You can't promote yourself to be a secure website Users do not pay bc.i for their security. bc.i earns money only with ads. If you pay nothing - you receive nothing. And do not complain.this not just about bci, you cannot use any 3rd party service that involves the creation of other addresses than your own. |
|
|
|
people who have been the victim of blockchain.info's incredible incompetence.
Are you sure this is incredible incompetence? The transactions are no reusing the same R values but there are an (unknown) patterm instead. That cannot be incompetence nor accident, it has to be programmed as it is in bc.i by developers (very talented developers indeed). Very good finding @bcearl, that paper describes what I think could happend (because of incompetence or not) and the conclusion is hard to swallow. |
|
|
|
|
it does matter because bc.i is THE site/wallet now and users without a technical background use theirs services so, if they introduced this hidden pattern in the R values then we (all) are in troubles. Bitcoin doesn't need another MtGox's incident like .
|
|
|
|
people who have been the victim of blockchain.info's incredible incompetence.
Are you sure this is incredible incompetence? The transactions are no reusing the same R values but there are an (unknown) patterm instead. That cannot be incompetence nor accident, it has to be programmed as it is in bc.i by developers (very talented developers indeed). |
|
|
|
Es algo obvio, Google no va a pagarles a los diarios españoles para que estos le permitan incrementarles el número de visitas y les de visibilidad global! |
|
|
|
|
Now Google and Apple will feel a little pressure to move faster in some direction.
|
|
|
|
I just saw this on reddit a few minutes ago, this is one good year for bitcoin. Now its only a matter of time till google joins the wagon. https://i.imgur.com/m2pKfft.pngThanks! |
|
|
|
Am I dreaming? This cannot be true, in fact I will wait a couple of hours before believe it.
That's how I feel about it actually! Still in shock at the news. Seriously, I think this could and should spark the next big rally, as the big money comes rolling in, after such an endorsement! WARNING: It could be a joke because nobody is seen the option (I cannot see it neither) |
|
|
|
|
Am I dreaming? This cannot be true, in fact I will wait a couple of hours before believe it.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not a property, is not gold (no gold 2.0), is not a national/foreign currency. it is a digital currency, period. If we find a way to teletransport things from a point A to a point B, only politicians will be discussing if the teletransporter shold be consider a train, an airplain or a car. It is just something new that doesn't fit in preexisting categories.
Because then you open yourself to getting audited by the IRS as soon as you barter. If you can do something to start using promissory notes and implement it into the bitcoin protocol somehow. Obviously, I have no idea how to do this then you open yourself up to the courts. Historically, promissory notes have acted as a form of privately issued currency. Flying cash or feiqian was a promissory note used during the Tang dynasty (618 – 907). Flying cash was regularly used by Chinese tea merchants, and could be exchanged for hard currency at provincial capitals.[9] According to tradition, in 1325 a promissory note was signed in Milan. There is evidence of promissory notes being issued in 1384 between Genova and Barcelona, although the letters themselves are lost. The same happens for the ones issued in Valencia in 1371 by Bernat de Codinachs for Manuel d'Entença, a merchant from Huesca (then part of the Crown of Aragon), amounting a total of 100 florins.[10] In all these cases, the promissory notes were used as a rudimentary system of paper money, for the amounts issued could not be easily transported in metal coins between the cities involved. Ginaldo Giovanni Battista Strozzi issued an early form of promissory note in Medina del Campo (Spain), against the city of Besançon in 1553.[11] However, there exists notice of promissory notes being in used in Mediterranean commerce well before that date. Then you have a legal means to start challenging government rulings on the currency in the court system.You don't set something like this up and I'm afraid. It's whatever the hell they say it is this day of the week. Don't you get what I'm saying. You would have a chance in common law court where a jury deliberates a verdict with a third part observent judge. This is in contrast to a system where a judge or officials tell you what the verdict is. No promissory notes, no preexisting concept/category/classification. Read my mouth: di....gi....tal cu....rren....cy |
|
|
|
 18Pue7t2x7JxQYYqVecwuV4M2p1ygQHoDD |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not a property, is not gold (no gold 2.0), is not a national/foreign currency. it is a digital currency, period. If we find a way to teletransport things from a point A to a point B, only politicians will be discussing if the teletransporter shold be consider a train, an airplain or a car. It is just something new that doesn't fit in preexisting categories.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been thinking about all this, about a standard, the code and the available documentation and I have to admit that there were several misunderstanding from my side.
