The 0.000159% is an unfortunate rounding error and is definitely unintended.
Yeah, I realised, was just joking. Having said that, if it was being implemented, it wouldn't surprise me if someone objected. You would no longer be able to say that the max number of Bitcoins is less than 27* million. Handling things as a soft fork has interest incentives. It benefits those who hold coins already, but means that miners would be accepting lower payouts. If miners are mainly mining and selling their Bitcoins, then they have little incentive to agree. Many miners probably have some bitcoins saved, so it might work. *21 ;-) As you said, miners can always accept a smaller fee, but (as you said as one alternative) I don't think the incentive to take a smaller fee now to potentially slightly increase the value of their hypothetical holdings sooner is there. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Mining Pools Targeted in Wave of DDOS AttacksAntPool, BW.com, NiceHash, CKPool and GHash are among a number of bitcoin mining pools and operations that have been hit by distributed denial-of-service (DDOS) attacks in recent days. http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-mining-pools-ddos-attacks/that will make BTC even stronger. I fear DDOS attacks greatly, what is the best defense against them? P2pool is one option since it is a distributed pool. |
|
|
|
It appears it has one confirmation now. Patience is key when low or no fees are used for small transaction amounts or large sizes. |
|
|
|
Try the curl command on one line, then the echo command on a second line as it was in grue's example.
It appears from the above that you did it all on one line.
Thanks for your keen observation. I indeed entered both commands on one line. Here's what I got now: $ curl https://mydomain.com/blocknotify.php/?blockhash=1
$ echo $?
0
$
blocknotify=curl https://mydomain.com/blocknotify.php/?blockhash=%s Just to respond once more to this, the 0 should indicate that it returned success (like /bin/true), or no error, which is a good thing. |
|
|
|
You can try "blocknotify=/bin/true". Nothing should happen, not even an error in your log  . Then copy /bin/true to your home. "blocknotify=/home/<your username>/true". Nothing should happen again, no errors either. Another thing worth trying is "blocknotify=/bin/touch /tmp/foo" to weed out problems with spaces and that. After the next block /tmp/foo should exist, and of course no errors in the log. Thanks for your suggestions. I tried "blocknotify=/bin/true". I got the following in /home/username/.bitcoin/debug.log: 2015-03-12 22:12:47 runCommand error: system(/bin/true) returned -1 What does this error mean? I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "Then copy /bin/true to your home". I assume that you simply want me to try "blocknotify=/home/<your username>/true". I haven't tried this nor your suggestion with /tmp/foo, as I assumed that I'll get the runCommand error again. Let me know if I should anyways or if there isn't else I can try. Thanks. /bin/true should return a 0 /bin/false should return a non-zero, typically 1 (or -1) e.g.
me@mine:~# /bin/true
me@mine:~# echo $?
0
me@mine:~# /bin/false
me@mine:~# echo $?
1
As dserrano5 said, it seems that "not even a simple /bin/true works." Try what I have as code above. Do you get something similar to the output above? /bin/true and /bin/false are useful for testing your logic when needed since you always know the result. |
|
|
|
Try the curl command on one line, then the echo command on a second line as it was in grue's example.
It appears from the above that you did it all on one line.
Thanks for your keen observation. I indeed entered both commands on one line. Here's what I got now: $ curl https://mydomain.com/blocknotify.php/?blockhash=1
$ echo $?
0
$ What does the 0 mean? Should I try putting back the following into bitcoin.conf?: blocknotify=curl https://mydomain.com/blocknotify.php/?blockhash=%s 0 should mean it returned successfully. If dserrano5's changes didn't create files in /tmp, that is odd unless there are permission problems there. |
|
|
|
|
Perhaps a better solution might be Google's Nearline or Amazon Glacier. With Nearline, at a penny/month/gigabtye, you could prepay 12000 months (1000 years) for about $120. (Assuming they are still around then, allow it etc). Or use both, plus Microsoft's version, a torrent, and Freenet for ultimate redundancy.
