By the way, the strategy was called "selfish" mining, in the sense of being selfish or acting in only one's own interest potentially on the expense of others. 2. The attack is based on secretly holding new mined blocks while trying to mine the next block on top of a secret one. Hence, it is obviously not applicable to pools. A pool must share the secrete block with each of its anonymous members, that could be anyone including the blockchain.info website. No, that is not the case - the only people that know that a winning nonce has been found are the pool operator and the person that mined this winning share. As there are a LOT of miners in a pool, it is highly unlikely that this is detectable by the miners themselves, unless they collude and check their nonces. The pool then can choose to reveal the block ("honest" miners are advised to do this as soon as possible to as many high hashrate miners as possible, sorted by hash rate - blockchain.info and other highly connected peers might only be useful to reach parts of the network you don't have a low latency, high bandwidth connection with). There is no way for a miner to know that a block was found or that the merkle root just changed because the pool server included another transaction. Let's call a pair of two blocks mined on top of the same older block a "fork evidence". I suggest that a block composer that includes a fork evidence as part of his/her block, where one of the evidence forked blocks is a predecessor of the newly composed block, will be rewarded half of the reward goes to the forked block, and the forked block owner will be totally disrewarded.
This option should obviously be limited to, say, 10 blocks ahead of the fork. This way the reward will not be frizzed longer than it is frizzed now, and an attacker from the future having an improved hash-rate with respect to the past, will not be able to easily create forks and get rewarded. Difficulty can have changed by up to a 4 times increase in the past 10 blocks... Also this give a strong disincentive to communicate forks you know about to others, to reap the rewards. Also: Where does the reward come from? 5. Although I am much frustrated about it, I acknowledge the fact that the other researchers published their results first. We should all respect them for that, although I hope the next time a theoretical attack will be found, researchers will not publish misleading information but the most accurate information.
Next time, I hope anyone bothering to write a paper first presents their findings here or with selected highly knowledgeable developers/members before doing the actual work of compiling something based on wrong or weak premises. If Bitcoin really worked like they assumed in their paper, the attack really would work. It doesn't however and I hope your unpublished (but hopefully already discussed in private with several members here...) attack also takes into account how the actual Bitcoin network and it's miners are connected instead of assuming that sibyl attacks are easily possible. |
|
|
|
Wouldn't it be better for exchanges to adapt Litecoin instead and use that to move funds ?
Good point. The cryptocurrency with the best liquidity will always be the best arbitrage medium. As long as LTC has better liquidity than XRP. The advantage with LTC is that it's also decentralized/open source. So just what problem is ripple solving again? While Bitcoin tries to be the ultimate fiat money (in the sense of "there shall be money", not in the sense of governmentally issued money) and hard asset, Ripple tries to be the ultimate market and transfer mechanism. These can, do and will go hand in hand [...]
If you add BTCLTC pairs on every exchange now, this would have no real influence on the BTCUSD markets... it is already very easy to get money off MtGox - but only if it is in BTC. Adding LTC, NMC, FTC, PPC or whatever other hard asset (yes, also XRP) will NOT change this and also not allow for better arbitrage. Ripple allows you to issue something that is tradeable like a BTC (no reversals, fast transfers...) but that maps something that is redeemable at the borders of the network. Neither LTC, NMC etc. are redeemable for anything, they are only transferable. You would still have to have LTCUSD pairs somewhere liquid and if you have that, LTC would be then more expensive on MtGox than on Bitstamp again. Adding on layers and layers of hard assets won't change the fact that it is very easy to transfer through these assets but very hard to jump the borders to assets that are not digital in the first place and/or adhere to different rules (like being reversible). If you only had cash (the closest thing to unregulated and irreversible USD) and a relatively secure way to send it (via mail for example) and make sure there are no counterfeits, you wouldn't have any kind of problem that MtGox currently has for example, having issues with AML/KYC laws and banking regulations/restrictions. They could just get a nice big safe and store their dollar bills there. |
|
|
|
I'll say it again: I understand the reasons why there can be *some* delays/shortages, but I would prefer if bitfinex would consider leaning slightly more towards "profit taking", and not overestimating counterparty risk (and whatever other reasons exist to withhold fiat from bitstamp),
I'd like to see at least one more exchange. Maybe a deal with campbx or btc-e? Even MtGox if possible again? Would diversify risks + bring more liquidity. Well, when I asked about Kraken, there was the chicken/egg response that it has not a lot of depth while trading there would probably improve depth... |
|
|
|
|
The points on there are partly incomplete, partly wrong and mostly pictures anyways. I've seen better pages describing in detail why Bitcoin is a ponzi scheme and anyone should stay away...
|
|
|
|
so ripple/xrp is pretty much done, right? no one cares anymore? what a big flop that was. glad i made some coins on xrp while it was hyped.
