No, the Newsweek reporter did.
This. Besides there is no way that he's the only person named Satoshi Nakamoto. Just ask Michael Bolton from Initech. |
|
|
|
If you are updating the list, p2pool.com also supports Dogecoin. |
|
|
|
Can you specify the address that any coins should be sent to or are they just sent to an address generated in your *coind?
They go to the coind wallet unfortunately. There's no easy way to adjust that on the fly since the wallets themselves don't support it. One could perhaps hack the wallet's API call for getblocktemplate to take an extra "payment address" parameter, and block that into the template returned. This way different miners could get different merged work. I thought that you could specify in the command line for running p2pool the wallet that payments will go to: -a ADDRESS, --address ADDRESS generate payouts to this address (default: <address requested from bitcoind>) source: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2PoolI plan on using a windows wallet on another computer that I would like payments to go to. My goal would be to seperate the pool and the wallet. When you launch p2pool, to see if this is working, one of the first checks it will do is determine the default payment address. The address specified should show up there. I haven't tried it myself, but I'm assuming this is how it will work. You can specify an address for the main pool, but when you use a merged parameter, you can't specify the address that any coins mined on the merged pool go to - they go to an address in the *coind wallet. So if you are merge mining namecoin with bitcoin, you can specify the address that any bitcoins go to, but not where the namecoins do. :-) |
|
|
|
he's a libertarian. so he don't need help  Unfortunately that only works if the bad guys accept the same "only use force in response" concept. ;-) |
|
|
|
Regarding http://bitcoin.advmapper.com:9332/static/1: How can I tell if people are using my P2Pool node? 2: If I don't mine, is there any reason to host a P2Pool node? 3: My GetBlockTemplate latency is rarely/barely under 1 sec, even with just P2Pool and Bitcoind running. Why? CPU usage is almost nothing, disks are SSDs and there appears to be no swapping happening. 4: How do people find a P2Pool node to use, and what kinds of things helps them make the decision about which is best for them? 5: Is the P2Pool network hurting for nodes, or is there a surplus of nodes and it's just miners that are missing? Hi, 1. If you look at the "Local rate" on the link to your static page, you see 0.00H/s right now, so no one is using it yet. 2. You are running bitcoind, so that helps the bitcoin network, as far as p2pool, it helps provide redundancy. Likewise, more nodes help p2pool so that block that are found propagate faster and reduce the chance of p2pool blocks becoming orphans. 3. You might point a miner to it and see if it shows the same information when someone is mining on it. Otherwise, I would just be guessing. 4. Usually from lists or posts, I think. Latency, reliability, those would be two criteria I would think are important. 5. The number of miners is lower than one would hope at the moment. I think the number of nodes is okay, but it doesn't hurt to have more (see #2). That is my quick take on the questions you asked. :-) |
|
|
|
Just a quick question regarding the bitcoin protocol,
I was contemplating making an altcoin for a school project, idea giving every possible address 1 coin to start, and people would 'mine' by generating addresses and sending those coins back to another address -their main address.
However I was wondering, would it be possible to implement a limit on how many transactions 1 node/connection can make to the network? Or would there be no way to do this, and my coin would be broken due to thousands of transactions per second coming from 'miner' nodes? -Maybe there is a computational issue with this idea anyway, would one node be even able to send out that many transactions anyway?
I've had a little look at the bitcoin wiki and it states currently it can handle 7tps, what happens to other transactions, big queue? Would the queue getting huge cause no problem or can it cause problems? Would a change to the codebase be able to fix this? (Add a limit to nodes max tps) like I said above, is this possible?
Any discussion would be greatly appreicated, thanks.
