It is given to denote the trust level the original Developer is designating to that legitimate account. Isn't that what trust is for? Leave a neutral rating from each account to the other to confirm that it is a trusted account. As a side note, you've left yourself positive trust, which is also generally frowned upon.Specially since it takes Merit to be able to post pictures and the threads need to be created soon. This reasoning might have been valid if you had left yourself 1 merit, since it only takes 1 merit to be able to post images, not 40. |
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm glad o_e_l_e_o (I hate typing out his name) got made a source I've got Piggy's bot set up to ping me for any mention of "oeleo" as well, so feel free to miss out the underscores. Or just call me Leo. I would also accept "Leonidas, King of the Spartans" or "Leonardo, the best Ninja Turtle". |
|
|
|
Hence, blockchain could help those poor helpless Americans to reach to world standards with the obvious difference shown on blockchain and make hospitals liable for extra charges. Yes, healthcare in the USA is broken, but blockchain technology isn't some magic bullet that can fix that. There are already plenty of places where you can see the price differences between hospitals, such as the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development for California: https://oshpd.ca.gov/data-and-reports/cost-transparency/hospital-chargemasters/. The issue isn't that one hospital is charging $50,000 for a caesarean section while another is charging $52,000, or that one pharmacy is charging $1,000 per month for insulin while another charges $1,100. The issue is that the real price of a caesarean section is less than $2,000 and the price of a month's supply of insulin is $20. The issue with healthcare in the US is that it is run entirely for profit by the corporations which control it - people are seen as customers to spend money, not as patients needing care. Until these influences are removed, American healthcare will always be horrendous. Blockchain won't fix that, and even if it could, the corporations would never let it in if there was even a sliver of a chance of it cutting their ridiculous profit margins. |
|
|
|
While I'm fine with Coinbase giving scum the boot - it's their business, their choice to choose who they do business with and as soon as you deposit Bitcoin there you have left a free and decentralised system - it is a bit of a taster of things to come. Youtube and Patreon don't have any obligations before him, they aren't government companies and they can't be counter as public space. I agree with you both. These are private companies and can host, or refuse to host, whichever people and viewpoints they like. And yes, if you don't like their terms and conditions, you are free to stop using their service and move elsewhere. I just have a general dislike whenever anybody - be it a person, company, government, university, etc - tries to decide which ideas other people are and are not allowed to hear. I'm more than capable of deciding that for myself, thanks. |
|
|
|
because a whole lot of great post has been miss my merit sources I hear this a lot, but it took me hours of focused searching to find 10 good unmerited posts by relatively junior members for my merit source application thread. Every time an offer has been made by merit sources to point them in the direction of these great unmerited posts, they only get tumbleweeds in return. suchmoon's offer has been up for almost 4 months and has found a grand total of 4 posts. We will see how LoyceV's new thread performs. In short, if you are seeing a "whole lot of great posts" being missed, then please(!) link us to them. |
|
|
|
If you press F12 in either Firefox or Chrome to enable the Web Console, it will tell you which parts of the page are insecure. In some of those threads it is because of http:// links in signatures. Other threads are pulling content from various insecure sites, but I'm not sure why. Edit: According to the source code, the following users are displaying an invisible avatar from an insecure link. All these users were registered back in 2011 and have lain dormant until 2018. leholmes12 saymajaan24conklinlianeArtHawk678RalphPittsclark581It is explained in mprep's old post from above: It's not fully secure since it's linking to an avatar located on a website without SSL (as in an image outside the forum). Seems like one of the few remaining users (specifically this guy) who got an avatar before the avatar vulnerability was discovered and hasn't changed it since. I'll ping theymos about this. |
|
|
|
|
I can't comment on your cloud storage solution, because I keep literally zero data on the cloud. I simply don't like other people having access to my data, even if it is encrypted. However, a few brief thoughts:
Storing the USB and the password together (obviously)
Storing the seed on paper - ink fades, paper degrades, vulnerable to water, fire, etc. Consider changing to the seed inscribed/engraved on a piece of metal.
