I can take the hit, it is when a bug that could have been easily found is making the entire network take a hit.
You're just speculating that it was an easy-to-find bug. Bugs happen. They've happened before and caused hard-forks. This is experimental software, and that has been reiterated by the developers over and over, especially lately now that the price has skyrocketed again. If you don't like it, don't send money to the Bitcoin Foundation. Send it to your own 3rd party source auditing group that can find these "easily found" bugs. Otherwise, seriously, stop embarrassing yourself over something which will correct itself. It's your fault you invested in experimental software and can't handle occasional issues. No some of the devs I talk to said it should have been check, we just had this conversation about the block limits last week. No one saw this coming? Give me a break. I will never send money to the foundation, I honestly think they are so miss-managed and just one hand washing the other, but that rant is for another day. As I predict you all call me a troll for things you have no understanding about. But you all think this is acceptable, then that is your opinion mine is that is very unacceptable and responsibility lies with Gavin cause he wanted to get paid and he messed up. He lead the community to a failure. Nothing is as valuable as a counter point, and the fact others may have resorted to calling you a troll take as mark that likely you have thrown up questions found hard to answer....and gone down the pyramid of reason a bit in oppositional ideas we may find closest/best truth, one sided agreement covers faults So I for one do appreciate your views, and that they are forcefully put. |
|
|
|
So who do you blame? I mean the blame lies on Gavin, I think. He is project lead, he is getting paid which means no more BS that he is doing this free, he should take the blame. If one payment is breaking his bank I be surprised, but I think that this is mess up and someone needs to be held responsible. But of course no one will take my side, and you all call me a troll, but bugs like this need responsibility behind them.
He why don't you go medieval and fetch the pitchforks instead. Removing bread from the mouth of a man (and his family if he has one to support) isn't fun enough, you should definitely eviscerate him... What about the bread out of my mouth? Time is money. What do you do for a living gweedo? If you make a mistake, do they withhold your paycheck? To be honest bitcoin is my job, so maybe you hobbyist aren't affected but it hits hard for me to be down for a couple hours. You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team. When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew. Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing. Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers. Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?
Gavin is paid, I think this month his payment should be revoked for this bug getting thru. Or not. So who do you blame? I mean the blame lies on Gavin, I think. He is project lead, he is getting paid which means no more BS that he is doing this free, he should take the blame. If one payment is breaking his bank I be surprised, but I think that this is mess up and someone needs to be held responsible. But of course no one will take my side, and you all call me a troll, but bugs like this need responsibility behind them. Hmm....I think the idea of a distributed anything is that it garners enough people who through self interest (ie bieng invested in the crypto) stand the best possible chance of fixing it having one person to blame....may demonstrate a weakness in a distributed system Gavin's pay and terms are just part of a debugging routine instituted by the larger [free] market, the blame if it is to be leveled is at us all to.... I posit that the allocation of blame to a individual, is myopic/archaic, but convenient idea to the lenses of our mind to focus on....broaden you mind-scape and appreciate the interwoven nature of systems and outcomes. Eg A Car is an expression of pheno type of the genome of human DNA, but to look at human DNA you would not see this readily. No Gavin whined about getting paid, now he is getting paid. The blame needs to fall on his shoulders cause this is his job, otherwise I would like to know what he is getting paid for? This doesn't demonstrate any weakness in that part, I could go and look thru the github blame and lay it on that person shoulders, but what good would that do. Gavin is lead developer and someone needs to step up and take responsibility for why people are losing money. Also I brought up when the foundation started paying him why they started paying him, everyone again sat and called me a troll cause I said paying Gavin cause he is and I quote "indispensable", that is also another reason why I am blaming him. Sorry to break to you, but this distributed protocol is controlled by one guy, and a foundation of businesses. I Also add you are not forced to use this protocol, you may go to others or start you own... see my points supra on LTC/TRC Othercoin The cryptocoin paradigm is here to stay...but which instantiation(s) [of it] will be successful for which time frame is up in the air. |
|
|
|
So who do you blame? I mean the blame lies on Gavin, I think. He is project lead, he is getting paid which means no more BS that he is doing this free, he should take the blame. If one payment is breaking his bank I be surprised, but I think that this is mess up and someone needs to be held responsible. But of course no one will take my side, and you all call me a troll, but bugs like this need responsibility behind them.
