There's no way you can found private keys of bitcoin address by manual collision unless you found weakness/pattern how bitcoin address/private key is generated in certain bitcoin wallet OR you could break ECDSA easily.
ETFbitcoin..... Directory.io.. even you should remember how that drama played out https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1527225.msg15378992#msg15378992Wait? I think everyone in here is joking or being sarcastic.
Didn't people read this news few years ago : Directory.io Prank Proves Bitcoin Protocol's Strength |
|
|
|
emphasis but for me its make bitcoin great again or bust,.. im not playing Luke Jr and other peoples games of just hand over bitcoins and run off...
im not in it to be "fiat rich". otherwise i could cash out any time and retire... im in it for the reasons bitcoin was created in the first place
I read that part But when people say something to that tune (sort of "all or nothing"), they are more often than not just bragging how cool and die-hard they are until they actually go through that part which is about nothing. Most of them would sell out long before it really comes close to what can be loosely considered as a turning point from all to nothing. That said, for most of us it is nowhere near "make bitcoin great again or bust", it is more about making profits and preventing losses. Thus we have to be a little more "flexible" in this regard, so to speak i made my hoards back in 2012-2013.. i did not squirm when the $1200 tanked to $200.. nor did i squirm at any other price drama. i see beyond the price drama. and keep my eye on the real infrastructure changes if it was about 'profit' i would still day trade today. i would even do sig campaigns and other things.. i dont need income. i dont need extra bitcoin and i am certainly not going to panic and run off back to fiat at any moment. thats what the cartels want people to do. you se them scream it alot in their attempts they shout "f**k off" alot... ill leave you to decide if **= or/uc |
|
|
|
though my btc hoard is much higher than most. telling anyone to just go back to fiat is like the 'whiteman' telling the native indian to head back up over the mountains through the northern passage and let the whiteman take over america It may turn out that you don't know it better As you claim, since I'm not telling you to go back to fiat. I'm just saying that it may be wise to convert some part (mind that) of your Bitcoin stash to fiat for a short period of time until the dust settles. Obviously, I'm not telling you to dump all your bitcoins for good. Apart from that, this is not what you were telling just a week ago when I told you that Litecoin may easily substitute Bitcoin as a means of payment for 500k merchants which are there, according to your own estimates until litecoin starts advertising that 500,000 merchants accept LTC (using coinbase/bitpay merchant shopping cart api tools). then LTC is not going no where, its just speculative hype
yep speculation hype. but out of all speculative hype LTC being the switch over currency of choice by the cartels, seems to be the most rational logical and easy to see possibility.. but until it happens .. its just speculation. emphasis but for me its make bitcoin great again or bust,.. im not playing Luke Jr and other peoples games of just hand over bitcoins and run off...
im not in it to be "fiat rich". otherwise i could cash out any time and retire... im in it for the reasons bitcoin was created in the first place
|
|
|
|
i never been interested in altcoins. last time i touched them was probably 2013
my business, my hoards are in bitcoin
im highly invested in bitcoin I understand your pains worse comes to worse ltc replaces btc as the 'merchant' accepting currency which ends up changing the paradigm Oh, now you come to see the lite i see how things play out long before most do. i been waffling for ages about this.. Take it for what's it worth, but in your place I would move part of your bitcoins into fiat now (say, the US dollar). You won't lose much if Bitcoin successfully comes through the bottleneck it is quickly moving to, but if it fails and becomes toxic, that may be quite painful for the guys like you who blindly believe in Bitcoin future. This blind faith might have worked in the past for you but one day it will inevitably stab you in the back
nah im good thanks. im not blind. i have what i need(btc) and know what im doing. i know where my triggers are to move. i dont panic when others do.. to me price drama is meaningless to me. i see where the real long term 'infrastructure' changes are and have my plans set out should worse come to worse. though my btc hoard is much higher than most. telling anyone to just go back to fiat is like the 'whiteman' telling the native indian to head back up over the mountains through the northern passage and let the whiteman take over america. sorry but for me its make bitcoin great again or bust,.. im not playing Luke Jr and other peoples games of just hand over bitcoins and run off... im not in it to be "fiat rich". otherwise i could cash out any time and retire... im in it for the reasons bitcoin was created in the first place P.S in 2013 i dumped my altcoins by literally giving them away i back then traded and had thousands of ltc.. then won competitions that gave me 1300 ltc and literally handed them away in different projects/methods. here is one https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=145201.msg1540606#msg1540606 |
|
|
|
|
Yawwwwwn
more drama that just goes over the nonsense of a few years ago, all related to...
