I starting to hating these users that read just the first post (that can be full of FUD) and waste their time on repeating as a parrot without even reading the few posts that that are just upper their last one.
I feel that just wasting my time in these discussions.
I guess i can't blame you. My reason of being vocal is inviting someone to prove me wrong. Thats how i (like to) learn. Or teach. But doing that i also notice that many users don't even try to learn and change their stance. They instead just "parrot" invalid arguments. Consider what you said to me to not have fallen into completely deaf ears. (eyes(?)) I'd rather a wallet not add code that may not be necessary or just a temp fix. But i guess XT devs may not be out to destroy Bitcoin. (Maybe, always best to assume everyone's out to get you!) |
|
|
|
I shall not support XT if it blacklists some ip address.
Here a new parrot. You're pretty spammy, rude and aggressive for a staffer. Aren't you required a minimum of justification in what you post? A minimum of content? A minimum of respect? I get you have/had a better grasp of the situation than me, than most. And now that i had a mature discussion with someone else, i can now attest to it. But you really don't contribute anything when you reply spam like "^User is a parrot." |
|
|
|
Not sure why you double posted, but sure. I get what you're saying.
But tell me, if the TX backlog was getting full. Then there was heavy DoS on the network. What would happen to the transactions request from Tor users? Would be still be processed at some point, even when the BTC system is inclined to drop off transactions that will not make it to a block after X conditions are met?
By heavy DoS on the network, do you mean all nodes? If there was, then we'd have a big problem period - doesn't matter if you are on Tor, running XT or core. If only some nodes are being DoS'ed then it's fine. Tor users would get dropped from certain XT nodes under attack (and that have the anti-DDoS feature enabled). Other XT nodes would not be under attach and would accept Tor connections. In short, it would be fine for Tor users as well as regular users only certain regular users would have fewer problems since they'd have a feature that might reduce the connection attacks. Well its true that if its just self-defense of a single node its much less of a big deal. I would have imagined DDoS focusing on the bigger nodes, slowing the overall network significantly, then combined with a TX spam attack. It would have allowed transaction request from Tor nodes to be dropped since they are lower priority and the network would already be saturated with "legit" tx spam. This would effectively allowing to filter out transaction from the black listed ip range. A massive attack of such magnitude isint that unlikely when you think of the several government who doesn't like BTC. To me it just seemed like it was another vulnerability. |
|
|
|
|
Not sure why you double posted, but sure. I get what you're saying.
But tell me, if the TX backlog was getting full. Then there was heavy DoS on the network. What would happen to the transactions request from Tor users? Would be still be processed at some point, even when the BTC system is inclined to drop off transactions that will not make it to a block after X conditions are met?
|
|
|
|
The longest chain is what the majority of the network chooses.
If the majority of the network will be on XT or anything else that support BIP101 (or others), than it will be the chain, it will be "the Bitcoin".
We have to see what will happen when the 1MB limit will be reached...
XT isint happening. There's already too much hashpower put toward not accepting XT. So unless XT supporter suddenly buy 75% up from 1% of the total network's hashrate. Its not happening. This blacklist score being an ip list uploaded by the dev is so shady, there's just no way actual volume of people will support it. Ever. Yes, because nobody ever changes their minds. Besides, if you're right then what is there to argue about? Seems like a lot of angst about something that has no chance of happening. Indeed. Nothing to argue about. I don't think the educated portion of the bitcoin community is going to reverse their decision on a fork that allow the devs to upload an IP black list. That is such a massive security flaw, its no wonder BIP100 gained 30 time the support of XT in 1 day. Of course that's just what i believe. I could be totally wrong and people may decide to purposely vote in a fork that allow a certain person to destroy bitcoin if he desire. Aren't you tired of going on and on about a feature that can be disabled by one line? -disableipprio Nope. I don't like how it allow people to trigger code that deprioritize certain IPs. Just the thought of adding this kind of code is heading down the wrong path. I have no idea what would be the effect on the network if a portion of the network did not use the default and used -disableipprio instead. |
|
|
|
