As long as all programs recognize both compressed and uncompressed adresses, it's all good.
If, for some reason, a firstbits service only looks through the compressed or uncompressed adresses […] Ok now I'm sure you're serious  . A firstbits service doesn't need to look at this, it looks at the address and nothing else. Two different addresses can't map to the same fb, period. I'm serious, but I'm wrong ;-) Yes, thinking about it, what's in the blockchain is safe. Or something. So, when eventually all programs know both formats, and may even watch both formats for a given privkey, all is fine. Ente |
|
|
|
Then we have compressed and uncompressed firstbits.
Not sure if serious. firstbits is a mapping to an address, whether it comes from a compressed key or not. My 12345 happens to be an uncompressed one—another address that starts with 12345 and comes from a compressed key will have different firstbits due to the need to disambiguate the prefix, not because of the underlying key. As long as all programs recognize both compressed and uncompressed adresses, it's all good. If, for some reason, a firstbits service only looks through the compressed or uncompressed adresses, or converts all of them to compressed or uncompressed adresses, people are mapping different adresses to the same firstbits. This probably won't happen. But then, I tried to import a compressed adress in Armory, didn't work. So I converted it to uncompressed, Armory importet that. But didn't show the balance after rescanning the blockchain.. I now expect unexpected behavior at every corner. Importing/exporting between clients? Blockexplorer? Firstbits? Try to explain that sht to a non-techie.. Ente |
|
|
|
It's compressed? Where did it come from? Probably not self-computed via vanitygen, as I imported a few from there to Armory with no probs.
They are actually from vanitygen modified to compute compressed keys. All my 1Dabs, 1Poker, 1Lotto vanity addresses are from vanitygen, and they are all compressed. I really hate that whole topic. One of the worst things that happened to Bitcoin. Compressed and uncompressed vanity keys? Really? Then we have compressed and uncompressed firstbits. And with that, there will eventually be lost bitcoins. I already can't import my Android keys to Armory because of the whole compressed vs uncompressed desaster. And no, even if I convert between compressed and uncompressed, it doesn't work. Even though they have the same privkey. /rant Ente |
|
|
|
Based on past price cycles we are due for a rally in price between October 15 and December 15. Every 6.5 to 8 months there has been a price hike.
I love such statements! Here, have another one: "Every time mankind has set foot on a new extraterestical object, there was a world war exactly 30 years before. People, stay away from Mars!" :-P So, how many datapoints did you compute for this? One, two? ;-) Actually I agree. But based on something much better, my gutfeeling. Hah! Ente |
|
|
|
Couldn't you still analyze the transactions and track down individual Bitcoin users that need questioning?
Yes, there are two stages of laundering coins. First stage, which is obvious and talked about everywhere, is how to transform dirty coins to fresh coins. There are several technical possibilities, which all break down to get the bitcoins from one, dirty adress to a clean one. The problem is that it's easy to follow when you have 527.3381 coins going in, and 527.3381 coins shpwing up half an hour later at a totally unrelated adress. So you split it up into several adresses, possibly over a few days. So you end up with 500 and 27.3381 coins, or with 371.51 and 155.8281 coins, or some combination more clever than that. Doing that right, your individual adresses drown in the noise of the blockchain. Voila, you effectively have anonymous coins. Or, at least, plausibly deniable coins. Second stage? If, at any time, you combine some of those coins into a tx, your cover is blown. And since all data is public, it doesn't really matter when you do that. An attacker would follow the 527.3381 coins until something funny happens. I guess he will immediately notice when some coinjoin or laundering or tainting happens. Then he scans every tx, and creates sets of tx where the outputs sum up to the original amount. With todays hardware, databases and network analysis programs it probably doesn't matter if he ends up with 100 or a million sets of tx. Even if you "cash out" clean coins in weeks it should be possible to find it as one set among many many others. So, you accidently combine two of those tx? Bam, he will see it as a red flare lighting up, being one of a few candidates. And I see no problem to closely follow those five "red flares" manually, just as you would track unwashed coins to begin with. I have a problem here, with my coins. I try to always use new adresses. So