 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
And how is the shadow market compared to the normal market? More expensive, and it gets targeted every day...
And unlike back market dealers that are mobile persons with distribution chains mining pools are sitting ducks, one letter and the datacenter cuts the pool's servers and that's all. Remember Mega?
One more thing about shadow market. The miner's reward is the sum of differences between output and input values of all transactions included in a block. In this way if all transactions are "black" then all miner's reward is "black" too. If we imagine that bitcoin will be split to "black" and "white", it's obvious that "black" will be cheaper due to the difficulties to change it to other currency. That's why even if fees in black pools are bigger it will be hard for "black miners" to implement the economic profitability of the process. Thus, I can't see any conditions for such shadow markets to exist too. |
|
|
|
I think the moment has passed on the issue of control. Regulation and strict prohibitive measures can only lead to a negative effect in the cryptocurrency field and, as a consequence, from there such capital somewhere where there are softer laws and clear rules of the game. As for the governments, but more often than not people are sitting there who are far enough from the idea of how it works and how it works, so they often make the wrong sharp steps, instead of detailed comprehension.
In my opinion the level of control of bitcoin ecosystem grows every day and one day it will become almost fully controlled. Moreover it is necessary for Bitcoin to be controlled to become legal everywhere and to collect its full cost. There are some introductory points I believe in: 1. Nowadays, Bitcoin is first of all money, not technology. I mean that some when in 2009-2012 it was just technology, later it got its cost, later in 2013-2014 it's cost grew about 100 times and Bitcoin began its movement from world of "computer geeks" to world of money. Later in 2017-2018 where was one more crucial moment. After that world bank system began to assume Bitcoin as money entity. 2. The fiat monetary system is fully controlled by world bank system and governments. This system is based on Bretton Woods system with USD as main world's currency. 3. These institutions have great (I believe - the greatest in the world) power and they will never allow any uncontrolled money to exist. From the other hand let's take a closer look at Bitcoin technology. 1. Decentralization (especially for Bitcoin) is myth. Because: a) Since 2016-2017, when Antminer S9 was produced, Bitmain became the monopolist in mining chip development. Their chips were built on top of technology and were the most energy effective and as far as I know nothing changed today from point of view mining chip development. We have only one company that produces economic effective mining chips. b) Today hashrate is so big that you are unable to launch any significant hashing power if you are not great player with great money. Let's make simple calculations with the most optimistic (cheap) scenario. Today hashrate is about 180 EH/s = 180 000 000 TH/s. The newest Antminer S19 PRO has hasrate 110 TH/s and its price was 2600$ (today it's more than 5000$). And its electrical power is 3250 Watt. Lets assume that all hashing power is based on this model of ASIC (chip). So the cost of all mining equipment is 180 000 000 / 110 * 2600 = 4 254 543 800$ (4,2 billion USD). Summary electrical power is 180 000 000 / 110 * 3250 = 5318179750 (5.3 GWatt). And it is the most optimistic scenario for energy consumption, and I'm sure not bad scenario by equipment price. So if you want to launch 10% hashrate farm you'll have to buy equipment for 420 million USD, and you'll need a power plant with power of 530 MegaWatt. I know these calculations are not accurate, but they can help us just to estimate the scale of mining process. 2. Anonymity is myth. All transactions can be seen by everybody. All you need is to map addresses to persons. I understand that it is impossible to map 100% addresses, but I'm sure it is not necessary. In statistical terms if you can map for example 30% of addresses it will be enough. And all is going to it: A federal court in the United States has authorized the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to serve a "John Doe Summons" on the crypto exchange Kraken, seeking identities of U.S. taxpayers who have used cryptocurrency, the Department of Justice said on Wednesday....https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-court-authorizes-irs-seek-identities-taxpayers-who-have-used-cryptocurrency-2021-05-05/3. There are many systems like crystalblockchain ( https://crystalblockchain.com/) are under development. Their purpose - deanonymize addresses 4. Lightning technology makes Bitcoin similar to classic monetary system - there can be "banks" with their lightning channels for inner transactions. All of these make me believe that today is the beginning of control era. And control is not a bad thing for Bitcoin as money entity. Because without control it can not become "real" money |
|
|
|
Wouldn't these actions trigger the creation of a shadow market for paid transactions?
