so you are trying to say this forum does not represent Bitcoin? My guess was it is the official forum to represent Bitcoin? Not anymore?
It's essentially a fan site which has no official endorsement. like this statement! thinking of putting it into my signature!  EDIT: will never ever make a donation to this forum!  |
|
|
|
Well I was wondering how long it would take for people to notice. It's me And no I am not putting lots of hashing power to the network, notice that it just says "relayed by" and not "mined by". I'm performing some measurements, paper is due in a few weeks. thank you! due your work I came under attack of some moderators and some pool operators (which I really like!) |
|
|
|
About time a university started researching Bitcoin seriously.
Stress testing the network and protocol by a neutral party is something we should be grateful for, regardless of the immediate consequences.
If they can disrupt the network, so can others. And then I prefer this uni to do it, so we can learn from it rather than die from it.
the whole mining process has to be inspected. all the involved parties which producing no really value have to be sorted out! |
|
|
|
This would have been more funny if the title was "Why do moderators move threads with ongoing discussion."
Isn't it close locked anymore? |
|
|
|
so you are trying to say this forum does not represent Bitcoin? My guess was it is the official forum to represent Bitcoin? Not anymore?
You guessed wrong. It was deliberately separated from bitcoin.org because it's not any kind of official representative of Bitcoin. It's essentially a fan site which has no official endorsement. yeah, it helps to explain some events in the past and also the mood here. I'm wondering also about the dicussions not to support the Bitcoin Foundation of some members here. they realy don't understand the mind behind Open Source. |
|
|
|
What is the relation of the involved persons in this forum to the Bitcoin Foundation?
And what are their personal dealings with Trendon Shavers aka pirateat40? Were they involved in the mail fraud scheme that Sonny Vleisides was indicted for? Armchair detectives need to know. so you are trying to say this forum does not represent Bitcoin? My guess was it is the official forum to represent Bitcoin? Not anymore? |
|
|
|
|
What is the relation of the involved persons in this forum to the Bitcoin Foundation?
EDIT: I guess we need more transparency here!
|
|
|
|
I'm wondering about moderators which are closing ongoing disscusions about the intransparent process of mining of Bitcoin? Are you crazy?? Any comments? EDIT: this one here --> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113654.0EDIT2: I don't know where you came from but from where I came a constructive disput about facts should help all and clean out the people who have something to hide. |
|
|
|
On the question of is it possible, yes it is theoretically possible to see a block submitted to the network and then publish that block quickly from a highly connected node and it will look like it came from you. So maybe that's what they are doing here.
Almost certainly. I've decompiled the Python code in snoopy.tar.bz2 from that web server and that appears to be exactly what it's doing. but why? |
|
|
|
How do you know it's not just relaying someone's blocks ? How do you know it's not just mining some blocks ? Well, 1) I suspect that you still don't believe us about how the block relaying and blockchaininfo's IP detection works. 2) Some of those blocks were mined by Deepbit and other pools. So I think that this is just a well-connected node. you are free to proof what you say. not a personal thing but without any proof of what you did say you did say nothing. |
|
|
|
there is also the source file: *deleted link* (not releated to this topic) |
|
|
|
Maybe they have tons of fpga unused? They talked about cheap double spending. I don't know how they accounted for 10% of the network power in a "cheap" way. Maybe they have access to supercomputers we can only dream off. They are 500Km away, I should go there and investigate give em a call, fake a Swiss accent and they won't even know you are from the internet  did you ever tried to fake a swiss accent? very impossible! they have different accent in every canton and every village. bad idea! ok, lol but this is Zurich, north of Swiss, so they speak german... yes, but they won't tell you secrets if you "only" speak german. you have to speak swiss german if you want to know secrets! |
|
|
|
