Well the Qora implementation of AT is nearly complete (I expect it to be released in the next few weeks) and still unfortunately we have seemingly no Bitcoin clone coders "up to the task" of implementing AT.

Unless I hear from some keen devs I think we will use the bounty to instead seed more work with those blockchains that have already adopted AT (we are now working on turning the ACCT AT into something much more like a *true decentralised exchange*).

From the OP:



From Wikipedia about Skype:


So using Skype as an example of P2P when considering things like privacy and security might not be the best idea.

Just an update to let people know that progress is continuing (admittedly at a slow but at least steady rate).

The "standard protocol" has been recently extended to make it fairly straight forward to manually create a blockchain (without txs at this stage).

The next step is to build this capability into the "loop-back peer support" so that a test blockchain can be constructed using just the one computer and after this has been tested blockchains built by multiple peers will next be tested before txs are then integrated.

For those who have been following AT (Automated Transactions) you might be pleased to know that a second blockchain (Qora) will be going live with AT very soon (perhaps as soon as one week from this post).

You can start here: http://ciyam.org/at

For further information PM me.

The AT team is quite busy but you are welcome to send a PM to discuss how we might be able to work something out.

Rather than "releasing a key" it would probably make more sense that the renter provides a "secret" and the hash of this would be stored in the day(s) they wish to hire (assuming perhaps 31 variables where one is for each day of the month).

When they turn up to pick up the car they provide the secret (which then clears that day ready for the next month) and if they don't turn up then perhaps something like a message with the hash from the AT creator clears those days (as a forced cancellation).

Note that with this approach each car would only need a single AT.

Also as blocks are not an exact measure of time each AT might need manual messages (from its creator) to keep it time locked (otherwise perhaps create a new AT every month or create ATs with 366 variables to cover an entire year for a car).

Assuming this a bit like Uber (but renting your own car out rather than acting as a taxi) then I think a key part is going to be having a smartphone app.

Perhaps you failed to see my .

(Americans - not only do they fail to detect sarcasm but they also fail to detect smileys)

We should be ready to see quite a few such interesting "articles" appear in the next 24-48 hours.

I've always told my wife that FBI means "Fucking Bloody Idiots" and CIA means "Completely Insane Assholes".

Not sure why you quoted me in regards to the "you guys" statement as I am not a staff member nor have any influence over anything about how this forum is run (if I did I'd have got ad-sigs banned for a start).

The 3b prefix is interesting because 3b41b7a14a1db1f2c8 is 18 characters (you'd expect 16 if it was a 64 bit value being displayed in hex).

My guess is that you also have something going on with your outputting.

Then why are you doing this?


(I am assuming that is what gives you the zeros along with your widening to 64 bit ints?)

If each "random" is only 4 bytes (32 bits) then you'd need to use 8 such random numbers for one 256 bit value.

Unfortunately I have never written any code in Go so can't give you "the answer" but what you are basically going to have to do is work out how to put together the smaller random numbers into the 256 bit value (piece by piece).

Perhaps the issue is the zero padding (although that seemingly has been done on purpose and I don't grok Go)?

And after the newbies spend hours and hours of their time trying to get "dust" from these faucets the next thing they tend to do is post in Technical Support complaining that they can't spend their dust without paying a huge fee.

So IMO the deeper you can bury them the better (I no longer bother replying to the posts for help with dust and I think even DannyHamilton is losing patience with that as the same question appears at least once per week).

These sorts of things really do not help to promote Bitcoin in any positive way at all.

This is the key point (presumably it is using the approach outlined by forum member TierNolan which is where the ACCT AT's design came from).


This Mercury project will only work between Bitcoin clones (i.e. ones that use the Bitcoin Script language) and the author doesn't even seem to realise that various other blockchains don't use Bitcoin Script (so he is mentioning about adding things like Ethereum when in fact that is not likely to be so easy at all assuming that it would be even possible).

The bounty I have put forward is to implement AT into a Bitcoin clone so that we wouldn't need an alternative client such as Mercury and so it would allow transfers between non-Script blockchains such as Qora and Burst.

Also - it uses an "order matching server" so is in fact not decentralised (and I don't believe it is using anything other than "testnet" for now and that will probably the case for a long time to come due to the tx "malleability" problem which btw doesn't affect the AT ACCT implementation).

If wanting to reward posters for good posts then some sort of "tip bot" would make *way more sense* than ad-sig campaigns.

Helpful (and far more patient than me) forum members such as DannyHamilton have resorted to publishing lists of all ad-sig posters to ignore because they are so sick of it.

To offer money for "any sort of post" is simply the wrong incentive.

This is why tips for useful posts would improve the content way more than allowing ad-sigs will ever do.

Advertisers just want to see their ad in every single topic (as that is all they care about) and posters oblige as they just want to get as much as they can from their ad-sig.

You (meaning the forum not anyone in particular) have created the need for a police force (which is generally not the kind of thing that members of this forum like).

And yes - I am "beating my head against a brick wall" with this (haven't quite given up yet but will soon).

Am glad to see @BadBear is coming around - I've been complaining about the rubbish ad-sig posts for months and at first I was basically ignored and then next I was trolled (by the ad-sig posters of course) - but it is becoming obvious that more and more people are just sick and tired of seeing pointless posts that are being made by people "earning money" that just wastes our time (being that of normal forum users and the mods and admins also).

This forum used to be "interesting" in past years but since late 2013 it has gradually become more and more full of pointless posts (to the point that it becomes tedious to bother trying to follow topics).

I would very much doubt that the developers of any major Bitcoin wallets are going to include support for Namecoin anytime in the near future to accomplish what this topic is about so proposing its use here doesn't seem to make much sense.

I never said a single thing about the "off topic" board (who cares what gets posted there?).

This is the typical sort of response you see from an ad sig poster which is to avoid answering any direct questions and then try to change the topic (mostly because they are so afraid of losing their income from making useless posts I guess).

Then of course they always remind us "you can switch of the display of sigs" despite the fact it has been stated at least a dozen times "that does not stop the crap being posted".

There is simply no point in trying to actually ever have a rational discussion about this as their are far more ad sig posters (who have many sockies no doubt) compared to non-ad sig posters.

So don't worry - I'll be unwatching this topic shortly and the mods themselves mostly have ad sigs also (so they are your friends - I already gave up reporting pointless posts from ad sig posters as the mods decided to simply lower my report rating by disagreeing that pointless stupid posts are correct to report as such).

Think of PayPal without the exorbitant fees (no fees for buyers and 1% for sellers) and you have Alipay (it works with Taobao which is the Chinese equivalent of Amazon as well as can be used to pay for meal vouchers, airplane tickets, etc.).

So because you have an ad sig it is reasonable?

This is about 99% of the problem actually (there is no-one without an ad sig that isn't a newbie sock-puppet that supports your point of view).

Please find 10 Legendary Members that support ad sigs if you want to refute this.

@tspacepilot - forum rank is not the reason they post crap - they post crap because they are "paid to do so" (this is also why they love "arguing about it").