I would hope that by that time the idea of mining just to make money will be long gone.

I'd happily run a mining rig if I only broke even on running costs and replacing the hardware when it needed it.

I think we are reaching a point in society where more and more people are realising that banks, corporations and governments don't give a shit about us and are only in it for themselves. Most people are the same, only bothered if something benefits them, but there are a lot of us who will help others without wanting something in return. Most will sit in traffic pissed off with the broken down car in front, and not give a shit about actually spending a minute helping them out, if only to move the obstruction they are getting pissed with. I would hope that in 100 years time, assuming Bitcoin and money in general is still a thing, transaction fees would be what's required to run the network, and not what miners want to line their pockets and driveways with.

I think this shows a flaw in the Crypto Currency idea as a whole. A mistake was made, someone lost a lot of money, and the only thing that they can do is ask online for help, and get told "it's your fault, deal with it".

If I pay my rent and add an extra 0 to the end by mistake, I can always go to the bank and get it back.

Maybe the protocol needs some kind of messaging system. If a node receives a transaction with a per Kb fee amount that's higher than the highest per Kb fee from the last 10 blocks averaged, the node can send a message back to the sender to confirm that it is correct before relaying it to the network. Maybe some percentage above that average to account for changes in fee amounts.

The lack of support for mistakes could turn a lot away from the technology, especially when you can loose 3 grand. If I was mining with a few GPU's and found a block and included that payment, who would you go to? I guess that individual miners are a lot harder (or impossible?) to find compared to a mining pool.

Part of it is similar to a web wallet. Each user has their own keys and addresses rather than just a number in a database that shows how much they have. Instead of sending each transaction to the network as soon as it is made, I will add them together into one larger one saving on overhead.

The exact working out of it all is yet to be figured out. At the moment I am writing software for card terminals

You know, I've been focussing so much on the hardware side to this I never really considered that.

It is account based, but everything still happens on the block chain. In a way that doesn't give too much information out at the moment, it takes the best bits of the Fiat banking system (no waiting for confirmations, endless methods of sending funds between accounts, both within and outside of the service and possibly a short term chargeback/transaction cancellation facility), and (unless a court warrant is provided) the anonymity of blockchain technology.

It's more of a way to provide banking type services, without the bank part, and Bitcoin is the value-carrier used. When I stop throwing boiling water all over myself (mid way through this post, boiling water and noodles straight on the frigging leg) and get some non-shite looking prototype hardware and a working back-end sorted, I'll be making a big post about it

As a side effect, it will also make the transactions much harder to trace. Although these transactions would be between users of a service, from publicly available data on the chain there is no way to know what UTXO's went to which address. Like cash in a cash register really, no way to trace which customers specific coins or notes went to which bank/supplier/petrol station/p0rn mag and tissues on company expenses.

I will end up putting a limit on TX size. I guess as part of my service provides Bitcoin facilities to point of sale and EMV hardware with fees to cover overheads, I'll arrange transactions so that I take the hit for the "overhead" fees.


Unfortunately I can't reduce the inputs. There will be a minimum of 1 input and 2 outputs per "user" transaction within this huge combined one. It's more about saving fees for merchants who accept Bitcoin than saving it for myself.

I need to do a project pre-announcement at some point, just waiting on getting a working demo sorted first

As part of a Bitcoin service I am developing, I am going to be performing Bitcoin transactions from users in bulk, rather than immediately as part of the security design (hard to attack a system if a reply to your request comes 30 minutes later).

A thought came to mind today. Instead of running *insert amount* transactions at once, would it actually be cheaper in fees to put all the inputs and outputs from all them transactions into one massive one? Would this cause problems for the network, and mining in general if was possible for my node to throw a single TX out that was nearly 500KB in size for example?

I'd rather not cause problems for nodes, or have miners unable to add my fat ass transaction as it pushes the block size too high.

OMG I found 250 Bitcoin at that forum!!!!

Here, go look for yourselves at www.that-full-of-shit-my-eyes-have-turned-brown.org

 

Pretty much as soon as it first appeared. Guess which dozy twat ran a miner for a while, ended up having to format the drive and then procrastinated for long enough that CPU mining was dead before he bothered to look at it again. 