Your concern about magnetic fields - some providers offer vaults which are Faraday cages to protect electronic assets. If yours does not, you could look in to buying or building your own.
|
|
|
|
Now if we could reclaim Bitcoin Discussion that'd be awesome. I'm hesitant to say it, but I do think Bitcoin Discussion is getting slightly better, based on the hours I spend in there going on reporting sprees. A useful thing to do is to sort by new posts ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=1.0;sort=first_post;desc), and report all the trash threads that get created before they have time to take off, and reporting spam threads for locking rather than individual posts if you don't have enough time to trawl through pages and pages of spam. As issue I am finding is that the spam posts get deleted promptly, but the reports to actually lock threads sometimes take a week to be acted upon (I assume these reports are being left for a higher mod?). In that time, the thread has filled back up again with another 5 pages of spam. Until we can get these threads locked down promptly, it is an endless game of whack-a-mole. Although I wish more people would actively report, I honestly can't blame people who are running out of steam over the whole thing. |
|
|
|
He is currently in a row with YouTube regarding censorship as well, over a video posted by his daughter. As such, he seems to be trying to move to a decentralized video service, and has just uploaded lots of his lectures, Q&As and interviews to BitTube. For the people who were interested in seeing more of his stuff, you can access it here: https://bit.tube/jbpetersonExchanges will be the new gatekeepers in a way that deffo isn't the spirit of BTC. This pisses me off, and is actually something Peterson touches on in several of his lectures, in regard to universities and "safe spaces". The whole point of universities is to be presented with new ideas, to encourage people to think for themselves, to grow as person by examining your believes and learning to defend them. If you try to silence everyone who says something you disagree with, then you will live your life as an infant. I don't know much about Gab, but from what I understand it is largely used by neo-nazis and white supremacists. While I abhor these people and thoroughly disagree with what they have to say, we shouldn't be removing their right to say it, and Coinbase (or anyone else for that matter) shouldn't be deciding for us. Having said that, Coinbase are in a tricky situation, as being seen to support racist and hate groups could jeopardize their business. But silencing others, no matter how much you disagree with what they say, is not in the spirit of a free and decentralized system. |
|
|
|
The only way for anyone to notice that they don't have enough coins to have every user/customer withdraw, is to have everyone withdraw at the same time, which won't ever happen so they are safe basically for ever. Even back in December, when Coinbase's cold storage addresses were being emptied and all the funds moved around (to new cold storage, as it turns out), all the FUD and panic posts on here and reddit were about this being a whale moving their coins to an exchange in preparation to dump them, even though that was provably not the case. I didn't see a single post raising the possibility of "could this mean Coinbase has been hacked?". So even when their cold storage of 600k empties, people don't even think about them being hacked. No one is going to notice if they lost a few hundred or even a few thousand BTC in a small hack, and as you say, they definitely wouldn't advertise it. Although maybe if there was a small public hack, it might wake some people up enough for them to actually withdraw their coins and store them securely, instead of trusting a random third party. |
|
|
|
In the past week, I merited 50 different posts on 1 day, and finally made a dent in "my own" sMerit stash. This morning I woke up to see my Source Merit trippled. I can only assume theymos keeps taps, this increase came after being a source for 8 months. It's to be expected that different sources will require different amounts, and it's good to know that once you show you are consistently using up your supply (responsibly), you will be given more. It sounds like along with creating the 3 new sources (or more, if some were removed, who knows!?), he's increased supply for the people who need it and decreased supply for the people who don't. My thread has no shortage of people wanting to Merit posts, but doesn't have a single link to a good post. I guess it once again shows that merit isn't scarce. Good posts are. As I mentioned on my source application, while there are more "good" posts by newbies than I was expecting, unmerited ones are hard to find, and I had to spend quite some time actively looking for these posts. Hopefully once word of your thread spreads, these good posts will find us, rather than vice versa. |
|
|
|
|
I am indeed now a source - that didn't take long! I'm sure I benefited from The Pharmacist also starting a thread about merit at the same time.
Many thanks to everyone for the support and endorsements, and of course thanks theymos. My allocation isn't huge (and I never expected it would be straight off), so I might ping a few posts to LoyceV's thread as and when I run out.
