Maybe the big phone manufacturers could start putting ASIC chips in the phones they sell and profit that way. Just one chip per phone, and it would be a small chip so the phone doesn't get too hot. It would stay dormant in normal use and would only be activated during times when the phone is fully charged but still connected to a charger. That way, the customer doesn't notice.
This is actually bloody genius. I disagree: "smart" TVs are where it is at. - They are already built to betray the user (implementing an alphabet soup of DRM including DTCP and HDMI).
- They are already known as power hogs even in standby mode (so that they can download programming guides an respond to voice commands)
- They already have internet access (required to get Blu-ray playback working again after your device is revoked, also services like netflix): likely cheaper than mobile Internet.
- Because these things are always plugged in and active, you can even use an off-the-shelf chip drawing 3-5W.
|
|
|
|
say i received.. 100 transactions of 0.01btc.. to 1franky1blahblahblah.
now for me to send the total of that to someone else. my transaction out would be
from: 1franky1blahblahblah
signature: skgdkf;djgsdkfj;sdkf;df;dlfk;adlkfg;dkfjg;dlkfgj;dsfk
value: 1btc
to: 1whomeverwantsitblahblah blah
now say each of those 100 transactions came to my 100 different addresses.. now for me to send out 1btc total that is then 100 signatures, 100 from addresses.. meaning im now above the limit of sending a free tx and have to pay a fee!!!
That would make sense if Bitcoin addresses actually held balances: they don't. (Mastercoin uses a balance-based approach). Instead, Bitcoin works by spending "coins" that have a specified value. You can only spend whole coins at once (whose value can be any number of satoshies). Bitcoin transactions have a series of inputs and outputs. your example would look more like: james@torchlight:~/coinjoin$ sx newkey > frank1.key
james@torchlight:~/coinjoin$ sx mktx frank_example.tx \
> --input 91c803a7f077a62c6470da3c18d46ed7bd9bf3b4f159ddcd701e8bc030b2e15d:0 \
> --input a5e8bc122fbcd97b03dd11c5c72888d3da1f38fc1875351cd7f4e1b723551cf3:3 \
> --input 3fa191bc482c5b0b03678247dc80f84674efcbf60844ac68384e171c5c74275a:0 \
> --input 60335716ed30901a0d4b2897f2f5e30c4421401882acb5b72296e6e1c3abe0bd:1 \
> --input b3cc34a0c46279e22358dee8ee9d64a0c42a438232d9fefb604f2ee99d562f83:1 \
> --input 564488909406dd53ae11ab96d42cd5a0874503c68c373dfab2d4bd8bb654b3b9:2 \
> --input 0d0763ab8abcd2ce8d31303b731911dd753efa04d95a796440eedcddb3450876:0 \
> --input 4a48400c44fc098c6853f3beef5195e17c9dd66f9ddc24c966de4b13e3bee824:0 \
> --input 7ee1446ee92faf924f178d18168c8ef109528ab2d6e218ca1ed9c1524ea0970f:1 \
> --input 09e9ce7afde753baf97611a97e283e9983c36ad9b49ac4f906941eec551ad4a7:1 \
> --output 3M8XGFBKwkf7miBzpkU3x2DoWwAVrD1mhk:100000000
Added input 91c803a7f077a62c6470da3c18d46ed7bd9bf3b4f159ddcd701e8bc030b2e15d:0
Added input a5e8bc122fbcd97b03dd11c5c72888d3da1f38fc1875351cd7f4e1b723551cf3:3
Added input 3fa191bc482c5b0b03678247dc80f84674efcbf60844ac68384e171c5c74275a:0
Added input 60335716ed30901a0d4b2897f2f5e30c4421401882acb5b72296e6e1c3abe0bd:1
Added input b3cc34a0c46279e22358dee8ee9d64a0c42a438232d9fefb604f2ee99d562f83:1
Added input 564488909406dd53ae11ab96d42cd5a0874503c68c373dfab2d4bd8bb654b3b9:2
Added input 0d0763ab8abcd2ce8d31303b731911dd753efa04d95a796440eedcddb3450876:0
Added input 4a48400c44fc098c6853f3beef5195e17c9dd66f9ddc24c966de4b13e3bee824:0
Added input 7ee1446ee92faf924f178d18168c8ef109528ab2d6e218ca1ed9c1524ea0970f:1
Added input 09e9ce7afde753baf97611a97e283e9983c36ad9b49ac4f906941eec551ad4a7:1
Added output sending 100000000 Satoshis to 3M8XGFBKwkf7miBzpkU3x2DoWwAVrD1mhk.
