|
Is this similar to that deep space address explorer program that we had on here a couple of years ago?
|
|
|
|
(Unfortunately, James has a bad habit of adding functionality faster than we can understand it, let alone create documentation.)
This and Bitmark are the only times in my life where I've seen development outpace all other aspects of a project!  |
|
|
|
Those users who preffer faster confirmation will never be happy even with 30 second blocks, because sometimes you have to wait many minutes (even 10min) because of variance. And the orphaned blocks rate become really problem.
The point is to trust 0 confirm transactions, but some 0 confirm transactions are risky (no fee, small fee, using unconfirmed input), other 0 confirm transactions are much more secure - the one withhout unconfirmed input and above average fee
Yeah, the current Bitcoin based cryptocurrency system is definitely far from perfect, but the balance between a reasonable orphan rate and user friendliness probably lies somewhere between 1-2.5 mins. Given that 2 minute confirms have been thoroughly tested now on other platforms I think it's clear that it would be a positive change. The least viable confirmation time is definitely up for debate, but I don't really see any advantage to 10 minute confirms unless I'm looking at it from the perspective of a miner. And even then, if an upgrade like that can benefit users it might increase demand which could offset miners losses via orphaned blocks. |
|
|
|
If you are not patient, you can go to other altcoins having quick confirmation, such as NXt, doge etc.
NXT and doge is still way way behind bitcoin. Not gonna do that. I agree with this fully. We often see cryptocoins on news but usually, the one getting the media's attention is Bitcoin. Alt coin is usually more volatile in price than Bitcoin. Unless there is a service which immediately exchanges your coins to fiat or Bitcoin without losing the value if the market crash, I don't see why merchants who are using Bitpay would switch to alt coins. Bitpay already accepts instant payment without confirmation for most cases. Bitpay could easily add payment options for an alt that was backwards compatible with Bitcoin. That is of course if it made sense for them financially and the alt was liquid enough. |
|
|
|
i think it was ponzi. btcd down, bbr down, unity down. i think somebody fucked me.
What are you talking about? |
|
|
|
Seems like blockchain hangs at block 45061
Can somebody explain what happening?
UDP
Blockchain grows very slowly. Est block per hour:
2014-10-17 01:40:24 UpdateTip: new best=2f8efcb02a965a1dc98c80ac2b5690e7a54c8ecbe6a56299bb20a6a15b9dd3fe height=45062 log2_work=55.2249 tx=68643 date=2014-10-17 01:40:26
2014-10-17 01:40:24 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2014-10-17 02:12:39 UpdateTip: new best=65bf95cf5937aa895e36e87966dab9ada24d5f1f82fbbdd2a7fc3ef773ed0cad height=45063 log2_work=55.225188 tx=68646 date=2014-10-17 02:12:29
2014-10-17 02:12:39 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2014-10-17 03:20:23 UpdateTip: new best=78a0a0a461551aa26a25a6d13c19ddbd30e1d9231c8ec356251519562f81b866 height=45064 log2_work=55.225475 tx=68648 date=2014-10-17 03:20:30
2014-10-17 03:20:23 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
The blocks are slow because the difficulty is high and the amount of hashing is low right now. |
|
|
|
So I wonder why people haven't been asking the core team to change the confirm time on the next hard fork? This is a perfect time to do it considering we're very likely going to be doing a hard fork any way to increase the block size from 1 mb.
