If it wasn't for the attack on Gox we would have stayed at +$4 for the previous week
Thank god they have made enough money by now to mitigate the DDOS attacks. Those things aren't cheap. I unfortunately imagine that DDOS attacks will become one of the massive barriers to entry of any bitcoin service provider. |
|
|
|
It is switching from http to https, so you have a warning because of the ssl certificate... (a solution would be to have a dedicated ip and a new ssl certificate, or to avoid the redirection to https) Might I suggest you avoid the redirection to https then? Until you get a properly signed certificate? That warning alone might scare away a few new users. Edit: I just signed up to your forum and made a few posts, but it seems as though you have some heavy spam protection on there! Good on you! Coming from a former forum poster however... it would be much more beneficial to your forum and your community if you simply created your own question to be answered when registering - using a plugin for phpbb like this one: http://boonedocks.net/mike/archives/143-PHPBB-Anti-spam-Registration-Question.htmlSimply changing that question once per month will keep your forum spam free forever. |
|
|
|
|
One of these two states are true:
OP is crazy.
All of us are crazy.
|
|
|
|
When I visit this page http://dot-bit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/namecoin-dev-dot-bit.org to sign up to the dev mailing list, it's all in french. Ce n'est pas un probleme pour moi... But when I click to translate the page into english, I am met with a scary "THIS CONNECTION IS UNTRUSTED" by firefox. Any way you could make it "trusted"? I'm considering setting up an experimental mining pool on the .bit infrastructure so I am indeed interested in the dev mailing list sign up! |
|
|
|
|
Thank you for putting my mind at ease both of you!
|
|
|
|
Compute my way into heaven by contributing to Folding@Home.
That's true, I wouldn't mind donating it to science. What exactly is going to come of all that folding anyways? |
|
|
|
BitcoinPool.com started getting DDoS'd within a half an hour of going live with a combined speed of less than 5 GH/s. We've now been running for a few months and have yet to experience a day that we weren't getting DDoS'd to some degree. A pool will get DDoS'd, and generally speaking, the attacks will be frequent.
So news pools are desirable because some will fly under the radar and those who don't will divide the attack power of the DDoS between them. It's just a matter of providing enough targets to become too hard to take down  I have a few personal friends who are miners as well that I could start testing the pool with. I agree with you there. The more pools there are, the tougher it will be to take them all down. Instead of limiting the ip addresses via a firewall, I could probably setup something that bans an ip for 1 hour if you try and contact us more than once every 5 seconds. That still would mean even a small botnet of 10,000 computers could hit my site at 2,000 requests per second... which is probably enough to take down a small server... hrmmm. I invite any pool owners to post details about their recent DDOS attempts so that we can all better protect against them. |
|
|
|
|
I imagine that once the difficulty gets so high that you're successful hashes start looking like this 000000000000000000000000000000fa that somebody might be able to break SHA256 would they not? Eventually we would find two hash values that were the same but had different inputs. That or Bitcoin would cease to work, right?
At what level of difficulty will we have to change our cryptographic hash function? (When will we have to re-inforce our security?)
|
|
|
|
|
So I imagine in a few more weeks I will either be turning off my miners and/or joining a pool.
I am curious, what are other people's plans for their GPU power once bitcoin difficulty goes through the roof?
Sell them on ebay/craiglist?
I have heard you can possibly unlock phones? (That would require setting up a business entity however I would imagine? Or could you sell that service through ebay as well?)
Create Namecoins?
Anything else?
|
|
|
|
This happens after every difficulty increase because the sites estimate based on a sliding window of blocks and utilize the current difficulty even though the most of the blocks in the window were at a lower difficulty.
I'm not so sure this is our average increase... The first 20 blocks now (we are at ~1994 left til the next increase as I write this...) have been solved in the past 80 minutes... that's an average of 4 minutes per block, over 20 blocks, even at the current (and highest ever) difficulty of 157426... Something is most definitely up imho. |
|
|
|
|
Buying a multimeter soon... how exactly does one do this?
Simply turn the MultiMeter to watts and touch it to the MB somewhere!?
|
|
|
|
Individual incentive, happily the bitcoin network has some pretty significant communal benefits in the longer term also ...
But can we seriously compare to this:  When that is a list of active "CPUs"... yes, I think we can. Our GPUs are approximately 100X faster than their CPUs. |
|
|
|
Just curious... what are the "minimum requirements" would you think for running a large scale mining pool with 1,000+ workers?
Would you need more than one server?
Could it be done with pushpool/pushpoold? (Is there even a difference? I cannot find any reference to pushpoold on the net but some people mention it on these forums..?)
