AWARD-WINNING

CASINO CRYPTO EXCLUSIVE

CLUBHOUSE 1500+

GAMES 2 MIN

CASH-OUTS 24/7

SUPPORT 100s OF

FREE SPINS PLAY NOW ertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertised sites are notendorsed by the Bitcoin Forum.They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in yourjurisdiction. Advertise here.

AgentofCoin



Offline



Activity: 1092

Merit: 1001









LegendaryActivity: 1092Merit: 1001 Re: This just in: Roger Ver can't even transact bitcoin properly April 30, 2016, 01:34:55 AM #2 Quote from: alani123 on April 30, 2016, 01:22:05 AM https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status/726169695880134660/photo/1



Roger Ver posted a censored image of a blockchain.info screenshot of what he claims to be a transaction of his, complaining about the block size and how his transaction can't confirm. Not only did he try to censor information of that transaction for privacy after having it relayed to hundreds of nodes, but he also overlooks the fact that he tried to spend an unconfirmed input (and didn't didn't even add proper high priority fees) before complaining about the block size. Bigger blocks won't solve incompetence.



Archive

Roger Ver posted a censored image of a blockchain.info screenshot of what he claims to be a transaction of his, complaining about the block size and how his transaction can't confirm. Not only did he try to censor information of that transaction for privacy after having it relayed to hundreds of nodes, but he also overlooks the fact that he tried to spend an unconfirmed input (and didn't didn't even add proper high priority fees) before complaining about the block size. Bigger blocks won't solve incompetence.

He used the same input as a previous tx with no miner fee attached.

So either he is trying to double spend or doesn't realize his inputs are tied up in a previous tx.

Here is the txid:



Edit:

Here is the tx, as it looked at the time:

Here are the other txs, as it looked at the time:



He used the same input as a previous tx with no miner fee attached.So either he is trying to double spend or doesn't realize his inputs are tied up in a previous tx.Here is the txid: https://blockchain.info/en/tx/e14e2a292ed816ecbdf04b4a2a1e7008ffdbfc1e4e818a94af1b0c2680322780 Edit:Here is the tx, as it looked at the time: https://i.imgur.com/Tv4zga7.png Here are the other txs, as it looked at the time: https://i.imgur.com/N2f42rl.png I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.

Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.

Denker



Offline



Activity: 1442

Merit: 1014







LegendaryActivity: 1442Merit: 1014 Re: This just in: Roger Ver can't even transact bitcoin properly April 30, 2016, 09:06:08 AM #10 Quote from: cjmoles on April 30, 2016, 02:00:42 AM He was probably drunk or something....Those type of things are a little more than oversite. No sober bitcoiner could be that incompetent....could they??? If this type of competency is standard, then weeeee I'm ahead of the curve for a change!



No he did this on purpose.He thinks we are dumb.

This guy is losing all the rest of his credibility if you ask me.

I really liked him in the past and what he has done for the community, but now with this crazy "bigger blocks now" crap attempts together with Marshall Long , GA and all the other crooks he becomes more and more ridiculous. No he did this on purpose.He thinks we are dumb.This guy is losing all the rest of his credibility if you ask me.I really liked him in the past and what he has done for the community, but now with this crazy "bigger blocks now" crap attempts together with Marshall Long , GA and all the other crooks he becomes more and more ridiculous.

franky1



Offline



Activity: 2884

Merit: 1751









LegendaryActivity: 2884Merit: 1751 Re: This just in: Roger Ver can't even transact bitcoin properly April 30, 2016, 10:08:32 AM #12 the point is that miners are suppose to allow a certain amount of "free" transactions and then have some space for priority transactions.



its like planes and trains. they have firstclass section and economy section.



the issue is that the first class section is now estimating at 0.00050000 for a KB tx, and the amount of transactions that are not including fee's are more then the economy section can handle. so much so that people can be waiting 12 hours +.



fee's are not essential to pools right now.

