Sorry if this has been answered elsewhere, but is there true consensus among the Bitcoin developers that a migration path from legacy wallets will indeed be supported indefinitely, even decades from now,
Yes. That is why there has been a lot of work put into the implementing the minimum required for migration to work without relying on any external dependencies. and that all legacy formats will remain operational in all newer versions of Bitcoin? I know there may be nuance, and things may change, but I've read some opinions contrary to indefinite legacy wallet migration, and the mixed signals and uncertainty on this topic are concerning.
This sounds like you are conflating legacy wallets with legacy address types. Legacy wallets refer to Bitcoin Core's wallet format only, and has no effect on anything else. Legacy address types (address types that existed prior to segwit), are not guaranteed to stick around and there has been a little bit of discussion about maybe soft forking them out eventually, but this is not a seriously considered idea yet. Wonderful. I was primarily concerned about legacy wallets. As long as legacy wallets are still supported, I see no problem. While I do prefer legacy address support, I understand the reasoning behind deprecating them. Thank you for the clarification!  |
|
|
|
New transport protocol, new wallet formats and options. These are the very basic of Bitcoin that should not be touched without great necessity and majority consensus. Imagine I go to prison for 10 years. Or join army. Or enter coma after colliding with train. When I get back to my computer I should be able to turn on my computer and sync the Bitcoin client right away. Bitcoin now have become a value storage medium in addition to tool for transactions.
These features are not added "without reason". The new transport protocol is specifically an encrypted protocol in order to make it harder to censor Bitcoin nodes. However, just because a new protocol is introduced doesn't mean that the original protocol is going away. The new protocol has considerations for backwards compatibility so it will be possible for nodes that don't understand it to still be able to connect to the network. The new wallet format is specifically BDB is entirely unmaintained and unmaintainable. Keeping the software in general up to date is generally a hard task, and gets harder when there are dependencies that are difficult to maintain. Even so, the change to the new wallet format is still specifically being done in a way to allow users with old wallets to still be able to use them in the future. There will be a migration path that will live indefinitely, and this will allow those people to load their old wallets and migrate them to the new format. This will not result in any loss of funds, whether preexisting, or new funds sent to old addresses. Sorry if this has been answered elsewhere, but is there true consensus among the Bitcoin developers that a migration path from legacy wallets will indeed be supported indefinitely, even decades from now, and that all legacy formats will remain operational in all newer versions of Bitcoin? I know there may be nuance, and things may change, but I've read some opinions contrary to indefinite legacy wallet migration, and the mixed signals and uncertainty on this topic are concerning. |
|
|
|
|
I see the algo listed as randomscash. I assume this is the same randomx algo used by monero?
EDIT: After looking at the code, it appears to be latest version of randomx, which monero hasn't adopted yet. Is this correct?
|
|
|
|
Depends how many Alpaca Socks they bought |
|
|
|
|
How can one assume that the bitcoins are indeed lost? Don't some people keep valuables in bank vaults for many decades? Don't others bury valuables in their backyards? Gold bullion is passed down through generations without ever leaving the vault or seeing the light of day. Grandpa's old stash of cash that he hid in the crawlspace is still legal tender (at least in countries that didn't hardfork their currency). What if I want to pass down bitcoins to my children, but they're still young and cannot yet be entrusted with the private key? What if a private key is held in trust for decades? What if the bitcoins I mined in 2010 are still under my control, and I intend to keep them indefinitely? As regards the quantity in circulation, decimalization allows for nearly any quantity of bitcoins to circulate without issue. Why assume that coins are lost if they haven't moved for an arbitrary amount of time?
This is a solution looking for a problem.
|
|
|
|
I pay CASH for BTE. $$$$
How much? And what about crypto instead of cash? |
|
|
|
Good point!
I neglected to mention that at one point I did indeed see a "double spend" error; however, that transaction was cancelled. Or at least supposedly cancelled.
I don't use breadwallet much, but it's nice to have on hand to show people how bitcoin can be integrated into the ubiquitous iOS environment.
I'm still a Bitcoin Core user at heart, and don't bother much with small amounts, so it's very interesting to see how other wallets, especially minimalist thin clients like breadwallet, may be used in day-to-day transactions.
Solid app that fills a much-needed role.