He why don't you go medieval and fetch the pitchforks instead. Removing bread from the mouth of a man (and his family if he has one to support) isn't fun enough, you should definitely eviscerate him... What about the bread out of my mouth? Time is money. What do you do for a living gweedo? If you make a mistake, do they withhold your paycheck? I humbly suggest my point is somewhat cast further than this, see Gavin paid or not may argue that you need 10 gavins to do his job, and perhaps he is right...or wrong, consider there is more than one paid person at Visa or Bank X. the best system (IMHO) is where we are all bound in to contribute to the extend we get the return (that cannot be taken from us by parasitical forces...cough *tax* cough) I don't disagree with your points on Gavin per se (assuming evidence backs yo up), maybe he did not perform to par, I don't know , Perhaps I could Ask what would you see as better solution? would this solution (likely) averted what just happened? To be honest bitcoin is my job, so maybe you hobbyist aren't affected but it hits hard for me to be down for a couple hours. You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team. When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew. Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing. Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers. Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?
Gavin is paid, I think this month his payment should be revoked for this bug getting thru. Or not. So who do you blame? I mean the blame lies on Gavin, I think. He is project lead, he is getting paid which means no more BS that he is doing this free, he should take the blame. If one payment is breaking his bank I be surprised, but I think that this is mess up and someone needs to be held responsible. But of course no one will take my side, and you all call me a troll, but bugs like this need responsibility behind them. Hmm....I think the idea of a distributed anything is that it garners enough people who through self interest (ie bieng invested in the crypto) stand the best possible chance of fixing it having one person to blame....may demonstrate a weakness in a distributed system Gavin's pay and terms are just part of a debugging routine instituted by the larger [free] market, the blame if it is to be leveled is at us all to.... I posit that the allocation of blame to a individual, is myopic/archaic, but convenient idea to the lenses of our mind to focus on....broaden you mind-scape and appreciate the interwoven nature of systems and outcomes. Eg A Car is an expression of pheno type of the genome of human DNA, but to look at human DNA you would not see this readily. No Gavin whined about getting paid, now he is getting paid. The blame needs to fall on his shoulders cause this is his job, otherwise I would like to know what he is getting paid for? This doesn't demonstrate any weakness in that part, I could go and look thru the github blame and lay it on that person shoulders, but what good would that do. Gavin is lead developer and someone needs to step up and take responsibility for why people are losing money. Also I brought up when the foundation started paying him why they started paying him, everyone again sat and called me a troll cause I said paying Gavin cause he is and I quote "indispensable", that is also another reason why I am blaming him. Sorry to break to you, but this distributed protocol is controlled by one guy, and a foundation of businesses. |
|
|
|
You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team. When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew. Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing. Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers. Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?
Gavin is paid, I think this month his payment should be revoked for this bug getting thru. Or not. So who do you blame? I mean the blame lies on Gavin, I think. He is project lead, he is getting paid which means no more BS that he is doing this free, he should take the blame. If one payment is breaking his bank I be surprised, but I think that this is mess up and someone needs to be held responsible. But of course no one will take my side, and you all call me a troll, but bugs like this need responsibility behind them. Hmm....I think the idea of a distributed anything is that it garners enough people who through self interest (ie bieng invested in the crypto) stand the best possible chance of fixing it having one person to blame....may demonstrate a weakness in a distributed system Gavin's pay and terms are just part of a debugging routine instituted by the larger [free] market, the blame if it is to be leveled is at us all to.... I posit that the allocation of blame to a individual, is myopic/archaic, but convenient idea to the lenses of our mind to focus on....broaden you mind-scape and appreciate the interwoven nature of systems and outcomes. Eg A Car is an expression of pheno type of the genome of human DNA, but to look at human DNA you would not see this readily. |
|
|
|
You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team. When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew. Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing. Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers. Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?
I have done qa, and programed some time ago....but fair point to you..... also I am doing something by asking these questions I have just extracted a nuance/detail of the problem that may not have been previously expressed...with as much clarity....I am meta programing/debuging...the meat space wetware, to throw out greater detail on the nature of the bug with questionGetFrom.BrainOfDevTeam() Sighhhhh There was, indeed, testing on the testnet with a full (1 MB) block. This was accepted by both the 0.7 and 0.8 versions. There is no concern here.
Slush's block should have produced the same valid block. However, the block was structured carefully as to expose a problem in 0.7 that was never discovered. So the problem was a pathological block, not simply a large block. Aha, seems we have flushed out a nuance in the problem!!! |
|
|
|
This is not accurate.
There was, indeed, testing on the testnet with a full (1 MB) block. This was accepted by both the 0.7 and 0.8 versions. There is no concern here.
