I checked your website and have few thought. 1. There's no warning message about maximum coin which could be swapped.  2. I didn't find page about privacy policy, terms/condition or FAQ. I expect few user would have question about logged data or what happen if they send too little/much coin. 3. I also tried visit your .onion url, but i find it's rather slow. It took about 30 seconds before the page is fully loaded. But it might be due slow circuit on my end. |
|
|
|
--snip--
Lopp should go to court just to see Craig tell his bullshit and later quote him.
IMO it's a waste of time. I'd rather see him write another technical blog post[1]. It looks like the next target of CSW is going to be Jameson Lopp. I guess that this guy doing this shitshow only to travel on others' (Ayre's) money.
Oh I can't wait to see this new Faketoshi doom trial and I am sure Jameson Lopp is not going to back down so easy. You made me remember how much money and time he spend to find out who call SWAT team to his house[1]. If faketoshi going too far, i expect Lopp would pursue him.
[1] https://blog.lopp.net/[2] https://blog.lopp.net/to-swat-a-swatter/ |
|
|
|
It depends on which full node implementation you use. IIRC Bitcoin Core avoid make connection to multiple nodes with same IP block.
Interesting, I did not know that. There may be speed test, but it would favor close nodes, so it is not the best solution. Based on commentary[1] i found, it looks looks like what Bitcoin Core do is bucket/split the node by /16 IP group. [1] https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16599 |
|
|
|
From the point of single node it would only mean that you lost some connections but you are able to quickly find replacements. At the end now, when you have your node and you are connected to 10 other nodes, you do not know if you are connected to Asia and Australia or to your neighbors on the next street
Each country have different IP address allocation, so you could make educated guess based on other node IP. there is no criteria for nodes selection, is there?
It depends on which full node implementation you use. IIRC Bitcoin Core avoid make connection to multiple nodes with same IP block. |
|
|
|
It's not related with Hodlonaut Trial, but i found out csw decide to claim/attack BIP 151 and 324 this time. https://nitter.net/Dr_CSWright/status/15840915685368995842. Satoshi said "I am not Dorian Nakamoto." on P2P foundation website[1].
Wasn't the Satoshi account on that page hacked long before 2014 when that post was published? Somehow I suspect that you did not notice the publication date, but the credibility of that statement is almost zero. The same account last posted at the end of 2021 and not about anything related to Bitcoin. You're right, it's hard to remember all past event in correct order. I just remember there's discussion which say Satoshi's P2P Foundation account compromised after Satoshi's GMX email address was compromised/re-used after it's inactive. |
|
|
|
Craig is Chief Scientist of NChain.
Are you talking about the one who copy/paste "Hello World!" code? Who is the Chief scientist of Blockchain ? You might say Gavin Bell (Anderson) but is he ?
What exactly do you mean by "Blockchain"? Blockchain.com?
I feel cringe reading this part. I know @Dr_CSWright is Satoshi because he has the perfect DNA to be Satoshi.
|
|
|
|
1. If you only need additional free storage space on old PC, you can uninstall it normally through "add/remove programs" feature on Windows OS. 2. If you have very serious privacy concern, you need to either - Format the drive and install the OS again. But take note quick format still give possibility Ledger data could be restored, unless it's overwritten by OS files.
- Use third-party uninstaller software (such as Revo uninstaller) which can find and delete all leftover data. Afterwards, you need to either write zeros on free space (if you HDD) or trigger TRIM (if you SSD).
3. Otherwise, there's no need to do anything unless you have free time to spare. P.S. This suggestion apply to any unused software on your computer or smartphone. I find it's weird they make separate uninstaller rather than including it on the installer. |
|
|
|
Do not buy a hardware wallet from a store nearby or an online marketplace, make sure you order the product from their official website, either Trezor wallet or Ledger wallet make sure it's coming from them officially.
While generally it's good suggestion, take note some hardware wallet including Trezor and Leder have official/authorized reseller[1-2] (whether it's physical or online store). You also could avoid high shipping fee or import tariff/fee depending on where you live. [1] https://trezor.io/resellers[2] https://www.ledger.com/reseller |
|
|
|
Double spending isn't an issue if you wait for at least 1 (preferably 2) confirmations.
This was more of a problem when Bitcoin first came out, as a user could send a transaction with one client and load the previous blockchain into another client.
Double charge (charged twice for same transaction) and double spend (using same UTXO/money on two different transaction) is different though. Double charge is essentially impossible on Bitcoin, unless you use buggy wallet which create 2 transaction which have identical receiver/amount (excluding change address). |
|
|
|
You can not reduce the blockchain size by getting rid of necessary data, you can only reduce the size by getting rid of data that is not necessary. For example the encoding used in the transactions could be changed (locally) to get rid of some bytes in each transaction like using a 1 byte tx version instead of 4. Anything more than that and you would be running a pruned node.
This can't be done either because it would definitely be a hardfork. Not if the modification is only used to store the blockchain locally. The node software could reconstruct the data (e.g. decompress or add zero padding as needed) before sending it to another node. |
|
|
|
And for cache, raspberry pi 3b+ cannot support the default dbcache present in bitcoincore. I recommend that you put the value dbcache=50 in your bitcoin.conf file.
Yeah, the default value of dbcache rather big (450MB for newer Bitcoin Core). But FYI, Bitcoin Core has nice article about reducing memory usage at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/reduce-memory.md. There are many options, but tweaking maxmempool and dbcache should be enough. |
|
|
|
who is managing/controlling/guiding Bitcoin development? Is there any team or a person behind all the decisions being made?
No one, anyone could make proposal for change/improvement. But it's up to Bitcoin community to accept or reject the change/improvement. I guess the code of Bitcoin was changed since Satoshi disappeared?
