 ça m'aiderait aussi : je dois acheter. 
|
|
|
|
Pointage :  |
|
|
|
and we talk about SSD now. have you buy a mecanical magnetic drive again ... for other than a backup (no 24h/24 plugged) ? no. I have replace all my HDD by SSD since 2 years now because the price is OK (less than 200 USD). strangely, it's the Bitcoin Full Node that it has the bigger SSD = 500GB.  that's why i talk always about the Storage. not a backup : a efficiently (fast) and reliability storage (chip). September 2016 :  December 2016 : |
|
|
|
Damn fiat is volatile.
 |
|
|
|
Fuck, it's HIGH !   |
|
|
|
Alors, tombera ... tombera pas ? |
|
|
|
Preuve par A+B ... qui ne fait pas C à la fin : http://www.businessbourse.com/2016/12/15/simone-wapler-le-grand-complot-contre-notre-argent-dont-bfm-business-parlait-ce-matin/« Ce que je ne trouve plus dans mon métier, je le prends dans les poches de mes clients […]
Et mon rêve, mon rêve serait de facturer les dépôts. Vous déposez 100 et je vous crédite de 98,50. Génial ! Le problème c’est qu’alors à ce moment-là les gens ne vont plus aller à la banque mettre leur argent.
Donc si on veut facturer les dépôts, avant, il faut discrètement supprimer l’argent liquide. Et ça va être compliqué. »
Là vous entendez quelques ricanements condescendants…
« Mais c’est ça le fil de l’histoire ! », proteste Nicolas Doze
A cet instant, Soumier se met à réfléchir tout haut…
« Pour ne pas aller à la banque, on met l’argent sous le matelas. Pour qu’il n’y ait plus d’argent sous le matelas, il ne faut plus qu’il n’y ait d’argent… »
Ce que je vous raconte depuis des années pénètre maintenant dans les studios d’une radio de grande écoute. Oui, oui ... c'est en France. Préparez-vous ! (comme dirais un collègue). |
|
|
|
however, double spenders /malicious users can put transactions with 1hr 59 minutes locktime.. try to sway merchants to accept the tx while unconfirmed to prevent having to wait near 2 hours for it to confirm (or not).. and then use RBF/CPFP to then make a new transaction to swipe the finds to a different destination after the merchant has lazily and wrongly done a trade based on an unconfirmed tx.
BIP65 : The system implemented in its current state does not allow for transactions containing a future nLockTime to be mined into a block until the lock time passes – the transaction sits in the mempool of full nodes on the network.
[...]
When used as part of an output script the new opcode OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY checks if the original transaction's nLockTime is larger than the most recent block, and if true the network deems the transaction invalid.
This script locks the output of a transaction, preventing them from being spent in a future transaction unless a certain duration has passed. and ... https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/4570 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2340#issuecomment-23233615 |
|
|
|
|
nodes for me ... are with a COMPLETE local blockchain.
when you have 102GB since 2009, i take care about the size of a block ... and love the SPAM feature include in this actual restriction of 1Mb (976kb).
i accept Segwit because it solves something.
block inflate solve NOTHING AT ALL.
---
are you even use the freenet network ... and learn what it's to decentralize the storage of a whole network over time ?
|
|
|
|
b. total size of the bunch of Tx higher than mempool capacity
you run out of fees before you can reach the 1/100 of the available whole network ... mempool.  |
|
|
|
i think you need to call your cries a 'block exaggeration'.. because its only you inflating the numbers of the real debate
wake up to reality and learn whats real.
I'm really award of a congestion scenario ... and Block Inflate is NOT a spam protection. If you want block Inflate, run 100 nodes ... and deal with this after 3 months.  |
|
|
|
i reject them, i never been a victim of malleability because i know what to look for.