james@torchlight:~/coinjoin$ sx showtx frank_example.tx
hash: 6dcfc9c6983b6bf00fa75f898320c9d7798bf3c129f275be2a70bb3a2e2d653e
version: 1
locktime: 0
Input:
previous output: 91c803a7f077a62c6470da3c18d46ed7bd9bf3b4f159ddcd701e8bc030b2e15d:0
script:
sequence: 4294967295
Input:
previous output: a5e8bc122fbcd97b03dd11c5c72888d3da1f38fc1875351cd7f4e1b723551cf3:3
script:
sequence: 4294967295
Input:
previous output: 3fa191bc482c5b0b03678247dc80f84674efcbf60844ac68384e171c5c74275a:0
script:
sequence: 4294967295
Input:
previous output: 60335716ed30901a0d4b2897f2f5e30c4421401882acb5b72296e6e1c3abe0bd:1
script:
sequence: 4294967295
Input:
previous output: b3cc34a0c46279e22358dee8ee9d64a0c42a438232d9fefb604f2ee99d562f83:1
script:
sequence: 4294967295
Input:
previous output: 564488909406dd53ae11ab96d42cd5a0874503c68c373dfab2d4bd8bb654b3b9:2
script:
sequence: 4294967295
Input:
previous output: 0d0763ab8abcd2ce8d31303b731911dd753efa04d95a796440eedcddb3450876:0
script:
sequence: 4294967295
Input:
previous output: 4a48400c44fc098c6853f3beef5195e17c9dd66f9ddc24c966de4b13e3bee824:0
script:
sequence: 4294967295
Input:
previous output: 7ee1446ee92faf924f178d18168c8ef109528ab2d6e218ca1ed9c1524ea0970f:1
script:
sequence: 4294967295
Input:
previous output: 09e9ce7afde753baf97611a97e283e9983c36ad9b49ac4f906941eec551ad4a7:1
script:
sequence: 4294967295
Output:
value: 100000000
script: hash160 [ d53d47ccd1579b93c284e9caf3c81f3f41787169 ] equal
address: 3M8XGFBKwkf7miBzpkU3x2DoWwAVrD1mhk
The above example uses only 10 inputs. (signatures omitted for my sanity) The signature size my vary a little bit with different addresses, but it should average out. Here is a real example that appears to be mining income: fc09ac2c27d82bccd55eccb9244a56060a7c5c983eb5906b3e08b36e8fffa176There are only 7+2 addresses present, yet the transaction is still over 5kB due to the large number of inputs. Second example 6 inputs, 2 outputs, all using different addresses (1kB): a74c774777510783e438a3ede0c4e83de29c2d73f0e77b73bf0c1a922fea9102 |
|
|
|
i read alot of blah..
ok yet again..
bitcoins are NOT suppose to be use once. as this is how people get donations, by putting one address on a page and receive multiple donations. the only purpose Luke-Jr is strongly advocating single use is more to do with adding data bloat to transactions so that he gets a fat fee when his pool mines transaction.. yes if your a paranoid person that wants to do illegal stuff, fine use single addresses. but it is not an absolutely needed rule for everyone to use..
Again, address re-use does not avoid block-chain bloat. Because I use the slightly risky sx tools, transaction construction details are not hidden from me. 10 inputs to 1 transaction will take the same amount of space: no matter if 1 or 10 addresses are used. secondly have you ever used a website that once logged in, you go to your profile and you change your profile picture, change your email, home address, etc... there is nothing stopping a service allowing people to change their bitcoin address in the same way..
just like changing your password it will ask you to validate new address change by asking you to sign message of old address then it would accept the new address.
its just that simple...
Yes, key rotation is important. A Naive implementation will use the public key hash (address) as a universal identifier. This breaks if you want to change your address, because such identifiers must: exist, be unique, and not change over time. As far as I know, Eligius does not allow you to change your address. |
|
|
|
say im a phishing scammer..
most phishing sites are a template to gather usernames and then use those at a later date
i can easily make up a template site that makes up random words yea, i can get a user to sign those random words yes.. but in no way can i then use that random signature on the true website later because the true website would not have generated those random words..
