-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 To be honest I can't call Ripple "cryptocurrency". It is most like securities united with Paypal. There is no block or decentralized nodes. It's the same to existing bank system.
What do you mean? Ripple does have 'blocks', but in Ripple parlance they are called 'ledgers': - - Transactions compete to be part of the next ledger. - - Once a majority of nodes agrees on a set of transactions, a new ledger is created and propagated through all of the network. - - The ledger contains a list of transactions, a reference hash to the previous ledger (building a merkle chain) as well as the changed 'state' of the system, similar to how Ethereum's system changes state. This ensures that all nodes can verify locally that the listed transactions indeed result in the given state change, making forks (near?) impossible. Nodes are definitely decentralized in Ripple: - - Everyone can run their own node. - - Nodes can connect to any other node. In fact, users can configure which other nodes they want to connect to exactly. Also, I am not really sure what "securities united with Paypal" looks like. Could you give some more information on this? ~Wiebe-Marten -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJaCg03AAoJEBfPRUP+Bdzsp8IP/3Ujqo+nTnlIziPjEFk+tOc7 BrcEVZIeX20dBxdJjHDLq/cxkmhDx5XPeYjRarMHgQAUwMI7kRNiZUx/fo50k71A ggoTy+HSGdWqxo/DVUBg+fuL/QsyWmWg9+OQGAqP0UwA4/Ab9IZAB/v8ChkORZuc nQ5NqB55w0oyHoVURNc2g8h5gm4udYUVxplLWf3vTjRhQ/aQrp5qeT/t1wcpqKCV L+nW3MsCeqUYUspobJ14lJuYJHKxbxTdlFbzrJoCr9/hJnN94MpoABuOB5XSPzA2 c4n0FoQP7gCM9ZbTDttP634pyaifHUG4CKv97e1n7c6A5dT4yABf79XJNnSFK+Wg 70blykfqySOmiKI306jiEHraDNmNCAxsuKqT3EBQ0l/39ysLvCsOGFnUAMWAfHdy 1JZ/jvQjBSXd1eXnNiCAwCbseaaUY7DYlSH68RfTVyYneK1ppQVKU8QAu+G4emq0 etJEea3ThQ1OIRHmiGVaPIFTy14xJEvuxvLNAgcGzeZJmzS8/wmEKVniZaRyUZOF zlg6ow7ueA+8HIps21e6E7H3ngFfF40hiCvuVcJwqru3pKgwxC7WMkA18Ds7RSBM dV/VrEovHIx0xiBE2uf0E1/Up34FmD4INOGEncaghrIVhZcjAEugVvsH6+sETJTo pIG2FR/nWAGZYtpLou7y =NHLj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- I am curious, do these ledgers have all the balances of every address on them? Or just the new transactions? It seems to me like it would have the same security if the ledgers just stored balances instead of transactions which isn't the case for PoW chains. There would be no need for the old ledgers then. You can just have the most recent one. And poof goes the blockchain. It is just a SWIFT system now where anyone can be a bank, right? |
|
|
|
Good to hear that things are coming along nicely. We have segwit now (since august) so in theory we would be able to implement Lightning network in a couple of months when it's completely finished and tested. Now that's great but in order to get it locked in and activated we would need consensus right? So would we have to go through a similar process like the process with segwit (1x)? Surely it can't be implemented straight away before getting approvement from miners, nodes and the community in general.
You are wrong  There is no consensus needed for LN as there is no change to the protocol, not even a soft fork. It is a second layer protocol that works on top of Bitcoin by using Bitcoin blockchain for security of it's transactions, but without need to place every single one on the blockchain. Just the opening of the channel and closing will have to be on the blockchain and they are valid Bitcoin transactions. You can read more about it here https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/understanding-the-lightning-network-part-building-a-bidirectional-payment-channel-1464710791/ |
|
|
|
Good Day,
If i join here can i post in local board? Thanks. God Bless.
You can, but you will not get payed for it as the manager wouldn't be able to tell if your posts are constructive. |
|
|
|
Am not technically sound when it comes to crypto/Blockchain stuff. But I guess I can relate it to familiar things, as physics methods could be Universal. We need to ask ourselves this question:
Can something of value be created/done without Energy?
I think the discussion should be how to get Blockchains use Clean Energy rather than eliminating the use of Energy itself.
