Today I've timestamped a git commit ID of my project using brainwallet.org without any effort.

Here's how to do it:
http://blog.oleganza.com/post/52237596486/today-ive-timestamped-my-secret-source-code-with

TLDR:

My commit: e09d665d7ffd70d5d6b672305e744916c3c827e9

To verify the timestamp, do the following:

1. Go to brainwallet.org
2. Select “Secret Exponent” and paste there commit ID e09d665…
3. See the resulting address: 1AAX6PJEm2FLXT6RoRAUzNFmFHnueFGGs1.
4. Go to blockchain.info and find this address.
5. Select the very first transaction: 687c24d…
6. Check that transaction is included in block 239851. Timestamp is 2013-06-05 07:46:41.

I will release the source when it's ready to be tested, some time later this year. Meanwhile I make sure that no one will claim that I picked someone's idea if they happen to come up with the same idea as me later, but before I release my app.

I'm reading:

1. Guide to Elliptic Curve Cryptography http://cdn.preterhuman.net/texts/cryptography/Hankerson,%20Menezes,%20Vanstone.%20Guide%20to%20elliptic%20curve%20cryptography%20(Springer,%202004)(ISBN%20038795273X)(332s)_CsCr_.pdf

2. Bitcoin-QT source code

3. libbitcoin source code

4. OpenSSL .h files

5. Apple WWDC13 videos (coming next week)


I recommend to others:

1. Murray Rothbard, "Man, Economy and State (with Power and Market)"

2. Stefan Molyneux, "Practical Anarchy"

Just 8 little pages:

Bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

I have nothing against using << as a streaming operator. The problem is that it's much harder to search for any operators in use (be it "<<" or "+"). Especially when you pointer-dereference operator overload. Or implicit copy constructors. Yes, code may look elegant for a mathematician, but inside an app where you have tons of multi-word symbols, operator density or implicitness is painful.

When you have "[a add:b]" instead of "a + b" it's much clearer what is going on and you can quickly find all occurrences of -add: method call.

"goto err" is not a big deal in my view.

Bitcoin-QT is a mess for entirely different reasons.

1. Endianness is not well documented. libbitcoin flips some bytes where BitcoinQT does not, but also does not document why they are doing that.

2. Excessive use of C++ subclasses and operators makes it hard to read code. You see a << b, but it actually goes to a very specific place which is not entirely obvious where.

3. Some utility class names look like variable names.

4. Some funny design patterns are not documented even with a single line of text. E.g. CBigNum is smartly done (BN_CTX and BIGNUM are wrapped in classes differently), but you have to be really proficient in C++ or spend half a day deciphering the code to understand why it is done that way. For someone coming from C/Objective-C it's not easy.

I'm working on Mac wallet app and reimplement many things that BitcoinQT does in C and ObjC and learn how that whole thing works. It is smart, but it's messy.

Anon136 said it all. Military as everyone else would be happy to accept bitcoins. But they will not raise enough for current expenditures. Building tons of very expensive equipment to be regularly destroyed is profitable to those who build and operate that stuff. And they are getting paid via inflation, in other words, stealing from everyone's present and future income. If Bitcoin survives and outlives fiat, there will be no inflation and no easy way to confiscate such enormous amounts of money.

I'm reading Bitcoin-QT source code and don't quite understand the difference between CPrivKey and CSecret.

key.h has some explanation:

// CPrivKey is a serialized private key, with all parameters included (279 bytes)
typedef std::vector<unsigned char, secure_allocator<unsigned char> > CPrivKey;
// CSecret is a serialization of just the secret parameter (32 bytes)
typedef std::vector<unsigned char, secure_allocator<unsigned char> > CSecret;

Looks like what we usually call a private key is a short 32 byte "secret parameter". But then I see code that uses CPrivKey in wallet.cpp. I would go to OpenSSL to study the difference between EC_KEY_get0_private_key (used in CKey::GetSecret) and i2d_ECPrivateKey (used in CKey::GetPrivKey), but OpenSSL .h documentation does not really explain much.

