layers
layers
layers
You can describe different cryptocurrencies with different Blockchains as "layers of the Bitcoin blockchain" as many times as you like (gee, I wonder whether you'll try to repeat this falsehood again in future? :/ ), it will never be true. In order to be a layer of Bitcoin, a protocol must use valid script of the Bitcoin protocol, and valid/spendable inputs/outputs from the Bitcoin blockchain. Please do not attempt to mislead people with your "biggest-blocks by any means necessary" rhetorical tricks, you've been told enough times already. There would be no point to your scheme anyway, blockchains scale tx throughput badly, adding blockchains therefore cannot improve scalability better than real additional protocol layers (which are not constrained by the same resource costs as the blockchain base layer). In what way is it my "scheme"? It's merely a potential future that could unfold. We all know that none of this is set in stone and the picture in future could look entirely different from what any of us currently imagine. I just think that if hopping from one blockchain to another becomes a seamless and simple process, the lines may well start to become blurred. People may stop seeing altcoins as separate entities and it may all just become different denominations of the same money. By all means continue being the maximalist zealot of the "one true blockchain", but there's little you can do if others see it differently. You wanted Lightning, this is one of the doors it might open. Then again, it might not. While I'm also excited about the potential applications that atomic cross-chain swaps could enable, I have to agree with Carlton Banks that further improving on-chain scalability by utilizing atomic cross-chain swaps to spread transactions across multiple blockchains -- effectively using it as a load-balancing method of sorts -- is unlikely to come to fruition. I do like your vision of blurred lines between various cryptocurrencies though. Of course transactions spread across multiple blockchains will be harder to get under control by an adversary than a single huge-ass blockchain with Gigabyte blocks (intentional hyperbole, but you should get the point). However it still doesn't change the fact that on-chain scaling as we know it is a linear function, no matter how we spread transactions across different currencies. It doesn't help that atomic cross-chain swaps still need to be settled at one point, thus hitting their respective blockchains and requiring those to have blockspace available in the first place. Either way, I'm looking forward to see what atomic cross-chain swaps will bring -- seamless integration of cryptocurrencies and utility tokens come to mind -- I just don't think improved scalability in terms of transaction throughput will be one of its main use cases. I would guess that we would see atomic swaps become available, but that not many people would use them honestly. |
|
|
|
The devs removed the application because the lost their signing key.
Without this key the devs won't be able to push updates / new versions to the play store.
And since there has been a small bug discovered, they are currently not able to fix it (To be more correct: they are not able to upload a fixed version).
According to the developer they accidentally deleted the key (not compromised).
They will upload a new version (and hopefully won't lose the signing key again) soon.
It is recommended to NOT use the application until a new (fixed) version has been released.
Wether they really lost their key or wether it got compromised can't be said for sure currently.
They said that they lost the key and not that it was compromised. I think they would be panicking a bit more if the key was actually compromised. |
|
|
|
|
There won't be an effective way to count lightning network transactions because transaction information isn't broadcast, only channel updates. Additionally, some channels may not be announced to the network (current phone wallets, private business networks, etc.). However I believe the number of transactions per second should scale up as the network gets larger, more nodes are added and more channels are created.
|
|
|
|
We'll be taking the site down to perform significant maintenance, will be back later today! 
Good luck on your upgrade, hoping things go smoothly. Those kind of site updates can't be easy to do. |
|
|
|
It should be pretty obvious that you will have access to your seed, which you can use to import your wallet into a different wallet (like Electrum).
I'm not so sure... With the current ledger setup, after the initial setup and confirmation, there isn't (as far as I know) a way to get the seed mnemonic to display on the device again. I believe this is a "security feature" to prevent the seed from being extracted or stolen etc. I doubt the new native desktop software will change this behaviour. Regardless, the user should have written the seed down during setup (and possibly made a 2nd copy as backup), so they *should* have access to the seed mnemonic and, by extension, the private keys. You don't really have a way to get around writing it down because it asks you to confirm (some of?) your seed words directly after showing them to you, to check that you've written them down. |
|
|
|
@BitMaxz
Yeah, but we must give a chance to any new service/product, more we have more it makes the crypto adoption possible. Most of the people find not easy to use Bitcoin so providing a friendly product help with this.