The phishing website can't replay my example later because of the included date. It should be possible to make the time-out explicit. The problem with the random challenge is that the user does not know what they are signing: they may think they are signing into one website, while they are really signing into another. It may not even be a sign-in: the signature may be authorizing a large movement of funds. For example, a raw transaction script will look like noise to most Bitcoin users. Really cool idea, loved it.
But once set, you would not be able to change/reset a password, right?
OpenPGP supports this, but it is complicated to set up. It is called key revocation. To set that up, you need a secure master key that will not get lost/destroyed (preferably stored offline in multiple locations), much like Bitcoin "cold storage". Essentially, the master key is your "real" identity, but your would use sub-keys for your day-to-day signing. Each device you use should probably have it's own sub-key. complicated needing master keys, blah blah... yes complicated and time consuming.. yet bitcoin signing is simple..... what are you not understanding. same security, same theory, but bitcoin is just simple and not requiring downloads of extra programs or setting up of keys ok ok we get it openpgp is your lover and life partner.. we understand. but bitcoin has the same principles that are available to utilise now. bitcoin users can already sign messages without needing to download programs or use complicated features.. so why push for complex features and templates (security breaches) instead of simplicity and randomness... you seem to be missing a few points Contrary to my example above, OpenPGP is not ideal for authenticating websites (distinct from authenticating users). X.509 is used for that: the only problem being that the the CA system is broken. As you have pointed out, the OpenPGP alternative: the "Web of trust" has proven to be confusing to many users. You essentially advocate that the same pseudonym be used every time. This does not prevent a Man-in-the-middle attack on the initial connection. My point about key revocation is that OpenPGP supports authentication mechanisms that Bitcoin addresses do not. Bitcoin addresses don't support key revocation because addresses are supposed to be single-use. You are advocating not allowing users to change their key since we know people will take care of it. It is a given that users will either loose their keys or have them compromised. OpenPGP can be easier to use. It is not new and exciting, so it appears few people focus on it. I myself have backed-up my Bitcoin keys in more than one geographic location (something I have not yet done with my OpenPGP keys). However, when I used Eligius, I had to create a new wallet just for being able to use message signing. The software I was using (Sx tools and Multibit) did not support signing arbitrary messages with my existing keys. I found that Eligus's set-up has a glaring weakness as well: mining shares are not signed by the miner (Edit: the block templates are not signed by the pool either). That means that a man-in-the middle can claim an arbitrary portion of your shares. OpenPGP with sub-keys can safely handle that by allowing me to give my mining machine a less-trusted, revocable key. If Bitcoin addresses are used, you need to keep the private key for your mining income in the miner's memory 24/7. |
|
|
|
1. openPGP has been around longer i agree, but that involves people downloading an extra program to sign a message, bitcoiners already have a program and is VERY easy to use as its already there. plus it doesnt need all the registration of keys with other services and all crap that goes with getting a PGP key.. bitcoin signaturs ar just there.. but all in all the theory is the same for the using part after registrations, just less userfriendly for noobs wen it comes to openpgp
Bitcoin users are still rare. Registering your keys with OpenPGP keyservers is optional. 2. your example of a message is the same as mine. they are both random, the difference is that because i added a nonce rather then just a time that changes every second. it makes it harder to guess the message
3. man in the middle attack is actually easier to achieve in your example then mine. imagine a phishing website that knew the message to display was a fixed template "log <email> into <service> <day><month><time><timezonecode><year>" that is pretty easy for a phishing site to replicate. but imagine if the message was complete random, not so easy to replicate on a copied template now is it. not impossible just slightly more code a phishing site would need to add. so lets not make it easy for scrript kiddies to just copy and paste front end code of websites to phish info.
I can easily generate <random wordx10> <Random decimal number><date>. Unless you are claiming the user will somehow recognize the challenge passphrase. If that is what you are relying on, you are not talking about a random message at all. I know banks use challenge images and phrases to "authenticate" their website, but that appears to be mainly "security theatre": designed to make naive users trust online banking. The real "security" is the reversibility of the transactions. The technology is not quite there yet, but the website can authenticate itself to you using OpenPgp as well. I , pool5.facebook.com am using the IP address: 10.0.2.34 on Fri Jul 11 11:59:46 MDT 2014
(edited to include date) Really cool idea, loved it.
But once set, you would not be able to change/reset a password, right?