Some pools will fight and block addresses, while other pools will add transactions from prohibited addresses to their blocks for money.
As long as mining is decentralized, small government mining pools will not be able to block transactions on the bitcoin network.
All written below is just an assumption and it's purpose is discussion! First of all let's just imagine that rejecting transactions from "black" addresses will become a global trend that have just begun. Initially big countries (USA, China) will compel pools that are under their juristdictions to exclude "black" transactions accordingly their national blacklists. Because of geopolitical reasons big pools of one country will process transactions form addresses prohibited by other country. For example China will not be care about US SDN and OFAC and will process transactions from these addresses. In this case the circulation of bitcoins will not be more complicated in global scale. But I think no country will want to process stolen bitcoin or terrorist's bitcoin. That's why it is possible that some day will be created some regulatory international organization, whose purpose will be managing international blacklists of addresses. If this happens all bitcoin will be splitted to really "black" and "white". In this case, I think, there will not be sense to create "shadow market for paid transactions" because if some miners will process "black" bitcoin it whatever stay "black" and no one will need such bitcoin, because if you receive it, you will have great problems to send it or change it to fiat. |
|
|
|
The "first robin" is already here  Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ:MARA) (“Marathon" or "Company"), one of the largest enterprise Bitcoin self-mining companies in North America, today announced that the Company will be launching the first Bitcoin mining pool based in North America that is fully compliant with U.S. regulations, including anti-money laundering (AML) and the Office of Foreign Asset Control’s (OFAC’s) standards.... To set up its pool, Marathon has exclusively licensed technology from DMG Blockchain that allows the Company to filter transactions. Marathon intends to leverage this technology to ensure that its mining pool adheres to AML regulations and that all transactions are compliant with OFAC’s standards. As such, the pool will refrain from processing transactions from those listed on the U.S. Department of Treasury’s Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN). By excluding these transactions, all bitcoin Marathon mines will be compliant with U.S. regulatory standards.http://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2021/03/30/2201996/0/en/CORRECTION-Marathon-Digital-Holdings-to-Launch-the-First-North-American-Based-Bitcoin-Mining-Pool-Fully-Compliant-with-U-S-Regulations.html |
|
|
|
I understand that the question is about reading blk files, but why do you need it ? You can ask bitcoin RPC all the data stored in these files.
Secondly, I was thinking of creating a different block explorer. Right now, block explorers respond with RPC commands and return their result to the client. I was thinking of inserting the blocks' information to a mysql database. This way, RPC is not needed. I'm pretty sure that block explorers already use internally some database, I think it is NoSQL databases. I personally did this work some time before - I loaded BTC blockchain to Postgres and it was bad idea. Because for example 438 600 blocks contains 481 744 165 transactions and they contains 1 285 285 104 outputs. So you have huge tables and problems with indexing. Than i decided to use Elasticsearch and this was mush better. So you should think what database would be better to use to solve this problem. As for RPC - I used bitcoin core rpc only to extract block data and write it to elastic. And I found bitcoinetl the best way to extract it. |
|
|
|
A block explorer will use a database to keep track of transactions and will update it as new blocks come in. It will probably not use RPC commands as it receives requests from its users.
This seems a great idea. Why haven't I thought it before... Once a new block is mined, the database will insert a new row of information. Still, though, I don't get how I'll convert the blk.dat files to csv. (So I can import it to a database) You would run a series of RPC commands to get the transactions contained in each block. I have pseudo code describing how to import transactions into a database below: #run for loop through each block #run for loop to get the txid of each transaction in the blook you are looking at #get the inputs, outputs, and amounts of inputs/outputs for each transaction #update database accordingly Once you have updated your database with existing blocks, you can create a script to run lines 2-4 each time your node receives a new block. You will also need to account for orphaned blocks once your database matches the current blockchain. There is a great tool for extracting data from different blockchains https://github.com/blockchain-etl/bitcoin-etl. It connects to RPC and extracts blocks, transactions, inputs and outputs data |
|
|
|
Носки же более точечное решение. У меня часто бывает запущено два браузера, один напрямую коннектится, другой через носки. С ВПН-ом такая схема уже не получится.
