How is it that NFTs are being traded for some users who have not logged in for a long time? The users themselves cannot list them. Thus, their NFTs are being passed around like cheap whores without their consent. theymos, prepare to be sued for intellectual property violation!
Oh, I see: - You can get a random fNFT for 50 BTC. A great deal, no? How could you not make money long-term?
So, a forum member can unwillingly and unwittingly have his name attached to an NFT being traded by others. How very evil. Of course, to pay off the resulting judgment of the Supreme Court of Cypherpunks, theymos can simply make more fake bitcoins. But is there a supply cap? What is MAX_MONEY? This needs to be documented.
thermos money printer go brrr
To whom it may concern:Please be advised that the nullius-I fNFT is the only fNFT authorized by nullius. Possession or transfer of any other fNFT bearing the name “nullius” shall be punished with execution by hardfork. Be guided accordingly, etc., etc. |
|
|
|
Lauda has no NFTs. 😿 Of course, I would check. My intent had been to dump mprep-III at its current low, low price so that I could buy a Kitty.
Edit: Of course, that makes no sense. Same problem as with satoshi. But none of this makes sense.  How is it that NFTs are being traded for some users who have not logged in for a long time? The users themselves cannot list them. Thus, their NFTs are being passed around like cheap whores without their consent. theymos, prepare to be sued for intellectual property violation!
|
|
|
|
pls buy my NFT , Sir Low Low price. u only need to spend ALL of the bitcoins
Edit: luser support question @thermos:We are using a state-of-the-art blockless-blockchain-database to avoid any annoying fees or wait times. But is there a supply cap? What is MAX_MONEY? This needs to be documented. thermos money printer go brrr |
|
|
|
I am watching u, Joe_Bauers. u hear that, Joe_Bauers? Tarz 🕵 is watching u! 👀 Joe_Bauers_👻, ur in trubble! RIP 🪦
Bauers is onto something here. What do u think he meant by insinuating "stop pretending u care and turn over the coin to someone else who does", and he made a laborious effort to repeat this, he literally said, hey, give up the project. I dunno. Maybe he meant that it is a catastrophically bad shitcoin, so bad that its value is NaN. If you could sell it for zero, then that would be an improvement! But there must be two sides to every trade; and someone who wants to buy for zero needs to be able to run a node, or use an exchange that runs a node... whoopsie. Eh, I can’t put words in his mouth. That is what I mean: Yacoin is so bad that it has the value of being literally ridiculous: Oh so fun to ridicule. Poor Bauers_👻 is probably more frustrated. My sympathies. 😏 By the way, I have a technical question about Yacoin: What is the address format?I have a reason for asking: I want to generate an address for Yacoin, for I intend to pump it. 🚀 Why? For the lulz—because April Fools’ Day starts in two hours (UTC/anonymous timezone), and Yacoin is literally ridiculous. And above, I sort of lied: To receive Yacoin, of course, I don’t need to connect to the Yacoin network in any way! To dump it, that would be necessary... So, what is the technical specification for a Yacoin address? I am a crypto expert; I know what I am doing. If a Yacoin address is like a Bitcoin P2PKH address, then I simply need to know the version byte, and whether I can use compressed public keys. (Did Bitcoin v0.8.6 do compressed public keys yet?  ) Also, I ask the version byte for a WIF, and whether there is a customary BIP 32 derivation path for Yacoin. Let’s get old Nully here set up with a Yacoin address, ’coz I wanna go TO THE MOON. thx 😼 |
|
|
|
...unless I can fix the terrible design flaw that has plagued Yacoin since day one. That is, using the PoW hash for EVERYTHING. This, as you know makes the client use more and more resources to run and gets worse for every Nf change. It shouldn't take a coin 15 days to sync and a non mining client shouldn't run at a high CPU and Memory rate. That's the main reason Yacoin is not on any exchanges. Litecoin uses GetPoWHash TWICE, Yacoin, almost 100. OH MY GAWD. :facepalm:So, let me verify that I understand correctly—because I just can’t believe it: Yacoin uses scrypt as a generalized hash!?That is easily one of the ten worst altcoin ideas that I have ever seen (and the other nine are from BSV). I think that I will now die of laughter. Thanks. But alas, your coin is not yet optimally pessimal. I can help you pessimize it further. I doubt that Yacoin really uses scrypt for everything. What about digital signatures? ECDSA needs a hash; deterministic ECDSA needs several hashes. If you instantiate those hashes with scrypt, preferably at a high Nfactor, then you will make validation extremely slower. * Nullius the Cynic is a grandmaster of pessimization. But why stop there? Why not use for all hashing purposes a Verifiable Delay Function based on iterated scrypt?  While you are at it, find anywhere in the code that uses a sorting function, and change it to use permutation sort. Once upon a time, as a fun learning exercise, I wrote an optimally pessimal permutation sort implementation; if I can find that old code, perhaps I could contribute it. That makes almost as much sense as using a password hashing function as a general-purpose cryptographic hash! Someone needs to tell Colin Percival, the designer of scrypt, that an altcoin is using it as a hash function for everything. He was unhappy when he heard about Litecoin’s misuse of his creation; it is not designed as a POW hash, and using it for that purpose is stupid enough.
