if you got a signed message from the previous owner then there should be no problem if you just leave it. most user (not all) might remove their post if you give them that signed message. though that means you're also telling them that you are not the original owner of that account.
thats good to know, unfortunately i didnt get a signed address on this one , all i have is forums threads containing the information , the sent funds and any private messages that ive sent or received that id be happy to give to a trusted member to verify from my account if it meant removal of the staked address. im still holding out that the loan will be repaid albeit a bit late. I wouldnt ask for a removal, that might indeed look like a scam attempt. I would stake a new address, quote the old one and state that the account has changed ownership due to a defaulted loan. Maybe stake a new address that will gain legitimacy over time. |
|
|
|
Your log file says its working. 2016-01-06 07:06:27 Importing bootstrap.dat...
2016-01-06 07:06:27 mapAddressBook.size() = 1
...
2016-01-06 07:06:27 Block Import: already had block 00000000c937983704a73af28acdec37b049d214adbda81d7e2a3dd146f6ed09 at height 1000
...
2016-01-06 07:14:36 Block Import: already had block 000000000000002fdd2c741ed50bc3975a640ca419081711f30f553939641303 at height 220000
the bootstrap.dat just does not give you any new blocks. |
|
|
|
@Realpra thanks for the answers. -snip segwit-
Did I miss something? Seems like a very expensive way to solve malleability and not much else.
You've missed 85% of the benefits of the design. The fact the it increases effective space is largely an incidental (but useful) side-effect. That it also make it possible to verify blocks fractionally (at your random choice) without having to trust data from third parties is what I was mostly referring to... [/quote] Id also argue that the recent attack with high S signatures was a major concern (quick fixed in 0.11.1) and IIRC seg wit is planed as hard fork in the long run. |
|
|
|
I hit it, somehow! Whoohoooo. Sorry OnkelPaul and Lincoln6Echo, legendaries before bro's.  I see now how the corruption seeps into the minds of the newly legendaries, disbanding their old friends for a measly half blue coin, they ascend to the highest rank believing themself to be over everyone else. On the top at last, among the small circle of the chosen. The awakening will be bitter and painful, when they fall behind once again with the rise of the mystics. In order words: Gratz. |
|
|
|
Just add printtoconsole=1 to bitcoin.conf and enjoy no new data added to debug.log file, there is nothing realy interesting to see there anyway.
Thanks. But I still need to have the debug.log for figuring out the reasons of any issues on my full nodes, e.g. bitcoind crashes, database corruptions, naughty peers, etc. Accept (or not accept) to mempool messages can be interesting as well. I recently had a node run by "mytrezor" connected to mine. They send >>2k TX every 30 minutes within a few seconds, sometimes close to 4k TX. Since the node is not very powerful and the scripts for the start start on a full minute as well they could not finish in time. Once I knew what was going on I just accepted the gaps in the stats, but without those logs I would probably still wondering what was going on. After the last reboot a few days ago the mytrezor node is no longer connected to mine. If you want a small .log file I would rather trim it. |
|
|
|
-snip-
Isn't CoinJoin already working? There's this JoinMarket thing, but it's still very archaic, not user friendly, and therefore not a lot of people use it yet, that's why we need this sort of stuff to be implemented within the actual wallets and working in a seamless "click there and send anonymous" way where the user doesn't necessarily even know what is going on in detail, he just knows his transaction is safely sent.
I didnt know about JoinMarkt, but it looks indeed to complex for the majority of users. CoinJoin itself is working, e.g. via bc.i, but if it requires a wallet with blockchain.info itd rather not use it. The JoinMarket stuff is too complicated imo, everything that isn't "click to send anonymously" is a hassle for the end user, and the end user is ultimately all that matters. At the end of the day, what we want is an anonymous transaction, that mixes the coins in a decentralized way, and that doesn't display the amount sent (this part is mostly solved by the nice work of Gmaxwell with CT). We combine both features in an easy way and then we can start talking about e-cash like the Bitcoin whitepaper said.
I will read more on JoinMarket, from the little I read about it on git I would consider it alpha as well. |
|
|
|
I did it but its not detecting it.
