Why the pessimism?  This.... ...means that everyone is optimistic. That is not the reason everyone is pessimistic. |
|
|
|
Take the first photo.
Run md5sum on it.
Print out the hash.
Include the printout in the second photo.
Photochain.
Nope, because you could still edit the photo and change printed hash before running md5 on that file. It all boils down to having a way to prove that photo has not been edited since taking a shot, but how to achieve that, I do not know. OP's original idea is not bad and definitely works, but is quite cumbersome. By the way, how cool would be to have image showing md5 hash, exact hash of that given image file? This is simply impossible unless a preimage attack against md5 is developed. |
|
|
|
Wow, I read the first couple threads on this board: red: bearish green: bullish black: neutral. Apologies to the R/G colorblind.- Soon...
- Poll: Bitcoincharts.com: More time intervalls?
- Doesn't belong in speculation? bitscalper anyone use this ?
- Is Fear About The Potential Impact of BIP 16/17 Suppressing Bitcoin Prices?
- The Historical Depth Blog -- updates once a day
- leverage rally is done at 6.15-6.2
- OP mentions he is selling. WTF?
Seriously, where did all the bulls that were so omnipresent a while back go? I don't consider myself a permabull, but I'm still starting to feel alone here. Here's a chart to make you all feel better:  So bearish, I know... |
|
|
|
Hey I'm new here, just came to check things out. I've been doing a bit of work with bitcoins over the past few months and things are really good. It seems like the "gold standard" except online. Anyway, great to be here!
Yeah, isn't amazing that BitCoin is actually 'backed' by something (the work to produce each block) but the US$ is "Trust us that it has a value". lol, who trust their government any more? What a quaint idea! Welcome to the Bitcoin community, HeyRon. As much as I prefer Bitcoin to USD, please note that your post is not entirely correct. The US$ is backed by the need to pay taxes, which is backed by governmental force. This is the definition of fiat. Bitcoin, unfortunately, is not currently backed by anything; the work to produce each block does not back it. Digging holes may be a lot of work, but holes are not backed by that work. Remember that this can change. All national currencies, including USD, have a finite and usually short lifespan, and at the end of it they lose their backing. And, it will only be time preventing someone from backing all the bitcoins, because of their limited amount, simply by agreeing to sell products for a total price above 21000000 BTC. |
|
|
|
How can this possible be more paying than mining?
I had some difficulty understanding this statement. Please correct me where I'm wrong: How can there possibly be more payment revenue than mining revenue? |
|
|
|
... but there IS a correlation..
Population and temperature is correlated as well, so lets kill some people for a better climate! Unfortunately, this is completely true. |
|
|
|
My understanding is that BIP 21 reduces the level of processing of the Bitcoin URI by both humans and machines and makes the overall URI scheme simpler.
To have single representation of an amount fixed as decimal BTCs (decimal biased) means that people can easily read the value as presented in their client in a raw state (e.g. a browser) without having to do any specialised thinking. For example, a member of the general public attempting to decode "amount=500X0Y6" would fail utterly. Equally, machine processing is made simple because there will nearly always be a decimal in place, and further decimal positions (e.g. a move from 8dp to 10dp or whatever) won't invalidate earlier URIs.
The purpose of a URI is to provide a unique resource identifier, and good design typically means that one URI binds to one resource (although others can temporarily point to the same one). In this case the resource is interpreted as a payment request.
The notation for the "required parameter" was going to change from "req:" to "req-" in line with RFC 3986 Section 2.2 "Reserved Characters" but the edits may not have made it to the wiki yet.
Hmm, thanks for this informative post. I still don't understand why this would make decimal shifts easier, however, as the X parameter can easily be expanded to include a negative exponent (e.g., Z instead of X). According to the wiki, however, decimal points are not needed in BIP 21, which gives rise to the multiple-URI one semantic I outlined in my previous post. I guess the design of BIP 21 focused on decoding the URI, while my proposal and understanding only considered making creating the URI more efficient and easier. To resolve this issue, I wrote a simple python script which would take a 500X0Y6 like parameter and convert it into a BIP 21 protocol string. Thanks again for clearing it up for me. Is it possible to offer third-party extensions in BIP21? For example, having a bitcoin client support a field like "req-satoshi-detailedamount" or "armory-lowfee", without coordination between the client developers? |
|
|
|
After reading the BIP in question again, I noticed this text: The alternative payment amounts in BIP 0020 have been removed.