The use of Energy is one of the few things that makes Crypto/Blockchain appear less of a Ponzi scheme.
Anything that people give value is valuable. It has more to do with society then physics. You can have people value a PoS coin as some of them exist and have a value, but the problem is the voting part. The point is that if you don't need to do real physical work for your vote then you have no reason not to try to cheat the network. Consensus must be energy consuming, otherwise you open new vectors of attack for little to no benefit. I agree on Clean Energy, even cash is created from cutting down trees to make paper. Whole world should use Clean Energy, this isn't just a crypto thing. Only pow is blockchain? I doubt it.
The consensus not energy consumption is the essential.
Sx2 told us miners cannot control everything.
And we need avoid centralized mining.
They are both essential as you can't have a fair consensus without consuming something to stop the spam. I wouldn't call it a blockchain, because it has no benefit of it being structured as a blockchain, only costs. It easy to see how a PoS coin doesn't need a blockchain, they just need to vote on the last chain state of the network, the rest is just taking up space and bandwidth. They have no security drawbacks by not using a blockchain, as the history of a chain state is trivial to produce in a PoS coin if you have control of a single chain state. It is just using a blockchain where it is not necessary. It is like banks bundling their transactions in blocks for no reason and calling it a blockchain. |
|
|
|
To be fair it is not like they are building something that was done before. It might be hard to estimate how long it will take to test all the bugs and everything. All I know is that these guys have been developing a client for it https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd and that they updated the ReadMe file to check the last box for "Lightning Network Specification Compliance". I hope it comes soon, but there really isn't any information out there. Your best bet would be to go to one of the developers twitter and ask him there. |
|
|
|
|
Some people think PoS is the answer, as it will provide confirmations with no extra energy consumptions.
I would argue that energy consumption is a feature, not a bug. That it is necessary and that if a blockchain isn't PoW, it isn't a blockchain.
Energy consumption required to solve cryptographic puzzles on Bitcoin blockchain is what ties the technology to the real world.
It is what gives people an identity, it is what stops spamming and gives people an incentive to reach a consensus.
If you don't consume extra energy that serves no other purpose, then you don't have physical incentives to reach a consensus.
You don't spend energy on a vote, which means there might be no real person behind such a vote.
Energy consumption is the only reasonable way to tie physical to virtual, but either way, a certain physical consumption is necessary to insure physical beings are controlling a virtual currency.
|
|
|
|
I see people very often confused about exit nodes, that is the part where most people don't understand the best about Tor. VPN are worse for privacy in every way unless you are running a VPN yourself, which kind of defeats the purpose of anonymity in the first place.
I think it's fair only if you're using VPN from companies. Open source VPN such as OpenVPN not worse than Tor. But i'm not a big specialist in web safety, so i'm waiting for your response For privacy purposes it definitely is, for security purposes it is equivalent at best. Tor stand for "The onion router" witch means that your communications are encrypted for every Tor relay along the way in layers, like in an onion. This way no one can know the full path of your connection. There are entry guards that know your IP, but have no idea who you are talking to, there are middle relays who know nothing except to pass along some encrypted data from one relay to the other and then there is an exit node who knows who you are talking to, but not who you are. In a VPN when you exit a network, there is a node that will connect you with your destination. But it will know who you are and who you are talking to. That means that at least one person knows what you are doing on the Internet. In Tor you don't have that, no one knows the whole story. As for the security, in theory everything should be equally safe when you are encrypting your communications (using HTTPS for example). And when you are not, then someone always know your data. Everyone in physical proximity if you are using a local network with a wifi, your LAN, your ISP if you are connecting directly, the exit node in Tor and whoever routes packets for your VPN for the outside of the network. In short, in Tor and in VPN whoever controls the IP the site you are connecting to shows you have is the one that can read your unencrypted network. |
|
|
|
|
Neither miners nor anyone else can ever cripple Bitcoin. Bitcoin will be fine as long as there are users who will use it. For now Bitcoin is most used, oldest, most secure and most stable blockchain in the history of cryptocurrencies. Don't worry, it will not disappear that easy. Let the whales play, it doesn't matter in the long run. If you believe in Bitcoin then hold it, if not then sell it. Either way, nothing to worry about, no one can take Bitcoin away from you or other users if they want to use it.