Почему не получится. Я пользую ProtonVPN, он имеет такую функцию, о которой я уже писал здесь Ну в некотором конкретном случае с конкретным клиентом может и получится ) А обычно ВПН это еще один сетевой интерфейс на вашем хосте куда, в зависимости от правил маршрутизации, идет или не идет весь или часть трафика хоста. Маршрутизация осуществляется за счет настроек роутинга операционной системы. Так что все же в общем случае - скорее не получится. |
|
|
|
I don't think not processing their transactions is a good move at all because one of the biggest steps done by the authorities is tracking them through the transactions they have made and simply not just blacklisting all the transactions they are seeing. I know the authorities have the power to do these but I don't think they want this to happen in the first place that's why we only see enforcement of KYC and AML procedures from happening to the Bitcoin network and also of course them knocking to all the crypto related services we have as the more coverage they have the more chances they can track down these criminals.
I like your answer very much. I think it one of the ways for "soft control". And as I know many countries spend a lot of money to make analytic, tracking and deanonimizing tools for bitcoin blockchain. Moreover, bitcoin is no so good as anonymous currency as it is always said. As for governments the only thing you have to do as to bind as more addresses as possible to real persons. And that is all you need. Because all correlations and interconnection are already written to blockchain for forever. |
|
|
|
I want to discuss the vision of bitcoin future. One of the main idea of Bitcoin was decentralization, but now we can see that all hashrate is concentrated in pools, which works under some jurisdiction, pay taxes, burn electricity - they are legal.
Pools don't burn electricity the way you think, and pools are not owning the hash rate, in most cases it's miners that point their gear to a pool...which brings us to the flaw in your scenario... Pools do not burn electricity. They create transactions using hash rate of miners. So it will be fair to say that they indirectly owning the hash rate. Lets imagine that pools have some blacklist of addresses for which they do not process transactions. At which point miners will be against this censorship which will, of course, hurt bitcoin and their profits and they will point their gear towards a pool that does not havea blacklist, easy as pie. The lists will be very small against full transactions bandwidth. Therefore, using blacklists will not affect the income of miners. From the other side the first thing that miners care of is their profit. If pool gives good fees miners will go to this pool, no matter if it is controlled by somebody or not. As pools control almost all hashrate there will not be any real chance to find block outside the pool.
As I said, pools don't control the hash rate, so, come with another scenario next time. Read above. Small miners can do noting with their hash rate without pools. The only way to regulate it is to regulate miners. As for miners, they will have to concentrate in pools, because is no another way to find a block in acceptable time. The pools will work in some jurisdiction under it's laws. So they will have to do what they will be said by laws of this jurisdiction.
p2pool, problem solved  Maybe. But I heard that miners always care about internet connection speed and quality for fast block propagation. p2p is always slower than direct connections. But maybe one of ways. |
|
|
|
The problem is not in generation new addresses, the problem is transferring bitcoins from existing addresses to any other. This is the point of possible control. This is the joke of the century, if you are not able to transact to new address then it means the network is dead and dusted. How do you think it will be proposed, the entire world will come out and control the miners and allow which coins to move and which coins will be stuck which is impossible in any aspect of imagination  . If the government wanted to kill the network they could have done that when it started exploding, regulations is coming but that does not mean that the government will be controlling the entire network. It is not joke at all. Just imagine situation in for example 10 years. Bitcoin is legal everywhere and miners are requlated by regional laws. Some international organization control miners in some way (for example in recommendation way). The purpose of this organization is to track "bad" addresses. At the same time some hacker have cracked some exchange and transferred it's bitcoins to their own address. Everybody knows this address and organization adds it to some "black list". If any miner include the transaction from this address he will ne responsible for it. As for me I see this scenario quite realistic. |
|
|
|
People can easily circumvent this by creating new addresses. That simple. Also, given the whole address space of bitcoin is 2^160, that's literally inexhaustible and no amount of law enforcement can ever comprehend just how many that number is really in the real world. While measures would surely be put into place to combat money laundering and fraud in the space, I think it would not extend more than that since it's practically impossible to contain bitcoin and its working parts individually or as a whole. Bitcoin is, by design, fragmented and decentralized so as to avoid being manipulated and controlled by a central entity, and I think it has the capabilities to live true of its design.
