Evidently they are only sending out 10 total SWIFT Payments a day - worldwide.
If they have thousands of customers, it could take decades for each customer to make a couple withdraws.
Worry not. It will all come to a natural equilibrium when they end up with 50 customers. Things will go smoothly then. |
|
|
|
- Unlike the Android Bitcoin Wallet, Mycelium does not connect directly to several nodes in the Bitcoin network. This means less bandwidth requirement for your mobile plan, less power consumption, and immediate availability, but also means that the server side could establish IP/address relations. (which it doesn't)
Can you reason this claim? Bitcoin Wallet also is "immediate available", has a very low bandwidth requirement and power consumption. The Bitcoin P2P protocol is very efficient (its binary), so how can Mycelium get any better than that? Any plans for private key management from you guys? That is Mycelium's best "killer feature" right now. Wrong thread. Continued here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4384.msg2932680#msg2932680 |
|
|
|
Continued from another thread: - Unlike the Android Bitcoin Wallet, Mycelium does not connect directly to several nodes in the Bitcoin network. This means less bandwidth requirement for your mobile plan, less power consumption, and immediate availability, but also means that the server side could establish IP/address relations. (which it doesn't)
Can you reason this claim? Bitcoin Wallet also is "immediate available", has a very low bandwidth requirement and power consumption. The Bitcoin P2P protocol is very efficient (its binary), so how can Mycelium get any better than that? Any plans for private key management from you guys? That is Mycelium's best "killer feature" right now. I would also like to know. BWA is impressive at many levels, and priv key management would make it stunning! |
|
|
|
Let's make some numbers on this solution as an example:
1- Let's say I want to move on the street with my wallet fill with 100$ in bitcoin (whatever is the exchange rate that day) for my day to day usage.
2- This translated to bitcoins will mean I'll need to have enough addresses with me to create transactions that can go as high as 100$ and as low as 10 cents (we don't want to give away too much change on every transaction)
3- The total amount of addresses will be 1000
This is possible but I imagine the fees that go into creating the daily wallet (or every time you have to get another 100$ for the bitcoin ATM) will not be trivial. In addition, the size of each transaction combining several addresses into one payment means there will be a lot of QR codes sent and waiting a long time for the camera to recognize all of them (up to 1000 addresses in one transaction to pay something of 100$).
No need for a 1000 addresses in this scenario. For each purchase, you will need to have ready only 10 keys: 10, 20, 40, 80 cents, and $1.60, $3.20, $6.40, $12.80, $25.60, and $51.20. This minimizes the number of inputs to a transaction, thus minimizing the fees. It requires you to carry a total which is N*Pmax, where N is the anticipated maximum number of purchases, and Pmax is the maximum price of a single purchase - all divided in the geometric series, as above. This is not a problem (either way you can run out of money, right?), except a risk of higher loss if you get robbed at a knife point and forced to reveal the PIN or whatever secures your wallet. Chances are, the robber won't even know you've got bitcoins, so no real danger there today. Once you are back online, you can refill the binary bins as needed, adjusting N and Pmax for that day. I have not gotten enough sleep again, so somebody else please try to build a model to evaluate the overall TX fees in this whole story. Does it even make things better? |
|
|
|
Did anyone get their mobile wallet BTC stolen?
Yes. A total of 55 coins so far. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=271486.0The relatively small amount is partly due to quick response of the community, and partly due to the fact that Android bug does not lead to every transaction being exploitable. Still, the bug has been public for many months now. Everyone - from obviously overpaid Google developers, to obviously underpaid Bitcoin developers, should be even more careful moving forward from here. This flaw was not catastrophic, but the next one may be. Tread carefully. |
|
|
|
Looking forward, I expect some options to visualize spending networks, and to see well-documented charts indicating the health of the Bitcoin ecosystem
Yes, please - documented charts, with clearly labeled axes, digit grouping and rounding! |
|
|
|
wait, which do you recommend? mycelium or spinner 0.8.3. makes no diff to me.