OpenPGP supports this, but it is complicated to set up. It is called key revocation. To set that up, you need a secure master key that will not get lost/destroyed (preferably stored offline in multiple locations), much like Bitcoin "cold storage". Essentially, the master key is your "real" identity, but your would use sub-keys for your day-to-day signing. Each device you use should probably have it's own sub-key. |
|
|
|
I don' t think luke-jr is wrong in this case. The thread in question is actually about the block-withholding attack: Does block withdraw method work against p2pool?
You mean block withholding. Yes, it does. It's actually worse there because nobody can stop it. In that post, Luke-Jr is pointing out the advantages of a centralized pool. Who (specifically) profits from such an attack remains an open question. |
|
|
|
Another working demo is the Eligius mining pool. It is annoying because is conflates your identity with your payment address (which is supposed to be transient). When I was mining with Eligius, I could not use a cold-storage address for mining Bitcoin if I also wanted to receive namecoin. Public-key cryptography has been around since the late 90's. The OpenPGP standard makes more sense for logging into websites. Edit: These types of authentication mechanisms don't make use of the block-chain, BTW.
when registering with a website. user can give the website a bitcoin PUBLIC address.. then when logging in the website shows a random message. EG:
"The Lamb Walked Into The Slaughter House. Bar Ram You. Splat! 1204856948447585 08/07/2014"
the user then signs the message using their bitcoin client of the bitcoin address they submitted at registration. and then types in their username and the signed message. the website then verifies the signed message to the bitcoin public address to authorize logins.
The authentication message should be plain-language, and never random. Random authentication messages open the door for Man-in-the-Middle attacks. For example facebook might use: Log john_doe87@hotmail.com into facebook Fri Jul 11 05:19:25 MDT 2014
|
|
|
|
If you or somebody else let the magic smoke out, there is no hope. I once recovered a damaged 486 chip by under-clocking it: all the magic smoke was still in the package. |
|
|
|
|
I suspect the OP really is the rawdog from Youtube.
If you look at his posting history, you will see he really likes master coin "because of the people behind it". He appears to have a strategy of investing in people, rather than specific technologies. That explains why he dismisses the importance of Bitcoin (the lead author was using a pseudonym and has left the project), while at the same time, elevates the importance of the Bitcoin Foundation. RawDog may have rightly pointed out that the BItcoin Foundation is now in trouble. Since he does not see any obvious leadership for Bitcoin, he concludes that Bitcoin must be in trouble as well.
I pointed out in a PM that mastercoin relies on Bitcoin. Don't recall a specific response to that.
|
|
|
|
This is interesting! Looks like this is only available to vehicle sales via eBay Motors, right?
As far as I know, escrow is available for any transaction, but the ~$50 fee means it only makes sense for large transactions. |
|
|
|
|
E-bay allows escrow for high-value transactions. I suspect if the buyer said they were happy, and the escrow released the funds, it would be harder to reverse due to buyer's remorse. Presumably, if they buyer says they are not happy, the escrow does not release the funds back to the buyer until you get the equipment back.
I sent paper mail to E-bay's escrow provider about 3 years ago briefly explaining what Bitcoin was.
|
|
|
|
|
I am confused why you would want to go through a third-party website to read your own power usage. Why can't the results be forwarded to your own web-server (on-site)?
Edit: Free has a second meaning: "Freedom". You are not "free" if you have to tie into a third-party service to actually use the product you purchased.
|
|
|
|
|
P2Pool has quirks. Among the most annoying is that proxies don't seem to work. It may be they can not easily switch.
|
|
|
|
If you are using over a million watts (an industrial user), the price varies throughout the day between $8/MWh and $850/MWh (with an average of about $50/MWh). The traditional model is to run your miners 24/7 until they no longer pay for power. However, if you want to run the miner intermittently (either for heating or load-shedding applications), it may be possible to get obsolete hash-power at a cheaper rate. From the [HAVELOCK] DataTank Mining: 1.2MW 3M Novec Immersion Cooled 2PH Mining Container thread, I learned that Bitcoin mining is pushing computing density limits. That said, for the high density they describe, you need to remove heatsinks and plug the boards into some kind of back-plane (that not all miners support). For such industrial mining, it is probably cheaper to buy current-gen chips in bulk, and make your own boards. |
|
|
|
How does someone with a single wallet (with all their coins in) not have an address that starts with a fucking 3? That's what I want to know.
multisig is for corporations, board members and other groups. i dont trust anyone else with my hoard, so why would i give 2 other people the ability to play with my coins behind my back.. I hope to upgrade my cold-storage to m of n signatures. I would be the one with access to all 3 keys, but they would be stored in 3 different locations. |
|
|
|
Specs claim 366W at the wall which translates to no more than 330W of 12V power per device.
