No, that's not true at all. The whole point of running a Bitcoin full node is that you do NOT blindly follow any rule changes miners agree on. That's fundamental. If you do blindly follow them then you're using simplified payment verification.
If the majority of miners decide to restrict block size to 100kbytes, what non-mining full node could do? They could either follow, or join a shorter fork with bigger block size (i.e. hardfork ). Non-mining nodes don't really have much choice While true, because miners control transaction selection, there are a great many rule changes that miners cannot make, no matter how much hash power they have. |
|
|
|
URL: https://github.com/jgarzik/txtooltxtool is a command line tool written in node.js that interfaces with Bitcoin-Qt/bitcoind, to automate or assist in building interesting, unusual, complicated or just plain odd transactions. The goal is to demonstrate advanced bitcoin features, and make it easier for users to experiment. The intended audience has a basic awareness of how bitcoin transactions look and work. The theory of operation and full list of commands may be reviewed at https://github.com/jgarzik/txtool/blob/master/READMEInitially, two working examples are presented: Further examples such as decentralized crowdfunding and atomic coin swapping will be demonstrated soon. |
|
|
|
As an success example of stopping spam to be a problem - look at Google BigTable.
Has YouTube problems with spam? No.
Does it care about single video to be re-uploaded thousands of times? No.
Bigtable consists of millions cheap servers with regular SATA HDDs. I want this to be implemented in Bitcoin. It will make Bitcoin very powerful and scalable and stop spam to be a problem at all.
All your examples are highly centralized services. If you want to build something decentralized, that is difficult to shut down or game, then it will look different than those examples. Bigtable was not built to check for cheating in those millions of cheap servers  |
|
|
|
|
Great stuff. Been interested in this personally for a while. I know BitPay is interested too.
|
|
|
|
can somebody tell me why a foundation that is meant to represent a worldwide monetary movement is based in the United States, when that country is VERY bitcoin hostile?
1. Regulators released guidance indicating that bitcoin buying/selling within the bitcoin economy is affirmatively OK, and would not require every user registering with the government, as many conspiracy theorists had direly predicted. 2. Many bitcoin users are in the US. 3. Many bitcoin investors are in the US. The sum of that != bitcoin hostile. Just the opposite. It's also silly to loudly complain when people are standing up and volunteering to take slings and arrows on behalf of others. |
|
|
|
If you read the paper, you can see they are talking about a change introduced in version 0.8.2, not 0.8.3. Further, it is a zero-confirmation transaction attack, which is already known to be insecure. |
|
|
|
|
My batch #2 unit arrived yesterday via DHL, Beijing -> Atlanta.
|
|
|
|
|
My batch #2 unit arrived yesterday via DHL, Beijing -> Atlanta.
|
|
|
|
|
There is nothing wrong with educating people about bitcoin. That includes knowing how your local jurisdiction's laws may apply.
Knowledge++ Ignorance--
|
|
|
|
The gain was that all the spam from satoshi dice, which is considerable, was lessened.
No. The recent dust change did not target SatoshiDICE. They increased their payout on losing bets immediately, demonstrating this. The recent dust change addressed the people who were dumping megabytes worth of data, such as the full contents of wikileaks cables, into the blockchain. |
|
|
|
With the block chain growth it would be exceptionally nice to have build in database placement options in the QT. maybe even allow for automatic mirroring, spanning, and automatic wallet/DB backup.
I use -datadir command to place the database on a NAS for security and storage reasons, it's just not that 'slick' of a solution.
The blockchain already has automatically mirroring and spanning; that is fundamentally what the bitcoin client does in the peer-to-peer network. The wallet is quite small, and you absolutely should be backing that up on a regular basis. |
|
|
|
Have there been any advances lately? It's a really awesome project and I hope it reaches a stable release sometime soon. Great work jgarzik!
Some slow advances. The library is seeing use in various places, as the base for custom bitcoin apps that need to be really fast. The two clients, "brd" (block relay daemon) and "picocoin" (SPV client) remain incomplete and have not seen much attention. The library, libccoin, is largely feature complete and available for use today. |
|
|
|
The letter, signed by Paul Clayton, senior counsel at the Department of Financial Institutions (California’s financial regulator), gave the Foundation 20 days to respond, although it was only received last week. I wonder if it would have been more appropriate if Bitcoin Foundation had released this sooner (e.g., same day). At a minimum, if someone at the Foundation learned of this order and then traded before the order was publicly released, that might be something another government agency might consider to be "insider trading". Insider trading laws do not apply to currencies. Further, insider trading can be a good thing. Read up on free markets Any trading, "insider" or not, adds information to the market and assists in price discovery. |
|
|
|
FinCEN does not have the authority to regulate WoW gold, nor does it claim such authority.
Yes, it does. FinCEN's March guidance makes this clear. World of Warcraft and Second Life, along with bitcoin, were also mentioned specifically in another report from the GAO. |
|
|
|
I hereby boycott 0.8.2! Going with 0.8.3 instead.
The only fix was an issue being complained about in a recent thread. Hopefully the author was happy. In 0.8.3? The fix is a vulnerability an attacker exploited on mainnet to crash several nodes,. |
|
|
|
Any idea on if the attack was used or it's impact at the time?
Yes, it was used. Some lower memory nodes crashed. |
|
|
|
Pressure on BF -> BF is cooperating with regulators -> developers are cooperating with regulators -> small changes in the client to better track transactions -> changes in the protocol to roll back unwanted transactions
This conspiracy theory is ignorant of (a) how open source works and (b) how the dev team works. |
|
|
|
And yet, pointedly, the question was not answered. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