I end up with more and more adresses and smaller and smaller amounts, "dust". Every transaction results in one new adress. Even worse, everything I do with one lump of bitcoins, and later with the change, is adding to the datatrail of this particular lump. If I start to eventually combine dust, the datatrail combines to much more than before. Do I like "laundering"? Yes. Is it any good, in theory? No. Might even give a false sense of security. Solution? Do "laundering" with every single transaction. How? Probably not with Bitcoin altogether. I don't think there is a possibility for such a fork. One of the very few valid reasons for an alt-coin, now I think about it. Ok, I learned something new while writing this post. Sometimes talking helps, even if you're just mumbling by yourself. Ente |
|
|
|
I dont know , right now you are already at 1.2k and it has been couple of days , by that time you will probably be at 20k+ people fed. I want to say here at this time what you guys are doing is noble and I am proud of people donating for this good cause , I on the other hand prefer to throw a bucket of wings on the middle of a dozen homeless person and watch them fight over it while filming it and making money off this. With that money , I will buy more buckets and more homeless to take videos  Yes I am not a good person I get that. I am usually not this bad, its just homeless topic that I am not found of. ..you might have a second look at the concept of 'Karma' ;-) No, seriously. I don't believe in that esoteric crap. But there is something to that "what goes around comes around". I'm at the smiling end of this deal, and it feels quite good! 20k+? Hell yeah! Ente |
|
|
|
All right, now I'm totally lost. I used as a privkey: 5JVNazqC4JucAHUeRLhcqrbGFAro2CySd2ptDaDnPe18G9tmuAs Message: Hello world! And got as a signature from jasvet.py: IHBIv6b+gp+aX1FSQ9vOGfjbh6svVfRzLq2NBlwSu6xQE7sq2cWBQnbRwkOL64IkJguDELeh9nGXKmlHxFgKJiI= Now comes the funny part: Both http://brainwallet.org/#verify and bitcoin-qt do verify the signature, but only to the adress 1N8UThyPpVz8DuZLNx4KbX9rqQhFAFfGRE The proper pubkeys to the given privkey should be: uncompressed: 1E4PLo2YV33dkG7np78rz3aT3yTQvK7Xkz compressed: 1D6eGU1hudNTkg5eaqYHxgM3NYCbq6MJoy What the heck is this mystery adress? As reference, from http://brainwallet.org/#sign I got HMkg8LsNsYAC/oTEbgaBZy6kLNjLPSz1cZbCcqlFAL6GqdxRGR2LEg6PofSnpkFVlJTPqFS0amps9t55WBcToNo= and from bitcoin-qt HPM/8W8EhvKMrBfY0X9TrHx8UJQNTl1XBrzH/63jZSoc4tByiOr5U9wkn4KJ8cWKDjF9PJFRl/Kb121OqOq0jQQ= as signatures, which both are verified valid by the respective other as coming from 1E4PLo2YV33dkG7np78rz3aT3yTQvK7Xkz, the uncompressed adress. Is there a different way to do this (signing a text with the privkey, being able to verify it with the pubkey) resulting in an even shorter signature? Doesn't have to be Bitcoin-related at all. Some recognized standard would be nice, so I don't have to print the sourcecode to the backside ;-) Ente |
|
|
|
Signatures aren't unique OH! Of course, without ever thinking about it, I assumed those signatures would be unique! Maybe like a hash with several inputs, one being the privkey and the other being the text. All right, but even when several different signatures verify "true" to the same adress and text, they all should verify. I can't figure how to verify {'b64-signature': 'ICJNavINw/4nHQId8M6AZ+IyyugUSwdp0RcVbUH+jknO5liYIiv5LolCFOZZSSTOySYasEL8f/hak6poxgB+DmI=', 'message': 'Hello world!', 'signature': ' "Mj\xf2\r\xc3\xfe\'\x1d\x02\x1d\xf0\xce\x80g\xe22\xca\xe8\x14K\x07i\xd1\x17\x15mA\xfe\x8eI\xce\xe6X\ on http://brainwallet.org/#verifyPrivkey: 5KWLD8VF29WR36qR2YM3wWLDuePHJAP4YKgCMcfvNN7TTxSFgFx Text: Hello world! Pubkey: 1PRPcHe3fFGjLmaGWFbQ92FtjKuSoUgcyz I'll dig out bitcoin-qt in a minute, and try to get some result which two out of the three agree upon ;-) /edit:Aww man, of course now it works! ICJNavINw/4nHQId8M6AZ+IyyugUSwdp0RcVbUH+jknO5liYIiv5LolCFOZZSSTOySYasEL8f/hak6poxgB+DmI= Hello world! Verifies to 16RiJy3VBjf4bQJiF5UL887pggK1RasMn8 Thank you, jackjack, for the script! Will have some fun with it now! :-) Ente |
|
|
|
I haven't kept up with the coinjoin thread, but ... assuming people could trust either one individual or one entity or even 2-of-3 multisignature addresses, can a bunch of people just send coins to that one person, and he sends it to himself (consolidating all the unspent inputs into 1 output), then send them all back out to the same bunch of people (at different addresses), and this is effectively mixed?
Let me rephrase that in steps:
1. many people send coins to, for example you, 1GMaxweLLbo8mdXvnnC19Wt2wigiYUKgEB, wait 6 confirmations.
2. you then use some form of raw transaction or coin-control to get all the unspent inputs, then spend them all back to 1GMaxweLLbo8mdXvnnC19Wt2wigiYUKgEB, wait another 6 confirmations.