Well, I just wanted newbies and others to aware what could possibly risk can happen if they use unknown hardware wallet. If you can afford to buy and ready to risk your money why not and give us a review about this hardware wallet so that other people know how this wallet works and what are the differences of using this wallet than the other hardware wallet. @RGBKey
I own a Ledger and believe me I didn't know it is possible to use on a smartphone device and have no idea how to do since it needs a USB cable (?)
You can use a usb on-the-go adapter which converts a male USB type A to a male micro usb. You can plug the cable from your ledger into the adapter, and into your phone. More info is hereAdditional info for the USB OTG cable for Android and Iphone, this is what it looks like  Source:https://www.ledgerwallet.com/products/ledger-otg-kit Just to be clear, you don't need to buy the ledger branded one. I use the samsung USB-OTG adapter that came with my phone and it works fine. |
|
|
|
@RGBKey
I own a Ledger and believe me I didn't know it is possible to use on a smartphone device and have no idea how to do since it needs a USB cable (?)
You can use a usb on-the-go adapter which converts a male USB type A to a male micro usb. You can plug the cable from your ledger into the adapter, and into your phone. More info is here |
|
|
|
|
The website looks really nice, I will give them that. I don't want to jump on it and call it fake or a scam because I don't feel like that's fair. But there's just so many websites out there that look like this (Here's a cool product that promises a lot, and a pre-order button!) that I don't know what to trust anymore. If there really is an actual team behind this then it looks cool. But I have my doubts.
|
|
|
|
I've been playing around with the mainnet lightning network a lot recently. I've been paying 1 satoshi in fees for almost every transaction. Note: That's not 1 satoshi per byte, that's 1 satoshi full stop.. The lightning network is specifically geared towards micropayments, with the ability to add another 4 decimal places to Bitcoin. Try downloading the Eclair mobile wallet and go make some payments at https://mainnet.yalls.org |
|
|
|
|
Seems convenient, but I'm not sure if I trust my phone more than my desktop for MITM attacks on hardware wallets. Plus, the ledger nano s has already been able to connect to phones. (Mycelium can do it with a usb on-the-go connector)
|
|
|
|
That's a straight upgrade, and there's hardly any downside to it.
Except the large number of services that currently don't support bech32 addresses  #devilsAdvocate Seriously tho, it is indeed a catch-22 situation... services won't start using bech32 until there is widespread adoption among users, users won't start using bech32 until there is widespread adoption among services   Personally, I commend the Bitcoin Core team for forging ahead and "encouraging" the migration to SegWit and bech32. I'm talking about segwit. Wrapped P2WKH addresses are still backwards compatible and are described by what I said above. Doesn't have to be bech32, but I have seen an increasing amount of adoption recently. |
|
|
|
|
Adding to achow's comment, the point of upgrading software is to make it better. Bitcoin Core 0.16 is an upgrade, because it provides you with addresses that use up less space and therefore are cheaper to transact with, and also keep blocks smaller. That's a straight upgrade, and there's hardly any downside to it.
|
|
|
|
...even funnier is that LN devs still are not being honest that to move funds involves locking in value. and fiinding routes.
many keep promoting that its just a deposit into LN once and infinitely be able to pay anyone any amount risk free...
LN devs have been completely honest. Everybody knows that in order to use the LN you need to put funds in a channel. Whether you think making funds available on a ultra-low fee network is equivalent to "locking them up" is your opinion. Also, you can just open a channel once and be able to pay people. You could pay people over the LN and get paid over the LN and never need to open another channel or close the one you have open, in ideal conditions. ...but the truth is not what is being promoted
EG if all you want to risk in LN is 0.01.. but know just 1 channel aint enough, so think 5 may work.. thats 0.002 per channel. meaning you can now only send 0.002 for the only route that works, and then have to close the other 4 channels (more onchain tx) and then reopen more channels incase the one you currently have, the counter party decides to go offline....