This issue aside, you should never use desktop wallets to hold more than pocket change unless you have a strong security background and can keep your system hardened against malware. Most users should only be holding keys on systems that are secure by default - systems that employ hardware encryption and are malware hardened with techniques like enforced code signatures and app sandboxing. This is why we chose iOS as the first platform for breadwallet. It's widely recognized as the most secure popular computing platform. Great point about large amounts on desktop machines and hardware encryption. Worth reminding everyone the crucial importance of bitcoin security. Maybe I'll get a trezor for christmas. Rest assured my big private keys are stored offline in a safe place. And thank you for the ultra-fast response to my support ticket. Amazing. |
|
|
|
Last night I dreamt I was loading the washing machine. I stepped out for a minute and when I returned Greg Maxwell had stuffed three knit blankets into the same machine, overloading it. I called out to him, but he did not respond. I never saw him, but sometimes in dreams you know things.
This is 100% true.
Overloading blocks? Commit access to my washing machine? I don't know what it means, but investors should take note.
Duly noted. It's been a while since I actually laughed out loud reading this forum. Thank you. |
|
|
|
I've been trying to send BTC from breadwallet for over 2 days now. No luck. I'm running the latest version of iOS with the latest version of breadwallet. The transaction is stuck as "unverified" although initially it was shown as verified.  I've rescanned the blockchain more times than I can remember. I've reinstalled the breadwallet using the backup pass phrase. I reinstalled the same breadwallet on 2 other iOS devices. I've tried different wifi connections. I've tried using data connection. I've let the transaction time out, then redo it, but it still won't verify and confirm. I've made numerous successful transactions in the past using this particular wallet. But they were all much smaller amounts. What typically happens is that it says "seen by 0 of 3 peers" or "seen by 1 of 3 peers" but that's where it stalls. The transaction never confirms. The amount of BTC I'm attempting to send is about $300 worth. Not a lot, but not insignificant. The fee is about $0.05 worth, which should be fine. Any idea why this transaction isn't confirming? I suspect it's a problem with breadwallet's connection to the bitcoin network. Any tips on retrieving my bitcoin? Really sorry you're having an issue. Please contact support@breadwallet.com and we will take care of you! Good point! I neglected to mention that at one point I did indeed see a "double spend" error; however, that transaction was cancelled. Or at least supposedly cancelled. I don't use breadwallet much, but it's nice to have on hand to show people how bitcoin can be integrated into the ubiquitous iOS environment. I'm still a Bitcoin Core user at heart, and don't bother much with small amounts, so it's very interesting to see how other wallets, especially minimalist thin clients like breadwallet, may be used in day-to-day transactions. Solid app that fills a much-needed role. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the quick reply.
I'll be in touch right away.
|
|
|
|
I've been trying to send BTC from breadwallet for over 2 days now. No luck. I'm running the latest version of iOS with the latest version of breadwallet. The transaction is stuck as "unverified" although initially it was shown as verified. I've rescanned the blockchain more times than I can remember. I've reinstalled the breadwallet using the backup pass phrase. I reinstalled the same breadwallet on 2 other iOS devices. I've tried different wifi connections. I've tried using data connection. I've let the transaction time out, then redo it, but it still won't verify and confirm. I've made numerous successful transactions in the past using this particular wallet. But they were all much smaller amounts. What typically happens is that it says "seen by 0 of 3 peers" or "seen by 1 of 3 peers" but that's where it stalls. The transaction never confirms. The amount of BTC I'm attempting to send is about $300 worth. Not a lot, but not insignificant. The fee is about $0.05 worth, which should be fine. Any idea why this transaction isn't confirming? I suspect it's a problem with breadwallet's connection to the bitcoin network. Any tips on retrieving my bitcoin? |
|
|
|
|
There are some days in everyone's life that change everything.
The days we never forget.
Many of them are intensely personal and involve other people, like the day my son was born, or the day I first fell in love.
Others involve experiences with things, like the day I got my first car or first used a computer.
But one day I’ll never forget was the day I discovered bitcoin.
It was 2010. I had just checked in to a suite at the J.W. Marriott in Bangkok, Thailand.
First thing’s first: get wifi working.
Laptop on the bed. Jet lag wasn’t so bad this trip. I ordered room service––a banana split sundae, I remember.
As a finance professional, I loved lurking the world of digital currencies. I had been following online money since the e-gold fiasco years ago. Now there were new players in the game. Liberty Reserve was big at the time. Pecunix was quiet but steady. MoneyBookers was popular. And of course there was Paypal. Although not its own currency, it was still part of the internet money landscape. I always have and probably always will deeply despise paypal.
Yet as always, every digital currency seemed dodgy and untrustworthy. Still, I knew that “magic internet money” would be important some day.
