It must be unbearable to use a gnu/Linux environment on a smartphone/tablet. Unless your device has 2 Go Ram at least, the system must lag most of the time (?) I won't even try to bother with it otherwise the tablet may go through the window You don't need 2 Go to run a gnu/Linux distro... For example, Lubuntu will run perfectly smooth with 1Go, arch linux will run fine with 512Mb. If you don't need a window manager, you can even run smoothly with less resources (altough i'm pretty sure you'll need a window manager when you try to run a linux distro on your tablet tough). If you know what you're doing, you can even install slax, i've seen it run on systems with 64Mb of ram  |
|
|
|
Newbie here, Just getting my feet wet here, Hoping to better understand these terms and their consequences.
Hoping to start with lite coin or bch, Any thoughts on these hard fork news? Thanks!
Your title does not reflect the rest of your post... To answer your title: the BCH fork has already happend quite a while ago... The situation you see today is what happened after the fork: nothing really. The forked chain exists, it's being traded, people that had controll over unspent outputs before the fork now have unspent outputs on both chains... That's about it To answer the second part of your question (the question asked in your post): i personally feel there's a big difference between LTC and BCH. Ltc was the first clone, they changed the POW algo (and some other parameters) and re-built their blockchain right from the genesis block. BCH is a forked off chain, they kept the historical blockchain database from BTC and only at a certain blockheight they decided to fork. Personally, i'm a bigger fan of LTC, but that's just my personal opinion. It's up to you to decide which (alt)coin you'd like to invest in, i don't think any of the two coins you asked about will dissapear any time soon (once again: my personal gut feeling) |
|
|
|
If the hash is bigger than the target, return false.. So if the hash is smaller than OR EQUAL TO the target, true is returned... #1 is correct (if i'm not mistaking)
Let's break this down to a simple example: Target = 10
Scenario A: Check value 9
Scenario B: Check value 10
Scenario C: Check value 11
Code
return = true;
#Scenario A:
if (9 > 10 )
return false;
#Scenario A: returns ->true
#Scenario B:
if (10 > 10 )
return false;
#Scenario B: returns -> true
#Scenario C:
if (11 > 10)
return false;
#Scenario B: returns -> false
Conclusion: EQAUL TO (as in scenario B) returns true, meaning it is accepted. In other words: #2 is the correct one. I'm on my employer's laptop, which only has php installed, so i wrote this analogy with the code: <?php
$target = 10;
$hash = $target - 2;
$end = $target + 2;
while ($hash < $end)
{
echo "testing hash $hash vs target $target => ";
if ($hash > $target)
{
echo "POW does not match claimed ammount\n";
}
else
{
echo "OK!\n";
}
$hash++;
}
?>
response: testing hash 8 vs target 10 => OK!
testing hash 9 vs target 10 => OK!
testing hash 10 vs target 10 => OK!
testing hash 11 vs target 10 => POW does not match claimed ammount
Since the OP was: I still think #1 is correct, the function will return true if the hash is lower than or equal to the target  EDIT: after re-reading your reply and noticing your conclusion was the same as mine: the hash has to be lower than or equal to, i just realised one of us is just misinterpreting the OP...
We both conclude that hashes lower than or equal to the target are fine... It's just that my interpretation of sollution one is exactly correct, while my interpretation of sollution 2 says that only hashes lower than the target are true (which is not correct if i'm not mistaking)...
|
|
|
|
Spamming my own website here, since it solves your problem  http://www.mocacinno.com/listmempool.php?verbose=0If you fill the captcha, you should see every transaction in my mempool at this moment... Since they're in my mempool, they should be unconfirmed (unless a new block has just been solved and it hasn't been relayed to my not yet) If you want more info, change the verbose parameter to 1 [d9b4d5b00b51f8413659a20b86eef7d218a90706baabad98fd33eaaf739f8a9c] => Array
(
[fees] => Array
(
[base] => 2.79E-6
[modified] => 2.79E-6
[ancestor] => 2.79E-6
[descendant] => 2.79E-6
)
[size] => 142
[fee] => 2.79E-6
[modifiedfee] => 2.79E-6
[time] => 1535617315
[height] => 539165
[descendantcount] => 1
[descendantsize] => 142
[descendantfees] => 279
[ancestorcount] => 1
[ancestorsize] => 142
[ancestorfees] => 279
[wtxid] => c62e4dc3c285dc792769f0792b2955bff321f9b315caab09a36b289ba6773b4e
[depends] => Array
(
)
[spentby] => Array
(
)
)
|
|
|
|
bool CheckProofOfWork(uint256 hash, unsigned int nBits, const Consensus::Params& params)
{
bool fNegative;
bool fOverflow;
arith_uint256 bnTarget;
bnTarget.SetCompact(nBits, &fNegative, &fOverflow);
// Check range
if (fNegative || bnTarget == 0 || fOverflow || bnTarget > UintToArith256(params.powLimit))
return false;
// Check proof of work matches claimed amount
if (UintToArith256(hash) > bnTarget)
return false;
return true;
}
Code doesn't lie So I agree it should be #2 then. Another case where the (official) documentation doesn't project the reality then! Anyhow, learned something again If the hash is bigger than the target, return false.. So if the hash is smaller than OR EQUAL TO the target, true is returned... #1 is correct (if i'm not mistaking) |
|
|
|
|
why is your mixer using cloudflare's ssl? Do you realise cloudflare will be able to decrypt all data between your customers and yourself? I'd encourage you to buy your own SSL certificates and move away from cloudflare asap if you want to be taken seriously.