Reminder: YACoin 1.0 is a completely open, decentralized cryptocurrency, Yes, we don't need the NFactor hash for everything. It is Yet Another flaw to address, although it is overblown. A solution to that is already in the works. It's not like other cryptocurrencies haven't address this. In the meantime, for downloading and syncing the chain, you can use this link.https://mega.nz/file/SZcVWSRK#HEP0u6GkrNBuvloZv-vijcJtCXPNgiHv1WHAzeSoxDY“Download the blockchain from this anonymous Mega link, and don’t validate it at all because it is too computationally expensive to validate” is not what I would call “decentralized”. That Mega link can contain any version of the ledger that you may desire. It can even contain an invalid ledger. You are now a trusted central authority. Hello, do you realize that Bitcoin Core even removed checkpoints? The whole concept was replaced long ago with -assumevalid. I myself recommend setting up your first node with assumevalid=0, viz., validate all scripts in all transactions; and then, you can set up other nodes using an assumevalid hash from something near the chaintip of your own node. assumevalid only skips script verification; everything still needs to be hashed.
Stop allowing this nonsense. if (
(0 < nPosBlockCount)
&&
(
(
fTestNet
&&
pprev
)
||
!fUseOld044Rules //(nTime >= YACOIN_NEW_LOGIC_SWITCH_TIME)
)
) What the fuck is that, COBOL? It reminds me of one fine day in early 2014, when I decided to try to audit OpenSSL. The code looked just like that, plus mazes of nested #ifdefs. To avoid blindness and insanity, I gave up after about ten minutes. By coincidence, this was about two months before Heartbleed was discovered; if I had persisted, perhaps I could have been the one to discover it!
Upgrade all code. No one is going to take seriously a coin that is running Bitcoin 0.8.6 code. You mention fixing a few errors, GREAT, what about the few hundred commits that have occurred in Bitcoin since? A “few hundred commits”? Nice guess; you are off by only two orders of magnitude. nullius@onion:~/src/bitcoin$ git rev-list v0.8.6...v0.21.0 | wc -l
22543
Oh, and... nullius@onion:~/src/bitcoin$ git rev-list v0.21.0...HEAD | wc -l
1931
Of course, this does not count commits from any of the many PRs that are reviewed, rejected, and closed without merging. Bitcoin development is highly active. Core is slow to release new features, because breaking the network could wreck a trillion dollars in value; they do not “move fast and break things”. Whereas Bitcoin has some of the most active development of any cryptocurrency!
