Latest posts of: CIYAM

It would be recommended to use a separate address for every tx and if you are expecting a lot of txs then you might also consider increasing the address pool from 100 to say 1000 (for backup purposes).

I think that theymos did a wise thing to not "put all the eggs in one basket" and I would recommend that other members set up "watch wallets" for the addresses as they have already been published publicly.

I have charged the forum 0% for my service in this matter (not that I think there is anything wrong with others charging for the service) and do hope that others can see that this is only to help protect forum from a single point of attack.

Have you taken a look at at CIYAM Open (ciyam.org/open with an introductory slideshow at ciyam.org)?

The site is going to be getting a "makeover" soon and we would be keen to discuss improvements and possible partnerships.

Cheers,

Ian.

I was rather surprised to see Bruno's posts about Bitcoin100 deciding to donate money to the Bitcoin Documentary film idea (fielded by a member who AFAIA has mostly only posted in the Speculation board previously).

I don't know if I am alone in this thinking but I thought that Bitcoin100 was created to help charities and I don't see how making a documentary film about Bitcoin really fits into that vain (it seems to be rather a world apart in my view at least).

I have been a supporter of the original Bitcoin100 idea (and was one of the initial donators to it) and I would like to be convinced that this is a good idea so perhaps this could be answered.

Please note that this is not intended as any sort of trolling thread but just to gauge what other Bitcoin100 donators think about this.

Paypal is reversible (and buying virtual currencies is specifically against their terms) so going first doesn't give anyone any reason to think that the transaction won't result in the loss of BTC and USD or at the very minimum accounts being frozen or shut down.

As has been pointed out many, many times - do *not* do Paypal for BTC.

If you seriously are wanting to buy BTC then do so with *cash*.

Quote from: retep on March 23, 2013, 09:23:54 AM

No, only outputs.

Aha - then I am not quite sure what the OP's problem is if you look at something like this:

https://blockchain.info/tx/0e058abfe294c051262610ff689a75577f5884529cc1cfcc108cd491b0d6b64f

Huh

Interesting - does this apply to both "sides" of the tx (i.e. the input UTXOs and the output UTXOs)?

Quote from: retep on March 23, 2013, 09:07:18 AM

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L574

Didn't know you could add the line # to such source links - nice!

But just below that is the following:

Code:

if (fAllowFree)
    {
        if (nBlockSize == 1)
        {
            // Transactions under 10K are free
            // (about 4500 BTC if made of 50 BTC inputs)
            if (nBytes < 10000)
                nMinFee = 0;
        }
        else
        {
            // Free transaction area
            if (nNewBlockSize < 27000)
                nMinFee = 0;
        }
    }

And the call you showed to this function sets fAllowFree to true.

Quote from: retep on March 23, 2013, 08:31:11 AM

That's not it - the default fee rules force fee payment on dust outputs.

If the output is old enough then no tx fee is necessary (even if it is only 1 Satoshi).

Quote from: erik777 on March 23, 2013, 04:41:06 AM

Perhaps I should of said "Sender address", which I anticipate mainstream users will interpret as the "reply-to address".

There really is no such thing - there are only UTXOs (which could either be from "coinbase" on from one or more previously unspent outputs that was part of someone's "wallet" whose output addresses generally are not anything that would or should be known to the the recipient).

In short if you want to determine who sent you a payment then create a unique payment address for them to pay to (the software and indeed the protocol are not designed to do this).

And to quote myself:

Quote from: CIYAM Open on March 22, 2013, 06:45:19 AM

oic - am guessing the best way to avoid fees with a faucet would be to have all its UTXOs being the exact amount as the outputs you wish to send and then just make sure that the wallet is "old" enough so that no tx fees are required at all (and replace wallets with new ones as they get exhausted).

(although that might mean having to put a month delay between now and your next payouts to age the coins enough)

Note that using uniform payment UTXOs (i.e. no change needed) will help to avoid getting even newer dust UTXO's every time you make a payout.

Quote from: gweedo on March 22, 2013, 06:53:50 AM

Do sendmany

Yes - that is probably the easiest solution.

Am guessing you are playing SD or similar?

The problem is that they send you a "dust" UTXO every time that you lose (it contains the minimum fee + 1 satoshi). Once your wallet starts filling up with such dust the standard client has difficulty in working out how to spend it without actually charging you more in tx's fees than the amount you might want to be sending (assuming it is a very small amount you are wanting to send in particular).

There are some solutions to cleaning up such wallet *dust* although my advice would be to avoid gathering the dust in the first place.

As an alternate DNS so far it would seem that namecoin is a complete and utter failure (and I own a .bit domain).

Whether it can morph itself into something more useful (say as some sort of key DB that is merged mined) is still waiting to be seen (but if it can I think that it might find its niche).

Quote from: helgur on March 21, 2013, 02:00:28 PM

Thank you very much for the heads up, I'll look closer into that!

No worries - and welcome to PM if you want some further details.

OP - have you looked at CIYAM Open (http://ciyam.org/open).

We do not do hourly rates but instead fixed BTC prices - but if you have the skills you'll be able to earn in excess of your USD rate fairly easily.

Quote from: Phinnaeus Gage on March 21, 2013, 04:01:26 AM

Seriously, no suggestions? Not even one for changing the name of documentary?

Hmm... how about "Satoshi's Rules" Huh

Quote from: t1mm3h on March 20, 2013, 03:13:24 PM

Am I right this can be done using public-key cryptography?

Yes - of course that is exactly what HTTPS is (and is the same way you can safely use your internet banking).

Quote from: t1mm3h on March 20, 2013, 01:14:25 PM

What I do not fully understand is how a recipient can remain anonymous. I mean, every recipient has to send his public address to the sender, right? And businesses have to "announce" this on their website. So if you would keep track of the addresses that, let's say WordPress, announces on it's website for senders to send their bitcoins to, you can see which transactions are going to WordPress. Everybody could see the incoming cashflow of WordPress. Am I wrong?

One would assume that WordPress (or any other public type of recipient) would show you the address to pay to via HTTPS (so it is not made public).

Of course if you and every other sender wants to disclose the address that they paid their fee to then WordPress will indeed have lost its payment anonymity (assuming that was important to them) but potentially so have you and every other sender.