Ако је неко заинтересован за пројекат који је ИЦО већ започео и сматрам да је то одлична прилика са високим РОИ (Ретурн он Инвестмент), слободно ме препоручите за више информација и детаља.
jbs mi sve ako ja znam o cemu ti pricas,el hoces da ti neko kaze koji ico je dobar ili ti znas za neki dobar ico? Cim vidis da je na cirilici i nije najrazumnije, ocigledno je da covek koristi google translate. Vidis da nije mogao da mu prevede return on investment, nego ga samo napisao na cirilici, da zna srpski napisao bi ili na latinici ili bi preveo. |
|
|
|
Just looking at creating a colored coin that would represent equity shares in a company. One way to comply with SEC regulations is if shares of a company can only be sold after 1 year. And any sale of that share beyond that also needs to be held a year. Since you're looking broader than just Bitcoin: Byteball offers regulated assets: Regulated assets
Regulated institutions can issue assets that are compatible with KYC/AML requirements. Every transfer of such asset is to be cosigned by the issuer, and if there is anything that contradicts the regulations, the issuer won't cosign. You can probably set up a bot to handle sales-requests (but I can't tell you how exactly). No, you can't do that with Bitcoin. Once the funds are spent, they have nothing to do with their past transactions anymore. When you make a transaction, you can specify whatever the rules of unlocking those funds you want, as long as you can unlock them. If it is possible in your implementation, you can simply specify that all the transactions have to use nLockTime with a month of delay, otherwise those coins are effectively burned, or uncolored. |
|
|
|
First of all you'll need to add bitcoind as a service (if you want, it will start every time that you start your computer): Ubuntu Linux — How do I start bitcoind as a service to run automatically?You'll need to setup a crontab or something similar, since bitcoin daemon does not have such any kind of method for restarting the daemon after crash. Here is basically a copy paste guide for restarting the daemon every time after crash How To Use a Simple Bash Script To Restart Server Programs. However the bash script would go as something like this: #!/bin/sh
ps auxw | grep bitcoind | grep -v grep > /dev/null
if [ $? != 0 ]
then
/bitcoind start > /dev/null
fi
Im assuming that by root directory you mean that the bitcoind file is on the root folder which would be /. I hope this is helpful, so far this kind of solutions is only one that i have found. I somehow doubt that his bitcoind binary is in the root directory, so I would recommend running "which bitcoind" first to get the absolute path, but I don't think it is necessary, a relative one should be fine. I think this solution is the easiest. |
|
|
|
Yeah, but 104 million transactions it's enough only for 52 million of users. Also, i didn't counted another types of transactions like transaction with big amount of btc (Lighnting network is desined for small payment), multioutputs and others. So real number of users is much less than 52 millions
Are you that sure about that number that you will have all the dangers of a hard fork with no replay protection when it is years, maybe even decades from potential necessity? I can very well imagine that everyone might use one big Lightning Network in the future and that there will be no need of ever closing it. There is also a cost to closing a channel, so there is an incentive of not paying mining fees that people might not want to ever close it. And people might not worry about the benefits of closing a channel as much as you think, since the only benefit is that there is no risk of your funds being lost. It makes sense to assume that people will not open a channel with a friend, but with a big well known node that has open channels with many other users. That way if that well known node betrays the well established trust starts closing channels, everyone would know about it, since it would be a big deal and maybe even be in the news and that could cost that node a great deal. This node won't be able to close all the channels at one either, since it will be literally impossible to put so many transactions in blocks. Here a bigger block size is actually a problem. You see, it isn't all that simple. But I can tell you this, the benefits of S2X are none for many years to come and costs and dangers are huge and there is no cost in postponing the fork and there are certainly benefits to do so. This is obvious to anyone who thought about it for a reasonable amount of time, which tells you something about that NYC agreement, whatever you think that something is. |
|
|
|
why don't they just launch each other's missile so we'll see who wins. north korea has been firing missile every now and then, why don't they try target one country to see how devastating it can be. they've been destroying seas already by doing it so they should be targeting someone that fires back. not cowardly aiming to seas. The world is on the verge of a big war. After such statements, it is inevitable. I'm more interested in how China will behave in this situation.
actually its china that they should aim. they've been hating each other for conquering korea thousands of years ago. Because there are no winners in a nuclear war. If the war begins, a global nuclear winter is a best case scenario. It is very likely that humanity will not survive it. If it will be as the previous world wars, i dont know if north korea will actually have as many allies to actually back up its war effort. War chest alone will be insane. Now the conspiracy theory will be that US will actually do the war so for money of course.