I think it would be more than enough. Sending work units to miners is not all that bandwidth intensive. But I'm wondering if it would be possible to increase your upstream capacity and lower your downstream capacity because upstream is what your future pool would be using the most. Oh and congrats on trying to start a pool. I for one think that the more mining pools we have the better. You would not need more than one server but for redundancy and reliability's sake it would be advised. Maybe you can setup a high availability cluster with 2 nodes? I dunno, the thing is that there are quite a few possible points of failure and if you can design the pool's infrastructure to be as resilient as possible then all the better  Thanks for the encouragement and advice! I have two relatively fast servers laying around. I was thinking for protection against ddos attacks (which I fear would be likely) I could setup a firewall to only allow registered members (who have declared their static IP address on the website) to access the pool's servers. It's not possible to upgrade the upload speed where I am currently, but I could always take this to Amazon's EC2 if it took off. @Dayofswords: you're probably right! :S |
|
|
|
|
Just curious... what are the "minimum requirements" would you think for running a large scale mining pool with 1,000+ workers?
Would you need more than one server?
Could it be done with pushpool/pushpoold? (Is there even a difference? I cannot find any reference to pushpoold on the net but some people mention it on these forums..?)
|
|
|
|
So, questions:
* Do you think a continuous decrease of the block reward is better?
* Is it worth breaking backward compatibility for?
No and no, in my opinion. I think being able to explain the block reward as "starts at 50 every 10 minutes and is cut in half every 4 years" is a big advantage. I like simple-- "the simplest possible solution that will work" is a good engineering rule of thumb. Although I do agree that simple is best for giving speeches and talking to the general public, you could just as easily have said "starts at 50 every 10 minutes and decreases gradually until all 21 million are distributed". I had just mentioned this in another similar thread as well so I will re-post it here too: What if the bitcoin reward drop turns out to be a horrible thing for the markets? People could potentially be scared off of bitcoin every few years and it could kill the project. |
|
|
|
I had mentioned on another thread (where I asked what was the highest fee paid for a block to date) that: Great, thanks Raulo! At this rate, miners will probably receive more than 50 BTC per block after 2013!But yes I do wonder why it does not decrease gradually with every transaction solved. It would seem much more of a "stable" model so to speak... nobody would be worried about any future happenings. What if the bitcoin reward drop turns out to be a horrible thing for the markets? People could potentially be scared off of bitcoin every few years and it could kill the project. |
|
|
|
What if tomorrow the value of BTC jumped up to $100,000 USD/BTC and Gavin decided he now wanted to "round" every transaction down and send the remainder to his own account (like the plot from "office space").
OK, but the transaction record is public. That hack would make for some interesting reading on blockexplorer.com. Sure, but the damage would have already been done. One could (in theory, if (s)he were in charge of releases)... 1) Round up (or even direct the entire transaction amount) to his/her bitcoin address. 2) Sell as many bitcoins as they possibly could on any/every market within 24 hours. 3) (OPTIONAL) DDOS the bitcoin.org forums for another few days until their payments came through. As of right now, that person could probably steal a few hundred thousand USD. In the not too distant future, that person could feasibly steal millions of dollars, in less than a day... I regrettably imagine that there are already some people with similar plans. |
|
|
|
Surely a lot of gold was dug up when it was a great barter good, but not yet full blown money. It isn't a black and white thing.
I suppose it's interesting that with gold very little is mined until people put a lot of value on it, but with bitcoin ~30% would be mined at this point with tiny interest or with worldwide acceptance.
As is frequently repeated though, mining is not the point. I could imagine a scenario where Bitcoin is introduced, say, 17 years ago. And it is way too early for major acceptance, but most of the coins are mined by this point. And now it gets in Forbes as this long lost great idea to save us from government money and some people invest in GPUs, but since the reward is down to 3/block most mining involves going to computer graveyard and searching hard drives for wallet files. We would essentially remine the coins once we realized the great value. Point being that the 'forced' creation of the coins isn't a problem. They will sit with miners or on forgot hard drives from 2009 until the world 'demands' that they be found and released.
I have a pretty good feeling that the world will demand Bitcoin become mainstream sooner or later. I sure hope you are right. |
|
|
|
From here: http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6284.msg92216#msg92216Hmm, I fail to see why the fees would drop with time. The upper limit on the rate of transaction processing should drive the fees up. From this post (of mine) http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5758.msg84788#msg84788Just some rough math to answer my own question, a 1MB block would contain roughly 3000 typical transactions. Thus there's an upper limit on the transaction processing rate for the entire economy - I reckon that means that once the transaction rate rises over an average of 18k/hr., there will be a minimum fee for your transaction to even have a chance of being processed, and market forces will drive the minimum fee up with time. The demand for performing transactions will presumably continue to increase, but the supply is constant, ~18k/hr. I have no idea, but I assume there are something like 18,000 transactions per minute inside the USA alone. Is this simply more proof that bitcoin can and will only ever become a "layer" to the financial system? Ie... people will not be accepting bitcoins as payment in the far future... but from third party banks who say "gigabyte coin's bank account gives your bank account X number of bitcoins". If it's the latter, why are we bothering trying to get anybody to accept BTC as payment then in the first place? |
|
|
|
|
Somehow I think that no matter how many votes we get... we will NEVER get free air time on fox.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