I guess I was focussed on preventing dust transactions and never thought of just letting it go as part of the fee. I'll probably just do that

I actually had this mostly working yesterday, and after some unknown fuckup with Windows, every open file in Visual Studio was replaced with a lot of 0x00. Firefox had a shit too and lost all recent history. No recent backup and lost a few days work

I'm working on a project and part of it is is a database based wallet. I'm trying to get a quick and dirty transaction building routine working so I can start making transactions, and filling the database with actual keys and transaction data for testing. This is all on TestNet.

One thing I want to quickly hack together is a fee calculator. I was considering just building the transaction with no fee, grabbing the size and then re-building it with the appropriate fee. It will work for initial testing and filling the database. Is this the best way to get it done quickly, or is there a better way?

I'm also trying to prevent filling change addresses with dust. I will be sorting un-spent outputs by size (after pulling from database where value is greater than payment amount). I would guess that the easiest way is just to use the highest value un-spent output there is, but that would mean a small transaction would potentially leave a larger one later on needing to use several inputs and potentially increase fees.

I am using NBitcoin and programming in C#.

Thanks for any advice

Instant, trustable payments require a trusted 3rd party to handle both wallets and they can guarantee the funds are there and give an instant yes/no.

It could work for online, seller can package product ready to ship, but in that case they'd just wait for confirmations anyway.

It wouldn't be hard to backup your wallet, make the payment, then restore the backup and add a huge miners fee and empty it.

I'm working on a project to make transactions faster when using Bitcoin in shops. It's a long way off and probably not to every-bodys taste though.

I feel that turning up in a small 3 wheeled van with a half finished project may seem a bit "Trotterish" That's actually one reason my funds are a bit short at the moment, buying myself an old Reliant van to drive around in .

I'm not too sure how much I will have got done by then. I'm still working on getting my kiosk software back to the point it was at before I started to re-design it. I would like to have something to demo, but can't be certain I can get there, depends on how the Trotter wagon goes.

I was going to be attending with my Coin Fusion project, but shit hitting the fan recently has put a stop to that! Being a personally funded project, unfortunately other things have to come first at the moment.

I will hopefully be attending to meet others and have a look at other peoples projects. If anything I will have my phone with me and some of the mobile software I am developing at the moment

I'll definitely be in contact. Incidentally I've had a bit of a cockup happen this weekend with a hardware delivery. Delivered to a closed business and it's nowhere to be seen, go Hermes

I've just registered on the forum, but while I am waiting for my account to be approved I'd like to ask a question here.

I'm currently working on a project that has the potential to change the way that people view Bitcoin, not those that already use it now, but the wider population. It's a combination of hardware and software, and I may have some prototype/demonstration hardware ready in time for Coinfest next year. Not planned, but the timings just happen to be about right.

What would happen with regards to being able to attend with a bunch of hardware and a few servers, and setting up a demonstration system? I'm not ready to release too much information yet, however Coinfest does seem an ideal venue to announce it all. Rather than bits of information online, demo a fully working setup at a public venue

I just ran that through my application and there's nothing there, it threw an exception. The transaction doesn't exist. I've actually been having issues with sending Bitcoin to paper wallets. One feature of my system is that it can print a paper wallet, then send Bitcoin to it. Sometimes it took weeks before scanning the WIF code gave a balance, others have never worked even though the transaction is there on the blockchain.

Problem is the block that my transaction was first included in only contains one transaction, and it isn't mine.

The check transaction function in my software (which has worked perfectly during 6+ months of development) shows block 1029856 as the block it was first included in, however BlockCypher disagrees, and so does my testnet Android wallet. I'll drag the txid from the database and post it up here in a few minutes.

Edit:

Okay, something's gone a bit screwed up. I must have screwed up the block height code when I re-wrote the GUI, but the transaction still hasn't appeared on my phone, and re-syncing it hasn't helped either.

Just as I'm typing it appears, ah well, non-existant problem solved. It's been one of those days!

A few days ago I had trouble sending all the Testnet coins from my phone to development machine. Today I send some back to the phone after re-installing the app, and they've not turned up. The transaction also has 30 confirmations, however it was made about 10 minutes ago.

Has the Testnet forked and left my phone on one fork, and my dev machine using the other?