I was thinking about starting some sort of decentralized casino.
could that work?
You can do it with special bitcoin txs and an oracle. |
|
|
|
Is the last rising of Bitcoin a sign of starting closed trading structures?
Example:
The daily volantlity is about 5.000 Bitcoins.
Some people build up a group, which own´s 10.000 Bitcoins.
Through that difference of Bitcoins they can make the price fall or rise, like they want...by selling or buying among themselves.
->The Bitcoins stay in a closed trading Structure.
Is that just a silly thought or theoretical possible?
Thx
ALT COIN is the solution.. Not really because they will just repeat the process... |
|
|
|
I think it's possible that recently, some insiders agreed to move the technology in a certain direction and various financial interests may have bought a significant number of bitcoin, resulting in a run-up in price. I don't think it's a coincidence that we have a huge market event at the precise time that the core developers are discussing bank-friendly changes to the bitcoin standards. We are looking to remedy these problems. http://www.altchain.org/?q=whitepapers/paper2.htmlConspiracy theories usually aren't the best approach on promoting something  Im not selling anything... |
|
|
|
|
Btw just noticed today a new feature on my tablet...
Android want to let Google check for problematic software...
It does let you opt out though.
|
|
|
|
Well, if we can not dictate this like I said, maybe still make smaller transaction with smaller difficulty to pass them faster.
And maybe make a lesser bounty in case of smaller fees or smaller difficulty?
You can do whatever you want. You just have to get 51% of the processors to agree with you.  Still think bitcoin is "peer to peer"? |
|
|
|
What are some possible scenarios of how the core dev team could intentionally or unintentionally compromise Bitcoin?
Just curious to know possible scenarios where the core dev team would be able to compromise the integrity of Bitcoin.
It's not that I don't trust the team, I do. I just want to learn more about Bitcoin's potential vulnerabilities.
the problem is that most of the bitcoin world relies on the Bitcoin core C code(including MOST clients). If they introduce default behaviors, then it becomes a standard. We saw this pan out with the COIN_DUST issue. The code base is not easy to modify, perhaps intentionally so. |
|
|
|
Why won't Bitcoin developers split smaller valued transactions (txs) in smaller blocks allowing lesser fees, smaller difficulty and smaller reward for them and turn on CPU processing in the clients for verification?
The larger the fee the bigger the verification requirement.
This will bring benefit to everyone and spur new business allowing larger transactions not to go through first - thus faster, but allow all transactions to go fast and everyone to profit from this.
So if you have a high value transaction and you want it to pass fast you pay larger fee, or else get into smallfee transactions which go to CPU/GPU nodes but with larger blocksize and thus higher difficulty and taking extra time to solve.
If you have small value transaction regardless of fee a CPU miner will pass it fast. Else you are stuck for a long time.
And if you pay high fee you get into fastest verifier nodes/pools capable of verifying and keeping a large block.
TL;DR: Fees and value determine the speed of transaction as well as block size, difficulty and verification process.
no one gets to dictate the behavior of miners, this is a feature not a bug apparently.  |
|
|
|
Is the last rising of Bitcoin a sign of starting closed trading structures?
Example:
The daily volantlity is about 5.000 Bitcoins.
Some people build up a group, which own´s 10.000 Bitcoins.
Through that difference of Bitcoins they can make the price fall or rise, like they want...by selling or buying among themselves.
->The Bitcoins stay in a closed trading Structure.
Is that just a silly thought or theoretical possible?
Thx
I think it's possible that recently, some insiders agreed to move the technology in a certain direction and various financial interests may have bought a significant number of bitcoin, resulting in a run-up in price. I don't think it's a coincidence that we have a huge market event at the precise time that the core developers are discussing bank-friendly changes to the bitcoin standards. We are looking to remedy these problems. http://www.altchain.org/?q=whitepapers/paper2.html |
|
|
|
Does google have Bitcoin by the balls?
Google does not have the same control over application development in Android as Apple has for Iphones. You can develop an Android app on your own PC and upload it to your phone without Google knowing anything about it. There are apps for just about anything considered 'edgy' including Bitcoin and Bittorrent. So the answer is no. To alter the Android app-sphere in such a way to put Google in control would require some very serious changes to the architecture. Google does have an 'App Store' type thing, but this only factors into how much exposure your app gets, it does not reflect on whether it's actually available to Android device owners. There are for instance many apps with clearly violate Google's user agreements(such as Youtube video downloaders). Android is safe for now... |
|
|
|
this concept is a fairly basic cryptographic primitive: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_chain-bm Did a little sleuthing today upon arriving to the office. I had remembered something from an old book I've had for more than 12 years. A book I used to help write some encryption classes in Java before Java offered them. I remembered that the author presented a payment system leveraging a protocol hashing and encryption. This wasn't my interest at the time, but somehow it stuck with me. Well I found the book again and did some reading (I've put this off too long).
