How do we move forward? Let's do it
What do you want to achieve? I believe everyone wants cheaper transactions. How do you get cheaper transactions without asking miners for permission? Two ways: 1) centralized bitcoin banks that settle balances between each other 2) side-channel payments that are based on the current protocol Both are possible. We don't need miners permission to have cheaper transactions. Which is important because it's unlikely that we'd get it. And the incentives to develop either of the two solutions are already there - high txs fees that have been and likely will be growing. Stop trying to change a weather in order to build a house and start thinking how to build a house in the existing weather. A developer's metaphor  |
|
|
|
|
How exactly is the UASF design going to prevent the hashing majority from conducting 50% attacks on the node ('users') majority branch after they'd split?
Because, as I understand it, they will split at the first tx spending a segwit output.
Am I missing something or do we get to deal again with geniuses who try to change bitcoin protocol while not even having a clue about the basic of its security?
The whole reddit of idiots along with bitcoin news websites are suddenly excited on how someone allegedly found a way to kick miners' arses...
But has he? Because I don't think so.
After activation of such 'user fork' all the weapons would still belong to the miners. Which would surely not hesitate to fire them on the rebels.
People should stop seeing bitcoin as an alternative to PayPal. Bitcoin is not a toy, or a computer game which rules can be adjusted and controlled by a ruling elite.
Bitcoin is a self regulating arm race - without the weapon you can't change the rules. And there is only one type of weapon: the mining farms.
|
|
|
|
So where should we invest bitcoin to actually earn some profit and increase the amount of bitcoin we own, is there any legit place?
I mean cloud mining is a scam but there must be something else we can actually do right?
It is not really a development nor technical discussion topic, but since you asked.. Myself and many other people on this forum have lost fortunes by investing bitcoins to "earn some profits"... Therefore my sincere advise is: just hold it! HODL - as they say on reddit |
|
|
|
Putting aside what core devs can or cannot do, traincarswreck what concretely are you proposing they should do? Apart from them acknowledging bitcoin cannot be ideal money I have not seen any concrete proposals from your end.
Yes you have. Stop trying to make bitcoin ideal money cause its a stupid thing to try to do. It's NOT possible, anyone with any understanding of money and macro economics KNOWS this. Is there any scientists here that read source documents? Has anyone here read a book on economics? I'm sure the central bakers have read loads of books on economics. Perhaps you will have better chances teaching them how to make a better money? |
|
|
|
The control of core developers (or any developers) over the future of bitcoin is hugely exaggerated.
Devs can add new features to the existing software, but they cannot change the blockchain protocol.
Only miners can.
So you're talking to the wrong people.
No I am not. Let me ask you this, then. Let's say there is a cataclysm, or whatever and every single "code dev" (whichever criteria you use to tag them) dies... What effect, in your opinion, would such an event have on the bitcoin as the currency? |
|
|
|
|
The control of core developers (or any developers) over the future of bitcoin is hugely exaggerated.
Devs can add new features to the existing software, but they cannot change the blockchain protocol.
Only miners can.
So you're talking to the wrong people.
|
|
|
|
It's in net.cpp Look for: // do not allow non-default ports, unless after 50 invalid addresses selected already
if (addr.GetPort() != Params().GetDefaultPort() && nTries < 50)
continue; |
|
|
|
It doesn't matter which post you select, because at some point in time (around adding the addr messages ad removing IRC) the algo in the bitcoin core for selecting peers to connect to has been fucked up. And ever since then the bitcoin core node intentionally discards peers that are listening at non-default port. I raised this issue once, but the answer was that it wasn't a bug, but a security feature. Great feature, BTW - it makes me feel so much more secured! Anyway, if you setup you node to use a different port, you only get incoming connections from non bitcoin core nodes. Because the bitcoin code node is fucked up and nobody gives a shit about it. Can you link me to the section of code that discards the peers, i'd like to submit a patch toc change that aspect. Users should be allowed to use whatever port they desire. That was my thinking from the very beginning. Also because now it's very easy to block bitcoin just by blocking tcp connections on port 8333 Changing it is easy - you just need to remove a bit of code... But I remember gmaxwell saying that they wouldn't change it, because it would allow for someone to use bitcoin nodes for conducting DDoS attacks on internet servers Not sure where it is now - the code is changing all the time... give me a sec. |
|
|
|
|
I don't think setting up dynamic DNS records for his node is going to help him anyhow with this issue.
I don't know much about bitcoin core, but it might have something to do with it being unable to notice your IP changes.