Yes (for both Bitcoin protocol and code/software implementation). FYI, Bitcoin Core is just one of many software to run full node. |
|
|
|
Short script which support JSON-RPC protocol and return fixed JSON file should do the job. I'm not web developer, but i'll share the script if i managed to create it within 1 hour.
It's much easier than expected. After read a tutorial[1] and library GitHub page[2], i managed to create one in less than 10 minutes. The fake data is based on testnet data with changed median time, but it can be changed to any JSON data. from jsonrpclib.SimpleJSONRPCServer import SimpleJSONRPCServer
import jsonrpclib
jsonrpclib.config.version = 1.0
def getblockchaininfo(*args):
return {
"result": {
"chain": "test",
"blocks": 2377252,
"headers": 2377252,
"bestblockhash": "000000000000001116b19fd67c291a7fdf87810b2ff47b7d313940ee42f5c1b5",
"difficulty": 67108864,
"time": 1666169543,
# fake mediantime
"mediantime": 9999999999,
"verificationprogress": 0.9999993333482174,
"initialblockdownload": False,
"chainwork": "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000007d7c718524bc0ba7e52",
"size_on_disk": 31445472022,
"pruned": False,
"warnings": "Unknown new rules activated (versionbit 28)"
},
"error": None,
"id": "curltest"
}
server = SimpleJSONRPCServer(('localhost', 8332))
server.register_function(getblockchaininfo)
server.serve_forever()
I tested it with curl and it works properly. FYI, the user and password could be any string. $ curl --user random_text --data-binary '{"jsonrpc": "1.0", "id": "curltest", "method": "getblockchaininfo", "params": []}' -H 'content-type: text/plain;' http://127.0.0.1:8332/
Enter host password for user 'random_text':
{"result": {"result": {"chain": "test", "blocks": 2377252, "headers": 2377252, "bestblockhash": "000000000000001116b19fd67c291a7fdf87810b2ff47b7d313940ee42f5c1b5", "difficulty": 67108864, "time": 1666169543, "mediantime": 9999999999, "verificationprogress": 0.9999993333482174, "initialblockdownload": false, "chainwork": "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000007d7c718524bc0ba7e52", "size_on_disk": 31445472022, "pruned": false, "warnings": "Unknown new rules activated (versionbit 28)"}, "error": null, "id": "curltest"}, "id": "curltest", "error": null}
[1] https://www.tutorialspoint.com/python_network_programming/python_rpc_json_server.htm[2] https://github.com/joshmarshall/jsonrpclib |
|
|
|
The entire BSV network has collapsed. Blockchair shows no blocks for a day. https://explorer.viawallet.com/bsv and https://whatsonchain.com/blocks both show recent blocks, but different recent blocks. If you look through the past 24 hours worth of blocks, this unknown miner is mining between 70-80% of them, completely empty. At any point, this miner could decide to just ignore all blocks other than their own, completely halting all transactions and activity on BSV. Difference on each block explorer made me curious, so i did quick research about top block height on each BSV block explorer. Here's the result, I skipped block explorer/website which no longer update their data (indicated by last block was mined on few weeks/years ago), but none of them show same number. And it's still on going (according to Blockchair). Honestly i don't know benefit of doing this other than proving they have full control over the network or reducing cost of running node. Definitely some weird stuff going on. Blockchair and some other explorers are showing no blocks for ~5 hours, while other explorers are showing 50 blocks beyond that, but with dozens more empty blocks. Seems to me that CSW and co are trying to re-org out all these empty blocks? I spend a minute on r/bsv and found post showing OP_RETURN on transaction (included on empty block) which say "Pay enough fee. Not 0.05 sat/B spam. Money has value.". https://www.reddit.com/r/bsv/comments/y71d5l/empty_block_miner_showing_his_cards_pay_enough_fee/ |
|
|
|
Eligible borrowers will be required to agree to our terms & conditions, including but not limited to:
a. an 18 to 24-month term
b. interest rates ranging from 5% to 10%; and
c. offering security, either physical or digital assets, satisfactory to Binance.
While most people question whether this loan would help or hurt miner economically, there's different concern where not all T&C which is mentioned publicly. While i expect something normal such as not mentioning agreed interest rate/payment date publicly, it could be something malicious such as applying blacklist on their pool. |
|
|
|
OP send me a PM where he state he use Electrum Wallet Portable version 1.7.15.948 on Windows 10. Most Electrum server no longer old support Electrum version, so OP should make a backup of his wallet and download latest Electrum from https://electrum.org/#download. Based on Electrum's github page[1] and this forum[2], it looks you're first human experiencing this error.
The issue in the first link: MemoryError: #7501 is the result of user(s) who submitted crash reports when experienced the same error; so far, there are four who submitted ( 3 users, maybe) and probably more who didn't send a crash report. You're right, although i was sure i wrote "reporting this error", not "experiencing this error". |
|
|
|
So recently 50% of BSV's hashpower comes from something called "mempool.com". Most explorers have been claiming this hashpower as "unknown" but the blocks are identified. Any idea why they are mining empty blocks? Are CSW and Taal going to simply re-org all these blocks away because they don't like them? And it's still on going (according to Blockchair). Honestly i don't know benefit of doing this other than proving they have full control over the network or reducing cost of running node. AFAIK they haven't broken the scrambling support in the code they copied from Bitcoin Core so their block files should be scrambled with some weak encryption that will prevent dumb scanning tools from finding things in them (we added that in bitcoin to prevent idiot anti-virus software from corrupting peoples blockchains when someone inserted some twentysome byte virus pattern in the chain).
I didn't know the blocks were scrambled in the (BTC) database. Can you post a link to the PR that added this? It's just XOR operation with random key and IIRC it's used on chainstate rather blocks directory. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
