What D5000 is describing sounds like a vunerability in bitcoin  So are you "saying" that it's possible to send bitcoins to an exchange like for example MEXC and then "fool" them by having the script delay the "ownership" by say 10000 blocks... and then if MEXC falls for it and credits the attempt with on exchange credit then later the owner of btc can reverse the transaction (Reversing the transaction in this case, would mean posting another transaction, before the 6th block... so before the script activates... at least that's what I believe how this might work, as you wrote the owner is still in control during these 5 blocks... or in my proposed "attack case" 10000 blocks...) Also this idea is not to scam people, it's kinda the opposite of this... people could force other people to make rushed decisions, for example exchange seizes to exists... and people make plenty of typoes... just imagine software without an undo function, photoshop, paint, notepad, wordpad, word, office, excel, programming/editors, etc... (LOL: Imagine Binance says: we're shutting down in 5 minutes ! if not withdrawn by then, all funds losts/seized by us, bye bye ! =D If you have only bitcoin, maybe... if you have multiple coins, oops, no time to check nothing... gogogogogogoggo) |
|
|
|
When you read the whitepaper and study Bitcoin more you realize that one of the principles which is the central idea behind Bitcoin was its irreversibility. It is actually addressing an existing problem with previous payment systems (eg. PayPal) where the transactions can be reversed very easily and the problems such a feature creates for its users specifically the merchants (receiving payments).
What you are suggesting goes against that principle.
Which parts of the paper you believe has this intention ?  First paragraph of the first section (introduction) on the first page! Interesting point, however it seems: 1. Bitcoin has evolved beyond this point (see replace by fee feature) 2. Eventually the transaction will be permanent. |
|
|
|
If you don't want to make mistake then don't do mistakes just as simple as that. Even Protonmail has an "Undo" option now after sending. You can't undo email to external providers, so all this means is they've added an extra time delay before really sending the email. More and more services are doing that, and all it does is make email slower. Your wallet could add a delay before broadcasting, but that's just moving the "you should check it"-part and makes your transaction slower. This is a pretty cool idea, however there are some problems with it, the user might only notice the problem, once the error transaction is processed and accepted by the blockchain, for example it is seen by block explorers and/or the user notices it's not showing up as it should... I just imagined a world without noobs where everyone is an expert. There's no room for errors because experts will likely behave like machines. Even experts atimes makes errors or dramatically changes their mind. It's not about not making mistakes, it's about thinking before doing something. If you need more than 3 seconds, think for more than 3 seconds. If you can't do that, no amount of popups is going to stop you. You're thinking process is not as safe as you think it is, it can be attacked, by for example making you panick somehow, interesting isn't it !  For example: An exchange just announced it's closing up shop soon, and you have lots of different coins on it, including bitcoin, now you must decide what to do, you worry that if you too late you will not get a good exchange price, and you must think, do I sell ? or do I extract and pay withdraw fees, the time is ticking, plus your sister just called and told you she is quite pissed that Trump won ! LOL and wants you to make some kind of report immediately ! LOL, you hear the distress in her voice, she didn't literally tell you she is pissed about Trump, but the emotion gets to you ! Just one little example of how somebody could "press your buttons". Maybe you can think of something that makes you panick, recent panicks might be the recent fires in L.A. where people lost their homes, perhaps sleep deprived from all the stress, fleeing for their lives, not sure if their brains would still function properly after all of that, and they try and buy something with bitcoin... To make blockchain more forgiving for human errors it's time to introduce the "undo" transaction.
This undo transaction can be issued up to 5 blocks from the original transaction, after which it is no longer possible.
In case of bitcoin this should give the user 50 minutes the time to issue the undo transaction, after the 6th confirmation of the original transaction it is no longer possible if the undo transaction was not included in the 2th, 3th, 4th, 5th, 6th block since the original transaction, being the 1th block.