3. then you send the coins back to their original owners.
Of course, this method is flawed in that they (the people) have to trust you. But a service could do this and charge 1% or something, like blockchain or bitcoin fog used to (they really did mixing by not connecting users to each other.)
Maybe I'm misunderstanding here, or am missing something: Why the extra step to "send all inputs to one adress" and then split them up again? As far as I remember, coinjoin does exactly the same thing you suggest, except it creates one huge transaction, where everybody throws inputs at it, defines new, "anonymous" outputs, and signs the whole tx when they are happy with the result. It's either all or nothing, the coins can't be taken in between. Also there is no central point whatsoever. Except, for convenience, a central point to organize all the people and inputs, outputs and the like. I see a market for such a central point. TOR and anonymity would be fine too, an .onion address would in fact be helpful. I'd throw a small fee at it too. Ente |
|
|
|
Armory wallets have not supported compressed keys yet. They would've by now if I had been able to finish RAM-reduction and gotten around to the new wallet format (that would've supported a lot more exotic things than compressed keys). To be clear -- I could probably "support" compressed keys "quickly." They're not complicated and all the pieces I need are waiting in my project for me. But the wallet code is excessively, thoroughly tested. That wallet code has hardly been touched in over a year because I'm so careful about making any changes that might compromise the reliability of the algorithms. I'm concerned about something like getting an address, sending coins to it, and then realizing that it actually sent it to hash(compressed-pub-key-plus-32-bytes-zeros), which would not be spendable. These are things I have to be extremely conservative about, and while I could implement something that probably works, very quickly, the testing is 80% of the work. I have to get RAM reduction finished with the fragmented backups. Then I'm getting married and going on my honeymoon After that, I'll get a chance to work on the new wallets. Congratulations, Alan! :-) You surely must be a happy man nowadays! Oh, and just in case: Don't lose the *real* priorities out of sight, right? ;-) Cheers! Ente |
|
|
|
..one of the first projects in the forest is building a kitchen for <BITHOC>
..get the homeless more involved with the preparation of this food
..fully transparent with what we are using funds for
..We actually have a water filtration system in place, and want to start bottling our own
Awesome! Jason, I honestly think you are writing history with this! Even just reading your posts and updates makes me feel like it's christmas! Any chance you could share some photos of the action? The Outpost already has such large dimensions, like the huge amount of lunchbags made, I can't imagine how it looks like when it's getting busy there! :-) No priority, obviously. Also, after a mere 24h, I already feel late to the party: 102: https://blockchain.info/de/tx/2179e4da2bb4abe2d4e3cb38c09de3b185141e44bc310e295da82cabfa59b197Looking forward to shake your hand, Jason, someday, somewhere. Ente /edit: Ah, complicated math! :-) |
|
|
|
Bump. Just a friendly reminder.
1. Compressed Keys (available since qt version 6.)
2. Aesthetics. (font, qr, etc)
I'm after functionality more than looks, so the last one can wait. I want to import my vanity address but it's compressed. hehe.
It's compressed? Where did it come from? Probably not self-computed via vanitygen, as I imported a few from there to Armory with no probs. /freebump Ente |
|
|
|
I just played a bit with jasvet.py, thank you both, jackjack and Alan. I try to sign one same message with several addresses. The signature should be somewhat futureproof and "official" (Like, legally proving the ownership of several addresses). A short signature is a plus, to be able to queeze more onto one piece of paper. So, I figured I'll go with the bitcoin-qt v0 method for this. Adding this to the script: def DecodeBase58Check(sec):
vchRet = b58decode(sec, None)
secret = vchRet[0:-4]
csum = vchRet[-4:]
hash = Hash(secret)
cs32 = hash[0:4]
if cs32 != csum:
return None
else:
return secret
#==============================================
pvk1=DecodeBase58Check("5KWLD8VF29WR36qR2YM3wWLDuePHJAP4YKgCMcfvNN7TTxSFgFx")
text1='Hello world!'