That's completely false. You can absolutely just open 1 channel with 0.01 BTC. And there is not just "the only route that works", there are many routes. Routing through a network is not exactly a new problem in computer science. And again, you don't have to close a channel when you run out of local funds, you can just receive a payment on the LN instead. Just how like in real life when you run out of money, you must get more before you can spend money. Shocking. ...alot of people still beleive LN is the trustless, permissionless, unlimited, never needs onchain again solution. when the reality is that opening and closing channels because route crash/counterpart offline/change their acceptable payment levels.
if only people became critics to actually mention the pitfuls, thus actually try asking for something better and thus getting something that could actually solve things. then real solutions would actually mature and solve things sooner. and not just suck up to devs and promote halve truthes,
Ignoring your bullshit like "route crash" (What is that even supposed to mean?), the rest of that sentence is completely false too. LN is trustless. Nobody ever said anything about "permissionless", and nobody said "unlimited" either. But it is entirely possible that with heavy adoption, people will not need to use on-chain transactions. You're just spouting off nonsense. You can't expect to do that without retaliation. |
|
|
|
Actually, I created a similar thread yesterday, it seems that nobody browses that section. I am still waiting for ZAP Android app which in my opinion looks better but I don't know anything about its features. I have already connected to a node using this Eclair app and there were no issues. I still haven't sent any transaction since I am still looking for merchants who accept LN payments and sell something useful. I found it easy to use the app, can we really make it more easier for ordinary people? Eclair already allows you to connect automatically to either their node or a random one. Google play link. I do like how the zap app looks but also I have zero complaints about how Eclair on Android looks. It's a fairly smooth and well-designed app and I'm very happy with it. |
|
|
|
It's sad that it didn't have any impact over the price
I don't think wallets should really impact the price. Though adoption will. I disagree. With something as complicated as the lightning network, a good wallet is going to make all the difference. If it's hard to use, it will severely limit adoption and people won't use it nearly as much, but with smooth, good looking apps like these there's a much better chance to get it in the hands of many more people. |
|
|
|
I've been testing it out myself, and while it gets errors sometimes still, the more channels you have open the more likely your payment is to go through. It's a lot better than it was before, and it still looks great. In case you're wanting to download it and try it yourself, here's a few places you can go and try to buy things (for cheap) Note that the phone app cannot receive payments over the lightning network currently due to technical limitations. If you're interested in receiving LN payments, also check out the desktop app of the same name by the same group. https://github.com/ACINQ/eclair |
|
|
|
And if so, why does signmessage prove knowledge of the pubkey instead of the privkey?
I get the impression almost everyone believes it's there to prove privkey control.
It does prove control of the private key. Signmessage signs a message. This message could be anything, and it produces a cryptographic signature proving that the owner of the private key corresponding to a public key known by a third party was the origin of the message. It is definitely useful after you send from an address. For example, signmessage could be used to sign a message stating that "I, <insert name here>, was the one that sent this money". I highly suggest you read an explanation on cryptographic message signing if you are unfamiliar with this. |
|
|
|
- The ledger nano s does not use a battery. It is powered by the usb port it is connected to.
- As long as you have a backup of your word list, it does not matter if the hardware dies, because you still have control of your coins.
- If you believe your seed has been compromised but you are still in possession of your device, you can just transfer the coins to a different wallet, one you believe is secure. Whether that's an electrum wallet, Bitcoin Core, Coinbase, is all up to you.
- If you believe your seed has been compromised and you do not have your device, or your device was stolen, you can import your seed into another wallet that supports the BIP39 standard. Most people probably would use Electrum for this, but there are of course other alternatives.
- Pulling out the device will not damage it in any way, as it does connect via usb but is not a storage device or similar. You are confusing the ledger nano s with flash media. If a file operation is in progress and a flash drive is disconnected, data corruption can occur. This is why you always eject a flash drive before removing it. However, no such operations occur on the nano s (with the exception of updating the firmware/applications, which you should not disconnect the device during), so you can simply unplug it when you are finished using it.
|
|
|
|
The competition has just ended, and it ended with the prize pool of... 402 ETH!. Pretty awesome, thanks to everyone for joining! And stick with us - we are planning more competitions soon.
Cheers,
Ethan
The real reason you won't open other coin investments to the public is because you want to continue to give away all your money  |
|
|
|
For all the people quoting me, I've was able to recover my account with the assistance of Primedice support.
Good one What reason would I have to lie? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