Why do we need a big CPrivKey when you can always generate key pair from just a secret? Where can I learn more about practical aspects of ECDSA (I already have a good theoretical guide)?

Thanks.

Block size will be raised when it's economically profitable. And at some point it will be for almost everyone.

http://blog.oleganza.com/post/49174658108/economically-limited-resource

Rampion, yesterday I've noticed your signature and thought it would be interesting to comment on this idea of Jeff Garzik. I'd love to get some feedback on my idea: http://blog.oleganza.com/post/49174658108/economically-limited-resource

Sorry for offtopic.

Iceland? Cheap electricity that cannot be moved outside, only wasted inside (perfect for mining farms). Newly elected government, yet not communistic. The moment BTC becomes their reserve or daily currency, they become the richest country on the planet.

I recommend blockchain.info too. It's ugly, but useful and so far was quite safe. And it has nice features like automatic backup by email and SMS notifications. I wouldn't recommend keeping significant amount there, but as an everyday wallet it's pretty good.

Every Bitcoin user recognizes BTC as Bitcoin code. ISO reserves BT* for Bhutan, but Bhutan does not use BTC yet. When it will, that might be a problem for them, not for anyone around. I'm not offending anyone in Bhutan, it's just if I was in Bhutan and there were tons of people already putting particular meaning in BTC, I would think twice before using it for some currency project.

I highly recommend Man, Economy and State by Murray Rothbard: http://mises.org/rothbard/mes.asp (PDF, Epub, HTML)

It includes everything Mises was teaching on economics, but it is much easier to read and it has detailed description of production structure.

Satoshi probably would never spend his coins as that may reveal his identity. I wouldn't be surprised if he destroyed the keys for all his early BTC so he wouldn't be tempted to use them some time later. He could still mine a lot of BTC for himself when number of miners significantly increased, but that would not include easily traceable coins from 2009.

What I tell to people is this:

1. Bitcoin in my opinion is a huge thing that can transform everything.
2. No one knows what will actually happen, there were no historical precedents.
3. Do not put more money than you can afford to lose tomorrow. Do not borrow anything, do not put more than 50% of your savings, do not touch money you already have made plans for. It's tempting, but just don't.
4. Before selling more than $10 bucks, learn about Bitcoin, how it works, why it works, its weaknesses, political associations etc.
5. Be careful about viruses, passwords, lost backups, bugs, human mistakes, panics on exchanges, DDoSes etc.
6. Check and double-check and triple-check before doing anything. Play with small sums before jumping in.
7. Never blame anybody except for yourself.
8. You most probably will have disappointment at some point in time. You will be scammed, your money will be stolen or lost. Prepare for it.
9. Never trust anyone including this message.

It's a great journey ahead of us, but it's bumpy. Don't come without equipment and proper training.

Bitcoin will not stabilize until it consumes the whole global economy. Dollar price will become irrelevant before that moment: people would dump dollars en masse when BTC is in hands of 1% of all people.

It's not only a payment system. It is also a single database which you can trust on the entire planet and where you can store pointer to whatever information you want. (Think document timestamping.) And it also has scripts to make even more cool things.

http://blog.oleganza.com/post/42262765318/direct-use-value-of-bitcoin

Thanks for the details. I'll check the source code.

Interesting. I have a transaction that sends around 0.1 BTC from a single 0.4 BTC output that was confirmed >100 blocks before. It is not included in any block for 7 hours already. I've been sending similar transactions with zero fees before from the same blockchain.info iPhone app and it was always confirmed quickly enough. What could be the reason for the problem? Is it just the mining fee that is suddenly required, or we are hitting block size limit, or one of the addresses could be banned? (Destination addresses are a new one, not SatoshiDice, and the same my address for the change.)

BitPay grows *faster* than BTC price. Bitcoin: 300% in last month, BitPay transactions: 750%.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitpay-eclipses-silk-road-in-bitcoin-sales-with-explosive-52m-march-2013-04-02