Joe_Bauers, my condolences. If you want to try to salvage something from this mess, I suggest calling it “Yacoin Classic” instead of “Yacoin Cash”. Well, that is if you avoid a network hardfork. Bcash was a network hardfork; the various coins called “Classic”, such as Ethereum Classic, were typically created to avoid contentious hardforks. If you want to remove the “use scrypt for everything” pessimization, I infer that you probably need your own hardfork; in that case, perhaps try “Yacoin Optimized”. (I first thought to suggest “Yacoin Unbroken” or “Yacoin Less-Stupid”, but that would just be cruel.) Merging fixes and upgrades from Bitcoin can have huge benefits. I have some practical experience with this; e.g., after Zcash pulled in Core’s switch from OpenSSL to libsecp256k1 for validating signatures, I could feel how much faster sync was. Quantitatively, jlopp measured “ significant performance improvements to the tune of more than a 50% speedup” between his tests of Zcash 2.0.1 and Zcash 2.1.1, probably due to merges of such upstream improvements—yes, sync time was cut in half. Of course, faster point arithmetic for secp256k1 is relatively meaningless if you have a maximally pessimized coin that is using scrypt for all of its hashing needs. Thanks for the laughs. I mean that sincerely and unironically. This thread made my day. |
|
|
|
|
Steve Jobs was a control freak. It was he who gave the world totally locked-down devices on which you are not allowed to install your own software (not approved by the Apple App Store)—with non-user-replaceable batteries—all secured by special screws that need a patented screwdriver. If Steve Jobs had invented a cryptocurrency, it would have been centralised, permissioned, only available from Apple, and impossible to use without Apple’s approval. Also, Apple would take a 35% cut of every transaction.
Satoshi Nakamoto gave the world Bitcoin.
/thread
|
|
|
|
Blockstream Issues Security Token Tied to Bitcoin Hashrate, Payable in BTC https://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-security-token-bitcoin-hashrate-payable-bitcoinWhat do you think of these hashrate tokens? The first batch will be sold in minimum lots of ~275k$, so it's only for whales, but they will be traded OTC in 0.1x lots. What looks nice to clueless me is they sell at a discount to actual mining hardware. And, more importantly, the buyer is not subject to issues with delivery, operation, maintenance etc. of actual ASICs. Are they a thing? Can they become a thing in due time? I think that Jihan should go fork his mother. Anyway, he just shit a brick. For almost any operation at scale, there are large advantages to centralisation. That fact is uncomfortable to Bitcoiners, but it is a fact. Big operations are more efficient than small ones—not only bigger, but more efficient. Bitmain is a threat to Bitcoin, and they are still far too powerful. Methinks that they are about to get cut down to size. Blockstream has been running “enterprise colocated” mining for years. Their co-founder and CEO is the inventor of Hashcash, so I would wager that they have this mining thing pretty well figured out... For hardware, they are partnered with a Shenzhen-based company who is not Bitmain (I guess still a Chinese company because Americans destroyed their own industrial base decades ago; but Blockstream’s mining facilities are in the U.S. and Canada). They have been on a hardware buying spree, they say that they have over 300 megawatts of capacity to run all this hardware—and they say that they are just beginning to ramp it up. Blockstream Purchase $25M of Bitcoin Mining Hardware from MicroBT
January 27, 2021
[...]
We’re excited to continue our relationship with MicroBT and this latest batch will provide our hosting clients with an extremely reliable foundation to contribute to the security of the Bitcoin network. Part of the order should also go toward a new, top-secret mining service we’ll be launching soon.
...we’ll continue to grow our operations aggressively throughout the next year. “Aggressively”. I like it. What does this scale of operation need? Capital, but of course. The more capital that goes into this, the faster and harder they can fuck Jihan, fuck his mother, fuck Bitmain, and change the whole shape of the Bitcoin mining market. So—securitised hashrate, traded on Liquid. With investors getting thirsty for anything whatsoever Bitcoinish, this will bring an ocean of capital. Anyway, that is my analysis of this news. I have no particular expertise in the mining field, nor do I have any information except what is stated in these various news articles and blog posts.
I took the time to write this post in memory of 12 November 2017, when I was glued to the screen watching the tumult in /r/Bitcoin as the Bcashers collectively did their damn best to kill Bitcoin. IIRC, at some point, Slushpool alone was 70% of our remaining hashrate. The Bcashers had to give up because at some point, they needed to mine Bitcoin so that they could pay their electric bills. By the way, I want to say thank you to the Bitcoin miners who kept their ASICs grinding Bitcoin hashes when a large % of hashrate claimed that you were mining a dead chain. If you had believed them about “the flippening”, then it would have been a self-fulfilling prophecy. Big operations take time to build. It seems that Blockstream has been working on this for the past few years—and now, they will push the difficulty to the heavens with new hashrate funded by big-money investors... Oh, I sincerely hope that soon, Jihan’s mother will need to turn tricks for DOGE to feed her idiot bastard son! |
|
|
|
Knuth
Kudos on that post. I intend to catch up Soon™. Meanwhile... Edit: Oh, and trust me on this: I'm extremely picky about typography, maybe as picky as you, if not more! This is not meant as an offensive comment. I think there are very few of us left. I'm always happy when I find another one...