Bitcoin is not for human errors, there was no place for it when it was created but later some things changed and at some point, it's forgiving to human errors. For example, there was no Replace By Fee and now, with Replace By Fee option, you can increase the transaction fee in case it doesn't get confirmed and you can also reverse the transaction before it gets confirmed in the next block. i.e. if you aren't unlucky and your transaction doesn't get confirmed immediately, you have some time to reverse transaction by paying a little higher fee. What you describe is the problem that Bitcoin tried to solve (double spend). So, that can't be implemented in Bitcoin. It doesn't work like that, it doesn't count minutes, it counts confirmation and also by following your idea, it will take lots of time to get Bitcoin transactions confirmed but majority of people want to get it confirmed ASAP, so many businesses that offer instant deposit, won't be able to show you deposit for at least 50 minutes. Funny assumptions, being made. 1. How do you know what bitcoin was ment for ? Are you Satoshi Nakamoto ? 2. Do you mean bitcoin was ment for robots/AI ? 3. What you wrote about replace by fee could be an admission that bitcoin needs to be a bit more forgiving, so perhaps a trend. I have not heard of a technical reason yet, why it could not be implemented. Basically "it's a state" thing and state can be modified by anything... however one has to known when the "state" is truely considered "stable"... in that sense my proposal does fit within the "6 confirmations" and the state should be stable mantra. Anyway consider the following: 1. Either get used to 6 confirmation times + undo possibility or the alternative 2. Loose funds when making a typo. Depending on the typo and situation, it could be small, medium, a lot or all of your funds... |
|
|
|
5 confirmations, then you can undo the transaction?
I think that's impossible. I don't think there's any wallet that can do this except for transactions with 0 confirmation. Electrum can cancel the transaction, but the process is by replacing the old transaction to send BTC back to your wallet with a higher TX fee.
NO, You can immediately undo the transaction, that is the entire idea, the faster the better, you have until the 6th confirmation comes in, if the undo transaction was not issued/seen by the network by that time/block, the undo transaction is no longer valid/accepted and the transaction is permanent. So the idea is you must submit the undo transaction before the usual/guidance/advise of waiting 6 confirmations before a bitcoin transaction can be considered valid/safe. Consider the "impossibility"... well some mention a feature which can be used to replace "in flight" transactions, this new idea is to enable "stored/commited transactions" to be "undo"/marked as invalid/undone. So this would be a change/addition/modification to the bitcoin protocol and source code to *make it possible* =D This is not currently possible and probably never will be in the foreseeable future because of the simple reason of once you send a transaction to another address, you no longer have the private keys to spend that sent BTC.
So any proposal that implements an "undo" transaction will not work out because then anybody could do chargebacks, and normal people would no longer be able to trust that untrustworthy actors have sent their BTC and won't try to take it back fraudulently.
I think this is nonsense, the original transaction will simply be ignored/overruled by the undo transaction which will be recorded in block 1,2,3,4,5 after the original transaction. As far as I know private keys are never revealed in bitcoin... it's only used to "sign" a transaction, and therefore there is no problem, and an undo transaction can also be signed by original user, whoever it was transferred to is not the new owner, as it was rolled back/undone... I do see one potential problem with this idea: a merchant must keep up with the blocks to see the undo transaction, if the merchant's bitcoin system would go offline it might not see the undo transaction... When you read the whitepaper and study Bitcoin more you realize that one of the principles which is the central idea behind Bitcoin was its irreversibility. It is actually addressing an existing problem with previous payment systems (eg. PayPal) where the transactions can be reversed very easily and the problems such a feature creates for its users specifically the merchants (receiving payments).
What you are suggesting goes against that principle.
Which parts of the paper you believe has this intention ? 50 minutes and an "undo" option? That doesn’t seem like something the community would support. Bitcoin’s whole purpose is to scale and provide fast, irreversible transactions. A 50-minute wait time and the ability to cancel transactions go completely against that purpose. It would make things messy, like following the model of some fiat digital wallets. In our country, one of the wallet providers actually introduced something similar, and while it may work for fiat, it feels out of place for Bitcoin. GCash cannot automatically reverse a completed transaction, but you can dispute it Some users like it, but we are not fiat, we are bitcoin,, so we don't follow their style. Strange conception you have. Bitcoin general advise is to wait 6 confirmations, this is not unnecessary, it's the way bitcoin works internally, it's possible for their to be multi-chain/multi-end points, basically a race condition, where multiple chains are the longest, only after some time will one grow faster than the other. As usual, i see you make unique suggestion/idea on technical board. I can't wait coffee shop require 6 (5 + 1) confirmation and exchange require 11 (5 + 6) confirmation, once your idea implemented on Bitcoin network.
Jokes aside, people already can "undo" or "cancel" their unconfirmed transaction thanks to existence of RBF and full-RBF. They just need to use wallet which support such feature, such as Electrum.
