I guess it is possible to modify whatever
signature scheme you have to create this "Luke wallets" (from lukewarm, as
in neither Hot nor Cold. ;-)
Just doing my part to raise the NSR (I'm all N, no S) ..... Consider using the term "warm wallets". "Luke wallets" would carry a highly charged connotation in some circles, obstructing useful discussion (kind of like this post). |
|
|
|
this is what you get with a lack of peer review, enjoy your broken "implementations"
GitHub is probably better place for peer review and discussing patches than reddit: https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/issues/61#issuecomment-139344632I guess Peter Todd knows that too, but just couldn't resist posting a good propaganda piece on Reddit.  Anyway the patch works to limit mempool size, so can be enabled during the current "stress test" if needed. There's also some follow up ideas on Bitcoin XT mailing list like picking two random transactions and evicting the lower fee/kB one. In case you have more insight to the issue I'm sure that constructive criticism is appreciated. Am I hearing you correctly? It's okay for Hearn to post a short, generalized summary of an XT patch, but it's wrong for someone else to follow up with important vulnerability details about the patch, and comment on the patch's review process? If the latter is propaganda, what is the former? |
|
|
|
...
pps: peter r is one helluva shady character.
Occasionally I'll take a few seconds and look back at a random few of a guy's posts. Normally it's not worth the bother. Just now I noticed that Peter R. was the guy who met the 'little old lady' at the Bitcoin ATM and she was there because she got ripped of by the cryptolocker malware. That story struck me as likely a bullshit psyop when I first read it. Just sayin' I know how you feel. Sometimes when I get AKo, opp has pocket rockets. |
|
|
|
The trouble with most of these bets (which have been ubiquitous as long as I've been around) is that it is extraordinarily labor intensive to prepare the terms and definitions. For instance, there is a very good chance that within a year there will be a >1MB block on 'the longest proof-of-work chain'. But which chain is 'the'.
Clearly the longest proof-of-work chain built from Bitcoin's Genesis Block. The terms and definitions are trivially simple. It's not simple at all of the blockchain forks because different groups consider different blocks to be 'valid.' This is a very real possibility and within this timeframe. Regardless of anyone's definition of validity, one chain will be longer than the rest (it will contain more cumulative work). I am betting that this (longest) chain will contain a block greater than 1 MB in size by this time next year. There is no ambiguity in that definition. If there is 'no ambiguity' in your mind that is because your mind is not very flexible. (You a tech writer? If so, just on contract or genuine interest?) If one burns a lot of cycles mining an invalid block it does not count toward 'cumulative work' by any definition. I would not even take your bet if I got to define 'longest'. I, like every other '1MBer' I can think of except perhaps MP, would be delighted to see larger blocks as long as they are safe _and_ needed. It's possible that that could happen within the next year and that could be great news. I think it more unlikely than not though. 1. The bet-defining blockchain one year from now will be the blockchain attracting the most hash power. 2. Define "needed". |
|
|
|
I wouldn't recommend this thread to anyone. It's certainly the biggest circlejerk currently running in the Bitcoin community.  That's not enough XTurds for a circlejerk. They'll have to settle for a triangle jerk instead.  Hey, Icebreaker, you and cypherdick were on the same side during the HF scam. Now you're on opposite sides of the XT drama. How'd that happen? I haven't noticed any direct attacks by you against cypherdick during the XT fight, but maybe I've missed them. Any comment? |
|
|
|
You tendency to confuse Bitcoin with free market is largely misguided. To quote davout: Do you think there should be an "artificial, centrally planned limit" on the amount of wood people are allowed to chop from the rainforest?
Do you think there should be an "artificial, centrally planned limit" on the amount of endangered species' specimens one is allowed to kill? Are you saying we need centrally planned limit to keep Bitcoin decentralized? YES! Thank you for answering honestly and not beating around the bush. It is my opinion that most of the small-block supporters feel the same way (i.e., that we need a centrally-planned limit to keep Bitcoin decentralized). I notice you didn't answer my(davout) questions. You wouldn't be against centrally planned limit on big game hunting would you  ? I don't believe in killing endangered animals; I think it's terrible, personally. So I guess I am glad there is a centrally-planned limit for killing bears in the mountains around Vancouver, for instance. But this isn't about what I believe…we're discussing what will actually happen. A centrally-planned limit on big game hunting requires that the organization implementing the limit also act to enforce that limit--with violence if necessary. I'm not going to wade into whether this is right or wrong, what I'm pointing out is that to enforce a quota that goes against the free market outcome requires the backing of strong organization or government willing to use physical force if necessary. Do you think Bitcoin Core is strong enough an organization to enforce a quota that goes against the natural free-market outcome? With 85% of the network nodes, it is already fairly strong. However, how will this organization physically force users not to defect to other implementations of Bitcoin that support larger block sizes to satisfy the demands of the market? That's ignoring the trick under our sleeve  We'll have a whole suite of financial instruments and software boasting agile privacy and instant and unlimited transactions all supported by wealth of the scarcest and most decentralized crypto-commodity on this face of "the market". Open source and trustless. All brought to us by the good folks at Blockstream. I'm sensing you expect the good folks at Blockstream to code/review/test at a faster pace than they have been coding/reviewing/testing revisions to Bitcoin core. If I sense your expectations correctly, on what do you base these expectations for vigor and rigor? |
|
|
|
Within the first ten years of starting my rental equipment company I had a piece of damaged equipment badly hurt a customer in his late 50's.
