While technically true, I'm sure his experience would be helpful, the wounds are so sore right now that there is no way this statement can go over well. |
|
|
|
pls make the blochain faster im fedup of waiting 100 confirmations i fought bittcon woz supposed to be instant im waiting half a day to convert them to doggiecoin
Your spelling, gramar, typing, capitalization, and attitude are all shitty. Defecation and language/expression issues aside, he's just confused. Coin maturation a subtle topic that few ever encounter...most miners have a level of insulation from what is actually going on provided by the pool. I wouldn't blame anyone for not knowing what he is complaining about. But don't be fooled into thinking that doggie coin doesn't have a maturation process. It's another easily adjusted variable just like all the variables that define the altcoins (derived from Bitcoin that is...). |
|
|
|
first fail:
he is using a crappy pool. which was his choice to choose that service with that delay, he should choose a different pool.
second fail:
he simply wants to convert to dogecoin. he should simply mine dogecoin and hoard if he loves doge so much
third fail:
he should mine doge and sell them for bitcoin.. he would earn more.. as he doesn't realise mining bitcoins to throw at doge is losing him value,
Sounds like OP is experiencing something most people except real old timers and those really in to mining know about: coin maturation. Newly minted bitcoins aren't instantly usable. You gotta wait 100 blocks after you generate (now called mine) bitcoins before you can spend them. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_chain"Blocks in shorter chains (or invalid chains) are not used for anything. When the bitcoin client switches to another, longer chain, all valid transactions of the blocks inside the shorter chain are re-added to the pool of queued transactions and will be included in another block. The reward for the blocks on the shorter chain will not be present in the longest chain, so they will be practically lost, which is why a network-enforced 100-block maturation time for generations exists." |
|
|
|
|
The general good citizen rules are hard to enforce...hacked or sold, I see too many newbie questions from hero accounts. Theymos does do a good job reminding people to change passwords with each potential security breach, but nothing will make accounts unstealable.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm confused again. Im not asking 1 party or pool to come up with 25 solutions meeting condition Y...the idea is that those that do find 1 of the 25 solutions to broadcast them to the network...mining pool operators can incorporate those solutions on their quest for 25 or forgo them in hopes of finding their own. The probability that any one pool gets all 25 I would think would be very low...it would also make it easy for pools to join forces against a dominant pool.
Since the tx inclusion policy per block is now variable (there may be 25 separate policies per block), wouldn't that be better? We want to avoid 51% of hashing power being used in support of one transaction inclusion policy; 75% hashing power supporting 25 policies would be a good thing, right?
I see one 40% mining pool having a huge advantage over another single 10% pool (as a sum on a binomial probability distribution), but that's a slightly different scenario where work isn't shared.
|
|
|
|
Why not enforce each block to have 25 coinbase tx's to different payout addresses and force the hash of each of those addresses combined with a subset of tx's in the block to be less than a specified difficulty value. Nobody gets a payout until 25 such hashes meets a difficulty threshold.
Any kind of "You must find X (x>1) results meeting condition Y" is not progress free. Rather than being like a lottery where you win instantly by chance— even if you just make a single lucky roll— with probability linearly proportional to how much you play, these patterns accumulate work and as a result faster participants have a much more likely chance to win compared to normal mining. If you're not seeing that, imagine an extreme case where you must have a billion difficulty-one solutions to form an acceptable block. In that case a miner with 40% hash-power would win virtually every time against a number of other miners with 10 and 20%.Now I understand. It's easier to see in the extreme case. Thank you. if 10 non p2p type pools control 99% of the hash rate, miners have very few choices in terms of what transaction inclusion policy they want to support with their hash power. |
|
|
|
What symbol you talking about? I see nothing in chrome.
 |
|
|
|
The fixation on Satoshi makes me a little sad. Bitcoin was created to create a system of money without trust and central control— all the salient features are in the system, not in the motivations or non-public activities of its creator... so this kind of research is just valuable as a historical novelty, not in any practical way.
