Forget about the official website and the documentation, it is filled with lies and misinformation. For example "Individual satoshis can be inscribed with arbitrary content, creating unique Bitcoin-native digital artifacts that can be held in Bitcoin wallets and transferred using Bitcoin transactions." is filled with misinformation. The satoshis are not inscribed, the content is not unique and there is no way to guarantee its uniqueness, you also can not and do no transfer the content itself to anybody when you send coins. Another way of looking at Ordinals is (to put simply) a brand new scam method to sell tiny amounts of bitcoin to idiots at much higher prices.- First step is to come up with some arbitrary data which can be anything like byte presentation of a picture and create the Taproot script.
- Second step is to compute the corresponding address of that script and sending some small amount of bitcoin to it (eg. 10000 satoshi)
- Third step is to find some idiot who would pay a lot of money to buy 10000 satoshi (of course minus the fee so in reality in the example above they are buying 5920 satoshi) for a lot of money.
- Fourth step is receiving the money and sending them the tiny amount of bitcoin whilst revealing the garbage data you created in step one.
There are no NFTs, no arts, no ownership, ... being transferred here, individual satoshis have no extra value, ... and all the other lies they tell in step 3. Bottom line is anybody who paid more than $1.28 for the example above is being ripped off while contributing to an attack on Bitcoin. Arguing over UTXOs and how they are involved in this spam attack is pointless in my opinion  |
|
|
|
Don't forget about people who have dynamic IPs which change easily. Please correct me if I am wrong but one node / One vote is not true today and since a long time.
People are not solo-mining BTC anymore through Bitcoin Core
I don't know what we should say now, one ASIC one vote ? One Eh/s one vote ?
It was 1 CPU 1 Vote and you could say that a CPU is representation of computing power or hash power which in turn means someone with a better CPU got "more vote" than someone with a weaker CPU. This means nothing has changed, you still get a vote equivalent of the amount of computing power you posses. If you have a better ASIC or more number of ASICs you get more votes. |
|
|
|
They have been in trade wars for years now and obviously, it has an effect on both countries. But if they started a full scale war then everyone will be affected, specially countries in the South East Asia (specially I live in Philippines wherein our government are still undecided, but it looks like the newly government will be in the US side), they will be torn apart.
For the global economy, it might hit harder as well, it will disrupt the world economy and it's hard to recovery if the war lasted for years.
but we will all know which sides are countries are going to take here.
That's a really strange situation not just with Philippines but with multiple Chinese neighbors specially when you look at the world map and see that all the neighbors have been slowly choosing a pro-US policy. Philippines, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea are the main ones that are challenging China in East and South China sea for US! I could understand competition with China and resistance against Chinese influence and growth but to go full anti-China and becoming friendly with US that we all know will abuse all these countries for their own benefit and at their cost makes no sense. |
|
|
|
It is important to note that a majority of miners must adopt the soft fork in order for it to work. If a majority of miners do not adopt the soft fork, then a transaction that is not valid according to the rules of the soft fork will still be valid because the longest chain would still treat the new instructions according to the old rules.
That is not specific to soft-forks only, any kind of change that can create a chain split needs the supermajority of the network to reach consensus otherwise there will be a chain split. |
|
|
|
i'll have to look into this aspect of it franky but one thing i can say for sure is it's very easy to counterfeit an ordinal. just mint the content in a new bitcoin transaction and now you own a bored ape or whatever other "nft" you wanted! seems so easy right? the only thing that proves yours is not the real one is if someone else's has a lower inscription #. you could make 1000 bored apes if you wanted to and no one can stop you!  That's the inherent flaw of tokens in general. They all can be counterfeited. Specially the so called "art" related tokens where the "art" is stored in a centralized website accessible to anyone who doesn't even have to own the token to access and download it! All you have to do is create a duplicate of the "art" and make your own token from it. |
|
|
|
I can't imagine the Chinese Yuan becoming the next reserve currency in the world. It will give unfantomable power to China beyond comprehension. If that happens, China will rule the world. I don't think the USD will get out of its current position without a fight. Nothing lasts forever, so it's likely the world will have another reserve currency in the future (hopefully it won't be the Yuan).