It takes about 1 hour to make sure the confirmation is solid due to orphan blocks or some kind of attacks. 6 confirmation of 10 minute block takes 1 hour. If you reduce the block time to 1 min, then it will take 60 confirmation to avoid double spend. Right, so we might as well have shorter confirms since no one is going to be rewriting blocks on the Bitcoin chain for any transaction that's worth less than the cost to do so. And for the ones that are, we wait an hour. Sounds pretty good to me. Over 30 minutes for a single confirmation does not (and will not ever) work in the real world. (Almost) Every time I start to believe that BTC is "going mainstream", I have a delay waiting for a 30+ minute block....  solution: if your paying for a coffee or a mars bar, dont wait. if your buying a house wait 30 minutes solution: if your paying for a coffee or a mars bar, use LTC or DOGE. if your buying a house wait 30 minutes  One confirmation with LTC or DOGE is much less secure then a 0/unconfirmed TX with bitcoin. Both of their network is not secure so it would be easy to attack the network and reverse your TX. Once a TX is propagated throughout the network, nodes will not accept TXs that use the same inputs so you will not be able to broadcast a TX that spends the same inputs, the only way to double spend is to confirm a block that uses at least one of the same inputs as what you just spent. As long as the value of your cup of coffee is less then what it costs to mine the next block then you are almost certainly safe to accept a 0/unconfirmed TX after the TX has been properly propigated Not disagreeing with you , but isnt LTC fairly secure? It is the most secure altcoin out there as of now but the short block time gives a misleading picture as to how secure it's network is. Even if it has the same difficulty as bitcoin it's 2.5 minute block time means that it takes 25% of the work to find one block and there will be at least 4x as many orphaned blocks. If you want to do an apple to apples comparison of network security the LTC network has a difficulty of ~36.5 thousands now, compared to 35 million for bitcoin. Granted BTC and LTC miners are not interchangeable but I think this gives a pretty good comparison as to how easy it would be to attack either network. as it prevents a whole category of zero confirmation double spend attacks. So that confirmation comparison you're making is only accurate for a comparison of attacks where a rogue miner is actually publishing blocks. And the amount of time you need to wait for the same amount of security is the same so they're actually equivalent. Like I said up thread, the only disadvantage to shorter block times seems to be more orphans, but since it's something that benefits the end user I would think most people who aren't miners would actually be behind such a change. And the smart ones who are miners will see that despite the fact that they will be wasting some hash in some cases, the potential gains in demand and positive perception due to people not having to wait around 30 minutes for a confirmation often enough should make up for it in the long run. That's just conjecture of course, but considering the amount of complaints we hear about Bitcoin's slow block targets I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case. It's not just more secure, it's infinitely more secure. Fast-confirm coins absolutely have a niche, in my opinion. Fast confirm coins are much less secure and having one confirmation on a fast confirm network is less secure then a 0/unconfirmed TX on a 10 minute network. The reason for this is that nodes will not accept a double spend transaction when there is a propagated TX that spends certain inputs. As long as nodes are sufficiently diverse and TXs are able to propagate quickly, then it will not be possible to double spend certain inputs you have spent on a 0/unconfirmed TX unless you find a block and include the double spend TX in that found block. At the very least you will need to wait for enough confirmations to equal one "10 minute" confirmations to get the same security of a 0/unconfirmed TX assuming the hashrate is the same. The problem with this is that shorter confirmation blockchains also give miners more of an incentive to mine on shorter blockchains to prevent their chain from being orphaned. This will result in more orphaned chains and longer chains, ones that will potentially exceed the equivalent of a 10 minute confirmation But it is possible to double spend unconfirmed transactions if you know how to do it correctly(not saying it's easy). Which is why the 1 confirmation is better, since that whole category of double spend attacks that are possible are protected against with one confirm. I think at this point it's pretty clear that Bitcoin could upgrade to 2 minute blocks on the next hard fork and people would be happy with the change. One confirmation, even if it's 1/5th as secure as a one 10 minute confirm is still very secure on the Bitcoin network. I think it would beneficial for Bitcoin to make this change. Here's Peter Todd's take on unconfirmed transactions: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/239bj1/doublespending_unconfirmed_transactions_is_a_lot/Note: I'm not saying that unconfirmed transactions aren't fine for microtransactions and such. Changing to 2 minute blocks would not be an upgrade. The only way to double spend an unconfirmed transaction if you do not control the miner that finds a block that confirms a double spend TX is to control a well connected node that miners connect to (you would probably actually need to control several well connected nodes) How would it not be an upgrade to receive one confirmation that provides 1/5th of the security in 1/5th of the time? When 1/5th of the security is very significant and sufficient for all but the highest value transactions. The cost benefit trade off seems pretty clear to me. A bit more wasted hashing shouldn't be a concern when considering increasing the usability of Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
So this is "Alex Green" from Moolah/Mintpal? Wow.
How did this info not get out earlier? When that liveleak video came out and he showed his face, did people not recognize him?