directory.io
its not natural collision. it was 'prepared' / drama collision.
what some dont realise is the first few thousand addresses had at the time a little bit of funds placed on the early numbers randomly and purposefully as a kind of "omg they are active" tempter of creating fake drama of 'omg collission happen alot'
but anyway spend your life going through every key, ask your great great great grandkids to carry on your project after you pass. you wont get far, and thats the point
|
|
|
|
|
i just opened up a vs project. not touched vs in a couple years..
only a few lines of code and was able to grab all key strokes from plug in keyboard AND onscreen keyboard
this also includes the password field which displays *** but the few lines of code displays what was actually typed
short answer. onscreen keyboard is no help what so ever
|
|
|
|
if you know greek wou will find easy what i post in altcoin section. Only to warn ppl about the tech scams and nothing more.
But as i say there are a bunch of charlatans around bitcoin that they think that with btc collapse their shitcoin will take it place.
this is and the main reason why this ppl so easy pump completely broken tech proposal as BU, BitcoinXt or bitcoin classic and do whatever they can to toxic and split bitcoin community.
Your agenda is not hidden anymore. But you payed for it. Other do this free.
lol more reddit scripts.. if you think bitcoin XT, classic, nbitcoin, btcd, BU are altcoins.. then you really need to adblock reddit.com.. you have been falsely advertised crap propaganda.. they are bitcoin implementations not altcoin implementations. they dont even have code that are staged to cause an altcoin.. however UASF is staged to create an altcoin.. have a nice day |
|
|
|
is this yours??  Bitcoin Discussion 10632 Service Discussion 345 Speculation 326 Off-topic 225 Altcoin Discussion 214 10632 vs 214 also i havnt posted in altcoin in years have a nice day
is this yours Bitcoin Discussion 728 Altcoins (Ελληνικά) 513 728 vs 513 |
|
|
|
and for sure you are new here and you dont even understand how blockchain works. Even the beloved from BU supporters Ethereum system collapse before two days after heavy load of onchain transactions or better smart contracts. Now Vitalik talk about scaling through Lighting network.
If you want to break bitcoin follow the opinion of the ppl that have no idea about tech as is Roger Ver, Jihan Wu and every charlatan around bitcoin that pump their ridiculous ideas.
If you have time try to find the post history of every person that is against bitcoin developers and pump this ridiculous tech ideas like BU or whatever.
You will be surprise when you find that all of them are also shitcoin supporters or worst scamcoin supporters.
My advice is for you to wake up.
gmax - monero in his profile DCG - zcash, ethereum, litecoin investors bobbylee(BTCC) - litecoin lover segwit support pools - merge mining altcoins but the real thing i find funny is that while only a third of the community want segwit.. hell even the pools that pushed litecoin to adopt segwit are not even using sgwit keypairs for their block rewards.. these segwit 'lovers' are the people that repeat the same buzzwords "jihan/bU/riger" as if only 2 people are against segwit... anyone who's buzzwords jihan/bu/roger are just reddit script readers of fud. who lack doing real research and probably have not read a single line of segwit code to understand what 'promises' will actually be met. anyway.. if anyone really wants to know why Luke JR loves the "just pay more" mantra. if anyone really wants to know why Luke JR loves the "if you dont like the roadmap f**k off mindset his income comes from fee's and merge mining altcoins |
|
|
|
This is where I get a little confused. I thought the beauty of block chain, was that events like Mt.Gox wouldn't happen.
well the beauty of gold is that things like hackers cant scam your credit card.. but if you put your gold into a storage box and not care who has the key.. then someone can steal it. the point of bitcoin is not to use things like mtgox!!! i have never been victim to exchange hacking. my hoard has remained in my sole control. the only time it leaves my control is when spending it. but then its not my problem anymore, its the recipients. bitcoin is not about using online wallet. but some people cannot look passed the fiat mindset, to be in self control.. so end up being lazy and "trusting" others to hold their value because its all they have ever known |
|
|
|
The network will never be " entirely cripled " with ~50$ average fees. Because, by then, bitcoin will either massively scale both onchain and offchain or die/ be replaced.
