Nope, you didn't understand, Getting the torrent, not its content, is very quick. The user need only spend a couple of minutes on the tracker's site to get the torrent/magnet loaded onto his torrent client. Then he no longer needs the tracker (or even the browser) but can download the torrent content thru his client, and it can take as long as it likes.
I support the idea to let sites use some percentage of my CPU power to let mine their coins. I'd even say it is a great concept to grant their income for their costs. Paying via ads (funding by ads) has become a pest not only in the internet....at TV as well.... Furthermore I never could get what's the real value of consuming ads since I do buy what I want either way. It would be a cool future concept to equip media devices with an ASIC chip to mine coins in order to pay live instead of watching all the ads. Consider you'd watch a private broadcast and you could 'pay' them with ASIC power instead of having all the commercial breaks...
@Yen: Believe it or not, ads did serve a useful purpose. Most people who watched ad driven TV or movies would use the ad time for a bathroom break, or to grab a quick snack. Of course, that was before digital on-demand TV, where you could pause the feed. As far as using Bitcoin goes, every possible security issue would have to be worked out, so that nobody could steal another persons' bitcoins. From what I'm seeing, we're not at that place yet. As a future concept, I agree. Smart chips on debit / credit cards seem to work well protecting the innocent from fraud, but those companies have the banks behind them. That level of consumer protection still has to be installed for Bitcoins to work.
Yen, I do not think the mega-media we have for entertainment today can be convinced that bitcoin mining would be profitable. Bitcoins are a very volatile commodity, radically up one day and down the next. Not every business accepts bitcoin, although there are a few that do.... but not many
Actually, by today's TV program standards, the ads can be more interesting than the program, especially if hey use pretty girls. But on torrent sites, their ads are particularly annoying, opening multiple tabs, and the site may not work if it detects an ad-blocker.
I have a lot of mixed thought on this matter (overall). At first hand, I love the general idea. If every website could make a profit without annoying me with flashing ads, pop-ups, video, audio, and sneaky ads (ads meant to trick you to clicking them), I would stop using an ad blocker and be OK with them displaying their site in the clear (more or less). But that brings another thought; the running process in the background. Usually if a site is using 20% of my CPU I am wondering WTF is going on? The idea of a hidden process that I may not be fully aware of is a concerning one and if you were to combine this with another sneaky process, the user may not be the wiser and would assume it was the "safe" bitcoin. I guess I worry about what door this may open people too if suddenly everyone's website caused a higher than normal CPU usage? This brings me to another thought: How much of an impact could this have an a website which is already resource heavy?
On another note, what's to keep web sites from taking more than 20%? What if some unscrupulous web sites decided to mine 75% and still bombard you with advertising? I like the idea of mining over ads, but can web sites do that responsibly?
Hi GOD, long time to see you. Valid points, also by Joe C. If this practice spreads and becomes acceptable, it will change browsing experience radically, we'll need bigger processors and computers will get more expensive. Also, using simple economic theory, the plethora of bitcoins generated will lead to their drop in value, so that the sites will need to generate more of them... So no, I'll choose the ads. After all, the devil you know is better that the devil you don't know.
Most newer pc's probably wouldn't notice a 20% take. And it'll be less than 2-1/2yrs before Windows 7 officially will not update which means almost anything by then will be a Skylake/Ryzen or better. Also, I think M$ stated that Windows 10 is not going to support older processors by 2020, I do not know what gen cpu's will be the cut off for updates. (Speaking in terms of general public, because we all know here there are already way's to get around that)
I want to pick up some arguments. The 'purpose' of commercial breaks. I have to admit it is nice to have one or two breaks during a movie. Nowadays they have become a pest. It's all about money! They are always the same brands who can afford to place their commercials at prime time to interrupt a 'block buster'. As result you get terrorized with those few brands all the time, a movie is interrupted 6 times and you have to watch a particular commercial up to 3-6 times @Katzenfreund All the Germans probably know the 'Trivago' ads. I honestly cannot stand them anymore and have to leave my living room, I do not make the efforts to zap... I NEVER would use the Trivago service to get a hotel! Security of bitcoins. It strongly depends on individual knowledge how to use bitcoins properly. Since cryptocurrency is no common currency (yet) there is no common access to info and many different info and ways how to use them. But already today you can have them as safe as online banking. My wallet is AES-256-CBC encrypted and can use 2FA. I have got a strong pass and a 'seed'. Most BTCs get stolen due to lack of tech knowledge, not because of BTC's own vulnerabilities. But I agree. Cryptocurrencies have to become more 'established', their usage more familiar. When I did online banking more than 20 years ago the first time I was concerned as well.... Besides of that if you would let others use your devices to mine coins in order to pay them, it's not your own coins either way, lol. Cryptocurrencies do get their own 'sense' the more you can buy for them directly. In the meantime you have to sell them to get 'money' which has a far greater acceptance. But that might change in future as well. For a future concept devices would have to get an additional separate ASIC. To share work power from CPU/GPU to mine is no good concept. It can be a good way in the future to pay services while using the device.