While the blockreward still exists and will continue to exist for decades, using fee's as a subsidy for their income instead of a bonus undermines the value of bitcoin, because it no longer helps push a price war for the bitcoin market price and instead starts costing users more to transact.



having the market price stagnant while increasing the cost of use is going to deter people from using it.

yet many people say its a good thing because bitcoin should be prioritizing "those that really need to use it" vs "those that dont mind waiting".(bad philosophy)



but bitcoin is suppose to be for everyone, with no barriers and no controls.



so in the last 12 months alone bitcoin average tx fee for 1kb tx has gone from 2.5cents to 22.5cents (0.0001 @ $250 vs 0.0005 @ $450)



so i think the point roger verr might be eluding to is an analogy like this:



a few years ago you can get on a train any time you like and be at your destination in 10 minutes virtually free

last year you can arrive at the train station and pay 2cents to get to your destination in 10 minutes or wait on the platform to get to your destination in a hour virtually free



this year your paying 22cents BUT without the guarantee of getting to your destination within 10 minutes and if you want one of the free seats.. well i hope you brought your sleeping bag and a couple packed lunches, because your going to be waiting on the station platform for a long time.



bitcoin has lost its 2009-2013 vision I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.

Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at

franky1



Offline



Activity: 2884

Merit: 1751









LegendaryActivity: 2884Merit: 1751 Re: This just in: Roger Ver can't even transact bitcoin properly April 30, 2016, 10:26:24 AM #15 Quote from: Carlton Banks on April 30, 2016, 10:16:45 AM Quote from: franky1 on April 30, 2016, 10:08:32 AM but bitcoin is suppose to be for everyone, with no barriers and no controls.



Nope, there has always been barriers and controls in Bitcoin, your observations are incorrect and have never been the case at any time in the past.



Because scarce resources. Scarce resources are valuable. Abundant ones aren't. No barriers or controls would confer abundance. Your idea(s) is/are idiotic.

Nope, there has always been barriers and controls in Bitcoin, your observations are incorrect and have never been the case at any time in the past.Because scarce resources. Scarce resources are valuable. Abundant ones aren't. No barriers or controls would confer abundance. Your idea(s) is/are idiotic.

lemming your argument about scarce resources actually validates my point.. if fee's continue to rise then its not as scarce to the pools because they are being handed old coins from customers so there is no need to try pushing their fresh coins to be sold at a premium because they are handed lots of old coins to mix together..



imagine it. someone is mining gold and he knows he can only dig 25 ounces.. but has $11,250 of costs that day.. instead of the easy maths of 25 ounces for $11,250.. lots of people hand him 2000 x 0.0005 meaning he now has 26 ounces.. so he can sell the 26 ounces for $432 each instead of $450+



and if users are being deterred from using it because the price of use has gone up 10 fold but the potential investment profit has only gone up 2 fold. then less people will want to use it, meaning less demand to grab new coins. thus the supply/demand game has now changed. less demand, = stagnant prices.



fee's should not be an essential part of pool income for decades it should be thought of as just a small bonus, but if it were to be pushed today. id rather see it being pushed with more capacity to keep the user cost down while allowing more users.. to keep to a nice bonus.. rather then keeping capacity low to force the price up



lemming your argument about scarce resources actually validates my point.. if fee's continue to rise then its not as scarce to the pools because they are being handed old coins from customers so there is no need to try pushing their fresh coins to be sold at a premium because they are handed lots of old coins to mix together..imagine it. someone is mining gold and he knows he can only dig 25 ounces.. but has $11,250 of costs that day.. instead of the easy maths of 25 ounces for $11,250.. lots of people hand him 2000 x 0.0005 meaning he now has 26 ounces.. so he can sell the 26 ounces for $432 each instead of $450+and if users are being deterred from using it because the price of use has gone up 10 fold but the potential investment profit has only gone up 2 fold. then less people will want to use it, meaning less demand to grab new coins. thus the supply/demand game has now changed. less demand, = stagnant prices.fee's should not be anpart of pool income for decades it should be thought of as just a small, but if it were to be pushed today. id rather see it being pushed with more capacity to keep the user cost down while allowing more users.. to keep to a nice bonus.. rather then keeping capacity low to force the price up I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.

Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at