Spot on. John Donne poem "For Whom the Bell Tolls"[1] captures the on going feeling for me. The poem gives me chills. We are all part of the island. And the sea... The sea just washes the coast. We never know when it's our time. It is both wonderful and terrifying. It pushes us to live, love, learn and effect change. Time is the only asset we truly can't afford to lose. I once heard a saying about immortality that I simply can't forget. "If you were to live forever, you would never get up in the morning". Limited time is the incentive for an enjoyable journey. |
|
|
|
Leo really fucked my day today. It's been a while since I lost a favorite person. I would never expect to feel the same from an Internet stranger. Fucking disease. I'm having a drink to o_e_l_e_o tonight. My drink is already on my desk. My thoughts are with Leo...
It's good to know that I'm not drinking alone tonight... |
|
|
|
|
This is the first time I need to pour myself into a whiskey to drink before posting a reply.
What the fuck. That felt like being punched in the stomach. I am at a loss of words, man. You are an example to follow for every person in this board. Knowledgeable, kind, helpful. And always with a good sense of humor. I'm sure you're a great person in real life as well.
A massive wound for the community. The scar will never fade. Farewell, Leo. I wish we drink that beer someday, somewhere else.
|
|
|
|
Other alternative question: How Satoshi makes money by create Bitcoin, Bitcoin Core and this forum? the answer is not every person that invent something is purely for making money. Pretty bad example, though. Satoshi invented money, he didn't just make an SPV wallet. Sure, he did risk his time and energy, but in a way, he did pay himself.
Another noteworthy detail, is that people working on free software around Bitcoin, completely voluntarily and with their own hours of operation, are likely retired already. I wouldn't be surprised if OG Bitcoin Core developers or ThomasV (as an example of an old SPV dev) sit on top of big stash and have decided to maintain the ecosystem for the rest of their lives. |
|
|
|
Which governments and financial institutions? In addition to Synchronice, even if we assume that governments do not share interests, each one can take it over for their people. The communist party of China forbade using Bitcoin. US followed by funding surveillance programs and is a matter of time until trading peer-to-peer or using bitcoin outside a KYC exchange becomes forbidden too. EU, same. Sure, Bitcoin isn't "destroyed", but governments have developed effective measures to control it. |
|
|
|
Thanks to NeuroticFish for the AI idea and franky1 for this cool site! So, here I present... https://ibb.co/G2tyKz4! (19.4 MB) |
|
|
|
[...] I get your points, and the law is way out of my field, but what concerns me is that only the participants of that illegal activity are held accountable, and permit distribution. - If I upload Oppenheimer on Google Drive, and then distribute the download link, then I'm responsible for that action. The authorities will warn Google about the incident, and Google will notify me about its deletion. - If I upload Oppenheimer on Pirate Bay, and be one of the seeders, then I'm also responsible for that action. The authorities will contact me, and request to stop distributing it (in the best case scenario). Then, maybe they request from every other seeder to shut down their operations. What happens if I upload it on the blockchain? Maybe I'm still responsible, but I hold no permission over the Bitcoin network. So, maybe I get a fine, but the activity is still on-going. I am no longer accountable. So, who is to blame if not every node distributing it? |
|
|
|
This is apples vs oranges, stealing a bike is illegal, storing a copy of a file you obtained legally and lawfully own is not illegal Storing a copy of a legally obtained file locally is not illegal. Distributing a copyrighted file universally without the creator's permission is definitely not legal. if you buy a movie/song and store it on your google drive, dropbox or some random VPS that is legal as far as I know. Storing it locally on a cloud service is completely different than distributing it to the entire Bitcoin network. If I manage to access those files and use them, then it is me commiting crime not you Both. When downloading a movie from Pirate Bay, sure, you're committing a crime, but so is the seeder who has uploaded it. In fact, most of the times, the authorities look for the uploaders. those folks are not stupid and have probably consulted the right people given that their identities are known to the public Do we really know which people are behind Ordinals? What prevents me from anonymously buying / selling / issuing Ordinals? |
|
|
|
After trying literally every service for this purpose (except the wasabi ones), I can safely agree that JoinMarket is my favorite one. I use others too, of course, but JoinMarket is the most decentralised one. It is the most decentralized, but honestly, I prefer Whirlpool over Joinmarket. In the former, you get infinite remixes for free. In the latter, not only don't you get free remixes, but you pay for every maker's input. It has also presented some issues with the fee selection, like this one for instance. JoinMarket does come with a UI, Joinmarket-Qt. Also, note that Jam is unofficial. |
|
|
|
Whoa the price is quite huge I would say. Wait till you see the price of the actual newspaper!  It wouldn't surprise me if it isn't a scam site (even though I hold my doubts). The Times newspaper is probably the rarest Bitcoin collectible, probably rarer than cacascius coins. |
|
|
|
Wow that frame is very nice and gorgeous. This one is even more gorgeous! But... the price and delivery costs are not attractive. Plus, I want to make this myself. |
|
|
|
Not a lawyer either, but as long as you don't intentionally expose the private key then how would anyone know the content? And as long as there are no cameras and nobody around, how can anyone know you've stolen a bike? Nonetheless, it is illegal to do. AFAIK, in the early days, miners prioritized the "aged" transactions. Why not continue favoring those transactions that do not circumvent the default 'datacarriersize' cap?
