When you complain about lack of content, you just seem whiny. If complaining about lack of content is whining, what does that make complaining about complaining? |
|
|
|
I think this would essentially make it impossible to create new customer deposit addresses more then once per day (or would be limited as to how many they would be able to create). No, it wouldn't. Why would you think it would? I think it would also create a false sense of security for keeping bitcoin at exchanges as multiple exchanges could potentially work together to be able to run away with their customer deposits. Right now, exchange operators need to cooperate with nobody in order to run off with customer deposits. This would be an improvement. |
|
|
|
Meh. The Feds only care about the big guys. Those they'll notice and regulate. They won't bother with the guys exchanging BTC for USD in a Starbucks.
Wishful thinking. Remember that kid in grade school who would get caught doing something then would immediately start naming all the other people who hadn't been caught to get them in trouble too? Apparently most adults never emotionally mature beyond the grade school level, or at least enough of them don't that the feds can count on somebody complaining about the people exchanging BTC for USD in a Starbucks to give them an excuse to take action. http://contrariancompliance.com/2014/09/19/us-money-transmission-laws-are-worthless-and-unconstitutional/so far the only company subjected to it appears to have been mine. The vast majority of my competitors operate today without a license in any state, or operated for years without them until I sued them in federal court. |
|
|
|
e is not part of a signature program. He has no signature at all.
He is like a counterexample for those who say the spam issue is due to signature programs
Newbies don't get paid for signatures, AFAIK. That's one of the causes of pointless posts, as well as the high volume of posts asking about precisely how activity works (they want to know when they roll over to the next category so they can start advertising). If you want to argue about counterexample, wait until after yraskk reaches "senior member" status. |
|
|
|
Great! But would this mean to have the whole blockchain on your phone? Which is a nogo clearly. I know a lightweight solution like Electrum ist not as secure as a full node but there's really no other way for mobile devices I guess.
Bitmessage doesn't work like that. It only stores a few days of history. |
|
|
|
It always surprises me how common this line of reasoning is (I'm referring to the OP in the linked thread), even among those who've been involved with bitcoin for a while. It's been going on ever since GPU mining started. Nobody really likes watching their profit margins shrink because of competition, no matter how inevitable it is, or how beneficial it is for an economy as a whole. There's always some group of people in any economic situation who believe they deserve their profit margins forever, and will appeal to any external force they can contact in order to keep the playing field tilted towards them. Taxi drivers try to get the state to ban Uber and Lyft, and bitcoin miners invent scrypt mining and PoS. |
|
|
|
They should have third party software performing the Merkle construction once a day lets say. A second "third party program" could verify individuals account holdings (crypto only mind you) by checking hash values. This program would be encrypted and stored on exchange servers by a third party. Then individuals could be assigned personal private keys to decrypt and run the verification software as they please. The private keys could be stored locally on customer devices.
Encrypting and MACing the verification software would ensure the exchange themselves could not alter this software. As long as enough users verified their holdings periodically they might be able to prove the exchange was not holding less coins than that declared by the daily merkle tree.
This is not an audit of course, more like an inventory check. I am I missing something? We can do much, much better than that. Exchanges can work together form m-of-n multisig pool in which to store customer deposits, then audit each other continually in real time, provided that they can provide cryptographically secure proof of liabilities. This arrangement is called a voting pool. Proof of solvency alone is pretty much pointless, since a fraudulent exchange can prove solvency right up until they decide to take the bitcoins and run. The voting pool arrangement means that no exchange can unilaterally refuse to honor withdrawal requests - they have to convince a majority of the exchanges simultaneously. So once they are deployed we should see a substantial reduction in the amount of exchange fraud, at least on the Bitcoin side (there's no such thing as multisig for USD). |
|
|
|
2016 is 2048 after an integer overflow.
Can't tell if you guys are joking... so here's a hint: Mine was a joke and also relevant to Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
2^11 is 2016?
it's 2048 on my calculator )  2016 is 2048 after an integer overflow. |
|
|
|
Assumption 1:
People without sigs post no shit
Falsified: Case in point, falllling and his 1000 alts. Among others
Assumption 2:
People with signature do not post constructive posts
Falsified: Several mods and legendary members have ads
Your argument is therefore invalid Deliberately pretending to misunderstand an argument so that you can refute something different is called a "strawman fallacy." |
|
|
|
And seriously you don't get that the point is the SHIT POSTS not the sigs themselves? Motivated ignorance, I think. |
|
|
|
If I want to actually use a stealth address right now, for example publish one in my signature, what are my options?
If I were to publish a stealth address in my signature would anyone be able send me BTC? Right now I believe you'd have to be using Dark Wallet to receive stealth address payments. Also, only Dark Wallet is capable of sending to stealth addresses, but as noted above at least one other client is actively working to implement DW-compatible stealth addresses Has the specification been completed or are the details still being hashed out? If there is a specification where can it be found?
It's complete enough to be implemented in Dark Wallet (which Works For Me, despite it's scary alpha warning) This the only documentation I know of: https://wiki.unsystem.net/en/index.php/DarkWallet/Stealth |
|
|
|
So who is trolling, as you always do.
For someone who's only been around for two weeks, you have remarkably strong opinions about what's going on. |
|
|
|
Why isn't that enough to solve this problem?
It is. (once it's actually implemented) Someone's just FUDing. |
|
|
|
I know that some people instantly press ignore on people with e.g. Prime dice signatures, I like that approach This approach worked better when ignored posters got feedback by having their post count change colors. That had to be removed because it was bogging down the response of the forum. Now there is no feedback, either to the posters themselves or the people paying them. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
