 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »
|
If You are behind NAT then don't open incoming 8333 port (disable UPnP in bitcoin settings) and bitcoin will connect to max of 8 nodes. Just that simple, just that clean!
Thanks all for your numerous "Just that simple" solution. If you haven't noticed, I'm inquiring about a solution for the general public. The general public has their bitcoin client behind a NAT without a forwarded port and therefore only 8 connections. Those who know how to open a port know who to limit the bandwidth using an external program. But it would be neater to have it integrated in the client itself. |
|
|
|
Having never mined a block I have no idea how bitcoin-qt depicts an immature coinbase transaction, but I would be interested in knowing how it handles it.
Does it count it against your total balance before it matures?
How does it display it in the transaction history?
@Deepbit: You happen to mine a lot, can you post a screenshot?
Use the testnet, you can mine plenty of blocks there and see for yourself. |
|
|
|
We started off with a bitcoin that anyone could use and now were forced to buy stuff we dont really want.
Mining bitcoins doesn't equal using bitcoins. Anyone can still start using bitcoins in a few minutes. Download a lightweight client create your wallet and you are done. |
|
|
|
|
You want the default fee to be higher?
Actually theres no such thing as a default fee. The bitcoin protocol doesn't enforce anything about fees.
|
|
|
|
|
You can also run multiple instances of electrum each with its own wallet if you use the correct commandline options. Same goes for the BitcoinQt. So you don't have to use 2 different clients if your goal is to use multiple wallets at the same time on the same computer.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know why ppl are always scared of paying taxes.
taxes are actually a great thing but only if everyone pays them and if they are spend on useful things only. Just look out your window and you will see lots of things paid with your taxes you use everyday.
|
|
|
|
If someone is better at C than C++ I have to question their proficiency in general. Learning new languages is part of being a good programmer.
So someone who doesn't like C++ and prefers to use C is a bad programmer? Well I prefer C. |
|
|
|
You all do realize that if mining hardware kept getting more widespread and more powerful at an insane rate like 4x per block cycle, bitcoins would be depleted in 25 years instead of 100, right? Cutting off like 7 days may not seem bad but any reduction to the useable life is bad. That's why the protocol should have been designed to overcompensate for overmining in the next cycle. Like if 1.2x the bitcoins are mined because of an increase in GH/s, adapt the next cycle to anticipate at 0.8 total bitcoin mining rate over the next difficulty period.
Yea you are right. But if you look at the history of bitcoin it's unlikely to see a 4x of the difficulty for a long time in a row. |
|
|
|
But you assume that you send from and to only one address. But what when you send to different addresses. The network wouldnt know that they are in the same wallet. And when each millions part is on million addresses they could be sent to another millione adresses. And so on. Of course that means creating addresses all the time and you would need more btc because of the waitingtime until first confirmation.
Im not sure but when its all different addresses?
I didn't assume I send to only 1 address. And your right the network won't know that all the transactions come from the same guy if he uses different addresses. But that doesn't matter since you have to pay a fee to send a single satoshi you just got not only if you send a few million. That's why there exists a coin age which is very important for the fee. |
|
|
|
Wondering if an Electrum client might be able to modified to talk to a pynode ... or vice versa?
What does Electrum use to talk to bitcoind? pynode provides a JSON-RPC HTTP server interface, just like bitcoind... It uses the Stratum protocol ... but I don't have detailed knowledge of that, yet. there are 2 electrum applications: the electrum client and the electrum server. The electrum server talks to bitcoind using the JSON-RPC interface but stores it's own blockchain. The electrum client talks to the electrum server using the stratum protocol. |
|
|
|
|
I think it would also be useful if that was included in the electrum client. That way ppl could compare the blockchain length of the nodes directly in the server list.
|
|
|
|
wabber... but such an attacker could split 1btc into 1million parts and send it back and forth to new addresses. When the protocol doesnt use the ip and the addresses are new one always then i think it will be hard to find out that its an attack isnt it? Or will every millions part of the 1btc have a history that lets the network know what its used for? If so then this money would be worth less because the transactions it went through makes it a big transaction isnt it? So that miners want a fee. Is that so or does the network only see that this one address received money the first time?