It won't be like previous wars. A nuclear war is very different, it is something like the life on Earth never have seen before. No allies, no tanks, no soldiers, none of it is needed. A nuclear war isn't like other wars where you have an army vs army, civilians are the target with nuclear weapons and there is no conquering of land. Once the bomb is dropped on an area, it is inhabitable for decades. This war won't be like any other wars USA fights in middle east, this one is very different. There is only one outcome of nuclear wars, these missiles are only built as a warning, saying "if we go down, everyone is coming with us", there is no actual war, it is just a massive genocide. |
|
|
|
|
It makes no sense to call Bitcoin expensive, it is like calling dollars expensive. You know you can just by a fraction of it? You can buy down to 1/100 millionth of a Bitcoin. This is called a satoshi, after the inventor of Bitcoin. Think of a satoshi as the cryptocurrency and a Bitcoin just as a word for 100 million satoshis. Now it isn't really expensive is it? It is too cheep even.
All the bitcoins in the world cost billions of dollars, is that what you mean by expensive? If that is the case, then take a notice that the amount of money in the world is easily in trillions. That makes Bitcoin an insignificant part of it and it is technologically far superior to fiat currency.
|
|
|
|
Out of interest, how have people found things since segwit activation?
I've noticed that fees seem a lot lower and things seem to happen faster?
I think to some extent the big block crew are correct. Ethereum works great with quick blocktimes mostly, other than during ICO peak periods, which bitcoin doesn't really have.
Segwit only got activated on the network. That means it is possible to use it, not that it is being used. There is still no difference that Segwit made, since almost no one uses it yet. Wallets need some time to start implementing it and Lightning Networks need to pop up as well in due time. There might not be any drastic changes over night, we could just see a gradual adoption. Fees are lower, but that is just the network. Maybe due to some Bitcoin Cash users leaving Bitcoin, since the split, other then that, just business as usual. Sometimes fees are high, sometimes low, but they are definitely better now. |
|
|
|
Dude the link you just gave me says exactly the same as what I said (link): Definition of atheist
:a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods :one who subscribes to or advocates atheism
My stated definition as by the Greeks: Atheďsm without god/gods.
So by both definitions an Atheist can still believe in a multitude of concepts/idea's.
And no words don't mean whatever someone means with it, if we do that whats the F**** point of having language in the first place, sky is grass and grass is home. Home is a keyboard and a keyboard is a computer and a computer is a glass of water. No it doesn't f***** work like that. Yes grammar is important cause languages depend on grammar to be able to express what we mean. The most basic example is your and you're. So many people mix this up and it means a world of difference in what you're saying.
You want to have a generation of illiterate d***bag* who can't properly formulate a sentence to defend their argument? Who start writing in emoji's instead?
It is f**** important and yes I get hung up on that. I won't get mad but I surely will tell you about it. I mean it doesn't matter right?- that we get most of our knowledge from books that are written way in the past from when we now live. If we translate or misinterpret that wrong it will be like you're reading a whole different thing.
You know that Erasmus was almost exiled from the vatican for claiming he found translation mistakes in the Bible, if I'm correct a good 52 of them.
You know how sensitive the information is from old greek that if we interpret it slightly different it means a whole another thing?
You know how sensitive interpretation is with religious texts?
You know how easily people can be manipulated trough mistranslation, misinterpretation? Especially if they don't even understand grammar or sentence construction. Let alone can read and write.
You know how much easier it is to formulate an argument if you have a broad vocabulary? And how much easier it is to convince others with proper formulation?
But I guess this all doesn't matter because the Vatican just had a different defintion of the words... Erasmus should have kept his nosy little mouth shut.
Then Calvin and Luther would have never started to seperate from the Vatican and create Calvinism and Lutherism
Language and grammar are important it is one of the reasons we are not still in the stone age throwing rocks and feces at eachother.
Language means organisation and organisation means progress and efficiency. It means you can work in a team when you communicate with eachother.
But no lets let everyone have their own definition of everything, that will certainly help. Like those people from Black Lives Matter who say that racism can only be aimed towards black people and not the other way around. Or who don't even understand the difference between discrimination and racism.
No please, lets take a big dump on every bit of progress we made and go back to the f***** stone age.