FTVerbose=True
sv0=ASv0(pvk1, text1)
print sv0
jasvet.py says: {'b64-signature': 'ICJNavINw/4nHQId8M6AZ+IyyugUSwdp0RcVbUH+jknO5liYIiv5LolCFOZZSSTOySYasEL8f/hak6poxgB+DmI=', 'message': 'Hello world!', 'signature': ' "Mj\xf2\r\xc3\xfe\'\x1d\x02\x1d\xf0\xce\x80g\xe22\xca\xe8\x14K\x07i\xd1\x17\x15mA\xfe\x8eI\xce\xe6X\ It seems I got something wrong, or need to convert the output or the like. http://brainwallet.org/#sign says: Privkey: 5KWLD8VF29WR36qR2YM3wWLDuePHJAP4YKgCMcfvNN7TTxSFgFx Text: Hello world! Signature: G+xTV1JL0C3eAtIPQwOETWwKYCALDR2Px0u1S/4CXl1lKhM/0mFEsuYH2BVMlPe/FvJFJmuFue2TfWW8OgacBVo= Ah, it's no fun to be a noob, I can tell ya! Ente |
|
|
|
It's an interesting question, but for me the truly shocking part is this: Even if YOU WANTED PAY FOR PORN and you searched around for a service that would sign you up for a paid subscription with your bitcoins, when you find such service you will discover that they are "temporarily disabled" or "on vacation" or something: http://biterotic.comhttp://pornforcoin.comYep, still waiting for the big boys to turn to Bitcoin. Yesterday someone announced his bitcoin-webcam-site, which looks great on first sight. Too great actually. Turns out there are many different sites which all use the same camfeeds or something. So that one was just another middleman. We're coming, getting there, getting closer, eh? ;-) Ente /edit: that's the one: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1mi3mb/my_boss_said_no_to_btc_i_quit_my_job_and_did_my/http://www.strip4bit.com/ |
|
|
|
>61% bullish sentiment.
Does it mean prices will rally from here or crash?
Yes. SCNR, Ente Well , frankly I was interested to hear some thoughts of the community about either side Why have people clicked that prices go up and what do those think who clicked that prices go down ? Ah, I see. Well, you do great work doing TA. As of lately, I fell back to "it goes up, it goes down, you can't explain it!". Therefore, your "bait" was irresistive for me. For what it's worth, I am more of a bull than ever. I remember two years ago when I talked with my mom about potential failure modes of Bitcoin: technical failures (aka hack), intervention from governments (aka banning) and negative media campaigns. All three look like less of a risk now compared to two years ago, so I will play permabull and enjoy the ride. Ente |
|
|
|
|
Just did a 2 BTC worth transaction with pheaonix.
Friendly, professional, highly organized.
Recommended!
Thank you,
Ente
|
|
|
|
I tried to create an offer without coins, but my ad never showed up before I deposit the corresponding amount of coins into my LCB account
I've had a cash-only sell listed for some weeks and I've never had to send localbitcoins any BTC. Right! I'm cash-only too! Maybe that's the difference? Ente |
|
|
|
Something to consider is that people can list Bitcoins for sale, which they do not yet own. They may only have a comparable stash of dollars on an exchange to put through at the time of the transaction to minimize risk.
I think these walls are projections of Gox and Stamp for the most part, but a reasonable portion may be held by the seller outright.
The question is, could the orderbook depths on the exchanges cover the claims the users at localbitcoins make? I doubt it.
The bid side can be imaginary since the site have no idea how much fiat money each buyer have, but the ask side should be true since you must first have those coins deposited in your LCB account to be able to sell Nope. You can create offers as you please. Even when someone accepts your offer, you don't need a single Bitcoin on LCB. Conveniently, you can even transfer the bitcoins afterwards, the system calculates the total amount and then funds/escrows the trade. So: the raw amount of offers, which is what we use in the other wallthreads, is totally random. Ente I tried to create an offer without coins, but my ad never showed up before I deposit the corresponding amount of coins into my LCB account Funny.. Ok, I'm not *that* sure then. I never had zero coins up with an ad at the same time. But I did have larger (BTC selling) offers than the amount of BTC on LCB. Someone else has to confirm either of us I guess. Ente |
|
|
|
Autolend automatically creates lending offers with any balance that is not yet lent out or in an offer. You can specify either VIR or a percentage rate.
Also it seems to cancel existing offers and recreates them at the autolend rate you set, I'm not sure if this has changed since I last checked. It won't lend out at market rates, it creates limit offers.
Uhum. Then what's the difference to "lend with auto-renew" then? Here, this creates exactly the same offer again when the lending ran out or was closed. Ente |
|
|
|
Something to consider is that people can list Bitcoins for sale, which they do not yet own. They may only have a comparable stash of dollars on an exchange to put through at the time of the transaction to minimize risk.
I think these walls are projections of Gox and Stamp for the most part, but a reasonable portion may be held by the seller outright.
The question is, could the orderbook depths on the exchanges cover the claims the users at localbitcoins make? I doubt it.
The bid side can be imaginary since the site have no idea how much fiat money each buyer have, but the ask side should be true since you must first have those coins deposited in your LCB account to be able to sell Nope. You can create offers as you please. Even when someone accepts your offer, you don't need a single Bitcoin on LCB. Conveniently, you can even transfer the bitcoins afterwards, the system calculates the total amount and then funds/escrows the trade. So: the raw amount of offers, which is what we use in the other wallthreads, is totally random. Ente |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