We should all be here in it for the long run, so these prices right now shouldn't worry you. Bitcoin will either be worth some fraction of a million dollars or nothing in few decades. All of this is negligible and is speculative on will the cryptocurrency take over or not, so kick back and think about the technology, the system, economy, mathematics and so on. Don't pull your hair out for every penny put or taken out of Bitcoin. It is either a revolutionary technology or a failed idea, nothing in between.
|
|
|
|
|
The best advice I can give you is to look through it with a hex editor or some hex dump program and see if you can spot any addresses in it. Then it shouldn't be to hard to determine what cryptocurrency it is based on the format of the address.
|
|
|
|
|
If you can get a private key of the Bittrex address you sent the coins to then yes. Otherwise, no.
|
|
|
|
I don't know about Dogecoin Core. but I can tell you how you would do it in Bitcoin Core. First you need to unlock the wallet with walletpassphrase command for n amount of seconds. In this example you will unlock it for 10 minutes (n=600). bitcoin-cli walletpassphrase "yourpassword123" 600 Then you can use dumpprivkey to get a private key for your address. bitcoin-cli dumpprivkey "1YourBitcoinAddress" |
|
|
|
|
There have been 5 blocks mined just in the last 20 minutes (currently network is at block 494094), so I would double check your confirmations. However, it seems that it took an hour for a block 494088 to be mined so this might be when you where stuck for an hour. This is natural for the blockchain, sometimes you get many blocks in 10 minutes, sometimes you wait an hour for just one. It is random.
Disclaimer: I am currently using a BlockExplorer.com which seems a bit of buggy at a moment so I might be wrong.
|
|
|
|
Thanks for all the input and support. So if I just leave it there, will it eventually become available to me even if it's 6 months later?
You can hope. No one can tell what will the fees be in 6 months nor what Bitcoin's value will be. Also, why is this happening??? I've been making my purchases from different Bitcoin ATM's. Is there a different wallet I should be using that this wouldn't happen, Coinbase, Bread, Blockchain etc?
Yes. In a way you never used a wallet, it is just that website you were using promised you bitcoins. A wallet is really a wallet when you fully control it. This means you need an open source software that you can use as an wallet. Try Electrum or Bitcoin Core (Core is more secure, but it downloads the whole blockchain which takes around 150GB currently). I don't know about Electrum, but Bitcoin Core allows you to have full control over the inputs and outputs in your transactions (this is called Coin control feature). As for how exactly did you use your bitcoins and what did the wallet do under the hood, nobody can really know. The point is that you where dealing with a lot of transactions and the network now has high fees. You never spent those small amounts, so now they pilled up. Whether it was your fault, website's fault or no one's fault, no one can tell right now, but it happened and now the best thing you can do in future is actually use a software wallet and be in full control so you can keep an eye on this and deal with it as you wish. |
|
|
|
But if a minority can announce a fork and intentionally wreak havoc, and get away with it, that would appear to show a weakness in the overall functional of the algorithm in our admittedly imperfect society.
On the other hand, Bitcoin never saw something like this before and these forks had a huge economical support and yet Bitcoin is still alive and number one. Give Bitcoin some credit when it's due. Bitcoin took this quite well regarding how big the support was from miners and big Bitcoin companies for these forks. Even tho all these forks were asking for a small change to a protocol and put a lot of money on it, they still failed. This just goes to show that Bitcoin is a lot more resilient then you might think on the first glance. |
|
|
|
Ja cu da kopam od danas Bitcoin Gold. Naravno da svako ima pravo na svoje misljenje, ali ja se ne slazem da je prevara.
