Not the way I understood it. From my perception, the coinbase reward is reduced by 90% of the redeemable transaction fees. This is only to determine the coinbase reward value. The transaction fees are still redeemed. Let's say it's a smoother way to go from coinbase reward to tx fee reward instead of just cutting BTC output in half at defined milestones. Destroying the transaction fees would be dangerous in too many ways to be implemented in such simple fashion.

Sure, but what's the point? A smoother transition to fee based rewards? Looks to me like it's biased on inflation if that's the case.


Looks to me like he's talking about coinbase reward based off this math, meaning there is no difference left, just this much coins given to the solver.

Solo mining tool or pool miner, it's all the same. The only difference is if you link the miner to a pool or your own instance of bitcoind.exe

As for the 4way SSE2 CPU miner going around, it performs SSE operations on 128bit integers, so I'm pretty sure that'll fill your 64 bit bus.

I presume those kind of services would still offer regular paying systems, such as cc and PayPal. Just have them submit a cc to register a pay account, then let them choose to pay with BTC.

+1 to that. Also, this thread doesn't belong in the dev&tech

A legitimate Bitcoin detractor wouldn't be holding BTC, nor bother hijacking a thread instead of making his point loud and clear in his own anti Bitcoin thread, let alone spew bullshit on individual users or pretend he's loaded with some BTC that he won't unload cuz hey the price ain't fair... really? Is that how dry your "anti Bitcoinism" is right now? Does it get more and more comical as the price reaches new highs?

Idiots demanding for more democracy... oh the irony...

What about "hurr durr deflation bad" or "bitcoin supports criminals"? Lots of these lately.

Avec ton GPU tu essaye de résoudre un hash. Le principe d'une fonction de hash est un calcul qui permet de produire un condensé d'un message quelquonque, de manière à ce que ce condensé soit unique et vraisemblablement aléatoire pour chaque message donné, au bit pret, que 2 messages differents ne puissent avoir un condensé identique et que l'on ne puisse pas retrouvé un message à partir du condensé, le hash.

Le principe de la "preuve de travail" est d'utiliser la fonction de hashing afin de trouvé un resultat avec des specificitées particulières. Dans la cas du SHA256 que Bitcoin utilise, le hash resultant est une valeur de 256 bits, qui équivaut a un entier naturel d'une valeur entre 0 et 2^256 -1. La difficulté est en fait la valeur à laquelle ton hash transformé en entier naturel doit etre supérieure. Naturallement, si tu as une fonction qui pour chaque valeur à l'entrée te rends un entier aléatoire mais cependant unique à la sortie, il y a une probabilité fixe de trouver un resultat au dessus d'une certaine limite. En augmentant la limite, on diminue cette probabilité, et donc il devient plus difficile de trouver un solution au probleme.

Le probleme en question c'est les bloques qui compose une liste contenant toutes les transactions qui ont eues lieu sur le reseau Bitcoin, le block chain. A chaque instant des transactions sont émisent par les utilisateurs du réseau, et toi en tant que "mineur", tu en fait un bloque, au quelle tu rajoute un valeur aléatoire de 32 bits, le nonce, puis tu hash le tout et verifie le resultat. Si le hash resultant est superieur au facteur de difficulté, alors tu a résolu un bloque, que tu soumets au reste du réseau pour la verification finale, ce qui aura 2 consequences: Les transactions qui compose ton bloque seront entérinées par le réseau, et tu recevra des Bitcoins pour ta peine.

Si ton hash ne satisfait pas la difficulté actuelle, tu augmente ton nonce de 1 et tu recommence, et cela plusieur millions de fois par seconde, jour et nuit. Le principe de la preuve de travail assure que tous bloques emient sur le réseau resultent d'un travail fournit, determiné par la difficulté au moment de la resolution de chaque bloque. Cela empeche que n'importe qui envoie des informations erronées sur le réseau afin de depenser plus de Bitcoins qu'il n'en posséde. La compensation financière pour "miner" des bloques assure que plus le Bitcoin a de valeur, plus d'individus vont joindre le reseau pour miner, ce qui maintient un niveau de sécurité élevé, car le réseau augmente la difficulté en fonction de la puissance de calcul dédié au "mining" afin de maintenir la vitesse d'émission des bloques à 6 par heure.


Le Bitcoin a l'heure actuelle, c'est comme de l'or. Tu peux pas acheter grand chose avec, il te faut le changé en monnaie locale pour faire tes courses. Par contre, sa valeur est en augmentation constante.


Actuellement, "miner" du Bitcoin est trés rentable. Si la difficulté continue d'augmenté à cette vitesse alors que le prix stagne autour de $10, la rentabilité en sera fortement reduite mais la valeur du Bitcoins restera logiquement toujours un peu au dessus du coup de production, logiquement. Le dollars est naturellement inflationnaire, donc la relation dollars/BTC n'est pas prete d'aller dans le mauvais sens.


Petite. Au long terme il n'y a pas de difference de revenu entre une grosse pool et une petite, sauf que Deepbit te charge 3% de tes revenues pour le service, alors qu'il y a des petites pool gratuite. Aussi, pour un souci de sécurité, il est préférable de joindre une petite pool. Comme la securité du système depends du travail fourni par les mineurs, quiquonque a plus de 50% de la puissance du réseau dans ses mains peut injecter des bloques corrompus dans le systeme, et les abrutis qui s'engouffre dans Deepbit sont en train de rendre cette situation trés réelle.