Just remember "every possible address" is a huge, practically incomprehensible, number. Good luck with the project. ;-) |
|
|
|
Hello Guys, I am trying to Merge Mine LiteCoin and FeatherCoin but am getting this error all the time: 2014-02-12 18:25:06.003000 > Error while calling merged getauxblock on http://127.0.0.1:9336:
2014-02-12 18:25:06.033000 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2014-02-12 18:25:06.045000 > File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 577, in _runCallbacks
2014-02-12 18:25:06.059000 > current.result = callback(current.result, *args, **kw)
2014-02-12 18:25:06.071000 > File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 1155, in gotResult
2014-02-12 18:25:06.084000 > _inlineCallbacks(r, g, deferred)
2014-02-12 18:25:06.097000 > File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 1097, in _inlineCallbacks
2014-02-12 18:25:06.110000 > result = result.throwExceptionIntoGenerator(g)
2014-02-12 18:25:06.136000 > File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\twisted\python\failure.py", line 389, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator
2014-02-12 18:25:06.242000 > return g.throw(self.type, self.value, self.tb)
2014-02-12 18:25:06.253000 > --- <exception caught here> ---
2014-02-12 18:25:06.268000 > File "C:\Users\Andradek\Documents\GitHub\p2pool-rav\p2pool\util\deferral.py", line 41, in f
2014-02-12 18:25:06.279000 > result = yield func(*args, **kwargs)
2014-02-12 18:25:06.293000 > File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 1097, in _inlineCallbacks
2014-02-12 18:25:06.294000 > result = result.throwExceptionIntoGenerator(g)
2014-02-12 18:25:06.305000 > File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\twisted\python\failure.py", line 389, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator
2014-02-12 18:25:06.319000 > return g.throw(self.type, self.value, self.tb)
2014-02-12 18:25:06.331000 > File "C:\Users\Andradek\Documents\GitHub\p2pool-rav\p2pool\util\jsonrpc.py", line 133, in _http_do
2014-02-12 18:25:06.344000 > raise Error_for_code(resp['error']['code'])(resp['error']['message'], resp['error'].get('data', None))
2014-02-12 18:25:06.371000 > p2pool.util.jsonrpc.NarrowError: -32601 Method not foundDoes anyone know how to solve this?Sorry if this has been answered before but i am lost here! Please Help! Note: I do not know if those coins are compatible for merged mining so forgive me if i am trying to mine "apples and and oranges" at the same time! Thank You for you help, Did you ever get this resolved? |
|
|
|
Need more evidence.
My initial assumption is malware on his computer.
My second assumption is unofficial copy of MultiBit.
My third assumption is that he didn't create the address with MultiBit.
Until there is proof that all three assumptions are false, I am not inclined to entertain a suspicion that the current version of MultiBit is at fault.
Malware was my first assumption too. He uses MultiBit since several month. So I don't think it's an unofficial copy of MultiBit. He said he did create the adress with MultiBit. What you mean with "overall safety & security"? He uses a antivir-programm and set a password for the wallet. What further measures are necessary? Some Anti-Malware programm? I didn't ask, if he had further balances on multibit, but would a malware not supposed to steal everything? Antivirus programs are not foolproof, there are zeroday exploits etc that can bypass them. As Danny said above, it sounds like malware is a possibility, Trojan version of multibit etc. Without more information it is hard to determine what has occurred. For larger balances, antivirus software isn't enough. |
|
|
|
Do you think it's enough to have the bitcoin wallets in a server you physically control or should also the website be located inhouse to prevent thieves from stealing bitcoins?
2 years ago i posted a idea that no wallet should be on a server. instead a withdrawal request should just be a database entry on the server. and on a separate system away from the server that has a copy of users details. no communications go to the off-server system. pure the off-server system looks in the database (one way communication) which it would see the request and compare the password or pin given on that request to the copy on their off-network system. if they match the off-server system would perform the transaction. all that should be on the server is a hashed copy of the password, used purely for login requests where the login page hashes the users password and compares the hashes. that way the hacker cannot guess the unhashed password adding to that the withdrawal request database uses a different hashing method which the off-server has a copy of, so that hackers dont simply copy the login hash to the withdrawal request. as the 2 would be different combine that with the fact that there is no privkey on the server makes cpu sniffing useless also QFT. D&T also makes a good point about a pool having their VPS hacked, and tons of bitcoins stolen nearly 2 years ago now. (And they were not the only one, it has been a recurring problem.) If you are on a pool, exchange, etc, don't store your coins there. Set an automatic payout, or use p2pool with an instant payout. |
|
|
|
You guys wanted deregulation and decentralized currency. This the result. Bernie Madoff is sitting in prison because all money transactions can be accounted for but in the bitcoin world once your money goes to another person that's it you can only pray the person delivers.
This has nothing to do with the currency. That is like saying "The dollar is doomed because Lehman failed," "The Euro is doomed because a bank was robbed," "The Euro is doomed because Cyprus did a bail in," or "Gold is doomed because pirates have stolen Spanish gold". If you do not own the private keys, the coins are not yours. Just like if you hand twenty Euros to the bum on the corner and ask him to hold it - you have to trust the bum. If you are dealing with someone you do not trust, you use this really new idea called "escrow". /sarcasm |
|
|
|
Strict financial regulation and fear of lawsuit are probably slowing down Bitcoin entrepreneurship in western world. This is particularly true for the US.
This. Regulation slows down adoption - e.g. the BTC ETF (from the Winklevoss twins) will be lucky to be approved by the regulators by the end of 2014, and they hope 2015. So the US just reduces freedom and reduces opportunity, and the ETF is just one example. |
|
|
|
So, I was able to fund the paper wallet, but only after I entered the private key to validate it. I'm going to keep trying to get to a point where the private key is only seen by the end user when they are redeeming, or sweeping the paper wallet. These things can serve as a great starter kit for BTC and other digital currency. I wish i knew how to write code. Does anyone have any suggestions and references on the best way to learn coding? Until someone comes out with an all encompessing online wallet, these paper wallets are going to have to do for now.
