Don't worry. They'll pay in two to three weeks. |
|
|
|
Elite 1984? It looks like Space Invaders or Asteroids, but apparently it's a space sim like FTL? I have to try it in my free time  Give it a shot. It gets more and more impressive as years go by - what they were able to cram into couple of tens of kB of RAM, and process at 1MHz. 3D graphics, an actual auto-pilot, inertia, radar, thousands of worlds with different markets to trade between, missiles, flares, even some AI swarm algos controling groups of ships. |
|
|
|
When thinking about a simple double-spend of 0-confirmation transactions, the ~10 minute wait is still much better than the two-month wait in case of credit cards. That is right. Merchants are at risk of fraudulent chargebacks by the customers for months after the transaction. Yet, credit cards are thriving. Why then do we see ten minutes as a problem with Bitcoin? Also, look at the replace-by-fee proposal. Interesting stuff. |
|
|
|
Zero chance of failure. Not possible. This will come close (there are two and they are very widely seperated), but it is incredibly impractical.   We also need to think about the ease of retrieving the data  The problem with a single device is that it is single. Even if it is proof against failure, it might get lost. With multiple devices it becomes complicated to keep them in sync without compromising security. Why not encrypt your stuff, and send it to the clouds? |
|
|
|
Last time I played seriously was  |
|
|
|
I was annoyed at first, but now I see this as something extremely positive. We should really undestand the results in the context of the following observation by Bob Dobbs: You know how dumb the average person is? Well, by definition, half of 'em are even dumber than THAT. It is amazing that over 40% of participants recognize Bitoin as "legitimate". I am assuming their interpretations of the meaning of "legitimate" and "currency" are at least as reasonable as Bob Dobbs' interpretations of "average" and "median". |
|
|
|
We have recently made the decision to temporarily suspend trading on the Tradehill platform. Internet Archive Federal Credit Union has experienced operational and regulatory issues and we are no longer able to continue our relationship at this time. Our unique relationship with IAFCU allowed our clients to hold their Tradehill balance in an account opened in their name and federally insured. If you had an account with Tradehill after our integration with IAFCU and would like to withdraw your funds please contact msr@archive.orgWe look forward to resuming operations soon. Sincerely, Jered Kenna Chief Executive Officer Tradehill Jered, can you provide more details regarding your plans for the near future? |
|
|
|
The 'coulda woulda shoulda' approach to investing is always dangerous.
+1 Truer words have never been spoken. Absolutely. Applies to both ends, not just buying in. |
|
|
|
It is sad that in August 2013 there still are people who believe that IP addresses on blockchain.info have anything to do with the miner who mined the block.
You don't need Tor, VPNs, or whatever to prevent blockchain.info from publicizing your IP. You simply don't let your node connect to them. The Bitcoin network will do the anonymization for you, at least when it comes to blockchain.info.
And as you might imagine, this miner wishes to remain anonymous. Chasing after geese is fine if it amuses you, but making accusations of lies against the innocent geese you find along the way while doing so is not part of the game. Play nice. Exactly. This whole effort is futile, and also leads to unfounded accusations. |
|
|
|
Did the Foundation convey to the agencies of Bitcoin's existential threat to fiat currencies?
Do they understand what the implications to governments would be if a significant portion of all commerce was done using bitcoins as opposed to the USD?
Do you understand what the implications to yourself would be if a significant portion of all commerce was done using bitcoins? Few hints to help you get started: Salaries paid to addresses on the record with revenue agencies Blockchain data mining for marketing and security purposes An emerging market for customer data (addresses used) Mining is a big game. You choose your payment processors, who include and validate your transactions in the blockchain for a fee. Bitcoins are considered money. Coin mixing services are prosecuted for what they are: money laundering. |
|
|
|
|
It is sad that in August 2013 there still are people who believe that IP addresses on blockchain.info have anything to do with the miner who mined the block.
You don't need Tor, VPNs, or whatever to prevent blockchain.info from publicizing your IP. You simply don't let your node connect to them. The Bitcoin network will do the anonymization for you, at least when it comes to blockchain.info.
|
|
|
|
Question: Is it possible to trace one input to a output?