Thanks everyone.
|
|
|
|
This has been a work in progress for a few weeks as my sMerit supply slowly dwindles, but this thread has somewhat forced my hand a bit, as you will see if you read my reasoning below. So here goes: If you want to be a merit source:
1. Be a somewhat established member.
2. Collect TEN posts written in the last couple of months by other people that have not received nearly enough merit for how good they are, and post quotes for them all in a new Meta thread. The point of this is to demonstrate your ability to give out merit usefully. I like to think I'd be classed as "somewhat established", I'm on both the list of top merit receivers and top merit senders, and I'm way above average in terms of reporting, which I would hope would qualify me enough to apply. I'm sure people will let me know if I'm way off base here. There are lots and lots of excellent posts, in particular technical explanations and guides, which certainly deserve more merit than they have received, but they have at least received some merit. However, I figure if all I did as a merit source was reinforce other sources' decisions with more merit, then I'm not really helping to keep the system as decentralized as possible. With that in mind, I've chosen instead to focus entirely on posts that have received no merit at all (this statement is correct at time of posting, although I now plan to merit these users). Also, in the spirit of spreading merit around as much as possible, and ensuring deserving newer members are not hindered from ranking up, I've also decided to focus entirely on posts made by users with less than 50 merits. While the posts I've selected below are generally not of the very high standard you would see in other "Merit Source Application" threads, I believe these posts show junior members who are here for the right reasons - to ask questions, learn, discuss, and contribute, regardless of whether you agree with their opinions, and not just to spam. These are the members we should be encouraging to stay by rewarding their efforts. I've also made a conscious effort to pick users who, at no point in their posting history, have contributed to spam via bounty hunting or bounty reports. @theymos - if I'm going completely the wrong direction here, please let me know and I will reapply with 10 exceptional posts as is the standard. I simply figured with a constant stream of people applying in this way (and no offense to them), to take things in a new direction. As an aside, this has been a good personal confirmation of my long held suspicion: There are very few good posts from junior members which go unmerited. As I mentioned, I've been working on this list for a few weeks or so, and every time I come back to it I have to remove one or two of the posts from it because someone has merited it already. I'm keen to see how LoyceV's thread turns out.
Post 1Block Checking & Submit Blocks File - main.cpp Line - 1154 -1295 bool CBlock::CheckBlock() const
{
These are checks that are independent of context
that can be verified before saving an orphan block.
// This section checks the Size limits if (vtx.empty() || vtx.size() > MAX_SIZE || ::GetSerializeSize(*this, SER_DISK) > MAX_SIZE)
return error("CheckBlock() : size limits failed"); // This section of code if for checking the timestamp of the block, a timestamp is valid if it is greater than the median timestamp of last 11 blocks and less than the network-adjusted time + 2 hours if (nTime > GetAdjustedTime() + 2 * 60 * 60)
return error("CheckBlock() : block timestamp too far in the future"); // This section checks to make sure the first transaction is a coinbase transaction and everything else is not a coinbase TX if (vtx.empty() || !vtx[0].IsCoinBase())
return error("CheckBlock() : first tx is not coinbase");
for (int i = 1; i < vtx.size(); i++)
if (vtx[i].IsCoinBase())
return error("CheckBlock() : more than one coinbase"); // Check transactions foreach(const CTransaction& tx, vtx)
if (!tx.CheckTransaction())
return error("CheckBlock() : CheckTransaction failed"); // This section checks that the proof of work matches claimed amount if (CBigNum().SetCompact(nBits) > bnProofOfWorkLimit)
return error("CheckBlock() : nBits below minimum work");
if (GetHash() > CBigNum().SetCompact(nBits).getuint256())
return error("CheckBlock() : hash doesn't match nBits"); // It is then passed to check the merkleroot if (hashMerkleRoot != BuildMerkleTree())
return error("CheckBlock() : hashMerkleRoot mismatch");
return true;
}
Now the code will check for AcceptBlock by checking the following aspects. bool CBlock::AcceptBlock() // In this section the code performs a check for duplicate block. uint256 hash = GetHash();
if (mapBlockIndex.count(hash))
return error("AcceptBlock() : block already in mapBlockIndex"); // Here the code will get the previous block index map<uint256, CBlockIndex*>::iterator mi = mapBlockIndex.find(hashPrevBlock);
if (mi == mapBlockIndex.end())