At least three in the WO. Be happy! Edit 2: I fully support your suggestion about using L AT EX as a markup language for posts here, in the way it is used in MathOverflow (Stack Exchange), for example. It's a pleasure to post there because of this, among other things. Enjoy:  I intended to ask for this long ago. Yesterday, in the Wall Observer, a mathematically inclined connoisseur of fine typography incited me to speak up for L AT EX-lovers and other T EXnicians. So yes, there is demand for this!
On a related note: Satoshi uses British English and inserts two spaces between sentences. I believe we may safely presume that Satoshi would appreciate proper spacing. [...rant about the stupidity of HTML standards decisions made in 1993...] |
|
|
|
I intended to ask for this long ago. Yesterday, in the Wall Observer, a mathematically inclined connoisseur of fine typography incited me to speak up for L AT EX-lovers and other T EXnicians. So yes, there is demand for this!
On a related note: Satoshi uses British English and inserts two spaces between sentences. I believe we may safely presume that Satoshi would appreciate proper spacing. Although the usage of two spaces between sentences is a dirty hack for devices which lack variable-width spacing, it is proper to separate sentences with space greater than an interword space; and the founder of this forum obviously knew that. Whatever the new forum software does, it must not collapse intersentence space to the size of interword space—lest it mangle Satoshi’s own posts! Were it not for an idiotic decision made by HTML’s designers in 1993, browsers’ behaviour would follow that of T EX: Use intersentence space between sentences, and interword space between words. Alas! T EX spacing was discussed on www-talk; but people were too lazy, and they did not care to DTRT. If the new forum software were to support L AT EX as a markup language, then it may be easier to find some way to support proper spacing. Some way—somehow. HTML (and nowadays, CSS) are crudely limited. A web browser in 2021 cannot do what T EX did in 1978 to uphold centuries-old traditions of quality typesetting. |
|
|
|
>Vue >Angular >Javascript Except for the new account registration and initial login, the forum currently works acceptably in a browser that has Javascript disabled. I have not enabled Javascript here since I set my current login cookies in 2017; and since theymos created the CAPTCHA bypass, I have expected that I should never need Javascript here again. If Javascript were to become a requirement, then the forum would risk losing some people. I am not the only one to have expressed similar concerns in the past. Most “ communities” would probably disregard the loss as negligible. Given that no-JS users are disproportionately represented amongst those who care about security, cryptography, and anonymity, the Bitcoin Forum should be different. We went to sleep, and dreamt of a universal platform. We awoke in a nightmare where the universal platform is the web browser, the universal language is Javascript, the universal ISA is Webasm—and the morals of youths have been corrupted so that they promiscuously run network-loaded executable code from random strangers as a lifestyle. I want to kill myself, or at least take up a hobby of severe alcoholism. SMF is WTF, but that is no reason to make things worse.
Discourse forums recently became unreadable without Javascript. Pages essentially show up as blank. I have accordingly decided that Discourse is only for morons; for example, I noticed that some of the major Ethereum development forums run on Discourse. (eth.wiki also shows blank pages without JS.) Just saying. |
|
|
|
Rather than the banks and exchanges doing KYC individually, there should be a centralized system 🤯 💥 💣Rather than the banks and exchanges doing KYC individually, there should be a centralized system where KYC needs to be done just once. When the individual banks ask for additional KYC verification then they can be directed towards the centralized sites. This will reduce the effort not just for the end-user, but also for the banks and exchanges. On top of that, it will eliminate the risk of fraudsters getting access to the KYC data.
Exactly and this is why people keep complaining about multiple KYCs with the same, say Government organizations. Most at times most of the Governments are not focused to know this, and it would easier for everyone to submit just one information which is already linked with all your data for easy verification but the same government organization keep asking for all your Bio metrics which is already giving in one of there locations.