Slush's block should have produced the same valid block. However, the block was structured carefully as to expose a problem in 0.7 that was never discovered. Not only was this an extremely difficult problem to catch, but its finding would in fact not have been accelerated with a mixed testnet. The introduction of 0.8 into the equation would actually delay finding the bug, as it would mean less time spent testing edge cases on 0.7.
[1] I don't quite buy you could not dial up the test parameters/code substrate variants to find this with both operating [2] If I am wrong about [1] and I accept I may well be, then BTC is functioning as a testbed for TRC/LTC/Other coin (esp SHA), and that amount of value will be arbitraged out of BTC to OtherCoin |
|
|
|
There was, indeed, testing on the testnet with a full (1 MB) block. This was accepted by both the 0.7 and 0.8 versions. There is no concern here.
Slush's block should have produced the same valid block. However, the block was structured carefully as to expose a problem in 0.7 that was never discovered. So the problem was a pathological block, not simply a large block. Aha, seems we have flushed out a nuance in the problem!!! |
|
|
|
You of course tested both v0.7 and 0.8 on testnet found the flaw and reported it to the development team. When they ignored you, you went viral sharing the incompatibility with everyone you knew. Thanks goodness we had you ... er wait you didn't do any testing. Most of the developers are unpaid volunteers. Given your extensive testing experience why aren't YOU doing something?
I have done qa, and programed some time ago....but fair point to you..... |
|
|
|
|
The Bug Could be found if testing was done by having both 0.7.0, and 0.8.0 tested together in the test environment under suitable conditions, and watching the outputs with various bug catches, eg BlockFill.percent()
There should be a standardized set of test tools that extract information about critical parameters.
It is unchallenged that not all people will upgrade uniformally so why the 0.8.0 is not being tested with prior versions is a false argument, doomed to throw a bug out, and this has now been proven QED
I am somewhat disappointed 0.7.0 was not the test environs ( I assumed you were doing that) and more disappointed that currently a good percentage of "talented people" are claiming that this bug could not have been detected
It seems dev is concentraing on single points like upgrade this upgrade that, but not viewing BTC as the full system as it is
(and I suggest the full system maybe Crypto/BTC is about re-aragning human activity/social fabric...and that why is that to be very distibuted....not on a few asic miners and not through an exchange that can calim 80% of all bitcoin, though the latter is not such a problem)
When I write a collision engine for example I ratchet up/down various parameters to the absurd to see what will happen, and I use various checks to test faults, eg use conservation of momentum forums versus velocity/position/mass / momentum eqns
similar weighted methods could be used in almost any test environment
What you are doing by not doing this is BTC will tend to be the best possible test bed for something like LTC or maybe TRC latter using a closer system to BTC than LTC, or other Coin, as LTC/TRC will now not make this mistake!!!, but BTC stress-tested everything for them.
LTC/TRC are going to at least arbitrage in from BTC the security they gain BTC mistakes and from not being first
TL:DR
BTC is turning into a possible test system for LTC/TRC etc
|
|
|
|
Transactions are 4x faster for one.
For one? Anything else?... Different Hashing algorithm from Bitcoin's SHA256. This separates Bitcoin ASICs from mining on Litecoin chain. Basically it is a fork in the road for miners and their hardware. Some may run asics on bitcoin and GPUs on litecoin for months to come. Some might go one way or the other. The difference soon will be that those buying ASIC devices can't just switch mining to litecoin from bitcoin. They are locked in with an ASIC. the more distributed a currency the stronger it is both in acceptance and power a few asic miners centralize the market, not so good, the asic miners maybe in the process of undercutting their own currency, by taking control of it all. Also their needs to be a killer app to have decentralized exchanges agrigated p2p so getting in and out of fiat cannot be controlled by say gox and co at least until bitcoint can actually be used at the corner store |
|
|
|
Can't be an early adopter with latecoin. I mean litecoin.
you can right now relative to btc |
|
|
|
I put this in another thread as well, but it fits here also:
If LTC rises faster than BTC at this time, it's a Tulip bubble. Trust me on this. People aren't really thinking it through, the rise is not based on anything else than technicals. I looked at LTC recently to see if I should diversify my Bitcoin holdings, but I came to the conclusion that there is absolutely nothing to see there. Litecoin is used exactly for 1 thing, mining new litecoins to either sell them for bitcoins or dollars, or to hoard them (which is is highly questionable since it's a Tulip bubble).