@franky1 i've seen you really trying to "fight" for btc. Do you really risk everything hoping bitcoin will eventually scale, or are you diversified ?
i never been interested in altcoins. last time i touched them was probably 2013. my business, my hoards are in bitcoin. and when travelling i talk about bitcoin, not the crap coins. though im highly invested in bitcoin. i can see rationally passed my own 'value' and see things from the prospective of third world countries and i do see and respect their objections they find when they try using bitcoin.
too many people compare bitcoin to the most expensive western service they can think of..
rather than the standard everyday things people use around the world.
EG do you think that developing countries pay $2 for every time money changes hands.. no
does it actually cost $2 for every time money changes hand in any country.. no
but stupid fools will still find the most expensive use-cases and try to say bitcoin is better than X
even while they ignore A-W which is cheaper/free
i also see the positioning of certain cartels and see where things could end up steering towards if things continue down blockstreams one way street (litecoin seems to be the direction flow (coblee->coinbase)(DCG->coinbase)(merchant tools->coinbase->ltc) seems more obvious than others) yea we have gmax with his monero adoration. but i dont see that being next in line. yea we have many cartel with zcash adoration. but i dont see that being next in line. worse comes to worse ltc replaces btc as the 'merchant' accpting currency which ends up changing the paradigm. but i still feel we shouldnt just let blockstream and barry silbert(dgc) cartel lead bitcoin down the one way street they have been since 2014 and we shouldnt give in to people who want splits and altcoins and we shouldnt give in to fools who just shout "just f**k off" |
|
|
|
Agree.
Agree depending on the ATM.
Disagree as transaction cost are added on the cost of good/services. One pays indirectly... sorry, playing semantics here.
the 'transaction costs are added on the cost of goods and services' lol actually you will finds this to be an OLD misconception. by the way if you think Visa charge 2.5% tx fee to merchants. you have been reading the fud. of try to find the most expensive examples of jst smal user cases and exaggerate it into sounding like every usercase. things like paypal and applepay are not Visa. so yea using paypal will cost people money. but im talking about using FIAT not these middle men crap same goes for ATM's... the ATM's that charge are not bank ATM's they are middlemen serviced ATM's. but im talking about using FIAT not these middle men crap but basically.. paying $2 just t buy anything.. is expensive. and dont turn it into "not if your buying a lamborghini" argument.. $2 is 40 hours labour in some countries. yep a bitcoin tx is more expensive then someones weekly wage in many countries |
|
|
|
so that means we can not trust bitcoin anymore, right? we should move on to the new cryptocurrency or something that can replace bitcoin as a new type of online payment and online currency. Am I correct?
"move on" - no... we should kick out the dev's that are trying to ruin bitcoin.. but soo many people are ass kissing devs.. because devs are offering false promises of discounts, and false promises that one day nodes can get paid. that nodes are being sheep herded into the wolfs pen and not realising they have been led astray. false promotion one (retail analogy) walmart: " in 6 months we are going to do a 75% discount on icecream... " reality: month 1-5 increase icecream by 2000%. and then the offer at the 6th month becomes 500% instead of 2000% of old prices false promotion two use our loyalty debit card service and get cashback just for using it instead of paying cash reality: lots of people put funds into the loyalty debit card and are charged a 500% transaction fee eachmonth to keep the card active.. and find out that the 'cashback' is only available on bulk items that only a select few people get to grab. |
|
|
|
To say PoW is more secure than PoS is quite a stretch. The security of PoS completely relies on how many Bitcoins would be staking and there's no way of telling who would stake. What we can say though, is that staking can be done on any pc, even on raspberry pi's, each of them securing a full node. You don't even need that large a percentage to make a stake attack completely untenable.
