But Roger told me Garzik has code in billions of devices   True story. Every contemporary Linux install that employs ATA (maybe 95+% of all currently running Linux systems) is absolutely dependent on his code. |
|
|
|
Obviously there will be attackers when Segwit2x is deployed.
While that seems likely, how likely is it that the attackers will be able to throw sufficient hashpower at the entire Bitcoin network in order to successfully mine 6000 blocks in 24 hours - including the intervening difficulty adjustments? If this is in any way remotely possible, then Bitcoin is already irreparably hosed. |
|
|
|
going in for free diameter enlarging surgery
chuckle-worthy |
|
|
|
Don't you all just luurve push polls, with leading language designed to elicit a favored outcome?
You may want to explain what you wanted to say "Jihancoin", "continue using Bitcoin", "Jihan's fork", ... If what you call "Jihancoin" amasses the economic majority, those continuing to use what you call "Jihancoin" will "continue using Bitcoin". |
|
|
|
|
Don't you all just luurve push polls, with leading language designed to elicit a favored outcome?
|
|
|
|
Haha, just call me the jgarzik of WO.
Considering that Jeff Garzik is pretty much the single-handed designer of the SATA subsystem of every contemporary Linux distro, that's pretty lofty company. |
|
|
|
It's not clear to me, is what just happened even possible on main net?
6000 blocks mined in a day? Sure. But at what probability? |
|
|
|
Maybe it's another year long bear market accumulation phase, so that we can celebrate again for 3 months in a few years when bitcoin crosses the 10k mark.  |
|
|
|
Okay and back on topic, it looks like a showstopper bug has shown up in their segwit2x code. They've hit the >1MB hard fork on testnet which refuses to accept a block unless it is bigger than 1MB: https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/issues/65At this point there aren't enough transactions to create a second block with more than 1MB of transactions on testnet, leading to a fork with 6000 blocks that aren't using the 2x code and the two forks not speaking to each other. Nevermind. I seem to have misunderstood what -ck was saying. Showstopper? Doesn't look like it. Code working as intended. On reaching specified block height, block must be over 1MB to be valid. There are not enough transactions on the test net to hit 1MB before block mined. Why not? Someone threw massive hashpower at the testnet all of a sudden. 6000 blocks mined in 24 hours. Troll? Extreme tester? Doesn't matter. When mining slows sufficiently such that transactions can accumulate, chain will fork. Actually sounds like a success case to me. |
|
|
|
Part of the argument is that there is no reason for the change, and change should be easier to make.. . but there was no real technical justification.. besides the desire to make change easier.
Are you sure you're not describing the versionbits modification part of The SegWit Omnibus Changeset? |
|
|
|
Has anyone noticed that the original upload of the full video is now deleted? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAcOnvOVquoThat is the original URL, and they have deleted it or put it on private or something... strange. It contained the entire conference of 8 hours with some other people that I wanted to hear. Maybe they didn't like the huge amount of dislikes the video had? You're a nutjob, you know that? The original vid was a day-long livestream. They pulled it when they cut it up into 1 speaker <> 1 video chunks. Sorry to crumple your tinfoil hat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgqtcu0zo-k |
|
|
|
About 2.5 hours out. According to the Old Farmer's Almanac, this will be the Full Buck Moon. Apropos. Round 6 happened on the Full Strawberry Moon. With champagne, I guess. Round 8 will happen on the Full Sturgeon Moon. Caviar for all! The sturgeon is a pretty funny critter. http://www.almanac.com/astronomy/moon/fullAnyone else find it chuckle-worthy that such an old-timey entity such as the Old Farmer's Almanac (the oldest continuously published periodical in North America, no less) is forward-thinking enough to have claimed the valuable URL of almanac.com? |
|
|
|
Thanks, but that did not seem to work. It had already precomputed 100 addresses ahead. Nevertheless, I entered a 'Compute this many more addresses:' of 21, and clicked [compute]. After a brief interface, it showed 121 precomputed addresses. I then clicked [Done], which brought me back the Wallet Properties dialog. It still does not show those addresses known to the Watch-only wallet, but apparently unknown (?) to this Cold wallet.
If you are using a version older than 0.96.0, you won't see the addresses in the wallet properties dialog if you haven't actually "used" the address (i.e. clicked the Receive Bitcoins button). However the wallet still knows about those addresses and should be able to sign for them. Thanks again. My Cold system is on 0.93.3. My Watch-only is 0.93.2. So on the Cold install, Clicking the [Receive Bitcoins] button brings up the Select Wallets dialog. If I select the relevant wallet, and clock [OK], I am faced with an ominous warning: (X) Careful (!) Armory is not online yet, and will eventually need to be online to access any funds sent to your wallet. Please do not receive Bitcoins to your Armory wallets until you have successfully gotten online at least one time. ... [Cancel] [OK] This being an airgapped system, it will never be online. However the wallet still knows about those addresses and should be able to sign for them.