Tu utilise l'ancien ou le nouveau calculateur? La valeur que le calculateur te donne est correcte pour les données saisies. Le difficulty factor c'est la difficulté actuelle sur le réseau.

quick! ban the dollar!

And you saying the network doesn't have a proper way to account for those extra 2k blocks in the next difficulty span?

I think the main protection layer for SilkRoad is Tor. If I was a cop and wanted to catch people using a known illegal service over Bitcoin, I'd get a list of the addresses used to deposit funds on that service from the block chain, then I'd listen on the network for a node to emit a transaction using those addresses. Pretty sure I'd catch a lot of people like this if it wasn't for the Tor layer.

It's because these people aren't, per say, capitalists. Capitalism is based on the right to private property. The people you describe are corporatist. They don't care 2 seconds for private property simply because they can bypass it thanks to the privileges they receive from the government. You might consider that this argument in semantics doesn't hold enough weight in the face of the global issues at hand to be made, but some think on the other hand that rigorous semantics are a necessary part of understanding and fixing issues such as this one.

How are you going to grow that chain so quick? You need the hash of the last valid block grow that parallel chain.

A few things. Price drives difficulty, and adoption of Bitcoin is expected to be exponential. The scheme your depict needs a stable price to be doable, and even then I wonder. What it boils down to is that in the face of easy profit (low difficulty, high price situation that your scheme engenders) people won't collude. There will be a constant stream of new comers that will eventually dwarf your mining power. From this perspective, your practice turns out to be less profitable than regular mining.

Let's assume price is low, thus difficulty is low, and your mining array is indeed significant. At this point, you'll earn more Bitcoin by simply mining all the time rather than using that scheme. The goal of that scheme is to reduce your energy expenditure per coin, at the cost of getting less coins. If you have 50% of the network hashing power and turn yourself off, assuming the rest of the network won't react, it would take it 4 weeks to achieve the 2016 of the current difficulty span. Difficulty then halves, and you rejoin, reducing the next difficulty span to a mere 1 week, earning overall about 1000 blocks, half of a single span, in 5 weeks for X cost. If you mine normally, you'd be pretending to a 2500 block rewards, half of 2.5 spans, for 5X cost. That is assuming the best possible scenario, when the rest of the network remains constant for a whole "attack" period. Unless it costs you over 32.5% of a block reward in production, you're not profitable with that method. The cost of block resolution right now is around 1% of block reward.

All of this is without considering price movement. You're of course much better off having those 2500BTC rather than 1000BTC if price increases. And naturally, as the price goes up, new people enter the mining market, and your mining power becomes insignificant, so not only did you lose a good opportunity to earn easy BTC, you're also in for alot of cash to maintain your portion of the network power, or your scheme is just altogether not doable anymore.

Last but not least, as the reward for mining shifts towards transaction fees, this scheme will be impossible, for block resolution speed will be unrelated to the daily reward miners can claim. If there is 1000BTC worth of transaction fee to be redeemed in a certain day, how many blocks were solved in that day is irrelevant to these transactions being integrated, and the reward thus ripped, so your electricity cost per BTC will detach itself from difficulty altogether.

These are cosmetic reasons. The goal of my arguments was to invalidate the logic reasons. Now if you think the cosmetics are worth 2-3% of your daily payout, go ahead, it's a free network. But don't come telling me it's "better", it's not quite the same as "I like it better".


You can opt to receive a daily email with your mining stats. Not quite as a good as on-site daily reward, but at least there's something about it. You can also petition the official thread to try and get the feature added. Surprisingly, it works most of the time.

Not really. There are a few free pools that have been around long enough to know they are reliable. This remark is more relevant to new vs old pools rather than free vs pay pools. Also, it makes much more sense to attack big pools first if you intent to disrupt the network. Since we know the profit expectable from a full blown attack on the network is orders of magnitude less than the price of the attack, it is expect that the majority of attacks will be motivated by trolling/stupidity/politics/hatred for the project, so the bigger pools will definitely be a prime target. And somehow #1 and #2 pools in the network are pay pools, so...


That's only relevant to the people in DeepBit to move the f*** out to a cheaper pool. I can't fathom why, with the explicit motive of making money, one presented with the choice of equivalently yielding processes, only distinguished by usage fee, would pick the more expensive solution.


That's cuz you like it ghetto. I like my pool with instant stats, round times, shares submitted, miners top, email alerts and all the fancy shit.


That's purely cosmetic, and I would discuss the underlying motive of being in such hurry one would want to instantly cash out amounts around 1 BTC and lower several times a day.

Well it all depends on the emitter's intent. If you traded a private key from an individual, you should redeem asap. If you got such a thing as a bitbill, you should consider the emitter has a very low incentive in destroying a sustainable business model forever to get a 1 day lotto like hit.

Democracy implies you are forced to be a member of the group. If an action is voluntary, by principle, there is no need to vote about whether taking it or not, only those interested would partake in it while the rest of the audience would move on. Now, some prefer that to a single guy making all the decisions, but to pretend that democracy is somehow legitimate because it is the "will of the people", as opposed to the will of dictator, is a farce. If the dictator is illegitimate because he enforces his decisions on the group, then so is democracy for enforcing its decisions on the minority. As such, unless your choice aligns with the majority, you ain't got bananas. Another case of "you're free as long as you do what I tell you".

lol inflation.