return error("AcceptBlock() : prev block not found");
CBlockIndex* pindexPrev = (*mi).second;
// It will then check the timestamp against previous block if (nTime <= pindexPrev->GetMedianTimePast())
return error("AcceptBlock() : block's timestamp is too early");
// It then performs a check on the proof of work if (nBits != GetNextWorkRequired(pindexPrev))
return error("AcceptBlock() : incorrect proof of work");
// Here the code will write the block to history file if (!CheckDiskSpace(::GetSerializeSize(*this, SER_DISK)))
return error("AcceptBlock() : out of disk space");
unsigned int nFile;
unsigned int nBlockPos;
if (!WriteToDisk(!fClient, nFile, nBlockPos))
return error("AcceptBlock() : WriteToDisk failed");
if (!AddToBlockIndex(nFile, nBlockPos))
return error("AcceptBlock() : AddToBlockIndex failed");
if (hashBestChain == hash)
RelayInventory(CInv(MSG_BLOCK, hash)); The next section is commented out of the code and I am still looking for some references for the code below and relations to VAtoms. // // Add atoms to user reviews for coins created // vector<unsigned char> vchPubKey;
// if (ExtractPubKey(vtx[0].vout[0].scriptPubKey, false, vchPubKey))
// {
// unsigned short nAtom = GetRand(USHRT_MAX - 100) + 100;
// vector<unsigned short> vAtoms(1, nAtom);
// AddAtomsAndPropagate(Hash(vchPubKey.begin(), vchPubKey.end()), vAtoms, true);
// }
return true;
}
Next the code looks to process the block by the following. bool ProcessBlock(CNode* pfrom, CBlock* pblock) // Check for duplicate uint256 hash = pblock->GetHash();
if (mapBlockIndex.count(hash))
return error("ProcessBlock() : already have block %d %s", mapBlockIndex[hash]->nHeight, hash.ToString().substr(0,14).c_str());
if (mapOrphanBlocks.count(hash))
return error("ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) %s", hash.ToString().substr(0,14).c_str());
// Preliminary checks if (!pblock->CheckBlock())
{
delete pblock;
return error("ProcessBlock() : CheckBlock FAILED");
} // If don't already have its previous block, shunt it off to holding area until we get it if (!mapBlockIndex.count(pblock->hashPrevBlock))
{
printf("ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK, prev=%s\n", pblock->hashPrevBlock.ToString().substr(0,14).c_str());
mapOrphanBlocks.insert(make_pair(hash, pblock));
mapOrphanBlocksByPrev.insert(make_pair(pblock->hashPrevBlock, pblock));
// Ask this guy to fill in what we're missing if (pfrom)
pfrom->PushMessage("getblocks", CBlockLocator(pindexBest), GetOrphanRoot(pblock));
return true;
}
// Store to disk if (!pblock->AcceptBlock())
{
delete pblock;
return error("ProcessBlock() : AcceptBlock FAILED");
}
delete pblock; // Recursively process any orphan blocks that depended on this one vector<uint256> vWorkQueue;
vWorkQueue.push_back(hash);
for (int i = 0; i < vWorkQueue.size(); i++)
{
uint256 hashPrev = vWorkQueue[i];
for (multimap<uint256, CBlock*>::iterator mi = mapOrphanBlocksByPrev.lower_bound(hashPrev);
mi != mapOrphanBlocksByPrev.upper_bound(hashPrev);
++mi)
{
CBlock* pblockOrphan = (*mi).second;
if (pblockOrphan->AcceptBlock())
vWorkQueue.push_back(pblockOrphan->GetHash());
mapOrphanBlocks.erase(pblockOrphan->GetHash());
delete pblockOrphan;
}
mapOrphanBlocksByPrev.erase(hashPrev);
} At this point the miner would be very happy! as the block has passed the checked and can be called Valid. The code then prints below : printf("ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED\n");
return true;
Post 2I understand what your trying to say . yes both of them are different though people still thinks that bank and bitcoin are the same because bitcoin can be store of value and it can be used as an invesment simillar to what they hear on the traditional banks but for me , both are actually different because bitcoin is commonly known as a curency while banks are a company that produces money . Banks are not supposed to "produce" money, but the sad truth is that they do, out of thin air! The way modern banks work is pretty similar to a ponzi scheme, its called Fractional Reserve Banking something that would be illegal (and it was until the 20th century) but the banks bought their way thru legislation and its perfectly ok to play roulette with the savings of people... But people are seriously misled into thinking banks store money (they don't), or that their fiat money is backed into something (its not). The scheme will hold as long as a sum above the fractional reserve is now withdraw at the same time (see?, just like any other scheme). So if the bank keeps 10% of the money, that's its limit before going bankrupt. But before that happens, Central Banks to the rescue. Now that 10% would need to be nationwide withdraw, to bankrupt the central bank, but World Bank to the rescue! now in the world 10% needs to be withdraw to bankrupt the entire system... (actually the fraction is different on every country). If only more people knew about fractional reserve banking... Debt based economies (school of chicago) would crash. Stop trusting banks!