Why is the exchange included in the transaction, that part of your comment/reply I do not understand ? Maybe to convert dollars into bitcoin and then pay at the coffee shop with bitcoin ? Just never sign a transaction unless its locktimed for at least 5 blocks in the future. TADA "undo". Enjoy. I like it! OP could even patch one of the open source wallets to do this for him. I won't use it though: it'll just be annoyingly slow. Waiting for 1 confirmation already feels slow when I order something. more forgiving for human errors Scammers will love this feature! While bitcoin is the gold standard of cryptocoins, it is indeed slow, the idea is that other faster blockchains/dagchains will overtake/also incorporate this feature so that faster blockchains can also support it, but maybe with more "grace" blocks, otherwise the undo time would be quite limited. Concerning the scammers It's good practice for people to wait a certain number of transactions for confirmations =D This could also be build into software to make sure transactions weren't undone. In case of bitcoin this should give the user 50 minutes the time to issue the undo transaction, after the 6th confirmation of the original transaction it is no longer possible if the undo transaction was not included in the 2th, 3th, 4th, 5th, 6th block since the original transaction, being the 1th block.
Don't you think that if this is implemented in the bitcoin network, it will give some people the room to malicious undo transactions which can pave way for double spending and hence create confusion in the network. You are trying to destroy one of the unique attributes of bitcoin as I learnt, i.e irreversibility. This feature makes bitcoin fit for ai and machine integration in the future. Edit: Just noticing that pooya87 has said similar thing above. I think the opposite logic could also be used, it gives people the chance to recover from malicious events, like people realize they got scammed, by for example sending small amounts of bitcoins to rich bitcoin people and these addresses end up in their wallets and they send to the wrong address because it was a smaller address, for example: ert45345...3453453 ert45345...3453453 ^ A known attack where some wallets don't display all digits and the ... contain the scammers address. I don't think the bitcoin paper every mention irreversibility, it just uses hashes to provide security and solve a race condition primarily, that is something else. |
|
|
|
|
To make blockchain more forgiving for human errors it's time to introduce the "undo" transaction.
This undo transaction can be issued up to 5 blocks from the original transaction, after which it is no longer possible.
In case of bitcoin this should give the user 50 minutes the time to issue the undo transaction, after the 6th confirmation of the original transaction it is no longer possible if the undo transaction was not included in the 2th, 3th, 4th, 5th, 6th block since the original transaction, being the 1th block.
|
|
|
|
I write this 3 days before halving...
So far it has been disappointing... no big rallies/bull runs yet.
Possible causes:
1. People's transactions to transfer/sell bitcoin after all time high still processing/back log (profit taking, congestion on btc blockchain/limited blockspace).
2. Major Exchanges pulling out of countries due to laws.
3. Tether/usdt pulling out/closing up shop on some blockchains (causes usdt liquidity issue, lack of usdt on exchanges(?)).
4. Some ETF outflows mostly grayscale ETF annual fee related (high maintenance costs, outflow/inflow to cheaper competitors or permanent outflow/self custody).
5. Bitcoin over bought, now correction: long term holders selling to short term holders.
Possible time line:
Next 2 weeks possible drop to 50k (for now holding on to 60k thx to oil/gold rally)
Next 2 months recovery/rally to 72k
Next 2 weeks Side ways 72k
Next 4 years to 100k to 150k, maybe 250k all time high.
Well here we are, drop to 50k bitcoin, 3 to 4 months later than expected. Where others see panic I see oppertunity =D |
|
|
|
Yes it is a steady addition of new coins with a division factor to prevent an infinite supply. What exactly is your problem? We're not mining Dogecoin here.
This is "inversed exponential"  Legend has it a math guy tricked a king once with grain. Now it seems Satoshi found a way to trick the world once again, though in a reversed way, but ultimately same way. Perhaps 1000 or 2000 or 3000 years from now a tripple math trick will be invented instead of this double trick (half the coins,double the machines/electricity)
I think whitepaper is just a summary, so it's not very detail. While the source code is everything that make Bitcoin run, probably there's other thing that didn't mentioned in whitepaper besides halving. POS = Proof of Scam, stay away from POS coins/tokens. It is best to have the bitcoin github[1] as reference since all the updates and upgrades are mentioned on that repository.
