I haven't looked at AWS in a while, but they've updated it. https://aws.amazon.com/free/They have a db service now, you can get a micro instance in MySQL, Oracle, or SQL express edition with 20 gb of db storage space. Linux or windows Micro instance, 30 gb elastic block storage and 5 gb of simple storage. Plus 15 GB of data transfer for it all. Toss on PHP and a free control panel like zpnael or open panel and you're set. and check out their uptime, Uptime: 99.385 % That's 5 hours of down time a month. Amazon will get you much better than that. In October they were up only 97% |
|
|
|
The big bang isn't perpetual motion it's just 100% efficient.
More nonsense or do you want to prove that? Proving it would be kind of tricky because we don't exactly know much about what's out there but the generally accepted view is that the expansion of the universe is slowing and at some stage will contract and eventually the cycle will begin again. The universe is (we think) all there is, therefore nothing can get out because there is no "out", energy cannot be created or destroyed so all the energy stays in the universe. I'm not saying it's perpetual motion. I'm also not saying it's 100% efficient. I'm saying that if you say it's 100% efficient, that's a bold statement and I would love to know how you came to that conclusion. My point being, words are cheap. Saying it doesn't make it a fact. |
|
|
|
You forgot the rest of the picture there. Here's the whole rig:  You guys are all extra funny today. |
|
|
|
The big bang isn't perpetual motion it's just 100% efficient.
More nonsense or do you want to prove that? |
|
|
|
It can't work because of this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy. Generating energie out of nowhere is impossible. It (hypothetically) might be possible to create something thats keeps spinning at a constant speed, in a vacuum and with no friction. That's it period. Fake. Really? Excuse my bad paint skills.  Why do people always assume that things are impossible? Nothing is.  lol |
|
|
|
I agree that the current difficulty is sufficient. I thought the difficulty being configurable would be a nice feature, but you can always just use a longer password. dd if=/dev/random bs=1M count=1 | sha256sum ^^ Damn good password. Hard to remember though. 5 alphanumeric shouldn't be too hard to remember without having to write it down or mistype a very long password. Not only is it hard to remember, it has enough bits to be a private key itself. I was making a little joke, not very good at jokes.  Over my head, sorry.  Get in a mind set discussion about certain things and the jokes start missing. |
|
|
|
I agree that the current difficulty is sufficient. I thought the difficulty being configurable would be a nice feature, but you can always just use a longer password. dd if=/dev/random bs=1M count=1 | sha256sum ^^ Damn good password. Hard to remember though. 5 alphanumeric shouldn't be too hard to remember without having to write it down or mistype a very long password. |
|
|
|
Could this be modified so that the amount of CPU per guess could be configured? For example if you had to hash something 100 times instead of once to get the key instead of 1 time it would take 6000 hours to crack instead of 60. But if you know the password it will still only take a few moments to decode.
Not sure about the exact internals of your protocol but something like that would be nice and really annoy the brute force attackers.
As he has it right now, it takes about a second to decode on my machine if you know the password. This would make it so that this could run on a phone in javascript at this difficulty when the password is known. Same machine would take half a year to crack 5 character single case. Make that upper lower and you're 12 years. Obviously, he had twenty machines and was not using the un-compiled code. For waht he is proposing the current hashing length is sufficient. If I'm calculating all of this right make it alpha numeric upper lower and that same thing takes 29 years on my single computer. |
|
|
|
I think I checked in UI elements to allow batch entry, but haven't written the code to actually parse them. This is in reply to your other thread, but single input works, the multiple does not. Regardless of what I enter, it does just say unrecognized. Looking at your code, button for multiple just allows multiline and changes textbox1. The button1 sends the text off to an interpreter that doesn't recognize more than one address at a time. Something else I noticed, if I add an address only, it says private key, unknown. Is there anyway to tell it what the private key is if I enter it backwards like that? |
|
|
|
|
FYI, my bets were the 2,3,5,6 and the 25. Bet 26 minutes ago, then it hit 5 15 minutes ago, 11 minutes after I placed my bet.
|
|
|
|
I hate your stupid game. I've wasted a few btc on it. Finally hit the number... and am just now finding out, that the pending transaction doesn't count for the roll unless it's put into the block... I hit it, and it didn't make the block (even though I included a transaction fee) and waited over 20 minutes. That blows.  |
|
|
|
Updated Github with ability to manually input your own private keys so you can print them as voucher notes.
Much better system than what I hacked in to make it work. I'll do some testing but I love what you have here. Love the passphrase protected private keys as well. |
|
|
|
Hi wtfvanity,
Thanks for your feedback.
I recently added a trim of whitespace to the address. It is only in the most recent version (0.4.15). Was that the version you were using ? - If so then I will have to look at it again as maybe I have missed it or put it in the wrong branch.
As it seems a common request I will have a think about adding multiple transactions on a send. It does not fit very well with the current UI where the top panel and the bottom panel are dynamically linked and entails beefing up the fees algorithm which is why I have been a bit reluctant to do it. It is pretty useful though and saves money so I'll put it on the ToDo list.
A little note on the UI to highlight that the address you entered is in your own wallet is a good idea yes. Whilst not an 'illegal' thing to do it most likely is from a cut and paste error so would be worth highlighting.
I am using 0.4.15. A space does not work, nor a tab, or a line break /n clfr etc. Space in front of the address does not work, nor in the middle of the address. It doesn't look like it made it into this branch. I agree that your existing UI, multiple outputs doesn't seem like there is a simple place to add it. In fact if you want to talk about UI, I thought the address book seemed confusing. I was testing it out and sent some coins and couldn't figure out how to "clear" it. Until I realized I was required to hit new or delete and start a new transaction. I'd love to see it but don't let that pull you off more important things. Again, that is an advanced feature. If someone is really using it then they may use the Satoshi client that is inherently more advanced. If you just put some text under the address that said *This address is in your own wallet, or something like that I don't need a dialogue box, just an FYI in case I'm being stupid because just as you mentioned, it's not against the rules to send them to yourself. New users may even do that on purpose so that they can see a transaction put into the block chain. |
|
|
|
|
Love multibit. Love the fact that it only takes 10 seconds to download the block chain not 10 hours. The saddest thing to me is no support for multiple output transactions. I'll continue to use the main client for that. However, I have two suggestions for the program after using it for a bit.
1. Can you trim the white space off of a BTC address? When I copy and paste an address and it tells me it's invalid- well it's annoying. If not, could you provide more information to the user why? Like an invalid character such as letters outside of the allowed or white space or incorrect length or something. That could possibly prevent some hair pulling for a new users.
2. Can you warn when coins are being sent to your own wallet? I don't know how I did it, but I completely messed up a copy and paste. The address was valid because it was mine. So I sent a transaction, wasted a fee and had to wait 10 extra minutes for the confirmation to have the next send be inserted into a block.
|
|
|
|
|
I checked where I was in the keyspace and even if I had chosen W as the first letter, I was about an hour behind this guy.
|
|
|
|
|
I chose V as the first letter! So close but so far!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm picking one starting letter and trying my luck. 1 in 13 chance I picked the right first letter. If it's not claimed by the time I finish I'll guess another one.
|
|
|
|
What if I compile the exe and have it email me the result and I split it with you?  |
|
|
|
|
Who would like the snippet code to run the loop? Let's break the key space up and share the prize haha. Or maybe I can sell the snippet. I'll let you chose which range in which spot and you can try luck of the draw and see if you can pick the right key space. First letter given should finish the race in a few hours. I'll take it if you're still handing it out at 20:00 UTC
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
