As discussed before here: http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=189.0But since that thread has died and no one really got any wiser of it, I'm creating a poll. Holding IRC meetings would be quite handy in discussing, maybe an hour or so per meeting? Anyone wishing to speak would just drop me a message. So, what would be a good time to hold the meetings? Do not forget to note your timezone!  Edit: People, please post a time which is convenient for you. It helps a lot knowing when people are available. |
|
|
|
|
Being the middle man?
For 50 BTC I'll be your middle man for any bitcoin transaction!
There's probably some market in it, who knows?!
edit: Send me a message on the forums or drop by on IRC if you need me!
|
|
|
|
What I would like to see is lower time to get started – currently, it takes several hours just to download all the blocks, which amount to few megabytes of data.
Or does it take so long because my PC has to verify all the blocks?
You can use the 'addnode' flag on the command line to add a node, and it will generally go faster, I heard so from people, worth a shot! |
|
|
|
There is one other way to change the amount of coins in circulation however, the dev(s) have a key that lets them print money. odds are good the dev(s) will make a shit ton of coins from this and not delete the key. unless someone somehow gets the key then you can't add new currency technologically.
How does that work? As far as I understand it, new bitcoins can be generated only by creating a new block, 50 BC at a time (or now). If the devs have some way to generate new bitcoins quickly, that would pretty much defeat the purpose of having P2P network with no central authority. Instead of trusting banks, we would have to trust the devs. I second this, if you don't trust the developers? Get the source code, read it and compile it yourself! |
|
|
|
thats ok - I'm not worried about disk i/o - although if I was using a SSD based netbook, that might be an issue. When travelling, I use a "wireless broadband" link - as they call them here in Australia - internet via mobile phone. Mine has a 1Gb per month limit, adequate for getting emails on the road, but not heavy p2p usage! Just wanted to be sure that using bitcoin on that link would not max me out in a few days!
Thanks,
Trevor
Note that the statistics theymos gave can and in my opinion mostly is just keepalive messages and not actual block sharing data. If you turn on Bitcoin every 24 hours or so? I don't think it should max out your datalimit. Then again, only way to find out is to try it! |
|
|
|
Hello, all  I'm new to Bitcoin. I'm running client on Ubuntu 10.04 x86 VM with two CPUs and 2.5GB memory. The VM's running in Hyper-V on Windows Server 2008 x64, on old Dell SC1435 with Quad-Core AMD Operon 2376 and 8BG memory. It's been up for two days, has 15 connections, and currently sees 65,564 blocks. This morning, it generated "50", and tells me that they'll mature in 9 more blocks. That seems more-or-less normal, yes? What's odd is that it's running at 300-500 khash/s when otherwise idle, but is using only about 1% host CPU on average, with occasional bursts to 10%-20%. The bursts seem to correlate with disk and network activity, which makes sense. Anyway, I'm curious why I'm not seeing higher khash/s, given that there's plenty of resources available. Could it be because the VM is running without Linux integration services (which I haven't managed to install successfully)? Or could it be because I'm not port forwarding? And FWIW, I can't do that because I'm connecting through OpenVPN. How can I increase resource utilization? Alternatively, I'm sure that Ubuntu would be happy with one CPU and 1GB memory. Would running four such VMs be workable? Thank you. This is fun. Well, running Bitcoin in an VM slows it down, significantly. It's better to run it directly on the host operating system. I suggest you do that. |
|
|
|
|
Why would you need a bank if you can backup your wallet.dat on regular basis?
I seem no need for it to be honest.
|
|
|
|
|
30 MB to get the initial blocks or something, I'm not sure, someone needs to confirm this.
Also: It shouldn't take that much up beside the regular "new block" broadcast.
Maybe 100 kb/h?
|
|
|
|
I've written this great (well, to my knowledge) wiki article for getting started here: http://www.bitcoin.org/wiki/doku.php?id=getting_started. So please read through it before you ask any questions. Also: Any questions can we asked in here. (Note: We have an IRC channel on irc.freenode.net , It's #bitcoin-dev) |
|
|
|
I (and many other "tin-foil-hatters") do not like nor will use software that will automatically update without our consent, and fully-automatic updating does not look good security-wise.