...
You should not have to enter a private key to send to a paper wallet. You should just be able to send to the public address, otherwise you are exposing the private key and are losing the benefits of a paper wallet being completely offline. |
|
|
|
You do not own any bitcoins if you do not own teh private keys to them.
This. It can't be said enough - if you don't own the keys, you don't own the coins. You just have an IOU from someone. |
|
|
|
I known :
btcGuild is btcGuild.com
Eligius is Eligius.st
P2Pool which website? P2Pool.in or P2Pool.org?
P2pool can be through any public node or your own personal node, they all connect together into one large pool. Public nodes: http://p2pool-nodes.info/http://p2pool.in/ is the main info site for setting up p2pool node yourself. P2pool.org is a fake p2pool (as noted in the small text on bottom of the site, "not affiliated with p2pool and forrestv". They just took advantage of the name). Elizium.name is a popular public p2pool node... And I have a public node listed in my sig. Just a point of clarification, I believe that p2pool.org is a node in the p2pool network given the software being used, the network hash rate shown the comments from p2pool.org in the p2pool software section. The statement in their footer is just clarifying that they are not forrestv nor the home of the p2pool software - unless of course their stats etc are all fake. There are a number of public p2pool nodes as you say. I'm just going by the common "wisdom" that gets passed around the forums and reddit every few weeks/months: http://www.reddit.com/r/litecoinmining/comments/1vizp3/psa_p2poolorg_is_not_the_real_p2pool/I see posts like this all the time... If they're a valid node, they really should re-evaluate their disclaimer. Saying they don't represent p2pool and forrestv, but are a valid node of the P2Pool network for the various coins they support would be much better than saying, "not affiliated with p2pool and forrestv" which gives a connotation of being totally separate from the rest of the P2Pool network. It's much clearer with your p2pool.com in your sig. I agree. I don't know the guy, but clarification would be useful. :-) |
|
|
|
...
why isnt there an app/extension of wallet software that 'locks' coins to an account or wallet
...
The private key "locks" your coins to you better than anything that can be social engineered. People were using Gox as a bank account and consequently only were an entry in gox's books saying they were owed a certain number of bitcoins. Encrypting any wallet on your computer is a plus, as is offline cold storage with something like bip38. Remember, you only own bitcoin if you have the private key, if not, someone just owes them to you and you have counterparty risk. :-) |
|
|
|
|
No. This has been discussed to death, but in short fungibility is good, whitelists and blacklists are not for a variety of reasons, including, who decides what coins go not the list? Who enforces it? Etc
|
|
|
|
|
Auroracoin has been added to P2Pool.com pooled mining, if you are interested in the coin.
|
|
|
|
I have a good idea about how the non-linear sharechain will work, but implementing that hasn't started yet.
I think that sounds awesome. The thing is the disk space for the share chain isn't that big of a deal, it uses no space really compared to the bitcoind blockchain itself. And older shares once expired don't need to be saved forever. If the sharechain can work more similar to a normal PPLNS share database at centralized pools, that'd be a big win for smaller miners. (Some way to accumulate tiny shares without paying them until they exceed the dust level might be useful, but prone to abuse if someone tries to flood the sharechain with changing addresses just to bloat it.) One option is that all stales still get passed around like valid blocks, and payments are based on all valid + stale blocks. It isn't like bitcoin where we actually need a single chain with a record of transactions. We're only using the chain's POW so we don't have to trust clients on how much work they are reporting. Another thought on the dust issue for small miners with tiny shares is when they are served work, that work include the prior shares value that was too low to pay. That is, a normal miner finds shares A B and C. When calculating payouts, that miner is going to be paid A+B+C until those shares start to expire off the chain. A small miner finds share A that is below dust level. They don't appear in the Payouts list. However, when serving work to miner A, they are served a share to work on that includes the diff value from share A. When share B is accepted, share A is invalidated and share B has the value of A + B's new work. If B is > DUST, it goes into Payouts list. If not, then when small miner finds C, C will include B and B is invalidated. The thought for doing DUST this way is the tiny miner can keep building a balance without storing every tiny share on the chain, and their dust won't expire off the chain before it can grow above the payment threshold since the share's age resets on each new share found. If the miner is so small they can't find even a tiny share consistently within the PPLNS window, they they probably need to mine something else.  This might be more appropriate for a pay-once PPLNS structure though and not the traditional PPLNS window p2pool uses now. (BTW, I've never looked, but p2pool needs to store the block (share chain?) difficulty when work is served so that can be logged on the share chain with the share, and payments based on the diff of work done vs diff of the block, not just the diff of the work done. Otherwise people get unfair rewards around diff changes and the pool is hoppable.) There are good ideas in here, particularly about the dust transactions for smaller miners. Perhaps increasing the window too would be helpful with that change in order to accommodate smaller miners in the future. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