So inputs 1a,2a,3a,4a in and outputs 1b,2b,3b,4b out. Is it possible to trace 2a ending up as 4b? (Assuming that is the path the transactions took)
It is absolutely not possible to trace one input to an output in complex transactions. The reason is that, by the protocol, we only check that it all adds up (inputs, outputs, and fees). If it ads up, the transaction is valid. We don't, because we can't, keep track of a bitcoin, much like you cannot keep track of a number when adding numbers: If 3+5=8, you cannot tell which of those eight come from those three. With physical objects you could, but bitcoins are pure abstraction, like numbers in the above example. You could maybe argue that one of the outputs is, for example, 12.5% related to one of the inputs (previous outputs, that is), but this is far from "tracing" one-on-one. |
|
|
|
|
Sense of scale is always welcome, and it is more than welcome in discussions about anonymity. Corporate and governmental interests are powerful enough to bomb whole countries into ashes, to fly to the Moon and back, to assasinate, to build amazing structures... It is oblivious to assume that anonymity can be guranteed against a powerful interest.
In other words, the ability to perform an action anonymously depends, among other things, on what toes you are stepping on in the process.
Moving on to Bitcoin specifically, most of "anonymity" is just an empty slogan by the uninformed and misled. Do not confuse the initial obscurity of a new technology with anonymity: law enforcement, marketing firms, and DHS/KGBs of the world will eventually catch up and start using it to their advantage. Bitcoin can do miracles for them.
You could certainly take steps that obfuscate your identity to some extent, much like you could devise a network of companies, cash deals, and offshore bank accounts that makes it hard for someone to determine your identity, or at least that makes it hard to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you are that guy. Still there is nothing inherently anonymous about Bitcoin or cash. It all depends on how you use them and how much you understand them, and on how powerful your enemy is.
|
|
|
|
On yeah, that's right, just use lasers for long distance. No radio interference and no jamming.
No radio interference, true. But fog, rain, birds, dust storms, snow, spiders...? Also, jamming a beam of light is more trivial than jamming a radio signal. Depends on how much power you put through it *sizzle!*  then it sizzles your receiver as well! |
|
|
|
This is certainly true if you encrypt a JPG image, as a cracking program can easily check whether a brute-force result yields a valid JPG file.
It may be much more difficult with just the text of the key, because that looks like gibberish anyway. Even with a relatively short password, many brute-force attempts may yield some similar gibberish, so the cracking program cannot discern the valid key from other wrong results with wrong passwords.
This is an important argument. It should be noted, however, that it is relevant if private key is in the raw, 32-byte form. If it is, the attacker has no idea whether he got the right passphrase until he performs ECDSA to create the public key, then ripemd160(sha256()) to create the address, and then search the blockchain for the address. That's a lot of work for each try, and only when you get lucky can you start hoping that there are unspent outputs. In case of the usual WIF-encoded private keys, it seems easier because of the checksum. First of all, the brute-force attacker checks if candidate begins with a "5". Next, she converts it to hex, and checks if last four bytes are sha256(sha256()) of the remainder. If not, move on. If yes, only then search the blockchain. This eliminates most of slow steps related to blockchain search. Does this make sense? How does computational burden compare between all the hashing and checking the blockchain in the above examples? |
|
|
|
Are there any stats someone could provide as to how much bandwidth and storage per month are we talking about to run full node like Blockchain?
My "blocks" folder is currently at 11GB. Since block size is limited, the growth can only be linear in time (even if we occasionally increase the block size limit), but storage per dollar increases exponentially over time. Therefore, I don't see it as a problem in the long run. Also, see http://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-sizeBandwidth is currently a tougher question. I typically see bitcoin-qt using tens of kB/s, sometimes running at 200-300 kB/s for minutes or hours (this is mostly my upload to new users downloading old blocks). Unfortunately, I don't have any solid data to offer, just these observations. |
|
|
|
v0.7.4 pushed to the beta channel, should be online by now. improved send dialog support for socks proxies (for example orbot) fading qr code for improved readability in low-light scenarios freshly mined coins are now spendable according to standard rules (120 blocks) manual address entry for desperate people. please try out all the features and tell us how you like them. as usual, to get the latest build, join this group https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/102264813364583686576 and enable testing at https://play.google.com/apps/testing/com.mycelium.walletthis time there is no direct download from mycelium.com, will follow for the main channel release sha1: c547c29162d47b298ec5ef3c5c7f61ac97e63ef8 Is rooting necessary in order to route Mycelium traffic through Orbot? |
|
|
|
On yeah, that's right, just use lasers for long distance. No radio interference and no jamming.