Post 3I have developed this idea into a BIP which is available for people to view here. https://github.com/mechanikalk/bips/blob/master/bip-%3F%3F%3F%3F.mediawikiWould really appreciate any additional feedback or discussion. The TL;DR is that it is many Bitcoin blockchains that are merge mined at different difficulties with different sets of state. This prevents sharding of PoW without causing sharding of state. Would enable a Bitcoin like blockchain to scale to 10,000s of TPS without any centralization. Thanks!
Post 4Hey guys,
I’ve been involved with bitcoin since 2011, long time user but never much for posting on forums or anything.
I recently have been putting together information to write a paper and I’m doing some market research. I often read forums and have helped others in the past in person when it comes to explaining bitcoin and assisting interested persons in learning about all crypto. I notice a lot of repeating questions and issues with new users and i just want to get a broader look on the community's problems see how that match up with my current perspective, and see what can be done to help newbies/ prospective users.
So, some questions I have for new users of bitcoin/crypto, or even more advanced users that still have issues.
1. What do you find is your biggest issues/ struggles when it comes to learning about cryptocurrency?
2. What would you say is your biggest pain points about crypto in general?
3. ^^ What is so difficult about these things and why?
4. What have you tried to solve these issues? Did anything work? What didn’t work?
5. If you could ask one question about cryptocurrency that you would want an answer to what would it be?
6. What interested you in cryptocurrency to try to learn about it in the first place? What are your main interests in in the space now?
7. What are your motives for, or what do you want to achieve, being involved in cryptocurrency? (What you hope to gain)
8. If there was something that could solve your issues regarding crypto, what do you think it would it be?
Feel free to answer any of these questions you feel like, or all of them if you choose, if you don’t want your answers publicized or you feel its too long to post, I’m more then happy to take them in email, just let me know and i can shoot you my email.
Also, for anyone potentially interested i’d also like to further interview anyone with pain points revolving bitcoin, maybe I could even help some users with answers to their issues as I have been involved with crypto for many years. I’m just interested in hearing what peoples issues most commonly in this space and what possible things can solve the community and its prospective members issues. If you’re interested in am email interview with just some further questions please feel free to email me or also message me here we can set something up, who knows maybe I can even offer some insight on your issues. Thanks guys!
Post 5Bitcoin ETF, as I understand is a way of indirectly buying bitcoin without needing to go through all the processes associated with purchase (exchanges, wallets, private keys etc)
It's basically a share of bitcoin which can be tradeable in external exchanges and would be classified as a security and would mirror the value of actual bitcoin.
It has been presented as a door to bring institutional investors into bitcoin and increase the adoption and price.
But I've come across articles where institutional investors are said to be buying bitcoin through OTC trades.
My question is;
Why would investors wait to buy bitcoin indirectly, when they can buy now?
And is the grounds of possible manipulations on which the proposals has been rejected a solid argument?
And lastly would bitcoin ETF approval herald the bull run as most people believe?
Post 6I think the admins should consider making everyone start on an equal playing field with zero merits and then everybody has to earn them from scratch. It's true that many people probably haven't earned their rank and got lucky just by signing up at the right time but then should Newbies be on the same starting point as someone who has been here for years and made a big contribution? I believe this is what you call 'equality'. Having the same condition passed out to everyone. I doubt that would solve or even reduce anything. Even in reality, equality is still a big issue and comes with alot of criticism. I also believe what the system experienced in your explanation is 'equity' conditions given out differ due to certain situations. I don't reject this. If some users here got merit by virtue of their availability at the right time here, then that is not much of a big deal(though I still see some heros and legendary ranks struggle with rules which is shocking to me), like they are being compensated for their time with the forum as it launches a new era or period. Taking this away or even giving more merits to some users currently would also bring about more issues and incoming new users will still complain about the unfairness of the system. Generally, the system/rules WOULD NOT always suit everyone and every condition. However, if its positive purpose is achieved to the majority then I consider it as a success. Satoshi will certainly be the anomaly here, though. I'm sure other more active users and even some of the most prolific would have difficulty having their older posts merited to such an extent. Most will be long buried and forgotten, whereas satoshi's will always have a spotlight on them. Even theymos doesn't post that much compared to the rest of the community but he is the most merited user here according to the merit stats and that's probably because he gets a lot for stickies and announcements of rules changes and so forth -- or people just like to suck up to him lol.
