Bitcoin Forum

UPDATE

the last one is collission, and we can all agree that it's not a threat

the one before require quantum computer to break the ecdsa, not a threat for now, they said they would change the algo, but it will arise other problems

the first point is what the whole xt drama is all about, there are other better solution, one of these will kick in when needed, i hope for dynamic block limit bip103...

XT is not "another system" but a potential fork. Whether it will gain a majority is unclear.
Whenever a cryptocurrency enjoys/suffers a fork, transactions mined before the fork stay visible in both branches, so you don't need to fear for your BTC.
However, anything done in one branch only isn't visible in the other branch.
In reality, should a fork actually happen, one of the branches will die out relatively quickly, depending on what the majority of miners prefer.

Onkel Paul

All bitcoin private keys were already exposed here www.directory.io , www.buttcoins.com . Unfortunately, No one can find a bitcoin address with balance. Because of probability & maths.

lets say the blocklimit is 20mb a block. and if every block was filled to the brim.. then the blockchain would grow by 1tb a year,
some people see this as a problem.
but the truth is we live in the 21st century.. where internet speeds are faster than the speed of block creations. where data storage is not millions of pounds. but hundreds.
for instance, the 1mb limit has been standard for a while now, but the blockchain has not grown by 52gb a year. so although its possible to download and store a 1tb a year blockchain growth, the chances that it would actually be 1tb a year is less of a worry.


more computing difficulty=more security,. yes hobby miners are a thing of the past. but then again so is digging up your own back garden and hoping for gold or oil,
in the end the reduction of block reward will find a balance as the profitability vs electric will make large farms change tactics... there will be a Plato effect that will level things out where industry's cant solely manage the mining and will require decentralised farms. in short the electricity companies wont have enough power to serve a single location, and thus it needs multiple locations/entities to get around electricity company limits

again the check system will actually become more decentralised in the future. because there is actually an electrical limit to a certain location.

there are more grains of sand in the universe then chances of cracking it. but there are many other topics that will tell you the real numbers

there are more grains of sand in the universe then chances of cracking it. but there are many other topics that will tell you the real numbers

even if things change.. the great thing about bitcoin. is that it can adapt.
1024bit encryption can be implemented.
setting up supernodes can ensure the blockchain ledger stays clean
businesses doing offchain transactions for instant and small transactions (pocketmoney amounts) to reduce bloat.

bitcoin can adapt.

Running a full node isn't mandatory for most user who requires basic functions such as sending and receiving. Additionally, users could implement block pruning in the future which would reduce the size. Only a few nodes are needed to run the full copy.
The computing power does not need to grow to confirm more transactions. Node wise, I believe there is a prototype that can achieve 4000transactions per second on a CPU that is 3 generations older. It should improve with the recent CPU release.
I don't get that.
No one can know your public key except those who have your private key.
Highly impossible and expensive. There is 2^160 keys that exist, it would take the power of several suns and extremely efficient computing power to stand a chance and it would still take thousands of years. However, it would be possible if the wallet has a weak RNG implementation, generating non random and easily guessable private keys.
Welcome.

thats an april fools joke.

the fool made like 1 page of valid addresses and then the other hundreds of pages are keys that are random and dont match.. in short it was a joke to scare people, and it looks like you fell for it

theres more then 5000 nodes.
that bitnodes site that meant to list the 5000, misses out sooooo many nodes.. i know of 10 people that have full nodes running and none of their IP's show up.

even if 1 out of 10 people i know was actually listed.. then thats roughly a 10% visability. meaning there would be potentially 50,000 nodes.
but because none of the 10 show up. i think the odds of visability are much lower.. so lets say it was 1%.. it would make the potential nodes 500,000.

short story
dont beleive all statistics, some key data may be missing

Even though all the keys are valid but in no way these are indexed and kept in a library. Imagine the computing space and size just to keep and maintain the list. The pages with all the keys are generated on the go which means that whatever random page number that you enter, these will be instantly generated based on mathematically calculation. Trust me, your private keys are safe and in no way somebody is going to find it.

That's absolutely ridiculous. There probably isn't more than 1000 quality full nodes out there.

I'm not talking about the stuff that's run from VPS & other hosting solutions which probably accounts for a majority of the nodes you see on bitnodes.

I didn't fell without a reason! somone had found some cents on directory.io  Proof? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1194333.msg12544561#msg12544561
I agree with you, but if someone have luck, he will found at least some bucks.

There wasn't actually that much node. It was a bug with the crawler and Bitcoin wasn't even that popular at that time.
Bitcoin does need more geographically distributed and stable node. Powerful nodes isn't a must. In the future, Block pruning would still allow the relay of TX which eliminates the problem of verifying transactions but it won't relay blocks. From what I understand, this would be a problem for SPV clients and they would rely on trusting miners even more.

I would still consider it as a joke. That is merely several cents and it could just be placed there by people who want to troll.