Nothing else whatsoever is going on in the Litecoin economy. The technology itself does not have any significant advantages to Bitcoin, making it near impossible for Litecoin to even slightly challenge the network effect of Bitcoin. So, again, you might see LTC price rise temporarily at a higher rate than BTC, but there is nothing real going on. The whole LTC economy is based on people mining new LTC's, it's a dead end loop.
the tulipers calling the tulipers etc etc LTC as I see it has one huge advantage, gpu miners, and gpu cards are going to outstrip ASIC miners in thier power and rate of production and mass distribution, so gpu will find a much broader base, already, the centralisation of ASICS is a bad thing IMHO this may have bee a flaw in BTC system but then....something better may come out and take over LTC ...! Also alot of people want to be early adopters so may just cash out of BTC to LTC so they can be and in the process it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy..... |
|
|
|
The prospects of large ASIC miners coming to town drove many to the LTC's side of fence.
It proves a truly distributed money creation (mining) is important to a cryptocurrency.
Interesting point perhaps the more distributed the mining can be, then that currency will be more successful as it draws in l larger base if so LTC may overtake BitCoin |
|
|
|
No! 20+ pasword is NOT enough.
Use 50+ STRONG password.
 no so sure about this open to brute force with common word dict so word1word2word3word4 try |
|
|
|
Anyone using a 3rd party wallet host will get all their coins stolen, confiscated, or magically disappeared at some point. Nobody should use them, ever. It's safer, faster, and infinitely smarter to secure your own wallet file yourself.
how? have the private key backed up
[2] My online wallet (blockchain.info) is encrypted with about 20 wordletter password and the sending of info is all opensource crypto
the worst that can happen is the online wallet service gets shut down, and they get a load of hashedupcryptobabble, and so I fire up bitcoin qt, elctum or whatever and carry on. |
|
|
|
I have made 20+ back ups of my wallet.dat, encrypted them in trucrypt containers made another 20 backup of that container, and emailed them to 5 different email accounts, and some other backup devices.
Great. But why would you delete it then? So if some one steals my computer they their is no wallet.dat for them to get!!!!! or use or see. |
|
|
|
So after I encrypt may wallet on Bt-qt if I wanted to use and old un encrypted wallet why would this not work?  I thought BitCoin qt was just a window on the BlockChain, so you could still use your address using you private key? Does encrypting a my wallet stop me look at those address and using them say from blockchain.info wallet if I installed a new copy of Bitcoin qt then could I use the old non encrypted wallet exactly what is Bitocin QT doing that can stop me using my old wallet elsewhere??? it must be doing something to the blockchain right??? or else how would it know??? |
|
|
|
Fiat money IS a crime. We are born into a world and we accept things when they seem to work. But when you start to look at it and think in critical terms you realize how much faith you must put into the hands of the issuers; and 2008 proved that that is an unwarranted offering. But the trick is to change the world without having to tear everything down and start all over again (which just leads back to the same old). We must slowly take away the power of the governments by becoming independent, untaxable, and indifferent. The internet, and p2p especially, gives the people the ability to collectively work from the ground up. Our government's in the west were founded 300 years ago and we think they are effective in the modern day? We rush to replace anything else ineffective by the power of technology but the houses of our governments are the SAME, filled with the privileged classes that assume they are there to serve the public because they know what's best for us, and then take our money when their friends screw up in the markets and cut them a carte blanche backed by the work debt of the masses.
I get what you are saying, but in all honesty, its naive thinking. The world has hardly changed politically since the days of the Greeks. People have always found that when they can't get what they want, they try and find a way to create their own rules. It all works out great for them, but eventually, others within the group want something else, find that the rules don't work for them, and the cycle continues! I guess the reason for this difference of opinion is our backgrounds. I live in a place where there are daily reminders of 2000 years of man's desire to change their own world. Every few generations, a revolution occurs and life changes. However, the dirty part of reality is that its the same people who are on the top of the pile. You think the privileged classes will get removed by bitcoin? Forget it, the reason they are there in the first place is because they know how to play the game. Bitcoin is just a handy way to move cash. No more, No less. yes but never before have we been able to exert power and rearrange society if full sight but also anon....bitcoin is rearageing society |
|
|
|
For now, the brew solution is the easiest. To do it yourself without brew... sounded like a total bear!
I'm about to post a bounty thread in the Armory sub-forum, to encourage someone to help me make a distributable OSX package, once and for all. I have zilch OSX experience, and people who do have OSX experience are struggling with this -- so it's way too daunting for me.
You'll see a thread, soon. There will probably be $1,000 worth of bounty for it!
make sure you get a few indepnedants to verify it....for bugs and worse esp if you know zip about it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