Then encode a link in the blockchain, or a proof-of-existence etc.
|
|
|
|
Its basically 5 full blocks. If only, OP_RETURN only takes 40 bytes. So if you made a smallish transaction it would be 10% of it. So something like 50 MB to do it. If you did it 3 times a day you have consumed the more than entire block bandwidth. It could also be encoded in addresses AFAIK which takes less space. I was assuming perfect use of block space, which of course is not realistic and an actual solution would waste even more space. The white paper by satoshi is said to be in this transaction[1] which has only ~7% overhead. [1] https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/54e48e5f5c656b26c3bca14a8c95aa583d07ebe84dde3b7dd4a78f4e4186e713Yes. The problem for any of these solutions is that then the reassembly and decompression algorithm has to be stored somewhere. Eg. Which blocks? Or at minimum, which op_returns to combine in which order. At 40 bytes each, that is 125,000 transaction - ordered, one per block. Then you'd just need to know the address to reassemble. It might take 250,000-500,000 blocks since you wouldn't want to do them out of order, so they'd have to be spaced out to avoid orphan out of order issues. And you run the risk of op_return going away later. edit: If you waited every 6 blocks to submit a transaction (even assuming it is mined in the next block) that is 24 per day or 5000 days total to encode it, about 13.6 years. |
|
|
|
assume that every nonce were equally likely to be a solution. How can I assume that, when that's what I'm seeking to prove, isn't it? I think part of his point was that if everyone starts looking at zero for a "winning" nonce and working up, the distribution will be towards the low end of the range since every nonce has an equal chance of being a solution. Consequently, your test will only show that more people are starting from zero and working up, than starting from <limit> -1 and working down or checking randomly between 0 and <limit>. That makes sense. thanks for the clarification It is interesting to see the distributions though, as a curiosity factor. :-) |
|
|
|
assume that every nonce were equally likely to be a solution. How can I assume that, when that's what I'm seeking to prove, isn't it? I think part of his point was that if everyone starts looking at zero for a "winning" nonce and working up, the distribution will be towards the low end of the range since every nonce has an equal chance of being a solution. Consequently, your test will only show that more people are starting from zero and working up, than starting from <limit> -1 and working down or checking randomly between 0 and <limit>. Asking you to assume that, is for the purpose of his example/question - if it is true that every nonce has an equal chance of being a solution, the pattern will be skewed by where people start searching. |
|
|
|
Yes, I have SSH. Sorry, I didn't understand what you meant. I tried your suggestion and I can tell that it executed my PHP program, as I have code in it that sends me an email. However, SSH outputted the following: $ curl https://mydomain.com/blocknotify.php/?blockhash=1 echo $? curl: (6) Couldn't resolve host 'echo' <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html><head> <title>302 Found</title> </head><body> <h1>Found</h1> <p>The document has moved <a href=" https://0/">here</a>.</p> </body></html> $ I don't know what that output means. Do you? Does this mean everything went as planned? Try the curl command on one line, then the echo command on a second line as it was in grue's example. It appears from the above that you did it all on one line. |
|
|
|
when i have the wallet syncing it says make sure your time and date is correct for the wallet to work properly. any advice on why it says that when the time is correct
The only time I've got that was when my time really wasn't correct. It compares your time with the one reported by other nodes. Is it possible you are on a wrong timezone? my time is correct just happens with a few wallets not all Which wallet software are you using? And the time zone is a good question. |
|
|
|
|
He has famously said that you shouldn't invest in something you don't understand.
He doesn't. Yet. There is always hope.
'Never invest in a business you cannot understand.' 'Always invest for the long term.' '
|
|
|
|
Consider me to be uninitiated - is this relevant only if I'm a miner, or if I'm running any full node?
Pfft. If you were a miner 99% chance you've never seen a full node in your life. Any full node can call that rpc, and only full nodes can call that rpc. Ok, understood. And if this call indicates a positive response for a given transaction, how much overall confidence does it give you about inclusion likelihood? Anyone know about this? I'd really like to some kind of metric about block inclusion likelihood for a given transaction. A lot depends on the priority of the transaction, number of transactions queued etc. Generally, if you were to calculate the priority for each transaction, that would give you a good metric showing which ones were most likely to be included sooner than others. e.g. you could say, transaction A is most likely to be included while transaction Z is least likely. I am not sure if there are statistics about it. It could be calculated if you were to run a full node, calculate the priority when you see a transaction, and then see how long it takes a transaction of a particular priority to be included in a block. Doing that for a while would let you create statistics - e.g. perhaps by 20% baskets and then you could say, the top 20% are included within X time with a confidence interval of Y. Then for each of the other baskets. e.g. Look for priority calculations https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees |
|
|
|
|
You can use addnode to add a specific IP. It is very strange that this is occurring..
|
|
|
|
Correction
Message
No block source available
I thought that was probably it. You might try quit it and restarting it. It is an odd message to see, but perhaps that will help. If not, there are other suggestions. ;-) |
|
|
|
Is that the exact message you are getting? Or is it perhaps "No block source available"?
