 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »
|
"Multiplier" implies an output greater than the sum of the inputs, which is impossible. Perhaps it is just a misnomer.
Nope, not a misnomer. Stellar radiation, upon striking aluminium, radiates 2-3x more than input. Nasa had an engine designed, for satellites and interplanetary observatories, that used a radiation multiplier propulsion engine (which produced 8x output), through stages I believe. 2-3x the input you say? So we can just take a small piece of aluminium heat it up with a lighter, use that piece of aluminium to heat up 3 new pieces, use these three pieces to heat up 9 pieces of aluminum etc Then we could have a room full of very hot aluminum and use it to boil water. The steam could then be used to generate electricity. Awesome a simple lighter and some aluminium could replace a nuclear power plant. But there are more ways to get free energy, just check out youtube. |
|
|
|
I know that the "age" of the coins is a factor. If these coins were just traded or mined it takes longer, I think. Perhaps someone with a larger brain could verify this or debunk it.
The size is also important, so if his bitcoins consisted of many small inputs the fee was too low. |
|
|
|
can you give some estimation for how many wallets or different keys these coins belong to
I mean,
can it be seen if those are in hands of a few owners or many ?
They are fresh coins. If they were all mined on fresh adresses (which is likely) it's impossible to link them together. |
|
|
|
I wonder if we could have a "superblock" every so often that is simply a hash of all the previous blocks. In essence you start out with a new genesis block and chain each time but old coins are still valid because they are in this "superblock".
I dont know if that makes sense...
You can't simply hash all the blocks and forget about everything else because you need the unspend transactions. If you hash all the blocks you will get something like this: aab4bab5af2a3deb2706954cffc89ad5cbed6dcc328d9e9daef3483cadbfa053 a simple plain hash. Now how do you know if Bob has bitcoins? And how do you know how much bitcoins Bob has? That's impossible to know if you only have that hash. Pruning works more like that: Let's say we have 3 people A, B and C A sends 1 BTC to B and B sends that bitcoin to C. That means we have 2 transactions. But we can forget about the first one if we are pretty sure that there wont be a chain reorg because your client doesn't have to know if A sent 1BTC to B it only needs to know that C has 1BTC. |
|
|
|
if you found a share that was a BLOCK It doesn't work this way. If it did work that way, you could just keep the block for yourself. You can't tell which share solves a block for the pool. You can. But you can't change the payout address of the block after it was solved or you have to solve it again if you change it which is why you can't keep it for yourself. |
|
|
|
If the bitcoin value keeps rising over the coming months to up to and over $20.00 a coin then each BTC0.0005 transfer fee would equal $0.01 and above. Talking about bitcoin having free or very low transfer fees wouldn't it be best to move the decimal place and make a bitcoin instead of worth $20.00 a coin but to $2.00 a coin keep the transfer fee BTC0.0005 and have 210,000,000 coins in total instead of 21,000,000 coins.
that would confuse ppl alot and it's useless. I think the bitcoin client needs an option to set the fee rules for miners and for users manually and there needs to be a way to resend a transaction with more fee if it doesn't get included in a block. Then the market could form it's own fee. But talking about fees right now is pretty useless because they are not even 1% of the block reward which means we could divide the fees by 10 right now and noone would get hurt. |
|
|
|
So I notice there are currently 6 servers the Electrum client is aware of ... just wondering if the servers can be made aware of other servers in the same way that the client is?
I didn't take a closer look to the source but i think electrum uses irc to find servers, so yeah it wouldn't be a problem for the server to be aware of other servers. But why would you need that? |
|
|
|
|
I've set up an electrum server some time ago for me and my friends because we didn't want to download the blockchain. I've made it public now, it doesn't have a domain but the IP should show up in the server list: 176.9.206.164
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I've found it and flipped through it this morning. It looks like it's based on python so I'm pretty sure I'll be able to get something going. The loading times for the database sure seem pretty daunting, but this just sounds like an excuse for the hardware upgrade I keep telling myself I need!
the only upgrade that has any effect is a SSD instead of a regular harddisk |
|
|
|
|
you better format your PC
|
|
|
|
Why is gravity 9.8 ? Because God ( Satoshi ) said it will be  nah  it's because of the mass and the size of the earth |
|
|
|
8 here not forwarding ANYTHING.
Have better things to do than seeing my balance emptied by some bugs.