Maybe it's better to ask on the support forum.
|
|
|
|
connecting a cheap mic and just recording the noise is probably much easier to implement. and you can still clap your hands if you want. I guess it's all about how many random bytes per second you need. if many, go into video, otherwise audio should do just fine. |
|
|
|
If you have a physical user, just make them the source of randomness.
you just need to mind that according to some people who are with us here, human brain is a very bad source of entropy, as there are (supposedly) multiple research papers proving that the output of one's brain can be easily guessed, simulated or predicted. so, a physical user yes, but only if he isn't using his brain  in other words, if you tell him to hit random keys or move mouse around, it would be a good idea to find someone with parkinson's or other disease preventing his brain from controlling the muscles. |
|
|
|
So you have to choose between your own entropy, which will be low quality but private OR other people's entropy, which will be public, but high quality. Why would my own entropy be of a low quality? It can have a perfect quality, if you just implement in properly. Take a high resolution photo of objects that do not move, then take another one, without moving the camera... Do you think the two photos will be identical? Only for your eye - at the pixel level they will have plenty of differences. And that's the noise - the natural form of entropy. Even if you don't want to use the noise produced by A/D converters , you can still build an application that uses a noise created by nature. * Take a photo of a cloudy sky, a running water, or a soil below your feet. * Record any kind of noise with a microphone. * Build your own simple hardware noise generator ( ex) The number of applications allowing to generate the actual entropy is only limited by your imagination. And they would all be of quite a perfect quality, if you just don't screw it up. Just take any of such input data, containing natural noise, put it through any cryptographic function producing high entropy output and you have quite a perfect random number generator. It's simple, cheap and very high quality. And it doesn't even need an internet connection. |
|
|
|
|
No it isn't the same thing.
When you make a photo yourself, nobody else has its copy.
You asked about 'gathering entropy'.
There is no entropy in files that you download from Internet.
You're not gathering entropy, but just obfuscating the origin of your seed.
|
|
|
|
|
First of all it would be nice to know what the wallet is, that you want to make.
For my experience, the word wallet as referred to bitcoin, has at least two different meaning:
The first meaning is sort of created and advertised by bitcoin.org website, where it tells you to "Choose your wallet", then referring you to all kind of bitcoin applications facilitating online bitcoin payments; from full nodes, through SVP clients and clients based on central servers keeping private keys local, all the way to online banks that manage the keys for you.
The second meaning is the best described by a "hardware wallet", although it might just as well be a software solution doing the same thing.
In this meaning the wallet is mostly a storage for private keys, although usually also capable of signing transactions.
It rarely has any online capabilities - if any, then rater in a "slave" mode.
The second type of wallet is definitely much easier to make, as it would be just a fragment of the first type of wallet.
|
|
|
|
Sorry for not updating for so long. I've been travelling for the last couple of months, so no development, just field testing. It should last for a couple of more months and then I will be back. Before I left, I made version 1.8.0 - I've just tagged it, as it's been quite stable. I have it running on my windows laptop and a linux VPS and it has been working fine for the last couple of months. Once I had to restart it, as it hanged after over 50 days of uptime - I have some ideas why, will try to fix it, but first would like to see it happening again. Also it well rejected the invalid block mined recently by BU node, although there was also something I will have to look at, as I found one debug of when it happened weird. Anyway, the current 1.8.0 has segwit support and a few other cool things, and it's stable. I got rid of the downloader, as the client is now able to sync the chain just as fast (with some additional command line switches). As for the future development. When I come back home, I want to make it possible to bootstrap (and further run) the node with only the block headers and a corresponding UTXO snapshot. Basically it will be possible to run the full node without downloading and keeping the blockchain on the disk. It will only keep the headers and the UTXO db. At this moment it's about 3GB of data. Obviously it will be an optional feature and you will still be able to keep (and serve) all the blocks, if you please. I've been thinking to establish some industry-wide standard for distributing a secured (first by the community signatures, later ideally by the chain protocol itself) UTXO snapshots, but it's not going to happen any soon, as it seems to be involving shit loads of politicking. So I will just start with my own little solution and see from there, because I find this feature quite necessary already, as new people are very reluctant to try full nodes since they need so much time to bootstrap. Plus the blocks on my travel laptop have already taken so much space that I had to start removing porn, and that's really disturbing |
|
|
|
|
you're overcomplicaing it, imho
you'd be better off just taking photos or recording voice, instead of downloading existing media files from internet.
each analog-to-digital converter adds some noise to the output data.
with a proper application, it can actually be used as a pretty perfect random number source.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm also interested in this.
Can I check the time it took to verify (and commit) each new block?
|
|
|
|
Is there another wallet that uses bitcoinqt (for a full node) and has a single-master-password (root key) that isn't full of bugs?
My gocoin software is a full node and its wallet works on single-master-password. But it doesn't use bitcoin-qt - it implements the node by itself. I get the impression that to do this using bitcoinqt that I'd have to write down / print-out every private key of every receiving address ever used. Is that right? I think the recent versions create HD wallets so you only need one backup. But first you need to create a new wallet, with a new version of bitcoin-qt. And then you'd probably prefer to backup the file, instead of printing it. Not quite sure - you may want to ask here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=4.0 |
|
|
|
https://dangerousthings.com/wp-content/uploads/NTAG213_215_216.pdfIf that's the chip, I don't think you can use it as a bitcoin wallet. It's not meant for this kind of applications. It's possible though that you could load some private keys on it. Maybe even protect them with some kind of PIN. But it won't sing you any transactions. You'd have to extract a private key from the chip and use it with a different device, each time you want to spend some coins. Poor security, IMHO.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