No radio interference, true. But fog, rain, birds, dust storms, snow, spiders...? Also, jamming a beam of light is more trivial than jamming a radio signal. |
|
|
|
What is the easiest and fastest way for us canadians to arb on other trading sites
I was thinking I would try bitstamp to see how long it takes for the money to arrive
Obviously there are limits we are not aware of - account closures, USD correspondent banks, hidden costs, low liquidity, AML... The apparent opportunity sometime lasts for days, and it doesn't get arbitraged away. Don't think big boys wouldn't have done it the same moment it showed. Also, there was a months-long reversal recently - again, just sat there out of equilibrium for ever. Unfortunately, people seldom share the problems of this kind publicly. The only way to learn is the hard and costly way. Good luck. |
|
|
|
http://pastebin.com/vH9z5pNmThis message is also available at http://secupost.net Alright, the messages sent out a few days ago are starting to expire now. It's time for everyone to learn what the purpose of secupost.net is. As many of you guessed, this is indeed a Bitmessage address to IP address mapper. Yes, the only thing that webserver would send was a 500 message. It did alright too, gathering nearly 500 bitmessage users information after sending 15000 messages. Double what I expected. I've included both a log of each address detected and the first thing to hit it including IP, reverse DNS and useragent as well as raw logs for every valid request. If you need to confirm this signature so you can verify messages from me when bitmessage is down, please see the bitmessage general chan for a copy from my bitmessage address. So, future lessons: - - - Yes, all bitmessage addresses are public and can be read from your messages.dat file using a small script. - - - Don't click links. Even if it looks like a security-related site and uses some technical terms. I am not a nice person, I will publish any information I can gather about you and I don't care if you get lit on fire by terrorists because of it. - - - Bitmessage does _not_ scale. It took me around 3.5 hours to send ~15k messages but it took the bitmessage network over 18 hours to fully propogate them. Some of you were smart enough to use tor or VPN providers, but many of these are direct home or server IPs. The information below is more than enough for any government to come after you or any script kiddie to DDoS you. Be more careful next time. Some of you tried to use scripts to claim addresses which weren't yours and skew the data, of course, you didn't even change your user-agent. Even without accouting for that your attacks were ineffective because the IDs were generated in a non-linear fashion using a cropped HMAC-SHA256. To find your id: def gen_mac(addr): mac = hmac.new("fuck you", addr, hashlib.sha256).digest() return unpack('>I', mac[0:4])[0] This simple deterministic method means that you would have had to try... (2^32/15000)/2 = 143165 times on average just to get a single collision. Thanks for playing, but no luck this time. This service has been operated completely anonymously thanks to Tor and Bitcoin. I hope you enjoy the result. Robert White (BM-2D8yr4fzoMzwndqPwLMVyzUcdfK9LWZXjY) BM-2DA3TCHz21eZ7ptJYV4y1ZjgWbM67DuwuW 172.249.2.119 cpe-172-249-2-119.socal.res.rr.com. "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/23.0" BM-2D7wBdwEUB4WxyxtRnofy7xh3hswdeTbs6 212.227.66.33 et-0-nat-1.gw-nat-a.spb.muc.de.oneandone.net. "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/23.0" BM-2D8EWs8RgMcDevKoBQTABeiVQHrfofNUTk 81.27.53.57 81-27-53-57.domolink.elcom.ru. "Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) Presto/2.12.388 Version/12.16" BM-GtojGUv6ibnhc45TdT8yri3q1wgaUQMY 141.105.4.147 "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/23.0" BM-GtWLbsErzqpJ12hcimbNkdmSjx4uPBLi 183.93.115.208 "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/23.0" BM-2D9zAMrTt9SatQmsnpwHKwgwYQWTftDouT 75.42.21.21 75-42-21-21.lightspeed.renonv.sbcglobal.net. "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/23.0" BM-2D92wxSMTiydW5i2v2LsuCGEU4RvyFx5xv 76.26.149.161 c-76-26-149-161.hsd1.dc.comcast.net. "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/23.0" BM-Gu9E1bH1AbquayZbM56jZ3oxQTBJNNh5 95.211.169.45 hosted-by.leaseweb.com. "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/23.0" BM-2DAWJ3LkFLyPhQW9MZ9wPSNyAtvUsBzWnG 86.140.205.124 host86-140-205-124.range86-140.btcentralplus.com. "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Ubuntu Chromium/28.0.1500.71 Chrome/28.0.1500.71 Safari/537.36" BM-GuJXmEFP5svk656Qcb2BhMxX7qxoXzDM 67.42.161.132 67-42-161-132.bois.qwest.net. "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/23.0" BM-GuBfb4KrhEUGF2MfdrqkAuTNeUBXa4ke 79.141.166.32 "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E; InfoPath.1)" BM-Gty5A4E2yeuWM2FkgnJGgagJ8aYXCz1F 216.105.250.50 "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_8_4) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/28.0.1500.95 Safari/537.36" BM-2DBZScRMbpNB5xYsWwFsCTS1sm8CaKiq9L 216.18.239.210 "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/23.0" etc. etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