Clearly it was my companies fault because the high school kids I hired to clean the equipment overlooked the damage and put the saw back on the rental line.
One of the reasons my attorneys fought so hard was because the old man couldn't provide proof that he was hurt with the saw and he never returned the equipment to us for inspection.
Cool story, bro. |
|
|
|
Cartoons and graphics sometimes say more than thousand words. Today I found the truth table in the cyberspace.  paging icebreaker for immediate application of the MP-RDF. These truths cannot be left unFUDed in public! This is a great illustration of the attack on core. The so-called "75% attack", carried out in broad daylight with great pride. |
|
|
|
As far as I can see the argument is already over if the anti-XT crowd feels it is so certain to lose any fair contest that it will resort to tactics like this.
If these tactics affect the contest, the contest didn't have fairness built in. Back to the drawing board for the mercantile mercenaries. |
|
|
|
This is defiantly not a good idea.
As a defiant idea, it's definitely good. |
|
|
|
I am completely stupid.
If I had a lot of money, could I run a full node?
Would my stupidity defeat the benefits of running a full node?
You need to have enough money to own a computer and to keep that computer connected to the internet. You need to be smart enough to be able to figure out how to download software, and run it on your computer. To actually be a help to the network, you'll also want to either be able to open a port on your firewall/router (if you have one) or know someone that can take care of that for you. I am willing to provide the capital, the location, and the electricity. But I am not smart enough to download, build, compile, configure, command line, set defaults, or other things non-stupid people are able to do. Nor am I smart enough to specify the proper RAM and HD space required when I make the computer purchase. Also, my internet connectivity is currently a smart phone, currently with a 30GB monthly plan. Is that a show stopper? |
|
|
|
|
I am completely stupid.
If I had a lot of money, could I run a full node?
Would my stupidity defeat the benefits of running a full node?
|
|
|
|
|
A decentralized alternative to central government, administered on voluntary peer to peer networks.
Crowd contracts record signatories' pledges to cooperate behaviorally for a common goal.
Signatories make a material deposit to a multisig escrow.
Response to breach is defined within the contract.
Development is funded by crowdfunding and voluntary signatory fees.
|
|
|
|
|
Karpeles arrested day after Ethereum network launches.
Coincidence?
I think not.
|
|
|
|
|
Brady will retire rather than accept suspension.
|
|
|
|
|
Only two reasons I can think of to live to 100 (40 more years).
|
|
|
|
Jesus! Millions of gun owners in NY state? I find these stats hard to believe. According to Wikipedia the last census put the stat's population at 8.5 million, and you're saying there are millions of gun owners? Let be conservative and make that 2 million gun owners. Almost a quarter of the population - one in four of every adult and child - own a firearm and are upset about registering their guns? I know (edit: the median) Americans are gun crazy and that on average there are ~ 90 guns for every one hundred citizens - but I thought there would be multiple guns per owner. New York City, 8.5 million, maybe. New York state closer to 30 million. Only by correcting members of the bitcoin pantheon do I ever hope to achieve ..... <exercise left for the reader>. |
|
|
|
Can someone advice me if this split would affect the price of bitcoin anyhow? If yes how?
The "split" like you call it, was resolved by the network 6 blocks after it happened - which shows how resilient (or anti-fragile) the Bitcoin network has become. Regarding the price of bitcoin, please go to the speculation section of the forum. It requires manual intervention, so anti fragile my ass! Also where is the 6 blocks figure from? Your ass? It just requires you to keep your software up to date. It's like having a website and complain to be hacked, just because you didn't install security patches. Do you also want the dev team to wipe your ass? No supporter of a website, web-server software or any other type of Internet appliance makes stupid claims like being "anti-fragile", "backed my math" or "secured by the laws of the universe" though. out of ass? |
|
|
|
anti-fragile my ass
Do it yourself. Preparation H usually works. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
