Nächstes Mal bzw. in Zukunft: Für jede Überweisung eine neue Adresse verwenden!

Maybe something along the lines of OCR or rendering... another requirement that you missed:

4) HAVE ABUNDANT INPUT

If you have to wait to mine until there is some work available agin or if you first have to download gigabytes of scene data and textures (or protein folding data) just to do PoW there might be issues.

Ideally you can generate your work yourself, just like with the current "find a hash value that is lower than X" PoW.

Well, the input range for the second hash is limited to 256 bits... maybe this could present some weaknesses, but I doubt there would be many flaws that would be useful for bitcoin mining.

Rainbow tables and the likes are just going to be far too sparse to be able to be of any use and as you can see from the SAT experiments so far also automated algorithms seem to not find shortcuts easily.

Was ist ein m pro hash?

Yeah, there are actually quite a few "announcements" in there that I don't see very important at all and some (e.g. new releases of main bitcoin wallet software like bitcoin-qt or Armory or electrum) are not posted there...

Most threads are about hacks, compromises and lawsuits or their fallout. Is this really the impression that "important announcements" of the Bitcoin community wants to give of Bitcoin?

Posting threads about how one can earn some sub-cent amounts for using a centralized, closed source, proprietory version of IRC is also not the solution imho.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=234850.0

Why the hell does this stuff belong in important announcements and not in service announcements?

I personally would use BIP32 keys and keep the last X (depending on the business) last used keys in the wallet, the rest can be purged and regenerated on demand anyways.

MtGox claims to have several million private keys (most probably in cold storage) afair.

Ja, nur eben um klarzustellen, dass man bei einem Angebot von 15% per annum wohl kaum jemanden hinterm Ofen hercorlocken wird können - aber man kann's ja mal versuchen und so auf BTCjam einstellen...

Viel Glück damit... Ich habe bisher eher Bereiche von hohen einstelligen bis niedrigen zweistelligen Beträgen pro MONAT gesehen, wenn ich mir https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=65.0 so durchsehe, scheint sich das nicht geändert zu haben.

Skimming over the ssdeep page + paper sounds more like it is describing the rsync algorithm (http://rsync.samba.org/tech_report/), a similar one is used in bup as well...
Also depending on desired block size these file signatures could be even larger than the input files.

I tried to build such a system for fun using Adler32 and SHA256, it ran fairly slow (as it was totally unoptimized and just a few lines after all) but still fast enough to deduplicate files at ~10MB/s on a single core.

How is this applicable to Bitcoin? You might be able to compress the block chain a bit by finding duplicate data, but besides that...?

Why not write a PM (personal message)?

All btc trades that are not settled face to face in cash are IOU trades. Most of the merchants out there give you IOUs in return for btc.

Ripple with btc would extend the capabilities of bitcoin and just like any other use case have no to minimal influence (depending on trade volume) on the actual system.

Bitcoin survives just fine even though besides local bit coins EVERY exchange transaction is using IOUs on at least one side.

Also i suggested to implement vanilla bitcoin next to xrp, these are not debt or IOUs.

Because bitcoin is not an IOU exchange system and would benefit from one. Just look at the amount of topics regarding distributed exchanges.

Ripples usefulness does not lie in its currency and some people seem to dislike this aspect so much that they dismiss the whole idea. Maybe bitcoin as a second native currency can also have other benefits, after all it is much better established compared to xrp.

Double post to seperate this rather personal piece above from this one:

How to integrate BTC as native currency in Ripple (next to XRP, as I believe there would be some benefits in staying compatible to the existing network):
The block chain needs to be stored by
 * end user clients to send transactions/trade offers
 * validators to validate these transactions and check if the attached BTC are actually valid
 # servers probably should have the block chain too (to not send bad transactions to validators) but I'm no 100% sure if they need it

There needs to be a way to:
 * make Ripple wait for a certain external event until a transaction has been confirmed (let's say for a certain amount of confirmations)
 * ensure that this does not create a double spend scenario (e.g. I buy USD IOUs for native BTC, I send my BTC and the USD need to be frozen at the same time. Now I can double-spend my BTC or my counterpart could doble-spend the USD IOUs, as the transaction isn't finalized yet and there won't be consensus for some time until the BTC are credited at their destination.)
 * do all this without requiring a mutually trusted escrow (the current way BTC <--> IOU trades are being done)

I assume XRP are still used for transaction fees and account funding, if that also needs to be done via BTC, you're looking towards an implementation that has to provably destroy BTC forever (using them as fees doesn't work as then bitcoin miners would have other incentives, especially if they also operate validators). Account funding might be replaced by PoW, this is tricky though as a past PoW gets worth less and less over time thanks to Moore's law.

