1) Make the nonce long enough that the extraNonce field is no longer needed in the coinbase transaction.
2) Now it's possible for miners to broadcast their Merkle tree as soon as they start hashing (10 minutes on average before they finish)
3) When they find a valid hash, now they only need to broadcast the block header because the rest of the network has (usually) already received and validated the Merkle tree.
4) Block header propagation is very fast and not dependent of the size of the blocks.
Using this model, miners can create large Merkle trees without worrying as much about orphans, because they get to broadcast them in parallel with searching for a valid hash. Probably miners would want to limit their Merkle tree to the amount of data they can transmit in 2 minutes to make it likely that the rest of the network has received and validated it before they finish hashing. This is a much more efficient use of bandwidth and allows final header propagation to be extremely rapid and independent of the number of transactions in a block. Also, it may have positive implications for the Selfish Miner attack. |
|
|
|
You're going to see more and more of these nonsense articles as Visa and Mastercard and the Banks start to worry for their profits.
Scaring people away from Bitcoin will be the most effective and common way to stifle its growth.
One mention of "hackers" and most people would never put their money into such a risky environment.
It's a fine strategy in the short term, except that it loses effectiveness over time. People who've been aware of Bitcoin for a while have heard many news stories about its imminent death, yet it still exists and gets stronger over time. Eventually "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" Syndrome kicks in. |
|
|
|
Anyways you may sometimes be the victim of the so-called "network congestion" and have to wait a few days.
1. Newly-mined coins are not spendable for 100 blocks. 2. Some miners direct their payouts to their Mt Gox account. 3. Mt Gox withdrawal code is not smart enough to avoid attempting to spend unspendable coinbase outputs. 4. When something goes wrong, they don't have any way to manually fix it besides waiting for the coinbase outputs to mature and rebroadcasting the transaction. |
|
|
|
The high-frequency-trading industry begs to differ.
The high frequency trading industry operates within a few mile radius, because what they do is sensitive to speed-of-light delays. That doesn't work as effectively when mining is spread out all over the globe. |
|
|
|
|
Another thing I've heard is that some miners direct their payouts to their Mt Gox accounts, which results in Mt Gox's hotwallet filling up with unspendable-for-100-block outputs and at least a few months ago their code wasn't smart enough to avoid attempting to use those unspendable outputs in withdrawals. Maybe they've fixed it by now.
Maybe.
|
|
|
|
The interesting points of this solution are to minimize the advantage of the low latency connection of the selfish miner. When the part of a block that must be rapidly broadcast is reduced to less than 100 bytes (regardless of the actual size of the block), propagation times are going to be so low that selfish miner will have a more difficult time responding in time to pull off the attack. |
|
|
|
I feel that this post might be the solution to this 33% attack. I originally thought of it as a way of more efficiently scaling to very large block sizes, but it might have the added effect of making this attack more difficult too. |
|
|
|
|
"Labor force" by standard definitions includes government employees and defence contractors. The actual size of the private sector is frighteningly small.
|
|
|
|
Coinbase reached its daily limits for buy orders (whatever that means) early in the day today. Yes, but they didn't stop processing orders for very long. They just raised their prices until they were charging above Mt Gox spot and kept selling. |
|
|
|
Nodes prefer the first heard among those with otherwise equal work. How often does it happen that two miners simultaneously find a block with exactly equal work values? |
|
|
|
This country *is*, at its core, quite productive, and that kernel can probably be milked for a while longer through increasingly creative financial and political means (at great long-term cost to the majority, of course). Have you checked the labor participation rate recently?  Obviously there's no way to know exactly when it all falls apart, but I expect some excitement within the next 5 years, 10 at the longest. |
|
|
|
How can a multimillion USD company fail at so many simple things? Back in 2011 they failed by having too much stored in their hot wallet, which allowed a hacker to steal it. So they started keeping more of their user's coins in cold storage, which means that somebody has to manually walk a transaction across the air gap when the hot wallet runs out. That somebody is probably Mark, and if he's sleeping or eating lunch, or taking the day off, you're probably SOL for a while. |
|
|
|
$10k seems to be in agreement with the numbers I pull out of my ass, my logic goes like this: If Bitcoin is to be really successful, then we will have enough people willing to run a global payment infrastructure, at the current price, the total revenue these people are expected to obtain from mining bitcoins is about 25*144*220=$800k/day, or about $300M/year, now to estimate how much should it cost to run a real global payment system, let's look at Paypal, whose yearly revenue stands at about 5.6 billion dollars per year, which translates to about $4000-5000 per bitcoin, consider the next halving is about 2-3 years away and the bitcoin miners are expected to do a lot more, I would say $10k/bitcoin is a fair price.
I scrape the trade data off of bitcoincharts.com every day and paste it into a spreadsheet. My spreadsheet tells me that the weighted weekly price increases, on average, by 6.5%. Simple extrapolation says that we'll hit $1000 by the end of April and $10000 sometime in January 2015. Past results are no guarantee of future returns, etc. but I haven't seen any case yet where we fell behind the 6.5% weekly line by more than a year, so that's why I expect $10k before 2016. I don't see any reason why the infrastructure needed to support that scale of a Bitcoin economy won't be ready before 2016, since everybody is busy frantically building out new services. |
|
|
|
Governments and banking sectors can collude to keep this thing afloat for far longer than level-1 logic would indicate. Yes, they can. However when it does sink it does so with surprising rapidity and with little warning. I expect the fate of the major western nations to rhyme with the collapse (reorganization) of the USSR. The system will go on until the insiders decide it's more profitable to abandon ship. They'll loot the public treasuries and assets for all they're worth and leave, just like the high-level bureaucrats and politicians in the USSR did in the final days of that system. |
|
|
|
All ASIC will be broken so basically no one will follow this hardfork. All ASICs get replaced after a few months anyway, so it would be no problem to define it 6-12 months in the future before implementing it. |
|
|
|
This problem as I see it is non-existent. As I've talked about before Mining Block References (MBRs) can tremendously reduce latency which would squash this attack. 1) Make the nonce long enough that the extraNonce field is no longer needed in the coinbase transaction. 2) Now it's possible for miners to broadcast their Merkle tree as soon as they start hashing (10 minutes on average before they finish) 3) When they find a valid hash, now they only need to broadcast the block header because the rest of the network has (usually) already received and validated the Merkle tree. 4) Block header propagation is very fast and not dependent of the size of the blocks. |
|
|
|
You can't seriously think It's just trolling and market manipulation. |
|
|
|
"Difficulty" and "target" are actual technical terms with precise definitions in the block protocol. That is true. However, since virtually everyone says "difficulty" when they really mean "target", and since the wiki uses "work" to refer to difficulty, using the most common convention will prevent a lot of confusion. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