I don't feel very comfortable with this..yes, Satoshi is a recognized figure here and otherwise. His posts are historic and has some form of direction and inspiration but continual meriting such posts doesn't seem very ideal to me. Reflecting on the past is good not continual compensation rather that should be used to focus on the present. This doesn't mean value in satoshi's post or works will reduce neither will meriting it increase its value anymore than it is. You could write a thesis on bitcoin and it might not be merited for all sorts of reasons.
This is one of the reasons spamming/plagiarism/repetition is still a major issue the forum has to always combat. In as much as we all don't want to entirely admit it, we humans, always want recognition almost immediately at all point if possible. Yes, there are lazy users that has no interests in contributing positive but only after what the he/she can take from the system yet, there are still that few that don't mind contributing as long as the will get the recognition. Now and then, I see posts of existing users on parma-ban for mostly plagiarism and I wonder if these long term users never read the rules or the chose to ignore and why... Some part of me feels this may be the reason coupled with other factors like the individual just being lazy. I know we can't go all a sore of meriting all quality posts and all that but we can always make efforts noticed even through our comments. I know alot of new users appreciates when hero/lengendary users comment and share ideas relating to the new user's quality post. It gives feelings that almost competes with the feeling that comes with a merit.
Post 7(Python) > p=0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFC2F
>
> x=0x78D430274F8C5EC1321338151E9F27F4C676A008BDF8638D07C0B6BE9AB35C71
>
> x3=pow(x,3,p) --> x^3 = x^3 mod p
>
> y2=(x3+7) % p --> y^2 = x^3 + 7 mod p
>
> y=pow(y2,(p+1)/4,p) --> this line computes sqrt(y^2) = y
>
> hex(y)
'0x5eae7f9cdbc532b201694991c0d137fec371f8d32f64c7cb5e607e08a633c7da'
>
because this y is even, we compute -y = p-y (if y is even, p-y is always odd and viceversa)
>
> hex(p-y)
>'0xa1518063243acd4dfe96b66e3f2ec8013c8e072cd09b3834a19f81f659cc3455'
then: A1518063243ACD4DFE96B66E3F2EC8013C8E072CD09B3834A19F81F659CC3455 : y (odd) uncompressed key = '04' + 'x' + 'y' 0478D430274F8C5EC1321338151E9F27F4C676A008BDF8638D07C0B6BE9AB35C71A1518063243ACD4DFE96B66E3F2EC8013C8E072CD09B3834A19F81F659CC3455
Wow, thank you for posting this. I was driving myself insane trying to understand more of the math and how it's actually implemented, trying very small values from links like this one: https://www.coindesk.com/math-behind-bitcointo get a feel for it. I think I'm getting there. I hope that ordering and reading Mastering Bitcoin: Programming the Open Blockchain will help with the math, and trying to write my own blockchain parser. I'm not a math heavyweight, so I have a couple of questions if you have time: From what I understand so far, there are constants that are always the same in Bitcoin. This includes the Q (curve generator), the p (for mod p), taken from your code and which I noted in the link to coindesk. I couldn't see how the order was calculated, given other values. Can you briefly describe what a base point is? I think I'm getting a decent idea of what a finite field is. When trying to find: y=pow(y2,(p+1)/4,p) --> this line computes sqrt(y^2) = y
Is this always how it's done, for any y2, p is always the same, and the (p+1)/4 part is constant as well for getting y from y2? Thanks again!
Post 8Does anyone have the exact numbers of how much protection you get using a 24 word seed vs using the conventional default standard that shows up automatically when you create a wallet in Electrum?
It's still not clear to me that you can trust this type of wallet, that could be bruteforced and then all of your keys are compromised forever as long as you keep creating them on that wallet. It still seems safer to use a wallet.dat file. I want to see the math.