Yes, good for you. But in a network view ... this BUG is NOT acceptable. network MUST refuse to transfer in mempool a wrongly connected transaction to "in-instant" other transaction in mempool. lucky for all, SPV don't have mempool. only miner ... and nodes. that's why we MUST delete this BUG before open the SPV feature in the nodes (and miners). that's why LN will be not deploy before SegWit. LN don't work with malleability BUG in action. LN must have access to mempool and be sure to not cross malleability transaction. if you believe that you can emit double-spend in a (enforced) segwit network, you dream in color ... litterally. https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_wallet_dev/ |
|
|
|
We just broke key resistance and you're predicting we're going down??  the problem is the discharge pics on this week (-10 USD for 200 BTC) ... someone have planned a big discharge (like the usual 2000 BTC in 1 shot). can be the start of the purge of annual return (sell, sell, sell !).  |
|
|
|
From 2016-12-09 to 2016-12-14. 129.13.252.36 HITS = 4442
129.13.252.47 HITS = 4432
52.205.213.45 HITS = 1378
59.110.63.71 HITS = 965
136.243.139.96 HITS = 647
45.33.65.130 HITS = 326
148.251.151.71 HITS = 277
52.76.95.246 HITS = 249
52.192.180.114 HITS = 248
52.62.33.159 HITS = 247
197.231.221.211 HITS = 214
54.223.77.14 HITS = 198
50.7.71.172 HITS = 180
52.32.80.148 HITS = 175
52.70.130.28 HITS = 158
54.94.211.146 HITS = 135
37.34.48.17 HITS = 104
52.29.215.16 HITS = 84
106.187.49.47 HITS = 62
72.36.89.11 HITS = 56
46.63.26.63 HITS = 55
Same list, ordered by IP range : 106.187.49.47 HITS = 62
129.13.252.36 HITS = 4442
129.13.252.47 HITS = 4432
136.243.139.96 HITS = 647
148.251.151.71 HITS = 277
197.231.221.211 HITS = 214
213.165.242.245 HITS = 49
37.34.48.17 HITS = 104
45.33.65.130 HITS = 326
45.55.45.119 HITS = 37
46.63.26.63 HITS = 55
47.222.206.109 HITS = 20
50.7.71.172 HITS = 180
52.192.180.114 HITS = 248
52.205.213.45 HITS = 1378
52.29.215.16 HITS = 84
52.32.80.148 HITS = 175
52.62.33.159 HITS = 247
52.70.130.28 HITS = 158
52.76.95.246 HITS = 249
54.186.75.87 HITS = 51
54.223.77.14 HITS = 198
54.94.211.146 HITS = 135
59.110.63.71 HITS = 965
72.36.89.11 HITS = 56
If you don't follow the rules of : - client version - disconnexion/connexion/reconnexion per day - or use a port circular scanner (after a ban) - or don't contribute at the Bitcoin network (blocks job) You are in this lists. |
|
|
|
lol
1. the double spend issue is still a problem
2. even the glossy roadmap explains the problem
3. block inflate.. oooh so ur against blocks being above 0.1mb in 2009, 0.3mb in 2012 0.5mb in 2013 0.7mb in 2014. 0.9mb in 2015..
4. as for LN
did you know it requires dual signatures..
1) In the ACTUAL network (mainnet) yes ... not in the TestNet SegWit. 2) You use the merchand problem, ok ... merchant MUST upgrade when SegWit is Enforced = problem solve. 3) Block Inflate want 8Mb permanently. You don't host a FULL node, yeah ... ? That's why you don't understand the decentralized manner of store the information and segregate this information for the storage. 4) And ? LN is supported by the server in an offchain server ... not a problem. Only benefic for HACKED exchanges (example, but plastic card is the next challenger for NFC/RFID Hack proximity sniffing). |
|
|
|
What if we only accept SegWit, but refuse the next step such as LN or something else that we don't know yet?
SegWit Allow LN. Block Inflate don't do this ... AT ALL. SegWit solve malleability hole and double-spend. Block Inflate don't solve this ... AT ALL. SegWit allow the SPV mode for the whole network WITH malleability FIX (include NODES). Block Inflate don't introduce this ... AT ALL.  Block Inflate is for members that they don't see the network solution. Only the coin/fees result ... in SPV world of wallet (on phones or exchanges or block explorer).  |
|
|
|
Le papy-boom : c'est le relais de croissance !
lol
la première génération a être taxée 4 fois : - 1 fois au boulôt - 1 fois la retraite - 1 fois la CSG/CRDS - plus de revalorisation de la retraite en fonction de l'inflation |
|
|
|
If you don't want SegWit ... i don't want a block inflate. Local Blockchain is at 102GB now. So, SegWit only for me (because i can prune after). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