And you think it's easier to exploit that bug when ppl are connecting to you instead of you connecting to them? Must be a really special bug |
|
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
mQENBE/l0bEBCADbb5RU8u8+IUMcYAKwI/YM24LJHT/T5Q4n5bxFpPmDxO8o/Gma
ocVLHpSI3LeZPZKE8D6b03dRIi3SXaI+vYa/syeB675Xr+PxecxdBtiGur/Iygf9
9Mvp2fANWx7AUEWixr9PQ4J0BNxEt0MVIVEo/E785hZ94WS+zyAqb99hGdu8lIT2
BLuXKKVN1EfdV/NCmKH7J5ZMKFIlhjZXS/SxBQyiOGjhwtXylHwTxAgtCYRVq1c2
g5PuWjX428/stL72gRtCI7hcHIkFBjxy1oYxOLTC1OyglGvIP+dMUJs1U6bOWTpA
I8AUPOzd2WeilR7UCRqXTfbNCewUBNdSaWWRABEBAAG0OXdhYmJlciAoZ2VuZXJh
dGVkIGJ5IFJldHJvc2hhcmUpIDx3YWJiZXJzQHJvY2tldG1haWwuY29tPokBNgQT
AQIAIAUCT+XRsQIbLwYLCQgHAwIEFQIIAwQWAgMBAh4BAheAAAoJEKipthk37SqN
ov4IAIYmMXfJNm+R6FxE5S408dddsE2tLjsPw3qkr2xUWAufrhe7xpg/3+GgJLJE
4s8Igzdg2k0k7xH9xuhmWuSMRSr3wyn7TSRsKriytDkkeXcfU5fia89ls2NzqJXL
4ajhzoTLxJI8SnS2OvjNk0QjulO+IOv6BZDop2buOcqiAdMkGLaFRb0d+2oxx9HQ
fqdsbgGVuyh6Z8JYo++x6arCOw7z7DjUNCC8iChXiOo52/DpQL20QrXKNcZQJKb8
FVz0GVBVe5WwxtFOYmmIrKz6bDvRYtZFEfuS6nxeMejB3d9nq7wuzTF+40SjSlH/
OWlDxjKD2FmrAfpCW0PalCLymaY=
=sD76
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
--SSLID--e297ec2e464986b32faeb0a575fd28d0;--LOCATION--home;
--LOCAL--192.168.1.230:29316;--EXT--0.0.0.0:29316; |
|
|
|
Please keep in mind that the "valid block policy" only concerns blocks with "illegal" contents (double-spends concerning previous blocks, wrong signatures, syntax problems etc). There's no policy concerning which transactions a miner will accept, or on top of which block he'll mine.
but by adding another illegal content (the type of transaction i paid not to include) I'm effectively changing the valid block policy which isn't a good thing imho. |
|
|
|
Splits happen from time to time, that's not working against the network. Plus, why would you generate a block and pay the majority of the miners to overrun it? You'd be throwing away all the reward of the block by doing so.
But this split can go on for days. If I pay 50% of the miners and then release my double spend block the split will continue until the miners I paid build a longer chain because they will never accept the chain of the other miners who included my block. By paying nodes not to include certain blocks we change their valid block policy you can't compare that to todays splits which are caused by block propagation lag. |
|
|
|
It's not really "working against the rest of the network".
Hm I think it is. Let's say i pay the biggest pools to not accept double spends of my transaction. Then I create a block including the double spend and broadcast it. That will result in a network split were the miners i've paid are still mining on the old block and the miners i didn't pay will work on the new block because its a legal block. I suppose the fee for such a guaranteed transaction shouldn't be too much which means that it's pretty cheap to split the network (well you still need some mining power but around 100Gh/s should be enough to cause one split a day) |
|
|
|
|
About the con that you mentioned:
If 50% of the network know about your contract and a solominer that doesn't mines on the longest chain, then he's wasting his work because all the major pools are still working on an older block.
So with your proposal you are bribing the major pools to work against the rest of the network if there's a double spend to your transaction. That doesn't sound like a good thing and it also decreases the income of the normal miners and lowers the overall security of the network.
|
|
|
|
It wasn't this bad before the transaction volume rose. Back then, there was an advantage to paying the fee. But now the fee-payers have to wait just as long.
Yea but it looks like the ones without a transaction fee have a much higher priority. I think we should increase the importance of the fee compared to the priority for making it into the next block |
|
|
|
|
to use the hashes for something else is only possible if you have to hash the same thing again and since bitcoin block hashes are kinda specific I don't think you can use the hashes again.
And there's another problem. Let's assume i've 1GHash/s and im saving all my hashes. That would be around 32GB EACH SECOND. No harddisk supports such high rates and even PCIE supports only around 1-2GB/s i think. So it's impossible to store the hashes and hashes without inputs are useless which means that it would be far more than 32GB/s .
|
|
|
|
|
You should use p2pool. It's not that hard to set up and there are plenty of tutorials around. You won't have to pay any fees and you get the TX fees too. Another advantage is, that you're pretty much your own pool then which means it is on as long as your internet works and the p2pool client didn't crash (which never happened for me). And of course since you're running your own pool noone can scam you as long as your p2pool client isn't corrupted.
If you consider setting up your own p2pool node please note that you will have some more stales, but don't worry as long as your stale rate isn't higher than the stale rate of the p2pool network you won't lose anything, sounds strange but makes sense if you know how p2pool works.
I'd suggest to install a p2pool node on one mining rig and point all other rigs to it and you should use a traditional as backup pool.
|
|
|
|
|
