|
And yet the price remains...mostly unaffected, which is a surprise.
|
|
|
|
|
There is one problem with online hashing, at least from personal experience, hashing is done on the ASCII, or on the binary. So I'm not sure if using online tools is good.
|
|
|
|
|
The number of transactions in a block is determined by the max block size, which in turn is determined by the size of transactions. Also, the bigger the fee, the higher the chance the tx gets included in a block. But some miners might decide, hey, I want only high fee transactions, in which case max block size may never get hit, and only say 50 TXes get included in a block.
|
|
|
|
If you are going to try to fix bits, at least try to use a more recent code base (with speed-ups, better altcoin support, etc.) included  I am not aware of any. Also, nobody should be forced to run severely old drivers to run this program, it's just not right. EDIT:This problem was known way back with Catalyst 13 and prior, user wyzhe provided a fix, but somehow it got lost I guess, here is the repo with said fixes https://github.com/wyuzhe/vanitygenWhen you download that repository's source code, you will need to apply just a small patch to file oclengine.c for this to work on latest drivers. Open file oclengine.c, find this if (drv && (strstr(drv, "1112") || strstr(drv, "1113"))) , for simplicity's sake, just remove that line of code, recompile and test. Don't forget to remove old .oclbin filesHere is the binary for those that cannot compile. https://www.dropbox.com/s/o5genfs5ul4ryuw/OCLVanitygen.zip. For those that express concern over binaries from random people, I've provided binaries for miners in the past, but it's ultimately your choice, you've got the source, you know what to do. Tips are appreciated(if it ends up working for you). Personally, for my 5850 and a 14.x catalyst, seems to work. |
|
|
|
The entire solar system has only 10x07 more atoms than earth? I find that hard to believe is there a source for these numbers?
By increasing the exponent simply by one, the output number increases two-fold from the previous, based on 2^10 to 2^11. In the case above, I guess it would be, increased by 10 times. But I think you are wrong, it says atoms in the solar system. |
|
|
|
So, I think the answer is 1,461,501,637,330,902,918,203,684,832,716,283,019,655,932,542,976 Is that right? Yea, thats a ton of addresses. But, if half the worlds population were to get into bitcoin and start trying to find vanity addresses, then we might get "closer" lol.. But, I think we are safe.
Not even close. Also wasn't the number of Bitcoin private keys less than 2^256 AND also only 2^160 public keys due to RIPEMD-160? The legend's colors for Bitcoin Addresses and Atoms in the Universe look the same to me. |
|
|
|
|
I might take a look at it later, but since my experience with OpenCL is very little, no promises.
|
|
|
|
It's not 10 satoshi it's 10.000! (0.00010000 BTC) - tha's the minimum my smartwallet let me send (and after the transaction I saw that actually it took double for the fee) https://blockchain.info/address/1CT5UbVxfAb9GLsLeK3eqkzTR42xDWUcMHAnd as far as I know the wallet is still in the directory... How can I recover the address? P.S. I have now ideea how to use the command line Please use the comma as the separator. So no matter how much you type 10.000 it's still just TEN for most of us. |
|
|
|
While folks are working on creating asset tokens for Bitcoin 2.0, I would ask for development of an image format akin to DRM that first checks the blockchain for the outputs before accessing the image data. Then anything done with the image like printing, displaying, or selling would require a transaction (with a fee) and would remove the color from the token.
Important documents would be authenticated by the author as a notarization. This wouldn't deter copyright infringement, but would be useful for authenticating original artwork. Rights for displaying lower resolution images in the case of artwork could be granted with different color (and cheaper) tokens.
This would mostly be useful when it is important to authenticate the originality of the document or artwork. For instance, applications could be developed that prove that "selfie" images were taken by the camera installed on the device. Games like "Magic: The Gathering" could sell virtual cards displayable once on a device. And of course, contractual tools could be developed.
Horrible idea, I hope it never see the light of day. This could prove to be...a serious anti-piracy tool and it can cause the destruction of...quite a lot of things. Lately, I keep wondering how people can sit around and think these kind of destructive ideas, like not just this thread, many more. |
|
|
|
and you're english needs some work. (;
Your English needs some work. (; @OP there's already a dozen threads like this. ._. no, you are english needs some work. Your write, mah engrish neds wrerk. Yeah, needs more twerk.  |
|
|
|
Think about it. 30,000 coins. A public key that everyone knows about now. And perhaps 10,000 computers guessing at the private key? I'd feel vulnerable.
that is all
10,000 computers and still billions(or if not, then millions) of years away before they may hit a key. |
|
|
|
|
For sure there will be people like that. Sad it wasn't me, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Well no wonder the Hernia guy left the BTF, he wanted $40k.
|
|
|
|
Total time logged in: 22 days, 21 hours and 31 minutes.