P.S. You just didn't proof anything, you only reaffirmed that I was right in the first place I doubt you even checked that link. And if you do then you reaffirmed my argument that grammar, language and vocabulary is important as you couldn't tell that Miriam-webster and I we're saying the exact same thing only formulated different.
Also History starts from the point that we write stuff down, everything before that is pre-historic.
Oops. I guess you did say the exact same definition. It wasn't that I didn't read the link I gave, I just didn't read your post that mindfully. I like how pissed are you and claim that you won't get mad about it  I really find your ranting very amusing, especially the "starting writing with the emoji" part Good job! I love it! haha! You know how sensitive interpretation is with religious texts? Dude it happened 2000 years ago, let it go. Who cares? If you are a historian translator, then sure, learn all about that historic roots of the word thing. Have a blast, good luck! I just don't care. The progress isn't just keeping everything ever invented, it is about letting things go, as well. Not all that happened is something we should keep. Keep it in the books, sure, but not in the minds of every human. Listen. the point is that people understand each other, that is the point of the language. I am saying that the meaning of a word is what people as a society chooses it is and sometimes they change it. There is nothing wrong with that, no houses will burn if someone changes the definition. But you are correct that I jumped to the conclusion in my first reply. Atheist doesn't literally mean the lack of belief in anything, but I explained it later on. A bit of Christian forgiveness would be nice here. As for the Black Lives Matter thing, cut them some slack. Sure some might be wrong, but there is only one way the racism was really a problem in the World and in America, so excuse them if they are not paying much importance to the racism towards the white people. All in all, you are a funny dude, but please chill for your own sake, you might just get a heart attack if you continue getting all worked up because some dude on the Internet said something you don't really agree with. |
|
|
|
speed of technological development
We do in terms of _real_ technological development, but not fake marketing crap... and not at the expense of stability and security. Compare, Bitcoin moving to innovative second generation error protected addresses w/ BIP173 vs ethereum still behind bitcoin 0.1 without a strong safe to use address system. Or ethereum validation being so slow that its impractical to sync-up a full node anymore, pushing almost all eth users onto SPV-like security for their initial sync, while Bitcoin sync tx/s speed is orders of magnitude faster and keeps getting faster. Omg, the famous Gregory Maxwell responded to my post What an honor! I agree. They don't even have a good multisig, if you search for an ethereum multisig all you get is bunch of news about lost coins due to the vulnerability in the commonly used multisig contract. The inability to sync an ethereum node is exactly why I never used it in the first place. I tried, but it got so slow that it would never sync at that rate, perhaps due to some buggy code. I appreciate your work mr. Maxwell. Thank you for all the good work you have done! |
|
|
|
RBF if better than CPFP IMO.
In rbf, a separate transaction is produce with the same inputs and outputs, just with a higher fee. So it'll get confirmed faster and the other transaction merely gets rejected (ensure it is the same script you're spending from).
I agree, but you need to set it beforehand, in which case, you might as well just set the appropriate fee. The CPFP is just a fix for people's mistakes. RBF would be perhaps dangerous to set as a default, as the lack of it allows to have a certain trust in unconfirmed transactions, since some double spends get rejected by nodes. |
|
|
|
i think The reason there’s evil in the world is not because of God, but because God gave us the freedom to choose. Now the potential for love outweighs the existence of evil, because you see, evil is only going to exist for a short time, but love is going to go on forever. And all of the suffering and all of the death that we see in the world today are the result because man has chosen to make wrong choices.
so what is you clarification on that question ?
Poor babies that chose to get aids on birth... Why is there Evil? Because there are people who call certain things evil. If these things weren't done they would call something else evil. There are people who do things without considering the bigger picture and the full consequence of their actions. Then there are people who aren't born like the rest of us and want something else in life that would make most of us sad. But that is the diversity for you, you get a bit of everything, a bit of good, a bit of bad, a bit of horrible, a bit of amazing and so on. Evil does only exist for the short time, but then some new evil is born, in whichever way you want to see this. |
|
|
|
|
Kind of stupid to believe any news you hear. If war has started, it would have already ended by now. Don't worry, there will be no world to remember who started the war. It is all just drama for the naive. Nuclear wars only go one way, everyone dies. All that these idiots are doing are either playing the stupidest game of chicken or doing a one big act for everybody. I hope that they are smart enough to see that either they will not push each other and just leave each other alone or die in a matter of minutes with the rest of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess that the increase in block size in not that necessary right now compared to the associated risks. Bitcoin Core probably sees Bitcoin as a stable network, that doesn't compete with altcoins in the speed of technological development as much as in stability and security in which Bitcoin can and is winning.
