|
3
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Bitcoin Core 0.17.1 Taking a very long time
|
on: December 28, 2018, 09:10:43 PM
|
|
My previous version was 0.14 or so. I installed 0.17.1 and it seemed to delete all of the blocks on the SDD and then download them from scratch. I have an i3 Intel Processor, 4 GB RAM, 320 SSD HD, so fairly new computer about 1-2 years old. I have set the memory in Bitcoin Core to 2000MB in the settings.
In my task manager the Disk IO is maxed out at 100%. I have 8 connections to the network. Time to sync says 4 weeks. Not sure why it is taking so long. Been 1.5 days.
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Need some help with c-lightning. Address is not routable...
|
on: January 22, 2018, 07:00:06 PM
|
|
bitcoind is running and is synchonized. I am trying to run lightning with the first command and I get this error:
lightningd/lightningd --log-level=debug
lightningd(3684): Trying to guess public addresses...
lightningd(3684): Address 192.168.1.12:9735 is not routable
lightningd(3684): Failed to connect 10 socket: Network is unreachable
My bitcoin.conf file has these lines:
server=1
rpcuser=aUser
rpcpassword=aPassword
Any help would be appreciated.
My computer is behind a router...
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / New Client Proposal: Bitcoin Core++
|
on: November 18, 2016, 04:08:05 AM
|
|
I am proposing a new bitcoin client called Bitcoin Core++ (BC++). It's a bitcoin client that advocates for the success of Bitcoin Core. What makes this client different? The original Bitcoin Core client is mainly neutral. They do not wish to force anything on anybody even if it is in the best interest for the entire group. For example, Bitcoin Core Segwit activation requires 95% of hashing power. The 5% remaining of hashing power can block this activation. In general core developers in conjunction with the community support this conservative stance of pushing for 95% super majority for soft forks. The purpose of Bitcoin Core++, however, is to promote the work of core developers by being less conservative so it can continually advance and technically promote protocol efficiency and usage, and to disregard politics. Decisions will lean to be technical instead of political.
For example, Bitcoin Core++ may block clients attempting to subvert the core protocol. For example, if a Bitcoin Unlimited client mines a block or relays a block then BC++ will ignore it. BC++ will also not allow BU clients to connect to itself. If you have any other suggestions then please post in this thread. Or, if you have any technical ideas or issues then let us know.
I am looking for volunteers to help create this new client including programmers, web developers, and online marketers.
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Rootstock RSK Fork
|
on: November 07, 2016, 10:28:58 PM
|
|
If I understand correctly RSK allocates a certain percentage of mining back to dev funding. If RSK is open source wouldn't it be possible to fork the code and remove this "tax" on mining? The same thing happened with ZCash and there is a fork of ZCash called ZClassic without the tax.
It seems like bitcoin sidechains that are open sourced will always be forked from one "inefficient" form of money to another. So to create the best coin you have to make it appealing for all users.
|
|
|
|
|
13
|
Other / MultiBit / NumberFormatException When Send BTC Amount With Four Digits
|
on: March 20, 2014, 04:10:51 PM
|
|
I have two laptops with multibit installed. I am trying to send bitcoins from one to the other using multibit. I generated an address on laptop 1. On laptop 2 I send bitcoins to that newly generated address public key. I get a numberformatexception.
Using multibit 0.5.17 on both laptops. Using Windows 8 for laptop 1. Windows 7 on laptop 2.
When I use a mycelium generated address to send bitcoins from laptop 2 to the mycelium it sends ok. I will try generating another address on laptop 1 and seeing if it generates the same error.
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
Bitcoin / Project Development / Project Invictus Vs. Project Holy Grail
|
on: July 09, 2013, 05:58:42 PM
|
Right now there seems to be two efforts that I know of working on a P2P Exchange. It seems like Project Holy Grail is much further along than Project Invictus. Project Invictus: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=229315.0Project Holy Grail: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=225954.0I just wanted to hear your thoughts about why Project Invictus would succeed over Project Holy Grail or vice versa. Project Invictus is still working on gathering requirements with little or no direction in coding. The lead seems to tackle the problem from a business perspective. Project Holy Grail already has bounties in place for the coding of the exchange with screenshots of some of the GUI components. What I really want to know is why the lead of Project Invictus will succeed over project Holy Grail, since the latter has a larger head start. Are you there? |
|
|
|
|
18
|
Other / Off-topic / Rpietila deleted my posts in his self moderated topic.
|
on: May 02, 2013, 03:24:34 PM
|
|
Just wanted to let everyone know and remember that rpietila deleted my post where I was confused on his prophecy of bitcoin never going to 115 again. Bitcoin is now at 100 so he is wrong.
If you have a deleted post put it there. He is now claiming bitcoin will never go under 100.
|
|
|
|
|
20
|
Economy / Speculation / The Pro Manipulators Are Here
|
on: April 25, 2013, 05:41:33 PM
|
|
Pro manipulators start by building a reputation in the forums by posting their analysis of the current bitcoin market. Once they develop trust they will use their acquired trust to their own advantage. They may even have multiple accounts.
I have witnessed this in action while trading stocks on Wallstreet and on Yahoo! forums. When Yahoo Finance was first introduced in the 1990s, it was a crazy wild west. Everyone including day traders, mutual fund managers, bankers, etc. would go to these forums and spew ridiculous claims. It came to a point where people sued other forum board members, and some were even prosecuted. Imagine if that would ever happen today! Laws were created that disallowed mutual fund managers to post in the forums, including Yahoo Finance and SiliconInvestor.
However, even though these laws were created I have seen manipulation that is illegal, but due to anonymity they cannot be caught and prosecuted (this was about 10 years ago). For example, I remember navigating the Yahoo Finance forums and one user was making a lot of good calls between different stock boards. This user then made a call to buy stock in xxx because of insider information. A lot of people started buying the stock and then a few days later the company was worth nothing. This still happens all the time with penny stocks and it used to be "more illegal", but nowadays it's a free for all due to "freedom of speech".
I'm pretty sure you guys all know this and I am preaching to the choir. :}
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