Isn't it already apparent that sweet profit is the answer? Transactions which pay a lot more than "aged" transactions, have priority. Maybe a small amount of profit does not incentivize them enough to bypass such rules (e.g., standardness), but millions of dollars worth of bitcoin definitely outweigh these rules. |
|
|
|
Bottom line: if everything but the block reward stays the same, in a couple of halving we'll need to pay ~0.0019 as fee if we want the same level of network security. It's important to mention that what we might want or not want is a little irrelevant. Maybe half of the Bitcoiners think that it is already too secure, and the other half holds the opposite view. What matters is the natural outcome, and I think we can all agree that paying 1-2 mBTC for a median transaction is an overdose for the vast populace. That suggests the security will decline over the long term. Another thing to note is that everyone wants these levels of security. The controversial part is what compromises does one deem acceptable in exchange for that security. Again, I think we can all agree that paying 1-2 mBTC for median transactions is unacceptable for the most part. |
|
|
|
The "1" in port 9050 means that there is 1 byte on the Recv-Q (receiving queue) waiting to be read. Now it's "0". It's a rather curious number to be honest. Is it constantly "1" or have you noticed it going higher? I haven't noticed it at all. Are there any other ports that have Recv-Q higher than 0? No. Currently, I'm at 12 connections (2 in, 10 out) and strangely have reached the tip. The problem has solved itself, but the mystery remains unsolved. |
|
|
|
The purging rate is not consensus Opinions Mempool policies are like assholes, my friend; everybody has one. |
|
|
|
Does bitcoin-cli getnetworkinfo show you are reachable by the onion network? For some strange reason, right now I'm having 8 connections (1 in, 7 out). The networkactive boolean is set to true. However, I bet I'll be back at 0 connections within the hour. Do you want to try if we can explicitly add a node via the addnode command? As I have already said, I have tried but it didn't work. You can try to add me as a node, or tell me your URI so I can add you, but I doubt this will help. The problem isn't in DNS. As it appears out, it fails parsing SOCKS5 responses. With onionnet=onion, this means complete connection failure. Although, tor-resolve fails even now that I do have connections, so I don't cross my fingers it's entirely its fault either. Are these options uncommented in your /etc/tor/torrc file?
No. Can you run sudo ss -tulpn | grep tor | grep LISTEN to see if the tor service is listening at the ports 9050, 9051?
$ sudo ss -tulpn | grep tor | grep LISTEN
tcp LISTEN 1 4096 127.0.0.1:9050 0.0.0.0:* users:(("tor",pid=39059,fd=6))
tcp LISTEN 0 4096 127.0.0.1:9051 0.0.0.0:* users:(("tor",pid=39059,fd=7)) |
|
|
|
Could it be firewall rules? Doesn't seem to be the case: $ sudo ufw status
Status: active
To Action From
-- ------ ----
<deducted>
8333/tcp (v6) ALLOW Anywhere (v6) # allow Bitcoin Core
Can you please run bitcoin-cli getconnectioncount and then bitcoin-cli getpeerinfo? $ bitcoin-cli getconnectioncount
0
$ bitcoin-cli getpeerinfo
[
] |
|
|
|
Usually the answer is simpler than it looks like. If you followed step by step Raspibolt's instructions, you shouldn't have these issues. It's been a while since I followed Raspibolt instructions, but I'm sure it isn't exactly Raspibolt. I was experimenting myself at some point. Is your node onlynet=onion? Yes. Here's my bitcoin.conf: # RaspiBolt: bitcoind configuration
# /home/bitcoin/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf
# Bitcoin daemon
server=1
txindex=1
debug=tor
# Network
listen=1
listenonion=1
onlynet=onion
proxy=127.0.0.1:9050
#bind=127.0.0.1
# Connections
rpcauth=<deducted>
zmqpubrawblock=tcp://127.0.0.1:28332
zmqpubrawtx=tcp://127.0.0.1:28333
whitelist=download@127.0.0.1 # for Electrs
whitelist=bloomfilter@192.168.0.0/16 # for Bisq
# Raspberry Pi optimizations
maxconnections=40
maxuploadtarget=5000
# Initial block download optimizations
#dbcache=2000
blocksonly=0
# filters
peerbloomfilters=1
pruned=0 You can verify yourself that this isn't copied-pasted from Raspibolt. For example, Raspibolt does bind to 127.0.0.1. I remember I had commented that, because it was producing issues with Bisq. |
|
|
|
ETF is just a very important tool for more Bitcoin adoption. Care to elaborate how an ETF helps on adoption? To me it rather seems as a tool for investors to not care about custody and regulation. It's just a little better than Binance's BTC IOU. The worst thing these corporations could do is convince Bitcoin Core devs to argue about every soft fork so that Bitcoin is ossified and cannot scale. You make it sound worse than it should. If corporations manage to persuade Bitcoin Core developers to adopt a specific roadmap, they would likely succeed in convincing the broader community of its merit. In the event that Core developers receive compensation for a hardfork, they would need to persuade others to embrace the fork, not just themselves. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