Videcemo ko je bio u pravu, vreme ce pokazati. Pozz
Ja sam nov na kopanje juce sam jedva prvi put iskopao 0.015 VIVO coin na GPU koristici ccminer i onaj komand line i neki pool koji placa svaka dva sata. Ajde molim te stavi ovde koji software je dobar za karticu i koji konfiguration file i pool je dobar da probam imam samo jedan gaming desktop i nov sam sa kopanjem voleo bih ako moze da bude profitabilno pa onda da probam da napravim rig. Pozz. Nek vam je sa srecom onda. Na nama je da vas upozorimo, na vama je da odlucite  |
|
|
|
This seems to be the case. I was confused and just assumed taht if the Tor Browser was oppened then Bitcoin Core autoamtically sets it up for you. By the way I was reading on using Tor with Core and I saw this: Note: It is not recommended that you use the Tor network for transferring wallets (unless well encrypted) as there are various attacks against this that can result in you losing your wallet, such as man in the middle exit nodes. In this example we are simply using the Tor network to route Bitcoin client traffic over the Tor network in order to perform simple tasks such as transactions and downloading the block chain, as this can help reduce your susceptibility to de-anonymization attacks. So im not sure anymore if this is a good idea at all... maybe it's better to use a regular VPN than Tor if you want an increased degree of privacy? I see people very often confused about exit nodes, that is the part where most people don't understand the best about Tor. VPN are worse for privacy in every way unless you are running a VPN yourself, which kind of defeats the purpose of anonymity in the first place. Running a Bitcoin node through Tor is absolutely just as safe (even more so) then running it through a VPN or just directly connected through the Internet. Bitcoin is distributed so there is no real harm of MITM attacks, safety is in the protocol already. Tor exit nodes know about your data just as much as your ISP, there is no difference, except they don't know where it is coming from. Most websites use HTTPS and the contents of the data is hidden between the client and the server, otherwise everyone on your wifi network or your ISP would know your data. All wifi networks are insecure currently as WPA2 has been broken, so if you use a wifi there is no reason not to use Tor exit nodes, as your connection should be end to end encrypted anyway. I am unsure if Bitcoin Core uses encryption for connections between nodes, but I can tell you that all the data that they are transferring (blocks, transactions,...) is already public knowledge and accessible to anyone and any other Bitcoin full node. So there is absolutely no risk in using Tor in any situation. Transferring wallet data, which nodes don't do of course as everyone would have everyone's private keys, is just as safe over Tor as over a regular connection or VPN, as your data will be available for your ISP, anyone on your LAN network (and WLAN) network, VPN service and every router between you and the destination to which you are sending your wallet. |
|
|
|
|
First thing you need to not be a psychopath. Next you need to be able to see that person, otherwise it is too easy to hide emotions. That is the only reasonable way to be able to tell what someone is feeling, otherwise you are wasting your time.
|
|
|
|
|
All the altcoins have risen in price compared to Bitcoin, since the fork was called off. This is because altcoin/btc price dropped in last weeks due to people selling their altcoins for bitcoins so that they can claim the free coins. Basically what was happened is that a market was being created for a new coin that was still part of the Bitcoin and once it was called off people simply restarted the crypto world to what it was before, more or less. Not everyone bought back their altcoins yet, some are just late, some just believe that the fork will still go on.
|
|
|
|
This is because they are encoded differently. It seems that the only difference is that the version byte is 5 in P2SH instead of 0. https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0013.mediawikihash160 to btc address
for p2pkh only
how to make it work with p2sh ?
why p2sh 's hash160 gives p2pkh address upon conversion through hash160 to bitcoin address and not the p2sh addresss ?
Because, as Danny already told you, you don't hash a public key to get to get a P2SH address... it is a "Pay to SCRIPT hash"... you need to hash a "redeem script", not a public key. Read my answer in your other thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2380374.msg24318230#msg24318230PS. don't create multiple threads for the same question, it'll fragment/split the answers and make things more confusing. Suggest you pick one thread and lock the other. OP is just asking of getting hash 160 of a bitcoin address and vice versa, whether or not he understands what an address even is or what that hash 160 is of is a whole other story. |
|
|
|
|
Well you see, those addresses with BTC on them have a very small amount. Even if you paid the entirety of that amount as a fee it still wouldn't be enough to cover the fees. This is what is often called a dust amount. So small that it is useless.
What I would suggest is that you export your private keys if possible and start using wallet software, like Electrum or Bitcoin Core where you would have a full control and better support when it comes to your bitcoins. For the amounts that small, you should definitely wait. Wait until the fees are low and Bitcoin price is even higher, then that small amount will become usefull. If you have any other address with more bitcoins on it, then you might want to send those bitcoins, but understand that the fee is still high, it is just that it is the same for every transaction of the same size, despite the amount being sent. So as percentage the fee could be considered low if you have a certain amount of Bitcoin in a single address (and as a single output), but the ones that you listed definitely don't have enough.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