Fees sometimes still rise, but neither Lightning Networks nor even segwit has reached high adoption. Bitcoin network is ready for it, but the technology is still in the development/testing stage. We can't know at this point if an increase in block size is needed and is it needed right now, while the S2X has no replay protection and appears to be rushing this fork as a consequence. LN nor Segwit can't be considered a failure at the time of the fork, as it is too early and we don't have as much of a need for it to rush it.
|
|
|
|
|
Blockchain is really for decentralized systems. If you want to keep some data or some simple and small code in a secure,fast and decentralized way, then blockchain can help. Otherwise, for the centralized systems, not as much. I would understand why you wouldn't want one person to have access to all the defense capabilities, but I am not that familiar with the industry.
Sure, you can use a blockchain for storing all kinds of data and code, so you can implement it in the aircraft systems as well. You can create a network that will have it's own blockchain. And then store whatever you want in it and be sure that it is decentralized and therefor doesn't have a single point of failure.
I am not so sure about the benefits of this, since the whole thing is probably based on trust anyway and the blockchain is all about allowing a trustless system and so on.
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone.
Hello. After the hard fork on 2nd of August it stopped syncing and this state continues up to this day.
Weird bug, have you tried restarting Bitcoin Core? Maybe delete the peers.dat file in the data directory. Always try restarting the computer when you have any bug. I was digging into the subject, because it's almost uncanny that there was such a whopping difference and I found a transaction that concerned me. https://blockchain.info/pl/tx/cb39028a8880a0b38b72edf39ed3c9637adef891fc403b4ab75929f8c924b374From where we checked he actually send 1.92BTC, but he doesn't recall the second output (1.08961509 BTC). Core also doesn't show that output and because of that the balance was wrong for almost 10 days! It looks like somebody stole his funds. That seems like good news to me. If someone stole the funds, he would have created a new transaction probably, instead of waiting for your friend to send one and then piggyback on it. This is also a default behavior of Bitcoin Core to create the change address and send the remaining funds to it, as you can't just not send bitcoins from the specified inputs in the transaction, otherwise they will be counted as the mining fee, don't want to bother you with to much detail tho. The point is that you should go to Bitcoin Core and then click on Help->Debug window->Console and type: dumpprivkey "18bVb8yd8iFBe977eK2Q3Qdaz9jc6pBFRC" That will give you the private key of that address and you will have your coins. Please help.
Best regards,
Tryptohash
I hope I did, enjoy your coins, feel free to send me some at the address on my profile  Best regards, Aleksej |
|
|
|
Try CPFP. That is a method when you act like that transaction is confirmed and spend those coins from those addresses, but in this new transaction where you spend those coins, you set a fee large enough to cover both of them. To do this just enable sending of unconfirmed balance from your wallet and set the fee to using this site bitcoinfees.21.co and using the sizes of that transaction and the new one. For the reference, that transaction is 1110 bytes and the new one could around 340 bytes. That is 1450 bytes and for an example you use 180 satoshis/byte, you get 261000 satoshis total for the new transaction or around 768 satoshis/byte since the new one could be around 340 bytes, but it could be way bigger then that, depending on how many unspent outputs you use from the 143wJEpgvFrJSwLaP8UQRBFod7a5u8j6hV address. If you are using Bitcoin Core, then you can specify exactly all of these things, just go to Options and click on the Wallet tab, then check both "Spend unconfirmed change" and "Enable coin control features". Then just go to Send tab and select the inputs from that transaction set the new address and set the appropriate fee. That should do it. |
|
|
|
SO: ATHEISM MEANS: ''WITHOUT GOD/GODS" IT DOES NOT MEAN NOT A BELIEVER cause you can still believe in a multitude of things,concepts and idea's.
Atheism is just a word, it means what people want it to mean. I never understood why some people get so hung up on the grammar or historical roots of the words and phrases. Literally the only purpose of the words is for people to communicate and if the point is unambiguously spread, then that is all that matters. Everybody has their own definition of what words mean and the most common ones are the ones that makes sense using, as it will allow you to speak to most people and that is all that words are meant for. As you can see in many definitions in dictionaries ( https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheist ) atheism is just whatever people mean when the say that word and in most cases it is just not believing in God. But since God is the most common thing people believe disregarding the likelihood of such a thing, I think that it is very fair to say that atheists don't believe in anything. When people say they believe in something, sometimes they mean just that they find it more likely, since it is harder to say that. Again, it is just a definition on what most people want it to be, it is just a consensus of the protocol in use. When I used the word "believe", I used the definition that makes most sense in this context, the belief without any evidence, not as in belief as most likely. |
|
|
|
At this moment, you need about $400-800 million dollars to attack the $44 billion Bitcoin chain (and in PoW too, you can get some or even all of them back by short selling in the right moment).
