Seems I have neglected this topic for a while so let me just update and let it be known that the first ACCT (Atomic Cross-Chain Transfer) between Burst and Qora blockchains is scheduled for this coming week and I have begun work on designing a new AT that will allow for discovery of "offers" for ACCTs (which will be the main way that decentralised coin trading can occur using AT).

In that case people could simply run their own webserver and access the pages via localhost (which would be decentralised) - IMO it would make sense that this should be bundled with Qora itself.

Not that I am aware of (other than using the "blocknotify" approach).


Maybe you just need to learn a bit more about scripting?

What is needed is hardware that can be trusted (which no government is keen to support).

So far this has proven to be rather tricky as problems with things like the Trezor project have already been found (there is a topic about how Trezor can be hacked somewhere on this forum).

IMO most people *are* going to trust a bank or similar to hold their BTC for them because if they are insured then that would currently be the least risky way to protect your investment (the fractional reserve problem is another one that perhaps stems from this).

Why don't you just parse the response to check for the error?

(then use your own loop to keep rechecking)

Unfortunately just as the AT code for Qora was ready to be merged (on April 30th) a bug was found.

So although calling it by the end of April was arguably a "tough ask" it had looked possible (and I'd also hoped that putting out such an ETA might provide a bit of extra incentive). Anyway most importantly the bug has now been squashed and the work to get Qora with AT rolled out the door is underway (I am not going to try and rush that as quality code is far more important than a precise ETA).

I won't call the date this time - but I am extremely confident that it will be days rather than weeks, and even if we end up being a week or two late, compared to Ethereum we are extremely punctual.

It is the Bitcoin equivalent of "spam" so no real need to worry about it (if you are concerned about it being used to *track* some future tx you make then you might want to do some research about "coin control").

No-one without an ad-sig would ever back this statement up (apart from sock-puppet accounts created by ad-sig posters of course).

Ad-sigs have *ruined* this forum and if used in the new forum will ruin it to.

People should note the sigs of long-time forum members such as @DannyHamilton.

Although I am far from being obese I have unfortunately managed to gain a rather larger belly than I'd like and I don't eat unhealthy foods and walk briskly for 1.5 hours per day (I also only have one large meal per day and eat few snacks other than fruits or nuts).

When I was younger I never gained weight but as I've got older things changed - so I do understand that at least if you are over 40 and finding it difficult to loose weight that is because it really is difficult.

Advocating that people "don't exercise" would be rather stupid as you are far more likely to end up with other health problems if you do very little exercise at all.

You mean if miners (mining pools actually) that control >50% of the hashing power decide (i.e. nothing to do with the % of miners as you could have 90% of miners only controlling say 30% of the total hashing power).

Such ideas of "black lists" have been brought up many times before and thankfully they haven't been adopted. If they do get adopted then Bitcoin would have a very big problem with regards to "fungibility".

Just as pointless as any other such link to a counter-argument (you are clearly "a believer").

Note that I am not going to try and counter your "argument" as I know that you can't be swayed from your belief.

As I don't actually have a belief one way or the other why are you still trying to "convince me"?

Respect - you didn't make a separate post (sorry but I do tend to get annoyed by ad-sigs) and yes such very long confirmation times are not very often.

What would be more interesting would be a mathematical explanation for the longest possible time one might have to wait for a confirmation (assuming that the network hashing rate hadn't decreased radically).

You are never going to actually find the truth - only the "truth as you perceive it" so your post is just as pointless as any other such post claiming to "hold the truth".

Personally I don't care what truth you want to believe (and I don't believe any versions of this supposed truth myself) so just choose the truth you want to believe in and be happy with that.

I don't get why people think that they can ever convince someone else of "a new truth" (and those like me who don't care for such things are even less interested).

You also should realise that the "media" links that you listed are all biased (as unfortunately all such modern media is) so they are really worth *zero* as some sort of basis for an argument about the facts.

Does anyone with an IQ above 100 really believe anything that Murdoch publishes?

Is what you wrote.

Now - if you want to do the honourable thing then edit your original reply rather than making a new post (which would be the "ad-sig" thing).

You clearly have not actually looked at the history as it has taken over an hour to create a new block in the past.

(of course your post was made because of your ad-sig rather than for any actual "real reason" as you didn't even bother doing the slightest bit of research before posting)

Haters are going to hate and people that like conspiracy theories are never going to give up on those theories.

The truth is something unfortunately that we rarely can ever be sure of because of all the crap that tends to surround it.

As like most other people that I've met - some Jewish people are wonderful people and others are assholes (no different to any other group of people I've met).

(this is not the sort of topic I'd normally post in actually but I do not like to see such prejudice topics without them being challenged - the modern idea of "freedom of speech" has unfortunately been reduced to the idea that I can say "fuck these people" without any reason beyond my "right to do so")

Polls? Seriously?

So we should all agree about what did or didn't happen according to some poll?

If you created such a poll on this forum then the people with the most sock-puppets would win every time. I guess that means that sockies are the authority then?

(and no I don't care about the stupid theories being espoused in this topic but please don't use *polls* as the argument of authority)

Can you explain this?

(without resorting to anything that can't be clearly understood by most people)

@sidhujag - you might find this link useful: http://ciyam.org/at/at_script.html (it describes a way that AT could be added to Bitcoin Script processing).

As far as ATs being able to work with things like Assets please note that following function from the AT API:


Although currently the specification only defines two standard tx types (normal and messages) this could be easily extended (for blockchains that support other kinds of tx types) and we have actually been recently considering to do just this.

Basic blockchain is now working (but needs a lot more testing) - if anyone is interested to run a node (and no - there is no financial reward for doing so) then contact me via PM.

To be very clear - the CIYAM blockchain is not a currency but instead aims to be a replacement for the current internet (perhaps an overly ambitious aim but why not "shoot for the moon"?).

One of the key objectives is to create a decentralised exchange for "coins" (and services).