In the video, Lemon was talking with someone who had requested a video of him to prove his identity as Alex Green. Lemon ignored that request the night it came through, rushed to the store, dyed his hair, and shaved his beard -doing the video the next day. He didn't look the same as the last time I had seen a photo of him. Still, all the false legalese and threats (that are a common part of Lemon's tactics) were a dead giveaway. He kept trying to leverage the interviewer's position with the foundation in an attempt to skirt around questions he can't answer. It's also hard to forget his voice though - it's just so mumbled, scummy, and juvenile sounding. Anyways, best part of this video is, after 25 minutes of asking for proof of an audit (which obviously there wasn't one), and 25 minutes of Lemon beating around the bush, the guy talking to him (someone named Ben from the foundation?) finally says "because I don't think you are Alex Green". The look on Ryan/Lemon/Alex/Sasuke/etc's face was priceless. He immediately goes into a spiel about UK company formation laws, where apparently fake IDs are impossible. Best part of all this is, he is on probation until December. He was arrested last October on other charges, and has now violated his release. I have gone ahead and contacted his former arresting constable and filed the needed complaints with the department. I truly hope he enjoys his time in jail, he deserves it. FWIW - Lemon stole from me as well through #bitcoin-otc, and has been scamming since, at least, 2004. He is truly a disgusting, sociopathic vermin. You are a legend! Getting this guy in jail will save people a lot of money and heartache. |
|
|
|
I thought bbr was anon version of xmr. Care to distinguish them for me?
I'll give my understanding. If I am incorrect someone please correct me. Both BBR and XMR are anonymous CryptoNote coins using Ring Signatures for anonymity. They are both based off of this technology https://cryptonote.org/BBR has undergone the most changes from the core code than any other Cryptonote coin. BBR uses the Wild Keccak algorithm while XMR and the rest of the Cryptonote coins use the CryptoNight algorithm. BBR is the only CrptoNpote coin that trims the blockchain to reduce bloat http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-reduces-blockchain-bloatBBR has an official working GUI BBR has opensource no fee AMD GPU miner Those are some of the differences between the two coins. You can find more information regarding Boolberry and the technology behind it at http://boolberry.com/I thought bbr was anon version of xmr. Care to distinguish them for me?
I'll give my understanding. If I am incorrect someone please correct me. Both BBR and XMR are anonymous CryptoNote coins using Ring Signatures for anonymity. They are both based off of this technology https://cryptonote.org/BBR has undergone the most changes from the core code than any other Cryptonote coin. BBR uses the Wild Keccak algorithm while XMR and the rest of the Cryptonote coins use the CryptoNight algorithm. BBR is the only CrptoNpote coin that trims the blockchain to reduce bloat http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-reduces-blockchain-bloatBBR has an official working GUI BBR has opensource no fee AMD GPU miner Those are some of the differences between the two coins. You can find more information regarding Boolberry and the technology behind it at http://boolberry.com/BBR also has something that helps keep unlinkability in transfers. The first paragraph on the first page of this thread has links to slide presentations that help explain the differences. Edit: And the nvidia GPU miner is open source, too. It just doesn't work in Windows. Yes, here it is. "Boolberry Solves Cryptonote Flaws": http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246I think this was one of the most interesting improvements. I am also interested to see how other CN coins handle their own implementation of this. |
|
|
|
Did you already ask Theymos if he wants to implement marking on Bitcointalk?
Does it need to be? We can do it without official help, no? That's part of the beauty of marking imo.  It can be implemented anywhere with no need to ask for permission since it works as a separate layer. Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, anything. And very soon all of these things will be implemented and we can begin working on making the user experience as great as possible on our own implementations. And then we can also work on providing out of the box tools(code, documentation, support ect) for people to create their own marking implementations or integrations. |
|
|
|
maybe if bbr was backed by berries the price would go up  The price will go up when demand goes up. Demand will go up when adoption starts to happen. If you think there will be demand for anonymous cryptocurrency transactions in the near future then BBR has a good chance of being a supplier of those transactions if it's value is demonstrated to potential users. It's a long term game, you can't expect high prices in a period where there isn't much demand yet. XMR for example is in the exact same position as BBR is right now. People are making speculative bets now that our future will be one where people will want to protect their financial privacy. |
|
|
|
|
So this is "Alex Green" from Moolah/Mintpal? Wow.