@Yen: I agree with you. I do my best not to purchase the products advertised on annoying commercials. My mom is so patient. She would sit there and video tape a show, stopping and restarting it at the commercials. She still has many of those VCR tapes.
You were right if BTCs would work that way, but they don't. The concept and ideology by 'Satoshi Nakamoto' takes into account that it remains a healthy system. The issue you have posted applies to currencies such as the U$ dollar where they just print some more. Many people are not familiar with the BTC basics: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Help:FAQ BTCs have a predeterminated reward system. There is the transaction fee and the block reward. Also there are block reward halfing (every 210,000th block) and mining difficulty / proof of work. ATM it's 12.5 BTCs per mined block. Since it is halfed every 210.000th block there is an approximated end of amount of BTCs ~21 Million pieces This means it's the other way around. The value is a sort of guarantied and ATM high due to their low number of pieces. This (end of mining) is BTW a con argument for replacing ads by BTCs (mining) alone. When I was a kid I played with my little brother a game we've called ads guessing. The one who was first by naming the advertised product has got a point. Also there had been little cartoons in between the ads. That time most ads were a kind of cool and there was also some arts recognizable. Today most of the ads are annoying....I once loved to watch British ads and was glad to receive English Broadcasts via sat. There are still some nice and funny ads, though. Anyway I frequently do record 'block busters' on PVR (on HDD) in order skip ads by winding forwards or I do wait for the late late night repeat which usually has got less ads...
favorite ads... ... Because you can't lie on the internet Real life instance: My wife being a Special Ed teacher, and it was the beginning of the school year noticed a new teachers autistic kid doing something he's not supposed to do. When she question him on it that new teacher stated that it was o.k. because his mom told him that autistic kids can't lie....gullible new teacher believed mom, comical today
For technical reasons the bitcoin network can currently only handle about 7 transactions per second. Visa, by comparison, routinely handles thousands of transactions per second and, in a pinch, can accommodate up to 56,000 per second. If bitcoin's true purpose is to be an electronic payment system, it is about to spectacularly fail at that mission. In fact, it already is; transactions that used to be nearly instantaneous and nearly cost-less are becoming slower (taking hours or even days to be confirmed) and more expensive. Gold, the known commodity with a track record of thousands of years, these types of considerations do not apply. Gold certainly has its own problems, specifically in the manipulation of the spot price. But for precisely that reason, seeing the price collapse to zero or shoot into the tens of thousands of dollars in the blink of an eye seems exceedingly unlikely. So once again, it comes back to the basic philosophy behind the question of "value." Are you interested in the value of gold and bitcoin as measured in US Federal Reserve notes? Are they just another commodity to be used to turnaround a quick buck? If so, then by all means, study the charts, look for the patterns, find your opportunities and enjoy the game. But what if the "value" of gold or bitcoin is not measured in government fiat, but in their own potential as monetary instruments? After all, the US dollar will not outlast the US government (in its current form, at any rate), but gold will and bitcoin might. And if these instruments are not investments but hedges, that changes the meaning of their "value," doesn't it?
66 Percent of Popular Android Cryptocurrency Apps Don't Use Encryption Believe it or not, new analysis by security firm High-Tech Bridge has found that 66 percent of popular cryptocurrency apps don't use HTTPS to encrypt information in transit. To make matters worse 94 percent of these apps had at least three medium-risk vulnerabilities. If you're using one of these apps and a hacker really wants to get into your wallet or passwords then you're in danger. Be careful out there my friends!
I generally would say any money transfer related actions should not be a job of an Android smartphone. The android development has no priority. Best OS is Linux and open source clients such as Electrum. People should also consider that popular currencies have more developed clients. Bitcoin versus bitcoin gold. Anyway the article has lack of technical knowledge, is unprofessionally researched and creates a distorted view! Furthermore is does not advise the reader properly. It is the way a transaction is made that makes a client safe! Cryptocurrency apps that have an own local wallet (and that are most) do not send any password! The password is used to decrypt the local wallet temporarily and to sign a particular transaction. This is made locally in RAM. A HTTP connection is no issue. It might be at any online bank account / wallet though, regardless of crypto currency or common currencies. Bitcoin user should use an app that properly encrypts a wallet and handles the entire transaction process without local vulnerability. It also should offer a reasonable and safe wallet restore option. Potential danger is local malware and incorrect use of clients. Concerned users can use offline wallets to make online transactions and sign them securely on an offline PC. My advise: If you use an online wallet / account just care for the same you do when using a common online bank account. Check for 2FA or another additional measure (mTAN...) When using a local (offline) wallet (to have full control of all your private keys) inform yourself about technical details. Go for popular ones on Linux or windows OS. Use open source clients. Get familiar with transaction / signing..... Check its documentation and how to's. Good clients such as Electrum offer a proper and detailed manual. Most coins get lost due to improper use of the client, not because of vulnerabilities of the client itself.