Yeah, just like Bitcoin...  |
|
|
|
|
Looks like there are still quite some issues with getting money over to actually liquid markets - I can't explain ~40% interest rates on USD otherwise while Bitcoin goes vertical and does a few 1000% return in a year if you consider just short term positions.
Please get more USD to Bitstamp!
Also:
Suddenly nearly all my lending positions (from various days) were returned all at once. What's going on there? Whales cashing out? Seems unlikely that all my positions were lent to only one single person though... Anyways, let's get this lending rate TO THA MOON and let the lenders also earn some profit and be frustrated that they didn't buy BTC with their USD instead.
|
|
|
|
wer möchte 100 DEM? die erste gepostete adresse gewinnt.  Warum? Anwesenheitstest?  ) ne war nur ein demonstrationstest, dass das netzwerk funktioniert, nachdem ich mitbekommen habe, dass wieder blöcke erzeugt werden. Also das Gute ist: das Netzwerk funktioniert - das Schlechte ist, irgendetwas wurde an Block 17752 vorgenommen. Ob es jetzt ein Fehler oder tatsächlich eine 51% Attack war versuche ich gerade herauszufinden. Eine 51% Attacke kann (hoffentlich?) niemals ungültige Blöcke erzeugen. Nach über 3 Wochen noch immer 0 Entwicklungsarbeit und schon die ersten Ideen, wie man grundlegende Funktionen (z.B. die Gesamtmenge aller "DEM", Inflationsrate...) ändern könnte. |
|
|
|
|
Will that be always the case? I doubt anyone runs a mining pol server from home - they are probably already quite close to each other in data centers...
Anyways, Merkle Trees are NOT static for 10 minutes, they usually change every time a pool sees a new transaction and decides to add it as well in the current block it is working on. While it might be really nice to broadcast them nevertheless, you might not want that amount of "spam" unless you are another miner.
Mining seems to be more and more to be a game of hash rate AND connectivity towards other players, instead of hash rate alone. If you add in trust (with special high capacity lines between selected pools, signed merkle trees...), you move away from the initial idea that anyone can have a nearly equal chance to take part in mining - further down the road, you will likely first have to deal with the large pools around unless you want a very high orphan rate. They don't even need to attack you, they just need to work in their own best interest and decide that they will host their servers only on Amazon in SF and Ireland, so they have faster connections between each other. Whoever does not take part in this, will be orphaned more often and have worse results, just because of latency and bandwidth.
This is also maybe a bit part of the block size discussion, but it could even happen with block headers in the future after all.
