|
Real time, triple entry accounting is not trivial to implement, but it's coming.
|
|
|
|
Are you listening, Gavin?
Bitcoin is fundamentally broken if its future depends on whether or not Gavin is listening. Fortunately, there are viable alternatives to Bitcoin Core now. |
|
|
|
Our current approach is to use bitcoin-core as our network gateway and block verification. From our point of view, we opt for the added security and reduced implementation cost.
To give you an idea of the implementation cost to move to such model: currently Armory only uses bitcoin core to push transactions to the network. New blocks are detected by polling the blockchain folder. We could move to a model where we receive and parse new blocks from p2p directly. That would be cheap to implement but Armory would need access to a local copy of the blockchain, and it would still need bitcoin core as a gateway, so there's no improvement in the attempt the decouple from a permanent bitcoin core process. I understand all of this. What you don't appear to understand is that I like this general model, and I also want the ability to use alternatives to Bitcoin Core. Bitcoin Core is just one of several implementations of the Bitcoin protocol so there's no reason it should be treated as occupying a privileged position. |
|
|
|
I'm assuming what you're thinking of is a Armory mode that takes its block from p2p instead of local file access. Exactly. We may look into that in the far future, however I don't think that's the direction we're taking right now. That's disappointing, because it's good to encourage people to run full nodes, and it's also good for the network if full node implementations are heterogeneous. When clients tie themselves to a single implementation it gets in the way of that goal. |
|
|
|
One thing you can do now is run bitcoind instead of bitcoin-qt, so at least you don't have an extra GUI cluttering up your desktop.
I'm liking the new disablewallet switch in Bitcoin Core. It seems to fit nicely with an Armory set up (as long as you are controlling Bitcoin Core yourself). I'm really looking forward to Armory no longer needing blockchain file-level access to a Bitcoin node. I'd rather run Armory against a btcd node, and the only thing stopping that from working is that btcd doesn't use the same file format for storing the blockchain. |
|
|
|
|
One thing you can do now is run bitcoind instead of bitcoin-qt, so at least you don't have an extra GUI cluttering up your desktop.
|
|
|
|
If I loaned you 1.00000000 bitcoin's today, which has a value somewhere around the arbitrary number of whatever value $600 i really supposed to represent, With a 10 year term.
If bitcoin rises in dollar value over 10 years by a multiple of 10, or the dollar devalues by a factor of 10, how could I reasonably expect repayment of the original loan of 100 million satoshi's.
You wouldn't expect repayment. You'd have to charge a ludicrous interest rate for that loan to have a positive risk-adjusted net present value, an interest rate nobody could afford or would ever want to pay. Long term BTC-denominated loans are nonsense. Even short term loans have extremely limited use cases. |
|
|
|
The vaults that offer insurance will probably offer other services, like making regular scheduled payments. They be much like an online bank. Yes, they will offer other services. Like undisclosed rehypothecation. |
|
|
|
After reading some of the Snowden docs it makes me wonder if there is any tax-payer funded naysayers here, because apparently the NSA and CIA do like to do that sort of thing to fracture online communities as discussed in the leaks This is almost certainly the case. Remember that just a few months ago we had BCB planting web bugs in high traffic threads, followed by a forum member who was apparently a high ranking member of one of those agencies getting hacked and outed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=335658.0Even if "they" aren't actively working to disrupt the forum, they are most definitely here. |
|
|
|
|
The only thing I've noticed is an uptick in concern trolls recently.
|
|
|
|
0.91 is an improvement over 0.90 for sure. But we don't believe that it's a critical upgrade. I'm eating lunch with altoz right now and he also says he's had problems with 0.90 that required him to delete the .armory directory. I think you've got a lot of users who having problem but are just living with them instead of reporting them. |
|
|
|
|
I know 0.90 never worked for me on Linux, I'd have frequent problems like the UI hanging indefinitely when trying to construct an outgoing transaction with more than one output. Also, it always did a full db reindex on startup even after clean shutdowns (which were rare because most shutdowns were inadvertent from crashes). I'm pretty sure I've seen similar complaints in this thread and others.
The 0.91 branch worked for me, so I've just been using that ever since and haven't been paying attention that much to your release schedule. What changed is in the last few weeks there has been a series of sophisticated, targeted attacks on Bitcoin companies and organizations. The attacks have been distressingly successful.
Getting usable cold storage out and in use is extremely important right now.
|
|
|
|
Sorry in advance for being blunt, but when it comes to releasing 0.91 you guys really need to shit or get off the pot. Right now you don't have any viable downloads on your website. The 0.8x series is too resource-intensive for most users, and 0.90 is unusably crash-prone. A year ago, I could point people in this situation: http://www.fr33aid.com/1511/fr33-aid-bitcoins-stolen/ at your website and know they'd find something there they could download and use, but that hasn't been true for the last six months and I don't see any particular acknowledgment of this or urgency on your part. It's not a problem for me personally since I can just grab the 0.91 branch from Git, but a lot of people who can't are losing Bitcoins because there aren't any good usable cold storage solutions any more. New features are great to have, but they shouldn't delay you having a minimal viable product out, where "minimum viable product" is defined as "an application that lets you send and receive bitcoins from cold storage without consuming obscene amounts of RAM and also doesn't crash every few seconds." |
|
|
|
I want to at least make it appear like I know something about the topic the site is about. If this is your goal, use "Bitcoin". BitCoin is what the people who don't know anything at all about the topic use. |
|
|
|
The policy to not remove anything worked when the forum was small. Now that we have thousands of posts a day, we can't afford 50% of them being junk. The moderators are now instructed to be less tolerant of low-value posts.
Some guidelines:
1. Free speech - you can say anything as long as it is relevant and presented in a calm and polite manner. Swearing, SHOUTING etc. make your post more likely to be removed.
2. No zero value posts or threads, like "SELL SELL SELL"
3. No pointless or uninteresting threads.
4. No referral code spam
5. No NSFW content
|
|
|
|
|
So when eBay starts using this to take down Bitcoin exchanges, is Bitcoin Foundation going to:
1) Use all those donations it got to fund legal challenges to get the patent overturned, or,
2) Urge every Bitcoin business to start paying to license the patent from eBay
|
|
|
|
Wow. OTT much? If you think that's over the top, you're in denial. It's probably not even close to being sufficient, given the completely broken state of PC security. |
|
|
|
|
I've stopped using my desktop PC as one for all practical purposes.
My desktop PC is now a virtualization host, and every task actually takes place in one of nine VMs.
One VM runs Thunderbird, and nothing else. It's firewalled such that it can't do anything at all except access one designated SMTP/IMAP server.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