I second this ... highly... It'd be a security risk. I would like a popup that alarms the user of any updates though. Like "Bitcoin has updates! We suggest you update as soon as possible, go to http://bitcoin.org/ to get [version]." or something. |
|
|
|
Am I the only one who thinks this is unwise at this moment? Bitcoin's only at version 0.3, bitcoind is far from complete, we have an incomplete API, might be bugs in it, who knows?! I hope for the sake of Bitcoin that Slashdot does not accept the story. If we do get Slashdotted, we might face people calling Bitcoin "buggy" or "feature lacking". Maybe I'm just being nuts or some doomsday thinker, but I'd really hate to see Bitcoin dropping.  I think it's a great idea. The program runs pretty rock solid. It's been a long time since I last heard of any serious stability problems. I really doubt anyone will call Bitcoin buggy, but there's really no harm if they do. If the influx causes a problem, it's better that we catch the resulting bugs now rather than later. I wouldn't be surprised if being slashdotted resulted in a few more quality programmers examining the code, so as far as I can tell, there are only benefits to increased publicity. Well, I've had some problems, it's stable now. But I'm saying the backend isn't prepared for the slashdot effect. Anyhow, I'm just worried, that's all.  |
|
|
|
BitCoin already has all the defense it needs: you can't change the core behavior of BitCoin and still be compatible with the "official" BitCoin software.
What determines this compatibility? What if some people decide to fork the software? For now, Satoshi more or less has Bitcoin under his control, but what happens if/when popularity explodes and anyone can edit the code? This is not a criticism of the open source model; I am just uncertain of what happens once you start having a proliferation of different clients. The changes don't have to be radical, they could be subtle and subversive. Satoshi does have Bitcoin under control right now. We might consider enforcing a "we only support official clients" rule in the future, if there's some sort of Bitcoin fork, ofcourse. I'm not talking about an entire different genesis block, but a fork that adds features or modifies behavior. But I'm talking about a fork that has its own website, uses the same genesis block the network's using right now, etc. (And I'm defiantly not talking about custom SVN builds here, Hi there Laszlo! ) |
|
|
|
Am I the only one who thinks this is unwise at this moment? Bitcoin's only at version 0.3, bitcoind is far from complete, we have an incomplete API, might be bugs in it, who knows?! I hope for the sake of Bitcoin that Slashdot does not accept the story. If we do get Slashdotted, we might face people calling Bitcoin "buggy" or "feature lacking". Maybe I'm just being nuts or some doomsday thinker, but I'd really hate to see Bitcoin dropping. |
|
|
|
|
It would be handy to see how many hashes per second are being performed by bitcoind.
So a command like "gethashespersecond" or "getkhashespersecond" would be great.
(If we add a "kilohashes per second" command, I suggest we return a floating point number, not an integer.)
So, what do you guys think?
|
|
|
|
- 20% faster hashing
Amazing!  - German, Dutch and Italian translations (thanks to DataWraith, Xunie and Joozero)
I feel proud now. Thanks to everyone for helping out with the project, I love opensource! |
|
|
|
I will do it for 5000 BTC
5000 * 0.005 = 25 US dollars, and since the price right now at Bitcoin Market is 0.007 or something, that makes it 35 US Dollars. Quite expensive for a 10 dollar game, isn't it? |
|
|
|
Hi there, I'd like to buy Osmos ( http://www.hemispheregames.com/osmos/ ), but I don't have a creditcard and don't like using paypal. So the person who will buy it for me, will make the transaction with their creditcard or paypal, and I'll send that person 1250 BTC. I know this doesn't add up to the 10 USD that is the price, but hey! You get Osmos with it for free! Who wants to buy it for me?! PS: I wanna download it myself from their site, if that's possible. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