|
|
|
|
Give me a single use case for Ripple which is not covered without Ripple. Bitcoin also does not cover much (if any) new grounds - it just makes them smoother. And finally Ripple has nothing to do with Bitcoin - what is the reason to discuss this legacy system in this forum ? See the title of this thread: "Ripple: A Distributed Exchange for Bitcoin" Ripple offers a system to exchange IOUs for assets like Bitcoins or others with each other easily on an open, mostly unregulated market. This thread deals with the methods on how to do so and some misconceptions (as well as some well funded criticism). Ripple is much older than Bitcoin (one could argue that the original concept "Hawala" exists already VERY long) and the current incarnation of RippleLabs is not the first implementation of such a system. In fact, there still exists a Ripple classic client as far as I know. You as well seem to neglect the trading aspect of money. Within Bitcoin, all you can get are other bitcoin, which stand for themselves (unless you consider IOUs issued as colored coins or mastercoins - though then you have IOUs again). With Ripple all you can get (well, nearly all, there's XRP - but imho you shouldn't "invest" in these) are things that represent something outside of the system. Instead of restriction (which makes sense for an asset that tries to be worth something) you have abundance (which makes sense for a system that can map anything and everything and where tokens actually already represent something). While Bitcoin tries to be the ultimate fiat money (in the sense of "there shall be money", not in the sense of governmentally issued money) and hard asset, Ripple tries to be the ultimate market and transfer mechanism. These can, do and will go hand in hand - for example since Bitcoin transactions can (nearly) not be reversed, they are also one of the most traded asset IOUs in Ripple right now, as gateways are happy to receive them. It took Google just 2 days or so, to shut down the wallet account of a gateway that used them to buy XRP in contrast (it works again... now you can buy XRP which are easily convertable to BTC with Credit Cards again, probably by far the cheapest way to buy BTC with CCs). In the future, this will get even better and better, with people not even realizing that their Bitcoin payments were bought on the fly on Ripple. Adding in Litecoin support or any other non-reversible, pseudonymous currency/payment system for that matter is also just a matter of coding a small gateway. Just like some people here boasted that "through bitbills, someone might have already shopped at your service in BTC without you even realizing it", Ripple already works this way in the BTC direction right now. I would say that alone makes it worthy of being allowed a thread here, other projects are unfortunately not that far yet. |
|
|
|
Ein Gratisburger alle paar Mal ist ja auch nicht schlecht... https://www.digitalocean.com/ z.B. - 5$/Monat falls man das Ding durchlaufen lässt oder eben wie erwähnt Amazon, da gibt's das Ganze sogar erstmal ein Jahr lang gratis. Es geht auch nicht um Sichtbarkeit, sondern darum, welche Transaktion zuerst in der Blockchain auftaucht - die an den Händler hat natürlich 0 Fee, die an meine 2. Addresse hat die normale Fee - das ist auch der einzige Betrag, den ich verlieren könnte. Geht die Transaktion an mich vorher durch, mache ich das Ganze eben so lange, bis es klappt. |
|
|
|
|
Wie wäre es noch mit Quick als Zahlungsmöglichkeit?
Ansonsten kannst du ja mal mit VirWoX als größter österreichischer Bitcoinexchange reden...
|
|
|
|
I'd say it's an operational p2p currency exchange already, though it's perhaps too early to tell if it will be successful. Ripple is about as P2P as PayPal. Depends on the aspects of Paypal you refer to. Possible to send IOUs to someone you just know the address from? Definitely. The ledger however is distributed and public, not in a private datacenter from the service provider. The blanket statements and one-liners that creep up again make it quitre hard to discern however what the real issue is. My guess is that people see several things in Ripple that it isn't and also isn't designed to be: Ripple != XRP for example. XRP are a part of the system, but they are not really required for users after funding and definitely not the main investment vehicle in Ripple. Ripple is also not a way to deposit/redeem money or other assets. These are the gateways and YOU are responsible to choose which of them you want to use and trust, not Ripple. Also, Ripple is just "the other side of the coin" in the struggle to create digital assets. Bitcoin created transactions in a central shared database with units that start off as worthless and that are traded at the borders against other things. Ripple allows you to create anything really that is worth something (a cow, a coin, a cake) but since the thing that is represented is actually existing it can be traded at the borders mostly/only(?) against the real thing while the "IOUs" can be traded inside the system. |
|
|
|
Nette Idee "long" zu gehen: Euros ausborgen, BTC kaufen, warten + "Verlust" machen, BTC verkaufen, Gewinn einstreichen und Euros zurückzahlen. Toller 0% Kredit den ihr da gegeben habt! Wenn Polarstorm im Juni um ~130 USD eingestiegen ist und jetzt bei ~200 USD aussteigt hat er immerhin über 50% Gewinn gemacht (falls er nicht handelt). Wenn er lieber in Energydrinks oder Colakapseln handelt, scheint das offenbar ein schlechtes Geschäft für ihn gewesen zu sein. Problem ist: keiner außer ihm weiß genau, ob er das eine oder andere gemacht hat - selbst wenn er ein paar gute Ideen hat, die gut klingen. |
|
|
|
Usually the wallet files (in the sense of the bits and bytes that make up a wallet) are not the issue - if you want to store them publicly, they need to be encrypted. As wallets are only keys themselves, the key that unlocks the wallet file again needs to be securely stored... maybe in the blockchain as well? You can't do that unencrypted, as the data is public though! So you need to store the key to the key to the wallet file (which contains keys to access your coins) someplace safe... ... how about encrypting it and storing it in the blockchain? |
|
|
|
*snip*
So far so good, right?