When i think about it cant be this way because at some point all bitcoins has to be moved many many times and the transaction log would be huge for every btc.
So i think an attack couldnt be blocked easily.
It's important here to notice how transactions actually work. You can split a single bitcoin in 100millionen parts. But that transaction has atleast 1 input (1btc) and 100millionen outputs (for every satoshi one output). That transaction would be gigantic in kilobytes because of the amount of outputs and therefore a huge fee would be needed to send that transaction. An average transaction has something like 2 inputs and 2 outputs. If you want to send those 100 millionen satoshis right again you can't without a fee because they are all very new. The attack is blocked by that. If you don't think so take 0.1BTC and send 10 times 0.01BTC without a fee to a new address. If it works which i doubt (atleast without waiting for a long time) then send all the 0.01BTC back again without using a fee. Read that page to understand what i mean with inputs/outputs https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction |
|
|
|
hm well actually the bitcoin protocol enforces only 1 confirmation before a coin can be spent.
There's no such restriction, you can also spend coins with no confirmation, but they will not be included in the block right away. that's what I meant. I consider a 0 confirmation transaction "not spent" and as you said a transaction can't get a confirmation before all its inputs have atleast 1 confirmation. And ofc you can send a transaction based on a 0 confirmation input I think that's what satoshi dice does to prevent double spendings. |
|
|
|
The coins had 6 confirmations already. So i think its the server itself that wanted a fee. Because instantly after i changed the server no errormessage appeared anymore. Possible?
When this would be a security against some kind of ddos then it doesnt look like a far advanced one. I mean someone who wants to do this surely can change a line of code in an open source wallet to prevent the fee if its included in the client. Or if its the network itself then simply create a script that creates new addresses on the fly and sending back and forth the money to a new address everytime. Would take more processortime but would solve the feeproblem. But maybe this was taken in advance already.
hm well actually the bitcoin protocol enforces only 1 confirmation before a coin can be spent. But to spend your coins you need a miner to include it in a block. But it's considered standard within miners to include transactions with a sufficient fee for the size and coin age first. Bitcoin clients usually force you to use a appropriate fee so your transactions won't end up unconfirmed. Normally electrum should let you ignore the fee, atleast for me it does so I don't really know why it didn't work with that particular server. About transaction spammer attacks: Ofc they can change the source code they could even use their own client but they still need a miner to include their transaction. Creating fresh addresses won't help anything. If i had 1BTC to spam the network and send it to myself then i have to wait for some confirmations before i can spend it for free again and how am I supposed to spam the network if I have to wait for a pretty long time before i can spend my bitcoin for free again. |
|
|
|
Hm... i have 10.66415915 btc in my wallet now. Its a fresh address. I wanted to send it without a fee and now got 2 times a message "error: Transaction rejected by bitcoin network".
I then chose electrum.novit.ro server and it went through without problems. Looks like the other server, electrum.bytesized-hosting.com had a minimum fee? But good that this can be circumvented by chosing another server.
By the way... i only have 3 servers in my list. I remember that yesterday there were 6 or 7. And i guess there are way more than that. Why are there only 3 servers in the list?
