✗ Gold/Silver
✗ Diamonds
✗ DJ Products
✓ Dutch festival tickets
✓ Clothing
✓ Sports accessories
✓ Playstation/XBOX games / computer games
✓ Family games
✓ Food
✓ Liquor
✓ Automotive
✓ Health products
✓ Travel tickets
✓ Real estate
✓ Art
✓ Wholesale
✗ Gambling cards/tables
✓ Gadgets
✓ Other (Post your answer)
✓ (almost) Everything!

Other: rent, bill payment, CDs, books, online education

I haven't seen any sites dedicated to that. If you are using Bitpay they have a directory that you can be included if they accept your application. Other than that, looks like it's grassroots marketing at the moment. I'm just trying to figure out the same thing with the designer sticker store that I've set up. Need to hustle....

That's totally true! I'm just thinking that people came up with methods to have bitcoin exchanges and wallet services that cannot run off with your money (m-of-n addresses, nLockTime transactions, that sort of things), I think it's a matter of time to come up with a right combination of bitcoin features to make it 0-trust. In the meantime, there's the bitbet.us model of not-0-trust-but-total-verifiability ("I can run away with your money, but on the other hand I can show you that I haven't run away with anyone's money so far in X amount of business), which is also only possible with Bitcoin.


Granted!


Yeah, casino-type gambling is indeed perceived like that, and often not without cause.
Instead of those, I'm more thinking of the state lottery examples. E.g. in England it is used to fund projects for the public good. Everywhere there's a lot of popular support and often even encouragement (in the media, society) for lottery, or sports betting whenever "the stars look good". Thus it's not all clear, more of an inconsistent cognitive stage.

There's a need for a conversation, exactly the topics you mentioned.

I was actually thinking about bitcoin gambling. There are a few people here in Taiwan who were asking theoretical questions - and the lawyers' view seem to be: don't do it unless you wanna go to prison.

I was thinking, why do governments have such monopoly over gambling. Can it be because before there were not a single way to verify that you got a fair deal in a gamble? The government is kinda stepping in: you cannot trust anyone, but of course you got to trust us ("we are the government after all"), and since you can only trust us, we can be the only ones doing gambling.

But now, with bitcoin and provably fair games, that is not like that. Eg. state lotteries can be (and probably are) bent, but correctly done cryptography cannot be bent.

Because of this, if it was a just world, wouldn't the days of unverifiable gambling (including state-run, licensed) be numbered?

The small fee is the "0.5% Local Trader Commission" in the My Info section?

Hi, just got the update for Mycelium Testnet, and it looks awesome.

Do you have any technical details how the fund release is handled? Is it just straightforward within the client, or is there any escrow involved?

In binary format, for every bit that you require in the front to be zero you have 1/2 chance, so if you want to have n bits to be zero, then it's 1/2**n chance (or on average 2**n tries).

If you want the beginning of the the hash in hex representation to be 0: every hex character is actually 4 bits, so for m digits, you'll need 2**(m*4) tries. For 10 zeros in the front it is 2**(10*4) = 2**(40) = 1099511627776 ~ approx 1.1 Trillion tries.

The "coinbase" in the Bitcoin protocol is the input of the coin generation (mining), basically the parent of the new coins.

Coinbase the business, on the other hand, took the business name from that particular technical name in the protocol.

So whether writing Coinbase or coinbase, or Blockchain or blockchain, one is a business, the other is part of the Bitcoin protocol. (though another level of capitalization is Bitcoin the protocol, and bitcoin the amount of value.... huh, my head hurts too

Yes, that's what I've meant: Blockexplorer is likely to be the one correct.


Blockexplorer is getting it from bitcoind (actually, a patched version of bitcoind), as it is mentioned on their Github page. I'd expect it to be similar with Blockexplorer: use bitcoind to talk to the network, parse the bitcoin network data (announced transactions, blocks, etc), put them into a database, then just talk to the database for most of the things. This process likely got a hiccup somewhere for Blockchain.info...

I would think that Blockchain.info has some problems. My own bitcoind and blockexplorer shows the same latest block (at the time of this writing 287869).

Also, on the unconfirmed transactions page they have 5174 transactions right now. That's crazy...

There could still be some network problems going on, in this last two days my transactions (even the supposedly "high priority" ones)  confirm much slower, and some services like Coinbase seem to be misbehaving too. My guess would be some underlying problem for which the Blockchain.info unsync is a symptom, and that I'm not satoshi enough yet to understand...

In the original writeup M/x'/1/i was supposed to be the internal chain, used mostly for change addresses I guess, and other addresses that are not needed to be communicated outside. I wonder if multisig would be better on a different chain, maybe e.g. a-of-b multisig could be M/x'/b/i chain?

I'm asking generally from the interoperability point of view. BIP32 is great to be suitable for infinite amount if different arrangements, but some concepts are worth to be figured out on top of it - trying to think what would make more sense.

