Will I be able to import my private keys into XT?
Yes, it is just like Bitcoin Core but with a few extra features added. |
|
|
|
Does anyone have a list of all of the people that hold the alert key's private key? I know that Gavin and Satoshi both have it since Satoshi gave it to Gavin. Also, according to https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Alerts, theymos also has the key. Does anyone know who else has the alert key? I'm asking this because of the possibility of Gavin using the alert key to abuse the alert system and broadcast to everyone that they need to switch to his fork. If other people hold the key, then this kind of abuse of the alert system can be mitigated because they can send out alerts which cancel Gavin's. |
|
|
|
"XT uses the same data directories as Core so you can easily switch back and forth."
as i understand it, these two versions will run together for some time with no problems. when you reach a critical mass with one version, you can make that version the main version.
There might be problems actually. If the blockchain forks, then you will have two blockchains, one that works with core, and the other that works with XT. Once that happens, then you will need two data directories. Furthermore, if the two blockchains coexist, then you will be able to spend your Bitcoins on both chains, effectively doubling the amount of Bitcoin that you have. This could become a major issue if total consensus is not reached. |
|
|
|
When do I get sudo apt-get install libdb4.8-dev libdb4.8++-dev: Package 'libdb4.8-dev' has no installation candidate
E: Package 'libdb4.8 ++ - dev' has no installation candidate
Oops, Sorry I made a mistake. Open /etc/apt/sources.list and add the line deb http://[mirror]/debian/ oldstable main where [mirror] is and <country> is any country on this list: https://www.debian.org/mirror/official#list. Then run sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install libdb4.8-dev libdb4.8++-dev and compile |
|
|
|
I wanted to say that I lot of people will not keep their money and it will cause themselves a damage also if they are in favour of the Gavin's proposal (because they will not know what they should do).
Almost nobody uses Bitcoin Core and Gavin can send a message to people telling them that there's an important update using the alert function. I did some research about the alerts, and it appears that Gavin is not the only one with the alert key. According to https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Alerts, it appears that theymos also holds the alert key. I would also assume then that the other core devs also hold the alert key. Thus, if Gavin sent out an alert to everyone to update, the other devs could cancel the alert and Gavin would then have less power. |
|
|
|
I like the idea that XT progressively increases the blocksize limit, but I think it would be better to fix core instead of switching entirely. However I need more information comparing the two. It would be nice if someone could post a quick comparison table between core and xt so everyone knows what they are voting for.
i dont understand why this isnt possible  maybe someone can explain that. The core devs disagree on whether or not to implement the fix into core. Therefore, Gavin is thinking about leaving the team and going to Bitcoin XT to implement the change while the other devs stay with Core and not implement the change. |
|
|
|
I'm not so secure of this thing  , this is what I am thinking that it will be a chaos. Maybe try it with testnet before using with actual Bitcoins. That way you won't lose any money and you will be able to see whether it works or not. |
|
|
|
After ./configure gives me an error: error: Found Berkeley DB other than 4.8, required for portable wallets (--with-incompatible-bdb to ignore or --disable-wallet to disable wallet functionality) I tried to give ./configure --with-bdb-compatible and ./configure --with-bdb-compatible \ but I always get the same error. How can I fix
That means that the BerkeylyDB version is not compatible with Bitcoin core. To install the correct one, run these: deb http://[mirror]/debian/ oldstable main
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install libdb4.8-dev libdb4.8++-dev Then compile. |
|
|
|
The solution he’s proposing is to increase the size of blocks from one megabyte to 20 with a code update. This means that fewer blocks would be uploaded to the blockchain overall, easing network congestion.
That is not true. The only thing that would change the number of blocks being discovered and broadcast is the difficulty and the hashrate, not the blocksize. This update would only ease network congestion by allowing more transactions to be added to a block and thus reducing the UTXO set. It could then increase confirmation times if transactions are not being confirmed due to not being added into a block because of the large UTXO set. Get your facts right. |
|
|
|
|
If he is doing this over the course of several months to a year, then I think that is plenty of time for the core devs to reach a compromise and a resolution to this issue. It also is enough time to test the system for a few months to make sure that nothing breaks with the increase so that a stable version can be released.
|
|
|
|
|
The transaction fee is included as part of the coinbase transaction. If you look at any block's transactions, you will see that the coinbase transaction is little over 25 BTC. The extra on top of the 25 are all of the transaction fees. This way the miner can spend those Bitcoins.
|
|
|
|
Before I cast my vote, I need to know more about XT. In which language it is written ? Where do I get to see the source code ? Who are the people in control of the source code ?
