's the case and not a hack, cause I find it hard to believe a whale account with the alleged monies involved had not got two way ath activated

This thread has been pretty quiet of late, I assume because the market was doing well. I'm looking forward to all the naysayers resurfacing in light of the current drop...

BrokenArrows

Mr Bloat wrote: »

This thread has been pretty quiet of late, I assume because the market was doing well. I'm looking forward to all the naysayers resurfacing in light of the current drop...

Well there is not much point in being worried when the market is doing well!!

What has just happened though. Every single coin and token has simultaneously plummeted!

JohnnyFlash

Mr Bloat wrote: »

This thread has been pretty quiet of late, I assume because the market was doing well. I'm looking forward to all the naysayers resurfacing in light of the current drop...

I've been reading it occasionally, and I'm definitely a skeptic. That said, I don't want to piss on anyone's parade. Losing real money buying virtual coins isn't nice, without there being this mistaken assumption that people are gloating over it. I think a skeptic thread, like on the reddit crypto forum would be a good idea. There's very valid reasons to be skeptical of this entire space, and it would keep it out of the other threads.

What says everyone?

lostboy75

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

a skeptic thread,

If I'm not mistaken this thread was created fur that purpose, but skeptic as such, but more open to debate
https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057831539/4/#post106080546

DVD-Lots

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Well there is not much point in being worried when the market is doing well!!

What has just happened though. Every single coin and token has simultaneously plummeted!

Binance "hack" apparently. People who used API's for bots without 2FA, all their ALT's got sold for BTC then traded for VIA, which shot up. All over Reddit. :rolleyes:

Withdrawls now suspended as they are working on it.

h0neybadger

Hate to sound calous, but I’m delighted. Idiots using bot’s to trade their Crypto deserve mistakes like this to happen.

I sincerely hope Binance don’t resolve it unless it’s an issue with their website.

If the bot just messed up, and good.

BrokenArrows

It's crazy how much influence exchanges have over price.

Tinder Surprise

BrokenArrows wrote: »

It's crazy how much influence exchanges have over price.

Binance is a juggernaut.

Believe it or not I can't see them banning bots.

Bots create trades - Exchanges get paid via trades.

smacl

h0neybadger wrote: »

Idiots using bot’s to trade their Crypto deserve mistakes like this to happen.

Why so? If you're playing a numbers to buy and sell that you can adequately describe as an algorithm what's the issue with automating your trades and using an API rather than using a GUI? I would have thought your time would be better spent optimising your trading parameters based on the market as you see it rather than faffing about with a GUI to make individual trades.

JohnnyFlash

The volume of tether being traded today is off the chart. It has a market cap of 2.2billion, but the trading volume for today alone is 2.8 billion.

rapul

Good time to buy on the cheap I guess!

GarIT

h0neybadger wrote: »

Idiots using bot’s to trade their Crypto deserve mistakes like this to happen.

If the bot just messed up, and good.

70% of all trading in everything other than crypto is done by bots it's nothing unique.

WhiteMemento9

rapul wrote: »

Good time to buy on the cheap I guess!

There is still another 180k BTC to get dumped on the market from the Mt. Gov trustee articles.

rapul

WhiteMemento9 wrote: »

There is still another 180k BTC to get dumped on the market from the Mt. Gov trustee articles.

Cheers for that holmes,I shall hold off so.

Elessar

WhiteMemento9 wrote: »

There is still another 180k BTC to get dumped on the market from the Mt. Gov trustee articles.

They may not do that, at least not straight away. From what I understand the BTC sold thus far provided enough $$$ to pay off the Mt.Gox creditors. As this falls under court proceedings & trustees, it's up to the them to decide what to do next, but they can't just dump it without court approval - they've gotten the money they need. They may distribute the remaining BTC.

This could actually be a silver lining - at least we know the cause of the massive drops over the last few months. Maybe the regular whales don't have as much power as we thought.

