People don't upgrade their nodes because they are compatible with the network, if there was a hardfork, you can expect them to switch rather quickly. Look at ETH or other alts, they have hard forks almost every year and they go pretty smooth. a hard fork is not required to implement a post-quantum signature scheme. (that's probably a good thing since bitcoin isn't some centralized shitcoin---BCH and BTG are what happens when people try to hard fork it) what are you saying---that we can literally just wait until ECDSA is broken and then do an emergency hard fork? that won't work. by then it's too late: QC could possibly break transactions in-flight, meaning the entire bitcoin supply is at risk of theft---outputs being moved to quantum safe addresses could be stolen in that scenario. even if QC weren't fast enough to do that, there would be 5+ million coins ready for the taking on day 0. are you considering the potential consequences of that? If quantum computers became real today, the world would be in a lot of trouble - bank account, emails, websites, military communications, classified data and so on - but you don't see them proactively moving to post-quantum crypto right now centralized organizations can implement new encryption standards at the drop of a dime. bitcoin cannot do that because it's decentralized. and as outlined above, its inability to do so puts the entire monetary base at risk. And cryptographers usually retire algorithms long before they become not even fully broken, but just weakened.
some cryptographers say ECC/ECDSA will be broken in the next several years...... |
|
|
|
About an hour after I stopped responding in that break, in UTG I see JJ sweet as I'm a well shy of average stack and well off the money, as I've been card dead for about a half hour.
Do my 2.5X raise, 1 caller on the button, then BB(Mouthpiece) Jams. This is about 17 or 18 BB raise, JJ isn't going anywhere as he could really have anything... I honestly didn't take the chat into account. Call him down and wouldn't you know it my friends AA are what he's holding.
His overall play hasn't been splashy or anything but I have seen him throw out a few raises to protect his Blinds and what not. I chalk it up to again just being coolered and somethign I couldn't get away from. He then tosses out a parting comment along the lines of shitty Canadian player or something. Made me laugh as if he had masterfully trapped me with some shit holding or something.
Curious if others would have called that Jam. Stack sizes for me and the mouthpiece were around 20 BB, he had me covered by about 200$ 1/2 a BB at this point I believe. BTN had us both covered by a wide margin. There were about 3 rounds of late Reg available but at that point you are just buying in to gamble a flip. depends how frustrated i was by the cold cards.  his style sounds too tight to be calling given those stacks. what's his expected range? you think he's jamming TT or lower, AJ or lower? unless he's been loose with all-ins, you're probably either dominated or looking at a flip. i think we can afford to wait for a better spot. |
|
|
|
upgrading to a post-quantum protocol in a conscientious way will take several years at least. when are we gonna start discussing the details?
When cryptographic community as a whole will reach both 1) a consensus on what quantum-ready algorithms will become the standard and 2) decide that it's time to start switching to it. There's no need for Bitcoin to be on the cutting edge cryptography, it would only mean unnecessary risks and forks after forks. quantum resistance =/= cutting edge. lamport signatures are from the 70s. centralized entities can quickly implement new encryption and reverse most of the damage done if QC breaks current standards. they can afford to wait. bitcoin is irreversible, and people take years to upgrade. there would be 5 million+ coins up for grabs if QC broke ECDSA today---and that's not even considering p2pkh inputs that might be stolen in-flight. if we want to reduce that number (ie prevent many millions of coins from being stolen) we need to act sooner than later, because again---people take years to upgrade their bitcoin software. by various estimates, ECDSA could be broken within 3-7 years. that doesn't leave us much time. |
|
|
|
LONG BEFORE before any actual Quantum Algorithm AND Quantum Computer exists that would allow someone to access the bitcoins secured by P2PKH, Bitcoin will already have moved to a quantum-resistant authorization algorithm. This will prevent Case 3, prevent the need for Case 2, and will allow plenty of time for any users that are still able to access their bitcoins to move those bitcoins with a quantum-resistant transaction. "long before" implies you know when QC will be capable of breaking ECDSA. when will that be---and accordingly, when will bitcoin developers discuss which quantum resistant scheme to implement, and when to implement it? what constitutes "plenty of time" for users to upgrade? considering how slowly users adopted P2SH or segwit outputs, bitcoin should probably implement quantum resistant signatures many years before the threat is even remotely real. otherwise many millions of coins could be stolen, just by virtue of today's common practices of address reuse, xpub sharing, etc. upgrading to a post-quantum protocol in a conscientious way will take several years at least. when are we gonna start discussing the details? |
|
|
|
Well Satoshi seems to have managed to remain anonymous, so maybe we can learn from him.  that's his secret. it's transacting with other people/businesses that leaks personally identifying information. even purely physical p2p transactions reveal your identity to the other party. the KYC exchange example mocacinno provided is just the most direct way to identify bitcoin users. even where KYC is not involved--- for example, web payments at an online merchant---your identity is at risk. third party trackers "typically possess enough information about the purchase to uniquely identify the transaction on the blockchain, link it to the user’s cookie, and further to the user’s real identity." from there, an adversary could perform cluster analysis on your wallets to identify most of your other bitcoin activity. |
|
|
|
this is pretty shady. they are shutting down for a month---during which they will "audit" accounts---and after that (in february!) customers are finally allowed to withdraw their funds. and they are openly stealing any new deposits from this point forward. new exit scam method? |
|
|
|
The rollover requirement is part of standard procedures that must be used by casinos with the Antillephone N.V. Curacao license. It has to do with fulfilling their particular AML policies. Bustabit and Bustadice don't hold this license, hence they don't have the requirement.