The problem is not in generation new addresses, the problem is transferring bitcoins from existing addresses to any other. This is the point of possible control. |
|
|
|
|
Полностью согласен. Если говорить именно в контексте сравнения что лучше ВПН или прокси (просто у ВПН изначально существенно более широкое предназначение чем просто ходить через него в интеренты), то ВПН хорош когда нужно упаковать весь трафик и куда нибудь его перенаправить. И когда важно избежать утечек трафика.
Носки же более точечное решение. У меня часто бывает запущено два браузера, один напрямую коннектится, другой через носки. С ВПН-ом такая схема уже не получится.
|
|
|
|
|
Сервисов дохуя - да. Говно - чтобы у тебя язык включился и раздельчик правильный открылся на страничке. Почему не сделать нормальный роутер - надо сделать.
|
|
|
|
As long as there is a decentralized cryptocurrency, governments will try to control it as much as possible. This process of confrontation will last for a very long time, since, indeed, the cryptocurrency has many opportunities to resist such control.
Over time, a certain golden mean should be worked out in this matter, which should generally suit both cryptocurrency owners and the government.
But what form this golden mean will have? What do you think ? |
|
|
|
Unfortunately I can not post images yet. Here you can see hashrate distribution among pools https://www.blockchain.com/charts/pools . As far as I know (not sure) most pools are Chinese. So China already control most hashrate. And as for me it is a little bit scary   But there are also a lot of mining farms outside of China, and we don't know what is on the government's mind, they have been thinking of banning bitcoin mining already, and that's why those big miners farms in China has a plan B already. So I would agree with your concern, but so far there is no incentive either from the government or the Chinese miners itself to sabotage bitcoin so I think we are safe by now. So that is the safe guard we have right now, Bitmain and other mining pools gains nothing about bitcoin centralisation or even a 51% attack. As for now I fully agree with you. But let's try to look a little farther. Bitcoin is going to become legal everywhere, because there is no another way for countries. They can not just close their eyes and say "We do not know what is Bitcoin. We do not accept it" like it was some time ago. To become legal it must be regulated by laws. The only way to regulate it is to regulate miners. As for miners, they will have to concentrate in pools, because is no another way to find a block in acceptable time. The pools will work in some jurisdiction under it's laws. So they will have to do what they will be said by laws of this jurisdiction. Furthermore if for example USA decide that pool do something wrong, the pool owners will have to live the rest of their life at some forgotten island or in American prison. That's why in my opinion it will not be easy for big pool to change it's jurisdiction. There is one other anxious scenario. Today mining equipment is build on top of current technological level and there is little manufacturers in the wold who can produce chips for ASICs. Let's imagine that bitcoin will be legally recognized money. So ASICs can be recognized as money development equipment, mining can be recognized as money production. And all of this can be strongly regulated by laws - production, sellings, and mining process. In theory the whole process of bitcoin lifecycle can be controlled  |
|
|
|
|
The service provides three types of smart contracts:
1. ERC20 token contract is based on standard code base, so there should not be any problems with security.
2. Security token is fully custom contract written by us. The code of this contract controls all processes: from collecting funds to accrual of dividends or refund in case of not successfull collecting.
3. The same as for utility token
There was no code review with anybody except our programmers, but we worked hard to do this job. Soon after additional review we will upload code to etherscan.
In future we are going to add ERC721, ERC777
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately I can not post images yet. Here you can see hashrate distribution among pools https://www.blockchain.com/charts/pools . As far as I know (not sure) most pools are Chinese. So China already control most hashrate. And as for me it is a little bit scary |
|
|
|
I find it interesting what you are saying but I'm not sure wether the pools can do that. Can miners choose which transactions to process? Let's see if someone with more technical knowledge can enlighten us.
Anyway, it's a bit fantasy, as all the pools would need to act as a whole, and there would still be some miners outside the pools.
Miners of course can choose which transactions to process |
|
|
|
|