Most of your questions would be answered with this video --> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZloHVKk7DHk {The amazing math of private keys} You would have no doubts

after watching these video's https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgo7FCCPuylVk4luP3JAgVw ...Hope you enjoy.

Please come back here and confirm if you found your answers.. and if we could assist you in anything else. James D'Angelo have mastered the art of explaining difficult concepts.   

I have one PC with bitcoin qt one all the time. It is a home computer with no fixed IP address. Does it still contribute to the community?

It would contribute to the network if you port forwarded port 8333. However, since it is a dynamic IP, nodes would disconnect everytime you change the IP hence it would be a slight hassle. But you are still relaying blocks and TX.

I wouldn't be taking those media experts and certain blog experts too seriously. I mean you have raised very valid questions but don't believe everything that they say under no circumstances.

Maybe 10% of them really have a clue what they are talking about. Maybe 5% of them really half understands Bitcoin!

That is not true.  They can say it all they want, but saying it doesn't make it true.


There is no evidence that ECDSA signatures are vulnerable to anything other than poor implementation. As long a you don't use faulty software, you'll be fine.


Then run a SPV wallet, or use a service such as Coinbase.


Of course it is. That's a silly thing to say.

it's just how the rumor, spread you need one hater that wrote a crap on the internet, and this spread like a plug

then you have major institutions that trust these rumors without thinking, because they hate bitcoin also, there is also a lose, for bank and big circuit, in fees, if bitcoin would be used by their "customers"

Then think about what will happen if we have 200% more transactions regularly. It would mean that constantly 33% of all legit transactions will never get a confirmation. Can you imagine how useless bitcoin would be then?

And it doesn't matter if someone tries to host a full node on his smartphone or C64, we simply can't trim bitcoin down so much that it renders practically useless.

Don't you think?

And don't believe all the fear against bigger blocks. The people spreading it have their own project in the makings. The lightning network. The worse bitcoin works the more people will use their altcoin, they hope. Which would translate into income for them.

The media doesn't even care about bitcoins but rather the views they will get from their articles that will make them money. Blogs also have the same goal: get traffic and take profit (though some of them I find really informative).

Well, it is way less than the fiat or banking system. But still, bitcoin has it's problems.

For example, the current hashpower is 100 times higher than needed. 1% of that hashpower would be enough to hold the bitcoin network secure. So there is no reason for the "fee market" the 1MB block fans propagate. Miners need to trim down their miners. It happened all the time. Nobody mines bitcoin with GPU or CPU anymore now. Those miners were switched off. So when the reward is way way lower then bitcoin will still survive even with many miners switching off their miners.

And this hugely overloaded system has another problem. A study, some months ago, showed that ONE bitcoin transaction needs so much power like 1.75 average US-households use in electricity per day. ONE transaction. If the transactions has more than one input and 2 outputs then this power consumption grows even.

So at the moment bitcoin surely is not environmental friendly because the reward for miners is too high.

Next year, we will have halving. So it will be more environmental friendly.

Wait a moment, if the bitcoin price rise by 4 times, it will be even less environmental friendly.

The max number of bitcoin is 21,000,000, so the amount of transactions will pretty much slow down after it reaches that point. The computing power will also get better in the future, so the blocks will be processed even faster. And the storage, bitcoin is real money, real money is kept in a bank. What happens when a bank runs out of storage, they make more storage, and thats what bitcoin will do.

Uh.. You have understood Bitcoin incorrectly. The reward would actually be quite small after the next few halvings, not when it completely stops. Transaction can still go on depending on the adoption rates. Even with huge portion of the coins getting lost, we can still divide Bitcoin beyond satoshis and it wouldn't be a problem.

---

No matter how fast the computing power can be, the blocks will never be faster in extended period of times. It would be faster between difficulty change if the processing power increases between it. For blocks to be faster, a hard fork is required.

No.  This isn't true. The maximum number will never be more than 21,000,000 (which is an easy number to say and remember so it is often used with the "never more than" description), but it will never be 21,000,000 either.  The maximum number is less than 20999864.7679.


The amount of transactions might speed up, or it might slow down.  There really isn't any way to know.


Nope.  Faster computing power does NOT result in faster blocks.  The average time between blocks will remain at 10 minutes regardless of how fast computing power gets.


Not always. I have U.S. dollars in my pocket.  I also have some in my dresser drawer.  I have a few in my car. My wife has some in her purse.  None of these are banks.


I'm not sure that your analogy makes sense, but I'm impressed by your ability to get so many things wrong in a single post.

if we count the coins lost forever the real maximum number is way less than this..

well that is the maximum available number no matter, what unless one day consensus decide to increase it(i hope never)

for the coins that are lost, there can always be chances in the future to retrieve them, they are not 100%, if new tech are discovered...

A hard fork can be done to recover all the lost coins but there isn't a way to prove that they are truly lost. It would also somehow equate to stealing those coins. Adding a decimal place if needed would be much better but I feel that there isn't a need anytime soon.