Any errors in the debug.log? |
|
|
|
|
Just put the bootstrap.dat in the roaming\bitcoin directory you dont need to pass a command.
|
|
|
|
Which account specifically? The only times I've heard of accounts being locked manually is when a DT member or a highly valued account is suspected to be hacked. Most likely its locked because you tired to use the security question feature(and got the answer correct) Not a good idea, would you like to be spammed by the same person? Drop a message each week(with a signed message from a staked address ofc) to theymos. I have problem in signing the message but able to provide the private key of address associated with the account. I think theymos is pretty busy in his work. Providing the private key is decidedly insecure. For all we know Hitler could be signing the message then. It isn't difficult to sign messages, especially if you use bitcoin core. For linux users I have a bash utility that even puts it in the correct format for you. Can anyone tell me how i right the message(in which format) to theymos and how to sign a message using blockchain.info. See here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=180068.0Format: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
<your message>
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
<message signature>
-----END BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- Alternatively -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=990345.0 (more pictures less text) |
|
|
|
Learn to use Profile settings.  FTFY. |
|
|
|
|
Odd, my watch only wallet shows several receiving addresses. Did you create the wallet with the master public key?
|
|
|
|
Do you really need to upgrade the cold one? As long as it can still sign transactions i dont really see the point?
Yes, you do. The old versions will create signatures that will not be relayed by the majority of the network nodes. AFAIK most of the electrum servers will also reject them. You can only change this behaviour by updating the offline wallet. |
|
|
|
|
Firstly I like the general idea and I had thought that pruned nodes work somewhat like this, at least in terms of storage. Im not entirely sure I understand every detail of your suggestion though. E.g., not that its of importance here, so feel free to ignore this question: How is it easy for governments to target companies unless they are all in the same country?
5.5:
I dont agree with the permanent blacklisting. You can either blacklist the ECDSA key, which is usueless because the cheating node can just create a new one or you can blacklist the IP. The cheating node will get a new IP and that banned as well. If some spoofed IPs you can completly isolate a node or even render the entire network useless.
"Proof of work burn done"? So I would need to pay (or burn) bitcoin in order to run a node?
5.7:
I am not entirely sure, but how do the tables you use to store information about other nodes work if you consider home run nodes? They will have e.g. daily new IP addresses and might be offline for the majority of the day. Also why not validate the entire block yourself, but only keep your chunk instead of requesting data from several peers that not might not be responsive. Block validation is crucial for propagation and if this becomes a slow process we might have a significant increase on orphans.
6.1:
Im not sure I can follow your arguments on bandwith usage. 156GB per year will not be evenly distributed. You also as far as I can tell did not account for transaction relaying, which is part of a full nodes work. If we assume 10^6 TX per block this is no small part to handle.
Other things I might have missed/dont understand:
- how are chunk sections select? Do I pick them by hand? Are they random?
- how do you suggest to start with an "all trust" approach considering the current state of the network "dont try anyone"?
- What if there are not enough swarm nodes to cover all chunk ranges? Or, less crucial, what if there are not enough swam nodes to cover all chunk ranges all the time?
|
|
|
|
@avatar_kiyoshi - First of all sorry for my bad English. For the last year research project in our university, we have to find an issue of any existing system and propose a solution. Me and my team members thought of selecting Bitcoin system, find an existing issue of the current system and provide a solution in an year. So we are looking for an issue in Bitcoin system to start our research project and that's why we posted a thread in this forum.
P.S - We are not familiar with Bitcoins much but hopefully we will learn about it and willing to provide a valuable solution through our research project.
Maybe as a first step you should fix that before considering fixing existing problems. |
|
|
|
-snip- I might put an asterisk next to the Human Resources thread (showing they are having problems), or even potentially consider removing it all together. There is a claim that they are part of a terrorist organization ISIS. There does not appear to be very much evidence to backup this claim so I don't think that removing it would be appropriate as of now, although it would probably be best to be cautious and at least give them an asterisk I dont think an asterix[2] is warranted just because someone forgot to take their medication. cooked up a conspiracy theory made a baseless claim. The argument "they want to stay hidden, must be IS" does not really convince me. The user also failed to back up the claims. Last time I checked IS[1] did not even use encryption. Now they are versed enough in darknet and crypto currencies matters to start a hiring spree for a secret project? I dont think so. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_2015_Paris_attacks#Analysis_of_tactics[2] http://blog.garethjmsaunders.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/asterix_or_asterisk.gif |
|
|
|
|
Without the seed and without knowledge about the password its very unlikely you will be able to open the file. If you assume a weak password for some reason you could try to brute force the file, but since you didnt set the password... maybe figure out who did. Its not like these things happen on their own.
|
|
|
|
Hi Mitchell. I manage the humamresources fixed signature campaign. I can confirm you that member has been paid for the first week. Is it possible to move it in A category?
All payouts have been processed according to submitted spreadsheet
payment received thanks a lot moved to A -> http://pastebin.com/qjFdqg05 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