I don’t want to waste any more of my precious lifetime so patiently explaining this issue to imbeciles and natural born slaves. But I must nonetheless communicate unrelenting hostility, lest bad ideas win by default. Silence is surrender. And “people” who want centralized KYC will better understand emojis, anyway. |
|
|
|
Mine’s Bitstamp to check the price, what’s yours?
I refresh the price widget. Why website? What widget? I don’t like having potentially malicious apps on my phone. What phone? I don’t like having potentially malicious devices enslaving me with perpetual 24/7 locational surveillance, on-demand audio and video bugging, and walled-garden app stores. The yoke rests so lightly on you. |
|
|
|
My girlfriend’s paysite, which accepts Bitcoin. I’m the BOFH sysadmin. (Why would I check the price? After awhile, it gets boring to watch my ticker repeat 1 BTC = 1 BTC. I mean, I love Bitcoin, but the thing just stays the same...) Sometimes these things need to be pointed out to the PFY's. PFY: The secure way to back up your Bitcoin seed is to save it on a floppy disk, then rub magnets all over the disk so that quantum magneto-polarization will enhance data integrity. BOFH (after creatively electrocuting the PFY): The secure way to back up your Bitcoin seed is to e-mail it to yourself using the department’s secure e-mail server. Trust me, I have this thing locked down and absolutely hacker-proofed with 31337-bit military-grade encryption. |
|
|
|
I find it funny when I read Bounty/Signature campaigns proudly highlight
Posts on the Wall Observer won’t be counted. I mean why? Why??
Because we're harder to shill here. No. Don’t fool yourself with such conceit. The stupendously obvious reasons: - The Wall Observer does not display signatures. Why do you suppose that signature ad campaigns would pay people to make posts that do not display, um, signatures?
- There is no rule against consecutive multi-posting here; and many other rules are relaxed. If CMs counted WO posts, then regardless of whether signatures are displayed here, sigspammers would bury infofront in so much spam that he would be crushed to death. The CMs want to avoid being charged with murder.
|
|
|
|
Apologies for being a little too picky here, but I absolutely hate it when I see a non-symmetrical version of the infinity symbol being used, such as the one shown above, which just looks like ' 8' rotated by 90°. Such a symbol will never be found in any of my writings. It is of no coincidence that (L A)T EX uses the proper, symmetrical symbol in its standard math typeface, or else it would not have passed Donald Knuth's strict criteria—and rightly so! You are wrong. You are wrong aesthetically: Serif fonts with calligraphic variations to their stroke widths are superior (and I am infinitely more “picky” about typography than you or anyone else ever could be). And you are wrong about the design of Knuth’s Computer Modern typeface. You are probably accustomed to some publisher’s house L AT EX package which tinkers with the fonts. My copies of the Te Xbook and the Metafontbook were lost years ago in a “tragic boating accident”; thus, I will use the lazy way. And I will be ultra-lazy, for I am in a lazy mood; make no replies about how I could have done this so much better by invoking Metafont with Knuth’s original CM font sources with (blah blah blah)! It is time for empirical evidence!\documentclass{article}
\begin{document}
$\infty$
\end{document}
$ pdflatex infty.tex
[...snip stuff that leaks info about my system...]
Output written on infty.pdf (1 page, 15410 bytes).
Transcript written on infty.log.
$ pdftocairo -png -transp -r 1200 -x 2459 -y 2141 -W 200 -H 140 infty.pdf
Result: That is $\infty$ according to Knuth.Double-checking that the PDF is using Computer Modern: $ pdffonts infty.pdf
name type encoding emb sub uni object ID
------------------------------------ ----------------- ---------------- --- --- --- ---------
LLVRDD+CMSY10 Type 1 Builtin yes yes no 4 0
SDXKYB+CMR10 Type 1 Builtin yes yes no 5 0
The one in your avatar looks fine though,
The infinity symbol does have some subtle variation in the stroke width. Take a closer look. In my post that you quoted, I do not know what your browser is showing; it will show a default serif font. Probably some open-source clone of Times Roman? P.S., I almost suggested that the new forum software should use \LaTeX as a markup language for posts—or at least to allow that as an option, alongside bbcode and/or markdown and/or whatever other stupidity. Then, I decided not to bother. Perhaps I can obtain your support for loudly demanding politely requesting this? :-)P.P.S., why do I not see you in Development & Technology? (Or do you use an alt there, because... never mind.)
