Bitcoin Forum
September 04, 2015, 04:34:48 PM *
News: New! Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.11.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 ... 71 »
81  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: IS Bitcoin Safe on: November 14, 2014, 09:28:41 PM
I don't think so as many don't recognize BTC and it is not a recognized.  Sad

I use it but don't keep BTC in my account and exchange it via PayPal to be on a safe side.

Paypal and Bitcoin don't mix; mkay?

The word "account" worries me too. Hopefully you have cold storage somewhere.
82  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 09:08:51 PM
wtf? No! Nothing requires extreme amounts of computing in POS. That's the point of POS
Huh
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=303898.msg3372610#msg3372610

A few posts later...
Let's suppose you have 10% of stake and an alien's computer stolen from Area 51.  Odds to generate 60 block long chain at the rate of 1 block a minute are very small (something like 1/10000000000000...)  

If you can cycle through enough adresses per minute to generate a hits that are 9 times lower than the average hit...

Guys, where do u get these numbers from?

Anyway, what is necessary to generate accounts that will hit the target within 1 minute timeframe in average (necessary to outpace benevolent miners) will always be a function of how much stake the attacker deploys. You seem to have forgotten this

1. Generate a private key (~0 ms)
2. Calculate a public key (~0.005 ms on a high-end CPU, numbers taken from http://ed25519.cr.yp.to/)
3. Sign the generation signature of a previous block (~0.005 ms)
4. Calculate SHA-256 of the signature (~0 ms, sorry for disassembling the Nxt byte-code Smiley)
5. Compare first 8 bytes to the target (~0 ms)
6. Repeat #4 and #6 lot of times (~???, whole Bitcoin network would hit the target in a few milliseconds)

So 1 CPU will loop thru say 0.001 key/sec. We can't run a botnet with 1 million computers to get 1000 key/sec coz this task CAN NOT be parallelized. Each iteration requires data from the previous one.

Conclusion: we will have problems only if someone uses a quantum/alien computer, until that noone can succeed at such the attack.
What are you talking about? Sucess is not binary here. You don't need an exact match, just the ability to select a match that is better than average.

Even if it takes 1 complete second to do one interation of 4 and 5, the system is still in deep trouble.
Suppose there are two coinholders, one with 90% and the other with 10%.
Without manipulation, the guy with 90% will find blocks once every 67 seconds on average and the guy with 10% will find blocks once every 600 seconds.

Suppose the guy with 10% has time to test out 9 different addresses per minute. Each address will have a different waiting time. Picking the best among these nine candidates is sufficient to boost 10% stake up to the mining power of 90% stake.
If you can do 90 iterations per minute, then you can attack with 1%; 900 with 0.01%

Your estimate of 0.01 ms per iteration suggests that a successful attack could be pulled off with 1.67×10^-9% stake. What is that? 100 or 200 satoshi.

Obviously, this is not acceptable. Attackers should have to hold more than a few satoshis in order to mount a successful attack.


As for which PoS coin: Nxt.

Edit: it appears that was before the rolling re-org limit and maturity rules were decided on

Quote relevant to recent discussion about botnet of seed-nodes:
Quote
For new people downloading the blockchain, you have to allow them to designate trusted sources manually. Otherwise,  some asshole can send them a long irreversible chain, preventing them from catching up to the rest of the network.
83  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: How come Netflix and other similar services is not accepting bitcoins? on: November 14, 2014, 08:30:00 PM
Free/Libre software and Proprietary/Restrictive software do not mix. Sony demonstrated this with the PS3: they included "Other OS" that kept other OSs in a sand-box. They then disabled the functionality in the 3.21 Firmware update.

