I have patched the "bitcoinr" to use system provided crypto, here is the result:
CPU: Premium III Mobile (yes, i know this is very very old)
Compiled with gcc 4.4, -O3 -msse
the cryptopp 5.6.0 in bitcoinr tree: 133khash/s
the cryptopp 5.6.1 (provided in debian): 200khash/s
Out of curiosity, what speed do you get from various algorithms in the CPU miner? That also uses Crypto++ code. |
|
|
|
|
Don't get hung up on a "strong scripting language" for checking application-specific data in the bitcoin chain.
C++ is a strong scripting language.
Get the other technical details right. Picking a programming language is the lowest task on the priority list.
|
|
|
|
|
To a lawyer, I would describe bitcoin as a digital commodity.
To a layman, I would describe bitcoin as digital cash.
|
|
|
|
|
Unless you accidentally created thousands of addresses, thereby bloating your wallet.dat, don't worry about it.
Addresses don't touch the network, and shouldn't slow down your client. Just ignore them.
You'll soon be creating an address per transaction (recommended), so you'll wind up with a bunch over time.
|
|
|
|
|
+1 on mybitcoin SCI.
The documentation is non-existent, but it works reliably, and works in the expected manner (like other SCI's such as Liberty Reserve or Pecunix).
|
|
|
|
For those who want bitcoin/tahoe-lafs integration, pledge your bitcoin where your mouth is.
I am more interested in technical details. How would bitcoin be integrated? Has anyone even sketched out such a scenario with sufficient technical detail? Do the maintainers of Tahoe-LAFS plan bitcoin integration, or is this simply something bitcoiners think would be a good idea? If bitcoin integration was not planned from the beginning, maybe we can come up with a better system with better incentives. |
|
|
|
As an addition, do you know if it's possible to write a test suite for C++ code?
Of course it's possible. There's nothing inherent about C++ that precludes unit tests or functional tests. A bitcoin test suite would be useful, but somewhat non-deterministic due to the way a proof-of-work would have to be used. |
|
|
|
|
Most agree that the current codebase suffers from "all in one file" syndrome.
However, I think it is overkill to break up every class into its own header and implementation files.
|
|
|
|
I will now only publish the ID 1HkJCceXf7of1sTNRVJbXiZHfDTLL71Siy in all mails, forum, webpages I use.
I even changed it on echelon.i2p.
Please notice that if you want to use a different address for each donation, you can. A small CGI script can do the trick. See there : http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1796.0That generates a new address for new CGI script invocation (== each page view). An attacker, or just a popular web page, could fill your wallet with never-used addresses. |
|
|
|
|
You don't want to generate a new address for each web page hit. That's a lot of useless addresses stored in your wallet.
|
|
|
|
BitcoinGateway.com now allows you to purchase MtGoxUSD via credit card. Currently there is a 10% processing fee and amounts are limited 30 mtgoxUSD to 100 mtgoxUSD.
Nice addition! Relieves some worries about exchange rate (though 10% with a maximum $100 is a bit tough). |
|
|
|
|
What is the remote protocol, so that other miners may participate?
|
|
|
|
|
Is anybody still experimenting actively with a Tahoe-LAFS grid?
|
|
|
|
I just joined Bitcoin today and I am dismayed that scamming is even possible at all. Didn't the designer take this into consideration from the start? I know this is a new and experimental version. But the fact that this is even a problem at all as already (in less than an hour) dissuaded me from using it any further. I was ready to plop down $100 and buy some bitcoins today. This should be a simple and secure process. Apparently it isn't. Not only do I need to worry that I will be scammed, but worse I, an honest *buying* customer, am also suspect. That is ridiculous, and shows the fatal, and I do mean FATAL flaw of this system. If decentralized currencies are ever to take off, they'll have to create a secure payment system right from the start.
bitcoin is digital cash. Just like real cash, a con man might scam you, or a burglar might take it. |
|
|
|
Paypal is not the only popular payment system. Certainly much more money is transferred by wires. by cheques, by WU etc - lots of services are bigger than Paypal.
Has this been discussed yet: what are the security implications of checks? In my own experience as a victim of identity theft, circa 1993, Wachovia security folks told me that a "stop payment" on a US check might go away after 180 days, implying that a criminal could cash a stopped-payment check on day 181 and possibly get money. Is this still the case, I wonder? It would be nice to accept US checks for bitcoins. That is well within the reach of your average US citizen. At major institutions there seems to be a 3-7 day holding period for deposited checks, after which it is considered cleared funds. Could a Bitcoin service do the same, I wonder? Presumably you would have to have humans perform check verification, over and above any automated systems in place. |
|
|
|
|
Donated. The article looks a lot better than it used to; much less "bitcoin community self-promotion" which is good.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