Here's the basics. Using the 2048 word BIP39 list, each word represents 11 bits of entropy (2**11 = 2048). So a 12 word phrase has 132 bits of entropy, and therefore a 24 word phrase has 264 bits of entropy. Looking at a 12 word phrase, that means there are 2**132 possible combinations = 5.444 x 10**39 possibilities. A 24 word phrase has 2**256 possibililties, or 1.158 x 10**77 If you want to go the distance on this analysis, you can do the math as to how long either would take, assuming some # of guesses/second. Either should give you comfort. If you want to consider phrases other than 12 or 24 words, as long as you're using the BIP39 list just remember: #bits of entropy = #words * 11 and number of possible phrases = 2**(#bits of entropy)
Post 9Hey everyone,
I've been looking into 51 percent attacks recently and was wondering about the limitations. In a 51 percent attack an attacker tries to generate an alternate chain faster than the honest chain. To convince the network that his chain is the correct, he must ultimately have the longest chain.
The blocktime for each chain is 10 min per block. If blocks are created too fast, the difficulty is adjusted.
Given these limitations how is it possible to build an alternate chain that grows much faster than the honest chain? If my understanding is correct, nodes also check whether the difficulty target has been adjusted correctly. So if the block time is too short in the long run, the newly mined blocks might not been recognized by the network.
Is that correct or do I miss something? Thanks!
Post 10
That's not what it means. It means the python interpreter he has does not think the code is correct. That's because he's using an older version of python as NeuroticFish pointed out above. He needs to update to python 3.6 or stick with electrum 3.2.3.
This is how I built Python 3.7.2 from source on Debian Stretch The steps: 1. Update all system packages first sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade
2. Install the required build tools for Python 3.7.2 sudo apt-get install -y make build-essential libssl-dev zlib1g-dev
sudo apt-get install -y libbz2-dev libreadline-dev libsqlite3-dev wget curl llvm
sudo apt-get install -y libncurses5-dev libncursesw5-dev xz-utils tk-dev
3. Download the latest version 3.7.2 source file and its SIG file using wget wget https://www.python.org/ftp/python/3.7.2/Python-3.7.2.tgz
wget https://www.python.org/ftp/python/3.7.2/Python-3.7.2.tgz.asc 4. Verify the authenticity of the source file gpg -v Python-3.7.2.tgz.asc 5. Unpack the source file 6. Enter the Python-3.7.2 directory and run ‘./configure’ to prepare the build cd Python-3.7.2
./configure --enable-optimizations 7. Run the following command to build Python 3.7.2 8. Run the following command to install Python 3.7.2 9. Reboot the machine After installing Python 3.7.2, below are the steps that I took to run Electrum 3.3.2: 9. Go to the folder where the downloaded file Electrum-3.3.2.tar.gz is 10. Unpack the gzipped file 11. Go to the directory where run_electrum is located 12. Type python3.7 run_electrum in a terminal 13. The following error appears: Error: Could not import PyQt5 on Linux systems, you may try 'sudo apt-get install python3-pyqt5'
/usr/local/lib/python3.7/asyncio/events.py:88: RuntimeWarning: coroutine 'ignore_exceptions.<locals>.wrapper' was never awaited
self._context.run(self._callback, *self._args)
RuntimeWarning: Enable tracemalloc to get the object allocation traceback
14. I went back to Step 8 and instead of altinstall, I typed the command: and rebooted the machine. This time Python3.7 is the default on my Debian Stretch 15. I typed the command python3.7 run_electrum and the same error message appeared: Error: Could not import PyQt5 on Linux systems, you may try 'sudo apt-get install python3-pyqt5'
/usr/local/lib/python3.7/asyncio/events.py:88: RuntimeWarning: coroutine 'ignore_exceptions.<locals>.wrapper' was never awaited
self._context.run(self._callback, *self._args)
RuntimeWarning: Enable tracemalloc to get the object allocation traceback Please note that python3-pyqt5 has already been installed when I was using version 3.2.3 Thomas (developer): If you are reading this post, could you help me out please? By the way, season's greetings to all of the folks here. |
|
|
|
there is no point in solving a problem that does not exist in the first place.