This $800 million sounds about right, but can you source or show how you calculated this number? This makes PoW seem way less secure than PoS. PoW is also a huge pointless electricity drain on the world, already using more electricity than Iceland, the country. If prices go 1000x higher as we like, it'll be 1000 Icelands, or entire continents of power just for PoW. PoW therefor seems to have no future. There is no fixed amount that will allow you to attack Bitcoin as it depends on how long you run the attack. It is a different story on how much you would have to spend on the initial costs for buying the mining rigs. If you already have the mining hardware then it can simply cost you as much as it costs the entire network to mine, which should be about the same as the amount they get from it, which is 12.5 bitcoins per 10 minutes on average, which is about $47000 currently per 10 min. As for the initial costs, they are about 700 million to match the hashrate of the network, which is about 8 million TH/s, with the Bitmain's Antminer S9-14TH/s that costs 1310 USD. |
|
|
|
Why not to use brand new blockchain for things like this? It's just a trash from bitcoin's point of view.
The point of these texts is that they are stored forever. Bitcoin blockchain is probably the most likely to survive a long time and is the most secure blockchain (due to high amount of hashpower over the years). If you want any blockchain for these things then Bitcoin blockchain is the way to go. |
|
|
|
Im not sure I understand this the way you do. I don't think you can generate private keys from a public key with the way you suggest. It's possible to get the private key by brute forcing to reveal every private key (which, in quantum computing would be considered a great accomplishment). It's unreasonable to imagine now, but one day it could be possible.
If I'm wrong here, can you help by posting a theoretical algorithm about how the private keys can be brute forced from a public key. Also, by public keys, that could be xpub, mpk or a bitcoin address as they are all technically public keys, although presumably this relates to xpub.
Well, I am pretty sure that what he meant was that you need a public key in order to figure out the private key using a quantum computer. The hashing of the public key would not be possible to be done as quickly on quantum computer due to the way the work. I have no clue how exactly these quantum computers should work, but to be honest, no one really does in detail either, they are just tests currently and don't really offer anything useful now. No one really understands the quantum physics, they make no logical sense, they are paradoxes that we can't solve, but are trying to utilize. There is something called Shor's algorithm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shor's_algorithmThat, to my understanding, is using a public key to find a private key, however on Wikipedia they talk about RSA keys and Bitcoin uses ECDSA, but I know that ECDSA require even smaller quantum computers, due to the efficiency of the algorithm. Shor's algorithm doesn't generate new public/private key pairs, but finds the period for a certain public key, from which it derives the private key. It requires a bit of understanding of RSA keys to know what it does, but that is the idea. Is having a multisig address more secure? Is that sort of what this guy is asking about right now?
Other than the fact that you need multiple keys to break, not really. No, he is talking about randomness of generating keys. Don't waste your time wondering about cryptography.
-snip-
Trying to take on key pair encryption, digital signatures and all the internals of bitcoin's block chain will take more time then you have left on this earth when you add in all the other stuff you need to do.
I will say that in my opinion, not even the NSA will be able to crack you private key let along the billions of others being generated. For now it's safe.
It really isn't that complex. You could really learn it all in one course at collage. The tech used here is quite new and there isn't that much of it. It would take a lot of time to learn the history, but the present technology has little to do with it. So my advice would be the opposite of yours, don't learn history, learn the present. well those private keys derived from brain wallets were pretty bad actually. They are not really private keys, but still, I guess you can think of it that way, and brain wallets are absolutely terrible security
Private keys generated in the online wallet might be shared to you and hold by the wallet providers. But hardware wallets and desktop wallet are unique can be utilize by the user alone. Henceforth private key is much safer for you to import the wallet and hold the amount in the wallet with much safety. To whom may ever, don't share your private key and wallet.dat file to keep your wallet safe. Some of the brain wallets were less secure then a normal desktop wallet and even less then a hardware wallet. They were easily guessable. The online wallet is hardly a wallet, we should all know that, but we are not even discussing this right now. Calling an online wallet a wallet is like calling your online bank account a wallet. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