Edit: You will argue with me about \TeX? :-/First thing I do is launch Firefox, which automatically opens 6 sites:
- Gmail
- Google Calendar
- Outlook Mail
[...]
Knuth does not use e-mail. And you use centralized shitmail. Also, it is unwise to fuck with me. |
|
|
|
My girlfriend’s paysite, which accepts Bitcoin. I’m the BOFH sysadmin. (Why would I check the price? After awhile, it gets boring to watch my ticker repeat 1 BTC = 1 BTC. I mean, I love Bitcoin, but the thing just stays the same...)
|
|
|
|
But you can divide, and separate the seeds words of your travelling wallet pasted to 3 or more text files,
That is not secure: An attacker who obtains one or two pieces can then attempt to bruteforce the rest. If you have a 12-word BIP 39 seed divided that way into 3 pieces, and the first two pieces * are discovered or seized, then the remainder has only 40 bits of security (!). * The order matters, because the last piece is partly just checksum material.Shamir’s Secret Sharing is information-theoretically secure. If you set it up with 3 shares where all 3 are required (3/3), then an attacker who obtains 2 pieces has zero information about the secret, and cannot bruteforce the rest. More generally, in an M/N secret sharing setup, M-1 pieces give nothing; M pieces are required to reconstruct the secret, while you can set it up with N>M for redundancy. If you lose one piece, you don’t want to lose access to the secret! |
|
|
|
Happy birthday nullius! :p
Thanks, but—oh, noes! My personally identifying information has been leaked. How did you dox me? 😿 Someone must have submitted my ID on my behalf in my absence, when theymos started enforcing KYC on the forum. Golly darn it, Kitty! Have you no respect for privacy!? 😾 What? Nullius was born??
Ah, phew. What a relief. I forgot: I AM ETERNAL. With neither beginning nor end, I have no birthday for the NSA to discover. I am division by zero. Muahahaha!∞ |
|
|
|
It is possible but the real question you need to ask yourself is "wouldn't a blog or a website achieve the same thing?" You could write "messages" in that blog/website and it will remain on the internet for a very long time so that people in the future can read what you wrote.
The difference however is that a blog/website is designed to "store messages" while bitcoin blockchain is not.
I get the impression that the OP wants to store a message that he can prove is unchanged. Depending on why OP need to prove it's unchanged, website archive service is good enough. An example, Archive.org's Wayback Machine is legit legal evidence, US appeals court judges rule. For most other cases, archive the website on multiple archive services is good enough. It's not likely multiple operator going to edit same archived website. I don’t care what some American court (or really, any court) says. It is not cryptographically secure. This provides proof of existence in time, at least, albeit not strong proof of authenticity: How OpenTimestamps 'Carbon Dated' (almost) The Entire Internet With One Bitcoin Transaction
May 25, 2017
[...]
[...description of fake evidence in the Craig Wright scam and how similar scams could work, for the sake of example...]
By consistently timestamping all Internet Archive content, we make attacks like the above easy to detect. The OpenTimestamps proofs we’ve generated are traceable back to the Bitcoin blockchain, a widely witnessed data structure with timestamps that can’t be backdated. Even with a sysadmin’s help, the best the attacker could do is create a modified file that’s very suspiciously missing a timestamp that all other files have.
However, it’s important to note timestamps are not a panacea: they’re just evidence as to when a file existed; by themselves they can’t prove a file is legit. For example, if I had known in 2008 that Satoshi was going to release Bitcoin, I could have generated fake keys and fake Bitcoin papers with 100% real timestamps. While such a scam is much less likely, it’s certainly not impossible1. Unfortunately, the link to the database page seems to be 404: https://opentimestamps.org/internet-archive/I don’t know if there has been any project to continue timestamping Internet Archive records. I guess probably not. There should be.
Other good replies earlier... fell behind here. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