1) Source code is the more detailed specification you can find. This is always true.
2) The reference implementation is not messy code, in fact it is pretty clear now. Last time I took a look at it was in 2011/2012.
3) Available documentation is very good. I didn't know about the developer guide before this post and it is rather detailed (the wire protocol and other low level data structures are well described in other places).
I think that my misinformation stole time to @gmaxwell and others however maybe it is a good thing because other developers could have the same questions about standards.
I'd love to have a library (a .dll) to link in my project with all (or at least the hard part) what is needed to implement a node and I am sure it is the way to move forward. If a VM is a better option I would like to understand why.
|
|
|
|
|
No, there isn't any built-in way to mark/flag a specific transaction with bitcoind/rpc just because the blockchain (the data structure where transactions are saved) doesn't provide any place for custom data.
You can implement your own marking system but that will require a database.
|
|
|
|
The issue that @gmaxwell has mentioned is that any alternative implementation that fails to do something that the current implementation does (which may have never been even witnessed before) would result in a fork.
So the unfortunate situation is that Bitcoin is not a protocol like HTTP but instead is the behaviour of a specific C++ program (who's every currently unknown *quirk* would have to be replicated in any other implementation).
The only way you could create a Bitcoin equivalent in another language would be to have something that behaves identically at the binary level (and that would most likely only perform slower than Bitcoin does).
That's exactly what I mean. I've heard people saying that one of the developer's perversion is that they want to rewrite all in another programming language, everybody wants to have a library available for being used in their favorite language. It is easy to understand why devs want to use a confortable language for their projects so, even when that could be too hard in the case of bitcoin full node, new implementations are going to appear and that could be a problem. It is clear that bitcon is not a commnon thing and there are lost and lots of details to have in mind and tests (like security). However, if I am rigth and new implementations are developed then the bitcoin core team will need to do something. One of my longer term hopes around the refactoring of Bitcoin core into a separate library for consensus is that it allows us to compile the consensus parts into a simple bytecode with a narrow interface which can be executed by an easily implemented and testable virtual machine, so every implementation can just use the same bytecode and be confident that they'll be consistent. Considering how hard it has been to get people to understand the unusual requirements of consensus, it may turn out to be hard to get people to accept the performance hit (and to avoid doing crazy JIT stuff which breaks the obvious-correctness of the approach).
I think that separate library (or specialized libraries) is an very good idea. I don't understand why a VM could be required. |
|
|
|
I don't use to open discussions here because all my questions have already been answered somewhere in this forum however I cannot understand what is going on in these days with the bitcoin price. Let me explain myself:
It is clear for me that in this year (2014) we are a lot better than years before. We can buy directly with bitcoins in overstock and paypal has "integrated" bitcoin in its payment system. I also saw a browser extension that allow us to buy in amazon (there is a middleman).
Without MtGox and after the 2013's bubble the ecosystem looks healthier than before.
There weren't bad news in 2014, no more repetitive-fear-generator SilkRoad / drugs / isis / satan news. In fact there were more good news thanks to new projects/startups.
I think that in this atmosphere the bitcoin's price shouldn't go down. What is going on? Do you know?
Bitcoin was in all news and people chose to ignore it. Nothing is going fantastic. It's dying, people don't want scam coin. Wake up, Sheeple! You sound like a bot in all the topics that you write in, you use the same words (sheep/s, sheeple, daying, media, stupid, cry) again and again. From my point of view everything is going fantastic. |
|
|
|
|
LOL Why does somebody need to be anonymous?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
