 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
|
|
2
|
Economy / Speculation / NOT Wanted : A Bitcoin Regulator
|
on: February 25, 2014, 03:22:14 PM
|
|
Today, there was an article in the Wall Street Journal entitled Wanted : A Bitcoin Regulator.
It seems to me that these events are an occasion for the government to step in and wield control over the Bitcoin network. I personally feel that if you were unfortunately stupid enough to leave any majority of your bitcoins on MT Gox, that they were better off to part ways with you. I say, cut your losses, and return to your day jobs, and please, don't go crying to your nanny state to clean up your mess.
Best Regards
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / seeking bitcoin encryption details
|
on: January 29, 2014, 05:35:00 PM
|
|
I have a few questions regarding the details on bitcoin wallet encryption for the original bitcoin wallet.
1) what encoding standard is used for the passphrase? By this I mean how is the text entered encoded i.e. utf-8 etc.
2) is there a way to manually check the decryption of a wallet without submitting requests to the server?
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / The Oversight "Problem"
|
on: November 27, 2013, 04:56:35 PM
|
|
Hi everybody,
I have noticed that there are a few instances in the Bitcoin protocol where human oversight and intervention is necessary to verify the network and insure that it is operating correctly. The obvious instance would be the fork earlier this year, where nodes had to manually revert their software to correct he problem.
A generalization would be this: Imagine that the network experiences a fork due to differences in protocol, I.e. Assume some portion of the network was affected by a virus that altered its client. How would this be handled?
It seems that the solution is to manually identify if your client is following protocol (which must be declared by a central development team) and then intervene. So there are two hold ups in the problem, where manual intervention is needed.
My question is whether or not there have been discussions or proposals on how this might be automated. I think that to automate this, there would have to be some way to decentralize "protocol determination", if that even makes sense.
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Bitcoin Client Majority Protocol Attack?
|
on: November 24, 2013, 05:50:29 PM
|
The difficulty for the next block is fixed by the protocol, as a deterministic function of the previous blocks. There is no choice involved in setting the difficulty.
Thanks for the answer. So, if a certain portion of the network decided to alter this function, they would no longer conform with the protocol. So then, when the target changes, it is verified by every full node? |
|
|
|
|
11
|
Other / Meta / Re: Is Bitcointalk forum compromised?
|
on: April 19, 2013, 07:02:23 PM
|
Reposting this here. I had the following exchange tony with a man named Tony coming from the e-mail tonycicc@gmail.comI received the following email today, to an email that is not even the one listed on my forum account. Hi I saw you are on bitcointalk.org forum and wondered if you would be willing to sell me your account for $15? I see you haven’t been on there in quite a while, so perhaps you don’t need the account.
I could make a new acct, but I don’t want to go through the newbie waiting period before I can post in the main forums, so I would like an active account. Let me know and I could Paypal you the money or send you the equivalent in BTC. Just let me know. Thanks. I sent the following follow up email I am a bit curious, what leads you to conclude that I am on the
bitcointalk.org forum? And he replied back with the following Hi, I believe your email address was listed on the site as being someone who
registered but hadn't used their account much, at least recently. So I just
looked through the member list and emailed a few people from there. But
can send the funds if you no longer need that acct or just want to make a
new one. Thanks. Very curious... |
|
|
|
|
12
|
Other / Meta / Funny email received requesting to purchase my account
|
on: April 19, 2013, 06:40:20 PM
|
I received the following email today, to an email that is not even the one listed on my forum account. Hi I saw you are on bitcointalk.org forum and wondered if you would be willing to sell me your account for $15? I see you haven’t been on there in quite a while, so perhaps you don’t need the account.
I could make a new acct, but I don’t want to go through the newbie waiting period before I can post in the main forums, so I would like an active account. Let me know and I could Paypal you the money or send you the equivalent in BTC. Just let me know. Thanks. I sent the following follow up email I am a bit curious, what leads you to conclude that I am on the
bitcointalk.org forum? And he replied back with the following Hi, I believe your email address was listed on the site as being someone who
registered but hadn't used their account much, at least recently. So I just
looked through the member list and emailed a few people from there. But
can send the funds if you no longer need that acct or just want to make a
new one. Thanks. Very curious... |
|
|
|
|
14
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer - MtGoxUSD wall movement tracker
|
on: April 12, 2013, 11:00:16 PM
|
There are absolutely reasons for the market to go down, and stay down - namely, the weak infrastructure built on top of bitcoin. It simply is not ready for prime time, and will not be ready for a long time to come. The system is overloaded, and the only way for it to go in this state is down.
"Bitcoin is not ready for the big time, and the only way to get ready is for it to hide in a cave and cower like a child" - Proudhon April 12, 2013 |
|
|
|
|
15
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Unencrypted Wallet Question
|
on: April 12, 2013, 10:50:04 PM
|
|
Aye, I did the math to back it up, and.... you guys are right.
Even if every single satoshi had its own unique address, then we have only used up 8.6361686e-62 percent of the keyspace. That means that you would have to generate about 5.513909e+61 addresses to even have a good chance on stumbling on a single address. Assuming you can generate a single address in 64 * 10^-9 seconds, it would take you 6.7140444e+48 years to find a single collision.
I am guessing that even a highly parallelized algorithm wouldn't put much of a dent in that, even with a super powerful computer.
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Feels good man
|
on: April 12, 2013, 10:06:32 PM
|
|
Great thread OP.
Put your money where your mouth is, and make a bet on the price.
I will bet 1 BTC that MtGox USD is over $100 7 days from now.
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Unencrypted Wallet Question
|
on: April 12, 2013, 04:45:03 PM
|
|
There are thousands of addresses that contain bitcoins. Isn't it possible that by generating a large amount of addresses, you will eventually stumble on one that already contains coins?
Maybe I am misunderstanding...
|
|
|
|
|
19
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Unencrypted Wallet Question
|
on: April 12, 2013, 04:00:44 PM
|
|
If there is an address with bitcoins, where the wallet is unencrypted, would it be possible for somebody to generate that address and then lay claim to the coins at that address? If not, what mechanism prevents this?
|
|
|
|
|