Maybe they have tons of fpga unused? They talked about cheap double spending. I don't know how they accounted for 10% of the network power in a "cheap" way. Maybe they have access to supercomputers we can only dream off. They are 500Km away, I should go there and investigate give em a call, fake a Swiss accent and they won't even know you are from the internet did you ever tried to fake a swiss accent? very impossible! t hey have different accent in every canton and every village. bad idea! In that case just choke up as many croutons from the back of your throat as possible and say you come from the most backward village of them all! bad idea too! I dont want to get a bullet in my head!  they get their army gun to home if they leave the regular army service but without cartridges. some years ago they had to give back the cartridges from home. but I do not trust in that! EDIT: "The structure of the Swiss militia system stipulates that the soldiers keep their own personal equipment, including all personally assigned weapons, at home (until 2007 this also included ammo[3])." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Switzerlandhttp://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Specials/Gun_debate/Background/Archives/Soldiers_can_keep_guns_at_home_but_not_ammo.html?cid=970614 |
|
|
|
Maybe they have tons of fpga unused? They talked about cheap double spending. I don't know how they accounted for 10% of the network power in a "cheap" way. Maybe they have access to supercomputers we can only dream off. They are 500Km away, I should go there and investigate give em a call, fake a Swiss accent and they won't even know you are from the internet did you ever tried to fake a swiss accent? very impossible! they have different accent in every canton and every village. bad idea! |
|
|
|
... Until now, double-spending attacks on fast pay-
ments in Bitcoin or mechanisms for their prevention
have not been studied. In this work, we analyze
double spending attacks in detail and we demon-
strate that double-spending attacks can be mounted
on currently deployed version of Bitcoin, when used
in fast payments. We further show that the measures
recommended by Bitcoin developers for fast trans-
actions are not always effective in resisting double-
spending; we argue that if those recommendations
are followed, double-spending attacks on Bitcoin
are still possible. Finally, we propose a lightweight
countermeasure to detect double-spending attacks in
fast transactions.
More specifically, our contributions in this paper
can be summarized as follows:
We measure and analyze the time required to con-
firm transactions in Bitcoin. Our analysis shows
that transaction confirmation in Bitcoin can be
modeled with a shifted geometric distribution and
that, although the average time to confirm transac-
tions is almost 10 minutes, its standard deviation is
approximately 15 minutes. We argue that this hin-
ders the reliance of transaction confirmation when
dealing with fast payment scenarios.
We thoroughly analyze the conditions for perform-
ing successful double-spending attacks against fast
payments in Bitcoin. We then present the first
comprehensive double-spending measurements in
Bitcoin. Our experiments were conducted us-
ing modified Bitcoin clients running on a hand-
ful of hosts located around the globe. Our results
demonstrate the feasibility and easy realization of
double-spending attacks in current Bitcoin client
implementations.
We explore and evaluate empirically a number of
solutions for preventing double-spending attacks
against fast payments in Bitcoin. We show that the
recommendations of Bitcoin developers on how to
counter double-spending are not always effective.
Leveraging on our results, we propose a lightweight
countermeasure that enables the secure verification
of fast payments. ...
source? EDIT: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113654.msg1228213#msg1228213 |
|
|
|
I dont know whether they mine with full power yet, but its not 51%, its 8.547% actually.
Number of Blocks relayed by 82.130.102.160: 20
First block relayed at Blockheight: 200691
Current Blockheight: 200925
dBlockheight=200925-200691=234 -> they have competed for 234 blocks yet
20/234*100%= 8.547%
They have currently relayed 8.547% of all blocks they have competed for.
what is the timeframe for an 51% attack. 6 blocks? |
|
|
|
I don't understand what in the translated paper. Do they have great hashing power or discovered a flaw in the bitcoin protocol?
i guess both. |
|
|
|
Swiss... they have something to defend  yes, the relationships of the involved scientists are hidden. so the party is not "good" nor "bad". |
|
|
|
This is not a bad thing. That is a legitimate organization, they are not doing it with hostile intent. Very interesting though!
it doesn't matter if the party is "good" or "bad". every party has to be rejected if they have more than 50% of the network if it was the case. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