To be more accurate, on lines 1752-1763. CAmount GetBlockSubsidy(int nHeight, const Consensus::Params& consensusParams)
{
int halvings = nHeight / consensusParams.nSubsidyHalvingInterval;
// Force block reward to zero when right shift is undefined.
if (halvings >= 64)
return 0;
CAmount nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 210,000 blocks which will occur approximately every 4 years.
nSubsidy >>= halvings;
return nSubsidy; Was it in there from the start or later added ? To answer my own question: Using deepgit 4.3 on Windows 7 german laptop with 2GB RAM, pagefile.sys/vmram 2 GB: int64 CBlock::GetBlockValue(int64 nFees) const
{
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 4 years
nSubsidy >>= (nBestHeight / 210000);
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
Blame for
File main.cpp
Commit e071a3f6 by sirius-m at 2009-08-30 05:46 on v0.1.5, v0.3.20, v0.3.20.01_closest, v0.3.20.2_closest
Msg First commit Who or what is sirius-m, in short SM. Is it really Satoshi Moto ? There were some shenigans along the way/changes/"going deeper" One attempt to change 210000 block halving to 150 block halving, not sure why, maybe for halving testing purposes, or preventing miners from getting too many too early. |
|
|
|
|
I write this 3 days before halving...
So far it has been disappointing... no big rallies/bull runs yet.
Possible causes:
1. People's transactions to transfer/sell bitcoin after all time high still processing/back log (profit taking, congestion on btc blockchain/limited blockspace).
2. Major Exchanges pulling out of countries due to laws.
3. Tether/usdt pulling out/closing up shop on some blockchains (causes usdt liquidity issue, lack of usdt on exchanges(?)).
4. Some ETF outflows mostly grayscale ETF annual fee related (high maintenance costs, outflow/inflow to cheaper competitors or permanent outflow/self custody).
5. Bitcoin over bought, now correction: long term holders selling to short term holders.
Possible time line:
Next 2 weeks possible drop to 50k (for now holding on to 60k thx to oil/gold rally)
Next 2 months recovery/rally to 72k
Next 2 weeks Side ways 72k
Next 4 years to 100k to 150k, maybe 250k all time high.
|
|
|
|
Satoshi Nakamoto Bread Making Machines: Produce 1 million breads per 4 years. Hidden feature: Produces half the amounts of breads after each 4 years ! =DDDDDDDDDDDD Now you need double the amount of machines after each 4 years to make your existing customers happy. Where have I heard this before ?! Oh yeah the king, the chess board and the math guy. Anyway.... Problem with this is potentially that people don't like unfairness and possibly unfair systems in general, thus long term bitcoin is probably doomed, people will switch to more fair systems. The funny thing is: The banks are unfair, invest money into scammers (loose the money and get saved by Craight Wreights tax paying dollars:)) Craight Wreight might be the inventor of bitcoin and decided to counter-scam the banks, with his own scammy bitcoin... which is a little bit less scammy than the banks. Thus giving a choice between: Very Scammy Bank/Fiat systems versus Less Scammy bitcoin system. People choose the less scammy system. Here is a better system: vite Go get it ! =D * =D Oh yeah one last thing to the people thay say the whitepaper is only an introduction ! Give me and us all an f-ing break, is it really that hard to include 1 line of text to include the explanation of the halving, which is pretty damn crucial for mining equipment... It may have been left out intentionally, and I believe it was... because look at the effect of it... So now you continue to defend the potential scammer of Satoshi Nakamoto. One more thing though about the COPA case and the denial of Satoshi Nakamoto on twitter: "I am not Craight Wreight". Who runs COPA lawsuit ?! The same guy who ran Twitter ?! Is it possible that this say guy wrote that same tweet ?! Absolutely. The funny part is Craight Wreight is as scammy as this bitcoin system, it fits the bill ! LOL =D
White paper does not mention halving !
The claim that the Bitcoin white paper misleads by not mentioning halving is not true. The halving process is indeed a fundamental part of Bitcoin’s design. The white paper specifies that after every 210,000 blocks, the reward for miners will halve. This means that while the white paper talks about the addition of new coins, it also implies a decreasing rate of supply over time due to halving events. These events are designed to control inflation and mimic the extraction of precious resources, becoming less frequent over time until the cap of 21 million bitcoins is reached. The halving is not a “dirty little trick” but a transparent and predictable feature of the Bitcoin protocol that is public and verifiable by anyone who examines the source code or understands the protocol’s rules. This shitty paper without algorithms, without (pascal) pseudo code is only 9 pages long ?! https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdfWhere did your delusional reading start on what page ? You claim it's there, I don't think so, a simple in-document search turned up nothing, I am not going to bother reading this scammy document again, it's up to you to at least give me a page number so I can cut my reading into 1/9. Others have already stated, they also saw nothing mentioned about halving...
What is really worrieing me at the moment is the term "halving".