Cryptocurrencies are simply a bubble which are gonna explode at any time, I don't believe in it, that said my bank responded to it and we get (next year) transfer times within 15 seconds - that's fast enough (for me). And there is not much difference except that my bank is more secure, don't waste as much energy as cryptocurrencies and there real people behind. That's not true. Most coins get lost by attacks, which is a fact, entire chinese market got so often attacked, two huge providers got down by this and they still haven't entirely figgured out how it was possible because there is less transparency. In entire EU there is no such app or page which not uses HTTPS right now, HTTP is an issue, when you're sitting in MCDonalds and check your wallet or want to update it you might get security related problems because it's easier to steal data from unencrypted connections. Also not true, it's both together you encryption is pointless if I can read out all data from your stolen smartphone. And you encrypted phone is useless when I simply can obtain your data on unsecure protocols. I see HTTP same like FTP, it should be removed and disallowed. Instead of wasting processing power for mining, how about making the web better? That should be priority. There is no offline wallet, there is something like a cache/revision but as soon as you want to work with your or other peoples money by e.g. transfering something you need to connect and update the database, which is the biggest weakness because you have to be online for this no matter what you can't transfer money offline (like the old fashion way). When the entire services get's a DOS attack you can't even do anything with your money and not even get something from others because the entire service is down. That should never be forgotten. I think the rest is pretty much well known and not only affects BitCoin or apps, I rather think that we should really build something which also offers ways which aren't so easily attackable and that's the challange here.
@CHEF-KOCH I'm with bitcoins since 2012. I do have practical experiences and have used many different clients. I also know tech details from studying the matter. I firstly had used the original client and had downloaded the entire blockchain. Now I am using Electrum since years. Friends have got online wallets at a certified bank. You do not differentiate online wallets and offline clients with wallets. And your arguments are wrong due to lack of practical knowledge. It seems you do not know how a transaction gets signed and what is transferred by that nor what a cold wallet is per definition. I take one more my time (the last time) to disqualify your arguments. Your link to a yellow press article (To voice opinion on twitter is no journalism, lol): I am sorry this is nothing, nothing confirmed. A DDOS attack and a crash are NOT directly reasoned. Decreasing rate and selling are. Besides of that an attack does not justify your statement 'greatest danger'. Sure BTCs get lost due to attacks on online accounts. But that is not the most probable risk. BTCs are de-centralized! I said when you deal with BTCs and using an own wallet the most probable risk to lose your coins is improper use and lack of knowledge. You need to get familiar with it. The second danger is local malware that can capture private keys from RAM at the moment of signing. A HTTP connection is no issue at all when using local wallets. The private certificates are never sent. It is the same when I give a cheque to you. I have signed it and I am the sender but you are not the receiver. What might you do? You cannot fake my signature since you are not the owner of my private keys. The only thing you could do is to prevent the transfer. Please inform yourself about further details. All your other arguments are wrong due to lack of technical details. It is for sure the way of transaction that has an impact on security. I am disappointed of your way arguing, had expected more knowledge. general http://docs.electrum.org/en/latest/faq.html offline wallet: http://docs.electrum.org/en/latest/coldstorage.html#create-an-offline-wallet cold storrage: http://docs.electrum.org/en/latest/coldstorage.html# How to create an unsigned transaction and sign and broadcast it later http://docs.electrum.org/en/latest/coldstorage.html#create-an-unsigned-transaction Nobody of those I know have lost any BTC due to attack!! The major issue is to lose the own wallet, the second to transfer it to an address which does neither belong to the receiver nor to the sender (typo)...another issue is too low transaction fee and hence the transaction gets stuck in the mempool.
I heard on the news this morning that BTC has increased 1,600% since the beginning of this year. Yen... you must be very pleased with these results!
Yes it's nice. Actually a bit crazy I actually did not buy BTCs to make money. I've got my last purchase of BTC for ~700 bucks. Now it's 17,000. My first coins I even had got for 70 bucks...but I purchased music for them... I do not realize the BTCs into Euros. I hold em regardless what'll happen...