In this case, Bitcoin is the Freedom-granting software, while Netflix is the restrictive software. If you have proprietary software running on your machine, you can not be assured that it is doing what you ask. Conversely, if your machine is running free software, proprietary software can not be assured that your machine is doing what they expect.
84  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 09:02:53 AM
Edit: Ideally, once coin creation ceases, mining fees will settle on an amount sufficient to secure the network. It is not clear that there is any stable feed-back mechanism to ensure this. Limited block-size may have to act as an approximation.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here. I think it depends on the value of the PoW coin on the free market and the amount of transactions that are occurring on its block chain. If the value isn't high enough and there aren't enough transactions then the network will possibly not be very secure as people will shut down their equipment. Someone could probably buy up that equipment for pennies on the dollar and mount a 51% attack on the less secure network. There are a lot of entities that would have incentive to do this.. banks, central banks, competing cryptocoins, governments pissed at dark markets and tax evaders, etc..
If the value and transaction volume is low, not much is lost if somebody attacks it. That is why I am not too concerned that it "only" costs about $300 Million to attack the Bitcoin network. If I want to be perfectly honest; Bitcoin has very small adoption at the moment. Bitcoin is not that important as a payment processing network in the scheme of things.

I agree the question of miner fees for securing the network is an open one. As somebody in another thread pointed out: we can switch to PoS if it becomes clear that fees are not sufficient to secure the network. That won't happen for decades.
Yes, it may not even happen in our lifetimes if at all, but I see it as being a possibiliy. There are some ALT coins that have quicker emission curves, so we will see how they are able to deal with it. We all know how Dogecoin went.. Monero is another one with a fast emission curve. If the crypto markets crashed really hard it could happen sooner than you'd think. I realize a PoW coin can switch later, but I think it is important that PoS be tweaked and improved upon now rather than later. That way if Bitcoin does have to switch it can switch to the best possible solution that has been "battle tested".

I think Dogecoin was simply a fad (that lasted a surprisingly long time). I will, however, be following Monero.
85  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How did bitcoin obtain it's value? on: November 14, 2014, 08:38:40 AM
Power bills, difficulty rate, mining rigs cost etc

This was initially true. Because people were mining with their PC at the time (with the difficulty being low), that worked out to something like $4/1000BTC.

In my opinion, the 10,000 BTC pizzas are what started convincing people that Bitcoin actually had value.
86  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 08:09:45 AM
You are missing the point of PoS. The point of PoS is not to be better at achieving decentralized consensus than Proof Of Waste. The point of PoS is to achieve sufficiently decentralized consensus without wasting a ton of electricity, therefore harming the environment, and/or wasting a ton of processing power that could be used to benefit society in one way or another. If you insist on PoW, then make the PoW beneficial to society like Primecoin or curing cancer... otherwise it is a waste of energy and processing power.

PoW coins can not use computations that are otherwise useful. If the computation is otherwise usedful, it can be pre-computed: weakening the security PoW is supposed to provide.
Quote from: Wiedai, B-money
1. The creation of money. Anyone can create money by broadcasting the
solution to a previously unsolved computational problem. The only
conditions are that it must be easy to determine how much computing effort
it took to solve the problem and the solution must otherwise have no
value, either practical or intellectual. The number of monetary units
created is equal to the cost of the computing effort in terms of a
standard basket of commodities. ...

Edit: Interesting to note that Bitcoin does not follow this algorithm long-term because, as CoinHoarder points out, money creation eventually ceases.

Furthermore, it is unclear whether Proof Of Waste will work once the block reward halvings stop and no more currency will be printed. Currently PoW coins are diluting their shareholders to pay for miners to secure their block chains.
This dilution helps spread coins around to new users. It lowers the barriers to entry if some organization manages to take control of the majority of the coins/hash-power for some reason. Put another way, scarcity will make the price rise, which will encourage somebody, somewhere to plug in a miner. In a PoS coin, I am not sure why anyone would sell enough stake to lose control over the "forging". The whole point is that stake costs almost nothing to maintain.

I agree the question of miner fees for securing the network is an open one. As somebody in another thread pointed out: we can switch to PoS if it becomes clear that fees are not sufficient to secure the network. That won't happen for decades.

Edit: Ideally, once coin creation ceases, mining fees will settle on an amount sufficient to secure the network. It is not clear that there is any stable feed-back mechanism to ensure this. Limited block-size may have to act as an approximation.
87  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: IS Bitcoin Safe on: November 13, 2014, 10:45:45 PM
So I was wondering what kind of scheme this thread is part of. OP has no ads in sig, doesn't seem to be inflating post count here, but the post has a vague, clickbaity feel to it. A couple of spammers "taking part" in the discussion.