You've got a long road ahead of you. Total time logged in: 63 days, 14 hours and 32 minutes. |
|
|
|
I dont think its possible since no one has those kinds of funds to start with.. lol.
You have to be a 1% to even those crazy things.
And yet nobody mentioned that the rest of the coins have not been minted yet. |
|
|
|
ahh you can open the otherside as well. haha there is a english part. Sneaky japanese.
It seems like more people got these.
all i have to say on the matter: 6 ii. "Any person possessing assets of the bankrupt, shall not deliver such assets to the bankrupt entity." translation mark karpeless shall not hand hidden bitcoins to mtgox trustee (Nobuaki Kobayashi) Mo, that means that anyone holding any property of Mtgox shall not return it to Mtgox. no, the property of mtgox (EG server /domain name /code )is automatically property of the trustee and part of the bankruptcy assets. but karpeles's secret hoard, now that he is not 'mtgox' (the trustee is mtgox) means karpeles doesnt have to hand over that missing 600,000 coin he hoards. Wrong! The notice means that if anyone is holding any property of the BANKRUPT ENTITY, that it should not be returned to that entity! Implies that the court should be notified and the control of the property be given to the court. The trustee is NOT Mtgox! The trustee CONTROLS Mtgox, its assets, etc. The notices does NOT mean that Karpeles cannot be forced to surrender any and all property that he owns or controls. This is a standard order in bankruptcy proceedings and I suspect because of other problems in the English version of the notice, that much was lost in transaltion. Indeed it has, indeed it has  . Do they send these postcards based on addresses you've used to withdraw money? |
|
|
|
|
Are we supposed to know who this guy is?
|
|
|
|
One of the biggest grudges people have with purely PoS coins are that the coins are unfairly distributed. Side note: I don't agree with this line of thinking, as everyone has a chance to invest in IPOs if they'd like. This same argument could also be applied to early adopters of Bitcoin... but I am getting sidetracked. I think it is a shame something as silly as this could hold back purely PoS coins, as I feel they are a step up from purely PoW coins which consume much more energy to secure their block chains and waste processing power.
Now that "Oracles" can confirm real world data, would it be possible to do a recurring IPO for a purely PoS coin? I feel like this would solve the problems people have with "unfair" distribution. The way I envision it there would be an initial IPO, and then one every year after that as determined by the oracles. The amount of IPO coins should be slowly reduced like Bitcoin's block reward. Using something like Oracles, the current price of the coin could be determined to figure out how much the IPO coins should cost in the recurring IPOs, or they could be sold at the original price (this may affect the market negatively and I'm not sure of the best approach.)
So, it'd go something like this:
1st IPO = 5,000,000,000 coins @ .0001
2nd IPO 1 yr later = 2,500,000,000 @ current market price or original price
3rd IPO 1 yr later = 1,250,000,000 @ current market price or original price
4th IPO 1 yr later = 625,000,000 @ current market price or original price
... so on so forth ...
I have a few questions.
I am not a developer, so would something like this be possible or is it just a pipe dream?
Would this idea even make sense to due to market variables? I'm thinking maybe it would be more fair to just keep the recurring IPOs at the original price of 0.0001, but it would affect the market.
Are recurring IPOs even possible?
Any other ways you guys can think of to improve distribution of IPO/purely PoS coins?
How about sticking to Bitcoin? |
|
|
|
Running a wallet/service on Windows, especially not a server edition sounds like a really bad idea. Don't get me wrong, I am a Windows user myself, but for hosting sensitive things, like people's Bitcoins I can only recommend a *NIX server.
Also, you should consider running the daemon, but again, don't go using Windows for a service. Also, you've not stated the version you are using. Latest is 0.9.2.1
Your reply immediately solved our problem! We still had version 0.8.5, how incredibly stupid. Also, we're considering to take a linux version instead of windows. Would that be better? Thank you very much!! Cheers, Nexigen With a *NIX host you're less likely to get infected by something malicious, since quite a lot of functionality requires root. Nowadays any EXE you run could be a malicious one. Also, more stability? Also, if you feel like it, you can send me a tip to the sig address. I wish I could live off photosynthesis, but so far that is scifi |
|
|
|
|
Running a wallet/service on Windows, especially not a server edition sounds like a really bad idea. Don't get me wrong, I am a Windows user myself, but for hosting sensitive things, like people's Bitcoins I can only recommend a *NIX server.
Also, you should consider running the daemon, but again, don't go using Windows for a service. Also, you've not stated the version you are using. Latest is 0.9.2.1
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