XT is a fork of Bitcoin Core. It is written in C/C++ and the code is located at https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt. Mike Hearn is in control of the code and possibly Gavin now too. I might switch, if I knew what the differences between Core and XT are. Also, XT is very behind on updates to Core and it hasn't been updated in over 5 months. |
|
|
|
"If you’re not really a fan of digesting the technical aspects of Bitcoin and how it works, this probably wouldn’t be of concern to you. However, chances are that most Bitcoin users from all around the world hope that Bitcoin will actually become the currency of the future, but how can that really happen in the case that it currently only handles 7 transactions per second? Yes, that’s right. Each second, only 7 people are able to make a transaction, which is mostly due to the block size limit of a Bitcoin. To put things into a better perspective, only 420 people can make a transaction during the same minute. While this may seem like a large number, it definitely isn’t as nobody wants to wait minutes or even seconds before a transaction is actually completed." Source: http://themerkle.com/coins/overcoming-7-transactions-per-second-bitcoin-limit/Most probably the article is wrong but I have aòways thought 7 tx/sec (now the average size of each block is 0.55 MB). I feel that the tx/sec measurement is misleading. With the current limit, a block can have about 5000 txs. This averages down to 8 tx/s and with the varying size of transactions and the extra data with a block, about 7 tx/sec. However, this doesn't mean that only 7 txs can be created and broadcast per second. You could theoretically have 5000 txs broadcast per second, and have 5000 tx/sec. But, only 5000 txs are put into a block and confirmed, which means that for more transactions to be confirmed, a larger block size is required. |
|
|
|
|
Did you compile Bitcoin with wallet support? Could you show us your debug.log?
|
|
|
|
Under 'gavincoin', 20MB is not the mandatory size of all new blocks. It's the maximum blocksize. If, as you say, Bitcoin is chugging along comfortably right now at 1 transaction a second, it's not suddenly going to jump to 20MB blocks overnight. OTOH if it DOES do that, it rather suggests that the 1 tr/sec was a bottleneck choking the system, doesn't it? That 20MB isn't going to be filled up unless the transactors need it to be, in which case it's a damn good job it was there.
However, if it was the bottleneck, then we would see tons of 1 Mb blocks right now, and there aren't. The average blocksize right now is around 0.5 Mb. |
|
|
|
ok and then you're going to solve the scalability problem how?
Use bigger blocks, but not jump immediately from 1Mb to 20Mb. Instead, I think we should slowly ease our way up to 20 Mb blocks. We should increment the changes since this is not that large of an issue with the network yet that we need to jump up that high immediately. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin-HT is simply a different coin ! WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL ?
THE MARKET WILL SUPPORT BOTH!!!!
:-)
====> no worries!!!
Since the new coin is based on blocks from the old Bitcoin, then people who have Bitcoin prior to the fork then have Bitcoins in both the old Bitcoin and the new Bitcoin. If both coins are still on the market at similar prices, then everyone who had Bitcoins prior to the fork just got their money doubled. This is a major problem if that happens. The market cannot support both. |
|
|
|
1. For users asking for mining address, mining pool and other mining information:How in the hell did you arrive at the conclusion that we are offering cloud mining? Did you even bother to READ OUR WEBSITE? Someone starting asking questions like: "where's the mining address?" "show us the mining address" and then others with NO RESEARCH WHATSOEVER have started to ask these questions and calling us a scam or ponzy because we don't want to provide this information. THIS SHOULD BE VERY CLEAR IF YOU DON'T EVEN BOTHER TO READ OUR WEBSITE: https://cloudthink.io
Your site implies that you are offering a mining service and contracts. As you see in the image, It can be misleading since you are saying that we can sign up and start mining bitcoins.  WE DO NOT SELL CLOUD MINING CONTRACTS, CLOUD MINING HASHING POWER or anything like this.
We do not offer users mining power or mine in to their address. We do not give any public access to our mining farm.
We didn't say anything about cloud mining or offering hashing power to our users. This is NOT our business plan, this would be very a inefficient plan in comparison to what we do.
This and many other details about our business plan and services are available on our website.
So from what I gather, it looks like you want people to invest in your company and they will receive a daily payout which comes from your mining operation. Is this correct? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
