See this is what I thought....I remember going over this about 3 years ago but cant find the thread....So to recap my understanding, a change address is used because it means you have not exposed  ? Using a change address is used for two purposes: 1. Ensure privacy. Using change address makes it harder to link addresses together. Eg. A --> B (Destination) + C (Change) A --> B (Destination) + A (Change) For the first example, you can accurately determine which is the destination. 2. To eliminate ANY security risk associated with address reuse. and so you are relying purely on elliptic curves or some such which are not provably secure....so the whole idea by satoshi to include the change addresses was to make it alot more secure......
is this right?
What? ECDSA is used in anything needed to prove the a signature associated with your address is valid (in transactions etc). It is secure as of now but address reuse prevents this issue. But yes, there is next to 0 risk for you to lose coins if ECDSA can be reversed if you never reuse address. ok i see...as i thought.....thanks....needed to confirm this |
|
|
|
Does signing a message expose coins on that address in anyway,
eg is it equivalent of sending some coins from an address and not using a change address?
and by expose I mean lessen security....
A block explorer essentially lists all transactions made from any address involved in transactions that has been confirmed or going to be. Signing with an address has the same coin exposing impact as sending a transaction. If you transactions using any change addresses can be found on a block explorer, it is already exposed. Signing a message will not increase said risk. I think it is a non factor. See this is what I thought....I remember going over this about 3 years ago but cant find the thread....So to recap my understanding, a change address is used because it means you have not exposed ? and so you are relying purely on elliptic curves or some such which are not provably secure....so the whole idea by satoshi to include the change addresses was to make it alot more secure...... is this right? |
|
|
|
|
Does signing a message expose coins on that address in anyway,
eg is it equivalent of sending some coins from an address and not using a change address?
and by expose I mean lessen security....
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder at what level Central banks and govs will realize its all over for them?
I think at 100K a coin they may cotton on, but it will be to late. The corridors of power probably cannot conceive the impact of BTC / Blockchain tech means their functions are largely marginalized/ replaced , decentralized.
At 100K a coin, you can throw in 100B a day which is probably enough liquidity for quite a bit of the market.
|
|
|
|
Why do we need hard fork for the sake of simply having a hard fork?
Are you trying to please BU community which expects that any change can be done only via hard fork?
It will be trade of this kind: "Oh, look! We will let you hard fork bitcoin if you allow SegWit to activate, deal?"
No, I don't like it and we don't need it.
i guess its an attempt at a compromise? anyhow it looks like ltc will segwit, which will be interesting |
|
|
|
You think that's shady? Try taking a closer look at the margin market on Polo.
u think its leverage pumped eh? I just hope the margin call system is robust |
|
|
|
|
Sooooo I wonder if it went down like this:
Buy all coins
Pump 3 coins insane level 1000%
everyone jumps in and buys up everything 200% hoping to catch the wave, pumpers sell already brought in coins
20 of the can sell 30 + coins at 200% they can still make a profit after pumping 3 coins at 1000% OR
Something is going on we don't know.
Its interesting that POLO holds largish 1% staking wallet for BTC Plus
|
|
|
|
|
given that hard drive space has 10x at least since 2009 there is no reason why blocksize canot do the same and then you would see transaction costs come down ~10X.
|
|
|
|
For the record, I replied to Loaded on March 24, 2017, 10:29:47 PM.
I still haven't heard back from him yet.
Oh please You can accept or decline the terms right now, then everyone knows where you both stand Or do you need more time to think it over You spin that comment however you want. I'd say a potential $100million+ bet warrants some due diligence. not so much that's kinda the whole point of btc tech, you can prove you have the money, you can set up some sort of contract to pay out, even if you used say eth to do it. |
|
|
|
BTC losing market cap dominance doesn't mean anything, nor would it if it lost its position as "first" in the market cap listings.
Sure it does it what makes news and influences decisions and spend |
|
|
|
|
[1] Tech reasons and lack of consensus dev now and the implications for the future
[2] People want to get more, eg 1btc in eth launch is now circa, $100K or 100 BTC, does BTC offer this over the same time frame? So people will continue to buy in to ICO's thus sort of becoming a self fulfilling prophecy
[3] Eth and Dash mayface issues of succession, once ED or VB leaves moves on or whatever, then they will fall into inter-cine deleterious warfare over various tech and other issues, much as BTC has now, so in someways BTC is goingi through this phase much much earlier
[4] The trend is clear, and never faultered only down, you have to diversify in to alts or loose value, and as a hedge against BTC.
|
|
|
|
|
how is lisk different to say a node.js and javascript implementation of ethereum?
|
|
|
|
|
Bigger than the fall inmho is the % of total market, <70%, this the first part of the network effect to be lost, with ethers 400% increase, from circa $1b to $4b.
Mull that over.
tech is littered with myspace face book, examples.....
|
|
|
|
What i mean by code is deliver product as well as they deliver press releases:: where is a product people can use now even eth got this right....even though it was command line in the beginning, it gave people a working system they could play with. I don't care if its 1980's style bulletin boards, command line ftp style etc ... no browser or gui ... just the guts of it. [/quote] Big utter nonsense, there's code to play with for far over far a year now (even longer for the real geeks). Especially the type of terminal stuff you talk about: https://safenetforum.org/t/profiling-vault-performance/10331/59Here's TEST 2 (May 2016) with all you just asked for: https://safenetforum.org/t/safe-network-test-2-update-7th-may-12-15-bst-now-complete/9079Notice it has GUIs for Linux, Windows and OSX. So yeah, thanks for trolling but you don't know 1 little thing about this project. Nice to interact anyway  . [/quote] When you TEST, this I take means its a testnet, no actual imutable system on which I can use my safecoins and won't be wiped clean by the next TEST.... |
|
|
|
you know sadly I think your right......
you realise this is exactly how 'they' want you to feel? pressure is being piled on from all angles. it can't last forever. let some smoke clear and see how it looks then. the issue is not the smoke clearing from this, but the implication this is going to happen again. and again over relevant issues. |
|
|
|
"At what point is the BU/CORE and Lack of DEV consensus going kill it?" I believe the answer you are looking for is "Now". you know sadly I think your right...... |
|
|
|
wait for the alt pump to calm down and then take a cold, hard look at stuff. nothing goes up 3x or more in the space of a few days/weeks and stays there no matter what it is, let alone the same tired old crap on poloniex.
but yeah, i hope this is a wake up call to everyone. it can't drag on forever when there might be better options. i don't class anything out there right now as a better option but others might.
sure it did BTC went up 10x to over 1c and never came back down. |
|
|
|
|
miners are already feeling the effects, if compromise is not reached they will have lots of bricks and debt
|
|
|
|
|
My view is its that any needful dev will face the same impass as the blocksize debate, so people are looking elsewhere for solutions.
Dash has a dev consensus and insta send, but a huge issue will premine, However dash has hooked in the MN (miners of dev) to want to act in a unified manner by offering a % income which also has made coin scarcity.
Eth has not so big an issue. Though it did have its DOA debacle
Why would people come back to BTC?
It quite amazing to watch the BTC community squander billions in value. Eventually the miners will be left with bricks at this rate, and core or bu wont matter.
|
|
|
|
It seems Eth and maybe dash / Ripple ? are fast catching up, btc is only 67% market now. The lack of dev consensus in BTC is killing it at an amazing rate.....at some point market share will be lost if this continues and why would people switch back. The big implication being if BTC can not even decide on this issue, what about all the other issues that are going to come up? I wonder when BTC community is going to see this? Before it is to late? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