Written up a bit more details, maybe that will make it a bit clearer what the heck is going on there: https://gergely.imreh.net/blog/2014/02/making-a-bitcoin-service-web-hierarchical-deterministic-wallet/

Cool, thanks a lot! I understand things a lot more making a related service in the meantime that I wanted to use (BIP32 web wallet), but now this library will be mighty useful. Will let you know for sure when I make something with it, thanks!

Hi,

I'm working on a web wallet for hierarchical deterministic (HD) wallets from BIP32. The working prototype is up at http://webhdwallet.github.io/ and would really appreciate some feedback.

The aim is to be easy to use, secure, and powerful tool for common operations (not trying to do absolutely everything).

Functionality so far

So far the key generation is done elsewhere (eg. could use http://bip32.org as detailed on the help page), balance queries and transaction submission is done through implicitly or explicitly through Blockchain.info.

The page can be used to show balances, generate addresses, and create transactions (in case of using an extended private key, signed transaction ready to submission).

The page never transmits your key. The only communication it does is querying generated addresses on blockchain.info for spendable balance.

Future

Huh, where to start....

Would want to make a version that works completely offline as well, so never need to enter your private key when there's network connection. That will require export and import unspent coins, and improvements on key management.

A lot to improve on address generation (derive addresses at arbitrary indexes).

More thought on unspent amount management / coin selection. This at the moment just solved by reloading the page (clearing all the info and re-polling the bitcoin network). Some of these can be difficult in offline mode.

Comments

The source is up on https://github.com/webhdwallet/webhdwallet.github.io Can download the source and run it on your own computer.

I'm using HD wallet for 17NWCFWo8EvFp7vtkbRH6ec3DEdxZhrhrd donation address already (dogfooding). Proof is in the extended public key for the wallet I use for the development: xpub69i6TTB6JU2mwcQ7pKeDG8aAMnc2AZ2UdpuphoNak4nT4UTWYhkSGqpDgbGjHGbxYVK8jNF4eXM Rk1aeGweLxiCWWB5EjKm3k6YMKoWN5VT

Sounds cool, thanks! Would love to check it out whenever you share it/open it up on Github I guess.

Yes, the main client software that generally has such fee requirements hasn't been updated in a while to keep in touch with the BTC/fiat exchange rate (which would predict how small payments are reasonable for common use). Thus indeed you can have quite high fees. For a cup of tea/coffee/beer you could end up with 3-6% network transaction fee.

You can send your payment without any fee, just much smaller percentage of miners will accept it into their block, so you'll have to wait longer to be confirmed.


There's a general algorithm, of how to have a good estimate of the required fees: http://bitcoinfees.com/ The size of the transaction in bytes is "148 * number_of_inputs + 34 * number_of_outputs + 10", and every 1000 bytes have 0.00001 BTC fee normally.


They also say: Receiving transactions is completely free, any network fees will be paid by us.

Haven't seen any PHP implementations of BIP32 so far, I was wondering if anyone's working on it by chance?

I've seen bitcoin-php for general bitcoin support, and considering that bip32 could be added to that one, though that library hasn't seem to been touched for the last 7 months or so.

Cheers! No worries, I'm not whining that "mommy I didn't get paid", it's more like I would like to understand how things actually work. I will move up on the hardware I'm trying, thought it would be easier on just some low level CPU first to have the experience. Apparently wrong

Thanks for the notes. It looks like there's a lot of partial information floating around.

I understand the benefits, and understand the general workings of the pool, though the details feel inconsistent. Getting there slowly, though. Thanks!

Some more parts I found to read read up on about p2pool payout system since I've asked this question:

Stackexchange discussion re payouts: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/12850
Pay Per Last N Share (PPLNS): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=39832

Hi,

I was experimenting with p2pool to see how does it work. My equipment is not good enough to make any profit, but wanted to try out how set up and run one, to be able get more people on here in the Taipei Hackerspace.

I run into the problem that I never actually got any payout from the p2pools that I participated in. Tried Litecoin a while back (mine-litecoins worked even if miniscule payout, p2pool received nothing). This week tried Dogecoin (much fun, shiny coins), but again nothing.

I'm connecting to this pool: http://nogleg.com:9555/static/graphs.html?Week and my address is DQzhUthpxummUdnCFVcHH7Bw2k5JfuA79H
In the interval in question, the area under the hashrate curve for me is about 1/2000th of the pool hashing power (~1GHash vs ~2THash). Wouldn't that mean that I should have gotten about 1/2000th of the payout? The current payout averages at 5.09kDOGE on the graph, that would mean ~2DOGE. But, as the graphs show as well, my miner received totally zero.

This is pretty much the same experience in the Litecoin pool as well.

Do I misunderstand something? Is my contributed hashing power too small? The graphs show other miner with ~12GHash (only 12x my contribution) for the same interval getting 171DOGE on average. Though also see people with much more power (819GHash) receiving nothing according to the graphs.

What's going on?