Initially I wanted to respond to your question in a very normal way, despite finding your topic title quite disturbing. But It seems that you are only looking to ignite some senseless discussions around Bitcoin and get attention. While it’s valuable for anyone to explore and ask about the intricacies of blockchain technology, it’s also important to base our discussions in verified information and rational arguments, as sometimes you are answering with much knowledge about the blockchain then again asking some dumb questions. Having read your previous topics telling me that you like circus shows. If Satoshi were indeed your computer science teacher, perhaps you could ask him directly about the halving and why it wasn't mentioned in the white paper. Perhaps this planet is one big circus show ! =D (matter of perspective) In that case, Welcome to planet Circus ! =D (I happen to be listening to this music, which fits perfectly with this "conclusion/observation"): https://modarchive.org/index.php?request=view_player&query=205885(Click "play" to listen to it) Yesterday something else happened, as I was listening to another piece of music, it mentioned "9" and the windows screen saver accidently rendered a 9 with it's lines, so coincidence ? does ? exist ? Or was it ment to be ? |
|
|
|
What is really worrieing me at the moment is the term "halving". When I asked some people what it ment they thought it ment the price was going to be "halved". The lack of proper documentation about it probably makes it much worse then needs to be. Imagine if the chinese or russian were speaking of a "halving"... News media report, "halving" is a google trend at the moment in the Netherlands. Clearly people are trying to find information about it and trying to understand it, for many it's probably an unbelievable concept ! I could not believe it myself at first, I had to see source code to really believe it ! * Somebody has finally explained the code, 5 days ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wB6Si4jZYc |
|
|
|
|
There can only be one conclusion:
Cryptocoins sold to finance break out of war/fight Israel vs Iran.
Last week mystery solved.
Monday price of gold will skyrocket futher.
|
|
|
|
|
There can only be one conclusion:
Cryptocoins sold to finance break out of war/fight Israel vs Iran.
|
|
|
|
I think whitepaper is just a summary, so it's not very detail. While the source code is everything that make Bitcoin run, probably there's other thing that didn't mentioned in whitepaper besides halving. POS = Proof of Scam, stay away from POS coins/tokens. It is best to have the bitcoin github[1] as reference since all the updates and upgrades are mentioned on that repository.
To be more accurate, on lines 1752-1763. CAmount GetBlockSubsidy(int nHeight, const Consensus::Params& consensusParams)
{
int halvings = nHeight / consensusParams.nSubsidyHalvingInterval;
// Force block reward to zero when right shift is undefined.
if (halvings >= 64)
return 0;
CAmount nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 210,000 blocks which will occur approximately every 4 years.
nSubsidy >>= halvings;
return nSubsidy; Was it in there from the start or later added ? |
|
|
|
|
It is about fairness to the people of earth. (Especially all those on the internet)
1. Not everybody is a programmer.
2. New programmers find C incredibly hard to understand.
3. Critical financial information was left out like:
3.1 Bitcoin halving (nasty supply shock after 4 years, repeats each 4 years, leaves late comers fighting for bread crombs)
3.2 Maximum supply (no more new/cheap supply for future generations, unfair/time discrimination)
3.3 Difficulty adjustment (while mentioned, too vague, drives up cost for future generations/unfair)
4. Early adopters received more coins then late adopters (unfair)
How would you feel about new crypto projects if these "details" were left out ?
|
|
|
|
|
The halving of bitcoin is indeed a dirty little trick hiding in the source code.
The bitcoin white paper misleads:
"The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins..."
Point being:
White paper does not mention halving !
|
|
|
|
|
The halving of bitcoin is indeed a dirty little trick hiding in the source code.
The bitcoin white paper misleads:
"The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins..."
I learned about this later as far as I re-call 2014 ? analyzed it in 2011 maybe I knew in 2011 probably but not sure
|
|
|
|
|
Rule 1 of bitcoin: Never sell (in large quantities/all of it)
My 1st advise to you:
Use bitcoin to get a loan.
Pay as little as possible to make loan happy.
Profit from bitcoin rise.
Perhaps re-loan.
My 2st advise:
Bitcoin risky/too high price 70k, sell 50% and buy vite at 0.0x cents a coin.
Enjoy x factors in future
|
|
|
|
|
Easy: vitex.net a first generation dex
1. Place (limit=automatic up to year 2024) buy order:
60000 usdt
|
|
|
|
|
What if everything was in the open:
Person A +2 million
Person B -2 million
Person B claims to have been robbed for 2 million,
Do you believe Person A is in trouble ?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
