Community Directory

Forum Posts

• Replies: 569
• Topics: 35
• Likes Received: 292

• Re: Bitcoins And Gravy?

  For everyone missing @johnbarrett, I spoke with him for 2.5 hours. Unless there's some major disruptive event, our edited talk will be the next episode of The Bitcoin Game (scheduled for release on October 8).

  Posted on September 30, 2015 at 12:41 PM
  Content Garden

• Did you listen to the most recent episode of The Bitcoin Game?

  If you'd like to win either a Bitcoin Keychain or Bitcoin fork, this question about episode 26 (Jeff Garzik) of The Bitcoin Game is sitting unanswered on Twitter.

  https://twitter.com/TheBTCGame/status/647930253218738176

  You can also opt to win a Counterparty token redeemable for either of the above. Digital tokens are nice because you can sell them, tip someone with them, etc. if you don't want to claim the physical good.

  Posted on September 27, 2015 at 10:33 AM
  Listener Lounge

• Re: So, is Factom just a defacto scam now?

  Chris, I've been wanting to say for some time I've enjoyed the interviews I've seen you do. You're knowledgeable and unafraid to mix it up and say your opinions. I thought the segment I heard with Joshua on the XCP update was pretty strong (I only heard one), and I'd listen to your show if you have/had one. That's my gut feeling as a consumer of Bitcoin content. I like strong opinions from smart people; right or wrong, they make you think.

  But I'll also say, going over what you've presented, and based on my own understanding of Factom, it seems like you have one or two exact issues you're upset about (perhaps rightly so), that's lead you to draw much larger negative conclusions about Factom than I do. From what I understand, Factom intends to work with large entities (corporations and governments) providing proof-of-existence on an unprecedented scale. While I understand what got your hackles up, I haven't heard or seen anything from you guys that has changed how likely I believe it is that Factom will succeed providing this service.

  Perhaps you'll get the last laugh, and many of us will have to admit we were taken in by a scam. Time will tell. But right now, it just seems like you're loading up the shotgun and shooting all over the place, at everything related to Factom, including those who don't condemn them (perhaps I'm next, for this post). Since the fundraising is over, I'm curious what your hopeful outcome is with soooo much continued effort focused on this? What is your goal right now?

  Posted on August 16, 2015 at 3:19 PM
  General

• Re: Upcoming Bitcoin Hard Fork & /r/bitcoin censorship

  @Tatiana

  First off, did you see this from Mike Hearn? (it’s linked to in the links to reddit, but you may not have seen it): https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1

  I’m surely not the best at trying to explain the debate, but as the Blocksize of 1MB is expected to be inadequate to handle the anticipated transaction volume in the near future, a lot of people think the block size needs to be increased. I believe Bitcoin XT (the suggested fork) will allow 8MB blocks. However, there are plenty of benefits to keeping block size small, and some think maybe simply allowing fees to dictate which transactions make it into the block is the way to handle it, until a better way to allow Bitcoin to grow (scale) is figured out (people point to possible eventual solutions like the lightning network and side chains). But others will say that we don't want to increase the transaction costs, as low costs are an important part of Bitcoin. I think there’s also an argument that, eventually, if Bitcoin were to ever scale to the number of transactions per second as the VISA network, we won’t be able to increase the block size to accommodate that amount of traffic. Thus some people claim increasing the block size is basically kicking the can down the road, putting off eventual major technical changes necessary for Bitcoin to fully scale. I'm sure there are plenty of technical arguments on each side, and then there are concerns about issue around a fork in general. There's been other suggestions for a dynamic block size limit, that's based on a formula using previous block sizes. But I think perhaps there are complexities, and ways to perhaps that minors could game the system with a dynamic block size, but that is beyond my comprehension. (If anyone thinks I'm off or missed a major element of the discussion, let me know!)

  I think both sides make some reasonable points, and don't feel I can begin to understand the full ramifications enough to make a call on 1MB vs 8MB blocks (that's really the technical change people care about, right, and I guess that a fork is being presented at all?). Would a different block size limit (2MB or 4MB) change anyone's feelings who is against 8MB or larger? Will any of us with Bitcoin Core (formerly called QT) eventually end up bailing due to the size of the Blockchain? Or is it inconsequential, especially as drives keep getting larger, and technology may make some huge leaps (3D XPoint Memory) before it matters?

  I will say the censorship on Reddit seems embarrassingly biased.

  @pooktwo
  I expect this to pass, but i am curious on if Chinese miners will start to exit and if they might dump more Bitcoin then they normally would right at the cut over deadline

  Mike Hearn said ALL the Chinese pools support an increase in block size in his post, but is that accurate? Maybe they support a smaller increase, and Mike's using that info a bit unfairly in his post, to suggest they support forking to Bitcoin XT? Does anyone see another way to interpret this?

  Posted on August 16, 2015 at 7:27 AM
  Bitcoin & Beyond

• Re: Adam's Process

  Some new tips, based on recent experience. I've found that putting a decent smartphone within inches of a PA speaker cabinet can create pretty decent quality recordings. The two things I'd suggest are (1) make sure there's a way to control the input volume so the recording isn't blown out and (2) find an app that records high quality audio, and can handle the length of the audio you plan to record. Don't be scared to put the recorder right next to the speaker, it really helps cut down the other ambient noises in the room. As you get farther away, the nervous tapping of someone's pen and the room's air conditioner may become larger parts of your recording than you'd like.

  I've been using an old iPhone 4S to record presentation audio. I think the recording quality with the built-in mic sounded a bit better than the iPhone 5S (the only two phones I tested). And I used the pay version of the Rode Record app. It's a little flaky and weird to figure out, but it's come through on three nine-hour-recordings at Bitcoin conferences.

  However, the Rode Record app had me cursing at it last night. The app makes you create an audio file first, then it can be transferred to your computer. However, the native app file and the export files for my nine-hour recordings are massive and time-consuming to process on the phone. But my most recent recording at KEYNOTE 2015 became impossible to export from the Rode Record app. Fortunately I found that others have dealt with the issue, and figured out how to extract the native audio file using a combination of iExplorer and Audacity. So, if the Rode Record app ever stymies you, Google the issue and you'll find the steps to save the audio. That method seemed so much better, that the next time I have an all-day recording, I'll probably use the workaround rather than have Rode Record create the audio file for export.

  BTW, a direct line from the sound board at a conference will sound best, as opposed to mic-ing a speaker (especially if you can get accurate levels). But so far, 2 of 3 conferences have not allowed access to the sound board.

  Posted on August 7, 2015 at 12:42 PM
  Content Garden

• Re: Get Gems. Share your handle.

  When I try to search to add a new contact, I don't see a place to enter a handle. Any hints?

  Posted on June 19, 2015 at 9:20 PM
  Community Bulletin Board