I believe you that the wallet still knows about the addresses. But how does one use them to sign? If I Tools>Message Signing/Verification...; Sign with Address; Address Book; Select Wallet... OH! There it is!When I click [Select Wallet], it exposes the next 'missing' address from the deterministic sequence. Thanks for your patience - I think you have walked me through it. |
|
|
|
I'm sure I'll be castigated soundly here for saying so, but I am considering throwing a few shekels in the collection basket. I'm sure I'll be castigated for saying this as well, but I find Roger to be among the most honorable Bitcoiners I have met. So while it is likely that I will not ROI on any such 'tithe', I expect his mining operation to put its weight behind the same vision of Bitcoin as I share. Accordingly, any loss (if any) would still really be an investment in the future value of the network. And I have previously excoriated others for employing cloud mining, as such are likely to be ponzi scams. See previous paragraph. |
|
|
|
i don't know if you are being super-stupid, super-unthinking, or super-dickish here, but that about exhausts the possibilities.
You seem to be attributing either malice or stupidness my various assertions, Or just being unthinking. As clearly listed above. And to be clear, that list of possibilities was directly targeted at your assertion that "a central goal of big blockers is emotional, namely the heads on spikes thinking". As should have been clear, if you actually read and thought about what I actually wrote. I get that you disagree that big blocks are necessary. I wasn't calling you out on that. I was calling you out on your mischaracterization of big blockers' motives. It's not like it's the first time that I have exposed your proclivity for doing so. |
|
|
|
a central goal of big blockers is emotional, namely the heads on spikes thinking..
Do you realize that it is literally impossible for you to know the "central goals of big blockers" better than the big blockers themselves know their goals? Stop ascribing to others things that are literally impossible for you to know. Especially when faced with a direct contradiction from those very persons. i don't know if you are being super-stupid, super-unthinking, or super-dickish here, but that about exhausts the possibilities. For the record, I advocate big blocks because I am convinced it will bring us more usability, more security, and more value. And I have conveyed this to you before. |
|
|
|
Switch to Expert mode and restart Armory. Then open the wallet properties and click the number next to "Addresses used". At the bottom of the dialog that appears, set the number of addresses you want to generate and click the compute button. Do that until the number of addresses that Armory has matches the number of addresses you have used on your online wallet.
Thanks, but that did not seem to work. It had already precomputed 100 addresses ahead. Nevertheless, I entered a 'Compute this many more addresses:' of 21, and clicked [compute]. After a brief interface, it showed 121 precomputed addresses. I then clicked [Done], which brought me back the Wallet Properties dialog. It still does not show those addresses known to the Watch-only wallet, but apparently unknown (?) to this Cold wallet. |
|
|
|
|
So I'm running a Cold wallet on an airgapped machine. I've generated a Watch-only wallet on a networked machine. These have been running for some time.
Today, I notice that the Watch-only wallet has addresses that the Cold wallet does not seem to know about. At least I cannot seem to get the Cold wallet to display these addresses.
As addresses are deterministically-generated (right?), there should be some way to induce the Cold wallet to generate the same addresses as the Watch-only wallet (right?).
How do I make the Cold wallet display the complete set of addresses - for example, in order to sign a message from those addresses?
|
|
|
|
Sell wall of 670+ at $2550.00 USD on GDAX.
LOooook at you.. goodie goodie.. and trying to stay on topic. Only when appropriate. Incidentally, it was pulled. After it started getting eaten. |
|
|
|
Hello Wall Observer, my old friend
I've come to troll with you again
Because a vision softly creeping
Left its seeds while Adam was sleeping
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Was a block chain
Within the sound of trolling
In restless dreams I trolled alone
Narrow threads in speculation
'Neath the halo of a monitor glow
I clicked a tab to bitcoinity show
When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of an all time high
That split the night
And touched the sound of trolling
And in the all time high I saw
Ten thousand trolls maybe more
Trolls posting without typing
Trolls moderating without reporting
Trolls writing posts that voices never shared
No one dared
Disturb the sound of trolling
"Trolls," said I, "you do not know
Trolling like a cancer grows
Read my posts that I might troll you
Take my keyboard that I might troll you"
But my words like unconfirmed transactions fell
And echoed in the wells of trolling
And the people bowed and prayed
To the Bitcoin god they made
And the sign flashed out its warning
In the words that it was forming
And the sign said "The words of satoshi is written in the order walls"
We dropped our jaws
And whispered in the sound of trolling
Nice work! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