BitcoinSpinner / Mycelium Wallet
An update has been prepared for Mycelium Wallet and is being pushed out via the Play Store. If you use BitcoinSpinner you are encouraged to upgrade to Mycelium Wallet, which is maintained by the same people.
|
|
|
|
Favors, like sex, are also a means of exchange. What is legally the difference between taxing virtual currency and taxing sex?
First of all, what do you mean by "taxing virtual currency"? Are you talking about the sales tax? VAT? Capital gains tax, and capital losses credits? By the way, there is nothing virtual about Bitcoin. It's a hard currency. Irreversible. Next, which jurisdiction are you considering? Finally: I just paid for massage. The goods-and-services tax was included. |
|
|
|
How was SecureRandom seeding implemented in vulnerable wallets? Was it custom-seeded, or left as default? EDIT - never mind. The problem was not with the implementation in wallet software, but was and still is with Android. http://www.nds.rub.de/media/nds/veroeffentlichungen/2013/03/25/paper_2.pdfWhen creating a self seeding SecureRandom instance (by calling the constructor without arguments and subsequent setSeed() call), the code fails to adjust the byte offset (a pointer into the state buffer) after inserting a start value. This causes a counter and the beginning of a padding (a 32 bit word) to overwrite parts of the seed instead of appending.
|
|
|
|
|
What casascius described sounds good. XORing even with a constant will certainly not decrease entropy. Thus, his method can only make things better.
|
|
|
|
How are the patches working around the problem?
Are they using a different source of entropy, or are they checking that the two R-values don't collide?
In my mind, best practice would be to do both.
I see a lot of cases in code where people need multiple random and unique values, (e.g. UUIDs)... where the only two requirements are that they are indeterminate and unique... but because the domain of random outcomes is so huge they rely on the vanishingly small probability of collision, and don't bother to check uniqueness.
But as we have found, that "vanishingly small probability" isn't so small if the PRNG is broken. A simple collision check isn't a waste of CPU cycles -- it guards against this kind of system problem.
As such, can all Bitcoin clients, Android or otherwise, be updated to check that the two R-values are unique?
On a different note, I don't see much discussion about the broken Android PRNG, does anyone have a link to the bug reports? This must have some pretty far-reaching consequences outside Bitcoinland too...?
Any comments from the developers here? Checking the uniqueness would require storing past r values along with the private key. Any problematic consequences of this? And yes, I am surprised that there is not much buzz about the broken android PRNG in general, unrelated to Bitcoin. Does all crypto on Android rely on this broken PRNG? Who wrote this particular implementation, who let it slip by? What else has slipped by? |
|
|
|
Hi all,
I'm a newbie in the bit coin scene and really excited to get started in the mining business. I'm looking to join a group buy but in order to join you need bitcoins. Now I live in NZ which has basically no bitcoin presence and it's rather difficult to find bitcoins to buy and all services outside NZ I have looked at all require back deposits, which aren't viable for me.
So my question is: Is there a service which you can but bitcoins with either a credit card or PayPal?
Thanks
It is possible but not easy to buy coins using credit cards or PP. You are essentially asking for real money, and offering a virtual payment which is subject to chargeback at your whim. The seller usually accounts for this risk by increasing the price. Try https://localbitcoins.com/country/NZ |
|
|
|
|
Most likely the problem is with the US bankers "freezing" their US-dollar funds. Add to this the similar seizure by the US government of their Dwolla funds, and the pending $75 million lawsuit by the US-based CoinLab, and picture is bleak... for the US dollar exchange. There is more to money than the US dollar.
The OP is based in Europe. Why not deal in Euros? Or the Swiss Francs? You can either bend over for Uncle Sam and enjoy the ride without whining, or choose different currencies and again quit whining. The liquidity is what it is. Make it better. Quit whoring yourselves to the bandits.
|
|
|
|
How "critical" is it? Has there been any successful attack using this weakness?
Sounds extremely critical, see links below. done and done, thanks to you and this community for such watchfulness and timeliness with these kinds of issues.