Here's the part you missed: The IP list thats included in the commit: http://pastebin.com/F15aHDMJIt doesn't need to be downloaded from tor project. They are just all tor exit nodes!  What do you think that they'll care about this? They are public servers, they work as public servers! XT isn't even going to give a shit about them until it receives a possible DoS attack. And it isn't going to connect them, it will just put them under a low priority, to avoid getting too many connections from them (because the DoS attack) See? I guess you're the parrot. I said they put up a list of black listed ip. And they did. They get low priority. How can this be exploited, how easily can ips be added to the list is beside the point thats up to the code engineers to decide and i trust them over you; Leave me alone. |
|
|
|
portion of the bitcoin community is going to reverse their decision on a fork that allow the devs to upload an IP black list. Do you know the difference betwean the words "uploading" and "downloading"? Do you know that if you set a proxy then XT will not download any list from torproject.org ? Do you know that you can just start the node with this flag -disableipprio flag XT will not download any list from torproject.org ? And one more thing, do you know what does this code on Bitcoin Core?  vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bitcoin.sipa.be", "seed.bitcoin.sipa.be")); // Pieter Wuille
vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bluematt.me", "dnsseed.bluematt.me")); // Matt Corallo
vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("dashjr.org", "dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org")); // Luke Dashjr
vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bitcoinstats.com", "seed.bitcoinstats.com")); // Christian Decker
vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("xf2.org", "bitseed.xf2.org")); // Jeff Garzik
vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch", "seed.bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch")); // Jonas SchnelliYou are just another parrot. Here's the part you missed: The IP list thats included in the commit: http://pastebin.com/F15aHDMJIt doesn't need to be downloaded from tor project. |
|
|
|
|
Thats a funny post.
Might want to let know the end user that to vote, they can just point their hash at a BIP100 supporting pool.
|
|
|
|
portion of the bitcoin community is going to reverse their decision on a fork that allow the devs to upload an IP black list.
There isn't any fork that allow devs to upload any IP black list, you are just parrot that repeat the first word that you hear without know the meaning. Are you kidding? https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/commit/73c9efe74c5cc8faea9c2b2c785a2f5b68aa4c23The code has both a static list and a list that's downloaded when the node starts. It starts with a blacklist of Tor exit nodes that allow when there is a heavy load on the network to prioritize transaction coming from Tor nodes. In simpler terms. This allow to kick off certain transactions if the load remain for a certain period of time. |
|
|
|
The longest chain is what the majority of the network chooses.
If the majority of the network will be on XT or anything else that support BIP101 (or others), than it will be the chain, it will be "the Bitcoin".
We have to see what will happen when the 1MB limit will be reached...
XT isint happening. There's already too much hashpower put toward not accepting XT. So unless XT supporter suddenly buy 75% up from 1% of the total network's hashrate. Its not happening. This blacklist score being an ip list uploaded by the dev is so shady, there's just no way actual volume of people will support it. Ever. Yes, because nobody ever changes their minds. Besides, if you're right then what is there to argue about? Seems like a lot of angst about something that has no chance of happening. Indeed. Nothing to argue about. I don't think the educated portion of the bitcoin community is going to reverse their decision on a fork that allow the devs to upload an IP black list. That is such a massive security flaw, its no wonder BIP100 gained 30 time the support of XT in 1 day. Of course that's just what i believe. I could be totally wrong and people may decide to purposely vote in a fork that allow a certain person to destroy bitcoin if he desire. |
|
|
|
+1 all these scammer topics should be closed and moved a.s.a.p.
Click the report to mod button. Mods are pretty quick to react on those. |
|
|
|
cyberghosterman has just scammed for only 1.4 USD. Here is the proof just now I have endup returning his funds - http://prntscr.com/89bsmtHere is the proof for deal completed on AUG 15th - http://prntscr.com/89btntSome reputed guys help to put him a label as a SCAMMER please. Post it in scammer accusation. You're not getting your money back but you can prolly burn his account if this is legit proof. (Not familiar with Paypal chargeback proof) Edit: Just as i typed this another trusted user reported that that user defaulted on a loan. The end. Pretty funny. |
|
|
|
The longest chain is what the majority of the network chooses.
If the majority of the network will be on XT or anything else that support BIP101 (or others), than it will be the chain, it will be "the Bitcoin".
We have to see what will happen when the 1MB limit will be reached...