"A really clever thing about this protocol is that the encryption key for each message depends on the previous message. Each message doubles as an authenticator for all previous messages. This means that someone can't replay an old message; the receiver could never decrypt it. I am impressed with this idea and expect that it will see wider use once it becomes widely known." [1]
I don't have the first edition of this book, so I don't know exactly when this was penned, but not after 1995.
[1] - Schneier, Bruce (1996). Applied Cryptography Second Edition : protocols, algorithms, and source code in C. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. p. 590
|
|
|
|
all the projects I've looked at in this realm don't have anything concrete. The color coins people have an idea that in my view is not really a 'P2P Exchange' or even a Distributed Exchange. I did talk to a developer not so long ago who was working on some ideas, but he hadn't made much progress. I have already described in detail how a Distributed Exchange could be constructed: http://goo.gl/vy1uUrThe idea is public domain and the code will be open source. |
|
|
|
I do have skills and a team, but I support only innovative projects. Bitcoin webwallet doesn't look innovative enough.
I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing, but I was thinking no webwallet, no external servers for anything else than blockchain storage. Local wallet integrated to the web browser. Maybe not innovative but what a step towards cryptocurrency mass adoption! you certainly could improve the basic web wallet experience by: 1) keeping ECC keys in the HTML5 Web Store 2) forming and signing the TXs in the browser using Javascript. -bm |
|
|
|
How is this project of yours not using hashes but building a chain?  Also Tahoe is by far not "simple". have a look at the whitepaper in my signature. lots of stuff coming soon... btw- it uses hashes to link the chain, but doesn't use a nonce or have a PoW requirement. |
|
|
|
You're in the countryside. Or the desert. Or on a mountainside. Or on a boat.
Bitcoin rules the world. Maybe we're in 2018 or somesuch year. You need to pay Bitcoins. Circumstances that make the paymnet necessary are sudden and unpredicted. No mobile internet coverage. No Bitcoins. Sad faces.
Satellite mobiles? Maybe. Have you seen the size of those things? They're like the original Magnum PI suitcase phones.
Bitcoin can't do it on it's own, it will be strictly the currency of the fast life until this particular gap is closed. Or....
see: Offline Transactions. |
|
|
|
Yes I know this has been mentioned a hundred times before. BUT can anyone point me to any active efforts to make this happen.
In simple terms, I would like to see an efficient data store, such as a Kademlia DHT, in which the nodes are not only kept honest (proof-of-retention etc) but are actively incentivized with crypto-currency. You earn money by pimping out your hdd & bandwidth.
It will be truly revolutionary when applications do not have to depend on centralized services for data persistence.
I feel that this is ridiculously important and I have the time and motivation to help make this happen. I would appreciate any pointers to groups/forums where something similar is being developed.
Confidence Chains does have the ability to do this. It doesn't use Proof Of Work and it's impossible to exploit the network in the way eg. Color Coins does. It's not a simple cloud storage network either like TahoeLafs, it's a distributed block chain similar to bitcoin, but there is no hashing. It uses a specially designed algorithm with specific qualities. |
|
|
|
Sounds like you are describing "coloured coins"
what on earth does that have to do with color coins? do you even know what color coins are? |
|
|
|
What some people don't seems to understand, and Mike Hearn in particular, is that both the bitcoin protocol, and the bitcoin clients, is technically a huge piece of crap.
Who want's to send a magnitude more data than necessary back and forth over the wire?
Who want's to spend huge amounts of time and energy processing the wrong answer to an algorithm over and over?
Who want's to run a offline PC just to keep their wallet safe?
Who want's to encrypt and decrypt every little bit at every level?
Bitcoin is _all_ about privacy and anonymity!
That is the whole mf point, idiots!
Only a nutjob would use this software if that is messed up.
note: you are a potential Confidence Chains fan. |
|
|
|
While this doesn't exactly constitute proof, I do firmly believe that Satoshi is not one single person. Kim Schmitz, Joakim Schmitz- German, Finnish Andrus Nomm- Dual citizen of Turkey and Estonia Sven Echternach- German Julius Bencko- Slovakia Bram van der Kolk- Dutch Finn Batato- Half-German, Half-Palestinian Mathias Ortmann- New Zealand A ' fellow' human I know works for the NSA unfortunately here in the USA and was really intoxicated last night and started to tell me about a "Top Secret" case in regards to who wrote: Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdfThey correlated together to come up with the proposal above. It makes sense, they had to hide the money somehow. Apparently they discussed this on something known as " Shangri-La called X.25 " which was basically a pre-Internet closed network! Long live Bitcoin! 'Vires In Numeris' . . .all it takes! 51% >> |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