Wrong.
I still trust the goldsmith for 1 oz, but he doesn't have any gold. Unless I am constantly checking my open trust lines I haven't noticed that the balance on that line has dropped to 0. The goldsmith can issue another oz. of Ripple gold units, but he has no way at all to redeem them.
In order to support exchange functionality between Ripple currencies and real-world currencies, Ripple needs the a non-revolving credit line, but it doesn't have one. Nobody is going to be able to implement a successful P2P currency exchange on Ripple, because of this infinite inflation feature.
This is like the following scenario: You have an accout at MtGox that can hold up to 10k USD (because of AML issues or whatever). Now you are afraid to actually use it, because MtGox might arbitrarily credit your account 5k USD out of thin air. The proper way to protect against this is fairly easy and known for centuries at the very least: Audits. Do not trust a goldsmith that might do such things in a way that you (or regulators) won't know about this and require him to have a daily/monthly/quarterly... audit where he gives proof of holding at least the 1337 oz of XAU that the current Ripple ledger states he owes his customers. You are being afraid to get free money (from the goldsmith) or worthless money (someone else pays you in Au.Goldsmith, even though he is bankrupt in reality). This is why banking laws and regulations exist. If your goldsmith publishes a picture of a big gold bar with the current edition of a popular newspaper right next to it (as a very simplistic way of having an audit) or MtGox would publish a bank statement every month that shows that their funds are actually enough to cover the balances issued to customers (or even just a simple audit...) this might make it more likely that people trust these issuers. Gox and 'stamp are P2P, you are not dealing with brokers but directly with orders from other users. The biggest issue (and the one that Bitinstant for example tried to solve) is liquidity of the balances on these platforms and their redeemability. If you only want to use Ripple as trading platform, not as a payment platform (where trading is done at the time of purchase, not beforehand) and you want to make sure you don't receive any payments from others, a first step might be not to accept payments on Ripple from others instead of nulling trust lines. Everything that comes inbound that is not from your trades then is a donation with purpose beyond that. |
|
|
|
|
You could try via Ripple, though I fear the liquidity there is also not really sufficient...
|
|
|
|
Die Verschlüsselung von telegram ist unsicher und von Behören leicht zu belauschen
...Beweis?! Solange man den Endgeräten vertraut (also weder Sender noch Empfänger haben einen Staatstrojaner etc.) und nur die Software/Protokoll betrachtet klingt das, was sie schreiben, eigentlich recht ordentlich. Belauschen ist sicher möglich, aber "verstehen" was da kommuniziert wurde ist nach aktuellem Stand (wenn die Sachen ordentlich implementiert wurden) nicht möglich. |
|
|
|
Die Verschlüsselung scheint tauglich, zumindest ihren Aussagen nach. Ich hoffe mal, das sie nicht den Android Zufallsgenerator benutzen, sondern sich selbst was zusammen stricken. Sonst ist AES256 auf dem Niveau von Rot13.
Wo braucht aes denn Zufallszahlen? Grundsätzlich stimme ich ja zu, dass man gute Zufallsquellen haben sollte, für AES an sich braucht man die aber meines Wissens nach nicht. Auch ein selbst zusammengebastelter Zufallszahlengenerator sollte zumindest die eingebauten mitverwenden. Übrigens wurde der in Android mittlerweile gefixt. |
|
|
|
|
Magst du und auch den Grund dafür nennen? Die Idee fand ich nämlich super... Wäre also gut zu wissen, ob du nur aufhörst weil die oma krank ist oder weil MasterCard klagt.
|
|
|
|
|
If you did any serious trading on Ripple, you'd have your own rippled + local client for better performance anyways (and you'd use the API, not the client...). On one hand people complain that it is "dead", on the other hand official servers are overloaded.
If you use Ubuntu, there is a PPA available with rippled binaries too, so you don't even need to wait the 2 minutes it takes to build.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