I don't know what will happen in the future but US dollar is already being abandoned as we speak. Dozens of countries have already started moving away from it, for example Brazil which has only slightly smaller exports to China compared to United States is the most recent country that switched to using Yuan instead of Dollar. It is not always replaced by Yuan though. Other currencies are being used too between countries. There is even gold bars being used as currency these days. Of course US is fighting this and will continue to fight (...Taiwan proxy war incoming...) but it will only slow down dedollarization, just like fighting bitcoin will only slow down its adoption. What will that mean for Bitcoin, is an excellent question. The crypto market is tied to the USD (although many coins can be traded for other Fiat currencies), so a collapse of the USD might boost prices all the way to the moon. BTC would probably be in the "millions" if that happens. We're still early to the game, so why not keep buying and "holding" BTC to plan ahead for the future? Just my thoughts  Exactly. |
|
|
|
Please correct me: a soft fork means stricter rules. Taking the current rules, and adding more, but without invaliding the previous.
Correct. Soft fork is all about adding more rules/restrictions to the consensus rules. We could view it as limiting the number of things that are valid. For example previously dummpy item for OP_CHECKMULTISIG could be anything including OP_0 but now it is limited to only OP_0. Does that encourage old clients to switch to new version, since they might hear on blocks that are likely to reorg?
It should because they can no longer be considered Full [Verification] Nodes since they no longer "verify everything". What could be the excuse of a non-Segwit node to stay in non-Segwit?
I can think of two reasons: 1. Laziness 2. Trying to avoid bugs in new releases eg. (usually done by running multiple versions) |
|
|
|
And now, if you allow any non-standard scripts, then it will effectively stop such upgrades, because then it will be a choice between activating some new soft-fork, and potentially invalidating a lot of existing outputs, or looking for a more complex way to introduce new features.
That should never be a concern, definitely not enough to discourage such an upgrade because anybody who goes out of their way to create such outputs should already be well aware of the consequences of doing so (anyone can spend before soft-fork and nobody may spend after it). |
|
|
|
|
This topic is getting far from what really matters by arguing about details of this attack! Whether the garbage is injected into the blockchain once or injected on each transfer (first one is correct BTW) doesn't change anything about the fact that they ARE injecting garbage into the blockchain and they ARE abusing the system and it IS harmful to bitcoin if this continues and grows...
|
|
|
|
I know that the public key gets exposed to the blockchain when a person sends a transaction to another address but does the sender only get exposed or does the address receiving also get exposed?
It depends on the address (better said output script) type you are sending to. The very old type that is no longer in use called P2PK is directly sending coins to a public key hence the receiver's public key is already revealed. The new types P2TR are also revealing a tweaked public key of the receiver. The sender should always provide their public key when they are sending coins using an unlocking script that has any of the checksig operations. How can you derive a public key from a transaction ID on the blockchain if this is hidden and only created at generation?
The transaction as I explained above should contain the sender's public key in its scriptsig or witness. You just have to decode the raw transaction bytes to extract them. I recently found out that you can check the public key which ties all of the addresses that were created on generation of the wallet and shows change addresses but this is not obvious on the blockchain explorers and requires you converting the public key into a different format to check.
It sounds like you are referring to master public key that deterministic wallets use. It is not something you reveal to the public so it can not be found on a blockchain explorer. It is something the wallet can use to derive child public keys from if they are not hardened. You can read more about it in BIP32 https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0032.mediawiki |
|
|
|
Do you mind checking beginning of file blockchain_headers with hex editor/viewer? I tried on my device, but mostly it only contain zeroes. I suspect Electrum only request needed block header rather than all block header.
Yes, although I simply read the file as a byte stream not with hex editor, the file starts with the genesis block's header ie. 0x01 followed by 35 zeros (previous hash) then 0x3b (merkle root) and so on. I've had my Electrum for a very long time though. The file was created in 2019! Maybe they changed some stuff like after the introduction of checkpoint header. Edit: Yeap. They've changed things. Downloaded Electrum 4.3.4 on Ubuntu and let it sync, even deleted the blockchain_headers file and let it be downloaded again. In both cases the file contains all zeros up until block height 747936. Which is a waste of space if you ask me!!! This also means what I explained above won't work using newer version of Electrum. |
|
|
|
Although I'm still hoping for this fad to wane "on its own", because I'm not sure what functionality you would cripple if you lower that limit.
I can't think of any existing functionality or [useful] utility that would be damaged by such a limit. Besides if there is a need for a bigger limit, it could be raised in a future consensus rule such as a new witness program version. |
|
|
|
I heard people keep saying don't sell when the price rise a little, or when it starts dropping!
You should never sell bitcoin just because price went up or down, a little or a lot. Bitcoin is not an investment to begin with, it is a currency and you shouldn't buy it only to make profit. It is a currency that is designed to give you financial sovereignty. I don't get, why are you holding it for long?