Making Bitcoin available was a gift to the world, but we seem to be repaying it with a not stop effort at violating the privacy of someone who clearly prefers it, plus these analysis are seldom very accurate— in most cases it may just as well be someone else... and then some other poor slub gets accused erroneously of being Satoshi, and potentially endangered when mentally ill people make assumptions about the returns on kidnapping. ::sigh::
I'd be less disappointed if the focus were just on early transactions, which are somewhat interesting on their own merits without the unnecessary game of pin the transaction on the person game.
+1E8 The techniques you are using could be employed on more complex transaction sets and might yield useful tools. That would be interesting from a technical perspective. |
|
|
|
The problem is the proof of work is tied to the transaction that sends the block reward. So, there isn't an obvious way to generate a coherent block using multiple proof of work solutions. So, the ways to make the block reward more granular means more blocks more often. However, there is a tradeoff as each block has additional overhead. So if you change from 10minutes to every 1 second the amount of additional network / computation / storage would make running the protocol much more challenging. So, there is the trade off.
Why not enforce each block to have 25 coinbase tx's to different payout addresses and force the hash of each of those addresses combined with a subset of tx's in the block to be less than a specified difficulty value. Nobody gets a payout until 25 such hashes meets a difficulty threshold. |
|
|
|
|
Turns out, that Rouble symbol was made part of unicode 7.0 just this month. that's rather rapid adoption in apple's part I would say!
|
|
|
|
I mean I had to fry one braincell to find this for you... PESOS!!!!!!!  Thanks for the pic...but the Ruble isn't on there. It does resolve my mild curiosity on the W-like symbol. I don't understand why you say "PESOS!!!!!" ::Confused:: |
|
|
|
Outdated information spotted:
"Individual members pay 2.5 BTC per year, or 25 BTC for a lifetime membership. Founders dues are 10 BTC per year."
March 2013 lifetime membership cost 25 BTC (approx $300)
When I purchased my lifetime membership a few months back, it cost only 0.3 BTC (approx $300)
How long, dear reader, until lifetime membership costs 0.03 BTC (approx $300) ?
this needs updating; the rates are fixed in dollar amounts now...not sure about the algorithm is for averaging/updating the fee in bitcoins. |
|
|
|
Confused with you question. Can you make it specific?
The documentary. It's called, "The Rise and Rise of Bitcoin" Where is it available to watch? Apparently, it's been out for a couple months. Yet, I can't even seem to find a place to PAY to watch it...which is extremely odd. I hear ya. I don't know how the market works, but, I think they're st the stage of trying to find a way to get money for showing the movie. Typically, a distributor pays the film makers and then the distributors get paid by consumers...most film makers don't have vast distribution networks  |
|
|
|
|
Here is an idea (that very well may be of no merit): let each block be composed of 25 mini blocks, each of which may award themselves up to ฿1. Each block accumulates the lowest hashed mini-blocks until one of the 25 hits the target for the main block...or maybe when the sum difficulty of the 25 mini-blocks hits the target would be best.
Would this make mining in smaller pools more attractive to those with hashing power?
If it's a dumb or old idea that didn't pop up in my forum search, my apologies.
|
|
|
|
Were you suspecting they are creating an AppleCoin? Apple is into healthcare now, they don't have time to fight a loosing battle on the crypto front.  I figured it was a national currency (like this w thing...₩), but it was brand new on my net board with iOS 8 beta and I was kinda surprised I hadnt seen it before... |
|
|
|
Are you volunteering?
Absolutely. Hand me what was collected and I will happily format them and host them on my own site - as I have already done for Wei Dai. Go do some work and prove yourself worth listening to.
Wow, how condescending. Yes. It is condescending. If you really want to contribute, you go and do something. Hint: start with a PM to OP instead of whining about "and how much time does it take to hand them over to someone who isn't 'busy with other things'?" |
|
|
|
That doesn't have the emails Hoskinson collected, and how much time does it take to hand them over to someone who isn't 'busy with other things'? Are you volunteering? Go do some work and prove yourself worth listening to. There was little interest in the project when Charles started it (ICYMI). |
|
|
|
|
I don't think your English is clear enough to result in a sensible response. Perhaps you could write in your native language and use translate.google.com?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