the age of coins depends on when they were last used in a transaction. Example: FriendA sent you 2 BTC yesterday he mined on the same day. FriendB sends you 2BTC today he got from someone who got them from someone etc. Then the coins from friendB are newer because you got them today so the last time they were used in a transaction was today even though they existed for a longer time already. It has nothing to do with the address. The idea behind that is if you have 2 ppl who want to spam the bitcoin network with transaction can't send the same coins to each other all the time. They would have to wait or pay a high transaction fee. On the number of servers its usually around 4-7 servers my own (176.9.206.164) was just down for maintenance and not all servers are public you can only see the public ones in your list ofc. About the coins in your electrum wallet. I suppose you just created that wallet and sent some bitcoins to it. Because they were just used in a transaction means they are very young and that's why the server said they probably wont go through if you sent them without a transaction fee. |
|
|
|
I knew before that there is a fee you can choose to pay. But the original client does have a forced fee too. I think its triggered when sending too often. Or maybe when youre amount is too small because i wanted to test multibit encrypted wallet by sending 0.0001BTC. The original client wanted to force me to pay 0.0005BTC Fee. Thats 500% of the original value. I raised the BTC to transfer and up to 0.1BTC i had to pay. At 1BTC it didnt force me. Before i only had the chance to pay the fee or abort the transfer.
Is this built into electrum too?
Regarding the fee... i know about the reason for this but i think its a myth that a transaction can take days with out a fee. I made some transactions till now and a fee makes no difference in any way. And transactions with no fee doesnt take longer. I think maybe a fee is needed once mining doesnt work anymore. But at the moment i think it doesnt make sense.
I think i will try electrum a bit more and probably have to pay the fee in multibit to get my btc out.
That's what i meant in electrum the fee is purely optional it only suggest a fee to pay. There are no forced fees in electrum. Fee is based on the transaction priority which is based on the age of the coins (to prevent transaction spamming) and the size of the transaction. And size of the transaction doesn't mean the amount of btcs sent it's the size of the transaction in kilobytes which depends on the number of inputs/outputs. And yes most of the time the transaction fees aren't necessary because there are ppl processing your transaction anyways. But if you use coins you have just received in a large(bytes) transaction your tx can take days to process. Just check out the threads on this forum it happened to some ppl (especially those who play satoshi dice, because they use the coins they just got again). |
|
|
|
I now sent some money to my wallet in multibit but now see that only 4 points after the dot are shown everywhere. While i sent 4 more digits. In fact 8 digits after the point. And i cant change this. Thats not so good.
And then i checked the preferences tab and saw that there is a fee set. I wondered because i sat it to zero before but now i learned that it cant be taken out. Thats not my thing. I believe in bitcoin as a free currency and i dont want to get forced to pay a fee.
How behaves electrum there?
electrum shows all digits for me. And about the transaction fee you asked about earlier, electrum suggest a fee but you are free to change it as you like before you send the transaction. But you should also keep in mind that if you lower the transaction fee it could take days until your transaction is processed by the bitcoin network and 0.001BTC or something is almost nothing and it's not wasted. It goes directly to the miners. And as flatfly said the server could only lie to you about your balance or it could refuse to send transactions. But since the server is opensource just like the client there are multiple servers. So if you think the server is lying to you about your balance just ask another too. It's just two clicks to change the server in electrum. |
|
|
|
Use Electrum and use the expert view. It's a lightweight client which means you use the blockchain of a server but you still keep the private keys for your adresses on your PC and only on your PC. That means you don't have to download the blockchain before you can use your bitcoins. Expert view enables you to see how much BTCs are on which address and you can freeze any address to force the client to use the bitcoins of another address which is what you want I think. |
|
|
|
It is very unlikely that a merchant would support both coins because all the old coins would exist in both chains and could be double spent: once as old bitcoins and once a new bitcoins.
Which doesn't matter because that should be accounted in the value of each coin. Example (using USD to show the value): 1BTC today equals 10$ Now theres a split and 20% of the people continue using bitcoinA and 80% continue using bitcoinB. 1BTCA then equals about 2$ 1BTCB then equals about 8$ It's only a rough example but it should be pretty much like that in reality. As you can see there's actually no disadvantage for a merchant accepting both bitcoin versions. At a chain fork the value doesn't simply double because of being able to spend the same coin 2 times. The 2 coins aren't equal and they can have different exchange rates. |
|
|
|
|
well actually the error says your client version is too old. Try to get the latest from bitcoin.org
|
|
|
|
|