the current situation is working just fine for the forum itself, the signature campaigns and the members participating. You can't possibly say that signature spamming is not a problem. The Altcoin boards are essentially unusable because of it. If you go on to Altcoin Discussion and pick any random mega thread, it is filled with one line spam from bounty hunters. Take this thread on the front page, for example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4582124.780. Almost 800 replies, including such insightful comments as: Now you can speculate very well.The market is now in one price range and moves 10-15 percent in one direction and the other. Your profit depends on how actively and successfully you trade. I think that alcoins can give a lot of profit, but you need to be very careful and have good luck. Well, I may not have gotten much so far, but am highly convinced that the future is bright and great with the set of altcoins, that I possess.. Thou, their prices may not be too good now, the future holds great tidings for us. Every single page is the same - meaningless drivel posted by users enrolled in some trash bounty campaign for some shady useless token. The current situation is working fine for the signature campaigns and the bounty hunters, but their endless spam is suffocating entire boards of any meaningful or sensible discussion. it's all up to the signature campaign managers to chose their participants, it is not hard to filter the good posters for the shitposters. but most campaign managers follow the bulk ads sort of way. It's very easy to filter the good posters from the spammers. The issue is the bounty managers don't care. They are quite happy to pay for quantity over quality. As long as we allow that to continue, the spam will continue. |
|
|
|
Have you added this list (scroll down a bit) to your hosts file yet? I'm not sure how effective it is against tracking, but blocking advertising servers is a good start. I had not, but I have now. I had a fairly small hosts file, which I had manually created from a couple of sources, but this is a great resource. As I say, I'm already pretty well protected so I'm fairly sure it will make minimal difference, but you can never be too safe. Thanks for sharing! |
|
|
|
The hash at the bottom of the ad (000000000000000000037e741045a99121918e6ee717108fc77ec40b7419a829) points to block number 554509, which was mined on 19th December 2018 by BTC.com. They very nicely added the message "vw\/ ThanksSatoshi /BTC.COM/mm" to the Coinbase Data: https://bitcointicker.co/block/554509. |
|
|
|
On the other hand if facebook is really looking into our chats at whatsapp and our pictures at instagram and builds algorithms to find out stuff about us and sell that to anyone other than marketing agencies that is a big big risk for them. There is no if about it. That is exactly what they are doing. They aren't just tracking your messages and pictures, they track everything from your internet browsing history to your location. Just look at the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Hell, you don't even have to have signed up to Facebook, and they'll still be tracking you. Yeah you can like a facebook page about how I met your mother and suddenly there is an amazon how I met your mother dvd set showing as an advertisement, that is fine, that is expected. I mean, I don't use Facebook and I have pretty strict ad-blocking and anti-tracking set-up, but is this really "fine" and "expected"? Do people these days just accept that it is normal for companies to track your movements and share your data like this? I see this as a massive invasion of privacy. |
|
|
|
1. Mailing a rule book for using this forum. The spammers will ignore it, same as they ignore all the current rules and stickied threads. 2.Few more moderators or automatic system that do not allow you to create a shit thread , reporting it as duplicate or out of context. There is no reliable way (yet) to create an automatic system to prevent thread creation based on these criteria, unless it is an exact copy-paste of an already existing thread. 3. Automatic locking of threads if it cross certain page or one month of inactivity. Although most threads over 10 pages are a spamfest, it doesn't mean all threads over 10 pages are, and an auto-lock feature would inappropriately cut short some ongoing useful conversations and discussions. Similarly, just because a thread has had a period of inactivity doesn't mean it is no longer relevant. Many people experience similar issues or have similar questions as to those that have been asked previously, and posting in an already existing thread is usually better than starting a brand new thread and having to re-hash all the same information again. I would agree with more moderators to manually lock the threads that are becoming spamfests, but that doesn't seem to be high on theymos' lists of priorities right now. |
|
|
|
We allow Americans on the English boards, some of those can't understand the language  . We even allow some Welshmen in! |
|
|
|
About half the Ledger team, including the CEO, CTO and President, are going to be at the Consumer Electronics Show in Vegas between 8th and 11th - 1 day after this announcement. The majority of their schedule seems to be taken up with what they are calling "Daily Demos" - https://discover.ledger.com/ces2019/. I would imagine this is going to be them demoing a new piece of hardware. I really hope that oval section we can see is a screen and not a fingerprint scanner. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