For your argument to work you'd need way too many people saying no to that juicy 1% to 5% (the fewer stake, the more rewarding staking gets) dividend.
the value of an address does not suddenly change the security of an address!!!! if you think the ECDSA security becomes magically stronger if someone has 0.1btc compared to someone else who only has 0.001btc. is foolish ECDSA doesnt become more secure the more value you add .. PoS is less about security and more about "i wanna get paid to keep my computer on" the way people should be thinking of is. "if i secure the blockchain by validating blocks, i get rewarded by my holdings value increase" in short you can hope to turn 0.1 into 0.1001 by ding PoS .. but if that system is not as secure.. that 0.1001 Value can decrease even if the count of satoshis increase |
|
|
|
Why would a secretary be paid more than a boss, especially for doing work that a boss could simply automate? Where's the logic in that?
Miners aren't doing any important work. That's an illusion created by the difficulty arms race they're caught up in. A few individuals with industrial scale gear having a complete monopoly on a whole currency. Those aren't secretaries, they're more like the Federal Reserve.
firstly.. in the real world a boss sits in a leather chair and gets others to do work. a secretary does the hard work of organising the bosses workload, communicating out memo's etc. and securing the papers in the companies safe(block).. in a fair world the boss would not earn as much as the secretary. but its the boss in the end that decides what is good or bad work and can trash any work done even if it took alot of money to produce said work. the boss can throw the safe(block) full of tx data out the window and make the secretary start again take any industry.. for instance sports. would you say the football manager deserves to get paid more than the trainer or the footballer. morally no... yeh a trainer is the guy that makes players get in line, do certain formations, but the boss can still sack them even if the trainer has put years into its work on the team. .. why nodes feel they deserve to get paid more then miners because without nodes the miners could falsify records and thats why they want PoS.. purely to get paid... thats why they want LN so that nodes get paid. but that then weakens the security of the system PoS is NOT as secure as PoW. LN is not as secure as PoW so in bitcoins symbiotic relationship removing PoW just to pay nodes has its down sides too ... if we go down that route of nodes getting paid. next the devs who will want to be paid... which then makes other issues too.. BUT. howver if you take away "who deserves to get paid" from the argument and just concentrate on the security symbiotic relationship of pools, nodes, devs.. bitcoin works better than PoS .. if you want to talk about the "who deserves to get paid".. then think about this. owning a share(coin) of a company for 5 years goes from $6 - $2400 purely because of how the bosses have so far ensured a good reliable system without any fraud being allowed through via any nasty secretaries. you start to see that those running nodes are usually the ones with larger stakes 'shares' holdings. that want to secure their holdings and maximise their holdings. so in my eyes bosses are getting paid by their 'share value' increase. and dont need to take a weekly salary. .. what could or should change to avoid devs going on strike or devs refusing to listen to the community is 'feature bounties' imagine it like if the community want feature X. a bip is created with a bitcoin address and the community donate what value they feel thy want to give devs to see that feature occur. thus crowd funding development.
anyway this has veared off topic... so reigning it back in. bitcoin has become more expensive than fiat. |
|
|
|
We can mince words about how to define 'the community'.
'Miners' and 'users' are two different groups of people and their interests are completely contrary to one another.
Proof of Work is perverse. Bitcoin is the fat bloated canary in the coalmine and when it dies the miners move on moving on to throttle the next coin they can mine, control and suck dry, like a swarm of locusts.
Why do you think so many coins are desperately trying to move to Proof of Stake?