XT isint happening. There's already too much hashpower put toward not accepting XT. So unless XT supporter suddenly buy 75% up from 1% of the total network's hashrate. Its not happening. This blacklist score being an ip list uploaded by the dev is so shady, there's just no way actual volume of people will support it. Ever. |
|
|
|
|
Seriously? You don't even get 1 points on 10.
Please turn my dollar into 4.38e^17 in 24 hours please!
|
|
|
|
LMAO, I literally just saw this listing, googled the name, and this thread was the first result I clicked on. I was like "12TH @ 1000W for no cost at all?! Did I jump forward into the future overnight?!" I already reported the listing as a scam. Update: The listing has already been removed lmao You should totally give it the benefit of the doubt based on its nice 3D rendered "Pictures" of the units.  |
|
|
|
|
I'd be interested in such a deal, but the seller would probably have to be based in Canada. If not, but the shipping is not too bad, i would split shipping cost.
I would still use Escrow, however.
|
|
|
|
Great. I look forward slapping this on Solo CK Pool.  I'll need a way to leave it running 24/7. I'll probably do it on my GPU rig thats running 24/7 anyways. Just need to figure out how much power the USB port on that mobo can safely give. (H81 Pro BTC) |
|
|
|
Is there a way of creating a transaction that is accepted by ompanies like coinbase after you confirm it manually on two different computers.
Are you asking if its possible to manually submit a transaction to the network stating you actually own 10000000 Bitcoin? Absolutely. Can you have 2 different manually computers confirm it? Absolutely. Will that do anything? Absolutely not. This really doesn't belong in Dev Discussion. |
|
|
|
whats happening on slash pool is the voting for bigger blocks size .
That's what I thought at first too. But if you look at the pool stats this whale is not pointed at the BIP101 port. And it is a whale, since it's got over 12 PH/s. Is it a XT port or a BIP101 port? Because those arent the same thing. At all. I don't think it's easy to tell which ports folks are using on Slush. The one hint I have found is under the "Pool Statisitics" tab is a chart with PH rate graphs broken out with BIP101 as one of the labels. I don't see an XT labeled line. My simplistic understanding is that SLUSH is essentially "labeling" blocks according to which pool you use. I think that BIP101 is the moniker that he's using at this time, but the whole XT/BIP101/Blocksize fiasco is terribly confusing for most folks. It's quite possible I have this wrong, as I expect about 90% of the miners in the world do. Yes it is horribly confusing. Because many confuse XT with BIP100 or BIP101, they thing "Oh they all bring block increase so its all the same and finally there's actual code that was released that could do it! Wowe!" and they miss the whole fact XT include non related code as well. Only the BIP101 part of XT would cause a hardfork. So from the pool's perspective it makes sense to vote for/against that specific BIP, whether it's implemented in XT or in Core. I understand why they're classed together then, but i wouldn't personally. I'd say XT is a step worser. But anyways, i think avoiding the hard fork way is the way to go. With a strict implemention of BIP100, i think we would be better off. I hope Bitmain will feel that way too, since with their size, they can basically prevent it from happening since i think BIP100 would need over 75% of block for 10 days strait? |
|
|
|
whats happening on slash pool is the voting for bigger blocks size .
That's what I thought at first too. But if you look at the pool stats this whale is not pointed at the BIP101 port. And it is a whale, since it's got over 12 PH/s. Is it a XT port or a BIP101 port? Because those arent the same thing. At all. I don't think it's easy to tell which ports folks are using on Slush. The one hint I have found is under the "Pool Statisitics" tab is a chart with PH rate graphs broken out with BIP101 as one of the labels. I don't see an XT labeled line. My simplistic understanding is that SLUSH is essentially "labeling" blocks according to which pool you use. I think that BIP101 is the moniker that he's using at this time, but the whole XT/BIP101/Blocksize fiasco is terribly confusing for most folks. It's quite possible I have this wrong, as I expect about 90% of the miners in the world do. Yes it is horribly confusing. Because many confuse XT with BIP100 or BIP101, they thing "Oh they all bring block increase so its all the same and finally there's actual code that was released that could do it! Wowe!" and they miss the whole fact XT include non related code as well. It would be very nice to not see whales and big pools obfuscate their vote for XT by labeling it BIP10X. Hopefully the S7 hash stays out of it too. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