EDIT: Court decisions can take years. Now that we know what caused the january crash and there's going to be no more huge dumping BTC is free to seriously soar again. Might take a while to stabilise though.

WhiteMemento9

Elessar wrote: »

They may not do that, at least not straight away. From what I understand the BTC sold thus far provided enough $$$ to pay off the Mt.Gox creditors. As this falls under court proceedings & trustees, it's up to the them to decide what to do next, but they can't just dump it without court approval - they've gotten the money they need. They may distribute the remaining BTC.

This could actually be a silver lining - at least we know the cause of the massive drops over the last few months. Maybe the regular whales don't have as much power as we thought.

EDIT: Court decisions can take years. Now that we know what caused the january crash and there's going to be no more huge dumping BTC is free to seriously soar again. Might take a while to stabilise though.

It has certainly shown the resilience of BTC. To think how well the market held up while this dumping was happening is a huge point of note. Mental to think if this hasn't been ongoing where these markets would currently sit. Crashing the market by selling in this way when you still have so much behind has to be one of the stupidest things anyone has ever done.

Edit - Still not happy having money in the market while the uncertainly remains around what is going to happen with the remaining funds.

Manic Moran

grindle wrote: »

Manic Moran wrote: »

I figure that if it ever approaches 85% of where it was before, I'll start drawing it out

Do you take part in any ICOs?

10% of your holdings placed into a good ICO can quickly turn into 30-90% of your holdings. If not quickly then usually within 6 months if it's a good non-scamcoin, the token has an actual use and the devs weren't excessively greedy - a rarity these days.

I’m quite willing to, but most of the time I find out about them too late. I’m more a lackadaisical investor. The one time I found about about one in time that seemed worthwhile, it was only open to UK/Ireland, for some reason.

grindle

Manic Moran wrote: »

I’m quite willing to, but most of the time I find out about them too late. I’m more a lackadaisical investor. The one time I found about about one in time that seemed worthwhile, it was only open to UK/Ireland, for some reason.

People living in the US (you're in California?) aren't supposed to be entering ICOs for possible securities because it adds a cost to those tokens, but if you tell fibs and use a VPN for KYC you still can. It's not illegal for you to do, it's just illegal for the service to offer the product to the US without playing by the SEC's rules.

Depends on what you find and your risk tolerance but one thing I'd suggest to everybody is to whitelist for anything that looks even slightly promising whether you intend to enter or not. Very possible for hype to build in the meantime.

hots

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

The volume of tether being traded today is off the chart. It has a market cap of 2.2billion, but the trading volume for today alone is 2.8 billion.

I would imagine a lot of that was triggered by Binance stopping withdrawals and a lot of people wanting to sit in fiat while it was getting sorted?

makeorbrake

hots wrote: »

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

The volume of tether being traded today is off the chart. It has a market cap of 2.2billion, but the trading volume for today alone is 2.8 billion.

I would imagine a lot of that was triggered by Binance stopping withdrawals and a lot of people wanting to sit in fiat while it was getting sorted?

Surely it's too risky to be using Tether?

Manic Moran

grindle wrote: »

People living in the US (you're in California?) aren't supposed to be entering ICOs for possible securities because it adds a cost to those tokens, but if you tell fibs and use a VPN for KYC you still can. It's not illegal for you to do, it's just illegal for the service to offer the product to the US without playing by the SEC's rules.

Well, I still have an Irish mailing address...

However, it's probably not overly safe for me to do so. I read the above, and took that to read "You can still get into an ICO for a coin named "KYC"". Only after doing some digging did I have my lightbulb moment. Probably indicates my level of knowledge.

lifeandtimes

Manic Moran wrote: »

Well, I still have an Irish mailing address...

However, it's probably not overly safe for me to do so. I read the above, and took that to read "You can still get into an ICO for a coin named "KYC"". Only after doing some digging did I have my lightbulb moment. Probably indicates my level of knowledge.

Morgan by name, Moran by nature?