This confirms that the removal of alternative payout amounts was intentional. How is this an improvement at all? A little bit more complexity isn't going to hurt here. If this is because of a security concern, just convert the value and ask the user to deal with it. If it is because the bitcoin developers want the URI to be unique, consider: which all compute to 5000000000 units. I understand that it is possible to use a req:flexiblesize parameter or something, but why not allow the more flexible representation to be used by all clients? (edit): I'm assuming, although unwritten, that a req:size and size can not co-exist. Also, although not explicitly stated, amount and size are also equivalent. If there is something I misread (e.g., amount still allows BIP20 description), please do inform me. |
|
|
|
panic buying
I don't know why, but "panic buying" sounds really weird to me. |
|
|
|
|
This feature is available if you become a donator, apparently.
|
|
|
|
Thanks.
My situation is a bit different. If you ever see before and after photos of a fat person who became thin using product X, how do you know that person wasn't thin and got paid to get fat? You will sometimes see a person holding up a newspaper, but the problem is you can always hold up news from a year ago.
So, my solution is to throw the photo's MD5 into the blockchain once taken. I don't want to post the picture first, or even announce the md5 publicly. If my project works out I want to prove before and after.
Looking at that story gave me an idea though: have the camera put the hash into the block chain when taken. You can the photo existed at least when it hit the chain, and not later.
There's one problem with that solution: one can take three photos: 1. AFTER 2. BEFORE 3. NEWSPAPER After the BEFORE is taken, place the verification in the block chain. Then, after NEWSPAPER is take, release all three photos. But I would have the newspaper IN the 'after' photo. Wouldn't this satisfy doubters? Day 0: 'Before picture', place MD5 in blockchain Day 100: 'After picture' with today's Newspaper Yes, unless there is evidence of photoshopping the newspaper in. |
|
|
|
Females will start being more "into" Bitcoin, when they are worth a bit more lol.
(emphasis mine) Ugh, there is more than one way to read this quote. |
|
|
|
Thanks.
My situation is a bit different. If you ever see before and after photos of a fat person who became thin using product X, how do you know that person wasn't thin and got paid to get fat? You will sometimes see a person holding up a newspaper, but the problem is you can always hold up news from a year ago.
So, my solution is to throw the photo's MD5 into the blockchain once taken. I don't want to post the picture first, or even announce the md5 publicly. If my project works out I want to prove before and after.
Looking at that story gave me an idea though: have the camera put the hash into the block chain when taken. You can the photo existed at least when it hit the chain, and not later.
There's one problem with that solution: one can take three photos: 1. AFTER 2. BEFORE 3. NEWSPAPER After the BEFORE is taken, place the verification in the block chain. Then, after NEWSPAPER is take, release all three photos. |
|
|
|
This is a Republican forum to say the least.
I'm a republican (well, republican counterpart in my country), but still very democrat from most other user's perspectives. So, yeah, this is a Republican forum. |
|
|
|
Hypothetical situation: Gavin releases BIP 16 anyways, and the merchants download the new client. Some miners also download it, so the old clients become isolated from the new network. How do you cope?
Developer releases new version, people choose to upgrade? Is that supposed to be scary? That's how Bitcoin has been working all along. With all the hype, and some posts by theymos and genjix, I was under the impression that BIP16 would bring a chain split. Gmaxwell cleared that up for me, and I apologize for anything negative I might have posted. |
|
|
|
Hypothetical situation: Gavin releases BIP 16 anyways, and the merchants download the new client. Some miners also download it, so the old clients become isolated from the new network. How do you cope?
BIP16 transactions are simply accepted as valid by old clients. They can't become isolated due to this. If that's the case, what's stopping anyone from employing P2SH right now by mining their own blocks? |
|
|
|
Dree12: Where is all this evidence you speak of? All sorts of things happen on this planet which affect the weather. Have you ever heard of a drought? Are those some modern invention of the industrial revolution...
Your lifetime? Pahahahahaha....you obviously aren't a geologist.
Correlation is not causation. This doesn't mean that correlation doesn't exist. Randy, do you live near the tropics? Closer to the poles, the warming is accellerating; it's quite scary, really. Anyone disputing it would be immediately called a dissenter and denialist here. I'm not a geologist, but geologists aren't useful here. I don't care whether warming is normal or not, it's still warming and it's still dangerous. Not precisely what I meant Randy. Extra water melt from the caps cant be helping them boss
In fact, sea level rise is partly offset by sea ice melt in the arctic and antarctic, so I'm not really concerned about this. |
|
|
|
Realistically, when it happens a bunch of people will shut down their rigs b/c of electricity costs, then the difficulty will go down. So although the blocks will be only 25btc it will be easier to get them. Similar to what happened when the $ value of the btc crashed.
Since June, the dollar value of bitcoin has collapsed to 20% of what it was before. The difficulty is currently 200% of what it was in June. This means that buying new rigs right now is likely going to be very unprofitable. |
|
|
|
Well played sir. I believe that makes you 7/7 Hmm, and by a considerable margin too. Thanks for the congrats. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