Installed version o.10.0 and synched when it was released.
now last 5 days - get message no blocks available
Reason?
|
|
|
|
I'm thinking of setting up an e-commerce store selling books for bitcoins, but waiting for the six confirmations to minimize my risk of a double spend attack. Does anyone know of any charts out there that list average confirmation time for the six confirmations to occur? My wish list for these charts: two charts, one that shows average amount of time to get six confirmations without any transaction fee, and another to show average amount of time with a transaction fee.
My concern is that I'm okay with waiting a day or two for the confirmations, but with typical e-commerce being instantaneous, customers would likely be frustrated and leave and I'd get no sales if this is common.
There are two separate questions here: 1. Once mined, the average time for 6 confirmations is, by design, going to be around hour. That is adjusted every, roughly, two weeks by the change in difficultly. The variance is an issue here of course, but it should be within 1-2 hours to get that many confirmations. Again, that is once mined. 2. The other question is what is the average time to get 6 confirmations including the time between when the transaction is submitted and when it is first mined. That is dependent on a number of factors, including if a fee is paid, the priority of the transaction (which includes the size) etc. This would be the average time of one hour, plus the time waiting for the transaction to be mined. The statistics for how long it takes a transaction to be mined will vary as above. [Edit: e.g. this depends on the number of inputs, the number of bitcoins (e.g. if you are selling an antique book for 1000 Euro (4 BTC from one output), you will get a much faster confirmation than if it is 0.0004 BTC from 50 different outputs because of the priority. etc) ] A few other notes: a. if you are truly selling "books for bitcoins" (not ebooks or something electronic), you can afford to wait much longer since you will no doubt have many hours to confirm the transaction prior to shipping. Even if you waited a day to ship, that wouldn't be an issue. You can accept the order when submitted, and ship once the transaction confirms. b. If you require payments to include appropriate fees, you will get a much faster confirmation. And you can say something like "transactions that do not include fees do not ship until confirmed. Transactions that include fees ship much faster." Make sense? |
|
|
|
Thanks for that explanation and breaking it down so it's easy to understand.
At least only addresses with spent outputs through a web wallet are possibly at risk, so that's good for me as I keep very small amounts in those. Keep your cold storage cold and only keep a small amount in your hot/spending wallets.
yes mostly online wallets/service. but sadly not only online wallets. i saw many droid technologies with same issues. and most problematic is the clones of cryptocoins which use this old android wallet clones. i already warned developers but many don't understand whats not good. i recommend sandbox system for handling BTC and/or cold-storage (paper & CLEAN usb flash). example I have computer with my bitcoins and only can connect with self writed IR-module for datatranser of signed transactions. so only can go out via IR to my internet-connected computer. and this have script which accept IR data and make rest. all started with little adruino experiment i made with friend  people often don't understand that enviroment must be secure. encryption and passwords is useless when enviroment is not secure. example you have super secured computer with sandbox (VM) and bitcoins safed here. but hacker goes in your computer with worm/expl/trojan and then waits for you type in password or keys and then all is stolen.. so most important thing is secure computer good or make it offline(no network communication i.e. rj45, wifi) when it s for bitcoin. Can you say which droid wallets use it? Thanks for posting this. Most of my bitcoins are already on paper wallets from a clean Ubunutu system (not connected to internet, old printer not connected to internet, etc). But I still have to use a hot wallet sometimes to pay people. Perhaps referring to the bad rng on android from about 18 months ago: https://bitcoin.org/en/alert/2013-08-11-androidBut that page says it was fixed with the "current" updates as of 2013. And the OP is talking currently of 2015. This is true, but as below it was a reference to past issues. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