Because I have not seen the OP respond yet, I suspect classic troll.

Quote from: Trolling the web: a guide
The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll.

If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it.
...
Section 6: Following-Up
...
Try not to follow-up to your own troll. The troll itself quickly becomes forgotten in the chaos and if you just sit back you can avoid being blamed for causing it.
-http://www.urban75.com/Mag/troll.html
88  Other / Off-topic / Re: Am I the only girl on here? : ( on: November 13, 2014, 05:03:50 PM
Have you been to any Bitcoin meetups to meet the crypto community in person? Guys/gals it should be interesting to do some "real world" connecting and talking about crypto.

Not yet. Where can I find info on where/when??

There is a sub-board for that.
89  Economy / Speculation / Re: Price rally - this is gentleman on: November 13, 2014, 04:55:44 PM

Wow. I tried searching for it hoping for a "know you meme" entry, and only came up with rap lyrics.

I had no idea it was only a day 12 hours old.
90  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 13, 2014, 04:15:04 PM
A bank such a JP Morgan with a FPGA super computer can conceivably do it (without figuring out how many operations are actually required).

I wouldn't be wrong to suppose no math will follow to back this statement, would I?

I say as much in the quote. Though, an FPGA should be an order of magnitude faster than a General-purpose computer (or even PoW hasher) for that type of problem.
91  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 13, 2014, 04:06:00 PM
I have no idea what you're going on about.

I know  Grin Search nxtforum for "BaseTarget adjustment algorithm" thread (leads to Blind Shooter algorithm and how it interacts with the retargeting algo, in the same thread) if you are genuinely interested. I get the impression no one on BTT is, they just listen to the echo and then repeat it.

The above makes the Nothing at Stake 'problem' wishful thinking. At least in Nxt it does.

I tried that: https://nxtforum.org/proof-of-stake-algorithm/basetarget-adjustment-algorithm/ (linked from cite note 9 on the Wiki) requires me to log in.

A bank such a JP Morgan with a FPGA super computer can conceivably do it (without figuring out how many operations are actually required).

Quote from: Whitepaper:Nxt
Block generation time is targeted at 60 seconds, but variations in probabilities have resulted in an average block generation time of 80 seconds, with occasionally very long block intervals. An adjustment to the forging algorithm has been suggested by mthcl and modeled by Sebastien256 on NxtForum.org[9].

According to that, the updated algorithm was as suggestion. How are we supposed to analyze the specific PoS algorithm in NXT if you keep moving the goal-posts?
92  Other / Off-topic / Re: Am I the only girl on here? : ( on: November 12, 2014, 04:29:20 AM
30 pages and where are the fucking pics?

She did not ask for pics yet.
93  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: why I think cryptocurrency market is a fake on: November 12, 2014, 04:09:16 AM
7 transactions per second makes a currency eligible for reserve currency? USA just needed to win the WWII to impose dollar....

If the Banks succeed in taking over Bitcoin, they will have access to networks that can handle more than 1MB of data every 10 minutes*. With 100MB blocks, Bitcoin can handle up to 700 transactions per second (CPU might start to become the bottle-neck).

Bitcoin appears to be the first secure network application in the history of mankind. It does not have to be imposed by force: because it is far superior to what has come before.

*Note: My full node uses about 100GB of it's 300GB cap every month (works out to less than 1Mbps).
94  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: why I think cryptocurrency market is a fake on: November 12, 2014, 03:48:43 AM
Its satoshi first of all and second u wont understand because its like a chess game and bitcoin is 4 steps ahead of u... U need to step back and see trends of decisions by smart ppl

ok, now the arguments please. Other than faith.

Mine are: Asia can create a gold backed reserve currency forcing world governments to do the same, decoupling people's currencies from government's currency. Everybody will want to work for government to get paid in hard currency and cryptos will be the currency of poor people. As long as governments, gold and oil do not disappear, and you do not revolve, cryptos will be the currency of poor people.