what gives you the idea that their license entails these rollover requirements? rollover requirements are standard for withdrawing promotional bonuses, but deposits? i understand they can't just let people deposit/withdraw funds without wagering anything, but it should be a discretionary policy. this does seem arbitrarily high and it comes off, as malevolent said, like they are just fleecing their depositors. |
|
|
|
to hedge BTC/USD value i usually trade USDC on binance/kucoin. when i want to cash out, i transfer USDC to coinbase pro and convert to USD. that saves me 0.4% per trade.
Unfortunately, Binance recently delisted several USDC trading pairs and the trend may continue due to low trade volumes... i guess you are now going to stick with Kucoin in that aspect https://www.binance.com/en/support/articles/360038120032those are just low volume altcoin markets. they won't be delisting the BTC/USDC market anytime soon. remove the handful of fake volume exchanges listed at the top and you can see binance has the highest volume BTC/USDC market in the world: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/usd-coin/markets/so naturally, binance is much better than kucoin when i need liquidity to dump into. what i like doing on kucoin is placing low bids and high asks so i can profit from the slippage. one example: yesterday i was able to sell at $9000 on kucoin BTC/USDC even though the spot market never passed $8500.  |
|
|
|
For some of us we choose a particular exchange because they have a good reputation, no KYC policy, a competitive commission rate, excellent UI or something else...
Why do you use the exchange you do? different exchanges for different purposes: -coinbase pro for fiat gateway. they have ultra fast free bank transfers and i've been verified for years already. -kucoin and binance because no-KYC accounts and low fees (0.1% or less on each side). -bitmex for leveraged futures. i would prefer kumex (kucoin) because they openly allow USA customers but bitmex is necessary for the liquidity. to hedge BTC/USD value i usually trade USDC on binance/kucoin. when i want to cash out, i transfer USDC to coinbase pro and convert to USD. that saves me 0.4% per trade. What would be the key issues that might or will make you choose an alternative exchange to start trading on? KYC implementation. coinbase pro is the only exchange i'm verified on. i would prefer to avoid it anywhere else. i don't trust exchanges to protect my data. plus, the less data they have to hand over to the IRS etc the better. |
|
|
|
Thanks very much to all who responded to my post.
However, if the price of THETA on all exchanges at the time was about $0.08 US cents how is it possible that I only received 22 THETA tokens for .02062038 BTC (about $154 dollars at the time)? That would mean Livecoin was selling THETA for about $7 dollars! For $154 US shouldn't I have received almost 2,000 THETA tokens on Livecoin?
I just checked my Livecoin holdings and it indicates I now have 0 BTC but 0.01621173 BTC "In orders". I bought the THETA yesterday -- would it actually take more than a day to complete the transaction?
that indicates that you still have open orders that weren't filled, and only 0.00440865 BTC was actually exchanged for THETA. scroll down past the order book to "my orders":  are there open orders that you can cancel there? |
|
|
|
if the network drops 65% transactions dont freeze they slow by a factor of 3.
so block time turns into 30 minute not 10 minute . the worst case is it is done on day 1 of a diff jump.
so a 14 day wait is 42 days. it is not a big deal. it would be a good thing as it would show the network is a tough thing to kill.
also i estimate more then 20eh of gear is shut off that can be turned on.
which means the drop would be from 100 eh to 35 eh add back 20 eh and we are at 55eh.
which worst case means diff wait of 13 or 14 days will stretch to only 25 - 30 days.
thanks for providing some numbers for perspective. indeed, the "plummeting hash rate" situation probably wouldn't be so dire at all. people often FUD about the necessity of an emergency difficulty adjustment, but just like the 51% attack situation outlined earlier ITT, in all likelihood the network could just wait it out. |
|
|
|
Is there any news about when any upgrade might be happening and what it will entail?