You're joking, aren't you?  This post is over one month old, while this one over half a year... Watchfulness my ass |
|
|
|
First of all, Bitcoin has been surviving without compliance. The question is can it keep growing without compliance? - probably not much more than what we've got today.
Another question: is government-issued cash compliant? Much less than even today's bitcoin. With Bitcoin, there is at least a trace in the blockchain. With cash, not so much - and yet, cash is surviving.
Excellent point, niko. That's one of the main arguments we plan to use to defend virtual currencies at the Bitcoin foundation. Thanks! Another way to put it is: Bitcoin cannot be compliant or not compliant. It is simply a technology. People who operate businesses or simply use bitcoins can be compliant or not compliant. |
|
|
|
You can also use some liquid to see it properly. Hmm... have you tried? I was told that freons work, and evaporate cleanly, but have not tested it myself. Ultimately, what's the actual problem here? If somebody can get to your paper wallet, and wish to steal the funds, they would be much smarter to just steal the damn thing, than to tamper with stickers, solvents, photo flashes, laser scanners, optical coherence tomographs, and neutron beams just so they can scan the priv key while leaving the wallet seemingly intact. Extracting the key without damaging the paper wallet is more of a prank than a crime. If I am ever to accept a casascius coin or a paper wallet as payment, I'll gladly rip it open and spend it into my address. If it's more than a couple of hundreds of dollars worth, I'll check it for unconfirmed spends. If it's more that a couple of thousands of dollars worth, I'll wait for a confirmation or two. That's all. |
|
|
|
Hey there! Someone's posted what might be a pretty good exploit on reddit, using a camera speedflash, see: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1jqmzv/dont_blindly_trust_bitcoinpaperwalletcom_you_can/However I'm having a devil of a time trying to reproduce his results. See my attempts here: http://imgur.com/a/FzPB0Can anyone else see if they can use a flash to expose a readable QR code off of a properly printed/folded/sealed wallet? I'll gladly put up a token bounty just for fun, say .10BTC (or I'll send you a nice batch of free stickers & sealing bags, your choice.) This is the best I could manage:  Make sure the layers are pressed together, perhaps between two plates of glass. This minimizes the blurring related to scattered light. |
|
|
|
Ok so theoretically, won't we reach a point where so many people have ASICs that they will generate fewer in BTC than they consume in electricity? Won't we reach a parity of sorts at which point people become unmotivated to mine in any way? This would be just like what has happened with the GPUs and FPGAs, but without a possible improvement of mining technology.
Obviously, should they become worth 1000$ each then it remains worth it for longer.
I sort of imagine a future where bitcoin mining is done philanthropically by those who can afford to, in order to keep money honest, but not as something you are materially rewarded for. Maybe even by a *shudder* elected body.
Nothing new. Mining will always be marginally profitable in the long run. There is money to be made there: the mathematically certain block reward, plus the fees which are the "soft" variable (in future, payment processors (miners) might be competing for contracts to process our transactions). In the short term, there may be periods of mining at a loss due to either decrease in btc value, or influx of new miners, or both. Some will drop out, thus making it profitable again for the stubborn ones. The important thing is to plan so you can absorb occasional dry spells without having to drop out. And as for the "elected bodies" - sure, why not? If bitcoins ever become a reserve currency, mining will become too important to be left to amateurs. The same goes for big corporations - if bitcoins become big for them, they will need to make sure block chain remains healthy. |
|
|
|
Him recognizing that bitcoin was a form of money just means that in that specific case. It's no different than how bitcoins were viewed before and doesn't really change anything on a monumental level. FinCEN still only has jurisdiction over the AML part of bitcoins, and the CFTC still doesn't have jurisdiction over its exchange.
Can't look up the links atm, but in at least one north-European country bitcoins were ruled a commodity, implying VAT or sales tax on all transactions. I would not dismiss the US ruling as insignificant. For example, cases of theft now have an important precedent set. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