I don't hold bitcoin, I use it as a currency meaning as it was meant to be used. To receive payments and make payments. Is that long term bitcoin don't experience losses?
Not so far and possibly not in the foreseeable future until mass adoption. |
|
|
|
But when this happens, the world would probably be using another currency (Euro, perhaps?) as its reserve currency.
There are a bunch of candidates as replacement and Euro is not among them. In fact in the future Europe's economy falls apart faster and worse than US economy as it is already evident from the inflation, recession and deindustrialization going on in the two continents. Unfortunately one of the biggest replacement options seems to be Yuan! Then it would be China that abuses its power an ruins the world instead of US... |
|
|
|
Trust Wallet is currently one of the most popular wallets among cryptocurrency users.There is no doubt that Trust Wallet's security system is very strong.
The attractiveness of wallets such as Trust Wallet is all in the fact that they support altcoins and sometimes people seek a light wallet to store their shitcoins that is not their centralize [custodial] exchange account. There is also the advertisement by the company behind this closed source wallet that would attract unaware newcomers to a very risky and insecure wallet. The popularity is definitely not that high though because sooner or later everyone realizes this is closed source and they should stay away which means they lose many users too. |
|
|
|
|
If I understand your code correctly the end result in your "elements" is a shuffled array containing all numbers between x and y (like 10k and 20k). So why not just create an array of the numbers between x and y sequentially (10000,10001, 10002,...) then shuffle that array?
Right now your code also has two bottlenecks slowing it down. First is repeated usage of RNG to generate all numbers between x and y and the fact that it may encounter collisions so to generate 10 items for example you may repeat the process 12 times.
You don't have to touch the list itself either, you can create an array of "shuffle indexes" to act as a map which you can reuse too. That "map" can be generated once at the start.
|
|
|
|
Here is another fun way of doing it which is a lot faster and cheaper to do: If you run a SPV client like Electrum on your computer you already have all the block headers saved up in a ~60 MB file called "blockchain_headers" which is a stream of bytes. All you have to do is to programatically read this file to get the raw bytes which should be a multiple of 80. Each 80 byte is a block header of a block in chronological order (so you have the block height this way too). Then start from the beginning (byte 0) and extract the time from each 80 byte chunk (ie. one header) knowing that 4th item in it is the timestamp. version[4] + prev_hash[32] + merkle_root[32] + time[4] + target[4] + nonce[4]
Here is a pseudocode stream = File.Read("blockchain_headers")
while(stream.HasBytesLeft)
stream.Skip(68)
timestamp = stream.Read(4).ConvertToTime_LittleEndian()
resultList.Add(timestamp)
stream.Skip(8)
Now all you have to do is search in the list of timestamps to see when the day in the datetime you converted changes to get the last height of the day. The height is the index of the datetime inside the resultList/array. Keep in mind that timestamps are in UTC not your local time. |
|
|
|
Overall, I can tell you that the process was less complicated than it is today. And it was within the reach of the public, unlike today it has become a monopoly on a few parties.
The process of mining is exactly the same as day one. You construct a block, fill it with transactions from your mempool and compute the header's hash and compare it with the target. If it is bigger, you make small changes and recompute the hash until you find the hash that is not bigger than the target. It is not a monopoly either, it just takes a better commitment than just turning your PC on and using your CPU to mine bitcoin. You have to make an investment (commit some money) to buy ASICs and mine bitcoin with them at a much higher hashrate. |
|
|
|
If we set a precedent that the protocol needs to change every time someone makes an emotional response to something they personally disapprove of, where does it end?
We first have to determine whether the widespread negative reaction to Ordinals is emotional and personal opinion or if it is because Ordinals is against the very purpose of bitcoin. It is one thing to complain about for example people still using P2PKH instead of P2WPH and demanding a protocol change for that and complaining about someone using bitcoin aka a payment system for file storage. |
|
|
|
The only reason why bitcoin has grown and is dominating the world (whether you call it "is still king") is only because it has an actual utility that people use and it does what it promises well. Meaning when we say bitcoin is a decentralized censorship resistant currency, it does offer all of that. If bitcoin continues raising they pump significantly and if it falls they dump depending on the dip.
Actually altcoins get dumped both when bitcoin price goes up and down. Look at the biggest shitcoin called ethereum. It used to be worth more than 0.15 BTC a couple of years ago and these days it is barely worth half that because bitcoin dropped down to $3,000 and then went back up to $20,000 while ETH got dumped all this time. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