What are the modifications that users would like to see in the next upgrade or update? taproot + schnorr signatures is probably the most highly anticipated upgrade. schnorr signatures will allow signature aggregation, which will make multi-sig transactions smaller (and cheaper) and will economically incentivize coinjoins. unfortunately, the BIP is still in the draft stages. planning on mainnet activation in 2020 is probably overly optimistic, although possible. |
|
|
|
anyone surprised by this? i'm not. kraken puts this report out every year, and every year it confirms the same trend: more and more requests from law enforcement. the only surprising thing is the USA government's share of total requests is falling. |
|
|
|
even if the chinese government seized farms, miners, pools, chip fabrication factories, etc and performed sustained 51%/censorship attacks.....the electricity, overhead, and production costs would be real. they couldn't just sustain the attack indefinitely. so ideally there would still be no POW change---we could just let the attackers burn themselves out. i just hope that bitcoiners are patient enough to do that.
Would you then say that whoever controls the large mining farms would start acting irrationally/collude to risk money/resources to attack the network, to do temporary damage? with an attack of this scale, the attackers might believe they are doing permanent damage. actually, that's the only way the attack makes sense: out-of-band incentives for miners, provided by attackers who are more interested in crushing bitcoin than profiting from it. it seems like a long shot to me, but it's an interesting hypothetical to ponder. let's say they censor the chain so nobody could transact for a month---how would that affect user confidence and adoption? meanwhile, the proposed solution (a POW algo change) would destroy the mining infrastructure. billions of dollars in value in mining gear would be destroyed. after that, don't you think would-be miners would be very skeptical of risking capital on a new operation? not to mention that existing miners would be bankrupted. how secure (proof of work wise) do you think this new "bitcoin" will be? |
|
|
|
What do you guys think?  i'm cautiously optimistic. we're coming off a strong double bottom and breaking up from a lengthy sideways accumulation---that's as good as it gets. any good bull market starts that way. however, it's too early to distinguish between a bull run and a bull trap. as long as we're below the weekly 20ma, the 200dma, the upper trendline extending from last summer......nothing has really happened yet. the longer term charts still say "bear market until proven otherwise". i've been watching dmwardjr's thread. he's got a great track record and he's bullish as hell. i want to believe:"$8,000 to Come Soon With $9,000 at the 50-MA in 3-Day @ Year End."  |
|
|
|
Thank you so much guys. What about Wasabi or Samourai ? Has anyone used those to mix ? And how does it work :s
while wasabi wallet and samourai wallet have made great strides towards privacy and trustlessness with their implementation of coinjoins, these implementations are far from perfect. a binance singapore customer recently had his account frozen after participating in wasabi wallet coinjoins with outputs withdrawn from the exchange. i love the idea of trustless and less centralized methods, but liquidity is a real problem for coinjoins right now. in a world with CT to obscure transaction values, they would be safer too. they just don't seem ready for prime time yet. we're still in a transitioning state where centralized mixers can be far superior. |
|
|
|
The Chinese government could order to cut all electricity to all mining farms in their country immediately. Should we start clamoring for a POW-change?
that might cause hash rate to plummet and block times to become significantly longer. impatient people might start clamoring for an emergency difficulty adjustment, but a POW change? that wouldn't make sense. even if the chinese government seized farms, miners, pools, chip fabrication factories, etc and performed sustained 51%/censorship attacks.....the electricity, overhead, and production costs would be real. they couldn't just sustain the attack indefinitely. so ideally there would still be no POW change---we could just let the attackers burn themselves out. i just hope that bitcoiners are patient enough to do that. |
|
|
|
With 38 replies to it....
I just was trying to post a quite lengthy reply myself when I was told the thread doesn’t exist anymore.
What is up with that?
moderators around here have a hairline trigger when it comes to deleting posts. this thread will be deleted too. AFAICT your thread title was on topic (unlike this one). but your OP was nearly nonexistent, just a few meaningless words. that's probably why. next time, add some substance to your OP. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