Even letsencrypt certificates would be a hell of a lot better than cloudflare's on such a privacy-centric service (don't get me wrong: cloudflare is great if you're not a service that would require absolute privacy... I've been using cloudflare on my sites for a long time, but then again: i don't even allow useraccounts to be created on my sites...)
|
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't say you need collateral, I'd rather say you need an escrow...
Find a TRUSTED forum escrow and escrow an amount larger than the sum of the value of all pending mixing orders you expect to have hanging at any given time.
Then make an ironclad agreement and always give a signed message as proof you'll start a mixing session...
This way, if you would run with your users funds, the escrow will just reimburse your victims with the escrowed funds and put a red tag on your name so you can't make new victims.
I know it sounds harsh, but you're a new, unknown member that hasn't invested anything in our community, and from the way I see it, this could just as well be an inventive scamming method instead of an honest business proposal.
In case you are for real: good luck with your business!
|
|
|
|
On the one hand, this is the right decision, because many of these applications are scammers. But on the other hand, it can badly affect the bitcoin exchange rate.
Still not see what is profitable to mining by mobile phone, because risk our phone can broken is really big. Even mining with our PC have big risk too, that is why people not mining BTC nowadays and start to mining with GPU. Sorry to tell you, but GPU mining btc hasn't been profitable in years... You need a latest gen asic and a good electricity rate. The misconception about GPU btc mining is so widespread I even included CPU's and gpu's in my profit calculator: https://www.mocacinno.com/mining/Even if you pay no power and you have some of the best gpu's money can buy, you'll only make cents a year, defenately not enough to ever repay you investment in GPU hardware |
|
|
|
On the one hand, this is the right decision, because many of these applications are scammers. But on the other hand, it can badly affect the bitcoin exchange rate.
If the exchange rate drops because google removes scam apps, it would have inevitably have dropped after the users of those apps started posting about the fact they were scammed anyways... Sorry to hear some legit apps were caught in the crossfire tough. |
|
|
|
If you want to use the wallet with the big security. Come on all the wallets are same to use it you missed to keep the fund safe with all the private key secured wallets. I do not know wallets completely secured even you do the mistake.
Common mistakes like private key sharing and phishing site access is the biggest problems to get scammed. Here are suggestion. Electrum, Multibit. Blockchain and Exodus.
It's quite hard to understand your post to be honest, but about your suggestions: Electrum: sure... It's a desktop wallet and should be fine to store a limited amount of funds on a clean PC with a recent version of electrum, up to date os, firewall,.. Multibit: is no longer supported!!! Blockchain: is an online wallet, thus shouldn't be suggested as a safe wallet Exodus: never used this one myself, I have no idear whether it's safe or not |
|
|
|
|
I wish you success with your business, however, allow me to express my concern... You're a new, unknown member that is offering a service that will put you in a situation that will allow you to rob the users of your service.
Could you elaborate as to how you're going to give your users some assurance you're not going to run with their funds after you've recovered their wallets?
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin.com wallet. I use this because its fee is very small.....
I don't think ANY decent wallet still charges a fee... Multibit used to charge a small fee per transaction, but that wallet has been obsolete for a while now. You're talking about cheaping out on the MINERS fee, the fee you add to guve an incentive to a miner to add your transaction to the block he/she is trying to solve. You might get away with cheaping out on your fees at this moment, but sooner or later you'll be faced with "stuck" transactions, and you'll be opening threads on this forum or bribing miners in order to fix the mess you caused by wanting to save a couple of cents. Just start paying the RIGHT fee instead of going for a wallet that underestimates or overestimates fees. Edit: just saw adolfinwolf already gave a similar answer while I was typing, still decides to post my reply since it gives a slightly different perspective |
|
|
|
|
@op: I see a lot of people suggesting to contact trezor support, even going as far as claiming they'll reimburse you... I just wanted to warn you not to get your hopes up.