Where are your arguments please?


Bitcoin, as is, can only handle up to about 7 transactions per second. As a result, Bitcoin is more likely to become a reserve currency than a currency of "the people".

The reason is that there are many, many poor people, but few banks. If Bitcoin technology takes off within 5 years, poor people will be priced out of the market, while banks will not be.

I have documented how that may happen. Though, I have no formal proof such plans are actually underway.
95  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 11, 2014, 05:16:05 PM
What would happen in Bitcoin in the same situation when you have Chinese miners cut off from the rest of the world and mining their own fork with their PH/s for 3 days?

Since the Chinese miners would still have less hashing power than the rest of the world, their chain will get "orphaned". When their nodes rejoin the network, they should automatically choose the fork with more "work" in it. Many transactions would have to be rebroadcast, and such nodes will likely enter "safe mode" if that happened.

Edit: Somewhat relevant
96  Bitcoin / Legal / Re: TD loves money exchangers on: November 11, 2014, 08:09:06 AM
Try TD.

They used to be the most Bitcoin hostile. I think I want to try a few others (like Alberta Treasury Branches) first.

Update Nov 17, 2014: On thursday, I opened a new personal chequing account with ATB. I don't find out until later this week if they are going to close my account over potential Bitcoin usage (that is when I am supposed to get an update on opening a commercial account).

I was delayed by a day over a credit check. I am not sure if that was just an excuse to delay, or the lady really could not pull my credit from the information given. I had no problem with CIBC (after giving the same information), which also insisted on a credit check.

It appears that the reason they need a credit check to open an account is so that they can try to push a credit card on you. However, in the past I was turned down for an account a Servus Credit Union because I was debt-free for over 3 years (and thus had no public credit history). They will turn you down even if you insist you don't want a credit card.
97  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 11, 2014, 08:01:34 AM
Can you explain exactly what you mean by deep manual re-orgs? There is no such thing in NXT. As far as I know the re-orgs are fully automatic, based on the rolling checkpoints 720 blocks deep maintained by each node's software as a distributed consensus.

Pretend you are in China and the "great firewall" cuts Chinese "forgers" from the rest of the network for 3 days. What happens when they reconnect with the rest of the world? Obviously, somebody has to force the re-org manually.
98  Other / Politics & Society / Re: First gay marriage in Russia on: November 11, 2014, 07:40:32 AM
Now it is so clear, but I'm hella confused.

Two guys, who dress up like girls, who are attracted to girls (or at least the look of a girl.)  

Perhaps a translation would help.

These are not two guys dressed in drag. These are two women getting married.

I have no idea how you read that but article seys pretty clear that brunette is a transgender.

http://rt.com/news/203571-russia-lgbt-marriage-law/


Thanks for the link. Apparently the state does not recognize her as a woman after-all:
Quote from: LGBT marriage? Two brides officially tie the knot in Russia (PHOTOS)
The trick here is that one of the brides is legally not a woman.

“Yes, in my passport it says ‘male’,” Irina has told RT.

Irina speaks of herself as a transsexual rather than transgender.
99  Other / Politics & Society / Re: First gay marriage in Russia on: November 11, 2014, 07:26:28 AM
In theory they could still have babies through intercourse so biologically it could be seen as a straight marriage (man and woman) but that's beside the point.

It is my understanding that the hormones prevent that.

I was not sure how to check that, but apparently Yahoo! Answers is actually getting better over time.
100  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Decentralized Security on: November 11, 2014, 07:21:06 AM
I think there is a question about Andreas Antonopoulos's remarks hidden somewhere in the OP.

Andreas was talking about the potential institutional use of Bitcoin. 'I was "hacked"' is not going to cut it: even if you really were "hacked". Multisignature transactions should allow businesses, banks, political parties and governments to handle Bitcoin in a transparent, secure manner.

The main concern I have is that the need for privacy conflicts with the goal of good transparency. Encouraging the use of tools such as Darkwallet may allow users to safely send funds to such transparent organizations.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 ... 71 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!