Where on ripplescam does it give proof that the consensus mechanism does NOT work (or can not work)?
Just saying "it's not Open Source, so it cannot be true" is a position that I cannot really identify with - existance of an implementation does not guarantee or imply correct workings. Also you're free to implement a consensus mechanism as outlined in the Wiki and use this to either prove or disprove the feasability of dispute resolution using consensus.

IOUs are inherently different from currencies like (native) BTC or XRP. IOUs have a certain value (0%-100% of the thing that is owed) but get destroyed once you actually redeem them. They exist to be destroyed. Currencies have 0 redeemable value (yes, both BTC and XRP), but have utility in being used for price discovery and have the big advantage that they can be actually owned as an asset, since they won't (and cannot) be redeemable with anyone for anything. The actual price of a currency comes from it's utility and even more the trust that people have in it.

If you use now BTC IOUs (e.g. MtGox BTC codes) as "currency" in Ripple or elsewhere, you again need to trust a person to redeem them and not a currency to be useful. It wouldn't matter if you used USD IOUs, XAU IOUs, BTC IOUs or LTC IOUs - what you are using is always IOUs that have different features than an actual currency.

Actually I disagree with you on this - if there is no generally accepted currency (it does not need to have a reserve, it  just needs to be trusted by people and be useful as a currency), there will be one created implicitly. The big danger imho is that if there is no native currency (something that you can own) this will be the most dispersed or otherwise highly trusted IOU. Bitcoin trading already suffers from high centralization towards MtGox, now imagine you cannot trade Bitcoins any more but only coins deposited at MtGox. Once you take away a central 0-value currency, another central currency would emerge. If that turns out to be an IOU, bad things can and will happen.

The point of this thread now is on how BTC can be used as this central currency (meaning I can exchange Ripple IOUs or native BTC for Ripple IOUs within Ripple instead of Ripple IOUs and XRP for Ripple IOUs) or at least be used next to XRP. There is already a thread at the Ripple forums about this, JoelKatz' stance seems to be that BTC would not be useful as they have a different target group, are slow and would be taken over by XRP because of this as XRP are inherently more useful than BTC in a Ripple system. If you disagree with this, I'd like to hear your reasons and ideas and please not again some rants about how the code should be open sourced yesterday. Please get more concrete - instead of "clearly this can be tuned" say "Sha512 hashing with a difficutly of 0.01 just takes X cycles on a modern CPU, so this costs just 0.000x USD assuming a power usage of 50W and Y cycles per second."

Lastly, I'm really fed up with the "shilling" accusations. I try my best to be constructive here, it is not very easy sometimes though. It would be great to have some useful discussions as this would also help the OT+BM implementation probably, which seems to me to be something similar to this "mesh exchange". I'm not too sure how one can trade there though (with trading meaning something different than investing) and what the implications of that would be.

"Money quote" (Little Leo has painted his own money and wants to deposit it at a bank):

http://www.ing-nextgenerationbanking.com/book/

The "history of money" section implies somethow that there is still a gold standard...
Also interesting is that the answers about what a bank does are very biased towards a modern western standpoint (=charging interest on credits) + handing our credit money, not speculation. If you published this book in some former times, you might get into quite some trouble, as interest equals usury...

Lastly people in poor countries are apparently poor because they don't know how to earn money, and they are so stupid that they need 9 year old kids from places where people know how to earn money to help them.

I'm not too sure if this relates 100% to Bitcoin, as it talks about made-up money and some theories behind I thought it might be interesting and also might help some discussions about Bitcoins. For example, how would they fit into the book's description of "money"?