AFAIK, I haven't seen a flaw that would cause a remote hacker to gain access to your seed or xprv, odds of a technical flaw within the trezor hardware, firmware or wallet are extremely slim... If it wasn't their fault your friend got robbed, I seriously doubt they'll reimburse +30 btc.
Sending logs to trezor might save future victims of being robbed (emphasis on *might*), however they will probably not be able to get you your btc back, so unless the funded address were in some way generated by the same seed, or if you can prove (without a doubt) it was trezors fault, or find the culprit yourself, I'm afraid the odds of getting your btc back are not good,no matter what anyone in this thread is claiming. I don't like to be the barer of bad news, but that's just the way it is.
PS: I realise op double posted, but I wanted to make sure to set the record straight in this, currently derailing, thread
|
|
|
|
|
I'm on my phone right now so I didn't look up those transactions, however judging by your op, it does look like somebody got their hands on either his seed phrase or his xprv.
Questions that pop in my mind:
- is he sure he isn't doing this himself? I've seen new users getting confused in the past?
- how secure is he storing that seed? Can the cleaning lady/plumber/family member reach it?
- did he enter the seed phrase in a desktop wallet to try restoring the wallet?
You *should* be able to run a trezor on an infected PC, and the odds of brute forcing a seed are extremely small, so the biggest odds are either somebody got their hands on the seed phrase or he's accidentally creating those tx's.
If he can find the physical person that stole his seed he can go to the police. If he's causing this himself he just needs to figure out whose address he's funding and try to ask the receiver to refund... Otherwise his funds are lost
|
|
|
|
Are these right people for job? And how much would it cost? Vod is already scraping most profiles for his public information program, so he's defenately the right guy to speak to https://bpip.org/He probably has all the info you need in a relational database already |
|
|
|
Hello as the Subject implicates, I would like to know which is the best online BTC in order to store my BTCs. I know some software wallets like Electrum but I would like to have an online in order to access it from anywhere.
My main question would be: do you really NEED to be able to spend your btc from ANYWHERE... Online wallet are the worst wallets around security-wise... I wouldn't recommand a single one, but if you really insist, I'd probably say that blockchain.info is the "best" insecure online wallet. Want my advice? Store the bulk of your btc using a secure wallet, and use a cellphone wallet to store some easy-accessible spending money |
|
|
|
--snip
The lightning network still is in beta.
And most of the wallets available currently do only work with the testnet (except if you make changes to the configuration, then it is possible to use them on the main net).
So if you didn't explicitly configure them to work on the mainnet, they were configured for the testnet.
--snip--
Not necessarily true.. Eclair has a pretty stable mainnet version for android which I've been using for several weeks without a hitch. Lnd and c-lightning can also be run on the mainnet without having to reconfigure them (although you need a synced node for both) |
|
|
|
|
If you see somebody selling merit: make a post in the reputation section and/or report the seller. Both seller and buyer will probably receive -ve from DT and get their accounts ruined (including whatever they invested in buying merit).
Selling merit is prohibited, however this doesn't mean it isn't going to happen, there are a limited number of mods and and admins... They can't monitor each and every thread, let alone monitor off-forum sales. That's why it's important we report these cheaters
|
|
|
|
There are sites like airdropalert.com which post new airdrops as soon as they are available.
But be careful, its time consumimg and projects often just dont pay. I quit taking part in airdrops a few month ago, its just not worth the effort.
That's exactly how I feel about airdrops to... I tried claiming a couple of them a while ago to see what all the fuss was about, but most of those tokens were completely worthless. In the end, I calculated I made less than $2/hour claiming those airdrops... Off course it's possible I didn't know how to distinguish promising air drops, so I might have spend a lot of time claiming airdrops that would have looked like rubbish for an experienced aidrop-claimer, but still, I think you can better get an IRL job and buy crypto with your income instead of claiming airdrops... Just my opinion tough |
|
|
|
The exchange would know because their server is monitoring the block chain. Whether the block was generated after they restarted or hours before, they are monitoring each block as it arrives at their server and they know how far they have tracked.
So, server restarts. It sees that it has tracked all the transactions in the block chain up to block X. Block X+1 arrives from peers, process that block just as if we'd been connected all the time - after all, it could have JUST been mined or mined hours ago, it doesn't matter. Block X+2 arrives do the same. Block X+3 arrives, etc.
Whether they get blocks X+1, X+2, X+3 in 10 seconds or 60 minutes doesn't matter, they are doing the same thing: processing blocks as they arrive.
How monitoring the block chain? Are there way that is not performed via walletnotify or blocknotify option at coind's .conf file? And what if that monitoring server is down? Like cr1776 said: it doesn't matter if your node is down. As soon as it's online again, it'll receive the blocks that were mined during the downtime and it'll treat them as if they were mined seconds ago... This includes using the walletnotify or blocknotify option. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