As most decent 1000W supplies are able to continously provide atleast 990W of 12V power, you should be fine with 3 at standard settings.
Are you claiming 5V and 3.3V draw is assumed to be only 10 watts these days? You really need to check what the rated 12V output is for the supply in question. Standby Power (5V, 2A) alone will have a rating of 10W. The First 1000W power supply listed on amazon does not list that info in the technical description, but does say it complies with the EPS 2.92 standard. That Standard does not actually cover 1000W power supplies, but a 950W configuration is listed on page 28. 5 12V rails are listed, each supplying no more than 18 amps (and at least 16 amps). One of the notes is that "Maximum combined current for the 12 V outputs shall be 76 A" -> 912W. If we assume a 1000W supply will have 6 rails, (76A/5~=15amps/rail ->x6=90amps total) -> 1080 W Hmm, looking at lower wattage supplies (like the 800W configuration), they still have 5 rails, but a lower maximum combined output. 5railsx18Amps/rail=90Amps (1080W) 5railsx16Amps/rail=80Amps -> 960W960W/3=320W<366W |
|
|
|
... Does your DataTank system have the ability to filter out electrolytes from Novec? Feel free to expand, but try to keep it terse...
You asked for it: Yes. ... ORLY? Please elaborate on the process used, and the types of electrolytes it is capable of removing/neutralizing. Here, feel free to be as expansive as you wish  ty *Though do try to keep your reply focused. Not sure how much of Capacitor electrolyte it can filter, but the article entitled " Bitcoin 2-Phase Immersion Cooling and the Implications for High Performance Computing" mentions Carbon Filters. Apparently those are good for filtering a lot of organic compounds. Edit: For ionic compounds, Silica Gel should work. It would not target them directly, but rather pull the water out of solution. Presumably, the ionic compounds would then precipitate out. Edit3: 3M's "Open Bath Immersion Cooling" video mentions both the carbon filter and silica gel at about 31:35. They also explain how to avoid losing unicorn tears during venting or maintenance. |
|
|
|
Block-chain technology is not suitable for storing massive amounts of data. It's sole purpose is deciding the order of transactions and publishing them. I was not aware of the 2013 thread on the same subject. |
|
|
|
Trust me, their efficiency is not the issue this time (that was the 2013 failed promise). The issue currently is their boards are pulling too much power and burning out. Apparently their engineers at the zoo are busy throwing poo.
BFL advertised a 600GH/s device. Unlike their last go around they can't just give you smaller units like they did with the minirig. Most people only have 1 PCIe slot per machine that could handle that much heat. So they are forced to try to cram 600GH/s onto a PCIe card. It is doable if done by professional. But BFL would have to find some professionals since they can't even handle their own PR mascot correctly.
Assuming it draws 1W/Ghash, there is no way they are going to be able to cool in in the PCI-E form-factor without liquid cooling. They may have 600Ghash/second boards that can't be run in open-air cases  |
|
|
|
I am curious: is the cover made out of plastic or metal? It should save on the cost of a case (which is one reason I have been a little reluctant to get an S1 (still haven't payed off my old blade either). Cases block EMI, which helps prevent interference with Over-the-air television.
I was thinking these things just need a 500W power supply: I suspect (but have not tested) that you can plug the 4Pin CPU connectors into the spare ports for an extra safety margin.
CPU connector(s) are different pinouts...Don't even try... ZiG OK, you made me try to look it up: Caution: The eight-pin PCI Express Auxiliary Power Connector and the eight-pin EPS12V CPU Power Connector use similar Molex Mini-Fit Jr. connector housings. Although they are keyed differently, the keying can be overcome by sufficient force such that you can plug an EPS12V power connector into a graphics card, or a PCI Express power connector into a motherboard. Either of these scenarios results in +12 V being directly shorted to ground, potentially destroying the motherboard, graphics card, or power supply. - Power Supply 101: A Reference Of SpecificationsForgot that CPU connectors are 8 pin now. Also was not aware that the 6 and 8 pin connectors had "sense" pins. Further, I compared the PCI-E diagram to the 4 pin diagram on the wikipedia ATX page. The polarities are reversed if you line up the tabs. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