Hast du Heizstrahler oder sowas im Haus (Fön, Staubsauger...)? Lass da mal 2000-3000 Watt an Leistung einen Tag lang in dem Raum laufen und dann schau mal, wie sich das aufheizt.

SAT solving would only help if the algorithm does have parts that can be neglected e.g. a 0 somewhere in the input can be mapped more or less easily to a 13 or 19 in the output. This would also mean that SHA256 is weaker than expected.
I would love to see more examples on this approach, my guess is that this is just variance.

Also the extreme case that would be the easiest to solve according to the theory would be a known hash (e.g. "00000000000000000000000000000000") and then one needs to find a nonce that creates this...

Also what makes SAT solving worse is the need for a time stamp in the header and even worse the reference to the previous block. As far as I understand SAT solving it will try lots of combinations until it finds a solution or has no more combinations left to try. Frequent changes in the input area are probably not helping as there might be actual progress with SAT mining compared to the pure guessing game of traditional brute force mining.

They did and there is no need for central servers. https://ripple.com/wiki/Consensus is probably the starting point to read about their solution.

Currently the Client code is released, which is something that you proabbly would consider "calling home" as you can send JSON encoded RPC calls and receive answers from the official public server(s).

Still this is again just starting to derail into a Ripple bashing thread - you can do that elsewhere! As far as I get it the topic is about integrating BTC (or maybe some other existing crypto currency) natively into the OpenCoin Ripple implementation as soon as server code is being released. It is reasonable to expect that this will indeed happen and it also makes sense to think about ways how this could be done already now.

So let's recap, XRP (can) serve as:
* Asset (actually the only asset in Ripple one can own), intended to be used as shortcut/general currency when trading IOUs (USD->XRP->EUR instead of USD->INR->BTN->JPY->RUB->EUR)
* PoS mechanism to make sure there cannot be an infinite number of accounts (50 XRP minimum on each account means there can be only Ripple accounts for 1/4 of the world's population of ~8 billion humans at most)
* Fee payment by being destroyed when sending transactions

All of these things are fulfilled quite well, where XRP really suck is the following:
* Store of wealth/investment vehicle - a central authority does not really help if this central authority is able to hold and being tasked to disperse a huge portion of funds to begin with.

Interestingly Bitcoiners seem to really be into BTC because it seems like it is a good store of wealth (I have mixed feelings about that too, but that's not part of this thread) and a lot of criticism goes in that direction. Still there might be a way to use BTC for the other parts too instead of XRP. I see a bigger problem in the slowness of BTC transactions though, as Ripple is designed to come to a resolution much faster and transferring BTC would take too long on the main chain. Once you start transfers off the chain though, you deal with IOUs which then again by definition are not assets that you actually own. I would be interested in actual ideas to replace XRP in a meaningful way.

@coinft:
PoW attached to transactions would be more expensive than current XRP fees (which are also much lower than other closed source bitcoin exchanges btw.) and it does not help with the (imho elegant) solution of having a native embedded currency/asset one can own. If you replace this with IOUs (BTC or USD), who should then be the truly decentralized entity that issues these? Maybe you could elaborate a bit more on your true mesh exchange that uses USD as asset?

Siehst du, geht ja - das ist schon sicherlich hilfreicher und wird eher zum Erfolg führen als nur mal generell zu fragen.

Die "niedrigen" Zinsen, die man auf coinlenders und co sieht sind deswegen so niedrig, weil sie monatlich oder gar wöchentlich berechnet werden.

Zur digitalen Signatur: Ich habe einen Class3 Smartcardreader daheim, der kostet auf Amazon ~40€... signieren sollte man aber auch mit anderen können, ich glaube in Deutschland gibt's da diesen "e-Perso" oder so. Nochmal: Derziet ist das ungefähr der Gegenwert eines Neuwagens was du da borgen willst, um dir Hardware anzuschaffen, die eventuell (je nach Vorhersagemodell) nicht mal so viele Bitcoins in ihrer Lebenszeit minen wird, wie sie kostet.

Naja, ich persönlich habe weder das Geld noch die motivation einen Kredit in der Höhe über ein Jahr zu vergeben, aber viel Glück dabei, vielleicht gibt's ja mutigere/reichere Zeitgenossen.