How did this info not get out earlier? When that liveleak video came out and he showed his face, did people not recognize him?
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure the coinwarz thing really made too much of a difference. The mining difficulty and hash pretty much strictly follows the price and is limited by the 4 * mechanism.
|
|
|
|
why the price is so low.
bbr is so innovate.
what does it bring fresh to the crypto world? Anonymity, reduced block chain for its class of coins, aliases, improved anonymity for its class of coins, a great dev who's committed to the project ect... |
|
|
|
That liveleak video speaks volumes.
Oh, and by the way people were duplicating currency, dumping it, and cashing out BTC from mintpal"v2" last week and moolah has their head so far up their own ass that they dismissed the reports as FUD and continued to let it run completely broken. Then surprise, surprise they don't have any money left.
Where was this reported? First report I saw was in a couple of pastebins being posted on Poloniex's troll box. Since then I remember hearing some other reports of people having their balance not updated after withdrawing and such. But the pastebin itself actually had links to screenshots and proof. Wish I had saved the links. I'll go poking around to see if I can find them and post them here. edit: found the pastebin! http://pastebin.com/bjbbUq9i notice this is Oct 8th! People were dismissing the reports as FUD here too, or no? I haven't been keeping up with all the threads here. edit2: https://twitter.com/moolah_io/status/520251319064354816I can't believe they kept the exchange up the whole time. Amazing. |
|
|
|
On a new topic, would a crowd funding site like kickstarter or indigogo allow you to raise the funds for this game or do they not allow the buying of an ingame currency with pledges? (I might have heard that somewhere)
If you have guys who can make decent html5 webpages you could just set up the funding site on cryptokingdom.com and use whatever rules you like. It would also save you the 10% kickstarter commission as well.
If you know people who are pretty clued up in integrating crypto transactions in websites in creative ways then you already have a fantastic resource that many people including me would love to hire for projects.
I would guess that the funding would come in XMR from the Monero community. But I'm not sure what rpietila has in mind for that. |
|
|
|
Not too many people really deserve the "Legendary" title on this forum but I think you've earned it! |
|
|
|
Currently testing PabloAngello's Bitmarker app for Android! |
|
|
|
$45,000 in wages and $22,000 in overheads per month.
I hope the uk government goes over them with a fine tooth comb and at minimum ban these guys from operating a business for 10 years minimum
Maybe if they had reduced staff / wages and overheads a bit they could have survived. Seriously once an exchange is fully tested and running, how many people need to be working on it full time aside from some support staff?? $45000 in wages per month seems like a lot to me. Maybe they had nice salaries. Yes and I suggest you all write to the uk government requesting a full enquiry. I would also like to know the legalities of announcing bankruptcy before filing it. They were incorporated in the US, right? Also, was there any confirmation that 'Alex' was his real name? |
|
|
|
From what it seems qora will be the first worldwide to have AT integrated into its core! @rpietila: have you checked qora? you can check the following posts: Since this thread is about observing altcoins, I wonder why I haven't seen more references to qora.. Because its closed-source? or maybe "was" ? it's been a while since last time i've checked it out It will be OS once the website and some other stuff are done. There is no way this is a scam. I mean the dev constantly keeps updating and communicating with the community. Just be patient. Regarding OS please check here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=522102.msg9208721#msg9208721 It has a link to the first voting for OS. Guys, we're talking about Complete Turing Engine, before Etherium! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=770239.0If this isn't a once-in-a-livetime chance, then what is it? Maybe it is. But the simple fact that it is still closed-source will be a turn off for many "investors". Also, I don't understand the reasoning behind not going open-source. There is nothing to be afraid of ! Especially clones... The only way a clone overcome the first implementation of the code is if the community leaves one for the other. The only way it happens is if the community as something to gain from the transfuge. Noone said not going open-source. Community just decided not to rush it. It would be better to have some GUI embellishment, website (picture to the outer-world) and featured integrated before going OS imho. The vast majority of people would say that your community chose wrongly. And the price seems to reflect that decision. Sounds like 'Qora'(the dev) himself is doing a good job, but closed source is a pretty big no-no regardless of whether people fork or clone your code base. Just the idea that Qora has been out for months now as closed source puts a rain cloud over the project. That alone might forever turn a lot of people off who otherwise might have been interested. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