consensus, when actually acknowledged and utilised properly, works but devs avoid consensus. also those wanting PoS dont care about longevity/security. they just hope for a slice of the reward pie without doing any work. EG they dont want to be the boss validating secretaries/ reviewing devs work and they dont want the secretary to be paid better than the boss. instead they just want to be share holders getting weekly dividends, all for the cost of signing a piece of paper |
|
|
|
Superb, this is where you got cornered
You have just given the miners a perfect reason to loudly and vocally scream about virtually anything. Since the community is everyone (and don't forget about his mangy dog) but no one will ever be happy with everything, the miners can safely claim whatever they want about how much they care for Bitcoin and everything, and then go on squeezing profits as per usual without any fear that their proposals will ever get implemented for real. BU is a glaringly conspicuous example of just that, no one meant it to kick off for real
you seem obsessed about miners lol if you were to imagine bitcoin as a company.. miners are just the secretary. they just get paid for collating the data in a certain format. nodes are the bosses who decide what is acceptable and devs are the employee's that make the product that the bosses want yes we the users are the bosses, we verify the secretaries work and trash the secretaries work thats not right. we decide what should happen to bitcoin and the devs (employees) listen and do what the bosses say but right now the devs are on strike. they want to take bitcoin in a new direction. refusing to make products we want and only wanting to make what they think is best. they tried to bypass the bosses consent thinking that if they got the secretary to sign off on the paperwork that the devs/employees could take over the company.. but no.. now the devs are trying to sack the secretary by trying to sway the bosses to presume the strike is the secretaries fault.. and then to give into employee(dev) demands to change the companies product into what the devs want to produce. but that wont really work either. the ultimate solution is the obstructionist devs should just go get another job for another company(coin) and the the bosses(nodes) can find other employee's to make the products the bosses want. ... we should not be treating devs as gods. they are temporary and yes miners are temporary too.. many devs hav moved onto other projects and many more will in the future.. blockstream dont care about bitcoin. they just want to fill their C.V with certain work history to impress their next boss (hyperledger). they are even willing to jump over to competing companies(litecoin). but that should not mean we give into their whims just to keep them around a few months longer. especially with their actions that have caused issues over the last 3 years. yes devs removed fee control mechanisms, ignored orders to make real bigger blocks, ignored orders to truly get txsigops under control, they just done some cludgy math workaround patches rather then real clean work. segwit is not a solution. its still a patchwork of cludge to send bitcoin in circles with the same empty HOPE of 7tx/s with no actual promise/guarantee of achieving. while leaving the backdoor open to mess with bitcoin more. doing all of that while pointing their fingers at the secretary(pool).. its time bitcoin remembers its manifesto/ethos and purpose for existing.. and let the blockstreamist devs go. rather then promote them into bing the boss |
|
|
|
until you understand what consensus is. because its not about miners. its about nodes and miners in a symbiotic relationship. so telling miners to do X while the nodes can only do Y is not consensus.
No problem with that But it just proves that you don't see my point altogether. Basically, you say that nodes (which seem to be representing community) don't agree to what miners are allegedly screaming so loudly about (at least, that's what some dudes here are asserting). The latter necessarily means that what these miners are saying and claiming is not in fact as urgent as they want it to look. That pretty much proves that their real intents and purposes are different from what they claim (which is what my point essentially revolves around). As I said before, you can't have it both ways nooo the community is everyone. its not just miners screaming for more tx capacity.. please stick with reality. pools cant just make big blocks because user nodes are not set to accept them. users nodes cant accept big blocks, because half a dozen devs wont get their head out the sand and code a clean version for users and pools |
|
|
|
|
LOL
the bait of the 'cheap segwit'
2015 - blockstream: WE promise you 75% discount
... blockstream remove fee control mechanisms, raise price 200x (2000%)
2018 - blockstream: WE promised you 75% discount, but never promised you 75% cheaper than 2015's prices
|
|
|
|
And so what?
You already said that the community had voiced the problem. You didn't say that someone from that community complained about something (which wouldn't count as a "majority report"). As to me, that pretty much counts as consensus. Basically, the community tells miners that they should fix the problem and they already have their agreement. Other than that, you still ignore my major point, i.e. if there is a real problem as severe as some claim here (a question of life and death, so to speak), there shouldn't be any issues with reaching the consensus you talk about so much
there is a problem.. there have now been 3.. yes THREE 'agreements' of a consensus... but then the blockstreamist cartel go and rip up that agreement. also your obsessed about miners!! until you understand what consensus is. because its not about miners. its about nodes and miners in a symbiotic relationship. so telling miners to do X while the nodes can only do Y is not consensus. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