I checked my usual online sources, and lo and behold, one had a link to an article about “loom” and another had a link to an article about “bitcoin.” Hacker sites always have interesting stories, I’ve learned.
I was fascinated by what I read.
I stayed up all night researching loom and bitcoin.
Loom (which wasn’t exactly money) is forgotten today.
But bitcoin has changed the world. And my world.
I found the old pre-MtGox New Liberty Standard exchange site.
I couldn’t believe these things called bitcoins actually had a market.
Some lunatics were offering up to a dollar per bitcoin, which most people agreed was outrageous.
I kept reading.
I found this forum.
I found the white paper.
I learned to “setgenerate true -1”
I dug deeper.
I bought a GPU.
It became an addition.
|
|
|
|
|
yeah, big solo miners are still out there. A few also p2pool. The wisely keep a low profile.
|
|
|
|
|
The smaller and wealthier the nation, the better.
|
|
|
|
|
Let's be careful with our arguments here. Nearly everyone supports increasing the block size. Arguing against people who don't support an increase is a straw argument that misses the point. The point, rather, is precisely how increasing the block size ought to be implemented. imho, the most insightful and thoughtful opinion on the matter has come from Dr. Adam Back.
|
|
|
|
I'd be remiss not to remind everyone, as an aside to this discussion as it pertains to gold and debt and money, that money and currency are not the same thing, that gold is (among other things) that which extinguishes debt, and that bitcoin shares some properties with gold, such as fungibility and scarcity (i.e., cannot be created via debt or other fiat mechanisms; must be mined), as well as other properties that still need to time to gain confidence and acceptance, such as bitcoin's ability to function, much like gold can, as a unit of account and globally as a supranational commodity-currency. Moreover, bitcoin, like gold, is cannot borrowed into existence. Not all money is currency, but all currency is money. Aristotle defined currency as being durable, portable, fungible and that it should have intrinsic value. This is why I mentioned the history of money earlier in this thread, since for the majority of known human history we have had commodity money. Which is not based on debt, fiat or money by authority is only a relatively recent development. Bitcoin represents a return to true commodity money, Bitcoin is an asset based currency not a debt based currency like fiat. One important factor when comparing Bitcoin to gold in terms of its value, is actually its utility, it is this utility that gives Bitcoin the advantage as a store of value compared to gold. After all we can not sprinkle gold dust down a phone line and send it across the world cheaply in a matter of seconds without relying on third parties. In those days some families whole possessions weren't worth one single gold coin. I have repeatedly stated that different types of precious metals where used, including silver and bronze. Which poor families could afford, often coins where also divided, this is where the term quarter comes from for example. Currency has been used by most people for the majority of our known history, it is as old as civilization itself. Aye. Good info. Studying monetary history is a passion of mine, and I can tell you know your history! Cheers! |
|
|
|
I question how viable decentralized ones are, though, due to the slower trading and such. It's going to be interesting to see...
Well they can easily find a solution. NXT has already built an exchange on itself, both currency and asset. It should be no harder than that. 1 problem though is that bitcoin takes 10 min to mine, I think a 5 min target would be better, because Even DOGE with 1 min time is not having any problems, so BTC should be at least 5 min, but otherwise it will take longer to confirm. So a BTC -> NXT transaction might take 11 minutes, which is slow. I'm curious how NXT will react to the development of bitcoin's Lightning Network. |
|
|
|
|
I'd be remiss not to remind everyone, as an aside to this discussion as it pertains to gold and debt and money, that money and currency are not the same thing, that gold is (among other things) that which extinguishes debt, and that bitcoin shares some properties with gold, such as fungibility and scarcity (i.e., cannot be created via debt or other fiat mechanisms; must be mined), as well as other properties that still need to time to gain confidence and acceptance, such as bitcoin's ability to function, much like gold can, as a unit of account and globally as a supranational commodity-currency. Moreover, bitcoin, like gold, is cannot borrowed into existence.
|
|
|
|
|
The odds of mining a bitcoin block with a block erupter are so absurdly low, it's best not to bother. However difficult you think it may be, it's probably orders of magnitude more difficult than that.
However, some people simply like to mine. If that's you, then try mining a SHA-256 altcoin. Far, far better odds of finding a block.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting.
Paul Erdős would have loved something like this.
And I agree that funding is the key.
And which math problems do you have in mind? Problems like the Millennium Problems? Are you focusing more on applied or pure mathematics?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
